Grenfell Tower fire in North Kensington - news and discussion
- Thread starter JTG
- Start date
mango5
Endeavour era
Free screenings of Steve McQueen's short film over the next few weeks
www.serpentinegalleries.org
Grenfell by Steve McQueen - Serpentine Galleries
Grenfell by Steve McQueen In December 2017, artist and filmmaker Steve McQueen (b. 1969, London, UK) made an artwork in response to the fire that took
www.serpentinegalleries.org
Lurdan
old wave
The Inquiry posted an update yesterday. It stated that the final report would not be finalised before the beginning of next year.
Twitter link
In a paywalled article Inside Housing points out:
Twitter link
This is hardly good news but as Grenfell United say it's also not very surprising. Lawyers for the bereaved, survivors and residents urged the Inquiry to consider how to ensure its recommendations were acted on. Carefully setting out the basis for making them will be a significant part of that, particularly if the Inquiry adopts some of the more far reaching proposals made in some of the final reports by it's expert witnesses. But obviously that goes hand in hand with the other aspect of the report: the strength of the findings it makes in respect of the failings it identifies.
Twitter link
In a paywalled article Inside Housing points out:
Twitter link
This is hardly good news but as Grenfell United say it's also not very surprising. Lawyers for the bereaved, survivors and residents urged the Inquiry to consider how to ensure its recommendations were acted on. Carefully setting out the basis for making them will be a significant part of that, particularly if the Inquiry adopts some of the more far reaching proposals made in some of the final reports by it's expert witnesses. But obviously that goes hand in hand with the other aspect of the report: the strength of the findings it makes in respect of the failings it identifies.
Last edited:
Lurdan
old wave
News about combustible cladding manufacturer Arconic.
Twitter link. Thread archived here at threadreaderapp.
Twitter link. Thread archived here at threadreaderapp.
Lurdan
old wave
Six years on from Grenfell, why do most social housing blocks still not have sprinklers or fire alarms? - Inside Housing (archived)
from the author's associated twitter thread
twitter link -- archived version of thread
from the author's associated twitter thread
twitter link -- archived version of thread
DaveCinzano
WATCH OUT, GEORGE, HE'S GOT A SCREWDRIVER!
Inside Housing journalist Peter Apps (see this thread passing) has won an Orwell Prize for Political Writing for his Grenfell book:
www.orwellfoundation.com
www.theguardian.com
Show Me The Bodies | The Orwell Foundation
A magnificent book that deftly combines vivid, compelling accounts of the victims of the fire with forensic (but no less engaging) detail on the decades of
www.orwellfoundation.com
Two debut books win Orwell prizes for political writing
Peter Apps’ magnificent account of the Grenfell fire tragedy and Tom Crewe’s historical novel about pioneering Victorian gay rights advocates will each receive £3,000
Lurdan
old wave
Peter Apps' book is well worth reading.
twitter link
twitter link
INTRODUCTION
It should have been a normal flat fire. It was just an electrical appliance malfunctioning in a flat on the sixth floor of a 1950s council block. The London Fire Brigade (LFB) attend these sort of events every day. Often, they put it out without the other residents of the building even knowing. But this fire would be different.
The tower block had been poorly maintained and serious fire safety defects had been allowed to fester. Residents had raised their concerns without any success. A legally required risk assessment had not been carried out. Worse, a recent refurbishment had seen highly combustible panels fixed to the external wall.
It was the middle of a hot summer when the fire broke out, the flames licking through an open window, igniting one of the panels. It began to spread up the building, threatening other flats.
This took the fire service by surprise. Fire is not supposed to spread from flat to flat. As call after call came in from trapped residents, the call handlers fell back on the textbook advice: ‘stay put’. On the ground, the rescue operation became chaotic. This was outside the firefighters' training and they didn’t know how to respond. Outdated equipment hindered the co-ordination of the response. Command was passed rapidly from one officer to another. Key information necessary to save the trapped residents was not conveyed to the teams on the ground quickly enough. Residents were left waiting desperately for help that never came. If they had been told to flee, they would likely have lived.
Harrowing 999 calls, which would later be played at a mammoth public inquest, recorded the rising panic of those trapped as smoke filled their burning flats. The fire ripped through the poorly maintained building. Fire doors failed. Eventually, the single staircase filled up with pitch-dark, choking smoke. In just one bathroom, two mothers and their three children died, including a baby born just weeks before.
‘The council were aware of our concerns. We told them we needed certain measures put into place,’ one resident told the Evening Standard just days after the fire. ‘But every time we complained, they told us they had taken our concerns on board, but nothing ever happened.’
