LACORS Guidance

[memnon30]

Just had a very very quick scan and it seems to me like a backward step. Didn’t like the idea that on some 3 story prems smoke seals should not be fitted so that smoke in the room can get out activating the detectors in the escape routes. Poor old occupier. Looks like sacrificial rooms are back when an interlinked detector would save all the mess. Hope our service doesn’t adopt much of what I have read.

[AnthonyB]

Big glaring error I spotted - requires fire blankets to BS 6575 which ceased to exist (as did new blankets to that standard) over 10 years ago in 1997, BS EN 1869 obviously escaped them!

[kurnal]

Horrified at the inclusion of paragraph 21.3 as identified by memnon30. Wow. Table C2 in the lacors guide contradicts table 1 in the RRO sleeping guide. The latter deos not recognise LD3 as set out in BS5839, stating that in addition all rooms leading off escape routes should be provided with detectors.
Look at it from the landlords point of view.

If I dont put detectors in rooms I also dont need to put smoke seals on doors.
If I put detectors in rooms then I need to put smoke seals on doors as well.

I conclude that a house without smoke seals and with detectors in the escape routes only is as safe as a house with both installed, and safer than a house with smoke seals but no detectors in rooms.

I'm off to see Matron now for another dose. I may be gone some time.

[Davidrh]

Stop it !!
You're making me laugh now !!!!

[Davo]

memnon30

If you were a codehugger you could say it's just guidance and ignore it!

At the end of the day its all about judgement eg in a house being converted to offices do I upgrade the doors due to single MoE or do I fit L1?





davo

[Tom Sutton]

It’s a pity LACORS didn’t read Colin Todd's submission at http://www.fire.org.uk/punbb/upload/viewtopic.php?id=786 item 4

[Colin_Hants]

Hi folks, Some help required on the requirements for front doors to Council flats (both towers and 4/5 storey walk up blocks).  I know there's lots of helpful threads on here and have read most of them but now am further confused by this LACORS document!  

In short, we have various flats which dont have FD30s fitted as front doors.  We came to the conclusion (after liasing with our F&RS) not to retrofit FD30s to all props but to fit them as and when current doors become past their useful lives.  Should say, none of our stock counts as a HMO under the RRO or HA04.  This approach applied to tenants, for leaseholders, we intended to give advice on FDs but came to the conclusion we couldnt enforce replacement under bldg regs or anything else.

What are the implications of this LACORS doc?  Does this place a requirement on us to retro fit FD30s to every flat?  Any other guidance on this major headache of mine would be much appreciated.

Thanks in advance,
Colin

[nearlythere]

Where the inner room is any other type of habitable
room (for example a living room, sleeping room,
workroom or study) it should only be accepted if:
• the inner room has access to a suitable door
opening onto an alternative safe route of escape,
or it is situated on a floor which is not more than
4.5m above ground level and has an escape window
leading directly to a place of ultimate safety;

Why is there a need for an alternative safe route of escape? Does this include an additional stairway?


• an adequate automatic fire detection and warning
system is in place (see paragraphs 22-25); and

Didn't read paras 22 - 25 so assume this is OK.


• a fire-resisting door of an appropriate standard is
fitted between the inner and outer rooms (typically
FD30S standard for non-high-risk outer rooms).

Why???.


The only thing missing from this guide is pictures of cows and horses. Remember?

[kurnal]

Hi folks, Some help required on the requirements for front doors to Council flats (both towers and 4/5 storey walk up blocks).  I know there's lots of helpful threads on here and have read most of them but now am further confused by this LACORS document!  

In short, we have various flats which dont have FD30s fitted as front doors.  We came to the conclusion (after liasing with our F&RS) not to retrofit FD30s to all props but to fit them as and when current doors become past their useful lives.  Should say, none of our stock counts as a HMO under the RRO or HA04.  This approach applied to tenants, for leaseholders, we intended to give advice on FDs but came to the conclusion we couldnt enforce replacement under bldg regs or anything else.

What are the implications of this LACORS doc?  Does this place a requirement on us to retro fit FD30s to every flat?  Any other guidance on this major headache of mine would be much appreciated.

