5.9.10
I was asked by a contractor to carry out an inspection and test of the fire alarm and emergency lighting systems at 26 Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO). The brief was to establish the operational status of the systems and to establish if the systems complied with BS5839-1 2002 or BS5839-6 2004 as applicable and the specific requirements of the Housing Authority operating the HMO Licence scheme.
Systems were generally post 1995 with the majority being post 2000. The HMOs were owned by various landlords. The majority of the premises contained two, three and sometimes four self-contained flats. Most were 3 storey.
As a simple matter of interest I have detailed my main findings below.
Systems were mostly to BS5839-1 although some were fitted with systems to BS5839-6. Where panels were used, the were conventional.
1. There was no documentation relating to the system in any of the HMOs other than an access code which had been hand-written on to the panel (somewhat defeating the purpose of a code).
2. There was no evidence of previous inspection and testing and no Log Book in any of the premises except one where the Log Book was last completed in May 2003. (It was not within my remit to pursue such evidence, merely just to allude to the requirement to have it available).
3. The systems in two properties were found to be totally disabled. Investigations revealed that in both situations, manual call points within the common areas had been operated (probably maliciously). Additionally, in one system a faulty smoke detector within a flat was triggering an alarm condition. It is known that the system was disabled by tenants using the access code for one system and both normal power and battery power had been disconnected in the other system by persons unknown. It was established that in the former case, the situation had prevailed for several weeks.
4. Five of the systems displayed panel faults but remained essentially operational. (In one system an EOL device had been removed from the sounder circuit. The EOL was found on the floor below the sounder). The tenant, who had limited English admitted trying to stop the noise from the siren during the night when he knew that it was a false alarm (from his own cooking). I assume that, in a futile attempt to stop the alarm, he may have twisted the sounder off its base and pulled at the wiring thereby dislodging the EOL. Other faults were low battery and incorrectly seated detectors.
5. Plastic bags had been stuck over detectors in one flat. The tenants denied doing this but smoking was obvious in all rooms. Again, a ploy likely carried out to avoid false alarm.
6. None of the properties achieved the required 75dbA sound pressure required at the bed head with bedroom doors closed. The attenuation of sound pressure levels by fire doors was found to be as much as 40db. Pressure readings at bed heads ranged from circa 37 to 71dbA
7. None of the systems in the HMOs that had self-contained flats complied with the Licensing Authorities to employ “mixed systems” or systems that would offer similar advantages. It was generally found that fairly comprehensive detection levels were provided but from a central panel usually located in an accessible position in the common ground floor hall. The only apparent consideration given to reducing false alarms was the provision of a heat detector in the living area instead of a smoke detector. This was apparent in about 15%-20% of the properties. Otherwise, once a detector triggered all sounders were activated.
8. Of the 378 detectors on the 5839-1 systems 3 were found to be faulty. Of the 18 domestic type, one was faulty.
9. Only two of the properties employed systems which used detectors to 5446-1. Both used the same detector manufacturer. The main problem again was false alarm generated by cooking. Once alarm condition was reached, silencing the system was frustratingly difficult. This may prompt tampering.
It would seem obvious that systems are not being maintained and I fear that once a Licence is granted, the same situation will prevail.
It is also concerning that false alarms have not been sufficiently dealt with at the design stage.
It would appear that minimum sound pressure levels have been ignored in most cases.
There is a need for simple hush disablement/facilities.
Regards,
Lyle Dunn
