Tenant called out fire brigade on Christmas Day.

RainyDay

Vera Few Bowl wrote: »

So your saying you should ring the fire brigade every time an alarm goes off? Madness.

Where exactly did I say that?

kceire wrote: »

Carbon Monoxide alarms are not interlinked and will only go off within the apartment itself, not throughout the building.

Also, the apartment may only contain one, 2 at he most CO detectors depending on the layout and the M&E locations. TGD Part J (Heat Producing Appliances).

You know that, and I know that - but will the average tenant, particularly the one with poor English language literacy know that?

athtrasna

Nowhere in the op does it mention CO Any chance we can keep this thread on topic?

Mod

gaius c

From a workplace point of view, if I was to respond to a potential fire by knocking on doors instead of hitting the site wide fire alarm, I'd be out of a job by the end of that day.

Whoever called the tenant a panicky bob needs to learn a wee bit more about fire safety.

Arbiter of Good Taste

gaius c wrote: »

From a workplace point of view, if I was to respond to a potential fire by knocking on doors instead of hitting the site wide fire alarm, I'd be out of a job by the end of that day.

Whoever called the tenant a panicky bob needs to learn a wee bit more about fire safety.

Actually, I called the tenant a pancky Bob. I once shared with a girl who was a f-ing nightmare. The house had a burglar alarm with a panic button. Little did we know that when she was alone in the house the slightest thing would have her set off the panic button. A windy night? Someone banged a door next door? That's ok, just set off the panic button and the local police will deal with it. When we actually had a series of attempted break ins, guess what.... Bingo, thats right, police didn't want to know.

There's nothing wrong with having a bit of sense. It's a building with three apartments. It should be fairly easy to ascertain whether or not there's a fire.

return guide

kceire wrote: »

IS3218 is the standard on fire alarms and detection.

Apartments should and must have smoke detection in the living room, circulation area (hall) and I insist on bedrooms too. This is Part B (Fire Safety) of the building regulations.

Irish Standard 3218:2013 Fire detection and alarm systems for buildings - System design, installation, commissioning and maintenance

Actually Building Regs Technical Guidance Doc B 2006 relies on IS 3218:1989 for "Buildings containing Flats or Maisonettes" (this only refers to common areas).

For residential dwellings the guidance document refers only to houses and relies upon British Standard 5839.

When designing fire alarm and detection systems in apartments I find 3218:2013 covers both common and tenants areas in Section 10.

Basically a heat detector from the central system in the lobby of each apartment to protect the central escape routes (L3X) and smoke alarms (230v interlinked) in the apartment living rooms, circulation corridors etc to warn the individual occupants (LD2) .

By the way, a lot of apartment complex landlords etc are now becoming aware that their fire alarm and detection systems are not compliant with 3218. It is virtually impossible to achieve the required 75 decibels in a bedhead unless the there is a fire alarm sounder installed in each bedroom. This has come to notice as service providers are now required to carryout a sound level test in all areas. (sorry for going off topic).

I hope this does not come across the wrong way.

RG

gaius c

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

Actually, I called the tenant a pancky Bob. I once shared with a girl who was a f-ing nightmare. The house had a burglar alarm with a panic button. Little did we know that when she was alone in the house the slightest thing would have her set off the panic button. A windy night? Someone banged a door next door? That's ok, just set off the panic button and the local police will deal with it. When we actually had a series of attempted break ins, guess what.... Bingo, thats right, police didn't want to know.

There's nothing wrong with having a bit of sense. It's a building with three apartments. It should be fairly easy to ascertain whether or not there's a fire.

When there's a potential fire, you move AWAY from it, not go looking for it. One lungful of smoke and you're as good as dead..

The issue is that the building fire alarm did not work correctly. The tenant did the right thing in those circumstances.

P.S. your anecdote about the former housemate is in no way relevant to this thread.

beauf

How did the alarm not work properly?

Graces7

ZENER wrote: »

So on Christmas day the fire alarm in our block apartment went off. There was no fire or smoke or any other signs. We suspect it was a smoke detector in one of the apartments triggered by burnt turkey etc.

Anyway one of the tenants (he did not cause the alarm) straight away called the Fire Brigade who attended. He also called us (Landlord) so we went to the block to see what was going on. He didn't tell us that he'd already called 999. So we arrive to find a Fire truck outside and the firemen doing what they do.

The firemen checked things over and reset the fire panel and left.

The local County Council charge 100 euro for attending a fire but charge 500 euro for attending apartment blocks where there is a false alarm.

I suspect we'll have to pay this fee ourselves but would like to get others opinions.

