AnthonyB

I'd need to see the site but for a purpose built mid 60's small block of flats you don't need a communal fire alarm, are unlikely to need to retrofit smoke vents and associated detection and your main risk assessment mandatory finding would relate to front doors being fire doors with effective self closers and a recommendation only for emergency lighting. Associated with this finding would be one that, as a result, fire detection & warning inside the flats is outside the scope of the freeholder's common responsibility and the as built stay put policy should stay in place. There could of course be other findings, but in essence, based on what I've found and what the build requirements of the day required, it's most likely

You don't necessarily have to install a large ugly plasterboard and stud cupboard anymore either - there are products to allow a more compact and aesthetic fire safe enclosure: https://envirograf.com/product/electrical-consumer-unit-and-distribution-board-fire-protection-system/

To be fair they would be better calling the fire brigade and getting out, however for the small fires that a householder would be expect the small extinguisher would suffice - it may not have an A rating, but that doesn't mean it's ineffective, just good enough for very small fires like a waste paper basket.

Assuming you aren't in the Irish Republic there isn't a maximum service life for extinguishers as long as parts are available and the extinguisher is structurally sound. This assumes that for non CO2 it's been Extended Serviced (as detailed above) every 5 years and overhauled (including pressure test) every 10 years if CO2. Most service technicians, unless very long in service or working for the small number of traditional extinguisher firms still around, are no longer trained in or equipped for refilling and testing and usually replace extinguishers with new. If your extinguishers are over 10 years old but in service date then either: a) you are using one of the few firms that do a proper job and they are fine, or: b)you have one of the increasing 'rag & tag' firms who will just fill in the label each year and take their money and I would replace the equipment (& the provider) Photos would give me a clue as whilst some makes and models over 10 years are still serviceable, others aren't and others still have been subject to a recall as whilst looking externally like they will work they don't! If the CO2 have more than 10 years of service records on and are being marked as OK or Serviced as oppose to requires test, corrective action required, etc then you definitely have had the cowboys in!

The correct answer should be ideally at a similar time on a set day, however some online training is quite poor and wrong in content. Random activation will cause confusion and slow down staff response in the event of real alarm

There is a delay programmed between the activation of a device and the alarms actually sounding, or relays to other systems like plant shutdown operating. You need the servicing company to download the exact cause and effect from the panel and put it into a table/spreadsheet as the set up can differ - different time delays, different devices being delayed (often smoke detectors have a delay, but heat detectors and call points don't as they aren't as prone to false alarms). Depending on the circumstances certain delays are permitted - in others they aren't & your Fire Risk Assessor should be able to decide what's appropriate for your premises..

Technically, yes. Considering how limited the common parts are & how small you may be able to complete it yourself using the available guidance.

Depends what running the place entails - if it's supporting the residents then the NFCC Specialised Housing guide is appropriate. If they are just servants then it is not a workplace for the purposes of the Fire Safety Order and an FRA and the associated general fire precautions are not required. From RRO: '“employee” means a person who is or is treated as an employee for the purposes of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974(4) and related expressions are to be construed accordingly' From HASWA: 'Exclusion of application to domestic employment. Nothing in this Part shall apply in relation to a person by reason only that he employs another, or is himself employed, as a domestic servant in a private household.' If they really did want some sort of fire safety check then you would have to refer to the single dwelling guidance in the LACORS guide and the general domestic fire safety tips from the Government's Fire Kills website.

That's up to the Fire Risk Assessment which could suggest, as an existing older building, either the openable windows at each landing, a permanent vent at the head or an AOV whichever is easiest to implement.

Before changing extinguisher types be aware that there are stringent legal requirements for extinguishers on both inland waterways and ocean going craft (including yachts) and Water Mist extinguishers wouldn't meet the minimum fire ratings for use if your yacht requires a Boat Safety Scheme license. If you are only using it outside waters requiring a BSS license and it is only ever used as a Class XII private pleasure boat, then being under 13.7m it escape the requirements under the UK Merchant Shipping Regulations of having any extinguishers (if it did then the Water Mist extinguishers would need to be 3 or 6 litre) and you could swap as you desire, although I'd check with your insurers first.

This is a property and land law issue & you need to consult a qualified legal adviser. A lot will depend on the nature of the legal agreement (if any) existing regarding usage of the shared space.

Firstly it's not much of a fire door with a hole in it!

