Publicly available information informs us that around a third of all of the London Fire Brigade’s calls are to a false alarm. In 2012/13 the Brigade attended over 39,000 calls to a false alarm with 26 sites calling the Brigade out over 50 times. Jim Swift asks - can you be sure that your evacuation is one-way traffic?
Ben Bradford highlights the importance of fire safety information and asks where do fire strategies go? However it is a complete mystery as to where fire strategies go, is it the same place odd socks go? Or is there a Bermuda Triangle for strategies? Or, perhaps they will turn up with Lord Lucan?
Ben Bradford discusses the advancement of the practice of fire risk management within our built environment. In the wake of some prominent multi-fatality fires, organisations have spent considerable sums of money on fire safety but not necessarily achieved an improved level of fire safety assurance.
In recent years there have been a number of new build and refurbishment projects that have been completed and occupied only to be decanted and occupants provided with alternative accommodation while the project is re-constructed due to inadequate passive fire protection.
Following the release of BS 9999: 2017, which contains a revised section 4, entitled “Designing for the management of fire risk” and reference to the term fire risk management strategy, We thought it might be worthwhile sharing some thoughts on how to craft fire risk management strategy.
Following two recent articles on fire policy and developing fire risk management strategy, Ben Bradford offers 7 steps to a successful fire risk management audit.
Ben Bradford highlights 7 key considerations issues that organizations should be considered prior to embarking on the procurement of third party fire risk assessors to deliver large fire risk assessment programmes across a multi-site portfolio.
What amounts to fire policy, fire risk management strategy and procedure is not well understood and so many fire safety professionals struggle to get it right.
It has been common place for fire safety professionals to point the finger of responsibility in the wrong direction when determining exactly who is responsible and this short article seeks to provide some clarification.
Ben Bradford dispels a common myth relating to our interpretation of the term ‘significant findings’. George Orwell said “Myths which are believed in tend to become true”. If George Orwell was right this article should dispel one common myth in fire safety, and reduce the number of fire safety practitioners who believe it to be true. The common myth relates to our interpretation of the term ‘Significant findings’ as applied to fire risk assessments.
Each year, more and more organisations outsource a growing range of activities. Why? Quite simply, outsourcing delivers results. It’s a proven tool in improving business performance and transforming functions such as fire risk management.
The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order, (FSO) and equivalent legislation in Scotland and Northern Ireland imposes a legal requirement, not just to undertake a fire risk assessment, but to review it regularly to keep it up-to date.
Fire Strategies can sometimes fail to afford the attention to management that management deserves! The risk posed by the threat of fire, to people, property, mission continuity and the environment is often governed more by the quality of management within a premises than the level of fire protection, and thus Management must be considered as of equal importance to fire protection measures.
The relationship between fire and security is often marred by talk of conflict. Is this conflict due to incompatibility, or more to do with a lack of understanding between these new companions? Both disciplines are in their infancy and the early stages of any relationship is often fragile, yet these two disciplines are maturing.