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
hammer1  
#1 Posted : 21 July 2011 15:16:03(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
hammer1

http://www.chad.co.uk/ne...nsfield_hotels_1_3570739


Seems he did it for £150 and a few pints, no qualifications and seems he mainly sold extinguishers, a partly read the Official guidance on sleeping accommodation.


Just to put some argument on this, where does it say in the fire safety order qualifications are needed?? Deffo an appeal is in order I think
Andrew W Walker  
#2 Posted : 21 July 2011 15:25:27(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Andrew W Walker

hammer1 wrote:

Just to put some argument on this, where does it say in the fire safety order qualifications are needed?? Deffo an appeal is in order I think



Safety assistance
18.—(1) The responsible person must, subject to paragraphs (6) and (7), appoint one or more
competent persons to assist him in undertaking the preventive and protective measures.

Could the person describe himself as competent?

Andy
stuie  
#3 Posted : 21 July 2011 15:28:31(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
stuie

Qual's may not be needed but competency is; seems to me that the judge felt he had niether the qualifications or compenecy to carry out the RA's.
Zimmy  
#4 Posted : 21 July 2011 15:30:14(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Zimmy

One must be competent surely? And qualifications go someway to show competence?

So if not competent how can a defence or appeal be mounted?

Zimmy
hammer1  
#5 Posted : 21 July 2011 15:47:33(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
hammer1

If the owner conducted the FRA himself and followed the sleeping accommodation guidance book as was the point the fire safety order was set out for in the 1st place, he would also not be deemed competent. It only mentions that the FRA to be 'suitable and sufficient' and not for the person doing the FRA to be competent.

Obviously as mentioned Article 18 state persons assisting should be competent, I suppose the fact he freely admitted to only reading a part of the Guidance was not a good move and doubt if he should use the same defence team again...Oops

In regards to appeal, I was thinking about the 8 month sentence and would try and have that reduced??

Just trying to play devils advocate here
firesafety101  
#6 Posted : 21 July 2011 15:47:38(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

How many different definitions of Competence can we come up with?
hammer1  
#7 Posted : 21 July 2011 15:50:56(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
hammer1

Competent =

Has to drink in same Pub, has to do it cheap (and a few pints chucked in), has to sell extinguishers for a living and finally only needs to read a few pages of the official guidance on fire safety to the premises concerned...
firesafety101  
#8 Posted : 21 July 2011 16:00:46(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

hammer1 wrote:
http://www.chad.co.uk/news/local/alfreton/jailed_pair_put_profit_before_fire_safety_at_two_mansfield_hotels_1_3570739


Seems he did it for £150 and a few pints, no qualifications and seems he mainly sold extinguishers, a partly read the Official guidance on sleeping accommodation.


Just to put some argument on this, where does it say in the fire safety order qualifications are needed?? Deffo an appeal is in order I think


Where does it say £150.00 is too little or too much? Where does it say a fee must be charged?
How much should one charge for a fire risk assessment?

The correct government guide is sleeping accommodation and 144 pages, did Judge Hamilton get that wrong?

As he was a fire extinguisher salesman why had he not sold some up to date extinguishers to the owner?

Does the previous fire in January 2006 have any relevance to this case?
firesafety101  
#9 Posted : 21 July 2011 16:05:29(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

Competence (or competency) is the ability of an individual to perform a job properly. (Wikipedia)



stuie  
#10 Posted : 21 July 2011 19:26:32(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
stuie

From reading the report it seems as if even his 'routine' job (servicing fire extinguishers) was not even done - let alone properly. Maybe though the client instructed him not too - or failed to ask him to service them?
frankc  
#11 Posted : 21 July 2011 19:46:13(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
frankc

ChrisBurns wrote:
Competence (or competency) is the ability of an individual to perform a job properly. (Wikipedia)


In answer to your earlier question, Chris, competence is a combination of Training, Knowledge and experience....
(According to the A.C.W.A.H.T)....
firesafety101  
#12 Posted : 21 July 2011 20:17:23(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

You are right Frank but I would add the ability to make the correct decision.

That could be to decide you are not comptent to do something?

If, to be considered competent you need training, then that would lead to qualifications?

frankc  
#13 Posted : 21 July 2011 20:29:24(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
frankc

ChrisBurns wrote:
You are right Frank but I would add the ability to make the correct decision.

That could be to decide you are not comptent to do something?

If, to be considered competent you need training, then that would lead to qualifications?



Knowing one's limitations...

Maybe your experience and knowledge would determine that?

RayRapp  
#14 Posted : 21 July 2011 21:09:33(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

Cutting to the chase...the Judge saw the flaws in the FRA etc and clearly the guy was only doing it for beer money. No need to worry about the definition of competence in this particular case.
messyshaw  
#15 Posted : 21 July 2011 22:24:29(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
messyshaw

Just to clear up the competency issue:

1) Nowhere in the RRO does not state that he person completing the FRA needs to be competent, however the FRA does need to be suitable & sufficient.

2) I accept that Article 18 states:

18.—(1) The responsible person must, subject to paragraphs (6) and (7), appoint one or more competent persons to assist him in undertaking the PREVENTIVE & PROTECTIVE MEASURES (my capitals).

