Compliance & responsibility
It is one of the most common disputes in commercial catering - and the answer is rarely in the statute book. It is in your lease.
The short answer
There is no line in fire safety law that says a landlord cleans the duct and a tenant does not, or the reverse. Responsibility for cleaning the kitchen extract system is set by the commercial lease - specifically its repairing and maintenance obligations, and any explicit clause requiring the extract system to be kept to TR19 Grease. In most catering leases the day-to-day extract clean falls to the tenant as occupier, because they generate the grease and control the kitchen. But that is a starting assumption, not a rule - read the actual wording before you assume.
Why the statute still touches both parties
Even once the lease has allocated the cleaning, fire safety law can still reach both sides. Under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, the responsible person is the employer or whoever has control of the premises - and Article 5 treats anyone who, by contract or tenancy, has an obligation for the maintenance or safety of the premises as a responsible person to that extent. That wording is deliberate: duties can sit on more than one party at once.
So a landlord who has written a repairing obligation into the lease, or who retains control of shared riser ductwork in a multi-let building, does not fully escape the fire-risk duty just because the tenant does the cleaning. Grease-laden ductwork that runs through a landlord's building is the landlord's problem too if a fire spreads through it. This is why landlords increasingly commission independent TR19 audits and write audit rights into leases.
Reading your own lease
Find three things in the lease before you decide who acts. First, the repairing covenant - does it put the extract system on the tenant, or keep the structure and services with the landlord? Second, any explicit compliance clause naming TR19 or kitchen extract cleaning frequency. Third, the position at lease end - dilapidations often require the system handed back clean and certified, which quietly makes the tenant responsible for the whole tenancy's cleaning history.
Where the wording is genuinely silent or ambiguous, the practical answer is that the occupier running the kitchen is almost always the party an inspector, insurer or fire officer will look to first - because they have control of the risk. Waiting to argue it out after a fire is the worst time to discover the clause was unclear.
The safe course
Whoever the lease names, the compliant course is the same: a full canopy-to-discharge clean to TR19 Grease, verified below 50µm, issued with a registered certificate. Once that certificate exists and is held by the party responsible, the question of who cleaned it is answered by evidence rather than by memory. If your lease is unclear, get the clean done and keep the record - then resolve the cost allocation separately.
Questions
No. Fire safety law does not split the duty by name. The commercial lease allocates it, usually through the repairing obligations and any explicit TR19 clause. The law then makes whoever has control a responsible person, which can be either party or both.
In practice the occupier running the kitchen is the party inspectors and insurers look to first, because they control the grease and the risk. A silent lease does not remove the fire-safety duty; it just makes it more important to clean and keep records.
Yes. Under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, anyone with control of the premises can be a responsible person. A landlord retaining shared riser ductwork, or with a repairing obligation in the lease, can hold a duty alongside the tenant.
Dilapidations clauses often require the extract system to be returned clean and certified. That can make the outgoing tenant responsible for the whole tenancy's cleaning history, so keeping certificates throughout the term protects you at exit.
With the registered TR19 certificate and post-clean verification report. It records the date, the areas cleaned and the qualified technician, and it is held by the responsible party - turning a memory dispute into a documented fact.
Phoenix Duct Clean · by the numbers
We clean and certify the extract system whoever holds the duty - and give you the paperwork to settle it.