An inspection of a hotel carried out just months before it was destroyed in a blaze scored it highly for fire safety management, it has been revealed.
Fire ripped through the Royal Albion Hotel last summer after a carelessly discarded cigarette set fire to an aged and weathered window frame.
Now, a series of fire safety inspection reports in the decade before the fire have been released by East Sussex Fire and Rescue Service in response to a freedom of information request.
They suggest at the time of the fire, staff were diligent in their fire safety duties – but older reports hint that the company which owns the hotel, Britannia Hotels, was not always responsive to requests for support and maintenance.
The most recent report, from September 2022, said: “Prior to the inspection and during the inspection it was evident that the hotel’s operations manager and the maintenance manager had a professional and pro-active attitude towards their fire safety responsibilities.
“An effective emergency plan and policy is in place for the premises and evidence of this has been provided.”
It also said staff were undertaking regular fire safety training, fire action notices were posted throughout the building, escape exits were free of blockages and emergency lighting was present.
However, it did find a lack of fire-stopping within electrical riser cupboards, which it advised rectifying.
The report is one of several releeased by East Sussex Fire and Rescue Service in response to a request from fire safety campaigner Alan Cox.
Documents from earlier years show the grade II* listed hotel had previously been warned it was at risk of breaching fire safety laws.
In 2015, a fire inspector witnessed blocked escape routes, fire doors wedged open, broken self-closers on fire doors, and disabled fire detectors while responding to “an incident”.
He undertook a full audit, which showed the smoke alarm system and fire doors were not adequately tested.
Almost 60 emergency lighting units were out of order, with many areas of the hotel in darkness with doors failing to close.
He found that training was sporadic, and guests were expected to help to evacuate each other.
The audit also said: “Cooperation was inadequate as head office allegedly does not respond to requests for maintenance.”
It added: “Agreement was sought that any areas with inadequate illumination would not be occupied until adequate illumination was in place”.
Another case note from the previous year had also mentioned issues with head office, saying: “There is evidence that the premises is well managed but the same issues every year are re-occurring.
“It seems like they have problem getting copies of all certificate from head office for the testing and maintenance of the systems.”
However, a note of a visit made in 2016 said most of the issues identified in 2015 had now been addressed, such as self-closing doors being fitted, gaps between doors filled, additional smoke detectors fitted and more staff training carried out.
It said a full evacuation drill of the hotel had seen it emptied within eight minutes. The note says the hotel was at that point broadly compliant.
A covid “short audit” carried out in November 2020 says the premises were then “broadly compliant”.
A record of inspection document dated 19 July, 2023 – four days after the blaze – shows that escape routes, sample bedrooms, a sample electrical riser, cupboards, fire alarm panels and the CCTV control room were inspected.
It also says the fire service requested configuration files, an event log, servicing and maintenance records from the smoke alarm servicing ompany, Gentec.
And a fire alarm engineer downloaded information from the main fire alarm panel – information which was referenced in the cause of fire report.
The records also discuss a large blaze at the hotel, in June 2017, which started in a linen cupboard and was deemed to be arson.
A note from the day after the blaze said only corridors were damaged, with bedroom doors stopping it spreading.
It says: “The guests were able to evacuate quickly apart from one guest who decided to leave by the window onto the roof which at this point needed to be rescued by the fire service.
“The internal means of escape would have been accessible for him.”
The Royal Albion wouldn’t have been allowed to operate without passing its fire compliance tests. The fire alarm panel would have indicated whereabouts the fire was from the outset so why wasn’t it put out immediately?
May we now know the true cause of this fire and why it was allowed to burn for 3 days rather than 3 hours, max in the 21st century with a modern fire alarm system?
It is unreasonable to assume that just because a building passes some requirements for fire safety measures, that is isn’t at risk of being destroyed by fire. These standards are there to allow people to escape the building and help provide safety for emergency services for a short period – they are not for the purpose of saving the building.
Old and decrepit buildings can never be brought to modern standards, and it’s daft to imagine that they can. Personally, I love the idea of a new functional and more relevant hotel on this site, being the most prime site for a hotel in the whole city. This is an opportunity, not a loss. The sooner it is done, the better.
Addressable fire alarm systems were invented to save both lives and buildings. There is no excuse for a fire to rage for 3 days unless it happens to be in a petro-chemical environment. If there was an issue with the nearby fire hydrant – also supposed to be checked on a regular basis – the sea was only yards away as a water source.
There is a brand new hotel next to Churchill Square if that is your preference. Some of us prefer the real characterful Brighton and to feel the city’s history in the walls.
Why rebiuid this hotel then it not the right thing to do when we could have a nice big bus station and lost all the other bus stop in the city centre
It’s a Grade II* Listed building. Part of real Brighton and the character/atmosphere visitors come to enjoy.
Anyone who doesn’t appreciate architecture can always holiday in Milton Keynes.
Just because it’s old doesn’t make it worth keeping. It was run down and ugly, didn’t meet modern standards of safety and looked like something from a depressing 1960s kitchen sink drama. The bland architecture was nothing of note. It looks like a lot of buildings along Eastbourne seafront.
I’m hoping it’s totally demolished.
Brighton is an up and coming young city. This is not Littlehampton or Bognor Regis.
The boomerati are obsessed with keeping everything the same as their childhood.
I’ve noticed this. There is a good career to be made being in a tribute band for people who haven’t bought a record since 1985. No wonder Christmas is what it is in the UK, depressing Groundhog Day, with the same 11 songs on endless repeat since 1974.
Thank goodness it was a different mindset in the 1700s, or we wouldn’t now have Brighton Pavilion, Regency Square, etc. At least we can be happy that the new generation have totally re-invented the world for themselves. We’ll judge that in the decades to come.
Save money and not waste it now
Brown envelopes all round.
I believe the conversation here is at risk of conflating fire management versus intrinsic fire risk of an traditional building.