Rank: Forum user 
|
We have recently conducted a fire risk assessment, some of the changes become costly and management are reluctant to take on board some of the recommendations, from a legal point of view will I has the health and safety manager be held responsible or the owner of the building who surely will be classed has the responsible person if anything was to go wrong concerning the recommendations, advise please
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
If you have done all thats reasonable to make sure that the business understands the risk and have escalated to a senior level then I would suggest that you would be in a good place to defend your position.
When I say you have done all thats reasonable, I'm referring to ensuring the level of risks in the FRA have been prioritised with the most serious risks being mitigated first. Have you also considering pulling a plan together to spread the cost? If the business cant afford everything now, a plan to demonstrates when it will get done, with a governance process to ensure it does get done at the specified time will also go along way to ensuring you have done all thats reasonable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Latchy,
If you are an employee then the simple answer is no you won't be held legally responsible. If on the other hand you are a part owner of the business or a consultant then you may be.
Just make sure you keep copies of all your work in case.
While the owner of the building has various responsibilities under the RRFSO they are not the responsible person, the CEO of the company is. After all, no one is forcing the company you work for to stay there in unsuitable conditions. Therefore, if something goes wrong the CEO will be the one in the firing line.
It is however in the owners best interest to keep the tennants happy so they may be prepared to implement some of the recommendations if it is presented to them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Happy New Year Latchy
You know that you should do it all in writing with an auditable trail to prove that your FRA has been competently produced and it's remedial proposals have been rejected; and you keep the evidence [forever!].
Of course, it may be that some of the proposed measures really are not reasonably practicable, in which case your organisation should commission an independent review with the intent of identifying which really are the most reasonably practicable remedial measures for those questioned.
If you cannot prove that the management, rather than yourself, have been responsible for the failure to implement the necessary improvements, you're in the front of the queue for interview under potential caution. Happy days!!
Frank Hallett
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.