AnthonyB

It sounds like the poster may be from the US where they still give extinguishers a full service life and overhaul. NFPA rules apply. If they are over 20 years old they can in theory remain in service as long as they are hydrostatic tested and recharged - but this is subject to the manufacturer still being in business and that they were made after 1984. They should be inspected monthly, serviced annually, recharged 6 yearly and hydro tested 12 yearly. New equipment prices are such in the US that hydro-testing, refilling, etc is still economically viable unlike in the UK

No - no common areas, the Fire Safety Order does not apply.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fire-safety-risk-assessment-healthcare-premises

If you don't appeal within the set period there is no provision for further appeals within the fire legislation. You need to appeal on the basis that the serious risk to relevant persons is no longer present and so the grounds for continuing prohibition are passed. Where an appeal is brought against a prohibition notice, the bringing of the appeal does not have the effect of suspending the operation of the notice, unless, on the application of the appellant, the court so directs (and then only from the giving of the direction). However there must be some reason why they think your remedial action hasn't removed the risk - have you done everything they asked (including a suitable and sufficient FRA although a lack of this alone wouldn't be grounds to prohibit)? If you have they may be of the opinion that the works are not suitable and sufficient (who did the work? Sadly they are a lot of companies/individuals that do fire safety related stuff that have poor workmanship such that the efficacy of their work is doubtful) If there is a disagreement on which technical solution to the breaches to use you can apply for a determination from the Secretary of State. Whatever you do, however tempted, do not breach the notice. It's an offence in itself, a criminal prosecution is almost inevitable and on conviction courts are happy to levy high fines and cost awards (& usually do) and custodial sentences (suspended or actual) are more common than you think, particularly if there was a serious risk still present at the time of the breach. However none of this is legal advice and may not be accurate to your particular case - you need a specialist law firm https://www.blackhurstbudd.co.uk/fire-safety-law/

Fire resisting ceilings (assuming boarded rather than a concrete slab) cannot usually prevent the downward spread of fire so should not normally be accepted, but despite what is likely to come out of the Grenfell Enquiry AI's and BCO's continue to play fast and loose with the standards despite not automatically having to be being fire experts and having instead to understand every single aspect of the building regulations.

No exemptions on size, that's an urban myth I'm afraid.

I would as a matter of urgency contact the business fire safety enforcement team of your local Fire & Rescue Service. There should have been a Fire Risk Assessment carried out by the landlord as there will be common areas & systems and from that there should be the right fire alarms, emergency lighting, protected escape routes, extinguishers, emergency procedures, etc in place before occupancy. It also sounds like the conversion and sub division may not have gone through the Building Control process either.

Note that the Enforcers Guidance does require enforcing officers to look to the use of competent persons and would use the British Standard for reference for both frequency of maintenance and competency and steps required. A British Standard is not law, but is an accepted benchmark and whilst it's quite possible to follow a different regime it must be demonstrable that it is still going to provide an acceptable standard of safety. Not having the competence, training and tools required for extinguisher maintenance means that enforcers and equally importantly insurers may take a dim view particularly if there is an incident. Most BSEN3 extinguishers also require maintenance to BS5306 so failing to follow the manufacturer's own maintenance regime as well as the benchmark goes against you too. Don't worry, you aren't constrained to the cost of servicing - there are two options that are readily justifiable: BS6165 Aerosol Powder extinguishers - designed to be user checked and disposed of at the end of the 5 year warranty or after complete/partial use: https://www.safelincs.co.uk/car-fire-extinguisher-fireblitz/ P50 Extinguishers - Designed by the manufacturer so the the annual basic service can be carried out by the user with each extinguisher having the required tools built in, only needs a service exchange at 10 years and end of life at 20 years. https://www.safelincs.co.uk/britannia-2kg-powder/

The emergency operation is manual and separate by use of the EN179 handle. This is built in to the device because the use of electromechanical locks is not usually permitted on escape doors where opening is purely reliance on an electronic strike as these can fail and jam. A failsafe on a strike linked to the fire alarm and with a green break glass would not make the lock compliant as a result and isn't necessary in any case as you have a separate physical release (the handle)

It won't be a rewire but an Electrical Installation Condition Report which whilst normally recommended every 10 years in domestic premises is usually 5 where they are rented. No expiry on doors as long as in good order however the one fitted in 2014 could be from one of the batches that failed fire tests and didn't meet the advertised fire resistance so needs replacing.

