AnthonyB

I'm thinking you should be using the services of a competent passive fire protection contractor for this work, you appear not to have the knowledge required - it sounds like you are using standard fire rated paint rather than a structural steel work intumescent coating!

Most buildings are moving away from their generators for EL as they can't meet the changeover and local circuit failure requirements and are retrofitting self contained fittings. Modern developments have generators purely as standby lighting and also install self contained EL fittings or addressable loop EL as well

There is a lot of misinformation & out of date information on EL testing. To keep it simple for self contained systems (which most are) you test: - Monthly function test. A quick test activating the fittings to ensure they are working at all - Annual duration test: As per the monthly test, but fittings are left on battery to check they last for their rated duration (often 3 years) Strictly speaking you should also check each fitting daily to see the green (red on older lights) charger LED is lit and on maintained fittings that they are lit. There used to be a 6 monthly test, but that was removed 11 years ago! And there has never been a 3 monthly test. You don't need a contractor to do either test as it's easy to learn how to do them in house - as long as you have the time to do it properly you need only bring in the contractor reactively for when a fitting fails.

If they are self contained for the life safety of the occupant then it's at his own risk. It would only be an issue if the devices were part of a building wide system intended to protect all flats

If there is no legally binding wayleave, means of escape license, easement or similar allowing them to access your land then regardless of fire regulations you are within your rights to prevent access - you could even build a fence across it on your land (subject to planning approval where required). The fire service and the police have no jurisdiction on this matter as it is a civil law matter and you should consult a lawyer specialising in the property law field. There is case law upholding removal of access even where they prejudice the adjacent properties exit routes and thus ability for legal occupancy, I've worked on both sides of the fence and you are the one in the strong position - you could give them access and draw up a lease for which they would have to pay in order to have access. They can sign it if they wish, but it's their look out if it leads nowhere.

Speak to your Council Housing Officer as the premises are liable to be subject to the safety requirements of the Housing Act 2004 and they are the lead authority for enforcement.

If it's a purpose built flat block then the correct guidance is the LGA Guide to Fire Safety in Purpose Built Flats and is sympathetic to existing premises. Your existing doors in such a small block, if notional fire doors compliant to the standard of the time, may suffice, although upgrading is always useful http://www.local.gov.uk/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=1138bf70-2e50-400c-bf81-9a3c4dbd6575

If you are leasing it as an FRI lease or some similar set up then as the tenant will be both the employer and person having control of the premises then it's all down to them. In a single occupancy commercial letting the landlord usually has no fire safety responsibilities unless they've a particularly poorly drawn up lease.

If it's in a communal internal circulation area then no, as it's introducing an ignition risk to an area normally fire sterile

Depending on the nature of the flats and existing doors there may actually be no need to change the doors and the existing fire doors would suffice - the FRA should have been carried in reference to the LGA Guide to Fire safety in purpose-built blocks of flats which is more sympathetic to existing buildings and is the default guide approved by the Government (http://www.local.gov.uk/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=1138bf70-2e50-400c-bf81-9a3c4dbd6575)

Don't fall for the con trick some sites have of having to replace all fittings just because they are older ones with the red LED light and you 'must' have the green light. Self testing fittings (unless part of a central addressable system or similar) have at least two (red/green) or three (red/amber/green) LEDs, not one, the light combination giving you a status report.

Fire extinguishers should have suitable emergency lighting adjacent (as per the emergency lighting standard BS5266) and some parties will say that you can meet this by the use of photoluminescent signage and so all your signs must meet this specification, However photoluminescent signage requires continuous 'excitement' by exposure to light to be able to work when needed and does not count as emergency lighting unless part of a photoluminsecent way marking to BS 5266-6:1999 (or BS ISO 16069) so in reality if you need emergency lighting you would still have to provide the electrical light fittings so you might as well use normal signs. The requirement for the sign just to identify an extinguisher is missing is only one code's take on it - other guidance suggests it's to locate the extinguisher as per the RRO requirement regarding non automatic fire equipment

Fire blankets are only really intended for small equipment using cooking oils (chip pan & similar) and a rule of thumb is that if your Class F risk involves more than 3 litres of oil or a container over 300mm diameter then you really should have the required number of F-rated Wet Chemical or Water Mist extinguishers (or even a fixed system for the larger ranges)

The only other manufacturer who uses the E-Series mist nozzle (under license I believe) is the Saudi manufacturer SFFECO who has a range almost identical in construction to Firebug's that include the 3 & 6 litre mist extinguishers. I've had a client who has safely and effectively used a water mist extinguisher on a live 415v industrial laundry machine fire (after CO2 was ineffective) so it's not all bluff, they are as good as they claim!

That sounds like an example of the increasingly common 'rag & tag' service engineer where nothing is inspected or tested and you are lucky if they even change the pull tag. If they remove the horn (which they ideally should to check for blockage & to weigh if the marked commissioning weight is without horn) then they should (although it's not shall in the standard) change the washer.