Rank: Guest
|
Posted By martinw
Any fire officers out there past or present(Hello Frank)?
Regarding premises fire risk assessments - of common areas of flats - I have had slightly differing interpretations from different Fire and Rescue services which I have had dealings with and wonder what your thoughts are(PS I know the regs etc so no need to quote).
Any takers?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By FAH
Hi Martin - I'm assuming you meant me.
My best suggestion is to locate a "lead authority" that other Fire Authorities will accept in line with the BERR initiative to reduce legislative variations.
I do recommend that you have a suitably competent representative to do the up-front negotiations though - I'm not free, just available!
Frank Hallett
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By martinw
BERR will be too busy merging with DIUS. It is more about interpretation. I spoke to two different enforcement officers from two F+R services regarding flats which are above commercial units. One said that the properties are effectively seperate and that any fire risk assessment for the commercial property below would not require those in the flats directly above to be listed as relevant persons. The other F+R authority said that they were relevant persons as they would be legally there and would be directly affected by the fire below.
Rather frustrating as I have found that I have to speak to enforcers in each authority to avoid unneccesary tweaking.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By clairel
Now there's a suprise (not)...different fire officers (and different fire service areas) giving contradictory advice.
Next you'll be telling me they give out the wrong advice sometimes!!! ;-)
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By martinw
Go Claire
what's your experience with the firefighters(if you will pardon the question)?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Messy Shaw
Martin
I am sorry to quote the RR(FS)O but the definition of relevant person is:
"relevant persons" means—
(a) any person (including the responsible person) who is or may be lawfully on the premises; and
(b) any person in the immediate vicinity of the premises who is at risk from a fire on the premises,
and the definition of premises is: "premises" includes any place
So it is not open to interpretation. In the example given:
Anyone in the shop is covered by (a) and
Anyone in a flat above is covered by (b).
So both parties are relevant persons and must be considered in a FRA
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By martinw
I know and fully agree
but I have direct information from a fire enforcement officer telling me otherwise when I rang the person this morning.
Hence my dilemma - to go against the advice of a Fire Brigade enforcement officer who has advised me to go in a particular direction regarding a fire risk assessment in his area or to go with the legislation. If an event happens in the place which I carried out the risk assessment then I will have ignored fire brigade direction. Alternatively I will be hammered by barristers for not following the law. Incidentally the fire officer did say that his advice was based on legal advice that his brigade had recieved....
woe is me...
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By CFT
Martin
Methinks your interpretation is the correct one supported by the post from Messy above.
If the comm premises were my responsibility - I would have to involve the flats above to ensure the workability of the FRA, otherwise (IMO) it becomes a wholly useless episode producing one.
Whilst I appreciate their is a need for shared information (or there should be in this case) I for one would certainly want to know that the area below me had addressed fire related issues.
Out of interest, are the flats above privately owned or rented from a letting company? i.e. the commercial premises below?
I know which fire inspectorate/officer I would be happier listening to. The one that addresses the risk to life, as opposed to the one trying to interpret the requirements.
All the best
CFT
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By martinw
Ta for that. In reality I will go with what I know to be right in terms of the law.
Really difficult position sometimes though, bearing in mind it is the fire brigade who would be the ones who would prosecute....
but thanks for your thoughts.
Martin
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By CFT
Apologies for incorrect use of their - which should have been there. Oh for an edit facility:-)
CFT
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Messy Shaw
Martin you have my sympathies
I was a fire service FS Inspecting Officer (IO) for many years before moving over to the other side in order to practice the dark art of risk assessing.
I worked with some very good people who stayed on top of the legislation, guides and current thinking and wold go the extra mile to develop themselves and their knowledge.
But sadly I also worked with a succession of pillocks who (at best) code hugged to cover their incompetence or were (at wost) the jobsworth type character who revelled in bully-boy tactics.
What can you do? That all depends on what stage you are at. Has this IO issued an enforecment notice or is it that s/he has had a little chat?
If it's the latter have a chat with his manager
If it's an enforcement notice, consider an appeal.
All IOs will have a manager who should- well, manage! They should be able to determine whether it's you or him who have got it wrong. But don't count on it. I had several managers who had been promoted directly from the fire station so had no FS experience at all so relied on the team for guidance.
Good luck(Ps are you able to say what fire service it is??)
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By clairel
I have had many problems with fire service advice Martin (sigh).
Where it becomes really apparent is with some of my multi-site clients who are spread over different areas. Say for example residential homes. I will go into loads of different homes and they will have been told to do things differently by each of the local fire officers.
What really irritates me is when clients say that the fire officer has been in and said everything is ok. But when I look around there is insufficient signage, insufficient emergency lighting etc etc.
I then have to try and persuade the client to follow my advice and not that of the fire officer.
My usual advice is that fire officers may be very good at putting out or preventing fires bu they don't necessarily understand the legislation.
That's just the situation as I have repeatedly found it.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By FAH
Hi Martin
I'm sorry that my comment didn't really help; but it is certainly relevant.
It's also a real shame that you appear to have been given incorrect [and conflicting] advice as you should be entitled to accurate interpretation & application of the legislation.
However, the majority of the info provided on this post in the interim is accurate & I also would include the residential accom as a consequence of the interpretation of "relevant person".
Messy is quite right & surprisingly restrained in his comments - I'd go a lot further but for the Moderators.
I still stand by my original observation though - to get a long-term fix, find a F&RS that is willing to act as "lead" for your business & then refer all adverse observations from elsewhere to them. There are some that are quite happy to take this on.
Frank Hallett
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By martinw
Life is easy really. I am employed, I enjoy what I do and know the law when it matters. Luckily this case is one which has got nowhere near enforcement in this instance: it was simply an enforcement officer who advised me when I asked for such policy within their brigade: I got more advice than I bargained for. And no, I will not say which brigade this came from, as one numpty does not a dodgy force make.
Cheers
Martin
|
|
|
|
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.