FireNet Community
THE REGULATORY REFORM (FIRE SAFETY) ORDER 2005 => Q & A => Topic started by: robara on October 18, 2006, 02:59:29 PM
-
Hi, hope someone can help with a query on fire escapes.
I have a two bed cottage that I use for holiday let, the staircase comes down into the living room with no dividing wall between them. There is no fire escape from the first floor. How will this be affected by the new regs.
-
Generally the accepted standard would be to ensure that there is a window from the bedrooms that will open and allow escape or rescue- opening needs to be around 600mmx450mm ideally and mains powered interlinked smoke alarms.
The full guidance document to the new order is available for free download - see guides and legislation links above.
-
robara, do you let through an agency? If yes, they will be in a good position for advising you also. If no, consider asking a reputable one by saying you are interested in using them.
-
Where in the guide does it allow for window escape from sleeping accommodation? My authority are just about to start delving into B&B and holiday let terratory and intend to enforce the guide as detailed on page 97 i.e provide a protected stair leading directly to a final exit. The result will probably lead to a large number of premises going out of business.
-
ABD allows window escapes for dwellings, but not in a way that you can pick and choose to avoid protecting a staircase.
"Enforce the guide"? Thats the sort of comment that will raise a few eyebrows. :)
-
Civvy FSO,
I agree!!! Does this not just re enforce the fact that not all enforcing authorities actually truely understand the ethos of the new legislation!!
Further to that out of interest do holiday lets come under the RRFSO at all? If they do, does that not mean that any rented domestic dwelling does as well? Or is it as I suspect that due to the irregular occupancy it does come under the order?
Confusion is rife!!!
Any help will be welcomed.
-
Holiday cottages etc would come under 'domestic premises' since they are actually occupied as a private dwelling by one family unit. So I would say any self contained holiday accommodation would not be controlled by RRFSO. Common areas, yes. i.e. Shared means of escape from seperate units.
Put more than one family unit in it and you can technically call it a HMO. But would we be bothered? This is not what the change in 'what constitutes a HMO' was designed to include.
-
Thanks, that makes sence!
-
According to legal advice holiday lets do fall within the FSO as, depending on the length of occupancy, they are not dewllings. If there is only temporary residence of a premises that will be deemed evidence that it is not the residents dwelling. One for the courts, should any authority be brave enough to take it that far.
-
And there I was thinking that Guidance was just that. How do you enforce guidance. Enforce the law by all means and all that states is for an FRA to be undertaken and the outcomes acted upon. The guidance is just one method of dealing with a particular premises type. The Fire safety Duties are there for the RP not the enforcers.
-
There is obviously a bit of confusion here! Ok so the HM Govt guides have been refered to by the judiciary in relation to various aspects particularly fire detection, but all that does is reinforce the fact that the guides if followed are deemed to be 'Best practice' in complying with the requirements of the FSO, they can I suppose be deemed quasi - legal in a similar way to the HSE guides, this does not mean that it is law to follow them, and if the requirements are met some other way then the standards should be the same or better than in the HM Govt guides.
Sorry if I have just ventured into the realms of the sucking of the egg lesson but I only wish to add some clarity to the subject.
-
Where in the guide does it allow for window escape from sleeping accommodation? My authority are just about to start delving into B&B and holiday let terratory and intend to enforce the guide as detailed on page 97 i.e provide a protected stair leading directly to a final exit. The result will probably lead to a large number of premises going out of business.
Are holiday lets high risk, then? Presumably the larger B&Bs have been known to you for a while (FPA and WPRs).
-
. The result will probably lead to a large number of premises going out of business.
Tully: Are you saying that this is inevitable, desirable or perhaps an aim of your FRS?
What happened to the enforcement concordat and 'reasonableness'.
Your FRS would do well to utilise FINDS before setting out on this foolish project to see what other FRS's have experienced.
With regards to protected staircases discharging into a room rather that a final exit, there's already history of a magistrates court uphoding an appeal of an enforcement notice and allowing a single staircase in a 4 storey pub (with accomodation over) to discharge into the high risk bar area.
I too doubt whether holiday cottages would fall under the FSO, as for instance, a group of students sharing a house for a few terms wouldn't, so why should a family of four (and a dog) attract such attention???
-
I know our brigade is looking at this issue,quickly realising that if the guide was followed then an awful lot of small B&B's would close,so are now working on an alternative strategy.Don't know the detail,stuck up my own tower at ivory tower at the moment.
-
. The result will probably lead to a large number of premises going out of business.
Tully: Are you saying that this is inevitable, desirable or perhaps an aim of your FRS?
What happened to the enforcement concordat and 'reasonableness'.
Your FRS would do well to utilise FINDS before setting out on this foolish project to see what other FRS's have experienced.
With regards to protected staircases discharging into a room rather that a final exit, there's already history of a magistrates court uphoding an appeal of an enforcement notice and allowing a single staircase in a 4 storey pub (with accomodation over) to discharge into the high risk bar area.
I too doubt whether holiday cottages would fall under the FSO, as for instance, a group of students sharing a house for a few terms wouldn't, so why should a family of four (and a dog) attract such attention???
Unless it's a smoking beagle
:)=)
-
I too doubt whether holiday cottages would fall under the FSO, as for instance, a group of students sharing a house for a few terms wouldn't, so why should a family of four (and a dog) attract such attention???
Correct me if I am wrong, but I would have thought that the students example would constitute a HMO in the proper definition of it, (unrelated persons, shared facilities, truly a "House in Multiple Occupation") and as such would be enforced by the local authority. (FRS would technically have the common areas, but where I am it is policy the let environmental health deal with the whole building unless we are aware of dangerous conditions.)
The difference with the holiday let is that the people there would be generally one family so would not constitute a HMO by definition. It is more like someone mentioned earlier, like any family renting a place to live, albeit for a short time.
-
Just returned from a 2-week holiday in Yorkshire in a self-catering cottage. The Letting Agency insists on certain items being present - SDs fire blanket and extinguisher. They also provide a 'What to do in case of fire' sign, though not compliant with BS 5499. Every hirer is also sent an A5 booklet with detailed instructions on what to do in case of fire, fire prevention and medical emergencies when they book the holiday.
I'd be interested to know what the statistics are for ordinary domestic versus self-catering.
-
Holiday cottages dont appear to come under HMO as far as i can tell. Lets check the definition;
"An entire house or flat which is let to 3 or more tenants who form 2 or more households and who share a kitchen, bathroom or toilet. (For a definition of household see the relevant question under faqs.)
A house which has been converted entirely into bedsits or other non-self-contained accommodation and which is let to 3 or more tenants who form two or more households and who share kitchen, bathroom or toilet facilities.
A converted house which contains one or more flats which are not wholly self contained (ie the flat does not contain within it a kitchen, bathroom and toilet) and which is occupied by 3 or more tenants who form two or more households.
A building which is converted entirely into self-contained flats if the conversion did not meet the standards of the 1991 Building Regulations and more than one-third of the flats are let on short-term tenancies.
In order to be an HMO the property must be used as the tenants’ only or main residence and it should be used solely or mainly to house tenants. Properties let to students and migrant workers will be treated as their only or main residence and the same will apply to properties which are used as domestic refuges."
So in summary for a family staying in a holiday cottage its not their main residence.
They are not tenants either.
Sometimes 3 or 4 families may share facilities in a very large country house but they are still not tenants and its not their main residence becuase they are on holiday for a few weeks and have another property that they normally live in.
BUT you let out your holiday cottage to students either for attending school/university or even say you have French students attending for summer holidays and they are sharing facilities then it would probably be classed as an HMO under the students clause. Afterall, students are in the high risk group.
-
The legal advice that we have recieved is that the holiday cottage does not fall within the scope of the Order. This is based on the fact that holiday cottages fall within the interpretation of 'domestic premises' in Article 2.
I'd be interested in the approach taken by Devon or Cornwall FRS in this respect.
-
It was never the intention to target these places. The key as i already stated is this line.
"In order to be an HMO the property must be used as the tenants’ only or main residence and it should be used solely or mainly to house tenants"
That means B & B's are not HMO's either unless they have tenants. Only lets them off the licensing side of things though all other fire control and RA apply.
Some do though, i know places where 3 or 4 rooms are typical short stay holiday rooms but there is a couple living on the top floor permanant and paying rent to the landlady. Thats then an HMO im sure but will take time to find all this places.
-
The English Tourist Board are making it a condition of grading that a recorded fire risk assessment is in place for holiday lets- at least that is the case in the Peak District.
The Trading Standards department and Fire Service locally both take the view that holiday cottages are not domestic premises.
The sleeping accommodation guide itself says it applies to holiday chalets but then it excludes domesic premises occupied as a single private dwelling. Confusing.
Certainly Trading Standards take the view that those letting accommodation in the course of a business, where the supply of the accommodation includes the supply of goods ie furniture and domestic appliances must comply with consumer protection and health and safety regulations.
-
I think thats makes perfect sense to me. If you allow others to stay in your property then it not a "single private dwelling" ie consist of a family living there permantly.
its a dwellinghouse used as a business venture and they should be made to comply to everything the law can throw at them including CORGI, PAT tests, RA etc. Becuase they are subjecting other people to the inherent risks of their home. A the very least i think you could expect to see smoke detectors, a fire blanket in the kitchen and the odd extinguisher would show they made an effort together a with safety welcome pack on arrivial. While the FRS can target the common areas remember under the HHSRS the LA have the powers to enter any "dwellinghouse" property presumably this would only ever happen if someone stayed in a shocking bad holiday house and complained it was a death trap.
