fire authority suggests "house hold" detectors in a commercial property...?

[David Rooney]

We maintain an old 5839 pt1 system in a kiddy/daycare centre... big "warehouse" type building with climbing frames etc

They recently partitioned some rooms up to form a "baby" room.

We recommended an additional smoke detector be installed. Apparently the fire officer happened to turn up, said the quote was too much and that a "household" detector would be sufficient!!!??

The client went to another company who apparently have put in (presumably) a battery powered detector in the middle of this building and not linked to the main fire alarm system....

Any comments ??

[Galeon]

Whats new , had the same scenario at a golf club when Mr T was with me , who spoke to the Brigade in question , and it got changed swiftly .

Dave I sympathise with you , tell you what take some panadol and go and bang you head of a wall , hopefully you wont feel too much pain .

Better still why not start giving advice on any fire related matters you know nothing about , seems their are plenty doing your job for you at the moment .

I would write to your client and put this matter to them to make it crystal clear where they stand so when some ambulance chaser decides to have a go or better still they get pulled on this detector by another person from the same organisation , you can fire it back at them.

[David Rooney]

I'm trying to find out who it was.... which could be interesting....!

But how can this system still be called "single stage" when we now have a standalone detector that doesn't give warning to anyone else in the building??

[Thomas Brookes]

You need to speak to the Fire Officer in question to understand his reasoning, put your reasons forward and see what they say.
Next step assuming this does not work is to put a formal complaint to the chief Fire Officer. Thats about all you can do, the down side with this is you will most likely never work for this customer again.

[nearlythere]

You need to speak to the Fire Officer in question to understand his reasoning, put your reasons forward and see what they say.
Next step assuming this does not work is to put a formal complaint to the chief Fire Officer. Thats about all you can do, the down side with this is you will most likely never work for this customer again.

What would be the nature of the complaint?
Pt6 detection is acceptable in premises where persons are most likely to die from fire. Pt1 detection is acceptable in premises where they do not. From the point of view of risk assessment have we got it the wrong way around?
Maybe the inspecting officer is applying fire risk assessment by common sense?

[Thomas Brookes]

The nature of the complaint totally depends on what his reasons are for allowing a battery detector not linked to the main alarm, he may have a valid point or not, But to do anything first you need to "speak to the officer in question to find out why he has gone for a battery detector".

[Mr. P]

Sleeping - that's what it is... The room for babies is - Sleeping.  What about any other authority involvement? Name suddenly escapes me but , but, the child care one would probably have something to say, they licence it after all.

[nearlythere]

Sleeping - that's what it is... The room for babies is - Sleeping.  What about any other authority involvement? Name suddenly escapes me but , but, the child care one would probably have something to say, they licence it after all.

The reference to sleeping would have helpful earlier. 
Is the baby sleeping room an inner room condition?
Depends on how it is managed. Is the room attended by staff at all times babies are asleep?
The remainder of the premises is coverd by a Pt1 system. This is OK for an inner/access room situation is it not?
Would you expect babies on hearing a fire alarm, to jump out of their cots and make their way to an exit?

[Mr. P]

I think (remember?) that it's 1 adult to 2 babies (not in arms but a wheeled cot/traveller)

There's another thread along this line somewhere to do with a new bld but on a 1st floor.

Sounds like an inner or even (wrongly) an inner/inner room by the 1st post description, but depends how they have or, can establish, exits.  But from what I have seen in similar esyablishments - Usually from a corridor access the room may be split in 2, but the furthest room exits directly to safe outside bld.

[Allen Higginson]

Have seen the battery detectors installed to achieve the inner room solution,that being if someone is in the inner room they are alerted locally - wouldn't be my solution mind.

[David Rooney]

To be honest I haven't personally seen the complete room/s or exactly what they have done as yet... I'm just going on what the client has told me over the phone.

When I said the rest of the system is a pt 1 system I did use the term losely... it is very old... as in it still has the old "gold top" heat detectors protecting the main open areas .. mounted on the steel structure about 20 feet off the ceiling !!!

This is certainly not an early warning system !!

[nearlythere]

If it is a big warehouse type layout is there the chance of a fire breaking out and not being noticed quite quickly?

[AnthonyB]

Pt 6 detectors are detailed in benchmark guidance for access rooms, notably the entry level guide for newsagents etc.

However what isn't made clear is the fact that any Part 6 detector would have to be a 240v type with capacitor or DC 9V battery back up or it would fall foul of the Safety Signs Regulations.

The problem with bunging in a £3 9v domestic DS isn't just the limitation of local alarm or secondary supply but the abject failure 99% of the time to test and maintain them meaning most are found in situ dead as a dodo

Also it's got nothing to do with the Fire officer about the cost, just the acceptability of the solution which the OP's recommendation clearly was if the FSO was suggesting a lesser standard.

[David Rooney]

Have spoken to fire officer today...

Apparently he suggested this measure as an interim temporary fix as the client was pleading poverty (over £250 quid...) but expected the works to be carried out properly byt the time of his return in six months.....

flying pigs come to mind.......!!!

[Allen Higginson]

Have spoken to fire officer today...

Apparently he suggested this measure as an interim temporary fix as the client was pleading poverty (over £250 quid...) but expected the works to be carried out properly byt the time of his return in six months.....

flying pigs come to mind.......!!!

In the present climate of fear regarding swine flu all pigs have been grounded indefinately and so makes this even less likely than you think!!