Smoke detector service - worth it?

Discussion in 'Property Management' started by scoop, 6th Jul, 2020.

Join Australia's most dynamic and respected property investment community
  1. Antoni0

    Antoni0 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    6th Jul, 2017
    Posts:
    1,791
    Location:
    Birisbane
    They only need sparkies for new installs, the service people would just have a restricted electrical licence at the most in Qld in case they need to rewire an alarm but most companies these days use their own alarms that slide off from the electrical connection base without the need to touch wiring. If you had to replace a faulty one, you'd just need to slide a replacement unit in.

    It takes me less than 20 minutes to test, clean and replace batteries in a 4 bedroom home. One reason I got rid of them is because they kept on strangely replacing alarms that were fairly new and not one alarm has failed since I've done them in the last 5 years. The new alarms would have the 10 year batteries, so even less work required.
     
  2. Mat

    Mat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    23rd Jun, 2016
    Posts:
    152
    Location:
    QLD
    A compliance check certificate does indeed mean nothing. As you correctly point out, some of these companies take photographs as evidence - I would go so far as to suggest that if you engage one of these companies, ensure you select one that does this, because a photograph is actual evidence vs an unregulated piece of paper that could have been written anywhere.

    Except that the electrical bodies don't regulate smoke alarm testing, so a company ballsing up pressing test on a smoke alarm would not be a matter they would concern themselves with.

    I'd be interested in seeing that legal advice, because I cannot see how it can be the case that legal practitioners would actually advise that a "compliance report" issued by an unregulated industry with no peak body setting industry practices, that frequently includes verbiage to the point that their compliance report isn't even professional opinion would have any legal relevance.

    I'm not arguing that it's worthless because it only tests the unit in the moment, I'm arguing it's always worthless in and of itself without being accompanied by real evidence that would actually meet the requirements without the certificate.

    You may want to read the standard terms of service then. For example, Smoke Alarm Solutions has this pearler:

    To the fullest extent permissible under the law, you indemnify us and hold us harmless from and against, and shall defend against, any and all liabilities, expenses, costs, loss and all other harm as set out in this agreement or arising from the instructions given or information provided or statements made by you, your employees, management, agents, representatives, other advisers and experts acting for you or on your behalf.​

    Then again, their terms also state their "compliance report" is not a professional opinion, so make of that what you will. Detector Inspector only contracts you to indemnify them if they declare your property an "excluded property" which I suppose is fair.

    Which is exactly what I've suggested is the correct way to go about it. Provide them the information (which is likely available in relatively easily digestible form from the fire service or Real Estate Industry body) and let them make the call - like you say, most people decide that outsourcing it to someone who makes a living out of chasing the rules and doing the work is far more efficient.
     
  3. wylie

    wylie Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    13,933
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Our tech yesterday is an electrician, just came here to check a faulty sensor. Turns out that sensor shouldn't be where it currently sits. I asked about bringing our house up to the new regulations now rather than wait.

    I spoke to him about this thread and some of the misinformation within it. He said he and the other techs see so many detectors in the wrong places, missing completely etc.

    He also debunked the "the certificate is worthless" statement. I used to be against paying someone for something I could do, and clearly I'm not going to change anyone's mind who is determined this service is a rip-off. I did everything right (I thought) but still didn't realise a couple of detectors were past their date, and possibly would have been in big trouble had a fire happened.

    So I have embraced having an expert do it, paying what is a very small fee, in exchange for coverage and a certificate by a company that has insurance.
     
    Last edited: 8th Jul, 2020
    luckyone likes this.
  4. Tom Rivera

    Tom Rivera Property Manager Business Member

    Joined:
    1st Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    2,718
    Location:
    South East Queensland
    @Mat How do you propose that a Landlord best carry out their statutory duties to indemnity themselves?
     
  5. Shogun

    Shogun Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26th May, 2018
    Posts:
    2,861
    Location:
    Perth
    In WA you need an "electrical compliance certificate" to buy/sell or rent out a property
    I had an over priced numpty electrician issue one with 10+ year old smoke detectors which he didn't even check.

    The electrician I use now charges $80, pictures and install new batteries, if smoke detectors or RCD need replacing on the day they only charge me for that and waive inspection fee. Their rates are very competitive
     
  6. wylie

    wylie Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    13,933
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Do electrical compliance certificates encompass smoke detectors? If so, then you should let that numpty electrician know.

    I like that smoke alarm companies specialise. Anyone can make a mistake, but if one of their staff does make a mistake, they wear the consequences, not me.
     
  7. Shogun

    Shogun Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26th May, 2018
    Posts:
    2,861
    Location:
    Perth
    I believe the certificate means it complies with relevant legislation. Working smoke detectors are legislation. I have never read the legislation myself. Numpty said he was checking them. Property Manager sided with the over priced numpty $320 vs $180 elsewhere. She PM lost 2 properties over it,

    The RCD must meet spec and trip in required time, I suspect smoke detectors need to be less than 10 years old
     
  8. Mat

    Mat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    23rd Jun, 2016
    Posts:
    152
    Location:
    QLD
    The regulations say that the owner has that requirement, and an agent may act for the owner. The chain of responsibility, ultimately, is always on the owner - with certain exceptions. There actually is no obligation for the lessor to test the alarms every 12 months in Queensland, that obligation is on the tenant. It's also an obligation on the tenant to replace the batteries.

    If you're looking for indemnity, that probably isn't going to happen. You could get the service you engage to take photos which would prove you had a good faith belief that it was done, but until someone actually gets prosecuted for not having smoke alarms maintained (so far, it hasn't happened) you can't even be sure if that will protect you. Your safest bet is to find one of these mobs that actually has a liability shift clause saying they will indemnify you if you follow their advice.

