TECHNICAL BULLETIN For Residential Surveyors
FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT AND THE RESIDENTIAL PRACTITIONER
BPE SOLICITORS V HUGHESHOLLAND (AKA GABRIEL V LITTLE) [2017] SC
PITCHED FIBRE DRAINS
FIRES DUE TO FAILURES IN ELECTRICAL CABLES
PAGE 04
PAGE 015
PAGE 020
PAGE 024
ISSUE 27
DECEMBER 2017
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
DECEMBER 2017
CONTENTS THE TECHNICAL BULLETIN
03
FOR RESIDENTIAL SURVEYORS
Welcome to the Technical Bulletin for Residential Surveyors. This Bulletin is designed for residential practitioners who are members of RICS and/or the SAVA Scheme. Produced jointly by BlueBox partners and SAVA, here you will find technical articles, updates on convention changes and best practice. We hope you will find this useful in your day-to-day work and we welcome any feedback you may have and suggestions for future publications.
CONTACT SAVA Head office : SAVA, 4 Mill Square Featherstone Road, Wolverton Mill, Milton Keynes, MK12 5ZD Telephone number: 01908 672787 Email: bulletins@nesltd.co.uk Web: www.surveyorqualifications.co.uk
WELCOME TO THE TECHNICAL BULLETIN 04
FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT AND THE RESIDENTIAL PRACTITIONER PHIL PARNHAM RICHARD TWINE
015
BPE SOLICITORS V HUGHES-HOLLAND (AKA GABRIEL V LITTLE) [2017] SC CARRIE de SILVA
CONTACT BLUEBOX Head office c/o SAVA, 4 Mill Square Featherstone Road, Wolverton Mill, Milton Keynes, MK12 5ZD Telephone number: 01908 442105 | 07989 406168 Email: chris.rispin@blueboxpartners.com Web: www.blueboxpartners.com
017
INTRODUCING THE PROPERTY CARE ASSOCIATION BOB MASSEY
CPD CPD is a commitment by members to continually update their skills and knowledge in order to remain professionally competent. The Technical Bulletin is worth 60 minutes of CPD and can be recorded as such.
020
PITCHED FIBRE DRAINS
MARIA JACOBS PHIL PARNHAM
SAVA is wholly owned by National Energy Services Ltd. (NES) While every effort has been taken to ensure the accuracy of all content in this publication, NES and BlueBox partners take no responsibility for any errors or omissions in the content and the views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of NES or BlueBox partners. Neither NES nor BlueBox partners can accept any liability for any loss or damage suffered as a result of the content or opinions expressed. All rights in this publication, including full copyright or publishing right, content and design are jointly owned by NES and BlueBox partners, except where otherwise described.
02
024
FIRES DUE TO FAILURES IN ELECTRICAL CABLES
SAVA TECHNICAL TEAM
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
NOVEMBER 2017
WELCOME TO THE
TECHNICAL BULLETIN HILARY GRAYSON DIRECTOR OF SURVEYING SERVICES - SAVA CHRIS RISPIN MANAGING DIRECTOR - BLUEBOX PARTNERS It was always our intention to use the Technical Bulletin to follow up on topics covered at the SAVA/Bluebox Conferences in the spring. Consequently, it was in our minds to cover hazards in the home in the bulletins, and specifically fire risk. Though, of course, none of us could have foreseen the tragedy that unfolded on the morning of the 14th June at Grenfell Tower in West London.
In the days and weeks after the fire at Grenfell Tower there was a lot in the press about what started the fire (at the time of writing a Hotpoint freezer seems to be the cause), how it spread so quickly and what went wrong. It is going to be some time before all the answers are known and we will not comment until we have facts and not speculation. But what we do know is that some of the flats were in private ownership – despite all the media reports about the tower being in a deprived part of London – and surveyors will still be advising clients on such properties.
If you attended the conferences, you will know that the topic of Residential Fire Regulations was covered by Richard Twine. During that session he discussed the tragic fire at Lakanal House in Camberwell, South London on 3 July 2009, at the time of the conference this was the UKs worst ever tower block fire. Three women and three children lost their lives in that fire. The inquest determined that the fire started in a television in a flat on the 9th floor but spread through the block with a ferocity that baffled firefighters at the time and early this year Southwark Council was fined a total of £670,000 because of safety deficiencies in the block after it pleaded guilty to four offences under the Regulatory Reform (Fire) Safety Order.
Hence, we have decided to cover safety in this issue and to include information and advice, where it currently exists, to assist surveyors. As more facts emerge from the appalling tragedy we will cover those in further issues. For now, we owe it to all those involved (those who lost their lives, those who lost homes and all their possessions and the courageous rescue services) to provide a considered and measured response. We hope you agree.
03
FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT AND THE
RESIDENTIAL PRACTITIONER
PHIL PARNHAM DIRECTOR OF BLUEBOx PARTNERs RICHARD TWINE DIRECTOR OF REGULATION SOLUTIONS 1.0 Introduction The fire at Grenfell Towers is a national disaster. Until all the investigations and enquiries have finished and their findings reported, there is no useful contribution we can make apart from holding those whom have suffered in our thoughts at this difficult time. Although these are early days, it seems likely these terrible events will result in a radical overhaul and change in the fire regulations and associated legislation. The Government have announced they will be reviewing the building regulations. We do not know the scope or the timescale but it is clear that fire regulations will be very different when the dust settles. However, because it is going to be many months, if not years, before this occurs there is going to be a period of uncertainty. Lenders will be unsure of the risk in this type of lending and they will have worries about how uncertainty will affect the value of their ‘back-book’. During this time, surveyors and valuers who made numerous assumptions about the safety and security of high rise buildings will be concerned these have now been undermined. Consequently, it will be some time before the market reflects what public opinion thinks about the safety and security of not only buying but also renting high rise property.
RICS has been sending out useful email updates containing links to advice and guidance from the Department of Communities and Local Government and other authoritative organisations. While these are important contextual documents, they do not give guidance that would be of use to valuers at the coal face. Consequently, residential practitioners are left in a familiar position: facing a complex issue with little practical help but still expected to decide on whether a property meets the varying criteria of different lenders. It is no surprise that inconsistent valuation decisions will be the result. This article attempts to give residential practitioners usable information about the assessment of flats that form part of large, purpose-built blocks. This information is not new. It makes no attempt at second guessing how future regulations may change and neither does it take account of stopgap lender guidance. Instead it concentrates on the processes and regulations as they stood before this tragedy occurred. This article is not only about flats. Government statistics show that there were 303 fire-related fatalities in 2015/2016 and 80% of these were in the home.
04
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
This is a 15% increase on the 2014/2015 which itself was a 25% increase on the previous year. Even without Grenfell Tower, this was already a shocking situation. Consequently, this article also looks at low rise dwellings but houses in multiple occupation (HMOs) will not be included due to their particular complexity. We intend to cover these in a future bulletin. ‘Sheltered’ or ‘Assisted Living’ accommodation has additional requirements which are not covered here.
DECEMBER 2017
The key document for flats is: •‘Fire Safety in purpose-built blocks of flats’ published by the Local Government Association in May 2012 and this can be downloaded from https://www.local.gov.uk/fire-safety-purposebuilt-flats for free. Additional documents of use are: •Building Regulations Approved Document B, volume 1 (Dwellinghouses) and volume 2 (contains guidance on flats)
2.0 Assessing residential properties for compliance Most of the Residential Surveyors we know are not ‘fire experts’ and are not qualified to carry out or check fire risk assessments. This is because most are not Fire Engineers and cannot evaluate alternative or novel fire prevention solutions.
