smoke detectors in B&B's

[Graeme]

This is all very Fascinating . I'm a hotelier. I really really really wish you people would get your act together and
. 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..

From experience Hotels and B&B's have some of the worst outdated poorly maintained fire alarm systems which i would not feel safe in at night.
The owners are not remotely interested in hearing the reports of an inspection especially when there is a cost involved but they are quite happy to spend money elsewhere on WI-FI decortaing etc.
I find that when a part of the Hotel is upgraded,the fire alarm is always ignored and only comes to light at the end when an engineer comes to do a test and there is still a plastic bag over the smoke detector left by the painter.Nice new rooms but an old manky smoke detector and panel from the seventies which does not work correctly.A smoke detector incidentally which has a working life of 10 years.

Changing heats to smoke in hotel rooms- why not point out the fool who chose to smoke to all the guests standing outside(if they even bother to get out of bed) instead of blaming the fire alarm system as usual.

Technology has improved vastly and the use of multisensors in hotel rooms are ideal for cutting down on unwanted alarms but if someone did not give your industry a kick up the backside you would all still have your 240v manual systems with one bell which is really puting the saftey of the punter first.....

[Davidrh]

Thanks for the comments
As I said what we all want is safety. Not confusion.
It looks like we have all been dumped on by whitehall.
Nothing new there then !!!

[AnthonyB]

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

Which is why lots of places have done H&S RAs. Indeed on inspections they can readily pull out dozens of various RAs for the endless subsidiary bits of law under the HASWA, but always have trouble when it comes to fire.

Yes FRAs were technically required in 1997 but for non certified premises, which were rarely visited anyway for 9A compliance and so there was little education or enforcement, certified premises happily continued under the FPA. Very few FRAs existed at this time - I remember doing one as part of my 3rd year in Uni on placement in 96 using the rather rudimentary draft guidance that was about. Our client base 97-99 only required Fire Certificate Compliance Audits and the small number of non certified multiocc's didn't want FRAs, just H&S stuff.

99 as we know saw FRAs extended to certified premises - but the FPA was retained and in our experience most Fire Authorities clung to certification, with the odd leaflet drop being made to mention the existence of the requirements for FRA, and few occupiers seemed to be doing FRAs and even less fire authorities enforced it (most prosecutions & notices we saw reported or were involved in resolving from 99 to 06 were under the FPA).

Many FRAs we did see were tick boxes or similar and showed little appreciation of what was needed and if it weren't for pre-existing (albeit outdated in some premises)measures required under a certificate standards in premises would have been dangerous with little compartmentation , minimal EL,  poor fire warning but lots and lots of extinguishers.

The fact that the RRO has finally destroyed the safety net of fire authority led specification and certification will have come as a massive culture shock, especially as it is being enforced and publicised - many owner/occupiers will be bewildered and confused.

[Goodsparks]

The HD thing is pretty scarry really. Had the pleasure of visiting Apollo a couple of weeks ago and witnessing a test in their fire test room. I forget the test reference but it basicly consisted of 3 polyurethane foam blocks A3 paper size, inch or so thick.

Within 30 or so seconds the ions/ opticals had started in pre-alarm / fire and the multi's in their various modes started to react. Fire burned itself out after 4-5 minutes whole room was smokelogged down to 300mm from the floor and the heat detectors had failed to even go into pre-alarm.

Probably common with other manufacturers, but they had a room full of kettles that they were using to simulate the steam escaping from a hotel bathroom into the sd/hd which always seems to be located right outside, to enable testing of their multi sensors in various modes.

So, multi sensors, or even opticals with some kind of managed delay if its really a problem, but by the time the heats have gone off its probably gonna be to late (unless of course all of the doors / other fire separation is really up to the required standard ?)

[jokar]

That was alwyas the stance that was there for HD in hotel bedrooms, that the occupants were dispensible.  Now the order talks about relevant person and not just about employers or employees, the case for HD has weakened and the protection of all relevant persons means that other forms of fetection should be considered.

[Nearlybaldandgrey]

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.

And I'm one of them. From personal experience, I have seen on numerous occasions the results of it all going wrong. It's very real, harrowing at times and not pleasant.

Perhaps that's why I now work as an Inspecting Officer .... hoping that other fire-fighters don't have to experience what I have in my career.

It's all very well moaning about the requirements of law, the numerous inspections, paying taxes etc etc, but that's what you do as a business operator.
Perhaps all hoteliers should reflect back a year and think about the situation at Penhallow in Newquay and whether they would like to have that experience before moaning about having to replace some detectors to protect the sleeping guests that keep them in a living.

[kurnal]

If Penhallow is found to be deliberate arson - as is suspected pending court hearings- then perhaps smoke detectors would have very little bearing on the outcome?

Now turn it round the other way- how many people have died in their hotel bedrooms as a result of accidental fires?

 How much would conversion of all heat detectors in thousands of hotels cost and how many lives are likely to be saved by it?

[Davidrh]

Hello Everyone
I hope you don't mind if I give a quick reply to some of your comments all of which I appreciate
1. CivvyFSO ......BS 5839 -2.
2. Chris Houston...The problem is interpretation. and from our angle (the hotelier) it looks like Fire brigades are sending out enforcement officers who interpret (or their brigade do) guidlines in their own particular way. I site two examples of inspection to two similar hotel and officers coming up with completly different interpretations of the rules. So its not much good blaming the government
also....and  I have read this from your form...hotel room deaths are I beiev rare !!
3.CivvyFSO ...I go back to what i said before it has to be a common sense approach. Gievn that the new rules mean that completely untrained people are now apparenlt in charge of fire safety, it has to be a system that will work, is logical and has common sence attached. As per my comment above at the moment that is not the case as fire brigade officers are running around the country "enforcing" rules in all sort of different way. You know this is the case. Just read your own forum.
4. My experience as a hotelier does not help when it comes to fire safety...Can you run a hotel?....
I do know that people smash fire safety glasses after weddings "for a laugh"..I do know they pass out in their rooms and pee their beds after smoking in their non smoking rooms. I do know that customers will lite mathes under smoke alarms (and heat) as a " laugh.  I do know that they won't move out of their rooms when the fire alarm goes off for the umptenth time...I know a lot about hotels.
and don't get me going on taxes...we are just a small hotel...and out taxes VAT, Local etc etc amount to over £100.000.00 per year. So lets not go near that one please.

I have some grunts. I object strongly to the implied assuption that I am just another hotelier trying to save money.
What I am is a hotelier trying to make a living under a high welter of red tape.

One thing to you all. I put fireman up there with the best. But please try to see things from our point of view..not just what "the rules say" ...or don't say

[Nearlybaldandgrey]

I have no doubt that there is alot of red tape, rules and regulations attached to running a business. We all get fed up with being taxed to the hilt, even those of us who do not run a business.

My reference to Penhallow was not in relation to the difference smoke alarms would have made, nor the cause. It was merely an example of a severe fire which did scost lives and destroyed a business.