AnthonyB

You can make it as difficult as you want to get in as long as you can readily escape outwards. Having two fastenings isn't ideal as it complicates escape and renders the push bar pointless as the exit is no longer panic proof (i.e. pressure of people against the door/bar opens it without having to carry out any positive action) although the numbers expected to use the exit are likely to be under the typical benchmark where it needs to be panic proof as most sheltered housing is "stay put unless in communal space" on hearing an alarm

It should always in theory have been an up arrow, but confusion set in with the example pictograms used in the UK implementation of the EU Safety Signs Directive in 1996 (The Health and Safety Regulations 1996). Rather than continue the use of our existing BS 5499-1:1990 pictogram & arrows it copied the example European signs from the Directive and we ended up with the man/arrow/door symbol and three arrow variants - Left, Right, Down. Things went full circle in 2013 with the EC Directive sign being supplanted by the BS EN ISO 7010 exit signage (very similar to the old BS5499 system) which went back to the 8 directional arrows including up for straight on.

Answered your PM

Firstly define 'kitchen'. Does it have a cooker, or is it just a tea/break out point with kettle, microwave, toaster (which can be totally open plan)? Secondly do the offices and staff room either side both have their own exits or would you create inner and possibly even inner inner rooms by adding doors? Absolutely no need for FD60 and possibly not even FD30 either (a door would probably be wedged anyway).

Where necessary is a reflection that specific provisions are determined by Fire Risk Assessment. Exit doors don't (& never have) had to open in the direction of escape unless likely to be used by 60 or more persons - this has formed a part of fire safety guidance for a very long time. Call point signage, like some other fire safety signage, isn't explicit in the Order, however some slack in the specific detail is filled by the Health & Safety (Safety Signs & Signals) Regulations 1996 which also covers fire safety signs, but even this isn't definitive on these signs. Strictly speaking they are not required as a matter of course based on the way the law is drafted because the actual call point is required to be red with a pictorial symbol under EN54 the fire alarm component construction standard so in effect signs itself - in theory only if obstructed or hidden or requiring location in a large open area would it need additional signage to ensure the fire alarm is readily usable. It's likely this is poor drafting of the legislation (it's full of poor writing) as in other EU countries (who adopted similar legislation as the Fire Safety Order continues the UK's earlier implementation of an EU directive for worker fire safety via the Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regulations) mostly routinely sign their call points. What is more common here is to place Fire Action Notices next to call points as a continuation of the practice that used to be a legal requirement under Fire Certification via the Fire Precautions Act, although even this technically isn't mandatory.

It depends on who did the report. Whilst many fire safety consultants will clearly show which actions, in their opinion, are considered necessary for compliance with your duties under the order and which are 'value added' optional good practice, others will phrase everything as a recommendation because you, the Responsible Person, decide what to do, not them. This means it's possible, with some reports, to not do something on the basis it's a 'recommendation' yet leave persons at risk from fire and be liable to prosecution. Compartmentation is critical in blocks of flats so it's very rare for an issue with it not to be necessary for compliance.

External stair? Difficult without photos, possibly not.

If you don't change the side glazing (& it isn't already to the required fire resistance) then there is little value in changing the door.

Such products exist, such as those from Envirograf, and some do have test data to back up their efficacy. Whilst this would generally suffice to satisfy regulatory requirements if you require the benefit of third party certification of the whole doorset to be maintained you would need to check with the manufacturer of the door & frame for compatibility with their test certification.

Not at all - it is desirable, but does not become mandatory until the door is required for use by 60 persons.

The whole system is well out of it's lifespan, over 20 years or so. Places like Acorn might have some old stock (including 34000 stuff that will work on it), otherwise it's time to move over to a Vigilon panel and replacement S-Quad devices, it's backwards compatible so the other old devices can be retained.

These are the two main providers: https://www.zzeus.org.uk/training-courses/ https://www.thefpa.co.uk/training/fire-detection-and-alarm-training-courses

Is it the only stair or would the floors above have access to a second stair?

Sounds more like designed for sheltered accommodation. These operate audible full evacuation in common areas with stay put in flats (so common system shouldn't be heard). Flats then have a local Grade D system in each just for protection of the flat occupier (which in sheltered would be linked to telecare) Whilst the common system doesn't need to go in the flats at all it's not uncommon for the common system to have a detector (no sounder) in each flat hall ways as a back up in case a flat catches fire whilst the tenant is out or they don't respond. If it should be a complete full evacuate block including the flats then the only main difference would be the common detector in the flat hallway should also have a sounder - no need to try and link the Part D systems

Is that metal? If so it's already in a non combustible housing so could be accepted.