3) However, look at the definition of PREVENTIVE & PROTECTIVE MEASURES as in Article 2 and it states:
“preventive and protective measures” means the measures which have been identified by the responsible person IN CONSEQUENCE of a risk assessment as the general fire precautions he needs to take to comply with the requirements and prohibitions imposed on him by or under this Order;

Therefore, Article 18 applies to those who are assisting measures as identified from the FRA - ie AFTER the FRA has been completed. Therefore this Article does not apply to the assessor, but does apply to alarm engineers, chippies fitting fire doors, trainers etc.

So to sum up, the risk assessor does not need to be competent, but his/her FRA must be suitable and sufficient. Don't argue with me as I never wrote this legislation. It's not dissimilar to saying the Jet pilot doesn't have to be competent as long as he takes off, flies and then lands safely!!


* As far as any prosecution goes, any person carrying out a FRA can be treated as the Responsible Person - Article 5(4)(b) refers. As a result, s/he can be prosecuted for failing to complete a S&S FRA as required by Article 9(1).
firesafety101  
#16 Posted : 21 July 2011 22:33:29(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

Messey calm down calm down, no body's arguing with you :o)

"If you read the guide and decide that you are unable to apply the guidance, then you should seek expert advice from a competent person.

More complex premises will probably need to be assessed by a person who has comprehensive training or experience in fire risk assessment."

page 5 guidance document on fra sleeping accommodation.
jwk  
#17 Posted : 22 July 2011 10:09:03(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
jwk

I'd go for the definition of competence given in the guidance to the Management regs:

Knows the job
Knows their own limitations
Knows where to go for advice when they don't know the answer,

John
boblewis  
#18 Posted : 23 July 2011 09:59:48(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
boblewis

Frankc

The ACWAHT ought to read some HSE documents rather than abrreviate - elsewhere the HSE use such as

Skills, Knowledge, Ability, Training, Experience, Attitude and Behaviour

http://www.hse.gov.uk/hu...rs/topics/mancomppt1.pdf

Bob

johnmurray  
#19 Posted : 23 July 2011 10:56:12(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
johnmurray

They were not jailed because they got it wrong, nor for not being "not qualified".
They were jailed because:

"The Judge said that the time had come to send out a message to those who conduct Fire Risk Assessments and to hoteliers who are prepared to put profit before safety"

Doubtless they are already out on appeal.
hammer1  
#20 Posted : 23 July 2011 13:51:41(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
hammer1

messyshaw wrote:
Just to clear up the competency issue:

1) Nowhere in the RRO does not state that he person completing the FRA needs to be competent, however the FRA does need to be suitable & sufficient.

2) I accept that Article 18 states:

18.—(1) The responsible person must, subject to paragraphs (6) and (7), appoint one or more competent persons to assist him in undertaking the PREVENTIVE & PROTECTIVE MEASURES (my capitals).

3) However, look at the definition of PREVENTIVE & PROTECTIVE MEASURES as in Article 2 and it states:
“preventive and protective measures” means the measures which have been identified by the responsible person IN CONSEQUENCE of a risk assessment as the general fire precautions he needs to take to comply with the requirements and prohibitions imposed on him by or under this Order;

Therefore, Article 18 applies to those who are assisting measures as identified from the FRA - ie AFTER the FRA has been completed. Therefore this Article does not apply to the assessor, but does apply to alarm engineers, chippies fitting fire doors, trainers etc.

So to sum up, the risk assessor does not need to be competent, but his/her FRA must be suitable and sufficient. Don't argue with me as I never wrote this legislation. It's not dissimilar to saying the Jet pilot doesn't have to be competent as long as he takes off, flies and then lands safely!!


* As far as any prosecution goes, any person carrying out a FRA can be treated as the Responsible Person - Article 5(4)(b) refers. As a result, s/he can be prosecuted for failing to complete a S&S FRA as required by Article 9(1).



Thank you for clarifying my point Messy.

Also it may state you should seek specialist advice in the official guidance, but this is not mentioned anywhere in the fire safety order.
frankc  
#21 Posted : 23 July 2011 15:27:14(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
frankc

boblewis wrote:
Frankc

The ACWAHT ought to read some HSE documents rather than abrreviate - elsewhere the HSE use such as

Skills, Knowledge, Ability, Training, Experience, Attitude and Behaviour

http://www.hse.gov.uk/hu...rs/topics/mancomppt1.pdf

Bob



There you go, Chris. There's another answer to your question.
firesafety101  
#22 Posted : 23 July 2011 16:11:51(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

I am certain that most of us that use this forum are competent, the others may not be competent but that will come with time.

There are so many different definitions but they all mean the same in the end.

You don't know what you don't know so don't be afraid to ask.
frankc  
#23 Posted : 23 July 2011 16:26:18(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
frankc

ChrisBurns wrote:


You don't know what you don't know so don't be afraid to ask.


Unless you don't need to know then you wouldn't need to ask would you?
JohnW  
#24 Posted : 25 July 2011 19:55:25(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
JohnW

frankc wrote:
ChrisBurns wrote:


You don't know what you don't know so don't be afraid to ask.


Unless you don't need to know then you wouldn't need to ask would you?



You still have to ask, in order to find out if you need to know.....
Zimmy  
#25 Posted : 26 July 2011 10:21:13(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Zimmy

Only a fool steps outside his/her spare of expert knowledge and even then measure twice and cut once. If you think you know it all what are you doing in the world of health and safety.

Zimmy
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.