smoke detectors in B&B's

[BG]

I am having one of those senior moments and I am mulling over - is their a need to recommend or enforce SD in bedrooms to small B&B establishments ( under three floors and 200m) ? The benchmark system is a grade d LD2 system . Which is in the common areas + high fire risk rooms.  

Would the average bedroom constitute a high risk room ? I doubt it

[terry martin]

Do the bedrooms lead directly onto the staircase as some little 'converted house' style B&B's do? is it single staircase condition?

[CivvyFSO]

Yes there is a need for SD. We need to attempt to protect the person in the room of origin, and also give the other relevant people early warning. There could be an argument over replacing existing HD with SD, but I would enforce SD every time. CLG sleeping accomm guides give an idea of what would be expected. The system should be more akin to an L2 as far as detector coverage goes, and some people would argue that a part 1 L2 system should be in place anyway..

[jokar]

Civvy that is not what the guidance states, LD2 is covered in post 1.  Mind you the guidance is not that in BS 5839 part 6.  Wait for the 23 July and see what the LACORS document states.

[fireftrm]

The Fire risk assessment should have the risk of the rooms in it already and the alarm installation engineer should be more than familiar with the requirements of any premises.

Senior moment? You aren't, by chance, the same person who (as alarmuelectrician) was asking on fireservice.co.uk whether an L2 system should have room SDs? If so I really think  that you should eb looking for the correct training and qualifications, or another job.

[Graeme]

The Fire risk assessment should have the risk of the rooms in it already and the alarm installation engineer should be more than familiar with the requirements of any premises.

Senior moment? You aren't, by chance, the same person who (as alarmuelectrician) was asking on fireservice.co.uk whether an L2 system should have room SDs? If so I really think  that you should eb looking for the correct training and qualifications, or another job.

won't suprise me and these are the "professionals" that i loose jobs to every week....

[CivvyFSO]

Civvy that is not what the guidance states, LD2 is covered in post 1.  Mind you the guidance is not that in BS 5839 part 6.  Wait for the 23 July and see what the LACORS document states.

My main point being that LD2 should have detectors in bed rooms, which would make the coverage more akin to L2.

[Ricardo]

CivvyFSO said  CLG sleeping accomm guides give an idea of what would be expected.
Jokar Said Civvy that is not what the guidance states,

Certainly the guide north of the border for "small premises providing sleeping accommodation" are advocating the following as a benchmark.

Regardless of system type, fire detection should include at least one:
• Smoke detector on each upper floor landing;
• Smoke detector in the ground floor hallway;
• Heat detector in each kitchen;
• Smoke detector each lounge;
• Smoke detector in each bedroom;
• Smoke detector in any basement; and
• Smoke detector in any other room off an escape route.

[BG]

Gents - many thanks  

In reply to "fireftrm" I am not the person who wrote into the other site .

My concern is as an enforcment officer I am applying/enforcing  the guidance in the CLG guide and I accept the argument  to protect the person in the room etc .

However ( for discussion purposes) when you compare the standards proposed in the Lacors guide for a range of premises it does make you wonder if the Lacors guide came out before the CLG guide that the approach to SD in "Small B&B" would be different. It apears that have made a blanket statement of smoke detection throughout the premises with a pt 1 sysyem for larger hotels and a part 6 for small premises. With the same provision of detectors within rooms.

When comparing the two guides regarding risk - what makes a small B&B two three bedrooms a greater risk than that of a "three storey shared house" or a "two storey bedsit" where in both cases there is no provision of detection in the bedrooms and where I feel the risk is greater than in a family run small B&B .

Regarding the standard - LD2 the BS states that additional detection should be provided in other rooms on the basis of risk assesment  - the CLG guide has determined (made a blanket statement) that any room adjacent to the staircase enclosure should be provided with a detector , which is not the philosophy of a pt 6 systems.

[Davidrh]

This is all very Fascinating . I'm a hotelier. I really really really wish you people would get your act together and
stop using the industry as some sort of experimental work experience.    Get back to a common sense practical approach that we can ALL understand and work with. Thinking about "enforcing"smoke detectors or worse Scoring goals with gleeful horaays against 'ordinary people (ie owners and managers of properties who don't earn a living working for the fire brigade) caught out by this or that regulation is unedifying and unhelpful in the extreme.....Yes I know people can die in a fire...but you know they can die in many other ways.
and I tell you with absolute certainty your wives would not appreciate being forced out of their warm hotel bed on a cold November night because some idiot decided he wanted to smoke in his non smoking room..and you sir had made the hotelier change his HD to a SD (Yes you people are doing that...........!!)
Look we all want the same thing. Safety for the punter. But please remember this.. Fire Regs (although very important) are just one of the many many  AND I MEAN MANY regulations and red tape we in the real
world have to deal with...and still make a living to pay the taxes to pay you all.
One last thing. I have the greatest respect for firemen. But reading the various submissions in this form is scary.
and the result of the unintended result of a change of legislation that did not need changing.

[Chris Houston]

Who exactly is your rant aimed at? Fire fighters don't make legislation.

