CK Tools :) The professionals choice when it comes to Electrical Tools
This official sponsor may provide discounts for members

Discuss Like for like replacement of fire alarm components in the Security Alarms, Door Entry and CCTV (Public) area at ElectriciansForums.net

Reaction score
0
Welcome to ElectriciansForums.net - The American Electrical Advice Forum
Head straight to the main forums to chat by click here:  American Electrical Advice Forum

I work in facilities management and I'm looking to clarify the rules for replacing fire alarm components like call points or door magnets.

Could someone considered 'competent' to carry out like for like replacement of normal electrical fixtures do similar work on alarm systems?
 

telectrix

-
Mentor
Esteemed
Arms
Reaction score
61,171
would think so but..... if there were to be a fire and the alarm did not function a it should, it's youse in front of the clown with the funny wig and the Batman cape.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Phil L

-
Esteemed
Arms
Reaction score
253
^^^ As above like for like replacements should be O.K if addressable systems it may be different as the call points could be soft or hard addressed, if you are competent and have tested after replacement and are happy to sign for it, crack on
 

Mike Johnson

-
Esteemed
Arms
Reaction score
1,776
After carrying out the work, test the system and issue a "satisfactory" certificate, then you are covered no matter what Marvel hero you stand in front of.
 

westward10

Admin
Mod
Reaction score
17,205
A fire alarm Modification Certificate doesn't really cover like for like replacement however there is no reason why one could not be issued. Any competent electrician should be able to do this but if you are concerned about ramifications then use a specialist fire alarm company who you would assume to be competent in such matters and would advise if any Certification is required.
 
Reaction score
0
Thank you for all the prompt replies. It's given me a few useful points to consider.

I might not have explained the situation very well in my first post.

Although we call our maintenanc staff technicians, handymen might be more accurate.
Their 'competence' is based on previous experience and on the job assessments by their supervisor rather than formal qualifications.
Currently they are only allowed carry out simple task such as replacing the glass elements in call points, blowing dust out of smoke heads etc. (And like for like on our standard electrical installations)

Recently the hold open magnet of an automatic fire door needed replacing at quite considerable cost and I've been asked why we are unable to do this work type of work in house. On the face of it I can seen the companies point, a like for like replacement of basic components should in theory be quite a simple task and because of the nature of reactive maintenance we often have slack hours in our facilities team.

My concern is how to prove the work has been carried out correctly and where to find suitable training material for our existing staff.
Of course if there is a regulation prohibiting anyone unqualified from carrying out this type of work, I can give the company a very straight forward answer.

Any opinions on this would be greatly appreciated.
 

loz2754

-
Esteemed
Arms
Reaction score
926
Part of the problem with using partly skilled operatives to carry out skilled tasks is producing proof of competency. This is important not only from an insurance standpoint, but obviously with a safety service like fire alarms, it can literally be a life and death situation.
That's not to say we shouldn't be able to train an operative to do certain tasks within a defined scope, and document such training in the personnel file. But that documentation would need to be very specific as to the level of training given, and which tasks are included/excluded within that scope.
 

Lister1987

-
Trainee
Reaction score
708
Chapter 46 of 5839-1 deals with non-routine maintenance. Throughout 5839-1 competency is referenced.

A logbook entry should be made so there is record of the maintenance. A modification certificate should be completed on line with 46.4.2g

ETA; door retainers have Thier own requirements and standards; BS 7273-4

At this point I would consult a specialist company
 

loz2754

-
Esteemed
Arms
Reaction score
926
Chapter 46 of 5839-1 deals with non-routine maintenance. Throughout 5839-1 competency is referenced.

A logbook entry should be made so there is record of the maintenance. A modification certificate should be completed on line with 46.4.2g
And this brings into focus another factor- the BS5839 referred to by @Lister1987 is a very expensive document and anyone installing or maintaining any part of a fire alarm system would need to have access to this document, and be fully conversant with its content.
Otherwise, how could a partly skilled operative know whether a particular maintenance task can be done without inadvertantly causing a problem in another part of the system, and what course of action would need to be followed if a mistake was made that, for instance, blew a fuse in the panel? Food for thought.
 

Mike Johnson

-
Esteemed
Arms
Reaction score
1,776
Then we are getting into the realms of legislating for everything, it would be a very sad world if we get back to the "have you got a ticket to do that" era.
 

Lister1987

-
Trainee
Reaction score
708
Thank you for all the prompt replies. It's given me a few useful points to consider.

I might not have explained the situation very well in my first post.

Although we call our maintenanc staff technicians, handymen might be more accurate.
Their 'competence' is based on previous experience and on the job assessments by their supervisor rather than formal qualifications.
Currently they are only allowed carry out simple task such as replacing the glass elements in call points, blowing dust out of smoke heads etc. (And like for like on our standard electrical installations)

Recently the hold open magnet of an automatic fire door needed replacing at quite considerable cost and I've been asked why we are unable to do this work type of work in house. On the face of it I can seen the companies point, a like for like replacement of basic components should in theory be quite a simple task and because of the nature of reactive maintenance we often have slack hours in our facilities team.

My concern is how to prove the work has been carried out correctly and where to find suitable training material for our existing staff.
Of course if there is a regulation prohibiting anyone unqualified from carrying out this type of work, I can give the company a very straight forward answer.

Any opinions on this would be greatly appreciated.
The Fire Regulatory Reform Order (FRRO) is a good starting point for knowing what you must do. LFB have a guide to it; The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 - Fire safety law - https://www.london-fire.gov.uk/safety/the-workplace/fire-safety-law-explained/

Suitable training materials at the very least would be a copy of the FRRO and a copy of 5839-1 at least. The FIA do training courses for various people, theyve got courses aimed at all levels.
 

Reply to Like for like replacement of fire alarm components in the Security Alarms, Door Entry and CCTV (Public) area at ElectriciansForums.net

Latest Posts

Top