-
Kurnal
Out of interest I have just contacted the Quality section of English Tourisum and they confirmed that as part of the grading system they will be asking for a fire risk assessment for holiday lets. It would appear that they are acting upon advice from DCLG which has been received recently. Had a look at DCLG site but no joy just the usual documents, if anyone has further info it could be interesting.
I have heard through one FRS that some FRS are inspecting holiday lets as part of their inspection samples and asking for improvements. Can come as quite a shock to some owners who had work done under private accomodation through building control to now find out that as busness they are being asked to do more work
-
Just as an update I have had email confirmation that as part of the assessment for grading of a premise a valid fire risk assessment is required. Also their scheme reassess on an annual basis and owners would need to ensure that they have a valid fire risk assessment when the inspector payes their annual visit.
So even those already on the scheme will need to have a risk assessment in order to continue partisipating
-
Rosemary Everton has written an article for the IFE magazine on this subject. I would never dream of challenging her legal thought process and after reading the argument, I think she says that holiday cottages DO come under the Order.
By using similar arguments I think that this principle could be extended to a much wider array of 'apparently' domestic premises than was first envisaged.
-
I dont have a problem with them being covered (I always thought they would be) but it's the way that they are dealt with that is important. If the thing is just a house then there is no need to provide much more in the way of fire precautions than would be provided in any other house.
OK the occupants will be a little less familiar with the premises, but its only a house so I cant see peoplegetting lost. Mains interlinked smoke alarms escape windows or a protected stair, job done.
-
Having some queries from the small B&Bs - formerly considered non cert hotels where the fire service is now looking at fire doors to rooms, protected routes etc.
Personally I make an assessment and try and determine whether the B&B is more akin to a single private dwelling with guests, or a hotel. I reckon the level of risk is often lower than the bigger houses let out as holiday lets- I know of one that sleeps 12.
I think in some small, supervised B&Bs where the owners are always present, where guests are vetted and the accent is on a home from home setting then the standards apertaining to a private dwelling may still be justified- including the retention of an open plan stair and opening windows in first floor rooms.
Have put forward a couple on this basis
-
Rosemary Everton has written an article for the IFE magazine on this subject.
It's been published in the July 2007 Fire Prevention and Fire Engineers Journal - page 21
-
Intersting view from rosemary but still no clearer are we could swing either way. Could a hfsc be sufficient?
-
........... we could swing either way. Could a hfsc be sufficient?
Not sure about swinging either way, but whatever floats your boat!!!
What is an hfsc???
-
I`m with Tall Paul here. single domestic premise. A good talking point, but that is all it is - haven`t inspecting officers got any proper work to do?
HFSC - home fire safety check? is this a quiz? Hope so, others include HFRA (home fire risk assessment) & HFRC (home fire risk check) they are different names in all brigades but means the same putting up smoke alarms.
-
single domestic idea??? what is this premise you speak of???
-
I too doubt whether holiday cottages would fall under the FSO, as for instance, a group of students sharing a house for a few terms wouldn't, so why should a family of four (and a dog) attract such attention???
I`m with Tall Paul here. single domestic premise. A good talking point, but that is all it is - haven`t inspecting officers got any proper work to do?
Messy Nope holiday cottages wouldn't be covered by the RRO as they are for all intent and purposes the same as single dwelling lets.
However I must take you to task on the subject of student accomodation - the scenario you describe would definately be a HMO no doubt about it regardless of the term of let
Dinnertime Dave - Yes Inspecting Officers have got better things to do but what with their new legislation (the RRO) that give them powers to go into a much wider range of premises - premises which they weren't able to enforce within before despite them being death traps and also the recent HMO licensing schemes which have come into play has highlighted the need to focus on small accomodation.
So if it make people safer what exactly is the problem Dinnertime Dave?
-
Midland Retty Wrote:
Yes Inspecting Officers have got better things to do but what with their new legislation (the RRO) that give them powers to go into a much wider range of premises - premises which they weren't able to enforce within before despite them being death traps.
So if it makes people safer what exactly is the problem Dinnertime Dave?
My apologies Midland Retty if I offended you it really wasn`t my intention – my point is that my brigades inspection regime is to concentrate on the high risk premises first. Holiday lets don`t fall into that category.
Yes in theory we can now enforce in a wider range of premises but I could deal with most of the things that come into my office by way of a standard letter.
Building Regulations - once occupied must comply with RRO
Licensing - comply with RRO
Enquiries- buy or download this guide or that guide.
