FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Fire Safety => Topic started by: AnthonyB on January 16, 2008, 11:33:25 AM
-
Our main work is for landlords of multi occ's and the division between landlord and tenant for maintenance of fire precautions and systems is normally quite straightforward.
An area of contention however is emergency lighting in tenanted areas.
Normally the LL will do the common and vacant areas & tenants are expected to do their own (unless fed off a building wide central battery, but this is rare to find now).
This is determined by control - each tenancy normally has it's own fixed wiring installation including it's own consumer unit & meter within their demise, so the tenant has full control over the power and can isolate it for testing, alterations, etc at their own whim.
But some older buildings have not had their wiring configuration changed to reflect a multi-occ layout and individual suites do not have their own installations and consumer units and to do anything electrical requires going to a central distribution room in the basement and finding the appropriate isolator - but this is a landlord controlled room and access is not permitted (plus you may not be able to isolate just the one suite but instead a whole section of the building). Or a single floor has been split into several suites, but still only has a single floor wide consumer unit, which again is in a landlord controlled riser cupboard. Not all suites have EL test switches to overcome the issue.
In these cases it could be argued that the electrical systems are realistically under landlord control and so they should maintain things associated with it such as periodic inspection an testing of EL units. The tenant should still risk assess the adequacy of the EL fittings in their area & ensure they seek evidence of testing, but the landlord should be doing the actual tests.
The question is - am I right?
-
Yes. The fire safety order only places a duty on responsible persons in so far as they have control. If the occupier cant control it- eg to isolate the power to carry out maintenance- then they cant be held responsible. The tenant does have a duty to make arrangements with the landlord to ensure that the work is carried out- they cant just walk away from it. If the fire authority were to find their emergency lighting not working for example they would probably serve a notice on both tenant and landlord to make effective arrangements for the provision and maintenance of the emergency lighting.
-
Yes. The fire safety order only places a duty on responsible persons in so far as they have control. If the occupier cant control it- eg to isolate the power to carry out maintenance- then they cant be held responsible. The tenant does have a duty to make arrangements with the landlord to ensure that the work is carried out- they cant just walk away from it. If the fire authority were to find their emergency lighting not working for example they would probably serve a notice on both tenant and landlord to make effective arrangements for the provision and maintenance of the emergency lighting.
Is there not a duty on each to liaise with the other?
-
Absolutely
-
In these cases it could be argued that the electrical systems are realistically under landlord control and so they should maintain things associated with it such as periodic inspection an testing of EL units. The tenant should still risk assess the adequacy of the EL fittings in their area & ensure they seek evidence of testing, but the landlord should be doing the actual tests.
The question is - am I right?
Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 Guidance Note No. 1: Enforcement
Article 17 – Maintenance
84. The responsible person(s) for parts of the premises to which the Order applies may make arrangements with the occupier of parts to which the Order does not apply (e.g. domestic accommodation) for the purposes of ensuring the maintenance requirements of the Order are met. This applies to HMOs and purpose-built flats.
85. Occupiers of private domestic premises in such buildings are required to co-operate with the responsible person where the latter needs to maintain a common fire precaution. Although no direct offence is associated with a failure by the occupier of private domestic premises to co-operate with a landlord etc, any contract/agreement (whether in terms of a lease, tenancy or licence agreement) should allow access to the
responsible person to enable him to maintain any fire safety provisions extending from the common parts to the domestic premises.
It appears, according to the guidance, this depends on the terms of a lease, tenancy or licence agreement.
-
Yes, I also agree with your conclusions and would have arrived at the same based on the control aspect of the EL system by the Landlord as explained above.