FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Fire Safety => Topic started by: Gasmeter on September 22, 2006, 04:49:48 PM
-
Has anyone got any ideas for an effective solution to vandalism and misuse of extinguishers in student accommodation? We've tried all the obvious things, like signs stating the penalties and the fact that it's a crime (which only seems to encourage them!) and endless reminders about the need for fire safety awareness; I've considered the 'Theft Stopper' alarm but it's expensive for the number of extinguishers we have and the 80db alarm will most likely provide an amusing diversion for the culprits. I live in hope!
-
The mosts effective solution I've seen was one of fines. One residence I went to simply split the £120 charge between all those in the shared part. A second offence resulted in exclusion (it was foreign students who generally were glad to have an education and worried about what their parents would think if they got sent home).
-
Other solutions used are the protective covers used for weather protection - most casual abusers can't be bothered to rip the cover off and then set off the ext. They are relatively cheap & don't need batteries!
Also GRP cabinets are sometimes used, either standard ones with a pull seal on the catches or the lockable ones with the key behind a screen in the door.
Of course under the traditional scales two 2 gallon fire buckets equated to one 2 gallon water extinguisher so you could always go low tech - buckets are easy and cheap to recharge!
-
Risk assess the problem and remove them, after all if they are empty they are little use anyway!!
-
To suggest the removal of fire fighting equipment from a place of work (and yes, student accomodation is a place of work - one where there is both sleeping and cooking) seems like a bad idea to me.
-
Chris, we always seem to agree to disagree on extiguisher usage. The system of fines works sometimes but if it doesn't then how does the on cost of rechaging or other maintenance get put into perspective? Extinguishers will always be subject to misuse in these types of premises because of high jinks and the input of alcohol. There has to be a balance and time trouble versus cost has been there for a long time now.
-
Indeed, we have to balance benefit against cost. We also need to comply with the Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regs that place a duty to provide fire fighting equipment, where appropriate. I think a workplace where people cook and sleep needs them. I think it would be difficult to argue to a judge (for that is what one would have to do) that the cost of recharging a fire extinguishers was too much, should there be a fatal fire in a students flat.
That's just my opinion, the employers and occupiers will have to make their own judgements and stand by them if things go wrong.
-
I have to agree with Jokar - what on earth is the point of supplying them if you know they are going to be vandalised. It's rather like sweeping up leaves in an autumn gale. You might as well just pour the maintenance fees down the drain.
Our absent guru Colin Todd suggests in one of his books on fire alarms that it might be worth considering providing fire safety measures in a building according to the behaviour of the occupiers, rather than on the use of the building, and I think there has got to be some merit in that - particularly in cases like these. I know it isn't a fire alarm issue - but the principle is the same.
Risk assessment gives you all the power you need to find a solution that will work - and I guess the solution is already in place in a students residence somewhere.
-
I am interested in the concept that student accommodation is a place of work - I assume that is for support staff rather than students?
If it is for the latter how would liability for the lack of training stand up in the event that students used them actively in fire and became injured.
As for solution I would have thought that that a trial of fines / cabinets / dummy CCTV etc may be adopted to see what solution fits each residential scenario. This would provide an audit trail of actions in the event that something in the future goes wrong
-
As far as I can see student accomodation comes under RRO 3 sleeping accomodation which does refer to the training of staff but doesn't say anything about anyone else.
So I would guess that the liability for a student actively using a fire extinguisher would be the same as that for a hotel guest doing the same. Any other interpretation would lead to the need to train the residents in an old persons home, hotel guests etc. to use fire extinguishers.
-
I am interested in the concept that student accommodation is a place of work
The people who work there might include: maintenance staff, surveyors, cleaners.
-
http://www.sti-europe.com/english/mis-ext-stopper.html
-
Graeme, I like that, especially when it gives neaerly 100 decibels. The only problem might be that the 2nd action level for noise at work is 90 decibels and one of the poor souls may get there ears hurt.
-
Dummy CCTV is only good for a one hit wonder. As soon as one person realises it is fake the word will soon spread. The use of boxes helps somewhat, but increased checks could result to actually make sure the Ext's are still inside.
The use of dye coating visual under ultra violet light shows up on the 'abuser' user. But again added costs checking etc.
-
Thanks for all your input, I'm sure I'll never cure the problem completely; maybe I should try electrification or automatic CS gas sprays.
-
Graeme, I like that, especially when it gives neaerly 100 decibels. The only problem might be that the 2nd action level for noise at work is 90 decibels and one of the poor souls may get there ears hurt.
all the better then.
-
Graeme, I like that, especially when it gives neaerly 100 decibels. The only problem might be that the 2nd action level for noise at work is 90 decibels and one of the poor souls may get there ears hurt.
all the better then.
1 - The noise regs are to protect staff, not students.
2 - They can move away from the noise.
-
Most of the students will probably spend more time in the disco or pop concert where measured noise levels may be encountered close to the speakers up to 140 dB. Bet they wont complain about that!
The noise at work action levels were reduced last year to 80 and 85 dB but dont forget that these levels are averaged over a full working day so even for employees for a short period noise levels may exceed these levels.
If I recall does not BS5839 talk about a maximum level of 120 dB for fire alarms - or have I been dreaming again?
-
Disco's Kurnal!!
you are showing your age but your not dreaming on the 120Dba
-
Old maybe and my shimmy is more a wobble but I can can still put it together at the palais. And the DDA means I can get the zimmer through much more easily.
-
How easy it is to get caught out, there was I concentrating on RR(FS)O and they change the noise at work regs. Chris, does not H&S apply to all persons whether at work or not? If not, why are students excluded, is it because parents pay for them
-
Current legislation protects employees, not just one's own employees. One has a duty of care to visitors and guests, but less specific legal responsibilities.
-
The noise at work regs action levels apply to continuous noise and when action is needed. So the 80 and 85 dB levels apply to employees who are exposed to the noise averaged over a day or a week. There are however peak sound levels and the lower action level for this is 135 dB. So you can crank the volume up on the fire alarm to 134dB and still be ok if it is only occaisional and for a short duration.
Incidentally the HSE can exempt the emergency services from the provisions of the act if they conflict the activities they are expected to carry out.