An evaluation of the role of fire extinguishers

126. In summary, there is a significant difference between official assumptions/guidance and actual
public behaviour. However, the government and FRS seek to deter this behaviour, and, in
singularly promoting their ‘get out’ message, they exclude recognition of any other course of
action or advice. What is clear is that limited numbers follow their advice and ignoring it may even
provide better outcomes for most. Many policies in this area are demonstrably failing and need to
better reflect the public’s priorities and the contribution.
How the public tackle fires
127. Despite tackling most dwelling/HMO fires, little is known about the public’s experience in doing so.
Further, there seems to be limited and sporadic interest from academia or the fire sector in
researching this subject, particularly in terms of building a detailed and objective knowledge of
how the public tackle fires.
128. For example, the FRS does not publish (or possibly even record) information regarding any
attempts to tackle the fire prior to their arrival at those they are called to. This is a missed and
readily available opportunity to capture important data, particularly when they arrive to find the
fire already extinguished. Equally, where they arrive to find an active fire, understanding what took
place before and its impact on the circumstances of the fire would be insightful not just for
operational reasons, but to enhance professional knowledge. Capturing this would aid them and
others to drive forward public safety. The general lack of curiosity or professional interest in the
public’s capability and experience undermines the relevance and effectiveness of many fire safety
arrangements.
129. Encouragingly, a recent study made an important start on understanding the fire conditions the
public encountered at different stages of interaction with a dwelling/HMO fire. For example, the
flame size and smoke volume when they entered a room and when they exited. From this, some
insight could be gained into the potential risk and how the public assess it. Much more remains to
be done on this topic, but if progressed, it would make a meaningful contribution to a range of
areas, e.g. improving risk communication between the services and the public.
130. Studies also identify other findings which differ from official guidance. For example, they show that
the most common way in which the public are alerted to something being different (i.e. before
they know it is a fire), is through either smelling or seeing smoke. Actuation of a smoke alarm was
third, accounting for about one third of occurrences. It is known that the public’s initial response is
typically to investigate and then undertake a range (between one and 11, with an average of five)
of other actions. This typically includes tackling the fire. Their response behaviour is the same
regardless of how they are first made aware of the fire or its effects.
131. The public are likely to encounter a fire that is relatively small and often contained to the item first
ignited. They are often present when it starts, e.g. whilst cooking. The evidence also suggests that
very few fires develop rapidly in the way perhaps anticipated by legislation and fire models.
132. The EHS and BCS do not describe the way in which individual fires were tackled by the public
or the FRS but do identify what fire safety measures the respondents had in their
homes, including extinguishers. During the period 2002/03 to 2016/17, fire extinguisher
ownership fell from 18% to 11%, possibly due to official discouragement. In not having
access to purpose-designed equipment, it is likely most would have used water as an
extinguishing medium and applied it by means of improvising with household items.
25
3