Questions rapidly emerged about other social housing tower blocks around the country, as it appeared some of the safety issues which had turned this fire into a disaster were widespread. Amid a storm of criticism, the fire service said it would review the stay put advice it had given trapped residents. It was Britain’s worst ever tower block fire. Politicians solemnly promised it would never happen again. These promises would be broken.
Because this wasn’t the Grenfell Tower fire of 2017. It was a fire at Lakanal House, a tower block in Southwark in south east London, in 2009.
It should have been a normal flat fire. It was just an electrical appliance malfunctioning in a flat on the sixth floor of a 1950s council block. The London Fire Brigade (LFB) attend these sort of events every day. Often, they put it out without the other residents of the building even knowing. But this fire would be different.
The tower block had been poorly maintained and serious fire safety defects had been allowed to fester. Residents had raised their concerns without any success. A legally required risk assessment had not been carried out. Worse, a recent refurbishment had seen highly combustible panels fixed to the external wall.
It was the middle of a hot summer when the fire broke out, the flames licking through an open window, igniting one of the panels. It began to spread up the building, threatening other flats.
This took the fire service by surprise. Fire is not supposed to spread from flat to flat. As call after call came in from trapped residents, the call handlers fell back on the textbook advice: ‘stay put’. On the ground, the rescue operation became chaotic. This was outside the firefighters' training and they didn’t know how to respond. Outdated equipment hindered the co-ordination of the response. Command was passed rapidly from one officer to another. Key information necessary to save the trapped residents was not conveyed to the teams on the ground quickly enough. Residents were left waiting desperately for help that never came. If they had been told to flee, they would likely have lived.
Harrowing 999 calls, which would later be played at a mammoth public inquest, recorded the rising panic of those trapped as smoke filled their burning flats. The fire ripped through the poorly maintained building. Fire doors failed. Eventually, the single staircase filled up with pitch-dark, choking smoke. In just one bathroom, two mothers and their three children died, including a baby born just weeks before.
‘The council were aware of our concerns. We told them we needed certain measures put into place,’ one resident told the Evening Standard just days after the fire. ‘But every time we complained, they told us they had taken our concerns on board, but nothing ever happened.’
Questions rapidly emerged about other social housing tower blocks around the country, as it appeared some of the safety issues which had turned this fire into a disaster were widespread. Amid a storm of criticism, the fire service said it would review the stay put advice it had given trapped residents. It was Britain’s worst ever tower block fire. Politicians solemnly promised it would never happen again. These promises would be broken.
Because this wasn’t the Grenfell Tower fire of 2017. It was a fire at Lakanal House, a tower block in Southwark in south east London, in 2009.
Lurdan
old wave
BRE ends relationship with Kingspan over ‘reputational risk’ following Grenfell Inquiry revelations - Inside Housing (archived)
Last week insulation manufacturer Kingspan wrote to it's clients to say that the Building Research Establishment were no longer accepting work from them. The decision was apparently taken last year.
The Inquiry heard that both Kingspan and Celotex deliberately 'gamed' the BRE testing system and then misrepresented the results to sell their products as generally compliant with Building Regulations for use on tall buildings. In fact they could only have been compliant in very specific configurations which did not apply at Grenfell, or on a great many other buildings. They are now banned from use on buildings over 11 metres tall, and Celotex withdrew a number of it's products from the market. Although the rapid spread of flames at Grenfell was caused by the ACM cladding material, the insulation manufactured by Kingspan and Celotex contributed to the fire first reaching that cladding material; Kingspan's K15 insulation produced burning debris; and both products contributed to the toxic smoke cocktail which was the main cause of death.
Twitter link (for those with twitter accounts)
The Inquiry is producing it's Phase 2 report which is expected next year. In an update last week it said:
Last week insulation manufacturer Kingspan wrote to it's clients to say that the Building Research Establishment were no longer accepting work from them. The decision was apparently taken last year.
The Inquiry heard that both Kingspan and Celotex deliberately 'gamed' the BRE testing system and then misrepresented the results to sell their products as generally compliant with Building Regulations for use on tall buildings. In fact they could only have been compliant in very specific configurations which did not apply at Grenfell, or on a great many other buildings. They are now banned from use on buildings over 11 metres tall, and Celotex withdrew a number of it's products from the market. Although the rapid spread of flames at Grenfell was caused by the ACM cladding material, the insulation manufactured by Kingspan and Celotex contributed to the fire first reaching that cladding material; Kingspan's K15 insulation produced burning debris; and both products contributed to the toxic smoke cocktail which was the main cause of death.
