Hochiki Europe launches FIREscape Nepto Black Edition emergency lighting

by Breaking NewsBuilding ManagementEvacuationHospitalityLightingLightingPublic Events

FIREscape Nepto Black Edition emergency lighting has been introduced by Hochiki Europe to provide a discreet emergency lighting solution for theatres, cinemas, nightclubs and other design-conscious venues

Hochiki Europe has expanded its emergency lighting portfolio with the launch of the FIREscape Nepto Black Edition emergency lighting range, offering a discreet solution for entertainment venues where maintaining the visual atmosphere is a priority.

The new FIREscape Nepto Black Edition emergency lighting has been developed for theatres, cinemas, nightclubs and similar venues where traditional white emergency lighting can stand out in darkened spaces. Its black finish is designed to blend into contemporary interiors while delivering the same performance as the standard FIREscape Nepto range.

The addressable system is built around a control panel connected to self-contained LED luminaires and exit signs using screened, extra-low voltage cabling. Each luminaire features an intelligent back-up battery capable of providing the required three hours of emergency operation in the event of a power failure.

According to Hochiki Europe, the low-voltage design and continuous self-testing and monitoring capabilities help simplify installation and maintenance while reducing associated costs compared with central battery or mains-powered emergency lighting systems.

The luminaire batteries have an expected lifespan of 10 years, helping to minimise replacement and maintenance requirements over the lifetime of the installation. The luminaires are certified to BS EN 60598-2-22 and BS EN 62034 Type PERC, while exit signs comply with BS EN ISO 7010. The complete system also meets the requirements of BS 5266.

The FIREscape Nepto range is designed to be scalable, with each control panel supporting up to two lighting lines and 127 devices per line. Up to 12 panels can also be networked together and controlled from a single keypad, making the system suitable for both single-site installations and larger estates.

The system includes adjustable lighting levels, day and night operating modes and the ability to configure luminaires as maintained or non-maintained, allowing users to tailor operation outside emergency situations.

While aimed at entertainment venues, Hochiki Europe said the Black Edition is also suitable for other environments where aesthetics are important, including premium retail spaces, gyms and modern office developments.

The FIREscape Nepto Black Edition is available now from Hochiki Europe.

Residential risks and responsibilities: Are you ready for the new RPEEPs regulations?

by Breaking NewsBuilding ManagementEvacuationSafety

With RPEEPs coming into force in England this month, residential evacuation planning is shifting from building-level assumptions to resident-level assessment, decision-making and record keeping

From 6 April 2026, responsible persons in England will be under a new statutory duty to identify residents in certain residential buildings whose ability to evacuate without assistance is compromised, offer them a person-centred fire risk assessment and, where an approach is agreed, record that in writing.

The Fire Safety (Residential Evacuation Plans) (England) Regulations 2025 place individual evacuation planning on a statutory footing for the first time.

They bring high-rise buildings and some mid-rise buildings with simultaneous evacuation strategies into scope.

They also respond directly to recommendations made after the Grenfell Tower fire.

What changes is the point at which decisions are made.

Evacuation planning is now carried out at resident level, with decisions recorded through residential personal emergency evacuation plans (RPEEPs).

From evacuation strategy to individual risk

The regulations require a shift in how risk is understood.

Stay put and simultaneous evacuation strategies remain in place, while evacuation planning also addresses how residents who need assistance will move if conditions change.

During a webinar called ‘RPEEPs: One month to go!’, Elspeth Grant, CEO of Triple A Solutions pointed out that this is less a niche issue than an operational reality: “For these in-scope buildings it would be highly unlikely to have any building that has nobody evacuation impaired.”

That matters because building strategies do not remove the need for individual planning.

Drawing on her experience, Grant said even in stay put buildings, the key question is what happens if a resident cannot remain safely in their flat, noting that the expectation is to “move away” rather than remain in place.

Her framing brings the regulations into practical focus.

The requirement centres on how a named resident would move if conditions inside their flat changed.

Core duties and ongoing process

The regulations apply to buildings in England that meet defined height or storey thresholds, or operate a simultaneous evacuation strategy.

Within those buildings, responsible persons must use reasonable endeavours to identify residents whose ability to evacuate without assistance is compromised by a physical or cognitive condition.

Once identified, the process moves into engagement.

A person-centred fire risk assessment must be offered and carried out if the resident agrees.

The responsible person must then consider what measures are reasonable and proportionate, attempt to agree an evacuation approach and record that approach where agreement is reached.

This is an ongoing process.

Residents move in and out of buildings, health conditions change and some individuals will only come forward after initial contact.

The duty remains active, which means systems need to stay current.

Identification challenges in practice

On paper, identifying relevant residents appears straightforward.

In practice, it is one of the more complex parts of compliance.

Guidance suggests identification at move-in, alongside regular reminders.

That relies on residents engaging with the process and disclosing information.

Some will not respond.

Others may not recognise that their condition affects evacuation.

In larger buildings, maintaining accurate records becomes a continuous task.

Grant’s view is that the starting point should be existing data, advising responsible persons to begin with “what information you already have within your systems.”

That reflects what was already known before Grenfell.

She pointed out that building managers were “already fully aware” of many residents’ needs through existing records, including lease information.

Identification therefore includes using current data alongside internal reporting routes.

Grant described this as “network fire safety,” where contractors and others on site can raise concerns as they arise.

Consent and information sharing

The regulations require explicit consent before prescribed information about a resident is shared with the local fire and rescue authority.

This introduces a clear procedural step and sits alongside wider legislation on emergency response and data use.

Grant explained that RPEEPs sit within a wider legal framework, including the Fire Safety Order and the Equality Act, alongside what she described as the “consent minefield” of data legislation.

She added that in emergency or safeguarding situations, the Data Use and Access Act can remove the need for consent.

Consent requirements within the regulations remain in place.

Emergency response may be governed by a different legal threshold.

For responsible persons, the task is to manage both.

Consent must be handled carefully within the RPEEPs framework, while recognising how emergency provisions apply.

Handling sensitive resident data

Even where information sharing is lawful, storing and managing resident data introduces its own risk.

The information recorded may indicate where vulnerable residents live and what assistance they may require.

Guidance supports digital storage because it allows updates to be made more easily.

Some fire and rescue authorities may still require physical information boxes on site, which creates variation between local areas.

