SP205-1

[Geoff]

Good Afternoon Gents,

I've been asked by friend if I know anyone who had gone through the SP205-1 process as the company he works for is looking to go through it. They are already 9001 accredited.

I know that some of you have done so and thought I'd ask you what he asked me.

1. Is it worth it if you only do about 400 or so FRAs a year?

2. How much man time does it generally take to obtain it?

3. Is it worth the money and did you gain any extra business from having the accreditation?

I've done a search for similar threads but couldn't find anything that was relevant to the questions, so don't shoot me if I missed something obvious.

Many thanks for any information you can give.

Regards,

Geoff

[Geoff]

I've been asked by the person concerned not to take my enquirers any further so no answers are know needed.😀

[colin todd]

Well, that made that simple then.

[Geoff]

Certainly did!

[colin todd]

Do you want answers anyway?

[Geoff]

Yes please.

That would be very helpful and much appreciated.

[colin todd]

1. I suppose the answer is "worth it" to whom.  If you mean commercially, I am not really sure, as we do not view 3rd party certification in strict commercial terms, but see it as the way forward for our profession and a means of establishing our professionalism; I suppose you could say that, in the  dreadful market out there for FRAs, in provides product differentiation, so could be a commercial benefit.  Some clients do now specify requirements for 3PC.

2. If you are doing the job properly, very little man-days, but there will be a need for internal audits as well as the TPCB audits, so maybe a few man days a year.

3. See 1 above.

Hope this helps.

[Fishy]

Slightly off-topic, but in the spirit of trying to help I would observe that though we don't (as a matter of choice) tend to take on a lot of fire risk assessment work, as regards those tenders / enquiries we do get in, I've never seen any form of third-party accreditation specified.  If it ain't in the requirements, then you're unlikely (in my experience) to be judged any differently whether you do (or don't) have it.

Government (well, the English government in any case) might issue encouragement to RPs to use TPA fire risk assessors but aren't likely to do any more because it has not been demonstrated that there's a serious problem with the industry. Whilst we can all probably come up with some examples of poor practice (and there are regular prosecutions) are there 'systematic' problems that are causing significant risk? Arguably not... in fact the fire statistics tend to suggest that the legislation is working rather well - at least compared to what was there before!

Having said all the above, I'm broadly supportive of accreditation, but I would offer an opinion that none of the organisations who offer such accreditation do enough to market the benefits of it to our potential clients and to get it into tender requirements and specifications - and it's only when the number of clients who ask for (or require) it increases that it's likely that a tangible case could be made why increased sales is going to cover your costs.  If I were a member of such a scheme then I would be demanding that they tell me how they plan to promote their scheme & what their plans for growth are and to keep me updated on progress vs. plan.

Risking arguing with myself... all the above ignores the other benefits of going through the accreditation may offer - better and more efficient internal processes, enhanced internal technical governance and reduced risk to your PI.  As others have said - if you're simply looking at it as a marketing tool (and I'm not suggesting that the OP was, by the way) then you might well be missing the point?

[colin todd]

Yawn, this is a re-run of an old movie, Haddock. For SP 205, read SP 203 and then read all the postings a few years ago about SP 203 and you have your latest posting almost verbatim. My head is flat banging it against a brick wall trying to explain to fire alarm contractors that the reason they don't see SP 203 or LPS 1014 specified in tender invitations is that people who want the certification (which, by the way should not be described as accreditation) dont send the tender invitations to companies that are not certificated. What would be the point- all they would get back would be a non compliant tender.  The whole purpose of the registers of certificated firms is precisely so that companies can pre-select. (I can never understand why lingerie manufacturers never invite me to model ladies underwear, but then maybe its because they know I am a man.)

[William 29]

Just reading through this one and agree with Colin's points above. We were the 4th Co in the UK to gain SP205-1 (before Colin even!).

Well worth the time and expense and not that time consuming once you have it, we have had 5 further "surveillance" audits since our initial one and has not caused us to many issues to maintain.

We are increasingly getting enquiries from clients going directly to the BAFE web site and it is being stipulated more on tenders.

[nearlythere]

Yawn, this is a re-run of an old movie, Haddock. For SP 205, read SP 203 and then read all the postings a few years ago about SP 203 and you have your latest posting almost verbatim. My head is flat banging it against a brick wall trying to explain to fire alarm contractors that the reason they don't see SP 203 or LPS 1014 specified in tender invitations is that people who want the certification (which, by the way should not be described as accreditation) dont send the tender invitations to companies that are not certificated. What would be the point- all they would get back would be a non compliant tender.  The whole purpose of the registers of certificated firms is precisely so that companies can pre-select. (I can never understand why lingerie manufacturers never invite me to model ladies underwear, but then maybe its because they know I am a man.)

I would say you just don't have the legs Dot. But a flat head is handy for setting your pint on. Back to topic.