CROSS UK REPORT: Incorrect firestopping by third-party certificated contractor

Collaborative reporting for safer structures. Report 1197: Incorrect firestopping by a third-party certificated contractor.

Improper installation of passive fire protection in wall penetrations by a third-party accredited installer

A reporter has raised concerns regarding the improper installation of passive fire protection in a penetration through a compartment wall. Although the installation company possessed the necessary third-party certification (TPC), the reporter believed that the operative failed to execute the task with competence.

Comments

TPC is a process whereby an independent, accredited certification body evaluates a company or individual to ensure they are working competently within a quality management system. This assessment verifies that the company or individual adheres to the required standards and best practices specific to a particular service.

A contractor’s TPC should offer assurance that the installation will comply with the necessary standards. This assurance is to be supported by documented evidence, which may include installation specifications, before and after photographs, certifications and details of the products used. Such documentation ensures traceability, a key element in maintaining building information and upholding the integrity of the Golden Thread.

An individual or company has to go through a process of application, assessment and auditing to achieve TPC. TPC should enable clients to select installers with greater confidence that the work will be compliant. However, the accredited certification bodies need to ensure that there is sufficient oversight and rigour of the accreditation and audit processes if this position is to be maintained.

CROSS has noted that maintaining a company’s TPC status requires ongoing supervision and training for all staff, not just those evaluated during the accreditation or audit process.

In the case described by the reporter, it appears the accrediting certification body failed to adequately scrutinise the installer to ensure competent installation. Relevant trade bodies have repeatedly raised concerns in this area over the years.

CROSS has observed several instances where installation works carried out and certified by accredited contractors have been subsequently challenged. On each occasion, when the operators of the TPC schemes have been contacted for their opinion, a review or to include the works in their surveillance inspections, these requests have been met with either silence or outright refusal to act. Furthermore, it appears that initiating the removal of an accredited contractor from a TPC scheme is rare, even when their installations are apparently substandard.

The TPC process is, in turn, reliant on the process the accredited certification body follows and maintains. Therefore, there must also be assurance that the organisations providing TPC are policed.

In England, Gateway 3 of the Building Safety Act 2022 will mean that for higher-risk buildings (HRBs) the build must be to the design that has been approved by the regulator, and evidence of this will be required.

It is thought that this will result in a significant change and an increase in the number of post-installation inspections required to meet Gateway 3 and Golden Thread standards. Such measures are expected to substantially improve the quality of firestopping in HRBs.

For works being carried out on existing buildings, there could be reliance on the Principal Accountable Person understanding there is a requirement to follow a process. It is also worth noting that changes to Building Regulations 2010 also affect clients’ obligations for non-HRBs. Regulation 11A requires that:

1. “a client must make suitable arrangements ... to ensure compliance with all relevant requirements.”
2. “arrangements ... are suitable if (a) they ensure the building work is carried out in accordance with all relevant requirements.”

So, if a completed building turns out to not be “in accordance with all relevant requirements”, the client’s arrangements were not suitable and they have breached their duty under the regulations. This is a relatively new part of the regulations (2023) and clients must appreciate their new legal duties and risks of non-compliance.

Further reading

• Building Regulations 2010 b.link/GOV_BR2010
• Association for Specialist Fire Protection’s competency framework for firestopping b.link/ASFP_framework
• Building Safety Act 2022 b.link/GOV_BSA2022

The Association for Specialist Fire Protection, as part of Working Group 2’s Firestopping Specialist Sector Sub Group, developed a competency framework for firestopping. CROSS understands that the Competence Steering Group is now using this approach to specify competence benchmarks for fire-resisting ducts and dampers

Image credits | iStock