Recommendations for Fire Suppression Companies

[db67]

Dear All, 

My first post so be kind to me.  I have an age old problem, an old aged Local Authority Enforcement Officer who sees his 'guidance documents' as the only way of achieving compliance.  A small care home has been issued with an action plan by the local authority who have stated that risk rooms opening onto the single staircase need suppression, to compensate for a lack of protection.  The premises is an extended and converted 4 bedroomed house.  The original single staircase has well maintained 30 minute protection, with self closing doors (Fitted with Dorgards) that are closed at night and good AFD, however, because there is a room in the attic, the enforcing officer now wants lobbied protection on the ground and first floors.  As this is not achievable, he has stated he will only accept Suppression.  The first quote is £27,000 and would cause massive disruption to the home and service users if it were being installed. 

The care home have been doing their own in house FRA's and whilst they have been better than some i have seen, they are clearly not the same as one done by a professional and doesnt record the single door protection as a risk, so there is no significant finding.

The fire officer is reasoning that the means of escape would be compromised by any fire that occured.  The care home put able bodied individuals in the first floor and attic room, and have excellent evac records that show the building can be completely evacuated in less than 4 minutes at night.  (2 minutes during the day)  It is staffed 24/7 with 2 carers overnight.

I am currently in negotiation with the care home, encouraging them to have professional FRA's done, (And this will probably not require Suppression) but in the meantime they have asked me to obtain further quotes for Fire Suppression companies, but i only want to approach reputable organisations. 

Thanks in advance for any comments/suggestions/recommendations.

[nearlythere]

Dear All, 

My first post so be kind to me.  I have an age old problem, an old aged Local Authority Enforcement Officer who sees his 'guidance documents' as the only way of achieving compliance.  A small care home has been issued with an action plan by the local authority who have stated that risk rooms opening onto the single staircase need suppression, to compensate for a lack of protection.  The premises is an extended and converted 4 bedroomed house.  The original single staircase has well maintained 30 minute protection, with self closing doors (Fitted with Dorgards) that are closed at night and good AFD, however, because there is a room in the attic, the enforcing officer now wants lobbied protection on the ground and first floors.  As this is not achievable, he has stated he will only accept Suppression.  The first quote is £27,000 and would cause massive disruption to the home and service users if it were being installed. 

The care home have been doing their own in house FRA's and whilst they have been better than some i have seen, they are clearly not the same as one done by a professional and doesnt record the single door protection as a risk, so there is no significant finding.

The fire officer is reasoning that the means of escape would be compromised by any fire that occured.  The care home put able bodied individuals in the first floor and attic room, and have excellent evac records that show the building can be completely evacuated in less than 4 minutes at night.  (2 minutes during the day)  It is staffed 24/7 with 2 carers overnight.

I am currently in negotiation with the care home, encouraging them to have professional FRA's done, (And this will probably not require Suppression) but in the meantime they have asked me to obtain further quotes for Fire Suppression companies, but i only want to approach reputable organisations. 

Thanks in advance for any comments/suggestions/recommendations.

Did the LA type make comment on the Dorgards on the doors enclosing the stairway?
What category of AFD is installed?
I doubt if the action plan should be insisting on suppression as being the only solution when possibly pressurisation might be a cheaper alternative.

[kurnal]

It really is impossible to comment without seeing the building and understanding the way it is used and by whom. One would assume the extensions and loft conversion were subject to Building Regulations approval?
Generally dorgards are not considered suitable use on doors to staircases in a care home and certainly not in a building with only one staircase.

On the other hand certain categories of very small care homes- core homes- focus on creating a homely environment that replicates a family dwelling and environment.

It might be that the enforcement officer is simply frustrated by the lack of fire safety awareness on the part of the responsible person and is leaning heavily on them in this way to ensure that a suitable and sufficient risk assessment is carried out by a competent person.
 

[db67]

Kurnal and Nearlythere

Thankyou both for your comments.  The building was built circa 1900, and the ground floor extensions are more recent but i am not sure on their age.  As I mentioned I have not completed an FRA, although from my brief visit i would expect the AFD to be to an L2.  I do not believe the Dorgards have been mentioned in the action plan issued by the enforcing officer.  I hope that if we are instructed to complete an FRA, we can ensure the correct level of fire provisions are present, and can recommend improvements to the protection of the staircase rather than fitting suppression to the risk rooms. 

I agree that pressurisation would be more suitable and less intrusive, in an environment that is aimed at feeling like a home, however the enforcing officer only seems to mention suppression!

[AnthonyB]

Sounds ripe for a Determination if they wont budge even if a decent third party FRA suggests pressurisation as a possible

[Phoenix]

A pressure differential system is not necessarily a cheap option. It may require a significant amount of ductwork (inside the staircase?), a suitable location for the fans (minimum of two), duplicate power supplies, possibly duplicate intakes (depending upon location), automatic opening vents on at least two faces of every storey but probably more due to the cellular layout, very extensive commissioning procedures and very extensive (expensive) annual maintenance regimes.  They're not generally installed in older buildings because they tend to be a bit leaky and this requires bigger fans.  In general, annual maintenance costs are likely to be prohibitive in such a building.  Also, the implications for opening forces on doors might be problematic in a care home.

In response to the original post........wot kurnal says.  

If you do go for suppression I would urge you not to be tempted by the possible apparent cost effectiveness of water mist, go for sprinklers.

Any fire risk assessment that is done now, in light of the foregoing situation, is either compelled to recommend sprinklers (it's the easy way out) or to come up with some pretty good justification for why sprinklers are not required.  If the protected route can be shown to have been improved by some means and if the fire safety management in the building can also be shown to have improved then that might be enough to obviate the need for sprinklers but we don't know what the building is like so, in general, as I already said, wot kurnal says.....


Stu

[nearlythere]

Was this converted from a dwelling to a res.home without anyones approval DB? Or is it the roof space had been converted without approval?

[Midland Retty]

Would have to agree with Phoenix you will probably find a pressurisation system will cost more than a sprinkler system. In any event I don't feel either are required in this instance if risk assessed properly.

[jokar]

Midders dear chap you have missed the point.  CFOA support sprinklers and therefore they have to be put in all buildings. Plus the Government want to get rid of all fire stations so there has too be some intervention avialble when the nearest fire crew are hours away otherwise the fatality and injury stats will go up.

[Midland Retty]

Sorry Jokar me old china, you're right. I'm so naïve at times.

[db67]

Thanks all for your responses.  In answer to some of the points, the house was originally a 4 bedroomed house, and was probably converted to a care home in the 1980's.  From my brief initial visit, the staircase to the attic looks original and not a modern addition, but that is just a gut feeling from the appearance of the staircase, as it is the same from the ground floor to the attic room and is quite unique.

I believe  the Fire Officers stubbornness may be over-ruled by his senior officers if they are presented with a comprehensive FRA.  I feel there is a strong argument which at least delays the installation of additional fire provisions such as Suppression, and Staircase Pressurisation as their installation will mean relocating service users with their special needs and this will be hugely disruptive and unreasonable. As an interim there is good management.

Although my original post was for recommendations for suppression companies, i agree, with others that there are reasonable alternative approaches that should be considered.  As there appears to be good management, I hope they instruct us to complete a detailed FRA so we can then at least negotiate with the Fire Authority about alternative approaches. 

If anyone knows of reputable suppression companies I would appreciate their details. It's always good to know for future reference.

Many thanks.