Grant’s warning on this point is direct: Information should not be stored in a way that exposes residents, and instead should be “coded” to reduce risk if accessed by the wrong people.

The regulations require compliance with data protection law.

Responsible persons need to develop systems that reduce exposure while keeping information accurate.

Cost and legal exposure

The regulations allow mitigating measures to be funded in different ways, depending on circumstances and lease arrangements.

This flexibility creates uncertainty when it intersects with duties under the Equality Act.

Grant highlighted the constraint clearly: “The Equality Act specifically prohibits the charging of a disabled person for a reasonable adjustment.”

This limits how costs can be allocated in practice.

A measure identified through a RPEEPs process may still fall within the definition of a reasonable adjustment, which affects who can be asked to pay for it.

Alongside cost sits personal liability.

Duties under the Fire Safety Order apply to individuals as well as organisations.

Decisions made during the RPEEPs process may later be examined in enforcement or legal proceedings.

Delivering and evidencing the process

Government estimates suggest around a quarter of residents in high-rise buildings may be evacuation impaired, which places ongoing demands on identification, assessment and review.

Records need to remain current as residents move and circumstances change, requiring a system that reflects the building as it is, not as it was.

The regulations do not require specialist consultants, and the resident-facing work is expected to sit with building staff.

Grant drew a distinction between strategy and delivery: “A consultant might be able to help you develop a strategy,” but added that it would be “counterproductive” for unfamiliar assessors to carry out person-centred conversations.

She also pointed to a core principle in guidance, that evacuation planning should enable residents to leave without relying on rescue services.

Compliance will be judged on evidence.

Responsible persons need to show how residents are identified, how decisions are made and how records are maintained.

As Grant put it, the test is whether you can prove what is “reasonable.”

Conclusion

RPEEPs introduce a clear expectation that evacuation planning must account for individual residents.

The regulations define what responsible persons need to do, while leaving key questions to be worked through in practice.

The shift to resident-level planning brings practical challenges.

Identification is continuous. Data handling requires care.

Decisions on measures may carry legal implications.

The purpose remains straightforward: Residents who cannot evacuate independently should be identified and supported through a recorded plan.

The difficulty lies in delivering that requirement across changing populations, with systems that stand up to scrutiny and reflect real conditions inside each building.

This was originally published in the April 2026 Edition of International Fire & Safety Journal. To read your FREE copy, click here.

When disasters drive change: Evac+Chair on anticipatory fire duty

by Breaking NewsEvacuationSafety

Emergency evacuation specialist Evac+Chair on why inclusive evacuation can no longer be an afterthought

In the UK, major advances in public safety have often followed tragedy.

From terrorist attacks to catastrophic fires, large-scale incidents have repeatedly exposed loopholes in the systems designed to protect people inside buildings.

While these events have prompted regulatory reform and heightened expectations of those responsible for safety, turning lessons into lasting improvements has often proved slow and complex.

The key question remains: has emergency planning evolved enough to ensure everyone can evacuate safely?

Tragedy as a catalyst for reform

In May 2017, a terrorist attack at Manchester Arena following a concert killed 22 people and injured hundreds more, exposing serious vulnerabilities in how publicly accessible venues plan for, assess and manage risk.

The UK’s terrorism threat level has remained at ‘substantial’ for several years, meaning that an attack is likely.

Since 2017, security services have intercepted 43 late-stage attack plots, while around 15 terrorist attacks have taken place in the UK.

Counter Terrorism Policing continues to make hundreds of terrorism-related arrests each year, underscoring the persistent nature of the threat facing publicly accessible spaces.

Following the Manchester Arena attack, the subsequent campaign led by Figen Murray OBE, the mother of one of the victims, Martyn Hett, resulted in the introduction of Martyn’s Law – formally the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act 2025 – which received Royal Assent in April 2025.

The legislation places a statutory duty on those responsible for publicly accessible premises to assess terrorism risk and implement proportionate protective measures.

Venues are tiered according to capacity, ensuring that requirements scale appropriately.

Crucially, the Act embeds risk assessment, emergency planning and staff training into operational responsibility.

Full implementation of those who fall into the tiers must comply by April 2027, reinforcing the principle that preparedness must be demonstrable.

That same year, the Grenfell Tower fire exposed systemic failings in building safety and evacuation strategies.

The tragedy claimed 72 lives, including 15 residents with mobility impairments.

The ‘stay put’ policy, reliant on effective compartmentation and fire-resistant construction, suppression and up to date fire risk assessments proved catastrophic when those systems failed.

The central lesson was clear: evacuation models dependent on multiple safeguards are vulnerable if any one element collapses.

Nearly a decade on, concerns around high-rise residential evacuation remain.

Following consultation, the government introduced the Fire Safety (Residential Evacuation Plans) (England) Regulations 2025 which will come into force on 6 April 2026.

These require responsible persons to identify residents who may struggle to self-evacuate and offer a Person-Centred Fire Risk Assessment (PCFRA) to inform appropriate evacuation arrangements.

Other sectors have faced similar scrutiny.

In 2017, a fire at Newgrange Care Home in Hertfordshire led to two fatalities and significant fines for fire safety breaches, highlighting failures in compartmentation and evacuation preparedness.

Even where fatalities have been avoided, expectations are shifting.

When wheelchair user Lucas Vezza-O’Brien was unable to evacuate during a school fire, he was instructed to wait in a refuge area whilst other students evacuated due to no evacuation equipment, this prompted the #NoStudentLeftBehind campaign and triggered parliamentary debate about the preparedness of schools and colleges.

Too often, evacuation procedures are designed around the needs of the majority rather than the realities of a diverse population.

From reactive response to anticipatory responsibility

Responsibility is increasingly framed around planning and anticipation rather than response.

However, effective anticipation requires a clear understanding of who may be at risk during an evacuation – and what support they may need.

In 2024, around 16.8 million people in the UK were living with a disability – nearly a quarter of the population.

More than 5.5 million are in employment, and with more people working beyond traditional retirement age, organisations must plan for a more diverse workforce.

Around 80% of disabilities are invisible, including chronic health conditions, cognitive impairments and temporary mobility restrictions.

These figures challenge traditional assumptions about who may require assistance in an emergency.

