https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/office-for-product-safety-and-standards

The reason this lot came in to being was the poor response from Whirlpool (and others) to white good fires

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/update-on-whirlpool-tumble-dryer-recall-progress

White goods were also cited as the cause of Grenfell.

I would say time to find a new employer if these are the senior management - profit over safety is a recipe for disaster and likley a charge of gross negligence manslaughter if they continue on this path.

This really needs reporting to the homes licensing authorities.

You definitely are in the right. Is there any way to escalate this to a more senior manager? Would be interested to see what your Fire Risk Assessment says also. I am presumming this is a residential care home, so if there is a fire risk with these dish washers that are used at night has this been looked into? 

I'm sat on the fence regarding this query and not sure which way to fall...

I fully understand where you and the other posts are coming form regarding white goods fire and the risk at night and would be interested in what the fire risk assessment states (was this conducted by you, or an independent person). Not sure whether quoting an issue with tumble dryers justifies banning dishwashers, it may be correct but would it help, or hinder your arguement with your management team !?!

The counter argeument is that suddenly (!?!) after one incident you've decided without discussing the matters with your facilities manager or your line manager to ban all "cheap" dishwashers - that you seem to be opposed to for a while. I presume that all the other 22 care homes were then placed in a situation whereby they, or the Facilities Manager, would have to go out and purchase new ones at a financial cost and this decision for extra financial outlay may have to be approved by oter senior managers or even board approval - a process that may involve ensuring that the products were robust, properly "specked", costed, budgeted, purchased and installed. A process that could normally take weeks or months (depending on the nature of the company / business) and in the interim each care home would have to find somone to hand wash all these dishes (up to 12 times / day) - if they have aternative dishwashing facilities. This may involve getting extra personnel in and the recruitement process for this could also take days / weeks. Not sure if the local care-home managers would appreciate your decisions / actions because of the extra activities required and they may have voiced their concerns regarding your edict too th Facilities Manager and your line manager too - even though you are protecting the business and their clients.

Probably correct safety decision, possible not best business decision and an agreement from the board / facilities manager to replace all these chear models within 1 to 3 months may have been a preferred option for all parties.

As part of your investigation did you look at:

- how the device had been installed? Most require gaps to allow for heat to dissipate from the appliance

- maintenance i.e. not letting filters become blocked allowing pumps to run dry, electrics getting covered with dust & debris

Perhaps using the manufacturers instruction manual as your situation control and an investigation technique will allow you to step back with grace from the initial cease & desist without actually recinding.

Maybe jumped the gun a bit here but if you are responsible for the FRA make sure you reference the use of domestic appliances clearly in it.   I have this argument over and over with my facilities department.  We had 2 fire incidents with a domestic washer dryer over heating.  I have now made it clear that EHS recommend the use of industrial equipment a decision which they can or cant ignore at their peril. 

Edited by user 31 August 2021 14:18:21(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

The problem with FRA especially those carried out by (some) external  consultants is that they don’t relate to what people are actually doing in an area and are based on some sort of abstract of what the room is for. The worst one of these I ever came across was for a lab which to no account of the many litres of flammable solvents it contained. The assessor insisted that the FRA related to the building fabric  not its use!  Something similar might have happened here with the building’s owners concluding that  building was safe based on the assumption that the dishwasher could not possibly catch fire. Of course, in the real world they might be  due to a faulty design or simply due to the hammering they get.  The point of risk assessment is to look at real, foreseeable  risks and risk assessment is an ongoing process so that when new information appears it must be evaluated. You might not need to replace all of the machines; it might be that the machines need more maintenance or repositioning(see Roundtuit’s comments on installing  the machines)  or some of the most heavily used machines should be replaced. The key thing is that the matter is investigated, and a way forward agreed. Simply saying that its not an issue  is very poor practice.

Originally Posted by: N Hancock

I have now made it clear that EHS recommend the use of industrial equipment a decision which they can or cant ignore at their peril.

White goods retailer £200 - £1,500 / Industrial equivalents £1,500 - £8,000

You get similar issues with all kinds of electrical devices for example drills, saws...

The difference is not the price nor the maker but the specification - even the "industrial" dish washers are sold on a place setting basis rather than cycles per day.

You are not wrong.If the fire had escalated and caused death or serious injury ,I am sure you might have been called up for questioning.The fact remains that health and safety interventions remain unappreciated until something big happens.

Mhuirem - you could try a different tack.

We get regular adverts on the media telling us never to leave our white goods running unattended.

Of course those ads don't mean some "white goods" such as the fridge freezer, but rather the washing machines and tumble driers that have a documented history of going on fire.

I don't know how robust industrial equivalents are in terms of reliability and not causing fires, but perhaps you could suggest that if your employer does not want to replace domestic white goods with industrial equivalents, they should reorganise use so that it is subject to regular oversight.