    The most well known (by which I mean, markets a lot) mob, Smoke Alarm Solutions, explicitly says that they will not be held liable in their own terms, and actively says their "compliance report" is "not a professional opinion".

    I certainly wouldn't take the word of someone who issues a worthless certificate in whether it's worthless or not.

    Again with this. wylie, I didn't say the service is a ripoff. I said there is no basis for a "certificate" issued by an unregulated industry participant with no industry codes of practice or regulatory body having any legal protection. The same as I couldn't issue a certificate of accreditation for a tenant to do their own inspections and have an owner not smack down the agent and hold them liable for the house being turned into a meth lab because they weren't doing the inspections because "the tenant was accredited!"

    If they enclosed photographs or a short video of the smoke alarm being tested (noting that the tenant is actually responsible for this, not the owner) then if it went in front of a magistrate you'd probably have a good argument that you made a good faith attempt to meet regulations.

    But, provided you're aware of the limitations of what they do they do actually provide tangible benefits like replacing any faulty alarms or dead batteries, usually at no extra charge, even hardwired ones. Having that pays for itself the second it saves you having a sparky out to replace one of those things. And as you've correctly pointed out, they can be a great advisory service if you manage to miss an expiry.
     
  9. Phoenix Pete

    Phoenix Pete Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    1st Jul, 2016
    Posts:
    346
    Location:
    PM - Sydney NSW
    If they say their compliance report is not a professional opinion then how the hell can they promote themselves as a smoke alarm testing company worth employing? They surely can't call themselves 'professional'.
     
    jared7825 and Mat like this.
  10. wylie

    wylie Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    13,933
    Location:
    Brisbane
    @Mat are you a property manager? This is directly lifted from the RTA website which is opposite to your understanding. It is the obligation of the agent or lessor to test the alarms, not the tenant.

    Image 8-7-20 at 2.31 pm.jpg
     
    TMNT likes this.
  11. wylie

    wylie Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    13,933
    Location:
    Brisbane
    I believe there are people in jail right now for just that.
     
  12. Mat

    Mat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    23rd Jun, 2016
    Posts:
    152
    Location:
    QLD
    My understanding is a direct quote (and linked to) the Fire and Emergency Services Act. That is all.

    No, there are not. Failing to abide by this regulation is a regulatory offence, not a criminal offence. Jail terms are not a sentencing option for an infringement.
     
  13. wylie

    wylie Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    13,933
    Location:
    Brisbane
    The link (and direct quote) you provided says this... (lessor is not the tenant)???

    Image 8-7-20 at 3.11 pm.jpg
     
  14. PeterCr

    PeterCr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    1st Oct, 2019
    Posts:
    194
    Location:
    Sydney
    Do we have any stats (Australia) that show how many Houses with Smoke Alarm have burned down and/or have caused serious/fatal cases. How many of those in Australia are directly attributed to Smoke Alarms (Faulty/Non Existent). Is it possible that even with a Smoke Alarm installed in a Place - we could still have fires in the place and cause damage/impact occupants.
     
    Antoni0 likes this.
  15. Phoenix Pete

    Phoenix Pete Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    1st Jul, 2016
    Posts:
    346
    Location:
    PM - Sydney NSW
    Maybe @wylie was referring to a case/cases where owners have not maintained smoke alarms and a tenant or tenants have died as a result of fire at the premises?
     
    wylie likes this.
  16. Mat

    Mat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    23rd Jun, 2016
    Posts:
    152
    Location:
    QLD
    Correct. Lessor is not the tenant. The lessor only has to test once, 30 days before the start of a tenancy. The tenant is responsible for ongoing testing during a tenancy.

    It's absolutely possible. But smoke alarms aren't intended to stop damage, they're to stop people dying when the place goes up in flames.

    Perhaps, but that's not relevant to this regulation. A person could commit the regulatory offence without committing a criminal offence and vice-versa. Criminal negligence is a way different standard.
     
    Phoenix Pete likes this.
  17. wylie

    wylie Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    13,933
    Location:
    Brisbane
    So this bit is not really correct. At least it could be correct if the tenant stays after twelve months. But we have them checked each twelve months regardless of whether the tenant stays or not.
     
  18. Lizzie

    Lizzie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    9th Jul, 2015
    Posts:
    9,618
    Location:
    Planet A
    I guess it depends what state you're in. In NSW the alarm has to be tested by a certified "tester" once every 12 months. Pain in the backside as, if the agent (lessor in this case) is not certified, then an outside body has to come in and do so - either way at owners cost

    If it's not tested by a certified body, and something happens, the landlord is liable ... even if they tested it as working themselves but are not certified ... and I wouldn't want to risk it in court if someone died as a result of my skimping
     
    Last edited: 8th Jul, 2020
    skater and wylie like this.
  19. The Prestige

    The Prestige Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    18th Jul, 2018
    Posts:
    140
    Location:
    Newcastle
    I pay $99 per year. Cheap peace of mind
     
    Karlos1234, wylie and Lizzie like this.
  20. PeterCr

    PeterCr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    1st Oct, 2019
    Posts:
    194
    Location:
    Sydney
    Other interesting note from this article:
    https://www.smh.com.au/national/flawed-detectors-pass-the-test-20130615-2oapv.html

    Ionisation alarm
    Measures particles under one micron (invisible to the human eye) but not required to pass a test for visible smoke. A ‘‘flame detector’’ does not respond until more than 50per cent smoke in testing conducted by CSIRO. Installed in most homes.


    Photoelectric alarm
    Must pass test for visible smoke — typically generated in early smouldering stages of a fire. Alarm responds typically at 8 to 12per cent visible smoke in testing conducted by CSIRO. Installed in most commercial buildings.