BFC urges caution over furniture fire safety changes

The British Furniture Confederation (BFC) has submitted a sector-wide response to the Government’s consultation on proposed reforms to upholstered furniture fire safety regulations.

Representing manufacturers, retailers, suppliers and trade associations across the UK, the BFC welcomes the ambition to reduce the use of harmful flame‑retardant chemicals where it can be achieved safely, while warning that aspects of the current proposals could weaken consumer protection.

Tony Attard OBE, Chairman of the BFC, said: “The BFC brings together expertise from across the UK’s furniture and beds, furnishings, and flooring sector.

“Drawing on the knowledge of both our Board and Public Affairs Advisory Council, I am confident our response accurately reflects the views of the industry and makes a constructive contribution to the Government’s consultation on furniture flammability regulations.

“We now look forward to hearing the outcome.”

While supporting the principle of reducing unnecessary chemical use, the BFC does not support replacing the current testing regime with a smoulder‑only standard.

In its consultation response, the BFC notes that open-flame ignition sources remain commonplace in UK homes, including candles, open fires, matches, lighters, and an increasing number of electrical products containing lithium-ion batteries.

It argues that removing open-flame testing could reduce fire safety performance and would not adequately reflect the real‑world risks faced by consumers.

The BFC also raises concerns over the consultation’s limited detail on enforcement, post‑market surveillance, and how an equivalent level of consumer protection would be maintained under the proposed regime.

The response highlights evidence from the National Bed Federation showing significant levels of non-compliance among mattresses originating outside the UK and EU, reinforcing the need for robust market surveillance before any regulatory changes are introduced.

On proposals to introduce composite, representative, or component testing, the BFC adopts a neutral position.

While recognising the potential for greater flexibility, reduced costs, and innovation, it believes insufficient detail has been provided to determine whether these approaches would deliver consistent, reliable, and enforceable compliance.

The BFC argues that clearer guidance is needed on testing methodologies, responsibilities throughout the supply chain, and how enforcement authorities would recognise approved testing routes.

The BFC also neither supports nor opposes proposals to regulate re-upholstery, repair, and second-hand furniture under the General Product Safety Regulations (GPSR). While strongly supporting circularity and the responsible reuse of furniture, it warns that the absence of clear legal definitions for terms such as repair, refurbishment, and remanufacture could lead to uncertainty and inconsistent enforcement.

It added that any due diligence requirements must be proportionate, particularly for charities, small businesses, and second‑hand retailers that may have limited access to the original product information.

The BFC has invited the Government to continue working closely with industry to develop a regulatory framework that reduces reliance on flame-retardant chemicals while maintaining high levels of protection against both smouldering and open-flame ignition risks.

For more information about the British Furniture Confederation, visit: Home – British Furniture Confederation