NEW GUIDE FOR PUBLIC SHOWING SOURCES OF COMPETENT FIRE RISK ASSESSORS

[colin todd]

The comments you made about UKAS staff having large salaries, long holidays, wanting to work in plush offices and nice hotels. This was fabrication based on nothing at all. You lose your point with such nonsensical hyperbole, which is personal comment about the UKAS auditors.

And I would imagine that their profit to turnover ratio that you quote of 5%, which is, as you say, simply ploughed back in, is much less than your profit to turnover ratio.

And as that nice kelsall always says certification without UKAS acreditation is meaningless.

[kurnal]

What is important is that the Industry should embrace TPC and at the moment we have one scheme offered by 4 CBs.  

I hope and trust that FRACS also achieves UKAS accreditation and brings a further element of choice to the market place.

BAFE SP205 did genuinely develop from the industry itself -members of the FIA getting together to create the foundations of a scheme that could be administered by others and persuaded  BAFE to take it on , in the very early days before the competency council had first met. Parallel to this FRACS Warrington were developing their own scheme to offer as part of their commercial portfolio.  Both schemes have merit and I for one wish FRACS well and success in their scheme too. But currently only SP205 has achieved UKAS accreditation as a company scheme, though the FRACS person scheme has had it for some time.

I have a bit of a personal dilemma. What should firenet do editorially? Should we promote free and open discussion, warts and all on what is potentially a public arena? If someone feels they have a criticism or concern there are few other places they can raise them, should we discuss and share experiences even if to do so may, to an outsider reading the thread, look like a disunited rabble undermining the good work the industry is trying to do?  

I criticise Government and enforcers for not doing more to promote TPC and yet, as a supporter of the principle , it could be said that to not sell it hard here at every opportunity, I am not doing my bit either.

I accept that my own comments are sometimes ill informed or poorly expressed but above all I recognise that people who are passionate about the industry will from time to time get angry with the views of others but hope they will continue to share their passion with us, whether it be signage, fire doors, fire alarms or TPC. But please lets try not to make it personal. We all have one thing in common- the best interests of our industry.

[colin todd]

Kurnal , now you are beginning to talk sense, other than that there are 3 CBs offering SP 205 not 4 unless you can advise us of a recent fourth).

The problem is the misinformation that gets spread here, which is to the detriment of the good work that has been done in the industry. I, alone, have had three calls from people totally confused by the rubbish that has been promulgated here, some of it  by well meaning people who just get things wrong, some of it commercially orientated, some of it by those with axes to grind, some from people who simply want to sound knowledgable but clearly arent and some of it deteriorating to the level of "I was down the pub the other night and my friend told me he was on a bus and heard two people talking and they said that SP 205 audits are all carried out by window cleaners"  ( There you have it. SP 205 audits are carried out by window cleaners. It must be true cos I just wrote it on Firenet.)

There are small companies, sole traders and the likes who are genuinely interested in TPC, but are put off by the confusion and misinformation. We have heard people here suggesting that TPC is promoted to keep some people out.

You should know very well that, when the FIA drafted the first version of BAFE SP 205, every single clause was tested to make sure a sole trader could not be precluded. But people read the allegation on Firenet so it must be true. In contrast, you were personally told by another scheme provider that it was not for you because your company is too small, notwithstanding its plush offices in Matlock Bath, the 23rd floor of which allows you to see to The Wash on a clear day. (That must be true because I wrote it on Firenet.)

If you really want to help people (which I know you waste a lot of time trying to do), why dont you explain properly in a rational logical and unemotive manner about the certification schemes, both person and company, to which people can look, explain why UKAS accreditation is important for commercial CBs and explain why 35 stakeholders in the profession, including the FIA, have concluded and advised the profession that the ultimate end game if you want reassurance that fire risk assessments will do what they say on the tin, is third party certification of companies, and explain why this potentially protects duty holders, such as RPs, from prosecution.

If the landlord who went to prison for 8 months for having, inter alia, duff FRAs had used a third party certificated company (had such a thing been available) would he have had the statutory defence incorporated in Article 33 of the FSO.  DISCUSS.  And I shall be marking your dissertation out of 100.

[kurnal]

The landlord who went to prison at the time would not have looked further than the bottom line even if SP205 was around at the time. The person registers which were around at the time would probably have given him similar protection, but he did not look to those either.

