Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Grenfell Tower fire in North Kensington - news and discussion

hitmouse said:
I'm actually in favour of this idea, come to think of it. "What, do you mean no-one remembered to pay the police fee? So the cops won't be turning up now? Bugger, what a shame."
Click to expand...

I don't have a crystal ball, but I have a feeling that it wouldn't quite work that way. :)
 
 
This week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 45: ‘Don’t you find all this rather a surprising debate, given that the Equality Act was passed in 2010?’
links from it should all be working.

This was the final week of hearings before the Inquiry takes it's summer break during August. Hearings resume on Monday 6th September. It will then hear the expert evidence from Barbara Lane about smoke control, and any final evidence relating to this module of the Inquiry (module 3). That will be followed by closing statements from core participants in respect of modules 1-3.

Aside from the last witness from the 'TMO', this week mainly heard evidence from expert witnesses instructed by the Inquiry. One of these was Colin Todd. As the Inside Housing Grenfell Diary points out Todd is in an unusual situation. He was commissioned to produce a report on the work of Carl Stokes, the 'TMO's fire risk assessor. (Link here to the reports about Stokes' evidence). However Todd was instrumental in drawing up some of the official guidance for fire risk assessments which the 'TMO' now claim to have been following in employing Stokes. Todd's appointment was heavily criticised by Bereaved Survivors and Residents.

His evidence thus turned into an examination, not just of his report, but of the guidance he had helped write, and the intentions and presumptions of it's authors. Aside from the view the Inquiry comes to about his report into Carl Stokes, (the kindest thing you could say about it was that he bent over backwards to take the most charitable view of Stokes' work), this also lays some of the foundation for when the Inquiry looks at the role of Government later in the year.

One of a number of the areas in which that guidance has been criticised was the inclusion of a statement that it was 'usually unrealistic' for landlords of blocks of flats to produce personal emergency evacuation plans for disabled residents. The Inquiry's Phase One report recommended that building owners and their agents should be required by law to produce these. This recommendation is one of several that has not as yet been implemented and there has been a great deal of push back against it from the housing industry.

Against this the relatives of Sakina Afrasehabi, a woman with severe mobility issues who died in the fire together with her sister Fatima, have been warning that they will take legal action if the recommendation is not implemented. Today they did just that.

Inside Housing - Bereaved Grenfell family issue legal proceedings against Home Office over republished guidance

This has been going on for a while, and that article gives an account of the background and links to previous Inside Housing stories. However it's perhaps also worth quoting from an article it doesn't link to here. That gives an account of the circumstances in which a woman with severe mobility issues was housed on the 18th floor of Grenfell Tower.

Why Sakina Afrasehabi was housed in Grenfell Tower​

  • From 1998, Ms Afrasehabi lived in a two-bedroom flat on the second floor of a building in Ladbroke Grove, west London. The flat had 42 steps to the front door and no lifts, meaning it was unsuitable for Ms Afrasehabi who had mobility issues resulting from an accident as well as severe arthritis.
  • Her family applied for a council housing transfer in 2000 to a more suitable home. In March 2003, a council assessment confirmed she should be rehoused in a property with no more than six steps or in a lifted property no higher than the fourth floor.
  • By 2012, after more than a decade on the waiting list, the family instructed a solicitor to help push for her to be moved to an accessible home. Ms Afrasehabi was made ‘high priority’, and following a review by the council it was recommended that she be housed in step-free accommodation.
  • In 2014, she had a bid accepted for a new build property with step-free access. But before she moved in, the council instigated an investigation claiming falsely that her daughter – her live-in carer – did not live with her and that she had in fact been under-occupying her two-bedroom flat. Investigators arrived unannounced at the flat to count toothbrushes and check the wardrobes. Ms Aghlani recalls being spoken to “like we were criminals”. “[My mother] was scared that this could happen again. She did not sleep. She was traumatised. She was someone who had great faith in the police and institutions, in the Queen, but she was very scared,” she recalled in her witness statement. The family were interrogated by investigators and suspended from the bidding system. They lost the flat.
  • By November 2014, the investigation was suspended with no wrong-doing found and the family were able to bid again on properties – but were told they could only bid for studio flats
  • She was eventually offered accommodation on the 18th floor of Grenfell Tower in early 2016, and told if she did not take it she would be suspended from the bidding system entirely. “I had deep worries at the time but I buried them in the back of my mind. I did not want to even contemplate what would happen if a fire ever happened,” said Ms Aghlani.
  • Less than 18 months later, Ms Afrasehabi and her sister died in the fire after being advised to ‘stay put’ by the fire service.
Source: witness statement of Nazanin Aghlani, available here.
 
