Biased Advice from Fire Service

Hello Peter,

for moving personnel with mobility problems, especially on upper floors, the provision of a device such as an evacuation chair is often a way forward.

There are a number of manufacturers in the market place who sell this type of equipment and as part of the deal they provide on-site training in manual handling and the use of the kit.

Start on Google with "Evac+Chair" and you will get a number of manufacturers up. "Evac+Chair" are just one of them, although they seem to be the market leaders, but, as always, shop around.

Good Luck !

Mike Kane

John
I agree. The company who trained my staff not only produced documents proving they were insured, they also proved that they were competent instructors i.e. qualifications. I would urge anyone arranging training that they check to make sure that those people who are going to deliver it, are properly trained & insured to do so.
They were very honest on what they could deliver and what they could not. They did say that if a premises expected people with some kind of disability, then proper disability escape etiquette training should be sought for a selected number of staff. Training they thought that they had no right to try and deliver.
I intend to start a new thread on this because a search on the www has proved fruitless in the search for a training provider.

I would add to Alan Cox's [always astute] comments by saying that one should ensure that any company or person carrying out such training is correctly insured. It may well be that Brigade officers[working within or even without their Fire Authroity's compass] do not carry adequate or appropriate insurance in the event of anything ging wrong-eitehr on the training or subsequently if the training is "misapplied"

Interesting Alan
absolutely agree: in a previous role I carred out fire risk assessments for the common areas of small blocks of flats. It was my practice to have my completed FRAs looked over by the enforcement officer in the area which I had carried out a particular assessment to ensure that the quality was suitable/sufficient etc.. One particular serving fire service enforcement officer offered the services of the company which he started, consisting of serving and former fire officers, to carry out fire risk assessments if I had too much on my plate. He asked me to keep it quiet. More prevalent than you think.
I did NOT take him up on his offer as I am sure it presented a conflict of interest at the very least.
Martin

Mark,

In my opinion when a public body recommends a third party company you have to consider if this is an official recommendation or is someone recommending a friend. If it's an official recommendation then it should be given as part of a list with an explanation of the criteria that was used eg "this list represents local companies that have expressed an interest in a particular field eg fire alarms but this list does not mean that any endorsement is given as to their competency" or they may point you to a list of companies that have certain trade accreditations. This I feel is the best way and avoids any problems if the third party does not do the job correctly.

How would you feel if you rang up the local fire station and asked if they were aware of a company that could fit a fire alarm and they recommended a local company that you subsequently gave the job to that company which later proved to be totally unsatisfactory? I don't think you would be very happy - but who would be to blame - you or the Fire Service?

Remember, we are talking about life safety here and not about buying a television or hi fi system. The enforcing authority has to be seen to be whiter than white and when you get into the realms of recommending one company above another you have to be very sure of your facts. When my clients ask for specialist advice I always give them a number of companies to look at and these generally always have some form of third party accreditation or I can personally vouch for their performance because I have used them myself.

If we are talking about unofficial Fire Service recommendations of friends of friends then in my experience this is a very uncertain road.

Regards Alan

I trust my local fire service to give advice on fire safety and training and I would hope that if they couldn't supply it they would be able to recommend someone who could.

As a Facilities Manager I have a list of approved suppliers as I'm sure most do. I don't see why local fire stations can't pass on their contacts to other local businesses. They are after all the professionals and best placed to promote companies or individuals they are happy to endorse - provided those companies and individuals are suitably approved and qualified of course!

Hi Peter,

I have asked Dorset Fire Service what their policy is on promoting third party companies and if I get a reply I will let you know.

Regards Alan

Alan
I thought as much. Dorset Fire Officer it was. It made no difference because the training had already taken place and very good it was to. The company who shall remain nameless employed serving fire officers who knew their stuff. And they used real fires on the extinguisher practical. One of my employees stated that this part was the best part of the training because the officers made sure the fire didn't go out untill the extinguishers were applied correctly. With one person, the fire didn't go out so the instructor asked the person why they were still there trying to put the fire out. Diplomatically of course.
I personally can now see the need for this type of training. I thought extinguishers were just for propping doors open before this course (joke).
Anyway, to get back to the issue, and as someone who runs a business, I would be pretty hacked off with any public organisation who had an agenda to promote perhaps connected / or preferred businesses unfairly, especially as they have a role in providing advice to members of the public.

Peter,

When I was in the Fire Service you were not allowed to promote an individual company for obvious reasons and I think that this it is still the same. Many Fire Services do have their own training departments and they would obviously promote this service which of course has to be paid for.

I do know of a number of situations where members of the Fire Service promote a company and also work for that company which is also something that should not happen. In one of the brigades that I worked in an Inspecting Officer was going around inspecting buildings and also selling fire extinguishers which of course he should not have been doing.

As you say the Fire Service should be impartial and the fire brigades that I worked in provided a list of local registered companies that allowed the person to select anyone from the list. Are you sure that this person was from the fire service because there have been a number of instances where people have pretended to be from the fire service but have in fact been private companies with no connection to the fire service.

If you are sure that this individual was from the fire service then you may want to send a letter to the Chief Fire Officer and ask him if he allows this sort of unprofessional service.

Regards Alan (mail@alanfcox.co.uk)

If you ask of them for advice such as this, most likely they may have a mate or ex fireman who now does this for a living and if he wants to put his name forward then he probably will.

As i said its your choice, if it was me your first point of call for training should be to the fire extinguisher provider/maintenance company as they will want to offer training of their own extinguishers

This post has been removed because it contravened our guidelines.

I recently posted a thread on the requirement for fire extinguisher training for employees. After a lively debate I went ahead and arranged training. I was contacted by a person from Dorset Fire & Rescue service recommeding a company that provided this training. I was taken aback by their advice. They recommended a single organisation for this (Yes they do charge for their courses).
My point is, why is a public service actively promoting one course provider over every other course provider. Surely they should be completely impartial here. I thought they had to be. Anyone got comments on weather they should or should not be doing this?