Author Topic: Routine testing (Read 14065 times)

jasper · « **on:** December 20, 2005, 09:10:50 PM »

My company have just received a contract for undertaking routine testing for a client of ours. Although our staff have just received training in these tests, no formatt has been identified for the recording of these tests. Basically we have been asked to undertake weekly fire alarm tests and monthly extinguisher, moe and emergency lighting checks. We will be providing cad drawings indicating locations of all equipment and on-site and entries in their 'fire log books', however we are unsure of the best method on site of recording so we can send a monthly report; is it better to use a pda with locations in excell etc? or is there a better method of undertaking this task?
Thanks in advance
Jasp

AnthonyB · « **Reply #1 on:** December 20, 2005, 10:25:26 PM »

Most buildings that do all the correct testing still use the humble fire log book as evidence that someone has actually been on site and carried out a test.

In addition to this some contractors will send a weekly or monthly summary docket to their client's nominated person stating which tests have been carried out & any problems noted.

This is how we work when instructing a contractor to do tests on behalf of our clients - site log book record without fail & a monthly summary for our records

Bill J · « **Reply #2 on:** December 21, 2005, 08:57:59 AM »

We install a Fire Logbook, A4 Ringbound, our engineers carry triplicate forms, one is left in the logbook, if the building is managed by a landlord/managing agent, we send them a copy, and one is retained for our records.

We do that for all of our tests, FA, EL, Ext, Sprinklers, Drills etc, the only one we do not do it for is weekly bell tests, where we just sign a single sheet within the logbook, otherwise we would be filling a logbook every 6 months.

Devices tested are normally indicated with a coloured sticker, or in the case of extinguishers a test date on an existing label.

The only other exception is a major non-conformance which is fast tracked, a phone call to the office and a fax/email to the managing agent.

Bill

fireftrm · « **Reply #3 on:** December 21, 2005, 10:03:08 AM »

Whilst the answers you have been given seem entirely suitable I am STRONGLY of the opinion that any company given this contract SHOULD HAVE THOUGHT ALL THIS THROUGH. That your staff have 'just received training in the tests' says a lot about the actual skill base. The company who gave yours the contract is obviously incredibly naively managed!

I would love to come across such easy work and would have done my homework BEFORE entering into any contractual negotiation. Indeed I would have EXPECTED the recording system to be a clear part of these discussions!!!!!!!!!!!

Your business should consider itself extremely lucky and watch out for the future pitfalls that p*** poor preparation will create. Quite a noteable disgrace to the fire industry.

Unbelievable. Does your company actually know what it is doing?

May I suggest that reputable other businesses (Anthony and Bill take note) should refrain from giving help like this, if Jasper's business do actually know what they are doing then they should be more than competent at answering these sort of questions themselves. If not then let them be hoist by their own petard. You may be doing the industry no favours by prolonging their demise.

jasper · « **Reply #4 on:** December 21, 2005, 10:32:37 AM »

Thanks guys for your helpfull information.
@ fireftrm, I only asked for the best way for my company to provide the report (as well as entering into the log book)

The client is HAPPY for 'logbook only' recording of the tests, but I prefer to provide them with more detailed information. So the question was really 'is the paper method the best or done on excell through a pda''

As for my company's 'reputation' and 'competancy' I dont think that over the past 7 years Boc gasses, Walkers Snack Foods and Wincanton Heinz have had a problem so far!

Have you just lost a large contract by any chance? you just not like us meneals expanding our businesses? or did you have a hangover this morning?

TallyHo · « **Reply #5 on:** December 21, 2005, 10:37:04 AM »

I am all in favour of folks coming on here asking for suggestions on how to solve unusual problems or advice on infrequent occurrences. But I am amazed that someone has come on here asking advice on such basic procedures that any reputable company should have in place as a matter of course.

fireftrm is spot on.

jasper · « **Reply #6 on:** December 21, 2005, 10:57:23 AM »

This is our first contract of this type DaveyH; if you asked for information on fra of an acetylene filling / production plant I will do all I can to help (cos I am that kind of guy), not get a strop on and say its too 'basic' to tell u

fireftrm · « **Reply #7 on:** December 21, 2005, 11:15:04 AM »

Sorry I still maintain my opinion and DaveyH is talking great sense. I cannot understand how you could get into such a contractual position with so evident a lack of knowledge.

I do not think that anyone who hadn't a clue about doing a FRA for an Acetylene filling/production plant should be asking on here either. If they have so little expertise, or knowledge then a question on an internet site isn't going to give them the required competence. If you aren't well enough prepared then you should not be doing it.

The question you posed was so very basic that it does suggest a lack of professionalism and preparation.

I stand by my post.

