Regards it being the clients responsibility to appoint a fire risk assessor, here is a comment in an IET Wiring Matters article about the BS7671 corrigendum issued last year and escape routes:

It is important to note that the fire strategy and fire engineering requirements are the responsibility of a fire engineer. It is not the job for an electrician to determine which areas are considered protected escape routes or not. Professional advice from a fire engineer should be sought.

electrical.theiet.org/.../

Presumably, unless they can get insurance, very few will be happy to step into a fire risk assessor/advisor role if it means carrying the can for omissions in a design/ construction of something you cannot see in totality - which may be the case for most projects on existing buildings. Which may risk leaving only the cowboy types in operation.
I also wonder where it leaves the £50 drive-by EICR. Should fire stops be checked at the same time ?

Mike

mapj1 said:

Should fire stops be checked at the same time ?

Just put that on the long list of "limitations" with whatever else is too hard or requires "update course" (CPD).

mapj1 said:

Should fire stops be checked at the same time ?

Just put that on the long list of "limitations" with whatever else is too hard or requires "update course" (CPD).

And that is the problem, like surveys where no-one goes in the loft because that would be 'working at height'. Well meant rules have an unfortunate side effect, and does not help the victim of any fire, flood or whatever very much.
Mike

Agreed ... apologies I was very dry in the last post. I wasn't being 100 % serious that I agree that's the way it ought to happen; however, I'm sure many have seen similar approaches, so it will happen.