All posts by ERFS

NEW! E-Series Water Mist Fire Extinguisher



This Kite marked and LPCB E-Series presents groundbreaking technology.

The Unique design of the water mist extinguisher`s supersonicnozzle create a microscopic mist curtain, reducing the oxygen content (that fuels the fire) around the fire, extinguishes the flames and creates effective cooling blanket on hot fuels, preventing re-ignition.

They are suitable for use on A, B, C and F fires and have passed the34Kv electrical tests, therefore safe to use on electrical equipment. The range of fire fighting potential this extinguisher has, can reduce the number of different fire extinguishers normally required as well as the overall number, therefore becoming a long term commercial benefit.

Water mist extinguishers are filled with de-ionised water and contain NO ADDITIVES. They are 100% environmentally friendly.

They are cleaner and safer to use than other products and the service and maintenance is the same as the conventional extinguishers.

The engineering behind the Dry Water Mist makes use of a significantly lower volume of water throughout the extinguishing process, removing the risk of water saturation or further collateral damage to the source area.

Training can be simplified with less chance of using the wrong extinguisher leading to fewer claims for extinguisher misuse.


Can your Fire Safety competence be proved?

Every workplace needs to have personnel trained in Fire safety to meet
it’s compliance needs.

Join one of our certificated fire courses to ensure your compliance.

Fire Marshal & Extinguisher course – £50.00pp

(including live fire training)

24 January 2017

30th March 2017

23rd May 2017

27th July 2017

14th September 2017

21st November 2017

Ensure you comply with current fire safety legislation!

All courses are held at; Canberra House TDC, 10 First Avenue, 

Doncaster, DN9 3GA

*All prices quoted are subject to vat*


Keep Your Chimneys Clear!

Seasonal hazard

Fire and Rescue Services are concerned about the rise in the number of chimney fires, which is in keeping with what we would expect when there is a spike of colder weather. However they are advising residents to “keep warm and well this winter”, but want to ensure “they are able to do so safely.”

Statistics show that there are approximately 7,000 chimney fires a year in England – most of which are considered preventable. Blocked chimney can also lead to the other danger of carbon monoxide poisonings.

The popularity of wood burning stoves have added to the number of such fires and the fire service is advising those people burning wood should get their chimney swept up to four times a year, and at least once a year for those burning smokeless coal, oil or gas, and twice a year for bituminous coal fires.

Myth 04: Fire risk assessments are only a recommendation

Fire Industry Association
03 Feb 2015

Article 9 of The Fire Safety Order 2005, Article 53 and 54 of The Fire (Scotland) Act 2005 and Article 25 and 26 of The Fire and Rescue Services (Northern Ireland) Order 2006 places a duty on the person responsible to make an assessment of the fire risks to which relevant people are exposed to identify the general fire precautions that need to be implemented.

Failure to carry out a fire risk assessment is a criminal offence. Where the assessment identifies the need for improvements, failure to implement those improvements is also a criminal offence, see Shell International Ltd case 2009.

It is always advisable to write down the risk assessment and the various control measures, but where five or more people are employed* the risk assessment must be recorded (written down).

* ‘Employed’ includes part time, temporary and voluntary workers

Firm fined for workers’ injuries tackling fire

Two workers suffered burns, one seriously, when hot material from an industrial drier hit them as they tried to tackle a fire at a factory in South Wales, a court has heard.

The employees of Maxibrite, in Llantrisant, were trying to fight fire at the Maxibrite coal briquette plant on 16 December 2012 when they were hurt, one suffering severe burns to his back, legs and hands.

The incident was investigated by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) which prosecuted Maxibrite at Pontypridd Magistrates’ Court today (28 March).

The court heard works manager Simon Gilbody and works engineer Andrew Price were alerted by staff who saw smoke coming from the top of a tower used to produce solid fuel.

After several attempts to control the fire by hosing the tower failed, Mr Gilbody decided an inspection hatch at the bottom of the tower should be opened to let out any dust that might be causing an obstruction.

A company employee, Carl Lewis, opened the hatch but hot cinders cascaded out, burning Mr Gilbody on the chest, neck and face but without causing serious injury. As Mr Lewis tried to close the hatch, he was himself engulfed by hot coals. After showering for 30 minutes he was taken to hospital and received skin grafts for severe burns.

HSE’s investigation found Maxibrite had not carried out a suitable risk assessment for the safe working of the rotary drier and failed to provide a safe way of working including adequate information, instruction and training for workers using the equipment, and in procedures to follow in the event of a fire.

Maxibrite Ltd, of Esh Winning, Durham, was fined a total of £20,000 and ordered to pay £5,115 in costs after pleading guilty to a breach of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and a single breach of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations.

HSE Inspector Steve Lewis, speaking after the hearing, said:

“Mr Lewis and Mr Gilbody could have suffered far worse injuries or even death in this incident, which could have been prevented.

“The drying process at the plant involved intensive heat so the risks of fire should have been obvious. There had been a fire at the plant previously involving a similar drying process.

“Employers must make sure they have proper plans for dealing with emergency situations and that workers are trained to know what to do when something like a fire breaks out.”

