After pleading not guilty, Michael Wilson (Director of Chumleigh Lodge Hotel Limited) was charged with 12 offences under the Fire Safety Order.  The hotel was ordered to pay £30,000, while Mr Wilson was charged with a £180,000 fine.

Following the blaze in 2008 inspectors found some bedrooms were not fitted with a smoke alarm, blocked escape routes and defective fire doors. Mr Wilson could also not produce a sufficient risk assessment and staff had not been given adequate fire safety training.

During the blaze three people were forced to flee the burning building and one of them had to escape via a window after fire spread from a first-floor bedroom up to the second floor corridor. The case is the first of its kind as the verdict was decided by a jury rather than a magistrate or judge.

Chairman of London fire and emergency planning authority and Barnet Council cabinet member, Brian Coleman welcomed the verdict: Business owners have a clear responsibility under fire safety law to ensure that both the public and their employees are as safe as possible from the risk of fire. This verdict sends out a clear message that if these responsibilities are ignored we will not hesitate in prosecuting and people will face serious penalties.’

Source: http://www.barnet-today.co.uk/news.cfm?id=5390&headline=Hotel%20fined%20over%20fire%20safety%20breach

Inspectors found at the 16th Century wedding venue that fire-proof doors had not been installed on escape routes and staff had not been properly fire safety trained. Also no risk assesment had been carried out and emergency lights were broken.

The company was ordered to pay fines and court costs totalling £23,815.

Community fire protection manager for Cheshire Fire and Rescue Service, Lee Shears said: “This was an extremely serious case of a business putting people’s lives at considerable risk from fire.

“Fire safety is a key part of good business management and Haslington Hall Ltd showed little or no regard for the safety of their guests or employees and the result was a prosecution, which came to light after information was received saying that the premises was being used as a wedding venue.

“The fire service aims to help and support any business to operate safely, however, we will take action when owners and managers choose not to treat fire safety as a legitimate business  requirement.”

Source: http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/Wedding-venue-fined-23-000-breaching-safety-rules/story-15121612-detail/story.html

*In recent years four people have died in boat fires at night when they were asleep and a working smoke detector could have helped them to escape. Although a fire is unlikely on a boat that is well maintained and kept up to minimum safety standards, it is always best to be prepared, have a plan of action and ensure your boat is equipped with the necessary equipment.

The Boat Safety Scheme is a great resource for boat owners to ensure safety on-board. Visit www.boatsafetyscheme.com for more information.

*Source: http://staysafe.boatsafetyscheme.com/fire-safety-for-boats

4^th January 2012

IFEDA, the Independent Fire Engineering & Distributors Association, is questioning the reasoning behind the recent removal of fire extinguishers in a property maintained by Richmond Housing Partnership (RHP). Residents at the property have allegedly been told that the removal of fire extinguishers from  common areas of their block of flats was for their own safety.

Nigel Walton, Chairman of IFEDA, commented: “IFEDA would question what available evidence demonstrates that the removal of fire extinguishers would enhance residents’ safety. Providing the correct type of fire extinguisher is in place, as determined by British Standard 5306 PT8, the likelihood of using the wrong type of fire extinguisher on a fire is minimal. It would be unlikely that dry powder extinguishers would be used in communal evacuation routes, for example, a stairwell. Therefore the risk from obscured vision and breathing difficulties due to dust is minimal. Surely the sensible option would be to inform residents about the practical use of handling a fire extinguisher, rather than removing them altogether.” Walton continued: “All fires start small. Where a fire can safely be extinguished by the correct use of a fire extinguisher, then this can clearly minimise the massive damage fire can cause. Extinguishers play a vital role in the prevention of fire spreading.”

Graham Ferris, General Manager at IFEDA added his concerns by saying: “Recent surveys, (Eurofeu/IFEDA 2002 and IFEDA 2008) across Europe and in the UK, have established that approximately 80% of fires are extinguished before they get out of hand, by the use of portable fire extinguishers, even where the operator has had no formal training in their use. Any fire, given the time to take hold, can cause untold damage to property. The resulting additional costs in insurance, re-build, re-homing, in addition to damage to the environment, through the pollution and release of toxins, surely is argument enough that the safe placement and use of a fire extinguisher is the sensible option. They not only help contain the fire, providing crucial additional minutes to escape, but can also help minimise the damage fire can cause.”

IFEDA, as an independent trade association, promotes quality standards and procedures within the fire safety industry.

Source: http://www.ifeda.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/IFEDA-voices-concern-over-fire-extinguisher-removal.pdf

4th December 2011