Fires in Dwellings ?

[Benzerari]

Guys;

According to the following statistics, why Dwellings are still less considered or not as much as buildings of mutiple occupancies, I mean in terms of standard and legislations, even the statistics not only the one displayed in here are still showing serious figures of fire incidents...etc?

[Allen Higginson]

The thing is that you need to be careful in taking the "facts" quoted in statistics as actual fact without taking into account the full picture.
While the number of dwelling fires numbered 24 there were 7 incidents in education (and by that I assume they mean schools) but you must bear in mind that pro rata/percentage wise there were more incidents in education than dwellings (simple maths - fire to dwelling ratio versus fire to educational establishment ratio).

[nearlythere]

These statistics arn't really giving much useful information without a link between the types of premises and causes of the fires in each.

[Benzerari]

The thing is that you need to be careful in taking the "facts" quoted in statistics as actual fact without taking into account the full picture.
While the number of dwelling fires numbered 24 there were 7 incidents in education (and by that I assume they mean schools)
but you must bear in mind that pro rata/percentage wise there were more incidents in education than dwellings (simple maths - fire to dwelling ratio versus fire to educational establishment ratio).

Where did you see these figures, at least display a link.

[Benzerari]

These statistics arn't really giving much useful information without a link between the types of premises and causes of the fires in each.

There are much information regarding the death in dwellings by toxic gases and not from burning...etc

The point in this published statistic is that it's among the latest ones and it's real, if you want to order the full report you might find out more serious things...etc

Dwellings in the above figures are classified the first in terms of number of fires and that's the point, but in terms of substantial loss, it's obvious that manufacturing loss is the highest. Since dwellings are where people normally spend '8h' sleeping or say the 1/3 of '24h' time spent in, while in other infrastructures people are normally awake. Which then makes people in dwellings more exposed to risks rather than in other sort of buildings...etc

[Allen Higginson]

These statistics arn't really giving much useful information without a link between the types of premises and causes of the fires in each.

There are much information regarding the death in dwellings by toxic gases and not from burning...etc

The point in this published statistic is that it's among the latest ones and it's real, if you want to order the full report you might find out more serious things...etc

Dwellings in the above figures are classified the first in terms of number of fires and that's the point, but in terms of substantial loss, it's obvious that manufacturing loss is the highest. Since dwellings are where people normally spend '8h' sleeping or say the 1/3 of '24h' time spent in, while in other infrastructures people are normally awake. Which then makes people in dwellings more exposed to risks rather than in other sort of buildings...etc

You're still missing the point in relation to statistics.For sake of arguement lets take the following hypothetical figures and work with them -

Dwelling incidents (in a specific area) - 20
Number of dwellings (in a specific area) - 1000
Incident per dwelling - 1 in 50 (or 2%)

Factory incident (in same area) - 2
Number of Factories - 20
Incident per factory - 1 in 10 (or 10%)

So you can see that the chance/risk is higher in the factory scenario is 5 times higher than the dwelling scenario.

[Benzerari]

These statistics arn't really giving much useful information without a link between the types of premises and causes of the fires in each.

There are much information regarding the death in dwellings by toxic gases and not from burning...etc

The point in this published statistic is that it's among the latest ones and it's real, if you want to order the full report you might find out more serious things...etc

Dwellings in the above figures are classified the first in terms of number of fires and that's the point, but in terms of substantial loss, it's obvious that manufacturing loss is the highest. Since dwellings are where people normally spend '8h' sleeping or say the 1/3 of '24h' time spent in, while in other infrastructures people are normally awake. Which then makes people in dwellings more exposed to risks rather than in other sort of buildings...etc

You're still missing the point in relation to statistics.For sake of arguement lets take the following hypothetical figures and work with them -

Dwelling incidents (in a specific area) - 20
Number of dwellings (in a specific area) - 1000
Incident per dwelling - 1 in 50 (or 2%)

Factory incident (in same area) - 2
Number of Factories - 20
Incident per factory - 1 in 10 (or 10%)

So you can see that the chance/risk is higher in the factory scenario is 5 times higher than the dwelling scenario.

Buzz;

You are comparing the number of dwellings and factories in a given area, I agree there are more dwellings than factories, and this is obvious but not the main point, the main point is the results in regards to the number of people dying in both manufacturing and dwelling apart from other substantial loss?

[ 95% of deaths in fire victims were caused during smouldering phase of fire, and while the victims where sleeping 4/5 have been toxically killed ].

