By Jordan Begg
Co-Founding Director – Future Group of Companies
Emergency lighting in residential buildings has long been a fundamental life-safety provision, particularly within communal areas such as corridors, stairwells and lobbies. Historically, compliance has centred on ensuring that emergency luminaires operate during a power failure, supported by routine monthly functional tests and annual full-duration testing.
Recent updates to UK and European emergency lighting standards reflect a clear shift in emphasis. The focus is moving beyond basic functionality toward demonstrable performance – specifically, whether emergency lighting systems continue to deliver adequate illumination levels in real-world conditions over time.
From “does it switch on?” to “does it still perform?”
Routine monthly and annual testing remains essential and continues to form the backbone of emergency lighting maintenance. These tests confirm that fittings illuminate on loss of supply and remain operational for their rated duration. What they do not confirm is how much usable light is actually delivered to escape routes.
Over time, the performance of emergency lighting systems can degrade for a variety of reasons. LED light output reduces gradually, batteries age, diffusers discolour, and building environments change. Doors are replaced, corridors reconfigured, and finishes altered. As a result, systems that once met design expectations can quietly fall below current performance benchmarks without any obvious functional failure.
Full-width escape route illumination
Current guidance places greater importance on assessing illumination across the full usable width of escape routes, rather than relying solely on centre-line measurements. In residential blocks, this distinction is particularly relevant in communal corridors and stairwells that include alcoves, door recesses, changes in width, or variations in layout.
In practical terms, this means that emergency lighting systems which appear compliant during routine testing may still provide insufficient illumination at the edges of escape routes — areas where trip hazards, door thresholds and changes in direction commonly occur.
The role of five-year photometric verification
Alongside existing testing regimes, there is now a growing expectation for periodic photometric verification, often referred to as a LUX survey. This process involves measuring light levels at floor level while the emergency lighting system is operating in emergency mode, to confirm that illumination remains adequate across escape routes.
Photometric verification does not replace monthly or annual testing. Instead, it provides a deeper assessment of system performance and is typically recommended at least every five years, or sooner where buildings have undergone alterations, systems are ageing, or concerns have been identified through fire risk assessments or audits.
Crucially, this approach allows issues to be identified proactively. In many cases, verification confirms that systems remain adequate. Where shortcomings are identified, it enables responsible persons and managing agents to plan improvements in a controlled and proportionate way, rather than responding reactively to compliance findings.
Implications for residential block management
For those responsible for residential buildings, the message is one of awareness rather than alarm. Existing testing regimes remain valid and necessary, but they may no longer provide a complete picture of system performance. Understanding whether emergency lighting continues to perform as intended is becoming an increasingly important part of demonstrating due diligence.
Reviewing whether a building has ever undergone photometric verification, and considering how changes over time may have affected lighting performance, is a logical next step for many communal systems.
A practical view from the industry
From my perspective, the most important thing for managing agents and responsible persons to recognise is that these changes are not about creating additional burden. They are about gaining clearer visibility of how emergency lighting systems actually perform over time.
Photometric verification does not automatically indicate non-compliance, nor does it suggest that existing systems are inadequate by default. What it provides is evidence – enabling informed decisions to be made based on measured performance rather than assumption. In many cases, it confirms that systems remain suitable; in others, it highlights areas where relatively modest improvements can significantly enhance safety and resilience.
As expectations continue to evolve, the ability to demonstrate that systems not only operate, but continue to meet their intended purpose under real conditions, is becoming increasingly important across the residential sector.
If you are unsure how photometric verification applies to your buildings, or whether your existing emergency lighting arrangements remain appropriate, seeking competent technical guidance can help provide clarity. At Future Group, we support managing agents and building owners by explaining these requirements in practical terms and helping them understand what, if anything, needs to be reviewed within their communal areas.
Author: Jordan Begg
Co-Founding Director – Future Group of Companies
