Cross corridor doors

[delboy]

Block of flats (PB) in 1990. 3 floors with one staircase and front and rear exits to ether car park or street. (1 mtr from bottom of stairs) 

On ground and first floor only there are corridors no more than 8 mtrs long containing 4 flats.

Each corridor has a set of double doors from new. These doors are solid 44mm Windsor style doors with Georgian wired glass as from new.

All frames have intumescent seals and one door has the same along one edge. All in good condition. Hinges were changed to G13 Fire Rated hinges 2 years ago , after a FRA.

All flat doors have certified FD30 doors with overhead closers, G13 Fire rated hinges, and seals and conform to all latest specs (after Door assessment)

We are now being told that the` Windsor style` cross corridor doors MUST be replaced with new doors.

No reason is being given other than ` old ones do not comply`

The doors have stickers (albeit 2017) from a fire door company saying that they were approved Fire Doors, in addition to having passed all previous FRAs. with the upgrade of the new hinges.

Is there or has there been any change in policy and Law for the Managing agent to now enforce this??

[Neil ashdown]

4 hours ago, delboy said:

We are now being told that the Windsor style cross corridor doors MUST be replaced with new doors.

No reason is being given other than ` old ones do not comply`

There has been no such change.  I would push them about exactly why these doors do not 'comply' and what it is they do not 'comply' with.

[delboy]

Here is an image of the doors as they are today.

I heard that the company quoting for the job has spoken with a local Safety Officer (no idea who they are talking about) presumably from the council, but these flats are ALL private and nothing to do with the council.

Doors are all sound but at 30 years old do have the odd nick on them, but thats about it as far as I can see.

[Neil ashdown]

So have they given a reason why they must be replaced?

[AnthonyB]

They do look like the original fire doors that are to the standard of the time with the upgrades as already mentioned.

They would be acceptable under both the existing flats guidance and based on the draft for consultation would still be acceptable under the new small blocks of flats guidance produced to account for the Fire Safety Act's amendment of the fire safety order.

Unless you see something in writing from the Council that you have verified is really from them I'd do nothing and even if something does then I'd ask a competent person to look at their rationale & put forward a  rebuttal if needed.

Could be a confidence trick, wouldn't be the first fire safety related one I've heard of. 

[delboy]

Thank you so much for your replies.

Further I have found the detailed wordings from the Door assessments.

I cannot look at all cross doors in all flats but I can look at the double doors shown on my image.

So referring to their observations regarding these particular doors they comment as follows:

 Has the door got a Fire Door label?................................................................Answer....,solid construction..........No Fire label.................NEW DOORS REQUIRED

If not, can you confirm it is a nominal Fire Door.............................................Answer...Yes.

Is the Frame firmly attached to the wall?........................................................Answer....No...gaps between wall and frame..........Install Fire stopping

Is the frame/door leaf consistent 3mm.?........................................................Answer....NO.......Result....Will be resolved when fitting new doors.

Are the intumesent/cold smoke seals in place?............................................Answer.YES...........result....supply and install new smoke seals !!!!

No intumesecent seals continues to the glass..............................................Answer......Not required as new doors will be fitted

That is a summary of any negative results to their questions.

I would admit that in my own opinion there is minor works to satisfy some of issues raised.

The only one I am unsure about is the Intumescent seals to the glazing.

I guess that If that in itself is not up to standard then any other problem is irrelevant??

[AnthonyB]

It's still not a requirement for the door to have a certification mark, it makes identifying the door more difficult but isn't the end of the world.

It's far easier to rebead the glazing with the correct intumescent than replace the door and frame (if they don't replace the frame then any new door certificate would be invalid as certification is for door sets (frame, ironmongery, etc) not just the door.

[delboy]

16 minutes ago, AnthonyB said:

It's still not a requirement for the door to have a certification mark, it makes identifying the door more difficult but isn't the end of the world.

It's far easier to rebead the glazing with the correct intumescent than replace the door and frame (if they don't replace the frame then any new door certificate would be invalid as certification is for door sets (frame, ironmongery, etc) not just the door.

Thanks, really interesting...they are actually quoting for the doors like this (image attached from your site), and are saying that they can no longer use doors like the existing ones? ...........Not allowed. (local safety officer, still unknown)

As you can appreciate they will just not match up in any way and look hideous, without matching frames, and then the cost will more than double

But if they are NOT allowed, how can they leave the side glazed frames in place? Which part is not liked....a 44mm solid hardwood door or the glazing.

And you can see that the frame also has a side glazed attached to the wall. No mention of new frames is mentioned at all, despite being space to say that (well not until they start I wouldn`t be surprised). In fact they do mention that sealant is needed between frame and wall, for which they have included a cost £130 per door frame

This is fast becoming an issue. Section 20 has been issued and looks like they will railroad this through.