The very people who should be telling you/advising you on the format of the report is the CLIENT!!! It is that this has only cropped up AFTER you entered into the contract that is amazing!

PS I do not have a hangover (wish I had been able to have a drink or three last night at one of my stations' Christmas dos but I was on call) and have lost no contracts. I am a FRA employee who believes that the fire industry needs to be professional. There are many on here who are, your post does not suggest the same of your business, no matter the contracts you already have.

I do hope, for your sake, that the companies you quote have not read your comments and decide to look again at the competence of the contractor they employee.

jasper · « **Reply #8 on:** December 21, 2005, 11:55:41 AM »

Post Removed by Moderator

I shall leave this paragraph up for a day only, we all know what "wtf" is an abreviation of, I'm not happy with that on the board. Also using caps to highlight a word is OK, but all caps sentences (i.e. shouting) is just over the line.

Guys, we are all for free speach and debate, we activly encourage it, but no shouting and no swearing please.

Thanks,

Chris.

jasper · « **Reply #9 on:** December 21, 2005, 12:06:33 PM »

Having looked at your post I am thinking you have misunderstood me; we are undertaking routing weekly fa tests and monthly em ltg and fire extinguisher inspections, we are not doing quarterly or annual fire alarm tests or annual extinguisher tests.
The reason the client has asked for this is that their staff do not do the checks correctly (or at all) and they dont want their extinguisher, fire alarm or electrical companies to do this as my company will produce a non-biased report
Jasp

Allen Higginson · « **Reply #10 on:** December 21, 2005, 08:01:41 PM »

It amazes me how "helpful" people can be when someone takes the time to ask a simple question. I prefer that than some of the idiots I see who have their own idea or interpretaion of regulations (and technical issues) and continue to get it wrong every time until something happens.
Get your heads out of your bums guys!

Paul · « **Reply #11 on:** December 21, 2005, 08:48:29 PM »

Buzzard, come on. If any self respecting fire safety pro were to ask you a question like this then you have to ask the question ' what are they doing in the industry'?

Surely as Firey says, this should of been set out from the offset. Nothing to do with guys asking simple questions, as I'm sure you'll see from reading through the posts on this forum. Most will go out of their way to offer good advice.

Allen Higginson · « **Reply #12 on:** December 21, 2005, 09:29:04 PM »

Quote from: Psmith

Buzzard, come on. If any self respecting fire safety pro were to ask you a question like this then you have to ask the question ' what are they doing in the industry'?

Surely as Firey says, this should of been set out from the offset. Nothing to do with guys asking simple questions, as I'm sure you'll see from reading through the posts on this forum. Most will go out of their way to offer good advice.

I'm not disagreeing with the general attitudes expressed on this site - indeed, in the majority of cases those replying to queries will bend over backwards to help.
I would also have taken the same line had the post had been "We have just taken over the maintenance of fire systems and associated life protecting equipment - how do we test it and how do we record the tests?". However, it was an innocuous enough question to ask what the best method was in presenting the associated data on a monthly reporting basis.
I also feel the tone of fireftrm's post was unnecessary,unconstructive and of no use to anyone other than to antagonise.

fireftrm · « **Reply #13 on:** December 22, 2005, 08:56:55 AM »

Fine Buzzard feel like that. But remember that how you are going to report is surely an intrinsic part of the negotiation that you would go through with your customer? Whether they want it in Word, Excel, email, printed etc?

I cannot accpet that the question was innocuous, the company, by Jasper's admission, have only just trained their staff how to do these tests so are hardly expert in the field and seem not to have thought through how they are going to pursue this line of business. Reporting methodologies are, or should be, part of the agreement you have with the client and if they just want the logbooks completed yet you wish to offer more then do so, but a truly professional organisation would not be posting questions as to how to do this on an open internet site!

My tone was deliberately fierce as I feel very strongly on this matter, somewhere some company is paying good money for a less than professional service, if you can't work out how to send a report on tests then how good is the testing, which is the more difficult task?

TallyHo · « **Reply #14 on:** December 22, 2005, 11:42:08 AM »

Quote from: jasper

This is our first contract of this type DaveyH; if you asked for information on fra of an acetylene filling / production plant I will do all I can to help (cos I am that kind of guy), not get a strop on and say its too 'basic' to tell u

I didn't get a strop on and I didn't say that 'it's too basic to tell u'. What I said was that I am amazed that questions were asked about basic procedures that any reputable company should have in place as a matter of course.

Asking advice about an acetylene filling/production plant is reasonable in my opinion and if I could help with such an enquiry I would be happy to do so.

If a long distance lorry driver went on to a web site asking how to fill in a tachograph, I don't think I'd be too keen on him transporting my goods around.

News:

Author Topic: Routine testing (Read 14065 times)