Good answers.
Just to put another slant on it: (Just hear me out before you all start putting your "All FSO's are b*****ds" hats on.)
As an inspector, I would not accept verbal alarm in any sleeping risk no matter how small. Coupled with the lack of decent fire doors it
could be a major failing of the following aspects of the legislation:
{Jack boots on}
Article 8: General fire precautions
Article 9: Risk assessment. (You might have one, I would challenge its suitablility as a suitable risk assessment should have led to detection being fitted and fire doors being fitted.)
Article 10: Principles of prevention. (You haven't avoided risks or adapted to technical progress)
Article 11: Fire safety arrangements. (There is a question about the whole management of fire safety. If you can explain how you are complying with this article then you might sway my judgement)
Article 13: Fire detection. (Clearly there is none that is suitable)
Article 14: Emergency routes and exits. (Lack of fire doors protecting escape route) (also, do you have emergency lighting?)
6 potential non-compliances, with at least another 7 applicable articles which I doubt you would be attaining "complaint" on.
As mean as this seems, the point being that even though you might just think you are not complying with 1 or 2 articles of the legislation, it opens up a whole can of worms. Basically in a sleeping risk you are looking at the 2 main articles that can make a huge difference between life and death, and as such it creates 2 seperate "proper" offences with just those 2 articles not being complied with.
So I think the worst case scenario for you would be, a visit by a very thorough officer. He would realise the potential of the offences straight away. A full audit would probably lead to an enforcement notice for all the non complaint articles, and the beginnings of a prosecution would be started for the offences linked to articles 13 and 14 with the other articles being used to support this where it can be proved that they contribute to putting relevant persons in danger.
As bad as this may seem it is possible this could achieve a bigger objective. i.e. All the other B&B's in the area will sit up and take notice, and get themselves on track because they do not want to go through what you have.
{/Jack boots off}
I am hoping I have not come off as too severe, but for "self complaint" legislation to work we (The FRS) need to be seen as being proactive in enforcing it, and the 'punters' need to know we mean business, otherwise they will sit around and wait for us to come and put it right for them.
My 'more friendly' advice would be to get an alarm system fitted and a proper risk assessment done. That would be a reasonable starting point.
