Risk Assessment Concerns

[SamFIRT]

So who is it that is asking for all these extinguishers to be installed? and where are they being sited?
*interested*

[kurnal]

Usually its the "fire risk assessor" who works for a company that sells fire extinguishers as their core business. Very thin on meaningful fire risk assessment, very heavy on the sales.

Often sited close to the perceived risk that requires protection so often remote from alarm call points and exit routes.

[tmprojects]

We could have a firenet white stick award for naming and shaming. (Only joking). But if fire services would name  risk assessors on the public register of enforcement notices this would help us  to get rid of the cowboys. Please also publicise the registers on your website.
I hope you will  suggest the RP  carries out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment and obtains a refund from the incompetent consultant.

i think this also goes into this thread. 'Scottish Government recognises the benefits of third party certification'

You can't look to the Fire Authorities, an enforcement notice does not automatically infer that the risk assessor hasn't done his job properly.

Why not a website where your views can be posted? Ebay allows its members to 'score' each other. Then theres trip advisor!

wouldn't this be better than Third Party Accreditation. a site where you could look up the contractor and the reviews of their previous clients or agencies?

[AnthonyB]

Some of the worst offenders for putting five times as many extinguishers in as are needed are third party accredited (& charge £200-£300 per extinguisher)!

[SamFIRT]

Usually its the "fire risk assessor" who works for a company that sells fire extinguishers as their core business. Very thin on meaningful fire risk assessment, very heavy on the sales.

So if this is a fact. Why are some of the firms not pursued in the courts for mis-selling. 

[kurnal]

Who would initiate the action? I tell the client but what recourse do they have? A lot of hassle for a refund at best. Are trading standards interested? Probably not. There are lots of people selling stuff to others that they dont need. The fundamental probblem is that the "fire Risk Assessment" used to sell these things usually isnt suitable or sufficinet but many of these are low risk workplaces that are at the bottom of your audit priority lists.

[tmprojects]

So if this is a fact. Why are some of the firms not pursued in the courts for mis-selling. 

Sorry but it is a fact. i see it all the time, virtually every week.

Why aren't they prosecuted? That easy.

because the worst offenders are the biggest companies and they are all bullet proof in their contracts. wording is everything.

'recognised best pracice'

'Our recommended standard will ensure you fully comply with British standards'.

'Look! we have loads of stickers that say we're great and can be trusted'

[SamFIRT]

Please don’t be sorry TM I was asking a question nothing else.

That is the beauty of this forum, It shows me opinions from a wide fire industry and public sector base.

It is very very interesting.

[mr angry]

We could have a firenet white stick award for naming and shaming. (Only joking). But if fire services would name  risk assessors on the public register of enforcement notices this would help us  to get rid of the cowboys. Please also publicise the registers on your website.
I hope you will  suggest the RP  carries out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment and obtains a refund from the incompetent consultant.

If only, our service wont even give enforcement officers access electronically to their register yet it is available to all should they choose to visit HQ.... what are they scared of?