Further information on fire safety can be found on the HSE website at:

Business Doncaster Success Stories

Solvent company prosecuted for decanting failures

A Doncaster solvent company has been fined after an unsafe decanting operation caused a huge fire that engulfed its Harworth base.

Employees were transferring highly flammable toluene from a bulk container into a smaller drum ahead of the incident at Solvents With Safety Ltd at Plumtree Farm Industrial Estate on 16 June 2010.

They were attempting to fill the drum using a pipe from the container, however the pipe they used was too short. It meant dropping the liquid from the pipe into the drum, a process called ‘splash filling’ that is known to generate static electricity – a potential ignition source.

Doncaster Magistrates’ Court heard (3 October) that the flash point of toluene is just 4 degrees. So on a “hot” June evening when the process took place, the toluene would have a flammable vapour over its surface.

The build up of static electricity in the drum is thought to have ignited the vapour and sparked a fire that quickly took hold and spread to other containers of flammable and dangerous solvent mixtures at the site, some of which exploded.

Seven workers were present at the time, but all managed to escape unharmed after a quick-thinking supervisor ordered them to evacuate the site and called the emergency services. The initial blaze was described as escalating to a raging inferno within minutes.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found the ‘splash fill’ method was wholly inappropriate and posed a clear risk that wasn’t properly assessed.

Worker safety was further compromised by the fact that the pipe used to fill the container wasn’t earthed, and because the personal protective equipment worn by the workers wasn’t anti-static and was therefore unsuitable.

The court also heard that HSE had twice written to Solvents With Safety, in May 2006 and December 2007, to warn of the dangers of splash filling containers.

The company pleaded guilty to breaching Reg 6(1) of the Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 and was fined £20,000 and ordered to pay £6,860 in costs.

After the hearing, HSE inspector Jayne Towey said:

“The Solvents With Safety workforce were extremely lucky to escape unharmed from this incident. The size and scale of the fire was immense, it took hold in minutes and caused total devastation to the company’s premises.

“Lives were needlessly put at risk because there would have been no blaze at all had the company taken more care with the decanting operation.

“The method they used was fraught with risk to say the least, and the generation of static charge could have been prevented by the provision of a longer filling pipe to avoid splash filling. This was a reasonably practicable measure to take, and the company was well aware of the dangers on the back of earlier HSE advice.

“Companies working with dangerous substances must take extreme care at all times and in all aspects of their operations. That clearly didn’t happen on this occasion and it could have had far-reaching consequences.”

Notes to editors

  • The Health and Safety Executive is Britain’s national regulator for workplace health and safety. It aims to reduce work-related death, injury and ill health. It does so through research, information and advice; promoting training; new or revised regulations and codes of practice; and working with local authority partners by inspection, investigation and enforcement.
  • Regulation 6(1) Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 covers the elimination or reduction of risks from dangerous substances and states: “Every employer shall ensure that risk is either eliminated or reduced so far as is reasonably practicable.”

See original article at >>

“Future of Fire” Conference and Event

The FPA is staging a new one-day future of fire summit on 29th november in Solihull, Birmingham. The event is a natural development from the associations long involvement with the UK’s fire and rescue conference. Leading figures will speak on topical themes, such as localism and accountability, encouraging discussions and views on a framework for the future. delegates can also put questions to the Fire Minister, visit a supporting exhibition and network with other stakeholders. Full conference details  are available from;

Care home owners and operators in England and Wales are being made aware of recent court rulings calling for self-closing bedroom fire doors in care homes.

In a recent determination (FLSP 4/6/4) a particular care home argued it could compensate for the absence of self-closers on it’s bedroom fire doors through staff management arrangements. however, the Secretary of State rejected this, ruling that the use of self-closing devices, plus hold-open devices linked to the fire detection system, was the most appropriate solution, particularly to prevent wedging open doors to residents’ rooms.

A landlord in Devon and a care home in Newcastle-upon-Tyne have been hit with substantial fines in two recent prosecutions under the Fire Safety Order.

Joseph Draper was fined a massive £135,000 and ordered to pay £23,000 in costs after pleading guilty to four offences under the legislation.

Mr Draper was the owner of a property in Ilfracombe that suffered a fire in February 2008. The premises was subdivided into flats up to four stories high. The fire, which started on the ground floor, spread throughout the building. Thirteen people escaped, with some of them having to clamber over the roof to get away from the flames and smoke.

A subsequent fire safety audit of the premises by Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service found it did not have adequate fire precautions for the type of use that it was being put to.


In a separate case, the owner and manager of a residential care home in Newcastle were fined more than £22,000.

Tirsul Limited, the owner of Bowland Lodge, pleaded guilty to five offences under the Fire Safety Order, in relation to a fire at the home in August 2009. Fire crews found one of the fire exits had been nailed shut and a padlock fitted.

A follow-up audit by Tyne and Wear Fire and Rescue Service highlighted further contraventions, including the lack of a suitable and sufficient fire risk assessment, lack of compartmentation, inadequately maintained floors, walls and ceilings to prevent fire spreading, and an unsafe external escape route due to building work.

Tirsul Limited was fined £18,750 and ordered pay £1,600 costs. In addition, Linda Parkin, the manager of Bowland Lodge, was fined £2,000 with £400 costs after pleading guilty to one charge relating to a locked fire exit.