Thread by @cyrilmoseley

My understanding of the Government's intention of using the Fire Safety Bill to make leaseholders "Responsible Persons" under the RR Fire Safety Order 2005 is to secure access to flat entrance doors and external cladding for any necessary enforcement action by the local F&RS.

This is a nonsense as that access could be secured by making the leaseholders "Dutyholders", which eould give them responsibility for seeing that any fire safety features within their individual flats are adequately maintained, without making them responsible for paying for it.

Unfortunately, even if this could be achieved by an amendment of the Fire Safety Bill, it eould not overcome the problem presented by the unfair terms of most leases which allow owners & freeholders to pass on the cost of maintenance and repairs to fire safety provisions. It is

.... leasehold law that requires changing in order to prevent the cost of remediation being passed onto leaseholders.
This whole problem eas caused when the "Experts" advising the Government identified the cladding as the most pressing fire safety issue without waiting for the

... outcome of the Grenfell Enquiry. Whilst one appreciates the need to take action to protect residents as soon as possible recommending a project which by any measure is likely to take 10 years or more, was not the best solution & ignored all other possible fire safety defects.

Whilst there is no doubt that the cladding was the cause of rapid vertical spread of the fire, it cannot be said to have been the direct cause of the deaths of many of the residents.
As the fire grew and entered flats through windows etc. at higher levels, it djould have been

... possible for occupants to leave and enter a protected escape route and mske their way out of the building. This seems to have been prevented by two things. The lack of effective self-closing fire doors & the "stay put" policy appear to have played a major part in the tragedy.

The Grenfell Enquiry will undoubtedly establish what part these fire safety defects played in the situation and what other defects also contributed to the problem. Missing cavity barriers, unprotected breaches in compartment walls and poor quality construction and regulation will

... all have played a part. Many of these defects came to light soon after the Grenfell fire, which makes it perplexing why effort was and still is being concentrated mainly if not exclusively on cladding removal. With such a wide range of fire safety defects in these buildings

.... what is needed is a solution that addresses or protects against the greatest number of them. I suggest that the best answer initially is to provide these flats with a means of fire detection and warning to facilitate early evacuation& removal of the stay put policy. The

.... structural defects can best be overcome in the short-term by the provision of sprinklers or water mist systems to extinguish any fire that starts or prevent it spreading to attack the defective parts of the structure. Self-closing fire doors & fire resisting compartmentation

Dhould be checked, serviced and repaired as necessary. An evacuation strategy should be drawn-up including PEEPS where required. Other fire safety features such as emergency lighting and fire safety signs should also be addressed. All of this work with the exception of cladding

... remediation could be paid for out of the £5.1bn already allocated, without the need for leaseholder contribution & should be addressed first. This would provide the highest level of safety while the cladding remediation issue is resolved. It could also avoid market stagnation