Leaseholder being forced into front door replacement without valid justification

Hello,

I know I'm far from the first leaseholder with this issue but would deeply appreciate any ideas.

My flat is in a purpose built block of 4 flats, set over 2 floors, and is on the upper floor. Building and fittings are c. 20 years old.

The front door recently failed a basic visual inspection because it's "not fire-rated". I have strong evidence this was only determined because it doesn't have a marking. As you are well aware, the Govt. guidance is clear that this isn’t required for older doors and this alone isn't enough to require automatic replacement. The door is original to the build and, to my knowledge, has had no major alterations.

The door did not appear to be assessed on a notional basis at all, the (external) assessor did not consider remediation as a possible option and gave no details to justify the replacement requirement besides "no rating". This also contradicts the guidance.

The door leaf itself is 44/45mm thick, is composite timber with no visible cracks or warping and sits well in the frame. The door leaf wasn't mentioned at all.

The other issues identified in the 1-page report appear to be remedial:

• 8mm gap middle latch side - the frame, which i believe is natural hardwood, has slightly warped here. This seems a typical common repair.

• A hinge adjustment may be needed and/or hinges may need replacing. There are 3 hinges.

• "non compliant" latch/lock - again not sure relevant to older doors, I'm certain this was based on current standards. No details given.

• The self closer wasn't even mentioned but needs adjusting or possibly replacing.

I’m now very familiar with the government guidance on notional doors and used the LAS to gather support for my case to properly consider remediation before demanding replacement.

The management company did not respond to my points but did then change their stance to "prove" it's fd30 rated and repair it and they'll accept it.

The issue - besides the direction to "prove" the rating - is that the only option seems to be re-testing. The management company are refusing to help despite the clear flaws in the initial test and are effectively backing me into a corner with only 2 bad - and potentially very costly - options. If i have another test and ultimately replacement is still required, I'll be out of pocket even more.

This kind of situation seems to be exactly why the government guidance was updated but the market is so behind. There appear to be almost no options for individual homeowners, everything is B2B. Trying to find someone to do an individual basic visual inspection AND who will properly follow the notional door guidance appears to be an impossible task.

I completely understand the importance of risk assessment in fire safety and in many instances extra caution is probably the right call. But some proportion and sense have to be applied when large costs are involved for individuals - this is a small block of 4, not a high rise or large commercial premises. At minimum, it must be explained.

So I have come to call on the knowledge and generosity of the people here. I'm obviously not expecting any formal confirmation, but I would be very grateful if anyone has any opinions on whether it sounds like I have a good case for repair, in which case I can feel more confident trying to find and pay for another assessment. (Whether i can find someone to come and do it with a proportionate approach is another matter).

Or, whether there's already enough here to tell that replacement is the only obvious choice.

All I want is some clear reasoning and justification before I fork out thousands.

Happy to provide any more info needed. Literally any advice or direction welcomed!

Huge thanks, I'm really tearing my hair out over here.