FireNet Community
FIRE SAFETY => Fire Risk Assessments => Topic started by: Meerkat on August 02, 2010, 03:15:45 PM
-
Since the simplified guidance came out for B&Bs and smaller guesthouses http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/fire/pdf/payingguests.pdf (http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/fire/pdf/payingguests.pdf) has anyone noticed a difference in the approach from Enforcing Authorities?
I'm aware that before this Guidance came along there was a tendency among some F&RS to "over-spec" the requirements, especially for small B&Bs. So how has the approach changed since this Guidance was published and what differences in regional approaches have people seen either before or after the Guidance?
I'm particularly interested to hear any stories that demonstrate over-the-top requirements that may have been successfully challenged - preferably not through the courts!
-
15 views and not a single answer ???
Surely I'm not the only one dumb enough to be doing FRAs for B&Bs?
-
Continuing the theme of talking to myself in this thread…
I’m wondering about the rationale behind specifying smoke detection actually in the bedrooms in a B&B. I recently visited one that is effectively a well-built five bedroom, two storey family home with a single staircase. Only three of the five first-floor bedrooms are to be let and they all have sturdy doors opening onto a common landing. The escape route than leads down the stairs straight into a large hall from which the main house front door opens into the garden. There is an alternative escape route through the dining room and out to the rear of the house.
The building already has a system of linked, mains-powered domestic smoke detectors with battery back-up, which cover the whole of the upstairs landing, stairs, hall and the rear lobby to the alternative exit. I will be recommending a heat detector in the kitchen, but what is the rationale behind the apparent requirement for the installation of additional smoke detectors in all the guest bedrooms as implied by the “Paying Guests” Guidance leaflet linked in my first post in this thread?
Fire risk in all bedrooms is low. No smoking, no portable heaters, no candles. The only electrical appliances are either brand-new or regularly tested kettles, hairdryers, bedside lamps and TVs. This being the case can it be acceptable to make a choice NOT to add extra detectors in the bedrooms on the grounds that the risk is low and the escape routes are already covered or are we simply going to fall foul of the first Enforcing Officer that comes along with the Guidance in his hand?
Your thoughts and any experience of this area which anyone has would be most welcome!
-
Surely the requirement is to provide the earliest possible warning of a potential fire to the occupants of other rooms?
If a fire starts in any bedroom, occupied or not, if there was no automatic detection in that room, then the first warning is likely to be when smoke escapes that room and is sensed by detection in escape routes and that is likely to be too late for sleeping occupants of rooms other than where the fire started, to safely escape.
-
I'd wondered if that was the rationale... I suppose I've been thinking along the lines that individual detectors would not be required if this was the layout of an office-style building, (i.e. the bedrooms were offices!) becasue detectors in the escape routes would be considered sufficient.
The big difference here of course is that people will potentially be asleep in the bedrooms and thus take much longer to respond to an alarm and I can see that's reason enough in itself. Sounds like we're going to be looking at detectors in the bedrooms too then!
-
Look at this from this point Meerkat:
Imagine you are asleep in one of the rooms. Your neighbour leaves their pants hanging over the bedside lamp, (not your bedroom lamp) hey presto a fire... The first time anybody is going to find out about it is when smoke is already coming into the escape route, (i.e. The bedroom door has been compromised) this will then set off the main alarm. Now picture yourself as someone who doesn't work in the 'trade', so to speak, sleeping off a few gins, and the alarm goes off. How long will it be before you actually wake up, (bearing in mind that there will probably not be any sounders in your bedroom) realise it is a fire alarm, put your head under the pillow hoping it turns off, realise it isn't going to turn off, actually pop your head out into the corridor to see what is happening? In the timeframe between the alarm sounding, and you moving the corridor has been steadily filling up with smoke.
-
Pants on the bedside lamp Civvy? :o It's not THAT sort of B&B..
Your description makes it very easy to see the need. Thanks - it was just what I was looking for. :)
-
Of course lets be fair....
We are not looking at major cost here either, small B&B utilising a grade F system?
I think it would reasonble to provide them.
-
Pants on the bedside lamp Civvy? :o It's not THAT sort of B&B..
Just an example of what actually caused a recent hotel fire in this neck of the woods. :)
-
Drop the incandescent lamps. Energy saving lamps are the way forward ;)
-
Continuing the theme of talking to myself in this thread…
I’m wondering about the rationale behind specifying smoke detection actually in the bedrooms in a B&B. I recently visited one that is effectively a well-built five bedroom, two storey family home with a single staircase. Only three of the five first-floor bedrooms are to be let and they all have sturdy doors opening onto a common landing. The escape route than leads down the stairs straight into a large hall from which the main house front door opens into the garden. There is an alternative escape route through the dining room and out to the rear of the house.
The building already has a system of linked, mains-powered domestic smoke detectors with battery back-up, which cover the whole of the upstairs landing, stairs, hall and the rear lobby to the alternative exit. I will be recommending a heat detector in the kitchen, but what is the rationale behind the apparent requirement for the installation of additional smoke detectors in all the guest bedrooms as implied by the “Paying Guests” Guidance leaflet linked in my first post in this thread?
