Brigade attendance to automatic signalled systems

[kurnal]

The alarm industry is also responsible to an extent. For example I was in a small self contained office building single storey for which the installed category M/ L5 system was perfectly adequate to cover a single inner room sitution. The SP203 alarm engineers had recorded it as "not compliant with BS5839 - no detection in escape routes" .

The whole thing is a mess and I have some sympathy with Kents position. There is little or no benefit in using an ARCs at present which is a shame. But lets not forget the main reason for having an alarm and detection system- its main purpose is to alert relevant persons who may be at immediate risk from fire in the building.

I think that for occupied buildings with life risk present it is reasonable to expect a back up call and for unoccupied buildings for the ARC to alert the responsible person and that they should have some pre planned response before calling the Fire service.

If systems were capable of double knock then this would be a benefit.

One problem with the back up call is the call challenge policy for care homes, call challenging can tie up one of only two staff on duty for up to 5 minutes in my experience, when they should be helping people at the scene of the fire. 

[colin todd]

Kurnal, so you want a single lone female at 2am to go into a building to check if there is a fire? I wonder if the great heros of the British Fire Service would take such an action.

And you dont mean double knock you mean coincidence operation.

And you are old enough to remember the days when enforcing authorities considered that AFD had no role in life safety- it was purely for property protection, so it is anomalous that you now discount its value in property protection.

And with regard to care homes, the new edition of BS 5839-1 will recommend againsy any investigation of fire alarm signals in care homes, regardless of what bizarre policies might be adopted by fire and rescue authorities in some areas of ENGLAND.

[kurnal]

As always Colin my intent is good but my presentational skills lack the razor sharp precision to satisfy your good self. However

A lone female is at no greater risk than a lone male would be from a fire at 2am.

The historic great heros of the fire service would not have been called out to investigate an alarm generated by an L1 detection and alarm system in an unoccupied building.

Staff will always have to investigate alarms in care homes, to determine whether there is a fire, whether persons are at risk, who is at greatest risk and, should it be necessary, what are the priorities and logistics for evacuation. Granted that the timing of the call to the fire service may change as a result of changes to BS5839 (but compliance with this is not mandatory). Will Service Users and staff be safer as a result?

I am familiar with the events that followed the Rosepark fire.  I would also like us to consider that many 40 bed care homes have only 2 staff at night. Is it better for them both to quickly investigate as a team and gather good intelligence to inform their decision or for one of them to investigate whilst the other is held on the phone for up to 5 minutes going through the inevitable call challenge process? Please discuss.

As the timing of a call to the fire service is a procedural matter  it needs to be in other guidance in addition to BS5839 which is of course the technical standard for the design, installation, maintenance and testing of fire alarms. It needs also to be included in the National Guidance issued under the Fire Safety Order and other sister legislation elsewhere, and perhaps guidance issued under the Care Standards Act.

[jokar]

Rather than worry about what the fire service will do or not in care facilities perhaps there should be some concentration on the care required and the numbers of staff required to do that 24/7.  It is the RP responsibility to provide care, training and management for the staff in all aspects of the work they can be asked to carry out.  Reliance on reactive organisations will always lead to difficulties and the passing on of information to others in the early hours of the mrornong or indeed at any time is a time consuming process.

BS 5839 part 1 can state whatever it likes but Acts of Parliament will always take precedence.

[kurnal]

The primary role of care staff is to care for Service Users. The recommended minimum staffing ratios  for this role is set out in the guidance to the Care Standards Act.

I dont disagree Jokar with what you say with regard to staffing levels and the Fire Safety Order but I dont think it is realistic to expect the Responsible Person to appoint additional staff over and above these levels in case there is a fire. 

At a time when everybodys budget is under pressure all stake holders are looking to shift the burden of responsibility from one stakeholder to another, you see this with all council services, government services and the NHS, social housing providers etc etc. Its like a game of tag. 

[Midland Retty]

I cant speak for all brigades but you might find that many won't call challenge care homes, or anything else where there is a sleeping risk. They might send fewer appliances, or an AFA response vehicle however.

[jokar]

Why is there an expectation then that the RP will ensure that there is a cogent evacuation plan in place that includes people with disabilities.  That this is builit in the structural protection provided within the premises and the detection and warning system that is installed.

Why is a care home any different from any other premises? 

The structure should be in place to support the detection and warning system and the evacuation strategy of any premises type.  The RP is responsible for that and has a duty of care for employees and residents in all premises.  That evacuation plan should not rely on the local fire station or its personnel.  Sods law would dictate that they may not be available at any given time due to other calls or duties.

