Camden Leaseholders’ Forum homepage › Discussion Board › Major Works (including roofs, lift & heating replacement etc) › Major Works, Fire Risk Assessment Works
23 February 2017 at 13:19 #4183
I’m new to this forum, so please forgive me if this has been covered elsewhere.
I’m receiving letters regarding ‘major works for fire risk assessment works’ that will of course affect my service charges.
I live in the middle flat of a three flat street conversion house. Our shared hallways has already been completely mucked around in the name of ‘fire safety’ and extremely lazy gas pipe replacements that are on the outside of the walls all the way up the stairs. It already looks more like the inside of something industrial, like a submarine, than a family home. Why on earth would they need to do more than this? Surely the safest thing would be to fix the gas pipes properly so that they are not so vulnerable. I’m opposed to what they have already done, and will not pay for them to muck it up any more. Of course we all want safety measures to prevent and protect us from fires. But already the work they have done is a complete mess, and way beyond common sense job spec.
So my question is, how do I oppose it? Who do I speak to? As far as I am aware, I’m the only leaseholder in the building, so my neighbours are unlikely to say anything.
Thanks in advance,
J Hautman21 March 2017 at 17:18 #4240
I’ve received a similar proposal for fire risk assessment works. I emailed firstname.lastname@example.org to ask precisely what they are proposing. They told me that it was to install a new fire alarm system. Further enquiries have not yielded much more information. But you could try that as a first step.
Eventually you’ll be sent a section 20 notice, and at that point you can raise formal objections. In my limited experience (one round of major works so far), Camden’s responses to a section 20 notice are unfortunately not very helpful.
Mark21 April 2017 at 19:41 #4253
I’ve also received a ‘Notice on Intention to carry out Fire Risk Assessment Works’ in NW1 (street property).
The proposed contractor is Mullaley & Co Ltd.
The Block cost is put at £8,315 to comply with Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005.
“Work may include replacement of non-compliant doors and fixings, electrical work, signage, maintaining emergency exits, painting communal areas with fire retardant pain, installation or maintenance of smoke detectors and alarms and additional related works”.
As far as I understand, this can only be for work to the communal area which is an entrance corridor 4m x 1.2m x 3m (LWH).
There is a consultation Monday 24 April 2017 16.30 – 19.00 Committee Room 4 Town Judd Street.
I have questioned Camden by phone and email but have had little to no response.
I have requested a breakdown from email@example.com – without response.
If anyone is in a similar position / had similar experience, I would welcome any advice on how to proceed with this matter.
Andrew21 September 2017 at 21:36 #4318
Hi, we live in NW5 – we have a leasehold flat which is 3 floors of a 4 floor terrace house. The only communal area is a small corridor on the ground floor, off which doors go to both flats. We just got a notice of intention to carry out fire risk assessment works. The total cost for the property is £13,289 and our share (54%) is £7,179. It’s not even clear what they are going to do, but we are really struggling to see how anything they could do to this small corridor could cost that much. We also got a separate letter setting out the types of work that fire safety work could include – it seems to be things like fire alarms, upgrading fire stopping etc. What makes us even more confused is that the Council did a bunch of “fire safety” work a year or two ago, which included putting a sign into the corridor!
There is a form enabling us to make written observations, so obviously we will do that. But given past dealings with the council, we are concerned this won’t get us anywhere. There is a consultation session on Tue 3 October, but it will be tricky for us to get to that.
Would appreciate any suggestions….17 October 2017 at 19:50 #4344
We are in exactly the same boat, I sent an email to Capital Services, the email given on the notice of works, and only just heard back today and it just said they were looking into it.
Have you had any feedback from Camden about it? Just seems crazy.13 November 2017 at 21:10 #4368
Hi J Hautman and others,
Just to say that the Leaseholders’ Forum will be having an Open Meeting about these expensive proposed Fire Risk Assessments (currently scheduled all across the borough) in December. For more details please see the latest newsletter (out today).
Paul14 November 2017 at 12:40 #4373
Thanks for this update. The announcement says the open meeting is on Tuesday 11th December, but the 11th is a Monday. So is it Monday 11th, or Tuesday 12th December?
Mark14 November 2017 at 16:15 #4374
Good spot! It’s Monday, 11th December. Correction now going out.14 November 2017 at 18:29 #4376
My first appearance on this forum. I went to the open meeting at Camden Town hall at the beginning of October, and Bruno Filiponni at Camden subsequently forwarded me the detailed list of measures proposed. My own place is on Gaisford St, top floor flat. The main item of cost will be Aico wireless fire alarm, in our case GBP 3,000 basic between four flats (and with other bibs and bobs totalling a terrifying GBP 2,500 each). I wrote to ask if Camden couldn’t run a trial of the Aico system at a few properties before starting to install it, in case it turns out to be not fit for purpose and a complete waste of time and money. I had the following reply today from contract manager Michael Grant, if anyone is interested:
‘A. Previous defective detectors were battery operated alarms which were installed in communal areas as in interim measure. The alarm systems are being installed in the Camden Town district and no faults have been found thus far. The system and components will have a warranty period and Camden will react promptly to any reports of defects.’
Good that there is a warranty period but the reply would have been more impressive if it had stated how long!
best to all,
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.