New Fire Certificates - Who is issuing them?

[messi]

How many Brigades are still issuing Fire Certificates?

I notice that Hants are asking for applications, visiting sites and imposing interrim duties but not issuing the actual cert.

London, on the other hand, are still issuing certs to the letter of the FPA71

Whose doing what? and who's right?

[dave bev]

interesting question!  

sorry but the following tables dont 'copy and paste' too well - however i'm sure you intelligentos can work it out or even search hansard for the info in tabulated format!
and as cfoa have said you dont have to do what the 'current' law says, then all is well with the world apparently. perhaps cfoa have even advised as to the legality or otherwise of the impending marriage of prince charles?

dave bev



from hansard -

Mike Clapham: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister pursuant to his answer of 27 January, Official Report, columns 462–63W, on the fire service, how many applications for new fire certificates in each brigade requested between 1999 and 2004 remain outstanding; what assessment he has made of the guidance issued by the Chief Fire Officers' Association to fire and rescue authorities regarding the processing of applications for fire certificates; and whether the guidance is publicly available.

Nick Raynsford: The numbers of valid applications for fire certificates, and the number of applications outstanding at the end of each of the years requested, is given in Table 1 for England and Wales. Data on the age of outstanding applications is not collected centrally. However, average times taken to issue of fire certificates in England and Wales for the last year for which figures are available are given in Table 2.

The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister reviewed the guidance promulgated to fire and rescue authorities by the Chief Fire Officers' Association (CFOA) and made the assessment that it was consistent with the legal obligations of fire and rescue authorities and others concerned.

CFOA are arranging for the guidance to be placed on a publicly available part of the CFOA website as soon as possible. Meanwhile copies of the CFOA guidance circular have been made available in the Library of the House.

 


Valid applications received
 Outstanding applications at end of year
 
1999–2000
 4,932
 1,650
 
2000–01
 4,897
 1,414
 
2001–02
 4,920
 1,348
 
2002–03
 4,224
 1,216
 
2003–04
 3,361
 1,240
 

 

Table 2
BV 14— average time taken by fire authorities to issue fire safety certificates
 
 
 Number of certificates issued
 Number of days to issue certificates
 Average time in days
 
 
 2002–03
 2002–03
 2002–03
 2001–02
 2000–01
 
Shropshire
 17
 119
 7
 11
 11
 
Cheshire
 34
 551
 16
 34
 31
 
Merseyside
 22
 480
 22
 52
 16
 
Staffordshire
 34
 760
 22
 19
 18
 
Mid and West Wales
 50
 1,211
 24
 25
 27
 
Gloucestershire
 129
 3,574
 28
 21
 18
 
Derby shire
 40
 1,229
 31
 73
 62
 
Dorset
 63
 2,006
 32
 44
 44
 
Warwickshire
 25
 822
 33
 27
 63
 
Tyne and Wear
 48
 1,609
 34
 52
 65
 
West Yorkshire
 51
 1,842
 36
 70
 54
 
Humberside
 65
 2,353
 36
 39
 32
 
Lincolnshire
 5
 188
 38
 37
 93
 
South Yorkshire
 46
 1,890
 41
 59
 68
 
Hereford and Worcester
 25
 1,086
 43
 82
 104
 
Buckinghamshire
 47
 2,119
 45
 82
 86
 
Kent
 66
 3,018
 46
 66
 53
 
Cumbria
 28
 1,316
 47
 105
 80
 
Essex
 99
 4,752
 48
 n/a
 143
 
East Sussex
 22
 1,120
 51
 51
 51
 
Cleveland
 18
 957
 53
 46
 67
 
Northumberland
 6
 319
 53
 25
 58
 
Upper quartile boundary1
 
 
 
 
 