As long as you are competent and the resulting assessment is suitable and sufficient then legally you can carry out the FRA. Many organisations choose to use external competent persons to ensure a suitable and sufficient FRA, but if you feel competent enough the official guidance is inked below: https://www.local.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/fire-safety-purpose-built-04b.pdf

Powder, whilst messy will put out ethanol fires as will CO2. Water Mist is also suitable, but only on very small fires as it has a small rating.Alcohol Resistant Foam extinguishers are available, but rather expensive and only in big sizes..

Yes they should and it's a bit of a coincidence with the fault. Was it a fire alarm company or just electricians?

As long as you are enclosing the area of special fire risk and maintaining protection of the stair you should be OK - unless the layout of the building requires lobby protection to the stair then your version of remedial actions does sound sufficient.

Fire and smoke will readily pass through this and depending on location and what areas it penetrates could indeed be an issue.

No, but an application of common sense and risk assessment is appropriate with rooms/cupboards off an inner room - if a normal habitable room it's a no, but a cupboard or single cubicle toilet could be tolerable as they aren't going to be inhabited for any length of time.

Defend in place is an accepted option in the care environment, but usually a last resort. Normally they are meant to have a member of staff stay with them and the bedroom and door be of 60 instead of 30 minutes fire resistance. The fitting of a domestic sprinkler system as added protection is not uncommon, plus if there is an elevated risk of fire from the service user themselves in their room then the use of a personal protective mist system to the room (as oppose to fitting a building wide system) is also an option.

Lipping/rebating doors predates modern methods of sealing fire doors - it used to be common because it was the only way to get some form of flame, heat & smoke seal. Whilst it had some effect compared to a door without the rebate the performance is nowhere near the same as a door with intumescent seals and cold smoke brushes. The acceptability of an 'older' method of fire safety joinery will depend on the situation and the performance requirements of the door-set in question - in some situations such as heritage premises and certain existing premises (based on other factors taken into account) it may be acceptable, but not if current standards are a requirement.

https://nearlylegal.co.uk/2017/01/perception-of-doors/ https://www.property118.com/dispute-certification-fire-doors-going-court/

Many manufacturers give a recommended shelf life of 5 years, although this is more of a 'best before' than a 'use by' in most cases as long as the powder remains sealed, free from moisture and still free flowing. Performance wouldn't be guaranteed by the manufacturer after their recommended age.

Ownership has no bearing on whether an action is desirable or required - if this is a required action then it would suggest (& the report should clarify this) that either the internal compartmentation or external cladding (or both) is inadequate and a full evacuate solution is required as mitigation until resolved (or permanently if it can't be). A lender would be very reluctant to lend on a premises in this condition and for valuation the properties would be zero valued. If it is of such a condition that it requires such an extensive change in strategy and precautions failure to do so would be considered a breach of the legislation and be enforceable against the freeholder/TMC. It's possible (& has happened) in the worst cases a premises (including dwellings) can be served a Prohibition Notice and everyone has to move out. The Housing Act applies to dwellings and can be used against individual dwelling owners to enforce actions required for fire safety - it's most commonly used to get unsatisfactory flat front doors changed & I've experience of sites where we've used that to get enforcement notices against leaseholders who wouldn't change their doors in a tower block.

To be fair any domestic fire small enough to be safely tackled by an untrained occupier would be within the capabilities of a 1.4L Water Mist extinguisher, one per landing (3l if you really want, but costly) If you can't put a garage fire out with 2kg Powder you should be leaving it to the brigade. A 3l foam would be similar performance but cleaner and easier to see. All are available from the forum sponsor Safelincs.

That's OK, I can answer then - it's similar to a situation I have across a few sites. Traditionally the approach was to extend detection & sounders from the common system into every flat to facilitate full simultaneous or phased evacuation of the whole block - this was based on most ACM or HPL blocks being completely covered in the material. Some blocks however only have selected strips of ACM only potentially linking a small number of flats, the greater part of the block being non combustible (e.g. brick) faced. In these there is an understandable reluctance to expand the system building wide (with the resultant cost to the flat owners on top of the already high remediation costs) when most flats remain both externally & internally structurally safe to retain a 'stay put' approach. In these proposals have been put forward to only put a temporary wireless linked system in each strip of flats with an ACM exterior with cover to the exterior facing rooms and the hall ways so that only the set of flats liable to be affected by an externally spreading fire that originated in one of them need to evacuate. This has been accepted and allowed a removal of the (very costly & unreliable) waking watch. It's important the FRA and resultant mitigation strategy clearly defines which route is required and why.