Posted By Crim A CDM-C I have worked with in the past has been offered a shed load of fire risk assessments by a client of his, and he wants to do them. The problem is he has no fire background at all, he recognises he is not competent and has asked for my help. The question here is not how he gains the necessary knowledge as he will get himself a training course of some sort, but once trained at what point does he become "competent". He is looking for me to carry out the fra's with him as my shadow, sharing the fees etc. and then he will take over and do the rest himself. I suppose there is no real answer to this but I would appreciate your views. Thanks in advance.

Posted By Ron Hunter Having worked as a CDM-C, he will be well versed in advising Clients of their duties under CDM. Surely then a dilemma for him in advising his client here that those undertaking FRAs must be competent. Then again, the level of competency required will be to large extent dependent on the complexity of the structures involved, and a range of experience in construction, civils,and building trades etc. may have given him as good a depth of knowledge in some of the key aspects of FRA as any 'specialist'?

Posted By shaun mckeever Crim, why don't you ask him to teach you his subject as you walk around so that you can do what he does.

Posted By D. Hilton I think you missed Shauns point there Crim.

Posted By D. Hilton Point being that in anything other than simple situations merely shadowing someone over a short period in itself would not result in competency.

Posted By D. Hilton depends on the type of training provided, understood, evaluated and experience taking into account the nature of the premises and activities under the /your joint assessment.

Posted By martinw Splitting hairs Messy I am confident it is implied, if not written in exact terms, that the competent person would be expected to be the person carrying out the fire risk assessment. Otherwise what is the point of referring to competency? The other point is that if someone is not competent, how will they know if the FRA is suitable and sufficient, or have the necessary training/experience to believe that it is? Can't expect every FRA to be externally verified - reliance is on the person completing to make sure that it is up to the job. I could not put my name to a report on fire safety without knowing that I have done what the letter and spirit of the RRO require, for both legal and moral reasons. If anything does go wrong and the FRA is found wanting upon examination, and the explanation for assumed competency is found to be similarly wanting, that is that person's reputation up the creek. No worth a few grand.