Mobility impairment is not confined to permanent wheelchair users; it can include individuals recovering from surgery, those in late-stage pregnancy, people whose conditions fluctuate or individuals experiencing cognitive or mental health challenges that may affect their ability to respond quickly in an emergency.

As workplaces, residential and public spaces become more inclusive in everyday use, emergency planning must reflect the same level of consideration.

Accessibility is only half the story

Significant progress has been made in improving accessibility across buildings and public spaces, with ramps, lifts, widened doorways and accessible facilities now widely expected.

Yet while the focus has been on helping people enter buildings, far less consideration has been given to whether everyone can safely evacuate them in an emergency.

In most multi-storey buildings, staircases remain the primary means of escape.

When lifts are unavailable during a fire, individuals with mobility impairments are therefore dependent on assistance or left waiting.

The Grenfell Inquiry highlighted the risks of relying on a single evacuation strategy.

The “stay put” approach can be effective when compartmentation, alarms and suppression systems work as intended and fire remains contained.

When these safeguards fail, evacuation quickly becomes urgent and complex, particularly for those unable to leave independently.

Embedding inclusive preparedness

Legislation provides the framework for safety, but preparedness depends on implementation.

Effective evacuation planning requires alignment between equipment, training and maintenance.

Evacuation equipment should suit the building’s layout and accommodate the diverse mobility needs of its occupants.

In publicly accessible and multi-storey premises, this often requires adaptable solutions for a range of evacuation scenarios.

Manufacturers specialising in evacuation solutions are increasingly designing equipment to accommodate a wider range of mobility needs and payloads, supported by structured training and servicing to ensure readiness.

As the original manufacturer, with more than 40 years of experience, Evac+Chair proudly manufactures its evacuation chairs in the UK and emphasises that inclusive evacuation is about far more than simply installing equipment.

However, equipment alone cannot ensure safety.

In high-pressure environments, confidence and competence are critical.

Staff must understand how to deploy Evac+Chairs correctly and safely, maintaining composure while supporting individuals who may already be vulnerable or distressed.

Maintenance is equally essential.

As Class I medical devices, Evac+Chairs must be inspected and serviced annually in accordance with the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) UK.

Failure to maintain equipment introduces avoidable risk and may expose organisations to compliance failures under workplace safety regulations.

An effective evacuation strategy therefore rests on three interdependent elements: appropriate equipment, trained personnel and ongoing servicing.

Together, these provide demonstrable evidence of preparedness.

Learning before the next crisis

Each major disaster that has shaped reform was preceded by identifiable vulnerabilities.

The introduction of Martyn’s Law and RPEEPs marks important progress, but legislation alone cannot eliminate risk.

Expectations placed on organisations have evolved.

Responsible persons must anticipate foreseeable threats, assess individual needs and ensure evacuation procedures are practical, tested and inclusive.

Inclusive evacuation is no longer a niche consideration; it is becoming central to responsible risk management and modern building safety governance.

Preparedness is measured not by documentation but by outcomes.

When an emergency occurs, systems must function, equipment must perform and people must act with confidence.

The responsibility is clear: protection must extend to everyone.

When the alarm sounds, no one should be left behind.

This was originally published in the April 2026 Edition of International Fire & Safety Journal. To read your FREE copy, click here.

Passing the baton: 1st Attendance challenges compliance culture

by Breaking NewsEvacuationTraining

Paul Dennett, Owner and Managing Director of 1st Attendance, examines workplace fire training, compliance gaps, and how organisations prepare staff for real incident

Fire safety training is mandatory in UK workplaces, yet many sessions are designed mainly to demonstrate compliance.

Staff can still feel uncertain about spotting early warning signs, making decisions under pressure or using equipment in complex buildings such as universities, retail estates and large commercial sites.

This creates a gap between legal compliance and real preparedness when a fire develops.

1st Attendance delivers practical, instructor-led training in real working environments, using demonstrations and scenario-based discussion to improve risk recognition, evacuation behaviour and confidence.

The company works primarily with public-facing and multi-occupancy organisations across higher education, retail, care and commercial sectors.

Paul Dennett, Owner and Managing Director of 1st Attendance, started as a fire extinguisher engineer and now leads business focused on realism and decision-making.

IFSJ Editor Iain Hoey sat down with Paul Dennett to discuss how effective fire safety education should work today for staff in complex sites across sectors.

How would you describe 1st Attendance’s work and the organisations you mainly support today?

At its core, 1st Attendance delivers practical, face-to-face fire safety training that’s designed to work in the real world, not just on paper.

That includes fire warden training, fire extinguisher training, evacuation training and we also give wider compliance support.

We mainly work with commercial and public-facing organisations — higher education, retail, care environments, offices, and large multi-occupancy sites.

Many of our clients manage complex buildings or have large numbers of staff.

Where do you see the biggest gaps between compliance driven training and real preparedness?

The biggest gap is that compliance doesn’t automatically equal competence.

A lot of training meets the legal requirement but doesn’t change behaviour.

People sit through a presentation, tick the box, and then often forget about it because it isn’t relatable or delivered in an engaging way.

 In a real incident, if the training is not practical or relatable, it simply won’t surface when it’s needed.

Real preparedness comes from: Understanding why risks exist, recognising early warning signs, and knowing how to make decisions, not just follow instructions

How does your training help staff recognise early fire risks and make better decisions?

We focus heavily on risk awareness and decision-making, not just fire theory.

Our training uses real workplace examples, visual demonstrations and scenario-based discussion.

We encourage people to think about what fire risk actually looks like in their environment — poor housekeeping, misuse of equipment etc.

When staff understand risk in context, they’re far more likely to spot problems early and act appropriately.

We also talk openly about human behaviour under stress, so people aren’t surprised by how they and other people might react in a real situation.

Do fire risks and training needs differ across higher education retail and large commercial sites?

Yes — significantly.

While the core principles of fire safety stay the same, the risks, layouts, occupancy types, and behaviours vary a lot between sectors.

A university, for example, has very different challenges to a retail store or a standard office.

That’s why we don’t believe in a one-size-fits-all approach.

Training needs to reflect: the type of building, the people using it and how it operates day to day

When training feels relevant, engagement and retention improve dramatically.

Do employers face challenges keeping staff engaged with fire safety training and its lasting value?

Yes, engagement is one of the biggest challenges employers face.

A big part of the problem is perception.

