Enforcement review

[wee brian]

Likelihood low consequence high.   

High? Higher than what?  A fire in an oil refinery?

[Kelsall]

There is a duty to implement general fire precautions under the RRO; a duty which is not being met by some RPs. The enforcement process is picking this up but at the rate of inspection currently; there remain many out there that are not meeting these requirements.

English FRS did 19% of known hotels last year and served 39 prohibition notices, by simple extrapolation that could mean there are a 156 hotels in the UK that could potentially cause a death or serious harm to staff or guests due to lack of general fire precautions; in the unlikely event of a fire.

I for one just can’t see how that is an acceptable position to be in. My point about putting yourself in that position is very relevant i.e. people are very willing to accept it when others are involved but if it was your own family you would undoubtedly be seeking some form of justice. Would those on the forum who are willing to accept that risk now, just accept the loss as unlucky? No, I think Colin would be his own expert witness in any litigation; if he could.

The conference I attended in Cornwall was all about hotel fire safety and unfortunately the relative of those who died in the Penhallow Hotel couldn’t make the event as he has in the past. I believe from speaking with the officers involved that he doesn’t have a sense of justice being done. However like many relatives of victims, he wants to ensure it doesn’t happen to anyone else’s family.

It doesn’t matter! Hardly seems like a very convincing defense for an RP to use.

“Mr Smith you failed to get your fire alarm serviced, you had no fire risk assessment, you didn’t train any staff and three of the final exit doors where locked from the outside. Have you anything to say in your defense?” 

“Yes; it doesn’t matter! So few people die in fires these days! It was just unlucky!   

In 2010, 35 people died from food poisoning. That is insignificant surely; so why then do we need all those food inspectors visiting all food retail and wholesale outlets? For a fly on the wall TV series perhaps! 

[nearlythere]

There is a duty to implement general fire precautions under the RRO; a duty which is not being met by some RPs. The enforcement process is picking this up but at the rate of inspection currently; there remain many out there that are not meeting these requirements.

English FRS did 19% of known hotels last year and served 39 prohibition notices, by simple extrapolation that could mean there are a 156 hotels in the UK that could potentially cause a death or serious harm to staff or guests due to lack of general fire precautions; in the unlikely event of a fire.

I for one just can’t see how that is an acceptable position to be in. My point about putting yourself in that position is very relevant i.e. people are very willing to accept it when others are involved but if it was your own family you would undoubtedly be seeking some form of justice. Would those on the forum who are willing to accept that risk now, just accept the loss as unlucky? No, I think Colin would be his own expert witness in any litigation; if he could.

The conference I attended in Cornwall was all about hotel fire safety and unfortunately the relative of those who died in the Penhallow Hotel couldn’t make the event as he has in the past. I believe from speaking with the officers involved that he doesn’t have a sense of justice being done. However like many relatives of victims, he wants to ensure it doesn’t happen to anyone else’s family.

It doesn’t matter! Hardly seems like a very convincing defense for an RP to use.

“Mr Smith you failed to get your fire alarm serviced, you had no fire risk assessment, you didn’t train any staff and three of the final exit doors where locked from the outside. Have you anything to say in your defense?”  

“Yes; it doesn’t matter! So few people die in fires these days! It was just unlucky!  

In 2010, 35 people died from food poisoning. That is insignificant surely; so why then do we need all those food inspectors visiting all food retail and wholesale outlets? For a fly on the wall TV series perhaps!  

There may have been 35 deaths from food poisioning Kelsal but I'm sure there were many thousands got very ill.

Is it because of all those food inspectors that there are not many more deaths?

35 of course is nothing compared to the recently reported thousands who die every year from neglect in hospitals. And thats at the hands of qualified, registered, certified, accredited, etc. etc. professionals.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9591814/Patients-starve-and-die-of-thirst-on-hospital-wards.html

By and large I would think that the risk to the public or employees from fire is a heck of a lot less than from anything else. H&S statistics I believe show that prople in the workplace are mostly killed by impact or falling.

[Dinnertime Dave]

English FRS did 19% of known hotels last year and served 39 prohibition notices, by simple extrapolation that could mean there are a 156 hotels in the UK that could potentially cause a death or serious harm to staff or guests due to lack of general fire precautions; in the unlikely event of a fire.

According to google that means about 5000 hotels inspected last year, none of those by me. I spent last year inspecting residential care homes.

When the Fire Safety Order was introduced I inspected all the hotels in my area within 12 months (clearly I don`t work in Blackpool). Based on those inspections we haven`t returned except for complaints, we would also return if they had a fire - But none of them have had a fire!

I do sympathise with your concerns, but I am concerned about your unrealistic expectations. As an I/O I can realistically carryout 2 audits per week. My office receives about 20 building regulation consultations and 2-3 complaints per week between 3 of us. On top of this I have to maintain operational capabilities, this takes about 2 days a month.

My brigade is prepared to work with businesses to promote fire safety, we may have a softer approach than some, but if you were to compare those brigades that continually prosecute businesses and those that don`t are the former brigade areas a safer place to work or live? I would suggest not. But what our approach does encourage is investment in the local area by national and international companies; this in turn creates employment and prosperity.   

[Steven N]

Spot on DD a veritable fountain of common sense  & for gawds sake please never ever give us the power to introduce on the spot fines.

[William 29]

English FRS did 19% of known hotels last year and served 39 prohibition notices, by simple extrapolation that could mean there are a 156 hotels in the UK that could potentially cause a death or serious harm to staff or guests due to lack of general fire precautions; in the unlikely event of a fire.

I do sympathise with your concerns, but I am concerned about your unrealistic expectations. As an I/O I can realistically carryout 2 audits per week. My office receives about 20 building regulation consultations and 2-3 complaints per week between 3 of us. On top of this I have to maintain operational capabilities, this takes about 2 days a month.

My brigade is prepared to work with businesses to promote fire safety, we may have a softer approach than some, but if you were to compare those brigades that continually prosecute businesses and those that don`t are the former brigade areas a safer place to work or live? I would suggest not. But what our approach does encourage is investment in the local area by national and international companies; this in turn creates employment and prosperity.   

I rest my case as i said on my last post, there just aren't the resourses anymore to inspect like we used to (now audits of courses). And these audits can be samples of buildings.  It's very much a reactive approach than proactive enforcement now in my view.

[Midland Retty]

I audit many different property types, and always find issues. (Wish I only had to do 2 audits a week like the poster above - I normally do two or more a day   - I'm not baiting here - I know it all depends on the brigade you work for, the area you cover, the building being inspected, sample or full audit etc etc)

Anyway the issues I find range from minor failings where abit of advice and education is all that is required, all the way up to premises you would call "death traps", places where if a fire occurred you would expect injuries and probably fatalities.

I went to a "death trap" on friday afternoon, and we come across places like that on a fairly regular in my neck of the woods due to the demographics of the area in which I work.

But these death traps aren't factories, hotels, shops, schools, hospitals, care homes, sheltered schemes, etc etc these "death traps" are HMOs. As enforcement of standards in HMOs is undertaken predominantly by Local Authorities it leaves me to wonder what other kind of death traps do fire authorities come across on a regular basis?.

I have dealt with some of the above property types (shops, factories, care homes etc) where standards were shocking, even to the point where they were "death traps" if you like, but they are few and far between.

The HMO problem doesn't apply to all parts of the country necessarily, I deal with them regularly because I work in a large Metropolitan area with hundreds if not thousands of HMOs in the area, so its no suprise I come across them.

So Kelsall I would have to say that apart from HMOs, in my area there are some risky premises that need addressing for sure, but they aren't generally places where people are going to get injured or killed (from fire atleast).

[longjohn]

English FRS did 19% of known hotels last year and served 39 prohibition notices, by simple extrapolation that could mean there are a 156 hotels in the UK that could potentially cause a death or serious harm to staff or guests due to lack of general fire precautions; in the unlikely event of a fire.