For anyone wondering how Kingspan were making out:

riLfuvH.png



Sales of Kingspan’s core product, insulated panels, surged by 44% year-on-year, as construction activity returned in force following Covid lockdowns in key markets. (...)

Kingspan’s shares were up by about 2%, but had jumped by as high as nearly 4% in earlier trading. The stock is now trading at over €96.

It fell to about €53 late last year after Kingspan gave evidence in the inquiry into the Grenfell Tower block fire in London, where one of its products was used against its knowledge in non-compliant building works. (...)
Click to expand...

ETA: oops forgot the link to the article
 
Last edited:
Inside Housing report on this afternoon's hearing

External walls should have been checked by risk assessors, expert tells Grenfell inquiry (archived)

Barbara Lane is giving evidence about her module 3 report 'The Management and Maintenance of Grenfell Tower'.

It's another very large report - ten separate PDF chapters plus conclusions totalling over 2400 pages.
The 11 PDFs on the Inquiry website total over 1GB. I have compressed them to a more manageable 87mb in total.

Chapter 9 is readable but doesn't look great - that's down to the original PDF.
A revised version of Chapter 6 Section 14 is forthcoming because Barbara Lane has increased the number of adults in the tower on the night of the fire that she has counted as vulnerable.

Chapter 01 - The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 and its application to high rise residential buildings

Chapter 02 - Organising and planning a system of management that provides the fire safety arrangements

Chapter 03 - The fire safety arrangements made by KCTMO

Chapter 04 - KCTMO's duty to provide protection measures to support means of escape - fire doors

Chapter 05 - KCTMO’s duty to control the hazards from building work and alterations

Chapter 06 - KCTMO’s duty to provide adequate fire protection for vulnerable persons

Chapter 07 - KCTMO’s duty to provide a suitable system of maintenance for fire protection measures

Chapter 08 - The adequacy of the advice provided by the fire risk assessor Carl Stokes

Chapter 09 - KCTMO's duty to create a system of emergency planning - The resulting emergency plan for Grenfell Tower

Chapter 10 - The external wall construction - the hazard it posed to relevant persons

Chapter 11 - Conclusions
 
Lurdan said:
Inside Housing report on this afternoon's hearing

External walls should have been checked by risk assessors, expert tells Grenfell inquiry (archived)

Barbara Lane is giving evidence about her module 3 report 'The Management and Maintenance of Grenfell Tower'.

It's another very large report - ten separate PDF chapters plus conclusions totalling over 2400 pages.
The 11 PDFs on the Inquiry website total over 1GB. I have compressed them to a more manageable 87mb in total.

Chapter 9 is readable but doesn't look great - that's down to the original PDF.
A revised version of Chapter 6 Section 14 is forthcoming because Barbara Lane has increased the number of adults in the tower on the night of the fire that she has counted as vulnerable.

Chapter 01 - The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 and its application to high rise residential buildings

Chapter 02 - Organising and planning a system of management that provides the fire safety arrangements

Chapter 03 - The fire safety arrangements made by KCTMO

Chapter 04 - KCTMO's duty to provide protection measures to support means of escape - fire doors

Chapter 05 - KCTMO’s duty to control the hazards from building work and alterations

Chapter 06 - KCTMO’s duty to provide adequate fire protection for vulnerable persons

Chapter 07 - KCTMO’s duty to provide a suitable system of maintenance for fire protection measures

Chapter 08 - The adequacy of the advice provided by the fire risk assessor Carl Stokes

Chapter 09 - KCTMO's duty to create a system of emergency planning - The resulting emergency plan for Grenfell Tower

Chapter 10 - The external wall construction - the hazard it posed to relevant persons

Chapter 11 - Conclusions
Click to expand...
Above and beyond, Lurdan, above and beyond 👍
 
This week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 46: ‘I think I’ve been very, very clear that is completely wrong’

This brought module 3 of phase 2 of the Inquiry to an end. (Although Barbara Lane has been asked to produce a report on the 'new' Smoke Control system which was installed during the refurbishment, which will be heard in Module 7, along with any other final expert reports).

What are these modules?

On Monday and all next week there will be closing statements by core participants for modules 1 and 2 (obviously more time will be needed to produce closing statements for module 3). The timetable for next week is here (PDF). I see it begins with BSR Team 1. Given what we have heard between January 2020 and March this year there will be no shortage of things to be said.

The documentary Grenfell: The Untold Story was sensitively made but very powerful. It can be streamed at C4's All 4 site - you will need to create an account.

Alternatively...
This link to download/watch it might be good for a week or so.

gofile.io

Gofile - Free Unlimited File Sharing and Storage

Gofile is a free, secure file sharing and storage platform. With unlimited bandwidth and storage, you can easily store and share files of any type without any limits. Our advanced features, such as CDN support and password protection, make Gofile the ideal choice for individuals and businesses...
gofile.io
 
Lurdan said:
This week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 46: ‘I think I’ve been very, very clear that is completely wrong’

This brought module 3 of phase 2 of the Inquiry to an end. (Although Barbara Lane has been asked to produce a report on the 'new' Smoke Control system which was installed during the refurbishment, which will be heard in Module 7, along with any other final expert reports).

What are these modules?

On Monday and all next week there will be closing statements by core participants for modules 1 and 2 (obviously more time will be needed to produce closing statements for module 3). The timetable for next week is here (PDF). I see it begins with BSR Team 1. Given what we have heard between January 2020 and March this year there will be no shortage of things to be said.

The documentary Grenfell: The Untold Story was sensitively made but very powerful. It can be streamed at C4's All 4 site - you will need to create an account.

Alternatively...
This link to download/watch it might be good for a week or so.

gofile.io

Gofile - Free Unlimited File Sharing and Storage

Gofile is a free, secure file sharing and storage platform. With unlimited bandwidth and storage, you can easily store and share files of any type without any limits. Our advanced features, such as CDN support and password protection, make Gofile the ideal choice for individuals and businesses...
gofile.io
Click to expand...

You're an absolute star Lurdan by keeping us all informed and by never letting the memories of that awful event fade away. Massive respect to you for collating all this info.
 
This week was devoted to closing statements by core participants for modules 1 & 2 .

To recap: Phase 2 of the Inquiry, which began in January last year, is divided into modules. The Inquiry's current provisional timetable is here.

Module 1 (which because of legal shenanigans and the pandemic ran from January to November last year) dealt with the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower.
Module 2 (which ran from November last year to March this year) dealt with the cladding products used.

(Closing statements for Module 3 which has just concluded will be heard after the end of the next Module sometime in mid-October).

Some core participants supplied written closing statements (links in the spoiler) and also made oral submissions. For the latter, links to the daily transcripts with page references can be found here.
Bereaved Survivors and Team 1 Module 1 - Module 2

Royal Borough Of Kensington & Chelsea Module 1 & 2

Fire Brigades Union Module 1 - Module 2

Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation Module 1 & 2

Studio E Architects Ltd Module 1 & 2

Exova (UK]Module 1 [/url] Limited Module 1 & 2

Arconic Architectural Products SAS Module 1 - Module 2

Celotex Limited Module 1 & 2

Kingspan Insulation Limited Module 1 - Module 2

Building Research Establishment Module 1 & 2

Mayor of London Module 1 & 2

Siderise Insulation Ltd Module 1 & 2

LABC (Local Authority Building Control] Module 1 & 2

Rydon Maintenance Limited Module 1 & 2

BSRs Team 2 Module 1 - Module 2

Some core participants only supplied written statements
Artelia Projects UK Limited Module 1 & 2

British Board of Agrément Module 1 & 2

Kevin Lamb t/a Bespoke Design Module 1 & 2

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government Module 1 & 2

London Fire Brigade Module 1 & 2

Max Fordham LLP Module 1 & 2

Osborne Berry Module 1 & 2

S D Plastering Limited Module 1 & 2

Harley Facades the 'specialist' cladding sub-contractor were notably completely absent. Adrian Williamson for BSRs Team2 observed:
It is striking and regrettable that Harley have put no closing submissions before the Inquiry. Their position is indefensible and they have not sought to defend it.
Click to expand...

