FireNet Community
FIRE SAFETY => Fire Risk Assessments => Topic started by: The Colonel on July 08, 2011, 04:49:14 PM
-
Do you think the jailing of the fire risk assessor at Nottingham Crown Court today is going to make some of the cowboys run for cover? or are they still going to try and make money while they can?
I must admit I am surprised at the jail sentence for the assessor, as no one was injured or died. The judge did comment that those who put profit before safety should be given a message of what to expect.
-
Well its been coming for a while and its exactly what the industry needs theres too many cowboys IMO.
-
Kurnal, I agree it is what the industry needs to wake a few people up and realise what they are putting at risk.
-
Bandwagon time may be coming to a halt - it's become prevalent in recent years to see fire alarm people try and do extinguisher servicing and fall short, general electricians try and do fire alarm work and fall short, extinguisher people try and do fire risk assessments.......etc.
It won't stop all the cowboys, but it will stop some. It won't stop all clients going for the cheapest provider, but it will stop some. But at least it is a start!
-
Does anyone know Mr John O'Rourke's background?
-
Hopefully ripples will turn into floods, some of the worst examples i have seen are ex firemen that have squirted water for 30 years!!!
-
Him personally, no, but the company is a fire extinguisher maintenance firm that trades from a private address, a typical sole trader type 'garden shed' firm still to be found in the fire extinguisher trade. Not even a member of one of the three main extinguisher trade associations nor third party accredited.
(All public domain info)
Next time I'm that way I'll look out for any extinguishers serviced by them to see how competently they are done as well!
-
Check out http://www.chad.co.uk/news/mansfield_pair_jailed_for_hotel_fire_safety_breaches_1_3561159 for a little more info.
Moderator : We have two threads on this subject could they be merged. Less confusion where to post.
-
I know that the FRSs have been competing to be the first to prosecute an assessor. I think that Nottingham may now have the bragging rights but it won’t open the flood gates of prosecutions I am afraid.
One in 5 years isn’t a real scare to the cowboy fire risk assessors working out there and if they stick away from high risk sleeping they will never face the courts unless there is a fatal fire in an office or corner shop.
Presumably these hotels have been open since the RRO came in and this was the first inspection they had? Not exactly a scare for the hoteliers either!
Inspection and prosecutions need to increase and improve, and that’s not going to happen with the cuts to the FRS budgets.
-
Him personally, no, but the company is a fire extinguisher maintenance firm that trades from a private address, a typical sole trader type 'garden shed' firm still to be found in the fire extinguisher trade. Not even a member of one of the three main extinguisher trade associations nor third party accredited.
(All public domain info)
Next time I'm that way I'll look out for any extinguishers serviced by them to see how competently they are done as well!
Mr Buck, you are labelled "Fire extinguisher expert" on this forum, so I would assume that as an expert, you will already know that being a member of any trades association, or being third party accredited, does not provide any guarantee that a good job will be done. I regularly come into contact with accredited companies and members of the three main trades associations who are clearly not competent at all, although it would be fair to say members of one of the three main trades associations are notably worse than others (draw your own conclusions from that statement). Running a fire safety business from home does not mean that a bad job will be done, anyone can have glitzy offices etc, but working from home, just makes him one of many, indeed hundreds up and down the country, and to save anyone checking, yes, I am also one of the many. I, personally, have chosen not to renew membership of a trades association because of unfair practices.
I do not know Mr O'Rourke, and I am not fighting his corner, if he has done something stupid he thoroughly deserves to be where he is now, and I for one, am very glad that this prosecution has happened. I do object to those of us who choose to work from home, and those of us who choose not to join trades associations, and those of us who choose not to become third party accredited, being tarred with the same brush as Mr O'Rourke.
It would, however, be useful to know the failings of his assessment.
-
John
AnthonyB is probably the leading FE expert in the country.
His point is that being a member of a trades association should reduce the risk of employing a wally!
As you are aware no doubt the industry is trying to rid the sort of cowboy you might find unblocking your sink!
