Miller Food and Wine Limited fined due to “serious fire safety failures”

The prosecution followed on from an inspection conducted by Kent Fire and Rescue Service officers back in March 2022, which identified significant fire safety concerns, including the absence of essential fire precautions and breaches in compartmentation of the building, in turn posing a serious risk to life in the event of a fire.
The business pleaded guilty to ten offences under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, including failure to comply with a restriction imposed by a Prohibition Notice.

The company was ordered to pay a total of £62,000 in penalties, comprising of £18,000 for the initial failures, a further £24,000 for breaching the Prohibition Notice, £18,000 in costs and a £2,000 victim surcharge.

Daniel Noonan, head of building safety at the Kent Fire and Rescue Service, said: “Public safety is our highest priority. This sentencing serves as a clear reminder to all businesses in the Kent and Medway region about the importance of complying with fire safety legislation.”

Noon added: “Fire safety is a shared responsibility. We’re committed to supporting businesses to ensure the safety of the public by offering advice and guidance. However, where lives are put at risk and there’s a failure in meeting fire safety obligations, we will pursue legal action when necessary.”

Offences in detail

*Failure to assess fire risks: Article 9(1)
Lack of a suitable or sufficient fire risk assessment, exposing people to serious risk

*Failure to manage fire precautions: Article 11(1)
No effective arrangements were in place for planning, organising or reviewing fire safety measures

*Lack of fire detection and alarms: Article 13(1)(a)
No appropriate automatic fire detectors and alarms were provided

*Blocked escape routes: Article 14(1)(a)
Combustible materials obstructing the only staircase, thereby compromising emergency escape 

*Defective fire door: Article 17(1)
Faulty fire doors (which, in the event of fire, may mean smoke and flames could spread into the escape routes 

*Compromised escape route: Article 8(1)(a)
A breach in compartmentation on the staircase would allow smoke and flames to spread into the only escape route 

*Basement fire risks: Article 8(1)
Breaches in compartmentation in the basement, where stock and electrical equipment was stored, risked rapid fire spread 

*Inadequate emergency lighting: Article 14(2)(h)
Emergency lighting was only provided in some areas of the premises, leaving escape routes unlit in the event of a power failure 

*Breach of Prohibition Notice: Article 31
The first floor was used in contravention of restrictions outlined in a Prohibition Notice

*Use of bedroom in a prohibited area: Article 3
A first-floor bedroom was being used for sleeping, which breached a Prohibition Notice