"You vs Us"

[PhilB]

All notices (informal or enforcement) that I write point out the perceived problem and use rather wooly advisory terminology when offering a solution to overcome the problem of being over prescriptive.
.

They may work until challenged Messy, I trust you have run this past your legal dept/adviser. Informal, no problem. However with an enforcement notice I would refer you to previous postings and look at case law Fleet vs McKenna.

I would also be interested to know what other notices you are referring to. There are only three.

[CivvyFSO]

Just completed a shiny new enforcement notice.

Got the actual enforcement notice, states provisions not complied with. i.e. Articles 13(1) and 13(2). Basic sentence claiming the fire alarm is inadequate.

There's a simple schedule, this HAS to be complied with: Provide adequate fire detection etc  for dimensions, use etc, chemical properties, blah blah blah, number of persons etc etc.

Then there's "Advice on how to comply", which is a more detailed description of what I consider to be the minimum system to acheive compliance. What standard of system, where call points are to go, where detectors should be fitted etc.

It does state that the RP does not have to adopt this advice.

I have to agree a little with Kurnal, taxpayers have paid for me to come up with a system when it is in fact the RP's responsibility. But then again business pay high rates, and part of those rates go towards F&R services, so IMO under the FS act we should be supplying some advice, and to be honest it didn't take long to come up with the system needed. It was almost done on the spot. (Took longer to type it out.)

Off topic a bit: With the recent change in legislation and inspection procedure can anyone see us heading towards something similar to fixed penalties? i.e. 5 articles not complied with, that will be a 5x £100 fine please sir, payable within 28 days, or prosecution...? Then later on private companies contracted to go out finding problems... Such as safety camera partnership for speeding offences? Hmm, commission based fault finding...?

[Pip]

Similar in my area,enforcement notice states failiure,legislation applicable,steps to remedy, and then we list those in more detail,and if the RP wants to do it differently, we invite them to contact us.

not so sure about handing out on the spot fines,although it might focus the RP,not sure I would like to be judge and jury,also not sure whether we would then carry on being an advisory body, not what I want to do,prefer the educate/inform route.

[CivvyFSO]

If people were at risk of on the spot fines if checked by an Officer would it not be more likely they would comply? If so, then is it not making the countrys premises safer?

It generally works for traffic/littering etc, why not for fire safety? I think some USA fire departments use a similar approach already.

On the positive side, money made through fines could ease the rate-payers burden, so the businesses who are complying get a benefit from the system.

I am not advocating this at all, before people jump up and down on me. Just food for thought.

[Pip]

as I said, it may well do, just not my thing.

[kurnal]

Yeah I agree to on the spot fines - so long as they also apply to the crown. (I bet)

I would like to be able to fine local and national government for failing to manage their budgets and squandering the revenue they raise through taxation and council tax.

[jokar]

Not keen on the term fire alarm, it smacks of something electronic, not all premises need such a thing.  Perhaps sticking to the terminology of detection and warning woulf be a better bet.  As regards on the spot fines, how do you value non compliance and what is non compliance if the role of the FSO is enforcement.  I can understand fully if an FRA has not been completed but all the fire safety outcomes depend on the FRA.  In addition, the first rule of Article 4 is risk reduction and fire prevention, that is not passive fire safety or electronic detection.

[Chris Houston]

For anything other than a simple single storey, open plan area, the fire alarm will need to be electronic (Ref: BS 5839, Part 1, 2002).  

Do you think a big company really cares about a £100 fine?  I suspect some would prefer to pay 5 x £100 fine every time they get a visit than spend the necessary money to upgrade the premises.  Prison sentences and fines that hurt is what is needed for unsafe work places.  Hearing that there had previoulsy been a hundred quid fine would do much to appease any angry berieved after a fatal fire.

[jokar]

Perhaps the starting point for any argument should be the building regulations and what they suggest the method of detection and warning cpould be for some premises rather then the blind obedience to a recommendation in a British Standard.  If justified by an RP, bells and whistles may be good enough or perhaps the building regulations and approved document B somehow sit below the recommendations in the BS.  The point is of course that the legislation for fire safety in England and Wales sits, in both documents with the Building Regulations and the RR(FS)O.  In both documents their is guidance available to individuals as regards methods of detection and warning which allows a person to make a choice, whatever that choice is.  It may be that BS5839 is followed for whatever reason and then the expectation would be as mentioned above that once installed to a standard it will follow that standard for maintenance and testing, alternatively it may not and that then gives an enforcer the opprtunity to enforce the law and that in turn will give the right of appeal and then the true enforcers, members of the judiciary, will make a decision, which has happened in a recent case in Lancashire.

[Chris Houston]

I think the Building Regs and the RR(FS)O provide the framework, the basics and then things like British Standards fill in the detail.

Bells and whistles?  Did they not become obsolete with gas lamps.  :lol: (And no, I have no interest in selling or servicing fire alarms)

[jokar]

Fire alarm systems
1.25 All buildings should have arrangements for
detecting fire. In most buildings fires are detected
by people, either through observation or smell,
and therefore often nothing more will be needed.
1.26 In small buildings/premises the means of
raising the alarm may be simple. For instance,
where all occupants are near to each other a
shouted warning “FIRE” by the person discovering
the fire may be all that is needed. In assessing the
situation, it must be determined that the warning
can be heard and understood throughout the
premises, including for example the toilet areas. In
other circumstances, manually operated sounders
(such as rotary gongs or handbells) may be used.
Alternatively a simple manual call point combined
with a bell, battery and charger may be suitable.
In all other cases, the building should be provided
with a suitable electrically operated fire warning
system with manual call points sited adjacent to
exit doors and sufficient sounders to be clearly
audible throughout the building.

The above is a section from the current ADB B1 on Fire Alarms, the bit that BCO's and FSO's have to look at when plans for any premises are submitted.  This gives consultants the opportunity to look at a detection and warning system and fit it to the premises to be extended, altered or built.  Once in existence, an enforcing body can challenge that provided, but they can not force an electronic system on a particular premises, that is my only point.

[Tom Sutton]

Jokar you said "Not keen on the term fire alarm, it smacks of something electronic, not all premises need such a thing." Chris said "For anything other than a simple single storey, open plan area, the fire alarm will need to be electronic". Both sentences are conveying the same understanding so what is your debate about? I would interpret both sentences as, if small it may not require an electronic system if larger, in almost all cases, it will.