certain group of hotels do they comply with FSO

[black arts]

Where I live there are certain hotels that will book customers in
during the daytime but there is nobody on duty at a nighttime.
Do you require a competent person onsite 24/7

Being a hotel you will have transit people who are there one/two nights
and therefore not familar with the layout of premises
is it acceptable for the RP just to issue a what to do in case of emergency notice

[val]

Probably!

I would assume that the hotel is bang up to scratch on MoE, AFD, etc and is of a relatively simple layout. The operators would also have to be confident that they could identify anyone with special problems and address these. (I am thinking of deaf alarms and the like). There was a firm that supplied emergency videos to go on the telly in the room before guests could access the pay for movie channels but I don't know if they are still trading.
Even in staffed hotels, how effective could a single night watchman be in assisting evacuation of say fifty guests?

There is no requirement for a competent/responsible person to actually be there 24/7. The French have been doing this for years, even to the point of having no-one on site...ever. Access is by credit card.

I would be looking very carefully at their fire risk assessment though. (Oh, all right then...the significant findings!)

[Tall Paul]

I agree with Val.  I would dig very deeply to test the 'robustness' of the fire safety plan and the evacuation strategy.  That's not to say it could not be effective... I would just need to be very sure.

[Ricardo]

The Responsible Person must have a responsibility to ensure that there are suitable arrangements within their FRA to alert the emergency services in case of fire? if there are no staff members on site, is this responsibility then left to a guest?
I am not saying there is a requirement for someone competent being on site 24 hours a day, but there must be a requirement for the Responsible Person to take account of this as a significant finding and have adeqaute suitable arrangements in place to deal with this matter as mentioned above.

[Tall Paul]

The means of alerting the emergency services may be by way of a remote monitoring centre.  The investigation of potential false alarms is of course another issue.

[wee brian]

Err I wouldnt use a risk assessment to alert the fire service (most people use the phone).

The reuirement to contact the fire service is by no means definate. The only reference I can find is in Art 13. Its a bit fuzzy round the edges.

[kurnal]

Like others I would want to see the emergency plan tested. I would not support any emergency plan that relied on guests. They are not responsible persons, they cannot be relied on or held to account for their actions. They are relevant persons not even temporary responsible  persons. They have no meaningful statutory duty of care to each other.  They may even be unaccompanied children. Remote supervision may work ok till theres a fire and then it will fall apart.
I agree that there is nothing in the RRO to require a human presence. But there is a requirement to produce a suitable and sufficient emergency plan.
But it is difficult to prove other than in hindsight. I tried to take on the same issue under the FP Act many years ago and failed. But I would remind the responsible person of the recent case in London (February) in respect of the care home prosecution.

[Nearlybaldandgrey]

Would not the requirements of Article 15 apply?

15 (1)(a) "The responsible person must establish and, where necessary give effect to appropriate procedures, including safety drills, to be followed in the event of serious and iminent danger to relevant persons;

(b) nominate a sufficient number of competent persons to implement those procedures in so far as they relate to the evacuation of relevant persons from ther premises ....

I think leaving guests to fend for themselves in a premises they are not familiar with is asking for trouble!

[nearlythere]

Is the plan not for everyone to evacuate if the fire alarm sounds? Doesn't really matter to the guests what happens to the building after that.
Is there a requirement for staff to be in a shop when the public are there? Don't think so.
Most of the impersonnal, room without the fuss, motel type places usually consist of long, straight and well lit corridors with rooms off and a way out each end. It would be very difficult to get lost in this type of place.

Now, as for the Ritz.........

[wee brian]

I think maybe when people check in they should be informed of the procedure, which should be very simple.

[Nearlybaldandgrey]

Is the plan not for everyone to evacuate if the fire alarm sounds?

In the ideal real world, yes. Unfortunately, people will have that "someone else will sort it out" attitude and may not move at all, which is why there should be staff available ti initiate the emergency evacuation procedures.

It would be an interesting case should a fatal fire occur in one of theses places ...... and a good test of the legislation.

I agree that as a person booking a room, you should be given information on the fire procedures but that doesn't happen.

I asked ithe receptionist at a large hotel I stayed in what the procedure for evacuation was and where the assembly point was. That request was greeted with a very blank look and a referrel to the manager to answer.
Not exactly confidence inspiring.

[wee brian]

Exactly - so what use would staff be anyway? You tell me the're essential and then point out they are useless???

[kurnal]

Is a hotel without supervision in effect an HMO?

[wee brian]

Oh now your just winding us all up!  well done.

[ian gough]

Kurnal - No.