FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Fire Safety => Topic started by: Tom Sutton on December 05, 2006, 09:39:35 AM
-
Local councils doing fire safety inspections in HMO`s is this correct I thought they come under RR(FS)O, at least the common parts.
-
Housing Act is most appropriate legislation so I think it is better for them to sort HMOs. Housing Act applies to the whole building. Fire Safety Order only applies to common parts.
The problem, in my opinion, is the rating system that they use. It benchmarks against ideal standards and for fire safety the benchmark is ADB, totally inappropriate for many HMOs.
-
phil I agree with you I have just read the Housing (Fire Safety in Houses in Multiple Occupation) Order 1997 and apart from having to consult with the FRS it all up to the local housing authority.
-
FRS need to set up protocols with the local authority to sort this out. many FRS will have HMO set as high risk due to the life safety issues and will reinspect quite regularly. The Housing Act 2004 is about licensing and the rting system. having applied, the licensee will have 5 years to do the work of which fire is a small part.
-
I am not too sure about the requirements of the RRO and HMO's but The Fire (Scotland) Act 2005 says that any premises requiring a licence must have an FRA carried out.
Is the RRO different?
-
All premises except domestic premises require a fire risk assessment. Common parts of HMOs fall outside definition of domestic premises so are covered by the fire safety order and would require a risk assessment.
If the HMO needs a license, the prescribed information must be recorded.
Gets horribly complicated because to assess the safety of the common parts I would suggest you need to look in the rooms off those parts, but the order does not apply to them so there are no poweres of entry.
Best to leave it to Housing Officers but I agree with Jokar that protocols should be established. I know many FRS are working on agreed required standards with HOs.
-
'Gets horribly complicated because to assess the safety of the common parts I would suggest you need to look in the rooms off those parts, but the order does not apply to them so there are no poweres of entry.'
Article 27 (1) a suggests that an inspector can enter any premises for the purpose of carrying out the order
-
The Housing Authority have loads of powers, including entry into domestic dwellings, let them get on with it.
-
Article 27 (1) a suggests that an inspector can enter any premises for the purpose of carrying out the order
Pip the order doesn't apply to domestic premises so there are no powers of entry. There is power for and only for Article 31 purposes i.e. prohibition or restriction.
-
The guidance document from RRO advocates a comprehensive fire alarm for most types of HMO, How would you feel about the FA engaging with a local authority to endorse / enforce the guidance recommendation. ie full detection spec in 15 storey block of flats? Have many of you got tower blocks of flats without fire alarms? If you have, are they not outside best practise guidance?
Sorry to many questions for submission, my real point is that RRO gives the fire authority powers, however LA's (under housing Act) police their own housing stock ( could be quite a political issue). Anyone got any experience on this type of scenario yet using RRO?
-
Why would you want a full detection system in a 15 storey block of flats? If someone burns their toast on the 15th floor do you think there is a need to evacuate 15 floors of domestic premises?
-
The normal standard recommended in large blocks of flats ( apartments if you want to be posh ) is a bs5839 pt6 system in individual flats to alert occupier only and with a bs5839 pt1 system to protect/cover common circulation routes ( this usually would need a heat detector in the lobby/hall of each flat as part of an L3 system ).
-
Get real, 60 minute structure, part 6 to alert the occupants, shut the door and call the FRS. Whatever is the point in an alarm system for a block of flats. Who is responsible for it, who resets it?
-
A block of flats isnt a HMO so there not a problem - The simple rule of thumb -again - is
self contained flats - self contained alarms.
Shared facilities (a HMO) shared alarm system.
As AFD rightly points out, if there is an automatic smoke vent then there will need to be some form of AFD in the common parts - this just operates the vents.
-
Article 27 (1) a suggests that an inspector can enter any premises for the purpose of carrying out the order
Pip the order doesn't apply to domestic premises so there are no powers of entry. There is power for and only for Article 31 purposes i.e. prohibition or restriction.
Yes, I understand what you are staying, but there used to be power under the FP act to enter a domestic property to ensure that it did not impact on the 'certificated ' premises.I am just suggesting that this is the same.I will enquire with our legal departments view
-
The RRO doesn't allow Fire Officers to enter domestic dwellings. However it could be argued that in a HMO scenario parts of the fire precautions in domestic areas (such as AFD) are important to the means of escape and can therefore be enforced by the Fire Authority.
This is something that will need to be tested in court.
In respect of HMO inspections our brigade policy is: - The Fire Officer inspects and enforces common areas, whilst the EHO or Housing Standards officer enforces fire precautions in the domestic parts - the two agencies work together to ensure a common goal is reached.
The Fire Authority is used if required to issue prohibition notice if things are really that bad.