This week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary gives an overview of the week. Obviously given the range of issues covered in these two modules, and the range of positions adopted, particularly where some of the circular firing squad of corporate core participants let others have it with both barrels, this is a more 'high level' overview than other Grenfell Diarys and only sketches out some basics,

Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 47: ‘an unedifying spectacle’ (archived)
Monday 13th - Grenfell demonstrates ‘culture of non-compliance’ in construction industry, inquiry hears
Tuesday 14th - Grenfell contractor put ‘financial self-interest’ ahead of fire safety, consultancy claims
Wednesday 15th - KCTMO sold Grenfell residents’ ‘interests and safety’ to ‘lowest bidder’, says mayor of London
Monday's contains a number of links to previous IH reports. Links in all of them should be working.

The most interesting closing statements IMO were those made on behalf of the Bereaved Survivors and Residents and the Fire Brigades Union.

The week's hearings began with Stephanie Barwise for BSRs Team 1 and ended with Adrian Williamson (module 1) and Sam Stein (module 2) for BSRs Team 2. Barwise's presentation, like those she has given before, was more technical. Williamson and Steins were more polemical. All focussed on the same group of core participants:
  • the Council and the 'TMO';
  • of the companies involved in the refurbishment: Studio E, Exova, Rydon and Harley;
  • of the manufacturers: Arconic, Kingspan and Celotex;
  • and the test houses and certifiers: BRE, BBA and LABC.
Martin Seaward for the Fire Brigades Union set his criticisms of the same bodies within the context of privatisation and deregulation.

Here are web page versions of those four closing statements. Where possible I've added links to documents referred to.

BSRs Team 2 (on module 1)
BSRs Team 2 (on module 2)
Fire Brigages Union
BSRs Team 1

I'd stick some sample quotes in here - there are some great ones - but this is already quite long enough. And it's coffee and biscuits time.

(Even by my tedious standards that's a lot of links - if you find any broken ones please point them out).
 
Last edited:
The FBU statement is expectedly quite damning. I read these articles and am astonished that some of the people responsible are not already in jail. It's like a mirror image of Johnson's lot and their dodgy, corrupt useless tender processes throughout Covid.
 
You could have had the best fire evacuation plan alarm and rhe fure brigrade making no mistakes.
People would still have died because moronic cunts wrapped the tower in shoddy firelighters to save a few quid🤬
 
Today the Inquiry began opening statements for Module 5. (What happened to Module 4 ? It has been put back to later in the year).

Richard Millett made a short opening statement setting out what is to be dealt with in this Module.

Today's opening addresses mark the start of module 5, during which we will investigate the remaining matters, concerning the London Fire Brigade's response to the Grenfell Tower fire on the 14th of June 2017, that could not be addressed in Phase 1.

We will also investigate three other specific topics that arise from the Chairman's findings in the Phase 1 report. Those specific topics are as follows:

First, the adequacy and effectiveness of visits carried out by the LFB, under section 7.2d of the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004, to obtain information which is necessary to discharge the LFB's statutory function to extinguish fires.

Secondly training, and with particular focus on the training provided by the LFB to incident commanders, and in relation in particular there, to evacuation.

And thirdly, alternative fire fighting strategies in high rise buildings.

As to the structure of module 5, we're going to start with opening statements by certain of the core participants today.

Starting from tomorrow, we will hear evidence from past and present senior LFB officers on the topics that I've mentioned.

You will recall that at Phase 1 the Inquiry called evidence from some 88 LFB employees, and the statements of a further 262 LFB witnesses were read into the record.

In this module 5 the Inquiry will not therefore be calling any further factual evidence about the events on the night of the fire on the 14th of June 2017. Those events have been the subject of detailed analysis and findings in the Phase 1 report.

The Inquiry currently expects the factual evidence of this module 5 to take 14 or so sitting days.

Following the factual evidence we will then hear from three of the four experts retained by the Inquiry for the purposes of this module. Those experts are as follows:
1. Professor Chris Johnson, who has examined the effectiveness of the LFB's communication systems;
2. Mr Steve McGuirk, who will deal in broad terms with fire fighting on the night; and
3. Professor Jose Torero, who will consider general issues arising from the fire fighting response.

We expect that that evidence, the evidence of each expert, will take one day apiece.

Doctor Ivan Stoianov has addressed certain issues relating to water on the night of the fire. In the light of some of the points made by Thames Water and the LFB, very recently in their opening submissions, the Inquiry team has decided to call Doctor Stoianov's evidence later, in Module 7, to allow him to consider the points that have been raised.

Finally, I should make it clear that the first part of Module 6 will be concerned with further questions for the LFB and others, such as the sufficiency of the LFB's policy arrangements for the management of fire survival guidance calls; MHCLG's policy document GRA 3.2 and evacuation; the translation of knowledge within the LFB, of risks presented by cladding fires in high rise buildings, into operational policy and practise; and the lessons learned and arising from the Lakanal House fire, and other relevant fires in this country and abroad. We intend to examine those matters in module 6 but also to some extent in this Module 5.

I should also make it clear that in module 6 the Inquiry will hear evidence from the present London Fire Commissioner and his two immediate predecessors.
Click to expand...

This was followed by opening statements from Counsel for Bereaved, Survivors and Relatives Teams 1 and 2, and Imran Khan & Partners. They have also submitted written statements which can be found here: Team 1 -- Team 2 -- Imran Khan & Partners

I think it's fair to say that people who were unhappy about the London Fire Brigade being criticised during Phase 1 of the Inquiry, will not find these happy reading at all. The three oral statements that were made this morning outlined detailed criticisms of the LFB, some of it forcefully expressed, and they were uncomfortable listening. Personally, I think being made uncomfortable is not only inherent in what this Inquiry is about, but it ought to be so.

This afternoon: opening statements from the Mayor, the FBU, the Fire Officers Association and the London Fire Commissioner. I'll link to today's transcript when it's up and I'll have a go at more reader friendly versions of some of the oral statements. Video of them is of course available now.

Inside Housing report of this mornings hearing:
LFB ‘closed-minded and parochial’ before Grenfell and ‘unable to cope’ with emergency beyond normal fire, lawyers for community say (archived)

ETA: Inside Housing report of the afternoon hearing;
Firefighters would have been 'improvising' if they had attempted Grenfell evacuation, says union lawyer (archived)
 
Last edited:
This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 48: ‘They knew, and lives could and should have been saved’
There are working links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page.

The Module 5 opening statements on behalf of the BSRs were highly critical of the Fire Brigades preparedness. Here are web page versions of a number of the oral opening statements:
BSRs Team 1
BSRs Team 2
Imran Khan & Partners
FBU
LFB

And I've just spotted I never actually posted the link to the transcript of last weeks BBC podcast :facepalm:
As I mentioned above the closing statements for Modules 1 and 2 last week by definition covered a great deal of ground. This podcast did a very good job of summarizing this, giving a sense both of the criticisms of the corporate core participants and also of their various lines of defence. (Which in some cases meant launching attacks on one another).
 
This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 50: ‘There is a culture in LFB that is very conservative. I think there is great comfort in what is familiar’
Working links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page.

Next week the Inquiry is only sitting on Wednesday (13th) to hear the evidence of Paul Grimwood, who developed an alternative firefighting strategy for high-rise residential buildings while working at Kent Fire and Rescue Service. (It's discussed in some of the opening submissions for this Module, for example, Imran Khan's: - starts at paragraph 86).
The following Monday (18th) should be the start of evidence by the Inquiry's expert witnesses.
 
This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 52: ‘I actually think that there is a measure of incompetence at all levels’
Working links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page.

The Inquiry sat for three days hearing Expert Witness evidence from:
  • Chris Johnson on Fire Brigade communications systems, and the LFB's on the night of the fire.
  • Steve McGuirk on the adequacy of the London Fire Brigade's inspections, risk assessments, procedures and training, the fire-fighting response on the night of 14 June 2017 and recommendations for any changes to training and practice in response to similar incidents.
  • Jose Torero on the correlation between fire safety provisions and the LFB's procedures for dealing with fires in high-rise buildings and the adequacy of firefighter training for dealing with these fires.
ETA: Steve McGuirk's report is here (15MB PDF)
Jose Torero's main report is here (10MB PDF) and a supplementary report here (5.4MB PDF)
Chris Johnson's report was a bit oversized - here is a compressed copy (10MB PDF) (Dropbox link)

That largely concludes the evidence for Module 5. (There is a further expert report by Ivan Stolanov on the sufficiency of water supply and water pressure to Grenfell Tower to enable the London Fire Brigade to effectively fight the fire. However this is being reconsidered in light of new information and will be dealt with in Module 7 next year).

On Monday and Tuesday next week there will be closing statements for Module 3 of the Inquiry which covered the management, and particularly fire management arrangements, for Grenfell Tower by KCTMO and RBKC before the fire. Closing statements by counsel for Bereaved, Survivors and Residents and the 'TMO' on Monday. For Carl Stokes, RBKC, the Mayor of London and the FBU on Tuesday.

On Thursday the start of Module 6 on the role of Government.
 
Last edited:
Interesting week which began with the closing submissions in relation to Module 3 which concluded last month. Module 3 dealt with the actions of the Council, their agent the 'TMO' and their contractors
  • in addressing fire safety related complaints by residents of the tower;
  • in complying with their legal responsibilities under the Fire Safety Order;
  • and regarding the provision and maintenance of active and passive fire safety measures within Grenfell Tower.
Here are the Inside Housing daily reports (there will be the weekly Grenfell Diary tomorrow).
Monday - Grenfell Tower fire was a ‘human rights disaster’, say lawyers for residents
Tuesday - Grenfell residents ‘not listened to as much as they should have been’, council admits

Here are transcripts of the two oral submissions made on behalf of Bereaved, Survivors and Residents Team 1
[I'm working on the transcript of the oral submission made on behalf of BSRs Team 2 and will stick a link to it here].

Written submissions were made by a number of core participants. Links to the PDFs of these in the spoiler below. In addition to submissions by those whose actions were dealt with during the module, Celotex who manufactured most of the combustible insulation used during the refurbishment has, as part of it's 'commitment to help the Inquiry', also taken the opportunity to put the boot into the Council and the 'TMO'. In their submissions KCTMO made a number of further admissions of failings on it's part.

BSRs Team 1 - BSRs Team 1 Submission One (16.08 MB)

BSRs Team 1 Submission Two (9.54 MB)

BSRs Team 2 - BSRs Team 2 Submission(16.02 MB)

BSRs Team 2 Table of Children Who Died

KCTMO - Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (14.87 MB)

C S Stokes & Associates Limited - C S Stokes & Associates Limited (9.3 MB)

Royal Borough Of Kensington & Chelsea - Royal Borough Of Kensington & Chelsea (15.04 MB)

Mayor of London - Mayor of London (1.91 MB)

Fire Brigades Union - Fire Brigades Union (8.48 MB)

Cadent Gas Ltd - Cadent Gas Ltd (8.81 MB)

Celotex - Celotex (16.15 MB)

Exova - Exova (1.79 MB)

J S Wright & Co Ltd - J S Wright & Co Ltd (2.17 MB)

London Fire Commissioner - London Fire Commissioner (455.65 KB)

Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities - Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (7.19 MB)

Email between Housing Ombudsman and MHCLG re_ complaints definitions (528.57 KB)

tRIIO - tRIIO (2.17 MB)

If you find any broken links let me know.
 
This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 53: ‘They make for chilling reading and harrowing listening’
Working links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page.

As I mentioned above the week started with closing statements for Module 3. It concluded with opening statements for Module 6. Or more accurately for one self-contained topic within Module 6.
Richard Millett's brief opening remarks set out what it will be dealing with. (I've added a link to what GRA 3.2 was).

Today is the start of the first part of Module 6, the subject matter of which concerns firefighting, and which flows directly from the matters which were reported on in the Phase 1 report, and further examined in the course of Module 5. We will investigate four particular topics. The first is the development of Generic Risk Assessment or GRA, 3.2, and in particular, consideration of the issue of evacuation. Secondly, translation of the knowledge of the risks presented by cladding fires into LFB's operational policy and practises. Thirdly, the sufficiency of the LFB's policy arrangements for the management of fire survival guidance calls, or FSGs, including the FSG training that was developed and delivered to control room staff after the Lakanal House fire in July 2009. And finally, the lessons arising from the Lakanal House fire, and other relevant fires in the United Kingdom and abroad, to the extent that those have not already been considered in Module 5.
Click to expand...