Its a slow process ???
davo
-
Davo, I am aware of Mr Buck's reputation, and on most comments he makes on this forum, I usually agree with him, however, in my opinion, his comments on this thread were unjustified and objectionable, so I took my opportunity to object. If, as you say, Anthony's point is by joining a trades association it reduces the risk of employing a wally, then a serious rethink is needed very quickly because it clearly is not working.
I would like nothing more than this industry to rid itself of cowboys, I personally don't think it will ever happen.
-
I too am not convinced that third party accreditation or membership of a trade organisation is yet any sort of guarantee that those accredited or members are sufficiently competent.
I too agree that 'one man bands' or those operating from domestic premises do not necessarily provide a 'lesser' service than those operating from flashy corporate premises.
-
But how does the RP know who is good and who is bad?
The concept here is that the RP needs some signposting and third party is the way to do that; I fully accept that some of the extinguisher schemes are c**P but that’s the fault of those wot wrote it and operate it.
If a trade association or a CB isn’t strong enough to kick out those that can't maintain a high standard; third party gets a bad reputation.
Third party has to be robust in order to protect the public and if a company does a bad job the RP should have recourse with the third party and if the complaint is upheld the company should be removed from the listing or be made to put it right.
If you aren’t third party you may be good and you may be rubbish how do people know? More importantly who do they complain too and what recourse have they got?
-
If you want to see the value of third party accreditation you just need to look at the construction industry, if this does not convince you that third party accreditation is just a meaningless money making scheme then I do not know what will.
One way of establishing competance is by obtaining references from persons who have used the assessors services before, how about introducing a system whereby inexperienced persons could work alongside those with experience for several years and then when it is felt that they have the necessary level of competence let them conduct solo assessment
I think the main problem today is everybody seems to want other to do for them what they need to do for themselves
If i want some one to fix my car i will ask other who they think does a good job, if i want to go out for a meal i aks if anyone knows of a good resturant, if i need a competent fire risk assessor i would enquire with other businesse who did their and would they recommend them.
In a previous job role i was an auditor for a well known company that audited companies health and safety arrangements for inclusion on one such list. Could I tell you some stories...
-
But how does the RP know who is good and who is bad? As Fire Risk Assessments are subjective that is a very diffucult question to answer
The concept here is that the RP needs some signposting and third party is the way to do that; I fully accept that some of the extinguisher schemes are c**P but that’s the fault of those wot wrote it and operate it. Only some ? ;)
If a trade association or a CB isn’t strong enough to kick out those that can't maintain a high standard; third party gets a bad reputation.
Third party has to be robust in order to protect the public and if a company does a bad job the RP should have recourse with the third party and if the complaint is upheld the company should be removed from the listing or be made to put it right.
If you aren’t third party you may be good and you may be rubbish how do people know? More importantly who do they complain too and what recourse have they got? It would appear Nottinghan Crown Court have answered that question for you ::)
-
if i want to go out for a meal i aks if anyone knows of a good resturant, if i need a competent fire risk assessor i would enquire with other businesse who did their and would they recommend them.
I dont disagree Chariot, the only thing I would say is that there are certain things you can go by recommendation on (such a nice restaurant or a decent mechanic) but I'm not sure if you can when it comes risk assessments /assessors.
You need to be sure the person making the recommendation knows that the assessor and the work that the assessor produces is pukka, bearing in mind how technical risk assessments can be. Does the person making the recommendation understand that?
It can be the usual story of an RP being handed a 100 page risk assessment which has been filled with utter drivel and waffle just to pad it out.
The hapless RP assumes that just because its has lots of pages it "must be good" and "worth all that cash s/he forked out" and "that they dont need to do anything else now - they are all compliaint because an assessor has been in "
That RP then says to you "I can recommend my risk assessor he was really good and thorough"
-
It can be the usual story of an RP being handed a 100 page risk assessment which has been filled with utter drivel and waffle just to pad it out.
