Fire Officer Recommending the replacement of old flat entrance doors

[Suttonfire]

Hi All,

I would appreciate your views on the following scenario:

 A local fire officer is demanding that the front entrance doors within a block of 3 storey flats are replaced due to them not being '30 minutes fire resistant'. Now, whilst the doors are not traditional notional 30 minute doors (they are all incorporate a large single panel  -thus 44mm core thickness is not achieved), the doors all appear to be in sound condition, and given that they are all uniform it is likely that they met the required standard at the time of installation. Furthermore, each flat has access to an external fire escape stairwell at the rear of the property, meaning that even if the main common escape route (accessed via the flats entrance doors) is compromised the residents will be able to use an alternative means of escape.

In view of the above would you consider that requiring the replacement of the doors is not proportionate to the risk, particularly given the presence of an alternative means of escape?

Thanks

[Golden]

A few questions. Is there any FD & A and is the external properly protected below and to the sides? Sounds to me like the IO doesn't fully understand the issues here. I'm getting a bit fed up with the FD suppliers banging on about fully compliant fire doors - what happens when the BS/EN changes in a few months/years time - are they going to insist all of these newly fitted doors are replaced or modified?

In my opinion, and from experience, I'd much prefer a 30 year old solid door to some of the rubbish that is sold these days (however is carefully designed for maximum profit and will pass the BS test).

[Suttonfire]

Hi,

No communal detection and not all doors opening on to the external escape stairs are fire rated. However, the cost of replacing all of the doors from the flats and windows which can not be confirmed as non fire rated would, in my view, not be proportionate to the risk. thanks

[Golden]

I'm going on very little information here but I'm afraid that given there is insufficient evidence that these were ever fitted as proper fire resisting doors (and despite my earlier comment that the IO may not understand the issues) I'm coming around to his/her point of view and that they should be replaced. There is insufficient protection to both staircases and a fire within a flat could affect both; given the lack of FD & A in the communal areas the fire could burn for some time and affect other flats in the block before residents were aware of the danger. If this is the case then there is no argument in my opinion and that it is reasonable that the internal staircase doors should be upgraded or FDA fitted and a simultaneous evacuation policy be adopted; the cost in either case is only a few thousand (3 floors - 9 flats?) which is not disproportionate to the risk. Fire alarms obviously attract testing and maintenance costs so a 'whole life' costing should be looked at.

I would also be checking the current protection between the flats and the internal staircase and between floors and if I could satisfy myself that there was a case for stay put then this makes the external redundant and there would be no need to protect. You could always send off a door to be tested however this would probably cost more than replacement. I'd repeat that having not seen the doors/building this opinion is only based on the information so far.

[Suttonfire]

Thanks for your views.

Just to add some further information there are actually 40 flats In total 8 self contained entrances). I can not prove the fire resistance standard of the door sets but feel that the wholesale replacement of the doors or the installation of a communal fire alarm system based upon presuming non compliance would be excessive. However, I do appreciate the response.

I wonder if I could gauge further opinion?

[Tom Sutton]

Tom, a few questions.

How do you know his name is Tom Golden? do you know him personally or are you just making a guess?

[Golden]

My apologies - I saw the 'Sutton' in the header and thought it was you! Post amended.

[Tom Sutton]

No apology needed I just thought you may have confused SuttonFire with me, just another from the south tun (village)

[Auntie LIn]

Just to lob in my three penn'orth here.   Is it worth doing a proper survey of the doors?   I'm very wary when people start 'demanding' replacement doors (and I come from the fire door industry).   You're often far better off with original doors which fit properly than some of the attempts I've seen to replace with modern stuff.   Too few of the 'operatives' fitting these doors (or worse still, doorsets) know hay from a bull's foot how to do the job properly.   Without actually seeing any of the doors I obviously can't give a firm opinion, but there may be scope for some fairly straightforward upgrading of the existing doors (although no doubt the FO's cover my back policy doesn't acknowledge this).

[colin todd]

Lin, the alarm bell that rings in the post is the large single panel- it probably needs to have its thickness and fit checked.  Its fine if it was an original 30 min door to BS 476-1 (which my granny told me about) but it may never have been of much cop.

[William 29]

What is the date of construction and I assume they are purpose built flats?

Colin's point above noted but if the doors are 30mins and have an effective self-closer, sounds fine to me on what you have presented.

The fire officer can "demand" all he likes but has he put his money where his mouth is and served a Notice?

[Dinnertime Dave]

Is the fire officer demanding or recommending?

[Suttonfire]

Thank you to all for your responses so far. I can provide the following further information:
I have been advised that the construction date is circa 1972 (purpose built flats).
The rear exit doors on to the external stairwell are a combination of aged doors incorporating g/w glazing, and more modern double glazed doors and windows.
The flat entrance doors within the common areas (deemed inadequate by the fire officer) are fairly weighty doors incorporating a solid wood (44mm depth) outer edge (which is around 100mm thick) and a large central panel (I will attach a photo shortly).The doors are not fitted with self closers (which we have recommended). The doors are well fitting within the frames.
The block is comprised of several separate entrances with a maximum of 6 flats (over 3 storeys) in each common area. All flat entrance doors appear to be identical, and as far as the managing agent is aware, they are the original door sets (40 flats in total).
The travel distances to the escape routes on all floors is limited and the layout of the escape routes very basic.
Based upon this I considered it reasonable to assume that the doors met the required standard at the time of construction. Taking this into account, and given the availability of an alternative exit from every flat onto the external stairs, I personally do not see it is being risk proportionate to presume non compliance and require the replacement of all flat entrance doors (both in terms of financial cost and the difficulties of actually getting the residents to agree to it). At the moment a notice of deficiencies has been served rather than a formal enforcement notice; however, I have since presented the above view (on behalf of the managing agent) to the fire officer and his opinion has not changed.

Thanks again for you input - I would appreciate any further views based on the above.

[William 29]

Without looking what you have detailed seems fine and the doors should provide the notional 30mins. What I think you may find is that you will have to provide some evidence that the doors are 30mins, maybe by sacrificing one of the doors to look at the construction.


You could try the other approach of getting the fire officer to state why he is so sure they are NOT 30mins FR without further evidence. I would argue given the construction is 1972 the doors are likely to have met the standard of the day and provide 30mins. The problem is some fire officers assume the worst without any concrete evidence to support this. For example I have seen some recommending common fire alarms based on the assumption that the compartmentation can not be guaranteed given the build date of 1960's, 70's etc when there is no clear evidence to support this other than the age of the block.

[Golden]

From the description given it is unlikely that these doors were ever classified as fire resisting; I'm sticking to my earlier response that they should be replaced. Have one tested is the only answer.