# Grenfell Tower fire in North Kensington - news and discussion



## JTG (Jun 14, 2017)

Looks absolutely horrendous. Been going since around 1am, whole tower is ablaze from the second floor to the 24th (top floor)

Reports of many people trapped.


----------



## JTG (Jun 14, 2017)

200 firefighters and 40 engines on scene. Eyewitness reports telling of people trying to attract attention with mobile phone torches from their windows. Around 120 homes in the building apparently


----------



## JTG (Jun 14, 2017)

Streets around the area have been sealed off and homes evacuated. No known cause so far. Multiple people being treated for a range of injuries.

All the above from Graun, on phone so linking is a pain


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jun 14, 2017)

Shit! Just seen it on news . 
2am it started apparently?


----------



## maomao (Jun 14, 2017)

Just seen this myself. It'll be a miracle if there aren't scores dead. The entire block's razed to the ground by the look of it.


----------



## JTG (Jun 14, 2017)

Calamity1971 said:


> Shit! Just seen it on news .
> 2am it started apparently?


Graun is saying fire brigade called at 12:50 I think


----------



## JTG (Jun 14, 2017)

People trapped is unconfirmed by LFB or the Met btw.


----------



## yardbird (Jun 14, 2017)

Shit. Just seen a jumper.


----------



## phillm (Jun 14, 2017)

Terrible news - many ambulances called very few seen leaving the scene. Recently refurbed with 'cladding'.

Grenfell Tower |


----------



## JTG (Jun 14, 2017)

Major incident declared


----------



## october_lost (Jun 14, 2017)

Really, really grim. Hope firefighters can save as many as possible.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

Holy shit, looks really bad...


----------



## MrSki (Jun 14, 2017)

Fuck. RIP those poor people.


----------



## JTG (Jun 14, 2017)

Graun reporting people still trapped and visible at windows. Police are advising anybody inside to cover their faces with a wet towel and get out by any means, not to wait for fire brigade

Tower had undergone a major refurbishment completed in May last year


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jun 14, 2017)

My brain can't handle this shit. If this is landlord health and safety fault, get the fuckers against a wall.


----------



## JTG (Jun 14, 2017)

LAS have tweeted they were called at 1:29 and have over 20 crews at the scene including the hazardous area response team


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)




----------



## JTG (Jun 14, 2017)

Nearby homes still being evacuated - Barandon Walk & Tesserton Walk according to Graun. Falling debris is making emergency services' job even more hazardous


----------



## MrSki (Jun 14, 2017)

How can anyone else survive? Just hope most of the residents managed to get out. 

Surely the building must collapse.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 14, 2017)

Utterly awful.



JTG said:


> Tower had undergone a major refurbishment completed in May last year


Grenfell Tower is managed by the Kensington and Chelsea TMO, the Council's ALMO. 

The refurbishment wasn't very popular with the tenants. From June last year - RBKC Cover-up at Grenfell Tower - Grenfell Action Group blog


----------



## Tony_LeaS (Jun 14, 2017)

LBC just reported that the residents association of the building warned the landlords/owners of fire safety in a blog post.

KCTMO – Playing with fire! - Article referred to, not sure if I can post here so do remove if applicable.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jun 14, 2017)

.


----------



## JTG (Jun 14, 2017)

Obviously cause yet to be determined but those blog posts don't look good for RBKC


----------



## MrSki (Jun 14, 2017)

Probable death toll in the hundreds.


----------



## JTG (Jun 14, 2017)

A40 closed in both directions, police asking people to avoid area to allow emergency services to access scene


----------



## xsunnysuex (Jun 14, 2017)

Fucking hell.  Sky news just said someone had to leave their disabled family in there cause she couldn't get them out.
This is horrendous.....


----------



## Ted Striker (Jun 14, 2017)

Fuck  This is less than half a mile from my old flat. The poor community 

The TMO are the biggest wankers going. Don't really want to attribute this to a failing of theirs yet but no-one has a good word to say about them locally.


----------



## MrSki (Jun 14, 2017)

Tony_LeaS said:


> LBC just reported that the residents association of the building warned the landlords/owners of fire safety in a blog post.
> 
> KCTMO – Playing with fire! - Article referred to, not sure if I can post here so do remove if applicable.





> It is a truly terrifying thought but the Grenfell Action Group firmly believe that only a catastrophic event will expose the ineptitude and incompetence of our landlord, the  KCTMO, and bring an end to the dangerous living conditions and neglect of health and safety legislation that they inflict upon their tenants and leaseholders. We believe that the KCTMO are an evil, unprincipled, mini-mafia who have no business to be charged with the responsibility of  looking after the every day management of large scale social housing estates and that their sordid collusion with the RBKC Council is a recipe for a future major disaster.
> 
> Unfortunately, the Grenfell Action Group have reached the conclusion that only an incident that results in serious loss of life of KCTMO residents will allow the external scrutiny to occur that will shine a light on the practices that characterise the malign governance of this non-functioning organisation. We believe that the KCTMO have ensured their ongoing survival by the use of proxy votes at their Annual General Meeting that see them returned with a mandate of 98% in favour of the continuation of their inept and highly dangerous management of our homes. It is no coincidence that the 98% is the same figure that is returned by the infamous Kim Jong-un of North Korea who claims mass popularity while reputedly enslaving the general population and starving the majority of his people to death.
> 
> ...





> In October 2015 a fire ripped through another KCTMO property, the 14 storey Adair Tower in North Kensington, causing mass panic and resulting in a number of residents taken to hospital suffering from smoke inhalation. It is reported that had it not been for the swift actions of the London Fire Brigade the consequences of this fire and potential loss of life could have been much worse.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 14, 2017)

Apparently since that November blog post the TMO had put up fire safety notices in the building






KCTMO – Feeling the Heat! - Grenfell Action Group blog (March 14th)


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 14, 2017)

Fuck! I've never seen a block fire of that magnitude. Looking at photos it seems to have ripped all the way through the centre.

Poor people trapped up in that, and at the very least losing their homes


----------



## MrSki (Jun 14, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Fuck! I've never seen a block fire of that magnitude. Looking at photos it seems to have ripped all the way through the centre.
> 
> Poor people trapped up in that, and at the very least losing their homes


If it was just their homes it would not be so bad.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 14, 2017)

Quite


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 14, 2017)

Latest updates here: London fire: fears of people trapped as major blaze engulfs tower block – latest


----------



## bimble (Jun 14, 2017)

Freaking out a bit,know it well there friends there on Latimer Road & can see the plume of smoke billowing from here


----------



## dessiato (Jun 14, 2017)

As unbelievably terrible this is for the tennants, we must also consider the terrible trauma being suffered by all those attempting rescue. The aftershock will rumble for years for everybody.

As selfish as it is, thank God it isn't me. But God help those who are involved.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 14, 2017)

Christ, that looks horrific. If the fire has gone straight up the building somehow then may be lift shafts or stairwells not properly protected? 

My thoughts are with the residents and the emergency services dealing with this disaster


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jun 14, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Latest updates here: London fire: fears of people trapped as major blaze engulfs tower block – latest





> Some residents of the tower are at a makeshift centre in the Rugby Portobello, a community centre, where people are delivering water and blankets. Others have come to offer their houses to those in need.
> 
> One resident, who did not want to give his name but said he lived “high up” in the tower, said no alarms went off as the fire started.
> 
> ...



Literally the stuff of nightmares jfc


----------



## october_lost (Jun 14, 2017)

.


----------



## bimble (Jun 14, 2017)

Fucking hell its huge the plume of smoke there blowing across on still morning right to Hampstead Heath (I'm in archway)


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jun 14, 2017)

This is awful. I can't imagine the terror. Those poor, poor people.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jun 14, 2017)

.
[QUOTE="dessiato, post: 1510997

As selfish as it is, thank God it isn't me. But God help those who are involved.[/QUOTE]
Very selfish. God ain't got a say in this in my world.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 14, 2017)

Christ.   Those poor people.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 14, 2017)

Underneath the BBC article on this there is a link to one from 2013 after another tower block fire, which states that LFB were not visiting fire blocks on a regular basis for familiarisation ie to learn about building layout, fire escape locations etc. 

Can't link because on phone but worth a look. More damning is that no-one from the landlords has commented on this so far.


----------



## seventh bullet (Jun 14, 2017)

Horrifying.  I can't begin to imagine what the residents are going through, or as sadly seems to be the case for many of them, did go through.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

MrSki said:


> How can anyone else survive? Just hope most of the residents managed to get out.
> 
> Surely the building must collapse.


Why?


Lurdan said:


> Apparently since that November blog post the TMO had put up fire safety notices in the building
> 
> 
> 
> ...



A stay put policy is fine if you have compartmentalisation within the building to stop spread of fire. It is clear there was no such protection in Grenfell Tower. Looking at the way it spread I wouldn't be surprised if the new cladding was responsible for spreading the fire.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

The eyewitness on BBC right now is coming out with gold, I think landlords are fucked if what he is saying is accurate!

eta: He just said what I suspected the cladding spread the fire!


----------



## Geri (Jun 14, 2017)

Pictures on the news look like scenes from 9/11. Eye witness accounts are horrifying.


----------



## Ponyutd (Jun 14, 2017)

Not one report of any deaths. That strikes me as odd.


----------



## wiskey (Jun 14, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> Underneath the BBC article on this there is a link to one from 2013 after another tower block fire, which states that LFB were not visiting fire blocks on a regular basis for familiarisation ie to learn about building layout, fire escape locations etc.


I was on mat leave over  the Lakanal House fire at work but when I came back they were using it as a training session and it scared the shit out of me. I never dealt with anything more than housefires myself, a whole block is a disaster! 

Especially if the alarm didn't go off as one man is quoted as saying


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 14, 2017)

That was a very powerful interview on the BBC from s bloke that managed to get out with his partner and little girl.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 14, 2017)

Ponyutd said:


> Not one report of any deaths. That strikes me as odd.



Bit early. It's going to take time to ascertain just how many people were likely to be in, how many managed to evacuate, how many taken to hospitals.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

Ponyutd said:


> Not one report of any deaths. That strikes me as odd.


There obviously will be, but doubt bodies will ever be found. Added to which its hardly the time to be badgering survivors and asking them who was left behind!


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Jun 14, 2017)

London fire: people trapped as major blaze engulfs tower block – latest

Cladding is mentioned by a man who escaped...

"This man spoke to *Assed Baig*, a journalist with Channel 4 News, about his escape from his home on the 17th floor of Grenfell Tower with his 68-year-old aunt. We’ve not yet been able to independently verify his suggestion that the building had no central fire alarm, or that the cladding was especially flammable.
“We saw the fire engines, so we were looking outside at what’s going on. There was no fire alarms anywhere, because we don’t have a kind of integrated fire system – it’s just everyone’s house for itself. I walked out into the common area to see if the lifts are moving, to see if people are in a hassle – nothing. But I could smell the smoke.
“I went back inside the house, looked out the window. I started looking down the window – I had to really pull myself out to look down the window, from the 17th floor, and I see the fire blazing, and coming up really fast, because of the cladding – the cladding was really flammable, and it just caught up like a matchstick.”


Terrifying


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Jun 14, 2017)

Horrifying.  Poor people caught up in that - dread to think what the death toll will be.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> That was a very powerful interview on the BBC from s bloke that managed to get out with his partner and little girl.


The first witness for the prosecution methinks. He pretty much nailed it!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

EastEnder said:


>


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 14, 2017)

Horrendous news , all those people :-(


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> London fire: people trapped as major blaze engulfs tower block – latest
> 
> Cladding is mentioned by a man who escaped...
> 
> ...



It seemed obvious to me that the cladding had spread the fire, purely by the charring of the outside of building and the pics of molten material dripping from structure. Added to the other issues about no integrated alarm system, and an inappropriate fire procedure there is going to be a criminal case from this. Some people are going to be very very worried today.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 14, 2017)

This is bad. Really bad. Something has fucked up really badly here.

During my degree we were shown really harrowing footage of a tower block fire in Brazil in the 70s, which apparently informed a lot of high rise safety in subsequent construction.

Think it was this one:

Joelma Building - Wikipedia

179 people died in that one.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> This is bad. Really bad. Something has fucked up really badly here.


No, SOMEONE has fucked up really badly here, and hopefully will be spending an extended vacation at HMP in the not to distant future.


----------



## hash tag (Jun 14, 2017)

Some of the people who were being interviewed during the night, including George Clark, were in tears and virtually speechless. It was horrible to hear those reports coming in. I liked to think that some of the reports were exagerated,
but seeing the pictures this morning, the scale of it is really starting to hit home.
It is difficult to imagine how the emergency services deal with a disaster on that scale and how the poor people survive.
Hoping for the best for all concerned.....


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 14, 2017)

I remember when my mates flat was affected by fire originating in the flat below. Scary enough, but it seemed to follow the more common pattern of the immediate flats above/across from where it started. I can't imagine anything on such a scale to rip through like this.

Someone on Sky saying that it appears to have started on the fourth floor, but engulfed the whole block in about 15 minutes.

As far as I know, there's only one staircase in that block, so fear the worst. Poor people 

Also incredibly calm and brave account from a resident on earlier - luckily they managed to evacuate from a lower floor.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 14, 2017)

Truly awful incident. Poor people once again.


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 14, 2017)

How the hell could it spread that quickly? And people saying no fire alarms. Just the stuff of nightmares, but real, and someone _will _be responsible for this. Those poor people


----------



## moomoo (Jun 14, 2017)

Christ. This really is the stuff of nightmares.  I've often looked at tower blocks and wondered what would happen in a fire.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 14, 2017)

moomoo said:


> Christ. This really is the stuff of nightmares.  I've often looked at tower blocks and wondered what would happen in a fire.



Yes.  This really brings it home how vulnerable tower blocks are.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 14, 2017)

No alarms? The poor people. Just horrendous.


----------



## Geri (Jun 14, 2017)

My ex husband was rescued from a tower block fire in Birmingham when he lived there, the old lady in the flat above him didn't make it. I would never live in one by choice.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 14, 2017)




----------



## Yossarian (Jun 14, 2017)

It's harrowing stuff, in one video children can be heard screaming for help. I don't know why the whole building went up in flames like that, there have been a few high-rise fires in Dubai in the last couple of years where the cladding on the outside caught fire and it looked horrifying, but the interiors weren't affected too badly.


----------



## emanymton (Jun 14, 2017)

God this is horrendous 

On the Radio this morning they did seem to talk to quite a few people who obviously made it out after the fire was well underway. Gives me some hope that the number of deaths might not be too high. Well it will be too high but you know what I mean.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 14, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> That was a very powerful interview on the BBC from s bloke that managed to get out with his partner and little girl.



They have just shown this again and credit to him in being able to give such a shocking eyewitness account and remain so calm. I would have been cursing like hell. It sounded truly horrifying.


----------



## purenarcotic (Jun 14, 2017)

This is absolutely horrific, can't believe how quickly it went up, the account I watched said that they heard an alarm in the hallway but not in his flat and he didn't hear it until he was in the corridor. If he'd not heard neighbours screaming he'd have probably just gone back to bed. Frightening, absolutely frightening.


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 14, 2017)

Tony_LeaS said:


> LBC just reported that the residents association of the building warned the landlords/owners of fire safety in a blog post.
> 
> KCTMO – Playing with fire! - Article referred to, not sure if I can post here so do remove if applicable.



Damning. Portentous. Ugh.


----------



## omnipeta (Jun 14, 2017)

purenarcotic said:


> This is absolutely horrific, can't believe how quickly it went up, the account I watched said that they heard an alarm in the hallway but not in his flat and he didn't hear it until he was in the corridor. If he'd not heard neighbours screaming he'd have probably just gone back to bed. Frightening, absolutely frightening.


Very, very sad. :-(


----------



## a_chap (Jun 14, 2017)

This photo would suggest the cladding caught fire very quickly


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 14, 2017)

Good grief. This is beyond awful.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> Damning. Portentous. Ugh.


Another Fire Safety Scandal

This one is even more damning!


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 14, 2017)

Glad to see the author of that Grenfell blog has survived, they have posted a roundup of all their warnings about poor fire safety standards. 

GRENFELL TOWER FIRE


----------



## Mation (Jun 14, 2017)

Can't get my head around how terrifying this must have been for those poor poor people


----------



## MrSki (Jun 14, 2017)

I can't get my head round this. If there is a god he can fuck off.


----------



## Mation (Jun 14, 2017)

Ian Bone has just said on Facebook that he used to live in this building.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 14, 2017)

I hope there are survivors, this is horrific


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 14, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Glad to see the author of that Grenfell blog has survived, they have posted a roundup of all their warnings about poor fire safety standards.
> 
> GRENFELL TOWER FIRE



Some fucking damning stuff there.


----------



## albionism (Jun 14, 2017)

Saw an interview with a lad who escaped with his elderly aunt.
He said there was no integrated alarm system, just every flat
for itself .


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 14, 2017)

Its just fucking awful


----------



## Cid (Jun 14, 2017)

This company seems to have been the subcontractor that provided the cladding system. And this would appear to be the specific product.

ACM is apparently aluminium composite material... Purely for reference purposes, making no judgment on whether the cladding was responsible, or could have been responsible.


----------



## Cid (Jun 14, 2017)

And yeah, fucking terrible. Can't even begin to imagine.


----------



## MrSki (Jun 14, 2017)

Mation said:


> Ian Bone has just said on Facebook that he used to live in this building.


Lots of people used to live in this building. Lots of them are now homeless & lots of them are dead.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 14, 2017)

Looking for strands of hope - the fact people were going around waking their neighbour's hopefully means most got out (despite the time of the event), that the fire appears to have gone up the exterior initially may mean that the interior wasn't immediately as bad as pictures look now (although smoke is usually biggest killer)

If it's anything like the block I'm in, finding out who is or isn't safe will be complicated by illegal sublets, air bnb etc.

Still really fucking grim and terrifying. Goes right through you just thinking about it. Thoughts with anyone caught up in it.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Jun 14, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> No alarms? The poor people. Just horrendous.


with the "Stay put" policy there aren't audible alarms to trigger an evacuation.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

MrSki said:


> Probable death toll in the hundreds.


Like many other urbs I've lived in tower blocks. Could easily have been me in there.  there will be a horrific death toll


----------



## trashpony (Jun 14, 2017)

No central alarm system, no sprinkler system and only one staircase. How the fuck is that legal? 

Horrific


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 14, 2017)

A man on CNN saying he saw it from five miles away, went there immediately, barged past police and helped carry people out, managed to locate his cousin and nephew who were living on the 18th floor.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 14, 2017)

pseudonarcissus said:


> with the "Stay put" policy there aren't audible alarms to trigger an evacuation.


----------



## MrSki (Jun 14, 2017)

Too early to say but eye witness reports seem to say that the new cladding contributed to the fast spread of the fire. How the fuck can the cladding not be safe?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


>


When I lived in a tower block in Hackney I saw no fire alarms and only discovered a fire outside my door because of the smell of smoke. Think the absence of fire alarms quite widespread.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 14, 2017)

Cid said:


> ACM is apparently aluminium composite material... Purely for reference purposes, making no judgment on whether the cladding was responsible, or could have been responsible.



That's the rain screen - as that page also says 


> All of Harley's rainscreen products come as a system, complete with carrier rails and brackets, and all necessary wall insulation and fire barriers



The descriptions of the work by the architects and the contractors refer to external insulation being fitted as well as these aluminium panels.


----------



## May Kasahara (Jun 14, 2017)

Just horrendous  I've never seen a tower block burn like that, it looks like it went up like a torch. Offering fervent good thoughts for everyone inside and the emergency crews involved.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 14, 2017)

MrSki said:


> Too early to say but eye witness reports seem to say that the new cladding contributed to the fast spread of the fire. How the fuck can the cladding not be safe?



If it is aluminium based, as any metal ending in ium, it burns ferociously once ignited. I have seen horrendous fires where aluminium was involved.
How this material got past building controls needs investigation.

But that's for another day, our thoughts need to focus on the poor victims and their families.


----------



## weepiper (Jun 14, 2017)

This is awful. Poor poor people.


----------



## MrSki (Jun 14, 2017)

My thoughts are with the victims but sadly that won't be of any help.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 14, 2017)

Goes beyond tragic, no words


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 14, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> When I lived in a tower block in Hackney I saw no fire alarms and only discovered a fire outside my door because of the smell of smoke. Think the absence of fire alarms quite widespread.



It just makes me equally sad and angry that we live in a country where those in power don't find money for this.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 14, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> If it is aluminium based, as any metal ending in ium, it burns ferociously once ignited. I have seen horrendous fires where aluminium was involved.
> How this material got past building controls needs investigation.



Could be due to it being external, may not need a fire rating then. Plenty of new builds around with timber cladding at the moment for example. Could be that it was installed according to regs, but there was some way that the fire bridged to the interior (unsurprising given windows would probably be open last night due to warm weather, curtains around windows and so on). Think this is an old block so it probably pre-dates a lot of the design changes that became standard after the Brazil fire (in that one the central stair core became a chimney for heat, smoke and fire preventing escape).


----------



## teqniq (Jun 14, 2017)




----------



## Lurdan (Jun 14, 2017)

Rydon the contractor who carried out the regeneration work seem to have removed the case study about it from their web site overnight. The page is still available at archive.org. 

And so it begins.


----------



## alsoknownas (Jun 14, 2017)

Tony_LeaS said:


> LBC just reported that the residents association of the building warned the landlords/owners of fire safety in a blog post.
> 
> KCTMO – Playing with fire! - Article referred to, not sure if I can post here so do remove if applicable.


----------



## wiskey (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> Added to the other issues about no integrated alarm system, and an inappropriate fire procedure there is going to be a criminal case from this. Some people are going to be very very worried today.


Worried?! If their shoddy building has killed people they should be doing all they can to make things better


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 14, 2017)

Mation said:


> Can't get my head around how terrifying this must have been for those poor poor people


Looking at the pictures and listening to the reports this morning made me throw up for exactly that reason.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

trashpony said:


> No central alarm system, no sprinkler system and only one staircase. How the fuck is that legal?


There's only 8 flats in my building - which is over 100 years old - yet we've got internal fire alarms, a communal fire alarm system & automatic sprinklers in half the flats. For a 24 storey building with over 100 flats, this seems truly shocking...


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 14, 2017)

pseudonarcissus said:


> with the "Stay put" policy there aren't audible alarms to trigger an evacuation.



What's the point of the "Stay Put" policy?


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 14, 2017)

Just utterly horrifying. All too easy to imagine it happening, but impossible to imagine what it would actually be like to be caught up in it.


equationgirl said:


> Underneath the BBC article on this there is a link to one from 2013 after another tower block fire, which states that LFB were not visiting fire blocks on a regular basis for familiarisation ie to learn about building layout, fire escape locations etc.


At the risk of bringing politics into it, would that have anything to do with cuts to the fire services from a few years back?


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 14, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> What's the point of the "Stay Put" policy?


At a guess, avoid mass panic/stampedes?


----------



## trashpony (Jun 14, 2017)

Copied from Mrs Magpie:

Attention West London people! 

The residents who escaped Grenfell House only have the clothes they stand up in,  mainly nightclothes at that. There is an urgent need for clothes to fit all ages, toiletries, toys etc. Please take donations to 
St Clement's Church. 
95 Sirdar Road, 
London, 
W11 4EQ


----------



## wiskey (Jun 14, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> What's the point of the "Stay Put" policy?


Because fires should be able to be tackled from inside the block of flats and the doors should give an hour or so of protection.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> What's the point of the "Stay Put" policy?


Kinda sounds like the sort of policy you have in place when you've got nothing better to suggest...


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jun 14, 2017)

Oh, that news reporter. Had to really compose herself when reporting some people saw children being thrown from windows in a desperate attempt to save them 
This is so horrible. Poor, poor people


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

S☼I said:


> Oh, that news reporter. Had to really compose herself when reporting some people saw children being thrown from windows in a desperate attempt to save them
> This is so horrible. Poor, poor people


Witnesses on the news talking about people jumping from halfway up the building...


----------



## spirals (Jun 14, 2017)

Those poor people


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jun 14, 2017)

This chap on BBC live giving tons of info.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 14, 2017)

trashpony said:


> Copied from Mrs Magpie:
> 
> Attention West London people!
> 
> ...


Appreciate you're just passing on the message, but is there any word (or any way of finding out) how long they'll be open? I have a couple of coats at work that I'd been saving for the annual coat collection in November, but could run them along this evening if they'd be of use.

Have also shared on Facebook, hopefully others can help.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 14, 2017)

trashpony said:


> Copied from Mrs Magpie:
> 
> Attention West London people!
> 
> ...


Cut and pasted to facebook.


----------



## killer b (Jun 14, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> At the risk of bringing politics into it, would that have anything to do with cuts to the fire services from a few years back?


It _is_ political. Effective safety regimes and preventative, responsive emergency services need to be well resourced. If something like this happens, it's because of these things being poorly resourced & funded - there's a reason why it looks like third world shit. 

The more you read & think about this, the more shock turns to rage tbh.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jun 14, 2017)

stop filming him ffs


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jun 14, 2017)

Lovely BBC reporter, a proper human reaction, giving him a hug. This is so distressing to see.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 14, 2017)

Up-to-the-minute info on survivor support/donations/volunteer coordination etc on this Facebook page:

Log in to Facebook | Facebook


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 14, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Appreciate you're just passing on the message, but is there any word (or any way of finding out) how long they'll be open? I have a couple of coats at work that I'd been saving for the annual coat collection in November, but could run them along this evening if they'd be of use.
> 
> Have also shared on Facebook, hopefully others can help.


Just seen this is all over Twitter, will try and get some details from there


----------



## Indeliblelink (Jun 14, 2017)

Dreadful scenes, thoughts go out to all those involved.
Spookily, I was woken up last night by a crackling noise and bright flashes from sparks coming from a plug under my bed where I had a strip socket with a lamp (not turned on) plugged in. It stopped after a few seconds and I just rolled over and thought to myself "I'll see what's wrong with it tomorrow".


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Terrible scenes.  I can't imagine anything more terrifying.  

As someone who used to work in external cladding / facades I'm struggling to understand what has happened here.  No cladding panel is combustible and there should have been firestopping at every floor level.  Being an old building the internal firestopping would have been basic in all likelihood.

The bottom line is that this sort of thing should never happen, any fire should not have spread at this speed and ferocity.


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 14, 2017)




----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 14, 2017)

From the Grenfell Action Group blog, 2015:



> In a recent door-knocking survey carried out by concerned Grenfell Tower residents we found that 39% of households had not had the HIU work done and we believe that approx 46 households are actively resisting work being carried out as currently planned.
> 
> We are also aware that a significant number of residents who have allowed the work to be done are not satisfied with the standard of the work delivered by Rydon and many claim they felt bullied into having the work done by the TMO in the first place.



GRENFELL TOWER – Propaganda, Lies and Fact


----------



## Fingers (Jun 14, 2017)

The blog owner was on the 16th floor and only just got out.


----------



## Cid (Jun 14, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> That's the rain screen - as that page also says
> 
> 
> The descriptions of the work by the architects and the contractors refer to external insulation being fitted as well as these aluminium panels.



As it says in the link the rain screen is a system; it includes cladding panels, insulation, windows and er... fire barriers. The external panels are ACM.


----------



## peterkro (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Terrible scenes.  I can't imagine anything more terrifying.
> 
> As someone who used to work in external cladding / facades I'm struggling to understand what has happened here.  No cladding panel is combustible and there should have been firestopping at every floor level.  Being an old building the internal firestopping would have been basic in all likelihood.
> 
> The bottom line is that this sort of thing should never happen, any fire should not have spread at this speed and ferocity.


Coincidently there was a program on Radio 4 yesterday where they were at a fire testing station and they described the testing of cladding, it appears very thorough and it's hard to believe something flammable would get past that test.Mind you according to the Guardian the manufacturer of the cladding has gone out of business.


----------



## no-no (Jun 14, 2017)

This KCTMO, how does that work? it's run by the tennants themselves but  it's also a private company?


----------



## Rebelda (Jun 14, 2017)

There have been a few block fires here recently and they scared the crap out of me even though they did terrible damage but were contained to one flat. This is...it won't fit in my head or my heart. Those poor poor people


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Cid said:


> As it says in the link the rain screen is a system; it includes cladding panels, insulation, windows and er... fire barriers. The external panels are ACM.



Hmmm. Rainscreen is a ventilated cladding system meaning there is a ventilation cavity between the panels and substrate (main building fabric). Curtain walling also sits outboard of the substrate.  Building regulations dictate that there should be intumesent firestopping at each floor level to prevent the fire shooting up the ventilation cavity.  Something as has gone very badly wrong here if the cladding system has contributed to the spread of flames.

ETA: ACM panels are aluminium composite, they absolutely should be fire rated. If the new facade had contributed to the spread of flames its going to be the firestopping in the cavity rather than the panels themselves.


----------



## Cid (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Terrible scenes.  I can't imagine anything more terrifying.
> 
> As someone who used to work in external cladding / facades I'm struggling to understand what has happened here.  No cladding panel is combustible and there should have been firestopping at every floor level.  Being an old building the internal firestopping would have been basic in all likelihood.
> 
> The bottom line is that this sort of thing should never happen, any fire should not have spread at this speed and ferocity.



A specific type of ACM product was apparently behind fires in Dubai. I have no idea what the law/standard practice is here though.

But yeah, the speed is horrifying. This should not have happened.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

peterkro said:


> Coincidently there was a program on Radio 4 yesterday where they were at a fire testing station and they described the testing of cladding, it appears very thorough and it's hard to believe something flammable would get past that test.Mind you according to the Guardian the manufacturer of the cladding has gone out of business.



Do you have a link to that? Which panel is it?


----------



## Maharani (Jun 14, 2017)

Devastating.


----------



## Athos (Jun 14, 2017)

Shocked, sad, and angry. Thoughts with the families of the dead, and the survivors.  Hope there's something practical we can do to provide immediate help, and something political.


----------



## phillm (Jun 14, 2017)

One can easily posit Kensington and Chelsea , social housing , run down the block , get the tenants out , do an Elephant aand Castle. If so these are now murdering bastards.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 14, 2017)

peterkro said:


> Mind you according to the Guardian the manufacturer of the cladding has gone out of business.


I think they've got the dates wrong - looks to me as if the company which supplied these materials had bought out the one which went into receivership before this contract began.
ETA: actually I think I might be wrong about that. 


no-no said:


> This KCTMO, how does that work? it's run by the tennants themselves but  it's also a private company?


It's an ALMO (Arms Length Management Organisation) set up by the Council which - I think uniquely - has adopted the legal form of a TMO (Tenant's Management Organisation). Actual tenant control of the organisation appears to be minimal however. I'm a little curious myself about exactly how they've structured this, but it's not a tenant run organisation in any meaningful sense.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 14, 2017)

killer b said:


> It _is_ political. Effective safety regimes and preventative, responsive emergency services need to be well resourced. If something like this happens, it's because of these things being poorly resourced & funded - there's a reason why it looks like third world shit.
> 
> The more you read & think about this, the more shock turns to rage tbh.


it didn't take long tbf. Someone is responsible for this and they allowed the building to be a fire risk. So people are dead or homeless so some cunt could have a few more quid in their pocket. 


those poor bastards...


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Just reading the live blog now on the Guardian website. People saying the cladding panels went up like mathsticks.  Fucking hell, what were they using? Painted plywood?

There is sadly a lot of corner cutting in construction, there is even a fancy name for it - _value engineering_. It basically means finding cheaper alternatives for everything the architect and engineer has specified.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 14, 2017)

So reading the stuff from Teaboy how on earth could it have spread so quickly?

E2a it seems you have answered my question.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

pseudonarcissus said:


> with the "Stay put" policy there aren't audible alarms to trigger an evacuation.


Like i said earlier a stay put policy is only appropriate if there are other fire control measures in place. To tell people to stay put, in a building that can be totally engulfed in fire within an hour is negligent beyond belief, and it makes me wonder whether the stay put policy was put in place to save money on an integrated alarm system!


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

trashpony said:


> No central alarm system, no sprinkler system and only one staircase. How the fuck is that legal?
> 
> Horrific


It almost certainly isn't!


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> I think they've got the dates wrong - looks to me as if the company which supplied these materials had bought out the one which went into receivership before this contract began.



Who are the companies involved?


----------



## no-no (Jun 14, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> I think they've got the dates wrong - looks to me as if the company which supplied these materials had bought out the one which went into receivership before this contract began.
> 
> It's an ALMO (Arms Length Management Organisation) set up by the Council which - I think uniquely - has adopted the legal form of a TMO (Tenant's Management Organisation). Actual tenant control of the organisation appears to be minimal however. I'm a little curious myself about exactly how they've structured this, but it's not a tenant run organisation in any meaningful sense.



No, it doesn't sound like the residents were happy with the work being done. from the kctmo website - "KCTMO is managed by a Board of Directors comprising of eight elected tenant and leaseholder members, four appointed Councillor members and three independent appointed other members."

Who are the 3 independent board members? 

fucking horrific.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Sprinkler systems are rare in UK buildings as we go down the compartmentalization process of containing fire.  Sprinkler systems use is widespread in the U.S. where they have a different approach.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Who are the companies involved?


The original company was Harley Curtain Wall, the successor is Harley Facades but I think I may be wrong about when the sale of the former's assets took place.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Terrible scenes.  I can't imagine anything more terrifying.
> 
> As someone who used to work in external cladding / facades I'm struggling to understand what has happened here.  No cladding panel is combustible and there should have been firestopping at every floor level.  Being an old building the internal firestopping would have been basic in all likelihood.
> 
> The bottom line is that this sort of thing should never happen, any fire should not have spread at this speed and ferocity.



Are you for real? The flammability of aluminium composite cladding has been a major concern for years.


----------



## killer b (Jun 14, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> it didn't take long tbf. Someone is responsible for this and they allowed the building to be a fire risk. So people are dead or homeless so some cunt could have a few more quid in their pocket.


Absolutely - but that's why we look to government to ensure building standards and safety regulations are sufficient and adhered to. We can - and should - punish whoever was directly responsible, but there's a whole load of questions need asking about the regulatory & inspections framework that can allow something like this to happen.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> Are you for real? The flammability of aluminium composite cladding has been a major concern for years.



Worked in the industry for years.  I know all about the various fire rating of panels. What specifically have I said which you think is wrong?


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> Are you for real? The flammability of aluminium composite cladding has been a major concern for years.



Bearing in mind this is a newish project it should have been up to date regarding building regs.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 14, 2017)

Poor people 



trashpony said:


> No central alarm system, no sprinkler system and only one staircase. How the fuck is that legal?
> 
> Horrific



I've just got back from a meeting, which involved an architect & a fire safety expert, they were saying regulations don't require the retrofitting of sprinkler systems or most other fire safety measures to older buildings to bring them up to current safety standards. 

Just found this link:
Which councils are retrofitting high rises with sprinklers? | Analysis | Inside Housing



> Six years ago this month, three women and three children lost their lives in a devastating fire at Lakanal House in London. Less than 12 months later, two firefighters died in another high-rise tragedy at Shirley Towers in Southampton.
> 
> At both inquests into these two fatal fires in local authority tower blocks, the coroners used their Rule 43 letters – recommendations to prevent future deaths – to say that social landlords should consider retrofitting sprinklers in high-rise blocks.
> 
> ...





> *The law*
> Building regulations in England require sprinklers to be installed to flats in new residential blocks over 30 metres in height. In Scotland, sprinklers are required in new blocks above 18 metres.
> 
> Wales has required sprinklers in buildings such as new and converted care homes, hostels and halls of residence of any height since April 2014. All new or converted homes must have sprinklers from January 2016.
> ...


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

There is an absolute fuck ton of ACM clad buildings out there.  Hundreds of thousands of square metres of the stuff.  Building Control don't just allow this stuff to be put on the wall for shits and giggles.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 14, 2017)

killer b said:


> Absolutely - but that's why we look to government to ensure building standards and safety regulations are sufficient and adhered to. We can - and should - punish whoever was directly responsible, but there's a whole load of questions need asking about the regulatory & inspections framework that can allow something like this to happen.





http://www.frmjournal.com/news/news...97-471E-989C2C5DA3CB2433#.WUCr7Qm-NKk.twitter


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Worked in the industry for years.  I know all about the various fire rating of panels. What specifically have I said which you think is wrong?


You stated that no cladding is combustible! Apologies if I misunderstood.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> The original company was Harley Curtain Wall, the successor is Harley Facades but I think I may be wrong about when the sale of the former's assets took place.



Harley are a subbie, or at least were.  They would have been the installer and possibly the system designer, unlikely to be the panel manufacturer.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 14, 2017)

Here's the spec of materials used externally:

External Finishes Schedule

Planning Material Samples


----------



## bimble (Jun 14, 2017)

is there a website for donations yet?


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> You stated that no cladding is combustible! Apologies if I misunderstood.



I used the word carefully.  

Virtually anything will burn if the temperature is high enough.  Combustibility and contribution to spread of flames is what fire regs is all about.   The panel will have been fire rated but I'm keen to understand what rating it is because the photos are pretty unbelievable, the panels look charred this morning which still suggests lack of fire stopping behind the panels to me, which if true is absolutely criminal.

The panel should have been a minimum of Class O (iirc) against spread of flames.  Clearly the flames have spread so either they've used a dodgy panel or the firestopping strategy has failed, or both.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 14, 2017)

Grenfell Tower Fire: Local Building Expert Reveals Long-Standing Fire Risk Worry - LBC


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 14, 2017)

bimble said:


> is there a website for donations yet?


 

there is a go fund me setup


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I used the word carefully.
> 
> Virtually anything will burn if the temperature is high enough.  Combustibility and contribution to spread of flames is what fire regs is all about.   The panel will have been fire rated but I'm keen to understand what rating it is because the photos are pretty unbelievable, the panels look charred this morning which still suggests lack of fire stopping behind the panels to me, which if true is absolutely criminal.
> 
> The panel should have been a minimum of Class O (iirc) against spread of flames.  Clearly the flames have spread so either they've used a dodgy panel or the firestopping strategy has failed, or both.


I found this in the product info....

"FIRE PERFORMANCE.

None of the components in the Spanwall RF 50 support combustion, and the use of a rockwool insulation will mean the total installation will be fire safe and comply with a Class O surface spread of flame.

If fire stopping is required the design team should consult a specialist supplier such as Siderise Ltd, for design and product advice."

This suggests that the product alone does not provide fire stopping!!!!

All the witnesses being interviewed are mentioning the cladding, it seems that something well dodgy has happened here. Expect a lot of company directors fucking off to sunny climes before it gets too hot for their liking at home!


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> Here's the spec of materials used externally:
> 
> External Finishes Schedule
> 
> Planning Material Samples



Ah a Reynobond cassette system. Thanks for the link.  

A very widespread used system.  Assuming that what was actually used and the contractor didn't change the panel at the last minute then it has to be something to do with the firestopping.  Either that or the entire testing regime has missed something.

This is just utterly desperate.  Some reports that the fire brigade may have been a bit slow to arrive as well.  All those cuts Boris Johnson instigated need to be looked at very carefully.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Grenfell Tower Fire: Local Building Expert Reveals Long-Standing Fire Risk Worry - LBC



That is damning!


----------



## MrSki (Jun 14, 2017)

Just heard on the radio a resident who escaped being woken up by shouting outside of "Don't jump don't jump" A fucking nightmare. It would have taken my a while to realise it wasn't.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 14, 2017)

fuck that is horrible. 

i lived in a tower bloc until recently. We had a fire when sofas were left in the entrance hall and not cleared - and some wanker set light to them. 
We were woken by the fire brigade at 3am and told to stay put. The hallways were full of smoke but inside the flats was fine, one bloke had to be treated for smoke inhalation after he left this flat to check on a neighbour - but everyone else was ok. The ground floor was completely fucked - it was a very fierce hot blaze - but it didn't spread. 
I dont understand how this fire spread through the whole bloc and so quickly - it looks like their have been some serious fuck ups with fire safety. I cant recall of a fire in a residential building this serious - certainly not in a tower bloc.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> I found this in the product info....
> 
> "FIRE PERFORMANCE.
> 
> ...



It certainly does.

As it states the system itself is not combustible but it is not in itself a firestopping product, it will need to be integrated into the wider firestopping strategy.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Some reports that the fire brigade may have been a bit slow to arrive as well.  All those cuts Boris Johnson instigated need to be looked at very carefully.



The fire brigade spokeswomen said they were there in 6 minutes.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Harley are a subbie, or at least were.  They would have been the installer and possibly the system designer, unlikely to be the panel manufacturer.


The web page for Harley Facades appears to state they also manufacture but I may not be reading it correctly. However if materials were supplied by Harley Curtain Wall, the company which was wound up, I guess the question would be whether, and to what extent, Harley Facades had acquired their liabilities as well as their assets. As the similar company names imply the same guy is behind both of them.

ETA: a more detailed account of the winding up of Harley Curtain Wall here
Crowborough company goes into administration - Crowborough Life


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 14, 2017)

Various volunteer/donation coordination efforts on the #GrenfellSolidarity Twitter hashtag.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

[QUOTE="Kaka Tim, post: 15110215, member: 264" I cant recall of a fire in a residential building this serious - certainly not in a tower bloc.[/QUOTE]

Lakanal House is the last one I remember.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

Looks like the fire it still pretty vigorous, wonder what the chance of structural collapse is?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> Looks like the fire it still pretty vigorous, wonder what the chance of structural collapse is?


----------



## brogdale (Jun 14, 2017)

Some the eye-witness accounts are so upsetting; just so dreadful.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 14, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> Looks like the fire it still pretty vigorous, wonder what the chance of structural collapse is?


Engineer on site of huge London flat fire in case of building collapse


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 14, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> Looks like the fire it still pretty vigorous, wonder what the chance of structural collapse is?


About half an hour ago the Fire Brigade said this wasn't yet a concern, and firecrew were still inside, however I see flames have just appeared again on one side of the building


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 14, 2017)

The guy on the BBC said he was woken up by the smell of burning plastic.


----------



## Ax^ (Jun 14, 2017)

fucking hell 

woke up to witness reports on the BBC

poor people


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> Looks like the fire it still pretty vigorous, wonder what the chance of structural collapse is?


It'll be fine, the CIA haven't been anywhere near it!


----------



## Cid (Jun 14, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> The web page for Harley Facades appears to state they also manufacture but I may not be reading it correctly. However if materials were supplied by Harley Curtain Wall, the company which was wound up, I guess the question would be whether, and to what extent, Harley Facades had acquired their liabilities as well as their assets. As the similar company names imply the same guy is behind both of them.
> 
> ETA: a more detailed account of the winding up of Harley Curtain Wall here
> Crowborough company goes into administration - Crowborough Life



They're a contractor that supplies a system. They might manufacture part of it, but they certainly won't be making things like window glass, insulation, panels etc.


----------



## Ax^ (Jun 14, 2017)

really don't get the no centralised fire alarm system


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 14, 2017)

Ax^ said:


> really don't get the no centralised fire alarm system



No.  And just one stairwell for the whole tower.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Ax^ said:


> really don't get the no centralised fire alarm system



Me neither in a block of this height.  I suppose you could argue that having everyone's alarm go off every time someone burns their toast would be a real pain but still.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> No.  And just one stairwell for the whole tower.



Well that's just the design of an old building.  Unfortunately when a lot of these blocks were built post-war there was little consideration to fire or insulation etc.  Obviously there are things that can be done later but additional stairwells is not one of them.


----------



## Cid (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Me neither in a block of this height.  I suppose you could argue that having everyone's alarm go off every time someone burns their toast would be a real pain but still.



Can you have a kitchen fire alarm, then a separate fire alarm in a hallway? I _think_ that's how it works in my flat. Certainly the one in the kitchen looks pretty conventional, while the one in the hall looks quite industrial and linked in. I remember as a student we had them in each room. Every fucking night, I mean it's like they thought their no smoking signs would work or something.


----------



## ChrisD (Jun 14, 2017)

Ronan point disaster changed attitudes and policy to new build tower blocks 
significantly at the end of the 1960s.  This will have even greater consequences in relation to insulation upgrading and people's attitude to high rise living.   Awful way to learn.


----------



## souljacker (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> Expect a lot of company directors fucking off to sunny climes before it gets too hot for their liking at home!



I thought the law had changed on this and they can now be done for Manslaughter or corporate homicide. Whether that is extraditable is possibly a different question.


----------



## 19force8 (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Well that's just the design of an old building.  Unfortunately when a lot of these blocks were built post-war there was little consideration to fire or insulation etc.  Obviously there are things that can be done later but additional stairwells is not one of them.


not "post war" 1974!

E2A According to V Derbyshire an hour ago.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Well that's just the design of an old building.  Unfortunately when a lot of these blocks were built post-war there was little consideration to fire or insulation etc.  Obviously there are things that can be done later but additional stairwells is not one of them.



Could they have put fire escape stairs on the outside? They seem to be standard in the USA on old high rises?


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Me neither in a block of this height.  I suppose you could argue that having everyone's alarm go off every time someone burns their toast would be a real pain but still.


Thats not what centralised alarm system does. Fire starts on 4th floor, they should have an alarm available that will alert everyone in building that they can activate, the lack of one is almost certainly criminal!


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Me neither in a block of this height.  I suppose you could argue that having everyone's alarm go off every time someone burns their toast would be a real pain but still.


Where I am - admittedly a tiny building by comparison - each flat has its own internal smoke/fire alarms, which are not connected to anyone else's. Then there's a communal fire alarm that covers the shared areas / stairwell. So you can burn toast with impunity, it only sets off the communal stuff if the smoke makes it out of an individual flat.


----------



## MrSki (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Me neither in a block of this height.  I suppose you could argue that having everyone's alarm go off every time someone burns their toast would be a real pain but still.


Not a smoke alarm but a fire alarm to alert the whole building.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

19force8 said:


> not "post war" 1974!
> 
> E2A According to V Derbyshire an hour ago.



Well that's still post-war sort off, its a catch all phrase.  But yeah, there were still very few building regs in the 70's.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> Thats not what centralised alarm system does. Fire starts on 4th floor, they should have an alarm available that will alert everyone in building that they can activate, the lack of one is almost certainly criminal!



Sure, internal fit-out was never my thing.  

Is it criminal though? Is there a legal obligation?  My block of flats doesn't have one and its pretty new (circa 2001).  This is a lot bigger mind.


----------



## agricola (Jun 14, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> Where I am - admittedly a tiny building by comparison - each flat has its own internal smoke/fire alarms, which are not connected to anyone else's. Then there's a communal fire alarm that covers the shared areas / stairwell. So you can burn toast with impunity, it only sets off the communal stuff if the smoke makes it out of an individual flat.



Same here, though  then again I have never heard it tested.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

This has already got the feeling of multiple fuck-ups.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> This has already got the feeling of multiple fuck-ups.


You don't say.

Theresa May aide 'sat on' report warning tower blocks were vulnerable to fire


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

Police confirm 6 fatalities so far...


----------



## brogdale (Jun 14, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> You don't say.
> 
> Theresa May aide 'sat on' report warning tower blocks were vulnerable to fire


Barwell is unfit for any public office.


----------



## bimble (Jun 14, 2017)

This will probably lead to significant tightening of the law, probably took something like this to do so. I don't know what the rules are but we have nothing in my block apart from a smoke alarm in the stairwell (old building converted to flats) .


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Between 400-600 people living there according to the BBC.  Oh god, this could be catastrophic.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> You don't say.
> 
> Theresa May aide 'sat on' report warning tower blocks were vulnerable to fire



That looks pretty damming.  If the recommendation was there for sprinklers then why not install them?  Can only be one reason I guess.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 14, 2017)

Police has confirmed six deaths so far, but this figure is likely to increase.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jun 14, 2017)

no-no said:


> No, it doesn't sound like the residents were happy with the work being done. from the kctmo website - "KCTMO is managed by a Board of Directors comprising of eight elected tenant and leaseholder members, four appointed Councillor members and three independent appointed other members."
> 
> Who are the 3 independent board members?
> 
> fucking horrific.


This is a very political matter, and we may now partly be seeing the results of decisions where the deciders just didn't care enough. I know the guy who runs London Federation of Housing Co-ops, which includes TMOs (Tenant Management Orgs). For those who don't know, a TMO is similar to a co-op in that it is a democratic structure, but a housing co-op owns its own properties, while a TMO just has a management arrangement. He told me a couple of years ago that everyone who is a fan of co-ops and TMOs thought (and tried to tell) K&C that they were fucking up by putting ALL their properties into the same TMO. A simple democratic structure like that would be appropriate for one block or maybe a few next to each other. The idea you can maintain genuine democratic control when you put all the borough's property in one TMO is absurd. You could try to create some federated structure I suppose, but they didn't. So they ended up with something that was meant to be democratically controlled by couldn't be, thereby losing both the full council oversight and the democratic advantage of TMOs. Basically the democratic element was tokenism - the borough didn't care that it wouldn't work.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Police has confirmed six deaths so far, but this figure is likely to increase.


Could take hours to search the whole place...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 14, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Barwell is unfit for any public office.



The good people of Croydon have already dispensed with his services. Which now looks like letting him off easy tbh.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> Could take hours to search the whole place...


grim, grim task


----------



## agricola (Jun 14, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> Could take hours to search the whole place...



More like days, if not weeks depending on how the structure is.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> The good people of Croydon have already dispensed with his services. Which now looks like letting him off easy tbh.


he's on my passenger list for south georgia


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 14, 2017)

Its not the fire, well not initially, its the smoke. FFS, there will be people in there who, live in a block _because_ of its accessibility and structure, people who may not be able to live in a conventional flat or house as they have mobility issues and suchlike. This doesn't bear thinking about. This is awful.


----------



## editor (Jun 14, 2017)

The Grenfell blogger is rightly fucking furious:


> Regular readers of this blog will know that we have posted numerous warnings in recent years about the very poor fire safety standards at Grenfell Tower and elsewhere in RBKC.
> 
> *ALL OUR WARNINGS FELL ON DEAF EARS* and we predicted that a catastrophe like this was inevitable and just a matter of time. Below is a list of links to previous blogs we posted on this site trying to warn the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea who own this property and the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation who supposedly manage all social housing in RBKC on the Council’s behalf:
> 
> ...


----------



## treelover (Jun 14, 2017)

not-bono-ever Awful news, yes, residents and locals have said there were a number of disabled residents in the block.

Once the awful work is carried out and the inquests begin, there will be some very damning evidence coming out, one wonders whether there has been a deliberate running down on these blocks as to 'encourage' movement out of the area.


----------



## treelover (Jun 14, 2017)

BBC News were interviewing a bloke called Piers, who clealy knew the issues, the area, knows the Grenfell blogger, Jane Hill had to keep saying, "ah, but we don't know what happened yet" Fair enough, but Piers was really on the ball.


----------



## 19force8 (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Well that's still post-war sort off, its a catch all phrase.  But yeah, there were still very few building regs in the 70's.


After the Ronan Point collapse building regs were substantially tightened.

So 1974 can't be regarded as part of the post war tower block craze. Also, look at contemporary buildings of similar height such as the Barbican Towers which show best practice at the time and consider why that wasn't followed here.


----------



## campanula (Jun 14, 2017)

noooo this is a nightmare, a fucking nightmare. My 12 year old sister died in a housefire in Milton Keynes - exacerbated by burning polystyrene ceiling cladding and worse, windows which only opened into 6 inch slats. There was a small space visible, behind a sofa which was not totally blackened, where she had obviously crouched in terror. I have no words to fully express my absolute misery for these people...and hope the repercussions lead to prison sentences.
My sister's death did, at least, cause MK council to investigate fire-proofing and safety throughout the whole series of estates...and, afaik, Conniburrow was actually knocked down and rebuilt.


----------



## bimble (Jun 14, 2017)

Can't stop thinking about the thing I read earlier that said someone had thrown a child out the window of their burning flat to save them from the fire


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

editor said:


> The Grenfell blogger is rightly fucking furious:



Whilst its deeply tragic that they've been unable to prevent the tragedy hopefully the blog will give the guilty no place to hide.


----------



## treelover (Jun 14, 2017)

This bloke and his partnet were evacuated from a nearby block, he said he had no insurance and had just brought as much of his belongings as he could.


----------



## klang (Jun 14, 2017)

So terrible! I know somebody who (used to?) lives in this building, together with his wife and five kids. Haven't 't seen him in a few years, so dunno if he still lives there, and his number seems to have changed. Will have to somehow try to get in touch with him......


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

bimble said:


> Can't stop thinking about the thing I read earlier that said someone had thrown a child out the window of their burning flat to save them from the fire


Doesn't bear thinking about... fucking horrific...


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 14, 2017)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

19force8 said:


> After the Ronan Point collapse building regs were substantially tightened.
> 
> So 1974 can't be regarded as part of the post war tower block craze. Also, look at contemporary buildings of similar height such as the Barbican Towers which show best practice at the time and consider why that wasn't followed here.


don't know who built it, whether it was rbkc or glc


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 14, 2017)

treelover said:


> This bloke and his partnet were evacuated from a nearby block, he said he had no insurance and had just brought as much of his belongings as he could.



Luckily for him he can go home at some point.


----------



## treelover (Jun 14, 2017)

campanula said:


> noooo this is a nightmare, a fucking nightmare. My 12 year old sister died in a housefire in Milton Keynes - exacerbated by burning polystyrene ceiling cladding and worse, windows which only opened into 6 inch slats. There was a small space visible, behind a sofa which was not totally blackened, where she had obviously crouched in terror. I have no words to fully express my absolute misery for these people...and hope the repercussions lead to prison sentences.
> My sister's death did, at least, cause MK council to investigate fire-proofing and safety throughout the whole series of estates...and, afaik, Conniburrow was actually knocked down and rebuilt.



I have heard of a number of properties in my area with no Gas Safe, etc, but tenants too scared to report it, due to retaliatory eviction, things must change.


----------



## agricola (Jun 14, 2017)

treelover said:


> not-bono-ever Awful news, yes, residents and locals have said there were a number of disabled residents in the block.
> 
> Once the awful work is carried out and the inquests begin, there will be some very damning evidence coming out, one wonders whether there has been a deliberate running down on these blocks as to 'encourage' movement out of the area.



I'd be amazed if there was a deliberate attempt to run things down in order to get people to move, even with that council.  

What is more likely is that they ignored obvious problems because it would have cost them or their mates money, which is after all the common theme when it comes to disasters occurring under their watch.


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 14, 2017)

bimble said:


> This will probably lead to significant tightening of the law, probably took something like this to do so. I don't know what the rules are but we have nothing in my block apart from a smoke alarm in the stairwell (old building converted to flats) .



It's inexcusable that they need to wait for a disaster like this to happen at home before they start tightening regulations - other cities with a lot more high-rises than London have managed to avoid this kind of disaster for a long time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Its not the fire, well not initially, its the smoke. FFS, there will be people in there who, live in a block _because_ of its accessibility and structure, people who may not be able to live in a conventional flat or house as they have mobility issues and suchlike. This doesn't bear thinking about. This is awful.


yeh, tower blocks house lots of people who can't out in a hurry, people with young children, old people, disabled people... it's indescribably awful, as the fucking thing was predicted by the grenfell blogger 

heads will roll, sadly only metaphorically


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

treelover said:


> I have heard of a number of properties in my area with no Gas Safe, etc, but tenants too scared to report it, due to retaliatory eviction, things must change.


in social housing they are big on gas safety, there's a mandatory inspection every year.


----------



## treelover (Jun 14, 2017)

agricola said:


> I'd be amazed if there was a deliberate attempt to run things down in order to get people to move, even with that council.
> 
> What is more likely is that they ignored obvious problems because it would have cost them or their mates money, which is after all the common theme when it comes to disasters occurring under their watch.






> *Keith*, 42, a former resident at Grenfell Tower said the fire alarms didn’t work properly when he lived there.
> 
> I grew up in Grenfell Tower; it was my home until I joined the army at 16. It was only four years ago that my mum sold her flat there and moved in with my sister. She’s now living up in Watford.
> 
> When I lived there we’d had a few fires over the year – nothing on a large scale, but the fire alarms did not work properly. If you were in your flat even with the telly off you wouldn’t have heard anything. It was so quiet. After a fire on the sixth floor when we lived there, my mum had asked me to speak to the other leaseholders on her behalf. It was a small fire but afterwards we would try and engage with the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation but nothing changed with them.



You may be right, this guy is describing events 25 years ago.(guardian update)


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

19force8 said:


> After the Ronan Point collapse building regs were substantially tightened.
> 
> So 1974 can't be regarded as part of the post war tower block craze. Also, look at contemporary buildings of similar height such as the Barbican Towers which show best practice at the time and consider why that wasn't followed here.



Sure but Ronan Point wasn't fire was it?  The tightening of fire regs is a relatively modern thing as it is with other regulations.  Why wasn't best practice followed?  The same reason is so often isn't I I imagine. Best practice is often inconvenient and expensive.  Unless obliged by building regs best practice is still often not followed. That's construction for you.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> That is damning!


That's odd though, he seems to be talking about a school next door - the Aldridge Academy (?).


----------



## moomoo (Jun 14, 2017)

A guy on the telly just said it was started by a fridge explosing in the flat next to his.


----------



## MrSki (Jun 14, 2017)

I heard earlier of wheelchair users on the 18th floor! What the fuck is that about. You are not supposed to use lifts in the event of a fire so how is someone in a wheelchair supposed to get down 18 flights of stairs.


----------



## treelover (Jun 14, 2017)

The emergency services will also need help and support in the days to come, they will have witnessed truly appallings scenes.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

MrSki said:


> I heard earlier of wheelchair users on the 18th floor! What the fuck is that about. You are not supposed to use lifts in the event of a fire so how is someone in a wheelchair supposed to get down 18 flights of stairs.


Maybe they were resident there before becoming wheelchair bound & were never offered a different flat...?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

MrSki said:


> I heard earlier of wheelchair users on the 18th floor! What the fuck is that about. You are not supposed to use lifts in the event of a fire so how is someone in a wheelchair supposed to get down 18 flights of stairs.


18 flights understates the problem: 2 flights per floor in towerblocks. and 1 flight would present pretty insurmountable problems to someone in a wheelchair.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 14, 2017)

treelover said:


> The emergency services will also need help and support in the days to come, they will have witnessed truly appallings scenes.




STOP this gushing please!!! You are begininning to sound like Kay Burley!


----------



## Wilf (Jun 14, 2017)

MrSki said:


> I heard earlier of wheelchair users on the 18th floor! What the fuck is that about. You are not supposed to use lifts in the event of a fire so how is someone in a wheelchair supposed to get down 18 flights of stairs.


I've seen fire safety videos where wheelchair users are just told to go into 'fire safety refuges' - stairwells - in the event of a fair, to wait for rescue.  FFS!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

Wilf said:


> I've seen fire safety videos where wheelchair users are just told to go into 'fire safety refuges' - stairwells - in the event of a fair, to wait for rescue.  FFS!


i can see stairwells being chimneys


----------



## LDC (Jun 14, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> in social housing they are big on gas safety, there's a mandatory inspection every year.



Indeed, but I've lived somewhere where a number of residents never allowed the safety inspections to happen in their homes.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 14, 2017)

Not sure what to usefully say really, just hope there aren't as many fatalities as there could be - and that any friends and relatives that fellow urbs might have there are safe. And that there's a reckoning if this really is about neglect and underspending.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 14, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> i can see stairwells being chimneys


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Indeed, but I've lived somewhere where a number of residents never allowed the safety inspections to happen in their homes.


where i lived the council said they would force entry to flats to ensure the safety inspection occurred.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 14, 2017)

Wilf said:


> I've seen fire safety videos where wheelchair users are just told to go into 'fire safety refuges' - stairwells - in the event of a fair, to wait for rescue.  FFS!


there is a bridge between buildings at the second storey level connecting two blocks of avenue campus university. Staff training is that they are meant to get their disabled colleagues there (as its a 'safe zone') and then leave them there and go to your outside assembly point. Apparently everyone at the coffee breaks said that would never happen, they come with us to the assembly point if we have to carry them


----------



## editor (Jun 14, 2017)

Shitloads of this cosmetic cladding has gone up on old blocks recently. I suspect some may have to come down if it's proven to have played  part in this awful fire.


----------



## LDC (Jun 14, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> where i lived the council said they would force entry to flats to ensure the safety inspection occurred.



Yeah, the place I lived said that, yet it took years to go through the courts for this to happen. Anyway, distractions. Fucked up night for people in the block. RIP and thoughts to those affected.


----------



## bimble (Jun 14, 2017)

The cladding is just for prettifying that's all,  to make the block look more modern from the outside?


----------



## 19force8 (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Sure but Ronan Point wasn't fire was it?  The tightening of fire regs is a relatively modern thing as it is with other regulations.  Why wasn't best practice followed?  The same reason is so often isn't I I imagine. Best practice is often inconvenient and expensive.  Unless obliged by building regs best practice is still often not followed. That's construction for you.


Sorry, at the moment I'm too angry to hold a rational discussion. More so after looking at the Grenfell Action Group blog. I'm going for a [long] walk.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

Wilf said:


> That's odd though, he seems to be talking about a school next door - the Aldridge Academy (?).


It's part of complex and seems same materials were used.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> there is a bridge between buildings at the second storey level connecting two blocks of avenue campus university. Staff training is that they are meant to get their disabled colleagues there (as its a 'safe zone') and then leave them there and go to your outside assembly point. Apparently everyone at the coffee breaks said that would never happen, they come with us to the assembly point if we have to carry them


some places have chairs which can go down stairs


----------



## Wilf (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> It's part of complex and seems same materials were used.


Ah, cheers.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 14, 2017)

Got this off the comments thread on this  journal.ie story:

"Estate resident Ahmed Chellat has been told that his relatives are safe after they were told to stay in their 21st-floor flat with wet towels under the doors.
His sister, brother-in-law, and their two children were advised to stay in the flat and that help was on its way. He told ITV they were safe.
Here’s hoping others are saved."

here's hoping yes.

At least 6 people have died in massive fire at west London tower block


----------



## agricola (Jun 14, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> there is a bridge between buildings at the second storey level connecting two blocks of avenue campus university. Staff training is that they are meant to get their disabled colleagues there (as its a 'safe zone') and then leave them there and go to your outside assembly point. Apparently everyone at the coffee breaks said that would never happen, they come with us to the assembly point if we have to carry them



Amazing that still goes on, tbh.  Where I work disabled colleagues have someone specifically designated to help them out if we have to evacuate, and our building isn't that high.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 14, 2017)

bimble said:


> The cladding is just for prettifying that's all,  to make the block look more modern from the outside?



Usually to improve insulation and sometimes to protect existing facades that may have degraded with age.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 14, 2017)

Wilf said:


> I've seen fire safety videos where wheelchair users are just told to go into 'fire safety refuges' - stairwells - in the event of a fair, to wait for rescue.  FFS!



The fire is supposed to be contained in the flat it started. Even if it breaches that, the stairwell is additionally protected. Certainly enough time for firefighters to go up and bring wheelchair users down from the landings. There could also be evac chairs that people can use to take wheelchair users down flights of stairs. That's why fire safety videos tell wheelchair users to go to refuges, because it's a system that works. 

Obviously if the building doesn't comply with the regulations, then all that goes out the window.


----------



## editor (Jun 14, 2017)

Just seen this: 


Due to the engulfment of the inferno in Grenfell Tower, Latimer Road, W11 1TG, people have been left with no clothes, food and homes. Numbers of casualties are not confirmed.

HELP/ DROP OFF POINTS:

RUGBY PORTBELLO TRUST
221 Walmer Road, 
W11 4EY

ST CLEMENT'S CHURCH 
95 Sirdar Road, 
W11 4EQ

TABERNACLE CHRISTIAN CENTRE
Jubilee House, 
210 Latimer Road, 
W10 6QY

Please share!


----------



## Wilf (Jun 14, 2017)

Just saw that 50 people have gone to hospital, mainly smoke inhalation, not surprisingly.  Horrible though that is, it does suggest a lot of people actually getting out? Fingers crossed.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Sure but Ronan Point wasn't fire was it?  The tightening of fire regs is a relatively modern thing as it is with other regulations.  Why wasn't best practice followed?  The same reason is so often isn't I I imagine. Best practice is often inconvenient and expensive.  Unless obliged by building regs best practice is still often not followed. That's construction for you.


Irrespective of building regs the fire regs have been around for 12 years in their current form. There is no excuse for not having a suitable risk assessment and control measures in place.


----------



## agricola (Jun 14, 2017)

CNN reporting that RBKC are saying that they "were assured the building was safe".


----------



## Wilf (Jun 14, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> The fire is supposed to be contained in the flat it started. Even if it breaches that, the stairwell is additionally protected. Certainly enough time for firefighters to go up and bring wheelchair users down from the landings. There could also be evac chairs that people can use to take wheelchair users down flights of stairs. That's why fire safety videos tell wheelchair users to go to refuges, because it's a system that works.
> 
> Obviously if the building doesn't comply with the regulations, then all that goes out the window.


Yeah and if you have no access to lifts, as is the case in a fire, it seems like the only plausible solution in a standard tower block.  Always gets me though, the idea of just 'leaving people' perched up the stairs.


----------



## bimble (Jun 14, 2017)

editor said:


> Just seen this:
> 
> 
> Due to the engulfment of the inferno in Grenfell Tower, Latimer Road, W11 1TG, people have been left with no clothes, food and homes. Numbers of casualties are not confirmed.
> ...



I read somewhere else (i think twitter) that they are now saying to wait until there are lists of what they actually want - I don't know.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Sure, internal fit-out was never my thing.
> 
> Is it criminal though? Is there a legal obligation?  My block of flats doesn't have one and its pretty new (circa 2001).  This is a lot bigger mind.


Legal obligation yes.


----------



## Mation (Jun 14, 2017)

I'm wondering what we can do to help people in the other blocks managed by KCTMO. The residents must be utterly terrified.

I remember seeing a fire in a block at the end of my road when I was 6 or 7. It was contained in one flat but the family - a mum and her daughter - died. I saw a picture of the burnt out flat in the local paper and the same view from outside my house. I didn't live in a block but I was hugely affected. I spent the next 10 years or so obsessively checking the gap under my bedroom door after lights out for flickering orange light and thinking about how I could escape, before I could sleep at night.

How much worse for the poor people who have seen this and live in exactly the same conditions?   How will they go home tonight or any night and not wonder whether they will wake up? Where can they go?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 14, 2017)

agricola said:


> CNN reporting that RBKC are saying that they "were assured the building was safe".



Just utter bullshit. Panic. Cunts.


----------



## bimble (Jun 14, 2017)

Something good, look!


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 14, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Yeah and if you have no access to lifts, as is the case in a fire, it seems like the only plausible solution in a standard tower block.  Always gets me though, the idea of just 'leaving people' perched up the stairs.



Obviously other evacuating people can help them down, but the main message is that they get to the refuge, and the fire brigade should be up there in minutes. Some buildings can also have designated fire evacuation lifts, but clearly this one didn't.


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 14, 2017)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> Obviously other evacuating people can help them down, but the main message is that they get to the refuge, and the fire brigade should be up there in minutes. Some buildings can also have designated fire evacuation lifts, but clearly this one didn't.


lifts in tower blocks notoriously unreliable at the best of times


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> The fire is supposed to be contained in the flat it started. Even if it breaches that, the stairwell is additionally protected. Certainly enough time for firefighters to go up and bring wheelchair users down from the landings. There could also be evac chairs that people can use to take wheelchair users down flights of stairs. That's why fire safety videos tell wheelchair users to go to refuges, because it's a system that works.
> 
> *Obviously if the building doesn't comply with the regulations, then all that goes out the window.*


Looks like there might've been a lot of non-compliance in this instance. Just the very idea of being in a wheelchair, stuck in an ineffective refuge, as the fire gets closer... it's a horrific thing to say, but at least an able bodied person has the last resort option of jumping out of a window...


----------



## Wilf (Jun 14, 2017)

My Dad's care home lift was broken for a week, leaving him stranded in his bedroom.  Sorry, a derail, but just another example of companies not giving a flying fuck. They would also have had to physically carry residents down in the event of a fire.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 14, 2017)

bimble what would be happening in that flat to make that woman decide throwing her baby from the 9th floor was the better choice? I'm so pleased the child was caught but


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 14, 2017)

On TV now it looks like footage from a war zone. It does look like it might collapse.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 14, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> bimble what would be happening in that flat to make that woman decide throwing her baby from the 9th floor was the better choice? I'm so pleased the child was caught but



I think we can all imagine.


----------



## bimble (Jun 14, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> bimble what would be happening in that flat to make that woman decide throwing her baby from the 9th floor was the better choice? I'm so pleased the child was caught but


I know. Just that hours ago i read that a child was thrown out of a window and now i see that one was caught, so that counts as 'good news'. Still too much for brain to deal with, of course.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

bimble said:


> The cladding is just for prettifying that's all,  to make the block look more modern from the outside?



No.  It is very often part of an upgrade to the thermal performance of the building, it should be a positive thing for the residents.  Insulation just wasn't a consideration for construction until relatively recently. To include insulation in old buildings you either lose internal space or stick it outside which means that a new cladding system will be required.  Modernising the look of the building is a happy by-product of this process.

Its supposed to be a win win. Warmer homes, cheaper bills and a modern looking building which the residents can feel good about.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> On TV now it looks like footage from a war zone. It does look like it might collapse.


It's looks unreal, such devastation, like something out of a hollywood disaster film...


----------



## mod (Jun 14, 2017)

People throwing their kids out of windows. People jumping from windows. Fuck me this is horrific. 

London fire: Families threw children out of Grenfell Tower to safety - BBC News


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 14, 2017)

trashpony said:


> No central alarm system, no sprinkler system and only one staircase. How the fuck is that legal?
> 
> Horrific


Mot of the modern flats I've lived in, up to 5 stories, have only had one staircase. The one where I was caught in a fire and few years back didn't have sprinklers or a communal alarm system or even emergency lighting. And that was only a few years old at the time. 

It should be mandatory for most blocks of flats to have proper fire prevention and management systems.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 14, 2017)

Cost cutting and skimping always hits those most who are least able to manage it. My shock and horror is moving towards anger


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

From the looks of the most recent photos it looks like the building is finished, it'll have to come down now.  I don't think I've ever seen anything as bad as this on a high-rise in the UK.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> From the looks of the most recent photos it looks like the building is finished, it'll have to come down now.  I don't think I've ever seen anything as bad as this on a high-rise in the UK.


Not to mention that, even if it were salvageable (seems improbable), who's going to want to live in a block that (possibly) a lot of people have died in?


----------



## cybershot (Jun 14, 2017)

This is far too close to home for me, having my Nan on the 12th floor of a tower block, and also my sister and her young family in another. also on the top floor. No words, really. Those lucky enough to get out, also now left with nothing. Absolutely nothing.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 14, 2017)

treelover said:


> The emergency services will also need help and support in the days to come, they will have witnessed truly appallings scenes.


Moving picture.

I imagine these men, last night, have seen things we cannot imagine. I hope they get the care they truly need. 

As much as I dislike the police generally, at times like this they earn their money, and deserve praise.

Ambulance crews too. Often forgotten when talking about emergencies, but always there, doing what they do.


----------



## bimble (Jun 14, 2017)

I stayed over last night at my friend's on 16th floor of a block that's decades old but now all private expensive high rent flats: It's full of brand new quality fire safety stuff (heavy duty fire doors all over the place sprinklers in each flat hoses all up the stairs etc) . If that block is adhering to the rules then why the hell wasn't k & C's council doing so too.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Looking again at the photos of the Lakanal House fire a few years back that was small and relatively contained compared to this yet 6 people died in that. I have a very horrid feeling regarding this one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Looking again at the photos of the Lakanal House fire a few years back that was small and relatively contained compared to this yet 6 people died in that. I have a very horrid feeling regarding this one.


yeh scores if not a hundred or more, i suspect

rip


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)




----------



## Geri (Jun 14, 2017)

The more I read about this the angrier I am getting.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 14, 2017)

me as well Geri . austerity kills, but not usually this obviously

fuckers


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 14, 2017)

Expert after expert being interviewed just can't believe how fast it took hold, and coverage seems to be increasingly focusing on the exterior of the building being the reason for it spreading so quickly, which does point towards the new cladding being the problem.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 109312



A blamestorming session no doubt.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 14, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Cost cutting and skimping always hits those most who are least able to manage it. My shock and horror is moving towards anger



they crowd people into unsafe flats, remove proper oversight, jobs for the boys shit going on probably with the choice of firms doing what work was done. And when you hear about this rhetoric of cutting red tape, removing impediments to business, optimizing fiscal potentiality or whatever. And this is what we get for it.
I'm just waiting for some scummy fucker in news world to suggest it was the fault of someone with a chip pan going who fell asleep drunk. Katie Hopkins will no doubt get her hate on in a manner such as that


----------



## girasol (Jun 14, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Expert after expert being interviewed just can't believe how fast it took hold, and coverage seems to be increasingly focusing on the exterior of the building being the reason for it spreading so quickly, which does point towards the new cladding being the problem.



Exactly.  Took 15 minutes to spread from bottom to top.  Concrete isn't meant to burn, so it's the surrounding structures that spread the fire, right? (going on the assumption it's build from concrete, what else would it be for tower blocks?)


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Expert after expert being interviewed just can't believe how fast it took hold, and coverage seems to be increasingly focusing on the exterior of the building being the reason for it spreading so quickly, which does point towards the new cladding being the problem.



Yes. Its utterly astonishing.  There are just so many reasons why this should never happen.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 14, 2017)

no-no said:


> This KCTMO, how does that work? it's run by the tennants themselves but  it's also a private company?



It doesn't sound like a conventional Tenant Management Organisation, but like an Arm's Length Management Organisation, which is an entirely different thing.  I'm not aware of any borough-wide TMOs in existence, so I expect this is just a name that RBKC has given to an ALMO which has tenant representation on the board, and has sub-committee "boards" (think "residents' associations") on each estate.

TMOs are, effectively, private companies, but if they've been constituted properly, they're fully constitutionally accountable - in a way that a council never is - to the residents of the TMO.  For example, on the one I served on, any board member could be suspended for minor transgressions of the constitution, and removed after a disciplinary procedure.  Something that bothers me about the Grenfell blog is that the blogger mentions that the TMO were re-elected (a proper TMO's mandate has to be regularly renewed by ballot) by proxy votes.  I don't know of ANY TMOs that allow proxy votes - most use postal votes for vulnerable and mobility-impaired residents.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 14, 2017)

girasol said:


> Exactly.  Took 15 minutes to spread from bottom to top.  Concrete isn't meant to burn, so it's the surrounding structures that spread the fire, right? (going on the assumption it's build from concrete, what else would it be for tower blocks?)



I've heard the stairwell didn't have functional fire doors, and the refurb saw lots of wood and plastic installed. Could have spread internally that fast too.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

bimble said:


> I stayed over last night at my friend's on 16th floor of a block that's decades old *but now all private expensive high rent flats*: It's full of brand new quality fire safety stuff (heavy duty fire doors all over the place sprinklers in each flat hoses all up the stairs etc) . If that block is adhering to the rules then why the hell wasn't k & C's council doing so too.


Think that may answer the question...


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

girasol said:


> Exactly.  Took 15 minutes to spread from bottom to top.  Concrete isn't meant to burn, so it's the surrounding structures that spread the fire, right?



Yup, I mean concrete will burn at high enough temperatures but to spread so quickly, something else is going on.  I said a few of pages back my money is on the ventilated cavity behind the cladding acting as a combustible chimney with the fire being sucked up the building and feeding off the oxygen.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 14, 2017)

no-no said:


> No, it doesn't sound like the residents were happy with the work being done. from the kctmo website - "KCTMO is managed by a Board of Directors comprising of eight elected tenant and leaseholder members, four appointed Councillor members and three independent appointed other members."
> 
> Who are the 3 independent board members?
> 
> fucking horrific.



In the case of the TMO I sat on, the (2) independent members were people we drafted onto the board to provide us with short-term expertise in a particular field.  We had an architect for a year, a QS, and accountant etc - all people that helped the board do a better job for the residents.  IF KCTMO were drafting local political worthies (it sometimes happens, especially with very large TMOs), then they should have reduced the councillor count accordingly.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Jun 14, 2017)

I've been fucking raging about this all day today.  RAGING.  It's a pointless, stupid loss of life but beyond that there are now people dead and homeless in the richest borough in the UK while gold-clad houses in the very same borough lie empty.

It's a fucking disgrace.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 14, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> I think they've got the dates wrong - looks to me as if the company which supplied these materials had bought out the one which went into receivership before this contract began.
> ETA: actually I think I might be wrong about that.
> 
> It's an ALMO (Arms Length Management Organisation) set up by the Council which - I think uniquely - has adopted the legal form of a TMO (Tenant's Management Organisation). Actual tenant control of the organisation appears to be minimal however. I'm a little curious myself about exactly how they've structured this, but it's not a tenant run organisation in any meaningful sense.



Yep, just been speaking to someone on the board of the National Federation of TMOs, and he said much the same - "they're a plastic TMO, designed by RBKC lawyers".


----------



## Ted Striker (Jun 14, 2017)

editor said:


> Just seen this:
> 
> 
> Due to the engulfment of the inferno in Grenfell Tower, Latimer Road, W11 1TG, people have been left with no clothes, food and homes. Numbers of casualties are not confirmed.
> ...




Got a garage full of old clothes within spitting distance of there, though can't get there until Friday


----------



## mrs quoad (Jun 14, 2017)

An unquotable rag (DM) is currently claiming ''Nobody on the top three floors survived''.

Though the wet towels story seems to run against that.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 14, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> they crowd people into unsafe flats, remove proper oversight, jobs for the boys shit going on probably with the choice of firms doing what work was done. And when you hear about this rhetoric of cutting red tape, removing impediments to business, optimizing fiscal potentiality or whatever. And this is what we get for it.
> I'm just waiting for some scummy fucker in news world to suggest it was the fault of someone with a chip pan going who fell asleep drunk. Katie Hopkins will no doubt get her hate on in a manner such as that


Let her, if she capitalises on this it will be the end for the cunt


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Yup, I mean concrete will burn at high enough temperatures but to spread so quickly, something else is going on.  I said a few of pages back my money is on the ventilated cavity behind the cladding acting as a combustible chimney with the fire being sucked up the building and feeding off the oxygen.


thank you for the insight you've offered, you never know how many fields urbs work in and it's been very useful reading your posts on this thread.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 14, 2017)

The subletting aspect could mean that there are many more people who are not even recorded as being in the building, possibly crowded into someones sublet flat for economy/ profit. fucks sake


----------



## Brainaddict (Jun 14, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Yep, just been speaking to someone on the board of the National Federation of TMOs, and he said much the same - "they're a plastic TMO, designed by RBKC lawyers".


And as I say, they were warned that it would by dysfunctional as a TMO at the time they set it up.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

This is making me weep buckets. Lots of people won't have been able to get out at all. Disabled people aren't usually supposed to be placed above a certain floor level in a tower block (think it might be fourth? Or it could just be my council's policy) but obviously if you become disabled later then you have to wait for a place to move to, and K&C is selling its nicer flats off when they become empty, because the govt's Housing and Planning Bill of last year forces them to, so there's nowhere left to rehouse people.

Those who did get out have probably had to leave their pets, their photo albums, all their possessions that had sentimental value - fuck, the poor people.

I really hope they figure out quickly what caused this and stop it happening elsewhere.



equationgirl said:


> Mot of the modern flats I've lived in, up to 5 stories, have only had one staircase. The one where I was caught in a fire and few years back didn't have sprinklers or a communal alarm system or even emergency lighting. And that was only a few years old at the time.
> 
> It should be mandatory for most blocks of flats to have proper fire prevention and management systems.



Up to five stories is rather different, though. Two staircases have the advantage of dividing up the residents between them and, if one becomes unusable through fire or somebody falling and a crush occurring, then there's still a way out. All of that is less crucial in a lower, smaller block.  Also the chances of survival by jumping from a window are way higher.


----------



## Ted Striker (Jun 14, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Cost cutting and skimping always hits those most who are least able to manage it. My shock and horror is moving towards anger



Not just that - the sheer incompetence and zero fucks given towards anything of importance to people in the TMO office, on anything, ever.

It used to enrage me to even try and deal with the smallest (obviously/unquestionably trivial in comparison) matter, and the whole organisation just didn't care.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Up to five stories is rather different, though. Two staircases have the advantage of dividing up the residents between them and, if one becomes unusable through fire or somebody falling and a crush occurring, then there's still a way out. All of that is less crucial in a lower, smaller block.  Also the chances of survival by jumping from a window are way higher.


my auld tower block, 18 floors high, has one staircase. two lifts, mind,  but one staircase.


----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 14, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> me as well Geri . austerity kills, but not usually this obviously
> 
> fuckers



me too. Am quietly fuming - I think this is going to be a very common and wide reaching reaction to these events. It really taps into both an underlying modern fear of potentital dangers of tall buildings, and the sheer brutality, unfairness and hypcrisy of the current housing system, austerity and neoliberalism

Potentially cold and callous thing to say at this time, but I hope this really acts as a political spark


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Well that's just the design of an old building.  Unfortunately when a lot of these blocks were built post-war there was little consideration to fire or insulation etc.  Obviously there are things that can be done later but additional stairwells is not one of them.



Architectural worker friend earlier today: "single stairwell high rise = chimney".


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 14, 2017)

Relevant article here about dangers/possible of cladding (interesting read). Coincidentally the guy who is in partnership with this company spoke to Guardian and said this below (which seems to be partly contradicted by the fact the building went up on the outside and possibly spread back inside as it did so.






View attachment 109315


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 14, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Barwell is unfit for any public office.



The chipmunk-faced little scroat!


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Yup, I mean concrete will burn at high enough temperatures but to spread so quickly, something else is going on.  I said a few of pages back my money is on the ventilated cavity behind the cladding acting as a combustible chimney with the fire being sucked up the building and feeding off the oxygen.



Just to expand upon this.  There should be intumescents behind the cladding.  Basically a chemical product that will swell when heated and therefore close the cavity.  If it is the cladding system that has contributed to this disaster then the intumescents have either failed or were incorrectly installed or not installed at all.

Regardless of what has been happening with council and the TMO this looks like something has gone seriously wrong from a construction perspective.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 14, 2017)

Also see this link from fire safety expert. Short excerpt below.


----------



## Lorca (Jun 14, 2017)

i know at the moment this is a relatively small point in the scheme of things, but where the hell are the 'surviving' tenants going to go in the short term? many will surely need to be re-housed nearby due to jobs, family commitments etc, but of course there's a chronic shortage of emergency housing afaik. also, many will have lost all their possessions. gonna be a bit of a nightmare for the local authority (and the tenants) to sort, surely.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 14, 2017)

I am watching this on the BBC now. if this is austerity, then heads will fucking roll for this.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 14, 2017)

editor said:


> Just seen this:
> 
> 
> Due to the engulfment of the inferno in Grenfell Tower, Latimer Road, W11 1TG, people have been left with no clothes, food and homes. Numbers of casualties are not confirmed.
> ...





bimble said:


> I read somewhere else (i think twitter) that they are now saying to wait until there are lists of what they actually want - I don't know.


Portbello Trust and St. Clement's Church reported being at capacity by late morning (which is kinda  in one sense), and the latter said they would tweet out any further items needed.

There are quite a few other places though, including a mosque and Sikh temple.

I'm keeping an eye on it as I'm heading over after work - we started asking for donations of items, but now we're just asking for cash which we'll take over and/or donate online.



Ted Striker said:


> Got a garage full of old clothes within spitting distance of there, though can't get there until Friday


I imagine they'll still be collecting by Friday, and it's possibly almost better for donations to be staggered. This is hundreds of people who have lost everything they own, they'll need a lot


----------



## stuff_it (Jun 14, 2017)

phillm said:


> Terrible news - many ambulances called very few seen leaving the scene. Recently refurbed with 'cladding'.
> 
> Grenfell Tower |


It seems that this cladding can be pretty flammable.

Fire Risks From External Cladding Panels – A Perspective From The UK «  Probyn Miers


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 14, 2017)

*PDF of design/materials for cladding on building. *

not entirely sure if these are the final choices. Anyone?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 14, 2017)

On the BBC lunchtime news, the top floors are still on fire, and bits of the building are still falling, which I assume is cladding.

A crane has turned-up, which seems to reach above that used by the fire service earlier, looks like it's pumping water in at floors around 16-18 now.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> I've been fucking raging about this all day today.  RAGING.  It's a pointless, stupid loss of life but beyond that there are now people dead and homeless in the richest borough in the UK while gold-clad houses in the very same borough lie empty.
> 
> It's a fucking disgrace.



Wouldn't it be nice if someone broke into those empty "homes" and housed some of these now-homeless people there?



Pickman's model said:


> thank you for the insight you've offered, you never know how many fields urbs work in and it's been very useful reading your posts on this thread.



Agreed.

Many years ago I lived on the 24th floor of a tower block with one staircase, too, but it was eventually knocked down as unsafe. WTF was going through the architects' minds to only have one set of stairs? A fire that spreads to that one staircase means everyone above that level dies. No safety doors can guarantee that won't happen, especially when people end up propping open fire doors because they're so bloody difficult to use.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 14, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> I am watching this on the BBC now. if this is austerity, then heads will fucking roll for this.


Such tragedy not only highlights their slashing of the state, but it also gives a context to the right's stated aims for Brexit.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 14, 2017)

I am in tears listening to the descriptions of people trapped. fuckfuckfuck.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> Also see this link from fire safety expert. Short excerpt below.
> 
> View attachment 109316



There is no way on a building this high a combustible material like expanded polystyrene should be used, even with firebreaks (basically a strip of non-combustible insulation such as Rockwool  incorporated into the insulation to act as a break).  Anything over 18m in height should use Rockwool or similar.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 14, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> An unquotable rag (DM) is currently claiming ''Nobody on the top three floors survived''.
> 
> .


 Haven't read the source, but it sounds unlikely.  Not so much that it isn't true, more that they couldn't _know_ it's true yet.

Oh, fuck, this is horrible.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

Lorca said:


> i know at the moment this is a relatively small point in the scheme of things, but where the hell are the 'surviving' tenants going to go in the short term? many will surely need to be re-housed nearby due to jobs, family commitments etc, but of course there's a chronic shortage of emergency housing afaik. also, many will have lost all their possessions. gonna be a bit of a nightmare for the local authority (and the tenants) to sort, surely.


There will probably be a reasonable degree of very short term help - shelter, clothes, food, etc. But what all those people do over the following days/weeks/months is a different matter entirely...


----------



## brogdale (Jun 14, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> I am in tears listening to the descriptions of people trapped. fuckfuckfuck.


Have had to turn off; way too much...folk in such a state of shock shouldn't be in front of mics


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 14, 2017)

Lorca said:


> i know at the moment this is a relatively small point in the scheme of things, but where the hell are the 'surviving' tenants going to go in the short term? many will surely need to be re-housed nearby due to jobs, family commitments etc, but of course there's a chronic shortage of emergency housing afaik. also, many will have lost all their possessions. gonna be a bit of a nightmare for the local authority (and the tenants) to sort, surely.



There was a lot of talk after the election about how much of Kensington is non resident empty houses owned by the rich. If there were any fucking justice they'd be used now for the displaced. 

A mate who used to be very active in the RMT on LU is talking about the big changes that were made in terms of fire regs and risk assessment where it moved from inspection by fire officers to self risk assessment. You can see the incentives for minimisation and avoidance in that system, especially in a time of austerity; the fact that this and other buildings 'passed' risk assessments may be meaningless. Wonder what the report the government has sat on for years has to say about this?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 14, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> Think that may answer the question...



In some cases, anyway.

I know a TMO in Southwark which forked out for capital works to put a sprinkler system and modern fire-doors in their blocks.  It's a question of will, most of the time.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> An unquotable rag (DM) is currently claiming ''Nobody on the top three floors survived''.
> 
> Though the wet towels story seems to run against that.


I have little faith in any of the DM's "reporting", but if they're to be believed, there could have been *600* people in the block....


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> *PDF of design/materials for cladding on building. *
> 
> not entirely sure if these are the final choices. Anyone?



That doesn't really tell us much unfortunately as its more about colours than specific products. The cladding product specified was a non-combustible product and its still there on the walls albeit very charred.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> There will probably be a reasonable degree of very short term help - shelter, clothes, food, etc. But what all those people do over the following days/weeks/months is a different matter entirely...



Yep. K&C simply won't be able to rehouse them. 

I'm looking on gofundme but there are 14 different campaigns and I don't know which are legit.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 14, 2017)

gawkrodger said:


> Am quietly fuming - I think this is going to be a very common and wide reaching reaction to these events. It really taps into both an underlying modern fear of potentital dangers of tall buildings, and the sheer brutality, unfairness and hypcrisy of the current housing system, austerity and neoliberalism



Absolutely this. My shock first thing thi morning has now just turned into anger.

Having been involved in social housing stuff the last little while, and having friends and family at various times living in not just social housing but in 60s towers, its been clear to observe the effects of austerity and neoliberalism and successive government housing policies, the decline of proper maintenance and funding allowing properties to fall into disrepairs, loss of janitors, local councils engaged in their own shady deals and profiteering from housing stock, the selling off of once entirely owned council blocks making management of buildings even more difficult, the privatisation of housing associations, etc.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Have had to turn off; way too much...folk in such a state of shock shouldn't be in front of mics



It'll help make people be held accountable (when and if it's found who contributed to this) and help them get money which I suspect they all desperately need.


----------



## A380 (Jun 14, 2017)

My heart goes out to the people in the flats. Emergency services crews will have done a fantastic job. Internet sites are saying some BA crews got at least as far as the 20th floor. 20 floors in BA in a working job like this; amazing.

But: how many fire crews have been covering wider areas because of full or part time station closures? Most of the cops will have been on at least 12 hour back to back shifts since Manchester and the non HART LAS people have been running at 96/97% capacity for years. That's no meals and no breaks. Don't even start on the receiving A and E departments

And none of them have had more than a 1% pay rise for years whilst both Fire and police have  had their pensions fucked. LAS had their pensions buggered years ago.

I look forward to the Maybot saying how much she respects the emergency services.


----------



## a_chap (Jun 14, 2017)

If it's not awful enough for those involved they are now having to contend with hordes of reporters seeking ever more distressing accounts of what they witnessed


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> There was a lot of talk after the election about how much of Kensington is non resident empty houses owned by the rich. If there were any fucking justice they'd be used now for the displaced.
> 
> A mate who used to be very active in the RMT on LU is talking about the big changes that were made in terms of fire regs and risk assessment where it moved from inspection by fire officers to self risk assessment. You can see the incentives for minimisation and avoidance in that system, especially in a time of austerity; the fact that this and other buildings 'passed' risk assessments may be meaningless. Wonder what the report the government has sat on for years has to say about this?


The Regulatory Reform Fire Safety Order 2005 is a dangerous piece of legislation imho. And your mate is exactly right, it took Risk assessment away from the professionals and gave it to occupiers, and abolished requirement for fire certificates.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Yep. K&C simply won't be able to rehouse them.
> 
> I'm looking on gofundme but there are 14 different campaigns and I don't know which are legit.



Having faced this trauma you can envisage people being expected to leave areas where they have friends, family and support. Probably to leave London. 

It's intolerable.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> It'll help make people be held accountable (when and if it's found who contributed to this) and help them get money which I suspect they all desperately need.


I hope so.
Just too painful really.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Wouldn't it be nice if someone broke into those empty "homes" and housed some of these now-homeless people there?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



From what I've been able to make out from a friendly architect, most *designs* feature adequate fire suppression systems, so the architects of most of those towers believed that the end product would be properly served for such emergencies.  However, given that the norm in repairs and maintenance for most local authorities has been neglect, if such systems were installed (rather than culled at the build stage), often they don't work properly - or some times at all.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 14, 2017)

More on the cladding


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 14, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> In some cases, anyway.
> 
> I know a TMO in Southwark which forked out for capital works to put a sprinkler system and modern fire-doors in their blocks.  It's a question of will, most of the time.



The link I posted before, confirming retrofitting of sprinkler systems is not required by current regulations, but can be done for around £1200 per flat, so let's say double that as this is a big block, that gives you a figure of around £300k in this case.

They recently spent £10m on this block, but don't appear to have spent £300k on a bloody sprinkler system.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> Having faced this trauma you can envisage people being expected to leave areas where they have friends, family and support. Probably to leave London.
> 
> It's intolerable.



While flats in their own borough lie empty just as investments.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 14, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> Having faced this trauma you can envisage people being expected to leave areas where they have friends, family and support. Probably to leave London.
> 
> It's intolerable.


Not to mention the un-necessary hassle these folk are likely to get from some employers/DWP about missing work/interviews/assessments.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

stuff_it said:


> It seems that this cladding can be pretty flammable.
> 
> Fire Risks From External Cladding Panels – A Perspective From The UK «  Probyn Miers



Its not.

Just to repeat for people who may be worried about their own building.  There is no cladding panel on the market in the UK which is combustible, otherwise you could just have people setting fire to the outside of a building.

Most things will burn if the temperature is high enough so phrases such as flammable and fire-proof are pretty redundant, that's why we talk about combustibility. Basically will a product make the situation worse.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 14, 2017)

> A pastor has blamed the “disgusting” disparity between rich and poor for the Grenfell tower block fire.
> 
> Read more here: https://inews.co.uk/…/video-pastor-blames-disgusting-divid…/


----------



## bimble (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Its not.
> 
> Just to repeat for people who may be worried about their own building.  There is no cladding panel on the market in the UK which is combustible, otherwise you could just have people setting fire to the outside of a building.
> 
> Most things will burn if the temperature is high enough so phrases such as flammable and fire-proof are pretty redundant, that's why we talk about combustibility. Basically will a product make the situation worse.


I have no clue but this from the guardian:

"Dr Jim Glocking, technical director of the Fire Protection Association (FPA), an industry body which carries out tests on fire safety issues, among other things, said a major issues was that insulation underneath cladding on the outside of tower blocks did not need to be fireproof.

Glocking said that while he did not know the situation at Grenfell Tower, the rapid spread of the blaze indicated thus could be the case.

He said the association had received increasing numbers of reports about insulation on the outside of buildings catching light.

“*They can be slapping on up to 300mm deep of polystyrene on the outside of the building,*” he said. “It can be very significant. I have no knowledge of what happened in this particular case.”

Laboratory tests on such cladding carried out by the FPA “found that there was scope for really large-scale fire spread under certain circumstances”, he said."
..He added:
*“I think the inexcusable element here is that with cladding or insulation there are choices. There will be a perfectly good non-combustible choice that can be made, but somebody is not making those calls.”*


----------



## WWWeed (Jun 14, 2017)

moomoo said:


> A guy on the telly just said it was started by a fridge explosing in the flat next to his.


Speculation at this stage isn't helpful to anyone, but as soon as I heard about this fridges and tumble driers sprang to mind (particularity beko and Hotpoint/Whirlpool/Indecit ones).

The London fire brigade have been shouting about this for years:
London Fire Brigade - Total Recalls: ‘Gaping hole’ in fridge freezer safety
London Fire Brigade - Total Recalls: How to check if your tumble dryer is a safety risk

I'd like to take this opportunity to remind people to take some time to check if any of your home appliances are subject to safety recalls. You can find more information on how to do this at Product safety: product recalls - GOV.UK


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 14, 2017)

Residents association guy explaining some issues and threats he received.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> From what I've been able to make out from a friendly architect, most *designs* feature adequate fire suppression systems, so the architects of most of those towers believed that the end product would be properly served for such emergencies.  However, given that the norm in repairs and maintenance for most local authorities has been neglect, if such systems were installed (rather than culled at the build stage), often they don't work properly - or some times at all.



But to me it seems obvious that you must always have a back-up safety feature that doesn't rely on electrical or mechanical input or anything at all complex. You need stairs. Any design that relies entirely on technology is basically crossing its fingers and hoping for the best.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 14, 2017)

From the Inside Housing website.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

bimble said:


> I have no clue but this from the guardian:
> 
> "Dr Jim Glocking, technical director of the Fire Protection Association (FPA), an industry body which carries out tests on fire safety issues, among other things, said a major issues was that insulation underneath cladding on the outside of tower blocks did not need to be fireproof.
> 
> ...



Yes, this is probably closer to where we are at.  In my opinion (and obviously its a guess at this stage) the cladding is a red herring, its going to be what is happening behind the cladding.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jun 14, 2017)

Just woke up to this.  It looks like about the worst possible of all potential fires--overcrowded, under-maintained, multi-story building.  Our news is reporting 7 dead, but I can't imagine, from the look of that, it would be anywhere near that low when they get the full count.


----------



## Sue (Jun 14, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> my auld tower block, 18 floors high, has one staircase. two lifts, mind,  but one staircase.


I've lived in two tower blocks and they were the same. Slightly lower though -- one was 10 floors, the other 12.


----------



## phillm (Jun 14, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> There was a lot of talk after the election about how much of Kensington is non resident empty houses owned by the rich. If there were any fucking justice they'd be used now for the displaced.
> 
> A mate who used to be very active in the RMT on LU is talking about the big changes that were made in terms of fire regs and risk assessment where it moved from inspection by fire officers to self risk assessment. You can see the incentives for minimisation and avoidance in that system, especially in a time of austerity; the fact that this and other buildings 'passed' risk assessments may be meaningless. Wonder what the report the government has sat on for years has to say about this?



I have no doubt that when we know the full facts of this utter , pointless tragedy that the tory unholy trinity of 'austerity', 'deregulation' , and 'efficiency savings' will loom large over the huge waste of life that is unfolding. And that the tories will inherit a national firestorm of rage that is only just beginning.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 14, 2017)

Having worked with a couple of sprinkler installation companies over the years. The big point that is always pushed is that no-one has ever died in the UK in a fire in a property fitted with a sprinkler system.
If sprinklers were fitted just on stairwells and hallways the cost would be less than one person losing their life.
Diabolical that health and safety are never an issue until people, usually poor people die.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

bimble said:


> I have no clue but this from the guardian:
> 
> "Dr Jim Glocking, technical director of the Fire Protection Association (FPA), an industry body which carries out tests on fire safety issues, among other things, said a major issues was that insulation underneath cladding on the outside of tower blocks did not need to be fireproof.
> 
> ...


_polystyrene_? In the past I've used lumps of polystyrene to light barbecues when I didn't have any fire lighters to hand......


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> _polystyrene_? In the past I've used lumps of polystyrene to light barbecues when I didn't have any fire lighters to hand......



EPS is used in a wide range of applications in construction, its a very good product.  It is however, combustible but the risk associated with that should be mitigated.

EPS is a product of the plastics industry so I really wouldn't use it to light your bbq with, assuming you like having functioning lungs.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 14, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> _polystyrene_? In the past I've used lumps of polystyrene to light barbecues when I didn't have any fire lighters to hand......



Beware, burning polystyrene releases Carbon Monoxide and in some cases, Cyanide gas!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 14, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> The link I posted before, confirming retrofitting of sprinkler systems is not required by current regulations, but can be done for around £1200 per flat, so let's say double that as this is a big block, that gives you a figure of around £300k in this case.
> 
> They recently spent £10m on this block, but don't appear to have spent £300k on a bloody sprinkler system.



Fucking ridiculous, isn't it?


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 14, 2017)

Is it possible that cheaper, non-regulation cladding was used on the QT?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 14, 2017)




----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> EPS is used in a wide range of applications in construction, its a very good product.  It is however, combustible but the risk associated with that should be mitigated.
> 
> EPS is a product of the plastics industry so I really wouldn't use it to light your bbq with, assuming you like having functioning lungs.





Sprocket. said:


> Beware, burning polystyrene releases Carbon Monoxide and in some cases, Cyanide gas!



Yeah, no worries, this was years ago as a foolish youth...


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> Is it possible that cheaper, non-regulation cladding was used on the QT?



Unlikely but possible.  That sort of thing does happen in construction though its usually with smaller harder to detect things.  Given the facade is how their building is going to look architects pay very close attention and are quite prescriptive in their specifications.  It is possible that the contractor has proposed a different system last minute and the architect has not done their due diligence investigating the alternative.

I do think it unlikely though.


----------



## Cid (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> EPS is used in a wide range of applications in construction, its a very good product.  It is however, combustible but the risk associated with that should be mitigated.
> 
> EPS is a product of the plastics industry so I really wouldn't use it to light your bbq with, assuming you like having functioning lungs.



Would it really be used in this kind of situation though? PIR/PUR surely more common... Kingspan's is phenolic (I have no idea what that is), Celotex's is PIR.

Though a kind of common theme is that these are expensive products...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> But to me it seems obvious that you must always have a back-up safety feature that doesn't rely on electrical or mechanical input or anything at all complex. You need stairs. Any design that relies entirely on technology is basically crossing its fingers and hoping for the best.



The fall-back system for blocks is usually a dry riser (or a stepped series of them).  A dry-riser is just a substantial pipe which can have water pumped into it under very high pressure, in order to feed fire-suppression systems from an outside source.  Even here, landlords fail to pressure test dry risers (supposed to happen once a year), and let them deteriorate to the point of failure.  If the dry riser is maintained, and suitable fire doors are in place, you don't need to worry about how many stairwells you have (dry risers have been used for about 120 years).


----------



## Cid (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Unlikely but possible.  That sort of thing does happen in construction though its usually with smaller harder to detect things.  Given the facade is how their building is going to look architects pay very close attention and are quite prescriptive in their specifications.  It is possible that the contractor has proposed a different system last minute and the architect has not done their due diligence investigating the alternative.
> 
> I do think it unlikely though.



What about speccing the minimum possible requirements, and failing to compensate in the rest of the system? Reynobond panels seem to come in a range of fire ratings. I'm guessing the better rated ones are more expensive.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 14, 2017)

Interesting interview. Lady says fire bridge turned up only last weekend and gave her advice (backed up by management company) to stay in her flat because the fire doors would contain the fire. Clearly they didn't expect the exterior of the building catching fire.

Here


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


>




Ahh.  Fluted concrete on the original facade that could well be it.  Here's some fluted concrete in Brentford (on the right of the facade)







If they've just stuck insulation over it then that would leave a small cavity behind it for the fire to shoot up.  Bloke in the video really knows his stuff.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> The fall-back system for blocks is usually a dry riser (or a stepped series of them).  A dry-riser is just a substantial pipe which can have water pumped into it under very high pressure, in order to feed fire-suppression systems from an outside source.  Even here, landlords fail to pressure test dry risers (supposed to happen once a year), and let them deteriorate to the point of failure.  If the dry riser is maintained, and suitable fire doors are in place, you don't need to worry about how many stairwells you have (dry risers have been used for about 120 years).



Perhaps, as long as the fire doors are closed. IME they are often not.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Ahh.  Fluted concrete on the original facade that could well be it.  Here's some fluted concrete in Brentford (on the right of the facade)
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That sounds very plausible.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Cid said:


> What about speccing the minimum possible requirements, and failing to compensate in the rest of the system? Reynobond panels seem to come in a range of fire ratings. I'm guessing the better rated ones are more expensive.



Yup another possibility and using the cheapest is not uncommon in construction particularly social housing refurbishment.  That being said if it was just about low cost they could have just used an insulated render system which would be much cheaper and has been used extensively.

No, I still think it is something to do with behind the cladding and now that fluted concrete has come to light I'm even more convinced and a bit worried as there's been a few blocks done like this.

ETA: The lateral spread of fire is something that remains odd.  This may be where the combustibility of the insulation comes in.


----------



## Cid (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Yup another possibility and using the cheapest is not uncommon in construction particularly social housing refurbishment.  That being said if it was just about low cost they could have just used an insulated render system which would be much cheaper and has been used extensively.
> 
> No, I still think it is something to do with behind the cladding and now that fluted concrete has come to light I'm even more convinced and a bit worried as there's been a few blocks done like this.



Yeah that explanation does seem credible.


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 14, 2017)

fucking why oh why did I look at the DM comments...


----------



## nogojones (Jun 14, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Such tragedy not only highlights their slashing of the state, but it also gives a context to the right's stated aims for Brexit.



"A bonfire of red tape" is a quote I recall


----------



## killer b (Jun 14, 2017)

Ranbay said:


> fucking why oh why did I look at the DM comments...


what could they possibly be saying??


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 14, 2017)

killer b said:


> what could they possibly be saying??




God's punishment for the London bridge attacks.

and one about why do we send 13 million to other countries etc etc


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

A positive thought just occurred to me: because it's Ramadan, the Muslim residents of the block are more likely to have been awake at the time the fire started. They're more likely to have been able to get out and warn their neighbours to get out.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 14, 2017)

I wish this were more impressive than it sounds, but I just rang the office of squalid tory turd Philip Davies to find out whether he'd made a statement in light of recent events, given his deliberate filibustering of the sort of bill that would have gone someway to preventing poor people from burning to death.

His secretary had no answer, but to recommend i email him where I'm sure he would be delighted to explain his carefully thought through nuanced position.

These are his contact details, all public knowledge: 01274 592 248 or 01274 582 272

These bastards must be held to account for what must be culpable negligence if not corporate manslaughter.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> A positive thought just occurred to me: because it's Ramadan, the Muslim residents of the block are more likely to have been awake at the time the fire started. They're more likely to have been able to get out and warn their neighbours to get out.


I've see a few people say that this indeed happened.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Jun 14, 2017)




----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> A positive thought just occurred to me: because it's Ramadan, the Muslim residents of the block are more likely to have been awake at the time the fire started. They're more likely to have been able to get out and warn their neighbours to get out.



That was being reported earlier today. Let's hope it was the case.


----------



## eoin_k (Jun 14, 2017)

What a tragedy. I can't look at the individual stories without welling up with tears. It's striking how many of the local residents are making the links between what happened and the council running the area down as part of their gentrification strategy, however inconvenient this might be for the BBC journalists who clearly don't want the interviews to go there.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 14, 2017)

Sadly this terrible incident puts all other ongoing topics into perspective.


----------



## no-no (Jun 14, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> In the case of the TMO I sat on, the (2) independent members were people we drafted onto the board to provide us with short-term expertise in a particular field.  We had an architect for a year, a QS, and accountant etc - all people that helped the board do a better job for the residents.  IF KCTMO were drafting local political worthies (it sometimes happens, especially with very large TMOs), then they should have reduced the councillor count accordingly.


 
sounds reasonable, I was thinking that it was another example of part privitisation, heard earlier it's def a non profit.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 14, 2017)

Even the presenter, Nihal, on Radio 5 Live atm (I know, what am I doing listening to 5Live when football isn't on) is openly asking what's wrong with this country if we don't look after people, if this just about money what does that say about us.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 14, 2017)

Corbyn tried to get a bill through to make landlords accountable for property unfit for human habitation, 72 Tories blocked it who are private landlords. Simon Kirby (Brighton Kemptown) was one of them. How the fucking fuck is this democratic & allowed to happen? I'm fucking fizzing with rage at these bastards.


----------



## killer b (Jun 14, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> Sadly this terrible incident puts all other ongoing topics into perspective.


not at all - it's a direct result of (some of) the ongoing topics - deregulation, austerity, privatisation of public assets... that's why people are so angry.


----------



## sim667 (Jun 14, 2017)

I can't donate clothes, and I'm too far out of town to offer a room (I think), but is there anywhere that I can donate a few quid to a fund?


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 14, 2017)

killer b said:


> not at all - it's a direct result of (some of) the ongoing topics - deregulation, austerity, privatisation of public assets... that's why people are so angry.



Exactly.


----------



## Poot (Jun 14, 2017)

I can think of little else today. I have absolutely nothing useful to add (I mean, is there anything at all, really?) I just wanted to be with likeminded others who are similarly bewildered. There really just aren't words.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 14, 2017)

sim667 said:


> I can't donate clothes, and I'm too far out of town to offer a room (I think), but is there anywhere that I can donate a few quid to a fund?



A few options here


----------



## jakejb79 (Jun 14, 2017)

One thing I found shocking was Good Morning Britain with the live Videos of the blind man trapped in his house and even naming him too.

Would like to know if he is ok.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 14, 2017)

> Fire safeguards in Grenfell were temporarily removed during the refurbishment, according to the trade journal Inside Housing.


From:
London fire: six dead, 20 in critical care after tower block blaze – latest updates


----------



## sim667 (Jun 14, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> A few options here


Thanks


----------



## brogdale (Jun 14, 2017)

nogojones said:


> "A bonfire of red tape" is a quote I recall


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 14, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Corbyn tried to get a bill through to make landlords accountable for property unfit for human habitation, 72 Tories blocked it who are private landlords. Simon Kirby (Brighton Kemptown) was one of them. How the fucking fuck is this democratic & allowed to happen? I'm fucking fizzing with rage at these bastards.



what??


----------



## editor (Jun 14, 2017)

frogwoman said:


> what??


Read it here: Tories vote down law requiring landlords make their homes fit for human habitation


----------



## phillm (Jun 14, 2017)

editor said:


> Shitloads of this cosmetic cladding has gone up on old blocks recently. I suspect some may have to come down if it's proven to have played  part in this awful fire.



Yeah - like Guy's Hospital.

Penoyre & Prasad reskins "ugly" London hospital tower


----------



## eoin_k (Jun 14, 2017)

I'm not trying to take away from the bill about landlord's accountability, but it's worth being aware that it applied to the private sector, so not directly relevant to this case (although no doubt there were plenty of leaseholder landlords in the building). It still reflects where different politicians' priorities lie.


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 14, 2017)

editor said:


> Read it here: Tories vote down law requiring landlords make their homes fit for human habitation



that's unbelievable 

fucking tories


----------



## hash tag (Jun 14, 2017)

In the wake of the huge fire that ripped through the block of flats in Southwark a year or two back coupled with the fact that this block has just had a big refurb makes this very difficult to make sense of. Thinking of our brave overstretched fire fighters who had an awful job dealing with it in the first place. I guess they will now have to investigate every nook and cranny in the block to ensure the fire is actually out before even checking on the cause and what went wrong. As of a few mintes ago, I see there is still plenty of smoke coming out of the block. In addition to the terrible tragedy of those that have lost their lives or who are injured, there are many who have lost their entire wordly possessions and may not yet know where they are sleeping tonight.
A massive task for hundreds, if not thousands of people to sort out, with recriminations to follow. A terrible sad tragedy, that, dare I say it, could probably been avoided.


----------



## killer b (Jun 14, 2017)

Dawn Foster in the Graun has been tweeting some good stuff all day, and has now turned in this article - some interesting/outrageous stuff in there

After Grenfell Tower, can we make our tower blocks safe? | Dawn Foster

_The London fire brigade, whose officers were deployed to Lakanal House and now to Grenfell, has been vocal about how stretched it has been cuts and station closures. Fire services have been affected across the country. Many say they can’t take more cuts without people dying. The figures seem to bear that out: last year saw a 21% increase in fire fatalities._


----------



## brogdale (Jun 14, 2017)

As nogojones said above...



Shower of cunts.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Jun 14, 2017)

frogwoman said:


> that's unbelievable



Is it?


----------



## ChrisD (Jun 14, 2017)

And they boast about it too...  makes me cry

Cameron claims victory in bonfire of the Building Regulations


----------



## agricola (Jun 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> My heart goes out to the people in the flats. Emergency services crews will have done a fantastic job. Internet sites are saying some BA crews got at least as far as the 20th floor. 20 floors in BA in a working job like this; amazing.
> 
> But: how many fire crews have been covering wider areas because of full or part time station closures? Most of the cops will have been on at least 12 hour back to back shifts since Manchester and the non HART LAS people have been running at 96/97% capacity for years. That's no meals and no breaks. Don't even start on the receiving A and E departments
> 
> ...



Things are that bad that I honestly can't remember the last time anyone at work went on a rant about about pay or what she did to pensions; people invariably now rant about the danger of what it is the Government has done, and is doing.


----------



## hash tag (Jun 14, 2017)

killer b said:


> Dawn Foster in the Graun has been tweeting some good stuff all day, and has now turned in this article - some interesting/outrageous stuff in there
> 
> After Grenfell Tower, can we make our tower blocks safe? | Dawn Foster
> 
> _The London fire brigade, whose officers were deployed to Lakanal House and now to Grenfell, has been vocal about how stretched it has been cuts and station closures. Fire services have been affected across the country. Many say they can’t take more cuts without people dying. The figures seem to bear that out: last year saw a 21% increase in fire fatalities._



That reporting is outrageous for so many reasons. People are dying simply because of cuts to the fire brigade, cuts to local authorities Etc. Anyone would think we lived in a poverty stricken underveloped country


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Jun 14, 2017)

This video.  Switched on young people:


----------



## hash tag (Jun 14, 2017)

agricola said:


> Things are that bad that I honestly can't remember the last time anyone at work went on a rant about about pay or what she did to pensions; people invariably now rant about the danger of what it is the Government has done, and is doing.



As a council employee my pay has been frozen for years now, fucking tories. Time for a demo?


----------



## Miss-Shelf (Jun 14, 2017)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> This video.  Switched on young people:



Don't apologise for his language.   He's furious and he should be.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 14, 2017)




----------



## agricola (Jun 14, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> View attachment 109330



the fire industry ffs


----------



## killer b (Jun 14, 2017)

hash tag said:


> That reporting is outrageous for so many reasons. People are dying simply because of cuts to the fire brigade, cuts to local authorities Etc. Anyone would think we lived in a poverty stricken underveloped country


I think that's the plan.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 14, 2017)

eoin_k said:


> What a tragedy. I can't look at the individual stories without welling up with tears. It's striking how many of the local residents are making the links between what happened and the council running the area down as part of their gentrification strategy, however inconvenient this might be for the BBC journalists who clearly don't want the interviews to go there.



Yet, they just recently spent £10m on this block, much of it on bloody cladding that seems to be at least part the reason the fire spread so quickly, instead of a bloody sprinkler system for a fraction of that cost.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Jun 14, 2017)

Miss-Shelf said:


> Don't apologise for his language.   He's furious and he should be.


I know, fucking unbelieveable that was


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Jun 14, 2017)

More of the same: Willful complacency furthering gentrification.


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 14, 2017)

Grenfell Tower


----------



## hash tag (Jun 14, 2017)

For my sins, about 12 years ago, I managed a sheltered housing tower block, just 12 floors but it was enough. One benefit night one of my tenants decided to have a drink and a smoke and as a result of falling asleep while smoking, she destroyed her flat. There was barely a mark to be seen outisde her door, yet alone the rest of her landing or even the rest of the block. It is not rocket science to make sure your fire doors work properly, the fire windows and such like.
Moving forward, I know Wandsworth carried out a major fire audit after the Southwark fire. I hold my nose and acknowledge it is a tory borough, but at least they tried to make sure that fire safety regulations were adheared to.
Poor bastards; this should not have happened. Ultimately, it is the victims that will pay and not the 40 odd strong councillors of that tory borough or the government that has so badly cut funding.
Incidentally, the block did not have a communal sprinkler system and as far as I know, still doesn't. In the first instance, the fire should be prevented from travelling.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Jun 14, 2017)

This is starting to stink.

I wouldn't put it past corrupt property developers.   They do it in Poland... they seem to like setting shit aflames.  Normally it's empty listed buildings where they are responsible for the upkeep but would rather a nice shiny block, or there's an accidental fire after letting it fall into disrepar.

Then there was this terrifying story when an activist was burnt to death:


Housing activist found dead in Warsaw


----------



## editor (Jun 14, 2017)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> More of the same: Willful complacency furthering gentrification.


Seems to be getting a whiff of the Cressingham Gardens about it ....


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 14, 2017)

I have moved up to utter fucking rage now. This is a black swan event that was not supposed to happen, it was kicked down the line and removed from discussion, a gamble based on austerity and big money influencing an authorities requirement to provide safe and secure housing of a minimum standard. The savings, cost cutting and other benefits do not justify one loss of life, never mind potentially scores.  Heads have to roll - this directly or indirectly goes right to the top and their policies. The regime have to be held to account


----------



## hash tag (Jun 14, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> I have moved up to utter fucking rage now. This is a black swan event that was not supposed to happen, it was kicked down the line and removed from discussion, a gamble based on austerity and big money influencing an authorities requirement to provide safe and secure housing of a minimum standard. The savings, cost cutting and other benefits do not justify one loss of life, never mind potentially scores.  Heads have to roll - this directly or indirectly goes right to the top and their policies. The regime have to be held to account



Whose? The council for the way they have managed their resources, the govt. for cutting funding.
There are other places you can look as well, but as is the case with our politics, there will no doubt be endless buck passing.

I am so angry with rage, but also shedding tears for those caught up in this


----------



## AverageJoe (Jun 14, 2017)

jakejb79 said:


> One thing I found shocking was Good Morning Britain with the live Videos of the blind man trapped in his house and even naming him too.
> 
> Would like to know if he is ok.



Theyve been slated for that in the press with people reporting it to Ofcom. I thought it was sensationalist and salacious.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 14, 2017)

I'm waiting for the justification that the Tories will inevitably pump out. I can hear them saying, "but this was an unforeseeable event, and the cuts in fire services, and the safety regulations did not affect the probability of something like this happening." I can hear the lies to come, and I'm both sickened and angered.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 14, 2017)

Across the board hash tag, across the board, too early to begin talking of enquiries as we do not even know the fate of many, but this cannot be buck passed to some poor career sap in planning - the entire cosy political system and its policies are at fault

having to throw your babies out of a burning building. can you imagine that ? FFS


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 14, 2017)

agricola said:


> the fire industry ffs



Have to keep the money flowing!


----------



## dessiato (Jun 14, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Across the board hash tag, across the board, too early to begin talking of enquiries as we do not even know the fate of many, but this cannot be buck passed to some poor career sap in planning - the entire cosy political system and its policies are at fault
> 
> having to throw your babies out of a burning building. can you imagine that ? FFS


I can't, and hope that I'll never need to find out how very awful this must have been for all the people involved, from the trapped to the rescuers.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 14, 2017)

Grenfell Tower was covered in material to keep luxury flat owners happy. That’s being blamed for multiple deaths

Both unsurprising and shocking at once.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 14, 2017)

Presumably the building will have to come down completely after this. And I doubt whatever gets built in its place will be social housing with priority for the original residents.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 14, 2017)

anyone got a legit just giving link for this ? there seem to be loads and I am not sure which would be the best. I don't know what else to do


----------



## stuff_it (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Its not.
> 
> Just to repeat for people who may be worried about their own building.  There is no cladding panel on the market in the UK which is combustible, otherwise you could just have people setting fire to the outside of a building.
> 
> Most things will burn if the temperature is high enough so phrases such as flammable and fire-proof are pretty redundant, that's why we talk about combustibility. Basically will a product make the situation worse.


Harley Facades were pretty quick to take down their page about the Grenfell Tower development. It sounds as though in this case their product did make the situation worse, causing the fire to rapidly spread all over the building.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

I know people are pretty raw at the moment but I do think there are a lot of leaps being made.  Lets bear in mind that this block was refurbished, it was clearly intended to make the lives of the residents better.  Elsewhere residents have had their homes knocked down and turned into yuppie flats whilst they have found themselves turfed out to Essex or wherever.  This one was a case of improving existing housing stock. 

Whilst there clearly are wider issues regarding the effects of cuts on fire brigades and quite clearly a serious issue with the way the building was managed, currently on the face of it it the fire itself does appear to be a construction issue.  How it spread so quickly is unclear and very worrying.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

phillm said:


> I have no doubt that when we know the full facts of this utter , pointless tragedy that the tory unholy trinity of 'austerity', 'deregulation' , and 'efficiency savings' will loom large over the huge waste of life that is unfolding. And that the tories will inherit a national firestorm of rage that is only just beginning.


Derugulation of Fire legislation was passed under Blair!


----------



## dessiato (Jun 14, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Presumably the building will have to come down completely after this. And I doubt whatever gets built in its place will be social housing with priority for the original residents.


I can imagine that there's some who see this as an opportunity for social cleansing of the area. Affordable housing? Not enough money in it. 

I feel so angry about this the more that I read about it. I find myself filled with hurt for the people. I'd like to think it'll never happen again, but with the Tory attitudes, I fear it will. 

I've said before that I used to be a member of the Tory party, but this lot, since Thatcher, disgust me more and more. It is not the party that I, or my family ever respected. Money grabbing, heartless, are just two ways of describing them that come to mind. And it's the poorer people they make suffer. Bastards the lot of them.


----------



## mod (Jun 14, 2017)

You can donate here 

Help raise £5000 to help the residents of Grenfell tower following the tragic fire


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> Derugulation of Fire legislation was passed under Blair!


And what was Blair but a Tory in disguise?


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

stuff_it said:


> Harley Facades were pretty quick to take down their page about the Grenfell Tower development. It sounds as though in this case their product did make the situation worse, causing the fire to rapidly spread all over the building.


To be fair that may have been out of respect.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

Cid said:


> Would it really be used in this kind of situation though? PIR/PUR surely more common... Kingspan's is phenolic (I have no idea what that is), Celotex's is PIR.
> 
> Though a kind of common theme is that these are expensive products...


Kingspan has flame retardants to a degree, but the aluminium foil backing burns like fuck.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 14, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> And what was Blair but a Tory in disguise?


That's why I voted for him. He was the type of Tory that I'd always approved of. How wrong was I.


----------



## kebabking (Jun 14, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> anyone got a legit just giving link for this ? there seem to be loads and I am not sure which would be the best. I don't know what else to do



I'd be tempted to go through the British Red Cross.

Given some of the shenanigans surrounding, at least, the ticket sales for the Manchester bombing concert, I'd be very, very wary of giving money to some unknown random.

Possibly a direct contribution to one of the local churches/community centres that have been asking for physical aid?


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 14, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Grenfell Tower was covered in material to keep luxury flat owners happy. That’s being blamed for multiple deaths
> 
> Both unsurprising and shocking at once.



That is just fucking beyond the beyond. Cunts. Absolute fucking cunts.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Presumably the building will have to come down completely after this. And I doubt whatever gets built in its place will be social housing with priority for the original residents.



It's looking like it might fall over all by itself. The pictures are so shocking - like something from a movie where you'd say nah, it'd never happen like that. 

I hate to think what's going to happen to the tenants. Stuck in a B&B then shipped out somewhere hundreds of miles from home, probably. And yup, there'll be more luxury flats to lie empty.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

stuff_it said:


> Harley Facades were pretty quick to take down their page about the Grenfell Tower development. It sounds as though in this case their product did make the situation worse, causing the fire to rapidly spread all over the building.



They were just the installer not the manufacturer of the system.  Its not surprising that you'd take down a case study of project (designed to show your expertise) under the circumstances.  Even if its not their fault this will probably bankrupt them again, possibly the main contractor Rydon as well.

They may yet be at blame due to the installation but its too early to know.  The cladding system as specified was a non-combustible system yet eye witness reports have it lighting up like painted wood. Its astonishing what has gone on and I'm struggling to get my head around it.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Jun 14, 2017)

horrendous


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 14, 2017)

And speaking of cunts, latest press release from KCTMO



> It is too early to speculate what caused the fire and contributed to its spread. We will co-operate fully with all the relevant authorities in order to ascertain the cause of this tragedy.
> 
> We are aware that concerns have been raised historically by residents. We always take all concerns seriously and these will form part of our forthcoming investigations. While these investigations continue with our co-operation, our core priority at the moment is our residents


----------



## dessiato (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> It's looking like it might fall over all by itself. The pictures are so shocking - like something from a movie where you'd say nah, it'd never happen like that.
> 
> I hate to think what's going to happen to the tenants. Stuck in a B&B then shipped out somewhere hundreds of miles from home, probably. And yup, there'll be more luxury flats to lie empty.


And then there's the ongoing problems associated with them not being able to get to work from wherever they're sent, the probability of losing their jobs due to PTSD, the problems of not having anyone around them that can empathise, the problems of not having family and friends to help, etc

But someone, somewhere, will build the luxury/expensive to rent flats and make a fortune out of the misery of these people.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Grenfell Tower was covered in material to keep luxury flat owners happy. That’s being blamed for multiple deaths
> 
> Both unsurprising and shocking at once.



I think updating the look of the building is of benefit to everyone in the area, especially the residents.  If you're trying to get planning permission you reach out to people likely to complain by telling them it will improve the area.

Interestingly that article then goes on to back up exactly what I've been saying and the cavity behind the cladding.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy - thanks for your informative & very reasonable posts on here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> And speaking of cunts, latest press release from KCTMO


i wonder if any of the people who raised those concerns are among the dead


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 14, 2017)

*LBC has published a list of links where you can donate:

Grenfell Tower Fire: How To Help Victims Of The Fire - LBC

I assume they have checked them out, I hope so, as I've just donated on the first link on that page. *


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 14, 2017)

This is Hillsborough stuff - with loads of potential other Hillsborough's all over.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 14, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> This is Hillsborough stuff - with loads of potential other Hillsborough's all over.


Bang on. Hopefully it won't take the guts of thirty years to get justice, though.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> This is Hillsborough stuff - with loads of potential other Hillsborough's all over.


More like Bradford really, but everyone's forgotten about that!


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> More like Bradford really, but everyone's forgotten about that!


It won't be one or the other - the common theme was w/c people dying for no reason. Only in one were the victims painted like dirt for 25 years. Let's leave that there (the pointless comparisons) please.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 14, 2017)

I predict no accountability for this.

the guy May just promoted back into office was the tory housing minister who sat on the report that there were exactly these kinds of problems.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> More like Bradford really, but everyone's forgotten about that!


No, it's not forgotten. I'll not derail this thread by talking about it, but I'm 100% certain that, like me, there's a lot of us on these boards who remember it all too clearly.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

One horrible thought I had is where does the responsibility lie for carrying out the fire risk assessment? Who was in control of the building, was it the landlord or the TMO? If it's the TMO, they could find themselves prosecuted even tho they were making the landlord aware of issues! 

I don't know how the law stands in this respect!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> I predict no accountability for this.
> 
> the guy May just promoted back into office was the tory housing minister who sat on the report that there were exactly these kinds of problems.


quoted for posterity. 

i think there will be accountability as it's not like this came out of nowhere, it was predicted and it occurred.


----------



## cybershot (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> It's looking like it might fall over all by itself. The pictures are so shocking - like something from a movie where you'd say nah, it'd never happen like that.
> 
> I hate to think what's going to happen to the tenants. Stuck in a B&B then shipped out somewhere hundreds of miles from home, probably. And yup, there'll be more luxury flats to lie empty.



Enough empty apartments lying around London doing nothing, least some landlords could do is house these people, even if it's only for a couple of weeks. but they won't, because, you know....H&S or some other bullshit.

Hopefully there's plenty of people out there offering at the very least a sofa and a meal I'm sure. However it's going to be the mental trauma that needs to be treated delicately. None of the survivors should be left alone at this moment in time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

dessiato said:


> No, it's not forgotten. I'll not derail this thread by talking about it, but I'm 100% certain that, like me, there's a lot of us on these boards who remember it all too clearly.


yeh it was another horrific day


----------



## agricola (Jun 14, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> I predict no accountability for this.
> 
> the guy May just promoted back into office was the tory housing minister who sat on the report that there were exactly these kinds of problems.



Once perhaps - but this is too big, they fill all the positions of responsibility here and they are too weak in Parliament for them to escape accountability this time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

cybershot said:


> Enough empty apartments lying around London doing nothing, least some landlords could do is house these people, even if it's only for a couple of weeks. but they won't, because, you know....H&S or some other bullshit.
> 
> Hopefully there's plenty of people out there offering at the very least a sofa and a meal I'm sure. However it's going to be the mental trauma that needs to be treated delicately. None of the survivors should be left alone at this moment in time.


equally they should not be smothered with kindness. they'll need some space to come to terms with what has happened.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 14, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> Bang on. Hopefully it won't take the guts of thirty years to get justice, though.


Yep.  In some ways I don't want to get into where this goes to on the day when it's actually happening.  But getting angry is really the best act of solidarity.  And on the Hillsborough comparison, you can almost be certain the survivors of the fire will probably end up having to bring a private prosecution at some point in the future.


----------



## phillm (Jun 14, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> And what was Blair but a Tory in disguise?



Not really in disguise he was Thatcher's chosen one.


----------



## nogojones (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I know people are pretty raw at the moment but I do think there are a lot of leaps being made.  Lets bear in mind that this block was refurbished, it was clearly intended to make the lives of the residents better.  Elsewhere residents have had their homes knocked down and turned into yuppie flats whilst they have found themselves turfed out to Essex or wherever.  This one was a case of improving existing housing stock.
> 
> Whilst there clearly are wider issues regarding the effects of cuts on fire brigades and quite clearly a serious issue with the way the building was managed, currently on the face of it it the fire itself does appear to be a construction issue.  How it spread so quickly is unclear and very worrying.


From the Indy article above it seemed that the refurbishment was about asthetics for neighbouring private blocks and not about what the Grenfell residents wanted or were raising concerns about for years


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

phillm said:


> Not really in disguise he was Thatcher's chosen one.


yeh he made a choice as to which party to join, which one he would have a better chance to succeed in.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> the guy May just promoted back into office was the tory housing minister who sat on the report that there were exactly these kinds of problems.



This is the reports that Barwell had advice that building regs regarding fire needed to be tightened up.  If it does turn out that the construction work was carried out correctly and in-line with regs and the materials used were suitable than the fall-out will be massive. Absolutely massive.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 14, 2017)

frogwoman said:


> that's unbelievable
> 
> fucking tories


iirc Hollobone is one of the talkers out. He's fucking vile and they all are, the damned rentier class.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> This is the reports that Barwell had advice that building regs regarding fire needed to be tightened up.  If it does turn out that the construction work was carried out correctly and in-line with regs and the materials used were suitable than the fall-out will be massive. Absolutely massive.


heads will roll


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 14, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> I predict no accountability for this.
> 
> the guy May just promoted back into office was the tory housing minister who sat on the report that there were exactly these kinds of problems.


Well that's another own goal for her not that this should get political , yet..


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

ruffneck23 said:


> Well that's another own goal for her not that this should get political , yet..


all roads lead to number 10 it seems


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 14, 2017)

ruffneck23 said:


> Well that's another own goal for her not that this should get political , yet..


It's already political. You cage the poorest in towerblocks and then abandon them economically. These are decisions made by politicians who hate the working class.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 14, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> And speaking of cunts, latest press release from KCTMO
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If one was cynical I guess one might consider that technically all those hundreds - HUNDREDS - of people just burned out of their homes are no longer really residents, and so not the _priority_ of KCTMO


----------



## agricola (Jun 14, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> all roads lead to number 10 it seems



You can tell how much of this is likely to be laid at their door by the way that Guido is covering today's news - which is of course dominated by the shock finding that Clement Attlee got more of the vote and more seats than Corbyn.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

agricola said:


> You can tell how much of this is likely to be laid at their door by the way that Guido is covering today's news - which is of course dominated by the shock finding that Clement Attlee got more of the vote and more seats than Corbyn.


investigative journalism at its finest


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 14, 2017)

Fire expert: Grenfell Tower tragedy 'entirely predictable'


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 14, 2017)

The London fire commissioner said she had seen loads of fires in tower blocks over her 29 years in the job, which were basically contained, and couldn't understand how this one spread from floors 2 to 24 in just 30 minutes.

Something clearly was wrong with this particular block, and it seems to keep coming back to this bloody cladding that was added last year.


----------



## editor (Jun 14, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> Fire expert: Grenfell Tower tragedy 'entirely predictable'


Cab you copy and paste the contents?


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

nogojones said:


> From the Indy article above it seemed that the refurbishment was about asthetics for neighbouring private blocks and not about what the Grenfell residents wanted or were raising concerns about for years



Sorry but I don't think that's what happened. The building has been upgraded in several respects including increasing the number of flats by remodeling the lower floors. The facade system was a combination of increasing the thermal performance (lower bills for residents) and improving the look of the building which should benefit all.  I don't believe they would just spend 10 million to tart it up a bit there has been more work done on it then that.

Whether the residents were consulted in the process I don't know but it would be unusual if they were not.  I've personally been to quite a few resident liaison meetings for similar projects where the plans are on show and the feedback from residents is sought.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

Police just confirmed official death toll now up to 12...


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 14, 2017)

editor said:


> Cab you copy and paste the contents?



Fire expert: Grenfell Tower tragedy 'entirely predictable'
14 JUNE, 2017 BY WILL HURST


Ministers failed to act on the clear lessons of the 2009 Lakanal House fire according to high-rise fire safety expert Sam Webb

The tragic fire at Grenfell Tower could and should have been prevented thanks to the lessons of a similar disaster in the capital eight years’ ago, a leading fire expert has told the AJ.

Sam Webb, a retired architect who investigated the fatal 2009 Lakanal House fire in Southwark and acted as an expert witness to the families affected at the inquest, said that Lakanal House also featured cladding which caught fire (pictured below).

That fire claimed six lives including three children and was previously the UK’s worst fire in a postwar block of flats.

Webb, who sits on the Parliamentary All Party Fire & Rescue Group and also investigated the infamous 1968 Ronan Point tower collapse, said that cladding panels underneath windows at Lakanal House had caught fire within four-and-a-half minutes.

Of Grenfell Tower, he said: ‘This tragedy was entirely predictable, sadly.

‘What we saw at Lakanal House should have been enough to make people think about what was going on with the outside of our buildings in terms of cladding.’

Webb also questioned why the government had not updated Part B of the Building Regulations covering fire risk in tall buildings and why sprinkler systems had been made mandatory in new build towers but not in refurbished ones.


‘We [the All Party Group] have been trying to get ministers to make sure we have sprinkler systems on refurbished as well as new towers but this has fallen on deaf ears,’ he said. ‘We provide people with water in their homes, why can’t we provide sprinkler systems – it’s not rocket science.

‘Ron Dobson, the then chief fire officer of the London Fire Brigade, concluded at the end of the Lakanal House inquest that these would have saved those who died.

Last autumn, then housing minister Gavin Barwell - who lost his seat at the general election and was this week appointed as Theresa May’s new chief of staff - announced a review into Part B of the Building Regulations 2010.

However, the review has not yet begun and in March, a spokesperson for the DCLG said the review would be undertaken ‘in due course’.

In 2009, a BBC London investigation found that hundreds of tower blocks across London had not been properly assessed for fire safety.

Using FOI, the investigation found that councils had failed to fire check at least 253 social housing high-rises – something that constitutes a criminal offence.

Lambeth Council has only carried out risk assessments on two of its 112 tower blocks while Southwark, the local authority in charge of Lakanal House, where six people died in a fire that year, refused to answer the FOI request.

Requests sent to 32 boroughs showed at least eight councils had failed to make proper checks.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 14, 2017)

editor said:


> Cab you copy and paste the contents?


This seems to be the only comment so far:

"*Hannah Mansell, chair of the Passive Fire Protection Forum, trustee of the Children’s Burns Trust and spokesperson for the BWF’s Fire Door Safety Week campaign *

We have a right to be very angry at the news about Grenfell Tower. I regularly sit in meetings with fire safety professionals, and their fury and frustration at the inaction of local councils and social landlords is palpable.

We have been warning about the risks of a fire like this for years. ‘What we need to get people to take notice is a huge fire in a tower block’ they say. Well, here it is.

’There’s an endemic fire safety problem in this type of housing stock’

There is an endemic fire safety problem in this type of housing stock. I have walked around tower blocks documenting and filming the fire safety breaches. I’ve seen flats without fire doors, no emergency lighting or signage on fire doors and escape routes, broken fire rated glass, wedged-open fire doors, poor fire stopping around service hatches that breach compartmentation, no smoke seals in fire doors, rubbish and combustible material left in the common areas, and no information displayed on the specific fire plan of the building.

But that information appears to fall on deaf ears. Action must be taken now to address these issues."


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jun 14, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> If one was cynical I guess one might consider that technically all those hundreds - HUNDREDS - of people just burned out of their homes are no longer really residents, and so not the _priority_ of KCTMO



If they had been a priority, you'd think they'd would have provided housing for their residents that wasn't a deathtrap.


----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 14, 2017)

editor said:


> Cab you copy and paste the contents?





> Ministers failed to act on the clear lessons of the 2009 Lakanal House fire according to high-rise fire safety expert Sam Webb
> 
> The tragic fire at Grenfell Tower could and should have been prevented thanks to the lessons of a similar disaster in the capital eight years’ ago, a leading fire expert has told the AJ.
> 
> ...


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I think updating the look of the building is of benefit to everyone in the area, especially the residents.  If you're trying to get planning permission you reach out to people likely to complain by telling them it will improve the area.



It obviously says this in Indy article, but this more from residents point of view. I've seen another resident on the tv that was pretty irate about it too. 

"The tower block had been fitted with external plastic cladding last year costing £10million. Residents said the panels were fitted to make the block more aesthetically pleasing for residents of luxury developments nearby, while lifts in neighbouring blocks had been left broken for years despite costing approximately £60,000 to repair."
Council blamed over tower blaze deaths


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 14, 2017)

Great posts by the way teaboy.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> A positive thought just occurred to me: because it's Ramadan, the Muslim residents of the block are more likely to have been awake at the time the fire started. They're more likely to have been able to get out and warn their neighbours to get out.


This is exactly what I've seen actually happened from people on Twitter.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 14, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> It obviously says this in Indy article, but this more from residents point of view. I've seen another resident on the tv that was pretty irate about it too.
> 
> "The tower block had been fitted with external plastic cladding last year costing £10million. Residents said the panels were fitted to make the block more aesthetically pleasing for residents of luxury developments nearby, while lifts in neighbouring blocks had been left broken for years despite costing approximately £60,000 to repair."
> Council blamed over tower blaze deaths


Fucking hell, this is going to be massive.  Again, sorry, both should and shouldn't be thinking things like that today. Fucking hell.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> It obviously says this in Indy article, but this more from residents point of view. I've seen another resident on the tv that was pretty irate about it too.
> 
> "The tower block had been fitted with external plastic cladding last year costing £10million. Residents said the panels were fitted to make the block more aesthetically pleasing for residents of luxury developments nearby, while lifts in neighbouring blocks had been left broken for years despite costing approximately £60,000 to repair."
> Council blamed over tower blaze deaths



These are slightly different issues.  You can't upgrade the insulation of a block of flats without putting a new skin on the building.  Unless of course you do it inside and make everyone's rooms smaller which is unpopular.  

Clearly the on-going maintenance is going to be a massive issue but there are all sorts of grants available from the government, the mayor and the energy providers for projects which include insulating a building.  Councils and social housing providers are obliged to have a strategy to improve all of their housing stock. Its obviously easier for them to do blocks of flats and do 40 odd homes in one hit then individual houses.

So in short the money would have come from a different pot then the maintenance which is why the residents have ended up with a new cladding system they didn't see the benefit of and lifts that don't work.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2017)

As butchers suggests a page or so back there are so many different strands to this going on.  So many possible factors that have possibly caused or at least contributed to this disaster.  I get the feeling this could be one of those watershed moments.  Not that that is much use to the poor souls who lived there.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

Reporters getting a bit too close - Sky showing disruption as distraught family get pissed off with having cameras shoved into their faces...


----------



## existentialist (Jun 14, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> equally they should not be smothered with kindness. they'll need some space to come to terms with what has happened.


The kindness needs to be available, but not imposed. 

At this stage, what people need is to be able to debrief - talk through what happened, what's going on for them, etc. The proper interventions don't need to happen for a few months, by which time it will be clearer whose struggling with post-traumatic psychological injury ("PTSD").


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> If one was cynical I guess one might consider that technically all those hundreds - HUNDREDS - of people just burned out of their homes are no longer really residents, and so not the _priority_ of KCTMO



Nah, they are still residents. Well, the living ones are.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 14, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> Bang on. Hopefully it won't take the guts of thirty years to get justice, though.


This feels more visceral and immediate  - like the poll tax. This is coming down on everyone. How can london live like this any longer?


----------



## bimble (Jun 14, 2017)

People who live nearby and had to watch helpless and hear the screams there will be a lot of people traumatised by this . My friend on Latimer Rd says everything in her place has the smell of smoke in it and ash in the air everywhere still


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 14, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> These are slightly different issues.  You can't upgrade the insulation of a block of flats without putting a new skin on the building.  Unless of course you do it inside and make everyone's rooms smaller which is unpopular.
> 
> Clearly the on-going maintenance is going to be a massive issue but there are all sorts of grants available from the government, the mayor and the energy providers for projects which include insulating a building.  Councils and social housing providers are obliged to have a strategy to improve all of their housing stock. Its obviously easier for them to do blocks of flats and do 40 odd homes in one hit then individual houses.
> 
> So in short the money would have come from a different pot then the maintenance which is why the residents have ended up with a new cladding system they didn't see the benefit of and lifts that don't work.


Fair dos I was more just sharing because they didn't seem to think it was to their benefit and were complaining that they hadn't been respected and listened to when carrying out the project. 


Teaboy said:


> Sorry but I don't think that's what happened. The building has been upgraded in several respects including increasing the number of flats by remodeling the lower floors. The facade system was a combination of increasing the thermal performance (lower bills for residents) and improving the look of the building which should benefit all.  I don't believe they would just spend 10 million to tart it up a bit there has been more work done on it then that.
> 
> Whether the residents were consulted in the process I don't know but it would be unusual if they were not.  I've personally been to quite a few resident liaison meetings for similar projects where the plans are on show and the feedback from residents is sought.


And I hadn't read that when I posted


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 14, 2017)

bimble said:


> People who live nearby and had to watch helpless and hear the screams there will be a lot of people traumatised by this . My friend on Latimer Rd says everything in her place has the smell of smoke in it and ash in the air everywhere still


That must be fucking awful - it's one thing to see the comparatively sanitised reporting on the telly, but to actually see & hear people screaming for their lives as the fire reaches them... Makes me shudder just to imagine it...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 14, 2017)

> Well-wishers have raised more than £250,000 for victims of the Grenfell Tower inferno just hours after flames ripped through the building.
> 
> More than 10,000 people have donated to four verified fundraising pages set up to help hundreds of families affected by the devastating fire that gutted the 24-storey social housing block on Wednesday morning.
> 
> More than £250,000 raised for victims in hours after devastating fire



This warms the cockles of my heart.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 14, 2017)

Terrifying a fire in a tall building with only one stairway.
I hope the casualties do not increase and most people managed to escape.


----------



## eoin_k (Jun 14, 2017)

An interviewee on Radio 4 just described a separate incident in Hammersmith - a neighbouring Tory-run borough that has a shared administration with Kensington and another local authority. I didn't follow the full story, but it involved a fire report that identified a certain design of window as a hazard not being published. It was only released through a Freedom of Information request. The interviewee couldn't see any legitimate reason for not making this information more widely available.

This is what a bonfire of red tape looks like.


----------



## Johnny Doe (Jun 14, 2017)

eoin_k said:


> An interviewee on Radio 4 just described a separate incident in *Hammersmith - a neighbouring Tory-run borough that has a shared administration with Kensington and another local authority*. I didn't follow the full story, but it involved a fire report that identified a certain design of window as a hazard not being published. It was only released through a Freedom of Information request. The interviewee couldn't see any legitimate reason for not making this information more widely available.
> 
> This is what a bonfire of red tape looks like.


Tri-borough shared services - Wikipedia

Looks like they fucked it up too Westminster and RBKC serve notice on Tri-borough


----------



## Johnny Doe (Jun 14, 2017)

Harry Smiles said:


> Tri-borough shared services - Wikipedia
> 
> Looks like they fucked it up too Westminster and RBKC serve notice on Tri-borough



H&F Council statement on ‘tri-borough’


----------



## Johnny Doe (Jun 14, 2017)

Apologies for slight digression. Hopefully relevant for wider context


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 14, 2017)

Nick Hurd, the Police and Fire Minister talking mealy-mouthed shite on the BBC - he's a landlord who voted against compelling landlords to make their properties fit for human habitation. He needs to be defenestrated from a high rise


----------



## J Ed (Jun 14, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> It obviously says this in Indy article, but this more from residents point of view. I've seen another resident on the tv that was pretty irate about it too.
> 
> "The tower block had been fitted with external plastic cladding last year costing £10million. Residents said the panels were fitted to make the block more aesthetically pleasing for residents of luxury developments nearby, while lifts in neighbouring blocks had been left broken for years despite costing approximately £60,000 to repair."
> Council blamed over tower blaze deaths



Christ. This is truly grotesque, was the plastic cladding really just for that?!?!


----------



## phillm (Jun 14, 2017)

Barefaced Cunts.


----------



## editor (Jun 14, 2017)

I don't think I like the BBC interviewer shoving the mic in distraught people and asking for the details of the loved ones they're desperately, frantically looking for.


----------



## cantsin (Jun 14, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Christ. This is truly grotesque, was the plastic cladding really just for that?!?!



this righteous, class conscious kids seems to think so ( apols if repost )


----------



## J Ed (Jun 14, 2017)

editor said:


> I don't think I like the BBC interviewer shoving the mic in distraught people and asking for the details of the loved ones they're desperately, frantically looking for.



London fire: Twelve confirmed dead but police expect further fatalities after tower block blaze – latest updates



> Tensions have erupted in clashes with the police outside the Rugby Portobello trust, which is acting as a centre for dispossessed people.
> 
> The road outside the club was packed with people, some in tears and some wailing. A fracas broke out, apparently over a journalist trying to film a distraught woman. Some men moved to protect the woman and, within seconds, a large contingent of police officers were jostling with the crowd amid shouting and screaming.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 14, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Christ. This is truly grotesque, was the plastic cladding really just for that?!?!



No.

Read Teaboy 's posts, they explain things in a reasoned way, without the hype & shite.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 14, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> No.
> 
> Read Teaboy 's posts, they explain things in a reasoned way, without the hype & shite.



Have done now, thanks.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 14, 2017)

editor said:


> I don't think I like the BBC interviewer shoving the mic in distraught people and asking for the details of the loved ones they're desperately, frantically looking for.



Not sure if this was a protest or what


----------



## AnandLeo (Jun 14, 2017)

Mayor Sadiq Khan is not a happy bunny at the moment, I think. All I am thinking is praying for the suffering of the souls including babies, children, women, and those who perished.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jun 14, 2017)

From J Ed's post: 

Tensions have erupted in clashes with the police outside the Rugby Portobello trust, which is acting as a centre for dispossessed people.

The road outside the club was packed with people, some in tears and some wailing. A fracas broke out, apparently over a journalist trying to film a distraught woman. Some men moved to protect the woman and, within seconds, a large contingent of police officers were jostling with the crowd amid shouting and screaming.​By turns you commodifiy and you residualise housing and people's homes go up in flames.

When you try to commodify and sensationalsise their grief, anger and sadness don't be surprised at the consequences.

Louis MacNeice


----------



## shygirl (Jun 14, 2017)

It's heart-breaking


----------



## phillm (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> More like Bradford really, but everyone's forgotten about that!



or for us oldies one of my earliest childhood memories was Aberfan and being sat down in infant school and told what had happened and watching it on a small black and white TV. Intensely sad - May knows she can't visit the grieving , displaced or injured. She would be lynched.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 14, 2017)

The thing is that the people who lived there have done 'the right thing', they highlighted all of these dangers in resident groups. What are they supposed to have done beyond that?


----------



## editor (Jun 14, 2017)

phillm said:


> or for us oldies one of my earliest childhood memories was Aberfan and being sat down in infant school and told what had happened and watching it on a small black and white TV. Intensely sad - May knows she can't visit the grieving , displaced or injured. She would be lynched.


I'll never ever forget Aberfan. I was the same age as some of those kids who died. The anger with the NCB and the government stayed with me all my life.

Eventually some kind of justice was obtained and changes were made within the industry. I hope that this tragedy makes big changes too and casts the spotlight on the whole fuck up of affordable, safe housing for Londoners and exploitative landlords.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 14, 2017)




----------



## editor (Jun 14, 2017)

Cunt


----------



## dessiato (Jun 14, 2017)

phillm said:


> or for us oldies one of my earliest childhood memories was Aberfan and being sat down in infant school and told what had happened and watching it on a small black and white TV. Intensely sad - May knows she can't visit the grieving , displaced or injured. She would be lynched.


How long before she does get there to offer "sympathy"? I'm guessing not till its too late to be meaningful, but not too late for some sort of political posturing.


----------



## phillm (Jun 14, 2017)

editor said:


> Cunt




Yes Cunt share widely.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 14, 2017)

dessiato said:


> How long before she does get there to offer "sympathy"? I'm guessing not till its too late to be meaningful, but not too late for some sort of political posturing.



She'll go somewhere easily managed, like one of the hospitals or a community centre (next week when it can be locked down and controlled). It's too real and fluid atm and she might have to face people's genuine emotions, she's not capable of that.


----------



## A380 (Jun 14, 2017)

editor said:


> I'll never ever forget Aberfan. I was the same age as some of those kids who died. The anger with the NCB and the government stayed with me all my life.
> 
> Eventually some kind of justice was obtained and changes were made within the industry. I hope that this tragedy makes big changes too and casts the spotlight on the whole fuck up of affordable, safe housing for Londoners and exploitative landlords.



That the NCB took money from the public donations to the families to repair the heaps was just one of the elements of one of the great crimes of the 20th Century in Britain.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 14, 2017)

J Ed said:


> The thing is that the people who lived there have done 'the right thing', they highlighted all of these dangers in resident groups. What are they supposed to have done beyond that?


More than that, we've heard how people:


Called in the fire on 999
Followed the ‘stay and wait’ instructions
Or, if they tried to leave the building, knocked up their neighbours first to make sure they knew what was going on
Helped others who couldn't walk so well leave via the stairs
Meanwhile, people outside who saw the fire take hold initially went into the building to raise the alarm with residents who might not realise what was going on
Helped direct emergency services to where people were trapped
Set up ad hoc shelters, information points, rest areas and canteens
Offered rooms or sofas in their own homes for displaced residents
Turned up from across London/England/the UK with food, drink and other supplies for survivors and rescue workers
Donated money to numerous fundraising efforts which were spontaneously set up


----------



## eoin_k (Jun 14, 2017)

...


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 14, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> It's already political. You cage the poorest in towerblocks and then abandon them economically. These are decisions made by politicians who hate the working class.


What I meant is ffs give it a day or two so people can find their loved ones and if not digest it all , but tm should really have come out and said something


----------



## Thimble Queen (Jun 14, 2017)

Catching up with the news on this. Absolutely horrific. I've not got the words.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 14, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> She'll go somewhere easily managed, like one of the hospitals or a community centre (next week when it can be locked down and controlled). It's too real and fluid atm and she might have to face people's genuine emotions, she's not capable of that.



She's hardly Churchill on Sidney Street calibre.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 14, 2017)

editor said:


> Cunt




Can't disagree he's a cunt.

But, cuts to the fire service doesn't seem to have been an issue here, they arrived within 6 minutes of being called.

The focus should be on what went wrong with this block, considering fires in blocks of flats happen all the time, they are normally contained, never has anything like this happened before in the UK, something seems to have gone very wrong with this block - and that seems to have more to do with the money spent on the cladding.

If that's proved to be the problem, action needs taking straight away on other blocks that have had this 'improvement' - with no expensive spared on resolving the risk that has been created.

I am so fucking angry about this.


----------



## phillm (Jun 14, 2017)

dessiato said:


> How long before she does get there to offer "sympathy"? I'm guessing not till its too late to be meaningful, but not too late for some sort of political posturing.



she will be being advised by a cunty cunt-faced collection of SPADs and/or 'not on my fire watch'  Barwell - probably after Corbyn and Prince Charles though.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 14, 2017)

It's astonishing, the number of incredibly conscious voices we are hearing out of this tragedy, this scandal, this violent crime - wisdom out of the mouths not of our ‘leaders’ or rulers, but ordinary people:

_Daniel Renwick, 29, a youth worker at the nearby Harrow Club, said:

“The Grenfell Action Group are probably the strongest advocates for reform in this borough. Grenfell are tireless in trying to bring these issues to light and they said the only thing that would give this issue some recognition is a disaster like this.

“It’s sick, because it exposes just how fucking disgraceful this council is. People who don’t understand why the Tories got kicked out of this place [in last week’s election], this is why. The push back can’t be stopped now because how are people supposed to feel about this? It’s the shock doctrine, that’s what this is.”_​
London fire: Twelve confirmed dead but police expect further fatalities after tower block blaze – latest updates


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 14, 2017)

AnandLeo said:


> Mayor Sadiq Khan is not a happy bunny at the moment, I think. All I am thinking is praying for the suffering of the souls including babies, children, women, and those who perished.



He's an intelligent man, he knows he's mayor of a corrupt cesspool of a city run as a playground for capital. He could have done something about this. He hasn't.


----------



## phillm (Jun 14, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> It's astonishing, the number of incredibly conscious voices we are hearing out of this tragedy, this scandal, this violent crime - wisdom out of the mouths not of our ‘leaders’ or rulers, but ordinary people:
> 
> _Daniel Renwick, 29, a youth worker at the nearby Harrow Club, said:
> 
> ...



Many hero and heroines and great people vox popping on the news. This is one of the first positive take-aways from this unfolding , god awful crime. Because that is what it is.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 14, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> He's an intelligent man, he knows he's mayor of a corrupt cesspool of a city run as a playground for capital.* He could have done something about this*. He hasn't.



BIB - How?

He's only been in the job for just over a year.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Jun 14, 2017)

Anyone know how it works about finding new homes those made homeless by this? I imagine that Kensington is not exacly awash with cheap housing and that the council housing list is no doubt of ludicrous length. Do these people go straight to the top and have to be found homes pronto (thus pushing down those beneath them) or do they go on the list at the position they would normally join, ie families are priority, single peeps are no hopers.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 14, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> BIB - How?
> 
> He's only been in the job for just over a year.



I don't know, but then I never asked to be made mayor of london. If I was him though, first order of business would be to sort out the planning loopholes that allow developers to bribe, lie or creatively account themselves out of their obligations to build social and affordable housing.


----------



## Mation (Jun 14, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> I don't know, but then I never asked to be made mayor of london. If I was him though, first order of business would be to sort out the planning loopholes that allow developers to bribe, lie or creatively account themselves out of their obligations to build social and affordable housing.


If you were him, you'd be a right wing shit who would do no such thing.


----------



## phillm (Jun 14, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Anyone know how it works about finding new homes those made homeless by this? I imagine that Kensington is not exacly awash with cheap housing and that the council housing list is no doubt of ludicrous length. Do these people go straight to the top and have to be found homes pronto (thus pushing down those beneath them) or do they go on the list at the position they would normally join, ie families are priority, single peeps are no hopers.



There are tens of thousands new build apartments all over the city waiting for Chinese investors to bank their ill gotten gains. So that won't happen - more probably Hastings or some such like.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 14, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Anyone know how it works about finding new homes those made homeless by this? I imagine that Kensington is not exacly awash with cheap housing and that the council housing list is no doubt of ludicrous length. Do these people go straight to the top and have to be found homes pronto (thus pushing down those beneath them) or do they go on the list at the position they would normally join, ie families are priority, single peeps are no hopers.



Hopefully enough people will be watching this situation and asking these same questions that the council aren't able to do what London councils normally do, namely fucking everyone off with no alternative housing provided.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 14, 2017)

[UPDATED]

Crowdfunders currently running:

*JustGiving*

Help families of Grenfell Tower (starter: Haley Yearwood) - £332,857
Help the residents of the burned down Grenfell Tower (Karolina Hanusova) - £247,976
We're raising money for the families and individuals affected by the Grenfell Tower fire (Family Action) - £55,580
Help as many people as possible in Grenfell Tower (Anass Bourdaka) - £31,315
Weʼre raising £5,000 to help those affected by the Grenfell Tower fire (Get West London) - £8,682
Weʼre raising £10,000 to help the victims of the Grenfell Tower fire (Will Hurst) - £5,167
Weʼre raising £10,000 to help the families & individuals impacted by the Grenfell Tower fire in London on with urgently required supplies (AMYA UK) - £1,075

*GoFundMe*

Grenfell Block Latimer Fire Appeal (Annoor Trust) - £74,902
West London Tower Fire Victims (Shameela Islam-Zulfiqar) - £61,742
Grenfell Tower Fire Fund (Eartha Pond) - £20,646
GrenFell Tower Fire Fund (Charmaine Hayden) - £8,876
Support Grenfell Tower Fire Victims (Simon Harris) - £5,118
*Others*

Grenfell Tower Emergency Relief (Westway Trust) Amazon WishList

There may be - in fact, probably are - others too.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> This is making me weep buckets. Lots of people won't have been able to get out at all. Disabled people aren't usually supposed to be placed above a certain floor level in a tower block (think it might be fourth? Or it could just be my council's policy) but obviously if you become disabled later then you have to wait for a place to move to, and K&C is selling its nicer flats off when they become empty, because the govt's Housing and Planning Bill of last year forces them to, so there's nowhere left to rehouse people.
> 
> Those who did get out have probably had to leave their pets, their photo albums, all their possessions that had sentimental value - fuck, the poor people.
> 
> ...


When I had to get out of a block during a fire with thick black smoke, I had to walk down into the smoke because the fire was in the electrics cupboard at the bottom. Had there been a second staircase at the rear of the building it would have been a bit easier to get out. 

My point was that all new build blocks of flats should have more than one staircase regardless of height of the block. 

It's horrific that people have died. Many will have had no chance of escape


----------



## eoin_k (Jun 14, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Can't disagree he's a cunt.
> 
> But, cuts to the fire service doesn't seem to have been an issue here, they arrived within 6 minutes of being called.[...]



Is response time the only impact of cuts?

I agree with you that the cladding seems most likely to be the immediate cause. But that doesn't call into question all the other issues this tragedy has brought up. Residents have been expressing concerns about this building being a fire hazard for years. A local councillor who sits on the TMO's board claims that she faced attempts to remove her for raising their concerns. Four housing ministers including the Prime Minister's special adviser did nothing with a report that recommended higher safety standards after a similar incident eight years ago. Even factors with no direct relationship to this case,like the bill on private landlords that the Tories voted down, reflect where their priorities lie.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 14, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Anyone know how it works about finding new homes those made homeless by this? I imagine that Kensington is not exacly awash with cheap housing and that the council housing list is no doubt of ludicrous length. Do these people go straight to the top and have to be found homes pronto (thus pushing down those beneath them) or do they go on the list at the position they would normally join, ie families are priority, single peeps are no hopers.


Lots of empty mansions a few hundred yards to the south, but I doubt they would be appropriated for emergency use.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 14, 2017)

eoin_k said:


> Is response time the only impact of cuts?
> 
> I agree with you that the cladding seems most likely to be the immediate cause. But that doesn't call into question all the other issues this tragedy has brought up. Residents have been expressing concerns about this building being a fire hazard for years. A local councillor who sits on the TMO's board claims that she faced attempts to remove her for raising their concerns. Four housing ministers including the Prime Minister's special adviser ignored a report that recommended higher safety standards after a similar incident eight years ago. Even factors with no direct relationship to this case,like the bill on private landlords that the Tories voted down, reflects where their priorities lie.



Totally agree.

But, trying to keep my emotions under control about all the contributing factors that could be involved here, I firmly believe the main focus needs to be on the issue, most likely the cladding, that allowed this fire to spread so fast.

Focus resources on that, to avoid something this major happening again.

Then move onto all the side issues, and the blame game.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 14, 2017)

Absolutely no chance that any of the national papers will do one of those photo line-up pages of those who died in this tragedy, too poor and not the right heritage for them. Stuff like this usually shows up who matters and who doesn't.


----------



## A380 (Jun 14, 2017)

editor said:


> Cunt



So. May spent three years telling the police federation they were crying wolf over cuts and now Borris telling someone standing up against fire cuts to 'get stuffed' . Today is a day for grief .


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> So. May spent three years telling the police federation they were crying wolf over cuts and now Borris telling someone standing up against fire cuts to 'get stuffed' . Today is a day for grief .


And tomorrow for anger?


----------



## Mogden (Jun 14, 2017)

Good mate of mine works for LFS. He sent me this earlier. Spoiler tags cos I don't think everyone wants to read it.


Spoiler: Graphic



We had the fire investigation lady in the office before - she'd been doing an aerial survey of the building to spot any survivors and try and judge if it was safe to send teams back in.

She said there were dozens of bodies on the roof where people had tried to get away from the fire and been overcome by the smoke.
Those poor people.


----------



## JTG (Jun 14, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Can't disagree he's a cunt.
> 
> But, cuts to the fire service doesn't seem to have been an issue here, they arrived within 6 minutes of being called.
> 
> ...


Surely cuts to the fire service include cuts to the preventative responsibilities they have as well? It's not all about fighting fires, it's about inspections, advice, cutting the need for them to go out at all. In other words, would a properly funded service with responsibilities not shunted to less trustworthy bodies have played a part in preventing this?


----------



## teqniq (Jun 14, 2017)

editor said:


> Cunt



Judging by how much that clip has been shared on social media I suspect he is already having cause to regret uttering those words.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 14, 2017)

eoin_k said:


> Is response time the only impact of cuts?
> 
> I agree with you that the cladding seems most likely to be the immediate cause. But that doesn't call into question all the other issues this tragedy has brought up. Residents have been expressing concerns about this building being a fire hazard for years. A local councillor who sits on the TMO's board claims that she faced attempts to remove her for raising their concerns. Four housing ministers including the Prime Minister's special adviser did nothing with a report that recommended higher safety standards after a similar incident eight years ago. Even factors with no direct relationship to this case,like the bill on private landlords that the Tories voted down, reflect where their priorities lie.


And the general context of widespread underfunding of social housing for decades, with naked contempt for the residents. And, in that area, huge swathes of planned and underway redevelopment and gentrification (I live just down the road). People rightly draw the connection between all of these things.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> That the NCB took money from the public donations to the families to repair the heaps was just one of the elements of one of the great crimes of the 20th Century in Britain.


Harold Wilson ordered it!


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Jun 14, 2017)

God that's awful Mogden


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

JTG said:


> Surely cuts to the fire service include cuts to the preventative responsibilities they have as well? It's not all about fighting fires, it's about inspections, advice, cutting the need for them to go out at all. In other words, would a properly funded service with responsibilities not shunted to less trustworthy bodies have played a part in preventing this?



Very good point.

I want Boris's head on a stick and his home given over to survivors. With this and the London Bridge thing him still being in his role shows how shit the Tories are.


----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 14, 2017)

Don't you dare say the fatal Grenfell Tower fire is not 'political'


----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 14, 2017)

I've just logged onto my facebook account and the sense of anger is palpable. Whole bunch of people who 'don't do politics' are livid and calling for the heads of Torys/landlords etc


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 14, 2017)

I forgot Gavin Barwell had got a new job as May's adviser. Hopefully she'll be hauled over the coals for that decision as she has for so many others recently.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

JTG said:


> Surely cuts to the fire service include cuts to the preventative responsibilities they have as well? It's not all about fighting fires, it's about inspections, advice, cutting the need for them to go out at all. In other words, would a properly funded service with responsibilities not shunted to less trustworthy bodies have played a part in preventing this?


It was actually the change of regulation in 2005 that did that. It passed responsibility for fire risk assessments from the fire service to controllers of premises.


----------



## Mogden (Jun 14, 2017)

farmerbarleymow said:


> God that's awful Mogden


Horrific


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

If this had happened 7 days earlier I think the result of GE would have been somewhat different.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 14, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> [UPDATED]
> 
> Crowdfunders currently running:
> 
> ...



This is wonderful to see but also infuriating. Those responsible should be paying. Through the fucking nose. For the rest of their days.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

Slightly off topic, but relevant, question.

i don't understand the position of mayor of London, on basis that London is made up of several councils.  How does this work in reality? Apologies in advance for my ignorance.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 14, 2017)

Justice for Grenfell Tower

“This Government, and many before it, have neglected council housing, and disregarded its tenants as if they were second class. Nationally and locally, politicians have subjected public housing to decades of systematic disinvestment – leaving properties in a state of disrepair, and open to privatisation. Regeneration, when it has come, has been for the benefit of developers and buy-to-let landlords, who profit from luxury flats built in place of affordable homes. Across London, regeneration has meant evictions, poor quality building work, and has left tenants with little influence over the future of their estates.

“The chronic underinvestment in council housing and contempt for tenants must stop. It is an outrage that in 21st Britain, authorities cannot be trusted to provide safe housing, and that people in council properties cannot put children safely to bed at night.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> Slightly off topic, but relevant, question.
> 
> i don't understand the position of mayor of London, on basis that London is made up of several councils.  How does this work in reality? Apologies in advance for my ignorance.


Mayor of London - Powers and Functions - Wikipedia


----------



## peterkro (Jun 14, 2017)

One consequence of no communal alarm I didn't think of, the lifts would still be working.I just heard a guy who's father took the lift from ground floor to fourth at 1.30am when the building was well alight.In a normal building the lifts go to the ground floor when the alarm goes off, opens the doors and stay that way.Otherwise you're in a steel box which could stop at any moment and the steel box is suspended in a chimney.


----------



## handy1 (Jun 14, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> And what was Blair but a Tory in disguise?


TBF he was not in disguise. He was quite blatant about being a tory. This is fuck all to the blood already on his hands.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

handy1 said:


> TBF he was not in disguise. He was quite blatant about being a tory. This is fuck all to the blood already on his hands.


In what way?

I suspect the fall out from this will highlight failing by government/local government stretching back years. They are all complicit!


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 14, 2017)

_Did you kill Grenfell towers_


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> Mayor of London - Powers and Functions - Wikipedia


That specifically states that the Mayor has total responsibility for fire planning and local boroughs have zero! (With the exception of their responsibilities as landlords)


----------



## handy1 (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> In what way?
> 
> I suspect the fall out from this will highlight failing by government/local government stretching back years. They are all complicit!


In what way was he not a tory? I agree that they are all complicit BTW.


----------



## JTG (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> It was actually the change of regulation in 2005 that did that. It passed responsibility for fire risk assessments from the fire service to controllers of premises.


Cheers for the detail. I well remember the FBU's battles with the Blair government


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 14, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Lots of empty mansions a few hundred yards to the south, but I doubt they would be appropriated for emergency use.


I used to pass this beautiful house on the way to work: Debenham House - Wikipedia
It's been vacant for years, all 20,000 square feet of it and has dozens of rooms. It's a mile south of Grenfell Tower. It makes my blood boil that it and thousands of other houses in London stand empty while hundreds of Grenfell residents (and countless other homeless Londoners)


----------



## Wilf (Jun 14, 2017)

Mogden said:


> Good mate of mine works for LFS. He sent me this earlier. Spoiler tags cos I don't think everyone wants to read it.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Graphic
> ...


RIP to them and all the rest who were killed.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jun 14, 2017)

peterkro said:


> One consequence of no communal alarm I didn't think of, the lifts would still be working.I just heard a guy who's father took the lift from ground floor to fourth at 1.30am when the building was well alight.In a normal building the lifts go to the ground floor when the alarm goes off, opens the doors and stay that way.Otherwise you're in a steel box which could stop at any moment and the steel box is suspended in a chimney.


If that was Tiago's dad on c4 news he said his dad ran up the stairs.


----------



## peterkro (Jun 14, 2017)

5t3IIa said:


> If that was Tiago's dad on c4 news he said his dad ran up the stairs.


I thought he said he got the lift to the fourth floor then ran up the stairs, presumably when the lift filled with smoke. I may have misheard.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 14, 2017)

There was a good article (independent I think?) that I read earlier that said if there were gaps between the cladding and insulation or other materials, and there is a fire behind the cladding panels, then the chimney effect may have come into play. 

Another London disaster, the Kings Cross fire of 1987, led to the discovery of the trench effect during fires on steeply inclined surfaces. I am not a fire specialist but there may be some overlap between the two mechanisms, especially if flashover was involved.


----------



## AverageJoe (Jun 14, 2017)

eoin_k said:


> Is response time the only impact of cuts?
> 
> I agree with you that the cladding seems most likely to be the immediate cause. But that doesn't call into question all the other issues this tragedy has brought up. Residents have been expressing concerns about this building being a fire hazard for years. A local councillor who sits on the TMO's board claims that she faced attempts to remove her for raising their concerns. Four housing ministers including the Prime Minister's special adviser did nothing with a report that recommended higher safety standards after a similar incident eight years ago. Even factors with no direct relationship to this case,like the bill on private landlords that the Tories voted down, reflect where their priorities lie.


So we're agreed that it's not the fire services fault? They could have 1000 firefighters there in two minutes, but the fact that the pressure in the hoses can only up so high...


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jun 14, 2017)

peterkro said:


> I thought he said he got the lift to the fourth floor then ran up the stairs, presumably when the lift filled with smoke. I may have misheard.


Oh, yes you're right he did. I misread what you said, sorry. You were talking about - fire alarms go off = lifts put themselves at the ground floor and stay there. Or they should. 

Ugh. This is so primally distressing. Those poor fucking people :'(


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

Mogden said:


> Good mate of mine works for LFS. He sent me this earlier. Spoiler tags cos I don't think everyone wants to read it.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Graphic
> ...


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 14, 2017)

Mogden hope your mate is OK, awful, horrific thing to see


----------



## malatesta32 (Jun 14, 2017)

just how the fuck ... 

Britain First Provoke Muslims Helping Grenfell Fire Families Outside East London Mosque | HuffPost UK

ghouls. just money grubbing ghouls.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 14, 2017)

Can't watch the Boris video due to shite 3G - did he really tell a member of the public to get stuffed?


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 14, 2017)

Teresa May says "lessons will be learned".

Yuck.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 14, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Can't watch the Boris video due to shite 3G - did he really tell a member of the public to get stuffed?


Think it was a member of the London Assembly


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 14, 2017)

I am out drinking and am still furious. RIP to all who have suffered loss in this.Appalling waste of life


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 14, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Teresa May says "lessons will be learned".
> 
> Yuck.


Well she can just fuck off some more. 

They had several chances to learn already.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

handy1 said:


> In what way was he not a tory? I agree that they are all complicit BTW.


My, in what way , comment was referencing your comment that it had nothing to do with the blood already in his hands!


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 14, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> This is wonderful to see but also infuriating. Those responsible should be paying. Through the fucking nose. For the rest of their days.


Absolutely. But right now, there are hundreds of destitute, bereaved, traumatised people - and but for these spontaneous, autonomous acts, they would have nothing, be nowhere. And everyone knows this. No one will forget.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 14, 2017)

Mogden said:


> Good mate of mine works for LFS. He sent me this earlier. Spoiler tags cos I don't think everyone wants to read it.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Graphic
> ...



Jesus fucking wept


----------



## Ceej (Jun 14, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Think it was a member of the London Assembly


A Labour member of the London Assembly fire safety panel.

And if I hear one more Tory praising the emergency services after cutting their status pay and numbers I'm going to vomit....


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Teresa May says "lessons will be learned".
> 
> Yuck.



Worse - she said "If there are any lessons to be learned they will be, and action will be taken," leaving open the possibility of doing fuck all. If there are lessons to be learned, FFS. And 8pm till she said anything.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 14, 2017)

malatesta32 said:


> just how the fuck ...
> 
> Britain First Provoke Muslims Helping Grenfell Fire Families Outside East London Mosque | HuffPost UK
> 
> ghouls. just money grubbing ghouls.


But if you go on beyond that, there's some brilliant clips of people getting it sorted, supporting each other.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 14, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Think it was a member of the London Assembly



It's a wonder someone didn't knock his fuckin lights out tbh!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> A shame someone didn't knock his fuckin lights out tbh!


Not just his lights


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> There was a good article (independent I think?) that I read earlier that said if there were gaps between the cladding and insulation or other materials, and there is a fire behind the cladding panels, then the chimney effect may have come into play.
> 
> Another London disaster, the Kings Cross fire of 1987, led to the discovery of the trench effect during fires on steeply inclined surfaces. I am not a fire specialist but there may be some overlap between the two mechanisms, especially if flashover was involved.


I think that is very plausible. I know if a fire on a construction site, I lecture in civstructuin health and safety, where a plumber was brazing a pipe passing through a walk for an outside tap, the heat from the copper pipe ignited the aluminium backibgbon Kibgsoan and it burnt I. The cavity wall. The chimney effect , or more correctly convection, caused fire to spread to roof space and the 3 storey block of flats was totally lost!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Worse - she said "If there are any lessons to be learned they will be, and action will be taken," leaving open the possibility of doing fuck all. If there are lessons to be learned, FFS. And 8pm till she said anything.



TBF her version of 'doing something' would probably be to send a van full of goons to check the immigration status of the poor souls huddled outside in their slippers.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 14, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> It's a wonder someone didn't knock his fuckin lights out tbh!


If he had said it today, I'm sure they would have


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 14, 2017)

Need action on this. No more treating people like unwanted surplus. No fucking more. Going home now still furious and pissed. Fuckers


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 14, 2017)

I Know none of this analysis brings them back. I'd perhaps hoped that authorities had learned after incidents like King's Cross and lakanal, amongst others but clearly not. 

How many of the poor and vulnerable in society have to die before action is taken?


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 14, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> If he had said it today, I'm sure they would have



I did wonder if that was from today!!


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 14, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Absolutely. But right now, there are hundreds of destitute, bereaved, traumatised people - and but for these spontaneous, autonomous acts, they would have nothing, be nowhere. And everyone knows this. No one will forget.


Case in point: the Westway Sport & Leisure Centre, run not by the council but by the Westway Trust, has turned itself into a dormitory shelter for up to three hundred people, mostly refugees from the buildings around Grenfell Tower displaced by debris and ash or else ordered to evacuate for safety reasons.



Stocked entirely by donations, staffed entirely by volunteers, not because it was anyone's job, but because it is everyone's responsibility; not to let the state or crap companies or weak regulators off the hook, but because _that could be me_, because _it is the right thing to do_, because_ I don't know what else to do_, because _we are Londoners_, because _Christian _or_ Muslim _or_ Sikh _or_ Jew _or_ anarchist _or_ socialist_ or _just an ordinary neighbour_, because _JUST BECAUSE_.

Because Theresa May sure as shit isn't going to be putting anyone up for the night.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Worse - she said "If there are any lessons to be learned they will be, and action will be taken," leaving open the possibility of doing fuck all. If there are lessons to be learned, FFS. And 8pm till she said anything.


Earlier on, when Butchers raised the Hillborough parallel, I mentally wondered whether someone would come out with the 'lessons will be learned' line.  Didn't post it because I thought even the monsters who run out world have acquired enough faux emotional intelligence to avoid anything so crass.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 14, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Need action on this. No more treating people like unwanted surplus. No fucking more. Going home now still furious and pissed. Fuckers


Stay mad mate.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 14, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> I did wonder if that was from today!!


That was from when he was mayor


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 14, 2017)

Mogden said:


> Good mate of mine works for LFS. He sent me this earlier. Spoiler tags cos I don't think everyone wants to read it.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Graphic
> ...



Shit.  Shit.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 14, 2017)

Is there any info on how and where the fire started?


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 14, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> Is there any info on how and where the fire started?



Only rumours, a fridge


----------



## weltweit (Jun 14, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> Is there any info on how and where the fire started?


I heard someone on the radio claim a washing machine caught fire.
But I don't know how credible that story was.
Oh eta might have been a fridge indeed..


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

I know the USA isn't held in the greatest esteem in these boards, but it would have been admirable if say Earls Court had cancelled everything for the next couple of weeks to provide shelter fir those made homeless, in The way that the Dome in New Orleans did after Katrina. I know it's a different situation, but it needs a venue in a massive scale to assist people. Not ideal to be sleeping in an exhibition hall, but it's something.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 14, 2017)

> The absence of the council on the street as hundreds of families were homeless was concerning, said Judith Bakeman, a Labour councillor at Kensington and Chelsea. “There’s been so many cuts, there aren’t enough people to deal with this.”
> Referring to Notting Hill Methodist church’s Rev Mike Long, she said: “Mike has been running this centre giving people food and water all day and not a single person from the council has been here.”
> 
> As we spoke, a volunteer from the Harrow Club and Latimer AP Academy, came to tell the councillor she had 138 beds available. He said that no one official had been to the centre and he didn’t know what to do with that information.



London fire: Twelve confirmed dead but police expect further fatalities after tower block blaze – latest updates


----------



## agricola (Jun 14, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> I Know none of this analysis brings them back. I'd perhaps hoped that authorities had learned after incidents like King's Cross and lakanal, amongst others but clearly not.
> 
> How many of the poor and vulnerable in society have to die before action is taken?



TBH lessons were learned after the Kings Cross fire, and the Underground is much safer as a result.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 14, 2017)

1927 said:


> I know the USA isn't held in the greatest esteem in these boards, but it would have been admirable if say Earls Court had cancelled everything for the next couple of weeks to provide shelter fir those made homeless, in The way that the Dome in New Orleans did after Katrina. I know it's a different situation, but it needs a venue in a massive scale to assist people. Not ideal to be sleeping in an exhibition hall, but it's something.



New Orleans superdome maybe not the best example here. Read up on it, it's an excellent case study in how not to deal with evacuees from a disaster area.


----------



## campanula (Jun 14, 2017)

So a Beko fridge...or a Whirlpool washer - both articles have had recalls for substandard or dangerous manufacturing...and yet, they carry on producing cheap dangerous crap, seemingly without sanction.


----------



## phillm (Jun 14, 2017)

The hateful Katie Hopkins like a stopped clock is right at least twice a day. Couldn't agree more with her polemic.

KATIE HOPKINS: Jail those to blame for the Grenfell fire | Daily Mail Online
*
This is corporate manslaughter on a scale we have never seen in our lifetime, where the lives of ordinary people were considered incidental to the career and salary advancement of the few.

A grubby trail of lies, deceit, cost-cutting and backhanders are likely to be uncovered. I can almost smell them out here on the street between the bits of building strewn about the floor.

Somebody needs to go to jail.

All the executive team should serve time inside and see what life is like when you are nothing, have nothing, and your voice counts for nothing.

But none of it will change this reality. It won't change this horrible thing and it won't make it better.

They are all dead.

Latest estimates say 12 confirmed dead; locals say you can easily add a zero to that.

Now we’re listening! How pathetic we are. How cruel.

Sadiq Khan will tell us 'lessons have been learned' and that 'changes will be made'. He's good at this scripted sh*t.

Right now, to these people I am with, that means nothing. Their anger is real and it’s justified.

I am angry with them.

It is time some people were made to pay *


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

Katie fucking Hopkins is on the scene? Haven't these people suffered enough? I mean that seriously, not as a joke - someone that manipulative and sociopathic should not be allowed near suffering people.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 14, 2017)

campanula said:


> So a Beko fridge...or a Whirlpool washer - both articles have had recalls for substandard or dangerous manufacturing...and yet, they carry on producing cheap dangerous crap, seemingly without sanction.



Maybe but the cheap, dangerous crap are the people responsible for contracting out fire safety and ignoring residents' concerns.


----------



## maomao (Jun 14, 2017)

phillm said:


> The hateful Katie Hopkins like a stopped clock is right at least twice a day. Couldn't agree more with her polemic.
> 
> KATIE HOPKINS: Jail those to blame for the Grenfell fire | Daily Mail Online
> *
> ...


She's wrong. She's itching for a scapegoat from the management company. This is a political disaster, a direct result of the tabloids and the Tories' war on health and safety and red tape. Political heads should roll.  Don't be taken in by her anger, she's never been right in her life.


----------



## magneze (Jun 14, 2017)

Who gives a shit what she thinks?


----------



## agricola (Jun 14, 2017)

I suppose you would have got good odds on Sadiq Khan being named in that diatribe.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 14, 2017)

maomao said:


> She's wrong. She's itching for a scapegoat from the management company. This is a political disaster, a direct result of the tabloids and the Tories' war on health and safety and red tape. Political heads should roll.  Don't be taken in by her anger, she's never been right in her life.


Yeah. She wants a nice simple culprit and deal with them and everything back to normal. The people who are angry about the cladding and the fire service cuts and the council ignoring them and tying it into a whole climate of "fuck you" are the ones who know what's going on.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 14, 2017)

maomao said:


> She's wrong. She's itching for a scapegoat from the management company. This is a political disaster, a direct result of the tabloids and the Tories' war on health and safety and red tape. Political heads should roll.  Don't be taken in by her anger, she's never been right in her life.



Agreed. She seems to be trying to point the finger at some kind of low-level corruption, when it seems pretty clear that there are systemic failures here that go all the way to the top and are in no way confined to this one building.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 14, 2017)

I've got a bit of a bee in my bonnet about this, but it's pertinent. Last year the borough of Kensington & Chelsea had 1399 empty homes:
This is the London borough with the most empty homes
Yet people are having to sleep in a sports centre. 
Can't help seeing parallels with New Orleans' Katrina disaster here. Different scale of course, but in both cases the poor got shafted cos of deliberate neglect and lack of foresight.


----------



## JTG (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Katie fucking Hopkins is on the scene? Haven't these people suffered enough? I mean that seriously, not as a joke - someone that manipulative and sociopathic should not be allowed near suffering people.


Not that I have much time for him but the fact she mentions Sadiq Khan by name and nobody else tells you where she's manipulating this to


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 14, 2017)

Meanwhile, in Tory twat land


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 14, 2017)

Metropolitan police famously not a firefighting organisation of course.

Fire engines already have water cannons. They just don't use them on the public.


----------



## trashpony (Jun 14, 2017)

This is a really long thread and so someone may have already mentioned it but I was just looking for photos of the building before the fire and it appears as a case study on Construction Enquirer, WITT UK Group (who make smoke control products), Studio E architects, Harley Facades (I know they have been talked about on the thread) and of course Rydon. All of them have taken the relevant pages down except for Rydon. Bunch of fucking cowards


----------



## Lucy Fur (Jun 14, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> Meanwhile, in Tory twat land
> 
> 
> View attachment 109356
> ...


Fuck me theres some scum around. And hopkins can fucking do one to, shes getting no millGe out of this as far as im concerned. Hope fellow urbanz personnal involvement is minimal and thoughts go out to all affected


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 14, 2017)

agricola said:


> TBH lessons were learned after the Kings Cross fire, and the Underground is much safer as a result.


That's true, but wooden escalators were in place at Holborn long after it was claimed they had all been replaced. I remember using them, although not quite sure when, but the earliest would have been around 1999/2000.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 14, 2017)

trashpony said:


> This is a really long thread and so someone may have already mentioned it but I was just looking for photos of the building before the fire and it appears as a case study on Construction Enquirer, WITT UK Group (who make smoke control products), Studio E architects, Harley Facades (I know they have been talked about on the thread) and of course Rydon. All of them have taken the relevant pages down except for Rydon. Bunch of fucking cowards



Lawyer's advice no doubt. I assume they'll also have been told not to express sympathy, offer to help or do anything else which could be construed as an admission of culpability.

e2a: I got this insider knowledge from watching TV shows with lawyers in them.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

If we were reading about this in history books about Victorian London it would be harrowing. The fact that is happening in 21st century London is unbelievable! Haven't seen news all say, but watching it now is cultivating all sorts  of emotions, and none of them desirable.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 14, 2017)

Firefighters and medics, I want to buy the fucking lot of them a massive amount of pints. Can't imagine having to charge into something like this as your job, fair play to the buggers.


Whoevers responsible for this absolute shit show of a catastrophe needs to be sued until they bleed and thrown in the deepest darkest nick we can find.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> New Orleans superdome maybe not the best example here. Read up on it, it's an excellent case study in how not to deal with evacuees from a disaster area.


I was thinking more of the concept!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 14, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> _Did you kill Grenfell towers_



Nope, but the police killed Liddle Towers.


----------



## Cid (Jun 14, 2017)

I had a quick chat with my mum earlier (recently retired architect), she was pretty damning about the regs on this sort of thing. Outdated, poorly inspected. She though it might be EPS insulation, I said surely they'd spec PIR or similar. She said they probably should, but they probably can spec EPS, and it's a fuck of a lot cheaper, so they would. With fire travelling up ventilation gaps that are kind of necessary in any system.


----------



## JTG (Jun 14, 2017)

Realise this has probably been asked/answered already today but anyone with a link to a verified fundraiser? There's loads but you know...


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

OMG, is that image on the BBC News now really live? Half the windows are still blazing!


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 14, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Stay mad mate.



its cry or kick off here Wilf.so angry at this. so fucking angry


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Jun 14, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Lawyer's advice no doubt. I assume they'll also have been told not to express sympathy, offer to help or do anything else which could be construed as an admission of culpability.
> 
> e2a: I got this insider knowledge from watching TV shows with lawyers in them.


The horse has bolted as far as any legal liability goes. I reckon it's more likely to be on the advice of the crisis comms consultants that they hired in a panic this morning - the boasts about the great job that they did, etc, wouldn't look great.


----------



## Sparkle Motion (Jun 14, 2017)

campanula said:


> So a Beko fridge...or a Whirlpool washer - both articles have had recalls for substandard or dangerous manufacturing...and yet, they carry on producing cheap dangerous crap, seemingly without sanction.


I heard a faulty TV on one programme. So could have been literally anything.  Truth is, we are still in the speculation stage. Just cannot believe such a thing could happen. Lots of flat dwellers will be sleeping uneasily tonight.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> OMG, is that image on the BBC News now really live? Half the windows are still blazing!


Looks like it:


----------



## binka (Jun 14, 2017)

I think I first read about the triangle factory fire about 15 years ago and it has stuck with me since then, thinking of the horror that the victims must have been going through as they realised no one was going to save them. A century later and what's really changed? A total disregard for the lives of poor people from those who could do something about it if they wanted to. Anger doesn't even come close.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 14, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> [UPDATED]
> 
> Crowdfunders currently running:
> 
> ...



Totted up, and there's already around £854,000 donated across just those twelve crowdfunders.


----------



## where to (Jun 14, 2017)

two absolute red lines going forward have to be a full public enquiry, and the rehousing of all survivors in the immediate vicinity for as long as they wish to live there.


----------



## eoin_k (Jun 14, 2017)

trashpony said:


> This is a really long thread and so someone may have already mentioned it but I was just looking for photos of the building before the fire and it appears as a case study on Construction Enquirer, WITT UK Group (who make smoke control products), Studio E architects, Harley Facades (I know they have been talked about on the thread) and of course Rydon. All of them have taken the relevant pages down except for Rydon. Bunch of fucking cowards


Rydon only put it back up after taking it down initially, possibly, because someone had already uploaded it to internet archive and then called them out for it.


----------



## Sparkle Motion (Jun 14, 2017)

Guess it won't be done until every combustible thing has gone up. I did wonder at those random hoses spraying ineffectually  (note, I know literally nothing about firefighting).


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 14, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Totted up, and there's already around £854,000 donated across just those twelve crowdfunders.



How does that work? How to be sure the ones started by individuals will end up being spent on the right stuff? I guess they have complete control of perhaps hundreds of thousands.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 14, 2017)

binka said:


> I think I first read about the triangle factory fire about 15 years ago and it has stuck with me since then, thinking of the horror that the victims must have been going through as they realised no one was going to save them. A century later and what's really changed? A total disregard for the lives of poor people from those who could do something about it if they wanted to. Anger doesn't even come close.


I thought of the triangle fire for exactly the same reasons.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 14, 2017)

where to said:


> two absolute red lines going forward have to be a full public enquiry, and the rehousing of all survivors in the immediate vicinity for as long as they wish to live there.




Literally not enough housing stock to do so, social housing already creaking at the seams


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 14, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> How does that work? How to be sure the ones started by individuals will end up being spent on the right stuff? I guess they have complete control of perhaps hundreds of thousands.


Not necessarily. If you have a Just Giving page, you don't get access to the money, it goes directly to a charity you nominate. I don't know what charity would administer such funds though, maybe local ones?


----------



## Ax^ (Jun 14, 2017)

where to said:


> two absolute red lines going forward have to be a full public enquiry, and the rehousing of all survivors in the immediate vicinity for as long as they wish to live there.



a 3rd no fucking ghoulish property enterprise will to repair and refit the block whilst offering apparent social fucking housing which is only affordable to people earning over 50 grand a fucking year

*shakes fist at sky*


----------



## A380 (Jun 14, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Looks like it:



They won't risk crews to save a building that's already lost and has no one left alive in it.The water going on it will be fixed ground monitors and robots on the aerial ladder platforms. Basically wait till it burns out.

Fire services' approach to risk assessment is:-

Fire fighters will take some risk to save saveable life,

Fire fighters will take little risk to save saveable property

Firefighters will not take any risk at all to try to save lives or property that are already lost.

Once it's out Local Authority civil engineers and LFB will make the structure safe then the cops will go in to do the body recovery with police and fire doing the investigation together.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 14, 2017)

Sparkle Motion said:


> Guess it won't be done until every combustible thing has gone up. I did wonder at those random hoses spraying ineffectually  (note, I know literally nothing about firefighting).


Some might have been water curtains to curtail smoke for reasons of visibility and to protect main fire fighting equipment from thermal load.


----------



## where to (Jun 14, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> Literally not enough housing stock to do so, social housing already creaking at the seams



they will have to find a way - new units, private rentals, whatever. they will also have to reuse the site for the highest possible standard of housing, council housing.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 14, 2017)

The fucking tower is still on fire.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 14, 2017)

where to said:


> they will have to find a way - new units, private rentals, whatever. they will also have to reuse the site for the highest possible standard of housing, council housing.


The thing is that they won't have to. They will just put these people on the list and they will resell this site, once the block has been demolished, to private cunt-hutch developers, like the rest of the area.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 14, 2017)

where to said:


> they will have to find a way - new units, private rentals, whatever. they will also have to reuse the site for the highest possible standard of housing, council housing.



Depressingly I'd expect something closer to insufficient compensation, a torturous application process for it, lots of arguing to get it and the land being either sold off or built on by a 'partner' developer who provide a few percent's worth of overpriced 'affordable' housing while old residents spend years trying to get back in any way at all.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

where to said:


> they will have to find a way - new units, private rentals, whatever. they will also have to reuse the site for the highest possible standard of housing, council housing.



Really? That'd be nice, but it's not going to happen, is it?


----------



## agricola (Jun 14, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> Literally not enough housing stock to do so, social housing already creaking at the seams



There are loads of new developments going up in and around central London at present, one or two of them should be compulsorily purchased to cope with this unexpected and unprecedented demand.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 14, 2017)

I'm not quite sure how you can possibly make a post-war tower block safe for investigation/body recovery when it's still burning internally after nearly 24 hours since it started. It'd be so unstable by now.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 14, 2017)

trashpony there's a number of pre-fire pictures on Google maps, if that helps?


----------



## teqniq (Jun 14, 2017)

> The absence of the council on the street as hundreds of families were homeless was concerning, said Judith Bakeman, a Labour councillor at Kensington and Chelsea. “There’s been so many cuts, there aren’t enough people to deal with this.”
> 
> Referring to Notting Hill Methodist church’s Rev Mike Long, she said: “Mike has been running this centre giving people food and water all day and not a single person from the council has been here.”
> 
> As we spoke, a volunteer from the Harrow Club and Latimer AP Academy came to tell the councillor she had 138 beds available. He said that no one official had been to the centre and he didn’t know what to do with that information.



London fire: Twelve confirmed dead but police expect further fatalities after tower block blaze – latest updates


----------



## where to (Jun 14, 2017)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The thing is that they won't have to. They will just put these people on the list and they will resell this site, once the block has been demolished, to private cunt-hutch developers, like the rest of the area.



after what's happened, the gravity of it, i'd have ve thought that would be politically unthinkable. i don't live in London though, sounds like i'm wildly out of touch.


----------



## Cloo (Jun 14, 2017)

Ax^ said:


> a 3rd no fucking ghoulish property enterprise will to repair and refit the block whilst offering apparent social fucking housing which is only affordable to people earning over 50 grand a fucking year
> 
> *shakes fist at sky*


Only fifty grand? In Kensington?

Btw, I'll bet Kensington has plenty of empty homes whose owners have never set foot in them and have no plans to. Not going to watch my clock for when they start offering them to homeless families to recover in.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 14, 2017)

teqniq said:


> London fire: Twelve confirmed dead but police expect further fatalities after tower block blaze – latest updates



To be honest I can understand the council struggling to deal with this, not just due to cuts but also the scale of it - no one's going to be trained to rehouse so many people immediately, or even to give them temporary care (clothes, food, a roof etc). Not seen any mention of anyone from any more central authority coming in either though and they should have the ability and the planning in place to be of use. Hope people are getting what support they need but also half an eye out for those 'lessons to be learned' that'll emerge in coming weeks and, as ever, be roundly ignored.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 14, 2017)

where to said:


> after what's happened, the gravity of it, i'd have ve thought that would be politically unthinkable. i don't live in London though, sounds like i'm wildly out of touch.



Wildly optimistic perhaps. The concession to the gravity of it will be a few speeches down the line about all the new 'affordable' units there are shouted over people pointing out that they can't afford them. If that, might just say everyone's moved on and nobody wants to live there any more. The ways to weasel out of any responsibility to the victims of this are endless if you're a big enough cunt.


----------



## Ax^ (Jun 14, 2017)

Cloo said:


> Only fifty grand? In Kensington?
> 
> Btw, I'll bet Kensington has plenty of empty homes whose owners have never set foot in them and have no plans to. Not going to watch my clock for when they start offering them to homeless families to recover in.



bit of an badly worded post, but really if its structurally sounds could see some shit cunt of a property developer move in and turn it into a regeneration block for  second home owners, investors and landlords whilst offering about 5 percent of the block in some sort of illusion of social house


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 14, 2017)

Ax^ said:


> but really if its structurally sounds could see some shit cunt of a property developer move in and turn it into a regeneration block



It'll be far from structurally sound after 24 hours, & still it glows like charcoal. I bet the gentrifiers are rubbing their hands together, job done.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Worse - she said "If there are any lessons to be learned they will be, and action will be taken," leaving open the possibility of doing fuck all. If there are lessons to be learned, FFS. And 8pm till she said anything.


Today cartoonist Ted Rall reposted this 2012 strip, saying it “showcases the boilerplate response after shootings...Used by Trump this AM and UPS this PM”.

 

Works pretty well for May today as well.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 14, 2017)

Woman interviewed on Newsnight did a brilliant truth to power job on Maitlis.
Top work, madam.


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Jun 14, 2017)

2hats said:


> Some might have been water curtains to curtail smoke for reasons of visibility and to protect main fire fighting equipment from thermal load.


Thanks for this explanation.

On C4 News earlier, a fire brigade rep was asked whether a helicopter could have dropped water on the roof. He made the point that a helicopter would only fan the flames. 

There's always a reason why the fire brigade do or don't do something and it's always surprising how little overlap there is between the common sense solution and effective fire fighting.


----------



## RD2003 (Jun 14, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Today cartoonist Ted Rall reposted this 2012 strip, saying it “showcases the boilerplate response after shootings...Used by Trump this AM and UPS this PM”.
> 
> View attachment 109362
> 
> Works pretty well for May today as well.


This is why I feel cynical about the official responses to the recent jihadist atrocities. The speeches are all on a tragedy template for whoever happens to be in power. The crowds responding in the expected way have more than a whiff of cold war eastern Europe about them, and I can't help but doubt how much of a reflection of the current mood of the country they are.


----------



## 8den (Jun 14, 2017)

1stly I've been off Urban all day and was dreading reading this thread to find out someone from this small, sometimes rough, but deeply caring web community had been lost. 

Newsnight is reporting that the new cladding that was put on recently was of a type that was less fire retardant that some others, and have been associated with several fires elsewhere.


----------



## mather (Jun 14, 2017)

Really awful news, terrible!

My hearts go out to all who have suffered from this and lost loved ones.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Jun 14, 2017)

I woke up raging. I am going to bed raging. 

I am so so sorry. 

I wish I could do/could have done something.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 14, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> Literally not enough housing stock to do so, social housing already creaking at the seams



RBKC is a rich borough and the government could pledge support if it wanted to.


----------



## trashpony (Jun 14, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> trashpony there's a number of pre-fire pictures on Google maps, if that helps?


Oh the pictures are still there. It's just the articles that have been nixed. I also suspect it's a combination of lawyers and PRs


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 14, 2017)

Cheap cladding, cheap platitudes, thoughts and prayers.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 14, 2017)

YouSir said:


> To be honest I can understand the council struggling to deal with this, not just due to cuts but also the scale of it - no one's going to be trained to rehouse so many people immediately, or even to give them temporary care (clothes, food, a roof etc). Not seen any mention of anyone from any more central authority coming in either though and they should have the ability and the planning in place to be of use. Hope people are getting what support they need but also half an eye out for those 'lessons to be learned' that'll emerge in coming weeks and, as ever, be roundly ignored.



Yes. Hundreds of suddenly homeless, distraught, penniless people would be impossible for even the best council to deal with, and this is a terrible council. They will definitely not be able to immediately rehouse people - they have nowhere to put them. Other councils will have to step in but that means displacing the residents.


----------



## Ted Striker (Jun 14, 2017)

agricola said:


> TBH lessons were learned after the Kings Cross fire, and the Underground is much safer as a result.



Kings Cross is the most appropriate comparison I can think of. A real generation life-changer. The problem is, with Kings X, we look back and think "how stupid, we let people smoke down on the tube". I fear there will be similar depressingly obvious lessons learned. Ridiculously so in 2017.

Fuck this has got to me


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 14, 2017)

8den said:


> Newsnight is reporting that the new cladding that was put on recently was of a type that was less fire retardant that some others, and have been associated with several fires elsewhere.



There's an interesting Twitter thread by _Newsnight_'s policy editor about the cladding issue:


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 14, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Yes. Hundreds of suddenly homeless, distraught, penniless people would be impossible for even the best council to deal with, and this is a terrible council. They will definitely not be able to immediately rehouse people - they have nowhere to put them. Other councils will have to step in but that means displacing the residents.



There was an official from Hammersmith on the telly earlier (I know, shit council, but not RBKC) saying that several other neighbouring NW London councils had already offered help - with the catch that there would need to be financial arrangements (but this is where the government could step in if they gave a fuck) - but hadn't heard anything back from K&C. Fucking useless.


----------



## 8den (Jun 14, 2017)

Map reveals shocking number of empty homes across London

There are over a 1,000 empty homes in the borough.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 14, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> There's an interesting Twitter thread by _Newsnight_'s policy editor about the cladding issue:



And Apps made quite clear who he thought responsible for not implementing the Lakanal coroners recommendations; Barwell.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 14, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> How does that work? How to be sure the ones started by individuals will end up being spent on the right stuff? I guess they have complete control of perhaps hundreds of thousands.


It's a fair point. One can make rudimentary checks of the appeal starter, and several began with Q&As where they explained who they were, where they were, their connection to the area, groups which could vouch for them in some way. Perhaps the biggest check is that this is being conducted very much in public.


----------



## ferrelhadley (Jun 14, 2017)




----------



## 2hats (Jun 14, 2017)

MAD-T-REX said:


> On C4 News earlier, a fire brigade rep was asked whether a helicopter could have dropped water on the roof. He made the point that a helicopter would only fan the flames.


Lot's of reasons for not firefighting tall buildings from aircraft. Visibility, strong down and up drafts, targeting seat of fire, structural damage from tons of water suddenly hitting the building, risk of knocking people off the building or injuring them in the process, fanning of flames, overall rate of delivery of water. A lot of outdoor airborne fire fighting in landscapes  is about control and building fire breaks/retardant zones rather than necessarily attacking the fire directly itself.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 15, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Justice for Grenfell Tower
> 
> “This Government, and many before it, have neglected council housing, and disregarded its tenants as if they were second class. Nationally and locally, politicians have subjected public housing to decades of systematic disinvestment – leaving properties in a state of disrepair, and open to privatisation. Regeneration, when it has come, has been for the benefit of developers and buy-to-let landlords, who profit from luxury flats built in place of affordable homes. Across London, regeneration has meant evictions, poor quality building work, and has left tenants with little influence over the future of their estates.
> 
> “The chronic underinvestment in council housing and contempt for tenants must stop. It is an outrage that in 21st Britain, authorities cannot be trusted to provide safe housing, and that people in council properties cannot put children safely to bed at night.


I spent the day watching the news about this fire in utter horror. This evening I went to a 'meet the contractors' meeting about major works to the block I live in. Where I learned that, after undertaking some remedial safety works and commissioning a structural survey, the local ALMO has decided to put out a contract which essentially puts the onus on the chosen contractor to determine the scope of what works are necessary. Jesus fucking wept. 

As a political response to what's happened I don't think this piece is at all adequate. (Even just taking things in terms of where we actually are today as opposed to where we might prefer to be). Underinvestment, the systematic attack on social housing, regeneration as an opportunity for corruption and 'aspirational' enrichment are all very real things, but the problems exposed by this fire aren't limited to them. Just as much of an issue are the various 'creative' attempts - some of them 'well meaning' - to address the problems they have caused. The consequences of arms length property management and cyclical administrative 'reorganization', in terms of the loss of basic knowledge about the buildings being managed, and the loss of a functional relationship with the hierarchies of different categories of tenants. The 'light touch' management of everything from major works contracts to fire regulation. In short virtually all fundamental aspects of how social housing is actually managed today. If that isn't also addressed then simply reversing the decline in investment in social housing, and treating tenants as 'first' rather than 'second' class ('first class' what ? clients ? 'stakeholders' ? mugs ?), won't make the level of catastrophic failure we've seen today any less likely.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 15, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> It's a fair point. One can make rudimentary checks of the appeal starter, and several began with Q&As where they explained who they were, where they were, their connection to the area, groups which could vouch for them in some way. Perhaps the biggest check is that this is being conducted very much in public.



I'm not donating until I see an appeal where I know the money will be going to the residents. I don't just mean the risk that some of those fundraisers might be fake, because odds are good that they're not, I mean that the residents will actually be allowed to have the money, and it won't go into a general charity pot or towards rebuilding or anything else. Only the residents. Then I definitely will donate.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 15, 2017)

scifisam said:


> I'm not donating until I see an appeal where I know the money will be going to the residents. I don't just mean the risk that some of those fundraisers might be fake, because odds are good that they're not, I mean that the residents will actually be allowed to have the money, and it won't go into a general charity pot or towards rebuilding or anything else. Only the residents. Then I definitely will donate.



I also think waiting to donate is useful because there's an amazing response at the moment but people will need support for weeks and months to come.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 15, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> I also think waiting to donate is useful because there's an amazing response at the moment but people will need support for weeks and months to come.



And years, possibly, depending on how optimistic you want to be about any right to return after rebuilding.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 15, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


>



He heckled the RB Kensington & Chelsea council leader Nick Paget-Brown later as well:

...Piers Thompson, a local campaigner, vented his fury at the Kensington and Chelsea council leader, Nicholas Paget-Brown, who arrived for an on-camera interview with the BBC in the shadow of the charred remains of the tower. He shouted: “Do you have blood on your hands, Paget-Brown?” The council leader did not respond.

Thompson said “Their social housing has been a catastrophe waiting to happen. Everyone here has lost someone. We want to see some justice for the victims.

“These guys [gesturing to the councillor] stand around with hubris and arrogance. They’ve built something which is more of a firetrap than it ever was before. It used to be a beautiful concrete building.”

Thompson said the council’s tenant management organisation was “not fit to run a bath”.

His wife, Tanya Thompson, who campaigns with her husband, said: “The breathtaking arrogance of the council – the refurbishment was appalling...”​
Locals’ anger and frustration spills out after Grenfell Tower fire


----------



## sheothebudworths (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I think updating the look of the building is of benefit to everyone in the area, especially the residents.  If you're trying to get planning permission you reach out to people likely to complain by telling them it will improve the area.



I think that's _all_ bollocks if you're a resident, tbh.
I was brought up on a council estate in central London that had a huge facelift, with some internal work but mostly lots of external work and years of disruption, with little attention paid to residents following consultation.
'Improving the area' essentially meant packing it full of shops, drawing people in. It was a shithole before  and it's not now but it's not _better_ for the people who LIVE there either - defo even more expensive - just prettier for other people to visit. They did install a better central heating system and new kitchens after 40 odd years but honestly, it wasn't about doing the _residents_ any favours.



nogojones said:


> From the Indy article above it seemed that the refurbishment was about asthetics for neighbouring private blocks and not about what the Grenfell residents wanted or were raising concerns about for years



This is what you have to listen to - what the people who _live_ there decide that they need.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 15, 2017)

K&C seem to have had little to no involvement in the relief efforts, if that's the right term. And look at this statement:

The borough of Kensington and Chelsea did not comment on claims its emergency response had been lacking. It said it had already “housed 44 families on commercial hotels” and would be working through the night to house people either in the Westway sports centre, where emergency accommodation for 300 people has been established, or in other hotels.

From here Locals’ anger and frustration spills out after Grenfell Tower fire Originally saw it on the mirror website but can't find it anywhere but here right now. 

Well done. 44 families. Out of hundreds. In hotels. Or probably "hotels." 

I wonder if there could be a campaign for compulsory purchase of some of the long-term empty homes, paid for out of the national purse because otherwise the council will go bankrupt and the council are not the only ones who've caused the problems with housing. I know people will be calling for council heads to roll and some probably should but the buck doesn't stop there.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 15, 2017)

scifisam said:


> K&C seem to have had little to no involvement in the relief efforts, if that's the right term. And look at this statement:
> 
> The borough of Kensington and Chelsea did not comment on claims its emergency response had been lacking. It said it had already “housed 44 families on commercial hotels” and would be working through the night to house people either in the Westway sports centre, where emergency accommodation for 300 people has been established, or in other hotels.
> 
> ...



What sort of housing stock is empty there? Reckon the owners would be in a position to block any movements towards compulsory purchase orders plus the council would probably look to sell whatever they could get on anyway. More viable in other boroughs maybe, if the money was there, hard to see that happening either though. I think it really needs a major and aggressive shift in London housing policy in general, a freeze on major private developments, legal action against any company that's failed to provide required social housing, fixed (and realistic) levels for affordable housing and a complete purge of (some) council's planning departments - corrupt as they are. Hard to see any of that happening quickly enough to support the people who're going to be struggling from today though.

Also 'hotels' is right, it's going to be shit for everyone, especially for families, who get pushed into the sort of accommodation that's likely to be offered. If the donation levels from the public stay high that's probably a better hope for some than waiting on any help from the government, hopefully a long term fund will appear soon. People will need something whatever else can be done to bring real change.


----------



## xenon (Jun 15, 2017)

Just fucking sickening.  The more you read about this,  The  angrier you get.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 15, 2017)

Apologies if already posted but here's documentation on what the residents were saying earlier, that the cladding was partly chosen


> so that the council could ensure the "living conditions of those living near the development" were "suitably protected".


Obscenity upon obscenity.
Grenfell Tower was covered in material to make it look better. That’s being blamed for multiple deaths


----------



## Mab (Jun 15, 2017)

Mind-numbing; an absolute massive tragedy. The shock many people are in including children must be massive. I am so sorry for you all.
*Love from Canada❤️*


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jun 15, 2017)

Today prog just saying it's still smoking and emergency services reached 'the top floor'. Not mentioned the roof  Someone earlier in the thread said something about bodies on the roof, and Today saying they 'know' death toll is going to rise.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 15, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> There's an interesting Twitter thread by _Newsnight_'s policy editor about the cladding issue:




Worth noting on that video that the fire appears to be contained laterally and doesn't noticeably bridge to the building interior. That's the fire barriers working. They didn't at Grenfall, something went very seriously wrong.

(Note that the smoke appears to rise almost vertically to begin with, so it may not have been windy - not the case in London where there were moderate winds which may have pushed flames along the building, and as mentioned before due to the warm weather it's likely windows were open, with curtains etc.)


----------



## phillm (Jun 15, 2017)

where to said:


> two absolute red lines going forward have to be a full public enquiry, and the rehousing of all survivors in the immediate vicinity for as long as they wish to live there.



There are literally thousands of empty new build apartments all over London in huge numbers (I have read something like 60,000) waiting to be bought most probably by overseas investors as a place to 'stash their cash' . So there is no shortage of housing. It won't happen of course , but the arguement can be made - that there is crippling ,  acute need by suffering shell shocked survivors , an outpouring of anger and empathy for their plight and a humanly simple solution to their immediate needs. The fault lines of the venality and greed of Capital have never been so brutally and nakedly exposed in 21st century Britain as they are today - and a tsunami of anger is starting to hit this goverment and all past ones whose grubby , greedy fingerprints are all over this obscene crime scene.


----------



## BigTom (Jun 15, 2017)

YouSir said:


> What sort of housing stock is empty there? Reckon the owners would be in a position to block any movements towards compulsory purchase orders plus the council would probably look to sell whatever they could get on anyway. More viable in other boroughs maybe, if the money was there, hard to see that happening either though. I think it really needs a major and aggressive shift in London housing policy in general, a freeze on major private developments, legal action against any company that's failed to provide required social housing, fixed (and realistic) levels for affordable housing and a complete purge of (some) council's planning departments - corrupt as they are. Hard to see any of that happening quickly enough to support the people who're going to be struggling from today though.
> 
> Also 'hotels' is right, it's going to be shit for everyone, especially for families, who get pushed into the sort of accommodation that's likely to be offered. If the donation levels from the public stay high that's probably a better hope for some than waiting on any help from the government, hopefully a long term fund will appear soon. People will need something whatever else can be done to bring real change.



Squatting residential properties is illegal now but if there were ever a situation where squatters would have public support it would be the residents here.


----------



## Dandred (Jun 15, 2017)




----------



## Steel Icarus (Jun 15, 2017)

The homeless families should be put in five star hotels and driven wherever they want by limos paid for by the government.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 15, 2017)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

S☼I said:


> The homeless families should be put in five star hotels and driven wherever they want by limos paid for by the government. carried in sedan chairs by government ministers of their choice


C4U


----------



## existentialist (Jun 15, 2017)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 109379


Who is this crass oaf?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Who is this crass oaf?


You're very restrained today


----------



## brogdale (Jun 15, 2017)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 109379


The actual state of this; FFS.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

scifisam said:


> K&C seem to have had little to no involvement in the relief efforts, if that's the right term. And look at this statement:
> 
> The borough of Kensington and Chelsea did not comment on claims its emergency response had been lacking. It said it had already “housed 44 families on commercial hotels” and would be working through the night to house people either in the Westway sports centre, where emergency accommodation for 300 people has been established, or in other hotels.
> 
> ...


May not be 44 families out of hundreds, but 44 families out of fewer than a hundred


----------



## Badgers (Jun 15, 2017)

brogdale said:


> The actual state of this; FFS.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Time perhaps for the angelic upstarts to reform and release a new single, the murder of grenfell tower


----------



## teqniq (Jun 15, 2017)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 109379


Jesus I suppose you have seen some more of her tweets? Prime tolling territory imo.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 109381


There is no need for la robinson to live anywhere


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Jesus I suppose you have seen some more of her tweets? Prime tolling territory imo.


There is an element of fun in tolling absent from robinson's cruel trolling.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 15, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Jesus I suppose you have seen some more of her tweets? Prime tolling territory imo.



It's a troll account operated by a bloke from Scotland


----------



## existentialist (Jun 15, 2017)

brogdale said:


> The actual state of this; FFS.


Looking at her Twitter feed, I think it's supposed to be an attempt to be funny.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 15, 2017)

@AP BREAKING: London fire commissioner says authorities 'genuinely don't know' how many victims died in building blaze.


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Jun 15, 2017)

Edit: Point already made.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 15, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Looking at her Twitter feed, I think it's supposed to be an attempt to be funny.


Failed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

MAD-T-REX said:


> This may sound grim, and I am not defending the council, but there probably aren't hundreds of surviving families to accommodate.


Not from 125 flats anyway, suspect 44 may be the major part of surviving families


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jun 15, 2017)

Cid said:


> Can you have a kitchen fire alarm, then a separate fire alarm in a hallway? I _think_ that's how it works in my flat. Certainly the one in the kitchen looks pretty conventional, while the one in the hall looks quite industrial and linked in. I remember as a student we had them in each room. Every fucking night, I mean it's like they thought their no smoking signs would work or something.



Standard practice is to fit heat detectors in kitchens rather than smoke detectors.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 15, 2017)

David lammy is very angry



> This is the richest borough in our country treating its citizens in this way and we should call it what it is. It is corporate manslaughter. That’s what it is. And there should be arrests made, frankly. It is an outrage.
> 
> Many of use across the country have been caught up in an election knocking on housing estate doors, travelling up to the top floors of tower blocks, and we know as politicians that the conditions in this country are unacceptable.
> 
> We build buildings in the 70s. Those 70s buildings, many of them should be demolished. They have not got easy fire escapes. They have got no sprinklers. It is totally, totally unacceptable in Britain that this is allowed to happen and that people lose their lives in this way. People should be held to account.



London fire: 12 confirmed dead but police expect further fatalities after tower block blaze – latest updates

I think he has a very strong point. this should be treated as a crime and the contractors, relevant council officials and building management should be arrested before any hard drives get binned and documents shredded.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 15, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> David lammy is very angry
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And that's good, but it's only a start. It cannot be allowed, should that ever happen, for the rest of the tories (and labour) to get away with this. Their policies have caused this, especially the Tories who sat on housing reports, cut services, and ran the council, and accelarated gentrification. If a few fatcats in council get punished it will only be at the expense of the culpability of the rest.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> David lammy is very angry
> 
> 
> 
> ...


if the shredders weren't working overtime yesterday i would be somewhat bemused.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 15, 2017)

Not sure whether this has been posted, but it sure does explain appliances failing - not the quality of appliances posted about earlier in the thread:

GRENFELL TOWER – FROM BAD TO WORSE

Based on the above, Lammy is right, corporate manslaughter.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 15, 2017)

Government criticised for abandoning requirement for new schools to install fire sprinklers

and from yesterday, note the quote:


----------



## brogdale (Jun 15, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> Government criticised for abandoning requirement for new schools to install fire sprinklers
> 
> and from yesterday, note the quote:


Blood on their hands; the lot of them.
Cunts.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

scum.

What is a life worth vs the impact on profitability ?


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

Good article here
A Very Political Tragedy


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Not sure whether this has been posted, but it sure does explain appliances failing - not the quality of appliances posted about earlier in the thread:
> 
> GRENFELL TOWER – FROM BAD TO WORSE
> 
> Based on the above, Lammy is right, corporate manslaughter.



That's interesting. I was about to post that I thought, if it was provable at all, criminal liability would probably fall on the subcontractor that installed it. But that raises further questions of negligence...


----------



## Brainaddict (Jun 15, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> David lammy is very angry
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He may be right that people should be arrested, but tbh it's still a bit early to tell . For instance, if the cladding turns out to be what spread the fire, that doesn't mean the council is culpable, as it appears to conform to existing standards. The standards may be wrong, or contractors may have substituted substandard materials.

A lot of it is quieter stuff that needs to be done too - it won't make for dramatic scenes, but the TMO clearly needs to be restructured to be more responsive to residents. No-one will get arrested for a bad organisational structure, but this kind of change is as important as courtroom scenes imo.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 15, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> David lammy is very angry



He may be right about demolitions but most tenants will be extremely wary of that because they assume, rightly, that any new developments will have minimal to no social housing and they will never return.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 15, 2017)

Does anyone know if there's a properly reliable place for donations yet? Anything that'll go direct to residents?


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

YouSir said:


> Does anyone know if there's a properly reliable place for donations yet? Anything that'll go direct to residents?



Justgiving seem to have set up a page specifically for it.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 15, 2017)

Cid said:


> Justgiving seem to have set up a page specifically for it.



They take their fee of course, they profit a lot from disasters like this.


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

in time there'll probably be need for money towards class action massive legal fees.


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> They take their fee of course, they profit a lot from disasters like this.



True.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 15, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> I spent the day watching the news about this fire in utter horror. This evening I went to a 'meet the contractors' meeting about major works to the block I live in. Where I learned that, after undertaking some remedial safety works and commissioning a structural survey, the local ALMO has decided to put out a contract which essentially puts the onus on the chosen contractor to determine the scope of what works are necessary. Jesus fucking wept.
> 
> As a political response to what's happened I don't think this piece is at all adequate. (Even just taking things in terms of where we actually are today as opposed to where we might prefer to be). Underinvestment, the systematic attack on social housing, regeneration as an opportunity for corruption and 'aspirational' enrichment are all very real things, but the problems exposed by this fire aren't limited to them. Just as much of an issue are the various 'creative' attempts - some of them 'well meaning' - to address the problems they have caused. The consequences of arms length property management and cyclical administrative 'reorganization', in terms of the loss of basic knowledge about the buildings being managed, and the loss of a functional relationship with the hierarchies of different categories of tenants. The 'light touch' management of everything from major works contracts to fire regulation. In short virtually all fundamental aspects of how social housing is actually managed today. If that isn't also addressed then simply reversing the decline in investment in social housing, and treating tenants as 'first' rather than 'second' class ('first class' what ? clients ? 'stakeholders' ? mugs ?), won't make the level of catastrophic failure we've seen today any less likely.


It's pretty good for a first quick attempt at getting what you're suggesting needs to be talked about into public dialogue.


----------



## editor (Jun 15, 2017)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Standard practice is to fit heat detectors in kitchens rather than smoke detectors.


Lambeth fitted smoke and heat detectors recently in my block. They kept firing off randomly, day and night, so most people unplugged them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

bimble said:


> in time there'll probably be need for money towards class action massive legal fees.


yeh? based on what? what's rather more likely, i suggest, is that there will be a test case and, assuming that wins, a rather larger but still not class action for damages. this may well be on a 'no win no fee' basis. less money needed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> David lammy is very angry


he is full of froth


----------



## mwgdrwg (Jun 15, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> They take their fee of course, they profit a lot from disasters like this.



5% - How our fees work - and what we do for it

I have no qualms about using it though, as I would have no other way of helping.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

May is on site, the fucking Ghoul


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> May is on site, the fucking Ghoul


she gains psychick energy from visiting sites of death


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

She's probably just eyeing it up as a potential development opportunity.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

strange picture to have chosen


----------



## bendeus (Jun 15, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> May is on site, the fucking Ghoul


Didn't meet residents. Wonder why?


----------



## Indeliblelink (Jun 15, 2017)

Death toll now raised to 17.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

Hopefully the vile  deposed Victoria Borthwick will be dragged into this horrendous scandal and made to answer questions - she was made well aware of concerns by residents about the state of the accommodation. Well aware


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

bendeus said:


> Didn't meet residents. Wonder why?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Indeliblelink said:


> Death toll now raised to 17.


won't stop there


----------



## killer b (Jun 15, 2017)

I have no doubt that the council, housing assoc and contractors bear a great deal of responsibility for this, and should swing for it: however, when this is revealed, we need to ensure the blame doesn’t remain with these low hanging fruits, as while they may have cut corners in ways which resulted in a massive loss of life, they did so in a regulatory and funding environment that encourages cutting corners, and only generally punishes bad practice after rare and catastrophic failures such as this. 

I'm pleased to note that thus far the fingers are pointing firmly towards the government. Make sure they stay pointing that way, even once the more local failures start to be revealed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

bendeus said:


> Didn't meet residents. Wonder why?



a massive self-inflicted fail. she could have shown she had some sort of people skills: but no, she's shown again she doesn't give a fuck about the hoi polloi


----------



## killer b (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 109390
> a massive self-inflicted fail. she could have shown she had some sort of people skills: but no, she's shown again she doesn't give a fuck about the oi polloi


she couldn't, really. No-one from that tower will have anything but rage towards her today.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

killer b said:


> she couldn't, really. No-one from that tower will have anything but rage towards her today.


it would have been better for her if she'd gone to a stage-managed photo op in a hospital, if she had to go at all, now she'll have alienated everyone in north kensington and a lot of people further afield because of her callous and stupid half-arsed appearance


----------



## spitfire (Jun 15, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Woman interviewed on Newsnight did a brilliant truth to power job on Maitlis.
> Top work, madam.



Sorry for twitter link but I don't know how to get the video off any other way.


----------



## kebabking (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> won't stop there



No, I rather doubt it will either - number of people living there, minus the number we can see who got out, plus the ferocity and geography of the fire, and I'm afraid we'll get to 100+ in no time at all.

200 wouldn't surprise me.

If people wish to make a financial donation can I recommend the British Red Cross - they are on scene and will be so for the long term.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

I am surprised she didn't arrive in an armoured car with a full team of tooled up bodyguards - seeing as pretty much everyone from the firemen & coppers, to the victims of this tragedy & the local residents would like to see her blood on the street


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 109388
> strange picture to have chosen



Donating whose money?


----------



## sim667 (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 109390
> a massive self-inflicted fail. she could have shown she had some sort of people skills: but no, she's shown again she doesn't give a fuck about the hoi polloi


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 109388
> strange picture to have chosen




How about donating a palace.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

sim667 said:


>



tell you what, i'll phone the met and fire lots and say i'm popping down for a private visit and could they accommodate me. do you suppose they could say no after allowing someone else to pay a private visit?

private visit my arse


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 15, 2017)

She'd have been slated whatever she did, to be fair.  Either trying to capitalise on the incident or hiding like a coward.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> She'd have been slated whatever she did, to be fair.  Either trying to capitalise on the incident or hiding like a coward.


yeh and now she has the worst of both worlds: trying to capitalise on the incident while hiding like a coward


----------



## existentialist (Jun 15, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> She'd have been slated whatever she did, to be fair.  Either trying to capitalise on the incident or hiding like a coward.


And justifiably so. If all she gets is "slated", perhaps she could consider herself the beneficiary of stratospheric levels of tolerance, because what she really deserves is to be strung up.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 15, 2017)

A bit of a strange question, but this talk about the refurbishment being for insulation purposes and therefore to reduce residents' bills - I read just now that it has a communal heating system. How does this work in terms of billing? Specifically: is there a direct/nearly direct relationship between energy use and the consumer bills, or is the landlord pocketing the energy savings from this work?


----------



## bendeus (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> it would have been better for her if she'd gone to a stage-managed photo op in a hospital, if she had to go at all, now she'll have alienated everyone in north kensington and a lot of people further afield because of her callous and stupid half-arsed appearance


This. I can't imagine what her chief of staff was thinking, especially given her total disconnect during the GE campaign, oh....... wait a minute her chief of staff is Gavin Barwell


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 15, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> She'd have been slated whatever she did, to be fair.  Either trying to capitalise on the incident or hiding like a coward.



She could have done something useful. First order of business would be to sack Gavin Barwell with immediate effect.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 15, 2017)

bendeus said:


> This. I can't imagine what her chief of staff was thinking, especially given her total disconnect during the GE campaign, oh....... wait a minute her chief of staff is Gavin Barwell


And she's not known for listening to advice in any case...


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 15, 2017)

mauvais said:


> A bit of a strange question, but this talk about the refurbishment being for insulation purposes and therefore to reduce residents' bills - I read just now that it has a communal heating system. How does this work in terms of billing? Specifically: is there a direct/nearly direct relationship between energy use and the consumer bills, or is the landlord pocketing the energy savings from this work?



If it's like my place, you have a heat exchanger in place of a boiler, and you're metered on that (presumably on the amount of hot water flowing through it). Tenants will pay for it.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 15, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> She could have done something useful. First order of business would be to sack Gavin Barwell with immediate effect.



Or to arrange funding for immediate temporary accommodation, or start working to open up housing stock in the borough for residents, or guarantee funding for a rebuild, or alter legislation to allow councils to do it themselves, or a million other things that the useless fuck will completely avoid by saying 'lessons will be learned'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

YouSir said:


> Or to arrange funding for immediate temporary accommodation, or start working to open up housing stock in the borough for residents, or guarantee funding for a rebuild, or alter legislation to allow councils to do it themselves, or a million other things that the useless fuck will completely avoid by saying 'lessons will be learned'.


she couldn't learn a times table


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 15, 2017)

Dont agree with Lammy wrt to demolishing tower blocs. they work fine when they are properly maintained. I lived in one for 8 years - and i was very happy. 
but police definitely do need to be seizing documents and hard drives like now.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 15, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> She could have done something useful. First order of business would be to sack Gavin Barwell with immediate effect.



And the 72 still serving MP's who are private fucking landlords, get rid of the fucking lot of em. Parasitic cunts!


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 109388
> strange picture to have chosen



Nice of them to return some of our money.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 15, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> How about donating a palace.



Yeah, I think they might have a few spare bedrooms. 

Anyone know if residents from neighbouring buildings have been allowed to return home yet?


----------



## Wilf (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 109390
> a massive self-inflicted fail. she could have shown she had some sort of people skills: but no, she's shown again she doesn't give a fuck about the hoi polloi


Presume she didn't bring her chief of staff with her.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 15, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Yeah, I think they might have a few spare bedrooms.
> 
> Anyone know if residents from neighbouring buildings have been allowed to return home yet?



No idea but can't be safe until a proper check has been carried out can it? Know nothing about engineering but having the burnt out wreck of a massive building within collapsing distance of other homes can't be good.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 15, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Presume she didn't bring her chief of staff with her.


He's busy shopping for really strong, fuck-off huge magnets.


----------



## likesfish (Jun 15, 2017)

the housing management team probably didn't mean to turn the block into a death trap but Tory's you never can tell .
  The chances are they certainly didn't have the skill or experience not to have the construction companys take the piss lawyers who work for councils vs commercial lawyers no chance really add cost cutting to the bare minimum and you've got a disaster waiting to happen.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

I would be quote happy in this exceptional case, to adopt ex LibDem prophet, Tim Farrons, scripture orientated outlook.

An eye for an eye, starting with every one of those Tory landlords and working up the chain of command from there


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> Dont agree with Lammy wrt to demolishing tower blocs. they work fine when they are properly maintained. I lived in one for 8 years - and i was very happy.
> but police definitely do need to be seizing documents and hard drives like now.



They're getting old now (well, the older ones are), and were constructed to different standards. I'd say there at least needs to be a major review of existing tower blocks.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

killer b said:


> I have no doubt that the council, housing assoc and contractors bear a great deal of responsibility for this, and should swing for it: however, when this is revealed, we need to ensure the blame doesn’t remain with these low hanging fruits, as while they may have cut corners in ways which resulted in a massive loss of life, they did so in a regulatory and funding environment that encourages cutting corners, and only generally punishes bad practice after rare and catastrophic failures such as this.
> 
> I'm pleased to note that thus far the fingers are pointing firmly towards the government. Make sure they stay pointing that way, even once the more local failures start to be revealed.



I think this is exactly spot on.

There is clearly going to be a lot of finger pointing going on the next few weeks and months and the various different companies / organisations involved will be used as a shield by the government.  Whatever the cause of the fire is deemed to be the wider picture of this has come to be should absolutely be the key issue.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 15, 2017)

YouSir said:


> No idea but can't be safe until a proper check has been carried out can it? Know nothing about engineering but having the burnt out wreck of a massive building within collapsing distance of other homes can't be good.


If the core is deemed stable (enough) then they will probably be installing (or about to install) props, gradually from lower floors upwards, to reinforce and redistribute load. Even so, material on the periphery will be at risk of breaking away.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 15, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> Dont agree with Lammy wrt to demolishing tower blocs. they work fine when they are properly maintained. I lived in one for 8 years - and i was very happy.
> but police definitely do need to be seizing documents and hard drives like now.




Tower blocks work fine but there is a tendency to a) not maintain them and b) cut costs when building them along with c) dump and forget the tenants of the blocks and slowly make living conditions unpleasant before flogging the land for a mint or kicking them all out when law and order breaks down as a result (which is basically a) but, eh)


Fire escapes and sprinkler systems are really needed in these larger blocks though, and not stuffing them with combustible cladding...


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 15, 2017)

Interesting exert from the Metro: Number of people confirmed dead in Grenfell Tower fire rises to 17


> Rydon, the firm that carried out the refurbishment work, said the project ‘met all required building regulations’, in its latest statement following the fire.
> 
> But a line stating the project had met all *‘fire regulation and health and safety standards’*, which was included in an earlier release, had disappeared.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 15, 2017)

The surviving residents of The Grenfell Tower horror should be rehoused immediately.

A government that spends £375m refurbing Buckingham Palace can afford it.

A government that claims to be capable of conducting Brexit negotiations can organise it.

Every hour this does not happen underlines how incapable they are and how little they care in the starkest human terms.

WorkingClassLivesMatter


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> Dont agree with Lammy wrt to demolishing tower blocs. they work fine when they are properly maintained. I lived in one for 8 years - and i was very happy.
> but police definitely do need to be seizing documents and hard drives like now.



I'm not keen on them tbh.  I written before on this site that they are a fire hazard and the best you can do is mitigate that.  I suppose its theoretically possible to add fire additional fire escapes but then you'd have to cover one side of the building in metal and that's assuming the substrate of the building could even take the weight if it.  

From an energy point of view they are crap as well, they piss energy.  They really are not fit for purpose any more.  I've said all along that they should be knocked down and replaced and the existing tenants all rehoused in the new block.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 15, 2017)

Here's a statement of the obvious: over the next weeks and indeed years as this develops through reviews and inquiries, the tories are going to try and get it running down separate tracks. One will be whether 'lessons were learned', previous disasters at home and abroad, regulations and, to some extent, management systems (without ever getting into the political project that lead to arms length management and the like).  The other which they will do their damnedest to keep separate will be social cleansing, the housing of the poor, the relationship to the surrounding affluent housing - and the fucking contempt the people in this block were met with.  They'll hang their heads for a day or two on that, but even within a week they'll pushing out the propaganda on the modernisation of the housing stock, how much as been spent etc.

Usually, governments are very good at managing these things, making sure heads only roll down the foodchain. It's our job to stop the cunts doing it this time.  This is going to be massive.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 15, 2017)

I'm trying to remember if it was May as hom/sec who made the comment 'living in London is a privilege not a right'

searched for that with her name attatched and got nowhere but 'some results removed blah blah'. Maybe it was some other tory. It sounds like the sort of shit rees-mogg would come out with...


----------



## Wilf (Jun 15, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> The surviving residents of The Grenfell Tower horror should be rehoused immediately.
> 
> A government that spends £375m refurbing Buckingham Palace can afford it.
> 
> ...


They are also planning on spending £7bn on the palace of Westminster. £7bn on their own fucking office.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

Its was westmister councillor glanz IIRC, in relation to the provision of social housing DotCommunist

eta


24housing » News » Social housing in central London ‘a privilege, not a right’
is this is ?


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 15, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Here's a statement of the obvious: over the next weeks and indeed years as this develops through reviews and inquiries, the tories are going to try and get it running down separate tracks. One will be whether 'lessons were learned', previous disasters at home and abroad, regulations and, to some extent, management systems (without ever getting into the political project that lead to arms length management and the like).  The other which they will do their damnedest to keep separate will be social cleansing, the housing of the poor, the relationship to the surrounding affluent housing - and the fucking contempt the people in this block were met with.  They'll hang their heads for a day or two on that, but even within a week they'll pushing out the propaganda on the modernisation of the housing stock, how much as been spent etc.
> 
> Usually, governments are very good at managing these things, making sure heads only roll down the foodchain. It's our job to stop the cunts doing it this time.  This is going to be massive.


This the one thing, the thing that w/c londoners can all be on board with - it has to be. Ian Bone was right onto something with the poor doors stuff.


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I think this is exactly spot on.
> 
> There is clearly going to be a lot of finger pointing going on the next few weeks and months and the various different companies / organisations involved will be used as a shield by the government.  Whatever the cause of the fire is deemed to be the wider picture of this has come to be should absolutely be the key issue.



I noticed this morning that the daily mail has already started with an effort to place the blame for this at the door of the man who owned the company that installed the cladding. They went with pictures of his house in surrey, him and his wife on exotic holidays etc.
But the commentators, even there, aren't buying that attempt to distract from the bigger picture.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

,


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 15, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> ,


cheers. I thought it had come from someone further up the foodchain, but this looks like it.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

it is from the very bottom of the foodchain.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 15, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> it is from the very bottom of the foodchain.


root and branch


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> Fire escapes and sprinkler systems are really needed in these larger blocks though, and not stuffing them with combustible cladding...



Sprinklers yes.  The cladding is considered non-combustible.  Whilst it was the cheaper core of the panel it still had a flame retardant property in it.  I've been having a good dig on the website and the lowest fire rated product I can find is still class b which is pretty good and absolutely should not be contributing to the spread of flames.  I wrote extensively yesterday about the potential of the cavity behind the cladding to create a chimney and I still think this is going to be a huge contributory factor.  I'm also getting the sinking feeling that the testing and regulatory system is not as good as is the industry thinks it is.

I was thinking a lot about this last night, trying to get my head around what has happened from a construction perspective. The more I think about it the more I think something was going on internally, there has to have been.  There are several reports of exposed gas risers internally and boilers mounted in stupid places.  Something was fueling this fire, the cladding may well have been one cause of spread but there is something else happening.

The pictures are astonishing, how can every floor both internally and externally be going up with such ferocity in such a short period of time?  When you look at other fires where the cladding has been a contributory factor the damage is nowhere near as bad.  The building has gone up like its made of tinder, everything has burnt apart from the original concrete structure.


----------



## killer b (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Sprinklers yes.  The cladding is considered non-combustible.  Whilst it was the cheaper core of the panel it still had a flame retardant property in it.  I've been having a good dig on the website and the lowest fire rated product I can find is still class b which is pretty good and absolutely should not be contributing to the spread of flames.  I wrote extensively yesterday about the potential of the cavity behind the cladding to create a chimney and I still think this is going to be a huge contributory factor.  I'm also getting the sinking feeling that the testing and regulatory system is not as good as is the industry thinks it is.
> 
> I was thinking a lot about this last night, trying to get my head around what has happened from a construction perspective. The more I think about it the more I think something was going on internally, there has to have been.  There are several reports of exposed gas risers internally and boilers mounted in stupid places.  Something was fueling this fire, the cladding may well have been one cause of spread but there is something else happening.
> 
> The pictures are astonishing, how can every floor both internally and externally be going up with such ferocity in such a short period of time?  When you look at other fires where the cladding has been a contributory factor the damage is nowhere near as bad.  The building has gone up like its made of tinder, everything has burnt apart from the original concrete structure.


