New take on an Old story. Fire extinguishers in flats.

[nearlythere]

I would take this whole thing simply to be.

1.Insurance requires provision of extinguishers
2.Untrained residents using said extinguishers is dangerous (regardless of in private or communal areas)
3.Legislation requires residence to be trained if extinguishers provided (according to article applies to both employess and residents of HMO'S)
4.Thus, training is both logical and lawfully required.

David
Can you point me in the direction of the legislation which requires residents to be trained to use extinguishers please?

Quotes it in the article.

Where please?

[wee brian]

Nah - that's baloney

[Big T]

*Big T throws himself out of a window*

There is absolutely, categorically, no legislative requirement to provide extinguisher training whatsoever  for resisdents of flats or the occupants of a HMO.

You only need to provide extinguisher training for staff where appropriate.

[Davo]

Baloney indeed
residents are not employees in this instance.


As you can see, their amount of topics and recent postings is not the best.

Keep the FNF faith

davo

[nearlythere]

*Big T throws himself out of a window*

There is absolutely, categorically, no legislative requirement to provide extinguisher training whatsoever  for resisdents of flats or the occupants of a HMO.

You only need to provide extinguisher training for staff where appropriate.

I would also suggest that there is absolutely, catagorically, no legislative requirement to provide extinguishers either.

[Psuedonym]

Unless told to do so by a body /person authority to issue such requests. Then as a service provider one would do as one is requested to allow one's table to have food placed upon it. Following an authorised Risk Assessment to ensure the table had the capabilities, size, strength and was indeed deemed fit for purpose. By one.
Now then, tea or coffee?

p.s. kidde are on their way anyway so all these arguments and points of view, interesting though they may be, are a waste of time.

[Steven N]

This is hard work isnt it! The practicalities of providing fire extinguishers in common areas of residential flats just dont bear thinking about. I agree using an extinguisher is not rocket science but on the other hand I've seen a set of pics from a school fire somewhere up north where they bent the handle of the extinguisher trying to use it without pulling the pin. Also what extinguishers should be supplied?
Somewhere along ther line here dear old common sense has gone on annual leave.

[Clevelandfire]

Lads can I just say a big thanks for making sure common sense prevails... this thread has been started by people with hidden agendas, or either that as Midland Retty says people who dont have a clue about fire safety o rthe affects of fire.

Wee Brian you are totally right - this is Baloney!

[kurnal]

I would take this whole thing simply to be.

1.Insurance requires provision of extinguishers
2.Untrained residents using said extinguishers is dangerous (regardless of in private or communal areas)
3.Legislation requires residence to be trained if extinguishers provided (according to article applies to both employess and residents of HMO'S)
4.Thus, training is both logical and lawfully required.

David
Can you point me in the direction of the legislation which requires residents to be trained to use extinguishers please?

Quotes it in the article.

Have you read the Fire safety order? If so, what is your understanding af Article 7(3) " Articles 19 and 21 impose duties only on responsible persons who are employers"

As for the poll on another website I cant see what this will prove. You could similarly ask a question such as "Do you think it scandalous that landlords of blocks of flats are not required to install smoke detection and fire alarms in the corridors and staircases"  or " Do you think that fire doors in corridors and staircases are an unacceptable impediment to free movement and should all be removed".

As someone once said- "eat ****- ten thousand billion flies cant be wrong"

[Clevelandfire]

As someone once said- "eat ****- ten thousand billion flies cant be wrong"

Oh my god you just hit a home run - you are Manchester United - That is priceless!  I just love that!

It speaks volumes to me that the guy who strated this thread and who was  asked to provide evidence of which article he refers to hasn't commented back

What a load of rubbish

[davidandrewsuk]

The articles there read it you got eyes aint ya ?

Although in fairness it seems that the writer has misinterpreted that part of the legislation but the equation holds true.

Insurance requirement to have them = Risk as they must be present = People require training.

Cant argue with that part imo.


Kurnal Wrote

" Do you think that fire doors in corridors and staircases are an unacceptable impediment to free movement and should all be removed".

..... depends .... is it locked ? lol

[davidandrewsuk]

... this thread has been started by people with hidden agendas ...

Lol just call me Mr X

I work for the extinguishlings of planet tyco.

They are in the midst of a battle with the firetons from system 02X.

The pair of them are waging a secret war here on earth and the stationing ground of Communal Areas is imperative to our war efforts.

[nearlythere]

The articles there read it you got eyes aint ya ?

All I am asking David is for you to point me to the specific Article which requires residents to be trained in the use of extinguishers please? Thats all. We want to ensure that we give the proper advice to our clients so they can comply with the law and we need your help to do this.
You can understand that if I advise a client that there is a legal requirement for residents of flats to be trained to use extinguishers he could challenge me. It would be great if I could show him the specific legislation regarding this.
Maybe my eyes are not as good as they used to be but surely such a simple request, especially as you have 20/20 vision, can easily be accommodated.
All you need to do is quote the legislation and where within I can find it. The use of a few letters and numbers will be sufficient.
Waiting.

[davidandrewsuk]

"Duties under this order

(2) Where the premises are not a workplace, the responsible person must ensure that any duty imposed by articles 8 to 22 or by regulations made under article 24 is complied with in respect of those premises, so far as the requirements relate to matters within his control"

"Training

21. -(1) The responsible person must ensure that his employees are provided with adequate safety training

(a) at the time when they are first employed......"

Regulatory Reform Order 2005(6)

My apologies nearly there that wasn't so much aimed at yourself it was a reasonable request it was more for the flippant Clevelandfire.
We can all be flippant, takes but a second.

As i went on to mention i think the writer has mis interpreted this section of the article however and i think it is safe to disregard it.

The insruance arguement, however,  in my opinion would still seem to hold and does present an interesting conflict between insurers and risk assessors.

[Mark Newton]

Just out of interest, which insurance company is 'requiring' extinguishers in the common areas of blocks of flats? I can't speak for the insurance industry as a whole, far from it, but mine (one of the largest in the UK) does not make any such requirement, for reasons that have been fully explored above!