Santosh Muthiah

Dear Mr Walker Response from the Association of Manufacturers of Domestic Appliances Further to your report dated 5 November 2014, AMDEA wishes to reply to the points 2 to 4 of your report as follows_ We accept that there are difficulties in identifying products and components that fail but in most cases the fire officers with specialist knowledge (such as are found in the London Fire Brigade) with assistance company specialists can overcome the difficulties preserited when product is burnt out and only a carcass remains: Over the past few years industry and the fire service have held regular meetings at AMDEA and we ensure that the services are supplied with contact details for all our members The idea of marking the product in some way that will survive a fire has been discussed in this group. It is accepted that such marking would have to be a separate marking in the steelwork at the base of the product whereas the plate needs to be at a level easily accessible to the consumer. This marking would only have value in event of a catastrophic fire which is an extremely rare event: The location would have to be known to the fire services and with the manufacturing products sourced throughout the world this would need world-wide agreement: Also the metal structure of these appliances can be used across range of appliances and range of brands, some of which are retailers own brands and some of which are the brands of other manufacturers: It would be very difficult to set up a standard for this with international acceptance since it would not be considered to be a safety matter by IEC. LFB have argued that manufacturers who provided such marking would also avoid the situation of their products being misidentified, as has happened in the past. This is now understood and discussions are continuing both in UK and European industry fora. AMDEA Rapier House 40-46 Lambs Conduit Street London WCIN 3NW +.+44 (0120 7405 0666 444 7405 6609 info@amdea org.uk wwwamdea orguk Chairman: Maurizio Pettorino Chief Executive: Douglas Herbison A company limited by guarantee Registered in England No. 1465823 from fire rating being (0120

With reference_to_the construction of refrigeration appliances (36 t0 40): the Technical Manager on Refrigeration within AMDEA together with industry safety specialists prepared a basic proposal for change to the international standard IEC 60335-2-24 to cover these points. This work arose because of a previous incident This proposal was placed before the BSI committee CPL61 and, was accepted as a UK proposal for change at international level in 2014. in his role as Chairman of BSI committee CPL/61 and UK delegate at recent International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) meeting in Tokyo, Japan, presented the UK proposal which was subsequently accepted by the meeting_ Full details of this standards activity contained in the correspondence to yourself from the BSI have included an extract from] (report for completeness With regard to point 39 the insulation material used in refrigeration appliances: whilst this is highly flammable it has been successfully used for at least 30 years and is currently the only way to meet the performance requirements of the Ecodesign Regulation as part of the industry's commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We believe that their continued use, with slight changes in the materials used to contain them, will be satisfactory. It is vital that any change to refrigeration products is accepted at international level since there is no major manufacturing of household refrigeration products in the UK We believe that we have taken note of the recommendations in the Coroner's report and will continue our dialogue with industry colleagues worldwide to address these concerns

Dear Mr Walker REGULAJION 28 REPORI JIQ PREVENT FUIURE DEATHS SANIOSH BENJAMIN MUTHIAH am writing in response to your letter of Sth November 2014, under Regulation 28 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013,relating to the inquest into the tragic death of Mr Santosh Benjamin Muthiah: Before responding to your earlier correspondence, would first like to express and place on record my deepest condolences to Mr Muthiah'$ family. Firstly, by way of an introduction | am the Deputy Chief Fire Officer of Humberside Fire and Rescue Service and_ also the Chief Fire Officers Association (CFOA) Lead Officer for Fire Investigation. In this capacity also chair CFOA '$ Fire Investigation Strategic Steering Group (FISSG) _ CFOA is a charity whose purpose is to promote and increase efficiency amongst the UK'$ Fire and Rescue Services (FRS) for the benefit of the public and all communities across the Country. It is important to note that my CFOA role does not authorise me to mandate any FRS to undertake a particular course of action. Whilst this is the case, can produce guidance and recommend to the CFOA Board that this be issued to FRS in order to support Association'$ purpose Page of 3 Chief Fire Officers Association 9-1 1 Pebble Close Amington Tamworth Staffordshire B77 4RD Registered in England &8 Limited Company N 02677186 Telephone +44 (0J1827 302300 Fax +44 (0J1827 302399 WWW cfoa org;Uk Aegistured in England 0s Charily Na 1074071 VAT Registralion No: 902 1954 46 the

