Fire safety at Rynet Court
This article aims to answer some of your questions about the fire at Rynet Court and what we are doing to support residents.
What was the cause of the fire?
The cause is still under investigation, but a minor has been arrested in connection with the fire. Initial reports today indicate that the building contained the fire in the way it was designed to, helping to keep residents safe. We are doing everything we can to support residents whilst they are unable to access their homes, and work with the police as they continue to investigate.
When was the fire started and how was it reported?
On Tuesday 2 June at around 5.20pm, the fire alarm system at Rynet Court detected a fire and alerted the authorities. The system also triggered other safety measures, including the opening of a vent at the top of the stairwell to let smoke escape and maintain clear escape routes. This significantly reduced the volume of smoke that got into peoples’ homes.
Is it true that the fire alarm was not working and residents had to inform each other about the fire starting?
No. Each flat has its own smoke detection alarms in the hallway and kitchen. These alert residents if a fire breaks out in their home.
However, if the fire is elsewhere, this particular building has been built in such a way as to keep residents safe inside their home, and contain fires for a period of time, and its Fire Emergency Plan is therefore Stay Put. This means that unless the fire is in their home, they can stay safely inside unless smoke or fire starts to impact them, they are told to leave by the fire and rescue services, or they wish to do so.
There is no fire alarm that sounds throughout the building alerting everyone all at once as this is not required. They are safest when they are in their homes, rather than on stairwells and in corridors.
The Fire Risk Assessment (FRA) completed in February 2025 references what is installed with the following commentary;
“A fire detection system is installed within the common areas. Fire alarm systems in common areas of blocks of flats are normally only installed to activate smoke control/ventilation systems and are silent systems”.
The FRA highlights that “The lift lobby has automatic smoke detection linked to the automatic-opening smoke vents at each floor level. The staircase has an automatic-opening vent on the top floor and openable windows at every other level.”
In addition to the detection and automatic ventilation the building is provided with emergency lighting and also a dry riser for fire-fighting activities.
Why was there no sprinkler system in place?
Rynet Court has a Stay Put Fire Emergency Plan (FEP) in place, which operates on the premise that people will be rescued from their homes rather than exiting the building. The use of sprinklers is typically for buildings that rely on evacuating people through communal areas. As such, buildings that are below 11 metres in height are not required to have sprinkler systems.
The requirement for sprinklers applies to new buildings of 11 metres and above in height (typically five-storey buildings and above), therefore even if Rynet Court was built today it still would not require sprinklers.
Residents claim there were no fire extinguishers available. Is this true?
This is correct. The FRA refers to this making the following statement:
“There are no fire extinguishers within the common areas. It is not normally considered necessary to provide fire extinguishers or hose reels in the common parts of blocks of flats. Such equipment should only be used by those trained in its use. It is not considered appropriate or practicable for residents in a block of flats to receive such training. In addition, if a fire occurs in a flat, the provision of fire extinguishing appliances in the common parts might encourage the occupants of the flat to enter the common parts to obtain an appliance and return to their flat to fight the fire. Such a procedure is inappropriate”.
Is this true? Residents have claimed that some cupboards at the front of the building were easily accessible and posed a fire risk. Is this true?
The fire was not the fault of any malfunction or due to anyone gaining access to electrical equipment. The electrical cupboard at the front of the building is locked. Some others, such as water meters, are more easily accessible to prevent the need for tradespeople accessing residents’ homes more frequently than necessary.
One resident has claimed that he has shared concerns over fire safety at Rynet Court for the last six years with no meaningful response from Your Housing Group (YHG). Can you tell us what actions you have taken in response to these concerns about fire safety at Rynet Court?
We work with fire safety experts to conduct regular Fire Risk Assessments (FRA) on each of our properties, detailing the risk associated with fires at particular premises and the steps we take to keep everyone safe if a fire does break out. Our most recent FRA for Rynet Court was completed in February of this year (2025). We are fully compliant with all the rules and regulations associated with reducing the risks of fire and keeping people safe if one happens.
Residents are claiming that YHG wrote to them to say the access code would be changed but it never was. Is this true?
Earlier this year, we listened to residents’ concerns that some tenants were sharing their door codes with non-tenants who could then gain access to the building, despite us changing the codes only a few months prior. Listening to their feedback, we took the decision to instead move to a fob access system and each household was issued with two fobs.
It is important that residents respect their neighbours by not sharing access codes with non-residents.
Do you have CCTV at the building and if so have you shared footage with the police?
There is no CCTV system at Rynet Court.