crl

Is this the correct signage for a block of flats with a 'Stay Put' fire escape policy in place? Just had new signage placed up and it seems more appropriate for an 'evacuation' fire escape policy.

The F.R.A reported that the stair lift obstructing the staircase was a Medium Risk.

Thank you. I also thought that it was unusual for a "By When" date to be given for the recommendations to be carried out. Is this the normal procedure for a F.R.A? I have also made a new request to the HA after the new FRA, to request what fire escape policy is in place i.e a "simultaneous evacuation" or a "stay put policy" The information that I was provided with was (attachment) this does not specifically state what policy is in place. I questioned this information with the HA and I was just informed that is the correct policy on the information that they have sent. Be cause my complaint is due to go to the Ombudsman Services it is important that I have the correct information. Do you consider that the information that was provided by the HA is sufficient for informing the tenants on the correct policy that is in place?

Sorry to carry on with my concern over the removal of the stair lift. Today I have received a report on the recent FRA for the reason of the removal of the stair lift. Does this offer a valid reason for the removal of the stair lift?

If fire compartmentation offers just a 30 mins fire resistance before the fire spreads into other apartments. Surely this will present problems if the fire breaks out early in the morning when everyone is sleeping?

I have had confirmation that the FRA is to be undertaken this Tuesday. One further question, if the FRA concludes that the fire escape policy reverts back to the 'Stay Put' policy, is there still a need for a common alarm to be installed? My concern is if there was a fire during the night on the 1st floor, with the apartments having a fire resistance of 30 min, how would the tenants on the ground floor be made aware that there was a fire above them? Surely there should be some requirement for an alarm to be in place for this type of scenario?

Bit of an update. I had an appointment today with the housing association to discuss the fire safety issues at my block. They were unaware what fire escape policy was in place, so they have decided to carry out a new FRA, I believe that they said that this would be a level 3 assessment. They confirmed that if there was a simultaneous evacuation in force there would be a need for a common alarm system. I was also informed that most of the HA flat type properties now have a simultaneous evacuation in place after the Grenfell tragedy. Because the 1st floor does have wooden floor boards, the HA believe that there is a concrete block construction underneath. This doesn't seem right because you can hear every noise from the upstairs flat even creaking floorboards. The flats were constructed back in the 70's or early 80's would this be the normal type of standard of building in those days? and would a level 3 FRA determine the construction of the upper floor? If as I suspect it is just a wooden floor with a one layer of plasterboard on the ceiling on the ground level would this classify that the compartmentation is sufficient for a 'Stay Put' policy to be put in place?

Thank you, Firstly, is a simultaneous evacuation policy the same as a full evacuation policy? I am a bit confused, the block where I reside at is a purpose built block. The only alarms that are fitted are mains smoke alarms (not linked) in the apartments themselves. Is this adequate and legally complying when there is a simultaneous evacuation policy in place?

Because the building only contains four flats (2 up & 2 down) would this have anything to do with no legal requirement for the fitting of fire alarms? Excuse my ignorance, but what exactly is a "common alarm" would that be a smoke alarm fitted in the communal area or something else?

Thanks so much for your information. So what you are saying is that for a purpose built housing (flats) with a "Simultaneous Evacuation" in force, there should also be a common fire alarm system in place? In my case there are no fire alarms, smoke alarms installed in any of the communal areas. I have questioned this in the past with my housing association and I am told that there is no legal requirement to install fire alarms in the communal area.

After questioning the housing association what to do in the event of a fire. I was informed "The policy that we operate is a simultaneous evacuation policy - The evacuation in case of fire will simply be by means of everyone reacting to the warning signal given when a fire is discovered, then making their way, by the means of escape, to a place of safety away from the premises. This is known as a simultaneous evacuation". However, when the fire service attended last year for their annual fire safety check. I was informed that we were to stay put in the building because the fire station is not to far away. The flat where I live consists of four apartments, two up and two down and comprises of four tenants in total. Would the "simultaneous evacuation" be the normal policy for this type of building? I am also concerned that the housing association are not making their fire escape policy very clear, is there a legal duty to inform tenants what to do in the event of a fire?

Thank you for your reply. There are no policies what to do in the event of a fire at the block. Is it the duty of the landlord to provide such information?

Thanks for your reply. The housing association are stating that it is an hazard due to the width of the stairway and it's not that that there maybe a danger of the equipment igniting in a sterile area. The strange thing is that some of the blocks are going to retain their stair lifts if the housing association considers that the upstairs tenants have mobility issues. To compare the risk with Grenfall I believe is an overreaction when there are only two tenants living on the first floor.

I have receive notification from my housing association that they are going to remove the stair lifts from all of their communal properties that are fitted with a stair case width of less than 1 meter. This is going to cause a lot of hardship for tenants with mobility problems. The reason for the removal of the stair lifts is because it is a fire safety hazard and will cause an obstruction in the event of a fire. My question is yes in a perfect world staircases should have no obstructions at all but in reality this is very difficult, is there a new regulation that now enforces the removal of stair lifts since the Grenfall Tower tragedy which the housing associations are mentioning is the reason for their decision?

I have had conflicting updates of my concern from the Fire Services. One officer said that if there are no concrete floors a double layer of plaster board is then required on the ceilings and butted and skimmed. Another officer stated that the only areas that come that come under the remit of the Fire Safety Order are the common areas and there are no regulations for the apartments themselves. This I believe is so wrong especially in a complex with elderly aged tenants. Please could you clarify which officer is correct?