Stair Lift Removal In Community Blocks?

[crl]

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? 

[AnthonyB]

Probably coincidence. There has been no change in legislation or risk assessment guidance (other than specific guidance for premises with cladding issues). What has happened is that many housing providers have urgently reviewed their fire safety management and risk assessments and issues that crop up as a result are being addressed.

It may be that your evacuation procedure has been changed as a result of your FRA so the full width is required to accommodate the evacuation of all flats as once rather than just the flat of fire origin initially, or that they deem the equipment an unacceptable ignition risk in what should be a fire/ignition sterile area.

 

[crl]

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.  

[AnthonyB]

Do the premises operate a stay put policy? If so the stair widths are nowhere near as important as where you would be trying to get all occupiers down in one go.

Sounds like a lack of ability to correctly risk assess in the way often associated with H&S

[crl]

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?

 

[AnthonyB]

Yes, one of the cornerstones of residential block fire safety has been to ensure residents are completely clear on the fire procedure (be it stay put, full evacuation or something in between) and are aware of key fire safety points such as not changing flat front doors, keeping common circulation areas free from storage, obstructions and ignition sources, etc.

Residents being unclear of what to do has been connected with deaths in the past. 

[crl]

On 12/15/2017 at 20:39, AnthonyB said:

Do the premises operate a stay put policy? If so the stair widths are nowhere near as important as where you would be trying to get all occupiers down in one go.

Sounds like a lack of ability to correctly risk assess in the way often associated with H&S

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?

[AnthonyB]

Simultaneous evacuation is a last resort in purpose built housing and is only to be used where a building has insufficient compartmentation to support stay put and it is not viable to upgrade it.. 

For evacuation the common fire alarm system must extend into the flats with a minimum of a heat detector to the hallway with an alarm sounder so that the fire is discovered before it breaks into the common areas preventing escape and so that 85dB sound pressure is present outside the bedroom door so as to wake sleeping occupiers. In very poorly constructed premises the system would need to be even more comprehensive.

Your premises sounds like it was built for stay put but you've had an unnecessary alarm system stuck in - I would ask to see the Fire Risk Assessment for the block.

[crl]

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.

[AnthonyB]

It can't be full evacuate without a common alarm that also extends into the flats. It must therefore be stay put. I think your HA need some new fire safety advisers!

[crl]

6 minutes ago, AnthonyB said:

It can't be full evacuate without a common alarm that also extends into the flats. It must therefore be stay put. I think your HA need some new fire safety advisers!

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?

 

[AnthonyB]

No - a purpose built block can be almost any size without a fire alarm. Modern blocks will have smoke detectors to open smoke vents to stairs and long corridors/lobbies (which are often also connected to sounders and manual fire alarm call points even though they needn't be and shouldn't be) but not fire alarm systems for full escape.

A common alarm system for full evacuation would usually be to the commercial fire alarm standard BS5839-1 with manual call points (break glass units), smoke detection to the common areas, heat detectors to the flat lobbies and alarm sounders to the common areas and flats lobbies, all connected to control and indicating equipment:

This is different equipment to the residential fire alarm standard BS5839-6 which you would see in your flat, consisting of self contained smoke and heat detectors with integral sounders and fed off the mains with a battery back up and often (not always) linked together with bell wire or via radio link:

[crl]

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?

[AnthonyB]

A full evacuation can be simultaneous or phased. The former has everyone leave at the same time, the latter staggers (usually by 2 floors at a time) and is used often in bigger taller buildings where it's impractical to load the stairs with everyone at once. In both cases you are evacuating as soon and quickly as practicable in the initial stages of an incident. With stay put you do not intend to evacuate at all unless affected by the fire or requested in the latter stages of an incident by the fire service.

Your set up is not compliant as you cannot evacuate simultaneous - how do you know there is a fire in the first place? Your alarm set up is for stay put only - only the flat on fire would have alarms sounding and no one else in the block would have an alarm - the audibility of the flat alarms would only be loud enough for the life safety of the occupiers of that flat alone.

If your block is genuinely poorly built or altered to such a extent everyone has to get out in one go it must have a common system that also provides some sounders & detection in the flats as described above. If, as I suspect, it's OK,then you should have a stay put policy and need no further alarms. 

[crl]

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?

 

 

[AnthonyB]

If purpose built after the 60's it would usually have solid concrete construction as per the CP3 guidance which was in place until 1991 - however as a small block it didn't have to follow this so could be wooden under-drawn with plasterboard. Small blocks can also be of 30 minutes fire resistance, not 60 and still be stay put.

A type 3 Fire Risk Assessment would not intrusively assess the block, instead it would be a non intrusive inspection of the common areas and flat front doors (as in a Type 1 FRA to comply with the Fire Safety Order) with the addition of the interior of the flats (for Housing Act compliance)

To fully assess compartmentation a type 2 intrusive FRA would be required for the common parts or exceptionally a type 4 (common & flats)

[crl]

On 2/8/2018 at 19:40, AnthonyB said:

 Small blocks can also be of 30 minutes fire resistance, not 60 and still be stay put.

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?  

[AnthonyB]

No, they wouldn't need to be aware as they would be protected by the compartmentation present

[crl]

1 hour ago, AnthonyB said:

No, they wouldn't need to be aware as they would be protected by the compartmentation present

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?

[crl]

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?

 

[AnthonyB]

Possibly if full evacuation, but as the premises appears to be built as stay put & doesn't have a suitable and sufficient fire detection and warning system for full evacuate it's irrelevant as you aren't going to have everyone leaving at any one time anyway and the numbers involved even so are negligible.

[crl]

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?  

[AnthonyB]

Looks like a modified version of the stay put fire procedure example in the flats guide which sort of blows the exit width excuse for withdrawing the stair lift out of  the water.

Actions in FRA's should be graded in levels of importance and it's common to give a suggested time frame too - this helps with budgets and prioritisation of works based on risk.

[crl]

13 hours ago, AnthonyB said:

Actions in FRA's should be graded in levels of importance and it's common to give a suggested time frame too - this helps with budgets and prioritisation of works based on risk.

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

[Tom Sutton]

What exactly are you trying to achieve?