Please help! I know I have been a sod at times on here, but if you can help I will be a changed man!

Local council are banning my elderly parents from having a christmas tree in there high rise flat, common area. Honestly there is nothing I can see that is a significant risk. They are stating that the 4ft tree with lights constitiutes a significant fire hazard. I have drafted the following which I hope will help change their minds, yet I am doubtful. Any further ideas? Do I really want to state PATest will be done if required or independant review by fire and rescue services can be done etc...Just want them to have a nice time. :-(

Try this as a draft?


“Dear Sir/Madam,

I understand that the Officer responsible for XXXXXX recently visited the XXXXX floor and discussed with one of the other residents the appropriateness of the small Christmas Tree (see enclosed picture) that has been placed in the common hallway; I have been advised that there was a request to remove the tree on the grounds of safety.

Clearly, all of the residents in XXXXXXX have a vested interest in the safety of the accommodation and we are keen to ensure that any risk is managed appropriately.

To that end, the risk was considered when the tree was put in position and it was deemed that the plug and lights posed minimal risk as they were purchased from new and complied with all of the relevant British Standards.

Unlike private areas where there are a large number of combustible materials (curtains, furniture, etc) and where Christmas trees are allowed, the hallway represents a relatively ‘spartan’ location and it was felt that the chance of any (low probability of) combustion would struggle to find another material with which to sustain or spread.

However, if this logic is not accepted we would be more than happy to go further and remove the lights from the tree which we could alternatively decorate with baubles. This would remove all possible sources of ignition and, given the location of the tree, we would find it difficult to identify a likely ignition source which could involve the tree. Likewise, we are confident that the tree does not impinge on the exit routes likely to be used by residents in the event of an emergency.

This letter is not intended to question or undermine the council’s ultimate responsibility and accountability for the safety of the residents – for that we are most grateful. Rather it is designed to assure you that we have taken all the potential hazards into consideration and have taken actions to mitigate the risks identified.

We would be more than happy to review the Council’s own risk assessment which presumably is in place to support the ‘no tree’ policy and to take whatever further action might be required to reduce the risk to as low as is reasonably practicable.

I’m sure that you will understand the desire by the residents to celebrate the Festive Season and to add a much-needed touch of colour and joy to life during this short period; we hope that we can work together to resolve this to everyone’s satisfaction.

I look forward to receiving your feedback in sufficient time to allow the Festive Season to be appropriately enjoyed by all.

Kind Regards

Garfield...

There is a cut and dried answer to this question.

Wrap everyone in cotton wool;
Sit in a chair with a tartan rug over your knees;
Sip your hot drinks through a straw - do not attempt to tilt your cup to your lips;
Do not move your head but stare straight ahead to prevent a crick in the neck;
Do not speak or question decisions so as to prevent cramping of the tongue or becoming tongue tied;
Stay in chair for the rest of your life - do not pass go - do not move for the rest of your life - do not accept the slightest risk, be totally risk averse - become a zombie - don't bother being born - have no experiences - be an imperie.

Life would be a dream.

Some so called H&S Practitioners should get a life and come into the real world where solutions are the name of the game to problems of risk.

Cynical Rich

Garfield

Your draft letter is very polite - I would fight the council's decision all the way - you may not win in time for this Xmas but next year all may be well.

Rich

I'm with Messy and David on this one, on the understanding that the communal staircase is the only means of escape from the flats. It has to be a protected stairway, and that means no unnecessary combustibles or sources of ignition. The only way to understand this is to view the stairs as a fire escape. Who would put a Xmas tree on a fire escape?

And David is so right about setting unwelcome precedents; maybe this tree is sprayed with flame retardants, maybe the lights are safe, maybe it will be removed as soon as 12th night is over; but what about next years' tree? And the one after that.

Freedom involves responsibilities (or so our politicians and (spits) journalists keep telling us). One important responsibility is to be sure that our own risk taking doesn't endanger others. People can erect trees in their own homes, but not on common fire escapes,

John

Low Voltage lights!!!!! I would simply ask to see their risk assessment and see if they have made a differentiation between 240 volt and 12 volt if not question the validity of the assessment. Your letter is too long and will not be read - simply binned with a negative response. You have to open a dialogue to find out how they came to this.

In truth every assessment I have seen is assessed as 240volt

Bob

One guess where old zimmy would like to stick the tree...what is the address of the council head? :-)

Another thought - would it help to suggest having a tree somewhat smaller than the one mentioned?

As an aside my missus and I went recently with friends for a meal at a hotel restaurant in an old building. Across the dining room was a large old-fashioned fireplace complete with blazing log fire. After a closer look we realised that the impressive looking fire was in fact a video clip of such a fire on a large screen located in the fireplace recess. This eliminated i) the need to buy logs, ii) staff to keep replenishing a real fire and iii) excessive heat for diners near the fireplace and iv) the risks of fire posed by a real fire!

Nope, sorry - can you run that one by me again Messy?

Mmm, so the poor postman/woman gets bad backs because of petifogging excuse. I would like to see the insurance claim on that one!!

So, we're talking here about high rise council flats and their communal areas. Open to anyone. Anyone off the street, visitors to neighbours, etc?

Not a sheltered housing complex, where I could see the point of putting up a Christmas tree in communal area.

In this instance, I think the council bashing is grossly unfair. Nothing to do with wrapping people in cotton wool, or any of that nonsense.

Communal areas do not belong to the tenants. If they want to celebrate Christmas by putting up a tree, why not do what others do and put it in their living room. Then they can shove as many lights and baubles on as they want. I don't put Christmas decorations on the lampost outside my house - it's not mine, so I'll stick to the areas that are mine.

If this "high rise council flat" is anything like the ones round here, the tree will be used as a weapon, or dropped from a balcony onto some poor unfortunate below.

Oh, and telling people to "get a life" without knowing any of the facts is pretty insulting to be honest

baa humbug!

....or shoud that be bah humbug? Too many sheep round here obviously!

A team I was part of had long discussions with the customer (a large London Council) and LFB re forthcoming FRAs of hundreds of their properties. The talks were aimed at setting a standard which the customer, residents and enforcers would be happy with - a local concordat if you like.

During the talks we discussed at length about the contentious issue of the fire resistance of front doors of the flats, many of which were owner/occupiers. Eventually, we got around to the question of should we accept letterboxes in flats or have a mail collection box by the front entrance?

We decided that individual letterboxes pose a small risk of smoke spread. In a flat fire, smoke would tend to gather at ceiling level before working its way to the floor. It was suggested that a normal height letterbox isn't much of a risk. In the collective 165 years of firefighting experience sitting at the meeting, none of us could remember a fire where fire spread (or smoke spread) via a well fitting letter box caused a significant problem.

However, the consensus was that agreeing low level letterboxes in flats would be an additional control measure (compared with those higher up). And in any case, the risk would be significantly lower than a stack of letters, papers and circulars stacked on shelves by front doors of these mainly (but not exclusively) single staircase properties.

We considered setting a measurement as a way of ensuring a standard and fair application of the 'rule' across the council. But finally settled on an individual RA where the assessor could take into account the full circumstances. We rather lightheartedly called it allowing 'letterboxes set lower than one's knees'.

I hope this makes sense!

Ah! I see. Such are the potential outcomes when too many people spend too much time at meetings.
A simpler expedient would be to ensure all door-mounted letterboxes apertures were the modern draught-proof type - flap either side and draught-proof brushes inbetween.
Saves a potential dilemma for those with a letter box that's too high up whilst improving energy efficiency of the housing stock.
;-)