Don’t they say that the idea behind the RRO is to make fire safety ‘self regulatory’
A cynical view would be that this is precisely what the RRO is all about, reducing the workload of Inspecting officers consequently reducing the number of inspecting officers, and going the way of HSE.
In practice I don’t do that because I do honestly believe that as the public pays my wage that I should be here to make the people who visit, live and work my county safer. (Romantic fool you say)
However, there appears to be a train of thought at principle officer level that I should tell the public which guide to get and if they don’t comply with the regulations and anything happens we will prosecute. I do get challenged by senior officers as to why I might have spent 6 hours on a building regulation submission when I could just give the above response. My answer is 6 hours spent now might save 20 hours in 12 months time and maybe a life.
As for dealing with these death traps. Are a lot of these new premises really death traps? Yes some might be and the full force of the law should come down on the owners of these premises. But how many people are actually dying in these places. Fortunately very few.
Right i`m off on my holidays have a good two weeks
-
PhilB, much too subtle.
-
PhilB, much too subtle.
Sorry Jokar...at least someone understood.
With regard to the arguement...I would refer posters to Prof Evertons paper on this subject......on many occassions holiday lets will be subject to the fire safety order......but please FSOs let's use some common sense and enforce appropriate to the risk.
-
Hi Dinnertime Dave
No offence taken old chum... just playing devils advocate.
You are right - Holiday lets aren't very high up the pecking order, but somehow i think hotels and small guesthouses are going to be very high on the agenda following the weekend's events in Cornwall
-
Midland Retty Wrote:
Yes Inspecting Officers have got better things to do but what with their new legislation (the RRO) that give them powers to go into a much wider range of premises - premises which they weren't able to enforce within before despite them being death traps.
So if it makes people safer what exactly is the problem Dinnertime Dave?
My apologies Midland Retty if I offended you it really wasn`t my intention – my point is that my brigades inspection regime is to concentrate on the high risk premises first. Holiday lets don`t fall into that category.
Yes in theory we can now enforce in a wider range of premises but I could deal with most of the things that come into my office by way of a standard letter.
Building Regulations - once occupied must comply with RRO
Licensing - comply with RRO
Enquiries- buy or download this guide or that guide.
Don’t they say that the idea behind the RRO is to make fire safety ‘self regulatory’
A cynical view would be that this is precisely what the RRO is all about, reducing the workload of Inspecting officers consequently reducing the number of inspecting officers, and going the way of HSE.
In practice I don’t do that because I do honestly believe that as the public pays my wage that I should be here to make the people who visit, live and work my county safer. (Romantic fool you say)
However, there appears to be a train of thought at principle officer level that I should tell the public which guide to get and if they don’t comply with the regulations and anything happens we will prosecute. I do get challenged by senior officers as to why I might have spent 6 hours on a building regulation submission when I could just give the above response. My answer is 6 hours spent now might save 20 hours in 12 months time and maybe a life.
As for dealing with these death traps. Are a lot of these new premises really death traps? Yes some might be and the full force of the law should come down on the owners of these premises. But how many people are actually dying in these places. Fortunately very few.
Right i`m off on my holidays have a good two weeks
Your "cynical view" is pretty cynical Dave and (trust me) not what was intended by the authors of the Order. As for the holiday lets, I'm with Prof Everton, they are in the main subject to the Order - basically they fail the "private" bit of the definition of domestic premises. As Wee Brian said what is most important is how they are dealt with if they are inspected - but if they are in an FRS fireground where a risk based enforcment regime is properly in place then I wouldn't have expected them to figure highly on the agenda and I hope we are not going to see an ill judged knee jerk reaction following the tragedy in Cornwall.
Happy holidays.
-
single domestic idea??? what is this premise you speak of???
Sorry for the poor English PhilB I meant to write 'single domestic premisES' what I really meant though was individual private dwelling.
I was already in holiday mood - incidentally in a holiday cottage in Wales Owned by the inlaws, two domestic smoke detectors and no fire risk assessment before anyone asks.
-
. The result will probably lead to a large number of premises going out of business.
Tully: Are you saying that this is inevitable, desirable or perhaps an aim of your FRS?
What happened to the enforcement concordat and 'reasonableness'.
Your FRS would do well to utilise FINDS before setting out on this foolish project to see what other FRS's have experienced.
With regards to protected staircases discharging into a room rather that a final exit, there's already history of a magistrates court uphoding an appeal of an enforcement notice and allowing a single staircase in a 4 storey pub (with accomodation over) to discharge into the high risk bar area.
I too doubt whether holiday cottages would fall under the FSO, as for instance, a group of students sharing a house for a few terms wouldn't, so why should a family of four (and a dog) attract such attention???
Are the Magistrate's Courts involved in legal appeals in some areas?