 

 

 

[Neil ashdown]

From what you say, Delboy, I am struggling to see how the fire door assessor has reached the conclusion that new doors are required. That's not to say that some upgrading wouldn't be recommended.

[delboy]

On 28/10/2021 at 06:10, Neil ashdown said:

From what you say, Delboy, I am struggling to see how the fire door assessor has reached the conclusion that new doors are required. That's not to say that some upgrading wouldn't be recommended.

Hi

     Yes, me too, and other leaseholders.

I have no problem is some extra work being. The really annoying thing is that on the last FRA in 2018, things like the hinges were reported, and all the work was done, at some considerable cost.

New managing agents since then, of course they use their own tame Fire Risk assessors, different assessor, different result !!! 

I can see this palava going on at each FRA in future, always finding something to spend our money on.

Fair enough if its really needed, but........................

 

[delboy]

Here is an update to this now old post.

After many attempts to get the MA to see sense, they finally agreed to meet another Fire company to look at the cross lobby doors...............upshot of that is that they were told that new doors are not needed, due to the distance of flat doors from stairways ...so a huge saving to leaseholders in unnecessary expense, due to dogmatic approach bt MA.

However despite that, no works have, as yet, been carried out from the FRA recommendations  done in June 2020 !!!!!

Now they are telling us that we must have annual checks, both internal and external. to all flat doors

So now another discussion ensues........The blocks of PB flats are less than 11mtrs tall, at the height of the top floor floor (In fact its only a 3 storey property, GF/FF/SF).

As I read the Regulation 10 of the updated Fire Safety report (Feb 2023) only if a building is more than 11mtrs tall (at level of top floor floor) is an annual check required.

Am I reading this all wrong? 

Of course from my viewpoint I would say that any/all occupiers, whether owner  occupiers or tenants should do this every day, let alone every year. As far as I see it it is just another tick box exercise, to cover the Freeholder, because like an MOT on a car, its only good on the day its done, and therefore, only suggests safety on 1 day out of 365.t day

[Neil Ashdown MAFDI]

Regulation 10:  https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fire-safety-england-regulations-2022/fact-sheet-fire-doors-regulation-10

I would interpret this to mean the 'total height of all storeys combined'.

[AnthonyB]

The Government guidance clearly states that buildings with the floor of the top storey under 11m are not exempt from the need for fire door checks under Article 17 of the Fire Safety Order, only that the frequency of those checks is not prescriptive as per the Fire Safety (England) Regulations, for example a smaller block may decide through their risk assessment to only check communal doors 6 monthly and only check a percentage of flat doors annually rather than trying to check all of them.

[delboy]

Total update to the FRA done in 2020...............still in August 2025, we have no certification to say that our block meets the regulations.

The cross corridor doors were not replaced but updated with new hinges etc.

But late last year unbeknown to us the MA had another FRA done along with a Safety report done.

I now have a copy of that report (had to be dragged out) and one thing I notice is that a part of that goes into detail about the cross corridor doors and the Wired glass.

It says that this is contrary to` Building Reg`s and consideration should be given to changing the glass, up to 80cm, (so 5 panels per door) using Fire/Safety glass.

I have looked at glass that is both safety and fire proof and there is only one, Pyrostop Glass

The cost of this is enormous, has anyone else come across this, and can New BR  be forced upon us???

[Mike North]

Building regulations can only be applied to new buildings or material alterations whilst they are being built, can you imagine the cost of bringing Windsor castle up to date?

You won’t get certification to say it meets the regulations.  Once a building is built and handed over, building regulations are out of the window except for material alterations. 

The fire safety order then comes onto force which (amongst other things) requires the responsible person (or their agent) to conduct a fire risk assessment on the building and address the findings.  It is not a money-making scheme,

If the glazing says it is fire rated, then unless the assessor can prove it isn’t then it’s acceptable

[delboy]

11 hours ago, Mike North said:

Building regulations can only be applied to new buildings or material alterations whilst they are being built, can you imagine the cost of bringing Windsor castle up to date?

You won’t get certification to say it meets the regulations.  Once a building is built and handed over, building regulations are out of the window except for material alterations.    Why no fire certification? Surely any prospective buyers lawyers will want confirmation that the building conforms to Fire Regs? Not to mention the Insurance company

The fire safety order then comes onto force which (amongst other things) requires the responsible person (or their agent) to conduct a fire risk assessment on the building and address the findings.  It is not a money-making scheme. FRA was done at same time as the Health and Safety check.

