TPS Passive Fire Solutions

In New Zealand, the building owner is ultimately responsible for maintaining passive fire protection – the fire-rated walls, floors, doors and penetration seals that contain fire spread. Where these are specified systems on the building’s compliance schedule, they must be inspected and maintained to keep the Building Warrant of Fitness current, and the owner signs the annual declaration. In practice, day-to-day responsibility is often delegated to property or facilities managers, and tenancy fit-outs are a common failure point – every new cable or pipe through a fire-rated wall needs correctly reinstated firestopping, which tenants’ contractors frequently miss. If you can’t say with confidence when your building’s passive fire systems were last surveyed, that’s the place to start. TPS surveys, documents and remediates passive fire systems, providing the register, marked plans and PS3 producer statements owners need. So you can rest assured that the service TPS provides is totally complete, fully compliant and always up to date.

Passive fire protection and active fire protection do different jobs, and a building needs both. Passive fire protection is built into the structure to contain a fire and slow its spread without anyone doing anything – fire-rated walls and floors, fire doors, and firestopping that seals the gaps where pipes and cables pass through fire-rated barriers. It buys time for people to escape and for fire services to respond. Active fire protection is the equipment that detects and fights fire – alarms, sprinklers, hydrants, extinguishers – which acts when fire occurs. The simple distinction: passive systems are static barriers that contain fire; active systems are devices that respond to it. Both are usually specified systems on a building’s compliance schedule and must be maintained for the Building Warrant of Fitness. TPS surveys, documents and remediates passive fire systems – the containment side that is most often neglected.

A passive fire survey inspects the systems that stop fire spreading through a building: fire-rated walls and floors, fire doors and hardware, and – the most common problem area – penetrations where pipes and cables pass through fire-rated elements. The surveyor documents each defect with location, photos and severity, producing a register and marked plans that become your remediation roadmap and compliance evidence. A building needs one when: it has never been surveyed, after tenancy fit-outs or services alterations, when buying or selling, when the BWoF process raises questions, or when insurers ask for evidence. Without a survey you’re declaring compliance annually on systems nobody has actually looked at. TPS conducts passive fire surveys and manages remediation through to completion, including PS3 documentation.

A PS3 producer statement is a formal document used in New Zealand building work in which the contractor who carried out the construction (here, the passive fire installation or remediation) certifies that the work was completed in accordance with the approved design and specifications. For passive fire, a PS3 provides documented evidence that firestopping, fire-rated penetrations or fire-rated elements were installed correctly by a competent installer – evidence that owners, councils and the building’s compliance regime rely on to demonstrate the systems will perform as intended. It is part of the paper trail that supports the Building Warrant of Fitness and reassures owners and insurers that passive fire work is not just done, but verifiably done right. This is general guidance, not legal or compliance advice. TPS provides PS3 producer statements for the passive fire work it completes, alongside registers and marked-up plans.

Every fit-out punches holes in fire-rated walls and floors – for power, data, plumbing and ventilation – and each penetration must be re-sealed with a tested firestopping system, not just any sealant. In practice, fit-out programmes run tight, multiple subcontractors each make their own penetrations, and reinstatement is missed or done with non-compliant products. The result: a building that passed its last survey quietly loses its fire separations, and the owner is declaring compliance on systems that no longer perform. The fix is process: survey after every significant fit-out, require firestopping evidence (product, location, installer) from tenancy works, and remediate defects with documented systems. TPS provides post-fit-out passive fire surveys and certified remediation with PS3 producer statements.

Passive fire systems that appear on a building’s compliance schedule – typically fire doors and other fire separation elements, depending on how the schedule is written – must be inspected and maintained for the annual Building Warrant of Fitness. The owner’s annual declaration states these systems have been maintained per the schedule; inspection records and certificates are the evidence behind it. The risk for owners is that passive fire is the least visible compliance item: an alarm fault announces itself, but a missing fire-stop behind a ceiling tile doesn’t. If your BWoF file is thin on passive fire evidence, commission a survey rather than waiting for an audit, insurer or fire engineer to find the gap. TPS provides the survey, remediation, register, marked plans and documentation that support BWoF compliance.

The cost of passive fire remediation is driven mainly by the number and type of defects found, the building’s size and complexity, access to the affected areas (ceilings, risers, service penetrations), the fire ratings required, and how much investigation and documentation is needed. A handful of incorrectly sealed penetrations is a modest job; a building with widespread firestopping failures from years of uncontrolled fit-out work is a much larger programme. Cost is also affected by whether the work is reactive (after a failed inspection) or planned and staged. The honest framing: remediation cost reflects how long passive fire has been neglected, which is why surveying and fixing issues progressively is cheaper than a crisis fix before a BWoF deadline. TPS scopes passive fire remediation from a survey, prioritises by risk, and can stage the work to manage budget.

A failed passive fire inspection isn’t unusual – most older commercial buildings, and many newer ones after years of fit-outs, have defects. The sensible sequence: get the findings documented as a register with locations, severity and photos; triage by risk (defects in egress paths and between tenancies first); plan remediation in stages your budget can absorb, prioritised by a competent contractor or fire engineer; and keep the documentation trail, because staged remediation with evidence shows a responsible owner, whereas ignored findings create serious liability if there’s ever a fire. Get remediation quoted with PS3 producer statements included, so the work itself becomes compliance evidence. TPS manages this full sequence – survey, prioritised remediation plan, certified work and documentation.

In New Zealand, fire doors in commercial buildings should be inspected regularly – commonly at least annually as part of the building’s compliance schedule and Building Warrant of Fitness process, where fire doors are specified systems – and many building owners inspect more frequently in high-traffic or higher-risk buildings. Fire doors are a critical passive fire element: they only contain fire if they actually close and seal properly, yet they are routinely compromised by being wedged open, damaged, painted over, or fitted with the wrong hardware. Inspection checks the door, frame, seals, gaps, hardware and closing function against its fire rating. Because fire doors are easy to defeat in daily use, regular inspection and prompt fixing matters. This is general guidance, not legal advice. TPS inspects, documents and remediates fire doors as part of passive fire surveys, with the records owners need for compliance.

Building owners should keep a documented trail that proves their fire systems – passive and active – are compliant and maintained. For passive fire this typically includes: a passive fire register identifying the rated elements and penetrations, marked-up plans showing their locations, survey and inspection reports, PS3 producer statements for installed or remediated work, and records of any defects and their remediation. More broadly, the building’s compliance schedule and annual Building Warrant of Fitness (with the supporting IQP records) tie it together. Good records matter because they are what councils, insurers and incoming owners or tenants rely on, and what protects you if a fire occurs – undocumented systems are treated as unverified. Keeping records current also makes each annual cycle cheaper. This is general guidance, not legal advice. TPS provides the registers, marked plans, reports and PS3s that make up a defensible passive fire record.

Choosing a passive fire contractor in New Zealand comes down to verifiable competence and documentation, because this is life-safety work that must perform in a fire. Look for: demonstrated passive fire expertise and trained installers, the ability to issue PS3 producer statements for completed work, familiarity with the Building Warrant of Fitness and compliance schedule process, use of tested and approved fire-rated systems installed to the manufacturer’s specification, and proper documentation (registers, marked plans, reports). Ask for evidence of similar commercial work and the qualifications of the people doing it – passive fire is frequently done badly by general trades who do not understand fire-rating requirements. The right contractor surveys, documents and remediates to a verifiable standard, not just visually. TPS provides surveying, remediation and PS3-backed documentation for commercial passive fire. Our complete service also means better integration between trades and passive fire considerations when work is conducted.

Yes – in practice, insurance for commercial buildings generally requires that fire protection systems, including passive fire, are maintained and compliant, and an insurer can question or reduce a claim if maintenance and documentation are inadequate. Most commercial policies expect the building to meet its legal compliance obligations (which include maintaining specified fire systems for the Building Warrant of Fitness), and many ask about fire protection and maintenance at underwriting. If a fire spreads further or faster because passive fire systems were defective or undocumented, that becomes a problem at claim time. The practical implication: maintaining and documenting passive fire is not just a compliance task, it protects your insurance position. Always check your specific policy wording – this is general information, not insurance or legal advice. TPS keeps passive fire systems maintained and documented, giving owners the evidence insurers expect.