I really dont care whether FRS attend AFAs or not, I have attended too many to think that any of them will be a fire.  Attending a fire call is something else and all that is expected is that an FRA will get called to a fire rather than relying on a passed signal that may or may not indicate a fire.  In accprdance with 5839 that call has to be made regardless of the AFA passing. 

However, if that is what the public expect or want then they have to get the funding correct for the FRS. 

[colin todd]

Kurnal, as retters says, they should not be challenging calls to care homes, so the matter of the 5 minute delay does not arise.   let me change the question, would the heros of the British Fire Service send a PERSON alone to investigate a fire in a building?

Of course buildings should stand alone but PHE assumes that someone comes to deal with the fire.

[Mike Buckley]

Of course buildings should stand alone but PHE assumes that someone comes to deal with the fire.

Which they will, when someone tells them there is a fire!!!!

I think the problem may well be that although we talk of a British Fire Service we are actually dealing with a number of local Fire and Rescue Services all of which have their own little God who is busily trying to get brownie points with Dave and his cronies (or the relevent Sir Humphrey!). To add to the problem there are also three parliaments each with its own variation of the legislation, each version is, of course, better than the other two.

This brinkmanship will continue until someone drops a real goulie.

[nearlythere]

This brinkmanship will continue until someone drops a real goulie.

.....and each will blame someone else.

[colin todd]

Michael, the point is that, by the time people frig about investigating, it will be fine every time there is a false alarm but not so clever when there is a fire about which they can tell the F&RS! ( 9 minutes in the case of the Rosepark fire).  By that time, intervention in extinguishment of the fire ( they do still put out fires in England, dont they?) may well be too late.

[Owain]

Michael, the point is that, by the time people frig about investigating, it will be fine every time there is a false alarm but not so clever when there is a fire about which they can tell the F&RS! ( 9 minutes in the case of the Rosepark fire). 

If it takes someone 9 minutes to investigate whether an alarm is genuine then something is wrong with their procedures, especially in a sleeping context. It may need smaller zones or addressable detectors, or a repeater panel in the sleep-over person's bedroom, but they should know where the alarm is immediately.

[SamFIRT]

To add to the debate let's look at what is actually posted on the Kent website.

http://www.kent.fire-uk.org/your_business/latest_business_news/change_to_afa_policy.aspx

Changing how we respond to automatic fire alarms (AFAs)
What’s changed?

From 2 April 2012, all calls from automatic fire alarms will be challenged by the Service’s 999 staff. During the day (6am to 6pm), unless the incident can be confirmed to be an actual fire or signs of fire, an engine will not be sent.

However, for a further year (to April 2013), a fire engine will be sent to calls to automatic fire alarms received at night (6pm to 6am), where a procedure has not been introduced to confirm a fire. This is to allow those responsible for managing premises extra time to make any required changes to their procedures.
This change will apply to all calls whether they are made from the affected building, through a call handling organisation or some other method.
We will ask sheltered accommodation to let us know if the call is a false alarm. If this is not possible then the fire service will attend. This is in response to feedback during our consultation. However we will expect these organisations to investigate false alarms and take any actions necessary to reduce them in future.

Why?

False alarms account for a third of all calls we attend – 98 per cent of these calls are triggered by things like dust or poorly maintained systems. This disrupts your building or business and diverts firefighters from genuine emergencies.

Your alarm, and the safety of those who use your premises, is your responsibility. Following this change, you need to be clear what you will do

Make your plans now to deal with your alarm if it goes off

How you will check to see if there is a fire?
If your alarm goes off because of a fire, tell the fire service when you call 999
Have you revised your fire risk assessment to take account of the changes?
Is your alarm system properly designed, installed, maintained and tested?
If your system makes false alarms do you investigate the cause and take steps to make sure they are not repeated?
Further advice

Download our guide "Your responsibilities if you have an automatic fire alarm" in PDF format
Speak to your fire alarm installation or maintenance company.
Reduction of false alarms - how you can help
Contact your local KFRS fire safety office for advice
Information on evacuation procedures

[colin todd]

Where does the 98% dust and bad maintenance come from.  Is it just one of these "facts" that everyone "knows" like 98% of LFB fire safety officers chew gum?

[SamFIRT]

All over Britain fire crews are attending AFAs. On arrival they check to see if there is actually a fire. DCLG statistics collated via the incident recording system (IRS) show that 98% of them are coded as an 8 or 9. That's false alarm good intent electric ie a failure of the system or false alarm good intent mechanical. That is the head had been activated by the ingress of a non fire related substance. Like thrips, dust, aerosol sprays etc etc. Also, activation of break glass call points are coded as a 6.

This data is a matter of public record and is available free to all.

Where is your empirical evidence to show this is not the case Colin?