As to the structure of this part of Module 6, we will begin with these opening statements today from some of the core participants. Then from next Monday 1st of November, we will begin to hear evidence from past and present senior officers of the LFB, and will conclude with the evidence of Commissioner Andy Roe, the present London Fire Commissioner, and also his two immediate predecessors. There will be no expert evidence called in this part of Module 6. I should also make it clear that as at Module 5, given the detailed evidence adduced during the Phase 1 part of this Inquiry, which was the subject of detailed analysis and findings in the Chairman's Phase 1 report, we will not be calling any further evidence about the events on the night of the 14th June 2017. The Inquiry currently expects the evidence in this part of Module 6 to take five weeks or so and no more than that.
Click to expand...

There were then oral opening statements on behalf of Bereaved, Survivors and Residents Teams 1 and 2, the FBU and the London Fire Commissioner.

They also submitted written statements as did Imran Khan & Partners on behalf of a different group of BSRs, the Home Office and the Mayor of London.

BSRs Team 1 - BSRs Team 1 (1.38 MB)

BSRs Team 2 - BSRs Team 2 (11.6 MB)

BSRs Team 2 Schedule One - Sample list of transcripts of emergency calls on the night of the fire (94.33 KB)

Fire Brigades Union - Fire Brigades Union (7.1MB)

London Fire Commissioner - London Fire Commissioner (5.75.63MB)

Home Office - Home Office (1.97MB)

Imran Khan & Partners - Imran Khan & Partners (1.14MB)

Mayor of London - Mayor of London (93.87KB)

The oral submissions from BSRs Teams 1 & 2 were both quite powerful. I'll put links to transcripts of them up when I get off my lazy arse later.
 
Here are transcripts of the oral opening statements by Bereaved, Survivors and Relatives Teams 1 & 2 for the first section of Module 6.

Danny Friedman (Team 1)
Leslie Thomas (Team 2)

Friedman's criticisms of the LFB are as forcefully worded as his Module 5 opening statement. He does make the very important point that the roots of those failings cannot simply be attributed to the austerity cuts and deregulation imposed by the coalition government but stem directly from the reforms introduced by the previous Labour government, something I entirely agree with. I think this is well worth reading.

The transcript of Leslie Thomas' oral submission was a bit of a challenge. The official transcribers also clearly had difficulty with it in places. Professor Thomas chose to illustrate the failings of the control rooms which took emergency calls on the night of the fire by quoting extracts from the transcripts of some of those calls, including some of those made by people who died. This is difficult stuff. However Professor Thomas' presentation of it was in places a very freestyle one. Phrases were extracted and put together in abbreviated combinations with verbal additions of his own. Where he listed which document he was quoting the official transcribers were able to render his own additions in the context of what he was quoting. For at least two emergency call transcripts he quotes they were unable to identify a source. I've added links to documents where sources are identifiable, and some transcribers notes in cases where they are not. He also 'quoted' two passages attributed to Hanan Wahabi's witness statements. The statement that is the source of one of these is identifiable but what he said is a construction drawn from it rather than a quote. The source of the other supposed quote isn't clear. It includes some phrases that can be found in her statements and her oral evidence during Phase 1 of the Inquiry. It could be from another witness statement that isn't on the Inquiry's public facing website but the official transcribers presumably have access to such material and they also don't seem to be able to identify it. (It is possible that a revised version of the official transcript may address some of this - that has happened before).

Professor Thomas argued:
At the heart of this Inquiry are people, and people who were not heard. It’s vital for the efficacy of this Inquiry that those voices – in the case of the fire survival guidance, literally their voices – should be heard.
Click to expand...

It is thus somewhat ironic that what we actually get is his creative rendition of their words.

Nonetheless he also makes some strong arguments, which in places are a little different, and are also differently expressed, to those made by Team 1.
 
This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 54: ‘Our consideration of evacuation at this time was something of a blind spot’
Working links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page.

The Inquiry put up a factsheet about the current Module, Module 6. PDF version here or web version here. The Module is planned to run until March.