Twitter link (for those with twitter accounts)
Peter Apps @PeteApps
Those who followed the inquiry evidence about both organisations may be tempted to make a comment about stable doors, horses and bolting
[He adds a screencap of part of the Inside Housing article linked to above:
"The inquiry also spent time focusing on a further Kingspan test in March 2014, where helmet camera footage appeared to show Kingspan representatives discussing the wording of the test report with the BRE.
After flames passed the top of the rig, which meant it had failed, one Kingspan staff member was recorded saying: “Can’t you just delete the whole sentence?”
Further emails showed BRE staff describing test reports for Kingspan as “potentially a huge source of income over the coming years” in 2015."
9:57 AM • Jul 4, 2023 •1-775 Views
Those who followed the inquiry evidence about both organisations may be tempted to make a comment about stable doors, horses and bolting
[He adds a screencap of part of the Inside Housing article linked to above:
"The inquiry also spent time focusing on a further Kingspan test in March 2014, where helmet camera footage appeared to show Kingspan representatives discussing the wording of the test report with the BRE.
After flames passed the top of the rig, which meant it had failed, one Kingspan staff member was recorded saying: “Can’t you just delete the whole sentence?”
Further emails showed BRE staff describing test reports for Kingspan as “potentially a huge source of income over the coming years” in 2015."
9:57 AM • Jul 4, 2023 •1-775 Views
The Inquiry is producing it's Phase 2 report which is expected next year. In an update last week it said:
Lurdan
old wave
Back in April more than nine hundred claimants reached a civil settlement with 22 civil and corporate bodies involved in the Grenfell Tower fire. Reportedly the settlement totalled £150m. The contribution towards this of Rydon, the main contractor for the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower, is revealed in its accounts.
Rydon pays out £27m for Grenfell civil claim settlement - Construction Enquirer
This £26.7m provision is about three times the £9.2m Rydon initially bid to win the refurbishment contract.
In its Phase One report the Inquiry found that the Aluminium Composite Material cladding panels, with a highly combustible polyethylene core, did not comply with Building Regulations and were the primary cause of the rapid fire spread around the building.
In the year to September 2022:
Rydon pays out £27m for Grenfell civil claim settlement - Construction Enquirer
This £26.7m provision is about three times the £9.2m Rydon initially bid to win the refurbishment contract.
In its Phase One report the Inquiry found that the Aluminium Composite Material cladding panels, with a highly combustible polyethylene core, did not comply with Building Regulations and were the primary cause of the rapid fire spread around the building.
In the year to September 2022:
Lurdan
old wave
Last December there was a High Court hearing at which members of Claddag, a campaigning group representing disabled residents of buildings with dangerous cladding, sought a judicial review of the Government's decision not to implement Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs) for disabled residents of high rise buildings. (One of the recommendations of the Grenfell Inquiry's Phase 1 report). Details back here.
The outcome was announced today - the attempt to oblige the Home Office to reconsider was rejected.
Peter Apps has written a twitter thread about this - archived here at threadreaderapp. It concludes:
Last week, during a debate in Parliament on Building Safety and Social Housing, Michael Gove said, in reply to a question from Richard Burgon:
It is not known what is to be proposed.
The outcome was announced today - the attempt to oblige the Home Office to reconsider was rejected.
(from paywalled Inside Housing report)
Peter Apps has written a twitter thread about this - archived here at threadreaderapp. It concludes:
Last week, during a debate in Parliament on Building Safety and Social Housing, Michael Gove said, in reply to a question from Richard Burgon:
It is not known what is to be proposed.
Lurdan
old wave
Cost of Grenfell Tower disaster soars to nearly £1.2bn - The Guardian
Costs now 4,000 times amount saved by replacing fire-retardant materials with combustible cladding
Costs now 4,000 times amount saved by replacing fire-retardant materials with combustible cladding
Lurdan
old wave
In July it emerged that the Building Research Establishment decided last year that it would no longer do business with Kingspan or Celotex, manufacturers of the inflammable insulation used at Grenfell, “following evidence heard during the course of the Inquiry”. Kingspan is an Irish based company and now the Irish regulator, the National Building Control and Market Surveillance Office is looking at them.
UK watchdog’s move to drop Kingspan prompts questions in Ireland - Business Post (archived)
UK watchdog’s move to drop Kingspan prompts questions in Ireland - Business Post (archived)
Lurdan
old wave
Interesting x-twitter thread by Peter Apps. Archived here as a webpage. (original x-twitter link here)
One of the pieces of post-Grenfell building legislation, The Building Safety Act 2022, included provisions to compel some freeholders to carry out remediation works to remove dangerous cladding and to protect some leaseholders from being charged some of the costs. Government explainer here. An Inside Housing article in March set out how limited these provisions are.
In August a group of leaseholders took their freeholder to a tribunal and were successful. (Background article here).
