Image: Dreamstime / David Milligan
There should be mandatory competency checks on anyone who specifies fire doors and associated door hardware.
That’s according to the Guild of Architectural Ironmongers (GAI), which has made the call in the response to the Building a Safer Future consultation on fire safety, following the recommendations of Dame Judith Hackitt’s independent review, and the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 call for evidence.
The GAI has also called again for mandatory fire door inspections and maintenance as part of Building Regulations, and urged the government to bring the clerk of works role back to the fore.
In its response, the GAI noted that the report says residents and landlords in high-risk residential buildings (HRRBs) should ensure fire compartmentation is maintained to a suitable standard but this was in fact only a step in the right direction.
Douglas Masterson, technical manager of the GAI, said: “The architectural ironmongery industry’s view is that there is a clear requirement for fire-related and other complex specifications to be undertaken by qualified ironmongers, and that installations and maintenance should also be undertaken by qualified personnel or companies. Competence is key across all these areas when it comes to ironmongery, particularly for fire and escape doors.”
Value engineering concerns
In its submission to the consultation, the GAI has also highlighted its growing concerns about continued ‘value engineering’ by contractors and sub-contractors, particularly the frequent changes to architectural ironmongery specified for fire doors.
The Guild said it supported the change control process recommended in Hackitt’s report, but also recommends taking it further to add ‘changes in specification on product with fire and life safety implications’ to the list of changes that would be deemed major.
Major changes would require the principal contractor to consult the client and principal designer, and then, if they are happy with these changes, the principal contractor must then notify the regulator and submit further details before carrying out the work.
“There is a danger that substitution of specified products which can have an impact on fire safety, such as architectural ironmongery, may not be picked up as part of the existing proposals. We are most concerned that any potential degrading of a specification which has been prepared by a qualified architectural ironmonger could have severe fire safety consequences,” said Masterson.
The Guild also supported calls for a national construction products regulator that can take action against any manufacturer which makes false claims about its products. But the GAI argues that its remit needs to go wider:
“A national regulator with the powers to take legal action should be a necessity against all major standards, not purely those which are harmonised standards, as suggested in the original report,” said Masterson.
