Friday 21 March 2014

Qualified and Competent - Fire Risk Assessors

Not all fire risk assessors stand up to scrutiny and obtaining a ‘suitable and sufficient’ assessment comes down to more than just qualifications. Guest Blogger Kevin Boreham explains:

Building fires not only threaten lives and property, but can also lead to enforcement action, prosecution, stiff fines and even jail. Employing the services of a competent fire risk assessor is therefore paramount for landlords, property managers and company owners.
The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (FSO) stipulates that a person shall be regarded as competent ‘ ...where he has sufficient training and experience or knowledge’. But how much raining, experience or knowledge is sufficient?
There are currently no formal qualifications required to become a fire risk assessor, although there are a number of excellent training programmes available. But regardless of the knowledge gained in a classroom setting, there is nothing like practical experience.
Having assessments peer reviewed or scrutinised by a local fire inspector can really highlight weaknesses in methodology and report formats, and experience shows that even big-name health and safety service providers can get it wrong.
When we recently took on a property, we scrutinised the fire risk assessment provided and found some worrying gaps. A further report by an in-house specialist uncovered some startling and basic omissions:
• dry-riser systems would not hold water as the bolts were only finger tight
• complete stairwells lacked any working emergency lights
• security was compromised, allowing indiscriminate entry
• plant rooms were used as storage facilities by residents
• the automatic smoke-ventilation system was not in working order.
When questioned, the staff on site remarked that the previous assessor had spent less than half an hour on the premises. This might have been enough time for a small apartment block, but not for this substantial property, which consisted of 12 cores over 10 to 12 floors, plus two levels of undercroft parking and several plant rooms.
It is doubtful how a ‘suitable and sufficient’ risk assessment can be conducted with this approach.
Conflict of interest
Formal qualifications are only part of the requirements to become a good fire risk assessor. An understanding of building regulations, construction methods and building materials enable better risk judgements to be made. Yet health and safety journals regularly carry advertisements placed by companies seeking serving or ex-fire officers to be fire risk assessors.
While studying for my formal qualifications, I once asked a serving fire officer for clarification on some of the finer points of fire-risk assessment and was surprised by his response: “How should I know? I just turn up with a hosepipe to put the fire out.”
Apart from the conflict of interest resulting from serving officers acting as fire risk assessors (and especially those who act as enforcers of the FSO), some doubt exists as to their ability to supply a suitable and sufficient risk assessment.
Enforcing the FSO and writing reports to help others abide by it are two entirely different things. Enforcement is a black-and-white issue – a building is either compliant or not. But adherence has real life to deal with, including staffing levels and human interaction.
So what is a ‘suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks’? This depends on who is asking the question, the knowledge of that person and to what type of property it relates. On 8 July 2011, Nottingham Crown Court jailed a fire risk assessor and a hotel manager for eight months for failing to carry out a suitable fire risk assessment, among other offences. In this instance, the enforcing authorities and the courts made the decision as to suitability.

Having assessments peer reviewed by a local fire inspector can really highlight weaknesses in methodology and report formats

After several years of regularly conducting risk assessments in residential, retirement and office blocks, I believe that I can produce ‘suitable and sufficient’ assessments for such properties.  However, an attempt by me to assess industrial sites or shopping complexes would likely be ‘unsuitable and insufficient’. Without the appropriate knowledge and observational skills, it is highly likely that deficient, inappropriate or missing passive/active fire-protection measures will go undetected.
So, who is competent and how can you tell? These are important questions for freeholders, managing agents, residents’ management companies and others with managerial control of properties.
The fire safety industry is attempting to address this issue as a whole. The new BAFE SP205 Life Safety Fire Risk Assessment Scheme, with a guidance document for certification bodies, has been developed for organisations that provide fire risk assessment services. While the document mentions competency, it clearly states that “it is not the purpose of the scheme to assess the competence of the individuals involved”. Whether it goes far enough remains to be seen. While using registered organisations on the scheme will provide some protection, consumers may still end up with unsuitable fire risk assessments.
There are some things you can do to ensure a suitable assessment:
• seek out assessors with formal qualifications, preferably more than a one-day course
• check their area of specialism; those doing assessments in residential properties require a different  
   knowledge base to those working in other areas
• ask to see samples of previous risk assessments
• use an established company
• ensure that access is provided to all areas of the property and relevant information is made
available to the assessor
• read and question the results to ensure that the assessment is not done as a tick-box exercise.

Enforcement is a black-and-white issue, but adherence has real life to deal with

Conclusion
All clients want value for money and there are providers that will cut their prices to gain business. The reality is that low barriers to entry leave the market open to abuse by those looking to ‘cash in’ on what is seen as a lucrative market. The outcome is assessments that do not stand up to scrutiny and are likely to fail the ‘suitable and sufficient’ test. Be aware: best price does not equal the best results.
So, how do you know a fire risk assessor is truly competent? When they supply a suitable and sufficient assessment that protects you and your clients and stands up to scrutiny, when they take their time when visiting the property and ask the relevant questions, and when the assessment is not seen as a retail opportunity.
Finally, and most importantly, when the assessor is prepared to stand up and be accountable for what they have provided to the client.

More information
Competency Criteria for Fire Risk Assessors (Fire Risk Assessment Competency Council): www.britishfireconsortium.org.uk/fire_risk_assessment_competency_document.pdf
The Regulatory Reform (Fire safety) Order 2005:


Kevin Boreham is the head of Mainstay Group’s Health, Safety and Compliance team. He is a member of the Institute of Residential Property Managers, a specialist member of the International Institute of Risk and Safety Management and a technical member of the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health. kevinboreham@mainstaygroup.co.uk

This article was published in the RICS Residential Property Journal January-February 2013. For full details of RICS and their services please go to www.rics.org