However in the judgement issued by the tribunal (pdf) it was noticed that the freeholders had employed a building safety expert to provide a report to support their defence. The name of the expert - Mr Brian Martin of DCCH Experts LLP.
Pre-Grenfell a Brian Martin was Policy Lead within what was then called the Department for Communities and Local Government. He was responsible for the sections of the Building Regulations to do with fire safety and was a key witness at the Grenfell Inquiry. Peter Apps runs through some of what emerged from his evidence:
The Inside Housing reports of his evidence are here:
25th March 2022 - Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 69: ‘It was just unthinkable, you had the makings here of a crisis that you simply couldn’t conceive of’
1st April 2022 - Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 70: ‘Show me the bodies’
Apps writes:
If it is the same Brian Martin his record of giving poor advice seems consistent.
One of the replies to Apps' thread:
One of the pieces of post-Grenfell building legislation, The Building Safety Act 2022, included provisions to compel some freeholders to carry out remediation works to remove dangerous cladding and to protect some leaseholders from being charged some of the costs. Government explainer here. An Inside Housing article in March set out how limited these provisions are.
In August a group of leaseholders took their freeholder to a tribunal and were successful. (Background article here).
However in the judgement issued by the tribunal (pdf) it was noticed that the freeholders had employed a building safety expert to provide a report to support their defence. The name of the expert - Mr Brian Martin of DCCH Experts LLP.
Pre-Grenfell a Brian Martin was Policy Lead within what was then called the Department for Communities and Local Government. He was responsible for the sections of the Building Regulations to do with fire safety and was a key witness at the Grenfell Inquiry. Peter Apps runs through some of what emerged from his evidence:
For those who don't know about Mr Martin's role in the build up to the fire, they included not producing an FAQ making it clear that the cladding later used on Grenfell was banned, after industry warnings that it was in use in the UK market. Asked why not, he told the inquiry he “forgot” to do so because he was “busy on other things”. One witness said he stated "there is going to be a major fire" as he left this meeting (he said this was not a reference to ACM).
After the coroner investigating six deaths at Lakanal House recommended the retrofit of sprinklers and a review of building safety guidance to prevent further deaths, he advised taking less drastic action as: “We only have a duty to respond to the coroner, not kiss her backside.”
He admitted not alerting his superiors to a "red alert" warning in January 2016 that ACM cladding was being widely used in the UK, and admitted assurances he gave that cladding was banned "lulled [his seniors] into a false sense of security".
He dismissed the recommendations of a fire safety campaigner as not “necessarily be in the best interests of UK Plc” and told the inquiry that if someone who made life safety an "absolute priority" wrote regulations "We’d all starve to death".
Days after the fire, he also helped draft a letter which told the industry government guidance banned all combustible cladding products - something he admitted under cross examination was "a false representation", but denied was a "a planned, deliberate and underhanded attempt...
"...to rewrite history in the light of the [Grenfell fire] in order to protect the government’s position after the event?”
At the end of his evidence, he said he was "bitterly sorry" as “there were a number of occasions where I could have potentially prevented” the fire.
After the coroner investigating six deaths at Lakanal House recommended the retrofit of sprinklers and a review of building safety guidance to prevent further deaths, he advised taking less drastic action as: “We only have a duty to respond to the coroner, not kiss her backside.”
He admitted not alerting his superiors to a "red alert" warning in January 2016 that ACM cladding was being widely used in the UK, and admitted assurances he gave that cladding was banned "lulled [his seniors] into a false sense of security".
He dismissed the recommendations of a fire safety campaigner as not “necessarily be in the best interests of UK Plc” and told the inquiry that if someone who made life safety an "absolute priority" wrote regulations "We’d all starve to death".
Days after the fire, he also helped draft a letter which told the industry government guidance banned all combustible cladding products - something he admitted under cross examination was "a false representation", but denied was a "a planned, deliberate and underhanded attempt...
"...to rewrite history in the light of the [Grenfell fire] in order to protect the government’s position after the event?”
At the end of his evidence, he said he was "bitterly sorry" as “there were a number of occasions where I could have potentially prevented” the fire.
The Inside Housing reports of his evidence are here:
25th March 2022 - Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 69: ‘It was just unthinkable, you had the makings here of a crisis that you simply couldn’t conceive of’
1st April 2022 - Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 70: ‘Show me the bodies’
Apps writes:
If it is the same Brian Martin his record of giving poor advice seems consistent.
One of the replies to Apps' thread:
Gillian Johnson @Gillian11135191 - Sep 21
if this is indeed the same man from the Inquiry imo he deserves to be placed in a cage and hung outside the remains of Grenfell Tower for all the world to see. Please let us know if you get confirmation of his identity.
if this is indeed the same man from the Inquiry imo he deserves to be placed in a cage and hung outside the remains of Grenfell Tower for all the world to see. Please let us know if you get confirmation of his identity.
