The Fire Risk Assesment and Self Regulation...is it working?

[davidj]

From my perspective as a new director of the RMC (Residents' Management Company) for 3 storey purpose built flats, I would say it is totally failing, except possibly, where there is a managing agent involved - and even then, I suspect it is failing in many cases (someone that I know is director of a managed block doesn't seem to have been nudged into doing an FRA, by their managing agents.

Although I sometimes see our own RMC as particularly bad, I suspect the truth is that no similar RMC in the area has done an FRA, and that makes it easy for the other directors and leaseholders, who haven't researched the law, to say "I don't know of any other block that does this, why should we?", or "we've never done that in the past, why should we do it now?", for any health and safety legislation.

Of course, because we have less than 5 employees, even though there could be up to 100 people at risk, and likely to compromise safety,  (although not all in the same block), we don't have to have anything in writing, which might make it difficult for an auditor to be sure we didn't have an FRA.

Taking one point:

As I posted on the other thread, I reckon its down to the perception that fire safety is a simple matter of controling a "triangle of fire" this coupled with the CLG guides has resulted in many below par risk assessments.

I tried to get advice from LFB, but in a short discussion of some points, they contradicted their own residential fire safety leaflet, it basically came down to they were only interested in mixed use developments, and that it was "all common sense", but you could look at the CLG guides.

The problem with the CLG guides is that they tend to conflict with the LFB position that maintaining the original fire precautions is sufficient, even if they predate the 1991 Building Regulations.  The net result is that there are too many judgement calls, where the leaseholders, particularly those who are sub-letting, will always err towards the do nothing option, as it appears cheapest. Whilst it would be easy to say that common areas should be completely sterile, enforcing that would be difficult, or very unpopular.

On the other hand, I don't think it is ever going to be reasonable to go into detailed calculations in this sort of environment.

I will probably come back with some of the more difficult questions in the near future.

(Even in the previous fire certificate regime, in offices, use of the big red door stops was common practice.  I even saw it in public area of public libraries.)

[davidj]

Almost everyone ... thinks that the 'reducing burden on business' is a load of rubbish and a smoke screen for 'reduce fire service budgets by taking a job off them'

Certainly from an RMC point of view it is an infinite percentage increase in governmental burden, as there was no formal burden before.  It seems to me that, for fire certificate businesses, having to self assess or go out to tender to private assessors is much more of a burden than having to go to a single source of consultancy.  That assumes you want to do the job properly.

[kurnal]

Welcome David and thanks for your patience in becoming a member.

I have not yet encountered a managing agent (Even members of RICS) who have any grasp whatsoever of the Fire safety Legislation. I am not saying there aren't any-just that I have never yet met one.

For blocks erected to current Building Regulations, and those erected in accordance with the Mandatory Rules and the CP3 chapter 4 part 1 codes that predated current standards, then to a great extent maintenance of the provisions installed at time of construction should ensure that the risk of fire is controlled. After all these codes are very prescriptive, having been written to reflect the absence of other legislative control.

The problem is that many of the contractors that have been brought in to maintain the buidings, and the agents who have employed them, have no grasp of the fire safety design principles involved. So fire stopping round pipes and shafts, compartmentation and surface materials - all critical safety factors affecting the design- are ripped out and not replaced. Many of the fire doors protecting the escape routes are poorly maintained and often provisions for ventilation removed through a lack of understanding.

One problem in asking the Fire Authority for advice is getting the right advice from the right people who know.  Very often the guys sent out to carry out operational assessments and fire fighting  in the red trucks have no training or experience in fire safety and building design, though to be helpful they will usually offer an opinion- often wrong.

 For definitive advice you should make a formal request to the local fire safety area office. Certainly high rise blocks will now be a major priority for them in view of recent tragic events.

[Northern Uproar]

One problem in asking the Fire Authority for advice is getting the right advice from the right people who know.  Very often the guys sent out to carry out operational assessments and fire fighting  in the red trucks have no training or experience in fire safety and building design, though to be helpful they will usually offer an opinion- often wrong.

So true. When I was an IO, I went to several places with a high life risk (Res Care for children and old folks) where the local crews had gone round and told the managers that they should wait for them to arrive and they'll evacuate the building. Then I come around and tell them different. It makes the Brigades look bad (at best), and there's no written record of advice given, which can create all sorts of problems if everything goes wrong.

[Midland Retty]

Hi David

High rise blocks are indeed a high priority target with Fire & Rescue Services in England & Wales.

The problems and perceptions you describe about the risk assessment process are absolutely spot on and echo the opinions I get from not just other RMCs but also some larger housing associations too. Plus you do get conflicting info from operational fire crews and their fire safety counterparts.

By far the biggest obstacle in producing a suitable and sufficient risk assessment is the need for instrusive investigations to be undertaken within blocks to establish the extent of fire stopping in places which can't be accessed easily. This is a huge problem for large housing associations let alone RMCs like yourselves (for which it must  be even harder).

Intrusive investigations cost a great deal of money, let alone disruption and time. Then there is the problem of access into private individual flats too. Some residents are co-operative, others may not be.

So I can sympathise particularly with RMCs who haven't the time money or resources compared to a housing association. Get on board with your local fire safety department, ask for some specific advice, talk through the problems you can forsee or are experiencing, the Fire Safety Officer should be open to giving as much help to you as possible, without actually doing the risk assessment for you!!  

[woody5746]

I would suggest that as i am hearing of companies and premesis that are still having initial FRA's carried out that it isnt, i do think that yes a competent individual with background knowledge may carry out an identification of risk but who is going to tell the owners of the buildings??? we have all seen the adverts from companies scaremongering but it still seems to go over the heads of those who are ultimately responsible.