FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Fire Safety => Topic started by: Suttonfire on December 18, 2020, 10:40:57 AM
-
I understand that in the Fire Safety Bill it is proposed to mandate regular inspections of flat entrance doors (potentially quarterly or annually dependent on which related article you read).
Is it considered likely that the expectation will be that landlords will gain access to 100% of their flat entrance doors to carry out full inspections of both sides within each time interval?
I can not see how this will be realistic for large councils etc with a stock of 1000s of flat entrance doors. I have recently been involved with a stock wide inspection of 3000 flat entrance doors and 2 years since the commencement date there are still 40 or so doors for which access to inspect has not been achieved, despite repeated efforts.
I would be interested to hear views on what would be considered to be reasonable in instances where arranging repeated full access across a large number of doors will be problematic.
-
From experience of access for sprinklers, annual would be enough of a struggle. Even though the proposed check is just of the closer it's the access that is the issue - easier if it's Social Housing or a similar scheme where the freeholder also is the landlord for the flats, but a nightmare where you have a varied mix of owner occupiers, different landlords, etc.
-
Oh don't make such a fuss! Apparently, it is entirely possible on Planet Zanussi, to which we have all been teleported by all the wise people who have strayed into the field of fire safety knowing very little in terms of custom, practice and practicability, but feeling able to pontificate nevertheless.
Wait!!!! You aren't still living on Planet Earth are you????? OMG! did you not know it was abandoned long ago. Surely you must have noticed that no one speaks Earthling any more.
-
Hi all, has this debate moved on any? Am I right in thinking that this cannot be charged to residents? So I am wondering if a 3rd party is engaged to basically camp on the premises and get access to 100's of privately owned flats and make lots of later abortive visits, if this can't be added to the service charge - who pays? AND - if something is found to be wrong - who organises for remedials to the appropriate standard, and again, who pays? AND - assuming F&RS will wait for compliance for the next round of FRAs - they wont be expecting compliant assessment with full details of doors from March or whenever this will become law....actually is there a confirmed date for this to become law as yet? Many thanks in advance for any clarity....
-
It's got to get through the Commons again first where the Lords Amendments are to be debated tomorrow. Blocks where the leaseholders have used 'right to buy' and all part own the site would remain liable, interesting times ahead for investor freeholders unless things get tweaked in Ping Pong - elements have already been watered down once, I seem to remember the flat door check was originally proposed to be more frequent than annually.
-
Thanks Anthony - the way I read the amendments voted down yesterday, is that now, it is was before, that a "reasonable sample" of resi flats doors should be included in a FRA as they are now explicitly within the FSO, along with consideration of the external walls. AND - bills for this can be in the service charge?
-
It looks like everything is back to how it is now regarding doors and charging, I'm waiting to see the final version that goes to assent as it keeps changing all the time at the moment!
-
phew - thanks for taking the time to reply Anthony, that makes a lot more sense effort should be placed where you get the best benefit in my view - no point checking 100's of perfectly good doors - concentrate on the dogs I say!
-
Hi,
Any links to the latest news on this? thanks
-
Back in the Lord's tomorrow for them to consider the Commons amendments and if they see fit try and bring their back again.
-
Now that the Bill has been passed, is there any clear guidance as to requirements to inspect ALL flat entrance doors, and the required frequency of inspections? Is a representative sample of doors acceptable?
All that I can see is that all flat entrance doors are now included within the scope of the RRFSO?
-
No, that is to come later, presumably with the publication of the revised "mandatory" guidance. Most of the Act isn't enacted yet and requires further Statutory Instruments to trigger (which weren't there when I last checked this afternoon)
-
You need to distinguish between what the RP needs to do in checking s/c devices and what the fire risk assessor can be expected to do.
-
Thanks,
Is it likely to be a requirement that the RP inspects all flat entrance doors within defined intervals (how can they be assured of that an acceptable standard is being achieved without doing so)? Also, any guidance on what it would be reasonable to expect of the fire risk assessor during the inspection (a representative sample % of doors?).
-
I ask for a sample of doors any way, usually a selection of original doors and any changed ones where possible. Gaining flat access reveals other things you often never know about (as the RP doesn't know) - a recent site (conversion of 19th century building) I went to had been put down as having a superfluous common area only fire alarm and stay put suitable in a past FRA where no flats where accessed yet on entering the sample flats I discovered that the system actually extended into each flat with heat detectors and bells (dating back at least 30-35 years based on the age of the detectors) and exposed wooden beams thus raising the question as to whether the construction should have been so readily assumed to be stay put compatible.
Oddly the system, despite appearing to be late 80's, was a 3-wire 240V system with no panel as common in the early certification days that had 24V Apollo heads off relays/transformers in large boxes
-
I do the same with flat entrance doors within the scope of an FRA inspection, and also recommend that the RP is proactive in ensuring that self closers and the condition of all flat entrance doors is inspected.
I would like to establish whether this approach is likely to be considered reasonable within the scope of an FRA by the enforcing authority, or whether the assessor would now be expected to go beyond that.
I would also like to be able to give clear advice to RPs as to what is expected of them in terms of the requirement to inspect ALL flat entrance doors to comply to the Act and how often. I have seen various news articles etc mentioning every 3 months and then annual inspections, but have not seen anything further since the Act came into being. Is it a case of waiting for guidance etc to now be produced on the back of the Act?
-
It's looking that way, particularly as the guidance will be more binding than before. Most of the Act isn't operational yet so there is time to bring in the guides.
-
And cracking guides they will be, Tony.
-
A potential client has asked me to price for some FRA work in, mostly, general needs blocks. I have previously done work for them and the price was calculated on the block height and number of stairs/common areas under the 'common roof'.
This is quite straightforward, but they now say that they have been 'told' by the fire service that they must have an FRA for each common area. I have, of course, said they can have what they want but wonder how others approach this?
-
I'm guessing that that each staircase and the flats off it are self contained and don't allow access between the different stairs?
I'd be asking how they were 'told' by the fire service, verbal or NoD.
I've encountered FRS that have been happy with a single report as long as the contents are suitable and sufficient and it's clear which areas points to relate to, especially where the build, layout and fire precautions are the same.
It's case by case for me depending on layout and build. If they want to split it up that's fine, but it costs more as there is more admin times in creating multiple reports.
-
Hi Tony,
The blocks are indeed as you describe.
I have spoken with others and all agree that, as one could make a case for either scenario, price per stair and make sure you cover the extra costs involved. It does make pricing easier as its a simple base price, plus a set amount per additional floor.
As regards this particular situation the client is the local authority housing provider-LA- and, they say, they receive advice from the fire service-FS-who are also part of the same LA.
I think there is a feeling that they must go along with whatever the FS advise however, when I question them along the lines you mention the responses are the vague "we have been told" and this is made worse by their inability to differentiate between what they must do and what others would like them to do.
Allan
-
I've done it both ways.
The HA I worked for had separate assessments purely because each block had its own unique property reference number to allow costs to be put against the relevant block.
I've also put two separate but attached blocks on one assessment.
-
Hey all - are we any further forward with the official number of times these blessed doors need to be "inspected"...and is it now def just the closing action that needs checking each time? Ive got some peeps demanding qtly inspections for common are doors and 6 monthly for resi doors now....getting a little out of hand if you ask me...
-
No, as the secondary legislation & statutory guidance is still in preparation. It's anyone's guess at the moment!
-
Ah thanks Anthony - I'll head back to the land of fog.