You can upgrade heritage doors to 30 minutes performance using a variety of methods that are usually compatible with their listing. English Heritage provide guidance and Envirograf many suitable products

Oxygen is not a flammable gas but is an oxidiser making other materials ignite more readily and burn more fiercely and quickly. A fire involving an oxygen enriched atmosphere is very dangerous and should be left to professionals. There is no point in having extinguishers over and above what you already have. More important is good fire prevention measures and that the fire service are aware cylinders are on the premises. Some advice is here: https://www.airliquidehomecare.co.uk/healthcare-professionals/home-oxygen-safety

The thumb locks are a simple fastening. Panic furniture is really only essential for numbers over 60 or places of assembly.

You only have to do a 3 hour test annually, there is no 6 monthly test. Yes it is likely you need to replace the fittings , but the cost is negligible so it's hardly capital expenditure: https://www.safelincs.co.uk/eden-led-emergency-bulkhead-light/

Ask to see the FRA, doesn't sound right, as long as maintained and managed so items are unlikely to be draped on them then they are nothing special risk wise

The pressure is constant in a CO2 until virtually empty, that's why they don't have pressure gauges, as the liquid CO2 level drops more CO2 vapourises in the cylinder to keep the pressure constant. Only when there is no liquid CO2 left does the pressure drop and the nature of the discharge change (higher pitch, almost clear discharge) as only CO2 in it's gaseous state is being discharged. It shouldn't be 38 bar unless it's virtually empty.

Sounds like it's been serviced by a rag and tag unqualified firm based on the information on the service label. Your true weights are stamped in the neck of the cylinder - 17.44kg full, 12.55kg empty, CO2 charge 5kg. The manufacture date is also stamped in the neck, usually mm/yy or mm/yyyy. If it's 2005 as on the service label it's overdue it's 10 year statutory hydrostatic pressure test and can't be refilled (but can be exchanged for a tested unit and sent off to be tested & revalved). You should weigh a CO2 with the horn assembly removed. A 5kg CO2 is 5kg (unless the cowboys commissioned a faulty unit that had leaked down to nearly empty!)

Complete load of cobblers - there is no statutory or common industry requirement to change colours. It's a good practice but even then there is no fixed scheme and different companies have completely different colours and rotations.

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, possibly articles 14 & 17

If you only really had one tenable exit the capacity shouldn't really exceed 60 persons. Also if the third door is signed as a fire exit it shouldn't be key locked even if the occupancy doesn't require it as people may just see the sign, go to it, find it locked and then the risk of crushing and panic increases

If it's correctly built to Building Regulations (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/441669/BR_PDF_AD_B2_2013.pdf) then it will not have a common fire alarm, only automatic opening vents to the stair and some or all (depending) of the corridor is required. Also if the premises are built to Building Regulations the fire would not have entered the flats. All a common alarm would have done is brought you out of your flat into the burning smoke logged corridor where you could have died (& others have in similar circumstances where there was an alarm and an arson attack in the common space) when actually the safest place to be was in the flat behind a 60 minute fire resistant wall and two 30 minute fire doors. If the premises are so concerning you should contact the Technical Fire Safety/Fire Safety Enforcement office of your Fire & Rescue Service (usually listed under the Business Fire Safety section of their website as it's commercial premises legislation that covers the common parts of flats) who will then audit the premises and can take action as required. Emergency lighting is intended for power failure, your normal lighting would be better & brighter if not affected by fire

It's been every 10 years since BS5306-3:2000 and the brief requirement for 5 year extended service on CO2 brought in the 2000 edition was repealed in the 2003 edition. Since then we've had 2009 & 2017 editions, the latter being current. The traditional regime in the 20th Century was 10 years from new unless there was a full service history in which case the test could be delayed until 20 years from new, unless the extinguisher was discharged between 10 & 20 years in which case it had to be tested before recharge. After the first retest the second was a fixed 10 years then the third and any subsequent tests were at a fixed 5 year interval.

It would form part of weekly means of escape walkarounds, there isn't actually much to check on a Redlam or Cooper Bolt, just signage, hammer presence and if the glass tube or Ceramtube is intact and not replaced by a bit of wood. As with any final exit the mechanism should be checked for free movement by removing the tube to see if the bolt springs back and the door opens easily (e.g. not swollen). They are unlikely to be mentioned in any British Standard as they are 1960's technology and are usually a legacy item in existing buildings rather than something newly installed. BS9999 does detail that "all escape routes should be inspected frequently and, in respect of buildings open to the public, on each occasion prior to the admittance of the public. " but does not define frequent. It has been tradition for formal means of escape inspections to be no less than weekly, but as always exact frequencies is down to risk assessment and mitigation as to why it doesn't follow traditional benchmarks but is still suitable and sufficient.

BS9999:2017 gives a useful PPM regime for most fire protection systems in a building - saves looking at loads of individual standards. Usually AOV's are tested for operation weekly and a full service of batteries, motors, chains, etc annually.