Fire risk assessment law/regs
Discussion
Hi. I posted something similar in the Homes forum but didn’t get much response so thought I’d try here. I’m interested in this topic from a legal and regulatory perspective
Does anyone have specific knowledge or experience of Fire Risk Assessments for blocks of flats / apartments please?
There are high priority remedial actions identified in our buildings fire risk assessment that have not been completed per the recommended completion dates. As a result, mortgage providers are unwilling to lend against the property, so we’re having difficulty selling it
I am building a case against the management company who I believe have been negligent (or at the very least ineffective) in dealing with the actions and my subsequent enquiries and complaints
There is loads of information online regarding Fire Risk Assessments for buildings and I understand it is a requirement of The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 to have one in place. What is not so clear to me is if there is any legal or regulatory requirement to complete the suggested remedial works within certain timescales. The risk assessment, which was completed by an external contractor on behalf of the management company suggests timescales but the management company are saying they are not binding.
I am drafting a letter to the management company that I have copied below. If anyone that is knowledgeable on this topic would be so kind as to read it and make suggestions or propose alternative angles it would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
Dear Sir / Madam
Ref: xxx
Thank you for your response dated 13th April 2021
I acknowledge that you have apologised for the inconvenience caused but must state that this is vastly beyond an inconvenience. The magnitude of concern, disappointment, the resulting inability to now sell our property and the fire risk resulting from failure to investigate and remedy “high priority” items identified in the Risk Assessment on time are unacceptable. We are seeking preliminary legal advice on this matter but in the meantime, I would appreciate it if you would consider and respond to the below points. For clarity and ease of correspondence I will number my points.
1/ We are concerned that the extent of outstanding works relating to “high priority” items was apparently undetermined or uncertain until an inspection was prompted by ourselves. When would this have been looked at if it was not for our enquiry? Given that Health & Safety works are considered essential Covid 19 appears not to be a reasonable justification for late completion.
The recommended timescale for completion of high priority management items (HM) in the risk assessment is 1 month. Items Q1, Q10 and Q11 were due to be completed by 7th October 2020 and as of 15th April 2021 are over 6 months late.
The recommended timescale for completion of high priority property items (HP) in the risk assessment is 3 months. Item L1 was due to be completed by 7th December 2020 and as of 15th April 2021 is over 4 months late.
I acknowledge that these are “recommended” timescales. What processes, controls or mitigations do you have in place for when these recommended timescales are not adhered to?
2/ The Fire Risk Assessment executive summary determine that the assessment risk rating is “moderate”. The Risk Rating tab goes on to define “moderate” as “It is essential that efforts are made to reduce the risk. Risk reduction measures should be implemented within a defined time period.” What is this time period, if it is not the recommended timescales indicated in the risk assessment?
The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 8.1 (b) reads; “The responsible person must in relation to relevant persons who are not his employees, take such general fire precautions as may reasonably be required in the circumstances of the case to ensure that the premises are safe.”
Given the wording in the Fire Risk Assessment it is fair to say the precautions are reasonably required and I therefore question whether Clarion Housing are compliant with the Regulatory Reform Order. We are seeking legal advice on this matter.
I appreciate the context of Grenfell and the increased concern over the safety of medium and high rise dwellings, and how this may have impacted your workload. I’m sure you will agree that it is not acceptable to compromise on safety in the interests of cost. If the delay in completing FRA actions is attributable to a lack of resource (i.e cost) it seems this would be highly likely to result in reputational damage if revealed to the press.
2/ We have received conflicting information from yourselves regarding the completion of remedial works which suggest a poor state of record keeping or organisation within your group. This is concerning given the safety related nature of the subject matter. For example, in the email attached, from xxx (Customer Support Specialist) dated 10th March 2021 we were informed that item Q10 was outstanding. A subsequent communication from xxx (Customer Solutions Coordinator) dated 23rd March 2021 advises that Q10 is in fact completed, citing the EWS1 dated 12th November 2020.
3/ I note you have received a full report from your contractor providing an “initial assessment” of actions identified in the Fire Risk Assessment. Are you able to provide us a copy of this document please? It is our view that the response you have provided is too brief and does not provide the necessary technical detail for us to fully understand the extent of the remedial works that are required and the risk to safety posed by the reported inadequacies.
3/ Reference FRA action L1. You mention that you are “looking to review the original certification for the doors.” Please could you indicate why you have not been able to complete this review before now? Per Building Regulation 38 - Fire Safety Information Approved Document B (2006) and the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 the building’s developer should have supplied this information in a pack. It seems a very simple check to perform if you have the correct documentation in place.