Many people don’t feel that fire is something that will affect them personally — it’s always going to be someone else, somewhere down the road.

Because of that, fire safety can feel theoretical rather than real.

Modern life adds another layer.

My own social media feeds show me fires almost every day because of how algorithms work and the sector I’m in.

Most people’s feeds are very different, so they simply don’t realise how frequently fires actually occur in the UK.

If people don’t believe the risk is real or relevant, it’s difficult to keep them engaged.

That’s why training has to close that gap by showing how often incidents happen, how quickly situations develop, and how easily everyday risks can escalate.

Lasting value comes from: keeping sessions interactive, making the content relatable and linking training to real responsibilities

We also encourage employers to see fire safety training as part of a wider safety culture, not a once-a-year exercise.

When it’s treated that way, the learning sticks and people are far more likely to act appropriately when it matters.

Are there any areas of the training offer you are looking to develop or refine?

Yes — we’re actively developing our blended learning approach, combining high-quality face-to-face training with digital support tools.

The aim isn’t to replace practical training, but to reinforce it — refresher content, reminders, and ongoing awareness so learning doesn’t fade after the session ends.

We’re also refining how we support organisations with repeat training cycles, so knowledge stays current as staff change and sites evolve.

What should organisations prioritise so fire safety training improves outcomes in real incidents meaningfully?

The biggest priority is quality over convenience.

Organisations should ask: Does this training actually prepare people for real situations? Would staff know what to do under pressure? Is the training specific to our environment?

Fire safety training should build confidence, awareness, and decision-making ability — not just satisfy a requirement.

When organisations get that right, compliance takes care of itself, and outcomes improve when it matters most.

This was originally published in the March 2026 Edition of International Fire & Safety Journal. To read your FREE copy, click here.

Saving lives with sound: How TOA uses voice systems to guide evacuations

by Breaking NewsCommunicationsEvacuationIFSJ Exclusives

Ian Bridgewater, Managing Director, TOA Corporation (UK) Ltd, talks critical communication, audio’s role in public safety and why sound saves lives

It is a hard fact to comprehend, but the reality is that incidents of natural disaster, tragic accidents and terrorism have increased in recent years and emergency responders are having to deal with more significant events than ever before.

Addressing how this is managed is key, and the use of audio is now at the forefront of how safety, early warning and evacuation systems are developed.

There are significant statistics showing that people respond better to direct vocal instructions than to a bell.

A bell is often ignored because individuals assume it does not apply to them, whereas a clear, direct command motivates people to follow instructions.

It is very important that we address both evacuation and invacuation when using messages to manage incidents.

We all know what evacuation means, but invacuation procedures involve people moving to a designated place of safety or staying in a zoned area while awaiting instruction.

The way messages are delivered influences how people react and can reduce panic.

Audio communication improves safety outcomes by providing clearer and more informative instructions.

As audio-based safety messages become more common, they will become part of everyday life, encouraging controlled responses rather than instinctive movement toward the nearest exit, which could increase risk.

Advantages of effective communication 

With this in mind, it is extremely important to acknowledge the advantages that audio provides for two-way communication.

 The ability for emergency responders to be able to communicate effectively and quickly allows us to minimise response times and improve methods of critical communication to those they can’t immediately reach to try and keep more people safe and calm.

 They can then deal with the incident, knowing they are able to keep in contact with people and communicate with them if, initially, evacuation is not an option.

This is particularly important in the event of an act of terrorism, where the perpetrators are often mobile and hostile.

 We have seen so many times that if a ‘stay put, stay down’ message had been delivered in certain incidents lives might have been saved.

This is what the industry must work towards moving forward.

In the UK, the introduction of Martyn’s Law in 2025, officially titled the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act 2025, means there are going to be many changes to how venues operate and respond to incidents and that audio systems will play a huge part in this.

Venues will have to demonstrate responsibility for their visitors and ensure their staff are trained in appropriate public procedures that specifically relate to evacuation, moving people to a safe place and lockdown.

Venues will have to have incident management plans in place which should include how they will communicate with external organisations offering emergency assistance.

 Many countries globally either have similar legislation in progress or are considering frameworks for changing the way they manage public places, and we can only see this developing internationally.

It is very clear in the UK what standards voice evacuation systems must adhere to and we are regulated to two BS standards.

BS EN 50849 requires BS-EN54 certified components that are suitable for use as a Sound System for Emergency Purpose (SSEP).

 A SSEP is a public address audio system that can deliver emergency messages but is not connected to a fire system.

BS-5839-8: 2023 is the standard that should be adhered to if there is a voice evacuation system that connects to the fire alarm system.

It is a legal requirement for power supplies, control and indicating equipment and speakers to be EN-54 independently certificated by a third-party approved body.

Connected systems

In terms of technology, we are increasingly asked by end-users to design a system that is not only multi-tasking for audio but also can connect and communicate with other safety solutions such as fire alarms and security CCTV.

 For example, a recent project involved a large multi-function facility with retail units, restaurants, offices and residential spaces where different units required separate audio.

However, the overarching landlord also wanted to have control to override this in the event of an incident or fire, enabling them to take back control of their whole building, keeping overall responsibility.

As buildings get bigger, systems will get more complex.

As a manufacturer, we have to address this in our research and product development ensuring flexibility and scope to expand and offer many solutions that connect together.

Voice alarm and public address systems that deliver audio give control and enable complex management of both events and incidents using one system to manage both.

They are designed to be scalable and can be used in many applications from a retail unit to large complex buildings, such as a football stadium.

At TOA we believe that audio provision should be designed to the building specification.

It is extremely important to get this right so that the audio is clear and intelligible, with the acoustics and placement of speakers reflecting the fabrication of the structure.

Advances in speaker technology and design have allowed us to improve the effectiveness of speaker profiles allowing projects to require less equipment while still projecting sound further and more effectively.

Advances in IP audio will also be a game changer in combining audio with IP networks for a complete safety solution.

By adopting common industrial standard protocols for audio transmission and network control we can fully integrate IP audio with platforms such as SIP services/phones, video management systems (VMS) or IP control systems.

In summary, using audio in fire safety and security is bringing many more options to the table as to how we communicate clearly and effectively, both with everyday messages and when we need to trigger emergency announcements.

Audio creates a much better way of keeping people informed, safe and ultimately will save lives.

