Charging for false alarms may have “serious repercussions” on fire safety, the Fire Industry Association (FIA) has warned.

Businesses eager to dodge fines could resort to turning fire alarms off entirely to cut the risk, which could lead to fires being undetected.

The warnings come after a proposal in the coalition’s Localism Bill that says fire and rescue authorities in England and Wales could be handed the power to demand cash for attending false fire alarms.

FIA CEO, Graham Ellicott, said: “If fire and rescue services charge for false alarm attendance they run the risk that companies will switch off their fire alarm systems to avoid being fined”, which could have potentially life-threatening implications.

The bill, which is now before the Parliamentary Bill Committee, makes up part of the Government’s plans to give more powers to councils and neighbourhoods, and it includes the proposal that fire and rescue services will be able to charge for attending false alarms. It is to be directed at businesses, rather than domestic premises.

Bill welcomed by fire service for 'maximising efficiencies'
However, the proposal has been welcomed by Peter Smith, assistant chief fire officer of Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue, who said that too much time was spent checking there was no emergency when “routine maintenance or management procedures would eliminate the problem".

“The ability for fire and rescue services to charge businesses who allow alarm calls from repeated faults from their fire alarm systems will be a positive step towards maximising the efficiency of the fire and rescue service. 

“The Bill will help to secure these efficiencies”, he told info4fire.

Risk outweighs benefits
But, according to Mr Ellicott, the increased fire risk to buildings far outweighed any positives from fines.

“With recent fire cutbacks, of course the fire and rescue services want to minimise time wasting due to recurring false alarms but the increased fire risk to buildings and the financial and environmental consequences must be considered,” he said.

“If people decide to turn fire detection and alarms off because the alternative is a fine, this is a very dangerous route to take.”

A joint letter signed by the FIA and the British Security Industry Association was sent to chief fire officers last week urging authorities to stick to its best practice guidance, the CFOA Policy for the Reduction of False Alarms and Unwanted Fire Signals.

The letter expressed concern over different interpretations made by fire and rescue services about false fire alarm best practice, and said that a uniform response as outlined in the CFOA policy should be adopted.

Confusion over responsible person
It also highlighted confusion over the responsible person, and whether fines would be given to alarm receiving centres (ARCs) or businesses.

Mr Ellicott said:  “If the day comes when charging is levied for false alarm attendance who will the bill be sent to? This is not a clear cut issue as many have assumed that it would be the owner of the building, which in itself could lead to the serious consequences I have already alluded to.

“However, in the past, bills were sent to the transmitter of the alarm signal - that is the ARC. If that is to be the case again, then given the ARC’s current view of the ever changing way that the brigades are treating false alarms, they have to strongly consider whether they want to be involved with the fire sector, especially as the security sector is larger and better regulated.”