Posted By Crim Hi Junebug, This has been discussed many times here, and no doubt will be again? For a starter you need someone experienced in fire risk assessing the type and size of premises you have, proof of this would be from previous assessments carried out. Further if the chosen assesser has met with the approval of the local fire brigade - as I have - that would also be helpful. You may be aware that there are fire officers who'se sole occupation is to audut fire risk assessments, of business premises, they arrive unannounced and study the current assessment, if available. You will need to be happy with the rate of fees, there are people out there who charge the earth for a fire risk assessment, and there are those of us who charge a fair rate for the job. You have a large number of fra's needed so I would assume you would negotiate a rate suitable to both parties? I agree a neutral assesser is best but a "familiar" assesser would not necessarliy be harmful, unless it involves high costs - "jobs for the boys"? If you would like to discuss this further you can email me as I would be interested myself. Best of luck!

Posted By SBH Agreed, sight of previous assessments should give you an in sight as to their experience in the areas concerned, What areas are you working in? SBH

Posted By Robin M In my opinion it would boil down to a good mixture of experience and qualifications. If the person has both they will tell you about them. Ask them to tell you what makes them competent. Anyone who is can and will!

Posted By Ian G Hutchings Hi Just to follow on from the last post, I suggest checking fire risk assessment specific qualifications. Particularly relevant is evidence of assessments, plus essentially previous client references. I don't think you should have to start asking very detailed questions about British Standards etc. This is why people have qualifications and evidence experience. Otherwise, it is like someone asking me what section 7 of a certain regulation means or how a permit to work system should work. Appointing well qualified, experienced people with good business references prevents having to test detailed competence. Best of luck Ian

Posted By D. Hilton I find it difficult to accept that any grad, Associate or Member of the IFE would not be competent to carry out a detailed and acceptable FRA on any scale?

Posted By D. Hilton I would argue that MIFIREE by examination and CPD would make a person competent to deal with any FRA related issues encountered. Its analogous to being a time served plumber rather than a city in guilds in brazing.

Posted By Crim There has to be some consideration to those with a disablilty here, i.e. dislexics who are unable to get numbers in the correct order but are perfectly capable of understanding the FSRRO and it's requirements. Some people with dislexia are able to pass exams and get qualifications but after the exam forget the technical aspect but remember the practical. I would not recommend asking questions about BS whatever the number, but certainly go for proof of previous assessments and length of time in H&S and fire safety. I agree there are ex firefighters that would possibly not do a good FRA, but there are others who have fire prevention training, and experience of fire prevention while serving in a brigade, that will do a good assessment. In my experience I have met people who are brilliant at remembering numbers but not so good at the practical aspects. Those that can do! Those that can't teach!

Posted By D. Hilton Shaun long time no see, welcome

Posted By D. Hilton Automatic entry would eliminate a potential revenue stream

Posted By Crim Darren, that's where competence really comes in. It's OK being competent at something you are well used to but you are right, the areas you have now brought into our equation certainly demand a different, higher level of competency. Those who are competent really know the areas they should/should not be performing in. The mention of a differing number of past fra's is interesting as I agree those with a higher degree of competence should be able to demonstrate good quality with a lesser number of assessments whereas someone with a lower level would need to get some under the belt to gain experience, that then goes into the competence factor.

Posted By shaun mckeever Hi Darren/Chris. Nice to be welcomed back, thanks. I just popped in temporarily to see what's going on. I'm heavily into my Masters in forensic fire investigation at the moment. Sadly there are many out there who are totally unaware of the limit of their knowledge wrt fire. Fire seems to be a subject in which everyone is an expert except the expert. I am now finding out about how gullible juries are when they have a fire officer giving evidence in court. Their evidence seems to carry more weight than an expert. For anybody who is interested see the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v Han Tak Lee (I know this is US but don't think the same mistakes can't be made here).

Posted By D. Hilton But hey, they have done a 5 day course and so they must be the great and the good compared to the rest of us.