Tri Fire Engineer Expelled : In Detail
Tri Fire Engineer Expelled by the Institution of Fire Engineers
The Institution of Fire Engineers (IFE) has officially expelled Tri Fire engineer Adam Kiziak with immediate effect. Kiziak had been suspended in August 2024 due to failing to hold Professional Indemnity (PI) insurance and not adhering to professional competency standards.
In an updated statement, the IFE confirmed that due to non-compliance with imposed sanctions, Kiziak has now been expelled from the institution.
Tri Fire Engineer Expelled – The Background
Tri Fire engineer Adam Kiziak has been described as a ‘prolific fire assessor’ with an article published in the Times recently estimating that he had signed off as many as 4,000 EWS1 forms.
A single EWS1 form is issued for each block of apartments, so if this estimate is anywhere near accurate, tens of thousand of property owners will have been affected by Tri Fire’s actions. Lenders including Natwest, HSBS, and Nationwide have refused to offer mortgages on properties with EWS1 forms issued by Tri Fire, preventing the sale of affected properties.
The IFE has added a set of FAQs to it's website, setting out some more detail in respect of their investigation of Adam Kiziak and Tri Fire. This reveals that the first complaints in respect of Tri Fire were received in 2021, with further complaints being submitted through to the conclusion of their investigation in 2024.
Given the scale of this issue, we examine what led to the unprecedented expulsion of a Tri Fire engineer and its implications for property owners.
What Does a Competent FRAEW/EWS1 Survey Look Like?
A Fire Risk Assessment of External Walls (FRAEW) or EWS1 survey must follow PAS9980 guidance, which requires a qualitative, risk-based approach.
Key risk factors include :
• Combustibility of materials
• Fire spread characteristics
• Height and layout of the building
• Fire escape provisions and alternative safety measures
• Likelihood of ignition sources near cladding
When considering the quality of Tri Fire’s work, the most tangible element to check in one of their reports will be the extent and quality of intrusive investigations undertaken.
The PAS9980 guidance is not prescriptive in setting the degree of sampling necessary, instead stating that ‘the external wall assessor needs to make a judgement as to what is appropriate’.
With this guidance in mind, as a minimum intrusive sampling should be taken of each wall type found on a building.
In addition, the presence and correct installation of cavity barriers is vital to prevent fire spread. Annex J of PAS9980 states that the ‘investigation of numerous buildings in the wake of the fire at Grenfell’ revealed issues where cavity barriers were not installed at all, had been removed, or badly fitted.
PAS9980 guidance recommends that particularly in larger buildings opening up to assess cavity barriers should be carried out in several locations remote from one another to assess variations in workmanship.
We’ve used a stock image to mock up an example, but a reasonable selection of sample locations should look like the image below :
Inspection Point 1 will pick up the horizontal compartment line between apartments as well as the penetration through the wall for the flue, point 5 will check cavity closers to the windows, points 7 & 8 extend inspections to the other side of the building etc.
To enable safe access to inspections at height a mobile elevating work platform (MEWP) would be required, and opening up works should be sufficiently large to enable clear inspection of elements of the wall make up.
The example image below shows a full fill wool barrier at the vertical compartmentation line for instance. Contractors would be required to operate the MEWP and undertake the opening up and making good afterwards.
What did Tri Fire Do?
Again, using stock images to illustrate what we found, inspections by a Tri Fire assessor were often limited to one section of the building at low level, as recreated in the image below.
Intrusive inspections appear to be limited to those parts of a building that could be reached from ground level with a ladder or occasionally from a balcony.
Intrusive inspection in many instances involved no more than a small hole drilled into the external wall, as shown below.
What does the quality of Tri Fire Inspections Mean?
The IFE give very little detail of what they mean when they say that Tri Fire failed to maintain professional competence.
Having now reviewed many Tri Fire reports for concerned property managers it is clear that their intrusive inspection methods fell far short of the guidelines set out in PAS9980.
Aside from whether Tri Fire’s professional judgement on the make up of a wall is correct or not, in all instances that we have seen they failed to adequately undertake intrusive inspections.
PAS9980 specifically recommends that opening up works should be carried out in several locations remote from one another, to assess overall workmanship.
It also specifically cautions that ‘sampling from low‑level areas, for ease of accessibility, might appear preferable, but low‑level cladding is frequently designed to be more robust (due to impact resistance and anti‑vandalism considerations) and might not, therefore, be sufficiently representative’.
Despite this very specific guidance, no matter the size of the building, Tri Fire’s reported only on areas of wall accessible by ladder, or on occasion from a balcony. This method of working gives rise to two significant issues.