The hapless RP assumes that just because its has lots of pages it "must be good" and "worth all that cash s/he forked out" and "that they dont need to do anything else now - they are all compliaint because an assessor has been in "
That RP then says to you "I can recommend my risk assessor he was really good and thorough"
[/quote]
This was exactly the senario that happened when our organisation engaged an accredited, certificated group of consultants, these consultants were recommended by another organisation (not on the basis that they were competent just on the basis that the owner of the consultency was a good guy)
The point I am trying to make is even when you go to a register, obtain references, check credentials you can still end up with an assessment that is not suitable and sufficient, you pay your money and you take your chance. The system does not work.
Perhaps a register of incompetent persons may be more effective provided we do not allow person to buy themselves off!!
-
I seem to be chasing you about now MF!
Personal reccomendation is a dangerous thing as the RP has already decided that they are not competent so they have elected to get a RA in. Unless the FRA has been through scrutiny by a FSO do they know that the doccument is any good?
Unless the reccomendation comes from someone with the knowledge its not a good idea. I can reccomend a mechanic, I don't know about cars but my car drives like a dream after a little visit to the mechanics. It has been through a test.
So if I was looking for an RA the check list i would want would be
CV of consultant doing the work
ISO 9001.
Example of work (can i understand it? does it appear to cover off all points I think are worthwhile, is it too big? too small? what sort of money was paid for it)
Insurance certificate (Min £1m)
Offer of a reference
Method Statement
On site risk assessment
A list of "like to have" would be
3rd Party Accreditation
Presented information on the RRO and what it means to be an RP (Nice touch)
And a couple of others but you can all think of those yourselves
Agree/disagree?
-
So if I was looking for an RA the check list i would want would be
ISO 9001.
(long list of other stuff snipped)
Agree/disagree?
I agree with the rest of your list Piglet but ISO9001? For a fire risk assessor? Surely not.
Getting back to the original topic ;) would love to know what it was about these assessments that the judge found so "wholly inadequate" that they warranted 8 months in jail? :o
-
I doubt, Meerkat, the judge would have a clue as to why they were "wholly inadequate" other than someone telling him.
Best to get that from the enforcement authority's presentation.
-
Third party accreditation & trade body membership doesn't mean perfection. However the failings are usually different.
From experience accredited companies, especially larger ones are more likely to over-provide, overcharge and over replace, but generally do most of the correct checks and don't often miss critical hazards.
The medium size accredited/trade membership firms are often just about right on most fronts.
The small companies/one man bands or non accredited/trade member firms (including some large ones and those who may be accredited for fire stuff excluding PFE) are far far more regularly not carrying out the basic service requirements, missing critical hazards and not generally knowing what they are doing.
-
Chariot you must be confusing accredited certification with registration as many on this site do. The company you speak of will have been on a register of approval, perhaps you could enlighten us as to what register they appeared on.
Personal reference!!!!!!!!!!! If the RP knew anything about technical fire risk assessment don’t you think they would have done the assessment themselves?
The only thing an RP can comment on with any assurance is perceived value for money, how nice and prompt the assessor was and how thick the risk assessment was when it arrived. You can’t comment on how technically good or bad your surgeon is just how good his bedside manner is. Do you think all the duff assessors out there are unpleasant tardy rough necks who provide dog eared documents?
Piglet I like your idea but it should start with 3rd party and then move on to the rest for exactly the same reason as above, the RP doesn’t know what to look for in a CV and they aren’t that reliable either. Some very experienced and well qualified assessors on paper produce absolute ‘guff’. Plus report review is OK but they aren’t going to send you a duff report are they?
-
The assessors that conducted the FRA's are on the FIA register amongst others.
The reference was that a Director had attended University with the Director from the consultancy and had previously worked together in another organisation.
Can surgeons not be responsible persons?
perhaps we need a register for competent responsible persons.
-
The assessors that conducted the FRA's are on the FIA register amongst others.
The reference was that a Director had attended University with the Director from the consultancy and had previously worked together in another organisation.
Can surgeons not be responsible persons?
perhaps we need a register for competent responsible persons.
Until April of this year the FIA list was meaningless; it isn’t much better now. However if the company you speak of was on the listing before April do check out the code of conduct and see if they have breached it. An alternative would be to go to the holders of the register they appeared on and complain to them in writing if you feel you have a grievance.