As your letter relates to the sharing of information following investigations into the origin and cause of a it is also important to note that whilst the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004,in particular Section 45 of that Act, does give the FRS powers to obtain information and investigate fires, it does not place a specific duty on them to do so. Therefore, whilst all UK FRS currently investigate fires to an extent, it cannot be guaranteed in the absence of statutory duty, the level that FRS will continue to investigate [fires] in the future. Despite that fact, would assert that Fire Investigation remains an important aspect of FRS work and, there is no doubt that the findings from various investigations have helped secure and safeguard both communities and firefighters alike This has been achieved through the identification of trends and emergent issues and, sharing information with partners and stakeholders In this regard | acknowledge that there would be benefits in Trading Standards (TS) and manufacturers being provided with more of the information that was available relating to appliance fires: In this respect, can report that there has been work on going since early 2014, initiated by the aforementioned CFOA FISSG, to improve the ability for the FRS to share information and intelligence with TS, Following meeting in June 2014, hosted by the Government's Business Innovations and Skills Department (BIS) , there was agreement by all stakeholders, including CFOA, the Department of Local Government (DCLG) and the Association of Trading Standards Officers (ACTSO) that information sharing Ibetween the FRS and TS was important and, as a result, BIS undertook to carry out exploratory research on how that might be achieved most effectively through web based means: CFOA continue to engage proactively on this project and are currently awaiting an update from BIS_ Ialso note that in your letter YOU address & number of concerns tol DCLG Deputy Director National Resilience and Fire Programme: It appears that those concerns are around a similar area of data sharing: On this matter, would comment as follows: All UK FRSs provide information as to the cause of and the extent of damage caused by fire, to DCLG via their Incident Recording System (IRS). This is provided for every fire attended by the FRS and is generally gathered by frontline crews at the scene, rather than dedicated Fire Investigators who are mobilised depending on local circumstances but mostly where incidents are likely to be protracted or complicated: In respect to subject matter, these routine reports will include the make and model of the appliance where that information is available. have discussed the overlap between the two areas that we are responding to with and some of her colleagues. Whilst am not in @ position to comment upon the capacity for DCLG to change any processes do believe that there may be opportunities to work to enhance some of the information gathered for IRS. As a result it may be possible to consider the ways that information is currently recorded and accessed thereby providing a more sustainable method to inform both TS and manufacturers of the information that YoU suggest on a regular basis. CFOA are already engaged with a working party developing the replacement IRS system, moreover there is an FISSG member to provide specific inputs on FI related matters. On this matter, my opinion is that if @ system was developed to extract information on those fires where the FRS had reported to DCLG in 8.1 of the IRS as being caused by "fault in equipment or appliance" and the manufacturer and/or model number was known and reported to DCLG in 8.2 of the IRS, then even that limited information may be useful to both TS and manufacturers There are clear benefits in such a system being administered centrally Using existing means rather than relying on the potential discrepancies caused by local inputs associated with a revised individual FRS arrangement: To illustrate this point, would refer to the lack of statutory duty around the investigation of fires and the current variations across the UK in respect to information is gathered and disseminated: Whilst this is the case, the requirement for each FRS to complete the IRS as described above is one which DCLG can continue to demand under Section 26 of the Fire and Rescue Services Act as it places a duty upon and Rescue Authorities to "submit to the Secretary of State any reports and returns required by him_

Chief Fire Olficers Association 9-1 Pebble Closa Amington Ternworth Statiordshire 877 4RD Rcrlstescd in Engam) 33 Lthied Company: No 02677126 Telephone +44 (0)1827 302300 Fax +44 (0Ji827 302399 wvwwctoa crg,uk Regjistered in Englanc] & Chfaiy No 1074371 VAT Rcg ralion No. 002 1954 4 fire , fires the how Fire

Proposals for further action by CFOA CFOA will continue to engage proactively with the work which BIS are progressing regarding information sharing between FRS and TS. As the nominated person for that work will ensure that CFOA provide any support within the timescales required by BIS_ CFOA will continue to engage proactively with DCLG to help develop the future IRS, and the ease by which this type of information can be gathered, accessed and disseminated. The timetable for that work is OUtside of the control of CFOA buf the Association has nominated an officer to be part of the working group and support as required_ CFOA will provide guidance to FRS by April 2015 to help ensure that the information provided on IRS is as accurate and meaningful as is possible to facilitate the ease by which DCLG could provide it to TS and manufacturers if they decided to do s0_ If DCLG determine it is not feasible to provide meaningful information to both TS and manufacturers on a periodic basis then CFOA, in consultation with DCLG, will provide guidance to each UK FRS on methods to be used in order to identify appliances involved in fire and the manner in which this is to be recorded and information shared with other partners; including TS and manufacturers. It must be acknowledged that this cannot be mandated, or indeed monitored by CFOA going forward: Depending on the response from DCLG this will be provided to FRS, even only as an interim measure that they may decide to adopt, by Ist April 2015. Once again please allow me to express my deepest condolences to Mr Muthiah'$ family. CFOA are committed to working with its members and partners in order to reduce the tragic incidences of deaths caused by fire in the UK and would welcome sight of responses from the other organisations that you have written to in order for Us to best understand how to achieve our dims:

Department for Business Victoria Street London Innovation & Skills SWIH OET Mr A Walker T +44 (0) 20 7215 5000 E enquiries@bis gov.uk Senior Coroner North London Coroners Court 29 Wood Street

Barnet ENS 4BE 26 January 2015 AtMrUlllces;, REGULATION 28 REPORT_ SANTOSH BENJAMIN MUTHIAH Thank you for the copy of your Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths; which you have addressed to Head of Product Regulation and the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills am replying as this matter falls within my portfolio. The death of Santosh Benjamin Muthiah in November 2010 was a tragic incident and share your interest in preventing a reoccurrence The first two concerns you have addressed to me relate to differences in approach to undertaking risk assessments of products (paragraphs 26-29) , and inconsistencies in the related guidance (paragraphs 31-34). My view on this is that the legislation itself is clear; and that this is underpinned by equally clear guidance (produced by Prosafe, a non-profit making organisation which draws together European Market Surveillance Authorities to spread and develop best practice, with support from the UK): The Government plays a leading role in discussions on risk assessment and corrective action in the EU, and we will continue to promote best practice and draw attention to the Prosafe guidance on this basis. However we are aware that there may be additional guidance in the public domain that is not fully consistent with Prosafe advice_ Whilst it is important to note that risk assessment is an inherently subjective activity, share your concern that any apparent divergence in approach could cause confusion for manufacturers in relation to their obligations As a result; consistency of guidance and sharing of best practice is something that will be considered as part of the independent review of consumer product recalls recently announced by Baroness Neville-Rolfe during a House of Lords debate on the Consumer Rights Bill. The review will incorporate views from a range of Market Surveillance Authorities and other business and non-government stakeholders. The output will be a report to BIS Ministers highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of the current system and making recommendations on how it might be improved. You also raise a series of concerns in paragraphs 52-57 The first of these relates to the creation of a website where all product recalls can be registered and accessed by consumers_ There are already a number of initiatives in this area including AMDEA's 'Register my Appliance' site launched on 15 January, as well as the online list of product recalls maintained Jo Swinson MP Minister for Employment Relations and Consumer Affairs

by the Trading Standards Institute. Nevertheless, the usefulness and feasibility of such a website will be considered as part of the aforementioned independent review: Your second concern in this section relates to white goods carrying key information on a fire- resistant plate or similar. understand that this idea has a number of practical challenges associated with it, but believe that industry are looking into it in some detail and are seeking to make a proposal with the aim of securing global agreement: BIS will continue to support their efforts in this area_ Your third concern covers the "failure to notify" offences under the General Product Safety Regulations 2005 and, in particular; whether the range of penalties is sufficient and whether the time limits for instituting criminal proceedings are too short In my view; the general scheme of offences in the 2005 Regulations operates in a proportionate and effective manner: In relation to penalties, it is important to appreciate that a producer or distributor who commits an offence under regulations 7 or 9 (the "failure to notify" offences) , will very frequently also have committed an offerice under regulations 5 (general safety requirement) or 8 (obiigations of distributors) , to which higher penalties can be applied. In addition, you may be aware that the Ministry of Justice is currently working on commencing section 85(1) of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, which would have the effect of permitting a fine of any amount to be given in respect of the "failure to notify" offences. In relation to time limits , agree that the system must allow sufficient time for effective prosecutions to be brought However; the system must also be proportionate and certain: Therefore, do not propose to address the range of penalties or the time limits applying to the "failure to notify" offences under the 2005 Regulations any further at this time_ Your fourth concern centres on collection and storage of consumers' contact details by retailers As you will appreciate, there are some challenging issues here in relation to data protection, as well as customers' general willingness to give their contact details. This is why BIS's approach focusses on encouraging consumers to register their appliances and helping them understand why this is beneficial, rather than forcing them to do sO. This is exactly what AMDEA's Register my Appliance site is designed to and we will continue to support that initiative_ Finally, you raise concerns about the absence of a Code of Practice on product recalls: believe that much of the content that one would expect to see in a Code of Practice is covered by the Prosafe guidance mentioned above. In addition, it is difficult to set out firm criteria for product recalls, since each one must be tailored according to a huge number of factors including the nature and age of the product; the nature of the risk; the number of products on the market and the consumers affected_ Once again, however; the potential for a Code of Practice will be considered as part of the independent review. In addition to the points above, would like to highlight that the independent review of product recalls also consider a number of the other concerns you have raised elsewhere in your report: understand that views will be sought coroners as part of the evidence gathering that underpins the review: would of course be happy to send you details of the review's findings when it concludes later in the year JO SWINSON MP RECEIEZ Minister for Employment Relations and Consumer Affairs 2 9 JAN 2063 do, will from