 
Devon
 41
 2,240
 55
 84
 66
 
Somerset
 14
 839
 60
 160
 14
 
Norfolk
 25
 1,542
 62
 30
 161
 
Bedfordshire and Luton
 15
 985
 66
 65
 63
 
Suffolk
 9
 607
 67
 67
 46
 
Nottinghamshire
 22
 1,520
 69
 92
 77
 
North Yorkshire
 54
 4,093
 76
 148
 60
 
Lancashire
 32
 2,474
 77
 74
 131
 
Cornwall
 37
 3,143
 85
 92
 97
 
North Wales
 19
 1,614
 85
 84
 55
 
Isle Of Wight
 3
 255
 85
 37
 76
 
Cambridgeshire
 44
 4,084
 93
 148
 74
 
County Durham and Darlington
 18
 1,782
 99
 123
 87
 
West Midlands
 71
 7,191
 101
 98
 92
 
Northamptonshire
 17
 1,748
 103
 85
 145
 
Royal Berkshire
 52
 5,470
 105
 97
 106
 
West Sussex
 58
 6,641
 115
 165
 175
 
South Wales
 63
 7,299
 116
 55
 90
 
Leicestershire
 12
 1,392
 116
 181
 136
 
Hertfordshire
 65
 7,735
 119
 209
 122
 
Hampshire
 100
 12,891
 129
 86
 53
 
Greater Manchester
 108
 14,578
 135
 131
 99
 
Wiltshire
 29
 4,232
 146
 103
 n/a
 
Oxfordshire
 26
 4,456
 171
 210
 77
 
Surrey
 26
 5,434
 209
 136
 125
 
London
 226
 48,364
 214
 208
 152
 
Avon
 18
 5,687
 316
 214
 68
 


n/a = not available.
(22) The upper quartile boundary is set at 53 using 2000–01 as the base date.

[AnthonyB]

Increasing different brigades are abandoning certificates and are generally not bothering re-issuing and updating in existing premises with material changes, or are accepting applications but putting them on the slow burner unless they are high risk premises.

Many premises we visit now bear little relevance to the buliding any more and some places still have pre 1971 Means of Escape certificates but are not being updated.

Basically as the FP Act is still on the statute and in force we advise clients to stick with the process and apply for new certificate, apply for revised certificates after changes and to notify any proposed material changes. We also get them to continually apply until a written response is obtained & not to accept a verbal "don't bother". If the fire service don't do their bit then the ball is in their court and the client is covered having fulfilled their duties

[dave bev]

pretty close to my veiw anthony! seems some people think they can ignore the law as it stands (and it does currently stand) i also thought the fire service were required to 'do their bit' - failure to do so therefore falls on the fire service in question ! interesting, or it could be if someone tested the process - especially if their insurance companies required compliance with fire certificates - wonder what would happen if 'it went off' somewhere?

dave bev

[Bill.]

I can confirm as the law hasn't changed as yet then then we as F Authorities would be on a very difficult footing were we to advise not to apply, fail to amend or fail to issue Fire Certificates, either when requested or when we disciver the premises attracts the requirements for one.

I can however only speak for the Brigade in which I serve, located in Scotland and begins with an 'S'.

It would be a very brave or foolish brigade which when faced with an application decides not to action, a fire ensues and the applicant (in light of an insurance company claim) looks to apply damage limitation.

I wait with baited breath.

ps all comments are personal and not representative of any Fire Authority concerned.

[messi]

Thanks for the replies

I agree about the liaibility issue if a FA fails to act. That seems to be the view of LFB, but Hampshire have their 'amended' policy on view ontheir website and are certainly not hiding it.

They say it's to save the punter money as the cost of the cert and plans would not be necessary under RRO.

Maybe the ODPM should issue an instruction so every FA is doing the same thing

[dave bev]

the odpm have been asked via the question in the house of all things bright and beautiful - they believe cfoa are correct as they seem to think they truly are the font of all knowledge. thing is, if they are wrong on such a simple issue as this, what else are they advising (incorrectly) on?  

anyone got a starter for ten?

dave bev

[james 15]

I think you are being a bit unfair on poor wretched fire authorities. Usually you're accusing them of being heavy handed and not moving with the times.
My authority, NW, has several football teams, has taken the view that it would be grossly unfair to charge businesses, (on occasions several thousand pounds) for a fire certificate when they 'should' become worthless in a few months. The Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regs already take precedence, are more closely aligned with the RRO and can deal with all premises on an equitable footing.

Having said that...the delay in the RRO is making things a tad less comfortable.
The Government, for once did listen and though they couldn't exactly tell us to break the law of the land, they did tacitly accept this position when it removed the need to report on the relevant BVPI.
The loss of 'income', although accountants would say it was only reflected reasonable preparation costs, has also been quite painful.

I don't think the arguments about insurers or liability will hold water. The implication that a fire certificate, or lack of it, has some causal link with a fire is nonsense when all dutyholders should be acting within the WP Regs.

[steve5]

If I may throw a spanner in the works to those who feel that the FPWP Regs gives adequate protection to ALL persons in a building.  The general interpretation of fire authorities is that the regs apply ONLY to employees.

If this is the case what current fire regulation protects persons other than employees in the workplace?

No FPAct certificate no protection?