Sure I read something about a burst gas main complicating things earlier?


----------



## emanymton (Jun 15, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> Interesting exert from the Metro: Number of people confirmed dead in Grenfell Tower fire rises to 17


Meaning someone is frantically double checking the plans against the regulations to make sure they did.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 15, 2017)




----------



## squirrelp (Jun 15, 2017)

As I understand it, meeting fire regulations legally is not simply a box-ticking exercise as buildings have unique circumstances and you have to do whatever is reasonably possible to mitigate the risk. It is inflexible to simply dictate a minimum standard across each aspect, instead an overall responsibility is charged and if there is an unsolvable weakness in one area you are obliged to make up for it with improved standards elsewhere.

I cannot understand how tower blocks with such obvious weaknesses re: escape  / no sprinklers can warrant anything but the highest standards of fire resistance in building materials.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 15, 2017)

killer b said:


> Sure I read something about a burst gas main complicating things earlier?


I heard that too, but couldn't tell whether it was a causal factor or a side effect of the fire.


----------



## pinkmonkey (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> The pictures are astonishing, how can every floor both internally and externally be going up with such ferocity in such a short period of time?  When you look at other fires where the cladding has been a contributory factor the damage is nowhere near as bad.  The building has gone up like its made of tinder, everything has burnt apart from the original concrete structure.


Looks like an air gap in the cladding which made the whole of the outside of the building act like a giant, hot chimney, funelling flames upwards and into the next flat where it would set it all alight. Horrifying. All those people.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 15, 2017)

killer b said:


> Sure I read something about a burst gas main complicating things earlier?


----------



## quimcunx (Jun 15, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> View attachment 109395



Is that something that they would have been able to get legal aid for previously?


----------



## mauvais (Jun 15, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Here's a statement of the obvious: over the next weeks and indeed years as this develops through reviews and inquiries, the tories are going to try and get it running down separate tracks. One will be whether 'lessons were learned', previous disasters at home and abroad, regulations and, to some extent, management systems (without ever getting into the political project that lead to arms length management and the like).  The other which they will do their damnedest to keep separate will be social cleansing, the housing of the poor, the relationship to the surrounding affluent housing - and the fucking contempt the people in this block were met with.  They'll hang their heads for a day or two on that, but even within a week they'll pushing out the propaganda on the modernisation of the housing stock, how much as been spent etc.
> 
> Usually, governments are very good at managing these things, making sure heads only roll down the foodchain. It's our job to stop the cunts doing it this time.  This is going to be massive.


Well put, but I think there's another clear strategy at play.

The first element is already happening, actually much like the pattern of terrorism response without the policing element, to limit the discussion to victim welfare - we must help these people, identify the dead, it's too soon to talk politics, investigations will be made when the time is right, etc - which buys a lot of very valuable time for political manoeuvring and preparation.

Once that can't be postponed any longer, it'll be all about the specifics of this incident, the more specific the better - the materials, the contractors, the unique elements of the case etc - and as far from the regulatory system and overarching, inherent, repetitive patterns as possible.

Then once that has soaked up as much as it can, great efforts will be made to frame any remainder in terms of progressive positives - how we will make changes to prevent this ever happening again, [as you say] how much money we're spending, etc - and very much not in terms of the historical failures, missed opportunities and so on.

Each of these will be a battle - to reclaim ownership of and recast in the appropriate terms.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 15, 2017)




----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> As I understand it, meeting fire regulations legally is not simply a box-ticking exercise as buildings have unique circumstances and you have to do whatever is reasonably possible to mitigate the risk. It is inflexible to simply dictate a minimum standard across each aspect, instead an overall responsibility is charged and if there is an unsolvable weakness in one area you are obliged to make up for it with improved standards elsewhere.
> 
> I cannot understand how tower blocks with such obvious weaknesses re: escape  / no sprinklers can warrant anything but the highest standards of fire resistance in building materials.



In this respect there is a lack of joined up thinking and regulation.  The fact the building didn't have any sprinklers does not (as far as I know) have any impact upon the choice of cladding material.  There is the on-going fire assessment of the existing building and then there is the basic criteria required for the renovation works.  It is unlikely that the two overlapped in any way. 

For example the local fire brigade would have been involved in the risk assessment and recommendations for the internal building but would have had no input or involvement in the external refurbishment works.

In all my time working in this industry (I've been involved in probably over 40 of this type of project) the internal fire stopping strategy was never discussed. It just never came up in conversation. It was all about whether the new system would meet building regs.  I'm sure there probably is some sort of cross over in regulations somewhere but I never encountered it.


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

pinkmonkey said:


> Looks like an air gap in the cladding which made the whole of the outside of the building act like a giant, hot chimney, funelling flames upwards and into the next flat where it would set it all alight. Horrifying. All those people.



The thing is this shouldn't happen. There should be properly fitted intumescent strips which expand to prevent any spread of fire, closing the ventilation gap... this was one of the problems in Lakanal.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

I'm not an expert in this kind of external cladding but generally building regulations work on the principle that you shouldn't have continuous hidden cavities through which fire can spread. There are all sorts of cavity barrier products and systems available because of this. Because each flat should have fire separation from the ones above and below it I would have expected that there should be a cavity barrier at each floor level.

Fire spreading through internal cavities is known as an issue. It's also what caused the fire in the Glasgow School of Art a couple of years ago.

There are a lot of people keen to point fingers of blame, of course. It will likely turn out that the cause of this was down to a complicated combination of factors, and it will take a while for them to be identified.

I read a couple of truly terrible articles in the Independent yesterday where an ill-informed journalist was jumping to all sorts of conclusions and they were doing their best to up the clickbait factor of their headlines.


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

quimcunx said:


> Is that something that they would have been able to get legal aid for previously?


Looks like it.
‘They tried to get lawyers’: Devastating cuts to legal aid prevented Grenfell Tower residents accessing advice over safety concerns - Legal Cheek

Lawyers now queuing up to offer their help for free, that is something good.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 15, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> This the one thing, the thing that w/c londoners can all be on board with - it has to be. Ian Bone was right onto something with the poor doors stuff.


Strangely, I was thinking about the Poor Doors thing when I typed that.  For some reason I was thinking it seemed wrong to link a specific small campaign to this horror.  It was a fucking stupid thought to have - the Poor Doors campaign is _exactly_ what was going on here.  Different doors to keep the poor away/lethal cladding so the rich don't have to look at fucking concrete.


----------



## Anudder Oik (Jun 15, 2017)

Poor people, ordinary people, have no voice and no influence. They raise the alarm and get ignored because they aren't considered worth the effort, they complain and get threatened with legal action against them and all the while greed continually degrades life.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Strangely, I was thinking about the Poor Doors thing when I typed that.  For some reason I was thinking it seemed wrong to link a specific small campaign to this horror.  It was a fucking stupid thought to have - the Poor Doors campaign is _exactly_ what was going on here.  Different doors to keep the poor away/lethal cladding so the rich don't have to look at fucking concrete.


shurely so the sight of concrete doesn't reduce the house prices of the rich


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


> Poor people, ordinary people, have no voice and no influence. They raise the alarm and get ignored because they aren't considered worth the effort, they complain and get threatened with legal action against them and all the while greed continually degrades life.


thank you for your recap of the thread.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> In all my time working in this industry (I've been involved in probably over 40 of this type of project) the internal fire stopping strategy was never discussed.



What do you mean by "internal fire stopping strategy"? I don't understand why you say it was never discussed and all that was discussed was building regs. Fire stopping strategies are a fundamental component of meeting building regs.


----------



## Anudder Oik (Jun 15, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I cannot understand how tower blocks with such obvious weaknesses re: escape  / no sprinklers can warrant anything but the highest standards of fire resistance in building materials.



All building materials are tested for resistance to stress, weight and fire. That this has happened in the UK and in the 21st century is absolutely sickening.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Wilf said:


> lethal cladding so the rich don't have to look at fucking concrete.



Where are people getting this idea that the main motivation to install the cladding was to improve appearance for the rich?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 15, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Well put, but I think there's another clear strategy at play.
> 
> The first element is already happening, actually much like the pattern of terrorism response without the policing element, to limit the discussion to victim welfare - we must help these people, identify the dead, it's too soon to talk politics, investigations will be made when the time is right, etc - which buys a lot of very valuable time for political manoeuvring and preparation.
> 
> ...



Meanwhile people have plenty of time to shred everything they can find.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


> All building materials are tested for resistance to stress, weight and fire. That this has happened in the UK and in the 21st century is absolutely sickening.


don't know why. people being slipshod with health and safety's got a long and sorry history. government and companies playing fast and loose with other people's lives is more the rule than the exception.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Where are people getting this idea that the main motivation to install the cladding was to improve appearance for the rich?


try using google or reading the thread: Grenfell Tower cladding was added to improve view from nearby luxury houses

next time you're on your own


----------



## Wilf (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Where are people getting this idea that the main motivation to install the cladding was to improve appearance for the rich?


I posted this earlier:
Grenfell Tower was covered in material to make it look better. That’s being blamed for multiple deaths


----------



## hash tag (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Where are people getting this idea that the main motivation to install the cladding was to improve appearance for the rich?



Why else do it, what was the point of it.
I see we have now lost 17 people and rising


----------



## dessiato (Jun 15, 2017)

I keep reading this thread, and the news. I swing between wanting to cry with the emotions stirred by this awful event, and wanting to cry in rage at the appalling treatment that has been meted, and continues to be meted, out to these victims.

I know nothing can bring anyone back, but things must be but in place to ensure nothing like this can ever happen again.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> try using google or reading the thread: Grenfell Tower cladding was added to improve view from nearby luxury houses
> 
> next time you're on your own



As I suspected: uncritical reading of sensationalist articles by crap journalists.

They claim that the fact that the appearance of the block from surrounding areas was mentioned in the planning report is somehow significant.

Ever single planning report for every single planning application assesses the visual impact of a development on the surrounding area. It's part of what the planning process does. That these things were mentioned in the report for this particular project means absolutely nothing.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> What do you mean by "internal fire stopping strategy"? I don't understand why you say it was never discussed and all that was discussed was building regs. Fire stopping strategies are a fundamental component of meeting building regs.


I can't speak for them, but I think they mean that, at least from certain perspectives, the reliance is placed on components and component regulations, not the sum of their parts. 'Is this wall that I'm building in compliance with fire regs?' rather than 'has the whole building got an effective fire strategy?' - which can be both a good and bad thing. Good in that every basic work item is in support of a goal without even necessarily knowing or understanding it, bad in that a lack of a holistic view can lead to a new sort of failure, perhaps a 'swiss cheese' one.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

hash tag said:


> Why else do it, what was the point of it.



The clue is that the panels contained insulation.

If they were installed purely for decorative purposes they would not have contained insulation.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

mauvais said:


> 'Is this wall that I'm building in compliance with fire regs?' rather than 'has the whole building got an effective fire strategy?' -



Assessing the whole building strategy is absolutely definitely part of the normal building regs process.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> As I suspected: uncritical reading of sensationalist articles by crap journalists.
> 
> They claim that the fact that the appearance of the block from surrounding areas was mentioned in the planning report is somehow significant.
> 
> Ever single planning report for every single planning application assesses the visual impact of a development on the surrounding area. It's part of what the planning process does. That these things were mentioned in the report for this particular project means absolutely nothing.



https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/idoxWAM/doc...LUME2&contentType=application/pdf&pageCount=1

do you want to have a guess who lives in the houses in the 'adjacent conservation area'?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 15, 2017)

YouSir said:


> Or to arrange funding for immediate temporary accommodation, or start working to open up housing stock in the borough for residents, or guarantee funding for a rebuild, or alter legislation to allow councils to do it themselves, or a million other things that the useless fuck will completely avoid by saying 'lessons will be learned'.



Yep: she could have done what a normal human being would do; go there, speak with those affected, sob your fucking heart out and then, as she is the fucking Prime Minister, she could do everything that needs doing to help those affected and ensure this never happens again.

Instead it will be lessons learned and inquiries set up to ensure the guilty go unpunished, a slight dent in their profits their only censure.


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

That article in the mirror if you read it says at the end that the cladding was added for reasons to do with heating insulation and something about it being necessary in relation to a new window system to improve ventilation.
There is plenty here without having to claim that the cladding was the culprit and was only added for the sake of the posh neighbours.


----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 15, 2017)

May has just ordered a full public inquiry (not that she had much option).

Labour beginning to go in quite hard on this.

'Unforgivable': local Labour MP vents fury over Grenfell Tower fire

Also, I assume many have seen it, but a demo has been called this Friday, 6pm at the
Department for Communities and Local Government


----------



## likesfish (Jun 15, 2017)

The uni I worked at had a team going round testing fire guiltonie like things that in the event of a fire slam down blocking  cable ducts so they cant spread fire.

  They had to drill and cut holes to gain access to several to test even though leave area free for access was stickered on several of the ducts when they cut through a celing and insulation to reach the duct


----------



## mauvais (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Assessing the whole building strategy is absolutely definitely part of the normal building regs process.


Probably not for anyone doing the work though. So you rely on some kind of joined up assessment at a level between 'this panel' and 'this building', all the interaction between components, small and large.


----------



## hash tag (Jun 15, 2017)

Is May's inquiry after Khan's, in addition to or confirming his?
From memory, THE Bishops Avenue has a few big houses in it, many of which have been empty for years. The could easily be used as accomodation for those who have lost their homes. They should be exempted from council tax, if applicable for at least a year; they will all have lost just about everything


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 15, 2017)

Corbyn has been shaking hands and telling the community we'll find out who and why this happened.

May has been quietly touring the site speaking to the top nobs of the emergency services. 


Bit of a contrast.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

bimble said:


> That article in the mirror if you read it says at the end that the cladding was added for reasons to do with heating insulation and something about it being necessary in relation to a new window system to improve ventilation.
> There is plenty here without having to claim that the cladding was the culprit and was only added for the sake of the posh neighbours.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 109398
> https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/idoxWAM/doc...LUME2&contentType=application/pdf&pageCount=1
> 
> do you want to have a guess who lives in the houses in the 'adjacent conservation area'?


Any building which will have an impact on a conservation area will be assessed in this way. It's assessed because of the existence of the conservation area, not because of who lives in the conservation area. If such an assessment was not made, the planning officer would not be doing their job according to planning legislation. Do you have an objection to the basic principle of conservation areas?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 15, 2017)

gawkrodger said:


> May has just ordered a full public inquiry (not that she had much option).


Khan has also announced this, saying it will be an independent inquiry. Though, in the past public inquiries haven't appeared to be that independent, as they tend to be led by members of the upper house.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Any building which will have an impact on a conservation area will be assessed in this way. It's assessed because of the existence of the conservation area, not because of who lives in the conservation area. If such an assessment was not made, the planning officer would not be doing their job according to planning legislation. Do you have an objection to the basic principle of conservation areas?


i'll take that as a 'no' then


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 15, 2017)

I have an objection to the needless, horrific deaths of innocent people.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> i'll take that as a 'no' then


Do you have an objection to the basic principle of conservation areas?


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 15, 2017)

Announcing a public inquiry just gives those responsible more shredding time and the opportunity to apply for Barbadian passports.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Khan has also announced this, saying it will be an independent inquiry. Though, in the past public inquiries haven't appeared to be that independent, as they tend to be led by members of the upper house.


perhaps a greater objection might be that the terms of reference so often preclude a genuine investigation.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 15, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> Even the presenter, Nihal, on Radio 5 Live atm (I know, what am I doing listening to 5Live when football isn't on) is openly asking what's wrong with this country if we don't look after people, if this just about money what does that say about us.



He's was doing similar just now, thought he was a campaigner at first, you don't normally get a Beeb host journo being so forthright.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Do you have an objection to the basic principle of conservation areas?


don't answer a question with a question, it makes you look feeble.


----------



## Callie (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Any building which will have an impact on a conservation area will be assessed in this way.



and the impact in this case is purely the view from the conservation area? when did that area become a conservation area and did the block exist before then? Im not really sure where to find this info out?


eta:
ladbrooke cons area existed prior to the block being built (1969 vs 1974 i think)

so the conservation area could raise objections based on appearance but would those outweigh anything that was considered essential for H&S reasons - surely that is unlikely?


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> don't answer a question with a question, it makes you look feeble.


There's no need for me to answer your rhetorical question. It's West London, of course rich people are going to be living in the conservation area. My point is that that's not the reason the views from the conservation area were assessed in the planning report, as you, and crap tabloid journalists, are concluding on account of ignorance about how the planning system works.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> There's no need for me to answer your rhetorical question. It's West London, of course rich people are going to be living in the conservation area. My point is that that's not the reason the views from the conservation area were assessed in the planning report, as you, and crap tabloid journalists, are concluding on account of ignorance about how the planning system works.


if that is the case then let me remind you that the block was built 43 years ago. it had the same appearance until 2016. seems to me that it's not me who you should be taking to task, but the royal borough of kensington and chelsea who, for 42 years, did not so take the appearance of the block from the nearby conservation areas into account.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Do you have an objection to the basic principle of conservation areas?


Your whole approach to this is a bit odd in itself, and is certainly back-to-front. Go back to the fundamentals. They weren't compelled to spend ten million quid on upgrades because of a conservation area, they were compelled to throw some supporting blurb about conservation into an existing project because that's how planning works.

Apart perhaps from media misinterpretation, all of this is an aside - what the motivation for the project was is still open to debate.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Callie said:


> and the impact in this case is purely the view from the conservation area? when did that area become a conservation area and did the block exist before then? Im not really sure where to find this info out?


In any planning process, the external appearance of the building will be assessed, whether or not it is in or near a conservation area. The idea of conservation areas is to particularly protect certain areas because the buildings are of particular merit, or they are a rare surviving example of a certain type of development, or have some other historical significance. In these areas particular emphasis is given to the visual impact of new development on the particular characteristics which that conservation area is intended to protect.

The information about when the conservation area was designated will be somewhere on the council website, I imagine.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> In any planning process, the external appearance of the building will be assessed, whether or not it is in or near a conservation area. The idea of conservation areas is to particularly protect certain areas because the buildings are of particular merit, or they are a rare surviving example of a certain type of development, or have some other historical significance. In these areas particular emphasis is given to the visual impact of new development on the particular characteristics which that conservation area is intended to protect.
> 
> The information about when the conservation area was designated will be somewhere on the council website, I imagine.


You seem to be forgetting Pickman's point, that the building had already been there for 4 decades.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 15, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Your whole approach to this is a bit odd in itself


He really really doesn't want it linked to gentrification, the rich/poor divide in london or any of that political side of things.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> In any planning process, the external appearance of the building will be assessed, whether or not it is in or near a conservation area. The idea of conservation areas is to particularly protect certain areas because the buildings are of particular merit, or they are a rare surviving example of a certain type of development, or have some other historical significance. In these areas particular emphasis is given to the visual impact of new development on the particular characteristics which that conservation area is intended to protect.
> 
> The information about when the conservation area was designated will be somewhere on the council website, I imagine.


avondale a few years back Avondale Conservation Area
ladbroke conservation area, various dates 1969-2002 https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/pdf/Ladbroke Conservation Area.pdf


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> if that is the case then let me remind you that the block was built 43 years ago. it had the same appearance until 2016. seems to me that it's not me who you should be taking to task, but the royal borough of kensington and chelsea who, for 42 years, did not so take the appearance of the block from the nearby conservation areas into account.



Planning policy changes over time, as do people's ideas about what is worth preserving and what is good architecture. Lots of these blocks were put up after the war in a rush to provide social housing. They were initially seen as representing progress and an escape from poor quality older housing stock. As their reputation changed, public perception changed and, for example, victorian housing became valued in a way it had not been before. Therefore it became seen as something to protect rather than to get rid of.

The Victorian Society was not formed until the 1950s because befoe then, victorian architecture was not seen as something of aesthetic value.

Likewise, now, some modernist concrete architecture is starting to be seen as worth preserving. There are now conservation areas which seek to protect buildings of that post war era, which were seen as eyesores by many, just 10 or 20 years ago. In fact there recent examples of attempts to save social housing blocks from demolition by using or seeking these new protections.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> if that is the case then let me remind you that the block was built 43 years ago. it had the same appearance until 2016. seems to me that it's not me who you should be taking to task, but the royal borough of kensington and chelsea who, for 42 years, did not so take the appearance of the block from the nearby conservation areas into account.



Cart before the horse here, the works will have been planned and then consideration of the impact to the conservation area will have taken place after application put in to plannning, nothing points to the work having been planned primarily for the benefit of the neighbour's view (although 'smartening up' the appearance of blocks like this is seen as desirable, but happens everywhere, not just in expensive areas).

This is usual planning stuff, there is a standard list of impacts that Development Control will pick from and apply to any scheme as necessary.

I seriously doubt there is anything to go at here with regards to the motivation for the refurbishment, despite the click baity independent article. There's plenty of other credible things to hang them for, better focusing on them.

(Edited to add: There may be valid criticism of this being the kind of 'grand scheme' that local authorities like, as external refurbishments are a very visual example of progress and renewal, good for posing in front of for the local rag come election time, whereas sticking in sprinklers wouldn't be a recognisable change to most people. That's part of a general problem with local politics, especially when cash is limited - things are done that look like things being done, not necessarily the most beneficial)


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jun 15, 2017)

First question: Why didn't you talk to residents?
Answer: Two minutes of fucking waffle with no answer to the question
Fucking robot
London fire: Seventeen dead after blaze engulfs tower block - BBC News


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Your whole approach to this is a bit odd in itself, and is certainly back-to-front. Go back to the fundamentals. They weren't compelled to spend ten million quid on upgrades because of a conservation area, they were compelled to throw some supporting blurb about conservation into an existing project because that's how planning works.
> 
> Apart perhaps from media misinterpretation, all of this is an aside - what the motivation for the project was is still open to debate.



I'd like the causes of this disaster to be discussed based on fact rather than people's attempts to fit it into their own political narratives based on misinformation or willful misunderstanding.

As a consequence the usual people will pop up to say this means I don't care about the political aspects, or am a promoter of gentrification, or whatever. Yawn.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Your whole approach to this is a bit odd in itself, and is certainly back-to-front. Go back to the fundamentals. They weren't compelled to spend ten million quid on upgrades because of a conservation area, they were compelled to throw some supporting blurb about conservation into an existing project because that's how planning works.
> 
> Apart perhaps from media misinterpretation, all of this is an aside - what the motivation for the project was is still open to debate.



Yes, this is exactly my thinking as well.  You don't get grants of 10 million quid just for a face lift.  I said this yesterday all councils, social housing providers etc are obliged (they have no say in the matter) to thermally upgrade their properties.  This is how you get the grants.

It is clear that they changed the windows at the same time as important when thermal upgrades are being carried out.  If you were to scaffold a building like this (in fairness they probably used mast climbers) then that would cost a million quid in itself.  So the idea is that if there is no wall insulation and the windows need replacing you do the whole lot at the same time.

Now there are lots of issues around how the work was carried out but the motivation for the work seems to be what it is.  To improve the building.  However if you're a resident you're clearly going to be hacked off if they spend 10 million on things you didn't ask for and the lifts don't work etc.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 15, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> Cart before the horse here, the works will have been planned and then consideration of the impact to the conservation area will have taken place after application put in to plannning, nothing points to the work having been planned primarily for the benefit of the neighbour's view (although 'smartening up' the appearance of blocks like this is seen as desirable, but happens everywhere, not just in expensive areas).
> 
> This is usual planning stuff, there is a standard list of impacts that Development Control will pick from and apply to any scheme as necessary.
> 
> I seriously doubt there is anything to go at here with regards to the motivation for the refurbishment, despite the click baity independent article. There's plenty of other credible things to hang them for, better focusing on them.


Well, we'll have to see.  Poor doors, gentrification, social cleansing, tenants fire concerns ignored - as well as the relationship between a rich conservation area and a poor block of flats.  That's the context.  How it played out in the specific decisions made about the project remains to be seen.  But at the very least, the relationship between all of the background and the actual construction project is a material issue - regardless of teuchter's squawking.


----------



## hash tag (Jun 15, 2017)

Councils beig councils will always take the bottom price for doing any work, regardless of how shoddy the workmen/materials might be. This is their obligation to the council tax payers. It's all about value for money.
A complication these days is that many of the properties in these blocks are in private ownership, making it more complicated to demolish the block and start again, leaving the alternative of tarting the place up. On the cheap.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Yes, this is exactly my thinking as well.  You don't get grants of 10 million quid just for a face lift.  I said this yesterday all councils, social
> Now there are lots of issues around how the work was carried out but the motivation for the work seems to be what it is.  To improve the building.  However if you're a resident you're clearly going to be hacked off if they spend 10 million on things you didn't ask for and the lifts don't work etc.


And that gets right to it as well.  Nobody can give definitive answers on the cause of the fire, but how we got to the point where this particular refurbishment was carried out, who decided, why other concerns were ignored, is absolutely central. *It's about power*.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

S☼I said:


> First question: Why didn't you talk to residents?
> Answer: Two minutes of fucking waffle with no answer to the question
> Fucking robot
> London fire: Seventeen dead after blaze engulfs tower block - BBC News


 

she is fucking disgusting. a vile excuse for a human being. scum.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Any building which will have an impact on a conservation area will be assessed in this way. It's assessed because of the existence of the conservation area, not because of who lives in the conservation area.



It has everything to do with who lives there, & I speak from experience working for a LA. The shit unnecessesary jobs we have to undertake just because the cunts that live there, whether cllrs or millionaires.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 15, 2017)

where to said:


> two absolute red lines going forward have to be a full public enquiry, and the rehousing of all survivors in the immediate vicinity for as long as they wish to live there.



The former may happen, a couple of decades from now, the latter is vanishingly unlikely.  Most of the poor bastards won't even be rehoused in London.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> she is fucking disgusting. a vile excuse for a human being. scum.



Totally.

Why does she keep prioritizing mentioning the emergency services?  I mean don't get me wrong they are incredible people who were working under terrible conditions but it is there job.  Possibly hundreds of people dead, many many people homeless and her first thoughts and words are about the people doing their jobs who will go home to their homes and their families and the end of their shift.  She was doing it last night as well. Barely human.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Totally.
> 
> Why does she keep prioritizing mentioning the emergency services?  I mean don't get me wrong they are incredible people who were working under terrible conditions but it is there job.  Possibly hundreds of people dead, many many people homeless and her first thoughts and words are about the people doing their jobs who will go home to their homes and their families and the end of their shift.  She was doing it last night as well. Barely human.



The one thing she knows to say which no one's going to disagree with and which requires her to do absolutely fucking nothing of use.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

YouSir said:


> The one thing she knows to say which no one's going to disagree with and which requires her to do absolutely fucking nothing of use.



Its like the election campaign is still going on.  She's hiding from the public and eventually when forced she gives a terrible and utterly evasive interview where she can't even pretend to give the tiniest fuck about people.  She is absolutely not fit for office.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> It has everything to do with who lives there, & I speak from experience working for a LA. The shit unnecessesary jobs we have to undertake just because the cunts that live there, whether cllrs or millionaires.


I am aware of what you describe. However, it does not change the fact that if a development will have an impact on a conservation area, this impact will be assessed regardless of who lives in the conservation area.


----------



## Cloo (Jun 15, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> The former may happen, a couple of decades from now, the latter is vanishingly unlikely.  Most of the poor bastards won't even be rehoused in London.


Oh yeah. They'll promise that everyone will be housed in social housing in the area, we will rebuild etc. Five years down the line when public eyes are elsewhere:  'sorry, land prices etc, have to put in lots of private sale units in order to afford social housing, sorry, we can't possibly afford more than 59 social rented units, shirt off me back etc, but hey, another 100 units will be 'affordable' and that's almost like being social housing'


----------



## Wilf (Jun 15, 2017)

Just saw some clips on the guardian site about people turning up and sorting it out, bringing bags of clothes and food.  Everybody just getting on and supporting each other at the community centre, loads of hand written notices, right to the point.  And then somebody coming straight out and saying it wouldn't have happened in a rich area. In in fucking tears, at my desk at work.
Grenfell Tower fire: 'Families are dead, they've got to do something' - video


----------



## scifisam (Jun 15, 2017)

hash tag said:


> Councils beig councils will always take the bottom price for doing any work, regardless of how shoddy the workmen/materials might be. This is their obligation to the council tax payers. It's all about value for money.
> A complication these days is that many of the properties in these blocks are in private ownership, making it more complicated to demolish the block and start again, leaving the alternative of tarting the place up. On the cheap.



I wonder if many of them are private? Mortgage providers generally don't give mortgages to people buying in tower blocks and this is an expensive area - not like the nicer parts of South Ken obviously, but still a lot of money to find even after the RTB discount. It's likely that almost all the flats are still council.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

hash tag said:


> Councils beig councils will always take the bottom price for doing any work, regardless of how shoddy the workmen/materials might be. This is their obligation to the council tax payers. It's all about value for money.
> A complication these days is that many of the properties in these blocks are in private ownership, making it more complicated to demolish the block and start again, leaving the alternative of tarting the place up. On the cheap.



This is certainly true.  There was a contractor who used to do a load of these type projects who were famous for quoting 20% below cost to win the project.  After winning it they would then take an axe to everything to make their price viable.


----------



## ChrisD (Jun 15, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> Cart before the horse here, the works will have been planned and then consideration of the impact to the conservation area will have taken place after application put in to plannning, nothing points to the work having been planned primarily for the benefit of the neighbour's view (although 'smartening up' the appearance of blocks like this is seen as desirable, but happens everywhere, not just in expensive areas).
> 
> This is usual planning stuff, there is a standard list of impacts that Development Control will pick from and apply to any scheme as necessary.
> 
> ...



Interesting info (link to planning drawings etc ) on olly wainwright's twitter feed today...(sorry can't seem to link from here)


----------



## LDC (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Why does she keep prioritizing mentioning the emergency services?  I mean don't get me wrong they are incredible people who were working under terrible conditions but it is there job.  Possibly hundreds of people dead, many many people homeless and her first thoughts and words are about the people doing their jobs who will go home to their homes and their families and the end of their shift.  She was doing it last night as well. Barely human.



Yeah, as someone that's worked in the emergency services it always feels quite odd for politicians to go on about the bravery etc etc. It's their/our fucking job, yeah say thanks at the end or something for sure, but ffs priortise expressing sympathy and talk about what you're going to do for the poor fuckers that have suffered and lost the most.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I am aware of what you describe. However, it does not change the fact that if a development will have an impact on a conservation area, this impact will be assessed regardless of who lives in the conservation area.


as per post #838, it is the views from the houses in the conservation area, not your actual impact on the conservation area: it is what the people in the conservation area see from their windows. the nice appearance for the rich people in the conservation area not for people passing through or whatnot. do you not understand?


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

scifisam said:


> I wonder if many of them are private? Mortgage providers generally don't give mortgages to people buying in tower blocks and this is an expensive area - not like the nicer parts of South Ken obviously, but still a lot of money to find even after the RTB discount. It's likely that almost all the flats are still council.


Don't know, but nearby Trellick Tower is full of privately owned flats now, around half a million for a two bedroom. Not sure of the proportion private to council.


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

ChrisD said:


> Interesting info (link to planning drawings etc ) on olly wainwright's twitter feed today...(sorry can't seem to link from here)



Well the full application is publicly available.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> as per post #838, it is the views from the houses in the conservation area, not your actual impact on the conservation area: it is what the people in the conservation area see from their windows. the nice appearance for the rich people in the conservation area not for people passing through or whatnot. do you not understand?


What are you on about? When I say visual impact, that means, what it looks like, viewed from within a conservation area, or in some cases, in views towards a conservation area. What it looks like from the street and what it looks like from inside buildings, in that conservation area. Yes those buildings may be homes for wealthy people. I think you have made that rather obvious point enough times now. However, that is not what determines whether or not it is assessed in the planning report.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 15, 2017)

scifisam said:


> I wonder if many of them are private? Mortgage providers generally don't give mortgages to people buying in tower blocks and this is an expensive area - not like the nicer parts of South Ken obviously, but still a lot of money to find even after the RTB discount. It's likely that almost all the flats are still council.


Yeah, banks are usually quite reluctant to lend on flats in tower blocks. However, I believe there's quite a buy-to-let presence in such buildings - BtL landlords who can afford to buy for cash will buy up flats in council tower blocks, especially in such a desirable location. I'd put money on many of the privately owned flats being bought in this way.


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

bimble said:


> Don't know, but nearby Trellick Tower is full of privately owned flats now, around half a million for a two bedroom. Not sure of the proportion private to council.



Trellick tower was designed by Goldfinger though, so has had a prestige element to it for a long time.

e2a: not that I'm for a moment saying they aren't slavering to sell off all the social housing in the area.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

Fwiw any privately owned flats would have had to contribute to the renovation works.  If you own a flat in a council block and they are going to do works like this you just get a bill land on your door matt.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 15, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> Yeah, banks are usually quite reluctant to lend on flats in tower blocks. However, I believe there's quite a buy-to-let presence in such buildings - BtL landlords who can afford to buy for cash will buy up flats in council tower blocks, especially in such a desirable location. I'd put money on many of the privately owned flats being bought in this way.



Yeah, agreed about buy to letters (which will make it more difficult to ascertain how many people are missing) but the tenants would have had to be able to buy their flats to sell on in the first place.

Trellick Tower might be different in that its iconic status might have meant that the council themselves jumped to sell any flats that became vacant. Under last year's bill they'd have to because they'd likely be worth over a million. Not so for Grenfell.


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

Kind of interesting article here
"If the cladding really was acting as the vector for the spread of fire, it would appear that a “prettification” was at least in part responsible for this disaster. This would be ironic, as the nearby Trellick Tower — designed by Erno Goldfinger and completed two years before the Grenfell Tower — is now one of London’s most desired addresses, adored by lovers of its uncompromising concrete Brutalism."
Subscribe to read


----------



## Ted Striker (Jun 15, 2017)

They're in huge demand (obviously Trellick is the Barbican of West London) - The uninterrupted views are to the chagrin to property developers everywhere.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Fwiw any privately owned flats would have had to contribute to the renovation works.  If you own a flat in a council block and they are going to do works like this you just get a bill land on your door matt.


yep, which makes it more likely for an owner to sell up if they can't afford, making for more absentee landlords buying to let


----------



## phillm (Jun 15, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> Yeah, banks are usually quite reluctant to lend on flats in tower blocks. However, I believe there's quite a buy-to-let presence in such buildings - BtL landlords who can afford to buy for cash will buy up flats in council tower blocks, especially in such a desirable location. I'd put money on many of the privately owned flats being bought in this way.



Here's one in the block.

Buy 

Check out this property for sale on Rightmove!

Rent 

Check out this property for rent on Rightmove!


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

bimble said:


> Kind of interesting article here
> "If the cladding really was acting as the vector for the spread of fire, it would appear that a “prettification” was at least in part responsible for this disaster. This would be ironic, as the nearby Trellick Tower — designed by Erno Goldfinger and completed two years before the Grenfell Tower — is now one of London’s most desired addresses, adored by lovers of its uncompromising concrete Brutalism."
> Subscribe to read



Paywall.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

Trelleck's listed I believe which always adds kudos.  Besides its an architectural concept building.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 15, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Yeah, agreed about buy to letters (which will make it more difficult to ascertain how many people are missing) but the tenants would have had to be able to buy their flats to sell on in the first place.


That's a good point. Maybe the fact that RtB is usually a lot cheaper than subsequent sales plays a factor? If the lender knows the value of the property is going to go up overnight, might grease the wheels a bit...


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

Cid said:


> Paywall.


yeah i don't know why it worked for me.
here it in full C&Pd  if interested:

With flames licking from windows, smoke billowing into a black cloud spreading across London and a rising death toll, the fire at London’s Grenfell Tower has been the ultimate urban nightmare.

One of four towers in the Lancaster West Estate in north Kensington, Grenfell Tower was completed in 1974, towards the end of a boom in high-rise council, or social, housing in the UK. The tower was part of Kensington and Chelsea’s so-called “slum clearance” plan.

The concrete council housing towers of the 1960s and 1970s are often derided as inherently unsafe, and there have been a number of tragedies associated with them. But unlike, for instance, the cheap, system-built Ronan Point Tower that collapsed in 1968, Grenfell Tower was a substantial structure, using external concrete columns and in situ cast concrete.

Unusually for the time, it was not designed by the Greater London Council architects’ department, but by Clifford Wearden and Associates, a relatively small practice that had been working on the designs since 1964.

The tower had undergone an extensive refurbishment in recent years, carried out by architects Studio E and contractor Rydon Construction. The refurbishment, which was finished last year, included new facilities at the base of the building, new windows and a recladding of the façades.
Residents said on Wednesday morning that the cladding had caught fire, with one witness saying it was “flammable and it just caught up like a matchstick”.

Photos of the fire clearly reveal flames climbing the tower’s exterior walls in the early hours of the day. After the blaze was brought under control, the surrounding area was littered with black clumps of what locals suggested was the charred remains of the new cladding.

If the cladding really was acting as the vector for the spread of fire, it would appear that a “prettification” was at least in part responsible for this disaster. This would be ironic, as the nearby Trellick Tower — designed by Erno Goldfinger and completed two years before the Grenfell Tower — is now one of London’s most desired addresses, adored by lovers of its uncompromising concrete Brutalism.
In the 1960s and 70s, high-rise was the preferred method for building new homes, with councils incentivised by government subsidies for blocks of six storeys or more. Local authorities wholeheartedly embraced the modernist ideal of towers surrounded by public space and parkland — a reaction to the density, damp and darkness of slum housing. Well over 6,000 tower blocks were built by local authorities across the UK, although many have since been demolished, often to make way for lower-rise accommodation or private sector developments.

Despite the long-held popularity of exposed concrete housing towers such as Trellick Tower or the Barbican, local authorities now appear to have a prejudice against the material. *The cladding used on Grenfell Tower was part of a programme of aesthetic “wrapping” to make the tower appear more in line with contemporary towers, which have come back into fashion in the private sector.*

Concrete generally performs well in fires, but composite cladding like the kind used at Grenfell can facilitate fires spreading up the outside of a building.

It would not be the first time that cladding has contributed to the spread of fire.

On New Year’s Eve 2015, The Address, a 63-storey tower in Dubai, went up in flames. It was later determined that the fire had been accelerated by aluminium composite panel cladding material. An earlier fire in a 24-storey block in Shanghai in 2010 spread through external cladding, killing 58 residents.

But cladding is not the only factor that could have accelerated the devastating Grenfell Tower blaze.

In 2009 six people died in a fire at Lakanal House, a 14-storey block in Camberwell, south London. Southwark Council was fined £570,000 over safety failings at the site. Residents at Lakanal House had been advised in the event of a fire to shut themselves into their flats and wait to be rescued — the same advice that had apparently been given to residents at Grenfell Tower.
The plans for Grenfell Tower’s refurbishment show a new, denser layout at the north Kensington tower block and, astonishingly, only one stairway for all 120 flats. New apartments had been added in to the base of the tower, which had been designed as partly open space with community facilities. The building was raised on concrete stilts on an open base.

Flats in council tower blocks were initially designed to generous “Parker Morris” space standards, which were abandoned by Margaret Thatcher’s government in 1980. More recently, the trend has been to make city centre flats smaller, to cater for a younger population and offset high costs in the private rental market. This “densification” of tower blocks has led to a large rise in the number of dwellings — although safety provisions are not always increased accordingly, as in the case of Grenfell Tower.

According to first-person reports, none of the residents appears to have heard fire alarms during Wednesday’s blaze. It is unclear whether there were sprinkler systems — or if there were, whether they were working.
Plans for the refurbished tower also appear to lack fire lobbies for some of the flats, with many appearing to have been compromised in the process of squeezing more apartments into a typical floor. T*he original plans do not seem to feature lobbies — begging serious questions about how the plans were given permission in the first place.*

_The writer is the FT’s architecture critic_


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 15, 2017)

phillm said:


> Here's one in the block.
> 
> Buy
> 
> ...


£275K for a 2 bed flat?! That's super cheap for London, let alone Kensington...


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

bimble said:


> yeah i don't know why it worked for me.
> here it in full C&Pd  if interested:
> 
> With flames licking from windows, smoke billowing into a black cloud spreading across London and a rising death toll, the fire at London’s Grenfell Tower has been the ultimate urban nightmare.
> ...



I think most news sites allow you to read a few free articles/month. Thanks.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> What are you on about? When I say visual impact, that means, what it looks like, viewed from within a conservation area, or in some cases, in views towards a conservation area. What it looks like from the street and what it looks like from inside buildings, in that conservation area. Yes those buildings may be homes for wealthy people. I think you have made that rather obvious point enough times now. However, that is not what determines whether or not it is assessed in the planning report.


There are processes and there is context.  For some reason you seem keen to ignore the context.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> What are you on about? When I say visual impact, that means, what it looks like, viewed from within a conservation area, or in some cases, in views towards a conservation area. What it looks like from the street and what it looks like from inside buildings, in that conservation area. Yes those buildings may be homes for wealthy people. I think you have made that rather obvious point enough times now. However, that is not what determines whether or not it is assessed in the planning report.


yeh but it's such a pity that you don't seem able to take the obvious point



not, you note, the living conditions of the people inside the towerblock.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

So, Pickman's model has a problem with planning legislation being set up to protect people from adverse effects of development near their homes.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Wilf said:


> There are processes and there is context.  For some reason you seem keen to ignore the context.


For some reason certain people are willing to ignore the facts about process when they turn out not to support their interpretation of the context.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> So, Pickman's model has a problem with planning legislation being set up to protect people from adverse effects of development near their homes.


yeh. a prime example of a teuchter lie.


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but it's such a pity that you don't seem able to take the obvious point
> 
> View attachment 109406
> 
> not, you note, the living conditions of the people inside the towerblock.



There's a full consultation document with the resident's views. You, or the people you're quoting, are taking a very specific bit of the planning application and reading too much into it.


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

n.b Not saying those views are accurately represented, or that the techniques used aren't selective etc. But the fact is residents are addressed in a different part of the process.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> don't know why. people being slipshod with health and safety's got a long and sorry history. government and companies playing fast and loose with other people's lives is more the rule than the exception.


I wish you were wrong.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Cid said:


> There's a full consultation document with the resident's views. You, or the people you're quoting, are taking a very specific bit of the planning application and reading too much into it.


yeh. i provided a link to the full document above and you can have another one here. https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/idoxWAM/doc...LUME2&contentType=application/pdf&pageCount=1


----------



## scifisam (Jun 15, 2017)

phillm said:


> Here's one in the block.
> 
> Buy
> 
> ...



That one for sale is pretty cheap really. Though I guess most council tenants would find it hard to get 175k in cash together unless they were conned by one of those "let us buy your council home for you!" companies.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

the planning application didn't even get considered by councillors


----------



## scifisam (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but it's such a pity that you don't seem able to take the obvious point
> 
> View attachment 109406
> 
> not, you note, the living conditions of the people inside the towerblock.



Unless substandard cladding was chosen because it looked better is it really so bad that the building's appearance was considered? I mean, I doubt "building will look nicer" was one of the residents' objections.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Unless substandard cladding was chosen because it looked better is it really so bad that the building's appearance was considered? I mean, I doubt "building will look nicer" was one of the residents' objections.


not sure how to answer it being as the cladding's being blamed for the fire's spread.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 15, 2017)

Where and what is going on tonight?


----------



## scifisam (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> not sure how to answer it being as the cladding's being blamed for the fire's spread.



Being blamed, yes, but we don't know if it really was the choice of cladding or rather the way it was put on, leaving a gap behind. Or something else altogether. And if the cladding was at fault then is it because they chose a nicer looking one rather than a safer one? I find that unlikely because they would have just gone for whichever was cheapest.

You have noticed that the building's appearance was not the sole reason for putting cladding on, yeah?


----------



## Wilf (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> For some reason certain people are willing to ignore the facts about process when they turn out not to support their interpretation of the context.


Given that neither you or I were present/party to the various meetings and discussions, there's no way to make statements about how things 'turned out'.  But given the socio-economic context and political control in that borough, there's an open question about how processes played out. You seem very keen to dismiss that.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> the planning application didn't even get considered by councillors
> 
> View attachment 109409


Having read the full report and relevant local policies, are you of the opinion that the application should have been refused and if so why?


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Wilf said:


> there's no way to make statements about how things 'turned out'.



No, it's quite simple: tabloid newspapers and some here had quoted part of the planning report that mentioned consideration had been given to the visual impact on adjacent conservation areas. They had then claimed that this demonstrated that the main motivation for the cladding of the building was to improve the appearance for residents in those areas. However, it "turns out" that this argument makes no sense whatsoever as this is a completely standard part of the process for any planning application. It "turned out" thus, in the sense that people who know how planning works pointed out a simple fact.

There may well be lots of open questions about how many processes played out. I think those questions should be pursued. Not this idiotic red herring about the whole thing having been driven by conservation area residents demanding the prettification of a tower block. It's just a stupid, simplistic distraction from what will be much more complex processes that led to this tragedy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> No, it's quite simple: tabloid newspapers and some here had quoted part of the planning report that mentioned consideration had been given to the visual impact on adjacent conservation areas. They had then claimed that this demonstrated that the main motivation for the cladding of the building was to improve the appearance for residents in those areas. However, it "turns out" that this argument makes no sense whatsoever as this is a completely standard part of the process for any planning application. It "turned out" thus, in the sense that people who know how planning works pointed out a simple fact.
> 
> There may well be lots of open questions about how many processes played out. I think those questions should be pursued. Not this idiotic red herring about the whole thing having been driven by conservation area residents demanding the prettification of a tower block. It's just a stupid, simplistic distraction from what will be much more complex processes that led to this tragedy.


Yeh. Have you ever considered supporting your position with evidence? This "I'm right and your wrong" bluster isn't persuasive.


----------



## haushoch (Jun 15, 2017)

As part of the original planning application, the architects submitted a Sustainability & Energy Statement, which can be found in full here:

https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/idoxWAM/doc...LUME2&contentType=application/pdf&pageCount=1

The other drawings and documents submitted can be found here:

https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/planning/se...=decision&tab=tabs-planning-2#tabs-planning-6

Main page for the application here:

Planning Search

Page regarding cladding (from the Sustainability & Energy Statement):


----------



## mod (Jun 15, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> she is fucking disgusting. a vile excuse for a human being. scum.



Yep she is. I've really come to loathe this woman. She is a horrible cunt.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. Have you ever considered supporting your position with evidence? This "I'm right and your wrong" bluster isn't persuasive.


What evidence is lacking, for the point I am making?


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 15, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> £275K for a 2 bed flat?! That's super cheap for London, let alone Kensington...



Depends on how much of the leasehold remains, lenders often specify a minimum (think it's 80 or 90 years) before lending. If the remaining lease is shorter than that, it'll be in cash buyer only territory, and cheap.

When refurbishment works like this take place it is normal for private leaseholders to pay their share, which can be in the tens of thousands. This is sometimes a prompt for people to sell up, to avoid these charges.

Rightmove has three other sales recorded going back to 2003, which suggests there probably weren't that many privately owned flats in the block.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> What evidence is lacking, for the point I am making?


supporting evidence. you know, stuff which supports what you're claiming.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 15, 2017)

Where are all these people going to be rehomed? It's been promised they will all be housed locally, but where?
I doubt there is the political will to do so in our present Government, but can properties be requisitioned in emergencies by local or national governments? It's happened in wartime, so there must be some sort of legislation for it.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

haushoch said:


> As part of the original planning application, the architects submitted a Sustainability & Energy Statement, which can be found in full here:
> 
> https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/idoxWAM/doc...LUME2&contentType=application/pdf&pageCount=1
> 
> ...


The insulation specified there is this:

Celotex FR5000 Insulation Board

which is a fire resistant PIR board, not polystyrene as widely stated in the papers.


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Where are all these people going to be rehomed? It's been promised they will all be housed locally, but where?
> I doubt there is the political will to do so in our present Government, but can properties be requisitioned in emergencies by local or national governments? It's happened in wartime, so there must be some sort of legislation for it.


I think what was promised in the statement was that "every effort would be made " to rehouse them locally, not that they actually will do so.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

haushoch said:


> As part of the original planning application, the architects submitted a Sustainability & Energy Statement, which can be found in full here:
> 
> https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/idoxWAM/doc...LUME2&contentType=application/pdf&pageCount=1
> 
> ...


not read all through there but found this little gem


p.8 sustainability & energy statement

i don't suppose the issue of people chucking stuff out of windows was sufficiently severe for it to be a genuine reason for changing the windows. the block i lived in, the issue with people chucking stuff out of windows was a few young people very occasionally throwing stuff from the stairwell, not people chucking from flats


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

mod said:


> Yep she is. I've really come to loathe this woman. She is a horrible cunt.



Me too.  She is just a soulless robot, incapable of the most basic level of compassion or empathy, no humanity. She is just utterly brutal and comprehensively incompetent, what a fine combination.  The interview she gave was like someone had just parked in her parking space or something.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 15, 2017)

May announces a public inquiry, if this was a terror attack people would already be in custody.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> So, Pickman's model has a problem with planning legislation being set up to protect people from adverse effects of development near their homes.


When, as appears to be the case here, more care has been taken to improve the exterior than seems to have been taken to ensure the safety of those on the inside, I think he might have a point.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> May announces a public inquiry, if this was a terror attack people would already be in custody.


evidence would already have been secured.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 15, 2017)

bimble said:


> I think what was promised in the statement was that "every effort would be made " to rehouse them locally, not that they actually will do so.


"every effort would be made".... that's a bit like when someone invites you to something you don't really want to go to, so you say "I'll try my best to be there", cos it's more polite than saying "never gonna happen".....


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Me too.  She is just a soulless robot, incapable of the most basic level of compassion or empathy, no humanity. She is just utterly brutal and comprehensively incompetent, what a fine combination.  The interview she gave was like someone had just parked in her parking space or something.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> "every effort would be made".... that's a bit like when someone invites you to something you don't really want to go to, so you say "I'll try my best to be there", cos it's more polite than saying "never gonna happen".....


yeh. 'every effort will be made' = 'fuck all will be done'. like when you say 'kind regards' at the end of an email when you feel anything but kind to the recipient, for whom you have no regard.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> The insulation specified there is this:
> 
> Celotex FR5000 Insulation Board
> 
> which is a fire resistant PIR board, not polystyrene as widely stated in the papers.



What was specified may have been changed prior to construction, someone may have put in a lower tender using an alternative material which was considered 'acceptable'. I really wouldn't like to be in the shoes right now of anyone involved in such a decision.

The BBC has been reporting it was polyethylene (not polystyrene).


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> What was specified may have been changed prior to construction, someone may have put in a lower tender using an alternative material which was considered 'acceptable'. I really wouldn't like to be in the shoes right now of anyone involved in such a decision.
> 
> The BBC has been reporting it was polyethylene (not polystyrene).


[Content removed at request of poster]
Fire Risks From External Cladding Panels – A Perspective From The UK «  Probyn Miers


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 15, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Where are all these people going to be rehomed? It's been promised they will all be housed locally, but where?
> I doubt there is the political will to do so in our present Government, but can properties be requisitioned in emergencies by local or national governments? It's happened in wartime, so there must be some sort of legislation for it.





bimble said:


> I think what was promised in the statement was that "every effort would be made " to rehouse them locally, not that they actually will do so.


As much as these things make any difference, but surely there's got to be a petition about that? Make it a visible and talked about issue, and show that it's not just the residents that care about it but the general populace too. I'm sure it'd get a hell of a lotta signatures.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 15, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> "every effort would be made".... that's a bit like when someone invites you to something you don't really want to go to, so you say "I'll try my best to be there", cos it's more polite than saying "never gonna happen".....


Shit. People know about this?!


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 15, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> As much as these things make any difference, but surely there's got to be a petition about that? Make it a visible and talked about issue, and show that it's not just the residents that care about it but the general populace too. I'm sure it'd get a hell of a lotta signatures.


petitions don't get things done do they though. the most useless resort of people with no power.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 15, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> petitions don't get things done do they though. the most useless resort of people with no power.


They get people talking? As I say, it would be a way of keeping the issue in peoples' minds, not letting it get forgotten.

On its own a petition might not do much, but it might set the platform for something that does.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> supporting evidence. you know, stuff which supports what you're claiming.



You want the specific planning policy that says planning assessments must consider the impact of development on views from conservation areas? The one that planning officers are obliged to follow when assessing any application in the borough?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 15, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> They get people talking? As I say, it would be a way of keeping the issue in peoples' minds, not letting it get forgotten.
> 
> On its own a petition might not do much, but it might set the platform for something that does.


but what would the petition be demanding? there are so many issues here. 
people are talking already anyway


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> May announces a public inquiry, if this was a terror attack people would already be in custody.



If this was a terror attack liability might be easier to pin down, and the suspects might pose an immediate threat to the public.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> You want the specific planning policy that says planning assessments must consider the impact of development on views from conservation areas? The one that planning officers are obliged to follow when assessing any application in the borough?
> 
> View attachment 109415


that doesn't say what you think it says


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

existentialist said:


> as appears to be the case here, more care has been taken to improve the exterior than seems to have been taken to ensure the safety of those on the inside



Why do you say this appears to be the case?


----------



## TruXta (Jun 15, 2017)

Housing minister Sharma saying everyone that needs rehousing will be rehoused locally according to graun live feed.


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> but what would the petition be demanding? there are so many issues here.
> people are talking already anyway



Innit, they piss me off. They so often focus on one aspect and ignore wider ranging problems, making them easy to dismiss or resolve. And that's the problem sorted.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 15, 2017)

Cid said:


> Innit, they piss me off. They so often focus on one aspect and ignore wider ranging problems, making them easy to dismiss or resolve. And that's the problem sorted.


they're only really good for the people who sign them


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Cid said:


> Innit, they piss me off. They so often focus on one aspect and ignore wider ranging problems, making them easy to dismiss or resolve. And that's the problem sorted.


not to mention they rely on the recipient to recognise the wrong that needs righting and ton give a damn about fixing it


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> they're only really good for the people who sign them


names straight to mi5


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> not read all through there but found this little gem
> 
> View attachment 109413
> p.8 sustainability & energy statement
> ...



Where does it say that it was the reason for changing the windows? It doesn't. You don't understand the difference between things that justify the decision to install new windows, and things that inform the decision of what type of windows to install, having decided to install new ones.

But thanks for your valuable anecdata about the block you once lived in.


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

Maybe the survivors will be treated well housed locally and provided with all sorts of help, very publically, by the government,  and if so great, but that will in no way distract from what has happened.


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

existentialist said:


> When, as appears to be the case here, more care has been taken to improve the exterior than seems to have been taken to ensure the safety of those on the inside, I think he might have a point.



You have a choice; rainscreen, or some other external insulation solution... The latter probably being render over insulation. Rainscreen has advantages in wet/damp climates (apparently). It might also look a bit better... But basically you're looking at two widely used systems that are considered safe. And, as specified in the planning report, probably are safe. But then it has to go out to tender, and the bills start to look ugly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Where does it say that it was the reason for changing the windows? It doesn't. You don't understand the difference between things that justify the decision to install new windows, and things that inform the decision of what type of windows to install, having decided to install new ones.
> 
> But thanks for your valuable anecdata about the block you once lived in.


you've contributed 23 posts to this thread, not one of which shows any empathy or sympathy with the dead or concern with the people who've lost everything, and a far greater concern with riling people here. for that reason from this point forth i'm not responding to your vexatious efforts to turn this thread into the teuchter show.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 15, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> but what would the petition be demanding? there are so many issues here.
> people are talking already anyway





Cid said:


> Innit, they piss me off. They so often focus on one aspect and ignore wider ranging problems, making them easy to dismiss or resolve. And that's the problem sorted.


In this specific case, that the Grenfell survivors are housed in good quality accommodation that remains local to Grenfell. [edit: should they want to remain local. Some of them may want to get away from the scene of the tragedy]

Yes, that's one specific issue, but I don't think it's a zero sum game. You can have many lines of dispute, and that's actually kind of my point - people will focus on what happened to the dead and may well forget about the ongoing support needed for the living.

I'm not the biggest fan of petitions either, and I'm really not suggesting it would solve the problem on its own, just that it could be one tool of many and is a tool people are familiar with. And yes, one of my problems with petitions is that they're often very poorly written, which is exactly why I'm not doing it myself


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 15, 2017)

Turning a bit ugly according to the Guardian



> One volunteer, Sinead O’Hare, said the fire and loss of life had tapped into a deeper sense of resentment and alienation.
> 
> “People are angry about years of Tory policy of cutting corners and costs, and refusing to take responsibility. The interests of the Tory party are closely allied to the interests of business and private landlords,” she said.
> 
> ...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 15, 2017)

bimble said:


> Maybe the survivors will be treated well housed locally and provided with all sorts of help, very publically, by the government,  and if so great, but that will in no way distract from what has happened.



Central government, GLA and local council have already missed their window for a proper response to this.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 15, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> Turning a bit ugly according to the Guardian



Who can blame them? All of this is true, it makes me feel so angry. It should never have got anywhere near this obviously foreseeable point.


----------



## Tony_LeaS (Jun 15, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> Turning a bit ugly according to the Guardian



I'm not surprised either, a community are needing to rebuild and they've probably got press all over the place getting cameras in their faces. Not a pretty situation, also people are angry now. Press might wanna back off from at least the local vicinity if they wanna report this.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> you've contributed 23 posts to this thread, not one of which shows any empathy or sympathy with the dead or concern with the people who've lost everything, and a far greater concern with riling people here.


Playing that card to avoid defending the fact that you're spouting ill-informed nonsense isn't very imaginative, and a bit low.

It goes without saying that what's happened to the people involved is terrible. I don't need to proclaim my feelings about that on the internet and it woudn't help anyone affected.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 15, 2017)

They ignored this just like they ignored the disgraceful treatment of disabled and unemployed.


----------



## Florkleshnort (Jun 15, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> “People are angry about years of Tory policy of cutting corners and costs, and refusing to take responsibility. The interests of the Tory party are closely allied to the interests of business and private landlords,” she said.



So, a genuine question because I have been pretty ignorant.. 

A lot of people are blaming the Tories. Were things any better under Blair? Have things really gotten significantly worse since the conservatives took power 7 years ago?


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

Cid said:


> You have a choice; rainscreen, or some other external insulation solution... The latter probably being render over insulation. Rainscreen has advantages in wet/damp climates (apparently). It might also look a bit better... But basically you're looking at two widely used systems that are considered safe. And, as specified in the planning report, probably are safe. But then it has to go out to tender, and the bills start to look ugly.



Yes, this point needs to be made.  Unless the system being quoted in the press was not used and a different one substituted last minute then there has been no corners cut with regard to the cladding.  Are there systems which have a better fire rating?  Yes, but this system was fully tested, approved and had a decent fire rating performance.  We are left with a range of possibilities:

Bad installation by the contractor
Bad design by the architect, possibly something to do with the nature of the existing building (fluted concrete)
A test regime which is wholly inadequate (this would have massive consequences)
Something else entirely.  Something happening unseen inside the building and the cladding burning being the external manifestation seen by eye witnesses. Its worth bearing in mind that if the fire was that intense inside the cladding would have failed regardless what it was made of
My suspicion is that its going to be a combination of all of the above combined with the lack of basic fire stopping and prevention measures inside.  What I absolutely do not believe is that the architect, contractor and sub-contractor all knowingly used an inferior and dangerous product.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 15, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Who can blame them? All of this is true, it makes me feel so angry. It should never have got anywhere near this obviously foreseeable point.



A whole community incinerated in the Kensington sky is a pretty ugly notion that, in due course, deserves an 'ugly' reaction.


----------



## hash tag (Jun 15, 2017)

Talking of press intrusion I see the BBC has a picture showing a fire still burning inside a burnt out flat....how? why?
The press intrusion on the morning of the fire was pretty horrible; interviews with bystanders who were in tears, to be followed by victims in tears...
let them get on with it in private. The last thing they need is their space being invaded by cameras and microphones!
Of course, they have nowhere to hide from this, the poor bastards are still looking for loved ones and have just minutes earlier been made homeless.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

Florkleshnort said:


> So, a genuine question because I have been pretty ignorant..
> 
> A lot of people are blaming the Tories. Were things any better under Blair? Have things really gotten significantly worse since the conservatives took power 7 years ago?



Obviously things were crap under Blair but the savage cuts to local authorities are a recent thing.  The housing crisis has deepened and worsened significantly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

brogdale said:


> A whole community incinerated in the Kensington sky is a pretty ugly notion that, in due course, deserves an 'ugly' reaction.


the grenfell action group were right - no one took heed of their warnings before the fire. and now local, regional and indeed national government don't seem to have a clue about how to properly proceed. their idea seems to be to divide and disperse the residents among hotels and so on rather than keep friends and neighbours together. pisspoor.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 15, 2017)

I thought this was interesting, from another board about the Melbourne fire:

In the Melbourne fire, it was found that the cladding was made by a Chinese company with non-compliant poly cores. They *claimed* it was compliant, but there was no check or balance to call them on their bullshit. The contractor, faced with a chioce of materials, chose the cheapest cladding making code-compliant claims. That covered the building in fuel. Because mineral fibre cores and poly cores are very hard to tell apart without testing, there was no cue to the building inspectors.

So - Contractor and building inspectors acted in good faith, and still set up a fire trap destined to kill. I think it will come out that this is a similar case.

There needs to be certification testing of any material making code compliance claims.

Though this doesn't explain everything because in that fire and similar ones the fire seems to spread upwards but not that much to the sides, and here it seems to have gone sideways too.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 15, 2017)

Blimey, there's still fires breaking out in the block! 

On a positive note, our charity quiz tonight has switched to supporting the victims here, having promised our chosen charity this month that they will benefit from our July one instead. 

The numbers booked have gone from the usual 30+ to over 70 so far, the venue that normally takes £5 out of the £10 entry fee for the buffet is donating their share this time. We normally raffle a bottle of wine & make around an extra £100 on that, instead we are having a auction tonight.

A few of us have hit the phones, we have over £2500 worth of stuff donated so far, event tickets/meals out/beauty treatments/free MOT & service/6-months free gym membership, etc., etc - and still expecting more in the next couple hours.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

The government were in stasis for the first 24 hours. Still are. in fact, they have made no statement or outside the bland and non committal, certainly I am not hearing anything about committed and organised action on the ground - it seems the community is pulling together on this- and that is fantastic - but what kind of precedent does this set ? is it now the default position to keep schtum for the first 48 hours and wait for charity and someone else to fill the gaps?

This isn't just shit and pathetic, this is shit, pathetic,  strategically criminal and offensively incompetent. Call yourself a Christian May? I am seeing lots of Christian ( and other)  values being displayed from the people on the ground, but nothing from you,  you are a fucking cunt.

Sorry/ had to get that one out


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

oh....I am angry again, hey ho, another night drinking myself to sleep


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

"Peter Vanezis, professor of forensic medical sciences at Barts and the london, who helped identify the final victim of the 1987 King’s Cross fire, said that identifying those who died would be likely to take months.'
Months.
unbearable.


----------



## hash tag (Jun 15, 2017)

Fuck her, fuck her useless govt. Theresa May was 's***', Grenfell Tower resident tells Jeremy Corbyn after PM refused to meet survivors

She is a robot; heartless, without soul, a disaster

"The Prime Minister carried out a private visit of the scene and spoke with emergency service crews but reportedly refused to meet any survivors of the tragedy and blocked media access."


----------



## hash tag (Jun 15, 2017)




----------



## Florkleshnort (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Obviously things were crap under Blair but the savage cuts to local authorities are a recent thing.  The housing crisis has deepened and worsened significantly.



Is there anywhere I can see numbers supporting this?


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

scifisam said:


> I thought this was interesting, from another board about the Melbourne fire:
> 
> In the Melbourne fire, it was found that the cladding was made by a Chinese company with non-compliant poly cores. They *claimed* it was compliant, but there was no check or balance to call them on their bullshit. The contractor, faced with a chioce of materials, chose the cheapest cladding making code-compliant claims. That covered the building in fuel. Because mineral fibre cores and poly cores are very hard to tell apart without testing, there was no cue to the building inspectors.
> 
> ...



That should never happen in the UK.  Changing the specification to some imported Chinese stuff with questionable testing data?  That's not acting in good faith at all, that's dereliction of duty and quite probably criminal.

There is a HEN (harmonized European norm) for testing regimes.  If the product is to be fully certified it has to have been tested rigorously - you can't just import some stuff you found on the internet, well you can but its against every rule in the book.  

The Reynabond system is a French system and is fully tested and certified.  It would be extraordinary if it has been substituted last minute for something else.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Obviously things were crap under Blair but the savage cuts to local authorities are a recent thing.  The housing crisis has deepened and worsened significantly.


Plus the Tories deregulation addiction


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

Florkleshnort said:


> Is there anywhere I can see numbers supporting this?



Yes.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

scifisam said:


> There needs to be certification testing of any material making code compliance claims.



Building materials do go through certification testing, and in theory, anyone specifying any critical material should check that the claims are supported by a valid certificate. In practice, of course, there are thousands of different product used in any project, and no architect or contractor calls up every single manufacturer, asks for their certificates and cross-checks them with the certifying authorities.

In reality, the system tends to rely on suppliers and others carrying out these checks. If I'm a builder then it's reasonable for me to assume that if Travis Perkins sells me something, I can trust that the relevant checks have been done. If big contractor goes to an unknown chinese manufacturer though, then most would say it would be their responsibility to check that claims were backed up by proper testing.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> That should never happen in the UK.  Changing the specification to some imported Chinese stuff with questionable testing data?  That's not acting in good faith at all, that's dereliction of duty and quite probably criminal.
> 
> There is a HEN (harmonized European norm) for testing regimes.  If the product is to be fully certified it has to have been tested rigorously - you can't just import some stuff you found on the internet, well you can but its against every rule in the book.
> 
> The Reynabond system is a French system and is fully tested and certified.  It would be extraordinary if it has been substituted last minute for something else.


 
it is not beyond the realms of possibility that id this is indeed an industry standard and highly recognised product, it could be faked and slipped into the supply chain by unscrupulous middle middle men  - is they do it for Boeing bits and access the chain, they can do it with building materials


----------



## hash tag (Jun 15, 2017)

Mad and full of tears...Grenfell Action Group


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 15, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Khan has also announced this, saying it will be an independent inquiry. Though, in the past public inquiries haven't appeared to be that independent, as they tend to be led by members of the upper house.



Most usually law lords, who can be trusted to support The Establishment.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> it is not beyond the realms of possibility that id this is indeed an industry standard and highly recognised product, it could be faked and slipped into the supply chain by unscrupulous middle middle men  - is they do it for Boeing bits and access the chain, they can do it with building materials



Well it is a possibility.  Cladding is a product which is purchased from a distributor / merchant / fabricator.  These companies are all pretty reputable in a construction sort of way.  That being said they may have found the product being advertised cheaply by a new, previously unheard of merchant.......

I'd still be surprised if this is the case though. Its quite easy to substitute a lot of products in construction because they end up underground, buried in concrete, hidden in the roof etc. But cladding is how the building looks, people will notice. The architect spends a lot of time choosing the product and the colour scheme etc.  The colour scheme was not uniform on this project so a lot of work had gone into the facade design.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 15, 2017)

hash tag said:


> Councils beig councils will always take the bottom price for doing any work, regardless of how shoddy the workmen/materials might be. This is their obligation to the council tax payers. It's all about value for money.
> A complication these days is that many of the properties in these blocks are in private ownership, making it more complicated to demolish the block and start again, leaving the alternative of tarting the place up. On the cheap.



Councils are supposed to award contracts based on best value, which DOESN'T necessarily mean "bottom price", if your procurement people are prepared to put in the work and do a thorough CBA on each tender, but often does if - like many local authorities - you've made your senior staff redundant, and the people doing the procurement are basically junior staff with new job titles and bigger responsibilities, whose main ambition is to just not fuck up.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 15, 2017)

Media bias in action: The Independent says the cladding was  "chosen to improve appearance /// so that the tower would look better when seen from the conservation areas and luxury flats that surround north Kensington" of the block - The Telegraph has it as "green energy concerns were prioritised ahead of safety as it emerged that cladding used to make the building more sustainable "


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 15, 2017)

Wilf said:


> And that gets right to it as well.  Nobody can give definitive answers on the cause of the fire, but how we got to the point where this particular refurbishment was carried out, who decided, why other concerns were ignored, is absolutely central. *It's about power*.



I strongly suspect that over the next few months, RBKC and KCTMO will wheel out sheaves of documents showing how thoroughly they "consulted" the residents through opinion surveys and informal "events" in community spaces.  Analysis of this consultation will show that far from offering choices, the options offered were what the landlord wanted, not what the tenants wanted.


----------



## Crispy (Jun 15, 2017)

ska invita said:


> Media bias in action: The Independent says the cladding was  "chosen to improve appearance /// so that the tower would look better when seen from the conservation areas and luxury flats that surround north Kensington" of the block - The Telegraph has it as "green energy concerns were prioritised ahead of safety as it emerged that cladding used to make the building more sustainable "


I'd wager the truth is a mix of the two.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

ska invita said:


> Media bias in action: The Independent says the cladding was  "chosen to improve appearance /// so that the tower would look better when seen from the conservation areas and luxury flats that surround north Kensington" of the block - The Telegraph has it as "green energy concerns were prioritised ahead of safety as it emerged that cladding used to make the building more sustainable "



Indy article is incomplete and has the wrong end of the stick and the telegraph one is just utter nonsense.  There is no real information out there so people are speculating whilst riding their hobby horse.

Its basically the written word version of 24 hour rolling news covering a big story.  There is no actual evidence so they just talk shit when really they should just run repeats of porridge and dads army until somebody has worked out what the hell is / was going on.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Indy article is incomplete and has the wrong end of the stick and the telegraph one is just utter nonsense.  There is no real information out there so people who haven't got a clue are speculating whilst riding their hobby horse.


yet they're being paid to do what we do for free


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> This is certainly true.  There was a contractor who used to do a load of these type projects who were famous for quoting 20% below cost to win the project.  After winning it they would then take an axe to everything to make their price viable.



Something that's also a well-known practice for the "big four" maintenance contractors to local authorities in London and the south-east, too, but where they also multi-charge for jobs (same job, 3 or 4 different job numbers) to bump up their profits.


----------



## LDC (Jun 15, 2017)

Article on Libcom about the fire and the context to it. Also in the comments there's some good factual info about the management and people involved, and details of forthcoming demos Smothered by regeneration: the Grenfell Tower fire


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yet they're being paid to do what we do for free



And we do it better.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Fwiw any privately owned flats would have had to contribute to the renovation works.  If you own a flat in a council block and they are going to do works like this you just get a bill land on your door matt.



Section 20 notice of works estimate, followed by the actual bill after works are completed.  Usually very scary pieces of paper, as local authorities invariably don't work them out properly.


----------



## phillm (Jun 15, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> £275K for a 2 bed flat?! That's super cheap for London, let alone Kensington...



Tactfully they have now been removed from Rightmove.


----------



## phillm (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> names straight to mi5



If your names not Mohammed you will probably be ok these days.


----------



## binka (Jun 15, 2017)

Seen a couple of survivors today say they phoned 999 and were told to stay in their flats to wait for rescue. Once they realised how bad it was getting they ignored that advice and got out. 

I can't even imagine how those call handlers are feeling now.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 15, 2017)

I hope this isn't true...


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> And we do it better.




Only because we reach for the pitchforks and blame the nearest toff.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> I hope this isn't true...



We all know it's going to be markedly higher than 17 and tbh wouldn't be surprised if it's 150. It's a horrible, shameful disaster which can't be swept under the carpet no matter what the tories want


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> I hope this isn't true...




Oh shit.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 15, 2017)

Bloody hell...


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 15, 2017)

Edited for taste


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> not read all through there but found this little gem
> 
> View attachment 109413
> p.8 sustainability & energy statement
> ...



The usual cause of people hoying stuff out of their windows, when it does happen, is rubbish chutes that are semi-permanently blocked.  Back when the towers went up, caretakers constantly checked and rodded the chutes.  Nowadays a job has to be raised to clear a single blockage, sometimes meaning a day or two days of delay.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 15, 2017)

J Ed said:


> They ignored this just like they ignored the disgraceful treatment of disabled and unemployed.


They caused both


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> The usual cause of people hoying stuff out of their windows, when it does happen, is rubbish chutes that are semi-permanently blocked.  Back when the towers went up, caretakers constantly checked and rodded the chutes.  Nowadays a job has to be raised to clear a single blockage, sometimes meaning a day or two days of delay.


Another area in which Hackney is crap - never had a chute


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 15, 2017)

There's been a few more posts about last calls on the Guardian and BBC news feed, they make absolutely grim reading


----------



## J Ed (Jun 15, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> They caused both



I meant the media ignored it, when it hasn't been legitimising it, which of course in turn has allowed it to happen and worsen in both instances.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 15, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> I hope this isn't true...




The motives of 'the media' are surely conjecture at this point though. If there was an official death toll, or more confirmed casualties, there is no way that some news outlet wouldn't run the story. Even the normally tame BBC has come straight out of the gate on this talking about systematic institutional neglect of the poor, social cleansing etc.

I would assume the delays in updating the list of casualties will be a result of the problems of recovering and identifiying bodies. The building was still burning last night remember.


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 15, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> I hope this isn't true...




I doubt there's any conspiracy to cover this up - the media tends to exaggerate, not understate body counts and papers today have unanimously been leading with the safety angle, from the Daily Star to the Financial Times.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> And we do it better.


but have you seen some of the comments 'below the line'? The worst of humanity!!


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> There's been a few more posts about last calls on the Guardian and BBC news feed, they make absolutely grim reading


Yeah it feels completely wrong to be reading that stuff i think, the last desperate words of someone to the mum ffs.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 15, 2017)

bimble said:


> Yeah it feels completely wrong to be reading that stuff i think, the last desperate words of someone to the mum ffs.



I am just not going to do that. The press intrusion generally has been obscene around all of this.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

Like most here I'm still fuming.  The next person who gives it the '..bloody 'elf and safety' routine is going to get a smack.


ETA: Using the VP method as outlined in the thread in general obvs.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Indy article is incomplete and has the wrong end of the stick and the telegraph one is just utter nonsense.  There is no real information out there so people are speculating whilst riding their hobby horse.
> 
> Its basically the written word version of 24 hour rolling news covering a big story.  There is no actual evidence so they just talk shit when really they should just run repeats of porridge and dads army until somebody has worked out what the hell is / was going on.


green energy concerns? So now it's the lefties that are to blame? Fuck off!


----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 15, 2017)

I see Corbyn and Labour are now coming out and saying empty homes in the area should be requistioned!

Good on 'em.

The difference between May and Corbyn on this disaster could not be more different


----------



## Ted Striker (Jun 15, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> I strongly suspect that over the next few months, RBKC and KCTMO will wheel out sheaves of documents showing how thoroughly they "consulted" the residents through opinion surveys and informal "events" in community spaces.  Analysis of this consultation will show that far from offering choices, the options offered were what the landlord wanted, not what the tenants wanted.



Personally seen their 'form' for completely misrepresenting these 'consultations'.

Very simple cherry picking of lone supporting voices, and restricting the actual surveyed population.

Went to one 'consultation' that nearly ended up in a riot as they were telling residents their garages were being scrapped to sell the area as a trendy hot-desking space, with all textbook hipster credentials. When the report came out that the palns "generally well received" I took a long time to calm down (again!).

The Subterrania/Neighbourhood/SupperClub/12 Acklam Road/Mode/Show-Your-Age-By-Telling-Me-What-You-Knew-It-As  club was a constant source of complaints from the residents that were opposite it, and could hear the bass every time the doors opened. 100's of houses were literally 15m/across a cobbled street from the doors of the club. Turns out their objections weren't considered relevant, nor where they notified of any licensing changes (to appeal against them) as they didn't share a connecting _wall _to the nightclub 

Slightly unrelated, but as an example to raise some suspicion they are probably crooked, as well as incompetent...I wasn't close to it, but the local library was sold to a prestigious (and tough to get in) prep school. After months of protests (obviously). Some co-incidence the guy in charge had applied to have his kids go to said prep school...

(Again, all very trivial, but just 3 examples off the top of my head where the consultation process is bollocks.)

They are in charge of probably the most lucrative underused (privately) real estate in the country. And they will try to do anything to maximize it and take it out of the locals' hands.


----------



## agricola (Jun 15, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> I doubt there's any conspiracy to cover this up - the media tends to exaggerate, not understate body counts and papers today have unanimously been leading with the safety angle, from the Daily Star to the Financial Times.



One can only hope that, if the reports are true, they aren't reporting it until there are people in place to deal properly with the families left behind - not putting people in bedsits or hostels and phone numbers to call if they are upset, but real homes with real support ready to go.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 109388
> strange picture to have chosen


They know what's it's like to have one's home burn down. Their gran's house burnt down a few years ago. That got sorted pretty fucking quickly!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

1927 said:


> They know what's it's like to have kbe's hime burn down. Their gran's house burnt down a few years ago. That got sorted pretty fucking quickly!


No doubt why they're laughing


----------



## JTG (Jun 15, 2017)

FBU point out that counselling services for firefighters in London were cut by Boris Johnson


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> green energy concerns? So now it's the lefties that are to blame? Fuck off!


Green energy by no means the preserve of the left


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

ska invita said:


> but have you seen some of the comments 'below the line'? The worst of humanity!!


Don't read comments in newspapers unless you want your blood pressure to rocket


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

i don't know how to spoiler a screenshot. 
This is really hard to read. Media intrusion beyond what you'd think possible, if true.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 15, 2017)

YouSir said:


> Or to arrange funding for immediate temporary accommodation, or start working to open up housing stock in the borough for residents, or guarantee funding for a rebuild, or alter legislation to allow councils to do it themselves, or a million other things that the useless fuck will completely avoid by saying 'lessons will be learned'.


She hasn't even said lessons will he learned, she said lessons MAY be learned!!!!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

bimble said:


> i don't know how to spoiler a screenshot.
> This is really hard to read. Media intrusion beyond what you'd think possible, if true.
> View attachment 109425


[s poiler]...[/sp oiler]


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 15, 2017)

agricola said:


> One can only hope that, if the reports are true, they aren't reporting it until there are people in place to deal properly with the families left behind - not putting people in bedsits or hostels and phone numbers to call if they are upset, but real homes with real support ready to go.



Mail etc. seem to have been following standard procedure so far: Find someone who says there might be hundreds dead, then put "Hundreds Dead" in quotation marks in their headlines.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 15, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> I hope this isn't true...



As I understand it, they are very careful not to confirm deaths until they have a pretty solid handle on the number. It may be frustrating, but I am sure there is not a conspiracy associated with it.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

1927 said:


> They know what's it's like to have one's home burn down. Their gran's house burnt down a few years ago. That got sorted pretty fucking quickly!



Not to mention the 350 million pound tart up one of her other places is getting.  Yet we must all remember that sprinkler systems are just too expensive for social housing.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 15, 2017)

JTG said:


> FBU point out that counselling services for firefighters in London were cut by Boris Johnson



They don't need counselling.  They can wrap themselves in the warm blanket of May's kind and sincere words.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 15, 2017)

gawkrodger said:


> I see Corbyn and Labour are now coming out and saying empty homes in the area should be requistioned!
> 
> Good on 'em.
> 
> The difference between May and Corbyn on this disaster could not be more different



From Harman and Lammy too.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 15, 2017)

Where the fuck's the government? Where the fuck's the council? Where the fuck's the mayor?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 15, 2017)

Just to be clear my tweet was mainly concerned with the number of deaths, not the claims of a cover up.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 15, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Where the fuck's the government? Where the fuck's the council? Where the fuck's the mayor?



They're all there. Look at them.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Ted Striker said:


> Personally seen their 'form' for completely misrepresenting these 'consultations'.
> 
> Very simple cherry picking of lone supporting voices, and restricting the actual surveyed population.
> 
> ...


I largely agree about consultation processes.

Regarding the last bit though - as far as I can make out, this particular project was not one that involved selling off space to private developers. It involved improvements to all of the existing housing units and communal areas plus the addition of 7 new ones at low level. All of those new units being for social rent.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Where the fuck's the government? Where the fuck's the council? Where the fuck's the mayor?


 
Don't you worry, I am sure they are working their soft hands to the bones sorting this out in the background, They have probably decided to make too many appearences as it will get in the way of the REAL issues. As our Strong And Stable PM in waiting recently said - *lets get to work!*


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 15, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> The usual cause of people hoying stuff out of their windows, when it does happen, is rubbish chutes that are semi-permanently blocked.  Back when the towers went up, caretakers constantly checked and rodded the chutes.  Nowadays a job has to be raised to clear a single blockage, sometimes meaning a day or two days of delay.



my chute was blocked for months on one occasions. usually would be at least 3 or 4 days. resident caretakers make blocs much safer and better maintained - but a rarity these days.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 15, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Where the fuck's the government? Where the fuck's the council? Where the fuck's the mayor?



I, like you don't know about the first two but it appears unsurprisingly that Sadiq Khan had a somewhat hostile reception from residents and neighbours, but at least he spoke to them, unlike somebody else.

Sadiq Khan confronted on live TV by furious Grenfell Tower residents


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 15, 2017)

JTG said:


> FBU point out that counselling services for firefighters in London were cut by Boris Johnson


As with so much else in this, I can't find the words to express the anger.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 15, 2017)

teqniq said:


> I, like you don't know about the first two but it appears unsurprisingly that Sadiq Khan had a somewhat hostile reception from residents and neighbours, but at least he spoke to them, unlike somebody else.
> 
> Sadiq Khan confronted on live TV by furious Grenfell Tower residents



He had absolutely fuck all of practical worth to say from what I've seen.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 15, 2017)

It's just, local communities and the wider public can do so much in such a short space out of their own time, money and resources, and yet anybody with any power and control are fucking useless.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Any building which will have an impact on a conservation area will be assessed in this way. It's assessed because of the existence of the conservation area, not because of who lives in the conservation area. If such an assessment was not made, the planning officer would not be doing their job according to planning legislation. Do you have an objection to the basic principle of conservation areas?


Surely the impact assessment would be in the new construction rather than in an existing one!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 15, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> He had absolutely fuck all of practical worth to say from what I've seen.



So he's doing his very best 'Sadiq Khan' impression then.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 15, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> It's just, local communities and the wider public can do so much in such a short space out of their own time, money and resources, and yet anybody with any power and control are fucking useless.



It definitely looks that way. Well in fact it is. From what I've seen/heard it appears that the volunteers have been completely overwhelmed with contributions, hoping for some help from the council such as additional storage. Couple of officials have looked in on them but practical help? None


----------



## redcogs (Jun 15, 2017)

How long before before serious victim blaming begins, or some fabricated allegation of deliberate fire raising sabotage to save political necks gets underway?  The anger needs a channel to put these deregulating privatising gangster fuckers on their backs.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 15, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> He had absolutely fuck all of practical worth to say from what I've seen.


I'm not entirely sure he had much to do with it
..


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jun 15, 2017)

There's some stuff blaming a black guy for having a dodgy fridge already. 

I predict full-on Hillsbourough style victim blaming within days.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 15, 2017)

redcogs said:


> How long before before serious victim blaming begins, or some fabricated allegation of deliberate fire raising sabotage to save political necks gets underway?  The anger needs a channel to put these deregulating privatising gangster fuckers on their backs.



 Fuckwits on Twitter/Facebook are already doing it.


----------



## hash tag (Jun 15, 2017)

It is very difficult knowing what to say at a time like this as everyone wants answers. Now, and we all know that will not happen, the fires are not even out yet, nor have all the bodies been recovered for goodness sake. They can't even begin to establish the causes and catalysts until this has been done and that they can be sure the building is safe to enter. Only then can the investigations begin. But at least Khan stood there, faced the people and took some flack. May?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 15, 2017)

ruffneck23 said:


> I'm not entirely sure he had much to do with it
> ..


As much as I don't like to quote myself but this comment from the Indy is spot on 

'As Mr Khan urged that checks must be undertaken on all apartment blocks, another resident shouted: “Jeremy Corbyn’s been saying that for ages. Why didn’t you support him Mr Khan? Why didn’t you support Mr Corbyn Mr Khan?” '


----------



## redcogs (Jun 15, 2017)

Bernie Gunther said:


> There's some stuff blaming a black guy for having a dodgy fridge already.
> 
> I predict full-on Hillsbourough style victim blaming within days.



Lets hope such voices can be drowned out..


----------



## 1927 (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> So, Pickman's model has a problem with planning legislation being set up to protect people from adverse effects of development near their homes.


I think you miss the point! This was not a new development, it had been there since 1974!


----------



## teqniq (Jun 15, 2017)

Police open criminal investigation into Grenfell Tower fire



> Police have opened a criminal investigation into the fire at Grenfell Tower that could result in the prosecution of anyone deemed responsible for building or any design failures that caused the blaze.....


----------



## 1927 (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Having read the full report and relevant local policies, are you of the opinion that the application should have been refused and if so why?


Which application?


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 15, 2017)

The fire isn't out, it's just getting started, fuelled by "National shame".


----------



## scifisam (Jun 15, 2017)

1927 said:


> I think you miss the point! This was not a new development, it had been there since 1974!



It's a change, though, isn't it? I just don't get why it's such a bad thing to consider how something looks _as well as_ the need for improved insulation. There are much better things to be annoyed about here.

The conservation area isn't a new development, btw, but a protected area of older buildings.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> You want the specific planning policy that says planning assessments must consider the impact of development on views from conservation areas? The one that planning officers are obliged to follow when assessing any application in the borough?
> 
> View attachment 109415


Why is this relevant? It wasn't a new development!


----------



## editor (Jun 15, 2017)

gawkrodger said:


> I see Corbyn and Labour are now coming out and saying empty homes in the area should be requistioned!
> 
> Good on 'em.
> 
> The difference between May and Corbyn on this disaster could not be more different


Fucking YES. Proper leadership.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 15, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Obviously things were crap under Blair but the savage cuts to local authorities are a recent thing.  The housing crisis has deepened and worsened significantly.


But the fire regs under Blair are the same as now! No one has ripped out fire prevention measures. They were safe yesterday as they were 12 years ago.


----------



## A380 (Jun 15, 2017)

Lilly Allen on Channel 4 news now. Doing a fantastic job.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 15, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> He had absolutely fuck all of practical worth to say from what I've seen.


It was a pretty shoddy performance. He might as well have just said "I know nothing, can do fuck all, but I'm here to maintain appearances". You'd have thought a decent politician could at least have done a better job of _pretending_ they're there as more than merely a box ticking exercise.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 15, 2017)

Yes proper leadership bring it on !


----------



## 1927 (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Building materials do go through certification testing, and in theory, anyone specifying any critical material should check that the claims are supported by a valid certificate. In practice, of course, there are thousands of different product used in any project, and no architect or contractor calls up every single manufacturer, asks for their certificates and cross-checks them with the certifying authorities.
> 
> In reality, the system tends to rely on suppliers and others carrying out these checks. If I'm a builder then it's reasonable for me to assume that if Travis Perkins sells me something, I can trust that the relevant checks have been done. If big contractor goes to an unknown chinese manufacturer though, then most would say it would be their responsibility to check that claims were backed up by proper testing.


Wrong! It IS your responsibility as a contractor/specifier!


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 15, 2017)

Fair fucks to Lily Allen.


----------



## billbond (Jun 15, 2017)

Labour bods really getting it now live on air as they were around when lots of these building reg decisions were made
Now Lilly slag Allen is on aptly lives local , blaming everything on the Tories , always a agenda with her 
A few minutes before she turned up she would have heard the Labour officials going through the mill
she will have to be very careful re Libel


----------



## electroplated (Jun 15, 2017)

A380 said:


> Lilly Allen on Channel 4 news now. Doing a fantastic job.



Yep. Just caught the last minute of her, querying why the media are downplaying the number of deaths and quoting much higher unofficial figures  - first time I've seen anything on that front on TV coverage.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 15, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> It was a pretty shoddy performance. He might as well have just said "I know nothing, can do fuck all, but I'm here to maintain appearances". You'd have thought a decent politician could at least have done a better job of _pretending_ they're there as more than merely a box ticking exercise.



You'd think a £143,000 a year mayor could actually mobilise something with the government and council a bit better than this rather than platitudes.


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

billbond said:


> Now Lilly slag Allen is on


fuck off.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 15, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> As much as these things make any difference, but surely there's got to be a petition about that? Make it a visible and talked about issue, and show that it's not just the residents that care about it but the general populace too. I'm sure it'd get a hell of a lotta signatures.


For what it's worth, there's this one.


> I'm looking for a commitment from government that the same number of like for like, social homes will be provided within the Kensington borough, within a reasonable timescale and all peoples affected by the Grenfell Tower inferno will be given assurances that they will be re-homed back within the community they came from.


----------



## billbond (Jun 15, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> Fair fucks to Lily Allen.


As if she cares
Prob got a new album out, looking for publicity, now off to her gated mansion


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 15, 2017)

billbond said:


> Labour bods really getting it now live on air as they were around when lots of these building reg decisions were made
> Now Lilly slag Allen is on aptly lives local , blaming everything on the Tories , always a agenda with her
> A few minutes before she turned up she would have heard the Labour officials going through the mill
> she will have to be very careful re Libel


 you need to need to be very careful less people think you're a cunt


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 15, 2017)

A380 said:


> Lilly Allen on Channel 4 news now. Doing a fantastic job.



Adele was there early apparently, for some reason or other.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 15, 2017)

billbond said:


> Labour bods really getting it now live on air as they were around when lots of these building reg decisions were made
> Now Lilly slag Allen is on aptly lives local , blaming everything on the Tories , always a agenda with her
> A few minutes before she turned up she would have heard the Labour officials going through the mill
> she will have to be very careful re Libel



Fuck off you slag.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 15, 2017)

billbond said:


> *Now Lilly slag Allen* is on aptly lives local , blaming everything on the Tories , always a agenda with her
> A few minutes before she turned up she would have heard the Labour officials going through the mill
> she will have to be very careful re Libel



Wtf is this?


----------



## billbond (Jun 15, 2017)

bimble said:


> fuck off.


Intelligent, Typical


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 15, 2017)

Bernie Gunther said:


> There's some stuff blaming a black guy for having a dodgy fridge already.
> 
> I predict full-on Hillsbourough style victim blaming within days.


Yeah, I just saw some shit Metro article making insinuations because the man whose flat it started in had a bag with him when he knocked on his neighbours door - media literally trying to turn neighbour against neighbour.
And drawing attention away from the point that buildings of this size need to have foolproof systems which stop the spread of the fire and automatically raise the alarm and why the fuck did this building have none of this.
Fucking shithead journalists.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 15, 2017)

1927 said:


> But the fire regs under Blair are the same as now! No one has ripped out fire prevention measures. They were safe yesterday as they were 12 years ago.



Are you sure about that?


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 15, 2017)

billbond said:


> As if she cares
> Prob got a new album out, looking for publicity, now off to her gated mansion



As if you care you daft cunt, fuck off.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 15, 2017)

billbond said:


> Intelligent, Typical


As opposed to your intelligent reasoning ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

ruffneck23 said:


> you need to need to be very careful less people think you're a cunt


We already know he is


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> We already know he is


Ah a bit slow on the uptake , still proven once again


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 15, 2017)

billbond said:


> Labour bods really getting it now live on air as they were around when lots of these building reg decisions were made
> Now Lilly slag Allen is on aptly lives local , blaming everything on the Tories , always a agenda with her
> A few minutes before she turned up she would have heard the Labour officials going through the mill
> she will have to be very careful re Libel



Fuck off you pointless, snivelling prick.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 15, 2017)

scifisam said:


> It's a change, though, isn't it? I just don't get why it's such a bad thing to consider how something looks _as well as_ the need for improved insulation. There are much better things to be annoyed about here.
> 
> The conservation area isn't a new development, btw, but a protected area of older buildings.


My point is that the new cladding was installed as a result of what an existing structure looked like from a new development, that isn't the point if conservation area legislation.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 15, 2017)

billbond said:


> As if she cares
> Prob got a new album out, looking for publicity, now off to her gated mansion


And where do you live sweetie ?


----------



## 1927 (Jun 15, 2017)

billbond said:


> As if she cares
> Prob got a new album out, looking for publicity, now off to her gated mansion


Does her motivation matter if she's putting it out there?


----------



## 1927 (Jun 15, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> Are you sure about that?


Sorry I missed out AS. As in As safe, sorry! Assuming that's what you were picking up on!


----------



## scifisam (Jun 15, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> Adele was there early apparently, for some reason or other.



She attended the vigil, was crying and didn't pose for publicity photos (saw the crying on blurry phone photos someone had taken). What a terrible person she clearly is.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 15, 2017)

regardless, you don't call women slags because its out of order. So what if they like fucking, lots of humans do only one half of the species is made to feel shit about it. Take this irrelevance elsewhere.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 15, 2017)

1927 said:


> My point is that the new cladding was installed as a result of what an existing structure looked like from a new development, that isn't the point if conservation area legislation.



I thought it talked about the view from the conservation area?

Christ, it's not a big deal. Why some of you think that planners should be allowed to whack up anything as ugly as they like I don't know. Oh, I remember, it's important that it's an existing structure. Obviously that means that any changes to it would be invisible, silly me.


----------



## editor (Jun 15, 2017)

billbond said:


> Now Lilly slag Allen is on aptly lives local


Take a warning for that, you misogynistic idiot.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 15, 2017)

I was teaching a health and safety course today and the first trainee that came in was a guy I know who is a fire expert. We talked about the fire and he agreed heads will have to roll and people must go to gaol. We agreed in one important point tho, in our opinion the building regs are a red herring. It doesn't matter what the standards were at the time the building was constructed . The Fire regs state that you must have suitable and sufficient fire preventative measures in place. There is no get out clause for old buildings.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 15, 2017)

scifisam said:


> I thought it talked about the view from the conservation area?
> 
> Christ, it's not a big deal. Why some of you think that planners should be allowed to whack up anything as ugly as they like I don't know. Oh, I remember, it's important that it's an existing structure. Obviously that means that any changes to it would be invisible, silly me.


You totally miss the point. The changes were made to the block because of the view from a new structure! Sounds to me like you and your mate Teuchter are apologists for poor fire prevention.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 15, 2017)

billbond said:


> Labour bods really getting it now live on air as they were around when lots of these building reg decisions were made
> Now Lilly slag Allen is on aptly lives local , blaming everything on the Tories , always a agenda with her
> A few minutes before she turned up she would have heard the Labour officials going through the mill
> she will have to be very careful re Libel



It has really rattled people like you that the response to this preventable tragedy (really manslaughter) has been a mix of ordinary people coming together in support of one another and anger directed at those who are responsible.


----------



## 1%er (Jun 15, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Police open criminal investigation into Grenfell Tower fire


Does the police opening a criminal investigation have any effect on a public inquiry, can they run at the same time?

I seem to remember reading that a parliamentary inquiry ( a different case to this) was stopped in case it interfered with a police investigation and was wondering if the same thing could hold up a public inquiry.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 15, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> For what it's worth, there's this one.


And you people doubted the power of petitions!  



> two middle-ranking ministers, Nick Hurd from the Home Office and housing minister Alok Sharma, fielding questions from, among others, the omnipresent Mr Corbyn. Very significant concessions were made: all homeless residents will be rehoused in the area, and children will be able to continue at their schools.


 

(Obviously you have to hope they won't try and weasel out of it or only deliver half-measures)


----------



## ska invita (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Don't read comments in newspapers unless you want your blood pressure to rocket


I was talking about comments on urban! 

(attempt at a joke)


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 15, 2017)

Rehoused where would be my first question ?


----------



## scifisam (Jun 15, 2017)

1927 said:


> You totally miss the point. The changes were made to the block because of the view from a new structure! Sounds to me like you and your mate Teuchter are apologists for poor fire prevention.



That's a fucking shitty thing to say. Fuck off.

Also, the changes were NOT made for that reason. Read the stuff you're talking about! In.su.la.tion. Is that a really really hard word for you?

Actually, no, after an accusation like that, you total fucking bastard, I'm putting you on ignore rather than derail the thread.


----------



## agricola (Jun 15, 2017)

1%er said:


> Does the police opening a criminal investigation have any effect on a public inquiry, can they run at the same time?
> 
> I seem to remember reading that a parliamentary inquiry ( a different case to this) was stopped in case it interfered with a police investigation and was wondering if the same thing could hold up a public inquiry.



the relevant bit of the Inquiries Act (emphasis added):



> *13* Power to suspend inquiry
> 
> *(1)The Minister may at any time, by notice to the chairman, suspend an inquiry for such period as appears to him to be necessary to allow for—
> 
> ...


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

Guardian editorial is calling it May's Katrina. 
Ends with the demand that "the families of victims and survivors must have legal aid so that they are on a level playing field at both the inquests and the inquiry. That must be guaranteed at once, so that they have the space to begin the process of grieving."
Which is a good point


----------



## agricola (Jun 15, 2017)

bimble said:


> Guardian editorial is calling it May's Katrina.
> Ends with the demand that "the families of victims and survivors must have legal aid so that they are on a level playing field at both the inquests and the inquiry. That must be guaranteed at once, so that they have the space to begin the process of grieving."
> Which is a good point



Lets hope someone notices what was in their manifesto then.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 15, 2017)

agricola said:


> Lets hope someone notices what was in their manifesto then.


they've already taken legal aid away, how could their manifesto propose worse?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 15, 2017)

In regards to the insultingly useless response of May to such a horror and death toll, who else is reminded of Bush/Katrina?


----------



## Humberto (Jun 15, 2017)

What is/should be happening in terms of counseling, liaison, proper accommodation? I can't begin to imagine how it must feel for them. Shock and grief must be beyond imagining. Lack of real help beyond grassroots volunteer stuff i.e decisive moves by authorities to assist them in an emergency situation is quite sickening.
Longer term I hope they are assisted towards getting some hefty compensation.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 15, 2017)

Humberto said:


> What is/should be happening in terms of counseling, liaison, proper accommodation? I can't begin to imagine how it must feel for them. Shock and grief must be beyond imagining. Lack of real help beyond grassroots volunteer stuff i.e decisive moves by authorities to assist them in an emergency situation is quite sickening.
> Longer term I hope they are assisted towards getting some hefty compensation.



As far as counselling goes I'd be surprised if there's anything beyond a possible flying visit, resources have been so stripped away on that front. Can only hope there's some community/charity organisation which can organise things.


----------



## mather (Jun 15, 2017)

I'm wanna buy some food n supplies tomorrow to donate to help people out. Where/who would I give it to?


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 15, 2017)

Apparently outside one of the mosques wherein people were doing positive stuff that actually helps, Paul Golding from Britain First (aka Britain's Worst) was calling them muslim terrorists. 

What a massive cunt


----------



## hash tag (Jun 15, 2017)

1927 said:


> I was teaching a health and safety course today and the first trainee that came in was a guy I know who is a fire expert. We talked about the fire and he agreed heads will have to roll and people must go to gaol. We agreed in one important point tho, in our opinion the building regs are a red herring. It doesn't matter what the standards were at the time the building was constructed . The Fire regs state that you must have suitable and sufficient fire preventative measures in place. There is no get out clause for old buildings.



You really don't believe people will go to jail for this? As is the way of the world these days in certain circles, there will be endless buckpassing/lack of accountability and one or two people will be allowed to quietly retire.
Without for one minute wishing to speculate on cause or second guessing the public enquiry people will say that this department was 10% responsible because of this, that company was 20% responsible because of something, someone else had a hand in it. We can all feel where we know and want the to buck to stop, but bet you what, it wont get there. It wont be current PM because she was not PM who instigated the cuts (which were not directly responsible) and she will be gone by then. Johnson for chopping the fire brigade, I doubt it. Local council because of what ever. It doesn't ever happen like that, however much you and I would want it to


----------



## scifisam (Jun 15, 2017)

mather said:


> I'm wanna buy some food n supplies tomorrow to donate to help people out. Where/who would I give it to?



The charities in the area are overwhelmed with donations of stuff right now, but you could donate to one of the campaigns instead.


----------



## hash tag (Jun 15, 2017)

mather said:


> I'm wanna buy some food n supplies tomorrow to donate to help people out. Where/who would I give it to?



I believe there are numerous places to take stuff to, that they are snowed under with donations and that they are desperately trying to coordinate everything to avoid duplication of resources Etc. If you can find a group that you can donate cash to, that might be a better idea, trouble is, which one.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 15, 2017)

mather said:


> I'm wanna buy some food n supplies tomorrow to donate to help people out. Where/who would I give it to?


From what I've been reading today, they have an oversupply of both materials and volunteers right now. Possibly money too, in the short term. They're apparently lacking warehousing, accommodation and specialist counsellors. No doubt the situation remains fluid but no doubt it would be worth trying to respond to dynamic needs as requested by people on the ground, rather than contributing something unsolicited in the hope it might be useful, IYSWIM.


----------



## agricola (Jun 15, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> they've already taken legal aid away, how could their manifesto propose worse?



They were proposing bringing in an "independent public advocate" in order to support victims and their families after a disaster.  This would have been independent in the sense of the word that they would have been appointed by the Government, who were probably the people at fault anyway.


----------



## mather (Jun 15, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Apparently outside one of the mosques wherein people were doing positive stuff that actually helps, Paul Golding from Britain First (aka Britain's Worst) was calling them muslim terrorists.
> 
> What a massive cunt



I saw that on Twitter, Golding is a fucking cunt! A few people were standing up to him but it was all rather restrained, if it had been me I'd have just punched the cunt. I mean of all the fucking days to stir shit up this ain't it when people are grieving.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 15, 2017)

Amber Rudd: Amber Rudd: Now we see London show its grit, compassion and tolerance

"But at this early stage, with firefighters still picking their way through the debris, I would urge everyone not to rush to judgement. If there are lessons to be learned we will learn them."

STOP SAYING "IF" YOU DISGUSTING EXCUSE FOR A HUMAN


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 15, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> Adele was there early apparently, for some reason or other.



She lives locally and wants to show support with her community. Nothing wrong with that, she didn't publicise her visit or anything.

eta = re counselling, there's good evidence that intervening too soon after trauma can interfere with processing and store up problems for the future. It's important people have time and space now, and time to fight to make sure those who need it receive the best care in due course.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 15, 2017)

FFS and pardon language but I just read that that fucking bitch had the nerve to trot out the "lessons will be learned" cliche. Possibly 150+ dead people and "lessons will be learned". I'm pretty much a pacifist, but if I met her at the moment I wouldn't want to say anything. I would punch her full on in the face. That's a bad thing to say and think I know, but she is so repugnant.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 15, 2017)

Anger is building.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Jun 15, 2017)

mather said:


> I'm wanna buy some food n supplies tomorrow to donate to help people out. Where/who would I give it to?


As others have said, they've been inundated with donations and don't need any more at the moment. There was a guy on the radio this morning saying that what they really needed was cardboard boxes to put stuff they've received into a storage facility out near Heathrow - however that was hours ago so I don't know if they've got all the boxes they need by now.


----------



## phillm (Jun 15, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> In regards to the insultingly useless response of May to such a horror and death toll, who else is reminded of Bush/Katrina?



Bush could though crudely attempt a grotesque parody of a human being unlike the utterly friendless May - a person more uncomfortable in their skin and life it would be hard to find.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 15, 2017)

billbond said:


> Labour bods really getting it now live on air as they were around when lots of these building reg decisions were made
> Now Lilly slag Allen is on aptly lives local , blaming everything on the Tories , always a agenda with her
> A few minutes before she turned up she would have heard the Labour officials going through the mill
> she will have to be very careful re Libel


fuck off


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 15, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> Anger is building.



2011 2.0?


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Amber Rudd: Amber Rudd: Now we see London show its grit, compassion and tolerance
> 
> "But at this early stage, with firefighters still picking their way through the debris, I would urge everyone not to rush to judgement. If there are lessons to be learned we will learn them."
> 
> STOP SAYING "IF" YOU DISGUSTING EXCUSE FOR A HUMAN



What the fuck? Oh yeah, it _may_ just be a perfectly normal offshoot of the construction industry. No-one's fault at all. Fucking hell.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 15, 2017)

Dr. Furface said:


> As others have said, they've been inundated with donations and don't need any more at the moment. There was a guy on the radio this morning saying that what they really needed was cardboard boxes to put stuff they've received into a storage facility out near Heathrow - however that was hours ago so I don't know if they've got all the boxes they need by now.



The solidarity of the British public has been amazing in the past few days.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 15, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> 2011 2.0?



Protest planned for tomorrow, will be interesting.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 15, 2017)

May didn't even have the fucking decency to meet any residents or volunteers, did an private visit with officials and some firefighters. Even the Mail and Express have been critical. Corbyn talking about practical support and offering sympathy to those affected. This has become the overriding image from today...


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 15, 2017)

billbond said:


> Now *Lilly slag Allen *is on aptly lives local...l



If I felt sexually inadequate I doubt I'd go letting a message board know about it.


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

That piece of shit article by Rudd says the relief efforts of Londoners have been led by the mayor. Mindboggling idiocy to even think of saying that.
"who has led the heart-warming response we have seen in the city'


----------



## phillm (Jun 15, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> May didn't even have the fucking decency to meet any residents or volunteers, did an private visit with officials and some firefighters. Even the Mail and Express have been critical. Corbyn talking about practical support and offering sympathy to those affected. This has become the overriding image from today...



Cometh the hour cometh the man.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 15, 2017)

Daily Mail has published pictures and name of the man whose flat the fire is rumoured to have started in.


Ipso link here - Complaints form


----------



## agricola (Jun 15, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> 2011 2.0?



It might, but it shouldn't.  After all it isn't KCTMO or the people responsible for social housing policy (and who appear to have ignored clear warning signs in the process) these last forty years who would be affected.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 15, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> Daily Mail has published pictures and name of the man whose flat the fire is rumoured to have started in.
> 
> 
> Ipso link here - Complaints form



Christ these people really are fucking parasites.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 15, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> She lives locally and wants to show support with her community. Nothing wrong with that, she didn't publicise her visit or anything.
> 
> eta = re counselling, there's good evidence that intervening too soon after trauma can interfere with processing and store up problems for the future. It's important people have time and space now, and time to fight to make sure those who need it receive the best care in due course.


Some services like CBT for PTSD, trauma and so on will only be relevant much later down the line, for this reason, but that doesn't mean access to care, support and counselling is to be omitted altogether now.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 15, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Christ these people really are fucking parasites.




Some 18 hours ago it was a skinny white guy in one article from the bastards, they've changed there minds now and tweeted a shot of a black guy sipping a pint saying it was him. 

The Scum is now saying he's a bastard for knocking at his neighbours door with a sack of his clothing and telling them theres a fire. 

Parasites is not a strong enough term for these fucking arseholes. Absolute cunts the lot of them.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 15, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Some services like CBT for PTSD, trauma and so on will only be relevant much later down the line, for this reason, but that doesn't mean access to care, support and counselling is to be omitted altogether now.


I said it's important people have time and space now. Counselling would be a very bad idea for the reasons I mentioned. Talking to people, humanity and care, absolutely needed. I have been involved in offering NHS emergency mental health support in previous major incidents, I do honestly know what I'm talking about here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

phillm said:


> Bush could though crudely attempt a grotesque parody of a human being unlike the utterly friendless May - a person more uncomfortable in their skin and life it would be hard to find.


If only she would shed that human skin and you saw her in her lizard glory you might say something different


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 15, 2017)

mather said:


> I'm wanna buy some food n supplies tomorrow to donate to help people out. Where/who would I give it to?


I heard they have enough food so I went to the just giving link on the evening standard ( ahhh I know but it seemed to be the only one that would let me )


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> Daily Mail has published pictures and name of the man whose flat the fire is rumoured to have started in.
> 
> 
> Ipso link here - Complaints form



Just having a quick scan of the PCC (code of practice):
*
3) Privacy **
i) Everyone is entitled to respect for his or her private and family life, home, health and correspondence, including digital communications.

ii) Editors will be expected to justify intrusions into any individual's private life without consent. Account will be taken of the complainant's own public disclosures of information.

iii) It is unacceptable to photograph individuals in private places without their consent.

_Note – Private places are public or private property where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.
_
*5) Intrusion into grief or shock*
i) In cases involving personal grief or shock, enquiries and approaches must be made with sympathy and discretion and publication handled sensitively. This should not restrict the right to report legal proceedings, such as inquests.



May be worth citing relevant bits of those in a complaint.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> If only she would shed that human skin and you saw her in her lizard glory you might say something different


You are icke and I want my fiver


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Christ these people really are fucking parasites.


If you look though at the comments, people - DM readers - are not buying it, they are telling them to fuck off with the victim blaming, just like they told them to fuck off with the earlier attempt to blame the boss of the company which fitted the cladding. This is not going to go away so easily as some would like.


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

And Artaxerxes can you say where they published it?


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 15, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Christ these people really are fucking parasites.



Proper scum.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 15, 2017)

Cid said:


> And Artaxerxes can say where they published it?




I've attached screenshots here, if you want to go on the Mail site there is a big fuck off article

Grenfell Tower in North Kensington is on fire

I am not going on The Suns site, because even with all my adblockers I don't want that shit on my PC or to give them the traffic.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 15, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> May didn't even have the fucking decency to meet any residents or volunteers, did an private visit with officials and some firefighters. Even the Mail and Express have been critical. Corbyn talking about practical support and offering sympathy to those affected. This has become the overriding image from today...


Pretty much sums up their fundamental differences as human beings.


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 15, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> Some 18 hours ago it was a skinny white guy in one article from the bastards, they've changed there minds now and tweeted a shot of a black guy sipping a pint saying it was him.
> 
> The Scum is now saying he's a bastard for knocking at his neighbours door with a sack of his clothing and telling them theres a fire.
> 
> Parasites is not a strong enough term for these fucking arseholes. Absolute cunts the lot of them.



How the fuck did they get hold of his number? They are going to end up driving someone to suicide.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 15, 2017)

Like not like again


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 15, 2017)

It really is about time the likes of the scum, daily fail et al had there presses smashed. Close them down.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 15, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> I said it's important people have time and space now. Counselling would be a very bad idea for the reasons I mentioned. Talking to people, humanity and care, absolutely needed. I have been involved in offering NHS emergency mental health support in previous major incidents, I do honestly know what I'm talking about here.


Sorry - counselling was a poor choice of words on my part, as it can have specific meaning. I really mean availability of a broader set of helping services - as one example, The Samaritans, who self-describe as 'listening not counselling'. Pressing people into anything any time soon would be a bad idea. But equally holding all services back to a distant perimeter would be dangerous too. It's a difficult and delicate balance.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 15, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> It really is about time the likes of the scum, daily fail et al had there presses smashed. Close them down.



Compulsory purchase their offices and turn them into social housing.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 15, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Compulsory purchase their offices and turn them into social housing.




I don't think there is an exorcist strong enough to clear the evil out of the place.


----------



## agricola (Jun 15, 2017)

bimble said:


> If you look though at the comments, people - DM readers - are not buying it, they are telling them to fuck off with the victim blaming, just like they told them to fuck off with the earlier attempt to blame the boss of the company which fitted the cladding. This is not going to go away so easily as some would like.



It will never go away.  In fact, I can't think of a disaster more descriptive of everything that is wrong with a country than this one.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 15, 2017)

agricola said:


> It will never go away.  In fact, I can't think of a disaster more descriptive of everything that is wrong with a country than this one.


Yes, grimly emblematic...hence Steve Bell's cartoon.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 15, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> It really is about time the likes of the scum, daily fail et al had there presses smashed. Close them down.



The multifaceted defence of the consequences of neoliberalism by these newspapers is indirectly killing people. Through cuts to the NHS, education, fire services, the bureaucratic and cruel mazes of the DWP and through countless other examples. This is basically violence and it is conducted because it harms us and helps them. It's that simple. That isn't limited to newspapers like the Sun or the Daily Mail though, it also applies to newspapers like the Guardian and the New Statesman which hold up the other end of neoliberalism with a different audience.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Compulsory purchase their offices and turn them into social housing.


Squat their offices. Don't give them a cent.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Squat their offices. Don't give them a cent.



Perhaps a couple of pence, more of a fuck you than total expropriation.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 15, 2017)

Some guy on LBC a min ago was like what if we all dont pay our rent to the council , got shot down but I thought what a great idea , mass squatting FTW , that may tellem


----------



## redcogs (Jun 15, 2017)

All empty luxury flats/houses in the locality should be taken over by the local authority and distributed to those rendered homeless by incineration.  Why are steps not already underway?  Perhaps they are?


----------



## agricola (Jun 15, 2017)

J Ed said:


> The multifaceted defence of the consequences of neoliberalism by these newspapers is indirectly killing people. Through cuts to the NHS, education, fire services, the bureaucratic and cruel mazes of the DWP and through countless other examples. This is basically violence and it is conducted because it harms us and helps them. It's that simple. That isn't limited to newspapers like the Sun or the Daily Mail though, it also applies to newspapers like the Guardian and the New Statesman which hold up the other end of neoliberalism with a different audience.



Indeed, plus of course there is the failure even to do basic things like actually report the news.  

One of the most spot on comments I've seen today was that bloke laying into the Press for only turning up when people had died, after spending years not noticing that people were warning of the danger posed to residents.  If they can't do that in the same city they all live and work in, for a block that many of them will have driven past most days, what hope does the rest of the country have?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 15, 2017)

Jezza is trying...


----------



## J Ed (Jun 15, 2017)

.


----------



## redcogs (Jun 15, 2017)

Even a Tory local state could be forced to act, May and her spiv ghost government are weak and only need a push to start offering concessions.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 15, 2017)

redcogs said:


> All empty luxury flats/houses in the locality should be taken over by the local authority and distributed to those rendered homeless by incineration.  Why are steps not already underway?  Perhaps they are?


Reason; the tory scum rentier councillors (or their tax-haven trust funds) own the investment assets...or homes as you or I might call them.


----------



## bimble (Jun 15, 2017)

Is there actually a government at the moment?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

redcogs said:


> Even a Tory local state could be forced to act, May and her spiv ghost government are weak and only need a push to start offering concessions.







Some tories being given a push: an artist's impression


----------



## J Ed (Jun 15, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Reason; the tory scum rentier councillors (or their tax-haven trust funds) own the investment assets...or homes as you or I might call them.



Yes, second they do this they lose much of their  political and financial backing, surely.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 15, 2017)

What good is a Tory government to you, Mr Vladimir 0.0001%, if it can't defend your property rights.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Some tories being given a push: an artist's impression




Defenestration of Westminster, I'd be up for it.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 15, 2017)

J Ed said:


> What good is a Tory government to you, Mr Vladimir 0.0001%, if it can't defend your property rights.


A good point indeed


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 15, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> Some 18 hours ago it was a skinny white guy in one article from the bastards, they've changed there minds now and tweeted a shot of a black guy sipping a pint saying it was him.
> 
> The Scum is now saying he's a bastard for knocking at his neighbours door with a sack of his clothing and telling them theres a fire.
> 
> Parasites is not a strong enough term for these fucking arseholes. Absolute cunts the lot of them.


Cunts, they're the ones who should be burning. Along with the Tories who filibuster housing bills.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jun 15, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Councils are supposed to award contracts based on best value, which DOESN'T necessarily mean "bottom price", if your procurement people are prepared to put in the work and do a thorough CBA on each tender, but often does if - like many local authorities - you've made your senior staff redundant, and the people doing the procurement are basically junior staff with new job titles and bigger responsibilities, whose main ambition is to just not fuck up.



indeed.  the amount of 'pre-qualification' bumf that's required before you can even bid for any sort of council contract is usually fairly huge.

how much of it is relevant, or how much of it's checked can vary.

and the procurement people tend to be procurement specialists, and may not know the first thing about the goods / services they are telling specialist officers how to procure.  it also depends whether the specialist officers are prepared to argue with the procurement people.

in my local authority past, i had a 'discussion' one time i was trying to tender some school bus contracts about whether it was really worth asking bus / coach operators whether they were signed up to some construction industry scheme...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 15, 2017)

Pretty damning article. 



> “I only use the mineral wool ones because your gut tells you it is not right to wrap a building in plastic,”



Experts warned government against cladding material used on Grenfell


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 15, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> It really is about time the likes of the scum, daily fail et al had there presses smashed. Close them down.



Captain Swing needs to be disinterred and modernised, Comrade.  As does Ned Ludd. 

I can see the _Guardian_ headlines now "Corbynist Catpain Gwins leads Lutdide mob to smash printing presses".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 15, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Compulsory purchase their offices and turn them into social housing.



IIRC, Mail's offices are in Kensington, so it'd be the right thing to do.


----------



## phillm (Jun 15, 2017)

ruffneck23 said:


> Some guy on LBC a min ago was like what if we all dont pay our rent to the council , got shot down but I thought what a great idea , mass squatting FTW , that may tellem



Soon the fight back has to at least be mass occupations , squatting , civil disobedience , protest , marches - I'm in.


----------



## redcogs (Jun 15, 2017)

Just to say something obvious.. a grim aspect of the working class condition is it's lack of confidence in it's own potential for enforcing positive social changes.  The side that desperately needs social and political justice have slept through decades of icy darkness.  Do i detact a thaw approaching?  We do not need to tolerate the shit that is constantly heaped upon us, be it PIP, or unemployment, or the ordinary, almost invisible daily deprivation..  we can act to protect our interests, and we can do it in memory of our people who have been brutally killed by free market logic.  The tragedy of so much slaughter at Grenfell Tower must be the moment when the naked and brutal bullying is confronted.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 15, 2017)

phillm said:


> Soon the fight back has to at least be mass occupations , squatting , civil disobedience , protest , marches - I'm in.



If you don't improve the housing we're living in for your cash gains, we ain't paying the rent, so get to fuck. A collective action that I dream about & that's long overdue. Sadly the residents of Grenfell won't be here to fight for that, but we are!


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 15, 2017)

bimble said:


> Is there actually a government at the moment?



I expect so, someone has to keep the party donations coming in - and that requires drawing up of legislation to suit said donors.


----------



## handy1 (Jun 15, 2017)

Amazing it has not fell in on its own footprint.


----------



## davesgcr (Jun 15, 2017)

Just a random thought - Posh Boy Cameron has an empty house - about half a mile away - as we are "all in this together" and people are sleeping on floors in church halls etc , with no possessions and worse , could they take  a few people in ? No chance ......

Getting sick of all this cutting essential safety and caring jobs (Police, NHS , Fire service etc) , whilst the bankers rebuild their balance sheets on our money and contracted out "service providers" make profits and and shareholder value ....


----------



## Humberto (Jun 15, 2017)

Read that someone called Peter Jukes on twitter says that S*n journos have been pretending to be injured victims to gain access to the injured in a hospital. They never learn.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2017)

Humberto said:


> Read that someone called Peter Jukes on twitter says that S*n journos have been pretending to be injured victims to gain access to the injured in a hospital. They never learn.


Let's hope the sun goes the way of the news of the world


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 15, 2017)

Peter Jukes is the journalist behind the Daniel Morgan podcast and book, devastating on police and media corruption. If he's saying it I'd believe it.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 15, 2017)




----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Let's hope the sun goes the way of the news of the world


Jukes knows a lot about that murky world of The Sun and News Of The World - he did that Byline podcast about the Daniel Morgan murder and implicated many NoW journos, right up to Rebekah Brookes, in their dealings with Jonathan Rees and his lowlife chums.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

I fear for this summer- I think there will be blood on the streets and mass disorder- srsly, this will boil over - it will take months to sort the biulding and ID the dead- this will be like a hge gangrenous thumb on the horizon for so many people


----------



## Tankus (Jun 15, 2017)

people carrying drones  ?

_""I fear for this summer- I think there will be blood on the streets and mass disorder- srsly, this will boil over - it will take months to sort the biulding and ID the dead- this will be like a hge gangrenous thumb on the horizon for so many people""
_
got that feeling as well


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jun 15, 2017)

1927 said:


> I know the USA isn't held in the greatest esteem in these boards, but it would have been admirable if say Earls Court had cancelled everything for the next couple of weeks to provide shelter fir those made homeless, in The way that the Dome in New Orleans did after Katrina. I know it's a different situation, but it needs a venue in a massive scale to assist people. Not ideal to be sleeping in an exhibition hall, but it's something.


The Copthorne Tara hotel, just off Kensington High Street would be idea. There are LOADS of hotels in Kensington, no need for people to sleep in mats in the local sports centre.


----------



## Ax^ (Jun 15, 2017)

Tankus said:


> people carrying drones  ?
> 
> _""I fear for this summer- I think there will be blood on the streets and mass disorder- srsly, this will boil over - it will take months to sort the biulding and ID the dead- this will be like a hge gangrenous thumb on the horizon for so many people""
> _
> got that feeling as well



good

it's about time..


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

it is interesting to see who is actually bothered about helping out in the 'hood- and guess what ? the ever so vocal and pushy large businesses / valubale part of the community etc are silent on the matter. Those on the ground trying to assist are , as ever, those who are in a less better position to be able to assist.This cannot be fixed with a gormless and inaedquate so called PM resiging - this cannot be sorted with some face saving bollocks and crocidile tears from the regime. Have to stay angry about this and use it.

eta- I am calming down now but its still there .


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

1927 said:


> You totally miss the point. The changes were made to the block because of the view from a new structure!


No they weren't. Go and do your homework.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 15, 2017)

David Lammy going in hard. Interestingly, he mentions the issue of the cladding and the appearance of the building when viewed from the rich areas. Without wanting to kick the whole thing off again, the issue is the _plausibility_ of the idea that the appearance of the cladding was given undue weighting (given what we know about the way central and local government treats social housing).
This was a monstrous crime – there must be arrests after Grenfell Tower | David Lammy


----------



## existentialist (Jun 15, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Some services like CBT for PTSD, trauma and so on will only be relevant much later down the line, for this reason, but that doesn't mean access to care, support and counselling is to be omitted altogether now.


What should be there is "critical incident debriefing". I've done that 3 times in schools in the aftermath of suicides, although this would potentially be on a far larger scale. It's not counselling, but is an opportunity for people to be able to come to terms with their feelings about what's happened in a safe environment, and (ideally) get some idea of what support is available down the line if they should need it.


----------



## ferrelhadley (Jun 15, 2017)

Might be a repost so apols


----------



## 8den (Jun 15, 2017)

Apparently using the more fire retardant cladding would have cost 5k. For the whole fucking building.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 15, 2017)

3 solid demands


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Wilf said:


> the issue is the _plausibility_ of the idea that the appearance of the cladding was given undue weighting (given what we know about the way central and local government treats social housing).



It's the plausibility of the idea that the refurb of the block, which was designed to improve its thermal insulation, and add new housing units at the base, was driven primarily or even partly by the desire to change its appearance as viewed from neighbouring areas. 

That, or that some alternative cladding, which had better fire performance, was rejected on the grounds that it would not look as nice from neighbouring areas.

Neither seems very plausible to me.

What does seem plausible is that the selection of a more risky cladding material was driven by cost considerations.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 15, 2017)




----------



## major major (Jun 15, 2017)

Wilf said:


> David Lammy going in hard. Interestingly, he mentions the issue of the cladding and the appearance of the building when viewed from the rich areas. Without wanting to kick the whole thing off again, the issue is the _plausibility_ of the idea that the appearance of the cladding was given undue weighting (given what we know about the way central and local government treats social housing).
> This was a monstrous crime – there must be arrests after Grenfell Tower | David Lammy


I saw Corbyn as doing no more than use the situation to his own advantage, as if his party had nothing to do with this tragedy, when the reality is they're as guilty as sin, Take note tory basher Lilly Allen.
I saw the Tory k&c council leader on TV tonight pretty much denying any responsibility, he hasn't got a clue how can someone like this exist in todays world.
These poor tower block survivors should all be put up in the best local 4 star hotels, the flats must all have been insured - relying on good hearted locals is disgusting  behaviour by the local  authorities.
This is the worst disaster since the Falklands. Possible deathrate of 140 is not a minor local issue.


----------



## agricola (Jun 15, 2017)

8den said:


> View attachment 109434



Sorry, what?

_"The Prime Minister is understood to have wept on the day of the fire but did so at Downing Street.  She shed tears after being praised by No.10 staff for a short speech of thanks on Wednesday."
_


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


>




Guy called Ishmahil Blagrove apparently, here's a Jon Snow interview with him and another housing activist.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

agricola said:


> Sorry, what?
> 
> _"The Prime Minister is understood to have wept on the day of the fire but did so at Downing Street.  She shed tears after being praised by No.10 staff for a short speech of thanks on Wednesday."_



'ouhv/;iyhv/ihycv/iyhcv /'iyhv'jv'o/uhv 'ijhkb hgvtesca yrweashtrvjyrfbtluih;mo'poipmoumoij'omij[nihih[io;jh;noih;oijnm;iojm;oij;miojmn[moinj[


----------



## spitfire (Jun 15, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> 'ouhv/;iyhv/ihycv/iyhcv /'iyhv'jv'o/uhv 'ijhkb hgvtesca yrweashtrvjyrfbtluih;mo'poipmoumoij'omij[nihih[io;jh;noih;oijnm;iojm;oij;miojmn[moinj[



yeah. i've nothing better to add. they need a fucking slap.

with a hammer


----------



## teuchter (Jun 15, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> Pretty damning article.
> 
> 
> 
> Experts warned government against cladding material used on Grenfell


It's not an article that seems to fully grasp the technical issues it's attempting to address. If you actually click through and read the BRE papers that it refers to, there has been some rather selective quoting and they don't really accurately reflect their scope or conclusions. They also seem to commit the common error of confusing the roles of planning building control.


----------



## spitfire (Jun 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> It's not an article that seems to fully grasp the technical issues it's attempting to address. If you actually click through and read the BRE papers that it refers to, there has been some rather selective quoting and they don't really accurately reflect their scope or conclusions. They also seem to commit the common error of confusing the roles of planning building control.



Shush.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

^^^that is rage. again. I think I have fuecked me keyboard. erk


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 15, 2017)

Cid said:


> Guy called Ishmahil Blagrove apparently, here's a Jon Snow interview with him and another housing activist.



Yep, that's him.


----------



## spitfire (Jun 15, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> ^^^that is rage. again. I think I have fuecked me keyboard. erk



I was typing something and you posted that which was better than anything I had.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> 'ouhv/;iyhv/ihycv/iyhcv /'iyhv'jv'o/uhv 'ijhkb hgvtesca yrweashtrvjyrfbtluih;mo'poipmoumoij'omij[nihih[io;jh;noih;oijnm;iojm;oij;miojmn[moinj[





  ^^^that is rage. again. I think I have fuecked me keyboard. erk


----------



## agricola (Jun 15, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> ^^^that is rage. again. I think I have fuecked me keyboard. erk



TBH I thought you were simulating an unexpected event occurring in the Maybot's code.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> If only she would shed that human skin and you saw her in her lizard glory you might say something different



I expect the lizards would vehemently deny any connection to her.


----------



## Anudder Oik (Jun 15, 2017)

Jeremy Hunt says he will consider pay rises for nurses in wake of UK terrorist attacks.

But announces it after the fire which has highlighted poverty and inequality. 

The timing is suspiscious. I think they are worried about a swell in anger and a coming hot weekend.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 15, 2017)

I wonder if the high-horse obfuscators who say we shouldn't politicise this have noticed that it's deeply political. I also wonder if they have shared their fascinating insights with survivors and residents, and what the response was if so.


----------



## ferrelhadley (Jun 15, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


> I think they are worried about a swell in anger and a coming hot weekend.


Something is in the air.


----------



## 8den (Jun 15, 2017)




----------



## JTG (Jun 15, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> I wonder if the high-horse obfuscators who say we shouldn't politicise this have noticed that it's deeply political. I also wonder if they have shared their fascinating insights with survivors and residents, and what the response was if so.


My twitter (used for football really so a spread of political views) has a small number of Tory leaning people using that line - "petty political point scoring" apparently.
Everyone else - Labour, Lib Dem, anarcho, whatever - is absolutely spitting about all of this. The ones who are fairly quiet about their views usually are demanding May's head, the ones who are louder have gone absolutely berserk.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 15, 2017)

8den said:


>



?


----------



## YouSir (Jun 15, 2017)

Wilf said:


> ?



Click on the date/time and you can see the whole thread. Not that worthwhile though.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 15, 2017)

YouSir said:


> Click on the date/time and you can see the whole thread. Not that worthwhile though.


ta.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 15, 2017)

the notting hill carnival will be a flash point i think - sold by the regime as a time for consideration and respect for the dead appeals for calm/ community leader and that guff- i think it could easily, easily explode.


----------



## Cid (Jun 15, 2017)

Wilf said:


> ?





> *Jack Bernhardt*‏ @jackbern23
> I promise I'll stop talking about this soon. But. I was taking the Tube home today, 4pm. H&C Line from Barbican to Shepherd's Bush Market.
> 
> 
> ...




Some media type passes building on the tube, feels upset. It's not worth your time, key quote;

"This isn't that. This is horror. This is shame. That black husk is a monument to our apathy to inequality, our othering of poor people."


----------



## YouSir (Jun 16, 2017)

Cid said:


> Some media type passes building on the tube, feels upset. It's not worth your time, key quote;
> 
> "This isn't that. This is horror. This is shame. That black husk is a monument to our apathy to inequality, our othering of poor people."



Ironic really, even in a moment of 'revelation' it's still _our_ apathy to _them_. And not a word said about the huge number of people who've been against austerity and inequality for years/their entire lives.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 16, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> the notting hill carnival will be a flash point i think - sold by the regime as a time for consideration and respect for the dead appeals for calm/ community leader and that guff- i think it could easily, easily explode.



Every year there's talk of limiting/cancelling Carnival for security reasons, either due to what happens or possible threats. Don't think they'd do it, but still, wouldn't be surprised to see the chatter ratcheted up this year. A shame, my favourite time of the year.


----------



## treelover (Jun 16, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


> Poor people, ordinary people, have no voice and no influence. They raise the alarm and get ignored because they aren't considered worth the effort, they complain and get threatened with legal action against them and all the while greed continually degrades life.



yes, you are right, and disabled and sick people are right at the bottom of the pile, a number whom may have lost their lives in this awful event.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 16, 2017)

Grrr. its obviously Stoli time (again ) and I have school tomorrow


----------



## spitfire (Jun 16, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Grrr. its obviously Stoli time (again ) and I have school tomorrow



I started absolut time earlier to avoid this problem. absolut time = stoli time. bed now. 

Nothing further can be achieved tonight.


----------



## treelover (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> They ignored this just like they ignored the disgraceful treatment of disabled and unemployed.



Who did?


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jun 16, 2017)

ferrelhadley said:


> Something is in the air.



When the numbers of the dead people inside the building start start coming out it will get hotter and hotter.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 16, 2017)

*Demonstrate:  Justice for Grenfell

Friday 16 June 6pm
Department for Communities and Local Government
2 Marsham Street, SW1P 4DF*


----------



## YouSir (Jun 16, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> *Demonstrate:  Justice for Grenfell
> 
> Friday 16 June 6pm
> Department for Communities and Local Government
> 2 Marsham Street, SW1P 4DF*


----------



## komodo (Jun 16, 2017)

The lawyer on Newsnight earlier, who had represented the families at the inquest into the Southwark tier block fire, was totally damning (and suspicious about) May's speedy announcement of a public enquiry. She said there can only be one or another, and only inquest allows a proper examinations for what's gone on...


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

Don't think anyone's posted this yet?

London fire: 'The working class aren't being listened to' - BBC News


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

BTW Nick Fagge, the _Mail_ journalist who did the dog-whistle-and-hatchet job on the Grenfell Tower resident, was previously at the _Express_, where he was involved in Madeleine McCann stories, to the point that he was summoned to the Leveson Inquiry.

[ARCHIVED CONTENT] UK Government Web Archive – The National Archives


----------



## treelover (Jun 16, 2017)

Tankus said:


> people carrying drones  ?
> 
> _""I fear for this summer- I think there will be blood on the streets and mass disorder- srsly, this will boil over - it will take months to sort the biulding and ID the dead- this will be like a hge gangrenous thumb on the horizon for so many people""
> _
> got that feeling as well



Who will they attack, the police, the emergency services, local shops?, riots don't often affect the powers that have caused the greivances.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 16, 2017)

treelover said:


> Who will they attack, the police, the emergency services, local shops?, riots don't often affect the powers that have caused the greivances.



I suspect many lessons of 2011 have been learned. I don't know what that means for the future tho.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 16, 2017)

The Guardian view on Grenfell Tower: Theresa May’s Hurricane Katrina | Editorial


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 16, 2017)

Note on that image from the front of the Mirror that the insulation material is missing from a vertically ribbed concrete section, which might back up theories that this formed an air gap for the fire to spread.

Not particularly keen on the sub-heading on that page reinforcing the trope that council housing is only for 'the poorest' - it was once much more universal than that, and still is to a limited extent.


----------



## Nylock (Jun 16, 2017)

ruffneck23 said:


> you need to need to be very careful less people think you're a cunt


Too late.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 16, 2017)

Worth reading


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 16, 2017)

The repair or Windsor castle cost £67 million in today's terms. How many houses could you build to rehome the surviving families with that and the amount it is going to cost to refit buck house.
You would never think we are all in it together would you?


----------



## phillm (Jun 16, 2017)

ruffneck23 said:


> Some guy on LBC a min ago was like what if we all dont pay our rent to the council , got shot down but I thought what a great idea , mass squatting FTW , that may tellem



Won't Pay , Won't Pay.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 16, 2017)

handy1 said:


> Amazing it has not fell in on its own footprint.


That only happens in controlled demolition.


----------



## Red Cat (Jun 16, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> I said it's important people have time and space now. Counselling would be a very bad idea for the reasons I mentioned. Talking to people, humanity and care, absolutely needed. I have been involved in offering NHS emergency mental health support in previous major incidents, I do honestly know what I'm talking about here.



Yes, People do have their own emotional resources, its important they can use and develop them. Although I work in the mental health field, I hate this idea that help always has to be an 'intervention' from the outside, from professionals.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> The repair or Windsor castle cost £67 million in today's terms. How many houses could you build to rehome the surviving families with that and the amount it is going to cost to refit buck house.
> You would never think we are all in it together would you?



Plenty of room in Windsor Castle as well.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jun 16, 2017)

handy1 said:


> Amazing it has not fell in on its own footprint.



Why, was the fire caused by an aircraft crashing into the building?


----------



## existentialist (Jun 16, 2017)

treelover said:


> Who will they attack, the police, the emergency services, local shops?, riots don't often affect the powers that have caused the greivances.


Considering how often we see you laying the guilt trip on others to Do Something, your sudden cautiousness at the prospect of spontaneous actions by the people rings slightly hollow...


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 16, 2017)

"Your gut tells you it's not right to wrap a building in plastic."

Experts warned government against cladding material used on Grenfell

Material used 'illegal in U.S'.

Anger grows over tower fire amid claims cladding was unsafe


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 16, 2017)

The papers are running with their own agendas on this - the scum pointing out how Mayor Khan and Jon Snow were heckled (because they're bad lefties) and the Mail blaming 'green targets'. Pathetic.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 16, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Blimey, there's still fires breaking out in the block!
> 
> On a positive note, our charity quiz tonight has switched to supporting the victims here, having promised our chosen charity this month that they will benefit from our July one instead.
> 
> ...



We normally raise around £250, but because of the auction & the landlord throwing in a little extra in to round the figure up - we hit exactly £3,500!


----------



## Edie (Jun 16, 2017)

Best place to donate so the money goes directly, in their hands, to the tenants please? Ta.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 16, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> "Your gut tells you it's not right to wrap a building in plastic."


Yep, unless you're one of 3 successive vermin housing ministers who have been influenced by industry lobbyists to block the review building regulations related to fire safety following Lakanal.

Hopkins, Lewis & Barwell.

Guilty men.

eta: not forgetting the malign role of Pickles.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 16, 2017)

Edie said:


> Best place to donate so the money goes directly, in their hands, to the tenants please? Ta.



I saw this one this morning which seems ok, but who knows: just giving


----------



## SE25 (Jun 16, 2017)

The more that comes out about this the angrier I and I'm sure every other Londoner get. Beyond words.

Feel so sorry for the poor people in that block.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 16, 2017)

It's not just London. London is the epicentre of the housing crisis, and of course it happened in your city, but the same problems and inequalities are playing out across the UK. People know it stinks.


----------



## SE25 (Jun 16, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> It's not just London. London is the epicentre of the housing crisis, and of course it happened in your city, but the same problems and inequalities are playing out across the UK. People know it stinks.



of course, it just hits home. How many council blocks could this have happened to in our country?


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 16, 2017)

treelover said:


> Who will they attack, the police, the emergency services, local shops?, riots don't often affect the powers that have caused the greivances.


the council?


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2017)

So a Criminal Investigation - has anyone seen somewhere an explanation of what this is likely to mean (as opposed to just an inquiry) does it mean that this is now manslaughter in the eyes of the law maybe?


----------



## brogdale (Jun 16, 2017)

I expect this has been posted elsewhere in the thread, but it wasn't until this morning that I read this particular account...with tears in my eyes...tears of anger.

Government delay in reviewing fire safety regulations 'putting tower blocks at risk' | News | Inside Housing





> He added: “We still have 4,000 older tower blocks in the UK which have the same regulations applied to them. The message to other social landlords and housing providers is unless there is a review of [part B] of the regulations you could face multi-million pound legal costs and compensation should you experience a Lakanal House tragedy.”
> 
> Mr King is concerned about the “failure of three successive government ministers” to review building regulations related to fire safety.


Rage.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 16, 2017)

bimble said:


> So a Criminal Investigation - has anyone seen somewhere an explanation of what this is likely to mean (as opposed to just an inquiry) does it mean that this is now manslaughter in the eyes of the law maybe?


I don't think they can suspect that until a full investigation has occurred. Also, they could be suspecting arson.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 16, 2017)

bimble said:


> So a Criminal Investigation - has anyone seen somewhere an explanation of what this is likely to mean (as opposed to just an inquiry) does it mean that this is now manslaughter in the eyes of the law maybe?


Presumably a criminal investigation is undertaken in order to ascertain whether any law has been broken. Once any evidence is found, charges might then be brought to the CPS. It's probably too early to be talking about any specific charges at this stage.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 16, 2017)

WTF?

*Council leader claims sprinklers were not fitted as residents did not want the disruption*

I find that hard to believe, considering the concerns raised by residents over the years.

Also from that article: British Automatic Fire Sprinkler Association has put the cost of installing a sprinkler system at £200,000.


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2017)

Yep. Met police commander in the indy;

"We as the police have started an investigation, I mentioned when I was down at the scene this morning that one of our very senior investigating officers is leading that for us," said Metropolitan Police commander Stuart Cundy. "We as the police, we investigate criminal offences - I am not sitting here and saying there are criminal offences that have been committed, that's why you do an investigation, to establish it."

This is going to take years isn't it.


----------



## Cid (Jun 16, 2017)

bimble said:


> So a Criminal Investigation - has anyone seen somewhere an explanation of what this is likely to mean (as opposed to just an inquiry) does it mean that this is now manslaughter in the eyes of the law maybe?



For corporate manslaughter you need a gross breach of a duty of care, but it's too early to know anything.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 16, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> WTF?
> 
> *Council leader claims sprinklers were not fitted as residents did not want the disruption*
> 
> ...



Yeah I saw that too. I smell bullshit.


----------



## weepiper (Jun 16, 2017)

The National - a Scottish daily - is reporting FOUR HUNDRED people are missing 
Police say 400 reported missing in Grenfell Tower fire


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

treelover said:


> Who will they attack, the police, the emergency services, local shops?, riots don't often affect the powers that have caused the greivances.


so if they do in their wrath and grief riot you'll be standing there to condemn them for not hitting what you consider the right and proper target


----------



## Ted Striker (Jun 16, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> WTF?
> 
> *Council leader claims sprinklers were not fitted as residents did not want the disruption*
> 
> ...



That's fucking enraging. Spidey senses go into overdrive when you read things like "Nick Paget-Brown, the Tory leader of Kensington and Chelsea Council, said there was not a "collective view" among residents in favour of sprinklers."

Vagueness and double-speak to point blame anywhere other than it should land. (Before you even consider that it's their responsibility to maybe do unpopular things to ensure peoples safety)

Prepare for battle with these people. There is one on the cards


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

weepiper said:


> The National - a Scottish daily - is reporting FOUR HUNDRED people are missing
> Police say 400 reported missing in Grenfell Tower fire


FOUR HUNDRED? fuck me, if it's that many the police may as well start dismantling the rkbc town hall now to stop other people doing it.

the murder of grenfell tower


----------



## SE25 (Jun 16, 2017)

weepiper said:


> The National - a Scottish daily - is reporting FOUR HUNDRED people are missing
> Police say 400 reported missing in Grenfell Tower fire



if true, wow. This must not be forgotten, brushed under the carpet.

a national disgrace.


----------



## Cid (Jun 16, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> WTF?
> 
> *Council leader claims sprinklers were not fitted as residents did not want the disruption*
> 
> ...



Thing is I guarantee that they'd take fitting sprinklers as an excuse to cut back on some other area. And then probably not properly maintain/test them. This is about a much wider culture of neglect.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 16, 2017)

Ted Striker said:


> Prepare for battle with these people. There is one on the cards



Bernie Gunther mentioned earlier about them trying to pull a Hillsborough and blame the victims. Don't think its doable, not in todays world, even with their tame press and bullshit artists


----------



## existentialist (Jun 16, 2017)

Ted Striker said:


> That's fucking enraging. Spidey senses go into overdrive when you read things like "Nick Paget-Brown, the Tory leader of Kensington and Chelsea Council, said there was not a "collective view" among residents in favour of sprinklers."
> 
> Vagueness and double-speak to point blame anywhere other than it should land. (Before you even consider that it's their responsibility to maybe do unpopular things to ensure peoples safety)
> 
> Prepare for battle with these people. There is one on the cards


I'm just trying, with what we know about K&C's high-handed approach to tenants, what this uncharacteristically open and communicative intervention would have looked like. Because, with all the history, the mere notion of them genuinely asking tenants what they wanted, and then actually listening to their responses, seems unlikely.

More likely is that someone said "oh, you realise sprinklers will add <insert huge timespan> to the project and be very disruptive, and will cost LOADS, but it's OK because your flats are fireproof anyway...sorry, what were you saying about sprinklers?"


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

One of council boss Nick Paget-Brown's pals is Victoria Borthwick, who was Kensington's MP from 2015 until her ouster the other day. 

Borthwick was also a Deputy Mayor and an MLA, and for several months after her election to Parliament she continued taking expenses for both those roles, making her a triple-snouter.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 16, 2017)

bimble said:


> So a Criminal Investigation - has anyone seen somewhere an explanation of what this is likely to mean (as opposed to just an inquiry) does it mean that this is now manslaughter in the eyes of the law maybe?


It doesn't immediately mean anything - just that there is the vaguest potential for criminal prosecution. Making it a criminal investigation introduces a higher burden in terms of process (evidentiary requirements etc) from the outset, which will be significant if it does ultimately go anywhere.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> Bernie Gunther mentioned earlier about them trying to pull a Hillsborough and blame the victims. Don't think its doable, not in todays world, even with their tame press and bullshit artists


the fucking bbc have been appalling. i watched the first few minutes of the 10 o'clock news last night, and i had to switch it off after seeing those two poor brothers describing how they lost their brother. why would anyone intrude into people's grief in that way i don't know, why anyone would make someone describe the last phone call they had ending in the apparent asphyxiation of a loved one...

it beggars belief, it really does.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 16, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> WTF?
> 
> *Council leader claims sprinklers were not fitted as residents did not want the disruption*
> 
> ...



I wonder if there was a "consultation", you know, one of the ones where the decision has already been made before you start, it's advertised poorly, the wrong people are consulted etc etc. By chance the consultation results in the decision that costs the least money. 

I was involved in community action against cuts where we had proof that the council hadn't acted or consulted legally, we had advice from a leading law firm that this was the case, but nobody had the thousands of pounds behind an armchair to fight it in the deliberately minuscule window available to do so. Our council went into several primary schools to talk to kids and classed that as a full consultation!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

mauvais said:


> It doesn't immediately mean anything - just that there is the vaguest potential for criminal prosecution. Making it a criminal investigation introduces a higher burden in terms of process (evidentiary requirements etc) from the outset, which will be significant if it does ultimately go anywhere.


it means "looks at us, we're doing something"


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> FOUR HUNDRED? fuck me, if it's that many the police may as well start dismantling the rkbc town hall now to stop other people doing it.
> 
> the murder of grenfell tower



"Cundy also said it was wrong to suggest the 400 people reported missing, would mean 400 deaths, as one person was reported missing 46 times."

He said he hopes it's not triple figures, and I'd guess he has a rough idea so i'd speculate it's going to be around the 100 mark.


----------



## SE25 (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> the fucking bbc have been appalling. i watched the first few minutes of the 10 o'clock news last night, and i had to switch it off after seeing those two poor brothers describing how they lost their brother. why would anyone intrude into people's grief in that way i don't know, why anyone would make someone describe the last phone call they had ending in the apparent asphyxiation of a loved one...
> 
> it beggars belief, it really does.



they are fucking vultures


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> Bernie Gunther mentioned earlier about them trying to pull a Hillsborough and blame the victims. Don't think its doable, not in todays world, even with their tame press and bullshit artists



Oh ye of little faith.

Yesterday the _Mail_ went big on the whole FIRST PICTURES OF MAN WHOSE FAULTY FRIDGE BURNED DOWN TOWER BLOCK
On _Newsnight_ last night Kensington & Chelsea council leader Nick Paget-Brown blamed residents for the lack of a sprinkler system


----------



## Ted Striker (Jun 16, 2017)

existentialist said:


> I'm just trying, with what we know about K&C's high-handed approach to tenants, what this uncharacteristically open and communicative intervention would have looked like. Because, with all the history, the mere notion of them genuinely asking tenants what they wanted, and then actually listening to their responses, seems unlikely.
> 
> More likely is that someone said "oh, you realise sprinklers will add <insert huge timespan> to the project and be very disruptive, and will cost LOADS, but it's OK because your flats are fireproof anyway...sorry, what were you saying about sprinklers?"



Quite.

It would go something like a fishing expedition to find one voice (maybe with a bit of obfuscation/general steering - especially eased with multitude of local language barriers and general understanding) that aligned with the desired course of action, and represent that in an official minutes as the 'general feedback'.

(edit - just read the 2nd paragraph - actually exactly as you describe  Are you sure you don't work for them  )


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> One of council boss Nick Paget-Brown's pals is Victoria Borthwick, who was Kensington's MP from 2015 until her ouster the other day.
> 
> Borthwick was also a Deputy Mayor and an MLA, and for several months after her election to Parliament she continued taking expenses for both those roles, making her a triple-snouter.



victoria borthwick: an artist's impression


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 16, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> WTF?
> 
> *Council leader claims sprinklers were not fitted as residents did not want the disruption*
> 
> ...


Victim blaming from the top down. Cunts. It's just ridiculous though. Regardless of what they say residents did or didn't want, the landlord has a duty of care with h&s laws which inform those responsibilities. They can't pin this on the residents.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 16, 2017)

why are they suppressing the number of fatalities? the media usually go big on that - often exaggerating the numbers, but it seems clear that the numbers are much higher than the 17 confirmed. Im assuming the media have been told not to report the likely  casualty figures - but why are they going along with it? why is it being done? They fear the reaction?


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 16, 2017)

weepiper said:


> The National - a Scottish daily - is reporting FOUR HUNDRED people are missing
> Police say 400 reported missing in Grenfell Tower fire


I wonder, where did they get that figure from? Is it speculation by individual officers, or an official figure not yet released to the public? It just sounds so high as to be hard to believe... I hope it's not true!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> "Cundy also said it was wrong to suggest the 400 people reported missing, would mean 400 deaths, as one person was reported missing 46 times."
> 
> He said he hopes it's not triple figures, and I'd guess he has a rough idea so i'd speculate it's going to be around the 100 mark.


yeh let's hope not eh.


----------



## bendeus (Jun 16, 2017)

SE25 said:


> if true, wow. This must not be forgotten, brushed under the carpet.
> 
> a national disgrace.


In fairness the article cautions against equating 400 reported missing with 400 being dead, stating that one person had been reported missing 46 times. 

Nevertheless, it's utterly horrific. I can't quite get my brain to go there - those poor, poor people.


----------



## Ted Striker (Jun 16, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> Bernie Gunther mentioned earlier about them trying to pull a Hillsborough and blame the victims. Don't think its doable, not in todays world, even with their tame press and bullshit artists



Make no mistake. The residents have done the herculean exercise in over-supplying a relief effort.

The TMO and Council are circling the wagons.


----------



## bendeus (Jun 16, 2017)

bendeus said:


> In fairness the article cautions against equating 400 reported missing with 400 being dead, stating that one person had been reported missing 46 times.
> 
> Nevertheless, it's utterly horrific. I can't quite get my brain to go there - those poor, poor people.


Oops, sry. Late to the game ^^^


----------



## Cid (Jun 16, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> I wonder if there was a "consultation", you know, one of the ones where the decision has already been made before you start, it's advertised poorly, the wrong people are consulted etc etc. By chance the consultation results in the decision that costs the least money.
> 
> I was involved in community action against cuts where we had proof that the council hadn't acted or consulted legally, we had advice from a leading law firm that this was the case, but nobody had the thousands of pounds behind an armchair to fight it in the deliberately minuscule window available to do so. Our council went into several primary schools to talk to kids and classed that as a full consultation!



There's a consultation document on the planning application page (engagement statement). Doesn't mention sprinklers. Or fire safety. At least not on a quick ctrl+f.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 16, 2017)

weepiper said:


> The National - a Scottish daily - is reporting FOUR HUNDRED people are missing
> Police say 400 reported missing in Grenfell Tower fire



I'd be wary of that figure, the total number of residents was supposed to be just over 500.

Googling for another source brings up the below.

Police received 400 calls reporting missing people following Grenfell Tower fire



> *Police revealed today that they have received around 400 calls reporting people missing following the Grenfell Tower fire.*
> 
> During a short appearance, Metropolitan Police Commander Stuart Cundy confirmed that there had been hundreds of calls following the launch of a criminal investigation. He downplayed the figure, saying it added up to more people than actually lived in the block.
> 
> One person was reported missing 46 times, he added.


----------



## weepiper (Jun 16, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> I'd be wary of that figure, the total number of residents was supposed to be just over 500.
> 
> Googling for another source brings up the below.
> 
> Police received 400 calls reporting missing people following Grenfell Tower fire


I hope so.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 16, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> why are they suppressing the number of fatalities? the media usually go big on that - often exaggerating the numbers, but it seems clear that the numbers are much higher than the 17 confirmed. Im assuming the media have been told not to report the likely  casualty figures - but why are they going along with it? why is it being done? They fear the reaction?



I don't think they are suppressing numbers, they just have no idea, one senior copper is saying they 'hope' it doesn't reach 100.

Until they make it safe enough to search the top floors, where most deaths are likely to have taken place, they are going to struggle on numbers.


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2017)

I read yesterday that it will probably take months to identify all the dead. They can't come out with any figures until they are sure who it is they have found for obvious reasons.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

bimble said:


> I read yesterday that it will probably take months to identify all the dead. They can't come out with any figures until they are sure who it is they have found for obvious reasons.


tosh. they can't come out with any figures until they know no body's counted more than once, yeh. but there would be no need to actually identify everyone before arriving at an accurate count of the dead.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 16, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> I'd be wary of that figure, the total number of residents was supposed to be just over 500.
> 
> Googling for another source brings up the below.
> 
> Police received 400 calls reporting missing people following Grenfell Tower fire


500 official residents? You know that official tenancy records are going to be inaccurate too though don't you?

Also, whole families have died. There isn't anyone to report them missing.


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 16, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> why are they suppressing the number of fatalities? the media usually go big on that - often exaggerating the numbers, but it seems clear that the numbers are much higher than the 17 confirmed. Im assuming the media have been told not to report the likely  casualty figures - but why are they going along with it? why is it being done? They fear the reaction?



The media are reporting likely casualty figures and have mostly adjusted them downward after earlier going with the highest estimates they could dig up - they're now saying 17 confirmed dead with the total likely to rise to maybe 70 or 80.

Papers going with the highest possible estimate seems a bit irresponsible and clickbaity, IMO - if it turns out to be 60 or so dead there'll be an element of 'at least it's not 400.'


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> tosh. they can't come out with any figures until they know no body's counted more than once, yeh. but there would be no need to actually identify everyone before arriving at an accurate count of the dead.


True, I suppose once they've accessed all over the building they could say we have found this many bodies but we can't tell you families if any of them are your missing.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 16, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> why are they suppressing the number of fatalities? the media usually go big on that - often exaggerating the numbers, but it seems clear that the numbers are much higher than the 17 confirmed. Im assuming the media have been told not to report the likely  casualty figures - but why are they going along with it? why is it being done? They fear the reaction?



It's going to take time to figure out how many people have died. Every reference I've seen in the media to the numer of confirmed casualties has come with a caveat, 'but this is expected to rise'.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 16, 2017)

This is the latest from the Guardian feed. 



> *More than 70 people are believed to be unaccounted for since the blaze, according to the Press Associaiton.*
> 
> Six bodies have been recovered from the gutted 24-storey tower, while 11 have been located inside, but cannot yet be removed.
> 
> ...



They just don't know right now, and as its a fire its going to be hard to identify a lot of remains, or find some remains if the heat was strong enough.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

bimble said:


> True, I suppose once they've accessed all over the building they could say we have found this many bodies but we can't tell you families if any of them are your missing.


you so frequently do this, posting up a load of rubbish when you're pulled up on something. obviously two things will proceed in parallel, the first removing remains and determining how many discrete corpses there are, the second trying to identify the remains. it makes you look daft, saying they wouldn'ttry to identify as they went along


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 16, 2017)

BBC are now saying "could exceed 60".


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> tosh. they can't come out with any figures until they know no body's counted more than once, yeh. but there would be no need to actually identify everyone before arriving at an accurate count of the dead.



It's not safe for them to have a proper search yet, the bodies already found haven't been removed yet. The place will be full of debris. I think we can offer them some patience on this. Media speculation on bodycount feels really mawkish to me.

In terms of missing people, some will have lost mobile phones (or at least won't have chargers) so finding people involved even if they are safe and not hospitalised will be complicated.  The collapse of the WTC after the 11/9 terror attack in New York initially had people speculating on 15-25,000 deaths, which later was revised down to about 6000 and ended up around half of that.  I'm hoping there has been a significant overestimate in this event too, but it's looking pretty grim tbh.


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> you so frequently do this, posting up a load of rubbish when you're pulled up on something. obviously two things will proceed in parallel, the first removing remains and determining how many discrete corpses there are, the second trying to identify the remains. it makes you look daft, saying they wouldn'ttry to identify as they went along


ok. I am daft sometimes, keep your hair on. Was mainly just trying to say that I doubt there's a conspiracy of suppressing the numbers as someone had suggested.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

bimble said:


> ok. I am daft sometimes, keep your hair on. Was mainly just trying to say that I doubt there's a conspiracy of suppressing the numbers as someone had suggested.


perhaps in future you could say what you mean and direct it to the person you intend it for.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 16, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> It's not safe for them to have a proper search yet, the bodies already found haven't been removed yet. The place will be full of debris. I think we can offer them some patience on this. Media speculation on bodycount feels really mawkish to me.
> 
> In terms of missing people, some will have lost mobile phones (or at least won't have chargers) so finding people involved even if they are safe and not hospitalised will be complicated.  The collapse of the WTC after the 11/9 terror attack in New York initially had people speculating on 15-25,000 deaths, which later was revised down to about 6000 and ended up around half of that.  I'm hoping there has been a significant overestimate in this event too, but it's looking pretty grim tbh.


Survivors have had days to contact relatives and the authorities now. If 70 people thought to be in the building at the time of the blaze are still missing I strongly suspect that they didn't make it.


----------



## two sheds (Jun 16, 2017)

Haven't read all the thread but has anyone pointed to last November blog from grenfellactiongroup? 

KCTMO – Playing with fire!



> It is a truly terrifying thought but the Grenfell Action Group firmly believe that only a catastrophic event will expose the ineptitude and incompetence of our landlord, the  KCTMO, and bring an end to the dangerous living conditions and neglect of health and safety legislation that they inflict upon their tenants and leaseholders. We believe that the KCTMO are an evil, unprincipled, mini-mafia who have no business to be charged with the responsibility of  looking after the every day management of large scale social housing estates and that their sordid collusion with the RBKC Council is a recipe for a future major disaster.





> We have blogged many times on the subject of fire safety at Grenfell Tower and we believe that these investigations will become part of damning evidence of the poor safety record of the KCTMO should a fire affect any other of their properties and cause the loss of life that we are predicting:
> 
> Fire Safety Scandal At Lancaster West
> 
> ...



and ending up with (their bold):



> *The Grenfell Action Group predict that it won’t be long before the words of this blog come back to haunt the KCTMO management and we will do everything in our power to ensure that those in authority know how long and how appallingly our landlord has ignored their responsibility to ensure the heath and safety of their tenants and leaseholders. They can’t say that they haven’t been warned!*



From an excellent Metabunk thread (the blog post was so prescient that Mick West over there at first thought it was fake).


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 16, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Survivors have had days to contact relatives and the authorities now. If 70 people thought to be in the building at the time of the blaze are still missing I strongly suspect that they didn't make it.



Two little girls have only just been found in hospital, due to police protocols of a terrorist incident, i.e. People being unable to search for family in hospitals! It was only by chance that a nurse let someone in cos of the description she was given. It's fuckin bonkers!


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Victim blaming from the top down. Cunts. It's just ridiculous though. Regardless of what they say residents did or didn't want, the landlord has a duty of care with h&s laws which inform those responsibilities. They can't pin this on the residents.


... and even _if_ it's true that there was a 'lack of consensus', it has to be seen in the context of the mistrust that built up over the years.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 16, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Victim blaming from the top down. Cunts. It's just ridiculous though. Regardless of what they say residents did or didn't want, the landlord has a duty of care with h&s laws which inform those responsibilities. They can't pin this on the residents.


Someone on a radio phone in, LBC I think, was suggesting that the blaze could have been started deliberately buy a long suffering resident to "make a point" that their complaints about fire safety were justified.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 16, 2017)

Looks like Paget-Brown has gone quiet on his twitter since the election.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 16, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> WTF?
> 
> *Council leader claims sprinklers were not fitted as residents did not want the disruption*
> 
> ...



It's bollocks. Council's/RSLs often do work that annoys residents, rightly or wrongly. Every part of the establishment is on the backfoot over this. The PR wonks will be on big overtime.


----------



## baffled (Jun 16, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> Bernie Gunther mentioned earlier about them trying to pull a Hillsborough and blame the victims. Don't think its doable, not in todays world, even with their tame press and bullshit artists



Hillsborough is mentioned in this article which I initially agreed with but the way the media have behaved in the last day or 2 I'm starting to wish they'd leave them the fuck alone.

Why it is vital to amplify the distraught voices of Grenfell Tower residents who were ignored for too long | JOE.co.uk

 Edit; deleted cut and paste due to weird format


----------



## Cid (Jun 16, 2017)

two sheds said:


> Haven't read all the thread but has anyone pointed to last November blog from grenfellactiongroup?
> 
> KCTMO – Playing with fire!
> 
> ...



Been linked to quite a few times... But it's helpful to have it reposted as the thread's moving quickly.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 16, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> 500 official residents? You know that official tenancy records are going to be inaccurate too though don't you?
> 
> Also, whole families have died. There isn't anyone to report them missing.


And, of course, one of the reasons that the figure is likely to be low is that, with the disabilities and welfare policies pursued by government over the last 10+ years, there is going to be quite a lot of informal accommodation - sofa surfers, etc. More than there might have been in a society with even slightly moer enlightened social policies than ours.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 16, 2017)

Graun have just tweeted that Scotland Yard have opened a criminal investigation now.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 16, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Someone on a radio phone in, LBC I think, was suggesting that the blaze could have been started deliberately buy a long suffering resident to "make a point" that their complaints about fire safety were justified.


That _someone_ needs to shut the fuck up.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 16, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Graun have just tweeted that Scotland Yard have opened a criminal investigation now.



Yes they just tweeted 12-hour old news


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Looks like Paget-Brown has gone quiet on his twitter since the election.


He's apparently suffering from writer's block, seeing as he can't think of anything newsworthy to post on his blog either, not since the council's AGM back in May, or the London Bridge attack in a neighbouring borough. Things are quiet in Kensington & Chelsea, I guess.

Nick notes


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> Yes they just tweeted 12-hour old news


By my reckoning that means it's due as a BBC Breaking News ticker sometime tomorrow.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 16, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> Yes they just tweeted 12-hour old news



Police had opened an investigation as they would, its only now its changed to criminal has it not??


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 16, 2017)

Those Germans huh?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 16, 2017)

*Lily Allen confirms she was axed from Newsnight after she controversially claimed '150 people died' in Grenfell Tower fire*
Lily Allen confirms she was axed from Newsnight after controversial comments


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 16, 2017)

If those kind of numbers are coming from people in the community, the action group, people who are aware of who's missing then you have to give them some credence.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 16, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Police had opened an investigation as they would, its only now its changed to criminal has it not??



They don't run civil investigations:

Police open criminal investigation into Grenfell Tower fire

The probe could result in the prosecution of anyone deemed responsible for building or design failures that caused the blaze.

"We as the police have started an investigation, I mentioned when I was down at the scene this morning that one of our very senior investigating officers is leading that for us," said Metropolitan Police commander Stuart Cundy.

"We as the police, we investigate criminal offences - I am not sitting here and saying there are criminal offences that have been committed, that's why you do an investigation, to establish it.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 16, 2017)

Right, so media using the wrong word.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

barwell does a 'no comment'


----------



## Humberto (Jun 16, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> Peter Jukes is the journalist behind the Daniel Morgan podcast and book, devastating on police and media corruption. If he's saying it I'd believe it.


 
To correct, victims' _relatives_. Poor reading comprehension on my part there. Apols.


----------



## killer b (Jun 16, 2017)

Wilf said:


> barwell does a 'no comment'



It's incredible really. also this. They're done for.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 16, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> If those kind of numbers are coming from people in the community, the action group, people who are aware of who's missing then you have to give them some credence.


I agree with that, but at the same time I don't think it's unreasonable for the authorities to keep the "official" figure as one that accurately represents known, recorded deaths at this time. Clearly they're aware that loads more people have died, but it would be irresponsible to put out _estimates_ which will be immediately seized upon by the media & treated as gospel. Especially when you consider the practical difficulties of managing such a large number of deaths. How do you make sure you don't count the same body twice or three times? There has to be a methodical system in place, which will inevitably mean it all takes time.

I'm not saying they _aren't_ suppressing the truth - that wouldn't surprise me - just that I think the clamour for information may be fuelling speculation of a conspiracy or cover-up.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 16, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Police had opened an investigation as they would, its only now its changed to criminal has it not??


No, it was announced last night, on the Guardian news feed and other news outlets


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

If I was feeling guilty as sin I would act in exactly the way the government is doing.  It's not even running scared, its hiding and cowering.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 16, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> *Lily Allen confirms she was axed from Newsnight after she controversially claimed '150 people died' in Grenfell Tower fire*
> Lily Allen confirms she was axed from Newsnight after controversial comments


tbf the reason she was bumped off the show is pure conjecture by the Mirror...journalistic innuendo....Lily herself says she was bumped because they got Paget-Brown on, and that was a fairly long and now important interview, in that it was there that he got forced into saying "they didnt even want sprinklers"


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 16, 2017)

ive never know a disaster where the death count has been restricted only to those who have been officially identified - the media always goes with "x number of people feared dead". The estimates seem to be coming from emergency service workers - so pretty credible. Also it may well be that many of the dead are not reported as missing - whole families may have been killed and there were probably a lot of people living there unofficially. This smacks of the sort of stuff they do in authoritarian regimes - and its only likely to fuel the anger.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 16, 2017)

ska invita said:


> tbf the reason she was bumped off the show is pure conjecture by the Mirror...journalistic innuendo....Lily herself says she was bumped because they got Paget-Brown on, and that was a fairly long and now important interview, in that it was there that he got forced into saying "they didnt even want sprinklers"



Why are you telling me? Call the mirror and tell them? Why not leave your extremely important comment in the comments section on that page?


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jun 16, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> ive never know a disaster where the death count has been restricted only to those who have been officially identified - the media always goes with "x number of people feared dead". The estimates seem to be coming from emergency service workers - so pretty credible. Also it may well be that many of the dead are not reported as missing - whole families may have been killed and there were probably a lot of people living there unofficially. This smacks of the sort of stuff they do in authoritarian regimes - and its only likely to fuel the anger.


We're being socially engineered to not riot.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

5t3IIa said:


> We're being socially engineered to not riot.


I'll bet the likes of Paget-Brown have got police protection at their home(s).


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 16, 2017)

the government's response is fucking awful. Its clear there have been major failings in the management and that residents were ignored - yet their response does not reflect this at all. All we are getting is bland words and a blank refusal to talk to the people affected. May is acting as if its some freak weather event thats killed three people in the outer Hebrides. There is no immediate action, no announcement of an immediate and urgent review of fire safety in tower blocs, no solid commitments to the victims, nothing - just blandishments. They really are callous cunts - all they are doing is trying to keep a lid on it and save their own sorry skins. Listen to fucking ledsome here - vile robot -


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 16, 2017)

May's off to visit a hospital today to make it all better.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 16, 2017)

Apparently the queen is visiting the victims as we speak... not sure if that'll do much to raise their spirits, but at least it's more than the bitch May managed...


----------



## Florkleshnort (Jun 16, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Two little girls have only just been found in hospital, due to police protocols of a terrorist incident, i.e. People being unable to search for family in hospitals! It was only by chance that a nurse let someone in cos of the description she was given. It's fuckin bonkers!



Wow, I can't imagine the emotions that family must have been through!


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 16, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> May's off to visit a hospital today to make it all better.


As if the victims haven't already suffered enough.....


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Jun 16, 2017)

I suspect May will only visit those who are still unconscious...


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I suspect May will only visit those who are still unconscious...


When she announces how wonderful the nurses and doctors were, coming in when they heard about the fire, there might also be a few wry smiles. Utter fucking scum, filth.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 16, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Why are you telling me? Call the mirror and tell them? Why not leave your extremely important comment in the comments section on that page?


im saying it because there's a conspiracy theory that the figure is being deliberately suppressed, and that headline gives the impression Newsnight are cancelling interviews as part of that conspiracy - I dont think thats the case in that situation


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Jun 16, 2017)

Wilf said:


> When she announces how wonderful the nurses and doctors were, coming in when they heard about the fire, there might also be a few wry smiles. Utter fucking scum, filth.


Maybe she can remind the nurses in a patronising manner that there is no magic money tree for them while she's there.


----------



## JTG (Jun 16, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> Apparently the queen is visiting the victims as we speak... not sure if that'll do much to raise their spirits, but at least it's more than the bitch May managed...


Hopefully they will give her some thoughts to pass on to her PM


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 16, 2017)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I suspect May will only visit those who are still unconscious...


How uncharacteristically merciful!


----------



## Ted Striker (Jun 16, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> WTF?
> 
> *Council leader claims sprinklers were not fitted as residents did not want the disruption*
> 
> ...



A local Councillor on BBC live right now (that was present at all consultation meetings) just mentioned she remembered no mention of sprinklers, and has called this as an outright lie and for Paget-Brown to retract the statement.


----------



## mod (Jun 16, 2017)

there's an unbelievably heart breaking video on this page (further down) of a poor syrian chap telling the story of how he was rescued from his flat but his brother was left behind and he then called him on the phone. 

London fire: Queen and Prince William visit Grenfell Tower centre - BBC News


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 16, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> ive never know a disaster where the death count has been restricted only to those who have been officially identified - the media always goes with "x number of people feared dead". The estimates seem to be coming from emergency service workers - so pretty credible. Also it may well be that many of the dead are not reported as missing - whole families may have been killed and there were probably a lot of people living there unofficially. This smacks of the sort of stuff they do in authoritarian regimes - and its only likely to fuel the anger.


Yeah I would have thought they'd be able to get a rough figure by working out how many missing person reports are duplicates, and counting unidentified people in hospitals - but that the final figure may well be higher (because of people with no-one to report them, including lodgers and others living there unofficially (for example my housing association told me I don't have to tell them if I have a partner, family member, or lodger move in, so long as I don't over-occupy or operate a business (ie airb&b) - I don't know if thats the case in social housing generally - and there'll always be  people staying with friends and family temporarily, not to mention subletting and airb&b going on either without the housing management's knowledge or in privately owned flats - and more of this going on because of the government's appalling housing policies).

But it seems odd that some sort of estimate isn't being given.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

PR people for the Royals realise what a mess the Tories are making of this and do not want to be caught wrong footed and associated with it.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

Ted Striker said:


> A local Councillor on BBC live right now (that was present at all consultation meetings) just mentioned she remembered no mention of sprinklers, and has called this as an outright lie and for Paget-Brown to retract the statement.


Astonishing.  fucking astonishing.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jun 16, 2017)

Someone on Twitter suggesting googling "Boris Johnson" "Rydon Construction"

I found this ...

Mayor of London announces new housing panel – Buildington Blog

There's also a bunch of stuff about Boris and some sleazy Chinese developers that comes up if you search "Boris" "Housing" "Corruption" and stuff like that ...


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Jun 16, 2017)

Ted Striker said:


> A local Councillor on BBC live right now (that was present at all consultation meetings) just mentioned she remembered no mention of sprinklers, and has called this as an outright lie and for Paget-Brown to retract the statement.


I don't normally like calling people "scum" but that Paget-Brown really, really makes my skin crawl


----------



## mod (Jun 16, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> the government's response is fucking awful. Its clear there have been major failings in the management and that residents were ignored - yet their response does not reflect this at all. All we are getting is bland words and a blank refusal to talk to the people affected. May is acting as if its some freak weather event thats killed three people in the outer Hebrides. There is no immediate action, no announcement of an immediate and urgent review of fire safety in tower blocs, no solid commitments to the victims, nothing - just blandishments. They really are callous cunts - all they are doing is trying to keep a lid on it and save their own sorry skins. Listen to fucking ledsome here - vile robot -




Endless robotic platitudes and fuck all substance. Much like listening to May. Fair play to the fella who articulately and passionately let her know the score. Well done son.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 16, 2017)

Its going to be prebooking your slot at Grenfell by the end of today. A cavalcade of political scum and robber baron parasites elbowing their way into the camera lens with *sad faces*


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> PR people for the Royals realise what a mess the Tories are making of this and do not want to be caught wrong footed and associated with it.



I don't much like the Royals but Lizzie is remarkably popular and liable to go down better than Lady May with the injured at the hospitals. 

They are also fairly experienced at handling this sort of thing, and tend not be seen as directly responsible unlike say the government or council.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> PR people for the Royals realise what a mess the Tories are making of this and do not want to be caught wrong footed and associated with it.


also 'one wishes to make that vicars daughter look a cunt. Arrange my carraige'


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

crossthebreeze said:


> Yeah I would have thought they'd be able to get a rough figure by working out how many missing person reports are duplicates, and counting unidentified people in hospitals - but that the final figure may well be higher (because of people with no-one to report them, including lodgers and others living there unofficially (for example my housing association told me I don't have to tell them if I have a partner, family member, or lodger move in, so long as I don't over-occupy or operate a business (ie airb&b) - I don't know if thats the case in social housing generally - and there'll always be  people staying with friends and family temporarily, not to mention subletting and airb&b going on either without the housing management's knowledge or in privately owned flats - and more of this going on because of the government's appalling housing policies).
> 
> But it seems odd that some sort of estimate isn't being given.


Even with all the complications about sub-letting and people who were tenants who were out at the time, they've almost certainly got a ballpark figure. Something that won't be right, but won't be wrong by a magnitude of 10 for example.  It seems they could be using phrases like 'tens', 'dozens' or 'is expected to rise over 100'.  At one level, as an uninvolved member of the public, I'm not fussed about knowing, though there's the suspicion they are managing the flow of information. It's more important for the families with missing relatives.  At the very least they need confidence that the authorities are being _honest_ in their estimates, even if they turn out to be wrong ultimately.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jun 16, 2017)

I haven't commented on this thread as yet because I've struggled to both get my head around the scale of the tragedy and to manage my emotional responses. It feels  almost inevitable that such a thing could happen, following the 'othering' of social housing residents, poor doors and all that.

I just want to break stuff right now. These cunts need to know and directly feel consequences for this institutionalised neglect. Enough. Fucking enough.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> I don't much like the Royals but Lizzie is remarkably popular and liable to go down better than Lady May with the injured at the hospitals.
> 
> They are also fairly experienced at handling this sort of thing, and tend not be seen as directly responsible unlike say the government or council.



I despise them. One good thing about the visit though is that it does make May look so much worse than she does already.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jun 16, 2017)

He





fakeplasticgirl said:


> I don't normally like calling people "scum" but that Paget-Brown really, really makes my skin crawl



He needs the Hunter Thompson prescription of having his nuts ripped off with a plastic fork.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 16, 2017)

eatmorecheese said:


> I haven't commented on this thread as yet because I've struggled to both get my head around the scale of the tragedy and to manage my emotional responses. It feels  almost inevitable that such a thing could happen, following the 'othering' of social housing residents, poor doors and all that.
> 
> I just want to break stuff right now. These cunts need to know and directly feel consequences for this institutionalised neglect. Enough. Fucking enough.



It hurts and enrages  at the same time I find.


----------



## mod (Jun 16, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> *Lily Allen confirms she was axed from Newsnight after she controversially claimed '150 people died' in Grenfell Tower fire*
> Lily Allen confirms she was axed from Newsnight after controversial comments



Thought it wouldn't take long for 'voice of the people' Lily to be on the scene giving another tearful contribution to a news event. Am I being overly cynical about Lily Allen or is she as irritating as i think she is?


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> I despise them. One good thing about the visit though is that it does make May look so much worse than she does already.



No 10 got a whiff that Liz was doing a hospital visit, & thought fuck, we'd better do one too. Wouldn't put it past em the utter filth.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 16, 2017)

eatmorecheese said:


> I haven't commented on this thread as yet because I've struggled to both get my head around the scale of the tragedy and to manage my emotional responses. It feels  almost inevitable that such a thing could happen, following the 'othering' of social housing residents, poor doors and all that.
> 
> I just want to break stuff right now. These cunts need to know and directly feel consequences for this institutionalised neglect. Enough. Fucking enough.


 
This is not a bad thing I feel , it is anger but it is also positive in  strange sort of way - cannot let this fall away and be forgotten about or politically tempered into something more acceptable - this is pivotal


----------



## ffsear (Jun 16, 2017)

mod said:


> . Am I being overly cynical about Lily Allen or is she as irritating as i think she is?



Not at all,  shes a fucking idiot


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

mod said:


> Thought it wouldn't take long for 'voice of the people' Lily to be on the scene giving another tearful contribution to a news event. Am I being overly cynical about Lily Allen or is she as irritating as i think she is?



I don't know a huge amount about her but she seems to really care about ordinary people in a way that I think other 'left' celebs like Billy Bragg do not. I don't think it's a career thing for her.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

a tory speaks





ffsear said:


> Not at all,  shes a fucking idiot


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 16, 2017)

Ted Striker said:


> A local Councillor on BBC live right now (that was present at all consultation meetings) just mentioned she remembered no mention of sprinklers, and has called this as an outright lie and for Paget-Brown to retract the statement.



The way stuff like this is often done is that they send out some shitty consultation questionnaire, get a small percentage of them returned as a lot of people are too busy or can't be arsed filling it in (often because their views will be ignored anyway), then count the tenants that don't respond as being on the side of whatever they want.  It's happened in some housing stock sell-offs, where they've claimed (as a hypothetical example) 'only 40% of residents were against the transfer to Crooked & Offshore Associates' when only half the consultations were responded to with 80% of residents against. Private Eye has had plenty of examples of this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> No 10 got a whiff that Liz was doing a hospital visit, & thought fuck, we'd better do one too. Wouldn't put it past em the utter filth.


if it was liz fraser out of the carry on films that might better raise people's spirits


----------



## killer b (Jun 16, 2017)

ffsear said:


> Not at all,  shes a fucking idiot


Well, that's cleared any doubts up for me.


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jun 16, 2017)

I don't have an opinion on Lily Allen either way but she's speaking up for people who keep getting patronised and censored by people interviewing them on tv. I think that's a good thing.


----------



## sunnysidedown (Jun 16, 2017)

mod said:


> Thought it wouldn't take long for 'voice of the people' Lily to be on the scene giving another tearful contribution to a news event. Am I being overly cynical about Lily Allen or is she as irritating as i think she is?



I thought she got it spot on yesterday on the C4 news.  Of course the points she made will be drowned out by the usual types giving her shit for being young, female and famous.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

sunnysidedown said:


> I thought she got it spot on yesterday on the C4 news.  Of course the points she made will be drowned out by the usual types giving her shit for being young, female and famous.


and articulate


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> I despise them. One good thing about the visit though is that it does make May look so much worse than she does already.



Yup.

Last night we were saying all the things she ought to have done, could have done, should have done.

But in the end, she did as she is, and it's fitting that she's showing herself as she truly is rather than acting like a person with any semblance of compassion or fellow feeling.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jun 16, 2017)

The term 'out of touch' gets bandied around so much that you feel you need another term for the degree to which the Tories have failed to respond to this adequately. In their own fucking universe? Living in rich scum land?


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 16, 2017)

I don't think it's a conspiracy or anything. It's like to be a case of simply not knowing who was in there, and there's likely to be few undocumented people in there, people who don't have papers, people staying on mates sofas etc. So it's gonna be difficult to provide estimates 

However, someone needs to go to fucking jail for this


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Brainaddict said:


> The term 'out of touch' gets bandied around so much that you feel you need another term for the degree to which the Tories have failed to respond to this adequately. In their own fucking universe? Living in rich scum land?


uncaring and wilfully ignorant seem to capture it without needing to ascend to hyperbole


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> The way stuff like this is often done is that they send out some shitty consultation questionnaire, get a small percentage of them returned as a lot of people are too busy or can't be arsed filling it in (often because their views will be ignored anyway), then count the tenants that don't respond as being on the side of whatever they want.  It's happened in some housing stock sell-offs, where they've claimed (as a hypothetical example) 'only 40% of residents were against the transfer to Crooked & Offshore Associates' when only half the consultations were responded to with 80% of residents against. Private Eye has had plenty of examples of this.



Yes. My local example of this: Lambeth council published a 'consultation report' claiming that "many residents" had approved their plan to sell off the playground and replace it with flats. This was a complete lie, which under pressure they finally agreed had been a 'mistake', as nobody had actually said they approved of it at all, so they edited it out of their report, eventually.


----------



## mod (Jun 16, 2017)

ShiftyBagLady said:


> I don't have an opinion on Lily Allen either way but she's speaking up for people who keep getting patronised and censored by people interviewing them on tv. I think that's a good thing.



Yeah i do agree. I actually share many of her political views and like what she says but am increasingly finding her to be a bit of an attention seeker. Feels like she's desperate for a slot on question time. I'm torn.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

They haven't got their act together yet in terms of cranking up the PR machine and their media self defence strategy.  I suspect they will be coming out with a few telling phrases in the next couple of days that will come back to haunt them.

Whole thing is going to be massive - the chance of riots is high, though more importantly I hope it produces something in terms of a united London working class movement (and beyond). However, as things stand, beyond some poor sap of a contractor or conceivably in the tenant management group, the chances of anyone more senior doing time are minimal.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 16, 2017)

my old dear said to me last night that 'we're supposed to have world class safety on the oil rigs now but it took piper alpha to get there'. I don't know enough about all that (before my time and out of my knowledge wrt how it happened and so on, I just know it did) but it demonstrates what she and myself and many others will be feeling. People have to die before they'll listen. My response was that having the previous day watched the house of commons line up to suck Bercows dick and generally congratulate themselves for being part of this Historic House blah blah. Then the next day I'm seeing a social housing tower block burn. grinding my teeth.


----------



## philx (Jun 16, 2017)

Cowell planning charity song for fire victims

Who incidentally donated  150 thousands Dollars directly to the IDF a couple of years ago


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

Wilf said:


> However, as things stand, beyond some poor sap of a contractor or conceivably in the tenant management group, the chances of anyone more senior doing time are minimal.



There are so many different companies involved in the construction process and so many layers of management involved in maintaining the flats.  With all this bureaucracy no doubt it'll be enough to protect those higher up the tree.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 16, 2017)

Not sure where this comes from but this is in London alone:


----------



## Crispy (Jun 16, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> There are so many different companies involved in the construction process and so many layers of management involved in maintaining the flats.  With all this bureaucracy no doubt it'll be enough to protect those higher up the tree.


It usually comes down to who has the best lawyers (or who *had* the best lawyers when the contracts were written)


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 16, 2017)

philx said:


> Cowell planning charity song for fire victims
> 
> Who incidentally donated  150 thousands Dollars directly to the IDF a couple of years ago


Surely he'd raise more money if people paid for him not to release a charity single? I'd put a tenner in.


----------



## mod (Jun 16, 2017)

If Lily Allen is right that 150 people perished there is going to be a riot. Get the feeling the authorities are withholding the true amount on purpose.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 16, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> my old dear said to me last night that 'we're supposed to have world class safety on the oil rigs now but it took piper alpha to get there'. I don't know enough about all that (before my time and out of my knowledge wrt how it happened and so on, I just know it did) but it demonstrates what she and myself and many others will be feeling. People have to die before they'll listen. My response was that having the previous day watched the house of commons line up to suck Bercows dick and generally congratulate themselves for being part of this Historic House blah blah. Then the next day I'm seeing a social housing tower block burn. grinding my teeth.


Yeah, sadly this is so often the case - whether is planes & trains crashing, ferries sinking, oil rigs blowing up, it often takes a massive tragedy (or several...) before standards improve - and are _legislated_ for. The very least that should come out of this are new laws mandating minimum fire safety across all forms of accommodation - and serious custodial sentences for any landlord / management company execs that fail to comply with them.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> Not sure where this comes from but this is in London alone:


I think someone has just looked at case studies for projects this contractor has done.  I'm not sure how helpful stuff like this is really.  They may be all ACM but its not always obvious which product is on the wall.  One of the photos looks more like a Trespa system which is a high pressure laminate rather than an ACM.  

Even if they are all ACM, even if they are all Reynabond, even if they all have the polyethylene core we still don't know anything like enough to say these flats are a danger.  I'm still sticking with my theory that the cladding panels themselves were a factor but by no means the only thing going on.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 16, 2017)

kabbes will know about these things I am sure- there is a *sort of* tolerance calculation of how many fatalities are accepted with major projects and what the trigger levels  needed to be to able justify the extra expense to alleviate this risk. its a bit esoteric for me atm but I have come across this before (somewhere)


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Surely he'd raise more money if people paid for him not to release a charity single? I'd put a tenner in.


edit: that was a fucking stupid image to post.  I posted up an obvious Rage Against the Machine 'reply' to Cowell, but the album art was highly inappropriate in the circumstances.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 16, 2017)

philx said:


> Cowell planning charity song for fire victims
> *
> Who incidentally donated  150 thousands Dollars directly to the IDF a couple of years ago*



What the fuck does that have to do with anything? 

Cowell is a cunt for many many reasons, and he'll be using this to siphon money off but dragging up the IDF is totally irrelevant.


----------



## major major (Jun 16, 2017)

500 residents and they originally said at least 80 of the flats were empty? -  absentee owners.
According to telegraph there are only 120 flats in the whole block.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 16, 2017)

major major said:


> 500 flats and they originally said at least 80 of these were empty -  absentee owners.


What?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 16, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> Yeah, sadly this is so often the case - whether is planes & trains crashing, ferries sinking, oil rigs blowing up, it often takes a massive tragedy (or several...) before standards improve - and are _legislated_ for. The very least that should come out of this are new laws mandating minimum fire safety across all forms of accommodation - and serious custodial sentences for any landlord / management company execs that fail to comply with them.



the things is there already had been a tragedy - 6 people died in a fire at  larkanal high rise flats in 2009. A report was made with a series of recommendations (such as sprinkler systems) - the government has been sitting on the report ever since.


----------



## kabbes (Jun 16, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> kabbes will know about these things I am sure- there is a *sort of* tolerance calculation of how many fatalities are accepted with major projects and what the trigger levels  needed to be to able justify the extra expense to alleviate this risk. its a bit esoteric for me atm but I have come across this before (somewhere)


There always inevitably must be a tolerance to fatal failure, but it's really, really low these days.  Spectacular coincidence kind of low, not just "whoops there was a major flaw that killed everyone, sorry about that" low.  We're not living in the days of that Ford car that had its fuel tank in the bumper.


----------



## nuffsaid (Jun 16, 2017)

Scum journalist impersonated relative to get an interview with a survivor in hospital - Unbelievable!

Sun journalist 'impersonated Grenfell Tower victim's relative at hospital'


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

major major said:


> 500 residents and they originally said at least 80 of the flats were empty -  absentee owners.


Do you have a source for that please?


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 16, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> the things is there already had been a tragedy - 6 people died in a fire at  larkanal high rise flats in 2009. A report was made with a series of recommendations (such as sprinkler systems) - the government has been sitting on the report ever since.


"Only" 6 people though... Not sure that's enough to cross the threshold of a government cost/benefit analysis... the evil fuckers need more blood before they'll act...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 16, 2017)

kabbes said:


> There always inevitably must be a tolerance to fatal failure, but it's really, really low these days.  Spectacular coincidence kind of low, not just "whoops there was a major flaw that killed everyone, sorry about that" low.  We're not living in the days of that Ford car that had its fuel tank in the bumper.


 
Yeah, it discussed the premise of Low probability/ High consequence risk wrt to catastrophic exceptional events & the tolerances involved .


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 16, 2017)

BBC reckon upto 76 missing, with the 17 confirmed dead that's 93, which tallies with the earlier police comments of hoping it won't reach three figures.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 16, 2017)

nuffsaid said:


> Scum journalist impersonated relative to get an interview with a survivor in hospital - Unbelievable!
> 
> Sun journalist 'impersonated Grenfell Tower victim's relative at hospital'


Jesus fuck...


----------



## belboid (Jun 16, 2017)

major major said:


> 500 residents and they originally said at least 80 of the flats were empty? -  absentee owners


80 out of 120?  That's obviously completely wrong. Don't spread bullshit, please.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

Piece by a woman who worked for KCTMO and did inspections
When I worked for KCTMO I had nightmares about burning tower blocks | Seraphima Kennedy
talks about the impact of austerity on her ability to do the job and how she had nightmares.  The way this all plays out over the next few years is going to be about the multiple layers in terms of building jobs and contractors, but also the multiple layers and arms length aspect of political control. At one level the multiple layers will be where the government hides and obfuscates, but its also a key manifestation of neo-liberalism as public sector policy - the very core of how social housing is now.

Have a feeling that Seraphima Kennedy is going to be an important voice in the various inquiries.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Have a feeling that Seraphima Kennedy is going to be an important voice in the various inquiries.



If she's allowed to be.

I have little faith in judge led inquiries, especially when the event is this recent.  I don't trust the establishment to investigate itself.  I'd much prefer to see something more akin to the Hillsborough inquiry panel.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 16, 2017)

Police saying number of dead is now at 30.


----------



## JTG (Jun 16, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> the things is there already had been a tragedy - 6 people died in a fire at  larkanal high rise flats in 2009. A report was made with a series of recommendations (such as sprinkler systems) - the government has been sitting on the report ever since.


Football fans died at Burnden Park in 1946, Ibrox in 1971, Bradford in 1985 and Hillsborough in 1989. There were reports published, standards raised - and still local authorities, football clubs, football authorities, the police and the government kept ignoring them all.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 16, 2017)

Sun journalist 'impersonated Grenfell Tower victim's relative at hospital'

Nice.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 16, 2017)

Police spokesman on the BBC just now, saying 30 deaths confirmed so far, and he expects that to increase as the building is made safe and a full search of the upper floors is carried out.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 16, 2017)

Fuck sakes


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## Badgers (Jun 16, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Sun journalist 'impersonated Grenfell Tower victim's relative at hospital'


Is there no depths to which those cunts will not stoop to sell papers


----------



## editor (Jun 16, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> It's bollocks. Council's/RSLs often do work that annoys residents, rightly or wrongly. Every part of the establishment is on the backfoot over this. The PR wonks will be on big overtime.


Exactly. Landlords have (or should have) a duty to ensure their properties are safe immaterial of whether the residents like what that involves or not. To try and blame the tenants is despicable.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 16, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Sun journalist 'impersonated Grenfell Tower victim's relative at hospital'
> 
> Nice.



Sick fucking scum.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 16, 2017)

I think the nature of the arms length structures that LA's are adopting to distance themselves from the functioning of ersatz ( for want of a better word)  social housing , need to be critically examined to see whether these do indeed aid problems with responsibility and safety. It has been touched on early on in the thread.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

Not sure it's appropriate to be finding amusing stories amid all this horror, but...

Yesterday, I saw some clips of what local people had been doing to support each other around the block and ended up with tears in my eyes at work. So, with a colleague who is also having a hard time, we nipped outside for a cig, with a good shot of whiskey in the coffee cups.  30 seconds later, a passing bird did a mega, liquid shit on my bald head. Cue tension relieving guffaws of laughter.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 16, 2017)

Badgers said:


> Is there no depths to which those cunts will not stoop to sell papers



None.

The despicable Daily Mail has named the man whose fridge apparently caught fire, and printed his details, along with photos of him.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 16, 2017)

That behaviour by Sun hacks comes as no shock to those who know how the billionaire press behaved in Manchester recently.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 16, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> I think the nature of the arms length structures that LA's are adopting to distance themselves from the functioning of ersatz ( for want of a better word)  social housing , need to be critically examined to see whether these do indeed aid problems with responsibility and safety. It has been touched on early on in the thread.



I sometimes think modern politics is driven by a desire to abdicate responsibility for as much as possible - sell it off, set up quangos to run things, such that all government has to do is turn up occasionally to debate which of the sponsor's colour schemes is suitable for the new royal yacht.  These things used to be ours, but we don't have a say in them anymore, other than getting fucked about between different energy providers etc. That's not power, it's inconvenience.

Such arrangements also create a firewall between local/national government and the results of their policies and funding, allowing the finger of blame to be pointed at a tier lower down from the real power.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 16, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> That behaviour by Sun hacks comes as no shock to those who know how the billionaire press behaved in Manchester recently.



Was just about to point that out, how relatives of victims were getting bombarded by Facebook friend requests etc. Vermin.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Wilf said:


> my bald head.


another illusion ruined 

i've always pictured you as similar to mr lucas out of are you being served


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 16, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> None.
> 
> The despicable Daily Mail has named the man whose fridge apparently caught fire, and printed his details, along with photos of him.



tbf I half expected them to invent a crack den or meth-lab fire...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Badgers said:


> Is there no depths to which those cunts will not stoop to sell papers


let's dump them in the mariana trench and find out


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 16, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> tbf I half expected them to invent a crack den or meth-lab fire...



Cannabis farms have caused quite a few house fires. I hope there isn't some illicit cause behind it as it would be used to direct blame and attention away from all the other failings. The cause of the fire is almost irrelevant, it's the failure of structural control mechanisms and the lack of political will to provide sprinklers and safe means of escape that need the most attention.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 16, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> None.
> 
> The despicable Daily Mail has named the man whose fridge apparently caught fire, and printed his details, along with photos of him.


I saw that in the Metro this morning too


----------



## binka (Jun 16, 2017)

philx said:


> Cowell planning charity song for fire victims


What the survivors and local residents think about this I don't know but a charity single just doesn't seem at all appropriate in these circumstances imo. Certainly not by someone with no apparent connection to those affected.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Residents furious as it emerges fire-resistant cladding for Grenfell Tower would have cost just £5,000
the tories like experts when it suits them i see


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 16, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> None.
> 
> The despicable Daily Mail has named the man whose fridge apparently caught fire, and printed his details, along with photos of him.


As if the poor sod isn't feeling shitty enough already... That's the sort of coverage that could drive someone to suicide...


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 16, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> As if the poor sod isn't feeling shitty enough already... That's the sort of coverage that could drive someone to suicide...



Lucy Meadows RIP.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 16, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> Cannabis farms have caused quite a few house fires. I hope there isn't some illicit cause behind it as it would be used to direct blame and attention away from all the other failings. The cause of the fire is almost irrelevant, it's the failure of structural control mechanisms and the lack of political will to provide sprinklers and safe means of escape that need the most attention.



Yep. It wouldn't even make a difference if it turned out to be arson because it _should not have spread like this _.


----------



## urbanspaceman (Jun 16, 2017)

Here are the components of a hybrid rocket motor, that is a type of rocket that uses solid fuel and gaseous oxidiser. The fuel is usually a polymer, often polythene. To improve the thrust, sometimes you mix in some aluminium powder (which burns hot and energetically). Running up the core of the motor is a empty channel, to ensure good contact between the oxidiser (usually just plain oxygen) and the fuel. 

So, in effect, the idiots (or criminals ?) who put cladding on Grenfell Tower were essentially wrapping it in a huge rocket motor. The gap behind the cladding panels acted as the oxidiser channel, the polythene core of the panels as the fuel, and the Aluminium cladding, once ignited, as an accelerant. It's quite difficult to get Aluminium burning, but once it gets going, it's pretty nasty stuff, burning with an amazingly hot flame. This was nothing like a house fire - Grenfell Tower was more like a giant incendiray device.

I worked in chemical/oil&gas safety, and I am amazed that any halfway competent engineer would choose not to specify the alternative panel design with a completely inert rockwool filling.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 109468
> Residents furious as it emerges fire-resistant cladding for Grenfell Tower would have cost just £5,000
> the tories like experts when it suits them i see


I'm not always a fan of the 'lead by experts' line, but in the circumstances of this fire, it's a pity they weren't lead by experts over the last couple of years. It's also a pity the prime minister's chief of staff sat on what the experts recommended.

Edit: sorry, yes, if I'd read to the bottom, I'd have seen it was a point you'd already made.


----------



## A380 (Jun 16, 2017)

Cladding for Grenfell Tower was cheaper, more flammable option

Looks like someone saved a few quid.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 16, 2017)

> Sun journalist 'impersonated Grenfell Tower victim's relative at hospital'



see also 'Theresa May impersonates Prime Minister to visit victims at hospital'


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I think someone has just looked at case studies for projects this contractor has done.  I'm not sure how helpful stuff like this is really.  They may be all ACM but its not always obvious which product is on the wall.  One of the photos looks more like a Trespa system which is a high pressure laminate rather than an ACM.
> 
> Even if they are all ACM, even if they are all Reynabond, even if they all have the polyethylene core we still don't know anything like enough to say these flats are a danger.  I'm still sticking with my theory that the cladding panels themselves were a factor but by no means the only thing going on.



It feels like at the moment there is zero chance of a rational assessment of risk that is going have much effect on popular opinion.

People are understandably angry that this can have happened, and the media is feeding that anger with all sorts of narratives about what led to this which aren't based on what actually happened, because they can't be. We don't know what actually happened yet and probably won't for several months, and the reasons are likely to be complicated.

Even the 100% nonsense story about the cladding having been installed to satisfy residents of a nearby luxury development has taken hold and I see it repeated everywhere in facebook comments and so on.

We don't know what changes in building regs might have prevented this failure, yet it's being widely presented that there were obvious dangers in current regs, changes to which have been blocked. We don't know if installing the slightly more expensive FR panels would have prevented it happening.

The reporting in the media regarding technical issues has been poor so far.

Many folk on here seem to be of the opinion that these technical questions have no bearing on the politics involved. It's easier to attribute blame without waiting for the facts to come out of course.


----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 16, 2017)

May has u-turned again and announced she is going to visit people at the site


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 16, 2017)

Does she have something better to do ? What fucking benefit will that provide ?


----------



## belboid (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> It feels like at the moment there is zero chance of a rational assessment of risk that is going have much effect on popular opinion.
> 
> People are understandably angry that this can have happened, and the media is feeding that anger with all sorts of narratives about what led to this which aren't based on what actually happened, because they can't be. We don't know what actually happened yet and probably won't for several months, and the reasons are likely to be complicated.
> 
> ...


You're right, there's nothing to see here and everyone is getting very angry about nothing. 

Twat.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 16, 2017)

too late im afraid, she should have been there yesterday , before 8am , I mean the queen and william have even beaten her too it, just another nail


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

gawkrodger said:


> May has u-turned again and announced she is going to visit people at the site


could it be that what so nearly happened to richard nixon in venezuela could happen to our own theresa may?


----------



## killer b (Jun 16, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Does she have something better to do ? What fucking benefit will that provide ?


The news reports of residents savaging her will be of some benefit to our sense of justice, if nothing else.


----------



## articul8 (Jun 16, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> As if the poor sod isn't feeling shitty enough already... That's the sort of coverage that could drive someone to suicide...


it's despicable, barely concealed racist attempt to blame a black guy for having a faulty fridge rather than the cunts who failed to listen to the residents' warnings and address the fire risk.   The Sun also carried an article interviewing a Tory councillor saying the residents didn't want sprinklers because it would mean the works would have disrupted them for longer.   As though it's the residents fault (with no evidence,of course, in fact all the evidence points the other way).   Oh and blaming Europe or Greens for energy efficiency targets.   Outsourcing and cost-cutting are to blame, together with contempt for the views of working class residents.


----------



## Libertad (Jun 16, 2017)

Philip Davies, yet again, made a valuable contribution to the democratic process.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 109468
> Residents furious as it emerges fire-resistant cladding for Grenfell Tower would have cost just £5,000
> the tories like experts when it suits them i see



I'm not sure where the £5k figure is coming from as it seems odd.  £5k is nothing on a build this size.  There must have been in the region of 3500m2 of cladding panels on this project. I would be amazed if they chose to go with this panel because it was a pound or so cheaper per m2.  Why would Reynabond even have two products with such a close pricing structure?  The cladding package could have been worth as much as 1/2 million pounds, what is £5k in the scheme of things?

ACM's are a cheap way to clad a building but there are much cheaper ways of doing it.   If this panel was chosen because it was cheaper the price saving must of been greater than 5k, it must have been.  Of course there is the possibility that this particular panel was chosen for other reasons, maybe the colours the architect wanted were only available in it or the level of gloss finish?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 16, 2017)

A380 said:


> Cladding for Grenfell Tower was cheaper, more flammable option
> 
> Looks like someone saved a few quid.



about £5 grand apparently. cunts.


----------



## Beermoth (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> It feels like at the moment there is zero chance of a rational assessment of risk that is going have much effect on popular opinion.
> 
> People are understandably angry that this can have happened, and the media is feeding that anger with all sorts of narratives about what led to this which aren't based on what actually happened, because they can't be. We don't know what actually happened yet and probably won't for several months, and the reasons are likely to be complicated.
> 
> ...



Yes, you're right.

If there's ever a time for dithery do-nothing liberalism it's right now.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

articul8 said:


> it's despicable, barely concealed racist attempt to blame a black guy for having a faulty fridge rather than the cunts who failed to listen to the residents' warnings and address the fire risk.   The Sun also carried an article interviewing a Tory councillor saying the residents didn't want sprinklers because it would mean the works would have disrupted them for longer.   As though it's the residents fault (with no evidence,of course, in fact all the evidence points the other way).   Oh and blaming Europe or Greens for energy efficiency targets.   Outsourcing and cost-cutting are to blame, together with contempt for the views of working class residents.



Couple this with the constant references to 'green measures' in the Mail and Telegraph.  The fight back has started with a vengeance to shift the blame anywhere but where it belongs.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

belboid said:


> You're right, there's nothing to see here and everyone is getting very angry about nothing.
> 
> Twat.



I said neither of those things.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Couple this with the constant references to 'green measures' in the Mail and Telegraph.  The fight back has started with a vengeance to shift the blame anywhere but where it belongs.


the emergency plan has been invoked


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I'm not sure where the £5k figure is coming from as it seems odd.  £5k is nothing on a build this size.  There must have been in the region of 3500m2 of cladding panels on this project. I would be amazed if they chose to go with this panel because it was a pound or so cheaper per m2.  Why would Reynabond even have two products with such a close pricing structure?  The cladding package could have been worth as much as 1/2 million pounds, what is £5k in the scheme of things?
> 
> ACM's are a cheap way to clad a building but there are much cheaper ways of doing it.   If this panel was chosen because it was cheaper the price saving must of been greater than 5k, it must have been.  Of course there is the possibility that this particular panel was chosen for other reasons, maybe the colours the architect wanted were only available in it or the level of gloss finish?



It may have been as simple as someone asking the manufacturer which specification was suitable to meet relevant building regs, and the answer being that the slightly cheaper one met the relevant regs, because as far as I can work out it did.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 16, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I'm not sure where the £5k figure is coming from as it seems odd.  £5k is nothing on a build this size.



it was reported on the bbc.


----------



## polly (Jun 16, 2017)

In addition to the dodgy cladding, residents are saying on bbc news that the gas pipes were installed in the only emergency exit, ie the staircase, to cut costs. They had, of course, raised this with the council.

Sorry if this has been posted.

Reading everything but really struggling to find any words.


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Jun 16, 2017)

ruffneck23 said:


> too late im afraid, she should have been there yesterday , before 8am , I mean the queen and william have even beaten her too it, just another nail




In the face of May's claim that she was being mindful of security issues when doing her visit privately, it almost looks as if queenie's visit is a deliberate editorial riposte. The reigning monarch and the heir to the throne both making a visit despite any security fears makes May look proper stupid.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

Cladding for Grenfell Tower was cheaper, more flammable option


> Omnis had been asked to supply Reynobond PE cladding, which is £2 cheaper per square metre than the alternative Reynobond FR, which stands for “fire resistant” to the companies that worked on refurbishing Grenfell Tower.


And before teuchter starts yapping again, I'm happy to confirm I don't have any technical knowledge of these materials and how much of a difference there is between them in terms of fire resistance.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> it was reported on the bbc.



Oh sure.  I just wandered where it originated.  It may well be true but it would be surprising then again a lot of things in construction are surprising.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 16, 2017)

.


----------



## Libertad (Jun 16, 2017)

Apologies if this has been posted before. This blog post addresses the BBC's silencing of residents' statements as "allegations" and K&C's “regeneration plan” for the estate.

What The MSM Isn’t Telling You About The Grenfell Tower Blaze


----------



## ShiftyBagLady (Jun 16, 2017)

SheilaNaGig said:


> In the face of May's claim that she was being mindful of security issues when doing her visit privately, it almost looks as if queenie's visit is a deliberate editorial riposte. The reigning monarch and the heir to the throne both making a visit despite any security fears makes May look proper stupid.


I reckon may was told the queen intended to visit and she scheduled a hasty visit but was advised 'don't speak to real people, they make you look bad'. 
Then the queen descends shaking hands and making small talk and Theresa cries in the toilet and despairs 'I can do it, if she can do it I can do it'


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

Anyone have any insight into whether this might be true?

Video: Govt “puts ‘D-notice’ gag” on real #Grenfell death toll #nationalsecurity


----------



## sunnysidedown (Jun 16, 2017)

Edit, as J Eds post.


----------



## Crispy (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> We don't know what actually happened yet and probably won't for several months, and the reasons are likely to be complicated.
> The reporting in the media regarding technical issues has been poor so far.



100% agreed. The behaviour of building fires can be complicated and unintuitive, and often requires careful detective work to put the story together after the fact.

The cladding panels *may well* be at fault for the death toll. IMO, the lack of fire suppression and smoke extract are more important factors. Regardless of how the fire started or spread, that building was basically impossible to escape from. That is the greater crime.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 16, 2017)

SheilaNaGig said:


> In the face of May's claim that she was being mindful of security issues when doing her visit privately, it almost looks as if queenie's visit is a deliberate editorial riposte. The reigning monarch and the heir to the throne both making a visit despite any security fears makes May look proper stupid.



TBF there was little chance of anyone attacking the royals, whereas with May...


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

By the by, just had this justgiving link from my union. The fact that it's from the union (UCU) and also that it has raised over £1m pretty much ensures it's legit:
Help raise £2000000 to Help the families of Grenfell Tower, West London who have been devastated by a fire which has destroyed their homes and taken loved ones.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Cladding for Grenfell Tower was cheaper, more flammable option
> 
> And before teuchter starts yapping again, I'm happy to confirm I don't have any technical knowledge of these materials and how much of a difference there is between them in terms of fire resistance.



There is a grade classification between Class A and Class B which is relatively significant.  The FR version being Class A and the standard version Class B. That being said they are both well within regs and better than others that are out there.

I think we're about to discover the full limitations of the testing regime.

I once sat in a meeting with a testing authority, contractor and manufacturer regarding a product that wasn't performing on-site.  The testing authority were asked about their testing and why the product was performing differently. The nonchalant reply was they only test in laboratory conditions.  Great! Lets build more buildings inside laboratories!

I know of a insulated render company that have a unique detail as part of their system which enabled them to get a good fire rating. Unfortunately as contractors move from system to system as they move projects the actual workman either didn't know to do the detail or couldn't be bothered. The result being that a crucial firestopping detail was often not implemented on-site.

There is a lot of accusations being leveled at the panel but I think we are going to find the cause of this runs a lot deeper than what or wasn't in the core of the cladding panel.


----------



## phillm (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 16, 2017)

bollocks is there a D-notice (or whatever they're called now - DSMA?)


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Anyone have any insight into whether this might be true?
> 
> Video: Govt “puts ‘D-notice’ gag” on real #Grenfell death toll #nationalsecurity


Doubt it, because:


Skwarkbox
There is no way it could be known exactly how many perished before the entire block had been painstakingly checked through
The fire was very public, and there is widespread acceptance/belief, based on the relatively small numbers of casualties in hospital, the ‘stay put’ advice, the ‘no one escaped the top three floors’ statements, that the total fatalities will likely rise very high
What possible benefit is there from obscuring an as-yet unknowable number which many will likely have accurately speculated upon?


----------



## Anudder Oik (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## EastEnder (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> It feels like at the moment there is zero chance of a rational assessment of risk that is going have much effect on popular opinion.
> 
> People are understandably angry that this can have happened, and the media is feeding that anger with all sorts of narratives about what led to this which aren't based on what actually happened, because they can't be. We don't know what actually happened yet and probably won't for several months, and the reasons are likely to be complicated.
> 
> ...


We do know that a tower block went up in flames in a manner that should never have been possible. This implies something technical was at fault.
We do know that residents had been complaining about safety issues for years & their complaints were ignored.
We do know that the type of cladding used on this tower block has been implicated in fires on other tower blocks, and is banned in other countries.
We do know that recommendations made after previous similar fires were not made mandatory, at the behest of the government, and primarily for cost reasons.

Even without knowing the full facts, I think there's enough there to justify peoples' anger.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> There is a grade classification between Class A and Class B which is relatively significant.  The FR version being Class A and the standard version Class B. That being said they are both well within regs and better than others that are out there.
> 
> I think we're about to discover the full limitations of the testing regime.
> 
> ...


Cheers.


----------



## gosub (Jun 16, 2017)

phillm said:


>




think it might have gone a bit different if they'd known Emma Coad was on the KCTMO  Board


----------



## editor (Jun 16, 2017)

I don't always agree with this woman, but this is spot on:


> That tomb in the sky will be forever Theresa May’s monument. Grenfellmarks the spot and her visit marks the moment the last vestiges of her career were finally rubbed out. She made it her own yesterday by that fateful “visit” to a handful of senior fire officers, guarding her from any contaminating contact with the bereaved and newly homeless. Dead to emotion or empathy, she sealed her fate.
> 
> Precise blame comes later in the public inquiry: we are all overnight experts in cladding and sprinklers now. But political blame spreads right through the Conservative party, with no escape on offer. This goes far beyond the precise shockers – the Tory MPs who mockingly rejected housing regulation; the cuts to funding to councils responsible for retro-fitting fire suppressants; the disregard of coroner’s instructions after the 2009 Lakanal House tragedy; and even the plan to opt out of EU safety regulations. Conservative Kensington and Chelsea council allegedly blocking its ears to tenants’ well-founded anxiety is just the immediate scandal. But this event reaches far deeper, to the very sinews of its party’s policy.
> 
> ...


Theresa May was too scared to meet the Grenfell survivors. She’s finished | Polly Toynbee


----------



## Lorca (Jun 16, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> about £5 grand apparently. cunts.



likely no housing money left in the pot, seeing as I believe the renovation of the House of Commons is going to cost us 3.5 billion-odd.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> We do know that a tower block went up in flames in a manner that should never have been possible. This implies something technical was at fault.
> We do know that residents had been complaining about safety issues for years & their complaints were ignored.
> We do know that the type of cladding used on this tower block has been implicated in fires on other tower blocks, and is banned in other countries.
> We do know that recommendations made after previous similar fires were not made mandatory, at the behest of the government, and primarily for cost reasons.
> ...



Quite right. And has been said on this thread we do know all this happened in a climate of light touch regulation, arms length and non-accountable management agencies, swinging and vicious cuts to local authority budgets and a relenting demonisation of the people who called the block home.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

From _Construction News_ today, going with the race-to-the-bottom theme:

GRENFELL TOWER: RYDON REPLACED LEADBITTER AS CONTRACTOR

Rydon was not the original preferred contractor for refurbishment works on Grenfell Tower, it has emerged.

A contract to upgrade the 24-storey tower block was awarded to Rydon in 2014 and work was completed in June last year.

However, a Kensington and Chelsea Borough Council press release sent in October 2012, seen by _Construction News_, refers to Bouygues-owned Leadbitter as the original main contractor for works.

“With architects, Studio E, and contractor, Leadbitter, on board the works can be carried out as cost-effectively and quickly as possible, minimising disruption to residents,” the press release said.

The fire at the Kensington tower in the early hours of Wednesday has so far seen 30 confirmed fatalities. 

Documents published by ITV show that Leadbitter originally quoted £11.27m to carry out the project, which was £1.6m above the council’s budget for the works.

The Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation, which managed and maintained the council’s housing stock, later put the contract back out to tender.

Rydon then took the contract on for £8.7m.

Rydon said this week that the refurbishment work it carried out “met all required building control, fire regulation and health and safety standards”.

Improvements mentioned in the 2012 press release included ”external cladding to provide an effective rain screen; double glazing to reduce noise, improve thermal efficiency and fuel economy; and new controlled heating and water systems”.

Yesterday prime minister Theresa May launched a public inquiry into the tragedy, in which at least 30 people are now known to have died.

Around 80 people have been treated in hospital and 12 are still in a critical condition.

A spokesman for Kensington and Chelsea Borough Council did not comment directly on the tender process, but a statement said: “We have heard a number of theories about the cause of the fire at Grenfell Tower.  All of these will be thoroughly investigated as part of the formal investigation which has already begun.”

Bouygues and Rydon have been contacted for comment.​


----------



## Sea Star (Jun 16, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I'm not sure where the £5k figure is coming from as it seems odd.  £5k is nothing on a build this size.  There must have been in the region of 3500m2 of cladding panels on this project. I would be amazed if they chose to go with this panel because it was a pound or so cheaper per m2.



Well, in TfL we have some huge projects - and my team fight hard to get changes to design and add ons built in in order to help with long term environmental targets and performance. In the last stages of the design is when our changes tend to kicked out because they've overspent on something and they need to balance costs. So even if the overspend is millions and our add ons are a few ks, they still get kicked out because at that point they are desperate to bring the total cost down as much as possible. So - I can believe that part is all I'm saying.


----------



## gosub (Jun 16, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> We do know that a tower block went up in flames in a manner that should never have been possible. This implies something technical was at fault.
> We do know that residents had been complaining about safety issues for years & their complaints were ignored.
> We do know that the type of cladding used on this tower block has been implicated in fires on other tower blocks, and is banned in other countries.
> We do know that recommendations made after previous similar fires were not made mandatory, at the behest of the government, and primarily for cost reasons.
> ...



We also know a judge has previously set the precident that if regs are knowingly not up to spec and you still adhere to the letter of the law rather than the spirit, you are culpable.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 16, 2017)

gosub said:


> think it might have gone a bit different if they'd known Emma Coad was on the KCTMO  Board


And member (past?) of the fire and emergency planning commtte or whatever it's called and been attacked by residents for being a placeman for the murderers on the 'board'. I was wondering why she was so quiet yesterday.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> From _Construction News_ today, going with the race-to-the-bottom theme:
> 
> GRENFELL TOWER: RYDON REPLACED LEADBITTER AS CONTRACTOR
> 
> ...





AuntiStella said:


> Well, in TfL we have some huge projects - and my team fight hard to get changes to design and add ons built in in order to help with long term environmental targets and performance. In the last stages of the design is when our changes tend to kicked out because they've overspent on something and they need to balance costs. So even if the overspend is millions and our add ons are a few ks, they still get kicked out because at that point they are desperate to bring the total cost down as much as possible. So - I can believe that part is all I'm saying.



Yes, the stench of value engineering is all over this.  Still though, £5k.  The subbie would have knocked that off the price without blinking. What a mess.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 16, 2017)

editor said:


> I don't always agree with this woman, but this is spot on:
> 
> Theresa May was too scared to meet the Grenfell survivors. She’s finished | Polly Toynbee



I dunno, it's been going on a lot longer than seven years. She's letting others off the hook by simply blaming it on Cameron etc.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 16, 2017)

Crispy said:


> The cladding panels *may well* be at fault for the death toll. IMO, the lack of fire suppression and smoke extract are more important factors. Regardless of how the fire started or spread, that building was basically impossible to escape from. That is the greater crime.


A fire brigade chap explained to me that fire safety was about having multiple safety in the chain. You must plan that something big might go wrong. So in this case there was an ignition source -> rapid spreading of fire due to cladding -> poor alarms -> no sprinklers. Lots of things going wrong or not happening.

I don't think the cladding issue is less important than the sprinklers. If there were sprinklers, you would still want to be safe even if the sprinkler system malfunctioned.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 16, 2017)

Lorca said:


> likely no housing money left in the pot, seeing as I believe the renovation of the House of Commons is going to cost us 3.5 billion-odd.



They can glad the HoC in paraffin. I'll bring the Swan Vesta.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> We do know that a tower block went up in flames in a manner that should never have been possible. This implies something technical was at fault.


Absolutely agreed. Although we don't yet know to what extent that technical fault was predictable.


EastEnder said:


> We do know that residents had been complaining about safety issues for years


Agreed 


EastEnder said:


> & their complaints were ignored.


Agreed, it appears that some of their complaints were ignored, but we don't yet know whether the issues they complained about were relevant to this fire


EastEnder said:


> We do know that the type of cladding used on this tower block has been implicated in fires on other tower blocks, and is banned in other countries.


Agreed - I think. Not 100% clear precisely which elements of the system are banned in which circumstances in which countries; some of the reports I've read have been inconsistent


EastEnder said:


> We do know that recommendations made after previous similar fires were not made mandatory, at the behest of the government,


There seem to have been a number of recommendations, for changes to multiple different bits of legislation and proceedure in various organisations, some of which have been implemented, and some of which are to be implemented on an undefined timescale (Part B amendments)


EastEnder said:


> and primarily for cost reasons.


Agreed that cost reasons will certainly be amongst the reasons. 



EastEnder said:


> Even without knowing the full facts, I think there's enough there to justify peoples' anger.


Agreed. As I was careful to say in my post you quote, "people are understandably angry". It's not yet clear exactly where the anger should be directed though.


----------



## Sea Star (Jun 16, 2017)

editor said:


> I don't always agree with this woman, but this is spot on:
> 
> Theresa May was too scared to meet the Grenfell survivors. She’s finished | Polly Toynbee





> What a contrast was Jeremy Corbyn’s visit, hugging and embracing victims, promising to guarantee that never happens. No one could have devised a better parable to convey the difference between the two parties than those two leaders’ visits.


on an aside - she seems to be such of a fan of corbyn now but just two months ago 


> Wrong, wrong and wrong again. Was ever there a more crassly inept politician than Jeremy Corbyn, whose every impulse is to make the wrong call on everything?


Jeremy Corbyn is rushing to embrace Labour’s annihilation | Polly Toynbee


----------



## Mordi (Jun 16, 2017)

editor said:


> I don't always agree with this woman, but this is spot on:
> 
> Theresa May was too scared to meet the Grenfell survivors. She’s finished | Polly Toynbee



My paranoia always gives these people too much credit, but I suspect that May is being forced (more by the situation than her incompetent party enemies) to take the fall for this one so that whichever fucker takes over the Tory party can try to distance themselves from it.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

Even if the cladding installer has decided to stuff the cavity with petrol soaked newspaper and chucked a lit tab there for a laugh it still won't absolve the government of the wider culture that led to this.  It a basic function of the government to keep its population safe as can be expected.  Not even the most swivel eyed tory can claim they have fulfilled their duty.


----------



## phillm (Jun 16, 2017)

gosub said:


> think it might have gone a bit different if they'd known Emma Coad was on the KCTMO  Board


Labour's new Kensington MP was on housing scrutiny committee


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

Mordi said:


> My paranoia always gives these people too much credit, but I suspect that May is being forced (more by the situation than her incompetent party enemies) to take the fall for this one so that whichever fucker takes over the Tory party can try to distance themselves from it.



She's wearing that haunted look all the time now.  It first started after Manchester (where she definitely knows she had a role in that) and has continued through London Bridge and now to Grenfell.  She is utterly broken and is just trying to hide but her party won't let her go.


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2017)

Sorry if this has already been posted.
Difference between inquest and a public enquiry petition to force an Inquest instead of the promised enquiry:
UK Parliament: This government must carry out an INQUEST into the Grenfell tragedy, not a public inquiry


edit: some informed people do not agree and say public enquiry is more suited. (i know nothing).


----------



## Rob Ray (Jun 16, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Yes, the stench of value engineering is all over this.  Still though, £5k.  The subbie would have knocked that off the price without blinking. What a mess.



At some point the bean counter who ticked the box for one type of cladding over another may well be picked up and monstered as an individual. If they are it'll be a red herring, because those decisions are absolutely in keeping with and testament to the endless pressure for "efficiency savings" that people above that sort of pay grade have been piling on for decades now (often in order to justify their own enormous salary hikes, or political reputations).


----------



## scifisam (Jun 16, 2017)

I don't think there's any deliberate suppression of the number dead, it's just that they don't know. 

Think about who might have been in that building. People will have had lodgers (possibly to help with bedroom tax), friends visiting, possibly using their flats as air b&bs given the location, and the private flats may well have crammed in many times the number of people supposed to be living there. Kids won't be listed on the TMO's records if they were born after the tenant moved in. 

Although it's likely that everyone who survived has reported in, that doesn't help much. I mean they won't just be able to say "right, here's the number of tenants, and here's the number of survivors, so what's left must be the fatalities." I doubt they can even make a rough estimate and that'd be a pretty shoddy way to treat something so serious anyway. 

The for brigade have only just been able to enter the top floors of the building to start searching for bodies. And given the length of time the fire went on and the young age of some of the missing it might well be hard to even find their bodies.


----------



## phillm (Jun 16, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> She's wearing that haunted look all the time now.  It first started after Manchester (where she definitely knows she had a role in that) and has continued through London Bridge and now to Grenfell.  She is utterly broken and is just trying to hide but her party won't let her go.



Her god in heaven is waiting for her maybe she should make an appointment.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

phillm said:


> Her god in heaven is waiting for her maybe she should make an appointment.



I don't think He'll want see her.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jun 16, 2017)

I wasn't really going to comment on this because I don't have anything in particular to say that hasn't already been said in this thread. Like most on here my thoughts are with those that have lost their lives/injured and their relatives. I one thing that did grab my attention was this video...


Rutita1 said:


>



...I have known of Ishmahil for nearly 20 years and consider him to be a good egg. I did a quick search and noticed that he has been mentioned in other threads.  I agree with him, there does need to be a bit of a "shake up". This level of neglect is just not acceptable, and although the full facts have yet to be determined, there does appear to have been a "profit before people" mentality amongst those in charge and the poorest people are not being looked after properly.



taffboy gwyrdd said:


>



If it is true what that lady said and that there was nobody from the council helping with coordination, then that is really not good enough.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

Rob Ray said:


> At some point the bean counter who ticked the box for one type of cladding over another may well be picked up and monstered as an individual. If they are it'll be a red herring, because those decisions are absolutely in keeping with and testament to the endless pressure for "efficiency savings" that people above that sort of pay grade have been piling on for decades now (often in order to justify their own enormous salary hikes, or political reputations).



Assuming it was a design & build contract the decision would have been made by the contractor, in this case Rydon. The architect would have had to agree it but under a d & b contract it is usually quite hard for them to argue as long as the alternative is 'similar and approved'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

phillm said:


> Labour's new Kensington MP was on housing scrutiny committee


they're all in it together


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2017)

its going to be a long summer.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

bimble said:


> its going to be a long summer.
> View attachment 109476


hot. a long hot summer. like a summer with a thousand julys.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 16, 2017)

Carl Benjamin, a cunt from swindon who, inexpliably, hasn't been beaten to death, chimes in:


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 16, 2017)

alas yes , but hopefully they can turn it around


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jun 16, 2017)

bimble said:


> its going to be a long summer.
> View attachment 109476


I hope that we've moved beyond that kind of reaction, but things do need to change in my opinion. This fire and the deaths is completely unacceptable and should not be tolerated and we need to do whatever it takes collectively to make sure that nothing like this ever happens again, but hopefully not by rioting.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 16, 2017)

There are a set of circumstances, time and place when rioting becomes inevitable. This is not one of these times I believe. Maybe more impact will be achieved by mass sit downs and causing London to come to a standstill for a day. Less damage and a peaceful, reflective protest against the poison that flows through this land.


----------



## gosub (Jun 16, 2017)

Rob Ray said:


> At some point the bean counter who ticked the box for one type of cladding over another may well be picked up and monstered as an individual. If they are it'll be a red herring, because those decisions are absolutely in keeping with and testament to the endless pressure for "efficiency savings" that people above that sort of pay grade have been piling on for decades now (often in order to justify their own enormous salary hikes, or political reputations).



If it was just the cladding...but it isn't, the fire also spread internally and that ain't supposed to happen.


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2017)

I have a feeling there will be violence very soon, London feels fractious & raw like a wound's been exposed though maybe i'm imagining it.
Facebook says 2.7 thousand people plan to go to the demonstration this eve with another 7 thousand maybes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> There are a set of circumstances, time and place when rioting becomes inevitable. This is not one of these times I believe. Maybe more impact will be achieved by mass sit downs and causing London to come to a standstill for a day. Less damage and a peaceful, reflective protest against the poison that flows through this land.


yeh. rioting not inevitable. but it is, i suggest, on the cards given the conjunction of circumstances and personalities. the fuel for a riot is certainly present, and it depends whether there is a spark to ignite it. your mass sit downs, for example, could easily offer such a flashpoint. but there's a lot of very angry people who were not listened to when disaster could have been so easily and who are now living in the aftermath of the destruction of grenfell tower. it would be foolish to write off the possibility of a riot, and - imo - patronising to say do this but don't do that. if a riot is the language of the unheard then prepare for disorder.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I hope that we've moved beyond that kind of reaction, but things do need to change in my opinion. This fire and the deaths is completely unacceptable and should not be tolerated and we need to do whatever it takes collectively to make sure that nothing like this ever happens again, but hopefully not by rioting.


by sitting meekly and waiting for the wheels of justice to turn?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 16, 2017)

FFS.



Note: Letter was dated 14th, but apparently hand delivered today.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 16, 2017)

Follow-up tweet.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> FFS.
> 
> View attachment 109478View attachment 109479View attachment 109480


you'd have thought they wanted to kick things off


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jun 16, 2017)

gosub said:


> If it was just the cladding...but it isn't, the fire also spread internally and that ain't supposed to happen.


The whole thing is rather odd. I wouldn't have expected a fire to spread so quickly in a modern high rise, like you said, that absolutely should not happen, especially after it had a lot of money spent on "refurbishment", so there's something wrong there and lessons need to be learned. Until there has been a full investigation I suppose we won't know for sure what role the cladding played, but I suspect it wasn't just the cladding and that there were other factors involved, for example lack of sprinklers etc.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 16, 2017)

They know what's coming - and it ain't kicking footballs on a wall.


----------



## phillm (Jun 16, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> FFS.
> 
> View attachment 109478View attachment 109479View attachment 109480



I can only beleive this is some sort of fake trolling stunt. Because the alternative that it is true is beyond my imagination. But then wrapping a council block in cheap flammable plastic to prettify the view for the elite and then having numerous poor folks horribly burned to death as a result whilst a haunted , ghoul like PM flitted in the shadows of a growing cauldron of anger and grief is also almost beyond belief.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> you'd have thought they wanted to kick things off


And as if it was a bad thing , I'm getting ready


----------



## Sea Star (Jun 16, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Someone on a radio phone in, LBC I think, was suggesting that the blaze could have been started deliberately buy a long suffering resident to "make a point" that their complaints about fire safety were justified.


oh FFS


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 16, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> FFS.
> 
> View attachment 109478View attachment 109479View attachment 109480




They wrote that on the Wednesday. While the tower was burning.


Fuck a duck.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

phillm said:


> I can only beleive this is some sort of fake trolling stunt. Because the alternative that it is true is beyond my imagination.


Or, maybe, the letters were sent out before the fire took place. Just a crazy theory though.


----------



## Sea Star (Jun 16, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> FFS.
> 
> View attachment 109478View attachment 109479View attachment 109480


Children playing is the opposite of anti-social - fucking miserable bastards! 

Meanwhile the drug dealers that operate in my block continue unhindered.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 16, 2017)

Bunch of fuckers


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 16, 2017)

For those not familiar with the area (me included)


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Or, maybe, the letters were sent out before the fire took place. Just a crazy theory though.




Typed up on 14th June, hand delivered by TMO today according to sources.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> FFS.
> 
> View attachment 109478View attachment 109479View attachment 109480


that would of course be janice jones, who's been there a few years now and you'd have thought has better things to be worrying about atm than a few balls being kicked about.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Or, maybe, the letters were sent out before the fire took place. Just a crazy theory though.


Really ? Once again you make yourself look like a cock , where's your humanity ?


----------



## Sea Star (Jun 16, 2017)

haven't seen this on here. Forgive me if its been posted already. 



> *Grenfell Tower fire: Lawyer calls for inquest instead of public inquiry asking 'What needs to be hidden?'*
> 
> 
> 'Juries will come out with narrative verdicts which may be very difficult for the Government to hear,' says Sophie Khan


Lawyer calls for Grenfell Tower inquest: What does Theresa May have to hide?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> Typed up on 14th June, hand delivered by TMO today according to sources.


austerity hits stamps


----------



## Badgers (Jun 16, 2017)

AuntiStella said:


> haven't seen this on here. Forgive me if its been posted already.
> 
> 
> Lawyer calls for Grenfell Tower inquest: What does Theresa May have to hide?





> Grenfell Tower residents should demand an inquest rather than a public inquiry to get answers about the tragedy, according to a solicitor who acted for people affected in the 2009 Lakanal House fire.


The residents have been demanding things for a while and been ignored sadly.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Or, maybe, the letters were sent out before the fire took place. Just a crazy theory though.



The fire started during the night of Tuesday the 13th. The letters are dated the 14th. Hand delivered today the 16th.

Strikes me that the TMO should and could have had a far more reassuring and helpful letter to deliver to neighbouring residents today. So many of them must be traumatised by what has happened/what they saw.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 16, 2017)

A Twitter thread on inquests vs public enquiries.


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2017)

Badgers said:


> The residents have been demanding things for a while and been ignored sadly.


For what it's worth a petition demanding an inquest instead of enquiry has almost reached 50,000 signatures within an hour. Can't link from phone but it's a page or 2 back.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> The fire started during the night of Tuesday the 13th. The letters are dated the 14th.


I'm not an expert on automated mailing systems but it seems possible that something could be set up to go out on the next working day.

My thinking tends to go along the lines of _perhaps this wasn't necessarily the result of one of my fellow humans being a heartless monster _but it turns out, that indicates my lack of humanity.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jun 16, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> There are a set of circumstances, time and place when rioting becomes inevitable. This is not one of these times I believe. Maybe more impact will be achieved by mass sit downs and causing London to come to a standstill for a day. Less damage and a peaceful, reflective protest against the poison that flows through this land.


I agree, and I hope that the anger that people have doesn't result in more fires and more deaths because of rioting. I do hope that there is a change in attitude that results in meaningful change and is not dismissed and ignored by those in charge.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> For those not familiar with the area (me included)
> 
> View attachment 109482



grenfell tower circled in red


----------



## free spirit (Jun 16, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> There is a grade classification between Class A and Class B which is relatively significant.  The FR version being Class A and the standard version Class B. That being said they are both well within regs and better than others that are out there.
> 
> I think we're about to discover the full limitations of the testing regime.
> 
> ...


The guardian had a diagram pulled from the intial planning consent I think, which showed the detailing.

It looks as if they've moved the windows onto the new cladding with an internal extension of the window surround covering part of the insulation layer. For this to have formed part of the fire proof barrier to stop the fire hitting the vulnerable insulation all the window surrounds would have needed to be fully fire rated, but I'll bet a lot of money that they were just done in UPVC and mastic.

The firestops in the insulation also didn't look to actually meet the cladding panel, so there would be a gap between insulation and the cladding, and between the firestop and the cladding.

So basically the fire could spread from flat to flat up the outside of the building simply by burning through the UPVC window surrounds, then burning the insulation and the flames just licked around between the firestop and the cladding.

That insulation effectively wasn't even properly external in classification as it no longer had a proper solid wall / windows between it and the inside, just a flimsy plastic window surround and some mastic.

If that detailing is what happened then everyone involved in signing that off should be in jail for manslaughter.


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 16, 2017)

Rob Ray said:


> At some point the bean counter who ticked the box for one type of cladding over another may well be picked up and monstered as an individual. If they are it'll be a red herring, because those decisions are absolutely in keeping with and testament to the endless pressure for "efficiency savings" that people above that sort of pay grade have been piling on for decades now (often in order to justify their own enormous salary hikes, or political reputations).



They shouldn't be made a scapegoat for the policies and culture spearheaded by others  up, though I would like to see the person who made the call and their bosses identified, asked to explain the decision-making process, and asked whether they would put the stuff on the outside of their own home.

That £5,000 figure is just sickening - going to work out to something like £50 per life lost, and it didn't even save any money in the end because their fucking building burned down.


----------



## Sea Star (Jun 16, 2017)

Badgers said:


> The residents have been demanding things for a while and been ignored sadly.


might be quite a few people demanding alongside them now.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 16, 2017)

AuntiStella said:


> might be quite a few people demanding alongside them now.


I hope that in this instance it gets taken seriously. Not being negative but being in the right and having numbers behind you does not always mean you are listened to in this country.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Badgers said:


> I hope that in this instance it gets taken seriously. Not being negative but being in the right and having numbers behind you does not always mean you are listened to in this country.


speak softly and carry a big stick


----------



## belboid (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I'm not an expert on automated mailing systems but it seems possible that something could be set up to go out on the next working day.
> 
> My thinking tends to go along the lines of _perhaps this wasn't necessarily the result of one of my fellow humans being a heartless monster _but it turns out, that indicates my lack of humanity.


Your thinking goes 'I must make excuses for those with all the power and the wealth'

Twat


----------



## Sea Star (Jun 16, 2017)

Badgers said:


> I hope that in this instance it gets taken seriously. Not being negative but being in the right and having numbers behind you does not always mean you are listened to in this country.


yes, I'm fully aware of that, but that doesn't mean we just give up.


----------



## Borp (Jun 16, 2017)

Does anybody know if volunteers are still needed? I've seen conflicting reports. But if they are happy to give a hand.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> My thinking tends to go along the lines of _perhaps this wasn't necessarily the result of one of my fellow humans being a heartless monster _but it turns out, that indicates my lack of humanity.


thats because you are wilfully blind to class. A common disease among liberals. To my mind to set the conditions through negligence and ignorance of the residents long and loud raised concerns is bad enough of itself. Little eichmann that you are, it was all just procedure and isn't it such a shame.



Shall we have what is the counter narrative so far?

-black blokes fridge exploding (this we know happened. But it will be played upon)

-The tenants expressed no wish to have fire safety equipment in the building

what have I missed from the list?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 16, 2017)

Borp said:


> Does anybody know if volunteers are still needed? I've seen conflicting reports. But if they are happy to give a hand.


From this morning...







Contact these places as a starting point.


----------



## killer b (Jun 16, 2017)

free spirit said:


> The guardian had a diagram pulled from the intial planning consent I think, which showed the detailing.
> 
> It looks as if they've moved the windows onto the new cladding with an internal extension of the window surround covering part of the insulation layer. For this to have formed part of the fire proof barrier to stop the fire hitting the vulnerable insulation all the window surrounds would have needed to be fully fire rated, but I'll bet a lot of money that they were just done in UPVC and mastic.
> 
> ...


