Fire Risk Assessments in Blocks of Flats: Types, Legal Duties and Common Pitfalls

Since the Grenfell Tower tragedy, fire risk assessments (FRAs) have moved from a background compliance task to one of the most heavily scrutinised documents in UK property management. For managing agents acting as, or on behalf of, the "responsible person" under fire safety law, getting the FRA right is not optional — it is a legal, financial and moral obligation. Yet confusion persists around which type of assessment applies, how often it should be reviewed, and where the most common failures occur.

The Legal Framework: Who Is Responsible, and For What

The cornerstone legislation remains the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (the RRO), which applies to the common parts of multi-occupied residential buildings in England and Wales. Under the Order, the "responsible person" — typically the freeholder, landlord, or managing agent acting on their behalf — must carry out and regularly review a suitable and sufficient fire risk assessment of the premises.

The Fire Safety Act 2021 clarified that the RRO explicitly covers the structure, external walls (including cladding, balconies and fixings) and individual flat entrance doors, closing a long-running ambiguity that had left many post-Grenfell assessments incomplete. This was reinforced by the Fire Safety (England) Regulations 2022, which introduced additional duties for high-rise residential buildings, including the need to share evacuation information with the fire service and to carry out regular checks of fire doors.

Non-compliance is not a theoretical risk. Enforcing authorities — usually the local fire and rescue service — can issue enforcement notices, prohibition notices, or pursue prosecution. Fines are unlimited, and in serious cases directors or responsible individuals have faced custodial sentences.

Understanding the Different Types of Fire Risk Assessment

Not all FRAs are equal, and selecting the wrong type is itself a common failing. The Fire Risk Assessment Competency Council and PAS 79 guidance set out a broad hierarchy:

• Type 1 – Common parts, non-destructive: A visual inspection of communal areas only, without accessing individual flats or testing fire-stopping. Suitable for lower-risk, straightforward buildings.
• Type 2 – Common parts, destructive/intrusive: Involves opening up elements such as ceiling voids or riser cupboards to check fire-stopping and compartmentation. Often required where there is doubt about construction standards.
• Type 3 – Common parts and a sample of flats, non-destructive: Extends the inspection into a representative sample of individual dwellings.
• Type 4 – Common parts and a sample of flats, destructive/intrusive: The most thorough assessment, combining intrusive inspection of communal areas with sampled, invasive checks within flats.

For buildings with cladding systems, significant alterations, or unresolved compartmentation concerns, a Type 3 or Type 4 assessment — or a dedicated Fire Risk Appraisal of External Walls (FRAEW) following PAS 9980 methodology — is frequently necessary. Relying on a basic Type 1 assessment for a complex, high-rise building is a red flag that any competent assessor, insurer, or building safety regulator will quickly identify.

How Often Should an FRA Be Reviewed?

There is no fixed statutory interval, but the RRO requires the assessment to be reviewed regularly and whenever there is reason to suspect it is no longer valid — following a fire, a near-miss, significant building works, a change of use, or new occupancy patterns. Industry good practice, reflected in guidance from the National Fire Chiefs Council and bodies such as the Institute of Residential Property Management (now part of the Property Institute), suggests annual review for higher-risk buildings and at least every three years for lower-risk ones, with an "action plan" review far more frequently.

Crucially, the FRA document itself is only half the job. The accompanying action plan — listing remedial works, responsible parties and target dates — must be actively tracked and closed out. An assessment gathering dust on a shared drive with unactioned recommendations is arguably worse than no assessment at all, since it demonstrates the responsible person was aware of risk and failed to act.

Common Mistakes Managing Agents Must Avoid

Drawing on enforcement trends and sector commentary, including analysis from Arthur Online and MRI Software, several recurring failures stand out:

• Using an under-qualified assessor. Fire risk assessment is not a generalist task. Assessors should hold recognised third-party accreditation (such as through the IFSM, IFE or BAFE SP205 scheme) and demonstrate relevant experience with similar building types.
• Treating the FRA as a one-off exercise. Buildings change — new tenants, altered layouts, works to communal areas — and the assessment must keep pace.
• Ignoring the action plan. Commissioning an assessment is meaningless without a clear, monitored process for closing out findings, particularly "high" and "intolerable" risk ratings.
• Failing to assess external walls. Post-Fire Safety Act 2021, omitting cladding, balconies and render systems from the scope is a direct compliance failure, not a grey area.
• Poor record-keeping. Under the Fire Safety (England) Regulations 2022, responsible persons of higher-risk buildings must keep accessible, up-to-date records, including information on the design and materials of external walls, and provide this to residents and the fire service on request.
• No resident communication. Leaseholders and tenants are often left unaware of fire safety findings, evacuation strategy (whether "stay put" or "simultaneous evacuation"), or their own responsibilities, such as keeping communal areas clear of personal items.

Building a Defensible, Transparent Process

With the Building Safety Act 2022 embedding a "golden thread" of building safety information as an ongoing legal duty, managing agents can no longer afford fragmented, paper-based fire safety records. Digitising FRAs, action plans, and remedial evidence creates an auditable trail that protects both residents and the responsible person in the event of regulatory scrutiny or insurance claims.

This is precisely where platforms like WiseBlock add real value — centralising fire risk assessments, action plan tracking, contractor sign-off, and resident communications in one place, so nothing falls through the cracks between review cycles. For agents managing portfolios across multiple buildings with varying risk profiles, that visibility is increasingly a baseline expectation rather than a nice-to-have.

Fire risk assessment is not a box-ticking exercise to satisfy an insurer or a lease covenant. It is the foundation of a building's entire fire safety strategy, and getting the type, scope, and follow-through right is now, more than ever, central to a managing agent's professional and legal duty of care.