Level of 'Sign Off' Required

[Suttonfire]

When building work is undertaken to address defects which may have been identified in an FRA, which level of 'sign off' would you consider to be appropriate upon completion?

For a example, if a building contractor was installing a fire rated partition in a roof void to address a previous lack of separation in place; Provided that the building contractor can demonstrate that they have adopted an approach/used materials which are in accordance with accepted guidance (e.g. The White Book etc), would you consider that sufficient to demonstrate that the work has been specified and completed to the required standard? Would you expect Building Control/a Building Surveyor to approve? Or a post inspection carried out by a suitably competent fire risk assessor (based on the work having been undertaken specifically to address an issue identified in an FRA report)?

[Fishy]

If the works constitute 'building works' then building control body should approve.  Other than that, the level of assurance required is completely up to the Client.

[Suttonfire]

Would what I have described in my post, I.e installation of a fixed partition in a roof void constitute ?building work? as per building regs in your opinion. Would it be considered to be a permenant structural structural alteration which would affect fire safety compliance?

[Fishy]

I'd bow to the greater authority of our 'regulator' forum members, but I would have thought that it would fall under the reg's.  Generally, if it falls under the guidance associated with the Reg's, & it isn't maintenance/repair, then I assume it's notifiable.

[col10]

It doesn't fall under the Regs.  It is not a material alteration (not more unsatisfactory in relation to Part B).