Smoke & heat detectors legislation for landlords in Scotland

What is being asked for is what we fit to our houses as standard.
There is little moral high ground to stand on if anything happens and a coroner asks why you did not fit the recommended heat and smoke detectors.
If you cannot afford to do it you should be asking yourself if you are serious about being a landlord.... it is just another expense we should meet.
Recently a group of tenants were shocked after we charged them nearly £1,000 to replace detectors they ripped out when they started smoking in their rooms and the interlinked alarms started screaming.... but the detectors were replaced the next day. I am not prepared to be accused of a failure in my duty of care.

Thanks to SAL for the link and to all who commented on this matter. I hope this thread will highlight this important matter to other landlords who are in my situation.
My electrician will be happy.

Reply to the comment left by "Michael Barnes" at "14/07/2014 - 20:13":

Hi Michael,
Whilst I agree with your interpretation of 'should', I think you miss the point that I was making. If the state is going to legislate it needs to legislate for all not a select few. The problem with the legislation is that it is 'one size fits all'. A very biased (communist?) perspective. Risk can be mitigated in many ways. If I live on the top of a hill, why should I pay a blanket expensive house insurance policy which covers flood when I do not need it? Putting in detectors in virtually every room in my home would, in my risk assessment, not make the house any more 'safe'. Indeed the chance of false alarms and the need to regularly test would be a nuisance. Obviously risk can also be managed by not entertaining a tenant who, for example, chain smokes and smells of booze. Car insurance is a sector where risk evaluation is factored into cost. Why should house risk be blanket in just one sector of the market?

Reply to the comment left by "Mike W" at "15/07/2014 - 11:22":

As far as I see it, putting a detector in every room is not for the 'detection' element primarily, in bedrooms in particular, it is the fact that if one were not actually IN the bedroom, you wouldn't hear the one downstairs in the kitchen and not be alerted to the danger of a fire.
Requirements are, i think, for 75dBm at bedhead, which is NOT achieved with one sited on the landing ceiling.
There may be a sounder device available, but whilst installing that, you might just as well install a full blown detector unit, in case someone in bed drops off to sleep with a fag in their hand !!

Reply to the comment left by "Jeremy Smith" at "15/07/2014 - 16:05":

Hi Jeremy,
Again there is no need to put another detector in a room for sound. I have an burglar alarm system and the sounder, located in the loft works fine. There are solutions for everything. But like I said risk can be managed in other ways that the 'one size fits all'.

Reply to the comment left by "Mike W" at "16/07/2014 - 17:23":

Yes, Hi Mike,
I guess that's fine for a burglar alarm, but there is minimum regulation sound level at bedhead for fire alarms that has to be satisfied, if the level is not met, then the system fails.
A sounder outside the bedroom doors, on the landing, does not satisfy the bedhead level.
If you make the sounder louder, then you run into problems with maximum levels damaging hearing ( and breaching another regulation !!) ...it is known that if a sounder is too loud, then people will not leave their room and go into the hall/landing because of the sound intensity.

Hi, read over comments made and wonder if anyone has updates on this? Yes i see Guidance issued by PRHP but this is as it states guidance. Fire Scotland dont have the same guidance and building regs dont automatically apply to rentals. Working smoke detectors are a satisfactory way of detecting a fire and would satisfy the repairing standard.

I am going to let out a property and the letting agent advised me on the requirement for smoke and heat detectors, hard wired, and inter linked. So far so good (if overkill). Where I have a problem though is her interpretation of "at least one on each floor". It is a 2 bedroom upstairs flat and she insists that the bottom of the interior stairs represents another floor. Seems ludicrous to me. Anyone offer advice?

Reply to the comment left by "Alex Stewart" at "13/05/2015 - 21:12":

Hi Alex, can you describe what you mean by bottom of interior stairs? if you have a hall upstairs and down stairs you need one on each. We have a problem with the interpretation of this new `legislation`. I say legislation a bit loosly as no one else has made a statement about mains wired being the law for private rentals apart from PRHP. The repairing standard states that detectors must be satisfactory. We agree that all properties should have if this its the law. Im a landlords and i have battery operated smoke detectors in my rental. Exactly the same detectors as the Scottish Fire Service install when they carry out a home fire safety visit.

Angela it can hardly be called a hall. An area of about one square metre. Open front door, then go upstairs to hall where there will be a smoke detector. Second smoke detector will be less than two metres away in the lounge and the heat detector literally through the wall from that in the kitchen. It was even suggested to me that if the tenant uses the second bedroom as a dining room, I have to install another one there! My point is, I don't think the interpretation that the downstairs entrance represents another floor in the property is correct but, other than my opinion, I have no way to convince the letting agent. Help! It is so frustrating.