Why Hackitt’s golden thread must reach residents

Resident behaviour can be a headache for property managers worried about fire safety, from wedging fire doors open to leaving rubbish in communal areas. But better resident engagement is at the heart of the Hackitt report’s vision for safer buildings, says Mark Varley.

Mark Varley

In the immediate fallout of the Hackitt Review, the headlines on combustible cladding and a new model of risk ownership have understandably been occupying the minds of many in our sector. The relationship between duty holders, those who hold responsibility for fire safety, and residents is an element of Dame Judith’s extensive work that has been somewhat overshadowed.

Under normal circumstances, many may switch off at the sight of the phrase ‘resident engagement’ – expecting it to be the soft window dressing in a document otherwise packed with recommendations for regulatory reform. But good engagement with residents isn’t just an added extra – it sits at the very heart of Hackitt’s vision of safer buildings.

With many of Hackitt’s recommendations requiring significant regulatory change, duty holders are awaiting a more detailed response from the Government.  But there is plenty that can and should be acted upon now. 

What should we do now?

Good property managers will already do much of what Hackitt demands. It is routine but crucial work: providing clear and accessible risk information for residents; ensuring appropriate emergency protocols are in place; giving advice about safety in their homes; frequently checking communal areas for risks and testing equipment.  

There are parts of our relationships with residents that will need to be formalised. The report is clear about the need for better information, education and instruction for residents. Under Hackitt, we will need to demonstrate to the Joint Competent Authority that our residents have the knowledge needed to avoid key risks. We’ll also need to show that we’re confident our residents know what to do in an emergency by making sure this information is available at multiple sources, such as on notice boards, letters and online, in a clear and easy to understand form.

The behaviour of residents in their own homes is difficult to legislate for.  But better communication can help address common risks residents can create – from wedging fire doors open, removing auto-closers from flat front doors, or changing flat front doors completely, to leaving rubbish or hazards in communal areas. 

But how do we achieve the appropriate level of awareness? Residents’ understanding of risk is largely determined by the on the ground contact they receive. An on-site presence will not be possible in all developments, so it is more important that there is clear advice from a defined expert with a complete understanding of a site’s fire safety case.

Hackitt says residents have an obligation to work in partnership with duty holders. This will require an ongoing programme of communication, explaining residents’ responsibilities and how to meet them, but also their rights, the strategy in place to keep their building safe, and how they can be involved in the decision-making on changes to their building. This may demand more frequent face-to-face contact and duty holders need to be confident that they can provide this.

Where to go from here? 

Better information and clearer communication can start now while we await further government guidance.  But how much is within the duty holder’s control? Take the whole-building approach to safety that Hackitt calls for. Our role as property manager generally ends at the flat front door and without clearer legislation it’s difficult to see how a duty holder could be held responsible for what goes on in people’s private homes. 

The challenges range from unsafe appliances, to residents’ own contractors conducting work, to simple behavioural issues and every day fire risk. Tweaking regulations on specific issues can help – Scotland recently mandated that all private homes will need fire alarms fitted by 2020 – but it will only take us so far. 

Do we need to advise homeowners on work taking place in their property and how to check for safe appliances? More broadly, will duty holders and property managers continue our role as guardians of communal areas, or be emboldened to take a more proactive approach which reaches into people’s homes?  The sensitivities are obvious and the guidance requires careful consideration. But with so much at stake, together we need to find the right balance.

Mark Varley is head of health and safety at FirstPort, a major residential property manager.