Retained Firefighters And Blue Lights??

[Chunty]

Having read all of the above we must all surely agree that blue lights on personal vehicles is an extremely dodgy area with no clearly defined rights in legislation.

Answer; let's not do it and if it detrimentally affects response times than that's a matter for the brigade's who prefer to offer a cheaper service by employing retained rather than whole-time firefighters. They can't save all that cash and expect the same response, it's not fair on the public or the poor retained who are at times pressurised in to behaving recklessly, and then there's the ones who need no encouragement to be reckless and they would probably be just as reckless trundling around with a van load of parcels.

Drive to arrive; anything else is crossing the line.

[Clevelandfire]

When I used to work as part of Wicklow Metals on site industrial fire team our Station Officer had to ask permission from the Police to use blue lights because we were on a split site and travelling from one site to another involved a small journey by public road. The police said they would allow us only if our drivers had received advanced training from the IAM. I think the SO used to have to seek permission every 12 months. The use of blue lights is acceptable in the right circumstances and with the right training if it helps to protect life. Drive to arrive is fair enough but blue light users stick to that theory as well. Blue lights dont necessarily mean tear ars*ng around the place at break neck speeds, they are there to let other road users know you need to get through.

[AnthonyB]

As the law is so out of date (framed on the days that there was only the police, local authority fire brigades and NHs ambulances driving in ambulances not cars etc) arguments like this will occur constantly.

Private fire and ambulance vehicles can fit blue  lights, no argument.

with the new Road Safety Bill Private Ambulances can break the speed limit if their drivers have suitable specialist driving, but private fire never can as the new regulations are more specific with fire and only a LA (or similarly Govt approved) fire service can use excess speed after the same extra training (which is not defined- yet).

As for the other RTA exemptions (traffic lights, keep left signs, etc) the usual groups can still use them without extra training, including private fire.

Retained fire fighter cars are not likely to be classed as 'fire brigade vehicles' for blue light purpose as technically you are commuting to work and 'FS purposes' don't start until you are in th big red engine. There is case law about this where ambulance staff got stuck on by the courts for using blues on his car to get to the ambulance station to go to an emergency transfer (although a private service this didn't affect the judges interpretation, they would have acted the sae for an NHS crew person)

Problem is you are stuck with 4 different bits of law, each using different definitions, to get the full package of lights, sirens and exemptions.

Then you get local interpretation of the laws, police turning blind eyes (they don't give 'permission' when they say this they simply mean they won't persue a prosecution) or police trying it on (the case with the metals brigade above - unless it was in the last year or so the police could quote the 'bluff & persuasion' act but not enforce your crews being trained as the law would allow them to blue it on the public road with no training)

[drifty]

Retained firefighters cars will never be classed as fire brigade vehicles because they are not owned by the brigade but the law actually states a vehicle being used for fire brigade purposes. Any retained firefighter using their car to attend the station as a result of a fire call is using their vehicle for fire brigade purposes. They are also not technically commuting to work because as soon as their alerter goes of they are officially in work already and covered under rules and insurances etc the same as a wholetime firefighter during their shift.

[Midland Retty]

I think it would be rather silly for a Police Superintendant  to risk putting something of the "Bluff and Pursuasion" variety in writing (see my earlier post where my friend has had written authorisation from the police)

[Chunty]

Retained firefighters ..... are also not technically commuting to work because as soon as their alerter goes of they are officially in work already and covered under rules and insurances etc the same as a wholetime firefighter during their shift.

Interesting point drifty; a watch manager on my station broke his wrist slipping over on the pavement responding to his alerter and quite rightly we all felt he would be covered as he was being paid from the moment the alerter went off and therefore was 'in employment' - the brigade didn't see it that way and his treatment was disgusting, without care and ultimately without pay of any sort.

[drifty]

Did the union get involved with this because i know of a incident where a firefighter was responding to his alerter and turned over on his ankle running in and it was classed as an on duty injury and he got full sick pay while he was off.

[Chunty]

FBU did get involved initially but dropped the issue without reasonable explanation, without wishing to promote a union debate on this thread this has been common in our brigade for retained issues to receive lukewarm interest, that's why many including the aforementioned watch manager are now RFU.

[Chris Houston]

I think it would be rather silly for a Police Superintendant  to risk putting something of the "Bluff and Pursuasion" variety in writing (see my earlier post where my friend has had written authorisation from the police)

I agree, but the law is quite clear as Anthony, I and the relevant website have demonstrated.  In the UK it is not the role of the police to provide authorisation or permission.  I think most people who have an informed opinion on the subject concur on that.  As with most things, the polices role is that of gathering evidence, presenting it to the CPS (or PF in Scotland), who make a decision about prosecution and then the courts decide guilt.  Generally the police do not go about in the UK permitting or prohibiting things (although it may seem like it) that is the role of lawmakers.

[Bathgate542]

Hi ,
    I would dare to suggest, that most retained looking at this are doing so ,solely for the purposes of a safe response,I know I am,More and more fellow drivers are slowing down deliberately when they see you woul;d like to pass, only on Monday I had a driver slow in front of me, to 20 mph on a 50 speed limit, for no other reason than being territorial. It's not as if you can shout out the window to them,and there is,I dont care what anyone says an unseen pressure on a responding firefighter to get there PDQ.

