TruthOrFake Logo
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: Fire alarms reportedly failed to activate during the fire, leaving many residents unaware of the danger until they noticed smoke or received calls from friends.

Fact Check: Fire alarms reportedly failed to activate during the fire, leaving many residents unaware of the danger until they noticed smoke or received calls from friends.

Published June 14, 2025
ByFactChecker 1.1 avatarFactChecker 1.1
i
VERDICT
Needs Research

# Fact Check: "Fire alarms reportedly failed to activate during the fire, leaving many residents unaware of the danger until they noticed smoke or rec...

Fact Check: "Fire alarms reportedly failed to activate during the fire, leaving many residents unaware of the danger until they noticed smoke or received calls from friends."

What We Know

The claim that fire alarms failed to activate during a fire incident has been reported in various contexts. For instance, a recent incident at Meriden's Community Towers highlighted that residents were instructed to call 911 to report fire alarms while the Housing Authority awaited repairs to the malfunctioning alarm system (source-4). This suggests that there was indeed a failure in the fire alarm system, which left residents unaware of the danger until they noticed smoke or received alerts from others.

Additionally, fire alarms are crucial for alerting occupants to fires, especially when they are asleep. According to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, a significant number of fatal fires occur when families are asleep, as they may not be aware of the fire until it is too late to escape (source-1). This underscores the importance of functional fire alarms in preventing tragedies.

Analysis

The reliability of the claim hinges on the specific incident at Community Towers. The source detailing the alarm failure (source-4) is a news article from a local outlet, which typically provides factual reporting but may also be influenced by the urgency of the situation and the need for immediate public awareness. This source is credible as it reports on a specific event and includes direct statements from officials.

However, the broader implications of fire alarm failures can be supported by general safety information. The Consumer Product Safety Commission's report on smoke alarms emphasizes their role in preventing fatalities during fires, indicating that when alarms fail, the risks increase significantly (source-1).

While the specific incident at Community Towers provides a concrete example of alarm failure, it is essential to note that not all fire incidents will have the same outcome. The claim could be seen as a generalization unless more evidence is provided to show that alarm failures are widespread or systemic across various incidents.

Conclusion

Verdict: Needs Research
The claim about fire alarms failing to activate during a fire is supported by specific incidents, such as the one at Community Towers, where residents were left unaware of the danger. However, more comprehensive research is needed to determine the extent of this issue across different locations and incidents. The evidence currently available is anecdotal and does not provide a complete picture of fire alarm reliability in various contexts.

Sources

  1. Why Are Smoke Alarms Important? Where Should ...
  2. Ekonomisk frihet (FIRE): När blir du ekonomisk fri? - RikaTillsammans
  3. Livet, pension, FIRE, förtidspension - Ekonomisk frihet (FIRE ...
  4. Community Towers' fire alarms don't alert Meriden ...
  5. Artikel i Dagens Industri om FIRE - Ekonomisk frihet (FIRE ...
  6. Fire Alarm Troubleshooting: Quick Fixes For Common Issues
  7. Ägt boende/fastigheter vs FIRE-kapital - Ekonomisk frihet (FIRE ...
  8. FIRE-funderingar - Ekonomisk frihet (FIRE) - RikaTillsammans …

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Foreign Investor Quietly Drops $65M. on Fire-Charred Malibu Lots. Real estate insiders say the buyer, not a U.S. citizen, snapped up multiple burned properties through shell companies and cash deals after January's wildfires. The investor’s identity and country of origin remain hidden behind layers of legal and financial secrecy.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Foreign Investor Quietly Drops $65M. on Fire-Charred Malibu Lots. Real estate insiders say the buyer, not a U.S. citizen, snapped up multiple burned properties through shell companies and cash deals after January's wildfires. The investor’s identity and country of origin remain hidden behind layers of legal and financial secrecy.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Foreign Investor Quietly Drops $65M. on Fire-Charred Malibu Lots. Real estate insiders say the buyer, not a U.S. citizen, snapped up multiple burned properties through shell companies and cash deals after January's wildfires. The investor’s identity and country of origin remain hidden behind layers of legal and financial secrecy.

Aug 17, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: A foreign investor has quietly dropped $65 million on multiple fire-charred properties in Malibu through shell companies and cash deals after January's wildfires.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: A foreign investor has quietly dropped $65 million on multiple fire-charred properties in Malibu through shell companies and cash deals after January's wildfires.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: A foreign investor has quietly dropped $65 million on multiple fire-charred properties in Malibu through shell companies and cash deals after January's wildfires.

Aug 17, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: BREAKING NEWS: $100M FIRE AID FUNDS NEVER REACHED VICTIMS, 12 NONPROFITS GOT THE CASH ESTEAD
False

Fact Check: BREAKING NEWS: $100M FIRE AID FUNDS NEVER REACHED VICTIMS, 12 NONPROFITS GOT THE CASH ESTEAD

Detailed fact-check analysis of: BREAKING NEWS: $100M FIRE AID FUNDS NEVER REACHED VICTIMS, 12 NONPROFITS GOT THE CASH ESTEAD

Aug 3, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: More than $100 million was raised at the celebrity "Fire Aid" concert. That money was supposed to go to victims of the Pacific Palisades fires. Instead, all of the money went to non-profit organizations.
Partially True

Fact Check: More than $100 million was raised at the celebrity "Fire Aid" concert. That money was supposed to go to victims of the Pacific Palisades fires. Instead, all of the money went to non-profit organizations.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: More than $100 million was raised at the celebrity "Fire Aid" concert. That money was supposed to go to victims of the Pacific Palisades fires. Instead, all of the money went to non-profit organizations.

Jul 31, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Is the UN, NY Times, and Hamas all happy now? How to debunk this myth: “I'm sure Hamas is. Their lies & propaganda destroyed cease-fire deal, tried to discredit safe and functioning GHF effort, emboldened Hamas & will result in this complete balagan! Most sad for hostage” families-grief prolonged”
Partially True

Fact Check: Is the UN, NY Times, and Hamas all happy now? How to debunk this myth: “I'm sure Hamas is. Their lies & propaganda destroyed cease-fire deal, tried to discredit safe and functioning GHF effort, emboldened Hamas & will result in this complete balagan! Most sad for hostage” families-grief prolonged”

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Is the UN, NY Times, and Hamas all happy now? How to debunk this myth: “I'm sure Hamas is. Their lies & propaganda destroyed cease-fire deal, tried to discredit safe and functioning GHF effort, emboldened Hamas & will result in this complete balagan! Most sad for hostage” families-grief prolonged”

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks