Fire resistance of structure

[Bill G]

A question for enforcers -
In the old days the guides (Lilac and Light blue) made refrence to the fire resistance of the structure ie specifically the floors and ceilings between level's. In the new RA guides no mention is made ( or we cannot find any) of the fire resistance of the elements of the structure other that that which forms the protected routes.

This then leaves us with the dilemma of can we serve an enforcment notice on the fire seperation between floor levels . Logic would suggest "yes" but if appealed could we be seen to being over the top?

Any thoughts !

[jokar]

The Guidance Documents are based on current British Standards and therefore as they reference ADB then you can use the table in that document to assess compartmentation levels.  However, if you are talking basements the Guidance documents give guidance on this for each of the 11 premises types identified.

[Bill G]

Jokar - many thanks .

I acept your advice - however on second reading of the books I still have a question ( ignoring the fire resistance to basements -as this is not in despute and the guides are very specific about fire resitance for them).

On reading the guides -

Office and Shops - only makes refrence to the FR of the escape route.
Factory & Warehouse - only make refrence to FR of escape routes.
Sleeping - does at section 4.1 does link FR to the ADB
Res Care - adds in a bit on FR of compartment floors .

Therefore in the guides it seems to imply that for sleepings risks - hotel /Res care etc that the Fr construction would be for the building as a whole .And for day risk the FR is only relative to the eccape routes.

My only concern on pursuing this is that after being involved in an appeal to an enforcment the lawers on the other side will analize these guides with a fine tooth comb and if it does not say it then we could have a difficult time in explaining our reson for wanting it to a  magistrate.

[jokar]

I beleive the issue is that enforcers are dealing with existing buildings that have been subjected at some stage to Building Regulations permissions.  These would have put a standard of structural protection on the premises which would need to kept to ensure the life safety of the individuals who resort to the premises.

As regards the appeal, enforcers are there to provide evidence to the magistrates and it is important to give it correctly and give reason for the stance taken.

For example, "we recommended that the standard of compartmentation is 60 minutes becasue this provision meets the requirements of ADB and if not provided as in this specific example the lack of structural integrity will affect the safety of people escaping from the premises because..........

[CivvyFSO]

You hit the nail on the head Jokar. We need to tie it down to the means of escape article from the RR(FS)O. Specifically 14(2)(b). If it doesn't affect the means of escape then we are slightly stuck. Regardless of guides, we enforce the legislation.

[PhilB]

You hit the nail on the head Jokar. We need to tie it down to the means of escape article from the RR(FS)O. Specifically 14(2)(b). If it doesn't affect the means of escape then we are slightly stuck. Regardless of guides, we enforce the legislation.

The Fire Safety Order is there to ensure the safety of relevant persons. This includes not only means of escape but also means for securing the means of escape.

Keeping fires to within certain sizes by using fire compartments is a means of securing the means of escape.

The recommendations in ADB are there to ensure the safety of persons in the building not the building itself. The building must stand up for sufficient time to enable persons to escape or be rescued. What is the purpose of compartmentatiuon if not to achieve that objective?

Compartmentation in a care home or hospital is there to ensure the safety of relevant persons who may not be able to leave the building quicky or indeed leave at all.

Therefore just providing means of escape would not fully fulfill the requirements of the Order...in my opinion only of course.

[CivvyFSO]

I couldn't agree more.

If this is the case then we could try going for them under article 10, preventative and protective measures. Basically saying there are not enough protective measures for the persons that are unable to be moved. Even under the good old simple 5 step risk assessment method, dealing with remaining risks, this should identify the measures needed to protect the relevant persons and if compartmentation addresses this risk and is 'reasonably practicable' then compartmentation it is.

Another argument is, the building needs to be able to support firefighters who may be rescuing relevant persons.

I was originally really just considering office/factory/shop type of risks.

Each case on its own merit.

(There's also the much overlooked article 8, which links in with article 4(1)(a) "Measures to reduce the risk of fire on the premises and the risk of spread of fire on the premises", for some reason I tend to look at article 9 onwards, possibly because article 8 is not even on the audit form.)

[PhilB]

Ah yes, the wonderful audit form!!!

[Dinnertime Dave]

I`ve heard that the audit form is to be reviewed

Hope they keep the property loss section "Estimate the extent of fire and smoke damage arising from an uncontolled fire" Assuming no firefighting action of any discription!!!

[Big T]

Just a suggestion,

2 brigades that i work closely with in situations like this have issued "informal" written advice to us covering items within buildings their particular county deem "higher risk"

1 of the letters we received covered the very issue of fire protection between the ceiling of a print shop and the floor of the flats above.

The advice was simple, provide certification on the FR of the floor slab or interlink the shop fire alarm with that of the flats above and evacuate in an alarm. The business complied to avert formalised action. Surley business' are far more likely to work with you if you provide formalised "informal" advice stipulating "do it or we wil serve an alterations or enforcement notice"

We all know that business will rarley adjust their working practices because you tell them people are going to die. Tell them they might get an enforcement notice and you watch how quickly they comply. Talk to them. People don't want their first meeting with a fire brigade to start with an enforcement notice hitting their desk.

[Bill G]

So what is the difference beteen this informal letter/notice and a letter of non-compliance ?

[Big T]

There isn't, Your thread started with you asking about giving someone an enforcement notice.

My thought was that if you sent them an informal letter or letter of non compliance as you call it it would probably do more good long term than just serving an enforcement notice on them. No people in curly white wigs to argue with you

[Nearlybaldandgrey]

The Responsible Person needs to comply with Articles 8 to 22 so Article 10 is relevant I would have thought.

The protective measures would include structural fire protection so if this is not taken account of, then surely an enforcement notice can be served.

If the recipient wishes to appeal, that's fine as they have the right. At least in court, M'lud would provide some further detail as to what it entails (based on the Fire Authority information)?

In answer to the first post, I would say that an enforcement notice is justified as long as the Inspecting Officer has been reasonable, taken time to reflect and consider the decision and applied the Enforcement Management Models responsible person factors.

If it has been highlighted on previous inspections and nothing has happened then it becomes relevant history in terms of poor inspections which would then give an indication of that responsible person is not complying for  financial gain.

Unfortunately, you have to have a firm stance with some people!

[Dragonmaster]

The advice was simple, provide certification on the FR of the floor slab or interlink the shop fire alarm with that of the flats above and evacuate in an alarm. The business complied to avert formalised action. Surley business' are far more likely to work with you if you provide formalised "informal" advice stipulating "do it or we wil serve an alterations or enforcement notice"

I'd be interested to find out what use an alterations notice would be. My understanding is that they are only issued to prevent alterations being carried where the premises:

"constitue a serious risk to relevant persons....., or
may constitute such a risk if a change is made...."

i.e. whilst they may constitute a risk, they are as safe as they can be at present e.g. a dynamite factory. Surely if they are that dangerous, the only option is enforcement notice or prohibition.