Vape shops and fire safety concerns

[Citybreak1]

Moderator note: Split from

Fire at Glasgow Central (08/03/26)

It seems that there's a large fire on the Union Street side of Central Station - from the photo I've seen, one of the buildings backing on to platform 1. All lines currently closed and nothing coming in or out, but services are still running through the low level platforms...

www.railforums.co.uk

Lots of talk about vape shops will they have to move if close to other stations? Also, the blue lagoon has been on fire three times, so perhaps that area needs to be non-retail?

 

[LT02 NVV]

Can we just get rid of all these vape shops selling dodgey vape items in Glasgow now? Because there’s tons more like the one that caught fire in the city centre, like on Argyle Street for example.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Can we just get rid of all these vape shops selling dodgey vape items in Glasgow now? Because there’s tons more like the one that caught fire in the city centre, like on Argyle Street for example.

mods note - split from this thread

Fire at Glasgow Central (08/03/26)

It seems that there's a large fire on the Union Street side of Central Station - from the photo I've seen, one of the buildings backing on to platform 1. All lines currently closed and nothing coming in or out, but services are still running through the low level platforms...

www.railforums.co.uk

If people stop buying dodgy vapes, the dodgy vapes shops will close. Blame Glaswegians, unless they are all bought by residents of Edinburgh coming across special.

 

[deerokus]

If people stop buying dodgy vapes, the dodgy vapes shops will close. Blame Glaswegians, unless they are all bought by residents of Edinburgh coming across special.

Not if they're money laundering fronts.

 

[Andyh82]

If people stop buying dodgy vapes, the dodgy vapes shops will close. Blame Glaswegians, unless they are all bought by residents of Edinburgh coming across special.

You assume it’s not a cover for something else

There was an investigation on BBC News last year about similar shops in Rochdale that were a front for all kinds of crime

 

[Russel]

You assume it’s not a cover for something else

There was an investigation on BBC News last year about similar shops in Rochdale that were a front for all kinds of crime

It's not just a problem in Rochdale, it's a problem on high streets up and down the UK, my local council raided 3 over the last couple of weeks...

 

[185143]

It's not just a problem in Rochdale, it's a problem on high streets up and down the UK, my local council raided 3 over the last couple of weeks...

Exactly. It's like all these "American candy" stores as well as Turkish (in particular, with no disrespect intended to any genuine ones!) Barbers.

Does one high street need 4 different Turkish barbers and 6 vape shops. No. Of course not. It's blatantly a front for money laundering and other crime no doubt.

 

[Russel]

Exactly. It's like all these "American candy" stores as well as Turkish (in particular, with no disrespect intended to any genuine ones!) Barbers.

Does one high street need 4 different Turkish barbers and 6 vape shops. No. Of course not. It's blatantly a front for money laundering and other crime no doubt.

Indeed, the Turkish barbers near me haven't raised their prices since opening just after Covid, with rampant inflation, that should set alarm bells ringing straight away...

 

[Acathater]

Exactly. It's like all these "American candy" stores as well as Turkish (in particular, with no disrespect intended to any genuine ones!) Barbers.

Does one high street need 4 different Turkish barbers and 6 vape shops. No. Of course not. It's blatantly a front for money laundering and other crime no doubt.

Money laundering for people smuggling, tobacco and drugs smuggling/sales, prostitution gangs.
All linked

 

[thomalex]

It's not just a problem in Rochdale, it's a problem on high streets up and down the UK, my local council raided 3 over the last couple of weeks...

Exactly. It's like all these "American candy" stores as well as Turkish (in particular, with no disrespect intended to any genuine ones!) Barbers.

Does one high street need 4 different Turkish barbers and 6 vape shops. No. Of course not. It's blatantly a front for money laundering and other crime no doubt.

Indeed, hopefully this incident focuses minds on no longer allowing these businesses to run rampant on high streets and turning a blind eye. Some simple policy changes would stop them over night if there was political will to do so.

Currently a lot of these shops are run by companies which then fold before a years out therefore paying no business rates or council tax, will not be VAT registered so will charge it but will take all the money, they then sell cheap, usually illegal knockoff, imported goods such as vapes which this shop clearly had stockpiled, money goes to the buildings owner in way of inflated rent, and the value of the building is then able to be pushed higher as it's based off the rentable value which the owner will then leverage to purchase more property. And of course you can launder a bit of money though it at the same time. And when you try go after these people the building owner will say who they rent to has got nothing to do with them, and the business owner a lot of the time won't have put their real address down, and when you try to investigate will fold and another company appear in its place starting the whole cycle again. It's a clear scam that is happening all over the country.

