Towering Inferno!

[perrykneeham]

I did a survey on a couple of floors in a factory on Tuesday. It was a bit of a deathtrap really, just from casual observation. Fire doors made out ofbtickky-tacky, fire doors opening the wrong way, unprotected means of escape corridors etc. It was obvious that it hadn't been up to speed for a very long time, but it had just had a visit from a private fire guy, who was really only interested in flogging more alarm gear. His risk assessment missed some real howlers apparently but, that's where we are: nothing bad will happen until something bad happens. I can't remember the last time I heard of a commercial building getting a fire inspection from an actual fireman. That being said,.there are an awful lot of ex-firemen in that game.

I've got to do these drawings, and I'm wondering if I should mark the various problems as non-compliant.

[mids]

I read a bit of a fire investigation report about this the other day. Quite readable although very long and detailed. They'd got a forensic fire investigator bloke to look in detail and he certainly did. Right down to taking apart the electric devices in the kitchen of flat 16, where the fire started. He even described the internal wiring in terms of material, number and thickness of strands. Good stuff. Anyway the outcome is that they couldn't say for sure exactly what caused the fire. Disappointingly, no mention of fish at all.

[perrykneeham]

Haha. Yeah, there's a lot of that. I've never been involved in a fire investigation, but they're certainly thorough. Money's at stake.

[moggyonspeed]

Sept 4, 2024 17:36:45 GMT perrykneeham said:

Approved Inspectors 1984.
Fire Regs Reform 2005.

None of this works with your narrative. I accept that LBK&C has always been Conservative.

Now who's peddling bullshit?

Whilst FRO 2005 sought to simplify UK fire regulations by bringing together many seemingly duplicate regs into one, what it was decidedly not about was the Eric Pickles tactic of pretty much unilaterally deciding which red tape (his words) should go and which should stay - the classic Tory thing of not opting for legislation but to do things on the qt, allowing Pickles to subsequently try blaming his then Civil Servants - again, a classic Tory ploy.

Yes, you may have your fingers in the pie of fire regs as they are implemented, but here we're talking of the Law and the UK political processes that should be used to change it.

[perrykneeham]

No, you're all at sea here. The regulations didn't change so much as the oversight did e.g. the Building Regs still required 1Hr Fire Resistence in corridors, let's say, but the Regs no longer said how you achieved that (I.e. there was the option to work to a performance spec rather than a material spec). A specifier could also choose mitigation in lieu of compliance (e.g better detection (or an engineering solution)) AND they could get both the alternative material AND the scheme approved by a private body.

Maybe start with the actualé  rather that try to batter inuendo and scuttlebutt into a  palatable scenario.

I have designed hundreds, and built dozen, and submitted full plans applications for maybe fifty schemes.  I think I have a reasonable handle on what went on during that period.

[perrykneeham]

I see the French are to blame.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp8n7m8v9rqo

[perrykneeham]

Also, I think the BBA have some questions to answer. It may be that they tested this kit and failed it, but they need to say so.