Scandal of fire risk hotels
HUNDREDS of Westcountry hotels and guesthouses have failed to comply with fire safety regulations in the wake of the worst hotel blaze in 40 years, the Western Morning News has found.
Since the Penhallow hotel in Newquay burned to the ground in August 2007 – a tragedy that saw three people killed – 473 notices have been issued to non-domestic properties in Devon and Cornwall stating they had fallen short of legislation to save more people from death and injury.
-

Penhallow Hotel, Newquay
The properties are chiefly those providing sleeping accommodation, such as hotels, B&Bs and guesthouses, which fire chiefs determined were "high-risk" after new laws were introduced in 2006.
Faults included poor fire escapes, inadequate techniques to stop fires from spreading and outdated alarm systems.
According to a publicly available register of notices, the vast majority were told by the fire service to upgrade within a set timescale.
Occasionally, fire services were moved to order hotels to shut partially or entirely, such was the risk to guests.
Seventeen such orders were issued in Cornwall since the Penhallow fire, including a Falmouth hotel which was found guilty at Camborne Magistrates' Court of ignoring the notice.
Among a number of issues, fire officers were deeply concerned that guests at the hotel would have to smash open a Perspex box to get keys to fire exits, which would cause "serious confusion and delay".
Kevin Thomas, Cornwall Fire Service area manager and senior fire safety officer, said: "I still think there are businesses out there that are less likely to grab hold of this legislation than they should.
"Some people still expect us to come round and tell them what they have to do. The reality is we now don't do that."
The revelations follow the conclusion of the inquest into the Penhallow tragedy earlier this month.
Coroner Dr Emma Carlyon said that all hotel and guesthouse owners needed to be reminded of their responsibility to comply with fire safety measures.
The new Regulatory Reform Order came into force in October 2006. The order means owners of all non-domestic properties are required to carry out a self-assessment of their fire safety provision, including hotels, factories and offices.
At the same time, the old system of fire brigades issuing safety certificates was scrapped.
Representing the biggest revision of fire safety guidance since 1971, the change meant that buildings that had not updated fire safety for potentially more than 30 years were suddenly expected to adhere to stricter rules.
Dr Carlyon said at the inquest: "I intend to write to the Minister of Tourism to highlight to her the concerns raised by those at the inquest about the change in fire legislation and to self-regulation and the risk of future deaths, in particular at hotels and guesthouses, if insufficient measures are provided to support the investment in fire safety or to ensure compliance."
Mr Thomas said the previous legislation was "not doing its job entirely". Small hotels and B&Bs, for example, had to make no provision for fire safety whatsoever.
"The weakness with that system was that the standard we requested in the early 1970s would be way off what we expect now," he said.
Notwithstanding the Penhallow tragedy, in which holidaymakers Joan Harper, 80, Peter Hughes, 43, and his mother, Monica Hughes, 86, were killed, Mr Thomas believed self-regulation, coupled with a thorough fire service audit, had made hotels in the region safer.
He said: "There is also quite clear evidence on the register of people that have complied with the notice. Not only have they had a notice, they've done the work.
"Before October 2006, there were hotels that had very old-fashioned or no alarm systems. What the legislation has done is required them all to come up to current-day standards fairly quickly.
"If I look back over the past two-and-a-half years, and we have to be careful because we have seen a tragedy, I think our inspection regime has achieved an awful lot in terms of the safety of buildings.
"Before, we didn't have the ability to require the updating of a system. We persuaded some people to and there were some very responsible owners.
"The vast majority accepted the requirements placed upon them by their fire certificate, did the minimum to maintain that but didn't want to invest additional funds to raise the standards further."
Tourism bosses argue that while most businesses are responsible, legislation is sometimes confusing and small businesses face bills they cannot afford.
John Armstrong, who has owned the four-star Headland Hotel, a "big, complex building", in Newquay for decades, said the number of notices issued was "open to misinterpretation".
He added: "It isn't that they are reading the riot act to all these recaltriant hoteliers, that's just the way the paper trail unfolds."
But he questioned whether hoteliers were the right people to be assessing their own fire risk, even if they employed consultants to carry out the work. He said the Government was expecting "non-experts to do what is a very expert function".
"They (the fire service) are the experts, they will know infinitely more about fire protection than I ever will. These guys are up-to-speed, up-to-date, they know what they are talking about.
