NOTICE OF FIRE SAFETY DEFICIENC!ES

[Tom W]

I have read quite a few of these letters now. They are not being sent with any rights of appeal and they confuse me.

Can someone in the service explain to me why so many of these are being sent out?

So you have found for example a site that Deficiency from Article 9 (1)
The Fire Safety Risk Assessment was not suitable and sufficient

This would produce an Enforcement Notice, no?

Are these now being used as an easy way to get things done without taking it through an enforcement notice.

I would like it explained to me if you guys can.

[nearlythere]

Northern Ireland would not normally issue an enforcement in the first instance unless there was a serious risk to peoples safety.
 Gently does it first and failing that formal enforcemment would ensue.

[colin todd]

Thomas a NoD is a courtesy used by EAs where the risk is not serious and the deficiency is not only minor but there is some confidence in the duty holder to get things sorted. It follows the principles of the Enfocement Concordat and the HSE Model of Enforcement.

[Tom W]

I have no problem with the approach but it can sometimes seem like a threat, do this or we will prosecute.

They have no details of appeal and the letters don't really explain themselves.

Im guessing its easier as an FSO to send out a NoFSd than an Enforcement notice so things are slipping into them that are not required by law but have been asked for.

So when other agencies such as the CQC see these letters if the RP hasn't done everything they will be marked down.

Im trying to write this in a way that im not lumping the whole of the F&RS into one basket im just recalling the ones I have recently read.

[nearlythere]

I have no problem with the approach but it can sometimes seem like a threat, do this or we will prosecute.

They have no details of appeal and the letters don't really explain themselves.

Im guessing its easier as an FSO to send out a NoFSd than an Enforcement notice so things are slipping into them that are not required by law but have been asked for.

So when other agencies such as the CQC see these letters if the RP hasn't done everything they will be marked down.

Im trying to write this in a way that im not lumping the whole of the F&RS into one basket im just recalling the ones I have recently read.

Mostly the notice can be quite lean on information as to how matters can be remedied and only quotes the specific Regulation(s), but any FSOs I know will visit, explain the situation and offer advice.
Any I have been dealing with has been because the employer or AP does not quite understand the issues in which case the FSO recommends using an outsider.

[CivvyFSO]

Just to expand on Colin's post:

The Enforcement Concordat does say that if a person is willing to rectify faults without the need for formal enforcement, then that course of action should be taken.

The Enforcement Management Model used is the CFOA's version of the HSE's EMM. Each article that is not complied with gives a number of points, these points add up to give a distinct course of action. (With some other factors taken into account such as previous history etc) The more points, the more severe/formal the action.

As there is no Enforcement Notice given there is no appeal as it is more in the realms of our advice, but on that subject, I personally believe that it is wrong for the notice to say that not doing the work could lead to prosecution. If there is such a risk there that a prosecution would be possible by virtue of the failings putting relevant persons at risk, then it is our duty as enforcers of the RRFSO to follow that through at the time. What a NoD should say, in my opinion, is that if you don't follow the advice given then an Enforcement Notice WILL be issued to rectify the failings, and a failure to comply with such a notice IS an offence.

[CivvyFSO]

Also I believe that this belongs in Q & A, not Operational

[Tom W]

Good points Civvy and sorry for posting in the wrong place

[colin todd]

Thomas, He will forgive you if you give him a free Dorgard to adorn the lounge of Civvy Towers.

[CivvyFSO]

No need to apologise, I was really pointing it out for the benefit of the forum admins who might have taken the trouble to actually move the thread to a section where it might get more comments.

[wainy]

Hi Piglet
The F&RS I have worked for give the option to rectify their deficiencies, i.e.

"Should you wish to propose an alternative method of complying with the legislation, this may be acceptable to the Fire and Rescue Authority. Any such proposal should be submitted in writing to the above named officer".

This gives the option for the buisiness to formulate a risk assessed solution, in my opinion complying with both the FSO and enforcement concordat.

[colin todd]

Civvy dont be so forgiving, go for the Dorgard  I went to the trouble of getting you.

[Midland Retty]

No, no, no, Sir Colin!

The dastardly CivvyFSO tends to loiter almost exclusively in dead end conditions, just for the fun of it whilst pondering very complicated calculations relating to smoke stratification and other fire dynamics.

Thus the use of a Dorguard®™ (other similar acoustic hold open devices are available) would not be suitable for his working environment.

[Tom W]

So you're the one person who read BS7273-4?!

[Wiz]

Piglet, I believe those that read it are many. I believe that those that understood it are few!