Am I over reacting?

[AnthonyB]

A client spent a very substantial sum on a new fire alarm at their shopping centre.

A renowned consultancy and a BAFE SP203 firm put it in place.

The spec was to replicate the existing system in function and C&E using current technology and to be to Category L1 of BS5839-1:2002+A2:2008 (current at the time)

I found however loads of non conformities and missed coverage, yet whilst agreeing to and actioning some of those I raised the responsible parties is claiming the following are OK:

- Not following BS5839 limits in placing detectors too close too walls or ceiling obstructions because they worked when tested with the Solo/No Climb smoke detector test poles

- Not monitoring retail units panels for fire & fault as per current BS9999, only fire despite the original system having both in accordance with the then BS5588-10

- Not providing the linear heat system with a sacrificial length for testing as per the manufacturers specification

- No evidence of Audibility testing or design calculations in lieu of same.

- No use of metal clips (at beyond a height where an auditor doing a walk-through would obviously note)

Main excuse for all this - not Mandatory!

Considering no variations covering any of this was agreed by the client and the sum paid for the job I think this is poor as there are issues with suitable & sufficient fire warning from poor placement, management issues with omitting the full monitoring in BS9999, and issues with suitable and sufficient schemes of maintenance with the linear heat. The plastic ties is an issue with both safety and integrity as the place is not simultaneous evacuation and the system needs to operate over a prolonged period and whilst not relevant persons firefighters could be at risk.

I'm minded to stick to my guns regardless of the fact that accredited firms were involved and wonder if the forum agree, especially Colin Todd (do you do expert witness work!).

[kurnal]

Becoming increasingly common in my experiece. I have had an email today from a developer approved by an AI that says in writing " its an L3 system. L3 systems are not intended to wake anyone up".

[nearlythere]

"Not following BS5839 limits in placing detectors too close too walls or ceiling obstructions because they worked when tested with the Solo/No Climb smoke detector test poles"

Ehh?

They would work under test even if they where on the roof.

[AnthonyB]

"Not following BS5839 limits in placing detectors too close too walls or ceiling obstructions because they worked when tested with the Solo/No Climb smoke detector test poles"

Ehh?

They would work under test even if they where on the roof.

Exactly - I had to read this twice before I believed it!

[Dinnertime Dave]

A colleague of mind was so angry at the poor workmanship of an installed fire warning system he reported the company to trading standards. They have employed an independent expert to produce a report. Watch this space for what eventually happens. 

[Mike Buckley]

Surely the case has got to be: is the fire alarm system certified to BS5839? If the installer has certified it and it does not meet the standard and no variations are recorded then BAFE need to know and maybe Trading Standards and it has to a case for breach of contract if the firm claims they supplied a fire alarm system to a standard and in fact have not.

[jokar]

I think the questions are;
In the event of a fire can all of those who need to, leave the premises having been alerted?
In the event of a fire will all the devices operate correctly and provide detection, alert and warning for all?
In the event of a fire will firefighters be put at risk when entering the premises to provide intervention?

The answers, from the first post, are probably No and therefore it is plainly inadeqaute.

[colin todd]

Tony,  I tend to agree.  I am not sure the issues are all fire safety ones, as, for example, detectors a bit less than 500mm are likely to work fine, but it is an issue of contractual compliance.  It is kind of digital.  If there is a non compliance with 5839 and no variation agreed they have not done what they were required to do, nor does the system do what it says on the tin.  (With regard to your question, I do virtually nothing else now other than expert witness work and training, though I do miss project work a bit but dont miss FRAs.)  The correct course is to raise these with the company and then if they do not react to raise them with the SP 203 CB, who are required to record and act on complaints as part of their UKAS accreditation.

[nearlythere]

But surely if the installer has been accredited with having golden balls the installation would naturally be right? could the underlying problem be that the accreditation body may not be doing its job properly and should be subject to investigation or is there a fear that might expose an inconvenient truth?

[colin todd]

Almosthere, firstly they are not accreditation bodies, they are certification bodies, and there is no conspiracy for you to have a theory about Im afraid.

[AnthonyB]

I would agree that beyond contractual issues a few cm here or there isn't a major problem, but this was a lot less than half that in some places!

[lyledunn]

Points out the weakness of self certification. I see it all the time, even in public sector contracts where the concerns of estate service officers have been swept aside by bully-boy tactics of FM contractors and weak-knee management. If you don't whistle blow they will just continue to turn out less than what they were contracted to do.
Last year I carried out an inspection of the electrical installation in a facility belonging to a local health trust. The building was fitted with a replacement FA system. Neatly installed below the suspended ceilings but an absolute dogs dinner above. I reported same but nothing done to date and probably never will be.

[nearlythere]

Points out the weakness of self certification. I see it all the time, even in public sector contracts where the concerns of estate service officers have been swept aside by bully-boy tactics of FM contractors and weak-knee management. If you don't whistle blow they will just continue to turn out less than what they were contracted to do.
Last year I carried out an inspection of the electrical installation in a facility belonging to a local health trust. The building was fitted with a replacement FA system. Neatly installed below the suspended ceilings but an absolute dogs dinner above. I reported same but nothing done to date and probably never will be.

I thought that was why suspended ceilings were developed Lyle  
About a month ago I saw a major NI fire alarm installer running cabling in the stairway of a multi storey car park. Surface mounted and not a non combustible fixing in sight.

And a new installation going in to a major building extension in my town with cable ties galore (Even my local boy knows not to do it.)
I would assume these installers are accredited, certified, or somethingfied.

And Lyle I do know that many carrying out ISITEE  testing are only doing the portable equipment. "The other stuff should be done during the general electrical installation inspection and test" I keep getting told.   Should the general installation not be tested with fixed electrical equipment disconnected?