Can I ask how long you've held all this expert knowledge about UPVC window installation and building regs?


----------



## Badgers (Jun 16, 2017)

AuntiStella said:


> yes, I'm fully aware of that, but that doesn't mean we just give up.


I agree


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I'm not an expert on automated mailing systems but it seems possible that something could be set up to go out on the next working day.
> 
> My thinking tends to go along the lines of _perhaps this wasn't necessarily the result of one of my fellow humans being a heartless monster _but it turns out, that indicates my lack of humanity.



What about the rest of my post? No opinion about that?


----------



## editor (Jun 16, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> -The tenants expressed no wish to have fire safety equipment in the building


This seems to be strongly disputed too.


----------



## Crispy (Jun 16, 2017)

killer b said:


> Can I ask how long you've held all this expert knowledge about UPVC window installation and building regs?


Makes sense to me


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

belboid said:


> Your thinking goes 'I must make excuses for those with all the power and the wealth'
> 
> Twat


You and others on here have been harassing me with this crap for about ten years now. It's not going to stop me from saying what I want. Try doing some actual thinking in place of the time you waste trying to smear.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

editor said:


> This seems to be strongly disputed too.


it's the auld goebbels' big lie


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> thats because you are wilfully blind to class.


and you.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> You and others on here have been harassing me with this crap for about ten years now. *It's not going to stop me from saying what I want.* Try doing some actual thinking in place of the time you waste trying to smear.



Good for you because that is the important thing at the moment.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 16, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> FFS.



Moaning about kids playing with balls while KCTMO play with fire.

Classy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> You and others on here have been harassing me with this crap for about ten years now. It's not going to stop me from saying what I want. Try doing some actual thinking in place of the time you waste trying to smear.


perhaps you could stop saying what you want and start saying what you should.


----------



## belboid (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> You and others on here have been harassing me with this crap for about ten years now. It's not going to stop me from saying what I want. Try doing some actual thinking in place of the time you waste trying to smear.


Pointing out your dishonesty, hypocrisy and general bullshit is not harassment. 

Twat.


----------



## killer b (Jun 16, 2017)

are going to have the riot right here on the thread?


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> What about the rest of my post? No opinion about that?



I agree with it. It's stating the obvious though, isn't it?


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 16, 2017)

Borp said:


> Does anybody know if volunteers are still needed? I've seen conflicting reports. But if they are happy to give a hand.




Volunteers fine, donations "pls stahp we have to much"


----------



## editor (Jun 16, 2017)

belboid said:


> Pointing out your dishonesty, hypocrisy and general bullshit is not harassment.
> 
> Twat.


Not the right thread for a bunfight.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

free spirit said:


> The guardian had a diagram pulled from the intial planning consent I think, which showed the detailing.
> 
> It looks as if they've moved the windows onto the new cladding with an internal extension of the window surround covering part of the insulation layer. For this to have formed part of the fire proof barrier to stop the fire hitting the vulnerable insulation all the window surrounds would have needed to be fully fire rated, but I'll bet a lot of money that they were just done in UPVC and mastic.
> 
> ...



Oh lord, really?  

I've not seen the detailing but if its as described it sounds like a proper dog's dinner.  

A couple of things though.  What was the insulation actually fixed back to?  There must have been some sort of substrate, surely?  Also the firebreaks (I can't believe I'm even talking about firebreaks on a building this high) wouldn't need to be in contact against the back the cladding.  The whole principle of ventilated rainscreen is that there is a continual vented cavity, a firebreak would block this.  Instead you'd have intumescents (expanding chemicals) in there to expand and block the cavity at the first sign of fire.  

I queried the presence /performance of the inutumescents towards the start of this thread.

Also fucking mastic.  If anyone is still using mastic (which has a design life of about 6 minutes) on facades in this era they need shooting.


----------



## phillm (Jun 16, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> thats because you are wilfully blind to class. A common disease among liberals. To my mind to set the conditions through negligence and ignorance of the residents long and loud raised concerns is bad enough of itself. Little eichmann that you are, it was all just procedure and isn't it such a shame.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



- (muslim) mayor Sadiq Khan barracked by residents (rather than Angela Leadsom or May's no show)


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

belboid said:


> Pointing out your dishonesty, hypocrisy and general bullshit is not harassment.
> 
> Twat.



If what you did was to fairly point out dishonesty and hypocrisy, it would not be harassment. Correct. You should try it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

phillm said:


> - (muslim) mayor Sadiq Khan barracked by residents (rather than Angela Leadsom or May's no show)


you seem to suggest sk was barracked because he was muslim and i don't believe this to be the case.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> You and others on here have been harassing me with this crap for about ten years now. It's not going to stop me from saying what I want. Try doing some actual thinking in place of the time you waste trying to smear.



actually I haven't have I?, I've had the brixton forum on ignore for years now since you and your bourgeois dickhead mates turned it from an interesting look at a community so very different to my own into the wankers fest it became. Crawled out toot sweet to decry any little misreported element as 'hysteria' and so on didn't you?


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> thats because you are wilfully blind to class. A common disease among liberals. To my mind to set the conditions through negligence and ignorance of the residents long and loud raised concerns is bad enough of itself. Little eichmann that you are, it was all just procedure and isn't it such a shame.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Insulation = green concerns = green concerns more important than human life.   

That's the line the mail and telegraph are pushing.


----------



## marty21 (Jun 16, 2017)

Drove back to London from holiday in Devon today , came into London via the A40 , you see the tower from the flyover , it is a shocking sight


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

free spirit said:


> The guardian had a diagram pulled from the intial planning consent I think, which showed the detailing.



What's in the planning consent is not usually a reflection of the final fully developed detailing.


----------



## phillm (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> you seem to suggest sk was barracked because he was muslim and i don't believe this to be the case.



sorry didn't mean that - Mail etc by inference showing mayor getting stick when I'm not sure he is in the firing line for culpability. Always feel the mail has hidden racism in putting him up front for a bashing. Hoping some of their more neatherndal readers will make the subliminal jump. Just a wild theory from me.


----------



## NoXion (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> What's in the planning consent is not usually a reflection of the final fully developed detailing.



Yeah, it could very well be worse than that.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


>



Now, I'm not saying anything about the people being featured in the video - the video has clearly been assembled from other people's footage - but that ‘filmmaker’ is clearly of a dubious political background. 

They're called ELITE NWO AGENDA, and they post up videos which claim that - say - the London Bridge terror attack was a staged/false flag incident, reupload Alex Jones InfoWars clips, have an obsession with the gold standard, is pro-Trump, etc. ENWOA's core audience is alt-right and the like.

Elite NWO Agenda
https://www.patreon.com/elitenwoagenda


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I agree with it. It's stating the obvious though, isn't it?



Really? So bloody obvious that no one in that housing office thought _'perhaps we should hold off on hand delivering these horrible warning letters today, instead we could offer residents some supportive words and/or information_'?

Stop making excuses for this insensitive nonsense.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Now, I'm not saying anything about the people being featured in the video - the video has clearly been assembled from other people's footage - but that ‘filmmaker’ is clearly of a dubious political background.
> 
> They're called ELITE NWO AGENDA, and they post up videos which claim that - say - the London Bridge terror attack was a staged/false flag incident, reupload Alex Jones InfoWars clips, have an obsession with the gold standard, is pro-Trump, etc. ENWOA's core audience is alt-right and the like.
> 
> ...


Anudder Oik has a grand record of posting up films by dubious _auteurs_


----------



## NoXion (Jun 16, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Now, I'm not saying anything about the people being featured in the video - the video has clearly been assembled from other people's footage - but that ‘filmmaker’ is clearly of a dubious political background.
> 
> They're called ELITE NWO AGENDA, and they post up videos which claim that - say - the London Bridge terror attack was a staged/false flag incident, reupload Alex Jones InfoWars clips, have an obsession with the gold standard, is pro-Trump, etc. ENWOA's core audience is alt-right and the like.
> 
> ...



What a surprise coming from Anudder Oik


----------



## NoXion (Jun 16, 2017)

jinx


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 16, 2017)

Crowds growing outside RKAC offices


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

NoXion said:


> What a surprise coming from Anudder Oik


you could put him blindfold and in a straitjacket in a dark room and he'd locate a 'loon or fascist film-maker with no difficulty


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> actually I haven't have I?,



yes you have. right here:



DotCommunist said:


> it was all just procedure and isn't it such a shame.



That's the attitude you attribute to me in your smear attempt. I have not said that it was "all just procedure". So, please don't try and make out like I have.

And I did not appear on this thread to decry a minor misreported element as "hysteria". It was to decry very poor journalism as very poor journalism.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 16, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> A Twitter thread on inquests vs public enquiries.


1) Judges are said to be independent of government, but... look at Hutton. The point of juries is that they really are the best independence
2) Doesn't matter that a coroner's inquest fails to blame. That can then follow. Notably, in the Jean Charles de Menezes inquest, the jury was directed not to find that Menezes was 'unlawfully killed' because then 'the police would have to have been prosecuted'. That was a bizarre direction which effectively held the police above the law and I wonder if the jury realised they could have ignored it. Doubtless no judge would have found that de Menezes was unlawfully killed.
3) Coroner's inquests do not necessarily accompany public inquiries - e.g. Hutton / Dr. Kelly - no coroner's inquest
4) The coroner can summon witnesses, and evidence is given under oath. I don't know if this can happen with a public inquiry, but it wasn't the case with the Hutton inquiry.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Really? So bloody obvious that no one in that housing office thought _'perhaps we should hold off on hand delivering these horrible warning letters today, instead we could offer residents some supportive words and/or information_'?
> 
> Stop making excuses for this insensitive nonsense.


What?

I mean it's obvious that it would be insensitive to send out a letter like that in the midst of the aftermath of the fire. If that's what happened, I agree with you it's insensitive. Is it not stating the obvious that doing so would be insensitive?


----------



## killer b (Jun 16, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Now, I'm not saying anything about the people being featured in the video - the video has clearly been assembled from other people's footage - but that ‘filmmaker’ is clearly of a dubious political background.
> 
> They're called ELITE NWO AGENDA, and they post up videos which claim that - say - the London Bridge terror attack was a staged/false flag incident, reupload Alex Jones InfoWars clips, have an obsession with the gold standard, is pro-Trump, etc. ENWOA's core audience is alt-right and the like.
> 
> ...


OMG. anudder oik sharing racists videos y'say? I am amazed.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

There's a website up providing updated information - donations, volunteers, legal support and such like - worth checking out here:

Grenfell Fire - How To Help


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> yes you have. right here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You really have manufactured this little drama haven't you?  Starts off with a couple of 'you don't understand the planning process' posts, moves onto digs about 'political narratives', then you are left trying to excuse a letter sent out about ASB after the fire.  This really isn't the thread for trolling and playing out your victim status. Go away.


----------



## belboid (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> If what you did was to fairly point out dishonesty and hypocrisy, it would not be harassment. Correct. You should try it.


You wrote about *automated* mail systems while quoting a piece referring to *hand delivery*. The contradiction between those two statements is very clear.


----------



## editor (Jun 16, 2017)

Getting spicy outside the council offices.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Wilf said:


> You really have manufactured this little drama haven't you?  Starts off with a couple of 'you don't understand the planning process', moves onto digs about 'political narratives', then you are left trying to excuse a letter sent out about ASB after the fire.  This really isn't the thread for trolling and playing out your victim status. Go away.


yeh. it's the teuchter show i mentioned yesterday.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 16, 2017)

Found a nice place for some of those without a home. Only 1.8 miles walk from Grenfell Tower.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 16, 2017)

Getting hotter outside the council offices.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

editor said:


> Getting spicy outside the council offices.


and inside...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 16, 2017)

Looks like it starting to kick-off, large crowd trying to get into the town hall, BBC are there, no sign of the police.


----------



## editor (Jun 16, 2017)

Repost...


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

belboid said:


> You wrote about *automated* mail systems while quoting a piece referring to *hand delivery*. The contradiction between those two statements is very clear.


The piece did not refer to hand delivery. Check your facts. More dishonesty from you.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 16, 2017)

seems to be on FB - is there a youtube link or something - cannot access FB


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

Wilf said:


> then you are left trying to excuse a letter sent out about ASB after the fire.



No I'm not. More smear.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> No I'm not. More smear.


Seriously, just fuck off. Stop playing this game.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 16, 2017)

I hope it does kick off, long time coming


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 16, 2017)

aha, on iplayer/ news live


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 16, 2017)

Fucking RAGE!

Sun journalist 'impersonated Grenfell Tower victim's friend at hospital'


----------



## haushoch (Jun 16, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Oh lord, really?
> 
> I've not seen the detailing but if its as described it sounds like a proper dog's dinner.
> 
> ...



I've found this detail from the application for the approval of details reserved by condition, which can be found here:

Planning Search

I've attached two images of the same detail, the second image is just a closer look of the first one.  It does detail horizontal cavity fire barriers and shows how the cladding panels are mounted to the structure of the building.  It says the windows are aluminium framed.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 16, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> aha, on iplayer/ news live


BBC News Channel - BBC News


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Seriously, just fuck off. Stop playing this game.


Stop playing the game of saying I've said things that I haven't, and there will be no need for it to continue.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jun 16, 2017)

On the 'no ball games' thing, a former colleague of mine did his youth work dissertation on the subject. He told me that, legally, there is almost no basis in law for enforcing such bans. No idea if this is true. Does anyone else know? Out and about, will do some googling later...


----------



## scifisam (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I'm not an expert on automated mailing systems but it seems possible that something could be set up to go out on the next working day.
> 
> My thinking tends to go along the lines of _perhaps this wasn't necessarily the result of one of my fellow humans being a heartless monster _but it turns out, that indicates my lack of humanity.



An automated mailing system that made the people hand delivering the letters to it and do it with no control over their body's actions? They're remotely controlled robots that can step over debris and dodge past grieving relatives but are you to deliver mail? I mean I'm not an expert on automated mailing systems either but I suspect that's beyond the council's budget.


----------



## editor (Jun 16, 2017)

Badgers said:


> BBC News Channel - BBC News


BBC iPlayer - Watch BBC News live


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Stop playing the game of saying I've said things that I haven't, and there will be no need for it to continue.


you haven't said what a horrible disaster this is, and until you can demonstrate that you actually give a shit about what happened at grenfell tower perhaps you might cease posting on this thread.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 16, 2017)

haushoch said:


> I've found this detail from the application for the approval of details reserved by condition, which can be found here:
> 
> Planning Search
> 
> ...



Note the caveat 'where applicable' to the fire barrier. Was it deemed applicable wherever it should have been?


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

Surprising it took this long.


----------



## maomao (Jun 16, 2017)

Could we please have teuchter banned from the thread? I know he'll start a tremendously annoying thread about it in the feedback forum but he really is being a prize cunt and ruining things on this one. Please editor .


----------



## hash tag (Jun 16, 2017)

I was feeling for the poor council staff who were not at fault over this and must be terrified at the invasion of their offices. As posted earlier, they are stretched beyond their limits due to job cuts etc. not had a pay rise for a long time and suffering further because of decisions taken by a few. 
The tory led council in this were shit but Is this not more of a reflection of a broken Britain and the demo was a long time coming. Should the demo not target May/the government/Downing Street....the "bigger picture". 

Storming the council offices will only hamper the people who are trying to sort out homes for many of those poor people.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

editor said:


> BBC iPlayer - Watch BBC News live


Fucking hell, kids holding photos up.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

scifisam said:


> An automated mailing system that made the people hand delivering the letters to it and do it with no control over their body's actions? They're remotely controlled robots that can step over debris and dodge past grieving relatives but are you to deliver mail? I mean I'm not an expert on automated mailing systems either but I suspect that's beyond the council's budget.


The original tweet posted on this thread, which I responded to, made no mention of them having been hand delivered.

Having just checked back, I see that it was edited, after I responded, to include this.

I was making the simple point that the officer who sent it out, who was probably not wealthy or powerful, may have done so via some mechanism that initiated the process before the fire started.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 16, 2017)

Anyone know if tonight's protest is happening? If they've already started at the town hall?


----------



## NoXion (Jun 16, 2017)

Who is the person speaking now on iPlayer?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

hash tag said:


> I was feeling for the poor council staff who were not at fault over this and must be terrified at the invasion of their offices. As posted earlier, they are stretched beyond their limits due to job cuts etc. not had a pay rise for a long time and suffering further because of decisions taken by a few.
> The tory led council in this were shit but Is this not more of a reflection of a broken Britain and the demo was a long time coming. Should the demo not target May/the government/Downing Street....the "bigger picture".
> 
> Storming the council offices will only hamper the people who are trying to sort out homes for many of those poor people.


i think the kctmo offices separate from the rbkc offices, as the tmo an almo


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 16, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I agree, and I hope that the anger that people have doesn't result in more fires and more deaths because of rioting. I do hope that there is a change in attitude that results in meaningful change and is not dismissed and ignored by those in charge.



My fear primarily is that any outbursts of violence, however justified, will favour those guilty for this terrible, criminal incident.
The pot is boiling but the authorities are masters at making us appear guilty by caring and resisting.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

YouSir said:


> Anyone know if tonight's protest is happening? If they've already started at the town hall?


it is


----------



## YouSir (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> it is



Cheers.


----------



## editor (Jun 16, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Who is the person speaking now on iPlayer?


A friend of one of the victim's families. He's got an unenviable job.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

Sprocket. said:


> My fear primarily is that any outbursts of violence, however justified, will favour those guilty for this terrible, criminal incident.
> The pot is boiling but the authorities are masters at making us appear guilty by caring and resisting.



I cannot imagine how angry someone who is directly or indirectly impacted must be.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 16, 2017)

The systemic problems that led to the tragedy are one thing, but the way the responses have been bungled is astonishing. Just across the board.

How have they continued to fuck up so badly, every step of the way?! May's 'visit', the lack of involvement from the council... fucking bemusing


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> The systemic problems that led to the tragedy are one thing, but the way the responses have been bungled is astonishing. Just across the board.
> 
> How have they continued to fuck up so badly, every step of the way?! May's 'visit', the lack of involvement from the council... fucking bemusing


yeh you'd think someone was masterminding things from behind the scenes, deliberately scuppering any attempt at a coherent response


----------



## hash tag (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> i think the kctmo offices separate from the rbkc offices, as the tmo an almo



It is nothing to do with general staff and due to the nature and size of this awful tragedy, many councils are trying to help find homes Etc. for those affected.
Understand with the anger but it is wrongly directed and not helping those in need of help.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> The systemic problems that led to the tragedy are one thing, but the way the responses have been bungled is astonishing. Just across the board.
> 
> How have they continued to fuck up so badly, every step of the way?! May's 'visit', the lack of involvement from the council... fucking bemusing



The people who rule  us are incompetent losers who also hate us.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

haushoch said:


> I've found this detail from the application for the approval of details reserved by condition, which can be found here:
> 
> Planning Search
> 
> ...



Interesting. Thanks for posting.

Its drawn in a rather odd way but I suspect its been drawn more with a view to how the glazing works then regard the cladding, the cladding is probably detailed better on a different set of drawings.  One thing that is apparent though is the lack of mention of intumescents which does leave the cavity exposed.  I'm going to guess and say they anticipated any fire would escape through the window and then make its way along the building via the insulation, once it reached a fire break it would go no further.  

Personally I have never thought fire breaks should be on a building over 12 metres, it should all be no combustible insulation such as Rockwool. Unfortunately building regs are there to be interpreted.  

What does appear to be clear (unless there are other drawings which are different) is that no one foresaw the possibility of the fire being so intense that the panels themselves caught or it could just skip over the fire breaks.  In short, from what I can see I don't think it's great detailing but its not exceptionally bad.  I'm increasingly think we're looking at a combination of indifferent detailing, questionable products, bad interpretation of regs and just bad and not fit for purpose regs.  And this is before we get inside the building.


----------



## neonwilderness (Jun 16, 2017)

The Guardian are reporting that protestors have entered the town hall with a list of demands


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

hash tag said:


> It is nothing to do with general staff and due to the nature and size of this awful tragedy, many councils are trying to help find homes Etc. for those affected.
> Understand with the anger but it is wrongly directed and not helping those in need of help.


tbh what will almost certainly have happened is staff able to leave the building will have been directed to go home.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> The people who rule  us are incompetent losers who also hate us.


Aye, but normally they're a _bit_ more competent than this. This has been nuclear-grade incompetence. Basic, basic stuff, that's in their own fucking interests to do!


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 16, 2017)

scifisam said:


> An automated mailing system that made the people hand delivering the letters to it and do it with no control over their body's actions? They're remotely controlled robots that can step over debris and dodge past grieving relatives but are you to deliver mail?



So what you're saying is the Maybot delivered them herself.  I did wonder what she was doing in the area.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> Found a nice place for some of those without a home. Only 1.8 miles walk from Grenfell Tower.


don't care for the chair coverings


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 16, 2017)

I thought I heard this wrong but now I can quote from The Guardian.



> The protesters also requested a list of the number of people in Grenfell Tower.
> 
> The response was:
> 
> This is not a matter for the council but for the coroner, police and other emergency services.



WTF?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 16, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> I thought I heard this wrong but now I can quote from The Guardian.
> 
> 
> 
> WTF?


It's a massive side step.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> you haven't said what a horrible disaster this is, and until you can demonstrate that you actually give a shit about what happened at grenfell tower perhaps you might cease posting on this thread.



You're using this tragedy to score points.

It goes without saying that it's a horrible disaster and horrific for anyone involved. And as I work in the building industry and am sometimes involved in specifying materials to deal with fire risk, looking at what has happened here is frightening and upsetting. For me it is important to understand what actually went wrong.

I don't feel the need to advertise my emotional response in public. I didn't know it was a competition for display of empathy. Congratulations on your efforts on that front. But I'll not say any more on this thread for now.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> I thought I heard this wrong but now I can quote from The Guardian.
> 
> 
> 
> WTF?


flabbergasting

surely the police etc would ask the council for a list of the number of people - tenants and their families - living there? surely easy enough to say "there's 450 people living there" or however many.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> flabbergasting
> 
> surely the police etc would ask the council for a list of the number of people - tenants and their families - living there? surely easy enough to say "there's 450 people living there" or however many.



Reminds me of how any question about the NHS is met with some bollocks about stigma and mental health.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

teuchter said:


> You're using this tragedy to score points.
> 
> It goes without saying that it's a horrible disaster and horrific for anyone involved. And as I work in the building industry and am sometimes involved in specifying materials to deal with fire risk, looking at what has happened here is frightening and upsetting. For me it is important to understand what actually went wrong.
> 
> I don't feel the need to advertise my emotional response in public. I didn't know it was a competition for display of empathy. Congratulations on your efforts on that front. But I'll not say any more on this thread for now.


nice use of a strawman, no one's asking you to have your emotional response here.


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> flabbergasting
> 
> surely the police etc would ask the council for a list of the number of people - tenants and their families - living there? surely easy enough to say "there's 450 people living there" or however many.



Yep. But like you said further up, it's almost like someone is deliberately scuppering things. Fucking unbelievable incompetence.


----------



## Sea Star (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> don't care for the chair coverings


what? They're fucking gorgeous. You have no taste! Disappointed in you, Pickers.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Anyone have any insight into whether this might be true?
> 
> Video: Govt “puts ‘D-notice’ gag” on real #Grenfell death toll #nationalsecurity





DaveCinzano said:


> Doubt it, because:
> 
> 
> Skwarkbox
> ...



Also:

No, There Isn't A "D-Notice" Banning The Media From Reporting Details Of The Grenfell Fire


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 16, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Interesting. Thanks for posting.
> 
> Its drawn in a rather odd way but I suspect its been drawn more with a view to how the glazing works then regard the cladding, the cladding is probably detailed better on a different set of drawings.  One thing that is apparent though is the lack of mention of intumescents which does leave the cavity exposed.  I'm going to guess and say they anticipated any fire would escape through the window and then make its way along the building via the insulation, once it reached a fire break it would go no further.
> 
> ...



Looking at some of the pictures, it's obvious the aluminium exterior has burned up, but there appears to be a fair amount of the insulation material remaining, albeit charred and with a broken up/fractured surface. I don't know if this is just a skeletal residue after combustion or indicates that the insulation didn't actually burn that well and may have to some extent resisted burning.

Possibly also worth considering that they may have used different types of insulation or panelling in different areas of the facade, with more combustible materials providing a conduit. Sure we'll know in due course.


----------



## 1%er (Jun 16, 2017)

Radio news here has just reported that some of the crowd outside of the town hall have turned on a camera man at the demo, anyone know what news org he is from?


----------



## Dr. Furface (Jun 16, 2017)

Dr. Furface said:


> As others have said, they've been inundated with donations and don't need any more at the moment. There was a guy on the radio this morning saying that what they really needed was cardboard boxes to put stuff they've received into a storage facility out near Heathrow - however that was hours ago so I don't know if they've got all the boxes they need by now.


I heard this morning that a packaging company heard the appeal for cardboard boxes and immediately rushed over 700 of them to the centres!


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Also:
> 
> No, There Isn't A "D-Notice" Banning The Media From Reporting Details Of The Grenfell Fire



Thanks DaveCinzano


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> flabbergasting
> 
> surely the police etc would ask the council for a list of the number of people - tenants and their families - living there? surely easy enough to say "there's 450 people living there" or however many.


The way the council answered the question was incredibly callous and buck-passing, but, as me, frogwoman, and weepiper have said before, the council/tmo will have a list of tenants and leaseholders, and the members of the tenants household when they moved in - but almost certainly don't know how many people living there in total.  You don't have to inform housing when you give birth or a child starts living with you.  Many housing providers have stopped asking tenants to inform them when a partner/adult family member/friend or lodger moves in.  Many tenants probably don't keep the council up to date with who lives with them anyway.  Sofa surfing and overcrowding is on the increase because of austerity.  Subletting and air b&b will undoubtedly have been happening. Private leaseholders can rent out to who they want without informing the council.  People have guests (perhaps especially during ramadan).  Some sick and disabled people might have overnight carers.  Some of the additional people living there or staying there may well be undocumented migrants or wanting to avoid being on official records for whatever reason.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

1%er said:


> Radio news here has just reported that some of the crowd outside of the town hall have turned on a camera man at the demo, anyone know what news org he is from?


There was one bit in the coverage where a camera shot up towards the sky, impossible to tell if it was something or nothing. There was also one bit where the idiot reporter asked a woman why the people were all down there.   He was answered fairly robustly, but nobody even laid a finger on him.  So, no, nothing I saw at least.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

Am I right in saying that what is going on now is spontaneous, and the organised protest is scheduled to start later?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## Ted Striker (Jun 16, 2017)

This sign is up near it, amongst the 'missing' posters


----------



## 1%er (Jun 16, 2017)

Wilf said:


> There was one bit in the coverage where a camera shot up towards the sky, impossible to tell if it was something or nothing. There was also one bit where the idiot reporter asked a woman why the people were all down there.   He was answered fairly robustly, but nobody even laid a finger on him.  So, no, nothing I saw at least.


The reporter was talking about the police being kept in side-streets and then said the police horses are coming, it looks like a TV cameraman is being attacked by a number of people in the middle of the road


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 16, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Oh lord, really?
> 
> I've not seen the detailing but if its as described it sounds like a proper dog's dinner.
> 
> ...


I was wondering about whether the new windows contributed to making things worse. I was once liaison on a large window replacement contract but I don't have any technical expertise. I know PVCu is reasonably fire resistant but will warp and then melt if there is enough heat which clearly there was. Even before that facilitates fire getting in it will facilitate smoke access from the fire on the outside of the building. 

There are windows on the stairs as well as in flats. The stairs were designed to be sufficiently free of smoke from a fire confined to a single flat for people to be able to get out but in practice they evidently filled up with toxic levels of smoke relatively quickly. My guess is that the effect of the fire outside on the windows will have significantly contributed. 

I've seen a couple of interviews with people who lived on the upper floors who only got out through luck because of this. Beyond a certain point even advising people to get out rather than stay put wouldn't necessarily have helped them.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 16, 2017)

Ted Striker said:


> This sign is up near it, amongst the 'missing' posters


can you please repost that full size? it's impossible to read


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jun 16, 2017)

Wilf said:


> There was one bit in the coverage where a camera shot up towards the sky, impossible to tell if it was something or nothing. There was also one bit where the idiot reporter asked a woman why the people were all down there.   He was answered fairly robustly, but nobody even laid a finger on him.  So, no, nothing I saw at least.


Yes I seen that, after the woman shot him down he turned to the camera and said 'as you can see emotions are boiling over' what he should have said is, 'as you can see I asked a really fucking stupid question there and I deserved that response'


----------



## ska invita (Jun 16, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> can you please repost that full size? it's impossible to read


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

Seems like May is in a church which is surrounded by an angry crowd...


----------



## killer b (Jun 16, 2017)

she's been run off now. it couldn't have gone any other way could it?


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 16, 2017)

.


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 16, 2017)

Dan, Dan the BBC man was asking for a smack with his line of interviewing a few minutes ago. Now he's disappeared. Coincidence? He did end up saying something along the lines of "this has opened up class divisions (my Marxism) which have been long buried". Yeah, buried by the likes of you, yer twat.

Oh, he's back. With added SWP banners. Noooooooooooooooo!


----------



## hash tag (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh what will almost certainly have happened is staff able to leave the building will have been directed to go home.



That will help no one.



Dr. Furface said:


> I heard this morning that a packaging company heard the appeal for cardboard boxes and immediately rushed over 700 of them to the centres!



I gather a few companies have chipped in with various contributions, companies I for one would not normally go near and fair play to them.
It is a disaster on a scale beyond anyones comprehension and anyone who chips in anything would surely be welcomed.


----------



## ChrisD (Jun 16, 2017)

free spirit said:


> The guardian had a diagram pulled from the intial planning consent I think, which showed the detailing


I agree that's a crap detail but there's significant difference between planning drawings/consent and building regulations/working drawings consent. Planners are not concerned with fixing or fire stopping details.

For what it's worth I think the issue of panel A  v. Panel B is irrelevant in the sense that if both satisfied the relevant regulations then most specifiers would choose the cheaper one.  The potential fault lies with setting those standards which it seems uk lags behind other countries despite evidence from other fires indicating changes needed.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 16, 2017)

From the Squarkbox article:



> This morning, Grime artist Saskilla told the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire programme that he had been told personally by one of the firefighters at Grenfell Tower that around two hundred bodies had already been identified at the scene of the terrifying blaze. The presenter attempted to pour water on the figure, but the musician insisted it was what he was told.


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 16, 2017)

ChrisD said:


> For what it's worth I think the issue of panel A  v. Panel B is irrelevant in the sense that if both satisfied the relevant regulations then most specifiers would choose the cheaper one.



Especially if it saved £5000 on a £10million budget and one was fire resistant and the other wasn't....and someone(s) appeared to be on a £1.4million backhander judging by the £10million £8.6million figures being thrown around.

Oh look. May's just offered a £5million bribe.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

*Soz already posted*


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 16, 2017)

Can't find any more info at present.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

How can someone who has to flee an enraged people continue as Prime Minister?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## belboid (Jun 16, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> Oh look. May's just offered a £5million bribe.


One woman's crowdfunder collection has raised over a million, and Maggie May offers just another four. Pathetic.  _Their_ response is just so unbelievably crass and uninterested, it's fucking shocking. Even to a bitter middle aged cynic.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Can't find any more info at present.



Somewhat pathetic seeing as it doesn't even match the grass-roots ad hoc collections of cash, let alone the material or service donations, or the pledges from existing charities, unions and others.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 16, 2017)

Pointless question: this has done for May, but can/how do the Tory party get out of this? It's arguably their legacy from the past 7 years of austerity (plus their general history, obviously); is there any way they turn things around? Another war?


----------



## maomao (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> How can someone who has to flee an enraged people continue as Prime Minister?


Because literally no other fucker in her party wants it right now. She's got no fucking choice and if it wasn't for the deaths of so many people we'd all be rolling on the floor pissing ourselves laughing at her. She's a fucking joke.


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Am I right in saying that what is going on now is spontaneous, and the organised protest is scheduled to start later?


i think so. Another  (planned) one is at Home Office 2 Marsham Street .


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> How can someone who has to flee an enraged people continue as Prime Minister?


Guardian live feed: "One local said: “The tower block is more strong and stable than that woman.”


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Pointless question: this has done for May, but can/how do the Tory party get out of this? It's arguably their legacy from the past 7 years of austerity (plus their general history, obviously); is there any way they turn things around? Another war?



Everything is so fluid now I don't think it makes sense to try and predict anything.


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 16, 2017)

> The two-hour Cabinet committee meeting marked an escalation after the government had initially relied on junior ministers to tackle the consequences of the fire, categorising it as a “civil contingency”.



*Holds back from saying what he's thinking*

Yeah, I'm not surprised you need that amount of security Mrs May.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

maomao said:


> Because literally no other fucker in her party wants it right now. She's got no fucking choice and if it wasn't for the deaths of so many people we'd all be rolling on the floor pissing ourselves laughing at her. She's a fucking joke.



Yes, I get this, but even so... god can you imagine how much she must want to resign!


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Everything is so fluid now I don't think it makes sense to try and predict anything.


Aye, fair point to a pointless question


----------



## belboid (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Everything is so fluid now I don't think it makes sense to try and predict anything.


All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and humanity is at last compelled to face with sober senses our real conditions of life, and our relations with our kind.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 16, 2017)

This could get shitty as it gets dark tonight. Another long hot weekend will not assist. May needs to roll out plan b to keep a lid on things tonight


----------



## neonwilderness (Jun 16, 2017)

Theresa May leaves church by side door to chants of 'coward'



> Theresa May has left a church in north Kensington being used as a support hub for victims of the Grenfell Tower fire through a side door to chants of "coward".


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> This could get shitty as it gets dark tonight. Another long hot weekend will not assist. May needs to roll out plan b to keep a lid on things tonight



Cameron didn't put soldiers on the street, would May?


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 16, 2017)

Luke Barrett is a journalist at Inside Housing magazine who wrote about the Grenfell Tower refurbishment before the fire. He says that the last fire risk assessment at Grenfell Tower was in December 2015 which contradicts what a KCC councillor told Radio 4 two days ago.

Crucially, at the time of the last assessment, the renovations were underway but had not been completed.

It seems odd that that a post-refurbishment fire risk assessment was not carried out once the work was completed - particularly given size of the building, the wide scope of the refurbishment project and the existence of  one solitary stairwell escape route serving 120 flats on 24 floors. That's not to mention the stream of outward correspondence from Grenfell tenants expressing safety concerns post-refurbishment.

More than half of the 82 KCTMO 'managed' tower blocks have had more recent fire and safety assessments than Grenfell Tower, despite Grenfell Tower being the second tallest and presumably one of the most recently refurbished.

Back to the sprinkler issue, it's been seemingly compulsory for residential buildings higher than 30m to have sprinklers fitted since 2007. Grenfell Tower is 70m. Irrespective of whether or KCC leader Nick Paget-Brown's doubtful claim that sprinklers weren't fitted because the residents didn't want them, it would surely be the council's legal obligation to ensure they were fitted regardless of residents wishes.

FOI: Grenfell Tower had not been risk assessed for 18 months | News | Inside Housing

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...chment_data/file/441669/BR_PDF_AD_B2_2013.pdf


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Jun 16, 2017)

May wont resign, at least not yet, she's as deluded as they come, she feels nothing.

Dangerous.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 16, 2017)

"no bank cards, no money" - priorities, as ever, on point.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

I have read a fair few lefties compare state of neoliberalism in Britain to late 80s in the USSR.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 16, 2017)

right at the end, ceaucescu flailingly announced  massive increases in wages as the crowd got restless. Then fucked off in a helicopter.


This is mays ceaucescu moment


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Cameron didn't put soldiers on the street, would May?


 
Would they bother turning out ?


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Would they bother turning out ?



I think they would, yeah, don't you?


----------



## 1%er (Jun 16, 2017)

neonwilderness said:


> Theresa May leaves church by side door to chants of 'coward'


TV pictures here showed police holding crowds back to let her car through (when I say crowds it looked like maybe a couple of hundred people on both sides of the road).


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2017)

I'm scared to go to the demo seems totally possible they'll do the horses & kettling I don't know .


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 16, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Pointless question: this has done for May, but can/how do the Tory party get out of this? It's arguably their legacy from the past 7 years of austerity (plus their general history, obviously); is there any way they turn things around? Another war?



This has certainly torpedoed Johnson's leadership ambitions, him having been Mayor and all.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

> At St Clement’s Church, the prime minister was greeted as she left the building and got in her car by shouts of “shame on you” and “coward, coward”. She did not speak to anyone as she left. One local said: *“The tower block is more strong and stable than that woman.”* There was a brief scuffle between one protester and some of the more than 30 police lined up outside the building.



Grenfell Tower fire: Prime minister announces £5m aid package – latest

When ordinary punters - not pundits, not commentariat types - throw your election slogan back in your face with such contempt, you are in trouble.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 16, 2017)

bimble said:


> I'm scared to go to the demo seems totally possible they'll do the horses & kettling I don't know .



Go, keep to the edges, its often fairly obvious from there when the horses and kettling are coming. I wish I could go but I'm not in London.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 16, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Oh lord, really?
> 
> I've not seen the detailing but if its as described it sounds like a proper dog's dinner.
> 
> ...


Ah, I didn't know about the intumescent strips, but in this situation I can't see how they'd work / can see why they clearly didn't. They're surrounded by insulation so will be insulated from the initial fire for long enough for the flames to have jumped through the air gap. The air gap would create a vertical chimney effect so the flames would shoot up the outside of the insulation in the air gap pretty quickly.

The mastic I referred to would be on the inside of the internal window surround, sealing the corners.

The insulation was fixed to the existing wall, but the window was moved out from the previous position so that the window itself was located around half way into the insulation section, presumably fixed to the sub structure of the cladding in some way. Which means that their would only have been the internal window surround between the inside of the flats and the insulation material (unless there was a fireproof layer at that point, but that doesn't seem to have been the case from the way the fire spread, and I can well see that just not happening.

The external fire breaks can be seen still in place on the pictures of the burned building, about half way between each window section running horizontally.

Scary shit, but frankly I've been expecting to see something like this for a long time having seen how some of these systems work, and also worked in buildings where it's clear that many trades don't give a toss about maintaining fire seals when running their cables etc. I remember one job where we were diligently putting the insulation back into the fire breaks around our cables only to look up and see an entire 1.2m wide roof to ceiling strip of fire sealing material missing completely - reported it but I bet it's still missing. I also see they've now exempted soil stacks from being in fire proof enclosures, because a 5 inch plastic soil stack / vent is completely fire proof by itself and in no way would simply burn and create a 5 inch diameter hole in any fire break.

There's a thread I think on here from 4-5 years back showing a tower block somewhere in Europe where the cladding caught fire in a similar way to this. Criminal that this work was still being done in this way even after that.


----------



## BigTom (Jun 16, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> Go, keep to the edges, its often fairly obvious from there when the horses and kettling are coming. I wish I could go but I'm not in London.



This. horses you'll be able to see around and know where they might use them. Kettling is a bit more tricky but it's a warm evening so if you get stuck it won't be so bad, just take enough water for a few hours in case you need it - but if you hang around at the edges and pay some attention to police you can see when they close off streets and move toward open ones / leave if it looks like they are closing it completely.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 16, 2017)

I wish I could go too, nowhere near it. Lived in London for a bit too. Hope you all unleash hell.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 16, 2017)

ChrisD said:


> I agree that's a crap detail but there's significant difference between planning drawings/consent and building regulations/working drawings consent. Planners are not concerned with fixing or fire stopping details.
> 
> For what it's worth I think the issue of panel A  v. Panel B is irrelevant in the sense that if both satisfied the relevant regulations then most specifiers would choose the cheaper one.  The potential fault lies with setting those standards which it seems uk lags behind other countries despite evidence from other fires indicating changes needed.


you'd hope there would be a significant difference, but the evidence of the burning tower would seem to indicate not.


----------



## mather (Jun 16, 2017)

The estate I live on is due to be demolished and rebuilt in a few years time and I have just found out that the company that was awarded the contract to do it is the same fucking company that 'renovated' Grenfell Tower!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 16, 2017)

I say in my Scottish accent


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 16, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> This could get shitty as it gets dark tonight. Another long hot weekend will not assist. May needs to roll out plan b to keep a lid on things tonight



Maybe they don't want to keep a lid on things? If it kicks off, it'll be the protesters that become the bad guys, get villified in the press for attacking our brave bobbies, putting the strain on our knackered heroes from the fire service etc.  The perfect scenario to deflect the heat from themselves.


----------



## bemused (Jun 16, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> Irrespective of whether or KCC leader Nick Paget-Brown's doubtful claim that sprinklers weren't fitted because the residents didn't want them, it would surely be the council's legal obligation to ensure they were fitted regardless of residents wishes.



That did strike me as an odd reason not to fit them.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 16, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Pointless question: this has done for May, but can/how do the Tory party get out of this? It's arguably their legacy from the past 7 years of austerity (plus their general history, obviously); is there any way they turn things around? Another war?


by stalling and buck passing with their media friends and hoping the people run out of stem, hoefully that won't happen


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 16, 2017)

free spirit said:


> Scary shit, but frankly I've been expecting to see something like this for a long time having seen how some of these systems work, and also worked in buildings where it's clear that many trades don't give a toss about maintaining fire seals when running their cables etc. I remember one job where we were diligently putting the insulation back into the fire breaks around our cables only to look up and see an entire 1.2m wide roof to ceiling strip of fire sealing material missing completely - reported it but I bet it's still missing. I also see they've now exempted soil stacks from being in fire proof enclosures, because a 5 inch plastic soil stack / vent is completely fire proof by itself and in no way would simply burn and create a 5 inch diameter hole in any fire break.



There was a new build block up here in Leeds (private not social) where they had the gas supply running in plastic pipes on the building exterior.

(They did get prosecuted for it, but still)


----------



## mather (Jun 16, 2017)

bemused said:


> That did strike me as an odd reason not to fit them.



Because its a bullshit excuse.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 16, 2017)

A note of caution to everyone, be mindful of what you say here or anywhere else. They will go crazy in the aftermath. Stay cool.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 16, 2017)

What I saw of the crowd as May left church looked way milder than it could have been, but perhaps I dare say the Twitter dupes will bang on about how awful it is.


----------



## belboid (Jun 16, 2017)

May on the BBC, just spouting her fucking soundbites and not answering the question. She has learned nothing.


----------



## 1%er (Jun 16, 2017)

Sounds like the police may be getting their excuses in early if they use heavy-handed policing.

According to the Globo reporter on the scene in Kensington , the police are claiming to the media they have intelligence that local gangs are intent on infiltrating the demonstrations to cause disorder


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jun 16, 2017)

She's concentrating on not blurting out 'strong and stable'


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

Rosemary Jest said:


> May wont resign, at least not yet, she's as deluded as they come, she feels nothing.
> 
> Dangerous.


Hard to tell. She's not got Blair's ability to carry on after mass murder, but she'll give it a go. Actually, fuck knows where this will end up. I note she hasn't sacked that cunt barwell yet tho.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 16, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> This could get shitty as it gets dark tonight. Another long hot weekend will not assist. May needs to roll out plan b to keep a lid on things tonight



Plan B. She's not got a plan A. I doubt she can spell 'plan'.


----------



## Fingers (Jun 16, 2017)

Theresa May is way way way out of her depth....


----------



## NoXion (Jun 16, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> A note of caution to everyone, be mindful of what you say here or anywhere else. They will go crazy in the aftermath. Stay cool.



What are you talking about?


----------



## free spirit (Jun 16, 2017)

free spirit said:


> you'd hope there would be a significant difference, but the evidence of the burning tower would seem to indicate not.


The more detailed design drawing is here.

Folded aluminium surrounds not upvc, which is better, but looks like they were padded out on battens so there would have been a gap behind them to the original wall, which should have been fire sealed but I bet wasn't.

But that's only the window sections, it looks like there was a window, then cladding panel, then window etc so the fire could have just jumped straight up behind the cladding if the intumescent strips didn't work fast enough (assuming they were actually fitted properly).


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 16, 2017)

Nine Bob Note said:


> She's concentrating on not blurting out 'strong and stable'



Sadiq Khan on the news yesterday described the emerency service response as 'breathtaking' which is an extremely poor choice of words in the circumstances.


----------



## 1%er (Jun 16, 2017)

Sounds like the demonstration is now moving from the town-hall and the crowd is walking to Grenfell tower


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 16, 2017)

NoXion said:


> What are you talking about?



Anyone thinking of getting out on the streets in protest tonight I assume. If the police decide to turn things ugly, they'll want scapegoats down the line and anyone who has been online talking up trouble might come to wish they hadn't.

With that in mind, please don't anyone go out and attack coppers or anyone else. Do however stand your ground, know your rights and take care of those around you.


----------



## EastEnder (Jun 16, 2017)

belboid said:


> May on the BBC, just spouting her fucking soundbites and not answering the question. She has learned nothing.


She is absolutely the worst, the most infuriating arsehole I've seen in a long time. I know it's standard practice for politicians to evade questions, duck issues & prevaricate ad infinitum, but she's in a league all of her own. I genuinely cannot stand to watch her being interviewed - I can't afford to replace my telly & the urge to throw things at it when she's on is too great. The degree to which she parrots prepared answers & overtly avoids the actual question is astonishing. She doesn't even _pretend_ to answer the questions, she lacks the most basic politician's toolkit of abilities to seemingly answer a question whilst not actually doing so. It's as if she's holding up a big sign saying "I think the public are such enfeebled morons they won't notice I'm treating them with utter contempt". I fucking loathe the witch.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 16, 2017)

NoXion said:


> What are you talking about?


Theres a history of the news and police looking through posts on here after riots / political street violence


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 16, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> She is absolutely the worst, the most infuriating arsehole I've seen in a long time. I know it's standard practice for politicians to evade questions, duck issues & prevaricate ad infinitum, but she's in a league all of her own. I genuinely cannot stand to watch her being interviewed - I can't afford to replace my telly & the urge to throw things at it when she's on is too great. The degree to which she parrots prepared answers & overtly avoids the actual question is astonishing. She doesn't even _pretend_ to answer the questions, she lacks the most basic politician's toolkit of abilities to seemingly answer a question whilst not actually doing so. It's as if she's holding up a big sign saying "I think the public are such enfeebled morons they won't notice I'm treating them with utter contempt". I fucking loathe the witch.



It's that visible contempt for being forced to explain herself, it can only come from a truly epic yet completely baseless sense of entitlement.


----------



## 1%er (Jun 16, 2017)

Sounds like there is now a demo outside Downing Street


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 16, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


>


For. Fuck's. Sake


----------



## 1%er (Jun 16, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


>


Anyone track the EDL on social media? This is just being mentioned on the news, something about a counter demo on social media by the EDL


----------



## YouSir (Jun 16, 2017)

1%er said:


> Sounds like there is now a demo outside Downing Street



It just arrived there. Talk of moving on or joining up with others


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> For. Fuck's. Sake


Dirty, dirty bastards. They'll take a fucking kicking.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

FBU's Matt Wrack on the looped _lessons will be learned_ empty platitudes:



> At the Downing Street protest, Matt Wrack, general secretary of the Fire Brigade Union said fire standards had deteriorated because of years of cuts.
> 
> “I heard people saying we need to learn the lessons from Grenfell Tower. These are not new lessons. We learned these lessons 40 years ago and we have to ask why these lessons were not learned,”



Grenfell Tower fire: May announces £5m of payments to residents – latest


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 16, 2017)

What I've seen so far is quite a bit milder than could have been realistically expected. But the elite and their social media drones might still speak to spin it, more outraged about some jostling and shouting than at scores of people needlessly burning and choking to death.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 16, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> FBU's Matt Wrack on the looped _lessons will be learned_ empty platitudes:
> 
> 
> 
> Grenfell Tower fire: May announces £5m of payments to residents – latest



He's here too


----------



## cantsin (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 16, 2017)

<Deleted due to mistaken identity>


----------



## Wookey (Jun 16, 2017)

Downing Street protest is gathering momentum.


----------



## chilango (Jun 16, 2017)

Is this "now"?

London fire: Protesters storm Kensington town hall - BBC News


----------



## Lucy Fur (Jun 16, 2017)

Why? 





Fingers said:


> Theresa May is way way way out of her depth....


Why? Are we dunking the witch now! Yay!


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 16, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's that visible contempt for being forced to explain herself, it can only come from a truly epic yet completely baseless sense of entitlement.



The movie is called "Fields of Wheat", starring Una Stubbs as a beleaguered vicar's daughter who dreamed of wearing leather trousers and leopard skin shoes and reached for the stars but just fucked up everything etc


----------



## inva (Jun 16, 2017)

chilango said:


> Is this "now"?
> 
> London fire: Protesters storm Kensington town hall - BBC News


can't play the clip but looks like it's footage from earlier.


----------



## chilango (Jun 16, 2017)

inva said:


> can't play the clip but looks like it's footage from earlier.


Ta, am trying play catch up with the thread, and failing.


----------



## camouflage (Jun 16, 2017)

Lucy Fur said:


> Why?
> Why? Are we dunking the witch now! Yay!



from what I've heard, witches were good people.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## agricola (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> I have read a fair few lefties compare state of neoliberalism in Britain to late 80s in the USSR.



A better parallel would be the state of British business in the 1980s.  

After all, what they have basically done is spent the last twenty years Ratnerizing everything - and taken the idea of pension holidays and implemented it as government policy in many areas (as an example I notice that they thought the last few days would be an opportune time to announce that the national student debt level is now £100 billion).


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 16, 2017)

free spirit said:


> The more detailed design drawing is here.
> 
> Folded aluminium surrounds not upvc, which is better, but looks like they were padded out on battens so there would have been a gap behind them to the original wall, which should have been fire sealed but I bet wasn't.



Cheers for that. Just found KCTMO's web page FAQ for tenants about the windows (which seems to have been removed from its site). Archive.org version here. Among the FAQ's 


> 4 What are the window cills and reveals made of?
> At flat 145 the window cill and reveals and cover pieces/trims were all shown as being in white UPVC, which does not need decorating. It is easy to wipe down if the cills get dirty, and the white reveals reflect more light into the room.



(From the newsletters issued during the regeneration contract it seems that the flat 145 referred to was a 'show flat' that was used as a 'respite' area for tenants during the works).


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 16, 2017)

camouflage said:


> from what I've heard, witches were good people.



Good witches are good, bad witches are scumbags.


----------



## cantsin (Jun 16, 2017)

chilango said:


> Is this "now"?
> 
> London fire: Protesters storm Kensington town hall - BBC News



Cple hours ago ? Not sure if they then marched to Downing St , or different demo ? 

Either way, 2 x 30c days / long nights ahead - wldnt be surprised if a fair bit of O.B. On overtime this w/e


----------



## YouSir (Jun 16, 2017)

.


----------



## major major (Jun 16, 2017)

Mrs MAY has just said it is 'awful' people have lost their homes and have nowhere to live.

NO Mrs May it's ''absolutely horrific'', young children and their parents have been Burnt Alive!!

Our PM has lost the plot, it's just one thing after another - she genuinely has the best of intentions but can't cope.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 16, 2017)

major major said:


> Mrs MAY has just said it is 'awful' people have lost their homes and have nowhere to live.
> 
> NO Mrs May it's ''absolutely horrific'', young children and their parents have been Burnt Alive!!
> 
> Our PM has lost the plot, it's just one thing after another - she genuinely has the best of intentions but can't cope.


Agree, apart from the last 10 words...which are bollax.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 16, 2017)

major major said:


> Mrs MAY has just said it is 'awful' people have lost their homes and have nowhere to live.
> 
> NO Mrs May it's ''absolutely horrific'', young children and their parents have been Burnt Alive!!
> 
> Our PM has lost the plot, it's just one thing after another - she genuinely has the best of intentions but can't cope.


Does she fuck. Why do you say that?


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 16, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> A note of caution to everyone, be mindful of what you say here or anywhere else. They will go crazy in the aftermath. Stay cool.


Who are you referring to? I don't follow


----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 16, 2017)

from the Granuaid live feed



> A man who posted pictures of a Grenfell Tower victim on social media has been sentenced to three months in prison.
> 
> Omega Mwaikambo was found guilty of malicious communications offences.
> 
> ...


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

gawkrodger said:


> from the Granuaid live feed



I'm not saying that anyone should be doing this sort of thing, it is not good and they shouldn't be but why is this being prosecuted? There were pictures of victims of the Manchester attack posted online and no subsequent legal action was taken against them IIRC.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 16, 2017)

What are the odds he's the only person who'll do time over this?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> I'm not saying that anyone should be doing this sort of thing, it is not good and they shouldn't be but why is this being prosecuted? There were pictures of victims of the Manchester attack posted online and no subsequent legal action was taken against them IIRC.


Seems very speedy too. Weird.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 16, 2017)

If the Tories think May can continue after this...


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 16, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> If the Tories think May can continue after this...


they need her to


----------



## mauvais (Jun 16, 2017)

Context is everything. Depends where he posted them and what the intent was.


----------



## maomao (Jun 16, 2017)

Broken glass and a warm bath. That's her best way out at the moment.

(there are very few human beings in the world that I'd suggest something so sick about but she's barely fucking human in the first place)


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

Solidarity to all urbz (and everyone else) on the march tonight.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 16, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> If the Tories think May can continue after this...





Orang Utan said:


> they need her to


Brexit negotiations on Monday


----------



## tim (Jun 16, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> they need her to



They don't they'll find a strong and stable replacement


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 16, 2017)

Aaron Bastani reporting on Twitter that TSG are out preventing protestors approaching Grenfell Tower.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 16, 2017)

tim said:


> They don't they'll find a strong and stable replacement


----------



## mauvais (Jun 16, 2017)

Yer man who got prosecuted opened body bags and took photos, it seems, then didn't take them down when viewers were disgusted by them. Not surprised they nicked him for that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

So I went to Westminster and the demo full of lefty vampires and went to Chelsea and caught up with cw.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 16, 2017)

Could this really be the beginning of the end for the bastards?

Feel a bit grimy saying that given the tenor of the situation, but if some good can come from such horror maybe the demise of these fuckers...


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 16, 2017)

Im going out to one tomorrow me thinks


----------



## tim (Jun 16, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> What are the odds he's the only person who'll do time over this?



An undisrupted spell of solitary, no doubt.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Context is everything. Depends where he posted them and what the intent was.


He posted them on Facebook because - by his account, but not disputed by prosecutors - the body had been left unattended outside his flat for a considerable length of time and he had



> tried to find someone to come and help but "there was not one else in sight" and took the photos to "show how the victim was being treated" and get someone's attention.
> 
> She said: "He was not someone that has gone to the scene to look at what's going on in some macabre way."



Man jailed for sharing photo of dead Grenfell Tower fire victim on Facebook

For this foolish, distasteful, wrong action, but not one seemingly done with malice or dishonest intent, he's been banged up for three months. 

What's the betting he's the only person who gets gaoled in connection with Grenfell Tower?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 16, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Yer man who got prosecuted opened body bags and took photos, it seems, then didn't take them down when viewers were disgusted by them. Not surprised they nicked him for that.



That explains it, if true, hope he has a hard 3-months, cunt.


----------



## tim (Jun 16, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


>



Ken Clarke getting the thumbs up from the bench opposite.


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 16, 2017)

I'm tempted to go to the protest but worried it won't be safe. I don't really want to go on my own either.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 16, 2017)

Austerity must really be over if we can find five million for Grenfell. After all we can't pay public sector workers or benefits.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 16, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> He posted them on Facebook because - by his account, but not disputed by prosecutors - the body had been left unattended outside his flat for a considerable length of time and he had
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Quick and easy to prosecute him though isn't it, less so anyone else. Little sympathy here - totally the wrong thing to do and, given the circumstances, very high potential for the victim's family to learn of it outside of controlled channels. Obviously I don't know what his intention really was but very much not something to be encouraged.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 16, 2017)

Best view I've seen of May actually bolting for the car.

Can't catch the audio at the moment, but can imagine...


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> He posted them on Facebook because - by his account, but not disputed by prosecutors - the body had been left unattended outside his flat for a considerable length of time and he had
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It looks like an attempt by the state to cover up the more visceral details of the fire, doesn't it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Best view I've seen of May actually bolting for the car.
> 
> Can't catch the audio at the moment, but can imagine...



Fucking angel of death that woman


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> It looks like an attempt by the state to cover up the more visceral details of the fire, doesn't it?



No.

The fuckwit unzipped a body bag & took close-up pictures & video of the victim, and posted them online, sick bastard.

His excuse is he thought it was out of order the body was unattended, FFS the services were somewhat busy trying to save lives. 

Besides if that was his problem, just take pictures of the body-bag, not unzip it, the man is sick.


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> It looks like an attempt by the state to cover up the more visceral details of the fire, doesn't it?



Yes.

Within 48 hours of 9/11 (well within) we were being told 10000 people had died. The actual figure was just short of 3000. There has to be something going on here where, 48 hours later, we are still being told 17/30 people have died. This is not only offensive to the people waiting to here something about lost loved ones but surely some sort of deliberate cover up in an attempt to manage the fallout from this tragedy.

If you don't want riots, don't fucking lie to people and make them feel their lives are worth less/worthless compared to those of dead bankers.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 16, 2017)

Ken Clarke (the cuddly face of the tories, put forward for this show...coincedence?) has a shit attitude. He's very flippant.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> How can someone who has to flee an enraged people continue as Prime Minister?


Her ceaucescu moment


----------



## Fez909 (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Her ceaucescu moment


It would be nice if her career ended the same way


----------



## not a trot (Jun 16, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> It would be nice if her career ended the same way



I'll gladly donate towards the cost of the bullets.


----------



## agricola (Jun 16, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> Yes.
> 
> Within 48 hours of 9/11 (well within) we were being told 10000 people had died. The actual figure was just short of 3000. There has to be something going on here where, 48 hours later, we are still being told 17/30 people have died. This is not only offensive to the people waiting to here something about lost loved ones but surely some sort of deliberate cover up in an attempt to manage the fallout from this tragedy.
> 
> If you don't want riots, don't fucking lie to people and make them feel their lives are worth less/worthless compared to those of dead bankers.



They aren't lying to people, but it should be explained a lot better than it has been.  

They know at least 30 people are dead - but they suspect far more are (IIRC above 70 is the number being cited at the moment, probably based on the number of missing reported to Casualty Bureau who haven't yet been located), but they won't know until the building is thoroughly checked.   Because of the horrific nature of this incident, that is going to take time.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 16, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> Yes.
> 
> Within 48 hours of 9/11 (well within) we were being told 10000 people had died. The actual figure was just short of 3000. There has to be something going on here where, 48 hours later, we are still being told 17/30 people have died. This is not only offensive to the people waiting to here something about lost loved ones but surely some sort of deliberate cover up in an attempt to manage the fallout from this tragedy.
> 
> If you don't want riots, don't fucking lie to people and make them feel their lives are worth less/worthless compared to those of dead bankers.


Again though, how is this being so mismanaged. The blueprint is there from countless other disasters, why are they dropping the ball on every simple thing?

Sorry, broken record, I just really don't understand the mass-bungling.


----------



## tim (Jun 16, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> Yes.
> 
> Within 48 hours of 9/11 (well within) we were being told 10000 people had died. The actual figure was just short of 3000. There has to be something going on here where, 48 hours later, we are still being told 17/30 people have died. This is not only offensive to the people waiting to here something about lost loved ones but surely some sort of deliberate cover up in an attempt to manage the fallout from this tragedy.
> 
> If you don't want riots, don't fucking lie to people and make them feel their lives are worth less/worthless compared to those of dead bankers.



Yes, but as you point out they got it wrong by ovestimating on 9/11. 

I assume that the Fire Brigade and police just don't know and don't want to guess. I also assume that counting bodies in a large unstable burnt out building is neither easy nor safe.

The real issue is not the exact body count but the way in which the state left people living in this and an unknown number of death traps; and its failure to support the survivors.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jun 16, 2017)

Fez909 said:


>



Real talk. Akala also lives in that area and has been vocal...


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 16, 2017)

tim said:


> Yes, but as you point out they got it wrong by ovestimating on 9/11.



But they didn't simply 'overestimate' the death toll in 9/11 did they? It was a deliberate politicized number broadcast to whip up support for retaliation. It was political. So what makes you think this is any different, albeit in reverse? This tragedy is political in its nature. An attack on the working class, albeit through accidental means initially. Why wouldn't they want to manage the damage, massage the figures until anger subsides? Why else would they order an inquiry that will take years, rather than an inquest where the public would have a voice and the jury a say?

The body count is an issue. Along with, as you say, the death traps the working class are forced to live in. One Hyde Park is not a death trap. The Shard is not a death trap.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Oh ye of little faith.
> 
> Yesterday the _Mail_ went big on the whole FIRST PICTURES OF MAN WHOSE FAULTY FRIDGE BURNED DOWN TOWER BLOCK
> On _Newsnight_ last night Kensington & Chelsea council leader Nick Paget-Brown blamed residents for the lack of a sprinkler system



Dacre's patience has evaporated already, and so has that of his frothiest-mouthed readers.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 16, 2017)

agricola said:


> They aren't lying to people, but it should be explained a lot better than it has been.
> 
> They know at least 30 people are dead - but they suspect far more are (IIRC above 70 is the number being cited at the moment, probably based on the number of missing reported to Casualty Bureau who haven't yet been located), but they won't know until the building is thoroughly checked.   Because of the horrific nature of this incident, that is going to take time.



I am not sure how clearer they can make it.

In the press conference around lunchtime today, when the copper announced the confirmed deaths had reached 30, he stated clearly they expected that to go up substantially, but wasn't able to say more until the search & recovery operation moved forward.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 16, 2017)

Fez909 said:


>




Ishmail speaks the truth. Vote Ishmail. Vote early. Vote often.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jun 16, 2017)

Fez909 said:


>




Phenomenal. Right down to the last line: 'I like you too, I like you fried, boiled, any which way you mainstream media motherfuckers'.


----------



## JTG (Jun 16, 2017)

Akala has apparently told the SWP to fuck off in Kensington


----------



## phillm (Jun 16, 2017)

A comment on Conservative Home.

_*There seems to be a lot of denial in these posts. 
Bottom line the slightest bit of common sense and decency would have been to visit the victims as well as the emergency serviices. Simple fact of life only one person gets to be first and lead the way. 
TM is permantely on the back foot and gives the impression she does not like to be involved with people who may not be singing to her songsheet. 
I do not like Corbyn, and he may have had an eye on an opportunity, but it was the right thing to do. 
We need a leader who has some nous and common sense, accompanied by an ability to reach out to people. Mrs May is not that person, it needs sorting before the conferences and before anything else happens. 
What a mess, fortunately she isn't running a brewery.*_


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Can't catch the audio at the moment, but can imagine...



It's subtitled!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 16, 2017)

JTG said:


> Akala has apparently told the SWP to fuck off in Kensington




I keep expecting there to be a day when Akala isn't 100% on point but that day just never comes.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 16, 2017)

JTG said:


> Akala has apparently told the SWP to fuck off in Kensington




The fucking SWP & EDL should be fucked out of this, both are scum of the earth.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 16, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> It's subtitled!


Aye, but that's just single speakers. Don't get the full aggro atmosphere


----------



## tim (Jun 16, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> I am not sure how clearer they can make it.
> 
> In the press conference around lunchtime today, when the copper announced the confirmed deaths had reached 30, he stated clearly they expected that to go up substantially, but wasn't able to say more until the search & recovery operation moved forward.



After the 1999 rail crash the initial official prediction was around 70 dead, the actual figure was 31. I assume it's better to do this carefully, respectfully and get it right.

BBC News | UK | Train crash: 70 feared dead

The St


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 16, 2017)

Fez909 said:


>




Best. Rant. Ever.


----------



## mather (Jun 16, 2017)

Lets get rid of May and swap her for Ishmail.


----------



## phillm (Jun 16, 2017)

mather said:


> Lets get rid of May and swap her for Ishmail.



Jez we can.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 16, 2017)

Apologies if I missed this posted already. From around 1pm.



As expected.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jun 16, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> I keep expecting there to be a day when Akala isn't 100% on point but that day just never comes.


I have nuff respect for Akala, he is always on point. Ishmahil too. I wonder if he'll be at speakers corner this Sunday. I might go, that's exactly how he is, it's not put on or fake in any way.

I really hope that some positive and effective action results from this tragedy.


----------



## NoXion (Jun 16, 2017)

Would it be fair to say that this isn't going away soon? I hope that's the case considering the magnitude of this tragedy - no, this *outrage* - and the context in which it happened.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 16, 2017)

The queen met Grenfell residents, the wailing and screaming in the background was unedifying and made for uncomfortable viewing. The ungrateful bastards should be shot.


----------



## mather (Jun 16, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Would it be fair to say that this isn't going away soon? I hope that's the case considering the magnitude of this tragedy - no, this *outrage* - and the context in which it happened.



I think it has the potential to go the other way and explode. All my neighbours are talking about this and everyone is pissed (and that is an understatement).


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 16, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Would it be fair to say that this isn't going away soon? I hope that's the case considering the magnitude of this tragedy - no, this *outrage* - and the context in which it happened.



Depends on what new level of fuckery is visited upon us next week I suppose.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 16, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> The queen met Grenfell residents, the wailing and screaming in the background was unedifying and made for uncomfortable viewing. The ungrateful bastards should be shot.



Not much point in shooting the Queen when she's already so old, is there? 



Fez909 said:


>




Fucking inhumanity of that reporter smirking and laughing and apparently unaware that he's not the only one with a camera.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 16, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Apologies if I missed this posted already. From around 1pm.
> 
> 
> 
> As expected.




A complaint about political game playing that goes on to big up his record as mayor. 

What an utter shit Johnson is.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 16, 2017)

Extremely thick and nasty Tory Solihull councillor Ken Hawkins compared protests to a lynch mob. Such contempt for people that it even overcomes their self-interest. 


And this prick is responsible for housing.


----------



## Humberto (Jun 16, 2017)

Boris is misleading there according to a reply by one Richard Paice.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 16, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> The queen met Grenfell residents



I'm no fan of the monarchy, but the queen had no reason to go there, she can't assist in any way. She's also in her 90's and going there and meeting those affected is hard on anyone. 

Yet she went cos she understands that by doing so some people may feel some comfort knowing that their overlords care for them. 

Contrast Mayhem who actually can do everything to help and yet has done nothing. Perhaps she thought last week's performance was not enough to guarantee her place in history?


----------



## brogdale (Jun 16, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Extremely thick and nasty Tory Solihull councillor Ken Hawkins compared protests to a lynch mob. Such contempt for people that it even overcomes their self-interest.
> 
> 
> And this prick is responsible for housing.



You'd think that people with this sort of stuff publicly available would think twice before venting their racist bile on the internet. But hey ho...


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 16, 2017)

> A sort of turbo-charged yuppiedom concerned only with prettifying the surface of wicked negligence.


Guardian columnist

Nicely put, even with all due allowances for the source.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jun 16, 2017)

This is probably a dumb question, but is there a program to hand out smoke detectors?  We have a program where you can go to any fire station and ask for a smoke detector.  Elderly folks can request a fire-audit and some firemen will show up and put up smoke detectors for them.  I know its not a replacement for building-wide detectors and sprinkler systems, but it would be a patch on a bad system.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 16, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> This is probably a dumb question, but is there a program to hand out smoke detectors?  We have a program where you can go to any fire station and ask for a smoke detector.  Elderly folks can request a fire-audit and some firemen will show up and put up smoke detectors for them.  I know its not a replacement for building-wide detectors and sprinkler systems, but it would be a patch on a bad system.


Yes, that's how it is here, too.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 16, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> Guardian columnist
> 
> Nicely put, even with all due allowances for the source.



She is busy slagging off Clive Lewis on twitter at the moment.



Scumbag lib aristo.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jun 16, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Yes, that's how it is here, too.



Thanks.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 16, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> This is probably a dumb question, but is there a program to hand out smoke detectors?  We have a program where you can go to any fire station and ask for a smoke detector.  Elderly folks can request a fire-audit and some firemen will show up and put up smoke detectors for them.  I know its not a replacement for building-wide detectors and sprinkler systems, but it would be a patch on a bad system.



Yes, kind of, not full on or full time, but nuff events when smoke and carbon monoxide detectors are doled out. Should be a red line building regulation for both imo.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> She is busy slagging off Clive Lewis on twitter at the moment.
> 
> 
> 
> Scumbag lib aristo.



If a bourgeois comes up with a good line I'm not too proud to expropriate it.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 16, 2017)

I live in London. Haven't been able to look at all of this thread. So may be repeating other posters.

I looked at C4 interview with a couple of local residents.

In the interview the local residents were bringing up issues of the big gap between rich and poor. The ethnic and social cleansing of London. With " regeneration" schemes being about that. This isn't directly to do with the fire. But I can understand why locals bring up these issues. Suddenly it on national news.


Thee have been comments from locals that the cladding was to prettify the tower blocks to make them look nicer to the well off. The cladding of old blocks is not for that. But that is how it's perceived.

Seems to me that the fire has meant that the poor in London suddenly find the media is asking there opinion on national TV. The kind of people who are usually ignored.

There is a lot of simmering anger out there about what has been happening to London.

This tragedy has focused it on a national platform.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jun 16, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yes, kind of, not full on or full time, but nuff events when smoke and carbon monoxide detectors are doled out. Should be a red line building regulation for both imo.



Yep.  When I replaced my furnace last year an inspector came out and checked to make sure there were carbon monoxide detectors.   They wouldn't have certified the furnace without one.


----------



## bmd (Jun 16, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Extremely thick and nasty Tory Solihull councillor Ken Hawkins compared protests to a lynch mob. Such contempt for people that it even overcomes their self-interest.
> 
> 
> And this prick is responsible for housing.




Fuckin arse nugget Conservative wank pimple.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> She is busy slagging off Clive Lewis on twitter at the moment.
> 
> 
> 
> Scumbag lib aristo.




Bevan's beyond her imagination, then?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> She is busy slagging off Clive Lewis on twitter at the moment.
> 
> 
> 
> Scumbag lib aristo.



Oh. I thought she was praising him for it


----------



## killer b (Jun 16, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> Bevin's beyond her imagination, then?


Yeah, I was thinking 'lower than vermin' was much more coarse. Tool.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jun 16, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> I live in London. Haven't been able to look at all of this thread. So may be repeating other posters.
> 
> I looked at C4 interview with a couple of local residents.
> 
> ...



A lot of the same issues came up in regard to a fire in a warehouse squat in San Francisco last year.  Housing is so expensive that it forces people to live in makeshift housing that doesn't conform to building codes.  I know I've lived in places that don't conform to building codes (or basic habitability for that matter).


----------



## Cid (Jun 16, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> This is probably a dumb question, but is there a program to hand out smoke detectors?  We have a program where you can go to any fire station and ask for a smoke detector.  Elderly folks can request a fire-audit and some firemen will show up and put up smoke detectors for them.  I know its not a replacement for building-wide detectors and sprinkler systems, but it would be a patch on a bad system.



Yes, but there's a world of difference between a smoke detector designed to alert a resident, and a full fire alarm system which alerts everyone in the block, and usually the fire service.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jun 16, 2017)

Cid said:


> Yes, but there's a world of difference between a smoke detector designed to alert a resident, and a full fire alarm system which alerts everyone in the block, and usually the fire service.



Yes, as I said in my post.


----------



## killer b (Jun 16, 2017)

Literally everyone is all up in her mentions going 'er, bevan?'. It doesn't seem to have quite been taken the way shed planned.


----------



## Cid (Jun 16, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Yes, as I said in my post.





I did try to read it, honestly.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jun 16, 2017)

Cid said:


> I did try to read it, honestly.



Hey, it's Friday!!!!


----------



## mather (Jun 16, 2017)

J Ed said:


> She is busy slagging off Clive Lewis on twitter at the moment.
> 
> 
> 
> Scumbag lib aristo.




I saw that crap on my Twitter, luckily everyone (me included) is calling her out on it.

I noticed she has not said anything about the disgusting comments made by certain Tories on this, I wonder why.


----------



## Ax^ (Jun 16, 2017)

Good luck to everyone and the urbs out protest today..

Not been on the internet all day good on ya'll


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 16, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> A lot of the same issues came up in regard to a fire in a warehouse squat in San Francisco last year.  Housing is so expensive that it forces people to live in makeshift housing that doesn't conform to building codes.



I don't want to jump to conclusions yet. There are many older tower blocks in London with no sprinkler system as standard. The Barbican development for example. Which is private.

A fair amount of money was spent cladding this tower block. It's about making them more insulated. Many Council blocks have this.

The question is whether this was done properly and the right fire resistant cladding was used ( newspaper reports say possibly this was not the case).

On top of this is how the less well off feel there are two Londons. One for rich and poor. This is correct imo. But it's separate issue.

Like the Deptford Fire a whole load of issues are coming into national view.

New Cross house fire - Wikipedia

This time the Queen has been quick to visit. I'm sure that's a lesson learnt from the Deptford fire.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 16, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> This is probably a dumb question, but is there a program to hand out smoke detectors?  We have a program where you can go to any fire station and ask for a smoke detector.  Elderly folks can request a fire-audit and some firemen will show up and put up smoke detectors for them.  I know its not a replacement for building-wide detectors and sprinkler systems, but it would be a patch on a bad system.


Well I got a letter hand delivered through my door today from the Chief Executive of the ALMO which manages the housing stock belonging to my landlord, Tower Hamlets Council.



> *Susmita Sen, Chief Executive*
> Susmita joined us from Network Housing Group where she was Network Stadium Executive Director. She was previously Chief Executive of Ealing Homes, and is a former Director of Housing and Interim CEO at Hackney Homes. In all Susmita has over 20 years of delivering social housing services.



Susmita tells me that


> Most of our tenanted flats have smoke detectors installed and many have new fire-rated front doors.


Most of them eh. That's nice.

She also helpfully points out that


> You can book a Fire Brigade FREE home fire safety check, which includes a free smoke alarm, by phoning 0800 028 44 28.


----------



## duncanh64 (Jun 16, 2017)

killer b said:


> Yeah, I was thinking 'lower than vermin' was much more coarse. Tool.


Quite; something as appalling as this happens and of course we must keep it all nice and polite FFS.


----------



## tim (Jun 16, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> Well I got a letter hand delivered through my door today from the Chief Executive of the ALMO which manages the housing stock belonging to my landlord, Tower Hamlets Council.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What fire warning and prevention have e ALMO themselves installed in your building?


----------



## JTG (Jun 16, 2017)

So, 72 hours on - what, aside from general arse covering, victim blaming and delivering shitty letters to tenants, has RBKC done? I've lost track but I think they've arranged accommodation for families. Are they coordinating any relief effort or anything else that could be considered useful?


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 16, 2017)

I really hope this tragedy won't be used to " regenerate" the remaining blocks. Replace them with the mockery of what passes as affordable housing in London. Ending up with social cleansing several years down the line.

There needs to be commitment to rehouse everyone locally in housing at social rent not the "affordable" bollox.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 16, 2017)

JTG said:


> So, 72 hours on - what, aside from general arse covering, victim blaming and delivering shitty letters to tenants, has RBKC done? I've lost track but I think they've arranged accommodation for families. Are they coordinating any relief effort or anything else that could be considered useful?



In London there is a rent cap. Be interesting to see if this will be waived. Temporary housing will be expensive. There is possibility that those on low incomes will exceed rent cap.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 16, 2017)

tim said:


> What fire warning and prevention have e ALMO themselves installed in your building?


Used to be a mains wired smoke detector in the living room (although thinking about it that predated the formation of the ALMO). My bathroom was done up under Decent Homes two years ago, and as part of that the smoke detector was replaced and a mains wired heat detector fitted in the kitchen. Given it's a bedsit that's entirely adequate. And happily the new smoke detector doesn't go off every time I have a fry up.

This kind of work is generally done as part of another contract, or hopefully, when a flat becomes empty. As the word 'most' in her letter implies this still leaves scope for lots of gaps in provision.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> I don't want to jump to conclusions yet. There are many older tower blocks in London with no sprinkler system as standard. The Barbican development for example. Which is private.
> 
> A fair amount of money was spent cladding this tower block. It's about making them more insulated. Many Council blocks have this.
> 
> ...


 On the underlined bit, I think it's just too soon to tell. It's not just the issue of why the cladding was put up, which cladding was used, or even the chains of management, sub management, contractors and sub contractors - how poor people are treated by neo-liberalism. It's also the things the residents have been complaining about for years.  And the residents anger carries on, taken further by the way they've been treated since the fire.  I'll put it this way, I'll be very surprised if the story of this horrendous fire resolves itself down to something solely and specifically technical and (social) context free.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 16, 2017)

I take that letter to mean that some have the _latest_ fire rated doors, not that some have no fire rating on their doors at all. I thought there was an obligation to retrofit to a certain standard. It would be worth finding out rather than guessing though.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 16, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> I really hope this tragedy won't be used to " regenerate" the remaining blocks. Replace them with the mockery of what passes as affordable housing in London. Ending up with social cleansing several years down the line.
> 
> There needs to be commitment to rehouse everyone locally in housing at social rent not the "affordable" bollox.


Hopefully this will result in a wider debate around regeneration and social housing.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 16, 2017)

I was chatting to someone today who lives in the area. He says there is complete divide between rich and poor. This tragedy has brought it out in open.

Listening to news and protest at Council was very angry.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 16, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> I was chatting to someone today who lives in the area. He says there is complete divide between rich and poor. This tragedy has brought it out in open.
> 
> Listening to news and protest at Council was very angry.



I think Classwar have been making the point for quite some time now.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 16, 2017)

Apologies if we've had this, but a Grenfell Action Group blogger was threatened by council solicitors for the blog (on safety issues):
Kensington and Chelsea Council threatened Grenfell Tower blogger with legal action after he brought up fire safety

Paget-Brown's obligatory knighthood must be receding.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 16, 2017)

mauvais said:


> I take that letter to mean that some have the _latest_ fire rated doors, not that some have no fire rating on their doors at all. I thought there was an obligation to retrofit to a certain standard. It would be worth finding out rather than guessing though.


I have a distinct impression of seeing very old and very clearly unrated front doors on properties fairly recently elsewhere on the estate although obviously it's impossible to judge whether or not these are leaseheld properties purchased a long time ago. Earlier this week I was informed of the detail of the next major works contract we will be 'enjoying', and amongst the things I wasn't actually 'consulted' about before it was let is a new front door. As with smoke and heat alarms this is the kind of thing that gets added on when something else is being done - in our case concrete repairs. So again, enormous scope for gaps in provision where there isn't a contract to link it to.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 16, 2017)

One of the most appealing traits of our useless robot leader is her ability to start to grin when she says something she seems to think is monumentally profound. "one of the things is to make sure the money goes where it's needed" Well fuck!


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 16, 2017)

On the right there's a curious and instructive dynamic of more anger at the anger than at scores of people dying horribly. They really seem to think we should put up with it. We have a responsibility to see that it ain't so.


----------



## harpo (Jun 16, 2017)

I work in mental health in Kensington.  The repercussions of this are wider than anyone can imagine.

If anyone has practical or counselling skills or anything at all to give in terms of time, please email ASC.comms@lbhf.gov.uk

It's the address we've been given.  They are looking for shifts tomorrow.  There will be other places and it'd be good if people post them.

Please include your mobile no. if emailing.


----------



## bimble (Jun 16, 2017)

Will write some stuff tomorrow but what I got from going to the demo today which ended at the base of grenfell tower is massive respect for my fellow Londoners, there was a lot of wisdom there in with the rage. I've never felt anything like the atmosphere at the memorial wall.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> I don't want to jump to conclusions yet. There are many older tower blocks in London with no sprinkler system as standard. The Barbican development for example. Which is private.
> 
> A fair amount of money was spent cladding this tower block. It's about making them more insulated. Many Council blocks have this.
> 
> ...


Also shown aod may up


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 16, 2017)

Humberto said:


> Read that someone called Peter Jukes on twitter says that S*n journos have been pretending to be injured victims to gain access to the injured in a hospital. They never learn.



Jukes is a good journo.  He co-wrote a decent overview of the Daniel Morgan murder with the deceased's brother.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

harpo said:


> I work in mental health in Kensington.  The repercussions of this are wider than anyone can imagine.
> 
> If anyone has practical or counselling skills or anything at all to give in terms of time, please email ASC.comms@lbhf.gov.uk
> 
> ...


(((harpo))) best wishes and strength


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 16, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> If you don't improve the housing we're living in for your cash gains, we ain't paying the rent, so get to fuck. A collective action that I dream about & that's long overdue. Sadly the residents of Grenfell won't be here to fight for that, but we are!



We know from the anti-Poll Tax movement that local authorities get easily overwhelmed when people stop paying, and rent strikes would make much more of a dent than withholding the Poll Tax ever did.  Every Magistrates' Court in the land would be snowed under with council-issued summonses.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 16, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Jukes knows a lot about that murky world of The Sun and News Of The World - he did that Byline podcast about the Daniel Morgan murder and implicated many NoW journos, right up to Rebekah Brookes, in their dealings with Jonathan Rees and his lowlife chums.



Did a good book, too.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 16, 2017)

handy1 said:


> Amazing it has not fell in on its own footprint.



Concrete core poured around steel girders to which each steel-reinforced concrete floor is mounted.  The external and internal walls of the flats are probably fucked, but the basic structure is hanging on because the loading is through the strongest components of the surviving building*.

*This is according to a civil engineer mate, who reckons Grenfell House still standing is actually a good argument for safety-refurbing such blocks properly, and getting another 50 years of liveable housing use out of them, *IF* local authorities and other landlords maintain them properly.


----------



## ferrelhadley (Jun 16, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> *This is according to a civil engineer mate, who reckons Grenfell House still standing is actually a good argument for safety-refurbing such blocks properly, and getting another 50 years of liveable housing use out of them, *IF* local authorities and other landlords maintain them properly.


The architect had written something about it over a year ago and had Ronan Point very firmly in mind and built a building that would not collapse except at the most extreme case.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 16, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> 'ouhv/;iyhv/ihycv/iyhcv /'iyhv'jv'o/uhv 'ijhkb hgvtesca yrweashtrvjyrfbtluih;mo'poipmoumoij'omij[nihih[io;jh;noih;oijnm;iojm;oij;miojmn[moinj[



Why have you summoned the Great Old One Nyarlathotep, sister-brother to Cthulhu, Surfer in the Starry Chaos, mortal?


----------



## harpo (Jun 16, 2017)

I've been in Portobello today and it's heartbreaking how many 'missing' posters are in every window.  They only went up the day before yesterday.  It's fucking unreal.  And yet that SHITTY building took 15 minutes to kill hundreds.  People NEED to be angry,


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 16, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Why have you summoned the Great Old One Nyarlathotep, sister-brother to Cthulhu, Surfer in the Starry Chaos, mortal?


Someone had to deal with Covfefe.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jun 16, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Why have you summoned the Great Old One Nyarlathotep, sister-brother to Cthulhu, Surfer in the Starry Chaos, mortal?



It's a really, really gnarly regular expression that is searching for "covfefe"

Edit: FFS simul-covfefe


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 16, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> We know from the anti-Poll Tax movement that local authorities get easily overwhelmed when people stop paying, and rent strikes would make much more of a dent than withholding the Poll Tax ever did.  Every Magistrates' Court in the land would be snowed under with council-issued summonses.


Absolutely, particularly since they haven't 'streamlined' the legal processes for recovering rent in the way they did for Council Tax.

However one thing that has changed since poll tax days - which affected all residents - is the extent and knock on effects of Right to Buy. The block I live on isn't anything like as desirable as some others, near the river say, but whereas tenants were a majority when I moved in today we are a minority. And among the leaseheld flats the distinctions between owner-occupied, sub-tenanted, sub-sub-tenanted and now airbnb style arrangements has further fractured what community there is, and to some extent what common interests there are. We twice voted down attempts to transfer us to other social landlords. I have to wonder what would happen if they revise the balloting rules (for example to address the 'democratic deficit' that leaseholders don't have a vote) and try again in the future. It's not an ideal basis from which to organize a rent strike.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 16, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> Absolutely, particularly since they haven't 'streamlined' the legal processes for recovering rent in the way they did for Council Tax.



Streamlined is right. Couple of years back I managed to get taken to court, convicted in my absence of non payment of council tax and fined accordingly before I'd even had time to miss a fucking payment in the first place.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Streamlined is right. Couple of years back I managed to get taken to court, convicted in my absence of non payment of council tax and fined accordingly before I'd even had time to miss a fucking payment in the first place.


Yeh but you'd *thought* about it


----------



## Fingers (Jun 16, 2017)

One would think that Jeremy Corbyn is running the country at the moment...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 16, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> The systemic problems that led to the tragedy are one thing, but the way the responses have been bungled is astonishing. Just across the board.
> 
> How have they continued to fuck up so badly, every step of the way?! May's 'visit', the lack of involvement from the council... fucking bemusing



There's a perception - rife among large corporates and public bodies - that issues such as disasters can be "managed".  It generally means the passing of responsibility from party to party ever more rapidly.  The fuck-ups are a direct result of this.


----------



## ferrelhadley (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 16, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> right at the end, ceaucescu flailingly announced  massive increases in wages as the crowd got restless. Then fucked off in a helicopter.
> 
> 
> This is mays ceaucescu moment



May's Ceaucescu moment will be when she and her hubby are dragged from their car, put up against a wall, and shot.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 16, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Streamlined is right. Couple of years back I managed to get taken to court, convicted in my absence of non payment of council tax and fined accordingly before I'd even had time to miss a fucking payment in the first place.




All the funnier because of all those councillors who've "forgotten" to pay council tax Private Eye has been digging up the last few months.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 16, 2017)

An interesting collection of front covers for tomorrow. Astonishingly the _Sun's_ one is not wholly offensive.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 17, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> An interesting collection of front covers for tomorrow. Astonishingly the _Sun's_ one is not wholly offensive.


Murdoch (Sun and Times) has turned on May post-election I think...that thing about him storming out on hearing the exit poll has been verified from other sources since it was first tweeted about


----------



## Ptolemy (Jun 17, 2017)

The Telegraph's headline is typical right-wing smearing though... no surprises there!


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 17, 2017)

Xmas day '89 IIRC ViolentPanda .

Its a long wait until Xmas 2017


----------



## eoin_k (Jun 17, 2017)

I'm just back from a demo in Westminster and then catching up with people around Latimer Road. A lot of pain and anger on display and rightly so. They can't get away with this.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jun 17, 2017)

It can be difficult to see the electoral register. There used to be one in every post office, but that no longer seems to be the case.

I tried to look at one in the public library in my home town last year, but they no longer keep one, the excuse being that it is constantly being updated / financial reasons. I was sent to the Town Hall reception, where I was asked exactly I wanted to see, and shown just that. I meant to mention it on here, can't remember if I did.

They used to keep a copy in Kensington library on Hornton Street. I might drop by and see if it is still available, or if you have to lodge a formal request to see it. RBKC is always sending letters asking for updates on who lives where, and although the ER will list only adults who are registered to vote, it might give some idea of who is missing in the area, although as harpo says, a walk down Portobello shows that.


----------



## ferrelhadley (Jun 17, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> View attachment 109526


The cold politics is had May gone down early on Wednesday and the residents been angry at her she could have turned that into a plus for herself.
"I am head of government and this government has let these people down at some point. Their anger is entirely justified and I am hear to listen to that anger and accept it with humility thus I having listened I am ordering blah blah blah..."
I think she is mentally shot, her political judgement is gone. And the tory press are getting the same smell. Few in the press are taking the hit for her anymore. Going through the motions until she can announce a new leadership election at conference.


----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 17, 2017)

I would recommend not looking at teh front page of the Telegraph if you want to maintain low blood pressure levels


----------



## sealion (Jun 17, 2017)




----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 17, 2017)

I have been truly heartened by the demands being made by people of the council and the government, and the unwillingness to have any shit:
*
WE WANT A PROPER INVESTIGATION INTO WHAT HAPPENED!*
_Sure, one ‘public inquiry’ special coming up..._
*OH NO, WE KNOW THAT OLD TRICK - GIVE US INQUESTS!*
_Well, I don't think inquests are..._
*INQUESTS! INQUESTS NOT PUBLIC INQUIRY!*
_But...
*DO I STUTTER? INQUESTS! *
But..._
*YOU SURE SEEM TO! INQUESTS!*
_Uh, I guess we can look into it..._
*AND REHOUSE THE PEOPLE!*
_Oh shit, ah..._
*REHOUSE THE PEOPLE!*
_Erm, okay, we'll try..._
*NOT GOOD ENOUGH! REHOUSE THEM ALL NOW!*
_Okay, okay - within three weeks..._
*YOU BETTER MAKE SURE THEY GET TO STAY IN THE BOROUGH!*
_But...But..._
*INSIDE.THE.BOROUGH!*
_Maybe... Alright, we'll try for inside the borough, but definitely no further than a neighbouring borough..._
*AND DON'T CHARGE THEM FOR REPLACING THEIR VITAL DOCUMENTS*
_Bu-_
*NOTHING! YOU CHARGE THEM NOTHING!*


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 17, 2017)

gawkrodger said:


> I would recommend not looking at teh front page of the Telegraph if you want to maintain low blood pressure levels



Thankfully, nobody reads the Telegraph any more.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 17, 2017)

Just heading home, pub after protest. Where was the Telegraph picture from? Only ruckus I saw was some right wing bloke starting. Anyway, decent turnout for the timing. Too much 'oh Jeremy Corbyn' and sound systems. Not the time for either. Lots of anger too, not seen such a raw reaction on a protest in years.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 17, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Thankfully, nobody reads the Telegraph any more.


What's that? Sixteen runs needed off the last two overs? Really?


----------



## newbie (Jun 17, 2017)

somewhat different focus in the way they present it online


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 17, 2017)

YouSir said:


> Where was the Telegraph picture from?



It's a shit photo. Anything could be happening there.


----------



## tim (Jun 17, 2017)

UrbaneFox said:


> It can be difficult to see the electoral register. There used to be one in every post office, but that no longer seems to be the case.
> 
> I tried to look at one in the public library in my home town last year, but they no longer keep one, the excuse being that it is constantly being updated / financial reasons. I was sent to the Town Hall reception, where I was asked exactly I wanted to see, and shown just that. I meant to mention it on here, can't remember if I did.
> 
> They used to keep a copy in Kensington library on Hornton Street. I might drop by and see if it is still available, or if you have to lodge a formal request to see it. RBKC is always sending letters asking for updates on who lives where, and although the ER will list only adults who are registered to vote, it might give some idea of who is missing in the area, although as harpo says, a walk down Portobello shows that.



Don't most people opt out of being on the public register, these days?


----------



## ska invita (Jun 17, 2017)

re Telegprah front page, can anyone find the "corbyn backers spread fake news about blaze toll!" piece online? I cant seem to...


----------



## YouSir (Jun 17, 2017)

True, far be it from me to put complete bullshit beyond them.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 17, 2017)

ska invita said:


> re Telegprah front page, can anyone find the "corbyn backers spread fake news about blaze toll!" piece online? I cant seem to...


There's some shite I can't be bothered to read at Guido Fawkes.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jun 17, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's a shit photo. Anything could be happening there.


They've chosen one that looks a bit like Jeremy Corbyn.


----------



## albionism (Jun 17, 2017)




----------



## UrbaneFox (Jun 17, 2017)

tim said:


> Don't most people opt out of being on the public register, these days?


I didn't know that you could.


----------



## newbie (Jun 17, 2017)

ska invita said:


> re Telegprah front page, can anyone find the "corbyn backers spread fake news about blaze toll!" piece online? I cant seem to...


Corbyn supporters spread 'fake news' about Grenfell Tower death toll


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 17, 2017)

Katrina May is an abandoned hulk, drifting aimlessly,no direction. She needs be be scuppered


----------



## ska invita (Jun 17, 2017)

newbie said:


> Corbyn supporters spread 'fake news' about Grenfell Tower death toll


cheers...not sure why it wasnt coming up for me

theyve really milked some crap off squakbox 
squakbox posts shit is hardly front page news!


----------



## tim (Jun 17, 2017)

UrbaneFox said:


> I didn't know that you could.



There's a fairly prominent opt out box you can tick when you register
 I ticked it so I assume anyone who doesn't want junk mail does too.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

newbie said:


> Corbyn supporters spread 'fake news' about Grenfell Tower death toll


This is fucking desperate shite.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 17, 2017)

teqniq said:


> This is fucking desperate shite.



What's behind the story? If anything? Won't click a Telegraph link until the story's about one of their journos dangling from a lamp post.


----------



## newbie (Jun 17, 2017)

ska invita said:


> cheers...not sure why it wasnt coming up for me
> 
> theyve really milked some crap off squakbox
> squakbox posts shit is hardly front page news!


I searched on the authors name, ie had to know it was there.  Which is what i meant about the online presentation being so different from the paper.  Different audience, much more likely to call bullshit.


----------



## newbie (Jun 17, 2017)

YouSir said:


> What's behind the story? If anything? Won't click a Telegraph link until the story's about one of their journos dangling from a lamp post.


no idea, it's useless clickbait propaganda, you have to pay to read it. Skwawkbox is mentioned as ska invita  said


----------



## Fingers (Jun 17, 2017)

They have gone peak daily mail. Panic has set in at telegraph Towers

Mustafa Almansur: Who is the organiser of the Grenfell Tower protest movement?


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

YouSir said:


> What's behind the story? If anything? Won't click a Telegraph link until the story's about one of their journos dangling from a lamp post.


here is a sample




			
				Torygraph said:
			
		

> Tension among residents was ramped up by suggestions that the Government had gagged the media in an attempt to manage public anger about the inferno.
> 
> The claims - all of them completely false - were spread by far-left supporters of Jeremy Corbyn including pop stars and socialist blogs.
> 
> They could now be examined by MPs as part of an ongoing parliamentary inquiry into “fake news”....


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 17, 2017)

UrbaneFox said:


> It can be difficult to see the electoral register. There used to be one in every post office, but that no longer seems to be the case.
> 
> I tried to look at one in the public library in my home town last year, but they no longer keep one, the excuse being that it is constantly being updated / financial reasons. I was sent to the Town Hall reception, where I was asked exactly I wanted to see, and shown just that. I meant to mention it on here, can't remember if I did.
> 
> They used to keep a copy in Kensington library on Hornton Street. I might drop by and see if it is still available, or if you have to lodge a formal request to see it. RBKC is always sending letters asking for updates on who lives where, and although the ER will list only adults who are registered to vote, it might give some idea of who is missing in the area, although as harpo says, a walk down Portobello shows that.


Suspect that is related to the data protection act and safeguarding individual personal information.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

newbie said:


> no idea, it's useless clickbait propaganda, you have to pay to read it. Skwawkbox is mentioned as ska invita  said


You don't have to pay, at least I don't.


----------



## newbie (Jun 17, 2017)

teqniq said:


> You don't have to pay, at least I don't.


how so?


----------



## sunnysidedown (Jun 17, 2017)

newbie said:


> no idea, it's useless clickbait propaganda, you have to pay to read it. Skwawkbox is mentioned as ska invita  said



I think their target was Aaron Bastani who tweeted the original story and backed it up in a following tweet.
The lad needs to better check his sources as it looks like they/he were fed a slippery fish.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

newbie said:


> how so?


I dunno I just clicked on the link and it takes me straight to the piece. i don't seem to have any problems accessing Torygraph stuff even though it's supposed to be pay to view.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 17, 2017)

teqniq said:


> I dunno I just clicked on the link and it takes me straight to the piece. i don't seem to have ant problems accessing Torygraph stuff even though it's supposed to be pay to view.


You only have to pay for the Premium articles:



> a world of specially curated, subscriber-only content and exclusive experiences



Introducing Telegraph Premium


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 17, 2017)

Just wanted to say, outside of the shit circs, this thread has imo been urban at its best. Thanks.


----------



## mather (Jun 17, 2017)

A few hours ago me and one of my neighbours went to the local Methodist church by Grenfell Tower where people had set up a makeshift memorial with cards, flowers and candles outside the church. Even at 11 in the evening there were still people there, some signing, some crying and others just quietly remembering those who were lost in this horrible (and preventable) tragedy. One thing I noticed when looking at all the cards and the missing posters for people who have yet to be found or confirmed dead is the number of children and babies, not to mention whole families stretching across three generations who all perished. It was heartbreaking to know that most were probably dead and that among the survivors are people who still don't know for sure whether their relatives and loved ones are alive or not.


----------



## Peter Dow (Jun 17, 2017)

I recommend that the government or the people's representatives should hire this expert witness / investigator for their public inquiry into the Grenfell Tower fire.

Martin Edwards, Associate Director, Probyn Miers
Author of

‘Fire Risks From External Cladding Panels – A Perspective From The UK’, February 2016, ‘Perspective’ Journal.
Probyn Miers has a twitter with some tweets about the Grenfell Tower fire.

My take on the subject would be that it is wiser to invest in sprinklers for high rise living than in exterior insulation and cladding. Better that your flat is little bit cold and you have to turn the heating up than to be at risk of fire because cowboy contractors have turned the previously fire-proof concrete exterior of the tower into a bonfire waiting to be lit.


----------



## NoXion (Jun 17, 2017)

Peter Dow said:


> I recommend that the government or the people's representatives should hire this expert witness / investigator for their public inquiry into the Grenfell Tower fire.
> 
> Martin Edwards, Associate Director, Probyn Miers
> Author of
> ...



Focusing on the cladding is a mistake. While it seems highly plausible that the choice of cladding contributed to the problem, it's just one of many symptoms of a wider culture of callous indifference, penny-pinching and corner-cutting in which culpability is shared by various levels of government, private contractors and those weird public-private hybrid organisations gifted to us by neoliberalism.


----------



## pogofish (Jun 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Fucking angel of death that woman



Time to bring these up to date:


----------



## Peter Dow (Jun 17, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Focusing on the cladding is a mistake. While it seems highly plausible that the choice of cladding contributed to the problem, it's just one of many symptoms of a wider culture of callous indifference, penny-pinching and corner-cutting


It was intended to be a refurbishment, making the houses easier to keep warm in winter, cool in summer.

It seems the cowboy contractors turned the walls into all-around 5cm wide chimneys, with flammable insulation for a ready-to-burn mother of all chimney fires.

Grenfell Tower Regeneration Project SUSTAINABILITY AND ENERGY STATEMENT PLANNING APPLICATION

It costs money to stick expensive "kindling" on the outside of a tower.

A true "penny pincher" wouldn't have spent anything on insulation and rain-screen cladding. A real penny-pincher would have left the tower in 1970s trim.

With hindsight, doing nothing would have been safer.

But if you were going to do something, then I might suggest good fire alarms, security, evacuation aids such as emergency lighting, an additional fire-escape route and of course sprinklers would be good choices but don't take my word for it. Ask an expert.



NoXion said:


> in which culpability is shared by various levels of government, private contractors and those weird public-private hybrid organisations gifted to us by neoliberalism.


Yes they are all culpable for the *way* they spent the limited money that was available, on the particular refurbishment project that they approved. What money they spent was spent foolishly, recklessly and I would say criminally.

I support David Lammy MP's call for arrests on corporate manslaughter charges. What's the interesting political question is how far up the levels of government should such charges be laid?


----------



## NoXion (Jun 17, 2017)

Peter Dow said:


> It was intended to be a refurbishment, making the houses easier to keep warm in winter, cool in summer.
> 
> It seems the cowboy contractors turned the walls into all-around 5cm wide chimneys, with flammable insulation for an ready-to-burn mother of all chimney fires.
> 
> ...



You appear to be assuming that improving insulation was the primary motivating factor rather than being a variety of justifiable excuse. The fact that the tower was in view of nearby posh flats is worth considering in this case. If that means that some favoured company gets a juicy contract into the bargain, then so much the better. The pennies are pinched for us, not them.



> Yes they are all culpable for the *way* they spent the limited money that was available, on the particular refurbishment project that they approved. What money they spent was spent foolishly, recklessly and I would say criminally.
> 
> I support David Lammy MP's call for arrests on corporate manslaughter charges. What's the interesting political question is how far up the levels of government should such charges be laid?



Straight to the top, if you ask me.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jun 17, 2017)

I'm struggling after seeing a guy on the news saying he made noise to wake people up but then couldn't be rescued. He feels guilty that they then knew their fate. This is so fucked up. He tried to give them a chance to escape if there had have been an escape!. He's got to be fucked up for the rest of his life because the people he tried to save lost their life aware of their fate.


----------



## Celyn (Jun 17, 2017)

O god, that's horrible for him.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jun 17, 2017)

That's one person who is fucked up forever. How many are going to be tortured by this? I can't begin to imagine. I have no words right now that can comprehend this fucking neglect of people trying to live their lives under this austerity and cunting awful government.


----------



## phillm (Jun 17, 2017)

Fingers said:


> They have gone peak daily mail. Panic has set in at telegraph Towers
> 
> Mustafa Almansur: Who is the organiser of the Grenfell Tower protest movement?



From grazing the main articles on the Mail today - they seem to realise that May must go -  and quick - with the headline *Maybot Malfunction* and other equally unflattering stories.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 17, 2017)

Fingers said:


> They have gone peak daily mail. Panic has set in at telegraph Towers
> 
> Mustafa Almansur: Who is the organiser of the Grenfell Tower protest movement?



This is pretty positive, not daily heil at all.

Alex


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 17, 2017)

Wanker Labour Councillor on BBC1 saying that while anger was understandable - and council/government response poor, the protests included people "from outside the community" (he's never heard of solidarity then) and the "attack" on the Town Hall prevented kids being counselled, schools being redeployed, and work done on housing people.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

crossthebreeze said:


> Wanker Labour Councillor on BBC1 saying that while anger was understandable - and council/government response poor, the protests included people "from outside the community" (he's never heard of solidarity then) and the "attack" on the Town Hall prevented kids being counselled, schools being redeployed, and work done on housing people.


#theyreallinittogether


----------



## flypanam (Jun 17, 2017)

That is Labour's role, to control the anger, control the protests, to ensure that things don't get out of control. I hope the residents don't let them.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 17, 2017)

flypanam said:


> That is Labour's role, to control the anger, control the protests, to ensure that things don't get out of control. I hope the residents don't let them.



The protests previously planned for today have been cancelled, why?


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

There was a lot of talk yesterday evening about people coming in to stir up trouble and turn people against each other and how that must not happen. A woman in hijab was saying that earlier she had seen a man shouting about Jesus saying that where do they think they're going to go the dead who didn't believe in Christ they're not going to heaven etc. She was saying she wouldn't be surprised if he was there to try to start a fight turn the community against eachother.  I saw another man with megaphone who was not local banging on about Allah, until the crowd turned against him and took his mike away gave it to someone else. There's a lot of paranoia maybe but also (my impression from what i heard) that people directly effected do not want this to descend into violence because that way the media and establishment will be able to turn it against the people, that what they want is solidarity and justice not violence.
there was a moment when things seemed about to kick off outside a nearby block when the protest was gathered there and the police started rushing forward - the crowd started shouting Peace Peace Peace, and things calmed down again.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

tim said:


> Don't most people opt out of being on the public register, these days?


No


----------



## phillm (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> There was a lot of talk yesterday evening about people coming in to stir up trouble and turn people against each other and how that must not happen. A woman in hijab was saying that earlier she had seen a man shouting about Jesus saying that where do they think they're going to go the dead who didn't believe in Christ they're not going to heaven etc. She was saying she wouldn't be surprised if he was there to try to start a fight turn the community against eachother.  I saw another man with megaphone who was not local banging on about Allah, until the crowd turned against him and took his mike away gave it to someone else. There's a lot of paranoia maybe but also (my impression from what i heard) that people directly effected do not want this to descend into violence because that way the media and establishment will be able to turn it against the people, that what they want is solidarity and justice not violence.
> there was a moment when things seemed about to kick off outside a nearby block when the protest was gathered there and the police started rushing forward - the crowd started shouting Peace Peace Peace, and things calmed down again.



Great to hear that - a riot will help no-one at the moment. If I lived there the last thing I would want is the place to be trashed further.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

Now apparently they are attempting to renege on an earlier commitment to house everybody made homeless locally

Corbyn calls Government response to Grenfell disaster an 'unacceptable failure'



> The Government has been accused of an “unacceptable” failure by Jeremy Corbyn after a promise made just 24 hours earlier to rehouse all Grenfell fire victims near their old homes began to crumble....


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Now apparently they are attempting to renege on an earlier commitment to house everybody made homeless locally
> 
> Corbyn calls Government response to Grenfell disaster an 'unacceptable failure'


Moving the riot clock towards midnight


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 17, 2017)

James O'Brien, the LBC liberal apologist, said this



Power concedes nothing jimmy


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> There was a lot of talk yesterday evening about people coming in to stir up trouble and turn people against each other and how that must not happen. A woman in hijab was saying that earlier she had seen a man shouting about Jesus saying that where do they think they're going to go the dead who didn't believe in Christ they're not going to heaven etc. She was saying she wouldn't be surprised if he was there to try to start a fight turn the community against eachother.  I saw another man with megaphone who was not local banging on about Allah, until the crowd turned against him and took his mike away gave it to someone else. There's a lot of paranoia maybe but also (my impression from what i heard) that people directly effected do not want this to descend into violence because that way the media and establishment will be able to turn it against the people, that what they want is solidarity and justice not violence.
> there was a moment when things seemed about to kick off outside a nearby block when the protest was gathered there and the police started rushing forward - the crowd started shouting Peace Peace Peace, and things calmed down again.


The media and government will turn things against 'the people' anyway


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Jun 17, 2017)

Cried my eyes out reading yesterday's paper...all the personal stories were so dreadful.
One about a young Italian couple both of whom phoned their parents from their flat as it began to fill with smoke. They knew they were going to die..smoke was coming in and they knew the fire escape was in flames...
 The young woman's last words to her mum were ..."thanks for everything you did for me"... the poor parents back in Italy heard no more after that. 

All of this nightmare is unbearable.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 17, 2017)

ferrelhadley said:


>



Victim blaming, quelle surprise


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 17, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> James O'Brien, the LBC liberal apologist, said this
> 
> 
> 
> Power concedes nothing jimmy




James O'Brien is such a self-important, moralising, liberal cunt, don't get why people rate him. He's no better than any of the right-wing wankers on LBC.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 17, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> James O'Brien is such a self-important, moralising, liberal cunt, don't get why people rate him. He's no better than any of the right-wing wankers on LBC.



If you're trying to push a right-wing narrative, having the likes of him as the 'left' flank for 'balance' and as a foil is a good way to do it.


----------



## flypanam (Jun 17, 2017)

J Ed said:


> The protests previously planned for today have been cancelled, why?


i guess exactly because there is a fear of violence. My point though is that that councillors intervention is divisive, it's saying that the protest is stopping the good work that the council could do. It's ultimate message is leave this to the experts. I think the residents should trust their own instincts and heed their own counsel and not be advised down a certain route. Look I'm not looking for a row on this thread. Not the place for it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

J Ed said:


> The protests previously planned for today have been cancelled, why?


Yeh. That'll calm things down. Moving the riot clock to midnight.


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

Someone filmed the moment where the crowd starts chanting peace to stop things boiling over with the police
Grenfell Protesters Chant 'Peace, Peace' As Scuffles Break Out - LBC


----------



## J Ed (Jun 17, 2017)

flypanam said:


> i guess exactly because there is a fear of violence. My point though is that that councillors intervention is divisive, it's saying that the protest is stopping the good work that the council could do. It's ultimate message is leave this to the experts. I think the residents should trust their own instincts and heed their own counsel and not be advised down a certain route. Look I'm not looking for a row on this thread. Not the place for it.



Wasn't trying to have a row. I agree with you.


----------



## phillm (Jun 17, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> James O'Brien is such a self-important, moralising, liberal cunt, don't get why people rate him. He's no better than any of the right-wing wankers on LBC.



so no room for him in the developing Popular Front then !


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 17, 2017)

INQUEST statement on Grenfell Tower Fire (they are recommending an independant judicial public inquiry not an inquest initially)


----------



## killer b (Jun 17, 2017)

This thread makes the point that one of the reasons the council's response is so poor is because they no longer have the resources or infrastructure for dealing with something like this - most services are stripped to the bone or hoved off to the private sector (anyone who has dealings with councils can confirm this is true).


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 17, 2017)

Some people may actually want to move out of the area, they may have family or friends somewhere else in London, or across the UK, but haven't been able to move for various reasons.

I think people should be allowed to decide where they want to be housed, and that should be done where ever it is in the UK.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 17, 2017)

killer b said:


> This thread makes the point that one of the reasons the council's response is so poor is because they no longer have the resources or infrastructure for dealing with something like this - most services are stripped to the bone or hoved off to the private sector (anyone who has dealings with councils can confirm this is true).



Pretty sure the Chief Executive isn't outsourced, and knows how to use a telephone and access the council's £150million+ reserve fund.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Some people may actually want to move out of the area, they may have family or friends somewhere else in London, or across the UK, but haven't been able to move for various reasons.
> 
> I think people should be allowed to decide where they want to be housed, and that should be done where ever it is in the UK.


They shouldn't be made to decide tho. they should be allowed to decide to be rehoused together not forcibly dispersed now


----------



## Red Cat (Jun 17, 2017)

killer b said:


> This thread makes the point that one of the reasons the council's response is so poor is because they no longer have the resources or infrastructure for dealing with something like this - most services are stripped to the bone or hoved off to the private sector (anyone who has dealings with councils can confirm this is true).



I have a very strong memory of a chat with the head of my girls' school years ago now, when I criticised the school's use of a third sector org, in which he said very bluntly there is no local authority (in Brum), the local authority has been destroyed. That's the case everywhere, the infrastructure, the resources, aswell as the experience and knowledge.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> They shouldn't be made to decide tho. they should be allowed to decide to be rehoused together not forcibly dispersed now



Totally agree. I just think after what they have suffered they should have a total free choice of where they want to be re-housed.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 17, 2017)

I have no words to express my horror and sorrow, it is beyond dreadful. Any other blocks with this type of cladding must be identified and sorted.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 17, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Some people may actually want to move out of the area, they may have family or friends somewhere else in London, or across the UK, but haven't been able to move for various reasons.
> 
> I think people should be allowed to decide where they want to be housed, and that should be done where ever it is in the UK.



Against the backdrop of aggressive social cleansing and 'displacement', this isn't very helpful. We know from whats happening in London that a majority of working class people living in social housing want to stay where their friends, families and communities are, and not be shipped around like cargo to other parts of the UK because they're considered as being no longer 'financially viable' in one of the richest capitals in the World.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 17, 2017)

When I read the responses from the authorities I'm reminded of an old song in which the chorus is "It's the poor what gets the blame, It's the rich what gets the pleasure, Ain't it all a bloomin' shame?" I keep hearing this attitude from the various government officials. I keep hearing victim blaming either directly or indirectly. Every time I think they can't make more angry someone finds a way.


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 17, 2017)

killer b said:


> This thread makes the point that one of the reasons the council's response is so poor is because they no longer have the resources or infrastructure for dealing with something like this - most services are stripped to the bone or hoved off to the private sector (anyone who has dealings with councils can confirm this is true).


I take the point that because neoliberalism councils no longer have direct control over lots of services which they "provide".  But there's a lot of rubbish in that thread.  He says that local government didn't have a major incident plan - they do (I know someone involved in major incident planning for my local council) and Kensington & Chelsea Council should have had one that works.  K&C council is one of the richest councils in the country and all councils have some sort of reserves.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 17, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> I have a distinct impression of seeing very old and very clearly unrated front doors on properties fairly recently elsewhere on the estate although obviously it's impossible to judge whether or not these are leaseheld properties purchased a long time ago. Earlier this week I was informed of the detail of the next major works contract we will be 'enjoying', and amongst the things I wasn't actually 'consulted' about before it was let is a new front door. As with smoke and heat alarms this is the kind of thing that gets added on when something else is being done - in our case concrete repairs. So again, enormous scope for gaps in provision where there isn't a contract to link it to.


Leaseholders have an obligation too, and the management company should be responsible for checking that they're in compliance. There's a thread about just that on here somewhere, a management company demanding the OP replace their door. Obviously there's a big difference in requirements when somewhere is either in a contained communal space or itself multiply occupied. Certainly a communally-situated front door of a flat, where the fire strategy is all about containment, should be regularly inspected (6 months I think) and kept up to code, on schedule, regardless of other works and regardless of ownership. Otherwise the whole model fails.


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Against the backdrop of aggressive social cleansing and 'displacement', this isn't very helpful. We know from whats happening in London that a majority of working class people living in social housing want to stay where their friends, families and communities are, and not be shipped around like cargo to other parts of the UK because they're considered as being no longer 'financially viable' in one of the richest capitals in the World.


Yes. Heard people yesterday talking a_ lot_ about social cleansing and about the mixed messages on whether survivors will be housed locally. That area might be the starkest example of the inequality in London, few minutes walk from the broad leafy streets of perfectly manicured white Victorian mansions, the occasional boutique chocolaterie.


----------



## phillm (Jun 17, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Victim blaming, quelle surprise



here's the cunt on foodbanks - cunt is used freely here for all sorts of abuse but I feel totally justified in using it in this instance. 

Food banks are a fine and noble thing

Nicholas Paget-Brown  | LinkedIn


----------



## killer b (Jun 17, 2017)

crossthebreeze said:


> I take the point that because neoliberalism councils no longer have direct control over lots of services which they "provide".  But there's a lot of rubbish in that thread.  He says that local government didn't have a major incident plan - they do (I know someone involved in major incident planning for my local council) and Kensington & Chelsea Council should have had one that works.  K&C council is one of the richest councils in the country and all councils have some sort of reserves.


They were supposed to have allsorts of fire safety measures that prevent tower blocks burning to the ground too.

I'm not saying they are entirely free of responsibility: but focusing on the council when we all know this could have happened at almost any council in the country lets the biggest culprits off the hook.


----------



## killer b (Jun 17, 2017)

Red Cat said:


> I have a very strong memory of a chat with the head of my girls' school years ago now, when I criticised the school's use of a third sector org, in which he said very bluntly there is no local authority (in Brum), the local authority has been destroyed. That's the case everywhere, the infrastructure, the resources, aswell as the experience and knowledge.


It's especially fierce in education because of academisation.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 17, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Against the backdrop of aggressive social cleansing and 'displacement', this isn't very helpful. We know from whats happening in London that a majority of working class people living in social housing want to stay where their friends, families and communities are, and not be shipped around like cargo to other parts of the UK because they're considered as being no longer 'financially viable' in one of the richest capitals in the World.



Sure the majority will want to stay, but if you have a few that, let's say, have lost their loved one(s), don't have  much in the way of roots locally, has family in Manchester or Birmingham, or even somewhere posh like Royal fucking Tunbridge Wells, and they fancy a new start - they should be given it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Sure the majority will want to stay, but if you have a few that, let's say, have lost their loved one(s), don't have  much in the way of roots locally, has family in Manchester or Birmingham, or even somewhere posh like Royal fucking Tunbridge Wells, and they fancy a new start - they should be given it.


Is there a precedent for your proposal?


----------



## eoin_k (Jun 17, 2017)

alex_ said:


> This is pretty positive, not daily heil at all.
> 
> Alex


Aside from all the other reasons for reporting this story sensitively, it's not often that the Daily Mail faces the dilemma of whether or not to misreport events in a working-class community that lives close enough to visit their offices.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Is there a precedent for your proposal?



I doubt it, as this is a unique situation, and everything should be done to help the victims.

Surely posters don't want to force people to be re-housed in K&C, if they wish to move away to somewhere where they will feel better, and recover quicker?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

killer b said:


> They were supposed to have allsorts of fire safety measures that prevent tower blocks burning to the ground too.
> 
> I'm not saying they are entirely free of responsibility: but focusing on the council when we all know this could have happened at almost any council in the country lets the biggest culprits off the hook.


Do you say this about many other landlords?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> I doubt it, as this is a unique situation, and everything should be done to help the victims.
> 
> Surely posters don't want to force people to be re-housed in K&C, if they wish to move away to somewhere where they will feel better, and recover quicker?


It's not unique

The victims are beyond assistance


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 17, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> I doubt it, as this is a unique situation, and everything should be done to help the victims.
> 
> Surely posters don't want to force people to be re-housed in K&C, if they wish to move away to somewhere where they will feel better, and recover quicker?



As nobody has been making that argument, no.

But you've very naive if you think that people will be rehoused out of area because of 'choice'. This stuff doesn't exist in a vacuum amongst wider political and economic machinations against social housing.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 17, 2017)

On point series of tweets.


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

Heard so many things yesterday that might or might not be true. There was one man was shouting where were the tall ladders where was the water, saying the rescue response was woefully inadequate. The young man who was in that video clip that went everywhere on Wednesday was there, he said that some journalists car was parked whilst the fire was still blazing so that it obstructed the access to fire engines. A woman said the stairwell was full of bodies, children and adults. Huge numbers were talked of, a lot of people definitely convinced there's a conspiracy to suppress the known numbers of dead. Rumours of undercover police and EDL members trying to undermine the solidarity of the community and the protests. The longer there's no answers the rumours will spiral filling the gaps.


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 17, 2017)

From BLMUK facebook:


> Some residents who have been given temporary accommodation are being told they are going been kicked out/moved out soon.( in days). Please pass on HJA Housing helpline – free housing advice for #GrenfellTowerFire survivors and residents in similar properties 0808 274 9308
> 
> Shelter has a London helpline offering free legal advice – it will be open all weekend: 0344 515 1540
> 
> ...


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> On point series of tweets.




yep. From Dm reporter who trawls through the mire of comments so you don't have to.


----------



## eoin_k (Jun 17, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> I doubt it, as this is a unique situation, and everything should be done to help the victims.
> 
> Surely posters don't want to force people to be re-housed in K&C, if they wish to move away to somewhere where they will feel better, and recover quicker?



Having transferred out of a Housing Association flat, literally, around the corner from Grenfell Tower a few years ago, I can say with some certainty that this is nonsense. People don't get stuck in Kensington; they cling on. If you have a tenancy there, it isn't hard to find someone willing to swap with to move elsewhere. We did it, as did my mother in law.

A locally led campaign has raised the demand that people should have the right to be rehoused in the Borough. This tragedy should not be allowed to perpetuate the social cleansing that led to it.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 17, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> I don't want to jump to conclusions yet. There are many older tower blocks in London with no sprinkler system as standard. The Barbican development for example. Which is private.
> 
> A fair amount of money was spent cladding this tower block. It's about making them more insulated. Many Council blocks have this.
> 
> ...


there isn't a requirement to update older buildings to new standards that's the thing, there's a bit of info on that in here(and requirements for alterations) it mainly provides a lot of info re the risk assessment side of things. Having a bit of experience in this(though in care homes and my own house as a childminder) the fire brigade involvement is probably a lot more minimal than people might expect. The RA is carried out by landlord or "responsible person" not necessarily(or often?) trained in fire safety and training can be just watching a video on it.  There's not much in place to make sure action plans are actually implemented AFAICS so this is going to come down the level of input from either party. For example our care home has a policy that non-ambulant people should be on bottom floor, but frustratingly this is pretty much never happening in practice. My risk assessment at home was just filling in a sheet and sending it in but then it's a very simple property. I might not have bought that fire blanket I told them I bought though, no checks. And yeah as Teaboy said I don't see a crossover between their end and ours. Won't say anymore as I have no experience from a landlords point of view though, though the guidelines here look much and such the same.

Fire safety in purpose-built flats

And on FB's level of involvement:

http://www.cfoa.org.uk/19532

Sorry if I digressed I was responding to a couple of other posts way upthread in my mind too


cupid_stunt said:


> I doubt it, as this is a unique situation, and everything should be done to help the victims.
> 
> Surely posters don't want to force people to be re-housed in K&C, if they wish to move away to somewhere where they will feel better, and recover quicker?


I guess it's a bit like this idea you can choose which hospital you want to go or even go private if you like, choice, yay! But people don't want or need that, they want the hospital near to home to be able to care for them properly. Hope that helps explain their point?


I think if someone wanted to move area they could actually just apply to the council themselves when they are ready anyway.


----------



## Cid (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> Heard so many things yesterday that might or might not be true. There was one man was shouting where were the tall ladders where was the water, saying the rescue response was woefully inadequate. The young man who was in that video clip that went everywhere on Wednesday was there, he said that some journalists car was parked whilst the fire was still blazing so that it obstructed the access to fire engines. A woman said the stairwell was full of bodies, children and adults. Huge numbers were talked of, a lot of people definitely convinced there's a conspiracy to suppress the known numbers of dead. Rumours of undercover police and EDL members trying to undermine the solidarity of the community and the protests. The longer there's no answers the rumours will spiral filling the gaps.



Conspiracy theories will undermine any cohesion and outward response more thoroughly than the EDL ever could.


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

Cid said:


> Conspiracy theories will undermine any cohesion and outward response more thoroughly than the EDL ever could.


I agree but its understandable in the vacuum of information and the shock and need for answers that aren't coming anytime soon. 
There were also i should say loud & clear voices saying that the most vital thing is that people don't get divided and don't get distracted into fighting each other.


----------



## marty21 (Jun 17, 2017)

It may be difficult to identify who was living in the block due to the mixture of tenures. The council will have the names of leaseholders and tenants but not necessarily all the household members.  Leaseholders may have sub-let their flats and not told the council (they are supposed to) . Tenants may have sub-let and not told the council as it is now a criminal offence and they would lose their tenancy, and they may not come clean now as they will be re-housed.


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> Heard so many things yesterday that might or might not be true. There was one man was shouting where were the tall ladders where was the water, saying the rescue response was woefully inadequate. The young man who was in that video clip that went everywhere on Wednesday was there, he said that some journalists car was parked whilst the fire was still blazing so that it obstructed the access to fire engines. A woman said the stairwell was full of bodies, children and adults. Huge numbers were talked of, a lot of people definitely convinced there's a conspiracy to suppress the known numbers of dead. Rumours of undercover police and EDL members trying to undermine the solidarity of the community and the protests. The longer there's no answers the rumours will spiral filling the gaps.


Yeah there's been videos circulating on social media of clearly distressed residents saying that they have "proof" the fire brigade didn't turn up until 4am, or that they think there were no survivors at all and there's a massive coverup.  It seems like Press TV and a few "alternative" news organisations are deliberately finding and interviewing people who have reached breaking point and become paranoid.


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 17, 2017)

marty21 said:


> It may be difficult to identify who was living in the block due to the mixture of tenures. The council will have the names of leaseholders and tenants but not necessarily all the household members.  Leaseholders may have sub-let their flats and not told the council (they are supposed to) . Tenants may have sub-let and not told the council as it is now a criminal offence and they would lose their tenancy, and they may not come clean now as they will be re-housed.


Yeah and - from the sounds of that BLMUK post I quoted here - at least some residents who can't prove their status in the flats have been told they will be kicked out of temporary accomadation soon and not rehoused


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> Heard so many things yesterday that might or might not be true. There was one man was shouting where were the tall ladders where was the water, saying the rescue response was woefully inadequate. The young man who was in that video clip that went everywhere on Wednesday was there, he said that some journalists car was parked whilst the fire was still blazing so that it obstructed the access to fire engines.



Although that's obviously jumbled in the aftermath, as well as being the result of people seeking answers where none are being given, it's not a conspiracy to note that access for emergency vehicles was woefully inadequate at Grenfell. It's one of the things raised as a concern in the Grenfell blog from a couple of years ago. And early reports in the media noted that although some 40 fire tenders turned up, only 2 were initially able to operate, probably due to this lack of access. Do we have to wait 3 years for the inquiry to say this before we can say it without being accused of being conspiracy theorists?

And just how hard is it for the council to provide a fairly accurate estimate of the numbers living in that tower block, something they are refusing to do? When you have a situation being mismanaged like that I don't think you can blame the people for inventing their own answers, even if those answers are inaccurate. The council was given a chance to quell the emotiveness with hard facts and they refused to take it.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jun 17, 2017)

"Sympathy Withdrawn - white proverb" .. what the fuck is that meant to mean? Is it meant to help? Or is it another rentagob using a massive tragedy as a springboard for attention. Wank.


----------



## marty21 (Jun 17, 2017)

crossthebreeze said:


> Yeah and - from the sounds of that BLMUK post I quoted here - at least some residents who can't prove their status in the flats have been told they will be kicked out of temporary accomadation soon and not rehoused


K&C are having nightmares enough without doing that ,I've a feeling that they will have to find a way to re-house all the households.  It doesn't have to be in council accommodation, it can be via private lets too.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 17, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> there isn't a requirement to update older buildings to new standards that's the thing, there's a bit of info on that in here(and requirements for alterations) it mainly provides a lot of info re the risk assessment side of things.


This may be true in part, but is far from universal. For example existing HMOs had a load of new requirements placed on them a few years back.


----------



## killer b (Jun 17, 2017)

crossthebreeze said:


> Yeah and - from the sounds of that BLMUK post I quoted here - at least some residents who can't prove their status in the flats have been told they will be kicked out of temporary accomadation soon and not rehoused


I was wondering what would happen to the people who were subletting unnofficially - which will be a decent number I expect. Grim.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 17, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> "Sympathy Withdrawn - white proverb" .. what the fuck is that meant to mean? Is it meant to help? Or is it another rentagob using a massive tragedy as a springboard for attention. Wank.


As with many of these, click on it and view the conversation - not much use on its own.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jun 17, 2017)

Sadly, that's how it'll get shared, rendering it poisonous.


----------



## BCBlues (Jun 17, 2017)

It's been horrific just thinking about all the emotions the victims went through and will have to endure.
When you even manage to mildly deal with that you see people like May Barwell  and Paget Brown cowering, deceiving and being smug in their non interest.

This thread has been a saviour,so much info shared and compassion/anger shown.

Eta that prick pagets name


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

mauvais said:


> As with many of these, click on it and view the conversation - not much use on its own.


i think you have to see that in context with the commentators on the DM also, to which i think its probably a response. Bunch of illegal brown people coming over here making a fuss after being given free houses etc.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

Fuck me she's all kinds of useless isn't she?

Theresa May branded 'inhuman' after Newsnight interview about Grenfell Tower fire



> Theresa May was criticised after she sidestepped questions about the Grenfell Tower fire.
> 
> In an interview with the BBC's Newsnight, Theresa May called the incident which killed at least 30 people “absolutely horrifying”.
> 
> But asked whether she had failed to judge the public mood by host Emily Maitlis, Ms May appeared to skip over the question. ...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 17, 2017)

Jesus Christ.



> A firefighter who climbed to the 15th floor as the Grenfell Tower was burned has spoken about how he feared the block would collapse like the World Trade Centre.
> 
> Leon Whitley, 34, was among the dozens to run towards danger when the blaze broke out at the 24-storey tower in west London.
> 
> ...


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 17, 2017)

mauvais said:


> This may be true in part, but is far from universal. For example existing HMOs had a load of new requirements placed on them a few years back.


Fair enough I lifted that bit straight from the link I shared but wary of talking past the scope of my knowledge!


----------



## mauvais (Jun 17, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> Fair enough I lifted that bit straight from the link I shared but wary of talking past the scope of my knowledge!


A long way from my expertise too, but there's definitely update requirements that should be complied with - all gets very complicated very quickly and goes into subdivided bits of legislation etc


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

This is a picture from yesterday, i can't put in words the feeling of seeing it up close like that, there were little groups of silent people just looking up at it. It sort of knocks the breath out of you, deadest thing i ever saw.


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 17, 2017)

is anywhere taking donations? a couple of days ago they were overwhelmed still.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 17, 2017)

More condemnation, this time from a BBC journo.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 17, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> Jesus Christ.


One of my uncles became a senior fire officer. At the beginning of his career he went into a burning house to try to save a child, against orders, because he couldn't stand to hear the screams. He's been retired for 10+ years and still has nightmares over this child. How much worse must it be for these men and women going into Grenfell? I hope that they get the mental health care that they will need. And not just the fire crews, but the ambulance and police who attended. Unfortunately I suspect that, because of reductions in NHS funding, they'll be forced to live with their nightmares

My only hope is that this is the start of the destruction of the Tory party as it stands.


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

frogwoman said:


> is anywhere taking donations? a couple of days ago they were overwhelmed still.


I think money is better than objects at this time, maybe this London Fire Relief Fund to help the people of Grenfell Tower
There were piles of things in the street outside nearby help centres yesterday, kids toys cooking pots clothes probably the overspill that they couldn't find room for inside.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

and again from a BBC journo


----------



## marty21 (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> This is a picture from yesterday, i can't put in words the feeling of seeing it up close like that, there were little groups of silent people just looking up at it. It sort of knocks the breath out of you, deadest thing i ever saw.
> View attachment 109542


I saw it yesterday as I drove on the westway, it is a shocking sight .


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 17, 2017)

frogwoman said:


> is anywhere taking donations? a couple of days ago they were overwhelmed still.


The red cross are also accepting monetary donations.


----------



## Cid (Jun 17, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Fuck me she's all kinds of useless isn't she?
> 
> Theresa May branded 'inhuman' after Newsnight interview about Grenfell Tower fire



Fucking hell. Bizarre.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 17, 2017)

The more I hear the angrier I become. Few things have made me want to actively protest, and to take to the streets to support protests. This does. I'm unreasonably angry. I have friends who live in similar tower blocks. I find myself thinking how it might be them.

I want the Tories to know that I, a normally peaceful person, wants to push their faces into faces of the victims, to force them to look how their policies have killed these, and other, people. I want them to suffer. I want them to know the pain they are causing, and have caused.

Sorry, it just upsets me so much.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

frogwoman I donated a bit of dosh to this justgiving account, it was posted by someone else way upthread over a million squid so far...


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 17, 2017)

Cid said:


> Fucking hell. Bizarre.



that interview ... 

'where are they going to be housed?'

'this has been a terrible experience'


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 17, 2017)

teqniq said:


> frogwoman I donated a bit of dosh to this justgiving account, it was posted by someone else way upthread over a million squid so far...



so did I a couple days ago


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

One of the chants yesterday 'shame on you teresa may'. She is hated, hard.


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 17, 2017)

this interview is a car crash.


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 17, 2017)

'maybot malfunction' is right


----------



## Cid (Jun 17, 2017)

S is for strong and stable, T is for terrible tragedy...


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 17, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Fuck me she's all kinds of useless isn't she?
> 
> Theresa May branded 'inhuman' after Newsnight interview about Grenfell Tower fire


No apology.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 17, 2017)

dessiato said:


> One of my uncles became a senior fire officer. At the beginning of his career he went into a burning house to try to save a child, against orders, because he couldn't stand to hear the screams. He's been retired for 10+ years and still has nightmares over this child. How much worse must it be for these men and women going into Grenfell? I hope that they get the mental health care that they will need. And not just the fire crews, but the ambulance and police who attended. Unfortunately I suspect that, because of reductions in NHS funding, they'll be forced to live with their nightmares
> 
> My only hope is that this is the start of the destruction of the Tory party as it stands.



I heard an FBU rep on site saying they were good as far as that provision goes and people would get what they needed.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 17, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> I heard an FBU rep on site saying they were good as far as that provision goes and people would get what they needed.


From the very little I know about the FBU is good at supporting the members, so I hope this is true.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> One of the chants yesterday 'shame on you teresa may'. She is hated, hard.


when I saw the footage of her doing a comedy sly exit from the church side entrance followed by jeers of 'coward' I had to pinch myself and remember that 4 weeks ago this woman was untouchable


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Jun 17, 2017)

I've just seen May's interview on Newsnight. This is just fucking outrageous, I'm so fucking angry at this when I think of all the threads that connect to it and the absolute failure of the response from government. Wtf have we become? Really, it is disgraceful, disgusting and shameful that this has happened.


----------



## Florkleshnort (Jun 17, 2017)




----------



## dessiato (Jun 17, 2017)

This incapability of May to understand and respond appropriately here makes me afraid for such an incompetent running the Brexit discussions. But that's not for this thread.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 17, 2017)

dessiato said:


> This incapability of May to understand and respond appropriately here makes me afraid for such an incompetent running the Brexit discussions. But that's not for this thread.



Negotiations start on Monday.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 17, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Negotiations start on Monday.


Frightening isn't it?


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jun 17, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> Jesus Christ.


Now I'm in bits again


----------



## iona (Jun 17, 2017)

dessiato said:


> One of my uncles became a senior fire officer. At the beginning of his career he went into a burning house to try to save a child, against orders, because he couldn't stand to hear the screams. He's been retired for 10+ years and still has nightmares over this child. How much worse must it be for these men and women going into Grenfell? I hope that they get the mental health care that they will need. And not just the fire crews, but the ambulance and police who attended. Unfortunately I suspect that, because of reductions in NHS funding, they'll be forced to live with their nightmares
> 
> My only hope is that this is the start of the destruction of the Tory party as it stands.



A friend of mine who's a London firefighter and was at Grenfell has been sharing a link to the Firefighters Charity if anyone wants to donate.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 17, 2017)

What's that line about 'all political careers end in failure'. Well, hopefully, hers will end in nationwide contempt. She was actually quite 'together' in that interview, wasn't a meltdown of any sort. She actually _planned_ to respond to questions like that. Cunt.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 17, 2017)

She appears to be literally incapable of doing anything but acknowledging the plainly visible.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 17, 2017)

Boris Johnson's sister just on LBC stating that May is also a victim of the fire.

WtAf??


----------



## dessiato (Jun 17, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Boris Johnson's sister just on LBC stating that May is also a victim of the fire.
> 
> WtAf??


And my level of anger reaches a new peak.


----------



## Nylock (Jun 17, 2017)

It's not like those cunts closing ranks was entirely unexpected...


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Boris Johnson's sister just on LBC stating that May is also a victim of the fire.
> 
> WtAf??


What kind of mental gymnastics were involved in that pronouncement?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 17, 2017)

dessiato said:


> And my level of anger reaches a new peak.



I know, nearly crashed my car listening to that shit.


----------



## Nylock (Jun 17, 2017)

Saying crass and stupid shit is clearly hardwired into the Johnson family DNA


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

my god the interview. She's a broken machine.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> my god the interview. She's a broken machine.



She did that all through the election campaign too. Is there any video evidence she can have a normal conversation?


----------



## scifisam (Jun 17, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Boris Johnson's sister just on LBC stating that May is also a victim of the fire.
> 
> WtAf??



Well, hopefully May will soon be losing one of her homes. 

Of course then she'll get a much heftier resettlement package than any of the actual surviving victims will.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jun 17, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Boris Johnson's sister just on LBC stating that May is also a victim of the fire.
> 
> WtAf??



Are these people actively trying to court a lynching?


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 17, 2017)

Damian Green thinks people have been 'terribly unfair' to mumsy.

Extraordinary.

I expect they are waiting for the anger to die down and dissipate before continuing to not listen to poor people


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Well, hopefully May will soon be losing one of her homes.
> 
> Of course then she'll get a much heftier resettlement package than any of the actual surviving victims will.


2 of her homes, chequers...


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 17, 2017)

you know what these cunts are saying between themselves in private as well, the shit they haven't printed.


Wilf said:


> What's that line about 'all political careers end in failure'.



enoch. Should be followed by 'but some failures are more ignominious than others'


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 17, 2017)

May is going to meet victims shortly....in Downing Street.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

Piers Corbyn long time housing activist and brother of Jeremy Corbyn speaking at Grenfell Tower


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 17, 2017)

frogwoman said:


> this interview is a car crash.


She's just not answering the questions.

You weren't asked how the fire started, you were asked if it was worth spending a couple of quid extra to make sure that the cladding woudln't have escalated what could well be an everday if terrible accident into a fucking horrific inferno. 

In many ways i wish she had been a victim of the fire. Then we'd have one less tory in the world


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 17, 2017)

killer b said:


> I'm not saying they are entirely free of responsibility: but focusing on the council when we all know this could have happened at almost any council in the country lets the biggest culprits off the hook.



I can just imagine the very different media response had this happened in a Labour-run council. It quite easily could have done, almost the same politics of neglect are in play there too.

It's going to change.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 17, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Piers Corbyn long time housing activist and brother of Jeremy Corbyn speaking at Grenfell Tower



double edged sword; piers is a fucking conspiracy theorist and friend to the David Icke crowd (iirc)

"green agenda"? Fuck off


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> double edged sword; piers is a fucking conspiracy theorist and friend to the David Icke crowd (iirc)


Yeh. Do you have evidence for this potentially libellous statement?


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> double edged sword; piers is a fucking conspiracy theorist and friend to the David Icke crowd (iirc)


Yes, I did hear something about this on here I think but he does seem to speaking a fair degree of sense here. As for the conspiracy stuff if true, no ta.

e2a in light of Pickman's post above was it you who mentioned it before?


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

Spotted him standing around outside the town hall with a couple of stragglers holding swp placards. Not sure about his use of the term "the green agenda" given he's a climate change denier.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 17, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Piers Corbyn long time housing activist and brother of Jeremy Corbyn speaking at Grenfell Tower




He's also a truther, v dodgy


----------



## ferrelhadley (Jun 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. Do you have evidence for this potentially libellous statement?


He is nuttier than squirrel shit. 


> Now Piers Corbyn, a British astrophysicist reports, "the world is now in one of its most extreme solar-lunar driven weather and earthquake/volcano events situations for at least 66 years and very likely twice that." Berkland suggests that in this top seismic window in years, the west coast of the United States is a high-risk area. Piers Corbyn is less specific on the location but believes the time of highest risk is in the five-day period of March 23-27.
> 
> According to Corbyn, it was the X Class solar flare of March 10, 2011, that caused a significant hit on the Earth by a coronal mass ejection, which was reported by NASA. He says this, in turn, triggered the massive Japan super quake (M=9.0) the following day.


British Astrophysicist Piers Corbyn Forecasts Earthquake Between March 23-27

Comments from Piers


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

J Ed said:


> He's also a truther, v dodgy


I am saddened by the amount of otherwise perfectly reasonable people that are.


----------



## ferrelhadley (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> Spotted him standing around outside the town hall with a couple of stragglers holding swp placards. Not sure about his use of the term "the green agenda" given he's a climate change denier.


Some (Mail, Telegraph) have tried to pin the fire on "CO2 madness" that the cladding was all about CO2 targets, rather than being about things like reducing the costs for residents heating in winter and helping keep the building cool in summer.
That there was cladding is not a problem, its the small price difference between the more and less fire resistant cladding that is the issue. It is a failed attempt to deflect blame that Piers has bought hook, line and stinker.


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 17, 2017)

This is the Twitter feed of a loon - and apparently a Trump supporter. He even retweeted the Daily Express' "Did EU regulation mean deadly cladding was used on Grenfell Tower?"

Piers Corbyn (@Piers_Corbyn) on Twitter


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

Oh dear.


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

Fucking hell had no idea he was that nuts. That's quite a twitter . Wind turbines are the work of sadistic satanists..


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 17, 2017)




----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 17, 2017)

He runs (or rather is) the company that provides the forecasts for the nutty Daily Express weather headlines ('coldest winter for decades ahead' etc.)


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 17, 2017)

dessiato said:


> Frightening isn't it?


I doubt they will, they will be postponed


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 17, 2017)

Maybe another thread for Pier's spudloonery?


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

How does he manage to cheer for Trump and for his brother at the same time? (but that's not for this thread)


----------



## LDC (Jun 17, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Piers Corbyn long time housing activist and brother of Jeremy Corbyn speaking at Grenfell Tower




He's a bonkers cunt and needs to be fucked off sharpish.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> He's a bonkers cunt and needs to be fucked off sharpish.


This has already been drawn to my attention.


----------



## editor (Jun 17, 2017)

Remember the criminal farce of the Heygate Estate: Heygate was Home · Digital Archive


----------



## Wilf (Jun 17, 2017)

Doctor Carrot said:


> I've just seen May's interview on Newsnight. This is just fucking outrageous, I'm so fucking angry at this when I think of all the threads that connect to it and the absolute failure of the response from government. Wtf have we become? Really, it is disgraceful, disgusting and shameful that this has happened.


Perfect post, even if it is one that describes a fucking horrible situation.  This is _politics_, the end results of an assault on the working class and politics as a thing that has moved so far away from community life that it ends up coming out with the maniacal drivel she spewed. But it's also a reminder, if it was ever needed, that _our_ politics and solidarity should always reduce itself down to real emotions and real people. The murder of the Grenfell residents embodies every bit of this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

Apparently caught fire again


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 17, 2017)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

frogwoman said:


>


Heading there now, no tube west of Edgware rd circle Hammersmith and city or west of south ken district and circle


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

It's odd, all tubes were running normal last night including Latimer Road a couple of minutes walk from the tower. I wonder if they'll expand the police cordon.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> It's odd, all tubes were running normal last night including Latimer Road a couple of minutes walk from the tower. I wonder if they'll expand the police cordon.


That was then...


----------



## Peter Dow (Jun 17, 2017)

NoXion said:


> You appear to be assuming that improving insulation was the primary motivating factor rather than being a variety of justifiable excuse.


I'm simply reading from (but not trusting those who submitted and approved) the planning application -

Grenfell Tower Regeneration Project SUSTAINABILITY AND ENERGY STATEMENT PLANNING APPLICATION



> 2.0 REFURBISHMENT RESPONSE TO EXISTING ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
> 
> 2.1 Insulation
> 
> Improving the insulation levels of the walls, roof and windows is the top priority of this refurbishment.


Personally, I would put fire safety as a more important priority than "insulation levels".

The planning application was submitted by Max Fordham, a building engineering services company hired by KCTMO.






Max Fordham - Wikipedia - Fordham's own firm's website which doesn't list Grenfell Tower as one of their projects. Presumably, that's because they deleted anything incriminating.

If charges of manslaughter and arrests are to be made then Max Fordham, the company and the man himself, should be in the dock, along with the engineers responsible for the planning application because the engineering was incompetently and recklessly done creating a very dangerous fire hazard.



> MAX FORDHAM LLP TEAM CONTRIBUTORS
> 
> Mark Palmer, Senior Engineer / Partner
> Andrew McQuatt, Lead Engineer / Partner
> Matt Smith, Engineer



The Guardian has a flow chart of the various companies also in the frame for corporate and individual manslaughter charges.

*Complex chain of companies that worked on Grenfell Tower raises oversight concerns*



Peter Dow said:


> Yes they are all culpable for the *way* they spent the limited money that was available, on the particular refurbishment project that they approved. What money they spent was spent foolishly, recklessly and I would say criminally.
> 
> I support David Lammy MP's call for arrests on corporate manslaughter charges. What's the interesting political question is how far up the levels of government should such charges be laid?





NoXion said:


> Straight to the top, if you ask me.


Well arresting Max Fordham and putting him in the dock takes us straight to the top via all the kingdom's institutions, such as the University of Bath, which validated his so-called "professional competence", see his wikipedia entry where they are listed.

The kingdom's institutions who validated Fordham, all have the blessing, the approval, charters, etc of Her Majesty the Queen.

So really the Queen should be in the dock of the people's courts. But then as a republican, I would say that.

The local council which approved the planning application also is criminally negligent and culpable for being as naive as Humpty Dumpty for trusting Max Fordham and all the Queen's men.

Presumably the government inspectors and fire building codes are not up to scratch either.

The people are absolutely right to demand justice and to take this to the very top.


----------



## JTG (Jun 17, 2017)

Peter Dow said:


> I'm simply reading from (but not trusting those who submitted and approved) the planning application -
> 
> Grenfell Tower Regeneration Project SUSTAINABILITY AND ENERGY STATEMENT PLANNING APPLICATION
> 
> ...


Go away you mad cunt


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

Peter Dow said:


> I'm simply reading from (but not trusting those who submitted and approved) the planning application -
> 
> Grenfell Tower Regeneration Project SUSTAINABILITY AND ENERGY STATEMENT PLANNING APPLICATION
> 
> ...


You're a fucking 'loon and no mistake


----------



## maomao (Jun 17, 2017)

I like the bit where we stick the Queen in the dock.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

maomao said:


> I like the bit where we stick the Queen in the dock.


Me too not being a royalist and all but she has gone up in my estimation somewhat for meeting and speaking to survivors. Doubtless it was as has already been pointed out in part motivated by a desire to shaft May, but still.


----------



## killer b (Jun 17, 2017)

I think it's just the queens's job to do stuff like that tbh, such as it is. I doubt it was motivated by any desire to shaft anyone.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 17, 2017)

Ive been thinking about the possibility of a possible criminal conviction...i know others here are quite hot on law so would be curious if you have an opinion

my understanding so far is that no one will be convicted...i say this partially from my own experience in dealing with fire regulations in my own place of work. When Fire Regs people come around there is a legal basic limit of what has to be there, and everything on top is recommended, or advised, but not mandatory. The level of what becomes recommended as opposed to essential seems pretty wide and deep.

I gather the buildings cladding wasnt illegal (as it is in other countries), and internal building bits would've been signed off as a basic pass at some point. I expect all the things to blame for the fire would be "advisory" changes. Which just goes to show how diluted these laws are.

The list of who is guilty is long of course: from politicans who refused to pass laws down to all those in charge of making the decisions for Grenfell itself. Sadly I expect all those many levels of guilt will not translate into a criminal conviction - not because of a cover up, but because they acted within the confines of what seems to be to be very weak law.

I haven't looked closely at the list of complaints that the community blogger highlighted  - was there a claim there that any of them contravened a law? Or was it a case of doing the 'advisory' bloody obvious good practice thing?

Thats all my impression anyhow.... Curious what others think


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

killer b said:


> I think it's just the queens's job to do stuff like that tbh, such as it is. I doubt it was motivated by any desire to shaft anyone.



Maybe, maybe not. But it certainly had that effect unintended or otherwise.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Heading there now, no tube west of Edgware rd circle Hammersmith and city or west of south ken district and circle



Reports in press those tube lines have been partly closed for fear of building collapsing.

Circle, Hammersmith and City Tube.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 17, 2017)

Another person on Twitter reporting the words of a firefighter.


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

Christ no. If it collapses then what of retrieving the dead. There were people working in there last night you could see lights , torches /cameras.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Is there a precedent for your proposal?



New things create precedents. If we relied on precedents, nothing would ever change.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 17, 2017)




----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 17, 2017)

There's a police update on the situation shortly. Sky video report here 



You can write the conspiracy theory now if it were to fall over.


----------



## gosub (Jun 17, 2017)

killer b said:


> I think it's just the queens's job to do stuff like that tbh, such as it is. I doubt it was motivated by any desire to shaft anyone.


It was clearly trolling after 'I cant meet the people cos of security'


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 17, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> There's a police update on the situation shortly. Sky video report here
> 
> 
> 
> You can write the conspiracy theory now if it were to fall over.




Surely that would be a conspiracy by Corbyn, as the tories look so awful?


----------



## Florkleshnort (Jun 17, 2017)

The thought of the media crowding round trying to capture footage of bodies being carried out kind of sickens me..


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 17, 2017)

Why would the tube lines be affected? Do they think the building is going to collapse? :O


----------



## Cid (Jun 17, 2017)

I actually know someone who worked for MF back around 2012, perfectly reputable company far as I know.


Barking_Mad said:


> Another person on Twitter reporting the words of a firefighter.




"morgue set up inside building...
a lot of the delay is due to fears around building stability"

Can both of those really be true?

Gah... This whole thing could do with a lot fewer unsubstantiated reports. And more official ones.


----------



## Tankus (Jun 17, 2017)

Future service charges are going to go through the roof ....social and private


----------



## Ptolemy (Jun 17, 2017)

killer b said:


> I think it's just the queens's job to do stuff like that tbh, such as it is. I doubt it was motivated by any desire to shaft anyone.



Quite right, as May is perfectly capable of shafting herself without HM's help.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> Christ no. If it collapses then what of retrieving the dead. There were people working in there last night you could see lights , torches /cameras.


<abitflippantsorry>that will send the conspiracy nuts into orbit!  </abitflippantsorry>


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 17, 2017)

Cid said:


> "morgue set up inside building...
> a lot of the delay is due to fears around building stability"
> 
> Can both of those really be true?



Someone mentioned that the lower floors had been propped? So a morgue on the ground floor makes sense.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 17, 2017)

According to the BBC news just now services have been suspended at the request of the police and fire brigade to allow planned engineering work to take place. I'd assume they are looking to make parts of the building safe so the search for bodies can take place.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 17, 2017)

ska invita said:


> Ive been thinking about the possibility of a possible criminal conviction...i know others here are quite hot on law so would be curious if you have an opinion
> 
> my understanding so far is that no one will be convicted...i say this partially from my own experience in dealing with fire regulations in my own place of work. When Fire Regs people come around there is a legal basic limit of what has to be there, and everything on top is recommended, or advised, but not mandatory. The level of what becomes recommended as opposed to essential seems pretty wide and deep.
> 
> ...


I'm no expert but I'd say there was a strong case for criminal manslaughter against individuals at KCTMO. I expect KCC will be very lucky and escape with a heavy fine.

The fire seems to have been caused by an electrical fault in one of the flats, either a fault with an appliance (possibly a fridge) in the flat itself or with the power supply into the flat (a power surge).

There was a previous incident with a power surge at Grenfell Tower in 2013 which was reported to KCTMO. The only KCTMO response was to tell the residents to get contents insurance. In other words, they knew about the problem and decided to do nothing about it. This information doesn't come from press speculation by the way, it's all recorded in the KCTMO's own board meeting notes.

I've trawled through the board meeting minutes from the end of 2013 onwards (that's as far back as they go on their site). Beyond the one mention that I've referred to, there's no word of any electrical power supply inspections or maintenance being done. There are numerous boasts on the £10m 2015/16 refurbishment project and what it brings (a new heating system, exterior cladding, enhanced entrance and lobby, new flats on the lower floors, boxing room, nursery etc. ) but there's no mention of enhancements to or safeguarding of the electrical supply.

As I say, I'm no expert but that looks like manslaughter to me.


----------



## Florkleshnort (Jun 17, 2017)

gosub said:


> It was clearly trolling after 'I cant meet the people cos of security'



To be fair, at this stage concerns for her security in the area would be pretty valid..


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 17, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> According to the BBC news just now services have been suspended at the request of the police and fire brigade to allow planned engineering work to take place. I'd assume they are looking to make parts of the building safe so the search for bodies can take place.



Making it safe obviously comes with serious risks.


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

One thing I'd suggest to anyone heading to the local area is don't go with a big camera and don't take pictures in people's faces. It got very tense at times around people who were taking photos, to the point of violence (people grabbing cameras demanding they delete pics etc)


----------



## LDC (Jun 17, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Someone mentioned that the lower floors had been propped? So a morgue on the ground floor makes sense.



No, a morgue on the ground floor makes no sense. Heat, dirt, no sanitary storage, inability to examine bodies, danger of collapse, etc etc.

Anyway, while I understand why all this speculation is going on, I actually think it's not politically helpful to engage in it too much. We don't need to start entertaining conspiracies and wild rumors to know the fucked up politics behind this disaster, and to do so might in some way dis-credit better more political explanations.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 17, 2017)

Probably obvious, but from what I've read to date, the fire service's prohibitive concerns about structural integrity seem to be very different from concerns about the structural integrity of the whole thing. That is, more about a floor collapsing in any given area than the whole thing coming down.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 17, 2017)

killer b said:


> I think it's just the queens's job to do stuff like that tbh, such as it is. I doubt it was motivated by any desire to shaft anyone.



We are her subjects and when we suffer something bad she feels she should be there for us. That's how she sees her role in life, so of course she went there and met the people. Pretty sure she'd have raised a wry smile once she saw how shit her actions made May look.


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

Maybe they'll build some scaffolding round it or something to prop bits of it up and help access over the weeks of work that are coming.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 17, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> Although that's obviously jumbled in the aftermath, as well as being the result of people seeking answers where none are being given, it's not a conspiracy to note that access for emergency vehicles was woefully inadequate at Grenfell. It's one of the things raised as a concern in the Grenfell blog from a couple of years ago. And early reports in the media noted that although some 40 fire tenders turned up, only 2 were initially able to operate, probably due to this lack of access. Do we have to wait 3 years for the inquiry to say this before we can say it without being accused of being conspiracy theorists?
> 
> And just how hard is it for the council to provide a fairly accurate estimate of the numbers living in that tower block, something they are refusing to do? When you have a situation being mismanaged like that I don't think you can blame the people for inventing their own answers, even if those answers are inaccurate. The council was given a chance to quell the emotiveness with hard facts and they refused to take it.



W


killer b said:


> I think it's just the queens's job to do stuff like that tbh, such as it is. I doubt it was motivated by any desire to shaft anyone.



Seeing her today, you cannot doubt her sincerity. I have never seen her so sombre looking, even the RHA ride-past, a real favourite, barely engendered a smile.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 17, 2017)

ska invita said:


> Ive been thinking about the possibility of a possible criminal conviction...i know others here are quite hot on law so would be curious if you have an opinion
> 
> my understanding so far is that no one will be convicted...i say this partially from my own experience in dealing with fire regulations in my own place of work. When Fire Regs people come around there is a legal basic limit of what has to be there, and everything on top is recommended, or advised, but not mandatory. The level of what becomes recommended as opposed to essential seems pretty wide and deep


I'm very much not a lawyer but the answer to this is a question: was anyone criminally negligent?

Did anyone in a position of responsibility have good reason to believe that there might be a significantly probable risk to life, and then failed to act on it? In terms of people in managerial or executive roles, that would expose them to the possibility of being prosecuted for corporate manslaughter.

Getting a conviction is difficult for a variety of reasons. In this case, I think the blog and the residents' prior actions behind it are the closest thing to compelling evidence to make a case against anyone. Possibly also the people involved in the construction, in their own separate way.

I think on balance it's probably unlikely that anyone will be convicted, but I wouldn't rule it out. Since 2007 it's also possible to convict a corporation itself, which may be more likely, but also practically pretty useless - a big fine.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 17, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Seeing her today, you cannot doubt her sincerity. I have never seen her so sombre looking, even the RHA ride-past, a real favourite, barely engendered a smile.



The Queen's Speech clashes with Royal Ascot and it's all Theresa May's fault.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 17, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> W
> 
> 
> Seeing her today, you cannot doubt her sincerity. I have never seen her so sombre looking, even the RHA ride-past, a real favourite, barely engendered a smile.



She always looks miserable to me


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jun 17, 2017)

It's probably a good time for me to unwatch this thread for the moment and this may be my last comment. I only posted because I saw the Ishmahil video and he's somebody that I know and respect. 

I didn't participate in the Manchester and London Bridge response threads either because I don't want to add to the negative vibe that seems to be associated with these kinds of reaction threads. People are understandably angry and saddened that this has happened, however in my opinion the memory of those that have died would be better served by us collectively responding in a calm and civilised manner and to put policies and procedures in place to prevent it from happening again. 
I'm really not keen on the witch hunt and lynch mob mentality. We love to find somebody to blame, and while it is probably true that there were mistakes made by one or more individuals, ultimately we are all responsible for this tragedy. It is us who elect the officials who make the decisions, WE PUT THEM THERE. It is easy to look for scapegoats especially when it diverts the attention away from ourselves. I'm probably as anti-tory as you can get, but I don't think it's right to be shouting out "murderer".  
As Akala said, it is up to us to organise ourselves properly and participate effectively in the whole decision making process so that we do have competent people in charge. Pointing the finger at others is a bit of a cop out in my opinion. If we want good people making decisions then we need to put them there in a civilised, orderly and well organised manner, not by burning down buildings or threatening behaviour, beating up on police etc. 
We had the opportunity to elect a potentially more caring government and didn't do it. We will have other opportunities to try again, lets see what happens. I'm not saying that Jeremy Corbyn will fix everything overnight like a fairy godmother, but his moral compass is more aligned with where I'm at. I think that's enough of my ranting for the moment and I'll leave the thread with an example of the sort of vibe I'd like to see more of :-


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 17, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Probably obvious, but from what I've read to date, the fire service's prohibitive concerns about structural integrity seem to be very different from concerns about the structural integrity of the whole thing. That is, more about a floor collapsing in any given area than the whole thing coming down.


That was what I drew from the last fire brigade press conference I saw yesterday. There was specific reference to the outer edges of the upper floors.

Mentioned on the BBC just now that the fire brigade is also concerned about vibrations from the railway but that this doesn't express a concern about the whole building coming down.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 17, 2017)

mauvais said:


> I'm very much not a lawyer but the answer to this is a question: was anyone criminally negligent?
> 
> Did anyone in a position of responsibility have good reason to believe that there might be a significantly probable risk to life, and then failed to act on it? In terms of people in managerial or executive roles, that would expose them to the possibility of being prosecuted for corporate manslaughter.
> 
> ...



I'm not a lawyer either, but I would imagine that Corporate Manslaughter is not out of the question.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 17, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> That was what I drew from the last fire brigade press conference I saw yesterday. There was specific reference to the outer edges of the upper floors.
> 
> Mentioned on the BBC just now that the fire brigade is also concerned about vibrations from the railway but that this doesn't express a concern about the whole building coming down.



The BBC were speculating, the Guardian quoted the LFB as saying the tube lines were closed due to the risk of debris falling on to the tracks.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 17, 2017)

J Ed said:


> She always looks miserable to me



So would I if I thought that I had to go on working until I die.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 17, 2017)

mauvais said:


> I'm very much not a lawyer but the answer to this is a question: was anyone criminally negligent?
> 
> Did anyone in a position of responsibility have good reason to believe that there might be a significantly probable risk to life, and then failed to act on it? In terms of people in managerial or executive roles, that would expose them to the possibility of being prosecuted for corporate manslaughter.
> 
> ...


agree, however it seems to me the legal defence "we did everything within the guidelines of the law" is a tight one...i would imagine that for a conviction there would have to be a direct contravention of a specific law?? 
Not sure if its  worth pursuing this armchair legal speculation that far, but thought it worth bringing up


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 17, 2017)

she used to have a sly smile on the old 20 pound notes where the portrait was from her younger years.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 17, 2017)

As well as not being a lawyer, I'm not a structural engineer either but Grenfell Tower has a concrete frame which is known for it's fire resistance qualities so is unlikely to collapse. The twin towers, which were built around the same time, were steel framed and thus more likely to buckle when exposed to extreme prolonged heat. That's my amateur assessment.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 17, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> Pretty sure the Chief Executive isn't outsourced, and knows how to use a telephone and access the council's £150million+ reserve fund.



The problem is the only people who are left to help him spend it work for capita.

Alex


----------



## gosub (Jun 17, 2017)

ska invita said:


> agree, however it seems to me the legal defence "we did everything within the guidelines of the law" is a tight one...i would imagine that for a conviction there would have to be a direct contravention of a specific law??
> Not sure if its  worth pursuing this armchair legal speculation that far, but thought it worth bringing up



no precedent is actually on spirit of the law not letter of the law


----------



## ska invita (Jun 17, 2017)

gosub said:


> no precedent is actually on spirit of the law not letter of the law


some small hope then, thanks


----------



## mauvais (Jun 17, 2017)

ska invita said:


> agree, however it seems to me the legal defence "we did everything within the guidelines of the law" is a tight one...i would imagine that for a conviction there would have to be a direct contravention of a specific law??


Not really - there would just have to be overall negligence. An organisational culture of carelessness and poor risk management would be sufficient. Law rarely covers every specific scenario and eventuality, so inevitably much of it comes down to duty of care & reasonable behaviour/expectations.

Corporate manslaughter in English law - Wikipedia



> Following _R v. Prentice_,[5] a breach of duty amounts to 'gross negligence' when there is:
> 
> ... indifference to an obvious risk of injury to health; actual foresight of the risk coupled with the determination nevertheless to run it; appreciation of the risk coupled with an intention to avoid it but also coupled with such a high degree of negligence in the attempted avoidance as the jury consider justifies conviction, and inattention or failure to advert to a serious risk which goes 'beyond inadvertence' in respect of an obvious and important matter which the defendant's duty demanded he should address.
> 
> The Law Commission's 1996 report on involuntary manslaughter found that the gross negligence formula overcomes the problems of having to find one particular officer who has the _mens rea_ for the offence and allows emphasis to be placed on the company’s attitude to safety.[6] This question would only arise where the company has chosen to enter a field of activity that carries a risk to others, such as transport, manufacture or medical care. The steps the company has taken to discharge the "duty of safety" and the systems devised for running its business, will be directly relevant.


----------



## Mogden (Jun 17, 2017)

I'm inclined to believe Lily and her assertion that the final count will unfortunately be in 3 figures. My mate has said, again quite strong content:



Spoiler: Graphic



We just had one of the search officers in
They were up to the sixteenth floor
And the stairwells were full of bodies
There's going to be fucking hundreds of the poor fuckers



So I've no doubt they're currently downplaying numbers just because it shouldn't have happened and the sheer horror of it.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 17, 2017)

I'm no expert - legal, structural, anything - but with regard to the sitting on reports, not learning the lessons of other fires at home and abroad, the cuts affecting fire service, impact of austerity on housing management and inspections, the chances of prosecution are NIL.  Fucking hell, may hasn't even sacked that disgusting shit barwell.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 17, 2017)

Mogden said:


> I'm inclined to believe Lily and her assertion that the final count will unfortunately be in 3 figures. My mate has said, again quite strong content:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hope your mate is OK mogden, that is such a lot to deal with.


----------



## killer b (Jun 17, 2017)

Mogden said:


> I'm inclined to believe Lily and her assertion that the final count will unfortunately be in 3 figures. My mate has said, again quite strong content:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


People keep reporting some chinese whisper stuff which could be real, or which could have been just  made up from putting two and two together - I think it's pretty pointless reporting stuff you've been told by a friend of a friend, or an anonymous screenshot from someone you've never heard of on twitter unless you know you've spoken directly to someone who's been in there (tbh even then I don't think it's a good idea).


----------



## Mogden (Jun 17, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> Hope your mate is OK mogden, that is such a lot to deal with.


I've been reaching out to him all week. He's just there in an admin capacity and it's not sitting well with him as you can imagine. Goodness only knows how you do it if you're on the front line  He does say the atmosphere in the office has been a collective one so all office politics and ill feeling have vanished for now.


----------



## Mogden (Jun 17, 2017)

killer b said:


> People keep reporting some chinese whisper stuff which could be real, or which could have been just  made up from putting two and two together - I think it's pretty pointless reporting stuff you've been told by a friend of a friend, or an anonymous screenshot from someone you've never heard of on twitter unless you know you've spoken directly to someone who's been in there (tbh even then I don't think it's a good idea).


He works in the offices at LFS otherwise I'd not mention it. This kind of stuff will never reach the papers, certainly not yet, and he is a very trusted friend. In the interests of balance I'm letting people know that it looks like the whispers are more factually accurate than we are led to believe.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 17, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> The BBC were speculating, the Guardian quoted the LFB as saying the tube lines were closed due to the risk of debris falling on to the tracks.


The two things are not necessarily in contradiction - I'd imagine that there are multiple safety concerns at play. I don't envy the people who have to carry out the shoring up work.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 17, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> The two things are not necessarily in contradiction - I'd imagine that there are multiple safety concerns at play. I don't envy the people who have to carry out the shoring up work.



The tube lines were not closed due to a danger of the building collapsing. This has been stated by the LFB, so unless you think they are lying then it's down to baseless speculation by the BBC.


----------



## xenon (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> One thing I'd suggest to anyone heading to the local area is don't go with a big camera and don't take pictures in people's faces. It got very tense at times around people who were taking photos, to the point of violence (people grabbing cameras demanding they delete pics etc)



People doing that are fucking vultures.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 17, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I didn't participate in the Manchester and London Bridge response threads either because I don't want to add to the negative vibe that seems to be associated with these kinds of reaction threads. People are understandably angry and saddened that this has happened, however in my opinion the memory of those that have died would be better served by us collectively responding in a calm and civilised manner and to put policies and procedures in place to prevent it from happening again.


This isn't mutually exclusive from holding people to account for their (in)actions - indeed the two are inevitably interwoven. Updated policies and procedures mean nothing without accountability for them.



PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm really not keen on the witch hunt and lynch mob mentality. We love to find somebody to blame, and while it is probably true that there were mistakes made by one or more individuals, ultimately we are all responsible for this tragedy. It is us who elect the officials who make the decisions, WE PUT THEM THERE. It is easy to look for scapegoats especially when it diverts the attention away from ourselves ... We had the opportunity to elect a potentially more caring government and didn't do it.


This in itself is nonsense and comes close to victim blaming, not to mention self-flagellation.

There is a good point in there somewhere and I'll make it for you: when a plane crashes, at least in British jurisdiction, the ensuing investigation deliberately avoids blame in the interests of future prevention. If you go in pointing fingers, the people with the most important evidence withhold vital information or even lie. It's crucially important that this doesn't happen. You can have an accident that consists in its practicalities entirely of basic human errors and is thus entirely preventable, but which simultaneously didn't involve malice or abject unreasonableness on anyone's part. Instead it can be something that's only enabled by the compound failure of systems and processes, and any resolution needs to recognise that in order to fix them, not pin the blame on the unfortunate meatsack that happened to be at the centre of it on that particular occasion.

So it is here. But it's also important that if good process based on prior lessons did already exist, or could have existed were it not for negligence, that someone be held accountable for their part in it. Otherwise you can have all the structural reform you can shake a stick at, but it's totally empty because noone ever need comply. Oh it's not your fault, we are all to blame. Sod that.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 17, 2017)

killer b said:


> People keep reporting some chinese whisper stuff which could be real, or which could have been just  made up from putting two and two together - I think it's pretty pointless reporting stuff you've been told by a friend of a friend, or an anonymous screenshot from someone you've never heard of on twitter unless you know you've spoken directly to someone who's been in there (tbh even then I don't think it's a good idea).



Right there we see 'full of' become 'hundreds'


----------



## T & P (Jun 17, 2017)

According to the Mail, the Royal Family has been 'defiant' in the face of tragedy by going ahead with Brenda's birthday bash


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 17, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It's probably a good time for me to unwatch this thread for the moment and this may be my last comment. I only posted because I saw the Ishmahil video and he's somebody that I know and respect.
> 
> I didn't participate in the Manchester and London Bridge response threads either because I don't want to add to the negative vibe that seems to be associated with these kinds of reaction threads. People are understandably angry and saddened that this has happened, however in my opinion the memory of those that have died would be better served by us collectively responding in a calm and civilised manner and to put policies and procedures in place to prevent it from happening again.
> I'm really not keen on the witch hunt and lynch mob mentality. We love to find somebody to blame, and while it is probably true that there were mistakes made by one or more individuals, ultimately we are all responsible for this tragedy. It is us who elect the officials who make the decisions, WE PUT THEM THERE. It is easy to look for scapegoats especially when it diverts the attention away from ourselves. I'm probably as anti-tory as you can get, but I don't think it's right to be shouting out "murderer".
> ...



If you live in London you can choose between a tory council that will run down and clear out social housing or a labour council which will do the same. You can't lay these things at the door of ordinary people when you've got a broken system in which no democratic choice, no action permitted within that system will bring the changes needed.

E2a: and in somewhere like Kensington you've got to remember that every working class voter is up against however many mega-rich wankers who are not gonna give a shit about housing for the people who clean their houses and drive their cabs.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 17, 2017)

T & P said:


> According to the Mail, the Royal Family has been 'defiant' in the face of tragedy by going ahead with Brenda's birthday bash



Gawd bless 'em.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

T & P said:


> According to the Mail, the Royal Family has been 'defiant' in the face of tragedy by going ahead with Brenda's birthday bash


Defiant of good taste for a start


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

xenon said:


> People doing that are fucking vultures.


Didn't see anyone doing that this afternoon


----------



## Anudder Oik (Jun 17, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Now, I'm not saying anything about the people being featured in the video - the video has clearly been assembled from other people's footage - but that ‘filmmaker’ is clearly of a dubious political background.
> 
> They're called ELITE NWO AGENDA, and they post up videos which claim that - say - the London Bridge terror attack was a staged/false flag incident, reupload Alex Jones InfoWars clips, have an obsession with the gold standard, is pro-Trump, etc. ENWOA's core audience is alt-right and the like.
> 
> ...



Are you absolutely raving mad? I didn't check who the video was uploaded by but on looking just now I see it's someone with a youtube account called witness who has this video and 11 others about katie fucking Perry ffs, you fucking sock-muppet. And the rest of you paranoics who went, yeah, it's oiks agenda. What a bunch of numpties. Get a life.

Go take a look in the mirror. Unfuckigbelievable. You couldn't make this shit up.

Here's the video in question if anyone wants to contrast the information themselves. Or is katie Perry part of some kind of strasserite conspiracy?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jun 17, 2017)

mauvais said:


> This isn't mutually exclusive from holding people to account for their (in)actions - indeed the two are inevitably interwoven. Updated policies and procedures mean nothing without accountability for them.
> 
> This in itself is nonsense and comes close to victim blaming, not to mention self-flagellation.
> 
> ...


Sigh. Bunfights seem to be the order of the day in this forum even in threads like this where behaviour should be a bit more dignified. I have no wish to participate in a bunfight, however I will make a few points in response to your comments and then call it a day.

Collective responsibility does NOT mean that nobody is held to account. This is not about blaming anybody. Mistakes were made and lessons need to be learned to lessen the chance of the same thing being repeated. I just don't think that a screaming mob is the way to achieve that. Even if it was true that it was a single individual that made the mistake that caused the fire and we publicly execute that individual for being the cause of so many deaths, we would still have to find out why the checks and balances were not in place that would stop that from happening. I suspect that there isn't just one person, but a multiple "points of failure" that need to be addressed. You disagree with the idea of collective responsibility, that's fine, you're entitled to your opinion. 



SpookyFrank said:


> If you live in London you can choose between a tory council that will run down and clear out social housing or a labour council which will do the same. You can't lay these things at the door of ordinary people when you've got a broken system in which no democratic choice, no action permitted within that system will bring the changes needed.


Again it's not about blame. If we want better governance and better decision making, we have to elect better decision makers. If we sit back and say "tories and labour are all the same, they're all crap so we can't do nothing", then nothing will change and we unfortunately will get the government we deserve. The politicians who do our bidding are elected by us. If they make crap decisions and we replace them with "different" politicians who also make crap decisions, it is still us who elected them. If we want better people in charge then we need to get better at picking good ones. That is not victim blaming. It is up to those of us who believe that Jeremy Corbyn is better than the other lot to do what we can to get him elected and to make the positive changes that he promises. Sitting back and blaming others and shouting them down etc isn't the best way to get shit done imo.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 17, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> The tube lines were not closed due to a danger of the building collapsing.


I haven't suggested they were. Indeed the post of mine you are quoting was agreeing with one by Mauvais saying precisely the opposite. My clear understanding is that the fire brigade do not think the building is likely to collapse.



bi0boy said:


> This has been stated by the LFB, so unless you think they are lying then it's down to baseless speculation by the BBC.


I simply stated what the BBC had said. I'm baffled how you draw from this that I'm suggesting that anyone is lying. Debris could fall on the track because of work carried out, or because of vibration, or because of structurally weakened elements of the building giving way without any specific intervention, or indeed for some other reason. I don't pretend to know which of these risks is more or less likely any more than I pretend to know which media source is more or less accurate or more or less unmediated. I can say that I would have more confidence in your own abilities in this area if you seemed a bit better at reading my posts as opposed to interpreting them.


----------



## ddraig (Jun 17, 2017)

Anudder Oik 
no one believes you, you've used this "i just searched youtube" excuse at least 3 times
bullshit!! stop it or admit your agenda


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Sigh. Bunfights seem to be the order of the day in this forum even in threads like this where behaviour should be a bit more dignified. I have no wish to participate in a bunfight, however I will make a few points in response to your comments and then call it a day.
> 
> Collective responsibility does NOT mean that nobody is held to account. This is not about blaming anybody. Mistakes were made and lessons need to be learned to lessen the chance of the same thing being repeated. I just don't think that a screaming mob is the way to achieve that. Even if it was true that it was a single individual that made the mistake that caused the fire and we publicly execute that individual for being the cause of so many deaths, we would still have to find out why the checks and balances were not in place that would stop that from happening. I suspect that there isn't just one person, but a multiple "points of failure" that need to be addressed. You disagree with the idea of collective responsibility, that's fine, you're entitled to your opinion.
> 
> ...


Not persuaded you've grasped collective responsibility tbh


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 17, 2017)

Police saying there are still 58 missing, all thought to be dead. I think that brings the number of dead so far to 88.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Anudder Oik
> no one believes you, you've used this "i just searched youtube" excuse at least 3 times
> bullshit!! stop it or admit your agenda


Yeh either he's terminally stupid or he's well on the right: or both


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jun 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Not persuaded you've grasped collective responsibility tbh


Fair enough, again that's your opinion. I shall leave you lot to it.


----------



## ddraig (Jun 17, 2017)

it says "elite NWO agenda" on the fucking video ffs


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


> Are you absolutely raving mad? I didn't check who the video was uploaded by but on looking just now I see it's someone with a youtube account called witness who has this video and 11 others about katie fucking Perry ffs, you fucking sock-muppet. And the rest of you paranoics who went, yeah, it's oiks agenda. What a bunch of numpties. Get a life.
> 
> Go take a look in the mirror. Unfuckigbelievable. You couldn't make this shit up.
> 
> Here's the video in question if anyone wants to contrast the information themselves. Or is katie Perry part of some kind of strasserite conspiracy?



You do protest too much


----------



## Wilf (Jun 17, 2017)

Just seen that the bloke who photographed one of the bodies has got 3 months.
Facebook ghoul who photographed dead Grenfell Tower fire victim in body bag is jailed for three months
An act of gross stupidity and crassness, but it contrasts with the people who produced the circumstances of this fire, none of whom will serve a single day.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Just seen that the bloke who photographed one of the bodies has got 3 months.
> Facebook ghoul who photographed dead Grenfell Tower fire victim in body bag is jailed for three months
> An act of gross stupidity and crassness, but it contrasts with the people who produced the circumstances of this fire, none of whom will serve a single day.


They'll commit ritual suicide in shame?


----------



## alex_ (Jun 17, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> . mega-rich wankers who are not gonna give a shit about housing for the people who clean their houses and drive their cabs.



You say this, but if you want to pay them not very much they need to live close by - minimum wage won't pay for a 2 hour commute.

Alex


----------



## alex_ (Jun 17, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> He runs (or rather is) the company that provides the forecasts for the nutty Daily Express weather headlines ('coldest winter for decades ahead' etc.)



Why do they need someone to tell them that - surely they can just make it up it's the same every year !


----------



## mauvais (Jun 17, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I suspect that there isn't just one person, but a multiple "points of failure" that need to be addressed. You disagree with the idea of collective responsibility, that's fine, you're entitled to your opinion


No, I don't disagree with this or the preceding statement at all - the very opposite. It's extremely likely to be a very complex web of responsibility. But this is not what you were saying.



PaoloSanchez said:


> Again it's not about blame. If we want better governance and better decision making, we have to elect better decision makers. If we sit back and say "tories and labour are all the same, they're all crap so we can't do nothing", then nothing will change and we unfortunately will get the government we deserve. The politicians who do our bidding are elected by us. If they make crap decisions and we replace them with "different" politicians who also make crap decisions, it is still us who elected them. If we want better people in charge then we need to get better at picking good ones. That is not victim blaming.


Yes it is. It says that people who die in these things are themselves somehow responsible because they elected their way into it, or otherwise failed to change the system. The government they deserved, the fate they deserved. And I _know _that's not what you _mean_, but it is the logical follow-on of what you're saying.

To use your phrase, if we want better governance and better decision making, we have to elect better decision makers, and hold the ones we have to account. For some people, that means directing their anger at who they perceive to be responsible.


----------



## ffsear (Jun 17, 2017)

Saw Hanz Zimmer at wembley last night... Great gesture by him..


----------



## Anudder Oik (Jun 17, 2017)

ddraig said:


> it says "elite NWO agenda" on the fucking video ffs



Never heard of them and don't see any right wing agenda in any of the videos I've seen or posted about the Grenfell massacre.


----------



## elbows (Jun 17, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Me too not being a royalist and all but she has gone up in my estimation somewhat for meeting and speaking to survivors. Doubtless it was as has already been pointed out in part motivated by a desire to shaft May, but still.



The BBC got a bit carried away, quite something to behold. She is apparently holding the nation together with her bare hands as we speak.



> In a long reign, the Queen has issued countless statements. They can sometimes be formulaic and lack the ability to resonate.
> 
> This is not one of them.
> 
> ...





> In such circumstances, as Head of Nation - a focal point at times of tragedy - the Queen has decided she cannot remain silent.
> 
> *She, and those around her, will be acutely aware of the potential for growing disquiet in the days ahead. *
> 
> ...



London fire: Queen reflects on 'sombre national mood' - BBC News


----------



## ddraig (Jun 17, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


> Never heard of them and don't see any right wing agenda in any of the videos I've seen or posted about the Grenfell massacre.


course you haven't and of course you don't, just confirmation bias


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 17, 2017)

ddraig said:


> no one believes you, you've used this "i just searched youtube" excuse at least 3 times
> bullshit!! stop it or admit your agenda



You know how YouTube searches/suggestions work? I imagine at this stage it's hard for Anudder Oik to find anything that isn't wingnut crank shit.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 17, 2017)

FWIW This Telegraph article has a total of 62 missing people. No idea how it tallies up with the officially released numbers. Not sure Ive seen this shown before but here's a plan of a supposedly typical floor in the flats.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

elbows said:


> The BBC got a bit carried away, quite something to behold. She is apparently holding the nation together with her bare hands as we speak.
> 
> 
> 
> London fire: Queen reflects on 'sombre national mood' - BBC News


After I read that article I bowed in the direction of Buckingham palace as I puked my guts up


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


> Never heard of them and don't see any right wing agenda in any of the videos I've seen or posted about the Grenfell massacre.


None so blind as those who will not see


----------



## elbows (Jun 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> After I read that article I bowed in the direction of Buckingham palace as I puked my guts up



Indeed, paying the proper respects. I'm not sure I've ever seen them openly shitting themselves to this degree at this stage before.


----------



## Grandma Death (Jun 17, 2017)

Im coming in to this debate late. Can someone explain to me why there's talk of hundreds dead?

I used to work in social housing-and one of the areas had tower blocks. As a landlord we knew the occupants-and the amount for each flat. Granted there'll be variations such as guests staying over etc

So why is there talk of deaths running into the 'hundreds'?

Is this just conspiracy theory or is there any substance in this?


----------



## editor (Jun 17, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> As well as not being a lawyer, I'm not a structural engineer either but Grenfell Tower has a concrete frame which is known for it's fire resistance qualities so is unlikely to collapse. The twin towers, which were built around the same time, were steel framed and thus more likely to buckle when exposed to extreme prolonged heat. That's my amateur assessment.


Ah yes, but the Twin Towers were also pre-wired with massive explosives and were also hit by holographic, missile firing rockets made to look like passenger aircraft. At least, that's what Jazz told me.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 17, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> Im coming in to this debate late. Can someone explain to me why there's talk of hundreds dead?


It's Ramadan and a lot of the residents had guests.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> Im coming in to this debate late. Can someone explain to me why there's talk of hundreds dead?
> 
> I used to work in social housing-and one of the areas had tower blocks. As a landlord we knew the occupants-and the amount for each flat. Granted there'll be variations such as guests staying over etc
> 
> ...


I think you confuse potential exaggeration with ct


----------



## NoXion (Jun 17, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


> Are you absolutely raving mad? I didn't check who the video was uploaded by but on looking just now I see it's someone with a youtube account called witness who has this video and 11 others about katie fucking Perry ffs, you fucking sock-muppet. And the rest of you paranoics who went, yeah, it's oiks agenda. What a bunch of numpties. Get a life.
> 
> Go take a look in the mirror. Unfuckigbelievable. You couldn't make this shit up.
> 
> Here's the video in question if anyone wants to contrast the information themselves. Or is katie Perry part of some kind of strasserite conspiracy?




The only numpty here is you. Check your sources you stupid plank. Or do you really think that conspiradribble YouTube channels are a good place to find videos?


----------



## editor (Jun 17, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> Im coming in to this debate late. Can someone explain to me why there's talk of hundreds dead?
> 
> I used to work in social housing-and one of the areas had tower blocks. As a landlord we knew the occupants-and the amount for each flat. Granted there'll be variations such as guests staying over etc
> 
> ...


It's not unusual for poor quality social housing in poor areas to be sublet, or be home to far more people than what's on the tenancy agreement.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 17, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> Im coming in to this debate late. Can someone explain to me why there's talk of hundreds dead?
> 
> I used to work in social housing-and one of the areas had tower blocks. As a landlord we knew the occupants-and the amount for each flat. Granted there'll be variations such as guests staying over etc
> 
> ...


I dont think anyone is suggesting more than 200 - somewhere between 100-200 seems to be realistic


----------



## NoXion (Jun 17, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


> Never heard of them and don't see any right wing agenda in any of the videos I've seen or posted about the Grenfell massacre.



Here's a handy rule of thumb, if a source mentions any of the following: New World Order/NWO, Illuminati, Bilderbergs, Trilateral Commission, Soros, the value of gold and how important it is that you acquire great quantities of this impractical metal, Flat Earth, then it's a crap source and should be entirely disregarded. The fact that such sources can draw from the real world (such as from _vox pops_) is no guarantee of reliability, since there is such a thing as editing and cherry picking.

Hope this helps.


----------



## starfish (Jun 17, 2017)

RIP.


----------



## editor (Jun 17, 2017)

Lot of people angry about Grenfell at the anti-coalition demo today.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 17, 2017)

ska invita said:


> I dont think anyone is suggesting more than 200 - somewhere between 100-200 seems to be realistic



Really? With 58 people reported missing?


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 17, 2017)

ska invita said:


> I dont think anyone is suggesting more than 200 - somewhere between 100-200 seems to be realistic



Police just gave a press conference in which they said they had identified 58 people who they were credibly informed were in the building and were unaccounted for. They stressed that this figure was not set in stone. There was a possibility that some of these 58 people may actually have survived but not been located or come forward and that there was also a possibility that other people had died in the building who had not been identified. {ETA : In addition to that list of 58] 16 bodies had been recovered and {ETA: in total] 30 people were known to have died.

That would suggest that the total number of dead was less than a hundred. However because of the hazardous nature of the site it could be some weeks before we have a definitive total of bodies recovered, and as stated earlier in the week there was a possibility that some bodies might never be identified


----------



## 1927 (Jun 17, 2017)

editor said:


> Ah yes, but the Twin Towers were also pre-wired with massive explosives and were also hit by holographic, missile firing rockets made to look like passenger aircraft. At least, that's what Jazz told me.


well they certainly didn't collapse just because of fire.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 17, 2017)

1927 said:


> well they certainly didn't collapse just because of fire.



Can we not do this here,  please?


----------



## scifisam (Jun 17, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> Im coming in to this debate late. Can someone explain to me why there's talk of hundreds dead?
> 
> I used to work in social housing-and one of the areas had tower blocks. As a landlord we knew the occupants-and the amount for each flat. Granted there'll be variations such as guests staying over etc
> 
> ...



-Subletters
-Lodgers, in part due to the bedroom tax
-Air B&B - this is Kensington after all
-People visiting (including for Ramadan) 
-People added to the home after the tenancy was taken on, like new partners, babies or live in carers, none of which need to be reported to the landlord (of course, people may have left too) 
-Some of the above may be undocumented and therefore not being reported as missing

You can't just take the number of tenants, deduct the number of survivors and come up with a rough estimate of the victims.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 17, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> It's Ramadan and a lot of the residents had guests.



That's nonsensical because if some had guests due to Ramadan, an equal proportion might have been away as guests elsewhere for the same reason.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 17, 2017)

scifisam said:


> You can't just take the number of tenants, deduct the number of survivors and come up with a rough estimate of the victims.



The estimates of the number of victims are not arrived at by doing that though...


----------



## scifisam (Jun 17, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> The estimates of the number of victims are not arrived at by doing that though...



No, but that's what was being suggested. 

There may be people in that building who have not been reported missing. In fact tbh I'd say it's likely there's at least a few.


----------



## Grandma Death (Jun 17, 2017)

scifisam said:


> -Subletters
> 
> You can't just take the number of tenants, deduct the number of survivors and come up with a rough estimate of the victims.



No Im aware of that which is why I mentioned variables in my post. Its just figures dont seem to match up with 'official figures' which seem to be heading towards 100.

But there's lot of chatter on social media and conspiracy of a cover up and the latest figure I saw from FB was just over 500-these figures seem to wildly vary. Even given the variables-100 is obviously very different to just over 500


----------



## Dandred (Jun 17, 2017)

.


----------



## Dandred (Jun 17, 2017)

Dandred said:


> Why didn't they collapse like WT5?


----------



## Dandred (Jun 17, 2017)




----------



## scifisam (Jun 17, 2017)

Grandma Death said:


> No Im aware of that which is why I mentioned variables in my post. Its just figures dont seem to match up with 'official figures' which seem to be heading towards 100.
> 
> But there's lot of chatter on social media and conspiracy of a cover up and the latest figure I saw from FB was just over 500-these figures seem to wildly vary. Even given the variables-100 is obviously very different to just over 500



500 maybe comes from people seeing estimates of numbers of tenants (5-600) then seeing the council they've rehoused 44 families temporarily - a number which has gone up and down due to nearby homes also being evacuated - and not understanding that families means multiple people. Also a lot of people kind of enjoy catastrophising and competing with each other on how dramatic they can be. Given the nature of the internet these people stick out more than their actual size should suggest.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 17, 2017)




----------



## killer b (Jun 17, 2017)

Dandred said:


>



erm no.


----------



## The Boy (Jun 17, 2017)

Dandred said:


>




Maybe fuck off?

Edit:  unless I've seriously misread that post, in which case I apologise.


----------



## LDC (Jun 17, 2017)

Dandred said:


>




You fucking what? Don't you fucking dare start with that here.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 17, 2017)

We are not having 9/11 Truthing on this thread.

ETA: actually we're not having it anywhere but we're definitely not having it here.


----------



## 8den (Jun 17, 2017)

Cid said:


> Fucking hell. Bizarre.



Maybot is like the reverse Donald Trump. He can't stick to a script and she's incapable of deviating from her fixed "talking points". 

Utterly fucking useless the pair of them.


----------



## 8den (Jun 17, 2017)




----------



## 8den (Jun 17, 2017)

Dandred said:


>




Even if it's a joke it's in incredibly poor taste. Fuck off.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 17, 2017)

scifisam said:


> No, but that's what was being suggested.
> 
> There may be people in that building who have not been reported missing. In fact tbh I'd say it's likely there's at least a few.



One point I saw mentioned was that people who may have been in the building 'illegitimately' (for want of a better term) e.g. subletters, people without legal right of residence in U.K. may have escaped but may not have identified themselves to authorities for obvious reasons. There's been a specific request made for them to come forward without fear of action just so they can be accounted for. It'll add to more confusion over numbers.

The BBC reported that the 58 missing does include the 30 already located, but they think there may be more, around 70 in total. This is still quite a bit less than some of the numbers being thrown around. Not sure what difference it all makes, it's still a big number and still devastating.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 17, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> Police saying there are still 58 missing, all thought to be dead. I think that brings the number of dead so far to 88.



I'm wrong here. Current known dead is 58 as it included some already counted in the previous total of 30.



> Speaking outside Notting Hill Methodist church on Saturday, Commander Stuart Cundy confirmed that 30 people are known to have died, but that an additional 28 people known to have been in the building are also thought to be among the victims.



Grenfell Tower: 58 people missing, presumed dead as Theresa May admits response was 'not good enough'


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 17, 2017)

That Raheem UKIP/Breitbart twat is posting some right fake shitstirring bollocks on Twitter. Getting the feeling that the embryonic UK alt-wrong lot are bitter that the anti-establishment drive in the U.K. is coming from the left and their little coup has been drowned out.


----------



## editor (Jun 17, 2017)

1927 said:


> well they certainly didn't collapse just because of fire.


Please take your fascinatingly fact-free theories to the appropriate thread. Thank you.


----------



## editor (Jun 17, 2017)

Dandred said:


>



No. No here. No fucking way. I made a light hearted comment - which, granted,  may not have been in the greatest taste (sorry, all) - but it wasn't an invite for every fuckwit theory about 9/11 to be regurgitated here. All further posts referencing 9/11 and associated moronic theories will be deleted from this thread on sight.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 17, 2017)

editor said:


> No. No here. No fucking way. I made a light hearted comment - which, granted,  may not have been in the greatest taste (sorry, all) - but it wasn't an invite for every fuckwit theory about 9/11 to be regurgitated here. All further posts referencing 9/11 and associated moronic theories will be deleted from this thread on sight.



You are part of the msm so of course you'd deny it.

Alex


----------



## ddraig (Jun 17, 2017)

What the fucking fuck???!?? No loons please


----------



## 8den (Jun 17, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> I'm wrong here. Current known dead is 58 as it included some already counted in the previous total of 30.
> 
> 
> 
> Grenfell Tower: 58 people missing, presumed dead as Theresa May admits response was 'not good enough'



The death toll in the twin towers took months to come out, but in the early days after the attack, people we talking figures 3 or 4 times greater than the final figure. Granted the original death toll was base on full occupancy, and the planes hit early in the morning before most people arrived for work. And the WTC had about 100 times more people working in it than Grenfell Tower, the point is at this junction speculation is little more than guesswork. Between the difficulties in investigating a fire and the likelihood the building is unstable making such work even harder, it may be a week or two before we know.


----------



## 8den (Jun 17, 2017)

alex_ said:


> You are part of the msm so of course you'd deny it.
> 
> Alex



Dont even joke about the fucking jokes.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 17, 2017)

Is there some kind of batsignal for these people?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 17, 2017)

alex_ said:


> You are part of the msm so of course you'd deny it.
> 
> Alex


get bent


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 17, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> If you live in London you can choose between a tory council that will run down and clear out social housing or a labour council which will do the same. You can't lay these things at the door of ordinary people when you've got a broken system in which no democratic choice, no action permitted within that system will bring the changes needed.
> 
> E2a: and in somewhere like Kensington you've got to remember that every working class voter is up against however many mega-rich wankers who are not gonna give a shit about housing for the people who clean their houses and drive their cabs.



This is no accident, Thatcher set this in motion with the full support of capital.

Suspect part of the reason Brenda's so glum is that her family has 1000 years experience of shitting on the serfs whilst having them adore you. In the past 30 years her government has given up on the 'get the serfs to adore you' shiz.


Well, serf's up. Grenfell Tower is 2017's Wat Tyler and it's time for change


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 17, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


>



This woman is outstanding. She's calm, rational and extremely knowledgeable. She speaks for 7 minutes and there isn't a wasted word in there. Easily the best thing I've seen on this so far. Thanks for posting.


----------



## phillm (Jun 17, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Here's a handy rule of thumb, if a source mentions any of the following: New World Order/NWO, Illuminati, Bilderbergs, Trilateral Commission, Soros, the value of gold and how important it is that you acquire great quantities of this impractical metal, Flat Earth, then it's a crap source and should be entirely disregarded. The fact that such sources can draw from the real world (such as from _vox pops_) is no guarantee of reliability, since there is such a thing as editing and cherry picking.
> 
> Hope this helps.



you missed out colloidal silver and false flag otherwise very comprehensive


----------



## Wilf (Jun 17, 2017)

Truthers can fuck right off this thread. But let's step round them rather than waste our anger.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 17, 2017)

editor said:


> Ah yes, but the Twin Towers were also pre-wired with massive explosives and were also hit by holographic, missile firing rockets made to look like passenger aircraft. At least, that's what Jazz told me.


Nanothermite, not just any explosives, at that.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 17, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> get bent


----------



## phillm (Jun 17, 2017)

This vile piece of editorial was prominent on the DM website an hour ago and then dissapeared so I had to do an advanced search for it. So to preserve this bile I will qoute it in full. So this is how they intend framing 'their fightback'.

DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Shame of playing politics with tragedy | Daily Mail Online

_After the horrific blaze at Grenfell Tower, this should have been a week for the nation to unite in grief for the dead, the bereaved and the relatives of the missing.


It should have been a week for politicians to join in demanding how such a catastrophe could happen in a first-world country, and seek immediate ways of averting another.


But no. Barely had the body count begun – and it seems, tragically, that it will run into scores – than hard-Left supporters of Jeremy Corbyn were spinning a narrative about the fire, blaming divisions of wealth, profiteering and (inevitably) ‘Tory cuts’.


After the Grenfell fire, hard-Left supporters of Jeremy Corbyn were spinning a narrative about Tory cuts. The Labour leader is pictured at the scene 


After the Grenfell fire, hard-Left supporters of Jeremy Corbyn were spinning a narrative about Tory cuts. The Labour leader is pictured at the scene 


Meanwhile, the Labour leader himself sought to advance his class-war agenda by insisting that the state should seize the properties of Kensington’s absentee rich to house those made homeless by the fire.


As if this weren’t bad enough, the Left played an unseemly game of competitive compassion (‘if Theresa May cared as much as Mr Corbyn, she would have talked to victims, not just emergency services’).


Enough! Out of respect for the victims and concern for others at risk, it is imperative to take the politics out of this tragedy and for our leaders, calmly yet urgently, to learn its lessons.


One thing is abundantly clear: budget cuts by the Tory council had nothing to do with it. Indeed, the tragic irony is that if Kensington and Chelsea had spent not a penny on refurbishment, the blaze could almost certainly have been contained.


As it was, the authority spent £8.6million on ‘improvements’ – money that appears to have been spent with appalling incompetence, hugely increasing the risk of an inferno. The way residents’ warnings were ignored should haunt all concerned.


For just £200,000, life-saving sprinklers could have been installed. Instead, priority seems to have been given to meeting EU targets for energy conservation, with the contractors using inferior exterior cladding of a type banned in other countries and insulation known to emit lethal cyanide.


Equally groundless are the Left’s attempts to blame cuts in London’s fire service. In fact, 40 appliances tackled the blaze – with the first of 300 heroic crew arriving within six minutes, in a city with the fastest response times in the country.


As for the Left’s efforts to smear Mrs May, yes, a more image-conscious politician might have ignored police advice and mingled with the victims, parading her compassion before the TV cameras. But given her shaken appearance, her prompt decision to set up a public inquiry and a £5million emergency relief fund, it is simply malicious to suggest she doesn’t care.


This should have been a week for the nation to unite in grief for the dead, the bereaved and the relatives of the missing. The fire is pictured above 


This should have been a week for the nation to unite in grief for the dead, the bereaved and the relatives of the missing. The fire is pictured above 


Which brings us to Mr Corbyn’s sinister call to requisition houses whose owners are overseas – even though ample accommodation was offered elsewhere.


Leave aside that property seizures would prompt a mass flight of the rich from London, causing untold harm to the economy. No, this was a naked, rabble-rousing attempt to stir up class envy – a classic tactic of the hard-Left.


More blatant still are the efforts by Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell to provoke a union-led popular uprising. His aim is to topple this shaky government with a summer of strikes and million-strong demonstrations, culminating in power for Mr Corbyn in a ‘Red October’. The threat of violence, already bubbling to the surface in London yesterday, is implicit.


But then what could we expect of a self-described Marxist, who has backed terrorists and makes no secret of his belief in taking power by undemocratic means? Truly, these are chilling times for Britain.


Yes, there are devastating questions for officials, contractors, councillors and ministers to answer about Grenfell Tower. But to exploit this tragedy in order to foment division is not only an affront to British democracy but a betrayal of the victims themselves.


_


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

read this - I got it from twitter don't know what newspaper the letter is in.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> read this - I got it from twitter don't know what newspaper the letter is in.
> View attachment 109578


Looks like the guardian. What twitter did you take it from?


----------



## alex_ (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> read this - I got it from twitter don't know what newspaper the letter is in.
> View attachment 109578



The guardian


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jun 17, 2017)

What does everyone make of the conspiracy theories about the death toll; that the government know it's much higher but are suppressing the actual number? 


.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 17, 2017)

Sorry I was mocking jazz, more than anything, in response to the post by Ed. 

Having read the BBC article where may admits the response wasn't good enough, I was hoping there would be more support now on offer than 'people in high visibility jackets offering advice'. At least put more money in the discretionary fund, or promise people proper long term housing. Do something substantial.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> read this - I got it from twitter don't know what newspaper the letter is in.
> View attachment 109578


Yesterday's guardian as a quick Google reveals


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

Kid_Eternity said:


> What does everyone make of the conspiracy theories about the death toll; that the government know it's much higher but are suppressing the actual number?
> 
> 
> .


of course it's higher


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

yep sorry its guardian. Astonishing, i think. The council has saved so much money into its reserves they were handing it out to the people who need it least??


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> yep sorry its guardian. Astonishing, i think. The council has saved so much money into its reserves they were handing it out to the people who need it least??


Is that what it says?


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Is that what it says?


err. yes? £100 rebates were sent to all who pay full rate council tax in K&C. Reserves currently (for year 16-17) of £209 million.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> err. yes? £100 rebates were sent to all who pay full rate council tax in K&C. Reserves currently (for year 16-17) of £209 million.


Where does it say this money came from the reserves?


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jun 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> of course it's higher



Well we don't know that as fact but it quite possible. What I'm interested in is how to counter the wilder speculation?


.


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Where does it say this money came from the reserves?


i don't understand your question. The letters says that the writer received with their bill a notification that due to its careful managing of its finances the council was able to send £100 back to all full tax paying residents, as that money was surplus to requirements.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Well we don't know that as fact but it quite possible. What I'm interested in is how to counter the wilder speculation?
> 
> 
> .


Why do you want to?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> i don't understand your question. The letters says that the writer received with their bill a notification that due to its careful managing of its finances the council was able to send £100 back to all full tax paying residents, as that money was surplus to requirements.


2208. They've saved so much into the reserves they're handing it out.


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

yeah as i said i don't know what you're on about. If you get a different interpretation from the letter do explain what i've got wrong.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> yeah as i said i don't know what you're on about. If you get a different interpretation form the letter do explain what i've got wrong.


Your post 2208.  I'm asking you about your post.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jun 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Why do you want to?



Ok you're playing your usual dick moves...but it's obvious: why would you want wild bullshit speculation dominating? Don't you want an informed intelligent citizenry?


.


----------



## binka (Jun 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Your post 2208.


Fucking hell does it matter? It doesn't affect the point being made - the council giving rebates to the wealthiest residents


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Your post 2208.  I'm asking you about your post.


You have a problem with "reserves" or "handing it out" or "to the people who need it least" ? WTF.
Or do you think the information in the letter is not of interest?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Ok you're playing your usual dick moves...but it's obvious: why would you want wild bullshit speculation dominating? Don't you want an informed intelligent citizenry?
> 
> 
> .


Tell you what, read the thread.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> You have a problem with "reserves" or "handing it out" or "to the people who need it least" ? WTF.
> Or do you think the information in the letter is not of interest?


Lots of things are of interest. But 1) I'm struggling to see how you get your money from reserves reading from the letter, but more importantly 2) I don't see how this £100 rebate is related to the fire except as context of general rbkc culture


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Lots of things are of interest. But 1) I'm struggling to see how you get your money from reserves reading from the letter, but more importantly 2) I don't see how this £100 rebate is related to the fire


i don't think i can help as both seem so obvious that i think you're just having a bad day. Drink some water its hot out there.
ah, good edit: Yes except as in context, as in in context with decisions made on what to do with their money, like for instance that they decided to send it back to the wealthy residents instead of installing sprinkler systems in the council housing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> i don't think i can help as both seem so obvious that i think you're just having a bad day. Drink some water its hot out there.


Right. Obvious to you. But it doesn't say the money came from the reserves, and we've been through the issue of rkbc culture already.


----------



## 8den (Jun 17, 2017)

Kid_Eternity said:


> What does everyone make of the conspiracy theories about the death toll; that the government know it's much higher but are suppressing the actual number?
> 
> 
> .



There was a theory that a D-notice was sent out over the death toll, but it's been widely discredited. Anyway, D-notices are a terribly British way of dealing with press censorship of sensitive stories, they aren't legally binding for a start, and have often been ignored (see the Guardian & Snowden). The British Press are far too competitive to sit on this story, and besides even if some reason they all agreed to keep stum, there's nothing the British Govt could do to stop foreign media reporting it. 

So yeah I'm saying it's bollocks.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 17, 2017)

.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 17, 2017)

8den said:


> The death toll in the twin towers took months to come out, but in the early days after the attack, people we talking figures 3 or 4 times greater than the final figure. Granted the original death toll was base on full occupancy, and the planes hit early in the morning before most people arrived for work. And the WTC had about 100 times more people working in it than Grenfell Tower, the point is at this junction speculation is little more than guesswork. Between the difficulties in investigating a fire and the likelihood the building is unstable making such work even harder, it may be a week or two before we know.


I remember the day after 9/11, the Belfast Telegraph's headline was "20,000 Dead".


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 17, 2017)

BTW I removed one more post that was trying to bring up 911. Don't do this please.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> ah, good edit: Yes except as in context, as in in context with decisions made on what to do with their money, like for instance that they decided to send it back to the wealthy residents instead of installing sprinkler systems in the council housing.


Near the start of the thread the gag blog was introduced which went through the rkbc refusal to do anything about residents' concerns. We've been through the bit about the view from conservation areas. We've looked at the small price difference between insulation used and fire resistant insulation. Not sure if we've mentioned rydon nepostistic sub-contracting. I think the council's attitude to its social housing residents - tenants and leaseholders - has been examined in some detail, and this letter to my mind adds at most icing to that cake of contempt and derision. Tory councils over the years, Wandsworth, Westminster, rkbc, Barnet, have in turn acted as flagship councils allegedly showing how tories offer better value for money whereas the tawdry truth is they all shaft their working class inhabitants. Walking from the Westway to Holland Park you see very much two boroughs, where even the pavement seems to improve as you walk south, the carriageway seems smoother. There are trees in the posh parts. If the council had installed sprinklers I think they'd have been as effective as the fire alarms already in the blocks, as safe as the insulation on the outside of the building


----------



## 8den (Jun 17, 2017)

phillm said:


> This vile piece of editorial was prominent on the DM website an hour ago and then dissapeared so I had to do an advanced search for it. So to preserve this bile I will qoute it in full. So this is how they intend framing 'their fightback'.
> 
> DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Shame of playing politics with tragedy | Daily Mail Online
> 
> ...



Fixed that for them.


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Near the start of the thread the gag blog was introduced which went through the rkbc refusal to do anything about residents' concerns. We've been through the bit about the view from conservation areas. We've looked at the small price difference between insulation used and fire resistant insulation. Not sure if we've mentioned rydon nepostistic sub-contracting. I think the council's attitude to its social housing residents - tenants and leaseholders - has been examined in some detail, and this letter to my mind adds at most icing to that cake of contempt and derision. Tory councils over the years, Wandsworth, Westminster, rkbc, Barnet, have in turn acted as flagship councils allegedly showing how tories offer better value for money whereas the tawdry truth is they all shaft their working class inhabitants. Walking from the Westway to Holland Park you see very much two boroughs, where even the pavement seems to improve as you walk south, the carriageway seems smoother. There are trees in the posh parts. If the council had installed sprinklers I think they'd have been as effective as the fire alarms already in the blocks, as safe as the insulation on the outside of the building


Yep agreed . Icing on cake is all it is, but not sure why you got so arsey with me.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 17, 2017)

ska invita said:


> Ive been thinking about the possibility of a possible criminal conviction...i know others here are quite hot on law so would be curious if you have an opinion
> 
> my understanding so far is that no one will be convicted...i say this partially from my own experience in dealing with fire regulations in my own place of work. When Fire Regs people come around there is a legal basic limit of what has to be there, and everything on top is recommended, or advised, but not mandatory. The level of what becomes recommended as opposed to essential seems pretty wide and deep.
> 
> ...



Looking at the blog posts. None refer to the cladding. Access for emergency vehicles is brought up, rubbish not being cleared and also issues around the Fire Risk Assessment.

The action group were complaining about emergency lighting and out of date fire extinguishers for example.

The action group were bringing up issues of poor management by the TMO.

Fire Risk Assessments are a judgement call. Many buildings in London are old. What was acceptable in 70s is not so now.

The Fire Risk Assessment had a stay put advice for residents. This is standard for blocks of flats. Putting in fireproof front doors with smoke seals is supposed to mean that one is safer staying in one's flat. This also depends on the assessment seeing that "compartmentalization" of the building works. That is that if fire starts in one flat it will not spread. Due to structure of building. Smoke seals on front doors should mean that smoke does not get into flats.

Something went badly wrong. I'm guessing but looks like staying put in one's flat didn't work.

I would say that the most recent FRA should be looked at. What it said and whether recommendations were followed.


----------



## editor (Jun 17, 2017)

From today's protest












Protest photos: No Coalition of Chaos with the DUP, Whitehall, London, Sat 17th June


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> Yep agreed . Icing on cake is all it is, but not sure why you got so arsey with me.


Because so frequently when you're presented with long bits of text you read into them things that aren't in fact there and, in at least this instance, don't do the simplest due diligence to see whether they're from a reasonable source. And then you get arsey when it's pointed out you're seeing things not there. I'm sure we've been through this before on a score of occasions.


----------



## bimble (Jun 17, 2017)

Never mind pickmans, don't think i did anything wrong but lets just leave it shall we, we don't disagree about anything of any significance here at all.


----------



## ChrisD (Jun 17, 2017)

The author of this blog know more about history and design of social housing than most local authority housing managers. Here's his take on Grenfell :
Municipal Dreams
"....Thirdly, and underlying everything said so far here and elsewhere, comes MONEY.  For almost four decades, we have been taught to see public spending as a bad thing; ruthless economising as a virtue.  We have come to know the price of everything and the value of nothing…and have ended with the funeral pyre of Grenfell Tower..."


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 17, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> Looking at the blog posts. None refer to the cladding. Access for emergency vehicles is brought up, rubbish not being cleared and also issues around the Fire Risk Assessment.
> 
> The action group were complaining about emergency lighting and out of date fire extinguishers for example.
> 
> ...



This is the point I made earlier today or perhaps yesterday. The last FRA was in December 2015, when the renovations (including cladding) were underway but had not been completed. There has been no FRA in the last 18 months. Half of the 82 buildings under KCTMO 'management' have even had an FRA in the last 18 months but Grenfell Tower hasn't despite the fact that it's undergone a £10m refurbishment and despite the fact that it's the second tallest building that KCTMO 'manage' and therefore a greater fire risk concern. KCTMO have dropped an enormous bollock by not commissioning a post-refurbishment FRA.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 17, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> This is the point I made earlier today or perhaps yesterday. The last FRA was in December 2015, when the renovations (including cladding) were underway but had not been completed. There has been no FRA in the last 18 months. Half of the 82 buildings under KCTMO 'management' have even had an FRA in the last 18 months but Grenfell Tower hasn't despite the fact that it's undergone a £10m refurbishment and despite the fact that it's the second tallest building that KCTMO 'manage' and therefore a greater fire risk concern. KCTMO have dropped an enormous bollock by not commissioning a post-refurbishment FRA.


This sort of thing would be handy but mandatory rather than reccomended 

http://www.london-fire.gov.uk/Docum...n_refurbished_buildings_audit_tool_report.pdf


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 17, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> This is the point I made earlier today or perhaps yesterday. The last FRA was in December 2015, when the renovations (including cladding) were underway but had not been completed. There has been no FRA in the last 18 months. Half of the 82 buildings under KCTMO 'management' have even had an FRA in the last 18 months but Grenfell Tower hasn't despite the fact that it's undergone a £10m refurbishment and despite the fact that it's the second tallest building that KCTMO 'manage' and therefore a greater fire risk concern. KCTMO have dropped an enormous bollock by not commissioning a post-refurbishment FRA.



A FRA does not have to be done every year. A block of this age and height once every three years with an annual review.

If annual reviews have not been done and recorded the TMO may have a problem.

The refurbishment would if it had been done properly probably have kept fire risk level the same as before or less. ( New front doors with higher rating of fire proof.)

So TMO may argue that within the best of there knowledge they haven't been careless.

FRA are not infaluable. Most people who do them are ex firemen. They are not builders. If told and shown documentation that works are done properly they must accept that.

Some people who do FRA are also surveyors. With greater knowledge of buildings.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 17, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> A FRA does not have to be done every year. A block of this age and height once every three years with an annual review.
> 
> If annual reviews have not been done and recorded the TMO may have a problem.
> 
> ...


I was trying to find out about this yesterday and it seems there are no hard and fast legal requirements on how frequently FRAs should be undertaken. Once every couple of years may be the norm for a low-rise multiple dwelling residential building, but an ageing 24 storey tower block which has just had £10m of work done and only has one staircase fire escape route should be having them more frequently. You would think it would have had one immediately after the refurbishment has finished at the very least. I expect FRA laws may change in light of what happened this week.

As you probably know, FRAs aren't done by the fire brigade, they're done by third party companies who are hired by managing agents (KCTMO in this case). The company who conducted a previous FRA at Grenfell Tower in 2010 were hired because, according to KCTMOs own board meeting notes, they offered the 'most competitive price'. That's not to say that company did a shitty job, but it is indicative of KCTMO's miserly, safety-last attitude towards the less affluent residents in the borough.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 17, 2017)

Here she is, Rachel Johnson. Piece of shit


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 17, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Here she is, Rachel Johnson. Piece of shit


I've got work tomorrow so should be going to bed soon, I really don't think I want to listen to that...


----------



## Lorca (Jun 17, 2017)

ChrisD said:


> The author of this blog know more about history and design of social housing than most local authority housing managers. Here's his take on Grenfell :
> Municipal Dreams
> "....Thirdly, and underlying everything said so far here and elsewhere, comes MONEY.  For almost four decades, we have been taught to see public spending as a bad thing; ruthless economising as a virtue. * We* have come to know the price of everything and the value of nothing…and have ended with the funeral pyre of Grenfell Tower..."



only a small point, but I wish people wouldn't use 'we' like that...we don't do these things, they're imposed upon most of us by a bunch of heartless bastards and their chums in the media.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 17, 2017)

Kid_Eternity said:


> What does everyone make of the conspiracy theories about the death toll; that the government know it's much higher but are suppressing the actual number?


A friend local to the area has posted  on facebook that there are 160 confirmed dead according to emergency services but that the figure is being repressed.


----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 17, 2017)

from the Save the UK Fire Service facebook group - long but worth a read



> Sent to us at STUKFS Powerful and emotional story from a firefighter who attended Grenfell Tower....
> 
> I'm not sure if this is something that I should vocalise or whether or not it should be shared with the world but as I sit at home thinking about the other night the Grenfell Tower I feel like people might want to know how the incident went from the point of view of a firefighter who was sent inside, while the tower burned all around us and how after years of cuts to the service I work for, how I feel about what we do and how the past few years have been for us.
> 
> ...


----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 17, 2017)

pt 2 



> As always we were woken with a start, the lights came on and the automated tannoy voice started shouting our call signs. It never fails to set your heat racing. Getting dressed I looked at the clock, I'd only lay down less than a hour ago. Time to see what we've got this time..
> Down the pole to the trucks and it's here I'm handed the call slip make pumps plenty.. what! No..
> That's a big incident.
> Wait.... I don't know where this is.. it's not on our ground.
> ...


----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 17, 2017)

pt3



> Taking a casualty each we set off. Within two floors both of us had been pushed down one of the flight of the stairs by our casualties. They are screaming at us that they couldn't breath.
> We try to reassure them.
> Stay with me!!
> We are going to get you out!!.
> ...


----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 17, 2017)

pt4



> -----------
> 
> 
> Now... this is only a small part of the things we saw and did on that night. Other stories will obviously come out but some won't. Some will be kept by firefighters and the other emergency services hidden away deep down in their thoughts, never to pass in to words, never to be told to a living soul but always there, those emotional scars will forever be there.
> ...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 17, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


> Are you absolutely raving mad? I didn't check who the video was uploaded by but on looking just now I see it's someone with a youtube account called witness who has this video and 11 others about katie fucking Perry ffs, you fucking sock-muppet. And the rest of you paranoics who went, yeah, it's oiks agenda. What a bunch of numpties. Get a life.
> 
> Go take a look in the mirror. Unfuckigbelievable. You couldn't make this shit up.



I suggest you wind your neck in, read the words I typed, consider what I said, and then write out your apology.

If that's beyond you, then I suggest you simply stroll on and don't bother dirtying up the thread with anything further on this particular side-issue.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 17, 2017)

gawkrodger said:


> from the Save the UK Fire Service facebook group - long but worth a read


Astonishing, sobering stuff - thanks for sharing.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2017)

Here we go...

Council attacked for stockpiling £274m despite Grenfell Tower residents' calls for fire safety improvements



> The council responsible for Grenfell Tower, where at least 58 people are now thought to have lost their lives after Wednesday's horrific fire, has been accused of carrying out “unacceptable” financial practises after it emerged the borough had stockpiled £274m of usable reserves following years of chronic underspending.
> 
> Labour MP for Tottenham David Lammy, whose friend Khadija Saye was killed in the blaze, said very serious questions needed to be asked about why the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC) was running a budget surplus despite repeated warnings from residents that the block posed a fire risk....


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 18, 2017)

As well as the various funds to support the survivors, you can also donate to the Grenfell Action Group, the residents' group which raised safety concerns with KCTMO and RBKC before the fire:

_To support The Grenfell Action Group Please donate to RHN account, marking donation 'GAG' - bank details are: s/c 08-92-99, acc no 65779994

or to Help raise £5000 to support the Grenfell Action Group Fighting Fund.  Through campaigning and court cases we can bring those responsible for the fire to justice_​(Via Solidarity with Residents of Grenfell Tower Facebook Group)


----------



## OneStrike (Jun 18, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Here we go...
> 
> Council attacked for stockpiling £274m despite Grenfell Tower residents' calls for fire safety improvements


The article doesn't suggest where they were investing/keeping the profits other than a handback of £100 per household, do we have this info?  I've been following the thread but do miss things.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 18, 2017)

OneStrike said:


> The article doesn't suggest where they were investing/keeping the profits other than a handback of £100 per household, do we have this info?  I've been following the thread but do miss things.


Sorry I have no idea i am just really fucking angry. Cunts.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 18, 2017)

Been talking to my dad about this this afternoon (he's a professor of combustion engineering / fire engineering, ran one of the only fire engineering courses in the country for several decades).

It seems that the list of regulatory failures that led to this are quite a bit longer and go back further than I'd thought.

Stuff like the fact that the advice that people in tall buildings should stay in their flats, and shouldn't use the lifts to escape has been under review for something like 15 years without that review ever being concluded.

And he reckons that the building regs requirements for the fire rating of these cladding panels / insulation for tall buildings was reduced in the building regs revision in 2010 when it changed from a previous BS standard to a EN BS standard, but you'd have to actually have copies of each document to know this. The new regs specifically don't have any requirement for smoke / soot emissions or to prevent molten burning material from dripping and spreading the fire that way. Which is why the smoke was so bad, and molten burning material can be seen falling from the cladding.

Amongst other things that he's currently writing up a report on.

Says he's been making these points at conferences etc for years and being ignored.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2017)

OneStrike said:


> The article doesn't suggest where they were investing/keeping the profits other than a handback of £100 per household, do we have this info?  I've been following the thread but do miss things.


The rebate/hardback was according to bimble's letter only 2014/15.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jun 18, 2017)

Link to that firefighter piece here, we need to get that shared as much as possible round Facebook to counter the lies being told about the operation: 


.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 18, 2017)

I can't vouch for the accuracy, but here's a list of ACM cladding fires from around the world, that shows why these materials should have been banned for this use well before they were used on this cladding project, if the Secratary of State was vaguely competent / not under the influence of the cladding / building industry.



> Borgata Casino Water Club Tower, Atlantic City, USA 2007 Sep
> Wooshin Golden Suites, South Korea 2010 Oct
> 28-story high-rise apartment, Shanghai, China 2010 Nov
> Dynasty Wanxin Hotel , Beijing, China 2011 Jan
> ...



From a comment on this article Updated: Grenfell fire highlights ‘serious failure’ and cladding concerns


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 18, 2017)

teqniq said:


> What kind of mental gymnastics were involved in that pronouncement?



No mental gymnastics, just the political classes closing ranks and protecting their own, the cunts.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. Do you have evidence for this potentially libellous statement?



To be fair, Piers is one of my Facebook "friends", and he often veers off into some extremely unsavoury loonspudulence around climate change.  Never seen him giving it the old "international bankers" _schtick_, mind, although he has more than a few followers who've obviously swallowed "The Protocols..." and every shitty diatribe Icke has ever written, whole.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jun 18, 2017)

YouSir said:


> .



.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 18, 2017)

Somewhat "homespun", but a favourite Youtuber of mine in Australia who's an amateur engineer and part-time bush fire-preventer happened to get his hands on some of this stuff and has spotted yet another weakness in its construction ...



Spoiler: youtube video


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 18, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Somewhat "homespun", but a favourite Youtuber of mine in Australia who's an amateur engineer and part-time bush fire-preventer happened to get his hands on some of this stuff and has spotted yet another weakness in its construction ...
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: youtube video



Can you explain what this weakness is? I'm afraid I'm not feeling up to wading through random videos


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 18, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> Can you explain what this weakness is? I'm afraid I'm not feeling up to wading through random videos



In the samples he has, there's actually a groove cut through the aluminium skin as part of the fixing process - so it's not like it's even a continuous skin.


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

great pic from one of yesterday's demos (found here)


----------



## Dandred (Jun 18, 2017)

500-600 dead according to this woman.


----------



## Thora (Jun 18, 2017)

Dandred said:


> 500-600 dead according to this woman
> A]


I haven't watched the video but that would mean 4-5 deaths per flat wouldn't it?  Which seems a bit unlikely.


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

That woman is obviously distressed. Don't think anybody knows yet what the true death toll is. There are survivors who got out.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 18, 2017)

It seems unlikely to me too, and it's Press TV.


----------



## maomao (Jun 18, 2017)

And the poster who's put it up is a pointless stirrer.


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 18, 2017)

Pilgrim Tucker from Grenfell Action Group is on Marr,  BBC1 now.


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 18, 2017)

can anyone confirm this list's accuracy or not? 149 still missing according to it

Gathrer.com Grenfell Resident Status List


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jun 18, 2017)

Interesting development reported by BBC just now. 

Perhaps whoever is running things in No 10 right now have, belatedly, realised that the utter inability of KCBC to provide help to its citizens is making austerity look bad.



> Government staff have been drafted in to manage the response to the Grenfell Tower fire after criticism of Kensington and Chelsea Borough Council.
> 
> A team of civil servants has been embedded in the council office after residents complained they had been left with little support or information from officials.



Grenfell Tower fire: Government staff sent into Kensington and Chelsea council - BBC News


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 18, 2017)

T & P said:


> According to the Mail, the Royal Family has been 'defiant' in the face of tragedy by going ahead with Brenda's birthday bash


It isn't a 'Birthday Bash' per se, it is the equivalent of 4th July for the USA or Bastille Day for France.


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

frogwoman said:


> can anyone confirm this list's accuracy or not? 149 still missing according to it
> 
> Gathrer.com Grenfell Resident Status List



I've no idea but you can see the chaos and confusion looking at that list, how the same people are reported missing from different flats, spellings of peoples names are unsure etc. The council must have better than that surely?


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 18, 2017)

bimble said:


> I've no idea but you can see the chaos and confusion looking at that list, how the same people are reported missing from different flats, spellings of peoples names are unsure etc. The council must have better than that surely?



there'll be lots of subletting, people staying over, etc i imagine


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 18, 2017)

Week in review: Grenfell could break the back of the Tories


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 18, 2017)

frogwoman said:


> can anyone confirm this list's accuracy or not? 149 still missing according to it
> 
> Gathrer.com Grenfell Resident Status List



Of the 149 listed as missing I counted at least 37 that are also listed as being duplicates in the comments column. I wouldn't regard that list as being remotely accurate.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 18, 2017)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Interesting development reported by BBC just now.
> 
> Perhaps whoever is running things in No 10 right now have, belatedly, realised that the utter inability of KCBC to provide help to its citizens is making austerity look bad.
> 
> ...



There was someone on one of the news channels earlier saying they hadn't seen anyone from K&C council on the ground, but a number of employees from Westminster council had been helping.

WFT is wrong with K&C?


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 18, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> It isn't a 'Birthday Bash' per se, it is the equivalent of 4th July for the USA or Bastille Day for France.


Given what the latter two commemorate, I'm not sure a Royal birthday is _quite_ the same thing...  Especially when it's fake


----------



## mauvais (Jun 18, 2017)

Grenfell Tower fire: May under pressure after 'angry exchanges' in No 10 – live updates



> Eve Allison, a Conservative who sits on Kensington and Chelsea Borough Council, said the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower should have looked at the inside as well as the outside of the block.
> 
> “It is on our watch, it’s our responsibility, we do have a duty of care to all our residents and whatever findings and failings come out, they have to come out soon because all the community, the victims, the families, people need answers,” she told BBC Breakfast.
> 
> ...


Perhaps not quite the right choice of phrase at the end there?


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 18, 2017)

I suppose they're getting closer, but fundamentally they're still not getting it...


----------



## teqniq (Jun 18, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Grenfell Tower fire: May under pressure after 'angry exchanges' in No 10 – live updates
> 
> Perhaps not quite the right choice of phrase at the end there?


Not really, no. Nevertheless it is telling of the prevalent attitude and for that I suppose we should be grateful. No regard for health and safety, just _appearances_.


----------



## 1927 (Jun 18, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> It isn't a 'Birthday Bash' per se, it is the equivalent of 4th July for the USA or Bastille Day for France.


No its not!


----------



## tim (Jun 18, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> It isn't a 'Birthday Bash' per se, it is the equivalent of 4th July for the USA or Bastille Day for France.



Clearly, it isn't because they don't give us a day off work and we don't stuff ourselves with roast swan and sturgeon.


----------



## YouSir (Jun 18, 2017)

1927 said:


> No its not!



People actually celebrate those for one thing.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 18, 2017)

And the small matter of us still having a monarchy.

You know, _like _celebrating a revolution and declaration of independence, but not.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 18, 2017)

tim said:


> Clearly, it isn't because they don't give us a day off work and we don't stuff ourselves with roast swan and sturgeon.



Much to Nicola's relief.


----------



## JTG (Jun 18, 2017)

Southampton & England defender Ryan Bertrand appears to be standing in for RBKC


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 18, 2017)

So the number of people in the building... Some guesstimates based on available figures. Feel free to correct me!

120 total flats over 20 floors*

Total of 80 two bedroom flats. (4 two bedroom flats on each floor.)
Total of 40 one bedroom flats. (2 two bedroom flats on each floor.)

Minimum total inhabitants presuming all flats occupied:

80 x 2 people = 160 people in two bed flats.
40 x 1 person = 40 people in one bed flats.
*= 200 people in Grenfell Tower*

A higher total of inhabitants based on all flats occupied with two adults, two children in two bed flats,  and two adults in one bed flats .

80 x 4 people = 320 people in two bed flats.
40 x 2 people = 80 people in one bed flats.
*= 400 people in Grenfell Tower.*

An even higher estimate of inhabitants based on all 2 bed flats having 6 people in them and one bed flats having 3 people in them.

80 x 6 people = 480 people in two bed flats.
40 x 3 people = 120 people in one bed flats.
*= 600 people in Grenfell Tower.*

Of course it's known that *some* two bed flats had more than 4 people and *some* one bed flats had more than 2 people in them, but reports also show there are instances of just one person in a one bed flat and two people in a two bed flat. That being the case it means that you'd need incrementally more people in those other flats to push the 400 total higher.

So I'd estimate somewhere between 400 and 600 people living there.

The fact it was 1am suggests many might have been at home in bed but there's probably some +/- variation due to work/social visits/Ramadan.

The death toll is officially 58.
There's a reported 72 people taken to hospital.
We know some people escaped unharmed, but not how many.
Total official dead and injured = 130 people.

The best way of finding out numbers is for  the council to say how many people they are having to re-house. That should be easy to assertion and would give a better way of looking how many are dead based on above guesswork.



*BBC reports 127 flats from floors 3 to 24 and with one or more on floor 2 which is mixed use floor. Other reports state only 120.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jun 18, 2017)

This smells very bad.



> The council responsible for Grenfell Tower, where at least 58 people are now thought to have lost their lives after Wednesday's horrific fire, has been accused of carrying out “unacceptable” financial practises after it emerged the borough had stockpiled £274m of usable reserves following years of chronic underspending.


 (my emphasis)


Where £5k would have bought a less flammable cladding, £200k a sprinkler system, meaning these people would not be dead or homeless.
Where the survivors have received help only from overstretched emergency services, volunteers and charities and the council has been invisible on the ground.

So what was that nice fat pot of money earmarked for one asks?



> ... claims by Labour Councillor Robert Atkinson the council was “bribing the electorate with its own money” after it “systematically and deliberately created underspends”.
> 
> “Our suspicion, based on past experience, remains that this council will bring in and hoard the people’s money in non election years (such as this) only to give it back as a pre-election bribe immediately before a council election – such as next year,” he said in a speech after 2017’s budget was announced.
> 
> “We think this council’s long standing practises of, every year, running huge underspends in its revenue budgets which it then transfers into Capital reserves is wrong, and, given the damage to services that has resulted over many years from the squeezing of revenue budgets it is not to put too fine a point on it – wicked.”



Council attacked for stockpiling £274m despite Grenfell Tower residents' calls for fire safety improvements


----------



## teqniq (Jun 18, 2017)

I already posted this yesterday but thanks for posting it again, it need to be repeated and shared far and wide.


----------



## Voley (Jun 18, 2017)

Bernie Gunther said:


> This smells very bad.
> 
> (my emphasis)
> 
> ...


This tweet is making the same point:


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jun 18, 2017)

teqniq said:


> I already posted this yesterday but thanks for posting it again, it need to be repeated and shared far and wide.



Sorry, I searched on the URL and didn't find anything.


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 18, 2017)

To add to Barking_Mad 's numbers, I know the housing situation is very different in London from where i live (where there is a lot of underoccupation as well as a lot of overoccupation in social housing because of the housing stock available and historic reasons). But surely there would be at least some underoccupation (pensioners whose kids have moved out, private leaseholders who can afford the mortgage and service charge) which would bring the total down a bit, even if flats were more likely to be fully or over occupied - though a few cases of extreme overoccupation or big iftar dinner parties might cancel that out i suppose.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 18, 2017)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Sorry, I searched on the URL and didn't find anything.


No really please no need to apologise. Not everybody will continue reading where they left off last night so it definitely need to be reposted.  The more people that are made aware of what they have done the better, it's fucking disgusting imo.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 18, 2017)

teqniq said:


> No really please no need to apologise. Not everybody will continue reading where they left off last night so it definitely need to be reposted.  The more people that are made aware of what they have done the better, it's fucking disgusting imo.


Indeed - I've really been trying to keep up with all the developments but this is naturally moving so fast that if you're away for a few hours you can come back to 10/15 pages of (often quite dense) reading, which is still growing as you try to catch up!

As frustrating as reposts can be sometimes, I think in this instance it's good to have 'recaps' or reposts.


----------



## cybertect (Jun 18, 2017)

Buzzfeed are reporting that Ealing Council are taking over the emergency response from RBKC

Another London Council Says It Is Stepping In To Deal With The Grenfell Tower Fire Crisis


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 18, 2017)

Voley said:


> This tweet is making the same point:


That's a bloody good letter.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 18, 2017)

free spirit said:


> Been talking to my dad about this this afternoon (he's a professor of combustion engineering / fire engineering, ran one of the only fire engineering courses in the country for several decades).
> 
> It seems that the list of regulatory failures that led to this are quite a bit longer and go back further than I'd thought.
> 
> ...




Appreciate a link to that report if your allowed to share it when it's done.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 18, 2017)

cybertect said:


> Buzzfeed are reporting that Ealing Council are taking over the emergency response from RBKC
> 
> Another London Council Says It Is Stepping In To Deal With The Grenfell Tower Fire Crisis


Holy hell, this just keeps on getting more and more embarrassing (and shameful) for K&C.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 18, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> Of the 149 listed as missing I counted at least 37 that are also listed as being duplicates in the comments column. I wouldn't regard that list as being remotely accurate.



Yeah, I just used Excel and "repeat" or "repeated" in the editable column suggests 37 duplicates. Might be more with different spellings of the same name that have not been spotted.

I might have a better look at it later. The guy needs to A to Z his list by surname!


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 18, 2017)

Another London Council Says It Is Stepping In To Deal With The Grenfell Tower Fire Crisis

RBKC with their cash can't even organise any kind of relief effort. The mind boggles, it truly  fucking does! There's children involved ffs!

E2a Just seen that posted apols


----------



## wtfftw (Jun 18, 2017)

Isn't that the letter bimble posted?


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

wtfftw said:


> Isn't that the letter bimble posted?


it is but well worth a second and third read


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 18, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Another London Council Says It Is Stepping In To Deal With The Grenfell Tower Fire Crisis
> 
> RBKC with their cash can't even organise any kind of relief effort. The mind boggles, it truly  fucking does! There's children involved ffs!
> 
> E2a Just seen that posted apols



Is this a direct result of the council cutting staff and/or outsourcing?


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Holy hell, this just keeps on getting more and more embarrassing (and shameful) for K&C.



On Friday eve at the site there was absolutely zero presence of anyone who looked at all official, apart from the police lines that were guarding the perimeter of the disaster site and keeping an eye on protestors, no sign of any officialdom at all, no information point, no focus for the people who were walking around with Missing posters sticky taped to their teeshirts ffs, nothing. A group of people, mostly Sikh, had set up a line of collapsible tables and were handing out free food and water to anyone who wanted it.


----------



## marty21 (Jun 18, 2017)

AAV: The chief editor of Breitbart London is spreading fake news about the Grenfell tower fire 

This meme has been spread about by breitbart


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 18, 2017)

bimble said:


> On Friday eve at the site there was absolutely zero presence of anyone who looked at all official, apart from the police lines that were guarding the perimeter of the disaster site and keeping an eye on protestors, no sign of any officialdom at all, no information point, *no focus for the people who were walking around with Missing posters sticky taped to their teeshirts* ffs, nothing. A group of people, mostly Sikh, had set up a line of collapsible tables and were handing out free food and water to anyone who wanted it.


Utterly shameful.

I've joined a couple of the supporter-type groups on Facebook, and the vast majority is "what do I do with these donations?", "where are the council?", "who's organising?". They're being flooded with donations with very little sense of where they're going or what's needed.

That said, the fact that donations are going awry is one thing, but the fact that those who don't know what's happened to friends and family in the tower, or what to do about it.. that's a whole other level of shame.


----------



## cybertect (Jun 18, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> Is this a direct result of the council cutting staff and/or outsourcing?



Or possibly plain cluelessness (though that might be being generous to them)


----------



## 8den (Jun 18, 2017)

marty21 said:


> AAV: The chief editor of Breitbart London is spreading fake news about the Grenfell tower fire
> 
> This meme has been spread about by breitbart



Raheem shitweasel.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 18, 2017)

cybertect said:


> Or possibly plain cluelessness



Seems that way. It really is a colossal fuck up of epic proportions.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 18, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> Is this a direct result of the council cutting staff and/or outsourcing?



Or they are prioritising what people they do have on preparing to defend themselves legally over caring for the survivors. Cynical of me I know, but look at this council.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 18, 2017)

Don't get the obsession over the number of dead, or buy into any kind of theory that this is being deliberately suppressed (why? To what ends?).  Don't think it leads to anywhere useful. The actual number of dead is 'too many', can we just stick to this?


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jun 18, 2017)

Holding back figures invites people to indulge in speculation, quote hearsay and unsourced randos on the internet and ultimately, offers us all an economy class ticket to Loonspudville.

Which of course makes protests about the actual evident crimes associated with austerity far easier to ignore.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 18, 2017)

Can't listen to this at the moment, so unclear on details.

Apparently they're being told they will be declared "intentionally homeless" if they refuse relocation outside of London?


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Jun 18, 2017)

Plumdaff said:


> Or they are prioritising what people they do have on preparing to defend themselves legally over caring for the survivors. Cynical of me I know, but look at this council.


I don't doubt that arse covering is top of the council's priority list, that's usually the case with any organisation. I also don't think RBKC actually gives a shit about homeless poors but not giving a shit in private and not giving a shit in the full glare of the spotlight are 2 different things.
In fairness (teeth gritted here) they are going to also be restricted in what they can do by what they have, There aren't going to have 120 empty  council homes available so they are going to have to look to the private sector which means hitting the problems of high rents and the rent/benefits cap (not that this excuses incompetence and/or disinterest) 
Some of these people are also going to be what a private sector landlord would consider undesirables such as refugees, benefit claimants or folks with rent arrears. Even if the council can/will pressure or persuade landlords to take them, I can easily imagine the kerfuffle 6 months from now when one of these rehoused families gets kicked out of their new home because they struggled with keeping up with the rent.
All the while this is going on of course, London's existing housing crisis continues, there are going to be women fleeing violent partners, families who can't afford rent rises (you know other people that the councillors in RBKC also don't give a shit about) who also need to be homed and will be competing with the Grenfell residents for scarce resources. 
The shit from this is going to be flying for a while yet.


