House inside a barn.

[col10]

Does the RRO apply?

House is used as a single family house.  The barn is in use for farm work, farming equipment, machinery and cars.

Does RRO apply to the barn as a place of work but not the part which is used as a house / dwelling?  If so, can, as far as RRO is concerned, fire risks be put in the common areas of flats and ignore the effect on the private flat?

[kurnal]

Yes the RRO applies to the barn but not to the domestic premises. Not because it's a place of work, but because the RRO applies to all places other than those specifically excluded. The duty on the RP is to ensure that relevant persons, including occupiers of the domestic premises are not exposed to risk. The FRA may not need to be recorded depending on circumstance.
You need to read the definitions in the RRO, including that for relevant persons.
Combustibles in the common areas of flats would place relevant persons at risk.

[col10]

So am I correct in thinking that the occupants of a flat can be relevant persons, but the occupants of the single private house in the barn can not because of article 3(10)?:

 "(10) In this article, ?premises? includes domestic premises other than premises consisting of or comprised in a house which is occupied as a single private dwelling and article 27 (powers of inspectors) shall be construed accordingly."

Is there a definition of a house in the RRO, because the Building Regs definition says that it is a flat if there is any horizontal division and the space in this barn extends over the roof of the house so maybe the house in the barn is actually a flat in the barn.

[kurnal]

There's so many different uses of the word premises in the Order ( but see interpretation) but the occupants of a flat and in this case the house must be relevant persons because they are legally on the premises and could be at risk from a fire if it occurred in the barn. The Order later excludes domestic premises from its scope but this does not mean that the occupiers of the domestic premises can be disregarded, it just means that other than for Article 31 no requirements can be made within the domestic premises themselves.

By the way how on earth did they end up with such an odd set up? I assume it was all done without approval?

[col10]

Fortunately I am not involved with this, but as far as I understand it was built without any approvals.

[Mike Buckley]

If it was built without any approvals then it should be dealt with by the local planning authority. It sounds like one of those dodges to avoid planning consent in line with the block of stables where the horses enjoyed fully furnished bedrooms, bathrooms with toileets etc.  lounges with tv and stereo and sofas to sit on and a fully functioning kitchen in case they got hungry.

Most of these cases end with prosecutions by the local authority and the end result will either be to make it comply or demolish it.

[Fire Monkey]

If the place of work can affect the protection or means of escape form the private dwelling then this should be investigated and noted in the FRA for the barn. Is there 60 min compartmentalisation protection in place (think loft spaces)? Just like a garage attached to a house there are requirements to prevent fumes and flammable spillages entering the house (seals on any interconnecting doors and a step) - can anyone confirm this? I would presume one would have a duty of care to inform the house occupants of the risks.

[Bruce89]

Kurnal, why are saying the house in the scenario as described I.e. Single family house could be subject to article 31?

[kurnal]

Oops slip of the finger or maybe the brain? The point I was unsuccessfully trying to make is that the fire safety order does not apply to domestic premises other than for the provisions of Article 31-10.

It might be interesting to consider what would happen if there was a stack of hay, nitrate  fertiliser and petrol in the barn that placed occupants of the domestic premises at risk. The fire service has received a complaint from the employee who lives in the house and is worried for their own safety. What could / should the fire service do about it if anything?

[Bruce89]

It would depend on whether or not the occupants of the house are considered as relevant persons in the vicinity, I'm not aware of whether or not "vicinity" has been tested in a court of law as of yet. Depending on how much is stored, an alterations notice served on the R.P. Of the barn might be an option.

[kurnal]

The CFOA perceived insights document gives the following guidance:

Individual houses (family/single occupancy)
The Order does not apply to individual houses whether detached or terraced, which are in traditional format (individual bedrooms, kitchen, lounge etc) occupied by a single household as domestic dwellings.
Private Flats (including those over commercial premises)
Private flats (having fire separation and separate access and egress) provided on premises as living accommodation for the owner or manager is to be regarded as a single private dwelling and as such sits outside the scope of the Order. Where such separation is not provided, enforcing authorities should remember that the responsible person (with a trade, business or other undertaking) owes a duty to relevant persons (in the domestic premises) and should take such action as will best protect those relevant persons from fire. However, even where private staff accommodation is provided, article 31 may be applied to the whole premises including that occupied as private staff accommodation.

Whilst the Fire Safety Order may be rather woolly in the circumstances I described, perhaps the Housing Authority has primacy? Is the Housing Act any more helpful?

[Jim Scott]

Depending on how much is stored, an alterations notice served on the R.P. Of the barn might be an option.

Why?

[Bruce89]

Referring back to one of Kurnal's posts, it may be that the quantity and of type of storage is acceptable as existing e.g. Hay, nitrate fertiliser, petrol, but any more could present a problem, therefore an alterations notice could be served.