Ken

Wondering if this would actually be called a false alarm though? An alarm went off; my idea of a false alarm is when there is no alarm and no fire...

Graces7

D wrote: »

I once called the FB for a fire that I noticed while out walking. Was the real deal with a prefab down the back of a converted house. Got a call the next week from the Fire brigade asking if I called. I replied that I had. They then asked me if my address was "place where the fire was" I said no, that I had noticed the fire while out walking. She thanked me, said goodbye, and hung up.

Well done; that time I called them it was from my IP phone which I only connect when I need to call. It shares with my computer...

gaius c

beauf wrote: »

How did the alarm not work properly?

See this post for details:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=98228241&postcount=36
Main fire alarm should not have activated.

beauf

Thx.

Semantic perhaps. But that means the alarm worked. It was just the wrong kind of alarm. So it wasn't that there was faulty equipment. Or there was a safety issue. Its just that to avoid false alarms, a different alarm should be fitted where there are multiple apartments. So its something for people to note to avoid these charges but still be safe and adhere to regulations.

gaius c

beauf wrote: »

Thx.

Semantic perhaps. But that means the alarm worked. It was just the wrong kind of alarm. So it wasn't that there was faulty equipment. Or there was a safety issue. Its just that to avoid false alarms, a different alarm should be fitted where there are multiple apartments. So its something for people to note to avoid these charges but still be safe and adhere to regulations.

the alarm worked

It was just the wrong kind of alarm

You're contradicting yourself in the space of one post.
The building fire alarm didn't work properly because the wrong type of alarm was installed in the apartments. That's the discussion we are having and it's why the tenants should not be liable for the callout charge.
An alarm that goes off incorrectly cannot be said to be working correctly.

"The missile blew up on the launcher truck and killed the crew. The fact that it blew up in the wrong place and killed friendlies instead of enemies is neither here nor there. There was no fault with the missile and it operated as expected...with a big fireball"

bohsfan

Personally, I find it very odd that people should think that the person who called should pay. If an alarm had been going off for an amount of time it should not be ignored- especially at Christmas time when people often have a lot of extra electrical items and bric-a-brac around their flat.

I know I would knock around but if I received no response and the alarm was still active I wouldn't be taking any chances.

I think I would be calling in anonymously though if I suspected the landlord might try and land me with the bill for the call out.

LeeLooLee

bohsfan wrote: »

Personally, I find it very odd that people should think that the person who called should pay. If an alarm had been going off for an amount of time it should not be ignored- especially at Christmas time when people often have a lot of extra electrical items and bric-a-brac around their flat.

I know I would knock around but if I received no response and the alarm was still active I wouldn't be taking any chances.

I think I would be calling in anonymously though if I suspected the landlord might try and land me with the bill for the call out.

Maybe the person who didn't turn their alarm off should pay?

beauf

gaius c wrote: »

You're contradicting yourself in the space of one post.
The building fire alarm didn't work properly because the wrong type of alarm was installed in the apartments. That's the discussion we are having and it's why the tenants should not be liable for the callout charge.
An alarm that goes off incorrectly cannot be said to be working correctly....

No, it alerted people. That's its job.

That a different alarm might be more appropriate to avoid callout charges is a valid, but different point.

bohsfan wrote: »

Personally, I find it very odd that people should think that the person who called should pay. ....if I suspected the landlord might try and land me with the bill for the call out.

It make sense to avoid false alarm by changing the alarm to avoid charges. Also so that people won't ignore the alarm for fear of charges.

But you have to consider why are there charges in the first place. Its not the LL who has this charge. The LL is not a bottomless pit either. There obviously is a problem with callouts.

They should charge the LL if they haven't adhered to the required standard. If its just people calling for trivial reasons, they should be charged.

ZENER

I never expected this thread to go this far, it's been informative but just to clear a couple of points up.

The sensors in the apartments are rate of rise heat sensors with smoke sensors and BGUs on the access stairwell. The panel is at the bottom of the stairs and is serviced yearly, it's not monitored by a central station or a GSM dialler (though this may change).

Talking with the Fire crew it's possible that it was a smoke detector or BGU in the stairwell that triggered the alarm given the ZONE number the fireman said was activated on the panel. As none of the BGUs (break glass still intact) were activated we can only assume it was the smoke detector.

It's possible it was set off by someone smoking at the bottom of the stairs with the main door open, butts on the ground around the door. We've had 2 new tenants in the month before Christmas and the cig butts were never a problem before they arrived.

We've had no contact from the CoCo yet regarding a charge so we'll have to wait and see what happens.

Thanks for the replies.

Ken