Grand Park Avenue Hotel In Bangkok Had No Fire Exits, Safety Features: Panel

[webfact]

HOTEL BLAZE

Hotel had no fire exits, safety features: panel

JESSADA CHUNTRARUK

THE NATION

The fire-damaged Grand Park Avenue Hotel in Bangkok's Sukhumvit Soi 22 was found to have neither fire exits nor a smoke blocking system.

BANGKOK: -- Side windows in the hotel rooms of the dead Russian tourists were locked and could not let smoke out, according to the initial findings of a committee.Two guests died in the blaze and 20 other people were hurt.

Another building that was damaged in a blaze recently - Fico Place on Asoke Road - was found to have no sprinklers and to have illegally modified areas to add more office space. As a result, fire escapes were hard to find in an emergency.

The nearby GMM Grammy building, however, was praised as a good example for safety with efficient security systems, including workable sprinklers and three fire escape ladders.

These were the initial findings yesterday by the Bangkok Council-assigned special committee, led by Kitjapol Cherchoosakul, which was checking on safety measures in high-rise buildings. The panel was accompanied by deputy city police chief Major-General Wichai Sangprapai and Klong Toei district director Wiparat Chaiyanukit on an inspection of the hotel's fire scene on the fifth floor and its general safety measures.

Kitjapol said the hotel had modified a part of the building and had no smoke blocking system. The result was smoke billowed through pipes to upper floors, causing people to choke.

Side windows in the Russians' room were locked shut, containing the smoke. Bangkok Metropolitan Administration public works officials will also inspect how fire alarms and emergency lighting systems performed during fire. The Klong Toei District Office would inspect adherence to other safety measures in accordance with the Building Control Act, Kitjapol said.

Police have notified the hotel about the illegal modification charges according to the Building Control Act, as reported by the Klong Toei District Office. After completing interviews of witnesses, they will summon the hotel's owner to hear the charges next week.

-- The Nation 2012-03-15

[RedNIvar]

I hope this incident will result in an improved safety standard in all buildings. I know, I know, wishful thinking.

The owners of the hotel will get a slap on the wrist, and a 60,000 bhat fine.

[Soupdragon]

I hope this incident will result in an improved safety standard in all buildings. I know, I know, wishful thinking.

The owners of the hotel will get a slap on the wrist, and a 60,000 baht fine.

This will happen when the authorities develop foresight.

Look over there, the pigs are flying again.

[beano2274]

Why are there no periodic checks carried out by the authorities? Surely this is their job!!!!

[monty1412]

while we all can lament about the fact that safety standards can be set yet the execution and observance of them in Thailand will not happen there is I believe a moral and legal onus on tour operators and hotel booking sites to ensure that paying clients are not put in potential harms way.

My belief is that websites such as Agoda have a duty of care to specify if a hotel has met and enforced minimum fire and electrical safety standards. If this has not happened then their should be very specific warning to the potential customer that this residence has not complied with minimum safety standards or wording to that effect.

Not only in this way would Agoda be protecting their butt but it would also force change amongst the hoteliers and encourage the right behaviours.

While it is a valid question to ask should these internet hotel booking sites effectively act as a watchdog , to my thinking they should not be advertising or making profit from hotels and rental accommodation that does not meet minimum safety standards and thus potentially putting their customers in harms way.

Their is duty of care involved here in recommending and selling accommodation.

It would be interesting to pose the question to a web portal such as Agoda and see what the answer back is... might just have to do that.

Unfortunately as we are all aware unless their is some fiscal penalty that goes beyond a bribe to the local inspector most of the local hotels and guesthouses will not comply with safety standards. There was a post in another thread were an OP reported that the fire sprinklers were actually stick on's on the room ceiling.

[beano2274]

Seems someone is posting about it on such websites

Here from tripadvisor

Edited March 15, 2012 by Scott
Commercial link edited out

[Reasonableman]

Seems someone is posting about it on such websites

Here from tripadvisor

Should it not be removed from TA until cleared for further use as a hotel? Assuming it has suspended operations, including advance bookings...

Edited March 15, 2012 by Scott
Commercial link edited out

[beano2274]

Seems someone is posting about it on such websites

Here from tripadvisor

http://www.tripadvis...ok-Bangkok.html

Should it not be removed from TA until cleared for further use as a hotel? Assuming it has suspended operations, including advance bookings...

Do not assume that it has suspended operations, that would mean someone losing money.

It is not showing up on websites for booking of rooms which is quite good

Edited March 15, 2012 by beano2274

[lovetotravel]

while we all can lament about the fact that safety standards can be set yet the execution and observance of them in Thailand will not happen there is I believe a moral and legal onus on tour operators and hotel booking sites to ensure that paying clients are not put in potential harms way.