•The LACORS guide to Housing Fire Safety •HM Government guide Fire Safety Assessment & Sleeping Accommodation
Risk
2.2 Fire safety – some general principles
However, we think any reasonable residential practitioner should have a broad awareness of related matters, be familiar with the key benchmarks that govern this area and be able to recognise the most obvious ‘trails of suspicion’ that may suggest non-compliance.
Before we get into the detail it will be useful to focus on some fundamental concepts that form the building blocks of fire safety. 2.2.1 Fire doors A fire door is one that has been tested to show it achieves resistance to the passage of fire and smoke for a certain period of time. Self-closing devices on internal doors have not been required within dwellings under the Building Regulations since 2006 (except internal doors that connect a house to a garage).
Important Note: in this article, we have summarised some of what we think are the most important indicators of whether the means of escape and other safety provisions in a property are likely to be acceptable. For reasons of brevity, we have not included all the detailed provisions of these complex regulations. Consequently, it is your responsibility to make sure your day to day practice is compliant. You can do this by downloading and reading the benchmark documents listed below. Not only will that give you a better understanding of the topic area but we think it can be logged against your informal CPD targets.
Fire doors usually require an intumescent strip to achieve their rating. This appears as a solid, plastic-type strip rebated into the door edge or frame. This strip expands at high temperatures to seal the door to the aperture and protect the most vulnerable part of the assembly from flame. However, it does nothing to stop the passage of cooler smoke in the early stages of a fire, which is why smoke seals (either a brush or rubber blade) are used.
2.1 The key benchmarks
Although smoke seals are sometimes required, some commentators consider there may be disadvantages within dwellings.
We think the reasonable surveyor should be aware of and have access to the following publications:
05
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
For example, if the fire detection within a dwelling relies on smoke detectors in the circulation areas then smoke seals on a bedroom door may allow the fire to develop for some time before setting off the alarms. However, flat entrance doors should always feature smoke seals, intumescent strips and self-closing devices. Note, in older buildings, ‘historic’ doors are often upgraded without changing the panelled outer face, by the use of additional boarding, or the use of intumescent paints or papers. It is difficult to identify whether a panelled door has been upgraded but the following indicators may help: •When opened and closed, it feels ‘heavier’ than normal doors of that age and type; •Looking along the edge of the door, you may be able to see where additional layers have been added to the inside face. •If the original door was thick enough, only the door panels would have been upgraded. In this case, the depth of the rebate (usually) on the inside will be slightly smaller than that on the other side. 2.2.2 Fire escape windows Windows can only provide an alternative means of escape in dwellings where the floor of the property is less than 4.5 metres above the external ground level. In this case, the window should have a minimum size of 0.33m2 with minimum clear opening dimensions of 450 x 450mm and a maximum 1100mm from floor to bottom of the opening. Although window locks are allowable, any restrictors need an override so they can be fully opened. 2.2.3 Inner rooms These are rooms where the exit from the room is through another, adjacent room (known as the access room). Typical examples are kitchens, bathrooms, ensuite bathrooms and WCs and so on. Habitable rooms can only be inner rooms if they
06
NOVEMBER 2017 DECEMBER 2017
have a suitable door or escape window that meets the requirements described above. ‘Inner-inner’ rooms are rooms where the exit is through two other rooms. These are only acceptable if additional fire detection is provided and none of the two access rooms are a kitchen. 2.2.4 Fire detection and warning This is probably the most important fire safety provision in buildings where people sleep. Early warning buys the occupants time – in a dwelling this allows the responsible adults time to gather their family members before exiting the building, hence the provision of fire doors too in taller dwellings. Since 2000, all new dwellings and most extensions should have been fitted with automatic detection and warning. These should be: •Mains-wired and interlinked with other smoke detectors in the property. They should have a battery backup and meet all other standards laid down in the building regulations •They should be sited in circulation areas such as corridors and stairs, and on every storey •Where kitchens are open to the stairs and corridors, heat detectors should be fitted in the kitchen in addition to the smoke detection. This arrangement would only normally be suitable in two storey dwellings where escape via a window is viable. For houses in multiple occupation, the positioning, type, and grade of detection system are more complicated and will depend on many factors. We will return to HMOs in future articles. 2.3 Means of escape for typical property types The previous section covers some basic principles but how do these relate to the fire escape provision from dwellings we normally encounter? To help, we have identified some typical property types and the sort of escape provision you should expect. 2.3.1 Bungalows This is the probably the most straight forward. All
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
habitable rooms should either: •Open directly into a hall that leads to a suitable exit door; or •Have an escape window that conforms to that described in section 2.2.2 above. The property should be fitted with a suitable fire detection system (see 2.2.4 above) if built after 2000.
NOVEMBER 2017 DECEMBER 2017
•After 2006, escape windows from the second floor are not an option and all doors opening onto the protected staircase should have a 20 minute fire resistance (FD 20). •If the ground floor is open plan and the first flight of stairs and route to the final exit are not protected, then there must be: •A fire door separating the first floor from the open staircase;
2.3.2 Houses
•An escape window at first floor, and;
Two storey houses
•Sprinklers protecting the ground floor.
The ground floor requirements are as described for bungalows in the previous section.
These are the most common scenarios – there are many other variants and if you want more detailed information then please see Approved Document B to the building regulations.
For the first floor, all habitable rooms should have: •An escape window as described in 2.2.2 as long as the floor level of the upper storey is less than 4.5m off the outside ground level, or; •Access to a fire protected stair leading to a final exit. •Again, dwellings constructed post-2000 should be afforded a suitable fire detection system. 2.3.3 Three storey houses The higher the building, the more complicated the provisions become especially as the regulations have changed a number of times in recent years. You may come across properties that conformed to the regulations at the time of construction/conversion but wouldn’t meet the benchmark today. You will have to come to a professional judgement based on the evidence but the following notes may help: •Up to 2006, loft conversions had to have escape windows close to the eaves of the roof and self-closers to existing doors in the protected staircase instead of new fire doors. These provisions have now been superseded.
07
2.3.4 Houses that are four storeys and above Properties at this height (storeys 7.5m above outside ground level or higher) usually require an alternative means of escape (for example, a second internal or an external stair) or a full sprinkler system. This is a complex regulatory area so asking for clear confirmation that the solutions meet current benchmarks is vital. Properties built prior to the modern regulations (pre-1985) will often not meet this guidance. At the very least the stair should be protected by suitable fire doors and the property be fitted with mains-wired, interlinked smoke detection in the circulation areas at all levels. With the absence of an alternative stair or sprinkler system it would be prudent to cover all risk rooms with interlinked detection. 2.3.5 Basements A fire in a basement can quickly block a single stairway with smoke. Therefore, for basements that contain a habitable room the property should have: •A suitable external door or window that allows escape from the basement. •A protected staircase leading from the basement to a final exit.
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN •Even where the basement/cellar does not contain a habitable room, additional fire protection and detection may be required. Like higher dwellings, basements pose additional complications when assessing fire escape standards so you should proceed with caution and put a higher emphasis on obtaining clear evidence of compliance with current benchmarks. 2.4 Obvious signs of non-compliance or ‘follow the trail’. If what you see on inspection falls below the typical benchmark standards as described above, then a referral for further investigation may be justified. However, as with other aspects of your survey, you will have to make a call on a case by case basis depending on what you can see on the day. The following indicators may help you decide: •For dwellings with older windows at ground and first storey - Do they open sufficiently to enable someone to climb out in the event of a fire? Many will not conform to the dimensions laid down in the current regulations. If this is the case, it may be appropriate to warn clients of the higher risk. •Are smoke alarms present at every level? Even if the answer is yes and the alarms are battery operated, it may be appropriate to warn clients these are not as safe as a hard-wired and interlinked system. If there are battery powered fire alarms, have the batteries been removed? If there are mains wired alarms, is there evidence these have been regularly inspected and tested? •Have doors that should be fire rated been altered so their fire resistance may be compromised? For example, heavy fire doors taken off or replaced with lighter alternatives. •Do dwellings with rooms above first floor have an open stair at ground floor? Has the fire separation been removed to make the stair open-plan?