"It would be much better if they said, 'This is what you have to do, now do it'.
"I suppose it is Cornwall County Fire Brigade sort of not wanting to take responsibility for fire precautions at the Headland Hotel, except they jolly well do.
"If I get it wrong, and they and I argue the toss, we go to the magistrates' court and we'll see who's right, shall we. It would just be better if they did it in the first place."
Mr Armstrong said there was not a requirement for even a fire extinguisher in a hotel when he entered the industry in the 1960s, but today, hoteliers could be pulled up for having just two hinges on a fire door rather than three.
He added: "What fire is going to be selective – melt one hinge and not all three? That strikes me as a funny one."
Gordon Oliver, chairman of Torbay Hospitality Association, said: "What we need with legislation is a benign manner of implementation. There should be a balance, a sympathetic approach."








9 Comments
by Tom Smith, Northumberland
Saturday, July 11 2009, 10:52AM
“I have owned and operated buildings open to the public for forty years. Gradually following fire related deaths standards have been improved and loss of life reduced. This new act requiring in essence every small premises owner to become expert in fire safety is the most retrogressive piece of legislation imaginable. It is on a par with the regime of banking regulation introduced by this government and the consequences will be similarly severe.
The owner of premises who spends least on safety will have a commercial advantage over the safer premises operating in the same market place.
Outside inspection is the only way to ensure standards are kept up and not allowed to fall for commercial reasons.
During this recession how many businesses will be actively seeking ways to make thier premises safer? The Fire Safety Officer is able to create a level playing field by treating all premises in the same way to the best of his expert ability.”
by Chris, Staffs
Tuesday, July 07 2009, 9:18AM
“I left the Fire Service after the strikes and we knew then there would be a major loss of life due to fire because of the new legislation handing over fire safety responsibility to owner/occupiers of businesses. It is driven into firefighters from training that their primary responsibility is to save life and property. Who is letting the public down, the Government, the Fire Service or the owner of the business? Ask the bean counters.”
by Peter Caddy, London
Friday, July 03 2009, 12:23PM
“I am amazed at the attitude of the owner of the Headland Hotel and no doubt many like him. As hoteliers we understand our business better than the Fire Brigade and know how the building is actually used day to day. Our foremost concern should be for that of our guests, both in terms of comfort and safety. In the 1960's we didn¿t have TV's, minibars, hairdryers, CD players, trouser presses, kettles etc. In adding these new facilities, as they have become available on the market, we have increased the fire risk and as such we must add the necessary fire precautions to our hotels, as they too enter the market.
It is quite possible to work with either the fire brigade or a consultant and use their expertise of fire safety together with our knowledge of the business to come up with a simple yet effective fire safety strategy.
I don¿t know how the manager sleeps at night and I certainly wouldn't want to be a guest sleeping at night!”
by Derek Wilmslow, Devon
Friday, July 03 2009, 11:36AM
“The law has not got stricter, it has become more flexible to provide people with a more bespoke approach to fire safety. It has wrapped all of the different fire laws (over 100) into one order. The precautions should be suitable for the premises. This is taking into account all businesses and the way they are run. If you are providing a service that service should be safe. The enforcers should show common sense but the service providers should show willing.”
by steve, Pendle
Friday, July 03 2009, 10:52AM
“The fire service no longer offer specific advice as such: because when they perform a fire audit they could be auditing their own work, and can they prosecute themseves if the advice is no good? I think not”
by Nick, Lincolnshire
Monday, June 22 2009, 4:26PM
“Name and shame the culprits. We all need to feel safe when we stay in hotels / B and Bs, etc.”
by Nick, Lincolnshire
Monday, June 22 2009, 4:23PM
“Name and shame the culprits. We all need to feel safer when we stay in hotels / B and Bs, etc.”
by Kernowman, Kernow
Monday, June 22 2009, 1:24PM
“Perhaps this should have been explained to the gentleman when the defect was noticed - at least that way he may have understood the reasoning behind it.”
by Alan Cox, Sutton Coldfield
Monday, June 22 2009, 10:16AM
“To clarify the situation about 3 hinges on a fire door - it's not about a fire being selective and melting one hinge - it is provided to stop a fire door distorting in a fire situation and causing early failur which is what may happen if you only have two hinges.”