Fire chief calls for checks on assessors
Housing staff and other professionals who carry out fire risk assessments should be accredited to show they are competent, London’s top fire fighter has said.
Ron Dobson, commissioner of London Fire Brigade, said an accreditation system would help landlords buying fire risk assessments to find good quality assessors.
Speaking at a meeting of London Assembly’s planning and housing committee, Mr Dobson said the Chief Fire Officers Association would like to see ‘some sort of accreditation so where responsibility goes out to buy risk assessment they know what they are buying in terms of people’s competence’.
He said this should apply to anyone who carries out the inspections, including housing officers. ‘Even where people understand their responsibilities [to carry out an FRA] the consistency with which the FRA is completed is variable,’ he said.
His comments follow a leaked email from another senior member of London Fire Brigade which said that a course the brigade provided for Southwark council housing officers did not provide them with the skills to carry out fire risk assessments on tower blocks. At the time the council said it had ‘no reason to suspect the training was not adequate’.
Committee member Navin Shah, a former architect, proposed an ‘MOT’ for buildings to ensure they remained safe after they were built and repaired. He said the MOT process should bring together existing legislation and inspection procedures.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (3)
the purple avenger | 18/03/2010 4:57 pm
Another big pay day for a training consultancy somewhere - and more cost for landlords. I know its important but I am not sure that this is the way forward. Why dont the fire brigade themselves employ people to carry out FRAs? That would ensure consistency - and they would have a direct reporting link to the local fire cheif if there were issues that were persistently ignored. I know its a cost to the tax payer - but then so is a scharge to landlords (albeit an indirect charge).
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Ron H | 19/03/2010 3:40 pm
As a local authority housing resident, I welcome this proposal.
At the moment, inspections are being done by caretakers and various housing officers, who are, it is claimed, 'trained'. This activity, in response to the Southwark disaster, has been welcome, but clearly inadequate. For example, they fail to pick up such things as inadequate signage, out of date fire extinguishers etc. Essentially, they only check (very occasionally) if fire doors close, and access is kept clear. Properly trained staff who are able to do inspections to the proper standard are a must. As for suggesting that fire officers being tasked with this work, ideal, but don't hold your breath.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
John | 19/03/2010 6:56 pm
Whilst I agree having a register of fire risk assessors is quite a good idea, I do wonder who would decide who is competent? London Fire Brigade? They were the Service that sold 12 Fire Risk Assessment training courses plus follow up sessions to Southwark Council to 132 building control officers only then to tell them it was the wrong course and that they were not adequately trained!!!!
The Fire Service used to carry out vists under previous fire legislation. The move to towards self assessment was meant to reduce the red tape to businesses and councils etc so that they could set their own fire safety management standards (based on government guidance). So I do not think the Fire Service will go back to doing this type of check.
My last point of this rambling post is..... Doing a fire risk assessment is just the first part of the equation. Responsible persons should then follow up any deficiencies found (Significant findings). Perhaps if LFB followed up FRAs to make sure they had be done and any check that significant findings had been resolved rather than try to earn a few extra pounds offering inadequate fire training courses perhaps London would be a bit safer! Perhaps CFO Dobson should put that in his next London Fire safety Plan.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment