Jailed risk assessor

[John]

But how does the RP know who is good and who is bad? As Fire Risk Assessments are subjective that is a very diffucult question to answer

The concept here is that the RP needs some signposting and third party is the way to do that; I fully accept that some of the extinguisher schemes are c**P but that’s the fault of those wot wrote it and operate it.   Only some ? 

If a trade association or a CB isn’t strong enough to kick out those that can't maintain a high standard; third party gets a bad reputation.

Third party has to be robust in order to protect the public and if a company does a bad job the RP should have recourse with the third party and if the complaint is upheld the company should be removed from the listing or be made to put it right.

If you aren’t third party you may be good and you may be rubbish how do people know? More importantly who do they complain too and what recourse have they got? It would appear Nottinghan Crown Court have answered that question for you 

[Midland Retty]

if i want to go out for a meal i aks if anyone knows of a good resturant, if i need a competent fire risk assessor i would enquire with other businesse who did their and would they recommend them.

I dont disagree Chariot, the only thing I would say is that there are certain things you can go by recommendation on (such a nice restaurant or a decent mechanic) but I'm not sure if you can when it comes risk assessments /assessors.

You need to be sure the person making the recommendation knows that the assessor and the work that the assessor produces is pukka, bearing in mind how technical risk assessments can be. Does the person making the recommendation understand that?

It can be the usual story of an RP being handed a 100 page risk assessment which has been filled with utter drivel and waffle just to pad it out.

The hapless RP assumes that just because its has lots of pages it "must be good" and "worth all that cash s/he forked out" and "that they dont need to do anything else now - they are all compliaint because an assessor has been in "
That RP then says to you "I can recommend  my risk assessor he was really good and thorough"
 

[Chariot]

It can be the usual story of an RP being handed a 100 page risk assessment which has been filled with utter drivel and waffle just to pad it out.

The hapless RP assumes that just because its has lots of pages it "must be good" and "worth all that cash s/he forked out" and "that they dont need to do anything else now - they are all compliaint because an assessor has been in "
That RP then says to you "I can recommend  my risk assessor he was really good and thorough"
 

[/quote]

This was exactly the senario that happened when our organisation engaged an accredited, certificated group of consultants, these consultants were recommended by another organisation (not on the basis that they were competent just on the basis that the owner of the consultency was a good guy)

The point I am trying to make is even when you go to a register, obtain references, check credentials you can still end up with an assessment that is not suitable and sufficient, you pay your money and you take your chance. The system does not work.

Perhaps a register of incompetent persons may be more effective provided we do not allow person to buy themselves off!!

[Tom W]

I seem to be chasing you about now MF!

Personal reccomendation is a dangerous thing as the RP has already decided that they are not competent so they have elected to get a RA in. Unless the FRA has been through scrutiny by a FSO do they know that the doccument is any good?

Unless the reccomendation comes from someone with the knowledge its not a good idea. I can reccomend a mechanic, I don't know about cars but my car drives like a dream after a little visit to the mechanics. It has been through a test.

So if I was looking for an RA the check list i would want would be

CV of consultant doing the work
ISO 9001.
Example of work (can i understand it? does it appear to cover off all points I think are worthwhile, is it too big? too small? what sort of money was paid for it)
Insurance certificate (Min £1m)
Offer of a reference
Method Statement
On site risk assessment

A list of "like to have" would be
3rd Party Accreditation
Presented information on the RRO and what it means to be an RP (Nice touch)

And a couple of others but you can all think of those yourselves

Agree/disagree?

[Meerkat]

So if I was looking for an RA the check list i would want would be

ISO 9001.
(long list of other stuff snipped)

Agree/disagree?

I agree with the rest of your list Piglet but ISO9001?  For a fire risk assessor?  Surely not.

Getting back to the original topic     would love to know what it was about these assessments that the judge found so "wholly inadequate" that they warranted 8 months in jail? 

[nearlythere]

I doubt, Meerkat, the judge would have a clue as to why they were "wholly inadequate" other than someone telling him.
Best to get that from the enforcement authority's presentation.

[AnthonyB]

Third party accreditation & trade body membership doesn't mean perfection. However the failings are usually different.

From experience accredited companies, especially larger ones are more likely to over-provide, overcharge and over replace, but generally do most of the correct checks and don't often miss critical hazards.

The medium size accredited/trade membership firms are often just about right on most fronts.

The small companies/one man bands or non accredited/trade member firms (including some large ones and those who may be accredited for fire stuff excluding PFE) are far far more regularly not carrying out the basic service requirements, missing critical hazards and not generally knowing what they are doing.

[Eli]

Chariot you must be confusing accredited certification with registration as many on this site do. The company you speak of will have been on a register of approval, perhaps you could enlighten us as to what register they appeared on.

Personal reference!!!!!!!!!!! If the RP knew anything about technical fire risk assessment don’t you think they would have done the assessment themselves?

The only thing an RP can comment on with any assurance is perceived value for money, how nice and prompt the assessor was and how thick the risk assessment was when it arrived. You can’t comment on how technically good or bad your surgeon is just how good his bedside manner is. Do you think all the duff assessors out there are unpleasant tardy rough necks who provide dog eared documents? 

Piglet I like your idea but it should start with 3rd party and then move on to the rest for exactly the same reason as above, the RP doesn’t know what to look for in a CV and they aren’t that reliable either. Some very experienced and well qualified assessors on paper produce absolute ‘guff’. Plus report review is OK but they aren’t going to send you a duff report are they?

[Chariot]

The assessors that conducted the FRA's are on the FIA register amongst others.

The reference was that a Director had attended University with the Director from the consultancy and had previously worked together in another organisation.

Can surgeons not be responsible persons?

perhaps we need a register for competent responsible persons.

[Eli]

The assessors that conducted the FRA's are on the FIA register amongst others.

The reference was that a Director had attended University with the Director from the consultancy and had previously worked together in another organisation.

Can surgeons not be responsible persons?

perhaps we need a register for competent responsible persons.

Until April of this year the FIA list was meaningless; it isn’t much better now. However if the company you speak of was on the listing before April do check out the code of conduct and see if they have breached it. An alternative would be to go to the holders of the register they appeared on and complain to them in writing if you feel you have a grievance. 

I suspect that too few people do this and again that’s why third party gets a bad rep as people complain endlessly without doing a thing about it. You can’t be kicked off a register without a complaint being made; just knocking a company on it isn’t going to get them ejected. Very often it’s easy to bad mouth someone without actually having your complaint substantiated. Those who like to tell others how bad someone else is should have the balls to do something about it or shut up moaning; especially if there is a mechanism to do so.

[kurnal]

Third party accreditation & trade body membership doesn't mean perfection. However the failings are usually different.

From experience accredited companies, especially larger ones are more likely to over-provide, overcharge and over replace, but generally do most of the correct checks and don't often miss critical hazards.

The medium size accredited/trade membership firms are often just about right on most fronts.

The small companies/one man bands or non accredited/trade member firms (including some large ones and those who may be accredited for fire stuff excluding PFE) are far far more regularly not carrying out the basic service requirements, missing critical hazards and not generally knowing what they are doing.

Anthony whilst I agree with your summary in respect of extinguisher companies I think the fire risk assessment industry is very different. From large to small companies the majority work not by employing substantial numbers of fire risk assessors directly but by sub contracting work to a pool of self employed associates.

This applies almost universally  from cotswold based fire associations through north west based organisations, and regional and national companies. I know because I  have carried out work for a number of them in the past. And many of the biggest names are very poor when it comes to checking consistency and quality. Some send out the associates' work without any quality checks whatsoever- and evidently in many cases not even using a spell checker.  None of the so called big boys I have ever worked for has ever sent anybody out to check on my standards on site when working under their umbrella and nobody has ever queried anything on any of my reports. It seems to be all about  Ker-ching- glossy brochures, cash cows and market position.

My associates all comment on the shock of the steep learning curve and unexpected degree of scrutiny of their work when they start doing jobs for me. I know there are others who take the same view- but they are a minority and in terms of quality the best in my view seem to be small to medium sized organisations.

[AnthonyB]

I agree - I was specifically responding to earlier comments regarding my findings in the extinguisher industry.

With risk assessment it can be very different, having seen excellent work by small firms/sole traders and some stuff from big firms that aren't much more than what an RP could do themselves once you get rid of all the standard gumph and some glaring errors as well.

[Tom W]

So if I was looking for an RA the check list i would want would be

ISO 9001.
(long list of other stuff snipped)

Agree/disagree?

I agree with the rest of your list Piglet but ISO9001?  For a fire risk assessor?  Surely not.

Getting back to the original topic     would love to know what it was about these assessments that the judge found so "wholly inadequate" that they warranted 8 months in jail? 

If a company has achived ISO 9001 you know they will be a good company to deal with, if you have a problem, paying your bill etc its about the whole interaction, not just getting a risk assessment.

[John]

So if I was looking for an RA the check list i would want would be

ISO 9001.
(long list of other stuff snipped)

Agree/disagree?

I agree with the rest of your list Piglet but ISO9001?  For a fire risk assessor?  Surely not.

Getting back to the original topic     would love to know what it was about these assessments that the judge found so "wholly inadequate" that they warranted 8 months in jail? 

If a company has achived ISO 9001 you know they will be a good company to deal with, if you have a problem, paying your bill etc its about the whole interaction, not just getting a risk assessment.

Achieving ISO 9001 does not necessarilly mean they will be a good company to deal with, in my experience, I agree that it should mean that, but so often it does not

[Tom W]

Bloomin heck! Does no official accredition actually mean anything to anyone these days!