According to google that means about 5000 hotels inspected last year, none of those by me. I spent last year inspecting residential care homes.

When the Fire Safety Order was introduced I inspected all the hotels in my area within 12 months (clearly I don`t work in Blackpool). Based on those inspections we haven`t returned except for complaints, we would also return if they had a fire - But none of them have had a fire!

I do sympathise with your concerns, but I am concerned about your unrealistic expectations. As an I/O I can realistically carryout 2 audits per week. My office receives about 20 building regulation consultations and 2-3 complaints per week between 3 of us. On top of this I have to maintain operational capabilities, this takes about 2 days a month.

My brigade is prepared to work with businesses to promote fire safety, we may have a softer approach than some, but if you were to compare those brigades that continually prosecute businesses and those that don`t are the former brigade areas a safer place to work or live? I would suggest not. But what our approach does encourage is investment in the local area by national and international companies; this in turn creates employment and prosperity.   

And that's the problem DD, 'the interpretation culture' I will open my new business in your area where I can rely on a visit from a local FO with common sense and we can be prepared to work towards a safer environment together, rather than in %^&**£shire where the 'gotcha' jackboot fraternity is the order of the day.

[nearlythere]

There is a duty to implement general fire precautions under the RRO; a duty which is not being met by some RPs. The enforcement process is picking this up but at the rate of inspection currently; there remain many out there that are not meeting these requirements.

English FRS did 19% of known hotels last year and served 39 prohibition notices, by simple extrapolation that could mean there are a 156 hotels in the UK that could potentially cause a death or serious harm to staff or guests due to lack of general fire precautions; in the unlikely event of a fire.

I for one just can’t see how that is an acceptable position to be in. My point about putting yourself in that position is very relevant i.e. people are very willing to accept it when others are involved but if it was your own family you would undoubtedly be seeking some form of justice. Would those on the forum who are willing to accept that risk now, just accept the loss as unlucky? No, I think Colin would be his own expert witness in any litigation; if he could.

The conference I attended in Cornwall was all about hotel fire safety and unfortunately the relative of those who died in the Penhallow Hotel couldn’t make the event as he has in the past. I believe from speaking with the officers involved that he doesn’t have a sense of justice being done. However like many relatives of victims, he wants to ensure it doesn’t happen to anyone else’s family.

It doesn’t matter! Hardly seems like a very convincing defense for an RP to use.

“Mr Smith you failed to get your fire alarm serviced, you had no fire risk assessment, you didn’t train any staff and three of the final exit doors where locked from the outside. Have you anything to say in your defense?”  

“Yes; it doesn’t matter! So few people die in fires these days! It was just unlucky!  

In 2010, 35 people died from food poisoning. That is insignificant surely; so why then do we need all those food inspectors visiting all food retail and wholesale outlets? For a fly on the wall TV series perhaps!  

There may have been 35 deaths from food poisioning Kelsal but I'm sure there were many thousands got very ill.

Is it because of all those food inspectors that there are not many more deaths?

35 of course is nothing compared to the recently reported thousands who die every year from neglect in hospitals. And thats at the hands of qualified, registered, certified, accredited, etc. etc. professionals.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9591814/Patients-starve-and-die-of-thirst-on-hospital-wards.html

By and large I would think that the risk to the public or employees from fire is a heck of a lot less than from anything else. H&S statistics I believe show that prople in the workplace are mostly killed by impact or falling.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21358905

With all the problems in our hospitals is fire safety really that important?
Is their sufficient evidence that forcing expensive fire safety legislation on businesses is warranted and necessary? 
Can any say, perhaps with the exception of detection in sleeping risks, that the normal fire safety standards imposed are really that "life saving"?
Other than in death or injury situations has any FS every carried out any routine investigations into fires to see if the fire safety measures served a useful purpose, certainly within the first 10 - 15 minutes from outbreak?