Revealed: the fire safety frenzy after Lakanal

Social landlords in West Yorkshire received a slap on the wrist from the region’s fire service last month.

Nigel Charlston, senior fire safety manager with West Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service, wrote to all landlords operating in the region after it conducted an audit of fire safety in high-rise blocks of flats. The service decided to review the action social landlords have taken to ensure tower blocks are safe following a fatal blaze at Lakanal House in Camberwell, south London, which killed six people in July.

Its checks revealed some worrying findings. ‘After the fire we did a series of samples in West Yorkshire just to see what the state of play was,’ Mr Charlston states. ‘As a result of that we thought it was worthwhile making it [high-rises] a priority for the rest of the year on our inspection programme.’

His letter to landlords states that ‘with the exception of Kirklees’ the results of the sample inspections ‘have not been encouraging and, as a result, it is now my intention to authorise further inspections’.

‘We found two blocks,’ he says. ‘One in Halifax was a 15 -storey block that had little or no fire resistance at all. We did have similar problems in Leeds as well but that was sorted out without having to go to prohibition.’

Of course, West Yorkshire Fire Brigade is not alone in the work it has carried out since the Lakanal blaze. Indeed, when it comes to ensuring tenant safety, the fire raised as many questions for fire services across the UK as it did for social landlords.

This is because fire authorities are responsible for auditing the fire risk assessments which social landlords are supposed to carry out on their buildings. Following the Lakanal blaze, Southwark Council was issued with enforcement notices by the London Fire Brigade on three other blocks - Perronet House, Marie Curie House and Castlemead House. Among the criticisms levelled in the enforcement notices was that none of the three had suitable fire risk assessments.

The blaze raises two significant questions for fire authorities. How seriously have they treated fire safety in high-rise flats and have they changed their position since the Lakanal fire?

Revelations

Inside Housing’s Safe as Houses campaign aims to stop preventable deaths from gas and fire and calls for a national database of tower blocks, and their most recent risk assesments, to be set up. As the campaign gathers support, and in an attempt to answer the serious questions raised by the Lakanal tragedy in July, Inside Housing used the Freedom of Information Act to find out how many risk assessment audits fire services have carried out on local authority blocks between 2006, when regulations were introduced requiring them to do so, and July, and what action they have taken since the blaze.

By last Friday 35 authorities had responded to our FOI requests out of a total of 42. The responses, some of which are highlighted opposite and overleaf, make interesting and occasionally alarming reading.

Most fire authorities had audited at least some risk assessments before 3 July but there were some that had examined only a small percentage of the total. Twelve of the fire authorities had subjected high-rise fire

risk assessments to more scrutiny since the Lakanal blaze or altered the way they worked with local authorities.

The responses to Inside Housing’s FOI queries suggest it is important that they do so. Where fire authorities had checked FRAs previously they had felt prompted to issue 136 enforcement notices - 124 of these were issued in London.

Two authorities did not start auditing risk assessments of tower blocks until after the Lakanal fire - with nine others dramatically increasing their programme of checks.

One said it would only be able to identify whether audits had been carried out with ‘a physical check of the paper file for each premises’.

Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service is one of those that has stepped up checks. It carried out 84 audits of FRAs before the fire but 161 since - with three of the original 84 requiring ‘further action’.

But after July this year Manchester’s fire safety managers responsible for 11 boroughs were instructed to ‘identify’ high-rise buildings above six storeys. It has now identified 184 premises and audited 161 of them.

Royal Berkshire Fire & Rescue Service, which has around 20 tower blocks in its area, hadn’t carried out any audits before July.

Its chief fire officer Iain Cox, who is also director for prevention and protection at the Chief Fire Officers’ Association, says his service is now looking into doing audits wherever necessary. But he explains: ‘Not everywhere is as dangerous as Lakanal. It has not been a priority in some areas because they [tower blocks] are a lower risk than hostels, hospitals and HIMOS [house in multiple occupation]’.

Mr Cox is now calling for social landlords across the country to arrange seminars in December and January to discuss the implications of the Lakanal fire.

He states it is the ‘management, management, management’ of buildings that is most important for making sure tower blocks are not at risk of fire. But it is on our radar,’ he adds.

South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue authority had not done any audits before Lakanal. Steve Chu, head of communications at the fire authority, says: ‘Residential buildings were considered to be a low risk compared to other premises in the county that were considered higher risk, such as hotels, hospitals and other industrial buildings. There are several industrial work premises in South Yorkshire.’ He explains the service is now looking at auditing 40 premises - a mix of residential, industrial and business, including tower blocks. But he says the whole ‘tactical approach’ to tackling fires in South Yorkshire will be reviewed, such as whether to tell residents to ‘stay put’ in their homes when a fire breaks out elsewhere in the building.

Recurring issues

Inside Housing’s FOI requests also reveal common problems uncovered by fire authority checks. Fourteen out of the 35 fire authorities found problems with some blocks when they conducted checks, despite landlords’ responsibilities. The problems include the fire safety of doors, which may be defective in some way or without intumescent strips, which expand when heated filling gaps around doors. These strips are a recognised way of helping stop fires spread and are required in some buildings.

Doors may also be left, or wedged, open meaning they are ineffective in preventing fire from spreading.

In audits carried out before July, Lancashire Fire and Rescue Service found some problems with most of the 18 tower blocks in its area. It handed out at least one enforcement notice and eight ‘minor non-compliance’ notices.

Its FOI response gives some examples of problems it found: ‘Mostly, there has been an absence of suitable fire doors, lack of self-closing devices, and intumescent strips and smoke seals on fires doors - usually on staircase or lobby doors, but also on flat doors.

‘Doors generally have been found to be in poor condition due to age, and in some cases the flat doors have been changed to uPVC instead of fire-resistant types.’

Holes had been cut into existing fire doors to insert letter boxes, it noted, and ‘older type multi-storey buildings rely on permanent vents/grills or openable windows to ensure that staircases are smoke-free’. Residents in older tower blocks were more likely to be affected by fire, the Lancashire Fire Service suggests, because ‘fire safety may have been compromised over time’.

Michael Gelling, chair of the Tenants’ and Residents’ Organisations of England, says he is ‘more than disappointed’ some fire authorities had not carried out more audits before the Lakanal fire.

‘If you are talking about where people live, where people believe, perhaps naively, they are safe, there’s an obligation on whoever it be that puts people’s lives in danger,’ he says.

‘I think it’s sad someone has to lose their life before people start doing their job properly.’

Certainly, it does seem many fire authorities have been spurred into making the auditing of local authority fire risk assessments of tower blocks a higher priority - with some even compiling a list of blocks for the first time.

The Safe as Houses campaign recognises the importance of a national database of tower blocks.

The fact that some fire authorities have kept little check on the work social landlords in their regions have done to maintain fire safety suggests such a network is needed sooner rather than later.

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

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment