Retirement village fire trial collapsed due to prosecution evidence that lacked ‘independence, impartiality and competence’

The CFRS insists that "the defence teams’ argument about our expert witnesses has not been raised previously in other fire safety cases".

Crown Office Chambers, which represented two defendants, said in a statement: “Fire safety prosecution collapses on day two of an eight-week trial at Chester Crown Court – four corporate defendants acquitted. 

“Legal submissions were advanced on behalf of the defendants that the prosecution’s fire officers’ ‘expert evidence’ was inadmissible due to an absence of independence, impartiality and competence.

“Having initially argued that the defendants’ arguments were baseless, after hearing oral submissions the prosecution conceded that they were right and offered no evidence on all counts on the indictment. Judge Leeming stated that he would have ruled in the defendants’ favour in any event.”

In a similar statement, Tower Garden Chambers, which also represented two defendants, said: “At the commencement of the trial the four corporate defendants argued that the evidence relied upon by the prosecution was opinion evidence of an expert nature and that the prosecution had failed to comply with the Criminal Procedure Rules applicable to expert evidence and lacked impartiality and independence.

“Having initially maintained that the arguments advanced by the defendants were unsubstantiated, on day two the prosecution conceded that the arguments advanced were correct. As a consequence, it offered no evidence on all counts on the indictment. Judge Leeming subsequently indicated that he would have ruled in the defendants’ favour.”

Another legal professional involved in the trial, who did not wish to be named, said: “If the trial had run, verdicts would have been delivered almost six years after the fire, and four years after our client was informed it was under investigation.

“For those affected by the fire and their families, that’s an unbearable delay. For our client, a growing family business with a stellar reputation at stake, it brought enormous strain. A strain that the acquittal, welcome as it was, will do little to alleviate. 

“All the more so when there will be no recovery of costs incurred or time spent reading papers and speaking with lawyers in preparation for a trial that never came.”

In an updated statement today, Alex Waller, chief fire officer at CFRS, said: “After very careful consideration, we agreed with our legal team to withdraw the prosecution because it was unlikely that we could sufficiently demonstrate the independence of our expert fire officers, as defined by Criminal Procedure Rules.

“Despite the case being discontinued, our investigation and follow-up work led to significant improvements in fire safety measures at Your Housing’s four other similarly constructed ‘mere’ complexes in Cheshire. These include improved compartmentation, smoke control and fire alarm systems, and the installation of sprinklers.

“The Beechmere fire had a profound impact on the community and was life-changing for many, so it was right that we did everything possible to hold those with responsibilities to account.

“To our knowledge, the defence teams’ argument about our expert witnesses has not been raised previously in other fire safety cases. This case has potential implications and learning which we will be considering and sharing with the rest of the fire and rescue sector.”

Prior to the trial this week, the landlord had pleaded not guilty alongside two of the firms, and the other three gave no indication of a plea. All six organisations had previously made a submission to have a number of the charges dismissed.

The fire service also charged Avantage (Cheshire), a subsidiary of Your Housing Group, which procured the design and build process and operated the scheme. Morgan Sindall Property Services was contracted to provide repairs and maintenance.

The other three organisations charged were WSP UK, a consultancy that provided a fire strategy for the building; Total Fire Group, which risk assessed Beechmere in 2017 and 2018; and Mac Roofing and Contracting, which carried out roofing works in the days immediately before the blaze.

In October 2024, six charges against roofing contractor Mac Roofing were dropped. Two charges against WSP UK were dropped in February 2025.

The four remaining defendants, all of which pleaded not guilty, faced a total of 14 charges between them.

Beechmere was a large retirement village that was built using a timber-frame structure, which was almost completely destroyed in the fire. 

More than 150 residents lost their homes and possessions. While none were injured, the fire service said the impact on their lives “has been significant”.

The development was a purpose-built housing scheme for people over 55, consisting of a block of 132 self-contained apartments. All the homes were designed for independent living with support and varying levels of care if required.