NEWS Further Grenfell reports revealed


A SERIES of reports were released that shone new light on the fire in June 2017, looking at the tower’s refurbishment, cladding and insulation.


Refurbishment report


A fire safety report into the tower’s refurbishment in 2013 was based on plans that did not include cladding, with the report writers not called back to complete the work despite this.


Inside Housing reported on


the fire safety report produced by Exova Warringtonfire in October 2013 for Grenfell Tower as part of its refurbishment, with the report not released and studied during the inquiry’s first phase. The news outlet reported that the report had been ‘based on early plans which did not include the cladding’, and that it was ‘never followed up despite a recommendation to do so’. Exova’s report said that the


refurbishment plans would have ‘no adverse effect on the building in relation to external fire spread’, but added that this perspective was to have been ‘confirmed by an analysis in a future version of this report’. It had been based on outline plans for a ‘simple conversion’ of the lower floors to residential use, and did not include the addition of external cladding, as well as the ‘other major changes’ such as new windows. The company was not asked


back to complete the work it would need to do with the final plans for refurbishment, and Inside Housing added that the intention to clad the tower dated back to 2012. Exova stated that it had never seen specifications for cladding when writing the report, and ‘it was not clear why Exova was not asked to comment on plans to fully clad the building, nor why it was not commissioned to complete the follow-up analysis it recommended’. Exova’s spokesperson


commented: ‘Exova was not instructed or engaged to


8


produce a further report, nor was it engaged for the later stages of design, material selection, construction or sign-off of the Grenfell Tower refurbishment project. In particular, Exova did not select, test, review or approve the cladding systems that were finally chosen and installed; nor did it ever have the level of information which would have been needed in order to carry out fire engineering work in relation to use of any system as part of the project.’ The document is called an


outline fire safety strategy, and these are ‘written as guidance on how to comply with building regulations when early plans are being drawn up’. Grenfell residents were consulted on what type of cladding should be used in 2012, and selected a ‘fire-retardant zinc material’, but this was later discarded ‘in favour of a cheaper and far more flammable aluminium and polyethylene product’ two years later, combined with combustible plastic insulation. At the inquiry, only one page


was publicly released, while it is expected to be discussed ‘in more detail’ in phase two, starting in 2020.


FBU response


The Fire Brigades Union (FBU) responded via general secretary


MARCH 2019 www.frmjournal.com


Matt Wrack, who referred to this as a ‘concerning development’, which ‘sheds further light on the complacent attitude towards resident safety shown by the council, the Westminster government, and the businesses involved in Grenfell. ‘The FBU has repeatedly


highlighted the dangers of the cosy relationship between councils, the construction industry, and fire safety regulators. This new evidence provides further proof that corners were cut, exposing the endemic cost-cutting mentality surrounding social housing, and which placed profit before the lives of residents. This is rightly a matter for the inquiry and potentially for police investigation.’ He commented further: ‘We


need to know why Rydon (the construction company that refurbished Grenfell Tower), failed to commission a fire safety report into the final plans; whether the council overlooked its responsibilities; whether cost- cutting measures drove this decision; and why the requests of residents for fire retardant cladding were ignored. ‘We are disappointed that, due


to the delay to the next phase of the inquiry, the corporate and government interests complicit in the fire safety regime at Grenfell will continue to evade justice for another year.’


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60