Clearly, that particular person thinks that s/he is not in the firing line when it comes to prosecution. If there is a contract to provide FRAs, the person will be considered to have an element of control and, as such, the RP, when questioned, will point the fickle finger of fate at the hapless assessor. Manchest has already prosecuted an alarm engineer for lack of failing to provide an adequate level of service: it is only a matter of time before the producer of a inadequate FRA is trailed into court. If the assessor's visit was earlier than the last periodic review and unless the assessor is clairvoyant or has a dynamic, self-updating, walk-through computer package, there are going to be difficulties demonstrating the FRA's validity. Colin Todd once stated that no 2 alarm systems should be the same because no 2 risks are the same. How much more truth is there in the statement when it is applied to Risk Assessments? This is why a registration scheme is needed: to weed out these chancers.

The guide to rrfso states "Much of the information for your fire risk assessment will come from the knowledge your employees, colleagues and representatives have of the premises, as well as information given to you by people who have responsibility for other parts of the building" So far so good. "A tour of the premises will probably be needed to confirm, amend or add detail to your initial views". OK so the first part of that does not require a personal visit by the assessor but the second sentence using the word PROBABLY certainly suggests a visit by the assessor. I wonder if it could be done by two people - one providing the information, the second writing up the significant findings? Presuming both persons are adequately qualified.

We do not have all the facts and for all we know it could be a very simple and low risk premises. The assessor may well have gathered sufficient information on his previous visit, he or she may have confirmed with his her client that no changes have taken place since the previous assessment. If these points are correct, then I see no problem with the approach described.

I agree with bleve. We don't have all the facts, we don't know anything about the premises and we don't know when the assessor last visited the premises or how familiar they were with them. Let's say I visit a low risk premises every week on Monday. I know it well and I did the last fire risk assessment, which was simple and straightforward with no significant findings. On Wednesday the owner of the premises asks me if I can update the assessment. I ask him if anything has changed since I last saw the building on Monday. He says it has not. I pull out last time's assessment, run through it, satisfy myself it all still applies, add a "reviewed on" paragraph and e-mail it back to the client. Chancer? Breach of the FSO? Of course not. Lambert45022 - a fire risk assessor already has been charged, over the Penhallow fire, although it's not clear what is happening with his part of this tragic case at the moment.

I see we are leaning towards the method being OK. You have to consider that the RP has ultimate responsibility therefore if it's OK with the RP then it's OK for the fr assessor.

Would that then mean that an employee of a company who is deemed competent by the employer could not fire risk assess unless on a register?

Heather it's not just the amount of evidence required but the jumping through hoops and the excessive cost. The only thing putting me off applying to join one of those registers is the £500.00 or so I would need to pay out, plus the extra cost of rejoining every couple of years. As a sole trader I can't afford that as I don't know if it would gain me any extra work - just like the OSHCR ? Compare that with our £30.00 - a mere drop in the ocean.

Lambert - I totally agree with everything you've said in that last post! I recall in a previous life (before I turned to the dark side of consultancy!) a fire extinguisher contractor that was admant that a building where I was responsible for the FRA did not have anything like enough extinguishers. I recall the entertainment value I got from the conversation as he realised slowly during the course of about ten minutes that: a) I was the one who had determined how many extinguishers the building needed when it was first constructed. b) I had done this on the basis of some actual calculations rather than just a finger in the air c) I was better qualified in fire safety than he was d) We weren't going to requre his services any further. On the subject of H&S generalists claiming fire safety competence. This is a tricky one as many fall into the trap of unconscious incompetence becasue they simly do not have the understanding of fire engineering to realise how complex a specific building or situation can be. My core competence is H&S but I do fire risk assessments as well. I think the key here is knowing when to stop. I'd be confident to assess most industrial premises as this is where most of my experience has been gained over some 20 years. However ask me to do a high rise block of flats or a historic stately home and I'd run a mile. Some things are best left to those who have the RIGHT experience! Like Chris I looked at the fire assessors registers but the cost is prohibitiive for someone who is only doing the occasional FRA like I am.

The question I would ask about these lovely old register's, is who out side of the health & safety and fire worlds, actually knows about them? If your a company requiring services, your going to go two routes: a) word of mouth b) google Are most companies going to care if someone is on a register or not? or know the value of them? most probably not. So what is the point of them other than to make someone money. Much like CHAS, Safe Contractor, Exor etc

Mr Flibble, the idea is to look into the HSE website when looking for a safety consultant then follow the links to the register. I know what you say, at some stage I would expect the HSE to have an advertising blitz.