4/ Reference FRA action Q11. I note your assertion that the glazing “is not compliant as there does not appear to be a suitable glazing system in place to support the glass.” Can you please indicate the specific regulation or guideline with which this is supposedly non-compliant?
An accurate description of the fire-resistant glazed system should be held in the building’s safety documentation, with a listing of all the key components by name and manufacturer (i.e. glass, glazing seal, frame, type of fixings and their specification, beads and fixings of the frame to the surrounding structure.)
4/ Can you please provide confirmation of when the outstanding works will be completed? Our current mortgage offer expires of the 17th May 2021. Can the works be completed and confirmation of their completion be provided in advance of this date?
5/ Late completion of these actions has effectively made properties within the development unsaleable and this is completely unacceptable. Is there a process to obtain any form of compensation for this? If not, are you willing to purchase the property back from me for the current market value?
6/ Why were residents and leaseholders not informed of high priority outstanding actions? It seems the only method of obtaining this information has been through request of a pre-sales pack, including the fire risk assessment.
7/ In your response from xxx (Customer Solutions Coordinator) dated 13th April 2021 I quote “Our contractor has also inspected both the car park and the wider building and they have identified that additional fire stopping is required throughout.” Should we be concerned by this from a safety perspective? It sounds alarming. Is the compartmentalisation of the building compromised?
7/ Please provide the identity of the responsible person for Raleigh House
8/ Please provide full details of the building insurance
11/ I do not think this enquiry has been concluded, as you mention in your letter. We need to be provided with dates for when the works will be completed and they need to be satisfactorily completed within written confirmation from yourselves before this enquiry can be considered complete.
12/ Due to incomplete FRA recommendations it is now very unlikely that our buyer’s lender (or any other lender) will lend against our property. As a result, we are also likely to lose our onward home purchase. The solicitors fees we have accrued so far in the conveyancing process amount to approximately £2,500. We expect to be compensated given this loss is a direct result of your non-completion of FRA actions.
13/ This process has been extremely stressful and damaging for our mental health and the Fire Inspection team have showed very little compassion or urgency in dealing with this
Our solicitor initially requested confirmation regarding this FRA on 24th February 2021 (see attached) so there has already been a significant delay. May I politely request that your future correspondence is more promptly timed in order that this can be resolved without further delay.
Does anyone have specific knowledge or experience of Fire Risk Assessments for blocks of flats / apartments please?
There are high priority remedial actions identified in our buildings fire risk assessment that have not been completed per the recommended completion dates. As a result, mortgage providers are unwilling to lend against the property, so we’re having difficulty selling it
I am building a case against the management company who I believe have been negligent (or at the very least ineffective) in dealing with the actions and my subsequent enquiries and complaints
There is loads of information online regarding Fire Risk Assessments for buildings and I understand it is a requirement of The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 to have one in place. What is not so clear to me is if there is any legal or regulatory requirement to complete the suggested remedial works within certain timescales. The risk assessment, which was completed by an external contractor on behalf of the management company suggests timescales but the management company are saying they are not binding.
I am drafting a letter to the management company that I have copied below. If anyone that is knowledgeable on this topic would be so kind as to read it and make suggestions or propose alternative angles it would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
Dear Sir / Madam
Ref: xxx
Thank you for your response dated 13th April 2021
I acknowledge that you have apologised for the inconvenience caused but must state that this is vastly beyond an inconvenience. The magnitude of concern, disappointment, the resulting inability to now sell our property and the fire risk resulting from failure to investigate and remedy “high priority” items identified in the Risk Assessment on time are unacceptable. We are seeking preliminary legal advice on this matter but in the meantime, I would appreciate it if you would consider and respond to the below points. For clarity and ease of correspondence I will number my points.
1/ We are concerned that the extent of outstanding works relating to “high priority” items was apparently undetermined or uncertain until an inspection was prompted by ourselves. When would this have been looked at if it was not for our enquiry? Given that Health & Safety works are considered essential Covid 19 appears not to be a reasonable justification for late completion.
The recommended timescale for completion of high priority management items (HM) in the risk assessment is 1 month. Items Q1, Q10 and Q11 were due to be completed by 7th October 2020 and as of 15th April 2021 are over 6 months late.
The recommended timescale for completion of high priority property items (HP) in the risk assessment is 3 months. Item L1 was due to be completed by 7th December 2020 and as of 15th April 2021 is over 4 months late.
