search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
NEWS Halt on composite fire door sales lifted


THE GOVERNMENT lifted the moratorium after three months of discussion with industry representatives as to their safety. Earlier in 2018, an independent


panel stated that ‘no change’ was needed to building fire safety advice after a fire door from Grenfell Tower tests failed police tests. That panel aimed to ‘determine whether any further action was required as a result’, and in a written statement, then Housing Secretary Sajid Javid confirmed further investigations into the doors – manufactured by Manse Masterdor, which is now no longer trading – were not recommended. Later, new Housing Secretary


James Brokenshire updated parliament, confirming that experts ‘advise the risk to public safety remains low’, though soon after that, an investigation found that London councils continue to ‘scramble to replace’ tens of thousands of faulty fire doors. Police tests on doors used at Grenfell Tower found that they could only resist flames for 15 minutes, and not the 30 minutes expected. In August, five suppliers’ doors


failed UK performance tests, and have been withdrawn from the market, while the National Housing Federation then warned that social landlords are ‘struggling to get hold of’ new fire doors, and are ‘uncertain’ about the risks posed by those that failed safety tests. In September 2018, confusion over government advice regarding fire doors delayed ‘vital work’ to replace unsafe fire doors nationwide.


‘The cost to the composite door industry during this period has been very heavy, with a number of casualties in terms of jobs and revenue. However, as long as all manufacturers of such products have completed bilateral testing in strict accordance with the building regulations, and provided the necessary written confirmation to their supplier, then supply may resume. ‘The task force set up by the


ACDM to tackle this issue has spent a great deal of time and energy to bring this to the earliest possible conclusion.’ Another development arising


Inside Housing reported that


the ‘moratorium’ on the sale of composite fire doors has been lifted, after the government and the industry spent three months discussing the risks. The doors are ‘typically made’ from plastic casing and insulation, and their sale was halted ‘after a slew of products’ failed safety tests. The sales ban was lifted based


on the proviso that manufacturers ‘can demonstrate primary test evidence illustrating that products have passed the required fire tests from both sides’, alongside ‘written confirmation’ from a test house confirming the result. In turn, a director from the manufacturer must also confirm ‘in writing’ that the company will ‘supply doors using only the exact same components as tested’. Andrew Fowlds, chair of the Association of Composite Door Manufacturers (ACDM), stated:


from the discussions was that the ACDM will become the governing body for the composite door industry, and will lead ‘development, implementation and policing’ of standards as well as promote use of the doors. The ACDM will also compile a database of all fire door products ‘tested by members’, and provide technical advice. A spokesperson for the Ministry


for Housing, Communities and Local Government stated: ‘It was right that swift action was taken to remove the GRP door off the market. We are pleased the industry has taken steps to ensure their products meet the required standards to be sold on the UK market. ‘Fire doors on sale in the UK


must meet the safety requirements as set out in building regulation advice, and we are continuing to work with the industry and local authorities to make sure this is the case.’


BAFE sees record monthly registrations


IN ONE month last November, 34 companies registered third party certification on schemes available from BAFE. BAFE stated that the companies


had ‘all successfully achieved third party certification to one of the BAFE schemes’ to ‘prove their competency in a specific fire safety service’, with the end of November seeing BAFE register 40% more


companies ‘than for the whole of 2017’. This had ‘broken registration records’ for the organisation, which believes UKAS accredited third party certification is ‘a clear method of demonstrating a company’s competency to provide fire safety services’. Stephen Adams, BAFE chief


executive, commented: ‘It is evident with the increase in


12 FEBRUARY 2019 www.frmjournal.com


companies gaining third party certification that end users and specifiers are taking their fire safety obligations more seriously than ever before. ‘It is encouraging to see that


more providers are seeking to gain third party certification to validate their own competency, distinguishing themselves from their competition.’


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60