Lurdan
old wave
The latest update from the Inquiry, posted on Friday. The completion of it's final report will take longer than previously thought.
It gives some detail of how the writing of the report is going. Some sections are still being drafted. But others are on to the next phase of the process.
Rule 13 refers to the 2006 Inquiry Rules
The rule requiring Inquiries to notify people if they are to be criticised, and giving them an opportunity to respond, is known as 'Maxwellization'. It was introduced after that delightful socialist entrepreneur Robert Maxwell took the DTI to court because their report into his former company Pergamon Press had stated:
(Maxwell subsequently went on to reacquire Pergamon and also buy the British Printing Corporation and Mirror Group Newspapers. After his death it emerged that he had, amongst many other things, stolen millions from his worker's pension funds to shore up his companies. The sort of financial malpractise which had led him to temporarily lose Pergamon, but this time conducted on a far greater scale).
Inevitably the Maxwellization process leads to delays in producing Inquiry reports, and this has sometimes led to considerable criticism.
After the regulators report into the collapse of HBOS in 2008, was finally issued in 2015, the Treasury sub-committee commissioned a review of Maxwellization which reported two years later. Amongst the changes the review suggested were that Maxwellization should be limited to persons who had not "already had an opportunity to respond to the criticism during the evidence-gathering phase of an inquiry."
This change was not implemented.
Peter Apps asked the obvious questions on x-twitter: (link1 -- link2)
And when you see that :
It gives some detail of how the writing of the report is going. Some sections are still being drafted. But others are on to the next phase of the process.
Rule 13 refers to the 2006 Inquiry Rules
The rule requiring Inquiries to notify people if they are to be criticised, and giving them an opportunity to respond, is known as 'Maxwellization'. It was introduced after that delightful socialist entrepreneur Robert Maxwell took the DTI to court because their report into his former company Pergamon Press had stated:
(Maxwell subsequently went on to reacquire Pergamon and also buy the British Printing Corporation and Mirror Group Newspapers. After his death it emerged that he had, amongst many other things, stolen millions from his worker's pension funds to shore up his companies. The sort of financial malpractise which had led him to temporarily lose Pergamon, but this time conducted on a far greater scale).
Inevitably the Maxwellization process leads to delays in producing Inquiry reports, and this has sometimes led to considerable criticism.
After the regulators report into the collapse of HBOS in 2008, was finally issued in 2015, the Treasury sub-committee commissioned a review of Maxwellization which reported two years later. Amongst the changes the review suggested were that Maxwellization should be limited to persons who had not "already had an opportunity to respond to the criticism during the evidence-gathering phase of an inquiry."
This change was not implemented.
Peter Apps asked the obvious questions on x-twitter: (link1 -- link2)
And when you see that :
it's not surprising that an extended delay is anticipated, given Kingspan's previous aggressive legal tactics, to point to just the most obvious example.
Lurdan
old wave
In October members of Grenfell United were invited to give a presentation to Derry & Strabane Council's Health and Community committee.
Derry councillors get Grenfell United presentation - Derry Now
Grenfell United had previously called on Ulster Rugby to end the sponsorship deal
Kingspan's lawyers have now written to the Council.
Kingspan’s anger at NI council over ‘grossly inaccurate’ Grenfell disaster presentation - Belfast Telegraph (archived)
The Government have taken some action against building sector companies. In December 2021 Rydon Homes, the developer for the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower, was booted off the Help to Buy Loan Scheme. The Government then pressured building developers to sign up to its Responsible Actors Scheme under which they agree to pay for the removal of unsafe materials on properties that they have developed. Eleven developers who failed to meet the deadline for signing the Developer remediation contract were named and shamed and threatened that they would be unable to start new developments in England and Wales or receive Building Control approval for those already underway. All eventually signed up.
No similar action has yet been taken against cladding and insulation manufacturers. Talks with the Construction Products Association broke down early 2022. In the spring of this year letters were sent to Kingspan, Arconic and Celotex
Government threatens cladding companies who refuse to remediate with severe consequences - pbctoday
So far there has been no follow up or attempt to put pressure on manufacturers.
In November Saint Gobain who owned Celotex, the other manufacturer of insulation used at Grenfell published an article on its website about its involvement in the Government's Great British Insulation Scheme.
Apps wrote a long thread about it which is archived here as a web page.
In February the Guardian reported that Saint Gobain (Celotex) and Kingspan had reported over £7.5bn global profits since the Grenfell fire.
