Most Responsible Persons did not choose the signalling path on their fire alarm panel. An installer fitted it, a service contract covered it and for years it quietly worked. Then on 15 December 2025, BT Redcare shut down for good. And the question landed on the desk of whoever signs off on fire safety for the building.
The problem is not that there is no answer to fire alarm monitoring after BT Redcare. There is one, and it is well established. The problem is that the answer was chosen by someone else – an installer, on your behalf, often years ago – while the legal accountability for it stayed with you.
If you are the Responsible Person, and your contractor has already migrated your system, you still need to know what they migrated it to. If they have not, you are sitting on a silent fire alarm: the panel looks fine, the ARC hears nothing, and the first person to discover the gap will be a loss adjuster or an enforcement officer. Either way, your Fire Risk Assessment should have been reviewed by now, and there are six or seven questions you should be able to answer about your replacement monitoring before someone else asks them for you.
What BT Redcare was, briefly
BT Redcare was the trading name for BT’s fire and intruder alarm signalling service, providing the signalling path between a building’s fire alarm panel and an Alarm Receiving Centre, or ARC. The ARC is the 24/7 staffed monitoring station, certificated to BS EN 50518, that pages the fire service and keyholders when an alarm activates. The signalling path is the communication route the signal takes to get there, historically a dedicated BT phone line with end-of-line monitoring.
BT announced the closure on 31 January 2024, and stopped selling new Redcare products at the end of February 2024. The original shutdown date was 1 August 2025, later extended to 15 December 2025. An estimated 100,000 to 120,000 UK properties, fire and intruder systems combined, relied on Redcare products – but what happened at the deadline depended on which product a building was running. The older units on BT Redcare Secure, Classic and GSM stopped working, and had to be replaced with an IP-based alternative or they went dark. The Next Generation Portfolio (NGP) units – the Essential, Advanced and Ultimate ranges – were transferred onto AddSecure’s platform and carried on working as normal, with no hardware swap for the property owner. The closure was driven by the wider PSTN switch-off led by Openreach, which removes all analogue phone lines from the UK network by January 2027. On the replacement side, the two names you will hear most often are CSL DualCom GradeShift Pro and AddSecure, both established alarm signalling providers whose IP and 4G products are now the default across BAFE, NSI and SSAIB registered contractors.
What the BT Redcare closure fire alarm situation means in practice
If your system was on one of the older Redcare products – Secure, Classic or GSM – and it has not been migrated to a replacement, it is no longer sending alarm signals to an ARC. The panel in the cupboard may look identical. The red and green lights may behave normally. But the signalling path to the monitoring centre is no longer there. A fire on a Sunday night would sound the bells in the building and reach no one else.
If your system was on a Next Generation Portfolio (NGP) unit, the picture is different. Those units transferred to AddSecure’s platform when Redcare closed and should still be signalling, with no hardware swap needed. That is not a reason to assume all is well: you should still confirm in writing that the unit is live and reaching the ARC, and note that the company behind your monitoring has changed. But you are checking a working system, not chasing a dead one.
If your system has been migrated, your contractor has swapped the Redcare unit for a replacement signalling device, almost certainly using an IP connection and a 4G back-up. That is the dual-path arrangement the industry is standardising on, in line with BS EN 50136 ATS (Alarm Transmission System) requirements. Two independent communication routes, so that one failing does not leave the building silent.
In either case, the signalling path has changed. Either your contractor has swapped the old Redcare unit for new signalling equipment, or the original path has simply gone dead and nothing has replaced it yet. Both count as an alteration to the way your building’s fire alarm reaches the outside world – a new route, or no route at all, where a working one used to be. That is a material change to a fire safety provision. And under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, material changes to fire safety provisions trigger a review of the Fire Risk Assessment.
Why this is an FRA review trigger, not just a service job
Under Article 13 of the RRFSO, the Responsible Person must ensure the premises are equipped with appropriate fire detectors and alarms where necessary. Article 9 requires the Fire Risk Assessment to be reviewed when there is reason to suspect it is no longer valid or when significant change has occurred. A change to the way your fire alarm communicates with the outside world – the transmission path between the fire detection and alarm system (FDAS) and the receiving centre – is exactly the kind of change that clause exists for.
Then there is Article 17. This is the maintenance duty. The Responsible Person must ensure the fire safety system is kept in an efficient state, in efficient working order and in good repair. A fire alarm that is no longer transmitting to the ARC is not in efficient working order, whatever the panel display says – and the prosecution record under the Fire Safety Act 2021 and the Fire Safety (England) Regulations 2022 shows that enforcement officers treat Article 17 failings seriously once a fire has exposed them.
None of this is about whether ARC monitoring is legally required. On its own, it is not: no fire safety law says a building must have its alarm monitored by an ARC, and plenty of premises are compliant without any monitoring at all. BS 5839-1:2025 is a code of practice, not a statute, and whether your building needs monitoring is driven by your Fire Risk Assessment and, usually, your insurer’s requirements. But once monitoring is part of your fire safety provision, keeping it working is a legal duty under Article 17.
What BS 5839 alarm signalling actually expects
BS 5839-1:2025 – the British Standard code of practice for fire detection and fire alarm systems in non-domestic premises – sets out the expectations for fire detection and alarm systems across offices, factories, retail units, care homes and other commercial buildings. It is the code of practice most insurers and fire risk assessors rely on when they judge whether a system is fit for purpose. On signalling, the headline points are:
- Alarms should reach the ARC within 90 seconds for Category L systems (life safety), or 120 seconds for Category P systems (property protection).
- Faults in transmission equipment should be flagged within 3 minutes for Category L and 31 minutes for Category P.
- On dual-path systems, loss of both paths must show as a fault at the panel. Loss of a single path does not have to.
- Where a system is connected to an ARC, each type of alarm must be tested during servicing to confirm the signal actually reaches the centre.
The Fire Industry Association (FIA) guide to the changes in BS 5839-1:2025 sets out the full detail. The transmission performance itself is graded under BS EN 50136-1, the European standard for alarm transmission systems. DP3 (Dual Path 3) is the commercial-insurance default. DP4 is reserved for high-risk sites such as pharmaceutical plants, data centres and major heritage buildings. If your contractor quotes you a grade, those are the two you are likely to hear.
Insurers have their own view on top of all this. Aviva, in its risk management guidance on the closure of BT Redcare, has made it clear that policyholders are expected to maintain equivalent or better signalling arrangements after migration. A drop in signalling grade that has not been discussed with your insurer is a claim problem waiting to happen – and a claim denial is the one cost that always falls back on the Responsible Person.
Replacement signalling paths in plain English
The term you will hear most often is “dual-path IP and 4G”. In plain terms:
- IP means the signal travels over the building’s internet connection, the same broadband that runs your email and Wi-Fi.
- 4G means the signal travels over the mobile phone network, using a SIM card inside the signalling device. Most devices now use roaming multi-network SIMs so the signal does not depend on a single carrier.
- Dual-path means both are wired in. If the broadband fails, the 4G takes over. If the 4G signal drops, the broadband carries on. Only if both fail is the building briefly without a transmission route, and that failure has to show at the panel as a fault.
The ARC itself, at the other end of the signal, is certificated to BS EN 50518:2019+A1:2023 (monitoring and alarm receiving centre requirements) and BS 9518:2021 (the UK process standard for ARCs). Those standards cover the physical construction, staffing levels, power resilience and procedures of the monitoring centre.
On the installer and ARC side, third-party certification is the marker to look for. BAFE SP203-1 is the modular scheme that registers fire alarm installer and maintainer companies. NSI (National Security Inspectorate) and SSAIB (Security Systems and Alarms Inspection Board) are peer UKAS-accredited certification bodies that certify both installers and ARCs. UKAS, the United Kingdom Accreditation Service, is the sole national accreditation body recognised by Government that oversees the scheme operators. What you want on paper is a contractor and an ARC that are third-party certificated to a recognised scheme such as BAFE SP203-1, NSI Gold or SSAIB. The NSI company finder lets you check whether your contractor holds the certification they claim.
A note on language. BAFE is a fire-only scheme. It does not certify ARC monitoring directly, so you should not see “BAFE-monitored” on a quote. ARC certification for fire signalling comes through NSI or SSAIB. And all of these schemes certify companies, not individuals, so “BAFE-qualified engineer” is the wrong phrase. The right phrase is that the company is a BAFE SP203-1 registered company, and the engineer works for it.
Your fire alarm monitoring compliance due-diligence checklist
The following is an informational overview, not legal advice. Your Fire Risk Assessment and a competent fire safety professional should determine your exact obligations for your specific building.
If your maintenance provider has migrated your system, or is about to, these are the questions you should be able to get a clear answer to. Put them in writing. Keep the reply on file. If the answers come back clear, you can stop worrying: the gap is closed. If they do not, you have at least caught the problem yourself, on your own terms, rather than finding out about it from an insurer or a fire officer after something has gone wrong.
- What signalling product is on the system now, and was it replaced or transferred? You want the product name and the manufacturer in writing. If the building was on an older Redcare product, it will have been replaced with new kit; if it was on an NGP unit, it will have transferred to AddSecure rather than being swapped out. Either answer is fine – what you are checking is that your contractor can tell you clearly which one happened, because “we migrated it” from a contractor who in fact did nothing is exactly the gap this question is designed to catch. CSL DualCom GradeShift Pro and AddSecure are the two most common names, with WebWayOne and Emizon also appearing on UK systems.