That's one of the reasons I've made enquiries with my group manager regarding blue light use,which he has said he will look into,as he has recently had requests of a similar nature from other stations in the group.

Below are some extracts from the road traffic act , which I did quote in my initial request,as technically when the alerter is activated it is because someone has dialled 999 for an emergency and we are then on Brigade time.

The way I'm looking at it an employer/employee , under health and safety legislation has to do everything reasonably paracticable to ensure they carry out their job safely and effectively.I feel that in this case not everything is being done.

In fact in order to carry out home safety visits, we had to Insure our own vehicles for business use,on brigade time.

Anyway here are the extracts .............

There is no authority that issues permission to use blue, green or amber lights on your vehicle. You must just follow the law.

Any driver can drive using blue lights without needing any higher qualification that a driving licence. Most services do insist on their drivers undergoing some form of advanced driver training though, and there are moves to establishing a national standard.

The following information is a simplification of:

The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 (1 November 1989)
The Road Vehicles Lighting (Amendment) Regulations 2005 (21 October 2005)  
The Road Vehicles Lighting (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2005 (12 December 2005)

An emergency vehicle is classed as a vehicle used:

for police purposes (but not necessarily a police vehicle, e.g. search and rescue)
for fire brigade purposes (but not necessarily a fire brigade vehicle)
for ambulance purposes (but not necessarily an ambulance vehicle, e.g. mountain rescue)
as an ambulance for moving sick, injured or disabled people
by a specialist company for fire salvage work
by the Forestry Commission for fire fighting
by local councils for fire fighting
for bomb disposal
for nuclear accidents
by the RAF mountain rescue
by the National Blood Service
by HM Coastguard
for mine rescue
by the RNLI for launching lifeboats
for moving around human organs
by Revenue and Customs for serious crime

I'd be interested in your thoughts,particularly if you have made a similar request and if it has reahc ed a conclusion.Be gentle (First Timer)

[AnthonyB]

Don't forget that under more recent legislation (Road Safety Act)  you must now undergo approved advanced training if you wish to exceed the speed limit.

But it sound like you don't need to speed, just get there steadily without holdup & so progressive driving rather than response driving sounds like what you want to be able to do.

I understand your frustration, yet if successful it would open the floodgates for hundreds of more cars with blue lights - you are no different from a Coastguard responding to their station to crew a motor to a life threatening incident, a lifeboat volunteer responding to station to crew the boat or an ambulance responder going directly to the scene of a collapse patient - all these use there own cars without blue lights* and have the same problems as yourself.

If you get too many blue lights and sirens all over the place you are going to condition the public to them and then still get stuck. And one day one of you will have a prang and that's your licence at risk - the RTA 'exemptions' don't cover you if you crash under blues- you will be considered for dangerous driving regardless of fault.

*Staffordshire responders have pool cars for each scheme with lights and sirens - they can't use the exemptions though & have now been required to do a £400 driving course (not NHS funded) to be able to continue with the blues due to liability concerns and the Road Safety Bill. Professional responders from the RAF have marked scheme cars and have to do the three week NHS driving course.

Health and Safety requires your job to be safe, full stop. It isn't bothered about work performance. The easiest way to keep you safe responding to station is to require you to follow the Road Traffic Act and drive normally to the station without blue lights - it may affect your turnout time but thats nothing to do with H&S although it may affect your brigade's responsibilities under the Fire & Rescue Services Act (sic).

Are you prepared to pay the potentially large extra insurance premium for using blue lights from one of the few insurers that will offer it? Don't assume the Service will foot the bill.

If you really do feel a need to get the OK to use blues on your cars, please go ahead, I'm just giving you advance knowledge of the counter arguments you may face.

I speak as a H&S officer for a blue light equipped national organisation with similar problems, I've had to look into this matter a lot over the years and a bit like the Fire Safety Order it is full of grey areas!

[Clevelandfire]

I think it would be rather silly for a Police Superintendant  to risk putting something of the "Bluff and Pursuasion" variety in writing (see my earlier post where my friend has had written authorisation from the police)

I agree, but the law is quite clear as Anthony, I and the relevant website have demonstrated.  In the UK it is not the role of the police to provide authorisation or permission.  I think most people who have an informed opinion on the subject concur on that.  As with most things, the polices role is that of gathering evidence, presenting it to the CPS (or PF in Scotland), who make a decision about prosecution and then the courts decide guilt.  Generally the police do not go about in the UK permitting or prohibiting things (although it may seem like it) that is the role of lawmakers.

