Who best can advise on fire and safety? ADT, of course! Hence ADT Fire & Security is warning that a new Localism Bill could have serious impact on fire safety in England and Wales.
The proposal, it is said would allow Fire and Rescue Services to charge should they attend a false fire alarm at a commercial property.
According to a source at ADT false alarms and unwanted fire signals from some automatic fire detection systems can be a major problem in the UK and result in many unwanted calls to Fire and Rescue Services every year.
Sources at ADT said unwanted fire signals divert essential services from the emergency services putting life and properties at risk and are an unnecessary drain on public finances.
Vigilance learnt that the fire and safety experts at ADT are saying not only is it crucial to select the best available system, it must be well designed and installed with the correct detection medium for both the risk from fire and false alarm potential.
Hence they are of the view that once commissioned, daily housekeeping, a regular planned preventative maintenance from a competent service provider are equally important in combating false and unwanted alarms.
Vigilance reliably gathered that with recent budget cutbacks, Fire & Rescue Services are looking at ways to increase their revenues and charging for false alarm attendance is one such proposal. This proposal is included within the Localism Bill, which is now before the Parliamentary Bill Committee. The bill is part of the Government's much-publicised devolvement of powers to Councils and neighbourhoods.
"In 2010, the Chief Fire Officers Association developed a policy for the reduction of false alarms and unwanted fire signals," commented Peter Lackey, Fire Product Marketing Manager at ADT Fire & Security. "However this has not been widely adopted by individual fire and rescue services. Instead, should the Localism Bill get the go ahead - we need to consider the serious impact in terms of fire safety if people decide to turn Fire Detections Systems and Alarms off because they do not want to run the risk of a fine."
Many questions begging for answers, listen to ADT!
There are further issues. For example, who gets the call out bill? Should it go to the end user (the most likely ‘target’ because theoretically they alone have the power to sort out the root cause of false alarms), the service provider or the Alarm Receiving Centre? If the ARC are landed with bills based purely on the fact that their call was the one which the brigade responded to, they may refuse to pay and not wish to get involved in what is seen as an inconsistent approach to policy implementation by individual brigades, the result of which could be a dilution of fire safety cover to UK business.
