Differing advice from different assessors

[Commonsensenotsocommon]

Hello all,

I am in need of desperate advice following different recommendations from different assessors. We manage 4 storey buildings that are a purpose built block of flats (built 2003/2004), with varying number of properties in each section of the building, which are not interlinked. The communal areas all have interlinked smoke detectors and there is an AOV in some sections of the building with a single detector at the top floor near the AOV. There is a AOV manual switch on the ground floor near the front entrance door which has been secured using a metal box with a fire bridge padlock (FB1 key). There is only a single staircase in each separate section of the building and thereafter you can exit the building using either a front or rear communal entrance door.

The first company who was asked to carry out the FRA sent an accredited assessor, but we found out in the end that the assessor had links with that particular company. They recommended the installation of a fire alarm, which is not required due to buildings adopting a stay put policy and also because the system would be vandalised daily. The second assessor was vetted to be completely independent but inevitably his recommendations were also questionable. One of the recommendations was having a fire action plan in multiple languages due to the different ethnicities living in the building. This assessor also put in the report that 'the idea of a fire alarm has been discussed, but not feasible due to vandalism'. We were quite annoyed that this was mentioned in the report as it suggests that the assessor does not know his 'stuff' because if he did, he would have known that a purpose built block like ours does not require a fire alarm and therefore did not need to mention it. He also recommended directional signs at the top of the staircase, but surely if you're on the third floor there is only one way down and out so the signs are not needed?

The third assessor made an extreme suggestion which was to remove the smoke detectors as they contradict the stay put policy. Apparently it is human nature to run when you hear an alarm? He also suggested to find an alternative to the metal enclosure that houses the AOV manual switch on the ground floor because everyone should be able to access it. The problem is, is that the manual AOV switches have been misused and we have suffered many a times from rain soaked carpets on the 3rd floor when the AOV is open.

I would really appreciate any comments on the above.

Also, do the recommendations seem inconsistent and questionable and how do we pick an assessor who will tailor the report to our buildings as opposed to using a template?

We ended up Googling 'common sense approach to fire risk assessments' and found a couple of new assessors who we hope will work with us and guide us properly, but in the meantime any advice from forum members will be highly appreciated.

[Tom Sutton]

Have you used the A Guide to Choosing a Competent Fire Risk Assessor  backed up by Fire Risk Assessment Competency Council - Competency criteria for Fire Risk Assessors then check their credentials with the appropriate organisation. Final check, to establish if they are using Fire safety in purpose-built blocks of flats to conduct their FRA.

[AnthonyB]

The first two were clearly out of their depth, the third was nearest to what the current benchmarks state - it would be correct in a post 2000 building regulation compliant stay put premises to not have a fire alarm system or domestic detectors and just have smoke detectors to operate the AOV's. Deaths have occurred in stay put flats where common area only detection with alarms (which would only activate if there was a fire in the common areas, an unusual occurrence and often associated with arson or charging mobility scooters) has brought people out of the 1 hour safety of their flat into a fire and smoke filled landing. It's therefore correct to suggest the erroneously installed smoke alarms be removed (or at least it be clear in the procedure given to tenants that hearing a common alarm may mean there is danger so take care if investigating and staying put may be safer) .

As long as the fire service can access the AOV manual controls (which they can from your info) then your solution to a building specific issue should have been accepted and rubber stamped by the FRA.

Too many under trained persons doing residential FRAs using the wrong guidance and ticksheets or point and click mobile report apps unfortunately.

[Commonsensenotsocommon]

On 15/11/2018 at 10:17, Tom Sutton said:

Have you used the A Guide to Choosing a Competent Fire Risk Assessor  backed up by Fire Risk Assessment Competency Council - Competency criteria for Fire Risk Assessors then check their credentials with the appropriate organisation. Final check, to establish if they are using Fire safety in purpose-built blocks of flats to conduct their FRA.

Thank you Tom appreciate your reply. I did use those guides, but the experience I had in the past was that I would speak to the company owner who is an assessor and then instead of him turning up to do the assessment, he's sent down another assessor who I assume would have been briefed by the main guy, but clearly not. I will not be making that mistake again that's for sure. I also should have checked references from other clients with similar properties, but I felt reassured by what we discussed hence not following up. Hey ho as they say..

[Commonsensenotsocommon]

15 hours ago, AnthonyB said:

The first two were clearly out of their depth, the third was nearest to what the current benchmarks state - it would be correct in a post 2000 building regulation compliant stay put premises to not have a fire alarm system or domestic detectors and just have smoke detectors to operate the AOV's. Deaths have occurred in stay put flats where common area only detection with alarms (which would only activate if there was a fire in the common areas, an unusual occurrence and often associated with arson or charging mobility scooters) has brought people out of the 1 hour safety of their flat into a fire and smoke filled landing. It's therefore correct to suggest the erroneously installed smoke alarms be removed (or at least it be clear in the procedure given to tenants that hearing a common alarm may mean there is danger so take care if investigating and staying put may be safer) .

As long as the fire service can access the AOV manual controls (which they can from your info) then your solution to a building specific issue should have been accepted and rubber stamped by the FRA.

Too many under trained persons doing residential FRAs using the wrong guidance and ticksheets or point and click mobile report apps unfortunately.

Thank you very much for your reply AnthonyB. The smoke detectors were fitted by the developer back in 2003/2004 so one would assume that they were fitted for a purpose. I am glad you mentioned the signage as this is what is at every front and rear communal entrance door from day one..

[Tom Sutton]

Only SP205 deals with the company and not individuals, all the rest register the individual as being competent, for example, if IFE register a person, that person has been tested to a standard that they consider he/she is competent. So if you employ a person who is registered then the organisation who registered him/her are saying he/she is competent.