Fire risk assessments completed in all high-rise blocks in the borough

Southwark’s fire assessment spree after Lakanal blaze

09/10/2009 | By Martin Hilditch

Southwark Council signed off more than 100 fire risk assessments on its tower blocks within a fortnight of a blaze that killed six people.

Safe as Houses logo

Information released by the council this week reveals that in the three months before the blaze at Lakanal House, Camberwell, on 3 July, the authority signed off 54 FRAs on its tower blocks.

But in the two weeks after the fire it signed off more than double this amount - 120 in total. Since the fire it has completed a total of 154 assessments. The council states that all blocks in the borough now have a completed FRA. A council spokesperson confirmed that work on most of the FRAs began ‘close to the times’ they were completed.

The borough has faced intense scrutiny over its FRAs after fire safety chiefs issued enforcement notices on three of its high-rises a month after the Lakanal fire. The notices stated that the council had failed to carry out suitable FRAs on Perronet House, Marie Curie House and Castlemead House. The notices also stated that some fire doors in the these blocks were not fire resistant and/or self-closing.

Kim Humphreys, deputy leader of the council, said that the borough owns more than 200 high-rise residential blocks.

‘We have now improved FRAs for all blocks over six storeys and a quarter of them were completed before the fire at Lakanal,’ he said.

Since the blaze, Inside Housing has launched its Safe as Houses campaign in a bid to prevent future tragedies. It calls for landlords to install emergency fire procedure notices in every corridor of high-rises and a national database of all UK tower blocks.

Until this week Southwark Council had refused to release information about the risk assessments on other blocks - stating that it did not want to interfere with the police investigation into the Lakanal blaze.

But following a meeting with police last week, the council reversed that decision. The meeting took place 24 hours after a senior police officer told a Southwark tenant that information about her tower block was a matter for the council and not the investigation.

In a statement released to Inside Housing this week, the council said it rejected any suggestion that it had withheld information about FRAs that the public is entitled to have.

Annie Shepperd, chief executive of the council, said she was confident that the council had ‘only ever acted in the best interests of supporting the police investigation’.

In an email sent to Southwark councillors, seen by Inside Housing, Ms Shepperd adds: ‘In respect of fire risk assessments, now that it has been clarified that these are not required for the investigation, they will be made available.’

Commander David Zinzan, from the Metropolitan police, added: ‘Southwark Council has co-operated in full with the police since the inquiries began, but it is important to understand that this is a highly complex investigation. As a result, misunderstandings can occur and things change as the inquiry progresses.’

For more on Inside Housing’s campaign see our Safe as Houses page

In figures

The aftermath

Six
The number of people killed in a fire at Lakanal House, Camberwell, on 3 July

120
The number of fire risk assessments signed off in the two weeks after the fire

54
Number of fire risk assessments signed off in the three months before the fire

Readers' comments (16)

kass | 09/10/2009 7:48 am
What does this say about social landlords?...
You will have Harry Lime here soon saying, the landlords did not have enough resources or that landlords cannot be everywhere and maybe even it is the tenants fault they did not hand over their diaries with their own personal risks assessments, so how on earth could the council really know and do something about it?... and of course he would add too that where tragedies occur there is no blame ...
Ok, keep telling that to the victims and all of us tenants who can be anytime in the same situation... And of course he and some other professioanls like him posting here will add that by saying this I am just hopelessly wasting my time attacking ALL landlords and ALL honourable staff in the sector... And some other professionals like him will add too that I do not know anything about how social housing works because I am just a tenant and I don't know how the sector works and I better start working in it myself and change it myself (because obviously they are not going to change anyting themselves)... and some other professionals will add I have a bad feeling for the WHOLE sector.... Nice way of solving huge problems, isn't it?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
karen | 09/10/2009 9:33 am
kass that is completely out of context and irrelevent. It is also highly duplicitous to attack someone in name when they have no capacity to defend themselves (i.e. they didnt know they were being attacked here).

Back onto the actual subject of the article... About bloody time too.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Tom Lloyd | 09/10/2009 9:56 am
Hi all, can I just make the point that although we're very happy for people to use this site to debate each others' opinions, it shouldn't be used as a platform to launch personal attacks. Anything that crosses this line may be removed.

