Car Fires

[lingmoor]

I suppose this should go in 'operational' but there is tumbleweed blowing through there

A car fire starts in a hospital car park close to the building...porters come out and use fire extinguishers at the early stages to stop it developing before the arrival of the fire service...the fire service thank the said porters for doing this.

Questions are asked, should the policy be to leave well alone as there could be a danger of the petrol tank exploding and petrol tanks are in different areas of cars (Ive attended loads of fully developed car fires and the tank has never gone...however it could happen obviously)

What would you say to the questioner?

I think like anything else it has to be assessed

Don't put yourself at risk
Only if it is at the very early stages should there be an attempt to tackle it
If it is a developed fire then leave it and evacuate any parts of the building it may affect

or is that crap and it should be 'leave it at all times for the fire service?

ps if there was still people inside then that would obviously change the mindset

[Phoenix]

As with any fire, first aid fire extinguishers should only be used by the staff on fires that are very small.  If no one's ever going to use the extinguishers then what's the point of having them?

Stu

[nearlythere]

As with any fire, first aid fire extinguishers should only be used by the staff on fires that are very small.  If no one's ever going to use the extinguishers then what's the point of having them?

Stu

The reason they are there is that the law says they have to be. (?). You would therefore think there would be a legal requirement to fight  fire.

[Owain]

A car fire starts in a hospital car park close to the building...

That makes things different, because it may be very difficult to evacuate the hospital and there are risks in doing so to patients (and to staff, who may have to manually handle non-ambulant patients down stairs).

[kurnal]

Always a dilemma.
One of my clients (hotel) had an arson attack in one of their function rooms. The duty manager extinguished the fire but had to use 8 extinguishers to put it out- damage was put at £20K.

Certainly way beyond the scope of  first aid fire fighting and certainly he did put himself at some risk. But the fire was out by the time the brigade arrived. OIC gave him and the owner a right good rollicking and investigated my level of training. Served a notice on the hotel to train staff in first aid fire fighting as they had placed an employee at risk. Indirectly I suppose they had through vicarious liability.

I know the theory of course....but personally l was all for giving him a medal not a rollicking.......

[nearlythere]

Always a dilemma.
One of my clients (hotel) had an arson attack in one of their function rooms. The duty manager extinguished the fire but had to use 8 extinguishers to put it out- damage was put at £20K.

Certainly way beyond the scope of  first aid fire fighting and certainly he did put himself at some risk. But the fire was out by the time the brigade arrived. OIC gave him and the owner a right good rollicking and investigated my level of training. Served a notice on the hotel to train staff in first aid fire fighting as they had placed an employee at risk. Indirectly I suppose they had through vicarious liability.

I know the theory of course....but personally l was all for giving him a medal not a rollicking.......

Trying to do the fire officer out of a job K. Very serious. I would send a letter to the Brigade suggesting they get there quicker.

[AnthonyB]

I would say it's a training issue primarily - extinguishers are used in most levels of motorsport quite effectively (& also not so!). If used early on enough, the risk is tolerable, I've used them effectively a couple of times on vehicles

[SamFIRT]

The fire service gives out mixed messages. 

They say if a fire occurs; Get out ....Get us out ...and stay out. Then....when someone does not follow this advice they pin a medal on the person risking their life to fight the fire. Or give them a rollocking for putting themselves at risk. With no rhyme or reason to which will happen and why.

I say the fire service (and others) should be teaching people about fire and what they can realistically do to mitigate it. Moreover they should explain the toxicity of the products of fire. Gone are the days when the general populace doffed their caps and said yes sir to uniformed public sector workers. You are quite right sir....I should not try and protect my family... my property ...or society in general, I should leave it to you people. Of course I should. Because you tell me to. You must be right. You have a uniform. Oh... thanks for the medal.

Questions to be asked are; how much training had said porters had in fire fighting, what risks had they been exposed to during their lives?  As we are all the sum total of our life experiences.
Say to a pensioner who has live through V1 and V2 attacks that a microwave is dangerous. Say to a returning veteran that a car fire is dangerous. So it may be but compared to an IED?

 Ask yourselves... those of you serving...or retired... fire-fighters....what would you do? Risk is subjective. We all take risks every day of our lives.

End of rant ..... Sorry!   

[Phoenix]

The reason they are there is that the law says they have to be.

What law is that then?

[nearlythere]

The reason they are there is that the law says they have to be.

What law is that then?

Ok you caught me out there as it doesn't actually say "thou shalt provide extinguishers....." Did you not see what i was saying without quoting legislation verbatum?

[lingmoor]

Sam

That wasn't a rant...it was interesting.

The Porters get annual Fire Safety training including non-live fire training using the firefighting equipment in the hospital

[Midland Retty]

We have missed one important issue here.
 
I'd put a week's wages on the fact that even if the porters received pukka first aid firefighting training the syllabus would not have included how to deal with car fires. We know car fires can be nasty and present their own risks.

So I think you have to be very careful here. Its a difficult one, my advice is people should stick to what they have been trained to tackle, anything outside of that then they should be encouraged to call the fire service and ensure the affected area is evacuated and secured in the meantime.

Onto Kurnals heroic hotellier. Don't get me wrong I can understand why people wish to protect their assets as SAMFrit points out.

The 'get out, stay out' message, to me, is aimed squarely at home owners, not commercial premises as such.

But Kurnal....  your fellow used 8 extinguishers? Come on! His training should have told him that if one extinguisher isn't enough, its time to evacuate. So I'm afraid I don't buy into this argument that somehow he should have had a pat on the back, what if he had been overcome by smoke, others would have had to put themselves at risk to rescue him?

Fair play to him for attempting to prevent the fire from getting biggger, but he should have known his limitations through his training.

[kurnal]

Thats exactly what the training told him -if it needs more than one extinguisher  then its not first aid fire fighting and you should leave, close the door and leave it to the fire fighters.

But he didnt and he put the fire out. And didnt need rescuing. So I dont buy into this argument that he put others at risk.

Initiative, bravery, valour are the words that come to my mind. Qualities that used to be admired not treated with disdain.

He did it and obviously had the skills to pull it off.

Come to that following your point why is it ok for amateur sailors or rock climbers or pot holers who by their actions , if they get into trouble, to place others at risk by having to rescue them? And surely they are making a selfish choice to put others at risk for their own pleasure? (if you take your point to its limits). No offence to sailors or pot holers or climbers. Use to enjoy these myself. Cant find a climbing rope strong enough now though.

[Clevelandfire 3]

Hang on to turn that argument on its head why did you teach that fella to use 1 extinguisher and not 8 then. For my money you need to replace the word skills with the word luck in the fourth sentence.  You were a brigade commander kurnal. Would you let your blokes go outside their level of competency or training. Very much doubt you would. So how is this geezer any different. Fine line between hero and zero. This guy was lucky.This notion that amateur sailors rock climbers and the like are no different is a complete non starter. They are amateurs with little or no training or understanding about what could go wrong and what is required to rescue their silly backsides.Whereas your guy received training and should have known better. So whats your argument. Theres a difference between silly amateurs and trained staff. Kurnal sorry but to follow your argument to its limits if you think this guy was great then you need to teach all your clients that its safe to use up to 8 extinguishers dont you.

[kurnal]

No Cleveland I will continue to teach them to use a maximum of one extinguisher and only if its safe to do so. First aid fire fighting is what its all about.
But if someones valour, bravery and initiative takes them beyond the call of duty and if they get away with it then personally  I celebrate their spirit. Its not expected of them but they go the extra mile to achieve a good outcome. Thats the best side of human spirit. Yes it is a fine line I agree. Luck? Probably. But you make your own luck.