[kurnal]

This is a completely voluntary  forum for discussion between all sides hopefully for the benefit of all and promotes understanding. We cannot do this without forthright discussion.  It does not represent the views of the fire service- the contributors range from poachers to gamekeepers and the grouse themselves.  So many of us are not in the fire service, some are in the insurance industry others are in the service industries, business owners and landlords. All sides are coming to terms with the most significant change to legislation and the way it is enforced ever. We are not helped by tranches of different and contradictory guidance issued by HM Government.

Did it need changing?- well the European Parliament thought so and so did the  CBI and FSB.  Are we pleased wth the changes? Some sectors welcome it - especially the Blue chip sector- whilst small businesses struggle to come to terms with new duties and responsibilities. Much cost and burden of compliance has been shifted from the fire service to the employer. The employer creates the risk- it is right that the employer should manage this risk.

So if you dont like the system let us know and please air your grievances freely. But please also take them up with yur local fire authority and your MP, or any other pressure group.

In terms of heat detectors in bedrooms please take a look at previous postings exploring the history of this- it goes much further than the control of false alarms- it is all about whether we are seeking to use detection to protect the escape routes for the majority, or whether we have a duty to also protect the occupants of each individual room from fire. And the best way of doing this.

In terms of your smoke seals on fire doors there is no doubt that if you fit seals the doors will perform better in a fire than without them. Whether you need to do it or not depends many factors such as how good your doors were when new, how they have been maintained, how good a fit they are, tempered with where they are in the building and the character and layout of the building .  
The fire Officer has not enforced you to do it- many years ago Chief Justice Popplewell in his review of the Bradford City Football disaster said that fire brigades have a duty to give their best advice at all times. It sounds like that is what they have done in your case. Whether you follow it is up to you.

It appears to me that perhaps you dont want to take the responsibility of making the decision. Perhaps you would rather have an enforcement notice served so you can appeal and let someone else take the decision for you?

As a private consultant I too am very frustrated with the new legislation, the confusing and conflicting guidance and the prescriptive approach to enforcement by some inspectors. Especially when I am told "No it doesnt matter what your risk assessment says, the guidance book shows x so that is what you must do"
But I welcome the chance to air these grievances on this free forum.

[CivvyFSO]

Get back to a common sense practical approach that we can ALL understand and work with.

Which approach was this?

Yes I know people can die in a fire...but you know they can die in many other ways.

And are any of these likely to happen in your hotel? Strangely enough this is not http://www.yougotdrunkanddiedinyoursleep.org.uk, it is a forum about fire related issues, so we will tend to talk about fire related issues.

and I tell you with absolute certainty your wives would not appreciate being forced out of their warm hotel bed on a cold November night because some idiot decided he wanted to smoke in his non smoking room..

I am sure they would like even less to be trapped in their room by a fire because some hotelier couldn't be bothered upgrading his fire alarm because "they can die in many other ways" (c) Davidrh 2008

and you sir had made the hotelier change his HD to a SD (Yes you people are doing that...........!!)

'you people'? There are many people in this forum who would argue from your side of things. Maybe if you came in with some comment about your experience as a hotelier, and enlightened me to your 'plight' of ensuring that people who pay to stay in your hotel are safe, then I may see your post as being more constructive and I could use that information to balance out the options in some future decision I may make.

Look we all want the same thing. Safety for the punter.

We do? And that would be achieved by having HD instead of SD? What do you think is the FRS motivation to have you install SD? Would we profit from it? Do you think we do it just to be clever?

But please remember this.. Fire Regs (although very important) are just one of the many many  AND I MEAN MANY regulations and red tape we in the real world have to deal with...and still make a living to pay the taxes to pay you all.

We all pay taxes. We all live in the real world. There are many here who have worked for FRS's for many years, and what they consider to be the 'real world' may be a world where they have seen what happens when it all goes wrong, which to them will seem much more 'real' than trying to run a hotel.

[AnthonyB]

Get back to a common sense practical approach that we can ALL understand and work with.

Which approach was this?

Presumably the one where the owner & occupiers sent off a form to the FRS, waited for an FPO to come along with their sketchpad and blue/red/yellow book, the owner/occ got a list of doors to upgrade and fire warning to provide, they did as told, got a lovely pack called a 'fire certificate' and other than a very basic level of ongoing maintenance never had to do anything ever again unless they started knocking the place down and changing the layout big time.

For the owner/occ you can see how the current regime is a massive shock and an additional hassle with a lot of grey as oppose to the clear cut requirements (or so it will have seemed) of the FPA.

Although they should have got eased into the FRA approach via the Workplace Regs, most either ignored it or didn't even know it existed and there seemed a desirability by both industry and the enforcers to hang onto the FPA instead, aided of course by it still running alongside the Workplace Regs.

If I for a moment forget I have anything to do with fire safety and try and put myself in the place of the smaller company I can see how they may feel aggrieved. Not that I'm saying dump the RRO for the FPA, just that I can see their point. Some premises that were not covered by the FPA, but are now covered by the RRO are facing massive works even using the most realistic risk based solutions causing obvious reactions from those in control.

The fact we have several contradicting guides doesn't help of course and something that should be cleared up urgently.

[Chris Houston]

risk assessments have been needed since 1974 for all health and safety risks, specific fire safety risk assessments since 1997.