Author Topic: Licensing Act (Read 18927 times)

fred · « **Reply #15 on:** January 20, 2006, 01:32:28 PM »

I guess those of you in the Fire Service who are beginning to receive Variations to Premises Licences under the new Licensing Act have stumbled upon yet another blunder with this legislation - the applicant is not required to submit a plan of the proposed variation !

If the description of the proposal is vague enough to satisy the Licensing Authority - and it probably will be - then unless the Fire Service ask for a review (based on what ?) the Variation is likely to be approved.

For those applicants undertaking structural alterations who are not too fussy about seeking Building Regulations approval (if there's no plan we don't know what they're doing) it's an absolute doozie !

Is anyone from CFOA taking this up ?

wee brian · « **Reply #16 on:** January 23, 2006, 09:43:02 AM »

Under the Order the Licensing Authority will not be able to make conditions relating to fire safety. as such I dont see why they would want a plan that covers fire issues.

If it's building work then they should go through building regs. If it isnt then the Responsible person will have to adjust their Risk Assessment etc.

The only way that the Fire Service will get invovled is iether, when they inspect or when they are notified of a change if an Alterations Notice is in force.

ian gough · « **Reply #17 on:** January 23, 2006, 10:06:17 AM »

Mmmm...this is going to be interesting.

wee brian · « **Reply #18 on:** January 23, 2006, 01:11:46 PM »

Yup

The brigades will either, put clubs and pubs High in the inspection list or dish out millions of alts notices.

I think inspection would be better but I get the impression that a lot of brigades see the changes as an oppurtunity to cut resources. Dish out loads of alts notices and its covered (assuming people comply with them).

zimmy · « **Reply #19 on:** January 23, 2006, 05:45:48 PM »

WB - I enquired some time ago when and on what should alterations notices be served. I agree with your comment at the time (which 'Val' concurred)(see post re RRO) that they should be used sparingly on 'high' risk premises only. They will create burdonsome red tape and probably wouldn't be complied with in a large percentage of cases. You intimate that Brigades may issue them left, right and centre to 'have it covered'.
I hope a circular from ODPM will give guidance before commencement of the Order to avoid this. The principle that 'the risk is now theirs' needs to be pushed home.

wee brian · « **Reply #20 on:** January 23, 2006, 10:05:20 PM »

I agree but ODPM are unlikely to be so direct in their guidance.

Big A · « **Reply #21 on:** January 24, 2006, 09:15:34 AM »

The principle that 'the risk is now theirs' has been true since the introduction of the WP regs. Issuing masses of alterations notices will be as toothless and time-consuming as section 8 of FPA. The only people who will comply with an alterations notice will also have complied with the rest of the Order.

fred · « **Reply #22 on:** January 24, 2006, 11:56:42 AM »

8(2) of the FPA didn't work, so I can't see that issuing Alterations Notices carte blanche to plug the gap created by inadequate legislation will work either; and an inspection programme based on the fact that premises may have carried out alterations is a long long way from a risk based inspection programme.
Hey ho ...

mikegibrn · « **Reply #23 on:** February 08, 2006, 06:50:50 PM »

I have also lost my copy of the Bradford City Fire. If anyone knows where I might obtain a copy, digital of VHS, please contact me at mikegibrn@yahoo.com

Thanks a million,

Stay Safe

News:

Author Topic: Licensing Act (Read 18927 times)

fred

fred