----------



## Libertad (Jun 18, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> I can easily imagine the kerfuffle 6 months from now when one of these rehoused families gets kicked out of their new home because they struggled with keeping up with the rent.



Why should they struggle with keeping up with the rent? They shouldn't be expected to pay any rent at all.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 18, 2017)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Holding back figures invites people to indulge in speculation, quote hearsay and unsourced randos on the internet and ultimately, offers us all an economy class ticket to Loonspudville.
> 
> Which of course makes protests about the actual evident crimes associated with austerity far easier to ignore.



Who is holding back any figures?


----------



## Voley (Jun 18, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Apparently they're being told they will be declared "intentionally homeless" if they refuse relocation outside of London?


Jesus. I'd kept it together up till now but this is really doing my fucking head in now


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2017)

Voley said:


> Jesus. I'd kept it together up till now but this is really doing my fucking head in now


Alice found wonderland logical compared to chelsealand


----------



## Badgers (Jun 18, 2017)

Voley said:


> Jesus. I'd kept it together up till now but this is really doing my fucking head in now


FFS


----------



## Voley (Jun 18, 2017)

I know that 'intentionally homeless' thing hasn't been verified yet but I can see how a particularly awful council could use it. There is a clause in the act that says if you've turned down an offer of suitable accommodation you can be refused accommodation on the grounds of 'intentionality.'


----------



## 8den (Jun 18, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> Don't get the obsession over the number of dead, or buy into any kind of theory that this is being deliberately suppressed (why? To what ends?).  Don't think it leads to anywhere useful. The actual number of dead is 'too many', can we just stick to this?




I do think the above is broadly true. 

Boris quoted a figure claiming that under his watch fire deaths in London fell by 50%. His opponents argue that that is because they started classifying death by smoke inhalation as different to fire. 

I don't think they'd try something that clumsy with Grenfell, but it shows there is a deliberate attempt at playing the numbers game. 

Plus if the towers were above full capacity for whatever reason (2 or more families to a flat) and sofa surfers, it adds an additional dimension to the tragedy, that if there was more affordable housing available the death toll could conceivably be lower. 

Plus the CT (whether it's true or not) fits into what is both a popular and true narrative) the council have ignored, bullied and threatened residents at every turn, so why would they start caring about them now, when they're dead.


----------



## Voley (Jun 18, 2017)

Shelter have a bit about it here.



> *You turned down a final offer of suitable accommodation from the council*
> It is very clear when the council is making you a final offer of accommodation. Do not turn this down without getting advice. The council won't go through the homeless application process with you again if you reject accommodation.



Fucking hell I hope this isn't true.


----------



## Voley (Jun 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Alice found wonderland simple compared to chelsealand


It's fucking unreal mate. I've worked in social housing for twenty years on and off and I've seen good decisions and bad decisions made over that time as you'd imagine. Don't think Ive ever come up against anything like this before though. I'm just hoping it's not true.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2017)

Voley said:


> It's fucking unreal mate. I've worked in social housing for twenty years on and off and I've seen good decisions and bad decisions made over that time as you'd imagine. Don't think Ive ever come up against anything like this before though. I'm just hoping it's not true.


Likewise


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jun 18, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> Who is holding back any figures?



Maybe that was the wrong way to put it, but what I was getting at was that speculation about the final death toll and associated cover ups is creating a space for CT nonsense to breed.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 18, 2017)

cybertect said:


> Buzzfeed are reporting that Ealing Council are taking over the emergency response from RBKC
> 
> Another London Council Says It Is Stepping In To Deal With The Grenfell Tower Fire Crisis



Earlier today a volunteer said on the news that they hadn't seen anyone from K&C on the ground, but staff from neighbouring Westminster were helping, now Ealing is taking over.

Just how fucking useless are K&C?


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 18, 2017)

Grenfell Tower fire survivors given just £10 to live on, volunteer says

wtf?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Earlier today a volunteer said on the news that they hadn't seen anyone from K&C on the ground, but staff from neighbouring Westminster were helping, now Ealing is taking over.
> 
> Just how fucking useless are K&C?


Think of a uselessness coefficient and then double it


----------



## FiFi (Jun 18, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Earlier today a volunteer said on the news that they hadn't seen anyone from K&C on the ground, but staff from neighbouring Westminster were helping, now Ealing is taking over.
> 
> Just how fucking useless are K&C?


Pretty Bloody useless from start to finish on this weeks evidence.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 18, 2017)

Hang on a minute...

...the government is now saying the cladding believed to have been used is banned in the UK. 



> The cladding used on Grenfell Tower, which has been widely blamed for spreading the blaze, is banned in the UK, Philip Hammond has said.
> 
> The chancellor told BBC1’s Andrew Marr Show: “My understanding is the cladding in question, this flammable cladding which is banned in Europe and the US, is also banned here.
> 
> Cladding on Grenfell Tower banned in UK, says Philip Hammond


----------



## teqniq (Jun 18, 2017)

marty21 said:


> AAV: The chief editor of Breitbart London is spreading fake news about the Grenfell tower fire
> 
> This meme has been spread about by breitbart


I just had a look at his Twitter feed. I wished I hadn't. Retweeting similar stuff from Tommy Robinson. How is this lying piece of shit allowed to get away with this?


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 18, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Hang on a minute...
> 
> ...the government is now saying the cladding believed to have been used is banned in the UK.



why the hell was it used then


----------



## 8den (Jun 18, 2017)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Maybe that was the wrong way to put it, but what I was getting at was that speculation about the final death toll and associated cover ups is creating a space for CT nonsense to breed.



Oh I wouldn't worry about that, a quick google will show you CTers don't need any help brewing up nonsense.

By it's very nature identifying bodies after a fire is a grim slow affair, add in the complications of the dangerous nature of working in the tower right now, the possibility that there were people living there unofficially and other unpleasant factors, ( possible illegal immigrants, granting visa access to families abroad to formally identify bodies) and this is going to drag out for a bit.

You have to remember theres no way for the Tories to legally repress the figures. The British media are probably the most aggressive in the world combined with a rickety government and leaky civil service, this death toll can't be repressed for long (if it even is, which it probably isnt)


----------



## 8den (Jun 18, 2017)

teqniq said:


> I just had a look at his Twitter feed. I wished I hadn't. Retweeting similar stuff from Tommy Robinson. How is this lying piece of shit allowed to get away with this?



The world is an unfair place, where assholes have a disproportion amount of power. Sorry.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 18, 2017)

8den said:


> The world is an unfair place, where assholes have a disproportion amount of power. Sorry.


Heh yeah it's ok I know this already but what a proper scumbag, here on the other hand is an entirely different person.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 18, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> Don't get the obsession over the number of dead, or buy into any kind of theory that this is being deliberately suppressed (why? To what ends?).  Don't think it leads to anywhere useful. The actual number of dead is 'too many', can we just stick to this?





Bernie Gunther said:


> Maybe that was the wrong way to put it, but what I was getting at was that speculation about the final death toll and associated cover ups is creating a space for CT nonsense to breed.



Rightly or wrongly it's all a symptom people not trusting their governments.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 18, 2017)

cybertect said:


> Or possibly plain cluelessness (though that might be being generous to them)


It is genuinely staggering quite how small some London Boroughs have actually shrunk the (local) state. My own borough (albeit a titchy one by GL standards) has an annual expenditure of £150m. (In a borough where the total estimated public sector expenditure is approx £2bn.) These neoliberal, consolidator entities hardly exist.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 18, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> Don't get the obsession over the number of dead, or buy into any kind of theory that this is being deliberately suppressed (why? To what ends?).  Don't think it leads to anywhere useful. The actual number of dead is 'too many', can we just stick to this?


Agreeing with you. Any number over zero is far too many.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 18, 2017)

Revealed, how fears about cut-price cladding were ignored: *Manufacturers warned deathly panels should never be fitted above 32ft... but contractors made 'disturbing' decision to install them anyway
*
Fears on cut-price cladding were ignored on Grenfell Tower | Daily Mail Online

The block was 220ft.* 

ETA, from the same link:




			A major blaze inside Grenfell Tower in 2010 was successfully contained, suggesting the building was safe before the flammable cladding was added;
		
Click to expand...

*


----------



## Corax (Jun 18, 2017)

A whole new strand of madness here.

[ETA: I originally posted the video up - but posters below have suggested it may be best not to have done, so removed]

A witness claiming that Muslims think that it was a revenge attack for London Bridge & Manchester.  Let's hope that narrative doesn't take hold.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 18, 2017)

Corax said:


> A whole new strand of madness here.
> 
> A witness claiming that Muslims think that it was a revenge attack for London Bridge & Manchester.  Let's hope that narrative doesn't take hold.


you shouldn't really be posting vids put up by racists


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 18, 2017)




----------



## killer b (Jun 18, 2017)

'patriotic populist' seems a legit source.


----------



## Anudder Oik (Jun 18, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> I suggest you wind your neck in, read the words I typed, consider what I said, and then write out your apology.
> 
> If that's beyond you, then I suggest you simply stroll on and don't bother dirtying up the thread with anything further on this particular side-issue.



You are right, sorry. I should have limited my tirade to the manic posters who used your post to get on their high hobby horses and make attacks on me, again. I see your wording was not an attack.


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

Corax said:


> A whole new strand of madness here.
> 
> .


There are a lot of crazy theories swirling about, I think not giving them air is probably best.


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 18, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Can't listen to this at the moment, so unclear on details.
> 
> Apparently they're being told they will be declared "intentionally homeless" if they refuse relocation outside of London?



Disgusting.  I am cynical that the commitments to house people will be watered down over time, and worried that they won't apply to people who weren't officially resident or not a full tenant or leaseholder, especially for single people (as all the government promises have mentioned families).  I think its going to require a great deal of organisation and solidarity to make this not the case.  Locally, Northumberland council and a Newcastle-based property firm have gone on record as "offering" homes in the North East to K&C council for the fire victims - completely counterproductive imo.



frogwoman said:


> Grenfell Tower fire survivors given just £10 to live on, volunteer says
> 
> wtf?


Horrendous, contemptuous, and utterly disorganised treatment


----------



## 8den (Jun 18, 2017)

Thread. Quite powerful watching the appreciation of the community towards LFB. Although the Scientologists setting up a stall to prey on the vulnerable is extremely enraging.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 18, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Hang on a minute...
> 
> ...the government is now saying the cladding believed to have been used is banned in the UK.


Hammond has done two things today: said that it's banned, and also said that the government's response to Lakanal was sufficient. I dunno why he'd go out and buy a sword to fall on, but he's on it regardless.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Hammond has done two things today: said that it's banned, and also said that the government's response to Lakanal was sufficient. I dunno why he'd go out and buy a sword to fall on, but he's on it regardless.


Not bought but leased


----------



## Badgers (Jun 18, 2017)

Has this been posted?


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

8den said:


> Thread. Quite powerful watching the appreciation of the community towards LFB. Although the Scientologists setting up a stall to prey on the vulnerable is extremely enraging.



That fireman's face, bloody hell, totally haunted face, what he's seen.


----------



## Corax (Jun 18, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> you shouldn't really be posting vids put up by racists


Sorry, I hadn't really paid any attention to the channel it was on.


----------



## Anudder Oik (Jun 18, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Hammond has done two things today: said that it's banned, and also said that the government's response to Lakanal was sufficient. I dunno why he'd go out and buy a sword to fall on, but he's on it regardless.



Inflammable building materials don't have the BS (British Standard). Given that the cuts had made inspections of the material on site less likely to happen, one can believe that the building contractors would have been able to get away with installing illegal material. Blame goes all the way back up the chain to the politicians.


----------



## Corax (Jun 18, 2017)

bimble said:


> There are a lot of crazy theories swirling about, I think not giving them air is probably best.


Fair point. I'll edit.


----------



## Anudder Oik (Jun 18, 2017)

Corax said:


> Sorry, I hadn't really paid any attention to the channel it was on.



Maybe you've got an agenda Oh well, let you off this time.


----------



## ddraig (Jun 18, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


> You are right, sorry. I should have limited my tirade to the manic posters who used your post to get on their high hobby horses and make attacks on me, again. I see your wording was not an attack.


They are not attacks, they are warnings to be careful of your links and where they come from. Will you take any of that on board?? Will you learn?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 18, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


> Maybe you've got an agenda Oh well, let you off this time.


yes, but Rax isn't a racist...


----------



## ddraig (Jun 18, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


> Maybe you've got an agenda Oh well, let you off this time.


Snivelling shit. You've been let off loads of times and had it explained to you by many posters and still keep doing it. Corax takes the point, apologises and edits, do you do that? No you twist and wriggle trying to justify your sources. See the difference??


----------



## Anudder Oik (Jun 18, 2017)

Badgers said:


> Has this been posted?





Occupy it, compulsory purchase it, requisition it.

Love it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Snivelling shit. You've been let off loads of times and had it explained to you by many posters and still keep doing it. Corax takes the point, apologises and edits, do you do that? No you twist and wriggle trying to justify your sources. See the difference??


With Corax it's a mistake, with Anudder Oik it's deliberate


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 18, 2017)

Orang Utan bimble you need to edit your quoted replies too!


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 18, 2017)

Offers of help


----------



## Badgers (Jun 18, 2017)

Even Pammy is on the case


----------



## Corax (Jun 18, 2017)

From The Guardian:


> Residents who live in the low-rise blocks at the foot of Grenfell Tower are angry at the continued absence of help from the council.
> 
> Nina Masroh said the only contact she had had was two texts telling her she could return home but that there was no hot water or gas.
> 
> ...


The shambles doesn't look like it's abating.  Like she says, if the school and tube line are deemed unsafe, then why the hell are residents in the area being told it's fine to go home now?


----------



## tim (Jun 18, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Hammond has done two things today: said that it's banned, and also said that the government's response to Lakanal was sufficient. I dunno why he'd go out and buy a sword to fall on, but he's on it regardless.



He's not falling on it, he's positioning himself as the compassionate amd competemt face of Toryism and  using the sword to do away with those he can portray as less compassionate or competent


----------



## 8den (Jun 18, 2017)

Badgers said:


> Even Pammy is on the case
> 
> View attachment 109618



Did the reporter ask her the obvious follow-up question, "name five other British Prime Ministers?" 

Also, did the journalist ask her editor the follow-up question, "why the fuck are we asking a washed up American panto star what the fuck she thinks about UK politics?"


----------



## 8den (Jun 18, 2017)

tim said:


> He's not falling on it, he's positioning himself as the compassionate amd competemt face of Toryism and  using the sword to do away with those he can portray as less compassionate or competent



If May's government lasts till the next budget, they'll live to regret her "magic money tree" sound bite.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 18, 2017)

8den said:


> Did the reporter ask her the obvious follow-up question, "name five other British Prime Ministers?"
> 
> Also, did the journalist ask her editor the follow-up question, "why the fuck are we asking a washed up American panto star what the fuck she thinks about UK politics?"


I am well aware of this. It is not funny but interesting what a wide cross section of people are calling May out. Pammy might just be bandwagon jumping but there you go...


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 18, 2017)

Conservative and fascist forces have conjured some ad hoc distractions via racism, hatred of the left, blame the EU and environmentalists, high-horse or generalised anger at anger (some staged for effect)

What they could do with now is for this to be booted off the front pages and prime headlines, more towards background noise and, eventually, long grass. Brexit negotiations this week will be a great help.

By Tuesday we should be back to normal service with more europhobe froth and the promotion of the idea that David Davies has the first clue what he is doing.


----------



## chilango (Jun 18, 2017)

Badgers said:


> I am well aware of this. It is not funny but interesting what a wide cross section of people are calling May out. Pammy might just be bandwagon jumping but there you go...


If so, that it has become a bandwagon upon which to jump is a very interesting thing in itself...


----------



## mauvais (Jun 18, 2017)

tim said:


> He's not falling on it, he's positioning himself as the compassionate amd competemt face of Toryism and  using the sword to do away with those he can portray as less compassionate or competent


There's a high probability he's shown to be wrong on both counts, the legality of the cladding quickly and the Lakanal business slowly. So I'm puzzled as to why he's gone out to bat for a PM that would like to get rid of him if she were able.

Then again I'm puzzled by many things, not least how the government can't even manage to throw money and resources at it to cover up their failings. Still no promised high vis types on scene, apparently.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 18, 2017)

chilango said:


> If so, that it has become a bandwagon upon which to jump is a very interesting thing in itself...



She doesn't even live here, does she?


----------



## The Boy (Jun 18, 2017)

If the cladding used was illegal we'd surely know by now, wouldn't we? The world and their brother has been poring over the regs and the materials.


----------



## maomao (Jun 18, 2017)

J Ed said:


> She doesn't even live here, does she?


She made it in the context of a pro-Assange rant apparently.


----------



## binka (Jun 18, 2017)

Paget Brown just on bbc news and was asked that considering there have obviously been serious failings before and after the fire has he considered resigning? 'fuck off!' was the gist of his response


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 18, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Earlier today a volunteer said on the news that they hadn't seen anyone from K&C on the ground, but staff from neighbouring Westminster were helping, now Ealing is taking over.
> 
> Just how fucking useless are K&C?



If you think of the 'B' in RBKC as 'bank' rather than 'borough' I find it kinda helps make sense of them a bit.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 18, 2017)

maomao said:


> She made it in the context of a pro-Assange rant apparently.



the internet has melted a lot of brains


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 18, 2017)

look at this cuntfop:


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 18, 2017)

Fuckin state of it


----------



## maomao (Jun 18, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> look at this cuntfop:
> View attachment 109620


He was shitting bricks on the telly the other night. What a fucking name too. He's as 'rock'-like as May is strong and stable.


----------



## Sue (Jun 18, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> look at this cuntfop:
> View attachment 109620


Loving the completely ridiculous name though.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 18, 2017)

Sue said:


> Loving the completely ridiculous name though.


He's a descendent of Charles II


----------



## A380 (Jun 18, 2017)

Sunday Times ( I get a free voucher...) are saying that the Government have removed the key staff from the local authority from their roles in the recovery phase and handed command to the British Red Cross who will be supported by central government staff and those from neighbouring boroughs.

How can one of the richest local authorities fail at a resiliance task?  Especially when supported by one of the country's best resiliance networks. Why do we need a charity to pick up the pieces ( that's a rhetorical question).


----------



## Andrew Hertford (Jun 18, 2017)

The Boy said:


> If the cladding used was illegal we'd surely know by now, wouldn't we? The world and their brother has been poring over the regs and the materials.



Hasn't it already been established that the cladding was legal and that now the question is _why_ it's legal here but not in countries like Germany and the US? Another question must be why is cheap non flame retardant building cladding even being manufactured legally?


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 18, 2017)

The gap between what RBKC's councilors thought their job would be like and the reality of the current situation is... well, it's vast. It's really fucking vast.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jun 18, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Hammond has done two things today: said that it's banned, and also said that the government's response to Lakanal was sufficient. I dunno why he'd go out and buy a sword to fall on, but he's on it regardless.



He's positioning himself against May for when she falls. He'll use this as evidence he was showing leadership while she was dithering and running scared.


.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Jun 18, 2017)

This is a must read if you haven't seen it: This is why the official death toll from Grenfell Tower is lower than expected

It explains very plainly what anyone who works for the blue light services (or have family/ friends who do) already know but the wider public may not...


.


----------



## tim (Jun 18, 2017)

J Ed said:


> She doesn't even live here, does she?



Probably not, but then most of the posters here frothing at Trump on various tbreads are not US citizens or residents.


----------



## 8den (Jun 18, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> He's a descendent of Charles II



That haircut suggests there's some Boris Johnson in his family tree as well.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 18, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> The gap between what RBKC's councilors thought their job would be like and the reality of the current situation is... well, it's vast. It's really fucking vast.


don't worry they'll be back in post when this all blows over. Back to the gravy train


----------



## Ted Striker (Jun 18, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> look at this cuntfop:
> View attachment 109620



He's the guy I mentioned earlier with twins on the waiting lists at super-posh Prep schools....To which he's just sold a local public library to

_Feilding-Mellen Bang To Rights? – Not Just Yet!

On 18th May the Grenfell Action Group published a blog that drew attention to Rock Feilding-Mellen’s apparent conflict of interest with regard to Notting Hill Prep School,  evidenced by the fact that the children of the RBKC Cabinet Member for Housing, Property and Regeneration are on the waiting list to attend this exclusive private school. Cllr Feilding-Mellen was closely involved in, and may have had a decisive influence on, the Cabinet decison in November 2015 to lease the North Kensington Public Library building to Notting Hill Prep School for a period of 25 years. We subsequently made a formal complaint to the RBKC Monitoring Officer alleging a breach of the Councillors Code of Conduct due to Feilding-Mellen’s failure to declare his personal interest in NHP.
_
_https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2016/05/18/more-awkward-questions-for-cllr-rock-fm/_
_
We were surprised and appalled by the response to our complaint that we received from RBKC which raised more questions than it answered.  Decision letter Cllr Feilding-Mellen   In her response to us, Leverne Parker, the Council’s Chief Solicitor and Monitoring Officer confirmed that Cllr Feilding-Mellen had indeed failed to declare that he had an ongoing personal interest in Notting Hill Prep, but claimed that this failure did not breach the Code of Conduct. Our readers should note that Cllr Feilding-Mellen was directly involved in the decision to lease the North Kensington Library building to NHP and was the only RBKC Councillor consulted on the matter.  They should also note that the decison by Cabinet to award the lease to Notting Hill Prep was made on his recommendation to Cabinet.

Our initial complaint had referenced Cllr Feilding-Mellen’s earlier involvement with the award of the lease in 2014 of the Issac Newton Centre to the Alpha Plus Group for use as a private prep school (Chepstow House School). Councillor Feilding-Mellen had declared a personal interest at that time stating that his children were on the waiting list for both private schools involved in the bidding for the Isaac Newton Centre (ie Alpha Plus Group and Notting Hill Prep). Feilding-Mellen had stated that although he had a personal interest in both schools he did not believe that this constituted a conflict of interest. This claim may well have been technically correct at the time, in the narrower sense, as it could be argued that his interest in both rival bidders had the effect of cancelling out any potential conflict of interest favouring one or other of the two.

However we would argue that a more serious and fundamental conflict of interest, on this occasion and again in 2015 when the North Kensington Library building was leased to NHP, occured in the decision of Cllr Feilding-Mellen to recommend the leasing of both the Issac Newton Centre and the North Kensington Library building, both public community resources, to two private schools in which he had personal interests. Meanwhile, his Cabinet colleagues colluded and concurred, apparently without even considering, let alone questioning, his impartiality.

What we have now discovered, and find most unsatisfactory, is that Feilding-Mellen, who  was closely involved in the recent award of the lease for the North Kensington library building to Notting Hill Prep, this time with no rival bids because it was a private deal with no competitive tendering process, chose not even to declare his interest in NHP. There is no doubt that Feilding-Mellen has a significant personal interest in the future of NHP as his children are likely to become pupils there in due course. In our view this certainly constitutes a significant conflict of interest which is more pertinent and more pernicious than was the case with the earlier lease of the Isaac Newton Centre in 2014.

We are very concerned that Cllr Feilding-Mellen appears to have committed with impunity a clear breach of the Councillors Code of Conduct and we are wondering why he declined to declare his personal interest at the Cabinet meeting in November 2015, when he recommended awarding the lease to NHP. We are also wondering why LeVerne Parker, as Monitoring Officer for the Council, allowed Feilding-Mellen the benefit of any doubt on this issue. We believe that, in the interest of openness and transparency, Feilding-Mellen should have declared his personal interest, and should have recused himself from any involvement in the negotiations. Instead, through his recommendation to Cabinet, he may have significantly contributed to the success of the NHP bid, to his own personal benefit and that of his children, who are likely to attend as pupils at NHP in due course.

In her response to our complaint LeVerne Parker stated that;
_
*“In my view a fair-minded member of the public who is aware of the facts would not consider Cllr Feilding-Mellen had a significant interest which could give rise to a conflict of interests.”*
_
We beg to disagree. In our view LeVerne Parker’s statement is completely contrary to the common sense view which, from our perspective, is that any fair-minded member of the public would likely conclude that Feilding-Mellen *did* have a significant personal interest in NHP and that his failure to declare this interest has given rise, at the very least, to a perception in our community that a serious conflict of interest has occurred. How can a serving Councillor, the Cabinet Member for Housing Property and Regeneration, be objective in his decision making if he has an interest in furthering the ambitions of this institution, the success of which will serve the private education of his own children?

We will be writing to the Town Clerk at RBKC to escalate our complaint and will be forwarding the information regarding the conduct of Cllr Feilding-Mellen to Private Eye and other investigative journalists. We pray that the axe will soon fall on the nefarious activities of Tory RBKC councillors who seek to forward the interests of the rich and privileged via the exclusion of, and at the expense of, the local working class community.

It is well known that Councillor Feilding-Mellen comes from a wealthy and privileged background and we think it highly unlikely that his rapid promotion to the RBKC Cabinet was earned on merit. There is little social or ethnic diversity among the ranks of the Tory Councillors who form the Ruling Party at Hornton Street, just as there is little social or ethnic diversity among the pupils of NHP. This is a prime example of wealth and privilege protecting the next generation of wealth and privilege and it is happening now to the great detriment of the largely working class and multi-ethnic residents of North Kensington.
_
*Notting Hill Prep School constitutes the next cohort of our privately educated future rulers and business leaders and they will learn early the dark art of asset stripping as their prep school seizes, with the collusion of Councillor Feilding-Mellen and his Cabinet colleagues, the precious public resources of the working class communities of North Kensington. All the while these spoilt, privileged and socially disconnected children of the rich will enjoy the special patronage of the over-privileged, and mostly white, rulers who wield power as of right and with impunity at the Town Hall in Hornton Street.*


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 18, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Can't listen to this at the moment, so unclear on details.
> 
> Apparently they're being told they will be declared "intentionally homeless" if they refuse relocation outside of London?




Legislatively, local authorities do have the power to deem you "intentionally homeless" and wash their hands of you, if you turn down what they term as a "fair offer" of housing, even if that housing is in Carlisle or County Durham, let alone Preston.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 18, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> look at this cuntfop:
> View attachment 109620



Lots of inbreeding going on there, with that receding chin and prominent nose.  Not surprising for a descendent of the Habsburgs though.  Inbreeding was a family speciality.


----------



## The Boy (Jun 18, 2017)

Andrew Hertford said:


> Hasn't it already been established that the cladding was legal and that now the question is _why_ it's legal here but not in countries like Germany and the US? Another question must be why is cheap non flame retardant building cladding even being manufactured legally?



Yes, but Hammond appeared to suggest otherwise in his interview. I'm not sure if I've misunderstood, he was talking about a diff material or Hammond is talking shite - either deliberately or because he's misinformed.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 18, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Can't listen to this at the moment, so unclear on details.
> 
> Apparently they're being told they will be declared "intentionally homeless" if they refuse relocation outside of London?



On Friday I heard k and c council had been in touch with Newcastle about taking people. It was from somebody who works in housing, so reliable  afaik.


----------



## Cid (Jun 18, 2017)

Andrew Hertford said:


> Hasn't it already been established that the cladding was legal and that now the question is _why_ it's legal here but not in countries like Germany and the US?



It's not banned in either country. Its use is height restricted. So the question is why haven't regulations been updated... the answer to which is because of a climate of deregulation and austerity.



> Another question must be why is cheap non flame retardant building cladding even being manufactured legally?



Because it has, or had its uses. On a low-rise, low risk building it's not going to be such a problem... Especially if the insulation and ventilation behind it is correctly designed. And the internal fire systems. Any product is a balance of risks and costs, advantages and disadvantages. e.g I never use FR MDF (in furniture) because it's (considerably) more expensive, heavier and tougher on tools. I have no idea whether there are any disadvantages to the FR version of this panel beyond the minor cost increase. I suspect here it's case of saving small amounts on individual bits for a large saving overall... Which again plays into regulation, austerity and problems with tendering (and the kind of race to the bottom culture it can create).


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)




----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 18, 2017)

Wilf said:


> On Friday I heard k and c council had been in touch with Newcastle about taking people. It was from somebody who works in housing, so reliable  afaik.


As much as I'm a fan of Newcastle, that's fucking insane. Again, aside from the sheer humanity of it, these are easy ways to at least not lose ground, if not pick a bit up. Even if all they care about is themselves, that alone should stop them from pulling this shit in the immediate aftermath.

But no, at _every single turn _they are making the wrong decisions, losing ground and looking inhumane and/or stupid. They have absolutely no idea what they're doing.


----------



## sealion (Jun 18, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Fuckin state of it


Standard issue tory by the looks of it. The name just makes him a bigger cunt.


----------



## tim (Jun 18, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> look at this cuntfop:
> View attachment 109620



I don't really care what he looks like and don't see any justification for judging folk by their looks rather than their actions. With many of those in power there seems to be plenty in the latter to focus on. 

Also whilst I don't like the Tories, I am also not convinced that  Newham, where I live or Lambeth or most other local authorities would have cooed with this disaster  any better. The primary problem is with the whole system not with rather impotent local politicians.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 18, 2017)

doesn't have that same air of studied arrogance they normally wear in that photo


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 18, 2017)

tim said:


> I don't really care what he looks like and don't see any justification for judging folk by their looks rather than their actions.



So you don't reckon Rees Mogg & Gavin Barwell have really punchable faces? Both a pair of cunts to boot.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 18, 2017)

Andrew Hertford said:


> Hasn't it already been established that the cladding was legal and that now the question is _why_ it's legal here but not in countries like Germany and the US? Another question must be why is cheap non flame retardant building cladding even being manufactured legally?





There seems some doubts about the regulations now, but certainly it seems the manufacturers says it shouldn't have been used on a 220ft building, and the contractors - Harley Facades - must have been aware of that, yet still used it. 

*Manufacturers' say it is 'crucial' that the panels should not be fitted above 32ft*







Fears on cut-price cladding were ignored on Grenfell Tower | Daily Mail Online


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 18, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> As much as I'm a fan of Newcastle, that's fucking insane. Again, aside from the sheer humanity of it, these are easy ways to at least not lose ground, if not pick a bit up. Even if all they care about is themselves, that alone should stop them from pulling this shit in the immediate aftermath.
> 
> But no, at _every single turn _they are making the wrong decisions, losing ground and looking inhumane and/or stupid. They have absolutely no idea what they're doing.


Too used to getting off with murder I guess, and still in denial.


----------



## tim (Jun 18, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> So you don't reckon Rees Mogg & Gavin Barwell have really punchable faces? Both a pair of cunts to boot.



Nazis punch and gas  people for looking "different". Why play their game even rhetorically


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 18, 2017)

tim said:


> Nazis punch and gas  people for looking "different". Why play their game even rhetorically



Yes, point taken


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 18, 2017)

FFS.

Two women feared dead in Grenfell Tower were 'threatened with legal action' for raising alarm about fire safety




			
				Independent said:
			
		

> Two women feared dead in the Grenfell Tower tragedy were allegedly threatened with legal action after they campaigned for improved fire safety.
> 
> Mariem Elgwahry, 27, and Nadia Choucair, 33, reportedly received letters ordering them to stop their campaign for improved safety.
> 
> ...


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

EDL trolls are posting these same lies all over social media - one of which even claimed he got it from The Spectator (Boris Johnson's old rag).
Allow me to turn the lies into facts:

1 - The KCTMO is a tory quango acting as a residents body, the landlord is the tory council.

2 a Labour MP was elected into that constituency only after last week's General Election, after being a tory safe seat for decades. And it remains a tory Council.

3 - the KCTMO are given a pot of money by the council to spend on day to day repairs, but the tory council is still the landlord

4 - Boris Johnson as Mayor cut 20,000+ firefighter jobs and close fire stations across the capital when told it was a bad idea publicly by an assembly member and that he lied to the people of London - he told that same assembly member to "get stuffed".

5 - Siddiq Khan did not call for further reductions in firefighters and no such report exists.

6 - the Tory KC council sent emails to the rich residents apologising for the appearance of Grenfell informing them that they will be placing plastic cladding on the outside so that it wouldn't be such an "eyesore" for them to endure.

7 - Theresa May's aid and former MP Gavin Barwell was the Minister for Housing four years ago - when he received a report warning him that Grenfell Tower was a tragedy waiting to happen, he chose to ignore the report.

8 - Grenfell Action Group complained to KCTMO for years about the safety of Grenfell Tower, they asked the council to take action - the tory council ignored their requests.

9 - when the Adair tower block fire happened several years earlier, the tories again ignored the requests to make tower blocks safe and to improve fire regulations.

10 - nearly 300 Tory MPs many of whom were landlords chose to vote against safety regulations that would have made Grenfell Tower safer - including the instillation of sprinklers

11 - Grenfell Action Group is made up of residents who live in Grenfell Tower and who have campaigned against the cladding that was used and general fire safety issues for over a decade.

12 Emma Coad was campaigning for greater safety measures in Grenfell as were the Grenfell Action Group who are elected by the residents of Grenfell.

But hey I get it it's more important to right wing trolls that the tory vermin stay in power than the innocent lives that were lost. 

Grenfell Action Group - proof of multiple complaints to KCTMO - GRENFELL TOWER FIRE

COPY AND PASTE WHENEVER YOU SEE THESE RIGHT WING TROLLS SPREADING FAKE INFO!!


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

tim said:


> Nazis punch and gas  people for looking "different". Why play their game even rhetorically


Because fuck em.


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> EDL trolls are posting these same lies all over social media - one of which even claimed he got it from The Spectator (Boris Johnson's old rag).
> Allow me to turn the lies into facts:
> 
> 1 - The KCTMO is a residents body, the landlord is KC council Tory.
> ...


This is full of bollocks , you're not helping.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> .. 10 - nearly 300 Tory MPs many of who were landlords chose to vote against safety regulations that would have made Grenfell safer including the instillation of sprinklers ..



Someone was telling me about this only yesterday. If it is true then it stinks!


----------



## tim (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> EDL trolls are posting these same lies all over social media - one of which even claimed he got it from The Spectator (Boris Johnson's old rag).
> Allow me to turn the lies into facts:
> 
> 1 - The KCTMO is a residents body, the landlord is KC council Tory.
> ...



KCTMO isn't a residents body its the company/Quango that manages Kensington and Chelsea properties on behalf of the council. So it is in practical terms the landlord.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 18, 2017)

If, as is being stated, people are going to be forced to move as far as Preston, Newcastle, etc. not only are they going to be estranged from their communities, which, I imagine, is going to become increasingly important to these survivors, but what's going to happen to their jobs, and their probability of find work they'll be able to do?


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Someone was telling me about this only yesterday. If it is true then it stinks!


I think its referring to this, it does stink.  
Tories have blocked Labour legislation to make rented homes safer – but it’s complicated.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 18, 2017)

dessiato said:


> If, as is being stated, people are going to be forced to move as far as Preston, Newcastle, etc. not only are they going to be estranged from their communities, which, I imagine, is going to become increasingly important to these survivors, but what's going to happen to their jobs, and their probability of find work they'll be able to do?


Also been suggested that if they're spread out disparately across the country it makes it harder to form any kind of justice movement.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 18, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Also been suggested that if they're spread out disparately across the country it makes it harder to form any kind of justice movement.


Shit shit shit


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

I still think its likely that the survivors will be housed locally, somehow, and probably presented with giant cheques or something by May, in a desperate attempt to save face, but who knows maybe the people in charge really are that stupid that they won't do it, all evidence points to them being that stupid.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 18, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> But no, at _every single turn _they are making the wrong decisions, losing ground and looking inhumane and/or stupid. They have absolutely no idea what they're doing.



When it comes to 'decanting' social housing tenants, they (Tory or Labour) know exactly what they're doing.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 18, 2017)

.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 18, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> When it comes to 'decanting' social housing tenants, they (Tory or Labour) know exactly what they're doing.


Aye, I suppose I was being a bit naive attributing it to incompetence.

Still incompetent to do it so blatantly after such a public tragedy. You'd have thought they'd take the social hit on this one and then just continue as normal once everything had quietened down.


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

bimble said:


> This is full of bollocks , you're not helping.


How?? Seems to check out against the right-wing campaign lies. Correct any mistakes and I'll take notice. Otherwise how the fuck are you helping?


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> How?? Seems to check out against the right-wing campaign lies. Correct any mistakes and I'll take notice. Otherwise how the fuck are you helping?


One major error has already been pointed out above by tim , you're just spreading more nonsense , saying that you're countering FAKE NEWS but adding to it.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 18, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Also been suggested that if they're spread out disparately across the country it makes it harder to form any kind of justice movement.


I wonder how deliberate that is.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> How?? Seems to check out against the right-wing campaign lies. Correct any mistakes and I'll take notice. Otherwise how the fuck are you helping?



Seriously it's full of half truths.


----------



## A380 (Jun 18, 2017)

tim said:


> ....
> 
> ... I am also not convinced that  Newham, where I live or Lambeth or most other local authorities would have cooed with this disaster  any better. The primary problem is with the whole system not with rather impotent local politicians...



There are some excellent local resilience officers and teams across local government, inside and outside London. Some ex emergency services/military and some home grown council people. It will be interesting to see in the enquiry what capacity Kensington and Chelsea had, if they'd cut anyone recently and when was the last time they tested or exercised their major incident plan. Like Health and Safety resilience is often seen as a bit geeky and is an easy cut to make. Right up to the point where it isn't.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 18, 2017)

maomao said:


> He was shitting bricks on the telly the other night. What a fucking name too. He's as 'rock'-like as May is strong and stable.



It must have been a weird few days for tories though - first not giving a shit, then feeling they had to pretend to and now finding out they dont really have to because lots of the victims are brown and angry at the government, while some of the sympathisers might be a bit LEFT WING. Now Project "Move On" should be just around the corner.


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> Seriously it's full of half truths.


Examples??


----------



## Wilf (Jun 18, 2017)

I was going to post a thread on 'solidarity actions with Grenfell residents' in Protest.  Is that the best way to go or do people want to leave it all on this one?


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 18, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> It must have been a weird few days for tories though - first not giving a shit, then feeling they had to pretend to and now finding out they dont really have to because lots of the victims are brown and angry at the government, while some of the sympathisers might be a bit LEFT WING. Now Project "Move On" should be just around the corner.



Plus (apparently/unconfirmed) that Immigration were feeling the collars of some survivors, five fucking days after escaping the inferno.


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> Examples??


For Fucks Sake.
Your thing says "The KCTMO is made up of residents who live in Grenfell and who have campaigned against the cladding that was used" . That is utter nonsense.
Whoever wrote that got confused and mixed up the managing agents who ignored the residents complaints & warnings (that is KCTMO) and the residents who warned them (called Grenfell Action Group), you twit.
So it is completely useless and you should probably not "cut and paste it everywhere!" as it instructs.


----------



## killer b (Jun 18, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> finding out they dont really have to because lots of the victims are brown and angry at the government, while some of the sympathisers might be a bit LEFT WING. Now Project "Move On" should be just around the corner.


This isn't real. Outside the proper mental fascists, no-one is any less outraged by this because the victims were mostly BME. 

If they try to 'move on' they will be eviscerated.


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

bimble said:


> For Fucks Sake.
> Your thing says "The KCTMO is made up of residents who live in Grenfell and who have campaigned against the cladding that was used" . That is utter nonsense.
> Whoever wrote that got confused and mixed up the managing agents who ignored the residents complaints & warnings (that is KCTMO) and the residents who warned them (called Grenfell Action Group), you twit.
> So it is completely useless and you should probably not "cut and paste it everywhere!" as it instructs.



Fair enough, must have overlooked that bit. Still, was put together quick with c&p to counteract the current EDL fake shit blaming Khan and Labour for the Tower fire. Still works to counter their bullshit. Will amend and repost. Any other issues with it??? Anyone?


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> Fair enough, must have overlooked that bit. Still, was put together quick with c&p to counteract the current EDL fake shit blaming Khan and Labour for the Tower fire. Still works to counter their bullshit. Will amend and repost. Any other issues with it??? Anyone?



I'd be interested in any info you've got to back up the bit that goes:

6 - the Tory KC council sent emails to the rich residents apologising for the appearance of Grenfell informing them that they will be placing plastic cladding on the outside so that it wouldn't be such an "eyesore" for them to endure.

anything? That sounds interesting.


----------



## killer b (Jun 18, 2017)

perhaps if you're wanting to debunk something, it might be best to carefully put together the document from verified sources rather than doing a 'quick q&p' that can be pulled apart in seconds by anyone who's read the news in the past four days?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 18, 2017)

killer b said:


> This isn't real. Outside the proper mental fascists, no-one is any less outraged by this because the victims were mostly BME.
> 
> If they try to 'move on' they will be eviscerated.



Ok, I wouldn't want to overstate it, but it's important not to understate it either. "proper mental fascists" are a significant minority, and when one thinks that a large point of online congregation is the Mail's website, which is a paper whose editor, at least till recently, probably had the ear of the PM more than any other, that is significant. 

Some of this fascist mindset infects the conservative party itself, it's base and it's voters. Way too much. Thus, they are represented at some level in government. We are, even in small-ish way, ruled by this shit. "Go Home" vans,  "Citizens of Nowhere", "Enemies Of The People", "Crush The Sabteurs" are all for them.

if they do try an move on it is partly for us to eviscerate them.


----------



## pinkmonkey (Jun 18, 2017)

Badgers said:


> I am well aware of this. It is not funny but interesting what a wide cross section of people are calling May out. Pammy might just be bandwagon jumping but there you go...


Shes pretty right on, she spent several days chopping onions at refugee community kitchen this spring in Calais, my neighbour set this charity up,  Id imagine shes heard a whole lot from them about the Tory government, whilst volunteering there.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 18, 2017)

Wilf said:


> I was going to post a thread on 'solidarity actions with Grenfell residents' in Protest.  Is that the best way to go or do people want to leave it all on this one?


Personally I think it might be worth having a separate thread, as this one is massive and fast moving and things might well get lost.


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

killer b said:


> perhaps if you're wanting to debunk something, it might be best to carefully put together the document from verified sources rather than doing a 'quick q&p' that can be pulled apart in seconds by anyone who's read the news in the past four days?



Have re-edited - perhaps if people could HELP instead of bitching??? Just a thought..

1 - The KCTMO is a tory quango acting as a residents body, the landlord is the tory council.

2 a Labour MP was elected into that constituency only after last week's General Election, after being a tory safe seat for decades. And it remains a tory Council.

3 - the KCTMO are given a pot of money by the council to spend on day to day repairs, but the tory council is still the landlord

4 - Boris Johnson as Mayor cut 20,000+ firefighter jobs and close fire stations across the capital when told it was a bad idea publicly by an assembly member and that he lied to the people of London - he told that same assembly member to "get stuffed".

5 - Siddiq Khan did not call for further reductions in firefighters and no such report exists.

6 - the Tory KC council sent emails to the rich residents apologising for the appearance of Grenfell informing them that they will be placing plastic cladding on the outside so that it wouldn't be such an "eyesore" for them to endure.

7 - Theresa May's aid and former MP Gavin Barwell was the Minister for Housing four years ago - when he received a report warning him that Grenfell Tower was a tragedy waiting to happen, he chose to ignore the report.

8 - Grenfell Action Group complained to KCTMO for years about the safety of Grenfell Tower, they asked the council to take action - the tory council ignored their requests.

9 - when the Adair tower block fire happened several years earlier, the tories again ignored the requests to make tower blocks safe and to improve fire regulations.

10 - nearly 300 Tory MPs many of whom were landlords chose to vote against safety regulations that would have made Grenfell Tower safer - including the instillation of sprinklers

11 - Grenfell Action Group is made up of residents who live in Grenfell Tower and who have campaigned against the cladding that was used and general fire safety issues for over a decade.

12 Emma Coad was campaigning for greater safety measures in Grenfell as were the Grenfell Action Group who are elected by the residents of Grenfell.

But hey I get it it's more important to right wing trolls that the tory vermin stay in power than the innocent lives that were lost. 

Grenfell Action Group - proof of multiple complaints to KCTMO - GRENFELL TOWER FIRE

COPY AND PASTE WHENEVER YOU SEE THESE RIGHT WING TROLLS SPREADING FAKE INFO!!


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

Also this:


----------



## agricola (Jun 18, 2017)

A380 said:


> There are some excellent local resilience officers and teams across local government, inside and outside London. Some ex emergency services/military and some home grown council people. It will be interesting to see in the enquiry what capacity Kensington and Chelsea had, if they'd cut anyone recently and when was the last time they tested or exercised their major incident plan. Like Health and Safety resilience is often seen as a bit geeky and is an easy cut to make. Right up to the point where it isn't.



I'd have to check, but I am reasonably sure that the LALOs train and liaise with their counterparts in the emergency services quite a lot so I'd be amazed if the council's response failed because of them.  

I would be much less amazed if it transpires that the council's response failed because the senior council types quibbled over, or couldn't provide, the amount of support the LALO called for.  Given how they have behaved since (especially if these claims about them rehoming people out of London are true), I think quibbling is the more likely.


----------



## killer b (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> Have re-edited - perhaps if people could HELP instead of bitching??? Just a thought..


It's difficult to know where to start tbh. Maybe with 'start again'. 'Fraid I don't have time this afternoon for anything more than that though - and I'm not sure how worthwhile posting massive C&Ps at far right nutcases is anyway.


----------



## ChrisD (Jun 18, 2017)

The Boy said:


> If the cladding used was illegal we'd surely know by now, wouldn't we? The world and their brother has been poring over the regs and the materials.


I assume Hammond was briefed before that interview....I'm puzzled by the use if the word "guidance". The design and implementation either complied with current uk building regs (seemingly years behind other counties in respect of cladding) or it didn't.  
  It is possible to comply with mandatory standards but still call short of some "best practice" "recommendation" or "guidance".  I suspect Hammond is trying to deflect criticism from the fact that building regulations review of this was kicked into the long grass.


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

killer b said:


> It's difficult to know where to start tbh. Maybe with 'start again'. 'Fraid I don't have time this afternoon for anything more than that though - and I'm not sure how worthwhile posting massive C&Ps at far right nutcases is anyway.


It's a swift way to counteract their blatant anti-labour and pro-tory agenda. I've been busy destroying these sly fuckers all over BBC and Evening Standard FB pages - these are the circlejerk right wing pages that are worth attacking, it's turning doubters into people who reject the tory agenda...


----------



## killer b (Jun 18, 2017)

Do you imagine you've been 'destroying' them with your error filled C&P? OK.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> It's a swift way to counteract their blatant anti-labour and pro-tory agenda. I've been busy destroying these sly fuckers all over BBC and Evening Standard FB pages - these are the circlejerk right wing pages that are worth attacking, it's turning doubters into people who reject the tory agenda...



Yes it reads like you want to make a pro-Labour riposte rather than set out the facts around this disaster.


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> it's turning doubters into people who reject the tory agenda...


----------



## Corax (Jun 18, 2017)

bimble said:


> For Fucks Sake.
> Your thing says "The KCTMO is made up of residents who live in Grenfell and who have campaigned against the cladding that was used" . That is utter nonsense.
> Whoever wrote that got confused and mixed up the managing agents who ignored the residents complaints & warnings (that is KCTMO) and the residents who warned them (called Grenfell Action Group), you twit.
> So it is completely useless and you should probably not "cut and paste it everywhere!" as it instructs.


I think it was on Marr that it was stated that 8 of the board of KCTMO were residents, but that they were there as advisors rather than having voting rights, and were mainly looked at as 'troublemakers'


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 18, 2017)

killer b said:


> Do you imagine you've been 'destroying' them with your error filled C&P? OK.


PK is a force of nature he doesn't need facts! 

Hello PK you nutter, you're a lot less radge than I remember


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> Examples??



Your point 11 isn't true. GAG didn't complain about the cladding. Hardly anyone seems to have known exactly what the cladding was until this week. Until after it went up like a firework as shown by the mobile phone footage (which surely should at least end these ridiculous 'if the cladding had anything to do with it' doubts).

As Gramsci pointed out earlier, and put succinctly



> Looking at the blog posts. None refer to the cladding. Access for emergency vehicles is brought up, rubbish not being cleared and also issues around the Fire Risk Assessment.
> 
> The action group were complaining about emergency lighting and out of date fire extinguishers for example.
> 
> The action group were bringing up issues of poor management by the TMO.



And you can add power surges to that...


----------



## ChrisD (Jun 18, 2017)

Each issue of Private Eye has a column called "rotten boroughs". What I've learnt this week about RBKC would fill up a whole book.


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> Yes it reads like you want to make a pro-Labour riposte rather than set out the facts around this disaster.


If this disaster is what it takes to reverse the blatant classism of the present UK situation and install a socialist led government then so be it.


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

ChrisD said:


> Each issue of Private Eye has a column called "rotten boroughs". What I've learnt this week about RBKC would fill up a whole book.


Can you cut and paste examples?
As much as I like Private Eye I'm not paying a penny to an Etonian!


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> Your point 11 isn't true. GAG didn't complain about the cladding. Hardly anyone seems to have known exactly what the cladding was until this week. Until after it went up like a firework as shown by the mobile phone footage (which surely should at least end these ridiculous 'if the cladding had anything to do with it' doubts).
> 
> As Gramsci pointed out earlier, and put succinctly
> 
> ...


Power surges that might have caused the fire, potentially...


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

OK have edited a lot: anyone fancy rewording it instead of just moaning - go ahead


----------



## A380 (Jun 18, 2017)

agricola said:


> I'd have to check, but I am reasonably sure that the LALOs train and liaise with their counterparts in the emergency services quite a lot so I'd be amazed if the council's response failed because of them.
> 
> I would be much less amazed if it transpires that the council's response failed because the senior council types quibbled over, or couldn't provide, the amount of support the LALO called for.  Given how they have behaved since (especially if these claims about them rehoming people out of London are true), I think quibbling is the more likely.


Agreed on the quality of most staff in this field: it's how many LALOs had they got and if they were full time or double hatting. As you say its more likely there was a lack of buy in at member and senior manager level. Did they take it seriously? How many directors or above had been on the Multi Agency Gold Incident Command Course (MAGIC)  or been to the Emergency Planning College? how many members had had any training or played in exercises?


----------



## Wilf (Jun 18, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Personally I think it might be worth having a separate thread, as this one is massive and fast moving and things might well get lost.


Done:
Solidarity Actions With Grenfell Residents


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> If this disaster is what it takes to reverse the blatant classism of the present UK situation and install a socialist led government then so be it.



Well no, it doesn't, not if it's built on bullshit and not the facts of it. No. Stop it.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 18, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Also been suggested that if they're spread out disparately across the country it makes it harder to form any kind of justice movement.



Oh, come on, in the internet age?


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 18, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Oh, come on, in the internet age?


Not everyone is happy using the net or has easy access to it.

Plus there's something to be said for the personal touch when talking about attending council meetings or protests. You can't react as fast if you're all across the country.

e2a: also worth pointing out I said _harder, _not impossible.


----------



## sheothebudworths (Jun 18, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> This woman is outstanding. She's calm, rational and extremely knowledgeable. She speaks for 7 minutes and there isn't a wasted word in there. Easily the best thing I've seen on this so far. Thanks for posting.



It's Pilgrim Tucker - myself and Mation went to school with her - she's a community coordinator for Unite and was working with the Grenfell action group, organising and campaigning, along with the multitude of other campaigns she's involved with.


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> Well no, it doesn't, not if it's built on bullshit and not the facts of it. No. Stop it.


I'm obviously not intentionally building on bullshit. I'm refuting as best I can the lies of the EDL/Britain First cunts. 

Of course you could always let them take the narrative instead...


----------



## editor (Jun 18, 2017)

Why repost such pointless shit?


----------



## killer b (Jun 18, 2017)

literally everyone in the world thinks those tossers are inhuman scum PK. they aren't 'taking the narrative'.


----------



## pengaleng (Jun 18, 2017)

ballache


----------



## killer b (Jun 18, 2017)

Shit, you might as well argue with the people who comment on youtube videos.


----------



## 8den (Jun 18, 2017)

editor said:


> Why repost such pointless shit?




Well I found out who the hell Kek is. 

Meet 'Kek', The Alt-Right's Anti-Semitic Hate God

Isn't learning fun?


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

killer b said:


> literally everyone in the world thinks those tossers are inhuman scum PK. they aren't 'taking the narrative'.



You aren't reading the FB pages of the right wing press. They are desperate to divert Grenfell attention away from tory scum.


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

editor said:


> Why repost such pointless shit?


maybe it could not be here.


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

bimble said:


> maybe it could not be here.


That's it - shut your eyes, sing "lalala" and pretend it isn't happening... great approach...


----------



## killer b (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> You aren't reading the FB pages of the right wing press.


entirely correct. Why would I do that?


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

killer b said:


> entirely correct. Why would I do that?


Know your enemy?


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> That's it - shut your eyes, sing "lalala" and pretend it isn't happening... great approach...


What do you think you're achieving by giving that hate-filled shit further publicity by re-posting their poison on here? 
I'm not unaware that they exist, but after a few attempts to argue with people on stormfront decided it wasn't best use of time.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> Power surges that might have caused the fire, potentially...



It really does sound like that was the cause. Hence lots of residents storming the housing office to complain.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> You aren't reading the FB pages of the right wing press. They are desperate to divert Grenfell attention away from tory scum.



FFS - start a new thread, stop fucking this one up.


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

bimble said:


> What do you think you're achieving by giving that hate-filled shit further publicity by re-posting their poison on here?
> I'm not unaware that they exist, but after a few attempts to argue with people on stormfront decided it wasn't best use of time.


I'm not encouraging anyone to argue with the cunts. I'm just pointing out - these fuckers have an agenda and they are all over news media (both left & right leaning) and their "facts" need refuting. Otherwise, they get away with it, and daft twats might believe it. This is how Trump got elected - simpletons and media bullshit.


----------



## pk (Jun 18, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> FFS - start a new thread, stop fucking this one up.


whatever


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 18, 2017)

Can there not be arguments and bunfights on this thread please?


----------



## agricola (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> I'm not encouraging anyone to argue with the cunts. I'm just pointing out - these fuckers have an agenda and they are all over news media (both left & right leaning) and their "facts" need refuting. Otherwise, they get away with it, and daft twats might believe it.



No-one is believing those people.  If anything, their "facts" are helping to expose those people for what they are.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> I'm not encouraging anyone to argue with the cunts. I'm just pointing out - these fuckers have an agenda and they are all over news media (both left & right leaning) and their "facts" need refuting. Otherwise, they get away with it, and daft twats might believe it.



It's a cesspit, you just end up drowning in shite. There are no "facts" in those places that you can refute. It's industrial bullshit.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jun 18, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> He's a descendent of Charles II



Sure he isn't a descendent of one of his spaniels?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 18, 2017)

This twat Paget-Brown seems in total denial about how useless his council has been in reacting to this situation.

* Interview on BBC News.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 18, 2017)

Governmentt have finally said families can have £5,500 each.  A really useful thing though would be an amnesty for anyone who was breaching a tenancy agreement or was an undocumented migrant. There will be families who probably feel like they can't access 'official' money.
Grenfell Tower fire: families to get £5,500 each from emergency fund, No 10 says - live updates


----------



## agricola (Jun 18, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> This twat Paget-Brown seems in total denial about how useless his council has been in reacting to this situation.
> 
> * Interview on BBC News.



That answer to the presenters question about the TMO almost had my TV out of the window.  Of course the questions about what the TMO has or hasn't done are questions for now (he insisted they were for the inquiry); thousands of people live in properties they are meant to ensure are safe.


----------



## agricola (Jun 18, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Governmentt have finally said families can have £5,500 each.  A really useful thing though would be an amnesty for anyone who was breaching a tenancy agreement or was an undocumented migrant. There will be families who probably feel like they can't access 'official' money.



The immediate question to this is why is the state's emergency fund paying?  As we have seen, the council has a couple of hundred million in reserve.


----------



## maomao (Jun 18, 2017)

agricola said:


> The immediate question to this is why is the state's emergency fund paying?  As we have seen, the council has a couple of hundred million in reserve.


Do they just have the money lying around in an account? Knowing Tories it's more likely tied up in some sort of investment.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 18, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Not everyone is happy using the net or has easy access to it.
> 
> Plus there's something to be said for the personal touch when talking about attending council meetings or protests. You can't react as fast if you're all across the country.
> 
> e2a: also worth pointing out I said _harder, _not impossible.


the impersonal touch via the Internet probably even makes cohesive action within communities a bit harder really


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2017)

maomao said:


> Do they just have the money lying around in an account? Knowing Tories it's more likely tied up in some sort of investment.


Apparently in their reserves so shouldn't be hard to get out the bank


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Jun 18, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> FFS.
> 
> Two women feared dead in Grenfell Tower were 'threatened with legal action' for raising alarm about fire safety



Here comes that anger again. I can't read or talk about this for more than a couple of minutes with anyone without feeling my piss start to boil


----------



## 8den (Jun 18, 2017)

Anywho, back on topic. Again Twitter, but this user has gone through the RBKC Grenfell Tower housing committee meeting, and you can clearly see residents complaints about the dangers of power surges, cladding and fire safety equipment are clearly ignored.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2017)




----------



## Cid (Jun 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


>




There's something horribly disturbing about the cuteness of that pic. I mean not that I'm complaining, it's just cute, and then you think about why and where they're wearing those boots, and what they're doing. And er.. yeah. Disturbing.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Jun 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


>



Some of the very few involved in all this whose integrity is beyond question


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 18, 2017)

Five and a half grand hush money from Aus-Theresa May? Good? Bad?


----------



## agricola (Jun 18, 2017)

From the Grauniad's live updates thread:



> Kensington and Chelsea council has been relieved of responsibility for taking care of the survivors of the Grenfell Tower disaster.
> 
> The work is being handed over to a new Grenfell Fire Response Team, made up of representatives from central government, the British Red Cross, the Metropolitan police, London-wide local and regional government and the London Fire Brigade.
> 
> ...



One can only hope that, though they have been stripped of responsibility, RBKC still end up with the bill for all this.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 18, 2017)

8den said:


> Anywho, back on topic. Again Twitter, but this user has gone through the RBKC Grenfell Tower housing committee meeting, and you can clearly see residents complaints about the dangers of power surges, cladding and fire safety equipment are clearly ignored.



From the tweets: 

"2. The London Fire Brigade recommended TMO visit Lakanal House in Southwark to familiarise themselves with the potential risk in high rises."

Unless she's quoting from another bit she hasn't highlighted, it actually says the LFB had to visit Grenfell tower to familiarise themselves with the building as well as another high risk flat . However according to reports at the start of this thread the LFB were not visiting these high risk flats as regularly as they should have been. We had visit like that where I worked as as a similar building to ours had caught fire though luckily it was a day center so no one was in it at the time. But afaik we've not had one like that since and it was a couple of years ago. Another case for tighter regulations here i think.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2017)

agricola said:


> From the Grauniad's live updates thread:
> 
> 
> 
> One can only hope that, though they have been stripped of responsibility, RBKC still end up with the bill for all this.


Huge clusterfuck for rbkc, I suspect special measures beckon


----------



## 8den (Jun 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


>




I used to meet a Fireman in Bruce Grove Park regularly when out walking my dogs. We have springer spaniels, like the dog on the right, and he had one as well which just qualified as a search and rescue dogs, so they one on the right may be his dog, Freddy. Unbelievable training. Because they're often into disaster zone (like Haiti post earthquake) where puddles and the like may be contaminated,  they're trained not drink from anything other their handler's water bottle. Their final test is a 48hr endurance challenge for both dog and handler in an abandoned quarry in Wales.


----------



## 8den (Jun 18, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> From the tweets:
> 
> "2. The London Fire Brigade recommended TMO visit Lakanal House in Southwark to familiarise themselves with the potential risk in high rises."
> 
> Unless she's quoting from another bit she hasn't highlighted, it actually says the LFB had to visit Grenfell tower to familiarise themselves with the building as well as another high risk flat . However according to reports at the start of this thread the LFB were not visiting these high risk flats as regularly as they should have been. We had visit like that where I worked as as a similar building to ours had caught fire though luckily it was a day center so no one was in it at the time. But afaik we've not had one like that since and it was a couple of years ago. Another case for tighter regulations here i think.



Someone posted on twatter that one of the first things the Tories had planned post brexit was relaxing rules on building and housing standards.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jun 18, 2017)

Lord Camomile said:


> Also been suggested that if they're spread out disparately across the country it makes it harder to form any kind of justice movement.



This is important imo. 

Community is much stronger face to face.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 18, 2017)

killer b said:


> literally everyone in the world thinks those tossers are inhuman scum PK. they aren't 'taking the narrative'.



They may not


Wilf said:


> I was going to post a thread on 'solidarity actions with Grenfell residents' in Protest.  Is that the best way to go or do people want to leave it all on this one?



I dunno whats best here, but there's this
Solidarity with residents of Grenfell tower

Nature of these things is that it will likely be quite generalised, but also likely to feature specific actions.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jun 18, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Oh, come on, in the internet age?



I think your apparent contempt for this valid point lacks a reasoned justification.


----------



## Florkleshnort (Jun 18, 2017)

agricola said:


> The immediate question to this is why is the state's emergency fund paying?  As we have seen, the council has a couple of hundred million in reserve.



Isn't there insurance for this type of thing? It is fairly standard for private housing to have insurance against fire which would also cover the cost of temporary accommodation until things got sorted out. Do councils not bother taking out these things?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2017)

8den said:


> Someone posted on twatter that one of the first things the Tories had planned post brexit was relaxing rules on building and housing standards.


Another of their plans scuppered


----------



## brogdale (Jun 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Another of their plans scuppered


Maybe, but more likely just made a little more politically challenging to implement.

The swivel-eyed have had their eyes on the prize for a long time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Maybe, but more likely just made a little more politically challenging to implement.
> 
> The swivel-eyed have had their eyes on the prize for a long time.
> 
> View attachment 109657


God I hate that man


----------



## Anudder Oik (Jun 18, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Five and a half grand hush money from Aus-Theresa May? Good? Bad?



Probably been mentioned aready but local residents admirably organized a collection themselves that has raised millions so Theresa May's offer of some trickle-down from her Saudi Arms deals is a late insult. The local residents need to take things further and make sure that nobody gets bought off, like accepting offers to relocate in Milton keynes, etc.

Having said that the locals who have made their collection should start dishing out cash soon to the victims, especially families with kids, but I imagine that is going to be a difficult logistical task.


----------



## marty21 (Jun 18, 2017)

Take a look at @natalieisonline's Tweet: 

This woman is painstakingly going through publicly available minutes of KCTMO meetings,  interesting stuff ,clear there were concerns about the cladding and power surges.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2017)

marty21 said:


> Take a look at @natalieisonline's Tweet:
> 
> This woman is painstakingly going through publicly available minutes of KCTMO meetings,  interesting stuff ,clear there were concerns about the cladding and power surges.



The master criminal always makes one fatal error and theirs was minuting the meetings at which problems with grenfell tower were discussed and placing them on the internet


----------



## binka (Jun 18, 2017)

I see the next local election in rbkc will be 2018 - you'd imagine there will be some sort of 'justice for grenfell' candidate standing in most/all of the wards


----------



## Anudder Oik (Jun 18, 2017)

Frankie Boyle on Theresa May.


----------



## marty21 (Jun 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> The master criminal always makes one fatal error and theirs was minuting the meetings at which problems with grenfell tower were discussed and placing them on the internet


Tbf , they have to publish the minutes of board meetings on the council Website.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> The master criminal always makes one fatal error and theirs was minuting the meetings at which problems with grenfell tower were discussed and placing them on the internet


And this should be their undoing. Fingers crossed.


----------



## marty21 (Jun 18, 2017)

I have worked for a TMO , about 15 years ago I tempted for one for about 6 months. What struck me at the time was that the tenant board members did have a lot of influence.  I've no idea if this was the case at KCTMO ,but at the one I worked for ,a tenant board member interviewed applicants for vacant flats , 100% of them were nominations from the Local Authority, so I would show the flat ,then they were interviewed, and if the board member didn't like them (it was as simple as that) he could turn them down and another applicant was shown the flat.  I did question this with management but they basically shrugged their shoulders  They had to keep the board happy. 

I was working in Housing with TMOs started to be created ,a Labour policy sadly. I was against them at the time, because it removed accountability from the councillors even though they were on the management boards.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> God I hate that man



I take it you know of his consorting with the Hitler apologists of Traditional Britain? (ejaculating such gems as "The Poles were asking for it")


----------



## Anudder Oik (Jun 18, 2017)

Corax said:


> A whole new strand of madness here.
> 
> [ETA: I originally posted the video up - but posters below have suggested it may be best not to have done, so removed]
> 
> A witness claiming that Muslims think that it was a revenge attack for London Bridge & Manchester.  Let's hope that narrative doesn't take hold.



Perhaps just break the link but leave it in place, if you think it should be debated. Personally, I don't think it is healthy or even intelligent on a debating forum to play the illiberal game known as "Safe Space or Echo chamber" where some stuff has to be hidden from view because some people are perhaps too scared or too sensitive to see something. Why be scared? Is this about free debate or feelings? Just because you post something doesn't mean you endorse it, does it?

Just do it in a way that doesn't give the uploaders any benefit, ie; broken link and don't watch the video to the end so it doesn't get the click, which can generate money and raise it in the rankings.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 18, 2017)

marty21 said:


> I have worked for a TMO , about 15 years ago I tempted for one for about 6 months. What struck me at the time was that the tenant board members did have a lot of influence.  I've no idea if this was the case at KCTMO ,but at the one I worked for ,a tenant board member interviewed applicants for vacant flats , 100% of them were nominations from the Local Authority, so I would show the flat ,then they were interviewed, and if the board member didn't like them (it was as simple as that) he could turn them down and another applicant was shown the flat.  I did question this with management but they basically shrugged their shoulders  They had to keep the board happy.
> 
> I was working in Housing with TMOs started to be created ,a Labour policy sadly. I was against them at the time, because it removed accountability from the councillors even though they were on the management boards.



I daresay tenant board members had way more influence then. Certainly the abolition of the Tenant Services Authority by Shapps since then won't have helped. 

Around that time I was asked, as a TARA co chair, if I wanted to do the training to become part of the new arrangement (provided by the stock transferred RSL-I can't remember the jargon)...I did the training because it was a free course and qual, it would provide insight, put me in touch with housing activists etc. But it became very obvious that the very amateur nature and time intensive nature of things meant that the new arrangements would facilitate very limited oversight indeed of what the RSL were up to.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 18, 2017)

8den said:


> Anywho, back on topic. Again Twitter, but this user has gone through the RBKC Grenfell Tower housing committee meeting, and you can clearly see residents complaints about the dangers of power surges, cladding and fire safety equipment are clearly ignored.



I was doing the same thing yesterday evening and summarised my clumsy findings in a couple of posts on here. Natalie's work is much more helpful and thorough. Her tweeting also goes beyond the 2013 power surge issue and looks at KCTMO's general performance with regard to Grenfell Tower.

If digging for information on the power surge issue, a  difficulty is that the KCTMO minutes on their website only go back to the November 2013 meeting which is covered in the minutes published in January 2014. The power surges took place in May 2013. In other words, there will be one or two KCTMO meetings which took place between May 2013 and October 2013 which aren't available on the KCTMO site but which will undoubtedly have more info on the then more current power surge issue.

Having said that, there is another half-buried source of useful information here:

RBKC Committees > Home > Housing and Property Scrutiny Committee.

These are the meeting minutes for the RBKCC  Housing and Property Scrutiny Committee. They start in July 2013 and cover the power surge issue in more detail. That link was difficult to find, it has much more info on the power surge issue and Natalie hasn't referred to it in any of her posts so I doubt if she has seen it. I don't Twitter or Facebook so would be extremely grateful if you could try to make her aware of it.

If anyone is still reading this post then my summary of the power surge issue is as follows... several surges took place in May 2013, 45 residents were affected by damage to appliances within their flats, a fault with an incoming mains cable was discovered and fixed but the even one and a half months later (July 2013) the Housing and Property Scrutiny Committee admit they aren't sure if the primary source of the problem had been rectified, KCTMO advised the affected residents to make claims on their own contents insurance policies but also seemingly made a claim on the KCTMO policy [Casual Observer thinks that's illegal but never mind], 25 of the 45 residents did make a claim via the KCTMO policy with Zurich Insurance but Zurich Insurance refused to pay out claiming KCTMO had done what could be reasonably expected of them to maintain the electrics in good order, KCTMO then offered to pay the affected residents £200 each (which they admit would not have covered the damaged items in many cases). There is also mention of more electric work being scheduled for later that July.

In other words, we know that RBKC and KCTMO are cunts but we can add Zurich Insurance to the list as well.

Fun fact not really related to this post: Ian Bone used to live in Grenfell Tower


----------



## Chrispreece30 (Jun 18, 2017)

The focus of discussions about the cause of the spread of the fire has been mainly about the cladding however other mistakes (including putting gas pipes in the stairwell) could have been made during the renovations. Not much has been made of the following so far, but it could be very significant. "To install the new pipes, the ‘fire stopping’ – systems used to seal openings and joints to prevent the spread of fire – would have had to be partially removed, under the “preferred option” listed in a report from 2012 by engineers Max Fordham. The document said this option was adopted.

The intention, *according to the sustainability and energy statement, was to replace the fire stopping once the new pipes had been installed*.

Max Fordham did not respond to enquiries about the safeguards put in place to ensure that fire stopping was replaced properly."
Grenfell renovation proposed temporary removal of fire protections  | News | Inside Housing


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

There's photos being released now of inside the building, the ruins of people's homes. These being shown accompanying a police statement explaining that a new updated figure for the dead is expected tomorrow and that due to the ferocity of the fire it may be that despite every effort some victims may never be identified.


----------



## Rob Ray (Jun 18, 2017)

marty21 said:


> the tenant board members did have a lot of influence



Mm thing is though KCTMO is enormous, incorporating nearly 10,000 people - 27% leaseholders. Problem with any bureaucracy, particularly one covering an area that large, is that the people with time, resources, contacts etc to get onto the boards will tend to be wealthier and are often brought on board specifically to back a particular faction.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 18, 2017)

bimble said:


> There's photos being released now of inside the building, the ruins of people's homes. These being shown accompanying a police statement explaining that a new updated figure for the dead is expected tomorrow and that due to the ferocity of the fire it may be that despite every effort some victims may never be identified.



In those pictures it looks like the internal walls have just gone


----------



## agricola (Jun 18, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> I was doing the same thing yesterday evening and summarised my clumsy findings in a couple of posts on here. Natalie's work is much helpful and thorough. Her tweeting also goes beyond the 2013 power surge issue and looks at KCTMO's general performance with regard to Grenfell Tower.
> 
> If digging for information on the power surge issue, a  difficulty is that the KCTMO minutes on their website only go back to the November 2013 meeting which is covered in the minutes published in January 2014. The power surges took place in May 2013. In other words, there will be one or two KCTMO meetings which took place between May 2013 and October 2013 which aren't available on the KCTMO site but which will undoubtedly have more info on the then more current power surge issue.
> 
> ...



TBH it would be interesting to find out what KCTMO told Zurich in order for them to come to that conclusion.


----------



## Anudder Oik (Jun 18, 2017)

Probably been posted already but I think the pop stars queuing up to join Simon Cowells' charity single for the Grenfell victims should get the inspiration for the lyrics of their song from this letter below.


*Two women feared dead in Grenfell Tower tragedy were threatened with legal action - after raising alarm about fire safety*
Mariem Elgwahry and Nadia Choucair were branded 'troublemakers' because they campaigned to make their homes safer

Grenfell Tower missing pair were sent legal threats after fire safety warning


----------



## kebabking (Jun 18, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


> ...The local residents need to take things further and make sure that nobody gets bought off, like accepting offers to relocate in Milton keynes, etc...



Some may wish to leave and build new lives elsewhere - as happens in the aftermath of every event of this nature - it's not for you, or any other self-appointed village Napoleon, to tell people where they can or must live.

Warwickshire, Worcestershire and Herefordshire councils (doubtless among many others) have let it be known that they will assist if tennant's wish to move away from London - and if they do then good luck to them.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 18, 2017)

Yep. Family elsewhere, quieter location, chance of a garden, chance to get a bigger home if they're overcrowded, there are reasons people might want to move away. 

Someone above said that nobody in social housing in Kensington wants to move away, but that's just not true - I used to be on a Homeswapper website and there were a fair few on there. But it wouldn't have been that easy for the Grenfell tenants to move if they wanted to because some people point blank refuse to live in a tower block even if it's in Kensington. Many people on Homeswapper say 'no estates' which I've always thought a little bizarre as it doesn't leave them with many options. 

However, a genuine choice to move away is very, very different to being forced or even cajoled to leave. I hope the govt doesn't try to get away with saying any residents 'chose' to leave when the other option on offer was absolutely nothing, like they sometimes do to other homeless people in London.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 18, 2017)

scifisam said:


> In those pictures it looks like the internal walls have just gone



Yep, just metal and stone left really.


----------



## OneStrike (Jun 18, 2017)

kebabking said:


> Some may wish to leave and build new lives elsewhere - as happens in the aftermath of every event of this nature - it's not for you, or any other self-appointed village Napoleon, to tell people where they can or must live.
> 
> Warwickshire, Worcestershire and Herefordshire councils (doubtless among many others) have let it be known that they will assist if tennant's wish to move away from London - and if they do then good luck to them.



Agree entirely, if those involved want to leave the area for whatever reason it must be facilitated, so long as the local council still commit to adding the homes they would have required in the borough should they have wanted to stay.


----------



## killer b (Jun 18, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


> Perhaps just break the link but leave it in place, if you think it should be debated. Personally, I don't think it is healthy or even intelligent on a debating forum to play the illiberal game known as "Safe Space or Echo chamber" where some stuff has to be hidden from view because some people are perhaps too scared or too sensitive to see something. Why be scared? Is this about free debate or feelings? Just because you post something doesn't mean you endorse it, does it?


When a video has been made by a mad racist, it's usually to serve an ideological purpose - so if someone posts a video by a mad racist without saying anything about the dodginess of the source, posters are going to bring it up. To make sure other posters (and perhaps whoever posted it in the first place) are aware that the video isn't just a neutral bit of reportage.

And if a poster keeps on posting videos by mad racists without saying anything about the dodginess of the source, posters might be forgiven for thinking the person posting them might actually share the ideology pushed by the mad racist's video.

Either that or we're all snowflakes here. Not sure which.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Jun 18, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Yep. Family elsewhere, quieter location, chance of a garden, chance to get a bigger home if they're overcrowded, there are reasons people might want to move away.
> 
> Someone above said that nobody in social housing in Kensington wants to move away, but that's just not true - I used to be on a Homeswapper website and there were a fair few on there. But it wouldn't have been that easy for the Grenfell tenants to move if they wanted to because some people point blank refuse to live in a tower block even if it's in Kensington. Many people on Homeswapper say 'no estates' which I've always thought a little bizarre as it doesn't leave them with many options.
> 
> However, a genuine choice to move away is very, very different to being forced or even cajoled to leave. I hope the govt doesn't try to get away with saying any residents 'chose' to leave when the other option on offer was absolutely nothing, like they sometimes do to other homeless people in London.


May has said that everyone will be found a home in RBKC or a neighbouring borough within the next three weeks, I realise her promises are as honest as a £9 note but a Tory council may be reluctant to make a liar of her whilst all this crap is still out in the light of day


----------



## fishfinger (Jun 18, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> look at this cuntfop:
> View attachment 109620


Rock Fielding-Mellen, AKA "Mock Grenfell 'n' I lied" or "I'm licked on Grenfell".


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 18, 2017)

Tourists blasted for taking 'disaster selfies' next to Grenfell Tower

Wtf?!


----------



## killer b (Jun 18, 2017)

frogwoman said:


> Tourists blasted for taking 'disaster selfies' next to Grenfell Tower
> 
> Wtf?!


I was thinking some of the news reporting for this was a bit off colour for similar reasons - Jon Snow reporting from the scene with the smoking ruins behind him etc.

I imagine they think they're just paying their respects. There were loads of people taking selfies at St Annes Sq in Manchester where all the floral tributes to the bomb victims were - that felt a bit odd too.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 18, 2017)

This is a bit fucking spooky:


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 18, 2017)

maomao said:


> Do they just have the money lying around in an account? Knowing Tories it's more likely tied up in some sort of investment.



Knowing Tories it'll be invested in arms, tobacco and Rwandan machete factories.


----------



## Anudder Oik (Jun 18, 2017)

kebabking said:


> Some may wish to leave and build new lives elsewhere - as happens in the aftermath of every event of this nature - it's not for you, or any other self-appointed village Napoleon, to tell people where they can or must live.
> 
> Warwickshire, Worcestershire and Herefordshire councils (doubtless among many others) have let it be known that they will assist if tennant's wish to move away from London - and if they do then good luck to them.



If people wish to choose that option of their own free will then by all means. The problem is if there are any attempts to coerce them (highly likely) and give them only the choice of leaving that area, which I understand is an active cleansing policy that the kensington council undertakes in favour of gentrification. There is also concern that the Grenfell land will be sold for private developement.

If a tenant turns down an offer to go outside the borough they are made to pay the consequences.

This from Grenfell Action group

Pants on Fire No.3 – Joint Award. Cllr Feilding Mellen and the RBKC Decant Policy

*This offer of housing could be anywhere in the UK and, if refused, will result in the tenant making themselves intentionally homeless and removed from the housing register.*


----------



## ska invita (Jun 18, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> This is a bit fucking spooky:


Tories: predictable same old shit since way back when


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 18, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> May has said that everyone will be found a home in RBKC or a neighbouring borough within the next three weeks, I realise her promises are as honest as a £9 note but a Tory council may be reluctant to make a liar of her whilst all this crap is still out in the light of day



I do not believe this to be physically possible.


Edit: missed the neighbouring borough bit, then it's possible but that's going to hurt other boroughs if it's not spread very wide


----------



## YouSir (Jun 18, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> May has said that everyone will be found a home in RBKC or a neighbouring borough within the next three weeks, I realise her promises are as honest as a £9 note but a Tory council may be reluctant to make a liar of her whilst all this crap is still out in the light of day



A permanent home or a temporary place? Not that I'm inclined to believe the Tories willing or capable of providing either.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 18, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> May has said that everyone will be found a home in RBKC or a neighbouring borough within the next three weeks, I realise her promises are as honest as a £9 note but a Tory council may be reluctant to make a liar of her whilst all this crap is still out in the light of day



It is a much more definite promise than most - not a lot of wiggle room there. I guess we'll all see in three weeks' time.


----------



## bimble (Jun 18, 2017)

I hope people won't get distracted if the homeless survivors are treated really well now, housed in fine local housing and giant cheques presented to them on tv, it's the obvious visible thing to do to appease the rage against the systemic causes of what has happened.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 18, 2017)

scifisam said:


> In those pictures it looks like the internal walls have just gone


Anything that's not a structural supporting wall - and these dividing walls won't have been - will just have been wood, plasterboard etc, so eventually lost.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> May has said that everyone will be found a home in RBKC or a neighbouring borough within the next three weeks, I realise her promises are as honest as a £9 note but a Tory council may be reluctant to make a liar of her whilst all this crap is still out in the light of day


Who knows how long May's writ may run, hours or days


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 18, 2017)

After this block is taken down nothing short of a memorial park /green space/ etc will do on the site.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 18, 2017)

more car crash shit

Two women feared dead in Grenfell Tower were 'threatened with legal action' for raising alarm about fire safety


----------



## JTG (Jun 18, 2017)

pk said:


> 2 a Labour MP was elected into that constituency only after last week's General Election, after being a tory safe seat for decades. And it remains a tory Council.


In fact, between 1997 and 2010 North Kensington was part of the Regents Park & Kensington North constituency which elected a Labour MP every time.

The old Kensington seat was Tory from 1974 when it was created until 1997 when it was abolished. It was replaced by RP & KN (above) and Kensington & Chelsea which was very safe Tory. In 2010 Kensington was revived, Regents Park moving into Westminster North & Chelsea becoming part of Fulham & Chelsea.

As you can guess from all this, Kensington is considerably less safe Tory (as we saw a week and a half ago) than K & C was. But it's incorrect to say North Kensington has been represented by Tory MPs for decades. It hasn't.


----------



## gosub (Jun 18, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> After this block is taken down nothing short of a memorial park /green space/ etc will do on the site.


  cos theres loads of other available land in Kensington for social housing


----------



## Mation (Jun 19, 2017)

sheothebudworths said:


> It's Pilgrim Tucker - myself and Mation went to school with her - she's a community coordinator for Unite and was working with the Grenfell action group, organising and campaigning, along with the multitude of other campaigns she's involved with.


She's brilliant. I met her last week for the first time in over 30 years as I saw her name in a Labour Party email and thought that there couldn't be many Pilgrim Tuckers in this world!


----------



## B.I.G (Jun 19, 2017)

gosub said:


> cos theres loads of other available land in Kensington for social housing



Harsh.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 19, 2017)

Mation said:


> She's brilliant. I met her last week for the first time in over 30 years as I saw her name in a Labour Party email and thought that there couldn't be many Pilgrim Tuckers in this world!


You knew her when you were a toddler?


----------



## gosub (Jun 19, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Harsh.



This mess ain't going to be easy to unpick.  And thats with semi competent people who weren't more interested in arse covering. -the number of blocks that they now have to look at nationally is in the thousands


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 19, 2017)

gosub said:


> cos theres loads of other available land in Kensington for social housing


That's not really the point though here - the point being made, and I agree with it, is that it wouldn't be right to rebuild housing on that particular site. A site where a large number of people have died through no fault of their own.

Let there be a garden of remembrance with a memorial to all those who perished as a mark of respect to them. 

Whether or not there are a large number of spare sites available for building new social housing is a separate issue - sites could be bought from those in private hands, for example, or even subjected to compulsory purchase. Hell, the Queen might even be persuaded to give some away.


----------



## gosub (Jun 19, 2017)

I'd rather a task of some magnitude was done, rather than made harder.


----------



## B.I.G (Jun 19, 2017)

Remembrance is very important.


----------



## gosub (Jun 19, 2017)

site of a worse London fire.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 19, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> This is a bit fucking spooky:




holy fuck.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 19, 2017)

gosub said:


> I'd rather a task of some magnitude was done, rather than made harder.


They will need to keep the site intact for some time for investigative reasons, for a start. Never mind then clearing the site. 

There is nothing to stop the council finding a new site for new buildings tomorrow, and starting the rebuilding process within the borough elsewhere.


----------



## gosub (Jun 19, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> They will need to keep the site intact for some time for investigative reasons, for a start. Never mind then clearing the site.
> 
> There is nothing to stop the council finding a new site for new buildings tomorrow, and starting the rebuilding process within the borough elsewhere.



whole thing, if undertaken seriously, will be a decade of building juggling.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 19, 2017)

gosub said:


> site of a worse London fire.


There's a monument there too - no housing though iirc. 

So you fail to make your own point.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 19, 2017)

gosub said:


> whole thing, if undertaken seriously, will be a decade of building juggling.


It may yet be found that these people died due to corporate manslaughter. Would you live somewhere you knew people had perished so horrifically?


----------



## gosub (Jun 19, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> There's a monument there too - no housing though iirc.
> 
> So you fail to make your own point.



well if you want an office block instead of social housing (either could wear a plaque) thats down to you.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 19, 2017)

Look, not everyone has even been identified yet, let alone been laid to rest. How about you show those who have perished some respect and dignity?


----------



## gosub (Jun 19, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> It may yet be found that these people died due to corporate manslaughter. Would you live somewhere you knew people had perished so horrifically?


there ain't much English soil that ain't got blood on it

it'll be a new build  probably more tastefully suggested in about a years time when things are less mental....the amount of spin around is appalling.  Grenfell was previously clad in asbestos....

We need rain.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 19, 2017)

marty21 said:


> I have worked for a TMO , about 15 years ago I tempted for one for about 6 months. What struck me at the time was that the tenant board members did have a lot of influence.  I've no idea if this was the case at KCTMO ,but at the one I worked for ,a tenant board member interviewed applicants for vacant flats , 100% of them were nominations from the Local Authority, so I would show the flat ,then they were interviewed, and if the board member didn't like them (it was as simple as that) he could turn them down and another applicant was shown the flat.  I did question this with management but they basically shrugged their shoulders  They had to keep the board happy.
> 
> I was working in Housing with TMOs started to be created ,a Labour policy sadly. I was against them at the time, because it removed accountability from the councillors even though they were on the management boards.



The new MP when she was a Cllr was on the board of the TMO.

TMOs are common in London. In theory they give tenants greater say in the management of there estates. The Council retaining the ownership.

I know one estate near me where the tenants have had to fight the Council to keep there right to manage. They don't trust the Council. It helps protect them from the Council looking to regenerate there estate. Which they see as the Council (Lambeth) getting rid of social housing.

TMOs are run by volunteers. As with all community organisations some work well and some don't.

So I wouldn't want to condemn idea of tenant management outright.

I also think some media reporting has been mixing up the TMO and the Council.

The new MP has been doing that. Even though she spent several years on the board of the TMO. From 2008 to 2012.


----------



## 8den (Jun 19, 2017)

bimble said:


> There's photos being released now of inside the building, the ruins of people's homes. These being shown accompanying a police statement explaining that a new updated figure for the dead is expected tomorrow and that due to the ferocity of the fire it may be that despite every effort some victims may never be identified.



Not disputing it, but that seems a bit odd, they were able to correctly identify 9/11 victims from the smallest fragments of bones, and DNA samples of relatives.

Edit to add, considering that some residents may well have been here, say, illegally, or as refugees, I just realised that it may be impossible to do the above.


----------



## gosub (Jun 19, 2017)

8den said:


> Not disputing it, but that seems a bit odd, they were able to correctly identify 9/11 victims from the smallest fragments of bones, and DNA samples of relatives.
> 
> Edit to add, considering that some residents may well have been here, say, illegally, or as refugees, I just realised that it may be impossible to do the above.



wtc was a workplace.  DNA identification requires comparable family members...Everybody in a workplace is somebodies child; with residential the whole family could be amongst the debris


----------



## wiskey (Jun 19, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> This is a bit fucking spooky:



Isn't it just


----------



## 8den (Jun 19, 2017)

gosub said:


> wtc was a workplace.  DNA identification requires comparable family members...



Basically the same point I made above, only not as well.


----------



## cybertect (Jun 19, 2017)

Open to correction, but I think Kensington & Chelsea is unique in having put _all _its property (10,000 dwellings) under one TMO.

Notably, this runs counter to the statutory guidance notes published by HMG, as it's associated with 'significantly higher risks'. 

Right to Manage statutory guidance: part 1 - GOV.UK


----------



## Corax (Jun 19, 2017)

gosub said:


> wtc was a workplace.  DNA identification requires comparable family members...Everybody in a workplace is somebodies child; with residential the whole family could be amongst the debris


Also, WTC victims had homes, with toothbrushes etc.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 19, 2017)

Did undercover police target Grenfell residents who raised fears about safety?


----------



## Raheem (Jun 19, 2017)

gosub said:


> site of a worse London fire.



Srsly. Are you expecting everyone here to have done the knowledge?


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 19, 2017)

gosub said:


> there ain't much English soil that ain't got blood on it
> 
> it'll be a new build  probably more tastefully suggested in about a years time when things are less mental....the amount of spin around is appalling.  Grenfell was previously clad in asbestos....
> 
> We need rain.


And yet various battlefield sites around the country are not built on...

Councils around the UK have plenty of other options for building less likely to cause general outrage than on sites where many people have died. Including Kensington.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 19, 2017)

8den said:


> Not disputing it, but that seems a bit odd, they were able to correctly identify 9/11 victims from the smallest fragments of bones, and DNA samples of relatives.
> 
> Edit to add, considering that some residents may well have been here, say, illegally, or as refugees, I just realised that it may be impossible to do the above.


Depending on the heat of the fire at its worst, sadly there may not be anything left to identify 

Extreme heat also degrades DNA, so remains may not yield a useful DNA sample.


----------



## maomao (Jun 19, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Srsly. Are you expecting everyone here to have done the knowledge?


It's Pudding Lane.

The Great Fire of London burnt down 13,000 houses and the whole city would have had to be moved to avoid building on its ruins.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 19, 2017)

maomao said:


> It's Pudding Lane.
> 
> The Great Fire of London burnt down 13,000 houses and the whole city would have had to be moved to avoid building on its ruins.



I know what it is. Just commenting on the posting of a photo of anonymous office blocks without explanation.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 19, 2017)

maomao said:


> It's Pudding Lane.
> 
> The Great Fire of London burnt down 13,000 houses and the whole city would have had to be moved to avoid building on its ruins.


It's pudding Lane in 2008, according to the wiki page it's borrowed from.


----------



## dessiato (Jun 19, 2017)

I'm not sure that posting pics of Pudding Lane is necessary, nor appropriate on this thread. It seems very insensitive.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 19, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> I was doing the same thing yesterday evening and summarised my clumsy findings in a couple of posts on here. Natalie's work is much more helpful and thorough. Her tweeting also goes beyond the 2013 power surge issue and looks at KCTMO's general performance with regard to Grenfell Tower.
> 
> If digging for information on the power surge issue, a  difficulty is that the KCTMO minutes on their website only go back to the November 2013 meeting which is covered in the minutes published in January 2014. The power surges took place in May 2013. In other words, there will be one or two KCTMO meetings which took place between May 2013 and October 2013 which aren't available on the KCTMO site but which will undoubtedly have more info on the then more current power surge issue.
> 
> ...



It wouldn't be illegal to claim on both your own insurance & KCTMO's insurance, but it would be illegal to take payment from both, as that would be making a profit, the correct thing to do is:

1 - Claim on your own insurance, that company can then claim against KCTMO's insurance company to recover their costs, if they think they have a case.

2 - If you don't have your own insurance, attempt to claim on KCTMO's insurance.

I assume KCTMO's insurance was a liability policy, and therefore only pays out if negligence by KCTMO is proven. Power surges can occur from internal & external sources, clearly if it was external it is unlikely to have anything to do with KCTMO. If internal it could be as a result of negligence by KCTMO, but not necessarily.

Liability insurance only covers any claims/costs resulting from legal liabilities incurred by the insured, similiar to the third party part of a car insurance policy.



agricola said:


> TBH it would be interesting to find out what KCTMO told Zurich in order for them to come to that conclusion.



It would indeed, assuming the electrics were up to date & signed-off, that could be considered all that was reasonably expected of KCTMO, and therefore proving any negligence, if indeed there was any, would be very difficult.

-----

Power surges are not uncommon, and a surge of just 10 volts can burn out microprocessors that are in most household electrical goods, such as TVs, cordless phones, computers, microwaves, dishwashers, washing machines and refrigerators.

The fact that it's widely reported that a fridge caused this fire means a power surge could have been the issue, although that would seem unlikely if other appliances in the block were not affected. More likely to be an issue with the fridge itself. Of course, none of this explains why it spread so fast, which remains the main issue.


----------



## Voley (Jun 19, 2017)

Ah right. I thought it was probably Kings Cross.


----------



## yardbird (Jun 19, 2017)

Makes you think -
Whirlpool called to account over 4m fire-risk dryers still not fixed


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 19, 2017)

gosub said:


> site of a worse London fire.


..and how is this site comparable? Seriously, get a grip. You disagree with a memorial park, so what. Thankfully, the final decision won't be yours.


----------



## killer b (Jun 19, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> look at this cuntfop:
> View attachment 109620


Turns out I was reading about this guy's mum recently, he isn't the first member of the family to enter politics - his mum once ran for parliament advocating drilling into your head for better mental health. Here's one of her election posters.






I actually have a t-shirt with a picture of her on it...  She's interviewed in Vice (where else?) here.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 19, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> ..and how is this site comparable? Seriously, get a grip. You disagree with a memorial park, so what. Thankfully, the final decision won't be yours.



I had the same thought as you yesterday Ruts, eventually turning the site into a public memorial garden would be the most fitting.


----------



## andysays (Jun 19, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> I had the same thought as you yesterday Ruts, eventually turning the site into a public memorial garden would be the most fitting.



I don't necessarily disagree with this, but I suggest it would be even more fitting if the various problems around social housing and wider issues were adequetely dealt with.

Which is not to say that *both* aren't possible, but questions around the future of the site don't seem paramount ATM, IMO.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 19, 2017)

.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 19, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> It wouldn't be illegal to claim on both your own insurance & KCTMO's insurance, but it would be illegal to take payment from both, as that would be making a profit, the correct thing to do is:
> 
> 1 - Claim on your own insurance, that company can then claim against KCTMO's insurance company to recover their costs, if they think they have a case.
> 
> ...


The cause of this fire has not yet been ascertained, therefore please remove that assertion from your post. It is misleading to post such things.


----------



## Manter (Jun 19, 2017)

maomao said:


> She made it in the context of a pro-Assange rant apparently.


More of a love letter than a rant. It's hysterical. Why My Heart Stands With Julian

Even assange seemed mildly taken aback


----------



## Manter (Jun 19, 2017)

Wilf said:


> On Friday I heard k and c council had been in touch with Newcastle about taking people. It was from somebody who works in housing, so reliable  afaik.


I ended up in a discussion with someone who works for K&C on twitter last night who denied that anyone had been given just £10, anyone was without housing and anyone had been asked/told/pressured to move north. Relatively junior, so not a high up coverup. Said his colleagues from the council were working 16-20 hour days


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 19, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> The cause of this fire has not yet been ascertained, therefore please remove that assertion from your post. It is misleading to post such things.



You are right, I've edited it to include 'The fact *that it's widely reported* that a fridge caused this fire'.



> The deadly fire that broke out at Grenfell Tower was caused by a faulty fridge in a fourth-floor apartment, reports suggest.
> 
> The flat’s owner, said to be mini-cab driver Behailu Kebede, reportedly attempted to warn other residents about the blaze in his kitchen, potentially saving lives.
> 
> ...


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 19, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> TMOs are run by volunteers. As with all community organisations some work well and some don't.



That's not the case. The KCTMO has a non-executive board but there are also four executive directors who run the company and are paid a salary. There will also be staff at KCTMO beneath the four executives who are also paid a salary. To describe TMOs as being run by volunteers is misleading.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 19, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> The new MP when she was a Cllr was on the board of the TMO.
> 
> TMOs are common in London. In theory they give tenants greater say in the management of there estates. The Council retaining the ownership.
> 
> ...


Other tmos are run by vols


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 19, 2017)

If you don't like the skwawkbox this may not be for you, but if true it's (more of the same) scandalous.

#KCBC: ‘if you accept temporary flats, you’re off rehoming list’ #Grenfell


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 19, 2017)

gosub said:


> site of a worse London fire.




Less deaths (officially at least)


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 19, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> You are right, I've edited it to include 'The fact *that it's widely reported* that a fridge caused this fire'.


It's at present a myth that's being perpetuated by the media. The guy is being hounded by the media on a rumour and you repeating it does nothing to help. 

Besides , whatever the cause was, the building should not have turned into a towering inferno within minutes. The cause may turn out to be largely irrelevant.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 19, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> You are right, I've edited it to include 'The fact *that it's widely reported* that a fridge caused this fire'.


The liability doesn't stem from the way the fire started, it stems from the way the fire spread up the outside of the building via the cladding that had been installed to the lowest possible standard to cut costs.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 19, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> It's at present a myth that's being perpetuated by the media. The guy is being hounded by the media on a rumour and you repeating it does nothing to help.
> 
> Besides , whatever the cause was, the building should not have turned into a towering inferno within minutes. The cause may turn out to be largely irrelevant.



Neighbours have been interviewed both on the TV & in the press saying he knocked on their doors saying a fridge fire had started in his kitchen, I see no reason to disbelieve them. His friends have also been reported saying he is “haunted” by what happened and blaming himself, when clearly the blame is not his. I feel sorry for the guy.

The fact that a copy of rags, the Mail & Sun, have been bang out of order in hounding him hasn't stopped more reasonable news sources reporting the story.



free spirit said:


> *The liability doesn't stem from the way the fire started*, it stems from the way the fire spread up the outside of the building via the cladding that had been installed to the lowest possible standard to cut costs.



Of course it doesn't, it should have been contained, that's why I finished my post, which was in response to a post regarding power surges in the block, with 'Of course, none of this explains why it spread so fast, which remains the main issue.'


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 19, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> If you don't like the skwawkbox this may not be for you, but if true it's (more of the same) scandalous.
> 
> #KCBC: ‘if you accept temporary flats, you’re off rehoming list’ #Grenfell


yes let's spread rumours


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 19, 2017)

> Ishmahil BlagroveFollow
> 11 hrs ·
> on will be led by survivors and victims of the tragedy, Michael Mansfield QC, Emma Dent Coad MP, religious leaders from various faiths and representatives of the police, fire and emergency services. We will be outlining the objectives of the campaign, what we expect from the government and how we intend to move forward as a community and begin the healing process. We are asking that everyone who attends remain composed, dignified and respectful in memory of those who have passed. This will be the launch of a peaceful campaign with the aim of bringing unity, equality and most importantly, Justice


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 19, 2017)

Police have just announced they now believe 79 to be dead. 

But, that figure may change.


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 19, 2017)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 19, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Police have just announced they now believe 79 to be dead.
> 
> But, that figure may change.


sadly unlikely to be downwards


----------



## Ted Striker (Jun 19, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> TMOs are run by volunteers. As with all community organisations some work well and some don't.



(minor point but...) They (well, KCTMO did) have salaried staff. Quite a few, from memory. It's a business, _in_ buiness. And that business (IME) was stripping the rich land for all sellable assets.

Again, I've never had the displeasure of engaging with a more ineffective, unmotivated and indecent organisation (this is all pre-Grenfell, and, again, all on relatively trivial matters (a leaking 4inch hole in a soil (shit) pipe into a garage block taking 6 months to repair was the most recent struggle...)

https://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/any-views-on-tmos.328372/#post-13472751


Ted Striker said:


> Imagine the pain of all of the times you've ever had to sort out fucked utilities bills, mobile phone contracts, getting an appointment at the local doctor, speaking-to-the-7th-person-on-this-call-alone just to find out why a delivery wasn't made, maybe a bit of proving some credit card purchase wasn't yours...all of those gruelling experiences, multiplied by a million, and you STILL don't touch the sides of the ordeal of getting ANYTHING remotely done with my (Kensington & Chelsea) TMO.
> 
> Every single experience was breaking new grounds in operational shitcuntery I have to have a valium next to the phone on standby such will be the seethingrage by the time I've put the phone down.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 19, 2017)

gosub said:


> site of a worse London fire.



Worse? More destruction of buildings but only about 8 actual dead. 



8den said:


> Not disputing it, but that seems a bit odd, they were able to correctly identify 9/11 victims from the smallest fragments of bones, and DNA samples of relatives.
> 
> Edit to add, considering that some residents may well have been here, say, illegally, or as refugees, I just realised that it may be impossible to do the above.



They haven't been able to identify loads of the 9/11 victims. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/amp/still-missing-unidentified-remains-leave-lingering-void-9-11-families-n642076 Really they're just going on who was likely to have been there rather than using DNA on every body.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 19, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Of course it doesn't, it should have been contained, that's why I finished my post, which was in response to a post regarding power surges in the block, with 'Of course, none of this explains why it spread so fast, which remains the main issue.'


ok, but the rest of your post was irrelevant to the liability issue you were discussing.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 19, 2017)

pk said:


> EDL trolls are posting these same lies all over social media - one of which even claimed he got it from The Spectator (Boris Johnson's old rag).
> Allow me to turn the lies into facts:
> 
> 1 - The KCTMO is a tory quango acting as a residents body, the landlord is the tory council.



Nope, KCTMO is a Tory ALMO, not a quango.



> 2 a Labour MP was elected into that constituency only after last week's General Election, after being a tory safe seat for decades. And it remains a tory Council.
> 
> 3 - the KCTMO are given a pot of money by the council to spend on day to day repairs, but the tory council is still the landlord
> 
> 4 - Boris Johnson as Mayor cut 20,000+ firefighter jobs and close fire stations across the capital when told it was a bad idea publicly by an assembly member and that he lied to the people of London - he told that same assembly member to "get stuffed".



The figure is 500+. 20,000 is the reduction nationally.



> 5 - Siddiq Khan did not call for further reductions in firefighters and no such report exists.
> 
> 6 - the Tory KC council sent emails to the rich residents apologising for the appearance of Grenfell informing them that they will be placing plastic cladding on the outside so that it wouldn't be such an "eyesore" for them to endure.
> 
> 7 - Theresa May's aid and former MP Gavin Barwell was the Minister for Housing four years ago - when he received a report warning him that Grenfell Tower was a tragedy waiting to happen, he chose to ignore the report.



Barwell, chipmunk faced fuck though he is, was not Minister for Housing 4 years ago.  He's held the job for a year and a half.



> 8 - Grenfell Action Group complained to KCTMO for years about the safety of Grenfell Tower, they asked the council to take action - the tory council ignored their requests.
> 
> 9 - when the Adair tower block fire happened several years earlier, the tories again ignored the requests to make tower blocks safe and to improve fire regulations.
> 
> 10 - nearly 300 Tory MPs many of whom were landlords chose to vote against safety regulations that would have made Grenfell Tower safer - including the instillation of sprinklers



The actual figure for Tory landlords who voted against, is 70.  



> 11 - Grenfell Action Group is made up of residents who live in Grenfell Tower and who have campaigned against the cladding that was used and general fire safety issues for over a decade.
> 
> 12 Emma Coad was campaigning for greater safety measures in Grenfell as were the Grenfell Action Group who are elected by the residents of Grenfell.
> 
> ...




You do the cause no favours by not fact-checking stuff before you post it.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 19, 2017)

sheothebudworths said:


> It's Pilgrim Tucker - myself and Mation went to school with her - she's a community coordinator for Unite and was working with the Grenfell action group, organising and campaigning, along with the multitude of other campaigns she's involved with.



So come on sheo, 'fess up - how badly did you, Mation and the other bad girls take the piss out of her name?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 19, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Governmentt have finally said families can have £5,500 each.  A really useful thing though would be an amnesty for anyone who was breaching a tenancy agreement or was an undocumented migrant. There will be families who probably feel like they can't access 'official' money.
> Grenfell Tower fire: families to get £5,500 each from emergency fund, No 10 says - live updates




A sickeningly-ironic twist is that the standard "home loss" payment given to people who are socially-cleansed from their estates for "regeneration" purposes, is around the same amount.  It's fuck-all, except an insult.


----------



## D'wards (Jun 19, 2017)

Without out being too grim, will the bodies be identifiable as bodies, and 
if so, would DNA testing be appropriate/work?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 19, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> A sickeningly-ironic twist is that the standard "home loss" payment given to people who are socially-cleansed from their estates for "regeneration" purposes, is around the same amount.  It's fuck-all, except an insult.



Well spotted. It will go no-where for families that have lost everything.


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 19, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> A sickeningly-ironic twist is that the standard "home loss" payment given to people who are socially-cleansed from their estates for "regeneration" purposes, is around the same amount.  It's fuck-all, except an insult.


Also, statement from the residents that met Theresa May about the payment (from guardian live feed) 
We naturally welcome funds for those in need, though this does show once more the tendency to sideline residents’ views.

At No 10 yesterday, the prime minister assured the group that from now on residents would be consulted on a coordinated relief effort. This has not happened with these funds.​


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 19, 2017)

marty21 said:


> Tbf , they have to publish the minutes of board meetings on the council Website.



Yep, legal requirement, although many local authorities try to delay publication if there's any gold (for their enemies!) in there.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 19, 2017)

marty21 said:


> I have worked for a TMO , about 15 years ago I tempted for one for about 6 months. What struck me at the time was that the tenant board members did have a lot of influence.  I've no idea if this was the case at KCTMO ,but at the one I worked for ,a tenant board member interviewed applicants for vacant flats , 100% of them were nominations from the Local Authority, so I would show the flat ,then they were interviewed, and if the board member didn't like them (it was as simple as that) he could turn them down and another applicant was shown the flat.  I did question this with management but they basically shrugged their shoulders  They had to keep the board happy.
> 
> I was working in Housing with TMOs started to be created ,a Labour policy sadly. I was against them at the time, because it removed accountability from the councillors even though they were on the management boards.



TMOs can't interfere in allocations anymore, mate, and KCTMO isn't a TMO (I have this straight from "the horse's mouth" - someone on the board of the National Federation of TMOs), it's an ALMO.


----------



## Corax (Jun 19, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Nope, KCTMO is a Tory ALMO, not a quango.


What's the difference - is it just ownership of capital assets?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 19, 2017)

Anudder Oik said:


> Probably been posted already but I think the pop stars queuing up to join Simon Cowells' charity single for the Grenfell victims should get the inspiration for the lyrics of their song from this letter below.
> 
> 
> *Two women feared dead in Grenfell Tower tragedy were threatened with legal action - after raising alarm about fire safety*
> ...



I do hope the *Arkell vs Pressdram'ed the cunt.

Legendary _Private Eye_ case where the response to a similar solicitor's letter was "fuck off".


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 19, 2017)

free spirit said:


> ok, but the rest of your post was irrelevant to the liability issue you were discussing.



No it wasn't. I was replying to a post concerning previous power surges in the block that caused a lot of damage to people's electrical goods, and the fact that KCTMO's insurance company turned down the claims, and the liability issue involved in that decision. Only my last paragraph mentioned a possible, but unlikely, connection between power surges & what caused this fire, whilst also pointing out the speed that the fire spread was the main issue.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 19, 2017)

D'wards said:


> Without out being too grim, will the bodies be identifiable as bodies, and
> if so, would DNA testing be appropriate/work?




Given the heat was enough to melt pottery in some areas of the tower, I expect at least some bodies will be completely lost and the rozzers have confirmed that might be the case.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 19, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> No it wasn't. I was replying to a post concerning previous power surges in the block that caused a lot of damage to people's electrical goods, and the fact that KCTMO's insurance company turned down the claims, and the liability issue involved in that decision. Only my last paragraph mentioned a possible, but unlikely, connection between power surges & what caused this fire, whilst also pointing out the speed that the fire spread was the main issue.


fair enough, I obviously didn't scroll back far enough in the thread to see that the discussion on liability was related to a previous case.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 19, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> A sickeningly-ironic twist is that the standard "home loss" payment given to people who are socially-cleansed from their estates for "regeneration" purposes, is around the same amount.  It's fuck-all, except an insult.




Do you have sources for that?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 19, 2017)

Corax said:


> What's the difference - is it just ownership of capital assets?



An ALMO takes control of the assets fully, and operates autonomously from the council.  Councils have used them historically as a method of hiving off responsibility for housing away from the council-proper, and onto an entity that insulates the council from financial and social consequences if anything goes pear-shaped.  Here in Lambeth, housing repairs and maintenance were put into an ALMO, and led to a precipitous decline in maintenance, and in quality of repairs, that's still being recovered from.  The ALMO was taken back in-house several years ago, and it was only last year that the council wrote off £10 million plus of debt the ALMO had accrued.

A TMO - that is a proper TMO - is resident-led.  That is, it's a democratic body in which all members of the TMO - that is, ALL residents within the TMO's catchment - have a say in what happens to their housing, and board members *do not* have special powers over allocations etc.  Board members are elected by the general membership, and are fully accountable to them, and to the Department of Communities & Local Government.

Final ownership of the capital assets always lies with the local authority, unless a full stock transfer has taken place, and even then, LAs can retain some rights.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 19, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> Do you have sources for that?



The legislation itself.

Minimum payment is £5,800 (was £5,300 until last year).  The minimum payment is by far the most usually prescribed by local authorities.


----------



## Corax (Jun 19, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> An ALMO takes control of the assets fully, and operates autonomously from the council.  Councils have used them historically as a method of hiving off responsibility for housing away from the council-proper, and onto an entity that insulates the council from financial and social consequences if anything goes pear-shaped.  Here in Lambeth, housing repairs and maintenance were put into an ALMO, and led to a precipitous decline in maintenance, and in quality of repairs, that's still being recovered from.  The ALMO was taken back in-house several years ago, and it was only last year that the council wrote off £10 million plus of debt the ALMO had accrued.
> 
> A TMO - that is a proper TMO - is resident-led.  That is, it's a democratic body in which all members of the TMO - that is, ALL residents within the TMO's catchment - have a say in what happens to their housing, and board members *do not* have special powers over allocations etc.  Board members are elected by the general membership, and are fully accountable to them, and to the Department of Communities & Local Government.
> 
> Final ownership of the capital assets always lies with the local authority, unless a full stock transfer has taken place, and even then, LAs can retain some rights.


Thanks.  I meant the difference v a QUANGO, but the above is helpful too!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jun 19, 2017)

mauvais said:


> No, I don't disagree with this or the preceding statement at all - the very opposite. It's extremely likely to be a very complex web of responsibility. But this is not what you were saying.


This is why I tend not to bother with these threads. There's always a smart Alec who's right about everything and likes to tell you what you've said (and get it wrong). I'm quite happy with what I said in both posts and as far as I'm concerned they were consistent. If you disagree and want to nit pick and micro analyse my wording then I'm not interested.



mauvais said:


> To use your phrase, if we want better governance and better decision making, we have to elect better decision makers, and hold the ones we have to account. For some people, that means directing their anger at who they perceive to be responsible.


If you're happy with the lynch mob mentality then that's up to you, I just don't think that blame culture or scapegoating individuals is the best way to solve the problems that led to this tragedy. Yes the Tory haters might get some sort of satisfaction if May fell on her sword and it may quieten many of those angry people for a while, but will the changing of the guard at the top lead to meaningful change on the ground? I'm not so sure.

imo there's way too much internet noise surrounding this for my liking (and I'm guilty of adding to it with this post). In a court case you have judge, jury, prosecution and defence lawyers, witnesses and other interested parties. They look at the evidence in detail present their arguments to the jury who reach a verdict and the judge passes the sentence. That system while not perfect works quite well, and shouldn't be affected by public opinion, media headlines and speculation. It is still raw for the people directly involved and their friends and family and it's up to the rest of us to support them and then to let the professionals get on with the job of finding out what happened and why it happened. Fanning the flames of anger isn't what I consider to be supportive, but I may be alone in that way of thinking.

Anyway, I'm done for now. I had already unwatched the thread and wasn't going to bother replying until I saw Jonathan Pie and felt like sharing it here for those that hadn't already seen it.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 19, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> This is why I tend not to bother with these threads. There's always a smart Alec who's right about everything and likes to tell you what you've said (and get it wrong). I'm quite happy with what I said in both posts and as far as I'm concerned they were consistent. If you disagree and want to nit pick and micro analyse my wording then I'm not interested.


For an improved quality Urban experience, try taking the hubris and outrage down a few notches.


----------



## marty21 (Jun 19, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> TMOs can't interfere in allocations anymore, mate, and KCTMO isn't a TMO (I have this straight from "the horse's mouth" - someone on the board of the National Federation of TMOs), it's an ALMO.


Well that is some good news.


----------



## xenon (Jun 19, 2017)

D'wards said:


> Without out being too grim, will the bodies be identifiable as bodies, and
> if so, would DNA testing be appropriate/work?



This is unavoidably grim. The ferocity of the fire in some parts of the building, may mean there are no remains as such to recover. You can't do DNA tests on ashes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 19, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> This is why I tend not to bother with these threads. There's always a smart Alec who's right about everything and likes to tell you what you've said (and get it wrong). I'm quite happy with what I said in both posts and as far as I'm concerned they were consistent. If you disagree and want to nit pick and micro analyse my wording then I'm not interested.


mauvais's done a sterling job, and if you want to enjoy your time here you'd do well to be more precise.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 19, 2017)

DNA testing will also be difficult where families have perished - how would you know which child is which if a link to familial DNA is all you have to go on?  So far beyond grim, it's hard to even think how someone has to deal with this as a procedural method without being totally overwhelmed by the bleakness of it all.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 19, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Nope, KCTMO is a Tory ALMO, not a quango.
> 
> The figure is 500+. 20,000 is the reduction nationally.
> 
> ...



Two further things pk -

* was Barwell given a report specifically identifying potential problems with Grenfell, or something more general about risks in high rise blocks? I've seen no mention of him being given a report on this block - evidence needed or it just sounds like horseshit.

* The 'landlord bill' voted out by Tories related to private letting - not applicable to most of the tenants in Grenfell (didn't cover social housing) and little to do with fire safety. It's barely relevant here at all other than as a demonstration of the attitude towards tenants by this political party.

There's little point countering dishonest bullshit with more dishonest bullshit that can be demolished in seconds. Fake news all over the shop, it's undermining the credibility of what should be an essential campaign for justice and accountability.


----------



## belboid (Jun 19, 2017)

Corax said:


> Thanks.  I meant the difference v a QUANGO, but the above is helpful too!


ALMO's are QUANGO's (of a specific type).


----------



## Indeliblelink (Jun 19, 2017)

apologies if this has already been posted, a search of the thread didn't show anything
Inquiry. The Great British Housing Disaster (Adam Curtis, 1984) - 43 mins onwards mentions fire risks of cladding tower blocks


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 19, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> DNA testing will also be difficult where families have perished - how would you know which child is which if a link to familial DNA is all you have to go on?  So far beyond grim, it's hard to even think how someone has to deal with this as a procedural method without being totally overwhelmed by the bleakness of it all.


You might find relatives of the different families, and then identify family members from DNA identification without knowing exactly who they were. It might be possible to match up an entire missing family in this way, without being able to individually link remains to the specific person.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 19, 2017)

Indeliblelink said:


> apologies if this has already been posted, a search of the thread didn't show anything
> Inquiry. The Great British Housing Disaster (Adam Curtis, 1984) - 43 mins onwards mentions fire risks of cladding tower blocks




Any reason for posting this?

It seems to be about system/factory building of blocks in the 60s, that doesn't apply to Grenfell Tower, which was built to far higher standards in the 70s. Grenfell Tower was designed with attention to strength following the Ronan Point collapse of 1968, and has survived previous fires, prior to it being clad in plastic.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 19, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Any reason for posting this?
> 
> It seems to be about system/factory building of blocks in the 60s, that doesn't apply to Grenfell Tower, which was built to far higher standards in the 70s. Grenfell Tower was designed with attention to strength following the Ronan Point collapse of 1968, and has survived previous fires, prior to it being clad in plastic.


It looks like an interesting documentary for background purposes, although obviously may not be directly relevant.


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 19, 2017)

it was designed to stand for hundreds of years wasn't it? why the hell did they wrap it in plastic then


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 19, 2017)

frogwoman said:


> it was designed to stand for hundreds of years wasn't it? why the hell did they wrap it in plastic then


One of the many questions for the investigation - what was it clad in? Why? What other options were there? Was it installed in accordance with manufacturer instructions? How combustible was it? What other fireproofing measures were taken?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 19, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> One of the many questions for the investigation - what was it clad in? Why? What other options were there? Was it installed in accordance with manufacturer instructions? How combustible was it? What other fireproofing measures were taken?



Assuming the reports are right about the materials used are correct, which may or may not have fallen within current regulations, it would certainly appear to have been installed against manufacturer instructions.



cupid_stunt said:


> There seems some doubts about the regulations now, but certainly it seems the manufacturers says it shouldn't have been used on a 220ft building, and the contractors - Harley Facades - must have been aware of that, yet still used it.
> 
> 
> *Manufacturers' say it is 'crucial' that the panels should not be fitted above 32ft*
> ...


----------



## editor (Jun 19, 2017)

Makes me so fucking angry There are 1,399 homes a stone's throw from Grenfell Tower left empty by millionaires. Time to move in the victims


----------



## Raheem (Jun 19, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Well spotted. It will go no-where for families that have lost everything.



I don't think this is fair, really. Providing emergency money is a really obvious thing that the government can do. It's meant for practical, immediate purposes, not as compensation. The issue is not the amount, but the fact that it has taken the best part of a week to sort out and, in the meantime, some of the survivors will have been entirely dependent on charity.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 19, 2017)

Raheem said:


> I don't think this is fair, really. Providing emergency money is a really obvious thing that the government can do. It's meant for practical, immediate purposes, not as compensation. The issue is not the amount, but the fact that it has taken the best part of a week to sort out and, in the meantime, some of the survivors will have been entirely dependent on charity.


Or the kindness of strangers, or friends, other relatives. 

There should have been a better implemented contingency plan, even if this was the absolute worst case scenario.


----------



## PursuedByBears (Jun 19, 2017)

Grenfell Tower fire: volunteer beaten up after being mistaken for CEO of company responsible for building

Oh dear.  At the Town Hall on Friday according to the article.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 19, 2017)

PursuedByBears said:


> Grenfell Tower fire: volunteer beaten up after being mistaken for CEO of company responsible for building
> 
> Oh dear.  At the Town Hall on Friday according to the article.


His job description alone appears ample justification for a bit of rough house, tbh


----------



## ChrisD (Jun 19, 2017)

Another industry view...An avoidable tragedy: questions for the public inquiry on Greenfell Tower - passivehouseplus.ie

Says that the whole project was done on a building regulations notice* with self certification by sub contractors.
*building regs are either certified by "full plans" or the "building regulations notice" route.  The later is fine for a simple house extension but I never realised that a complete refurbishment of a tower block could be done that way. So not only does approved document B ( fire safety) need urgent review which we knew I suggest that the whole regulatory process needs overhaul.


----------



## ChrisD (Jun 19, 2017)

An event to discuss technical and political issues from this tragedy
The Truth about Grenfell Tower

"Please join us and share what we collectively know so far about the technical and political decisions that led to the Grenfell Tower fire; reassure residents about the safety of post-war tower blocks against the fear being spread by the media; and discuss how we can counteract this disaster being used by politicians to promote the demolition of London’s council estates for profit."


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 19, 2017)

Grenfell Tower – The KCTMO Culture Of Negligence

New Blog post up.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 19, 2017)

editor said:


> Makes me so fucking angry There are 1,399 homes a stone's throw from Grenfell Tower left empty by millionaires. Time to move in the victims




A better article on this. 

Where are the empty homes in Kensington?


----------



## editor (Jun 19, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Grenfell Tower – The KCTMO Culture Of Negligence
> 
> New Blog post up.


This bears repeating: 



> It is incumbent on us also to state our firmly held belief that the cladding in question was not introduced for the benefit of the residents of Grenfell Tower but because Kensington and Chelsea Council had redeveloped the surounding area, building another of their flagship academy schools right next to Grenfell Tower, and a new sports and leisure centre next to that. The cladding on Grenfell Tower was intended to pimp it up so that it wouldn’t spoil the image of creeping gentrification that the Council are intent on creating, here and throughout the rest of North Kensington.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 19, 2017)

> *WeThePeople*‏ @gaurangmorjaria 1h
> Worth reminding that Cllr Judith Blakeman (Lab) complained 19 times! Its time Police stepped in before evidence is destroyed #GrenfellTower pic.twitter.com/xCFUCTE0kS




Important video in this tweet.


----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 19, 2017)

FBU statement

Firefighters demand no cover up on Grenfell Tower - justice for victims | Fire Brigades Union


----------



## agricola (Jun 19, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> A better article on this.
> 
> Where are the empty homes in Kensington?



Certainly whoever wants to be rehoused locally should be temporarily accomodated in some of them empty flats and homes, but there is a lot more the state could do in the long term.  For example, they are (or at least were) about to sell off the Hyde Park barracks site for yet more super-luxury dwellings.  Why not commit at least part of that site to building social housing for the displaced residents of Grenfell and others?


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 19, 2017)

agricola said:


> Certainly whoever wants to be rehoused locally should be temporarily accomodated in some of them empty flats and homes, but there is a lot more the state could do in the long term.  For example, they are (or at least were) about to sell off the Hyde Park barracks site for yet more super-luxury dwellings.  Why not commit at least part of that site to building social housing for the displaced residents of Grenfell and others?




They should, and they probably will.

It will be a lie.


----------



## xsunnysuex (Jun 19, 2017)

Someone on a facebook thread about housing the survivors in the local area,  posted people who don't work should be grateful for any accommodation they are offered.
Don't think they will make the mistake of posting that again!!


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 19, 2017)

The idea that the refurbishment project carried out by Rydon was primarily about aesthetics has really taken hold now.  It seems to be taken as fact that it was the main motivator yet as far as I can see the only evidence for this is one extract from a planning document which was really rather typical.

I've said on this thread several times that the cladding was part of an upgrade to improve the thermal performance of the building, this is something the council is absolutely obliged to do.  There have been countless similar projects around the UK.
 As part of the upgrade there were new windows installed which presumably would have had a better thermal performance and reduced sound transfer. There was also external wall insulation.  These two things alone would have been to the benefit of the tenants and the tenants alone.  You cannot install external wall insulation without a new cladding system of some description, it cannot be done.  

There have traditionally been a number of funding options available to councils and social housing providers to help pay for these upgrades.  You cannot get these substantial funding arrangements simply for prettying up a place.  I don't know how this project was funded but I suspect there must have some sort of government fund tapped somewhere.

Now you can argue over the individual merits of modern design and cladding against the brutalist architecture of the 60's & 70's but I have absolutely no reason to doubt this was an attempt to make the block look better for everyone but the primary factor were the windows, insulation and redevelopment of the lower floors creating more flats.  As I said pages and pages ago, re-furbs like this are meant to be a win win.

It seems that something has gone badly wrong in the planning and implementation of the construction project and there is a raft of other legitimate criticisms to make, many of which go straight to number 10. 

What we have to ask is should council tenants live in warm flats with good windows?  Should those more likely to struggle with paying energy bills be first in line for insulation and modern windows?  I really think this focus on the motivation for the re-furb is at best unhelpful and at worse a distraction from the serious underlying failures.  This is only my belief, but as I have said before I have personally been involved in many similar projects.


----------



## bimble (Jun 19, 2017)

The fallout from that issue of the council's reserves and rebates continues:
Kensington and Chelsea council has £274m in reserves


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 19, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> The idea that the refurbishment project carried out by Rydon was primarily about aesthetics has really taken hold now.  It seems to be taken as fact that it was the main motivator yet as far as I can see the only evidence for this is one extract from a planning document which was really rather typical.
> 
> I've said on this thread several times that the cladding was part of an upgrade to improve the thermal performance of the building, this is something the council is absolutely obliged to do.  There have been countless similar projects around the UK.
> As part of the upgrade there were new windows installed which presumably would have had a better thermal performance and reduced sound transfer. There was also external wall insulation.  These two things alone would have been to the benefit of the tenants and the tenants alone.  You cannot install external wall insulation without a new cladding system of some description, it cannot be done.
> ...



Spot on!

Those claiming the 'improvements' were done just to tart-up the outside are frankly bonkers.


----------



## 8den (Jun 19, 2017)

Mood in W8


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 19, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> The idea that the refurbishment project carried out by Rydon was primarily about aesthetics has really taken hold now.  It seems to be taken as fact that it was the main motivator yet as far as I can see the only evidence for this is one extract from a planning document which was really rather typical.
> 
> I've said on this thread several times that the cladding was part of an upgrade to improve the thermal performance of the building, this is something the council is absolutely obliged to do.  There have been countless similar projects around the UK.
> As part of the upgrade there were new windows installed which presumably would have had a better thermal performance and reduced sound transfer. There was also external wall insulation.  These two things alone would have been to the benefit of the tenants and the tenants alone.  You cannot install external wall insulation without a new cladding system of some description, it cannot be done.
> ...





Teaboy said:


> The idea that the refurbishment project carried out by Rydon was primarily about aesthetics has really taken hold now.  It seems to be taken as fact that it was the main motivator yet as far as I can see the only evidence for this is one extract from a planning document which was really rather typical.
> 
> I've said on this thread several times that the cladding was part of an upgrade to improve the thermal performance of the building, this is something the council is absolutely obliged to do.  There have been countless similar projects around the UK.
> As part of the upgrade there were new windows installed which presumably would have had a better thermal performance and reduced sound transfer. There was also external wall insulation.  These two things alone would have been to the benefit of the tenants and the tenants alone.  You cannot install external wall insulation without a new cladding system of some description, it cannot be done.
> ...


There seems to be many things that the council and tenant management organisation were 'absolutely obliged to do' regarding fire safety for the residents of Grenfell Tower, but failed to. So, I don't think it is unfair to wonder about the true motivations of those who led the refurbishment project.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 19, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Spot on!
> 
> Those claiming the 'improvements' were done just to tart-up the outside are frankly bonkers.


Teaboy knows his stuff, but 'bonkers' overstates it.  Every bit of context here has the residents being treated like shit - for decades.  When you seen phrases in the planning documents about 'the view from the conservation area', antennae twitch.  I'm perfectly happy with the expert position Teaboy sets out, but we may well never know the precise discussions and weightings that went on in, but there are certainly questions to be asked when you are talking about an authority like K and C.  That's not me suggesting it was primarily done for the external view, just that these are real Qs and can be put forward without getting into conspiraloonery.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 19, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> There seems to be many things that the council and tenant management organisation were 'absolutely obliged to do' regarding fire safety for the residents of Grenfell Tower, but failed to. So, I don't think it is unfair to wonder about the true motivations of those who led the refurbishment project.



Yes but you don't get external funding in the millions from British Gas to fix the lifts.  It's a distraction and the fact a conspiraloon like you is onto it should ring alarm bells.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 19, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Teaboy knows his stuff, but 'bonkers' overstates it.  Every bit of context here has the residents being treated like shit - for decades.  When you seen phrases in the planning documents about 'the view from the conservation area', antennae twitch.  I'm perfectly happy with the expert position Teaboy sets out, but we may well never know the precise discussions and weightings that went on in, but there are certainly questions to be asked when you are talking about an authority like K and C.  That's not me suggesting it was primarily done for the external view, just that these are real Qs and can be put forward without getting into conspiraloonery.



Don't get me wrong, it would have been a consideration in planning but however misguided they may have been I have no reason to doubt that they thought the new appearance would be beneficial to the whole community.


----------



## xsunnysuex (Jun 19, 2017)

Some good news for once.

FIRE FAMILY FOUND 
*Grenfell Tower ‘family of five who were missing and feared dead are found ALIVE after managing to flee as fire took hold’*


Grenfell Tower 'family of five who were missing and feared dead are found ALIVE after managing to flee'


----------



## 8den (Jun 19, 2017)

xsunnysuex said:


> Some good news for once.
> 
> FIRE FAMILY FOUND
> *Grenfell Tower ‘family of five who were missing and feared dead are found ALIVE after managing to flee as fire took hold’*
> ...



Reported in the independent on Friday

Syria refugee family of five missing in Grenfell Tower fire found safe and well


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 19, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> The idea that the refurbishment project carried out by Rydon was primarily about aesthetics has really taken hold now.  It seems to be taken as fact that it was the main motivator yet as far as I can see the only evidence for this is one extract from a planning document which was really rather typical.
> 
> I've said on this thread several times that the cladding was part of an upgrade to improve the thermal performance of the building, this is something the council is absolutely obliged to do.  There have been countless similar projects around the UK.
> As part of the upgrade there were new windows installed which presumably would have had a better thermal performance and reduced sound transfer. There was also external wall insulation.  These two things alone would have been to the benefit of the tenants and the tenants alone.  You cannot install external wall insulation without a new cladding system of some description, it cannot be done.
> ...


Teaboy, I don't disagree with what you have said on the subject of cladding and new windows but it's worth pointing out that that other parts of the refurbishment project were definitely not for the benefit of residents (converting what had been community space on the lower floors into 9 new flats, installing a new heating system to enable itemised charging charges for each flat for example).

I have a couple of cladding questions:

Have any of the cladding projects you have been involved in involved applying cladding on top of fluted concrete surfaces and if so, what measures were taken to fill in the vertical gaps created by the fluting on the original concrete surfaces?

Are there UK laws about the types of surface to which cladding can be applied?

Are UK cladding rules for new buildings different to those for old buildings?


----------



## marty21 (Jun 19, 2017)

I work for a local authority so of course there is much panic there at the moment coupled with thank fuck it wasn't one of our blocks.  I was off last week and came back to the news that there was a fire in one of our blocks . Luckily ,no one died and the fire was contained within the flat and actually within the kitchen ,the block is not clad .


----------



## brogdale (Jun 19, 2017)

Gotta say, that with all the whining and belly-aching from the rentiers on the MSM, perhaps Corbo needs to develop his emergency idea of empty house requisition into a policy of nationalisation.
Reckon that would be a popular way of increasing the social housing base quickly.
I'd vote for that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 19, 2017)

xsunnysuex said:


> Some good news for once.
> 
> FIRE FAMILY FOUND
> *Grenfell Tower ‘family of five who were missing and feared dead are found ALIVE after managing to flee as fire took hold’*
> ...


Have you a non-murdoch link?


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 19, 2017)

xsunnysuex said:


> Some good news for once.
> 
> FIRE FAMILY FOUND
> *Grenfell Tower ‘family of five who were missing and feared dead are found ALIVE after managing to flee as fire took hold’*
> ...




Please just copy the entire article from the Sun if you want to share it. 

Not giving the bastards pageviews.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 19, 2017)

It's in the Telegraph as well which is marginally more palatable (not by much, mind you):

A family thought to be missing after the Grenfell Tower fire has been found alive and well


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 19, 2017)

Here's a photo of the Grenfell Tower cladding project nearing completion. There are a few panels missing at the bottom which I'm sure were rectified but the insulation material between the original surface of the building and the cladding panels themselves looks suspect. The insulation appears far from airtight, particularly the column on the inside left. In other words, the panelling seems to be creating enclosed air pockets up which a fire could spread quickly.

It's worth remembering that Rydon, the company who eventually won the tender for the refurb were not the original preferred contractor. KCTMO originally chose a company called Leadbitter who were then deemed too expensive so the project was put out to tender a second time to save money.

Sorry for the oversized picture. If a moderator felt able to spare my blushes I'd be grateful.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 19, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> It's in the Telegraph as well which is marginally more palatable (not by much, mind you):
> 
> A family thought to be missing after the Grenfell Tower fire has been found alive and well



I read a paper copy of the Sun on Sunday while waiting to have a haircut yesterday and they weren't actually that bad in their coverage, talking about stuff like people having been ignored. Only a minor dig at 'green targets' in Tony Parsehole's column had my eyes rolling. If anything the Telegraph has been worse with claims of left-wing antagonists getting involved, in an attempt to shut down any debate on class issues.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 19, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Yes but you don't get external funding in the millions from British Gas to fix the lifts.  It's a distraction and the fact a conspiraloon like you is onto it should ring alarm bells.


I don't understand the point you are making here.
Can you explain?


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 19, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> Here's a photo of the Grenfell Tower cladding project nearing completion. There are a few panels missing at the bottom which I'm sure were rectified but the insulation material between the original surface of the building and the cladding panels themselves looks suspect. The insulation appears far from airtight, particularly the column on the inside left. In other words, the panelling seems to be creating enclosed air pockets up which a fire could spread quickly.
> (...)



I strongly suspect you're onto something here, those angled sections look like they're creating vertical conduits, fire would go straight up that. Looks like the original profile beneath is rounded.

 I think on the photo on the cover of the Mirror a couple of days ago there appeared to be a vertical strip of missing insulation between each window block, wonder whether it was this detail?  It could just be that these sections fell off easier due to how they were supported.

Sooner or later someone in the press is going to speak to one of the workmen involved in installation of the cladding, I'm sure there will be a story there.


----------



## 8den (Jun 19, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I don't understand the point you are making here.
> Can you explain?



You're a conspiraloon spud and mad as a hatstand?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 19, 2017)

8den said:


> You're a conspiraloon spud and mad as a hatstand?


"mad as a box of frogs"


----------



## Corax (Jun 19, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> There seems to be many things that the council and tenant management organisation were 'absolutely obliged to do' regarding fire safety for the residents of Grenfell Tower, but failed to. So, I don't think it is unfair to wonder about the true motivations of those who led the refurbishment project.





Teaboy said:


> Yes but you don't get external funding in the millions from British Gas to fix the lifts.  It's a distraction and the fact a conspiraloon like you is onto it should ring alarm bells.


I think the point isn't anything to do with the lifts, but more that they are "absolutely obliged" not to carry out works in such a way that they turn the block into a big fucking candle.


----------



## Corax (Jun 19, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> Here's a photo of the Grenfell Tower cladding project nearing completion. There are a few panels missing at the bottom which I'm sure were rectified but the insulation material between the original surface of the building and the cladding panels themselves looks suspect. The insulation appears far from airtight, particularly the column on the inside left. In other words, the panelling seems to be creating enclosed air pockets up which a fire could spread quickly.
> 
> It's worth remembering that Rydon, the company who eventually won the tender for the refurb were not the original preferred contractor. KCTMO originally chose a company called Leadbitter who were then deemed too expensive so the project was put out to tender a second time to save money.





Dogsauce said:


> I strongly suspect you're onto something here, those angled sections look like they're creating vertical conduits, fire would go straight up that. Looks like the original profile beneath is rounded.
> 
> I think on the photo on the cover of the Mirror a couple of days ago there appeared to be a vertical strip of missing insulation between each window block, wonder whether it was this detail?  It could just be that these sections fell off easier due to how they were supported.
> 
> Sooner or later someone in the press is going to speak to one of the workmen involved in installation of the cladding, I'm sure there will be a story there.


There was one bit of technical info I read early on (and can't remember where now, sorry) stating that there should be fireblock material installed periodically to prevent this chimney type of effect.  I don't think it's possible to tell anything about that from the photo.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Jun 19, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> "mad as a box of frogs"



I've always thought boxed frogs get a hard time. I mean, I'd be pretty pissed off if I was a frog stuck in a box, and I reckon you would be too.


----------



## 8den (Jun 19, 2017)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> I've always thought boxed frogs get a hard time. I mean, I'd be pretty pissed off if I was a frog stuck in a box, and I reckon you would be too.




Not sure why I said hatstand, it's not like they've got a reputation for being mental.


----------



## bimble (Jun 19, 2017)

8den said:


> Not sure why I said hatstand, it's not like they've got a reputation for being mental.


A hatstand wouldn't try denying that it's a person in a court of law, whilst Squirrelp would.


----------



## Corax (Jun 19, 2017)

bimble said:


> A hatstand wouldn't try denying that it's a person in *a court of law*, whilst Squirrelp would.


You mean a ship, right?


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Jun 19, 2017)

Man overboard!


----------



## brogdale (Jun 19, 2017)

Dave Smith speculating whether, as part of the Radical Housing Network, the Grenfell Action Group might have come to the attention of spycops.


----------



## editor (Jun 19, 2017)

For the record, so we don't forget the names:
Government ministers 'congratulated themselves' for cutting fire regulations


----------



## brogdale (Jun 19, 2017)

editor said:


> For the record, so we don't forget the names:
> Government ministers 'congratulated themselves' for cutting fire regulations


Indeed.
This reads particularly badly...



> ‘Businesses with good records have had fire safety inspections reduced from six hours to 45 minutes, allowing managers to quickly get back to their day job.’


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 19, 2017)

editor said:


> For the record, so we don't forget the names:
> Government ministers 'congratulated themselves' for cutting fire regulations





> Former Prime Minister David Cameron promised to abolish the ‘albatross’ of ‘over regulation’.



The albatross of over regulation. You Bullingdon cunt.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 19, 2017)

I read this today

Architects know Grenfell Tower fire was an avoidable tragedy | Deon Lombard

This article looks at the systemic reasons for the tragedy. Worth a read. Architects used to have much more influence in projects they worked on.  Shows how cuts have led to cutting corners.

My concern and why I feel uncomfortable about what has been voiced is that two issues have been mixed up. The systemic reasons that led to this tragedy and  the larger picture of gentrification of London. The divide between rich and poor.

Its taken this tragic loss of life for the above to be taken seriously in mainstream media.

If there is to be a public inquiry it should be wide ranging.  Like the Scarman report post 81 riot in Brixton.

Looking at how the less well off in London feel they have been sidelined and ignored. How they feel ( correctly imo its something I hear a lot from ordinary people I meet) social and ethnic cleansing of London is a fact.

What sort of London people want.

Reading what residents in the area of the tragic fire are saying. Its also about the class divisions in the area. How they feel they are looked down on.

If anything positive is to come out if this tragedy one thing should be that the working class start to have a real say.

As I usually post up on Brixton forum a lot of the complaints of residents near the fire are what I hear in my area. There are two Londons. One for the well off and one for the poor.

And for voicing this one is regarded as as bringing up the usual shit on Brixton forum.


----------



## editor (Jun 19, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> I read this today
> 
> Architects know Grenfell Tower fire was an avoidable tragedy | Deon Lombard
> 
> ...


The attitude displayed by some on the Brixton forum is symptomatic of British society as a whole. Anyone going on about poverty or poor housing or the growing divisions in society is someone to be dismissed or ridiculed.


----------



## where to (Jun 19, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Don't get me wrong, it would have been a consideration in planning but however misguided they may have been I have no reason to doubt that they thought the new appearance would be beneficial to the whole community.



thought I would add a few words on this from the perspective of a local authority town planner as the comments from the planning report really have been wildly misrepresented, most prominently by the Independent.

firstly the planning stage will have had next to nothing to do with the original decision to clad the tower. the project will have been planned months or years before the planning application, which is a requirement for any development of this kind, not just because this development was connected with the Council.  the planning application will have been submitted only when the decision to clad the tower was reached.

the purpose of the planning report was to set out the assessment of the merits of the proposals from a planning perspective. so the report was duty-bound to cover aspects such as appearance, including from the conservation area.

the consideration of impact of a proposal on a conservation area is absolutely standard for any development in or 'affecting' a conservation area.  this has nothing to do with snobbery, conservation areas simply have architectural or historic value and are given special protection through the system for that reason.  near Grenfell Tower is a large former public housing estate which is protected as as conservation area for its architectural value and its place 'in the landscape of labour history' (Old Oak Lane), whilst there will be miles of hyper expensive ugly modern developments occupied by the super-rich down at the Thames that aren't.  yes conservation areas are generally occupied by the better off, but broadly speaking, that's simply because people pay a premium for well designed places.

finally, health and safety is not a planning matter.  the planning application process is completely separate to the building warrant/ building control process, even though the two departments often work side by side.  that means any concerns about health and safety will not have come into the author's thinking when writing their report. it was not a trade off between h & s and appearance.

unhelpfully, the application seems to have included a lot of superfluous technical information which gives the impression that it was relevant to the planning application.  It is for the applicant to decide if they want to submit unnecessary detail, it doesn't mean this is given any consideration.  the author of the report will probably have skimmed over some of this content. it wasn't relevant to the planning decision they had to make.

i've never been much of a fan of this cladding material, but that's a personal thing. on the face of it, this would have been a no-brainer approval for the author.  reference to the Conservation Area was not a clincher, as much as simply box ticking.

the Independent article was really misleading and unhelpful and has sent people down a dead end.

EDIT TO ADD:  this is not to say that people shouldn't question the process that led to the cladding of the tower.  but simply that the planning report is not the evidence it is being presented as.  a more pertinent question perhaps is whether it was easier to clad the tower than demolish it?


----------



## bemused (Jun 19, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> If there is to be a public inquiry it should be wide ranging.  Like the Scarman report post 81 riot in Brixton.



I wouldn't want to see both issues rolled into a single review. 

The safety aspect of that review needs to be done ASAP, wrapping into a wider debate is merely going to slow it down.

If people are living in giant candles I'd like to see a plan to make them safe sooner rather than later.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 19, 2017)

Corax said:


> You mean a ship, right?


I'm not going to enter into the personalities here!


----------



## UrbaneFox (Jun 19, 2017)

gosub said:


> cos theres loads of other available land in Kensington for social housing



There are loads of run-down and empty shops on and around Notting Hill Gate and Kensington High Street, some of which could be bought and converted into houses and flats. I think they probably were intending to convert them into flats, etc, but Luxe affairs, not social housing.


----------



## weepiper (Jun 19, 2017)

Andy Murray says if he wins at Queen's Club he will donate the £347,000 prize money to the victims of the fire.


----------



## purenarcotic (Jun 19, 2017)

I hope that this sparks a wider debate around the way we handle homelessness in England along with the important stuff around health and safety etc. Being carted off miles away from support networks, being threatened with this concept of intentionally homeless, families living in rooms with no facilities is really par for the course unfortunately. There is a hotel the council use here which is half way down the motorway - they've housed people with kids there when there's no shops or anything near by. Because of the lack of facilities a lot of homeless families are forced to order takeaways or eat out which is expensive - you can't cook proper meals when all you have is a kettle and then they get hammered for not handling their money correctly. There's lots of use of the word 'choice' when in reality there is little choice. The whole system is a disgrace and perhaps naively I have been surprised at other people's surprise at how badly the residents of Grenfall are being treated. This is pretty standard, I hope it starts to change both for them and everyone else.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 19, 2017)

I've finally tracked down the politician who bears ultimate responsibility for the change in the building regulations that allowed this cladding to be used.... 

Step forward former Deputy Prime Minister - John Prescott. 

The change happened in the 2002 amendment to the part B of the building regulations which incorporated EU standards as well as BS standards. 

In doing this the previous requirement for cladding of buildings above 20m in height to be Class 0 fire rating Non-combustible) was changed to buildings above 18 m in height could either be class 0 rated in the BS standards, or could be Class B-s3, d2 rated in the European Standards.

There's no real equivocation about this, Prescott signed off on a downgrade in the fire rating of the regulations, despite someone actually writing in to the regulations exactly what the S3 and d2 bit means, and it should eb obvious to anyone that class B is not going to be the highest rating, so is not going to be equivalent to the highest BS rating.

"When a classification includes S3,d2, this means that there is no limit set for smoke production and/or flaming droplets/particles."

When implementing the change to EU regulations they're legally supposed to be implemented at an equivalent level or higher to the existing British Standards, but case law shows that the courts have decided that it is for the secretary of state to judge what equivalent level or higher actually means in practice, not the courts. 

So John Prescott is personally responsible for signing off the change in the regulations that ultimately resulted in this tragedy.

This also looks to be in part a result of his power grab to increase the areas his department was responsible for, as until a year earlier it was part of the remit of the department for Environment Transport and Regions, who probably had the competence to actually handle this work properly, and had even issued a report on the fire concerns with external cladding of tall buildings in 1999. Had the DETR still be in charge I doubt this change would have happened.

ps For clarity it's not the EU regulations at fault, it's that they didn't apply the correct EN standard to be equivalent to the BS standard, they applied a lower standard.

page 91


----------



## teuchter (Jun 20, 2017)

free spirit said:


> I've finally tracked down the politician who bears ultimate responsibility for the change in the building regulations that allowed this cladding to be used....
> 
> Step forward former Deputy Prime Minister - John Prescott.
> 
> ...



Not as straightforward as that, as I believe the panels used *did* meet Class 0.

In other words they would still have been allowed prior to the changes to AD part B you describe.

If, (and it's not immediately clear to me reading the regs whether they should) in addition to consideration for *surface spread of flame* requirements, the cladding panels should be considered as an "insulation product or filler material" (para 12.7) and therefore need to be assessed for *combustibility* (not the same thing) you are referred to Appendix A and tables A6 and A7. And the EU standards that are specified there are not the _Class B-s3, d2 _you mention but the higher _Class A2-s3, d2 _and_ Class A1._


----------



## twentythreedom (Jun 20, 2017)

I bet you're fun at parties


----------



## free spirit (Jun 20, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Not as straightforward as that, as I believe the panels used *did* meet Class 0.
> 
> In other words they would still have been allowed prior to the changes to AD part B you describe.
> 
> If, (and it's not immediately clear to me reading the regs whether they should) in addition to consideration for *surface spread of flame* requirements, the cladding panels should be considered as an "insulation product or filler material" (para 12.7) and therefore need to be assessed for *combustibility* (not the same thing) you are referred to Appendix A and tables A6 and A7. And the EU standards that are specified there are not the _Class B-s3, d2 _you mention but the higher _Class A2-s3, d2 _and_ Class A1._


yeah I just checked that, and both the cladding panels and insulation are certified by the manufacturers as meeting class 0.

Which is scary shit. How does celotex itself get classed with the highest fire rating?


----------



## Mation (Jun 20, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yes let's spread rumours


#Grenfell video: “move north or be ‘intentionally homeless’, lose all support


----------



## free spirit (Jun 20, 2017)

I'd also just sussed that they've got class A2 in one section for the insulation, and class B on diagram D for wall surface covering. Which is really odd. But also is still a downgrade for that element.

Also here's how Celotex get the rating for above 18m buildings - it;s not for the boards by themselves, but for the entire system with 12mm fibre cement board, and non-combustible board sandwiched around it and fire stops etc. Which really isn't obvious at all on either the website or datasheet, only on this sheet.



> Building above 18 metres Celotex RS5000 has been successfully tested to BS 8414-2:2005 (Fire performance of external cladding systems: Test method for non-loadbearing external cladding systems fixed to and supported by a structural steel frame), meets the criteria set out in BR 135 and is therefore acceptable for use in buildings above 18 metres in height. The system tested to BS 8414-2:2005 was as follows: ▶ 12mm fibre cement panels ▶ Supporting aluminium brackets and vertical rails ▶ 100mm Celotex RS5000 ▶ 12mm non-combustible sheathing board ▶ 100mm SFS system ▶ 2 x 12.5mm plasterboard Celotex RS5000 has been successfully tested to BS 8414- 2:2005 (Fire performance of external cladding systems) Fire stopping was provided by ventilated horizontal fire breaks positioned at each floor slab edge and above the hearth opening. Vertical non-ventilated fire breaks were provided at the edges of both the main face and the return wing and around the hearth opening. N.B. Ventilated fire barriers comprised of stonewool insulation with Class O aluminium foil facings and a continuous bonded intumescent strip. Non-ventilated fire barriers comprised of stonewool insulation with Class O aluminium foil facings specifically intended to fully fill the void. The fire performance and classification report for Celotex RS5000 only relates to the components detailed above. Any changes to the components listed will need to be considered by the building designer.


----------



## Corax (Jun 20, 2017)

My money's on those fire-stops having been nah-let's-not-bother-ed.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 20, 2017)

Corax said:


> My money's on those fire-stops having been nah-let's-not-bother-ed.


Or broken in some way, it may have been there in some fashion but incomplete and as much use as a chocolate teapot.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 20, 2017)

I've not watched last night's Panorama special yet, but here's a report on it:



> Firefighters who successfully tackled the fridge fire that started the Grenfell Tower thought their was job was done and began to leave - only realising how quickly it had spread when they stepped outside.
> 
> Units were called to what they believed to be a standard fridge fire at the doomed high-rise, and within minutes told residents the fire was out in the flat.
> 
> ...



Sorry for the source, google has only thrown up the Mail & Sun.

ETA: Just watched Panorama, it was hard. 

But, yeah, they are saying having spoken to senior fire sources, the fridge fire had been put out, and they thought the job was done, until they saw what was happening outside, and they couldn't believe what they were seeing.

Back-up was called, and there's mobile phone footage taken inside one of the back-up fire engines as it approached the block, the fire crew couldn't believe it, words along the lines of 'What the fuck [bleeped out]. Jesus. How's that possible?' were heard.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 20, 2017)

In other news, loads of people have complained about the coverage of the poor sod who lived in the flat where the fridge went up, by both the Mail & the Sun.



> Hundreds of people have made formal complaints about press coverage that has “shamed” the man in whose flat the Grenfell Tower fire reportedly started.
> 
> MailOnline ran an article headlined *‘The man whose faulty fridge started tower inferno’ *which identified and pictured a man it called an “Ethiopian taxi driver”.
> 
> ...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 20, 2017)

Video from firefighters approaching the tower block

London tower fire: Video reveals disbelief of firefighters heading into 'Towering Inferno' - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> I've not watched last night's Panorama special yet, but here's a report on it:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry for the source, google has only thrown up the Mail & Sun.


Even Google can't stomach them


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 20, 2017)

Jobseekers' allowance rules suspended for Grenfell Tower tenants - well that's something, one assumes normal housing rules will also be lifted too.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 20, 2017)

Fears more Grenfell Tower victims unaccounted for because they 'officially didn't exist'

Fear that we'll never really account for all the missing and dead, due to subletting and also victims being too scared to reveal themselves because of their possible immigration status. At a time when they've lost everything they'll also avoid accessing any formal support 

Links to archived listings from property websites have been doing the rounds and some of these flats were being rented out at £2,100 p/m for a two bed. It's just extortion and depressing that housing (especially built for the public/social need) has ended up like this 

Just does my head in.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> Teaboy, I don't disagree with what you have said on the subject of cladding and new windows but it's worth pointing out that that other parts of the refurbishment project were definitely not for the benefit of residents (converting what had been community space on the lower floors into 9 new flats, installing a new heating system to enable itemised charging charges for each flat for example).



Yes, I don't really know enough about what has gone on internally to comment, there are certainly a lot of bad stories coming out about both design and implementation.  I guess if the 9 new flats went to people on the housing list that's good for them but less good to lose the community space



> I have a couple of cladding questions:
> 
> Have any of the cladding projects you have been involved in involved applying cladding on top of fluted concrete surfaces and if so, what measures were taken to fill in the vertical gaps created by the fluting on the original concrete surfaces?
> 
> ...



As it happens I was involved in a project where fluted concrete was present, 3 tower blocks in South London.  In this case an insulated render system was used which differs from cladding in that the insulation is fixed directly back to the existing substrate and then a wet applied render is used directly over the insulation.  Its a cheaper system and the aesthetics (short term and long term) of render and questionable but from a fire safety point of view its probably better as there are no cavities behind the system.  For this particular project we only proposed a non-combustible insulation (Rockwool), my original proposal was for the fluted concrete to be dubbed out to present a flat surface for the insulation to be fixed to. Its a while ago now and I'm pretty sure that it was happened but the main thinking for this was so there was a flat surface for the insulation to be chemically fixed (glued) to, there is also a secondary mechanical fix. Fire wasn't really a consideration because we were using Rockwool which obviously satisfied regs.  There is no specific regs for dealing with every type of existing substrate, everyone just gets together and makes a proposal which is either accepted or rejected by building control.

The thing about building regs is that they mainly focus around safety so its down to the various parties involved to propose best practice with regard to fixing.  With this is mind architects and engineers often rely heavily on the system manufacturers.  So in theory a system can be applied to any substrate as long as every party is happy and building control and insurer are satisfied.  The main criteria for a substrate for cladding is will it hold the weight and will it be possible to get a good fix.

Building regs tend to be tighter on new build then re-furb for the simple reason that a lot of what they were doing back in the day wouldn't be allowed now, but as the building is already there and some features are not easily retro-fitted you have to make do with what you've got.  From a facade point of view I believe the regs surrounding fire are the same, but it is a 4 years since I worked in the industry and things change.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> In other news, loads of people have complained about the coverage of the poor sod who lived in the flat where the fridge went up, by both the Mail & the Sun.


Which was why I objected to your post yesterday.


----------



## Grace Johnson (Jun 20, 2017)

purenarcotic said:


> I hope that this sparks a wider debate around the way we handle homelessness in England along with the important stuff around health and safety etc. Being carted off miles away from support networks, being threatened with this concept of intentionally homeless, families living in rooms with no facilities is really par for the course unfortunately. There is a hotel the council use here which is half way down the motorway - they've housed people with kids there when there's no shops or anything near by. Because of the lack of facilities a lot of homeless families are forced to order takeaways or eat out which is expensive - you can't cook proper meals when all you have is a kettle and then they get hammered for not handling their money correctly. There's lots of use of the word 'choice' when in reality there is little choice. The whole system is a disgrace and perhaps naively I have been surprised at other people's surprise at how badly the residents of Grenfall are being treated. This is pretty standard, I hope it starts to change both for them and everyone else.



This is a brilliant post.

There is not enough understanding of what actually happens when you are in dire circumstances and need housing. And The way that people in these situations are treated is just getting worse and worse. 

I spent time in women's hostels just about 3 years ago and that was horrible enough. But although they were restrictive, imposing ridiculous rules on you and generally trying their best to make you feel like a criminal and a failure at least they were vaguely safe. 

The conditions weren't great and having your freedom restricted i.e.; having to be back by a certain time and only be allowed a night away if you cleared it with staff for example. was humiliating and intrusive. But compared to situations people are in now esp families it was easy. It nearly broke me but in comparison it was easy.

Most people here now are being housed in really crappy bnbs and they are just not safe. They are housing young families in the same crappy 'hotels' as violent ex offenders and long term street homeless people with severe alcohol and drug problems. Next door to them with no security and only them small bar locks like you have in pub toilets on the door. When I was in places I could handle it when there was drug dealers outside because they know it's an easy place to sell and when it was kicking off because someone has come back on spice and is having a psychotic episode. Just about like, sent me under tho. But how can families deal with that? 

One lady got stabbed in my friends place next door to a woman with her two kids under five, they must have heard everything. how the fuck do you handle that when you have got 2 or 3 young kids to handle? How do you explain why you are there to a 3 year old? 

And these families are getting told if you leave here you will be considered intentionally homeless and you will have to present your children to social services. How the fuck can we call ourselves a civilised country when we can allow that happen? It's beyond me it really is. 

It makes no sense logically or ethically, it's going to cost many many times more to put those kids into care than it is to house the family or help them with their rent arrears. It's just punitive, people even young children are being punished for being poor now. 

We all know how explorative and genrally fucked this housing market is but There's plenty of people making ridiculous money of this, it's not a housing crisis for them it's payday and kids are getting punished for it in horrific ways. And even If you do get housed after months or years of living being treated like a criminal stuck in some Dickensian limbo even if you are lucky and can get social housing you can still burn to death in your own home because if your poor they just don't give a fuck about ya. This is what it's come to and it is just so casual that's what's terrifying. 

They talk about terrorism and the attacks over the last few weeks have been terrible and sad and frightening. The army evacuating my flats after the Manchester attacks shit me right up, had panic attacks for days. But this fire and all the circumstances that have lead our society to a place like this, that's what chills me to my bones, it deeply disturbs the soul of me because it's so fucking casual. I know what terrifies me and my community more and it seems like you can't escape from it. 

Like you say I hope the whole situation can get examined properly know, that we can really look into how families are treated when they have housing need because nobody deserves anything like this especially not little kids man.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Jobseekers' allowance rules suspended for Grenfell Tower tenants - well that's something, one assumes normal housing rules will also be lifted too.


THat's not quite the same as "as flexible as possible" though, is it.

The only thing that will stop the bastards from sanctioning or otherwise applying their sadistic regime will be the chance they, and I mean the frontline staff, will get their fucking teeth smashed in if they try it. There's no way that the Tories will otherwise relent on their shit system because the rest of us will, rightly IMO, wonder why this can't be the way the system operates by default.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> THat's not quite the same as "as flexible as possible" though, is it.
> 
> The only thing that will stop the bastards from sanctioning or otherwise applying their sadistic regime will be the chance they, and I mean the frontline staff, will get their fucking teeth smashed in if they try it. There's no way that the Tories will otherwise relent on their shit system because the rest of us will, rightly IMO, wonder why this can't be the way the system operates by default.


will you do this fucking smashing?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> THat's not quite the same as "as flexible as possible" though, is it.
> 
> The only thing that will stop the bastards from sanctioning or otherwise applying their sadistic regime will be the chance they, and I mean the frontline staff, will get their fucking teeth smashed in if they try it. There's no way that the Tories will otherwise relent on their shit system because the rest of us will, rightly IMO, wonder why this can't be the way the system operates by default.


your posts make you sound about twelve


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> your posts make you sound about twelve


you're very generous, ou.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 20, 2017)

London fire: A tale of two tower blocks - BBC News



> A 2012 report by the British Automatic Fire Sprinkler Association (BAFSA) concluded that fire sprinklers could be retrofitted with tenants in place at a cost of about £1,150 a flat. Since the 24-storey Grenfell Tower contained 120 flats, it would have worked out at £138,000. That's significantly less than the £2.6m spent on the cladding and replacement windows.
> 
> Architect and fire expert Sam Webb said: "We are still wrapping post-war high-rise buildings in highly flammable materials and leaving them without sprinkler systems installed, then being surprised when they burn down.
> 
> "I really don't think the building industry understands how fire behaves in buildings and how dangerous it can be. The government's mania for deregulation means our current safety standards just aren't good enough."


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 20, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> your posts make you sound about twelve


How does that address any of what I've said?

You seriously think the DWP gives a shit about these people? The only reason they have relented, if it can be considered that, is because of the media spotlight.

At no point did they volunteer to do the right thing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> How does that address any of what I've said?
> 
> You seriously think the DWP gives a shit about these people? The only reason they have relented, if it can be considered that, is because of the media spotlight.
> 
> At no point did they volunteer to do the right thing.


i ask again: are you volunteering to assault dwp staff? or is this something you only recommend to others?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> How does that address any of what I've said?
> 
> You seriously think the DWP gives a shit about these people? The only reason they have relented, if it can be considered that, is because of the media spotlight.
> 
> At no point did they volunteer to do the right thing.


The DWP is made up of many individuals, many of which do give a shit, but have been put in impossible positions by government policies.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 20, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> Video from firefighters approaching the tower block
> 
> London tower fire: Video reveals disbelief of firefighters heading into 'Towering Inferno' - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)


That's horrible, real time processing with the fire fighters getting a grip on what has happened.  Even experienced fire fighters needing a few seconds to see something and then get their heads round what they are about to experience. Statement of the obvious, sorry - but just horrible.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 20, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Fears more Grenfell Tower victims unaccounted for because they 'officially didn't exist'
> 
> Fear that we'll never really account for all the missing and dead, due to subletting and also victims being too scared to reveal themselves because of their possible immigration status. At a time when they've lost everything they'll also avoid accessing any formal support
> 
> ...


I'd have thought getting an amnesty for all the issues about sub letting and immigration status should be a key demand. Everybody has to get rehoused and everybody has to get the temporary payments (and longer term monies).


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 20, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> The DWP is made up of many individuals, many of which do give a shit, but have been put in impossible positions by government policies.



You're just stating the obvious, what's your point? What is it that you want to do here. You have two choices:
Either you stand against the regime
Or it continues and this includes the sanctioning (because it WILL happen) of Grenfell survivors. Not to mention everyone else left to starve to death.

If all you are going to do is state that they are in an impossible situation, then nothing will change. If these people will not act to chagne this situation then nothing will change. If that's the case then i'd rather they lost their job than a fire victim who's lost everything is left to starve by the state. Obviously I'd rather that didn't happen, but that will happen if all people do is make excuses for this system, and i'm afraid that includes those working within it. This also means that unions need to get more involved and help those people get out of impossible positions. This isn't easy, by any means, but the alternative I'm afraid is worse.

If all you can do in respoinse to that is simply insult me then you are contributing nothing. If anything that's the childish position. 

Grenfell survivors will struggle with the DWP. This headline belies a less positive tone from the DWP and it's about time we stopped using this 'workers in an impossible situation' argument because it isn't working. Support them, collectives, do all that. But stop making excuses, people are dying. We know this. We've seen it. When someone from Grenfell gets sanctioned the excuse will be that "we were unable to correctly verify his identity, and so he could have been a fraudster". This is not good enough. If the DWP can relent (if) for this group (and rightly so), then that is clear proof the system shouldn't be this brutal.

Don't engage in puerile gaslighting, engage with what I've said.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> engage with what I've said.


i ask *again*: are you volunteering to assault dwp staff?


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PHD said:
			
		

> If all you are going to do is state that they are in an impossible situation, then nothing will change. If these people will not act to chagne this situation then nothing will change. If that's the case then i'd rather they lost their job than a fire victim who's lost everything is left to starve by the state. Obviously I'd rather that didn't happen, but that will happen if all people do is make excuses for this system, and i'm afraid that includes those working within it. This also means that unions need to get more involved and help those people get out of impossible positions. This isn't easy, by any means, but the alternative I'm afraid is worse.



If you think assaulting frontline DWP workers is actually going to achieve and change anything, other than even more draconian and reactionary measures from the DWP and government protected by the police, and resulting in tougher attitudes to those needing help and support, then you're a fucking dick. A few weeks ago, you were arguing that only a vote for Labour would change anything.

Direct action has to be focused and aimed towards the government and power structures that underpin and create the systems, not other workers.


----------



## belboid (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Don't engage in puerile gaslighting, engage with what I've said.


You really shouldn't use phrases you don't understand.


----------



## LDC (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> You have two choices:
> Either you stand against the regime
> Or it continues and this includes the sanctioning (because it WILL happen) of Grenfell survivors. Not to mention everyone else left to starve to death.



Bit you're either with us or against us that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

belboid said:


> You really shouldn't use phrases you don't understand.


tbh he shouldn't use phrases he does understand either


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Bit you're either with us or against us that.








who phd at home


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> You're just stating the obvious, what's your point? What is it that you want to do here. You have two choices:
> Either you stand against the regime
> Or it continues and this includes the sanctioning (because it WILL happen) of Grenfell survivors. Not to mention everyone else left to starve to death.
> 
> ...


You don't appear to understand what gaslighting is. Your posts have very little substance beyond puerile anarkidisms. Go away.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I don't understand the point you are making here.
> Can you explain?



Yes. The funding for upgrades to thermal performance can be obtained from different sources meaning that a refurbishment like this can be heavily subsidised.  Whereas ongoing general maintenance and internal works come out of the councils general budge (I'm generalising here a bit). The point being that there is money available for these sort of works where there might not be for general maintenance.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 20, 2017)

who phd - if you'd have come along to the  Bristol and District Anti-Cuts Alliance meetings and got involved when i offered to help you do so you'd have met many frontline DWP staff who had been fighting to resist implementing the range of austerity measures. Many of them doing so from before any tory cuts. Then you may not have ended up making such daft posts - outlining 'positions' that were largely rejected by the resistance to welfare cuts  - as long ago as the proposed  'three strikes and you're out' campaign against frontline staff of the early-mid 90s - as being counter-productive posturing with no understanding of the dynamics of class based organising.

If today is the day that you choose to_ do it _and this the issue on which you choose to do it...then crack on. Sooner done, soonest over.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 20, 2017)

belboid said:


> You really shouldn't use phrases you don't understand.


In what way have i shown that I don't understand gaslighting?


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 20, 2017)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Bit you're either with us or against us that.


Unfortunately that's how i see the situation, and I've seen nothing that changes my mind. I don't like it, but there it is.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> In what way have i shown that I don't understand gaslighting?


what do you understand it to mean? cos from what you said to me, you seem to think it means contradicting someone


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 20, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> You don't appear to understand what gaslighting is. Your posts have very little substance beyond puerile anarkidisms. Go away.


Gaslighting is when you play on someone's insecurity, usually by means of making them think they are nuts. That's the extreme end, making people doubt their sanity. Here it's demonstrated by the choice to engage in childish putdowns, insinuating my thoughts on this issue are puerile or at best naive - without actually bothering to provide refutations and without being rude. 

So yes, I do understand. Now why don't you provide a proper rebuttal to my comments instead of contributing nothing and trolling


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Gaslighting is when you play on someone's insecurity, usually by means of making them think they are nuts. That's the extreme end, making people doubt their sanity. Here it's demonstrated by the choice to engage in childish putdowns, insinuating my thoughts on this issue are puerile or at best naive - without actually bothering to provide refutations and without being rude.
> 
> So yes, I do understand. Now why don't you provide a proper rebuttal to my comments instead of contributing nothing and trolling


and now you don't understand what trolling is.


----------



## maomao (Jun 20, 2017)

Can we not turn this thread into the Awesome Wells show please?


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 20, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> and now you don't understand what trolling is.


You've dodged two questions and only responded to engage in attacking the person, not their argument. You answered my question about gaslighting with another question. You're also derailing the thread by doing so. I made a legit point and you've not once responded to it choosing in turn to go after me. Either respond to the point I made and we can have a proper discussion, particularly given that this isn't a thread where this kind of shitposting is appropriate _at all, _or I'll just ignore you. Your choice, flower.


----------



## belboid (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> In what way have i shown that I don't understand gaslighting?


Because it isn't just about being a bit rude. Where have you been made to question your memory of events you took part in?


----------



## chilango (Jun 20, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> who phd - if you'd have come along to the  Bristol and District Anti-Cuts Alliance meetings and got involved when i offered to help you do so you'd have met many frontline DWP staff who had been fighting to resist implementing the range of austerity measures. Many of them doing so from before any tory cuts. Then you may not have ended up making such daft posts - outlining 'positions' that were largely rejected by the resistance to welfare cuts  - as long ago as the proposed  'three strikes and you're out' campaign against frontline staff of the early-mid 90s - as being counter-productive posturing with no understanding of the dynamics of class based organising.
> 
> If today is the day that you choose to_ do it _and this the issue on which you choose to do it...then crack on. Sooner done, soonest over.



There's also plenty of reading online that can be done about these struggles. Any point linking to it though?


----------



## belboid (Jun 20, 2017)

maomao said:


> Can we not turn this thread into the Awesome Wells show please?


Oh, really? Much is explained.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 20, 2017)

maomao said:


> Can we not turn this thread into the Awesome Wells show please?



Is that who he is?


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 20, 2017)

belboid said:


> Because it isn't just about being a bit rude. Where have you been made to question your memory of events you took part in?


What part of my response wasn't clear for you?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> You've dodged two questions and only responded to engage in attacking the person, not their argument. You answered my question about gaslighting with another question. You're also derailing the thread by doing so. I made a legit point and you've not once responded to it choosing in turn to go after me. Either respond to the point I made and we can have a proper discussion, particularly given that this isn't a thread where this kind of shitposting is appropriate _at all _or I'll just ignore you. Your choice, flower.


what questions? all i've done is take issue with your unhelpful and childish comments


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 20, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Is that who he is?


gaslighting, 101.


----------



## belboid (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> What part of my response wasn't clear for you?


What? It was perfectly clear. And it was perfectly bollocks. Gaslighting doesn't mean what you said it did.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> gaslighting, 101.



Well is it you?


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 20, 2017)

belboid said:


> What? It was perfectly clear. And it was perfectly bollocks. Gaslighting doesn't mean what you said it did.


Do you think there's a prize to be won here? I made a point, address it or fuck off with this shit. What does this nonsense have to do with the point I made. Do you really think the DWP gives a toss about Grenfell survivors?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Is that who he is?


he is 'bo' wells


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 20, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Well is it you?


No.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> What part of my response wasn't clear for you?


yeh. are you volunteering to assault dwp staff?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Do you think there's a prize to be won here? I made a point, address it or fuck off with this shit. What does this nonsense have to do with the point I made. Do you really think the DWP gives a toss about Grenfell survivors?


I think it's unwise to classify 'the DWP' as one entity as it is made up of lots of humans who do care and have compassion for the survivors. Most of them will be frontline workers who will do their best to help the survivors


----------



## belboid (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD said:


> Do you think there's a prize to be won here? I made a point, address it or fuck off with this shit. What does this nonsense have to do with the point I made. Do you really think the DWP gives a toss about Grenfell survivors?


I did address it. I made a specific point in reply to a specific one of yours. You are avoiding that response. I guess because you can't admit to using a word wrongly. 

As to the DWP, lots of DWP workers - some of whom will probably have had friends/family, or even themselves in Grenfell - will give a fucking big toss.


----------



## killer b (Jun 20, 2017)

maomao said:


> Can we not turn this thread into the Awesome Wells show please?


or any thread, ever.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 20, 2017)

belboid said:


> I did address it. I made a specific point in reply to a specific one of yours. You are avoiding that response. I guess because you can't admit to using a word wrongly.
> 
> As to the DWP, lots of DWP workers - some of whom will probably have had friends/family, or even themselves in Grenfell - will give a fucking big toss.


It's very obvious that my referring to the DWP is institutionally; to think that I mean otherwise is being deliberately unfair. The people at the bottom will not be the ones making these kinds of policy decisions.

However the point still remains: if DWP workers won't stand up then the situation won't change. It is uncharitable to call that childish when it is absolutely the reality. By all means they should be supported in doing so, to do otherwise would be a betrayal. Solidarity networks and unions, particularly the PCS, should be fighting with these people. But it cannot be acceptable that we allow these people, difficult though their position may be, to drive others, including friends/family, or even themselves in Grenfell, to face utter annihilation. That is a line that cannot be crossed. Anyone that regards that as puerile is, IMO, dodging the issue. Anyone who doubts the DWP would rather not have to give 'special treatment' to Grenfell survivors is being naive.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 20, 2017)

Who PhD - Please leave it there now, out of respect for other users, this is a serious thread, that doesn't deserve being derailed.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 20, 2017)

Meanwhile...

Grenfell victims are sleeping in cars and parks, says Kensington MP


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 20, 2017)

"Those responsible will never get away with it" - Defend Council Housing speaker on Grenfell Tower horror.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Who PhD - Please leave it there now, out of respect for other users, this is a serious thread, that doesn't deserve being derailed.


I agree.


----------



## Corax (Jun 20, 2017)

FTR, whilst I don't live near Grenfell, my DWP advisor was themselves housebound with mental health issues until 6 months ago.  They've been nothing but empathetic and supportive.  I rather hope that they don't "get their fucking teeth smashed in"


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

Corax said:


> FTR, whilst I don't live near Grenfell, my DWP advisor was themselves housebound with mental health issues until 6 months ago.  They've been nothing but empathetic and supportive.  I rather hope that they don't "get their fucking teeth smashed in"


who phd needs to learn how to win friends and influence people


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 20, 2017)

Meanwhile, people find ways of focusing their feelings and raising awareness...


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 20, 2017)

Corax said:


> FTR, whilst I don't live near Grenfell, my DWP advisor was themselves housebound with mental health issues until 6 months ago.  They've been nothing but empathetic and supportive.  I rather hope that they don't "get their fucking teeth smashed in"


Nor do i, supportive and empathetic staff aren't the people i'm referring to. If you're sanctioning grenfell survivors you are neither supportive nor empathetic.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 20, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Yes. The funding for upgrades to thermal performance can be obtained from different sources meaning that a refurbishment like this can be heavily subsidised.  Whereas ongoing general maintenance and internal works come out of the councils general budge (I'm generalising here a bit). The point being that there is money available for these sort of works where there might not be for general maintenance.


IMO one aspect of this that needs reviewing is the BREEM methodology, which takes zero account of fire risk. 

It'd be pretty simple to add fire risk into it so that it was obvious that one option posed a higher fire risk than another, though we would also need to sort out the fire classifications to stop celotex PIR insulation looking as if it was as fire proof as rock wool.

If the fire risk is increased then the funding ought to cover adding sprinklers or other fire measures as part of the work to mitigate that increase in risk (though in this case nothing would have mitigated it, the fire risk from the materials used was too great anyway).


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

free spirit said:


> IMO one aspect of this that needs reviewing is the BREEM methodology, which takes zero account of fire risk.
> 
> It'd be pretty simple to add fire risk into it so that it was obvious that one option posed a higher fire risk than another, though we would also need to sort out the fire classifications to stop celotex PIR insulation looking as if it was as fire proof as rock wool.
> 
> If the fire risk is increased then the funding ought to cover adding sprinklers or other fire measures as part of the work to mitigate that increase in risk (though in this case nothing would have mitigated it, the fire risk from the materials used was too great anyway).


BREEAM. the BREEAM methodology.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 20, 2017)

free spirit said:


> IMO one aspect of this that needs reviewing is the BREEM methodology, which takes zero account of fire risk.



Why start trying to assess fire risk within a system that isn't set up with the expertise to do so? Doesn't make any sense. If it's true that certain materials or methods present an unacceptably high fire risk then change needs to happen via building regs, the regs that should guide all building work.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 20, 2017)

BREEAM is just a back-slapping tickbox exercise for 'sustainability' brownie points. I suppose a building at high risk of being destroyed by fire isn't very sustainable, so you could award 1 credit for 'building can't easily become a towering inferno' but then this could be offset by adding 1 credit for 'washing machines are specified with B rating under EU Energy Efficiency Labelling Scheme' or similar.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

free spirit said:


> IMO one aspect of this that needs reviewing is the BREEM methodology, which takes zero account of fire risk.
> 
> It'd be pretty simple to add fire risk into it so that it was obvious that one option posed a higher fire risk than another, though we would also need to sort out the fire classifications to stop celotex PIR insulation looking as if it was as fire proof as rock wool.
> 
> If the fire risk is increased then the funding ought to cover adding sprinklers or other fire measures as part of the work to mitigate that increase in risk (though in this case nothing would have mitigated it, the fire risk from the materials used was too great anyway).



I'd be wary of mixing up different elements like this.  The other thing to remember is BREEAM is a methodology created by essentially a private company like BBA certificates.  Things like this are useful addition to construction and manufacturers see the benefit and pay handsomely to have their products rated.

Safety critical stuff like fire should really be covered (as it is) in national legislation as to what is minimum acceptable standards. 

I agree with you about PUR and PIR mind, its clearly time to state that only mineral fibre can be used on tall buildings.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 20, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Yes. The funding for upgrades to thermal performance can be obtained from different sources meaning that a refurbishment like this can be heavily subsidised.  Whereas ongoing general maintenance and internal works come out of the councils general budge (I'm generalising here a bit). The point being that there is money available for these sort of works where there might not be for general maintenance.


Well two points:

1) It seems to me speculation on your part to assume that the cladding part of this project was heavily subsidised, I'm not aware of evidence that it was subsidised at all.

2) Even it was completely subsidised, that would not preclude motivation for the work being a cosmetic one from those who ordered and controlled it.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 20, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Why start trying to assess fire risk within a system that isn't set up with the expertise to do so? Doesn't make any sense. If it's true that certain materials or methods present an unacceptably high fire risk then change needs to happen via building regs, the regs that should guide all building work.


because that was the point at which the various options were assessed, BREEAM includes a range of factors but excludes fire risk entirely.

I'm not saying it should include a full fire risk assessment, but it could easily include an at a glance risk rating for the different options, and if the risk were too high / complex for the assessor to undertake themselves it should be outsourced at that stage to a fire risk assessor to give their input.

This doesn't just apply for the cladding, also the option to fit combi boilers in each flat and knock a 4-5 inch vent hole through the outer cladding in each flat had fire safety implications that should have been picked up as part of the overall assessment.

The BREEAM report was the stage at which all options were being assessed and recommendations being made, those shouldn't happen without at least a basic level of fire risk analysis happening as well, otherwise decisions are being taken with only partial knowledge of the implications


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 20, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Well two points:
> 
> 1) It seems to me speculation on your part to assume that the cladding part of this project was heavily subsidised, I'm not aware of evidence that it was subsidised at all.
> 
> 2) Even it was completely subsidised,* that would not preclude motivation for the work being a cosmetic one* from those who ordered and controlled it.



Oh, FFS!

The windows had reached end of life & needed replacing, the block suffered from lack of insulation, flats becoming saunas in summer & hard to heat in the winter. If the windows had to be replaced, it was logical to install insulation (leaving aside the wrong type of material used here, and any other shortcomings) at the same time, that was the reason for the work.

Once that decision was made, the next stage was planning permission, which always includes consideration of the visual impact to the local area, whether that includes a conservation area or not.

Anyone thinking this was about it being a cosmetic job for people living in expensive properties nearby, should ask themselves why dozens of other blocks across the country have undergone this type of 'improvement' despite the fact they are not over looked by residents in a conservation area.

This bonkers idea that it was done for cosmetic reasons needs to be dropped, it's a distraction from focusing on the real reason(s) why things went tits-up here.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 20, 2017)

free spirit said:


> I'm not saying it should include a full fire risk assessment, but it could easily include an at a glance risk rating for the different options, and if the risk were too high / complex for the assessor to undertake themselves it should be outsourced at that stage to a fire risk assessor to give their input.



Very bad idea. A few credits for wireless heat detectors in kitchens and similar trendy stuff could yield a decent "at a glance" risk rating that ignored other factors. It is totally not the place for a fire risk rating to be tucked away in, and certainly not the right format for arriving at a low risk rating that would preclude a full fire risk assessment.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Well two points:
> 
> 1) It seems to me speculation on your part to assume that the cladding part of this project was heavily subsidised, I'm not aware of evidence that it was subsidised at all.
> 
> 2) Even it was completely subsidised, that would not preclude motivation for the work being a cosmetic one from those who ordered and controlled it.



With regard to your first point I would point you to the following schemes which have run at one time or another:

CERT Scheme
CESP Scheme
ECO Scheme

Overview of previous schemes

Initially CERT was set up to provide funding for this sort of thing primarily from the energy providers.  It was primarily to do with cavity wall, loft insulation etc although funding could be gained for more expensive schemes such as external wall insulation (EWI).  As the money was insufficient for EWI the CESP scheme replaced it and ran reasonably successfully until David Cameron's 'greenest government ever' came into power and overhauled the system as part of the wildly unsuccessful Green Deal.  The element of the Green Deal which was focused on social and council housing was called ECO which stood for something like Energy Company Obligation (or something like that, I can't be bothered to google and lets face it nor can you).

Funding for these sorts of schemes have been around for a very long time and have led to huge amounts of tower blocks and other housing developments being insulated.  There were are also lots of other schemes from the crackpot competition 'Retrofit for the Future' through to Mayor of London schemes.

In my time in this industry which covered 40 odd projects similar to this I only encountered one scheme which was fully financed by the local authority because it was primarily a face lift. This was done by Reading Borough Council and it was for very specific reasons. I don't know for sure how the Grenfell project was funded but it would be very surprising and highly unusual if a scheme of this sort didn't seek out the funding that was available to them.

Your second point is largely irrelevant because one comes from the other.  The motivation to do exactly this comes from the government both in the form of instructions to local authority and the funding capability.  It was going to be done at some point.  And just to reiterate that you cannot install external insulation without a new cladding system of some description.

Now, I have a question for you. If it was just about aesthetics why bother with the new windows, curtain walling system (incorporating an SFS system which is not cheap) and external insulation?  The cladding is actually the cheap part compared to other aspects of the build.

Even after all this is did turn out that some person in a high position was having his view being ruined and pushed for this none of this changes the fact the building was (if only externally) being improved for the benefits of the residents.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 20, 2017)

The Grenfell tower BREEAM report covered Energy efficiency, water use, ventilation, safety, flooding, responsible sourcing of materials.

I see no reason why it couldn't also include Fire safety.

Though maybe the methodology isn't right as it allows one factor to be offset against another, when fire safety should be absolute really.

If not then there should be a statutory requirement for a fire risk assessment to be carried out and probably lodged with building control in advance for all significant works, and for all works to result in an overall improvement (or at least no worsening) of the fire risk score for the building. (AFAIK this isn't the case currently)

But my point on BREEAM was that this should be being done at least to some extent at the point when the decisions are being taken on which materials to use etc not just being done retrospectively after the decision has been taken. It's a crucial factor that should be visible to the decision makers at the point the decision is being taken on which option to go for.

There was a 28 page options appraisal carried out at the start of the decision making process for this project that had no information at all about fire risk implications within it. It recommends the use of low VOC paints for health benefits, but nowt about the risks of cladding the building in flammable material.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 20, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> Very bad idea. A few credits for wireless heat detectors in kitchens and similar trendy stuff could yield a decent "at a glance" risk rating that ignored other factors. It is totally not the place for a fire risk rating to be tucked away in, and certainly not the right format for arriving at a low risk rating that would preclude a full fire risk assessment.


instead we have a situation where there is zero requirement for a fire risk assessment prior to a decision being made. I don't see this as being a positive thing.


----------



## Corax (Jun 20, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> 1) It seems to me speculation on your part to assume that the cladding part of this project was heavily subsidised, I'm not aware of evidence that it was subsidised at all.


It's a pretty reasonable assumption, given that people can get subsidies for things like getting their loft insulated and other energy saving measures.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> This bonkers idea that it was done for cosmetic reasons needs to be dropped, it's a distraction from focusing on the real reason(s) why things went tits-up here.



It appears that even the residents' action group are hooking onto this idea now



> It is incumbent on us also to state our firmly held belief that the cladding in question was not introduced for the benefit of the residents of Grenfell Tower but because Kensington and Chelsea Council had redeveloped the surounding area, building another of their flagship academy schools right next to Grenfell Tower, and a new sports and leisure centre next to that. The cladding on Grenfell Tower was intended to pimp it up so that it wouldn’t spoil the image of creeping gentrification that the Council are intent on creating, here and throughout the rest of North Kensington.


Grenfell Tower – The KCTMO Culture Of Negligence

This gives people excuse to write them off as rabble rousers rather than a residents' group who have been raising reasonable objections over the years.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 20, 2017)

free spirit said:


> instead we have a situation where there is zero requirement for a fire risk assessment prior to a decision being made. I don't see this as being a positive thing.



Fire safety for proposed developments is covered under part B of buildings regs. It doesn't belong anywhere else imo. Sure there are lots of ways those regulations can be changed, but adding stuff to BREEAM is not appropriate.

It would be like adding the Landlord's Gas Safety Certificate into the EPC with points for 'how safe is the gas boiler'.


----------



## Corax (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> This bonkers idea that it was done for cosmetic reasons needs to be dropped, it's a distraction from focusing on the real reason(s) why things went tits-up here.


Although I understand your point, I disagree.

Whilst it may not have been done primarily for cosmetic reasons, the issue is priorities.  From what I've read there were cheaper, inherently safer (purely rendered insulating cladding - with *no air gaps*) options available, but they're not as pretty.  If it turns out that corners were cut to reduce cost, on a more expensive but more cosmetically pleasing option, then that's very much relevant IMO.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 20, 2017)

teuchter said:


> It appears that even the residents' action group are hooking onto this idea now
> 
> 
> Grenfell Tower – The KCTMO Culture Of Negligence
> ...



It would be helpful then, if someone in the know, could reach out to the resident's action group and articulate these concerns to them. Perhaps that someone could also give advice about a more practical approach to their campaign for justice.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

free spirit said:


> The Grenfell tower BREEAM report covered Energy efficiency, water use, ventilation, safety, flooding, responsible sourcing of materials.
> 
> I see no reason why it couldn't also include Fire safety.
> 
> ...



It is something worth considering as long as it sat alongside robust legislation.


----------



## editor (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Oh, FFS!
> 
> The windows had reached end of life & needed replacing, the block suffered from lack of insulation, flats becoming saunas in summer & hard to heat in the winter. If the windows had to be replaced, it was logical to install insulation (leaving aside the wrong type of material used here, and any other shortcomings) at the same time, that was the reason for the work.
> 
> ...


Perhaps the residents group know more about this than you. They're hardly like to completely make it up unless they believe there's some truth in it, although they may perhaps be exaggerating it a bit out of their understandable anger.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Oh, FFS!
> 
> The windows had reached end of life & needed replacing, the block suffered from lack of insulation, flats becoming saunas in summer & hard to heat in the winter. If the windows had to be replaced, it was logical to install insulation (leaving aside the wrong type of material used here, and any other shortcomings) at the same time, that was the reason for the work.
> 
> ...


leaving aside it was a factor mentioned in the planning documents.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 20, 2017)

It's all very well picking holes in the way people see things or how they are going about things. Solidarity is an active thing however. If you think you know better, share that knowledge. Volunteer to help. Many hands make light/er work.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

Corax said:


> Although I understand your point, I disagree.
> 
> Whilst it may not have been done primarily for cosmetic reasons, the issue is priorities.  From what I've read there were cheaper, inherently safer (purely rendered insulating cladding - with *no air gaps*) options available, but they're not as pretty.  If it turns out that corners were cut to reduce cost, on a more expensive but more cosmetically pleasing option, then that's very much relevant IMO.



The problem with this that the only way anyone can make any decision on whether a product is suitable and safe is whether it has been tested and satisfies regulations.  On both counts it would appear that the cladding system did.

Its also worth mentioning that the client (in this case the council or the housing provider) would have probably had very little input into the choice of the panel. The decision would have been made by the architect and main contractor, all the client would have done is OK'd the colour scheme. It may be the case that they did take a more active role but it is not always the case as how would they know anyway unless they are a construction professional?

Obviously the client in this case is responsible for driving down of costs which has the inevitable consequences of value engineering which has already been discussed.

Lets face it, nothing is known for sure at the moment but we can have a good guess at crappy regulations which can be loosely interpreted by race to the bottom mentality.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 20, 2017)

editor said:


> The attitude displayed by some on the Brixton forum is symptomatic of British society as a whole. Anyone going on about poverty or poor housing or the growing divisions in society is someone to be dismissed or ridiculed.



TBF though, those "some on the Brixton forum" are invariably gobshites and shitcunts of the first water.


----------



## Corax (Jun 20, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> The problem with this that the only way anyone can make any decision on whether a product is suitable and safe is whether it has been tested and satisfies regulations.  On both counts it would appear that the cladding system did.


Safe if installed correctly.

That's the point I'm making regarding the aesthetics.  If corners were cut *in the installation* (eg no/shoddy fire-stops) to save costs, on a solution that was more expensive in the first place - but prettier - then the whole 'aesthetics' angle remains relevant _even if it wasn't the primary reason for the project in the first place_.

IYSWIM...


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

editor said:


> Perhaps the residents group know more about this than you. They're hardly like to completely make it up unless they believe there's some truth in it, although they may perhaps be exaggerating it a bit out of their understandable anger.



I think this is a fair point.  

I just think nothing is known yet and nothing can be.  There may be some things which are never known, if dodgyness has gone on then the evidence will be destroyed no doubt.  

We can't say for sure the most basic thing like was the cladding everyone think was used actually used?  Did the cladding actually have anything to do with the fire?  We just don't know yet and in the absence of information rumours and accusations are flying.


----------



## killer b (Jun 20, 2017)

teuchter said:


> It appears that even the residents' action group are hooking onto this idea now
> 
> 
> Grenfell Tower – The KCTMO Culture Of Negligence
> ...


Who's writing them off, other than you?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I think this is a fair point.
> 
> I just think nothing is known yet and nothing can be.  There may be some things which are never known, if dodgyness has gone on then the evidence will be destroyed no doubt.
> 
> We can't say for sure the most basic thing like was the cladding everyone think was used actually used?  Did the cladding actually have anything to do with the fire?  We just don't know yet and in the absence of information rumours and accusations are flying.


yes, the cladding did have something to do with the fire, as can be seen from the fact that huge flames which would not have been otherwise present run up the sides of the building. in addition, we're told that similar insulation has been involved in fires in australia and dubai. the extent to which the cladding and insulation were responsible for the tragedy may yet need to be determined, but that it did have some bearing on the great growth and irruption of the fire cannot be argued.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 20, 2017)

teuchter said:


> It appears that even the residents' action group are hooking onto this idea now
> 
> Grenfell Tower – The KCTMO Culture Of Negligence
> 
> This gives people excuse to write them off as rabble rousers rather than a residents' group who have been raising reasonable objections over the years.



The now removed content from the Rydon website, as reported by the Independent here stated:




			
				Independent said:
			
		

> A statement from Rydon after the work was finished noted that "rain screen cladding, replacement windows and curtain wall façades have been fitted giving the building a fresher, modern look".
> 
> That statement included a quote from Nick Paget-Brown, the leader of the council, who remarked on how happy he was to see "first-hand how the cladding has lifted the external appearance of the tower".
> 
> ...



Whilst I'd agree with what's been said here by Teaboy and others that cladding has been done for insulation and damp-preventing purposes primarily, I wouldn't still be so quick to discount though that appearance wouldn't be a factor in all this - and I'm sure Grenfell Action Group are party to more information than most of us here about the history and issues and they seem both organised and well informed. FWIW, I've seen and experienced comments made by councillors and developers about other estates in terms of 'dirty, grim concrete tower blocks and flats that are making our area look unattractive' and what can be done, and so being able to make them look more aesthetically pleasing for wider political reasons (and not just for the benefit of residents) is a consideration.

(for transparency: whilst I believe its important that we understand and learn to what degree the cladding was suitable or not or its installation was the problem in terms of exascerbating the fire, so that lessons can be learned from it and other blocks using it such as Ferrier in Newham can be subject to revision asap, I admit its rather lower on my immediate concerns of what's going on with the wider issue of social housing, cleansing and gentrification and the effects on communities_ right now_, and sadly demonstrated by Grenfell).


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

Corax said:


> Safe if installed correctly.
> 
> That's the point I'm making regarding the aesthetics.  If corners were cut *in the installation* (eg no/shoddy fire-stops) to save costs, on a solution that was more expensive in the first place - but prettier - then the whole 'aesthetics' angle remains relevant _even if it wasn't the primary reason for the project in the first place_.
> 
> IYSWIM...



Yeah, I see what you're saying. The contractor would have been instructed to install fire breaks if they haven't then that is gross negligence, probably criminal negligence.  If they felt forced into that position because of cost cutting to fund a more expensive system than would be terrible but the buck would stop with the contractor, legally speaking.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 20, 2017)

The focus needs to be kept on the materials used & how they were installed, because that is the root of the problem here.



Teaboy said:


> The problem with this that the only way anyone can make any decision on whether a product is suitable and safe is whether it has been tested and satisfies regulations.  On both counts it would appear that the cladding system did.



You say that, but according to reports, the manufacturers themselves said it is 'crucial' that these panels should not be fitted above 32ft, the block was 220ft tall.

I would be interested in your comments on that, as clearly you know more than me.



cupid_stunt said:


> There seems some doubts about the regulations now, but certainly it seems the manufacturers says it shouldn't have been used on a 220ft building, and the contractors - Harley Facades - must have been aware of that, yet still used it.
> *
> Manufacturers' say it is 'crucial' that the panels should not be fitted above 32ft*
> 
> ...


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yes, the cladding did have something to do with the fire, as can be seen from the fact that huge flames which would not have been otherwise present run up the sides of the building. in addition, we're told that similar insulation has been involved in fires in australia and dubai. the extent to which the cladding and insulation were responsible for the tragedy may yet need to be determined, but that it did have some bearing on the great growth and irruption of the fire cannot be argued.



Yeah, don't get me wrong it looks like the main cause of the spread of flames but we don't know for sure at the moment.


----------



## editor (Jun 20, 2017)

killer b said:


> Who's writing them off, other than you?


I haven't seen their concerns or claims being "written off" anywhere. Given their track record of voicing legitimate concerns, they're the people who should be listened to the most. Anyone trying to dismiss them or write them off should have their agenda looked at very carefully.


----------



## editor (Jun 20, 2017)

Just to repeat the salient points from the Indie article: 


> And that cladding – a low-cost way of improving the front of the building – was chosen in part so that the tower would look better when seen from the conservation areas and luxury flats that surround north Kensington, according to planning documents, as well as to insulate it.





> “Due to its height the tower is visible from the adjacent Avondale Conservation Area to the south and the Ladbroke Conservation Area to the east,” a planning document for the regeneration work reads. “The changes to the existing tower will improve its appearance especially when viewed from the surrounding area.”
> 
> The document, published in 2014 and providing a full report on the works, makes repeated reference to the “appearance of the area”. That is the justification for the material used on the outside of the building, which has since been claimed to have contributed to the horror.





> The materials used were chosen “to accord with the development plan by ensuring that the character and appearance of the area are preserved and living conditions of those living near the development suitably protected,” according to the same report.
> 
> A number of conditions were attached to the 2014 decision to approve the plan – many of which related specifically to the material used in the cladding, so that the council could ensure the "living conditions of those living near the development" were "suitably protected".





> That planning application concludes with a statement that "the development will provide significant improvements to the physical appearance of the Tower, as well as the environmental performance and the amenity of its residents".
> 
> Rydon, the company behind the refurbishment work, said the cladding and other changes had been made to help with "improving thermal insulation and modernising the exterior of the building".



Grenfell Tower was covered in material to make it look better. That’s being blamed for multiple deaths

So, no, the residents' group have very fucking right to bring up the cosmetic role of the cladding. it's not something to be written off or dismissed. It clearly forms part of the equation.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 20, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I think this is a fair point.
> 
> I just think nothing is known yet and nothing can be.  There may be some things which are never known, if dodgyness has gone on then the evidence will be destroyed no doubt.
> 
> We can't say for sure the most basic thing like was the cladding everyone think was used actually used?  *Did the cladding actually have anything to do with the fire? * We just don't know yet and in the absence of information rumours and accusations are flying.



Your posts have been very informative, and frankly amazing.

But, questioning if the cladding had anything to do with the fire?


----------



## Corax (Jun 20, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yes, the cladding did have something to do with the fire, as can be seen from the fact that huge flames which would not have been otherwise present run up the sides of the building. in addition, we're told that similar insulation has been involved in fires in australia and dubai. the extent to which the cladding and insulation were responsible for the tragedy may yet need to be determined, but that it did have some bearing on the great growth and irruption of the fire cannot be argued.


Coupled with off-the-record comments from LFB, the evidence is pretty overwhelming.


----------



## editor (Jun 20, 2017)

Rage levels: critical



> And he is certainly right about one thing: When it comes to many regulations, it is best to leave such calculations of benefit and cost to the market, rather than the government. People can make their own assessments of the risks, and the price they’re willing to pay to allay them, rather than substituting the judgment of some politician or bureaucrat who will not receive the benefit or pay the cost.
> 
> Grenfell Tower, of course, was public housing, which changes the calculation somewhat. And yet, even there, trade-offs have to be made. The government spends money on a great number of things, many of which save lives. Every dollar it spends on installing sprinkler systems cannot be spent on the health service, or national defense, or pollution control. Would more lives be saved by those measures or by sprinkler systems in public housing? It’s hard to say.



Beware of Blaming Government for London Tower Fire


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 20, 2017)

A small point:
The organisation that had charge of Grenfell Tower - Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation - is *NOT* structurally a TMO, it's an ALMO - an entirely different kettle of fish, contractually.
Most TMOs are resident-centric - that means that refurb decisions are balloted, NOT imposed, and that if you have board members taking the piss, they can be voted out at the TMO's AGM (that they are structurally-obliged to hold).
All the actions of KCTMO suggest an ALMO that's been given a name to make it sound like the organisation empowers residents.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> The focus needs to be kept on the materials used & how they were installed, because that is the root of the problem here.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think we're getting the the nub of the problem.  Manufacturers recommendations and building regs are different things.  Also as I have said all along regulations are there to be interpreted.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jun 20, 2017)

editor said:


> Rage levels: critical
> 
> 
> 
> Beware of Blaming Government for London Tower Fire


Fuck me.


----------



## Corax (Jun 20, 2017)

editor said:


> Rage levels: critical
> 
> Beware of Blaming Government for London Tower Fire





> Every dollar it spends on installing sprinkler systems cannot be spent on the health service, or national defense, or pollution control, or subsidising the bar and restaurants at Westminster, or tax breaks for big corporations or your landed gentry mates from Eton.


FIFY.

Fucking false dichotomy cuntishness of the highest order.


----------



## editor (Jun 20, 2017)

Tories, eh?

Tory politician branded 'disgrace to humankind' after Grenfell comment


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Your posts have been very informative, and frankly amazing.
> 
> But, questioning if the cladding had anything to do with the fire?



Yeah just to expand on that.  There have been fires with similar cladding which have been nowhere near as catastrophic. Also this fire was extraordinary, all the floors were on fire at the same time and with extreme ferocity.  I have said all along that I suspect something else was happening in addition, something was fueling this fire.  Bearing in mind what these panels are made of the fire would have had to be sustained by something as it may its way into the building so quickly.  The insulation is probably going to be a culprit as is the lack of fire stopping.  Regardless of what happened with the cladding the residents should have had an hour to escape this building at the least, it appears they didn't even have minutes.

I don't know more than anyone else about how this fire spread so quickly and so devastatingly.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 20, 2017)

editor said:


> Rage levels: critical
> 
> 
> Beware of Blaming Government for London Tower Fire



Jesus.

I despair enough at people and commentators talking about _those bad lefties politicising it all_. Like its not fucking political.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 20, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Jesus.
> 
> I despair enough at people and commentators talking about _those bad lefties politicising it all_. Like its not fucking political.


this is the enemy writing for the enemy to justify their world view. I find it useful (and one day evidence for the prosecution in a peoples court) cos it shows you which way the currents of managing the reactions are/will go. But I'm not suprised.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 20, 2017)

Well, this is still a crock of shit...


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

editor said:


> Rage levels: critical
> 
> 
> 
> Beware of Blaming Government for London Tower Fire



Her conclusions in that article are remarkably stupid and show a stunning lack of insight and reasoning.  A true free market libertarian.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 20, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> It is something worth considering as long as it sat alongside robust legislation.


I'd envisage that the legislation would state that a fire risk assessment was necessary and what the requirement was for a project to be approved, then inclusion in the BREEAM report would be one way to ensure compliance.

One thing that inclusion in BREEAM would do would be to force the manufacturers to clarify exactly what there product was rated at and for, so that accurate comparisons could be made. 

The rating that Celotex gives their product seems to vary depending on which paperwork you check. On the data sheets it's class O, but on the FR version on the CE declaration it's Euroclass F, and on the version used on this job it has NPD listed for all the fire ratings, and elsewhere it gives info that indicates that it's only rated for use on above 18m buildings as part of a specific installation method that effectively protects the celotex from any fire. So the data sheet appears to be very misleading.

On the intiial BREEAM assessment cladding design it wasn't shown as being used in accordance with those instructions, so presumably the designers at that stage at least weren't aware of the requirement and thought the Class O applied to the FR5000 insulation itself, as it would seem from reading the datasheet.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> The focus needs to be kept on the materials used & how they were installed, because that is the root of the problem here.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This is what they say on the website


> Suitable for use in warm steel frame constructions for ventilated facade applications, Celotex RS5000 can be used in buildings above 18 metres in height – a first for PIR insulation.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Well, this is still a crock of shit...




Jesus. Its just compounding shit on shit.  Being told they are making themselves intentionally homeless if they don't accept the first offer of accommodation even if its miles and miles away. Its nothing short of a disgrace.


----------



## bimble (Jun 20, 2017)

Overheard two old women on the bus today talking about this, furious at the way those made homeless are being treated, it's not going away or unnoticed, which is something.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 20, 2017)

killer b said:


> Who's writing them off, other than you?



Here we go again.

What a waste of time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

teuchter said:


> What a waste of time.


your new tagline


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 20, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Here we go again.
> 
> What a waste of time.





teuchter said:


> This gives people excuse to write them off as rabble rousers rather than a residents' group who have been raising reasonable objections over the years.



_But, but, concerns!!1!_


----------



## J Ed (Jun 20, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> _But, but, concerns!!1!_



What has being a residents' group who has been raising reasonable objections over the years gotten them?


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

killer b said:


> Who's writing them off, other than you?



Sorry I missed this earlier. Was this meant for me?  I don't really get what you are saying.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 20, 2017)

free spirit said:


> This is what they say on the website



*head explodes*

That link is to Celotex, whereas the press reports name Arconic, are they connected despite having different names & websites?


----------



## killer b (Jun 20, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Sorry I missed this earlier. Was this meant for me?  I don't really get what you are saying.


No, I was replying to teucher.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> *head explodes*
> 
> That link is to Celotex, whereas the press reports name Arconic, are they connected despite having different names & websites?



The Celotex is insulation used behind the cladding system.  Arconic are the parent company of the Reynabond system which is the cladding.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

killer b said:


> No, I was replying to teucher.



Ah right, thanks.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 20, 2017)

J Ed said:


> What has being a residents' group who has been raising reasonable objections over the years gotten them?



Never mind no fucking roofs over their head, teuchter has _concerns_.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 20, 2017)

editor said:


> Just to repeat the salient points from the Indie article:
> 
> Grenfell Tower was covered in material to make it look better. That’s being blamed for multiple deaths
> 
> So, no, the residents' group have very fucking right to bring up the cosmetic role of the cladding. it's not something to be written off or dismissed. It clearly forms part of the equation.


 Indeed. It's not so much whether the appearance of a building is a standard consideration, part of usual planning processes. It's whether there was a _specific_ impact in this case... and what that was.  Talking about the 'view' from the conservation area symbolises the deeply fucked up relationship between rich and poor housing in London, alongside actual systems and processes designed to silence (even threaten) the Grenfell residents.  We don't know if/how any of this played out at any stage in the refurbishment, right through to the work of the fitters.  but by fuck it's _relevant_.


----------



## Corax (Jun 20, 2017)

teuchter said:


> What a waste of time.


You called?


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Indeed. It's not so much whether the appearance of a building is a standard consideration, part of usual planning processes. It's whether there was a _specific_ impact in this case... and what that was.  Talking about the 'view' from the conservation area symbolises the deeply fucked up relationship between rich and poor housing in London, alongside actual systems and processes designed to silence (even threaten) the Grenfell residents.  We don't know if/how any of this played out at any stage in the refurbishment, right through to the work of the fitters.  but by fuck it's _relevant_.



I do get this point.  Not why was the building clad but why was this particular cladding used?  I'm just worried that from a justice for residents perspective it may turn out to be a bit of a fruitless route.  The various parties involved will just be able to hide behind regulations and test data.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 20, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Never mind no fucking roofs over their head, teuchter has _concerns_.



It's harder to think of a stronger indictment of _doing the right thing_ as an ordinary person in our society.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 20, 2017)




----------



## Wilf (Jun 20, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I do get this point.  Not why was the building clad but why was this particular cladding used?  I'm just worried that from a justice for residents perspective it may turn out to be a bit of a fruitless route.  The various parties involved will just be able to hide behind regulations and test data.


I'm sure that's right. Just feel that every bit of this has to be kept in view.  There will no doubt be some very bad practices that emerge in terms of things like the internal pipes or other repairs (mentioned as random examples) that turn out to have had no real bearing on the spread of the fire. However they are equally symptomatic of what went wrong, the lack of regard for tenants - potentially, accidents waiting to happen (even if not active components of what happened last week).


----------



## alex_ (Jun 20, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Her conclusions in that article are remarkably stupid and show a stunning lack of insight and reasoning.  A true free market libertarian.



What exactly is the issue ?

The last paragraph makes perfect sense - everything is a series of trade offs, spend more on one thing and you have to spend less on something else. Government is about balancing the priorities.

Alex


----------



## teuchter (Jun 20, 2017)

I'm just going to quote this post from a few pages back. If people want to continue to ignore the points it makes, so be it:



where to said:


> thought I would add a few words on this from the perspective of a local authority town planner as the comments from the planning report really have been wildly misrepresented, most prominently by the Independent.
> 
> firstly the planning stage will have had next to nothing to do with the original decision to clad the tower. the project will have been planned months or years before the planning application, which is a requirement for any development of this kind, not just because this development was connected with the Council.  the planning application will have been submitted only when the decision to clad the tower was reached.
> 
> ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> What exactly is the issue ?
> 
> The last paragraph makes perfect sense - everything is a series of trade offs, spend more on one thing and you have to spend less on something else. Government is about balancing the priorities.
> 
> Alex


Yeh rbkc are unbalanced


----------



## teuchter (Jun 20, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Never mind no fucking roofs over their head, teuchter has _concerns_.


People have no roof over their heads, and you are wasting time indulging conspiracy theories.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> What exactly is the issue ?
> 
> The last paragraph makes perfect sense - everything is a series of trade offs, spend more on one thing and you have to spend less on something else. Government is about balancing the priorities.
> 
> Alex


 
That would only be true if you really believed that government action or inaction couldn't impact on the creation of wealth and you don't believe that surely?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

teuchter said:


> People have no roof over their heads, and you are wasting time indulging conspiracy theories.


Yeh you wheel out a smidgen of concern now and then.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> What exactly is the issue ?
> 
> The last paragraph makes perfect sense - everything is a series of trade offs, spend more on one thing and you have to spend less on something else. Government is about balancing the priorities.
> 
> Alex


Is it? Do you really believe that?


----------



## bimble (Jun 20, 2017)

Painful to say it but I agree with teuchter, with the point he keeps trying to make. But it might be inevitable that in a horrific situation like this a clear simplish narrative (it was the cladding & it was clad to please the rich neighbours) is irresistibly attractive.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 20, 2017)

Well I've spent a few days combing through the Google docs list that was posted on here re: missing people. I've cross checked names, ages, floors, flat numbers etc in the media with available data re: residence lists from 2013. Obviously some people have moved out and in a couple of cases moved flats in the same building.

The total dead and missing from these media reports is 79. 

I suspect that's a pretty reasonable base estimate from reliable sources, but it's clear there's a lot more people unreported. Many of those are from lower floors, so it's possible they're safe as the majority of those low down in the building did escape. There are however clearly many more from higher floors still missing.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 20, 2017)

squirrelp said:


>




WTF are you doing posting this out of date nonsense?

If everyone died, why are hundreds still in need of help & support?

You are a loon, and need to fuck off.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 20, 2017)

bimble said:


> Painful to say it but I agree with teuchter, with the point he keeps trying to make. But it might be inevitable that in a horrific situation like this a clear simplish narrative (it was the cladding & it was clad to please the rich neighbours) is irresistibly attractive.



Regardless of the details of the narrative, it seems clear to me that the story is about power. Who has it and who doesn't and the consequences of that differential.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 20, 2017)

teuchter said:


> People have no roof over their heads, and you are wasting time indulging conspiracy theories.



If you read my first reply, I didn't 'indulge' any such thing, whilst also not being so fucking arrogant to dismiss that things do or don't always get done for the most sound of reasons (and not in a 'conspirital' sense - I mean political, economical, capital drivers).


----------



## alex_ (Jun 20, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Is it? Do you really believe that?



What do you object to in the last paragraph ? ( in the article, I'm sure you object to my whole Post )

And yes - if you want to spend more money on one thing you have to spend less money on something else. Unless you have an infinite amount of money to spend on something, and generally you don'tz

Alex


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> What exactly is the issue ?
> 
> The last paragraph makes perfect sense - everything is a series of trade offs, spend more on one thing and you have to spend less on something else. Government is about balancing the priorities.
> 
> Alex



The point about safety regulations being about critical mass and governments having to make very cold decisions upon priorities (even if that means accepting the death and suffering on some is one I understand). I don't like it and I don't have to but that is the prevalent way of thinking and is essentially how insurance works.

What I don't accept is that safety critical thinking should be left to the free market.  I will never accept that the free market will in the long term make the best decisions for our safety.  I also think its a bit bloody rich for someone that enjoys the benefit of modern safety standards (that exist specifically because of regulations) to say they shouldn't really exist.

Everywhere I look in my industry I see corner cutting, low quality products and highly questionable practice all brought about in the name of efficiency. We need more and better regulations and we cannot rely on those who financially benefit from lax regulations to police themselves.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> The focus needs to be kept on the materials used & how they were installed, because that is the root of the problem here.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Again, nobody knows what the cause or the real problem is. Personally, I doubt it's one single factor, more likely a perfect storm of things going extremely wrong. 

What ever happened, it wasn't just the materials.


----------



## Cid (Jun 20, 2017)

Article from the AJ, basically summing up their initial impressions with 5 questions:




			
				AJ part 1 said:
			
		

> With a criminal investigation under way and a public inquiry announced, the AJ puts forward five key questions about the causes of the tragic fire
> 
> *1. CLADDING** • **2. THE REGS** • **3. ARCHITECTS’ ROLE** • **4. BUILDINGS AT RISK** • **5. IMMEDIATE ACTION*
> 
> ...


----------



## Cid (Jun 20, 2017)

AJ part 2 said:
			
		

> *3. Could the declining role of architects have played a part in this tragedy?*
> The answer to this will of course depend on the exact cause of the fire and thus on the outcomes of the public inquiry. However, there is a suspicion that there is no longer a single competent professional such as an architect or engineer who has responsibility for specifying materials and – alongside the building control and fire officers – ensuring such materials, or a safe and legal alternative, are used and correctly installed.
> 
> Instead, the argument goes, responsibility for risk has been spread around to the point where no-one knows where responsibility lies. In a recent opinion piece for _The Guardian_ in response to the Grenfell Tower fire, architect Deon Lombard – a former project director at tp bennett who has worked on major refurbishment projects and on residential towers – wrote: ‘In the past, architects have specified construction materials and have then been in a position to ensure that the specified materials were used. This is increasingly not the case as performance specifications enable alternative materials to be used, often selected by the developer, contractor or subcontractors.
> ...


----------



## Cid (Jun 20, 2017)

AJ part 3 said:
			
		

> *5. What needs to be done immediately to make sure post-war, high-rise residential blocks are safe?*
> Ampthill Estate in Camden
> 
> Among the most extreme solutions is give up on these buildings and to simply flatten them. Writing in last weekend’s _Observer_, mayor Khan wrote: ‘It may well be the defining outcome of this tragedy that the worst mistakes of the 1960s and 1970s are systematically torn down.’
> ...


----------



## sheothebudworths (Jun 20, 2017)

The Grenfell Tower fire was the end result of a disdainful housing policy | Pilgrim Tucker


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> What do you object to in the last paragraph ? ( in the article, I'm sure you object to my whole Post )
> 
> And yes - if you want to spend more money on one thing you have to spend less money on something else. Unless you have an infinite amount of money to spend on something, and generally you don'tz
> 
> Alex


Right. And how many millions do rbkc have in their reserves?


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> WTF are you doing posting this out of date nonsense?
> 
> If everyone died, why are hundreds still in need of help & support?
> 
> You are a loon, and need to fuck off.


I saw this video for the first time today. Apologise if I have missed something but I haven't seen anything to contradict it.

From the Guardian (checked today's date)



> King’s College hospital, which declared a major incident when it became aware of the fire in the 24-storey high-rise block, had potentially been expecting “hundreds” of patients, Bew told the Press Association. But staff became saddened when so few arrived, which meant many more were still trapped inside.
> 
> “We were ready to receive many more casualties. We knew there were many more people in the building. As time went on and we realised that we weren’t going to receive those casualties, it was very sad,” he said. Most of those arriving were conscious, and almost all were suffering the effects of smoke inhalation, with very few having burns.



Grenfell survivors face months of recovery, doctors warn


----------



## scifisam (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> What do you object to in the last paragraph ? ( in the article, I'm sure you object to my whole Post )
> 
> And yes - if you want to spend more money on one thing you have to spend less money on something else. Unless you have an infinite amount of money to spend on something, and generally you don'tz
> 
> Alex



And if you don't spend money on some things you end up spending more later on. Do you really think not installing sprinklers was a cost effective move? Given the low cost of installing them they'd pay for themselves within a couple of much smaller (and highly likely) fires. 

I mean, they're sprinklers, not gold-plated taps - you have to go to nearby Buck House to see public money being spent on that.


----------



## LDC (Jun 20, 2017)

There's a fucking bunch of bonkers (and of course unfounded) conspiracy theories going round about this fire (like the video you just posted squirrelp). Can they just please fucking stop now. It's obscuring the real issue and in the long run is going to do nothing but damage the struggle around this incident and housing in general.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 20, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> Again, nobody knows what the cause or the real problem is. Personally, I doubt it's one single factor, more likely a perfect storm of things going extremely wrong.
> 
> What ever happened, it wasn't just the materials.



The fire service turned-up & put out the fridge fire, they thought the job was done, until they saw what was happening outside.

The cladding was responsible, to what degree it was the material used -v- how it was fitted will come out in time, but the cladding was the problem - every expert is saying that.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 20, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I saw this video for the first time today. Apologise if I have missed something but I haven't seen anything to contradict it.



You haven't seen anything to contradict it? 

Try pulling your head out of your arse, then report to a hospital for a brain transplant.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 20, 2017)

scifisam said:


> And if you don't spend money on some things you end up spending more later on. Do you really think not installing sprinklers was a cost effective move? Given the low cost of installing them they'd pay for themselves within a couple of much smaller (and highly likely) fires.
> 
> I mean, they're sprinklers, not gold-plated taps - you have to go to nearby Buck House to see public money being spent on that.



Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

How much would installing sprinklers in every multi storey public sector building in the country cost ?

Alex


----------



## teuchter (Jun 20, 2017)

bimble said:


> Painful to say it but I agree with teuchter, with the point he keeps trying to make. But it might be inevitable that in a horrific situation like this a clear simplish narrative (it was the cladding & it was clad to please the rich neighbours) is irresistibly attractive.


Why's it painful? 

Anyway, yes, of course a clear simplish narrative is irresistably attractive, and I don't blame those directly affected by the tragedy for grasping hold of it when it's fed to them.

It's the responsibility of people in general, though, to stand back and do their best to work out what the real reasons behind this were. And, despite what some of the blowhards on here like to try and imply, someone trying to look rationally at boring technical or regulatory issues doesn't have to mean they are ignoring or discounting the politics and economics that are behind everything.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
> 
> How much would installing sprinklers in every multi storey public sector building in the country cost ?
> 
> Alex



You didn't read the whole post, did you?


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> The fire service turned-up & put out the fridge fire, they thought the job was done, until they saw what was happening outside.
> 
> The cladding was responsible, to what degree it was the material used -v- how it was fitted will come out in time, but the cladding was the problem - every expert is saying that.


Respectfully, you're not an expert. You keep making posts without thinking, making sweeping statements when actually all that is known FOR A FACT is that there was a dreadful fire in a tower block and many people died. 

Lots of industry people are giving their opinions on what might, MIGHT have happened. But nobody KNOWS because the investigation has barely started. 

You also seem dead set on saying that the cladding was THE problem here without considering there may be multiple factors involved. That's closed minded and unhelpful. 

At this stage all we can do is help those who need help and support and wait for actual facts to emerge, however long that takes.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
> 
> How much would installing sprinklers in every multi storey public sector building in the country cost ?
> 
> Alex


That's such an inane question. How much does it cost to fit smoke alarms in every council house in the country? See, proves fuck all.


----------



## LDC (Jun 20, 2017)

I'm not an expert but I can safely say capitalism and class society are to blame, not the fucking cladding.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> You haven't seen anything to contradict it?
> 
> Try pulling your head out of your arse, then report to a hospital for a brain transplant.


Well no, I haven't. First we had an official figure of 17 or so. Now it's an order of magnitude greater at 79. How high is the real one? I don't know, but suggest that you might not either.

From the Guardian article it is not just those resident in Grenfell Tower who count as people needing help and support but also residents nearby.

How many actual residents of the Tower have been accounted for? If you have information on this please post.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 20, 2017)

I'm not an expert, but the firemen I saw on a vid going to the building, the second lot were cursing a blue streak and baffled as to how it went while the one of them said 'its climbing up the outside' or something similar, all of them expressing disbelief at it burning like that.

but yes inevitably this


LynnDoyleCooper said:


> capitalism and class society are to blame



is the kicker


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
> 
> How much would installing sprinklers in every multi storey public sector building in the country cost ?



We could always not spend £150 million on a hastily called general election, or force councils to not stockpile £270 million and use it instead for the public good.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
> 
> How much would installing sprinklers in every multi storey public sector building in the country cost ?
> 
> Alex



Not as much as the funerals and the public inquiries and fire/police services when they should've been installed in the first place.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 20, 2017)

scifisam said:


> You didn't read the whole post, did you?



Yes, reread it still Not sure what I missed.

Anyway apparently there are 4000 council/ha blocks which need inspection, 1% of blocks already have sprinklers - I've seen varying costs of installation between 200k and 333k.

So we are talking about .8bn gbp to install sprinklers - but the TOTAL deaths by fire in the U.K. Is <300.

17000 people per year die in accidents - could you come up with a way of saving more lives by spending that .8bn on something else ?

Tough decisions.

Alex


----------



## alex_ (Jun 20, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> Not as much as the funerals and the public inquiries and fire/police services when they should've been installed in the first place.



I'd like to see the sums which back this statement up.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 20, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> Respectfully, you're not an expert. You keep making posts without thinking, making sweeping statements when actually all that is known FOR A FACT is that there was a dreadful fire in a tower block and many people died.
> 
> Lots of industry people are giving their opinions on what might, MIGHT have happened. But nobody KNOWS because the investigation has barely started.
> 
> ...



And, you seem to be in denial of the facts known so far, I have no idea why.

The other day you pulled me up because I repeated the fact the the fire was started by a fridge, widely accepted by everyone & now confirmed by senior fire sources.

Now you are pulling me up on this, despite every report, every expert, the clear video evidence, and fire sources all putting the blame on the cladding.

Concrete tower blocks do not go up in flames like this, the fire spread across the whole outside of the building in about 30 minutes, the problem was the cladding.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> I'd like to see the sums which back this statement up.



I'd like to see your sums that says it costs 8 Billion to prevent similar tragedy.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Tough decisions.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 20, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> We could always not spend £150 million on a hastily called general election, or force councils to not stockpile £270 million and use it instead for the public good.


Let's refurbish the fucking palace as well, always helps.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 20, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Let's refurbish the fucking palace as well, always helps.



Yes, I forgot about the £360 million on that, and there's the £3.5 billion for doing up Parliament.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> And, you seem to be in denial of the facts known so far, I have no idea why.
> 
> The other day you pulled me up because I repeated the fact the the fire was started by a fridge, widely accepted by everyone & now confirmed by senior fire sources.
> 
> ...


I 'M pulling you up on stuff because you're all over the place, you're chasing from article to article , theory to theory, without stopping to pay any type of critical reasoning or common sense. You're reposting the least little thing as if it were a solid known fact when much of it is opinion.

I don't know how many times this has been pointed out to you - the cladding is a factor, and not the only factor. By focusing on this one thing do you know how much you might miss or disregard because it doesn't fit with your chosen narrative.

TRyand exercise a little care and caution in what you breathlessly repeat. This is not an academic exercise. People died, for fucks sake.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Yes, reread it still Not sure what I missed.
> 
> Anyway apparently there are 4000 council/ha blocks which need inspection, 1% of blocks already have sprinklers - I've seen varying costs of installation between 200k and 333k.
> 
> ...



800 million (based on the 200k estimate because a project of this scale should be able to get some serious economies of scale going) for sprinklers that will last for multiple years, not just one, will reduce injuries as well as deaths, will reduce loss of property 3 presumably make a small difference to insurance costs. When it comes to death and injury you have to take into account loss of earnings, extra costs of carers, extra cost in benefits, as well as the obvious medical, emergency services and funeral costs. 

I do actually think it adds up. No hindsight needed. 

Private blocks nearly always have sprinklers - they won't be there just for fun.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 20, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Yes, I forgot about the £360 million on that, and there's the £3.5 billion for doing up Parliament.


Sssh steth your numbers don't add up...conspiraloon that you are. ....and you Sam...Alex has spoken...tough decisions? All hail the twit.


----------



## campanula (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Tough decisions.
> 
> Alex



Have been reluctant to post on this thread but the absolute crap being written about 'tough decisions' as though integrity is involved anywhere in these cost equations has spurred me to mention a little tale of council values. It is Feb/March - still unspent money in the pot which must be disposed of before the end of the year...what to do? Hey, lets install scaffolding, front and back on 3 storey 'townhouses' and 5 storey 'maisonettes'...to paint 2 x 9inch strips of concrete along the front and back of buildings (directly over filth, bird shit, leaves - not even a basic sweeping away of rubbish was done before a slick of white gloop was smeared (badly) on these unstructural strips...regardless of the fact that the entire estate has thermal expansion in ALL the windows. A whole order was made. somehow getting all the measurements wrong, leading to 564 dwellings being fitted with windows which are too small. 2 years ago, our roof slates - all in excellent order, were replaced with cheap Spanish slate, dodgy private contractors...and all of us now have ongoing leakage and electrical issues as our roofs have lost integrity. We have no say in any of this and can see, with our own eyes, that work is done by some arcane system known only to the local council...but absolutely not based on need or even practical investment.
Don't talk about 'tough decisions' as though a bunch of bureaucrats are agonising over best practice, value for customers, environmental issues...we had a 3 year battle to retain a 24hour caretaker post (vital, given the number of elderly and vulnerable people on my estate)...so much that we were prepared to fund it ourselves.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 20, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> I'd like to see your sums that says it costs 8 Billion to prevent similar tragedy.



They're in the post above the one you replied too, in fact they are in the post you misquoted 8bn from.

Incidentally if all you've got is insults it means you've got nothing.

Alex


----------



## Cid (Jun 20, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> And, you seem to be in denial of the facts known so far, I have no idea why.
> 
> The other day you pulled me up because I repeated the fact the the fire was started by a fridge, widely accepted by everyone & now confirmed by senior fire sources.
> 
> ...



And it also spread _inside_ the building. And it was started by an exploding fridge, we don't yet know why that exploded. There are a number of issues that need to be investigated...


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> They're in the post above the one you replied too, in fact they are in the post you misquoted 8bn from.
> 
> Incidentally if all you've got is insults it means you've got nothing.
> 
> Alex



You didn't post any facts, just 'apparently' and 'varying costs' shit. If you're going to claim you've posted facts, then post some fucking facts.

eta If I've all I've got is insults it means you are nothing.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 20, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> I'd like to see your sums that says it costs 8 Billion to prevent similar tragedy.



It's 800million, but he wrote it as .8billion to make it seem like more.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 20, 2017)

Dupe


----------



## alex_ (Jun 20, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> You didn't post any facts, just 'apparently' and 'varying costs' shit. If you're going to claim you've posted facts, then post some fucking facts.



4000 blocks - 'Disaster waiting to happen': fire expert slams UK tower blocks

Cost of sprinklers 
Reality Check: Why don't all high-rises have sprinklers? - BBC News

Now off you go to back up your statement.

Alex


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Dupe


"The cost can be high because in blocks made of concrete and steel like Grenfell, the process is difficult and time-consuming. So the focus has been on other measures which would contain a fire to stop it spreading.

However, Roy Wilsher, chair of the National Fire Chiefs Council, said it is "certainly something we need to look at again" "

"In 2015, a spokesman for the Chief Fire Officers Association said that nobody had ever died in a fire in the UK in a property with a "properly installed sprinkler system working the way it's meant to"."

And just remember point-8-billion is just under a third of what it cost to spruce up parliament as quoted upthread.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> "The cost can be high because in blocks made of concrete and steel like Grenfell, the process is difficult and time-consuming. So the focus has been on other measures which would contain a fire to stop it spreading.
> 
> However, Roy Wilsher, chair of the National Fire Chiefs Council, said it is "certainly something we need to look at again" "
> 
> ...


All the tower blocks in the country could have been made safe for what was pissed away on the millennium dome


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> 4000 blocks - 'Disaster waiting to happen': fire expert slams UK tower blocks
> 
> Cost of sprinklers
> Reality Check: Why don't all high-rises have sprinklers? - BBC News
> ...


DId you read the BBC article? It makes it very clear that most blocks don't have sprinklers because there is nothing mandating their retrofit to existing unrefurbished blocks. Only mandatory in new builds and refurbishment in various circumstances around the UK. 

Also cost of £1m for three blocks is of similar size to estimates for a system for Grenfell.


----------



## killer b (Jun 20, 2017)

I dislike the idea we somehow have to choose - we can ensure housing is safe _and_ pay for the construction, upkeep and restoration of public institutions.


----------



## editor (Jun 20, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> All the tower blocks in the country could have been made safe for what was pissed away on the millennium dome


At least that gave people some pleasure. I'd say it's better to compare it with the millions, nay billions, that are lost by tax dodging corporates.


----------



## Corax (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> 4000 blocks - 'Disaster waiting to happen': fire expert slams UK tower blocks
> 
> Cost of sprinklers
> Reality Check: Why don't all high-rises have sprinklers? - BBC News
> ...


It costs £6m p/a to subsidise the prices at the Houses of Parliament bars and restaurants.

So frankly, you can take this 'hard decisions' schtick about having to cut nurses or fuel payments and stick it right up your fucking arse.


----------



## Cid (Jun 20, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> "In 2015, a spokesman for the Chief Fire Officers Association said that nobody had ever died in a fire in the UK in a property with a "properly installed sprinkler system working the way it's meant to"."



To be fair that specific quote is kind of meaningless... I mean how many buildings with a properly installed sprinkler system are there? How many are residential? How many have had fires?

Not that I'm disagreeing on the broad point. But I mentioned upthread that if a body spending money can tick a box by installing something, they will neglect other areas... This needs thorough research and, I suspect, a combination of compulsory compartmentalisation, sprinkler systems and updated regs. And liability for management companies in maintaining the former two.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 20, 2017)

Cid said:


> <timeline>


Shirley Towers was basically in our back garden. There were a bunch of recommendations from the inquest, not least one relating to the support of electrical cables, which melted causing the cables to fall down, and may have contributed to the firefighters' deaths. This was the second such incident of its kind.

In 2013 the government rejected a change to the standards to avoid this problem. In 2015, five years after the incident, it was finally adopted through consistent lobbying by a charity and the fire service. The government response to this stuff can easily be shown to be systemically and repeatedly inadequate.

Edit: additionally a factor in both Shirley Towers (I read the report) and Grenfell (I saw it in a firefighter account) was that firefighters found it difficult to identify what floor they were on at any one time. Again a Southampton coroner recommendation to clearly sign floors was rejected.


----------



## Pac man (Jun 20, 2017)

sheothebudworths said:


> The Grenfell Tower fire was the end result of a disdainful housing policy | Pilgrim Tucker


From above .."In the council housing sector, these changes came together in a drive towards removing housing from local government ownership and control. Council housing was handed over to newly created quasi-private bodies, such as arms-length management organisations and tenant management organisations, or transferred en masse to housing associations".

So is this the case with Grenfell Towers? Did Kensington and Chelsea Council still have ownership and or any control over Grenfell? or was all control, responsibility relinquished allowing KCTMO to exonertate the Council from all and any legal responsibility? Does anybody know..


----------



## existentialist (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Yes, reread it still Not sure what I missed.
> 
> Anyway apparently there are 4000 council/ha blocks which need inspection, 1% of blocks already have sprinklers - I've seen varying costs of installation between 200k and 333k.
> 
> ...


Another alternative might have been to spend a little more money on materials that were fit for the job. And, of course, a little money on inspection and QA to make sure they were installed appropriately, too.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> 4000 blocks - 'Disaster waiting to happen': fire expert slams UK tower blocks
> 
> Cost of sprinklers
> Reality Check: Why don't all high-rises have sprinklers? - BBC News
> ...



Back up what statement?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 20, 2017)

killer b said:


> I dislike the idea we somehow have to choose - we can ensure housing is safe _and_ pay for the construction, upkeep and restoration of public institutions.



We don't, we can have both things. The problem is with the thinking that we can't have both. Like some of those things are more important than others. That there is a need to choose. There isn't. That they hold more value in the minds of some is a large part of the problem.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 20, 2017)

Apart from Parliament though, where we should only retain the facade for tourist photos.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 20, 2017)

Pac man said:


> From above .."In the council housing sector, these changes came together in a drive towards removing housing from local government ownership and control. Council housing was handed over to newly created quasi-private bodies, such as arms-length management organisations and tenant management organisations, or transferred en masse to housing associations".
> 
> So is this the case with Grenfell Towers? Did Kensington and Chelsea Council still have ownership and or any control over Grenfell? or was all control, responsibility relinquished allowing KCTMO to exonertate the Council from all and any legal responsibility? Does anybody know..


Isn't it astonishing that people could have come up with the term "arm's length management organisation" and, apparently, use it with an entirely straight face, without ever once stopping to think what the subtext of such a phrase was...?


----------



## existentialist (Jun 20, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Apart from Parliament though, where we should only retain the fascade for tourist photos.


Oh, I think those little Norman arches in the façade would make perfect anchoring points for a series of nooses...it doesn't just have to be purely about appearance


----------



## Cid (Jun 20, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> Apart from Parliament though, where we should only retain the fascade for tourist photos.



Pugin's interiors are pretty damn good. Mothball most of it, rest as a museum.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 20, 2017)

Cid said:


> Pugin's interiors are pretty damn good. Mothball most of it, rest as a museum.



Museum would be good - its got plenty of relics inside it.


----------



## Manter (Jun 20, 2017)

brogdale said:


> His job description alone appears ample justification for a bit of rough house, tbh


What, volunteer?


----------



## Pac man (Jun 20, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Isn't it astonishing that people could have come up with the term "arm's length management organisation" and, apparently, use it with an entirely straight face, without ever once stopping to think what the subtext of such a phrase was...?


Very true but that doesnt really answer my question, just how much if any legal responsibility did the LA have? Do ALMOs assume all responsibility if so why did tenants complain to the Council? trying to understand how the relationship between council, ALMO and tenant works.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 20, 2017)

Manter said:


> What, volunteer?


No, that's not a job, is it?


----------



## Manter (Jun 20, 2017)

8den said:


> Reported in the independent on Friday
> 
> Syria refugee family of five missing in Grenfell Tower fire found safe and well


I'm really fucking baffled by this one. They were never missing- the Syria solidarity campaign knew where they were the whole time. Their lawyers knew, their caseworker knew. They were at an event I was at on Saturday. 

So how monumentally fucked is the process that they were 'missing'? 

It's just rank incompetence.


----------



## Manter (Jun 20, 2017)

brogdale said:


> No, that's not a job, is it?


There is no job title for him in the article. It says he is 56 and spent a week volunteering


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 20, 2017)




----------



## mauvais (Jun 20, 2017)

Following on from my earlier post, to provide some proper detail, this is from the Shirley Towers fire in 2010, and the report and coroner's recommendation letter in 2013:


> The IC assuming that Flat 72 was on the seventh floor and planning to set up the Bridgehead on the fifth floor instead of the seventh floor. In fact, by mistake and contrary to the instructions of the IC who gave instructions for the Bridgehead to be positioned on the fifth floor, the Bridgehead was set up correctly on the seventh floor but throughout the incident most personnel were confused about the actual floor they were on.
> 
> ...
> 
> ...


This is from a Grenfell firefighter account:


> The smoke grew thicker with each floor we went up. No proper floor numbers on the stairwells after about the 5th floor made it hard to know where you were. Someone before us had tried to write them on the wall with chinagraph pencil but this didn't last long. The dirty smoke was covering the walls with a film of blackness.


This is a link I posted earlier: CLG rejects fire safety advice | News | Inside Housing


> Peter Holland, chief fire and rescue advisor to the Communities and Local Government department ...
> also said there will be no requirements for specific signage to be placed in tower blocks. The government believes current regulations place ‘responsibility for compliance where it belongs - with employers and building owners’, he added.


Can't even put fucking numbers in a stairwell FFS, so what chance a £200k sprinkler system.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 20, 2017)

Manter said:


> There is no job title for him in the article. It says he is 56 and spent a week volunteering


Yeah, apologies.
Either I got confused with the telegraph version of the same story, or the Indy piece has subsequently been edited.
Either way, here's an overview of his work:-


> But the father of two, a financial consultant whose firm is employed by Kensington and Chelsea Council, was at the council offices when despair turned into angry protests on Friday...
> Mr Outram, from Stafford, works in debt management and is a former civil servant.
> He was head of income collection at Islington Council before setting up his own company, Westgem Consultancy, which provides debt recovery advice and interim management to public and private sector clients.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 20, 2017)

Why are the tube stations still closed?


----------



## sealion (Jun 20, 2017)

Apols if this has already been posted up thread.
Unite donates to Grenfell fund and provides legal support for residents seeking justice


----------



## ddraig (Jun 20, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
> 
> How much would installing sprinklers in every multi storey public sector building in the country cost ?
> 
> Alex


a tiny drop in the ocean of trident renewal
a bit of the money paid to pay off senior exec staff when they leave/are sidelined
the fucking sandwich budget of a few large councils 
the hotel bill for staff going on completely pointless conferences
need anymore?


----------



## Manter (Jun 20, 2017)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, apologies.
> Either I got confused with the telegraph version of the same story, or the Indy piece has subsequently been edited.
> Either way, here's an overview of his work:-
> ​


Ooh, blimey. Yeah. See what you mean


----------



## killer b (Jun 20, 2017)

Manter said:


> Ooh, blimey. Yeah. See what you mean


Does seem a bit sus that the only guy to get roughed up was the debt collector.

Maybe someone recognised him?


----------



## brogdale (Jun 20, 2017)

killer b said:


> Does seem a bit sus that the only guy to get roughed up was the debt collector.
> 
> Maybe someone recognised him?


yeah, if so, he was lucky to get away with being "...pushed to the ground and water poured over him.."


----------



## Manter (Jun 21, 2017)

killer b said:


> Does seem a bit sus that the only guy to get roughed up was the debt collector.
> 
> Maybe someone recognised him?


The independent article says he looks like the head of KCTMO (or something! Can't remeber) And there is a pic of him misidentified on the internet 

But yeah. Interesting


----------



## mojo pixy (Jun 21, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> "mad as a box of frogs"





ItWillNeverWork said:


> I've always thought boxed frogs get a hard time. I mean, I'd be pretty pissed off if I was a frog stuck in a box, and I reckon you would be too.



I once actually carried a box of frogs, from an old pond we were digging up and filling in, to a nearby river. 

Mad.


----------



## Celyn (Jun 21, 2017)

killer b said:


> Does seem a bit sus that the only guy to get roughed up was the debt collector.
> 
> Maybe someone recognised him?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 21, 2017)

Lbc reporting this morning that none of the refurbishment work was ever officially approved/signed off. :'(


----------



## existentialist (Jun 21, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Lbc reporting this morning that none of the refurbishment work was ever officially approved/signed off. :'(


I bet it was paid for, though...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 21, 2017)

LBC report here

EXCLUSIVE: Grenfell Tower Refurbishment Was Not Approved - LBC

Although as pointed out on Twitter, this might not be correct?


----------



## brogdale (Jun 21, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> LBC report here
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Grenfell Tower Refurbishment Was Not Approved - LBC
> 
> Although as pointed out on Twitter, this might not be correct?





> "The TMO was responsible for the works and therefore the council may well say it is responsible for making sure the refurbishment works complied with building control. *This could get very messy*."


Contender for under-statement of the year award.