[dave bev]

james - me unfair, or are you referring to someone else?
i have a view that if the law says 'one thing' it would be wrong for someone - whoever they are, to say something else, or even 'ignore the law' - principle i suppose as opposed to a 'view'. or do we all get to pick and choose which laws to ignore - yippee!
the simple answer would have been to address the 'interim' arrangements and sort out this issue properly beforehand- before moving to a position - mind you that seems to be the generic stance being advocated by those poor wretched fire authorities - they think something will be ok so instead of resolving the issues and 'testing' they move straight to trafalgar square without passing go!

sign of the times i suppose - im with steve on this one though - i wonder why they call them the workplace regs? hmmmmmnnn let me think about that one for a while!

there are of course some poor wretched fire authorities who jhave taken the stance that until the rro is enacted they will continue to abide by the law - seems sensible to me?

[James 15]

Dave Bev...I wasn't referring to you in particular, just the general tone of this posting.
As for always abiding by the law...we have been castigated for years for being prescriptive, you know, TD should be 18m...says so in the blue guide,ADB, etc. If you are advocation strict adherance to the law, I suggest you talk to the Fed of small businesses and the CBI...you only have to look at the post about signs and signals to see what a pigs ear it can become.
As for the workplace regs only applying to workplaces and employees...well to a point you are right but I normally find that every building that has some reasonable level of risk has employees and I've yet to see a FRA that tells the employees, (all of them), to leg it for the doors and not assist any others. Indeed, care homes, hospitals, shops, entertainment premises and many hotels all have employees whose are to a greater or lesser degree expected to assist the public. With a bit of creative thinking, and I know this is not perfect, you can usually expect levels of provision and systems that cover all people on the premises. The RRO really just clarifies this.
No FP Act cert ever protected residents in a care home.
My point was that FA have to deal with the cards as they are dealt...transitional legislation may have been the answer but it wasn't forthcoming. Most FA have taken a pragmatic approach, considered by CFOA and given the nod by the ODPM.
Those who insist on a shiny fire cert will get an embossed on on parchment!

[dave bev]

james guides are guides and the law is the law - no confusion there for me!
i also recognse the pragmatic approach, however thats all about making 'do' when nothing is in place to tell you otherwise. this is different than ignoring legislation that is still in place. fire certificates are not just about pieces of paper, and to introduce care homes into this discussion is a bit of a leap - trying to justify not abiding by the law by including a premise outside of its scope ?

anyway, no doubt some frs are following cfoa guidance and perhaps some of the contributors on here have even supported that stance, so its not strange people justifying their position - what do we ignore next i wonder

[Ken Taylor]

Without fire certs Steve5, I suppose we only have Regs 3-5 of the Management of H&S at Work Regs 1999 - although these relate only to general risk assessment and control and are not fire-specific. It's strange that the duties upon employers under the FPW Regs relate to employees whereas the thrust of the H&S at Work Act includes others affected by the work undertaking.

[stevew]

Thanks Ken I am aware of the general duties under H & S.
Hampshire  made the decision last April to no longer inspect premises under the FP Act 1971.  This could be looked upon as forward thinking or 'jumping the gun' depending on when the RRO comes into force.  One has to bear in mind that under the FP Workplace Regs Hants inspecting officers do not carry out FULL inspections.
 
On the plus side Hants are at least making employees aware of ther risk assessment approach to fire safety.  A good lead into the RRO.
On the negative side any further delay in the introducition of the RRO will in my
opinion continue to place persons at unecessary risk in premises where the fire certificate has been in place for 30+ years.  Premises where there have been no changes and the recommendations of the fire authority have been noted but not implimented.

With regards to James15 comment that the RRO is just clarifying existing fire safety arrangements.  It reminds me of the general overview presented to Government by fire authorities prior to the introduction of the FPWorkplace Regs.  The view was that all was rosy out there and that the FPAct 1971 was working well.   Interesting that this view came from senior management level and not from those working out there at the sharp end.  Maybe it was a case of saying what they wanted to hear rather than the truth.  Enough, we have moved on and should look forward.

Perhaps the way forward would be to:
Re-train fire safety inspectors
Give selected fire inspectors the power to spot fine for serious/repeated infringements
Fire authorities to enter into the 21 century and offer advice to employers of the advantages, and what to look for in an advisor  
Educate employers
Provide an effective community fire education policy  

Well thats enough to be going on with.  How do I continue to be motivated?
It must be the ex-fire officer in me, oh! and the money.

[dave bev]

stevew - could it be seen as illegal, seeing it as 'forward thinking or merely jumping the gun' makes it easier to sell i suppose? - it always leave me feeling a little uncomfortable when the law is clearly broken and it gets referred to as forward thinking!
or are we in the position of breaking laws when we dont agree with them - if we are i could think of a few for starters!