Public Building...Locked Fire Escape!

[Donna]

After a member of the public made a complaint (amongst other things) to both the HSE and the local Fire Service about Poor lighting in a well used Public Building, Fire escape signs, etc etc
After the Complaint, measures were taken and the lighting was significantly improved by the Council, and various information signs were erected in the appropriate places including the one Rear Fire escape (the front of the building is always open and has approx 6 internal carpeted steps, and 4 or so masonary steps outside to pavement level)
The thing is, the rear Fire Escape (which is also the main IN/OUT Disabled access, plus internal route to the Disabled Toilet via Stannah Stairlift and Rear door) now sports a "Fire Escape" sign....but it is locked by key (and so are another two doors in between this door and the external door)!

Is this Illegal?

[Clevelandfire]

Is this Illegal?

From what you describe it doesn't sound particularly very good, but whether it is illegal depends on a few factors.

Initially I would say yes it is illegal, however they may have in their procedures a mechanism whereby a member of staff goes straight to that door in the event of a fire alarm to unlock the door (all members of staff carry the key and theres enough staff on to cover people away on sick leave or holidays etc)

But even then it would be pushing it, and it would have to be a rigid policy.In the days of risk assessment etc thats an option they may wish to use but they'd need to prove it was fool proof and would always work

Speak to the local fire officer again and see what she or he said , might be theyve accepted it or that there is another factor you are unaware of that comes into play.

[Donna]

Well after them Reporting this to the Local Fire Officer in the July, as well as the fact that this Main disabled entrance and Exit was partially blocked with tables and chairs, which was also mentioned in their complaint, the "said" Fire officer did not contact the Owner and Occupier of the building until after the two weeks following a letter to the complainant dated 11th October, who then said in the letter,
"as a result of your complaint, I have programmed an audit on the premises that will be carried out by one of my inspectors"......"however you need to be aware that we give occupiers of premises a couple of weeks notice of our intention to audit to give them the opportunity to collate the records etc that we need to see. There will therefore be a slight delay in this audit taking place.
They then had another letter on the 7th November which confirmed the audit had now taken place.........all this time passed from the July to the November, when the Fire Authority had been told of the "blocked (Fire exit/disabled entrance) Corridor" and in fact one has to go through "2 locked doors" to get to the outside, which are relocked behind the person before the door in front of them is unlocked,

There are only 2 members of staff on site at public times, and despite new signage, lighting etc etc The Fire Authority still hasnt stopped them for locking the door!
I just cant believe it!

[Donna]

Can a complaint be made about the above?
 This building is used for Craft Fairs and Weddings and this fire escape is permenantly locked by key, and there are another 2 doors to be unlocked before one can get to the outside!

[kurnal]

Donna
This sounds on the face of it way out of line. If its marked as a fire exit then it should be available for use at all times, sometimes there may need to be special arrangements made involving security devices but it is never acceptable for a building occupied by members of the public to require the use of a key to open an exit door.
I suggest you find the name of the Chief Fire officer and the Chair of the Fire Authority and make your complaint directly to them in person- ask for a meeting.

And if you dont get a good answer from them then think about using the Press. TV recently did an exposee of west country hotels- they may be interested in this.

[Clevelandfire]

Well after them Reporting this to the Local Fire Officer in the July, as well as the fact that this Main disabled entrance and Exit was partially blocked with tables and chairs, which was also mentioned in their complaint, the "said" Fire officer did not contact the Owner and Occupier of the building until after the two weeks following a letter to the complainant dated 11th October, who then said in the letter,
"as a result of your complaint, I have programmed an audit on the premises that will be carried out by one of my inspectors"......"however you need to be aware that we give occupiers of premises a couple of weeks notice of our intention to audit to give them the opportunity to collate the records etc that we need to see. There will therefore be a slight delay in this audit taking place.
They then had another letter on the 7th November which confirmed the audit had now taken place.........all this time passed from the July to the November, when the Fire Authority had been told of the "blocked (Fire exit/disabled entrance) Corridor" and in fact one has to go through "2 locked doors" to get to the outside, which are relocked behind the person before the door in front of them is unlocked,

There are only 2 members of staff on site at public times, and despite new signage, lighting etc etc The Fire Authority still hasnt stopped them for locking the door!
I just cant believe it!

