Failed fire door inspection but very little information of what work is actually necessary

[Guest Alan Jones]

We have a 3rd floor flat in a six story block and we have recently had a fire door inspection carried out by Tetra consulting.  Pretty much all the 183 flats in the block failed the survey on a number of points, some of which are a bit contentious.  Can anyone provide some information of the following as I am finding it pretty much impossible to get a sensible answer from Tetra.  The flats were built in 2003

1.  Hinges are not CE/UKCA marked.  The flats were constructed in 2003, my understanding is that CE/UKCA marking was not required at that time, therefore as long as the hinges are in good condition and suitable for the weight of the door, they shouldn't need to be replaced just because they are not CE marked.  Is this correct?  They are 4" inch ball bearing hinges.

2. Gap between the bottom of the door and the floor exceeds 3mm.  My understanding is that 3mm applies to smoke and fire doors, fire door only gaps can be up to 10mm.  When were smoke and fire doors mandated by legislation, was it after 2003?  If so, I assume these are fore only doors and a gap of up to 10mm is acceptable.

3. It couldn't be determined if intumescent seals are fitted to the letterbox and spy hole.  Are we required to investigate by removing the items or can we assume they were fitted correctly by the developer?

In all cases, the doors were found to be acceptable, but nearly all were identified as having gaps larger than 4mm, but we do not have the original data sheets for the doors so have no way of knowing if this is intentional.

I will be very grateful for any information you can provide as we currently have a lot of people at a loss as to what problems we have to address and what we can ignore.

Regards Alan Jones 

[AnthonyB]

1. Correct, no CE mark by itself is not a reason to automatically require replacement
2. Smoke control doors were a thing way before 2003, your FRA should determine what doors are expected, but for the size and age you'd expect FD30S
3. Your fire door inspector should have been able to tell if an intumescent letter box was in place. A spy hole is so small your risk assessor should determine in line with a competent fire door specialist if it's proportionate to investigate further.

The biggest unnecessary overspend in existing blocks of flats relates to fire doors and in an ideal world a competent fire risk assessor and a competent fire door inspector would meet together and with the client to assess on a risk based approach as per the legislation what must be done promptly, what can be done over time progressively and what really isn't necessary. The most important thing is that the doors are all self closing flush in frame.

A lot of places have taken advantage of fire door inspection requirements so have trained staff on a pass/fail modern standards basis only whereas the legislation & it's official guidance does allow a risk based approach - this means you need to choose carefully your fire door inspectors & risk assessors.