NEWS Confusion reigns over fire door replacement


THE NATIONAL Housing Federation (NHF) warned that social landlords are ‘struggling to get hold of’ new fire doors, and are ‘uncertain’ about the risks, while industry representatives said ‘flawed’ government advice has delayed ‘vital work’ to replace unsafe units. Earlier in 2018, an independent


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


James Brokenshire later stated that experts ‘advise the risk to public safety remains low’, though soon after an investigation found that London councils continue to ‘scramble to replace’ tens of thousands of faulty fire doors. In August, five suppliers’ doors


failed UK performance tests, and have been withdrawn from the market. These included doors manufactured by Manse Masterdor and Masterdor Limited, Specialist Building Products Limited (trading as Permadoor), Solar Windows Limited and Birtley Group Limited. The doors, including glazed and unglazed units as well as glazed composite doors, were tested by BRE, with each supposed to be able to withstand 30 minutes of fire, but some failing in 19. Mr Brokenshire asked the National Trading Standards body to oversee local investigations taking place. Inside Housing reported on


the NHF’s concerns that landlords of social housing blocks are facing ‘huge problems’ finding replacement doors; are ‘struggling’ to get hold of them; and are ‘uncertain about how serious a risk models that have failed safety tests pose’. Lucy Grove, Grenfell programme lead at the NHF, commented that


test data’. This has also ‘never applied’ to non composite, timber or metal doors, with some landlords taking action after being unable to get data for both sides. Advice Note 17 was later


‘where members use these makes, they are working to change doors. However, many housing associations are facing huge problems finding replacements. There’s a massive supply chain issue’. Mr Brokenshire had stated that


there is evidence of a ‘broader issue across the fire door market’, but Ms Grove added: ‘The government needs to provide clarity on how widespread the problem is across the fire door market, information about how the doors failed, and how the issue will be resolved. Housing associations need this to be able to put the right safety measures in place.’ The government’s Advice Note


16 stated that ‘the systemic issues have so far been identified in the composite door industry only’, which it claims represents ‘less than 5%’ of the fire door market. Inside Housing later reported


industry views on Note 16, with representatives calling it ‘flawed’ and ‘misleading’, and blaming it for delaying ‘vital work’. Landlords have cancelled door orders, sent back deliveries and ‘refus[ed] payments for fully certified’ doors. Note 16 stated that before


a replacement could be fitted, a landlord needs to have ‘test evidence that the door resists’ fire and smoke ‘from both sides’, but this is commonly applied to composite doors that are ‘relatively new’ and are ‘without historical


released, and clarified Note 16 ‘applies to composite doors only’, with many believing that the ‘incorrect advice’ was because the government did not have ‘enough experts on fire doors advising it’. While such experts have held ‘numerous’ meetings with the Ministry of Housing and Local Government (MHCLG), Inside Housing had heard that ‘some feel their advice has been ignored’. Fire safety consultant Mike


Wood said: ‘For timber doors, there’s a protocol established by test evidence, that if you test opening into the furnace – for a symmetrical door leaf – that’s a worse orientation than opening away from the furnace. So you test on that side. The government has to be far more responsive to the way the industry works. They can’t just drop a bombshell like that. What they don’t seem to realise is, they create doubt and confusion which hangs around.’ Charlie Conley, head of asset management at Flagship Group, added: ‘There is a lack of clarity on what products are safe. We can’t say for certain there aren’t going to be some more issues with fire doors further down the line. We want to make sure that we are spending the money wisely and if there is this uncertainty then that is something of huge concern. ‘We don’t want to be spending


tenants’ money on things that aren’t fit for purpose and also potentially putting them at risk by putting something in there which is not going to be safe.’ An MHCLG spokesperson


responded: ‘The government is doing everything it can to ensure construction products are of the highest safety standards. Advice Note 17 is complementary, not contradictory of Advice Note 16 and both notes still stand.’


www.frmjournal.com OCTOBER 2018 9


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