Donna

There may be reasons for this. I get alot of members of the public contact me concerned about what they deem to be terrible fire precautions and practices. They are unaware of what goes on behind the scenes however and the exact rule of law and sometimes things arent what they appear to be on face value.

I totally agree that from what you describe the situation sounds dicey.
 
I am absolutely confident however that no fire inspector would allow a unsafe practice to continue once he or she is aware of it but naturally you are entitled to approach the officer concerned to discuss this further.

IF and only if you dont get a satisfactory response then write to the Cheif Fire Officer but not before otherwise your concerns wont be acted on.

[Donna]

Ok, Thankyou,  contact will be made with them again in the first instance,
There is definalely something not correct, The first Fire Officer  who was dealing (with this member of the public's observation of poor Health and Safety/) Fire Safety issues, told the member of the public that they would arrange a visit the building almost "immediately",  and were very concerned, then they were uncontactable and The member of the public could not get hold of them for a while, and then eventually was told that the first Fire officer had been promoted and been not involved with the case. anymore..Then and only then did they receive the first written letter (detailed in above posts).
The HSE made some enquiries, and the Council were then told to upgrade the lighting to meet requirements (and this was a significant change) as the corridors housed a Stannah Stairlift and doubled as the fire escape (but at the time of the member of the publics' observations, NO fire escape sign was visable) and the very same corridor was contained chairs and folding tables awaiting collection from a wedding furniture hire firm after a wedding, this person has since got hold of information that this happens as often as weddings take place and other craft fairs etc etc, so it is an ongoing matter!
All the above information was given to the First investigating officer, in the July, (most weddings take place in the summer) but the place was visited in the November as previously described!

The member of the public, was not happy with how slow things were happening between the July and the November, and re contacted HSE and asked for all correspondence between the HSE and the Fire service under the freedom of information act, it arrived, and the member of the public was furnished with the emails between the HSE  and Fire Service....The HSE wrote on several occaisions the reiterations of the complainant, and it was only noticable given the timing of the HSE it was for this reson only that the Fire Officer actually replied to the complainant by letter...and then they did not do anything!
The member of the public phoned the said Officer, and in the conversation, the fire officer told the person that the council staff have NOW been told to have a nominated Responsible person, and from the date in November, thay shall make regular hazard inspection reports (which they were not doing up to the time of the Fire Officers visit, they were told)

Now 2 years on, the original reason the member of the public entered the building (I will not elaborate due to legal reasons) has not yet been resolved, and is a seperate case, but in the meantime, they have uncovered a can of worms when they have now received the bundle of papers, again from the freedom of information act from the Fire Service, They had asked for the Hazzard inspection reports, of the said building, simply as they knew there would NOT be any...as the Staff of the Council owned building were only told to START keeping them in the NOVEMBER! the F.I.A. has now has produced lots of Hazard inspection reports of the building, dating up to 3 years  BEFORE the time that the fire Officer told them that they should START to do them! Strange ....very Strange... as these are now produced like a rabbit out of a hat, all wrote out the same, the same ticked boxes, Not one entry has been entered as to the regular delivery of Wedding venue chairs and tables, that happens weekly, and they HAVE to be removed from the main rooms as these are used for another reason from a Monday to Friday!
The only thing that has changed between the time of the Fire Officer telling the Member of the public, that the staff had NOT previously kept Hazard reports and them NOW being produced in duplicate...is since the conversations between the fire service and the member of the public, There are legal proceedings between them and a trird party.

The member of the public does not want to make a complaint to the fire service, Not really, (As on the whole they are fantastic,) I suppose they would just want someone to think "Hang on a minute, I shouldnt let this go on...Ok the people who occupy 70% of the building, are a really big and powerful organisation, and it them who want the doors locked, But I have a responsibility to the members of the public, and I should gently advise that they stop locking the fire exit, no matter how intimidating they are"
Does that seem a fair request?