Posted By H.S.E.people [reference removed] is a new website designed exclusively for people working or recruiting in the area of Health and Safety. The site is 100% Free to join and offers members the ability to exchange information and network in a way that has not been possible until now. [reference removed] combines the best features of Social Networking, Job Sites and Training resources all in one place. Members can build a profile advertising their availability, services they offer and any company information they wish including contact details and web links. Other members can browse profiles and search using key words or location. It is easy to send a message to a member’s inbox or to leave a comment on their profile. Members can upload pictures, safety videos or even music to their profile and can easily add other friends also on the site. It is easy to view who is online and rather than send a message or email, members can chat quickly through the sites instant messenger or using the sites forums where discussions can range from requests for information, exchanging general chit chat or talking about job leads. The forums offer freedom of speech and are not over moderated like other forums on the Net. One of the main features of [reference removed] is the free jobs pages and RSS Jobs Feeds. The first allows any Recruiters / Companies on the site to list HSE Positions on the forums for FREE. The jobs pages are proving very popular with already over fifty agencies posting jobs in the first six weeks and many success stories starting to emerge of successfully placed candidates. The second is the RSS job feeds which are pulling jobs in from lots of other job sites all over the Web. These are broken down into categories and update as soon as jobs are listed on the relevant sites. This means that we are very confident you can find more HSE jobs on [reference removed] than any other site on the Net! The best part is it’s FREE to list, browse, search and apply for Jobs. More ways of exchanging information is also available to any member on the site. Any member can create a blog to their own profile. If the content is relevant to other [reference removed] then that blog can be posted to the site magazine with moderator approval. Everything can be done from the control panel at the left hand side on every main page on the site. [reference removed] is a community site and in looking for ways to fund the site, keeping the content relevant to Health and Safety and not plastering the site in banner advertising we have came up with a few ideas that may work well with your business. Firstly, the Events page, this page allows Trainers or Course providers to upload details on training events they are holding in the near future. Members of the site can then enlist for the event. [reference removed] will only charge 10% of the course cost per delegate signing up through the site. It is free to upload an event so you have nothing to lose by giving it a go. Secondly, is the addition of a links page that will be coming very soon. This page will be broken down into three categories: Recruiters, Trainers & Consultants. Here you can place a link on a main page of [reference removed] and advertise your business to our members. As the site is new we are offering the first 25 links for only £150. If you would like to show your support for [reference removed] and promote your business to our ever growing number of members please contact Kevin@hsepeople.com Thirdly, we will in the future be offering a product review page. This will be a great way of getting your product out into the market and visible to our members. We particularly want to hear from PPE Companies or Safety Equipment manufacturers who would like us to review their products. This service may eventually expand to course providers. Lastly, [reference removed] is hoping to soon be able to offer a Document Library that any member will be able to add documents too. Other members will then be able to browse, search and then download any document they need. We think this will prove to be a very valuable and popular page. How many times have you been required to write a new procedure or produce a risk assessment or training presentation on a subject that you know other [reference removed] have probably covered thousands of times? No longer will you need to reinvent the wheel… Power points, Presentations, Forums, Posters, Regulations, Procedures, Formats and much more will all be able to be uploaded. This page is proving expensive to make and it would be great to hear from companies interested in sponsoring it. We are sure it will be the most popular page on the site and we could offer your company some fantastic exposure. [reference removed] is only six weeks old but already proving hugely popular with almost 1000 members, the site has so far grown mostly on word of mouth. Only now are we starting to appear in search results and directories. I think this demonstrates how much of a hit the site is. We hope [reference removed] becomes the one place recruiters go when looking for candidates, Candidates when looking for jobs, Companies when looking for Consultants and [reference removed] when looking for information or training courses. The site is currently receiving over 2500 hits a week and that is increasing with every new member that signs up. We are working hard to appear at the top of Search Engine Results and even though it takes time and a lot of effort we are committed to making [reference removed] a Success. I would like to take this opportunity to invite you to create a profile on [reference removed], Advertise your company or business and have a feel round see what you think. If you see the potential in the site and wish to support it by any of the above mentioned methods then please do drop us a line. Your support will make the site a success and hopefully the one stop shop for everything HSE. Hope to see you there. Kevin Forbes www.hsepeople.com

Posted By martinw Good luck with it Crim.

Posted By Richard Hammer A person carrying out a FRA does not have to be competent (all depends on their environment and overall level of risk). If a RP owns a 2 storey office block with 10 employee's, they can go on a course and use the various official guidance documents to assist them in carrying out the FRA. They even have templates FRA to use. Part of the reason of the FSO is to less the burden financially and otherwise to the employers fulfilling their duties. As you will see at various stages in the guidance documents if the person feels not competent, requires expert advice, it is then they should seek it. Obviously a large warehouse, with engineering solutions, complex evacuation strategies will require competent advice. Common sense prevails The fact most RP have not the time or the patience in low risk environments that in most cases it is passed on to a outside source or the competent adviser takes up the baton.

Posted By Messy Shaw I think the point both Richard & I are trying to make is that whilst by law, anyone assisting the RP in undertaking the protective and preventative matters must be competent (Article 18 RR(FS)O 2005), there is no such statutory duty placed on the person conducting the actual FRA. Of course the suitability of the FRA may well be dependant on how competent the assessor is, and when employing someone to complete one on your behalf, you would want to ensure they knew what they were doing, but it is not a legal requirement for them to be competent in the first place. Call it splitting hairs if you want, but it is a legally relevant point.

