A Fire Risk Assessment (FRA) is an evaluation of a premises to identify fire hazards, assess risks, and determine the adequacy of existing safety measures. The law designates a “Responsible Person” who holds the legal duty to ensure an FRA is completed and actively maintained. This assessment must be treated as a living document, not a one-time task, to remain effective in protecting occupants and property.
The Legal Duty for Regular Review
The legal framework governing fire safety for non-domestic premises establishes a clear obligation for continuous risk management rather than adherence to a simple calendar date. Legislation across many jurisdictions mandates that the assessment must be both suitable and sufficient for the premises and, crucially, subject to regular review. This requirement ensures that the document remains relevant and accurate as the building and its operations evolve over time, preventing the assessment from becoming obsolete.
The law does not typically specify an exact fixed interval, such as every twelve months, recognizing the diversity of risk across different sectors. Instead, the focus is placed on maintaining the integrity of the original assessment to accurately reflect the current risk profile of the property. The frequency of review is therefore intrinsically linked to the level of risk present within the building, requiring the Responsible Person to exercise professional judgment in setting the schedule.
Simply reviewing an assessment on the anniversary of its creation may not fulfill the legal duty if significant changes have occurred in the interim. The legal mandate is to ensure the safety of occupants is maintained continuously, which necessitates a flexible approach to review timing based on operational factors and changes in occupancy or structure. Consequently, fire safety professionals have established industry best practices to guide the Responsible Person in setting appropriate, proactive review schedules.
Recommended Periodic Review Intervals
Industry best practice provides practical timelines for routine review based on the inherent danger posed by the premises. These recommended intervals help the Responsible Person establish a proactive schedule that aligns with expert understanding of risk decay and operational drift. Establishing a routine review ensures that the fire safety strategy is systematically checked for obsolescence and that all previously identified actions have been completed.
For premises deemed to be high-risk, fire safety professionals recommend a comprehensive review be conducted annually. This category often includes buildings where evacuation is complex or the potential for fire spread is high, such as care homes, hospitals, manufacturing facilities using flammable materials, or large assembly venues. The increased risk necessitates a shorter review cycle to quickly identify and mitigate any emerging hazards that could compromise the means of escape or fire detection.
Premises classified as lower-risk may adopt a less frequent routine review cycle, typically every two years. This applies to smaller, straightforward buildings with low occupant density and minimal fire load, such as small retail units, low-volume offices, or simple storage facilities. Even in lower-risk environments, the biennial review provides a necessary safeguard against slow, unobserved changes that can gradually accumulate risk over time, such as minor changes to storage practices.
Specific Trigger Events Requiring Immediate Review
Beyond the recommended routine intervals, certain operational or structural changes automatically invalidate the existing risk assessment, requiring an immediate reassessment. The original assessment is based on a specific set of circumstances, and when those circumstances change materially, the document must be updated before the new conditions are allowed to persist. The Responsible Person must recognize these triggers as mandatory review points.
Structural and Layout Changes
Modifications affecting the structure or internal layout necessitate an immediate review. This includes adding extensions, major internal reconfigurations, or altering the building’s fire compartmentation. Changing the location or integrity of fire doors, or removing internal walls, directly impacts the calculated means of escape and the spread of smoke. Reassessment ensures escape routes remain adequate and fire separation is maintained.
Changes in Use or Occupancy
A change in how the space is used or a significant variation in the number of people regularly present constitutes a mandatory trigger for review. Converting a space from a low-risk office to a high-risk residential use, or from a warehouse to a manufacturing plant, fundamentally alters the inherent hazards. A substantial increase in the number of occupants affects the required width and number of escape routes, directly impacting the evacuation strategy detailed in the original assessment.
Introduction of New Hazards
Bringing new processes, machinery, or materials onto the premises that were not considered in the original assessment demands an immediate update. This includes installing new heat-producing equipment, introducing new chemicals, or increasing the quantity of flammable or combustible materials stored. The introduction of these new elements can dramatically increase the fire load or the potential ignition sources, requiring corresponding adjustments to fire suppression and detection systems.
Modification of Safety Systems
An immediate review is also required whenever the fire safety systems or procedures are significantly modified or replaced. If a new fire alarm system is installed, the evacuation procedure is changed, or the means of escape are altered, the assessment must be updated to reflect the new safety baseline. These changes must be documented and verified to ensure that the new measures provide a suitable and sufficient level of protection as intended.
Fire Incidents or Near-Misses
Any actual fire or a serious fire-related near-miss event is a clear indicator that the existing risk assessment may be flawed or that procedures have failed. An immediate review must be undertaken to determine the root cause of the incident and evaluate whether the assessment failed to identify a specific risk. This corrective action is paramount to learning from the failure and maintaining a safe environment.
Consequences of Non-Compliance
Failing to conduct or regularly review a Fire Risk Assessment carries severe consequences. The Responsible Person may face formal enforcement action from fire authorities if the premises are found to be non-compliant with safety legislation. In cases of serious risk or where a fire leads to injury or death, the penalties can escalate to unlimited fines and imprisonment for the individuals responsible.
A failure to maintain a current and sufficient risk assessment can lead to the invalidation of the building’s insurance policies. Insurers rely on the Responsible Person’s compliance with safety law, and any breach may allow them to refuse to pay out on a claim following a fire incident. This leaves the business or organization financially liable for property damage and loss of earnings. The Responsible Person also faces potential civil liability claims from occupants or visitors injured due to inadequate fire safety provision.
Maintaining Comprehensive Records
The physical documentation of the Fire Risk Assessment and its subsequent reviews is the primary evidence of compliance with the legal duty. Clear and comprehensive records demonstrate that the Responsible Person has actively managed the fire risks over time and taken appropriate steps to mitigate identified hazards. This documentation must specify the date the assessment was carried out, the name of the competent assessor, and the key findings and recommended actions.
The records must also include the dates of all subsequent reviews, clearly stating whether the review was routine or triggered by a specific event. Detailed notes on what changes were observed, what actions were taken, and the current status of the fire safety measures provide an auditable history for enforcement bodies. Maintaining this paper trail is the only way to demonstrate compliance with legal requirements.