Tom Sutton

The legal requirement is article 21 of The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 and require the Responsible person to train all his employees what to do in the case of fire, which includes practice drills. Only the common areas of HMO's or student accommodation (private blocks) are subject to The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 therefore the Responsible Person does not have control over the tenants, other than give them sound advice, but in a workplace he/she does. It is the Housing Act that controls the whole of the premises in residential situations.

All depends some will, some won't, all the doors should be assessed and those that fail the assessment should be upgraded or replaced. The common areas are subject to a fire risk assessment under The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 and any fire doors that do not meet the required standard will be considered a significant finding and should appear in the FRA.

I agree Joe to get a definitive answer the site requires a risk assessment by a competent person but unfortunately my response can only be based on assumptions. My first assumption is the staircase in question is the standard steel external escape staircase which will have been designed for the means of escape at the time of construction, but if there has been a change of use and the numbers reduced then there is a possibility the width of the staircase could be acceptable. If the plant pots are fixed on the inside there could be a tripping or obstruction hazard as well. If they were fixed on the outside of the balustrade they there could be a health and safety problem. Finally I would sooner go up to the roof and sit in the garden on a nice sunny day, enjoying what it has to offer than pass a few plant pots, on the rare occasions I use the staircase, I am a lift man myself. :) That is why I prefer the roof option although it is the more expensive option and leave the external staircase for the purpose it was designed for.

As you can see the plants are fixed to the outside of the balustrade consequently what could happen if while working in the plants a hand tool is dropped or other things I see a possible strong health & safety situation developing. The link shows one storey, the one in question 9 storeys consider the potential of a dropped item by the time it reaches the ground floor.

I would think the roof garden is a better solution but as you said very expensive, however if the fire escape, community garden, went pear shaped it could be even more expensive.

This type of question can be answer more fully on forum's like http://firealarmengineers.com/. But I would suggest you consider why the recommendation has been introduced and this should help you to decide if your solution is acceptable. I understand, the reason is, if the cable supports fail in a fire, allowing the cable to fall this could cause a hazard for firefighters. There may be other reasons and you should research why, and see if it will affect your solution. If fire resistance is the concern then check out the reason why and apply the same logic.

I see no fire safety reason for putting screening on the door to the garden there maybe a health and safety reason. Placing the door handle so that children cannot reach it is acceptable, providing the children are never left alone and it is fully documented in your fire procedure. The tiny alarm panel that alerts you to people coming through into that space, again is acceptable. If double doors are required and one is always locked at the top and bottom is not acceptable as people will think both doors will open allowing them to escape in an emergence, causing a blockage and trying to open them during an emergency would be impossible.

It is true as they could cause a trip hazard so why don't you keep them inside your flat and the only person at risk would be yourself?

What does your Fire Risk Assessment (FRA) say about the fire alarm because a mains powered smoke detector ( with battery backup ) is for domestic premises not commercial. The problem is that intruder and fire alarms should be installed using different British Standards, also using the relevant part depending on the use of the premises. I would think combined fire and intruder alarm would be more suited to domestic premises. Another consideration is the legislation is risk based so occasionally risk assessor will deviate from the norm so you need to study your FRA closely. A further considerations is that the standard for installing a fire alarm is much higher than an intruder alarm and if an intruder alarm fails the worse scenario is the loss of property if a fire alarms fails it could be the loss of a life.

Another point is that certain items , like mattresses, are subject to the regulations but do not have to be labeled, so how do you identify the manufacturer or importer?

No prob.

I do not know if your procedure is in line with best practice in other schools but the attendance officer taking more than 5 mins before he/she can evacuate is not ideal. I see two problems the first is the location of the printer which places the attendance officer in a vulnerable situation and what happens if the room the printer is in is involved in fire. I would be having words with your friends in the computer department and maybe considering portable printers or an intranet with the latest registers downloaded onto it, and giving access to the staff that needs it, they maybe able to come up with better solutions.

There could be situations where a self closer would be required but in most situations self closers are not required on final exit doors to open air. If a means of escape has to pass close to the door on the outside, like an external fire escape and there are other situations, then self closers would be required.

You need to find out what the green LED indicates, it is most likely a self contained luminaire and indicates that the battery is charging. Without this LED you would not know if the battery was being charged and if the supply failed, it could be a month before you found out that the battery had discharged, rendering you escape lighting ineffective. Consequently it is a very important indicator warning LED which ensures the emergency lighting system is functioning correctly and as far as I am aware there is little or no modifications can be done.

