AnthonyB
-
Posts
2,713 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by AnthonyB
-
-
It's unlikely to significantly enhance the fire resistance as it's not thick enough or anywhere near the tested specification (https://files.mutualcdn.com/medite-smartply/files/TEUSG0429-Rev01-Medite-Prem-FR-Euroclass-C-30-minute-FR-Partition-Wall.pdf) Euroclass ratings are for a wall or ceiling linings reaction to fire not their ability to hold back fire. Plasterboard or Gypsum board is more common for use to increase fire resistance of walls & doors
https://files.mutualcdn.com/medite-smartply/files/Specification-Guide-to-Flame-Retardant-Wood-Panels-Part-1-REV0.pdfhttps://files.mutualcdn.com/medite-smartply/files/Specification-Guide-to-Flame-Retardant-Wood-Panels-Part-2-REV0.pdf
https://files.mutualcdn.com/medite-smartply/files/Specification-Guide-to-Flame-Retardant-Wood-Panels-Part-3-REV0.pdf
-
That may well be a potentially suitable upgrade - some premises go down an alternative route, especially where there isn't much room for a bulky cupboard: https://envirograf.com/product/ecu-fire-protection-system/
-
When were they built - Building Regulations are not retrospective, but fire safety regulations allow for technical progress in assessing risk meaning in some situations corrective work is required. Government fire risk assessment guidance expects an existing block of flats to have a divided roof space if retaining a stay put policy, but on the other hand doesn't require new flat front doors if the original flat doors are fire doors to the standard of the time of build and are still in good condition.
It's risk assessment driven - ask for the Fire Risk Assessment carried out for the block as the management company is now legally obliged to provide you with details of the risks and protective measures in the building as well as the identity of the fire risk assessor. -
British Standards and the like are not retrospective by themselves. The Fire Risk Assessment, which has to account for technical progress, has to determine if the existing precautions remain tolerable without modernisation - in many cases they are still suitable (especially if other aspects have been modernised.
Example - a hotel in the 1970's could comply with fire safety legislation with either no smoke detection or provision just to the stairs and corridors - this would no longer be tolerable as lack of any, or just limited, detection in any sleeping accommodation has been proven to be an unacceptable risk to life so the current standard requires detection throughout most areas of the hotel including bedrooms and it would be expected this is retrospectively applied & legally enforceable. On the other hand the same hotel would have original fire doors with a wooden stop on the frame instead of the current standard of intumescent strips and smoke brushes but could (& have in legal cases) justify not replacing them where they were in good working condition & the premises had more detection than when first approved.
They only need to work to the 2025 standard for service intervals and actions and for major additions/new systems - the system itself does not need to be current as long as it still performs adequately and the FRA says such. -
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fire-safety-in-purpose-built-blocks-of-flats
Usually you need your own expert report - clients going to First Tier Tribunals often use these - unless you can convince them with this guide that does not require external doors to be fire doors except in limited circumstances (not yours)
-
If that is a final exit to the outside then there is every likelihood it doesn't need to be a fire resisting door so you can simply fill the holes with whatever you want to prevent draughts.
-
No it isn't - an external entrance door does not need to be a fire door unless onto an external escape stair or a balcony with escape in only one direction.
-
https://www.flameguardbedding.co.uk/Fire-Retardant-Pyjama-Sets-Extre--1 All sorts of special dressing gowns, nightwear, etc can be found if you search
-
All I can find free are:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6243119ce90e075f1088f5c1/ps-11-fire-safety-march-2022.pdf
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2018/9780111164631/pdfs/ukdsi_9780111164631_en.pdf
So it looks like having to pay for it - if it's like the other ones for special sectors like BB100 for fire safety design in schools in it's depth and specific content it should be worth it if doing prisons work (have you tried asking the establishment you are working at for a copy?)
-
First Tier Tribunal - challenge the necessity for the door being changed - most flat fire door replacements are not required to meet the functional requirements of the law and the guidance (which has special status such that if you follow it you tend to be deemed compliant if someone alleges there is an issue)
However you need to establish that the current doorset meets the requirements applicable to the block - the minimum standard being based on age, layout & height of the block.
