Latest RRFSO determination outcome

[Ricardo]

http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/fire/selfclosingdevices

[nearlythere]

Took me a while to read that the doors in question were fire doors, probably by assumption.

Is that the HTM84 compartmentation of bedrooms torn up?

[jokar]

So we no longer can have a homely atmosphere in a care home and the inmates (as it is now a prison) have to be kept locked in all day.  Swing free is a costly remedy and the determination has nothng in it with regard to ALARP or CBA.  The phrases WHERE NECESSARY has also been delted from the paraphrasing of Article 14.

So, if the CLG and the Chief Fire and Rescue Advisor wants prescriptive standrads why doesn't he tell the Givernment to tear up the RR(FS)O and go back to certification with a note to himself to cover all premises. This is not Fire Risk Assessment as there is no mention of the ignition sources, fuel or oxygen in the room of origin which will start and grow the fire which will require the room door to be closed.  L1 warning and detection with an adressable panel who needs it, not so much life safety as property protection and where does it say that in the RR(FS)O

[Dinnertime Dave]

Took me a while to read that the doors in question were fire doors, probably by assumption.

Is that the HTM84 compartmentation of bedrooms torn up?

Not really it is saying that

"other requirements in the Health Technical Memorandum series are not complied with, for example the requirement to control ignitability of bed linen, the lack of 60 minute fire separation of the laundry room and the sighting of electrical hoists with the means of escape corridors."

[Phoenix]

Health and Safety has become a thing of some ridicule over the last few years due to over zealous practitioners convincing large parts of the lay population that they have to take certain, over the top, preventative actions in order to safeguard their own positions  (e.g. see picture below).  The lay person is always compelled to follow the advice because of a fear of criticism or prosecution.

I always hoped that fire safety would not follow the same path. My hopes have been dashed a little by this outcome.

Stu

[nearlythere]

Took me a while to read that the doors in question were fire doors, probably by assumption.

Is that the HTM84 compartmentation of bedrooms torn up?

Not really it is saying that

"other requirements in the Health Technical Memorandum series are not complied with, for example the requirement to control ignitability of bed linen, the lack of 60 minute fire separation of the laundry room and the sighting of electrical hoists with the means of escape corridors."

Yes but what the lack of 60 minute fire separation of the laundry room and the sighting of electrical hoists with the means of escape corridors has to do with self closers on bedrooms I can't quite get. Can anyone?

[BLEVE]

Dont see what the laundry or hoist storage has to do with self closing doors either.

I can appreciate an opinion stating that the FRA was not suitable or sufficient if failing to consider patient demographics "dimentia" etc and delay in staff response. In the world of H & S, improvement notice would be issued without prescriptive or required counter measure or corrective action being provided.

Would be more interested in the sources of ignition, combustibility of materials, furnishings etc.

where does this leave similar premises abd assessments already conducted and scrutinised without comment

[Tom W]

So the Fire & Rescue service don't quote BS7273-4 when talking about fire door retainers and they only specify magnets as acceptable?!

Oh dear

Apart from that, credit to the judge for realising that the doors would be wedged if they only had S/C

[Midland Retty]

I think this has been taken way out of context.

My understanding of the determination is simple. And I would ask you all to remember that the determination process is supposed to be an independent process - where the authority and RP dont agree they can go for determination rather than the RP simply being told by the enforcing authority "you will do as we tell you"

The care home might have won the determination if it's case were legitimate. So I can't understand why people are saying its "health and safety gone mad" because I don't think it has at all.

The downfall of the care homes argument was that it tried to "cherry pick" the best bits out of various guidance to suit it's needs.

Sir Ken pointed out that you can't cherry pick "To take sections of differing standards and use them to form one assessment is an erroneous approach as individual sections in guidance documents rely on assumptions in other sections of that document which may differ from other guidance. The responsible person’s case rests on such an approach. For example, the use of the HMT documents would require that the complete approach is adopted."

Also the care providers couldn't really demonstrate that staff would be able to shut the doors quickly enough, and Sir Ken was not convinced about the zone model they had submitted.

Most care homes Ive had involvement with either have S/Cs, magnetic hold-open devices or free swing, they may be more expensive, but not prohibitively so in the greater scheme of things.

[Tom Sutton]

Hear hear Midland.

[Wiz]

..........Most care homes Ive had involvement with either have S/Cs, magnetic hold-open devices or free swing, they may be more expensive, but not prohibitively so in the greater scheme of things.

Budget estimate cost to supply and fit good-quality standard hydraulic door closers to 36 doors = £2,800 + vat

But, taking into account the standards for the building that were used to inform the design in 2003, notably the Health Technical Memorandum (HTM) 84: Fire Safety in Residential Care premises (part of the Northern Ireland Fire Code) as appropriate guidance. This indicates that self-closers are not required on bedroom doors so as to allow staff to observe residents easily and address the concern that residents could be become isolated.

Therefore, budget estimate to supply and fit 36 No. Briton 996 closers, set-up in free-swing mode, with all associated power supplies, cabling and links to fire alarm system including modifications to existing fire alarm system to meet recommendations of BS7273-4 = £ 16,000 +vat.


IF the same was to apply to, say, 3,000 similar buldings nationwide with an average of 36 doors in each building; total budget cost = £ 4.8 million.

I'm glad I'm not paying for it! 

But, of course, we will all actually be paying for it in one way or another!

[nearlythere]

Should hospital wards now have all sleeping areas partitioned off and fitted with FRSC doors?

[Midland Retty]

The point is still being missed. If you apply all of HTM 84 you dont need SCDS

Trouble is the care home was cherry picking parts of it. They were trying to have their cake and eat it.

[Midland Retty]

But, of course, we will all actually be paying for it in one way or another!

You're not wrong - and that's my point. Aside from Southern Cross (who have a very bizare business model) I have never met a poor care home operator yet. And if they do own 36 homes, then they would be getting alot of operational profit.

The figures you quoted do make the SCDs sound expensive, and to the likes of us it is. But self closing devices are not that costly in the bigger scheme of things especially compared to the other stuff that is required by other regulations and consumables care homes use!

And they could just stick to mechanical self closers if they really wanted to watch the pennies!

[colin todd]

Retty,  There is hope for you yet.  Next time I come over to dinner at Retty Towers and we send Mrs Retty to the utility room while we have the brandy and cigars, we can deliberate over how WISE this determination is.

I am surprised it even went to determination.  It is a no brainer that even the DCLG could not get wrong.  Nothing in the facts cited would lead me to believe that the care home in question did not need self closing devices.  In fact, even the smoke and mirrors of fire engineering calculations (which is more and more what fire engineering has become) would lead me to be certain they they ARE required.

And yes, HTM 84 is wrong, it always was, still is and always will be.  I hate to mention the fact, but, for donkeys years, the SCOTTISH version of HTM 84 said that you DID need self-closers and they should be swing frees.  Interestingly, also there would be no debate about this under the current Scottish Building Regs, and certainly not post Rosepark.

Does anyone know who on earth thought fit to take this to a determination and which FRS was sensible enough to stand their ground on the subject.  (Please tell me it was not LFEPA as I do not want my illusions about them to be shattered.)

Finally, Grand Wizard Retty, there will be poor care home operators once you and I become residents, as we will raid the drinks cabinet every evening while the staff are fiddling about doing something that would not be closing fire doors.