FireNet Community
FIRE SAFETY => Fire Risk Assessments => Topic started by: Tom Sutton on November 29, 2013, 11:08:14 AM
-
Is now the time for a National Fire Safe Register? BM TRADA seeks further views
http://www.means-of-escape.com/content/now-time-national-fire-safe-register-bm-trada-seeks-further-views
-
Not even worth responding to Tam, as it will never happen.
-
Nevertheless I think it would be a goof idea, run by the government or maybe FIA who would nominate suitable organisations to be certified registrars who would test candidates to a required standard using the FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT COMPETENCY COUNCIL Competency Criteria for Fire Risk Assessors, as a syllabus and include them on the national register when they meet the standard.
The chance are slim be you never know.
-
The chance are slim be you never know.
Yes, snowball in hell springs to mind.
-
How would a mandatory system work?
Notallowed to talk about fire safety unless registered?
Not allowed to advise on fire safety unless registered?
What would you prohibit exactly?
-
How would a mandatory system work?
Notallowed to talk about fire safety unless registered?
Not allowed to advise on fire safety unless registered?
What would you prohibit exactly?
Who suggests it should be mandatory?
-
If your talking a voluntary register, then there are already lots of them.
-
That is the point, RP's would only have to consult one register instead having to decide which of the four should s/he use.
-
Most of them don't know there are four so what chance would they have of finding one??
This would just give "carte blanche" for the accrediting bodies to hike the fees up - don't think it would give anything to the RPs. To be honest its the same situation with FRS/FBs as its pot luck there too!!
-
The concept is a bit broader in its approach than just fire risk assessors and would be an attempt to remove the credibility of those cowboys who are operating in the fire safety field. Credibility is so easy to establish these days; with a decent website and a van with some decals on, anyone can be anything in the fire sector overnight.
Those that have third party approval already from a UKAS accredited body in any fire related field would be eligible to be listed on the 'Fire Safe Register'. This register would be a searchable site for the RP or their representative; a sort of amazon with pre-qualification. It would not be mandatory nor should it have any significant additional cost to those who appear on it.
Those who don't want to be on it can continue to operate as they do now. The idea is to signpost a single point of reference for fire with a hefty amount of due diligence built in to any selection they make from that list.
It is a simple concept that should help improve the RPs lot and create a commercial advantage for those on the register. Sorry but those who are good and have no third party are swimming in the same pool as the poor with no third party. When an RP goes fishing for services or products he doesn’t know what is coming out of the water. This in concept is a stocked fishery with only stocked fish of known pedigree.
The RPs would find this register very high up in the Google search results and they would find it very difficult to ignore the register when looking for fire safety services or products. This should drive up standards and marginalise the poor providers. I have no doubt it will marginalise some of the good ones too but to improve we have to move on and this is a positive development that could happen.
-
The concept is a bit broader in its approach than just fire risk assessors and would be an attempt to remove the credibility of those cowboys who are operating in the fire safety field. Credibility is so easy to establish these days; with a decent website and a van with some decals on, anyone can be anything in the fire sector overnight.
Those that have third party approval already from a UKAS accredited body in any fire related field would be eligible to be listed on the 'Fire Safe Register'. This register would be a searchable site for the RP or their representative; a sort of amazon with pre-qualification. It would not be mandatory nor should it have any significant additional cost to those who appear on it.
Those who don't want to be on it can continue to operate as they do now. The idea is to signpost a single point of reference for fire with a hefty amount of due diligence built in to any selection they make from that list.
It is a simple concept that should help improve the RPs lot and create a commercial advantage for those on the register. Sorry but those who are good and have no third party are swimming in the same pool as the poor with no third party. When an RP goes fishing for services or products he doesn’t know what is coming out of the water. This in concept is a stocked fishery with only stocked fish of known pedigree.
The RPs would find this register very high up in the Google search results and they would find it very difficult to ignore the register when looking for fire safety services or products. This should drive up standards and marginalise the poor providers. I have no doubt it will marginalise some of the good ones too but to improve we have to move on and this is a positive development that could happen.
Start one Kelsall. One register of all registered assessors regardless who registered with.
-
"anyone can be anything in the fire sector overnight"
And there are some around here that testify to that!!
"stocked fish of known pedigree"
- at this time everybody is swimming in the same pool and that's the way it should stay. I've dipped my toe into UKAS TPA but withdrew rapidly when it became apparent that there is absolutely nothing in it for the small business but costs and hassle. The serious RPs aren't interested as they know quality when they see it and the vast majority of RPs just don't know anything and really aren't bothered about anything but a cheap FRA. If I have to do it again (TPA) it will be as easy as it was the first time - just get the paperwork straight and pick a few local and simple examples - I may even set up a business getting people through the process as that may be a nice little earner too. The 'non-UKAS' IFE register interview was much more technical and was a proper examination of knowledge; its about time they got themselves UKAS registered and become the masters of any register.