This note reinforces that wholesale replacement is often not required - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fire-safety-england-regulations-2022-fire-door-guidance/fire-safety-england-regulations-2022-fire-door-guidance -
It's not quite a BS7273-4 device, but it's probably the nearest guidance - this would equate to weekly rotational testing, servicing in accordance with manufacturers instructions = basically it's risk assessment based
-
-
Yes, for the external walls and due to the hallway. Not many requirements would be expected to come off the back of it though.
-
It may be at a lower than usual height for wheelchair users (even though I'm guessing there aren't any!) Their safeguarding & fire risk assessments need to match up to provide a suitable balance between placement for escape and placement to avoid children escaping.
-
On 30/11/2025 at 10:22, Guest Guest said:
Hello, I have a situation similar to Ron above but with less flats. With regards to a FRA for the building itself, would this mean that the assessor would need to go into each individual flat or just the outside of each flat and outside of the shop? Each property has their own external escape route and no communal interior shared space, just exterior.
I am about to start minor structural building work to the shop. The shop is rented out. Would it be my responsibility to do a FRA after the work has finished or the tenant? So far the tenant has done their own FRA. Would that be acceptable or would it need a new FRA by a professional assessor?
Thank you.
Are there internal common areas for the flats? If not then a building owner FRA would be of the exterior of the building primarily.
Where there are internal common areas as a minimum a sample of flats would need access to their hallways to inspect the front fire door properly from both sides and to check if any common fire alarm system devices are present.
If the tenant is still in occupancy through & after the works then it is for them to review their FRA not you - it is up to them whether they do this in house or via an external accredited person. -
On 25/11/2025 at 09:23, Dean B said:
Yes, the warning signs. However, the only regulation I found (eventually) seems to state they are required if the opening is used as a route you go through. This is just a serving hatch and you would need to be rather determined to be able to climb through it!
As the law is risk based to achieve functional standards and is not a prescriptive list of specific individual requirements for every aspect of Health & Safety if there is no risk of entrapment your H&S risk assessment might accept it - speak to your H&S person to see if your HSRA can accept this
-
Report it to Trading Standards, it must have the permanent label if sold for domestic use.
-
If you follow the longstanding and current guidance for existing blocks, then FD30 doors and glazing fire protected unless the bottom sill is 1100mm high or greater.
-
I assume they mean an illuminating sign and siren to warn of 'fire shutter closing' often included in modern purpose built kits, sometimes missing from older set ups or those assembled using standard shutter parts.
The requirement for warnings may be in the powered shutter standard BS EN 13241-1:2003 (I don't have a copy) plus some form of warning would be likely under The Health and Safety (Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations 1996
Just because it wasn't mentioned before doesn't mean it shouldn't have been!
-
Q : do we need to replace domestic twin & earth cabling to these detectors with fire proof/resistant wiring ? If cable failure would cause the AOV to fail safe to the open position then no, otherwise yes
Q : is there a legal requirement for an AOV or can we convert to a MOV ? No, if the existing installation is an AOV you can't make something worse than original, just equal or better
Q : is there a legal requirement for signage in this single staircase, single exit, less than 9m run scenario ? No requirement for fire exit signage, no requirement for floor and flat numbering if an existing building (but good practice), fire instructions notice required near entrance or on notice board, etc
-
If you actually need to upgrade at all (often not actually required in smaller existing blocks as backed up by official guidance) then you should be going for combined intumescent & smoke seals.
Costs are down to the individual leases & agreements for the block - front doors are usually the flat owner, the meter cupboards more of a grey area -
Unfortunately Building Control are getting less helpful and less flexible than before, often they require a Chartered or Incorporated Fire Engineer to author any strategy that varies from the norm and for the cost of that you may as well have upgraded your heritage doors!
-
Real trees are only a particular problem if not watered regularly - also it's whats on the tree and around it that need to be considered (ignition source from lighting on the tree, flammable decorations, etc) as well as where you are wanting to put it.
It's a risk based approach for each venue -
The guide doesn't address your layout as it assumes protection of the stair rather than the greater expense of an external stair unless you are a storey higher than you are. You could argue to Building Control that the stair is over and above the requirements and would compensate for an unprotected stair as the upper floor isn't relying on it for safe escape, after all Approved Document B isn't law & if you can show an alternative approach provides equal safety they are meant to accept it- they an only say no
Door mates
in Landlords
Posted
You wouldn't want to use a roof as an exit as you would then be trapped with fire & smoke of course liking to rise (look at the Joelma Building Fire)
A single protected stair is an acceptable escape route in many situations