On Wednesday Saint Gobain published another article on it's website announcing the sale of Celotex. According to Bloomberg's
Derry councillors get Grenfell United presentation - Derry Now
Grenfell United had previously called on Ulster Rugby to end the sponsorship deal
Jonny Petrie: Review of Kingspan association will follow Grenfell Inquiry report, says Ulster Rugby CEO - BBC Sport
Kingspan's lawyers have now written to the Council.
Kingspan’s anger at NI council over ‘grossly inaccurate’ Grenfell disaster presentation - Belfast Telegraph (archived)
The Government have taken some action against building sector companies. In December 2021 Rydon Homes, the developer for the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower, was booted off the Help to Buy Loan Scheme. The Government then pressured building developers to sign up to its Responsible Actors Scheme under which they agree to pay for the removal of unsafe materials on properties that they have developed. Eleven developers who failed to meet the deadline for signing the Developer remediation contract were named and shamed and threatened that they would be unable to start new developments in England and Wales or receive Building Control approval for those already underway. All eventually signed up.
No similar action has yet been taken against cladding and insulation manufacturers. Talks with the Construction Products Association broke down early 2022. In the spring of this year letters were sent to Kingspan, Arconic and Celotex
Government threatens cladding companies who refuse to remediate with severe consequences - pbctoday
So far there has been no follow up or attempt to put pressure on manufacturers.
In November Saint Gobain who owned Celotex, the other manufacturer of insulation used at Grenfell published an article on its website about its involvement in the Government's Great British Insulation Scheme.
Apps wrote a long thread about it which is archived here as a web page.
In February the Guardian reported that Saint Gobain (Celotex) and Kingspan had reported over £7.5bn global profits since the Grenfell fire.
On Wednesday Saint Gobain published another article on it's website announcing the sale of Celotex. According to Bloomberg's
Serge Forward
Just enjoyin' my coffee.
Lurdan
old wave
Last week the Inquiry posted an update on its website. It will not, as it had hoped, be able to produce it's Final report before the anniversary of the fire on June 14th.
I referred above to the delays caused by the rule 13 process (known as 'Maxwellization'), in which anyone subject to 'explicit or significant' criticism in an Inquiry report has to be notified in writing and given an opportunity to object. We now know this applies to about 250 individuals. Some of whom will have expensive lawyers.
Peter Apps has written a piece about it on his Substack. While the article seems to be accessible for the moment some of the links in it are to pages which themselves contain paywalled links. Here is a copy of the article with (I hope) fully working links.
Grenfell - Justice Delayed (Again)
ETA: Friday Night - archive.vn seems to be having issues with a couple of its domains breaking that link. May just be temporary but in the meantime this link seems to be working: Grenfell - Justice Delayed (Again)
I referred above to the delays caused by the rule 13 process (known as 'Maxwellization'), in which anyone subject to 'explicit or significant' criticism in an Inquiry report has to be notified in writing and given an opportunity to object. We now know this applies to about 250 individuals. Some of whom will have expensive lawyers.
Peter Apps has written a piece about it on his Substack. While the article seems to be accessible for the moment some of the links in it are to pages which themselves contain paywalled links. Here is a copy of the article with (I hope) fully working links.
ETA: Friday Night - archive.vn seems to be having issues with a couple of its domains breaking that link. May just be temporary but in the meantime this link seems to be working: Grenfell - Justice Delayed (Again)
Last edited:
GarveyLives
Well-Known Member
Lurdan
old wave
Peter Apps has a short x-twitter thread about the Met press conference about Grenfell this morning. Archived here as a web page.
From it:
From it:
Lurdan
old wave
Peter Apps has written a piece about the implications of yesterday's Met press briefing about their Grenfell investigations. It's on his substack. It's not paywalled (at the moment). However it contains links to some Inside Housing stories. These also don't appear to be paywalled (at the moment) but themselves contain links to others which are. Here is a copy of the article with working links. It should be possible to follow the chain of links if people wish to.
Grenfell - Justice Delayed (part two)
Worth reading IMO. Apps assessment of how far there is to go before we see any trials seems depressingly realistic.
The Inquiries phase two report is currently due late summer or early autumn.
Why? Because any major discrepancies between the reports conclusions and the evidence justifying them, the evidence about the police investigations and the case presented in court by the prosecution will be seized upon by defence counsel.
Being in my seventies the chances of my being alive at the end of such a period seem slim to non-existent.
So should the Police investigation have gone first? How would that work?
As Apps points out the Inquiry has turned up far more about the complex of interlinked systemic failures lying behind the multiple potential criminal offences than the Police ever could have. In some cases it has exposed potentially criminal activity which was not visible at all in the immediate aftermath of the fire.
More to the point 'Police investigation first' was what happened after the Lakanal fire in 2009. The fact that there was a Police investigation was used by the Department of Communities and Local Government to shut down the Building Research Establishment's investigation into the fire and avoid making any changes to Building Regulations Guidance. The BRE were subsequently employed by the Police to assist in their investigation, but their findings were never published and the Police investigation did not lead to any prosecutions.
Perhaps with the possibility of a Labour Government things might be different in future? Well only if was different to the Labour Government which was in power at the time of the Lakanal fire and set the priorities which the DCLG were applying. Personally I'd never completely rule out the possibility that pigs might fly but then I also have no especial desire to be shat on from a great height.
Apps concludes:
Grenfell - Justice Delayed (part two)
Worth reading IMO. Apps assessment of how far there is to go before we see any trials seems depressingly realistic.
The Inquiries phase two report is currently due late summer or early autumn.
Why? Because any major discrepancies between the reports conclusions and the evidence justifying them, the evidence about the police investigations and the case presented in court by the prosecution will be seized upon by defence counsel.
Being in my seventies the chances of my being alive at the end of such a period seem slim to non-existent.
So should the Police investigation have gone first? How would that work?
As Apps points out the Inquiry has turned up far more about the complex of interlinked systemic failures lying behind the multiple potential criminal offences than the Police ever could have. In some cases it has exposed potentially criminal activity which was not visible at all in the immediate aftermath of the fire.
More to the point 'Police investigation first' was what happened after the Lakanal fire in 2009. The fact that there was a Police investigation was used by the Department of Communities and Local Government to shut down the Building Research Establishment's investigation into the fire and avoid making any changes to Building Regulations Guidance. The BRE were subsequently employed by the Police to assist in their investigation, but their findings were never published and the Police investigation did not lead to any prosecutions.
Perhaps with the possibility of a Labour Government things might be different in future? Well only if was different to the Labour Government which was in power at the time of the Lakanal fire and set the priorities which the DCLG were applying. Personally I'd never completely rule out the possibility that pigs might fly but then I also have no especial desire to be shat on from a great height.
Apps concludes:
Lurdan
old wave
The reason for yesterday's Met Police press briefing becomes clear as the Inquiry issued an important update this afternoon:
Grenfell United issued a statement on x-twitter
Inside Housing story
Grenfell Tower Inquiry final report to be published on 4 September (archived)
Grenfell United issued a statement on x-twitter
Grenfell United @GrenfellUnited
As much as the General Election overshadowed yesterdays Grenfell news, and may well do today, please take a moment to note another important, yet much delayed milestone in our fight for Justice that has just been published Publication of the Phase 2 Report | Grenfell Tower Inquiry
On the Grenfell Tower Public Inquiry’s announcement of the publication date of the Phase two report, Grenfell United, bereaved families and survivors group said:
“We said 10 years until justice only yesterday, and today's update has confirmed that. We now have a long awaited date for publication and wait in anticipation of the findings.
“When the report is finally released, we need to know that Sir Martin Moore-Bick’s recommendations will be implemented by the new government in power. Nearly 5 years since the publication of the first report, the Tory Government has failed to implement four of the phase one recommendations.
“That is why we are calling for a National Oversight Mechanism; an independent public body responsible for collating, analysing and following-up on recommendations from inquiries into state-related deaths.
“Hundreds of vital recommendations are made following inquiries and millions of pounds are spent, but what is the point if there is no system in place to make sure changes are made? If Government implemented the recommendations following the Lakanal House Fire in 2009, our experience on the 14th June could have been very different.
“The Public Inquiry phase two report will hopefully give us the truth we deserve, but it needs to bring the change we so desperately need to see. This change is the legacy for our loved ones. And to ensure no one suffers like us”
3:42 PM - May 23, 2024
As much as the General Election overshadowed yesterdays Grenfell news, and may well do today, please take a moment to note another important, yet much delayed milestone in our fight for Justice that has just been published Publication of the Phase 2 Report | Grenfell Tower Inquiry
On the Grenfell Tower Public Inquiry’s announcement of the publication date of the Phase two report, Grenfell United, bereaved families and survivors group said:
“We said 10 years until justice only yesterday, and today's update has confirmed that. We now have a long awaited date for publication and wait in anticipation of the findings.
“When the report is finally released, we need to know that Sir Martin Moore-Bick’s recommendations will be implemented by the new government in power. Nearly 5 years since the publication of the first report, the Tory Government has failed to implement four of the phase one recommendations.
“That is why we are calling for a National Oversight Mechanism; an independent public body responsible for collating, analysing and following-up on recommendations from inquiries into state-related deaths.
