The most common fire door defects, and how to record them properly

Look across enough fire door checks from unrelated buildings and, much like fire risk assessment actions, the same handful of defects keep reappearing. Knowing the common patterns in advance makes them faster to spot, and recording them properly is what actually stops them becoming a repeat finding.

The self-closer that doesn't quite close

Probably the single most common defect: a self-closing device that gets the door most of the way shut but doesn't fully close and latch, especially from a wide-open position. This often develops gradually as the closer's mechanism wears, rather than failing suddenly, which is exactly why it's easy to miss on a casual glance.

Doors wedged or propped open

Less a mechanical fault than a behavioural one — a door deliberately held open for ventilation, convenience during a delivery, or because a closer feels too stiff. The fix here is often as much about addressing why the door is being propped as it is about removing the wedge, because the same wedge tends to reappear within days if the underlying reason isn't dealt with.

Damaged or missing intumescent seals

Seals can be damaged by repeated impact, painted over in a way that affects their function, or simply removed and not replaced after other work on the door. A door can look entirely normal with a compromised seal — this is exactly the kind of defect a routine, hands-on check catches and a passing glance doesn't.

Unauthorised holes and fixtures

Cable runs drilled straight through a fire door, a hook or fixture screwed in without regard for the door's fire-rated construction, or a vision panel added without appropriate fire-rated glazing all compromise a door's performance in ways that aren't always visually dramatic.

• –Self-closer not fully closing and latching the door, especially from a wide-open position
• –Door wedged or propped open for convenience, ventilation or during deliveries
• –Damaged, missing or painted-over intumescent seals
• –Unauthorised holes, cable runs or fixtures compromising the door's fire-rated construction
• –Gaps around the door outside the manufacturer's specified tolerance
• –Signage missing, damaged or obscured where it's required

Recording a defect properly, not just noting it

A defect record that just says "door needs attention" is nearly useless a month later. A useful record notes the specific defect, its location on the door, a photo where practical, the date found, and — critically — the date and evidence of resolution once it's fixed. Without that last part, there's no way to distinguish a defect that's genuinely closed from one that's simply been forgotten about.

This is the same discipline that applies across fire risk assessment actions generally — a fix that isn't evidenced tends to get treated, fairly or not, the same as a fix that never happened. On a portfolio with hundreds of doors, recording each defect against its specific door, with photo evidence and a genuine close-out date, is what separates a register that's actually useful from one that's just a list of past problems nobody can confirm were solved.

Recording the defect and recording the cause

"Door does not latch" is a record of a symptom. It might be a worn closer, a dropped hinge, a swollen leaf, a misaligned keep or a floor covering raised at the threshold, and each carries a different fix and a different likelihood of recurrence. A record that captures only the symptom produces a repair that addresses whatever the attending person judged it to be, with no way afterwards to tell whether that judgement was right.

The practical improvement is small: record what was observed, what was judged to be causing it, and what was done. When the same door appears again six months later, that record is the difference between a second adjustment and someone asking why this door keeps doing this.

Common mistakes

• –Recording the symptom without the assessed cause
• –No photograph where the defect is visual
• –Defect recorded against a location rather than a uniquely identified door
• –No link between the defect and the remedial work that followed
• –Repeat defects on one door never identified as repeats
• –Free-text descriptions that cannot be searched or compared