Responsibility for Fire Risk Assessment

[johno67]

Many thanks Kurnal,

exactly the right balance of opinion and fact, and by far the best example I have seen to date.

[PhilB]

Anyone can be prosecuted under article 32(10) including, in my opinion an assessor who gives poor advice, but the RP would have to demonstrate that they had exercised due diligence to ensure that the assessor was competent.

Guidance Note No.1 is guidance that enforcers must have regard to but it is not statute law, it will be for the courts to decide if a consultant who offers poor advice can be prosecuted using 32(10), in my opinion he could be and with the number of muppets out there churning out poor FRAs it will only be a matter of time before we have the answer.

Don't forget that FPA circular 28 was also guidance issued by the secretary of state and it contained errors e.g it claimed that failure to carry out a suitable and sufficient FRA was an offence. In fact it was only an offence if that failure placed an employee at risk of death or serious injury.

As spooky as it may seem, and I hate to burst anyones bubble but the Secretary of State does make the occassional error.

[nearlythere]

Many thanks Kurnal,

exactly the right balance of opinion and fact, and by far the best example I have seen to date.

Yep. If you are patient you will always get the answer you prefer.

[johno67]

Many thanks Kurnal,

exactly the right balance of opinion and fact, and by far the best example I have seen to date.

Yep. If you are patient you will always get the answer you prefer.

Have no preference one way or the other, just need to know which outcome is the most likely.

Difference is Kurnal, PhilB and the like back up their personal opinions with facts and examples where others only express their opinions.

[Mike Buckley]

As an alternative view whether or not the assessor is prosecuted the employer still has the option to sue for negilance in that the assessor owed the employer a duty of care, the duty of care was breached and the employer has suffered harm as a result.

Get your insurance up to date!

[nearlythere]

As an alternative view whether or not the assessor is prosecuted the employer still has the option to sue for negilance in that the assessor owed the employer a duty of care, the duty of care was breached and the employer has suffered harm as a result.

Get your insurance up to date!

Exactly.

[val]

Sorry to re-ignite this discussion but doesn't Article 5(4) have an impact on this argument? The assessor has a contract in relation to the 'safety of premises' and therefore holds some liability if the advice they gave is subsequently considered to be grossly defective. For example, if the assessor signs off a maintenance system for the firefighting lift which is not adequate (seriously not adequate), doesn't the RP have some mitigation in claiming that they took the advice of an 'expert'. I agree that the offence would be under 32 (10).

(4) Where a person has, by virtue of any contract or tenancy, an obligation of any extent in relation to—

(a) the maintenance or repair of any premises, including anything in or on premises; or
(b) the safety of any premises,

that person is to be treated, for the purposes of paragraph (3), as being a person who has control of the premises to the extent that his obligation so extends.

[kurnal]

Hi Val
I am sure you are right though it would be interesting to know whether this was the original intention of those who played a part in the drafting of the order. The wording appears to be a very competent means of catching anybody or encompassing any situation.

[Clevelandfire]

Val I agree with you. I think the RP should be able to prove due dilligence.

The problem as far as im concerned is that its all well and good the powers that be pointing the finger and saying that the RP should check the assessor is competent but how does the RP know what to look for in ensuring the assessor is competent?

Yeah PhilB says you wouldnt employ Joe Bloggs from the pub, thats common sense but otherwise what should the RP be asking for to determine that assesors competence?

There is no yet nationally recognised qualification to demonstrate competence in fire risk assessment. If an assessor said to an RP "hey im an ex firefighter" i bet that RP would be tempted to emply them by virtue of the fact they would assume that assesor knew a thing or two about fire.

[jokar]

There are a number of 3rd party accreditation schemes so perhaps thats the answer.

[Davidrh]

My local fire service has a definition for the RP.
Me and the wife!!!!!!!
That is to say The Owners (in a partnership) or secretary in a Ltd Co.
No if buts or hows your father
Are they right ??

[CivvyFSO]

You own the company and run the business. You clearly have the full responsiblity and utmost control over the premises. I don't think that it could be much clearer without you wearing t-shirts with "I AM THE RP" printed on them.

And possibly a badge.

[Davidrh]

It will give me punters a nice warm feeling of security inside Civvy.
The notice saying .

In compliance with the new legislation Fire safety in this building is now courtesy of...wait for it...

"me and the missus"

[Midland Retty]

In business with the Missus, youre a braver man than I - Mine would be too bossy and have me working like a slave. Hang on she already does....anyway!

Yes you as the owners are the people who make the main strategic decisions within the business, youre at the top of the tree, the ones in financial control of the venture and the people in overall control of maintenance etc so you are the RPs I'm afraid.

I would not recommend the T Shirt CivvyFSO suggests, a nice tweed lounge jacket with the initials "RP" is far more classy and garners much more respect from visiting enforcement officers.

[Davidrh]

I'm off to the taylor now Retty !!!!