UPDATE: Cigarettes warning after fire damages home

Dorset Echo: BLAZE: The property in Knowle Hill, Wool  Picture: FINNBARR WEBSTER BLAZE: The property in Knowle Hill, Wool Picture: FINNBARR WEBSTER

A FAMILY home was ravaged in a fire started by a cigarette.

Firefighters from Wareham and Bere Regis were called to the major blaze in Wool in the early hours of this morning.

A resident at the property in Knowle Hill was treated for smoke inhalation.

Crews remained on scene until 6am damping down.

The fire is believed to have started in an extension of the house which was destroyed in the blaze. The rest of the house suffered serious smoke damage.

On the eve of No Smoking Day, firefighters are warning people of the dangers posed by cigarettes.

A Fire and Emergency Support Service, run by British Red Cross volunteers, also arrived at the scene to assist the five people in the house at the time.

A spokesperson for Synergy Housing, which owns and manages the house, said: “We’re aware a fire broke out at one of our Wool properties during the early hours of Tuesday morning.

“We understand the fire may have started in the adjoining outhouse and the occupants were not seriously harmed.

“However, due to smoke and structural damage, the occupants are being moved to alternative accommodation until their home is fully habitable again.

“As the incident is being investigated by the local fire service, it would be inappropriate to comment further on the cause of the fire at this time.”

Phil Head, group manager at Dorset Fire and Rescue Service, said: “We believe this fire was caused by carelessly discarded smoking materials.

“The message to all smokers, especially on No Smoking Day which is on Wednesday, is to ensure that you have fully extinguished your cigarettes or tobacco before you leave the room or are in danger of falling asleep.”

He added: “It’s also a timely message for friends, family and neighbours to look out for people who might be vulnerable – and give us a call for a free home fire safety check where we will advise you on a range of things including smoking safety.”

No Smoking Day, which is being recognised tomorrow, is an annual health awareness campaign run by the British Heart Foundation.

The campaign helps smokers who want to quit by creating a supportive environment, and by highlighting the sources of help and advice available.

For more information visit www.nosmokingday.org.uk

Comments (13)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:55pm Tue 11 Mar 14

Peter6 says...

Good reason to ban Smoking or charge Smokers more on home insurance.
Good reason to ban Smoking or charge Smokers more on home insurance. Peter6
  • Score: 1

1:06pm Tue 11 Mar 14

Dorsetdumpling says...

Peter6 wrote:
Good reason to ban Smoking or charge Smokers more on home insurance.
Ah yes! - good to see the Echo Comments tradition of kicking the victim when they're down is still going strong.

Incidentally, if the house suffered 100% damage, do we really need to report that the room the fire started in also suffered 100% damage?
[quote][p][bold]Peter6[/bold] wrote: Good reason to ban Smoking or charge Smokers more on home insurance.[/p][/quote]Ah yes! - good to see the Echo Comments tradition of kicking the victim when they're down is still going strong. Incidentally, if the house suffered 100% damage, do we really need to report that the room the fire started in also suffered 100% damage? Dorsetdumpling
  • Score: 0

2:11pm Tue 11 Mar 14

IDONTKNOWIFITISTRRUE says...

Dorsetdumpling says...Incidentally, if the house suffered 100% damage, do we really need to report that the room the fire started in also suffered 100% damage?
Do you really expect Echo reporters to know how to find out the total number of rooms in the house, subtract one (the room that the fire started) and work that out as a percentage.
Sometimes they have problems with English spelling and grammar and now you expect them to be mathematicians (:o))
Dorsetdumpling says...Incidentally, if the house suffered 100% damage, do we really need to report that the room the fire started in also suffered 100% damage? Do you really expect Echo reporters to know how to find out the total number of rooms in the house, subtract one (the room that the fire started) and work that out as a percentage. Sometimes they have problems with English spelling and grammar and now you expect them to be mathematicians (:o)) IDONTKNOWIFITISTRRUE
  • Score: -2

2:16pm Tue 11 Mar 14

Kbear3 says...

Absolute speculation! Typical journalist can't get any information from anyone so makes up there own nonsense and as for PETER6 get off your high horse until you know the facts, disgraceful!
Absolute speculation! Typical journalist can't get any information from anyone so makes up there own nonsense and as for PETER6 get off your high horse until you know the facts, disgraceful! Kbear3
  • Score: 1

2:17pm Tue 11 Mar 14

kerryamawi says...

this is all hearsay, the fire brigade have not given a reason for the fire has yet this is a false accusation so this report should not have been printed .
this is all hearsay, the fire brigade have not given a reason for the fire has yet this is a false accusation so this report should not have been printed . kerryamawi
  • Score: -4

2:19pm Tue 11 Mar 14

Shannondavin96x says...

Some people have nothing better to do than comment on other peoples lives when it was just amused it was from a cigarette.. The family has not be told it was caused by a cigarette.
Some people have nothing better to do than comment on other peoples lives when it was just amused it was from a cigarette.. The family has not be told it was caused by a cigarette. Shannondavin96x
  • Score: -5

3:30pm Tue 11 Mar 14

JackJohnson says...

kerryamawi wrote:
this is all hearsay, the fire brigade have not given a reason for the fire has yet this is a false accusation so this report should not have been printed .
The story is on the Dorset Fire and Rescue web site. They give the cause as 'smoking materials' so it's reasonable to assume that if smoking were to be banned there would have been no (legal) smoking materials in the property to start a fire.

Also, Dorset Fire and Rescue say that there was 100% fire damage to the room the fire started in and 100% smoke and heat damage to the rest of the property. So a little more clarity.

Perhaps the reporters need to use a little more care when plagiarising stories.
[quote][p][bold]kerryamawi[/bold] wrote: this is all hearsay, the fire brigade have not given a reason for the fire has yet this is a false accusation so this report should not have been printed .[/p][/quote]The story is on the Dorset Fire and Rescue web site. They give the cause as 'smoking materials' so it's reasonable to assume that if smoking were to be banned there would have been no (legal) smoking materials in the property to start a fire. Also, Dorset Fire and Rescue say that there was 100% fire damage to the room the fire started in and 100% smoke and heat damage to the rest of the property. So a little more clarity. Perhaps the reporters need to use a little more care when plagiarising stories. JackJohnson
  • Score: 9

4:35pm Tue 11 Mar 14

shy talk says...

Peter6 wrote:
Good reason to ban Smoking or charge Smokers more on home insurance.
Insurance companies do charge higher premiums if you declare there are smokers in the household. Thankfully nobody was hurt and I hope they get everything sorted out.
[quote][p][bold]Peter6[/bold] wrote: Good reason to ban Smoking or charge Smokers more on home insurance.[/p][/quote]Insurance companies do charge higher premiums if you declare there are smokers in the household. Thankfully nobody was hurt and I hope they get everything sorted out. shy talk
  • Score: 5

5:21pm Tue 11 Mar 14

westbaywonder says...

Peter6,
Non smoker and Human rights for vegetables activist!
Sit down have a spliff and get a life man! LOL.
Peter6, Non smoker and Human rights for vegetables activist! Sit down have a spliff and get a life man! LOL. westbaywonder
  • Score: 2

5:43pm Tue 11 Mar 14

JackJohnson says...

I think they need to proof-read their copy before publishing too.

“As the incident is being investigated by the local fire service, it would not be inappropriate to comment further on the cause of the fire at this time.”
I think they need to proof-read their copy before publishing too. “As the incident is being investigated by the local fire service, it would not be inappropriate to comment further on the cause of the fire at this time.” JackJohnson
  • Score: 5

11:24pm Tue 11 Mar 14

babaswim says...

Isn't it time to treat council / social housing the same way as pubs went?
NO smoking - if you want to smoke go out side
Isn't it time to treat council / social housing the same way as pubs went? NO smoking - if you want to smoke go out side babaswim
  • Score: -1

11:25am Wed 12 Mar 14

JackJohnson says...

babaswim wrote:
Isn't it time to treat council / social housing the same way as pubs went?
NO smoking - if you want to smoke go out side
I can see the point, but given that there'd still be smoking materials around, and plenty of other inflammable materials in almost every home, that the reduction in household fires probably wouldn't be noticeable. In fact, the opposite might even happen. People who smoke outside putting their smoking materials in places where they're out of sight - garages, gas/electric cupboards etc so smouldering isn't noticed until it has turned into a serious fire.

Also, how would it be policed?
[quote][p][bold]babaswim[/bold] wrote: Isn't it time to treat council / social housing the same way as pubs went? NO smoking - if you want to smoke go out side[/p][/quote]I can see the point, but given that there'd still be smoking materials around, and plenty of other inflammable materials in almost every home, that the reduction in household fires probably wouldn't be noticeable. In fact, the opposite might even happen. People who smoke outside putting their smoking materials in places where they're out of sight - garages, gas/electric cupboards etc so smouldering isn't noticed until it has turned into a serious fire. Also, how would it be policed? JackJohnson
  • Score: 0

12:40pm Wed 12 Mar 14

elloello1980 says...

westbaywonder wrote:
Peter6, Non smoker and Human rights for vegetables activist! Sit down have a spliff and get a life man! LOL.
"human rights for vegetables"

PMSL (as they say)
[quote][p][bold]westbaywonder[/bold] wrote: Peter6, Non smoker and Human rights for vegetables activist! Sit down have a spliff and get a life man! LOL.[/p][/quote]"human rights for vegetables" PMSL (as they say) elloello1980
  • Score: -1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree