Fire Alarm Maintenance/Service Periods

[jakespop]

Is it a legal requirement to have a Part 1 system maintained every 6 months? What would be carried out differently to the annual check?

[Allen Higginson]

Is it a legal requirement to have a Part 1 system maintained every 6 months? What would be carried out differently to the annual check?

To meet 5839 the interval between service visits should not exceed 6 months.
I dont have my copy handy though to go further but no doubt some kind soul will fill in the many blanks!

[colin todd]

No, it is a legal requirement to have it maintained in effective state, efficient operation and in good repair. BS 5839-1 RECOMMENDS  that in effect this should be 6 monthly service visits.

[jakespop]

Thanks for reponses and I dont have my copy handy either. I have a client who has asked if the 6 monthly inspection is mandatory as they have been refused a certificate unless they have it done. From my understanding 5839 issues guidance but you would have to have a good reason not to comply with it.

[kurnal]

"The recommended period between successive inspection and
servicing visits should not exceed six months. If this recommendation is not implemented, it should be
considered that the system is no longer compliant with this part of BS 5839."

"The work described may be carried out over the course of two or more service visits during each twelve month period."

Whilst much is duplicated, once per year every device must have a function test carried out, as opposed to a visual in many cases on the six month service. The six monthly also incorporates a check for changed conditions or layout of the building.

The BS has a list of items (45.3)that should be checked tested every six months and a further page full of tests and inspections that should be tested once per year (45.4) . For example all call points should be inspected every six months but physically tested annually. All detectors should be inspected every six months and subject to a function test annually. 

[David Rooney]

Thanks for reponses and I dont have my copy handy either. I have a client who has asked if the 6 monthly inspection is mandatory as they have been refused a certificate unless they have it done. From my understanding 5839 issues guidance but you would have to have a good reason not to comply with it.

... and wouldn't they would be right... ?

I can't fid it but isn't there a line stating that if a system is not "serviced" each six months then it is deemed to be non compliant?

[nearlythere]

Thanks for reponses and I dont have my copy handy either. I have a client who has asked if the 6 monthly inspection is mandatory as they have been refused a certificate unless they have it done. From my understanding 5839 issues guidance but you would have to have a good reason not to comply with it.

... and wouldn't they would be right... ?

I can't fid it but isn't there a line stating that if a system is not "serviced" each six months then it is deemed to be non compliant?

Yes, but non compliant with a recommendation.

[David Rooney]

Thanks for reponses and I dont have my copy handy either. I have a client who has asked if the 6 monthly inspection is mandatory as they have been refused a certificate unless they have it done. From my understanding 5839 issues guidance but you would have to have a good reason not to comply with it.

... and wouldn't they would be right... ?

I can't fid it but isn't there a line stating that if a system is not "serviced" each six months then it is deemed to be non compliant?

Yes, but non compliant with a recommendation.

It would be far simpler and to buy a copy of the BS and tell every potential customer to read them and make their own minds up.

So if we tell the client he doesn't need six monthlies because its a recommendation he thinks he's going to half his service charge, then we spend another two hours debating and explaining the BS and the RRFSO and expanding our carbon foot print and being blamed for the shrinking rain forest.

So in this case if the client doesn't want a six monthly visit are we saying it's ok to write a certificate saying "it doesn't comply with the BS but it's only a recommendation anyway".... so what value is the certificate?

[Allen Higginson]

If you get a numpty like that Dave then you make sure it says in big letters that the system is not being serviced as per the recommendations of 5839 - that'll go down well should an action be taken against them in relation to an incident!

[David Rooney]

If you get a numpty like that Dave then you make sure it says in big letters that the system is not being serviced as per the recommendations of 5839 - that'll go down well should an action be taken against them in relation to an incident!

That's fine till they ask "do they have to comply as it's only a recommendation" then you have to go round in circles saying "no....but under the RRFSO blah blah blah"

I seem to spend half my life now trying to explain to people the various choices they have depending on their risk assessment and justifying why we try and meet the BS even tho its just a "recommendation" and apparently doesn't need to be met.

Sometimes there are just too many choices !

[nearlythere]

Thanks for reponses and I dont have my copy handy either. I have a client who has asked if the 6 monthly inspection is mandatory as they have been refused a certificate unless they have it done. From my understanding 5839 issues guidance but you would have to have a good reason not to comply with it.

... and wouldn't they would be right... ?

I can't fid it but isn't there a line stating that if a system is not "serviced" each six months then it is deemed to be non compliant?

Yes, but non compliant with a recommendation.

It would be far simpler and to buy a copy of the BS and tell every potential customer to read them and make their own minds up.

So if we tell the client he doesn't need six monthlies because its a recommendation he thinks he's going to half his service charge, then we spend another two hours debating and explaining the BS and the RRFSO and expanding our carbon foot print and being blamed for the shrinking rain forest.

So in this case if the client doesn't want a six monthly visit are we saying it's ok to write a certificate saying "it doesn't comply with the BS but it's only a recommendation anyway".... so what value is the certificate?

But if you carry out a service you can still certify that it passed, or not, can you not?

[Mike Buckley]

Aren't we back to the old BS arguement as to the legality of the BS. As far as I am concerned the reasoning is the same as that of the Highway Code which is only guidance however when the case goes to court it is the benchmark.

In a similar way if the occupier is taken to court by the enforcing authority and charged with failing to maintain the alarm system it would be up to the occupier to persuade the court that they had taken adequate steps to maintain the alarm system, and the benchmark the court would use is 5839. The only way I could see this happening was if the occupier got a signed statement from the manufacturer of the system that it did not need six monthly testing, which would mean the alarm system did not comply to 5839 in the first place.

[Allen Higginson]

Thanks for reponses and I dont have my copy handy either. I have a client who has asked if the 6 monthly inspection is mandatory as they have been refused a certificate unless they have it done. From my understanding 5839 issues guidance but you would have to have a good reason not to comply with it.

... and wouldn't they would be right... ?

I can't fid it but isn't there a line stating that if a system is not "serviced" each six months then it is deemed to be non compliant?

Yes, but non compliant with a recommendation.

It would be far simpler and to buy a copy of the BS and tell every potential customer to read them and make their own minds up.

So if we tell the client he doesn't need six monthlies because its a recommendation he thinks he's going to half his service charge, then we spend another two hours debating and explaining the BS and the RRFSO and expanding our carbon foot print and being blamed for the shrinking rain forest.

So in this case if the client doesn't want a six monthly visit are we saying it's ok to write a certificate saying "it doesn't comply with the BS but it's only a recommendation anyway".... so what value is the certificate?

But if you carry out a service you can still certify that it passed, or not, can you not?

You can say it passed the tests as per recommendations but that the system is not being maintained under said same recommendations!

[Wiz]

Surely it is obvious that you could check a system that hadn't been serviced for years and find that it is all working perfectly well. In these circumstances you could issue a certificate stating such. You don't have to mention it hadn't been serviced regularly previously.

If being asked to provide a service contract, it would be obvious that you would offer a contract based on the BS recommendations. If the customer decided to vary this offer, you would ask him for an indemnity confirming he hadn't accepted your advice.

Good business practice is to always give the customers what they want, but indemnify yourself if they choose to ignore your advice or BS (etc.) recommendations.

[Galeon]

The crux of the matter is read Toddy's post over a few times , as Wiz said you could service a system thats hasnt been touched for years . Its the responsible persons issue to have it looked after correctly.