FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Technical Advice => Topic started by: Cal on September 16, 2005, 11:29:08 AM
-
I could really do with some help. I need to know what exactly is a “single private dwelling”. I can find definitions for “dwelling (approved document B ADB) “domestic premises (HASWA 1974)”, “house (loads of case law)” “flat”, “HIMO”, etc. However, the only place I come across the term “single private dwelling” is in fire legislation and I can’t find a definition as to what it means. According to ADB 2000 the guidance suggests “it is possible to treat an unsupervised group home with up to 6 residents as an ordinary dwelling” This being the case then a dwelling could provide a home for 6 unrelated persons thus making it a HIMO. It would also be classed as a domestic premise by virtue of the definition under HASWA 1974. However, if my inferences are right then I believe that the guidance within ADB leads me to gather that a dwelling could be both HIMO and domestic premises but still be a “single private dwelling”. Am I correct?
-
Cal
Dont confuse statutory definitions with technical ones. The definitions in legislation serve as triggers for when powers can be used. How they are used is a matter of judgement.
What ADB is saying is that if there are only six people sharing a dwelling then it can be designed like a normal flat or house this has no effect on its legal status.
-
Cal also take care that a premise is what you are considering and that the premises are the premise upon which the consideration is being made.
A common error of assuming that premises is a plural of premise.
-
Well said , but it would have been more eloquent and helped the chap understand your point better if you had explained that a premise is a proposition and a premises is a building.
-
Colin, you are right, however I was just trying to use words in a way to be slightly humourous, sorry it obviously didn't translate well!
-
Well you know how we always have a communication problem. But i am brushing up on durhamese.
-
I wouldn't understand that I can't speak with such a southern tongue
-
Thanks for the replies and I really appreciate the help but I'm still no nearer understanding what constitutes a "single private dwelling" The problem I'm trying to bottom out is a fire authority have the power to serve a section 10 notice on a HIMO by virtue of it being a class of premises which could have been designated (section 1(1)(a) FP Act). However, a notice could not be served if the premises were classed as a "single private dwelling" (section 2(e)). I'm trying to write a dissertation on fire safety law and enforcement in HIMO and this question is quite critical to my work. As part of the studies I’m looking at Housing law and duties on landlords etc, so this is just one element. Is there someone I could approach in ODPM or somewhere else to get an authoritative answer?
-
No need to bother the civil service chappies Cal. They are busy cocking up fire safety, which is a big job given how good it has become over the years. The answer is very simple. You can serve a s10 on a HMO. No question about it. Cast iron. As sure as the fact that small employers will ignore the RRO, and you dont get much more certain than that. Prof Everton has written an article about this recently by the way, which you may find helpful. Its in the Fire Service College journal.
-
Cal,
I am no authority but my understanding is that:
Single = occupants form a single household (Housing Act 2004 section 258)
Private = not open to the public
Dwelling = place where people sleep and includes a toilet, personal washing facitities and/or cooking facilities.
A block of flats would include single private dwellings and common parts.
Would your studies support this definition?
Steve
-
Thanks everyone for taking the trouble to give me their views. Really grateful!!
Cal
-
Simple answer is FA cannot issue a sec.10 notice on premises defined in sec.2 of FP Act "premises consisting of or comprised in a house which is occupied as a single private dwelling'. An HMO is not a house occupied as a single private dwelling. Neither is a block of flats.
-
Excuse me for resurrecting this thread but I am unclear about the following:
In Article 31 Prohibition notices the FSO says:
"(10) In this article, "premises" includes domestic premises other than premises consisting of or comprised in a house which is occupied as a single private dwelling and article 27 (powers of inspectors) shall be construed accordingly."
What does this mean in relation to prohibition notices and powers of inspectors?
Will it be possible to serve a prohibition notice on the common parts of a block of flats? The consequence of this might be to prevent some people using their flats. I am assuming that each flat is a single private dwelling.
Within a HMO made up of converted flats (Housing Act section 257), does an inspector have a right of entry into each flat or only into the common parts?
Within a HMO made up of private bedrooms with occupants sharing other amenities; does an inspector have the right to enter each private bedroom or only the common parts?
I am after the legal position rather than the practical difficulties involved.
-
What does this mean in relation to prohibition notices and powers of inspectors?
Will it be possible to serve a prohibition notice on the common parts of a block of flats?
In theroy yes in practice no
Within a HMO made up of converted flats (Housing Act section 257), does an inspector have a right of entry into each flat or only into the common parts?
