‘Responsible Person’ at Brighton HMO prosecuted by East Sussex FRS

On 20 April at Brighton Magistrates’ Court, Markandayar Gowrikaran (the person having control of the premises at 20A St James Street, Brighton BN2 1RF) pleaded guilty to offences under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. Specifically, Gowrikaran admitted failing to take the general fire precautions required at the premises, which he operated as an HMO.

On 20 July when appearing at the same Magistrates’ Court, Gowrikaran was fined the sum of £3,875, which included the statutory victim surcharge. He was also ordered to pay £7,075.31 to East Sussex Fire and Rescue Service in respect of investigation time and costs.

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 places a legal duty on the ‘Responsible Person’ to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the safety of relevant persons from fire. This includes carrying out (and regularly reviewing) a suitable and sufficient fire risk assessment, implementing appropriate fire safety measures on-site, maintaining fire safety equipment, ensuring escape routes remain available and protected and providing suitable information and training where and when required.

Inspection process

Fire safety inspecting officers from the ESFRS first attended 20A St James Street on 14 February 2023 following concerns raised by the local authority regarding the storage of fireworks within the ground floor commercial premises.

During their inspection, officers identified a number of significant fire safety deficiencies affecting the HMO:

*the fire alarm control panel was displaying faults across multiple zones

*missing smoke detector heads

*a manual Call Point that wasn’t securely fixed

*the removal of a fire-resisting door protecting the means of escape

*combustible materials stored within communal escape routes and on the external fire escape

*a kitchen door opening on to the escape route that failed to fully self-close

*an inadequately protected electrical intake that was neither secured nor enclosed within suitable fire-resisting construction

These matters were then brought to Gowrikaran’s attention, together with the requirement to undertake and record a suitable and sufficient fire risk assessment process.

Despite informal advice, the issuing of formal Enforcement Notices and a number of follow-up inspections, insufficient progress was made to remedy the deficiencies. Inspections carried out between February and December 2023 identified many of the same defects, with substantial remedial work not being undertaken until the early part of 2024.

Increased risk

Article 32(1)(a) of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 makes it an offence for a ‘Responsible Person’ to fail to comply with the fire safety duties imposed by Articles 8 to 22 and Article 38 where that failure places one or more relevant persons at risk of death or serious injury in the event of a fire.

By failing to address all the identified deficiencies within a reasonable period, Gowrikaran exposed occupants to an increased risk in the event of a fire. Had a fire occurred within the kitchen or electrical intake, the absence of adequate fire precautions could have allowed fire and smoke to spread more rapidly.

In addition, combustible storage within the escape routes increased both the likelihood of fire development and the potential for the obstruction of occupants attempting to evacuate the premises on a safe basis.

Legal duty

Station manager (legal and enforcement) Jake Kaye said: “Those responsible for fire safety have a legal duty to carry out and record a suitable and sufficient fire risk assessment. Effective fire safety management is essential to reduce the likelihood of fire occurring and to ensure that, should a fire happen, it can be detected quickly and occupants are able to escape safely. Escape routes must be kept clear and protected at all times.”

Kaye added: “We continue to find that many HMOs with shared communal areas don’t have a suitable fire risk assessment in place. This remains a significant concern. The fire risk assessment is fundamental to identifying the measures needed to protect residents.”

In conclusion, Kaye observed: “We hope this prosecution serves as a reminder that those responsible for fire safety must comply with their legal duties and with any enforcement action taken by the Fire Authority. Where they fail to do so and place people at risk, we will take appropriate enforcement action.”

George O’Reilly, assistant director of risk reduction, explained: “I would like to thank Brighton Magistrates’ Court for its careful consideration of this case, together with our legal team and fire safety officers for their professionalism and commitment throughout the investigation.”

O’Reilly added: “East Sussex Fire and Rescue Service has a statutory duty to enforce the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. We take that responsibility seriously and will continue to take proportionate enforcement action where failures to comply with fire safety legislation place people at risk of death or serious injury.”

Legislative changes

Legislative changes to the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 brought forward through the Building Safety Act 2022 require all ‘Responsible Persons’ to carry out and record a fire risk assessment taking into account the risks from fire to all persons legally on or in the vicinity of the premises.

The requirements apply to all non-domestic premises, such as where people work, visit or stay, including workplaces and the non-domestic parts of multi-occupied residential buildings.

*Further support and information can be accessed on the East Sussex Fire and Rescue Service website at www.esfrs.org/fire-safety-legislation