----------



## nuffsaid (Jun 21, 2017)

They've got grief tourists to deal with now - Grenfell locals have a stern warning for visitors taking sick selfies with the tower


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 21, 2017)

Over 170 years after Engels, Britain is still a country that murders its poor | Aditya Chakrabortty


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 21, 2017)

Manter said:


> I'm really fucking baffled by this one. They were never be missing- the Syria solidarity campaign knew where they were the whole time. Their lawyers knew, their caseworker knew. They were at an event I was at on Saturday.
> 
> So how monumentally fucked is the process that they were 'missing'?
> 
> It's just rank incompetence.



Did all their neighbours know they were OK? They were probably reported as known to have lived in the block and put on a list of potentially missing people, and given there were hundreds of people on that list from various sources it would be a big job to rule them out. They're probably working on such vague stuff as 'there was a Syrian family living on my mate's floor, don't know the flat number'. People will be on the list multiple times, sometimes by name, sometimes by description, and they'll be very cautious in eliminating potential missing people from the list. This sort of dot-joining stuff is also why it takes a long time to come out with expected casualty figures.

Exagerating a story like this also makes good clickbait, so don't expect such tales to perfectly match the facts, especially with the Independent.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 21, 2017)

nuffsaid said:


> They've got grief tourists to deal with now - Grenfell locals have a stern warning for visitors taking sick selfies with the tower


 
that is pretty shit


----------



## D'wards (Jun 21, 2017)

Had a thought - if the survivors are given a load of cash from the various charity things etc, then they would be ineligible for benefits. They'd have to pay their own rent, and they'd be fools to stay in the area paying those prices.


----------



## 8den (Jun 21, 2017)

Footage shot by LFB members as the came over the westway seeing the fire the first time. 


Warning it's pretty harrowing


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 21, 2017)

8den said:


> Footage shot by LFB members as the came over the westway seeing the fire the first time.
> 
> 
> Warning it's pretty harrowing



this was posted yesterday, when its trained pros gobsmacked and cursing in disbelief then you know the situation is fucked.


----------



## BigTom (Jun 21, 2017)

D'wards said:


> Had a thought - if the survivors are given a load of cash from the various charity things etc, then they would be ineligible for benefits. They'd have to pay their own rent, and they'd be fools to stay in the area paying those prices.



iirc £6,000 in savings and benefits starts to taper off at that point (assuming you are on income based rather than contributions based) - that was for JSA a few years ago, probably different for Universal Credit.
In any case, if they receive the cash and spend it it won't deny them benefits. I suppose it might be counted as income and have their benefits reduced/stopped for a month but I don't think it'd make them ineligible - definitely something for anyone who is claiming to watch out for though.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 21, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> that is pretty shit


I'm amazed how restrained the residents have been over this. In fact I'm amazed how restrained they've been more generally. The most the Mail and others could rant about was that a few tried to push their way up the stairs at the council offices demo. I'm equally amazed how together they've been when doing interviews.  In their position I'd have been an incoherent wreck, unable to get two words out without screaming.


----------



## LDC (Jun 21, 2017)

BigTom said:


> iirc £6,000 in savings and benefits starts to taper off at that point...



Wonder if that's why that initial sum the government announced was £5,500 - so below that. I did think it was an odd amount.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 21, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Yeah just to expand on that.  There have been fires with similar cladding which have been nowhere near as catastrophic. Also this fire was extraordinary, all the floors were on fire at the same time and with extreme ferocity.  I have said all along that I suspect something else was happening in addition, something was fueling this fire.  Bearing in mind what these panels are made of the fire would have had to be sustained by something as it may its way into the building so quickly.  The insulation is probably going to be a culprit as is the lack of fire stopping.  Regardless of what happened with the cladding the residents should have had an hour to escape this building at the least, it appears they didn't even have minutes.
> 
> I don't know more than anyone else about how this fire spread so quickly and so devastatingly.



I thought I'd go back to basics and did my own fire test on some slightly less fire rated celotex that I had kicking around, and have now changed my opinion on it quite a bit.

With a blow torch on it it did burn quite a lot, with thick black smoke, but within a few seconds of the blowtorch being removed the flames went out as the surface of the insulation charred and formed a seal.

So I'd agree with you that something else is likely to have been happening to provide the fuel to have sustained the fire which caused the cladding to continue burning instead of self extinguishing. Unless the reflective innerface of the external cladding was enough to retain enough heat to keep the insulation fire going or something.

The fire rating of the insulation for that height building was only for use with a fully fire proof gyproc outer skin (IIRC), it wasn't rated with this cladding system, so could be that it's the combination of the 2 systems at fault. Maybe either would be ok without the other, but not together.

I'm also suspicious of the fact they've apparently placed all the combi boilers on the extenal walls, with flues that I can't see extending beyond the external cladding on any of the pictures. That provides a potential fuel source and route for the fire to take hold in the external cladding if the boiler was damaged and the gas wasn't turned off soon enough.


----------



## 8den (Jun 21, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> this was posted yesterday, when its trained pros gobsmacked and cursing in disbelief then you know the situation is fucked.



I watched it this morning for the first time jaw on the floor.


----------



## Cid (Jun 21, 2017)

A thought on Teaboy 's point on the fluting from earlier up thread... You can clearly see that in this picture (I'll put these in spoilers, but they're just the ones that are widely available, this one is after the fire, top of the building):



Spoiler












On the same note you can see that burning extends further down on the columns in images after the fire. Obviously I have no idea whether this is actually significant... (BBC image after the fire showing three sides of the tower):



Spoiler


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 21, 2017)

It's strange that the fire in a flat on the fourth floor was put out by LFB who then left the building by which time flames were visible on the outside of the building. This suggests the fire has somehow travelled unseen along a ceiling cavity or beneath the floorboards connected to the fourth floor flat.  

It is known that the 2015/16 refurbishment involved the temporary removal of firestopping materials between the floors to enable the installation of new boilers. It is unclear whether these materials were replaced which, though speculation, might explain the "now you see it now you don't" manner in which the fire spread beyond it's initial source.

On a separate point, looking at the top picture in Cid's post, it's impressive how the 1974 fluted concrete columns appear relatively undamaged while pretty much everything that was added in 2015/16 is charred beyond recognition.


----------



## Pac man (Jun 21, 2017)

BigTom said:


> iirc £6,000 in savings and benefits starts to taper off at that point (assuming you are on income based rather than contributions based) - that was for JSA a few years ago, probably different for Universal Credit.
> In any case, if they receive the cash and spend it it won't deny them benefits. I suppose it might be counted as income and have their benefits reduced/stopped for a month but I don't think it'd make them ineligible - definitely something for anyone who is claiming to watch out for though.


As far as im aware compensation from something like this would go into some kind of trust fund (solicitors will sort it out) and shouldnt affect benefits. This is how it works for victims of historical child abuse and victims of more recent sexual offences. So cant see why the same principles shouldnt apply, but im not 100% certain.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 21, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> It's strange that the fire in a flat on the fourth floor was put out by LFB who then left the building by which time flames were visible on the outside of the building. This suggests the fire has somehow travelled unseen along a ceiling cavity or beneath the floorboards connected to the fourth floor flat.
> 
> It is known that the 2015/16 refurbishment involved the temporary removal of firestopping materials between the floors to enable the installation of new boilers. It is unclear whether these materials were replaced which, though speculation, might explain the "now you see it now you don't" manner in which the fire spread beyond it's initial source.
> 
> On a separate point, looking at the top picture in Cid's post, it's impressive how the 1974 fluted concrete columns appear relatively undamaged while pretty much everything that was added in 2015/16 is charred beyond recognition.



Several reports have said the fridge fire had spread to the cladding through the kitchen window, the firefighters in the kitchen weren't aware of this when they put the fridge fire out. As the fire outside engulfed most the block in just 30 minutes, it re-entered the building on various floors via open windows, then into other flats as closed windows gave up the ghost.

Other things may have been going on inside too, but the fire outside & it re-entering the building at various stages would appear to have been the main issue.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 21, 2017)

All this amateur armseat detective work is a bit distasteful, no?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 21, 2017)

I think the conversation here has on the whole been very tasteful actually. It's inevitable that people are going to be interested in what happened and how.

There's no piss taking, edgy jokes, nor exaggeration as far as I can see.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> All this amateur armseat detective work is a bit distasteful, no?


no


----------



## Badgers (Jun 21, 2017)

Grenfell tower victims to be given luxury flats in £2bn block


----------



## free spirit (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> All this amateur armseat detective work is a bit distasteful, no?


depends if you think that we should wait 5 years for the results of an official inquiry before taking action* or sus things out now so that pressure can be applied in the right places to ensure that whatever caused this is stopped from happening on new installations, and identified and rectified on existing tower blocks as soon as possible.

Most of the information needed to work this out is available in the public domain, this is just a useful way of collating it, verifying it and getting additional opinions.

* or more likely brushing it under the carpet and doing sfa about it.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> All this amateur armseat detective work is a bit distasteful, no?


Dunno really.  Can't say I've read all the technical stuff on this thread, but it all looks to be lined up at answering the question of how the residents were let down. Haven't seen anything too prurient.  All fine lines of course, but urban's discussions have been respectful as far as I've seen.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 21, 2017)

free spirit said:


> depends if you think that we should wait 5 years for the results of an official inquiry before taking action* or sus things out now so that pressure can be applied in the right places to ensure that whatever caused this is stopped from happening on new installations, and identified and rectified on existing tower blocks as soon as possible.
> 
> * or more likely brushing it under the carpet and doing sfa about it.


surely there will be independent investigators appointed by residents' lawyers who will be doing all this. you don't have access to all the facts/data, so your own investigation will be of limited value. 
i dunno. i felt like this about the amanda knox discussion on here too. it's sits uneasily with me.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 21, 2017)

Badgers said:


> Grenfell tower victims to be given luxury flats in £2bn block



Hmmm...



> The 68 flats have been bought by the City of London Corporation as part of the response to the tragedy, and handed to Kensington & Chelsea Council for social housing.
> 
> *They will provide “longer-term accommodation” as 250 residents affected are currently being housed in hotels around the area.*



This figure includes residents from surrounding blocks too?

Why have the CoLC done this?

Also I fucking hate the ES...sensationalist, hate mongering wankers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> surely there will be independent investigators appointed by residents' lawyers who will be doing all this. you don't have access to all the facts/data, so your own investigation will be of limited value.
> i dunno. i felt like this about the amanda knox discussion on here too. it's sits uneasily with me.


everything we do here is of limited value but the true urbanite doesn't let that stop them.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> surely there will be independent investigators appointed by residents' lawyers who will be doing all this. you don't have access to all the facts/data, so your own investigation will be of limited value.
> i dunno. i felt like this about the amanda knox discussion on here too. it's sits uneasily with me.





> Most inquiries are, as Sir Paul argued, ‘quick political fixes’ in response to urgent pressures, like the Hutton report after the death of Dr David Kelly or the Leveson inquiry after the revelations about the hacking of Milly Dowler’s phone. After the initial announcement, inquiries have several purposes. They serve as political theatre with high-profile witnesses, while occasionally finding out something new and providing lessons which can be learnt in future.


The role of public inquiries


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 21, 2017)

free spirit said:


> The role of public inquiries


so what? you really think you can personally solve this when you don't have all of the facts? this is not a mystery novel ffs


----------



## marty21 (Jun 21, 2017)

Other councils are not surprisingly in panic mode ,we are all heading out to visit estates and speak to residents to calm their fears .


----------



## killer b (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> so what? you really think you can personally solve this when you don't have all of the facts? this is not a mystery novel ffs


he's got some plastic and a blowtorch. surely that's enough?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 21, 2017)

killer b said:


> he's got some plastic and a blowtorch. surely that's enough?


that was the final straw for me.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> so what? you really think you can personally solve this when you don't have all of the facts? this is not a mystery novel ffs



There really isn't any need for this level of exaggeration. You've made your point and some here disagree with you. You can choose not to read the thread.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 21, 2017)

there's been some sensible posts from Teaboy and he's advised caution about speculation, yet people have continued to spraff off


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 21, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> There really isn't any need for this level of exaggeration. You've made your point and some here disagree with you. You can choose not to read the thread.


I think I may have to but people need to get a grip


----------



## killer b (Jun 21, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> You can choose not to read the thread.


not really an option is it? The thread isn't just a receptacle for amateur columbo work, it's also a thread for discussion about a hugely significant ongoing situation.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> there's been some sensible posts from Teaboy and he's advised caution about speculation, yet people have continued to spraff off


i am surprised and perplexed. surely you've been here long enough to know speculation's what we do.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> I think I may have to but people need to get a grip



There are very few people _spraffing off_ on the thread.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 21, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> There are very few people _spraffing off_ on the thread.


I beg to differ


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> that was the final straw for me.


yeh never lose a chance to do down someone with the gumption to go out and experiment.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 21, 2017)

killer b said:


> not really an option is it? The thread isn't just a receptacle for amateur columbo work, it's also a thread for discussion about a hugely significant ongoing situation.



It is an option if you think that this thread on the whole is 'amateur columbo work'. I don't think it is. Surely the way to keep it sensible and informative is to focus on the sensible and informative stuff.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 21, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> It is an option if you think that this thread on the whole is 'amateur columbo work'. I don't think it is. Surely the way to keep it sensible and informative is to focus on the sensible and informative stuff.


columbo does of course always get the villain.


----------



## killer b (Jun 21, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> It is an option if you think that this thread on the whole is 'amateur columbo work'. I don't think it is. Surely the way to keep it sensible and informative is to focus on the sensible and informative stuff.


No-one has said the thread is 'on the whole' amateur columbo work. Just that it'd be nice to see less of it.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> so what? you really think you can personally solve this when you don't have all of the facts? this is not a mystery novel ffs


It's a basic fire engineering issue involving a mix of building materials and installation techniques and regulations, for which virtually all the relevant information is in the public domain.

I think I mentioned earlier that my dad is a professor of combustion engineering who's taught fire engineering to a good proportion of the countries fire officers, and's working up a report on this. He's just not so good at scouring the internet to obtain info that's public domain, nor does he have experience on the installation side of things which some on this thread appear to have (and I do to a more limited extent).

If you're not interested in anything I post on this then feel free to not read it - use the ignore function if you want.

Leave it to the experts is one thing, but leave it to a politically stitched up public inquiry...... sorry, but I can't agree with that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> so what? you really think you can personally solve this when you don't have all of the facts? this is not a mystery novel ffs


So where would you prefer to see the thread go?


----------



## bimble (Jun 21, 2017)

Badgers said:


> Grenfell tower victims to be given luxury flats in £2bn block


Good on them (the developers who agreed to sell the flats at cost according to that).


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 21, 2017)

free spirit said:


> It's a basic fire engineering issue involving a mix of building materials and installation techniques and regulations, for which virtually all the relevant information is in the public domain.
> 
> I think I mentioned earlier that my dad is a professor of combustion engineering who's taught fire engineering to a good proportion of the countries fire officers, and's working up a report on this. He's just not so good at scouring the internet to obtain info that's public domain, nor does he have experience on the installation side of things which some on this thread appear to have (and I do to a more limited extent).
> 
> ...


it doesn't matter how much your dad knows about stuff as you don't have access to all of the stuff you need to know.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 21, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Hmmm...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sounds like the developer is selling the flats at "cost price"...perhaps they don't have enough buyers and there are some affordable housing quotas they would benefit from meeting or something


----------



## bimble (Jun 21, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> Sounds like the developer is selling the flats at "cost price"...perhaps they don't have enough buyers and there are some affordable housing quotas they would benefit from meeting or something


They'd have had to provide some percentage of social housing anyway to get their development approved.
I think its a bit sad that people seem determined to find something negative to say about what looks like the first bit of good news since Tuesday.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 21, 2017)

Cost price means different things to both parties. This is in no way any kind of philantrophy - there will be a cost, maybe not direct, but a cost to KC council/ UKG . Maintenance and support for these flats will have to be covered and areas like this can be the generator of income / savings for the developer.


----------



## kabbes (Jun 21, 2017)

marty21 said:


> Other councils are not surprisingly in panic mode ,we are all heading out to visit estates and speak to residents to calm their fears .


How can you calm their fears when those fears may well be justified?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 21, 2017)

bimble said:


> They'd have had to provide some percentage of social housing anyway to get their development approved.
> I think its a bit sad that people seem determined to find something negative to say about what looks like the first bit of good news since Tuesday.


 
Do you really think this is a selfless act of generosity? of course not. there will be a trade off , maybe easing of PP for new developments or rezoning of other areas that were previously out of bounds.


----------



## bimble (Jun 21, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Do you really think this has a selfless act of generosity?


I think your post above that says " this is in no way any kind of philanthropy' is based on nothing much. You're suggesting that they will make more money by selling at cost to the council for social housing tenants than by selling on the open market, i don't get why that would be true.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> All this amateur armseat detective work is a bit distasteful, no?


I have no issue with properly sourced information, however there are so few known facts at the moment the constant theory chasing and posting without thinking by some is getting a bit wearing. 

THe first hand videos by firefighters I personally find informative, although sobering. Those guys were incredibly brave, knowing what they were going to. 

THe 'several reports say x' posts not actually quoting the sources feels a bit like hearsay.

This is not an academic exercise. We all want to know exactly what happened, but right now nobody does.


----------



## Cid (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> it doesn't matter how much your dad knows about stuff as you don't have access to all of the stuff you need to know.



Nor does the media, nor do those coming up with conspiracy theories... Let them dominate the narrative?

Nor for that matter do people trying to build a political response.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 21, 2017)

I can cure your gullibility for £100. PM me and I will send you my bank account details


----------



## Corax (Jun 21, 2017)

Cid said:


> A thought on Teaboy 's point on the fluting from earlier up thread... You can clearly see that in this picture (I'll put these in spoilers, but they're just the ones that are widely available, this one is after the fire, top of the building):
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Having not see that pic before, I noticed one thing in particular.  On the columns, there are indeed some horizontal lines where I'd expect fireblock to be installed to prevent the air gap acting as a chimney.  However, the way the shadows are falling, particularly on the corner one, it looks very much as though these aren't solid blocks at all, but more joists of some sort.

Teaboy or free spirit or someone who knows more about this stuff - would you expect to be able to see the fireblocks on the ruin, or would they have disintegrated and/or fallen off?

And Orang Utan - I see nothing wrong with this discussion.  People read newspaper reports about things that they will have no expertise in or involvement with all the time.  They will ask themselves questions about them.  They will talk to friends or colleagues.  It's not tawdry or morbid, it's a desire to understand - a desire that's as integral to the human condition as eating or sleeping.  If anything, a measured and balanced discussion such as this may in fact be a force for good, steering some readers away from conspiracy theories or cover-ups.


----------



## killer b (Jun 21, 2017)

Sure I'd heard of some massive slowdown of the London property market recently, with developers struggling to shift flats. Reckon it's probably better to sell 'at cost' and have everyone think you're some kind of philanthropist than having them sit empty while you offer people cars to come and live there...


----------



## bimble (Jun 21, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> I can cure your gullibility for £100. PM me and I will send you my bank account details


What would you have liked to see offered to the survivors, what would have been the housing solution that would have satisfied you that it wasn't just a scam done for someone's self-interest?
I'm glad this has happened, sorry for being so dumb.


----------



## killer b (Jun 21, 2017)

here: Buy a home, get a car free: offers galore as London estate agents struggle to sell


----------



## bimble (Jun 21, 2017)

You people. Ok , its not good news, its just more shit. As you were.


----------



## Cid (Jun 21, 2017)

killer b said:


> Sure I'd heard of some massive slowdown of the London property market recently, with developers struggling to shift flats. Reckon it's probably better to sell 'at cost' and have everyone think you're some kind of philanthropist than having them sit empty while you offer people cars to come and live there...



I wonder whether it can offset against other affordable housing obligations in some way. And it does no harm to the image of the developer obviously. 

Still, hope it works out.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 21, 2017)

Being cynical about developers potential self interest doesn't mean people aren't happy for residents getting rehoused at the same time. It's not an either or thing.

It's not negative to speculate like this about an industry and their decisions that we all know are usually capital and investment driven.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 21, 2017)

of course, the priority is getting people rehoused locally. Incredibly naïve to think that there is no benefit on this for the developer.

these scum have a long history of avoiding providing social housing commitments  by all legal means at their disposal- this is well documented - look at the Heygate thread for examples of how they do this. I am happy people are being rehomed but Kapital does not give out freebies


----------



## killer b (Jun 21, 2017)

bimble said:


> You people. Ok , its not good news, its just more shit. As you were.


It's good news people are being rehoused. It's the genuflecting to the property developers you were doing people object to.


----------



## bimble (Jun 21, 2017)

Yeah fair enough.
Seems these are poor door type situation flats, at least they're from the required 'affordable' part of the development, which may be the hardest to shift as not the full luxury package but still no doubt out of the reach of most people.

"The complex includes a 24-hour concierge, swimming pool, sauna and spa and private cinema. It is not yet clear if the Grenfell residents will have access to the facilities, which are normally not included for those in affordable housing.."

Grenfell Tower families to be rehoused in 68 apartments in luxury development


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 21, 2017)

I really hate the ES. Hatemongering scum.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 21, 2017)

Not that I have any sympathy, but the deal is not very good news for the developer. Publicity isn't worth very much, especially not here. Instead it makes plain their astonishing markup, will probably upset many existing clients, and for the same reason that they try and avoid affordable housing commitments in the first place, will make further selling of aspirational nonsense to upmarket clients much harder.

It is good news for the state/CoLC as they've got a bargain. Perhaps one day we'll find out how.


----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 21, 2017)

It's even better news for Corbyn as May adopts his policy


----------



## kabbes (Jun 21, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> I can cure your gullibility for £100. PM me and I will send you my bank account details


I would like my gullibility cured.  Let me know your bank account details.  Sort code, account number, full name and name of bank will be just fine.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 21, 2017)

Do you need my PIN as well ?


----------



## kabbes (Jun 21, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Do you need my PIN as well ?


Either that or mother's maiden name.  I can work with either, your choice.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 21, 2017)

Its my first pets name. and For reason for security, I cannot tell you Princes name


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 21, 2017)

bimble said:


> Yeah fair enough.
> Seems these are poor door type situation flats, at least they're from the required 'affordable' part of the development, which may be the hardest to shift as not the full luxury package but still no doubt out of the reach of most people.
> 
> "The complex includes a 24-hour concierge, swimming pool, sauna and spa and private cinema. It is not yet clear if the Grenfell residents will have access to the facilities, which are normally not included for those in affordable housing.."
> ...



Excellent news. Providing it's as it says on the tin.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 21, 2017)

Hmm...The CoL buying social housing stock in another borough and letting that borough manage the stock.

What benefit is there for them? Does this mean they can get away with having less SC stock in central London themselves and therefore fewer 'poor' people in their housing/borough? Does this add to/fulfil their own quotas in some way?


----------



## Cold Harbour (Jun 21, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Hmm...The CoL buying social housing stock in another borough and letting that borough manage the stock.
> 
> What benefit is there for them? Does this mean they can get away with having less SC stock in central London themselves and therefore fewer 'poor' people in their housing/borough? Does this add to/fulfil their own quotas in some way?


The CoL don't build social housing in the City any more, developers of posh housing pay a levy to mitigate the expectatipn they will have a % of social housing. The levy is generally much smaller than you/I would like it to be. The details of recent examples are hidden in CoL Planning Committee Minutes.


----------



## Humberto (Jun 21, 2017)

I think it might be a cynical attempt to buy people off. Relieves pressure on government from victims and the wider community.


----------



## agricola (Jun 21, 2017)

It is good news, but all they've done is in this one development is done what Livingstone insisted on in every development.


----------



## bimble (Jun 21, 2017)

It looks from this like the cheapest properties in the development were on offer for over 1.5 million. Can that seriously have been the 'affordable housing' bit? Can't be.
Kensington Row, New Apartments in Kensington - St Edward


----------



## agricola (Jun 21, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Hmm...The CoL buying social housing stock in another borough and letting that borough manage the stock.
> 
> What benefit is there for them? Does this mean they can get away with having less SC stock in central London themselves and therefore fewer 'poor' people in their housing/borough? Does this add to/fulfil their own quotas in some way?



IIRC they have quite a bit of social housing stock across many London boroughs - there are certainly some in Lambeth (by Lambeth North tube and along Hercules Road) and Southwark.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 21, 2017)

^^^^^

Revealed: how developers exploit flawed planning system to minimise affordable housing

heygate example.


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 21, 2017)

"I wonder if I torch my fridge , the government will buy me that Cornish farm house with swimming pool, 5 acres of woodland , overlooking the Atlantic ocean, that I have always dreamed of owning. Probably not, I work , pay taxes and am English born and bred."

DM comments FTW


----------



## Raheem (Jun 21, 2017)

bimble said:


> It looks from this like the cheapest properties in the development were on offer for over 1.5 million. Can that seriously have been the 'affordable housing' bit? Can't be.
> Kensington Row, New Apartments in Kensington - St Edward



Think the affordable housing bits are not being offered through that website. On the map lower down on the page, these are buildings that have no names as yet (ETA: or whose names are not important for the purposes of the website).


----------



## belboid (Jun 21, 2017)

They weren't built as 'affordable housing ' from what I read, but as social housing. So they would never have been available for sale.


----------



## agricola (Jun 21, 2017)

Ranbay said:


> "I wonder if I torch my fridge , the government will buy me that Cornish farm house with swimming pool, 5 acres of woodland , overlooking the Atlantic ocean, that I have always dreamed of owning. Probably not, I work , pay taxes and am English born and bred."
> 
> DM comments FTW



I hope someone has pointed out that the Government probably would buy him that Cornish farm house with the swimming pool, 5 acres of woodland, overlooking the Atlantic Ocean and quite a bit more besides if the government bore a considerable amount of responsibility for utterly destroying his house, all of his moveable property and incinerating more than eighty of his neighbours.


----------



## IC3D (Jun 21, 2017)

Who has empty flats to sell other that property developers?


----------



## scifisam (Jun 21, 2017)

bimble said:


> It looks from this like the cheapest properties in the development were on offer for over 1.5 million. Can that seriously have been the 'affordable housing' bit? Can't be.
> Kensington Row, New Apartments in Kensington - St Edward



No, the affordable part will have been for rental rather than purchase. 

I hope these flats are social rent, not affordable, because a lot of the affordable tenancies where I live charge as the entire benefits cap. 

Of course, since these are from the affordable part of the project they're not actually extra housing stock and people already on the housing list will have even less chance of getting a place. 



Rutita1 said:


> Hmm...The CoL buying social housing stock in another borough and letting that borough manage the stock.
> 
> What benefit is there for them? Does this mean they can get away with having less SC stock in central London themselves and therefore fewer 'poor' people in their housing/borough? Does this add to/fulfil their own quotas in some way?



They've been doing it for years because it's a really good way of making money. Nothing more complicated in it than that.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 21, 2017)

belboid said:


> They weren't built as 'affordable housing ' from what I read, but as social housing. So they would never have been available for sale.



I don't know, but they are marked as "affordable housing" on the developer's map.

Quite possible, though, that the press people are spinning this as "government splashes out on luxury flats" when the reality is that they have given the developers a bit of extra cash so that a block of housing association flats is ready a bit earlier than it would have been.


----------



## Who PhD (Jun 21, 2017)

Ranbay said:


> "I wonder if I torch my fridge , the government will buy me that Cornish farm house with swimming pool, 5 acres of woodland , overlooking the Atlantic ocean, that I have always dreamed of owning. Probably not, I work , pay taxes and am English born and bred."
> 
> DM comments FTW


Good god man, don't do it to yourself! Why even read what these sewer rats think?

Meanwhile in the Metro  I read that Theresa May was swanning around at the Savoy at a £5000 a head Tory party fundraiser.

I hope she was able to raise funds for that fiddle she seems bent on playing.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 21, 2017)

belboid said:


> They weren't built as 'affordable housing ' from what I read, but as social housing. So they would never have been available for sale.



Affordable housing includes rental properties. The rents are supposedly 80% of average local rent for that property size, but in reality they're usually 100% or over. Tenancies are five years, not permanent, though generally people who are already social tenants can get a permanent contract. 

My flatmate's on the housing list and the affordable rent properties here hardly have any bidders because no-one eligible for social housing can afford them.


----------



## bimble (Jun 21, 2017)

Re affordable / social I don't know but according to that Guardian article the flats that will be used to house these people were 'affordable housing' which 'have been purchased by the COL and will become part of its social housing stock.'


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 21, 2017)

scifisam said:


> They've been doing it for years because it's a really good way of making money. Nothing more complicated in it than that.



Is there any need to be so dismissive? I asked a couple of questions, if you didn't want to answer them fine but don't condescend to me. Thankfully, others saw them worthy of a more helpful/detailed response.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 21, 2017)

*Radical Housing Network*
5 mins · 
**** press statement ****

In response to news that the Corporation of London has offered affordable housing to families of Grenfell in a luxury block, Radical Housing Network said:

"We're pleased that the Corporation of London has stepped in to offer laffordable social housing to Grenfell residents – the least that should happen is that existing social tenants are offered alternative social housing after their homes have been burnt to the ground following council and government negligence.

"However, questions remain about housing social tenants in luxury apartment blocks - how 'affordable' will these flats really be? We also abhor the way in which developers of luxury blocks meet 'affordable' housing quotas by designing buildings in which those on low-incomes are kept out of sight and out of mind from the rich.

"It's unclear whether these flats will be available to private renters, homeowners or subtenants of Grenfell Tower. Public authorities have a responsibility to ensure the safety and security of all of those displaced by the Grenfell catastrophe, whatever their status.

"Long term we need public investment in housing. Council housing pays for itself and saves public money - currently, we spend £23 billion every year on housing benefit which goes directly into landlord's pockets.

“We need housing for people not for profit - and public investment in secure, decent, genuinely affordable housing for everyone.”

Notes to Editors

Radical Housing Network is a London-wide network of campaigns fighting housing injustice. For all press statements see radicalhousingnetwork.org.

Grenfell Action Group is a member of the Radical Housing Network.

Press contact

Katya Nasim 07791018631 
Harriet Vickers – 07817724556

Radical Housing Network 
info@radicalhousingnetwork.org 
@radicalhousing


----------



## scifisam (Jun 21, 2017)

To clear up the matter:

Affordable housing is social rented, affordable rented and intermediate housing, provided to eligible households whose needs are not met by the market.

From here Definitions of general housing terms - GOV.UK

Intermediate housing can be for sale, affordable housing is for rent. These were always going to be rental properties. I don't know if the sale to City took place before these events or not but it's such a long process that I suspect it was already in the works. They're not extra housing, in any case.


----------



## scifisam (Jun 21, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Is there any need to be so dismissive? I asked a couple of questions, if you didn't want to answer them fine but don't condescend to me. Thankfully, others saw them worthy of a more helpful/detailed response.



Woah. Think you've read an awful lot into me just answering your question there!


----------



## scifisam (Jun 21, 2017)

Actually now this thread is descending into bunfights I'm going to put it on ignore and piss off.


----------



## bimble (Jun 21, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Actually now this thread is descending into bunfights I'm going to put it on ignore and piss off.


----------



## eoin_k (Jun 21, 2017)

Rutita1 , scifisam was the only person to respond to your question as far as I can see.


----------



## ddraig (Jun 21, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Is there any need to be so dismissive? I asked a couple of questions, if you didn't want to answer them fine but don't condescend to me. Thankfully, others saw them worthy of a more helpful/detailed response.


no need for this, back off!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 21, 2017)

Cold Harbour said:


> The CoL don't build social housing in the City any more, developers of posh housing pay a levy to mitigate the expectatipn they will have a % of social housing. The levy is generally much smaller than you/I would like it to be. The details of recent examples are hidden in CoL Planning Committee Minutes.





agricola said:


> IIRC they have quite a bit of social housing stock across many London boroughs - there are certainly some in Lambeth (by Lambeth North tube and along Hercules Road) and Southwark.





eoin_k said:


> Rutita1 , scifisam was the only person to respond to your question as far as I can see.


 you missed these two above then!


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 21, 2017)

New York TImes on the disaster.

Opinion | Would a White British Community Have Burned in Grenfell Tower?

Pretty poor stuff I thought.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 21, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Woah. Think you've read an awful lot into me just answering your question there!


You didn't answer my questions though Sam, you dismissed them by saying they've been doing it for years/nothing to see here.

I got some answers anyway. Happy to leave it here.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 21, 2017)

ddraig said:


> no need for this, back off!


 Nice try. Not comparable in any way though with the snarky bullyboy routine you tried which led me to tell you to back off on the Finsbury Park thread.


----------



## agricola (Jun 21, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> New York TImes on the disaster.
> 
> Opinion | Would a White British Community Have Burned in Grenfell Tower?
> 
> Pretty poor stuff I thought.



A terrible article.  Disasters like Grenfell (caused by incompetence, penny-pinching and Government indifference to blatantly dangerous situations) did happen to "White British Communities" at Hillsborough, Valley Parade, Aberfan, Ibrox and at least a dozen different coal mines.  She would have been better off just writing "poor".


----------



## Cid (Jun 21, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> New York TImes on the disaster.
> 
> Opinion | Would a White British Community Have Burned in Grenfell Tower?
> 
> Pretty poor stuff I thought.



It's an op-ed by a graun jounalist, so not really the NYT on it.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 21, 2017)

Cid said:


> It's an op-ed by a graun jounalist, so not really the NYT on it.


The headline would be the NYT's work.


----------



## ddraig (Jun 21, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> You didn't answer my questions though Sam, you dismissed them by saying they've been doing it for years/nothing to see here.
> 
> I got some answers anyway. Happy to leave it here.





Rutita1 said:


> Nice try. Not comparable in any way though with the snarky bullyboy routine you tried which led me to tell you to back off on the Finsbury Park thread.


so it's ok for you to dish it out to all and sundry? and get to decide what's out of order too?


----------



## Cid (Jun 21, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> The headline would be the NYT's work.



Yes, but that reflects the content. I mean they published it, clearly they see some value in it, it's just not really the NYT itself reporting on it.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 21, 2017)

The other NYT article is pretty good

U.K. Officials Said Material on Tower Was Banned. It Wasn’t.



> Critics of the material have warned for years that aluminum surface sheets can melt in a fire, after which flames could race through flammable insulation. If other protections fail and fire penetrates the cladding, “It is like you have got a high-rise building and you are encasing it in kerosene,” said Edwin Galea, director of the Fire Safety Engineering Group at the University of Greenwich. “It is insanity, pure and simple.”


----------



## free spirit (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> it doesn't matter how much your dad knows about stuff as you don't have access to all of the stuff you need to know.





equationgirl said:


> I have no issue with properly sourced information, however there are so few known facts at the moment the constant theory chasing and posting without thinking by some is getting a bit wearing.


The level of known facts has increased as this thread has gone on.

The following are some of the known relevant aspects of the situation

The insulation used was certified for use in above 18m buildings (BS 8414-2:2005) only if a specified installation method is used with regular fire stops and with a certain type of intrinsically rigid and non-combustible cladding. 
The cladding in this installation was not the cladding used to gain the certification, and had an HDPE core to provide rigidity that would melt at around 115-135 degC. 
Fire stops appear to have been installed (judging from photos of before and after), but the building looks incredibly difficult for this to have been done in a way that created fully sealed fire stops throughout. 
The cladding was using Renubond PE. The manufacturer claims both this and the Renubond FR cladding meeting class O under BS 476 UK fire regs, which would mean that either would seem to meet the requirements of Diagram D (page 95) of ADB2 for external finishes of walls. However it gives no further details, and doesn't included the PE version at all in the more detailed fire safety document for high rise buildings. It also has a diagram showing the PE should only be used for cladding on buildings under 10m on page 1 of that document.
The building was recently refitted with combi boilers in each flat, each needing to be vented through an external wall.
This provides a potential route for fire to get out to the cladding, a route for smoke and fire to enter the building from the cladding, and a potential additional fuel source for any cladding fire if any boilers were damaged. 
From this it seems that the exact combination of cladding and insulation used here were not certified for this use, unless they'd been specifically tested by the installation company or either supply company for this installation method and that test result isn't available online.

It's also possible to see why the specifiers would have missed this, as you need to really dig into the literature to sus this out, the datasheets do not make this clear and the cladding by itself actually would have been allowed as it meets the required BS 476 standard, it's only the combination that probably isn't certified.

There is a serious problem though with the all the standards involved here. OU took the piss out of my burner test, but essentially that is the main BS test that's used other than it also being electrically heated and under STC.

This article explains the different fire regulations standards, and why the PE variant of the cladding might pass the UK standard but not the German standard (flame applied to the side of the cladding vs the base of it).

There's also the issue that with the external insulation the class 0 requirement is lower than for other elements, it's allowed to flame for up to 10 seconds, and give a 25 deg temp rise, vs the standard requirement of no flame and a 20 degree maximum rise. So even a Class 0 pass isn't the same standard for all products. ie for insulated cladding it's allowed to catch fire and flame, so it will add to any fire that is already burning but that's fine as long it goes out within 10 seconds of the other source of the fire going out.

What was and is really needed is a requirement for all elements of the cladding and insulation to be non-combustible, to not flame at all, rather than allowing all these complex varieties of it being allowed to burn a bit in certain situations but then being controlled by xyz additional measures and installation methods.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 21, 2017)

What I said before.


----------



## maomao (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> What I said before.



You're wrong. It's a discussion on current affairs, not a memorial. There's been some very enlightening posts from people with experience in construction and for the most part people veering towards conspiracies have been told to fuck off. If you don't like it don't read it but I don't see what people should be posting other than a discussion of what might have happened.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> What I said before.


this thread in some ways resembles the bbc, most notably in the quantity of repeats you post


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> What I said before.



That's actually a pretty detailed explanation which contains the facts as are known.  You may not be interested in the finer points of building design and fire regulations and that's fair enough, actually it'd be a bit weird if you were, but I don't really see anything wrong with what is being written.  I don't think its sensationalist or lacking in respect in any way. 

At some point in the future there will come a sweeping under the carpet of what has happened.  To understand how that will play out it is useful to know as much as possible.

There are potentially a lot of people living in similar buildings right now and I guess the question is do we trust the regulations? 

There are people now working their socks off the assist the homeless and the traumatized, there are people contributing what they can.  I would say it is incumbent on those who have knowledge in this area to attempt to ensure that the lessons really are learned (and not in the normal fobbing off way) and this never happens again.

ETA: Personally I'm not sure I see the value of the day of rage march which is going on at the moment. Actually I do, I'm just not sure what it will achieve.  I do recognise though it is people acting in their own way to try to _do something_ so in that respect I'm not going to criticise them.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 21, 2017)

free spirit said:


> The level of known facts has increased as this thread has gone on.
> 
> The following are some of the known relevant aspects of the situation
> 
> ...



Have you seen this?

http://www.kingspaninsulation.co.uk...Bulletin--Routes-to-Compliance--Fire-Saf.aspx

(For others reading, this refers to a Kingspan board that's very similar to the Celotex one. Kingspan and Celotex are the "big two" manufacturers of this kind of insulation board in the UK)

It mentions the acceptability of "desktop study reports" as a means to approval. We don't know if something like this might have been done in this case.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 21, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> That's actually a pretty detailed explanation which contains the facts as are known.  You may not be interested in the finer points of building design and fire regulations and that's fair enough, actually it'd be a bit weird if you were, but I don't really see anything wrong with what is being written.  I don't think its sensationalist or lacking in respect in any way.
> 
> At some point in the future there will come a sweeping under the carpet of what has happened.  To understand how that will play out it is useful to know as much as possible.
> 
> ...


Ok, I accept that. I didn't read fs's post as the length of it made me itch. Maybe I'm just having a bad reaction to what looked like a  self-serving competitive geek off, but I accept that people just want to find out what happened.
I best just not read anymore as it makes me feel physically sick to see such detail repeated over and over again.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 21, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I would say it is incumbent on those who have knowledge in this area to attempt to ensure that the lessons really are learned (and not in the normal fobbing off way) and this never happens again.


This is my purpose in posting this stuff on this thread. I come from the perspective of 'Knowledge is power', and the wider that knowledge can be spread among those affected or potentially affected the harder it will be for the authorities / building owners to brush off their questioning.

That along with being able to be sure that any work we're involved in / have been involved with isn't going to result in a similar risk / knowing what to watch for.

Ultimately if this is down to a failing in the building regs then this can't wait for a public inquiry to report before it's rectified, it needs an urgent revision now.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 21, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Ok, I accept that. I didn't read fs's post as the length of it made me itch. Maybe I'm just having a bad reaction to what looked like a  self-serving competitive geek off, but I accept that people just want to find out what happened.
> I best just not read anymore as it makes me feel physically sick to see such detail repeated over and over again.



Yeah I get that.  It is a bit like an autopsy I guess but I do think there is a meaningful purpose to it.


----------



## Corax (Jun 21, 2017)

free spirit said:


> This is my purpose in posting this stuff on this thread. I come from the perspective of 'Knowledge is power', and the wider that knowledge can be spread among those affected or potentially affected the harder it will be for the authorities / building owners to brush off their questioning.
> 
> That along with being able to be sure that any work we're involved in / have been involved with isn't going to result in a similar risk / knowing what to watch for.
> 
> Ultimately if this is down to a failing in the building regs then this can't wait for a public inquiry to report before it's rectified, it needs an urgent revision now.


Indeed.

This was posted by a (non-newbie) member on SkyScraperCity:



> it seems very likely from reports that another 20 towers in London have the exact same cladding as Grenfell. Making the assumption the cladding was the main fire factor, at this moment anything between 7,000 and 10,000 Londoners may be sleeping, surrounded by a ring of highly flammable material. With the London fire brigade aware that it is probably incapable of preventing or significantly slowing another major combustion event if/when it occurs.
> 
> If we knew a type of aircraft carrying this number of passengers at any time had such a fatal flaw, it would be grounded immediately (for example the Boeing 787 with unstable lithium batteries). Can we really cross our fingers and hope no other fires occur in these tower blocks until the country eventually gets round to sorting the problem?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 21, 2017)

A nice corporate social responsibility gesture from Harrods.



> Harrods, which is located in the borough, announced it is to donate £1m to the British Red Cross London fire relief fund, to help support individuals and families affected. The store said some of its employees had been personally affected. Its in-house cooks had been producing food for local relief centres, while other employees had been collecting blankets, toiletries and toys for donation, it said.
> 
> Michael Ward, the Harrods managing director, said: “Over the past week, we have been overwhelmed by how the community has come together to support our neighbours at this terrible time.” He added that through the donation “we want to play our part in helping our neighbourhood recover from this tragic event”.
> 
> Grenfell Tower: May apologises for 'failures of state, local and national'


----------



## free spirit (Jun 21, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Have you seen this?
> 
> http://www.kingspaninsulation.co.uk...Bulletin--Routes-to-Compliance--Fire-Saf.aspx
> 
> ...


I'd not seen that, but had been reading a council building control guide that basically showed the same thing.

One way or another someone in the chain that decided on this option would seem to have either taken the datasheet specs at face value, or got someone to sign off on it via one of those other routes who's not grasped the difference between the 'class 0' panels and the fully non-combustible panels used in the make up that celotex used in their certification test.

Had building control been involved instead of this being self certified (apparently) then I doubt they'd have let that one pass however it had been done.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 21, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Dupe



Just surprised you didn't use "sheeple", you mug.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 21, 2017)

ddraig said:


> so it's ok for you to dish it out to all and sundry? and get to decide what's out of order too?


Just stop it. I haven't dished anything out other than a request not to condescend to me. Keep trying to shit stir though, yeah?


----------



## ddraig (Jun 21, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Just stop it. I haven't dished anything out other than a request not to condescend to me. Keep trying to shit stir though, yeah?


no you were out of order to Sam, my point is that you think it's ok to both dish it out and call people on dishing it out. not trying to stir anything


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 21, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> ^^^^^
> 
> Revealed: how developers exploit flawed planning system to minimise affordable housing
> 
> heygate example.



Developers of Battersea Power Station have just reneged on their affordable housing commitment to the tune of over 250 properties, the scum-fucks.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 21, 2017)

scifisam said:


> To clear up the matter:
> 
> Affordable housing is social rented, affordable rented and intermediate housing, provided to eligible households whose needs are not met by the market.
> 
> ...



In real terms though, "affordable housing" almost always now means "intermediate housing for sale OR rent", and qualifies as "affordable" by virtue of sitting at 70-80% of market rent or purchase price.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 21, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Developers of Battersea Power Station have just reneged on their affordable housing commitment to the tune of over 250 properties, the scum-fucks.



Should have planning consent withdrawn for the entire development


----------



## donkyboy (Jun 21, 2017)

beautiful news

London fire: Flats acquired for Grenfell Tower survivors - BBC News



> The one, two and three-bedroom flats are located in two blocks that stand alongside a large luxury development, where private homes go for up to £8.5m


----------



## free spirit (Jun 21, 2017)

Here's the problem with the call for public inquiries. We've already had a full parliamentary inquiry into a very similar fire, but nothing was done as a result.

This is some of the evidence submitted by the fire brigade union to a 1999 DETR parliamentary inquiry into a cladding fire on a high rise block of flats in Scotland.


> 2.11  It is for these reasons that we believe that all cladding used on multi-storey buildings over 25 metres in height and the fixing systems should be completely non-combustible, or achieve a fire resisting standard equivalent to the external walls.





> We have been particularly concerned for some time with the principle of small scale fire testing of large building components such as composite cladding, or insulated sandwich panel systems. We believe strongly that such testing and its findings should be validated by large scale testing of the complete system under realistic fire conditions. However, it appears that the real barrier to large scale testing is the question of cost rather than that of scientific prudence.
> 
> We understand that since 1991 work on a more realistic test has taken place and between 1995 and 1996 a new test procedure for external cladding systems was developed jointly by leading board manufacturers and the Fire Research Station. This is entitled "A Test Method to Assess the Fire Performance of External Cladding Systems" and we also understand that it was submitted for acceptance by the DETR, but nothing has since been heard on its progress towards adoption.
> 
> What ever happens in the future, we believe that the existing small scale test method is unsatisfactory and that a new test for both internal and external cladding systems and sandwich panels should be developed which should be based on the ISO 9705 Room Corner Test.





> 5.6  In the case of new buildings or alterations to existing buildings then we believe that the following requirements should apply:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> 6.1  We believe that the role of the Building Regulations Advisory Committee (BRAC) in this matter and generally as to its constitution and working practices should be discussed by the Sub-committee. BRAC exists to offer guidance to the Secretary of State upon the content and application of the Building Regulations in England and Wales. In Scotland a similar body called the Building Standards Advisory Committee, or BSAC also exists.
> 
> 6.2  Members of BRAC are nominated by professional bodies, or associations, but are appointed on a personal basis by the Secretary of State for Construction at the DETR, currently Nick Raynsford MP. They are then asked to sign the Official Secrets Act and theoretically from that point on they should not discuss any matters they may collectively consider with anyone else, including their nominating bodies.
> 
> ...



The DETR lost responsibility for this area of law 2 years later, so any changes that could have come out of this inquiry would have been lost at that stage.

Little of this is new, the dangers have been known about and widely discussed in fire safety & building design circles for 3 decades but the recommendations above were not implemented. Had they been then this fire would have almost certainly been contained and put out within a few minutes.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 21, 2017)

And further evidence about the problems of the class 0 rating from the fire safety development group at the same inquiry.


> 2.3  A material of limited combustibility can achieve a Class 0 rating as defined by the regulations but a Class 0 material is _not_ equivalent to a material of limited combustibility. A material of limited combustibility is generally a material which is totally non-combustible or which contains a small amount of combustible material. Combustible materials, like plastic, wood, etc are _not_ materials of limited combustibility but can achieve Class 0 performance by adding fire retardant chemicals or facing the combustible material with a metal foil or sheet. Thus there is a fundamental difference between products that are inherently Class 0 and products modified to enhance their performance. This serves to undermine the integrity of the regulations and therefore reduces fire safety.
> 
> 2.4  Confusion often occurs because some manufacturers refer to Class 0 products without due consideration for the way the product will be used or treated. The performance of an external cladding sheet which, when tested alone and meets the requirements of Class 0, could easily be downgraded to an inferior level by painting the sheet with the wrong type of paint.
> 
> 2.5  We believe that both methods can suffer from technical problems, particularly for products used for exterior applications, when the additive may not be durable. With time, the performance will fall to a lower level. If a facing foil or laminate has been used on the plastic material, this could be damaged with time or delaminate due to loss of adhesion between the foil and the substrate. These types of products still remain combustible and will contribute to fire load in the event of fire. Higher levels of smoke will be developed when combustible materials burn than for materials of limited combustibility. Furthermore, in the case of thermoplastics, they could drip in the event of a fire and this will exacerbate fire spread.


----------



## killer b (Jun 21, 2017)

The articles about these flats are all really weird - basically gushing adverts for the luxury development, then tucked away in the article it's revealed the flats in question were purpose built social housing - so the flats will be used for the actual purpose they were built, they're just being completed a bit earlier.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 21, 2017)

I was thinking that maybe the technical side of things should be taken to another thread, but I do think that it needs to be more widely understood how long these problems have been known about, and that the governments of all 3 major UK parties have taken bugger all action in 2-3 revisions of the regulations since that inquiry to address the concerns clearly expressed in 1999, and I'm fairly sure at other points as well.

Politicians of all stripes need to be held to account for not ensuring that these recommendations were implemented in the nearly 2 decades since the fire that led to that previous inquiry.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Jun 21, 2017)




----------



## weepiper (Jun 21, 2017)

killer b said:


> The articles about these flats are all really weird - basically gushing adverts for the luxury development, then tucked away in the article it's revealed the flats in question were purpose built social housing - so the flats will be used for the actual purpose they were built, they're just being completed a bit earlier.


They're supposed to make the reader jealous of the poor bastards that have 'won the lottery' by getting 'given' these - by being burnt out of their flats and watching their neighbours burn to death. Classic divide and rule. And from a quick scan of the comments on the Evening Standard it's working too


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 21, 2017)

weepiper said:


> They're supposed to make the reader jealous of the poor bastards that have 'won the lottery' by getting 'given' these - by being burnt out of their flats and watching their neighbours burn to death. Classic divide and rule. And from a quick scan of the comments on the Evening Standard it's working too


yeh. but who reads the comments on the evening standard?


----------



## killer b (Jun 21, 2017)

weepiper said:


> a quick scan of the comments


there's a rule against that for a reason y'know. They don't mean anything either.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Jun 21, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. but who reads the comments on the evening standard?


They allow comments?!


----------



## Wilf (Jun 21, 2017)

free spirit said:


> I was thinking that maybe the technical side of things should be taken to another thread, but I do think that it needs to be more widely understood how long these problems have been known about, and that the governments of all 3 major UK parties have taken bugger all action in 2-3 revisions of the regulations since that inquiry to address the concerns clearly expressed in 1999, and I'm fairly sure at other points as well.
> 
> Politicians of all stripes need to be held to account for not ensuring that these recommendations were implemented in the nearly 2 decades since the fire that led to that previous inquiry.


 I'm fine about it staying here as the tech and the narrative about residents complaints are interlocked. However, when we get to the point of initial findings and the various reports that are bound to emerge and compete, there will be a need for more than 1 thread then.  So yeah, if you want to.  It at least gets round any qualms that people might have, as discussed in the last couple of pages.


----------



## editor (Jun 21, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Developers of Battersea Power Station have just reneged on their affordable housing commitment to the tune of over 250 properties, the scum-fucks.


Despicable vile cunts.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 21, 2017)




----------



## agricola (Jun 21, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Developers of Battersea Power Station have just reneged on their affordable housing commitment to the tune of over 250 properties, the scum-fucks.



... which the local council are about to let them do.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 21, 2017)

Even if this cladding refurbishment passed statutory legislation for safety, there must surely be a common law offence of breach of duty of care or similar. Someone, possibly multiple people, should face criminal charges.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 21, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Even if this cladding refurbishment passed statutory legislation for safety, there must surely be a common law offence of breach of duty of care or similar. Someone, possibly multiple people, should face criminal charges.


Yeh. What charges would you prefer?


----------



## agricola (Jun 21, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Even if this cladding refurbishment passed statutory legislation for safety, there must surely be a common law offence of breach of duty of care or similar. Someone, possibly multiple people, should face criminal charges.



Misconduct in a Public Office still exists, though it is a lot less used than it was


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 21, 2017)

agricola said:


> ... which the local council are about to let them do.



That goes without saying.  Wandsworth happily bend over for developers.


----------



## Cid (Jun 21, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Even if this cladding refurbishment passed statutory legislation for safety, there must surely be a common law offence of breach of duty of care or similar. Someone, possibly multiple people, should face criminal charges.



Only if someone has actually breached a duty of care, and it can be shown that that breach caused the fire. It is entirely possible that the blame is so diffused as to make it impossible to bring a prosecution.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 21, 2017)

agricola said:


> Misconduct in a Public Office still exists, though it is a lot less used than it was


Unfortunately most ministers could get away with the defence of not having understood the risks, even if they've been clearly laid out for them - I'm sorry your honor but I simply didn't read that document so wasn't aware of the risks involved.

Those who could make ministers aware of risks such as this are usually kept several steps away from the ministers, dealing with civil servants or in endless rounds of British / European Standards meetings during which most participants who know what they#re doing lose the will to live and it's just the bureaucrats left by the end (I'm involved in a similar process for solar PV regulation, which started off being mainly installers on the steering group, now there's often just one or 2 of us and a dozen reps from various bodies who've mostly never actually installed a solar panel).

A civil action against the Government for failing to sort out the regulatory regime after the fires and parliamentary inquiry of the late 90s, with the various organisations involved in setting the standards could potentailly work.

Probably alongside corporate manslaughter charges for the building owner, and cladding installation company, and / or the fire risk consultants who signed off on this work, and / or cladding and insulation manufacturers for not making it clearer on their datasheets exactly what the panels should and shouldn't be used for and just labeling them as Class 0.
Depending on which stage in the chain it's been that's made the fateful decision to use the reduced fire rated cladding.

Probably dubious chances of actually seeing anyone in jail that way, unless there's giveaway emails that show that relevant decisions were made by those at the top. (the controlling minds).


----------



## Pac man (Jun 21, 2017)

*Grenfell Tower: 16 council inspections failed to stop use of flammable cladding*.
Grenfell Tower: 16 council inspections failed to stop use of flammable cladding


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 21, 2017)

Ripping all that lethal cladding off of buildings is going to cost a fortune and make a bloody awful mess.


----------



## Pac man (Jun 21, 2017)

Cid said:


> Only if someone has actually breached a duty of care, and it can be shown that that breach caused the fire.


The Council, I dont even think you would have to show a direct cause, just that the Council were consistently negligent and refused to heed warnings from residents about the risk to life that the building posed, complaints that KCTMO were repeatedly failing to protect tenants from harm/fire/electrical issues etc. The Couincil had 3 years of complaints, it should have sacked KCTMO long ago and employed a more competent ALMO..A constant and persistent breach of a basic duty of care by the council.[/QUOTE]


----------



## classicdish (Jun 21, 2017)




----------



## bimble (Jun 21, 2017)

Don't know why but always hated that song.


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 21, 2017)

killer b said:


> The articles about these flats are all really weird - basically gushing adverts for the luxury development, then tucked away in the article it's revealed the flats in question were purpose built social housing - so the flats will be used for the actual purpose they were built, they're just being completed a bit earlier.


This Guardian article doesn't even explain that the flats are social housing  - it does show anyone moved there'll have a couple of horrors as neighbours though.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 21, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Ripping all that lethal cladding off of buildings is going to cost a fortune and make a bloody awful mess.



They may be able to get away with adding extra fire breaks, and updating existing fire protection within the building (e.g. sprinklers, improved egress, being thorough about compartmentalisation).  The problem with Grenfell wasn't just that the cladding appears to have caught fire rapidly, but that there was weak protection inside the building. Also if it happened again elsewhere I doubt anyone would stay in their flat as advised to on this occasion.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 21, 2017)

Cid said:


> Only if someone has actually breached a duty of care, and it can be shown that that breach caused the fire. It is entirely possible that the blame is so diffused as to make it impossible to bring a prosecution.


I can't see how a tower block can be turned into a death trap without someone having breached a duty of care.

David Lammy is making a good point in a Guardian interview
David Lammy: ‘If burning in your home is not political, I don’t know what is’ – video

Have the police started seizing documents from the Council / Contractors before they can mysteriously vanish? If not why not? This needs to happen.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 21, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I can't see how a tower block can be turned into a death trap without someone having breached a duty of care.
> 
> David Lammy is making a good point in a Guardian interview
> David Lammy: ‘If burning in your home is not political, I don’t know what is’ – video
> ...


What grounds would you suggest exist for them to seize documents from the council?


----------



## marty21 (Jun 21, 2017)

kabbes said:


> How can you calm their fears when those fears may well be justified?


The council wants us to calm their fears , I have doubts that it'll work. Saw about 20 residents this afternoon, some were very worried ,some were surprisingly unconcerned . All seemed grateful that we had descended on the estate.


----------



## kabbes (Jun 21, 2017)

marty21 said:


> The council wants us to calm their fears , I have doubts that it'll work. Saw about 20 residents this afternoon, some were very worried ,some were surprisingly unconcerned . All seemed grateful that we had descended on the estate.


You're missing my point, though.  The phrase "calm their fears" contains within it the implication that the fears are unfounded and thus it is right to calm them.  In this case, there is no reason particularly to assume that the fears are unfounded.  Is it appropriate to tell somebody not to worry about something if actually they probably _should_ be worried about it?


----------



## Cid (Jun 21, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I can't see how a tower block can be turned into a death trap without someone having breached a duty of care.
> 
> David Lammy is making a good point in a Guardian interview
> David Lammy: ‘If burning in your home is not political, I don’t know what is’ – video
> ...



It will depend hugely on what the actual causes are... I'm... Kind of hopeful. But, if it is possible, it's more likely to fall on the installation subcontractors than on KCTMO and the edifice of corporate landlordism. The problem is that there are likely a large number of causes, and each individual cause might not amount to the level of negligence required for gross negligence manslaughter. For example the TMO might say they consulted <x> who said that the best policy for tower block fire safety was no alarms and compartmentalisation. Or they might say they contracted building safety out to <y>, and that they therefore can't be held responsible for <z>. Certainly KCTMO can say they contracted the building works out to Studio E. Studio E can say that, on the type of construction contract, they weren't able to properly supervise work and had no control over the final products used. It's been a while since I studied any of this mind you, need to brush up (but the case law is fucking depressing).

Basically it's not a simple area of law in the first place, and this is likely to be a complicated case. And KCTMO and Rydon at least will have very good lawyers.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 21, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Just surprised you didn't use "sheeple", you mug.



It was a dupe post.


----------



## ddraig (Jun 21, 2017)

alex_ said:


> It was a dupe post.


Don't start this crap, please


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 21, 2017)

Cid said:


> It will depend hugely on what the actual causes are... I'm... Kind of hopeful. But, if it is possible, it's more likely to fall on the installation subcontractors than on KCTMO and the edifice of corporate landlordism. The problem is that there are likely a large number of causes, and each individual cause might not amount to the level of negligence required for gross negligence manslaughter. For example the TMO might say they consulted <x> who said that the best policy for tower block fire safety was no alarms and compartmentalisation. Or they might say they contracted building safety out to <y>, and that they therefore can't be held responsible for <z>. Certainly KCTMO can say they contracted the building works out to Studio E. Studio E can say that, on the type of construction contract, they weren't able to properly supervise work and had no control over the final products used. It's been a while since I studied any of this mind you, need to brush up (but the case law is fucking depressing).
> 
> Basically it's not a simple area of law in the first place, and this is likely to be a complicated case. And KCTMO and Rydon at least will have very good lawyers.


I haven't studied law but it seems to me to be totally unsatisfactory if an overall liability can be avoided by splitting up around various parties. Surely the only fair result would be to sue all parties, the judge finds them all negligent together (unless a party truly covered themselves), and then splits up the debt according to how responsible they were?


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 21, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> What grounds would you suggest exist for them to seize documents from the council?


They probably wouldn't need a court order. They could go round and ask for them. Refusal wouldn't look too hot.


----------



## Cid (Jun 21, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I haven't studied law but it seems to me to be totally unsatisfactory if an overall liability can be avoided by splitting up around various parties. Surely the only fair result would be to sue all parties, the judge finds them all negligent together (unless a party truly covered themselves), and then splits up the debt according to how responsible they were?



Suing is a very different situation from criminal conviction.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 21, 2017)

Cid said:


> Suing is a very different situation from criminal conviction.


Balance of probabilities rather than beyond reasonable doubt, other than that I don't know what would be pertinent.

Well that's the only fair way I can see, if I am wrong then the law seems wrong to me.


----------



## Cid (Jun 22, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Balance of probabilities rather than beyond reasonable doubt, other than that I don't know what would be pertinent.
> 
> Well that's the only fair way I can see, if I am wrong then the law seems wrong to me.



In normal criminal law you'd require mens rea, guilty mind. i.e someone would have to intend to do something. Obviously that doesn't apply in negligence, but it's still not really in the public interest to prosecute people for many types of negligent behaviour. They can be liable in a civil sense, but the criminal question is whether they need to be punished. It's not simply a different standard of proof, it's a different standard of behaviour... Gross negligence manslaughter requires that the conduct be so bad as to amount to a crime. In a complex case with multiple causes, where different parties may be responsible for different actions or omissions, it may be difficult to say that a particular action was, on its own, grossly negligent.


----------



## Corax (Jun 22, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Balance of probabilities rather than beyond reasonable doubt, other than that I don't know what would be pertinent.
> 
> Well that's the only fair way I can see, if I am wrong then the law seems wrong to me.


With a custodial sentence though - which I think is what's in many people's minds when it comes to this - it all falls apart a bit.  Sentencing fifty odd people to all serve a few weeks would only minorly inconvenience them, and give no sense that 'justice has been served' to the victims.

Besides - the burdens of proof you mention are an absolutely *enormous* difference.


----------



## Corax (Jun 22, 2017)

Cid said:


> In normal criminal law you'd require mens rea, guilty mind. i.e someone would have to intend to do something. Obviously that doesn't apply in negligence, but it's still not really in the public interest to prosecute people for many types of negligent behaviour. They can be liable in a civil sense, but the criminal question is whether they need to be punished. It's not simply a different standard of proof, it's a different standard of behaviour... Gross negligence manslaughter requires that the conduct be so bad as to amount to a crime. In a complex case with multiple causes, where different parties may be responsible for different actions or omissions, it may be difficult to say that a particular action was, on its own, grossly negligent.


You say it doesn't apply to negligence, but it does - which you've then gone on to outline quite nicely!

A decision not to act is still mens rea.  A decision not to be as thorough as needed - mens rea.  A decision to prioritise something else instead, whether it be other work or golf - mens rea.  Intent not to bother is still an intent.


----------



## Cid (Jun 22, 2017)

Corax said:


> You say it doesn't apply to negligence, but it does - which you've then gone on to outline quite nicely!
> 
> A decision not to act is still mens rea.  A decision not to be as thorough as needed - mens rea.  A decision to prioritise something else instead, whether it be other work or golf - mens rea.  Intent not to bother is still an intent.



Not exactly. Mens rea requires a knowledge of the defendant's state of mind and that isn't required for gross negligence.


----------



## Pac man (Jun 22, 2017)

Cid said:


> Not exactly. Mens rea requires a knowledge of the defendant's state of mind and that isn't required for gross negligence.


Mens rea IS a gulity mind, which can include an omission too surely? This line of reasoning was used in the Supreme Court in Feb this year, Armes or NA vs Nottinghamshire Council, you can watch it on the website herer if interested https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2016-0004.html. 
Vicarious liability and a Non delegable Duty of Care. The case has very similar legal principles a duty of care, vicarious liability and a non delagble duty.. Which the council in Grenfell Towers would most likely argue as there defense, that all responsibilty past to KCTMO, i doubut it would get away with it though after 3 years of complaints. Whilst the Armes case is about historical child abuse and the LAs duty of care to children in foster placements and other associated care facilities (homes). The outcome will have a bearing on the level of duty a LA has in a wide range of situations, Grenfell Towers included.Still awaiting the outcome of the Appeal from 8th and 9th Feb this year.


----------



## Cid (Jun 22, 2017)

Pac man said:


> Mens rea IS a gulity mind, which can include an omission too surely? This line of reasoning was used in the Supreme Court in Feb this year, Armes or NA vs Nottinghamshire Council, you can watch it on the website herer if interested https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2016-0004.html.
> Vicarious liability and a Non delegable Duty of Care. The case has very similar legal principles a duty of care, vicarious liability and a non delagble duty.. Which the council in Grenfell Towers would most likely argue as therer defense, that all responsibilty past to KCTMO, i doubut it would get away with it though after 3 years of complaints. Whilst the Armes case is about historical child abuse and the LAs duty of care to children in foster placements and other associated care facilities (homes). The outciome will have a bearing on the level of duty a LA has in a wide range of situations, Grenfell Towers included.Still awaiting the outcome of the Appeal from 8th and 9th Feb this year.



Negligence can be a type of mens rea, but mens rea is not always required to show negligence. Look, it's nearly 1am.


----------



## Pac man (Jun 22, 2017)

Cid said:


> but mens rea is not always required to show negligence. Look, it's nearly 1am.


 Strict Liability offenses such as driving without due care and attention..


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> They probably wouldn't need a court order. They could go round and ask for them. Refusal wouldn't look too hot.


Yeh. Right. What are those grounds again?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2017)

Luxury flat residents complain rehousing Grenfell families 'unfair'


----------



## andysays (Jun 22, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 109899
> Luxury flat residents complain rehousing Grenfell families 'unfair'



Cunts gonna be cunts, unfortunately, though this does help to illustrate the utterly obscene classist assumptions which have at the very least contributed to this tragedy.

Part of me feels like those making such complaints deserve to be burnt out of their homes, if only as a lesson in appreciating some of the hardship others have to endure.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 22, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 109899
> Luxury flat residents complain rehousing Grenfell families 'unfair'


Hate mongering cunts continue to hate monger.

The ES articles about these flats have succeeded in their mission to incite class prejudice and snobbery from existing residents and inspire envy in other social housing tenants. Perhaps these selfish idiots would have preferred everyone had died than shock, horror they get rehoused in decent accommodation. Cunts.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2017)

"A number" of flats clad in combustible material.  _What_ number is not revealed.

High rise cladding 'combustible' says PM - BBC News


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 22, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> "A number" of flats clad in combustible material.  _What_ number is not revealed.
> 
> High rise cladding 'combustible' says PM - BBC News



I doubt they know.

As we speak there is almost certainly a lot of contractors, sub-contractors and merchants all scrawling through their old receipts to see what was actually put on the wall.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 22, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. Right. What are those grounds again?


The same grounds that police would use if they were doing a drugs bust. They are investigating criminal offences and wish to seize evidence before it can be destroyed.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 22, 2017)

In Bristol the council maybe 20 years ago used polystyrene insulation then high tech sticky render on the local tower blocks - the same as used on terraced houses in my street - my neighbour has recently done his whole back wall.
Certainly perfectly safe on low-rise ... doubtless much more expensive and higher maintenance to use render rather than rigid panels.

I was melting holes in polystyrene yesterday and the thought of vast amounts of that going up doesn't bear thinking about it I believe napalm is similar material.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> The same grounds that police would use if they were doing a drugs bust. They are investigating criminal offences and wish to seize evidence before it can be destroyed.


right. so you think the police can just turn up and say 'we suspect criminal offences' and grab a load of stuff, they don't know what it is, and make off with it. a giant fishing expedition as it were. not to mention a range of the material they'll be after will be in the rbkc archives. do you think archivists would be complicit in this sort of destruction activity? if cops were doing a drugs bust they would have powers of entry: what power of entry do you suggest the police use in this instance?


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 22, 2017)

Corax said:


> With a custodial sentence though - which I think is what's in many people's minds when it comes to this - it all falls apart a bit.  Sentencing fifty odd people to all serve a few weeks would only minorly inconvenience them, and give no sense that 'justice has been served' to the victims.
> 
> Besides - the burdens of proof you mention are an absolutely *enormous* difference.


Yes, in favour of the plaintiff. I would guess an action taken under a duty of care breach would be a civil action.


> A decision not to act is still mens rea. A decision not to be as thorough as needed - mens rea. A decision to prioritise something else instead, whether it be other work or golf - mens rea. Intent not to bother is still an intent.


A duty of care requires action where necessary. "Qui tacet consentire videtur" - he who stays silent, consents


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 22, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> right. so you think the police can just turn up and say 'we suspect criminal offences' and grab a load of stuff, they don't know what it is, and make off with it. a giant fishing expedition as it were. not to mention a range of the material they'll be after will be in the rbkc archives. do you think archivists would be complicit in this sort of destruction activity? if cops were doing a drugs bust they would have powers of entry: what power of entry do you suggest the police use in this instance?


I suggest they simply knock on the door


----------



## J Ed (Jun 22, 2017)

IDS and Mogg in parliament arguing that all tower blocks should now be torn down, no doubt to make way for their developer mates. Sick fuckers see the potential for grift in all of this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I suggest they simply knock on the door


so now you're conceding you don't believe they have an actual power of entry in this case


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 22, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> so now you're conceding you don't believe they have an actual power of entry in this case


No, I'm suggesting it's not necessary (to apply for the court order).


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> No, I'm suggesting it's not necessary (to apply for the court order).


i suggest you don't have a scooby what you're on about


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I doubt they know.
> 
> As we speak there is almost certainly a lot of contractors, sub-contractors and merchants all scrawling through their old receipts to see what was actually put on the wall.


Well, indeed. And meanwhile an indeterminate number of working class families are going to bed tonight in potential tinderboxes.


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 22, 2017)

J Ed said:


> IDS and Mogg in parliament arguing that all tower blocks should now be torn down, no doubt to make way for their developer mates. Sick fuckers see the potential for grift in all of this.



Somebody should ask those twats why they think it is that places like Hong Kong and Singapore have been able to put most of their populations in public housing tower blocks without this kind of fire happening.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2017)

J Ed said:


> IDS and Mogg in parliament arguing that all tower blocks should now be torn down, no doubt to make way for their developer mates. Sick fuckers see the potential for grift in all of this.


We've had this all before. It's the same debate as a century ago.


----------



## Pac man (Jun 22, 2017)

Property hazards and landlords Duty of Care..
Worth reading from Duty of Care onwards.


Property Hazards and the Landlord's Duty of Care


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 22, 2017)

I've said before on this site I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with pulling down these 60's and 70's high rise blocks, I just don't think they're fit for purpose.  The big caveat to this is that they would need to be replaced with something that was fit for purpose and the residents re-housed in the new block.  As this is clearly never going to happen under a tory or labour regime they will have to stay.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 22, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> i suggest you don't have a scooby what you're on about


Thank you for your advice!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Thank you for your advice!


let us hear no more of your prating on the law, you turn out to know rather less about it than diamond.


----------



## bimble (Jun 22, 2017)

This tower (before & after pics below) is where 'mr bimble' lives at the moment, on 14th floor. It was clad as part of the transformation from 70s brutalist office block to swanky flats. There is cladding on so many buildings now, I have no clue of course if this building was done safely whilst Grenfell wasn't but am sure they'll find residents asking questions even here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> This tower (before & after pics below) is where 'mr bimble' lives at the moment, on 14th floor. It was clad as part of the transformation from 70s brutalist office block to swanky flats. There is cladding on so many buildings now, I have no clue of course if this building was done safely whilst Grenfell wasn't but am sure they'll find residents asking questions even here.
> View attachment 109909


so that's the 66m tall archway tower


----------



## bimble (Jun 22, 2017)

yep archway tower. Because of that change of use clause they will have had to fit sprinklers throughout, and fire doors on every landing which they did do.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> yep archway tower. Because of that change of use clause they will have had to fit sprinklers throughout, and fire doors on every landing which they did do.


had a very poor rep before it was flats, when the dhss were there. interesting pdf: http://ruthewan.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/How-to-Make-Archway-Tower-Disappear.pdf


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 22, 2017)

Pac man said:


> Property hazards and landlords Duty of Care..
> Worth reading from Duty of Care onwards.
> 
> 
> Property Hazards and the Landlord's Duty of Care


from the above link:



> *Design and construction*
> Notwithstanding the landlord's historical immunity, there are specific situations where the courts have held that a landlord can be liable for negligence when letting a property. Builders, developers, architects, surveyors and designers who have failed to exercise reasonable care in the work that they have carried out on a building have been held to be liable to the occupiers of that building for injury or damage resulting from their negligence.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I doubt they know.
> 
> As we speak there is almost certainly a lot of contractors, sub-contractors and merchants all scrawling through their old receipts to see what was actually put on the wall.


It may be 600, "Number 10" is now saying.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 22, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> We've had this all before. It's the same debate as a century ago.



Sometimes it feels like we have gone back a century.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Sometimes it feels like we have gone back a century.


It really does.


----------



## salem (Jun 22, 2017)

Camden are taking down the cladding on some of their buildings immediately and putting 24 hour fire wardens on site while they do so.

Work was done by Rydon and Harley Facades, the same contractors as the Grenfell tower and Camden say that the cladding used was not the cladding that was specified.




			
				Councillor Georgia Gould said:
			
		

> “The new results from the laboratory show that the outer cladding panels themselves are made up of aluminium panels with a polyethylene core.
> 
> “Therefore the panels that were fitted were not to the standard that we had commissioned. In light of this, we will be informing the contractor that we will be taking urgent legal advice.



Exclusive: Cladding to be removed from Camden  blocks after tests reveal similarities with Grenfell Tower


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 22, 2017)

salem said:


> Camden are taking down the cladding on some of their buildings immediately and putting 24 hour fire wardens on site while they do so.
> 
> Work was done by Rydon and Harley Facades, the same contractors as the Grenfell tower and Camden say that the cladding used was not the cladding that was specified.
> 
> ...



Blimey.  There's seem deeply worrying implications there.  There is an almighty suggestion that Rydon and Harley have been up to no good.  This could yet lead to corporate manslaughter.  I'm genuinely staggered by some of the stuff coming out.  I know that construction is a bit of bodge-it industry and there is a lot of corner cutting.  I never expected anything quite as serious and cynical as this.


----------



## ChrisD (Jun 22, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> They may be able to get away with adding extra fire breaks, and updating existing fire protection within the building (e.g. sprinklers, improved egress, being thorough about compartmentalisation).  The problem with Grenfell wasn't just that the cladding appears to have caught fire rapidly, but that there was weak protection inside the building. Also if it happened again elsewhere I doubt anyone would stay in their flat as advised to on this occasion.



The basic design of this type of tower block relies on effective compartmentalisation and protection within each flat. Hence the single staircase and tragic advice to stay in flat unless advised otherwise. I don't think that width staircase will comply with means of escape required widths etc (rightly so after ibrox etc disasters) if all residents were to take to staircase at once. 

Sprinkler systems installation (good for Croydon to propose) require all sorts of consideration re zoning and insurance for "what if your neighbour sets them off and ruins your stuff ".   Yet somehow urgent solutions need to be found.   

Have shares in rockwool gone up in the last week?  I'm an architect (though I've never wished on tower blocks) and I feel collective guilt for the whole building industry except a few individuals like Sam Webb who have been pointing out these things for years.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> This tower (before & after pics below) is where 'mr bimble' lives at the moment, on 14th floor. It was clad as part of the transformation from 70s brutalist office block to swanky flats. There is cladding on so many buildings now, I have no clue of course if this building was done safely whilst Grenfell wasn't but am sure they'll find residents asking questions even here.
> View attachment 109909



If you get a close up photo of the new cladding I'll probably be able to tell if its an ACM panel.


----------



## bimble (Jun 22, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> If you get a close up photo of the new cladding I'll probably be able to tell if its an ACM panel.


Closeups from the architects in here GRID Architects | Archway Tower
I'll try taking pictures of the real thing when next there. (thanks)


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 22, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Sometimes it feels like we have gone back a century.


more working class cohesion in 1917. And October of that year was quite special...


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> Closeups from the architects in here GRID Architects | Archway Tower
> I'll try taking pictures of the real thing when next there. (thanks)



The CGI's look like they were proposing a GRC panel which would be a good thing as its a concrete based system. Test report here: http://telling.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Firetest-classification-report-grc.pdf

The problem is if the last week has taught us anything is that what the architect proposed and what was used are not always the same.


----------



## bimble (Jun 22, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> The problem is if the last week has taught us anything is that what the architect proposed and what was used are not always the same.


Yes, thanks. It _looks_ plasticy in real life, the cladding, to a clueless eye anyway. But that place has very good internal fire prevention measures, as it seems it had to have by law as it went through 'significant change of use'. That makes so little sense to me - why does change of use mean you must install sprinklers etc, whilst total refurb whilst keeping same use doesn't.


----------



## Cid (Jun 22, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> The CGI's look like they were proposing a GRC panel which would be a good thing as its a concrete based system. Test report here: http://telling.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Firetest-classification-report-grc.pdf
> 
> The problem is if the last week has taught us anything is that what the architect proposed and what was used are not always the same.



You can see it undergoing refurbishment in google maps.


----------



## bimble (Jun 22, 2017)

^ that looks dodgy as hell, says someone who knows nothing about cladding.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 22, 2017)

Cid said:


> You can see it undergoing refurbishment in google maps.


  See this is a prime example of how architects sell a scheme which ends up looking nothing like the proposals.

First thoughts are that it is definitely not a cassette system as used at Grenfell and you can see loads of Rockwool so at least the insulation is completely non-combustible.  It looks like a standard ventilated rainscreen but I can't see what the panel is. 

It appears that at Greenfell they were combining many different products and fixing methods which in isolation may have been OK but used together in a system were a accident waiting to happen.  

The system going on the wall in the google image is very different.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> ^ that looks dodgy as hell, says someone who knows nothing about cladding. View attachment 109911



Nah don't worry about that,  that's how rainscreen is fixed.  The steel rails create a good fix and the ventilated cavity behind it.  The yellow-ish insulation is Rockwool (which as the name suggests is made from rocks). The photo also shows the Tyvek membrane which is absolutely standard.

Looks like a textbook installation from what I can see.


----------



## gosub (Jun 22, 2017)

If you resign when you don't want to but are told to... Isn't that more sacked than resigned?


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 22, 2017)

gosub said:


> If you resign when you don't want to but are told to... Isn't that more sacked than resigned?



Fucker probably got 1/4 of a million to do it as well.


----------



## pinkmonkey (Jun 22, 2017)

I worked for a corporation 20 years ago, we manufactured sporting goods and all employees who went to factories were given training in how to spot unsafe practices, be they stuff such as workers taking guards off machinery (you can work faster but injury is more likely), to checking that all hazardous materials were correctly labelled and stored, to fire safety. I had to do a course and pass an exam. And every time I visited I had to follow a listed procedure as part of my visit. I knew to check the extinguishers were there, they were in date, there was no rubbish being stored, all the safety signs were in place, lots of stuff, we all had to and as a result checks happened regularly, several times a year, with a proper health and safety audit carried out by the auditor once a year. Yes of course this is all because of pressure from from activism, the media reports about sweatshops. The thing is, it is being done. People are being forced to give a fuck.
We are treating our own council housing tenants with less care than a commercial corporation making garments in asia would treat their employees.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2017)

gosub said:


> If you resign when you don't want to but are told to... Isn't that more sacked than resigned?


it wasn't even his boss who said "go" but a minister who has no real business doing this sort of thing.


----------



## gosub (Jun 22, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Fucker probably got 1/4 of a million to do it as well.


The only reason I think of for resign rather than sacked is avoiding an unfair dismissal claim as with baby p. But you are probably right, these super annuated arseholes have no shame


----------



## killer b (Jun 22, 2017)

May run out of Kensington again last night. 

Theresa May booed after visiting Grenfell Tower residents


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2017)

killer b said:


> May run out of Kensington again last night.
> 
> Theresa May booed after visiting Grenfell Tower residents



may being run out of kensington (an artist's impression)


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 22, 2017)

The vile Melanie Phillips wades in on Newsnight to unintentionally remind us that May is relatively human compared to some ...  (I haven't actually watched the video)



Spoiler: eeeeeeek !


----------



## teuchter (Jun 22, 2017)

To me it doesn't seem safe to assume that the same system with Rockwool instead of celotex would be OK. If it's the case that it was primarily the cladding that fuelled the fire - and it appears that when it does burn, it burns really hot - then it's possible that the Rockwool would quickly fry away to nothing, enhancing any chimney effect and exposing window frames etc.


----------



## marty21 (Jun 22, 2017)

From a housing point of view , the shit has hit the fan #cladding


----------



## teuchter (Jun 22, 2017)

Grenfell fire: 600 other tower blocks might have similar 'combustible' cladding, says Downing Street

Telegraph making a hash of explaining the technical details of the cladding.

 

No. The celotex was not the core of the cladding.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 22, 2017)

marty21 said:


> From a housing point of view , the shit has hit the fan #cladding


Any developments other than having to visit and reassure residents?


----------



## bimble (Jun 22, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Grenfell fire: 600 other tower blocks might have similar 'combustible' cladding, says Downing Street




May: 
"All social landlords have been instructed to carry out additional fire safety checks on tower blocks and ensure the appropriate safety and response measures are in place."
She added: "We've also taken steps to make private landlords aware and make our checking facilities available to them for free."

so if its a private landlord they're under no obligation to do anything at all?


----------



## Sue (Jun 22, 2017)

marty21 said:


> From a housing point of view , the shit has hit the fan #cladding



Can I ask a general question? I've lived in two tower blocks -- one in Hackney until about three years ago, the other in Lambeth in the late 90s -- and in neither of them were there instructions about what to do in a fire.

Signs up saying that the lifts wouldn't work but nothing else at all. Is this normal?

I was quite surprised that the Grenfell Tower residents knew they were meant to stay in their flats  -- I'd certainly never heard anything about what you were meant to do.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 22, 2017)

Sue said:


> Can I ask a general question? I've lived in two tower blocks -- one in Hackney until about three years ago, the other in Lambeth in the late 90s -- and in neither of them were there instructions about what to do in a fire.
> 
> Signs up saying that the lifts wouldn't work but nothing else at all. Is this normal?
> 
> I was quite surprised that the Grenfell Tower residents knew they were meant to stay in their flats  -- I'd certainly never heard anything about what you were meant to do.


I believe the fire safety notices were only put up within Grenfell Tower just a few months ago, probably as a token belated response to a) the 2015 fire at the nearby KCTMO 'managed' Adaire Tower and b) several years of campaigning by the Grenfell Action group following a previous fire in 2010 and the power surges of 2013.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jun 22, 2017)

Justice for Grenfell mural one of my friends has just helped finish:


----------



## D'wards (Jun 22, 2017)

What a crying shame asbestos is so lethal to the lungs. 

I wonder if asbestos has killed more people of lung disease than its saved by containing fires? Probably


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 22, 2017)

D'wards said:


> What a crying shame asbestos is so lethal to the lungs.
> 
> I wonder if asbestos has killed more people of lung disease than its saved by containing fires? Probably



Sadly I know three men I have worked with die of Mesothelioma (Asbestos cancer). Thankfully I know no-one who died in a fire. I suppose the industrial use of asbestos and it's decay is more likely for fatalities than domestic use though.


----------



## Manter (Jun 22, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> Did all their neighbours know they were OK? They were probably reported as known to have lived in the block and put on a list of potentially missing people, and given there were hundreds of people on that list from various sources it would be a big job to rule them out. They're probably working on such vague stuff as 'there was a Syrian family living on my mate's floor, don't know the flat number'. People will be on the list multiple times, sometimes by name, sometimes by description, and they'll be very cautious in eliminating potential missing people from the list. This sort of dot-joining stuff is also why it takes a long time to come out with expected casualty figures.
> 
> Exagerating a story like this also makes good clickbait, so don't expect such tales to perfectly match the facts, especially with the Independent.


They were reported missing by a volunteer English teacher who they don't know well. She wasn't due to see them so it's not like they missed a session so she raised the alarm- so it's a process problem. A completely amateur process problem.


----------



## kabbes (Jun 22, 2017)

D'wards said:


> What a crying shame asbestos is so lethal to the lungs.
> 
> I wonder if asbestos has killed more people of lung disease than its saved by containing fires? Probably


This is actually a difficult question that has been debated a lot down the years.  It has been suggested, for example, that the WTC would not have collapsed had it contained full asbestos fire breaks (no idea if that is true or not, but the debate is out there.  Also, there was asbestos in the WTC, I believe, but not in the way there would have been had it been built ten years previously).

A lot of mesothelioma deaths, as well as lung cancers and debilitating but not necessarily lethal diseases such as asbestosis have come about less because of the use of asbestos _per se _and more due to the way it was applied, for example in aerosol spray form or within fibreboard that was then cut without proper protection. It's entirely possible that had it always been properly controlled and restricted to areas that the public would not come into contact with, it could always have been safely contained and would have prevented a number of disasters over the years.


----------



## Cid (Jun 22, 2017)

kabbes said:


> This is actually a difficult question that has been debated a lot down the years.  It has been suggested, for example, that the WTC would not have collapsed had it contained full asbestos fire breaks (no idea if that is true or not, but the debate is out there.  Also, there was asbestos in the WTC, I believe, but not in the way there would have been had it been built ten years previously).
> 
> A lot of mesothelioma deaths, as well as lung cancers and debilitating but not necessarily lethal diseases such as asbestosis have come about less because of the use of asbestos _per se _and more due to the way it was applied, for example in aerosol spray form or within fibreboard that was then cut without proper protection. It's entirely possible that had it always been properly controlled and restricted to areas that the public would not come into contact with, it could always have been safely contained and would have prevented a number of disasters over the years.



The problem is people very rarely do things as they're regulated... I mean they might on install, but then x goes bust and y takes over, and chops and changes a few things without knowing. I mean here (Sheffield) pretty much every industrial building has an asbestos roof... Relatively safe asbestos, but they're all gradually falling apart. It's also sodding expensive to deal with. I think you'd need full top down supervision and funding of removal/modification.


----------



## Cid (Jun 22, 2017)

I realise I'm thinking about that specifically in industrial terms, but I suppose the problem is it's hard to know what'll happen 30 years down the line. You might have dilapidated surface panels and a Tory government that won't fund safe removal...


----------



## marty21 (Jun 22, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Any developments other than having to visit and reassure residents?


Plenty , my authority has been very pro-active tbf


----------



## marty21 (Jun 22, 2017)

Sue said:


> Can I ask a general question? I've lived in two tower blocks -- one in Hackney until about three years ago, the other in Lambeth in the late 90s -- and in neither of them were there instructions about what to do in a fire.
> 
> Signs up saying that the lifts wouldn't work but nothing else at all. Is this normal?
> 
> I was quite surprised that the Grenfell Tower residents knew they were meant to stay in their flats  -- I'd certainly never heard anything about what you were meant to do.


Most councils have fire safety departments who are supposed to check the buildings regularly, In the event of a fire ,we get a report from the fire service and have to act on the recommendations. I don't manage any Tower blocks so It's not an area of expertise for me tbh.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 22, 2017)

marty21 said:


> Plenty , my authority has been very pro-active tbf


Are you able to say more/share more detail about what?


----------



## marty21 (Jun 22, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Are you able to say more/share more detail about what?


Not really  it is the number 1 priority though.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 22, 2017)

marty21 said:


> Not really  it is the number 1 priority though.


Fair enough, I was cautiously pushing my luck I know.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 22, 2017)

teuchter said:


> To me it doesn't seem safe to assume that the same system with Rockwool instead of celotex would be OK. If it's the case that it was primarily the cladding that fuelled the fire - and it appears that when it does burn, it burns really hot - then it's possible that the Rockwool would quickly fry away to nothing, enhancing any chimney effect and exposing window frames etc.


I don't think rockwool burns very easily



> ROCKWOOL stone wool fibres can withstand more than 1000°C without melting


Product Benefits - ROCKWOOL Technical Insulation


----------



## 74drew (Jun 22, 2017)

Work colleague of mine has lost some family in the fire. Please sign and share.

Grenfell Tower Fire Victim Grieving | Campaigns by You


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 22, 2017)

There was a community meeting today. Local residents asking key questions. Video of the livestream here:




Haven't had a chance to watch it yet but bookmarking here for those who are interested.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 22, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I don't think rockwool burns very easily
> 
> 
> Product Benefits - ROCKWOOL Technical Insulation


That's the point, it doesn't. Melting is not the same as burning by the way.


----------



## pesh (Jun 22, 2017)

i can't stop thinking about this. so upset and so angry.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 23, 2017)

I just tried burning a bit of Celotex - I'm insulating my house with it - and it's impressively self-extinguishing - so presumably needs something else to fuel and sustain its combustion - such as a sandwich of thin aluminium with an inflammable foam core - plus a chimney.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 23, 2017)

ChrisD said:


> The basic design of this type of tower block relies on effective compartmentalisation and protection within each flat. Hence the single staircase and tragic advice to stay in flat unless advised otherwise. I don't think that width staircase will comply with means of escape required widths etc (rightly so after ibrox etc disasters) if all residents were to take to staircase at once.
> 
> Sprinkler systems installation (good for Croydon to propose) require all sorts of consideration re zoning and insurance for "what if your neighbour sets them off and ruins your stuff ".   Yet somehow urgent solutions need to be found.
> 
> Have shares in rockwool gone up in the last week?  I'm an architect (though I've never wished on tower blocks) and I feel collective guilt for the whole building industry except a few individuals like Sam Webb who have been pointing out these things for years.


unless your neighbour has set fire to your flat they'll not be able to set your sprinklers off as each sprinkler head should be individually heat activated.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

Grenfell Tower Fire – The Forgotten Forgotten Victims



> Today’s blog will be about the plight of a particular section of the Lancaster West community who have become the forgotten forgotten victims of the Grenfell Fire Atrocity. The graphic above (borrowed from Google Earth) shows Grenfell Tower shaded red on the left of the picture. It also shows an extensive complex of low rise blocks, two smaller blocks adjacent to Grenfell and three long blocks (‘the finger blocks’) radiating away from it. This blog will focus on the plight of the hundreds of households in these low rise blocks.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 23, 2017)




----------



## Teaboy (Jun 23, 2017)

It just gets worse and worse.  I was watching Newsnight last night with my head in my hands.  Its so much worse in every respect then I ever envisaged.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 23, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> It just gets worse and worse.  I was watching Newsnight last night with my head in my hands.  Its so much worse in every respect then I ever envisaged.


you ain't seen nothin yet, as al jolson pointed out


----------



## teqniq (Jun 23, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> It just gets worse and worse.  I was watching Newsnight last night with my head in my hands.  Its so much worse in every respect then I ever envisaged.



Can I have a precis please? No telly.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 23, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Can I have a precis please? No telly.



Well, as the tweet you posted suggests this is no longer just about loose regulation and a lack of oversight.  This looks like deception and deliberate criminality on behalf of the contractors involved.  The whole industry is going to be tarnished by these dangerous greedy fools.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

teqniq said:


>




*Grenfell Tower: Fire started in Hotpoint fridge freezer, say police*

7 minutes ago








Image copyrightPA
*The Grenfell Tower fire in London started in a fridge freezer, and outside cladding failed safety tests, police say.

Insulation on the building also failed tests and the Metropolitan Police will consider manslaughter charges.*

Seventy-nine people are missing or presumed dead after the blaze destroyed 150 homes in the Kensington tower block.

Police confirmed the fire had not been started deliberately.

Det Sup Fiona McCormack said she wanted to hear about anyone who was in the tower, whether or not they were meant to be in the building.

She said: "I do not want there to be any victims of this tragedy that we do not know about.

"Our priority is to understand who was in Grenfell Tower. We are not interested in people's reasons for being in Grenfell Tower."

Grenfell Tower: Fire started in Hotpoint fridge freezer, say police - BBC News


----------



## teqniq (Jun 23, 2017)

Thanks, yeah just reading this in the Indy now



> ...“What we are being told at the moment by the Building Research Establishment is that the cladding and insulation failed all safety tests.”
> 
> She added: “Our investigation is to establish how the fire started.”
> 
> Police are looking at "every criminal offence from manslaughter onwards", as well as health and safety regulations and investigating all companies involved in the building and refurbishment of Grenfell Tower....


----------



## frogwoman (Jun 23, 2017)

I'm on my way to Oxford and I just saw it looking out my window in the bus.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 23, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> That's the point, it doesn't. Melting is not the same as burning by the way.


yes, thank you. I would better quote that rockwool is 'non-combustible' from the same page.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 23, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> This looks like deception and deliberate criminality on behalf of the contractors involved.


not that they'll ever be able to prove it (unless some people have been sloppy with their own futures rather than other peoples) 

but council collusion in this, I think. The whys and hows of how the firm doing the work got the contract. Local government is rotten as fuck.


----------



## yardbird (Jun 23, 2017)

Whirlpool, who owns Hotpoint, has urged anyone who thinks they may own one of the appliances of the model FF175BP or FF175BG to call 0800 316 3826.

It said: "We offer our most profound condolences to the victims, those who have lost loved ones, homes, and possessions, and to their friends and families."

I suggested this on FB several days ago.
Liability ?


----------



## Wilf (Jun 23, 2017)

Plod _apparently_ talking about manslaughter charges, though when you get past the headline it's clear thatnothing of the sort is actually happening:
Grenfell Tower fire: police consider manslaughter charges
Sounds to me like a bit of politically inspired rhetoric from the police. They are nowhere near the point of any kind of charges and the usual response would be along the lines of 'we are at an early stage ... too early to speculate' etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 23, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Plod _apparently_ talking about manslaughter charges, though when you get past the headline it's clear thatnothing of the sort is actually happening:
> Grenfell Tower fire: police consider manslaughter charges
> Sounds to me like a bit of politically inspired rhetoric from the police. They are nowhere near the point of any kind of charges and the usual response would be along the lines of 'we are at an early stage ... too early to speculate' etc.


yeh we're supposed to be speculating, they're supposed to have information


----------



## belboid (Jun 23, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Plod _apparently_ talking about manslaughter charges, though when you get past the headline it's clear thatnothing of the sort is actually happening:
> Grenfell Tower fire: police consider manslaughter charges
> Sounds to me like a bit of politically inspired rhetoric from the police. They are nowhere near the point of any kind of charges and the usual response would be along the lines of 'we are at an early stage ... too early to speculate' etc.


But they are investigating potential manslaughter. They need to have an idea what particular crime they are investigating, even if they might later change their mind.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 23, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> not that they'll ever be able to prove it (unless some people have been sloppy with their own futures rather than other peoples)
> 
> but council collusion in this, I think. The whys and hows of how the firm doing the work got the contract. Local government is rotten as fuck.



Yes, you're almost certainly right. Corruption is utterly rife in local authority and it'd be a surprise if someone from the council was getting something from it.

Thing is even if there wasn't anything dodgy going on they still signed up to a contract with a bid that was massively lower than the original bidder.  Not just a couple of hundred grand but knocking on 35% lower.  If no one bothered to properly investigate the reasons behind such a low bid that is at best dereliction of duty.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 23, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Well, as the tweet you posted suggests this is no longer just about loose regulation and a lack of oversight.  This looks like deception and deliberate criminality on behalf of the contractors involved.  The whole industry is going to be tarnished by *these dangerous greedy fools*.



The owners of Harley Facades Ltd, the sub-contractors that fitted the cladding, used to own Harley Curtain Wall Ltd, which went bust late in 2015 with debts of over £1m after having put almost £2.5m in tax avoidance schemes according to HMRC, then various assets were sold to Harley Facades Ltd. 

Grenfell cladding bosses 'put £2.5m into tax avoidance' | Daily Mail Online


----------



## teuchter (Jun 23, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> yes, thank you. I would better quote that rockwool is 'non-combustible' from the same page.


My point was that, *if* the cladding was burning at a very high temperature, we wouldn't necessarily know how well rockwool would survive. It doesn't melt until 1000C but some of the resins that bind it together apparently fail at a lower temperature.

The question of whether it would remain intact (rather than whether it would burn) is relevant because if it were to disintegrate, it could enhance the chimney effect behind the cladding.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 23, 2017)

teuchter said:


> My point was that, *if* the cladding was burning at a very high temperature, we wouldn't necessarily know how well rockwool would survive.


a) the cladding burning at a very high temperature has no bearing on b) our knowledge of how rockwool would survive. that knowledge is separate from and independent of cladding burning at any temperature.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 23, 2017)

yardbird said:


> Whirlpool, who owns Hotpoint, has urged anyone who thinks they may own one of the appliances of the model FF175BP or FF175BG to call 0800 316 3826.
> 
> It said: "We offer our most profound condolences to the victims, those who have lost loved ones, homes, and possessions, and to their friends and families."
> 
> ...



The only possible liability on Whirlpool would be around the initial fire & damage in that one flat, as the firefighters had put that out within minutes of arriving. There would be no liability in what happened after that, being that Whirlpool had no part in the cladding & insulation issues.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 23, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Plod _apparently_ talking about manslaughter charges, though when you get past the headline it's clear thatnothing of the sort is actually happening:
> Grenfell Tower fire: police consider manslaughter charges
> Sounds to me like a bit of politically inspired rhetoric from the police. They are nowhere near the point of any kind of charges and the usual response would be along the lines of 'we are at an early stage ... too early to speculate' etc.



From that link:



> Crown Prosecution Service figures last year showed that 19 companies had been charged with corporate manslaughter since the law was introduced in 2007.
> 
> There were 15 guilty verdicts, with fines ranging from £50,000 to £700,000, three acquittals and one case yet to come to trial. New sentencing guidelines introduced last year were expected to lead to higher fines for larger companies convicted of the most serious regulatory breaches. But charges have traditionally been easier to prove against smaller companies because of the need to identify a “controlling mind”.



That implies corporate manslaughter only results in fines?

Can directors & other responsible people not be charged & face jail?

ETA: Just found another link confirming directors can be jailed, giving examples of between 8 months and 3 years & 2 months - nowhere near long enough IMO.

CQMS H&S: Corporate Manslaughter Prosecutions


----------



## Wilf (Jun 23, 2017)

belboid said:


> But they are investigating potential manslaughter. They need to have an idea what particular crime they are investigating, even if they might later change their mind.


Yeah, I get that, I just get a sense that there's an element of political manipulation there, to convince the public that the government will push it all the way. In fact the likelihood is that the government want to put it all on the council, contractors and subcontractors - rightly in the sense that there seem to have been massive failings of regulation/testing there - whilst defending barwell and the failure to learn from recent tower block fires, at home and abroad (_their_ responsibility).


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 23, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> From that link:
> 
> That implies corporate manslaughter only results in fines?
> 
> ...


The system generally protects corporations.

I would hope that the corporate veil could be pierced and those involved face straight manslaughter charges, not corporate. That's probably a hope too far.

This also doesn't affect civil litigation.

I wish we could do away with limited liability.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 23, 2017)

There's always one complete arsehole, though I suspect in this instance there'll be more than one.

"If Grenfell Residents Move Into My Flats, I'll Move Out" - LBC


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 23, 2017)

teqniq said:


> There's always one complete arsehole, though I suspect in this instance there'll be more than one.
> 
> "If Grenfell Residents Move Into My Flats, I'll Move Out" - LBC



Excellent. One more flat available for those who have lost everything.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 23, 2017)

* whistles 'Always look on the bright side of life' *


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 23, 2017)

Hopefully the ghastly new intake will drive the price down for her.


----------



## agricola (Jun 23, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Excellent. One more flat available for those who have lost everything.



... and think of the extra work given to those who craft, tune and play incredibly small string instruments.


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

With all this talk of so many similar clad buildings going on, isn't it just inviting some religious nutters to go around setting fire to them in the dead of night? Either these religious nutters have no idea, or the government is incompetent by allowing this information to go public so soon. Probably both, as they are as fuck witted as each other.


----------



## little_legs (Jun 23, 2017)

Warren Street station is on fire, massive evacuation and panic


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 23, 2017)

little_legs said:


> Warren Street station is on fire, massive evacuation and panic


source pls


----------



## little_legs (Jun 23, 2017)

I just ran out of there


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Jun 23, 2017)

What happened?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 23, 2017)

little_legs said:


> I just ran out of there


on fire i.e. smoke and flames or fire alarm? did you actually see evidence of fire?


----------



## little_legs (Jun 23, 2017)

Just smoke coming out of northbound Victoria line platform and rancid smell


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 23, 2017)

little_legs said:


> Just smoke coming out of northbound Victoria line platform and rancid smell


rancid smell usual for the tube, smoke less so.


----------



## little_legs (Jun 23, 2017)

Something was definitely burning the smoke cloud was too big for it to be minor


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

little_legs said:


> Just smoke coming out of northbound Victoria line platform and rancid smell





> *TfL Travel Alerts*‏Verified account @TfLTravelAlerts 2m2 minutes ago
> Warren Street: The station is closed to the @Victorialine and trains are non-stopping.





> *Becky*‏ @BeckyGJ 6m6 minutes ago
> Just got evacuated from *Warren* *Street* tube station because of "an emergency". Terrifying tbh. Sirens everywhere. No idea what's going on.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 23, 2017)




----------



## BemusedbyLife (Jun 23, 2017)

teqniq said:


> There's always one complete arsehole, though I suspect in this instance there'll be more than one.
> 
> "If Grenfell Residents Move Into My Flats, I'll Move Out" - LBC


Aren't the ones they're moving into the "compulsorily built affordable housing complete with the poor door?" ones not the fancy ones in the main block, they would have been filled with the poors anyway just a different set of poors than the ones she's getting. She's just making herself look an even bigger arsehole than she no doubt is?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 23, 2017)

teqniq said:


> There's always one complete arsehole, though I suspect in this instance there'll be more than one.
> 
> "If Grenfell Residents Move Into My Flats, I'll Move Out" - LBC



These flats were always going to be for social housing, instead of them being offered to a housing association they were picked-up by the CoL Corporation instead, they are in separate blocks to the luxury apartments.

The truth behind claims Grenfell residents are being given luxury flats



> *What are these homes?*
> The first thing to recognise is that these are not luxury homes that are being re-purposed especially to help ex Grenfell residents, but unfurnished social housing.
> 
> Social housing is specially built to be let out by housing associations at below-market rents to people with low incomes.
> ...


----------



## Buckaroo (Jun 23, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> These flats were always going to be for social housing, instead of them being offered to a housing association they were picked-up by the CoL Corporation instead, they are in separate blocks to the luxury apartments.



Let's hope they have adequate cladding to insulate the rich from the poor.


----------



## salem (Jun 23, 2017)

The press (no doubt with some help from the gov) are giving the impression that these guys are being given luxury £2.5bn with concierge, gym and jacuzzi as some kind of consolation prize. Green eyed monster already reading it's head.

I wonder whether the Mail or Sun will be first with the story of someone taking drugs, having a party or having dirty curtains or something? Guarantee there will be dodgy journalists nosing around for a while after people move in waiting for someone to put a foot out of line.


----------



## editor (Jun 23, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> The owners of Harley Facades Ltd, the sub-contractors that fitted the cladding, used to own Harley Curtain Wall Ltd, which went bust late in 2015 with debts of over £1m after having put almost £2.5m in tax avoidance schemes according to HMRC, then various assets were sold to Harley Facades Ltd.
> 
> Grenfell cladding bosses 'put £2.5m into tax avoidance' | Daily Mail Online


Exactly the sort of despicable cunts that capitalism and this fucking government helps create.


----------



## editor (Jun 23, 2017)

What I've learnt from this is that 'shared ownership' flats somehow get categorised as 'social housing.'
Go figure.


----------



## Nylock (Jun 23, 2017)

teqniq said:


> There's always one complete arsehole, though I suspect in this instance there'll be more than one.
> 
> "If Grenfell Residents Move Into My Flats, I'll Move Out" - LBC


A lot of the comments on that article made for very depressing reading...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 23, 2017)

Nylock said:


> A lot of the comments on that article made for very depressing reading...



Twats will be twats.


----------



## killer b (Jun 23, 2017)

Don't read the comments ffs. Why would anyone do That?


----------



## killer b (Jun 23, 2017)

They only exist to make you lose faith in humanity.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 23, 2017)

Think of Comments Sections as a _storage unit for scum._


----------



## tim (Jun 23, 2017)

Dandred said:


> With all this talk of so many similar clad buildings going on, isn't it just inviting some religious nutters to go around setting fire to them in the dead of night? Either these religious nutters have no idea, or the government is incompetent by allowing this information to go public so soon. Probably both, as they are as fuck witted as each other.



Yes this truth stuff is not Good for people, they just can't take it. Perhaps, we should provide them instead with a simple secular belief system that would keep them on the straight and narrow.

In the meantime we need to watch out for mullahs with matches, rabbis with magnifying glasses and lighter wielding rectors.


----------



## Rob Ray (Jun 23, 2017)

Well that's the big conceit isn't it, there's about a million ways to kill or hurt lots of people in a complex modern society, but somehow terror is restricted to the occasional twat doing something half-arsed. It's almost as though the spectacle of organised terror as viewed through the prism of media hysteria has no relation to the reality of its resourcing/levels of organisation/social base or something...


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

tim said:


> tim  Yes this truth stuff is not Good for people, they just can't take it. Perhaps, we should provide them instead with a simple secular belief system that would keep them on the straight and narrow.
> 
> In the meantime we need to watch out for mullahs with matches, rabbis with magnifying glasses and lighter wielding rectors.



Christians with burning crosses? I'm sure they would be the worst fire risk, no?


----------



## editor (Jun 23, 2017)

Just got this: 



> Grenfell Tower residents evicted from hotel accommodation with hours notice
> 
> Today residents of Grenfell Tower were given eviction notices from their temporary accommodation in Kensington, in a move described as ‘barbaric’ by Radical Housing Network.
> 
> ...


----------



## editor (Jun 23, 2017)

Not the only one, I expect....


> 161 homes in tower block on Chalcots estate in Camden, north London, to be evacuated due to concerns over cladding



Camden flats to be evacuated over cladding - BBC News


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

editor said:


> Just got this:



Now why would they want to split them up do you think? They want individuals/not a community. Knowing that together they are stronger, more connected, better organised...I really hope that the RHN and the Grenville Tenants group are keeping track of people. Argggggggggggghhhhhhh!


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 23, 2017)

Wouldn't be surprised if Ferrier Point in Newham also gets evacuated soon. Ferrier Point and the Chalcot tower block were both clad and renovated by the lethal Harley Facades/Rydon Construction tag team.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 23, 2017)

There will be a lot of student housing becoming available in a few days time. Probably not appropriate for families, but might tide some people over until permanent replacement accommodation is ready. 

I don't imagine it's easy finding places at short notice, even stuff rented privately will need to be checked over to confirm it is safe and appropriate. It a should be part of local authority emergency/contingency planning to have a quantity of family accommodation available for instant occupancy, perhaps somewhere shared by all London boroughs to keep costs reasonable.


----------



## salem (Jun 23, 2017)

editor said:


> Not the only one, I expect....
> 
> 
> Camden flats to be evacuated over cladding - BBC News


That's odd. There are 5 blocks and Taplow is identical to 4 of the others. I wonder why the distinction?


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 23, 2017)

Sue said:


> Can I ask a general question? I've lived in two tower blocks -- one in Hackney until about three years ago, the other in Lambeth in the late 90s -- and in neither of them were there instructions about what to do in a fire.
> 
> Signs up saying that the lifts wouldn't work but nothing else at all. Is this normal?
> 
> I was quite surprised that the Grenfell Tower residents knew they were meant to stay in their flats  -- I'd certainly never heard anything about what you were meant to do.




free spirit 

Has posted up about the stay in your flats policy. (this is long thread so can't catch up on everything).His dad who is professional working in building disagreed with this. Idea ( if I understand it correctly) is that fire in one flat can be contained. Leaving enough time for fire service to deal with a fire. Front doors with built in smoke seals mean that people are safer in there flats. In theory. This clearly didn't work in this case.


----------



## cybertect (Jun 23, 2017)

salem said:


> That's odd. There are 5 blocks and Taplow is identical to 4 of the others. I wonder why the distinction?



The Guardian are reporting all five are being evacuated 

Five London tower blocks to be evacuated over safety fears after Grenfell fire



> An entire estate in north London is being evacuated after a fire inspection in the wake of the Grenfell Tower disaster found the tower blocks to be unsafe. Temporary accommodation is being sought for about 800 households from the five high-rise buildings on the Chalcot estate. Work to make the blocks safe is expected to take three to four weeks, the leader of Camden council, Labour’s Georgia Gould, said on Friday.


----------



## cybertect (Jun 23, 2017)

The BBC have updated their story to match 




			
				BBC said:
			
		

> It had initially announced the evacuation of one tower block, Taplow, but later extended the move to all five tower blocks it had checked.


----------



## Sue (Jun 23, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> free spirit
> 
> Has posted up about the stay in your flats policy. (this is long thread so can't catch up on everything).His dad who is professional working in building disagreed with this. Idea ( if I understand it correctly) is that fire in one flat can be contained. Leaving enough time for fire service to deal with a fire. Front doors with built in smoke seals mean that people are safer in there flats. In theory. This clearly didn't work in this case.


I get that. My point is more that there was absolutely nothing up in either of the tower blocks I lived in saying what you should do if there was a fire. Nothing about staying in your flat or leaving. Nothing at all.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 23, 2017)

It seems odd that the *Police *did independent tests on the Celotex and found it wanting ...
Celotex themselves are simply not now supplying it for buildings over 18 storeys - which seems a bit odd.
It's Celotex's assertion that it complied and that any problems would be as a result of it not being fitted properly.


----------



## bluescreen (Jun 23, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> It seems odd that the *Police *did independent tests on the Celotex and found it wanting ...
> Celotex themselves are simply not now supplying it for *buildings over 18 storeys* - which seems a bit odd.
> It's Celotex's assertion that it complied and that any problems would be as a result of it not being fitted properly.


*Buildings over 18 metres* 
Suffolk firm Celotex, based in Hadleigh, halts supplies of insulation used in Grenfell Tower cladding


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 23, 2017)

So more like 7 storeys ...


----------



## bluescreen (Jun 23, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> So more like 7 storeys ...


Yep, six or seven - I don't think I'd be comfortable with it even so.


----------



## Gramsci (Jun 23, 2017)

Sue said:


> I get that. My point is more that there was absolutely nothing up in either of the tower blocks I lived in saying what you should do if there was a fire. Nothing about staying in your flat or leaving. Nothing at all.



From reports it does appear that residents had not been made aware of this by signs on communal spaces. Whether they were notified in other ways have to see when inquiry starts.

Some of the big office blocks I go to have regular fire drills. ( They are comparable in size to big blocks of flats) . People have to do it as they are employees. Business recognise that putting up signs is not enough. It's like the lecture you get before a plane takes off. No one takes much notice.


If the stay put policy is to be dropped then fire drills would be needed in tower blocks. To ensure and give people practice in what to do. Good in practice but would people do it?

I go into a lot of private flats and see little info in what to do in event of fire. Except on main notice board. I do see exit clearly marked. But in a panic people might not follow it.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

Hold on...WTF?



> *Barac Zita*
> 5 mins ·
> 800 households being evacuated right now in Swiss Cottage & told literally nothing - no notice - or 30 mins notice don't know where they are going, TV news filming them as they come out - disgraceful - told they will be away for around 3 weeks to remove cladding -but also told gas prob - nothing about what accommodation they are going to or proper info , not even time to pack belongings


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

Hundreds of Camden flats evacuated amid cladding fears - BBC News


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

Dandred said:


> With all this talk of so many similar clad buildings going on, isn't it just inviting some religious nutters to go around setting fire to them in the dead of night? Either these religious nutters have no idea, or the government is incompetent by allowing this information to go public so soon. Probably both, as they are as fuck witted as each other.




TOLD YOU SO!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

What tonight? Just like that?  

Hundreds of Camden flats evacuated amid cladding fears - BBC News

Really happy that resident safety is being taken seriously but...NOTICE helps!

Also...AGEIST of me yes, perhaps...how the hell does someone in her _30s_ become head of a large London Borough?


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Also...AGEIST of me yes, perhaps...how the hell does someone in her _30s_ become head of a large London Borough?



By actually doing something?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 23, 2017)

Like not like , again , what worries me is mass gentrification , and quickly ,let's hope all affected can stay in the area , and in luxury . Fuck the rich for once instead of the poor

But then again I'm a bit pissed


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

Dandred said:


> By actually doing something?



Doing something like what?  Please share.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 23, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> What tonight? Just like that?
> 
> Hundreds of Camden flats evacuated amid cladding fears - BBC News
> 
> ...


By being the daughter of Tony Blair's best mate.


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

I wonder who called the services about this?


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

All it takes is one religious nutter with a can on petrol........ Christians are known for starting fires outside of buildings....


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 23, 2017)

It's monstrous. _Shut up and do what we say we know best_ - in both the fire and the now 'reaction' to it. No one else's voice is heard or considered legitimate. People can't put up with this.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Also...AGEIST of me yes, perhaps...how the hell does someone in her _30s_ become head of a large London Borough?





Dandred said:


> By actually doing something?





Rutita1 said:


> Doing something like what?  Please share.





Dandred said:


> I wonder who called the services about this?





Dandred said:


> All it takes is one religious nutter with a can on petrol........ Christians are known for starting fires outside of buildings....



Ermmm please answer the question I asked instead of this random word salad?


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

ruffneck23 said:


> Like not like , again , what worries me is mass gentrification , and quickly ,let's hope all affected can stay in the area , and in luxury . Fuck the rich for once instead of the poor
> 
> But then again I'm a picese and a dreamer
> And a bit pissed



this guy is only 21 Hackney’s youngest councillor Mete Coban talks about ‘rebranding politics’


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 23, 2017)

Dandred said:


> All it takes is one religious nutter with a can on petrol........ Christians are known for starting fires outside of buildings....


Just shut up - go waste your time elsewhere child.


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Doing something like what?  Please share.



Hackney’s youngest councillor Mete Coban talks about ‘rebranding politics’

Going out and getting votes?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

Dandred said:


> this guy is only 21 Hackney’s youngest councillor Mete Coban talks about ‘rebranding politics’



He is a councillor...not the head of a large London borough. Stop being silly.


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Just shut up - go waste your time elsewhere child.



Ignorance is bliss, enjoy it.


----------



## tim (Jun 23, 2017)

Dandred said:


> TOLD YOU SO!



I doubt Camden Council share your worries about pyromaniac God-botherers. It's just some antsy bureaucrats, concerned about malfunctioning white-goods, applying the precautionary principal in a cack-handed way.

You need to temper your theophobia a little


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

Have you guys missed this? Quite prophetic, no?





Dandred said:


> With all this talk of so many similar clad buildings going on, isn't it just inviting some religious nutters to go around setting fire to them in the dead of night? Either these religious nutters have no idea, or the government is incompetent by allowing this information to go public so soon. Probably both, as they are as fuck witted as each other.


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

tim said:


> I doubt Camden Council share your worries about pyromaniac God-botherers. It's just some antsy bureaucrats, concerned about malfunctioning white-goods, applying the precautionary principal in a cack-handed way.
> 
> You need to temper your theophobia a little



Yes. Quite.


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

I bet it isn't the only council by the end of tomorrow, thank religions nutters for that!


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 23, 2017)

Just to save time for anyone who is tempted to spend time on this clown.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 23, 2017)

Fuck off, Dandred


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 23, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Just to save time for anyone who is tempted to spend time on this clown.


Fucking hell, doesn't she live in Korea?


----------



## tim (Jun 23, 2017)

Dandred said:


> Have you guys missed this? Quite prophetic, no?


It's spelt with a "pat-" not a "prop-"


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 23, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Fucking hell, doesn't she live in Korea?


Possibly - they need off this conversation, and preferably, this board. Let's not allow them to make it about them though.


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

Missing the point.....  going for the lizards!


----------



## tim (Jun 23, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Fucking hell, doesn't she live in Korea?



That would explain her enthusiasm for firm paternal secular leadership


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

I may have made a drunken post about some world domination in the past, but I was quickly re-educated by the good people of U75, no more lizards for me!


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

I wonder how many more councils will make similar evacuations based on internet rumors?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 23, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> It's monstrous. _Shut up and do what we say we know best_ - in both the fire and the now 'reaction' to it. No one else's voice is heard or considered legitimate. People can't put up with this.


the sudden concern now arses need covering with a healthy dollop of 'for your own good'. Ties into those shits ids and rees mogg looking to tear it all down for the land the same way decent housing was 'slum cleared' to make way for these tower blocks


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

tim said:


> That would explain her enthusiasm for firm paternal secular leadership



Corbyn all the way!


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 23, 2017)

If they are dangerous , all off them hopefully


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> the sudden concern now arses need covering with a healthy dollop of 'for your own good'. Ties into those shits ids and rees mogg looking to tear it all down for the land the same way decent housing was 'slum cleared' to make way for these tower blocks



Nothing to do with random religious nutters setting the buildings on fire in the dead of night because a load of immigrants might live there?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

Shut up Dandred! 

Meanwhile...

_Two board members of the housing charity Shelter, including its chairman Sir Derek Myers, have resigned amid reports of internal disquiet over the organisation’s allegedly muted response to the Grenfell Tower fire.
*
Myers is a former chief executive of Kensington and Chelsea council, which owns Grenfell Tower, while trustee Tony Rice is chairman of Xerxes Equity, the sole shareholder in Omnis Exteriors – the company that sold the cladding used in the tower.

Two Shelter board members quit after Grenfell Tower fire*_


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jun 23, 2017)

You could make it up , or not , it's going to be a long , hot summer


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 23, 2017)

He's a board member of shelter? I don't know what to say. Down here it was 'uncovered' that a green councilor is a secret BTL empire landlord  - and was  a key member of tenants advocacy group ACORN. I thought, nothing going to top that. Wrong.

The whole caste needs to go. Now.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 23, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Also...AGEIST of me yes, perhaps...how the hell does someone in her _30s_ become head of a large London Borough?


read it and weep 
Camden council leader Georgia Gould: 'Dad gave me strong values'


----------



## Brainaddict (Jun 23, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Shut up Dandred!
> 
> Meanwhile...
> 
> ...


There are few charities as establishment as Shelter. I can't say I'm really surprised at the links. Good that they're going, but Shelter will still feel the need to be very cosy with government, which often mutes their response to things anyway.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jun 23, 2017)

KCTMO and the housing office really need to stop digging. I hope heads start to roll soon.


----------



## iona (Jun 23, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> From reports it does appear that residents had not been made aware of this by signs on communal spaces. Whether they were notified in other ways have to see when inquiry starts.
> 
> Some of the big office blocks I go to have regular fire drills. ( They are comparable in size to big blocks of flats) . People have to do it as they are employees. Business recognise that putting up signs is not enough. It's like the lecture you get before a plane takes off. No one takes much notice.
> 
> ...



We had a fire drill where I live yesterday (first in the six months I've been here, afaik - not sure often they would be without something like what happened at Grenfell to prompt one). I stayed put, like the laminated sign in my room said to do (I was never given any other information when I moved in, just this). Then got told off for not evacuating with other residents as per building policy - no one could explain why I had a sign in my room saying the exact opposite, or where it had come from.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

ska invita said:


> read it and weep
> Camden council leader Georgia Gould: 'Dad gave me strong values'



 Weep? You mean get punchy! 

31.  qualified.


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> Fucking hell, doesn't she live in Korea?



Nice, showing your true colours now!


----------



## killer b (Jun 23, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Weep? You mean get punchy!
> 
> 31.  qualified.


they must be proud to have such a hard-working & talented daughter.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

killer b said:


> they must be proud to have such a hard-working & talented daughter.


They can Nepofuckthefuckoff. It's ridiculous. Can you imagine being a Camden Council employee of any level of expertise, experience and long service?


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

After so many years of human history, are you really surprised by nepotism?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

Dandred said:


> After so many years of human history, are you really surprised by nepotism?



No but I am frequently astonished by people like you being such inappropriate, irrelevant, time wasting, trolling arseholes. 

Find a purpose, passions and interests ffs. This trolling shit is such a waste of your life. People are robbed of theirs each and everyday and yet you choose to waste yours in this way?


----------



## killer b (Jun 23, 2017)

Dandred said:


> After so many years of human history, are you really surprised by nepotism?


So the 'doing something' you were on about up thread is 'have powerful parents'?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

killer b said:


> So the 'doing something' you were on about up thread is 'have powerful parents'?



She _did_ that. She made them


----------



## IC3D (Jun 23, 2017)

Not much on the power surges damaging electricals referred to by the action group before the fire has been talked about in the media. I don't get this, surely a connection to a fridge that blew up.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

IC3D said:


> Not much on the power surges damaging electricals referred to by the action group before the fire has been talked about in the media. I don't get this, surely a connection to a fridge that blew up.



Could be of course. Not sure how recently the power surges were still being reported though?


----------



## classicdish (Jun 23, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> 31.  qualified.


Not defending Gould, but she has been a councillor for 7 years and was elected by the other Labour councillors to be their leader. She isn't a chief executive or anything.

What qualifications are you expecting local councillors to have? There are about 39 Labour councillors in Camden and probably not all of them can be arsed to do all the extra work that the leader is required to do. I don't know anything specifically about what goes on in Camden but AFAICS the biggest requirement is a tolerance for sitting through tons of endless meetings, reading vast amounts of paperwork, signing off on whatever the council officers were advising in the first place and then making bland statements pretending it was all down to your own brilliant decision making. Gould has 7 years practise of farting about on committes etc so she is probably as 'qualified' as any of them to do this.


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> No but I am frequently astonished by people like you being such inappropriate, irrelevant, time wasting, trolling arseholes.
> 
> Find a purpose, passions and interests ffs. This trolling shit is such a waste of your life. People are robbed of theirs each and everyday and yet you choose to waste yours in this way?



What, like posting stuff on an irreverent bulletin board?


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Weep? You mean get punchy!
> 
> 31.  qualified.



Maybe if you put more effort into daily life than being on here you could accomplish something similar.

"Find a purpose, passions and interest" become something!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

Dandred said:


> What, like posting stuff on an irreverent bulletin board?


Go to bed.


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

killer b said:


> So the 'doing something' you were on about up thread is 'have powerful parents'?



Who in history didn't?


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Go to bed.



Morning here! Just having my second coffee! I think you should go to bed.


----------



## IC3D (Jun 23, 2017)

> The residents of Grenfell Tower were alarmed to discover smoke pouring from their electrical appliances in May 2013. Laptops, televisions, washing machines and fridges were damaged by *an unexplained series of power surges* that prompted the frightened occupants of the 24-storey tower in west London to descend on their estate office, demanding action and answers.


  Gruan

When I read that I thought that was obviously what blew the fridge up but it doesn't appear to being discussed unless the whole block was rewired which I doubt.


----------



## marty21 (Jun 23, 2017)

Brainaddict said:


> KCTMO and the housing office really need to stop digging. I hope heads start to roll soon.



There are many reasons for heads to roll at KCTMO but I think the temporary accommodation is now being dealt with by a government task force .


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

IC3D said:


> Gruan
> 
> When I read that I thought that was obviously what blew the fridge up but it doesn't appear to being discussed unless the whole block was rewired which I doubt.



Why hasn't more of this been public, this is terrifying.


----------



## IC3D (Jun 23, 2017)

marty21 said:


> There are many reasons for heads to roll at KCTMO but I think the temporary accommodation is now being dealt with by a government task force .


Are you sure about that Camden have a dedicated emergency planning department set up after 7/7 and this is	  exactly the sort of thing they were set up to deal with eta if you're referring to Camden that is


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

tim said:


> It's spelt with a "pat-" not a "prop-"



We laughed ourselves to death with that one. Well done. Ignore this issue, have pointless dig. Nice.


----------



## Dandred (Jun 23, 2017)

With so many buildings in the UK having this cladding, isn't it just a short matter of time some religious nutter sets one on fire in the name of religion? I'd guess some right wing group like the EDL will be next to start a blaze.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 23, 2017)

Watch Grenfell MP's spine-tingling first speech exposing the shame of poverty


----------



## teqniq (Jun 23, 2017)

Dandred said:


> With so many buildings in the UK having this cladding, isn't it just a short matter of time some religious nutter sets one on fire in the name of religion? I'd guess some right wing group like the EDL will be next to start a blaze.



Your imagination is getting the better of you.


----------



## Corax (Jun 23, 2017)

74drew said:


> Work colleague of mine has lost some family in the fire. Please sign and share.
> 
> Grenfell Tower Fire Victim Grieving | Campaigns by You


This isn't any comment on the petition, but only an observation on my own reaction to it, which I thought I may as well pass on for comment.

I don't believe I'm particularly special, so I assume my reaction's not unique.

I saw this post and immediately thought "Oh, another one" and scrolled on.  I didn't even click on the link to see what the petition was for.  It was just another petition for something that I probably thought was a good idea but eh, done loads of these and cba tbh.  Change and Degrees clog most of my inbox up each day ffs.  WTF does it achieve anyway.

In this case, fwiw, I checked myself and signed it.  But there are countless examples to the contrary.

I'm not making a point (I think, maybe I am. FFS...), just an observation.  And even if I'm not special or unique in this, it's still a bit of a depressing one when I look in the mirror.  

Meh.


----------



## Nylock (Jun 24, 2017)

Dandred said:


> What, like posting stuff on an irreverent bulletin board?


And yet, here you are...


----------



## Dandred (Jun 24, 2017)

Nylock said:


> And yet, here you are...


----------



## cybertect (Jun 24, 2017)

It seems Camden are very pissed off with Rydon



Edit: I just noticed this was published on Thursday, sorry if this has been posted up before


----------



## Celyn (Jun 24, 2017)

Sue said:


> I get that. My point is more that there was absolutely nothing up in either of the tower blocks I lived in saying what you should do if there was a fire. Nothing about staying in your flat or leaving. Nothing at all.


Sue, I have lived in tower blocks, not in London, but in Glasgow, and there was, as you say, no fire advice. At all.
And that is a bit odd, isn't?  And quite a bit mad and brainless?

I don't think I have ever been in a workplace, (or, thinking back many years, my school), where there was not at least some kind of fire drill procedure. Often ignored,of course. 

When I moved into a flat on the 16th floor, I did kind of think "oh, what if there's a fire?". Quickly followed by "well, it's a flat I can have, and anyway, it has never burned before".  And "well, if there be fire, then I'm fairly certainly dead".  The way you think when you think the fire is not possible.  

But you are so right, Sue, even little notices, ANY sodding notices, were noticeable by absence. 

No gas in any high-rise I lived in. Def. no gas.
Ronan Point? Clarkston?  After those disasters, certainly no gas in multi-storey blocks of flats. Electricity only.

But it comes down to what the hell was going on for that fire not only to do its thing up along the outside, but to be able to travel inside also so fast and so fierce.

Horrible, horrible.


----------



## Dandred (Jun 24, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Your imagination is getting the better of you.



Better than than ELD man with a van!


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jun 24, 2017)

<snip>

Meanwhile...

_Two board members of the housing charity Shelter, including its chairman Sir Derek Myers, have resigned amid reports of internal disquiet over the organisation’s allegedly muted response to the Grenfell Tower fire.
*
Myers is a former chief executive of Kensington and Chelsea council, which owns Grenfell Tower, while trustee Tony Rice is chairman of Xerxes Equity, the sole shareholder in Omnis Exteriors – the company that sold the cladding used in the tower.

Two Shelter board members quit after Grenfell Tower fire*_[/QUOTE]

There does seem to be an awful lot of this shit.

Developers and contractors infiltrating the boards of organisations that are supposed to provide support and/or governance to *protect* people from developers and contractors.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 24, 2017)

Celyn said:


> Sue, I have lived in tower blocks, not in London, but in Glasgow, and there was, as you say, no fire advice. At all.
> And that is a bit odd, isn't?  And quite a bit mad and brainless?
> 
> I don't think I have ever been in a workplace, (or, thinking back many years, my school), where there was not at least some kind of fire drill procedure. Often ignored,of course.
> ...


Gas and electric where I lived


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 24, 2017)

Fwiw Glasgow have confirmed none of the tower blocks in the city are affected. The ones near me are being refurbished and I think are covered in render not cladding. This is the nearest one I can see from my living room :


----------



## Celyn (Jun 24, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Gas and electric where I lived


Yep. It might have been a local Glasgow decision, I realise.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 24, 2017)

Celyn said:


> Yep. It might have been a local Glasgow decision, I realise.


At least one on the estate near me is combined heat and power, it has its own small power plant. I suspect in that case it only has electricity because if the chp system has been properly designed you wouldn't need gas for heating. Other blocks may be similar.


----------



## cybertect (Jun 24, 2017)

It's likely down to the construction method.

After Ronan Point, gas was banned in _Large Panel Systems_ [LPS] built blocks of seven or more storeys. As the name suggests, Large Panel Systems are built using large (usually around 3m x 4m) precast concrete panels that are bolted together, rather like you might assemble an Ikea wardrobe.

It was the when some of those panels were blown away the explosion on the 18th floor of the 22 storey Ronan Point that the whole corner of the building was taken out. The panels above the 18th lost their support and then fell onto the floors below, causing a progressive collapse of the structure down to the ground.

Glasgow built a lot of their tall buildings with large panel systems, which is probably why they didn't/don't have gas.

Grenfell tower was constructed (in 1974 under post-Ronan Point regs) with a reinforced concrete frame to which external panels were fixed. These panels do not perform any structural function, the strength of the building is in the frame. In the event of an explosion, a few panels in the immediate vicinity may have been blown off, but the structural integrity of the building would remain intact. No LPS, so gas is permitted.


Edited for sloppy grammar


----------



## marty21 (Jun 24, 2017)

IC3D said:


> Are you sure about that Camden have a dedicated emergency planning department set up after 7/7 and this is	  exactly the sort of thing they were set up to deal with eta if you're referring to Camden that is


I was referring to KCTMO .


----------



## free spirit (Jun 24, 2017)

Sue said:


> I get that. My point is more that there was absolutely nothing up in either of the tower blocks I lived in saying what you should do if there was a fire. Nothing about staying in your flat or leaving. Nothing at all.





Gramsci said:


> free spirit
> 
> Has posted up about the stay in your flats policy. (this is long thread so can't catch up on everything).His dad who is professional working in building disagreed with this. Idea ( if I understand it correctly) is that fire in one flat can be contained. Leaving enough time for fire service to deal with a fire. Front doors with built in smoke seals mean that people are safer in there flats. In theory. This clearly didn't work in this case.



I'm pretty sure that there should have been signs with emergency evacuation procedures displayed prominently in the building, and not doing so would be a breach of the fire regs. CBA to go and find the exact regulation right now though.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 24, 2017)

cybertect said:


> It seems Camden are very pissed off with Rydon
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: I just noticed this was published on Thursday, sorry if this has been posted up before



That will be all in the wording of the tender / contract.

As I doubt the council can actually specify a specific product, they will probably have simply specified it as being 'class 0' fire resistant cladding, which the PE version of the cladding still actually is because our fire tests are so crap.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 24, 2017)

IC3D said:


> Are you sure about that Camden have a dedicated emergency planning department set up after 7/7 and this is	  exactly the sort of thing they were set up to deal with eta if you're referring to Camden that is


Er set up under civil contingencies act 2004, nothing to do with the events of July 2005.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 24, 2017)

'Hundreds' have actually died in Grenfell Tower fire, says shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 24, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> 'Hundreds' have actually died in Grenfell Tower fire, says shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott



I guess that's not irresponsible of her because she has diabetes.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 24, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> I guess that's not irresponsible of her because she has diabetes.


I think she has her numbers correct this time.

from wikipedia:


> The tower contained 127 flats, with 227 bedrooms, at the time of the fire
> ...
> On 21 June, the government announced that 68 new flats in the same borough as Grenfell Tower are to be made available to survivors of the fire.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 24, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I think she has her numbers correct this time.
> 
> from wikipedia:



What, hundreds have died? Maybe she knows something we don't, but she says this knowledge that hundreds have died is based only on the block having 23 floors. She should really should shut up and stop feeding conspiracy theories.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 24, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I think she has her numbers correct this time.
> 
> from wikipedia:


She must be pissed off to have you on her side


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 24, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> What, hundreds have died? Maybe she knows something we don't, but she says this knowledge that hundreds have died is based only on the block having 23 floors. She should really should shut up and stop feeding conspiracy theories.


And it's 'conspiracy theory' because someone, somewhere would surely say that actually the true figure is much larger than the official one?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 24, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> And it's 'conspiracy theory' because someone, somewhere would surely say that actually the true figure is much larger than the official one?


Nothing you say has any credibility as you're a FOTLer loon.


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 24, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> Fwiw Glasgow have confirmed none of the tower blocks in the city are affected. The ones near me are being refurbished and I think are covered in render not cladding. This is the nearest one I can see from my living room :
> 
> View attachment 110062



Amazingly you have captured a Lilliputian Airways flight a fraction of a second before it crashes into the second from top floor there. And yet still nothing on the MSM. Conspiracies abound.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 24, 2017)

I'm a bit puzzled as to you guys. A minimising of the reported death toll to minimise public disorder is hardly a wild proposition especially with a Conservative government on the brink of failing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 24, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I'm a bit puzzled as to you guys. A minimising of the reported death toll to minimise public disorder is hardly a wild proposition especially with a Conservative government on the brink of failing.


I am sure you can offer examples of minimised death tolls from recent years


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 24, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> I am sure you can offer examples of minimised death tolls from recent years


Do you want to help me out with the maths here?



> The tower contained 127 flats, with 227 bedrooms, at the time of the fire
> ...
> On 21 June, the government announced that 68 new flats in the same borough as Grenfell Tower are to be made available to survivors of the fire.


I believe people have been displaced from nearby too


----------



## bluescreen (Jun 24, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Do you want to help me out with the maths here?
> 
> 
> I believe people have been displaced from nearby too


Just to take one thing from your raft of assumptions: the 68 flats to be made available to survivors of the fire aren't going to house all the survivors and no one has said they are. Many will remain in temporary accommodation.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 24, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Do you want to help me out with the maths here?
> 
> 
> I believe people have been displaced from nearby too


Yeh. Pls tell me, where has anyone said these 68 flats are to house *all* the survivors?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 24, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Do you want to help me out with the maths here?
> 
> 
> I believe people have been displaced from nearby too


I don't want you to do the maths as you'd fuck it up


----------



## andysays (Jun 24, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I'm a bit puzzled as to you guys. A minimising of the reported death toll to minimise public disorder is hardly a wild proposition especially with a Conservative government on the brink of failing.



There's already been discussion on this thread as to why the currently known/reported death toll is likely to be a significant understatement of the actual figure, and recognition from most of us that there are legitimate logistical reasons why this might be.

It's a shame that Abbott has apparently spoken in such a way that the part of her statement which can be presented as DA having trouble with her figures again can be highlighted and the other reasonable points she's making can be minimised or ignored


> “Grenfell Tower is not just an accident; Grenfell Tower is not just an unfortunate incident. Those hundreds of people that died are a direct consequence of Tory attitudes in social housing,” Ms Abbott told a conference of the Labour Progress group. "The Tories think people in social housing are second-class citizens. And, as we have seen from Grenfell House, they are offering them second-class standards of safety. So, a direct consequence of that. A direct consequence of outsourcing ... and a direct consequence of deregulation."
> 
> Ms Abbott said people in Government needed to answer questions about why they did not implement recommendations made after previous fires.



It's also a shame that the Independent have chosen to highlight this aspect with such a clickbaity headline, and it's a shame that you've chosen to air your apparent conspiraloonery here, on what has mostly been a respectful and serious thread about this tragic subject.

(It's also a shame, though hardly a surprise, that DA has focussed entirely on current tory govt responsibility and failed to recognised that past Labour national government and current Labour local government also share some responsibility for the destruction of social housing and treating people in social housing as second-class citizens, including in her own Hackney constituency)


----------



## marty21 (Jun 24, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> What, hundreds have died? Maybe she knows something we don't, but she says this knowledge that hundreds have died is based only on the block having 23 floors. She should really should shut up and stop feeding conspiracy theories.


It may never be possible to discover the number of deaths. The council would gave a record of the tenants and the leaseholders.  They may not have a record who lives win the tenant ,they would rely on the tenant actually informing them if the household had changed after the tenancy agreement had been signed.  The tenancy agreement would have details of who was living there when they signed the agreement.  The DWP records can add to the tally but there may be sub-letters and the actual tenant may not know who is living there, plus the leaseholders are supposed to inform the council if they rent the place  but mostly don't.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 24, 2017)

andysays said:


> There's already been discussion on this thread as to why the currently known/reported death toll is likely to be a significant understatement of the actual figure, and recognition from most of us that there are legitimate logistical reasons why this might be.
> ...
> 
> It's also a shame that the Independent have chosen to highlight this aspect with such a clickbaity headline, and it's a shame that you've chosen to air your apparent conspiraloonery here, on what has mostly been a respectful and serious thread about this tragic subject.


How can you agree with the postulation and then simultaneously label it as 'conspiraloonery'?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 24, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> What, hundreds have died? Maybe she knows something we don't, but she says this knowledge that hundreds have died is based only on the block having 23 floors. She should really should shut up and stop feeding conspiracy theories.


Everybody knows that hundreds have died. We know that hundreds lived there (even if the exact number of hundreds is not known), we know the approximate number who've come out, and by now, the idea that there are loads of people who might have escaped but nobody knows about them is not really credible.


----------



## xenon (Jun 24, 2017)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Everybody knows that hundreds have died. We know that hundreds lived there (even if the exact number of hundreds is not known), we know the approximate number who've come out, and by now, the idea that there are loads of people who might have escaped but nobody knows about them is not really credible.



You 'know'. this how?


----------



## xenon (Jun 24, 2017)

What isn't credible is numbers based on guesswork   My mates lived in LA sublet, so the same must be here. Extrapolation


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 24, 2017)

How many have come out, approximately?


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 24, 2017)

This daily mail article names 60 or so missing people presumably not accounted for in the death toll 
How boy aged 9 became youngest Grenfell Tower hero | Daily Mail Online

I haven't found an account of someone escaping from the higher than the 17th floor.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 24, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> This daily mail article names 60 or so missing people presumably not accounted for in the death toll
> How boy aged 9 became youngest Grenfell Tower hero | Daily Mail Online



No, there are 79 officially missing presumed dead and the Mail has named 60 of them.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 24, 2017)

xenon said:


> You 'know'. this how?


That post explains how.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 24, 2017)

Dandred said:


> Ignorance is bliss, enjoy it.



You obviously do.


----------



## GarveyLives (Jun 24, 2017)

*The Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea has a 'Director for Housing' called Laura Johnson, who is apparently paid £88,000 p.a.

What exactly does Laura Johnson have to say about this disaster?*


----------



## xenon (Jun 24, 2017)

FridgeMagnet said:


> That post explains how.



Guessing then.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 24, 2017)

xenon said:


> Guessing then.


How would we know how many died without "guessing"?


----------



## xenon (Jun 24, 2017)

FridgeMagnet said:


> How would we know how many died without "guessing"?




What. Really? Come off it.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 24, 2017)

FridgeMagnet said:


> How would we know how many died without "guessing"?



How many died at Hilsborough? 500? We know thousands were there and approximately how many came out.


----------



## stuff_it (Jun 24, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> This daily mail article names 60 or so missing people presumably not accounted for in the death toll
> How boy aged 9 became youngest Grenfell Tower hero | Daily Mail Online
> 
> I haven't found an account of someone escaping from the higher than the 17th floor.


There was an Asian woman who rang her family from the 19th/18th floor landing telling them she couldn't get out and she was in the hands of God. Turns out she was in hospital for a few days surrounded by family before they found out that a fireman actually did get her out and she is now recovering.

Happy ending among Grenfell Tower despair as missing woman found alive


----------



## xenon (Jun 24, 2017)

They sublet. That's what they do. Just stop guessing FFS. Sorry, pisses me off.


----------



## stuff_it (Jun 24, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> How many have come out, approximately?


They're obviously not saying. The listed dead are "whole or near entire bodies" afaik, so anyone who was consumed by extreme heat or was very young wouldn't come up in that tally, nor would their families likely still be around to kick up a stink. 

I think the worst one was the 42 people found together comforting each other as they burned.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 24, 2017)

xenon said:


> What. Really? Come off it.


Clearly it's absurd to say that we must assume that only people whose bodies have been formally identified are dead. At this point we have to estimate, and we will always have to because not all bodies are identifiable. It takes a while to identify bodies anyway and we don't and are unlikely to ever know how many people were actually there at the time. So yeah guessing.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 24, 2017)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Clearly it's absurd to say that we must assume that only people whose bodies have been formally identified are dead. At this point we have to estimate, and we will always have to because not all bodies are identifiable. It takes a while to identify bodies anyway and we don't and are unlikely to ever know how many people were actually there at the time. So yeah guessing.



The official estimates are not derived from a body count but from those reported missing.


----------



## xenon (Jun 24, 2017)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Clearly it's absurd to say that we must assume that only people whose bodies have been formally identified are dead. At this point we have to estimate, and we will always have to because not all bodies are identifiable. It takes a while to identify bodies anyway and we don't and are unlikely to ever know how many people were actually there at the time. So yeah guessing.




Fair enough. Sadly likely to be the case. I mean it's worse than a plane being blown up in that respect. 

Just get the hump with all the speculation I spose.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 24, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> No, there are 79 officially missing presumed dead and the Mail has named 60 of them.


I think you are right on that one, thank you.


----------



## 74drew (Jun 25, 2017)

Corax said:


> This isn't any comment on the petition, but only an observation on my own reaction to it, which I thought I may as well pass on for comment.
> 
> I don't believe I'm particularly special, so I assume my reaction's not unique.
> 
> ...



99% of the time i'm exactly the same. I wonder what good it does. I think in this case, if nothing else the more people that sign then the family will feel more support, If nothing else then that's a good thing?


----------



## existentialist (Jun 25, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I'm a bit puzzled as to you guys. A minimising of the reported death toll to minimise public disorder is hardly a wild proposition especially with a Conservative government on the brink of failing.


That would be impressive if there were any evidence for it beyond your belief that such a thing must, somehow, happen.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 25, 2017)

existentialist said:


> That would be impressive if there were any evidence for it beyond your belief that such a thing must, somehow, happen.



Not so much a case of "must, somehow, happen", as a case of "well, UK governments have form for covering up the toll in mass deaths, so as to make life easier for themselves.  Slapton Sands springs to mind, but also the Kings Cross fire, the Moorgate crash, the Herald of Free Enterprise sinking etc - all cases where the media was managed, and death tolls were fed out in dribs and drabs because it made fewer waves for the government that way.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 25, 2017)

Hours later sorry, anecdotal evidence FWIW-  the sort of thing that would probably never come up in investigation- my sons school which was built a couple of years ago had roof slates flying off it in high winds. Council came out with same statement that it was the contractors that sourced the slates and they met building regs. However it's a small community and rumour has it(yes I know, unverifiable) that the original contractor pulled out as they wouldn't put their name to the work due to the cheap slates. I suspect maybe arms and legs added but I guess the local contractor offered to do it at a certain price, wouldn't go lower because the Welsh slates they eventually replaced the cheap ones with are in use all over Orkney and any cheaper wouldn't stand up to our harsh climate, so then the council has gone for a contractor south instead which possibly wouldn't have that experience of cheap slates flying off roofs  in large numbers so soon after construction. They can blame the contractors but they are also buying cheap.


Also can we stop arguing about the number of deaths


----------



## MikeMcc (Jun 25, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Not so much a case of "must, somehow, happen", as a case of "well, UK governments have form for covering up the toll in mass deaths, so as to make life easier for themselves.  Slapton Sands springs to mind, but also the Kings Cross fire, the Moorgate crash, the Herald of Free Enterprise sinking etc - all cases where the media was managed, and death tolls were fed out in dribs and drabs because it made fewer waves for the government that way.


You've picked three cases where the investigations led to substantial safety improvements, none of which were due to deliberate policy choices, just sloppy policies and processes.


----------



## MikeMcc (Jun 25, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> How many died at Hilsborough? 500? We know thousands were there and approximately how many came out.


At Hilsbourgh it was 96 dead and 766 injured.  As part of a fire course that I was involved in I was shown some truly shocking footage, stuff that I would have thought was impossible.  Absolutely dreadful.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 25, 2017)

I get the impression that some people are eagerly hoping for a higher death toll because it would be worse for the government.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 25, 2017)

From the figures I've collated (ive spent way too much time doing it) I don't think the numbers are as high as people are suggesting, unless the reports of subletting with 40 people are true. I've not seen reports from neighbours saying they were aware of large numbers of people staying in one flat and Id have expected to hear that being the case by now as they'd be the ones best replaced to report it. Although obviously this could be wrong.I don't think at this point that "A fireman told me....", is a reliable source of evidence.

If the missing figures were to pan out as the current information I have I think there were possibly 350 people in the building.

FWIW: Nobody below floor 10 is currently listed as missing or deceased, although Im missing 10 flats with any information about who lived there, let alone if they survived or not)


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 25, 2017)

MikeMcc said:


> You've picked three cases where the investigations led to substantial safety improvements, none of which were due to deliberate policy choices, just sloppy policies and processes.



Mmm, my point wasn't about where the investigations led, but that the govt and a collusive media did their best to eke out the death-count in the days following those disasters.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 25, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> I get the impression that some people are eagerly hoping for a higher death toll because it would be worse for the government.



Who is?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 25, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> I get the impression that some people are eagerly hoping for a higher death toll because it would be worse for the government.



Anyone doing so, doesn't need to.  The government's own actions have guaranteed that things are far worse for them than they would otherwise have been.


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 25, 2017)

stuff_it said:


> I think the worst one was the 42 people found together comforting each other as they burned.



Is that a fact is it? I guess that's in addition to the "dozens of bodies on the roof" mentioned earlier in the thread, or the "scores" of bodies on the stairs?

It really pisses me off when people parrot these rumours as if they are facts, which they aren't.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 25, 2017)

How The Grenfell Tower Community Helped Themselves – Because No One Else Would


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 25, 2017)

Khadija Saye's art put on display at Tate Britain in memory of Grenfell Tower victims


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 25, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> How The Grenfell Tower Community Helped Themselves – Because No One Else Would


yeh this isn't 'no one else would', this is about the pisspoor response from the local and national government: a most misleading headline.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 25, 2017)

Arconic knowingly supplied flammable panels for use in tower: emails


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 25, 2017)

> GRENFELL TOWER, JUNE 2017:
> a poem by Ben Okri
> 
> 'It was like a burnt matchbox in the sky.
> ...


----------



## existentialist (Jun 25, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Arconic knowingly supplied flammable panels for use in tower: emails


"When asked about the emails, Arconic said in a statement that it had known the panels would be used at Grenfell Tower but that it was not its role to decide what was or was not compliant with local building regulations."

Exactly the kind of plausible deniability these arms-length multiple-layers-of-subcontracting setups seem almost designed to create. I guess they might be legally watertight, but I'd imagine that's the reputation of the brand thoroughly trashed.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 25, 2017)

Tory councillor who managed Grenfell Tower refurbishment 'flees luxury £1.2m home after threats from angry residents'


----------



## existentialist (Jun 25, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Tory councillor who managed Grenfell Tower refurbishment 'flees luxury £1.2m home after threats from angry residents'


My heart fucking bleeds. 

Actually, no, it doesn't. He's had to evacuate at his own expense? I bet HE didn't end up in some flophouse...


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 25, 2017)

I hope CW lynch the cunt.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 25, 2017)

The 1984 Documentary That Predicted Grenfell Tower fire



Spoiler: 1 minute Youtube video


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 25, 2017)

Mr.Bishie said:


> I hope CW lynch the cunt.


CW?


----------



## weltweit (Jun 25, 2017)

Grenfell survivors were told to sign council form that 'could waive rights'


----------



## ddraig (Jun 25, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> CW?


Class War


----------



## ddraig (Jun 25, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Grenfell survivors were told to sign council form that 'could waive rights'


they just can't fucking help themselves can they?!?!


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 26, 2017)

...


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 26, 2017)

Youtuber conducts own fire test on aluminium composite panelling.



Spoiler: youtube video


----------



## IC3D (Jun 26, 2017)

Is that a relative gentlegreen


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 26, 2017)

IC3D said:


> Is that a relative gentlegreen


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 26, 2017)

In Defense of the High-Rise



> It is easy to imagine a shock doctrine response to this massacre. Councils are already evacuating blocks clad with flammable material by Rydon. They have little money, crippled both by New Labour’s suspicion of local government and by Tory austerity. Many may opt to demolish, or to sell up to developers who can promise to properly refurbish the blocks — at a price, of course.
> 
> Contrary to what Sadiq Khan argues, the consequence of the fire might be not that the “mistakes” of the 1960s and 1970s are demolished, but that the mistakes of the 2000s and 2010s are continued, as ’60s “mistakes” are transformed into aspirational “solutions” for a better class of resident. Then, the people who once had, for all their poverty, commanding views over Western Europe’s most unequal city, will be moved far out of it, to distant towns and cities where the rich won’t have to look up at them



worth the read, although I am certain some of our newly qualified housing safety experts will cry hyperbole


----------



## NoXion (Jun 26, 2017)

This bullshit that because of mistakes and miserliness done in this century, we have to tear down and/or sell off perfectly serviceable buildings built last century, really boils my piss and should be challenged at every turn.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 26, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Tory councillor who managed Grenfell Tower refurbishment 'flees luxury £1.2m home after threats from angry residents'



He has amazing parents. 

Amanda Feilding - Wikipedia



> Feilding ran for British Parliament twice, on the platform 'Trepanation for the National Health' with the intention of advocating research into its potential benefits.[4] 35 years later, she initiated and was involved in research into the physiological effects of trepanation and cranial compliance at the Sechenov Institute for Evolutionary Physiology and Biochemistry, St. Petersburg.



They are also rich as fuck.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 26, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> I get the impression that some people are eagerly hoping for a higher death toll because it would be worse for the government.


Nah, that would be really shit. However I do think it's important that the true death toll is acknowledge (even if it may never worked out with any confidence). It's partly about acknowledging the scale of the tragedy, but also to remember those who died.  The idea that some people who might have been 'illegal'/undocumented and just slip away from history, is awful.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 26, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Tory councillor who managed Grenfell Tower refurbishment 'flees luxury £1.2m home after threats from angry residents'


That Met response to the _Mirror_ is priceless:



> Police were alerted on Saturday, 17 June, to reports of posters with allegedly abusive content displayed outside a residential address in the borough of Kensington.
> 
> Officers who subsequently attended the scene did not find any evidence of posters at the scene, or any evidence of criminal damage at the property.
> 
> Officers were subsequently sent photographs of the alleged posters. The individual property owner concerned was given advice by police. Enquiries continue.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 26, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> That Met response to the _Mirror_ is priceless:


One wonders what the exact nature of said _advice_ proffered to said _individual property owner_ might have been, in the circumstances, like.


----------



## ddraig (Jun 26, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> One wonders what the exact nature of said _advice_ proffered to said _individual property owner_ might have been, in the circumstances, like.


"grow up and get a grip you whinging toff, someone put up a poster? a poster?, boo hoo, they've lost loved ones and homes, get some pers pec tive" i'd hope, but doubt very much


----------



## mrs quoad (Jun 26, 2017)

Edit: I'm feeling deeply suspicious of that link. I can't find a time / date stamp on it, and am unable to find the story on any other current news sites.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jun 26, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Baby rescued from burnt building 12 days after London’s Grenfell Tower fire
> 
> Holy fuck.


that can't be true


----------



## teqniq (Jun 26, 2017)

How is that even possible?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 26, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Baby rescued from burnt building 12 days after London’s Grenfell Tower fire
> 
> Holy fuck.


That's a fake news/clickbait site.


----------



## killer b (Jun 26, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> that can't be true


the other stories on the site seem to be made up, so no.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jun 26, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> That's a fake news/clickbait site.


Thanks, and apologies. It looked increasingly dodgy as fuck the more I looked into it (and thought about it); edited pretty much as you were commenting.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jun 26, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> One wonders what the exact nature of said _advice_ proffered to said _individual property owner_ might have been, in the circumstances, like.



Hopefully "don't fucking waste our time, you chinless slag", rather than the usual cop-to-posho deference.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 26, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Spoiler: potentially dodgy fake news, beyond remarkable if true
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Absolute tosh. Dodgey Wordpress blog Meka-news 2016.


----------



## strung out (Jun 26, 2017)

Orang Utan said:


> that can't be true


It's not - that website is pretty clearly fake.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 26, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Hopefully "don't fucking waste our time, you chinless slag", rather than the usual cop-to-posho deference.


they have ways of expressing it without using the language reserved for norms, although it was probably someone of rank making the polite but withering remarks


----------



## mrs quoad (Jun 26, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Absolute tosh. Dodgey Wordpress blog Meka-news 2016.


Lesson swiftly learnt. Opened fingers before engaging brain.


----------



## ddraig (Jun 26, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> That's a fake news/clickbait site.


ffs


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 26, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Lesson swiftly learnt. Opened fingers before engaging brain.


A grim reminder that there are some right sick bastards out there prepared to monetise the shit out of grief and pain


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 26, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> A grim reminder that there are some right sick bastards out there prepared to monetise the shit out of grief and pain


It's disgusting. Who would do it?


----------



## existentialist (Jun 26, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> One wonders what the exact nature of said _advice_ proffered to said _individual property owner_ might have been, in the circumstances, like.


"If I were you, sir, I'd fuck off out of it pretty sharpish. We've only got 2 coppers on this beat, and, well, y'know, wandering over could take a bit of time if there's any old ladies needing helping across the road or kittens up trees, and things unravel fast. We hear Rockall's quite nice this time of year, sir."


----------



## existentialist (Jun 26, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> That's a fake news/clickbait site.


Urgh, I've just had to point this out to several friends who've reposted it. I *think* I've pre-empted Mrs E doing so, but you can never be sure...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 26, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> One wonders what the exact nature of said _advice_ proffered to said _individual property owner_ might have been, in the circumstances, like.



Just fuck off.

And, so he has.


----------



## salem (Jun 26, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> It's disgusting. Who would do it?


It'll be someone trying to get shares/likes on facebook which they can then sell (along with ads on the site in the meantime). This one seems especially considered though which is quite sick.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 26, 2017)

Anyone with a modicum of knowledge of human physiology should know that the human body cannot survive much longer than 3 days without water. Anyone who doesn't know should be made aware.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 26, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Anyone with a modicum of knowledge of human physiology should know that the human body cannot survive much longer than 3 days without water. Anyone who doesn't know should be made aware.


3 days water, three weeks food, three mins air. Thems the average limit although drinkers of their own piss may squeeze an extra day


----------



## Wilf (Jun 26, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Arconic knowingly supplied flammable panels for use in tower: emails


That link closed my browser a couple of times. Here's another version in case it's doing the same for other people.  Damning stuff, some heavy duty buck passing:

E-mails show Arconic, cladding manufacturer in London tower fire, knowingly supplied flammable panels


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 26, 2017)

Wilf said:


> That link closed my browser a couple of times. Here's another version in case it's doing the same for other people.  Damning stuff, some heavy duty buck passing:
> 
> E-mails show Arconic, cladding manufacturer in London tower fire, knowingly supplied flammable panels


<Never mind me >


----------



## existentialist (Jun 26, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> <Never mind me >


Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery


----------



## A380 (Jun 26, 2017)

teqniq said:


> How is that even possible?


It's not. Sadly.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 26, 2017)

A380 said:


> It's not. Sadly.


I know, see post #3405


----------



## A380 (Jun 26, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> they have ways of expressing it without using the language reserved for norms, although it was probably someone of rank making the polite but withering remarks


It's like the Queen. She can't say " Theresa, you are fucking useless, and you lied to one when you came to the palace and said you had a deal with those DUP wankers " . She can send the same message by wearing an EU flag hat instead of a crown to her speach.

Same principle.


----------



## A380 (Jun 26, 2017)

teqniq said:


> I know, see post #3405


Sorry, phone was only showing the page it was on.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 26, 2017)

Do we know what the state of play/progress is with searching and clearing the rest of the tower? I was assuming that the fire service would be going through it floor by floor, and I'd (perhaps naively) assumed that they'd have at least checked the whole building by now.

There was talk in the early days of people who had got to the roof, and died there - have those been included in the casualty count yet? I appreciate that there are all kinds of problems with identification or even finding some of the bodies, but it does all seem to have gone very quiet...


----------



## Libertad (Jun 26, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Tory councillor who managed Grenfell Tower refurbishment 'flees luxury £1.2m home after threats from angry residents'



Rock Paper-Scissors.


----------



## editor (Jun 26, 2017)

Dandred said:


> Missing the point.....  going for the lizards!


I'm taking you off this thread because I'm fed up reading reported posts about your disruptive behaviour,


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 26, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Do we know what the state of play/progress is with searching and clearing the rest of the tower? I was assuming that the fire service would be going through it floor by floor, and I'd (perhaps naively) assumed that they'd have at least checked the whole building by now.
> 
> There was talk in the early days of people who had got to the roof, and died there - have those been included in the casualty count yet? I appreciate that there are all kinds of problems with identification or even finding some of the bodies, but it does all seem to have gone very quiet...


I expect we might hear something further after the vote on the queen's speech.


----------



## Libertad (Jun 26, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I expect we might hear something further after the vote on the queen's speech.



Why's that then?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 26, 2017)

FFs.




> The UK’s insurance industry issued a warning relating to flammable external surfaces on high rise buildings just one month before the Grenfell Tower fire that left at least 79 people dead.
> 
> In a statement, the Association of British Insurers said that it had been calling on the Government to review its standards for building regulations for the last eight years and that it had issued a warning in May specifically relating to the combustible external cladding on buildings like the Grenfell Tower and how it can cause fire to spread.


Britain's association of insurers issued a warning about cladding a month before the Grenfell disaster


----------



## Wilf (Jun 26, 2017)

Libertad said:


> Rock Paper-Scissors.


To be honest, I'd use all of them. Even death by a thousand paper cuts does it for me.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 26, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I expect we might hear something further after the vote on the queen's speech.


If it emerges that there really has been some kind of Governmental coverup, then I am very happy to be accused of naivety. But it seems to me to be several kinds of wrong to countenance that as even a remote possibility at this stage.

I would prefer to assume that the building is being painstakingly searched, and that the relevant services - particularly since this now looks as if it will be a criminal inquiry - are doing a careful job of documenting and gathering everything. And Occam's Razor suggests far more plausible explanations for the slowness of the emergence of this information than the Conspiraloon's Friend, the Government Coverup.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 26, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> FFs.
> 
> 
> 
> Britain's association of insurers issued a warning about cladding a month before the Grenfell disaster


Or to put it into a headline: "Was Theresa May too busy running an unnecessary election to listen to the British Association of Insurers warnings on the fire risk of cladding?"
(((Strong and Stable Government)))


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 26, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Or to put it into a headline: "Was Theresa May too busy running an unnecessary election to listen to the British Association of Insurers warnings on the fire risk of cladding?"
> (((Strong and Stable Government)))


Full of fail government


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 26, 2017)

Someone in the business was telling me over the weekend ( i will try and get the exact details) that insurers had been refusing to insure warehouses that had (aluminium?) composite panels from the mid 80s after a series of big fires and claims. So this sort of stuff wasn't good enough for commodities for decades. But people...


----------



## Corax (Jun 26, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Someone in the business was telling me over the weekend ( i will try and get the exact details) that insurers had been refusing to insure warehouses that had (aluminium) composite cladding panels from the mid 80s after a series of big fires and claims. So this sort of stuff wasn't good enough for commodities for decades. But people...


It reads like you're implying people aren't commodities?


----------



## editor (Jun 26, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Or to put it into a headline: "Was Theresa May too busy running an unnecessary election to listen to the British Association of Insurers warnings on the fire risk of cladding?"
> (((Strong and Stable Government)))





> In a statement, the Association of British Insurers said that it had been calling on the Government to review its standards for building regulations for the last eight years and that it had issued a warning in May specifically relating to the combustible external cladding on buildings like the Grenfell Tower and how it can cause fire to spread.


Criminal negligence.


----------



## free spirit (Jun 26, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Someone in the business was telling me over the weekend ( i will try and get the exact details) that insurers had been refusing to insure warehouses that had (aluminium?) composite panels from the mid 80s after a series of big fires and claims. So this sort of stuff wasn't good enough for commodities for decades. But people...


upthread I posted links to reports submitted to a parliamentary committee into a big tower block fire in the 90s at which the exact same points about the failings of UK regulations and fire tests were made that are being raised now, but nothing has changed at all as a result.

None of the issues involved are new, experts have been calling for changes for 20-30 years but nothing's happened.

This is partly down to all the government expertise being farmed out, with the likes of BRE and the fire testing labs being flogged off, and the organisations that are responsible for setting most of the relevant standards now being basically industry bodies dominated by the insulation manufacturers. There's pretty much nobody left actually in government who knows anything about the subject themselves, they're pretty much entirely reliant on advice received from the industry bodies. Plus the ministers get chopped and changed before they've had chance to get a handle on their brief, so longer terms stuff like this never actually gets sorted despite everyone involved in the industry / fire safety field knowing it's a complete mess that's going to result in a huge fire and lots of deaths at some point.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 26, 2017)

Insurers could  refuse to take on the risk of clad structures if intransigence is shown by the government - this is serious bad vuggm if it happens, as HMG will have to underwrite the liability as the skint councils will be unable to do this. We saw a similar theme with the Oil industry after Piper alpha, where the companies were unable to lay off the risk and were forced to self insure  via tied insurance vehicles IIRC . kabbes will invariably put me right on this and point my obvious and foolish errors


----------



## kabbes (Jun 26, 2017)

We also saw similar issues ground aeroplanes post-911 and prevent building on floodplains


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 26, 2017)

Has anyone posted the London Fire Brigade video of a fridge catching fire ?

Horror video shows just how quickly plastic backed fridge freezers catch fire


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 26, 2017)

Bit late, and still cunts in my book, but...



> Arconic discontinues Reynobond PE, the cladding linked to the London blaze, for use in high-rise buildings.
> 
> The decision to stop selling it for use in skyscraper cladding comes after it emerged that the company knew the less fire-resistant version, Reynobond PE, would be used on Grenfell Tower despite its own guidelines warning that it was unsuitable for buildings above 10m tall. Emails obtained by Reuters showed Arconic was involved in discussions about the use of cladding on the building during 2014.



Grenfell Tower: cladding linked to fire pulled from sale worldwide


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jun 26, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> He has amazing parents.
> 
> Amanda Feilding - Wikipedia
> 
> ...



Ok, right, his mother is that "Drill your own hole" art loon


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 26, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Has anyone posted the London Fire Brigade video of a fridge catching fire ?
> 
> Horror video shows just how quickly plastic backed fridge freezers catch fire



That is fucking scary! 

I had already checked my old Hotpoint fridge freezer isn't the model involved in Grenfell, which it isn't, and I've just pulled it out to check the back of it, and was pleased to find it had a metal back.


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 26, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> He has amazing parents.
> 
> Amanda Feilding - Wikipedia
> .



Who gave their children amazing names. 

Rock Basil Hugo Feilding Mellen 

Cosmo Birdie Feilding Mellen

Only in the aristocracy...


----------



## bemused (Jun 26, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> [..]ke on the risk of clad structures if intransigence is shown by the government [..]



I think they'll throw money at this problem to make it go away.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 26, 2017)

Another timely harvest from the mythical magic money tree no doubt


----------



## Wilf (Jun 26, 2017)

bemused said:


> I think they'll throw money at this problem to make it go away.


Maybe we should have a scale and a currency in terms of payments to make things go away.  So, given that we've just handed the DUP £1,000,000,000, henceforth small scale payments of say £500,000,000 should be classed as _Half a Creationist_.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 26, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Another timely harvest from the mythical magic money tree no doubt


will there be any left after the DUP just grabbed all the windfall?


----------



## Wilf (Jun 26, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> will there be any left after the DUP just grabbed all the windfall?


They'll only go and spend it all on gable ends.


----------



## bemused (Jun 26, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Maybe we should have a scale and a currency in terms of payments to make things go away.  So, given that we've just handed the DUP £1,000,000,000, henceforth small scale payments of say £500,000,000 should be classed as _Half a Creationist_.



Given the money that the Labour party were promising at the last election I think the Tories could go an a spending spree and still be able to say they weren't spending as much as Jezza wants to.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 26, 2017)

Wilf said:


> They'll only go and spend it all on gable ends.


Not on gable's end


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 26, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Maybe we should have a scale and a currency in terms of payments to make things go away.  So, given that we've just handed the DUP £1,000,000,000, henceforth small scale payments of say £500,000,000 should be classed as _Half a Creationist_.


3 counties


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 26, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> Who gave their children amazing names.
> 
> Rock Basil Hugo Feilding Mellen
> 
> ...


ffucking fielding melon


----------



## ddraig (Jun 26, 2017)




----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 26, 2017)




----------



## editor (Jun 26, 2017)

ddraig said:


>



I'll post this up on Buzz in the morning.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 26, 2017)

ddraig said:


>



Meanwhile...

Anger sparked after Grenfell Tower fundraiser is axed following venue's objection to bashment music - NME



> Stormzy was among the high-profile names to slam Shoreditch's Trapeze Bar for their decision to cancel the charity event
> 
> The postponement of a fundraiser to benefit the victims of the *Grenfell Tower* fire has attracted widespread criticism after the venue claimed that the event’s offer of bashment music would attract a “poor quality demographic.”...


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 26, 2017)

Yeah we love charity fundraisers but too many black faces...no thanks.


----------



## editor (Jun 26, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Meanwhile...
> 
> Anger sparked after Grenfell Tower fundraiser is axed following venue's objection to bashment music - NME


What a shitty scummy bar.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 26, 2017)

editor said:


> What a shitty scummy bar.



You mean RACIST too right?


----------



## teqniq (Jun 26, 2017)

editor said:


> What a shitty scummy bar.


Not for much longer one would hope.


----------



## shaman75 (Jun 26, 2017)




----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 27, 2017)

I know this is at the morbid end of the scale in terms of the monitoring of this but I feel like I need to/want to.

Grenfell Tower victim Isaac Paulos, 5, choked to death on fire fumes



> The coroner overseeing formal investigations into the causes of death for each of the Grenfell Tower fire victims has spoken of the almost indescribable complexity of identifying them as scepticism about the official death toll grows.
> 
> The Westminster coroner, Dr Fiona Wilcox, said the removal of bodies and formal identification would continue to be hampered by how dangerous the Kensington tower block has become since the blaze.



Really important to remember obviously.



> Opening the inquest into five-year-old Isaac Paulos, one of the 18 people identified so far, she said: “It can’t really be explained in enough detail how complex an investigation this is in terms of identification and in terms of recovery of bodies on a dangerous site that my team are not allowed to enter because the building is being shored up.”
> 
> Paulos, one of the youngest of the victims so far, lived with his family on the 18th floor and was found on the 13th floor, Wilcox said. He was identified by dental records and his preliminary cause of death was given as inhalation of fire fumes.



He made it down to the 13th floor this lad and whomever he was with. The smoke was travelling upwards though.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 27, 2017)

> The other three victims whose inquests were opened included artist Khadija Saye, 24.
> 
> The artist, hailed as a "wonderful young woman" by Tottenham MP David Lammy, was due to appear on a BBC documentary about her work, which was on show in Venice as part of a collection on the theme of diaspora.
> 
> ...


----------



## Miss-Shelf (Jun 27, 2017)

Thank you for sharing that Rutita1 , awful though it is to comprehend


----------



## MikeMcc (Jun 27, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Mmm, my point wasn't about where the investigations led, but that the govt and a collusive media did their best to eke out the death-count in the days following those disasters.


I don't think there was any desire to eke out the count.  But a definite desire to make sure that the figure they gave was absolutely backed up with evidence,  Any attempt to 'guesstimate' would back-fire publically  and none of them are willing to tolerate that.  In this case the emergency services were taking great pains to only report confirmed evidence AND provide fairly good expectations that the figures would grow and to what extent.  Don't blame them for revising those figures as they went along.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 27, 2017)

Grenfell Tower fire survivors demand say in public inquiry

_Survivors of the Grenfell Tower fire are demanding a say in the scope and setup of the inquiry into the disaster, including over the choice of the judge appointed to chair it.

Residents in the area acknowledge that such consultation would be unprecedented in such an public inquiry but say it is necessary to restore local trust in the authorities.

A group representing the Lancaster West Estate surrounding the tower, which includes some survivors of the disaster, has written to Theresa May to “demand that our voices are heard and fully included in the public inquiry”.

The letter welcomes the inquiry and the government’s apparent commitment to listen to residents’ concerns, but it says it should demonstrate this by consulting residents over the terms of reference of the inquiry and the choice of the chair, the counsel to the inquiry and composition of the advisory panel._


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 27, 2017)

Counselling for the Grenfell firefighters is virtually non-existent due to cuts.
Fire Heroes Struggle with ‘Drastically Cut’ Counselling - Real Media - The News You Don't See


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 27, 2017)

Have we had this unmitigated cunt yet? 

Count how many times he repeats himself.


----------



## ddraig (Jun 27, 2017)

proper bluster and time wasting to avoid the point


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 27, 2017)

ddraig said:


> proper bluster and time wasting to avoid the point



I can picture the training sessions yesterday afternoon, taxpayer-funded of course.


----------



## iona (Jun 27, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Counselling for the Grenfell firefighters is virtually non-existent due to cuts.
> Fire Heroes Struggle with ‘Drastically Cut’ Counselling - Real Media - The News You Don't See



The firefighters charity also offers a range of services for firefighters, including psychological support, if anyone would like to donate.

(Not that it's right of course, all the funding & services cut and left for charities to provide  But I have friends who were at Grenfell and have accessed or will access the firefighters charity's support in future - passing on their request for donations feels like the least I can do in return)


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 27, 2017)

London fire: Who are the victims? - BBC News


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 27, 2017)

iona said:


> The firefighters charity also offers a range of services for firefighters, including psychological support, if anyone would like to donate.
> 
> (Not that it's right of course, all the funding & services cut and left for charities to provide  But I have friends who were at Grenfell and have accessed or will access the firefighters charity's support in future - passing on their request for donations feels like the least I can do in return)




As I understand it, a lot of people in the mental health field are offering services pro bono as well. I share your anger that this needs to be the case. It's exactly what that Big Society shit was about. "give us your taxes but we can't be arsed - you lot sort it out". Next thing you know, people are sleeping in parks after a brush with death which many of their neighbours didn't survive.

Still...at least there's going to be AN INQUIRY, and LESSONS WILL BE LEARNED within about 10 years. Some of them may even be applied within 20.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 27, 2017)

MikeMcc said:


> I don't think there was any desire to eke out the count.  But a definite desire to make sure that the figure they gave was absolutely backed up with evidence,  Any attempt to 'guesstimate' would back-fire publically  and none of them are willing to tolerate that.  In this case the emergency services were taking great pains to only report confirmed evidence AND provide fairly good expectations that the figures would grow and to what extent.  Don't blame them for revising those figures as they went along.


But usually with cataclysmic events there are reports of estimated deaths, qualified as such. This event does seem to be an exception.


----------



## agricola (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> But usually with cataclysmic events there are reports of estimated deaths, qualified as such. This event does seem to be an exception.



It is, but that is largely because of the circumstances of this disaster.  For a start, based on public statements one does get the impression that the TMO doesn't know how many people were actually living in that block on the night of the tragedy.  Combine that with the intensity of the fire and its very easy to see why they are only giving estimates of the dead that they know about.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 27, 2017)

I think it is more to do with maintaining public order and preventing mass demonstrations outside Downing Street before the queen officially invites May to form a government.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I think it is more to do with maintaining public order and preventing mass demonstrations outside Downing Street before the queen officially invites May to form a government.


i don't think the government would care two hoots whether there were 'mass demonstrations outside downing street'


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 27, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't think the government would care two hoots whether there were 'mass demonstrations outside downing street'


On the contrary, they care several hoots.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> On the contrary, they care several hoots.


yeh. that being the case, why is that of the many demonstrations which process along whitehall so very few of them actually achieve their objective? campaigns aren't won on demonstrations, squirrelp.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 27, 2017)

I don't think they have a clue how many people were in the block that night. Also it's clear that people are scared to come forward to the authorities for obvious reasons.  If they were to start guessing then they could be out by a substantial figure which would make them look even worse.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 27, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. that being the case, why is that of the many demonstrations which process along whitehall so very few of them actually achieve their objective? campaigns aren't won on demonstrations, squirrelp.


BBC ON THIS DAY | 31 | 1990: Violence flares in poll tax demonstration

That was the end of Thatcher.

This could be the end of Thatcherism.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> BBC ON THIS DAY | 31 | 1990: Violence flares in poll tax demonstration


yes, i am familiar with the poll tax riot, i was there.

what's your point, caller?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> BBC ON THIS DAY | 31 | 1990: Violence flares in poll tax demonstration
> 
> That was the end of Thatcher.
> 
> This could be the end of Thatcherism.


oho you've edited.

the poll tax was the end of thatcher. the poll tax riot was not the end of thatcher.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 27, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Meanwhile...
> 
> Anger sparked after Grenfell Tower fundraiser is axed following venue's objection to bashment music - NME



The general manager's racism is worth a £2000 donation to the Red cross apparently.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 27, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Meanwhile...
> 
> Anger sparked after Grenfell Tower fundraiser is axed following venue's objection to bashment music - NME





Rutita1 said:


> You mean RACIST too right?



Seems like just a racist dickhead General Manager. The owners seem ok:



> “The management team of Miroma Leisure, owners of Trapeze, are undertaking a full investigation of the matter and will take ‘affirmative action’ following the outcome. We have spoken with the promoters and offered them another date of their choice and offered to ‘double’ the money raised on the night for Grenfell as a gesture of goodwill.”
> Read more at Anger sparked after Grenfell Tower fundraiser is axed following venue's objection to bashment music - NME


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 27, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Seems like just a racist dickhead General Manager. The owners seem ok:


Pffft. Damage limitation.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 27, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Pffft. Damage limitation.


Well yes, but what else could they do? The bloke's a knob.


----------



## J Ed (Jun 27, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Seems like just a racist dickhead General Manager. The owners seem ok:



Are they ok? They could well be racist as well but realise what bad PR the whole thing is, in a sense it doesn't matter. The whole thing is disgusting, especially when you think about the fact that residents reported racism as a component in why they were not listened to.


----------



## agricola (Jun 27, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> oho you've edited.
> 
> the poll tax was the end of thatcher. the poll tax riot was not the end of thatcher.



is this a call for tea at the Ritz?


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 27, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> oho you've edited.
> 
> the poll tax was the end of thatcher. the poll tax riot was not the end of thatcher.


The edit was within 30 seconds, without seeing your post. I think the point is a pretty obvious one, tbh. The poll tax riot was the end of the poll tax. Spontaneous mass demonstrations are a big deal. A decent sized one would blow May over. This is precisely a scenario which could have produced something fairly big.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> The edit was within 30 seconds, without seeing your post. I think the point is a pretty obvious one, tbh. The poll tax riot was the end of the poll tax. Spontaneous mass demonstrations are a big deal. A decent sized one would blow May over. This is precisely a scenario which could have produced something fairly big.


The poll tax demonstration that ended in a riot in london was anything but spontaneous - and there isn't going to be anything happening that isn't already happening by adding a hundred to the official figures.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 27, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> oho you've edited.
> 
> the poll tax was the end of thatcher. the poll tax riot was not the end of thatcher.


That is not my recollection. From wikipedia (doubtless, there are better sources)



> Prime Minister Thatcher was at a conference of the Conservative Party Council in Cheltenham. The poll tax was the focus of the conference; as coverage of the demonstrations unfolded, speculation developed for the first time about Thatcher's position as leader.
> 
> *Consequences[edit]*
> *Fall of Thatcher[edit]*
> The riot in central London did much to contribute to the downfall of Margaret Thatcher, who resigned as Prime Minister on 28 November the same year. The national opposition to the poll tax (especially vehement in the North of England and Scotland) was the major factor; an opinion poll had found 78% opposed to it.[13] John Major, who succeeded Thatcher, announced that the tax would be abolished.


Poll tax riots - Wikipedia


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 27, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> The poll tax demonstration that ended in a riot in london was anything but spontaneous


You can't apply for a riot


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> You can't apply for a riot


You can spend a year plus organising the conditions for it to happen. And many of us did.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> You can't apply for a riot



If you want to discuss history, in respect of the poll tax & the associated demos & riots, please start a new thread & stop derailing this one, out of respect for the Grenfell victims & most people following this thread.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 27, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> You can spend a year plus organising the conditions for it to happen. And many of us did.


The point is, mass demonstrations outside Downing St can and do have political impact. If public order starts falling apart that can be a very big deal.
If the death toll is indeed hundreds, and an accurate estimate was released in the day after the event, there would have been a real prospect of a poll tax riot situation. As it was there was a spontaneous demonstration which produced disorder in Kensington Town Hall, that was on a reported death toll of less than 20.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 27, 2017)

I think everyone was aware that the death toll was going to be a lot higher than 20 just as everyone is aware that its going to rise still.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 27, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I think everyone was aware that the death toll was going to be a lot higher than 20 just as everyone is aware that its going to rise still.


Well frankly, no, that's not correct. Higher than the 17 or so, but not 150+. People rely on information from authority in these situations. It was  'conspiracy theory' to suggest that the death toll was being kept low in the days after the event:

Death toll cover-ups, media blackouts and D-notices - the truth about the Grenfell conspiracy theories


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Well frankly, no, that's not correct. Higher than the 17 or so, but not 150+. People rely on information from authority in these situations. It was  'conspiracy theory' to suggest that the death toll was being kept low in the days after the event:
> 
> Death toll cover-ups, media blackouts and D-notices - the truth about the Grenfell conspiracy theories



Odd response.  You can refer back to the first few pages of this thread if you want. The size of the block with the amount of homes in it combined with the ferocity of the fire and the limited ability for the fire service to fight it all clearly added up to a big death toll.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> The edit was within 30 seconds, without seeing your post. I think the point is a pretty obvious one, tbh. The poll tax riot was the end of the poll tax. Spontaneous mass demonstrations are a big deal. A decent sized one would blow May over. This is precisely a scenario which could have produced something fairly big.


no, the end of the poll tax was caused not by the riot but by the extent of non-payment. the end of the poll tax was announced in 1991 when bills were lowered by £140 (£136 in the case of wandsworth): while it would be good if the riots had ended the poll tax the simple fact of the matter is that mass working class action dealt the tax a knock-out blow.

as someone who was at all the national poll tax marches and active in haringey and camden throughout the poll tax, i think i might know something more of what went on than you do, being as you seem to be getting your information very much second - and perhaps third - hand.

anyway, that's ancient history, and we're meant to be talking of the murder of those killed in grenfell tower.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 27, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Odd response.  You can refer back to the first few pages of this thread if you want. The size of the block with the amount of homes in it combined with the ferocity of the fire and the limited ability for the fire service to fight it all clearly added up to a big death toll.


Which is precisely the point. There was no announcement as such from the emergency services reflected in the news reports, as one would expect to be the case.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 27, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> no, the end of the poll tax was caused not by the riot but by the extent of non-payment. the end of the poll tax was announced in 1991 when bills were lowered by £140 (£136 in the case of wandsworth)


Thatcher quit in November 1990.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Which is precisely the point. There was no announcement as such from the emergency services reflected in the news reports, as one would expect to be the case.


please get off your hobby horse about this. you can't know at any one time how many people are in houses on e.g. camden's queens crescent or westminster's elgin avenue or lambeth's coldharbour lane. similarly, you can't be sure how many people were in grenfell tower as it burned. given the extent and ferocity of the fire it's quite possible not so much remained of some bodies. what do you want, guesswork?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Thatcher quit in November 1990.



Thatcher didn't quit, she was forced out.

Having asked politely & been ignored, fuck off you loon.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Thatcher quit in November 1990.


oh fuck off


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Which is precisely the point. There was no announcement as such from the emergency services reflected in the news reports, as one would expect to be the case.



I wouldn't expect the emergency services to speculate, I would expect them to get on with the job at hand and deal in facts that are known. Any other approach would be unprofessional.


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> It was  'conspiracy theory' to suggest that the death toll was being kept low in the days after the event:


It's still a conspiracy theory. 

Adding someone to an official death toll (even if their identity is unknown) is a controlled process to avoid fuck ups. During the Cumbria shootings, it took all day for an accurate figure to emerge and that was with a much smaller number of victims actually lying out on public roads.

The fire brigade were not just going to do a quick once over of the accessible parts of the building, which was on fire for more than a day remember, and blurt out a number. It wouldn't have helped anyone.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 27, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I wouldn't expect the emergency services to speculate, I would expect them to get on with the job at hand and deal in facts that are known. Any other approach would be unprofessional.


As if he'd believe the emergency service anyway. They're usually in on it in his world.

(and that is my last on this crap)


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> On the contrary, they care several hoots.


If they cared, the recommendations that came from the lakanal tower fire would have been implemented several years ago without questions or delays.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I think it is more to do with maintaining public order and preventing mass demonstrations outside Downing Street before the queen officially invites May to form a government.


That isn't surprising.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I think it is more to do with maintaining public order and preventing mass demonstrations outside Downing Street before the queen officially invites May to form a government.


The fire was 5 days after the official invite.

(Know i said i wouldn't but that sort of basic stuff does need clearing up).


----------



## David Clapson (Jun 27, 2017)

I've been talking to a friend in construction and thought I would share his POV about cladding. I haven't read the thread so I apologise if this is going to be repetitive. I just don't have time to read the thread.

Flammable cladding has been standard in England for decades. So has the 2 inch air gap, which allows rain to dry when it gets behind the cladding. Fire breaks are fitted in the air gap to prevent the terrifyingly rapid 'chimney effect' spread which we all saw. Some types of cladding burn more easily and quickly than others, but they all burn. The cheaper cladding typically has a 1 mm skin of aluminium and plastic filler. And plastic, being oil-based, gives off lots of thick, black smoke and poisonous fumes when it burns. When a cladding panel is cut so that something else, e.g. a pipe, can be installed through it, a piece of aluminium trim is added so that the filler continues to be protected inside a complete 'box' of aluminium. Other filler materials are also used, some of them being less flammable. This sandwich-type cheap plastic-filled cladding is on flats for rich and poor, offices, schools, hospitals, shops, factories etc. Not just for refurb, but also for new build.  Pretty much every building site you pass has truckloads of the stuff going in - it's light, cheap and easy to fit. If a building is not skinned with expensive brick/stone/concrete/glass (not flammable), it's cladding. All of it flammable, and not that hard to set fire to, especially if you cut off or drill through the aluminium skin and hold a blowtorch to the filling, which is what the last week's shock-horror brand new 'safety tests' seem to consist of. From the media coverage they don't look as if they bear much relation to the accepted industry tests, in which a cooler flame is usually used. After a certain time the flame gets through the cladding. If the cladding can tolerate a flame at a certain temperature for a certain number of minutes before a hole appears allowing the flame through, the test has been passed. That's a gross oversimplication of testing but it gives you some idea. 

There's a fire in a tower block pretty much every day. Fridge fires are about as frequent. But there've only been 2 cases of a fire shooting rapidly up the outside of a high rise because the cladding is burning. The other one was in 1999 in Scotland. After it, Scotland got a much tougher law about cladding:

How 1999 Scottish tower block fire led to regulation change - BBC News
BBC News | UK | Fire hits tower block
BBC News | UK Politics | Tower block fire safety fears
Urgent safety probe after tower block fire. 

Because of understandable grief/horror/blissful ignorance, some people not in Scotland are saying 'why does everyone live in inflammable buildings, we must evacuate and/or remove the cladding'. Another way to look at it is 'why has this freak occurrence happened for only the 2nd time in 18 years? What was it about this fire and this building which caused the fire to spread? How did a fridge fire get outside the flat and into the cladding? Why didn't the fire breaks in the air gap inhibit the chimney effect?' Nobody knows. We're waiting for the inquiry. We do know, if Panorama was correct, that the fire crew who doused the fire in the flat did not look out of the window to check the cladding. That tells you how improbable the fire was. No doubt that fire crew are feeling pretty bad, but maybe they followed their training to the letter and did the usual excellent job? In the meantime everyone in construction is refusing to be mauled by the press, or by John McDonnell with his talk of murder, so they won't talk about it.


----------



## elbows (Jun 27, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> no, the end of the poll tax was caused not by the riot but by the extent of non-payment. the end of the poll tax was announced in 1991 when bills were lowered by £140 (£136 in the case of wandsworth): while it would be good if the riots had ended the poll tax the simple fact of the matter is that mass working class action dealt the tax a knock-out blow.
> 
> as someone who was at all the national poll tax marches and active in haringey and camden throughout the poll tax, i think i might know something more of what went on than you do, being as you seem to be getting your information very much second - and perhaps third - hand.



Yes. I was a tad too young, somewhat politically naive and not in London at the time but even I could tell that although the riot provided some powerful images on telly, it was ordinary and often quite elderly people saying on telly that they were prepared to go to prison rather than pay the poll tax that did it. Sorry for the excessive focus on how it came across on tv, but tv was almost the only window I had to the political world at the time.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 27, 2017)

And it's been found today that a block of student residences in Edinburgh has the same cladding as that used at Grenfell. 

Article on BBC website (on phone, can't link).


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 27, 2017)

I was thinking on the way home that the reason for wanting to evacuate the buildings is that the very process of removal may well increase the risks of fire.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 27, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I was thinking on the way home that the reason for wanting to evacuate the buildings is that the very process of removal may well increase the risks of fire.


How so?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 27, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> How so?


Removal of fire-breaks / exposure of cladding core ... though I don't suppose they'll actually need to resort to angle grinders.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 27, 2017)




----------



## Anudder Oik (Jun 27, 2017)

Theresa May's answer to the Grenfell massacre is a big "fuck you all!!!" to all the poor people in Britain. At this rate Ikea will have to start a new daity wooden furniture product called *gi ljotin, *which translated means "Guillotine", a wooden piece of furniture with a part that slides down, because history repeats. Marie antionette said, let them eat cake and Theresa May says let them eat shit and die".

*Grenfell Tower cladding scandal could cost councils millions after Government says no guarantee of extra funding.*

Cladding scandal could cost councils millions after Government says no guarantee of extra funding

dedicated to all who the tories consider scum


----------



## David Clapson (Jun 27, 2017)

Has there been any sensible discussion of unofficial sublettings? Unknown numbers of social housing tenants sublet their homes. Are there any estimates as to how widespread this is? Maybe the press and politicians won't touch this because they don't want to be seen to be attacking victims for living there illegally. But one of the things which keeps London running is the Europeans doing minimum wage jobs who share a 2 bed flat between 6 people. You can't close your eyes to it, it's become normal. And there have been mutterings about several hundred deaths in Grenfell Tower. It's very plausible.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 27, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> The fire was 5 days after the official invite.
> 
> (Know i said i wouldn't but that sort of basic stuff does need clearing up).


Corrections on questions of fact appreciated.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 27, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> Has there been any sensible discussion of unofficial sublettings? Unknown numbers of social housing tenants sublet their homes. Are there any estimates as to how widespread this is? Maybe the press and politicians won't touch this because they don't want to be seen to be attacking victims for living there illegally. But one of the things which keeps London running is the Europeans doing minimum wage jobs who share a 2 bed flat between 6 people. You can't close your eyes to it, it's become normal. And there have been mutterings about several hundred deaths in Grenfell Tower. It's very plausible.


It's exceptionally common. "Illegal" sublets might as well be legal because the council will do nothing about them. Agencies in West London will routinely rent a 1 or 2 bed flat and then sublet it to anyone they feel like at an inflated rate, trying to fit 6 people into a 2 bed flat. Nothing happens even if they do blatantly illegal things like change the locks on the actual owners.


----------



## xenon (Jun 27, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I think it is more to do with maintaining public order and preventing mass demonstrations outside Downing Street before the queen officially invites May to form a government.



I think you're an idiot. Sorry. People are explaining some reasons why numbers have been given. You keep sticking to conspiracy shit. As if 79 doesn't meet the threshold for rightious anger anyway. 
No harm to you. I've not read all thread. But only conspiracy is the same old give the poor / wc the shoddy shit, profit before safety.


----------



## David Clapson (Jun 27, 2017)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It's exceptionally common. "Illegal" sublets might as well be legal because the council will do nothing about them. Agencies in West London will routinely rent a 1 or 2 bed flat and then sublet it to anyone they feel like at an inflated rate, trying to fit 6 people into a 2 bed flat. Nothing happens even if they do blatantly illegal things like change the locks on the actual owners.



Have you seen it acknowledged anywhere? I used to have a Polish girlfriend in that situation so I was expecting it to be a big issue...but so far nothing.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 27, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> Have you seen it acknowledged anywhere? I used to have a Polish girlfriend in that situation so I was expecting it to be a big issue...but so far nothing.


There's no traction in it for the authorities or the media. Housing is a massive problem, thanks in large part to a succession of governments who've seen fit to appeal to the property-owning demographic for electoral advantage at the expense of those who don't/can't own property. Enough of them will know that the inevitable consequence of this will be all the usual activities that serve to provide accommodation on a no-questions-asked, no-laws-enforced basis - after all, if a council kick 6 people out of a council flat, they've now got 6 people on the streets, which doesn't look so good.

And "invisible" people living cheek-by-jowl in invisible flats on the 20+th floor of some block on the periphery of Central London...well, where's the story there?


----------



## David Clapson (Jun 27, 2017)

But it's got to come out in the end - all those parents will be asking where their kids are. Not just European, but English, Irish, African...the whole bloody world supplies cheap labour to London.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 27, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> Have you seen it acknowledged anywhere? I used to have a Polish girlfriend in that situation so I was expecting it to be a big issue...but so far nothing.


It won't be acknowledged by the councils because that would highlight that they aren't doing their job. It doesn't seem to be the focus of any housing protest group that I know of either, and I could come up with some unflattering reasons why that might be. It's a logical extension of inflated prices, that they produce parasitical capitalism, though.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 27, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> But it's got to come out in the end - all those parents will be asking where their kids are. Not just European, but English, Irish, African...the whole bloody world supplies cheap labour to London.


Their kids are paying £800 a month for half a front room.


----------



## David Clapson (Jun 27, 2017)

Well, could somebody tell John McDonnell? He's not shy. Seriously, somebody should tell him.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 27, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> Have you seen it acknowledged anywhere? I used to have a Polish girlfriend in that situation so I was expecting it to be a big issue...but so far nothing.



You were expecting it to be acknowledged by whom exactly?


----------



## David Clapson (Jun 27, 2017)

Journalists. Jon Snow.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 27, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> Journalists. Jon Snow.



...and he would report it based on what information?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 27, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> Well, could somebody tell John McDonnell? He's not shy. Seriously, somebody should tell him.


These rates are frequently paid by immigrants. We're not supposed to consider them, or if we ever do, it's just some abstract issue of exploitation that needs to be shut down while of course not allowing immigrants to get a fair rent.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 27, 2017)

A block in Germany has also been evacuated.

Wuppertal evacuates tower block over Grenfell-like cladding | News | DW | 27.06.2017

I will be interested to find out whether this is a result of tests showing that the cladding is against German regs, or whether it's within their regs but they are getting nervous.


----------



## David Clapson (Jun 27, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> ...and he would report it based on what information?


Common knowledge! Fridge Magnet and I aren't the only ones in on this 'secret'. Some people at ITN must have a clue. And there must be scores of former employees of councils or housing charities who know the score and have nothing to lose by speaking out. Then the programme could reasonably say that it's possible that if the tower was like other blocks it could have had hundreds of unregistered occupants.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 27, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> If they cared, the recommendations that came from the lakanal tower fire would have been implemented several years ago without questions or delays.


One would have hoped so, but this is a bit like saying that if criminals cared about getting caught, they wouldn't do the crime.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 28, 2017)

Cladding scandal could cost councils millions after Government says no guarantee of extra funding

But they have £1.5bn for a deal with the DUP. Not as I have said that I actually begrudge the people of Northern Ireland the money, but wtf???


----------



## editor (Jun 28, 2017)

Pretty much nailed it: 



> This was not simply an accident; as a public inquiry or coroner’s inquest is likely to prove.  It was an entirely avoidable tragedy of immense proportions generated by the housing crisis, austerity, deregulation and outsourcing. Grenfell has become a grim monument, a ghastly tomb symbolising the Tory austerity regime; arguably it is bigger than that – a proxy for the unmitigated folly of the neoliberal ideology of deregulated free market orthodoxy favoured by successive governments.



Grenfell tower: The beginning of the end for the Tories


----------



## Manter (Jun 28, 2017)

agricola said:


> It is, but that is largely because of the circumstances of this disaster.  For a start, based on public statements one does get the impression that the TMO doesn't know how many people were actually living in that block on the night of the tragedy.  Combine that with the intensity of the fire and its very easy to see why they are only giving estimates of the dead that they know about.


I think that may have been true a week ago.  But it's starting to smell a bit different. The fire services can only go through their clear process, but the council should have pulled records, interviewed survivors, checked with local charities and services... if they haven't done that yet, they really *are* grossly incompetent.


----------



## Manter (Jun 28, 2017)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It's exceptionally common. "Illegal" sublets might as well be legal because the council will do nothing about them. Agencies in West London will routinely rent a 1 or 2 bed flat and then sublet it to anyone they feel like at an inflated rate, trying to fit 6 people into a 2 bed flat. Nothing happens even if they do blatantly illegal things like change the locks on the actual owners.


Lots of it isn't subletting per se either. Refugees often let friends stay because otherwise where do they go? Social housing is like gold dust, affordable private housing simply doesn't exist.... so if a Syrian family gets a flat, they soon end up with four or five other people on it with them. Loads of the people who come to us are sleeping on sofas and floors (sometimes the overcrowding just becomes too much, sometimes the neighbours complain, or their status changes, so they are referred to us)


----------



## mauvais (Jun 28, 2017)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It's exceptionally common. "Illegal" sublets might as well be legal because the council will do nothing about them. Agencies in West London will routinely rent a 1 or 2 bed flat and then sublet it to anyone they feel like at an inflated rate, trying to fit 6 people into a 2 bed flat. Nothing happens even if they do blatantly illegal things like change the locks on the actual owners.


Subletting a HA property (possibly only in its entirety) is a criminal offence, rather than the civil breach of contract you might expect it to be. Not sure how that plays into any of this.


----------



## likesfish (Jun 28, 2017)

councils do enforce action against subletting from proactive  to going through the motions.
  it is taking the piss especially with the waiting list as it is.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 28, 2017)

Manter said:


> I think that may have been true a week ago.  But it's starting to smell a bit different. The fire services can only go through their clear process, but the council should have pulled records, interviewed survivors, checked with local charities and services... if they haven't done that yet, they really *are* grossly incompetent.



Of course they'll be doing that but it takes a long time. An experienced firefighter was on LBC yesterday saying that by law they must identify remains before adding them to an official death toll. Given the intensity of the fire and the tendency for people, especially loved ones, to huddle together in such situations, the authorities will be finding piles of ashes and charred, disintegrated bones, so it's sometimes virtually impossible to be sure of even how many people's remains they are dealing with. Add to that the fact that there will have been people staying there that weren't the registered occupants and it's quite possible that the true death toll will never be known.


----------



## Manter (Jun 28, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Of course they'll be doing that but it takes a long time. An experienced firefighter was on LBC yesterday saying that by law they must identify remains before adding them to an official death toll. Given the intensity of the fire and the tendency for people, especially loved ones, to huddle together in such situations, the authorities will be finding piles of ashes and charred, disintegrated bones, so it's sometimes impossible to be sure of how many peoples remains they are dealing with. Add to that the fact that there will have been people staying there that weren't the registered occupants and it's quite possible that the true death toll will never be known.


I think there is a difference between the official emergency services process and the administrative process. An exact number may be impossible, but even the numbers that have been released are contradictory. Let the emergency services get on with the physical count in the building, but there is so much more that can be done to shed some light on this.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 28, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> One would have hoped so, but this is a bit like saying that if criminals cared about getting caught, they wouldn't do the crime.


You're the one claiming the government cares, not me. 

If they care so much, explain to me why the lakanal recommendations weren't implemented.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 28, 2017)

Manter said:


> I think there is a difference between the official emergency services process and the administrative process. An exact number may be impossible, but even the numbers that have been released are contradictory. Let the emergency services get on with the physical count in the building, but there is so much more that can be done to shed some light on this.


Some light regarding numbers of dead, you mean?


----------



## Manter (Jun 28, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Some light regarding numbers of dead, you mean?


Quite a few things tbh. But yes- dead, survivors, what is being planned for survivors (accommodation, trauma support, immigration, finances). We have journalists doing a lot of investigative work (notably the FT) while minutes of meetings and technical specs and so on disappear from the internet; and community activists compiling lists and providing support that should be in place from the authorities. Psych support for the firefighters is being run by volunteers, even. It just feels like a complete shambles.


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 28, 2017)

Manter said:


> Lots of it isn't subletting per se either. Refugees often let friends stay because otherwise where do they go? Social housing is like gold dust, affordable private housing simply doesn't exist.... so if a Syrian family gets a flat, they soon end up with four or five other people on it with them. Loads of the people who come to us are sleeping on sofas and floors (sometimes the overcrowding just becomes too much, sometimes the neighbours complain, or their status changes, so they are referred to us)


Not just refugees doing this either (though I know its common among refugee communities).  One of my (english) mates was living 3 families to a highrise council flat in London for a while about ten years ago because of homelessness, and the housing situation has obviously got loads worse since then.  The government changed the law about 4 years ago so that council/housing associations can't stop people having lodgers (and therefore also people sofa surfing or whatever) except where flats/houses would become officially overcrowded (but they're only going to know that's the case if someone reports it to them, and even then might not be minded to do much), and under universal credit you don't have to declare income from lodgers so long as its under a certain amount.  Where I live, getting a lodger gets pushed by housing associations/the council as a solution to the bedroom tax even.
Subletting proper (where the tenant has moved out) is illegal in social housing on the other hand, but of course it goes on.  My first thoughts are that an overcrowded sublet in a highrise with one entrance would be spotted by the housing managers quite easily (more so than in some other types of housing), but obviously I don't live in London and don't know how proactive this council about subletting.


----------



## squirrelp (Jun 28, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> You're the one claiming the government cares, not me.
> 
> If they care so much, explain to me why the lakanal recommendations weren't implemented.


I don't know what you think is inconsistent about my position.

Criminals do care about getting caught but they may still try to get away with it.

Likewise, many of the conservatives are in the pockets of big business.

They care about mass demonstrations which have the potential to see them out of office, but they will push as far as they think they might get away with.

And if they can avoid those demonstrations with some media manipulation they'll do that where they can.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 28, 2017)

Legal aid cuts leave residents no way to challenge poor housing | Liz Davies


----------



## editor (Jun 28, 2017)

For fuck's sake: 



> The last fire safety consultant to assess Grenfell Tower, who received almost a quarter of a million pounds from Kensington and Chelsea Council, "is confident that its fire risk assessment work was carried out to the highest professional standards".





> Carl Stokes, director, sole shareholder and only consultant at C S Stokes and Associates – a fire safety consultancy contracted by the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC) for the past seven years – spoke to Inside Housing about his work on Grenfell Tower, which was destroyed two weeks ago in a fire. At the last estimate, the blaze had claimed 79 lives.
> 
> C S Stokes and Associates received £244,318 over seven years from RBKC, starting in November 2010, when Mr Stokes was hired as the fire risk assessor for Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO) – which managed Grenfell Tower – and continuing until the most recently recorded financial period.
> 
> ...



Fire risk assessor for Grenfell Tower revealed


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 28, 2017)

Vultures and arse coverers taking their seats...

Chairman of Government’s new Grenfell panel pushed ministers to cut fire service funding by £200m


----------



## Libertad (Jun 28, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Vultures and arse coverers taking their seats...
> 
> Chairman of Government’s new Grenfell panel pushed ministers to cut fire service funding by £200m



Fucking what?


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 28, 2017)

editor said:


> For fuck's sake:
> 
> Fire risk assessor for Grenfell Tower revealed



Luke Barratt at Inside Housing is great. He/they are the only independent source (as far as I know) who covered the KCC/KCTMO shitshow at Grenfell Tower BEFORE the fire.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 28, 2017)

here we go, operation longrass


----------



## editor (Jun 28, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Vultures and arse coverers taking their seats...
> 
> Chairman of Government’s new Grenfell panel pushed ministers to cut fire service funding by £200m


The more the government keep fucking this up, the quicker the tide will turn against them and the more the anger will rise.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 28, 2017)

editor said:


> The more the government keep fucking this up, the quicker the tide will turn against them and the more the anger will rise.


I honestly think that they're somewhat disappointed that rioting has not yet occurred giving them them the opportunity to discredit/slap down dissent.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 28, 2017)

Interesting take.

Where are the missing? How the tabloids underplayed deaths at Grenfell for their own gain


----------



## agricola (Jun 28, 2017)

Manter said:


> I think that may have been true a week ago.  But it's starting to smell a bit different. The fire services can only go through their clear process, but the council should have pulled records, interviewed survivors, checked with local charities and services... if they haven't done that yet, they really *are* grossly incompetent.



IIRC that is what the Police side of the investigation is doing, but you really can't overstate how difficult that is going to be.  The unaccounted for people are going to be those who aren't on record, who may not have liaised with local charities, who didn't use public services (for whatever reason), and if they were subletting its unlikely that the owner of the flat is going to have their real name, contact details etc; and that assumes the owner comes forward.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 28, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Vultures and arse coverers taking their seats...
> 
> Chairman of Government’s new Grenfell panel pushed ministers to cut fire service funding by £200m


This is going to be like the nonce inquiry where they got through about 3 discredited chairs before they could even start their work. Astonishing.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 28, 2017)

Wilf said:


> This is going to be like the nonce inquiry where they got through about 3 discredited chairs before they could even start their work. Astonishing.



Who was Home Secretary for that debacle? 

Perhaps it isn't so astonishing.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 28, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Who was Home Secretary for that debacle?
> 
> Perhaps it isn't so astonishing.


Ah, yes!


----------



## agricola (Jun 28, 2017)

Wilf said:


> This is going to be like the nonce inquiry where they got through about 3 discredited chairs before they could even start their work. Astonishing.



If only.  For all the failures in that Inquiry, at least they managed to never put in charge of it someone who would almost certainly be named and criticized for their serial failures in the final report.


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 28, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Given the intensity of the fire and the tendency for people, especially loved ones, to huddle together in such situations, the authorities will be finding piles of ashes and charred, disintegrated bones, so it's sometimes impossible to be sure of how many peoples remains they are dealing with.



Indeed.



> Police said some residents had tried to move up the building to escape the flames and it is thought a number of people may have ended up in one flat.



Ugh.

No final Grenfell Tower death toll 'this year' - BBC News


----------



## David Clapson (Jun 28, 2017)

agricola said:


> The unaccounted for people are going to be those who aren't on record, who may not have liaised with local charities, who didn't use public services (for whatever reason), and if they were subletting its unlikely that the owner of the flat is going to have their real name, contact details etc; and that assumes the owner comes forward.



Exactly. I've got an unregistered lodger at the moment. We've agreed she won't tell the council she lives here, or go on the electoral roll. None of the neighbours know her status. For all they know she's my girlfriend, not a resident. (I'm not a council tenant, my flat is owned by a private landlord.)

I used to live in a HA flat which the tenant had sublet to me. The mgmt and neighbours never asked who I was.

Some people go on the council flat waiting list with the intention of subletting as soon as they get a property.  In Inner London the difference between the rent you pay the council and the achievable market rent is huge. It must be the easiest fraud in the book. The landlord has to give 24 hours' written notice to inspect the property and it doesn't matter if a 'friend' is the only person in during the inspection. The illegal residents can easily use a friend/relative's address for tax, banking and so on. AFAICS pretty much everything except parking permits can be organised via another address.


----------



## Pac man (Jun 28, 2017)

Why havent they at least released the survivors figures yet, they are "rehousing" survivors so know how many there are?


----------



## Manter (Jun 28, 2017)

Pac man said:


> Why havent they at least released the survivors figures yet, they are "rehousing" survivors so know how many there are?


Tbf they aren't housing all the survivors. Some are going to charities like ours because their immigration status or general fear of the authorities mean they don't trust all the reassurances. (Justifiably considering the reassurances were withdrawn less than two days later.)

agricola I know it's difficult but 'official' numbers aren't even in the same ballpark as the numbers volunteers and activists are coming up with.


----------



## equationgirl (Jun 28, 2017)

Pac man said:


> Why havent they at least released the survivors figures yet, they are "rehousing" survivors so know how many there are?


Read the thread, or even some of the links on this page. It's been examined several times on the thread.


----------



## emanymton (Jun 28, 2017)

Pac man said:


> Why havent they at least released the survivors figures yet, they are "rehousing" survivors so know how many there are?


It is unlikely that all the survivor's will be applying for rehousing. Some will be afriad to come forward for one reason or another, and others will have juat sorted something out themselves rather than waiting.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 28, 2017)

Pac man said:


> Why havent they at least released the survivors figures yet, they are "rehousing" survivors so know how many there are?



Because then people can start doing maths, and maths *could* give answers. I just read this,



> "Police warned the death toll could rise further and said there were 23 flats in the tower where they had not been able to trace anyone alive."



I, along with two other people (one of whom is a resident), have been collating information and I can confidently say the police need to get a shift on if they are missing that much information, as we have only 13 flats with no information (we do have four more that we don't have names of people for, but we are told they are all safe). 

However I would say that our dead, presumed dead and missing total is almost exactly the same as the one put out in the above link, 80. We have 78 (although we've taken a couple of people out of the stats who might be deceased as we can't vouch for the accuracy of the data), so it could actually be identical.


----------



## David Clapson (Jun 28, 2017)

How can you possibly find out who was sharing flats on the quiet? Neighbours don't know. You don't tell the neighbours because they're the first ones to snitch to the council and the tax man. Your figure of 78 could be out by several hundred and you wouldn't have a clue!


----------



## salem (Jun 28, 2017)

I can accept there might be some people who were staying there under the radar. However the idea that there are 'several hundred' is nonsense and I find it quite perverse that some people seem keen for a higher death toll.


----------



## David Clapson (Jun 28, 2017)

Just do the maths and make some friends who are sharing a 2 bed flat between 6 or a 3 bed flat between 8. And perhaps consider that you just might be a tiny bit naive.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 28, 2017)

Any further news on the appliance that apparently was the start of it all?

As I understand it that particular model had never been the subject of any safety recalls.


----------



## Reiabuzz (Jun 28, 2017)

editor said:


> For fuck's sake:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Maybe not the best idea to have his mobile number all over his site

Carl Stokes — Fire Safety Consultant


----------



## David Clapson (Jun 28, 2017)

weltweit said:


> Any further news on the appliance that apparently was the start of it all?
> 
> As I understand it that particular model had never been the subject of any safety recalls.


Fridges catch fire. There are fridge fires every day. 

Hotpoint and their owners, Whirlpool, don't have a stellar record. ISTR Whirlpool have been in a class action just recently because of driers catching fire? You can look it up. I've got to go...


----------



## bi0boy (Jun 28, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> Just do the maths and make some friends who are sharing a 2 bed flat between 6 or a 3 bed flat between 8. And perhaps consider that you just might be a tiny bit naive.



There weren't any three-bed flats in the block. Police have spoken to people from 106 of the flats leaving 23 flats where they haven't made contact with any occupiers.

The idea there are several hundred people missing is ridiculous. For example, how many residents and others have come forward with accounts of massive over-occupancy in the 1 and 2 bed flats in which their neighbours lived? Where are the "there were 8 people living in the flat upstairs and they're all missing" claims?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 28, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> There weren't any three-bed flats in the block. Police have spoken to people from 106 of the flats leaving 23 flats where they haven't made contact with any occupiers.
> 
> The idea there are several hundred people missing is ridiculous. For example, how many residents and others have come forward with accounts of massive over-occupancy in the 1 and 2 bed flats in which their neighbours lived? Where are the "there were 8 people living in the flat upstairs and they're all missing" claims?



According to figures we have Floor 3 had 1 three-bed flat and 3 four-bed flats.


----------



## xenon (Jun 28, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> According to figures we have Floor 3 had 1 three-bed flat and 3 four-bed flats.




 The fire started on the fourth floor.  I think I read everyone from the first four floors got out. 

 In any case, if there were this massive ove occupation.  You'd expect to see such occupants numbered amongst the survivors too.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 28, 2017)

xenon said:


> The fire started on the fourth floor.  I think I read everyone from the first four floors got out.
> 
> In any case, if there were this massive ove occupation.  You'd expect to see such occupants numbered amongst the survivors too.



I was just responding to the comments that there weren't any 3 or 4 bed floats, there were some. Our information shows that was far as we know, nobody below the 10th floor died.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 28, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> Just do the maths and make some friends who are sharing a 2 bed flat between 6 or a 3 bed flat between 8. And perhaps consider that you just might be a tiny bit naive.



For the flats we have figures for the information shows just 2 flats with 6 people in, and 6 flats with 5 people in. The rest were below those two amounts.

One resident we spoke to said that no residents she had spoken to had any reason to believe that _before the fire_ they were aware of any flat with 40 odd people in it, as had been claimed by one person.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 28, 2017)

btw, there's a couple of oddities with the numbers we have, and it's possible that the numbers could rise much higher because of that - whether the police and fire service are aware of more deaths is something only they can answer. That said those numbers so far are imo a fair reflection of what is currently known in the media and amongst some residents. I see some reports suggest that people might have moved up the building to escape the fire. That's certainly possible given the oddities in the figures, but will have to see.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 28, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> Just do the maths and make some friends who are sharing a 2 bed flat between 6 or a 3 bed flat between 8. And perhaps consider that you just might be a tiny bit naive.


And how does that account for people who had the misfortune to be visiting grenfell tower then?


----------



## Pac man (Jun 28, 2017)

emanymton said:


> It is unlikely that all the survivor's will be applying for rehousing. Some will be afriad to come forward for one reason or another, and others will have juat sorted something out themselves rather than waiting.


From the Guardian.."Sajad Jamalvatan, a biomedical engineering student who lived on the third floor of the block, has established a Whatsapp community of 86 families who escaped from the block, calling the group Grenfell United." 

It seems odd why they wont say how many survivors "have" come forward..


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jun 28, 2017)

Apparently there were rubbish chutes on each floor that were fireproofed in case of disposal of hazardous waste. And those were found without much smoke damage, but it goes without saying that none of the residents had known or thought to take refuge there.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 28, 2017)

editor said:


> For fuck's sake:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



We've had fire assessors in where I work and we've had to change companies a couple of times because we've used people who, while cheap, clearly didn't give a fuck. It felt very much like we were paying for a piece of paperwork we were required to have, rather than for an actual assessment.

TBH our own records of alarm testing, risk assesments etc were sloppy to non-existent and any decent professional would have refused to sign us off until we had that stuff in order.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 28, 2017)

Really confused interview with David Orr from the National Housing Federation on Newsnight tonight.

He was saying that all housing with "cladding" should have it taken off, even if it's safe, or something. I don't actually know what he was trying to say.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 28, 2017)

Grenfell Tower inquiry to be led by retired judge Sir Martin Moore-Bick


----------



## teqniq (Jun 28, 2017)

Establishment though and through from a cursory glance.


----------



## ddraig (Jun 28, 2017)

This Sat

Greensleeves Grenfell Tower fundraiser

From it’s birth in 1975 Greensleeves Records has always had it’s home in West London. It seems only fitting that all money raised at the next official Greensleeves Record club night goes to the Grenfell Tower Fire Relief fund.

Please come and support. Saturday 1st July (7pm-1am). 
 at The Social, 5 Little Portland St, London W1
Entry by donation - all money raised goes to the Grenfell Tower Fire Relief Fund.

DJs Keith Lawrence (Mi-Soul/Dub Organiser) Champian & Mistah Brown (Tighten Up) and Oxman (Dub Vendor/Soho Radio).


----------



## sheothebudworths (Jun 29, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> For the flats we have figures for the information shows just 2 flats with 6 people in, and 6 flats with 5 people in. The rest were below those two amounts.
> 
> One resident we spoke to said that no residents she had spoken to had any reason to believe that _before the fire_ they were aware of any flat with 40 odd people in it, as had been claimed by one person.





Barking_Mad said:


> btw, there's a couple of oddities with the numbers we have, and it's possible that the numbers could rise much higher because of that - whether the police and fire service are aware of more deaths is something only they can answer. That said those numbers so far are imo a fair reflection of what is currently known in the media and amongst some residents. I see some reports suggest that people might have moved up the building to escape the fire. That's certainly possible given the oddities in the figures, but will have to see.



Bless you for doing this work Barking_Mad
Looks to me that the suggestion has been that it was a large number of people who ended up in one flat, during the fire, rather than it being occupied by 40 prior to it, but I get why you'd clarify when that's been reported.
It's monumentally distressing to hear even the very first official reports back identifying parents and children (both young _and_ grown) being found on different floors.




Barking_Mad said:


> Apparently there were rubbish chutes on each floor that were fireproofed in case of disposal of hazardous waste. And those were found without much smoke damage, but it goes without saying that none of the residents had known or thought to take refuge there.


----------



## sheothebudworths (Jun 29, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Grenfell Tower inquiry to be led by retired judge Sir Martin Moore-Bick



Apart from all the other dodgy rulings he's made, this is quite unsurprising...



> In his commercial work and at the appeal court, Moore-Bick dealt with some housing cases although his main area of expertise was to do with contracts, insurance and banking.



Who (/how/why) decides which judge should be appointed? I mean I get it's a fit up, a judge appointed to serve a purpose, but what's the _process_ they base it on (to explain it away, sorta thing)? I read something earlier about the residents rightly demanding that they have input into who will oversee the enquiry. Obviously that's going to be made difficult but is there any existing legal way for them to challenge it?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 29, 2017)

Feeling punchy about it all tbh sheothebudworths ... I'm sick of them expecting us all to play at being too stupid to understand what is going on. :/


----------



## sheothebudworths (Jun 29, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Feeling punchy about it all tbh sheothebudworths ... I'm sick of them expecting us all to play at being too stupid to understand what is going on. :/



Yes, me too. It doesn't seem to be what's happening for once, that it's quietly going away, that that will be _allowed_, but there's no joy to be taken from that either of course.


----------



## sheothebudworths (Jun 29, 2017)

Having said that, I know that'll be the object ultimately, too, to sink it under other news. My own observation was that it was genuinely felt by people who may not normally have paid much attention but I'm not sure whether that's stuck now, or if it just _feels_ like it has because it _is_ still *in the news*.


----------



## Pac man (Jun 29, 2017)

equationgirl said:


> Read the thread, or even some of the links on this page. It's been examined several times on the thread.


Ive folllwed the thread from the start and read most links, nowhere is there a suggestion of how many people survived, or how many are being re housed, or just a general figure of how many registered survivors there are. Neither is there any official tennans list from the council to say how many people were officially living at grenfell, im not talking about squatters, friends or sublets. Just an official tennants list and how many survivors, this should be all over the msm but they refuse to release the number of survivors that have come forward...why?


----------



## Pac man (Jun 29, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Grenfell Tower inquiry to be led by retired judge Sir Martin Moore-Bick


Reminds me of the child abuse enquiry, butler sloss et al. i wonder how much time he will waste before stepping down, to allow another time waster in..


----------



## BigTom (Jun 29, 2017)

sheothebudworths said:


> Apart from all the other dodgy rulings he's made, this is quite unsurprising...
> 
> 
> 
> Who (/how/why) decides which judge should be appointed? I mean I get it's a fit up, a judge appointed to serve a purpose, but what's the _process_ they base it on (to explain it away, sorta thing)? I read something earlier about the residents rightly demanding that they have input into who will oversee the enquiry. Obviously that's going to be made difficult but is there any existing legal way for them to challenge it?



Afaik the prime minister or relevant minister that called the inquiry simply appoints someone to it. There is probably a parliamentary procedure to object in case of conflicts of interest but often people just declare their conflicts of interest and then chain that's all fine and not a problem as it's been declared.
I'm not sure though, 20 year old half remembered a level politics knowledge.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 29, 2017)

More on Martin Moore-Bick



> ...However, his appointment is likely to cause controversy after it emerged he had presided over an appeal court case in 2014 that ruled in favour of Westminster council, which had argued that a single mother with five children could be rehoused outside of London.
> 
> Titina Nzolameso’s lawyer said at the time that the decision "sets a terrible precedent for local authorities to engage in social cleansing of the poor on a mass scale”.
> 
> ...


----------



## alex_ (Jun 29, 2017)

teqniq said:


> More on Martin Moore-Bick



Criticising judges because you don't like the law they interpret is exactly what revolted people about this headline

Fury over High Court judges who defied Brexit voters and could trigger constitutional crisis | Daily Mail Online

"Enemies of the people" so you don't have to click through.

Alex


----------



## Cid (Jun 29, 2017)

Pac man said:


> Reminds me of the child abuse enquiry, butler sloss et al. i wonder how much time he will waste before stepping down, to allow another time waster in..



When May was home sec of course.


----------



## Cid (Jun 29, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Criticising judges because you don't like the law they interpret is exactly what revolted people about this headline
> 
> Fury over High Court judges who defied Brexit voters and could trigger constitutional crisis | Daily Mail Online
> 
> Alex



Nor did he apparently, given that the Supreme court overturned his ruling.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 29, 2017)

Cid said:


> Nor did he apparently, given that the Supreme court overturned his ruling.



Which is why we have a Supreme Court.

Alex


----------



## Cid (Jun 29, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Which is why we have a Supreme Court.
> 
> Alex



Wonderful chain of reasoning there.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 29, 2017)

Cid said:


> Wonderful chain of reasoning there.



I said that personal criticising judges because you don't like the law they interpret makes you level with the daily mail.

The Supreme Court is for overturning lower cases who's interpretation they don't agree with.

Alex


----------



## xenon (Jun 29, 2017)

sheothebudworths said:


> Apart from all the other dodgy rulings he's made, this is quite unsurprising...
> 
> 
> 
> Who (/how/why) decides which judge should be appointed? I mean I get it's a fit up, a judge appointed to serve a purpose, but what's the _process_ they base it on (to explain it away, sorta thing)? I read something earlier about the residents rightly demanding that they have input into who will oversee the enquiry. Obviously that's going to be made difficult but is there any existing legal way for them to challenge it?




 Theresa May? She has an excellent track record for picking heads of inquiries.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 29, 2017)

alex_ said:


> I said that personal criticising judges because you don't like the law they interpret makes you level with the daily mail.
> 
> The Supreme Court is for overturning lower cases who's interpretation they don't agree with.
> 
> Alex


Take the word interpret out of your posts. It doesn't belong in that argument. If you think that it it does then you've killed your argument from the start as people subject to laws have every right to criticise the various subjective interpretations of them that judges come up with.


----------



## Cid (Jun 29, 2017)

alex_ said:


> I said that personal criticising judges because you don't like the law they interpret makes you level with the daily mail.
> 
> The Supreme Court is for overturning lower cases who's interpretation they don't agree with.
> 
> Alex



The worst you can say about the criticism of Biro is that people have mentioned a previous ruling in a somewhat knowing way. No-one has plastered his face across the front pages and called him a traitor. Also his ruling has already been commented on by the supreme court, who overruled it. It is a judgment has been criticised, that criticism is available to anyone who can access the report. There's also a brief summary on wikipedia... It is an established ruling.

And of course it's reasonable to criticise previous rulings... I mean how the fuck do you think people go about reforming archaic interpretations of the law if not by repeatedly and persistently challenging it?


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jun 29, 2017)

alex_ said:


> *I said that personal criticising judges because you don't like the law they interpret makes you level with the daily mail.*
> 
> The Supreme Court is for overturning lower cases who's interpretation they don't agree with.
> 
> Alex



Yes you did say that, and you were wrong.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 29, 2017)




----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 29, 2017)

> Councillors will be convening to discuss the Grenfell Tower fire, according to a notice on the local authority's website, joined by support officers and “invited guests (if any)”.
> 
> The notice said: “Please note this meeting will be held entirely in private session, pursuant to Standing Order 31.01, in the light of the risk of disruption (as witnessed on Friday 16 June) and consequent security and public safety concerns.
> 
> ...


Grenfell Tower survivors have been banned from Kensington and Chelsea council meetings

Looking forward to those minutes being published.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 29, 2017)

The notice (from that nice Mr Bone)


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 29, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> The notice (from that nice Mr Bone)


no written report eh...


----------



## bluescreen (Jun 29, 2017)

Charlie Falconer was on WatO just now describing this proposed _in camera_ cabinet meeting as "very ill-judged" and saying that they should have organised security if they were worried about disruption and there was no excuse for not at least permitting the press to attend, and that he hopes they change their mind. He sounded quite upset about it. (He'd been hauled onto the programme to say what a super top bloke Sir Martin Moore-Bick is.)

It's all of a piece, isn't it, with their arrogance and incompetence.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 29, 2017)

Company in charge of Grenfell Tower locks community out of therapy centre Wtf?


----------



## Raheem (Jun 29, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


>




Pretty unbelievable to be starting off without consulting with survivors and families. Even if they feel a need to keep the enquiry on a short leash, has May learned nothing from the child abuse enquiry about managing the process?


----------



## agricola (Jun 29, 2017)

bluescreen said:


> Charlie Falconer was on WatO just now describing this proposed _in camera_ cabinet meeting as "very ill-judged" and saying that they should have organised security if they were worried about disruption and there was no excuse for not at least permitting the press to attend, and that he hopes they change their mind. He sounded quite upset about it. (He'd been hauled onto the programme to say what a super top bloke Sir Martin Moore-Bick is.)
> 
> It's all of a piece, isn't it, with their arrogance and incompetence.



The disorder that lot will cause is almost as well signposted as the disaster was.


----------



## xenon (Jun 29, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Pretty unbelievable to be starting off without consulting with survivors and families. Even if they feel a need to keep the enquiry on a short leash, has May learned nothing from the child abuse enquiry about managing the process?



Learned? These aren't mistakes.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 29, 2017)

Cid said:


> The worst you can say about the criticism of Biro is that people have mentioned a previous ruling in a somewhat knowing way. No-one has plastered his face across the front pages and called him a traitor. Also his ruling has already been commented on by the supreme court, who overruled it. It is a judgment has been criticised, that criticism is available to anyone who can access the report. There's also a brief summary on wikipedia... It is an established ruling.
> 
> And of course it's reasonable to criticise previous rulings... I mean how the fuck do you think people go about reforming archaic interpretations of the law if not by repeatedly and persistently challenging it?



There is a huge difference between criticising his ruleings - which is what the Supreme Court is for and criticising him personally.

Alex


----------



## alex_ (Jun 29, 2017)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Yes you did say that, and you were wrong.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice



Which bit ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 29, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Grenfell Tower survivors have been banned from Kensington and Chelsea council meetings
> 
> Looking forward to those minutes being published.


Yeh. But you know the Grenfell bit will go into the secret cabinet minutes. The public bit will be the first two bits, and unless I miss my mark someone will then point out there's some reason to keep the main business confidential. And if they're not withheld they'll be the most opaque minutes you'll ever see.


----------



## Schmetterling (Jun 29, 2017)

*Judge orders council to allow media into Grenfell Tower meeting*

Judge orders council to allow media into Grenfell Tower meeting

ETA Woah!

'Asked on what basis the media was also being excluded, a different council spokesman said: “The press are the public. There is no distinction between them.”

Further asked if the council had evidence press could contribute to disorder, the spokesman said: “Well, I’ve seen the media kick off before.”'


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 29, 2017)

Woah... They are trying everything. A clear concerted effort to be as secretive and authoritarian as possible.


----------



## belboid (Jun 29, 2017)

Schmetterling said:


> *Judge orders council to allow media into Grenfell Tower meeting*
> 
> Judge orders council to allow media into Grenfell Tower meeting
> 
> ...


I thought for a moment you made that last quote up to make K&C look even more ridiculous. But you didn't. Some sentient human being actually said it. To a journalist. 

There are no facepalms big enough...


----------



## bluescreen (Jun 29, 2017)

Wow! I was liking for the link to the press getting a judicial order, before the ETA. That council is truly gobsmacking.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 29, 2017)

The contents of that meeting won't provide anything of satisfaction. 100% of the councillors listed as attending are Conservative. It's a shame Judith Blackman can't make it as that might have have spiced it up. Paget-Brown also gets to approve the minutes before they're published.


----------



## belboid (Jun 29, 2017)

The council become more gobsmackingly awful by the second. Meeting cancelled, because it being reported would be 'prejudicial'

And Paget-Brown wont resign 'in the forseeable future'

Kensington council meeting adjourned over inquiry prejudice fears - BBC News


----------



## bluescreen (Jun 29, 2017)

Send in the commissioners!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 29, 2017)

belboid said:


> The council become more gobsmackingly awful by the second. Meeting cancelled, because it being reported would be 'prejudicial'
> 
> And Paget-Brown wont resign 'in the forseeable future'
> 
> Kensington council meeting adjourned over inquiry prejudice fears - BBC News


He'll be gone by bastille day


----------



## yardbird (Jun 29, 2017)

"Inquiry prejudice fears" wtf is that about?
They were just having a little meeting to discuss the best way to cover their tails for goodness sake.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 29, 2017)

best kept a the lodge then etc etc


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 29, 2017)

Meanwhile other meetings be like...


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 29, 2017)

Great idea.



> Residents of council tower blocks and estates across East and South London dropped 22 banners – one for each of the 22 residential floors in the 24 storey Grenfell Tower, destroyed by fire in Latimer Road on 14 June – in a show of mass solidarity with victims, survivors and local community.



















A beautiful message to the Grenfell community, from the housing estates of East London


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 29, 2017)

Looks to be a big story in the _Times_ tomorrow (not up on website yet) claiming the council changed the original specs, downgrading from flameproof cladding to lower costs:


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 29, 2017)

belboid said:


> The council become more gobsmackingly awful by the second. Meeting cancelled, because it being reported would be 'prejudicial'
> 
> And Paget-Brown wont resign 'in the forseeable future'
> 
> Kensington council meeting adjourned over inquiry prejudice fears - BBC News


----------



## belboid (Jun 29, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


>



Any idea who the guy complaining is?


----------



## ddraig (Jun 29, 2017)

for fucks sake!!
bonkers but can see where it comes from having seen some of these cttees in action
they always get scared when the public and press get involved even though they make all the right noises about scrutiny, transparency and participation, pathetic


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 29, 2017)

belboid said:


> Any idea who the guy complaining is?



No I don't. Please let me know if you find out.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 29, 2017)

belboid said:


> Any idea who the guy complaining is?


Cllr J. Robert Atkinson (Labour)


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 29, 2017)

belboid said:


> Any idea who the guy complaining is?


I think that's the Labour group leader, Cllr Robert Atkinson.

There's another video from the ‘meeting’ which goes on longer at the end, and there are a few more people in the audience towards the front who speak, and I'm pretty sure they're also Labour councillors (Robert Thompson, Monica Press and Beinazir Lasharie); the Tory backbenchers seem to be sat further to the rear of the room.

See: 



RBKC Councillors


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 29, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> Cllr J. Robert Atkinson (Labour)


Nimble fingers!


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 29, 2017)

And here he is outside 5 minutes later...


----------



## free spirit (Jun 30, 2017)

Theresa May just lied in the commons while trying to make this non-party political.

She alleged that cladding of tower blocks began under Tony Blair, yet there was a 1999 parliamentary inquiry into cladding fires on tower blocks that identified these fires amongst others that had already occurred well before Tony Blair was in power.


> Knowsley Heights, Liverpool, 1991. Deliberate fire spread up and behind rainscreen cladding, extended over 11 floors. Building Regulations were changed as a result of this.
> 
> Mercantile credit building, Basingstoke, 1991. Fire on 8th floor spread up the building behind glass curtain walling.
> 
> ...



This began under a Tory government.


----------



## yardbird (Jun 30, 2017)

Grenfell Tower: Cladding 'changed to cheaper version' - BBC News
No wonder the council leader didn't want the press at the meeting.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 30, 2017)

yardbird said:


> Grenfell Tower: Cladding 'changed to cheaper version' - BBC News
> No wonder the council leader didn't want the press at the meeting.



Watched this report on the news this morning, what I don't get is this line - "Both types of cladding have the same fire official rating."


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 30, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Watched this report on the news this morning, what I don't get is this line - "Both types of cladding have the same fire official rating."



They're rated the same, so the decision wasn't made to knowingly substitute a a product of a lesser grade, it would have met the same criteria for fire performance. This doesn't mean that it was of the same flammability, just that both (according to official tests) met a particular standard - although it turns out the original proposed material would have performed better. I doubt it was considered any further than meeting the same specification

Still, this phrase in the BBC report is a fairly damning indictment of austerity:



> The savings were part of an ongoing effort by the council and the local tenant management organisation to drive down the cost of the refurbishment.
> A source close to one of the many companies involved in the project said the change was typical of constant pressure by councils to reduce the costs of building refurbishments.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jun 30, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Which bit ?



You said '...that personal criticising judges because you don't like the law they interpret makes you level with the daily mail.'

So in a very brief post you managed to get two things wrong. Firstly it wasn't the law that was being disliked (which is what your post actually says), it was specifically the interpretation that was being objected to. Secondly objecting to a judge's particular interpretation (an objection unanimously endorsed by the supreme court) doesn't place an individual on an internet forum 'on a level' with a national newspaper, a pro-tory national news paper with huge international reach. 

It's not so much which bits you got wrong as you got nothing right.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 30, 2017)

Below the line comment posted under a Times article this morning :


----------



## teuchter (Jun 30, 2017)

Aluminium cladding is cheaper than zinc.

I don't believe the change of face material from aluminium to zinc is relevant to fire resistance (might be wrong though).

In fact zinc melts at a lower temperature than aluminium. However, the original panels may have had some kind of zinc alloy.

What's relevant is the core material. The question is whether the originally specified zinc panels had a more fire resistant core.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 30, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> They're rated the same, so the decision wasn't made to knowingly substitute a a product of a lesser grade, it would have met the same criteria for fire performance. This doesn't mean that it was of the same flammability, just that both (according to official tests) met a particular standard - although it turns out the original proposed material would have performed better. I doubt it was considered any further than meeting the same specification



That's what I was thinking, if you are offered 2 versions of cladding* & told they are both as safe as each other,* but one will save you about £300k, logically the cheaper option is going to get chosen.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 30, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Aluminium cladding is cheaper than zinc.
> 
> I don't believe the change of face material from aluminium to zinc is relevant to fire resistance (might be wrong though).
> 
> ...


The question for me is more how it is possible for a - presumably - somewhat carefully arrived-at specification for materials can be almost summarily changed purely to save some money and by simply making some kind of equivalence on the basis of a standard, rather than going back and looking at the previous decisions that were made in regard to the original material, and questioning where any impact of the revised choice might fall. "Regression testing", if you will...


----------



## Badgers (Jun 30, 2017)

Grenfell Tower council meeting ends in chaos


----------



## ddraig (Jun 30, 2017)

yardbird said:


> Grenfell Tower: Cladding 'changed to cheaper version' - BBC News
> No wonder the council leader didn't want the press at the meeting.


----------



## ddraig (Jun 30, 2017)

wrt the council's excuse for stopping the meeting yesterday saying it would prejudice the inquiry, Wondering whether the council meeting and minutes could have informed/been used by the inquiry if considered appropriate?

obviously the council and senior officers/cabinet are arse covering and dodging it as far as possible but how valid (or rather legal) is their excuse?


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 30, 2017)

yardbird said:


> Grenfell Tower: Cladding 'changed to cheaper version' - BBC News
> No wonder the council leader didn't want the press at the meeting.





ddraig said:


>



But if both types of panel had the same fire rating, that's not where the blame lies.

At the moment the fault seems to be with the testing and safety _standards_.


----------



## bluescreen (Jun 30, 2017)

ddraig said:


> wrt the council's excuse for stopping the meeting yesterday saying it would prejudice the inquiry, Wondering whether the council meeting and minutes could have informed/been used by the inquiry if considered appropriate?
> 
> obviously the council and senior officers/cabinet are arse covering and dodging it as far as possible but how valid (or rather legal) is their excuse?


If they are finding any of that a problem then they might finally realise that they should resign.


----------



## 19force8 (Jun 30, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Company in charge of Grenfell Tower locks community out of therapy centre Wtf?


I can understand the council wanting to lock the public out of their meetings - they're obviously terrified [with good reason].

But for the TMO to lock traumatised kids out of after school art therapy classes beggars belief. I don't think it would be possible to imagine a clearer demonstration of contempt for the people they should be serving.


----------



## Cid (Jun 30, 2017)

existentialist said:


> The question for me is more how it is possible for a - presumably - somewhat carefully arrived-at specification for materials can be almost summarily changed purely to save some money and by simply making some kind of equivalence on the basis of a standard, rather than going back and looking at the previous decisions that were made in regard to the original material, and questioning where any impact of the revised choice might fall. "Regression testing", if you will...



Plans inevitably change from those submitted for permission. You just need to get permission for that change, and/or building regs approval. And why would you go beyond that? if something is rated as safe by building regs, and passes an inspection you're not unjustified in thinking it's suitable... The problem is that we're looking at this in hindsight; Grenfell has massively highlighted incidents of fire related to this particular material. And we don't know what combination of factors lead to the fire spreading so quickly. In essence it's entirely reasonable to look at two products with the same fire rating but a cost difference of £300k and go for the cheaper one. There may be factors at play that run deeper than that, but that surface decision is difficult to criticise. The question beyond that is why was the non-fr product chosen, for a saving of only £5k (assuming that's correct).


----------



## 19force8 (Jun 30, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> But if both types of panel had the same fire rating, that's not where the blame lies.
> 
> At the moment the fault seems to be with the testing and safety _standards_.


I don't know if this is relevant, but I saw on tv the other night a report saying that the original testing process involved putting cladding on a test structure and setting fire to it to see how it performed. This was later stopped and manufacturers merely required to provide proof they had followed procedures. [or some such - I'll try to find the report and link to it]


----------



## teuchter (Jun 30, 2017)

existentialist said:


> The question for me is more how it is possible for a - presumably - *somewhat carefully arrived-at specification for materials can be almost summarily changed purely to save some money and by simply making some kind of equivalence on the basis of a standard, rather than going back and looking at the previous decisions that were made in regard to the original material*, and questioning where any impact of the revised choice might fall. "Regression testing", if you will...



We have at present absolutely no idea whether this is what happened or not.


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 30, 2017)

19force8 said:


> I don't know if this is relevant, but I saw on tv the other night a report saying that the original testing process involved putting cladding on a test structure and setting fire to it to see how it performed. This was later stopped and manufacturers merely required to provide proof they had followed procedures. [or some such - I'll try to find the report and link to it]


It also seems that all of these buildings that are currently failing fire tests on their cladding are failing completely different tests to those in place at the time of construction.

If a contractor is mandated to make cost savings on a previous quote and can reduce the bill by 200k by changing the panelling, of course they'll do that. The only foul is if they knowingly overlook safety requirements to do it, which doesn't seem to be the case here.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 30, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> But if both types of panel had the same fire rating, that's not where the blame lies.
> 
> At the moment the fault seems to be with the testing and safety _standards_.


 

Indeed- lots of bluster and finger pointing going on by everyone to distract the blame - if the contractors who installed the cladding were directed to use xxx rather than yyy- both of which having the same certification levels _and _they installed it correctly on site according to whatever conventions they were supposed to follow, then this isn't their problem.They can fuck up the install but thats about it


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 30, 2017)

Plenty of coverage in the last couple of weeks on the aluminium cladding and insulation, failed safety tests etc. but bizarrely no mention at all thus far of the fire breaks/barriers. These items, a crucial third piece in the jigsaw, are supposed to be attached to the original exterior of the building, bisecting the insulation material at periodic intervals. The barriers expand when heat is applied and...  er .. prevent the spread of fire. Looks like they weren't fitted at all, weren't fitted properly or cheap inadequate ones were used.


----------



## 19force8 (Jun 30, 2017)

19force8 said:


> I don't know if this is relevant, but I saw on tv the other night a report saying that the original testing process involved putting cladding on a test structure and setting fire to it to see how it performed. This was later stopped and manufacturers merely required to provide proof they had followed procedures. [or some such - I'll try to find the report and link to it]


I think the original report was last week on Channel 4 News, but their website is painfully slow and I don't have the time to search just now.

From the BBC today Grenfell Tower: Panels not tested 'properly' - BBC News

The39thStep I don't necessarily disagree, but I do think the changes in testing procedures would have been lobbied for by the industry with a view to cutting costs. So although an individual manufacturer might have adhered to the new regulations that doesn't mean they aren't responsible.


----------



## Cid (Jun 30, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> Plenty of coverage in the last couple of weeks on the aluminium cladding and insulation, failed safety tests etc. but bizarrely no mention at all thus far of the fire breaks/barriers. These items, a crucial third piece in the jigsaw, are supposed to be attached to the original exterior of the building, bisecting the insulation material at periodic intervals. The barriers expand when heat is applied and...  er .. prevent the spread of fire. Looks like they weren't fitted at all, weren't fitted properly or cheap inadequate ones were used.



They were discussed immediately afterwards... Though I'll grant there hasn't been much on them since. I suppose the problem is that it will be difficult to get further information until there has been a proper on-site investigation. Which doesn't make for good headlines.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 30, 2017)

Always nice to have it confirmed; what you already know about how smug middle and upper class cunts think...

Councillor admits he 'phrased comments badly' on Grenfell victims



> Labour’s Jordan Blyth said Grenfell victims were “not respectable sorts of citizens” during a special session of Middlesbrough Council held on Wednesday.


----------



## 19force8 (Jun 30, 2017)

19force8 said:


> I think the original report was last week on Channel 4 News, but their website is painfully slow and I don't have the time to search just now.
> 
> From the BBC today Grenfell Tower: Panels not tested 'properly' - BBC News


This is it: Why do England's high-rises keep failing fire tests? - BBC News

It refers to using desktop studies rather than full fire tests and also describes how failure to update regulations and outsourcing of compliance inspections and application of regulations to industry bodies has undermined safety.


----------



## Sue (Jun 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Always nice to have it confirmed; what you already know about how smug middle and upper class cunts think...
> 
> Councillor admits he 'phrased comments badly' on Grenfell victims



 'Phrased badly' FFS.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 30, 2017)

Sue said:


> 'Phrased badly' FFS.


'lowest rungs of society' and 'immigrants'. Why doesn't he just say untermensch and be done with it


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Always nice to have it confirmed; what you already know about how smug middle and upper class cunts think...
> 
> Councillor admits he 'phrased comments badly' on Grenfell victims


 
I had this on FB - decrying the invasion of the council office and the abuse of May- stating that civilised people do not do this kinda thing, its not the way we do things here- the undercurrent here isn't hard to work out. Rural tories from the same county as the bloke above. Not common sentiments but not unheard of either  - thankfully in the NE, most people are sensible enough to understand the horror of this happening


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 30, 2017)

19force8 said:


> I think the original report was last week on Channel 4 News, but their website is painfully slow and I don't have the time to search just now.
> 
> From the BBC today Grenfell Tower: Panels not tested 'properly' - BBC News
> 
> The39thStep I don't disagree, but I do think the changes in testing procedures would have been lobbied for by the industry with a view to cutting costs. So although an individual manufacturer might have adhered to the new regulations that doesn't mean they aren't responsible.



What are you not necessarily disagreeing with me on?


----------



## Sue (Jun 30, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> I had this on FB - decrying the invasion of the council office and the abuse of May- stating that civilised people do not do this kinda thing, its not the way we do things here- the undercurrent here isn't hard to work out. Rural tories from the same county as the bloke above. Not common sentiments but not unheard of either  - thankfully in the NE, most people are sensible enough to understand the horror of this happening


'Civilised people' = know your place


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 30, 2017)

Another voice saying testing just the cladding is wrong, the insulation needs testing. The police have said the insulation on Grenfell seemed to have been the bigger problem.



> The Conservative local government chief has savaged the Government’s tower block safety checks after the Grenfell fire – warning not all of the cladding is being tested.
> 
> Ministers had blundered by testing only the core of the panels on high-rise blocks and not the insulation behind them, which may not be fire-resistant, Lord Porter said.
> 
> ...


----------



## David Clapson (Jun 30, 2017)

Has there been no criticism of the fire service since Panorama reported that when the first crew put out the fridge fire they didn't realise that the fire had got out of the flat? 

Sorry about linking to the Telegraph, I couldn't find a better alternative
Grenfell Tower firefighters put out fridge blaze 'and were just leaving when flats erupted in flames'


----------



## xenon (Jun 30, 2017)

existentialist said:


> The question for me is more how it is possible for a - presumably - somewhat carefully arrived-at specification for materials can be almost summarily changed purely to save some money and by simply making some kind of equivalence on the basis of a standard, rather than going back and looking at the previous decisions that were made in regard to the original material, and questioning where any impact of the revised choice might fall. "Regression testing", if you will...



Other questions. 
Why are the regulations so week. Why can materials pass our regulations, yet apparently be banned in other countries. Why can materials the manufacturer themselves say should not be used on buildings above a certain height, be specced for a building above that height. Or who chose them?
How does a burrugh with a surpless of 200 million have a housing waiting list?

My thoughts.
Government cutbacks, contractors cost saving all down the 
chain, none with the larger picture or a care much to look at it, of how these changes interplay.

Industry regulation capture, = piss poor regulations.

Class.


----------



## 19force8 (Jun 30, 2017)

The39thStep said:


> What are you not necessarily disagreeing with me on?


Sorry, mistook you for Spymaster 

Though I'm sure I could find something I don't necessarily disagree with you about


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 30, 2017)

xenon said:


> How does a burrugh with a surpless of 200 million have a housing waiting list?


of course it needn't if only they were prepared to massively increase the density of housing. there is of course only a certain amount of land in any borough and if, as seems likely, the council is as unwilling to build tower blocks as potential residents would atm be to live in them not sure how that can be resolved. not to mention a load of former council flats and houses will have passed from the council's control.


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 30, 2017)

19force8 said:


> Sorry, mistook you for Spymaster
> 
> Though I'm sure I could find something I don't necessarily disagree with you about


Easily done although I am better looking, have more personality and am a lot brighter


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 30, 2017)

A bit tangental, but this so needs saying in defence of national heroes.

How Murdoch Uses Sex to Trash Our Democracy.....


----------



## 19force8 (Jun 30, 2017)

The39thStep said:


> Easily done although I am better looking, have more personality and am a lot brighter


There you go, two out of three ain't bad.


----------



## yardbird (Jun 30, 2017)

Just heard on R5 - no written link yet - that #10 has said RBKC was wrong in not allowing public and/or press into meeting. More to follow.


----------



## yardbird (Jun 30, 2017)

Here we go - Grenfell Tower fire: Downing Street criticises council over aborted meeting - BBC News


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 30, 2017)

yardbird said:


> Just heard on R5 - no written link yet - that #10 has said RBKC was wrong in not allowing public and/or press into meeting. More to follow.


Kensington council's Grenfell Tower meeting turns to chaos | Daily Mail Online


----------



## Wilf (Jun 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Always nice to have it confirmed; what you already know about how smug middle and upper class cunts think...
> 
> Councillor admits he 'phrased comments badly' on Grenfell victims


A partial defence from me:
Firstly, the video in the link kept crashing, so I didn't manage to hear his full comments.  Anyway, I don't know him personally but people involved in local anti-cuts stuff regard him as okay.  He's not a Corbnyite certainly, but seen to be generally okay.  He's certainly middle class and there's definitely the problem of language there, when somebody from one class describes another group of people - and it sounds horrendous. However, I'd be _inclined_ to see it as a (very) badly worded attempt to say something about the way K&C council treated the residents.  Having said that, his refusal to apologise is pretty crass.  Even if it was 'just' badly worded he should said sorry.  It's the sort of comment which, even with the best intentions, still embodies an element of class prejudice [so, actually, I'm probably not making much of a defence]


----------



## Wilf (Jun 30, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> I had this on FB - decrying the invasion of the council office and the abuse of May- stating that civilised people do not do this kinda thing, its not the way we do things here- the undercurrent here isn't hard to work out. Rural tories from the same county as the bloke above. Not common sentiments but not unheard of either  - thankfully in the NE, most people are sensible enough to understand the horror of this happening


Was that Jordan Blyth also?  Sorry, hard to read the Gazette story in the link, keeps crashing (wish these fuckers at work would buy me a proper computer so they could allow me to read urban when I'm sat at my desk.  ).


----------



## David Clapson (Jun 30, 2017)

In 2005 Scotland banned the most flammable cladding types, following a fire in 1999 in Irvine - the only other time in the UK that high rise cladding has enabled a fire to spread at speed. The local MP asked for a parliamentary enquiry, but a select committee said cladding was safe enough. Would somebody like to find out who was on that committee and whether they had a financial interest in preventing the Scottish ban from being adopted in the rest of the UK?

House of Commons - Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs - First Report

How 1999 Scottish tower block fire led to regulation change - BBC News


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 30, 2017)

The39thStep said:


> Easily done although I am better looking, have more personality and am a lot brighter


Yeah but I've got a bigger dick.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 30, 2017)

.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 30, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> In 2005 Scotland banned the most flammable cladding types, following a fire in 1999 in Irvine - the only other time in the UK that high rise cladding has enabled a fire to spread at speed. The local MP asked for a parliamentary enquiry, but a select committee said cladding was safe enough. Would somebody like to find out who was on that committee and whether they had a financial interest in preventing the Scottish ban from being adopted in the rest of the UK?
> 
> House of Commons - Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs - First Report
> 
> How 1999 Scottish tower block fire led to regulation change - BBC News


Why not read your own link?


----------



## David Clapson (Jun 30, 2017)

Thanks. I don't have time to look up the interests of the members, perhaps someone else would like to?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 30, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Was that Jordan Blyth also?  Sorry, hard to read the Gazette story in the link, keeps crashing (wish these fuckers at work would buy me a proper computer so they could allow me to read urban when I'm sat at my desk.  ).


 
Nah, it was someone from just down the road from him in Darlington who was applauded on FB for saying the angry protest achieve nothing and is not civilised to do so . Rapid Kipper by the way.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 30, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Nah, it was someone from just down the road from him in Darlington who was applauded on FB for saying the angry protest achieve nothing and is not civilised to do so . Rapid Kipper by the way.


Ta.


----------



## killer b (Jun 30, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Yeah but I've got a bigger dick.


*am


----------



## Spymaster (Jun 30, 2017)

killer b said:


> *am


Ok. 

I've got am bigger dick.


----------



## 19force8 (Jun 30, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> ...Rapid Kipper by the way.


A Herring then


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 30, 2017)

More from Luke Barratt at _Inside Housing_...

*Grenfell cladding was not risk assessed despite LFB warning*

The exterior of Grenfell Tower was not fire risk assessed, despite a warning from the London Fire Brigade (LFB) “strongly urging” councils to do so two months before the deadly blaze.

_Inside Housing _has obtained a letter from the LFB which warned London’s social landlords to check “insulation… and in-fill panels” on the exterior of buildings to “secure public safety and minimise fire losses” sent in May this year.

The letter continued: “I would strongly urge that you consider this issue as part of the risk assessment process for premises under your control.”

But in a statement given to _Inside Housing_, CS Stokes Associates – the firm which risk assessed Grenfell Tower – said: “It is very important to stress that these assessments focused on the common parts of the building to the requirements of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, rather than the building’s refurbishment or structural changes.”

At least 80 people are confirmed dead in the blaze, which tore across the outside of the 24-storey building in minutes. Tests by police later revealed both the cladding and the insulation, added in a refurbishment a year before, failed fire safety tests.

Cladding is not typically included in a fire risk assessment and the firm said the last risk assessment on Grenfell Tower was carried out in 2016, before the warning was issued.

CS Stokes and Associates, said it “is confident that its fire risk assessment work was carried out to the highest professional standards”, and also said it “liaised closely” with Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO) over the refurbishment works. It clarified, however, that director Carl Stokes’ formal risk assessments did not address the works.

A spokesperson from KCTMO said: “All fire risk assessments are conducted in accordance with statutory and regulatory requirements. This means that [they] focus on communal areas such as stairwells, lift lobbies, lift shafts, risers and walkways etc, as confirmed by those undertaking these assessments.”

CS Stokes and Associates was described by the KCTMO board as offering the “most competitive price” of any applicant for the fire risk assessments contract and praised for being “willing to challenge the fire brigade… if he considered their requirements excessive”.

LFB issued the warning to landlords in May in a letter titled _Tall Buildings – External Fire Spread. _It followed Inside Housing securing research which showed a huge tower block fire in Shepherd’s Bush had spread due to external window panels.

The fire brigade did not make the warning public or issue it to councils outside the capital.

Grenfell cladding was not risk assessed despite LFB warning

You might need to register (for free) to use the links. The article mentions the last Grenfell Tower FRA being in 2016 - that could be a typo, I think it was December 2015.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 30, 2017)

_Construction News_ is reporting that Rydon has threatened Camden Council with legal action “after the authority claimed that the cladding fitted to five towers in the borough had not been ‘to the standard commissioned by the council’.”

Rydon threatens legal action against Camden over cladding claims (£)


----------



## Pac man (Jun 30, 2017)

Still no list of how many "registered survivors" there are..fishy as fuck..


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 30, 2017)

People who legitimately raise questions about the Grenfell Tower death-rate are now having the "conspiracy theory" pejorative thrown at them, not just from the usual forces of conservatism and reaction, but from some who should know much better.

This isn't to recognise that emergency services, coroners etc. don't have their own diligent methods, but the implied comparison to people who think Diana is buried on the moon or whatever is as offensive as it is stupid.

It also overlooks that, by the same standards, the Hillsborough campaigners spent a quarter of a century as conspiracy theorists.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 30, 2017)

Sprinklers will be installed at Northampton flat block following pressure from tenants over fire safety concerns

Hopefully other councils will follow.


----------



## 19force8 (Jun 30, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> People who legitimately raise questions about the Grenfell Tower death-rate are now having the "conspiracy theory" pejorative thrown at them, not just from the usual forces of conservatism and reaction, but from some who should know much better.


I think "registered survivors" is different. Especially as it will relate to who is entitled to rehousing/compensation, etc.

If there are problems with this a fortnight after the fire then it does seem troubling.


----------



## Pac man (Jun 30, 2017)

This isn't to recognise that emergency services, coroners etc. don't have their own diligent methods, but the implied comparison to people who think Diana is buried on the moon or whatever is as offensive as it is stupid.

It also overlooks that, by the same standards, the Hillsborough campaigners spent a quarter of a century as conspiracy theorists.[/QUOTE] But this isnt about the death toll, its about the survivors, why arent the media even social media listing the numbers? there will be an official and unofficial number of survivors..its in the public intrest to know.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 30, 2017)

Chief executive of company that managed Grenfell Tower resigns

Right then.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Chief executive of company that managed Grenfell Tower resigns
> 
> Right then.


What's the betting he's now suddenly unable to answer any questions about anything without a summons?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 30, 2017)

The Grenfell Fire Response Update #9

Some updates of interest in this.

A massive and potentially upsetting mistake to say this though.



> The first funeral of a victim of the Grenfell fire was held today. Anthony Disson, aged 65,



Anthony's hasn't been the first funeral at all. Fucking hell that's a horrible insult to the others.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 30, 2017)

> *New charitable grants*
> 
> Every family who lost someone in the Grenfell fire is to receive £20,000, those seriously injured will receive up to £10,000 and there will be a further £10,000 ‘fresh start’ grant to every family who has been made homeless.



Doesn't seem very much to me


----------



## Badgers (Jun 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Doesn't seem very much to me


Got a link for that? Who is paying these?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 30, 2017)

Badgers said:


> Got a link for that? Who is paying these?


It's in the link above The Fire response Update #9

It's not clear what they mean by charitable grants in terms of who is paying them.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> It's in the link above The Fire response Update #9


Cheers.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 30, 2017)

Possibly the wisest words by a politician thus far (not difficult):

*Lord Adonis: don't wait for inquiry to implement change*

Important decisions on fire safety should not be delayed until after the public inquiry, which “could take 10 years”, an influential Labour peer chair of the National Infrastructure Commission has said.

Lord Andrew Adonis made the remarks in his address to the Housing 2017 conference in Manchester earlier today.

“What tends to happen with these public inquiries,” he warned, “is everybody says that they should leave taking any serious action until the public inquiry’s been reported and that they can’t deal with all these difficult questions until after the inquiry.

“It’s very important that we don’t delay all action and all improvements and any bold attempt to address this serious problem of the shortage of social housing in central London, that we don’t park all of that until this inquiry has reported.”

Lord Adonis, who in his speech emphasised the importance of a joined-up approach between infrastructure and housing, also insisted that setting up an inquiry was not the same as taking real action.

“There had to be a public inquiry on this occasion because the loss of life was so great and the tragedy so appalling,” the life peer conceded. “But it’s very convenient for governments to set up public inquiries because they appear to be doing something.

“In fact – let’s be clear – all that they’re doing is appointing a public inquiry. Nothing else has changed.”

Retired judge Sir Martin Moore-Bick will lead the public inquiry. Lord Adonis said that he hoped Sir Martin has “a lot of resilience and staying power because he may well need it”.

_Inside Housing_’s Never Again campaign calls on government to update and clarify building regulations immediately – with a commitment to update if additional learning emerges at a later date from the Grenfell inquiry.

Adonis: don't wait for inquiry to implement change


----------



## killer b (Jun 30, 2017)

Paget-Brown has resigned Council leader to quit over fire response - BBC News


----------



## agricola (Jun 30, 2017)

Good news that he's gone, but sadly typical that he waited until late on Friday afternoon before doing so.


----------



## Cid (Jun 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> The Grenfell Fire Response Update #9
> 
> Some updates of interest in this.
> 
> ...



Did you tell them?


----------



## teuchter (Jun 30, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> Possibly the wisest words by a politician thus far (not difficult):
> 
> *Lord Adonis: don't wait for inquiry to implement change*
> 
> ...


We shouldn't wait until after an enquiry. We should however wait until we have a clear idea from a technical point of view of what went wrong. Otherwise money will end up being spent on things that make people feel safer rather than things that actually make them safer.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 30, 2017)

killer b said:


> Paget-Brown has resigned Council leader to quit over fire response - BBC News



Thus leaving the council in the capable hands of Deputy Leader Rock Fielding Mellon. Oh hang on...


----------



## bluescreen (Jun 30, 2017)

Feilding Mellen has got to resign too. The whole bloody shower of a cabinet has to resign.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 30, 2017)

Just in time for A nice long summer break. You scum


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 30, 2017)

Cid said:


> Did you tell them?


They have been emailed yes.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 30, 2017)

bluescreen said:


> Feilding Mellen has got to resign too. The whole bloody shower of a cabinet has to resign.


I understand Fielding-Mellen has also announced he is to resign.

Paget-Smith hasn't actually gone yet - he has announced he will resign when a replacement leader is appointed. According to the Times he is expected to remain as a councillor.

Similarly Robert Black the Chief Executive of KCTMO is also not resigning but "stepping aside" and again according to The Times


> He will continue to remain a member of staff at the organisation he has led for eight year and will receive his chief executive salary.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 30, 2017)

Yeh. He's signalled his departure as soon as I gave him till the 14th. My work is nearly done


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 30, 2017)

bluescreen said:


> Feilding Mellen has got to resign too. The whole bloody shower of a cabinet has to resign.


Too little too late.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 30, 2017)

its taken this long for them to realise brazening it out isn't going to work. Never ceases to amaze me, that complete arrogance. If it were me I'd have been cap in hand resignation the minute I saw the tower burning. But not these people.


----------



## Sue (Jun 30, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> its taken this long for them to realise brazening it out isn't going to work. Never ceases to amaze me, that complete arrogance. *If it were me* I'd have been cap in hand resignation the minute I saw the tower burning. But not these people.


Yeah, but you're not an arrogant, fucking scumbag.


----------



## ddraig (Jun 30, 2017)

what will happen to their assumed knighthoods??  won't no one think of the senior tories?!


----------



## existentialist (Jun 30, 2017)

Sue said:


> Yeah, but you're not an arrogant, fucking scumbag.


I think that there has been a mode of thought that has grown in (particularly the more corporate aspect of) the political caste - that they really are somewhat untouchable. It seems inconceivable to us that people like Paget-Brown, May, even people like Sadiq Khan, can make what seem to us like unutterably crass statements or decisions, and not realise how they're going to be received. So up go the barriers, down come the victim-blaming and self-protective denials, and we sit there aghast at the total insensitivity of it all.

Part of it is maybe an excessive emphasis on media training - perhaps they truly believe that by "handling" people, their PR tech will enable them to move past the untutored expectations of the grubby proles - but when all you've got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. We (most of us) don't have that hammer, so when we hypothesise about how we'd deal with it, we look for other solutions - like compassion, honesty, openness, admitting our fallibility, that kind of thing. And then we sit there open-mouthed when these supposed professionals just don't realise what people want.

Good. Perhaps the pendulum will begin to swing the other way.

What does amaze me is that these PR strategies don't seem to include the "just go out there, give it 100% sincerity, and say sorry" option. Maybe they don't think their principals are even capable of *faking *sincerity. I can see why.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 30, 2017)

bluescreen said:


> Feilding Mellen has got to resign too. The whole bloody shower of a cabinet has to resign.


Deputy leader follows Kensingon Council leader in quitting over Grenfell Tower disaster


----------



## Sue (Jun 30, 2017)

existentialist said:


> I think that there has been a mode of thought that has grown in (particularly the more corporate aspect of) the political caste - that they really are somewhat untouchable. It seems inconceivable to us that people like Paget-Brown, May, even people like Sadiq Khan, can make what seem to us like unutterably crass statements or decisions, and not realise how they're going to be received. So up go the barriers, down come the victim-blaming and self-protective denials, and we sit there aghast at the total insensitivity of it all.
> 
> Part of it is maybe an excessive emphasis on media training - perhaps they truly believe that by "handling" people, their PR tech will enable them to move past the untutored expectations of the grubby proles - but when all you've got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. We (most of us) don't have that hammer, so when we hypothesise about how we'd deal with it, we look for other solutions - like compassion, honesty, openness, admitting our fallibility, that kind of thing. And then we sit there open-mouthed when these supposed professionals just don't realise what people want.
> 
> ...


It also helps if you don't completely despise people who aren't the same as you. Especially those you purport to represent.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Deputy leader follows Kensingon Council leader in quitting over Grenfell Tower disaster


One out - all out


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 30, 2017)

ddraig said:


> what will happen to their assumed knighthoods??  won't no one think of the senior tories?!


They hang as well as anyone else and better than most


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jun 30, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Meanwhile other meetings be like...




This meeting...seeing video from it today...


----------



## gawkrodger (Jun 30, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> its taken this long for them to realise brazening it out isn't going to work. Never ceases to amaze me, that complete arrogance. If it were me I'd have been cap in hand resignation the minute I saw the tower burning. But not these people.



But we weren't raised in posh private schools


----------



## Sue (Jul 1, 2017)

Just heard part of Paget-Brown's resignation statement. Due to 'perceived failings' by the council. No acceptance that the council has done anything wrong. 

Even if you wait for the results of the enquiry, it's clear they fucked up their response and have treated those affected with contempt. FFS.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jul 1, 2017)

'perceived failings'


----------



## MikeMcc (Jul 1, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> please get off your hobby horse about this. you can't know at any one time how many people are in houses on e.g. camden's queens crescent or westminster's elgin avenue or lambeth's coldharbour lane. similarly, you can't be sure how many people were in grenfell tower as it burned. given the extent and ferocity of the fire it's quite possible not so much remained of some bodies. what do you want, guesswork?


It's less to do with the 'extent and ferocity'. The population of those affected in that block cause massive complications for those accounting for the dead.  There's the testimony of the survivors about their neighbours, concerns that health and electoral data don't reflect actual occupancy, etc.  On top of that, horrifically, many of the remaining bodies will have been cremated, there will be literally ash left of the bodies.  In many cases this will have been disturbed in the fire-fighting and incident investigation procedures.  We will eventually have a minimum value, I doubt that we ever have a final, complete figure.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 1, 2017)

Sadiq Khan calls on PM to appoint commissioners:

Grenfell Tower fire: Sadiq Khan calls on PM to appoint commissioners - BBC News


----------



## killer b (Jul 1, 2017)

Jaw dropping interview with someone from the council on radio 4 this morning. About 8.15 if you want to listen again - total denial the council have done anything wrong.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 1, 2017)

killer b said:


> Jaw dropping interview with someone from the council on radio 4 this morning. About 8.15 if you want to listen again - total denial the council have done anything wrong.



Very likely, within the paradigm, system goals and rules they thought they were supposed to be following, they weren't doing anything particularly wrong.

The problem was the paradigm, system goals and rules themselves.

Specifically, neo-liberalism as implemented in the UK.

So its no surprise people in their position are struggling with a bit of cognitive dissonance right now.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 1, 2017)

Grenfell cladding boss is a government adviser - Times (Paywalled)



Spoiler: Text of story



Sean O’Neill, Chief Reporter

July 1 2017, 12:01am, The Times

A senior executive from the company that made the insulation boards fitted to Grenfell Tower is an adviser to the government on building regulations.

Mark Allen, technical director of Saint Gobain UK, which makes Celotex insulation, is on the Building Regulations Advisory Committee (BRAC), which advises Sajid Javid, the communities and local government secretary.

Scotland Yard said last week that its investigation into the fire, which claimed at least 80 lives, had found that the Celotex RS 5000 insulation boards fitted in a large refurbishment project had proved highly flammable. Although classified as “low risk” in terms of fire, police said “the insulation samples collected from Grenfell Tower combusted soon after the test started”.

The product has been withdrawn from use on high-rise buildings but Mr Allen remains on the committee that met last week to discuss Grenfell.

BRAC members are appointed by the secretary of state. It meets three times a year but does not publish minutes.

Fire safety experts complain that the committee is “heavily weighted towards the building industry” and has proved “difficult to engage with”.

There is concern that regulations have failed to keep pace with changes in construction techniques and the development of new types of materials, including the kind of external cladding used in the £8.6 million Grenfell refit.

Cladding materials have been fitted to thousands of buildings and the continuing 100 per cent failure rate in tests on samples from blocks of flats drew criticism of the process yesterday.

Panels on 149 buildings from 45 local authority areas are described as having failed the tests, which are narrowly focused on the core material in cladding.

Sample panels are taken from buildings to fire-testing houses where they are taken apart and small fragments of the core material removed. This is then burned in pure oxygen to find if they are flammable, fire retardant and therefore burn slowly, or non-combustible.

Lord Porter of Spalding, chairman of the Local Government Association, said the tests were flawed as they were not examining panels in their entirety and not looking at insulation boards which, as in Grenfell, are fixed behind the cladding.

After the comments, the expert panel set up by Mr Javid after the fire said that the tests would not always mean cladding had to be removed from buildings. The panel said its approach was to conduct “screening tests” to determine what was in panels so measures could be taken to ensure residents were safe.

The Fire Protection Association had to conduct a postcard lobbying campaign to secure a meeting with the BRAC as it sought tighter fire-safety measures on building regulations.

It is concerned that the regulations have not been fully reviewed for more than ten years and are “not fit for the prescription of new building and refurbishment methods and materials”.

The government said the BRAC was made up of volunteers chosen by ministers for their experience and expertise. A Celotex spokesman declined to comment on Mr Allen’s committee position.





> Mark Allen, technical director of Saint Gobain UK, which makes Celotex insulation, is on the Building Regulations Advisory Committee (BRAC), which advises Sajid Javid, the communities and local government secretary.


(...)


> BRAC members are appointed by the secretary of state. It meets three times a year but does not publish minutes.
> 
> Fire safety experts complain that the committee is “heavily weighted towards the building industry” and has proved “difficult to engage with”.


----------



## killer b (Jul 1, 2017)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Very likely, within the paradigm, system goals and rules they thought they were supposed to be following, they weren't doing anything particularly wrong.
> 
> The problem was the paradigm, system goals and rules themselves.
> 
> ...


As it happens, she does draw attention to the council's 'outstanding' rating during the interview


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 1, 2017)

killer b said:


> As it happens, she does draw attention to the council's 'outstanding' rating during the interview



I'm sure we'll be adding a new chapter to the literature on cognitive dissonance over this one ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 1, 2017)

killer b said:


> Jaw dropping interview with someone from the council on radio 4 this morning. About 8.15 if you want to listen again - total denial the council have done anything wrong.


Both what she said and how she said it: she'll be on her way shortly, like paget-brown and fielding-melon


----------



## Cid (Jul 1, 2017)

killer b said:


> Jaw dropping interview with someone from the council on radio 4 this morning. About 8.15 if you want to listen again - total denial the council have done anything wrong.



Link, 1:15 (starts with end of Yvette Williams bit).


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 1, 2017)

killer b said:


> Jaw dropping interview with someone from the council on radio 4 this morning. About 8.15 if you want to listen again - total denial the council have done anything wrong.



She is actually cross that her pain, her sacrifice and her achievement aren't being recognised. What's more she sounds like she actually believes it. It just goes to show how different events can look depending on where you're observing them from. 

Her fundamental problem and that of Paget-Brown et al. is that they cannot conceive that they should be looking at this from the viewpoint of the burnt out, the bereaved, the injured and the frightened, the displaced, the distressed and traumatised, the angry and the saddened.

As Yvette Williams said in her contribution, the people of north Kensington ran the response to the fire, and showed that they are quite capable of running their own affairs. 

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 1, 2017)

so - a bunch of cunts have resigned so they can spend quality time with their lawyers.


----------



## gosub (Jul 1, 2017)

Grenfell evacuees still being charged rent after inferno


----------



## teuchter (Jul 1, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> Grenfell cladding boss is a government adviser - Times (Paywalled)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No, that's the celotex boss. Celotex did not make the cladding.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 1, 2017)

> Faulks also works as a “property finder” for Vivien Thompson Property Search, which looks for properties to buy for customers who do not have time to search. Her profile on the company website says “she has a flair for spotting the potential in any property”.



aye


----------



## Brainaddict (Jul 1, 2017)

Sue said:


> Just heard part of Paget-Brown's resignation statement. Due to 'perceived failings' by the council. No acceptance that the council has done anything wrong.
> 
> Even if you wait for the results of the enquiry, it's clear they fucked up their response and have treated those affected with contempt. FFS.


I think in their world they feel afflicted by bad luck, and you can kind of see the logic: it turns out loads of other councils have also clad their blocks in flammable cladding because the system allowed it, so it is 'bad luck' that it happened in North Kensington rather than anywhere else. And a lot of the regulatory systems are set up at national level rather than local, so why should they take the blame? And which council _is _ready to respond to a catastrophic fire that was meant to be impossible?

What they don't understand - because why would they want to? - is that everyone sees there have been massive systemic failures, and therefore everyone with any power in those systems has to be held responsible to some extent. It's fine for the lowly building control surveyor to hold up their hands and say the system was wrong and they had no power, but it just ain't going to work if you headed the council and so were responsible for overseeing a lot of the systems.

I think one particular thing the council leaders are failing to take responsibility for is the shittiness and lack of accountability of the TMO - some great stuff in Private Eye about it right now. This was an issue where they had real power, even if they can say the building control stuff was out of their hands. But they're still stuck on 'everyone else did it too', and they can't see that people won't accept that.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 1, 2017)

killer b said:


> Jaw dropping interview with someone from the council on radio 4 this morning. About 8.15 if you want to listen again - total denial the council have done anything wrong.





> “I was very shaken. I had to call the police on 999 from inside the council for the SWAT team to take me out. But this isn’t about me.”
> 
> <deadpan>It was unclear whether armed police attended the town hall during the protest.</deadpan>



Tory councillor: media efforts to attend Grenfell meeting were 'clever stunt'


----------



## andysays (Jul 1, 2017)

DaveCinzano said:


> Tory councillor: media efforts to attend Grenfell meeting were 'clever stunt'



Whereas council attempts to prevent oversight of meeting were work of stupid cunt...


----------



## marty21 (Jul 1, 2017)

gosub said:


> Grenfell evacuees still being charged rent after inferno


The staff are presumably a bit busy at the moment , it won't be difficult crediting the rent accounts when someone is free to do it.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 1, 2017)

marty21 said:


> The staff are presumably a bit busy at the moment , it won't be difficult crediting the rent accounts when someone is free to do it.


Eh? 
Marty...the rent accounts should no longer exist because the home/tenancy no longer exists.

Surely they are not being charged for the hotel's and temp accommodation?

Money is being taken out of people's bank accounts...money they most certainly need at the moment.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 1, 2017)

I would have thought suspending all computer generated activity with regard DD's for this block would have been a priority? At least now, it's been a few weeks!


----------



## belboid (Jul 1, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Eh?
> Marty...the rent accounts should no longer exist because the home/tenancy no longer exists.
> 
> Surely they are not being charged for the hotel's and temp accommodation?
> ...


With a staff cut to the bone, and having to work even harder now, under even more pressure, it's not surprising some mistakes like this are made. It will, probably, be one staff member who hasn't clicked one box, or one tenant who, for some reason, didn't come up on the spreadsheet of Grenfell residents not to be charged and so got overlooked.  It shouldn't happen, of course, and its right to make a fuss of it, especially if it has happened to more than one or two people, but it's the kind of error that is all to easy in any large bureaucracy, and one that should be able to be put right in five minutes.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 1, 2017)

andysays said:


> > Tory councillor: media efforts to attend Grenfell meeting were 'clever stunt'
> 
> 
> 
> Whereas council attempts to prevent oversight of meeting were work of stupid cunt...



Nice play on words,

Yours, cupid stunt.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 1, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Eh?
> Marty...the rent accounts should no longer exist because the home/tenancy no longer exists.



TBF, the article does refer to people 'evacuated from their homes close to Grenfell Tower', not people from the tower itself, so I guess their homes still exist, bit of a cock-up, certainly not right, but...

Anyway, from the link:


> The threat came after it was revealed that families who where evacuated from their homes close to Grenfell Tower, in the wake of the fire which killed at least 80 people, have continued to be charged rent on their flats.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jul 1, 2017)

belboid said:


> With a staff cut to the bone, and having to work even harder now, under even more pressure, it's not surprising some mistakes like this are made.



That's not the case. The KCTMO, which runs the social housing operation on behalf of the council, had a full time staff of 220 as of 31 March 2015. They also employ agency staff on top of that figure as well as having their own separate repairs company with even more staff.  That's hardly 'staff cut to the bone' is it?


----------



## belboid (Jul 1, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> That's not the case. The KCTMO, which runs the social housing operation on behalf of the council, had a full time staff of 220 as of 31 March 2015. They also employ agency staff on top of that figure as well as having their own separate repairs company with even more staff.  That's hardly 'staff cut to the bone' is it?


Dunno. It's not a small area, how many staff did they have doing the same jobs five years ago? Do you really think eight years of austerity have had no effect on jobs there?


----------



## Cid (Jul 1, 2017)

KCTMO 'runs nearly 10000 properties' according to wiki...


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Jul 1, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> That's not the case. The KCTMO, which runs the social housing operation on behalf of the council, had a full time staff of 220 as of 31 March 2015. They also employ agency staff on top of that figure as well as having their own separate repairs company with even more staff.  That's hardly 'staff cut to the bone' is it?


This is 2017 killing off a Direct Debit is the click of a mouse it's not like someone has to traipse down to the bank and sign 15 forms, this may not be malicious but it reeks of incompetence and disinterest in dealing with the issue
There's also a report on the Beeb about some family evacuated from Camsden (including school kids) that are sofa surfing a week after they were kicked out to make it look like council were doing something.
Sofa surfing is acceptable when I'm crashing on my sisters couch because I've had a skinful on Saturday night  and missed my bus home, no way should kids that have to go to school the next day  be doing it.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jul 1, 2017)

belboid said:


> It's not a small area, how many staff did they have doing the same jobs five years ago?



I don't have the figures for 5 years ago but can say that KCTMO had 161 directly employed staff on 31 March 2011. As said in my previous post, they had 220 directly employed staff on 31 March 2015. In other words, their staffing levels increased by 37% in the four year period of 'austerity'.



belboid said:


> Do you really think eight years of austerity have had no effect on jobs there?


 It did have an effect on jobs, but not in the way you think. It increased them by 37%.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jul 1, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> I don't have the figures for 5 years ago but can say that KCTMO had 161 directly employed staff on 31 March 2011. As said in my previous post, they had 220 directly employed staff on 31 March 2015. In other words, their staffing levels increased by 37% in the four year period of 'austerity'.
> 
> It did have an effect on jobs, but not in the way you think. It increased them by 37%.


Common sense* says no social housing provider has had a big increase of resources in the last few years, so perhaps some research is needed on why this happened.

I know that a while back KCTMO set up their own maintenance company because they were getting crap service from outside providers. This type of changing between outsourcing and in-house could account for changes in staff levels.

*And a Tory government


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 1, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> TBF, the article does refer to people 'evacuated from their homes close to Grenfell Tower', not people from the tower itself, so I guess their homes still exist, bit of a cock-up, certainly not right, but...
> 
> Anyway, from the link:



Yeah fair point. I took the headline too literally. Charging evacuated people, for whom there must be a register is fucking shit though. Having to live away from home is expensive enough without having to pay rent for a property you can't live in as well. suspending charges is the least they can do.


----------



## belboid (Jul 1, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> I don't have the figures for 5 years ago but can say that KCTMO had 161 directly employed staff on 31 March 2011. As said in my previous post, they had 220 directly employed staff on 31 March 2015. In other words, their staffing levels increased by 37% in the four year period of 'austerity'.
> 
> It did have an effect on jobs, but not in the way you think. It increased them by 37%.


6,924 tenanted properties v over 10,000 today - an increase of 45%. So not as big a cut as many councils have faced but K&C were always tight as fuck in the first place.

None of which should be taken to mean K&C shouldn't be held responsible for their tight assedness, or the tories let off for austerity, but it's that that's at fault. And saying otherwise risks letting the blame be stuck on some lowly worker/temp.


----------



## marty21 (Jul 1, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Eh?
> Marty...the rent accounts should no longer exist because the home/tenancy no longer exists.
> 
> Surely they are not being charged for the hotel's and temp accommodation?
> ...


The rent accounts exist until someone terminates them. Yes the individual tenants do need the money. One would hope that the leaseholders who rented their flats out have cancelled their tenancies.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jul 1, 2017)

Brainaddict said:


> Common sense* says no social housing provider has had a big increase of resources in the last few years, so perhaps some research is needed on why this happened.
> 
> I know that a while back KCTMO set up their own maintenance company because they were getting crap service from outside providers. This type of changing between outsourcing and in-house could account for changes in staff levels.
> 
> *And a Tory government


I referred to the separate KCTMO maintenance company a couple of posts ago. That's a wholly-owned subsidiary of KCTMO and files its own annual reports. This repairs company quote average staffing levels of 30 for y/e 31/03/16. Let's assume for this debate that the repairs company also had 30 staff for y/e 31/03/15. As I say, I suspect these staff are additional to the 220 staff directly employed by KCTMO at the same time but, even if they aren't that, that still gives us 190 full time staff at KCTMO on 31/03/15 - an increase of 18% in the 4 years since 2011. This proves that staff levels have increased, not reduced during the austerity era.

On top of the directly employed full time staffing numbers that I quote, KCTMO also employ additional agency staff.

The point I am trying to make is that charging homeless ex-Grenfell residents for rent after the fire is unforgivable. It is a not an innocent clerical error that can be blamed on austerity, staffing levels 'cut to the bone' etc..


----------



## belboid (Jul 1, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> I referred to the separate KCTMO maintenance company a couple of posts ago. That's a wholly-owned subsidiary of KCTMO and files its own annual reports. This repairs company quote average staffing levels of 30 for y/e 31/03/16. Let's assume for this debate that the repairs company also had 30 staff for y/e 31/03/15. As I say, I suspect these staff are additional to the 220 staff directly employed by KCTMO at the same time but, even if they aren't that, that still gives us 190 full time staff at KCTMO on 31/03/15 - an increase of 18% in the 4 years since 2011. This proves that staff levels have increased, not reduced during the austerity era.
> 
> On top of the directly employed full time staffing numbers that I quote, KCTMO also employ additional agency staff.
> 
> The point I am trying to make is that charging homeless ex-Grenfell residents for rent after the fire is unforgivable. It is a not an innocent clerical error that can be blamed on austerity, staffing levels 'cut to the bone' etc..


But you haven't taken into account them taking on more properties to look after, so it's not comparing like to like.


----------



## Ted Striker (Jul 1, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> The point I am trying to make is that charging homeless ex-Grenfell residents for rent after the fire is unforgivable. It is a not an innocent clerical error that can be blamed on austerity, staffing levels 'cut to the bone' etc..



You can sure-as-shit bet they've informed their insurers accurately enough about the loss in revenue.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jul 1, 2017)

belboid said:


> But you haven't taken into account them taking on more properties to look after, so it's not comparing like to like.



There is no evidence that KCTMO had more homes to look after during the period when there was a 37% increase in staff (2011 - 2015). In fact, the evidence suggests that dwelling levels stayed the same over this period.

I can't find a figure for social housing dwellings in 2011 but there is mention of a KCTMO resident survey at that time which involved knocking on the doors of 'almost 10,000' doors. We can assume from that that there were 'almost 10,000' social housing dwellings in 2011. The official figure for 2015 is 9,862. As I say, no increase.

The 6,924 number that you quoted in an earlier post is from 1996. All the numbers that I quote come for 2011 and 2015 come from KCTMO annual reports.

Charging homeless ex-Grenfell residents for rent after the fire is unforgivable. It is a not an innocent clerical error that can be blamed on austerity.


----------



## belboid (Jul 1, 2017)

The 6924 is from the 2010/11 annual report


----------



## Casual Observer (Jul 1, 2017)

I see where the confusion may be coming from. The 6,924 number that you mention is for 'tenanted properties', which is a subset of the total number for social housing properties (tenanted + leasehold). The total number stands at approximately 10,000 and seems to have remained at that level throughout the 2011 to 2015 period, when there was an apparent 37% increase in staff.


----------



## killer b (Jul 1, 2017)

Why are you bothering with all this googling? Seems an odd hill to die on.


----------



## Gramsci (Jul 1, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> Possibly the wisest words by a politician thus far (not difficult):
> 
> *Lord Adonis: don't wait for inquiry to implement change*
> 
> ...



Lord Adonis makes a telling comment in the Inside Housing article:



> “It’s very important that we don’t delay all action and all improvements and any bold attempt to address this serious problem of the shortage of social housing in central London, that we don’t park all of that until this inquiry has reported.”



He is a Blairiite. His "bold" idea is to "regenerate" Council estates. As at Heygate. An example he uses in the IPPR paper he helped to write.

The 35% Campaign ( been writing very good stuff critiquing the so called regeneration of Elephant & Castle) write about it here


Manifesto for the destruction of council estates

The way I read his piece in Inside Housing is that he to use the Grenfell fire as another reason to get on with his plan to get rid of Council housing. He doesn't want a larger discussion of the need for truly affordable housing that's publicly owned.


----------



## emanymton (Jul 1, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> TBF, the article does refer to people 'evacuated from their homes close to Grenfell Tower', not people from the tower itself, so I guess their homes still exist, bit of a cock-up, certainly not right, but...
> 
> Anyway, from the link:


Maybe not 

Grenfell fire: Survivor's 'rent deducted' - BBC News


----------



## killer b (Jul 1, 2017)

What the fuck is going on here?

Mistrust and anger deepen as Grenfell death toll is still unknown


----------



## ddraig (Jul 1, 2017)

killer b said:


> What the fuck is going on here?
> 
> Mistrust and anger deepen as Grenfell death toll is still unknown


 jesus!


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 1, 2017)

killer b said:


> What the fuck is going on here?
> 
> Mistrust and anger deepen as Grenfell death toll is still unknown





> They arrived ahead of the meeting and found a single man in a hat, whom no one recognised, and a police officer who was the only named person on the agenda.



How did he come to be there? The named copper.  Presumably because he was named on the agenda and wanted a look -so why not reported to bosses? I suspect it was a hilarious 'ultra-left' stunt. The single copper - if the report is correct - needs explaining as does the vague man in hat ref - talk to him/them then.

edit: no, the knowing the names and hotel addresses rules that out.


----------



## Gramsci (Jul 1, 2017)

At the Tories out demo today


----------



## killer b (Jul 1, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> How did he come to be there? The named copper.  Presumably because he was named on the agenda and wanted a look -so why not reported to bosses? I suspect it was a hilarious 'ultra-left' stunt. The single copper - if the report is correct - needs explaining as does the vague man in hat ref - talk to him/them then.
> 
> edit: no, the knowing the names and hotel addresses rules that out.


On a side note, jolyon Maugham has inserted himself very effectively into British public life the last 12 months or so. He's everywhere atm.


----------



## J Ed (Jul 1, 2017)

killer b said:


> On a side note, jolyon Maugham has inserted himself very effectively into British public life the last 12 months or so. He's everywhere atm.



I was just thinking that. Wtf.


----------



## J Ed (Jul 1, 2017)

12 months ago I had no idea anyone was called Jolyon, now everyone is called that


----------



## killer b (Jul 1, 2017)

J Ed said:


> 12 months ago I had no idea anyone was called Jolyon, now everyone is called that


No, there's just Maugham. It just feels like he's everyone.


----------



## J Ed (Jul 1, 2017)

killer b said:


> No, there's just Maugham. It just feels like he's everyone.



What about Jolyon Green?


----------



## killer b (Jul 1, 2017)

I was joking... He's definitely the most visible jolyon though. Also now everyone on Twitter has changed their names to jolyon it's difficult to know who's real or not.


----------



## Sue (Jul 1, 2017)

killer b said:


> On a side note, jolyon Maugham has inserted himself very effectively into British public life the last 12 months or so. He's everywhere atm.



Never heard of him. Acording to Google, he's a tax lawyer who's anti-Brexit. Why is anyone interested in him? 

Jolyon Forsyte and sons are the only Jolyons I'd previously ever heard of.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 1, 2017)

Sue said:


> Never heard of him. Acording to Google, he's a tax lawyer who's anti-Brexit. Why is anyone interested in him?
> 
> Jolyon Forsyte and sons are the only Jolyons I'd previously ever heard of.


There's a jolyon in tintin too


----------



## killer b (Jul 1, 2017)

Sue said:


> Never heard of him. Acording to Google, he's a tax lawyer who's anti-Brexit. Why is anyone interested in him?


He appears to be representing the grenfell survivors, so has ended up a media mouthpiece of sorts for them. Elsewhere he's taking uber to court to make them pay minimum wage, and he's been all over brexit like a rash. He Also finds time to blog about tax, and presumably has to do some paid work sometimes.


----------



## killer b (Jul 1, 2017)

I'm interested in him because of his sudden ubiquity.


----------



## elbows (Jul 1, 2017)

killer b said:


> I'm interested in him because of his sudden ubiquity.



He seems to have got some attention in 2015. eg:

Labour's non-dom adviser represented celebrity tax dodge film schemes



> A leading QC who advised Labour on its non-doms tax crackdown represented controversial film investment schemes that sheltered money for hundreds of wealthy celebrities including Sir Alex Ferguson and Take That.
> 
> Ed Balls, the shadow chancellor, cited Jolyon Maugham as an independent expert who had backed the policy and had forecast that it would raise £1billion.
> 
> The Telegraph has established that Mr Maugham, a Labour suporter, has been in discussions with Labour about the policy for six weeks and played a role in designing it.



Don't Labour tax advisers pop up in the funniest places? | Coffee House



> Well next month Jolyon is off on a jolly to that well-known bastion of progressive taxation: Geneva.
> 
> He has just been unveiled as a star speaker at the Transcontinental Trusts 2015 conference in Switzerland. The Grand Hotel Kempinski will play host to tax efficiency experts from around the world, for a two-day seminar on the sort of tax practices Ed Miliband spent his five years as Labour leader slamming.



Fifth of Labour Party donors 'have quit' since Corbyn became leader



> Jolyon Maugham, a top London tax barrister who advised Ed Miliband on his non-dom crackdown before the election, told the Evening Standard he left in September and had switched his financial support to causes like Labour Women’s Network.
> 
> “I was giving the Labour Party £5,000 a year but I stopped on the day that Corbyn was elected because of the fact that there was not a single woman on stage with him that day,” he said.
> 
> ...


----------



## 8den (Jul 2, 2017)

Fuck. 'In. Hell.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 2, 2017)

8den said:


> Fuck. 'In. Hell.




Yesterday's news. 

K&C have already said they have stopped collecting rent for flats in the tower, and for other nearby properties evacuated, because they were dependant on the boiler in the basement of the tower for hot water. They have also said that even when people move back into these properties, no rent will be taken until Jan, 2018. Should a mistake have been made, they've asked for the person/people concerned to contact them for an urgent refund.

Most media sources have been reporting a third party saying they know one person who has had rent deducted, others have claimed several have. It could be a cock-up, or it could be a case Chinese whispers going on, and perhaps this person was renting privately.  

Residents near Grenfell Tower will not have to pay rent, says council


----------



## 8den (Jul 2, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yesterday's news.
> 
> K&C have already said they have stopped collecting rent for flats in the tower, and for other nearby properties evacuated, because they were dependant on the boiler in the basement of the tower for hot water. They have also said that even when people move back into these properties, no rent will be taken until Jan, 2018. Should a mistake have been made, they've asked for the person/people concerned to contact them for an urgent refund.
> 
> ...




I'm not saying it was deliberate, more if it has occurred it's a demonstration of RBKC's continued mismanagement.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 2, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> There's a jolyon in tintin too


The only Jolyon for me


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 2, 2017)

Sorry for the source, but I reckon it's worth sharing. 



> Under the heading ‘Legal Statement’, he wrote: ‘You do not have to give a copy of your fire risk assessment to anybody, not even the fire authority, if you do give them a copy this could be used against you at a later date.’
> 
> Mr Stokes, who served for many years with Oxfordshire Fire Service, then explained that withholding his report from London Fire Brigade was important because they ‘have the power to undertake an audit of the fire risk assessment to determine if it is suitable and sufficient or not’.





> Safety failings at Grenfell Tower in Mr Stokes’s assessment included a failure to test emergency escape lighting, to inspect escape staircases and to maintain fire extinguishers. He wrote in the 2012 report: ‘The fire extinguisher in the basement boiler room, the lift motor room, the ground-floor electrical room plus other areas were out of date, according to the contractor’s label on the extinguishers. Some located in the roof level areas [of Grenfell Tower] had “condemned” written on them in large black writing, with a last test date of 2009 or 2010.



Grenfell safety consultant urged council to hide failings | Daily Mail Online


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 2, 2017)

Jesus wept.

They're wrong about one thing, though - Stokes's involvement and fee isn't news.
Fire risk assessor for Grenfell Tower revealed


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 2, 2017)

I don't know: is that sort of caveat standard boilerplate on fire risk assessors' reports? It might be, but it shouldn't be. There should be complete openness and a way of enforcing remedial action.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jul 2, 2017)

bluescreen said:


> I don't know: is that sort of caveat standard boilerplate on fire risk assessors' reports? It might be, but it shouldn't be. There should be complete openness and a way of enforcing remedial action.


No it isn't. Just had a look at a 13-page FRA for my residential block of flats from 2012. None of that weaselly bollocks in there.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 2, 2017)

The Grenfell Tower Fire Risk Assessment for 2012 which the Mail are quoting from has been available as a PDF download on the Grenfell Action Group blog for a couple of weeks.

The Mail are being a little misleading (wot a surprise eh) - this 2012 assessment does go on to spell out the prescribed information that the 'responsible person' is required to make available



> (7) The prescribed information is—
> a)  the significant findings of the assessment, including the measures which
> have been or will be taken by the responsible person pursuant to this
> Order; and
> ...



However that doesn't detract from the problems with the Fire Safety (FSO) regime that was introduced in 2005, or the opportunities it leaves open for 'responsible persons' to act irresponsibly. 

In social housing the situation is more complex still since the 2005 FSO regime only applies to common parts of buildings not the individual dwellings (although it does apply to the common parts of homes in multiple occupation). 

Under the Housing Act 2004 landlords and owners (including leaseholders) are also required to carry out separate fire risk assessments for their dwellings, and in respect to any works carried out on them. Where the Fire and Rescue Services are responsible for enforcement of the FSO regime, its the local authority who are responsible for enforcement in respect of dwellings.

There are also requirements under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 to ensure that all people, including the disabled, can safely leave a building in the event of a fire.

I've no doubt we will learn a lot more about how these things all failed to work at Grenfell Tower.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 2, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> There are also requirements under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 to ensure that all people, including the disabled, can safely leave a building in the event of a fire.


repealed, according to wikipedia, and replaced by the 2010 equality act, except in the 6 counties where it still applies.


----------



## Cid (Jul 2, 2017)

bluescreen said:


> I don't know: is that sort of caveat standard boilerplate on fire risk assessors' reports? It might be, but it shouldn't be. There should be complete openness and a way of enforcing remedial action.



The wording has a whiff of the pseudo-legal about it... Difficult to say exactly why (probably because it's not 11 paragraphs of obscurity), but it does.


----------



## GarveyLives (Jul 2, 2017)

GarveyLives said:


> *The Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea has a 'Director for Housing' called Laura Johnson, who is apparently paid £88,000 p.a.
> 
> What exactly does Laura Johnson have to say about this disaster?*


Apologies if I have missed the answer.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 2, 2017)

GarveyLives said:


> Apologies if I have missed the answer.


Not sure there's evidence that she deserves the wagging finger. From the Graun, _a propos _complaints about new gas pipes:





> Laura Johnson, Kensington and Chelsea’s director of housing, complained to the local Labour ward councillor Judith Blakeman in an email on 22 May that “National Grid have been and continue to be a law unto themselves and, despite repeated requests from the TMO to act in a more consultative and collaborative manner with the landlord, this has not taken place”.


The whole article is worth a read. Grenfell Tower gas pipes left exposed, despite fire safety expert's orders


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 2, 2017)

Or do you mean since the disaster?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 2, 2017)

killer b said:


> What the fuck is going on here?
> 
> Mistrust and anger deepen as Grenfell death toll is still unknown



This is a pic of most of that letter. Really fucking odd. No one seemed to have a clue who organised this or posted the letters.


----------



## GarveyLives (Jul 2, 2017)

_Since_ this disaster, has the council's £88,000 p.a. Director for Housing, *Laura Johnson*, addressed the public or the media concerning a matter which seems to be related to her responsibilities?


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 2, 2017)

GarveyLives said:


> _Since_ this disaster, has the council's £88,000 p.a. Director for Housing, *Laura Johnson*, addressed the public or the media concerning a matter which seems to be related to her responsibilities?


No idea. Nothing showing on Google. What's the betting she's getting the same shitty legal advice as the rest of the council? Some lawyer there can't seem to tell the difference between advising the council and advising individuals.


----------



## stuff_it (Jul 3, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> From the figures I've collated (ive spent way too much time doing it) I don't think the numbers are as high as people are suggesting, unless the reports of subletting with 40 people are true. I've not seen reports from neighbours saying they were aware of large numbers of people staying in one flat and Id have expected to hear that being the case by now as they'd be the ones best replaced to report it. Although obviously this could be wrong.I don't think at this point that "A fireman told me....", is a reliable source of evidence.
> 
> If the missing figures were to pan out as the current information I have I think there were possibly 350 people in the building.
> 
> FWIW: Nobody below floor 10 is currently listed as missing or deceased, although Im missing 10 flats with any information about who lived there, let alone if they survived or not)


The claim was that 42 people were found in the same flat, not that they all lived there. I got the impression they may have been comforting each other once they realised there was no way down.


----------



## stuff_it (Jul 3, 2017)

bi0boy said:


> Is that a fact is it? I guess that's in addition to the "dozens of bodies on the roof" mentioned earlier in the thread, or the "scores" of bodies on the stairs?
> 
> It really pisses me off when people parrot these rumours as if they are facts, which they aren't.


Quite a few named dead have now been found on the stairs, and quite a few more rescued from the stairwell having been overcome by smoke. Dunno about scores, but it sounds like there were definitely a fair few.

The lack of concrete info is of course going to lead to speculation. And yes, I do believe that the figures are being released slowly on purpose.


----------



## Mation (Jul 3, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:
			
		

> . They have also said that even when people move back into these properties, no rent will be taken until Jan, 2018. Should a mistake have been made, they've asked for the person/people concerned to contact them for an urgent refund.


They shouldn't have to contact anyone. Write to us, contact us, make a claim. The council needs to look at their systems and sort it the fuck out.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 3, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> This is a pic of most of that letter. Really fucking odd. No one seemed to have a clue who organised this or posted the letters.


How can it be important to set up this GVST, yet this weird entity is also "highly experienced"?   

Nice to see that the setting up of this thing 





> has been agreed by Authorities


Unfortunate that these "Authorities" are not named (although they do get to be part of the random use of upper case, so perhaps that is intended to indicate how very important the Authorities are).

Dodgy but dodgy and of a dodginess.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 3, 2017)

Amazing story of survivors from 22nd floor, had me welling-up.

Grenfell fire survivors from 22nd floor tell of last phone call: 'I don't know if I'll make it out. I love you.'


----------



## existentialist (Jul 3, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Amazing story of survivors from 22nd floor, had me welling-up.
> 
> Grenfell fire survivors from 22nd floor tell of last phone call: 'I don't know if I'll make it out. I love you.'


One of the most scary - but also encouraging - aspects of events like this fire is the knife-edge on which survival depends. I imagine there were quite a few people who made the same decision to escape, but for whom, due to circumstance or a tiny difference in timing or approach, it wasn't successful...and yet, for a few, it was.

I bet she got a big hug from her husband when he returned.


----------



## eoin_k (Jul 3, 2017)

Grenfell Victims and Survivors Trust seems really dubious. 'They' managed to get people's addresses off the council, to get the police on side and to use a venue linked to the relief effort. Yet, there is nothing behind it but a Gmail account, a mobile number and an inactive twitter handle. The chair of the meeting doesn't seem to have given their name to anyone, and the council's comments don't shed much light on what was going on.



> Authorities running the relief effort confirmed that they had sent out letters to survivors, but said they had been provided for delivery by the council. A council spokeswoman said she could not immediately provide further details of the group, or why the letter had been delivered to survivors.
> 
> Several hours later, prominent barrister Jolyon Maugham added his voice to concerns about the group. “Apparently my name is being used to endorse the ‘Grenfell Victims and Survivors’ Trust’. I know nothing of this organisation,” he said on Twitter. He said the group’s lack of public profile raised concerns about their motives for seeking a role in a legal battle that is widely expected to be long and complicated.


----------



## killer b (Jul 3, 2017)

The council didn't give out the addresses fwiw, they just arranged the delivery. Almost certainly the council themselves or some associate I'd say?


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 3, 2017)

killer b said:


> The council didn't give out the addresses fwiw, they just arranged the delivery. Almost certainly the council themselves or some associate I'd say?


So maybe the council were duped, rather than in on it?


----------



## Casual Observer (Jul 3, 2017)

bluescreen said:


> So maybe the council were duped, rather than in on it?


I'm guessing the council may well have been in on it and this trick is not uncommon. Under the guise of being helpful, the opposition coerce multiple aggrieved parties into a joint single legal representation of their choosing. A similar thing was attempted on me about 10 years ago.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 3, 2017)

bluescreen said:


> So maybe the council were duped, rather than in on it?


Given the duplicitousness of recently departed members perhaps you are being overly charitable.


----------



## eoin_k (Jul 3, 2017)

bluescreen said:


> So maybe the council were duped, rather than in on it?



You might think the police or council could offer some clarification on what happened,instead of this:



> A council spokeswoman said she could not immediately provide further details of the group, or why the letter had been delivered to survivors.



However this came about, it shows both incompetence and contempt for the residents. It either looks like a lazy and cynical attempt by the council to direct former Grenfell residents towards a particular form of representation, or it demonstrates that two weeks after the event they have still failed to liaise with any actual representatives of the affected community and that they thought it was a good idea to facilitate a meeting with an unnamed man in a hat with no credentials, no address, no landline, without having anyone to run the idea past beforehand.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 3, 2017)

Incompetence and contempt, no doubt about that. Slightly OT, this article by Aditya Chakrabortty, but it's all of a piece with how Grenfell (and neighbouring) tenants were and are being treated. 
How power operates in modern Britain: with absolute contempt | Aditya Chakrabortty


----------



## eoin_k (Jul 3, 2017)

Framing this in terms of cock up or conspiracy seems to miss the point. Wouldn't a competent local authority that took its responsibilities seriously be doing something similar to this, but in a way that was more transparent and less manipulative? Whatever general issues there might be with this sort of political mediation, nobody would be surprised if the council were organising meetings with the people affected, community and faith groups, residents associations, lawyers etc. from which they encouraged a representative body with some legitimacy to emerge. Then they could negotiate and liaise with it to share information and manage resources.


----------



## ice-is-forming (Jul 3, 2017)




----------



## ice-is-forming (Jul 3, 2017)

My dad sent me this ^^ on June 22nd.  one of my second cousins is a writer and married to a firefighter..


----------



## David Clapson (Jul 3, 2017)

FINALLY an acknowledgment that some tenants had probably illegally sublet their flats:



> Communities Secretary Sajid Javid has announced guidance from the Director of Public Prosecutions not to prosecute tenants at Grenfell Tower and Grenfell Walk for unlawful subletting....Anecdotal evidence from the community suggests that some of the tenants in the tower block may have been unlawfully sub-letting their properties. This may mean people are reluctant to come forward with valuable information that would help to identify anyone still missing.



Protection from prosecution for unlawful subletting at Grenfell Tower - GOV.UK

Perhaps eventually there'll be acknowledgement of possible overcrowding. I'll bet you any money that some of the sublet flats had 6 residents, but the legitimate tenants were only aware of 2 of them.  Wouldn't it be great if this led to debate about the minimum wage and acknowledgment that many people can't afford rent unless every room is used as a bedroom?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 3, 2017)

ice-is-forming said:


> My dad sent me this ^^ on June 22nd.  one of my second cousins is a writer and married to a firefighter..


Yes, the FBpost was linked to at the time.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 3, 2017)

The Guardian website posted a new lead article late this afternoon.

Grenfell survivors issue 12 demands to PM to overhaul response to tragedy

The first paragraph of the story says "Survivors of the Grenfell Tower fire are writing to the prime minister". By the third paragraph however it transpires that the letter has been "written by lawyers on the survivors’ behalf, (...) based on feedback from the meeting".

The meeting is the one held in Parliament last week, called by Diane Abbott.

A Guardian story on Saturday described it as follows :



> Labour MPs invited survivors to parliament for a meeting chaired by Diane Abbott, which collapsed into recriminations and resentment.





> One activist, who walked out of the meeting, said that local residents and survivors felt as if they had been paraded before a “flock of vultures”.





> “How many more times are the victims of this tragedy going to be exhibits in a grotesque sideshow?” Ishmahil Blagrove said in a posting on Facebook after the meeting, questioning why MPs had not come to visit the site of the fire.



Ismahil Blagrove is a co-ordinator for Justice 4 Grenfell.

This letter has been sent on behalf of a different group BMElawyers4Grenfell. It begins :



> We are an umbrella action group incorporating leading BME Lawyer groups, BME Community Organisations, survivors, residents and supporters, created to assist those who have survived the fire and those who live within the vicinity of Grenfell Tower.





> We arranged a meeting, called by the Shadow Home Secretary, Diane Abbot M.P. (...) Also in attendance were 150 Residents.



The letter is signed by Ismet P Rawat (Mrs), President, Association of Muslim Lawyers, Peter Herbert, Chair, Society of Black Lawyers, Ghino Parker (Mrs), Resident and Grenfell community representative.

The Guardian article clarifies that Mrs Parker is "a local resident who is supporting survivors and bereaved relatives".

Did the meeting "collapse into recriminations and resentment" or is that just Ismahil Blagrove's view ? If it did how did it express the 12 demands which have been formulated ? How did it mandate BMElawyers4Grenfell to represent its views ? In its interestingly ordered list of the various people involved in BMElawyers4Grenfell survivors are listed third and residents listed fourth. When the letter refers to 150 residents attending the meeting how many of those were survivors ?

I note that not a single former resident of Grenfell Tower is quoted in this Guardian story.

Nor in the one on Saturday which included an account of the meeting.

That one did contain quotes from Pilgrim Tucker, "a housing campaigner who has worked with Grenfell residents for several years", "prominent barrister" Jolyon Maugham, David Alexander, "professor of disaster management at University College London", David Lammy, "the MP for Tottenham who lost a friend in the fire and has become a strong advocate for survivors and bereaved families", Souad Talsi, "founder of Al Hasaniya, a charity supporting Arabic-speaking women in the area" and an unnamed senior manager of Al Hasaniya.

But not a single survivor.


----------



## mauvais (Jul 3, 2017)

ice-is-forming said:


> <snip>


This is printed in a few places if that makes it easier to read. This is the original source I think.


----------



## ice-is-forming (Jul 3, 2017)

mauvais said:


> This is printed in a few places if that makes it easier to read. This is the original source I think.


 Thank you. My dads almost 90 and had no idea how to do links..


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 3, 2017)

Have we had this?

CORRUPTION? Tory advisor revealed as boss of firm that made Grenfell panels which failed ALL safety tests | EvolvePolitics.com


----------



## free spirit (Jul 3, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Have we had this?
> 
> CORRUPTION? Tory advisor revealed as boss of firm that made Grenfell panels which failed ALL safety tests | EvolvePolitics.com


Yes. This problem was raised in the 1999 parliamentary inquiry into high rise building / cladding fires I've previously linked to on this thread.

Not a new issue, not a tory issue, not corruption exactly, just the logical consequence of 40 years of neoliberal government deregulation and privatisation. Government no longer has the in house expertise to write / review the standards themselves, so they get industry committees to write them, then maybe ask the privatised BRE to give their opinion (who now earn much of their income from product testing for industry), then consult but ignore the responses because they don't understand them, then sit on it for a few years etc etc.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 3, 2017)

De-skilling, which started in the '80s IIRC, has this and much else to answer for.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 4, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Have we had this?
> 
> CORRUPTION? Tory advisor revealed as boss of firm that made Grenfell panels which failed ALL safety tests | EvolvePolitics.com


Yes we have, and as I pointed out before, it's wrong. Celotex does not make the cladding panels. It's the cladding panels which have failed "safety tests" although it's not very clear what those tests are.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 4, 2017)

£1100 a month...Oh goodie, bargain! 

*Grenfell Tower fire: a look inside a flat offered to survivors*


----------



## newbie (Jul 4, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Have we had this?
> 
> CORRUPTION? Tory advisor revealed as boss of firm that made Grenfell panels which failed ALL safety tests | EvolvePolitics.com



From the Celotex homepage



> *Update - Friday 23rd June
> 
> Grenfell Tower: Celotex is to stop the supply of RS5000 for use in rainscreen cladding systems in buildings over 18m tall*
> 
> ...



my emphasis

Everyone knows Celotex burns, and that it is a better insulator, lighter and cheaper than Rockwool, which doesn't.  The spec sheet for RS5000 (pdf) shows how it should be protected from fire:

ie, it should be put behind about 1/2 hour protection.  The speed with which the fire spread suggests that was not adhered to.

At the moment it looks like the designer/architect has an awful lot of questions to answer.  I'm not sure yelling CORRUPTION because a standard industrial product was potentially misused is really adding much.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 4, 2017)

newbie said:


> Everyone knows Celotex burns, and that it is a better insulator, lighter and cheaper than Rockwool, which doesn't.



Celotex is a better insulator than rockwool but it is not cheaper, it is more expensive. Fire considerations aside, Rockwool tends to be used if you've got lots of space, and celotex type boards where you want to keep the thickness of the wall build-up down.



newbie said:


> ie, it should be put behind about 1/2 hour protection. The speed with which the fire spread suggests that was not adhered to



No, that buildup does not place it behind 1/2 fire protection, it puts it in front of (on the outside of) the fire protection. That buildup is similar to the Grenfell one in that the Celotex is exposed to the cavity behind the rainscreen panels. But in that case the rainscreen panels are non-combustible fibre cement.


----------



## newbie (Jul 4, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Celotex is a better insulator than rockwool but it is not cheaper, it is more expensive. Fire considerations aside, Rockwool tends to be used if you've got lots of space, and celotex type boards where you want to keep the thickness of the wall build-up down.


I've tried and failed to find spec and pricing for a Rockwool slab certified for use above 18m. Is there one?




> No, that buildup does not place it behind 1/2 fire protection, it puts it in front of (on the outside of) the fire protection. That buildup is similar to the Grenfell one in that the Celotex is exposed to the cavity behind the rainscreen panels. But in that case the rainscreen panels are non-combustible fibre cement.


'behind' was ambiguous, perhaps I should have said 'protected by'.  The sandwich they tested is shown here.


----------



## Teaboy (Jul 4, 2017)

newbie said:


> I've tried and failed to find spec and pricing for a Rockwool slab certified for use above 18m. Is there one?



The Rockwool Duo slab is used in EWI applications.  I don't think it needs to be certified as such because it is a completely non-combustible product.  This is the major problem with cladding systems over render.  An EWI render system is tested as a complete system and supplied as such, this includes the adhesives, the insulation, the base coat, the primer and the top coat.  This is one system.  In cladding panels all suppliers are just providing one element and they are then being thrown together with little consideration for how they work together.

I'm going to come back to this because I want to say a few things about how this fire has come about and what I think the findings will tell us.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 4, 2017)

Verso


> *The Colonial Logic of Grenfell*
> _The colonial politics of space overdetermined the premature and violent deaths of the Grenfell residents racialised as non-white._


----------



## newbie (Jul 4, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> The Rockwool Duo slab is used in EWI applications.  I don't think it needs to be certified as such because it is a completely non-combustible product.  This is the major problem with cladding systems over render.  An EWI render system is tested as a complete system and supplied as such, this includes the adhesives, the insulation, the base coat, the primer and the top coat.  This is one system.  In cladding panels all suppliers are just providing one element and they are then being thrown together with little consideration for how they work together.
> 
> I'm going to come back to this because I want to say a few things about how this fire has come about and what I think the findings will tell us.


tvm.  I'll be interested in your conclusions (and those of the inquiry, obviously). 

I know I have more questions than answers about all of this, including the extent to which cosmetic and commercial considerations, both short- and long-term, have overridden everything else.  Also with regard to the design airgap between insulation and rainscreen cladding (which puzzles my layman understanding).

The responsibility for materials choice and the overall system clearly lies with the designer/architect, hopefully in consultation with the technical departments of the various manufacturers, but they're operating within a design brief.   There must be reasons why cladding rather than rendering is part of that brief.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 4, 2017)

newbie said:


> 'behind' was ambiguous, perhaps I should have said 'protected by'.  The sandwich they tested is shown here.



In the buildup they show there it's *not* (aside from fire breaks at each floor level) protected from spread up the cavity, behind the cladding panels, which is what seems to be relevant at Grenfell.

The difference between what they show there, and what seems to have been installed at Grenfell, is really only the cladding panels. At grenfell they had the plastic core, in that celotex document they are non combustible fibre cement.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 4, 2017)

newbie said:


> I know I have more questions than answers about all of this, including the extent to which cosmetic and commercial considerations, both short- and long-term, have overridden everything else.  Also with regard to the design airgap between insulation and rainscreen cladding (which puzzles my layman understanding).



Rainscreen cladding relies on that gap to let water drain away. The principle of a rainscreen is that it protects the wall behind from wind-driven rain, but the cladding layer is not fully watertight. Any water that gets through the joints between the panels has to drain away and that is what the gap is for. It has advantages over fully sealed systems in that you are not relying on weathertight joints between panels, and also it can be helpful for letting water vapour within the wall to escape, depending on the exact buildup.



newbie said:


> The responsibility for materials choice and the overall system clearly lies with the designer/architect, hopefully in consultation with the technical departments of the various manufacturers, but they're operating within a design brief.   There must be reasons why cladding rather than rendering is part of that brief.



It may be an aesthetic consideration. Render can have a habit of looking pretty grubby after a few years, especially in locations where you can't easily repaint it. How well metal panels weather in the long term is open to debate.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 4, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Yes we have, and as I pointed out before, it's wrong. Celotex does not make the cladding panels. It's the cladding panels which have failed "safety tests" although it's not very clear what those tests are.



In your reply to me you appear to be restricting the word cladding to the Reynobond ACM panels. However the Celotex RS5000 insulation also forms part of the overall cladding system. 

As you say the Celotex insulation is not being tested under the arrangements set up by the DCLG. However at the Police press conference on June 23rd Det Supt Fiona McTaggart stated that small scale preliminary tests had been conducted by the Met on samples of the Reynobond panels and the Celotex insulation from Grenfell Tower. In the report in the Evening Standard she is quoted as saying


> What we are being told is that the cladding and the insulation failed all safety tests.The insulation was more flammable than the cladding. Tests show the insulation samples combusted soon after the test started.






newbie said:


> Everyone knows Celotex burns, and that it is a better insulator, lighter and cheaper than Rockwool, which doesn't.  The spec sheet for RS5000 (pdf) shows how it should be protected from fire:
> 
> ie, it should be put behind about 1/2 hour protection.  The speed with which the fire spread suggests that was not adhered to.


CEP Architectural Facades and images "fabricated (ie cut to shape) two of the components in the building’s cladding system (rainscreen panels and windows) using materials, and to a design, specified by the Grenfell Tower design and build team."

In a statement issued on June 23rd they stated :


> Investigators have identified the role of the insulation material in Grenfell Tower. We assume they will want to understand why a class O fire spread rainscreen panel material and a class O insulation material were specified together.
> 
> Individually these materials can be integrated into a safe cladding system but certainly we recommend that in high rise buildings class O rainscreen panels should only be used in conjunction with a non-combustible insulation material such as mineral fibre.



They illustrate this with photographs from two fires in tower blocks clad with Reynobond PE and a similar product but using mineral fibre insulation.

Interestingly last Friday the Grenfell Action Group posted a PDF of the Sustainability & Energy Statement from the 2012 planning application for the Grenfell Tower refurbishment. This gives calculations of the anticipated effect of the insulation. The tables illustrating how the calculations are arrived at show that not only were they based on a system employing zinc Reynobond FR  (which we know was replaced with aluminium Reynobond PE in a cost cutting exercise in 2014) but also using the more fire resistant Celotex FR5000 instead of the Celotex RS5000 that was actually used.
(Full PDF here) Here's one of the tables :





No doubt the issue who made the decision to use Celotex RS5000 instead will be under scrutiny.

Of course the issue with the Celotex insulation isn't limited to how fire resistant it is. As the Grenfell Action Group point out :


> According to studies this material burns when exposed to a fire of moderate heat and intensity. Once ignited it burns rapidly and produces intense heat, dense smoke and irritant flammable gases which are extremely toxic. The toxic gases produced include carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide. The burning PIR attached to the exterior of Grenfell Tower is believed to have released enough poisonous hydrogen cyanide gas to potentially fill every dwelling in the building, and the simultaneous release of carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide is more lethal than if they are released separately.



Richard Hull who co-authored "Assessment of the fire toxicity of building insulation materials" in 2011, (PDF available here) put it a little more bluntly in an interview for Sky reported in the Mirror.



> The outside wall of the building had 150mm of PIR foam (fitted), and once the fire had spread to that every flat would have its own source of PIR foam, which would have produced enough hydrogen cyanide to kill all the people in that flat



This could presumably be an issue even if fire is confined to a single area as is intended in buildings of this design.

Add in fire spread and the complete failure of the arrangements to keep the staircase relatively smoke free and this insulation is fully fit for purpose in helping to unwittingly create what radical eugenicists used to call the "lethal chamber".


> If I had my way, I would build a lethal chamber as big as the Crystal Palace, with a military band playing softly, adn a Cinematograph working brightly; then I'd go out in the back streets and main streets and bring them all in, all the sick, the halt, and the maimed; I would lead them gently, and they would smile me a weary thanks; and the band would softly bubble out the 'Hallelujah Chorus'.


D. H. Lawrence 1909


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 4, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Verso


No. Just no. The key segregation in Kensington is class, not race: the latter trails in the wake of the former (not that anyone on here would need reminding of that).


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 4, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> No. Just no. The key segregation in Kensington is class, not race: the latter trails in the wake of the former (not that anyone on here would need reminding of that).



Do contact the author and let her know you disagree with her.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 4, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Do contact the author and let her know you disagree with her.


I'm sure it would be an educational experience for everyone.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 4, 2017)

Rutita1, look, the treatment of ethnic minorities in UK is deeply rooted in the legacy of the Empire, and all its tools of colonial rule. But the whole point of colonial tactics and strategies of rule was that they weren't for use in the metropole or the 'mother country'. There, other forms of power and its abuses were employed - and it's those forms which provided the basis for the events at Grenfell tower and after.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 4, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> Rutita1, look, the treatment of ethnic minorities in UK is deeply rooted in the legacy of the Empire, and all its tools of colonial rule. But the whole point of colonial tactics and strategies of rule was that they weren't for use in the metropole or the 'mother country'. There, other forms of power and its abuses were employed - and it's those forms which provided the basis for the events at Grenfell tower and after.


not to mention that similar problems found in towerblocks up and down the country are found in areas where the residents of social housing are predominantly white too. this is to do rather more with class and capitalism than race.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 4, 2017)

I am sure you don't mean to sound so condescending. 



Idris2002 said:


> Rutita1, look, the treatment of ethnic minorities in UK is deeply rooted in the legacy of the Empire, and all its tools of colonial rule. But the whole point of colonial tactics and strategies of rule was that they weren't for use in the metropole or the 'mother country'.


 Massive generalisation here don't you think? I'll play for a bit though. Maybe, at a time when the 'mother country' didn't have many 'subjects' from the colonies/former colonies there was no necessity, nor context in which to employ such tactics?



> There, other forms of power and its abuses were employed - and it's those forms which provided the basis for the events at Grenfell tower and after.


 By there you mean 'here'?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 4, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Massive generalisation here don't you think? I'll play for a bit though. Maybe, at a time when the 'mother country' didn't have many 'subjects' from the colonies/former colonies there was no necessity, nor context in which to action such tactics?


what time's that then? and action such tactics? the vacuity of management-speak obscures your meaning.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 4, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> I am sure you don't mean to sound so condescending.



Don't be so sure.



Rutita1 said:


> Massive generalisation here don't you think? I'll play for a bit though. Maybe, at a time when the 'mother country' didn't have many 'subjects' from the colonies/former colonies there was no necessity, nor context in which to action such tactics?



But even though the rise of ethnic minority communities with 'staying power' did attract the attention of those in charge of the 'mother country', and not in a good way, they could not use the methods of social control (e.g. openly racist urban planning) which were possible in the colonies.



Rutita1 said:


> By there you mean 'here'?



Yes, because I'm here and not there.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 4, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> Don't be so sure.


 Right. I'll not bother with you then.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 4, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> Don't be so sure.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


for the verso thesis to be valid, the conditions obtaining in north kensington must be of post-windrush origin. however, north kensington in the 1930s was very deprived:


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 4, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> for the verso thesis to be valid, the conditions obtaining in north kensington must be of post-windrush origin. however, north kensington in the 1930s was very deprived:
> 
> View attachment 110746
> 
> View attachment 110747


Thanks, that is interesting. There is an important question, though, of how racist and racialised deployments of power fed into those conditions, and added their share to the structural injustices which led to the fire. And so even though Rutita1 thinks I'm condescending, I think her posting of that link had an undeniable value.


----------



## Mation (Jul 4, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> No. Just no. The key segregation in Kensington is class, not race: the latter trails in the wake of the former (not that anyone on here would need reminding of that).


Why "No. Just no."? I didn't read that and think it negates a class analysis. Can't we hold more than one way of looking at things in our heads? (By we I mean you  )


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 4, 2017)

Mation said:


> Why "No. Just no."? I didn't read that and think it negates a class analysis. Can't we hold more than one way of looking at things in our heads? (By we I mean you  )


No. Just no. Mation, look...


----------



## ddraig (Jul 5, 2017)

apols if already posted

"This isn't Great Britain, this is Grenfell Britain

Watch my rhyming response to Grenfell, then subscribe to Justice 4 Grenfell: www.justice4grenfell.org"


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 5, 2017)

ddraig said:


> apols if already posted
> 
> "This isn't Great Britain, this is Grenfell Britain
> 
> Watch my rhyming response to Grenfell, then subscribe to Justice 4 Grenfell: www.justice4grenfell.org"




I love Georgie's stuff.  Great bloke, walks the walk.  He's done stuff to help Cressingham Gardens (his piece "Estate of War" was filmed there) and Brixton Arches, and he does loads of community work with the local youth.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 5, 2017)

Mation said:


> Why "No. Just no."? I didn't read that and think it negates a class analysis. Can't we hold more than one way of looking at things in our heads? (By we I mean you  )





Rutita1 said:


> No. Just no. Mation, look...



OK, look at it this way. Back in the early 1900s, the British colonial authorities in Sierra Leone built new houses in the hills above Freetown, in order that the local expat admin class wouldn't be exposed to Malaria. The people living down the hill - i.e. the population of  indigenous Africans, and people of African descent - were not helped out with any proper public health measures against the mozzie-born illness.

That's an example of how, in the colonial world at its height, openly racist urban planning exposed those considered racially inferior to natural disasters, epidemics, etc.

The key point is that it was openly racist: the racism involved in the processes that exposed Grenfell's residents to death by fire are more covert, secretive and insidious. And they piggy-backed on the pre-existing class differences (not 'classist', class) that shaped Kensington's demographics and urban geography. So the two need to be analysed. And that's why I said 'no, just no' to the verso link - because it assumed _a priori _that what was true of the colonial world was true of Planet London too, and I just didn't think that that was the case. 

One point that struck me as interesting about the Verso link, though, was the statistic that said that BME kids were far more likely to live on the upper floors of tower blocks than anywhere else. Has anyone else come across that one before?


----------



## belboid (Jul 5, 2017)

Taskforce sent in to replace 'parts of' the council

Grenfell Tower: Government sends in 'taskforce' - BBC News


----------



## belboid (Jul 5, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> One point that struck me as interesting about the Verso link, though, was the statistic that said that BME kids were far more likely to live on the upper floors of tower blocks than anywhere else. Has anyone else come across that one before?


I think racist housing policies were fairly well established, well into the eighties. Haringey used to (in the seventies, iirr) explicitly place white and 'immigrant' families in different estates. The 'white' estates weren't particularly better dwellings, but they were nearer to much better amenities. 

Hackney was the subject of a CRE study in its 'loony left' days which found it wasn't much better,  black families being placed in 'worse' estates as a matter of course.  I can't find the original report now, but there is this


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> for the verso thesis to be valid, the conditions obtaining in north kensington must be of post-windrush origin. however, north kensington in the 1930s was very deprived:
> 
> View attachment 110746
> 
> View attachment 110747


 
Am reading Radical London in the 50's buke - it outlines a similar situation for the  St Pancras area


----------



## Libertad (Jul 5, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Am reading Radical London in the 50's buke - it outlines a similar situation for the  St Pancras area



A nation wide rent strike might help to concentrate minds.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 5, 2017)

The Grenfell inquiry will be a stitch-up. Here’s why | George Monbiot


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 5, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Am reading Radical London in the 50's buke - it outlines a similar situation for the  St Pancras area


unaware of book: have ordered


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 5, 2017)

belboid said:


> I think racist housing policies were fairly well established, well into the eighties. Haringey used to (in the seventies, iirr) explicitly place white and 'immigrant' families in different estates. The 'white' estates weren't particularly better dwellings, but they were nearer to much better amenities.
> 
> Hackney was the subject of a CRE study in its 'loony left' days which found it wasn't much better,  black families being placed in 'worse' estates as a matter of course.  I can't find the original report now, but there is this


Googling brings up this book on the urban geography of racism:

http://www.univpgri-palembang.ac.id.../Geografi manusia/Ras dan Rasisme.pdf#page=12


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 5, 2017)

belboid said:


> Taskforce sent in to replace 'parts of' the council
> 
> Grenfell Tower: Government sends in 'taskforce' - BBC News



About bloody time.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> unaware of book: have ordered


 
Radical London in the 1950s  - Amberley Publishing

Link for anyone else who is interested in post war London stuff


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 5, 2017)

belboid said:


> I think racist housing policies were fairly well established, well into the eighties. Haringey used to (in the seventies, iirr) explicitly place white and 'immigrant' families in different estates. The 'white' estates weren't particularly better dwellings, but they were nearer to much better amenities.
> 
> Hackney was the subject of a CRE study in its 'loony left' days which found it wasn't much better,  black families being placed in 'worse' estates as a matter of course.  I can't find the original report now, but there is this


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 5, 2017)

teqniq said:


> The Grenfell inquiry will be a stitch-up. Here’s why | George Monbiot


 
A cavalcade of scum right there


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 5, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> OK, look at it this way. Back in the early 1900s, the British colonial authorities in Sierra Leone built new houses in the hills above Freetown, in order that the local expat admin class wouldn't be exposed to Malaria. The people living down the hill - i.e. the population of  indigenous Africans, and people of African descent - were not helped out with any proper public health measures against the mozzie-born illness.
> 
> That's an example of how, in the colonial world at its height, openly racist urban planning exposed those considered racially inferior to natural disasters, epidemics, etc.
> 
> The key point is that it was openly racist: the racism involved in the processes that exposed Grenfell's residents to death by fire are more covert, secretive and insidious. And they piggy-backed on the pre-existing class differences (not 'classist', class) that shaped Kensington's demographics and urban geography. So the two need to be analysed. And that's why I said 'no, just no' to the verso link - because it assumed _a priori _that what was true of the colonial world was true of Planet London too, and


Why have you come back to this with yet another unnecessary condescending effort at a history lesson? 



> I just didn't think that that was the case.


 No, you didn't hence your 'No. Just no.' post.

I think you have since actually read the article and thought about it...realising there is much more to what she has written with regard 'racist housing policies' and perhaps the analogy is making much more sense to you now you have actually considered it more closely.

Statements like this are annoying tbh... 





> But even though the rise of ethnic minority communities with 'staying power' did attract the attention of those in charge of the 'mother country', and not in a good way, they could not use the methods of social control (e.g. openly racist urban planning) which were possible in the colonies.



You are talking about PEOPLE, the direct ancestors of and/or people here on Urban. There is a coldness and objectification in your tone and descriptions. A phrasing which seems to overlook the importance of almost 70 years of 'stay power' and experiences. Policies don't need to be _openly racist_ to have an effect. They just need to be implemented.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 5, 2017)

87 discoveries of human remains have been found in Grenfell Tower, police reveal


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 5, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> 87 discoveries of human remains have been found in Grenfell Tower, police reveal





> "On Monday, we forensically recovered the last of the visible human remains from Grenfell Tower and transferred them to Westminster Mortuary."
> 
> Mr Cundy said: "I do not want there to be any hidden victims of this tragedy. We continue our work to build as full a picture as possible of who was inside Grenfell Tower on the night and, importantly, those who lost their lives. I completely understand the desire for clarity."



I hope I am wrong, but seeing the pictures of the inside of some of those flats, and the police saying it will take months to complete the search despite 250 people being involved, I suspect there will be hidden victims.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 5, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> I suspect there will be hidden victims.


 Yep, for sure.


----------



## Mation (Jul 5, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Why have you come back to this with yet another unnecessary condescending effort at a history lesson?
> 
> No, you didn't hence your 'No. Just no.' post.
> 
> ...


It's only gradually been dawning on me that the term 'openly racist' usually seems to mean only the racism that's obvious to white people.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 5, 2017)




----------



## David Clapson (Jul 5, 2017)

On C4 News last night Simon Israel said he knew of a tenant who had sublet her flat but was too scared to come forward. AFAIK the Police have said they won't prosecute illegal subletters, but there's been nothing from the council to say that they won't ask for the money back and the tenant won't lose their entitlement to a property. What a fucking dog's breakfast. 

I wonder how much the typical wait for social housing would be cut by if there was no subletting? Is subletting a big enough factor to deserve a mention in the debates about not enough social housing being built? If the Tories were aware of the true scale of subletting, would they be using it as a stick with which to beat Labour-dominated councils? If all councils were as inept, obstructive and wrong-headed as Lambeth, would there be habitable council housing anywhere in the country? I'd like to see the entire stock transferred to housing associations.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 5, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> I'd like to see the entire stock transferred to housing associations.


 Why???


----------



## David Clapson (Jul 5, 2017)

Because they're less useless than councils.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 5, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> Because they're less useless than councils.


Are they? This isn't my experience at all. They are also more expensive IME.


----------



## sealion (Jul 5, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> I'd like to see the entire stock transferred to housing associations.


A lot of social housing is already managed by ha's on the coucils behalf. The management and corner cutting is still shit and subletting is as rife as it is with council property.


----------



## David Clapson (Jul 5, 2017)

Maybe someone else should run them all. I'm struggling to think of candidates though. Shelter? Centrepoint?


----------



## killer b (Jul 5, 2017)

How about some sort of elected body, accountable to the tenants and wider community?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 5, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> I'd like to see the entire stock transferred to housing associations.


i'm sure you would


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jul 5, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> Maybe someone else should run them all. I'm struggling to think of candidates though. Shelter? Centrepoint?




Shelter are a bit dodgy with this at the moment.


----------



## Sue (Jul 5, 2017)

killer b said:


> How about some sort of elected body, accountable to the tenants and wider community?


Was just about to suggest that, completely crazy idea as it is...


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 5, 2017)

killer b said:


> How about some sort of elected body, accountable to the tenants and wider community?


 
How about a block Soviet, appointed by and answerable to the residents? No subletting, no profiteering, no queue jumping.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 5, 2017)

re above- half taking the piss, but most of the HA and Arms length vehicles used are unfit for the purpose nowadays


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 5, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> Shelter are a bit dodgy with this at the moment.


perhaps you could expand on that 'dodgy' bit


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jul 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> perhaps you could expand on that 'dodgy' bit




Nah.


----------



## David Clapson (Jul 5, 2017)

killer b said:


> How about some sort of elected body, accountable to the tenants and wider community?


A housing dept accountable to tenants, and tenants accountable to the housing dept. You'd need 10,000 clones of Beveridge and Bevan to make that happen.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 5, 2017)

Artaxerxes said:


> Nah.


because as far as i can see from the article they *were* dodgy but unless you have some other information to the contrary the dodgy/dodgier people seem to have gone.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 5, 2017)

I need to get away from U75, I am going to go postal soon. Grrr


----------



## David Clapson (Jul 5, 2017)

I took the Shelter resignations to be a sign that there are a lot of motivated, principled staff there. You don't go through those agonies unless it's important to you. It's not as if they were pushed to do it by external critics.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 5, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> I took the Shelter resignations to be a sign that there are a lot of motivated, principled staff there. You don't go through those agonies unless it's important to you. It's not as if they were pushed to do it by external critics.


They were motivated by the fact that internal critics saw the conflicts of interest and their positions as untenable.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 5, 2017)

killer b said:


> How about some sort of elected body, accountable to the tenants and wider community?



So, a council?


----------



## andysays (Jul 5, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Verso  _The colonial politics of space overdetermined the premature and violent deaths of the Grenfell residents racialised as non-white_



Coming back to this thread after a break, but have to comment on this

What about the premature and violent deaths of the Grenfell residents *not* racialised as non-white?

How does Nadine El-Enany explain their deaths, or is she, as appears from her article, simply not interested in them as their deaths can't be used to push the one-dimensional agenda she's interested in pushing.

There is absolutely no mention of class in that article at all, and no recognition that some of the victims of Grenfell and many, many of those condemned by the state to exist in squalid and potentially life threatening housing conditions are in that position not because of colonialism or racism (which clearly still exists in housing provision), but because of poverty caused by the class system, so to claim that the article can be read as saying that both race and class are significant strikes me as either naive or disingenuous, unfortunately.

ETA: ...either naive or...


----------



## killer b (Jul 5, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> So, a council?


yesthatwasthejoke.


----------



## planetgeli (Jul 5, 2017)

andysays said:


> ...some of the victims of Grenfell and many, many of those condemned by the state to exist in squalid and potentially life threatening housing conditions are in that position not because of colonialism or racism (which clearly still exists in housing provision), but because of poverty caused by the class system,



Indeed.



> The squalid conditions in which people lived...in the area that became known as the potteries and the piggeries was described in a report that said most houses were"merely hovels in a ruinous condition" and "filthy in the extreme". The combination of unregulated house building, over-population, poor drainage and bad sanitation, *all of which were completely ignored and brushed aside by the authorities, *finally gave rise to serious concerns.
> Not far from the affluent neighbouring areas, with their large mansions and villas, Notting Barns was regarded as a shameful blot on the landscape by the borough officials *but they chose to refuse responsibility. In 1893 the Daily News claimed Notting Dale was " the most hopelessly degraded place in London".
> *



Always been a class thing.

History of our estate - Silchester Estate


----------



## Anju (Jul 5, 2017)

I was wondering if there is a way to find out if the Telegraph changed an article in response to a Facebook post from Ishmahil Blagrove. 

Here are a couple of screenshots. One shows two points made in his post and the other shows part of the article which make it look like his comments are wrong.


----------



## David Clapson (Jul 5, 2017)

Here's a copy of the article saved in the Google cache on 5 Jul 2017  at 19:45:27. The Justice4Grenfell agitators: campaign group tries to push Tower inquiry judge to resign

Google would have saved copies of the article at other times but I don't know whether they can be retrieved.

Edit: you could search in the Google Search forum. If the answer's not there you could post a question. Google Groups


----------



## Anju (Jul 5, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> Here's a copy of the article saved in the Google cache on 5 Jul 2017  at 19:45:27. The Justice4Grenfell agitators: campaign group tries to push Tower inquiry judge to resign
> 
> Google would have saved copies of the article at other times but I don't know whether they can be retrieved.
> 
> Edit: you could search in the Google Search forum. If the answer's not there you could post a question. Google Groups



Thanks. The Facebook post was about 6 hours before that version. Hopefully someone will know if it's possible to retrieve an earlier version. Original article was from yesterday evening.


----------



## David Clapson (Jul 5, 2017)

So you don't have the article from yesterday evening? Do you remember the exact wording of the sentence you want? Maybe you could use that as a search term.

You could also get a printed copy of the paper and see if it's different from the online version.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 5, 2017)

Found this in one of the support groups from yesterday (4 JULY 2017 • 9:21PM):

The Justice4Grenfell agitators: campaign group tries to push Tower inquiry judge to resign



> he Grenfell Tower judge is being subjected to a politically-motivated witch hunt, his allies said yesterday, as a Labour MP demanded he be replaced by someone “who understands human beings”.
> 
> Friends of Sir Martin Moore-Bick have been taken aback by the sustained attacks on him since his appointment as Grenfell inquiry chairman just five days ago.
> 
> ...


----------



## Anju (Jul 5, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> So you don't have the article from yesterday evening? Do you remember the exact wording of the sentence you want? Maybe you could use that as a search term.
> 
> You could also get a printed copy of the paper and see if it's different from the online version.



Unfortunately I didn't see it until this evening. Should be in today's printed version as the time shown on the online copy is 21:21 yesterday.


----------



## gosub (Jul 5, 2017)

I think Mrs Dent Coad has more questions to answer than aspersions to throw


----------



## Anju (Jul 5, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Found this in one of the support groups from yesterday (4 JULY 2017 • 9:21PM):
> 
> The Justice4Grenfell agitators: campaign group tries to push Tower inquiry judge to resign



Not sure whether that could have been updated but if it hasn't it's disappointing that people are making false statements in representation of the residents. Either lazy and sloppy or deliberately misleading. Either way it's unhelpful and even potentially damaging.


----------



## David Clapson (Jul 5, 2017)

That link is just to the current version, live on the Telegraph site. The date and time are from when the article was first published.  If there have been minor changes between first publication and now, the paper wouldn't amend the date and time.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 5, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> That link is just to the current version, live on the Telegraph site. The date and time are from when the article was first published.  If there have been minor changes between first publication and now, the paper wouldn't amend the date and time.


Shame as some online publications will list at the very least the date and time of edits/updates.


----------



## Anju (Jul 5, 2017)

It should be in the printed version if it went online at that time. Would be a great example of how they operate if they have changed it. Maybe help change a few peoples minds.


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Jul 5, 2017)

Here's a version captured last night: The Justice4Grenfell agitators: campaign group tries to push Tower enquiry judge to resign

It contains the same reference to the Supreme Court case and the quote from Yvette Williams.


----------



## David Clapson (Jul 5, 2017)

Anju said:


> Would be a great example of how they operate if they have changed it.



But everyone already knows that papers tell lies, make assumptions and mistakes. Never accept anything as true unless you've checked it in several other papers.  That gives you about half the story, if you're lucky. You never find out the rest unless you talk to people who were involved.


----------



## Anju (Jul 5, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> But everyone already knows that papers tell lies, make assumptions and mistakes. Never accept anything as true unless you've checked it in several other papers.  That gives you about half the story, if you're lucky. You never find out the rest unless you talk to people who were involved.



Not sure everybody does. We all like to indulge in a little confirmation bias information gathering. 

I thought the speech, which I saw on Facebook but quickly became unavailable, Yvette Williams made in the residents meeting was amazing. They need more people like her fighting for them, not people who will happily make dodgy social media posts.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 5, 2017)

Anju said:


> Not sure everybody does. We all like to indulge in a little confirmation bias information gathering.
> 
> I thought the speech, which I saw on Facebook but quickly became unavailable, Yvette Williams made in the residents meeting was amazing. They need more people like her fighting for them, not people who will happily make dodgy social media posts.


You are questioning the veracity of Ishmahill's  fb post?


----------



## Anju (Jul 5, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> But everyone already knows that papers tell lies, make assumptions and mistakes. Never accept anything as true unless you've checked it in several other papers.  That gives you about half the story, if you're lucky. You never find out the rest unless you talk to people who were involved.



Not everyone, plus we all like a bit of confirmation bias based information gathering whether we admit it or not.


----------



## Anju (Jul 5, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> You are questioning the veracity of Ismail's fb post?



I posted my question because I thought the Telegraph had changed their story. If they have I would see it as a bit of a victory for him.

As it looks like it might also be him making things up I now question his motivation. Same feeling I had about UKBLM leaders, who took their bit of fame, wrote a couple of articles and then fucked off having destroyed what was a viable national organisation for challenging racism.

 I saw the speech Yvette Williams made in the residents meeting. She is clearly concerned solely with helping the residents. Same sincerity and passion as Doreen Lawrence and Marcia Rigg. These are people who work tirelessly for what they believe in.

People making inaccurate Facebook posts are not fit to represent those people. Certainly you need to be able to operate at the same level as the judges, lawyers, journalists but truth needs to be at the heart of everything if that's what you're fighting for.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 6, 2017)

Anju said:


> Not everyone, plus we all like a bit of confirmation bias based information gathering whether we admit it or not.



You're only saying that because you read it somewhere and it struck a chord.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 6, 2017)

ffs

Grenfell Tower survivors could be deported in 12 months, after latest government U-turn


----------



## planetgeli (Jul 6, 2017)

Cunts.



> "This period of leave to remain for those directly affected by the fire will provide survivors with the time to deal with the extremely difficult circumstances in which they find themselves and start to rebuild their lives *whilst considering their future options*,


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 6, 2017)

Anju said:


> I posted my question because I thought the Telegraph had changed their story. If they have I would see it as a bit of a victory for him.
> 
> As it looks like it might also be him making things up I now question his motivation. Same feeling I had about UKBLM leaders, who took their bit of fame, wrote a couple of articles and then fucked off having destroyed what was a viable national organisation for challenging racism.
> 
> ...



You feel all that on the back of one facebook post? 

Also, I think you need to spell out just what you think he is making up? could there be no other reason for this inconsistency?

Here is his post again to aid you:


> We didn't expect to challenge the Establishment and the mainstream media and be able to leave this unscathed. We have been prepared for and awaiting the lies and distortions and it has begun today in The Telegraph - of course owned by billionaire tax dodgers, the Barclay brothers.
> 
> It is journalism of the most sloppy and desperate kind, demonstrated by their inability to even spell my name correctly - low standards characteristic of The Telegraph.
> 
> ...




Seems to me you came at this with a dislike of him and are making some very heavy judgements based on not very much at all. Perhaps I am wrong, perhaps you know a lot about him and have simply yet to say.


----------



## sheothebudworths (Jul 6, 2017)

teqniq said:


> ffs
> 
> Grenfell Tower survivors could be deported in 12 months, after latest government U-turn



Absolute _bastards_...there's really just no end to this shameless, filthy behaviour, is there? 

It's so difficult to imagine such a horrendous situation being made even worse for some of the survivors - how it could _get_ any worse - but by fuck, it does - those cunts _ensure_ that it does.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 6, 2017)

Um. conspiracy theorist on FB now link the company who supplied the cladding to international global capital / Joos & Bildeberg group. Pre planned demolition to facilitate redevelopment for the rich by all accounts. Some earlier discussion over whether the Grenfell missing ever actually existed. fucking hell, have these people no shame ?


----------



## existentialist (Jul 6, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Um. conspiracy theorist on FB now link the company who supplied the cladding to international global capital / Joos & Bildeberg group. Pre planned demolition to facilitate redevelopment for the rich by all accounts. Some earlier discussion over whether the Grenfell missing ever actually existed. fucking hell, have these people no shame ?


They don't see the need for shame. On the contrary, they consider themselves to be doing us a favour by revealing to us these incredibly well-kept secrets that only a few million fruitloops on the Internet have managed to figure out the TRUTH behind.

If you talk to these people, there is frank incomprehension in them at the idea that anyone could seriously consider any other narrative. Hence the horrible confrontations with Sandy Hook parents, etc.


----------



## frogwoman (Jul 6, 2017)

It makes me feel physically sick.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jul 6, 2017)

Thermite cladding.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 6, 2017)

existentialist said:


> They don't see the need for shame. On the contrary, they consider themselves to be doing us a favour by revealing to us these incredibly well-kept secrets that only a few million fruitloops on the Internet have managed to figure out the TRUTH behind.
> 
> If you talk to these people, there is frank incomprehension in them at the idea that anyone could seriously consider any other narrative. Hence the horrible confrontations with Sandy Hook parents, etc.


OK. That means one thing. They have to be ejected from wherever they turn up, by physical force if necessary.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 6, 2017)

Anju said:


> It should be in the printed version if it went online at that time. Would be a great example of how they operate if they have changed it. Maybe help change a few peoples minds.


Yeh cos what the telegraph says is so vitally important


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Jul 6, 2017)

teqniq said:


> ffs
> 
> Grenfell Tower survivors could be deported in 12 months, after latest government U-turn


Is there actually anyone amongst the survivors in this position? I know there were some people with official refugee status but these are people whose immigration status has already been established and whose rights to be in this country shoudl not be affected by events of the fire.
This article would seem to apply that there were/might be/possibly someone who would be classified as an illegal immigrant, Are there actually people in this position or is someone just stirring things up?


----------



## Mation (Jul 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Is there actually anyone amongst the survivors in this position? I know there were some people with official refugee status but these are people whose immigration status has already been established and whose rights to be in this country shoudl not be affected by events of the fire.
> This article would seem to apply that there were/might be/possibly someone who would be classified as an illegal immigrant, Are there actually people in this position or is someone just stirring things up?


It will be difficult to find out now, won't it? Anyone in that position would be unlikely to come forward under threat of deportation.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Jul 6, 2017)

Mation said:


> It will be difficult to find out now, won't it? Anyone in that position would be unlikely to come forward under threat of deportation.


Well yes that's why I'm curious the article gives the impression that on the night of the fire there were people coming out of the building and melting into the darkness like ghosts which is possible but seems a bit far fetched to me. There would be panic and confusion, many went to the hospital,a load more would have just gone along with the crowd and ended up in the leisure centre with the others. Amongst all these people was there anyone who's legal (let's not get into debates over moral) right to be there was in anyway questionable.
It would take remarkable presence of mind for someone to be woken in the middle of night, stagger downstairs throgh the smoke and fire struggling to breathe and then get outside and think to themselves 
"Damn the gig is up I had better disappear"
That why's I am curious if there are any such people or is this article and the quotes in it is actually fact based or some journo and or politician fishing for a bite.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife I think the answer is, no one actually knows.

I find it totally possible there were some 'illegals' in the building, but how many I doubt we will ever know.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Is there actually anyone amongst the survivors in this position? I know there were some people with official refugee status but these are people whose immigration status has already been established and whose rights to be in this country shoudl not be affected by events of the fire.
> This article would seem to apply that there were/might be/possibly someone who would be classified as an illegal immigrant, Are there actually people in this position or is someone just stirring things up?



Well, it's entirely possible that were people living in the block in this "illegal" or "undocumented" or whatever-the-hell-preferred-word situation.

You and your family could be living in the Grenfell block, meet someone in a desperately homeless situation, invite said person to come and crash in your place - living room sofa or a sleeping bag on the floor, whatever.

"





BemusedbyLife said:


> ...  that there were/might be/possibly someone who would be classified as an illegal immigrant...



I think your "might be" and "possibly" be actually does mean that some *serious* thought must be given to that fact that it is *very likely* that there were were some people living there about whom the council did not know.

People WILL at times, have friends/family to stay for a long time, and yeah, some of them might be "illegal immigrants" or students who have overstayed visa etc.

I didn't think of informing council/Housing Association when I took my brother in to stay for a while. Nor did he, at a later time, notify them that Nigerian friend, having finished his studies, would stay in his flat for a while.

Anyone "illegal" and surviving through all that horrible hellish fire and terror ... oh let them recover and do not terrify them further.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Well yes that's why I'm curious the article gives the impression that on the night of the fire there were people coming out of the building and melting into the darkness like ghosts which is possible but seems a bit far fetched to me. There would be panic and confusion, many went to the hospital,a load more would have just gone along with the crowd and ended up in the leisure centre with the others. Amongst all these people was there anyone who's legal (let's not get into debates over moral) right to be there was in anyway questionable.
> It would take remarkable presence of mind for someone to be woken in the middle of night, stagger downstairs throgh the smoke and fire struggling to breathe and then get outside and think to themselves
> "Damn the gig is up I had better disappear"
> That why's I am curious if there are any such people or is this article and the quotes in it is actually fact based or some journo and or politician fishing for a bite.





BemusedbyLife said:


> It would take remarkable presence of mind for someone to be woken in the middle of night, stagger downstairs throgh the smoke and fire struggling to breathe and then get outside and think to themselves
> "Damn the gig is up I had better disappear"...



What if you are alive, but very very extremely accustomed to thinking "... I had better disappear"? Given that, if "illegal" person, you would be damn used to things going badly for you?

What if the whole fire and smoke "gig" is one that you have seen rather too often before?


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Jul 6, 2017)

Celyn said:


> Well, it's entirely possible that were people living in the block in this "illegal" or "undocumented" or whatever-the-hell-preferred-word situation.
> 
> You and your family could be living in the Grenfell block, meet someone in a desperately homeless situation, invite said person to come and crash in your place - living room sofa or a sleeping bag on the floor, whatever.
> 
> ...


They could indeed or there might be 10 of them packed into a 1 bed flat rented out by a leaseholder knowingly or otherwise, I'm not curious how they ended up there I can imagine loads of scenarios for myself.
What I'm wondering is whether there actually were. As far as I know none of the known survivors have been harassed or arrested by the authorities about their immigration status and given the general insentivity of how things have been handled since the fire, I'm sure they would have been so if there were any such people they all died or disappeared since none are apparently among the injured.  
I personally incline to the belief that there weren't any, the rantings of the Fail notwithstanding the streets of the capital are not heaving with the desperate and dispossessed of the world stealing and scaring old ladies.
There were ony about 500 people in this one building in a city of over 10 million so the odds that some might be illegal migrants has got to be actually quite low.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 6, 2017)

Oops. I  think I posted two posts that might as well have been one, sorry, computer muddles.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> They could indeed or there might be 10 of them packed into a 1 bed flat rented out by a leaseholder knowingly or otherwise, I'm not curious how they ended up there I can imagine loads of scenarios for myself.
> What I'm wondering is whether there actually were. As far as I know none of the known survivors have been harassed or arrested by the authorities about their immigration status and given the general insentivity of how things have been handled since the fire, I'm sure they would have been so if there were any such people they all died or disappeared since none are apparently among the injured.
> I personally incline to the belief that there weren't any, the rantings of the Fail notwithstanding the streets of the capital are not heaving with the desperate and dispossessed of the world stealing and scaring old ladies.
> There were ony about 500 people in this one building in a city of over 10 million so the odds that some might be illegal migrants has got to be actually quite low.



All the better, then.  If there were only one or two people in this situation, surely some clemency in regards to the immigration thing is in order?



BemusedbyLife said:


> I personally incline to the belief that there weren't any, the rantings of the Fail notwithstanding the streets of the capital are not heaving with the desperate and dispossessed of the world stealing and scaring old ladies.



Some of the dispossessed and desperate might not be "stealing and scaring old ladies" but, in fact living on the sofa or floor of friends, and given that the friends would also share food, therefore no need to go "scaring old ladies".


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Jul 6, 2017)

Celyn said:


> All the better, then.  If there were only one or two people in this situation, surely some clemency in regards to the immigration thing is in order?
> 
> 
> 
> Some of the dispossessed and desperate might not be "stealing and scaring old ladies" but, in fact living on the sofa or floor of friends, and given that the friends would also share food, therefore no need to go "scaring old ladies".


If there is indeed such an individual then a case for clemency could be made of course, appeals have been granted on many things, I think the Fail holds to the opinion that the mere existence of foreigners is ground to be scared.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> ... the streets of the capital are not heaving with the desperate and dispossessed of the world *stealing and scaring old ladies *...



I feel ashamed and worried that I had failed to notice this other crime.  

STEALING old ladies! That is really not on!    Who has been stealing these old ladies?    This must be stopped.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> If there is indeed such an individual then a case for clemency could be made of course, appeals have been granted on many things, I think the Fail holds to the opinion that the mere existence of foreigners is ground to be scared.



Oh. I see. You do not hold to that opinion, then?  
OK.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Jul 6, 2017)

Celyn said:


> Oh. I see. You do not hold to that opinion, then?
> OK.


my father is white, my mother is brown (but not one of the scary ones)  so no I'm not a fan of the Daily Fail


----------



## maomao (Jul 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> There were ony about 500 people in this one building in a city of over 10 million so the odds that some might be illegal migrants has got to be actually quite low.


Don't be silly. Not all places have equal chances of having illegal immigrants in them. The point is that illegal sublets in the upper floors of tower blocks is exactly where you tend to find people of unclear immigration statuses for exactly the same reasons that authorities require finding it so hard to say how many people were in the building.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Jul 6, 2017)

maomao said:


> Don't be silly. Not all places have equal chances of having illegal immigrants in them. The point is that illegal sublets in the upper floors of tower blocks is exactly where you tend to find people of unclear immigration statuses for exactly the same reasons that authorities require finding it so hard to say how many people were in the building.


OK I have no reason to doubt you but why would that be so? why are upper floors more likely than lower ones or houses?


----------



## maomao (Jul 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> OK I have no reason to doubt you but why would that be so? why are upper floors more likely than lower ones or houses?


Because they are less desirable. For the same reasons there are more illegal immigrants in Ilford than Richmond.


----------



## David Clapson (Jul 6, 2017)

That seems logical to me. A legitimate tenant moves out, they get a dodgy letting agent to find some tenants. The people most likely to pay top dollar despite the height and the unreliable lifts are the ones with the fewest other options, i.e. people who came on a student visa but overstayed, etc.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Jul 6, 2017)

David Clapson said:


> That seems logical to me. A legitimate tenant moves out, they get a dodgy letting agent to find some tenants. The people most likely to pay top dollar despite the height and the unreliable lifts are the ones with the fewest other options, i.e. people who came on a student visa but overstayed, etc.


All fair points perhaps I was wrong and the reason there are no illegal migrants amongst the injured is because  indeed they are all or mostly dead and human tragedies aside it will be vey difficult to identify them, this may therefore be the answer to the question I first posed.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> my father is white, my mother is brown (but not one of the scary ones)  so no I'm not a fan of the Daily Fail


OK, I did not think you were a fan of such things but it was a bit confusing.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 6, 2017)

maomao said:


> Don't be silly. Not all places have equal chances of having illegal immigrants in them. The point is that illegal sublets in the upper floors of tower blocks is exactly where you tend to find people of unclear immigration statuses for exactly the same reasons that authorities require finding it so hard to say how many people were in the building.



Nope, sorry, not understanding this. It might chime with your experience of living in the high floors of council tower blocks, maomao, but not with mine.


----------



## Anju (Jul 6, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> You feel all that on the back of one facebook post?
> 
> Also, I think you need to spell out just what you think he is making up? could there be no other reason for this inconsistency?
> 
> ...



I had never heard of him before reading his Facebook post.

My first reaction was positive, more so when I read the article he referred to and thought the Telegraph had changed their story in response to the post.

When it appeared that he had made a couple of totally false statements I realised he was just another hijacker. 

Nothing about the actual inquiry was covered, just a load of self indulgent self congratulation about taking on the media and establishment. 

Putting a more negative and false spin on the article can't be helping anyone other than a bit of ego massaging for the poster.


I doubt the residents want to embark on any kind of battle. They need an inquest, as open as possible, a time frame,  with their own team to find and question expert witnesses, of which there seem to be a lot who are willing to tell the truth, good lawyers and some funding. 

They don't need incompetent or dishonest, can't tell which the guy is, people who consciously or not will hijack their recovery and chance for finding some answers and eventually if possible peace.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> There were ony about 500 people in this one building in a city of over 10 million so the odds that some might be illegal migrants has got to be actually quite low.



I think the % for this block would be significantly higher than the *average* for London all things considered. This wasnt exactly Luxury urban loft living for well Heeled oligarchs - it was W/C block in a densley populated area


----------



## Kate Sharpley (Jul 7, 2017)

Max Baginski on the 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist Company fire.

"War or peace – the slaughter continues, for the character of capitalist society is so inexorably murderous that no amount of moralizing can mitigate it.

"Horrified we witness the carnival of death, fain to believe that these catastrophes are “accidental,” exceptional, while in reality the destruction of human life, industrial murder because of greed and inhumanity, is an established institution. In a society where profit is paramount and the fate of the toilers a negligible quantity, what other result can be expected than the most cynical indifference to the lives of the workingmen.

"The hundred and forty-five victims of the fire at the shirtwaist factory of Blanck & Harris, in Washington Square, New York, have been murdered by capitalism. The helpers and executioners in the massacre were the owners of the scab shop, the officials of the public safety department, the administration of the City of New York, and the government and legislature at Albany. These are the guilty. But as they control the machinery of “justice,” they will acquit themselves. Within a few weeks the terrible crime will be all but forgotten and – the business of murder will continue."

The rest is up at Everlasting Murder
[The response to the fire was a milestone. See among other things Remember the Triangle Fire Coalition
Baginski's call to 'abolish the industrial system of wholesale slaughter and exploitation' not yet redundant.]


----------



## Cid (Jul 7, 2017)

C4 article from 2012 about figures from the Audit Commission at the time says London tenancy fraud rates were at 4-6%. So that range might be a useful starting point. The article doesn't cite the 4-6%, it may be in the Protecting the public purse report, but I don't have time to dig around that. As far as I could tell on a very brief look at a later document it focused on detection rates (which were more like 0.5%), though they must be comparing that against an estimate of total rates.

Then obviously there's the problem of estimating what percentage of those are in the country illegally, which is probably nigh on impossible. It does tell us that potentially 4-6% of those affected are unrecorded, and - for survivors - unlikely to come forward for assistance... Whether in the country illegally or not.


----------



## David Clapson (Jul 7, 2017)

At last, some detail about something which I thought had been ignored!

It also occurred to me that KCTMO, as a profit-oriented business, would be even less likely to care about illegal sublets than the 'public servants' at RBK&C.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 7, 2017)

Cid said:


> C4 article from 2012 about figures from the Audit Commission at the time says London tenancy fraud rates were at 4-6%. So that range might be a useful starting point. The article doesn't cite the 4-6%, it may be in the Protecting the public purse report, but I don't have time to dig around that. As far as I could tell on a very brief look at a later document it focused on detection rates (which were more like 0.5%), though they must be comparing that against an estimate of total rates.
> 
> Then obviously there's the problem of estimating what percentage of those are in the country illegally, which is probably nigh on impossible. It does tell us that potentially 4-6% of those affected are unrecorded, and - for survivors - unlikely to come forward for assistance... Whether in the country illegally or not.


 

I am going to Google this now, but I know in Southwark when they did an audit of a block a year or two ago, the majority of the tenants were subletters. Need to find where I read this obvs.....


----------



## sheothebudworths (Jul 8, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> I am going to Google this now, but I know in Southwark when they did an audit of a block a year or two ago, the majority of the tenants were subletters. Need to find where I read this obvs.....



Out of interest, what was the purpose of the audit?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 8, 2017)

i dunno - cannot find where i read it. apols


----------



## David Clapson (Jul 8, 2017)

Check out this Feb 2014 Southwark press release. Near the end it says they have recovered 480 sublet properties since April 2012  Seven housing fraudsters brought to justice in one of country’s biggest cases | Southwark Council


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 8, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> How about a block Soviet, appointed by and answerable to the residents? No subletting, no profiteering, no queue jumping.



Plus revolutionary justice for would-be profiteers and sub-letters.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 8, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> re above- half taking the piss, but most of the HA and Arms length vehicles used are unfit for the purpose nowadays



Many ALMOs were unfit-for-purpose from inception.  They were just a way for councils to attempt to take repair borrowing off the books.  When that didn't work, most of them turned out to be more expensive than the in-house operations they replaced.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 8, 2017)

The Guardian's account of Thursday's meeting between Sir Martin Moore-Bick and former Grenfell residents quotes Joe Delaney of the Grenfell Action Group. Moore-Bick “wasn’t jeered or booed. It was more scepticism. You could hear people sighing and tutting”.

Although many of the press reports of the meeting mention that there had previously been 'calls' for Moore-Bick to stand down or be replaced I haven't yet found one which states this was raised at the meeting itself.

Nor were any of the other 12 demands formulated by BMELAWYERSFORGRENFELL, which were reported in the Guardian as being demands made "by the survivors". I expressed some scepticism about how these demands were drawn up here.

I note that in addition to posting a handful of tweets BMELAWYERSFORGRENFELL has also set up a wordpress blog with a single post. 

It consists of an advert for a forthcoming human rights seminar. Underneath it is this picture







The fair-minded part of me feels that this was probably just a sample picture which they failed to remove from the wordpress template employed. The cynical old scrote part of me can't help wondering if perhaps this might be evidence from a case where a restaurant was being sued for delivering the wrong lunch order to chambers.

Now I know nothing about the lawyers involved in BMELAWYERSFORGRENFELL.  It's fair to say their activities to date don't inspire enormous confidence but they may be entirely 'well meaning', something that can't be said of all the lawyers who are involving themselves with Grenfell Towers.

From a Times story today :


> The North Kensington Law Centre, which is helping more than 100 people who lived in the tower, said it was very concerned that families were vulnerable to exploitation.
> 
> “We heard quite a lot of reports of ambulance chasing in the aftermath of the fire — people were being told, ‘You need a lawyer asap, here’s a form, sign here,’ ” a spokesman said.





> Sue Caro, of the Justice for Grenfell group, said that she had been told of people claiming to represent a senior barrister advising residents of the urgency of getting legal representation.
> 
> “We have also heard about different forms of scams, targeting survivors because of the money they are being given by the government,” she added.



If my scepticism about BMELAWYERSFORGRENFELL turns out to be justified that still places them on a different part of the spectrum of cuntishness to bottom-feeding ambulance chasing scumbags.

However the Grenfell fire casts a light on all aspects of how it came about and how it is responded to and that includes the functioning of the various groups which make up the 'representariat'. We will undoubtedly have plenty of opportunity to see how this works. I fear it may start with more illustrations of how the most "efficient" way to give a "voice to the voiceless" is to ensure they are voiceless by drowning out what they have to say.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 8, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> Thermite cladding.



*Nano*-thermite cladding.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 8, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> *Nano*-thermite cladding.


rampant greed and neglect cannot melt steel beams. Everyone knows that.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 9, 2017)

Some further details about the bogus Grenfell Victims and Survivors Trust

Call to investigate rival Grenfell Tower support group - Sunday Times (Paywalled)



Spoiler: Text of story



The government taskforce set up to help survivors of the Grenfell Tower disaster is facing criticism after promoting a “suspicious” trust that acted as a rival to community activist groups.

Last month, the taskforce delivered flyers to survivors’ hotel rooms inviting them to a meeting to establish the “Grenfell Victims and Survivors Trust” (GVST), an “independent organisation” that would be “the recognised body that [takes] full OWNERSHIP of all current and future issues relating to the Victims and Survivors of Grenfell”.

According to the flyer, the meeting, held at the taskforce’s base at the Westway Centre on June 30, would have speakers including a retired police commander and the area Dean of Kensington, the Rev Mark O’Donoghue.

When residents arrived they became suspicious of the group’s founder, Ibrahim El-Nour, who claimed to be a relative of one of the deceased. Quizzed by people who lived in the block, El-Nour said his aunt was Fathaya Alsanousi, a 70-year-old resident on the 23rd floor, who died in the fire.

This weekend, El-Nour, 60, admitted he was not related to Alsanousi but knew her as a “matriarchal figure” who came from the same part of Sudan as he had. He said he had set up the group with the best intentions after talks with taskforce members and a government minister.

The retired police chief said he had agreed to attend because the involvement of the Grenfell Fire Response Team taskforce implied it was government-backed. He left when the meeting descended into chaos.

O’Donoghue said he had declined to speak at the event and suspected his name had been used to give it a “veneer of respectability”.

El-Nour left with a police escort and GVST’s Twitter feed disappeared soon afterwards. Residents have now called for police to investigate the trust.

One local volunteer who works with survivors said: “Some of the community groups have really struggled to get support from the authorities, but this trust appears out of nowhere and gets its flyers in every survivor’s hotel rooms and a meeting at the Westway.”

A spokesman for the taskforce said:“The Grenfell Response Team offered support to a number of groups who were helping local people [including] providing space for meetings and help with distributing leaflets. This support was provided on the same basis to all organisations.”





> The government taskforce set up to help survivors of the Grenfell Tower disaster is facing criticism after promoting a “suspicious” trust that acted as a rival to community activist groups.





> Last month, the taskforce delivered flyers to survivors’ hotel rooms inviting them to a meeting to establish the “Grenfell Victims and Survivors Trust” (GVST), an “independent organisation” that would be “the recognised body that [takes] full OWNERSHIP of all current and future issues relating to the Victims and Survivors of Grenfell”.


(...)


> When residents arrived they became suspicious of the group’s founder, Ibrahim El-Nour, who claimed to be a relative of one of the deceased. Quizzed by people who lived in the block, El-Nour said his aunt was Fathaya Alsanousi, a 70-year-old resident on the 23rd floor, who died in the fire.





> This weekend, El-Nour, 60, admitted he was not related to Alsanousi but knew her as a “matriarchal figure” who came from the same part of Sudan as he had. He said he had set up the group with the best intentions after talks with taskforce members and a government minister.


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jul 9, 2017)

I would just add though that - while it does seem like dodgy goings on and this Ibrahim El-Nour may well be acting to further himself rather than the actual survivors, him calling Fathaya Alsanousi his aunt isn't that suspicious. I've got aunts that aren't, and in some cultures its most used as a term of respect and recognition.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 9, 2017)

Outrage as Islamist claims Grenfell Tower victims were 'murdered by Zionists' who fund Conservative Party 



> An Islamist activist has claimed the Grenfell Tower victims “were murdered” by Zionists who fund the Conservative party in an astonishing outburst now being investigated by police.
> 
> Nazim Ali, a director of the Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC), is accused of exploiting the tragedy during an anti-Israel demonstration in the days after the fire.
> 
> ...


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 9, 2017)

crossthebreeze said:


> I would just add though that - while it does seem like dodgy goings on and this Ibrahim El-Nour may well be acting to further himself rather than the actual survivors, him calling Fathaya Alsanousi his aunt isn't that suspicious. I've got aunts that aren't, and in some cultures its most used as a term of respect and recognition.



Hard to judge what was going on with the inappropriately named 'Trust'.

This Ibrahim El-Nour seems to be the same age as the one, described in various news stories as a cafe owner active in efforts to exempt shisha cafes from the smoking ban, who was the founder of an Edgware Road Association for small businesses around 2003. He may have simply felt that he could contribute in some way by offering leadership. The community clearly didn't agree with him.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 9, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Two planes, three towers collapsed... maybe something else is the factor.
> 
> The first fully transparent, peer reviewed scientific investigation into the collapse of WTC7 is shortly going to conclude that there was zero chance it collapsed due to fire.
> 
> www.wtc7evaluation.org


I think it has already been made clear on other threads that this not a forum for 911ery.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 9, 2017)

No more posts on this subject full stop. (Please nobody reply to them either.)


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 9, 2017)

In fact I think it's best to just take all the 911 posts out.


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Jul 9, 2017)

This is pretty pathetic.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 9, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> Some further details about the bogus Grenfell Victims and Survivors Trust
> 
> Call to investigate rival Grenfell Tower support group - Sunday Times (Paywalled)
> 
> ...



A little feedback/response to this fake trust/article in a group I am in.



> Zerina Anirez Yup. Wasted mine time and the time of several residents who turned up at Westway two Fridays ago only find out it was just some charlatan. He was eventually carted away by police.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 9, 2017)




----------



## Jan Glepop (Jul 9, 2017)

I know, Rutita1! What a bunch of chavs :-(


----------



## fishfinger (Jul 9, 2017)

Jan Glepop said:


> I know, Rutita1! What a bunch of chavs :-(


Fuck off


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 9, 2017)

Jan Glepop said:


> I know, Rutita1! What a bunch of chavs :-(



Erm a bunch of what?   Fuck off!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 9, 2017)

I reported your post btw Jan Glepop  because if that is your opening gambit there will be no joy, ever. Best we deal with your inadequacies in perception and trolling ability now yeah?


----------



## Jan Glepop (Jul 9, 2017)

I think an ex-judge is just what's needed here. Someone who understands the law


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 9, 2017)

Jan Glepop said:


> I think an ex-judge is just what's needed here. Someone who understands the law



Yep... You are just saying what everyone is thinking.  Apart from all of us who aren't thinking like you that is.


----------



## Jan Glepop (Jul 9, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Yep... You are just saying what everyone is thinking.  Apart from all of us who aren't thinking like you that is.


Who cares whether I'm saying what you're (collectively) thinking? I'm saying what I think. Isn't that the point of a discussion forum?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 9, 2017)

Martyr.


----------



## Jan Glepop (Jul 9, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Martyr.


Fartyr. Sistyr. Brotyr. 

You'd do well not to generalise.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jul 9, 2017)

fuck off, twat


----------



## Jan Glepop (Jul 9, 2017)

Puddy_Tat said:


> fuck off, twat


Is this the legendary "urban welcome"?


----------



## xenon (Jul 9, 2017)

Ninja, hm.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 9, 2017)

xenon said:


> Ninja, hm.



Boring, still.


----------



## Jan Glepop (Jul 9, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Boring, still.


You people. Y'all call twats on anyone who disagrees with you. Like a baby.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 9, 2017)

Jan Glepop said:


> You people. Y'all call twats on anyone who disagrees with you. Like a baby.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2017)

Jan Glepop said:


> You people. Y'all call twats on anyone who disagrees with you. Like a baby.


And when in your 24 hours on this board did you reach that conclusion?


----------



## Jan Glepop (Jul 9, 2017)

Wilf said:


> And when in your 24 hours on this board did you reach that conclusion?


Very early on. Within the first hour.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2017)

Jan Glepop said:


> Very early on. Within the first hour.


Ah, right, must have also been when you heard about the 'legendary urban welcome'.


----------



## editor (Jul 9, 2017)

Jan Glepop said:


> You people. Y'all call twats on anyone who disagrees with you. Like a baby.


Bye.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 10, 2017)

Grenfell fire: Police say 255 people survived the blaze - BBC News



> The Metropolitan Police believe there were around 255 survivors from last's month fire at Grenfell Tower in London.





> Police say "extensive investigations" led them to conclude 350 people should have been in the Kensington tower block on the night of the blaze on 14 June.





> That night, 14 residents were not in the building, leaving at least 80 people dead or missing, the Met said.


(...)


> In the update on Monday, police said 32 bodies had been formally identified by the coroner.


(...)


> But Scotland Yard believes that about 10 people escaped the fire and are unwilling to come forward.




Grenfell Tower death toll will remain at about 80, police believe - Guardian



> The number of people who died in the Grenfell Tower fire will remain at about 80, police believe.





> Police said they were starting from the point that the 80 deaths resulted potentially from manslaughter. Assistant commissioner Martin Hewitt said: “This fire should not have happened and as a result of that fire a large number of people have lost their lives.”


(...)


> Police said a total of 73 people had been reported missing. Of these, experts have been able to positively identify 32 victims. But so great was the inferno that raged at 1000C that 41 people have not been identified so far.





> It is understood that families have been told that the remains of their loved ones were so badly damaged by fire that they it will not be possible to return them.





> Tonnes of debris often in tiny pieces are being gone through by hand to detect anything that may be human. Some of it is being passed through a sieve so as not to miss anything and dogs trained to sniff human remains are being used.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 10, 2017)

I thought it was going to take until the end of the year to search properly? Yet now it's a case of 'job done' in one month?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 10, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> I thought it was going to take until the end of the year to search properly? Yet now it's a case of 'job done' in one month?


Job done: but not properly


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 10, 2017)

I don't see this as anything more than an update on the current situation.


----------



## Cid (Jul 10, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> I thought it was going to take until the end of the year to search properly? Yet now it's a case of 'job done' in one month?



People have been asking for estimates on the number of dead since day one, surely all they're doing is providing that.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 10, 2017)

Cid said:


> People have been asking for estimates on the number of dead since day one, surely all they're doing is providing that.



Yeah, suppose so. Just seems very final considering. 

Also, the description of 'suicide' is boiling people's piss, I can see why. Being driven to jump because of an inferno, isn't really 'suicide' in the everyday sense of the word.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 10, 2017)

Rutita1 - sorry, but I've not seen 'suicide' mentioned anywhere, who's using this term?


----------



## Cid (Jul 10, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Yeah, suppose so. Just seems very final considering.
> 
> Also, the description of 'suicide' is boiling people's piss, I can see why. Being driven to jump because of an inferno, isn't really 'suicide' in the everyday sense of the word.



I don't see why it seems final... They've removed all identifiable remains, it makes sense to provide a clearer estimate at this stage.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 10, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Rutita1 - sorry, but I've not seen 'suicide' mentioned anywhere, who's using this term?



Another article that i've seen quoting those stats above also had how many people are believed to have jumped/committed suicide listed . Will see if I can find it.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 10, 2017)

Hi all,

The reason I started looking into this was because I was wary of what the authorites may or may not say re: the death toll. However, so far I have no reason to presume that the numbers presented by the police are spectacularly wrong - given that they broadly tally with othe ones we have collated.

There could be some (more) sub-letting going on but the make up of the people living there suggests that in my opinion, there probably wasn't much of it.

0 deaths from Floors 1-9.
4 dead/presumed dead, floors 10-13.
11 dead/presumed dead, floors 10- 16.
65 dead/presumed dead, floors 17-23.

We're missing any information for 12 flats, but 10 of those are from floors 1-9, where we have 0 deaths. The other two are on floors 14 and 15 and whilst it's possible people died in those flats and we simply don't know about it it would seem a little unlikely, at least at the moment.

Those living on the higher floors are (from what we know) largely families, some fairly sizeable (5, 6 and 7 people living in two bedroom flats in some instances), plus people living on their own (some for a long time in the building) or in couples. There would have to be some massive overcrowding and/lying going on for those numbers to jump significantly. And sure, that's possible but in my opinion not incredibly likely.

Edit:

Our list shows:

308 Total Occupants
232 Survivors
76 Dead/Presumed dead

Also 11 people who we are fairly sure live there (and survived), but have no flat or floor details for them. If they were correct it would bring the total occupants to 319 and total survived to 243.

All these figures are from media reports and in some cases reports via occupants of Grenfell.

Edit 2: I did ask a resident we were in contact with whether anyone she knew was aware of large numbers of people living in the same flat, to which she said they were not. Again, not proof, but worth mentioning.

Edit 3: I've found only one reported instance of someone actively staying in a flat when they weren't supposed to be. That was a bicycle delivery driver who'd had an accident and was out of work, and had no money due to loss of job. He was crashing on a friend's couch.


----------



## Cid (Jul 10, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> Hi all,
> 
> The reason I started looking into this was because I was wary of what the authorites may or may not say re: the death toll. However, so far I have no reason to presume that the numbers presented by the police are spectacularly wrong - given that they broadly tally with othe ones we have collated.
> 
> ...



Who's we?

Your numbers seem to tally broadly with the official ones though, which is at least somewhat reassuring.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 10, 2017)

The sorts of figures being suggested look credible to me.

Patterns of occupancy can vary enormously between different estates, even between different blocks on the same estate, so I don't think the kind of generalizations about subletting which have been waved about are very useful, even where they are not based on dubious assumptions about social housing and the communities which live in it, which also vary enormously. My own experience, for what little its worth, is that 'overoccupancy' is usually significantly balanced out by 'underoccupancy'.



Barking_Mad said:


> Edit 3: I've found only one reported instance of someone actively staying in a flat when they weren't supposed to be. That was a bicycle delivery driver who'd had an accident and was out of work, and had no money due to loss of job. He was crashing on a friend's couch.



Not sure what you mean by "when they weren't supposed to be". In itself what you describe wouldn't be a breach of a local authority secure tenancy unless the tenant issued them with a [ETA : rent book tenancy agreement]. [ETA: Unauthorised] Subletting is now a criminal offence, but secure tenants still have the right to take in lodgers without getting prior consent to do so, unless there are then so many occupants that statutory overcrowding rules apply. Although its normally specified in the tenancy agreement that you should notify the landlord or their agent about lodgers, failure to do so is only a minor breach.


----------



## patman post (Jul 10, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> The sorts of figures being suggested look credible to me.
> 
> Patterns of occupancy can vary enormously between different estates, even between different blocks on the same estate, so I don't think the kind of generalizations about subletting which have been waved about are very useful, even where they are not based on dubious assumptions about social housing and the communities which live in it, which also vary enormously. My own experience, for what little its worth, is that 'overoccupancy' is usually significantly balanced out by 'underoccupancy'.
> 
> ...


£700+ per month for room rentals is a good incentive for "social housing" tenants to ignore the restrictions. Not saying there were many such examples in Grenfell, but it may explain why some inhabitants haven't been reported as safe...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 10, 2017)

Cid said:


> Who's we?
> 
> Your numbers seem to tally broadly with the official ones though, which is at least somewhat reassuring.



Myself and a couple of other people who ended up working together on this by chance.


----------



## Nylock (Jul 10, 2017)

patman post said:


> £700+ per month for room rentals is a good incentive for "social housing" tenants to ignore the restrictions. Not saying there were many such examples in Grenfell, but it may explain why some inhabitants haven't been reported as safe...


Why the scare quotes around "social housing"?


----------



## patman post (Jul 10, 2017)

Nylock said:


> Why the scare quotes around "social housing"?


Why not? It's a catch-all phrase for subsidised housing made affordable for various groups...


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 10, 2017)




----------



## Nylock (Jul 10, 2017)

patman post said:


> Why not? It's a catch-all phrase for subsidised housing made affordable for various groups...


Then it does not need the scare quotes -unless your objective is to somehow cast doubt upon their status as social housing tenants (see, no use of scare quotes there). "Scare quoting" is almost universally used as a de-legitimising tool when attempting to "other" people in "debate" by claiming to air what "you" "perceive" to be the "commonly held viewpoint". Bonus points if you spot the scare quoting for quotations sake as opposed to, you know, "casting doubt"....


----------



## editor (Jul 11, 2017)

patman post said:


> Why not? It's a catch-all phrase for subsidised housing made affordable for various groups...


It's not subsidised, you idiot.

*Economic Myths: Social housing in the UK is subsidised by the taxpayer*



> Obviously, this is largely a function of higher rents – those who claim that social housing is "subsidised" because it charges lower than market rents often fail to point out the extra costs that would fall on the welfare budget if rents were raised to private market levels.
> 
> The "economic subsidy" of social rents is worth some £7bn annually. But this will fall gradually as the government's new affordable rents start to take effect, pushing up the cost of housing benefit support.
> 
> ...


----------



## patman post (Jul 11, 2017)

editor said:


> It's not subsidised, you idiot.
> 
> *Economic Myths: Social housing in the UK is subsidised by the taxpayer*


Why's everyone so confrontational on here?

Shelter's definition of social housing: _Social housing is let at low rents on a secure basis to those who are most in need or struggling with their housing costs. Normally councils and not-for-profit organisations (such as housing associations) are the ones to provide social housing.
Registered providers are financially regulated and funded by the government through the Homes and Communities Agency, which is responsible for the construction of new social homes. The government department currently responsible for overseeing the social housing sector is the Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG).
What is social housing? - Shelter England_


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

patman post said:


> Why's everyone so confrontational on here?
> 
> Shelter's definition of social housing: _Social housing is let at low rents on a secure basis to those who are most in need or struggling with their housing costs. Normally councils and not-for-profit organisations (such as housing associations) are the ones to provide social housing.
> Registered providers are financially regulated and funded by the government through the Homes and Communities Agency, which is responsible for the construction of new social homes. The government department currently responsible for overseeing the social housing sector is the Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG).
> What is social housing? - Shelter England_


Not seeing the s word there chuck


----------



## patman post (Jul 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Not seeing the s word there chuck


"_financially regulated and funded by the government"_
If funding building and keeping rents affordable isn't subsidising, what is? Where does the money come from? Nowhere did I claim any money came directly from the taxpayer...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

patman post said:


> "_financially regulated and funded by the government"_
> If funding building and keeping rents affordable isn't subsidising, what is? Where does the money come from? Nowhere did I claim any money came directly from the taxpayer...


Where does it say the government gives money to keep rents affordable?


----------



## editor (Jul 11, 2017)

patman post said:


> "_financially regulated and funded by the government"_
> If funding building and keeping rents affordable isn't subsidising, what is? Where does the money come from? Nowhere did I claim any money came directly from the taxpayer...


In your keenness to look down on people in social housing, you seem to have trouble understanding the difference between not for profit and subsidised.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 11, 2017)

patman post said:


> "_financially regulated and funded by the government"_
> If funding building and keeping rents affordable isn't subsidising, what is? Where does the money come from? Nowhere did I claim any money came directly from the taxpayer...



You're a clown, that needs to be fucked off this thread, just as the 911 loon was the other day.


----------



## editor (Jul 11, 2017)

And one more time for those slow on the uptake: 


> *Myth: **Public housing is subsidised*
> The vast majority of council homes were built decades ago, and the cost of building them has long since been recouped many times over by tenants paying rent to the council. There is no ‘subsidy’ – far from it, council housing is in fact a public asset that brings in more money for councils in rent than it costs in management and maintenance.
> 
> Until last year the government was also taking a slice of the surplus cash – £200 million a year. Now that has been scrapped, but what the government stopped taking with one hand it took with the other, by ending major repairs grants and pushing mostly-fictional ‘historic’ housing debt onto the councils.
> ...


----------



## squirrelp (Jul 11, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> You're a clown, that needs to be fucked off this thread, just as the 911 loon was the other day.


How about you rein in the personal abuse?

I have to say I don't find your posts terribly classy.


----------



## BigTom (Jul 11, 2017)

patman post said:


> "_financially regulated and funded by the government"_
> If funding building and keeping rents affordable isn't subsidising, what is? Where does the money come from? Nowhere did I claim any money came directly from the taxpayer...



Every year councils overall make a profit on the rents they charge for social housing. A small profit, just a couple of hundred million per year, but a profit nonetheless.
A subsidy involves money being given to a group.
Councils give central government the surplus generated from rents.
council house payments therefore subsidise central government, don't they?
But you are saying it's the other way round?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 11, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> How about you rein in the personal abuse?
> 
> I have to say I don't find your posts terribly classy.



Are you a mod? No, well fuck off, you offensive 911 loon.

ETA: Oh, look at the next post, the twat has reported me. This loon is upset because I pulled him up the other day for bringing 911 crap on to this thread, which got deleted, now he's decided to come after me, sad git.


----------



## squirrelp (Jul 11, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Are you a mod? No, well fuck off, you offensive 911 loon.


I have reported this post for abuse.

For someone who clearly has no obstacle to giving forthright advice, it's somewhat hypocritical for you to suggest only moderators may give it.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 11, 2017)

BigTom said:


> Every year councils overall make a profit on the rents they charge for social housing. A small profit, just a couple of hundred million per year, but a profit nonetheless.
> A subsidy involves money being given to a group.
> Councils give central government the surplus generated from rents.
> council house payments therefore subsidise central government, don't they?
> But you are saying it's the other way round?


And that 'profit' is arrived at after some Councils have increased the charges made to the Housing Revenue Account for back office functions - so that


> The net effect of the council-wide cut and increase in HRA contribution leaves housing budgets bearing a bigger burden of councils' central costs. In effect, local authorities are using social rents and housing benefit to keep corporate services ticking over in the aftermath of town hall austerity cuts.



From Raiders of the HRA - Inside Housing 7th July 2016 - Paywalled



Spoiler: Excerpt from the article



Raiders of the HRA

Insight 07/07/16 by Keith Cooper

An Inside Housing analysis has now for the first time discovered the extent of another incursion on council housing budgets, one for which Whitehall is not accountable - not directly, at least.

These cuts to housing resources have been made discreetly by councils and are seldom declared clearly in papers prepared for public consumption.

Our analysis of financial figures from 100 council landlords has found that many appear to be filling big gaps in back-office budgets, opened up by 'general fund' austerity cuts, with housing cash.

These raids are carried out on ringfenced HRAs with a legal accountancy trick.

The trick allows councils to use housing budgets to prop up the shrunken budgets for central functions, like finance and legal. These functions, dubbed 'corporate and democratic core services', are used by a range of council departments, from waste collection to social care. Each department, including housing, is expected to contribute towards these corporate costs.

Each year, however, every department's share can be tailored - cut or increased - based, in part, on its capacity to pay.

According to our analysis, the 100 councils' back-office budgets were cut by almost £90m between 2011/12 and 2014/15 - a reduction of 15%. But over the same period, HRAs' contribution to this cost was hiked by £1.7m - an increase of 4.6%.

More than half of councils (55%) raised the contribution to core services from the HRAs over these four years. Almost a third hiked them by more than 20%. Ten councils doubled their internal charges on the HRA.

Poole hiked the amount paid by its HRA for back-office costs by 1,590%, from £10,000 in 2011/12 to £169,000 last year. South Tyneside quadrupled its charge to the HRA from £222,000 in 2011/12 to £891,000 in 2014/15. Doncaster almost trebled the charge over the same period, from £244,000 to £712,000.

Over the same four years, just under half of authorities (45%) reduced these internal bills, in some cases significantly. Camden, Leeds and Babergh cut their internal charges respectively by £1.7m, £252,000 and £214,000, for instance.

But overall, the 100 council landlords raised the contribution of their HRA by 5% at the same time as slashing their council spending on these back-office costs by 15%.

The net effect of the council-wide cut and increase in HRA contribution leaves housing budgets bearing a bigger burden of councils' central costs. In effect, local authorities are using social rents and housing benefit to keep corporate services ticking over in the aftermath of town hall austerity cuts.

The analysis found that the housing budgets of big city councils, like Newcastle and Stockport, are hardest hit. While 13 metropolitan authorities reduced back-office costs by, on average, 15.9% between 2011/12 and 2014/15, they tapped their HRAs for an additional 20%. This pushed up the housing departments' share of the central cost by 42.6%.

London boroughs, in contrast to other councils, slimmed their HRA contribution by 7.7% on average but slashed central services budgets by 23.3%, more severely than any other council type. This pushed up housing departments' share of the back-office bill by 20.4%.

Smaller district authorities in England's shires increased central costs by 2.9%, boosting their housing share by 9%. Unitary authorities reduced central costs by 16%, increasing the HRAs' share by 27.1%.

The unsurprising result of these cuts and increases is that larger numbers of all kinds of councils now bill their HRAs for a disproportionate share of back-office costs.

District councils paid for the largest proportion of back-office costs from HRAs: 10.8% on average in 2014/15. This relatively larger proportion makes sense, as housing is one of the districts' only main functions. Unitary authorities, which run major departments like social care and education as well as housing, pulled under 4.4% of their back-office costs from their housing budget.

But our analysis found that the number of authorities billing their HRAs for 15% or more of these central costs rose from 17 in 2011/12 to 23 in 2014/15.

The most eye-catching example is the unitary authority, Reading. It billed its HRA for more than half of the £1.2m cost of its central services in 2014/15. The council declined to comment.

The housing budget of Islington, in London - another noteworthy case - was billed for 43.7% of the authority's back-office costs in 2014/15, up from 37.7% in 2011/12. The London average is 6.9%.

(...)

Some in the housing sector suggest it is logical that such a picture has emerged. The data consultancy Housemark has previously suggested that councils should "raid" their housing budgets to prop up council services (Inside Housing, 11 April 2014).

In its paper, Sense of purpose, Housemark argued that housing departments were not a "separate entity from the corporate authority" and that "it can and should support the 'centre' in terms of alleviating pressure on the general fund".

One organisation, which represents public sector finance experts, raises questions about the fairness of using social rents to plug gaps in back-office costs.

Ken Lee, chair of the housing panel at the Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accountancy, says our research proves once again that ringfences around HRAs are too weak.

"As social tenants tend to be the poorest and are a minority in society, is it right that they should be supporting the majority in the community?" he asks.

"We should be looking at strengthening that ringfence and bringing it up to date."

Increasing internal charges on the HRA for back-office costs is a way councils could keep their council tax rates "artificially low", he adds. "The rules aren't very strong, but they expect fair charging: that those that use the service should pay for the service."

Basing charges on the proportion of social tenants in an area - as Islington appears to have done - seems like an "arbitrary" method, Mr Lee suggests.

The vulnerability of HRA ringfences were previously subject to annual checks by district auditors, employed by the Audit Commission until it was abolished last year.

This role has now passed to private accountancy firms, appointed by each local authority. "District auditors were keen on checking this kind of thing when the Audit Commission was around," Mr Lee adds. "This role has now gone to private auditors. They have some recognition of this issue, but not the same recognition as the Audit Commission."

The general trend towards increasing the burden on HRAs for back-office costs, uncovered by this analysis, is not common to all councils, however.

Just over a quarter of councils (26) cut their housing budget share of central services between 2010/11 and 2014, some significantly so. Five reduced their HRAs' share by more than 10%.


----------



## squirrelp (Jul 11, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> ETA: Oh, look at the next post, the twat has reported me. This loon is upset because I pulled him up the other day for bringing 911 crap on to this thread, which got deleted, now he's decided to come after me, sad git.


Again, I suggest you rein in the personal abuse.

I have reported your subsequent editing of your post as a fresh post for personal abuse.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Again, I suggest you rein in the personal abuse.
> 
> I have reported your subsequent editing of your post as a fresh post for personal abuse.


the mods will love you


----------



## ska invita (Jul 11, 2017)

patman post said:


> Why's everyone so confrontational on here?


fuck off and get a life


----------



## squirrelp (Jul 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> the mods will love you


Maybe as much as you Mr model!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Maybe as much as you Mr model!


the mods' contempt for and hatred of fotlers and 'loons like yourself exceeds the derision in which i am held among them. please cease and desist from continuing this line of posting, this subject's far too serious for your fotler/'loon ways.


----------



## squirrelp (Jul 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> the mods' contempt for and hatred of fotlers and 'loons like yourself exceeds the derision in which i am held among them. please cease and desist from continuing this line of posting, this subject's far too serious for your fotler/'loon ways.


The line of posting I am pursuing is simply one of correctly dealing with personal abuse.

I suggest that you cease from joining in attempted bullying.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> The line of posting I am pursuing is simply one of framing and reporting personal abuse.
> 
> I suggest that you cease from joining in attempted bullying.


i didn't expect you to be so explicit about what you're trying to do.

i strongly suggest you stop now.


----------



## squirrelp (Jul 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> i didn't expect you to be so explicit about what you're trying to do.
> 
> stop now.


'framing' as in making explicit, obviously.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> 'framing' as in making explicit, obviously.


yeh right.


----------



## squirrelp (Jul 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh right.


I don't know what else you are suggesting. It would be pretty strange to suggest that the contents of CS's posts do not comprise personal abuse, and I can assure you that I did not post them myself.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 11, 2017)

If you haven't worked out that conspiracy bollox is widely held in contempt round here, now would be a good time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I don't know what else you are suggesting. It would be pretty strange to suggest that the contents of CS's posts do not comprise personal abuse, and I can assure you that I did not post them myself having logged into his/her account myself.


you are making yourself ridiculous. what you complain of as abuse (being called a twat) is nothing more than gentle mockery in urban terms. and you can't in all honesty deny you are a 'loon while you do come across as something of a twat. cease and desist from this line of posting - you may not give a flying fuck about the fire at grenfell tower, but so many other people do that this exchange, and your behaviour which prompted it, is unwelcome.


----------



## andysays (Jul 11, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I don't know what else you are suggesting. *It would be pretty strange to suggest that the contents of CS's posts do not comprise personal abuse*, and I can assure you that I did not post them myself.



And yet the mods seem strangely reluctant to take any action, despite your announcing that you've reported the posts in question.

This is in contrast to the promptness with which your WTC posts were removed from the thread yesterday when I reported them.

Draw your own conclusions...


----------



## squirrelp (Jul 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> you are making yourself ridiculous. what you complain of as abuse (being called a twat) is nothing more than gentle mockery in urban terms. and you can't in all honesty deny you are a 'loon while you do come across as something of a twat. cease and desist from this line of posting - you may not give a flying fuck about the fire at grenfell tower, but so many other people do that this exchange, and your behaviour which prompted it, is unwelcome.


You are prolonging this exchange, the matter was already dealt with. The contents of your post are too ridiculous to address.


----------



## Buckaroo (Jul 11, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> The contents of your post are too ridiculous to address.



This thread is about this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> You are prolonging this exchange, the matter was already dealt with. The contents of your post are too ridiculous to address.


if you think the fire - which killed at least 80 people -  too ridiculous to address, you should not only gtfo the thread but gtfo the boards.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 11, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I don't know what else you are suggesting. It would be pretty strange to suggest that the contents of CS's posts do not comprise personal abuse, and I can assure you that I did not post them myself.


Yes, they might have been abusive. And that would have, as teqniq points out, entirely in keeping with official board policy on conspiraloonery and 9/11 idiocy.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 11, 2017)

Buckaroo said:


> This thread is about this.


I am *so* tempted to 'shop a couple of airliners into that pic, only I think that our estimable mods might take an extremely dim view, not to mention quite a lot of Urban. Just let it be known I thought about it and decided against, discretion being the better part of valour


----------



## squirrelp (Jul 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> if you think the fire - which killed at least 80 people -  too ridiculous to address, you should not only gtfo the thread but gtfo the boards.




Of course, it is not Grenfell Tower that is 'too ridiculous' to address, it is your insinuation that I do not care about the subject or its victims or survivors.

I suggest that if you indeed wish to discuss Grenfell Tower (rather than defending the rights of posters to abuse others) that you return to precisely that topic as this exchange has become incredibly tedious.


----------



## squirrelp (Jul 11, 2017)

existentialist said:


> I am *so* tempted to 'shop a couple of airliners into that pic, only I think that our estimable mods might take an extremely dim view, not to mention quite a lot of Urban. Just let it be known I thought about it and decided against, discretion being the better part of valour


I have reported this post for repeating the proscribed topic.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 11, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> Of course, it is not Grenfell Tower that is 'too ridiculous' to address, it is your insinuation that I do not care about the subject or its victims or survivors.
> 
> I suggest that if you indeed wish to discuss Grenfell Tower (rather than defending the rights of posters to abuse others) that you return to precisely that topic as this exchange has become incredibly tedious.


Something I have noticed is that when you start to resort to this quasi-legalese posturing, it's usually a sign that you're on the back foot. I take this as an encouraging sign, in the context. Because attempting, even in the most oblique way, to link this to the canonical 9/11 bollocks is probably about No. 3 on the list of Most Insensitive Positions To Take On A Grenfell Thread. I shall leave it to those with more fecund imaginations than mine to conceive of #2 and #1.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 11, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I have reported this post for repeating the proscribed topic.


This will end well...


----------



## squirrelp (Jul 11, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Something I have noticed is that when you start to resort to this quasi-legalese posturing, it's usually a sign that you're on the back foot. I take this as an encouraging sign, in the context. Because attempting, even in the most oblique way, to link this to the canonical 9/11 bollocks is probably about No. 3 on the list of Most Insensitive Positions To Take On A Grenfell Thread. I shall leave it to those with more fecund imaginations than mine to conceive of #2 and #1.


It is not me that is continuing to introduce that topic here on this thread. I'm guessing you haven't been reading the thread properly.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 11, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> It is not me that is continuing to introduce that topic here on this thread. I'm guessing you haven't been reading the thread properly.


"continuing to introduce"?

Talk me through that one...though maybe on a different thread.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> How about you rein in the personal abuse?
> 
> I have to say I don't find your posts terribly classy.





squirrelp said:


> I have reported this post for abuse.
> 
> For someone who clearly has no obstacle to giving forthright advice, it's somewhat hypocritical for you to suggest only moderators may give it.





squirrelp said:


> Again, I suggest you rein in the personal abuse.
> 
> I have reported your subsequent editing of your post as a fresh post for personal abuse.





squirrelp said:


> Maybe as much as you Mr model!





squirrelp said:


> The line of posting I am pursuing is simply one of correctly dealing with personal abuse.
> 
> I suggest that you cease from joining in attempted bullying.





squirrelp said:


> 'framing' as in making explicit, obviously.





squirrelp said:


> I don't know what else you are suggesting. It would be pretty strange to suggest that the contents of CS's posts do not comprise personal abuse, and I can assure you that I did not post them myself.





squirrelp said:


> You are prolonging this exchange, the matter was already dealt with. The contents of your post are too ridiculous to address.





squirrelp said:


> Of course, it is not Grenfell Tower that is 'too ridiculous' to address, it is your insinuation that I do not care about the subject or its victims or survivors.
> 
> I suggest that if you indeed wish to discuss Grenfell Tower (rather than defending the rights of posters to abuse others) that you return to precisely that topic as this exchange has become incredibly tedious.





squirrelp said:


> I have reported this post for repeating the proscribed topic.





squirrelp said:


> It is not me that is continuing to introduce that topic here on this thread. I'm guessing you haven't been reading the thread properly.


yeh. please could you stop making this the squirrelp show and either leave the thread or post on topic. this isn't about you - despite your evident belief it is - it is about the dreadful fire and its aftermath.


----------



## squirrelp (Jul 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. please could you stop making this the squirrelp show and either leave the thread or post on topic. this isn't about you - despite your evident belief it is - it is about the dreadful fire and its aftermath.


With respect, I have done nothing here except stand up to abuse and against the baiting on a topic proscribed by the moderators. If you want to return to Grenfell Tower then you can and should do exactly that.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 11, 2017)

I deleted the posts to try to stop this thread being derailed by crap arguments. I think we can all agree that that's an appropriate goal (and if we can't, maybe there are better threads for you).


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Jul 12, 2017)

Worth tuning into lbc at the moment. James o'brien is broadcasting from Kensington and talking to people who volunteered and continue to do so in the aftermath of it. It still sounds chaotic and just complete abandonment from the local authority! I feel quite inspired and amazed by the things people have done off their own backs.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 12, 2017)

There were some very moving and informative interviews with survivors and residents on LBC all of this morning too. Worth going back for a listen.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 12, 2017)

The following debate follows PMQs today: 12/07/17
http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2017/july/mps-debate-grenfell-tower-fire-inquiry/


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 12, 2017)

Council leader 'never been in high-rise' before fire - BBC News

...._after ELEVEN years as a councillor for the area, she never once canvassed the residents in her borough who live in the council blocks._


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 12, 2017)

patman post said:


> Why not? It's a catch-all phrase for subsidised housing made affordable for various groups...



How is it "made affordable"?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 12, 2017)

patman post said:


> "_financially regulated and funded by the government"_
> If funding building and keeping rents affordable isn't subsidising, what is? Where does the money come from? Nowhere did I claim any money came directly from the taxpayer...



If you had half a wit, you'd know that funding from central government is derived from remittances from local authorities of rents and Council Tax.  In other words, no subsidy.  Rents in social housing aren't "kept affordable", they're affordable by virtue of the fact that most local authority social housing has paid for itself twice over, so there's no imperative to charge a so-called market rent.  Are all Tories as wilfully-ignorant as you?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 12, 2017)

some opportunist MP speculating on getting the carnival moved. Never let a tragedy go to waste eh.Typical.


----------



## BigTom (Jul 12, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> How is it "made affordable"?



If this was a sensible person with bad english skills I would suggest that they might mean "made" as in "built" or "designed", which is exactly what council housing was - housing built and designed to be affordable.
Of course that's not what was meant!


----------



## andysays (Jul 12, 2017)

This story is worth reading

Grenfell fire: 'I was too afraid because I'm undocumented'


> There have been persistent claims that the Grenfell Tower death toll is higher than official estimates because there were undocumented residents living there. One such woman explains why she is too afraid to come forward to the authorities.


----------



## Paul__Macca (Jul 13, 2017)

andysays said:


> This story is worth reading
> 
> Grenfell fire: 'I was too afraid because I'm undocumented'



So... you want illegal immigrants to be rehoused FOC from the crowdfund dough?


----------



## editor (Jul 13, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> So... you want illegal immigrants to be rehoused FOC from the crowdfund dough?


What do you want to do with the people who have lost family members, Paul?


----------



## Paul__Macca (Jul 13, 2017)

editor said:


> What do you want to do with the people who have lost family members, Paul?


I'd like to see the people who lived in Grenfell legitimately to be rehoused


----------



## editor (Jul 13, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> I'd like to see the people who lived there legitimately to be rehoused.


So what about those people who were subletting in (quite probably) shit conditions and who lost family members through this easily avoided disaster brought on by cost cutting politics? What about them? Where should they go?


----------



## maomao (Jul 13, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> So... you want illegal immigrants to be rehoused FOC from the crowdfund dough?


Not at all. I want the council to pay for the rehousing.


----------



## andysays (Jul 13, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> So... you want illegal immigrants to be rehoused FOC from the crowdfund dough?



I did't actually said that, did I, I simply suggested that story was worth reading (to illustrate the sort of reason why there may have been some unofficial/undocumented people living in Grenfell Tower).

But (unlike yourself it seems) I would have absolutely no problem with people like Rhea being helped in whatever way necessary, including being able to resolve her immigration status and being permanently rehoused if that's what she wants.


----------



## Pac man (Jul 13, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


> Hi all,
> 
> There could be some (more) sub-letting going on but the make up of the people living there suggests that in my opinion, there probably wasn't much of it.
> 
> ...


It would help if these figures were published, to quell the fears that there were hundreds more people that died.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 13, 2017)

Newsnight, 12/07/2017

_Four weeks after Grenfell, Newsnight finds the first evidence of cyanide poisoning among survivors. Plus why do so many not believe the official number of dead?_


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Jul 13, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Newsnight, 12/07/2017
> 
> _Four weeks after Grenfell, Newsnight finds the first evidence of cyanide poisoning among survivors. Plus why do so many not believe the official number of dead?_


I would sugggest that it is because the council continues to mishandle communication with the survivors and they are undeniably peeved about it, many have probably suspected they're viewed as nobodies for years but having it rubbed in your face is probably a bit galling.
There is absolutely no reason at all anyone would try and conceal the number of casualties, there isn't some magic number  over which the number of dead becomes more serious. It's OK only 80 poors have died so we can just forget it? but 200 will require someone to get a stern talking too?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 13, 2017)

It's worth a watch btw...it explores a lot of the evidence and rumours etc. Moving/interesting interviews with survivors, local residents and relatives also.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 13, 2017)

Lot of detail about the cyanide issue

Grenfell survivor was diagnosed with cyanide poisoning - BBC 

Back on the 23rd June Public Health England issued a press release attempting to reassure the public about the toxicity of the smoke from the fire



> Our advice is that the wider risk to people’s physical health as a result of the fire, beyond those directly affected, is low.


(...)


> We know that bound asbestos, contained in building materials such as plaster or fibre board, was present in Grenfell Tower in ceilings and header panels inside airing cupboards. It is possible that very small amounts of asbestos fibres will have been dispersed within the smoke plume but would have formed only a small fraction of the smoke and particles released in the fire; all smoke is toxic and any asbestos would present a minimal additional risk to health.





> Asbestos related diseases are typically associated with a long term workplace exposure to high levels of airborne asbestos fibres.



In a Guardian story yesterday about the search of the building


> Now 12 disaster identification officers are working with 24 search-trained officers and six archaeologists to sift through the estimated 15-and-a-half tonnes of rubble on each floor of the 24-storey tower block to find victims’ remains.





> They wear layers of protective clothing and respiratory equipment because of asbestos in the building as they carry out their meticulous search.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 13, 2017)

And in todays episode of "If only they'd given us clear guidance" :

Grenfell Tower: building control warned about refit insulation plan - Guardian



> Building safety experts had warned in 2014 that the insulation planned for use on Grenfell Tower – which was installed and which fuelled the fatal fire in June – should only be used with non-combustible cladding.





> The Guardian has seen a formal certificate issued by the building inspectors organisation, Local Authority Building Control, stating that the insulation chosen for the £10m tower refit was acceptable for use on tall buildings only if used with non-combustible cladding panels.





> But at Grenfell Tower combustible polyethylene filled panels were installed on top of synthetic insulation. The insulation, known as Celotex RS5000, was made from polyisocyanurate, which burns when exposed to heat and gives off toxic cyanide fumes.


(...)


> The experts’ certificate will increase concern over why the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea’s building control team certified the building work on Grenfell Tower as complying “with the relevant provisions”. There were 16 site visits by council building inspectors from August 2014 to July 2016.


(...)


> It has also emerged that a second combustible insulation material was used. Kingspan said one of its products was used “as part of a combination for which it was not designed and which Kingspan would never recommend”.





> It said the material, a phenolic insulation called Kooltherm, had never been tested with polyethylene core aluminium panels and that the company “would be very surprised if such a system ... would ever pass the appropriate British Standard 8414 large-scale test”.





> According to Kooltherm’s LABC certificate, phenolic products “do not meet the limited combustibility requirements” of building regulations guidance.


(...)


> The certificate is one of a series produced by LABC, a membership organisation for all building control departments in England and Wales. The certificates are developed by a system of peer review and are routinely used by building control officers to help them determine whether proposed systems meet building regulations.





> The certificate does not mean that building regulations can never be met using Celotex RS5000, but makes clear that testing to British Standard had been done in combination with specific non-combustible products.


----------



## Nylock (Jul 13, 2017)

editor said:


> So what about those people who were subletting in (quite probably) shit conditions and who lost family members through this easily avoided disaster brought on by cost cutting politics? What about them? Where should they go?


*Digs out right-wing-trope bingo card and awaits response*


----------



## Paul__Macca (Jul 14, 2017)

editor said:


> So what about those people who were subletting in (quite probably) shit conditions and who lost family members through this easily avoided disaster brought on by cost cutting politics? What about them? Where should they go?



That's a bunch of presumptuous nonsense. 



Nylock said:


> *Digs out right-wing-trope bingo card and awaits response*



Funny.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 14, 2017)

You know it's serious when American shareholder start lobbing lawsuits around:



> NEW YORK (Reuters) - A shareholder of Arconic Inc (ARNC.N) on Thursday filed a lawsuit accusing the company of defrauding shareholders over its supply of cladding panels used at Grenfell Tower, the London high-rise where at least 80 people died in a fire last month.
> 
> In his proposed class-action complaint, Michael Brave is seeking to recoup "significant" shareholder losses stemming from Arconic's failure prior to the June 14 blaze to properly disclose its use of "highly flammable" Reynobond PE panels [...]



Arconic sued in United States over fatal London tower fire


----------



## xenon (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> That's a bunch of presumptuous nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> Funny.




 What do you reckon should happen to the people that may have been subletting,  crashing on a couch? FOC  is irrelevant. They will still be paying rent, but are rehoused.


----------



## Paul__Macca (Jul 14, 2017)

xenon said:


> What do you reckon should happen to the people that may have been subletting,  crashing on a couch? FOC  is irrelevant. They will still be paying rent, but are rehoused.



Everyone should have a place to live. 

But whatever happened to paying for your keep? I'm hearing a lot about crashers, subletters, family, friends, visitors. I'm not hearing a lot about people losing everything they've worked for. 

You think that couch crashers deserve to be automatically given somewhere FOC to live because the last one they happened to be dossing in was razed?


----------



## editor (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> That's a bunch of presumptuous nonsense.
> Funny.


Are you going to answer the question or is it too difficult for you to give a straight answer?


----------



## editor (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> Everyone should have a place to live.
> 
> But whatever happened to paying for your keep? I'm hearing a lot about crashers, subletters, family, friends, visitors. I'm not hearing a lot about people losing everything they've worked for.
> 
> You think that couch crashers deserve to be automatically given somewhere FOC to live because the last one they happened to be dossing in was razed?


Who are these "couch crashers"? What evidence do you have that they were not paying rent? Please produce it. Thanks.


----------



## squirrelp (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> Everyone should have a place to live.
> 
> But whatever happened to paying for your keep? I'm hearing a lot about crashers, subletters, family, friends, visitors. I'm not hearing a lot about people losing everything they've worked for.
> 
> You think that couch crashers deserve to be automatically given somewhere FOC to live because the last one they happened to be dossing in was razed?


I think you already answered your own question.

_Everybody should have a place to live!_

We don't want homeless people. If that means they have to live somewhere basic free of charge or paid for so be it. If the place they are staying in burns down, then let's find them another one.


----------



## Paul__Macca (Jul 14, 2017)

editor said:


> Are you going to answer the question or is it too difficult for you to give a straight answer?


Which question? The one about subletters? Subletting is normally outlawed. And if you live in an outlawed society, you must accept cowboy rules. UNFORTUNATELY.


----------



## Paul__Macca (Jul 14, 2017)

editor said:


> Who are these "couch crashers"? What evidence do you have that they were not paying rent? Please produce it. Thanks.



I don't know. I was just responding to xenon. Crashers hadn't even entered my head until then.



xenon said:


> What do you reckon should happen to the people that may have been subletting,  *crashing on a couch? *FOC  is irrelevant. They will still be paying rent, but are rehoused.


----------



## Nylock (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> That's a bunch of presumptuous nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> Funny.


....and yet, here we are:


Paul__Macca said:


> Everyone should have a place to live.
> 
> But whatever happened to paying for your keep? I'm hearing a lot about crashers, subletters, family, friends, visitors. I'm not hearing a lot about people losing everything they've worked for.
> 
> You think that couch crashers deserve to be automatically given somewhere FOC to live because the last one they happened to be dossing in was razed?





Paul__Macca said:


> Which question? The one about subletters? Subletting is normally outlawed. And if you live in an outlawed society, you must accept cowboy rules. UNFORTUNATELY.


----------



## Paul__Macca (Jul 14, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I think you already answered your own question.
> 
> _Everybody should have a place to live!_
> 
> We don't want homeless people. If that means they have to live somewhere basic free of charge or paid for so be it. If the place they are staying in burns down, then let's find them another one.





Nylock said:


> ....and yet, here we are:


?


----------



## Paul__Macca (Jul 14, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> I think you already answered your own question.
> 
> _Everybody should have a place to live!_
> 
> We don't want homeless people. If that means they have to live somewhere basic free of charge or paid for so be it. If the place they are staying in burns down, then let's find them another one.


Yes, but Grenfell wasn't a homeless person's tower. You're asking for a solution to a different problem, squirrelp.


----------



## Weller (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> Yes, but Grenfell wasn't a homeless person's tower. You're asking for a solution to a different problem, squirrelp.


I am getting very confused by your posts and do not understand what a homeless persons tower is ? surely if there were homeless persons towers then there would be no homeless ?
I might be missing something though but luckily I have paid work not on a zero hours contract so I am able at the moment to afford a place without "Dossing" as you put it I would imagine that many do not have that option for many other reasons also
I cannot see why giving them a home to rent or funded until they can pay when they should have one anyway is a problem ?


----------



## Paul__Macca (Jul 14, 2017)

Weller said:


> I am getting very confused by your posts and do not understand what a homeless persons tower is ? surely if there were homeless persons towers then there would be no homeless ?
> I might be missing something though but luckily I have paid work not on a zero hours contract so I am able at the moment to afford a place without "Dossing" as you put it I would imagine that many do not have that option for many other reasons also
> I cannot see why giving them a home to rent when they should have one anyway is a problem ?



Your confusion is not my problem.


----------



## Weller (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> Your confusion is not my problem.


Is there anything besides your own problems that are


----------



## Paul__Macca (Jul 14, 2017)

Weller said:


> Is there anything besides your own problems that are



I don't know mate. I haven't disclosed any of my own problems, so you'll need to expand


----------



## Weller (Jul 14, 2017)

> Paul__Macca, I'm not hearing a lot about people losing everything they've worked for



Do you not think that some of the people "Dossing"  without paying their way as you put it might have been doing that there  because the above may have already happened to them before this fire
What is a "Homeless persons tower" was my confusion you obviously know what one is I do not


----------



## Paul__Macca (Jul 14, 2017)

.


----------



## Weller (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> Where is the evidence of this dossing


I think they plan to tell us in 12 months or so along with the details of those that were  [QUOTE="Paul__Macca "whatever happened to paying for your keep ?"[/QUOTE] perhaps


----------



## Paul__Macca (Jul 14, 2017)

Weller said:


> Do you not think that some of the people "Dossing"  without paying their way as you put it might have been doing that there  because the above may have already happened to them before this fire
> What is a "Homeless persons tower" was my confusion you obviously know what one is I do not


I don't really care. I'm a bit fed up hearing about people who need housing, education, food, a job, happiness and fulfilment without lifting a solitary finger. 
So to me...the "dossers" should get off their lazy arses and get a job to pay for their own room.


----------



## Paul__Macca (Jul 14, 2017)

Weller said:


> I think they plan to tell us in 12 months or so along with the details of those that were  [QUOTE="Paul__Macca "whatever happened to paying for your keep ?"


 perhaps [/QUOTE]
So were you dossing?


----------



## Weller (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> So were you dossing?



Ive used a bloke in the pubs couch in the past - not sure it was registered anywhere  though Id have used one of these "Homeless Peoples Towers" you mentioned  if you would tell me what one is its all I asked really


----------



## Weller (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> I don't really care. I'm a bit fed up hearing about people who need housing, education, food, a job, happiness and fulfilment without lifting a solitary finger.
> So to me...the "dossers" should get off their lazy arses and get a job to pay for their own room.


Shocked   you seemed to have so much empathy earlier
They could stay in  one of your "Homeless Peoples Towers" perhaps once they have a decent fully contracted job and can pay  2 months deposit


----------



## Paul__Macca (Jul 14, 2017)

Weller said:


> Ive used a bloke in the pubs couch in the past - not sure it was registered anywhere  though Id have used one of these "Homeless Peoples Towers" you mentioned  if you would tell me what one is its all I asked really


I mean like a YMCA or some other kind of temporary hostel. It's not difficult.


----------



## Weller (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> I mean like a YMCA or some other kind of temporary hostel. It's not  difficult.


It is


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> I haven't disclosed any of my own problems



You think you haven't but your posts are pretty transparent so far. It's not hard to see what you think some of your problems are. From where I'm sitting, one of them seems to be a lack of empathy, though even if you accept this is a problem, I'm sure you'll blame it on other people.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> I don't really care. I'm a bit fed up hearing about people who need housing, education, food, a job, happiness and fulfilment without lifting a solitary finger.
> So to me...the "dossers" should get off their lazy arses and get a job to pay for their own room.


A bit much when it's your hearing that's the problem


----------



## Libertad (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> I don't really care. I'm a bit fed up hearing about people who need housing, education, food, a job, happiness and fulfilment without lifting a solitary finger.
> So to me...the "dossers" should get off their lazy arses and get a job to pay for their own room.





Paul__Macca said:


> I don't know mate. I haven't disclosed any of my own problems, so you'll need to expand



Your main problem is that you're a cunt.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 14, 2017)

Libertad said:


> Your main problem is that you're a cunt.


Do you think that's his main problem, or just one of the subsidiary ones?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 14, 2017)

existentialist said:


> Do you think that's his main problem, or just one of the subsidiary ones?


His problems are legion


----------



## eatmorecheese (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> I don't really care. I'm a bit fed up hearing about people who need housing, education, food, a job, happiness and fulfilment without lifting a solitary finger.
> So to me...the "dossers" should get off their lazy arses and get a job to pay for their own room.


You're clearly struggling to keep a grip on the real world. Poverty doesn't leave much room for laziness.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> Which question? The one about subletters? Subletting is normally outlawed. And if you live in an outlawed society, you must accept cowboy rules. UNFORTUNATELY.



Go on any local authority website and you'll find that most local authorities have a subletting policy that *allows* subletting by local authority tenants *provided* you get permission from that local authority.  Perhaps a little more research, and a little less portentousness, Oswald?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> I mean like a YMCA or some other kind of temporary hostel. It's not difficult.



It's been difficult to get a bed in a YMCA for the last 30 years or so.  They're ridiculously over-subscribed, as is most temp. accommodation.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 14, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> His problems are legion



Oddly enough, legion's my middle name.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 14, 2017)

The Grenfell inquiry must look at the developers carving up our cities | Anna Minton
anna minton always worth reading


----------



## Nylock (Jul 14, 2017)

And still they keep on coming. I'll say this for you; you are certainly delivering on the bingo-card front atm:


Paul__Macca said:


> I don't really care. I'm a bit fed up hearing about people who need housing, education, food, a job, happiness and fulfilment without lifting a solitary finger.
> So to me...the "dossers" should get off their lazy arses and get a job to pay for their own room.





Paul__Macca said:


> I mean like a YMCA or some other kind of temporary hostel. It's not difficult.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 14, 2017)

Nylock said:


> And still they keep on coming. I'll say this for you; you are certainly delivering on the bingo-card front atm:


My magic marker burst into flames about 5 posts in...


----------



## Nylock (Jul 14, 2017)

existentialist said:


> My magic marker burst into flames about 5 posts in...


TBF I'd pre-emptively filled mine in before the replies started, and so-far he's on the money


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 14, 2017)

Paul__Macca said:


> I don't know mate. I haven't disclosed any of my own problems, so you'll need to expand


squeakyarsehole. Really not the thead for you is it?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jul 14, 2017)

Hooray! The first Grenfell related court case.

Oh...it's capitalists squabbling over the share price.

http://www.reuters.com/art…/us-arconic-lawsuit-idUSKBN19Y2U8


----------



## squirrelp (Jul 14, 2017)

Weller said:


> Do you not think that some of the people "Dossing"  without paying their way as you put it might have been doing that there  because the above may have already happened to them before this fire
> What is a "Homeless persons tower" was my confusion you obviously know what one is I do not


I was a bit puzzled by this too.


----------



## andysays (Jul 18, 2017)

Grenfell council gained £50m from affordable housing deals


> The council that ran the Grenfell Tower block struck deals worth nearly £50m last year to allow developers to avoid having to build affordable homes, research for BBC News shows. Kensington and Chelsea's own analysis shows it has built a fraction of the social housing the borough needs...





> ...The council's policy is for half of homes in large housing schemes to be available for rent or sale at below market rates. The official target is to build 200 affordable units - flats or houses - each year between 2011 and 2021. But the council's own figures show that since 2011-12, just 336 units have been built; in 2012-13, just four were completed. At the same time, Kensington and Chelsea struck deals with developers to pay it nearly £60m...



And I'll be willing to bet that K&C isn't alone among London (and probably other) councils in accepting what are, in effect, legalised bribes from developers to avoid including necessary social housing in new developments


----------



## teqniq (Jul 18, 2017)

Grenfell Tower residents in uproar over failure to distribute donations


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 19, 2017)

> The first full council meeting of Kensington and Chelsea is due to take place at 6.30pm on Wednesday 19th July. Please join our peaceful protest outside the Town Hall from 6pm.
> 
> We are outraged that the public and press were excluded from observing a meeting of the council cabinet at Kensington Town Hall on Thursday 29th June. The press only gained entry after a court order was issued against the council but the public were still shut out.
> 
> The council has assured the community that local residents will be allowed into the meeting. We will be at the council building to make sure this happens.


Protest at Kensington and Chelsea Town Hall – Wednesday 19th July from 6pm, called by Justice4Grenfell

I'm going to see if I can make it down for this.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 20, 2017)

Did you go? Lot of quite justifiably angry and upset people there in the vid and the reporting. This isn't just going to 'go away'. Nor should it.

Grenfell Tower residents call on new Kensington council leader to resign amid shouts of 'murderers'


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 20, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Did you go? Lot of quite justifiably angry and upset people there in the vid and the reporting. This isn't just going to 'go away'. Nor should it.
> 
> Grenfell Tower residents call on new Kensington council leader to resign amid shouts of 'murderers'


No, I couldn't make it down in time. I was just going to look for reports on how it went actually.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 20, 2017)

Dawn Foster did a good job last night.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 20, 2017)

'The newly elected deputy leader of Kensington and Chelsea council has promised that there'll be no Hillsborough-style cover-up of the Grenfell Tower disaster as all the relevant files are in police hands.'
Read more at Grenfell Tower: New council No.2 promises there'll be no Hillsborough-style cover-up


----------



## squirrelp (Jul 21, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> The newly elected deputy leader of Kensington and Chelsea council has promised that there'll be no Hillsborough-style cover-up of the Grenfell Tower disaster as all the relevant files are in police hands.
> Read more at Grenfell Tower: New council No.2 promises there'll be no Hillsborough-style cover-up


to be fair, this is twisting the context of the quote fairly sneakily.



> Sam put it to his interviewee that the council still has access to records and information, and could thus tamper with the details - as happened after the Hillsborough disaster in 1989.
> 
> But Taylor-Smith said this was impossible, telling our listeners "the police have secured all the files, they've taken copies of absolutely everything, so that has all been preserved and that is part and parcel, as it should be, of their investigation.


----------



## J Ed (Jul 21, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Dawn Foster did a good job last night.



Article which follows up on this Councillors fear abuse – Grenfell residents are used to it



> On Wednesday evening, I attended the first open council meeting of Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea council (RBKC) since the Grenfell Tower fire. The last meeting barred the public and, initially, the press until a court order demanded we be let in – then the meeting was adjourned due to our presence. On Wednesday, locals queued outside but were told there was limited space so most would be able to watch only by videolink. The journalists were patted down by security guards and had our bags searched before being allowed into the chamber.
> 
> A number of survivors were granted seats in the chamber. Part of the agenda was given over to hearing their testimony and that of their family members. The testimonies were harrowing, full of both insurmountable, open grief and uncontrollable anger at both the repeated refusal to listen to residents’ concerns before the blaze, and their shambolic and callous treatment since.
> 
> ...


----------



## J Ed (Jul 21, 2017)

I'm glad that Dawn Foster is doing this, it feels like most of the media have already moved on from Grenfell or at least moved on from covering what is happening to the residents.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 21, 2017)

squirrelp said:


> to be fair, this is twisting the context of the quote fairly sneakily.


Have amended my post to reflect the fact that it was a quote, not my own comment.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 22, 2017)

Notting Hill Carnival to pay tribute to Grenfell victims

Hope this comes together well.


----------



## oryx (Jul 23, 2017)

Went past Grenfell Tower today while travelling out of London on the M40.

Photos and footage I have seen online and on TV somehow don't give the full picture as you are distanced from it.

I'm not sure but I think it may be the worst thing I have ever seen in my whole life. 

I work in housing and have taken a keen interest in this thread and in the news about Grenfell Tower. I haven't had anything to add because anger and sympathy are taken as read.

The thing that angers me the most is how the residents' persistent complaints about fire safety and power surges were ignored. They were the ones living there day to day, they knew there were issues, they reported them time after time and yet this happened.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 23, 2017)

Came across this site:

https://www.grenfelltowerinquiry.org.uk/



> The next public consultation meeting on the terms of reference, for survivors and local residents, will be held at 6.30pm on Tuesday 25 July 2017 at the Notting Hill Methodist Church, 240 Lancaster Road, London W11 4AH.
> 
> This is the official website of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry. The site will be used to provide the latest information on the Inquiry, including details of hearings, evidence and how to contact the Inquiry Team.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 24, 2017)

https://grenfellresponse.org.uk/wp-...enfell-Response-NewsA4_Issue24_AW_low-res.pdf

Grenfell Fire Response News 22nd July 2017


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 25, 2017)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 25, 2017)

Barking_Mad said:


>


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jul 25, 2017)

A few other bits of information, some of which are in the tweet.

Our numbers are still slightly less than the official police ones in both deaths (75/80) and the total number of people recorded as living/present in the building at the time of the fire (316/355) IIRC.

There are 8 flats we have with no resident information for. These could be empty, but on the basis they have people living in them we can estimate another 25 people on those flats (we know all the bedroom sizes and can work this out from the other flats). We also have 8 two-bed flats with just one person living in each. This seems unlikely, but possible. However if we again use the numbers in other two bed flats we can estimate another 11 people living there.  This would bring a possible total number of people living/present at Grenfell to 352. Which by coincidence or otherwise is nearly the current police total. 

The flats with no information on them suggest there might be a higher death toll, but counter to this is the fact that 6 out of the 8 are below floor 10, and as far as we know everyone below floor 10 escaped with their lives. Of course there's the possibility they were empty at the time, or that people died, but the later seems in my opinion unlikely given the numbers and testimony about knocking on doors etc.

We haven't seen many solid examples of "undocumented migrants/illegal subletting" etc. taking place. There's certainly 2, two-bed flats with 6 and 7 people living in them, but they are all of the same family. We had to remove 3 people from the list as the guy turned out to be fraudulently claiming himself, his wife and son lived there - when they didn't).


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 25, 2017)




----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 25, 2017)

Grenfell fire: Judge in second meeting with angry survivors - BBC News

If only those poxy survivors would stop being so angry right?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 25, 2017)

Grenfell: TMO spent millions on management fees rather than refurbishment


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 26, 2017)

Architects for Social Housing have produced an excellent report on Grenfell Tower

The Truth about Grenfell Tower: A Report by Architects for Social Housing

1. Technical Causes of the Grenfell Tower Fire
2. Management Decisions responsible for the Grenfell Tower Fire
3. Political Context for the Grenfell Tower Fire
4. The Fire Safety of Council Tower Blocks
5. The Programme of Estate Regeneration
6. Accountability for the Grenfell Tower Fire

(also available as a PDF here).

Best attempt I've seen so far to look in detail at the specific issues raised by the fire, and then set them into a wider political context. It's particularly strong on how the 'regeneration' which rendered the building unsafe fits into the overall plans for social housing implemented by Councils of all political persuasions.


> The Grenfell Tower fire happened in a Conservative-run borough, but the series of management and political decisions that led to the fire – the indifference of the Tenant Management Organisation to residents, the contracting out of the refurbishment to a private company specialising in cost management, the cost cutting that led to flammable insulation material being used, the negligence that led to the use of a combustible cladding system that acted as a chimney for the fire, the ignoring of warnings by the London Fire Brigade and residents about inadequate fire safety in the block, and the financial motivations for the refurbishment itself – are being replicated across London.





> And although the Labour Party has sought to turn this disaster into a stick with which to beat the Conservative government, the estate regeneration programme that caused it is primarily being implemented in Labour boroughs, where more than 170 estates that we know of are under threat of privatisation, demolition and social cleansing by the regeneration schemes of Labour-run councils.



But even at the purely  'technical' level it's the first account I've seen which explains aspects of the cladding system relating to the windows in terms simple enough for me to grasp. 

And it contains a handy list of 60 people who they believe


> should be immediately arrested by the police and their records seized, investigated for their role in the Grenfell Tower fire, and where necessary put on trial in a criminal court


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 26, 2017)

Through the door this eve.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 26, 2017)




----------



## ddraig (Jul 27, 2017)

the (physical) covering up of Grenfell is apparently to help the forensic investigations
and tower meant to start being taken down in 2018

Work to start on covering Grenfell Tower - BBC News


> Grenfell Tower will be covered in a protective wrap to help with forensic investigations, the site manager has said


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 27, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> Architects for Social Housing have produced an excellent report on Grenfell Tower
> 
> The Truth about Grenfell Tower: A Report by Architects for Social Housing
> 
> ...


Thank you very much for this. I really urge anyone who has the time to put aside  a few hours and go through this, giving each section the attention it deserves. If you can't hack the technical stuff please give section 5 a go at least as it covers the wider battles to come and who we'll be fighting in great detail.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jul 27, 2017)

Edit: Nevermind


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 27, 2017)




----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 27, 2017)

Grenfell police have 'reasonable grounds' to suspect Kensington Council and TMO committed corporate manslaughter


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jul 27, 2017)

Long hot summer.


----------



## bi0boy (Jul 27, 2017)

Corporate manslaughter cases against state-owned organisations seem a bit pointless to me. Am waiting to see if they will charge any individuals.


----------



## A380 (Jul 27, 2017)

ITV showing a documentary about the LFB response.

It's on now ( Thursday evening).


----------



## Mr Retro (Jul 27, 2017)

A380 said:


> ITV showing a documentary about the LFB response.
> 
> It's on now ( Thursday evening).


Brave people those firefighters. Humbling.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 27, 2017)

These charges would be lesser then the ones faced by the handful of Hillsborough accused. And carry no risk of a sentence. Why are they saying this already?


----------



## teqniq (Jul 27, 2017)

limiting expectations?


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Jul 27, 2017)

Realistically, no one is going to be prosecuted for gross negligence manslaughter. It's a hard offence to prove even when someone has done something that (at the time) was obviously reckless.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Jul 28, 2017)

teqniq said:


> limiting expectations?


And limiting the scope of the investigation
 just heard a lawyer explain that this approach can only result in fines, not individual charges.


----------



## Crispy (Jul 28, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> Architects for Social Housing have produced an excellent report on Grenfell Tower
> 
> The Truth about Grenfell Tower: A Report by Architects for Social Housing



This really is superb.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 28, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> And limiting the scope of the investigation
> just heard a lawyer explain that this approach can only result in fines, not individual charges.



It can still result in individuals being charged, but very hard in large organisations because of the need to identify a "controlling mind", but I would be surprised if any individual in K&C council or the TMO are charged.

However, things could be different with the various contractors involved.



> In English law, proving corporate manslaughter and securing a conviction of an individual where the corporation involved is a small concern are easier where it is easier to identify a "controlling mind" (in _R v OLL Ltd_, 1994, about the Lyme Bay canoeing tragedy, managing director Peter Kite was convicted), but efforts to convict people in larger corporate entities tends to fail as the management structure is more diffuse making this identification more difficult. Instead, the prosecution stands more chance of pursuing a case successfully if it prosecutes simply on the grounds of a safety breach under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.
> 
> Corporate manslaughter in English law - Wikipedia


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 28, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> It can still result in individuals being charged, but very hard in large organisations because of the need to identify a "controlling mind", but I would be surprised if any individual in K&C council or the TMO are charged.
> 
> However, things could be different with the various contractors involved.


i wondered whether something like malfeasance in a publick office might work


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 28, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> It can still result in individuals being charged, but very hard in large organisations because of the need to identify a "controlling mind", but I would be surprised if any individual in K&C council or the TMO are charged.
> 
> However, things could be different with the various contractors involved.


I believe the 'controlling mind' nonsense is well gone.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 28, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> I believe the 'controlling mind' nonsense is well gone.



From my understanding the 'controlling mind' thing doesn't apply in respect of the new corporate manslaughter law applying to organisations, but the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act doesn't cover individuals.

Individuals can still be charged for gross negligence manslaughter, and that seems to require an element of 'controlling mind', in order to pin it on an individual.

Just found this link:



> *Gross negligence manslaughter *
> 
> The CMCHA does not say anything about individuals within corporations being liable.
> 
> ...


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 28, 2017)

The thing the met is talking about has no 'controlling mind' element.

GNM is what duckenfield is now charged with and what the met is not talking about  - it applies to individuals and so doesn't require a 'controlling mind' either.

My point above was that the met is talking up solely the first sort of charges. Almost as if this would be seen a public  victory and getting people behind it rather than talking about GNM. There's some expectation management and shaping  going on here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 28, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> The thing the met is talking about has no 'controlling mind' element.
> 
> GNM is what duckenfield is now charged with and what the met is not talking about  - it applies to individuals and so doesn't require a 'controlling mind' either.
> 
> My point above was that the met is talking up solely the first sort of charges. Almost as if this would be seen a public  victory and getting people behind it rather than talking about GNM. There's some expectation management and shaping  going on here.


so many of the people responsible for what happened are too posh to pull


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 28, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> so many of the people responsible for what happened are too posh to pull


Indeed - if you read the brilliant report that lurdan linked to you'll find many examples of this. For example:



> In the face of the mounting evidence of corruption at every level of involvement in the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower it is important to distinguish between individual and systemic corruption. As an example of the former, the blog of the Grenfell Action Group has revealed that Councillor Feilding-Mellen, in his capacity as Cabinet Member for Housing, Property and Regeneration, was ultimately responsible for Kensington and Chelsea council’s 2015 decision to lease North Kensington Library to Notting Hill Prep School, thereby taking it out of public control and use. However, at the time of this deal – which was strongly opposed by the local community – Feilding-Mellen had two children on the long waiting list for the £5,800-a-term private school, which as part of the deal was allowed to skip the first year’s rent of £365,000.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 28, 2017)

On the 6th July the DCLG ordered full fire safety tests on 6 different cladding designs. These were tests of complete cladding systems not individual components. On Wednesday night Newsnight reported the result of the first of these tests which had employed the same combination of materials as used on Grenfell Tower.


> It involved creating a test rig of panels with horizontal and vertical fire stopping, using PIR plastic foam insulation and aluminium panels with a combustible polyethylene plastic core.



This combination of materials completely failed the test.

Grenfell-style cladding design fails official fire test - BBC
(this includes a clip from the Newsnight report)

As was stated in the Newsnight report :


> The critical thing about this test is that it is a test on the choice of materials used in Grenfell, installed perfectly.
> 
> This isn’t about “maybe they messed up the installation”, “maybe they didn’t include fire breaks”.
> 
> They conducted a test with all of the fire breaks in place and it burnt. The whole test was an absolute failure.’



So even before any consideration of whether there were additional issues relating to poor construction, substitution of materials and so on, this combination should never have been used. Had they been given a full fire test before installation they would have failed.

However as the Times reported on July 22nd


> The cladding system used on Grenfell Tower was not subjected to a full fire safety test before being fixed to the wall, sources close to the building project have told The Times.
> 
> Instead of constructing a mock-up of the combination of materials and setting fire to it, it is understood that a “desktop study” was commissioned.





> Both methods are accepted “routes to compliance” with building regulations but while a full two-day test at a recognised fire safety facility costs about £35,000, the desktop exercise can be done for less than £5,000.



Today it's being reported that either 60 (BBC) or 70 (Guardian) tower blocks are known to have been clad in systems employing this combination of materials.

Grenfell Tower: Sixty blocks 'fail new fire test' - BBC



> It is thought nine blocks in Salford are the only local government-owned buildings to be affected so far.
> 
> Local Government Association chairman Lord Porter said housing associations and private sector landlords will be among those that own the 60 tower blocks which failed the new fire test.



And illustrating the new spirit of openness and transparency


> He added that intellectual property rights on the installation of cladding systems means the identification of tower blocks affected by fire safety issues may not be made public.



The DCLG are expected to issue a statement later today.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 28, 2017)

The BRE report on this first fire safety test has been put online by the DCLG. (PDF here) along with advice for building owners (PDF here). From the latter


> This wall system failed the test, which means it did not adequately resist the spread of fire over the wall to the standard required by the current Building Regulations guidance, and which is referred to in BR135. The Expert Panel’s advice is that, based on the test results, they do not believe any combination of these materials (ACM with unmodified polyethylene filler and foam insulation) would meet current Building Regulations guidance, and are not aware of any tests of such combinations meeting the performance criteria set out in BR135. This combination of materials therefore presents a significant fire hazard on buildings over 18m.



The fire test is intended to last 40 minutes but was terminated after 9 because the flames had already reached the top of the 9 metre test rig.

The accompanying press release states that 


> 82 buildings are currently known to have this combination of materials in their wall cladding systems - 47 of which are local authority or housing association owned or managed



This is just the first of six of these tests using different combinations of materials. It will be interesting to see which of the others pass - or not.

Another independent review of building regulations and fire safety has been announced. Led by Dame Judith Hackitt, former Chair of the HSE and currently Chair of EEF, the Manufacturers’ Organisation, it will look at current building regulations and fire safety with a particular focus on high rise residential buildings.

Tucked away at the bottom of the announcement of this review


> The government expects that building owners will fund measures designed to make a building fire safe, and will draw on their existing resources to do so. We will work with relevant bodies so current restrictions on the use of their financial resources do not prevent them from making essential fire safety upgrades to buildings.


So no offer of central government funds.


----------



## Wilf (Jul 28, 2017)

The FA have banned Joey Barton from playing in a charity game to raise funds for the victims of Grenfell, because it's an 'FA sanctioned game' (and he's on a ban)
Joey Barton hits out at FA after being banned from Game 4 Grenfell


----------



## Wookey (Jul 28, 2017)

So my mum lives in a housing association block with half of its cladding currently off, the other half on while they wait for government guidance. 

82 buildings have failed the fire test, and we're not allowed to know if hers is one of them because of intellectual property rights??! 

They aren't learning anywhere near fast enough that this kind of treatment is just unacceptable.


----------



## Nylock (Jul 29, 2017)

teqniq said:


> limiting expectations?


A warning shot maybe? 'This is the least that's going to come of this'...?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 29, 2017)

A warning to who though?


----------



## Nylock (Jul 30, 2017)

Had a few ciders when I wrote that. But I think my thought process went along the lines of 'maybe they've found evidence that at the least implicates several highups in corporate manslaughter and that some may seven end up doing serious time for this from either the LA or the contractors'. It's likely I'm wrong but was offering a drunk opinion...


----------



## Cid (Jul 30, 2017)

Nylock said:


> Had a few ciders when I wrote that. But I think my thought process went along the lines of 'maybe they've found evidence that at the least implicates several highups in corporate manslaughter and that some may seven end up doing serious time for this from either the LA or the contractors'. It's likely I'm wrong but was offering a drunk opinion...



Corporate manslaughter is only punishable with a fine.

It was a sop to assuage public opinion after the repeated failure of the gross negligence manslaughter laws. But the problem is still there.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 30, 2017)

Cid said:


> Corporate manslaughter is only punishable with a fine.
> 
> It was a sop to assuage public opinion after the repeated failure of the gross negligence manslaughter laws. But the problem is still there.


And any fine will come out of k&c's capacious reserves


----------



## Cid (Jul 30, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> And any fine will come out of k&c's capacious reserves



Yep, I believe the recommendation is a percentage of annual turnover, it's not going to be a problem for them. The key figures might have to resign, but they'll have no trouble finding places to go. Probably just do a bit of job swap with some untainted cronies.


----------



## Nylock (Jul 30, 2017)

Cid said:


> Corporate manslaughter is only punishable with a fine.
> 
> It was a sop to assuage public opinion after the repeated failure of the gross negligence manslaughter laws. But the problem is still there.


Yeah, i re-read that after I responded. That'll teach me to read to the end of the thread before replying and respond to a thread when sober...


----------



## spliff (Jul 30, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> And any fine will come out of k&c's capacious reserves


K&C's money is not _their_ money it's OURS. How capacious is it?
I get pissed off with government bodies particularly the Met Police paying out undisclosed sums for some wrong-doing on their part.
That's my fucking money you cunts, it was money for you to protect me not yourselves.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 30, 2017)

spliff said:


> K&C's money is not _their_ money it's OURS. How capacious is it?
> I get pissed off with government bodies particularly the Met Police paying out undisclosed sums for some wrong-doing on their part.
> That's my fucking money you cunts, it was money for you to protect me not yourselves.


Maybe so. But they have the money and it's in their reserves


----------



## maomao (Jul 30, 2017)

spliff said:


> K&C's money is not _their_ money it's OURS. How capacious is it?
> I get pissed off with government bodies particularly the Met Police paying out undisclosed sums for some wrong-doing on their part.
> That's my fucking money you cunts, it was money for you to protect me not yourselves.


Almost any other council or public organisation and I'd be in complete agreement. This is the council that's been chucking out CT rebates in the posh half of their borough to buy votes. Fuck 'em.


----------



## spliff (Jul 30, 2017)

maomao said:


> Almost any other council or public organisation and I'd be in complete agreement. This is the council that's been chucking out CT rebates in the posh half of their borough to buy votes. Fuck 'em.


I agree 100% , I'm not going to Wiki it but isn't this the borough that Lady Tesco got done and buggered off to Israel to avoid charges of gerrymandering?
Probably been addressed in post's #4 or #9 or something. However _spliffycomelately  _Got to get the oar in_._


----------



## andysays (Jul 30, 2017)

spliff said:


> I agree 100% , I'm not going to Wiki it but *isn't this the borough that Lady Tesco got done and buggered off to Israel to avoid charges of gerrymandering*?
> Probably been addressed in post's #4 or #9 or something. However _spliffycomelately  _Got to get the oar in_._



That was Westminister.


----------



## spliff (Jul 30, 2017)

andysays said:


> That was Westminister.


So it was, thank you.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 30, 2017)

maomao said:


> Almost any other council or public organisation and I'd be in complete agreement. This is the council that's been chucking out CT rebates in the posh half of their borough to buy votes. Fuck 'em.


Apparently to anyone paying council tax in full without ctb/lone person reduction, which would include a lot of people in social housing too, many leaseholders, etc. So not just the posh half of the borough. From where do you derive your claim?


----------



## GarveyLives (Jul 31, 2017)

*

Justice4Grenfell: Owning the rules of the game*​


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 31, 2017)

In a new blog post Grenfell Action Group question the relationship between the BRE (British Research Establishment), which is currently conducting the fire safety test on different cladding systems, and successive governments. They highlight the differences between BRE advice about the adequacy of current building regulations given to the Tory government following a scoping study in 2015, (seemingly a half hearted response to various fires in blocks with cladding systems), and that given to the Labour government in 1999. And they question the presence of the BRE's CEO Peter Bonfield and of Ken Knight, a trustee of BRE’s charitable parent company, the BRE Trust, on the governments advisory panel.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 1, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> In a new blog post Grenfell Action Group question the relationship between the BRE (British Research Establishment), which is currently conducting the fire safety test on different cladding systems, and successive governments. They highlight the differences between BRE advice about the adequacy of current building regulations given to the Tory government following a scoping study in 2015, (seemingly a half hearted response to various fires in blocks with cladding systems), and that given to the Labour government in 1999. And they question the presence of the BRE's CEO Peter Bonfield and of Ken Knight, a trustee of BRE’s charitable parent company, the BRE Trust, on the governments advisory panel.


BRE are complicit in a lot that's wrong with the UK building industry, along with those who privatised them.

To give an example, they sit on solar PV advisory bodies, wrote multiple aspects of industry guides that had to be followed, but when it came to installing a system on their own roof they proudly displayed pictures on their website showing the panels installed in completely the wrong way for the shading. At least they did until I pointed it out, at which point they took the huff and pulled the photos from their website.

They also fucked up their wind loading calcs for solar panels to such an extent that anyone in the industry who followed their (semi-mandatory) guidance was installing twice as many brackets in the middle of arrays than was necessary. That stood for about 12 years, until they revised them to something more sensible, but did it in such a way that you couldn't just do a side by side comparison to easily see how much they're previously fucked it up.

The SAP assessments they designed for solar were ridiculously inaccurate, their SAP calcs for building types were so bad that when solid wall insulation was being assessed for the Green Deal programme they ended up having to apply a correction factor of something like 0.66 to the savings because solid walls actually lost 1/3 less heat through them than their calcs showed they should do.

etc.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 1, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> In a new blog post Grenfell Action Group question the relationship between the BRE (British Research Establishment), which is currently conducting the fire safety test on different cladding systems, and successive governments. They highlight the differences between BRE advice about the adequacy of current building regulations given to the Tory government following a scoping study in 2015, (seemingly a half hearted response to various fires in blocks with cladding systems), and that given to the Labour government in 1999. And they question the presence of the BRE's CEO Peter Bonfield and of Ken Knight, a trustee of BRE’s charitable parent company, the BRE Trust, on the governments advisory panel.



Building Research Establishment, surely?


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 1, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Building Research Establishment, surely?


Yes it is - duh.

(Never entirely recovered from my 'Smash the tyranny of bourgeois proofreading' period  ).


----------



## ddraig (Aug 2, 2017)

Owners of empty properties in K&C 'accidentally' sent to press, including a fair few in ward of Grenfel tower

Grenfell: names of wealthy empty-home owners in borough revealed

Of course they are 'being done up' or 'not safe' so won't be any use to rehouse victims in desperate need


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 2, 2017)

And it's illegal to squat them. Government can show some foresight when the interests of the rich are involved.


----------



## Ptolemy (Aug 2, 2017)

I went to London yesterday and stayed in Hammersmith. Taking the Underground from St Pancras, I was stunned to look up partway through the journey and see the tower looming over the tracks. It looked surreal.

What's the latest news on the rehoused tenants?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 2, 2017)

Ptolemy said:


> I went to London yesterday and stayed in Hammersmith. Taking the Underground from St Pancras, I was stunned to look up partway through the journey and see the tower looming over the tracks. It looked surreal.
> 
> What's the latest news on the rehoused tenants?


And on those still awaiting rehousing...


----------



## Ptolemy (Aug 2, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> And on those still awaiting rehousing...



I should have guessed...


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 2, 2017)

Different landlords who have installed cladding combinations similar to that which facilitated the fire spread at Grenfell Tower are reacting in different ways.

Genesis Housing Association manages two new partially clad blocks at Pitsea near Basildon.

‘We are not removing flammable cladding’ - Harwich and Manningtree Standard


> Genesis bosses found that the flammable cladding in the top blocks of the tower failed the new tests put in place by the government - but said they were waiting for further Government guidance.





> A spokesperson for Genesis would only say: “Genesis has taken all appropriate actions recommended by ministers and the fire brigade.





> “This includes placing 24-hour Fire Monitors on-site to patrol and reassure residents, made sure that all relevant fire risk assessments are up to date and all fire precautions are in place and are functioning effectively.”



Genesis are famously
The housing association that will no longer build homes for the poor - The Guardian (2015)

Genesis claimed their decision to focus on shared ownership and "affordable" housing developments had been "forced" on them by government policies. But as that Guardian story points out Genesis had funded some of the research which influenced those policies.

For example this Policy Exchange report Freeing Housing Associations (PDF) which they co-sponsored and which recommended a grant-free regime for Housing associations


> 1. Allowing them to sell off expensive social homes in order to build a greater number of new affordable homes without having to get permission from the Homes and Communities Agency.





> 2. Extending the Help to Buy scheme for new homes beyond 2020 for housing associations to allow them to build more market homes for sale. Profits could be used to cross subsidise affordable homes.





> 3. Allowing them to set their own rent policy. Instead of having a number of different rents for similar properties inhabited by similar households, as dictated by government, grant-free associations could set a single rationalised rentor cheaper rents to reward good tenant behaviour.



As the reports author stated :


> “Housing associations want to make an even bigger contribution than they do now - with more affordable and market homes - but they cannot. We need to free them up to do it. As well as releasing them from the antiquated regulatory constraints, this means stopping local authorities from dumping the most anti-social tenants on housing associations and giving them freedom to set their own rents.”


from New ‘Free housing associations’ could build 100,000 new homes a year - on the Genesis web site

Why don't Genesis wish to spend money on removing the cladding from the blocks in Pitsea without clear instructions from the government ? Perhaps they prefer to spend their money influencing what those instructions should be.

In other places landlords are acting differently. For example, not long after the fire at Grenfell Tower it was reported that "similar" cladding had been found on an block in Hackney.

Cladding similar to Grenfell Tower found on Woodberry Down estate block - Hackney Citizen

Woodberry Down is a very large "regeneration" project on a former Council estate.


> By 2031, around 2,000 council or former council homes will have been demolished and replaced with more than 5,500 units on the estate: some social housing; some for “key workers”, the euphemism now used for low-paid public servants, and the majority to be sold on the open market. The flagship private block in Woodberry Down, looking on to a lovely reservoir, has been sold largely to foreign investors, with one flat going for a million pounds (tell a Londoner that flats in Manor House are going for a million quid and see how low their jaw drops).



from The truth about gentrification: regeneration or con trick? - The Guardian (2014) (well worth reading)

At this Woodberry Down block with similar cladding


> "(...) developer Berkeley Homes and Genesis Housing Association are working “swiftly” to remove the cladding straight away as a precaution."



Yes that's the same Genesis Housing Association that needs government instructions before it will remove the cladding from the buildings at Pitsea.

Perhaps if those Pitsea buildings were part of an ongoing cash cow development they would feel 'empowered' to take an initiative.


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 3, 2017)

The DCLG has announced the results of the second of the fire safety tests of cladding systems using different materials. (Press release here)


> This test was of a wall cladding system consisting of Aluminium Composite Material (ACM) cladding with a polyethylene filler (category 3) with stone wool insulation.


So the same ACM panels as at Grenfell Tower but with a fire resistant form of insulation.

This combination also failed.

The BRE report has not yet been published but new advice for building owners has been (PDF here)

According to this


> The Expert Panel’s advice is that, based on the test result, they do not believe that any wall system containing an ACM category 3 cladding panel, even when combined with limited combustibility insulation material, would meet current Building Regulations guidance, and are not aware of any tests of such combinations meeting the standard set by BR135. Wall systems with these materials therefore present a significant fire hazard on buildings over 18m.


So use of the kind of ACM panels used at Grenfell Tower on buildings over 18m high does not comply with Building Regulations regardless of what other materials they are combined with.

It brings to mind the comment about combustible cladding panels quoted by Architects for Social Housing in their report on Grenfell Tower :


> You might as well clad the building in ten-pound notes dipped in Napalm.



According to the DCLG press release


> 111 buildings are currently known to have this combination of materials in their wall cladding systems – 90 of which are local authority or housing association owned or managed.


The Guardian say that according to the Local Government Association a third of the 111 are council owned.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Aug 3, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> And on those still awaiting rehousing...


Are there any waiting to be rehoused??? If anyone is still bedding down in the leisure centre six weeks after the fire someone's arse needs kicking badly, this is the UK not Uganda.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 3, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Are there any waiting to be rehoused??? If anyone is still bedding down in the leisure centre six weeks after the fire someone's arse needs kicking badly, this is the UK not Uganda.


yeh there are: Two thirds of Grenfell Tower residents still in emergency accommodation


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Aug 3, 2017)

It would be interesting to see why so many offers have been rejected, Grenfell Tower doesn't strike me  as the peak of sophisticated living. There might be the odd person who is clinging to the hope that somehow they might get a flat in Canary Wharf but if most prefer to doss on the floor of a leisure centre then what they have been offered must be even worse than some of the places I lived in as a student.


----------



## Plumdaff (Aug 3, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> ... even worse than some of the places I lived in as a student.



plus miles away I'd imagine.


----------



## 19force8 (Aug 3, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> It would be interesting to see why so many offers have been rejected, Grenfell Tower doesn't strike me  as the peak of sophisticated living. There might be the odd person who is clinging to the hope that somehow they might get a flat in Canary Wharf but if most prefer to doss on the floor of a leisure centre then what they have been offered must be even worse than some of the places I lived in as a student.


I don't think it's the quality of the alternative that's the main stumbling block, though I can understand why anyone would refuse some of the vermin infested flats served up as emergency accommodation.

Rather people are reluctant to be relocated away from friends, family, work and support. There might also be a feeling that if they are dispersed it will be easier for the authorities to side step their way out of this. While public transport in London is way better than the rest of the country the time and costs involved aren't trivial if you're on a low income. So better to stay put and keep up the pressure on K&CBC and the Tories.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 5, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> So use of the kind of ACM panels used at Grenfell Tower on buildings over 18m high does not comply with Building Regulations regardless of what other materials they are combined with.



You would think this is what the statement means on first reading, but on more careful reading and investigation it's clear that actually it doesn't mean that.

It references building regulations guidance, and BR135, which is also stated as being guidance. ie it's not a regulatory requirement to meet BR135, so cladding systems using this cladding could well both be meeting current building regulations, and not meeting the associated BR135 guidance.

There is a clear regulatory failure here that the establishment are attempting to airbrush out of the picture and make out that it's all the fault of these companies that have been fitting this cladding, whereas the regulatory authorities could and should have amended the actual regulations when this issue first became apparent in the 90s to prevent this from happening entirely.

Not that the combination of cladding & insulation used at Grenfell was building regs compliant, but the cladding used with rockwool would have been even if they're now saying that it doesn't meet BR135 guidance.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Aug 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> It would be interesting to see why so many offers have been rejected, Grenfell Tower doesn't strike me  as the peak of sophisticated living. There might be the odd person who is clinging to the hope that somehow they might get a flat in Canary Wharf but if most prefer to doss on the floor of a leisure centre then what they have been offered must be even worse than some of the places I lived in as a student.


Take your snotty assumptions and do one. What a nasty, sneerie piece of work. You lived in some dodgy student accommodation in your time, so what? These people have lost everything, some of them family members. Don't you dare judge them by the lack of actual 'struggle' in your own life experiences. Nasty, demonising assumptions. Victim blaming and misrepresentation. Scum.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> It would be interesting to see why so many offers have been rejected, Grenfell Tower doesn't strike me  as the peak of sophisticated living. There might be the odd person who is clinging to the hope that somehow they might get a flat in Canary Wharf but if most prefer to doss on the floor of a leisure centre then what they have been offered must be even worse than some of the places I lived in as a student.


How many offers have been rejected?


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Aug 6, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> How many offers have been rejected?


It was in the article you posted #4177 
175 offers  have been made out of which 48 have been accepted and only 13 have been rehoused 
There were 120 flats so I'm assuming the council counts each flat as an household and makes a offer to an household, it is possible that if one flat was grossly overcrowded the council may make 2 offers to 1 household though that implies more forethought than they have demonstrated so far.
There's no explanation of why the offer was rejected though, too small, too poor a condition, too far etc.
Either way the success rate is very poor and I would be genuinely interested in why


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Aug 6, 2017)

Rutita1 please check the instructions on the side of the package I suspect you may be exceeding the recommended dose.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Aug 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Rutita1 please check the instructions on the side of the package I suspect you may be exceeding the recommended dose.



They don't like it up them do they? 
You dish it out but can't take it.
Now somehow because I have rightly called you out I must be on medication?
Keep digging. Scum.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Aug 6, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> They don't like it up them do they?
> You dish it out but can't take it.
> Now somehow because I have rightly called you out I must be on medication?
> Keep digging. Scum.


My apologies, I thought that hurling angry abuse at anonymous strangers wasn't normal behaviour but perhaps I have indeed led too sheltered a life and I  am wrong 
PS and I mean this in a totally non confrontational way but I think you forgot to press the Caps Lock key?


----------



## existentialist (Aug 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> My apologies, I thought that hurling angry abuse at anonymous strangers wasn't normal behaviour but perhaps I have indeed led too sheltered a life and I  am wrong
> PS and I mean this in a totally non confrontational way but I think you forgot to press the Caps Lock key?


Ooh. This should be good.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> It was in the article you posted #4177
> 175 offers  have been made out of which 48 have been accepted and only 13 have been rehoused
> There were 120 flats so I'm assuming the council counts each flat as an household and makes a offer to an household, it is possible that if one flat was grossly overcrowded the council may make 2 offers to 1 household though that implies more forethought than they have demonstrated so far.
> There's no explanation of why the offer was rejected though, too small, too poor a condition, too far etc.
> Either way the success rate is very poor and I would be genuinely interested in why


Yeh. Perhaps you could post again on this subject when you need not rely on assumptions.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> My apologies, I thought that hurling angry abuse at anonymous strangers wasn't normal behaviour but perhaps I have indeed led too sheltered a life and I  am wrong
> PS and I mean this in a totally non confrontational way but I think you forgot to press the Caps Lock key?


Have you only recently taken over the bbl a/c?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Rutita1 please check the instructions on the side of the package I suspect you may be exceeding the recommended dose.



Try to not be a cunt, eh?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> It was in the article you posted #4177
> 175 offers  have been made out of which 48 have been accepted and only 13 have been rehoused
> There were 120 flats so I'm assuming the council counts each flat as an household and makes a offer to an household, it is possible that if one flat was grossly overcrowded the council may make 2 offers to 1 household though that implies more forethought than they have demonstrated so far.
> There's no explanation of why the offer was rejected though, too small, too poor a condition, too far etc.
> Either way the success rate is very poor and I would be genuinely interested in why



120 2-bed flats, I believe.
Grenfell was 3 and (IIRC) 1-bed flats, so very obviously for many households those flats offered would be too small, and for the households in 1-bed flats, the jump in rent from 1-bed to 2-bed, plus new-build having water meters, would mean (going on my own London local authority's set-up) a jump of about 35-40% above what they were previously paying.
Occam's Razor.


----------



## marty21 (Aug 6, 2017)

Lurdan said:


> Different landlords who have installed cladding combinations similar to that which facilitated the fire spread at Grenfell Tower are reacting in different ways.
> 
> Genesis Housing Association manages two new partially clad blocks at Pitsea near Basildon.
> 
> ...


I worked for Genesis in the 90s/00s, when it was known as Paddington Churches Housing Association , I think they went corporate in around 2004? It was a more caring Social Housing Landlord 20 years ago ,sad to see what it has become .


----------



## Treacle Toes (Aug 8, 2017)

Have noticed a lot of stuff going up online in 'dedication/homage' recently...this one via Lowkey has it's moments, stick with it.


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 9, 2017)

The results of the third fire safety test commissioned by the DCLG have been published.


> This third test was of a wall cladding system consisting of Aluminium Composite Material (ACM) cladding with a fire retardant polyethylene filler (category 2 in screening tests) with PIR foam insulation.



So ACM panels with a less combustible core than at Grenfell combined with the same kind of insulation as used there.

This combination also failed. 

Full BRE report (PDF here) and DVLG advice to building owners (PDF here). (The BRE report from the second test is also now online - PDF here).

The combinations of materials used in the first two tests failed 

because flames spread up above the full height of the 9 metre test rig well before the 40 minutes allowed. (In just 9 minutes in the first test, 7 minutes in the second).
because the heat of the fire reached above the prescribed limits.
In this third test the temperature of the fire didn't rise above the limits and fire spread took longer. But the flames still reached above the height of the test rig in 25 minutes rather than 40.

According to the DCLG press release


> There are up to 13 buildings over 18 metres tall in England known to have a combination of ACM with a fire retardant polyethylene filler with PIR foam insulation.



An additional seventh test has been commissioned by the DCLG 


> testing ACM with a fire retardant polyethylene filler (category 2 in screening tests) with phenolic foam insulation.


This may be addressing the concerns that had been raised that the programme of tests didn't deal with the fact that two different types of insulation were discovered to have been used at Grenfell Tower.


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 12, 2017)

Fourth DCLG commissioned fire safety test and finally they find a combination of materials which passes.


> This fourth test was of a wall cladding system consisting of Aluminium Composite Material (ACM) cladding with a fire resistant polyethylene filler (category 2 in screening tests) and stone wool insulation (a form of mineral wool). This combination of materials has passed the test.



Press release here, BRE report (PDF here), DCLG guidance to building owners (PDF here).


----------



## Beats & Pieces (Aug 13, 2017)

Rutita1 said:


> Have noticed a lot of stuff going up online in 'dedication/homage' recently...this one via Lowkey has it's moments, stick with it.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 13, 2017)

Beats & Pieces said:


>



What's that about, arsehole? Why don't you just fuck off.


----------



## Nylock (Aug 14, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> PS and I mean this in a totally non confrontational way but I think you forgot to press the Caps Lock key?


"What a totally non-confrontational way to end a post" no-one said upon reading that. If you're going to try wind someone up at least be a bit more opaque about it or give up now.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Aug 14, 2017)

Nylock said:


> "What a totally non-confrontational way to end a post" no-one said upon reading that. If you're going to try wind someone up at least be a bit more opaque about it or give up now.


I can't tell from this whether you are complementing me or insulting me Kudos I doff my hat to you sir.


----------



## GarveyLives (Aug 17, 2017)

​


----------



## GarveyLives (Aug 21, 2017)

​


----------



## editor (Sep 5, 2017)

Fuck's sake: 



> A woman who falsely claimed her husband died in the Grenfell Tower fire, claiming £10,000 in funds allocated for survivors, has appeared in court.
> Joyce Msokeri, 46, of Ambleside Gardens, Sutton, south London, is charged with seven counts of fraud.
> It is alleged she also falsely claimed to have a child in intensive care following the blaze.
> Westminster Magistrates' Court heard Ms Msokeri made substantial claims on the basis she was a survivor of the fire.
> ...



Grenfell Tower support fraud: Woman charged - BBC News


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2017)

Grenfell Tower: 'Twenty suicide attempts' since fire - BBC News

the survivors are being failed yet again, not only with the lack of suitable accommodation offers, but in terms of the support anyone going through trauma would require.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 115121
> Grenfell Tower: 'Twenty suicide attempts' since fire - BBC News
> 
> the survivors are being failed yet again, not only with the lack of suitable accommodation offers, but in terms of the support anyone going through trauma would require.



Trauma support is useless across the board. Try finding support for acute PTSD attacks; if you can't afford to pay through the nose then specialist therapy is basically out of the question. You might get a CBT course administered by some teenager who has done a two day course.

About the only trauma sufferers we look after are those who volunteered to be traumatised by joining the army.


----------



## Miss-Shelf (Sep 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 115121
> Grenfell Tower: 'Twenty suicide attempts' since fire - BBC News
> 
> the survivors are being failed yet again, not only with the lack of suitable accommodation offers, but in terms of the support anyone going through trauma would require.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 5, 2017)

Posts 4203 & 4204 are both shocking.


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 5, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Trauma support is useless across the board. Try finding support for acute PTSD attacks; if you can't afford to pay through the nose then specialist therapy is basically out of the question. You might get a CBT course administered by some teenager who has done a two day course.
> 
> About the only trauma sufferers we look after are those who volunteered to be traumatised by joining the army.



I largely agree with your post but I do want to say that CBT with an accredited practitioner is, along with EMDR, the most effective treatment for PTSD. CBT is often much maligned when the problem is often more availability, access (not least the fact that generic services are awful at recognising trauma) and not least, the fact that anyone can say they offer CBT. I wouldn't want someone to not try help that is well proven because of the ongoing tragedy that is mental health provision in this country.


----------



## agricola (Sep 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 115121
> Grenfell Tower: 'Twenty suicide attempts' since fire - BBC News
> 
> the survivors are being failed yet again, not only with the lack of suitable accommodation offers, but in terms of the support anyone going through trauma would require.





> Deputy leader Kim Taylor-Smith said the council was "committed to supporting those affected by this tragedy".
> 
> He said support included proactive work within the community and schools, a 24-hour NHS helpline and emotional support services provided by local community groups along with the Samaritans.



Are RBKC actually doing anything to support those affected by this tragedy?  Of their own list, the NHS are doing the helpline and the emotional support services are provided by community groups and the Samaritans.  

That just leaves the proactive work within the community, which could easily be proactive in the sense that they know they aren't wanted and so don't go there.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2017)

agricola said:


> Are RBKC actually doing anything to support those affected by this tragedy?


tbh their action has been more obvious in its absence than anything else. useless bunch of cunts.


----------



## agricola (Sep 13, 2017)

I am not sure that anything about this horror should, or even can, shock anyone any more - but still:



> The chief executive of the organisation that managed Grenfell Tower is still being paid his full salary despite resigning from the top job in the wake of the blaze that claimed at least 80 lives, the Guardian understands.
> 
> Robert Black remains on the books of the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation and is believed to be receiving a six-figure salary while he helps the organisation respond to multiple investigations.
> 
> ...


----------



## ddraig (Sep 14, 2017)

Inquiry statement live


----------



## not a trot (Sep 14, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Inquiry statement live




He could have saved time by just announcing it's going to be one big fucking whitewash.


----------



## Chilli.s (Sep 14, 2017)

not a trot said:


> He could have saved time by just announcing it's going to be one big fucking whitewash.


And take ages.


----------



## salem (Sep 28, 2017)

The 21st floor - BBC News

This is one of those long form BBC pieces which are usually really well done, it's quite odd in a way seeing these lovely bright photos of peoples homes. I'm only part way through but it's a difficult but important piece and certainly adds a lot of colour to my understanding of the night.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 28, 2017)

Kensington and Chelsea council has just terminated its contract with Grenfell Tower's landlord


----------



## teqniq (Oct 18, 2017)

The Met Police has blocked the release of key Grenfell fire documents



> The Metropolitan Police has advised Kensington and Chelsea Council (RBKC) to block the release of correspondence that would shed light on what action was taken to mitigate fire risks at Grenfell Tower, _The Independent_ can reveal.
> 
> Officers are vetting requests for information on the council’s response after it was warned by London Fire Brigade about the potential risks of cladding at Grenfell and other buildings.
> 
> ...


----------



## teqniq (Oct 19, 2017)

Theresa May confirms she won't give money to fit tower blocks with sprinklers

Plenty of money to waste on consultants hired to provide advice on privatising an NHS staffing agency. An attempt which failed but still cost us £3 million quid, and yet they have no money for sprinklers. I am sure other examples of hypocrisy abound.


----------



## editor (Nov 13, 2017)

Fucking Tory scum 







Kensington Tories just surveyed residents to see if they'd stopped caring about Grenfell yet | Evolve Politics


----------



## BigTom (Nov 16, 2017)

Grenfell Tower final death toll 71

Police say they've identified everyone who has died - 71 people


----------



## A380 (Nov 17, 2017)

editor said:


> Fucking Tory scum
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Don’t they have any grown ups left who could tell them what an obscene idea this is?


----------



## likesfish (Nov 17, 2017)

people screaming about hundreds of missing dead claimed their were 547 households in grenfill towers even though theres only 120 flats.
 As if 71 one dead hundreds traumatised wasn't bad enough


----------



## oryx (Nov 24, 2017)

An interesting piece from the BBC about a Grenfell resident and local blogger who raised his concerns about fire safety before the disaster happened.

Why no-one heard the Grenfell blogger's warnings

I think the title of the piece is debatable, though - it blames the decline of local papers and traditional local journalism. I think there's a lot more to it than that, i.e. the residents concerns were not taken seriously regardless of how they were or were not flagged up.


----------



## teqniq (Dec 7, 2017)

Petition: Call on PM to take action to build public trust in the Grenfell Tower Inquiry


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Petition: Call on PM to take action to build public trust in the Grenfell Tower Inquiry


She couldn't build a lego house let alone public confidence


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 7, 2017)

oryx said:


> I think the title of the piece is debatable, though - it blames the decline of local papers and traditional local journalism. I think there's a lot more to it than that, i.e. the residents concerns were not taken seriously regardless of how they were or were not flagged up.



If anything the quality of that Grenfell blogger's work is far better than you'd expect in a local paper. And there's nothing in it that the people in charge shouldn't have already known at the time the revelant decisions were being made.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 7, 2017)

oryx said:


> An interesting piece from the BBC about a Grenfell resident and local blogger who raised his concerns about fire safety before the disaster happened.
> 
> Why no-one heard the Grenfell blogger's warnings
> 
> I think the title of the piece is debatable, though - it blames the decline of local papers and traditional local journalism. I think there's a lot more to it than that, i.e. the residents concerns were not taken seriously regardless of how they were or were not flagged up.





SpookyFrank said:


> If anything the quality of that Grenfell blogger's work is far better than you'd expect in a local paper. And there's nothing in it that the people in charge shouldn't have already known at the time the revelant decisions were being made.



I think it is fair comment to put a degree of blame on the decline of local papers, they have seriously gone downhill in the last 10-20 years, before that, when they were rooted in their communities, well resourced & had decent circulations they were very good at holding councils to account, councils feared them, and they were handy for running or supporting important local campaigns.

Over 20 years ago as Chairman of an action group campaigning to save a playing field from becoming a multi-storey car-park, we would never have won our battle without the two local papers getting behind our campaign. One of those papers (a decent freebie getting into 95%+ of homes) has since closed and the circulation of the other paid-for one has nosedived, getting into under 20% of homes rather than 60-65%, it would be fairly ineffective now compared with back in the day. 

I've spent most my working life in local radio, newspapers & magazines, and was proud how they were an important part of the communities that they served well, sadly the big groups moved in, and the rot set in, I was lucky to escape that sector some years ago. 

What pisses me off, is how the big three groups have cut-back so much, that somehow they have managed to get the BBC to fund them to take on extra reporters, yeah, as bonkers as it sounds the TV licence fee is being used to fund local newspaper reporters, mainly for the big three groups.


----------



## mhendo (Dec 10, 2017)

BigTom said:


> Grenfell Tower final death toll 71
> 
> Police say they've identified everyone who has died - 71 people


I want to ask a question about the upcoming memorial service (this Thursday), and this thread seemed like it might be a good place to do it.

The service is going to be broadcast on the BBC, and I was wondering if any Urbanites might have the technological capability to record it and convert the video to a file that could be uploaded and shared on the web. 

I understand that this officially constitutes copyright infringement, and is often frowned upon, but I'm asking because the last two victims of the fire, including the woman pictured in *BigTom*'s linked article, were my aunt and my cousin, Victoria King and Alexandra Atala. My mother (Vicky's sister) lives in Australia, and she can't be there for the service, but she would really like to have a copy of it to watch, and I don't think they're going to show it on Aussie television. I'm in the US, and I don't think they'll show it here either.

If this were likely to be a really popular show, I would just wait for it to air and then go searching the internet in the sort of places where pirated TV shows are shared online. But I wonder whether this would be something that people are likely to upload? Anyway, if anyone has any suggestions about how I could get a copy for my mum, that would be great.


----------



## teqniq (Dec 10, 2017)

Commiserations. 

I'm sure there'll be someone who can sort it but if not a quick google...

Top 5 Ways to Record BBC iPlayer Stream on Windows/Mac


----------



## agricola (Dec 10, 2017)

mhendo said:


> I want to ask a question about the upcoming memorial service (this Thursday), and this thread seemed like it might be a good place to do it.
> 
> The service is going to be broadcast on the BBC, and I was wondering if any Urbanites might have the technological capability to record it and convert the video to a file that could be uploaded and shared on the web.
> 
> ...



Have you tried the media team phone number on the memorial service link?  I can't believe they (or the BBC) wouldn't sent a copy of the service out to your mum in the circumstances.


----------



## mhendo (Dec 10, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Commiserations.


Thanks. I hadn't actually seen my aunt or cousin for almost 30 years, so for me it's not really a loss, in the sort of personal sense that you often associate with family. I remember them, but it was so long ago that I don't really have that sort of connection. It's different for mum, though. Vicky was her sister, and they grew up together.





teqniq said:


> I'm sure there'll be someone who can sort it but if not a quick google...
> 
> Top 5 Ways to Record BBC iPlayer Stream on Windows/Mac


Thanks. 

There's no way my mother is technologically savvy enough to do it, but I might be able to work it out. Even though I'm outside the UK, I can get iPlayer shows through my DNS Unlocator subscription, so I'll give it a go.


agricola said:


> Have you tried the media team phone number on the memorial service link?  I can't believe they (or the BBC) wouldn't sent a copy of the service out to your mum in the circumstances.


That's definitely worth a shot. I'll check it out.

For what it's worth, my mother has nothing but praise for the people she's been in contact with regarding this whole thing. From the moment she got in touch with the authorities in London, they've kept her informed of everything they've been doing to track down her sister and neice, and confirm the deaths. She got regular phone calls and email updates, and they even organized for the Australian Federal Police to come to mum's house and collect a DNA sample for comparison. I know that there has been a lot of criticize in the political handling of so many things related to this disaster, but mum's experiences with the police and other officials has been fantastic from start to finish, she says.


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 11, 2017)

On the front of today's times:

 
Apparently using a phrase such as 'blood on their hands' is extremism, and best not to consider class being an issue in these avoidable deaths. Worse than ISIS.

They've been doing a lot of this red scare stuff lately. Rupert must be worried.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 11, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> On the front of today's times:
> 
> View attachment 122712



OK first two points are pretty vague but as far as I've seen there are all sorts of groups fundraising and organising on this issue, it would be some kind of miracle if some weirdos weren't involved in a few of them. It's not that hard to do five minutes' research to make sure the group you're supporting or working with is legit, vouched for by people you trust etc. 

Point three is just nothing. The council clearly does have blood on it's hands, being a union officer is a far more respectable position than being a murdoch hack, and John McDonnell is a front bench politician not some danerous fringe lunatic.

Point four is classic pot-kettle-black stuff. Unlike Mr Putin, Rupert Murdoch has for years openly boasted about his ability to control the British government.


----------



## bimble (Dec 11, 2017)

Some of this stuff was evident the day of the demonstration a few days after the fire, people with megaphones fighting to push their narrative onto what had just happened, including various religious zealots etc. Maybe good to avoid anything that this woman is organising. Antisemitic outbursts of prominent Grenfell aid organiser


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 11, 2017)

bimble said:


> Some of this stuff was evident the day of the demonstration a few days after the fire, people with megaphones fighting to push their narrative onto what had just happened, including various religious zealots etc. Maybe good to avoid anything that this woman is organising. Antisemitic outbursts of prominent Grenfell aid organiser


"Holohoax" 

Fucking hell.


----------



## MrSki (Dec 12, 2017)




----------



## elbows (Dec 18, 2017)

I'm not exactly surprised that the interim report found shocking practices and plenty of room for deadly shortcuts in the building & fire regs.

