Our local Fire & Rescue Service has introduced a system of 'call challenging' between the hours of 08:00 - 20:00 for Automatically Activated Alarms. What this means in practice is that during these hours if your alarm sounds off and you call 999 they will ask you to confirm that it is an actual fire. This may require someone going back into the building and checking for signs of fire/smoke.
I would like to get some idea of how others are approaching this and what sort of protocols/safe systems they are implementing where this requirement is in practice.

Thank you all in advance

Not an answer but....

Should part of the emergency procedure be that someone is locally in charge of things and attempts to find out why the alarm sounded either before evacuating or by questioning key occupants after evacuating?

Admittedly, there's a problem if no one knows.

In my opinion fire and rescue services are taking the rrfso to it's limits by avoiding as much responsibility for fire service as they can.

I am not sure we should assume that they would require anyone to re-enter a building to confirm a fire. Maybe it is simply a case of establishing whether it is known that someone has seen a fire?
Maybe there would be other questions such as "any persons missing" checks?
Does anyone know for sure why the question is being asked and what the different available responses from the service will be?
Without that it is difficult to make any decision about changes to emergency planning I would suggest,

p48

As Ziggy states, its a decent risk assessment control
This seems entirely sensible to me.

Like the NHS, because its free at point of use too many people think they can devolve their own responsibilities.

Ian,

Have you never been in a situation where an employee burns the toast; sets off a smoke detector; building is evacuated?

Would you expect the Fire Brigade to come rushing to you when quite possibly there is a real emergency on the other side of town?

Ian,

I hazard a guess that if you looked at all statistics associated with fire alarms activating, that the vasy majority of quacks are not made by genuine ducks

You will have a written agreement with your FRS that will include them turning out to your premises and you paying for that service.

Why not queery this agreement and suggest a reduced payment for a reduced service?

I think Chris is reffering to 'RedCare'. The age of the contract will determin what response you get.

depending on the age of the contract they may be contractually obliged to turn out regardless. It was because of false call outs that new 'RedCare' contracts were diluted in the early noughties.

Safety Smurf,

Thanks for your response. I have just had a look at "RedCare" who act as an ARC, i.e. Alarm Receiving Centre.

Now I am confused by the previous acronym used by Chris, i.e. I assumed that FRS meant the Fire & Rescue Service, so are you saying that an ARC pays them to come out if they receive an alarm activation from a building?

Or are you saying that an ARC representative goes out to the building in question to check that there is a fire?

It's probably me just being dim after a long week!!

Not all fire alarm systems are connected to the fire brigade or alarm monitoring company, only those with a contract for that service are connected.

No contract - no automatic response.

Thanks to everyone for their replies, however they do not actually answer my question. The situation is that when our automatic alarm is activated we will have to physically confirm that it is a genuine fire or the Fire Service will not send out a fire engine. We have a number of different premises being used for a wide portfolio of activities (NHS Community Services + Office Admin) and we are looking at a Corporate wide protocol for carrying out this requirement. At the moment it is being suggested that the Estates Department is called out and that one of their Engineers will enter the building, check the control panel and then make their way to the area where the alarm has been activated to check if there is a genuine fire.
If the answer is yes they telephone the Fire Service, if no they re-set the alarm and give the all clear. Potentially I can see problems with this system and I wanted to gauge what others thought of such arrangements, and if they had identified some other way of checking the premises.
My enquires so far have drawn a blank, and it would appear that no one I have spoken to have implemented any 'call challenging' protocols so any guidance would be gratefully recieved.

Firstly, call challenging has very little to do with diverting/protecting firefighting resources to attend 'real' incidents', is mostly about driving down calls which subsequently allows cuts later to front line fire cover.

But beware, true call challenging can go much further and can involve control operators 'challenging' 999 calls they suspect are unreliable.

Consider this true story. A fire in a mental health 'group home' where patients receive part time care just prior to being discharged into the community.

The fire involves a kitchen and the catering staff have left leaving the home unstaffed (usual procedure). A resident in a panic calls 999 and gets themselves in a right state trying to talk (partly due to their condition)

Fire service control operators 'challenge' the caller, as they can see 999 call has come through a hospital exchange 3 miles from the home, and they clearly consider the caller a nutter and a liar.

Meanwhile the fire burns on and the caller becomes very agitated (imagine not being believed, you'd be bloody agitated to!)

Thankfully, passers by dial 999 on their mobiles when they see smoke coming from the building. The caller is still in the building, at some risk, distressed & in tears.

The NHS Trust refuses to complain to the large(st) metropolitan fire brigade, as they want to keep a good relationship with them. Scandalous

So call challenging is not just fire alarm calls, it can be much more. This system will save thousands but will eventually kill (if it hasn't already)