Firstly, whatever the conclusion of Tri Fire’s assessment of the material make-up of a wall and the presence and effectiveness of cavity barriers, this is only ever at low level and cannot be taken to apply to the whole building. Anything much above the bottom of first floor height, unless accessible from a balcony, will not have been assessed.
Secondly, the poor quality of evidence contained in their reports makes it impossible for any other consultant to rely on Tri Fire’s opening up works. A picture of a small drill hole reveals very little about the wall make up.
Much of the intrusive inspection work completed by Tri Fire over the last five years will have to be repeated.
Tri Fire Engineer Expelled - PI Insurance
Tri Fire enclosed a copy of a PI insurance certificate with many of their reports, which would appear to confirm that they had PI cover. Why then would the IFE state that Adam Kiziak failed to hold PI insurance?
An explanation may be how PI insurance policies are worded. A typical PI policy provides cover for all the activities that an organisation performs, with exceptions for certain types of work. A good example is cover for Asbestos surveys, which has been excluded from standard policy wording for many years. Any organisation wishing to carry out this sort of work would need to purchase a specific policy to cover the exclusion. These exclusion are often not set out in standard PI insurance certificates.
Cover for EWS1 work was largely excluded from standard professional indemnity insurance policy wording around the time of the government's consolidated advice note on external wall fire safety in January 2020. This broadened the scope of buildings requiring EWS1 assessments, leading insurers to view the increased risk as unmanageable.
It is likely that whilst Tri Fire had PI insurance in place, the policy excluded EWS1 cover. This hypothesis would appear to confirm the IFE’s statement that ‘where exclusions in PI policy are work prohibitive failed to make these known’.
Even in instances where Tri Fire carried out non-EWS1 work, no PI insurance policy will provide cover in instances of fraud. The report by Awwal Salisu that his credentials had been fraudulently used by Tri Fire would further invalidate Tri Fire’s PI Cover.
Tri Fire Engineer Expelled - One more issue
Adding further to the concern over the impact from Tri Fire’s actions is the fact that Adam Kiziak also signed off reports for other fire consultants.
We have also seen examples where Awwal Salisu’s signature has been used to sign off peer reviews, ostensibly undertaken by Tri Fire, of other consultants reports.
Whilst the quality of inspection work undertaken in these instances is not known, it cannot be assumed that only reports issued by Tri Fire are affected by Adam Kiziak’s expulsion by the IFE.
Tri Fire Engineer Expelled - How We Can Help
We understand the significant concerns and uncertainty this situation creates for building owners and occupiers. Recent reports include the news that major banks are now refusing to lend on properties reported on by TriFire.
To address these issues, we offer the following support :
Independent Assessment of EWS1 Forms or FRAEWs
Our team of accredited fire engineers can review any EWS1 form or FRAEW report that may be of concern. We ensure assessments are completed to the highest professional standards, offering transparency and reliability.
However, in respect to any documentation issued by Mr. Kiziak or TriFire, due to the IFE findings any work produced by him cannot be relied upon and will have to be recommissioned.
Verification of Fire Safety Assessments
If you suspect your building’s fire safety assessment may be compromised, we provide a thorough re-evaluation. This includes a detailed report confirming compliance with current fire safety regulations and identifying any deficiencies.
Legal and Regulatory Guidance
We can connect you with legal experts specializing in fire safety compliance and property regulations. They will help determine whether compensation or remedial actions are warranted based on faulty or fraudulent EWS1 forms or FRAEW reports.
Stakeholder Communication Support
We can assist building owners in communicating with lenders, insurers, and residents about the implications of invalid or fraudulent EWS1 forms or FRAEW reports. Clear and proactive communication is critical to maintaining trust and mitigating concerns.
Our goal is to ensure buildings are assessed safely and accurately, giving all stakeholders the confidence and clarity they need in addressing this matter.
Tri Fire Engineer Expelled - Conclusion
Adam Kiziak, the Tri Fire Engineer expelled by the IFE highlights serious failures in fire safety assessments that could have widespread consequences for property owners.
We specialize in FRAEW surveys and EWS1 certificates, ensuring compliance with PAS9980 and fire safety regulations.
With offices in London, Birmingham , Manchester, Bristol, Norwich & Plymouth we provide FRAEW surveys and EWS1 certificates for sites all around the UK.
If you are affected by Adam Kiziak, the Tri Fire Engineer who has been expelled, contact us for expert guidance and reliable fire risk assessments
For more information on fraudulent EWS1 forms, see our previous article. Also see our FAQs on the EWS1 process.
For further information on teh expulsion of Tri Fire by the IFE, or for help with an FRAEW or EWS1 survey please call our Enquiry line on 020 4534 3130.
To book a call back from a member of the team, please fill in our Contact Us form.
For further help or advice please contact :
Sarah Taylor
Business Support Manager
Building Surveying
London