Removal of MCP from Halls of Residence

[Chris Houston]

Firstly, it is unacceptable to walk away from the fire, the fire alarm system activation in many buildings summons the fire service.

unacceptable? only on paper.. the 1st rule is still life safety and everything else is secondary. besides, the ground rule is "not take personal risk".

I presume you are misunderstanding me.  My point is that it is unacceptable to walk away without activating a call point.  The Fire and Rescuse Service need to be summoned to protect life as well as property.  The fire alarm system must be activated immediatly to ensure that all students are alerted to the presence of a fire.

____________________________________________________________

I am absolutely amazed, shocked and saddened that people are considering taking away the sole means of raising an alarm where vulnerable people sleep.  I think it is entirly inconsistent with the Fire Precautions Workplace Regs (the duty to provide means of alarm, which is in addition to the need for an assessment of risk), the Health and Safety at Work Act and morals.

[Graeme]

Not necessarily. People are better fire detectors than any automatic detector.

Not when there intoxicated students

maybe but if i was really drunk and saw a fire i would break the glass and then crawl really fast out of the building.

It is a big enough temptation for some people who are sober,when there is no fire.

[Apollo_SG]

hi Chris, actually apart from the MCP which raise an alarm automatically, we do have (in singapore) provision for manual alarm. What this does is a gong with a rotating alarm that you turn in cyclic motion and that generates a noise when the striker hits the gong repeatedly.

almost like the water gong for sprinklers.

[AnthonyB]

Manual alarms  such as the rotary gong, triangle & air horn are still available and used in the UK, but in specific circumstances.

Construction sites and camping and caravanning sites are the most common.

They can suit very small premises as well, although self contained single station MCP/sounder stations are also available.

There is also the oldest manual alarm of all - the shout of 'fire!' (but not in a crowded theatre...)

[mazbaz]

there are many better solutions we are at this time fitting STI alarmed covers to all call points these usually have the desired effect!

[shaunmckeever]

Thought I would keep you all up-to-date with progress.

I visited site with a fire officer and then sat down with him. He agreed at the time that on reflection it was not a good idea to have the MCPs blanked off.

My proposals to him were:-

1. the call point adjacent to the exit should continue to be blanked off but the call points in the flat corridors should be reinstated. It is the MCP just inside the front door that appears to be maliciously operated most often. Security doors prevent unauthorised access into the building and then again into the individual flats so the only persons who should be able to operate the MCPs are the occupants of the flats.

2. The MCPs will be fitted with a cover that requires breaking a seal before being lifted. This should act as a psychological deterrent (it is not difficult to break the seal).

3. Covert cameras continue to be used.

4. The university will take a more severe approach rather than the previous measly £50 fine

I asked the fire officer if he would provide me with a letter so that I may persuade the University to reinstate the MCPs. Unfortunately after returning to base and discussing this with his senior officers the Brigade concerned have decided to stick to their original decision. So now the Halls of Residence will on occasions have the following situation particularly party time

1. Fire doors to kitchens and bedrooms wedged open by students
2. Covered detectors to prevent accidental operation when cooking/smoking/burning candles
3. Some students under the influence of alcohol and drugs
4. No means of rasing the alarm other than using a mobile phone if they have one
5. Exit routes obstructed


The brigade concerned referred to me to clause 1.9 in ADB!

By the way bedrooms and kitchens are fitted with heat detectors and common areas are fitted with SD.

I must be missing a trick somewhere!

Just for info the brigade concerned is not London.

[Graeme]

3. Some students under the influence of alcohol and drugs
.

i refuse to believe this bit.

wedging open doors etc maybe.

[Graeme]

Shaun

depending on what category the fire system is but HD is acceptable in bedrooms for L2 and 3

[Allen Higginson]

Shaun

depending on what category the fire system is but HD is acceptable in bedrooms for L2 and 3

Protecting the fir escape/corridor outside the room etc....but the rest stinks to high heaven!

[Ken Taylor]

The threat of expulsion (being sent down) might not be unreasonable in these circumstances and could be an effective deterrent.

[Graeme]

.but the rest stinks to high heaven!

well it is student accomodation.The last one i was in certainly did.

[colin todd]

Graham, Heat might even do for L1.

[Chris Houston]

The brigade concerned referred to me to clause 1.9 in ADB!

Clause 1.9 then refers you to clause 1.30, which refers you to BS 5839, which can only be complied with by providing call points.

[Graeme]

Graham, Heat might even do for L1.

colin,can you tell me in what circumstances?
thanks.

[colin todd]

The BS is not specific, but notes that detectors other than those in escape routes do not always need to be smoke.