Fire Risk Assessment Costs in London: What to Expect

Who needs one, and why it is not optional

Under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, the responsible person for a building — an employer, building owner, freeholder or managing agent — must ensure a suitable and sufficient fire risk assessment is carried out and kept up to date. For blocks of flats the duty covers the common parts. It is a legal obligation, not a discretionary survey, and recent reforms have sharpened both the record-keeping expectations and the consequences of getting it wrong. The cost question, then, is really about scope: a competent assessment that genuinely protects occupants, sized to the building.

Typical London cost ranges

As a broad market guide in London: a small, single-occupancy commercial unit or a modest low-rise block might fall in the £350 to £700 range; a mid-sized purpose-built block or a larger commercial building more commonly sits between £700 and £2,000; and a large, complex or higher-risk building — multiple cores, mixed use, or one requiring more than a visual inspection — can run from £2,000 into five figures where intrusive work is involved. Re-inspections and annual reviews are usually priced below the initial assessment. These are market-typical illustrations; we confirm a fixed fee once the building type, size and required FRA type are known.

The four FRA types — the real cost driver

For blocks of flats, fire risk assessments are commonly categorised into four types, and the type matters more than floor area. A Type 1 assessment — non-destructive inspection of the common parts only — is the most frequent and the cheapest. Type 2 adds limited destructive inspection of the common parts where there is reason to look behind finishes. Type 3 extends to a sample of flats non-destructively, and Type 4 adds destructive inspection within flats — the most thorough and the most expensive. Most blocks are well served by a Type 1 on a routine cycle, with a higher type commissioned where the building’s history, construction or a specific concern justifies it. Paying for a Type 4 when a Type 1 suffices wastes money; relying on a Type 1 when the construction demands more leaves a gap.

What pushes the fee up

The multipliers are straightforward: building height and the number of storeys and flats; the number of separate cores and stairways; mixed use, which brings commercial fire risks alongside residential; the age and construction, since older or altered buildings hide more; and whether the assessment needs to go beyond a visual Type 1. Higher-risk buildings within the scope of the Building Safety Act carry additional duties and documentation that a competent assessment must support. Poor existing records and difficult access — risers, roof voids, plant rooms — also add time. As with most surveys, it is the investigation the building demands, not its postcode, that sets the bill.

How an FRA connects to compartmentation, doors and passive protection

A fire risk assessment frequently identifies follow-on work rather than resolving everything itself. Where it flags concerns about the integrity of fire-resisting walls and floors, a fire compartmentation survey investigates and quantifies them. Where flat entrance and communal doors are in doubt, fire door inspections assess them against current standards. And where service penetrations and cavities need closer scrutiny, passive fire protection surveys examine the fire-stopping. Budgeting for an FRA in isolation can therefore understate the picture; treating it as the front door to a coordinated programme is both safer and, over time, cheaper.

Common questions

How often does an FRA need reviewing? There is no single statutory interval, but a review is expected at regular intervals and whenever the building or its use changes materially. Many responsible persons review annually and reassess fully every few years.

Who can carry one out? It must be a competent person. For anything beyond the simplest premises, that means an assessor with relevant fire-safety competence and professional indemnity cover — not a generic checklist exercise.

Is the cheapest assessment a false economy? Often. An assessment scoped too narrowly, or carried out without the competence the building needs, can miss the very issues that matter and expose the responsible person.