FRA FAQ
The responsible person remains liable: the Fire Safety Order duty to have a suitable and sufficient assessment cannot be transferred to the consultant who wrote the document. The assessor may face separate professional and contractual liability for defective work.
Two lines of liability
Enforcing authorities act against the responsible person. Article 5 of the Order fixes the duties on the role, extends them to others with control of the premises, and leaves no route by which a bad report becomes a defence. Telling an inspecting officer that a consultant wrote the document explains the failure; it does not move the breach. The wider picture of who carries safety duties is covered in who is legally responsible for a risk assessment.
The assessor is exposed on a different front. A consultant who produces a defective assessment can face contractual claims, negligence claims and damage to accreditation, which is why serious practitioners carry professional indemnity insurance and work within third-party schemes such as BAFE SP205, FRACS or the IFE registers, with BS 8674 as the competence framework behind them. Since Section 156 of the Building Safety Act 2022, a careless appointment is a breach in its own right, so checking credentials is now part of the competent person question rather than good practice alone.
Enforcement in practice
When a fire and rescue authority audits a building and judges the assessment inadequate, the response is graduated. Minor shortfalls usually produce advice or a notification of deficiencies with a deadline. More serious gaps bring an enforcement notice requiring a fresh, suitable and sufficient assessment by a competent person. Where the risk is grave, a prohibition notice can restrict or close parts of the building immediately, and prosecution carries unlimited fines, with imprisonment available for the worst cases.
What tips an assessment into inadequacy is usually visible on its face: a generic template with no building-specific reasoning, no significant findings or action plan, external walls and flat entrance doors ignored despite the Fire Safety Act 2021, or a review date years out of date. What are common mistakes in risk assessments catalogues the patterns, and what should a fire risk assessment include describes the document that survives scrutiny.
FAQ
Sometimes. A claim in contract or negligence can recover remediation costs or losses caused by defective work, subject to the terms of appointment and the assessor holding professional indemnity insurance worth pursuing. Winning that claim does not undo enforcement action already taken against the responsible person.
Check that it reflects the building as it stands, covers the post-2021 scope including external walls and flat doors, names the people at risk, records reasoned findings with a prioritised action plan, and shows a credible review date. Gaps against any of those points are where an auditing officer will start.
No scheme guarantees the output, but appointing through BAFE SP205, FRACS or the IFE registers is strong evidence the responsible person took the competence duty seriously. The responsible person must still read the report, question anything thin and act on the findings; an unread assessment protects nobody.
FRA Flow ties every finding to captured evidence and a named reviewer, the trail that questions about adequacy come down to. Free tier, no card.