If the glazing says it is fire rated, then unless the assessor can prove it isn’t then it’s acceptable....building is from 1990.

 

[AnthonyB]

On 09/08/2025 at 09:45, delboy said:

Total update to the FRA done in 2020...............still in August 2025, we have no certification to say that our block meets the regulations.

The cross corridor doors were not replaced but updated with new hinges etc.

But late last year unbeknown to us the MA had another FRA done along with a Safety report done.

I now have a copy of that report (had to be dragged out) and one thing I notice is that a part of that goes into detail about the cross corridor doors and the Wired glass.

It says that this is contrary to` Building Reg`s and consideration should be given to changing the glass, up to 80cm, (so 5 panels per door) using Fire/Safety glass.

I have looked at glass that is both safety and fire proof and there is only one, Pyrostop Glass

The cost of this is enormous, has anyone else come across this, and can New BR  be forced upon us???

Someone is either completely unaware of how the legal regimes for both fire safety & building regulations work and shouldn't be writing reports or someone is angling to make a lot of money out of unnecessary works. It's only recently the Government had to issue updated guidance as too many leaseholders were being ripped off with unnecessary work (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fire-safety-england-regulations-2022-fire-door-guidance/fire-safety-england-regulations-2022-fire-door-guidance).

You have two choices:
- Pay the s20 charge for the works
- Pay for a decent independent evidence based assessment and take the case to a First Tier Tribunal, leaseholders have won a good number of these in recent years, I've helped one in a similar situation with erroneous work being charged for (they won against the freeholder & Council).

[delboy]

32 minutes ago, AnthonyB said:

Someone is either completely unaware of how the legal regimes for both fire safety & building regulations work and shouldn't be writing reports or someone is angling to make a lot of money out of unnecessary works. It's only recently the Government had to issue updated guidance as too many leaseholders were being ripped off with unnecessary work (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fire-safety-england-regulations-2022-fire-door-guidance/fire-safety-england-regulations-2022-fire-door-guidance).

You have two choices:
- Pay the s20 charge for the works
- Pay for a decent independent evidence based assessment and take the case to a First Tier Tribunal, leaseholders have won a good number of these in recent years, I've helped one in a similar situation with erroneous work being charged for (they won against the freeholder & Council).

      The works to attend to the FRA done in 2020, are still not completed. All money was paid in 2021 under section 20.       But in the meantime the MA had another FRA done in 2024, and last year this H&S report as well. Nothing bad about the FRA announced (despite not all works completer as in some flat doors still not either replaced or rectified). But it is the H&S report to which I am referring, where it goes into detail about the cross corridor doors, which would appear to be OK from a Fire Risk point of view, but its the H&A report that goes on about the Wired glass being OK for Fire Safety, but they pose a Health risk from a breakage point of view.  Then the fact that BR forbid them being used. I fully understand that todays BR do not mean retrospective action, but as you say some MAs will try it on. I just wanted to be sure that giving present situation we could not be forced to replace the glass.

[Mike North]

On 11/08/2025 at 21:05, delboy said:

Why no fire certification? Surely any prospective buyers lawyers will want confirmation that the building conforms to Fire Regs? Not to mention the Insurance company

You may get certification to say that the building was built to building regulations, however a building that was built in the 1980s it does not mean it comply with the current building regulations.

Any alterations or maintenance to building would make the original certification null and void as what was signed off is not what was is there now.

You need to look at the regulation 38 information, which should be an up-to-date record of all the fire safety information for the building Including fire doors along with the latest FRA and any recent fire surveys to get an holistic view.

[AnthonyB]

On 11/08/2025 at 22:16, delboy said:

      The works to attend to the FRA done in 2020, are still not completed. All money was paid in 2021 under section 20.       But in the meantime the MA had another FRA done in 2024, and last year this H&S report as well. Nothing bad about the FRA announced (despite not all works completer as in some flat doors still not either replaced or rectified). But it is the H&S report to which I am referring, where it goes into detail about the cross corridor doors, which would appear to be OK from a Fire Risk point of view, but its the H&A report that goes on about the Wired glass being OK for Fire Safety, but they pose a Health risk from a breakage point of view.  Then the fact that BR forbid them being used. I fully understand that todays BR do not mean retrospective action, but as you say some MAs will try it on. I just wanted to be sure that giving present situation we could not be forced to replace the glass.

Nothing wrong with wired glass, it's still used today, just less common than before for aesthetic reasons. It is however not as good as modern glass for safety on impact and whilst perfectly legal in existing buildings it is good practice to consider replacing depending on who is using the area and the resultant risk and of course if the glass location needs to meet safety standards at all (it's location dependant)