All depends on the reasons for the fire door, is it to prevent the spread of fire/heat or is it to prevent the spread of cold smoke or both. If it is to contain the smoke the cold smoke seals (brush seals) appear to be satisfactory, if it is to seal the gaps in the door to contain fire/heat (intumescent seals) then the 6mm gap is in excess of the recommended 4mm but could be acceptable. I would then consider could you reduce the gap without increasing the gap elsewhere, also I guess it is a floor hinge, which would limit your options, consequently without surveying the situation my best guess would be to accept the 6mm gap, providing it is not a high fire risk. The gap is measured from wood to wood and 6mm gap is not compliant with the appropriate British Standard but fire safety is all about risk assessment.

Escape windows only apply if the is no alternative means of escape and only apply to the first/ground floors. So it all depends where in the premise your son is located and is there an alternative means of escape.

More information would be required to give a definitive answer but providing you cannot put your hand through the gate from the outside to operate a locking device you could fit glass bolts or a push pad designed for gates. Check out http://www.firesafe.org.uk/security-and-fire-safety/ https://www.jacksons-security.co.uk/security-gate-locks.aspx

Apart from what green-foam has said you would have other problems, if they were fitted to the inside of the handrail they would cause an obstruction in an emergence when the escape stairs is a full capacity, if they were fitted to the outside of the handrail there would be health and safety issues. You would need an engineers report to ensure the stability of the external escape stair was not affected consequently I do not think it would be a workable proposal.

Without knowing the size and layout of the portacabin it is impossible to give a definitive answer but a small one you most probably require one exit and a large one an exit at each end.

A single private dwelling is exempt from the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 but subject to the Building Regulations because you are having a material alteration. Guidance for means of escape is Approved Document B (fire safety) volume 1: Dwellinghouses and para 2.8 covers external doors provided for means of escape and says windows can be fitted with locks with or without keys no mention of external doors. I suggest you ask the building inspector where he/she get their information so you can check it out.

The Govt is having another look at the F & F regs and the old regs will be revoked being replaced with a new one. https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/furniture-and-furnishing-fire-safety-regulations-proposed-changes-2016 I do not think it will affect purchasers and retailers too much but it will need careful study by manufacturers and importers. Just hope the FIRA gets its guidance up and running soon.

In a fire emergency the occupants should leave by the nearest exit and this would apply to a fire drill. All exits are fire exits in an emergency, some will evacuate by the normal route used every day, others will use designated fire exits, just use the nearest, if it is safety to do so. If you are paying lip service to fire drills then the whole exercise is a waste of time and nothing will be learnt. There has been research on this matter and it was found that most people will leave the premises by the route they entered the building unless they are told to use all exits. One experiment was a lecture theatre with exits at each corner and when the fire alarm operated they all used the two doors at the front, the ones they had entered by. The second experiment was the lecturer told everybody to use all exits and the theatre was emptied much quicker. The conclusions were fire alarms should be supplemented with voice commands.

At night time can everybody find your way out of the premises safety, if the normal lighting is switch off, using only the outside illumination. I they can then you do not require emergency escape lighting but if there is any doubt install it, its better to be safe than sorry.

I say again I wish I could have given you some positive advice.

This is a difficult one because of the restricted space, in a building you can ensure the escape route is wide enough to allow a wheelchair to pass and when it reaches the stairs you can construct refuge where disable persons can wait in safety until there are evacuated. On a canal boat you would have to make all the cabin the refuge enclosing it to a minimum half hour fire resisting standard and ensuring the fire risk is a low as possible. The lighting would have to be designed that any minor fault would trip the meter preventing a fire and the heating would have to be water or hot air again ensuring a low fire risk. If you could achieve a minimum of hour fire resistance between any fire risks and the, cabin then it could be considered a place of comparative safety and 15 minutes could be acceptable, which I am sure would be reduced in an emergency situation using all available exits. Although not required by The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 you could consider a Fire Risk Assessment by a competent FR assessor. You also need to consider firefighting equipment, emergency lighting, smoke and CO alarms, etc. Check out http://www.boatsafetyscheme.org/media/149757/fsg-2013-web.pdf http://www.thefitoutpontoon.co.uk/buying-building-canal-narrowboat-escape-plan.html