An Inspector has the power to enter at any reasonable time any place to ascertain if the order applies so yes.
Within a HMO made up of private bedrooms with occupants sharing other amenities; does an inspector have the right to enter each private bedroom or only the common parts?
Please see above and under article 31( 10) can prohibit the use of such bedrooms if they are not a SPD.
I am after the legal position rather than the practical difficulties involved.
Answers are in ypur quote.I cannot use technology
Its good to see that some London officers are reading up on RRO its a shame you probably will not get any training tilll 2007.
-
Under RRO for prohibition purposes only an inspector can enter any premises apart from premises consisting of or comprised in a house which is occupied as a single private dwellings.
Yes he could article 31 a block of flats but unlikely to do so. Yes he could enter all parts of all hmos and prohibit all or part of them regardless of whether they are SPDs.
-
Under RRO for prohibition purposes only an inspector can enter any premises apart from premises consisting of or comprised in a house which is occupied as a single private dwellings.
Yes he could article 31 a block of flats but unlikely to do so. Yes he could enter all parts of all hmos and prohibit all or part of them regardless of whether they are SPDs.
Thanks for your response Phil,
I notice that you specify "for prohibition purposes only" Does this means that although an inspector has a right to enter these SPD, an enforcement notice could not be served on someone in these premises for fire safety failings in their SPD? (My brain is starting to hurt.)
The "house" bit of "house which is occupied as a single private dwelling" I think means "a building or part of a building"; unfortunately this doesn't really help to make the meaning any clearer.
-
No not strictly correct someone in a SPD in say an office block, think of a caretakers flat, that flat is his spd but it is not comprised in a house.
An inspector would have no power of entry to that premises other than for prohibition or restriction purposes.
However the caretaker may have to co-operate with the responsible person to ensure certain things are maintained. But an inspector has no power to enter to make sure he is co-operating!
If he isn’t co-operating he would be failing to comply with the order and an enforcement notice could be served on him if he had to any extent control of the premises.
For example if he removed his self closing fire door that was required to protect the stairway he would be in some way in control of that part of the premises and enforcement action could be taken.
I think it was a mistake to remove the power of entry to dwellings that was in FPA i.e. we could enter the caretakers flat if 24 hrs notice was given. RRO does not allow entry as a right unless article 31 applies.
So in answer to your questions:
An enforcement notice could be served but you could not enter the premises to do so.(Unless Article 31 applies)
House means house not a building or part of a building that was the definition of premises in FPA. No power of entry if premises consists of or is comprised in a house occupied as SPD.
I hope that has clarified things for you now go and lie down in a darkened room!
-
That has helped Phil - especially the lie down.
The definition of "house" was from the Housing Act 2004, in full:
"99 Meaning of “house” etc.
In this Part—
“dwelling” means a building or part of a building occupied or intended to
be occupied as a separate dwelling;
“house” means a building or part of a building consisting of one or more
dwellings; and references to a house include (where the context permits) any yard,
garden, outhouses and appurtenances belonging to, or usually enjoyed with, it
(or any part of it)."
It would be nice and simple if the FSO did not cover a "building" used as a SPD. Then we could use that lovely building definition in Circ 5:
The definition of "building" has been interpreted variously by the courts for purposes of other legislation and is therefore subject to some uncertainty. However, to ensure uniformity in the administation of the Act, it is considered desirable that a building should generally be regarded as extending from its lowest level to roof-top and that the horizontal limits should be regarded as set by party/separating walls through which there is no internal communication with neighbouring buildings. Doors provided in party walls solely as fire exits should not be regarded as a means of internal communication. Nor is it considered that the effect of imperforate floors extending over the whole area of a building is to create two (or more) separate buildings, notwithstanding that there may be no internal means of communication between the parts.
Unfortunately it isnt that simple.
-
I know it may appear confussing as there are various definitions of house.
In reality it is quite simple the only places a prohibition notice could not be served on is a stand alone SPD, as long as it is being occupied as such.(i.e. start running a sweat shop in your living room it is no longer being used soley as a dwelling.
If the dwelling is located in another building it is not then comprised in a house occupied as a SPD. e.g carertakers flats in offices.
An HMO may consists of SPDs but they are comprised in a house containing more than one SPD and can be restricted.
That is the situation now and will continue with RRO. Only difference is under existing legislation we may enter SPDs(except those in single houses) if 24hrs notice is given.
RRO affords no right of entry unless to prohbit or restrict use of dwellings in other buildings.