This is a general point, and isn't particularly directed at anyone who has commented on this article - I will post this message elsewhere as required.

Thanks,

Tom (web editor)
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
sharon | 09/10/2009 11:52 am
I have said this before but in the private sector, our right to manage company Directors and managing agent are all too aware of the punishments that await us if we don't comply with legislation. What makes this situation even more tragic is the fact that Southwark Council were obviously more than capable of carrying out the required assessments as ably demonstrated by their actions after the Lakanal fire. Someone screwed up badly over this and I have yet to see anyone being held accountable for these deaths. If they can''t be attributed to one person or department then make them all accountable. Can Southwark Council really put so little value on the lives of those they have a duty of care towards? Thats what they get paid to do after all.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
kass | 09/10/2009 12:19 pm
karen | Fri, 9 Oct 2009 09:33 GMT....
exactly, keep going....
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Joe Halewood | 09/10/2009 1:32 pm
Am i mistaken or is there still an ongoing inquiry into Lakanal?

Also - and again i may be mistaken - it appears that the IH campaign is about added fire safety measures that would prevent this in the future. Does this mean that the council had not complied with existing measures / standards or that they had?

So two linked points. I agree that all must be done to make property safer, but if the council complied with the existing regulations then they may not be held liable or accountable under law. That same point applies to all landlords and whether we like it or not.

The fire service enforcement notices mentioned above are not at Lakanal but forother blocks. Was there an enforcement notice on Lakanal? I dont knowe and dont think this information has been given out.

Everyone can be wonderfully wise in hindsight and im sure this council are not the only ones to receive enforcement notices. The police are invesytigating thi matter presumably to see if there is any charges that can be brought against the council. As yet it appears no charges have been levelled against them.

If the police do bring charges and the council is responsible or accountable then good lets roundly criticise and vilify them. Or even if an inquiry does then lets do that.

However, and while some may not like this, the council is innocent until proven guilty. And far more importantly, all councils and all landlords must learn from this and make sure it doesnt happen again.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
kass | 09/10/2009 1:50 pm
sharon | Fri, 9 Oct 2009 11:52 GMT....
Great post. I am so glad you said. If it had been me, I would be attacked for blaming ALL landlords and all decent people who work in social housing.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Tony O | 09/10/2009 2:13 pm
I have the solution! Maybe we should have had "no hesitation and occupied the town hall and refused to move until all these matters were urgently sorted and if not possible by the council demanded directly the Prime Minister to sort them out"
Come the revolution.....

OR carry out an independent investigation to decide the failure in the protocol, find where that responsibility (and therefore liability) sits, then take the appropriate action. I'm not sure any court will consider (seriously) action against all council employees!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Janet Yatak | 09/10/2009 3:19 pm
Southwark have not done any Fire risks assesments for years and only started doing them this and did the majority of them after the fire,

Not doing risk assessments puts lives at risk and of course someone should be held to account for that now Lakanal will take months and only deal with that issue,

Cllr Humphreys was stated as saying that the FRAs can not be done overnight yet nearly 200 FRAs were done in 2 to 3 weeks, after the fire the HOs that did them have had one days training, and They did none for 3 years then suddenly had a rush on probably not done adequately in that rush, the fire authority are of course to share some blame as they have not been enforcing but please do not insult the familes of those that died in the fire and the residents whose lives are still being put at risk by saying that Southwark council are angels and innocent until proven guilty, an Enforcement ORDER is not given for nothing,
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Janet Yatak | 09/10/2009 3:53 pm
I forgot to say in my last post , I wrote to the Leader of the Conservatives in Southwark Cllr Lewis Robinson, asking if he thought it was acceptable that lives were being put at risk, and if he thought it was acceptable that no one had been to account , or resigned or sacked, and he did not respond for weeks then sent my email to a Senior Officer in the council making a complaint about harrassment, and I was making unfound allegations, and I was told that if I continue the council would take the matter further. one or two Lib Dem councillors also did the same, so I am warning any reader that lives in Southwark do not write to your local councillor if they are a Lib dem or Tory about this matter as they will report you, for harrassment.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment