A coroner has questioned whether a “stay-put” fire policy was the right procedure for the Hinchley Wood retirement home where Irene Cockerton died in a fatal fire.

On the fourth day of her inquest, Coroner Richard Travers called into question Gibson Court’s policy and procedure.

Mrs Cockerton, 87, died after a fire broke out two doors away from her flat at the Manor Road North property in the early hours of September 30, 2011.

She was the only resident at the retirement home, owned by Peverel Retirement, not to reach safety.

The court heard from Robert Lane, a health and safety consultant who had provided fire safety training to house managers in Peverel-owned properties.

He explained how fire risk assessments, which would include checking the fire curtains in the loft space, should be reviewed every 12 months.

On Tuesday, the inquest heard from contractor Graham Ralston, who said the fire curtains he saw in the roof space in April 2011 were torn and had holes in them.

Earlier at the hearing on Wednesday, Martin Pepperrell, an electrical contractor who had worked at Gibson Court in 2007, told the court that the fire curtains in the roof space were “just hanging” from the ceiling in the central area of the loft.

Another contractor, Steven Kelly, who worked at the property in 2010, told the inquest he felt the fire curtain was in a reasonable condition but said it did not provide a complete barrier across the loft space he had worked in.

Reverting to the issue of Gibson Court’s stay-put policy in the event of a fire, which was said to be a nationally-recognised approach, Mr Travers asked Mr Lane why the policy was used.

Mr Lane said: “It is hard to have an evacuation policy if there is nobody [staff members] there to see if everybody is out of the building. While you have got a building with staff at points of the day, you don’t know the movements of the residents.

“Individual residents had freedom of choice. If they decided they heard the alarm and didn’t want to stay, they were free to leave but my understanding is Peverel would provide information about the policy and fire safety in the dwellings.”

While each flat had a fire door which would provide protection for about 30 minutes, making it a safe compartment, the loft space above each flat was not sectioned individually.

Questioning Mr Lane, Mr Travers said: “For a stay put policy to be a safe policy, there have to be certain factors at the building to make it safe. The place in which the person is staying put is to be a safe compartment from fire, correct?”

Mr Lane responded “yes”.

The inquest continues.

For more stories see www.surreycomet.co.uk/gibsoncourtfire