The Module deals with four topics. The first of them, firefighting policies, and the training and preparation based on them, follows directly from the issues looked at in the last Module. It is thus being dealt with in a self-contained way. (Hence why there were opening statements for just this first topic last week). The Inquiry has announced that closing statements for both Module 5 and this firefighting topic will be heard together in January.

In December, before it's Xmas break, the Module will start on the other three topics, which include the role of Government in setting and overseeing the legal and regulatory framework within it was possible to turn a social housing block into a combustible death trap.
 
Lurdan said:
Here are transcripts of the oral opening statements by Bereaved, Survivors and Relatives Teams 1 & 2 for the first section of Module 6.

Danny Friedman (Team 1)
Leslie Thomas (Team 2)

Friedman's criticisms of the LFB are as forcefully worded as his Module 5 opening statement. He does make the very important point that the roots of those failings cannot simply be attributed to the austerity cuts and deregulation imposed by the coalition government but stem directly from the reforms introduced by the previous Labour government, something I entirely agree with. I think this is well worth reading.

The transcript of Leslie Thomas' oral submission was a bit of a challenge. The official transcribers also clearly had difficulty with it in places. Professor Thomas chose to illustrate the failings of the control rooms which took emergency calls on the night of the fire by quoting extracts from the transcripts of some of those calls, including some of those made by people who died. This is difficult stuff. However Professor Thomas' presentation of it was in places a very freestyle one. Phrases were extracted and put together in abbreviated combinations with verbal additions of his own. Where he listed which document he was quoting the official transcribers were able to render his own additions in the context of what he was quoting. For at least two emergency call transcripts he quotes they were unable to identify a source. I've added links to documents where sources are identifiable, and some transcribers notes in cases where they are not. He also 'quoted' two passages attributed to Hanan Wahabi's witness statements. The statement that is the source of one of these is identifiable but what he said is a construction drawn from it rather than a quote. The source of the other supposed quote isn't clear. It includes some phrases that can be found in her statements and her oral evidence during Phase 1 of the Inquiry. It could be from another witness statement that isn't on the Inquiry's public facing website but the official transcribers presumably have access to such material and they also don't seem to be able to identify it. (It is possible that a revised version of the official transcript may address some of this - that has happened before).

Professor Thomas argued:


It is thus somewhat ironic that what we actually get is his creative rendition of their words.

Nonetheless he also makes some strong arguments, which in places are a little different, and are also differently expressed, to those made by Team 1.
Click to expand...
What I will say is that his behaviour is not atypical of some academics with regards to the creative interpretation of some of the calls. He really should have been more rigourous than that.
 
I also think the council behaved appallingly over the treatment of Sakina and can't help but think she was valued less as a human being because of her disabilities. As the production of personal evacuation plans, I don't see this as a particularly onerous requirement on any landlord. Certainly it should be mandatory for any person with disabilities living in a tower block. Failure to produce one within a set time period should be a criminal offence, and not a civil one excused merely by paying a fine.

People died because of these deficiencies.
 
Last edited:
This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 55: ‘My review is pretty scathing!’

For those who want them links to the daily reports
LFB training of control room staff 'ad hoc and not robustly planned' despite warnings, inquiry hears
LFB manager wrote ‘scathing’ internal review of brigade’s post-Lakanal training
LFB training on advice to trapped residents limited before Grenfell amid 'budgetary constraints', inquiry hears
Time pressures and staff ‘deficiencies’ made some LFB training ‘unachievable’, says manager

The week was taken up with evidence from past and present senior LFB managers about the training of control room staff, particularly in dealing with Fire Safety Guidance calls from people trapped in a fire, and the failure to implement the recommendations made after the Lakanal House fire in 2009.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PTK
Fire in Tower Block in Dagenham, London, Monday 26 August 2024.
Replies
27
Views
1K
moochedit
moochedit
G
Kemi Badenoch discussion
13 14 15 16 17
Replies
495
Views
22K
pbsmooth
P
A
125 firefighters fight Fire at Somerset House
Replies
8
Views
534
Fozzie Bear
Fozzie Bear
BristolEcho
Barton House Tower Evacuated
Replies
16
Views
979
teuchter
teuchter
PR1Berske
UK election poll: Islington North
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
161
Views
6K
hitmouse
hitmouse
Back
Top Bottom