08
DECEMBER 2017
3.0 Flats in purpose provided blocks The complexity of regulations that govern fire escape in blocks of flats are far more complex than those for houses. Engaging with this level of regulation presents many pitfalls and problems. For example, the common areas of flats and maisonettes are controlled by The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. Scotland and Northern Ireland have separate fire service and fire safety legislation: The Fire Safety (Scotland) Regulations 2006 and the Fire Safety Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2010. The approach taken under this legislation is a ‘riskassessment based regime’ requiring employers, property owners and their managers (amongst others) to take action to prevent fires and protect against death and injury of employees and other relevant persons, including tenants. Probably the most relevant publication is ‘Fire Safety in purpose-built blocks of flats’ published by the Local Government Association in May 2012 and this can be downloaded from https://www. local.gov.uk/fire-safety-purpose-built-flats for free. Before we look at any further detail, it will be worthwhile reviewing two general principles: ‘stay put’ strategies and fire risk assessments. 3.1 ‘Stay put’ policies The Grenfell Tower tragedy and the previous fire at Lakanal House in Southwark has placed the policy of ‘staying put’ at the centre of any forthcoming enquiry. The theory goes something like this: if each flat or compartment has a fire separation of at least one hour then occupants should remain in their homes until the fire is extinguished or unless instructed otherwise by the emergency services. The logic behind this policy is that if all the flats in a block were to be evacuated simultaneously when a fire alarm is triggered, the resulting chaos could makes matters worse. Any alternative to ‘stay put’ would rely on an interlinked alarm system, which raises its own issues. For example: •Who carries out the weekly fire alarm test, and at what time are the tests? How can a fire alarm engineer access every flat on the same day to perform twice-yearly maintenance? With 129
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
DECEMBER 2017
separate flats in Grenfell Tower for example, the logistics would be challenging to say the least.
these types of dwelling can be particularly complex and should be left to the specialists to assess.
•After a few false alarms at 3am, few of the upper floor occupiers are likely to respond to the next alarm.
3.3 Fire risk assessments (FRAs) A fire risk assessment (FRA) is required by Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. The FRA must be ‘suitable and sufficient’, and the local fire and rescue service has the authority to audit them. Where the building or the assessment is deemed unacceptable, the fire and rescue service may take enforcement action against the ‘responsible person’. The purpose of the FRA is to evaluate the risk to people from fire and enables the ‘responsible person’ (usually the owner, landlord or their agents) to determine the necessary fire safety measures required.
•What would happen to those who rely on the lifts? Would the elderly and disabled be left stranded? •There could also be a corridor and/or stairway clash between occupants trying to leave the building and personnel from the emergency services trying to access the building at the same time. For these reasons, published guidance and most fire risk assessments for blocks have been based on the ‘stay put’ principle. Guidance states that fire alarm systems are only interlinked between residencies and common areas in exceptional circumstances.
Under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order, the FRA only needs to consider the common parts of the block, but where a landlord has concerns about the risk to residents within their flats, the FRA may extend to the flats themselves. However in all cases the assessment should consider the fire resistance of the individual flat entrance door.
Due to the adoption of ‘stay put’ strategies, the fire resistance between flats and to the common areas (compartmentation) is of critical importance. In the case of Grenfell Tower the ‘stay put’ policy was initially effective as the compartmentation held the fire in the flat of origin until it was extinguished. The disastrous failure of the external cladding system is what compromised this policy. 3.2 Fire escape within the flats Once within the flats, the simplest layout from a fire safety perspective is where all the habitable rooms have access to an internal hallway. In this case, the internal hallway should be protected by fire resisting linings and all internal doors should be 30 minutes fire resisting. However, experience suggests many older flats will not meet this standard. To meet modern standards the flat should also be fitted with hard wired alarms.
Figure 1:
There are many other flat configurations (for example, flats with restricted travel distances, flats with open plan areas and those that have more than one storey). The requirements for
This is part of a notice for residents of a three storey block of flats. It describes what to do in the case of a fire and is clearly not a ‘stay put’ strategy but helps to show this is a well managed block.
09
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN Intrusive fire risk assessments (involving destructive exposure) will only be necessary where there is justifiable concern regarding structural fire precautions. For example, it is common for FRAs to lift a sample of accessible false ceiling tiles, or to open a sample of service risers and so on. Some FRAs may have no intrusive investigations at all. They are nominally graded as follows and are self-explanatory: •Type 1 – Common parts only (non-destructive) •Type 2 – Common parts only (destructive) •Type 3 – Common parts and flats (non-destructive) •Type 4 – Common parts and flats (destructive) A fire risk assessment need not always be carried out by specialists. For example, the landlord of a small, simple block of flats can act as the fire risk assessor and produce their own fire risk assessment using the appropriate guidance. Where the landlord is not confident to do this or where the building is particularly complex, then the ‘responsible person’ may want to employ a consultant to produce the FRA. Here start the usual problems – how does the ‘responsible person’ identify a competent fire risk assessor? There seems to be a range of so called ‘specialists’ offering their services and judging by the commentary on a wide range of authoritative websites, the quality of the FRAs they produce is, at best, variable. For example, one of our associates is a Fire Risk Assessor. He submitted a fee quotation for producing a FRA for a variety of buildings on behalf of a potential client. Eventually he was thanked for the quote but told another consultant had undercut him on both cost and time. Then Grenfell Tower happened. A few days later he was contacted by the same organisation who had reflected on the process and asked him to carry out the work on his original terms and conditions. If you have management responsibilities, here are a few tips that might help you assess the suitability of a Fire Risk Assessor: •Whilst there is no requirement for an assessor to hold specific qualifications, a reasonable expectation is that they should be part of a third
010
DECEMBER 2017
party accredited scheme where members have to meet the competency requirements of the Fire Risk Assessment Competency Council (FRACC). The FRACC has published a set of competency criteria. •The better risk assessors generally have a limited scope of services. Beware of those offering a ‘onestop-shop’ for multiple regulatory needs – they are often ‘jacks of all trades’ without the detailed knowledge and training to deal with complex or high risk buildings; •Does the assessment refer to the ‘type’ of assessment carried out, as described above? If not, it may not have been produced in accordance with the LGA Guidance which is the current accepted guidance document for purpose built flats; •Refer to the ‘obvious signs’ section below. If the assessor has missed any of these then the validity of the assessor should be in doubt. Although we have no detailed information on any of the following professional organisations, they all seem to run schemes that offer some form of review and/or audit process for their members: •The Institute of Fire Safety Managers (IFSM) •The Fire Industry Association •The Institution of Fire Engineers •Institute of Fire Prevention Officers •The Fire Risk Assessment Certification Scheme Whoever performs the function, the FRA should be reviewed regularly. Although no fixed periods are stated in the regulations, it has become good practice to review the document every year and/ or when something changes (for example, after refurbishments or repair, staff and legislation changes and so on). The LGA guide recommends a new assessment every two years. A fire risk assessment must consider the ‘general fire precautions’ as defined in the regulations and usually includes the following: •Measures to reduce the risk of fire and the risk of the spread of fire. •Means of escape from fire.
