Smoke Alarms In Qld

[alwayscurious]

Reading through..

I decided to go with SmokeAlaramSystems as well.

I've read a bit of the legislation, and for $75 I think it's worth it. Too many preventable deaths by fire could be fixed by having working smoke alarms.

So, the rent has to go up $5 a week to cover.

 

[lura]

Honestly, the law doesn't state that it has to be done by a professional company. But, property managers are not covered to test alarms, nor are they permitted for OHS to get on ladders at properties.

The annual fees charged by many companies ensure that the owners and agents are protected by law if a fire does break out. It may seem like passing the buck, but those companies who do test smoke alarms do so with training and professional indemnity. They must log all visits and this a copy of the service certificate is provided to the owners.

I came across a landlord who questioned this cost and process also, then I found out that he installed the smoke alarm but "something" didn't fit, so to accommodate - he made alterations to the unit during install. If he didn't tell me this, I wouldn't pick it up, if there is a fire - I wouldn't be covered by insurance. Thankfully he took my advice and removed the altered one. But you never know....

I have a company that does the smoke alarm servicing for my properties and the properties under management for $112 per year - unlimited visits as necessary to comply with the act and change of all screen door locks at end of tenancy. Cost a little bit more but peace of mind.

 

[Fudge]

Honestly, the law doesn't state that it has to be done by a professional company. But, property managers are not covered to test alarms, nor are they permitted for OHS to get on ladders at properties.

What do you mean by they are not covered?

So whats stopping them from using a stick to test the firealarm??

It is really not that hard.

The rules are pretty straight forward, and for any testing company coming along to you and giving you letters informing you that professsionals should undertake the works, its only 'scare mongering', and should be ripped up.

If you are fortunate to have a recurring tenant on a fixed lease agreement, then the responsibility falls directly on their shoulders to maintain the units.

Cheers,

F

 

[beachside]

Fire protection = license to print money!

I worked in fire protection for a while - casual while looking for another proper job. Offered to me word of mouth through someone I knew. No experience needed, learnt the basics on the job - had someone with me for a few days. Big company or small, the majority would not rate 4/10 in an audit. I heard a lot of what others did or didn't do in other companies, and some of the useless/lazy twits they employed - including ours. (Pay peanuts, charge megga bucks to clients) The company who inspects our block of units did not pick up the most basic things on the first inspection and only 4 years later on most recent inspection picked up on some but not all of these.

As for smoke detectors (I'm talking battery or wired, not back to panel) if you think there is anything where you need a specialist you must like throwing money away. Inspection companies would generally never clean a detector, only test if it is working. If it is not and a new 9v battery does not fix it, or if it is wired and the 240v is not getting through it is failed.

Cleaning - if you want to do it is as simple as a vacuum cleaner to suck any dust out from around it. If in an area where it might be clogged by oil fumes (would have gone off all the time until battery went flat) - throw away and replace after relocating. To test - poke with broom stick etc or spray with artificial smoke (oil based spray can). Real smoke or stream will do the same.

If a wired unit you can test the back up battery by unclipping/sliding the head from the base - (usually obvious) then spray or press button. It will not work if battery flat or give a run down beep if battery near flat.

There is nothing difficult about testing a battery or 240V (with battery back up) detector.

Only companies who live off peoples lack of knowledge will make it sound like a specialist is needed. I am sure there are some companies who do a a thorough job, but the majority just feed off peoples lack of knowledge and fear. If I was to employ someone to do that job I would only consider an owner operator, not someone who employs people who could not give #### knowing that no one is ever likely to know otherwise in 99% of cases. Same goes for fire hydrants or hoses.

 

[lura]

If you are fortunate to have a recurring tenant on a fixed lease agreement, then the responsibility falls directly on their shoulders to maintain the units

No - this would be incorrect. It only applies if your tenant has a lease >12 months e.g 2 years, then they have to clean and test after 12 months.

If you have a tenant whose lease is re-newed: it is the owners responsibility:

Within 30 days before the start or renewal of the tenancy and according to the manufacturers instructions.

http://www.rta.qld.gov.au/smoke_alarms_fs.cfm

Beachside: I understand not all employees of these companies will do as they say do - this unfortunately is part of problem of employing staff.
However, the legal side of this is something as professional property managers, we need to consider for our clients. Our mandate is to protect the property first always as part of our fiduciary duties to the owners.

So whats stopping them from using a stick to test the firealarm??

Yes, it is easy for property managers to run around with dowels and test during inspections. But what do you do when batteries need changing? do you want pm's to get up on chairs and change it? or carry step ladders and screwdrivers in their cars to change it? Buy and carry around spare 9V batteries also? - Now are are starting to stray too far from carrying out a rountine inspection. Fudge - you can't just use dowel - if you are going to do it, do it properly. I'm an experienced property manager and also a seasoned renovator so doing this not a problem for me - but this can't be said for property managers who do comprehend the process - I'm sorry there are a lot of them out there.


Testing of smoke alarms and replacing batteries is considered a "maintenance" matter - property managers should not be expected to do "maintenance" on your property. They "manage" your property and any maintenance on that property.

Protecting owners:
An independent smoke alarm testing company will "log" their visits. It is this log that will protect owners against litigation in the event of a fire causing loss of property or worse loss of life.

If bring all this back to some common law principles:

What was the property manager employed to do?
Answer: Manage the property.

Can it be reasonably expected that a property manager knows how to service the smoke alarms?
Answer: Maybe if the smoke alarm was functioning properly, but it can also be argued that no, because outside of normally functioning smoke alarms, it would not be reasonably expected that a property manager would know how to determine what is the cause of fault.

Just let the independent companies service the smoke alarms - fire safety is an extremely important matter. If $72 - $75 a year can save lives - this is worth doing.

 

[Fudge]

No - this would be incorrect. It only applies if your tenant has a lease >12 months e.g 2 years, then they have to clean and test after 12 months.

If you have a tenant whose lease is re-newed: it is the owners responsibility:

If it falls back to a periodic agreement, it is the tenants responsibility.

Yes, it is easy for property managers to run around with dowels and test during inspections. But what do you do when batteries need changing? do you want pm's to get up on chairs and change it? or carry step ladders and screwdrivers in their cars to change it? Buy and carry around spare 9V batteries also? - Now are are starting to stray too far from carrying out a rountine inspection. Fudge - you can't just use dowel - if you are going to do it, do it properly. I'm an experienced property manager and also a seasoned renovator so doing this not a problem for me - but this can't be said for property managers who do comprehend the process - I'm sorry there are a lot of them out there.

If new tenancy, replace batteries and test as per fact sheet.....no problems.

Testing of smoke alarms and replacing batteries is considered a "maintenance" matter - property managers should not be expected to do "maintenance" on your property. They "manage" your property and any maintenance on that property.

Fair enough

Protecting owners:
An independent smoke alarm testing company will "log" their visits. It is this log that will protect owners against litigation in the event of a fire causing loss of property or worse loss of life.

If you think this, then so be it.

If bring all this back to some common law principles:

What was the property manager employed to do?
Answer: Manage the property.

Depends what is in the management agreement. Mine in Brissie say the PM's do it....Simple.

Can it be reasonably expected that a property manager knows how to service the smoke alarms?
Answer: Maybe if the smoke alarm was functioning properly, but it can also be argued that no, because outside of normally functioning smoke alarms, it would not be reasonably expected that a property manager would know how to determine what is the cause of fault.

Thats a bit of a silly statement. Do you think a PM, for that matter anyone with half a brain, wouldn't know how to test a firealarm.

All that is required is to hit the 'test' button. There is no other test involved. Surely if it doesn't sound, then you would get someone else in to replace it if it is not working. Even when batteries are going low, they send out an annoying beep every minute, so you know you just have to change the battery.

That is the only test you need to do with respect to the law. Some companies carry out smoke tests. (Bottles of smoke you can buy for smoke tests), but this test is above what the standards and legislation dictate.

Just let the independent companies service the smoke alarms - fire safety is an extremely important matter. If $72 - $75 a year can save lives - this is worth doing.

If your happy to pay this expense, so be it. When you get up to double digit properties, it is another expense that spirals out of control.

With the increases in electricity, rates, water, etc coming soon, I wouldn't like to add this 'Fire' levy management fee, as well as any other future ones that filter through the web in the forthcoming year.

Out of interest, do you get a commission or any fee for you teeing up landlords with Fire Management companies (or whatever they are called)

Cheers,

F

 

[Miss V]

I am aware the laws are changing from July 1 but could somebody help me clarify my position....

I have a house that will hopefully settle in July 07, contract date is in May 07... So I am obliged to have smoke alarms because the previous owners are PPOR whereas I am an ivestor. (correct so far?? or is it supposed to have smoke alarms on settlement??)

As far as I can remember, it should state in the contract that all homes are to have smoke alarms fitted. It was a tick a box option as is the safety switch regulation. It should be up to the vendors to install them.

