Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 29 August 2009 00:12:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Hilary Sawtell
Anyone been asked to carry out a Fire Risk Assessment on a single occupancy dwelling at the request of a buyer's solicitor. Seems to me that this is a case of over zealous solicitors being confused over the purpose of the RR(FS)O 2005 but perhaps I am missing something.
Admin  
#2 Posted : 29 August 2009 01:24:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Messy Shaw
Seems a little odd.

Is it likely that people will be employed here or perhaps a business will be run from the premises?

I am not saying that a FRA will be needed, but it might explain the request
Admin  
#3 Posted : 29 August 2009 09:55:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Hilary Sawtell
Not as far as I can ascertain, the place is tiny and only 1 bedroom. Asbestos survey has also been requested, property is pre 20th Century!
I think the confusion may be due to the fact that its in a row of cottages which share a communal courtyard but all have separate door access similar to a terrace.
Admin  
#4 Posted : 29 August 2009 10:39:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Stuff4blokes
Whilst certainly unusual, it seems to me to be a reasonable part of pre-purchase enquiries. Is this house a death trap or has it been updated to include modern wiring and protection, decent doors, alarm etc.

Asbestos is quite likely to have been added at some mid-20th Century time (boiler house door lining, bath surround, wiring and fusebox, garage etc).

Sounds to me like the potential purchaser is a H&S professional!

Admin  
#5 Posted : 29 August 2009 10:40:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Messy Shaw
Sounds like a load of nonsense then, as single dwellings are not covered by the FSO (except under Article 31 for imposing a prohibition notice - and even then it probably would not apply to a cottage

Mind you, I wouldn't mind getting that as a job. A nice little earner.
Admin  
#6 Posted : 29 August 2009 11:53:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Crim
I would do the risk assessment but only if I could follow the guidance in the "Fire Risk Assessment in Domestic Dwellings" ACOP?

Admin  
#7 Posted : 29 August 2009 13:07:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By D. Hilton
Did the solicitor specifically request a FRA under FRRO? or was it a request to verify building fire safety against the Building regs/ approved Doc B/TGD B.

I do not see anything wrong in effective due diligence prior to purchase.

Admin  
#8 Posted : 31 August 2009 06:14:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Adrian Watson
Unfortunately, this is now common.
Admin  
#9 Posted : 31 August 2009 19:12:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By martinw
Or is it just someone misunderstanding the requirements of a HIP?
Admin  
#10 Posted : 01 September 2009 08:05:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Coshh Assessor
This happened to me too, just before the RRO took effect. I explained the misunderstanding about the requirement and the solicitor dropped the request. It's surprising that this is still happening though.
Admin  
#11 Posted : 01 September 2009 10:25:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By paul sykes
The RRO does not apply to domestic premises
Admin  
#12 Posted : 01 September 2009 10:42:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By paul sykes
Tell the wig if he is a reader of law to read this

Application to premises
6. —(1) This Order does not apply in relation to —
(a) domestic premises, except to the extent mentioned in article 31(10);

"domestic premises" means premises occupied as a private dwelling (including any garden, yard, garage, outhouse, or other appurtenance of such premises which is not used in common by the occupants of more than one such dwelling);

31(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

In Laymans terms the RRO does not apply to domestic premises appart from giving an inspecting officer his powers within the private dwelling
ie you do not require a risk assessment unless you have common shared areas
Admin  
#13 Posted : 01 September 2009 11:13:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Stuff4blokes
There may be no law requiring a fire risk assessment of domestic premises but it still seems to me to be part of reasonable pre-contract enquiries for any would-be purchaser, particularly as this is a pre-20th Century structure.

So too is the request for information about asbestos.

So in response to anyone who told me as an interested potential buyer that the RRO does not apply to houses I'd say "so what? I still want to know how likely this house is to be involved in a fire and how quickly it would spread and how can the occupants be made aware and get out to safety."
Admin  
#14 Posted : 01 September 2009 15:30:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Alan Baser
There is another piece of applicable legislation that covers domestic properties, that being the Housing Act 2004, Part 1 of which introduced the Housing Health & Safety Rating System. The HHSRS applies to all domestic properties from an individual's owned property to more complicated houses in multiple occupation (HMO) such as hostels. The complicating factor with the latter being that the RRFSO also applies.