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
•Measures to ensure that escape routes can be safely and effectively used. •An emergency plan, including procedures for residents in the event of fire. •Measures to mitigate the effects of fire. •Details of testing and maintenance of building services and of fire safety measures. •Identification of the ‘responsible person’ (which may be a landlord, residents group etc) who is responsible for fire safety.
all the appropriate ‘…valid planning permissions and statutory approvals for the buildings and for their use, including any extensions or alterations, have been obtained and complied with’. For avoidance of doubt, alterations will include new cladding or replacing external finishes. Although this is the usual approach for most cases, given the complex nature of flat-related legislation and the events at Lakanal House and, of course, Grenfell Tower, it is our view this advice should be expanded and be more specific. You may find the following information useful:
“
The FRA should conclude an Action Plan and this should set out a list of any (normally prioritised) physical and managerial measures that are necessary to ensure that fire risk is maintained at, or reduced to, an acceptable level.
Because of the particular nature of the flat and the block within which it is contained, you should ask your legal adviser whether planning permissions and other statutory approvals for the buildings and for their use, including any extensions or alterations have been obtained and complied with. In respect of this flat, this should specifically include the following :
4.0 Assessing the fire safety of purpose built flats Most Residential Surveyors and Valuers are not qualified Fire Risk Assessors or Fire Engineers. Also, we are unlikely to have a deep, working knowledge of the building regulations or other relevant British standards and codes of practice unless we are also involved in design and specification work. Consequently, it is our view at SAVA/BlueBox that a residential practitioner’s approach to assessing the fire safety of purpose built blocks should be similar to that used for assessing building services in residential dwelling; namely: is there evidence all the appropriate approvals and supporting paper work are in place and, based on the appropriate level of inspection, are there any obvious visual indicators that suggests non-compliance. These are discussed in more detail below. 4.1 Evidence the block has all the necessary documentation This evidence will vary depending on the nature, type and age of the block. However, the first step for a residential practitioner is to tell the client/ lender to ask their legal adviser to check whether
DECEMBER 2017
•A fire risk assessment (FRA) carried out within the last 2 years by a competent person who is a member of an insurance backed, third party accredited scheme. •The FRA should cover all common areas and parts of the subject flat where appropriate. It should also cover the recent alterations within the flats in the block (carried out in approximately 2011), the over cladding (carried out in 2013) and the repair to the rubbish chutes (carried out in2016).
”
If appropriate documentation is not available, then an appropriately qualified and experienced person should investigate the matter further.
We have used some imaginary recent repairs to illustrate a number of issues but these are not uncommon for many older blocks. The length of this clause may not suit many lenders but we think residential practitioners need to be specific
011
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
NOVEMBER 2017 DECEMBER 2017
about what legal checks are required especially as many home buyers never meet their legal advisers who have no idea what the flat looks like or what it contains. In addition to the FRA, you might also want to include some other approvals: •If the block has been recently constructed, does it have the benefit of a warranty or guarantee? This is particularly important because many use ‘innovative forms of construction’ and unusual building materials and techniques. •Building control approval, including evidence of some form of final certificate or final sign off. This will be relevant for both relatively recently built or repaired/renovated blocks. Although this did not prevent the Grenfell Tower fire, it does, at least, provide some form of benchmark. •Evidence that the flat and the common areas are covered by appropriate electrical and Gas Safe certificates. Certificates should also cover unusual elements such as lifts and automatic gates although the managing organisation may have to provide these. •Where water is stored, there should be evidence a legionella risk assessment has been recently carried by an appropriately qualified person.
Figure 2 : This block was built in the 1970s. The hatch on the balcony floor was a formal part of the fire escape route if the fire blocked the front entrance door. The occupant was meant to lift the hatch cover and drop down to the level below (approx. height of 2.6metres). Something that is now beyond the 93 year old leaseholder.
4.2.1 Look out for signs of breaches of compartmentation especially inside the flat.
4.2 Obvious signs of non-compliance
For example:
In a similar approach to that suggested for services (see ‘Assessing building services’ by Phil Parnham. RICS 2012), residential practitioners should not seek to confirm the actual flat and blocks conform to the documentation provided. Instead, you should look for obvious visual indicators that suggest the dwelling/building may not comply. Although you should not go beyond the scope of the inspection described in your terms and conditions, given the current public profile of the issue, you may want to follow those ‘trails’ a little more thoroughly. The following information may be of use.
012
•The walls, ceilings and floors between the flat, common areas and adjacent areas, should all be in satisfactory condition without any holes or missing components. •Spend additional time looking in storage cupboards or spaces where electrical cables, and pipes and so on pass through walls, floors and ceilings. These should be effectively sealed. Expandable foam is not a suitable method of fire stopping, and the pink fire resistant foams are unsuitable for larger apertures – beware of any above 20mm.
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
•Think about bathrooms, toilet rooms and kitchens. Where do the appliances drain to? Is there a common SVP? Does it seem to have appropriate fire separation? Where does the mechanical ventilation run? Mechanical ventilation systems played a key part in the deaths at Lakanal House in 2009, and any system other than one ducted direct to external air should prompt further questioning. •Are there adequate escape provisions within the flat itself? Is the flat fitted with hard-wired fire alarms? Is there evidence these have been recently inspected and tested? Does the internal hallway (where present) have robust and resistant partitions, floors and ceilings?
NOVEMBER 2017 DECEMBER 2017
4.2.2 Do the common areas seem well-managed? Typical indicators include: •Are the stairwells/staircases clear of storage or rubbish? •Is there emergency lighting (windowless stairs or above two storeys) and is it in a satisfactory condition or has it been broken and/or vandalised? •Is there sufficient signage. Typical examples would include: •Advice about emergency procedures; •Clear fire escape signs.
Figure 3 :
Figure 4:
This shows the meter cupboard ceiling within a flat. The joists to the floor above can clearly be seen where part of the ceiling has been removed so cables and gas pipes can be fitted through. This could a breach of compartmentation.
This is a flat entrance door off the common staircase of a three-storey block. Although it appears in a satisfactory condition, the recessed panels could suggest it may not have a one hour rating.
013
ISSUE 27 27 NOVEMBER DECEMBER 2017 2017 ISSUE
TECHNICAL BULLETIN BULLETIN TECHNICAL
•As you go up and down the stairs, look at the flat doors of the other dwellings. Do they look like fire resisting doors? Have some been replaced by the occupants? Are there any PVC doors ? (fire resistant UPVC doors are available but are rare and expensive). •Are the finishes on the stairs and landings appropriate and in satisfactory condition? •If there is a rubbish chute - is it in a satisfactory condition and is it maintained? If there are large bins at the base are these kept secure so they cannot be easily tampered with? Chutes should be separated from the stair by fire resisting construction, and ideally by a ventilated lobby. •Are there any unprotected gas mains in the common areas or located in or adjacent to escape routes? •Look around the base of the block. Does it seem well managed? Is there enough space for fire service access? Is there evidence of illegal/chaotic parking blocking access for emergency services? •Is there a means of ventilating the staircase? This usually takes the form of mechanically operated windows or rooflights, or dedicated smoke extraction systems. Is there detection in the stair to trigger the ventilation, or a fire service control at ground floor? •Remember that with ‘stay-put’ policies, communal fire alarm systems are undesirable except in unusual circumstances as they are not usually properly maintained and tested. •Has any external cladding system been fire tested? Has any recladding work received Building Regulations Approval? As we saw at Grenfell tower this does not necessarily guarantee it is suitable, but does at least defend your own professional position. These are not a comprehensive list but represent what we think you should be looking for on valuation inspections, HomeBuyer Reports and Home Condition Surveys.