For expert advice contact the TOA Corporation UK Team on 01372 389799 or email technical@toa.co.uk

This was originally published in the March 2026 Edition of International Fire & Safety Journal. To read your FREE copy, click here.

Upcoming Webinar: How the UK second staircase mandate affects evacuation systems and building design

by EvacuationFeatured NewsSafety

IFSJ webinar to examine the UK’s second staircase mandate and its impact on tall building fire safety design

International Fire and Safety Journal (IFSJ) will host a webinar examining the implications of the UK’s second staircase mandate for fire safety strategy, system design and evacuation planning in tall residential buildings.

Register now

Titled “Redefining Escape: What the UK’s Second Staircase Mandate Means for Global Fire Safety Design”, the webinar will take place on 11 May 2026 at 11:00 BST.

The session will discuss how the introduction of mandatory second staircases in all new residential buildings over 18 metres is influencing how tall buildings are designed, occupied and managed.

While the requirement is rooted in UK legislation, the discussion will also address the broader relevance of these regulatory changes for international fire safety design and operational practice.

The webinar will examine how the second staircase requirement affects evacuation strategy in multi-stair buildings, including considerations around escape planning, compartmentation, evacuation sequencing and system zoning.

It will also address what building owners and facilities teams should consider to ensure life safety systems remain effective, maintainable and operational across multiple escape routes.

Another focus of the session will be the role of emergency lighting and dynamic signage in supporting evacuation behaviour, particularly as building layouts become more complex.

The discussion will also examine how coordinated approaches to lighting, detection and wayfinding systems can support clearer evacuation routes and reduce complexity during an emergency.

Speakers

The webinar will feature insights from two industry specialists with extensive experience in fire detection and life safety systems.

Martin Green, Commercial Training & Support Manager, Hochiki Europe, has more than 30 years of experience in the fire safety sector, including nearly two decades with Hochiki Europe.

He delivers training and technical support across the UK and provides accredited CPD and practical guidance for those responsible for the design, installation and management of life safety systems.

His expertise covers fire alarm and emergency lighting design, regulatory compliance and fire safety strategy.

He will be joined by Mick Hall, Regional Sales Manager, Hochiki Europe, who has spent the past decade working with architects, consultants, installers and building owners across the UK.

His experience includes system design, application engineering and integrated life safety approaches, including dynamic emergency communication and wayfinding systems.

Together, the speakers bring more than forty years of combined experience in the fire safety market, offering technical insight into the practical implications of the second staircase mandate.

Who should attend

This webinar will be relevant for professionals involved in the design, operation and management of tall buildings, including:

  • Architects and building designers
  • Developers, building owners and asset managers
  • Facilities and estates teams
  • Health and safety and fire safety professionals
  • Fire safety installers and electrical engineers

Although the session focuses on UK regulation, it will also provide useful insight for international audiences seeking to understand how regulatory change is influencing tall building fire safety design and operational practice.

Register for the webinar

The webinar will take place on 11 May 2026 at 11:00 BST.

To register, visit: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/4263019240448011096

Protecting operations, health and safety: International SOS talks wildfire planning

by Breaking NewsEvacuationWildland Fire

International SOS’s Adam Lakhani, Security Director, and Dr Katherine O’Reilly, Medical Director, discuss multi-stage evacuations and communication planning

Extreme heat, dense smoke and rapid evacuations have disrupted staff and operations across Europe during what may become the region’s most severe wildfire season in decades.

Organisations have faced sudden relocations, air quality hazards and supply challenges, often without the planning needed to manage prolonged disruption.

These pressures have highlighted weaknesses in crisis structures and reinforced the need for clearer health guidance, faster decision-making and stronger continuity measures.

International SOS supports clients through these conditions by providing real-time security intelligence, medical advice and operational planning.

Their teams assist with evacuations, health protection, essential supplies, post-incident care and longer-term resilience work that helps organisations stay functional during extended wildfire activity.

To understand what this looks like in practice, IFSJ Editor Iain Hoey sat down with International SOS’s Adam Lakhani, Security Director and Dr Katherine O’Reilly, Medical Director, to discuss how their teams help organisations prepare for and respond to wildfire risks.

What challenges have organisations faced during nearby wildfires, especially for operations and staff welfare?

Lakhani: One of the biggest challenges is evacuation.

Wildfires spread quickly and unpredictably, catching people off guard.

Staff can suddenly find themselves unable to move freely, and industries that rely on fixed sites like factories and offices are severely impacted.

Dr O’Reilly: Along with relocating staff, ensuring they have essential supplies, such as face masks and bottled water, is also critical.

For example, during the January 2025 Los Angeles wildfires, we provided emergency accommodation for displaced employees and their families, helping them stay safe while businesses sustained continuity.

What practical problems do you encounter when accessing staff or protecting essential services during deployments?

Lakhani: The challenges our teams face can also mirror those of the people affected.

Crises can stretch teams over extended periods and with limited understanding of duration so the endurance of those on-the-ground, as well as supporting, can be a challenge.

Appropriate resourcing and rotations are essential.

Sometimes we simply can’t access certain locations because of essential restrictions.

During the Los Angeles wildfires, our teams worked around the clock to secure emergency housing, and ensure people were moved, safe and with critical supplies.

How do those challenges translate into health or safety risks for people in those settings?

Lakhani: The physical risk from wildfires remains acute.

During Canada’s 2025 wildfire season – one of the most severe on record – more than 7.3 million hectares were burned, forcing mass evacuations and creating widespread health and operational challenges.

International SOS supported organisations in protecting staff from poor air quality and extreme heat, which often converge to magnify risks.

There are also consequential security implications.

Large-scale evacuations can sometimes lead to looting or opportunistic crime, compounding the difficulties faced by affected communities.

Dr O’Reilly: The health impacts are both immediate and long term.

Inhalation of wildfire smoke – a toxic mix of heavy metals and carcinogens – can trigger asthma attacks, worsen Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), and increase the risk of heart attacks, strokes, and respiratory infections.

 Extreme heat adds further risk, with cases of dehydration, heat exhaustion, and heatstroke rising.

In fact, in the first seven months of 2025, International SOS saw a 13% increase in heat-related assistance calls compared to the previous year.

There is also a significant psychological toll.

Evacuations, property loss, and prolonged smoke exposure often leads to anxiety, depression, and PTSD.