"nor should it have any significant additional cost"
- significant? That is a matter of perspective linked to turnover.
-
I still feel that if we in the fire industry don't support and promote 3rd party certification then who will?
Some major RP's in my experience are getting wise to the cheaper non certificated FRAs. I have now dealt with two very large housing providers that went for cheap and cheerful FRAs, paid out several hundred thousands of unnecessary pounds on upgrading the FR, common fire alarms, emergency lighting etc. and are now having the FRAs done again.
We also have the Fire Risk Assessment Competency Council where anyone worth anything in the fire industry contributed to and issued the "guide to choosing a competent assessor". If things go badly wrong for a large RP they would need to justify in Court why they chose to ignore this guide and select a non UKAS accredited assessor or company. I think its only a matter of time for this to come up in the Courts.
-
If things go badly wrong for a large RP they would need to justify in Court why they chose to ignore this guide and select a non UKAS accredited assessor or company.
Of the four registers recommend only one is UKAS accredited, FRACS the others are not but I am more than happy with that. With the reputation of IFE I do not believe they need to be UKAS accredited and the other two (IFPO, IFSM) I am not sure about.
-
BAFE SP205 is UKAS accredited, apparently the FRACS UKAS only extends to their individual, not their company scheme.
-
BAFE SP205 is UKAS accredited, apparently the FRACS UKAS only extends to their individual, not their company scheme.
That is correct although I am told that the FRACS Company scheme will gain UKAS soon. There is also another scheme that is UKAS accredited but the name escapes me?
-
Check out http://www.notts-fire.gov.uk/Documents/A_Guide_to_Choosing_a_Competent_Fire_Risk_Assessor.pdf
-
Tam the FRACC doc is available for download from lots of sites including FIA and BAFE. I admire your discerning approach to certification and registration , and as chairman of the IFE Panel responsible for registering fire risk assessors and auditors as competent I am grateful for your support.
Willie: IFC Certification have a UKAS accredited scheme. The BAFE scheme goes from strength to strength and is growing all the time.
-
Support grows for fire safety register
Proposal to create a national fire safety register to promote competence and compliance for installers, maintainers and registered fire risk assessors was discussed during a Parliamentary seminar.
The plan, which was first discussed at the Fire Sector Summit in October, is for an umbrella register that would gather together all the existing accredited schemes under a single brand, which could be widely promoted.
The issue was further debated on 4 December at a seminar in the House of Commons, which was organised by the Association for Specialist Fire Protection (ASFP). Delegates heard that clear evidence from incidents such as at Lakanal House indicates that significant problems lie with installations in buildings that are less than fit for purpose and with key professionals failing to ask the right questions at the right time, or cutting corners and eroding specifications along the construction chain. With the fire safety order raising concerns, a register could give assurance to those lacking in-house expertise to decide if an installation is correct.
Speaking at the seminar, Chair of the Passive Fire Protection Federation Mike Wood explained that an online survey, conducted by BM TRADA, had shown strong support for such a scheme, with over 90% of respondents agreeing that there should be a National Fire Safe Register and 95% of those respondents saying that they would use it.
Mr Wood declared that this was the strongest indication that such a scheme would be well supported and, if implemented, would provide an essential step in improving standards across the UK. He said: ‘A National Fire Safe Register is the natural next step and I trust the fire safety sector through the Fire Sector Federation will plan to take it. As the responsible body, I don’t see how we can avoid that step. It is simply an obligation to those who rely on fire safety.
‘Installation and maintenance are critical. We know as a sector that correct installation for all fire protection systems is fundamental in achieving proper function in protecting against fire, according to product and system design. We also know from industry feedback that too many installations are carried out below standard.’
-
Has anyone heard what would be required to gain access on to this National Register if it ever comes off? i.e. UKAS accredited individual or company or IFSM, NAFRAR registers etc?
-
They are nowhere near that stage William they haven't got to base 1 yet, if they ever do, I still have "snowballs in hell" ringing in my ears.
-
:D
-
William you will be fine with your SP 205 and Tom check out who owns the domain names.
It is on the way; I think it is just a question of ownership and where the money comes from! 10 K should enable the whole thing to be developed and working.
The criteria has to be set at accredited third party level, and as certification already exist for many services and products in the fire sector; those eligible just need transferring to a searchable web site.
Simples!