014
5.0 Conclusions As the various inquiries and investigations begin to report their findings, we hope the true nature of the tragedy at Grenfell Towers will be revealed. Hopefully this will lead to a full, thorough and balanced review and revision of the current law and regulations and in turn will be reflected in changes to how residential practitioners value and report on the condition of flats in purpose built flats. Until that time, we hope this article provides you with some useful information that will enable you to make balanced and reasonable professional judgements. Like all articles in the Technical Bulletin, we welcome your feedback together with any suggestions how practitioners can best serve their clients during this period of review and adjustment. Please send your comments to bulletins@nesltd.co.uk About the authors: Richard Twine - Director of Regulation Solutions Limited, an independent Building Regulations adviser and trainer. email - richard@regulationsolutions.co.uk Phil Parnham - Director of BlueBox Partners, limited with experience in both public and private sector. email - phil.parnham@bluebox.com
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
NOVEMBER 2017
BPE SOLICITORS V HUGHES-HOLLAND
(AKAGABRIEL V LITTLE)
[2017] SC THE SAAMCO CAP
there would have been a duty to warn of the full range of risks associated with the purchase, for example market volatility.
CARRIE de SILVA Principle lecturer, hARPER adams university
For how much of a loss is a negligent professional liable? I am looking at the principle in the context of valuation but it applies across the range of The BPE Solicitors case, heard recently in the professional advice and BPE Solicitors v HughesSupreme Court, affirmed the SAAMCo cap principle Holland recently heard in the Supreme Court, limiting the extent of liability in professional related to the purported negligence of a solicitor. negligence cases. What does this mean, in practical terms? Mr Gabriel agreed to lend Mr Little, a property developer, £200,000 for the development of some Firstly, what is the SAAMCo cap? In the House of offices on land at Kemble Airfield, Gloucestershire. Lords (what would now be the Supreme Court), In fact the monies were used by Mr Little to South Australia Asset Management Corp. v York Montague [1996] overturned the wider liability held in Banque Bruxelles Lambert SA v Eagle Is valuer liable in negligence for loss of £20,000 or Star Insurance Co Ltd and others [1995] and £30,000? limited professional liability in cases where the If valuer had given correct value and the property was professional service in question was the provision purchased, there would still have been a loss of £20,000. of information, as opposed to advice. To put this But it’s not that simple: maybe the transaction would not into a simple valuation example: have been seen as a good move at the true value and, The SAAMCo cap means that in so called ‘information’ cases, the liability is limited to £20,000, in this example. If, however, the professional had been engaged to ‘advise’ on the transaction, rather than just provide the bare information as to value, then there could be liability for the full £30,000 as
015
but for the incorrect information, the purchaser would not have entered the transaction at all. Negligent valuation True valuation at the time Sale price following a drop in the market
- £100,000 - £80,000 - £70,000
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
purchase the property and to discharge another loan, with nothing then left for development. The solicitor drawing up the Gabriel-Little agreement knew that the monies were not being used for developing the Kemble Airfield premises. He did not point this out and the misunderstanding on Mr Gabriel’s part was supported by wording in the documents that his monies would be used for the office development project.
DECEMBER 2017
engagement, and those terms of engagement need to be clear. Where a client is being given information only, the losses resulting from negligence will be limited to losses which are a direct result of the erroneous information, i.e. £20,000 in the above example. Conversely, where a client is being given advice as to whether or not to enter a transaction, then liability would be for all losses incurred as a result of the transaction, i.e. £30,000 in the above example. The fact the advice is crucial to the decision to enter the transaction does not, of itself, turn the situation into an ‘advice’ case. Whether or not it is an ‘advice’ case will be based on the terms of engagement. The traditional ‘but for’ test, that a transaction would not have been entered ‘but for’ the information provided, is a necessary element of establishing liability but is not sufficient in itself.
Mr Gabriel unsuccessfully sued Mr Little and his associated company for fraud and negligent misrepresentation. He then sued BPE Solicitors for negligence (Hughes-Holland in the case name being Mr Gabriel’s trustee in bankruptcy). There was a clear basis in relation to liability for negligence. The contention was as to the level of damages. At first instance it was held that the solicitors were liable for the full loss. The failure to provide relevant information masked the nature of the transaction thus the whole loss was a foreseeable and recoverable consequence of the negligence, subject to contributory negligence.
Bristol & West v Steggles Palmer [1997] and Portman Building Society v Bevan Ashford [2000] were expressly overturned. The so called ‘Steggles Palmer principle’ (being an exception to the SAAMCo cap, ascribing liability for the full losses of a transaction where there is an element of dishonesty or fraud) has been swept aside, with the extent of liability in negligence firmly based on terms. This may sound harsh where there has been fraud but there are likely to be other causes of action, both civil and criminal, in such instances.
The Court of Appeal, in the leading judgment of Gloster, LJ, reversed this. They put the burden of proof on the claimant, Mr Gabriel, to prove that if the information provided had been correct he would not have made the loss. He failed to establish this. It was found that significant losses were (a) on the facts, almost inevitable, and (b) the result of a commercial risk which Mr Gabriel would be, or should be, aware of, not due to the lack of BPE Solicitors failure to highlight the precise use of the monies.
The decision does not, of course, help to decide whether a particular case is an ‘advice’ or an ‘information’ case and terms can be ambiguous. Lord Hoffman did say that valuers (and conveyancers) are likely to be providing bare ‘information’ where financial advisers will be giving ‘advice’ but this is a simplification of an often complex practice so the drafting of terms of engagement, as well as any subsequent letters, emails or oral assertions, need to be carefully considered.
The Supreme Court supported the Court of Appeal decision. The solicitors were engaged to prepare the loan documentation, not to advise on the commerciality of the transaction. They were responsible for the mistaken belief but the loss would largely have been suffered, on the facts, even if the loan had been applied in the way in which Mr Gabriel expected.
