Should a fire risk assessment identify design/build issues?

[lyledunn]

Kurnal mentioned lack of supervision during the construction stage of a building. How right he is! I just finished the inspection of the electrical installation in a relatively large 5 year old civic building in which Building Control occupy a complete floor.  One would have thought that they would have kept a close eye on the construction of a building which they themselves would ultimately occupy. The breaches of compartmentation that I witnessed above the suspended ceilings were significant. Massive holes left around duct work and other services passing through walls, poorly fitted fire dampers, some set so far back from the wall through which they passed as to be utterly useless, absolutely no records for the electrical installation other than a set of as-fitted drawings that were incorrect in many ways!
I witnessed the same slap dash situation in a nearby, recently constructed primary school. It would have been the same Building Control that would have been responsible.
Far from accepting the bona-rides of the building design and inspection team, it seems that a fire risk assessor may actually be the most important link to accredit the fire worthiness of a building. Maybe they need to be prepared to get down and dirty, don the overalls and scrutinise the dark voids above suspended ceilings! Perhaps, many do but I have seen a few fire risk assessors in tight dresses and high heels. I know what you are thinking, perhaps it was Colin Todd, but no these guys were much uglier!

[Karissa]

I have certainly made comment in my reports, albeit probably too diplomatically, where recent or current building or refurbishment works have been shoddy. I will let them know what I think of a contractors' work, whether good or bad.

[William 29]

I remember debating this one at length in the fire safety office before the FSO came in to force.

What about a situation where the fire service are consulted on a new build and the building is signed of by them and building control. However when occupied at a later date say 12 months or even longer during a fire service audit or as a result of a FRA serious building defects are identified.

Can the fire service have a second bite of the cherry and serve a notice or prohibition?
If so how would this look in Court if they decided to prosecute the RP?
Would the RP be able to use the fact the fire service signed the building off as a defence?

[Fishy]

Can the fire service have a second bite of the cherry and serve a notice or prohibition?
If so how would this look in Court if they decided to prosecute the RP?
Would the RP be able to use the fact the fire service signed the building off as a defence?

...with the ENORMOUS caveat that I'm not a lawyer; it would be up to the Court to decide and the opinions expressed in the following are the personal thoughts of an old, befuddled fire engineer, very tired on a Friday morning...

- Of course they can - if there' s an offence under the Order it would make little difference whether the fire authority had been (or should have been) previously aware of it or not.  They don't 'sign off' or 'approve' anything during the building reg's process - it's just consultation.  I'd observe that it might make a difference as to whether they'd be inclined to prosecute, though, once it got in front of the Chief Officer;

-  wouldn't matter, it would not be likely to make any difference to the guilty/not guilty verdict;

-  can't see why it would affect the verdict, but it might make a difference to the sentence!
 

[Mike Buckley]

From limited experience but it always seems to me that the consultation from the Fire Brigade usually comments that the approval is subject to a suitable and sufficient Fire Risk Assessment.

Hark I hear a flying buck!!