Jump to content

delboy

Members
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. thks. I understand that others here are being asked change the doors completely !!! It looks to me as if this is an ideal situation to be doing things unnecessarily, we can be told anything. Are Perko chains OK on a 28 year old purpose built block of flats (ground/first and second only), if they close the entrance flat door??
  2. I am leaseholder of a flat in a purpose built black (28 yrs old). FRA done 2 years ago, made no mention of Flat Fire doors to common areas, other than doors met with safety regs. New FRA done this year, now mentions possible entrance door remedial work. Doors are recognised as FD30s. (written in the FRA) All intumescent strips in place. I attach a photos of the roller lock fitted, which I replaced earlier this year, before the FRA. I replaced internal lock with same as was there, which is a Union make. Does this lock look OK for the purpose? Door fitted with original Perko closure, which works perfectly closing the door over the roller lock (great cause I cant lock my self out of the flat)
  3. Hi Thank you for the post....interesting The managing agents tell me that they are looking into it, but when I suggested that they cannot make the decision, and only the freeholders could make that decision, they agreed, suggesting that they havent even asked the freeholder yet. And of course all the while this goes on we keep on paying (£50/wk just to push a button to test) !!!! Ridiculous
  4. Hello I am a leaseholder of a flat, one of 32 in total, arranged in 3 separate attached blocks, each with their own 2 entrances. Arranged over ground. first and second floors. The 3 blocks are 28 years old and there is a common Fire alarm system fitted, with simple central alarm that will sound in all 3 blocks in the event of fire. I understand it is L4+M type of system. There has been 2 Fire risk assessments done over the past 2 years (by different companies), where both reports suggest that a Fire Alarm system is not required. There is a StayPut policy in force. So despite not being required, the unit still needs to be serviced, checked, maintained and tested at considerable cost. I have asked the managing agents, if they will ask the Freeholders to agree to its removal or decommissioning, as its upkeep now forms a large part of our total service charges. In the event that the Freeholders insist that the system remains, are leaseholders in a position to challenge their decision or refuse to pay for its upkeep? Any comments appreciated
×
×
  • Create New...