Residential PEEPs: the evacuation duty now in force

The question of how a disabled resident gets out of a tall building in a fire has been open since the Grenfell Tower fire in 2017, where the majority of the disabled residents in the tower died. The first phase of the Grenfell Inquiry recommended personal evacuation plans for residents whose ability to escape was compromised. Nine years on, that recommendation has finally become a legal duty. The Fire Safety (Residential Evacuation Plans) (England) Regulations 2025 came into force on 6 April 2026, and they put a named obligation on the people who run residential blocks.

Which buildings are in scope

The duty does not fall on every block. It applies to a specified residential building, which the regulations define in two ways. The first is the familiar higher-risk threshold: a building at least 18 metres above ground level, or with at least 7 storeys, containing two or more sets of domestic premises. The second is lower but conditional: a building more than 11 metres in height that operates a simultaneous evacuation strategy, the temporary arrangement many blocks adopted while waiting for cladding remediation. So a mid-rise block on a stay-put strategy may be out of scope today and in scope the moment its evacuation strategy changes, which is worth flagging on the building record now rather than discovering later.

What the responsible person has to do

For every relevant resident, someone whose ability to evacuate without help is compromised, the responsible person under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 now has three linked duties. Offer a person-centred fire risk assessment, a PCFRA, and carry one out if the resident asks for it. Put in place mitigating measures that are reasonable and proportionate to help that person leave safely. And agree with the resident how they would actually evacuate, record it in an emergency evacuation statement, and give them a copy.

The PCFRA is a conversation, not a form posted through a door. It looks at the specific risk that arises from one person's compromised ability to get out, in their actual flat, on their actual floor, and identifies what would make a real difference. A resident cannot be made to take part. The decision to engage sits with them, which means the offer, the response and any follow-up all have to be evidenced rather than assumed.

Why this is a records problem

The statement is not a one-off. The regulations require a review no later than 12 months after the statement is first recorded, and before the end of every 12 months after that, plus a review whenever circumstances change or the resident asks. A building of any size will accumulate a rolling set of these, each on its own clock, each tied to a person who may move, whose needs may change, or who may decline this year and accept next year.

That is the part a spreadsheet handles badly. The work is not writing a single statement, it is proving, at any moment, who was offered an assessment, who took one up, what was agreed, when it was last reviewed and when the next review falls due. A fire safety record that holds the PCFRAs and statements against the building they relate to, with each review date sitting on a compliance calendar that chases the renewal rather than waiting to be remembered, is what turns a new statutory duty into a managed cadence. It is the same evidence logic we set out for the wider fire risk assessment: the assessment matters, but being able to find it and show it is current matters just as much.

None of this is exotic work. It is knowing which of your buildings are in scope, knowing which residents the duty reaches, and keeping a dated trail of the offer, the assessment, the agreed plan and the review. The blocks that handle an inspection well will be the ones that built that habit in April, not the ones reaching for a folder in the autumn.