Fire Risk Assessment.

It’s when you walk in and find the wireless base from the alarm that was removed from a bedroom, but not the alarm because apparently someone threw it away, when in reality there was around equipment worth around £90 that needed to be moved to a different location because of the change in layout.


So you end up refitting the secondhand base, which is still paired with the rest of the system and installing a new alarm to it, because the original has been skipped.


Absolutely no consideration of what was required for altering the fire alarm system by the landlord, the landlords agent, their builder or the builders “electrician”. Moving the complete wireless base and alarms would have been around half a hours work, even the original bit of wire for the power supply from a light fitting could be reused.


Then they wonder why the Council want an inspection certificate for “a few smoke alarms”.

I'm qualified to carry out fire risk assessments, I have NEBOSH general certificate and RRFSO add-on, I did it about 12 years ago, so can't remember the exact names, it took two weeks full time and the exams were externally marked, with none of the tutor hinting the right answers, like the asbestos courses!


There isn't any pass or fail either, you do the assessment, and produce an action plan, which may include things like the emergency lighting needs repair or the need for fire extinguishers in the kitchen should be assessed 



it does not cover things like designing a fire alarm, you would say something like 'the fire alarm has been designed and installed to BS5839 and is maintained by a third party competent contractor and records are held.' 


you could note that some detection appears to be missing, and then recommend that it is investigated or its absence justified. 


The trend these days is to fire alarm everything, but you ought to exhaust the passive fire protection first, that is always the most important thing, and that is also what failed at Grenfell, because the building was altered from its passively safe design. 


holes made by trades is often an easy spot above suspended ceilings, or badly or non-maintained plant or machinery



The client then needs to write an evacuation plan, and practice it


to be honest, it's more like an audit if anyone is familiar with that. The fire brigade will only do a risk assessment for blocks of flats, as the common areas are considered to be streets, so they should have done a risk assessment and familiarisation visit at Grenfell. 


If you ask their advice, you won't get any, they are just like the HSE in that regard. They will tell you when they think it's wrong though, but it's too late by that time.

"This is the chaos that ensues when the "authorities" delegate life saving methods and systems from professionals to the great unqualified unwashed. "


I think this is why, having rolled back in 2012 from responsibility for such, the Fire Service has now come back to it's previous position and is now more willing to re-assume some of the responsibilities for provision of advice.

There is absolutely no point whatsoever in the likes of Public authorities demanding that you comply with something when they are not prepared to tell you how to comply!

exactly, you ask the enforcing authiroty for advice and they point blank refuse 'we arent here to advise, only enforce'


so you give them a scenario, and the response is 'if you think its ok, its ok'. Something goes wrong, its your fault. 


I agree it's ridiculous

'Twas on the Monday morning, the fire risk assessor came to call. He drew up his report and pinned it to the wall.


'Twas on the Tuesday morning, the fire alarm designer came round. "You need a bell," he said, "it makes a nicer sound."


'Twas on the Wednesday morning, the electrician came. To keep the wires tidy, he made a little frame.


'Twas on the Thursday morning, the certifier came along. He double-checked and didn't get it wrong.


Oh, it all makes work for the working man to do ...


With profound apologies to Messrs Flanders and Swann.

Back in the late 1970’s I was one of the people involved in installing a kitchen sink and base unit in the nurses station within a hospital X-ray department, it actually required thirty two people to organise, supervise and actually do the work.


There were three different plumbers working for three different contractors, one for the cold tap, one for the hot tap and a third for the waste pipe. All the plumbers said it wasn’t their job to secure the sink top, I nearly started a “who does what dispute” when I did it, because all the plumbers said it was a plumbers job, but not theirs so one of the other plumbers should have done it.


I have heard LABC Building Inspectors say that they are not onsite to advise, merely to inspect, therefore they will say what is wrong but not give advice on compliance.