If the door is locked for security purposes...then they should have a human guard or something at the door....but DONT lock it!
And when this Fire escape is being used as  the wheelchair access/exit, I dont think it is safe practice for them to be ushered into the corridor, have the door locked behind them, then the member of staff have to push tightly past them (as the corridor was partially blocked with chairs and tables and there is no wheelchair turning space if an alarm then started to ring!) to then unlock the door in front of them, and then repeat the proceedure in the Second corridor, at this time a person is locked in between two locked doors in front and behind, (Twice in two separate corridors) and was unable to turn around because of the blocked corridor,

[black arts]

Contact the Brigade HQ, register your complaint, tell your story demand a reply within three working days

[Clevelandfire]

Hi Donna

Telling us that it slightly puts a different slant on things .

As black arts said start rattling the cages at Brigade HQ

I think i might be able to guess whats going on here...

Firstly i didnt realise this was a council building (apologies if you already elluded to that fact I miss things at my age)

Im not going to say anymopre on that subject but lets just say the fact it is a COUNCIL (note the big letters) building does explain a few things.(Im sure you perhaps get my meaning if not private message me and Ill explain)

The other thing here is that yes a fire offficer shouldnt allow un safe practices to continue once he or she is aware of them - but if the council have been told not to lock doors by a fire officer but then continue to do so then it isnt the fire officers fault. Some fire brigades dont have the resources to go and check on continued compliance in this way. If something happens in the meantime its the councils fault for ignoring the fire service. I know thats not the way it should work, but there you have it.

Well here is yet another case of something Im hearing alot about.

The government want a level playing field and yet when it comes to enforcing on certain organisations the intervention of cheif execs who all play at the same golf club / visit the same masons lodge all seem to be pally with one another somehow always plays a part... hmm how strange!

[Donna]

Dear Jim,
I have tried to send you a Private Message, but the email address shown does not seem to work, and it has returned the message unsent to me, maybe if you Private Message me with a link, I can tell you more details,

[Clevelandfire]

No problem will PM you Donna!

[Donna]

Nothing come through to my email inbox yet, Jim?

[Clevelandfire]

Blimey give me chance Donna

I was out with the family having a well deserved Bank Holiday evening meal down at the pub

Il PM you tomorrow for its rather late now and I need my beauty sleep

[Donna]

Oops! Sorry, I forgot it was Bank Holiday

[Donna]

Thankyou Kurnal for the legislation info that I needed for Yesterday :-)

The local Fire Safety Officer was telephoned Yesterday, but no-one was available to speak to, the concerns with the locked Fire Exit were discussed with the person who answered the phone, and they said that someone would be in contact....an email was received later from "The Fire Safety Officer" (but no name was supplied)  that asked for someone from a legal team to contact their Data Protection Officer!  (I already know that the data protection Officer does not have the area of expertise to deal with Fire Safety Questions)

A polite email was returned re-iterating the issue, and it explained that the member of the public only want the simple question asked which was,

"After a Fire Safety Officer audit of the ****************in November 2006, It is known that the Signed Fire Exit is STILL being locked, this exit route contains 2 seperate locked doors,  This building holds Craft Fairs and Weddings at the weekends which hundreds of people frequent, and the One Fire Exit remains locked!, As a member of the public I am entitled to ask this question, as simple conversation and communication may well resolve the issue, I do not think it is neccesary for a member of a legal team to be invited to contact your Data Protection Officer, who has already explained that she has no knowledge of actual Fire Safety Issues, It may well be the case that you are unaware that the Fire Exit is being Locked, I look forward to speaking with you soon"
 Does that seem a fair email? I thought so,

Another Email has been received, which says, (A standard letter I think)

"Thankyou for your email, Your enquiry will be logged as non-urgent and passed to the relevant Fire Safety Officer for appropriate action"

As a member of the public, I am concerned of this, and its not surprizing that people can lose faith in The Safety Services,
I just wondered what you think?