Posted By martinw The issue for me comes when you are dealing with premises which are more complex than those you are dealing with normally. I know that the LACORS guidance says that simple premises require little expertise and that the RRO does not stipulate competence in all cases. But if you are not competent how do you know when you need advice? Most fire risk assessors do not go from one day assessing simple premises to a massive multifunctional warehouse or shopping centre the next. They stay in their sphere of competence, and if that is extensive, then good. But if not, potentially every situation which you have not dealt with, if it is more complex that you have assessed before, could require advice. Who is going to do that if they have done 50+ assessments on smaller premises? Surely, the argument goes, you just do the same, just bigger etc etc. The trouble is, competence not only tells you what you know, it also tells you what you don't know. If you do not know what gaps you have in your knowledge how do you know you have them? Or who to ask? Or at what stage of the assessment - before you start, during, or after when you are seeking clarification on a point in the building regs(say)? Surely it is better to be competent and assess smaller premises in the knowledge that you are confident, than move up a notch to more complex premises and think that you will be OK because you have loads of Experience of assessing smaller units. And Messy, sorry about the splitting hairs bit. Beleive me, if I had a query re FRA you would be the first I would ask for advice. Martin

Posted By martinw Quite right. I have at times admitted my ignorance to fire enforcement officers regarding those blocks of flats - simple premises - built prior to 1991(without the associated available presumptions re compartmentalisation) - they were built in the 80's - and was told that it is up to me, but I may need to consider getting a surveyor in to ensure that the materials and standard of construction used are suitable for the required standards of compartmentalisation. What the hell can you do? I am not a builder or a surveyor. Of course I got the surveyor in, only to be told after paying, that in their view their presence was never really required: their competence showed that immediately. I recognised the limit of my experience and sought advice as required; that advice was that their advice was not really required. Marvellous.

Posted By shaun mckeever Crim I'm not suggesting that a fire risk assessment of adjacent premises is undertaken but that what must be considered is who will be at risk from a fire within your premises. This is implicit within the RRO. It is even more relevant when your premises contains hazardous materials such as acetylene gas. As you know the brigade would cordon off a radius of 200m if acetylene gas cylinders were involved therefore in a FRA when considering persons at risk anyone within a 200m radius must surely be considered....a competent person would identify that. Someone shadowing someone for a couple of days may not pick up everything he needs to know and may miss obvious examples such as this.

Posted By Crim The CDM-C that hopefully I will be working with has now enrolled on a NEBOSH Course (NGC1) which, if he gets through will enable him to then take the NEBOSH Fire Certificate (FC1). He will, if his emplloyer allows do ‘day-release’ until December. There is a practical requirement in the FC1 Course and working with me may help in that the regard. How about that - when he finishes the FC1 he will be more qualified than me as I do not have any formal fire risk assessment training.

Posted By Crim The flat upstairs senario was not discussed - only the next door unit linked by adjoining door, he told me not to consider the neighbours as they do their own assessment. The flat upstairs senario is one I assessed recently - a Glaziers with flat above, same landlord. I made certain recommendations about the plasterboard ceiling and to consider an alarm that would sound in the flat if there was a fire down below.

Posted By shaun mckeever Crim I would not always rely on the knowledge of the fire officer. They are not always right As regards 'relevant persons' below is the definition given in the RRO "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, So you will see from section (b) that it applies to anyone who is at risk from a fire on the premises (except firefighters undertaking firefighting duties). Therefore it applies to anyone in their flat if they are at risk or it will apply to anyone 200m away if they are at risk too.

Posted By Adrian Watson Crim, I agree the Fire authority are policemen; but kindly remember it is not the policeman but the court that is the final arbiter. One of the best questions to ask is "why?" both of yourself and the enforcer. Regards

Posted By martinw Crim, if the fire officer is wrong and you know it, if you go along with it you are both wrong. I know that I am stating the bleeding obvious but you have to do what is know is right, not just what looks right. I know, easy to say, but I really have had the arguments with enforcement officers and the same conversation on this forum. I would not be saying this unless I had the same issue Crim, and this is also important for your colleague who needs to see the bigger picture. Sorry if this sounded sanctimoneous, I really didn't want it to. Martin

Posted By Crim Between a rock and a hard place springs to mind. Either follow your heart according to the guidance document, or at least your interpretation of it, or do what the fire officed wants. Somwhere there is a right answer, perhaps go along with both?