I have recently purchased a three story terraced building with a ground floor commercial tenant (betting shop) and a 1st and 2nd floor commercial space, now being turned into flats. The Fire Officer and Building Control have said the existing ceiling in the betting shop offers no fire resistance. They said it should have, for a long time, had a 30min rating and now needs a 60min given it will be residential above. The ceiling will need to be upgraded by sliding sections of fire rated plasterboard through the existing suspended ceiling framework and applying it to the ceiling. 

The lease states the tenant must keep his space up to date with all fire regulations. However, he is arguing that that does not include the ceiling. He claims that is the fabric of the building and therefore classed as communal. Even so, communal costs are split 57% ground floor and 43% uppers, meaning I would pay 43% at present. 

Can anyone please confirm which party is responsible for paying for the work to be done? 

Not been a legal expert, I suspect that the building is currently compliant with the use as it is.  You want to make a material change to your property by changing the use of the first and second floor to residential bringing BR into play, and now want your tenant to pay 57% of the cost?  I wouldn’t have thought you couldn't make any claim on the tenant.

One for the lawyers to examine their leases. Their FRA should have considered other relevant persons in the premises affected by a fire in their demise which should have looked at the ceiling, but would at best all would be expected would be a 30 minute ceiling or linked building wide fire alarm and even they they could argue the unit should have been compliant when they moved in - the 60 minutes requirement is purely connected with the new development and as such the developer is likely to be expected to pay.

On 09/04/2025 at 10:21, Mike North said:

Not been a legal expert, I suspect that the building is currently compliant with the use as it is.  You want to make a material change to your property by changing the use of the first and second floor to residential bringing BR into play, and now want your tenant to pay 57% of the cost?  I wouldn’t have thought you couldn't make any claim on the tenant.

The ceiling should have been a 30min but was zero and now it needs to be a 60min. 

15 hours ago, AnthonyB said:

One for the lawyers to examine their leases. Their FRA should have considered other relevant persons in the premises affected by a fire in their demise which should have looked at the ceiling, but would at best all would be expected would be a 30 minute ceiling or linked building wide fire alarm and even they they could argue the unit should have been compliant when they moved in - the 60 minutes requirement is purely connected with the new development and as such the developer is likely to be expected to pay.

No FRA carried out I suspect - I asked several times but none were emailed over. 

BR and the fire officer said the tenant's ceiling should have been 30mins already. Now it needs to be 60min. There's a suspended ceiling but it's not fire rated. It will be their suspended ceiling. They've been in the premises for over 30yrs. Their lease states they are responsible for meeting all fire regulations. 

On 07/04/2025 at 17:33, HKR said:

The ceiling will need to be upgraded by sliding sections of fire rated plasterboard through the existing suspended ceiling framework and applying it to the ceiling

I dare sayBC will want a more detailed specification to achieve 60min REI than just another layer of plasterboard. For example, look at the British Gypsum White Book and it soon becomes clear that joist size, spacing, screw placement, plasterboard type and thickness etc, are essential components in any claim for fire resistance. Also be aware that there will be a need to consider sound attenuation. Probably cheaper to remove existing suspended ceiling and get an architect to specify.