FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Fire Safety => Topic started by: Guest on July 20, 2004, 01:14:13 PM
-
Spotted this this morning- whopping fine handed out of £400000!
http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/news/s/124/124430_death_blaze_hotel_fined_400000.html
Comments anyone?
-
Good stuff - but it would be better to prosecute before somebody gets killed.
-
Combustible items in an escape route - they should know better. Everyone should know better. But it is so typical. And it does appear that they are only getting done because there was a fire. Why do we not see all the workplaces getting dragged to court, I see similar breaches most times I look round a workplace (and I look round only public buildings.)
It would be good to see more organisations getting done and for the fines to be as high even if there is no fire. This is probably the only thing that will motivate organisations (apart from Corporate Manslaughter/Killing charges.)
-
Sadly enforcement is becoming more reactive - the HSE have already said that they are aiming towards only responding to complaints and accidents with certain outcomes for the majority of sites and I can see fire going down a similar route.
Of course you could go the other extreme and go down the privatisation/agency/local authority route with self funding through penalties - look how that has increased the inspection, detection and penalties for parking and speeding offenses!
-
Has the increased use of penalties reduced the level of speeding? most people I know just take the chance of being caught as a known risk and keep driving as normal.
-
It sends a message that offences of this nature are taken seriously and I for one applaud the harsh line. It will be intersting to see how the hotel industry respond to this
-
It is somewhat ironic that GMC have achieved such a significant fine by bringing a prosecution under the FP Act, only months before it is revoked. I believe the sentence brings the contravention of fire safety law firmly under the H & S umbrella. The Judge refered to case law brought under H & S legislation in deciding the level of fine.
GMC have consistently brought cases to court when appropriate and I believe other enforcing authorities will have little option but to follow suit when the RRO is enacted. Many, very rich and powerful companies see serially challenging enforcement orders, (that is appealling against an enforcement notce) as little more than an inconveinience. Enforcing authorities had better be ready, the days of 'bluff and persuasion' are, (quite correctly), gone.
-
All very exciting and orgasmic for the gung ho. Doesn't help the old couple does it.
-
Guest
Your contribution is extremely frustrating. Throughout this very long and at time difficult case the fact that two people lost their lives was never far from everyone's minds.
Are you implying that the prosecution was brought because of some perverse pleasure in taking companies to court?
Or, are you implying that taking companies to court is a waste of time?
I hope that you're implying that adequate resources should be made available so that all premises can be checked frequently enough to make sure this sort of event doesn't happen...however if this last one is what you meant, you are in cloud cuckoo land!
Perhaps you would care to elaborate a bit further on your vision of the future. What do you see as the best way to make sure fire safety, (and peoples lives) is taken seriously?
That may have some gem that would save the Mr and Mrs Robertsons of the future.
-
All very exciting and orgasmic for the gung ho. Doesn't help the old couple does it.
Well spotted Sherlock, but what would you recommend? Perhaps you should direct your anger towards the people responsible not those engaged in serious discussion about fire safety. :idea:
-
Wasn't the fire started by a member of staff? If he was that intent on putting people's lives at risk or even murdering people, could he not have done so anyway, without the gift of fuel from the management? Just a thought. With regard to stopping such problems, education is probably as valuable as hanging and flogging. Unfortunately, no one really takes staff and indeed management training very seriously. A lot of staff training is done by people who frankly do not do it very well. Better education as to the WHY rather than the do it or get shot at dawn often gets more commitment.
-
Oops sorry. I sent the last message. The kind IT support man has dropped my password out again today.
-
Sorry again. Got logged in this time.
-
Colin,
You are right about training...however I believe the government is set against any 'verifiable', competent or prescriptive training.There will be no standards against which to judge the trainer or training. Much too onerous on organisations! Instead they will tacitly accept the premise if training is seen to be a factor in any 'serious risk situation', then de facto, it wasn't adequate.
Quite clever really, it is 'stable door legislation' without all that messing about with designating orders and such.
-
The only hope is that the guidance docs will set some sort of benchmark standard, to which people can refer.
-
Sorry that was me again above, made anonymous yet again by the IT man.
-
For once Colin, you wish may come true. There will be lots of guidance on training and instruction (two different things apparently) in the guidance documents. No prescription mind you, but no 'responsible person' will be able to say they weren't given enough advice. That is of course unless BRE have been instructed to fillet the guides to make them more acceptable to the CBI. (I know you wouldn't have done this... having waded through BS 5839 P1)! (Only joking, it was, for the most part, a paragon of common sense and reasonableness).
-
Yo Jimmy, My wish to marry Joanna Lumley never came true so the thought of guidance on the RRO must surely be a very close second. Would it not have been nice though if the guidance had been written by sharp end people who had actually inspected lots of buildings, dare I say like an experienced and enlightended fire officer (yes they do exist), who had seen good and bad management in real buildings, rather than I shudder to think who?