I have to agree that tower blocks should have BS5839 Part 1 L2 systems in common areas, and Part 6 systems in the flats. Most of the flats being upgraded in the West Mids seem to have been fitted out this way,someone told me Building Control insisted upon it when the upgrades were being done (dont know how true that is)
There aren't many flats out there with alarms in common areas however! And the FA could enforce it if they wanted. Luckily most of the tower blocks in our area are now in private housing association hands - therefore not much council stock left as such! This has meant we've not yet had any Authority prosecuting Authority type scenarios yet!!
-
I agree that the FSO appears to not allow entry into a single domestic household, but this was something that was allowed under the old FP act,I am wondering why that facility has been removed.Anyway my legal dept are seeking advice on that, and also I have asked them how we can ensure the compliance of a common part(and i am not talking HMO's here) when one part comprises of a privately owned single domestic dwelling, the other a premises that does come the FSO.We used to be able to check that domestic dwelling under the old section 19.
-
Anyway my legal dept are seeking advice on that, and also I have asked them how we can ensure the compliance of a common part(and i am not talking HMO's here) when one part comprises of a privately owned single domestic dwelling, the other a premises that does come the FSO.We used to be able to check that domestic dwelling under the old section 19.
Hi Pip
I'd be grateful to hear of the outcome from your legal eagles think of this (if you can) - I think you've brought up a very intresting point and Ive found myself pondering those questions too.
Be helpful to find out what your chaps and chapettes think!
-
It is quite clear what powers are available. Originally it was a bit cloudy because although the order never applied to domestic premises, article 27 said that there was power to enter "any premises". So could the term "any premises" include domestic premises?
The answer came a few months later when article 31 was amended by adding 32.10
" 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."
So ONLY for article 31 purposes (prohibition/restriction) is the power available.
Now some will argue that you cannot determine that such conditions exist without entering ... I agree but that does not mean you can go barging into domestic premises willy nilly using that excuse.
I totally agree that the power to enter such premises should have been retained with 24 hrs notice required.
-
Isn't the answer (as far as checking AFD is concerned) that if, for example, you have determined that an L1 system is required (perhaps via an enforcement notice), it is up to the responsible person to demonstrate that they have complied? It is not up to us to sniff out every detector and bell.
-
Anyway my legal dept are seeking advice on that, and also I have asked them how we can ensure the compliance of a common part(and i am not talking HMO's here) when one part comprises of a privately owned single domestic dwelling, the other a premises that does come the FSO.We used to be able to check that domestic dwelling under the old section 19.
Hi Pip
I'd be grateful to hear of the outcome from your legal eagles think of this (if you can) - I think you've brought up a very intresting point and Ive found myself pondering those questions too.
Be helpful to find out what your chaps and chapettes think!
Of course I will post the outcome,but it is via 'Bar Direct' so will take a few weeks.I take the point that it is not up to us to'sniff' everything out, but that should not mean that we can't look when we need to.Another possible way in to a domestic premises might be through one of the Housing Acts(ie similar/same as for entry in to HMO's.I can't remember off hand which one it is, but an interesting presentation by a housing officer last year suggested that they could enter any domestic house, and impose conditions if they thought it was unsafe, including any fire safety related issues.So it may be that, in the circumstances I gave we have to get a local Housing officer to enforce as we do in a HMO.
-
a while coming but I will keep the advice given grief:
1)As we all noted, with the exception of prohibition notices-no power of entry under FSO.
2)access may be possible with managing Agent/landlord/RP under their right of entry under lease, tenancy or other agreement.The scrutiny committee considered the courts would be likely to find a RP had statutory rights of access for the purpose of articles 17 (maintenance) and 38 (maintenance of measures to protect firefighters)
3)The owner/occupier, if they do not co operate,could be prosecuted under Article 32(10)
so the 'right' of entry, is now thru other means i.e. the landlord/managing agent/housing officer.Any detector in a non shared area that is part of a larger system has to be maintained.A lot of landlords/housing Assoc/councils now looking at 'front doors' to see if they are suitable.Apparently a case to go before high court to determine who pays for upgrading, or replacement of such doors-tennent/landlord or RP etc.
-
see Q&A RRO & housing re FRS protocol
-
Thanks for that, I knew some work was underway but had not seen a document.did I read/hear somewhere that LHA's might be reluctant to prohibit sleeping accommodation as they have then a duty to rehouse at their expense?but if they get the Fire Authority to prohibit there is no duty to rehouse?
-
Pip
as I understand it, 'the duty to re-house' or lack of it is independent of which Authority takes the action. Most LHA would re-house vulnerable people on moral grounds but this definition is fairly limited.
-
The best result would be to build all or alter all HMO's of whatever definition so that they comply with ADB Part 1 or BS5588 part with a 60 minute structure and let the occupants stay in their homes. Of course most building materials now will give 60 minutes on soundproofing alone so nothing to difficult.