My belief is that websites such as Agoda have a duty of care to specify if a hotel has met and enforced minimum fire and electrical safety standards. If this has not happened then their should be very specific warning to the potential customer that this residence has not complied with minimum safety standards or wording to that effect.

Not only in this way would Agoda be protecting their butt but it would also force change amongst the hoteliers and encourage the right behaviours.

While it is a valid question to ask should these internet hotel booking sites effectively act as a watchdog , to my thinking they should not be advertising or making profit from hotels and rental accommodation that does not meet minimum safety standards and thus potentially putting their customers in harms way.

Their is duty of care involved here in recommending and selling accommodation.

It would be interesting to pose the question to a web portal such as Agoda and see what the answer back is... might just have to do that.

Unfortunately as we are all aware unless their is some fiscal penalty that goes beyond a bribe to the local inspector most of the local hotels and guesthouses will not comply with safety standards. There was a post in another thread were an OP reported that the fire sprinklers were actually stick on's on the room ceiling.

Great idea, but due to defamation laws here, probably won't happen. One reason they are so careful here on TV. Even if sued, and you win, you can still lose financially. It's a really big deal here and the laws need to be reformed. Until then, people are hesitant to speak up.

[monty1412]

Seems someone is posting about it on such websites

Here from tripadvisor

I like what Im reading here... all good....

Edited March 15, 2012 by Scott
commercial link edited out

[monty1412]

while we all can lament about the fact that safety standards can be set yet the execution and observance of them in Thailand will not happen there is I believe a moral and legal onus on tour operators and hotel booking sites to ensure that paying clients are not put in potential harms way.

My belief is that websites such as Agoda have a duty of care to specify if a hotel has met and enforced minimum fire and electrical safety standards. If this has not happened then their should be very specific warning to the potential customer that this residence has not complied with minimum safety standards or wording to that effect.

Not only in this way would Agoda be protecting their butt but it would also force change amongst the hoteliers and encourage the right behaviours.

While it is a valid question to ask should these internet hotel booking sites effectively act as a watchdog , to my thinking they should not be advertising or making profit from hotels and rental accommodation that does not meet minimum safety standards and thus potentially putting their customers in harms way.

Their is duty of care involved here in recommending and selling accommodation.

It would be interesting to pose the question to a web portal such as Agoda and see what the answer back is... might just have to do that.

Unfortunately as we are all aware unless their is some fiscal penalty that goes beyond a bribe to the local inspector most of the local hotels and guesthouses will not comply with safety standards. There was a post in another thread were an OP reported that the fire sprinklers were actually stick on's on the room ceiling.

Great idea, but due to defamation laws here, probably won't happen. One reason they are so careful here on TV. Even if sued, and you win, you can still lose financially. It's a really big deal here and the laws need to be reformed. Until then, people are hesitant to speak up.

Like to understand this more... are you saying that a travel advisory/. booking portal could say post in a safety section on the site and relevant to each and every hotel you click on that a certain hotel does not meet min safety or fire standards etc and the owners of that hotel could sue them for defamation assuming the statement was correct i.e the hotel did not meet min saftey standards . Interested to understand this

[noitom]

This sounds like a case of "negligence" and manslaughter, according to the news reports so far. The Thai tourism police will be coming around soon to the Russian embassy and the demanding that the newspapers and government extoll the safety of "most" hotels.

[lovetotravel]

Like to understand this more... are you saying that a travel advisory/. booking portal could say post in a safety section on the site and relevant to each and every hotel you click on that a certain hotel does not meet min safety or fire standards etc and the owners of that hotel could sue them for defamation assuming the statement was correct i.e the hotel did not meet min saftey standards . Interested to understand this

Yes, for a variety of reasons. One of which is corruption. If it's owned by a wealthy Thai person, they can make your life a living h---. The other is, how would this site determine such safety standards? That can only really be done by government organizations. Right? So if they say a hotel is not up to snuff, and the government organizations says it is (even if it isn't), instant lawsuit.

Net: it's a real mess here and you have to be careful what you say. Especially publicly. One reason you sometimes only see vague references to people being investigated in the newspapers. Like, "We're looking into a person whose first name begins with "K".

[monty1412]

Just sent this to agoda.. I will be very interested in their response. Agoda are NASDAQ listed and part of Priceline but also have disclaimer that any/ all legal action is under jurisdiction of their Singapore company and hence subject to singapore laws.

Not picking on or trying to spotlight agoda.. could have been any travel website however I use them allot and quite favour them.

Of course this is a can or worms in itself .. is a travel agent responsible for ensuring that an airline meets all FAA standards and would they be liable for legal action of the plane went down.. answer is of course no as their is global safety standard and I believe all IATA registered travel agents are required only to book and recommend airlines that have FAA approvals. So this industry is regulated and enforced.

Does a restaurant review website have liability in the case of a visit to a recommended restaurant and a subsequent case of food poisoning.. obviously not unless the reviewers also suffered the same fate.

However in the case of accommodation ( hotels/ motels) and websites such as Agoda and others its a different story... they are via their site and via their charging structure of the various hotels and accommodations effectively recommending different hotels and receiving financial incentive to do so. Additionally it is well recognised that the fire code/ safety requirements across allot of Asia are not being adhered to and as such my laymans feeling is that they do have Duty of Care to ascertain if a certain hotel does comply with all relevant building safety codes.

Not trying to slam the travel and hotel booking websites but certainly the recent fire and revelations ( or perhaps not) re the potential non adherence to fire codes does raise the question for us travellers.. is this hotel safe to stay in

Dear Agoda, as a frequent user of your site i would like to understand what Duty of Care responsibility you take to ensure that hotels that are advertised and promoted on your site comply with minimum local safety standards as it pertains to fire codes and appropriate fire safety equipment. The recent hotel fire in Bangkok in Soi 22 makes this relevant in terms of understanding what steps you take in qualifying hotels and other accommodation modes as to their minimum safety adherence.

Kindest regards

[monty1412]

Like to understand this more... are you saying that a travel advisory/. booking portal could say post in a safety section on the site and relevant to each and every hotel you click on that a certain hotel does not meet min safety or fire standards etc and the owners of that hotel could sue them for defamation assuming the statement was correct i.e the hotel did not meet min saftey standards . Interested to understand this

Yes, for a variety of reasons. One of which is corruption. If it's owned by a wealthy Thai person, they can make your life a living h---. The other is, how would this site determine such safety standards? That can only really be done by government organizations. Right? So if they say a hotel is not up to snuff, and the government organizations says it is (even if it isn't), instant lawsuit.

Net: it's a real mess here and you have to be careful what you say. Especially publicly. One reason you sometimes only see vague references to people being investigated in the newspapers. Like, "We're looking into a person whose first name begins with "K".

LtT.. not sure it would be that much of a issue re a site determining safety standards.. simple part of contractual agreement with hotel or residence as part of the sign up papers would be that hotel ticks a box and provides certificate that they meet and comply with all relevant building and fire safety codes. No expectation for the site to act as inspector/ policeman on this rather simply get assurance from said lodgings that they comply.

Of course it would a brave new world where a travel site actually employs staff to inspect hotels and look at their aircon cooling towers for legionella, room condensers for black mold, fire sprinklers and fire exits etc etc.

[DocN]

Sorry to say, but...surprise, surprise...

[Misterwhisper]

And what's the ridiculous penalty prescribed for such blatant disregard for the building safety code? 6 months imprisonment and/OR a maximum fine of 60,000 Baht. Guess what the bigwig owners of the hotel will get away with, if convicted?

[lovetotravel]

LtT.. not sure it would be that much of a issue re a site determining safety standards.. simple part of contractual agreement with hotel or residence as part of the sign up papers would be that hotel ticks a box and provides certificate that they meet and comply with all relevant building and fire safety codes. No expectation for the site to act as inspector/ policeman on this rather simply get assurance from said lodgings that they comply.

Of course it would a brave new world where a travel site actually employs staff to inspect hotels and look at their aircon cooling towers for legionella, room condensers for black mold, fire sprinklers and fire exits etc etc.

Hotels here, as elsewhere, would probably just tick the box they are compliant with everything. I'm still amazed at what that hotel in Chiang Mai got away with last year. Unreal.

In your brave new world, that almost does exist in many Western countries, right? Or at least close to it. My friend use to be a building inspector in the US. They routinely visited places to check on safety standards, just like is done with restaurants back home. But obviously not here.

[monty1412]

LtT.. not sure it would be that much of a issue re a site determining safety standards.. simple part of contractual agreement with hotel or residence as part of the sign up papers would be that hotel ticks a box and provides certificate that they meet and comply with all relevant building and fire safety codes. No expectation for the site to act as inspector/ policeman on this rather simply get assurance from said lodgings that they comply.

Of course it would a brave new world where a travel site actually employs staff to inspect hotels and look at their aircon cooling towers for legionella, room condensers for black mold, fire sprinklers and fire exits etc etc.

Hotels here, as elsewhere, would probably just tick the box they are compliant with everything. I'm still amazed at what that hotel in Chiang Mai got away with last year. Unreal.

