(split topic) minimum requirements of fire safety for their residential block of flats under the RRO

[nearlythere]

At the end of the day the risk assessment is intended to allow the selection of general fire precautions from article 4 so as to demonstrate compliance with article 8. Only significant findings need be recorded.

Are we over complicating the matter
There would appear to be a finite number of "hazards" applicable to any premises, the risk for any hazard and premises is dependent on the control measures actually in place.

Bleve. You say "Are we over complicating the matter? There would appear to be a finite number of "hazards" applicable to any premises, the risk for any hazard and premises is dependent on the control measures actually in place."

Your view please.

Situation:-
    Two storey office block, single stairway with exit direct to open air at ground floor. 10 office type persons above ground floor.

Existing Control Measures:-
    Protection of escape rouute - All doors enclosing starway 1/2 frscss in good condition. L3 auto detection and manual system, emergency lighting. Therefore, tolerable risk.

As the risk to the first floor occupiers has been addressed with existing adequate control measures, is your line of thought that there are no significant findings in regards to this and as such would not be recorded?

[nearlythere]

Locked exits, non functioning fire alarm systems, lack of fire compartmentation are not hazards, they are connected to risk.

I would have thought that a locked exit was a hazard with the risk being that persons could be trapped. The locked exit could result in harm to persons from fire.

[BLEVE]

NT
Not trying to teach anyone to suck eggs

(6) As soon as practicable after the assessment is made or reviewed, the responsible person must record the information prescribed by paragraph (7) where—


(a) he employs five or more employees;

(b) a licence under an enactment is in force in relation to the premises; etc

    (7) The prescribed information is—

(a) the significant findings of the assessment, including the measures which have been or will be taken by the responsible person pursuant to this Order; and

(b) any group of persons identified by the assessment as being especially at risk.

In the case of the situation presented:

If travel distances are acceptable in relation to a single direction of escape, plans in place if applicable for assisting disabled, typical fire loading for office type premises, then only the measures required by the order need be recorded.

However, you did not specify the type of door or glazing provided at the corridor/offices art the upper floor.

[Midland Retty]

Locked exits, non functioning fire alarm systems, lack of fire compartmentation are not hazards, they are connected to risk.

I would have thought that a locked exit was a hazard with the risk being that persons could be trapped. The locked exit could result in harm to persons from fire.

This is where there is often confusion. Remember that a hazard is something with the potential to cause harm, risk is the likelyhood that the hazard will cause harm.

A locked exit isn't a hazard. It has no potential to cause you any harm. It's not as if it is going to burn you or grow teeth and bite you, it could come of its hinges and fall on you if not fitted properly i suppose, but you get my point.

A locked exit isn't a problem until a fire occurs and I need to get out. By it being locked it has increased the risk (ie likelyhood) that the hazard (fire) will cause me harm, and whilst the locked door stopped me from getting out, it is the fire that has killed me, not the door.

[jasper]

going back to the original post - consultants still required (recently retired / graduate considered)

[nearlythere]

Locked exits, non functioning fire alarm systems, lack of fire compartmentation are not hazards, they are connected to risk.

I would have thought that a locked exit was a hazard with the risk being that persons could be trapped. The locked exit could result in harm to persons from fire.

This is where there is often confusion. Remember that a hazard is something with the potential to cause harm, risk is the likelyhood that the hazard will cause harm.

A locked exit isn't a hazard. It has no potential to cause you any harm. It's not as if it is going to burn you or grow teeth and bite you, it could come of its hinges and fall on you if not fitted properly i suppose, but you get my point.

A locked exit isn't a problem until a fire occurs and I need to get out. By it being locked it has increased the risk (ie likelyhood) that the hazard (fire) will cause me harm, and whilst the locked door stopped me from getting out, it is the fire that has killed me, not the door.

Have to strongly disagree MR. Without getting into a game of ping pong I will always consider a locked escape door a hazard in the event of fire and you will not.
Let's not discuss this over a jug of Banter Bar special brew.

[Midland Retty]

Hazard is the something with the potential to cause harm.

Yes a locked fire exit will increase the likelyhood you will be harmed by the fire, but the door itself isn't going to harm you and is thus not a hazard.

[nearlythere]

Hazard is the something with the potential to cause harm.

Yes a locked fire exit will increase the likelyhood you will be harmed by the fire, but the door itself isn't going to harm you and is thus not a hazard.

I shall not be drawn 

[Chris Houston]

I've split this topic from the original as it has now developed into one about something other than fire risk assessors in yorkshire.  if you want to discuss the fire risk assessorts in yorkshire, please go to the other thread.  thanks.  chris.

[CivvyFSO]

Hazard is the something with the potential to cause harm.

Yes a locked fire exit will increase the likelyhood you will be harmed by the fire, but the door itself isn't going to harm you and is thus not a hazard.

Is that not a little like saying that a load of boxes on a staircase are not a hazard, as it is the sudden decceleration upon hitting the floor that will hurt you, therefore the floor is the hazard?

[Midland Retty]

Civvy...                   

You know very well what I mean Mr Sarky Pedantic pants

 

[nearlythere]

Hazard is the something with the potential to cause harm.

Yes a locked fire exit will increase the likelyhood you will be harmed by the fire, but the door itself isn't going to harm you and is thus not a hazard.

Is that not a little like saying that a load of boxes on a staircase are not a hazard, as it is the sudden decceleration upon hitting the floor that will hurt you, therefore the floor is the hazard?

Yeh Civvy  . It wasn't the fall that killed him. It was the hard ground at the end.

[CivvyFSO]

Egg Zakly!

[Davo]

Where's BLEVE when you need him?
We need to calculate the velocity of the person of 98kg and six feet tall falling from a height of-

A- One metre
B- Two metres

and in both cases at NTP


davo

[nearlythere]

Where's BLEVE when you need him?
We need to calculate the velocity of the person of 98kg and six feet tall falling from a height of-

A- One metre
B- Two metres

and in both cases at NTP


davo

Easy Davo

Fast and a little bit faster, in that order.