-
It sees to me that this is another 'Everybody, somebody and anybody' scenario in line with the Risk Assessors Registers.
Everybody agrees there should be a register, somebody should set one up and anybody can set one up. There is already a proliferation of different bodies in the field and all of the could set up a register if they so wanted.
The only people who could set up a national register with any legitimacy is the government, who will view it as a bar to 'competition' or someone like the BRE. Otherwise it will descend into the cat fight we have seen between the different Risk Assessor's register.
A good idea but I can't see it working.
-
Mike
Remember this is for the good of the RP and not those on the register. The benefits for those on the register will be real and should be financial however that is a fringe benefit. The real aim is to stop the difficulty in finding quality assured products and service providers. This will be much more than a rate a tradesman site; it will be a clear signpost to those who have an independent third party reference of a technical nature and not a personal nature. The Fire Sector Federation is the logical owner for this, and their involvement would give it credibility and would drive the register. There is no question of it being a bar to competition as the system is voluntary and already exists in a disparate format.
In my opinion it would be a really good way of driving standards up. The government wants the industry to improve itself and this is one way of doing that.
‘Earned Recognition’ is what it is all about. These products and service providers are ‘Fire Safe’; of course there is a little more to it than just selecting someone off that register, but it could also be a really useful education tool too.
Fire needs a …’One Stop Shop’ a holistic approach is the key to delivering fire safe buildings in the UK
-
Sorry Kelsall "Domain Names who owns them" explain a little more?
-
Forgive me for being cynical, but who exactly are the Fire Sector Federation? I have seen their website and there are a number of organisations listed who have got together but the question is what is their legitimacy?
For example I could gang together a number of the members of this forum and I could call it something like the 'Fire Advisors BB Association' and then claim that we are the natural home of a register for all Fire Advisors and charge £500 to become a member, when in fact we would be little more than a lobbying group.
My point is any number of bodies could set up a national register and without a legitimate backer with perceived authority (i.e. the government) they will be worthless and in the worst case a large cat fight.
I am not looking at it from the point of those on a register but from the point of view of the RP who needs to know that the register is actually worth something and not just a club for people who are prepared to pay the membership fee.
At the end of the day you only have to look at this forum and the discussion about the different Fire Risk Assessor registers and their actual value to the people on the register. It will remain the same the good RPs will check for competence and the bad ones will go for the cheapest quote.
By the way for the FSF website CAOFOA no longer exists it has changed to CFOA.
-
Tom
Base one would be buying the domain names I assume!
.com, .co.uk and .org.uk are all taken. They were actually destined for another similar initiative, which used a different name in the end.
Someone saw the value in buying them; presumably if they are not being used they could be available!
-
Mike
The FSF is the fire industry ear and apart from the trade associations and professional bodies the FSF are the body driving fire safety in the UK. Many professional bodies and trade associations are members and I am guessing if you are a member of any such body they are represented on the Federation and therefore they represent you. The coroner from the Lakanal house inquest wrote to the FSF as ‘the’ industry body and asked if it could help with a response to the issues raised at the inquest. There are many issues that came from that inquest and the Federation is trying to address those issues. So it is a little bit more authoritative than you and your mates off the forum. I am also convinced that the fire minister also believes it represents the fire industry in the main. Indeed several of the most influential people in UK fire sit in on meetings and at working groups so I guess they give it added credibility.
I am sure I haven’t explained it well enough; the concept as I understand it is about getting the existing accredited third party schemes referenced in one place.
The aim of this being to give the end user more chance of finding an assured contractor or product. So for example if someone wanted to buy a fire door set they could search this register and all those with certification would appear in one data base. BMTRADA, CERTIFIRE, LPCB, and IFCC etc would all have their certification clients on the site.
I genuinely don’t see why that wouldn’t be a good thing!
-
Base 1, IMO would be agreeing to have a national register and who would run it, deciding on a website is way down the list.
-
Michael, can I join the Fire Advisors BB Association. And can I vote for Kelsall as chaiman, provided he stops working for shareholders.
-
Ah Colin!
I work for a very large company owned by shareholders, so what! I am not really that sure you actually understand how we operate and what does and doesn’t happen here. Not that it has anything to do with you; get off your high horse, you’re not working for a not for profit organisation. (Far from it)
Anyhow, it’s much better working for the man, than being a self-made man, who worships his creator!
Kurnal him again! How many more times?
::)
-
I can see the need to filter out the cowboys but I keep thinking back to the ethos of the RRO when it started 'not to be a consultants charter' (amongst other things) so the genuine 'little guy' doing a fine job for the RP's of small business is going to be put off by yet more hoops to go through (with additional fees of course).