Rank: Guest
|
Posted By shaun baker
Help please.
A little while ago we engaged a safety consultant to conduct a fire risk assessment on our behalf. In the assessment our consultant advised us to place a wheelchair user in a designated refuge point where the fire brigade will complete the rescue. The landlord's fire risk assessor has reviewed our fire risk assessment and has identified a number of issues where he is not in full agreement with our consultant's findings. A major disagreement is that the landlord's fire assessor says it is our responsibility to rescue the wheelchair user. Is he correct?
Other areas of disagreement are the standard of the fire doors - the landlord's assessor says some doors don't comply because the glazing is loose. No mention of that in our consultant's report.
There are a couple of other issues but I haven't time to go into them right now.
I would like some opinions on the two points I have raised if anyone is able to help.
For your info we occupy the fourth floor of a 7 storey office block in Swindon.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Laurie
And what if the fire brigade are on a major shout, and have to pull resources from somewhere 30 minutes away? Do you let the wheelchair user burn?
It is your responsibility and yours alone.
The professionals will use their training, experience and expertise to assist if the evacuation is not complete by the time they arrive, but initial response must be yours.
If you do use the refuge principle it is simply a temporary safe refuge while your own rescue team assembles and deploys
Laurie
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By TBC
Shaun
Just some comments
1. Fire Risk Assessments should have been carried out some time ago.
2. It would have been more beneficial if all the building occupants had a co-ordinated Fire Risk Assessment carried out by a ‘Competent’ person.
3. Not all ‘Competent’ assessors will find the same faults – only human.
Would suggest that you go along with the landlord’s assessor – Fire and Rescue services are becoming less agreeable with the use of refuge points and would prefer/insist on the building being fully evacuated, but check with your local Fire Safety Officer on their requirement.
Loose glass rattling back and forward in a fire situation would break quicker and cause the spread of smoke and heat quicker throughout the building. Worse case scenario – this could aid a backdraft situation.
The landlord’s assessor seems to have carried out a through assessment. Although without sight of the content I could not comment further.
Your on the fourth floor – If the faults were on the floors below, it could mean a difficult situation for you – so why put the occupants above in danger.
Hope it helps.
Regards
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robin Kettle
I read with interest your article about safe refuges, although not an answer to your question I would like to add me views as an Access Auditor.
On my many access audit visits up and down the country I have undertaken DDA audits in many multi storey buildings. As a disabled person and a DDA auditor I am concerned about the DDA recommendations of areas of safe refuge within multi storey buildings. The DDA states that such building should have areas of safe refuge for those unable to manage the stairs in the event of an evacuation.
This surely is assuming the emergency is a fire and those in the safe refuge area will ‘assumable’ be rescued relatively quickly by the fire department.
I personally do not have a problem with this assuming the safe refuge area has been checked thoroughly but and the big but is would you be happy to remain in an area of safe refuge in a large building if the emergency was say a ‘Bomb Scare’? Would it not be better to have Evac chairs in all multi storey building with staff equipped to use them? Food for thought wouldn't you say?
As a wheelchair user I fully agree that we should be able to have access to most reasonable public buildings, however as an access auditor I feel if we cant get out of the building safely, we should not be going in it, at least not until those responsible have address all issues including egress. For more details on DDA access audits see www.access-auditing.com Finally my advice to fellow disabled people is: When entering a building think about how you will get out in an emergency as well as how you will get in.
Note: Companies/forums wishing to use this article please contact via web address above.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By TBC
Good comment Robin - it's good to get a few viewpoints on these issues from various perspectives.
Thanks for the info.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By shaun baker
Laurie, we do not disagree with the landlord's risk assessor. It makes sense to have a procedure to evacuate disabled persons without relying on fire brigade atendance. What we are concerned with is that we have engaged a professional who claims to be competent in fire and yet was unable to identify a number of issues that we would have expected him to identify. I go along with the idea of using the landlord's risk assessor since they have obviously vetted him better than we vetted our own consultant. According to the landlord's risk assessor we should be looking for someone who is affiliated with the IFE rather than someone who has the MIOSH letters. His feeling is that there is a big difference between general health and safety and fire safety.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mark Eden
With regard to safe refuges a lot of persons with disabilities refer to them as BBQ points.
As occupier of a building and with staff members who are non ambulant or with restricted capabilities it is your responsibility to evacuate them safely from the building not the fire brigade.
With new brigade policies in place, they will not always attend automatic fire alarms unless there is a follow up phone call or your building is of a high risk.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Alan F Cox
I have read the correspondence with interest and would now make the following observations:
1. Evacuation of Disabled Persons
This is an age old problem that obviously raises a great deal of concern. Many building occupiers feel that because they have "Refuge Areas" they can leave the person there for the Fire Service (FS) to rescue them - whilst the FS will rescue them if the building Fire Procedure fails - it is the occupiers initial responsibility to arrange for their safe evacuation. Obviously this needs a Risk Assessment and on going dialogue with the person to make sure that if any additional equipment or evacuation aids and training are required they are in place.