Too many organisations remain underprepared, with gaps in both mental health support and emergency planning.

Our role goes beyond the immediate response – whether that’s evacuations, medical support, or delivering essential supplies.

We also provide post-incident care, including counselling services and stress management.

Mental health is often overlooked, with up to 50% of those exposed to extreme events experiencing lasting psychological impacts.

How is International SOS adapting its services as wildfires and heatwaves grow earlier and more intense?

Lakhani: We’re taking several steps to help organisations prepare.

Each year we publish our Wildfire Insight Report ahead of the season, which looks back at the previous year, forecasts risks, and shares practical recommendations.

We’re also reinforcing our partner networks so that we can assist no matter the location or request.

Every organisation has different needs, however, so a one-size-fits-all approach doesn’t work.

With the complexities of modern-day business, tailored preparedness and resilient networks matter more than ever.

What single piece of advice would you give fire and safety professionals facing severe heat-driven conditions today?

Lakhani: Plan ahead and put a clear crisis management structure in place.

Too often, bureaucracy slows down decision-making.

Organisations should be asking: Who is on our crisis management team? Do we have clear escalation points? Have we assessed and run tests or simulations for responding to wildfire risks to our people, assets, and operations? If the answer to any part of this is no, those gaps need to be closed.

Dr O’Reilly: Raising awareness of health risks is just as important as structural preparedness.

Organisations should run education campaigns and share preventative health advice – especially as extreme weather intensifies.

Prevention is critical: hydration, rest schedules, and recognising early symptoms can make all the difference.

This was originally published in the February 2026 Edition of International Fire & Safety Journal. To read your FREE copy, click here.

Martyn’s Law in motion: Evac+Chair answers the compliance question

by Breaking NewsEvacuation

Evac+Chair examines risk assessment obligations, staff competence, maintenance standards and documentation needed to support demonstrable compliance

On 3rd April 2025, the UK Government confirmed a major step forward in safeguarding the public when Martyn’s Law, officially the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act 2025, received Royal Assent.

Named in memory of Martyn Hett, one of the 22 people tragically killed in the Manchester Arena attack during the Ariana Grande concert in 2017, this legislation represents the culmination of tireless campaigning by his mother, Figen Murray.

Following her loss, she worked relentlessly to drive meaningful change, supported by a personal commitment from the Prime Minister to ensure the law was passed swiftly.

Martyn’s Law is more than a legislative milestone; it represents a national commitment to protecting people and preventing tragedies by strengthening the safety and resilience of publicly accessible premises.

The law introduces a clear legal duty for organisations to assess terrorism risks, implement effective protective measures and ensure people can be kept safe.

The wider security context reinforces this urgency.

Last year, Counter Terrorism Police and MI5 made 248 arrests, the highest in a single year since 2019, and since March 2017, have disrupted 43 late-stage terrorist attacks.

For venues hosting hundreds or thousands of people, Martyn’s Law makes clear that preparation is not optional.

Planning saves lives, and in a high-pressure emergency, every second matters.

What Martyn’s Law requires

Martyn’s Law applies to a broad spectrum of publicly accessible premises and events, ranging from stadia, theatres and conference centres to hotels, healthcare facilities, places of worship, gyms, cinemas, restaurants, nightclubs and retail locations.

The level of compliance depends on the maximum capacity of the venue.

Premises with an occupancy between 200 and 799 people fall under the Standard Tier.

These organisations must appoint a Responsible Person to oversee the premises, ensure that procedures for evacuation, invacuation, lockdown and communication are in place, and guarantee that staff are trained and fully aware of their roles during an incident.

Premises accommodating 800 or more people fall under the Enhanced Tier.

In addition to fulfilling all Standard Tier duties, these organisations must appoint a Designated Senior Officer (DSO) to oversee compliance, conduct formal terrorism risk assessments, produce and maintain security plans and provide terrorism-protection training to relevant staff.

Martyn’s Law also makes clear that emergency arrangements must be practical, inclusive and demonstrable.

Having equipment on-site is not enough; this includes making sure evacuation procedures work effectively for everyone on the premises, including people with permanent, temporary or invisible impairments.

Inclusive evacuation isn’t a new expectation introduced by Martyn’s Law.

Under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, amended by the Fire Safety Act 2021, Responsible Persons must carry out fire risk assessments, provide fire safety training and ensure evacuation procedures account for people with reduced mobility.

The consequences of non-compliance

The Security Industry Authority (SIA) is responsible for monitoring and enforcing compliance with Martyn’s Law.

Inspectors can gather information, carry out inspections with or without a warrant, take copies of records and retain evidence where necessary.

Obstructing an inspector, impersonating an inspector or failing to comply with a request for information constitutes a criminal offence.

Sanctions can include contravention and restriction notices, civil penalties of up to £18 million or five per cent of worldwide revenue for Enhanced Tier premises, and in serious cases, imprisonment.

While the SIA mainly supports organisations in meeting their obligations, serious breaches that put the public at risk can lead to prosecution and significant reputational damage.

This reinforces the importance of being able to demonstrate that safety measures are not only in place, but effective and routinely maintained.

Why effective planning matters

Martyn’s Law reinforces lessons long championed by Evac+Chair: readiness saves lives.

In an emergency, seconds count, and even well-trained staff can face significant challenges without clear procedures and appropriate equipment.

Inclusive evacuation plans take into consideration the access and egress of everyone, including those with permanent and temporary mobility impairments.

This includes wheelchairs users and those with sensory, cognitive or medical conditions, all of which affect a person’s ability to self-evacuate.

Effective plans ensure that emergency procedures work, not just on paper.

Evacuation chairs in context

Evacuation chairs play a critical role in inclusive emergency planning.

Evac+Chair are the original and global leader in the design and manufacture, training and servicing of evacuation chairs.

Dedicating over 40 years to supporting organisations throughout the UK and internationally, helping to create a safer, more inclusive world.

Evac+Chair enable the safe and efficient evacuation and transfer of people with reduced mobility, assisting organisations to provide an inclusive environment.

Spanning across a variety of sectors including education, healthcare, hospitality, stadia, transport, retail and public services, their wide range includes evacuation chairs, mats, transfer chairs and slings, providing a comprehensive offering to meet the demands of today’s diverse built environment.

The Evac+Chair range includes manual and powered evacuation chairs, designed for a variety of stairs and personnel.

ProMove slings provide a safe and dignified solution for individuals who are unable to transfer independently from seat to seat.

The ResQMat supports the horizontal evacuation or transfer of individuals who for medical reasons cannot be placed in a chair or seated position.

By supporting a wide range of mobility needs, Evac+Chair helps organisations strengthen emergency preparedness and improve inclusive safety planning aligned with Martyn’s Law.

How Evac+Chair supports compliance

Evac+Chair offers complimentary on-site evacuation assessments conducted by their team of specialists.

These assessments review the building layout, stair configuration and any site-specific complexities, alongside the needs of employees and potential visitors with reduced mobility.

By considering existing Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs) or General Emergency Evacuation Plans (GEEPs), the team recommend the most suitable Evac+Chair or combination of models, to ensure evacuations are practical, inclusive and fit for purpose.

Evac+Chairs are only fully effective when staff are trained to operate them.

Training equips teams with the practical skills and confidence to deploy Evac+Chairs safely, manage real-world evacuations and provide reassurance to passengers.

Employees gain knowledge of correct operational techniques, understand potential hazards and are able to act decisively under pressure, reducing risk and improving outcomes.

Evac+Chair offers two training courses delivered by its nationwide team of experts, combining hands-on experience with essential theory to support smooth, safe and effective evacuations.

The Operator Training course equips delegates with the practical skills and confidence to deploy and operate an Evac+Chair correctly, ensuring they are prepared in an emergency.

The Key Trainer course goes a step further by developing certified in-house trainers who can deliver and cascade Evac+Chair training across their organisation, helping larger teams maintain competence and confidence over time.

Both courses are delivered on-site, allowing delegates to assess their own setting, practise in familiar surroundings and implement any necessary adjustments during the training session.

By combining reliable equipment with professional training, Evac+Chair helps organisations deliver inclusive, effective evacuation procedures that are confidently managed – supporting safer emergency planning and strengthening preparedness and compliance with Martyn’s Law.

Maintenance is equally critical.

Evac+Chairs are a Class I Medical Device and fall under the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) UK, organisations are legally required to ensure equipment is maintained in safe working order.

Evac+Chair supports this through annual maintenance packages ranging from one to five years, designed to keep your Evac+Chair fully compliant, safe and ready to perform in an emergency.

Each service includes a full inspection with multiple safety and performance checks, plus replacement of any worn or damaged components using only genuine Evac+Chair parts – something no third party can supply – helping protect long-term reliability and performance.

Inspections are carried out using their patented Friction Checker™ and Tension Checker™ service tools, ensuring every check is precise, reliable and repeatable.

Following every visit, a digital service report is provided within 24 hours, offering instant, transparent proof of service and clear documentation to support compliance.

Together, equipment, training and maintenance form a complete and demonstrable approach to inclusive evacuation.

Inclusive evacuation as a legal and moral responsibility

Martyn’s Law represents the most significant public-safety reform in a generation, raising expectations for how organisations assess risk, protect people and respond to emergencies.

It requires venues to move beyond theoretical planning and demonstrate that their procedures work in practice for everyone on the premises.

Inclusive evacuation is no longer optional – it’s a legal and moral responsibility.

With Evac+Chair, organisations can strengthen emergency preparedness and inclusive safety planning compliant with Martyn’s Law, helping ensure every person has a safe route to escape when it matters most.

To book a complimentary evacuation assessment, contact Evac+Chair at via phone +44 (0)121 706 6744, email (enquiries@evacchair.co.uk) or visit  evacchair.co.uk

This was originally published in the February 2026 Edition of International Fire & Safety Journal. To read your FREE copy, click here.

SFRS explains who needs evacuation plans from 6 April in England

by EvacuationFeatured News

Evacuation duties from 6 April 2026

New legal duties on residential evacuation planning in certain buildings take effect on 6 April 2026.

Surrey Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS) has said the Fire Safety (Residential Evacuation Plans) (England) Regulations 2025 will apply to Responsible Persons (RPs) for residential buildings 18 metres or higher or with seven or more storeys, plus buildings over 11 metres that operate a simultaneous evacuation strategy.

The regulations are intended to improve safety for residents who may struggle to evacuate during a fire.

SFRS described these as relevant residents and said this includes people with mobility challenges, sensory impairments or cognitive conditions.

What Responsible Persons must do

SFRS set out duties for Responsible Persons (RPs) under the new regulations.

Responsible Persons must identify relevant residents who may need assistance to evacuate.

Responsible Persons must offer and complete a Person-Centred Fire Risk Assessment (PCFRA) for those residents, setting out specific needs.

Responsible Persons must develop and agree an Emergency Evacuation Statement with each relevant resident, explaining what to do in the event of a fire.

Responsible Persons must prepare a building-wide Emergency Evacuation Plan and store it securely in a Premises Information Box that fire crews can access.

Responsible Persons must share essential information with SFRS, with the resident’s consent, to support operational planning during an emergency.

Rob Jenks, Group Commander for Protection at SFRS, said: “This legislation is a vital step forward in protecting vulnerable residents.

“We’re here to support Responsible Persons in understanding and meeting these requirements.

“Our Protection Team can provide guidance and resources to help ensure compliance and keep people safe.

“The Grenfell Tower tragedy highlighted the urgent need for clear evacuation plans for those unable to self-evacuate.

“These new regulations go some way in ensuring that no one is left behind in an emergency.”

SFRS said residents in affected buildings will receive a letter advising them about the change.

Inclusive, compliant evacuation planning: Evac+Chair on what “responsible persons” must do

by Breaking NewsEvacuation

Evac+Chair outlines the regulatory framework guiding responsible persons through maintenance, training and inclusive evacuation duties across UK workplaces

In the event of an emergency, the safe evacuation of all building occupants is a non-negotiable responsibility.

For people with mobility impairments, whether permanent, temporary or invisible, evacuation readiness can mean the difference between safety and disaster.

There are 5.5 million people with a disability in employment in the UK and this figure is growing, reinforcing the urgent need for inclusive evacuation strategies.

And yet, despite legislation and increased scrutiny, many organisations continue to fall short in their planning, training and maintenance obligations.

Inclusive evacuation is not a future ambition; it is a current and critical requirement.

In all premises, ensuring that everyone can escape safely is not only a legal duty but a moral one.

Navigating a complex legal framework

UK fire safety law sets out clear responsibilities.

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, as amended by the Fire Safety Act 2021, defines the role of the “responsible person”, typically an employer, building owner or facilities manager.

This individual is legally obligated to ensure that appropriate fire safety measures, including evacuation procedures and provisions, are in place for the safety of all individuals on the premises.

As part of their legal duties, the responsible person must ensure that evacuation equipment is properly maintained and that designated individuals are trained and competent in its use.

This is essential to safeguard everyone on the premises in the event of a fire or other emergency.

Articles 17, 18 and 21 of the Order respectively address equipment upkeep, competent person appointment and staff training.

Other frameworks further support and reinforce this.

The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 outlines a broad duty of care employers have towards their employees and visitors, while the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) 1998 requires that workplace equipment, be maintained in a safe condition and inspected regularly by competent individuals.

The Equality Act 2010 also plays a role, ensuring that reasonable adjustments are made for disabled people.

This includes ensuring safe and equal access, covering entry and exit, including in emergencies if a route is inaccessible for a disabled person, this could be classed as disability discrimination.

Despite these legislations, recent enforcement data suggests a distinct lack of compliance.

In the 2023/24 financial year, fire and rescue services in the UK issued 2,823 enforcement notices following fire safety audits, a 24% increase on the previous year.

Alarmingly, prosecutions under Article 32, which penalises the failure to maintain essential life-saving equipment, rose by 79%.

The lack of readiness

Having evacuation equipment is a great first step to preparedness and readiness.

However, without trained employees, regular practice and robust maintenance protocols, equipment may not be effectively deployed in a time critical emergency.

Research by Evac+Chair, the UK’s leading manufacturer of evacuation chairs and with more than four decades of experience, reveals the extent of this readiness gap.

In 2023, the company commissioned the ‘Risky Business’ report, surveying key decision-makers across a range of sectors.

The findings were concerning.

Nearly 1 in 4 respondents admitted to having only a partial understanding of their legal responsibilities around evacuation.

Almost 1 in 5 respondents said their emergency plans did not account for individuals with temporary mobility impairments, such as those recovering from injury or in late-stage pregnancy.

Most worryingly, 1 in 10 businesses had no plan at all for evacuating people with permanent disabilities.

Company culture is just as important as having the right information, yet recklessness when it comes to safety exists.

Evac+Chair’s results illustrate that the problem is rooted in irresponsible workplace culture, finding just over two-thirds of decision makers think there is a culture of fire safety non-compliance or looking for loopholes in the business community.

These statistics suggest a widespread failure to plan effectively for inclusion.

The risks are not hypothetical.

In a high-pressure emergency, untrained staff and unmaintained equipment can contribute to confusion, delay and potentially fatal outcomes.

To protect life, evacuation procedures must be well-documented, regularly tested and supported by training and servicing regimes that ensure equipment and personnel are always ready to respond.

Building confidence through training

Training is critical for turning evacuation plans into effective, life-saving action.

Staff must be able to confidently and safely operate evacuation chairs, as real-life scenarios often present challenges, such as crowded stairwells or time pressure.

Without adequate training, evacuation efforts may be delayed – leading to confusion, hesitation and potentially dangerous bottlenecks on staircases.

In an emergency, speed is vital; every second counts when it comes to evacuating a building and protecting lives.

Effective, hands-on training not only reduces the risk of injury to both the operator and the passenger, but also ensures that staff are competent, prepared and ready to respond swiftly and efficiently when it matters most.

The most effective training combines essential theory with hands-on experience.

 Training offer operators the confidence and competence to use an evacuation chair.

Refresher training is equally important.

Over time, skills fade and confidence diminishes.

Regular training helps ensure that, in the event of a real emergency, staff are ready to act swiftly and correctly.

Official guidance supports this approach.

The Fire Safety Risk Assessment: Supplementary Guide recommends organisations take out evacuation drills at least twice per year, with additional training for anyone responsible for operating evacuation equipment.

Maintenance: a non-negotiable priority

Just as critical as training is the ongoing maintenance of evacuation chairs and related devices.

Under Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) 1998, organisations have a legal duty to maintain and inspect all workplace equipment regularly.

Visual checks by in-house teams on a quarterly basis can also help identify issues such as worn belts, damaged wheels or loose buckles before they compromise safety.

The consequences of poor maintenance are not merely theoretical.

A malfunctioning evacuation chair during a real evacuation could lead to injury, delay or loss of life.

Proactive servicing not only ensures equipment reliability but also extends product life and demonstrates due diligence.

In an era of increasing risk, from extreme weather to terrorism, being prepared is no longer optional.

The human cost of inaction

While the legal framework sets out clear obligations, there is also a powerful ethical case to act.

Failing to provide adequate evacuation procedures for those with reduced mobility amounts to a denial of fundamental rights.

Accessibility is about more than just entering a building; it’s about being able to leave safely when it matters most.

Inclusive evacuation must become the standard, not the exception.

Buildings should not be considered truly accessible unless they include safe, viable routes of egress for everyone.

That includes people using mobility aids, wheelchair users and those with hidden or temporary impairments.

The fire safety community has a vital role to play in raising awareness and closing the compliance gap.

Fire risk assessors, consultants and enforcers must continue to champion inclusive evacuation planning, not only at the point of inspection but throughout the design, construction and operational phases of buildings.

Policymakers too should consider introducing clearer, more enforceable mandates for evacuation planning, especially in complex buildings or those with public access.

No time for complacency

Evacuation is not just about ticking boxes.

It is about responsibility, readiness and respect for human life.

As Nathaniel Thomas-Hall, Head of Export and Innovation at Evac+Chair, puts it: “Failure to prepare is preparing to fail.

We have the tools, technology and training to make inclusive fire safety a reality – what’s missing in many cases is the will to act before it’s too late.”

The time is now for that to take shape.

In today’s regulatory climate, organisations can no longer afford to be complacent.

Evacuation planning must be inclusive, comprehensive and proactive.

Only then can we truly guarantee that when the alarm sounds, every person will have a clear and safe path to escape – no hesitation, no confusion.

This was originally published in the December 2025 Edition of International Fire & Safety Journal. To read your FREE copy, click here.