I suspect that too few people do this and again that’s why third party gets a bad rep as people complain endlessly without doing a thing about it. You can’t be kicked off a register without a complaint being made; just knocking a company on it isn’t going to get them ejected. Very often it’s easy to bad mouth someone without actually having your complaint substantiated. Those who like to tell others how bad someone else is should have the balls to do something about it or shut up moaning; especially if there is a mechanism to do so.
-
Third party accreditation & trade body membership doesn't mean perfection. However the failings are usually different.
From experience accredited companies, especially larger ones are more likely to over-provide, overcharge and over replace, but generally do most of the correct checks and don't often miss critical hazards.
The medium size accredited/trade membership firms are often just about right on most fronts.
The small companies/one man bands or non accredited/trade member firms (including some large ones and those who may be accredited for fire stuff excluding PFE) are far far more regularly not carrying out the basic service requirements, missing critical hazards and not generally knowing what they are doing.
Anthony whilst I agree with your summary in respect of extinguisher companies I think the fire risk assessment industry is very different. From large to small companies the majority work not by employing substantial numbers of fire risk assessors directly but by sub contracting work to a pool of self employed associates.
This applies almost universally from cotswold based fire associations through north west based organisations, and regional and national companies. I know because I have carried out work for a number of them in the past. And many of the biggest names are very poor when it comes to checking consistency and quality. Some send out the associates' work without any quality checks whatsoever- and evidently in many cases not even using a spell checker. None of the so called big boys I have ever worked for has ever sent anybody out to check on my standards on site when working under their umbrella and nobody has ever queried anything on any of my reports. It seems to be all about Ker-ching- glossy brochures, cash cows and market position.
My associates all comment on the shock of the steep learning curve and unexpected degree of scrutiny of their work when they start doing jobs for me. I know there are others who take the same view- but they are a minority and in terms of quality the best in my view seem to be small to medium sized organisations.
-
I agree - I was specifically responding to earlier comments regarding my findings in the extinguisher industry.
With risk assessment it can be very different, having seen excellent work by small firms/sole traders and some stuff from big firms that aren't much more than what an RP could do themselves once you get rid of all the standard gumph and some glaring errors as well.
-
So if I was looking for an RA the check list i would want would be
ISO 9001.
(long list of other stuff snipped)
Agree/disagree?
I agree with the rest of your list Piglet but ISO9001? For a fire risk assessor? Surely not.
Getting back to the original topic ;) would love to know what it was about these assessments that the judge found so "wholly inadequate" that they warranted 8 months in jail? :o
If a company has achived ISO 9001 you know they will be a good company to deal with, if you have a problem, paying your bill etc its about the whole interaction, not just getting a risk assessment.
-
So if I was looking for an RA the check list i would want would be
ISO 9001.
(long list of other stuff snipped)
Agree/disagree?
I agree with the rest of your list Piglet but ISO9001? For a fire risk assessor? Surely not.
Getting back to the original topic ;) would love to know what it was about these assessments that the judge found so "wholly inadequate" that they warranted 8 months in jail? :o
If a company has achived ISO 9001 you know they will be a good company to deal with, if you have a problem, paying your bill etc its about the whole interaction, not just getting a risk assessment.
Achieving ISO 9001 does not necessarilly mean they will be a good company to deal with, in my experience, I agree that it should mean that, but so often it does not
-
Bloomin heck! Does no official accredition actually mean anything to anyone these days!
-
If a company has achived ISO 9001 you know they will be a good company to deal with, if you have a problem, paying your bill etc its about the whole interaction, not just getting a risk assessment.
You should be on Britain's Got Talent with jokes like that.....!!!
;D ;D ;D
-
CTA Fire not an ISO company then?
I think its a cynical view to say that ISO is not a good stamp for a company, at least those who have it have made a stand towards achieving a quality process.
You didn't fancy it then? ;)
-
CTA Fire not an ISO company then?
I think its a cynical view to say that ISO is not a good stamp for a company, at least those who have it have made a stand towards achieving a quality process.