Even when the building owner isn't in cahoots with the shop owner, they will happily take these sort of shops as, due to what I've described above, they'll quickly take an empty shop unit and the owner won't have to lower the rent.

Couple of simple measures that would stop it would be companies house actually requiring proof of addresses, shops required to be paying tax from day one, VAT registered from day one, with quick legal powers to stop them operating if they don't comply. Things like vape shops should also be properly regulated. The only reason I can see why these loopholes haven't been closed up is because too many people with commercial property have been benefitting from it.

In the case of Central Station were these practices not allowed to happen you would likely have a legitimate business in this location that wasn't hoarding a load of imported vapes, and there would be no fire.

 

[Deepgreen]

Indeed, the Turkish barbers near me haven't raised their prices since opening just after Covid, with rampant inflation, that should set alarm bells ringing straight away...

You may be right, but inflation has hardly been "rampant".

 

[AndrewE]

You may be right, but inflation has hardly been "rampant".

well, it certainly hasn't been zero!

 

[JohnofWessex]

I would suggest

1. There is a strong case for better control of Vapes and Tobacco. I suggest that not only sellers but wholesalers/manufacturers/importers need to be licensed with a proper chain of custody so a shop has to demonstrate that the pack of 20 Woodbines they are selling came from a licensed wholesaler who has in turn has to show who the importer/manufacturer was.
2. Some sort of selective licensing of certain types of shops/areas which are likley to cause problems eg late night opening, barbers etc
3. Proper procedures for setting up a limited company and ensuring directors are liable for unpaid tax - a lot of the the 'tax gap' is from 'fly by night' limited companies

 

[brad465]

3. Proper procedures for setting up a limited company and ensuring directors are liable for unpaid tax - a lot of the the 'tax gap' is from 'fly by night' limited companies

Shutting down Companies House and setting up a much stricter and better vetted system would be a good starting point here, this seems to be a haven for money laundering and other dodgy practice. Last year there were ID reforms introduced, but I wouldn't be surprised if they're an easy get round given not much else changed.

 

[sor]

A quick google suggests that commercial property landlords are not required to undertake the same sorts of ID checks that are necessary for a residential letting. The latter is more about immigration enforcement than anything else, but it still seems odd that this has not been acted upon.

It's not just a problem in Rochdale, it's a problem on high streets up and down the UK, my local council raided 3 over the last couple of weeks...

It's going to become a harder problem to ignore too as they pop up in the "nicer" places. I live near (not in!) such a town and a vape shop with ridiculously garish green sign has popped up recently. I'm not a huge NIMBY but the signage sticks out like a sore thumb.

 

[35B]

I would suggest

1. There is a strong case for better control of Vapes and Tobacco. I suggest that not only sellers but wholesalers/manufacturers/importers need to be licensed with a proper chain of custody so a shop has to demonstrate that the pack of 20 Woodbines they are selling came from a licensed wholesaler who has in turn has to show who the importer/manufacturer was.
2. Some sort of selective licensing of certain types of shops/areas which are likley to cause problems eg late night opening, barbers etc
3. Proper procedures for setting up a limited company and ensuring directors are liable for unpaid tax - a lot of the the 'tax gap' is from 'fly by night' limited companies

Judging by reports of police closures of shops selling dodgy tobacco round me, the criminality is a lot deeper than (1) allows for. It’s also made possible, some may say encouraged, by the very high price of cigarettes caused by the duty payable on them. And regulation of the sort you propose is in place in Australia, which is suffering armed attacks on vape shops despite the almost total regulation out of them.

 

[Lewisham2221]

In the case of Central Station were these practices not allowed to happen you would likely have a legitimate business in this location that wasn't hoarding a load of imported vapes, and there would be no fire.

Can you point me to where the fire service have confirmed that vapes are responsible for starting the fire? For the spread of the fire? That there vapes were even present in any significant quantity? So far all we actually know is that there was a fire and it appears to have originated in a shop which at least one member of the public referred to as a "vape shop" when calling the fire brigade to report the fire.

