Agenda item

Area Manager (AM) Matt Hamer gave a presentation to members to provide an overview of Lancashire Fire and Rescue Services (LFRSs) actions and investment in the services Protection (Fire Safety) department since the Grenfell Tower incident.

Following the tragic incident at Grenfell Tower on the 14 June 2017 where 72 persons lost their lives, LFRS had invested significantly to adapt and innovate in strengthening the services Protection department which oversees LFRSs duties as the Fire Safety Enforcing Authority for the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 and other fire safety legislation.

With the introduction of new primary legislation (Fire Safety Act 2021 and Building Safety Act 2022) new statutory duties fell to LFRS to regulate. In addition, the creation of the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) saw LFRS act on behalf of the Health and Safety Executive in regulating relevant buildings. Alongside new legislation, changes impacting local authorities, the construction industry and competency requirements had required the service to adapt and train staff to regulate circa 65,000 commercial premises in the county.

Further legislation was expected to continue to be released with Residential Personals Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs) legislation expected in April 2026.

Lancashire had 5238 high risk premises comprised of 72 high-rise, 166 mid-rise, 418 care homes and hundreds of hospitals and hotels. High-rise referred to buildings that were over 18 meters tall or over 7 storeys high, AM Matt Hamer explained that the number of high-rise buildings could fluctuate depending on changes to landscape and methods of measuring. Methods of measuring were now being standardised with trained inspectors and the potential use of drones. Lancashire had around 65,000 medium and lower risk premises including shops, factories and offices. AM Matt Hamer explained that any live risks identified were inspected and the risks mitigated.

In response to a question from Councillor J Hugo in relation to the fluctuation in numbers, AM Matt Hamer explained that reasons for fluctuation could include changes to buildings such as adding additional storeys or conversion of buildings.

Councillor J Hugo asked a further question in relation to where empty properties sat on the risk ladder. AM Matt Hamer explained that buildings classified as empty were considered by the Community Safety Partnership to ensure they were secure, any specific fire risks identified would be brought to the attention of the local authority. If a building was to be considered under planning regulations LFRS would be involved to ensure any proposals were fire safety compliant. He added that LFRS was working with Blackpool Council in relation to empty buildings within the Blackpool area. Councillor G Baker asked if empty buildings needed a fire certificate, AM Matt Hamer confirmed that they did not. Councillor G Baker then asked if insurance companies considered the fire risk of empty buildings, AM Matt Hamer stated that he could not comment on insurance company regulations but added that LFRS could not carry out enforcement as an empty building would not have a responsible person, LFRS could put a notice on the building to request the service be updated if the building became occupied. The DCFO added that the Fire Precautions Act 1971 allowed the issue of a certificate until the implementation of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, with the onus then on the responsible person within the building.

Over the previous 8 years, LFRS had invested over £1 million of government uplift grant funding in the Protection function, restructuring, creating new roles, new guidance and new performance metrics to ensure that the service met its nationally leading, risk-based intervention programme (RBIP). LFRS had introduced dedicated leads for high-rise, mid-rise and hospitals ahead of the national direction towards mid-rise buildings.

Upskilling had also been undertaken with operational staff to allow them to both prevent incidents occurring, through the delivery of LFRS’s Business Fire Safety Checks service, and respond more effectively if they did, through the provision of dedicated built environment training.

The investment in people was supported by an investment in digital systems to allow staff to work more effectively and efficiently. New hard and software had been developed and procured to enable staff to better share information and provide a more consistent regulatory programme.

In 2021 50% of LFRS’s building regulation consultations were responded to within the set timeframe, in 2024 this had improved to 95%. Some submissions were more complex and had large volumes of paperwork or missing information which could lead to delays. The service averaged over 1000 consultations per year.

Councillor J Hugo commended the increase in response compliance by the protection team.

LFRS remained actively engaged locally, regionally and nationally to remain agile for further legislative changes along with significant changes to supporting guidance. Investment in the services Protection function continued, with further awareness training for operational crews and responding officers along with the procurement of a new digital system.

In response to a question from County Councillor J Tetlow in relation to fighting fires within high-rise buildings, the DCFO explained that the highest buildings in Lancashire were up to 30 stories high, crews would be able to safely use their breathing apparatus (BA) sets from the ground floor to the top. He explained that for taller buildings crew may be instructed to only use their BA once they were a few floors under the fire, however crews would be carrying gas sensors and be instructed to use their BA if this sensor began to indicate. He added that high-rises would often use sprinkler systems and the use of drones was being explored in other international countries. Additionally LFRS’s tallest Aerial Ladder Platform (ALP) could reach up to 45 meters, it was acknowledged that this would not reach the top of Lancashire’s tallest buildings. AM Matt Hamer added that new buildings had been designed with Fire Safety Regulations in place however the quality of the build was important, LFRS would use different tactics for older buildings.

In response to a question from County Councillor J Tetlow in relation to the ‘stay put’ policy instructed at Grenfell Tower, the DCFO explained that generally flats were self-contained units that could stay safe for one hour. In Lancashire if immediate evacuation was required fire control would instruct residents who made contact to evacuate the building. He added that LFRS’s high-rise evacuation was tested during an exercise with HMICFRS during its recent inspection and went well. It was noted that modern buildings now react very differently to older buildings.

County Councillor J Tetlow asked a further question in relation to evacuation of high-rise hotels, the DCFO explained that hotel rooms should be safe for one hour and hotels would have fire evacuation procedures in place.

In 2023/24 the service had two successful prosecutions with the outcomes being 11 month custodial sentences, 6 months suspended sentences, 200 hours community service and £10,414 to be paid in costs. In 2024/25 the service had 3 successful prosecutions with the outcomes being 14 months suspended sentences, 420 hours community service, 20 days rehabilitation, £142,500 fines and £44,225 costs. In 2025/26 the service had 1 prosecutions, 1 case in the court system and 16 case files in development with the outcomes being £30,000 fines, £18,000 costs and a £2,500 victim surcharge. AM Matt Hamer explained that 2 further cases had very recently been through court, the first case resulting in a suspended sentence and costs and the second case resulting in fines and costs. AM Matt Hamer added that LFRS was very robust with prosecutions and had one of the highest prosecution rates nationally, but it was important that individuals and businesses were not frightened of asking for help.

In response to a question from Councillor J Hugo in relation to the income from fine payments, AM Matt Hamer explained that any fines went to the CPS, Courts and Central Government and any costs were received by LFRS. AM Matt Hamer added that for any cases likely to lead to prosecution the service recorded all actions and costs from the commencement of the incident to allow them to be accurately submitted to court. He also explained that one of the cases taken to court in June 2025 had happened in 2021, as the service had had to work closely with police and the coroner. Prosecution cases could take anywhere between 150 to 500 hours of work.

County Councillor J Tetlow asked if prosecutions were prepared within the service, AM Matt Hamer explained that cases were prepared by the Legal Protection Support Officer, then reviewed by the LFRS Solicitor before being sent to an external barrister.

AM Matt Hamer explained that the journey for LFRS continued with further legislation expected, changing risks surrounding modern building methods and building operational knowledge.

Resolved: That the Planning Committee noted the report and the contents of the presentation.