Al,

could you add to the prosecutions list on the CRRIS please.

 

Thanks,

Ken

 

 

 

 

From: nicholas.coombe@london-fire.gov.uk [mailto:nicholas.coombe@london-fire.gov.uk]
Sent: 27 October 2008 13:22
To: uk-brigades@lists.fora.uk.net
Subject: First Imprisonment under RRO

 

LFEPA –v- (1) WATCHACRE PROPERTIES LIMITED AND (2) MEHMET ZEKI PARLAK

PREMISES: 23 RUSKING ROAD, LONDON N17

 

 

This was a prosecution under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005.  This is a landmark case under the RRO, as the second Defendant, Mr Parlak (DOB: 01 January 1946), was sentenced to a four month custodial sentence.  The first Defendant Watchacre Properties (to which Mr Parlak is a director), was fined a total sum of £21,000 and ordered to pay costs in the sum of £8,800.  It should be noted that the above sentences were given despite an early guilty plea by the Defendant.

 

 

Background

 

On16 September 2007, there was a fire at the premises known as 23 Ruskin Road, London N17.  The premises is a house of multiple occupation (HMO).  It has four floors, including a self-contained basement flat with a separate entrance [‘the premises’].  The main power supply for the premises is in the basement.  At the half landing between ground and first floor, there is a communal kitchen, W.C. and shower room (accessed via the kitchen).   The remaining rooms in the premises provide private accommodation.  The premises has been owned by Watchacre Properties Limited since 05 August 2004.  Mehmet Zeki Parlak is a director and secretary of Watchacre Properties Limited.  He has been a Director since 21 November 2001.

 

The fire on 16 September 2007 broke out in the early hours of the morning.  A number of officers attended at about 4:30am.  No alarm sounded during their attendance at the premises.  The fire was located in a flat/bedsit on the ground floor.  The fire was put out.  A man was found in the flat.  His name was Abdullah Gardoon.  He was unconscious; he was not breathing.  He was taken by ambulance to hospital, where he was pronounced dead.

 

It was later discovered that whilst there was a fire alarm system installed, the main power supply had been turned off  and, whilst there were a number of unlinked smoke detectors in the common parts of the premises, the batteries had been removed.

 

Fire inspections were carried out on the 16th and 17th September 2007, the latter in the presence of Mr Mehmet Zeki Parlak.   Significant findings included the following:

 

a.                    No Fire Risk Assessment had been carried out.

b.                   There were no fire safety arrangements.

c.                    There were no appropriate procedures in place to address the serious and imminent dangers of a fire.

d.                   The fire alarm was not functioning.  The power supply had been turned off and the back-up battery was not working.  There was no smoke alarm at all in the staircase at the first floor level. Existing smoke alarms had had their batteries removed.  There were no fire action notices provided on the premises adjacent to the fire alarm call point.

e.                   Fire fighting equipment was wholly inadequate.  No such equipment was available at all at the premises; the only evidence that equipment had ever been installed was a small bracket outside the kitchen door.

f.                     Emergency exit routes were blocked by;

 

i       A gas fired boiler was installed in the staircase enclosed inside a timber cupboard partially blocking the escape route;

ii      Combustible materials were stored in the exit route, including a washing machine, a television, clothing and furniture.

 

g.                   There were no maintenance records for the fire alarm system or for emergency lighting.  On 26^th September 2007, an Enforcement Notice was served on Watchacre Properties Limited making a series of fire safety requirements in relation to the premises.

 

The following sentences were imposed:

 

 

Summons 1 – Article 9 – Failure to make a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks to which relevant persons were exposed.

·         Company sentence £2,000

·         Mr Parlak’s sentence 3 months’ imprisonment

 

Summons 2 – Article 11 (1) – Failure to make and give effect to appropriate fire safety arrangements.

·         Company sentence £1,000

·         Mr Parlak’s sentence 1 month’s imprisonment

 

Summons 3 – Article 13 (1)(1) – Failure to provide appropriate fire fighting equipment.

·         Company sentence £7,500

·         Mr Parlak’s sentence 4 months’ imprisonment

 

 

Summons 4 – Article 13 (1)(a) – Failure to provide appropriate fire detection measures, namely adequate smoke alarms in the common parts of the premises.

·         Company sentence £7,500

·         Mr Parlak’s sentence 4 months’ imprisonment

 

 

Summons 5 – Article 14 (1) – Failure to ensure that routes to emergency exits from the premises and the exits were clear (in relation to the gas fired boiler).

·         Company sentence £1,000

·         Mr Parlak’s sentence 2 months’ imprisonment

 

 

Summons 6 – Article 14  (2)(a) – Failure to ensure that persons were able to evacuate the premises as quickly and safely as possible, in that the escape route was not properly protected (because the intermescent strip and cold smoke seal were missing from the top edge of the second floor habitable room and there were combustible materials stored in the exit route including a washing machine, television, clothing and furniture).

·         Company sentence £1,000

·         Mr Parlak’s sentence 2 months’ imprisonment

 

 

Summons 7 – Article 14 (2)(g) – Failure to ensure that there was adequate signage at the premises to indicate the emergency exit and route.

·         Company sentence £1,000

·         Mr Parlak’s sentence 1 month’s imprisonment

 

 

Summons 8 – Article 15 (1) - Failure to establish and give effect to appropriate procedures to be followed in the event of serious and imminent fire.

·         Company sentence £1,000

·         Mr Parlak’s sentence 1 month’s imprisonment

 

Total company fine £21,000 plus payment of costs to LFEPA in the sum of £8,800

Total of Mr Parlak’s custodial sentence 4 months

 

 

The sentences are to run concurrently and Mr Parlak is to receive a total sentence of 4 months.  HHJ Winstanley initially stated that he was minded to give Mr Parlak a total sentence of 8 months imprisonment.  However, he had reduced this sentence due to the guilty plea and the mitigating circumstances.

 

 

 

Nick Coombe

Fire Safety Regulation Policy Manager

020 8555 1200 ext 30813

07810 850709

 

****************************************************************************

LONDON FIRE BRIGADE

For fire Safety advice please go to http://www.london-fire.gov.uk/YourSafety.asp

This email intended solely for the addressee and is confidential. If you
receive this email in error, please delete it and notify the sender
immediately. If you are not the addressee please note that any
distribution, copying or use of the information in this email may
be unlawful.

Email transmissions cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free
as information can be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive
late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not
accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this
message that arise as a result of email transmission, including any
damage which you may sustain as a result of software viruses. You
should carry out your own virus checks before opening emails or their
attachments.