You didn't fancy it then? ;)
Don't you just love it when people clearly don't understand the statements they make...
Piglet, CTA Fire have NSI Silver accreditation and BAFE SP203, both of which require ISO to be in place. A quick look at their website would have told you that.
-
Someones grumpy!
-
CTA Fire not an ISO company then?
I think its a cynical view to say that ISO is not a good stamp for a company, at least those who have it have made a stand towards achieving a quality process.
You didn't fancy it then? ;)
Don't you just love it when people clearly don't understand the statements they make...
Piglet, CTA Fire have NSI Silver accreditation and BAFE SP203, both of which require ISO to be in place. A quick look at their website would have told you that.
Errrrr not quite true ............
NSI silver requires an "in house" system of work to be in place via a "Business Process Manual".
NSI gold requires the full on ISO 9000 and whatever we are up to.
We have looked at it, and we have the full on Quality Manual / procedures and paperwork in place and we generally work to it. All we have never done is officially implemented it and paid our dues to get audited.
No one has ever asked us specifically to have it.
I think you can have as many procedures and systems in place as you want, at the end of the day most of it is simply to satisfy a pen pusher somewhere who needs to tick a box to say he can't read your letter head because it is so full of pretty stamps and logos telling the world how wonderful you are.
It's people that count, and if they don't care about what they do all the procedures in the world won't matter a jot.
-
CTA Fire not an ISO company then?
I think its a cynical view to say that ISO is not a good stamp for a company, at least those who have it have made a stand towards achieving a quality process.
You didn't fancy it then? ;)
As a natural born cynic a lot of companies bought into it because the marketing suggested they would never work again without it. Nothing to do with actually trying to improve the quality of their company.
For bigger companies I'm sure the standardisation of processes helped. What it doesn't seem to do is help direct the end user on the phone to the right person within an organisation to get a simple answer to a simple question.... :)
-
CTA Fire not an ISO company then?
I think its a cynical view to say that ISO is not a good stamp for a company, at least those who have it have made a stand towards achieving a quality process.
You didn't fancy it then? ;)
As a natural born cynic a lot of companies bought into it because the marketing suggested they would never work again without it. Nothing to do with actually trying to improve the quality of their company.
For bigger companies I'm sure the standardisation of processes helped. What it doesn't seem to do is help direct the end user on the phone to the right person within an organisation to get a simple answer to a simple question.... :)
True, its horses for courses and I agree if you were going after every accreditation going you would A. be skint and B. not actually working!
9001 has helped my company, I think most decent companies have a quality system in place, 9001 is just about documenting it and a great way of learning from projects, mistakes, and achievements
-
I dare say that one day soon we will pay our 30 pieces of silver and make our deal with the devil...... :)
-
David....In my opinion you are right to stay as you are, Quality is not a certificate from thirdy parties that haven't got a clue about your customers needs and requirements Quality is delivering products and services that conform to customers requirements.......Quality is delivered by an organisation working to a disciplined system for the sole objective of continuous improvement....Audit and Review are key elements in the process. Feedback and Comments from satisfied and dissatisfied customers are key to the process. BS 5750...ISO 9000.....ISO 140001 are excellent tools to help but I would suggest that being successful by reference reputation, and recommendation from satisfied customers is far better to rely on than an ISO 9000 certificate. In all the businesses I have been involved with I have always treasured customers testimonials and most recently their quality audits on the organisation. More valuable to new customers seeking assurance and good for the organisation staff that are proud to do a good job for customers.
-
Jim, you are right that you don't need IS09001 to be called a quality company, there are many ways of showing that. I will say that ISO can help your company improve even further, speed up processes, cut out work that is unnecessay, see it from all angles. Getting an auditor in that is completely unbias can usually result in finding things to improve that someone in your organsisation can't usually see. It is also helpful if you are ever off work for illness or holiday and things go wrong, your staff can consult the documented procedures and pick up where you left off.
-
Is there a competency standard for auditors?
-
Auditors of what Chariot?
-
Auditors of safety, fire safety, environmental and quality systems.
-
Yes
ISO 17021-2