 

[styles]

I would suggest

1. There is a strong case for better control of Vapes and Tobacco. I suggest that not only sellers but wholesalers/manufacturers/importers need to be licensed with a proper chain of custody so a shop has to demonstrate that the pack of 20 Woodbines they are selling came from a licensed wholesaler who has in turn has to show who the importer/manufacturer was.

At least for tobacco, this is already true.

But it doesn't stop under-counter selling.

The tax on tobacco has tipped over into the prohibitively expense side of the scales and it is now 'worth' illegally importing cigarettes, selling them, getting caught, having loads of them confiscated, and paying the fines. The shops who get caught doing this often are re-stocked with illegal cigarettes the next day.

Some of these rules will apply to vape products in ~3 weeks' time: https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...oducts-duty-and-the-vaping-duty-stamps-scheme

2. Some sort of selective licensing of certain types of shops/areas which are likley to cause problems eg late night opening, barbers etc

There are already licensing rules for these things. It's up to the local authority.

Barbers aren't licensed, but I think that's a bit different to the fire safety risk of vapes.

3. Proper procedures for setting up a limited company and ensuring directors are liable for unpaid tax - a lot of the the 'tax gap' is from 'fly by night' limited companies

There are some attempts at this with mandatory director ID. It unfortunately doesn't help with the 'phoenix' problem, which needs closing up in legislation.

 

[Russel]

It's going to become a harder problem to ignore too as they pop up in the "nicer" places. I live near (not in!) such a town and a vape shop with ridiculously garish green sign has popped up recently. I'm not a huge NIMBY but the signage sticks out like a sore thumb.

Yes, they all seem to use a variation of the same garish, tacky signage and lighting, same as Turkish barbers.

 

[NorthernSpirit]

These vape shops make towns and cities look run down and seedy - one only has to have a look n Halifax and there must be at least ten selling the same tat, why?

Then you've got the epilepsy inducing strobing signs that are cranked up to the max on brightness. Then there's the issue of people vaping onboard trains (mostly the youth from what I've observed), again why isn't this raised as a safety issue as you could have a three car unit filled with 100 passengers of which 30 of them vape - that's 30 people who are putting the other 70 passengers at risk of their vape contraption malfunctioning with nowhere to escape to.

It raises a good question as to why they are not heavily regulated as my concern is if it can happen in Glasgow, then it could happen anywhere, plus I don't think Network Rail will be happy to accommodate a vape shop in a railway station any more and for a very good reason - public safety.

 

[Trackman]

51 vape shops on two streets!
www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/two-streets-51-vape-shops-33283471

At his peak, Usain Bolt could run 100 metres in 9.58 seconds. On one Manchester side street, he could see around two dozen vape shops in that time.
‌
Something almost surreal has happened on Harris Street, off Bury New Road in Strangeways, and neighbouring Overbridge Road. On a brief walk along both streets this week, the Manchester Evening News counted a staggering 51 vape shops.

Can you point me to where the fire service have confirmed that vapes are responsible for starting the fire? For the spread of the fire? That there vapes were even present in any significant quantity? So far all we actually know is that there was a fire and it appears to have originated in a shop which at least one member of the public referred to as a "vape shop" when calling the fire brigade to report the fire.

I'm with you there, let's see what the fire service investigation team say first.

 

[styles]

These vape shops make towns and cities look run down and seedy - one only has to have a look n Halifax and there must be at least ten selling the same tat, why?

Then you've got the epilepsy inducing strobing signs that are cranked up to the max on brightness.

They are tacky, though on the flip side, if they weren't there they'd just be empty units. Maybe that would look better to some, but hardly a dramatic improvement.

Then there's the issue of people vaping onboard trains (mostly the youth from what I've observed), again why isn't this raised as a safety issue as you could have a three car unit filled with 100 passengers of which 30 of them vape - that's 30 people who are putting the other 70 passengers at risk of their vape contraption malfunctioning with nowhere to escape to.

I think it is raised as a safety issue? They're banned on the rail network in the same places smoking is. E-scooters and e-motorbikes ('illegal e-bikes') are banned by most TOCs because of the battery fire risk. But it's a bit unenforceable to ban vapes being in people's bags and pockets. Also frankly everybody has a mobile phone in their pocket as well so if the concern is the batteries then it would be a bit odd to ban one but not the other.

It raises a good question as to why they are not heavily regulated as my concern is if it can happen in Glasgow, then it could happen anywhere, plus I don't think Network Rail will be happy to accommodate a vape shop in a railway station any more and for a very good reason - public safety.

They are regulated. But to enforce regulations like UKCA approval requires huge resources, which local authorities don't have these days. They're also spending a lot of their time cracking down on smuggled cigarettes and particularly in Scotland knock-off booze because of how high the taxes/minimum prices on tobacco and alcohol are. That's before the American candy stores selling fake Wonka bars and unsafe knock-off plush toys (I forget the name of the current popular one). That's in addition to the usual under 18 selling checks, etc.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Can you point me to where the fire service have confirmed that vapes are responsible for starting the fire? For the spread of the fire? That there vapes were even present in any significant quantity? So far all we actually know is that there was a fire and it appears to have originated in a shop which at least one member of the public referred to as a "vape shop" when calling the fire brigade to report the fire.

The BBC website has an interview with 'the man with the fire extinguisher' who says that the fire was under the counter where multiple chargers were in use. Other than shop staff that would appear to be the best we can hope for at this stage.

BBC article here

Lamin Kongira told BBC Scotland News he had been walking past when a shopkeeper ran out saying "fire, fire".
"I ran into the shop and I saw a small fire under the counter," he said.
Lamin said there was an adapter charging system - full of chargers - and that's where the fire was.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Mar 2026 ==

I would suggest

1. There is a strong case for better control of Vapes and Tobacco. I suggest that not only sellers but wholesalers/manufacturers/importers need to be licensed with a proper chain of custody so a shop has to demonstrate that the pack of 20 Woodbines they are selling came from a licensed wholesaler who has in turn has to show who the importer/manufacturer was.
2. Some sort of selective licensing of certain types of shops/areas which are likley to cause problems eg late night opening, barbers etc
3. Proper procedures for setting up a limited company and ensuring directors are liable for unpaid tax - a lot of the the 'tax gap' is from 'fly by night' limited companies

There are some attempts at this with mandatory director ID. It unfortunately doesn't help with the 'phoenix' problem, which needs closing up in legislation.

Private Eye is already suggesting that the director identity checks, carried out by third party providers and not Companies House itself, are, erm, not as good as they could be.

 

[styles]

Private Eye is already suggesting that the director identity checks, carried out by third party providers and not Companies House itself, are, erm, not as good as they could be.

It's pretty standard for the government not to do their own ID checks these days for all sorts of things as they've come up with some sort of approved identity provider network. How good it is, I don't know! Though it can't be much worse than the old system which was pretty much 'trust me bro'. There were streets in some parts of the country where a dozen or so houses had something daft like a hundred companies registered to them, without the residents being involved in business activity whatsoever.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

It's pretty standard for the government not to do their own ID checks these days for all sorts of things as they've come up with some sort of approved identity provider network. How good it is, I don't know! Though it can't be much worse than the old system which was pretty much 'trust me bro'. There were streets in some parts of the country where a dozen or so houses had something daft like a hundred companies registered to them, without the residents being involved in business activity whatsoever.

Multiple examples of that. A simple solution perhaps being to send a good old fashioned physical letter to the registered address and await a written response BEFORE registering the company and allowing it to trade.

There were also investigations of dodgy company registration/formation agents and registered offices with dozens/hundreds of companies trading from a small office. One in Cardiff as I recall. Perhaps one person receiving and redirecting post. I watched a Minder episode of just that last Thursday where Arfur set up a racing tipster business, which seemed strangely familiar to other recent happenings!

But, hey, everything must be online and instant to show how 'with it' and 'efficient' we are. My sympathy is with the people who innocently find themselves embroiled in such scams and have to spend time, effort and money untangling themselves, if you ever truly can.

 

[styles]

Multiple examples of that. A simple solution perhaps being to send a good old fashioned physical letter to the registered address and await a written response BEFORE registering the company and allowing it to trade.

Which is how HMRC operates as it happens, for say VAT registration. For Companies House, for a long time they would let you register online for cheap, then if you actually wanted to file returns you needed a code sent in the post. But if you fancy just... not filing returns, then it's no issue not having the code sent in the post! That's what they're trying to change, albeit I'm not sure how well they're doing it.

There were also investigations of dodgy company registration/formation agents and registered offices with dozens/hundreds of companies trading from a small office. One in Cardiff as I recall. Perhaps one person receiving and redirecting post. I watched a Minder episode of just that last Thursday where Arfur set up a racing tipster business, which seemed strangely familiar to other recent happenings!

This is still possible in a sense. A business can be registered to pretty much any address. For privacy reasons, a lot of companies are registered either with Mailboxes etc or with registered office address companies who then handle the mail. I think that's pretty legitimate as a lot of company directors won't want to expose their personal details by virtue of being a sole director of a company for example. There are also legitimate business reasons for this irrespective of privacy, e.g. wanting somebody to open and scan post, or receive parcels, etc.

But the key thing for me is that the directors themselves must be properly ID verified.

But, hey, everything must be online and instant to show how 'with it' and 'efficient' we are. My sympathy is with the people who innocently find themselves embroiled in such scams and have to spend time, effort and money untangling themselves, if you ever truly can.

I mean I do think registering and running a business should be digital-first. In fact the notion that certain HMRC communications are only ever sent by post I think is out-dated. But in order to adopt this digital-first approach, you really do need thorough and robust identity and address verification.

 

[jon0844]

I think it is raised as a safety issue? They're banned on the rail network in the same places smoking is. E-scooters and e-motorbikes ('illegal e-bikes') are banned by most TOCs because of the battery fire risk. But it's a bit unenforceable to ban vapes being in people's bags and pockets. Also frankly everybody has a mobile phone in their pocket as well so if the concern is the batteries then it would be a bit odd to ban one but not the other.

Mobile phones use properly certified and tested batteries, with advanced battery management systems and protections. I doubt there's any sort of safety management in the average vape, and e-scooters should have but may not as there are plenty of cheap dodgy Temu style offerings alongside the (generally) trusted brands like Xiaomi or Pure (but didn't Pure have a spate of problems not so long ago with one of their models?).

The other factor is battery size and energy density. A vape is a much lower risk, but obviously if it was to catch fire and set something else off then all bets are off. A scooter fire may not spread due to trains being designed to cope with fires, but the fumes are absolutely dangerous.

As you say, there also needs to be some common sense applied. Nobody can search every passenger for vapes and mobiles, but generally an e-scooter is quite visible (although I've seen people put them in holdalls, and one even put his in a bin bag to get through a gateline).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Mar 2026 ==

But to enforce regulations like UKCA approval requires huge resources, which local authorities don't have these days.

I thought we ditched the UKCA scheme?

 

[styles]

Mobile phones use properly certified and tested batteries, with advanced battery management systems and protections. I doubt there's any sort of safety management in the average vape, and e-scooters should have but may not as there are plenty of cheap dodgy Temu style offerings alongside the (generally) trusted brands like Xiaomi or Pure (but didn't Pure have a spate of problems not so long ago with one of their models?).

The other factor is battery size and energy density. A vape is a much lower risk, but obviously if it was to catch fire and set something else off then all bets are off. A scooter fire may not spread due to trains being designed to cope with fires, but the fumes are absolutely dangerous.

Sure I'm just illustrating that rail operators do take the risk of battery fires seriously.

As you say, there also needs to be some common sense applied. Nobody can search every passenger for vapes and mobiles, but generally an e-scooter is quite visible (although I've seen people put them in holdalls, and one even put his in a bin bag to get through a gateline).

This, and also, the practicality of some sort of inspector being able to distinguish between a 'safe' battery and a 'dodgy' battery. This is why e-scooters are banned wholesale - staff don't have the time or knowledge to inspect every device or battery.

I thought we ditched the UKCA scheme?

Not that I'm aware of. Manufacturers have the choice (currently) of using either the UKCA marking or the CE marking. Given the government has said it has no plans now to discontinue the allowance of the CE mark for retailing in the UK, it does mean UKCA is perhaps a bit niche because you could meet the CE requirements and use the CE mark, which are broadly the same as UKCA, and you'll have a much bigger market to sell to. But yeah I probably should've said UKCA/CE instead of just UKCA in my comment

 

[thomalex]

It's pretty standard for the government not to do their own ID checks these days for all sorts of things as they've come up with some sort of approved identity provider network. How good it is, I don't know! Though it can't be much worse than the old system which was pretty much 'trust me bro'. There were streets in some parts of the country where a dozen or so houses had something daft like a hundred companies registered to them, without the residents being involved in business activity whatsoever.

This stuff isn’t hard. If I got a loan from a bank I bet you they would make sure I had a verifiable address.

 

[styles]

This stuff isn’t hard. If I got a loan from a bank I bet you they would make sure I had a verifiable address.

Around half a million cases of identity fraud in banking each year.