Yes I could probably spend more time making the sales pitch for TPC on firenet and I might try (or more likely encourage others with the right skill set to do so) if I thought more RPs accessed the site for information and advice. But I dont think they do.

I think that firenet's role nowadays is as a bulletin board for those inside the industry. Sharing personal experiences and concerns and requests for a second opinion. Part of this is because of the site security requirements since we were brought down by hackers. It appears to have stopped requests for general advice from the general public dead in their tracks. Linkd-in has taken many of the general requests from RPs away from us.

[The Colonel]

Colin, I think you should go back and read my post again, its the high cost thats putting me off 205 and like most people I will exercise my right to shop around with care, I could negotiate with the CB but they don't seem bothered enough to get back to me. And where do you get that ex fire service officers don't need any TPC, not from me intact i support TPC why do you think I am seeking to use FRAC. You seem to have a downer on the fire service for some reason yet happy to pocket their money when it suits.

Back in the day my fire authority decided that if we were auditing fire risk assessments then we must know how to do them and see it from both sides, who did they employ your company, who do many fire authorities use for training and advice your company. When a number of ex fire safety officers leave the service with as you put it "Their demob papers" who has provided some of these papers, your company but all you seem to do is to be little hard working people if as stated earlier they don't tow the party line. I also understand you employ some as well.

I used to have a great deal of respect for your views and opinions but that is being affected you the way you seem to like to put people down if they don't agree with you, this is a site where views can and should be expressed without personal sniping.

[colin todd]

Sergeant major, you seem to ignore the point I made about your allegation that it is about keeping small people out of the business, when in fact many people have given of their time unpaid to make sure that exactly the opposite is the case. If that groundless accusation was not sniping, I dont know what was.

There is competition amongst the SP 205 CBs, so if you arent happy with the quote you received you can get two alterntaive quotes. As it happens, it seesm to me that, even for a sole trader, the costs of certification are well worthwhile.

[nearlythere]

So what would be your view on the RQIA letter Mr Todd which specifically advises Managers and Owners of Residential Care Homes in NI that it "prefers" the use of a company rather that a person to carry out a fire risk assessment?
Any idea who guided the signator's hand when it was written?

[The Colonel]

Colin, thank you for your reply, let me correct a few things. I have not made any allegations merely expressed my impression of the scheme and process after reading a number of documents that are issued when applying for the process by BAFE and i may be wrong but that is my view on it. If unsure check a dictionary for impression and allegation. And no their was no personal sniping as I did not aim my comments at an individual

Let me asure you of one thing I believe that assessors should be encouraged to seek third party accreditation of their work and not to sit back on their laurels thinking they know it all and that applies to both large and small companies or sole traders, ex fire service or others

[colin todd]

Sergeant major, then we are not very far apart, other than your paranoia arising from a misplaced suspicion of docmentation. So stop grumbling and stump up and get your TPC, you know it makes sense. There is still time for you to be the 10th certificated firm under BAFE SP 205. If times are hard, I will personally give you a loan at 0.5% per annum interest rate just so you can join we certificated firms.

Almostthere, if you recall what this thread is all about, you will appreciate that the RQIA are simply following, to the letter, the advice of the Fire Risk Assessment Competency Council, in respect of the Council's recommendation for COMPANY  certification. For avoidance of doubt, that advice was not the brainchild or axe to grind of any individual but was deveoped on behalf of 35 stakeholders, 29 of whom are credited with the document.

So just lets remind ourselves as to who it was that was responsible for the document that recommends unequivocally COMPANY certification:

Association of Building Engineers (ABE)
Association of Fire Consultants (AFC)
Association for Specialist Fire Protection (AFSP)
Awarding Body of the Built Environment (ABBE)
British Approvals for Fire Equipment (BAFE)
British Fire Consortium (BFC)
BRE Global Ltd (BRE)
Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH)
Chief Fire Officers‟ Association (CFOA)
Chief Fire & Rescue Advisors Unit (CFRAU)
Confederation of British Industry (CBI)
Construction Products Association (CPA)
Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG)
Fire Industry Association (FIA)
Fire Brigades Union (FBU)
Fire Protection Association (FPA)
Federation of British Fire Organisations (FOBFO)
Institution of Fire Engineers (IFE)
Institute of Fire Prevention Officers (IFPO)
Institute of Fire Safety Managers (IFSM)
International Fire Consultants Certification Ltd (IFCC)
Institute of Occupational Safety & Health (IOSH)
National Examination Board in Occupational Safety and Health (NEBOSH)
Passive Fire Protection Federation (PFPF)
Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA)
Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS)
Skills for Justice
Warrington Certification Ltd (WCL)
United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS)


I suppose they and RQIA could all be wrong and you are right, though on the balance of probabilities........