- Is it single-path or dual-path, and to what grade under BS EN 50136? DP3 is the usual commercial answer. If it is lower than your previous Redcare arrangement, your insurer needs to know. And if yours is a life safety (Category L) system, confirm the product is certified for Category L specifically: dual-path signalling is required for Category L under BS 5839-1:2025, and not every signalling product on the market qualifies.
- Which ARC is receiving the signals, and what is its certification? The ARC should be third-party certificated to BS EN 50518 and BS 9518, and operated by an NSI or SSAIB registered company.
- Is the signalling being tested at each service visit? BS 5839-1 expects every alarm type – fire alarm, fault, pre-alarm – to be tested to confirm it reaches the ARC. Ask to see the record.
- Has the Fire Risk Assessment been reviewed since the migration? If not, that is an Article 9 gap you can close quickly.
- Has the insurer been notified of the change in signalling arrangement? Most commercial property and business interruption policies require notification of material changes to fire safety provision.
- Is the installer company third-party certificated to BAFE SP203-1, NSI or SSAIB? Ask for the certificate number and verify it with the scheme operator.
- What happens at the panel if both signalling paths fail? The answer should be that a fault is displayed. If it is not, the system does not meet BS 5839-1 expectations.
None of these questions are adversarial. A competent maintenance company will answer them all without hesitation. A company that cannot, or will not, is the warning signal the checklist is designed to catch.
Frequently asked questions
What happens if my fire alarm has not been migrated from BT Redcare?
The signalling path stopped working on 15 December 2025. The panel itself will still detect fires and sound the bells, but the signal to the Alarm Receiving Centre is no longer reaching its destination, so the fire service and keyholders are not being paged. Under Article 17 of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, the Responsible Person must keep fire safety systems in efficient working order. A non-transmitting system does not meet that duty. The practical step is to get a written confirmation from your maintenance contractor of the current signalling status today, and a migration quote if it has not already been done.
Does a Redcare migration trigger a Fire Risk Assessment review?
Yes. Article 9 of the RRFSO requires the Fire Risk Assessment to be reviewed when significant change has occurred or when there is reason to suspect the assessment is no longer valid. A change to the communication path between your fire panel and the Alarm Receiving Centre is a material change to a fire safety provision and falls squarely within Article 9. The review does not have to be a full re-assessment, but it should document the new signalling product, the ARC receiving signals, the transmission grade under BS EN 50136, and confirmation that the arrangement still meets the building’s fire risk profile.
What signalling grade does BS 5839-1:2025 expect for commercial fire alarms?
BS 5839-1:2025 does not mandate a specific grade; it sets transmission performance expectations (alarms to the ARC within 90 seconds for Category L systems, 120 seconds for Category P) and points to BS EN 50136 for the grading framework. In practice, DP3 is the commercial-insurance default most contractors will quote, and DP4 is reserved for high-risk sites. The grade your building needs is driven by your Fire Risk Assessment and your insurer’s requirements, not by the standard alone. If the replacement grade is lower than your previous Redcare arrangement, the insurer must be notified before that becomes a claim problem.
How do I verify the Alarm Receiving Centre my signals are going to?
Ask for three things in writing: the ARC name, its certification, and the certification body. A compliant ARC is third-party certificated to BS EN 50518:2019+A1:2023 and BS 9518:2021, and operated by an NSI or SSAIB registered company. BAFE certifies fire installers, not ARC monitoring directly, so a quote describing a service as “BAFE-monitored” is using the wrong term. The NSI company finder and the SSAIB directory both let you verify whether the ARC and the installer hold the certifications they claim. If your contractor cannot name the receiving ARC or its certification, that is itself the finding.
What should happen at the panel if both signalling paths fail?
A fault indication must display at the panel. BS 5839-1:2025 requires loss of both signalling paths on a dual-path system to register as a fault; loss of a single path alone is not required to display, because the back-up path is still transmitting. Faults in transmission equipment should be flagged within 3 minutes for Category L systems and 31 minutes for Category P. If your panel stays clear when both paths are tested offline, the system is not meeting BS 5839-1 expectations and the installer should be asked to demonstrate correct fault signalling at the next service visit, with the result recorded on the log.
Before you go
The alarm signalling migration was never really about BT. It was about the last analogue strand of UK fire safety being pulled into the IP era, and about the Responsible Person duty under Article 17 not pausing while the industry sorts itself out. If your building is monitored, the signal is either leaving the panel in working order or it is not.
If you are not certain where your building stands, a short review of your signalling arrangement, your Fire Risk Assessment and your maintenance documentation will close the gap in a single visit – panel check, paperwork review and a written confirmation you can file against your next insurance renewal. Get in touch to arrange one. Fire alarm monitoring after BT Redcare is not a complicated subject once the paperwork is in order.