However, the main concern as per the first post, why dwellings are still less considered or not as much as buildings of multiple occupancies, I mean in terms of standard and legislations

[Big T]

Its because there are more residential premises than any other type in the UK. And when you consider this the number of instances pro rata are very small.

In addition how would you police it?

I disagree that dwellings are not considered as much as opther types. ADB, building controls and BS 5588 pt 1 are very good and extremely prescriptive. In addition residential buildings are targetted by local fire services to improve safety amongst the masses.

[Allen Higginson]

New build dwellings have smokies installed do they not??

[Tom Sutton]

Guys; why Dwellings are still less considered or not as much as buildings of multiple occupancies, I mean in terms of standard and legislations,

If you are asking why most safety legislation does not include single domestic dwellings it has always been accepted that the proverb "Englishmans home is his Castle" has some validity and is sacrosanct which includes the legislators.

Also the head of a private single dwelling has a highly vested interest in all the occupants because they are family and s/he will always provide a safe environment for them.

Where there is a profit motive then regulation is considered acceptable.

[Allen Higginson]

Guys; why Dwellings are still less considered or not as much as buildings of multiple occupancies, I mean in terms of standard and legislations,

If you are asking why most safety legislation does not include single domestic dwellings it has always been accepted that the proverb "Englishmans home is his Castle" has some validity and is sacrosanct which includes the legislators.

Also the head of a private single dwelling has a highly vested interest in all the occupants because they are family and s/he will always provide a safe environment for them.

Where there is a profit motive then regulation is considered acceptable.

Succinctly put but to put it in basic terms - you and your family are your concern and if they perish in a fire because you have no smoke detetcion then what a bad person you are.However,in the case of HMO's you have to give adequate notice so that everyone else can get out while you succumb to smoke inhaliation after setting fire to your room (similar applies to hotels).

[Benzerari]

I think, It’s not just a matter of just agreeing or disagreeing about…, any way that's what I have found in terms of legislation just to state some:

1. Offices, Shops and Railway Premises Act 1963
2. Private Places of Entertainment Act 1967
3. Factories Act 1971
4. Health and Safety at Work Act 1974
5. Fire Certificates (Special Premises) regulations 1976
6. Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regulations 1997

Etc…

Thus, what about dwellings? Why is not an obligation by the law to have means of fire protection for dwellings, even they are private?
 
Also, in terms of standard, why the levels of protections L1 to L5 in addition to M and P...etc, are not applicable to dwellings accordingly... including houses with their different sizes even if they are privates?

Dwellings are covered separately with less tedious requirements in BS5839 part: 6. through what they called the grades from A to F…, dwellings too are multiple occupancies when it comes to the number of people living in, or coming in and out or invited some times so what’s the difference?

In the common sense, it’s the people’s lives that matter first isn’t it? What ever the sort of buildings?

[Allen Higginson]

I think, It’s not just a matter of just agreeing or disagreeing about…, any way that's what I have found in terms of legislation just to state some:

1. Offices, Shops and Railway Premises Act 1963
2. Private Places of Entertainment Act 1967
3. Factories Act 1971
4. Health and Safety at Work Act 1974
5. Fire Certificates (Special Premises) regulations 1976
6. Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regulations 1997

Etc…

Thus, what about dwellings? Why is not an obligation by the law to have means of fire protection for dwellings, even they are private?
 
Also, in terms of standard, why the levels of protections L1 to L5 in addition to M and P...etc, are not applicable to dwellings accordingly... including houses with their different sizes even if they are privates?

Dwellings are covered separately with less tedious requirements in BS5839 part: 6. through what they called the grades from A to F…, dwellings too are multiple occupancies when it comes to the number of people living in, or coming in and out or invited some times so what’s the difference?

In the common sense, it’s the people’s lives that matter first isn’t it? What ever the sort of buildings?

I think that it is fair to say that you have a very set opinion on this Benz.I for one would not welcome some council/fire authority type person putting his nose in where it is not wanted.
It is common sense to have smoke detectors fitted correctly in everyones home but those who don't are no different to those in the commercial sector who cut corners where fire alarm and detection systems are required.
One point however - if you have a 3 or more storey house in excess of 200m3 then you should have a part 1 system installed covering escape routes,areas of circulation and rooms of risk of fire to occupants.

[AnthonyB]

Interestingly, in parts of the US Fire Codes do apply to domestic houses - when I last stayed there with friends whose parents had emigrated their house had smoke alarms & extinguishers in set locations as prescribed by code - Fire Marshals & Buildings Control could check this and issue citations if it was missing or defective

[jokar]

Mr Blair it seems, is back in the guise of Benz.