Fire doors for old 3 storey non HMO (with escape route via kitchen)

Landlord Discussion New Laws & Regulation Changes
1

The LACORS guidance suggests that fire doors are not needed for an old 3 storey house (non HMO), provided that the escape route has solid doors, and does not go through a risk room. But what if the escape route does go through a risk room?

Are there any specific cases where Landlords have been fined for not having fire doors in such a property?

1 Like
2

@Christiaan

How about this (Not a house but flat and egress through a restaurant without correct fire doors on ground floor and self closing doors for the kitchen)

Or this one where means of escape not fire resistant

Or this one

“The inspection also revealed multiple fire safety breaches, including the absence of a carbon monoxide alarm, obstructions to the fire escape route, and inadequate fire-resisting doors to the flat entrance, kitchen and bedrooms.”

If you are concerned over fire safety most fire brigades will come out and give advice free (some will even replace fire alarms in communal areas for free London Fire Brigade do that)

Best

3

Best to get an inspection of the property and do as the inspector says

1 Like
4

Thanks David for your answer! The main issue with the first case seems to be the lack of fire alarms, which is a clear breach of the law. In the 2nd and 3rd case, both of these properties were classed as HMOs which have much stricter rules about fire doors than non HMOs.

5

@Christiaan in all 3 cases the lack of firedoors or inadequate fire resistance in an escape route are cited as part of the reason for fines. Not just because they are HMOs. From the reports on the 3 cases..

“When the Brigade’s inspectors visited the property, a number of breaches were identified including fire doors removed on the ground floor, no emergency lighting, and no fire alarm.”

“The means of escape out of the property was not fire resistant and was in poor repair - and fire precautions in the property were not being maintained, leaving occupants vulnerable to becoming trapped in the event of a fire”

“The inspection also revealed multiple fire safety breaches, including the absence of a carbon monoxide alarm, obstructions to the fire escape route, and inadequate fire-resisting doors to the flat entrance, kitchen and bedrooms”

  1. So basically the same as the issue you raise with your property. Think if you read in full in some of these there was advice and LL took no action which was part of the problem and result in fines. (Your seemingly dismissive response wouldn’t find favour with enforcement agencies I suspect)
  2. If I were you I’d get advice from a fire safety expert who inspects your property and find out their recommendations and any options. We can’t judge the detail of your property but if you do follow their advice (whether fire doors, door closers, FD rated door seals at the bottom of doors or whatever) you’ll be fine. Other things like items in corridors left there by tenants could be equally serious. We just don’t know.

(As an aside and sorry if ridiculously obvious, there is I think a legal req to do fire risk assessments - and costs of these are like other extra expenses, can be claimed against income for tax purposes)

Good luck

6

You can pay a third party to advise you, but at the end of the day whether they give correct advice or not is down to you. The authorities will decide if you made the right decision only after something goes wrong.

Therefore, I’d tend to be cautious, and if you are in doubt, get Fire doors fitted. It is unlikely to break your bank, wheras if something goes wrong, that definately will.

That said, the wording you put in your post seems to answer your question, as you say it does go through a risk room, so the ‘not required’ does not apply.

1 Like