“Hundreds of vital recommendations are made following inquiries and millions of pounds are spent, but what is the point if there is no system in place to make sure changes are made? If Government implemented the recommendations following the Lakanal House Fire in 2009, our experience on the 14th June could have been very different.
“The Public Inquiry phase two report will hopefully give us the truth we deserve, but it needs to bring the change we so desperately need to see. This change is the legacy for our loved ones. And to ensure no one suffers like us”
3:42 PM - May 23, 2024
Inside Housing story
Grenfell Tower Inquiry final report to be published on 4 September (archived)
Lurdan
old wave
Seven years ago today, the Grenfell Tower fire killed 72 people. Two hundred and ninety seven people, mostly residents but also some visitors, were in the tower when the fire started about 12.50am. Sixty-seven people died inside the tower of the effects of smoke inhalation. The first of them in the lobby on the 10th floor about 1.30am. The last of them about three hours later. Three people died falling from the tower. One person and an unborn child died in hospital after leaving it. The last survivor left the building at 8.07am. The fire only burnt out seventeen hours later.
Peter Apps has written an article on his substack - it's not paywalled. Seven Years On
It concludes:
Peter Apps has written an article on his substack - it's not paywalled. Seven Years On
It concludes:
GarveyLives
Well-Known Member
Commemorative Silent Walk from Notting Hill Methodist Church to mark the 7th anniversary of the Grenfell Masscare:
Lurdan
old wave
Lurdan
old wave
Today the Inquiry confirmed arrangements for the publication of its Phase Two report on September 3rd.
It will be online at their website from 11.00am. The Inquiry Panel will make a brief statement at the same time which will be live streamed on the Inquiry's YouTube channel.
Peter Apps has written the first of three previews of the multiple issues the report will be dealing with. It's on his substack here. It links to a number of previous stories on the Inside Housing website. Those links all seem to work (at the moment) but the Inside Housing pages link in turn to other pages which are paywalled.
Here's an archived version of Apps' article. The chains of links from it should all be working if people wish to follow them.
It will be online at their website from 11.00am. The Inquiry Panel will make a brief statement at the same time which will be live streamed on the Inquiry's YouTube channel.
Peter Apps has written the first of three previews of the multiple issues the report will be dealing with. It's on his substack here. It links to a number of previous stories on the Inside Housing website. Those links all seem to work (at the moment) but the Inside Housing pages link in turn to other pages which are paywalled.
Here's an archived version of Apps' article. The chains of links from it should all be working if people wish to follow them.
trashpony
Hag
I’ve heard snatches of this which is written /presented by a bbc journo who has been attending the enquiry. 10 parts and from what I’ve heard, worth a listen
www.bbc.co.uk
BBC Sounds - Grenfell: Building a Disaster - Available Episodes
Listen to the latest episodes of Grenfell: Building a Disaster on BBC Sounds.
www.bbc.co.uk
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
Awful fire at a block in Dagenham this morning 
The building had scaffolding up and is reported to have also been in the process of having non-compliant cladding removed. No confirmation yet on any casualties.
news.sky.com
The building had scaffolding up and is reported to have also been in the process of having non-compliant cladding removed. No confirmation yet on any casualties.
Dagenham fire: Residents describe escape after homes evacuated from tower block engulfed by flames
A tower block in east London caught fire in the early hours of bank holiday Monday. It was covered in "non-compliant cladding" and more than 80 people, including children, have been evacuated. Another 20 were rescued. The Mayor of London has urged people to avoid the area.
Last edited:
May Kasahara
take me to the feeling
Lurdan
old wave
This building in Dagenham was converted from offices to mixed residential and commercial uses around 2015. According to the (former?) managing agents, Block Management UK
As part of the conversion to it's current uses two additional floors were added.
Ownership seems to have changed at the start of 2020. In 2022 the Spectrum Residents Association submitted evidence during the passage of the Building Safety Bill through parliament.
Planning permission was granted last year to put right some external issues
The fifth and sixth floors were the ones added during the building conversion. So non-compliant cladding and window panels and balcony screens had been installed when it was converted. Obviously we don't know what caused the fire or allowed it to spread to affect the whole building.
As part of the conversion to it's current uses two additional floors were added.
Ownership seems to have changed at the start of 2020. In 2022 the Spectrum Residents Association submitted evidence during the passage of the Building Safety Bill through parliament.
Planning permission was granted last year to put right some external issues
The fifth and sixth floors were the ones added during the building conversion. So non-compliant cladding and window panels and balcony screens had been installed when it was converted. Obviously we don't know what caused the fire or allowed it to spread to affect the whole building.
Similar threads