Fire risk in all bedrooms is low. No smoking, no portable heaters, no candles. The only electrical appliances are either brand-new or regularly tested kettles, hairdryers, bedside lamps and TVs. This being the case can it be acceptable to make a choice NOT to add extra detectors in the bedrooms on the grounds that the risk is low and the escape routes are already covered or are we simply going to fall foul of the first Enforcing Officer that comes along with the Guidance in his hand?
Your thoughts and any experience of this area which anyone has would be most welcome!
Sounds like you are ripping them off if you are doing their risk assessment in a property that low risk. ;)
Do you do many B&Bs?
-
Sounds like you are ripping them off if you are doing their risk assessment in a property that low risk. ;)
Do you do many B&Bs?
I certainly would be ripping them off if I was charging them my daily rate ;) However I am not.
I don't actually have much experience of FRA for B&B - that's why I asked the questions. I have no idea ATM if it's something I will do more of. This one was actually kind of a favour for someone....
-
If it were a private domestic dwelling the standard would be non FR rated doors for a 2 storey building and a part 6 system to LD3 specification.
If it were a hotel it would have fire doors, protected routes and a part 1 system to category L2-smoke detection in corridors, heat detection in rooms and smoke detectors in bedrooms nominated for use by disabled people. (I dont intend to start the argument over whether heat detectors provide adequate protection for the occupier of a room- there are many such threads on this site discussing that topic).
If it were a HMO it would have a different solution - one of many possible arrangements as set out in the LACORS guide.
The art of the fire risk assessment in a small B&B is to identify the nature of the fire risk- is it akin to a private dwelling, (i.e. are the owners always present, are they fastidious, how big, how high, layout of rooms and escape routes etc) or is it more akin to a hotel or even an HMO.
The nature of the risk will then inform your judgement of what is reasonable and appropriate in the case in point.
In all honesty Piglet sometimes the smallest premises are the hardest to assess. With big buildings of a high risk it is easy to identify the risk and apply the National guidance and standards. In the small premises it can be difficult to keep things in proportion and affordable.
-
"In proportion and affordable" hits the nail on the head Kurnal.
I'm absolutely not trying to get away with a lower then acceptable standard here, merely trying not to go "over the top" with my recommendations for someone who is effectively looking to open up his home to paying guests and has already spent a fair whack of money on the process.
No it's not veering towards the hotel end of the B&B market. Yes the owners are likely to be conscientious about the way they run it and yes they will always be on the premises when they have guests. Two of the rooms have en suites, exit from all the rooms is very simple and straight onto the main landing. Escape routes are good and should be clear at all times as they are the main house stairs and corridors.
The "Paying Guests" guidance - which incidentally I think is quite good - has this to say about provision of detectors
Premises similar to a family home (i.e. two or three storeys) are likely to need an automatic fire detection system that runs from the
mains electricity (with battery back-up) and consists of interconnected detectors. Detectors will be needed in the staircase, corridors and bedrooms. This (technically known as a Grade D LD2 system) has been designed for domestic premises.
The premises I am looking at does have such a system but without bedroom detectors. I can see it will have to be detectors in the bedroom then...
Incidentally the owner of the B&B was pretty much expecting me to say this but as he's just had the rooms all beautifully decorated, I think he has hoped I would not! :D
-
I have assisted many B&B owners in these respects as a friend runs a holiday cottage and B&B agency.
I dont think the guidance is intended to be prescriptive, sometimes I have recommended LD3, sometimes LD1 and sometimes L2. You must remember also that the BS5839-6 description of coverage of an LD2 system differs from that in the guidance.
I suggest that rather than hugging the code, we should recommend what we deem to be appropriate to meet the risk, justify our decision by recording the reasons for it in the fire risk assessment and be prepared to argue the case if the Fire Authority question it. In my experience they will usually be sympathetic to a well reasoned and argued case.
I get the impression that you would be happy with the level of risk without detectors in bedrooms- if this is the case then dont recommend them! Simples!
-
I think it is important to remember that many B&B's are still domestic dwellings.
Before I moved from FP, there was a great deal of discussion in the office on this and a common standard was agreed, which was a grade D LD2 system with heat detection in the kitchen.
Fire doors were not deemed necessary but doors were to be in good repair and well fitting.
Discussion with the owners often reveals how much of the time the B&B is used, some are full time and some are during holiday season to make a few more pounds, so this had to be considered. We were aware that demanding a full alarm system and fire doors etc would not be reasonable nor practicable in many cases.
We have to remember that the fire safety provisions should be apropriate to the risk ... early detection and warning was considered the most important to protect life.
-
Thanks Kurnal and Baldyman - very helpful points.
I have to say I've found it harder to make the judgements required to FRA a small B&B than for a 10,000 sq m factory using flammable liquids... I think it just goes to show that it's horses for courses and it persaudes me even more not to get involved in assessing hotels or residential homes without some more training and some on the job experience with someone who knows more about the risks of this type of premises than me!