Building safety 'cuts corners' says review


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2018)

Residents of tower with Grenfell-style cladding told they must foot £2m bill


----------



## agricola (Jan 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Residents of tower with Grenfell-style cladding told they must foot £2m bill



That will probably keep lawyers going for years, though I'd be amazed if its the leaseholders who have to stump up money to the landlord at the end of it - after all its not a repair to the building, it is the building being defective by design (the cladding seems to have been on there since it was built).   You would also think that the leaseholders have a good case against the freeholder as well, given the danger they have been exposed to.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2018)

agricola said:


> That will probably keep lawyers going for years, though I'd be amazed if its the leaseholders who have to stump up money to the landlord at the end of it - after all its not a repair to the building, it is the building being defective by design (the cladding seems to have been on there since it was built).   You would also think that the leaseholders have a good case against the freeholder as well, given the danger they have been exposed to.


Yeh, you'd think so


----------



## RainbowTown (Jan 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Residents of tower with Grenfell-style cladding told they must foot £2m bill



An absolute stomach churning kick in the gut for these residents. It almost borders on a sick joke. Except, of course, it isn't.

Hopefully, there will be such outrage against this that the appropriate authorities will come to their senses.

 As if these people haven't been through enough already.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jan 17, 2018)

Poor first paragraph in that article. It's the leaseholders not the residents who'll be asked to foot the bill. Some of the leaseholders will be residents, of course, but I'd guess at least half of the flats in that building are owned by buy-to-let investors.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2018)

Casual Observer said:


> Poor first paragraph in that article. It's the leaseholders not the residents who'll be asked to foot the bill. Some of the leaseholders will be residents, of course, but I'd guess at least half of the flats in that building are owned by buy-to-let investors.


yeh, it's the guardian.


----------



## agricola (Jan 17, 2018)

Casual Observer said:


> Poor first paragraph in that article. It's the leaseholders not the residents who'll be asked to foot the bill. Some of the leaseholders will be residents, of course, but I'd guess at least half of the flats in that building are owned by buy-to-let investors.



True, though if they did get stung with a £31,300 bill then you can bet that is going to get passed on to the people renting the flat in one way or another.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jan 17, 2018)

Fire brigades are now carrying out far more safety audits and issuing far more enforcement notices than they were pre-Grenfell. Previously, if the fire brigade deemed a building to be a safety risk, the building's freeholder was given a reasonable amount of time to arrange the necessary repairs without the need for wardens.

I'm slightly baffled by the need for wardens in this instance. Wardens don't put out fires themselves, they patrol the building and, if they discover a fire, alert the fire brigade and bang on residents' doors to get them out of the building. In other words, wardens do the job that a good fire alarm system would do. This looks like a modern building so I'm surprised it doesn't have a modern alarm system.

This looks like a freeholder cock-up to me as a) the building wasn't safe when it should have been and b) the enforcement notice could have been legally challenged before wardens were employed  - the freeholder doesn't seem to have done this.

Good luck to the flat owners (even the buy-to-let ones). They'll probably have to stump up for the repairs but should have a good chance of avoiding the wardens cost which should come out of the freeholder's pocket.

EDIT: I've sobered up. Fuck the buy-to-let shits.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh, it's the guardian.


And your poor proofreading.


----------



## gosub (Feb 1, 2018)

MPs set to leave Houses of Parliament for £3.5bn restoration


what odds there are still tower blocks that haven't had their cladding sorted by the time the Parliamentary referb is completed?


----------



## gosub (Feb 15, 2018)




----------



## Dogsauce (Feb 16, 2018)

Drove past it again today. Can't believe they've still not covered it up yet, it's such a desperately miserable sight. Just can't imagine what it must be like for families affected to have to see this day in day out, this charred stump of a building.  Gives me a lump in the throat every time and I've no connection, the mental harm to those directly involved must be huge.

For some reason it gets to me more at night, the surrounding blocks have lights on, but this one stands dark.


----------



## GarveyLives (Mar 4, 2018)

​


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Residents of tower with Grenfell-style cladding told they must foot £2m bill





agricola said:


> That will probably keep lawyers going for years, though I'd be amazed if its the leaseholders who have to stump up money to the landlord at the end of it - after all its not a repair to the building, it is the building being defective by design (the cladding seems to have been on there since it was built).   You would also think that the leaseholders have a good case against the freeholder as well, given the danger they have been exposed to.



Tribunal rules against the leaseholders 
Tower residents told to pay £500,000 to replace Grenfell-style cladding


----------



## agricola (Mar 13, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Tribunal rules against the leaseholders
> Tower residents told to pay £500,000 to replace Grenfell-style cladding





Not a surprise, but that is a ludicrous decision.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 13, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Tribunal rules against the leaseholders
> Tower residents told to pay £500,000 to replace Grenfell-style cladding


----------



## oryx (Mar 13, 2018)

It's an awful, awful situation for them. They either stuff themselves financially or live with the possibility that there may be another cladding-related fire disaster.

I would also imagine that even if some of them wanted to go ahead, there would need to be consensus from all of them and that ain't gonna happen.


----------



## agricola (Mar 13, 2018)

oryx said:


> It's an awful, awful situation for them. They either stuff themselves financially or live with the possibility that there may be another cladding-related fire disaster.
> 
> I would also imagine that even if some of them wanted to go ahead, there would need to be consensus from all of them and that ain't gonna happen.



The truly mad thing is that, God forbid another cladding-related fire disaster happened, the leaseholders would be the only people who didn't bear responsibility for it.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 15, 2018)

Report of a Sky News interview with one of the Grenfell firemen who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Grenfell firefighter's guilt over not being able to save more people

Some of the points made (the inadequacy of breathing equipment that only lasts for 25-30 minutes when you have to climb 23 floors, whether the stay put policy should have been changed earlier, the radio failures, and whether the resulting communication problems affected decision making) have been raised in the past but it's still a sobering read. 

Obviously whatever the fire brigade could have done better doesn't deflect fundamental blame away from the building management regime and the set of decisions and actions by the parties involved with the refurbishment which fatally compromised fire safety. Rather it highlights their consequences.



Spoiler: Text of article



A firefighter who spent the night battling the blaze at Grenfell Tower last June speaks to Sky News Correspondent Charlotte Lomas on the condition of anonymity about what happened.

Eerily quiet.

That was the scene I encountered when I was sent into the blazing inferno of the Grenfell Tower fire.

Outside it had been loud and chaotic like a war zone, but inside it was quiet.

And the reason soon became apparent - our radios weren't working and we had lost all communication.

It felt like we were very much alone.

We couldn't radio back to let our crews know where we were, what we were doing, if we had done the job we had been sent up there to do.

So if any of us were in trouble, we had no way of communicating that back.

We couldn't see much. Everywhere we went it was filled with smoke - you couldn't even see your hand in front of your face.

Everything about our training is teamwork and communications.

We talk to each other, we talk to the outside, communications between the control staff, the people calling 999.

If we haven't got radio communications then it's all guesswork and that's what a lot of our work was that night.

I think there would have been a higher chance of getting more people out alive if the radios had worked properly.

It was the biggest failure of the night as far as the London Fire Brigade was concerned.

No one could talk to anyone outside.

Imagine a firefighter going up to a certain floor in Grenfell Tower and telling someone to stay put because that's what they've been told to tell them and not realising the outside of the building was now fully engulfed in flames.

And that's what firefighters have to live with now because no one could tell them inside the building that there was a raging inferno outside.

I know that firefighters would have made a decision to get more people out of that building if they knew what was happening on the outside of that building.

What makes me angry is the fact that we all know how useless our radio communication system is. And despite all the advanced communications systems these days, that we are not given the best equipment to save people's lives is frustrating.

We're there to save people's lives and we should be given the best equipment.

The 'stay put' policy was brought in due to the safety of flats in tower blocks.

It's a policy that I've worked to for many years.

I've been to tower block fires where we've been into a flat with a raging fire and it's never breached outside of that particular flat. But this was a new thing for us.

We were unprepared for it.

Looking back, I do think there was a stage in that night that the 'stay put' policy should have been changed.

I don't think it was done early enough.

I don't know if it would have caused some kind of stampede on the stairwell, I don't know if it would have saved more lives or killed more people, I really don't know.

But I just believe from what I saw on the outside of that building it was quite apparent quite early on that these people should have been given a chance to get out.

It was clear this was no ordinary fire.

A normal fire in a block of flats will stay in one flat, that's what the tower blocks are designed for.

But it somehow got outside of the flat onto the outside of the building.

It was like nothing I've ever seen, it's hard to describe it in words.

It went so quickly from a tiny fire on the outside and fizzed up, down, sideways, just around that building.

I remember saying at the time to a friend, it looked like someone had poured petrol down the side of the building and it was just following the route of the petrol.

We carry standard duration breathing apparatus which gives about 25-30 minutes of air depending on how hard you are working inside the building.

So you can imagine sending someone up that stairwell up to the 21st/22nd/23rd floor, by the time they get up there they haven't got much time at all before they've got to come back down again.

It soon became apparent during the night that sending us in with standard durations instead of extended duration apparatus was literally suicide.

We were going in there, doing two minutes of work and then having to run out again.

I know a few firefighters whose air ran out who came down - we call that stage 'sucking on plastic'.

On top of that, most of the ladders were too short.

Someone in their wisdom decided that long ladders weren't needed at these high rise incidents.

The Fire Brigade have since said that those ladders wouldn't have made a difference that night.

But they've also decided to bring them back so now those ladders go to emergency call outs on high-rises, so read into that what you will.

I can't definitively say it would have made a difference, but a ladder carries a monitor which can put a hell of a lot more water on the fire then what we can with just a hose.

There's a chance it could've controlled it. There is a chance if it was there right from the start it might have kept it to the lower floors.

It would have been above the floor of the fire so it would have been raining down water onto the fire. It was such a quick, severe, rapid spread.

We're never going to know if it would have made a difference, but it definitely wouldn't have made things worse.

We soon realised the cladding on the outside of the building was not only flammable but it was waterproof.

The water was literally bouncing off the cladding.

We would try to get at angles to try and get inside it.

At certain stages - I can't explain it - the water was hitting the fire and seemed to be pushing it out somewhere else.

We couldn't stop it, we'd never seen anything like it.

We've never had any sort of training for this sort of stuff and the fact that this cladding is on so many buildings around this country, surely firefighters should know about it?

Surely if it is allowed on, some sort of training should be given to us to at least prepare us for this sort of fire?

The tower was literally crumbling apart.

I can only describe it again as like a war zone out there.

We were falling into craters, and things were exploding above our head and we were using riot shields to protect people going in and out of the building.

Nothing can prepare you for what happened that night.

When we came out we just sat there, looking up out the building, trying to recover.

I looked around and all I could see was the shocked faces of the firefighters, it was horrible.

It was like a numbness, and we were all wide-eyed and in shock.

I've been into fires in tower blocks since and, I'm not going to lie, it's always at the back of my mind and it will be at the back of my mind for the rest of my career.

And I might make different decisions than I would have before 14th June.

I'm a completely changed man. I live with it day to day and there's not a day goes past that I don't think about it. And it's really tough.

There's still so much guilt that we had to leave 71 people in there.

In response to this article, the Head of Grenfell Tower Investigation and Review Team, Deputy Assistant Commissioner Andy Bell said: "It's essential that we understand what happened on the night of the Grenfell Tower fire.

"Not only do those who lost loved ones and their homes deserve to know exactly what happened, but we all need to learn about the cause and response to the fire to prevent such an incident ever happening again.

"Firefighters will give evidence properly later this year as part of the Public Inquiry and every aspect of the Brigade's response is part of the ongoing police investigation.


----------



## 19force8 (Mar 15, 2018)

oryx said:


> It's an awful, awful situation for them. They either stuff themselves financially or live with the possibility that there may be another cladding-related fire disaster.
> 
> I would also imagine that even if some of them wanted to go ahead, there would need to be consensus from all of them and that ain't gonna happen.


I don't think it works that way. If the Mgt Co decides to go ahead the leaseholders are liable for the costs.


----------



## 19force8 (Mar 15, 2018)

Lurdan said:


> Report of a Sky News interview with one of the Grenfell firemen who spoke on condition of anonymity.
> 
> Grenfell firefighter's guilt over not being able to save more people


This is also worth listening to:

BBC Radio 4 - Woman's Hour, Forgotten female composers, Women and Grenfell, The lies parents tell


----------



## ddraig (Apr 5, 2018)

depressing reading

Grenfell cladding failed to meet standard



> Fire tests carried out as early as 2014 showed cladding used on Grenfell Tower failed to meet the safety standards originally claimed by its manufacturer, a BBC investigation has found.
> 
> The firm Arconic knew the test rating had been downgraded, but the UK body that certifies building products said it was not told about the change.
> 
> ...


----------



## agricola (May 8, 2018)

Hard to even come up with the words to describe this, if its true:

Grenfell Tower: fire-resistant cladding plan was dropped



> A costed proposal to fit Grenfell Tower with panels that did not burn was dropped amid pressure from the Conservative council to slash the cost of the refurbishment, the Guardian has been told.
> 
> A cladding company which fits nonflammable aluminium panels claimed it provided a £3.3m quote to fit its system to the 24-storey tower in west London at the request of Leadbitter, Kensington and Chelsea’s preferred contractor in 2013.
> 
> ...


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2018)

agricola said:


> Hard to even come up with the words to describe this, if its true:
> 
> Grenfell Tower: fire-resistant cladding plan was dropped


Au contraire, very easy to find words for it but they all seem too weak


----------



## salem (May 8, 2018)

Are they saying that they changed the plan to cut costs and were so incompetent that they ended up paying more for an inferior product? 

How on earth is that possible?


----------



## teuchter (May 8, 2018)

agricola said:


> Hard to even come up with the words to describe this, if its true:
> 
> Grenfell Tower: fire-resistant cladding plan was dropped



I'm not sure what the point of that article is. We already know that the alternative system described would almost certainly have performed better. This article doesn't tell us anything useful about when and why the decision was made to go with the system that was eventually used.


----------



## skyscraper101 (May 8, 2018)

agricola said:


> Hard to even come up with the words to describe this, if its true:
> 
> Grenfell Tower: fire-resistant cladding plan was dropped



How is this only coming out now??


----------



## teuchter (May 8, 2018)

salem said:


> Are they saying that they changed the plan to cut costs and were so incompetent that they ended up paying more for an inferior product?
> 
> How on earth is that possible?


They made a decision about the procurement route. One option would be to use the council's 'preferred contractor' in which case that contractor submits a price, and then the council might seek to reduce that price through negotiation, and possibly through agreeing changes to the spec which may or may not have involved changes to the cladding.

The alternative option, which it looks like they chose, was to put the project out to competitive tender, in which case several different contractors would submit prices and the council could then choose between them. Because it was put out as a 'design and build' contract, each contractor would have been able to propose its own preferred system for many aspects of the building, potentially including the cladding system.

So, Rydon would have submitted their price and it may have involved proposing the eventually used cladding system or it may not have (that could have been changed later in the process). And the reason for changing it may have been based on cost grounds or other factors could have been involved.

As I say, the article dosn't really tell us anything very useful. Neither do the committee meeting minutes that it links to.


----------



## teuchter (May 8, 2018)

Also what the article doesn't discuss: the actually installed system would likely (in theory at least) perform better thermally than the proposed one using mineral wool.

So, someone making a decision between the two would be looking at cost, and they would be looking at thermal performance. If one offers better thermal insulation at a slightly higher cost, then it could be perfectly rational to choose the more expensive one. Of course, through all of this, fire safety should also have been informing the decision. So the crucial question is whether the people making that decision had access to (or had made enough effort to get access to) information about fire safety of each option. If they had been informed that one option would not meet building regs, and chose it anyway, then of course they would be culpable. If they'd been informed that either would meet regs and be safe then it's down to whoever gave them that advice. And so on down the chain except that in this case, that chain gets very complicated because firstly it's not even clear that the building regulations themselves are adequate, and its not clear how much risk was added by the manner in which it was installed vs the way it was specified and designed.

This kind of article tries to simplify it down to decision making that chose a dangerous system over a safe one, because it was cheaper. It may very well be that in the broadest sense, that's exactly what happened as a result of systematic things such as procurement methods, or insufficient money being spent on testing and approvals processes. But that's the more important story rather than this 'revelation' that at some point someone provided a quote for an alternative cladding system. There's nothing unusual or unexpected about that.


----------



## Teaboy (May 8, 2018)

teuchter said:


> They made a decision about the procurement route. One option would be to use the council's 'preferred contractor' in which case that contractor submits a price, and then the council might seek to reduce that price through negotiation, and possibly through agreeing changes to the spec which may or may not have involved changes to the cladding.
> 
> The alternative option, which it looks like they chose, was to put the project out to competitive tender, in which case several different contractors would submit prices and the council could then choose between them. Because it was put out as a 'design and build' contract, each contractor would have been able to propose its own preferred system for many aspects of the building, potentially including the cladding system.
> 
> ...



Yes, all this is spot on.  Of course the other thing to say is just because a company previously quoted for a project doesn't mean to say that's what it would have eventually cost, construction being what it is.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2018)

salem said:


> Are they saying that they changed the plan to cut costs and were so incompetent that they ended up paying more for an inferior product?
> 
> How on earth is that possible?


Have you ever worked in local government? Believe me it's easily possible.


----------



## teuchter (May 8, 2018)

Did the leaked pages from the BRE report get posted on here by the way?

They are here (scroll down)

Disastrous refurbishment turned Grenfell Tower into a 'tinderbox'

It makes very unhappy reading. It's worth noting that the type of insulation chosen wasn't the only significant factor. There are all sorts of issues relating to design and installation that appear to have contributed. This means that even if the cladding system would fail certain fire tests (and it has done) - if other things had been done properly, it's quite possible the fire would not have spread in the way it did.

The problems run much deeper than what decisions one particular organisation made in conjunction with this one particular building project.


----------



## Teaboy (May 8, 2018)

teuchter said:


> The problems run much deeper than what decisions one particular organisation made in conjunction with this one particular building project.



Absolutely.  The wrong materials specified, some of those products then changed combined with a very poor and dangerous installation.  Quite simply everything was wrong and this sort of shot happens far too often in construction.  There has just been a shrug and a 'what are you going to do?' attitude as its been a race to the bottom for a long time now.


----------



## elbows (May 11, 2018)

Inquiry panel u-turn and awkward-looking May photo.

U-turn over Grenfell fire inquiry panel


----------



## Teaboy (May 11, 2018)

look at her, just look at her.  

She's fighting for all her worth to make sure no blame can ever be laid at the door of the government, that is her only goal.  It'll be the main contractor, the sub-contractor, the architect, the cladding manufacturer, the insulation manufacturer, the local building control, the BRE, the BBA and I bet she'll even throw the local tory council to the wolves if it deflects blame from the government.  This is going to be Hillsborough all over again.

Fucks sake.


----------



## GarveyLives (May 16, 2018)

​


----------



## ddraig (May 21, 2018)

The Fire Brigades Union responds to BBC Panorama investigation's findings on Grenfell Tower | Fire Brigades Union

*Responding to the findings of a BBC Panorama investigation about the insulation used on Grenfell Tower, Matt Wrack, the general secretary of the Fire Brigades Union, said: *

“The findings outlined in the Panorama investigation are beyond shocking. The issues identified in the programme are matters for the police to urgently investigate. Those responsible for any criminal behaviour in relation to Grenfell should be held accountable and feel the full force of the law.

But we must look at how a lax regulatory system created an environment where the Grenfell Tower disaster was allowed to happen. As this investigation proves the current regime of regulation and testing of materials used in the construction industry has been shown to be a complete and utter failure. A failure of that nature which results in 72 deaths as happened at Grenfell is in itself criminal.

“The fire safety testing regime in this country has been easily gamed. A product can pass a fire safety test because the manufacturer is able to submit a version which is far more fire retardant compared to the product it actually intends to sell to customers. This is a shocking state of affairs. Residents living in affected blocks and firefighters who may be sent to fight fires, not knowing what they are facing, will be utterly outraged at what has been going on.

“The same type of insulation created by Celotex has been used in hundreds of other buildings across the UK. That’s just one product. How many other types of material have managed to pass fire safety tests while posing a threat to life? It is not good enough to say that one manufacturer behaved illegally. The entire fire testing regime needs to be redesigned urgently if we are to avoid another Grenfell.”


----------



## Casual Observer (May 22, 2018)

I haven't yet watched last night's Panorama but will do later. Following on from ddraig , the BBC are claiming that Celotex (the manufacturer of the insulation behind the cladding panels) used an additional fire retardant on their product which enabled it to pass the BS 8414 test in 2014, thus clearing it for use on high rise buildings. Celotex then marketed their product (without the additional fire retardant) as being suitable for use on high rise buildings. Oh dear.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2018)

elbows said:


> Inquiry panel u-turn and awkward-looking May photo.
> 
> U-turn over Grenfell fire inquiry panel
> 
> View attachment 135046


to be fair, theresa may looks awkward in every picture

oh, and remind me to submit a freedom of information request in a month to find out where in 10 downing street that picture is displayed.


----------



## Teaboy (May 22, 2018)

Its very shocking stuff, Celotex are one of the biggest names in insulation if this is true than its corporate manslaughter for my mind.  The thing is (and I've also yet to watch the program) British Standards are quite explicit that external insulation used on buildings above 12m in height should be non combustible.  Putting a flame retardant additive into your product makes it simply flame retardant, it is still combustible.  Its like the stuff they put on sofas or tents, all it means is that it will self extinguish unless in constant contact with the source of the fire.

To my mind there is no way Celotex should have been used on this building regardless of which version and this is before we even get to the cladding.  I said right at the start of this thread that so many people would have turned a blind eye to what was being proposed for this project, disgusting and and a total dereliction of their professional and moral duty.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Its very shocking stuff, Celotex are one of the biggest names in insulation if this is true than its corporate manslaughter for my mind.  The thing is (and I've also yet to watch the program) but British Standards are quite explicit that external insulation used on buildings above 12m in height should be no combustible.  Putting a flame retardant additive into your product makes it simply flame retardant it is still combustible.  Its like the stuff they put on sofas or tents, all it means that it will self extinguish unless in constant contact with the source of the fire.
> 
> To my mind there is no way Celotex should have been used on this building regardless of which version and this is before we even get to the cladding.  I said right at the start of this thread that so many people would have turned a blind eye to what was being proposed for this project, disgusting and and a total dereliction of their professional and moral duty.


m'learned friends will do very nicely out of this


----------



## teqniq (May 22, 2018)

But will successive governments who have presided over this melange of lax oversight/regulations and cost-cutting be held accountable? Unfortunately I think not.


----------



## hash tag (May 22, 2018)

What a shit god awful thing to do Families walk out as Grenfell video shown
As if those poor people have not been through enough, then had the wounds opened, had salt rubbed in and now this.
How utterly shit can we make things for them. FFS


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 22, 2018)

hash tag said:


> What a shit god awful thing to do Families walk out as Grenfell video shown
> As if those poor people have not been through enough, then had the wounds opened, had salt rubbed in and now this.
> How utterly shit can we make things for them. FFS



Total cock-up, that shouldn't have happened.


----------



## teqniq (May 22, 2018)




----------



## Jeff Robinson (May 24, 2018)

Powerful interview with survivor:


----------



## teqniq (Jun 1, 2018)

Edit. I posted a direct link to the site publishing this but you have to be registered to read it unfortunately


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 1, 2018)

InsideHousing said:
			
		

> The consultation submissions to the 2010 review of building regulations carried out by the coalition government show significant warnings were issued about the mounting risk from fire safety, seven years before 72 people were killed in the blaze at Grenfell Tower.
> 
> The documents were released after the intervention of the Information Commissioner, following a 10-month battle with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) who declined an original request in July last year.
> 
> ...


----------



## teqniq (Jun 1, 2018)

stethoscope Thank you.  Pretty damning stuff. I wonder whether it will result in any significant heads rolling though?


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 2, 2018)

Worth reading The Tower by Andrew O Hagan in this issue of the LRB. It's very long and in parts desperately painful to read. It's also challenging - I think he's a little too soft on the leading K&C councillors who were imo more complicit in the policies of austerity than he allows - but his wider arguments about the cynicism of national politician, the poor reporting of the disaster, the easy slide in our current politics into blaming and distaste for facts, and the blame really lying with the political culture of the last 30 years rather than individual councillors (whom it's rather more comfortable to scapegoat) are well made and hard to disagree with.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 3, 2018)

Plumdaff said:


> Worth reading The Tower by Andrew O Hagan in this issue of the LRB. It's very long and in parts desperately painful to read. It's also challenging - I think he's a little too soft on the leading K&C councillors who were imo more complicit in the policies of austerity than he allows - but his wider arguments about the cynicism of national politician, the poor reporting of the disaster, the easy slide in our current politics into blaming and distaste for facts, and the blame really lying with the political culture of the last 30 years rather than individual councillors (whom it's rather more comfortable to scapegoat) are well made and hard to disagree with.


I've read this now - it took about an hour - and it does have some interesting things in it. I think as an account, it's probably quite insightful.

However its political thrust seems far more questionable. Principally, who does it actually criticise? Not many people at all really, but a few people in top level government, the construction industry in its ill-defined entirety, the fire service in a vague way, and then quite a lot of the time, activists and victims for their incoherent and messy rage.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 3, 2018)

mauvais said:


> I've read this now - it took about an hour - and it does have some interesting things in it. I think as an account, it's probably quite insightful.
> 
> However its political thrust seems far more questionable. Principally, who does it actually criticise? Not many people at all really, but a few people in top level government, the construction industry in its ill-defined entirety, the fire service in a vague way, and then quite a lot of the time, activists and victims for their incoherent and messy rage.



I didn't feel there was any criticism of the victims. There was some criticism of some activists, both for bandwagon jumping and for not having facts to back up their assertions. I think he's too critical of the local activists, and doesn't seem to understand why they may have developed a kneejerk opposition to anything 'the council' proposes.

I think there's a real strength in the article saying the council did do stuff - that the countless social workers, housing staff etc that support people are 'the council' - I think he's soft on the main Tory councillors, but he's absolutely spot on that decisions on this cladding were made throughout the country by councils of all stripes and making bogeymen out of a couple of K&C councillors misses the larger problem; the deregulation and privatisation of safety, housing and the wider inequalities of our society. I think he's saying to the comfortable LRB reader - we're at fault, we're complicit, you can't just tut at the nasty Tories. And the fire brigade response failed because all the assumptions about what would be safe to do and advise were wrong - it wasn't safe to stay and await rescue - because of over 30 years of the hollowing of the state. I think it's fairly very damning of May and Javid who essentially threw K&C council under the bus even though - or likely because they knew that - national politicians were more culpable.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 3, 2018)

Plumdaff said:


> I didn't feel there was any criticism of the victims. There was some criticism of some activists, both for bandwagon jumping and for not having facts to back up their assertions. I think he's too critical of the local activists, and doesn't seem to understand why they may have developed a kneejerk opposition to anything 'the council' proposes.
> 
> I think there's a real strength in the article saying the council did do stuff - that the countless social workers, housing staff etc that support people are 'the council' - I think he's soft on the main Tory councillors, but he's absolutely spot on that decisions on this cladding were made throughout the country by councils of all stripes and making bogeymen out of a couple of K&C councillors misses the larger problem; the deregulation and privatisation of safety, housing and the wider inequalities of our society. I think he's saying to the comfortable LRB reader - we're at fault, we're complicit, you can't just tut at the nasty Tories. And the fire brigade response failed because all the assumptions about what would be safe to do and advise were wrong - it wasn't safe to stay and await rescue - because of over 30 years of the hollowing of the state. I think it's fairly very damning of May and Javid who essentially threw K&C council under the bus even though - or likely because they knew that - national politicians were more culpable.


The simple thing is that in any tower block fire the design means people going down narrow stairs in smoke and confusion will likely lead to deaths. This has nothing to do with the hollowing of the state and everything to do with the design of tower blocks. Ime stairs in tower blocks are essentially chimneys with stairs and there's generally only one staircase. You will burn if it is blocked or filled with smoke.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 3, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> The simple thing is that in any tower block fire the design means people going down narrow stairs in smoke and confusion will likely lead to deaths. This has nothing to do with the hollowing of the state and everything to do with the design of tower blocks. Ime stairs in tower blocks are essentially chimneys with stairs and there's generally only one staircase. You will burn if it is blocked or filled with smoke.



That's precisely why the Fire Service told people to stay in their flats. However the situation at Grenfell was atypical - the cladding was unsafe and was sending fire up the building and into people's homes (and arguably the reason the cladding was unsafe had everything to do with the hollowing out of the state) - so the normal advice was wrong. However dangerous the stairs were, and they of course deteriorated during the fire, they were the only way to survive Grenfell. The fire service did eventually change their advice and tell people to flee, but for many this change came too late. People who had stayed in or returned to their flats on earlier Fire Service advice died. Worth reading the article which does cover this at length.

A tragic detail of the article is that the bin areas and shutes were sealed and were completely intact; no one was advised to nor took shelter in them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 3, 2018)

Plumdaff said:


> That's precisely why the Fire Service told people to stay in their flats. However the situation at Grenfell was atypical - the cladding was unsafe and was sending fire up the building and into people's homes (and arguably the reason the cladding was unsafe had everything to do with the hollowing out of the state) - so the normal advice was wrong. However dangerous the stairs were, and they of course deteriorated during the fire, they were the only way to survive Grenfell. People who stayed in or returned to their flats on Fire Service advice died. Worth reading the article which does cover this at length.
> 
> A tragic detail of the article is that the bin areas and shutes were sealed and were completely intact; no one was advised to nor took shelter in them.


I'm on phone so it's a pain going through long posts and deleting the extraneous bit you're not replying to. The design of tower blocks itself dangerous in any situation in which large numbers of people need to move quickly. Which ought to give pause to people approving large numbers of towers in London.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 3, 2018)

Plumdaff said:


> I didn't feel there was any criticism of the victims. There was some criticism of some activists, both for bandwagon jumping and for not having facts to back up their assertions. I think he's too critical of the local activists, and doesn't seem to understand why they may have developed a kneejerk opposition to anything 'the council' proposes.
> 
> I think there's a real strength in the article saying the council did do stuff - that the countless social workers, housing staff etc that support people are 'the council' - I think he's soft on the main Tory councillors, but he's absolutely spot on that decisions on this cladding were made throughout the country by councils of all stripes and making bogeymen out of a couple of K&C councillors misses the larger problem; the deregulation and privatisation of safety, housing and the wider inequalities of our society. I think he's saying to the comfortable LRB reader - we're at fault, we're complicit, you can't just tut at the nasty Tories. And the fire brigade response failed because all the assumptions about what would be safe to do and advise were wrong - it wasn't safe to stay and await rescue - because of over 30 years of the hollowing of the state. I think it's fairly very damning of May and Javid who essentially threw K&C council under the bus even though - or likely because they knew that - national politicians were more culpable.


I agree with the details of your summary but I think I give different importance to the various parts. It started fine, and it was initially interesting to read about the council workers on the ground as I’d not heard an awful lot about that side, but it really started to grate as he repeatedly said that activists and locals were being irrational without further thought or examination, and when he started talking to patrician Tories with no indication that he was checking what they said let alone their record in other areas, saying how nice they were and how much they cared, I’m afraid I got really cross.

I went away from it feeling like it was designed to exonerate nice caring upper middle class people at the expense of the unfortunate but irrational victims (being taken advantage of by outside rabble-rousers of course). The liberal Tories I know would love it. Blaming big business and central government is an uncontroversial thing to do and it doesn’t even go into why that might have happened. Which is a shame because there is also good detail in there.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 3, 2018)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I went away from it feeling like it was designed to exonerate nice caring upper middle class people at the expense of the unfortunate but irrational victims (being taken advantage of by outside rabble-rousers of course). The liberal Tories I know would love it. Blaming big business and central government is an uncontroversial thing to do and it doesn’t even go into why that might have happened. Which is a shame because there is also good detail in there.



I can't disagree with that really. The bits about the good old Etonians who built the estate did stick in the craw.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 3, 2018)

Response by one of the people involved btw:


----------



## Arbeter Fraynd (Jun 4, 2018)

The LRB article is pretty awful.  There's more sympathy for the Tory councillors than almost anyone else.  The personal stuff about the victims in the first section was really well written and moving, had me in tears at one point, but after that the article becomes mainly about how wonderful and misunderstood the council were.  Local activists and demonstrations are dismissed several times.  I'm sure he's right about how arrogant and manipulative the likes of May and Javid were, but I'm amazed the LRB chose to give over almost a complete edition to an article that so consistently missed the point and spent so much energy defending tories


----------



## gosub (Jun 4, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Its very shocking stuff, Celotex are one of the biggest names in insulation if this is true than its corporate manslaughter for my mind.  The thing is (and I've also yet to watch the program) British Standards are quite explicit that external insulation used on buildings above 12m in height should be non combustible.  Putting a flame retardant additive into your product makes it simply flame retardant, it is still combustible.  Its like the stuff they put on sofas or tents, all it means is that it will self extinguish unless in constant contact with the source of the fire.
> 
> To my mind there is no way Celotex should have been used on this building regardless of which version and this is before we even get to the cladding.  I said right at the start of this thread that so many people would have turned a blind eye to what was being proposed for this project, disgusting and and a total dereliction of their professional and moral duty.



Agreed.  Can't see how there won't be jail time and corperate manslaughter charges at the end of this


----------



## agricola (Jun 4, 2018)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I agree with the details of your summary but I think I give different importance to the various parts. It started fine, and it was initially interesting to read about the council workers on the ground as I’d not heard an awful lot about that side, but it really started to grate as he repeatedly said that activists and locals were being irrational without further thought or examination, and when he started talking to patrician Tories with no indication that he was checking what they said let alone their record in other areas, saying how nice they were and how much they cared, I’m afraid I got really cross.
> 
> I went away from it feeling like it was designed to exonerate nice caring upper middle class people at the expense of the unfortunate but irrational victims (being taken advantage of by outside rabble-rousers of course). The liberal Tories I know would love it. Blaming big business and central government is an uncontroversial thing to do and it doesn’t even go into why that might have happened. Which is a shame because there is also good detail in there.



The thing that does my head in most about it is that 99% of the _"but the council did this"_ things he mentions were (a) done by lower-level staff and (b) are precisely what they are meant to do after a disaster anyway; wheras nearly everything where someone senior at RKBC was required to make a decision went wrong.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 4, 2018)

agricola said:


> The thing that does my head in most about it is that 99% of the _"but the council did this"_ things he mentions were (a) done by lower-level staff and (b) are precisely what they are meant to do after a disaster anyway; wheras nearly everything where someone senior at RKBC was required to make a decision went wrong.


Yes, it felt really dishonest the way he segued from folk working on the ground to middle and upper management, carrying on the idea that “the council” as a whole was unappreciated - when it was quite clear that people made a distinction between “the council” as a body and the workers they saw alongside them, in fact barely thinking of the latter as part of the former. And then he had the cheek to imply this viewpoint was irrational.


----------



## billbond (Jun 4, 2018)

gosub said:


> Agreed.  Can't see how there won't be jail time and corperate manslaughter charges at the end of this



Nothing will happen like that
Look at Hillsborough , nobody been jailed as far as i know


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 4, 2018)

gosub said:


> Agreed.  Can't see how there won't be jail time and corperate manslaughter charges at the end of this


I  can


----------



## Brainaddict (Jun 5, 2018)

The LRB piece is really odd and not what I would expect from them. I don't know much about O'Hagan but have read him previously in the LRB and thought he was ok. Thing is, there are some correctives to the initial narrative that are worth look at. Was K&C council more negligent of poorer residents than other councils? Probably not, is my sense. The narrative of blaming the council probably did let the central government off the hook too easily. The idea that the council was absent in the response has been over-egged, even if the coordination wasn't done well. And I'd even admit that there are times when angry activists should be pressed to give more facts to back up their accusations.

But the whole tone of the piece is pretty shocking really. So unsympathetic to local activists, so sympathetic to Tory councillors. He even asks why people are angry with Tories for acting like Tories. What kind of fucking question is that? So this could have been the article to usefully question some of the narratives around Grenfell, but it isn't that, because it so badly misjudges things in terms of cutting lots of slack to people with power, while being really harsh on people who have been screwed over. It's odd not just from the writer but as a major editorial decision from the LRB.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> The LRB piece is really odd and not what I would expect from them. I don't know much about O'Hagan but have read him previously in the LRB and thought he was ok. Thing is, there are some correctives to the initial narrative that are worth look at. Was K&C council more negligent of poorer residents than other councils? Probably not, is my sense. The narrative of blaming the council probably did let the central government off the hook too easily. The idea that the council was absent in the response has been over-egged, even if the coordination wasn't done well. And I'd even admit that there are times when angry activists should be pressed to give more facts to back up their accusations.
> 
> But the whole tone of the piece is pretty shocking really. So unsympathetic to local activists, so sympathetic to Tory councillors. He even asks why people are angry with Tories for acting like Tories. What kind of fucking question is that? So this could have been the article to usefully question some of the narratives around Grenfell, but it isn't that, because it so badly misjudges things in terms of cutting lots of slack to people with power, while being really harsh on people who have been screwed over. It's odd not just from the writer but as a major editorial decision from the LRB.


i thought he was quite clever starting the article (more short book or pamphlet) the way he did as it's a long auld read before you get to anything truly peculiar. my belief is that they simply hadn't read it all the way through: cock up not conspiracy

incidentally, it's not only angry activists who should be pressed to give evidence to support their case.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 5, 2018)

billbond said:


> Nothing will happen like that
> Look at Hillsborough , nobody been jailed as far as i know



My feeling why this could be different is that Hillsborough was very much about the state, it was a direct result of the attitude of the government at the time and whilst there were a couple of private companies involved it was really all about state apparatus and as such we had a massive cover-up.

With Grenfell there are clearly things that can be laid be laid at the door of the government and the local Council but to put it simply they reason the block went up like kindling is because of a deeply flawed construction project.  For years various industries have argued for light touch regulation, construction is still mainly a self-regulating industry.  What we have seen here is a load of private companies flagrantly ignoring regulations and best practice to maximise the return from the project.  If this isn't corporate manslaughter then I don't know what is and far from the government wanting to cover it all up they should have a vested interest in exposing the malpractice.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jun 5, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> If this isn't corporate manslaughter then I don't know what is and far from the government wanting to cover it all up they should have a vested interest in exposing the malpractice.


But if it is about flawed construction projects, it wasn't just one, it was hundreds. When lots of companies were doing the same thing, and the government ignored warnings about it, the government is at fault too - and will try to evade responsibility.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 5, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> The LRB piece is really odd and not what I would expect from them. I don't know much about O'Hagan but have read him previously in the LRB and thought he was ok. Thing is, there are some correctives to the initial narrative that are worth look at. Was K&C council more negligent of poorer residents than other councils? Probably not, is my sense. The narrative of blaming the council probably did let the central government off the hook too easily. The idea that the council was absent in the response has been over-egged, even if the coordination wasn't done well. And I'd even admit that there are times when angry activists should be pressed to give more facts to back up their accusations.
> 
> But the whole tone of the piece is pretty shocking really. So unsympathetic to local activists, so sympathetic to Tory councillors. He even asks why people are angry with Tories for acting like Tories. What kind of fucking question is that? So this could have been the article to usefully question some of the narratives around Grenfell, but it isn't that, because it so badly misjudges things in terms of cutting lots of slack to people with power, while being really harsh on people who have been screwed over. It's odd not just from the writer but as a major editorial decision from the LRB.


O'Hagan wrote a novel called "Our Fathers" years ago in which one of the main characters is "Scotland's Mr. Housing", who is presented as contemptible for pushing for tower blocks and their manifest ills. The way I remember it, he (E2A: O'Hagan) was driven by a general opposition to  public housing as such, and not just in the flawed form it took in the tower block era.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 5, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> But if it is about flawed construction projects, it wasn't just one, it was hundreds. When lots of companies were doing the same thing, and the government ignored warnings about it, the government is at fault too - and will try to evade responsibility.



For sure the government is culpable for various factors but I'm not sure about the hundreds of flawed projects.  How many had this combination of insulation, cladding and original substrate?  I am in no doubt that had building regs been followed this wouldn't have happened.  Building regs were certainly inadequate and the lack of sprinklers in UK buildings is a worry but this project should never have been completed in this way.

Had they used the insulation that should have been used on this building (Rockwool) and I strongly believed this fire could have been contained even with the cladding being used.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm on phone so it's a pain going through long posts and deleting the extraneous bit you're not replying to. The design of tower blocks itself dangerous in any situation in which large numbers of people need to move quickly. Which ought to give pause to people approving large numbers of towers in London.


What are you actually saying - that we should not have any 'towers' at all? What are your criteria for what is safe enough and what is not?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> What are you actually saying - that we should not have any 'towers' at all? What are your criteria for what is safe enough and what is not?


you really are stupid. no, i am not saying we should not have any towers. i am saying that the ones we do have are in the main, certainly the ones i've been in, sufficiently badly designed to make mass evacuation extremely dangerous. my criteria for what is safe enough would include two staircases at a minimum with points within the stairwell which can be blocked off - through doors - so that any fire within the stairwell can be prevented from engulfing the entire thing. as a librarian and not an architect i cannot offer you the comprehensive list you desire.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> you really are stupid. no, i am not saying we should not have any towers. i am saying that the ones we do have are in the main, certainly the ones i've been in, sufficiently badly designed to make mass evacuation extremely dangerous. my criteria for what is safe enough would include two staircases at a minimum with points within the stairwell which can be blocked off - through doors - so that any fire within the stairwell can be prevented from engulfing the entire thing. as a librarian and not an architect i cannot offer you the comprehensive list you desire.


Is your proposal that your two staircase rule would be applied to existing buildings as well as new ones? And that it is a blanket requirement for all high rise buildings, ie. can not be supplanted with fire-engineered solutions in any situation?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Is your proposal that your two staircase rule would be applied to existing buildings as well as new ones? And that it is a blanket requirement for all high rise buildings, ie. can not be supplanted with fire-engineered solutions in any situation?


no.

what is a fire-engineered solution?


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 5, 2018)

I think modern building design is fairly decent with regards to fire stopping.  Generally there is a process of compartmentalisation in new build residential (containing the fire in the apartment it broke out in long enough for people to escape and fire service to arrive) and sprinklers etc in larger open plan buildings such as offices.  I think sprinkler systems should be mandatory but beyond that modern design and regulations are decent if adhered to.

For me the problem is with the existing architectural legacy we have in this country.  I remember a few years back writing on a thread on here (possibly the Heygate one) that in itself I didn't really have a problem in seeing the old tower blocks being pulled down, it was that the residents were not moving back into the new ones.  The two reasons I cited was poor energy efficiency and a fire risk, I remember clearly writing it because those two things collided at Grenfell.

Resolving the problems with old tower blocks without actually pulling them down is not an easy question to answer.


----------



## Hollis (Jun 5, 2018)

Fire-engineered solutions.

Fire Engineering - Clancy Consulting


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2018)

Hollis said:


> Fire-engineered solutions.
> 
> Fire Engineering - Clancy Consulting


I see teuchter's bottled it


----------



## teuchter (Jun 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> no.
> 
> what is a fire-engineered solution?



It's one where a strategy is designed for the specific building, rather than by following prescriptive codes. You seem to want to establish a prescriptive code that says all high buildings must have at least two escape stairs. You may be unaware that such a code exists already, in the form of the building regs approved docs which require exactly that - minimum 2 stairs - for buildings over a certain (not very high) height. That is the default requirement.
You will find some high buildings that do not have this, or perhaps only have one stair for the uppermost part. In these cases, an "engineered" solution has been accepted instead. This might involve things like sprinkler systems, active smoke venting systems, lifts that can be used for evacuation, upgraded compartmentation and so on. Some might make the argument that beyond a certain height, evacuation isn't even a sensible response to a fire and it's better to design the whole building on the basis that a fire can be brought under control without any attempt at evacuation being necessary.
There will be lots of different viewpoints on this and also, the evidence base on what the principle risks and most effective strategies for high buildings are is continually changing simply because compared to other building types where risks are very well understood, high rise is a relatively new building form.
So, I could ask you to further expand on your proposed solutions for this rather complex area, which is not one which I am very expert in, but I think it's fairly obvious that you don't really have a clue what you're on about, so I'll not bother


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It's one where a strategy is designed for the specific building, rather than by following prescriptive codes. You seem to want to establish a prescriptive code that says all high buildings must have at least two escape stairs. You may be unaware that such a code exists already, in the form of the building regs approved docs which require exactly that - minimum 2 stairs - for buildings over a certain (not very high) height. That is the default requirement.
> You will find some high buildings that do not have this, or perhaps only have one stair for the uppermost part. In these cases, an "engineered" solution has been accepted instead. This might involve things like sprinkler systems, active smoke venting systems, lifts that can be used for evacuation, upgraded compartmentation and so on. Some might make the argument that beyond a certain height, evacuation isn't even a sensible response to a fire and it's better to design the whole building on the basis that a fire can be brought under control without any attempt at evacuation being necessary.
> There will be lots of different viewpoints on this and also, the evidence base on what the principle risks and most effective strategies for high buildings are is continually changing simply because compared to other building types where risks are very well understood, high rise is a relatively new building form.
> So, I could ask you to further expand on your proposed solutions for this rather complex area, which is not one which I am very expert in, but I think it's fairly obvious that you don't really have a clue what you're on about, so I'll not bother


There are many things you are not very expert in and I have yet to see you claim expertise in an area. Yet you never fail to affect the pose of a know-all.


----------



## 2Mins (Jun 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It's one where a strategy is designed for the specific building, rather than by following prescriptive codes. You seem to want to establish a prescriptive code that says all high buildings must have at least two escape stairs. You may be unaware that such a code exists already, in the form of the building regs approved docs which require exactly that - minimum 2 stairs - for buildings over a certain (not very high) height. That is the default requirement.
> You will find some high buildings that do not have this, or perhaps only have one stair for the uppermost part. In these cases, an "engineered" solution has been accepted instead. This might involve things like sprinkler systems, active smoke venting systems, lifts that can be used for evacuation, upgraded compartmentation and so on. Some might make the argument that beyond a certain height, evacuation isn't even a sensible response to a fire and it's better to design the whole building on the basis that a fire can be brought under control without any attempt at evacuation being necessary.
> There will be lots of different viewpoints on this and also, the evidence base on what the principle risks and most effective strategies for high buildings are is continually changing simply because compared to other building types where risks are very well understood, high rise is a relatively new building form.
> So, I could ask you to further expand on your proposed solutions for this rather complex area, which is not one which I am very expert in, but I think it's fairly obvious that you don't really have a clue what you're on about, so I'll not bother


PM bullies people. He does it because he thinks that being "on a forum" gives him superpowers. Nonsense of course. The guy is a lowly clerk in a suburban library.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2018)

2Mins said:


> PM bullies people. He does it because he thinks that being "on a forum" gives him superpowers. Nonsense of course. The guy is a lowly clerk in a suburban library.


Who were you before again?


----------



## editor (Jun 5, 2018)

2Mins said:


> PM bullies people. He does it because he thinks that being "on a forum" gives him superpowers. Nonsense of course. The guy is a lowly clerk in a suburban library.


Thanks and bye.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 6, 2018)

The inquiry has commissioned a number of expert reports and this week it has heard initial presentations from some of the people commissioned to produce them. (The written transcript and video of Mondays session (available on this page of the inquiry website) includes a useful presentation of how these hearings are scheduled as well as the first of the presentations).

Five of these expert reports have been published on the inquiry website as PDFs. This page on the BBC site lists them and supplies some bullet points indicating elements of their content and conclusions.

These are initial reports. Various investigations into aspects of the fire are still ongoing and final versions of the reports and the detailed evidence given about them by their authors (currently set for October) will take account of the results of these.

The reports are linked on separate pages from that first link I gave above and also from that BBC page. Unfortunately the expertise deployed by the inquiry doesn't extend to optimizing PDFs - for example Luke Bisby's 260 page report is a ridiculous 589mb. I've made optimized versions for myself (my version of Bisby's is 18mb). Here are links to them in case they are of use to anyone else :

Colin Todd on the Statutory and regulatory background - pdf here (6.7mb)
Jose Torero on how the fire spread - pdf here (9.3mb)
Luke Bisby on the contribution of the cladding materials to how the fire spread - pdf here (18.4mb)
Niamh Nic Daeid on the initial cause of the fire - pdf here (7.7mb)

Barbara Lane's report on the fire protection measures in place on the night of the fire, the extent to which they failed to control it and the extent to which they contributed to it, is the largest of the reports at over 1500 pages. This is IMO the most interesting and the one which has attracted the most news coverage. On the inquiry website it is split into 32 individual PDFs which are thus of a more sensible size but this introduces its own usability issues. I've produced a single file version - obviously with a report this big that also raises usability issues but it means there is a choice of difficulties.

Barbara Lane on the fire protection measures and their consequences on the night of the fire - pdf here (71.4mb)


----------



## Miss-Shelf (Jun 6, 2018)

Lurdan thank you for collating all of that

I just saw this account responding to O'Hagan's article in LRB [don't know if it's been shared above]

Verso


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 6, 2018)

Lurdan said:


> The inquiry has commissioned a number of expert reports and this week it has heard initial presentations from some of the people commissioned to produce them. (The written transcript and video of Mondays session (available on this page of the inquiry website) includes a useful presentation of how these hearings are scheduled as well as the first of the presentations).
> 
> Five of these expert reports have been published on the inquiry website as PDFs. This page on the BBC site lists them and supplies some bullet points indicating elements of their content and conclusions.
> 
> ...



Thank you for doing that.


----------



## likesfish (Jun 7, 2018)

even Brighton 60's tower blocks have twin staircases and fuckloads of fire doors.
 so the fire brigades advice would have worked and the fire would have been out in minuties if the refurb hadn't been done on the cheap and bodged because the council didnt give a fuck about poor people


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 7, 2018)

Useful piece on Jules Birch's blog drawing on Barbara Lane's report for the inquiry. It illustrates the way in which her report, which covers the issue of the fire protection measures at Grenfell Tower as a whole, by virtue of that casts light on how multiple levels of non-compliance in design and failure in practise interacted in ways that often only succeeded in making things worse.  

*Grenfell’s ‘culture of non-compliance’* - Jules Birch. June 5th



Spoiler: Large chunk of the blog post



Yes it was the cladding but expert reports for the public inquiry into the Grenfell Tower fire find multiple fire safety failures in the building and its refurbishment and management and in the wider regulatory system and construction industry.

The first thing that leaps out of the report by fire engineer Dr Barbara Lane is a timeline that shows that the conditions for ‘Stay Put’ advice to residents had ‘substantially failed’ by 01:26 on the morning of the fire.

This was within half an hour of the fire breaking out in Flat 16 and the London Fire Brigade did not abandon Stay Put until 02:47.

Those conclusions have already made some of the headlines but Dr Lane makes clear that there is a deeper context for them.

The way that high-rise buildings are designed and the way that fires in them are fought in them rely on the fact that multi-storey external envelope fires are not meant to happen.

So the fire at Grenfell rendered invalid all of the basic assumptions about fighting fires from the inside and telling residents of other flats to stay inside them because they will be protected by compartmentation.

That meant there had to be an improvised approach to fighting the fire from the outside on the night but most of the building was always going to out of reach even for aerial appliances – the whole reason why the risk of external fires should be designed out in the first place.

Fire safety relies on ‘defence in depth’ or multiple levels of safety, meaning not just compartmentation but a whole range of other levels such as provision of firefighting equipment, fire doors, smoke control, ventilation of the staircase, fire alarms and active and passive fire protection systems. But once the fire spread they began to fail one by one.

As Dr Lane puts it:



> ‘The building envelope created an intolerable risk on the night of the fire, resulting in extreme harm. It did not adequately resist the spread of fire over the walls having regard to the height and use of the building. The active and passive fire protection measures within the Tower were then required to mitigate an extraordinary event, and as a result, the consequences were catastrophic.’



She concludes based on test evidence supplied to the inquiry that the construction materials forming the rainscreen cladding system ‘did not comply with the recommended fire performance set out in the statutory guidance of [Approved Document] B 2013 for a building of that height’.

But the problems went beyond just the cladding, with ‘multiple catastrophic fire-spread routes’ created by the construction form and detailing and the arrangement of materials used around the old and new windows increasing the likelihood that fire would spread from a flat to the cavities in the cladding system.

Attempts had been made to subdivide the cavities but both the horizontal and vertical fire stopping were installed incorrectly, and ‘no evidence has been provided that they were ever tested for performance in an ACP based rainscreen cladding system of the type installed at Grenfell Tower’.

The windows did not have fire resisting cavity barriers and ‘these unprotected openings themselves were surrounded by combustible material’, meaning that there was ‘a disproportionately high probability of a fire starting near a window spreading to the cladding.

The arrangement and type of construction materials in the cladding system then stretched the rest of the fire safety system to breaking point, with multiple internal fires, large amounts of smoke, an early need for external firefighting and a need to change the evacuation strategy.

She finds that the cladding system was ‘therefore non-compliant with the functional requirement of the Building Regulations’ but

All of that had severe knock-on effects for the firefighting operation with the Fire Brigade never told that there was a combustible cladding system.

In one of the most damning sections of the entire report she says:



> ‘I have found no evidence yet that any member of the design team or the construction team ascertained the fire performance of the rainscreen cladding system materials, nor understood how the assembly performed in fire. I have found no evidence that Building Control were either informed or understood how the assembly would perform in a fire. Further I have found no evidence that the TMO risk assessment recorded the fire performance of the rainscreen cladding system, nor have I found evidence that the LFB risk assessment recorded the fire performance of the rainscreen cladding system.’



On Stay Put, Dr Lane says she is particularly concerned about the delay between 02:06, when a major incident was declared, and 02:47 when the advice was changed.

However, she points out that there is no requirement in the UK for automatic detection and alarm systems in high-rise buildings and so no way to raise an all-out alarm in Grenfell Tower or to communicate with vulnerable residents.

As the report makes clear, Grenfell went through an extensive refurbishment between 2012 and 2016, including not just the cladding but also full internal refurbishment of the first three storeys, work on the building services on every floor and in every flat, replacement of all the fire doors and gas supply works.

The problems with the fire doors are now well known. The report says that the installed doors had different metal fittings and intumescent seals, which could have affected their performance and some were glazed and could have failed prematurely

Dr Lane concludes that ‘all the flat entrance doors (from Level 4-23) were non-compliant with the fire test evidence relied on at the time of the installation’ and that this non-compliance ‘would have contributed to the failure to prevent the spread of fire and hot smoke from the fire to the lobby’.

There were further failures of the ventilation system that was meant to extract smoke from the lobbies and of the fire lift, with the Fire Brigade unable to take control.

Grenfell also had a dry fire main rather than a wet one, making it non-compliant with design guidance at the time of the original construction and with current standards.

A wet main would have enabled a faster response to the original fire and enabled greater water pressure but even they are not designed for the multiple hoses needed.

That non-compliance contributed to a failure to prevent the spread of fire and hot smoke from the flat to the lobby.

Overall, Dr Lane finds that:



> ‘The number of non-compliances signify a culture of non-compliance at Grenfell Tower. I am particularly concerned about the maintenance regime of the active and passive fire protection measures. I note that multiple automatic systems such as the control of the fire lift and the smoke ventilation system, appear not to have operated as required.’



That and other issues such as the gas installation will be covered in Phase 2 of her report.

(...)

[Birch then summarizes a number of Lane's conclusions including] :

*Communications with residents* – even if the advice at Grenfell had been changed more quickly from ‘Stay Put’ to ‘All Out’ it’s not clear how the message could have been communicated to residents. Dr Lane points out change to Stay Put is not easy in the UK because there is no statutory requirement for automatic detection and alarm systems to warn residents of high-rise buildings.



(Birch writes a regular blog on the paywalled Inside Housing site but reposts it on his own. While written from a Housing Association industry perspective it's often very interesting).


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 7, 2018)




----------



## mauvais (Jun 7, 2018)

Plumdaff said:


> I didn't feel there was any criticism of the victims. There was some criticism of some activists, both for bandwagon jumping and for not having facts to back up their assertions. I think he's too critical of the local activists, and doesn't seem to understand why they may have developed a kneejerk opposition to anything 'the council' proposes.


Just coming back to this now I have a moment more time - he absolutely is critical of the victims, sometimes subtly, sometimes not.


> ‘As often as possible,’ Frida from Children’s Services said, ‘we had to sit down and cross-check to see that every family had a keyworker. But families would then say to journalists and politicians, “Oh no, I’ve not seen anybody from the council,” because they didn’t associate the person sat next to them in the room with people from the council.’





> Daffarn’s [the blogger and resident] days of writing to the council were long gone, and now he did half-hour interviews with Jon Snow on Channel Four News, unchallenged. (Many people liked being asked to provide opinions, but they didn’t want to be asked to provide evidence, and they gently slid away.)





> ‘Nobody said “no” to anybody,’ one of the department heads told me. One survivor said he needed a pram for his one-year-old. ‘We said: “No problem: dozens have been donated.”
> 
> “No,” he said, “I want a new one.” The one he wanted cost £900. We bought it.’





> Almost all the residents I spoke to brought this up with me. One of them printed off a list from Zoopla of four properties near Westbourne Grove at two to three million pounds each, and she wrote ‘one’, ‘two’, ‘three’, and ‘four’ beside them in order of preference. She gave it to her keyworker and imagined the council would go ahead and buy one.


Merely a selection. Lots of explicit criticism that is veiled in something else too, like 'community leaders' and 'activists' - what, are none of those people residents?


----------



## agricola (Jun 7, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Merely a selection. Lots of explicit criticism that is veiled in something else too, like 'community leaders' and 'activists' - what, are none of those people residents?



In any case it is a bit much to criticize the survivors for that when it (a) is as we have all seen how MPs and many senior council executives behave anyway with their expenses, and (b) it is a direct consequence of the decision taken by the council to support people by paying them cash on demand rather than take on the expense of rehousing them all at once (by compulsory purchase of a suitable development, of which there are loads in London).


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 7, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Just coming back to this now I have a moment more time - he absolutely is critical of the victims, sometimes subtly, sometimes not.



I'll give you the buggy one, although tbh, when reading, I thought "why the fuck not" about both that demand, so didn't pick up on the implicit criticism. If I'm right - and it's too long an article to check through - the zoopla quote comes from a passage about the council being fucked over by Javid announcing they'll permanently rehouse everyone within a couple of weeks, even though that's likely not advisable let alone currently doable, which in context changes the meaning for me from it being perceived as an unreasonable demand on the part of the resident to the council being set up to fail on promises made. 

However the first two; I think we should be able to back up our criticism with evidence, and I think it was very telling that people didn't associate their local housing and social workers with 'the council'. I think it was important to point that out. What the article got wrong was equating those front line staff with the leaders of the council and displaying a complete lack of curiosity about why the split in perception might be the case.


----------



## D'wards (Jun 7, 2018)

Imran Khan wants to be careful throwing accusations of racism at the Firemen and women - that won't play well in the public gallery. Especially when all evidence suggests they did what they could, at great personal rsik to themselves, and lots are living with the physical and mental consequences of that night.

Grenfell firefighters deny response was affected by racism


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 7, 2018)

D'wards said:


> Imran Khan wants to be careful throwing accusations of racism at the Firemen and women - that won't play well in the public gallery. Especially when all evidence suggests they did what they could, at great personal rsik to themselves, and lots are living with the physical and mental consequences of that night.
> 
> Grenfell firefighters deny response was affected by racism


when i've been on the silent march i've seen many, many people go and shake the hands of the firemen and -women at the end: but none approach or shake the hands of the line of police waiting for their malign services to be similarly recognised.


----------



## agricola (Jun 7, 2018)

D'wards said:


> Imran Khan wants to be careful throwing accusations of racism at the Firemen and women - that won't play well in the public gallery. Especially when all evidence suggests they did what they could, at great personal rsik to themselves, and lots are living with the physical and mental consequences of that night.
> 
> Grenfell firefighters deny response was affected by racism



That is sadly typical for him; he makes a whole load of common sense points (about why it was the council ignored everything, whether they ignored everything because the population of Grenfell was not one that would vote for them and the reasons why minority groups are overrepresented in tower blocks / lower quality housing generally) and then ruins it by a claim that is so offensive and so demonstrably wrong that it winds everyone who reads it up.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 7, 2018)

agricola said:


> That is sadly typical for him; he makes a whole load of common sense points (about why it was the council ignored everything, whether they ignored everything because the population of Grenfell was not one that would vote for them and the reasons why minority groups are overrepresented in tower blocks / lower quality housing generally) and then ruins it by a claim that is so offensive and so demonstrably wrong that it winds everyone who reads it up.


the thing about imran khan is his fame's not actually based on him being a good lawyer, but on him being in the right place to represent the lawrence family. every time i went past his offices on theobalds road i thanked my lucky stars i would never require his services.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 7, 2018)

Plumdaff said:


> However the first two; I think we should be able to back up our criticism with evidence, and I think it was very telling that people didn't associate their local housing and social workers with 'the council'. I think it was important to point that out. What the article got wrong was equating those front line staff with the leaders of the council and displaying a complete lack of curiosity about why the split in perception might be the case.


Ultimately Daffarn's home burnt down and nearly killed him; perhaps it can be argued that the concerns he raised beforehand weren't well evidenced or pertinent to the fire itself, I don't know, but I think it rapidly becomes unreasonable to expect the man to have his narrative fully together, now or indeed at any point before the fire, for he is an amateur, and it doesn't necessarily diminish his relevance. If it really must be dissected then it ought to be possible to do it without tackling the man himself or losing sight of the fact that he nearly _died in a fire_.

The lack of identifying council workers is certainly interesting and a point worth making one way or another, but like everything else, it's just done in a way that at best is sympathetic to the council before anyone else. In a harsher light it's saying that the victims are wrong to have criticised the council because _actually_ if they'd just paid more attention they would have noticed who it was that helped. If you think this is pedantry then ask yourself how you would have tried to make the same observation either as a matter of fact or sympathetically - I don't imagine you'll find it that difficult, e.g. probably writing in a different voice for a start.

It's this grossly misjudged tone throughout that aggravates the most, but it's not the only issue with the thing.


----------



## Chilli.s (Jun 8, 2018)

I'v read the LRB thing now and broadly agree with the criticisms levelled on this thread. It strikes me as the start of the change of aired opinion that moves from the must find someone to blame angle and arrives at the it was all a sad culmination of mistakes and no one could foresee the consequence so none to blame point.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 8, 2018)

Chilli.s said:


> I'v read the LRB thing now and broadly agree with the criticisms levelled on this thread. It strikes me as the start of the change of aired opinion that moves from the must find someone to blame angle and arrives at the it was all a sad culmination of mistakes and no one could foresee the consequence so none to blame point.


He's either been nobbled or shown his true colours


----------



## 19force8 (Jun 8, 2018)

Miss-Shelf said:


> Lurdan thank you for collating all of that
> 
> I just saw this account responding to O'Hagan's article in LRB [don't know if it's been shared above]
> 
> Verso


This:


> The evidence gathered by O’Hagan came from the members of the local community. They were told that their accounts would be unedited; they were anything but. Reading his article is like looking through a kaleidoscope, I see everything I know refracted into something unrecognisable.


and the conclusion is telling:


> It is not coincidental that the LRB put the online version of the article out as the final testimonies from bereaved families and survivors were heard at the Public Inquiry. Within the LRB, Kensington’s toryism telegraphs its moves in the Public Inquiry. For this, we have O’Hagan to thank.


----------



## likesfish (Jun 8, 2018)

72 people died in a bloc managed by C&K the Leaders may be lovely people to chat down the wine bar but they fucked up and were the ones where the buck stopped.
 Same unfortunately with the leadership of the fire brigade on the night they cocked up it was probably a disaster anyway but they made mistakes.
Survivors not being the grateful poor well if the council had done its job you wouldn't be dealing with the  traumatised survivors buying a 100 odd flats is would not bankrupt chelsea council even in london


----------



## 19force8 (Jun 8, 2018)

likesfish said:


> 72 people died in a bloc managed by C&K the Leaders may be lovely people to chat down the wine bar but they fucked up and were the ones where the buck stopped.
> Same unfortunately with the leadership of the fire brigade on the night they cocked up it was probably a disaster anyway but they made mistakes.


The council's "mistakes" were part of an ideological attack on the welfare state. The fire brigade made mistakes on the basis of what they thought was best practice.

The former resulted in dozens of deaths, the latter made Herculean efforts to save lives.

Definitely not the same


----------



## existentialist (Jun 8, 2018)

19force8 said:


> The council's "mistakes" were part of an ideological attack on the welfare state. The fire brigade made mistakes on the basis of what they thought was best practice.
> 
> The former resulted in dozens of deaths, the latter made Herculean efforts to save lives.
> 
> Definitely not the same


Furthermore, if the council had not already turned the place into a deathtrap whereby fast decisions made under pressure on the scene had such potential for catastrophe, that responsibility would not have rested with the fire service in the first place.

There's a bit too much of this "so we take this situation as read, NOW look what a fuckup the people at the sharp end of things made" thinking going on - from Brexit, through benefits, to stuff like this. The buck stops a long way back from the fire service's actions on the night, and anyone who is trying to shift the blame there can only be up to no good.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 8, 2018)

existentialist said:


> Furthermore, if the council had not already turned the place into a deathtrap whereby fast decisions made under pressure on the scene had such potential for catastrophe, that responsibility would not have rested with the fire service in the first place.
> 
> There's a bit too much of this "so we take this situation as read, NOW look what a fuckup the people at the sharp end of things made" thinking going on - from Brexit, through benefits, to stuff like this. The buck stops a long way back from the fire service's actions on the night, and anyone who is trying to shift the blame there can only be up to no good.


from my pov it feels like the cops trying to exculpate themselves from the disdain and contempt which is felt for them round grenfell by saying 'we're not racist, it's them the firemen, they're racist'. but that cock won't fight.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 8, 2018)

existentialist said:


> There's a bit too much of this "so we take this situation as read, NOW look what a fuckup the people at the sharp end of things made" thinking going on - from Brexit, through benefits, to stuff like this. The buck stops a long way back from the fire service's actions on the night, and anyone who is trying to shift the blame there can only be up to no good.



It's asking why. The fire service advice _was wrong_ on the night, but why was that, and who was to blame for the reasons why it was wrong? Not the fire service.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 8, 2018)

subtly pushing blame towards first responders is always the tell of those higher up looking to distance themselves from the issues


----------



## likesfish (Jun 8, 2018)

first responders got a shit sandwich but it had been made by others.
  If the building hadn't been converted into a firelighter their advice would have worked as it was people died needlessly, fortunately, the fire service doesn't get to practice high rise fires in a shoddily rebuilt death traps so aren't expert in what to do.

the Council leadership are responsible for C&K are not a poor council not sure mays at fault the ministers who decided not to act on the warnings about cladding are though.


----------



## maomao (Jun 8, 2018)

likesfish said:


> the fire service doesn't get to practice high rise fires in a shoddily rebuilt death traps so aren't expert in what to do.


Lakanal should have been a warning really but it was taken as a one off when it seems to have been a pretty clear example of the state of London high rise housing in general.


----------



## crossthebreeze (Jun 8, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Just coming back to this now I have a moment more time - he absolutely is critical of the victims, sometimes subtly, sometimes not.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I know its a bit of a tangent, but the way he wrote that £900 pram bit really stuck in my craw - its the whole sneery if you're working class you shouldn't have luxuries thing - and the implication is obviously meant to be that the man was a chancer and the council were overly generous.  Whereas maybe his family had a pram like that which had been lost in the fire (those massive old fashioned and hugely expensive silver cross prams are really popular in some specific communities round here).  Maybe having something you can be confident is safe and clean and smart for transporting your kid around, or sitting outside with them, or that is not just used as a pram but as cot, playpen, car seat, etc might seem really important and be a totally rational ask when you've just been burnt out of your house and are in temporary accommodation.  Maybe the child (or one of the parents) had additional needs and needed a certain style of pram.  A totally fair enough ask.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 8, 2018)

crossthebreeze said:


> I know its a bit of a tangent, but the way he wrote that £900 pram bit really stuck in my craw - its the whole sneery if you're working class you shouldn't have luxuries thing - and the implication is obviously meant to be that the man was a chancer and the council were overly generous.  Whereas maybe his family had a pram like that which had been lost in the fire (those massive old fashioned and hugely expensive silver cross prams are really popular in some specific communities round here).  Maybe having something you can be confident is safe and clean and smart for transporting your kid around, or sitting outside with them, or that is not just used as a pram but as cot, playpen, car seat, etc might seem really important and be a totally rational ask when you've just been burnt out of your house and are in temporary accommodation.  Maybe the child (or one of the parents) had additional needs and needed a certain style of pram.  A totally fair enough ask.


I also think that if you have - as seems pretty evident - fucked up to the point that someone's entire life, if not their loved ones, has gone up in smoke, you're pretty much wide open to whatever they might choose to claim was lost. If you don't like the idea of your tenants asking for things you suspect they didn't have already, don't engineer their homes in such a way as to ensure the total destruction of everything they have.


----------



## likesfish (Jun 8, 2018)

exactly
poor sod had lost friends and possibly family and knew "the council" had been responsible for why the flats went up like a tinderbox.
  expecting gratitude a bit much when it was your fault the person was living in a hotel.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 8, 2018)

Fire brigade faces police inquiry over Grenfell 'stay put' order


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 8, 2018)

teqniq said:


> View attachment 137586
> 
> Fire brigade faces police inquiry over Grenfell 'stay put' order


The more of this sort of chaff that gets thrown around, the easier it is to justify the "nobody really to blame" conclusion.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 8, 2018)

Plumdaff said:


> It's asking why. The fire service advice _was wrong_ on the night, but why was that, and who was to blame for the reasons why it was wrong? Not the fire service.


it was the wrong advice for the right reasons. when i lived in a tower block we got new doors which we were told would last a certain amount of time in a fire, and being as there was a fire station down the end of the road i was confident of a swift response. if things had been as they should then the advice was at the time good: and of course no one had bothered to let the fire service know the place was rigged to go up like a roman candle.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 8, 2018)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The more of this sort of chaff that gets thrown around, the easier it is to justify the "nobody really to blame" conclusion.


 
Chaff is a perfect term for this!


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 8, 2018)

Pulling together the various strings of this is not easy.

At the heart of it we have a catastrophic construction project where Building Regs have been ignored and no one in the chain has taken responsibility. It was mentioned up thread that projects don't necessarily have to comply with Building Regs if a suitable justification has been given.  Clearly not the case, which brings us onto the second point.

What on earth has been going on in the regulation of the construction sector.  Everyone knew fire regs were weak years and years ago, they were far to open to interpretation and it fell upon the manufacturers (who's sole aim is to flog product) to interpret these guidelines.  Everyone knew this and especially the government did and we know that twat Barwell sat on the problem for a couple of years as did his predecessors.

Thirdly we have the roll of the local authority both before and after the disaster.  Fourthly there is the wider role of the government and the engineered housing crisis which led to poor people being stacked on top of each with scant regard to any basic level of safety or security.  A tower block (full of people who are the victims of our terrible housing system) surrounded by hundreds of empty, million pound plus properties.

Lastly is the roll of the fire service and was the advice correct?  To my mind this is the least troubling of all of the above.  I remember commenting on this thread at the time about all the praise the government were heaping onto the first responders immediately after the event, even to the point of virtually ignoring those who had been killed or lost everything.  Now, they would have us believe, the fire service were useless and racists to boot - it beggars belief really.   The fact that the police seem to have opened an investigation against the fire service before any of the criminally negligent persons involved in the construction project says it all really. 

I think its vitally important that with everything else that was going on we should never forget that this was a disaster primarily created by crooks in the construction companies and the cunts involved should not be allowed to just slink away.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 8, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> I think its vitally important that with everything else that was going on we should never forget that this was a disaster primarily created by crooks in the construction companies and the cunts involved should not be allowed to just slink away.



I know quoting yourself is bad form but I just wanted to expand on this.

My fear is that the government will try and protect the construction industry for fear of the industry just pointing out the piss poor regulatory environment which of course puts the government square in the frame.

Keeping the pressure on the industry will ultimately force the government's hand. That is my hope.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 8, 2018)

Over-focus on the role of the firefighters can distract from the more important question about regulation in the construction industry. But so can over-focus on this one particular council. That's not to say that they should be excused of the responsibilities they had to properly manage the building in use, but as far as the design and construction of the refurb is concerned, making sure that was done properly was down to the designers, installers and the regulations that apply to them. It's easy to say that the situation was caused by cost-cutting, and it's not that that is irrelevant, but if a cost cutting measure is proposed that compromises fire safety then there should be a system that makes sure that such a measure is simply not allowed. If it was cost reasons that lead to the final cladding spec being chosen (and it's not entirely clear at this point if it was) the principal failure is still in the fact that the spec was allowed at all.

The reality is that you also see poor, and unsafe, construction standards in high-end and private housing projects. The dodgy installation stuff gets hidden behind the finish whether the finish is plasterboard or marble. Pressures to drive down cost are there in all building projects, and in the end those pressures are inevitable. There needs to be a strong regulatory system to provide protection from them and the biggest lesson from Grenfell as far as I can see is that this system is not there.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 8, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> ...Now, they would have us believe, the fire service were useless and racists to boot - it beggars belief really...


Not really unfortunately. The modus operandi of those within positions of power if it looks like they may be held accountable somewhere down the road is to cast around for scapegoats and then smear, smear, smear.


----------



## maomao (Jun 8, 2018)

I've believed the stay put advice was wrong since the results of the Lakanal enquiry but it's not a straightforward thing to change it. The change to 'just get the fuck out if you can' only happened when it was clear large numbers of people were going to die. It's not really good advice for everyone on it's own. It nly works for relatively fit and mobile people and only with some sort of training and information on how best to make your way through a burning building.


----------



## fucthest8 (Jun 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it was the wrong advice for the right reasons. when i lived in a tower block we got new doors which we were told would last a certain amount of time in a fire, and being as there was a fire station down the end of the road i was confident of a swift response. if things had been as they should then the advice was at the time good: and of course no one had bothered to let the fire service know the place was rigged to go up like a roman candle.



One of the firefighters who had been in and out of Grenfell on the night was interviewed on radio 4 last week. They kept asking him if he regretted the stay put order. After making it clear that he wasn't personally responsible, he really struggled to find the right way to answer, eventually settling on "fire does not spread like that" and when pushed "in my XX years of experience, fire _does not_ spread like that".

(Can't remember the exact number of years, it was a lot, 20 or 30).

Pretty obvious what he meant.


----------



## kebabking (Jun 8, 2018)

Much as I agree with others that whatever errors, or not, on the FB's part are very much small beer compared to the somewhat larger problem of flammable building materials and a non-existant testing and regulation environment, I think it's worth looking at whether there is a problem with the training of senior fire officers with regards to decision making and command.

In both this incident and the Manchester bombing the FB's were significantly behind what was happening - they had a plan in both cases, and no plan is perfect and it never survives contact with reality, so don't blame them for the plan not working - the problem is that in both cases there was a real time lag between it becoming apparent that the existing plan wasn't working and anyone making a decision that a new plan was required.

That's not slagging off firefighters, it's wondering if two very different incidents that showed _similar _problems with regards to decision making at a senior level might have a basis in how those senior officers are trained.


----------



## mauvais (Jun 8, 2018)

fucthest8 said:


> One of the firefighters who had been in and out of Grenfell on the night was interviewed on radio 4 last week. They kept asking him if he regretted the stay put order. After making it clear that he wasn't personally responsible, he really struggled to find the right way to answer, eventually settling on "fire does not spread like that" and when pushed "in my XX years of experience, fire _does not_ spread like that".
> 
> (Can't remember the exact number of years, it was a lot, 20 or 30).
> 
> Pretty obvious what he meant.


Yeah, I heard this too. I think the interviewer might have referenced O'Hagan too actually, but I'm not sure.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jun 8, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Yeah, I heard this too. I think the interviewer might have referenced O'Hagan too actually, but I'm not sure.


That was another of the many things that annoyed me about O’Hagan - what felt like an extended characterisation of the FB’s reaction as wrong. I mean we all know it was wrong in hindsight but it was right in theory and criticism would only be valid based on some failure to identify the change in circumstances from normal and/or failure to communicate it in time, neither of which I felt he backed up.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 8, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Just coming back to this now I have a moment more time - he absolutely is critical of the victims, sometimes subtly, sometimes not.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If people didn't associate the person sat across from them with the council, why didn't they fucking say they were from the council?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 9, 2018)

Good doc by sonya poulton. Deserves many views.


----------



## gosub (Jun 11, 2018)

I 'regret' my Grenfell reaction - May

 "What I did not do on that first visit was meet the residents and survivors who had escaped the blaze.
"But the residents of Grenfell Tower needed to know that those in power recognised and understood their despair.
"And I will always regret that by not meeting them that day, it seemed as though I didn't care."


i wonder if it was the Queen who pointed this shit out to her


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2018)

gosub said:


> I 'regret' my Grenfell reaction - May
> 
> "What I did not do on that first visit was meet the residents and survivors who had escaped the blaze.
> "But the residents of Grenfell Tower needed to know that those in power recognised and understood their despair.
> ...


the queen learned her lesson
in september '97


----------



## gosub (Jun 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the queen learned her lesson
> in september '97


Acttually, the Queen learned how to "fix" cars long before that


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2018)

gosub said:


> Acttually, the Queen learned how to "fix" cars long before that


i was referring to her apparent descent into seclusion following the _serendipitous _death of her daughter-in-law


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 11, 2018)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Good doc by sonya poulton. Deserves many views.




She repeats as fact the theory that 'political correctness' was responsible for the failures in dealing with gangs sexually exploiting children, as opposed to a combination of corruption and sheer disregard which there seems to be more evidence for.

Pretty good apart from that though.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 11, 2018)

gosub said:


> I 'regret' my Grenfell reaction - May
> 
> "What I did not do on that first visit was meet the residents and survivors who had escaped the blaze.
> "But the residents of Grenfell Tower needed to know that those in power recognised and understood their despair.
> "And I will always regret that by not meeting them that day, it showed I didn't care."


Corrected.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 12, 2018)

There's a response to the O'Hagan piece here:

The Tower: Rewriting Grenfell. ASH response to Andrew O’Hagan


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 12, 2018)

teuchter said:


> There's a response to the O'Hagan piece here:
> 
> The Tower: Rewriting Grenfell. ASH response to Andrew O’Hagan



Thanks. 

Give's O'Hagan's article the demolition it deserves.


----------



## krink (Jun 13, 2018)

I got an email at work saying all government (and local government) buildings etc will have a minute's silence tomorrow. I don't know for certain this is all the govt's idea but if it is, i think it's an absolute piss take and part of a government pr exercise. you'd quite likely be labelled negatively to question this but i think it's actually quite sick if this is a government initiative rather than from the victims and their supporters. anyone know?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jun 14, 2018)

Plumdaff said:


> It's asking why. The fire service advice _was wrong_ on the night, but why was that, and who was to blame for the reasons why it was wrong? Not the fire service.



Perhaps their advice was based on an assumption that the cladding wasn't illegal.

I suspect the general aiming of blame at them could be a conscious strategy.

From the minute the horror started to unfold, highly paid people (I daresay from our money) had a job to cover arses regarding any elite responsibility. Given the woeful authority response, it's fair to assume that more time was spent on these concerns than those of the dead, homeless and traumatised untermensch.


----------



## andysays (Jun 14, 2018)

krink said:


> I got an email at work saying all government (and local government) buildings etc will have a minute's silence tomorrow. I don't know for certain this is all the govt's idea but if it is, i think it's an absolute piss take and part of a government pr exercise. you'd quite likely be labelled negatively to question this but i think it's actually quite sick if this is a government initiative rather than from the victims and their supporters. anyone know?



Grenfell Tower lit green a year after fire


> ...And a minute's silence will be observed nationally at midday.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 14, 2018)

Another fire in another tower block.

Blaze breaks out in London tower block

Fortunately looks like its been contained through adequate firestopping and a sprinkler system.  What could have been...


----------



## ricbake (Jun 14, 2018)

andysays said:


> Grenfell Tower lit green a year after fire



Lambeth bathed the Town Hall in green light in solidarity last night - must have cost £1000s


----------



## andysays (Jun 14, 2018)

ricbake said:


> Lambeth bathed the Town Hall in green light in solidarity last night - must have cost £1000s


I suspect that gestures of solidarity like this are far easier and cheaper than ensuring this never happens again, and crucially, can be done without actually establishing who is responsible.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 14, 2018)

andysays said:


> I suspect that gestures of solidarity like this are far easier and cheaper than ensuring this never happens again, and crucially, can be done without actually establishing who is responsible.


Better yet, it offers an answer to the question "Who's responsible?". Which is "Don't you care about all those people who suffered - is it all about finding someone to blame for you?" <cynical >


----------



## oryx (Jun 14, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Another fire in another tower block.
> 
> Blaze breaks out in London tower block
> 
> Fortunately looks like its been contained through adequate firestopping and a sprinkler system.  What could have been...



What could have been, indeed. I assume it's a private block if it had a sprinkler system (there's a lot of new private blocks in that area).


----------



## oryx (Jun 14, 2018)

Did anyone see the programme about the history of Grenfell Tower and the Lancaster West estate, and the surrounding area?

Very interesting in a 'Secret History of Our Streets' way. It focused largely on the history of class division within the area.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jun 14, 2018)

oryx said:


> What could have been, indeed. I assume it's a private block if it had a sprinkler system (there's a lot of new private blocks in that area).


This building looks like it was built after 2007, the year when it became mandatory for all new buildings above 30m (like this one) to have sprinklers fitted regardless of public/private ownership.

EDIT: not compulsory for 30m+ buildings built prior to 2007 to have sprinklers retrofitted. I remember Paget Brown (ex-leader of KCC) claiming Grenfell residents were against the installation of a sprinkler system but there's no evidence to back this up which there would be if his claim was true (meeting minutes etc.).


----------



## Beermoth (Jun 14, 2018)

Tube driver halts journey and waves to people holding Grenfell vigil – video


----------



## davesgcr (Jun 14, 2018)

oryx said:


> Did anyone see the programme about the history of Grenfell Tower and the Lancaster West estate, and the surrounding area?
> 
> Very interesting in a 'Secret History of Our Streets' way. It focused largely on the history of class division within the area.



Excellent programme - going to watch it again.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 21, 2018)

Another lengthy response to O'Hagan's article in the LRB on the Grenfell Action Group blog

O’HAGAN’S IVORY TOWER – PART TWO


----------



## rekil (Jun 27, 2018)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Good doc by sonya poulton. Deserves many views.





SpookyFrank said:


> She repeats as fact the theory that 'political correctness' was responsible for the failures in dealing with gangs sexually exploiting children, as opposed to a combination of corruption and sheer disregard which there seems to be more evidence for.
> 
> Pretty good apart from that though.


Poulton is a loon whose CV includes an interview with Michael Shrimpton for Icke.


----------



## AnandLeo (Jun 28, 2018)

The fate of the perished victims was ominous, because there was no angelic firefighter or police officer in London to shout total evacuation overriding the stay put order, no sooner than the ferociously spreading fire engulfed the building, and was not contained in a flat where it started. It is esoteric wisdom.   
Grenfell firefighters questioned 'stay put' order which doomed residents 
Firefighters tackling the devastating blaze at Grenfell Tower urged senior officers to abandon the policy of telling residents to stay inside their flats, a public inquiry heard.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 28, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> The fate of the perished victims was ominous, because there was no angelic firefighter or police officer in London to shout total evacuation overriding the stay put order, no sooner than the ferociously spreading fire engulfed the building, and was not contained in a flat where it started. It is esoteric wisdom.
> Grenfell firefighters questioned 'stay put' order which doomed residents
> Firefighters tackling the devastating blaze at Grenfell Tower urged senior officers to abandon the policy of telling residents to stay inside their flats, a public inquiry heard.



Angelic?
Esoteric wisdom?

Fucking do one, yeah.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 28, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> The fate of the perished victims was ominous, because there was no angelic firefighter or police officer in London to shout total evacuation overriding the stay put order, no sooner than the ferociously spreading fire engulfed the building, and was not contained in a flat where it started. It is esoteric wisdom.
> Grenfell firefighters questioned 'stay put' order which doomed residents
> Firefighters tackling the devastating blaze at Grenfell Tower urged senior officers to abandon the policy of telling residents to stay inside their flats, a public inquiry heard.


oh dear


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 28, 2018)

copliker said:


> Poulton is a loon whose CV includes an interview with Michael Shrimpton for Icke.


speaking of loons...


AnandLeo said:


> The fate of the perished victims was ominous, because there was no angelic firefighter or police officer in London to shout total evacuation overriding the stay put order, no sooner than the ferociously spreading fire engulfed the building, and was not contained in a flat where it started. It is esoteric wisdom.
> Grenfell firefighters questioned 'stay put' order which doomed residents
> Firefighters tackling the devastating blaze at Grenfell Tower urged senior officers to abandon the policy of telling residents to stay inside their flats, a public inquiry heard.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jul 18, 2018)

Does anyone know, with regard to the 300+ tower blocks that have unsafe cladding, what the ages of the cladding are? I’m trying to work out when unsuitable cladding started getting used, i.e. is there a particular date when the building control system started breaking down, and how this might relate to the privatisation of building control.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 28, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> Does anyone know, with regard to the 300+ tower blocks that have unsafe cladding, what the ages of the cladding are? I’m trying to work out when unsuitable cladding started getting used, i.e. is there a particular date when the building control system started breaking down, and how this might relate to the privatisation of building control.



Anecdotally the only buildings round here getting their cladding replaced post-Grenfell have had the cladding for less than ten years. In some cases they're new buildings which had the flammable cladding as part of the original design.


----------



## Casual Observer (Aug 8, 2018)

ITV have seen a 'fire deficiency notice' from the London Fire Brigade that was sent to KCTMO in November 2016 highlighting multiple safety failures at Grenfell Tower which required 'prompt action'. The deadline for remedial action imposed by the LFB was May 2017, one month before the June 2017 fire which killed 72 people.

The 'fire deficiency notice'  has not been made public. That phrase is ITV's by the way - I think 'enforcement notice' is the official parlance. Incidentally, such a notice is not the most severe that the LFB (or another fire brigade) can serve but does require action within a set time period  - a 'prohibition notice' is more severe and requires a faster and more drastic response.

A separate fire risk assessment (FRA) was also carried out independently (not by the LFB) in June 2016, a year before the fire. The assessor then wrote to KCTMO in October 2016, just 8 months before the fire, to express concern that no action had been taken on more than 20 of the issues highlighted in their report.

One of the issues of concern raised to KCTMO was poorly fitted communal area fire doors. After the fire, 'experts' expressed surprise at the ease and speed with which smoke spread through the interior of the building.

Hopefully, this strengthens the case for corporate manslaugher against KCTMO at least.

More info on the link below but be warned that it does contain David Lammy.

The first documents that show there were official warnings about fire safety at Grenfell Tower months before tragedy


----------



## belboid (Aug 8, 2018)

Casual Observer said:


> The 'fire deficiency notice'  has not been made public. That phrase is ITV's by the way - I think 'enforcement notice' is the official parlance.


ITV are actually correct, surprisingly. 'A Notification of Fire Safety Deficiencies' is served if there are 'provisions and or procedures, which the Fire Authority considers as either lacking or not suitable and sufficient in regards to the  Premise.'


----------



## Treacle Toes (Aug 14, 2018)

How to get it soooooooooooooo wrong... 

*'JAA Studio’s view*
_The still, silent, blackened shell of Grenfell was a haunting and brutally honest account of what happened, and as such very disturbing to view in the aftermath. Now over a year on, the tower is cocooned in scaffolding and tarpaulin; not as raw, not as black, covered up. 

Grenfell Tower: in Memoriam retains the existing tower’s structure and encases it within a civic-scaled sarcophagus of 224 black concrete panels. Visually, the tower will remain part of the skyline, but differentiated from the similarly scaled blocks nearby by its lack of windows and unpunctured silhouette. It stands in the city scape, part of it, but standing apart. 

*At night, Flat 16 where the fire started, is illuminated amongst the mass of shadow, a small gilded beacon, a quiet nightly narrator of the tragic event. *

The rooftop is made accessible to form a memorial roof garden. A perimeter of columns topped by a canopy in pared-back black concrete as per the monolithic tower below, act as a muted backdrop to contrast to the newly planted colours and swaying wild flowers on this new 25th storey open to the sky. Stillness is formed, a true quiet space above the hustle and bustle. A place to stop. A place to reflect. A place to breathe. 

The physical proposals are somber, restrained, quiet, yet effective through their presence in the medium and distant views, how the memorial speaks to the city and to the local area. At close range however, the bottom four floors are renovated and re-purposed, made a pleasant and approachable space. These levels are extended and clad in glazing, lightweight and open, in contrast to the imposing and expressive bulk of the tower above - the scheme is not only physically present as a memorial, but also of purpose and use to the community. A new community centre is introduced, the boxing club is reinstated as well as a small permanent documentary gallery to the disaster and its victims. 

All other floors are closed off, serving no purpose other than to form the monument in the landscape. 

This project does not claim to be the answer to the difficult conditions found in the aftermath of Grenfell, but instead offers an alternative way of thinking about the site (and others similar) and its new-found sanctity through disaster. If we build over these individual spaces borne out of tragedy we will forget over time. And the city needs its scars; the city needs to remember. Because if we don’t, in the future we won’t only be discussing Ronan Point and Grenfell, but who knows how many other avoidable catastrophes.'_

MP slams architects’ ‘misery porn’ Grenfell Tower memorial concept


----------



## hash tag (Aug 30, 2018)

Restores your faith, huh?

Finance manager admits spending £60k of Grenfell victim fund on herself


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2018)

hash tag said:


> Restores your faith, huh?
> 
> Finance manager admits spending £60k of Grenfell victim fund on herself



so grenfell victims, the nhs and a museum. no wonder her husband doesn't want her to come back, she's plumbing the depths of human iniquity


----------



## hash tag (Aug 30, 2018)

I really don't know how people can be so cruel and mean. She must have had a reasonable income.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 30, 2018)

There has been quite few people looking to make a quick buck out of the misery of others at Grenfell.  As far as I can tell most of them have just been desperate chancers but this is a new low. What the fuck is wrong with someone like this?


----------



## hot air baboon (Oct 15, 2018)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 31, 2018)

If you haven't watched it, I suggest checking out on the iPlayer 'The Fires that Foretold Grenfell' that was shown last night on BBC2.

Lessons should have been learnt from previous fires, dating back to the 'Summerland' one on the Isle of Mann in 1973, un-fucking-unbelievable. 

Summerland disaster - Wikipedia


----------



## davesgcr (Oct 31, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> If you haven't watched it, I suggest checking out on the iPlayer 'The Fires that Foretold Grenfell' that was shown last night on BBC2.
> 
> Lessons should have been learnt from previous fires, dating back to the 'Summerland' one on the Isle of Mann in 1973, un-fucking-unbelievable.
> 
> Summerland disaster - Wikipedia



One of my volunteer colleagues spent a lifetime working nearby in the Fire Research department at Garston (near here) , and as a young man was flown to investigate the Summerland disaster - (there were no other senior bods around) - he contributed to this programme and was interviewed , but did not appear on it. 

He does not like to talk about it , or some of the other bad fires he had to cast professional judgement over.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 31, 2018)




----------



## D'wards (Nov 5, 2018)

Fuck's sake 
Laughing party-goers burn Grenfell Tower effigy in 'appalling' bonfire night scenes


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 5, 2018)

I saw that video earlier and decided that those evil cunts didn't deserve their racist cuntiness to be posted on this thread.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 5, 2018)

There's a separate thread about it here:

https://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/britains-biggest-morons.361622/

Perhaps better to post on that one, to avoid polluting this one.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 6, 2018)

What a scumbag. 



> A man has pleaded guilty to fraud after claiming more than £100,000 intended for victims of the Grenfell Tower fire.
> 
> Sharife Elouahabi, 38, of Chelsea Manor Street, south-west London, said he was living in the tower at the time of the fire in 2017.
> 
> However, an investigation revealed he had been living at another address and not at Grenfell Tower.



Man pleads guilty to Grenfell Tower fraud


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> What a scumbag.
> 
> 
> 
> Man pleads guilty to Grenfell Tower fraud


there's been quite a few of those


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> there's been quite a few of those



I know, very depressing.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 10, 2018)

"Unforgivable cowardice" Government won't allow company to criticise May over Grenfell Tower fire


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 23, 2018)

Back in June the Inquiry published initial reports from some of the experts it has commissioned.

Last Monday it published a further batch of reports. Some of these are updated final versions of reports issued back in June, as the authors have conducted further work and thought about their conclusions. A couple are new.

All of these reports are available as PDFs on the Inquiry website. Unfortunately, as with the first batch these are very large unoptimized PDF files, and a couple of the reports have been split into multiple chapters and appendices. The full set of 75 files total 2.87GB.

I've optimized the reports for myself and joined the multi-part reports together. This produced 10 files totalling 231MB. Here they are in case they are of use to anyone else.

Obviously I don't possess a magic wand and compressing the fuck out of files will affect quality to some degree. The results are perfectly readable IMO (YMMV) but tables with small print for example look noticeably worse.

Updated reports :

Luke Bisby - On the fire spread and in particular the contribution of the cladding materials. PDF here (21.2MB)

(Bisby has also produced video evidence available on the Inquiry website, including one of the various pieces of video footage taken at the time put into a timeline. Personally I found this somewhat upsetting to watch).

Jose Torero - On how the fire developed. PDF of the main report here (13.5MB). There is also an addendum to the report. PDF here (69KB).

Niamh Nic Daeid - On the cause of the fire in Flat 16. PDF here (9.49MB).

Barbara Lane - On the fire protection measures in place on the night of the fire, the extent to which they failed to control it and the extent to which they contributed to it. This is the largest of the reports at over 2100 pages (and it's grown by a third since June). I've joined the sections of the main report as one file. PDF here (74.6MB). And the appendices as a second. PDF here (70.2MB). There is also a file of corrections and addenda. PDF here (1.07MB)

New reports :

David Purser - On the toxic gases produced by fires and their effects on people exposed to them, the specific toxins likely to have been produced by the materials used in Grenfell Tower and the likely causes of death and incapacitation as a result. PDF here (6.5MB)

John Duncan Glover - On the possibility that the fire in Flat 16 was caused by faulty electrics. This report was also split into multiple sections which I have joined. PDF here (21.9MB). (The quality of the original PDF of the main report was rather poor). There is an accompanying rather technical report in multiple parts on a damage assessment carried out on materials recovered from the fire scene which I have also joined. PDF here (12.4MB).

These updated reports have been issued as some of their authors give evidence about them. So far this week Jose Torero, Luke Bisby and Barbara Lane have appeared. Lane is back on Monday. Video and transcripts of all the sessions are on the Inquiry website and the video is also on their YouTube channel.

However the best way to keep up with the Inquiry IMO is still the podcast the BBC produces every day that the Inquiry is in session.

BBC Radio - The Grenfell Tower Inquiry with Eddie Mair - Downloads - BBC site


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 23, 2018)

Lurdan said:


> Back in June the Inquiry published initial reports from some of the experts it has commissioned.
> 
> Last Monday it published a further batch of reports. Some of these are updated final versions of reports issued back in June, as the authors have conducted further work and thought about their conclusions. A couple are new.
> 
> ...


good work


----------



## hash tag (Dec 12, 2018)

Speaks for itself Luxury Kensington complex will have just five affordable homes


----------



## maomao (Dec 12, 2018)

hash tag said:


> Speaks for itself Luxury Kensington complex will have just five affordable homes


That's a lie too. It will have zero affordable homes.


----------



## likesfish (Dec 13, 2018)

They are ramping up to blame the fire brigade whose advice did kill people But their advice would have been sound if Grenfell hadn't been wrapped in the highly inflammable cladding


----------



## existentialist (Dec 13, 2018)

hash tag said:


> Speaks for itself Luxury Kensington complex will have just five affordable homes


Wouldn't it be a shame if the whole lot burned down?


----------



## two sheds (Dec 13, 2018)

I thought this was a strange statement to make:




> *Grenfell cladding firm: 'fire could have been put out with simple extinguisher'*
> 
> The manufacturer of the combustible panels wrapped around Grenfell Tower has claimed other materials were responsible for spreading the fire that claimed 72 lives and said it could have been put out with a handheld fire extinguisher.
> 
> Arconic, which made the Reynobond aluminium composite panels which were filled with plastic that burned with an intensity that has been compared to petrol, made a combative closing statement, claiming that it was possible no one would have died if other aspects of the refurbishment had been different.



Sounds a bit like saying the California fires could have been put out with a wet blanket if they'd been caught early enough. 

*Grenfell cladding firm: 'fire could have been put out with simple extinguisher'*


----------



## dessiato (Dec 13, 2018)

I can only assume they're trying to pass the buck.


----------



## lizzieloo (Dec 13, 2018)

likesfish said:


> They are ramping up to blame the fire brigade whose advice did kill people But their advice would have been sound if Grenfell hadn't been wrapped in the highly inflammable cladding



I've listened to the whole podcast series that has been broadcast every day the enquiry sat, there really are valid arguments for the "suits, not the uniforms" of the LFB having got things wrong, that doesn't sit at all well with me given the chaos on that night but the arguments are valid.

The fire fighters themselves were put into an impossible situation though. Cuts by the government pretty much meant the LFB's hands were tied anyway

It's a tough thing to hear given the chaos of that night and I'm sure that the blame should lie somewhere within the tarting up of the tower to make it look nice for the posh people living outside it and Whirlpool whose statements and reports on what they "believe" happened is beyond belief.

The closing statements are well worth listening to. (I'm yet to listen to Wednesday's)

BBC Radio - The Grenfell Tower Inquiry with Eddie Mair, 105 Closing Statements: Day 1

BBC Radio - The Grenfell Tower Inquiry with Eddie Mair, 106 Closing Statements: Day 2

BBC Radio - The Grenfell Tower Inquiry with Eddie Mair, 107 Closing Statements: Day 3


----------



## teuchter (Dec 13, 2018)

two sheds said:


> I thought this was a strange statement to make:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't think it's a strange statement. Just because one building component is flammable under certain conditions, doesn't mean it's unsafe. It's the whole system that has to be assessed and it's the whole system that was at fault, as they say. To mention that the core of the panels burnt 'like petrol' is meaningless. Lots of buildings use timber in the construction and timber burns 'like firewood'.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 13, 2018)

lizzieloo said:


> the tarting up of the tower to make it look nice for the posh people living outside it



This conspiracy theory still doing the rounds, then.


----------



## lizzieloo (Dec 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> This conspiracy theory still doing the rounds, then.



In the enquiry, yes.


----------



## likesfish (Dec 13, 2018)

its the cladding that caused the extensive fire FB leadership were slow to change the plan but they trained for how tower blocks are meant to behave not how a towerblock wrapped in firelighters behaves because obviously, you don't expect somebody to wrap a tower block in the highly flammable cladding to save £5grand because that would be moronic and evil.
 oh sorry, torys.
  Fortunately, we don't have regular massive fires so the skills and drills to rapidly deploy multiple engines and coordinate multiple crews are sadly a bit rusty  unfortunately the Fire brigade won't have a build-up period to rehearse and fine tune because we can't predict these disasters though typically looking back it's going to be fucking obvious


----------



## teuchter (Dec 13, 2018)

The 'saving £5grand' bit isn't really the relevant bit.

The failings are in the building regs, how they are drafted, interpreted and enforced and how inspections are carried out. These failings are there regardless of the budget for any job.


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> The 'saving £5grand' bit isn't really the relevant bit.
> 
> The failings are in the building regs, how they are drafted, interpreted and enforced and how inspections are carried out. These failings are there regardless of the budget for any job.


Do you know when the building regs environment gets looked at in the enquiry? Doesn't really seem to have come out yet.

A small rant arising from that question: I know K&C councillors with double barrelled surnames are fair game, but to my mind the focus on them and the inequality within the borough (as though that is the borough's doing) has let the central government off the hook far, far too lightly so far. The inequality is appalling but it is largely a result of national policies, not local councillors (minor tax tweaks wouldn't really have changed much - odious as it was that K&C gave a rebate), and the building regs are definitely a matter of central government policy. 

One of the missed opportunites of O'Hagan's shitty LRB piece was that I think he was right that left wing activists hit the wrong targets by going after the living caricatures that are K&C councillors. You can't build a political movement on asking a few posh councillors to stand down. They stand down and nothing changes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> Do you know when the building regs environment gets looked at in the enquiry? Doesn't really seem to have come out yet.
> 
> A small rant arising from that question: I know K&C councillors with double barrelled surnames are fair game, but to my mind the focus on them and the inequality within the borough (as though that is the borough's doing) has let the central government off the hook far, far too lightly so far. The inequality is appalling but it is largely a result of national policies, not local councillors (minor tax tweaks wouldn't really have changed much - odious as it was that K&C gave a rebate), and the building regs are definitely a matter of central government policy.
> 
> One of the missed opportunites of O'Hagan's shitty LRB piece was that I think he was right that left wing activists hit the wrong targets by going after the living caricatures that are K&C councillors. You can't build a political movement on asking a few posh councillors to stand down. They stand down and nothing changes.


how long would you give k&c to make some impact on inequality in the borough, being as they've already had 53 years?


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> how long would you give k&c to make some impact on inequality in the borough, being as they've already had 53 years?


As I say, it's largely a matter of central government policy, as all the inequality in the UK is. Local authorities in the UK have very little power, and less with each day of cuts.

For instance, anecdotally neither the old money in the borough, nor the poorer voters in the north of the borough, nor the councillors, nor the council officials actually liked or wanted the influx of the super-rich into the borough, sending prices through the roof and leaving homes empty most of the year. There was nothing they could do about it. The central government created the environment for that to happen, and the local authority had no tools with which to stop it.

Edit: but in case it isn't clear, my point isn't to let Tory councillors off the hook, it's to say that the central government should be very much on the hook. I believe that if the finger doesn't get pointed more at central government then most of the causal factors of the grenfell fire will go unaddressed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> As I say, it's largely a matter of central government policy, as all the inequality in the UK is. Local authorities in the UK have very little power, and less with each day of cuts.
> 
> For instance, anecdotally neither the old money in the borough, nor the poorer voters in the north, nor the councillors, nor the council officials actually liked or wanted the influx of the super-rich into the borough, sending prices through the roof and leaving homes empty most of the year. There was nothing they could do about it. The central government created the environment for that to happen, and the local authority had no tools with which to stop it.


53 years and they've not had the slightest impact on it, according to you.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I don't think it's a strange statement. Just because one building component is flammable under certain conditions, doesn't mean it's unsafe. It's the whole system that has to be assessed and it's the whole system that was at fault, as they say. To mention that the core of the panels burnt 'like petrol' is meaningless. Lots of buildings use timber in the construction and timber burns 'like firewood'.



Yes, although you wouldn't want a multi-story block of flats to be clad in extremely flammable wood either. Yes you look at the whole system but you wouldn't want any component of that system to be extremely flammable and allow fire to spread rapidly because that's where it's going to fail.


----------



## teqniq (Dec 14, 2018)

What the fuck?


----------



## brogdale (Dec 14, 2018)

The state of this.


----------



## agricola (Dec 15, 2018)

likesfish said:


> its the cladding that caused the extensive fire FB leadership were slow to change the plan but they trained for how tower blocks are meant to behave not how a towerblock wrapped in firelighters behaves because obviously, you don't expect somebody to wrap a tower block in the highly flammable cladding to save £5grand because that would be moronic and evil.
> oh sorry, torys.
> Fortunately, we don't have regular massive fires so the skills and drills to rapidly deploy multiple engines and coordinate multiple crews are sadly a bit rusty  unfortunately the Fire brigade won't have a build-up period to rehearse and fine tune because we can't predict these disasters though typically looking back it's going to be fucking obvious



Trumpton actually practice a lot, probably more than the other two London emergency services do (largely because they have more time to do it, and get a much clearer benefit from doing so).  As you say though, to practice (or even plan) for a Grenfell-style disaster is going to be impossible to do for real and almost impossible even as a tabletop exercise (given the absurd nature of what central government, RKBC and the contractors had done - it would be like trying to plan for an airliner crash but finding out when it happens that RKBC had suddenly decided to open an airport in the middle of its most densely populated estate, because it was in Zone 2).


----------



## NoXion (Dec 15, 2018)

teqniq said:


> What the fuck?
> 
> View attachment 155484



I take it that these thugs didn't bother showing any ID or otherwise identifying who they were working for? Because this is completely unacceptable behaviour.

But isn't this also a very stupid thing to do as well? I would have thought that this is one of those scenarios where you don't want to draw attention to yourselves. Even if you do tell your goons not to identify themselves, having them act all belligerent like this just screams "we've got something to hide!".


----------



## lizzieloo (Dec 15, 2018)

.


----------



## lizzieloo (Dec 15, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> Do you know when the building regs environment gets looked at in the enquiry? Doesn't really seem to have come out yet.



The first part of the enquiry was specifically looking at what happened on the night of the fire

The second part will be looking at everything leading up to it.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 15, 2018)

lizzieloo said:


> The first part of the enquiry was specifically looking at what happened on the night of the fire
> 
> The second part will be looking at everything leading up to it.



That will be the more significant and interesting part of the enquiry, I think.


----------



## GarveyLives (Mar 4, 2019)

​


----------



## GarveyLives (Mar 7, 2019)

The process of wearing down the victims ahead of a full-scale cover-up is now in full flow?

_"Survivors and the bereaved from the Grenfell Tower fire have expressed their “extreme frustration” at the pace of justice after *Scotland Yard admitted no charges were likely for at least two years* ..."_

Grenfell survivors’ anger as _police say no charges until 2021_


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

GarveyLives said:


> The process of wearing down the victims ahead of a full-scale cover-up is now in full flow?
> 
> _"Survivors and the bereaved from the Grenfell Tower fire have expressed their “extreme frustration” at the pace of justice after *Scotland Yard admitted no charges were likely for at least two years* ..."_
> 
> Grenfell survivors’ anger as _police say no charges until 2021_


the process of wearing down the survivors of that dreadful night has been in full flow for quite some time

if there'd have been riots then i am sure the process would have been much accelerated.


----------



## GarveyLives (Mar 23, 2019)

The growing stench around this affair is becoming unbearable:

Grenfell council spends more than £90k on bosses' bonuses


----------



## GarveyLives (Apr 8, 2019)

​


----------



## GarveyLives (Apr 16, 2019)

A summary of some of the Grenfell related stories in the media over the past few weeks ...

​


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 29, 2019)

Only just noticed that a Radio 4 documentary from last month has been added to the BBC's Grenfell podcast page

The Story of Flat 113

It deals with the events on the night through what happened to the occupants of the flats on the 14th floor, most of whom ended up in Flat 113, and who didn't all survive.

It's sensitively made but it's also quite powerful and I didn't find it an easy listen.


----------



## GarveyLives (May 2, 2019)

> "A housing boss in charge of Grenfell Tower before it went up in flames has been chosen to speak at a national housing conference on improving building safety, in a move that has provoked fury among survivors."



No - it's not some sort of belated April Fool's joke ...

Anger as Grenfell boss is invited to speak at housing safety event


----------



## Chilli.s (May 2, 2019)

GarveyLives said:


> No - it's not some sort of belated April Fool's joke ...
> 
> Anger as Grenfell boss is invited to speak at housing safety event


Ignorant and tasteless in the extreme. Rewarding failure.


----------



## GarveyLives (May 29, 2019)

> _"Kensington and Chelsea council made *£129* million from selling property in the years leading to the Grenfell fire tragedy - money that could have been spent on the tower’s renovation works which may have been fatally compromised by cost-cutting."_



Exclusive: Grenfell council had £129M it could have spent on tower renovation



> _"Here, we detail exactly when key decisions about the tower's renovation and how to finance it were made, alongside the council's property deals ..."_



Grenfell tower timeline: The key events 








(Source: as stated in image)

*Wasn't the guy from The Skinners’ Grammar School in Tunbridge Wells and Christ’s College, Cambridge with the 50-year legal career, who has also been Queen’s Counsel, receiving a knighthood while serving in the Commercial Court of the High Court in 1995, up to his appointment as Lord Justice of Appeal, supposed to tell us all this?*​


----------



## GarveyLives (Jun 8, 2019)

Hardly a surprise, given what has come to light thus far:

_"An MP has called out council officials, after claiming they described The Grenfell Tower area as “little Africa” and “full of people from the Tropics ...”
_
MP accuses Grenfell council of racism and snobbery


----------



## GarveyLives (Jun 14, 2019)

Two years later:

Two years on, Grenfell survivors accuse ministers of 'going through the motions'

And a sordid truth ...

_"It’s not that we don’t see injustice such as Grenfell or Windrush, it’s that we get bored by it ..."_

The shameful truth about Britain’s response to Grenfell






*Lest We Forget Them*​


----------



## GarveyLives (Jul 24, 2019)

Sadly, another victim ...

Grenfell campaigner, 51, killed herself after writing a note describing how witnessing the disaster had ruined her life, inquest hears






*"Dr Fiona Wilcox, recording a verdict of suicide, said: 'Amanda lived very close to the fire and there is no doubt that she was extremely traumatised by it.

'Following the fire she worked in the community providing support, acting as an advocate, making so many posts on social media and, at the time of her death, she was still working."*​


----------



## GarveyLives (Aug 19, 2019)

A further Grenfell Media Watch Update apprears below:

​


----------



## tim (Sep 9, 2019)

Block of flats ablaze in Worcester Park. 

Major blaze at south-west London flats

It doesn't look good!


----------



## Mation (Sep 9, 2019)

tim said:


> Block of flats ablaze in Worcester Park.
> 
> Major blaze at south-west London flats
> 
> It doesn't look good!


No physical injuries reported yet, thank fuck. This must be terrible for many people though


----------



## muscovyduck (Sep 9, 2019)

tim said:


> Block of flats ablaze in Worcester Park.
> 
> Major blaze at south-west London flats
> 
> It doesn't look good!



Fuck sake


----------



## brogdale (Sep 9, 2019)

One of the Berkeley Group's 'New England style' wood & cardboard blocks on "the Hamptons" development on the former Worcester Park sewage works.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 9, 2019)

Really rich estate built with wood. Lots like this in SW London.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 9, 2019)

Wood.


----------



## dessiato (Sep 9, 2019)

I've deliberately not read this thread for a while because it's so distressing. I came here today just to try to catch up, hopefully on positive news. All it's done is anger me. The scum who just seem to shrug off the damage they do to people's lives disgusts me.

I need to ignore this again. I'm just so angry and equally disgusted by the fudging around that's being done. Politicians, greedy landlords...arseholes at best


----------



## Jay Park (Sep 9, 2019)

dessiato said:


> I've deliberately not read this thread for a while because it's so distressing. I came here today just to try to catch up, hopefully on positive news. All it's done is anger me. The scum who just seem to shrug off the damage they do to people's lives disgusts me.
> 
> I need to ignore this again. I'm just so angry and equally disgusted by the fudging around that's being done. Politicians, greedy landlords...arseholes at best



Ditto, I could not and still cannot internalize the trauma that people experienced on that day and the disdain they’ve had to cope with since. Lending empathy and the usual platitudes just doesn’t quite cut it. 

I was a long way away when it happened and met a London lass on my travels, about a week or so after the fire, it was still smoking for fuck sake. We both were unable to contain our emotions. 

Those pictures of Jacob Twat-Bogg asleep in the commons (in my warped opinion) gave him a look that almost resembled being human (that jaded feeling from Brexit etc) and yet I’ve just remembered that his policies and his voting was a huge factor in this happening. Should be fucking hung.


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 9, 2019)

The Worcester Park fire is not the first of it's kind this year :


> Fire chiefs were trying to work out why the fire spread so fast. The estate was completed in 2010 and features timber frames.





> It is the third serious fire to affect a block fitted with wooden features this summer. A fire destroyed a block of 20 flats in Barking in June. The block, built in 2012, was clad with a wood-based material called Thermowood which had a Class D fire rating, according to _Inside Housing._ Last month a care home in Crewe built in 2009 was devastated by fire. It had a timber frame.





> Regulations state that external walls must rate as a Class B or higher for fire safety but this only applies to buildings more than 18m in height.


Worcester Park fire: families lose everything after blaze devastates block of flats - Times (paywalled) 



TopCat said:


> Really rich estate built with wood. Lots like this in SW London.



This particular block was managed by Metropolitan Thames Valley HA and at least some of the flats were shared ownership. 

Other parts of the Worcester Park estate are very upmarket indeed. However the plans for the development also included 40% 'affordable' rented housing (originally 150 out of 500 units). The 'affordable' units (built in brick rather than the wooden 'New England' style of the expensive stuff) were managed by Thames Valley Housing who merged last year with Metropolitan. 


> When tenants moved in, they had to sign a Good Neighbour Agreement, which amongst other rules, required that under-15s must be home and supervised by 9pm.
> 
> So if young teenagers want to play football together this summer, the homeowners can stay out on the lush green spaces until the cows come home, but the social tenants must go home early.





> Thames Valley Housing says the agreement was a preventive measure to stop anti-social behaviour before it starts.


(Inside Housing July 2008 - paywalled)

The situation produced this article in the Mail on Sunday 
Apartheid UK: How a controversial law to integrate social housing in new developments is creating mini-ghettos - Mail (2008)

Those social housing tenants eh. Imagine having one next door.

Metropolitan Thames Valley HA announced a very large fire safety programme earlier this year, and earlier this week advertised for an additional fire safety officer.


----------



## GarveyLives (Sep 10, 2019)

"Deeper into the long grass ..."

​


----------



## Manter (Sep 10, 2019)

Gavin fucking Barwell is on the honours list


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 10, 2019)

Manter said:


> Gavin fucking Barwell is on the honours list


Lord Grenfell


----------



## Poi E (Sep 10, 2019)

Feudal titles are for fuckwits. Dead fuckwits.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 10, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Feudal titles are for fuckwits. Dead fuckwits.


duke ellington? count basie?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 10, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Lord Grenfell


Think I'd prefer to see Lord complicit in murderous class-war negligence and blind-eye turning on of behalf of rich donor scum....cunt.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 10, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Lord Grenfell


i think you'll find that julian pascoe francis st leger grenfell is lord grenfell


----------



## GarveyLives (Sep 16, 2019)

No arrests to date, but now ...:

_London Fire Brigade_ officials interviewed under caution by police over disaster


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 16, 2019)

Would be shit if members of the fire brigade who would have been acting in good faith end up in jail while wilfully negligent politicians and construction firms escape blame.


----------



## GarveyLives (Oct 17, 2019)

A harrowing report:

Doreen Lawrence says Grenfell tragedy was linked to racism


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 29, 2019)

The report into phase 1 of the Grenfell inquiry (events on the night of the fire) is due to be published tomorrow (Wednesday). Yesterday core participants were given access ahead of that but the reports findings were supposed to be embargoed until it is published.


> The Chairman believes that it is very important that those most affected by the fire have the opportunity to consider the key findings in the report before it is made public. In particular, he wishes to avoid a situation in which Bereaved, Survivors and Resident core participants learn of any of the contents of the report as a consequence of media coverage arising from premature and unauthorised disclosure.



The Daily Telegraph has chosen to break the embargo and make some of the findings their lead story today. (Paywalled - archived here). [ETA: link broken - here's another].  Other papers have followed suit.

Grenfell inquiry finds fire brigade 'gravely' ill-prepared for blaze - The Guardian

The stories so far have led on criticisms of the Fire Brigade, but also state that the refurbishment was carried out in breach of safety regulations, and that the principal cause of the fire spread was the ACM (Aluminium Composite) panels the building was clad with. Without seeing the actual report it's impossible to judge whether this is a fair summary of its findings.

Back on the 15th October the Inquiry published initial details of phase 2 of the inquiry which is due to begin hearings on January 27th next year. It is to be split into eight modules looking at the various issues that phase 2 will cover. (Current list of issues - PDF file).

Module 1 - The Primary Refurbishment (Overview And Cladding)
Module 2 - Cladding Products – Testing/Certification, Product Marketing/Promotion
Module 3 - Complaints And Communication With Residents; Management Of Building, Compliance Rro 2005, Fire Risk Assessment; Active And Passive Fire Safety Measures Internal To Building.
Module 4 - Aftermath
Module 5 - Firefighting
Module 6 - Government
Module 7 - Experts
Module 8 - Evidence Relating To The Deceased


----------



## agricola (Oct 29, 2019)

Another triumph for the British Press.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 29, 2019)

agricola said:


> Another triumph for the British Press.


You cannot hope to bribe or twist
(thank God!) the British journalist
But seeing what they'll do
Unbribed there's no occasion to


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 29, 2019)

Why is phase 1 dealing with the response to the fire, surely phase 1 should look at the causes of the fire and phase 2 with the response to the fire?


----------



## teqniq (Oct 29, 2019)

If you blame the first responders at the beginning, that is what will stick in people's minds rather than the corrupt system that allowed this to happen in the first place.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 29, 2019)

It looks like the finger is being pointed at the command and the systems they had in place, rather than the first responders themselves.


----------



## teqniq (Oct 29, 2019)

You may have arrived at that conclusion but I pretty much guarantee that a fair few people casually perusing the headlines over breakfast will not. Moreover it is irresponsible of major news outlets to publish parts of the report when it was supposed to be embargoed. I wonder why they chose to do that?


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 29, 2019)

The reasons given, at the start of the Inquiry, for the division into two phases were :


> I propose to conduct the inquiry in two phases.  In the first phase I shall investigate the development of the fire itself, where and how it started, how it spread from its original seat to other parts of the building and the chain of events that unfolded during the course of the hours before it was finally extinguished. I shall also be looking into the response of the emergency services and the evacuation of residents.





> It is necessary to address these questions first for two reasons.  The first is because there is an urgent need to find out what aspects of the building's design and construction played a significant role in enabling the disaster to occur.  That is important, because if there are similar defects in other high-rise buildings, steps must be taken quickly to ensure that those who live in them are kept safe.





> The second is because until we understand the chain of events in some detail, it will not be possible to pinpoint the critical decisions that had a bearing on the exposure of the building to the risk of an uncontrollable fire.



I don't think anyone who followed the evidence at the hearings will be very surprised that there are criticisms of aspects of the Fire Brigade's response. But how far the reporting today reflects what the report actually says remains to be seen.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 29, 2019)

teqniq said:


> You may have arrived at that conclusion but I pretty much guarantee that a fair few people casually perusing the headlines over breakfast will not. Moreover it is irresponsible of major news outlets to publish parts of the report when it was supposed to be embargoes. I wonder why they chose to do that?


To sell papers I guess. But I agree they should not have.


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 29, 2019)

Of course the fire service are going to get blamed, no mention of the cuts to their budget being at all a contributing factor, oh no.


----------



## Libertad (Oct 29, 2019)

Chilli.s said:


> Of course the fire service are going to get blamed, no mention of the cuts to their budget being at all a contributing factor, oh no.



And who was responsible for making those cuts? That cunt Johnson.


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 29, 2019)

Libertad said:


> And who was responsible for making those cuts? That cunt Johnson.


Fire service an easy target, won't be any names, just poor policy in place at the time bla bla bla lessons learned bla bla...


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 29, 2019)

It boils my piss... those poor firemen doing their level best to save people, some probably traumatised by the event, risking it all. And now this indignity.  Yet those with the real responsibility to oversee this situation and ensure that it was a safe place to live will just walk away.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 29, 2019)

The fire service were not the main problem, but clearly mistakes were made, and the comment from the LFB’s commissioner Dany Cotton that she "wouldn’t change anything the brigade did on the night" was moronic. 

Clearly there's no blame on the front-line fire fighters, but those in charge need to accept mistakes were made.

But, the real focus needs to be on the cunts that made the tower so unsafe in the first place.


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 29, 2019)

Mistakes will be made when cuts have happened. So the cuts are the cause. Not the overstretched, less trained, less equipped.


----------



## polly (Oct 29, 2019)

They seem to be complaining that the Fire Brigade told everyone to stay put, but that would have been the right advice if the building had been fire proofed in the way it should, and not wrapped in flammable plastic. I thought this was all accepted that the time, that the Fire Brigade changed their advice and told people to gtfo once they realised the fire wasn't being contained properly. 

Absolute cunt move, obviously, to try to shift the blame onto the Fire Brigade. Doesn't seem to be going down well with any of the local groups.


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 29, 2019)

polly said:


> They seem to be complaining that the Fire Brigade told everyone to stay put, but that would have been the right advice if the building had been fire proofed in the way it should, and not wrapped in flammable plastic. I thought this was all accepted that the time, that the Fire Brigade changed their advice and told people to gtfo once they realised the fire wasn't being contained properly.
> 
> Absolute cunt move, obviously, to try to shift the blame onto the Fire Brigade. Doesn't seem to be going down well with any of the local groups.



Absolutely, nail head hit. That's what happened.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 29, 2019)

polly said:


> They seem to be complaining that the Fire Brigade told everyone to stay put, but that would have been the right advice if the building had been fire proofed in the way it should, and not wrapped in flammable plastic. I thought this was all accepted that the time, that the Fire Brigade changed their advice and told people to gtfo once they realised the fire wasn't being contained properly.
> 
> Absolute cunt move, obviously, to try to shift the blame onto the Fire Brigade. Doesn't seem to be going down well with any of the local groups.



Basically yes.

But, it was clear the fire hadn't been contained and was well out of control, long before the advice was changed.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 29, 2019)

The report has also specifically said that the cladding did not meet building regulations.

So it's clear that blame is also being attributed to those who designed and built it.

Anything to do with the fire brigade becomes emotive because the public perception is of firefighters being brave and heroic, which they are to some extent (although working on a building site is actually more dangerous). It doesn't seem right to use that to dismiss criticisms of how the response worked at a systematic level. There will always be fires that develop in unexpected ways. It doesn't seem controversial to say that the fire brigade's systems of command need to allow for default advice to be adjusted rapidly if it becomes clear that the course of a fire is proceeding in an abnormal way.


----------



## polly (Oct 29, 2019)

Perhaps it's our media then that is giving prominence to the blame on the fire service, rather than the report? I've read the bit about the cladding but it's not in any of the headlines that I've seen. I mean, yes, the Fire Brigade should be trained to respond to specific situations that they know might arise, but the giant blame finger really needs to point at the people who knowingly made money from forcing poor people to live in unsafe conditions, rather than those who were ill prepared to rescue those people. That's not to say that the LFB shouldn't learn from this, of course.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 29, 2019)

polly said:


> Perhaps it's our media then that is giving prominence to the blame on the fire service, rather than the report?



I don't know because I've not read the report yet, but I expect that yes certain sections of the media at least will write stories that get people wound up.

I was just at the dentist and reading the subtitles to the 'victoria derbyshire' programme on the TV screen fixed to the ceiling. Their report actually seemed to stress that the blame was mainly aimed at the command structures, but then it got to the end bit where they read out viewer comments and they were all people going on about how dare you blame our brave firefighters etc etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I don't know because I've not read the report yet, but I expect that yes certain sections of the media at least will write stories that get people wound up.
> 
> I was just at the dentist and reading the subtitles to the 'victoria derbyshire' programme on the TV screen fixed to the ceiling. Their report actually seemed to stress that the blame was mainly aimed at the command structures, but then it got to the end bit where they read out viewer comments and they were all people going on about how dare you blame our brave firefighters etc etc.


everything struck out superfluous


----------



## polly (Oct 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I don't know because I've not read the report yet, but I expect that yes certain sections of the media at least will write stories that get people wound up.
> 
> I was just at the dentist and reading the subtitles to the 'victoria derbyshire' programme on the TV screen fixed to the ceiling. Their report actually seemed to stress that the blame was mainly aimed at the command structures, but then it got to the end bit where they read out viewer comments and they were all people going on about how dare you blame our brave firefighters etc etc.



Yes, I am acquainted with our press  I hadn't seen or heard a headline that mentioned anything but the LFB being to blame until I googled just now.

I think it's extremely rich of anyone to cast the first (or largest) stone at a public service that has been cut to the bone (under BJ as mayor alone, it lost 10 fire stations, 300 firefighters and 30 engines), rather than the council or management company, who ignored repeated warnings about exactly this event, or the property wankers who made the building so unsafe in the first place. The reality is: chronically underfunded public service lacks up-to-the-minute training in tackling the various possible fallouts from building management companies and councils failing to adequately fire proof their buildings in the pursuit of every possible drop of profit. I'm not a headline writer  

And firefighters will take any criticism of the service personally, and people will do so on their behalf, which I think is understandable - it's pretty emotive, rescuing people from fires and being long term underpaid for doing so.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 29, 2019)

Then there's fire risk assessments. Legislation is slack here. Prosecution for not doing the job properly but nothing to ensure in advance that it will be. Plenty of scope for skimping on the job. Classic case of passing something off onto the private sector because the public sector is inadequately funded.



> 38.1 There is no legal requirement for the fire risk assessment to be carried out by specialists, such as consultants. Indeed, in the case of, say, small or modern blocks of flats (eg built within the last 20 years), it can be advantageous for the landlord or other responsible person to use this guide and carry out the fire risk assessment themselves. Their consequent understanding of the fire safety design in the building will enable them to manage fire safety better on an ongoing basis.
> 38.2 In the case of taller blocks of flats (eg comprising more than a ground and three upper storeys), more specialist knowledge may be necessary to carry out a fire risk assessment, particularly if the block was designed and constructed before 1992. However, the decision as to whether to use outside specialists to carry out a fire risk assessment rests with the responsible person.


 P. 48 here: https://www.local.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/fire-safety-purpose-built-04b.pdf


----------



## teuchter (Oct 29, 2019)

polly said:


> I think it's extremely rich of anyone to cast the first (or largest) stone at a public service that has been cut to the bone (under BJ as mayor alone, it lost 10 fire stations, 300 firefighters and 30 engines), rather than the council or management company,



If the fire service is chronically underfunded then people need to know it is failing as a result. If there is no criticism and everyone thinks the fire service performs flawlessly then why would there be any argument for increasing funding?

Councils (including building control departments) have had their funding cut to the bone too.


----------



## polly (Oct 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> If the fire service is chronically underfunded then people need to know it is failing as a result. If there is no criticism and everyone thinks the fire service performs flawlessly then why would there be any argument for increasing funding?
> 
> Councils (including building control departments) have had their funding cut to the bone too.



I agree that people need to know where the fire service is failing due to underfunding. I just don't think that they should be scapegoated for this when the larger degree of fault clearly lies with the people who caused the problem in the first place. Knowingly. 

Yes, they have. Solidly tory K&C is not one of them, though. Over the last 8 years their budget has increased by 10%.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 29, 2019)

polly said:


> when the larger degree of fault clearly lies with the people who caused the problem in the first place. Knowingly.



We don't really know that yet. I expect there will be multiple points of failing, it will be complicated and they will have been done with varying degrees of understanding of the consequences. That'll be the reality even if most people won't want to see it in those terms.


----------



## polly (Oct 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> We don't really know that yet. I expect there will be multiple points of failing, it will be complicated and they will have been done with varying degrees of understanding of the consequences. That'll be the reality even if most people won't want to see it in those terms.



You're right that it's pretty pointless to discuss this until the report is actually out.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 29, 2019)




----------



## Lurdan (Oct 30, 2019)

The Phase 1 Report is now online. There's an Executive Summary and then the report itself split into four separate pdf's.

Obviously there is a lot of it. The recommendations are in chapter 33 - starting on page 272 of the fourth pdf.

Phase 1 report - Grenfell Tower Inquiry

ETA: The Chair of the Inquiry has put up a short video summarizing the reports findings


Spoiler: Video


----------



## GarveyLives (Oct 30, 2019)

An update on Grenfell-related events published ahead of publication of the Phase 1 findings:

​


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 30, 2019)

Response to the report from Grenfell United :



Spoiler: Grenfell United Statement



“Grenfell United have chosen not to break our silence ahead of the Grenfell Inquiry Phase 1 Report being made public and we are disappointed that a number of media outlets and individuals chose to do so.

“While nothing can ever bring back our loved ones that passed away in the fire, this is a strong report with a forensic examination of the events of the night and clear recommendations that if implemented will save lives. The Government cannot afford to repeat the mistakes of Lakanal and ignore them.

“Justice means different things for all of us but the truth needs to be at the heart of our collective healing. We have been waiting a long time for this report. Today’s findings give us some confidence that our journey towards truth has finally begun.

“We now need to urgently see responsibility and action from this report, not excuses. One of the most worrying findings is Sir Martin Moore Bick’s view that the LFB are currently an institution at risk of not learning the lessons from Grenfell. ”

ON HOW THE FIRE STARTED:

“We are glad to read this report totally exonerates our neighbour in flat 16. The Whirlpool fridge started the fire and our neighbour did everything he could do try to stop it and raise the alarm. He is long overdue an apology from media and corporates that tried to scapegoat him. ”

ON THE BUILDING:

“One of the most important conclusions for us is Sir Martin Moore Bick found that the building was not compliant with building regulations. This finding means that RBKC and KCTMO have serious questions to answer in phase 2 of the inquiry, as do each of the corporates involved including Arconic, Celotex, Studio E and Rydon amongst others. “This finding adds to our determination to see criminal charges brought against those responsible for turning our homes into a ‘death trap’.”

ON TMO AND RBKC:

“As we know all too well RBKC, and the KCTMO have been found to be deficient, with a 15 year out of date emergency plan, no plans of the building and no plans for rescuing disabled residents. Robert Black, the KCTMO's Chief Executive, failed us on many levels and was held to account by the Chair for the detachment he displayed during hearings. And this is just the beginning. RBKC and KCTMO are at the centre of the refurbishment project and we are confident much more will be exposed in phase 2.”

ON THE LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT OF THE LONDON FIRE SERVICE:

“Sir Martin Moore Bick recognises that many firefighters showed ‘enormous courage’. The reality is, mistakes were made and opportunities missed by individuals on the night, but contrary to commentary ahead of publication, the report does not blame the firefighters on the night for the fire, instead he shows how they were let down by their training, procedures, equipment and leadership.

“It is heartbreaking to read that more of our loved ones could have been saved that night if the building was evacuated earlier. We have been saying for two years that stay put must be reviewed and fire fighters must get the training they need to evacuate, now it is beyond doubt.

“One of the most worrying parts of the report is Sir Martin’s view that the ‘LFB is an institution at risk of not learning the lessons of Grenfell’.

“Senior officers in the LFB must stop hiding behind the bravery of their front line fire fighters. The Grenfell fire is proof that they failed to learn the lessons from Lakanal, this cannot happen again. The most senior leadership of the LFB must face consequences for these failings if there is to be change. And the LFB must make urgent fundamental changes to training and procedures so that Londoners can be safe.”

WHAT MUST HAPPEN NOW:

“The Prime Minister must not only accept these recommendations in full, he must also outline how and when he will ensure they are implemented. He must bring in a national evacuation plan for high rises, new laws for building owners and ensure there must be institutional change at the LFB so that lessons are learnt. The Government will also provide the fire service with the resources it needs to make the necessary changes to training and equipment.”

“Our thoughts today are once again with people still sleeping in buildings covered in highly combustible cladding and insulation. This cannot go on any longer. The immediate and real dangers of these materials are now beyond any doubt. Lives are at risk and the Government need to treat this as a national emergency.

“Phase two of the inquiry must now focus on where responsibility for the devastating refurbishment lies. RBKC, the TMO and all companies involved must face serious questions. There can be no more hiding or trying to shift the blame. This is just the beginning. There is still a long road ahead for justice and change. For the 72 people that we lost, who are forever in our hearts, we will not stop until change comes.”



from their twitter account 

ETA: and a statement from Justice for Grenfell
J4G Statement on Grenfell Inquiry Phase 1 report publication – Justice4Grenfell


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 30, 2019)

Inside Housing have put up some useful articles summarizing the reports findings and recommendations. The site is normally paywalled so here are archived copies of two of them.

The first is a general round up of what the report says and towards the bottom a list of the immediate recommendations it makes.

Grenfell Inquiry: round-up of Sir Martin Moore-Bick’s phase one conclusions

The second deals specifically with his finding that the refurbishment of the building meant it did not comply with building regulations, and that the ACM panels were the primary (but not sole) cause of the fire spread

Grenfell Inquiry: ACM cladding was ‘primary cause of fire spread’ and tower did not comply with regulations, judge rules


----------



## teqniq (Oct 30, 2019)

Jesud H Christ. how low can you go?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 30, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Jesud H Christ. how low can you go?
> 
> View attachment 188598





Puddy_Tat said:


> bunch of cunts


----------



## killer b (Oct 30, 2019)

I guess they just thought he was wearing a lurid green tie, not that he was wearing a lurid green tie to honour Grenfell. Was this a widespread thing, or just something Corbyn did?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 30, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Jesud H Christ. how low can you go?
> 
> View attachment 188598


Oh they can go lower yet


----------



## rekil (Oct 30, 2019)

killer b said:


> I guess they just thought he was wearing a lurid green tie, not that he was wearing a lurid green tie to honour Grenfell. Was this a widespread thing, or just something Corbyn did?


It's been the Grenfell campaign colour. Dizzzgusting tories.




			
				Harpers said:
			
		

> The East Façade of Kensington Palace, which is found in the same London borough as the tower block, was illuminated in the colour to mark the poignant anniversary and honour the victims. Other London landmarks including the London Eye, Cabinet Office and Downing Street also turned green.


----------



## killer b (Oct 30, 2019)

I don't think they were intentionally mocking Corbyn for honouring the dead of Grenfell though, that would be actually mad. They were just ignorant that the campaign colour is green. and why would they know? They don't give a fuck.


----------



## quiet guy (Oct 30, 2019)

Killer b - you hit the nail on the head " They were just ignorant..."


----------



## MrSki (Oct 30, 2019)

A tory gooner complimented the speaker for, like himself,wearing his Arsenal tie & said it was a shame that Corbyn wasn't wearing his too. 

Half the MPs were wearing a similar coloured heart next to their poppies so it is questionable that they were not aware. A lot of the Grenfell victims were watching from the strangers gallery too.


----------



## Miss-Shelf (Oct 30, 2019)

Its widespread knowledge about green for Grenfell.  Doubt they are not aware


----------



## killer b (Oct 30, 2019)

I didn't know tbf


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 30, 2019)

The BBC Grenfell podcast is producing new episodes covering the phase 1 report and one has been put up tonight which gives a broad summary of the reports key findings, illustrated with excerpts from the evidence given at the hearings. It concludes with an interview with Ed Daffarn of Grenfell United.

BBC Radio - The Grenfell Tower Inquiry with Eddie Mair - Downloads 

I gather the intention is to go on to look at aspects of the report in more detail over the next few days.

I'm sure I'm not the only person struck by the faint absurdity of making recommendations to a Government which currently is 'in office but not in power'. For what little it's worth in the debate on the report in Parliament today our beloved Prime Minister stated


> Where Sir Martin recommends that responsibility for fire safety should be taken on by central Government, I can confirm that we will legislate accordingly.





> More widely, we plan to accept in principle all the recommendations that Sir Martin makes for central Government. We will set out how we plan to do so as quickly as possible, but I can assure the House and all those affected by the Grenfell tragedy that where action is called for action will follow.



"Plan to accept in principle" - how reassuring coming from such a principled leader.


----------



## crossthebreeze (Oct 31, 2019)

Response to the report from the FBU: FBU response to Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 1 report


----------



## Libertad (Oct 31, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Jesud H Christ. how low can you go?
> 
> View attachment 188598



Lower than vermin.


----------



## teqniq (Oct 31, 2019)

Face like a slapped arse.


----------



## crossthebreeze (Oct 31, 2019)

Lurdan said:


> Response to the report from Grenfell United :
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There are utter aresholes commenting on Grenfell United twitter calling them "compensation chasers", "shameful", "disgusting", "wrong" for criticising the fire brigade management/the stay put policy etc - supposedly because of solidarity with "heroic firefighters" (though obviously they haven't read FBU statement).  Just depressing.


----------



## Ming (Oct 31, 2019)

A firefighter's response.


----------



## quiet guy (Oct 31, 2019)

Unfortunately he is another Teflon politician where nothing will stick. He'll just ride it out because that's what they all learn, no morals and no personal responsibility for the decisions he takes.


----------



## GarveyLives (Oct 31, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Jesud H Christ. how low can you go?
> 
> View attachment 188598


_Theresa May_ blasts Tory MPs for mocking Jeremy Corbyn's green tie


----------



## Artaxerxes (Nov 1, 2019)

GarveyLives said:


> _Theresa May_ blasts Tory MPs for mocking Jeremy Corbyn's green tie



Mail link, don't post these.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 5, 2019)

Mogg is taking his edgelord reputation a bit far this morning

Next year the must have accessory for all members of the houses must be an a single headshot and a matching unmarked shallow grave.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 5, 2019)

After a fair show trial of course.we don’t need any accusations of not playing the game here.


----------



## polly (Nov 5, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Mogg is taking his edgelord reputation a bit far this morning
> 
> Next year the must have accessory for all members of the houses must be an a single headshot and a matching unmarked shallow grave.



My god he's a cunt. As well as suggesting it was people's own fault that they died, he also said it was 'sad' that people were linking their deaths to their class and race, and that is was nothing to do with that. I wonder how many of his Eton chums are living in homes they know to be unsafe but are powerless to do anything about it. 

Someone else observed that he brought the interviewer and listeners in as well, 'you and I would know better than to sit tight' etc. Divide and rule. CUNT.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Mogg is taking his edgelord reputation a bit far this morning
> 
> Next year the must have accessory for all members of the houses must be an a single headshot and a matching unmarked shallow grave.


they won't get a headshot and they won't get a grave. should tests be successful they will be fed to the penguins when they have done their bit for the works of the south atlantic industrial zone


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 5, 2019)

Unseemly behaviour to the penguin community


----------



## MrSki (Nov 5, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Mogg is taking his edgelord reputation a bit far this morning
> 
> Next year the must have accessory for all members of the houses must be an a single headshot and a matching unmarked shallow grave.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 5, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Unseemly behaviour to the penguin community


by no means. underground heating will be installed for them, and the former people will also construct a sewage system to finally deal with the great volume of excreta the birds produce. the former people's corpses will also help penguins feed their young without risking being crushed getting into the sea or the various marine hazards that present themselves.


----------



## polly (Nov 5, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


>




  


His shite apology for people who don't have twitter


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 5, 2019)

"common sense" rather implies hindsight isn't necessary, no?


----------



## Chilli.s (Nov 5, 2019)

Proof again that RM knows he is above the law.  He basically thinks that disobeying orders from emergency services is fine and dandy. When the fall comes for this despicable cunt I hope it's a proper spectacle.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2019)

polly said:


> View attachment 189119 View attachment 189117
> 
> 
> His shite apology for people who don't have twitter


to be fair it's a pretty shite apology even if you do have twitter


----------



## polly (Nov 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> to be fair it's a pretty shite apology even if you do have twitter



I idly considered changing it but cba, I should've known better really


----------



## Flavour (Nov 5, 2019)

What a vile, disgusting cunt he is


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 5, 2019)

Certainly plumbing new depths the twat.  Kathy Burke puts it well.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 5, 2019)

‘


----------



## CNT36 (Nov 5, 2019)

polly said:


> View attachment 189119 View attachment 189117
> 
> 
> His shite apology for people who don't have twitter


Gaffe.


----------



## killer b (Nov 5, 2019)

Andrew Bridgen's entry into the fray is quite something


----------



## MrSki (Nov 5, 2019)

Andrew Bridgen is as much of a cunt too. Justifying JRM. 

Beaten to it by killer b


----------



## teuchter (Nov 5, 2019)

You could almost justify JRM's words as clumsy expression where he might not have actually meant what it sounded like. But what Andrew Bridgen has said is quite unbelievable.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 5, 2019)

.


teuchter said:


> You could almost justify JRM's words as clumsy expression where he might not have actually meant what it sounded like. But what Andrew Bridgen has said is quite unbelievable.



You could almost justify anything if you're a cunt.


----------



## Chilli.s (Nov 5, 2019)

The best quote I find about Andrew Bridgen is: Conservative Party colleagues described him as "thick as mash".


----------



## Voley (Nov 5, 2019)

I wish I was surprised by the Conservatives inhumanity but I'm not any more.


----------



## Ming (Nov 5, 2019)

Voley said:


> I wish I was surprised by the Conservatives inhumanity but I'm not any more.


I know what you mean.


----------



## Poot (Nov 5, 2019)

Voley said:


> I wish I was surprised by the Conservatives inhumanity but I'm not any more.



It is unsurprising. Absolutely unsurprising. However, the reason that this twat has sunk to a new low is because everyone who has ever lived in a tower block, particularly near the top, can understand how the stairwell/firedoor configuration would make it EASY to believe that the advice of 'don't go into the stairwell, stay put' would make perfect sense. This twat, however, has probably never even set foot inside a tower block and STILL BELIEVES THAT HE KNOWS BETTER. *head explodes*


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> You could almost justify JRM's words as clumsy expression where he might not have actually meant what it sounded like. But what Andrew Bridgen has said is quite unbelievable.


Clumsy? He revealed what his considered opinion is. He thinks he is more 'knowledgeable' than professionals, he thinks he would have easily legged it down the stairs through the thick, dark, smokey corridors and stairways, over dying and dead people, and saved his own life even though the fire brigade were telling him to stay put. He's a grade A prick and a insult to humankind. He has no fucking clue how awful it was for people, how they worried, suffered, choked and died whilst thinking they were doing the right thing. I'd personally like to take a longggggggggggggggggggggggg run up and jump slap his face into next week along with any cunt that makes excuses for him. His contempt for those that died says everything about who he really is.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 5, 2019)

Looks like Brendan O'Neill is in line for a face slap

Jacob Rees-Mogg is right about Grenfell



> People are accusing JRM of saying the Grenfell residents lacked common sense. He doesn’t say that. He is saying that if he had been in the burning building, he would have left. To him that would be the common-sense thing to do. Many people agree. I do. This isn’t to insult the Grenfell residents who trusted the fire service. Nor is it to insult the firefighters who behaved with extraordinary bravery on that awful night. It is simply to question fire _chiefs’_ attachment to the policy of ‘stay put’, and to lament the catastrophic consequences it seems to have had on that night.
> 
> If you are more angry with a politician for saying it is a tragedy that people did not ignore dangerous advice than you are with the people who issued the dangerous advice, then your moral compass is in urgent need of repair. The cynicism of it all is breathtaking. People are purposefully misinterpreting and exploiting JRM’s words to the cynical end of hurting the Tories in the election. ‘Maybe this will cost them some votes!’ is the gross undertone of this confected media storm. Once again the leftish middle classes are exploiting the dead of Grenfell to score political points, and I say that is far more repulsive than what Rees-Mogg said on the radio this morning.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Looks like Brendan O'Neill is in line for a face slap
> 
> Jacob Rees-Mogg is right about Grenfell



Yeah just heard him on the radio. Another cunt.


----------



## Ming (Nov 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Looks like Brendan O'Neill is in line for a face slap
> 
> Jacob Rees-Mogg is right about Grenfell


Amazing how people these days seem to line up to defend the indefensible. I think it’s down to 40 years of right wing politics poisoning the zeitgeist. The only thing that ‘trickled down’ was the attitudes. By the way The Laffer curve was sketched for Cheney and Rumsfeld by Laffer on a cocktail napkin.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 6, 2019)

Is this the same prick who thinks racism is a natural part of football?


----------



## Badgers (Nov 6, 2019)

They can't help themselves 


> Mr Rees-Mogg is facing calls to quit over the remarks - but Andrew Bridgen said he would have "given a better decision than the authority figures who gave that advice"


----------



## Badgers (Nov 6, 2019)

Voley said:


> I wish I was surprised by the Conservatives inhumanity but I'm not any more.


Post of the year candidate


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Nov 6, 2019)

Badgers said:


> They can't help themselves



Blame the Fire Brigade so they can make more cuts, that's their plan.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Post of the year candidate


Yes, it's on the shortlist


----------



## Chilli.s (Nov 6, 2019)

Andrew Bridgen said he would have "given a better decision than the authority figures who gave that advice"  does he have any experience in tackling a blaze in a multi story building that has been built without following building regulations or fire safety?


----------



## tommers (Nov 6, 2019)

Just unbelievable. Both that these are their real thoughts and that they're professional politicians and have said them out loud.

Maybe it helps some people see through them. Maybe.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 6, 2019)

Last night's 'Newsnight' (from approx 22.30 mins) saw Gavin Barwell put up to field the Rees Moog/Grenfell stuff; very revealing response when Croydon Central Labour MP Sarah Jones asked him about the reported 21 letters that he had received (& ignored) about the Lakanal House fire.

His response appeared to reveal the lame, technical defence that he's already prepared for when the Grenfell II report exposes his responsibility. He'll claim that no-one explicitly informed him that non-compliant materials classified as compliant had been used on high rise buildings. 

What an odious little man.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 6, 2019)




----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 6, 2019)

tommers said:


> Just unbelievable. Both that these are their real thoughts and that they're professional politicians and have said them out loud.
> 
> Maybe it helps some people see through them. Maybe.




  It’s dog whistle. These fuckers know exactly why Grenfell victims are fair game for them to point the finger


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 6, 2019)

I don't advocate violence but I would be in favor of an effigy of JRM being lit on Bonfire Night. The cunt.


----------



## marty21 (Nov 6, 2019)

Poot said:


> It is unsurprising. Absolutely unsurprising. However, the reason that this twat has sunk to a new low is because everyone who has ever lived in a tower block, particularly near the top, can understand how the stairwell/firedoor configuration would make it EASY to believe that the advice of 'don't go into the stairwell, stay put' would make perfect sense. This twat, however, has probably never even set foot inside a tower block and STILL BELIEVES THAT HE KNOWS BETTER. *head explodes*


Yep, there was a fire in a Camden Block (with cladding) in 2012 , the fire was limited to the flat, the Fire Brigade was correct in their advice - it wasn't to know that K&C and the TM0 that managed Grenfell had fucked the building with their cladding.

The Camden block is Taplow and was one of the blocks evacuated by Camden in the wake of the Grenfell fire.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 6, 2019)

Disgraced Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees Mogg has made the Washington Post 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...wmaker-just-implied-they-lacked-common-sense/


> LONDON — Conservative British lawmaker Jacob Rees-Mogg apologized on Tuesday after making comments many deemed insensitive about the Grenfell Tower blaze that killed 72 people in June 2017.
> 
> Talking to radio show LBC on Monday about the newly published report into the fire, the deadliest in modern British history, Rees-Mogg appeared to suggest the victims should have used “common sense” and ignored the instructions of the London Fire Brigade to stay in their homes as the 24-story building went up in flames.


----------



## polly (Nov 6, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> It’s dog whistle. These fuckers know exactly why Grenfell victims are fair game for them to point the finger



Yeah, sadly I have to agree. I've seen some shockingly nasty, racist shit on social media today and yesterday about Grenfell victims. That's what these cunts' dog whistles deliver and they know it.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> He'll claim that no-one explicitly informed him that non-compliant materials classified as compliant had been used on high rise buildings.



It's not quite as simple as that, because the argument is about whether or not they were "classified as compliant" (it comes down to an interpretation of what the Approved Documents require).

What he says in the interview is "at no point did anybody in british politics think there were things on buildings that didn't comply with the existing regulations".

Even if that were true, it sidesteps the fact that problems with interpretation of the Approved Documents absolutely had been raised, especially since the Lakanal fire and they had not been addressed. His statement is very dishonest.

There is quite a good explanation of the complicated situation with building regs here:

The Paper Trail: the Failure of Building Regulations


----------



## Wilf (Nov 6, 2019)

Can you imagine the furore if Corbyn said Lee Rigby should have made 'better decisions' the kind of decisions that a public school education would have equipped with? 

Mind it doesn't always work. For example Lord Mountbatten studied _Latin, Greek _and _Checking Your Boat for Semtex_...


----------



## mauvais (Nov 6, 2019)

marty21 said:


> Yep, there was a fire in a Camden Block (with cladding) in 2012 , the fire was limited to the flat, the Fire Brigade was correct in their advice - it wasn't to know that K&C and the TM0 that managed Grenfell had fucked the building with their cladding.
> 
> The Camden block is Taplow and was one of the blocks evacuated by Camden in the wake of the Grenfell fire.


Similarly there was one in Shirley Towers, Southampton in 2010 - it's very well documented not least because two firefighters died. That had a stay put policy that worked well. The stairwells and corridors filled with smoke and would not have been passable once the incident was underway.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Nov 6, 2019)




----------



## maomao (Nov 6, 2019)

The worst thing is that while they might have had a better chance running, people did die on the stairs doing just that. I would have run because what happened at Larkanal scared me shitless but it's a policy that's saved lives in the past.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Nov 6, 2019)

maomao said:


> The worst thing is that while they might have had a better chance running, people did die on the stairs doing just that. I would have run because what happened at Larkanal scared me shitless but it's a policy that's saved lives in the past.



Just from a sheer "I don't want to get n the way" perspective I'd have probably stayed put, even if absolutely bricking it. But especially if the fire brigade were going around in full kit saying don't move.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Nov 6, 2019)

So JRM is basically telling people to ignore instructions from emergency service personnel.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 6, 2019)

ElizabethofYork said:


> So JRM is basically telling people to ignore instructions from emergency service personnel.


Yes. So that, next time around, when dozens of people are heaped at the bottom of a stairwell, dying of crush injuries and smoke inhalation, he can say "Well, you see, if these stupid people with no common sense can't obey simple instructions from the professionals on the scene, what are we supposed to do?".

Man's a cunt. But I suspect the Tory party know that, and have wheeled him out deliberately to boost the Cunt Tory vote, a significant part of the demographic.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 6, 2019)

I remember hearing about a ferry that sank, and bodies were found by the muster point, and thinking "that would have been me". Because in an emergency you trust the emergency procedures.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 6, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Yes. So that, next time around, when dozens of people are heaped at the bottom of a stairwell, dying of crush injuries and smoke inhalation, he can say "Well, you see, if these stupid people with no common sense can't obey simple instructions from the professionals on the scene, what are we supposed to do?".
> 
> Man's a cunt. But I suspect the Tory party know that, and have wheeled him out deliberately to boost the Cunt Tory vote, a significant part of the demographic.


He's there for one reason only; to say that Johnson's (May) WAB "is Brexit" and neutralise the intra-party factional threat from the nut-job faction and Farage's noise off. They don't care that he's a cunt; they all are.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 6, 2019)

ElizabethofYork said:


> So JRM is basically telling people to ignore instructions from emergency service personnel.


Zero chance of a resignation


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> I remember hearing about a ferry that sank, and bodies were found by the muster point, and thinking "that would have been me". Because in an emergency you trust the emergency procedures.


yeh but sadly it wasn't jrm


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 6, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Yes. So that, next time around, when dozens of people are heaped at the bottom of a stairwell, dying of crush injuries and smoke inhalation, he can say "Well, you see, if these stupid people with no common sense can't obey simple instructions from the professionals on the scene, what are we supposed to do?".


I do wish the follow up had been "do you understand _why_ that was the advice given?". Maybe it was and I just haven't seen that reported; I'm not exactly trying to find out a lot of detail about the odious toad.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 6, 2019)

That cunt mogg has never seen the inside of a block of flats in his life I warrant.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> That cunt mogg has never seen the inside of a block of flats in his life I warrant.


hopefully he'll see one in the minutes before he shuffles off this mortal coil, as he climbs the stairs in the trellick tower before taking the swift way to the ground floor.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> hopefully he'll see one in the minutes before he shuffles off this mortal coil, as he climbs the stairs in the trellick tower before taking the swift way to the ground floor.


That'll be the full scale, Southern hemispheric replica of Trellick that he and his pals have previously built on the South Sandwich islands?


----------



## Plumdaff (Nov 6, 2019)

They don't seem to get that much of the reason for anger is that the stay put policy should have kept people safe but did not, not because of the residents or fire service, but because of criminal behaviour of contractors and the council in the context of 40 years of housing being about profit, not people and their safety.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> That'll be the full scale, Southern hemispheric replica of Trellick that he and his pals have previously built on the South Sandwich islands?


Haven't decided yet


----------



## brogdale (Nov 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Haven't decided yet


Other islands are available; understood.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Other islands are available; understood.


So are other tower blocks


----------



## brogdale (Nov 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> So are other tower blocks


To channel DaftPunk..._Bigger, higher, taller..._


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> To channel DaftPunk..._Bigger, higher, taller..._


I'm in discussions with a maker of bungee ropes who wants to test a new material and sought a test dummy. I think I've persuaded them to use JRM as a test subject and if things pan out as I hope he'll be testing the rope throughout its working life. This will entail something like 100-150 jumps a day


----------



## teuchter (Nov 16, 2019)

Looks a bit like another cladding fire -

Huge fire breaks out at student flats block


----------



## spring-peeper (Nov 16, 2019)




----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 16, 2019)

Glad to hear that people seem to have got out OK.  Looks a pretty bad fire from the pictures in that article.  Some pictures from the MEN.







You can see the cladding in this picture, but it doesn't seem to have affected the entire facade.  It will be interesting to know if the cladding was dubious - although the building is only six stories, so might not have fallen into the checking regime for high-rise blocks (not sure what the cut off point was). Like like it has burnt right through the external wall by the roofline though.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 16, 2019)

Video of the burning stuff falling to the street:


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 16, 2019)

This was apparently reported by the local rag two years ago (from Twitter).


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 16, 2019)

Some people who live there report that fire alarms didn't go off, and they had to knock on peoples' doors to let them know to evacuate.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 16, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> This was apparently reported by the local rag two years ago (from Twitter).


Looks like a different building to me


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 16, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Looks like a different building to me


Bolton News is referring to it as such so I don't know why the picture doesn't match.  Maybe it was a file photo they used, and it has been reclad since.

Maybe it was a photo of one side of the block - this from an article this evening shows the same building with fire engines outside.






eta - better image here - the picture on the local paper story is the building on the main road, but it is the building behind that is on fire.  Guess both buildings are part of the same complex.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Looks like a different building to me


Always good to hear your devil's advocate post.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2019)




----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Looks like a different building to me


Some buildings look similar


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2019)

Would you agree with the person below teuchter or will being contrary be your default position?


----------



## Mation (Nov 16, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> This was apparently reported by the local rag two years ago (from Twitter).


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 16, 2019)

The Fire Brigade is still asking residents and visitors to the block to register to confirm they are OK.  I hope everyone did get out safely, but time will tell if there were any casualties.  The fire seems to be under control now which is good.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2019)

Shit news. Hope all are safe but this must have been terrifying for them. Also a hideous flashback for people in Grenfell


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 16, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Shit news. Hope all are safe but this must have been terrifying for them. Also a hideous flashback for people in Grenfell


Yeah, I feel really sorry for those affected.  Lots of them on Twitter saying they've lost everything.     The mind boggles why the fire alarms didn't go given it ended up like this.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2019)

Hope that the property developers, investors and shareholders are okay


----------



## Poi E (Nov 16, 2019)

[edited-wrong building shown]. UK lessor of land (?)/owner of building (?) is Valeo USL Ltd. Parent is the Valeo Groupe Europe.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Hope that the property developers, investors and shareholders are okay


Thoughts and prayers


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Looks like a different building to me


Yeh well obvs it's in ashes now so doesn't look as it did before


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> This was apparently reported by the local rag two years ago (from Twitter).


Sure it was different dangerous cladding


----------



## mauvais (Nov 16, 2019)

Valeo the wiper blade people should do this other Valeo in for besmirching their name.


----------



## agricola (Nov 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Sure it was different dangerous cladding



It will be that which makes all the difference.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 16, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Would you agree with the person below teuchter or will being contrary be your default position?



I think I've made it fairly clear in previous posts that there's a massive failure of building regs and how they are enforced, and that's been overseen by several governments including the current one, and like I said in post 4573 a page or two back, the current government particularly failed to take action following the Lakanal fire.

We'll have to wait to find out the cause of this fire, but it looks to me like another cladding fire, which is why I posted it on this thread last night, and the owner/landlord obviously needs to be held to account. I'll of course be interested to find out the technical details of what the cladding was here and how it compares to the Grenfell system, because maybe it isn't the same and demonstrates that the problem is even more widespread than previously assumed.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 16, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> Bolton News is referring to it as such so I don't know why the picture doesn't match.  Maybe it was a file photo they used, and it has been reclad since.
> 
> Maybe it was a photo of one side of the block - this from an article this evening shows the same building with fire engines outside.
> 
> ...



Yes, worked that out from Google streetview, there are two blocks, it looks to me like one is a renovated old block and the other (the one where the fire took place) is a new-build.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I think I've made it fairly clear in previous posts that there's a massive failure of building regs and how they are enforced, and that's been overseen by several governments including the current one, and like I said in post 4573 a page or two back, the current government particularly failed to take action following the Lakanal fire.
> 
> We'll have to wait to find out the cause of this fire, but it looks to me like another cladding fire, which is why I posted it on this thread last night, and the owner/landlord obviously needs to be held to account. I'll of course be interested to find out the technical details of what the cladding was here and how it compares to the Grenfell system, because maybe it isn't the same and demonstrates that the problem is even more widespread than previously assumed.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 16, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> Glad to hear that people seem to have got out OK.  Looks a pretty bad fire from the pictures in that article.  Some pictures from the MEN.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Some student blocks areound here had their cladding replaced after Grenfell. These were also five/six storey so not exactly high rise. 

Still, there doesn't seem to be any sort of liability in these cases so I'm sure the owners/landlords can rest easy.


----------



## Brainaddict (Nov 17, 2019)

Bolton firefighters are being careful not to leap to conclusions but confirm the fire 'spread rapidly up the exterior'. Bolton fire: Firefighters condemn "complete failure" of UK fire safety system

The building was clad in HPL panels that some experts said should be removed in July, to zero action from the government:
Experts demand urgent removal of cladding from tower blocks

I feel this story should be much more front page news than it is. We've just had confirmation of the breakdown of the building control system (for those who needed confirmation) and that hundreds more towers are potentially lethal, and the government is doing fuck all.


----------



## Brainaddict (Nov 17, 2019)

Still, at least Balliol college residences aren't clad in HPL or ACM, eh? 

I feel like posting that Michael Jackson tune 'They don't care about us'. But I won't because he was a paedophile.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 17, 2019)

HPL panels were what were involved in the Lakanal fire.

Next Grenfell-style disaster ‘will be in HPL-clad tower’, says academic


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 17, 2019)

Hmmm.  Trespa is a HPL panel.  Trespa has sold a huge amount in the last 25 years.  This could be a big problem.


----------



## Brainaddict (Nov 17, 2019)

It seems HPL panels have different fire ratings. Some may be okay, but who could you trust to make the judgement at this point?

What I'm also amazed by is the banning of ACM panels only on high rise buildings over 18m. I find the idea of cladding a four storey building in flammable material being okay to be very strange. It feels like there's a lot of lobbying by manufacturers and developers going on to slow down any bans on their products.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> Bolton firefighters are being careful not to leap to conclusions but confirm the fire 'spread rapidly up the exterior'. Bolton fire: Firefighters condemn "complete failure" of UK fire safety system
> 
> The building was clad in HPL panels that some experts said should be removed in July, to zero action from the government:
> Experts demand urgent removal of cladding from tower blocks
> ...


We have known for two years that hundreds of tower blocks have this sort of flammable cladding and the government has done fuck all


----------



## teuchter (Nov 17, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> It seems HPL panels have different fire ratings. Some may be okay, but who could you trust to make the judgement at this point?
> 
> What I'm also amazed by is the banning of ACM panels only on high rise buildings over 18m. I find the idea of cladding a four storey building in flammable material being okay to be very strange. It feels like there's a lot of lobbying by manufacturers and developers going on to slow down any bans on their products.



The logic of the 18m is to do with the reach of fire engines. In other words, over 18m you can't really fight the fire from the outside. Fire regs have never been about reducing the risk of fire to zero, it's about reducing the risk to an "acceptable" level and having the means to fight the fire if one does happen.

Banning combustible materials outright would probably mean doing away with any kind of timber cladding. Some might say that's what we should do. Then all facade materials kind of have to be masonry or cement based. At the same time as everyone is looking at fire risk, there are a lot of people calling for the construction industry to reduce its use of cement, and increase the use of timber, on environmental grounds.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> We have known for two years that hundreds of tower blocks have this sort of flammable cladding and the government has done fuck all


They have cut councils funding and firefighters


----------



## agricola (Nov 17, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> It seems HPL panels have different fire ratings. Some may be okay, but who could you trust to make the judgement at this point?
> 
> What I'm also amazed by is the banning of ACM panels only on high rise buildings over 18m. I find the idea of cladding a four storey building in flammable material being okay to be very strange. It feels like there's a lot of lobbying by manufacturers and developers going on to slow down any bans on their products.



Not "slow down" so much as "remove any possibility of".  For years, but especially since 2010, government has done a very good job of looking like it does not want to even acknowledge obvious risks when new things come onto the market.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 17, 2019)

teuchter said:


> The logic of the 18m is to do with the reach of fire engines. In other words, over 18m you can't really fight the fire from the outside. Fire regs have never been about reducing the risk of fire to zero, it's about reducing the risk to an "acceptable" level and having the means to fight the fire if one does happen.
> 
> Banning combustible materials outright would probably mean doing away with any kind of timber cladding. Some might say that's what we should do. Then all facade materials kind of have to be masonry or cement based. At the same time as everyone is looking at fire risk, there are a lot of people calling for the construction industry to reduce its use of cement, and increase the use of timber, on environmental grounds.



Timber-framed, timber-clad tower blocks are predictably rare however. This does illustrate why it's sensible to have different standards for different types of building.

E2a: A large, 'sustainable' timber clad building did go up in flames at Nottingham university not that long ago.


----------



## Brainaddict (Nov 17, 2019)

teuchter said:


> The logic of the 18m is to do with the reach of fire engines. In other words, over 18m you can't really fight the fire from the outside. Fire regs have never been about reducing the risk of fire to zero, it's about reducing the risk to an "acceptable" level and having the means to fight the fire if one does happen.
> 
> Banning combustible materials outright would probably mean doing away with any kind of timber cladding. Some might say that's what we should do. Then all facade materials kind of have to be masonry or cement based. At the same time as everyone is looking at fire risk, there are a lot of people calling for the construction industry to reduce its use of cement, and increase the use of timber, on environmental grounds.


But it's beginning to look like firefighters are unable to put out these cladding fires even on lower buildings. If that's the case then the fact that they can reach them may not be relevant (though important they can reach people with ladders obv). Perhaps the temperature at which they burn is different, and that needs to be factored in? I'm pretty sure plastic burns hotter than wood and would be harder to extinguish.

I'm aware I'm making suggestions while not being an expert here, but I guess that's because we appear to have a building control system that has had enough of experts, so I'm left making guesses...


----------



## Cid (Nov 17, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Timber-framed, timber-clad tower blocks are predictably rare however. This does illustrate why it's sensible to have different standards for different types of building.
> 
> E2a: A large, 'sustainable' timber clad building did go up in flames at Nottingham university not that long ago.



That was still under construction though, and buildings are always systems in terms of how they actually perform. So if your internal spaces aren't divided as they will be when finished, and if parts of it are open, they might be far more vulnerable to the rapid spread of fire than they would be when finished... they seem to have had the confidence to rebuild it to essentially the same design.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 17, 2019)

Timber structure is a whole different thing to cladding anyway. In many ways a timber frame is more resistant to fire than a steel one. Timber chars through at a steady rate and usually structures will be designed so that the timbers can still function even after having lost some of their thickness. On the other hand steel at a certain temperature simply fails completely.


----------



## wiskey (Dec 10, 2019)

Don't know if anyone else is listening to Flat 142 on R4. I didn't intend to but I appear to be. I've taken, listened into and dealt with many horrible 999 calls in the past and even so this is grim listening.


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 10, 2019)

Is that the one that they ran earlier in the year? It’s a tough listen, but very good radio.


----------



## wiskey (Dec 10, 2019)

This one

Grenfell: Flat 142 - BBC Sounds


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 10, 2019)

No, that one is new. The one I listened to was lower down, the firefighters actually reached their flat but told them to wait but didn’t come back. Heavy going.


----------



## wiskey (Dec 10, 2019)

Sounds it. 

Not sure I'm up to listening to any more tbh. 

Miserable and anger making.


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 13, 2019)

Fucking scum lib dems. That is all.


----------



## GarveyLives (Dec 13, 2019)

Published Wednesday 4 December 2019:

Why isn’t Grenfell an election issue? _Because politicians like Boris Johnson *simply don’t care*_


----------



## Artaxerxes (Dec 16, 2019)

Donoteat (socialist yank Youtuber) has done a video on the fire.



The footage of the firefighters on approach about an hour in is still chilling stuff.


----------



## GarveyLives (Dec 17, 2019)

I fear that there is a lot more "shuddering" to come:



> _"Grenfell should have been central to this election, the government’s deficient response to the dozens of lives lost reflects their attitude to many areas of social care ..._



I lost family in the Grenfell fire and the thought of a new Tory government makes me shudder


----------



## Casual Observer (Dec 18, 2019)

GarveyLives said:


> I fear that there is a lot more "shuddering" to come:
> 
> 
> 
> I lost family in the Grenfell fire and the thought of a new Tory government makes me shudder


That was published the day before the election and spoke warmly of Emma Dent Coad, the Labour MP for Kensington. The author of the article said she was the only local politician to offer meaningful support after the fire. The rest of Kensington showed how much they care by voting Tory and removing Dent Coad the next day.


----------



## GarveyLives (Dec 21, 2019)

Casual Observer said:


> The author of the article said she was the only local politician to offer meaningful support after the fire. The rest of Kensington showed how much they care by voting Tory and removing Dent Coad the next day.



I suspect that "the rest of Kensington" probably had the same view of the Grenfell Tower massacre as many of the politicians seeking their votes:




The following update on developments was prepared shortly before the General Election:

​

Further local responses appear here:



> _"This result is a disaster for my neighbours, who have suffered immeasurably before, during and since the Grenfell Tower atrocity, former Labour MP Emma Dent Coad writes ..."_



My Electoral Defeat In Kensington Shows Lies Pay


And:



> _"Kensington is a microcosm for the wider havoc the Conservatives have wreaked, and it has highlighted the deceitful tactics the Lib Dems are willing to use. Their views on minority communities are not so different to the Tories, as they would like us to believe. Whilst hundreds of people in London and Glasgow attended anti-Boris protests over the weekend, Kensington residents held yet another local walk for Grenfell, but both messages remain unheard ..."_


_
Kensington and the Grenfell victims deserve better than lying Lib Dems and a Tory MP





*Former Conservative Party leadership candidate, Sam Gyimah, who contested the parliamentary seat concerned for ... the Liberal Democrats.*

​_


----------



## GarveyLives (Jan 20, 2020)




----------



## Treacle Toes (Jan 25, 2020)

Some fairly good news. She should never have been appointed.









						Grenfell Tower inquiry member resigns over links to cladding firm
					

Benita Mehra, who has connections to the Arconic Foundation, says she regrets an "oversight on my part".




					news.sky.com


----------



## MrSki (Jan 27, 2020)

Cunts.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 27, 2020)




----------



## Lurdan (Jan 28, 2020)

Phase 2 of the Inquiry is divided into 8 modules. In his opening statement yesterday, Richard Millett, the Counsel to the Inquiry, set out what would be covered in each module and the provisional timetable.

Video and transcripts for each day can be found on the Inquiry website.  Homepage | Grenfell Tower Inquiry

Transcripts are in the standard, rather annoying, two column format with line numbers. Here is a more readable pdf of that opening statement.

Millett also went into some detail about who would be called to give evidence during module 1, and the relation of the different companies involved in the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower to one another.

Core participants were asked to give written statements (these are all up on the website), which they all then got to see. As Richard Millett indicated, with only one exception - the Council - none of these statements admitted any liability. This week there will be opening statements from Counsel for the various core participants. Tomorrow morning (Wednesday) there will be submissions on behalf of the TMO and the Council.

Below are the details he gave about each module of the Inquiry.

Module 1 - planned to conclude in April


Spoiler: Module 1



Module 1 will examine the role, acts and omissions of the professionals and other persons involved in the refurbishment of the tower from 2012 to its sign- off in July 2016. We will be hearing from a significant number of witnesses, including witnesses for the architect, Studio E; the design and build contractor, Rydon; the cladding subcontractor, Harley; the fire safety engineer, Exova; the fabricator of the aluminium composite, or ACM, panels, who was CEP; as well as the employer's agent, quantity surveyor and CDM 1 co-ordinator, Artelia; and the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea's Building Control department. 

We will also hear from the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation, or TMO, about their role in procuring the project and what they did as client. 

As I will explain in due course, Mr Chairman, there will be particular focus on the materials selected for incorporation into the external wall as the project progressed, and their compliance or otherwise with the building regulations and relevant associated statutory guidance, and in particular Approved Document B on fire safety, or ADB, as well as relevant industry guidance.

(...)

The issues that we will be examining with the Module 1 witnesses broadly encompass the following: 

First, the initial decision to undergo refurbishment at Grenfell, the reasons for the decision and the budget. 

Second, the appointment of the professionals by the TMO, criteria, roles, interface between professionals. 

Third, procurement of the design and build contractor, looking at the process adopted and compliance. 

Fourth, planning. 

Fifth, the cladding, particularly the design and selection decisions, compliance with ADB and industry guidance, consideration given to fire safety or fire risk, with a particular focus on the ACM panels, the rainscreen insulation, the window infill panels, the windows and window surrounds, cavity barriers, and the crown.

Sixthly, fire strategy, pre- and post-refurbishment, development and adequacy, including consideration of cladding.

Seventh, Building Control, with the principal focus on the facade.



Module 2 - planned to run from 4th May to mid-June


Spoiler: Module 2



Module 2 will then examine closely the testing, classification, certification, and marketing of key products used in the external wall, and specifically the ACM panels used in the rainscreen system, made and sold by Arconic; the polyisocyanurate, or PIR, and phenolic insulation used behind those ACM panels in the external wall construction, principally RS5000, made and sold by  Celotex, which was PIR; the K15 Kooltherm product, made and sold by Kingspan, which was phenolic; the cavity barriers made and sold by Siderise; and the Aluglaze window infill panels.

We will be particularly interested in : first, the key tests that these products underwent, particularly the Arconic ACM panels with the polyethylene core and the Celotex and Kingspan insulation; second, their resultant fire classifications; third, how those tests and classifications were represented by the manufacturers to their markets and to the two certification bodies, the LABC and the BBA; fourth, the relevant certificates issued by the BBA in the case of the ACM panels and Kingspan's K15 Kooltherm product, and the LABC in the case of both K15 Kooltherm and the RS5000 insulation; and last, how those certificates were represented by the manufacturers to their markets, their buyers.



Module 3 - planned to run from the end of June to early October


Spoiler: Module 3



Module 3 will be divided into three broad topics. The first topic will investigate the complaints made by residents of the tower before 14 June 2017, which particularly relate to fire safety and concerns that were raised about doors and the quality of workmanship during the refurbishment. We will then examine the responses of the TMO and RBKC to those complaints and the degree of engagement by the TMO in the refurbishment works.

Module 3 will then consider a second topic, namely compliance by the TMO, RBKC and the London Fire Brigade with their obligations under law, namely the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety ) Order 2005, otherwise known often as the RRO. A particular focus of our investigation at this module will be the fire risk assessments carried out by Carl Stokes and their adequacy.

The final topic of Module 3 will contain the active and passive fire safety systems inside the tower — so lifts, fire doors, smoke extraction system — together with the gas supply system.


There will then be closing statements for the first three modules.

Module 4 - provisionally mid-October to mid-November


Spoiler: Module 4



In Module 4, we will examine the performance of local and central government in the immediate aftermath of the disaster.



Module 5 - provisionally from the end of November to mid-February 2021.


Spoiler: Module 5



Module 5 will consider the adequacy of the firefighting response on the night of the fire. Important elements of that assessment were addressed by you already, Mr Chairman, in the Phase 1 report, including the fundamental question whether stay-put advice could and should have been withdrawn before 2.47 am. 

There are, however, matters that require further investigation. These include: the purpose and adequacy of section 7.2(d) visits; the training of firefighters, including but not limited to incident command training, as well as alternative tactics for fighting fires in high-rise buildings; and communications and equipment, including the adequacy of water supply and pressure.



Module 6 - provisionally from February to May 2021


Spoiler: Module 6



Module 6 will involve a close study of central and local government's role in the disaster, and it will study in particular the responses by central government and other public bodies to previous incidents and reports, coroners' recommendations and things of that nature, including in respect of the building regulations and associated guidance and fires and firefighting. 

In addition, and following on from the evidence which you will hear in Module 2, we will examine in further detail a number of aspects of the existing regime for testing, certification and classification of materials for use in external cladding systems, both in general terms and in relation to specific products. That examination will, we anticipate, encompass four things at least : 

First, the route to compliance with the requirements for external cladding systems under the building regulations and associated guidance, as well as the basis for each such route, including the practice of desktop assessments.

Second, guidance produced by industry associations and standard-setting organisations as to fire safety for the external cladding systems of high-rise buildings, and as to the compliance with the functional requirements of the building regulations for individual components of such systems and as a whole.

Third, understanding across industry and amongst standard-setting and certification bodies of the meaning and application of key test results and classifications.

Fourth, the regulation and supervision of testing, certification and classification of construction products in relation to fire safety and performance in fire, including, again, the role of central government.



Module 7 - provisionally May 2021


Spoiler: Module 7



Module 7 will be devoted to the remaining expert evidence and will run for a week, one week, until mid-May next year. The experts will examine the results from testing of cladding components and their final conclusions on the relative contributions of the cladding design and materials to the fire spread at Grenfell Tower; the adequacy of the testing regime investigated in earlier modules; and the conclusions to be drawn about the Grenfell Tower fire, including the lessons to be learned when comparing the Grenfell Tower fire with other fires, both domestically and internationally.



Module 8


Spoiler: Module 8



Module 8 is to be for any remaining evidence and all submissions relating to the circumstances in which each deceased met their death, so far as not covered in the earlier modules and Phase 1.



There was a brief introductory BBC podcast last Friday. During phase 2 they will be producing podcasts weekly rather than daily.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 28, 2020)

Reported in various sources -



> Richard Millett QC, counsel to the inquiry, criticised those involved in the refurbishment for showing “no trace of responsibility” for what happened in the fire.
> “With the sole exception of Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea council, not a single core participant involved in the primary refurbishment of Grenfell Tower has felt able to make an unqualified submission against their own interests,” Mr Millett said on Monday.
> “With that solitary exception, Mr Chairman, one finds in those detailed and carefully crafted statements no trace of any acceptance of any responsibility for what happened at Grenfell Tower.”



I find this statement a little strange. What does he expect? What company or individual is going to willingly incriminate itself, given the consequences of doing so? It's the purpose of an enquiry to ask the right questions and find out where the responsibility lies. Especially in a situation like this, where responsibility is likely to be spread over multiple failings of multiple people and organisations, who's going to risk putting their hand up and saying they accept some share of responsibility only to find that they are the only ones to have done so?


----------



## two sheds (Jan 28, 2020)

Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea council?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2020)

two sheds said:


> Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea council?


To me it's more surprising that they've already volunteered liability than that others haven't. What have RBKC actually said though - I can't seem to find their opening statement anywhere.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 29, 2020)

It ought to be that organizations who don't admit liability are treated more harshly. It happens with individuals - is that true if an organization if found guilty of criminal acts in court?


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 29, 2020)

teuchter said:


> Reported in various sources -
> 
> 
> 
> I find this statement a little strange. What does he expect? What company or individual is going to willingly incriminate itself, given the consequences of doing so? It's the purpose of an enquiry to ask the right questions and find out where the responsibility lies. Especially in a situation like this, where responsibility is likely to be spread over multiple failings of multiple people and organisations, who's going to risk putting their hand up and saying they accept some share of responsibility only to find that they are the only ones to have done so?



I agree that its wholly unsurprising that companies involved will try and protect their own arses and wiggle and squirm.  That much is predictable.  It doesn't however mean they shouldn't be criticized for it when it is very obvious to everyone what they've been up to.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2020)

It's not obvious to me to what extent, for example, Studio E did anything wrong. I started reading their statement last night. It seemed they were defending themselves against various things that have been said about their liability and at first sight it seemed quite reasonable that they defend themselves. It seems unfair to write this off as 'buck passing'.


(they also state that their financial resources limit the extent to which they can take part. I guess PI insurance doesn't cover public inquiries?)


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 29, 2020)

Emails reveal key Grenfell firms knew cladding would fail in blaze
					

Grenfell Inquiry told bid documents specified zinc cladding not ACM before value engineering




					www.constructionenquirer.com
				




Pretty much what I was saying from early on.  Everyone knew (its the only way this could have happened) and they all turned a blind eye in the name of value engineering.  

When I worked in EWI and cladding we were going out there and insisting on Rockwool and minimum class o cladding and walking away from projects where people weren't listening.  We knew there was some dodgy shit going on out there but no one wanted to listen.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 29, 2020)

teuchter said:


> It's not obvious to me to what extent, for example, Studio E did anything wrong. I started reading their statement last night. It seemed they were defending themselves against various things that have been said about their liability and at first sight it seemed quite reasonable that they defend themselves. It seems unfair to write this off as 'buck passing'.
> 
> 
> (they also state that their financial resources limit the extent to which they can take part. I guess PI insurance doesn't cover public inquiries?)



You obviously have a decent knowledge of the construction industry, I don't know in what context.  You must know though that contractors just can't value engineer something without approval from the architect or where relevant, the engineer.  Bearing in mind as well this was the building aesthetic, the most important thing to an architect in a project such as this.  Of course the architect knew this was dangerous and for whatever reason they have chosen to turn a blind eye.

Fun fact about the email mentioned in the story I linked to.  It has come from the insulation company who have pretty much removed their entire offering from the UK market for 'testing'.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> You obviously have a decent knowledge of the construction industry, I don't know in what context.  You must know though that contractors just can't value engineer something without approval from the architect or where relevant, the engineer.  Bearing in mind as well this was the building aesthetic, the most important thing to an architect in a project such as this.  Of course the architect knew this was dangerous and for whatever reason they have chosen to turn a blind eye.
> 
> Fun fact about the email mentioned in the story I linked to.  It has come from the insulation company who have pretty much removed their entire offering from the UK market for 'testing'.


Firstly this was a design and build contract which means that most of the decision making power is taken out of the architects' hands. They essentially become a consultant to the contractor who doesn't have to abide by their preferences. In order for the contractor to use a particular buildup they have to have approval from building control, not from the architect. As I understand it, the architects (studio E) specified zinc cladding panels in the initial stages of the design. These were changed to the aluminum ones after the D&B contract had been awarded to the contractor. 

Secondly, even if the achitects had full control of the final specification - is it reasonable to say they "knew it was dangerous"? Architects can't be specialists in everything - they rely on advice from others. If the cladding suppliers, the fire engineer, and the building control officers say something is ok, then it seems reasonable for the architects to accept this. Even if the architect had their own opinion on the matter, it would involve going to the client (who is paying for it) and telling them that they should ignore the advice of these other specialists, and stay with a more expensive option. Of course, if the architect had access to specific knowledge that demonstrated something was unsafe this would be the right thing to do. At the time though, they would not know any of the stuff we now know - internal emails from the suppliers raising concerns, evidence that testing had not been carried out properly, and so on.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 29, 2020)

teuchter said:


> Firstly this was a design and build contract which means that most of the decision making power is taken out of the architects' hands. They essentially become a consultant to the contractor who doesn't have to abide by their preferences. In order for the contractor to use a particular buildup they have to have approval from building control, not from the architect. As I understand it, the architects (studio E) specified zinc cladding panels in the initial stages of the design. These were changed to the aluminum ones after the D&B contract had been awarded to the contractor.



Yes I know it was D&B and I know all about how D&B works.  The spec would have stated a product or equal and approved.  It is absolutely within the power of the architect to say this is not equal and we do not approve.  It is also within their power to resign from the project when their wishes are not being respected in critical matters.  This does happen.



> Secondly, even if the achitects had full control of the final specification - is it reasonable to say they "knew it was dangerous"? Architects can't be specialists in everything - they rely on advice from others. If the cladding suppliers, the fire engineer, and the building control officers say something is ok, then it seems reasonable for the architects to accept this. Even if the architect had their own opinion on the matter, it would involve going to the client (who is paying for it) and telling them that they should ignore the advice of these other specialists, and stay with a more expensive option. Of course, if the architect had access to specific knowledge that demonstrated something was unsafe this would be the right thing to do. At the time though, they would not know any of the stuff we now know - internal emails from the suppliers raising concerns, evidence that testing had not been carried out properly, and so on.



I believe architects should familiarize themselves with building regulations and they should have the professional standards to call a problem when they see one.  I do it all the time as manufacturer when I see a critical failing.  We make it clear our objections and why and then walk away from the projects.

Anyway this is all moot because we know for a fact the architect was fully away that the cladding would likely go up in flames if exposed to fire.  I'm not pinning all the blame on the architect as they are one part of a totally failed project design system but ultimately they are the lead designer.  The role of the fire consultant Exova is also key here. What on earth were they doing OK'ing this?


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 29, 2020)

An interesting development this morning. When the hearing began Moore-Blick stated that he had been made aware very recently that when they are called to give evidence, starting next week, many of the witnesses who were involved in the design and choice of materials are likely to claim privilege against self-incrimination as a reason for not answering questions. He said this had come as a surprise since to date the inquiry had, in his words, had "the fullest co-operation" in the form of providing written statements and in supplying documents. No one so far had sought to avoid doing this or answer questions on these grounds.

A written application was made yesterday signed by Counsel for a number of the core participants including Harley Facades, certain current or former employees of Rydon, the TMO, installers Osborne Berry and Kevin Lamb an independent specialist cladding designer. It asks Moore-Blick to apply to the Attorney General for an undertaking that nothing said by a witness in response to questions would be used in furtherance of a prosecution against them.

Moore-Blick has directed that this application will be heard tomorrow afternoon. He will hear at that time from any core participant who wishes to address him about it, and he will then decide what action to take in the interests of the Inquiry. He adjourned proceedings for an hour so that Core Participants could discuss this with their Counsel.

The written application received yesterday has been posted on the inquiry website  - PDF here - and it reveals that in addition to being signed by Counsel for the people listed above, it had followed an initial letter delivered to the Inquiry on Monday, drafted by Counsel for Harley Facades, which had also been signed by Counsel for Studio 6 and for a different set of Rydon employees.

Moore-Blick agreed to hear from Mike Mansfield, who is representing a number of survivors and relatives, about this matter this afternoon.

ETA: Mansfield expressed concern that the application had been made this late when witnesses were due to start giving evidence next Monday. Moore-Blick expressed sympathy with this point. Mansfield asked if the application by the corporate participants could be heard tomorrow as arranged but that Counsel for the Bereaved, Survivors and Residents could have enough time to hold a meeting with their clients and make representations in response to the application on Monday morning. This was agreed.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> Yes I know it was D&B and I know all about how D&B works.  The spec would have stated a product or equal and approved.  It is absolutely within the power of the architect to say this is not equal and we do not approve.  It is also within their power to resign from the project when their wishes are not being respected in critical matters.  This does happen.



No. The power of the architect is entirely dependent on the nature of whatever their appointment is with the D&B contractor. They might be appointed to provide design input on certain aspects of the project or they might not be. At the point where the project is taken on by the D&B contractor, there may or may not be a spec that is confirmed as fully building regs compliant. For example the architects might only have been engaged to develop the design to the level of detail necessary for planning permission. At that level of detail there's no need to specify products which will not be visible on the outside of the building. Nor is there the need to specify particular variations of a product, if all the variations have essentially the same outward appearance. The architects may also have been engaged to provide a set of information that can be used for pricing - that is, the set of information that goes out to tender. That information can be at various levels of detail and might well involve some level of "performance spec" - in other words, the exact cladding buildup might not be laid out, but there might be a written description that simply includes the requirement that it's compliant with building regs (along with everything else relevant). In fact that kind of performance spec is even more likely to be involved if the tender going out is one for a D&B contract, because the whole point is that a certain proportion of the detailed design takes place after the contractor is involved.

So in other words, at the point where the project is handed over to the D&B contractor, it won't necessarily state "X product or equal and approved".

But even if it does - if the architect is not then appointed by the contractor to take on design responsibility for that element of the work, they have zero power to approve or not approve any subsequent changes. As far as I can see (I've not got through the whole of the statement yet) in this case, the detailed design responsibility for the facade cladding was not given to the architect - it was given to Harley, the specialist cladding subcontractor. Studio E would have no power to approve decisions made by Harley unless their appointment said so.



Teaboy said:


> I believe architects should familiarize themselves with building regulations and they should have the professional standards to call a problem when they see one.  I do it all the time as manufacturer when I see a critical failing.  We make it clear our objections and why and then walk away from the projects.
> 
> Anyway this is all moot because we know for a fact the architect was fully away that the cladding would likely go up in flames if exposed to fire.  I'm not pinning all the blame on the architect as they are one part of a totally failed project design system but ultimately they are the lead designer.  The role of the fire consultant Exova is also key here. What on earth were they doing OK'ing this?


I don't think we know for a fact that the architect was fully aware that the cladding system was dangerous. As I said earlier the architect relies on the advice of specialists. In this case, that would have included the advice of Harley. Architects need to be familiar with building regs but can't be expected to check every question of safety going back to first principles. If you are advised by the specialist contractors and product suppliers that something is safe, and if building regs appear to agree it's safe, then it seems reasonable to conclude that it is safe.

Of course, an attempt to untangle all of this is what is going to happen over the next few weeks. I don't know to what extent Studio E are guilty of negligence, if at all. I'm not going to defend them by default but I don't think at this stage anything is clear at all.


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 1, 2020)

The BBC podcast about last weeks hearings is now up. For anyone wanting a brief account this very short piece at Construction News covers the basics.

Along with video and transcripts of the hearings the Inquiry has also put online a number of documents. These can be found at its evidence page. 





__





						Evidence | Grenfell Tower Inquiry
					






					www.grenfelltowerinquiry.org.uk
				




They include copies of some of the email exchanges referred to in opening statements. 

An example is this PDF (the emails in it are in reverse order). After Rob Warren, Celotex's Head of Technical, has been fairly candid that the RS5000 insulation as used at Grenfell is combustible, one of their distributors responds :







Also online are the written opening statements produced by Counsel for many of the core participants. These are not the same thing as the verbal submissions made at the hearings this week. Many are longer and much more detailed.

Among them are three produced by Counsel for different groups of the Bereaved, Survivors and Residents (BSRs). PDFs here : 
BSR Team 1,  
BSR Team 2 
Imran Khan and Partners. 

The most interesting IMO is that produced by Team 2, which sets out a detailed timeline relating the order in which different companies became involved in the refurbishment, and the points at which key choices and decisions about the design and the materials appear to have been made. 

Anyone getting into these written statements should take note that many of them refer to the expert reports commissioned for this module of the Inquiry. There is one by an architect Paul Hyett, three by Barbara Lane, and one by Beryl Menzies on the acts and omissions of the Council's Building Control officers. 

Their authors will be giving evidence at the end of this module, when they will also be asked about the objections to their conclusions made by those criticised. The reports themselves won't be published until then. 

Across these different opening statements criticisms are made of all those involved in the refurbishment. As an example, here is an article  from Architects Journal (paywalled so archived), which compiles together the criticisms made of architects Studio 6. 

And the comments underneath it give a taste of the level of outrage to come from members of the salaried middle class at the idea that they might be held to account for "only doing their jobs".


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 6, 2020)

After considering the application, from a number of the corporate core participants, that the inquiry should seek an assurance from the Attorney General that evidence given cannot be used in any subsequent prosecution of the witness giving it, the inquiry panel has decided to do that. Their ruling, giving the reasons for making it, is here (PDF).

There will thus be a further delay as the Attorney General considers the matter. 

This kind of assurance from the Attorney General is not that uncommon in public inquiries. This particular request to the Attorney General is limited to the first three modules of phase 2. It would cover both individuals and companies. It would remove their ability to invoke their right not to incriminate themselves in order to refuse to answer questions or produce documents. Statutory Inquiries such as Grenfell have powers to order the production of evidence and to give oral evidence. Failure to do so, and giving false evidence, are criminal offenses, and prosecutions for those offenses are explicitly excluded from the form of assurance being sought from the Attorney General. 

The assurance isn't a grant of immunity against prosecution, only an assurance that evidence given after the assurance is made cannot be used in any prosecution of the person giving it. However that evidence could still be used in prosecuting other people and bodies. (The finger pointing at others in the various opening statements - in particular those by Celotex and Artelia - suggests the assurance would be unlikely to inhibit the circular firing squad that seems to be forming among those responsible for the refurbishment and materials). The assurance would not apply to the large body of evidence already acquired by the inquiry, and obviously not to any evidence separately gathered by the police or other investigating bodies. 

All that said, the timing of the application, and the contrast between it and the assurances of a willingness to co-operate in the opening statements of those who have made it, just further proof, as if any were needed, of what a collection of fuckers we are looking at.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 6, 2020)

Lurdan said:


> After considering the application, from a number of the corporate core participants, that the inquiry should seek an assurance from the Attorney General that evidence given cannot be used in any subsequent prosecution of the witness giving it, the inquiry panel has decided to do that. Their ruling, giving the reasons for making it, is here (PDF).
> 
> There will thus be a further delay as the Attorney General considers the matter.
> 
> ...




Not only are these fuckers a bunch of scumbags, why has the police not been knocking on their doors and doing a criminal investigation in to this? Clearly there are many people who feel they may be criminally liable...


----------



## Chilli.s (Feb 6, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Not only are these fuckers a bunch of scumbags, why has the police not been knocking on their doors and doing a criminal investigation in to this? Clearly there are many people who feel they may be criminally liable...


It's like the cunts saying "We'll tell you what we did if you let us off".


----------



## teuchter (Feb 6, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> why has the police not been knocking on their doors and doing a criminal investigation in to this?


They've said they want to wait until the inquiry has reached its conclusions, which seems reasonable to me, or do you want the inquiry's efforts to be duplicated by a police investigation running in parallel?

On the timing of this application - I can see that it has made at a point which appears to offer maximum disruption to the inquiry. But the first stage report was only published about two months ago. The first stage report decided that building regulations had not been complied with, which was not something that was entirely clear before that point, and as I understand it, changed the likelihood of criminal charges being brought against some of those who will be giving evidence. I imagine that people have been having a lot of discussions with lawyers since that point. Is two months an excessively long time, to deliberate and decide that yes, we would like to apply for these assurances about immunity? I don't know, maybe it is.


----------



## agricola (Feb 6, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Not only are these fuckers a bunch of scumbags, why has the police not been knocking on their doors and doing a criminal investigation in to this? Clearly there are many people who feel they may be criminally liable...



They have been - indeed that investigation and where it might lead is the reason for these witnesses making this request.  (edit) It has nearly 200 officers working on it.


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 6, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Not only are these fuckers a bunch of scumbags, why has the police not been knocking on their doors and doing a criminal investigation in to this? Clearly there are many people who feel they may be criminally liable...


Last detailed update I saw was last autumn. Couple of hundred officers. Interviews under caution. Some thousands of witness statements. Charges, if they happen, unlikely before 2021. 

This is of course the Met we're talking about however.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 6, 2020)

teuchter said:


> They've said they want to wait until the inquiry has reached its conclusions, which seems reasonable to me, or do you want the inquiry's efforts to be duplicated by a police investigation running in parallel?
> 
> On the timing of this application - I can see that it has made at a point which appears to offer maximum disruption to the inquiry. But the first stage report was only published about two months ago. The first stage report decided that building regulations had not been complied with, which was not something that was entirely clear before that point, and as I understand it, changed the likelihood of criminal charges being brought against some of those who will be giving evidence. I imagine that people have been having a lot of discussions with lawyers since that point. Is two months an excessively long time, to deliberate and decide that yes, we would like to apply for these assurances about immunity? I don't know, maybe it is.




Fuck inquiry then a possible police investigation, we've been there before, Hillsborough etc.


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 8, 2020)

Inquiry paused until at least February 24th to allow the Attorney General to respond to the request to grant an assurance to witnesses. 

This weeks BBC podcast briefly covers what such an assurance means (and what it doesn't), and then since there's been nothing else happening this week it gives a useful explainer about Building Regulations and how they helped facilitate the situation in which Grenfell Tower was turned into a death trap. One of the contributors, Peter Apps of Inside Housing magazine, has an article up (paywalled so archived) which discusses the significance of this application to the Attorney General. 

No comment as yet on these developments from Grenfell United (perhaps reflecting the fact that the three sets of Counsel representing different groups of Bereaved Survivors and Residents didn't have a common view on the application). Justice for Grenfell has only retweeted a link to a statement from Lord Porter of the Local Government Association.


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 26, 2020)

The Attorney General has agreed to issue an undertaking that oral evidence given by individuals cannot be used in any subsequent prosecution of them. She has declined the request from the inquiry to extend this undertaking to companies. (The inquiry had asked for this because of concerns that some people - the obvious case being sole traders - might invoke the right not to incriminate the companies they effectively embodied). Attorney Generals decision letter here (PDF) and a FAQ about it here (PDF).

Grenfell United statement about the decision


Spoiler: Statement















Hearings resume next Monday March 2nd.


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 27, 2020)

The Inquiry got a Court order today requiring Gareth Mills, a former employee of insulation manufacturer Kingspan, to provide written answers to a list of questions originally addressed to his former employers. (Inside Housing - paywalled so archived)



> Kingspan made the ‘Kooltherm K15’ insulation boards that formed a part of the cladding system involved in the devastating blaze.


(...)


> As a technical advisor, Mr Mills was responsible for advising on the suitability of Kooltherm K15, maintaining and expanding its certifications, assessing its performance and offering technical expertise for product testing, a court hearing was told this morning.


(...)


> Mr Mills was contacted by Kingspan’s lawyers in August and September 2019 and issued a legal notice [by the Inquiry] in November 2019  requiring him to provide a statement by 20 December.


(...)


> He provided a partial response – answering the first 22 of the 89 questions without reference to any documents – at close to 11pm last night.


(...)


> Kingspan had offered him £10,000 to cover his legal fees and said it would give him access to any documents required to prepare his statement.


(...)


> He was given until 26 March to answer the inquiry’s questions.


(...)


> The judge also ordered him to pay the inquiry’s legal fees of £10,236




(Being a technical advisor for the manufacturer the questions he has been asked will presumably not directly address the question of how and why a quantity of combustible Kooltherm K15 came to be substituted for the already adequately combustible Celotex RS5000 that had been specified).


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 10, 2020)




----------



## GarveyLives (Mar 15, 2020)

There is some recent (4 March 2020) analysis of events here:

​


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 17, 2020)

Not very surprising announcement


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 14, 2020)




----------



## Lurdan (Apr 21, 2020)

The Inquiry has issued an update on it's work while the lockdown is in force. It has written to core participants asking for their views on how future hearings should be conducted. That letter hasn't been published but the Guardian which has evidently seen it gives an indication of the issues and options it discusses.

Any notion that the various legal teams are spending lockdown enjoying a relaxing netflix binge is somewhat contradicted by this little factoid in the update.






There have also been announcements from the Government about some of the fire safety issues which the fire drew attention to. Peter Apps has written a useful round up for Inside Housing. It's paywalled and I don't seem to be able to archive the page so here's the text of it :

*What did we learn from the recent government announcements on fire safety?* - Inside Housing (paywalled)



Spoiler: Text of article



Insight 20/04/2012:00 PM
by Peter Apps

What has been announced? At the start of the month the government issued a major fire safety update, which among the many other things occupying the world’s attention at the moment was somewhat overlooked. But it was significant. (Link to update)

First, more details on the new Building Safety Regulator, which is being set up by the Health and Safety Executive. This new watchdog will police the safety of buildings above 18m, and will keep tabs on major decisions made during the construction or refurbishment of buildings. It will also ensure residents have better access to information about the safety of their home.

Next, it was confirmed that sprinklers and better fire safety signage will be required in new buildings down to 11m in an update to the official guide to the building regulations, Approved Document B.

Finally, there were important updates about where the government is with the new building safety fund it promised at the Budget in March and its work to unstick the mortgage market.

Here we look more at what each of these announcements mean.

*Fire safety is still a priority*

Neither the establishment of the regulator nor the lowering of the height limit for sprinklers were a surprise. The government announced both in January and this serves as confirmation post-consultation that they will happen.

Both will likely be welcome steps in terms of building safety: sprinklers are not a panacea in terms of building safety, but there is a wealth of evidence to say that they prevent large fires and lives will likely be saved by their inclusion. Similarly, the screaming need for a properly equipped regulator was made more apparent with each day of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry before it was paused.

Arguably, though, both announcements point to an even more important factor: civil servants are still working on fire safety.

Across Whitehall resource and attention has been diverted to the rapid development of the necessary policies to combat coronavirus and fire safety could easily have been placed on the backburner until the world began to return to normal. That it has not is good news.

*The new fund is coming soon – but has some serious limits*

The downside to both of these policies is that they will largely ensure the safety of new buildings which – thanks to the combustibles ban – were much less likely to be a problem anyway.

The most important work is to make existing buildings safe before one becomes the next disaster, and with heightened fire risk because of the coronavirus outbreak and self-isolation, that has become even more pertinent.

So, all eyes turn to the £1bn fund for remediation, on which there was both good and bad news.

The good news was a welcome announcement that the fund will open in May: having been announced in the Budget in March, this is about as fast as anyone could reasonably expect the fund to start operating and is further evidence that fire safety is not going to be sidelined by Whitehall during the pandemic.

But the bad news is the government is showing no sign of budging on the strict limits on its scope.

The BBC was briefed after the Budget that buildings below 18m may qualify for funding on a case-by-case basis but this fact – which the government was never willing to confirm to Inside Housing – has been flatly ruled out by the latest update, with an added statement that it will not be extended: “We are clear that the unprecedented total investment to support remediation of… buildings above 18 metres will be the limit to the government’s funding support.”

This means first that all those leaseholders in buildings below 18m will most likely have to foot the bill themselves, or be left bankrupt and homeless by the cost. There are 100,000 buildings between 11m and 18m and many will require remediation. This is an awful lot of people who will not be helped.

Furthermore, many fire safety costs extend beyond cladding removal. Those residents paying an additional mortgage for the waking watch and insurance costs on their block had hoped for some government support – particularly given the coronavirus outbreak. Others who face remediation costs for issues such as missing fire breaks or internal defects also look set to be excluded from the fund.

*We still don’t know the size of the problem*

Last summer, the government instructed local authorities to collect data on all private blocks above 18m within their boundaries, to build up a national picture of non-aluminium composite material (ACM) clad buildings.

The deadline for completing this crucial work was 31 March, but – as Inside Housing revealed in January – the collection process was going badly with more than 70% of blocks unidentified. Local authorities complained that they did not have the powers or resources to force private building owners to release the information.

These fears appear to have materialised: the deadline has passed and no nationwide data is yet available about the scale of the building safety crisis outside ACM. This is an important omission: it means we have no real idea of the scale of the problem, how long it will take to solve or whether the £1bn fund will be sufficient.

Housing secretary Robert Jenrick’s letter announcing the changes said “this work continues”, and added that “we encourage local authorities and housing associations who have not yet submitted their data ahead of the deadline to do so as quickly as possible”. (Jenrick's letter PDF)

The Scottish government recently completed and published this work and several Australian states which were more proactive have managed to gather this data and have moved on to the next phase of making them safe. That the English government has not, almost three years after the Grenfell Tower fire, is not a good look.

*The static mortgage market problem has not been solved yet*

A major source of stress for flatowners at the moment is not necessarily the knowledge that they definitely do have dangerous cladding on their buildings, but the lack of knowledge about what actually is there.

Government advice notes insisting all buildings down to 11m must have non-combustible facades or be justified through large-scale testing has kicked off a fully blown mortgage crisis, with flat residents unable to buy or sell until testing confirms their facade is safe.

But with limited testing facilities this has resulted in people simply being stuck, unable to sell. A recent effort to solve the problem by allowing surveyors to fill out a form confirming the facade as non-combustible has also faltered, in part because of difficulties securing indemnity insurance.

The recent updates acknowledge this problem but offer nothing new to solve it. There is hope that the announcement of the fund will give lenders the confidence to lend again (as they know the remediation will be carried out and the costs covered), but with its limits and the lack of information about how many buildings it must be spread between this seems optimistic.

A “round table with mortgage lenders” is promised for buildings below 18m and “work with the [insurance] industry to consider potential solutions” is offered for the indemnity issue. As before, the good news is that this is still being thought of. The bad news is that it doesn’t appear close to any real answers.

*The combustibles ban is still to come, with all eyes on timber*

The next big step in the fire safety picture is a consultation on whether to lower the combustibles ban to 11m.

Broadly, this is a non-controversial decision but one aspect is proving very contentious.

Banning combustibles from walls would mean an end to the use of manufactured timber and if the combustibles ban comes down to 11m that could be the end for the cross-laminated timber industry.

Furious lobbying from the timber industry for an exemption is under way and the deadline for the consultation has been pushed back to 25 May. It is worth keeping an eye on.


----------



## Lurdan (May 6, 2020)

48 storey residential block in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates goes up in flames tonight. Looks like the fire spread via. the cladding.




BBC story

Khaleej Times (Dubai) reporting the fire began on the tenth floor. No reports of any fatalities.


> Seven people were treated at the site, while five others were rushed to hospital to be treated for suffocation.


----------



## teuchter (May 6, 2020)

Certainly looks like the cladding went up.









						Video: Morning after fire ravaged Sharjah tower
					

A look at the aftermath of Tuesday night's fire at a building in Sharjah




					gulfnews.com


----------



## Teaboy (May 6, 2020)

Yes, although it looked like it mostly charred and the fire stayed external.  Still terrible.


----------



## Lurdan (May 6, 2020)

Looks as if it was a complete design fail as a death trap.

(Coombe is Building Safety Programme Lead for the National Fire Chiefs Council).


----------



## teuchter (May 7, 2020)

That's simply not true though. Other countries do allow single staircase designs.


----------



## Teaboy (May 7, 2020)

I'm also a bit confused about that tweet because its on the Grenfell thread.  You can't really add another staircase to an existing tower block.  Well, I guess you could but it would have to be external and everything that entails and wouldn't have been much use.


----------



## Lurdan (May 7, 2020)

In retrospect it might have been more sensible if I'd just posted the Nick Coombe tweet without the Phil Murphy tweet responding to it. And also perhaps make it clear that it was talking about the the fire in the block in Sharjah referred to in the posts immediately before mine. And indeed add appropriate caveats.

The point of interest as far as I was concerned was Coombe's understanding of the details of the Sharjah block and how that might - one would wish to stress that word - partly account for the differences in outcome. 

Clearly without context such details only go so far. A more recent story at Gulf News includes this


> Hassoun said they faced difficulty leaving the building as it was dark and the emergency exits were blocked with discarded furniture.


Obviously one staircase leading to a door you can get out of could be more useful than two which lead to a dead end. 

A story today in the Khaleej Times specifically links the fire spread to the presence of ACM cladding 
Police say banned cladding caused Sharjah blaze to spread rapidly - Khaleej Times


> Aluminum composite cladding - widely used to cover a building's exteriors - has been banned in Sharjah since 2017, after it was found to be a primary factor in massive fires in 2015, 2016, and 2017, Brig Al Serkal said. Such cladding issues were also detected in the fire incidents at The Address Downtown and The Torch in Dubai Marina. Though the Abbco Tower was built before the cladding ban, its owner had already been ordered to remove the aluminum panels from its facade.


(...)


> The official said they have conducted a comprehensive survey of existing buildings with aluminum facades across the city. Owners were given a grace period to change the exteriors and replace the material, he added.



If it's true that a 'comprehensive survey' has actually been carried out, then at first glance that might seem to compare favourably with the still incomplete cladding audit here in the UK. This was reported to be in difficulty in January (and serious questions were raised about the accuracy of what had actually been done).
Almost 70% of high rises have not had cladding materials identified, investigation reveals - Inside Housing (links paywalled so archived). 
The cladding audit: why the government’s attempts to check high-rise facades is failing - Inside Housing  

The end of March deadline for completing the audit was missed. However as the current pandemic illustrates we should be suitably cautious about making hasty and poorly founded comparisons with other and very different countries responses to very complex issues.


----------



## teqniq (May 20, 2020)

Government backs away from pledge to remove Grenfell-style cladding from high-rise buildings by June


----------



## Teaboy (May 20, 2020)

teqniq said:


> Government backs away from pledge to remove Grenfell-style cladding from high-rise buildings by June



If it was me (and I understand why others would feel differently) I wouldn't be unduly concerned if I lived in a block of flats that had this type of ACM combustible cladding provided it was a relatively new build.  Sure, I'd want it changed but I wouldn't be living every day in fear as I would back the internal compartmentalisation to give enough time to escape.  Of course if there was Rockwool wall insulation (either external or internal) that would give me a extra level of comfort.

As I say though I can understand why others would feel differently.  I would be very worried if I lived in an older block of flats which had limited or no internal fire stopping.  I wonder how many blocks there are out there which have been retrofitted with this stuff.

I wouldn't be particularly bothered about HPL cladding.  It might not be the best but I doubt it will contribute much to the spread of flames in a real world fire situation.


----------



## GarveyLives (May 26, 2020)

Sadly, Grenfell Massacre survivor, *Afwerki Abraha*, passed away on 11 May 2020.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 9, 2020)

The Grenfell Inquiry has posted an update :

Following a consultation with core participants in May they decided to draw up plans to resume hearings with limited personal attendance. They are now working on those hearings commencing on Monday 6th July.



> The Panel's primary concern is the health, safety and wellbeing of all those who would need to attend. The Inquiry team has been working with its contractors to put arrangements in place so that a limited number of attendees can use the Inquiry premises safely and in line with government guidelines. A thorough risk assessment process will be undertaken by the Government Property Agency to ensure compliance with all health and safety requirements.





> For these arrangements to be effective, we will need to begin by restricting attendance to the members of the Panel, Counsel to the Inquiry, the witness, their legal representative and any person providing immediate support, and those Inquiry staff and contractors critical to the operation of the hearings. A member of the Press Association will be invited to enable first-hand reporting and assist in making the process as transparent as possible.





> Hearings will continue to be streamed online, and Hestia will continue to be available to provide a range of remote wellbeing support services for the bereaved, survivors and residents.





> The Inquiry will keep attendance numbers under constant review. The Panel are particularly keen for the bereaved, survivor and resident community to return when possible, but their safety must be our overriding concern and it is too early to suggest when or how that might be possible.




The Inquiry has also published a letter from Boris (pdf here fwliw) which draws attention to Robert Jenrick's June 2nd update on implementing the Phase 1 recommendations (text here - *Trigger Warning*: there is a deeply unpleasant photograph of Jenrick smirking). Boris also states :


> I would like to confirm that the Cabinet Office has engaged the executive search company, Perrett Laver, to identify a shortlist of suitable candidates for the vacant panel member role. This work is progressing well.



Oh good.

Work has continued on phase 2 of the Inquiry during the lockdown. Since April 17th a further 38,635 documents have been disclosed to core participants bringing the total to date to 175,085. That compares with 20,725 for the whole of phase 1.


While hearings were suspended the Inquiry revisited the issue of the undertaking given by the Attorney General that evidence given in the public hearings cannot be used in any subsequent prosecution of the person who gives it. (But can of course be used in the prosecution of others).

The Inquiry had originally asked that this assurance applied to 'legal persons' (ie. companies) as well as 'natural persons' (human beings, or what passes for such in the social housing and building sectors). They had in mind that sole traders, such as some of the independent consultants used during the refurbishment of Grenfell, and directors of some of the larger companies who can afford better quality legal representation, might claim immunity from self-incrimination (ie. refuse to answer questions), if their evidence could be argued to be evidence given 'by' the company they embodied.

The Attorney General initially declined to extend the assurance to 'legal persons'. Lawyers for some 'legal persons' then clarified that their clients did indeed intend to try to avoid answering questions by claiming their right not to self-incriminate. (I suspect that the detailed and fairly intense questioning faced by the first witnesses before hearings were suspended may have focused minds among some of them). The Inquiry asked the Attorney General to reconsider her decision and she agreed.

The correspondence regarding all this can be found on this page, including the correspondence from lawyers on behalf of 'legal persons'. The Attorney General's factsheet on her revised decision is here (PDF file).


----------



## GarveyLives (Jun 10, 2020)

For information:


----------



## baldrick (Jun 12, 2020)

Article on Inside Housing: How the government has failed to make buildings with dangerous cladding safe three years after Grenfell

Inside Housing


----------



## Badgers (Jun 19, 2020)




----------



## teqniq (Jun 19, 2020)

Scum.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 19, 2020)

teqniq said:


> Scum.


Seems a bit kneejerk. 

Here is a different perspective on what they are actually saying.









						At last, some sense over the cladding crisis from … Rob Perrins, of the Berkeley Group - Leasehold Knowledge Partnership
					

Rob Perrins, the CEO of the Berkeley Group, tells the Times today that there needs to be a risk-based approach to the remediation of cladding sites rather than a blanket ban on various types of cladding.




					www.leaseholdknowledge.com


----------



## GarveyLives (Jun 30, 2020)

Ahead of the resumption of the public inquiry:

Kensington residents campaign for Grenfell fire inquiry to_ look at impact of racism_

Meanwhile, veteran scholar activist *Colin Prescod*, who has lived at the same address in West London, a stone’s throw away from the site of the Grenfell massacre since 1958, "gives keys to question what justice for Grenfell could “look like” for the former tenants of the tower, as well as for North Kensington residents, beyond the framework of the state’s judicial system":

Justice4Grenfell: A Political Walk in North Kensington, London.  Recorded by Léopold Lambert in London with Colin Prescod on 13 February 2020


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 11, 2020)

This week the resumed Inquiry heard evidence from two employees of fire safety consultants Exova.

During the first phase of preparation for the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower, before Rydon was appointed in 2014 as the main contractor, Exova were employed to produce a fire safety strategy for the existing building, which didn't have one, and a fire safety strategy for the refurbishment work.

Neither of these was ever completed, and when Rydon took over they chose not to continue to employ Exova, and not to appoint a replacement. (Exova were subsequently approached for pieces of ad-hoc advice and supplied some). The uncompleted draft fire strategies which were produced by Exova have been criticised, in particular for failing to address the issue of the proposed cladding.

The BBC are continuing to produce a weekly podcast when the Inquiry has public hearings. I listened to much of the hearings this week and the latest podcast episode does a very good job of drawing out the essentials. At the end there is a brief interview with a lecturer in fire engineering about how far the level of communication between architects Studio E and Exova, and the assumptions about their respective roles which have emerged in evidence, represents 'normal industry practice'.

Earlier in the week there was another episode of the BBC podcast which interviewed two residents of blocks still covered in combustible cladding.

For those catching up, Phase 2 of the Grenfell Inquiry is divided into eight modules. It is currently still dealing with module 1. Originally, pre-coronavirus and legal issues, this was due to run from February into April. Presumably it will now be running until September, subject to any further interruptions. The details of what each module covers were set out back in January and can be found in this post.

Video of the evidence sessions is available on YouTube and transcripts and supporting documents on the Inquiry website.

I'd again recommend the BBC podcasts if you want to get up to date with the evidence so far during module 1. If you only have time to listen to one of them I'd suggest episode 118 - the second week of Studio E's evidence. Among other things it covers how non-compliant materials and designs were chosen, provides a large portion of 'explanations' as to how (in their opinion) Studio E were 'not responsible' for this, and eloquently 'paints a picture' of the relationship between the companies involved. It thus lays the foundation for a good deal of the evidence still to be heard.

On Monday the Inquiry is due to hear evidence from another employee of Exova, on Tuesday and Wednesday Bruce Sounes of architects Studio E is due to complete his evidence (twice interrupted back in March by illness), and on Thursday the first of what I imagine will be several days of evidence from Rydon, the main contractor on the refurbishment.

edited to correct spelling


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 13, 2020)

> One of the Grenfell Tower architects said they were “miffed” at demands from a building safety officer aimed at preventing fire spreading up the tower and complained it was causing cost increases and delays...The inquiry heard how a fire engineer hoped building regulators would not notice the evacuation arrangements might not be compliant with up-to-date building regulations. One fire engineer wrote to a colleague: “Let’s hope [the building control officer] doesn’t pick up on it.”













						Grenfell architect clashed with council over fire prevention
					

Building control officers insisted on fire barriers in the wall structure, inquiry hears




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 18, 2020)

Latest BBC Grenfell Inquiry podcast is up
Podcast 122 - Exova, Studio E and Rydon

Inside Housing's Grenfell diary also covers this weeks hearings. It's paywalled so here is an archived version:
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week six: ‘I can’t recall any instance where I discussed the materials with building control’

Inside Housing are also reporting (paywalled) that :


> The government will publish a draft of its Building Safety Bill on Monday – intended to introduce major regulatory changes to resolve the issues that contributed to the Grenfell Tower fire.





> Ministers said that the “landmark” piece of legislation will deliver the most comprehensive building safety reforms for nearly 40 years. It will provide the legal framework for a new Building Safety Regulator for blocks taller than 18 metres, which is currently being established in shadow form within the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).





> Tower block residents will have a “louder voice” under the new regime, the government claimed, with the power to challenge inaction on safety issues from building owners. Leaseholders will also be protected from huge bills to pay for safety work, it added.





> A separate consultation on proposals to implement recommendations from the Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s phase one report is also set for publication by the Home Office. The inquiry’s demands included mandatory three-monthly checks of fire doors and personal evacuation plans for all high-rise residents.



The Government's press release about the draft Bill with a little more detail is here
Explained: The Draft Building Safety Bill


----------



## two sheds (Jul 20, 2020)

Grenfell firm took some of cladding savings for itself, inquiry told
					

Rydon contract manager admits firm under-reported savings from switch to ACM panels




					www.theguardian.com
				




Rydon looks like it's in a spot of bother. 



> The main contractor on the Grenfell Tower refurbishment secretly “pocketed” £126,000 while switching the cladding to cheaper, more combustible materials, the inquiry into the deadly fire at the building has heard.
> 
> Rydon was bidding for the project in March 2014 when it told the landlord of the council block that it could save £293,368 by switching from the originally specified zinc cladding to plastic-filled aluminium panels, which the inquiry has heard had “significantly worse” fire performance.
> 
> ...


----------



## two sheds (Jul 20, 2020)

One bit I missed out: 



> Rydon was also under further pressure to save money on the job because one of its employees, Frank Smith, had underpriced the total works by £212,000. Rydon was looking for ways to “compensate” for the mistake, internal company emails showed.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 24, 2020)

Grenfell consequences are increasingly becoming significant in the building industry.

Some of this is directly related to the building regs changes for buildings over 18m. These are suddenly a lot more onerous than previously, and really the industry has had to scramble to comply. It's not just that you are more restricted in the type of insulation or cladding that can be used - essentially it now says that you can use virtually nothing combustible in external wall buildups. That includes many of the smaller components, and for many of these, until recently (or still now) there was basically nothing on the market that would comply. Have a look at this website for example - you can get an idea of the speed with which things are having to be developed and certified.





__





						Metz A1 Non-Combustible Cavity Tray / A1 Fire Rated / BBA Approved
					

The Metz A1 Non-Combustible Cavity Tray System is a unique patented all metal, A1 Fire Rated, BBA Approved soft zinc alloy.




					www.metzcavitytray.co.uk
				




In some cases, it seems that the new rules are being applied to buildings where the initial building regs approval was given prior to the changes. Usually, (and building regs get updated all the time) what you have to comply with is whatever was in place at the beginning of the project, because it's not practical to change things once a building is halfway through construction. But now there are projects where substantial and expensive changes are having to be made after things are already half built. As I understand it, this is mainly driven by fire consultants becoming ultra cautious.

Effects are also visible in professional indemnity insurance. There have been reports for a while of building control companies being unable to renew their PI insurance. Many architects, especially if they've ever worked on anything that the insurance company thinks might be vaguely similar to the Grenfell cladding, have seen their PI insurance costs go up massively. In some cases, the increase in the insurance cost completely wipes out any fees earned on the job in their history that has raised the red flag. It also seems to be common for PI renewals to be offered but with an endorsement that basically says you are not covered for _anything_ related to fire safety.

These kinds of effects I think are rather predictable. Unfortunately they don't really address the problems that lead to Grenfell happening. Just becoming ultra cautious and attempting to follow some kind of zero risk strategy doesn't really work... it's not really possible anyway. I've been following quite a lot of the Grenfell evidence and it's clear that while there were lots of minor individual failures that compounded problems, really it's a systematic thing and the way to make it better is through somehow building much more reliable processes for checking and signing stuff off. If you have that in place then it's safe to go with managed risks, which is all you can ever really do anyway. 

These kinds of things that result from the insurance market can often have positive effects - but I'm not sure that creating a situation where building essentially just becomes much more expensive does anything to help making the wider changes, and it has lots of negative effects, not just for the people working in the industry.

I wonder if we'll see a trend for buildings that are 17.9m high, for some time.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 25, 2020)

This weeks BBC podcast is up
BBC Radio - The Grenfell Tower Inquiry Podcast, 123 The Contractor: Rydon

Two witnesses this week, both former employees of Rydon, the company appointed in 2014 as lead contractor for the Grenfell refurbishment, on a design and build basis, after the first attempt to get the project going had fallen through.

Simon Lawrence, Rydon's contract manager gave evidence for three days, and Simon O'Connor the onsite project manager for one. Although both had worked for Rydon for some years they were both newly promoted to the roles they held for this project, and both left Rydon in 2015, some time before the refurbishment was completed. Indications have begun emerge that the contract was a more troubled one than has been reported so far.

Some more attention grabbing things came out :

the fact, as mentioned in two sheds posts above, that Rydon misrepresented to the TMO the amount of money to be saved by switching from the solid Zinc cladding, which the architects and Council planners had favoured for aesthetic and durability reasons, to ACM panels with a combustible core, which the TMO had asked to be considered on cost grounds;

the fact that behind the talk of 'stakeholder engagement' residents were characterised as vocal and aggressive in raising concerns;

the fact that Rydon in general, and neither of these witnesses in particular, had adequate knowledge of building regulations and fire safety, took no steps to employ or acquire any, failed to see or heed any of the red lights in documentation and correspondence, and were thus, as they stated, dependent on their specialist sub-contractors in these areas, while being unable to effectively monitor what those sub-contractors were doing;

But while these sort of things stood out they don't get to the heart of the larger picture that is emerging of the scale of the failings, and the extent to which they were facilitated by, and in many cases a product of, 'standard industry practise'.

I've recommended the BBC podcast before. I think this one does an exceptional job of setting out and explaining this weeks evidence. I haven't seen anything else which comes close.

Inside Housing's Grenfell Diary for the week covers the headline points :
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week seven: ‘I do not think I have ever worked with a contractor operating with this level of nonchalance’ (paywalled so archived)

More evidence from Rydon employees next week.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 30, 2020)

The draft "Building Safety Bill"









						What is in the government’s Building Safety Bill? Seven key takeaways
					

Inside Housing takes a look at the government’s draft Building Safety Bill and assesses the biggest changes for the housing sector




					www.insidehousing.co.uk


----------



## teqniq (Sep 7, 2020)




----------



## Artaxerxes (Sep 7, 2020)

Cunts.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 8, 2020)

Even the local tory MP Buchan voted against it.


----------



## editor (Sep 8, 2020)

This government are filth.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 10, 2020)

Felicity Buchan calls for phase one of the inquiry to be put into law after voting against phase one to be put into law earlier this week.


----------



## Chilli.s (Sep 10, 2020)

Heartless self serving cunts.


----------



## Streathamite (Sep 10, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Felicity Buchan calls for phase one of the inquiry to be put into law after voting against phase one to be put into law earlier this week.



HUH??? 
She can't be that thick. Can she???


----------



## Streathamite (Sep 10, 2020)

teqniq said:


> View attachment 229565


Utter bastards.
Labour actually deserve credit for trying though


----------



## MrSki (Sep 10, 2020)

Streathamite said:


> HUH???
> She can't be that thick. Can she???


I think it will be about obeying the tory whip but worried about her electorate. Well out to lunch whatever.


----------



## Streathamite (Sep 10, 2020)

MrSki said:


> I think it will be about obeying the tory whip but worried about her electorate. Well out to lunch whatever.


Oh, agrreed, absolutely, but she must have realised there will be no shortage of people pointing this out to voters in Kensington, and I think we can assume those voters can read, and had what you might call a _fairly_ strong reason to take an especial interest in that bill. 
Tory being wanker = no surprise.
Tory defending a mega-marginal, gifting her opponents the most spectacular open goal = bit more surprising


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 12, 2020)

The Inquiry resumed hearings on Monday after it's August break. First up was Zak Maynard, the Managing Surveyor for Rydon, the main contractor on the refurbishment. Then the first two witnesses from Harley, the specialist cladding design and construction sub-contractor. Managing Director Ray Bailey for two days and then Commercial Director Mark Harris.

As in previous weeks various strands emerged across the evidence given by different people. The weekly BBC podcasts remain the best overview each week. 

Here are the Inside Housing Grenfell diaries for this week and for the last week before the summer break. (Paywalled so archived).

Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week eight: ‘It haunts me that it wasn’t challenged’ (w/e 31/7)

Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week nine: ‘All I can say is that you will be taken out for a very nice meal very soon’ (w/e 11/9)

Next week more witnesses from Harley.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 12, 2020)

Lurdan said:


> Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week nine: ‘All I can say is that you will be taken out for a very nice meal very soon’ (w/e 11/9)



This one in particular needs to be read widely. A circle of amiable, unspoken corruption.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 16, 2020)




----------



## Teaboy (Sep 16, 2020)

Literally nothing that has come out so far has surprised me in the slightest.  In fact I predicted as much.  Everyone knew, everyone turned a blind eye.  Looks like there might also have been some usual construction industry bribery / corruption as well.

As sure as night follows day...


----------



## MrSki (Sep 17, 2020)

teqniq said:


>



They were not lost. They were destroyed.   Another fucking crime.


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 17, 2020)

MrSki said:


> They were not lost. They were destroyed.   Another fucking crime.


Daily news outlets are struggling to find 'relatable' stories and this one is a classic example of something which isn't nearly as interesting as it seems. The guy in question left the employment of Harley, the specialist cladding design and construction subcontractor, in March 2016. So before the completion of the refurbishment and over a year before the fire. He was allowed to keep his work laptop on condition that he deleted anything related to his employment. Somehow this material also got deleted from the company server as well. His boss, when asked about this, suggested the guy had 'arranged for this to be done'. Questioned about it the guy himself said he didn't have access to the company server and hadn't done so. Whatever actually happened it seems far from clear that it happened in order to 'cover up' anything regarding the fire.

It's also not clear to me what 'incriminating' material would have been involved. The picture that has emerged from the Harley evidence so far is that this guy was named 'project designer' for the Grenfell refurbishment, in his words, "to reassure" main contractor Rydon that Harley were on top of things while "a project team was pulled together". His company CV was 'enhanced' before being supplied to Rydon, according to him without his knowledge. (Enhanced CVs is something of a recurring theme). During the period between 2014 and 2015 that he was nominally 'design manager' on the refurbishment for Harley, the bulk of his time seems to have actually been spent on two other contracts, one of which reportedly had time consuming 'issues'. He doesn't seem to have had any role at all in the contract negotiation or documentation regarding the Grenfell refurbishment, and he doesn't seem to have had a very significant role in the production of Harley's construction drawings beyond (not very diligently exercised) oversight. He had no role overseeing work on site. In early 2015 other people (still to give evidence) took over his functions for the remaining year of the refurbishment contract.

In the scale of things to be suspicious or outraged about I don't rate this lost data as very significant at all.

As a structural engineer he had little expertise to contribute as regards fire safety issues. By his account he had no knowledge of previous cladding fires, despite attending a seminar that contained a presentation about them. He managed to fail to spot potential red lights in the documentation he saw about the materials used. Like the others involved he didn't question the issue of missing cavity barriers when this came up and a consensus developed that this was acceptable. And he had the same conviction as everyone else that fire safety was some other fuckers concern. But he isn't, as far as I can see, anything more than a fairly small cog in a set of much larger failures, and the contents of his computer weren't needed for his shortcomings and those broader failures to be perfectly clear


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 20, 2020)

Last week the Inquiry heard from three witnesses who worked for Harley Facades, the specialist cladding design and construction sub-contractor. First Mike Albiston, who worked as an estimator pricing the elements of Harley's bid and then worked on the search for cost savings. Then Daniel Anketell-Jones, nominally Harley's 'design manager' from 2014 to 2016, and lastly Kevin Lamb, a freelance designer brought in as 'project designer' (his view) or 'lead designer' (his bosses view).

Weekly BBC podcast in the usual place. And here's this week's Inside Housing weekly diary (paywalled so archived). 
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 10: ‘As we all know, ACM will be gone rather quickly in a fire!’

So far we've only heard from four of the companies involved (architects Studio E, fire consultants Exova, main contractor Rydon and the first witnesses from Harley), and it's already getting a little complicated distinguishing the various runners and riders on the 'merry-go-round of buck passing', let alone keeping straight the contradictions in their evidence. The BBC podcast does a pretty good attempt at this, as well as explainig the technical and background stuff, but it is of course a podcast. Not everyone likes the format, and it's difficult to look things up. So as a bit of fun _(other definitions of the term fun are available)_ here's an unofficial transcript of this weeks episode.


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 27, 2020)

Last week the Inquiry heard from employees of Harley, the specialist cladding subcontractor (namely the managing directors son who was employed as onsite project manager having worked on one previous contract); of CEP the fabricators who made and supplied the combustible cladding panels; of Max Fordham the building services engineers who amongst other things suggested the level of insulation to be employed and first mentioned Celotex; and the TMOs clerk of works (or as he saw it site inspector).

BBC podcast up as usual. 
Here is an unofficial transcript of this weeks podcast for those who prefer text. 
Week 11 (w/c 21st Sep)

This was the third week of evidence from Harley. It makes sense to see it in relation to the two previous weeks so here are unofficial transcripts of the previous two BBC podcasts :
Week 9 (w/c 7th Sep) 
Week 10 (w/c 14th Sep) - This replaces the link in my last post.

And here's Inside Housing's Weekly Diary (paywalled so archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 11: ‘Did you get the impression that Grenfell Tower was a guinea pig for this insulation?’


----------



## BCBlues (Sep 27, 2020)

Thanks for pulling all this together Lurdan , especially the Inside Housing reports which we wouldnt be able to read otherwise.
Theres a lot of very inept/corrupt characters mentioned frequently in these reports. Almost a reflection of our incumbent Gov't.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 27, 2020)

Thanks, the podcast transcripts are useful.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 4, 2020)

Last week's witnesses were

one of the partners in John Rowan who supplied the one-day-a-week clerk of works employed by the TMO;
the two partners in Osborne Berry who carried out the cladding and external window installation as subcontractors of Harley Facades;
the director of SD Plastering who, amongst other things, were subcontracted by Rydon to install the internal window trims completing the sandwich of inflammables around the windows;
and the Building Control officer who failed to see any of it.
BBC podcast in the usual place. Here's an unofficial transcript of it for those who prefer text. And here is this week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (paywalled so archived).

Grenfell Diary Week 12: ‘Would you accept that was a serious failing on your part?’

Next week: Monday morning another former RBKC officer, the Building Control Manager at the time of the fire.
The rest of the week various witnesses from Artelia who were employed by the TMO as employer's agent, quantity surveyor and CDM co-ordinator. They were pretty scathing about the TMO in their opening statement. The TMO has still to give evidence. We are in the final weeks of Phase 2 module 1 which, barring further interruptions, is due to end this month.

[ETA later on]

Having done some more transcripts of BBC podcasts I figured rather than leave links scattered through the thread it would be sensible to collect them together. Here's a simple page with links to :

A list of what each of the Inquiry Phase 2 modules will deal with
A list of the module 1 hearings since January, including who gave evidence each day and a link to the official transcripts.
A list of the unofficial transcripts of BBC podcasts done so far (with 5 new ones).
A list of the links to the Inside Housing Grenfell Diaries to date


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 11, 2020)

Last week's witnesses were

the former head of RBKC Building Control
three employees of Artelia, the employers agents, CDM coordinators and quantity surveyors employed by the TMO.
(Amongst other things some interesting further detail about the discussions the TMO had with Rydon about cost cutting while tendering was still underway. Artelia say that had they known the nature of these it could have led to the tender process being voided. And more detail about the unhappiness with Rydon's peformance during the contract).

BBC Podcast here. An unofficial transcript of the podcast here. And this week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary is here:
Grenfell Tower Inquiry week 13: ‘Value for money is to be regarded as the key driver for the project’

The Inside Housing diary doesn't deal with the evidence from RBKC Building Control.
Inside Housing's account of that is here (although FWIW I think the account in the BBC podcast is better) :
Head of RBKC building control denies ‘culture of bullying’ at the council

There are now unofficial transcripts of most of the BBC podcasts for this module of the Inquiry here.

Starting on Monday witnesses from the TMO. I expect this to be an interesting week.


----------



## Streathamite (Oct 11, 2020)

Lurdan said:


> Last week's witnesses were
> 
> the former head of RBKC Building Control
> three employees of Artelia, the employers agents, CDM coordinators and quantity surveyors employed by the TMO.
> ...


Thesee are useful updates. Please keep on posting them.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Oct 12, 2020)

Contemptible.

_Paul Dunkerton, a project manager for the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation, told colleagues in a March 2013 email that Ed Daffarn, who later escaped from the burning tower, was one of two “main antagonists on the Lancaster West Estate regarding Grenfell Tower”._​​_Daffarn, who later predicted that “a serious fire in a tower block … is the most likely reason that those who wield power at the KCTMO will be found out and brought to justice”, had asked the TMO to update residents about the progress of planning applications for the refurbishment._​​_“Perhaps my choice of words wasn’t great,” Dunkerton told the inquiry. “But they were more vocal than other residents and leaseholders in the tower.”_​​_The inquiry previously heard that an executive at Rydon, the main contractor, described Daffarn and other residents as “rebels” when they questioned the quality of works, and complained that they were “persistent and aggressive”._​
There's more:

_The inquiry saw a draft of a newsletter to be sent to residents about the refurbishment which included figures about how many people said they wanted new windows that they could clean themselves. The majority said they did, but the final leaflet sent out said: “You do not have a clear preference about whether residents should clean the windows or the TMO.”_​​_A newsletter item summarising responses from a residents’ questionnaire about the cladding reported: “There is no clear opinion on the colour or type of cladding.”_​​_But the inquiry heard that no one had been asked about the type of cladding, only its colour. The combustible plastic-filled panels that were eventually used were the main cause of the spread of fire, the inquiry has already concluded._​​_Asked to explain the discrepancy, Dunkerton said the draft newsletter was sent to his manager, Mark Anderson, and the TMO’s communication team, and that might explain it._​










						Grenfell landlord called safety campaigner an antagonist, inquiry told
					

Tenant organisation singled out Ed Daffarn, who later escaped the burning tower




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 14, 2020)

Boris has appointed a new panel member for Phase 2 of the Grenfell Inquiry, to replace the one who stood down in January.

Official statement and correspondence:
Ali Akbor OBE appointed to the Grenfell Tower Inquiry Panel - GOV.UK



> [He] will start reading into the work of the Inquiry immediately and will join the Panel from 2 November. Ali will sit for the duration of the Inquiry and, alongside his two fellow panel members, will be jointly responsible for the whole of the Inquiry’s Phase 2 work.



Mr Akbor is the CEO of Leeds based Unity Homes & Enterprise.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 17, 2020)

Last week the first four witnesses from Kensington and Chelsea TMO :

Paul Dunkerton the TMO's first project manager on the Grenfell refurbishment.
Mark Anderson the TMO's director of assets and regeneration from 2011 to February 2013.
David Gibson the TMO's head of capital investment from 2013 to 2016.
Claire Williams the TMO's project manager on the Grenfell refurbishment from September 2013 onwards.
BBC podcast here.  Unofficial transcript of the podcast here.  (Previous weeks transcripts here).

Inside Housings Grenfell diary for this week (paywalled so archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry week 14: ‘Did it not occur to you at this point that your budget was simply too low?’
(Previous weeks diaries here)

Next week Claire Williams is due to continue giving evidence on Monday and Peter Maddison of the TMO on Tuesday and Wednesday. 

Assuming that timetable is held to, the first of the Inquiries expert witnesses, architect Paul Hyett, will be giving evidence on Thursday. The report he produced will be published then.

AFAIK there are two further expert witnesses for this module, Barbara Lane, who I think has produced three reports, and Beryl Menzies who has produced a report on the Council's Building Control. The intention is evidently to conclude module 1 the week after next, and to begin Module 2 on Monday November 2nd with the Inquiry's new panel member taking part.
 (What are these modules?)


----------



## teqniq (Oct 17, 2020)




----------



## two sheds (Oct 17, 2020)

Have we had: 









						Grenfell Tower landlord had 'secret' meeting on cost cutting, inquiry told
					

£800,000 of refurbishment savings agreed ‘offline’ with contractor Rydon, including cheaper cladding




					www.theguardian.com
				






> The Grenfell Tower landlord held a secret meeting to cut refurbishment costs – including discussing the switch to cheaper cladding – despite being warned by lawyers that it would break procurement law and could void the main contract, the public inquiry into the disaster was told.
> 
> David Gibson, head of capital investment at the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO), which operated the council tower block for its owner, the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, organised a “secret” and “offline” meeting with the contractor Rydon in which they agreed more than £800,000 in savings, he told the inquiry on Thursday.
> 
> ...