Thanks in advance,
Colin

The LACORS document has no legal standing and does not affect your legal duties in any way. The Fire Safety Order and the guidance on sleeping risks is the benchmark. Having carried out your risk assessment and determined your action plan, if you find that you cannot meet the benchmark standards as set out in the Sleeping guide you may then look at other National guidance documents for ideas on alternative approaches and if they appear to meet your requirements then you may adoopt them and record the basis for your decision in your risk assessment, other guidance may include BS5588 part 1, CP3, the LACORS guidance etc.

[Big T]

Colin,

In my opinion (I look after 3500 blocks of flats that are housing association stock) Your risk assessment should Identify that the front doors are not FD30s doors. Your action plan should read along the lines that retroffiting with intumescent strips and cold smoke seals is not practicle due to the doors being old style doors, disruption to residents, budgetry issues etc. You should ensure that a suitable budget is in place to replace over a suitable period of time if possible or if not as you say in your post upgrade to the modern spec when the door is no longer serviceable or in the couorse of a significant decoration of the block where this change could be budgetted.

Other mitigations could for example involve installing a fire alarm system and changing the building to an evac strategy (I tell you now though that this will not work as the tennants will ignore the alarm and false alarms/hoax alarms will be significant.)

In real terms the doors on the flat entrances were probably installed to CP3 so will be FD30 doors but without the s (for smoke) suffix.

The building will cope with a fire as generally blocks of flats are designed to not require a full evac as the fire would be contained within the individual flat. (the assessor should be able to judge this)

The LACoRS guide is pants and has little appeal to the real world of fire safety in a social context (based on the 4 hours I have given it so far to read) It may be of use if you have buildings converted to provide flats or HMO's. Other than that it describes fire safety within dwellings which is outside the remit of the RRO.

BS5588 pt 1, the sleeping accomodation guide and common sense should prevail.

The RRO applies in the common areas of your block and not the housing act. Risk assess in accordance with the RRO. Use the LACoRS document as a door wedge

[PhilB]

Where the inner room is any other type of habitable
room (for example a living room, sleeping room,
workroom or study) it should only be accepted if:
• the inner room has access to a suitable door
opening onto an alternative safe route of escape,
or it is situated on a floor which is not more than
4.5m above ground level and has an escape window
leading directly to a place of ultimate safety;

Why is there a need for an alternative safe route of escape? Does this include an additional stairway?


• an adequate automatic fire detection and warning
system is in place (see paragraphs 22-25); and

Didn't read paras 22 - 25 so assume this is OK.


• a fire-resisting door of an appropriate standard is
fitted between the inner and outer rooms (typically
FD30S standard for non-high-risk outer rooms).

Why???.


The only thing missing from this guide is pictures of cows and horses. Remember?

Surely if "the inner room has access to a suitable door opening onto an alternative safe route of escape" it is not an inner room!

I am also confused as to the need for FD30s door between the rooms.

Quack Quack Mooooooo!

[Colin_Hants]

Kurnal & BigT - Thank you both v much.  That's the approach we intend to take and it's good to hear that this new doc has little relevance.  Incidentally, it's a really badly written guide IMO.  Right, back to work!  Thanks again..........

[AnthonyB]

Makes me wonder if the 'alternative escape' refers to the bypass balconies between neighbouring flats with kick panels as seen in several 60's high rise blocks

[nearlythere]

Kurnal & BigT - Thank you both v much.  That's the approach we intend to take and it's good to hear that this new doc has little relevance.  Incidentally, it's a really badly written guide IMO.  Right, back to work!  Thanks again..........

Must have been written by a Senior Fire Safety Officer. An Inspecting Officer would have been more appropriate.
If the guide is considered stupid by those who have to make sense of it then it must be considered a complete waste of taxpayer's money and the balloon who scribed it sacked.
Forgot.  This is local government we are talking about. Squandering taxpayer's money is the norm and nobody is ever held to account.

[confused]

I agree a big step backwards! Is it a drive to save landlords money? what about the risk to occupants after all according to our stats there in a high risk group!!