Avatar photo

Contributor

Author Bio ▼

Adam Bannister is a contributor to IFSEC Global, having been in the role of Editor from 2014 through to November 2019. Adam also had stints as a journalist at cybersecurity publication, The Daily Swig, and as Managing Editor at Dynamis Online Media Group.
March 10, 2016

Sign up to free email newsletters

Download

Whitepaper: Multi-residential access management – The move to digital

Fire-Risk Assessments: Should Landlords Take the Practical Needs of Vulnerable Residents into Account?

Fire risk assessments - how muchWhen the prescriptions of a fire-risk assessment and the practical needs of vulnerable residents collide, does the responsible person have any room for manoeuvre?

I ask this after reading a report in the Folkestone Herald about the disgruntlement of residents of semi-sheltered accommodation over the imposition of fire-safety rules that reduced their storage space.

East Kent Housing, which owns Cheriton Wood House, introduced the rules based on a fire-risk assessment conducted by property management company Savills.

The main point of contention for residents of the 12-flat, two-building accommodation, all of whom are over the age of 50, was an instruction to remove personal belongings, including a mobility scooter, from shared hallways without provision of adequate alternative storage.

Speaking to the Folkestone Herald Lynne Martin, who has lived in the accommodation for 2.5 years, said “It’s nonsense. Our liaison manager visited us before Christmas and told us we had to clear the communal area but they haven’t given us a safe alternative place to put it.

“It’s just got ridiculous. We have a storage space for our garden furniture out there that the other residents agreed we could have, but that’s got to go too.”

Fire-retardant flooring

The Martins also complained that while EKH had taken a hard line on clearing the hallways, they weren’t replacing wooden dormer windows or remedying the lack of fire-retardant flooring.

Residents were told to remove the following items from the shared hallway:

  • Doormat
  • Plants including tomatoes
  • Rug
  • Storage box
  • Mobility scooter
  • Tables
  • Pictures on the wall

Although residents are permitted to store items in a storage box behind the building, the area is accessible to the public.

Lynne and Husband Leslie Martin sent an email to East Kent Housing requesting a full report of the recommendations in January. The email also said: “The portable additions to our community area actually enhance our living experience and create a homely atmosphere rather than living with an empty and stark space.”

“Zero tolerance”

A comment left underneath the Folkestone Herald story said that Savills “are covering themselves to allow for any failings in the management of the flats. They are adopting a ‘zero tolerance’ policy which is normally applied [to] buildings that have a poor record of fire safety, poor passive/active fire protection, poor management or difficult residents or occupants with a history of unnecessary abuse of storage in the common areas of flats.”

‘Farley Green’ (the commenter’s moniker) backed East Kent Housing over the mobility scooter, which would “present a serious fire risk”, but removing mats and hanging pictures” was “extreme. Fire Risk Assessment is just that; assessing the risk against the findings of the hazards and risks noting the type of occupants, building design, passive and active features, the fire safety management and the depth of advice and guidance given to the residents.

The ‘below-the-line’ contributor, whose technical knowledge suggests a background in fire safety, also addressed the issue of access for fire crews: “As long as there are no extremes like storage boxes, mobility scooters and alike then fire crews are trained to move in smoke AND expect to find some obstructions.

“Additionally, the flats, if they have quality fire doors FD30S with good tight fit, cold smoke seals, intumescent strips and good door closers, the door will keep at bay the smoke and products of combustion to allow clear visibility for fire crews to enter and extinguish the fire.”

Carla Smith, operations manager at East Kent Housing, Shepway, said: “We have appointed Savills to carry out a fire risk assessment at Cheriton Wood House, which has identified that personal items belonging to residents are being stored in the communal area.

“The items found pose a fire safety risk to the block and Savills have made their recommendations to East Kent Housing based on their findings.

“The neighbourhood manager has requested these items be removed and has been working with the residents to look at ways in moving this forward without compromising the residents’ safety.

“The biggest issue with fire safety is ensuring the communal areas are clear to assist Kent Fire & Rescue with a quick evacuation in the event of a fire.”

“Reasonably practical”

The Folkestone Herald obtained the following comment from Kent Fire and Rescue Service: “Under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, the ‘responsible person’ for a premises is required to carry out or nominate someone, as is the case with Cheriton Wood House, to carry out a fire-risk assessment identifying the risks and hazards, consider who may be at risk and eliminate or reduce the risk from fire as far is it is reasonably practical, providing general fire precautions to deal with any residual risk.

“They are also required to create a plan to deal with any emergency.”

‘Farley Green’ suggested the fear of prosecution meant quality of living was being neglected.

“There are hundreds of buildings that manage their fire safety very well by allowing similar things that these flats have but Savills do not allow any leeway on matters such as this purely to cover themselves from prosecution, but also have very little interest in the quality of living for the residents.

“We have come away from ‘prescriptive’ fire safety legislation and fire certificates, but Savills are doing exactly that and interpreting the guidance documents (note ‘guidance’ documents) literally.

“Managed correctly, most of what the residents want can be done with cooperation and understanding with a ‘managed approach’ to fire safety and NOT a ‘zero-tolerance’ policy.”

Do you think the rules imposed by East Kent Housing sound reasonable? Did they have room for manouevre in legal terms? Were Savills over-zealous in some of their recommendations?

To what extent can quality of life considerations reasonably influence fire-safety measures? Leave your comments below the line!

2023 Fire Safety eBook – Grab your free copy!

Download the Fire Safety in 2023 eBook, keeping you up to date with the biggest news and prosecution stories from around the industry. Chapters include important updates such as the Fire Safety (England) Regulations 2022 and an overview of the new British Standard for the digital management of fire safety information.

Plus, we explore the growing risks of lithium-ion battery fires and hear from experts in disability evacuation and social housing.

FireSafetyeBook-CoverPage-23

Related Topics

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
5 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
phases3
phases3
March 10, 2016 2:21 pm

Totally agree with Farley on this one. ‘been there’

rjd459
rjd459
March 10, 2016 2:47 pm

The Fire Risk Assessor will generally consult with a housing association on what evacuation strategy is to be adopted within a premises and how best to manage items within the communal means of escape. Most managers of premises find the communal means and the storage within something of an endless task, as residents can often decide the hallways are a handy place for a pot plant and small picture however also a great place for a sofa, table and chairs and of course mobility scooters,(hence the zero tolerance easiest option)  Without a joint common approach from both residents and landlord,… Read more »

paulwebber
paulwebber
March 10, 2016 2:54 pm

I guess zero tolerance is an easy option if you don’t have confidence in assessing risks in a competent manner. It would make sense to agree what is and isn’t acceptable based on the overall assessment, not a ‘one size fits all’.

jcrust
jcrust
March 10, 2016 6:05 pm

It is all too easy to judge but without the full facts it is impossible to know who is right in any particular case. Residents invariably resist change and sadly rarely appreciate the risk of impeded escape routes; the well known White Shark fire (see footage on UTube) is a great example used by many of us in the industry to educate people. Although the legislation is not prescriptive fire safety arrangements need to be once decided by the Responsible Person. The main failing here would appear to be a lack of consultation with the residents, at the very least the… Read more »

keithhaw60
March 10, 2016 9:59 pm

I have read your editorial with interest.   Been there, Got the T-Shirt.  As a qualified Level 3 Fire Risk Assessor I do not normally make comments regarding fellow Fire Risk Assessors findings. Having read the above I do think that E.K S’s rules are reasonable. Final Exit Routes should be kept “Sterile and Free From Combustable Materials” simple as that. Insofar as “room for manouevre in legal terms”is concerned  I’m not too sure what you mean therefor I cannot answer. I would only say that should a Fire occur and the storage of these materials within this area contributed… Read more »