The HHSRS is an evidence based approach to the management of H&S hazards within residential accommodation, it has 29 hazard categories, one of which is fire. The system requires a risk assessor to assess the property against an ideal and to use a formula to work out a hazard score and banding.

LACORS is now requesting private landlords to carry out a fire risk assessment for property that they let out, this is to ensure (amongst other things)that there are no category one hazards in the premises which the LA are obliged to take enforcement action against. Many LAs have enforcement policies in place that require action against properties containing category 2 hazards.

So, I can see that if the property is to be let out then there is an argument to carry out a FRA. It may also be the case that the purchaser wants to avoid any enforceable category one or two hazards in the property prior to purchase. That being said, for the property described it does seem rather over zealous.

Alan
Admin  
#15 Posted : 01 September 2009 15:51:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By ScotsAM
My local fire authority carries these out free of charge to anyperson who asks.

In fact they have said that they have targets to meet and effectively do door to door in order to find people who want a fire risk assessment carried out on their home.
Admin  
#16 Posted : 01 September 2009 16:34:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Coshh Assessor
But the HHSRS is a methodology, not a requirement - nobody (except the LA in some circumstances) has to do an assessment under it. In any case, why consider just the fire element of it in isolation?
Admin  
#17 Posted : 22 September 2009 22:44:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Charles Robinson Tech IOSH
This seems to be an expanding area my daughter is in the proccess of buying a first floor flat and has recieved the following from her solicitor.

I have now received further information from the mortgagees solicitors in relation to this matter and, therefore, the only outstanding issues at this time relate to a copy of the asbestos report and the fire risk assessment.

You will remember that I emailed to you at the outset of this transaction to advise you that the lessees owned the freehold between them jointly but we would not be able to deal with the transfer of the freehold into your name with the other remaining lessees as the whereabouts of the defaulting borrower are not know by the mortgagees in possession in connection with this matter. The legislation in relation to the both the asbestos report and the fire risk assessment will put personal responsibility on to the landlords for failure to deal with these issues and it attracts criminal liability. I am, therefore, very concerned that these issues still remain outstanding and if you choose to proceed with these matters not being in place then you will do so against my advise and on the basis that you will accept that you could be held liable for the failure of the landlords to deal with this matter.

Can you please return one copy of this email to me with a note confirming that you are happy to proceed on that basis if this be the case.

I have advised her to proceed as I also believe this to be over Zealous
any comments ?

Admin  
#18 Posted : 23 September 2009 09:24:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Crim
Charles I would not advise to proceed as it is obviously against the advice of The Solicitor.

With it being a first floor flat I can understand the thinking outside the box approach as I would want to know how the other flats affect my safety. This is a good idea.

Further if asbestos is present who would be responsible for the cost of removal if/when it became necessary?

Regarding the original thread by Hilary I would be interested in the "main findings" if there are any?

The FSRRO does not affect residential properties but perhaps landlord's properties should be included?

Admin  
#19 Posted : 23 September 2009 10:30:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Messy Shaw
Charles. Whilst I am no legal expert and frankly haven't got a clue what the Solicitor is referring to, one part of the e-mail may be relevant.

It states that the lessees jointly own the freehold. I have dealt with FRAs in similar blocks of flats, where such an arrangement is in place.

In these cases, the lessees are the 'responsible person' under the RR(FS)O 2005, and subsequently are responsible for the completion of a FRA on the common parts.

Could this be what the solicitor is talking about??
Admin  
#20 Posted : 23 September 2009 10:55:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Charles Robinson Tech IOSH
Hi Messy
It is not a block of flats it is a semi detached house with a flat on the ground floor first floor and an attic flat problem seems to be that they are unable to locate previous occupier who was also the lease holder or part lease holder? The flat was repossessed though as previously stated private dwellings do not require a fire risk assessment and as for asbestos apart from possible asbestos soffits there is unlikely to be much asbestos in the building even if there was it would not be a problem unless building works or major works were being carried out? Why would there be a need for either of the above requirements and what would now happen if the sellers did not provide these ? thanks for your replies
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
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.