Site Responsible Person

[chrpay]

I understand the term in single occupied premises. I also I understand it if it is multi-occupancy and the Landlord is represented on site.

What if the premises is multi-occupancy, and the Landlord's representative is not on site?

Is there such a concept of "Site Responsible Person"?

Or is each occupier has such a person and they all must co-ordinate and co-operate?

A case in point is who should report to IP when alarm activates in the absense of Landlord's representative?

We have a difficult occupier.....

[nearlythere]

I understand the term in single occupied premises. I also I understand it if it is multi-occupancy and the Landlord is represented on site.

What if the premises is multi-occupancy, and the Landlord's representative is not on site?

Is there such a concept of "Site Responsible Person"?

Or is each occupier has such a person and they all must co-ordinate and co-operate?

A case in point is who should report to IP when alarm activates in the absense of Landlord's representative?

We have a difficult occupier.....

Do you need that specific occupier to be cooperative in order for the landlord to comply with his duties? Is it a case that he/she or it is not reporting an issue in their occupancy that no other occupier is able to?

[chrpay]

Hi nearlythere

One occupier appears to want the landlord's representative to be on site 24/7. This is not practicable. Under such circumstances, who is site responsible person? Who would take lead at evacuation? Who would report to fire brigade o i/c? I know they would only want one conversation.....and not talk to representatives of all occupiers. My view is that this should form part of co-operation and co-ordination and an agreement be reached between occupiers. One occupier is not playing ball

[nearlythere]

My view is that this should form part of co-operation and co-ordination and an agreement be reached between occupiers. One occupier is not playing ball

That would be my view also. You cannot expect the landlord to be reponsible for the evacuation procedure within each occupancy. That would be each RPs responsibility. As long as the landlord has provided and maintains the common MOE. And, as you say, each occupier, including the landlord, must co-ordinate and co-operate. If your RP needs a person on site it could show a weakness in his evacuation procedure. Who, other than each RP, to know who is in his occupancy on an outbreak of fire. No reason why each should not report to the FS in a co-operative and co-ordinated way.

[AnthonyB]

I agree with Nearlythere and find that the OP strangely reflects rather closely a question I was asked outside of the forum recently....

It's hardly proportionate for every landlord with a commercial property with some form of communal area to employ someone on site at every building 'just in case' of a fire.

If the premises are such a communal security officer/receptionist/building manager based on site is deemed necessary for the effective management of the premises (overall not just fire) then of course they can provide a useful coordinating role.

From experience evacuations fall down more on the inaction of the tenants wardens than any issues on the landlord side - even when you have a landlord/agent appointed co-ordinator they are useless if tenants representatives do not report in promptly (or at all).

I've done some awful drills in buildings with a common coordinator, yet some perfect ones where there are just the various tenants on site, it's not a clear cut issue

[Tom Sutton]

Check out the definition of a Workplace (art2) and it includes the common areas so the employers (RP’s) are responsible, under the RR(FS)O, for the whole of the building, not the landlord. They must ensure that any duty imposed by articles 8 to 22 or by regulations made under article 24 is complied with (art 5.1). Therefore they must co-operate with the other responsible person’s concerned so far as is necessary to enable them to comply with the requirements and prohibitions imposed on them by or under the RR(FS)O (art 22). The RP's must Co-operate and co-ordinate no choice.

You could make an argument that the landlord could be a RP if he/she has a workplace in the building (boiler room) and would be included with the rest of the RP’s. Also the landlord could be a Person Having Control (PHC) under art 5 (3), if for instance he/she was responsible for the maintenance of the fire alarm or FFE in the common areas and therefore be subject to art 13.

[Mike Buckley]

My view is that there is no such thing as a 'Site Responsible Person' in the FSO.

As I read the Order the Responsible Person is a concept to actually pin the responsibility on. Part of the issue with the old Fire Precautions Act was that it could be very difficult to find a person to prosecute. Hence the new definitions of the Responsible Person.

If we take the case of a chain of stores, hotels etc. The general manager of a particular store cannot be held to be responsible for everything unless they have total control of the store. So that it is up to the general manager whether they want to spend £20,000 putting a new fire alarm system in for example. Normally this type of expenditure would have to be sanctioned by head office. Hence the Responsible Person has to be the owner/managing director/chief executive officer.

So the site responsible person is a non starter. However the FSO does in section 18 does state that the Responsible Person can appoint Competent Persons to assist him in his duties. This Competent Person does not have to be an employee of the Responsible Person.

So one of he answers could be for the landlord to appoint a 'Competent Person' for the building to assist him and this could be one of the people working in the building, obviously the requirement to co-ordinate and co-operate would apply.

[wee brian]

dont confuse "responsible person" with "a person who has responsibilities".

The first is the legal term that points towards a person or body co-orporate who is ultimately responsible for ensuring compliance.

The latter is a person, or people who do the stuff that needs to be done. You can organise this how you like, as long as it works.

[lingmoor]

so much for the RRO cutting through all the crap...confusion still reigns after 7 years

 

[Midland Retty]

Multi occupied premises are always a headache

If any of the occupants (tenants) employ people they will be a responsible person by default. (see Article 3(a) of the Order )

The Freeholder (landlord) will be the RP for the common areas, and normally all of the common precautions - however sometimes this depends on the lease.

If any occupants are sole traders and therefore do not employ anyone then they woud be persons having control of their particular part of the building (see article 5(3) of the order)

For example take Woolworths Plc as was. Woolworths Plc as body corporate would be the responsible person, one of it's store managers would be a "person who has, to any extent, control of those premises so far as the requirements relate to matters within his control." under article 5(3)

[Tom Sutton]

The Freeholder (landlord) will be the RP for the common areas, and normally all of the common precautions - however sometimes this depends on the lease.

Midders the RP's workplace extends to the common areas that is available to his employees, including any access or egress from his place of work so what is the landlord RP of, somebodies workplace? (Check definition of workplace art 2)

[AnthonyB]

Before going off on a tangent on the RP, I strongly suspect that the OP is using 'site responsible person' in relation to fire evacuation coordination and not the RP under the FSO which as you say has different implications

[Tom Sutton]

Point of clarification for me Anthony, who or what is the OP?

[kurnal]

Thomas the OP is the original poster who started the discussion

[Tom Sutton]

Thanks Kurnal I think we should have an area for abbreviations for old farts like me, I usually give it in full and abbreviate afterwards.