Don't forget that the Police have additional roles other than enforcement. They are involved in the licensing of various things which is a form of permission or authorisation in it own right based around a framework of legislation at a local level. Don't forget also that legislation won't cover all bases and often determinations can be made to Government with regard to any grey areas. Determination is looked at by the Secrtary of State or a nominated government department acting on his/her behalf.Ive spoken to a police officer who is a family friend on the subject of blue light use ealier today and thought I'd share the conversation with you. Sorry its like war and peace. My friend said that any vehicle not covered by the "lighting regs" which uses or carries blue lights will obviously be subject to Police scrutiny under various bits of legislation. They are able to use an amount of discretion in deciding whether that vehicle should continue to use blue lights or not for valid purposes. If they don't feel the vehicle should use blue lights they will report or prosecute the user. If they decide to prosecute it is not turning " a blind eye" they are merely using their perogative to exercise discretion legally.
Sometimes the Police will contact VOSA for a determination as they are the main agency whom draft legislation in this area on behalf of government. It won't nroamlly go before the Secretary of State unless the blue light user contests any decision made by VOSA. An example my friend gave was when he worked in the Devon & Cornwall force areas. The local Harbourmasters used Blue Lights for the purposes of combating serious crime, such as immigration or custioms related offences in and around the ports or harbour area which included sections of a public highway. He said that whilst the lighting regulations allow for use of blue lights for vehicle engaged in a law enforcement role " for police purposes but not necessarily a police vehicle" the harbourmaster's vehicles didn't really fit under that heading. He explained that private security firms are engaged in law enforcement to a large degree but they are not permitted to use blue lights on a public road. If a vehicle not covered by the lighting regs carries blue lights and the Police decide not to prosecute or report the user an officer holding the rank Superidendant or above can issue a form saying that the Police Force concerned will not prosecute the user for using them. The form can then be presented to any police officer IN THAT COUNTY in case the vehicle is stopped by an officer unaware that the superintendant has decided to not prosecute (i.e this ensures a consistant enforcement approach)  
This wouldnt necessarily hold any weight in a neighbouring force's area should the vehicle be used outside the county. For a determination to allow use of blue lights for vehicles needing to travel through two or more counties VOSA has to be approached.Another example given was some Life Guard / Life Saving Corps vehicles which patrol beaches in the north west. They look very much like Coastguard vehicles. They could be deemed to be search and rescue vehicles, but the Police weren't convinced they should use Blue Lights and wanted to prosecute them. To avoid prosecution they put the words "Rescue Ambulance" on the side of their Landrovers as if to suggest they are primarily used as an ambulance and thus entitled to use blue lights. The police didn't pursue the prosecution any further after that.
On the subject of retained firefighters my friend suggested that when responding to station their vehicles are not used for fire service purposes. But under some of the processes talked about above it maybe that they could be granted blue light use. If a fire authority approached VOSA and argued that retained firefighters in a particular area require them for critical reasons then it may be accepted and a determination given as such.
My friend has also come across other people displaying the word "AMBULANCE" on the side of various vehicles in an attempt to craftily use a blue light - but if a copper caught you you would have to justify that you were transporting someone to hospital or on route to an emergency.Sorry this post is so long but you know what coppers are like they like to rabbit on a bit.

I also confirm as another guy said that the police were right in saying that our driver needed to have had advanced driver training to drive on blues and twos on a public road even though it was only a distance of 350yards between both sites we covered

[Bathgate542]

Further to this topic, in 1997 the Retained Firefighters union consulted a Q.C with regards to use of Blue lights by retained staff, a copy of which was kindly sent to me in it ,it states :
" As far as this advice is concerned.In my opinion a privarte car used to convey a retained firefighter to a fire station in response to a summons via his pocket Alerter, is a vehcile used " For Fire Brigade purposes"

In a further doccument also forwarded to myself from the RFU it says :
"The Home Office looked at this issue in 1982 and recognised that the use of Blue Beacons by retained personnel was legal.However they opposed their use on the grounds that the benefits would not outweigh the greater risks from wider usage".

As a result most CFO's use this opinion to oppose their use by retained staff as there are concerns of abuse of the equipment, than for any other reason.


I think since 25 years have passed and at a time when our roads and routes to station are much busier, not to mention the territorial attitudes of other road users, this does need to be looked at again .

abuse of equipment and safe progress during use can be addressed by a variety of methods, such as risk assesments, training etc.

If my reading of these items are correct then there are legal grounds available that would allow use, providing Services and officers could work together on a definitive procedure for implementation and usage.

All opinions welcome.

[Chris Houston]

I think it is important to note that this is just the opinion of one barrister.

[Midland Retty]

Yes definately and also I think blue light use for retained personnel vehicles is a no no and could lead to more problems. Trouble is there doesn't appear to be many other options available.

I dont like the idea of increasing response times. You cant move fire stations at a drop of a hat either without impacting on your personnel etc etc You could move to the other end of the village lets say meaning the existing crew can no longer make the station in the allocated response time

Whole time crews back up? Get real have you not heard about cut backs meaning that wholetime crews are stretched as it is?

Yes we attend a lot of AFA's nowadays, but one day a shout will come in for persons reported and Im sorry - I dont care what anyone says - we are the fire service and should be there to help protect and save life, thats what the public expects us to do, its what they pay us to do, so lets make sure we deliver. Time is of the essence.


Afterall we live in a "first world" country dont we?