 

[Peterw]

I fear you may get mislead, by referring to the RTA on this matter. The Qld Government Department that monitors the legislation is Qld Fire and Rescue Dept, and here is the website that you should read from, for the correct information.

http://www.fire.qld.gov.au/communitysafety/smokealarms/legislation.asp

Fines range from $350+ dollars upwards, and we know of one landlord charged over a death. PM's are there to monitor the tenancy, no the compliance of the building to the new building codes. I believe that, like all other building code requirements, belong to the landlord. The PM's do their utmost to follow and understand the impact of the different legislations regulations etc, as well as the building code, and can advise you, that some thing may in fact not comply, however we are not certified to make specific comments etc, but can suggest that you have some one that is qualified and insured to provide that advice. Yes, we do know that some companies do fall short on their staff training etc, the pink bat debarcle again confirmed that, however the reality is, you have at least done your best is so far as your duty of care is concerned. No one wants additional costs, yes we do know the risks and costs that LL's already have to bare, and we do our best to generate the best return we can, but carrying dowel, ladder and cleaning equipment on inspections ...... sorry I dont think that PM's will see that within their briefs.

Please make sure that you read, and understand the legislation. Saving a dollar, and then leaving your self exposed may not be the wisest step to take.

 

[Rags]

Interesting read

I actually got 1 of these letters recently from my PM stating $99 a year for the service plus extra's for any replacement's needed in nsw i might add not qld.Found it rather odd that this was the first ever letter i got on the matter in 10 years of owning the property so i looked up the website provided in small print on the letter. Service is provided by a ex-real estate agent and the web site wasn't even set up fully smells fishy 2 me.

I am all for safety but these fear mongering letters PM's send you in my opinion are nothing but utter rubbish intended to indemnify themselves of any problem that arises.I will add though as a landlord you should always be up to date with the latest regulations if not then you deserve any fines you get.

http://www.nswfb.nsw.gov.au/page.php?id=439

 

[Fudge]

I fear you may get mislead, by referring to the RTA on this matter. The Qld Government Department that monitors the legislation is Qld Fire and Rescue Dept, and here is the website that you should read from, for the correct information.

http://www.fire.qld.gov.au/communitysafety/smokealarms/legislation.asp

Fines range from $350+ dollars upwards, and we know of one landlord charged over a death. PM's are there to monitor the tenancy, no the compliance of the building to the new building codes. I believe that, like all other building code requirements, belong to the landlord. The PM's do their utmost to follow and understand the impact of the different legislations regulations etc, as well as the building code, and can advise you, that some thing may in fact not comply, however we are not certified to make specific comments etc, but can suggest that you have some one that is qualified and insured to provide that advice. Yes, we do know that some companies do fall short on their staff training etc, the pink bat debarcle again confirmed that, however the reality is, you have at least done your best is so far as your duty of care is concerned. No one wants additional costs, yes we do know the risks and costs that LL's already have to bare, and we do our best to generate the best return we can, but carrying dowel, ladder and cleaning equipment on inspections ...... sorry I dont think that PM's will see that within their briefs.

Please make sure that you read, and understand the legislation. Saving a dollar, and then leaving your self exposed may not be the wisest step to take.

Yeah,

Hi Peterw. I have referred to all these data sheets before, and they are in line (or should I say the RTA one is in line with the Fire ones).

Does my anology / interpretation differ to what is provided in the fact sheets, in terms of landlord / tenant responsibility?

Apart from the circumstances identified in Lura's post, I think it is factual, and considering that it is all what the law requires, my duty of care has well and truly been substantiated.

Cheers,

F

 

[handyandy]

Fines range from $350+ dollars upwards, and we know of one landlord charged over a death.

Could you please elaborate and give references.

 

[Peterw]

Fudge, I just wanted to ensure that people were looking in the right direction for advice. The Fire Dept and the RTA are both State Gov Depts, however the first contols this particular piece of Legislation, and the second gives advice on how it applies in a rental situation. I would hope that their advice does mirror the former.
Handyandy, I got the figure from the fire dept site, and also saw a figure of $375 alongside another breach. I hope they should stand out OK while you read it. Within a couple of months of the legislation becoming law, there was a fire at a rented premises, and there was a death. The house did not have alarms, and yes the landlords were charged. This was widly reported at the time, however I have not found an article on the outcome.
More recently, the fire dept regulations have been broadened to include buildings, where there are multiple dwellings. These broadly apply to home unit buildings, and blocks of flats, and in some instances townhouse, all depending on how the access is configered. These regs require enacuation plans, clearly displayed, annula fire drills etc. Again, penalties apply for breaches. Phew, the work loads for PM's is for ever increasing, and sadly this also means additional costs for LL's

 

[Fudge]

Thanks Peterw

I appreciate and take note of your comments.

Cheers,

F