All totally above board then.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 19, 2020)

Interesting developments at the start of the hearing this morning. Apparently, late on Friday afternoon the solicitors acting for the TMO informed the Inquiry that Peter Maddison, the TMOs Director of Assets and Regeneration between 2013-16, had just remembered he still had a set of work notebooks and diaries which hadn't been disclosed, either to the Inquiry or the Police. The Inquiry is scrambling to assess and disclose this material - several hundred pages - to core participants.

Since Maddison was due to start his evidence tomorrow morning this has created a scheduling problem. The Inquiry team have proposed that after asking Maddison about his failure to disclose this material tomorrow morning, the hearing is then adjourned until Wednesday. This is to give core participants time to respond to these documents. Maddison will then be giving evidence for the rest of this week and probably the start of next. The Inquiry's expert witnesses will then give evidence which will carry over into the following week. This revised timetable is still subject to discussions with core participants.

Once Claire Williams (the TMOs project manager for the refurbishment), resumed giving her evidence she was asked about notebooks. She revealed that she had handed one notebook covering 2017-18 to the TMOs solicitors but that she had "binned" her other notebooks when clearing her desk at the time she left the TMO in May 2018. This led to some sharp questioning during which she stated that nobody had instructed her about retaining relevant material. Whether or not what she says about this disposal is true, it raises very uncomfortable questions for the TMO, and also for the solicitors who were advising it at the time. (Apparently not the same ones acting for it now). 

Later in her evidence a set of cost spreadsheets came up which it appeared the Inquiry also hadn't received from the TMO's current solicitors. And earlier. in addition to Maddison's notebooks and diaries, it was stated that another relevant document about resident involvement in the tender process had only just been disclosed. This all gives the impression of a rather deeper issue than just Ms Williams notebooks.


----------



## baldrick (Oct 19, 2020)

I saw that this morning on Pete Apps Twitter. I have also seen this story linked this morning:

Immediate evacuation of development due to fire safety


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2020)

Lurdan said:


> Interesting developments at the start of the hearing this morning. Apparently, late on Friday afternoon the solicitors acting for the TMO informed the Inquiry that Peter Maddison, the TMOs Director of Assets and Regeneration between 2013-16, had just remembered he still had a set of work notebooks and diaries which hadn't been disclosed, either to the Inquiry or the Police. The Inquiry is scrambling to assess and disclose this material - several hundred pages - to core participants.
> 
> Since Maddison was due to start his evidence tomorrow morning this has created a scheduling problem. The Inquiry team have proposed that after asking Maddison about his failure to disclose this material tomorrow morning, the hearing is then adjourned until Wednesday. This is to give core participants time to respond to these documents. Maddison will then be giving evidence for the rest of this week and probably the start of next. The Inquiry's expert witnesses will then give evidence which will carry over into the following week. This revised timetable is still subject to discussions with core participants.
> 
> ...


would conspiracy to pervert the course of justice be a possible remedy?


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 19, 2020)

Inside Housing's story about this mornings developments (archived)
KCTMO project manager admits destroying evidence relating to Grenfell refurbishment after fire

To reiterate what I said above I got the impression that the issue of failure to disclose seems to go somewhat deeper than Ms Williams actions. I imagine Mr Maddison will be questioned closely about this tomorrow and I would assume the issue of how the Inquiry's requirements were conveyed to him will be tackled. (As I understand it he left the TMO before the refurbishment was completed). 



Pickman's model said:


> would conspiracy to pervert the course of justice be a possible remedy?



Given that this is emerging from admissions freely made by these fuckers it seems a rather odd sort of conspiracy to me. Nonetheless I imagine the Police will be planning some interviews.

Ms Williams still has to give evidence about the email she sent Rydon in 2014 saying 


> _“Simon, I’m just writing to get clarification on the fire retardance of the new cladding – I just had a ‘Lacknall’ moment.”_


and why she didn't appear to follow it up when she got no reply.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2020)

Lurdan said:


> Inside Housing's story about this mornings developments (archived)
> KCTMO project manager admits destroying evidence relating to Grenfell refurbishment after fire
> 
> To reiterate what I said above I got the impression that the issue of failure to disclose seems to go somewhat deeper than Ms Williams actions. I imagine Mr Maddison will be questioned closely about this tomorrow and I would assume the issue of how the Inquiry's requirements were conveyed to him will be tackled. (As I understand it he left the TMO before the refurbishment was completed).
> ...


the master criminal always makes one fatal error and theirs is to freely admit to all manner of peculiar behaviour when they've had three years to get their stories straight


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 19, 2020)




----------



## GarveyLives (Oct 19, 2020)

> *“You binned them even though you knew by that time there was already on foot a public inquiry?”* asked inquiry chair Sir Martin Moore-Bick.
> 
> _“I believe I looked at them and they were notes. Everything that was in there, I would have thought is actually documented elsewhere,”_ she replied.
> 
> ...



Source: KCTMO project manager admits destroying evidence relating to Grenfell refurbishment after fire, Peter Apps, Inside Housing, 19 October 2020 







(Source: as stated in image)

*Claire Williams, former project manager of the Grenfell Tower refurbishment for Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation.*

*Perverting the course of justice carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.*​


----------



## Fedayn (Oct 19, 2020)

I can't help but feel she is another who will quite literally get away with it....


----------



## stethoscope (Oct 19, 2020)

Laptops being wiped, notebooks being destroyed, no backups or copies of documents. Well this is all very convenient.

Thanks @Lurdan for your continued updates on this.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 19, 2020)

People seek outrage at the actions or inactions of individuals and newspapers want headlines but anyone actually following the enquiry can see that the problems are totally systematic and affected the way every single person who worked on the project behaved. Unless you work out how to change how building projects are procured, the ways in which responsibility is assigned and regulations are monitored all the same things will continue to happen.


----------



## alex_ (Oct 20, 2020)

teuchter said:


> People seek outrage at the actions or inactions of individuals and newspapers want headlines but anyone actually following the enquiry can see that the problems are totally systematic and affected the way every single person who worked on the project behaved. Unless you work out how to change how building projects are procured, the ways in which responsibility is assigned and regulations are monitored all the same things will continue to happen.



no, sending a badly paid project manager to jail will fix it


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 20, 2020)

Very few organisations have a thought out records retention policy other than the NHS and the police. I have worked mainly in R&D and even there whilst I've kept most of my personal notebooks going back 12 years or so, I doubt my colleagues have.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 20, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> Very few organisations have a thought out records retention policy other than the NHS and the police. I have worked mainly in R&D and even there whilst I've kept most of my personal notebooks going back 12 years or so, I doubt my colleagues have.


from my reading of met police's records retention policy they want to keep shit they can use on other people forever and destroy or conceal  as soon as possible anything that might possibly be used to hold them accountable.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Oct 20, 2020)

alex_ said:


> no, sending a badly paid project manager to jail will fix it



Sure noone involved in decision making was badly paid.


----------



## equationgirl (Oct 20, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> from my reading of met police's records retention policy they want to keep shit they can use on other people forever and destroy or conceal  as soon as possible anything that might possibly be used to hold them accountable.


An accurate observation, Police Scotland moved to special notebooks with numbered pages so they couldn't be removed. The policeman I spoke to said there were severe penalties for removing the pages.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 20, 2020)

Artaxerxes said:


> Sure noone involved in decision making was badly paid.


that's the first decision they made


----------



## two sheds (Oct 20, 2020)

there was the bloke who sounded hugely overworked and stressed into making a decision because they'd let all the other inspectors go - as I recall.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 24, 2020)

Last week further evidence from former staff of Kensington and Chelsea TMO :

Claire Williams the TMO's project manager on the Grenfell refurbishment from September 2013.
Peter Maddison the TMO's director of assets and regeneration from January 2013.
BBC podcast here.  Unofficial transcript of the podcast here.  (Previous weeks transcripts here).

Inside Housing's Grenfell diary for this week (paywalled so archived):
Week 15: ‘Have you ever informed the police that you destroyed documents relevant to their investigation?’
(Previous weeks diaries here)

(There is a link in this weeks diary to a June 2019 Inside Housing story about how the TMO responded to the recommendation to fit sprinklers after the Lakanal House fire. That link is broken - here is an archived version.
Grenfell management company ignored Lakanal recommendations after government said they would ‘not be mandatory’

On Monday Peter Maddison is due to continue. Once his evidence is concluded the Inquiry's expert witnesses will begin giving evidence. Currently Beryl Menzies is scheduled for Tuesday and Barbara Lane for Wednesday and Thursday.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 25, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> Very few organisations have a thought out records retention policy other than the NHS and the police. I have worked mainly in R&D and even there whilst I've kept most of my personal notebooks going back 12 years or so, I doubt my colleagues have.



I must be thinking of a different police then. You know, the ones that misplace every piece of evidence that could make them look bad with never a soul held accountable.


----------



## alex_ (Oct 25, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> I must be thinking of a different police then. You know, the ones that misplace every piece of evidence that could make them look bad with never a soul held accountable.



I’m pretty sure what you describe is an outstandingly well arranged records retention policy.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 25, 2020)

Most places I’ve worked, the policy is that documents must be archived and also destroyed. You must destroy sensitive documents once they’re not in use. But you must also keep them.

I hope that’s clear.


----------



## alex_ (Oct 25, 2020)

danny la rouge said:


> Most places I’ve worked, the policy is that documents must be archived and also destroyed. You must destroy sensitive documents once they’re not in use. But you must also keep them.
> 
> I hope that’s clear.



i once worked somewhere where all email was deleted after 30 days.

The ico deletes emails after 12 months, and instant messages after 7 days.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 25, 2020)

alex_ said:


> i once worked somewhere where all email was deleted after 30 days.
> 
> The ico deletes emails after 12 months, and instant messages after 7 days.


One place the policy was “ask Sheila”.

She’d say “is it a receipt or invoice? Give it to Gaynor.  If not, shred it”.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 25, 2020)

Apologies for the detour.


----------



## GarveyLives (Oct 25, 2020)

Police investigating the Grenfell Tower disaster have arrested a man on suspicion of _perverting the course of justice_ ...


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2020)

Unfortunately Gavin Barwell is 48.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 31, 2020)

This week saw the final day of witness evidence for Phase 1 of the Inquiry, and the start of evidence from the Inquiry's expert witnesses.

Peter Maddison the TMO's director of assets and regeneration from January 2013 gave a final day of evidence.
Beryl Menzies gave evidence about the Council's Building Control.
Barbara Lane gave evidence about the fire strategies produced by Exova, and the various pieces of health and safety information which should have been produced during and at the end of the reburbishment.
BBC podcast here. Unofficial transcript of the podcast here. (Previous weeks transcripts here).

Inside Housing's Grenfell diary for this week (paywalled so archived):
Week 16: ‘I conclude this was very serious evidence of professional negligence’
(Previous weeks diaries here)

Next week, from Monday afternoon to Wednesday morning, the last expert witness, architect Paul Hyett, is due to give evidence. There are no closing statements for Module 1 - they will be heard at the end of Module 3. So on Thursday it is intended to start Module 2 with opening statements from the Inquiry team and various core participants.   -  What do all these modules cover ?

There was an additional BBC podcast this week covering the response to the recommendations made by Phase 1 of the Inquiry one year later. A transcript of it should be up later this weekend.


----------



## agricola (Oct 31, 2020)

equationgirl said:


> An accurate observation, Police Scotland moved to special notebooks with numbered pages so they couldn't be removed. The policeman I spoke to said there were severe penalties for removing the pages.



There is in the Met as well; they used to regularly kick people out at Hendon who tried to do it (there were even people who tried to do it with the old IRB, which had numbered pages).


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 6, 2020)

After 65 days of hearings Module 1 of this phase of the Inquiry concluded on Wednesday, at the end of two days of evidence from the final expert witness, architect  Paul Hyett.

Yesterday Module 2 started with opening statements. The third Inquiry panel member, Ali Akbor, took part for the first time via video link.

Richard Millett, the Inquiry's Lead Counsel, revealed that some former employees of Arconic were still attempting to avoid giving evidence in person, citing French law. They have however given written statements, and Millett indicated that if ongoing discussions didn't resolve this issue they could be 'empty chaired'. Part of the six days scheduled in January for their testimony could be devoted to a presentation of the evidence the Inquiry already has, and the questions the Inquiry would have invited them to respond to.

More interestingly still, Millett revealed that just last Thursday solicitors for Kingspan, the manufacturers of the combustible insulation that was substituted on parts the outside of Grenfell Tower had written to the Inquiry :



> (...) attaching a letter directly from Kingspan to the BRE saying that they were now withdrawing a number of their BS 8414 test reports and associated BR 135 reports. Kingspan’s letter to the BRE said in terms that the very first test carried out on Kooltherm K15 in 2005 was not representative of the K15 product which had been sold by them from 2006 onwards. That is to say the K15 tested in 2005 was essentially a different product to what was being sold after 2006.





> It was also confirmed that the K15 product used in two further BS 8414 tests in 2014 was not representative of the K15 product then on the market. The letter says that this was prompted by discoveries of irregularities relating to the testing systems, the systems tested, which had in turn been prompted by requests from this Inquiry.



This is actually a big deal. Kingspan are market leaders in the supply of insulation products and these now withdrawn test certificates were a significant part of the basis on which these products have been sold and used on thousands of buildings in the UK. Peter Apps for Inside Housing (archived):
Kingspan withdraws insulation fire test admitting it is 'not representative' of product on market for 15 years

The Inquiry then heard an opening statement from BSRs (Bereaved Survivors and Residents) Team 1. Although written down this comes across as rather technical and dry (here is a transcript of it), it was a pretty brutal takedown of the way materials manufacturers influenced changes in the regulatory regime which permitted new 'routes to compliance', gamed and rigged fire test results to obtain fire ratings and certificates, and then misrepresented those ratings and test results to sell their combustible products. 

Peter Apps on this opening statement here, and specifically about Arconic here. Inside Housing story about it archived here
Grenfell cladding and insulation firms engaged in 'sinister' attempts to undermine regulations, inquiry hears 

Later, amongst others, there were opening statements from manufacturers Arconic, Celotex, and Kingspan. In addition to weasel words from all three, the first two continued the circular firing squad strategy by vigorously denouncing other corporate core participants.

Full transcript of the days proceedings here (pdf in usual annoying two column fomat).


----------



## teuchter (Nov 6, 2020)

If these things about the various manufacturers are true then it is indeed a big deal.

I've watched a fair bit of the enquiry and with most of the people involved in the project itself, I feel that although some of them failed to check things sufficiently, or were doing stuff that wasn't entirely within their competency, or were wrongly assuming that things were other people's responsibility, in many cases I can to some extent imagine myself in the same position and I don't see them as willfully doing things that they know to be dangerous.

This stuff with the manufacturers is a bit different - it appears that they are deliberately cheating test results. Also, they can't point to some other organisation misleading them. The buck stops with them. When someone on the Grenfell construction or design team says that they looked at a BBA certifcate or product literature, and trusted that the information there was basically sound, even if they failed to read the caveats properly, or didn't have the technical knowledge to interpret things correctly, in the end they are trusting that these companies would not present something in a way that makes it appear fine when actually it's not. But if those companies knew internally that they were producing misleading information, and were doing it deliberately, that's a whole different thing, a kind of active rather than passive negligence.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 6, 2020)

This week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary is up a bit earlier than usual - archived here :
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 17: ‘It’s hard to make a note about this because we are not clean’

Understandably it focuses on what came out at the first day of of module 2 yesterday. *If you only have time to read one of the inordinate number of links I've posted today I would recommend this one.*

As a result the expert evidence from earlier in the week is only dealt with in the form of paywalled links to it's previous stories. Here are archived versions of them :
1. -  Government guidance ‘endorsed’ use of deadly ACM cladding panels before Grenfell, expert says 
2. - Specification of combustible insulation was ‘major failure’ by Grenfell architect, says expert 
3. - Construction industry ‘culture’ places cost ahead of safety, says Grenfell Inquiry expert


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 7, 2020)

This weeks BBC podcast is up. Here's an unofficial transcript of it. The first half is understandably devoted to the claims about the materials manufacturers made on Thursday. It usefully adds to the other accounts I've linked to.

As an example, one thing I haven't seen picked up elsewhere is that after reporting the BSR Team 1 opening statement about how Celotex had


> procured the carrying out of the BS 8414-2 test in May 2014 in a wholly improper manner by using magnesium oxide board, which is used in furnaces, to fortify the cavity barriers


the podcast then adds:


> In her written submissions Stephanie Barwise referenced a witness statement which has not yet been publicly released, to suggest that it’s overwhelmingly likely that staff in the Building Research Establishment advised Celotex on how to pass this large scale fire test. This is an extraordinary claim. It would mean one of the organisations responsible for testing, certifying and setting standards in the construction industry also helped companies think their way around those tests.



The second half of the podcast also gives a rather better account of the expert evidence given by Paul Hyett earlier in the week. This was highly critical of the architects Studio E and rejected a number of the arguments they made in their evidence. In the unofficial transcript of the podcast that starts here.


----------



## GarveyLives (Nov 8, 2020)

GarveyLives said:


> I suspect that "the rest of Kensington" probably had the same view of the Grenfell Tower massacre as many of the politicians seeking their votes:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




An update on someone who no longer appears to have very much to say about the people of Kensington, particularly those impacted by the Grenfell Tower massacre:

Tory-turned-Lib Dem *Sam Gyimah* lands directorship role at _Goldman Sachs_






*The joke's on who?*​


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 14, 2020)

There were more Module 2 opening statements this week, a presentation on fire testing by expert witness Barbara Lane and the first two days of evidence from former employees of insulation manufacturer Celotex.

BBC podcast up as usual. Unofficial transcript of it here. (Older transcripts here)

There has been no Grenfell Diary so far this week from Inside Housing. Thus the only full account of this weeks hearings is the BBC podcast and the unofficial transcript of it.

Here's an archived version of one Inside Housing story which covers Barbara Lane's presentation.
Inquiry expert questions testing regime used for Grenfell cladding system products

Next week more evidence from Celotex and (presumably subject to how long those take) from Simco a subcontractor Celotex employed to construct their large-scale fire test mock-up.

ETA: Among the opening statements on Monday there were two given on behalf of Bereaved Survivors and Residents Team 2. The most interesting of them IMO was the first which went over the actions of the manufacturers, illustrating this with reference to documents, including some which haven't yet been released. Here is a transcript including images (this includes a couple of screenshots where items aren't yet on the Inquiry website).  BSRteam2Opening

The other Team 2 statement did contain some of the best lines  :


> Sam Stein (for BSR Team 2): (…) you and the panel may well come to the conclusion that the manufacturers, Arconic, Kingspan and Celotex, are little more than crooks and killers. These companies knew their materials were dangerous to life. They knew their materials would burn with lethal speed. And yet they marketed their products into an uncaring and underregulated building industry, which spread them around residential buildings like a disease.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 15, 2020)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary now up. Archived here :
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 18: ‘It was just reckless optimism, wasn’t it?’


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 16, 2020)

__





						Fire test for Grenfell foam cladding panels was rigged, admits ex-employee | Grenfell Tower inquiry | The Guardian
					

Jonathan Roper says Celotex was ‘dishonest’ in second test of foam boards after they failed first one




					amp.theguardian.com


----------



## maomao (Nov 16, 2020)

DaveCinzano said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Good on him for speaking up.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Nov 16, 2020)

maomao said:


> Good on him for speaking up.



Absolutely - but I think we know how the company is going to play it:

"...a young, junior member of staff...not conversant with full facts or overall picture...left under something of a cloud...spotty performance...we had high hopes for him which sadly were not realised...seems to be suffering from a misplaced sense of guilt..."


----------



## teuchter (Nov 16, 2020)

I've been listening to some of the testimony of the less junior celotex staff. They can't put it on one guy - everyone knew what was being done. And very similar story over at the main competitors, Kingspan.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 20, 2020)

More evidence from Celotex all this week.
Inside Housing's Grenfell Diary for the week is up. Archived here. (Previous Grenfell Diaries here)

Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 19: ‘And that was intentional, deliberate, dishonest?’ 

It's a little longer than usual - there's been quite a lot to cover.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 22, 2020)

Unofficial transcript here of this weeks BBC podcast which is in the usual place.

It's another very useful take on last weeks evidence from Celotex. They haven't finished - there's another Celotex witness rescheduled for Thursday - but the main event this coming week is evidence from Kingspan. Not just the other insulation manufacturer whose products finished up on Grenfell Tower, but also the company who developed and led the strategies for getting their combustible insulation on high-rise buildings which Celotex emulated.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 27, 2020)




----------



## TopCat (Nov 27, 2020)

They rigged the fire test.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 27, 2020)

Yup, they did indeed.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 27, 2020)

It's indefensible. And there's a question about whether the BRE were aware of it or not. I don't think the enquiry has got to them yet.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 27, 2020)

I think rigging fire tests has been a thing for some time.  I could name at least one insulated render company who also did the same.  There is a fundamental problem with effectively privatising our test and certification process.  Companies like BRE and BBA are commercially driven and it reflects in their decision making process.

Its not a healthy situation.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 27, 2020)

Teaboy said:


> There is a fundamental problem with effectively privatising our test and certification process.


I do hope the enquiry is going to confront this properly.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 27, 2020)

teuchter said:


> I do hope the enquiry is going to confront this properly.


Seems to be the plan. The Celotex and Kingspan witnesses so far have been questioned at length about their interactions with the BBA, BRE and LABC. As well as calling the manufacturers whose products ended up on Grenfell Tower (Kingspan are back all next week. Still to come: Aluglaze - combustible infill panels, Siderise - cavity barriers, Arconic - combustible cladding and Celotex's distributor SIG), the following are also scheduled for this Module :



Spoiler: from Inquiry Module 2 Opening Statement



Later in Module 2, we will hear witnesses from the testing house, the BRE, in respect of the testing to British Standard 8414 of the systems incorporating the Celotex and Kingspan insulation products and the classification of those systems.

We will also be hearing from the main certification bodies, namely the British Board of Agrément, or BBA, in respect of Arconic’s Reynobond PE 55 panels, the one certificate that pre-dated the fire , issued on 14 January 2008, and Kingspan’s Kooltherm K15 insulation products, namely five certificates running between October 2008 and November 2015.

We will also hear from Herefordshire building control, who, under the auspices of the Local Authority Building Control, LABC, provided system approval and registered detail certificates for Kingspan K15 from May 2009 onwards.

We will also be hearing evidence from LABC in Module 6, when there will be further and broader examination of the testing and certification regime in general and construction products more generally in turn.

In Module 2, we will be examining with them the role they played in the tests, how they interpolated the test results, the extent of their audit or monitoring of the manufacturers, and how each of the key certificates involved in this Inquiry came to be composed and worded as they were.



As that says there will also be a


> further and broader examination of the testing and certification regime in general and construction products more generally


in Module 6.

On a different tack  Inside Housing have just put up a handy timeline of the Grenfell refurbishment based on the evidence in Module 1. Archived here:

Grenfell Tower refurbishment: a timeline


----------



## teuchter (Nov 27, 2020)

Lurdan said:


> On a different tack  Inside Housing have just put up a handy timeline of the Grenfell refurbishment based on the evidence in Module 1. Archived here:
> 
> Grenfell Tower refurbishment: a timeline



That's handy. What would be really interesting would be a timeline showing all the critical construction details, as presented in drawing form throughout the process.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 27, 2020)

This week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary is up. Archived at this link. (Previous diaries here)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 20: ‘We were outed by a consultant who we then had to fabricate a story to’

(There is a little more detail about Kingspan's legal threats when the NHBC raised serious concerns about combustible insulation in this Inside Housing story earlier in the week. Kingspan threatened legal action against NHBC for raising concerns over non-compliant insulation )

The Inquiry has yet to hear what caused the NHBC to subsequently reverse it's position and issue inaccurate guidance


> saying K15 could be used on high rises with various common cladding panels without even being justified by test data.




The plastic insulation sector's combination of lobbying to change the regulatory regime, and aggressive legal action if the safety of their products was challenged, was explored in a long Sky News story back in 2018

Grenfell - Britain's fire safety crisis - Sky News

It described, for example, how


> Rockwool, the main producer of the non-combustible mineral-based alternative to plastic insulation (...) sent out videos in 2007 showing how their product doesn't burn and how plastic insulation does. They were sued for trademark violation and malicious falsehood. Despite the falsehood claim being thrown out the legal action tied up Rockwool for years and cost them millions of pounds.



The manufacturer who sued them was Kingspan - here's an account of the case
Chancery douses incendiary knocking campaign - marketinglaw

Kingspan's litigiousness was referred to in Celotex internal emails disclosed by the Inquiry. Rockwool could afford to defend themselves - the situation for researchers was rather different. From that Sky story :


> Time after time we were told the plastic insulation industry was highly litigious, that speaking out about its fire safety was impossible, and that while the story should be told, no-one would go on camera. Eventually we found a former government scientist who agreed to talk, on condition of anonymity, about the pressures he faced. He said threats to sue him had made him unwell.





> "If you've got no [legal] insurance you lose your house," he said. "It was a worrying time and they were quite famous for it - people knew this was the way they reacted." He says he doesn't think the work he did was influenced by the threats, but they had an effect: "I think perhaps more than anything else other people were silenced - by saying 'Oh, you'd better not say anything about that, look what happened to him,'" he told us.


(...)


> And the week after the Grenfell Tower fire, six European plastic industry lobby groups complained in a letter to the respected publishers of a peer-reviewed paper on the dangers of toxic smoke from burning plastic insulation written by chemistry and fire safety expert Professor Anna Stec at the University of Central Lancashire. "We request that the article is withdrawn," it said. "The consequences […] are enormous and could well lead to significant consequential losses." It ended: "We feel you should consider this very seriously."


Professor Stec, who has subsequently done work on the contamination caused by the fire, has been appointed as an expert witness to the Inquiry.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 29, 2020)

Here's the unofficial transcript of this weeks BBC podcast which is in the usual place.

* * * * * * * * *​
While some ex-employees of Celotex and Kingspan have acknowledged that claims made for their employers' combustible insulation products were inaccurate and misleading, and that to a greater or lesser degree they were aware of this, not all of them have been willing to do so.

In this excerpt Gareth Mills of Kingspan is being asked about a 2009 certificate issued by the LABC, which stated in error that Kingspan's K15  "can be considered as a material of limited combustibility". The error wasn't pointed out and the certificate was used to market K15 for inappropriate and unsafe uses.



Spoiler: Weasel of the week



Kate Grange: Do you remember it being celebrated within Kingspan that this LABC certificate had been issued?

Gareth Mills: I know they were happy with getting an additional approval, yeah, yeah. No, yeah.

Kate Grange: Were you happy with it, as someone in the technical department?

Gareth Mills: I wasn’t a big fan of the LABC approvals because they didn’t really say a lot in them. But, you know, it wasn’t something I dealt with, had much involvement with, so I didn’t give it a great deal of thought.

Sir Martin Moore-Bick: It didn’t trouble you that it was misleading?

Gareth Mills: Well, I suppose perhaps I -- you know, because I knew the full details, maybe I looked at the information a bit differently to someone who wasn’t, and was coming at it as just reading that document. I suppose I sort of maybe read it differently because I knew the surrounding information and things like that. But yeah, maybe that was a... you know, a little bit of a jump perhaps. But yeah.

Sir Martin Moore-Bick: Well, I mean, I’d quite like to understand this. Did you think it was misleading or not?

Gareth Mills: It didn’t mislead me, no.

Sir Martin Moore-Bick: No, no, that’s not the question I asked.

Gareth Mills: Yeah.

Sir Martin Moore-Bick: Did you think it was misleading --

Gareth Mills: Well, yes, I said --

Sir Martin Moore-Bick: -- in the sense that it was liable to mislead someone who didn’t have the same degree of technical knowledge that you had?

Gareth Mills: It’s a possibility, looking back, yeah.

Sir Martin Moore-Bick: Did you think it was responsible for you or Kingspan generally to send this out to people who didn’t have the same degree of technical knowledge?

Gareth Mills: It certainly would -- I suppose in that way, yeah, it would have needed some additional explanation if you were going to use it, yeah.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 29, 2020)

Thanks for all the work you've done on this Lurdan


----------



## BCBlues (Nov 30, 2020)

Kingspan manager belligerent over fire concerns in 2008, Grenfell inquiry hears
					

Philip Heath said builders asking questions were mistaking him for ‘someone who gives a damn’




					www.theguardian.com
				




Theres been some arseholes in these revelations but this Philip Heath is an utter disgrace


----------



## teuchter (Nov 30, 2020)

BCBlues said:


> Kingspan manager belligerent over fire concerns in 2008, Grenfell inquiry hears
> 
> 
> Philip Heath said builders asking questions were mistaking him for ‘someone who gives a damn’
> ...


I reckon most folk who have worked in the building industry will have come across people like that guy.

To try and drag something positive out of this, it's at least nice to see evidence of some conscientious people within the industry trying to challenge him on the dodgy claims back then.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 30, 2020)

Inside Housing's write up (archived)
Kingspan manager said professionals raising fire concerns could 'go f*ck themselves', Grenfell inquiry hears 








(Heath is clearly a lovely chap but even so he hasn't managed to displace Stephen Blake of Rydon and David Gibson of the TMO from the top of my own 'most puncheable' list).


----------



## elbows (Nov 30, 2020)

Its pretty useful when that sort of shithead is also too stupid not to put their thoughts in writing at the time.



> Heath forwarded this email to friends, saying: “I think Bowmer & Kirkland are getting me confused with someone who gives a dam. I’m trying to think of a way out of this one, imagine a fire running up this tower !!!!!…!!!! Any ideas…?”



I guess his feeble imagination didnt extend to his messages ending up being scrutinised if such a fire happened.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 30, 2020)

elbows said:


> Its pretty useful when that sort of shithead is also too stupid not to put their thoughts in writing at the time.
> 
> I guess his feeble imagination didnt extend to his messages ending up being scrutinised if such a fire happened.


Doubtless this will be one of the 'lessons learned' for many in the industry.


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 4, 2020)

This week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary is up. Archived at this link. (Previous diaries here)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 21: 'It’s there in black and white, isn’t it? We see a complete absence of any consideration of life safety' 

More evidence from insulation manufacturers Kingspan building on what we heard last week. They are back again for three days next week.

Inside Housing's Pete Apps produced a twitter thread about one implication of this week's evidence. Archived here.
It refers to a 2018 Inside Housing story about how the Government had failed to act on warnings about combustible cladding and insulation in 2014 at the same time these were being specified for Grenfell Tower. That story is archived here.


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 6, 2020)

Here's the unofficial transcript of this weeks BBC podcast, which can be found here.
(Previous transcripts here). I should point out that I've corrected a passage at about the seven minute mark where two Kingspan employees were mixed up.
*****​It refers briefly to Kingspan's energetic lobbying of Government. An internal report from 2007 was disclosed which stated


> Kingspan Technical were heavily involved in the consultation of the English Fire Regulation Approved Document B.  Out of the 250 consultation submissions Kingspan submitted 6 versions under various guises (BRUFMA, EPFA,  Company and individuals).



They are still actively representing their interests. In September they made a submission to the Parliamentary Committee considering the Building Safety Bill. (Archived here.). Quoting a passage from Judith Hackitt's review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety which said that buildings of ten storeys or more were at the highest risk, they suggest that the proposed building safety regime should thus apply to these rather than to buildings taller than 18 metres (approx. six storeys) as proposed in the Bill. In plain English they would like another four floors they can cover in combustible products which produce toxic fumes if they catch fire.

They also urge a move away from focusing on the safety of individual products to testing specific assemlies of building products. They helpfully suggest that "a product labelled as  ‘unsafe’ product may be entirely safe as part of a system in application.". Any resemblance to the regime Kingspan was able to 'game' for years is presumably entirely coincidental.


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 9, 2020)

At the end of today's hearing it was announced that a member of the Inquiry team has tested positive for Coronavirus and a number of other members and support staff are going to have to self-isolate. The Inquiry was going to take a break anyway, from Thursday 17th until January 11th, but because of this development hearings are now suspended from now until then.


----------



## BCBlues (Dec 9, 2020)

Thanks again Lurdan for the updates. I did notice this in the Grauniad yesterday, Kingspan staff being utterly useless in their jobs.









						Staff joked safety claims about material used on Grenfell were 'all lies', inquiry told
					

Kingspan employees’ text exchange questioned insulation product’s fire performance




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 9, 2020)

Here's the Inside Housing write up of this morning's evidence from Adrian Pargeter, a current Kingspan director. He was asked about Kingspan's lobbying of Government after the fire in an attempt to avoid the ban on combustible materials on high-rise buildings.


> In its submission to the HCLG Committee, the firm said it had evidence of “three failed large-scale fire tests” using non-combustible materials produced by Kingspan’s competitors, in order to support its argument that non-combustible materials could still be dangerous when used with certain systems. However, the inquiry heard today that these tests had been commissioned by Kingspan and were designed in a way to ensure the non-combustible insulation achieved the worst possible fire performance.



Kingspan director denies firm made ‘deliberate attempt to deceive’ MPs on post-Grenfell fire testing - Inside Housing (archived)


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 11, 2020)

This week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary is up
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 22: ‘All we do is lie in here’

Although the Inquiry only sat for three days the evidence from Kingspan director Adam Pargeter was both revealing, and also unusually for these hearings, provided some rather grim entertainment as he attempted to follow the company line and defend the indefensible.

***​Before the fire Peter Ward who does building restoration had put up a YouTube video demonstrating how combustible Kingspan's insulation was. While the fire was burning he tweeted a link to it. The next day, before the fire had been fully extinguished, Kingspan sent him a letter threatening legal action.

Kingspan issued legal threat to Twitter critic just hours after Grenfell fire

The speed of their response makes an interesting contrast with the four year delay between (according to the company line) 'realising' the fire tests they had been using to market K15 hadn't been carried out on the product they were actually selling, and withdrawing those tests.



> After threats from Kingspan to sue us for defamation if we published anything about their insulation, we thought we'd have another go at burning their insulation. This video shows a stack of kingspan being burned in my woodburner - lit with a few sheets of paper from the office waste paper bin. This video shows how easily Kingspan burns and emits horrible toxic fumes. Kingspan wrongly told us their products were not involved with Grenfell Tower - they were. I'd be very happy if this form of insulation was banned from any use in buildings.


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 13, 2020)

Here's the unofficial transcript of this weeks BBC Grenfell podcast. (The podcast itself is here).

It was pointed out this week that Gene Murtagh, Kingspan's CEO, and Gilbert McCarthy, global managing director of it's insulation businesses, were copied into the email correspondence about the 'gamed' 2018 Dubai fire test, which was conducted post-Grenfell fire on a rival company's non-combustible insulation, to support Kingspan's position in opposition to a ban on combustible materials on high-rise buildings.
In one of the emails:


> I  have introduced as many weak features/details  as possible  to ensure it  has the best chance of performing poorly whilst  at  the same time retaining  the panel modules and cavity barrier arrangement associated with all  tests  to date.



Reports that Kingspan have


> begun disciplinary procedures and investigations of some current and former staff arising from the Grenfell Tower inquiry in Britain


presumably are not referring to Murtagh or McCarthy.

The Irish Times named Murtagh it's 'Business Person of the Month' back in March when the company reported it's 2019 profits.


> Murtagh moved after share price spike to sell some of his stock, raising €5.37 million. Shares in the company have since fallen in line with the wider market, as investors consider the impact of the spread of the coronavirus on the global economy. However, analysts at German bank Berenberg said this week that Kingspan’s pullback offers a “rare entry point” for new investors.


Just before Kingspan started to give evidence at the Inquiry Murtagh, McCarthy and another Kingspan director cashed in another £6m worth of share options. The company's shares have dropped about 10% since then.

For Kingspan it has, relatively speaking, been a 'good month' for this to come out. The pandemic and brexit have kept their evidence at the Inquiry off the front pages. However the Irish Times are now asking
Is the Grenfell Tower inferno Kingspan’s Volkswagen moment?

and even Dominic Lawson in The Times is saying


> It turns out that the depravity, at a corporate level, was worse even than we could have imagined.



Obviously this module of the Inquiry is far from over. In the new year we will be hearing, amongst others,  from Arconic/Alcoa, the manufacturer of the combistible ACM cladding panels used at Grenfell. The excerpts of internal emails revealed in the opening statements for this module suggest that the contest for rottenest apple on a very rotten tree is still an open one.

edited to remove evidence of dumb error


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 15, 2020)

(Grenfell United twitter link)





The article link is to this Times story (archived)



> Two construction firms at the centre of investigations into the Grenfell Tower disaster will earn millions of pounds from a government drive to make homes more energy efficient. Celotex and Kingspan, which supplied combustible foam insulation that caught fire during the blaze in June 2017, are marketing their products for use in the Green Energy Grant scheme, which has earmarked £2 billion for making houses more eco-friendly.





> Celotex, which supplied 95 per cent of the insulation on Grenfell, said that its range of products “provide a comprehensive thermal insulation offering” for the scheme. It is running training courses for installers seeking accreditation to carry out the works. Kingspan has set up a “dedicated green homes grant service”, including a telephone helpline, to answer questions. (...)





> Both companies are vying for a share of the green homes scheme announced in August by Alok Sharma, the business secretary, under which property owners can apply for grants of up to £10,000. (...)
> 
> A government spokesperson said that the Green Homes Grant did not endorse any particular brand.


----------



## BCBlues (Dec 15, 2020)

Lurdan said:


> (Grenfell United twitter link)
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This is disgraceful but comes as no surprise when we have a PM who is an unashamed liar. He would fit in well at Kingspan in particular. Jenrick too with his illegal activities.
This Gov't is easily the most corrupt one the UK has had to endure.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 15, 2020)

What are they actually proposing though? That the two manufacturers are banned from any works funded by the scheme? On what basis - as punishment for actions under investigation of an ongoing enquiry? Or on the basis that they are not safe for the kinds of uses that would be involved under the green grants scheme?

If the concern is about safety then they should be banned for all building work regardless of how it's funded, and so should products from the various other manufacturers that make essentially the same stuff and market it for the same uses.

If it's as a punishment then I don't know how you'd cover that from a legal point of view.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 15, 2020)

BCBlues said:


> This is disgraceful but comes as no surprise when we have a PM who is an unashamed liar. He would fit in well at Kingspan in particular. Jenrick too with his illegal activities.
> This Gov't is easily the most corrupt one the UK has had to endure.


well perhaps since rotten boroughs and the 1832 reform act


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 15, 2020)

No surprise that Boris' "Green Industrial Revolution" should actually be a three-course meal deal for cunts with a small side order of 'greens'.

Worth recalling that Celotex, who are "running training courses for installers seeking accreditation to carry out the works" under this Green Energy Grant scheme, didn't just admit 'gaming' a large-scale fire test and using the result to make misleading claims about how their combustible insulation could be compliant with building regulations.

They also lied about the thermal efficiency of their insulation by selectively recording the results of the testing done during manufacture. That's the thermal efficiency which was the main rationale for retrofitting insulation to buildings.


> Four to six measurements of thermal performance were taken every day. But only the best would be logged onto the system, the rest discarded. Internal documents described this as “a high degree of data management and manipulation” and warned that it “could be identified by an auditor if they followed the process trail”.


Inside Housing Grenfell Diary Week 19   -   see also Official transcript for day 72 (starts at page 19 of the PDF).


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 15, 2020)

In case anyone was worried about the state of American satire







Here's the ITV report on this weeks protest by Grenfell United outside the French Embassy, trying to get the French Government to put pressure on Arconic's current and former employees who are refusing to give evidence citing French law. (It also deals with the Justice for Grenfell protest at Downing Street).




According to the Guardian


> A French official source said the government’s position was that the inquiry’s requests “do not appear to fall under the scope of … the French blocking statute. We have made it clear to Arconic that we do not share their point of view with its refusal to comply with the summons and its wish to avail itself of the blocking statute,” the official said.





> “We have asked Arconic to shoulder its responsibility in this matter. We have informed the inquiry and the UK Foreign Office of our position. [The purpose of the blocking statute] isn’t to obstruct the emergence of the truth or to guarantee immunity for French nationals. This is not a way to evade responsibility.”



In it's opening statement to the Inquiry Arconic said :


> Whilst the company obviously can’t control whether any witnesses testify, the company remains willing to do what it can to assist the Inquiry in working with the French government.


which doesn't sound enormously helpful. Surely one of "America's most responsible companies" would jump at the chance to show exactly how 'responsible' it is. Or, then again, perhaps not.

ETA:
Inside Housing story late last night on the current position of the four current and former Arconic employees who had declined to give evidence.
Grenfell cladding company witnesses refuse to attend inquiry despite assurance from French government  (archived)

Two former employees are still refusing (one of them Claude Wehrle, author of some of the emails quoted in the opening statement from BSR team 2). One current employee is seeking conditions before agreeing to attend. One is undecided. All are based in either France or Germany. Since the Inquiry has no means of compelling them to come to the UK, the Inquiry had indicated it will empty chair those that don't by presenting the evidence it has and the questions it would have asked them.


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 18, 2020)

Kingspan have begun repairs to the 'reputational damage' caused by their evidence at the Inquiry. It's CEO issued a Christmas message to staff on Wednesday.


> In a letter to staff yesterday, seen by the Irish Independent, Gene Murtagh Jr admitted "historical unacceptable conduct and process shortcomings" within the UK insulation boards division and said the problems were "being addressed with the utmost seriousness". He went on to refer to "undeniable shortcomings that occurred in a part of our organisation that need to be acknowledged and addressed to underpin our unequivocal commitment to proper professional conduct and to fire safety". He said the company would be taking decisive action to begin rebuilding trust, following significant changes already made to its fire testing protocols and a review of its product performance claims.



The 'decisive action' has begun with the announcement yesterday that Peter Wilson, the managing director of Kingspan's  insulation division will be retiring at the end of the month and stepping down from the board.  The company has also - wait for it -


> appointed operations director Jim Carolan as group head of compliance and certification – a newly created role reporting to the group CEO Gene Murtagh Jr – reflecting the increased scrutiny on safety testing for Kingspan's products.


(Quotes from the Irish Independent).

Most detailed account so far is in the Times (archived here)


> It remains possible that Mr Murtagh, 50, an Irish billionaire, could be called as a witness after the inquiry was told this month that he was copied into emails about the business’s political lobbying activities in the aftermath of the fire in which 72 people died.
> The inquiry has heard no evidence on whether Mr Murtagh read the emails or not. A 2011 newspaper profile said he was a man who emptied his inbox daily because he hated clutter.



And it gives some background:


> Mr Murtagh is lionised in Ireland and his company often portrayed as having risen from humble beginnings to become a global success and a leader in the battle against climate change. Operating in more than 70 countries, with annual sales of £3 billion, Kingspan has come a long way from the back yard of a pub in Co Cavan, where Eugene Murtagh began making farm trailers in 1965. The younger Murtagh has driven the expansion that turned Kingspan into an international success.





> Mr Murtagh has made a reported £22 million profit by selling shares since the Grenfell fire, including a block that made £3 million just before the inquiry began hearing Kingspan’s evidence. His father is said to have made a £76 million gain on share sales since 2017. The family’s fortune of an estimated £1.95 billion puts it fifth on The Sunday Times Ireland Rich List.



I mentioned on the previous page that in February the company had announced a 12pc increase in trading profit for 2019. It's share price rose as a result and Gene Murtagh Jr sold a large block of his shares raising €5.37 million, before the share price fell again. On March 13th the Irish Times named him it's 'Business Person of the Month'.

Just six days later the big-hearted billionaire announced the company's response to the pandemic. Two months of pay cuts. 50% for executives and 40% for the rest of it's 14,500 global workforce. He


> told staff he did not know if the cut in pay from April 1 to June 1 would be sufficient but that it was critical to protecting as many jobs as possible as they face into “a monumental test”.


(Reuters)


----------



## hitmouse (Dec 19, 2020)

*Fire hazards found at block housing Grenfell Tower survivors*


_Fire hazards similar to those found at Grenfell Tower have been discovered at a block bought by the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea to house survivors of the disaster that killed 72 people.

To the horror of residents, round the clock “waking watch” patrols started on Friday at Doveberry Place in north-west London after a risk assessment uncovered problems with fire protection between floors, doors and ventilation.

The residents include Hermine Harris, 81, who escaped from the seventh floor of Grenfell Tower on 14 June 2017 and moved into the brand-new block in May 2019. Of the nine flats, four are occupied by former Grenfell residents and the rest from Grenfell’s neighbouring walkways.

The block was bought by RBKC to house traumatised residents, some of whom had spent long periods living in hotels.

“They have put us in a building deemed fit for people to live in and now they are telling us it’s a fire hazard,” said Yvonne Harris, Hermine’s daughter. “Mum is in shock and doesn’t know what to do. She feels, how can they do this to me again? We have been going through trauma for the last three and a half years and now we’re adding further trauma.”

Branislav Lukic, who escaped from the 11th floor of Grenfell and then had to be rescued from a second fire in temporary accommodation, was also housed at Doveberry Place. “Is this really happening to us again?” he said. “I have no words to explain how I feel. Grenfell will repeat again. It’s just a matter of time.”

He said that after a fire in the apartment next door to his temporary accommodation after Grenfell, “they promised they would sort me out … I spent another year in a hotel, and now this,” he said.

Some of the residents were terrified, said Jhangir Mahmood, a lawyer acting for some of those involved. He said it “beggars belief that RBKC would place vulnerable and traumatised former Grenfell residents in a building which is not fire safe”, and added that he was considering legal action on behalf of Harris.

“It is the height of incompetence,” Mahmood said. “One would expect them to carry out a fire risk assessment before putting them in there, and not years afterwards. They must now be transparent and reveal when they first realised this problem.”_


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 30, 2020)

Kate Lamble who produces the BBC podcast has produced a useful year end summary
Grenfell Tower inquiry: 11 key things we’ve learned this year - BBC News

Peter Apps of Inside Housing has also produced a round up in the Spectator. Archived version here:
Eight shocking moments from the Grenfell Tower Inquiry in 2020

The Inquiry itself has published a factsheet for the current module of the Inquiry. It can be found here as a PDF or here as a web page.
Aside from lists of issues to be covered, and the manufacturers and testing and certification bodies to be called to give evidence, it also includes a glossary of some of the terms and key concepts that are referred to. On the web page version that starts here.


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 27, 2021)

Schmidt was one of four witnesses who had not agreed to give evidence - it was reported in mid-December he was still in discussions with the Inquiry. Details in this post #4,801

The Inquiry is due to resume hearings on Monday February 8th. (They ceased earlier than planned in December when a member of the Inquiry staff tested positive for Coronavirus. Were due to restart on January 6th but postponed again because of the current restrictions). 

The resumed hearings will initially take evidence remotely.


> The hearings will use a Zoom based video platform and allow all those who would have been required to be onsite for the limited attendance hearings to participate from remote locations. (...) Remote hearings are a temporary measure to be used only for as long as is absolutely necessary.





> The Panel recognises that the subject of remote hearings was fully explored with core participants last spring during the first 2020 lockdown, and that it was not in favour of that option for the reasons it gave. However, the Panel has decided it is better to have remote hearings than no hearings at all while the current restrictions are in place, and wishes to emphasise that this is a temporary measure to be used only for as long as it is absolutely necessary. The Inquiry is working with its supplier to make urgent preparations for remote hearings, including safely distributing equipment to witnesses and testing it to ensure that hearings proceed smoothly.



Hopefully this will work with fewer technical glitches than when opening statements for this module of the Inquiry were given remotely. Concerns have also been raised that taking evidence remotely might mean witnesses could be discretely 'prompted' by their lawyers.


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 5, 2021)

Inquiry hearings resume on Monday. When they were suspended Kingspan's former CEO had just started giving evidence. He will back towards the end of this module (currently pencilled in for mid-March) together with Adam Pargeter, the Kingspan witness who preceded him. Pargeter will be explaing the 'unfortunate' 'mix-up' in which he 'appeared' to testify that Kingspan had misled a Parliamentary sub-committee.

So on Monday there's another Kingspan witness Andrew Pack, then on Tuesday Deborah French the first of the witnesses from Arconic, who manufactured the combustible ACM sheeting which was fabricated into the rainscreen panels used on Grenfell. 

Inside Housing have produced a useful catch up piece (paywalled so archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry: what to look out for over the coming weeks - Inside Housing

(Inside Housing's coverage of the Inquiry, and of the wider post-Grenfell consequences for residents of a great many buildings, obviously comes from a housing association industry perspective, but it has (IMO) been useful and very extensive. Unfortunately their recent articles, particularly explainers like this one, but also their general news articles, increasingly contain lots of links to their previous reporting which are also paywalled of course. In the case of the article above I've archived the pages it links to, but not the links on those subsequent pages etc etc. I can foresee this might become a bit more of a problem as the Inquiry continues, and the linkages between the multiple issues it's dealing with become more complex).

At the bottom of that article it gives a useful list of the witnesses to come for the rest of this module of the inquiry. They've evidently got this from the Inquiry together with target dates. As has been seen before the Inquiries draft programme can change for many reasons which is why it only issues specific timetables one week in advance. I'd treat those dates as provisional.

For anyone looking to remind themselves further of where we are I'd recommend the end of year pieces I linked to in post #4,804 above. (4804 - bloody hell).


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 8, 2021)

First day of the resumed Inquiry hearings held remotely by video link. Only very minor technical issues - some noise interference online. The system clearly isn't ideal for taking evidence but today's session went as well as could be expected. Today's witness gave evidence from Dubai. Next week an Arconic executive will be giving evidence over several days from Europe through a translator. Which will be an interesting test of the remote set-up.

Andrew Peck, currently Kingspan's global technical support manager, but until 2010 a technical services manager, gave evidence today. In particular about his involvement in the process through which the LABC (Local Authority Building Control) issued a certificate in 2009 saying that the company's combustible K15 insulation “can be considered a material of limited combustibility”.

Write up in Inside Housing (archived)
Kingspan manager celebrated ‘plainly misleading’ insulation certificate as ‘FANBLOODYTASTIC’

An interesting aspect was that a batch of Kingspan emails had been disclosed while hearings were suspended. These served to 'remind' Mr Peck of things he had forgotten when producing his written statement to the Inquiry. While no 'bombshells' emerged it again highlighted the way in which the statements drafted by lawyers for the corporate witnesses have been structured around the material it was believed the Inquiry would have access to. Not for the first time that belief has been mistaken.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 10, 2021)

Cladding: Extra £3.5bn for unsafe buildings 'too little, too late'
					

Ministers say dangerous materials will be removed from England's high-rises "at no cost to residents".



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Sue (Feb 10, 2021)

Not sure if this is quite the right place but...

More or Less on R4 had some stats around cladding/work being done to remove and replace it. (The reporter has been attending the Grenfell Inquiry.)

From about 10 mins 30 secs in.









						More or Less - Brexit exports, cladding and are 1 in 5 disabled? - BBC Sounds
					

Are exports to the EU down since Brexit? Plus removing flammable building cladding.




					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## teqniq (Feb 18, 2021)

Jeez:



unroll of the thread is worth a look:









						Thread by @PeteApps on Thread Reader App
					

Thread by @PeteApps: Lunchtime update from the Grenfell Tower Inquiry: President of Arconic's French arm accepts customers were 'deliberately and dishonestly misled' over fire classification of cladding panels, as ...…




					threadreaderapp.com


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 21, 2021)

Once Arconic's combustible ACM sheeting had been named in the Inquiry's phase 1 findings as the main cause of the fire spread, the company became of particular interest. Not least amongst the other corporates and interest groups looking for a prime villain to point the finger at.

This led to high expectations for Arconic's evidence over the last couple of weeks. However it has actually been a bit of a slow burn.

Deborah French, Arconic's former UK Sales Manager, appeared last week. She was involved in the sale of the ACM used at Grenfell, and emails to and from her have featured in previous evidence.

As she gave evidence however, it became clear that although she had the title 'UK Sales Manager' she was actually just the local rep for Arconic's sales team based in France. (Something confirmed by her successor Vince Meakins, who also appeared). She had no executive role in setting UK sales policy, had no technical knowledge other than what she picked up on the job, and indeed was working from home. She was questioned at length but there were evident limits to what she could give evidence about. 

This week Claude Schmidt, the president of Arconic Architectural Products, has given evidence through an interpreter. As the BBC podcast put it, with some understatement, this made the proceedings "grindingly slow".  The hearings have produced admissions nonetheless, although not a great deal which had not been trailed previously.

Here are archived versions of the Inside Housing Grenfell Diaries for the last two weeks:

Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 23: ‘That would have come as an earthquake to you at the time, would it not?’

Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 24: ‘Do you accept that Test 5B was Arconic’s deadly secret?’

And transcripts of the BBC podcasts - Week 23 and Week 24.

Notably missing was Claude Wehrle, the former head of Arconic's French-based technical sales support team. He is still refusing to give evidence citing French law. Emails put to his boss Claude Schmidt make it clear that Wehrle was aware how dangerous ACM could be; was actively involved in misrepresenting the Class 0 status of Arconic's PE core product; was actively involved in fraudulently obtaining the BBA certificate used to mis-sell it in the UK; and actively involved in concealing all of this from Arconic's customers.

It was reported in December that Wehrle has been a part-time fireman for 28 years.








> Claude Wehrle offers fire safety advice to families in his role as a part-time fire brigade lieutenant in the picturesque town of Colmar. After leaving in January he now works as deputy technical director for construction firm Rinaldi Structal, which also designs building facades.




Claude Schmidt is back again tomorrow followed by witnesses from the Building Research Establishment.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 21, 2021)

Lurdan said:


> Notably missing was Claude Wehrle, the former head of Arconic's French-based technical sales support team. He is still refusing to give evidence citing French law.
> 
> It was reported in December that Wehrle has been a part-time fireman for 28 years.



Pompier circumstance


----------



## MrSki (Feb 24, 2021)

Cunts.


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 26, 2021)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary is up (archived here):

Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 25: ‘This is quite an incredible list of omissions and missed instances, isn’t it?’
(At the bottom of that page are links to the daily reports this week - those are working links)

The Diary only deals with the three days of evidence from former employees of the Building Research Establishment (BRE) about the fire tests conducted for Celotex and Kingspan, and to what extent they were aware, or should have been aware, of the ways in which those companies were 'gaming' the fire test system, and then misusing the test results to sell their combustible insulation.

On Monday there was the last day of evidence from Claude Schmidt the president of Arconic Architectural Products. That was covered in this Inside Housing story (archived):

Arconic allowed post-Grenfell certificate for cladding to repeat false fire test claim


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 28, 2021)

Transcript of this weeks BBC Grenfell podcast here. 

Coming up this week :

more evidence from people who worked at the Building Research Establishment
an employee of cladding sub-contractor Simco who constructed a test rig at the BRE, on behalf of Celotex, which had been 'engineered' to pass a large-scale fire test
and, assuming the timetable is held to, the officer from Herefordshire Building Control who issued, on behalf of the LABC, a certificate for combustible Kingspan Kooltherm K15 insulation which said it  “can be considered a material of limited combustibility” and as a result was suitable in all situations “including those parts of a building more than 18m above ground”.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 7, 2021)

Inside Housing Grenfell Diary for last week (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 26: ‘You were taking an enormous risk, weren’t you?’

Transcript of this weeks BBC podcast here.

Both useful summaries of a very interesting week (although IMO the podcast drew the various strands together a little better).

Next week a mixed batch of witnesses including from Siderise, who provided the cavity barriers used on Grenfell, and from the British Board of Agrément, who issued certificates for the combustible products produced by Arconic, Celotex and Kingspan.

However the most interesting day may be next Wednesday, billed as "Presentation of Arconic Evidence by Counsel to the Inquiry". The Inquiry had stated they might 'empty chair' the Arconic witnesses who declined to give evidence, by setting out the questions they wished to ask and presenting the evidence and witness statements collected by the Police. Arconic had initially refused to provide anything to the Inquiry :


> Through their lawyers, Arconic and the individual witnesses relied on the FBS [French Blocking Statute] as a reason not to provide any documents or information to the Inquiry. They gave disclosure of the majority of their documents, not pursuant to the Inquiry’s own powers of compulsion of evidence, but, in the end, after service of a European Investigation Order as part of a criminal procedure operated by the Metropolitan Police, who then disclosed the documents they received to the Inquiry in turn.


(From the statement made at the Inquiry about Arconic on Feb 9th - transcribed here).

* * * * *​
Last Wednesday was the 100th day of phase 2 of the Inquiry, although because of the pandemic they've taken place over 400 days. (Phase 1 of the Inquiry involved 85 days of hearings).

Over the 1362 days since the fire itself the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea have been managing the Grenfell Recovery Fund. Interesting Byline Times report on how this has gone. Clue: not well :
The ‘Grenfell Industry’: Council Accused of Misspending Disaster Recovery Funds – Byline Times



> The Grenfell Recovery Fund is a five-year £50 million budget, to be spent by the RBKC until 2024, designed to provide “services for bereaved and survivors and the wider community”. The fund is roughly split into two pots: one for the bereaved and survivors, known as the Dedicated Services budget; and one for the wider community.





> In 2019-20, £2.56 million of the £4.5 million Dedicated Services budget was spent on council staff salaries and council property costs. £601,000 alone was spent on “management” salaries, with a council spokesperson telling the Evening Standard last year that just two managers were employed with this budget.





> Aside from managers, the staffing budget pays for dedicated workers who – in theory – act as personal agents for the survivors and the bereaved, fielding their requests and chasing up enquiries within the council. These individuals are paid in the range of £40,000 a year.





> In contrast, the bereaved and survivors are granted a £1,000 budget every year if they are an adult, and £2,000 a year if they are a child. This money is not simply deposited in the accounts of the victims on a monthly or annual basis, however. The council controls how and when this budget can be spent.



And so on.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 12, 2021)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary is up :
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 27: ‘What will happen if one building made out [of] PE core is in fire and will kill 60 to 70 persons?’

(All the first, and some second level  links from this archived version of the page are working, with one exception, beside which I have stuck a [PAYWALLED] tag. That is to their very interesting 2019 investigation into combustible window panels which unfortunately just opens up a whole Russian Doll's nest of more and more levels of paywalled pages).

The Inquiry has published a timetable for resuming limited attendance hearings as pandemic restrictions ease. Current plans are that from the 19th April they return to the same level of limited attendance as before (Inquiry panel, lawyers, essential staff and witnesses only). Then from the 17th May


> the Inquiry plans to allow a number of bereaved, survivors and residents to attend to watch the proceedings in person if they so choose. Careful consideration is being given to how this can be done safely and places allocated fairly, and the Inquiry will write to core participants with its plans in due course.



All subject to how the pandemic plays out of course.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 14, 2021)

Here's the transcript of this week's BBC podcast.

Coming up this week more witnesses from the British Board of Agrément. We will see if they have a more compelling explanation of how they came to issue inaccurate and/or misleading certificates to Arconic, Kingspan and Celotex for their combustible products, than their first witness last week.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 14, 2021)

Although I'm quite often complaining about rubbish media coverage of Grenfell, the BBC podcast is really excellent, doing the hard work of condensing things into a manageable form but without dumbing down or over-simplifying. I don't know if there's a big team behind it or if it's mostly put together by the main presenter. Definitely recommended listening.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 19, 2021)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary is up (archived) : 
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 28: ‘This is a serious safety matter’
Links from it should all be working

The week was taken up with evidence from the BBA who issued inaccurate/misleading certificates for some of the combustible products Grenfell Tower was wrapped in. When the Government contacted the BBA in 2014 about an inaccuracy in the certificate for Kingspan's K15 insulation the BBA responded that this had been due to "human error". One of the humans in question was the BBA's former head of approvals Chris Hunt who gave evidence this week. The Inside Housing account doesn't do justice to the sheer bumbling incompetence Mr Hunt exhibited. Here's an extract from his evidence:



Spoiler: Bloody Hell



*Rachel Troup*:  What was your understanding in 2008, at the time you approved issue 1 of the certificate for K15, of the combustibility or otherwise of the K15 product?

*Chris Hunt*: I think at the time I would have understood that it's not a---------that it wasn't a non—combustible product or a product of limited combustibility.

*Rachel Troup*: Right.

*Chris Hunt*: I think I would have------again, I can't---it’s so long ago, I can't remember exactly what my thought would have been, but I don't think I would have thought of it in that way.

*Rachel Troup*: No. It’s understandable, it was some time ago. Just to be clear, is your evidence that you did understand in 2008 that K15 was a combustible phenolic insulation material?

*Chris Hunt*: I would have------I believe so, yes. I know that, you know, combustibility is a scale of----you know, you’ve got non—combustible at one end and then you’ve got----

*Rachel Troup*: Yes.

*Chris Hunt*:-----this isn’t a defined term, very combustible at the other end. So most products would lie somewhere within----on that spectrum, I think.

*Rachel Troup*: Yes. Understood. Your answer was, ”I believe so, yes”, so just to be absolutely clear, you did understand that K15 was combustible?

*Chris Hunt*: I believe so, yes, a combustible in some-----to some degree, yes.

*Rachel Troup*: All right. That being the case, can you help me to understand how it could possibly be accurate to state in a BBA certificate for that product, "The boards will not contribute to the development stages of a fire”?

*Chris Hunt*: I think at the time my understanding would have-------or my reading of that would have been that the----you know, if it-----it’s not non—combustible, but it wouldn’t be one of the initial sources of the fire , it wouldn’t be something that burnt readily at the very start of the fire. You know, once a fire is established, it may then obviously be part of that, but development-----I think I probably read it as development would be the very early stages. But I can't be sure exactly how I read that at the time.

*Rachel Troup*: No, I’m not really asking you too much about how you read it at the time. Perhaps we will come back to that answer. What I'm trying to understand from you, in very simple terms, is this: if you knew the product to be a combustible material, how could it be accurate to state in definitive terms, without qualification or caveat, "The boards will not contribute to the development stages of a fire”? (...)

*Chris Hunt*: I-----again, I think it might depend------you know, I think I thought-----would have thought it would depend on the degree of combustibility of the product. So I think obviously my thinking at the time would have been that buildings contain a lot of different products, many of which are combustible. Some products will contribute more to the development of a fire than others. I think I took that to mean that it wasn’t a product that was very combustible and would contribute to the early stages of the fire . I think in my mind, development probably meant early stages, perhaps, rather than later stages. But I’m------in saying that, I'm not, you know, a fire expert and that may not be correct.

*Rachel Troup*: (...) Did you ever simply go to the project manager who had written it and say, "What does this mean?”

*Chris Hunt*: I may well have done. I don't recall a conversation along those lines .

*Rachel Troup*: I see.

*Chris Hunt*: But I-----it's quite likely that I would have done, yes, and I can’t remember whether that did occur and what his answer was.

*Rachel Troup*: No, fine. If that did occur, it must be the case, mustn't it, Mr Hunt, given that you later signed off that wording, that he gave you some sort of satisfactory answer as to the source of or basis for that wording?

*Chris Hunt*: I would believe so, yes.

*Rachel Troup*: Do you have any idea now what that could be?

*Chris Hunt*: No, I don’t, I'm sorry.

*Rachel Troup*: No. Can you accept that in fact, given that K15 is neither non—combustible nor a material of limited combustibility, that wording is in fact misleading and inaccurate?

*Chris Hunt*: I think it could potentially be read as misleading, knowing what I know now. (...) At the time, I don’t------perhaps I probably wouldn’t have necessarily picked that up.

*Rachel Troup*: In what circumstances could it not be read as misleading or inaccurate?

*Chris Hunt*: I think if it related to some of the content in section 7, if it was something that could be taken from some of the testing described there.

*Rachel Troup*: (...) You said: ”1 think it potentially could be read as misleading, knowing what I know now.” I’m a little confused by that answer because, as I understood it, you knew at the time that the product was combustible. What do you know now that leads you to say that could potentially be read as misleading?

*Chris Hunt*: Oh, okay. I think probably at the time I wouldn’t have read any great significance into that statement.

*Rachel Troup*: Why not?

*Chris Hunt*: I think again because-----and, as I say, rightly or wrongly-----I think in my mind it was------I didn't think that K15 was a non—combustible product, but I didn’t think that it would have a big contribution to the development of the fire. That may be-------

*Rachel Troup*: Forgive me. On what basis did you think at the time that it would not have a big contribution to the development of a fire? Why do you say that?

*Chris Hunt*: I can't remember. I can't remember what my thoughts were exactly at the time. (...) I mean, I clearly would have read it at the time, may have had a discussion with George Lee about it, may have had other considerations, but I can’t remember why it was included in those key factors assessed, because it normally wouldn’t have a statement in there that then isn't repeated in the section 7, or just a straight reference to section 7.

*Rachel Troup*: Or in fact that can’t be founded in any kind of scientific or evidential data?

*Chris Hunt*: Yes.

*Rachel Troup*: Right. But I think you said earlier that you didn't pick it up at the time or you didn’t read anything particularly significant into that wording?

*Chris Hunt*: I don’t think so, no. I can't remember--------I think if I had, you know, we'd have omitted it.

*Rachel Troup*: Do you think you ought to have done, looking back now?

*Chris Hunt*: With hindsight, yes, it obviously has caused confusion, so I don’t think at the time I realised that it would cause confusion, but it’s clearly-----I think probably would be better off without it in the certificate .

*Rachel Troup*: Given what you have just said, I think I do need to ask you this at this stage: on what basis do you say in October 2008 that you were competent to check statements about fire performance in BBA certificates?

*Chris Hunt*: I don’t think I would be competent to, you know, check a fire —related comment in that particular way. I was probably, I suppose you could say, competent in looking at BBA certificates in general, but I don't---------I didn't have any competence in fire as such-----

*Rachel Troup*: No.

*Chris Hunt*:------other than being able to read Approved Document B and the various standards and have some knowledge in that way.

*Rachel Troup*: All right, but not enough-------is this right?---to pick up that it might be ill—advised to state in the fire performance section of a certificate for a combustible product definitively that the product would not contribute to the development stages of a fire? Is it genuinely your evidence that that did not strike you at the time as a significant or important statement?

*Chris Hunt*: I don't think it did, not in that front summary. I think I would have perhaps attached more significance within section 7, but I realise that’s not------you know, it does appear in the certificate and therefore, you know, forms part of the certificate . But, yeah------

*Rachel Troup*: I’m not sure that I do follow. On that basis, and in relation to the answer you’ve just given, how could you possibly, as head of approvals, have any confidence that what was being said within the certificate about the fire performance or properties in fire of that product was correct and accurate? You were the last line of sign-off before the chief executive, were you not?

*Chris Hunt*: Yes, yes.

*Rachel Troup*: So how could you have had confidence at the time that your own checks on the technical content of that certificate were good, were accurate, were adequate?

*Chris Hunt*: I think at the time I clearly thought they were, based on, you know, reading section 7 and knowing something about what was in Approved Document B, but ... I can't really say any more, I don't think.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 21, 2021)

Transcript of this week's BBC podcast here.

We are coming to the end of this module of the Inquiry. More evidence this coming week from the BBA, followed by the return of two witnesses from Kingspan. First Adrian Pargeter, Kingspan's director of technical, marketing and internal affairs who will be wishing to 'clarify' the 'mistaken' impression created by his previous testimony that Kingspan misled a parliamentary sub-committee. Then Kingspan's former UK CEO Richard Burnley whose evidence was interrupted when hearings were suspended in December because of Coronavirus. No doubt some of the evidence about Kingspan which the Inquiry has heard since then will be put to them.

Not sure if the intention is to hold hearings beyond this week, but the Inquiry will very shortly be adjourning for its Easter break. It will return on April 19th, commencing with opening statements for Module 3. (There are no closing statements for this Module. Combined closing statements for Modules 1-3 will take place at the end of Module 3).



Spoiler: What does Module 3 cover.



From the Inquiry opening statement at the start of phase 2 of the Inquiry:

Module 3 will be divided into three broad topics. The first topic will investigate the complaints made by residents of the tower before 14 June 2017, which particularly relate to fire safety and concerns that were raised about doors and the quality of workmanship during the refurbishment. We will then examine the responses of the TMO and RBKC to those complaints and the degree of engagement by the TMO in the refurbishment works.

Module 3 will then consider a second topic, namely compliance by the TMO, RBKC and the London Fire Brigade with their obligations under law, namely the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety ) Order 2005, otherwise known often as the RRO. A particular focus of our investigation at this module will be the fire risk assessments carried out by Carl Stokes and their adequacy.

The final topic of Module 3 will contain the active and passive fire safety systems inside the tower — so lifts, fire doors, smoke extraction system — together with the gas supply system.



Module 3 will be looking closely at the Council and the TMO amongst things. Obviously this is evidence bereaved, survivors and residents were particularly interested in being present for. As mentioned above, subject to the state of the pandemic,  the Inquiry hopes to extend limited attendance to include some of them from May 17th.


----------



## ddraig (Mar 23, 2021)

Grenfell Tower inquiry: 9 things we now know about the cladding
					

A public inquiry has questioned employees of the metals firm that supplied cladding for Grenfell.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## teqniq (Mar 23, 2021)

Bid to save leaseholders from huge bills to remove cladding defeated by government


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 26, 2021)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary is up (archived) : 
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 29: ‘Is it true that Kingspan’s position… was to do its best to ensure that science was secretly perverted for financial gain?’

All the links (and most of the sub-links) from it should be working with one exception. Towards the bottom of the page is a link to an interesting summary of this module of the Inquiry which Inside Housing put up yesterday. It's another multi-paywalled-link extravaganza which will require some work. The main page for it will probably load but few, if any, of the links on it will. I've marked it as PAYWALLED.

The hearings for Module 2 concluded this week. However my guess above about the Inquiry's Easter break was wrong. The Inquiry will be sitting on Monday and Tuesday next week when it will hear opening submissions for Module 3 (and then presumably will take its break). 

As with Module 2, the first submissions on Monday will be from the Inquiry team followed by two of the legal teams for Bereaved Survivors and Residents. Given what is covered in Module 3 (see above) I imagine they will have plenty to say. They are followed in the afternoon by submissions on behalf of the Council and the 'TMO'.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 27, 2021)

Transcript of this weeks BBC podcast here. (Previous transcripts here).

When giving evidence back in December Kingspan were questioned about their ultimately unsuccessful efforts, after the Grenfell fire, to influence the Government not to introduce a ban on combustible materials on high-rise buildings. Amongst other things this had involved carrying out a large-scale fire test involving non-combustible mineral wool which was intended to fail. Their intention was to use the result to demonstrate that even non-combustible insulation could fail a test, and that rather than banning combustible materials there should instead be a requirement that all proposed cladding systems should undergo large-scale fire tests. Which would keep the door open for their combustible insulation

In December Kingspan's head of technical and marketing, Adrian Pargeter, was confronted with emails discussing 'engineering' a fire test rig to ensure it failed. It was put to him that in using the 'evidence' of this failure to make their argument Kingspan had sought to mislead a parliamentary sub-committee.

After that Inquiry hearing Kingspan contacted the sub-committee to 'correct the record'. They said the emails discussing 'engineering' a test rig to fail had not related to the test Kingspan had told MPs about but a previous one. One they had not previously disclosed.

Adrian Pargeter duly came back this week to 'correct the record'. This didn't exactly go to plan. He and his former colleague Richard Burnley were taken through these fire tests, and their efforts to influence the Government, in even greater detail than before. A catalogue of one 'cunning plan' after another culminating in Kingspan's self-defeating attempt to 'correct things'.



> Richard Millett: Do you accept that your attempts following your evidence on the 9th of December 2020 to set the record straight have simply been to create a further record of dissembling and mendacity, Mr Pargeter?
> 
> Adrian Pargeter: No.



Part of Kingspan's 2018 schmooze offensive had been a dinner and presentation at the Houses of Parliament. Giving evidence in December Adrian Pargeter had been unable to recall whether any MPs had been present. This week confronted with a Kingspan email to DUP MP Jim Shannon headed 'Kevin Hollinrake Dinner', former Kingspan Insulation CEO Richard Burnley 'recalled' both had indeed been present although he couldn't recall who else had been.

Mentions of the 'Kevin Hollinrake Dinner' during that days evidence were reported. So Hollinrake himself decided to 'correct the record' on twitter.


----------



## MrSki (Mar 30, 2021)

Fucking hell. It just gets worse.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 30, 2021)

MrSki said:


> Fucking hell. It just gets worse.


"Surprisingly" his company website went offline in January. He will be giving evidence.

There is an interesting clash of Inquiry Expert Witnesses regarding him. Colin Todd who helped write the Local Government Association advice, which the Council and the TMO have cited in their explanations for their actions, is an Expert Witness. Todd apparently thinks Stokes was appropriately qualified, and produced acceptable Fire Risk Assessments. Other Expert Witnesses, including Barbara Lane, do not agree. Todd is lambasted in several of the opening statements on behalf of the Bereaved Survivors and Relatives, and his views opposed by Counsel for the Fire Brigades Union. The Council and the TMO support Todd, and the TMO supports Stokes.

Opening Statements yesterday and today for Module 3. That by the Counsel to the Inquiry sets out the three main topics this Module deals with.

The oral Opening Statements on behalf of the BSRs forcefully set out the criticisms of the Council, the 'TMO' and their contractors, which this Module will be looking at.

For BSR team 1 Stephanie Barwise and Danny Friedman.



> TMO briefed councillors against residents, making clear complaints had been rejected, were without foundation, and suggesting residents had acted unreasonably. This concerted effort to manage councillors ’ perceptions of TMO came from the top. It was led by Black, who cultivated a relationship with RBKC’s Laura Johnson, which gave him advice and influence over councillors (Barwise)





> The investment needed to be sold to those who saw these units not as homes but as assets in the context of an identified £30 million funding shortfall in the ringfenced housing revenue account. Grenfell was considered one of RBKC’s worst performing assets, presumptively to be knocked down, not refurbished. Lucrative mixed housing regeneration was identified by RBKC as the solution to the funding shortfall. The TMO believed, with a degree of existential anxiety, that it had to prove itself to RBKC as able to deliver on such ambitious regeneration projects for fear of being replaced by someone else. The TMO’s desperation or, in Peter Maddison’s words, a seat at the table on such future projects, made it hypersensitive to the preferences of its single client. Meanwhile, RBKC left the TMO in no doubt that its priorities were delivery on time and in budget, and not resident satisfaction and safety. (Friedman)




For BSR Team 2 Michael Mansfield and Adrian Williamson.



> And, of course, Modules 1 and 2 did not include the voices of the families, although they have plenty to say about the issues in Modules 1 and 2. Instead, they had to sit at home, usually, and watch — and I hope this is not an understatement, or even an overstatement — a parade of arrogance. There may be one pandemic outside the hearing; there’s another inside it, and it’s the pandemic of lies, of manipulation, of deceit, of jocularity, of pride in what they’re joking about. And one has to ask, obviously, how that has come about. (Mansfield)





> In conclusion as to maintenance, what is noticeable, as with so many other aspects of the TMO’s performance, is its inability to get to grips with maintenance problems. The tower needed a systematic plan, the planned preventative maintenance and reactive maintenance put in place by the TMO. The TMO then needed to follow up assiduously to ensure that what was planned and agreed was put into practice. None of this happened. At best, various organisations responded ad hoc as problems arose. Often this response consisted of little more than the assertion that some other body needed to deal with the issue. All of this contributed to the poor state of the building on the night of 14 June 2017. (Williamson)



And much more.

Both teams have also produced written opening statements PDF links - Team 1 here and here.  Team 2 here


----------



## MrSki (Mar 30, 2021)

Thank you for your coverage of this Lurdan You are doing a sterling job.


----------



## two sheds (Mar 30, 2021)

Echoed ^^


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 1, 2021)

The BBC were up first this week with their podcast. Transcript of it here.

Inside Housing's Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 30: ‘There is certainly a high probability that in the event of another fire the whole building can become an inferno’ 

This Module of the Inquiry will be looking at the role of the Council and its 'TMO' as social housing landlord and agent. Just as previous Modules raised broader questions about the wider design and construction sectors and Building Control bodies; and about product manufacturers, product sellers and certification bodies,;this module will be raising broader questions about the social housing management sector. Questions which will be uncomfortable ones for the sector generally.

Those 'uncomfortable' questions will very likely lead to 'answers' that in turn prove uncomfortable for social housing tenants, as the Government develops frameworks of reform, and social housing managers find ways of 'adapting to' and 'working within' them. That process is already underway.

The history of social housing 'reform' in the past illustrates that 'reforms' and ''restructuring' and 'adaptations' will only be driven by managerial considerations, and by the class interests of those designing and implementing them. They will not be centered on the interests of tenants in anything other than a rhetorical sense.


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 2, 2021)

Peter Apps of Inside Housing wrote a short piece about was was learned in Module 2. It's in the Spectator which is probably not high on the list of people's go to publications so here's a copy someone else has archived.

Apps has also had sight of the draft programme for Module 3 and posted some details to twitter.



> Some dates for the diary for those following the Grenfell Tower Inquiry. Understand residents will give evidence in the first week back on April 19. RBKC's director of housing Laura Johnson begins in w/c 4 May. Former cabinet member for housing Rock Fielding-Mellen w/c 11 May. Former council leader Nicholas Paget Brown and TMO head of safety Janice Wray in w/c 17 May. Risk assessor Carl Stokes in w/c 24 May and full week of 1 June. Former TMO chief exec Robert Black in w/c 14 June (inquiry not sitting on anniversary).





> Module due to run through to 26 July, when we will hear closing statements for the evidence of the entire three modules so far, going back to January 2020. Dates above provisional and just some highlights. Including experts there are 56 witnesses in total.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 2, 2021)

MrSki said:


> Thank you for your coverage of this Lurdan You are doing a sterling job.


Yes, though I fear my ANGRY button will soon be worn out entirely.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 24, 2021)

Apps throwing more meat into the grinder. Absolute shitshow 









						Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 31: ‘If we cannot get out, people will die’
					

Inside Housing, news, analysis, and comment about the social housing sector in the UK.




					www.insidehousing.co.uk
				






> ...In 2009, independent auditor Maria Memoli published a damning report which found evidence of board members abusing their positions and tenants waiting years for leaks to be fixed...“I thought that the complaints procedure was a way for the TMO to be judge, jury and executioner,” he said. “It essentially let them judge themselves. Their strategy was to refer me to the complaints procedure and exhaust [Grenfell Tower Leaseholders Association]”...residents with mobility issues being told of how they were trapped in the building by both lifts going out of service around once a month...hot water and sometimes even drinking water being cut off at the tower and KCTMO failing to provide bottled water...described “mould and mushrooms” growing in her kitchen following a leak and silverfish coming in through the windows...leak became so bad that the floor of her bathroom was ruined, and when a workman attended he broke her toilet and removed an expensive rug...
> 
> ...Seven years before the tragedy of June 2017, there was a serious fire on the sixth floor which saw smoke spread all the way up to the 15th floor, leaving three residents injured...serious defect: the smoke ventilation system was broken with improper seals, meaning it spread smoke around the building rather than remove it...“catastrophic failure”...nothing was done until it was upgraded during the refurbishment in 2016...he was threatened with the forfeiture of his lease and that RBKC and KCTMO “always seemed to want to ignore the existence of GTLA”...
> 
> ...


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 24, 2021)

Pete Apps managed to limit himself to just one paywalled link in the diary article this week  It's to this from last December:
Government watered down implementation of Grenfell recommendations for disabled people after push from lobbyists (archived - none of the links from it are however)

The BBC have had two podcasts this week. [BBC Podcast page]. The first was a special about Race and Class at Grenfell. Transcript of it here. (Transcript of the  second 'regular' podcast is 'in process').

Very interesting week. Monday heard evidence from a former secretary of the Grenfell Tower Leaseholders Association, and the former sub-tenant of a leaseheld flat who was involved in Grenfell Unite and the Grenfell Compact before the fire. On Tuesday four former tenants gave evidence in person and extracts from the witness statements of eleven others were read into the record. On Wednesday Ed Daffarn of the Grenfell Unite/Compact/Grenfell Action Group blog gave evidence all day. On Thursday morning, before the first two witnesses from the 'TMO', there was a presentation of the evidence from Shah Ahmed who is unable to give it in person. Ahmed founded the Towers leaseholders association in 2010 after a previous small fire in which his wife had been injured. He also preserved documentation of the complaints made and responses received to them. Much of such documentation held by other residents was of course lost in the fire. For those who want them links to the official transcripts for the four days and an index of their contents here.


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 25, 2021)

Transcript of the regular BBC podcast for this week here. Podcasts obviously don't have to be a specific length to fit into a broadcast slot. This is one of the longer ones they've produced, reflecting the number of issues covered this week. (Since we're on a new page of this thread a reminder that previous phase 2 podcast transcripts can be found here, and previous Inside Housing Grenfell diaries here).

Coming up this week more former 'TMO' staff, including the return of refurbishment manager Claire Williams on Tuesday and Wednesday, followed by the TMO's former director of assets and regeneration Peter Maddison.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 27, 2021)

Lurdan said:


> Coming up this week more former 'TMO' staff, including the return of refurbishment manager Claire Williams


And she is as anyone might expect:



> "There was never any comment about the good work we were doing in terms of employment initiatives, all the things we did for residents – they were just overlooked,” she said.



That's her complaining about the tenant group blog which had consistently raised concerns over, inter alia, fire safety, and which was blocked from its staff's computers by the TMO.









						Grenfell Tower landlord ‘blocked staff access to residents’ blog’
					

KCTMO censored blog by Grenfell Action Group which warned of a potentially disastrous fire, inquiry hears




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## two sheds (Apr 27, 2021)

Good to see the government holds leaseholders' safety and interests close to their hearts. 









						Vote to protect leaseholders from cladding costs fails despite Tory rebellion
					

Government defeats amendment aiming to stop fire safety costs being passed on to leaseholders, but Lords vote means new Commons showdown




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## blossie33 (Apr 27, 2021)

two sheds said:


> Good to see the government holds leaseholders' safety and interests close to their hearts.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Unfortunately I'm one of the people it's affecting


----------



## two sheds (Apr 27, 2021)

going back to house of lords apparently but that just means more delay


----------



## not-bono-ever (Apr 29, 2021)

And it’s gone. Appalling behaviour from parliament


----------



## Brainaddict (Apr 29, 2021)

It's so clearly unjust that even though it's the Tories I'm still surprised. The government let their building control regime fall apart, the government should pick up the bill. If they want cladding companies to pay up to cover some of the costs then fine, they should make that happen. The idea that leaseholders should be the ones footing the bills is a joke. In what way was it their fault? Hopefully the Tories just lost a bunch of voters.


----------



## Badgers (Apr 29, 2021)

Brainaddict said:


> It's so clearly unjust that even though it's the Tories I'm still surprised. The government let their building control regime fall apart, the government should pick up the bill. If they want cladding companies to pay up to cover some of the costs then fine, they should make that happen. The idea that leaseholders should be the ones footing the bills is a joke. In what way was it their fault? Hopefully the Tories just lost a bunch of voters.


I doubt much of their voter base live in cladded flats.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 29, 2021)

The key thing here is that they've done the maths and decided that the banks can eat any losses arising from insolvency or foreclosure. What happens to the actual people involved is not even a factor. Protect the banks and all the financial pyramid schemes balanced on top of the property market, fuck everything else.


----------



## stdP (Apr 29, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> The key thing here is that they've done the maths and decided that the banks can eat any losses arising from insolvency or foreclosure. What happens to the actual people involved is not even a factor. Protect the banks and all the financial pyramid schemes balanced on top of the property market, fuck everything else.



Fire sale (ha!) on unmortgageable properties from people forced to sell because their flat is worth less than whatever the outstanding debt on it is. Mass buy-up of said flats for cash by management companies/private equity as an investment opportunity. All of a sudden replacing the cladding doesn't cost £10,000 per flat for the firms holding majority stakes in the flats in the building (but the leaseholders hanging on by their fingernails still have to pay it). Flats minus the Ronson cladding either back on the market ("hey, we get to sell it twice!") or rented back at the same cost as before. Trebles all 'round.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 30, 2021)

I note that this latest fuckery is being reported as 'MPs vote to make flat owners pay for safety defects' and not some watered down or equivocal version of that. 

Elsewhere you've got people in new builds forced to sign NDA's just to get their homes brought up to building regs standard by the developers. If these cunts aren't reined in now, and the building control system made fit for purpose then the cost in money and human lives will continue to spiral.


----------



## fucthest8 (Apr 30, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> I note that this latest fuckery is being reported as 'MPs vote to make flat owners pay for safety defects' and not some watered down or equivocal version of that.
> 
> Elsewhere you've got people in new builds forced to sign NDA's just to get their homes brought up to building regs standard by the developers. If these cunts aren't reined in now, and the building control system made fit for purpose then the cost in money and human lives will continue to spiral.



I briefly "liked" this but that's the wrong response.

Fucking depressing tbh. From this to all the corruption and the outright lies and what happens? Literally nothing. There is no accountability, none at all.

E2A: and is the Torygraph reporting that way? Bet it isn't


----------



## glitch hiker (Apr 30, 2021)

Minister’s aide tells family facing £40,000 fire safety bill to call Samaritans
					

Robb family had written to Robert Jenrick asking for help with repairs to flat in Manchester tower block




					www.theguardian.com
				




Is there a helpline for people who want to see corrupt Tory scum who take backhanders on behalf of pornographers die miserably?

FFS

And Starmer _still_ can't top them in the polls


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 30, 2021)

glitch hiker said:


> Minister’s aide tells family facing £40,000 fire safety bill to call Samaritans
> 
> 
> Robb family had written to Robert Jenrick asking for help with repairs to flat in Manchester tower block
> ...



Starmer would do no different if he were in charge.


----------



## Jay Park (Apr 30, 2021)

glitch hiker said:


> Minister’s aide tells family facing £40,000 fire safety bill to call Samaritans
> 
> 
> Robb family had written to Robert Jenrick asking for help with repairs to flat in Manchester tower block
> ...



getting sick of hearing his name


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 30, 2021)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 32: ‘Let’s hope our luck holds out and there are no fires in the meantime’
(links from it all archived, and with one exception a couple of levels down, so are the subsequent links)

For anyone who want's their daily reports:


Spoiler: Links



21.04.27 - KCTMO failed to tell Grenfell residents smoke ventilation system broken ‘beyond repair’
21.04.28 - KCTMO decided to ‘not disclose’ fire risk assessment backlog to fire brigade
21.04.29 - RBKC decided against fire door inspection programme months before Grenfell fire



Couple of gems from Claire Williams the refurbishment manager for the 'TMO'.



> Richard Millett: Coming back to a question I have asked now quite a few times today: why were the residents not informed that there was an elevated level of risk while the work was being carried out on the smoke ventilation system?
> 
> Claire Williams: I’ve said that I don’t remember, I don’t remember ever discussing it with anybody in terms of why we didn’t say to residents. I don’t remember anybody ever saying, "Let's put it in the newsletter". It wasn’t discussed and I don't remember raising it as an issue.


(...)


> Richard Millett: Now, as I've shown you, you said in paragraph 238: _"This appeared to be a comprehensive assessment of all fire safety issues and he further reported on the provisions for means of escape."_
> I just want to explore with you the statement that it appeared to be a comprehensive fire risk assessment of all fire safety issues. Can you please go back to the fire risk assessment, at page 18. On that page, you can see that there’s a section called "Pest control”. Do you see that?
> 
> Claire Williams: Yes.
> ...


----------



## glitch hiker (Apr 30, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> Starmer would do no different if he were in charge.


I don't know what he'd do but at least he wouldn't be Boris Johnson.

Both shit tbf but the thought of Tory tears and the sight of them crying puce tears of Gammon is a small comfort


----------



## MrSki (May 1, 2021)




----------



## Lurdan (May 3, 2021)

Transcript of the BBC podcast for last week here.


> Richard Millett: You see, isn’t there a problem here? Let me spell it out to you. If you had a fire risk assessor who was prepared to do what you asked him in matters of judgement of risk, how could you trust his risk assessments at all?



Tomorrow Peter Maddison of the 'TMO' continues to give evidence. He's followed by one of the Inquiry's expert witnesses, Jonathan Sakula, who I understand has produced a report into the state of knowledge within the cladding industry during the period January 2012 to June 2017. Then it's another witness from the 'TMO'.


----------



## ska invita (May 7, 2021)

Its under control supposedly , but it can so easily happen again


----------



## Lurdan (May 7, 2021)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry week 33: ‘Isn’t that a serious gap in the scope of the policy that was meant to safeguard vulnerable people?’ 

(Apps again limited himself to one paywalled link - the same one as last week. I've archived that page but not yet the other pages it links to).


----------



## hitmouse (May 7, 2021)

Ah, see Ska beat me to it, but yeah, here's a BBC article on the latest cladding fire: Poplar fire: London tower block blaze leaves two men in hospital


----------



## Lurdan (May 9, 2021)

Transcript of the BBC podcast for last week here.

Tomorrow Sacha Jevans, the 'TMO's former director of operations gives evidence, then on Tuesday the first of several days of evidence from Laura Johnson, the Council's former director of housing.


----------



## Lurdan (May 15, 2021)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 34: ‘Some members of the community are doing their best to spread false information’

Once again the diary contains just one paywalled link however this week that page and most of the subsequent links it leads to are also archived.

For anyone who wants the daily reports Inside Housing put up this week


Spoiler: links



21.05.10 - RBKC 'said no' to fire brigade call for safety improvements before Grenfell 'due to budget'
21.05.11 - Council housing boss requested tenancy status check on Grenfell resident after they raised concerns
21.05.12 - RBKC housing head failed to check if fire service concerns over Grenfell had been fixed before fire
21.05.13 - Grenfell council housing head ignored recommendations from Lakanal Fire coroner’s report


----------



## Badgers (May 15, 2021)

Six Grenfell households still living in temporary accommodation nearly four years after tragedy
					

Figures from the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea Council (RBCK council) show that there are still six households living in temporary accommodation




					inews.co.uk


----------



## BCBlues (May 15, 2021)

Lurdan said:


> This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
> Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 34: ‘Some members of the community are doing their best to spread false information’
> 
> Once again the diary contains just one paywalled link however this week that page and most of the subsequent links it leads to are also archived.
> ...



Thanks Lurdan .

Not Grenfell but we've heard this contempt for residents viewpoints and welfare somewhere before haven't we

'They told us not to attend meetings drunk' - tenants' anger at council insult 'They told us not to attend meetings drunk' - tenants' anger at council insult


----------



## Lurdan (May 16, 2021)

Transcript of the BBC podcast for last week here.

The Inquiry put up a factsheet about this module. PDF here or as a webpage here. It includes a short glossary of some key concepts and terms.

Coming up: tomorrow morning more evidence from Amanda Johnson of the 'TMO'. She's followed by former RBKC councillors Rock Feilding-Mellen (Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Housing, Property and Regeneration at the time of the fire) and Nicholas Paget-Brown (Leader of the Council at the time of the fire), current councillor Quentin Marshall and former councillor Sam Mackover.


----------



## two sheds (May 17, 2021)

Grenfell: councillor was told about cheaper cladding plan before fire
					

Rock Feilding-Mellen said he was emailed about potential cladding change but didn’t understand significance




					www.theguardian.com
				






> Rock Feilding-Mellen, the Tory councillor in charge of the Grenfell Tower refurbishment, was informed of plans to save money by swapping zinc cladding for aluminium in 2014 but told police he only knew about it after the June 2017 fire, statements released to the public inquiry show.



Lying to the police? Trying to pervert the course of justice?


----------



## existentialist (May 17, 2021)

two sheds said:


> Grenfell: councillor was told about cheaper cladding plan before fire
> 
> 
> Rock Feilding-Mellen said he was emailed about potential cladding change but didn’t understand significance
> ...


Errr...



> Rock Feilding-Mellen, the *Tory *councillor


Course not: he's immune


----------



## Lurdan (May 21, 2021)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary  (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 35: ‘I really didn’t like the champagne’ 
(working links to their daily Inquiry reports at the bottom of the page)

On Monday more evidence from Councillor Judith Blakeman. Then on Tuesday the start of several days evidence from the TMO's fire assessor Carl Stokes.


----------



## two sheds (May 21, 2021)

Grenfell costs surpass £500m as council bill revealed
					

Kensington and Chelsea has spent £406m on its response to blaze, which followed £300,000 cost-cutting move




					www.theguardian.com
				






> Grenfell costs surpass £500m as council bill revealed





> Kensington and Chelsea has spent £406m on its response to blaze, which followed £300,000 cost-cutting move


----------



## alex_ (May 22, 2021)

two sheds said:


> Grenfell: councillor was told about cheaper cladding plan before fire
> 
> 
> Rock Feilding-Mellen said he was emailed about potential cladding change but didn’t understand significance
> ...



i assume the definition of being informed is receiving a document ?

This doesn’t  mean he was aware.

alex


----------



## two sheds (May 22, 2021)

Possibly, if he was the councillor in charge of the refurbishment you'd think he'd have a responsibility to read what he was sent though.

Eta he was specifically told about it: "In August 2018 he told Scotland Yard detectives investigating the 72 deaths that “issues such as any changes in materials, for example the use of aluminium instead of zinc, was something that I only remember becoming aware of after the fire”.

However, the council’s tenant management organisation told him by email that it was “hoping to achieve savings by negotiating with the planners over the cladding material (aluminium instead of zinc)”, according to a separate statement he made three months later to the public inquiry and published on Monday."


----------



## teuchter (May 22, 2021)

I wouldn't expect a councillor to have any knowledge about the relative fire risks of cladding panel types, and it would be unreasonable to expect them to. They wouldn't have the technical knowledge and you couldn't expect them to question every single component used in a design. It's not in any way obvious in a "common sense" or intuitive way that a metal panel would be a fire risk. Metal, in most people's experiance, does not burn. There are multiple layers of other people who did have (or should have had) the technical knowledge and failed to question the use of these panels. The number of people who failed to pick it up, or chose not to question it, is really quite shocking and its an absolutely massive systematic failure for every single part of the building industry. There also should have been regulation which should have prevented it and the regulation failed, both in its drafting and in its enforcement.

I've just been listening to the latest enquiry podcast though, and it seems to me that what the councillors failed to pay attention to was stuff sent to them by the LFB which was specific guidance for what questions councillors should be asking about building management or refurbishment. These were important things to check that highlighted things that they should not assume to have been dealt with by "others" and were more to do with the general management of the buildings, carrying out of risk assessments and so on. In fact it seems that the LFB sent the council / the TMO notices on many occasions highlighting potential problems with Grenfell. These were not really to do with the cladding but to do with escape strategy, fire doors and so on.


----------



## Lurdan (May 24, 2021)

Transcript of the BBC podcast for last week here.

Cllr Judith Blakeman continued giving evidence this morning. She was shown a 2015 email exchange between Laura Johnson, RBKCs director of housing, and Sacha Jevans of the 'TMO' which referred to her and the concerns she was raising. I don't think this has previously been exhibited. Here's a screenshot of Laura Johnson's contribution.









> We shall celebrate when it's finished, the children go to the new nursery, kids are boxing in a fabulous new gym and people are living in lovely warm flats.


----------



## Lurdan (May 28, 2021)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 36: ‘Is that not a very incurious approach for a fire risk assessor?’
(There are links to this weeks daily reports in the article, all of which should be working).


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 4, 2021)

Well time for some links I guess.

The Inquiry only sat for one day this week but it concluded the four days of evidence from Carl Stokes, the 'TMO's fire risk assessor.

Here's this week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 37: ‘In giving that advice, weren’t you acting beyond your knowledge and expertise?’
Links from it should be working.

One of many issues that came up was Carl Stokes' response to a letter the London Fire Brigade sent all Councils in April 2017, following the outcome of the investigation into a fire the year before in Shepherd's Court, a tower block in Hammersmith & Fulham. (A different borough of course. Admittedly one that was part of the tri-borough arrangement with Westminster and RBKC, but it would be unreasonable to expect that arrangement to facilitate any lessons learned without external prompting </sarcasm>)

The Grenfell Diary links to one of Inside Housing's articles about Shepherd's Court, but they also produced a detailed report about it in May 2017 just weeks before the fire at Grenfell.
A stark warning: the Shepherd's Bush tower block fire  (archived)

Carl Stokes reassured the TMO twice in writing that the issues raised by the LFB didn't apply at Grenfell. In his evidence on Tuesday he attempted to justify this:


> *Carl Stokes*: (…) this letter did not apply to Grenfell because it does not apply to cladding, this letter applied to spandrel panels and was site-specific to Shepherd’s Bush, and on the second page it says about the requirements of Building Regulations and the building control officer had signed off Grenfell Tower anyway.



In the strict sense, of course, the situation at Grenfell wasn't like that at Shepherd's Court. It was very much worse. As Kate Lamble points out in this weeks BBC podcast:


> The panels involved in the Shepherd’s Court fire were made of wood and polystyrene foam covered in a thin sheet of steel. At Grenfell in addition to the polyethylene-filled cladding, and the combustible foam insulation packed around the edges of the windows, in between the windows there were also panels made from extruded polystyrene covered in a thin layer of aluminium.



Not that Carl Stokes knew one way or the other.

Here are the transcripts of last week's and this week's BBC podcasts. The second contains an interview with Peter Wilkinson of the Institution of Fire Engineers to set some of Stokes' testimony in context.

Inside Housing published a long report about the building safety risks associated with combustible window panels back in 2018.  Flammable window panels: the forgotten threat (archived).

Next week Janice Wray, the 'TMO's health and safety and facilities manager, who Carl Stokes reported to, is due to give evidence all week.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 11, 2021)

Here's this week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 38: ‘Well it’s a bit more than that, isn’t it. He’s suggesting that you tell the LFB a lie’
Working links to their daily reports at the bottom of the page.

The whole week was taken up with evidence from Janice Wray, the health and safety and facilities manager for the 'TMO', and currently facilities manager for RBKC. The Inquiry isn't sitting on Monday, the fourth anniversary of the fire, but she is back on Tuesday for at least one more day. The schedule then is for evidence from a couple of London Fire Brigade officers, presumably about the interactions between the LFB and the TMO before the fire, which there has been a lot of evidence about. Then more former TMO employees.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 13, 2021)

For the fourth anniversary of the fire, Inside Housing has produced a long investigative piece about how the regulatory framework, which permitted buildings to be wrapped in readily combustible materials that produced toxic smoke when burned, has developed since the 1990s.

Special investigation: how the government missed the chance to prevent the cladding crisis in the 1990s (archived)

Long but well worth reading IMO. 

This is just the latest long piece Inside Housing has published since the fire. The most relevant to the issues in this new one was The Paper Trail back in 2018. This was also published on a non-paywalled site here, but unfortunately while that page is accessible, the multiple links back to articles on the Inside Housing site are not, and one or two links are now broken. Here's an archived version which fixes those issues. It's in three long parts written by different IH reporters


Spoiler: details and links



The Paper Trail: the Failure of Building Regulations (23rd March 2018)

Was the cladding legal? - Peter Apps
Testing times: the rise of combustible insulation - Luke Barratt
The missed warnings - Sophie Barnes
Never Again



Some of what's in it has been clarified further by things which have emerged at the Inquiry, but taken with the new piece it provides a thorough overview of an important aspect of how we got here. If you want reasons to give our various red and blue neoliberal overlords since the 1990s an eight o'clock clap, for their sterling efforts in helping to create the current building safety problems, these are an excellent starting point.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 14, 2021)

Inside Housing - Four years on, has the government kept the promises it has made since the Grenfell Tower fire? 

Hmmm, I wonder what the answer could be.


----------



## BCBlues (Jun 14, 2021)

I've put this in the Palestine thread but feel I should drop it here too as it involves Arconic and its the 4th anniversary 

Live updates- Police called as protesters climb onto factory roof of Arconic site in Kitts Green Police at scene as protesters climb onto city factory roof


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 14, 2021)

alex_ said:


> i assume the definition of being informed is receiving a document ?
> 
> This doesn’t  mean he was aware.
> 
> alex



If he wasn't, he should have been.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 14, 2021)

BCBlues said:


> I've put this in the Palestine thread but feel I should drop it here too as it involves Arconic and its the 4th anniversary
> 
> Live updates- Police called as protesters climb onto factory roof of Arconic site in Kitts Green Police at scene as protesters climb onto city factory roof



I dare say the new policing bill will make it easier to bring this sort of action to a sudden stop.

These are the same fucking muppets who demand more in state support, totally tin-eared to the amount of state resource their actions consume.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 14, 2021)

What a decent chap...

Whatho lads


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I dare say the new policing bill will make it easier to bring this sort of action to a sudden stop.
> 
> These are the same fucking muppets who demand more in state support, totally tin-eared to the amount of state resource their actions consume.


a few components from a nuclear missile i suppose


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 14, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> a few components from a nuclear missile i suppose



I have no objection to people protesting, but they should have to pay the full policing cost up front.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I have no objection to people protesting, but they should have to pay the full policing cost up front.


i don't think you've really engaged brain over this one

i have no objection to margaret thatcher sending a task force to the falklands but the members of the cabinet should pay the full cost of the operation up front


----------



## Badgers (Jun 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I have no objection to people protesting, but they should have to pay the full policing cost up front.


What a cunt of a man you are eh


----------



## Argonia (Jun 14, 2021)

Justice.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I have no objection to people protesting, but they should have to pay the full policing cost up front.


I think that, when we can reasonably rely on our government to respect the rule of law, a zero-tolerance approach to protest might be a more tenable option. Right now, I don't think we're remotely near such moral authority.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 14, 2021)

existentialist said:


> I think that, when we can reasonably rely on our government to respect the rule of law, a zero-tolerance approach to protest might be a more tenable option. Right now, I don't think we're remotely near such moral authority.



I take it by government, you mean of all stripes?

Boris has not done anything that tops the Blair/Campbell lies.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I have no objection to people protesting, but they should have to pay the full policing cost up front.


Big fan-of-firing-squads-with-streamlined-invoicing-processes energy there 👍


----------



## existentialist (Jun 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I take it by government, you mean of all stripes?
> 
> Boris has not done anything that tops the Blair/Campbell lies.


Yes, of all stripes. But I'd question whether even Blair's deceit and warmongering comes anywhere near close to the institionalised lying, corruption, graft, and refusal to conform to the most fundamental principles of governance that breaches of have hitherto tended to be notable by their rarity, as opposed to the present situation when it is a refreshing change to learn that a Government minister has actually acted with integrity. A refreshing change I'm struggling to recall the last example of.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 14, 2021)

existentialist said:


> Yes, of all stripes. But I'd question whether even Blair's deceit and warmongering comes anywhere near close to the institionalised lying, corruption, graft, and refusal to conform to the most fundamental principles of governance that breaches of have hitherto tended to be notable by their rarity, as opposed to the present situation when it is a refreshing change to learn that a Government minister has actually acted with integrity. A refreshing change I'm struggling to recall the last example of.



Surely everyone realises that politicians make sewer rats look like model citizens?


----------



## existentialist (Jun 14, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Surely everyone realises that politicians make sewer rats look like model citizens?


There are sewer rats and sewer rats. The current crop seem to be particularly foetid.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Surely everyone realises that politicians make sewer rats look like model citizens?


And this is why you want to stop protests? Why do you think the state - which you say is led by unprincipled bounders - should lay down the costs of demonstrations and force those affected by their actions into destitution?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 15, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> And this is why you want to stop protests? Why do you think the state - which you say is led by unprincipled bounders - should lay down the costs of demonstrations and force those affected by their actions into destitution?


Name one protest that achieved anything.


----------



## Smangus (Jun 15, 2021)

poll tax riots


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Name one protest that achieved anything.


carnival against capitalism, 18.6.99


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 15, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> carnival against capitalism, 18.6.99


What specifically did it achieve?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> What specifically did it achieve?


a good time was had by (almost) all - is that such a little thing?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 15, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> a good time was had by (almost) all - is that such a little thing?



So, the honest answer is nothing.

Just the same as all the other disruptive actions, which impinge heavily on people who don't give a fuck about whichever 'cause' has instigated the march.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> So, the honest answer is nothing.
> 
> Just the same as all the other disruptive actions, which impinge heavily on people who don't give a fuck about whichever 'cause' has instigated the march.


in other words the uppity blacks and women etc ought to be grateful for what they've got and not protest about racism or sexism and so on. many of the basic things we take for granted in society, eg the eight hour day, paid holiday, even the paltry right to vote every few years - all products of protest. a brief period of mild inconvenience isn't i think too much to put up with.


----------



## Smangus (Jun 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> So, the honest answer is nothing.
> 
> Just the same as all the other disruptive actions, which impinge heavily on people who don't give a fuck about whichever 'cause' has instigated the march.



Poll tax riots (again)


----------



## belboid (Jun 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Name one protest that achieved anything.


Storming of the bastille.  The long March.  Some Eastern European demos, late ‘89.  Poll tax.  George floyd.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 15, 2021)

How did women get the vote?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2021)

Badgers said:


> How did women get the vote?


they asked politely and then lloyd george graciously handed it to them in 1918, at least for women over 30, instead of paying women for all the work they'd done during the war


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 15, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> they asked politely and then lloyd george graciously handed it to them in 1918, at least for women over 30, instead of paying women for all the work they'd done during the war


wasn't there a property qualification as well?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2021)

DotCommunist said:


> wasn't there a property qualification as well?


you are as ever right: in 1918 lloyd george kindly permitted women aged over 30 who resided in the constituency or occupied land or premises with a rateable value above £5, or whose husbands did to put an x on a ballot paper


----------



## Badgers (Jun 15, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> they asked politely and then lloyd george graciously handed it to them in 1918, at least for women over 30, instead of paying women for all the work they'd done during the war


I thought the men of the time had a change of heart and apologised?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2021)

Badgers said:


> I thought the men of the time had a change of heart and apologised?


they did and looked to the prime minister of the day to make it all ok


----------



## belboid (Jun 15, 2021)

Badgers said:


> How did women get the vote?


A particularly well written letter to The Times


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Jun 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I dare say the new policing bill will make it easier to bring this sort of action to a sudden stop.
> 
> These are the same fucking muppets who demand more in state support, totally tin-eared to the amount of state resource their actions consume.


You're a mean-spirited, begrudging, authoritarian cunt. What a surprise  🖕


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2021)

Count Cuckula said:


> You're a mean-spirited, begrudging, authoritarian cunt. What a surprise  🖕


it's taken you a year and a half to work that out


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 15, 2021)

Count Cuckula said:


> You're a mean-spirited, begrudging, authoritarian cunt. What a surprise  🖕



You though, are an antisocial arsehole who is prepared to disrupt people's lives, and squander huge resource to feed your ego.


----------



## hitmouse (Jun 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> Name one protest that achieved anything.


Balfour Beatty and NG Bailey dropping their plans to use unskilled labour to carry out electrical work after protests from rank and file construction workers, for a start. See also BESNA, Frank Morris reinstated on Crossrail, and various others, just talking about protests by UK construction workers within the last decade or so.


----------



## hitmouse (Jun 15, 2021)

That protest in Bristol that achieved someone doing the sickest skate trick of all time:


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 15, 2021)

hitmouse said:


> That protest in Bristol that achieved someone doing the sickest skate trick of all time:
> View attachment 273662



My grandson used to skateboard, some of the things he and his friends did were terrifying.

Our skatepark here in Livingston was world famous at one point.









						Skate expectations: Superstar Tony Hawk says historic West Lothian park could become a world-leading attraction - The Sunday Post
					

The world’s most famous skateboarder has backed calls for a historic West Lothian skate park to be returned to its former glory as one of the best in the world.




					www.sundaypost.com


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Jun 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> You though, are an antisocial arsehole who is prepared to disrupt people's lives, and squander huge resource to feed your ego.


Unlike you I'm the opposite of anti-social. Resources are already squandered, but in a way that tory pricks like you are happy for them to be, and they are squandered in that way much more than the way you claim they are 'by protesters'. Knobhead.


----------



## hitmouse (Jun 15, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I have no objection to people protesting, but they should have to pay the full policing cost up front.


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."


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 18, 2021)

Here's this week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 39: ‘What you said there was a grotesque understatement’ -
Working links to their daily reports at the bottom of the page.

Janice Wray the 'TMO's health and safety and facilities manager finished her five and a bit days of evidence. Two Fire Brigade officers gave evidence about the LFB's concerns about the TMOs performance regarding fire safety before the fire. And two of the 'TMO's caretakers gave evidence about the reality of their role in this area, which unsurprisingly, rather than the significant contribution described by their managers, actually involved staff cuts and workloads increased, to the point that capacity was reduced. 



> "So you cover the really important parts and hope, and that was it. That’s all you can do. What can you do?”



Next week two more Fire Brigade officers, followed by Barbara Matthews, the 'TMO's executive director of financial services and ICT, and then the return of it's chief executive Robert Black.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 25, 2021)

This week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 40: ‘An exercise in concealment and half truth’ 
Links from it should be working.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 26, 2021)

Catching up a bit, here are transcripts of the last three BBC podcasts. Week 38 (Janice Wray), Week 39 (TMO and London Fire Brigade) and last week, Week 40 (TMO's Senior Management). 

Next week Robert Black the CEO of the 'TMO' is back on Monday. On Tuesday, Graham Webb the managing director of the TMO's wholly owned repairs company, Repairs Direct. 

On Wednesday the Inquiry begins hearings covering it's third topic: the active and passive fire safety systems in Grenfell Tower. The Inquiry intends dealing with :

Gas works at the tower, including work to replace one of the main risers;
The smoke control system (including Building Control approval of that system);
The TMO’s maintenance regime;
Fire doors (especially flat entrance doors); and
Lifts.
It's beginning with the smoke control system. First, on Wednesday, opening statements from two of the groups of Bereaved Survivors and Residents; from PSB, the company responsible for maintaining the system; and from the Fire Brigades Union. Then on Thursday, evidence from Paul Hanson, a building control surveyor for RBKC who specifically deals with means of escape under the fire regulations.

For each of these systems opening statements will be followed by evidence hearings and then by the Inquiry's expert witnesses. For the smoke control system expert reports have been produced by Barbara Lane and Beryl Menzies. (For more details of this module of the Inquiry see here and here).


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 2, 2021)

This week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 41: ‘We should do nothing. This is not the sort of website we should be responding to’

Their daily reports for those who want them


Spoiler: Links



21.06.28 - KCTMO chief denies trying to ‘silence’ Grenfell councillor who raised refurbishment concerns
21.06.29 - Grenfell contractors accused of ‘selective’ customer satisfaction data collection
21.06.30 - Dampers for Grenfell smoke system were ‘lowest possible standard’, inquiry hears
21.07.01 - Budget cuts led sign-off on insufficient smoke control system in Grenfell Tower, inquiry hears



As mentioned above, on Wednesday the Inquiry started hearings devoted to the issue of the smoke control system in the tower. Specifically the new system which was installed during the refurbishment, and which failed on the night of the fire. (The Inquiry has already heard evidence about the 'TMO's failure to maintain the existing system).

Written opening statements have been supplied by a number of the corporates involved as well as by BSR (Bereaved Survivors and Relatives) Team 1, Team 2 and the Fire Brigades Union. The latter also gave oral opening statements - transcripts here: BSR Team 2, BSR Team 1  and the FBU.

PSB who designed the new system also gave a combative opening statement in which they rejected the findings of the expert report by Barbara Lane (this won't be published until she gives evidence about it). However the impact of their oral opening was somewhat undercut by following immediately after the opening by Stephanie Barwise for BSR Team 1 which had just given their written statement a good kicking.

On Thursday Paul Hanson of RBKC building control gave evidence. He described how RBKC had reduced the size of the building control team which considered issues of means of escape from five to three and then to one person. And had got rid of building control's in-house mechanical and engineering surveyor just before the Grenfell refurbishment.



> This was the first job we’d ever done without a mechanical and ventilation engineer.



This was especially unfortunate given  that the system installed in Grenfell Tower when it was built (1972-4) had been in his words 'experimental'. The task both of the designers of the new system and of building control was made more challenging because RBKC had failed to retain any records of it.



> We had a system in this building where it was designed to some kind of idea and we were trying to understand how it worked. I don’t think I’ve ever had a job where that has ever been the case before (...)



RBKC's building control failings are of course part of a nationwide pattern of cuts and changes. A couple of background pieces from Inside Housing:

From April this year - The disappearing act: cuts to building control professionals and what they mean for building safety and a long article back in 2019 - Who’s been signing off Grenfell-style cladding?

edited to correct misspelling.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 3, 2021)

The transcript of this weeks BBC podcast is here.

IMO this does an exceptional job of explaining the issues relating to the smoke control system, and the disagreements over it between the Inquiry's own expert witnesses, as well as the disagreements the system's designers and RBKC building control  have with aspects of Barbara Lane's expert report.

Next week evidence from:

PSB, the company which designed the upgraded system, and then tested, commissioned and issued the compliance certificate for it;
Gilberts, the company who manufactured the dampers used;
Max Fordham, the building services engineering company who advised the TMO;
and from JS Wright, the mechanical and electrical sub-contractor for the refurbishment, who carried out the upgrade work, and employed PSB.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 9, 2021)

This week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 42: ‘They would leak as much as they leaked. They were what they were’
working links to the daily reports at the bottom of the page.

There was a procedural hearing this week in the legal action, involving 1130 separate claims made on behalf of 800 bereaved and survivors, and 140 firefighters and police officers.



> The defendants include the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC), which was the landlord of Grenfell Tower; Rydon, the lead contractor for the refurbishment; and Arconic and Celotex, the companies that supplied the combustible cladding panels and insulation respectively. Architecture firm Studio E; cladding sub-contractor Harley Facades; risk assessor Carl Stokes; fire engineers Exova; and building manager Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO) are also listed as defendants. The London Fire Commissioner and the Metropolitan Police are also listed as defendants, as they are facing claims from their employees, who were left traumatised by the events of the night.



Counsel for RBKC and the TMO asked the Court to put the proceedings on hold to allow time for negotiations over a possible settlement, via. an alternative dispute resolution process overseen by a retired Court of Appeal judge. A number of the claimants opposed this and said they wouldn't negotiate until RBKC and the TMO admitted liability. However the Court agreed to stay proceedings for nine months. (This will, of course, also allow for further evidence to emerge at the Inquiry. This module is now likely to conclude in September after the summer break).

Details (including a lot of links):
Grenfell victims set for first hearing in legal action against corporates and council
Grenfell victims’ civil case paused for settlement negotiations


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jul 9, 2021)

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."



I don't have a crystal ball, but I have a feeling that it wouldn't quite work that way.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 9, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> I don't have a crystal ball, but I have a feeling that it wouldn't quite work that way.


Yeah, the notion of having people pay for public service workers to come and have their fun was always going to be slightly flawed...


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 16, 2021)

This week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 43: ‘Contractors at the time were not generally aware of the importance of leaving holes unsealed’

links to their daily reports for those who want them


Spoiler: Links



21.07.12 - Emergency valves to turn off gas at Grenfell Tower may have been buried by refurbishment 
21.07.13 - Grenfell Tower gas work left holes which helped smoke spread through building, inquiry hears 
21.07.14 - Grenfell gas contractor should have blocked pipeline holes to stop smoke spread, says expert 
21.07.15 - KCTMO opted against installing firefighting lifts at Grenfell, claims consultant


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 22, 2021)

This week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 44: ‘I’ve never seen a fully compliant firefighting lift in any local authority building to this day, actually’ 

(The expert witness scheduled to appear yesterday afternoon and today was unwell so the Inquiry hearings finished early this week, and Inside Housing's Diary is up earlier than normal).


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 30, 2021)

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__._


----------



## Lurdan (Aug 22, 2021)

For anyone wondering how Kingspan were making out:










> 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. (...)



ETA: oops forgot the link to the article


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 7, 2021)

Summer break over then. Inquiry hearings begin again at 2.00pm today.

Peter Apps of Inside Housing has just put up a summary of some of the housing management failings by RBKC and the 'TMO' that have been looked at in this module of the Inquiry.

Inside Housing - Insight - Six key failures in the way Grenfell Tower was managed before the fire (archived)

Scheduled to give evidence all this week is Barbara Lane.


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 7, 2021)

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.



Spoiler: Dropbox links here



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


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 7, 2021)

Lurdan said:


> Inside Housing report on this afternoon's hearing
> 
> External walls should have been checked by risk assessors, expert tells Grenfell inquiry (archived)
> 
> ...


Above and beyond, Lurdan, above and beyond 👍


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 8, 2021)

Inside Housing report on today's hearings
Failure to identify disabled Grenfell Tower residents before fire 'not acceptable', inquiry hears (archived)

At 10.00pm tonight on Channel 4 *Grenfell: The Untold Story*.
Commissioned by C4 but made by the BBC Studios documentary unit, it's based on footage taken during the refurbishment.

Article about it by Peter Apps in today's Evening Standard
What really went on at Grenfell? Giving a voice to the victims of the fire four years on


----------



## Ax^ (Sep 8, 2021)

this is just going to make me angry

residence  meeting years before the fire :/


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 10, 2021)

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...


Spoiler



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





__





						Gofile - Free file sharing and storage platform
					

Gofile is a free file sharing and storage platform.  You can store and share your content of any type without any limit.




					gofile.io


----------



## BCBlues (Sep 10, 2021)

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).
> ...



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.


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 12, 2021)

Glad to hear it's of use.

Here's the transcript of this week's BBC podcast. 

Podcast transcript production slipped behind in July. I'm blaming the shortage of suitable 'drivers'. Anyhow the backlog has now been cleared.


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 17, 2021)

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.


Spoiler: Links to their written statements



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


Spoiler: Links to their 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.



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)


Spoiler: Archived versions of their daily reports



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).


----------



## BCBlues (Sep 17, 2021)

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.


----------



## likesfish (Sep 18, 2021)

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🤬


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 20, 2021)

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:
> 
> ...



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)


----------



## Lurdan (Sep 24, 2021)

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 
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).


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 1, 2021)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 49: ‘I’m not sure we’ve always taken every opportunity to learn as an organisation’ 
Working links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 8, 2021)

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.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 15, 2021)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 51: ‘We teach firefighters to expect building failure’


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 22, 2021)

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.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 28, 2021)

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

Stephanie Barwise
Danny Friedman
[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.



Spoiler: Links to written closing submissions for Module 3



*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.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 29, 2021)

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.





> 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.



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.



Spoiler: Links to written submissions



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.


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 30, 2021)

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.



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.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 5, 2021)

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.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

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)
> ...


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.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 5, 2021)

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.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 12, 2021)

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


Spoiler: 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.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 19, 2021)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 56: ‘Why didn’t we thump the table harder?’

For those who want them links to the daily reports:


Spoiler: Daily Reports



LFB mock script for call handlers did not include warnings about risk of reassuring trapped residents
Major IT problems and lack of resources hampered LFB efforts to train call handlers, Grenfell inquiry hears
LFB control room training still ‘ad hoc and lacking in structure’ two years after Grenfell, inquiry hears
LFB ‘should have worked harder’ to improve control training, says director


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 20, 2021)

Lurdan said:


> This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
> Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 56: ‘Why didn’t we thump the table harder?’
> 
> For those who want them links to the daily reports:
> ...


Thank you again for keeping us up to date with the inquiry. It's a fairly damning indictment on the LFB this week.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 26, 2021)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 56: ‘It was worse than slow, it was sluggish’

And links to the daily reports:


Spoiler: Daily Reports



LFB officer disputes accuracy of figures showing low training rates in call handlers
Description of training improvements post-Lakanal ‘overstated and misleading’, former LFB commissioner accepts
LFB 'forewarned' on cladding but failed to implement national guidance, Cotton accepts
London Fire Brigade warned government of high-rise fire fears weeks before Grenfell


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 26, 2021)

Lurdan said:


> This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
> Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 56: ‘It was worse than slow, it was sluggish’
> 
> And links to the daily reports:
> ...


On reading that I do have questions about the decision to outsource training, the selection process in general and how Babcock's won the contract if they apparently lacked the capability to create the training materials.

Thanks for posting.


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 3, 2021)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):

Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 58: ‘I don't think we deserve to ask for trust until we demonstrate different outcomes’

For those who want them links to the daily reports:


Spoiler: Daily Reports



LFB ‘complacent’ to assume large cladding fire would not happen in the UK, former commissioner accepts
LFB commissioner describes use of racist language by firefighters
Conservatism at LFB led to ‘arrogance and complacency’, chief says



The week saw the last of the evidence from the London Fire Brigade, concluding with the current Commissioner Andy Roe. As mentioned on the previous page this was the first of the four topics which Module 6 will be looking at. Because it ties in with the matters looked at in the previous module, it has been dealt with separately to those other topics, which are:

Testing and certification;
Fire risk assessment; and
The role of central government.
Next Monday and Tuesday there will be oral opening statements for these remaining topics.

On Monday after a short statement by Counsel for the Inquiry 
Stephanie Barwise for BSRs Team 1, Michael Mansfield for BSRs Team 2 (covering central government and fire risk assessments), Adrian Williamson for BSRs Team 2 (covering testing and certification), Anne Studd for the Mayor of London and Martin Seaward for the FBU.

On Tuesday Matthew Butt for the National House Building Council, Samantha Leek for the Building Research Establishment and Jason Beer for The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities.

On Wednesday and Thursday the Inquiry will start with evidence from Local Authority Building Control. There will be one further week of evidence until Thursday 16th when the Inquiry breaks for Christmas. It will return on January 24th when it will hear closing statements for Module 5 and the firefighting topic of Module 6.

Meanwhile the row over Mercedes Formula 1 team signing a sponsorship deal with Kingspan, everyone's favourite combustible insulation manufacturer, rumbles on with Michael Gove expressing his 'disappointment' over it.

Grenfell Tower: Rethink deal with insulation firm, Mercedes F1 urged - BBC News



> A spokesman for the Mercedes team said: "Our partner Kingspan has supported, and continues to support, the vitally important work of the inquiry to determine what went wrong and why in the Grenfell Tower tragedy.
> 
> "Our new partnership announced this week is centred on sustainability and will support us in achieving our targets in this area."



Can't honestly say that the sustainability of Kingspan as a business is at the top of my wish list.


----------



## BCBlues (Dec 3, 2021)

Lurdan said:


> Can't honestly say that the sustainability of Kingspan as a business is at the top of my wish list.



Can't honestly say I'm convinced either that Gove is 'disappointed' given the blatant corruption and cover ups his party are up to.

Thanks again Lurdan for the updates


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 6, 2021)

A very interesting day at the Inquiry. Here's an archived copy of Peter Apps' lunchtime report for Inside Housing:

Government ‘cover-up’ of dangerous cladding ‘one of the major scandals of our time’, lawyers tell Grenfell Inquiry 



> In shocking opening statements delivered by lawyers acting for the bereaved and survivors today, governments stretching over a 30-year period were accused of repeated “deliberate cover-ups” of the risks of dangerous cladding.



Apps really only deals with the first two opening statements on behalf of the BSRs although they provided more than enough material. They were followed by another trenchantly worded BSR opening about testing and certification, and later on a statement on behalf of the FBU which, amongst other things, went into detail about the consequences of the 'localization' of fire services and the deregulation of fire safety assessments.

Like all of the Inquiry's sessions video is online, as are some of the written statements made by core participants. There are a lot more of the latter to come. Counsel to the Inquiry gave a clearly worded hint about some of the written submissions received from official bodies which we haven't seen yet.



> By way of postscript. By the time this week is over many will have read the opening written submissions of the public or quasi-public bodies from whose witnesses we are going to hear. And will have heard what they tell you.
> 
> We have seen a number of concessions made by these bodies, particularly by DLUHC and the Home Office. You may come to wonder whether they go nearly far enough, and whether there are any further concessions to come before their witnesses come to assist us.
> 
> ...



"Their written submissions tend to suggest that they have been drafted with fingers crossed."

I'll do  some of the oral openings as web pages now the official transcript is up.


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 7, 2021)

Peter Apps produced a second more detailed Inside Housing report on yesterdays hearing.
‘One of the major scandals of our time’: key revelations as the Grenfell Tower Inquiry turns to government
It includes links to some of the background reports and stories Inside Housing have previously published. The links in that archived version are working but here they are again


Spoiler: Links



August 2018 - Government did not act after warning about Grenfell-style cladding in 2014, minutes reveal
July 2019 - Special investigation – The lost lessons of Lakanal: how politicians missed the chance to stop Grenfell
June 2021 - Special investigation: how the government missed the chance to prevent the cladding crisis in the 1990s
Sept 2021 - Cladding systems failed government-commissioned fire tests in 2004, leaked document reveals



Richard Millett's opening remarks about this part of Module 6 can be found here.  And here are web page versions of three of the oral opening statements made yesterday:

Stephanie Barwise for BSRs Team 1

Michael Mansfield for BSRs Team 2

Adrian Williamson for BSRs Team 2

The Team 2 openings both illustrated points by exhibiting documents which aren't yet on the Inquiries web site. I've added screencaps of them.

Most of the points picked up in the Inside Housing reports come from Stephanie Barwise's opening. Barwise is a corporate lawyer. She addresses the panel, making few concessions to a wider audience, and assumes familiarity with names and technical terms. You might find the Inquiries glossary of the latter useful. Nonetheless, as with her previous opening statements, she has a formidable grasp of the issues and the documentation, and a remarkable ability to put the stilleto in. 



> The Grenfell disaster is a predictable yet unintended consequence of the combination of the laudable desire to reduce carbon emissions coupled with an unbridled passion for deregulation, in particular a desire to deregulate and boost the housing construction industry. Government’s dependency on that industry resulted in government becoming the junior partner in the relationship, thereby permitting industry’s exploitation of the regulations.
> 
> Government’s response on realising the extent of the problem was to react by concealment instead of candour. The result is a prolonged period of concealment by government which should properly be regarded as one of the major scandals of our time.





> The failure to identify and address the problem of fire safety in façades has, in one sense, transcended party politics, stretching as it does across Conservative, Labour, Conservative/Liberal Democrats coalition and finally, again, Conservative governments. That said, certain political ideals, principally deregulatory policies entwined with a radical housing policy, bear primary responsibility for the astonishing period of willful blindness reflected in a failure to revise ADB properly from 1992, and a failure to review it at all from 2006 to the time of the Grenfell fire and beyond.
> 
> The events which occurred at Grenfell are not merely the product of the absence of enforcement or oversight, as government now suggests, but are an unintended consequence of a political ideology which broke free from common sense and safety constraints. That is ultimately a failure of systems.



Three short oral opening statements this morning. The most interesting (relatively speaking) on behalf of the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities which acknowledged a series of past failings. Other core participants have limited themselves to written submissions which are still being added to the Inquiry's web site.


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 8, 2021)

Last Friday: "Our new partnership announced this week is centred on sustainability".
Today: Lewis Hamilton’s Mercedes team ends deal with Grenfell firm - The Guardian

Inside Housing report about yesterday
Government ‘deeply sorry’ for failures in oversight of regulatory system before Grenfell 
"We are very sorry that we failed to properly scrutinise that people were adhering to our absolutely wonderful regulations".


----------



## BCBlues (Dec 8, 2021)

Lurdan said:


> Last Friday: "Our new partnership announced this week is centred on sustainability".
> Today: Lewis Hamilton’s Mercedes team ends deal with Grenfell firm - The Guardian
> 
> Inside Housing report about yesterday
> ...



A sharper u turn than either Hamilton or our wonderful PM could do


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 8, 2021)

BCBlues said:


> A sharper u turn than either Hamilton or our wonderful PM could do


Distinct smell of burning rubber


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 9, 2021)

Grenfell United's response to the DLUHC's 'admissions' on Tuesday.







Twitter Link

Inside Housing - Grenfell survivors slam ‘disingenuous’ and ‘deeply offensive’ government inquiry statement - 

Peter Apps of Inside Housing also produced a twitter thread succinctly setting out some of the problems with the Government's stance. It's archived here. Since it includes links to normally paywalled Inside Housing articles here it is with links to archived versions of them.



Spoiler



Peter Apps on Twitter 8th December 2021.

I think it is probably worth explaining in a bit more detail why the government's 'apology' for Grenfell yesterday was inadequate and disingenuous...

In its opening statement the government ultimately accepted two failures:

Not realising local authority building inspectors were failing to properly enforce the rules
A 'misplaced' trust in product manufacturers and contractors which was 'abused'
The implication was that it learned of these issues after the Grenfell Tower fire. However, the evidence simply does not support that claim. It is clear it knew, in some cases in quite specific terms, about both problems before the fire. Let's take the misplaced trust first.

Ultimately, this is a reference to the misleading marketing which led to the sale of highly combustible cladding materials for high rises. The government was repeatedly warned this was going on before Grenfell.

Brain Martin, its lead civil servant for the fire safety guidance, was told in July 2014 that combustible insulation was being widely used on high rises. He warned the country's largest building inspector (the NHBC) about this. They responded with a detailed explanation of how Kingspan's K15 was being used on high rises even though "testing carried out to date does not bear this out”.

What was done? With specific govt consent, guidance was weakened to make it even easier for these products to be specified.



> 20.12.03 - Key government official warned over use of Kingspan insulation on high rises in 2014



They had also been warned by the London Fire Brigade in 2009, following the Lakanal House fire, that the panels on that building did not meet the standards advertised. LFB said it believed this type of panel had been "supplied by more than one company".



> 21.09.23 - Government did not act on LFB advice to warn housing providers about combustible cladding eight years before Grenfell



It said ministers should instruct providers to check for similarly combustible materials. The govt rejected this advice, shut down the investigation and said it wanted to “..avoid giving impression that we believe all buildings of this construction are inherently unsafe”.

Not to mention that in 2002, it ran tests on a cladding system with polyethylene-cored ACM (the material later used on Grenfell) which failed so badly the 30 minute test was stopped in less than six minutes. It did nothing to ban the use of this product or warn about it.

It was warned again in 2014 that this material was in wide use in the UK due to a perceived weakness in our regulations and did not even write an FAQ to make clear that it was banned. This followed a series of large fires with the same product in the Middle East.






Not to mention further that in 1991, the government instructed that a huge fire in a cladding pilot project it was funding in Knowsley should be "played down" and never published a report revealing the cladding panels were combustible.



> 21.06.13 - Government sought to ‘play down’ cladding fire at pilot project it funded in 1990s, investigation reveals



Put all of this together and you can say that the government ::knew:: its trust in industry was 'misplaced'. It elected not to act.

What about building control? It's notable that many of the corporates have moved to blame building control. It's the easiest scapegoat - the organisation which was supposed to ensure compliance has admitted not doing so.

But once more, this does not sit easily with government. They were repeatedly warned over the years that building control were struggling. Take this response to a 2010 consultation for example:






How did govt respond? With austerity cuts to local authorities which helped reduce the number of building control inspectors by 27.4% in the next decade, at the same time as increasing their workload by pursuing policies to increase house building



> 21.04.28 - Hundreds of building control surveyor posts cut by councils since 2010, research reveals



It was also an active decision in the 1980s to marketise building control by making local authorities compete with the private sector for work. It was warned at the time and since that this would reduce standards but never lifted a finger to change this position

You also have to ask: what standards were building control actually being asked to enforce?

The govt knew guidance could allow dangerous cladding products through. It knew combustible insulation was being used in untested systems.

You can't set the rules up like this and then blame the inspectors for not enforcing different ones. If it thought the statutory provisions should not have permitted combustible cladding systems, it should have said so. Anything less was tacit consent.

Really, yesterday's apology was a means to point the finger towards other parties and spin the government's role as an unknowing outsider rather than an active participant in causing the crisis. It needs to be understood in that light


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 10, 2021)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 59: ‘Recent tests have apparently shown it continued to burn for 20 minutes after a flame was taken away’

The opening statements heard on Monday and Tuesday were covered in detail in the articles linked to above. So this diary deals with the evidence on Wednesday and Thursday from past and present employees of Local Authority Building Control, about the certificates they issued for combustible materials installed at Grenfell. In her opening statement Stephanie Barwise described the LABC as "a spineless members’ association". After hearing the evidence from them this seems a rather charitable assessment.

Here are Wednesday and Thursday's daily reports if anyone wants them.


Spoiler: Daily Reports



LABC did not correct 'misleading' Kingspan certificate despite multiple warnings, Grenfell inquiry hears
LABC did not remove Kingspan certificate despite hearing insulation 'carried on burning for 20 minutes' in fire tests


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 17, 2021)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 60: ‘You could have an exact repeat of the Dubai fire in any number of buildings in London’
Links (including, at the bottom of the page, to the daily reports) should all be working.

More evidence was heard of how useless the LABC were, followed by three days of evidence from the National House Building Council, which amongst other things is the UK's largest private building control company, and also issues warranties for the majority of newly built homes.

The NHBC addressed it's own concerns about whether combustible cladding complied with Building Regulations, and about the failure of manufacturers to conduct enough successful large-scale fire tests, by drawing up guidance which promoted the use of desktop studies, conducted by a "suitable independent UKAS accredited testing body", as a way of justifying the use of these materials. When it became clear that UKAS accredited testing bodies didn't have the capacity to deal with the volume of work


> The requirement for a UKAS-accredited testing house was removed and replaced with a requirement for the assessment to be done by “a suitably qualified fire specialist”.


What could possibly go wrong?

The Inquiry is now on it's Christmas break. It resumes on January 24th with closing statements about Module 5 and the firefighting topic of Module 6. There will then be further evidence about testing and certification.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 17, 2021)

Lurdan said:


> This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
> Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 60: ‘You could have an exact repeat of the Dubai fire in any number of buildings in London’
> Links (including, at the bottom of the page, to the daily reports) should all be working.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your continuing perseverance in making these digestible updates available for us.


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 25, 2022)

The Inquiry sat for one day yesterday to hear closing statements for Module 5 and the first topic of Module 6 (firefighting). 

Oral statements were made on behalf of Bereaved, Survivors and Relatives Teams 1 & 2, the Fire Officers Association, the Mayor of London, the Fire Brigades Union and the London Fire Commissioner. All have also made written statements - links here.

Here's the daily report from Inside Housing (archived):
Grenfell survivors call for ‘duty of candor’ and national body to oversee inquiry response

The oral statements from both BSR Teams were extremely critical of the LFB and it's responses to the Inquiry. Here are transcripts as web pages. I've added screenshots of some documents presented onscreen during the Team 1 statement, and links to documents referred to in the Team 2 statement.

Danny Friedman for BSR Team 1

Leslie Thomas for BSR Team 2

The Inquiry resumes on Monday.


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 28, 2022)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry Diary Week 61: ‘Mistakes are meant for learning, not repeating’


----------



## Lurdan (Jan 30, 2022)

The evidence which the Inquiry heard at the end of 2020 (Module 2), about how product manufacturers had gamed the testing and certification systems in order to miss-sell combustible products, led the Government to announce the setting up of the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS). It was established last April in advance of the Building Safety Bill currently going through Parliament.

Government to establish building materials regulator following Grenfell Inquiry revelations - Inside Housing
National regulation: construction products - GOV.UK

This week Inside Housing reported the OPSS had served prohibition notices on Kingspan to cease supplying Kooltherm K15 products manufactured since last August, and requiring it to arrange to recall those already sold but not yet installed. K15 had been advertised as having a Class C European rating but testing showed it only achieved Class D.

Kingspan ordered to halt sales of widely-used insulation product following fire test failures - Inside Housing (archived) - lots of background.
Kingspan told to recall Grenfell insulation - Sunday Times (archived)

Although the prohibition orders don't require affected K15 which has already been installed to be removed, developers may find themselves obliged to do so or face their properties being un-mortgageable.

K15 was one of the insulation products used on Grenfell Tower. What about the Celotex RS5000 insulation and the Arconic Reynobond 55 PE cladding which also contributed to fire spread? Both were withdrawn from sale immediately after the fire.

Although a ban on combustible products on buildings above 18 metres in height (above 5-6 stories) came into force in December 2018 they are still legal for use on buildings up to that height provided Building Control approve them. It was reported last April that three quarters of the mid-rise buildings (3-6 stories) which had cladding systems fitted in 2019 and 2020 were believed to have used combustible insulation, Kingspan being the market leader.

Inside Housing -Three-quarters of cladding systems on new medium-rise buildings use combustible materials, data shows (archived)

Kingspan claim they have since successfully tested K15 to Class C and hope to resume selling it shortly. The OPSS say enforcement action is ongoing.


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 4, 2022)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 62: ‘Did it ever occur to you that this act of collaboration was, in one sense, corrupting?’

The week was largely taken up with more evidence from the National House Building Council, (which is the UK's largest private building control company, and also issues warranties for the majority of newly built homes). I think it's fair to say they were questioned robustly about their role in signing off buildings with combustible insulation, promoting the use of 'desktop studies' to justify this and in drawing up guidance which would have made this even easier.

Yesterday the Inquiry heard that Brian Martin, the civil servant responsible for Building Regulations Guidance, had emailed the NHBC on the 16th June 2017.



> Rebuttal of Times Article:
> Apologies in advance for asking but;
> I’ve been asked to prepare a rebuttal of the assertion that PE cored ACM panels comply with the guidance in ADB.
> I’ve also been asked if an independent expert would be willing to say this (or something similar) in public?
> ...



The NHBC declined and referred him to the Building Control Alliance (BCA). The disclosure of this email has not gone down well.

The fire at Grenfell began after midnight on June 14th 2017. It was not brought under control until 24 hours later on the 15th, and for some hours after that firefighters were still dealing with pockets of fire and beginning the operations to recover bodies. Fingers were pointed at the role of the cladding in fire spread from the start. The make of the cladding panels used was soon established from the planning documents for the refurbishment.

At midnight on the 15th the Times published two articles on it's website which then appeared in the next morning's paper.
Grenfell Tower: fire-resistant cladding is just £5,000 more expensive  and US banned cladding that was used on Grenfell Tower. They stated "The PE panels used in Grenfell conformed to British regulations" and "The PE panels conform to UK standards but are rated as “flammable” in Germany."

By early afternoon Brian Martin was looking for 'independent experts' who would publicly confirm the Government's line that polyethylene-cored cladding panels did not comply with Building Regulation Guidance.











Link to twitter thread. (The article it links to is linked to in the Grenfell Diary).






Link to tweet.

Mr Martin will be giving evidence later in this module.


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 11, 2022)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 63: ‘It came after the general move towards deregulation. So more regulation was not welcome’ 

Working links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page. 
(As with other pages archived at archive.vn you will find that links to YouTube videos don't play on the page but the 'watch on YouTube' option works).

Evidence from the United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) about their monitoring of the Building Research Establishment, from the Centre for Window and Cladding Technology (CWCT) which issued influential guidance to the cladding industry, and from the first of a number of witnesses from the Building Research Establishment.

The Inquiry has previously looked at the BRE's role in large-scale fire testing and its misuse by product manufacturers. This week was about it's role in investigating and monitoring fires on behalf of the Government, and it's failure to flag up that Building Regulations did not adequately address the issue of combustible materials used in cladding systems.

Aside from looking at failings by these specific organisations, this is laying the groundwork for the evidence to be taken from civil servants in the MCLG (as it was then known) and from politicians later in this module.


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 18, 2022)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 64: ‘I didn’t think ACM would be suitable for use in any high-rise buildings. I don’t think anyone did’ 

The daily reports for those who want them


Spoiler: Links



Mon/Tue - Government failed to warn of ACM cladding dangers despite 2002 test showing ‘catastrophic’ fire 
Wed - BRE scientist did not clarify guidance on Grenfell-style cladding despite request 
Thu - BRE described as ‘buckpassing incompetents’ after inaction on cladding warning



(You may find that accessing links to pages at archive.vn you are required to complete an "are you a human being" Cloudflare captcha. These links should be working, There might, however, be issues with older ones in this thread).

More evidence this week from senior staff at the Building Research Establishment. The Inquiry had previously heard that, despite believing that Building Regulations Guidance prohibited the use of combustible cladding panels on buildings above 18 metres high, the BRE had failed to help produce interim guidance which made this clear, after saying that it would. This failure was explored at length. 

More evidence from the BRE next week followed by the first witness from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 25, 2022)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 65: ‘Unless the government does something now about ACM panels, people will die’

There are working links to the daily reports at the bottom of the page.

(The Cloudflare issues with Archive.vn links I mentioned last week seem to have been sorted out. However if you do have any problems accessing pages I'd be grateful if you could let me know).

One of the issues that has come up over the last few weeks, and will continue to do so now the Inquiry has begun taking evidence from civil servants and the politicians in charge of them, concerns the meaning of the terms 'limited combustibility ' and 'Class 0' used in Building Regulation Guidance. Peter Apps posted a useful short twitter thread explaining this here. It's archived as a web page here.

Much of the week was taken up with evidence from Debbie Smith, a former Managing Director of the Building Research Establishment. It went over the range of issues BRE witnesses have been questioned about in previous weeks :- the consequences of the privatization of the BRE. The nature of the relationship between the BRE and Government, and between the BRE and the companies it carried out material and large-scale fire testing for. The BRE's role in developing the regime of large-scale fire testing, which was supposed to determine whether combustible products used on the outside of buildings complied with Building Regulations. The adequacy of the information the BRE gave Government about the results of it's testing work and it's investigations of fires. And whether the way that information was presented was affected by the commercial relationships with manufacturers or by pressure from Government.

There were some interesting moments. Right at the end of her evidence Debbie Smith was asked some blunt questions about whether the access Phil Clark, a former BRE employee, had been given to BRE records in order to prepare his evidence to the Inquiry back in Module 2, had anything to do with the fact that some key documents have not been located. She was also questioned robustly about why, in the immediate aftermath of the Grenfell fire,  the BRE had not drawn the Government's attention to the fact that ACM panels had completely failed a large-scale fire test commissioned by the Government and conducted by the BRE back in 2001. (This only emerged at all last year after a document was leaked to the BBC). Or to the fact that prior to ambiguously-worded amendments to Building Regulation Guidance in 2006 the use of combustible cladding materials had been permitted. Or that those ambiguously-worded amendments had then created confusion about whether such materials were permitted or not. BRE witnesses have insisted they were unaware that both before and after those amendments combustible cladding materials were being widely used in practise. They have admitted they had significant concerns about the activities of insulation manufacturers. In both cases the adequacy of the information they gave Government about these issues was challenged.

On Thursday afternoon the first civil servant began giving evidence. He is back on Monday and the Inquiry will then hear from others.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Feb 28, 2022)

Lurdan said:


> ...On Thursday afternoon *the first civil servant began giving evidence. He is back on Monday* and the Inquiry will then hear from others.


Report in the _Graun_:



> A senior official has admitted the government knew 15 years before the Grenfell Tower disaster that plastic-filled cladding panels – which fuelled the fatal fire – burned “fast and fierce” and he believed they should not be used on tall buildings.
> 
> But the results of tests were not published, and on Monday Anthony Burd, the principal fire safety professional and later head of technical policy in the government’s building regulations division from 2000 to 2013, denied there was a cover-up.
> 
> ...Burd said the results should have been published but denied that this did not happen because the government feared it would trigger “an immediate cladding crisis”...He told the inquiry that the damning results had instead “fallen down between the department and Building Research Establishment”, which the government commissioned to test 14 cladding systems in large-scale fires, including five with rainscreen panels, all of which failed.











						Fire safety official admits tests showed cladding danger 15 years before Grenfell
					

In evidence to inquiry, Anthony Burd denies there was a cover-up of the results of taxpayer-funded tests




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## BCBlues (Feb 28, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> Report in the _Graun_:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Shocking stuff. Its easy under our parliamentary system to kick problems down the road and let someone else take the flack later on, even if it's the same ruling party. I think this is a prime example of that. 
(Then I look at Russia right now and see the damage having someone like Putin in control for too long can cause).


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 28, 2022)

Lunchtime Inside Housing report about this morning's evidence
Former official ‘can see why people would think’ government covered up risk of dangerous cladding for 16 years

Anthony Burd, the former DCLG civil servant who has been giving evidence, was originally scheduled for Friday and today, but they only got as far as events in 2004 and he is now back tomorrow. He was in post until 2013 so, amongst other things, I imagine this may include the first evidence from DCLG staff about the response to the coroner's recommendations after the Lakanal House fire.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Feb 28, 2022)

Jesus none of these people will be punished for any of these long lists of failures and ignoring issues.


----------



## Chilli.s (Mar 1, 2022)

Artaxerxes said:


> Jesus none of these people will be punished for any of these long lists of failures and ignoring issues.


Absolutely, what a poor cover up, drag it out till it's so long ago, lessons will be learned. The same old shit.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 1, 2022)

Inside Housing report of today's hearing
Fire minister warned of 'significant reputational harm' to government from deregulation in 2011

Anthony Burd was questioned about degregulation, the Department's response to the Lakanal House fire and the ambiguous rewording of Building Regulation Guidance.

Tomorrow another civil servant, Bob Ledsome, who was deputy director of the Building Regulations Division, of what was then called the Department for Communities and Local Government.
Bereaved, Survivors and Relatives Team 2 discussed him in their written opening submission (PDF) for this module of the Inquiry.



> 98. The Deputy Director of the Building Regulations Division was Bob Ledsome from 2011. The Department dealt with complex Building Regulations and Building Control systems. Two major pressures were to be countenanced; the Red Tape Challenge from 2012 and the Housing Implementation Task Force in 2015, whose remit was to deregulate the building industry.
> 
> 99. The flow of regulation was controlled by a measure already described - one-in-two-out, and, by 2016, three-out. This was reflected in the 2011-2013 review of the Building Regulations. Building control processes were 'simplified' by removing prescribed inspections with a move towards a risk-based approach. It allowed spurious products to be marketed under a 'green' banner. In the background was a serious depletion of resources and capacity. The Department was reorganised, and the number of staff shrunk by a third. Additionally, there was a high turnover of Directors.





> 100. This was compounded by unsatisfactory overview. For example: "there was no specific mechanism to monitor changes in building design, construction practice, and use of materials. " This was not considered to be the function of the Department. The Approved Documents provided the guidance, and it was left to industry to get on with it. Quite why the Department thought this is unclear, but undoubtedly it was principally driven by Government preferential treatment of business enterprise. The repercussions have been exposed in earlier modules, and create a non-interventionist fire-led environment, in which deaths are risked, dependent on BRE research on 'fires of special interest', rather than a proactive approach to Building Control approvals.
> 
> 101. Mr Ledsome was experienced; he had been at the Department for many years, had knowledge of Garnock Court, BR 135 and Lakanal, and had awareness of numerous warnings about compliance failure and risks from cladding. Given this, we ask straightforward questions: Why not simply decide that combustible cladding must be banned? Was this discussed? Was there anyone else with the equivalent level of understanding and appreciation?


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 4, 2022)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 66: ‘Was there a cover up?’

Monday and Tuesday's daily reports were posted above. Here are the other two.


Spoiler: Daily Reports



Government considered scrapping building control entirely as part of red tape review 

Senior official branded government's response to fire safety concerns 'appalling' in post-Grenfell review



After the evidence from Anthony Burd on Monday and Tuesday, which dealt with some the technical issues involved (how the process of switching from UK to European fire performance standards stalled with both then run in parallel; how, despite knowledge of the serious problems with the UK Class 0 standard, Building Regulation Guidance was only rewritten in a way which arguably made it less clear whether combustible cladding panels were permitted, and so on), his former boss Bob Ledsome gave evidence.

Burd, and other civil servants who will be giving evidence, were specifically recruited because of their professional background and technical knowledge. Ledsome by contrast was a senior generalist civil servant responsible for overseeing Building Regulation and Building Control regulation and implementing Government policy. A Sir Humphrey if you will. And that was exactly how he came across except there was nothing at all funny about it.

Obviously in the 'merry-go-round of buck-passing’, which was referred to at the opening of phase 2, Government ministers will be blaming the civil servants. But IMO it's impossible to feel the slightest sympathy given what we've heard. After the Lakanal House inquest, then minister Eric Pickles gave an undertaking to the Coroner to rewrite Building Regulation Guidance by 2017. The deregulation agenda of the Coalition and Tory Governments, and repeated changes of ministers, created serious challenges to delivering this. But it became clear as Ledsome was taken through the minutiae of departmental procedure, that the failure to do this lay squarely with the civil servants. And included a failure to adequately acknowledge the fire safety issues involved.

Ledsome is scheduled to return on Wednesday next week. On Monday and Tuesday evidence from Richard Harral who replaced Anthony Burd. After Ledsome evidence from Ken Knight, chief fire and rescue advisor to the Home Office and then Dennis Davis of the Fire Sector Federation. However as we have seen over the last couple of weeks the timetable is subject to slippage.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 11, 2022)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 67: ‘When exposed to a fire, the aluminium melts away and exposes the polyethylene. Whoosh!’ 
(Links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page).

Some very interesting evidence sessions IMO, particularly Richard Harral on Tuesday. It doesn't really come over in the Diary but in marked contrast to the defensiveness shown by his boss Bob Ledsome, Harral was very clear in his account of the Department's failings and his view of the reasons for them.

Next week Louise Upton (Home Office) and Melanie Dawes (former Permanent Secretary at the DCLG from 2015). Scheduled to begin giving evidence on Thursday, Brian Martin, who was DCLG policy lead for a number of parts of the Building Regulations and associated guidance, including Part B (Fire Safety). His name has come up repeatedly during the Inquiry and parts of the questioning. particularly over the last couple of weeks, have been directly about him. It's fair to say there is very great interest in his evidence which will clearly take some days.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 18, 2022)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry week 68: ‘Can we agree that was a pretty dangerous thing to have, all this falling on one man’s shoulders?’

(Links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page. All links should be working)

Thursday was day 250 of the public hearings in Phase 2 of the Inquiry.

Another very interesting week. First Louise Upton, head of the fire safety policy team, originally within the DCLG (currently the DLUHC - it's a department which has changed names more often than a dodgy builder) but which was moved to the Home Office. Then the most senior former civil servant the Inquiry will hear from, Melanie Dawes, formerly DCLG Permanent Secretary, currently the chief executive of OFCOM.

And lastly the first day of evidence from Brian Martin. Originally from a local authority building control background, between 1999 to 2008 Martin was seconded to the DCLG from the Building Research Establishment. He then moved to the Department as a policy lead in 2008, and became the DCLG's in-house expert on the fire safety aspects of the Building Regulations and associated guidance. After the fire he was promoted to Head of Technical Policy. At about the time that this module of the Inquiry began last autumn, (and also at the point that Michael Gove took over the Department, amongst other things to reset the Government's post-Grenfell response), Martin was in his words "encouraged to find an alternative post" and currently works in the planning directorate.


> The challenges associated with my attendance at the Inquiry and the attention I was getting in the press was making it increasingly  difficult for me to carry out my duties.



Martin will be giving evidence all next week (and possibly into the week after). It was made quite clear on this first day of evidence that he will be questioned very robustly about his role in the DCLG's failure to spot the growing use of combustible materials in cladding systems, to address the inadequacy of the Building Regulation guidance which was interpreted as permitting this, and his failures both to clarify the guidance when asked to, and to flag the importance of the issue up within the DCLG hierarchy. All of this despite multiple specific warnings and 'learning opportunities' from the early 2000s onwards.

We will get into the meat of his evidence - the period when he played a more direct role in forming policy, both by commission and omission, next week.

As I said last week people have been looking forward to Martin's evidence with keen interest. It is perhaps worth stressing that while Martin played a very significant role in how it became possible to wrap buildings in combustible materials, this in no way exonerates every other fucker involved at every level of the manufacturing, construction, housing management, product certification and building control (etc etc etc) sectors.

The Inside Housing Grenfell Diaries are doing a very good job IMO (obviously from a housing association industry perspective) but by now there is a very great deal to cover each week. If you're not already listening to it I recommend the weekly BBC podcasts as another extremely useful overview.


----------



## Lurdan (Mar 25, 2022)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
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’

(Links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page. All links should be working)

Inquiry Chairman Moore-Bick tested positive for covid at the end of last week. He chaired this week's hearings by remote link and is due back in person next week.

Four more days of evidence from Brian Martin. He's due back on Monday and Tuesday. A great deal of ground covered. The diary does a good job but as I said last week it will be worth listening to the BBC podcast as well.

After Martin the first member of the Government is scheduled to give evidence on Wednesday. Brandon Lewis, currently the NI Secretary, was an under-secretary of state at the DCLG from 2012-14 and then Minister from 2014-16. Presumably the response to the Lakanal fire and the deregulation policies of the coalition and Cameron governments will come up. Following him James Wharton who was an under-secretary of state at the DCLG from 2015-16.

In advance of their evidence Peter Apps put up a link to a 2018 Inside Housing article - How politics prevented the chance of stopping Grenfell. At the bottom of it is a link to their long three part 2018 article The Paper Trail: the Failure of Building Regulations.


----------



## GarveyLives (Mar 30, 2022)

Lurdan said:


> Martin will be giving evidence all next week (and possibly into the week after). It was made quite clear on this first day of evidence that he will be questioned very robustly about his role in the DCLG's failure to spot the growing use of combustible materials in cladding systems, to address the inadequacy of the Building Regulation guidance which was interpreted as permitting this, and his failures both to clarify the guidance when asked to, and to flag the importance of the issue up within the DCLG hierarchy. All of this despite multiple specific warnings and 'learning opportunities' from the early 2000s onwards.
> 
> We will get into the meat of his evidence - the period when he played a more direct role in forming policy, both by commission and omission, next week.



I think we get the gist of his attitude towards these matters:



> _"A senior official told colleagues that a coroner’s recommendation to encourage housing providers to fit sprinklers in high-rise blocks was “essentially pointless” and *they did not need to “kiss her backside*”._



29 March 2022:  Senior official said government did not need to ‘kiss the backside’ of Lakanal House coroner



> _"A civil servant has admitted *he could have potentially prevented the Grenfell Tower fire on a number of occasions* ..."_



30 March 2022:  Grenfell Tower: Official admits he could have prevented fire








(Source: BBC)

*"Brian Martin, the head of technical policy for building regulation, told the public inquiry that he found it hard to express how sorry he was."*

*Not as sorry as the friends and relatives of the people who lost their lives.*​


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 1, 2022)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 70: ‘Show me the bodies’ 
(Links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page. All links should be working)

Next week the last three former ministers to give evidence: On Monday Stephen Williams who was under-secretary of state at the DCLG with responsibility for building regulations from 2013-15. Tuesday Gavin Barwell, minister of state for housing and planning from 2016-17. Wednesday and Thursday Eric Pickles who was secretary of state for communities and local government from 2010-15.

Not sure what further witnesses are due to give evidence in this module of the Inquiry. If these are in fact the last then next we will presumably hear opening statements for Module 4 (looking at the response of local and central government in the immediate aftermath of the fire), before the Inquiry breaks for a week over Easter (week commencing 18th April).


----------



## BCBlues (Apr 1, 2022)

“Brian Martin’s reply to me was, ‘Where’s the evidence? Show me the bodies,’ said Mr Webb. “It was as if he needed a disaster before he or the government would act.”

He, Brian Martin, should have been dragged down the morgue after Grenfell to see the charred bodies and told "there they are you c***".

Thanks again Lurdan for the updates.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 6, 2022)

Government in action / Government inaction


----------



## brogdale (Apr 7, 2022)

What a massive cunt.


----------



## existentialist (Apr 7, 2022)

brogdale said:


> What a massive cunt.



The problem. Right there.

TBF, it's as well he wasn't in Grenfell at the time - that amount of inflammable lard would have made things much worse.


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 8, 2022)

This weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower week 71: ‘I have changed my schedules to fit this in. I do have an extremely busy day meeting people’ 
(Links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page. All links should be working)

That was the last week of evidence for Module 6. Next week the start of Module 4 which will look at


> the performance of local and central government in the immediate aftermath of the disaster.



On Monday a short opening from Counsel to the Inquiry setting out in more detail the issues the Module will be focussing on. Then opening statements from  Bereaved Survivors and Residents Teams 1 and 2 and Imran Khan, who will undoubtedly have much to say. Followed by the Met, RBKC, the Mayor of London, the Cabinet Office and the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. 

The Module will presumably hear more evidence from local and national politicians and officials. But before getting to them it is starting on Tuesday with several days of evidence from the bereaved survivors and residents themselves.


----------



## two sheds (Apr 9, 2022)

brogdale said:


> What a massive cunt.



Clearly talked to his PR adviser during the break.


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 11, 2022)

Twitter thread by Peter Apps of Inside Housing about a few of the points made by Danny Friedman in his opening on behalf of BSR Team 1.





Twitter thread link



> Danny Friedman QC says this slur was only being pushed by RBKC, with police saying there were no public order issues. "RBKC's efforts to instil fear of the crowd against our clients could not have underscored more why it was inappropriate for response to remain under its control".
> 
> Inquiry has heard this morning that RBKC rejected external support offered at 7.44am on the morning of the blaze to avoid looking like "we can't cope". Meanwhile, survivors were left without support in "unspeakably terrible" conditions.





> At the same time, KCTMO was instructing a PR firm to put out messages about the compliance of the refurbishment at 11am on the morning of the blaze - before the rescue operation had been declared over.
> 
> Central govt failed to intervene, assuming RBKC was "a tight and steady ship" and that its chief executive Nicholas Holgate would be a competent Gold Commander because he had once worked at The Treasury.


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 11, 2022)

Lunchtime Inside Housing report on this mornings opening statements:
RBKC sought to ‘instill fear’ about Grenfell survivors as its response to fire ‘collapsed’, inquiry hears 

Assuming the transcript is put up in the usual way today (occasionally it isn't) I'll start transcribing some of the opening statements as web pages and post links tonight. Written submissions from the core participants making oral submissions are being put up as the various Counsel start speaking. Links on this page here.

As I write this Counsel for RBKC has just finished making a long list of admissions about it's manifest and very visible failings immediately after the fire.


----------



## dessiato (Apr 11, 2022)

One thing, as much as anything, that offends me about all this, is that the enquiry is still grinding on. It's as if the powers that be Hope that by the time they've finished it will all be forgotten by the majority.


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 12, 2022)

Here is a transcript of the opening statement by Richard Millett setting out what this module of the Inquiry will be dealing with.

As will become apparent over the next few weeks, the different pieces of legislation and statutory guidance which provide the framework for the States response to major emergencies and disasters, are implemented by a network of local bodies, all of it with an arsenal of annoying acronyms. Millett gave a compact outline of this structure but was obliged to use a graphic to illustrate the different bodies and their relationship. That part of his presentation was of necessity a bit technical.

After that, however, he went through the six topics this module will be looking at. That part starts here.

The six topics, which will be dealt with in roughly this order, are:

BSRs. Evidence from those who were directly affected in the immediate aftermath of the fire.
RBKC. Their responsibilities, plans, policies, and procedures, and their response to the consequences of the fire.
The TMO. It's role in the aftermath of the fire.
The voluntary, community and faith sectors.
London Resilience (the body co-ordinating disaster and emergency planning in London).
Central Government. It's plans and procedures at the time of the fire, and it's response in practise.
More detail at that link. We will apparently be hearing from one or two people who have already given evidence in previous modules, including former DCLG Permanent Secretary Melanie Dawes, and a particular "favourite", Robert Black, the former CEO of the so-called 'TMO' which managed Grenfell Tower.

And here is a transcript of the opening submission made by Danny Friedman for BSR Team 1.

When the Grenfell fire occurred it seemed to me that there were two appalling events one after the other. The first was the fire itself. That was the subject of Phase 1 of the Inquiry. So far much of Phase 2 has been looking at the background to the fire, from the refurbishment which wrapped the building in combustibles, all the way through to the establishment of the framework of inadequate and unenforced building regulations under which it was signed off. With this Module we come back to the second appalling event. The catastrophic failure of local and national Government to deal with the aftermath of the fire.

Five years after the fire it might be imagined that 'Inquiry fatigue' would have set in, and that it would be difficult to summon up some of the rage provoked at the time by that second event. I can only say that Friedman's opening succeeded in doing that for me. I will (fear not) be posting more links this week, including transcribed versions of the other two BSR opening statements. However if you only have time to read one I would recommend this one.

ETA: Tuesday morning. I've corrected an error in the fourteenth paragraph of Friedman's opening, which begins "In the aftermath", where some words were missing in the final sentence.


Spoiler: The corrected sentence



All of this matters because in the UK there is no statutory or administrative concept of a disaster, only an emergency, defined in the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 as an event or situation which threatens serious damage to human welfare.


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 15, 2022)

Not sure this is my idea of Easter bank holiday reading however.

I posted Monday morning's Inside Housing daily report above. There was a second IH report that day mostly based on comments about Eric Pickles in one of the opening submissions.
And Lucie Heath wrote a story for yesterday's Guardian about the evidence from former Ministers.
Ex-ministers could have shown humility and regret at the Grenfell inquiry. They didn’t - Lucie Heath - The Guardian

I posted a link to a transcript of Danny Friedman's opening statement for BSR Team 1 above. Here are links to the other BSR openings.

Imran Khan for those BSR's represented by Imran Khan & Partners

Leslie Thomas for BSR Team 2

Here is this weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 72: ‘The system isn’t broken. It was built this way’

(Links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page. All links should be working)

Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday heard evidence from those directly affected by the aftermath of the fire. Relatives of some of those who died who had gone to the Tower on the day of the fire, former occupants of the Tower who got out of it and residents of the finger blocks in front of the tower who were evacuated from their homes for some time, described their different experiences over that first week. Common to all of them was the complete failure of any even marginally adequate official disaster relief operation. They also spoke about the support from the local community, and about the birth of Grenfell United in one of the improvised 'rest centres'. Some of it was very difficult listening. The BBC podcast will presumably be up as usual later today. This is another week where hearing some of the words spoken is as important as reading them IMO.

The first to give evidence was Karim Mussilhy, one of the bereaved. At the end he said this.






 The Inquiry resumes on Monday 25th.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 15, 2022)

Lurdan said:


> Not sure this is my idea of Easter bank holiday reading however.
> 
> I posted Monday morning's Inside Housing daily report above. There was a second IH report that day mostly based on comments about Eric Pickles in one of the opening submissions.
> And Lucie Heath wrote a story for yesterday's Guardian about the evidence from former Ministers.
> ...


That last quote should be flyposted round the country,on leaflets through doors, spread on every social media platform


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 15, 2022)

Lurdan said:


> Not sure this is my idea of Easter bank holiday reading however.
> 
> I posted Monday morning's Inside Housing daily report above. There was a second IH report that day mostly based on comments about Eric Pickles in one of the opening submissions.
> And Lucie Heath wrote a story for yesterday's Guardian about the evidence from former Ministers.
> ...


Thank you for spending your good Friday morning putting this together for us


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 15, 2022)

dessiato said:


> One thing, as much as anything, that offends me about all this, is that the enquiry is still grinding on. It's as if the powers that be Hope that by the time they've finished it will all be forgotten by the majority.


Yeh I'm sure it's been forgotten by most people already and tbh five years on it's receded in my own mind despite the utter horror and incandescent anger and sorrow I felt at the time and for many months after. Since then we've had so much rotten shit in this country that it'd be very difficult for Grenfell to retain the prominence it deserves. But reading this thread brings back that anger and sorrow for the survivors and bereaved and hatred - not too strong a word - for the scum who caused the fire and who've prospered since.


----------



## dessiato (Apr 15, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh I'm sure it's been forgotten by most people already and tbh five years on it's receded in my own mind despite the utter horror and incandescent anger and sorrow I felt at the time and for many months after. Since then we've had so much rotten shit in this country that it'd be very difficult for Grenfell to retain the prominence it deserves. But reading this thread brings back that anger and sorrow for the survivors and bereaved and hatred - not too strong a word - for the scum who caused the fire and who've prospered since.


And continue to prosper


----------



## Lurdan (Apr 29, 2022)

Here is this weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 73: ‘Most people would regard that as hopeless’

(Links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page. All links should be working)

Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday heard evidence from two members of RBKC's contingency planning unit and their line manager. The unit was responsible both for advance planning for emergencies and disasters, and for initiating the response when events occurred. The last of them to give evidence, Rebecca Blackburn, gave an extremely blunt account of RBKC's failings over the first couple of days. The Diary gives a good account of their evidence.

On Monday two more BSRs gave evidence about their experiences. First, Nabil Choucair, one of the bereaved (his brother gave evidence before Easter). Then Hanan Wahabi, a former resident of the tower who had been a member of the Grenfell Action Group during the refurbishment.  She and her family survived the fire. Her brother, his wife and their three children, who also lived in the tower, did not. At the end of her evidence she read a statement she had prepared. An extract is quoted in the Grenfell Diary. Here is the whole thing.



Spoiler: Hanan Wahabi's closing statement



*Counsel to the Inquiry Zeenat Islam*: If we could just go to paragraph 82 of [your] statement, please, you say:

"It was clear that RBKC and the government failed us in their response. I hope nothing like this ever happens again. However, there needs to be plans in place which ensure a coordinated response which enables people have access to the support and services they need. Families should be treated with dignity.”

You have just touched on this, but if there’s anything else you would like to add, what lessons do you feel need to be learned from the experience that you and your family had in the immediate aftermath?

*Hanan Wahabi*: I've actually written some words to answer this question, because I... I mean, thank you for allowing me to take my time to respond to the questions today, that has helped, but part of my PTSD is I do kind of get tongue-twisted sometimes, the simplest of vocabulary just, you know, go. So I wanted to prepare something that I feel comfortable reading, and I’ve got that with me today to answer this question.

*Zeenat Islam*: Of course.

*Hanan Wahabi*: Thank you, first of all, thank you very much.

So the last time I was asked that question, I implored Sir Martin to ensure there was change. I want to thank you and the entire Inquiry team for the work you are doing to expose the truth about the failings that led to 72 preventable deaths, including that of my dear brother, Abdulaziz, his wife, Faouzia, and the beloved children, Yasin, Nur Huda and Mehdi.

There are some things I'd like to say that go beyond my statements and, to some extent, also beyond the scope of the Inquiry. These are not only addressed to you, but to everybody working in housing, the built environment, local and central government.

First, to the community, volunteers, charities, and religious groups who rushed to our aid from all over the country and the world, who were present and supported us in the best way they could, words can never express my gratitude. Thank you for everything you did and continue to do.

I know the authorities, be they local or central government, may feel that they have contributed to the support during the aftermath. For me personally and my family, this is far from the truth. No one from government looked for us. No one helped us. We were left exposed and vulnerable, and when the authorities eventually did come, it felt like a tick-box exercise. We were treated like numbers, not humans. This is something that we still feel today.

In my experience, in the eyes of local and central government, our Grenfell and North Kensington community are second class, the people with needs and problems. I cannot help but feel that had our community lived in a different part of the borough, on the more affluent side, had we been from a different class, had we been less ethnic, the response in the aftermath would have been immediate. It would have been present. It would have been felt.

We may be different, we may be diverse, but we are people. Think of the different professions in the tower, of the challenges that so many from the BAME communities had overcome prior to the fire in 2017. Think of the dignity demonstrated by those of us impacted over the last five years. We are human beings. We contribute. We pay tax. We provide leadership in our communities. In truth, our differences and diversity are a contribution to the borough and the country.

Some people think about the aftermath as straight after the fire, but the aftermath continues today, five years later. The aftermath will last for years to come, and the impact will be generational. You cannot imagine what it is like having no one there to help you, to give you any glimpse or bit of information, anything, any strings to hold onto. When you don’t know what’s happened to your loved ones, it’s torture. We experienced torture. The aftermath was torture. It was physically and mentally torturing.

The Prime Minister promised that we’ll be housed in three weeks. Four of us, including my 16-year-old son and 8-year-old daughter, were moved into one hotel room, a room I remained in for 18 months. Four individuals who were survivors and bereaved. Can you imagine the PTSD, the impact it had on us as a family? And that is just me. Imagine what it is like for all other families, bereaved, survivors. Imagine what it is like for my mum. She lost her son, her grandchildren, her daughter-in-law. No one checked on her. No one asked about her.

And I ought to say something about the children. They are the most forgotten. Even those who had parents who had lived, in the aftermath of the fire, the children experienced life as if they were orphans. We weren't and couldn’t be there for our children. We couldn't even be there for us.

My body has never experienced so much pain since 14 June 2017. Physical, internal and emotional pain. Life isn’t easy anymore. Life is a challenge. Fear is constant. Nightmares never go. Inner peace is what we yearn for. Even when we feel like it's going to be okay, it’s just a matter of time that a memory, a thought, a feeling, an experience will interrupt that, and then we’re back there again, like it's happening all over again.

You may see us smiling at times, you may see children laughing, but that is just the part that avoids and masks. This tragedy has pierced wounds in each and every one of us in ways that one cannot imagine. We may now and again put plasters to hide our wounds, but they are still there, and sometimes, many times, those plasters fall off.

To this day, the support that we are given is only provided after jumping through hoops, whether it’s fighting to get house repairs done or get the medical support we need. We are forever asked to prove that we have been impacted, forever having to prove our pain. We are constantly having the impact assessed and measured to prove that we need mental or physical therapy, to prove we are still in pain.

Is it not enough that we walked out of the building and had to watch my family, my brother and his family die? We still need support. Our children need support. Local and central government cannot be allowed to abandon us, to wash their hands of us, when they think they have done enough. What happened to us was through their failings. Our loss, our pain, our wounds are because of them.

This duty of care needs to extend beyond us to the rest of the country, to the thousands of families who live in communities like us, like we had at Grenfell, who are still treated as second-class citizens. It needs to extend to the thousands impacted by the building safety crisis up and down the country.

We are still impacted. We still hurt. We still remember. We haven’t forgotten. All the issues we have, the PTSD, the mental and physical trauma that you see as problems in us, this isn’t who we were; this is who some of us are now because of what the government did to us. Because of your absence, because you were not there, because you did not show that you cared, you have sapped all the energy from us. Those that caused this tragedy need to be held accountable. Their duty of care to us now has no limit.

Thank you.



Starting Tuesday next week evidence from two former senior RBKC officers, Sue Redmond, director of adult social care, and Laura Johnson, director of housing. Then Nicholas Holgate, RBKC's former Town Clerk (chief executive) who took overall charge of it's response to the fire.


----------



## BCBlues (Apr 29, 2022)

Lurdan said:


> Here is this weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
> Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 73: ‘Most people would regard that as hopeless’
> 
> (Links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page. All links should be working)
> ...



That is a heartbreaking read


----------



## baldrick (Apr 29, 2022)

Lurdan said:


> Here is this weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
> Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 73: ‘Most people would regard that as hopeless’
> 
> (Links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page. All links should be working)
> ...


What a devastating statement. 

She writes so beautifully, it's horrific to imagine what she has been through. And she is just one of many hundreds of people still suffering after Grenfell.


----------



## Lurdan (May 6, 2022)

Here is this weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 74: ‘Do you agree that RBKC was ill-prepared and incapable to meet its duties’ 

Here are the daily reports. Links should be working.


Spoiler: Daily Reports



Tuesday - RBKC staff were ‘rabbits in headlights’ due to lack of structure in Grenfell response, inquiry hears 

Wednesday - Residents displaced by Grenfell fire left sleeping rough after blaze, inquiry hears 

Thursday - Former RBKC chief denies failure to request support in Grenfell aftermath was 'politically' motivated



Next week: on Monday Teresa Brown the former head of housing for the 'TMO'. On Tuesday morning Robert Black it's former CEO. Then evidence from people running three of the rest centres which opened after the fire and from the British Red Cross. On Thursday John Hethrington the deputy head of London Resilience at the time of the fire.


----------



## Lurdan (May 13, 2022)

Here is this weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 75: ‘It still shocks me to the core that that’s how we treat our citizens in this country’ 

Here are the daily reports. 


Spoiler: Daily Reports



Monday - KCTMO mistakenly listed people who died in Grenfell fire as ‘safe’ in wake of tragedy 

Tuesday - Civil servants feared KCTMO staff were destroying computer records in aftermath of Grenfell fire 

Wednesday - RBKC staff swore at Grenfell survivors amid ‘shambles’ at main relief centre, inquiry hears 

Thursday - Omitting tower block fire from list of major risks to London was ‘serious failing’



Next week: On Monday John Hetherington of London Resilience completes his evidence. Then Mark Sawyer and John Barradell of London Local Authority Gold. Barradell, the CEO of the City of London took charge of the post-fire response when RBKC finally accepted that they could not cope. He is followed on Wednesday by Emma Spragg of the British Red Cross. And then Katharine Hammond of the Cabinet Office.


----------



## Lurdan (May 18, 2022)

Government rejects Grenfell Inquiry recommendations on evacuation of buildings as ‘not proportionate’ - Inside Housing



> The government has announced it will not implement critical recommendations of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry which called for legal obligations to plan for the evacuation of high-rise buildings and disabled residents in the event of a serious fire. In a consultation document published today, the Home Office said it does not believe it is “proportionate” to follow the recommendations and will continue to place its faith in ‘stay put’ advice in most buildings. Instead, it is launching a new consultation on sharing the location of disabled residents with fire services, but will only apply this to buildings known to have serious fire safety issues.  (...)





> While it was rarely enforced, pre-Grenfell law and guidance was clear that all residents must be able to evacuate a building unaided, with only a 2011 guide published by the Local Government Association on “purpose built blocks of flats” suggesting this was unnecessary for disabled residents in general needs blocks of flats.
> 
> This means that today’s consultation effectively proposes a watering down of the pre-Grenfell legal position.


----------



## Lurdan (May 18, 2022)

Grenfell United's response:





Twitter thread link



> For five years we’ve had to endure Government’s games. We’ve been forced to hold them to account to create a legacy of meaningful change for our loved ones. To prevent another Grenfell.
> 
> Today’s news has left us speechless. Outraged.





> 72 people died at Grenfell. 15 people had disabilities. They had no personal evacuation plans and no means of escape. Our loved ones did not stand a chance.
> 
> Government failed them in every way.





> The report from Phase 1 of the Grenfell Inquiry was published in 2019. It concluded that the Government must drop its reliance on stay put and provide personal evacuation plans for disabled residents.





> Today - three years on - the Government has announced it will not implement this core recommendation. They have decided that cutting costs is more important than the value of human life.
> 
> We will not let this be brushed under the carpet.





> Please respond to Govt’s report stating your disapproval.
> 
> Email:
> FireSafetyUnitconsultations@homeoffice.gov.uk





> Write a letter to:
> Fire Safety Unit
> Home Office
> 2 Marsham Street
> ...


----------



## Pickman's model (May 18, 2022)

Lurdan said:


> Government rejects Grenfell Inquiry recommendations on evacuation of buildings as ‘not proportionate’ - Inside Housing





Lurdan said:


> Grenfell United's response:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


that fucking beggars belief


----------



## Lurdan (May 18, 2022)

Twitter thread by Inside Housing's Peter Apps who has read the Home Office 'consultation' document.





Twitter thread link

Here's the thread archived as a web page.






Announcing the publication of this 'consultation' in the House of Lords on the 4th April (Hansard link), 'Building Safety Minister' Lord Greenhalgh said (my emphases)



> On practicality, how can you evacuate a mobility-impaired person from a tall building before the professionals from the fire and rescue service arrive? *On proportionality, how much is it reasonable to spend to do this at the same time as we seek to protect residents and taxpayers from excessive costs?* On safety, how can you ensure that an evacuation of mobility-impaired people is carried out in a way that does not hinder others in evacuating or the fire and service in fighting the fire?


----------



## RainbowTown (May 18, 2022)

Lurdan said:


> Grenfell United's response:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yet, surprise, surprise, they have the funds - an estimated £12 billion upwards - to refurbish another property in London. Namely, the Houses of Parliament. 

This a not only a sickening betrayal towards those who died and those who were affected by this tragedy, but it is also just another example of how truly callous and contemptuous this government is. They sink lower and lower with each passing day.


----------



## teqniq (May 18, 2022)

They really do not give a fuck about anyone who they consider to be not the 'right', (and by that I mean seriously wealthy) people do they?


----------



## teuchter (May 18, 2022)

The problems with implementing assisted evacuations in buildings that were designed on the basis of compartmentation and "stay put" policies are real and difficult ones. Some of the response to the stuff published today seems a bit simplistic and misrepresentative to me.
There are no easy solutions even if you throw money at it. In a building where there are ten residents needing assisted evacuation, even if you employ, say, 20 people full time to be ready at any moment to effect the evacuation, then how exactly are you going to get all of those people, using chair carriers, down a single staircase which all other residents are going to be trying to use too, and which the fire services will imminently need to use to access the building and start fighting the fire.
It seems so expensive and impractical to me that it seems perfectly reasonable to consider other approaches, or to decide that this approach only makes sense in certain buildings, which seems to be what is happening.


----------



## agricola (May 18, 2022)

teuchter said:


> The problems with implementing assisted evacuations in buildings that were designed on the basis of compartmentation and "stay put" policies are real and difficult ones. Some of the response to the stuff published today seems a bit simplistic and misrepresentative to me.
> There are no easy solutions even if you throw money at it. In a building where there are ten residents needing assisted evacuation, even if you employ, say, 20 people full time to be ready at any moment to effect the evacuation, then *how exactly are you going to get all of those people, using chair carriers, down a single staircase which all other residents are going to be trying to use too, and which the fire services will imminently need to use to access the building and start fighting the fire*.
> It seems so expensive and impractical to me that it seems perfectly reasonable to consider other approaches, or to decide that this approach only makes sense in certain buildings, which seems to be what is happening.



A big part of the emboldened bit here can be worked out by reasonably regular (6 months / yearly, ideally) evacuation practices with the local fire brigade, which would cost nowhere near the sums suggested (and what money was spent would go on increasing the number of fire staff so that the practices can be run).  

You'll never get PEEPs that are as reliable as workplace ones, but by getting the residents to know who in their own part of the building will need help getting out (and how that help needs to be delivered) it would go a long way towards being effective.  It would also help the non-vulnerable residents understand what they needed to do, and the presence of the local brigade at these practices would also mean that they'd know who needed extra help too, potentially allowing the prioritization of calls from that resident in an emergency, and allow them to do the PEEPs (rather than the building owner, who would inevitably do it as cheaply as possible if they did it at all).   There obviously might be problems with availability of people but those might not be insurmountable with sufficient thought (eg:  a half or full days leave, directed by the state like jury duty, to take part).  

I did like though that point in the consultation where it suggested residents might behave differently in an emergency (and presumably abandon the vulnerable), which perhaps underlines what the Home Office actually think of people (though I understand that they do have themselves and their ilk as a frame of reference).


----------



## muscovyduck (May 18, 2022)

agricola said:


> I did like though that point in the consultation where it suggested residents might behave differently in an emergency (and presumably abandon the vulnerable), which perhaps underlines what the Home Office actually think of people (though I understand that they do have themselves and their ilk as a frame of reference).


I don't know about how things work in evacuation/fire scenarios but I've got experience with water safety and most people will absolutely drown someone coming to rescue them in desperation to keep themselves above water a couple seconds longer. It's not a moral thing, it's barely even conscious. It's strong enough it can even happen with parents and their own children. Anecdotally though I'm under the impression that doesn't translate over to evacuation situations the same way. Would be interesting to hear what other people who know about this sort of thing have to say


----------



## teuchter (May 18, 2022)

agricola said:


> A big part of the emboldened bit here can be worked out by reasonably regular (6 months / yearly, ideally) evacuation practices with the local fire brigade, which would cost nowhere near the sums suggested (and what money was spent would go on increasing the number of fire staff so that the practices can be run).
> 
> You'll never get PEEPs that are as reliable as workplace ones, but by getting the residents to know who in their own part of the building will need help getting out (and how that help needs to be delivered) it would go a long way towards being effective.  It would also help the non-vulnerable residents understand what they needed to do, and the presence of the local brigade at these practices would also mean that they'd know who needed extra help too, potentially allowing the prioritization of calls from that resident in an emergency, and allow them to do the PEEPs (rather than the building owner, who would inevitably do it as cheaply as possible if they did it at all).   There obviously might be problems with availability of people but those might not be insurmountable with sufficient thought (eg:  a half or full days leave, directed by the state like jury duty, to take part).



I don't think they are ruling out these kinds of options at this stage though are they?



agricola said:


> I did like though that point in the consultation where it suggested residents might behave differently in an emergency (and presumably abandon the vulnerable), which perhaps underlines what the Home Office actually think of people (though I understand that they do have themselves and their ilk as a frame of reference).



Doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Who knows how anyone is going to behave in an emergency until it actually happens. I wouldn't want my evacuation plan to rely on a neighbour putting themselves at risk in order to get me out. That's the point isn't it - what you can rely on.


----------



## bluescreen (May 18, 2022)

teuchter said:


> I don't think they are ruling out these kinds of options at this stage though are they?
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't seem unreasonable to me. *Who knows how anyone is going to behave in an emergency until it actually happens.* I wouldn't want my evacuation plan to rely on a neighbour putting themselves at risk in order to get me out. That's the point isn't it - what you can rely on.


This is why there are fire drills, and practice sessions, so that people know what to do and are less likely to panic. 
Horrible situation though.


----------



## teuchter (May 18, 2022)

The thing is with Grenfell, loads of stuff was done badly and contributed to the didaster, including evacuation plans and so on.

But in the end it's fairly straightforward what was basically wrong - it was clad in a highly dangerous way. The materials and the system they were used in simply shouldn't have been there. The technical knowledge that they shouldn't have been there existed. The ability to prevent them from being used existed. The occupants were let down by the systems that should have prevented the building being clad in that way. That they were let down is horrendous and shocking and demonstrates that multiple institutions absolutely failed to do what they should have done.

And of course lots of other buildings are also clad in these unsafe systems. The principle of compartmentation and stay-put is reasonably sound, as long as it's not compromised, as it is by these cladding systems. So the basic options are: - change the building and the way it's managed so that an evacuation strategy can work, and you no longer rely on compartmentation
- get rid of the thing that compromises compartmentation - ie replace the cladding.

The way it looks to me, there are some buildings where you simply can't achieve the first of those options. Maybe you can sort-of achieve it at tremendous expense, but even then not in a very convincing way. 

In those cases my view is that the solution therefore has to be to replace the cladding (or make some substantial modifications to it that are proven to substantially reduce the risk of external fire spread). This will also be very expensive, but if it actually sorts the problem out, then it's a much better option than the other very expensive option. That's the kind of scenario where it makes sense to talk about proportionality of cost to benefit.

A very bad outcome would be for the govt to announce it's implementing some kind of PEEP scheme, maybe even with lots of funding, but one that just sets up a load of systems that don't work in practice, and gradually get degraded over the years through apathy.

That's why I don't have an issue with this stage of the consultations deciding that that approach is not practical.

Of course, we have to see what happens next.

I think it would be better to shout at govt to get buildings reclad, rather than to implement these PEEP schemes just because it appears they are not following the enquiry's recommendations to the letter.


----------



## Lurdan (May 20, 2022)

Here is this weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 76: ‘I fear this will become our New Orleans’ 

Here are the daily reports.


Spoiler: Daily Reports



Monday - Senior London emergency co-ordinator ‘should have challenged RBKC’s claim it was coping with Grenfell aftermath’

Tuesday - ‘Deficiences’ in Grenfell response continued after control was handed over by RBKC, inquiry hears

Wednesday - No RBKC staff had central government emergency training in 3.5 years before Grenfell fire

Thursday - Senior civil servant warned Grenfell was becoming ‘our New Orleans’ due to failing humanitarian response



Next week: On Monday, David Bellamy, chief of staff to the Mayor of London, and Nick Hurd, who had just been appointed as Home Office minister for policing and the fire service two days before the fire. Then some former DCLG officials. On Tuesday Gill McManus, emergencies management resilience adviser. On Wednesday Jo Farrar, the former director general for local government and public services. And on Thursday Melanie Dawes, the former permanent secretary.

I don't know if the hearings for this Module of the Inquiry will extend beyond next week. The next module, Module 7, is for further evidence from expert witnesses. Over the course of June we should also be hearing closing statements for Module 6 and for the current Module 4. The Inquiry seems to be on schedule to conclude hearings in July.


----------



## Miss-Shelf (May 20, 2022)

agricola said:


> A big part of the emboldened bit here can be worked out by reasonably regular (6 months / yearly, ideally) evacuation practices with the local fire brigade, which would cost nowhere near the sums suggested (and what money was spent would go on increasing the number of fire staff so that the practices can be run).
> 
> You'll never get PEEPs that are as reliable as workplace ones, but by getting the residents to know who in their own part of the building will need help getting out (and how that help needs to be delivered) it would go a long way towards being effective.  It would also help the non-vulnerable residents understand what they needed to do, and the presence of the local brigade at these practices would also mean that they'd know who needed extra help too, potentially allowing the prioritization of calls from that resident in an emergency, and allow them to do the PEEPs (rather than the building owner, who would inevitably do it as cheaply as possible if they did it at all).   There obviously might be problems with availability of people but those might not be insurmountable with sufficient thought (eg:  a half or full days leave, directed by the state like jury duty, to take part).
> 
> I did like though that point in the consultation where it suggested residents might behave differently in an emergency (and presumably abandon the vulnerable), which perhaps underlines what the Home Office actually think of people (though I understand that they do have themselves and their ilk as a frame of reference).


my bf lives on the 19th floor of a block in east London.  When I first met him I was asking him what would happen in a fire.   Like the if 5 neighbours on his landing knew each other and if they wanted to be in a whatsapp group for emergency reasons.   He reached out to them and non of them responded.   Having a regular practice drill would help foster a spirit in neighbours of at least knocking on a door to see if someone is in/knows they should evacuate.  

If a fire happened now he would likely not get out.  He has a serious lung condition and has become reliant on oxygen.    AFAIK his housing association doesn't have an accurate record of disabled residents .  This must be the case in countless blocks


----------



## Pickman's model (May 20, 2022)

Miss-Shelf said:


> my bf lives on the 19th floor of a block in east London.  When I first met him I was asking him what would happen in a fire.   Like the if 5 neighbours on his landing knew each other and if they wanted to be in a whatsapp group for emergency reasons.   He reached out to them and non of them responded.   Having a regular practice drill would help foster a spirit in neighbours of at least knocking on a door to see if someone is in/knows they should evacuate.
> 
> If a fire happened now he would likely not get out.  He has a serious lung condition and has become reliant on oxygen.    AFAIK his housing association doesn't have an accurate record of disabled residents .  This must be the case in countless blocks


when i lived in a tower block (14th floor) there was no information on what to do in the event of a fire that i ever saw. i don't recall there ever being a fire inspection in the sixteen or so years i was there. there were no fire alarm panels to break that i ever saw. and there was only one staircase and two lifts, and the lifts broke down on a frequent basis. looking back it was (and for that matter, is) a death trap. if god forbid something happened there even now there'd be lots of dead people. down the way there used to be a fire station, closed by johnson in his wisdom when he was mayor of london. that used to reassure me when i occasionally and briefly considered the possibility of the block burning down. don't know how far fire engines would have to travel now if that block caught fire, it doesn't bear thinking about. council, btw, not ha


----------



## Lurdan (May 27, 2022)

Here is this weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 78: ‘The planning hadn’t been done and there was nothing for us to be drawing on’ 



Spoiler: Daily Reports



Monday - Former minister ‘ashamed’ of state's ‘wholly inadequate’ response in Grenfell aftermath 

Tuesday - Civil servant denies she was more concerned about building regulations than recovery after Grenfell 

Wednesday - Senior civil servant challenged over ‘situational awareness’ of Grenfell fire response 

Thursday - Senior civil servant feared ‘panicking’ DCLG would ‘comprehensively mess up’ Grenfell response



As I suspected this was the last week of hearings for Module 4. The Inquiry isn't sitting next week. On Monday June 6th hearings will begin for module 7 - more expert witnesses.


----------



## BCBlues (May 27, 2022)

Imagine rolling out of bed that morning and your first thoughts are omg theres going to be an investigation, I need to give the team a heads up, while watching live news reports of people perishing. How heartless.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 9, 2022)

Next Tuesday is the fifth anniversary of the fire.







The anniversary coincides with the Inquiry entering it's last few weeks. This week and next there will be hearings for Module 7, which deals with further expert evidence. (The Inquiry will not be sitting on the 14th). The following week, (w/c 20th June) there will be closing statements for Modules 4 and 6. And at the end of the month the final Module 7 expert evidence.

It's planned that the last Module, Module 8, will begin on July 4th. This is to hear evidence about those who lost their lives in the fire.


----------



## chainsawjob (Jun 9, 2022)

I saw this image of a 'jubilee street party' done by Grenfell United, a table with 72 empty seats, last weekend. There aren't words are there.

Thanks Lurdan for the continuing updates, appreciated.









						Empty table with 72 seats laid out for Jubilee street party nobody will attend
					

‘I can almost picture them seated at the table today, joining in the celebration.'




					metro.co.uk


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 9, 2022)

A little more detail about the programme of expert evidence in Module 7, which began on Monday, can be found here.

In advance of next weeks anniversary Peter Apps of Inside Housing has posted a long twitter thread about some of the things which have come out of Phase 2 of the Inquiry.






The thread starts here and a version archived as a web page at threadreaderapp.com can be found here.

The thread links to some of Inside Housing's daily and weekly reports. Some of those normally paywalled links work at the moment. But some do not. And on the pages from those links that do work, any subsequent links generally don't work.

Here is a version of it as a web page with images of the tweets, and links to archived versions of the Inside Housing pages, which themselves then have working links.  In addition to making it easier to follow the various chains of links it may be of use to people who are twitter phobic, as well as to fans of shit Geocities level web design. 

The thread concludes:


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 10, 2022)

Here is this weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 78: ‘The abandonment of the ‘stay put’ strategy for high-rise residential buildings is essential’



Spoiler: Daily Reports



Monday - ‘Prevalence of poor practice’ in design of smoke systems, expert tells Grenfell Inquiry

Tuesday - Grenfell Tower smoke system failed to comply with requirements of regulations, expert says

Wednesday - LFB did not follow ‘even basic standards’ in firefighting equipment tests, expert says

Thursday - ‘Essential’ that ‘stay put’ policy for high rises is abandoned, expert tells Grenfell Inquiry



The eagle-eyed may notice that last week's Grenfell Diary was also labelled week 78. This was a cock-up by Inside Housing (they have since corrected it on their site) which I also didn't spot. In terms of their week numbering which I have been following the previous week was week 77.

Interesting week. This Module is about work commissioned by the Inquiry from expert witnesses. That includes some further work that has been commissioned where things have emerged in the course of the Inquiry, or where there has been push back from some corporate core participants against the findings in previous expert witness reports.

There was an example of the latter on Monday and Tuesday. PSB who designed the refurbished smoke control system in Grenfell Tower were unhappy with the conclusions of the Inquiry's expert witnesses and commissioned their own independent report. Simon Lay who produced that gave evidence about it on Monday. The Inquiry's expert witness Barbara Lane has produced a further report in response to this and gave evidence on Tuesday.

There was another example on Wednesday. Ivan Stoianov gave evidence about his report on the water supply available at the time of the fire and how it was used. This was originally due to be presented during Module 5 which looked at the London Fire Brigade but he was asked to do further work to respond to the push back against his conclusions from both the LFB and Thames Water. This is a rare example where I'm really not at all impressed with how Inside Housing has reported things. I'll have a go at explaining why over the weekend.

On Thursday Jose Torero and Luke Bisby both gave presentations about work they were commissioned to carry out. They will both be back next week to answer questions about the reports they have produced.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 13, 2022)

Ten page article in the Sunday Times magazine. Web version here (archived)
Corner-cutting, cover-ups and a disregard for human life: why Grenfell really happened - News - The Sunday Times

It includes some statistics about the extent of the building safety issues which came to light after the fire:


> The ramifications slowly emerged. First up to 33,000 flats with Grenfell-type cladding had to be stripped; then, as The Sunday Times revealed in 2020, almost 200,000 high-rise homes were found with other flammable materials. Only last month the government quietly confirmed that up to 138,000 further flats in mid-rise blocks also need work. As lenders clamped down, up to 1.5 million homeowners could no longer sell or switch mortgages on their flats. Some flat owners have received fire-risk bills costing more than their homes. The government has pledged £9.1 billion for repairs, but just 21,000 of the 366,000 dangerous flats have been fixed to date.









PDF of the whole article attached.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 13, 2022)

Long and interesting Inside Housing article by Peter Apps:
Grenfell five years on: could it happen again? 



> Putting all of this together, we have a list of basic flaws: dangerous cladding, broken fire doors and the lack of an evacuation plan. What, then, has been done to address these at other buildings?



(...)



> Add all of this up, and we go to the fifth anniversary of the Grenfell Tower fire with the depressing reality that a repeat remains, at least, a possibility.
> 
> That is something no one would have accepted when they first saw those horrifying images five years ago.


----------



## PTK (Jun 14, 2022)

I have just listened to an interview with the first firefighter to enter Grenfell Tower on the World At One on Radio 4, and I was very moved.

It is an absolute disgrace that no-one has been prosecuted, that there are still tower blocks with flammable cladding.

The Grenfell Tower fire is a mark of Cain on the Conservative Party in the London Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and on the Conservative government.


----------



## friendofdorothy (Jun 14, 2022)

dont know if this has already been posted here. its a call for the govt to actually implement the recommendations of the public inquiry -






						Sponsor UK Government: UK Government to be legally obligated to implement Public Inquiry recommendations.
					






					www.change.org


----------



## GarveyLives (Jun 14, 2022)

*Lest We Forget Them*​


----------



## srb7677 (Jun 14, 2022)

And still no one has been held to account.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 14, 2022)

Much as I would like it to, that's not going to happen is it? The culpability goes right to the top.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 17, 2022)

Here is this weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 79: ‘You could argue that the system was created specifically to enable people to circumvent the rules’

(Links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page).

Next week the Inquiry sits on Monday and Wednesday with closing statements for Module 6 (topics 2-4) - Testing and Certification, Fire Risk Assessments and the role of Central Government).


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 24, 2022)

Here is this weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 80: ‘The evidence points to wilful blindness and complacency towards safety’ 

(Links to the daily reports at the bottom of that page - they and the other links should all be working).

This week the Inquiry interrupted the current Module, which is hearing further evidence from expert witnesses, in order to hear closing statements for Module 6 (topics 2-4).

Module 6, which ran from October last year to April this year, dealt with four topics, all concerning the regulation of fire safety in the built environment. The first topic related to firefighting, and closing statements for it were heard back in January, together with the closing statements for Module 5, which also dealt with firefighting. This week was about the other three topics: 

testing and certification; 
fire risk assessment; 
and the role of central government in setting the framework of relevant legislation. 
That's a lot of ground to cover in making closing arguments, and although the Inquiry only sat for two days there was plenty to say. The Diary gives a very good overview, and I expect the BBC podcast, which should be up shortly, will do so as well.

On Monday Counsel for Bereaved, Survivors and Residents Teams 1 & 2 and the Fire Brigades Union, were followed by the London Fire Brigade and UKAS. On Wednesday Counsel for the Mayor of London was followed by Arconic, Kingspan, Building Research Establishment, LABC, NHBC and perhaps most interestingly the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. The latter made a series of admissions of failings reflecting the change in tone, at least, since Gove was put in charge at the end of last year.

I'll get transcripts of some of the BSR closings up over the weekend.

Next week, on Monday the Inquiry hears further closing statements, this time in respect of Module 4. This ran from April to May and dealt with the aftermath of the fire. Counsel for BSRs Teams 1 & 2 will be followed by RBKC, the LFB, the Mayor, DLUHC and the Met.

On Wednesday and Thursday it's back to Module 7 and the final expert witness, David Purser. He gave evidence during Phase 1 of the Inquiry about the toxic gases produced in fires. His report for phase 2 will deal with the effects of exposure to the toxic products of fire and the causes of the incapacitation and death of those who died at Grenfell Tower.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 27, 2022)

The Inquiry has been hearing Module 4 closing statements this morning. Very powerful statements from BSRs Teams 1 & 2. The statement made by Counsel for Kensington and Chelsea included a long list of further admissions of failings. (As one of the few corporate and official core participants which can't wind itself up, reorganise and rebrand itself under a new name or move operations overseas I imagine it has had little choice given the evidence heard).

Changing subject here are transcripts of four of the closing statements made last week in respect of Module 6.

Stephanie Barwise for BSRs Team 1

Sam Stein for BSRs Team 2

Michael Mansfield for BSRs Team 2

Martin Seaward for the Fire Brigades Union

I have added screenshots where they asked for documents to be displayed, and added links to some of the documents and Inquiry transcripts they cited. I omitted two short passages from the transcript of Martin Seaward's where he discussed how much time he had left with the Chair, and I have lightly sub-edited Sam Stein's to correct some punctuation and add back in a couple of missing words in the transcript. I contemplated annotating the uses of surnames and acronyms in Stephanie Barwise's for at least five seconds before giving the idea up.  

These statements are very different in form. Those by made Stephanie Barwise have always been high-level, addressed to the panel and make few concessions to a wider audience. Acronyms, surnames and technical terms are used without explanation. This one was no exception. At the opposite extreme Mike Mansfield's was highly discursive (he overran his allotted time, causing an unusual intervention from the Chair) and polemical. 

But they also illustrate differences in the criticisms drawn from the evidence the Inquiry has heard. Martin Seaward makes a strong case that:



> the fundamental underlying causes of the terrible loss of life at Grenfell Tower were political decisions made by central Government from 1979 onwards in the service of a social and economic system driven by profit and greed.



Stephanie Barwise is scathing about Government's failings but also states:



> (...) I turn to the role played by industry. It is ultimately responsible for the events which led to the Grenfell disaster. The Inquiry’s experts consider the external fire spread guidance in ADB, even as it stood, was intelligible to competent designers and, therefore, if Grenfell’s designers had been competent, they would have understood it. (...) To conclude that the failure to clarify or amend ADB led to the lethal fire spread at Grenfell is to overlook the role of the construction sector in deliberate non-compliance, even in areas where ADB left no room for debate, such as insulation and cavity barriers.



Of the other oral closing statements the most shameless came, predictably enough, from Kingspan, which selectively quoted from the expert evidence the Inquiry heard the week before to try to make it's case that banning materials, or prescribing their performance, should be abandoned in favour of a system of large scale fire testing of the kind they were able to game in the past. 

Links to the various written closing statements can be found, along with video and transcripts of the oral statements, here and here.


----------



## Lurdan (Jun 28, 2022)

Here are transcripts of the Module 4 Closing Statements made by BSRs Teams 1 and 2 yesterday.

Allison Monroe on behalf of Team 2

Danny Friedman on behalf of Team 1

Inside Housings daily report yesterday covers aspects of them. 
‘Islamophobic’ police document predicted ‘crime and disorder’ after Grenfell fire due to ‘Muslim background’ of victims 

It leads on Allison Monroe's citation of an as yet publically undisclosed Met monitoring report. In their own oral closing statement the Met 'strongly refuted' that "Islamophobia affected its response to the tragedy". 

However the Inside Housing report doesn't touch on the later part of her statement in which she puts the boot into the TMO in particular, but also the Council and central Government. That part starts here in the transcript.

I've added links to documents quoted and some of those cited (where I can identify them). I've also corrected where at one point Team 1 referred to the wrong person (they also do it in their written statement). 

Written statements here: Team 1 and Team 2. [PDF files] Other closing statements linked from here.


----------



## BCBlues (Jun 28, 2022)

That's powerful stuff from Allison Monroe, one day before the Met is placed in special measures due to many "systematic" failings. If that document isnt included as part of the obvious failings of the Met then it should be, undisclosed or not, they know it's there and its shameful.









						Met police placed in special measures due to litany of new ‘systemic’ failings
					

Exclusive: watchdog’s decision follows nearly 70,000 unrecorded crimes and errors in stop and search




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 1, 2022)

Here is this weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 81: ‘This is Islamophobia, it is racism, the elephant staring back at us in the room’ 

After the Closing Statements for Module 4 on Monday (see above), on Wednesday and Thursday the Inquiry heard the final expert witness in Module 7.

David Purser, a toxicologist, gave evidence about the composition of the toxic elements of the smoke produced by the materials in the cladding system, in the windows and window surrounds  and, once fire had re-entered the building, flat contents. In one section of his report he gives estimates of the likely times and causes of death of the 70 people who died in, or in three cases falling from, the tower. (Two other people died after they had left it). Much of Thursday was taken up with evidence relating to these individual cases. 

The Inside Housing daily reports, together with the Diary cover his findings.

Wednesday - Rapid spread of smoke to lobbies a ‘key event’ in Grenfell deaths, expert witness says 

Thursday - Cladding panels and insulation contributed ‘approximately equal’ amounts of toxic smoke at Grenfell Tower, expert says 

Purser's view is that those who died were overcome by, and eventually died from, the effects of the toxic fumes. There has been great interest in the fact that the insulation used produces hydrogen cyanide when it burns. Purser's conclusion is that it's contribution to the deaths was far less than the much greater quantities of carbon monoxide produced by all of the burning materials.

He stressed the importance of the speed with which the lobbies filled with toxic levels of smoke - to the extent that at their worst these areas, in contrast to the stairs, were survivable for only three or four minutes. Thus emphasising the importance of the means by which they filled so rapidly with smoke, and the issues of front doors and door closers, the 'refurbished' smoke ventilation system and lifts, and the 'passive' measures to keep the stairs free from smoke, which the Inquiry has spent so much time on.

That concluded the hearings for Module 7 - the Inquiry's provisional timetable says there will be Closing Statements but gives no indication of when or how this will be done.

On Monday the start of the final Module of the Inquiry, Module 8, which consists of "the presentation of evidence concerning the deceased to enable the finding of facts necessary for the purposes of s.5(1) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009".

There will be expert evidence from three people: On Monday morning Ashley Fegan-Earl, lead forensic pathologist will give evidence about the processes of identifying the cause of death, and Gaille MacKinnon, one of the lead forensic anthropologists working on the identification of those who died in Grenfell Tower, will give evidence about the process of victim identification.
The following Monday morning, 11th, Karl Harrison, one of the lead forensic archeologists working on the recovery of those who died in Grenfell Tower, will give evidence about the process of victim recovery.

However the rest of the hearings until Thursday 21st will deal with each of those who died.


----------



## BCBlues (Jul 1, 2022)

Next weeks hearing already sounds pretty grim


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 4, 2022)

Module 8 began this morning with short opening statements by the Inquiry Chair and Lead Counsel outlining what it will be dealing with and how. 

A transcript of those statements here.

Aside from evidence from the three people I listed above (the first two of them heard this morning) there will be a presentation in relation to each of the deceased. These will be made by the Counsel for the Bereaved, Survivors and Relatives. They will address the factual questions which the Coroner would be seeking to establish at an inquest, (who the deceased was, and how, when and where they came by their death) and also the facts required by an investigation under Article 2 of the the European Convention on Human Rights, something requested by the BSRs. 

To be clear the Inquiry isn't conducting or replacing the inquest but seeking to find answers to the questions an inquest would ask. If the Coroner is satisfied with the Inquiry's findings, and subject to any legal challenge, it would be open to her to adopt them.

The ten questions to be addressed, which the Inquiry has agreed with the BSRs, are listed in Richard Millett's opening statement - link to transcript above. The Phase 2 report will then include individual findings in relation to each of the deceased.

The individual presentations about the people who died begin tomorrow.

Closing Statements for Module 7 which concluded last week will apparently be held in November. I gather that the Inquiry has also asked corporate core participants to prepare updated accounts of what actions they have taken in respect of the issues the Inquiry is looking into, to be produced by November, so presumably these will also be heard then.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 6, 2022)

Grenfell Tower families finally hear harrowing details of how loved ones died


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 6, 2022)

teqniq said:


> Grenfell Tower families finally hear harrowing details of how loved ones died


I'm sorry teqniq, the dancing up and down I'm about to perform isn't aimed at you, but the headline, and the similar claim made in that article, are complete and utter bollocks . The bereaved families are not "finally hearing" harrowing details.

Firstly, the details being presented for each of the deceased been have all been discussed - often in more far more potentially distressing depth - at different times during the Inquiry. The BSRs are themselves core participants. Not only will they have had the chance to see all the evidence that has been presented and published publicly, they will have had the chance to see a great deal more that hasn't been. And they will have seen it all well before it has been dealt with in the hearings.

But more importantly these presentations are not being made by Counsel to the Inquiry, but by the legal representatives for the bereaved themselves. In addition to going over the details of the identity of each deceased person, and what is known of how, when and where they died, drawing together the evidence the Inquiry has heard, they are also giving short presentations of who they were as people. These latter have been written with the bereaved and reflect their wishes, for example about whether or not to show photographs of them. These presentations are being made on behalf of the bereaved not to them, or at them.

I don't generally bother with the issue of how bad the Guardian is (IMO they're all cunts) but that is an amazingly crass piece of misreporting.

I'd add that the presentations are obviously dealing with difficult things but they have been respectful and IMO are not nearly as grim as, for example, the evidence last week from the toxicologist which dealt not just with the estimated times and cause of death, but touched on the nature of those deaths.

If anyone does want to watch the video of these Module 8 presentations I'd recommend doing so on catch up rather than live. There are long breaks between each presentation, which are very often extended to ensure that family members of the deceased who wish to be present in the hearing room, some of whom have come to London to be there, can take their places.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 8, 2022)

Here is this weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 82: ‘Their chance to hear about the circumstances in which their loved ones died is the culmination of five years of waiting’ 
Lots of links from it all of which should be working.

Inside Housing are only providing weekly accounts during this part of the Inquiry. (A note from Inside Housing on our Grenfell Tower Inquiry coverage). 

This one gives a good account of what the module is about and illustrates this with material from the presentations given about the deaths related to Flat 205 on the top floor: four people who died in the flat after taking refuge in it and one person who fell from it. (In total twenty four people died in the flats or the lobby on the top floor and two people fell from it).


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 15, 2022)

Here is this weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 83: ‘They died together as they lived: caring for one another’ 
Links from it should be working

This was the second week of presentations about the people who died in the fire. The Diary gives accounts of some of them: the four people who died in Flat 202 on the top floor, the eleven people who died in Flat 193 and one person who died in Flat 181.

Next week is the final week of these presentations.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 15, 2022)

Twitter thread by Peter Apps of Inside Housing (twitter link)



> It might be worth pointing out a couple of the things that are coming up in this part of the inquiry (which is focusing on the circumstances of each victim's deaths) as some of the slightly more overlooked aspects of the inquiry have been held up as quite significant...





> *1. Lifts.* There has been a lot of discussion about how disabled and vulnerable residents were unable to get out. In many of the presentations the issue of lifts has also been raised. Grenfell did not have 'firefighting' lifts, which could have been used in rescues.
> Firefighters had also been unable to take control of the lift via an override switch on the ground floor. We covered this evidence last year, but it appears stigmatising views relating to fears of ASB (Anti-Social Behaviour) contributed. Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 44.​





> *2.* *Smoke vents.* A key reason for residents trapped on Floor 23 not fleeing was the speed with which the lobby filled with smoke. Witness evidence suggests this smoke came (at least partly) through the smoke vents – so the system was pulling it up from lower floors and leaking.
> There was lengthy evidence about the smoke vents (and the dampers which should prevent smoke leakage) also last year:  Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 42.​





> *3. What caused 15 residents to go up to the top floor at around 1.30am?* At this point the stairs were (relatively) passable, and more than 70 people evacuated unaided. But instead of going down 15 people from upper floors went up. 14 of them died.
> This issue was addressed at length in Phase One and the report, but remains unsettled. It has come up in several presentations. Evidence has focused in particular on one witness who recalls hearing a male voice “shouting in a clear English accent, ‘go back, go back’”.​





> We don't know precisely who this voice belonged to. We do know that other residents (who survived) were told to go back to their flats by firefighters as they descended. They ignored this advice.​We also know that at around the time as the group who went up were entering the stairwell, a rescue attempt a few floors below saw a stairwell door held open and smoke suddenly enter the stairs. This may have increased the sense of danger.​Some also believed there was a possibility of rescue by helicopter, and those with vulnerabilities would have struggled to make it all the way down the stairs.​





> *4. Evacuation plans and vulnerabilities.* This has been talked about a lot, but it is coming up in so many presentations. We know that the fire disproportionately killed disabled residents who could not escape.
> The presentations are illustrating that these vulnerabilities were known to the TMO. They are also illustrating (tragically) the way in which relatives who might have been able to escape stayed and died because they could not leave vulnerable residents.​We've written on this issue a lot, but in short it was systemic – and continues. Residents of high rise buildings still don't have evacuation plans, with the Home Office recently branding providing them "not proportionate".​





> *5. 999 calls and promise of rescue.* This was obviously covered in detail in Phase One, but we're going back through it – how for example, whole families reported being trapped from as early as 1.40am, but no crews were dispatched to reach them until 3am.
> In the meantime, they were given false reassurances that firefighters were coming which made them less likely to attempt an escape during the window when it might have been possible.​





> It's often said that the Grenfell Tower fire was about more than cladding and that's true - these presentations are a heartbreaking illustration of the scale of the multiple failures that led to the deaths.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 21, 2022)

Today was the last day of Module 8 and the last day of hearings until Monday November 7th when it will hear final overarching submissions by core participants.

In the meantime the Inquiry will start writing its Phase 2 report. No target date for completion has been set. It could well be the autumn of next year. For comparison Phase 1 of the Inquiry sat for 85 days and disclosed 20,752 documents. It took eleven months to produce the Phase 1 report. Phase 2 has sat for 308 days and disclosed 299,056 documents. And as Peter Apps pointed out on twitter today







Given that after the Phase 2 report is released there will not only be decisions about any criminal prosecutions, but also a small tsunami of legal action between and against the corporate core participants based on its findings, I would think 'complex' is putting it mildly.

Here is the Inside Housing report of today's hearing which heard difficult presentations about the deaths of five family members in Flat 182 and about the deaths of three people who died in Flat 113 and one person who fell from it. (Flat 113 was the subject of a special episode of the BBC podcast).

Grenfell Tower Inquiry oral evidence completes with final presentations relating to trapped victims

At the end of the day after a minutes silence for those who died their names were read out:

View attachment Module 8 - Presentations Relating to the Deceased-output3.mp4


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 21, 2022)

twitter link



Spoiler: Text of Richard Millett's closing statement



Mr Chairman, members of the panel, we have now come to the end of Module 8, the final module in this Inquiry.

During the last three weeks, in addition to the evidence of the professionals who worked on recovery, identification and cause of death of the deceased we have heard many accounts of the facts bearing on how those who lost their lives in the tower in the early hours of 14 June 2017 came to meet their end.

The Inquiry team and I are grateful to all counsel for the bereaved, for their presentations, and for the mostly neutral way in which the relevant facts were presented. That cannot have been easy. We are also grateful that this advanced point in our work for the sensitive and dignified recalling of who each of the individuals who died were, what they were like in life, and what they went through in their final hours and minutes. There can be nobody whoever had a heart who hearing those presentations could remain unmoved and unthinking.

I offer two reflections on what we've heard. First, there may have been times in the last three weeks when you were struck by the vast distances between the final terrible experiences of those who died, what they saw, smelt, heard, felt, feared and said in those last hours and the matters that we have investigated over the last two and a half years in this phase.

How great is the Gulf between, for example, what Jessica Urbano Ramirez experienced in her final hour and the filler debate. What did Hamid Kani's end have to do with the NBS specification? Raymond Bernard's final moments with the evolution of GRA 3.2, the Choucair's deaths with class 0, Hesham Rahman's with the Lakanal case study, what did architect's test 5B have to do with Mehdi El-Wahabi's last moments?

At times in these weeks you might have wondered whether we were sitting in a completely different room listening to something wholly unrelated to all the other threads making up the fabric of this disaster, and it is this perception of distance in itself which is an important discovery in our work. It tells us how so many actions and omissions of so many people working in offices and on their smartphones, in meeting rooms, on sites, in testing houses, discharging endless strings of emails, have consequences perhaps far remote from their consciousness but which were always objectively present in the perpetually contingent.

Each presentation that we have heard has built a bridge across that Gulf. Each presentation not only reminds us again of who we do this work for and why we do it, but it also tells us that every decision, every act, omission, interpretation, understanding, practice, policy, protocol, affects someone somewhere. Someone who is unknown and unseen but who is an adored child, a beloved sister, a respected uncle, a needed mother.

Secondly, I must add one further observation from counsel's chair. Sitting here, my team and I can only admire the dignified bearing of those left behind. The grieving families who still travel a hard road. They have endured many months of detailed and often dry evidence with patience, and they have now come here to sit and hear these graphic and unsparing accounts in modest and silent reflection. Their dignity and their courage in the face of the ineffable horror is its own attribute, a light shining out in the darkness.

Mr Chairman, I would now ask those who are able to stand for a 72 second period of silent reflection after which we will read the names of each of the names and the faces of those who perished at Grenfell.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 22, 2022)

twitter link



Spoiler: Text of Grenfell United statement



Responding to the closing statements of Module 8 from the Public Inquiry. Grenfell United, the bereaved families and survivors said:

Yesterday marked the end of the Inquest function which examined the most horrific details of how our loved ones passed and the painful accounts of how they spent their final moments.

Reliving the details in such a public way made it even more difficult. But knowing that they died needlessly is the hardest part to accept.

For the last four years we have listened to how we were failed by those who were responsible for our safety. And with the truth now exposed, everyone has heard just how bad things were and remain.

We experienced first hand the mistreatment of our local authority and landlord the Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO). But to hear the evidence and watch those who bullied us for years lie in an attempt to evade the consequences of their actions, serves a different kind of pain.

This process has uncovered what we have always known. That Grenfell was totally avoidable. Had our landlord listened to our warnings, had our Government valued our safety instead of feasting on corporate money with a sole focus to deregulate the system, had those in power not turned a blind eye to corruption and bribery, had the London Fire Brigade removed stay put as soon as it was clear the fire was not containable, had politicians not built a system that only serves them and their friends and not the people.

72 people would still be with us today and 18 children would still have their futures ahead of them.

But 72 people died, forced to pay the ultimate price. And we will forever suffer the consequences of other peoples' negligence, greed and corruption.

We thank the inquiry team and our lawyers for uncovering the truth about what caused the Grenfell fire and the failings during and after on the 14th of June 2017. However, with that said, the Inquiry's findings mean nothing if no one is held accountable and the process is meaningless if the recommendations are not implemented and left to gather dust.

It's a sobering thought that this much evidence can be made public yet the companies responsible continue to profit. That our Government continues to reject vital recommendations and little to nothing has changed for the better.

We hope Sir Martin Moore-Bick will be thorough and rigorous in his findings and that the Phase Two report will be rigid and impactful in bringing about real change.

We now await the Metropolitan Police and the Criminal Prosecution Service (CPS) to bring about the necessary criminal charges and to prove to us that there is not a two tier justice system.

We have been patient, we have given this process all the rope we have. But we have not healed and we are no closer to justice.

We ask all those who have stood with us until now to keep going. This phase might be over, but the battle for justice is not, and we will continue to fight until those culpable are prosecuted.


----------



## Lurdan (Jul 22, 2022)

Here is this weeks Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 84: ‘Every decision affects someone who is an adored child, a beloved sister, a respected uncle, a needed mother’ 
Links from it should be working

The Diary mainly deals with some of this weeks presentations about those who died. Peter Apps has written a separate thoughtful commentary piece.

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry has painted a vivid picture of the world we must leave behind


----------



## Lurdan (Oct 31, 2022)

Next Monday 7th November the Inquiry reopens to hear final submissions from core participants.

As part of their submissions, corporate and government core participants have been asked to give an account of what changes they have made since the fire. At the start of the Inquiry in 2018 they were asked to provide initial position statements, and these were put up on the Inquiry website over the summer. It will be interesting to compare them with what they have to say now. Other core participants will be giving overarching final submissions. 

The Inquiry has not announced how next week's hearings will be structured. No closing statements were heard for Module 7, which heard final expert evidence, and we don't yet know whether there will be separate submissions in respect of this module.

Peter Apps of Inside Housing has begun a series of recaps of the evidence heard during phase two of the Inquiry. Here is the first. Links from it should be working.

Grenfell Tower Inquiry recap: module one – the refurbishment (archived)


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 1, 2022)

Second Inside Housing recap of phase two of the Inquiry, covering the testing, certification and sale of cladding materials.

Grenfell Tower Inquiry recap: module two, the cladding products (archived)


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 2, 2022)

Third Inside Housing recap.

Grenfell Tower Inquiry recap: module three – the management and maintenance of the block (archived)


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 3, 2022)

Last of the Inside Housing recaps.

Grenfell Tower Inquiry recap: module six – central government (archived)


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 4, 2022)

Timetable for next week's hearings is now up (PDF file)

Monday looks like this:


----------



## GarveyLives (Nov 4, 2022)

For information:

How we let Grenfell happen, Peter Apps, Deputy Editor, Inside Housing, Thursday 17 November 2022


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 7, 2022)

Inside Housing report on today's closing statements for Phase 2 of the Inquiry.

Lawyers for Grenfell community set out ‘rogues gallery’ of organisations ‘most accountable’ for fire (archived)

I'll transcribe the oral closing submissions made on behalf of the BSRs.
Here's the first by Stephanie Barwise for BSR Team 1

(I should point out that I've added back in part of a sentence missing from the official transcript, inserted some commas and added a couple of words in square brackets to hopefully make the meaning clearer).

I'll add the others here as I do them.

Danny Friedman also for BSR Team 1.
Michael Mansfield for BSR Team 2.
Adrian Williamson also for BSR Team 2.
Imran Khan for the BSR represented by Imran Khan & Partners.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 8, 2022)

Transcript of yesterday's final closing submission by Martin Seaward for the Fire Brigades Union

I added transcripts of the other oral closing submissions made on behalf of BSRs yesterday to the post above. The written submissions can be found linked from here on the Inquiry website along with the video and the official transcript for the day.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 8, 2022)

Today's Inside Housing report:

Grenfell cladding manufacturer calls failure to release devastating fire tests on material used on tower a ‘non-issue’  (archived)

The Inquiry heard final submissions from Arconic, Kingspan, Harley Facades (cladding subcontractor on the refurbishment) and PSB (who designed the refurbished smoke extraction system). The 'merry-go-round of buck passing', generously lubricated with weasel words, came out for another spin. 

It's back again tomorrow with Celotex, the BBE, RBKC and the former "TMO".


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 8, 2022)

Twitter link


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 9, 2022)

Today's Inside Housing report:

Social housing staff under investigation for ‘serious criminal offences’ relating to Grenfell fire (archived)

Before the headline gets your hopes up it is worth reading the actual quote from James Ageros representing the former "TMO":



> Counsel for the Inquiry urged core participants not to engage in a merry-go-round of buck passing and it was remarked on that none of the core participants, save for RBKC, and now possibly DLUHC and the BBA has made any admissions before the Inquiry. This is not lost on the TMO. However, as the Inquiry knows, the TMO exists now only as an organisation whose function is to respond to any civil or criminal proceedings brought against it. The handful of staff presently in post were not in post before the fire and had no dealings with the refurbishment. Sir, for these reasons it is not appropriate for those now employed to express critical judgements about the organisation as it previously was, or its employees. This is especially so when a number of the individuals in question continue to be investigated by the police for serious criminal offences.



If it wasn't for those pesky police officers they could tell all.

However, he was able to state:



> As it has throughout the TMO expresses its sincere sympathy and condolences to those who lost loved ones during the terrible fire which occurred on the 14th of June 2017. And it hopes that those who grieve may find some comfort in the years to come including through the findings of this Public Inquiry.



So that's all right then.

Other core participants felt far less inhibited in blaming former employees, or admitting "non-causative" errors, including Celotex, the manufacturer of one of the combustible insulation products used on the tower. The Inside Housing report gives a good account of what their counsel said.

Their position was demolished by Stephanie Barwise for BSR Team 1



Spoiler: Team 1 submission



Turning to Celotex. Unlike the other core participants, Celotex does admit to wrongdoing, albeit it denies that these actions had any causative effect. The two aspects of wrongdoing Celotex admits to are, first, discrepancies in the BS 8414 test carried out by BRE on RS5000 insulation in May 2014, and the way that test was described in Celotex marketing literature. It was that test which led Celotex to be able to market its RS5000 product as suitable for use above 18 metres.

The second aspect of admitted wrongdoing is the understatement of lambda values by the selective use and omission of data. Lambda values represent the heat conductivity of a material such as insulation, and are therefore part of the thermal calculations done to ascertain the ability of every layer of the external walls to resist heat loss. Those calculations are known as U-values. The lower the lambda values and overall U-values the better.

Both these aspects of Celotex’s wrongdoing — the misstatement of the test and the understatement of the lambda values — feature in the reasons why the designers and contractors at Grenfell were influenced to use Celotex. Both these behaviours evidence a culture within Celotex at the time which will require careful examination in this Inquiry. It is not the case that the test on RS5000 and the misdescription of that test and the understatement of the lambda values had no causative effect.

As Celotex was well aware, there was a lack of knowledge in some building inspectors about the use of combustible insulation. Celotex exploited this lack of knowledge, but in a way which carefully avoided expressing a view on the requirements of ADB.

A good example of this was that in April 2015, a distributor of RS5000, SIG, told Celotex that the NHBC was refusing to approve RS5000 unless there was no difference between the proposed cladding system on site and that described in Celotex’s RS5000May 2014 test.

If we may turn to {CEL00001406}, at the bottom of page 1 we see Celotex’s head of technical’s reply to SIG.

He says:



> The official Celotex view.
> 
> Celotex are open about the test we have performed and we always include the (…) Rainscreen Cladding Guide (…) The key line being:
> 
> ‘Any changes to the components (…) will need to be considered by the building designer’.



At the foot of page 1 he says:



> Here is my view.



If we scroll down, he says:



> (…) ultimately the specification of this product will depend on the (…) requirements of (…) [ADB]. Celotex do not try to second guess what may, or may not be, deemed suitable and if RS5000 is rejected as an option (…) we take it on the chin (…) We have (…) had conversations with the NHBC and are aware that generally we will struggle to [get RS5000] accepted (…) at this time.



He went on:



> We have heard of one (…) job where the inspector said that it was OK to use any insulation upto 18m and only above 18m did it have to be non-combustible or in line with the requirements of BR 135. Clearly wrong. The fire hasn’t got a tape measure and if it starts at the ground floor it will love to race up the first 18m. Just shows you the smoke of confusion out there.



If we can scroll back up to the top of page 1 (CEL00001406/1), Celotex’s distributor’s reply to this was:



> Thanks for that.
> 
> Never has the expression ‘smoke and mirrors’ been more appropriate.
> 
> I think I’ll adopt a version of ‘caveat emptor’ and if specifically challenged use the rock fibre options. If I’m not challenged it’ll be RS5000.



This, as Celotex well knows, is how its marketing strategy worked. Contractors and designers would use the fact that the sales literature indicated the product was fit for use over 18 metres to get it onto buildings if they could get it past the building control inspector.

Celotex also omits to mention just how aggressive its marketing strategy was. It used the subcontractors and specifiers effectively as pushers to ensure that its products were specified and used on buildings. This was part of Celotex’s so-called push/pull marketing strategy, namely using potential contractors on a project to push the product onto architects, who would then specify it, thereby pulling it onto the building.

Nowhere was that more apparent than in an internal Celotex document in early June 2017 in which Celotex acknowledged that architects and main contractors push RS5000 particularly vehemently, but noted that to sell RS5000, Celotex needed to engage with the key decision-makers, namely the building owner, client warranty provider and fire engineer. The document records that one of the main reasons why RS5000 was continuing to achieve success was because of Celotex’s growing relationships with these warranty providers and fire engineers.

In these circumstances, it does not lie in Celotex’s mouth to assert that the misleading description of the May 2014 test for RS5000 had no causative effect and that the designers at Grenfell cannot have relied upon it.

As Celotex accepts, it was dealing directly with Harley in relation to the use of RS5000 at Grenfell, and indeed it is clear that Celotex went out of its way to win the Grenfell project. The so-called must-win projects list sent by Celotex to its parent company, Saint Gobain, on 7 November 2014, included at item 2 Grenfell Tower. Celotex saw Grenfell as being a flagship for the RS5000 product, hence in July 2015 it drafted a Celotex case study regarding the use of Celotex at Grenfell, boasting super-low lambda values, delivering better U-values and thinner solutions, precisely the qualities it knew the designers of Grenfell wanted.

Whilst it was heartening that Celotex’s counsel corrected Harley’s incorrect submission that there was no evidence that Harley knew the cladding was dangerous, it is nevertheless disappointing that Celotex itself also fails to recognise the evidence which demonstrates the fallacy of its position.



She didn't say that this week. This was in the Team 1 opening submission back in January 2020. (Worth reading again IMO)

RBKC reiterated the admissions of serious failings it had previously made. Counsel for the BBA went through the changes it has made to its organisation and procedures. And counsel for the Mayor of London made the same point as some of the BSR submissions, that the Inquiry should consider how to try to ensure that its recommendations are acted on.

Tomorrow Exova, DLUHC and a closing statement by Counsel to the Inquiry.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 10, 2022)

Twitter link



Spoiler: TEXT OF GRENFELL UNITED STATEMENT



*Responding to the closing statements from the Grenfell Tower Public Inquiry. Grenfell United, the bereaved families and survivors said*:

Five and a half years ago, we might have seen today as a significant milestone, marking the formal end of the Grenfell Tower Public Inquiry. A process we have endured for over five years.

But in reality, today is no different to any other. Only another reminder that we've been saying the same thing for five years. That we continue to live our lives knowing the evidence has been uncovered. And yet, there's no change. No accountability. No charges.

In the half a decade since the fire, we've had four Prime Ministers, seven Secretaries of State. And no progress.

What we've had instead is Government Ministers who continue to advocate for deregulation. Today of all days, Jacob Rees-Mogg, the same Minister who blamed residents for not using their common sense has chosen to speak out on this matter.

Whilst we wait for further recommendations, the Government has yet to implement a single recommendation from the Phase 1 report. They've been allowed to continue their circus for far too long. And we sound like a broken record.

The Government was warned countless times of the danger to human life through deregulation. But they turned a blind eye, let corporates game the system and Government pocketed the profits.

The Lakanal House fire in 2009 should have been the wake up call. It killed six people and opened up questions on building safety but they did nothing.

The Lakanal House Inquiry issued the London Fire Brigade with critical recommendations left incomplete by the time Grenfell Tower was alight. Had they lifted the stay put policy when it was clear the fire was uncontrollable, that night might have been very different.

The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea treated us like second class citizens. They refused to invest in Grenfell Tower for 30 years, and when they did they wrapped it in petrol.

Our local council colluded with our landlord the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management to ensure we were silenced. The KCTMO bullied us, ignored our fire safety concerns and treated our lives like a game of monopoly.

Kingspan's tests in 2006 and 2007 showed a "raging inferno" and the product "burning on its own steam" but they concealed it and sold it anyway.

Arconic managers speculated about a fire killing 60 or 70 people.

Celotex staff were made to "lie for commercial gain" and described the company as a "fraud on the market".

All of this, and yet no consequences.

We now have to put our faith into a justice system that protects the powerful. A system that prevents justice. Whilst this system exists, we face the same unachievable battle as the many before us. From Aberfan, to Hillsborough, justice has been denied and Grenfell is no different.

We hope Sir Martin Moore-Bick will be thorough and rigorous in his findings and that the Phase Two report will bring real change; a legacy for the 72 people who lost their lives that night.

We thank the Inquiry team for all their work in uncovering the evidence. It's now up to the Metropolitan Police and the Criminal Prosecution Service (CPS) to bring about the necessary criminal charges and to prove to us that there is not a two tier justice system.

We ask all those who have stood with us until now to keep going. This phase might be over, but the battle for justice is not, and we will continue until those culpable are prosecuted.


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 10, 2022)

Today's Inside Housing report:

Grenfell Inquiry ‘able to conclude every death was avoidable’ as its lawyer slams ongoing ‘merry-go-round’ of buck-passing (archived)

This was the last day of hearings and finished with a closing statement from Richard Millett in which he made concrete the 'merry-go-round of buck passing'. Taking each of the main corporate and official bodies in turn he listed all of those they had pointed the finger at, each illustrated with a graphic. At the end he drew the graphics together into a 'web of blame'. 






Earlier the DLUHC and Exova had given closing statements.

The written closing submissions for those bodies who haven't made oral statements: the Cabinet Office, NHBC, JS Wright, BRE, Thames Water, Max Fordham, Siderise and Rydon are linked from here on the Inquiry website. Noticeably missing are architects Studio E.







twitter link


----------



## Lurdan (Nov 11, 2022)

This week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived):

Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 85: ‘The merry-go-round turns still, the notes of its melody clearly audible in the last few days’ 

It concludes with a long extract from Richard Millett's closing statement. If you want to read the whole thing here is a transcript.

Tonight there will be an episode of the BBC podcast which can be found here once it has gone up.


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 7, 2022)

Among the recommendations in the Grenfell Inquiry's Phase 1 report were a series dealing with evacuation in high rise buildings. They included

The development of national guidelines for carrying out partial or total evacuations of high-rise buildings – including protecting fire access routes and procedures for evacuating people who require assistance
Fire services develop policies for partial or total evacuation of high rises
Owner and manager be required to draw up and keep under review evacuation plans, with copies provided to local fire and rescue services and placed in an information box on the premises
All high-rise buildings be equipped with facilities to enable the sending of an evacuation signal to the whole or a selected part of the building
Owners and managers be required by law to prepare personal evacuation plans for residents who may struggle to do so personally, with information about them stored in the premise’s information box
All fire services be equipped with smoke hoods to help evacuate residents down smoke-filled stairs



> The Inquiry's recommendations were based on the idea that buildings should have Plan B: a workable plan that can be activated if stay put unexpectedly becomes untenable for some or all of the residents due to the building failing.



In May this year the Government launched a consultation into a system which rejected this approach, and in particular the need to plan for partial or total evacuation in most circumstances, and the requirement to provide Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs) for disabled residents. The system they consulted on instead is a five-step plan for “emergency evacuation information sharing” (EEIS).



> Defining the building’s evacuation strategy: deciding whether the building should have general advice to stay put, or leave immediately in the event of a fire
> Identification of those who need support to evacuate: asking residents to “make themselves known… if they consider they would need support to evacuate”
> A person-centred fire risk assessment checklist: an assessment of in-flat risks of the resident who would struggle to evacuate, which the building owner would “review… and consider what might be reasonable for them to implement to mitigate against the risks identified”. However, it added: “Responsible persons currently have no statutory duties to implement in-flat prevention or suppression measures. We do not propose to change this. In-flat measures should remain largely for the resident to implement and finance.”
> Sharing information with local fire authority: to share the information about residents with disabilities either digitally or via a premises information box with local fire services
> The fire and rescue service to access and use this information in the event of a fire





> However, the consultation said “it would not be proportionate to mandate the measures laid out in steps two to five in stay put buildings”, meaning that for the vast majority of buildings no process of identification will be put into effect.
> 
> The proposals therefore mark an effective abandonment of the core philosophy of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s phase one report: a plan B is required because it is not possible to place total reliance on stay put.


Quoted from this Inside Housing story.

Under this proposal buildings would be divided into one of two categories: "stay put" or "simultaneous evacuation". The latter would be those defined as dangerous and requiring a waking watch. For the rest - the majority:



> Stay put buildings would have no plans made for evacuation, with total reliance placed on the building’s compartmentation to keep residents safe.



In September two members of Claddag, a campaigning group representing disabled residents of buildings with dangerous cladding, were given permission to seek a judicial review over the decision not to implement PEEPs. The judicial review hearing began yesterday. The Inside Housing report of the proceedings is here (archived)

Government privately ruled out implementing Grenfell Inquiry recommendation before completing consultation, court hears 

The Government will be presenting its case today.

On the issue of the need for a Plan B, an evacuation plan if stay put becomes untenable, in March the Home Office appointed the National Centre for Social Research to conduct a research project on the issue of evacuating high-rise buildings. Last week they published its report which entirely contrary to the Government's current approach concluded



> the body of evidence suggests that no single strategy is universally appropriate for the evacuation of high-rise residential buildings. Instead, every high-rise residential building should have a bespoke fire evacuation plan, developed in full consideration of the building design, the composition of occupants and crucially, the presence, or indeed absence, of effective compartmentation.



Residential high-rise buildings ‘should have individual evacuation plans’, says government-funded review - Inside Housing (archived)


----------



## Lurdan (Dec 8, 2022)

Inside Housing report on yesterday's judicial review hearing over the Government's decision not to implement PEEPs.

Government says ‘no decision’ made on personal evacuation plans for disabled people (archived)

Despite going out to consultation on entirely different proposals than those recommended by the Grenfell Inquiry, and stating that "we are currently unable to mandate PEEPs in high-rise residential buildings", the Governments Counsel argued that no decision had in fact been made about PEEPs. and it would be “premature for the court to be invited to second-guess as to how that decision will be taken and what it will be”.

The High Court's ruling is expected next year.


----------



## BCBlues (Dec 8, 2022)

Lurdan said:


> Inside Housing report on yesterday's judicial review hearing over the Government's decision not to implement PEEPs.
> 
> Government says ‘no decision’ made on personal evacuation plans for disabled people (archived)
> 
> ...



Kicking the can down the road at it slimiest. The minute you see Johnsons name alongside "unelected peers" you should not be surprised at the arrogance on show here.


----------



## GarveyLives (Today at 11:49 AM)

Disturbing:






Firefighters who saved lives at Grenfell Tower are diagnosed with terminal cancer


----------

