Two words decide whether your fire risk assessment is worth the paper it's on: suitable and sufficient. They come straight from the law, they're the standard your insurer or landlord is really checking against, and they're deliberately not a fixed checklist. Here's what they actually mean.

Where the phrase comes from

It's the test set by Article 9 of the Fire Safety Order: the responsible person must make a "suitable and sufficient" assessment of the fire risks. The law doesn't prescribe a format or a page count. It sets a standard the assessment has to meet, which is why two assessments of the same building can both be valid but look quite different, and why a glossy 80-page document can still fail the test.

"Suitable", the right assessment for this building

Suitable means appropriate to your actual premises, its use, and the people in it. A corner café, a dental surgery and a multi-storey HMO face different risks and need different precautions. An assessment that ignores what's specific about your building, or worse, reads like it was copied from another one, isn't suitable, however thorough it looks.

"Sufficient", thorough enough, and no more

Sufficient means it goes deep enough to support its conclusions: it covers the significant hazards, the people who could be harmed, and the precautions that genuinely matter. Crucially, sufficient does not mean exhaustive. It doesn't have to chase every theoretical possibility or flag forty things to look diligent. Proportionate depth, matched to real risk, is the whole idea.

A box-tick covers someone's back. A suitable and sufficient assessment covers yours.

How to tell a good report from a box-tick

You don't need to be a fire engineer to spot the difference. A genuinely suitable and sufficient report tends to have:

  • findings backed by what was actually seen on the day, ideally with photos, not generic statements;
  • a clear, prioritised action plan, what matters first, what can wait, what needs nothing;
  • reasoning you can follow, so you understand why something is or isn't a problem;
  • proportionate recommendations, not a wish-list that quietly inflates the fee;
  • a named, competent assessor who stands behind it.

If a report is vague, generic, or reads the same as one for a completely different building, be sceptical, whatever it cost.

The competence question

"Suitable and sufficient" quietly assumes the person doing the assessment is competent to make those judgements. That's why the standard BS 8674, a framework for fire-risk-assessor competence, has become the reference point. It's exactly what an insurer or landlord scrutinising your assessment will look for: not just that an assessment exists, but that the right person did it.

General information to help you judge quality, not advice for your specific premises. If you're unsure whether your current assessment meets the standard, ask us, we'll give you a straight answer.