In your brave new world, that almost does exist in many Western countries, right? Or at least close to it. My friend use to be a building inspector in the US. They routinely visited places to check on safety standards, just like is done with restaurants back home. But obviously not here.

yes unfortunately all too correct...

[Payboy]

And what's the ridiculous penalty prescribed for such blatant disregard for the building safety code? 6 months imprisonment and/OR a maximum fine of 60,000 Baht. Guess what the bigwig owners of the hotel will get away with, if convicted?

Its going to be much more than that. See the photo, men wearing neckties are involved. That should cost something.

Edited March 15, 2012 by Payboy

[bkk_mike]

But were they actually non-compliant with the safety codes...?

i.e. It's obvious (in hindsight) that the place was apparently a death-trap in the event of a fire, but as it was built before 1992, it wouldn't have had to meet current fire safety codes. The question is really if it met the fire safety codes in place prior to 1992.

Maybe Agoda, etc. could flag when the hotel was built (not renovated), so that pre-1992 hotels could be excluded from your search if you wanted...

[lovetotravel]

I lived in a condo where they retro fitted sprinklers to keep up with the new codes. All buildings should have to do this.

[madjbs]

Booking agents could simply refuse to work with hotels which they deem to be unsafe etc.. They won't though as it would be a lot of extra work for them and currently they don't have much to lose by offering pretty much any hotel anyway.

[Scott]

Posts with links to commercial sites have been deleted or edited.

[mangi1]

I stayed in this hotel on the 6th floor 4 months ago. The Russians in the next room were so drunk they were throwing beer bottles out the window onto the yard and house below. They partied until 3am. I complained and checked out early. Maybe that's why the windows were locked up tight.

[friendphil]

Seems someone is posting about it on such websites

Here from tripadvisor

It looks as if the link that was provided was edited out of this post. I'd have liked to follow it. What's with the editing, guys?

We'll see if this one flies.

AND, I certainly hope Thai authorities learn to conduct inspections, safety checks, etc., in advance of such disasters. This would be way cool.

[simon43]

My belief is that websites such as Agoda have a duty of care to specify if a hotel has met and enforced minimum fire and electrical safety standards

When a hotel registers for listing on a booking web-site such as Agoda, they complete a 'facilities' checklist which - for some online agents - includes indicating whether or not smoke alarms are installed. But as a (small) hotelier who uses many different booking engines, I have never encountered a comprehensive safety checklist that covers items such as:

Fire extinguishers

Sprinkler system

Emergency lighting

Fire escape directions/signs

Electrical safe-T-cut/RCBs

etc

I recently took issue with Booking dot com for listing illegally-built guesthouses at Nai Yang Beach, but the company's response was that they would continue to list them because 'they would be legal soon' ...

Simon

Edited March 16, 2012 by simon43

[khaowong1]

As I recall, there were some posters on here who were lambasting anyone who made any remark about how lax or even negligent Thailand is with their fire and safety codes and inspections. "No fire exits, windows locked shut, fake fire sprinklers glued to the ceiling?" Where are all those Thailand is wonderful posters today?

[chrisinth]

But were they actually non-compliant with the safety codes...?

i.e. It's obvious (in hindsight) that the place was apparently a death-trap in the event of a fire, but as it was built before 1992, it wouldn't have had to meet current fire safety codes. The question is really if it met the fire safety codes in place prior to 1992.

Maybe Agoda, etc. could flag when the hotel was built (not renovated), so that pre-1992 hotels could be excluded from your search if you wanted...

Good point Mike, but even if it was built before the 1992 act, it surely wouldn't be "grandfathered" and should have been upgraded to comply with current regulations.

In my view, both hotel and inspecting body are equally at fault for not ensuring compliance to current regulations.

That said, I have no idea of what the regulations are or who is responsible for enforcing them.

[friendphil]

But were they actually non-compliant with the safety codes...?

i.e. It's obvious (in hindsight) that the place was apparently a death-trap in the event of a fire, but as it was built before 1992, it wouldn't have had to meet current fire safety codes. The question is really if it met the fire safety codes in place prior to 1992.

Maybe Agoda, etc. could flag when the hotel was built (not renovated), so that pre-1992 hotels could be excluded from your search if you wanted...

Good point Mike, but even if it was built before the 1992 act, it surely wouldn't be "grandfathered" and should have been upgraded to comply with current regulations.

In my view, both hotel and inspecting body are equally at fault for not ensuring compliance to current regulations.

That said, I have no idea of what the regulations are or who is responsible for enforcing them.

Does anyone have any idea, including the Thai authorities?