The need for duct cleaning:

 

The build-up of grease and fat deposits in commercial kitchens is a serious fire risk and if kitchen duct cleaning is not carried out regularly your insurance may be invalid.  In fact, it is now a requirement of insurance companies that all grease extraction plant and ducting is cleaned frequently by an accredited specialist company.

 

 

your cleaning work should be planned around the level of use: Heavy use (12-16 hours per day) - clean every three months. Moderate use (6-12 hours per day) - clean every six months.

 

 

 

Industry standards for duct cleaning:

 

• • The industry standard for grease extraction systems encompasses canopies, fans, filters and ducting is set by The Heating and Ventilating Contractors’ Association (HVCA).  Its best practice guide, TR/19, Part 7 sets out

• • The level of contamination that is allowed before a complete clean is required

• • The required post-clean measurement

 

A recommendation of the frequency of cleans necessary, based on usage, so that a kitchen that is subject to:

• • light use (between two and six hours each day) should deep clean ducts and extraction systems every twelve months.

• • medium-use kitchens (used between six and twelve hours each day) duct cleaning should take place every six months and kitchens that are subjected to heavy use (between twelve and sixteen hours each day) should clean their vents every three months.

Contact us today if you would like to find out more about Extract Compliance specialist commercial kitchen duct cleaning services. We use the most technologically advanced equipment for efficiency and effective cleaning to maintain the highest standards, so you, your staff and your business are protected.

​

​

​

Legislation

​

Food Safety

 

Under food safety legislation, namely the Food Safety (General Food Hygiene) Regulations 1995, it is the legal duty of the operator of a food business to maintain food equipment and premises in a clean condition.

 

 

Fire Safety

 

The introductory of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 has created the legal requirement for all buildings to have a Fire Risk Assessment undertaken. To comply with the legislation, any identified fire hazard must be removed, controlled or minimized where possible.

The order is designed to provide a minimum fire safety standard in all non-domestic premises including parts of premises used for the purposes of an employer’s undertaking, which is made available to employees as a place of work, and used in connection with the carrying of a trade, business or other undertakings, for-profit or not, with a few exceptions. If it is a workplace it designates the employer, if he/she has to some extent control, the Responsible Person (RP). If any other person has to some extent control then they could have duties under the order. If it is not a workplace then any person having the control to some extent or the owner and can be designated as the Responsible Person. Those persons or a person acting on their behalf, are required to carry out certain fire safety duties which include ensuring the general fire precautions are satisfactory and conducting a fire risk assessment.

 

 

Health & Safety

 

Under the provisions of the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974, it is the responsibility of the employer to ensure the health, safety, and welfare of all parties. This includes staff and customers. An absence of adequate control renders the business operator liable to a criminal action. The absence of an effective system for maintaining ventilation extraction systems could readily lead to fire and subsequent injury or death of either building occupants or of third parties such as fire officers. Any such event would be likely to result in legal action under the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974.

 

 

Corporate Manslaughter

 

The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 is a landmark in law. For the first time, companies and organizations can be found guilty of corporate manslaughter as a result of serious management failures resulting in a gross breach of a duty of care.

 

 

Civil Liability

 

The management team should be aware that if a property insurer can show that the systems employed to protect an installation were inadequate and this led to the loss of all or part of a building, any claim can be disputed. Where the company loses a criminal case, any civil claim will inevitably fail as, under civil law, the burden of proof is on the balance of probabilities rather than beyond all reasonable doubt

​

​

​

​