Carrie de Silva LlB (Hons) MA BlueBox Partners trainer Harper Adams University - Principal Lecturer in Law and Taxation carrie@carriedesilva.co.uk
In underlining the SAAMCo principle, professional negligence cases need to review the basis of
016
THE PROPERTY
CARE ASSOCIATION PHIL PARNHAM DIRECTOR OF BLUEBOx PARTNERs BOB MASSEY Independent consultant, specialist surrey 1.0 Introduction Older residential practitioners reading this article have probably only just got used to writing ‘PCA member’ alongside their referrals for further investigations for timber and damp problems rather than ‘BWPDA’. After giving a paper at the recent PCA conference, I was approached by Bob Massey of Bob Massey Associates Ltd, Bristol and reminded the PCA is not just an organisation of contractors and manufacturers but also includes an active section of independent and freelance surveyors. This article is an edited version of one produced by Bob and may help residential practitioners refer their clients to specialists better suited to their needs. 2.0 What is the PCA ? The Property Care Association (PCA) is the trade association representing specialists across the UK who can be trusted to resolve problems affecting buildings. PCA members have met strict membership criteria to demonstrate their technical competence and service delivery standards and can investigate and resolve property defects involving:
017
• Damp • Condensation • Domestic Air Quality & Ventilation • Timber Decay or Insect Attack • Structural and Basement Waterproofing • Flood Restoration and Flood Protection • Structural Defects • Invasive Weed Control (incl. Japanese knotweed) Some readers may remember the British Wood Preserving and Damp-proofing Association (BWPDA). The BWPDA no longer exists. Most of it’s activities now sit under the Property Care Association (PCA). There is also a trade organisation called the Wood Protection Assocation (WPA). The WPA is a technical and advisory organisation focused on improving the performance and value of wood as a sustainable construction material and provide technical guidance on technical applications for wood in the factory to ensure resistance to decay, insects and fire. Issues relating to dampness in buildings, timber preservation, including the control and eradication of wet and dry rot and attack by timber destroying insects, underground waterproofing, structural repair, flood remediation and flood protection
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
and invasive weed control including Japanese Knotweed, come under the Property Care Association website. Issues specifically relating to pre-treated timber and preservatives are now under the Wood Protection Association. THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF PCA MEMBERSHIP There are several different types: A ‘PCA CONTRACTOR’ is a company providing services to the domestic and/or commercial market within the sectors represented by the PCA. They can provide customers with diagnostic investigation services backed by a written survey report and quotation for any necessary works. All member contractors have signed up to a voluntary Code of Ethics and have been assessed by the PCA as being capable of undertaking repair and rectification work to the highest standards. A ‘PCA Independent Surveyor’ is an individual who offers a specialist surveying service and has no commercial link or interest with any organisation or individual that derives profit or gain from the undertaking of building preservation work. A ‘PCA Freelance Surveyor’ is an individual who offers a specialist surveying service but has a declared commercial link with one or more organisations or individuals that derive profit or gain from the undertaking of building preservation work. A ‘PCA Independent Consultant’ is an individual who offers a specialist building preservation consultancy including surveying and site investigation services but will not provide estimates for rectification or undertake any repair works. Consultants are deemed to have the ability to act as an independent witness in litigation cases and are able to produce CPR 35 compliant reports in accordance with civil procedures. A ‘Manufacturer / Distributor’ is a company manufacturing and/or distributing products used by contractors within the trade sectors represented by the Property Care Association.
018
DECEMBER 2017
Which type of member do I need? When choosing a PCA member, you should consider the specialist qualities you or your client require. For example, in the case of a property purchase that requires a pre-purchase survey, a PCA Independent Surveyor is likely to be more appropriate and could offer a service similar to a Sava Home Condition Survey or RICS Buyers Report. If an assessment and quotation for remedial works is needed then a PCA contractor would be the appropriate member. Independent and freelance surveyor members can also advise on remedial work and offer a somewhat different service to that of a contractor. They receive no financial reward for recommending any particular type of work and will base their recommendations on the client’s instructions and aspirations taking into consideration the age and nature of the construction, its current condition and intended use. For this reason, this type of survey is usually more expensive in comparison to a contractor’s report and may include additional useful information beyond the scope of what could be described as a standard ‘damp survey’. While the report they produce is not, by definition, a quote for work to be undertaken, they will provide an estimate for costs involved if required. If you require specialist technical services or support for litigation, an independent consultant would normally be a more appropriate choice although some independent surveyors will offer this service as well. When you have made your choice you should give specific and precise instructions as to the scope of the investigation and whether any destructive exposure work and analysis is required. Tests could include readings taken using a simple conductivity meter or plaster analysis in order to determine the presence of ground salts which are indicative of rising damp due to the lack of an effective damp proof course. Furthermore, sophisticated tests such as gravimetric testing and the use of a calcium carbide meter may be advisable where tests are required in order to provide quantitative moisture levels in masonry and plasterwork. However, all these types of tests
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
are destructive. Data logging using hygrometers will help determine the risks associated with condensation which often results in mould colonization. Data logging isn’t normally part of a standard damp condition survey unless requested within the scope of works provided by the client. Subfloor inspections are usually advisable but, as we know, are not always possible during a prepurchase survey unless the vendor has agreed to allow the lifting of floor coverings and floorboards or there is an obvious access. Where the inspection is commissioned by the existing home owner this is more feasible, though if the owner is trying to sell they may still be reluctant. For example, hardwood flooring or laminate type floor coverings are not easy to remove without causing damage which is likely to be unacceptable in a pre-purchase situation.
ISSUE 27
DECEMBER 2017
Many building surveyors recommend subfloor inspections in their reports but it must be appreciated this is not always easy or acceptable to the seller, for the reasons given above, and will require special arrangements to be agreed with the homeowner. The PCA has a very comprehensive website and additional information and technical papers relating to the services PCA members offer can be found there. Bob Massey, Bristol. http://www.bobmasseyassociates.co.uk/ For more information about the PCA, follow this link:http://www.property-care.org/homeowners/ what-type-of-member-do-i-need/
PITCHED FIBRE DRAINS
MARIA JACOBS AssocRics white horse surveyors PHIL PARNHAM DIRECTOR OF BLUEBOx PARTNERs INSPECTING UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE SYSTEMS
1.0 Introduction To constitute a dwelling, a property must have independent cooking and washing facilities containing sanitary ware connected to a water supply and drainage system. Waste water is disposed of via internal above ground pipework to an underground drainage system, which is commonly connected to public sewers or can discharge to independent, private drainage systems (septic tanks and soakaways, cesspits or packaged treatment plants). Understandably, drains matter to people and every year SAVA receives several queries from home owners relating to drains both inside and outside the property - “ what should the surveyor have seen and what should they have reported?” In this article we will review good practice relating to underground drainage and look specifically at the issues with pitch fibre pipes. 2.0 Drainage systems connected to public sewers The growth of piped water supply system to individual dwellings after the Public Health Act of 1875 also prompted construction of centralised
below ground drainage system (famously in London the sewer system was designed by the engineer Joseph Bazalgette and was instrumental in relieving the city from cholera epidemics). Any design for underground drainage must fulfill multiple purposes, be self-cleaning, require minimal maintenance from the occupiers and provide sufficient removal of waste water designed to meet and exceed the occupant’s requirements. Historically properties built prior to 1950 are likely to have drainage systems based on the original designs of the 19th Century. The most common material was salt glazed clay drain pipes with socket and spigot ridged joints, as this was the most cost effective and available building material. Salt-glazed clay pipes remained the most common type until the 1950s when vitrified clay drain pipes with flexible joints were introduced. Other materials were also used including concrete, asbestos cement or plastic pipes. In a short period between 1950 and 1970, pitch fibre pipes were also installed. This sort of pipe has posed specific problems over and above other designs, so we are focussing on
020
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
the issues surveyors need to address. 3.0 The problems posed by pitched fibre drains Pitch fibre drains were made from wood fibre impregnated with coal tar, and while they have been shown to perform sufficiently when dealing with normal waste water, research has shown that they can react badly when subjected to large quantities of hot water, oils and fats. These can soften the tar and cause deformation and leaks. The design life of pitch fibre pipes is estimated to be about 40 years. This means that many will have reached the end of their life expectancy. In the worst cases, they can collapse, blocking the drain run. According to a “Review of Existing Private Sewers and Drains in England and Wales” published in 2003 by the Government Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, it is estimated that there are around 50,000 properties with this type of drain. Some types of pitch fibre pipes were also reinforced with asbestos fibres and this can increase the cost of replacement. The pipes [made from pitch fibre] were relatively inexpensive and easy to handle and install. However, it became apparent that these pipes were susceptible to the delamination of their inner surface, ruining the integrity of the pipes. It was also discovered that, under normal conditions, they were susceptible to collapse under applied loading sooner than pipes made of more rigid materials. 4.0 Problems with identification In cases where the sections of underground drains visible via inspection chambers contain vitrified clay drains, it is very difficult to identify whether there are out of sight sections of the drain run which are pitch fibre. One of the main problems with pitch fibre pipes is they are difficult to spot. This is because most change to vitrified clay channels as they pass through inspection chambers - easy to miss during a brief visual inspection. One recommended approach is to lift the chamber lid and set it aside.