[Kelsall]

Not so Mr Todd. You made it personal. There is no place in the forum for such comments. I hope and expect the forum members agree.

I agree but he has been getting away with it for years. That's why I lower myself to his level.

[Kelsall]

Kelsall, I dont have chums who sell SP 205, cos I really dont like aggressive salesman; my chums are all technical people, who work for a non profit making organization that is there to improve standards within the profession not sell schemes to help the shareholders.

So now we have that straight cant you tell us all the answer to the conundrum.

Sergeant Major:  BAFE SP 205, far from being written to push out sole traders, was carefully crafted to make sure they could be included. And I bet in your FRAs you recommend that the electrical installation is inspected and tested by an NICEIC contractor or a member of the ECA or SELECT. When you recommend fire alarm contractors you probably recommend an LPS 1014 firm or a BAFE SP 203 firm. When the client asks who will maintain the fire extinguishers you probably yawn and say oh go look at the SP 101 list.  Many NICEIC firms and SP 203 firms and SP 101 firms probably make no more money than pensioned ex firemen, not least cos they dont have the pension. So everyone else is expected to have TPC or be  recommended by fire risk assessors but the fire risk assessors can just waive their fire service demob papers and that should be good enough for anyone?  I think not.

The non for profit thing is nonsense! I had a price from one of the CBs for a sole trader. It was ridiculous, absolutely ridiculous for a sole trader to pay that much. I also know for a fact that the FIA bean counters want more training as it makes money! Granted it all goes on wages of the many staff they have but still it is a commercial venture.

[Kelsall]

Colin, I think you should go back and read my post again, its the high cost thats putting me off 205 and like most people I will exercise my right to shop around with care, I could negotiate with the CB but they don't seem bothered enough to get back to me. And where do you get that ex fire service officers don't need any TPC, not from me intact i support TPC why do you think I am seeking to use FRAC. You seem to have a downer on the fire service for some reason yet happy to pocket their money when it suits.

Back in the day my fire authority decided that if we were auditing fire risk assessments then we must know how to do them and see it from both sides, who did they employ your company, who do many fire authorities use for training and advice your company. When a number of ex fire safety officers leave the service with as you put it "Their demob papers" who has provided some of these papers, your company but all you seem to do is to be little hard working people if as stated earlier they don't tow the party line. I also understand you employ some as well.

I used to have a great deal of respect for your views and opinions but that is being affected you the way you seem to like to put people down if they don't agree with you, this is a site where views can and should be expressed without personal sniping.

I agree with you ; he should stick to the thread, he is more than capable of arguing his case without trying to put people down in order to make them seem inferior.

[colin todd]

Kelsall, what has FIA (which is non profit making) training to do with the pricing of BAFE SP 205. The only thing the two organisations have in common is that you appear to always want to rubbish both. And werent you the one that told some small companies that they were so small your scheme would not be worthwhile for them.

[lancsfirepro]

I must be missing something here - what's this scheme you're running Kel?

[Fishy]

As the most senior fire safety specialist working for a large RP, if I were to want to contract out fire risk assessment and if I were inclined to require TPC, I’d look for someone belonging to a relevant UKAS accredited scheme.

I really don’t care whether it’s the individual who’s registered or the Company – I’d trust UKAS to ensure that the ‘rules’ under which it accredits the CBs take the different circumstances into account, so that I have an equal degree of assurance in both cases (or what’s the point of the UKAS accreditation)?

I really can’t understand why anyone would wish to muddy the waters by recommending a particular ‘flavour’ of UKAS-accredited scheme – that’s just going to either confuse us, or more likely we’ll completely miss the distinction or we’ll simply ignore it.  If they were going to recommend UKAS-accredited schemes then they should have left it as that.