Hi All Had a visit from an insurance inspector and a report off the back of this. The report states that our contractor for sprinkler systems is not allowed on site as they do not meet the requirements accepted in the industry. They are Firas accredited, whereas the insurance inspector belive that they can only be LPC. As far as I am aware, contractors have to work to is BS EN 12845, which state that there is a requirement for third party certification. A few years ago the LPC were forced to assist Firas in setting up this third party accreditation for Sprinkler Companies; as until then they had a monopoly and could charge whatever fees they felt fit and dictate to the industry. Can anybody give me their opinion on this and any useful links/info I can use to justify to the insurers that this is correct? If I am not correct, I am more than happy to hold my hands up, but I do not feel that we should remove a perfectly good contractor if the insurer is wrong. Thanks All J

I once worked for an American company who were insured by IRI, (Industrial Risk Insurers) and I was of the opinion that they were way way over the top on their requirements but they covered the risk and demanded their standards, otherwise no cover and no insurance payments if there was a claim. The point is, do what they say or go to someone else.

Surely insisting that only a contractor approved by LPC will do is a restraint of trade. All they can say is that the contactor has to be suitably qualified and if FIRAS is the equivalent qualification they cannot insist that only LPC certified contractors will do.

Perahaps someone shouild ask a question in the Houise(of Commons) since this sounds more like a protection racket rather than a sensible way to mange 'elf and safety'?