021
DECEMBER 2017
Then get as low down as possible so you can look up the drain run as far as you possibly can. Often the texture and colour of the pipe will clearly change as it meets the clay channels. In some cases, you may be able to see remnants of the black tar used to seal the junction. If the chamber is not too deep, you may be able to use a mirror and torch to look up the drain. You could even take a photo along the drain if you have a ‘selfie stick’ although be ready to move if you hear a gurgling sound!
PROBLEMS WITH INSURANCE According to the Financial Ombudsman Services, most insurance policies will cover damage to underground drains that serve the insured property so long as those pipes are the responsibility of the policy holder and the damage is accidental. However, such policies may contain several exclusions, notably wear and tear, gradual deterioration and faulty workmanship or design. They report that some insurers may specifically refuse to pay claims relating to pitch fibre pipes even though the policies do not specifically exclude them due to the above. There is comprehensive consumer guidance on their website on how policy holders should approach any potential claim but this will not be straightforward. However, some more modern policies are much more open and specifically exclude coverage of pitch fibre drains. Consequently correct identification may have considerable financial implications for the home owner.
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
We are not suggesting you adopt this approach with every property but when you are inspecting a dwelling built between 1950 – 1970 you should follow this trail. If pitch fibre drains are identified or suspected a recommendation for further CCTV investigation of the drains can be justified on the grounds of their known estimated life expectancy, the possible issue with insurers and the need for further investigation. The likelihood of failure can be justified and repairs can be of significant cost and particularly complicated where drains are shared or run over adjacent properties. 5.0 Limitations to inspection It is worth pointing out that on many properties there are no drain inspection chambers within the vicinity of the property or if they are present, they can’t be lifted. (This can be due to them being in an inaccessible location, being too heavy to lift during the course of a normal inspection or there being a risk of damage if they are lifted). In such situations a limitation of the inspection should always be recorded in the site notes, ideally with a photograph. In such a situation a constructive comment in the actual report about the presence or lack of inspection chambers and their suitability for inspection can be helpful for your client and help to manage their expectations.
DECEMBER 2017
brief explanation of potential risk factors such as root damage from very close trees or hedges, instability of extensions, conservatory foundations affecting the drain run underneath, visible signs of ground movement through the assumed drain lines, etc. will contribute to your justification for the Condition Rating you attribute to the drains. The protocol can be helpful here, and as with other elements in the property, if you feel it is inappropriate to attribute a CR3 to all the drains where you feel only one part may be suspect, you can report on more than one drain – splitting the element up. The approach for RICS survey products is different and we will return to this in another article. In circumstances when there are no inspection chambers, or the chamber lids could not be lifted and there are no known issues (visible or that you can deduce from local knowledge, experience etc) that could have a negative impact on the performance of the drains, awarding a Condition Rating 1 may be appropriate but with a clear description of the limited scope of the inspection and supported with photo evidence of the limitations and surrounding area of the assumed drain run. But think carefully about risks to the drains that may have occurred since they were laid and consider the expectations of your client.
In most causes where no access is possible, a Condition Rating 1 is very unlikely to be correct and could lead to an unhappy client and a possible complaint. Your client - and their solicitor (should it all get litigious) - will rightly and literally comprehend the 6.0 Reporting on Drains in the HCS reported condition as “No repair is currently needed. Normal maintenance must be carried out.” Later, if an When applying the condition rating (assuming issue manifests itself the surveyor’s liability will be you have carried out a Home Condition Survey) a challenged with minimal chance to defend.
022
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
In such instances, rating ‘Not Inspected’ is most likely to be appropriate but you should justify why it was not inspected and provide an adequate and comprehensive reason for the limitations. But this must be judged on a case by case basis. If there is any doubt in your mind as to the efficacy of the drains even when clear access to an inspection chamber is possible, it would be sensible to allocate a Condition Rating 3, suggesting further investigation due to risks relating to the drains and referring to the fact that on the date of inspection you were not able to inspect the drains. Pitch fibre drains will fall into this category.
DECEMBER 2017
Finally, all drainage systems (drain runs, inspection chambers, septic tanks, cesspits, etc.) present within boundaries of the subject property must be included in the BCIS calculation. The reinstatement cost for underground drainage can be very substantial and it is often left out or underestimated. Such works can make up a large proportion of the reinstatement value therefore it is crucial that surveyor estimates are as accurate as possible, so the property is not underinsured.
The following wording with appropriate amendments might be adopted in similar situations: “The property has mains drainage connected to a public sewer system, however no inspection chambers could be located within the boundaries. Access to the drains is .... [either state position of inspection chambers if identified or describe restriction limiting access to drains.]” Then, if no visual issues identified: “Whilst no deficiencies were observed via visual inspection, the location of the drainage access should be confirmed by your conveyancer for future reference.” If some visual defect indicators are present (e.g. bad smells, signs of flowing sewerage and/or property located in high risk areas of surface water flooding, etc.) then CR 3 recommending further investigation is the right option. If you are able to lift the drains cover then photographs should be taken and stored with the site notes and uploaded within the HCS report clearly describing condition of the benching, drain pipes, any objects present within the drains (roots, debris, sediments, etc.). If possible, a flow of the drains should be observed but you should ensure that it is safe to do so (be very aware of the occupants of the property at the date of inspection). A similar approach can be adopted with private drainage systems with addition of a comment about type and frequency of disposal.
023
Drains and the value of local knowledge. HILARY GRAYSON reports:
“
When I was a practising surveyor at one stage I worked for the London Borough of Bromley, primarily packaging up development land for private sale. Being an outer London borough, this was usually for residential development. One site that we sold was in Biggin Hill. The land was immediately adjacent to Biggin Hill Airport. Housing in Biggin Hill varies in age but there was not a lot there dating before the second world war, when the airport was an RAF base. Most of the older properties date from around this period and were built to house the base workers. By the mid-1980s, when I was at Bromley Council, Biggin Hill had begun to gain a reputation for drainage problems. This caused us considerable headaches when we were selling the land and I remember commissioning endless drain surveys. The reason for the reputation was simple – the main sewers were apparently installed at the time the RAF base was developed. The priority then was not to create a long lasting public sewage system but rather to beat the Luftwaffe. Consequently, and particularly adjacent to the airport, the public sewers were not great and some of the connections to the private drains on people’s property were distinctly sub standard.
”
FIRES DUE TO FAILURES IN ELECTRICAL CABLES TECHNICAL TEAM SAVA of cable failure include: 1.0 Introduction
Ageing:
According to a report in the Guardian Newspaper in August this year (and following the Grenfell Fire) it was reported by the London Fire Brigade that nearly one fire a day in London involves faulty white goods. The Fire Safety Council estimates that 89% of electric fires are caused by faulty goods with only 11% caused by faulty installations. Between 2010 and 2016 there have been nine fatalities and 298 injuries as a result of fires involving white goods in London alone.