2. Fire Doors
This is another area of great confusion and one which is commonly misunderstood by both Safety and Fire Officers. Having a loose piece of glass may indicate that it is not secured correctly but is no guarantee that the glazing may fail in a fire - it may be that the glazing is in a Fire Resisting Channel which can give the appearance of having "loose glazing". What is important to everyone is that the Fire Door has a Certificate and this will detail how the glazing should be fixed. Many people think that a Vision Panel can be fitted into a Fire Door without a problem - unfortunately this is another myth and only reference to the Fire Door Certificate will verify if this will be ok.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By jackw.
Hi, I am surprised at the consultant recommending refuge areas. Current legislation clearly suggests that if you let a person with a disability into your building then you should have procedures in place to evacuate them in the event of an emergency. Additionally our local fire brigade fire safety officer has made it very clear that the responsibility for getting someone out lies with the owner/occupier and that the fire service consider themselves as rescuers of “last resort.” We have, on the back of our own fire risk assessments, put in place evac chairs with staff trained in how to use them and in basic moving and handling techniques.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB
I'm looking for some advice on this very point about refuges.
If LFAs are frowning on the use of refuges (although I really would like to see some evidence of that) then what actions should be taken in the event of an emergency. We can pontificate all we like about who said what but we need to know what to do!
Imagine a 10 storey office block with a fire exit at each end A person with a mobility disability works on the 7th floor.
There is a real fire with real smoke and real panic.
Do we block one exit whilst using an evac chair?
Or do we use a safe refuge? If using a refuge who do we delegate to stay with that person ?
Practical advice only please.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Alan F Cox
Evacuating Disabled Persons
One of the methods that I have found useful is the preperation of a Personal Emergency Evacuation Plan (PEEP) This will look at issues such as Buddies, Communication, Evacuation Methods, Training and Responsibilities on an individual basis. As with any problem communication is an important aspect and the views of those involved need to be considered very carefully. However, the reality is that the evacuation of the majority cannot be delayed by the minority and generally I have found that if the problem is discussed in detail and the realaty explained most people will accept and understand the reason.
Alan F Cox
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Messy
Simple guide to who does what in the event of fire (with regards to persons within building):-
Building occupier = Evacuation of building by ALL occupants
Fire Service = Rescue of TRAPPED persons
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Pete Driver
I thought a reasonable question was asked about a practical situation but only one response has been forthcoming!
Is there any evidence that Fire Authorities frown on refuges (if so which ones)? Or can we dismiss the statement that has been made.
It would seem obvious that fire exits should not be blocked for one or two persons at the expense of many.
Would anybody like to contradict that statement?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Messy
Refuges are permitted. The acceptable standards for the design of such places is given in BS5588 part 8 and Approved Doc M(I think).
I understood that the main question here was whether the occupiers or Brigade have responsibility in moving the disabled person from the refuge. The answer is that the occupiers/employers have responsibilty for establishing a system for evacuating everyone (not the Brigade)
As for the fire door. If the glass is loose it probably does not conform to BS476 and perhaps the consultant who didn't mention it, didn't see it
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Pete Driver
TBC
You mention that LFAs are becoming less agreeable about refuges - could you support that statement for me please as I have quoted it to our LFA and they have no knowledge of any changes in thinking.
Pete
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ken Taylor
With regard to your two specific points, Shaun, it's a management responsibility to provide for the evacuation of all persons (including disabled) from the workplace and loose glass in a fire door requires attention - although unlikely to present a major risk if it's the proper glass.
On the general point of evacuation: refuges are part of the evacuation plan and not for disabled persons to remain in the building (with or without a companion). Approved Document B1 to the Building Regs refers us to the BS quoted above (which gives the details for refuges) and with new- build we are required by Building Control/approved Inspectors to have them.
The fire brigade rescue people trapped in buildings - if they can.
I am now informed that PAS79:2005 (fire risk assessments) has just been published on the Barbour Index subscription service, so subscribers can download this FOC.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By James Goodstadt
Shaun,
The building owner's consultant is right, the IFE would have been a better place to look for a fire risk assessor. They have a register of such assessors, who have to be allowed to register, based on a set of criteria (so it is not JUST a "pay up and be allowed to operate" scheme) for future use, that may be a place to start
(Just for info, though I am a Chartered Member of the IFE, I am not on the register, so I am not touting for work through it!!)
I know it is no help, but risk assessments are always going to be based on what the assessor spots during his visit, and opinions do vary over what issues are important. If the glass was fire rated, or, for example, internally wired glass, the assessor may have thought that slightly loose glass would have maintained the integrity of the fire door for a time suitable for egress from the building. It is hard to comment too accurately without knowing the door type, glass, level of looseness etc.
I hope this helps somewhat.
Regards
James
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ken Taylor
Just to add to the qualification issue: you may also find people with MIFPO (or FIFPO) (Institute of Fire Prevention Officers) - who tend to be non-ex UK fire brigade fire professionals.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By TBC
Pete
If you read my earlier response again you will see that what I said was that LFAs are becoming less agreeable with the use of safe havens. I didn't say that all were changing.
They do however increasingly place the onus on the employer to ensure the safety and evacuation of all personnel. As other responses pointed out, suppose the LFA is very busy and your call doesn't get a response for some time. Who are you going to allow to get cooked?
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.