The service visit only need test a sounder operates at all: "k) All fire alarm devices should be checked for correct operation. It should be confirmed that visual fire alarm devices are not obstructed from view and that their lenses are clean. NOTE 9 This test is intended to ensure that every fire alarm device operates in response to a fire alarm signal. It is not intended that sound pressure level measurements are made." This extract explains the relation of the weekly test to sounders: "The following recommendations are applicable. a) Every week, a manual call point should be operated during normal working hours. It should be confirmed that the control equipment is capable of processing a fire alarm signal and providing an output to fire alarm sounders, and to ensure that the fire alarm signal is correctly received at any ARC to which fire alarm signals are transmitted. It is not necessary to confirm that all fire alarm sounder circuits operate correctly at the time of this test. NOTE 2 It is essential that any ARC is contacted immediately before, and immediately after, the weekly test to ensure that unwanted alarms are avoided and that fire alarm signals are correctly received at the ARC. NOTE 3 The user needs to take account of the manufacturer’s recommendations, particularly when battery powered devices are being tested, e.g. within radio-linked fire detection and fire alarm systems. b) The weekly test should be carried out at approximately the same time each week; occupants should then be instructed that they should report any instance of poor audibility of the fire alarm signal. In systems with staged alarms incorporating an “Alert” and an “Evacuate” signal, the two signals should be operated, where practicable, sequentially in the order they would occur at the time of a fire (i.e. “Alert” and then “Evacuate”). c) In premises in which some employees only work during hours other than that at which the fire detection and fire alarm system is normally tested, an additional test(s) should be carried out at least once a month to ensure familiarity of these employees with the fire alarm signal(s)."

There are, but the reference for their use that I could swear used to be in BS5839-1 I can't find in the current edition, meaning it would need to be a variation. Not impossible, but it's not a prison (although it might have some DOLs powers) where such a thing might be routine. Doesn't rule it out fully though.

If there is a party wall liable to give 60 minutes fire resistance between the main building and flat then the assumption would have to be that the flat would operate stay put if the adjacent house was on fire, as escape through a high risk room (kitchen) would not normally be allowed as the sole escape route - is the flat totally landlocked with no external windows for escape in a different direction?

Every building needs one (even if empty or derelict, the legislation was drafted in such a way to ensure this) , however whether it needs a single report per building or one covering several is a point of much debate. It may be that larger distinct buildings on a site need separate reports, smaller groups of outbuildings can share one. There is no right or wrong answer.

Sounds like the design has been done in line with residential fire engineering calculations for open plan kitchens with the cooker at least 1.8m from the escape route. These calculations do assume that there is an LD1 alarm system (smoke/heat alarms in every room and hall other than toilets/bathrooms) and a residential sprinkler system, which I'm guessing you don't? Do the bedrooms have escape windows? It's not beyond possibility that the existing layout you inherited on purchase was itself unauthorised without building regs approval - it's not uncommon for previous owners to have knocked around internal layouts without going through the right processes.

Broadly (as it can only be so as the legislation is functional, not specific and prescriptive) any final fire exit not in daily use as the main entrance that could be obstructed externally should be signed "Keep Clear - Fire Exit" using mandatory signage. 14.—(1) Where necessary in order to safeguard the safety of relevant persons, the responsible person must ensure that routes to emergency exits from premises and the exits themselves are kept clear at all times. (2) The following requirements must be complied with in respect of premises where necessary (whether due to the features of the premises, the activity carried on there, any hazard present or any other relevant circumstances) in order to safeguard the safety of relevant persons— (g)emergency routes and exits must be indicated by signs;

Escape through open plan kitchen/diners is already an option in Building Regs guidance as long as: i. The travel distance from the flat entrance door to any point in any habitable room is a maximum of 9m. ii. Cooking facilities are remote from the main entrance door and do not impede the escape route from anywhere in the flat. How far is the cooker from the entrance lobby?

A few bits of info needed: Do both buildings evacuate simultaneously? Do people regularly go between the buildings during the day?

Shoddy job not being properly sealed at edges - if set up for simultaneous evacuation it would only need to be 30 minutes fire resistance at the most. If not installed correctly you could argue if may fail prematurely at the edges

If it's a stay put block of flats you would need AOV. If you are a MO which operated simultaneous evacuation with a mixed fire alarm system you don't. ADB is not law or regulation, just one method of meeting Building Regs and other approaches are allowed as long as they meet the functional requirements of the law (suitable alarm and escape, compartmentation, internal & external fire spread, fire service facilities, etc)