The service life of a cable can be significantly reduced if it has been expected to operate beyond the optimal operating conditions it was designed for. Ageing will usually result in the cabling getting brittle and cracking creating failure of the insulating and sheathing materials, exposing the conductor and risking a potential short circuit. This is a potential cause of electrical fire. Application:
If cable selected is not appropriate for the application it is more likely to fail in service. For example, a cable which is not robust enough for the environment, either mechanically tough enough to wear and abrasion or chemically resistant to the This short article looks specifically at how installed ambient conditions, is more likely to fail than one cables, and the materials that come into contact whose construction is suitable for the installation environment. with the cables, can increase the risk of fire. Of course, white goods fall outside the remit of a prepurchase survey but even though the percentage is small other electric faults can expose a property to a risk of fire.
2.0 What are the main causes of failure in electric Mechanical failure or damage: cables? If the cable is damaged either during installation or There are many reasons why a cable may fail with in subsequent use, the integrity of the cable will be the risk of igniting a fire. Some of the main causes affected and can result in failure described above.
024
ISSUE 27
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
Degradation of the cable sheath: There are several reasons why the sheathing material may degrade. These include excessive heat or cold, exposure to chemicals, exposure to inclement weather conditions, and abrasion of the sheath. All these factors can ultimately cause electrical failure as the insulated cores are no longer protected by the sheathing as originally designed. Moisture in the insulation: If water gets into the cable it can cause significant problems including short circuit and corrosion of the copper conductors. Heating of cable: Excessive heating of the cable will cause degradation of the insulation and sheathing material and premature failure. The heat may come from an external source or may be generated by the resistance to current flow in the conductor – this is a particular problem if the cable is overloaded and/ or underrated for the application. Electrical Overloading: Electrical overloading normally occurs when the cable is underrated for the application or when too much load is being placed on the cable. In domestic applications this is often a result of plugging too many appliances into the one socket and overloading the wiring to that individual socket, extension adaptor or gang socket. Rodent attack: Rodents can nibble at the outer layers of cables. This damage can be extensive, significantly reducing the sheathing or insulation properties of the cable causing another possible source of electrical fires. UV exposure: UV exposure can have a significant influence on electrical cable insulation and sheathing. Cables likely to be exposed to UV light should either be designed with UV resistant materials with a suitable carbon black content, or protected from exposure
025
DECEMBER 2017
with a protective covering ie. cable conduit, not in direct sunlight. UV exposure frequently causes cracking of the insulation and therefore potential short circuit failures. Fire Case Study from Essex Fire Brigade The property in question was well looked after and maintained. Early one Sunday evening, the occupier heard her smoke alarm activate. She went to investigate and saw wisps of smoke coming out of the loft hatch on the landing. She immediately phoned the fire service and left the property, shutting the door behind her. When fire crews arrived they discovered a small fire in the loft. This was quickly extinguished with a hose reel.
Cause - Electrical wiring It was discovered that electrical wiring had been run across the loft space with sheets of polystyrene insulation laid over the top. Over a period of years the cable insulation became coated in polystyrene as a result of “plasticiser migration”. There was a reaction between the plasticiser in the PVC insulation and the polystyrene, whereby the plasticiser migrated out of the PVC, softening the styrene which adhered to the PVC, leaving a brittle cable that cracked and split. This exposed live conductors which ignited a fire, the fuel being the timbers within the loft space. But for the activation of the smoke detector aiding early intervention by the fire service, the damage to the couple’s home could have been far more severe. Safety message The service life of insulated cables where is contact with polystyrene can be severely reduced. The advice from the fire authorities is that household electrical wiring should be inspected and replaced regularly by a qualified electrician. Care should be taken with any wiring that might be run up the inside of a cavity wall where polystyrene bead insulation has been installed at the property.
TECHNICAL BULLETIN
ISSUE 27
DECEMBER 2017
3.0 PVC Cables in contact with polystyrene and polyurethane insulating materials
normal inspection in order to produce a Homebuyer report or Home Condition Survey to:
Plasticisers are used in PVC to give the required physical properties such as flexibility and toughness. These compounds are commonly used in TPS (Tough Plastic Sheathed) Power cables, Cat5 & Cat6 data cables and B20 and B95 data cables. Plasticisers are typically non-volatile, high boiling point liquids which are absorbed into the PVC matrix at high temperatures during the manufacture process. However, they are not chemically bonded to the PVC compound and under certain conditions can be extracted from the compound.
•Identify high moisture in walls adjacent to sockets or other light fittings thereby highlighting additional risks of short-circuiting etc.
Commonly used PVC plasticisers can ‘dissolve’ into polystyrene and polyurethane insulating materials. Because they are not chemically bound in the PVC, these plasticisers can move from the PVC compound when there is a direct contact between the two materials. This causes the PVC on the cable to become harder and more brittle, thus making it susceptible to electric fires (see causes of fires earlier in this article). The Surveyors Responsibility As already mentioned the greatest risks relating to fire come from white goods, including extension cables etc. Despite the lower risks from the actual installation and the fact that the majority of that installation will be out of sight, surveyors still need to be aware of potential for harm to people or property associated with the installation and specifically the cables. It would be in scope for the
WE LIKE...
The Electrical Safety Council campaigns on behalf of consumers and electrical trade professionals to improve safety regulation and ensure safety messages are appropriate, up to date and well communicated. They are recognised by government and industry as the leading campaigning charity and technical authority on electrical safety.
•Identify the possibility of rodents with access to exposed cables •Identify the risk of cables exposed to polystyrene or polyurethane materials (such as spray polyurethane foams in roof spaces etc.) •Note the excessive use of extension cables by the existing occupiers Guidance is clear – for ‘services that kill’ where there is no valid and current safety certificate visible at the date of inspection then it is appropriate to apply a Condition Rating 3. While this is ‘best practice’, when auditing Home Condition Surveys in SAVA we see a lot of properties without the relevant safety certificates. Of course we do not know what the homebuyer does with this information, and there is a suspicion that many do not follow it up. Therefore, it could be argued that the surveyor should provide additional information relating to specific risks to people and property, such as those identified here, where they are clearly visible over and above the general CR3 because there is no valid and current safety certificate.
What do you think? of electrical safety. They campaign on behalf of consumers and the electrical trade profession to improve safety regulation. They cover product recall (not just faulty white goods but also products used in the electrical installation), counterfeit products and product misuse. They take particular note of the more vulnerable in society – the elderly who are disproportionally at risk from electrical hazards in the home, and those in private rented accommodation.
The Electrical Safety Council (Trading name They publish a series of downloadable fact sheets Electrical Safety First) works to ensure that and best practice guides. For further information go to everyone in the UK understands the importance https://www.electricalsafetyfirst.org.uk/
SAVA SCHOOL OF SURVEYING
KEY DATES 2018 CAREERS DAY 2018
MARCH 22ND – RICOH ARENA, COVENTRY.
OPEN DAYS 2018 MANCHESTER OPEN DAY 1
SURREY OPEN DAY 3 MANCHESTER OPEN DAY 2
THE MANCHESTER ETC WEDNESDAY 10TH JANUARY 11AM – 1:30PM DE VERE HORSLEY ESTATE WEDNESDAY 17TH JANUARY, 11AM-1:00PM THE MANCHESTER ETC TUESDAY 13TH FEBRUARY, 11AM – 1:30PM
COURSE START DATES 2018 SURREY FEBRUARY 15TH 2018 MANCHESTER APRIL 11TH 2018
DE VERE HORSLEY ESTATE, OCKHAM ROAD SOUTH, EAST HORSLEY KT24 6DT All classroom training days will be delivered at De Vere Horsley Estate with the exception of an optional day at the Landmark offices in Reading.
MANCHESTER ETC. 11 PORTLAND STREET, MANCHESTER M1 3HU
All classroom training days will be delivered at Manchester etc. 11 Portland Street, with the exception of an optional day at the Landmark offices in Reading.