I acknowledge that these are “recommended” timescales. What processes, controls or mitigations do you have in place for when these recommended timescales are not adhered to?
2/ The Fire Risk Assessment executive summary determine that the assessment risk rating is “moderate”. The Risk Rating tab goes on to define “moderate” as “It is essential that efforts are made to reduce the risk. Risk reduction measures should be implemented within a defined time period.” What is this time period, if it is not the recommended timescales indicated in the risk assessment?
The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 8.1 (b) reads; “The responsible person must in relation to relevant persons who are not his employees, take such general fire precautions as may reasonably be required in the circumstances of the case to ensure that the premises are safe.”
Given the wording in the Fire Risk Assessment it is fair to say the precautions are reasonably required and I therefore question whether Clarion Housing are compliant with the Regulatory Reform Order. We are seeking legal advice on this matter.
I appreciate the context of Grenfell and the increased concern over the safety of medium and high rise dwellings, and how this may have impacted your workload. I’m sure you will agree that it is not acceptable to compromise on safety in the interests of cost. If the delay in completing FRA actions is attributable to a lack of resource (i.e cost) it seems this would be highly likely to result in reputational damage if revealed to the press.
2/ We have received conflicting information from yourselves regarding the completion of remedial works which suggest a poor state of record keeping or organisation within your group. This is concerning given the safety related nature of the subject matter. For example, in the email attached, from xxx (Customer Support Specialist) dated 10th March 2021 we were informed that item Q10 was outstanding. A subsequent communication from xxx (Customer Solutions Coordinator) dated 23rd March 2021 advises that Q10 is in fact completed, citing the EWS1 dated 12th November 2020.
3/ I note you have received a full report from your contractor providing an “initial assessment” of actions identified in the Fire Risk Assessment. Are you able to provide us a copy of this document please? It is our view that the response you have provided is too brief and does not provide the necessary technical detail for us to fully understand the extent of the remedial works that are required and the risk to safety posed by the reported inadequacies.
3/ Reference FRA action L1. You mention that you are “looking to review the original certification for the doors.” Please could you indicate why you have not been able to complete this review before now? Per Building Regulation 38 - Fire Safety Information Approved Document B (2006) and the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 the building’s developer should have supplied this information in a pack. It seems a very simple check to perform if you have the correct documentation in place.
4/ Reference FRA action Q11. I note your assertion that the glazing “is not compliant as there does not appear to be a suitable glazing system in place to support the glass.” Can you please indicate the specific regulation or guideline with which this is supposedly non-compliant?
An accurate description of the fire-resistant glazed system should be held in the building’s safety documentation, with a listing of all the key components by name and manufacturer (i.e. glass, glazing seal, frame, type of fixings and their specification, beads and fixings of the frame to the surrounding structure.)
4/ Can you please provide confirmation of when the outstanding works will be completed? Our current mortgage offer expires of the 17th May 2021. Can the works be completed and confirmation of their completion be provided in advance of this date?
5/ Late completion of these actions has effectively made properties within the development unsaleable and this is completely unacceptable. Is there a process to obtain any form of compensation for this? If not, are you willing to purchase the property back from me for the current market value?
6/ Why were residents and leaseholders not informed of high priority outstanding actions? It seems the only method of obtaining this information has been through request of a pre-sales pack, including the fire risk assessment.
7/ In your response from xxx (Customer Solutions Coordinator) dated 13th April 2021 I quote “Our contractor has also inspected both the car park and the wider building and they have identified that additional fire stopping is required throughout.” Should we be concerned by this from a safety perspective? It sounds alarming. Is the compartmentalisation of the building compromised?
7/ Please provide the identity of the responsible person for Raleigh House
8/ Please provide full details of the building insurance
11/ I do not think this enquiry has been concluded, as you mention in your letter. We need to be provided with dates for when the works will be completed and they need to be satisfactorily completed within written confirmation from yourselves before this enquiry can be considered complete.
12/ Due to incomplete FRA recommendations it is now very unlikely that our buyer’s lender (or any other lender) will lend against our property. As a result, we are also likely to lose our onward home purchase. The solicitors fees we have accrued so far in the conveyancing process amount to approximately £2,500. We expect to be compensated given this loss is a direct result of your non-completion of FRA actions.
13/ This process has been extremely stressful and damaging for our mental health and the Fire Inspection team have showed very little compassion or urgency in dealing with this
Our solicitor initially requested confirmation regarding this FRA on 24th February 2021 (see attached) so there has already been a significant delay. May I politely request that your future correspondence is more promptly timed in order that this can be resolved without further delay.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff