TrentVilla Posted June 30, 2017 Author Moderator Share Posted June 30, 2017 Just now, peterms said: This saga will be used as a case study for PR and comms people for years to come, as an example of everything not to do when handling a disaster. Quite. It is staggering how consistently wrong people are getting things, the incompetence knows no limit. In part I think it's a result of people being terrified of doing the wrong thing and the consquences (legal or otherwise) for them personally. In part it's a result of a litigious society which stops people taking responsibility, not just for what has gone wrong but also doing something about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 London council that evacuated building knew of fire door problem five years ago Quote A London council that mounted an emergency evacuation of hundreds of people from their tower block homes last weekend partly because fire doors were not working was warned about the problem five years ago. Fire safety experts told Camden council in 2012 that apartment doors in Taplow, a 23-storey tower on the Chalcots estate in Swiss Cottage, were not sufficiently fire resistant and should be replaced. Last weekend the building was evacuated after the London fire brigade raised multiple fire safety concerns including that “fire doors in the building are not working as they should, meaning that in the event of a fire it could spread to other parts of the building”. The 2012 fire risk assessment, seen by the Guardian, concluded the doors would not provide residents with 30 minutes fire separation and recommended “all apartment doors are replaced”. Last weekend the council urged residents to get out of the tower and three neighbouring blocks after fire brigade inspectors raised concerns about the doors, as well as cladding and insulation around gas pipes. The evacuation of 650 properties caused chaos with at least 100 people staying in the Swiss Cottage leisure centre overnight, and the council promising to reimburse those who had paid for their own hotels. In a statement on Saturday, Georgia Gould, leader of Camden council said: “There were a number of fire safety issues that we and the London fire brigade were previously unaware of.” But on Wednesday, Camden confirmed it had commissioned the report by Hoare Lea Fire Engineering, following a refurbishment of the towers by the Grenfell Tower contractor Rydon under a PFI deal. Rydon still has responsibility for maintaining parts of the Chalcots buildings. The report said “the existing apartment doors do not meet the recommended design standards” for fire resistance and that some residents had replaced original entrance doors with decorative non fire-rated front doors. It said the replacement of non-compliant apartment doors was “considered essential” and said “a rolling programme” should be considered. A spokesman for Camden said: “Individual front doors to flats should be fire-rated. In some cases in the Chalcots these have been changed or adapted by residents over time, for example, through addition of non-fire rated letterboxes. Whilst not all may be required for the Chalcots estate, the council has bulk ordered 1,000 fire doors. Some existing doors can be corrected by fitting door closers and fire-rated letterboxes.” ...more on link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 1 hour ago, snowychap said: London council that evacuated building knew of fire door problem five years ago Well, that explains why they were in such a panic to decant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 12 minutes ago, peterms said: Well, that explains why they were in such a panic to decant. It would seem to offer some explanation, yes - as would her apparent inability to admit that there may have been fire safety issues of which the council were aware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 24 minutes ago, snowychap said: there may have been fire safety issues of which the council were aware That's the game-changer, in terms of culpability and possible criminal prosecution. Knowing, and failing to act. I imagine the staff responsible for actioning the report will face action internally. Of course they may have brought forward proposals, in which case the question will be why such proposals were not agreed, and the most likely answer will be cost. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mottaloo Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 I hear a 52 yr old clearing in the woods has been charged with making fraudulent claims about losing 2 family members, receiving handouts. If i didnt know it already, what a fcked up world we live in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 13 minutes ago, mottaloo said: I hear a 52 yr old clearing in the woods has been charged with making fraudulent claims about losing 2 family members, receiving handouts. If i didnt know it already, what a fcked up world we live in And they said there would be no criminal prosecutions coming out of this. Well, as long as they do this chancer out to make a few quid, they probably don't need to bother about the people who actually did things or failed to do things that led to scores of deaths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 So the leader of K&C and the CE of the TMO have gone. Next for the chop should be the little tosser Rock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 55 minutes ago, peterms said: So the leader of K&C and the CE of the TMO have gone. Next for the chop should be the little tosser Rock. And there he goes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 1 hour ago, peterms said: So the leader of K&C Well, he goes when there is a replacement. With apologies to Fry and Laurie, I'd like to propose: 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 3 minutes ago, snowychap said: Well, he goes when there is a replacement. With apologies to Fry and Laurie, I'd like to propose: I had to google that, but I'm glad I did. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 I can't see a problem here at all. Quote A senior executive from the company that made the cladding fitted to Grenfell Tower is reportedly 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), The Times reported. The committee is a non-departmental public body that advises Sajid Javid, the Communities and Local Government Secretary, on making building regulations and setting standards for the design and construction of buildings. It emerged last week that the Celotex RS 5000 insulation boards fitted in a large refurbishment project proved flammable when tested, and cladding on at least 137 high-rise buildings across 41 local authorities have failed safety checks. Of cladding samples tested across the country, 100 per cent failed. The product has been withdrawn from use on high-rise buildings, but Mr Allen remains on the committee, which met last week to discuss the Grenfell disaster. Fire safety experts have reportedly complained 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. Combustible cladding was thought to have aided the “unprecedented” spread of the fire in Grenfell Tower, which killed at least 80 people on 14 June. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 2 hours ago, peterms said: I can't see a problem here at all. Literally 10 seconds of research brought up his Linkedin profile, which shows that he was appointed to the BRAC in May 2017. He's also not a statutory director of the company. A Youtube video of him has him stating that he's an architect. The court of public opinion is in session, all rise! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 I'm not clear what point you're making. The problem I perceive is clearly stated in the first line of the piece I linked: "A senior executive from the company that made the cladding fitted to Grenfell Tower is reportedly an adviser to the government on building regulations." It is further elaborated in the rest of the article, explaining that fire safety experts feel the advisory board is too heavily weighted towards the building industry (which has an interest in weakening regulation if it increases profit). When he was appointed, whether he is a director of the firm, and what his profession is, do not address this conflict of interest in any way, do they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 27 minutes ago, Risso said: Literally 10 seconds of research brought up his Linkedin profile And from that: Quote Marks philosophy, and architectural background enable development of an integrated company strategies to reduce silo mentality provides cross company solutions enabling exploitation of current legislation, regulations within the sustainable agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 17 hours ago, peterms said: I'm not clear what point you're making. The problem I perceive is clearly stated in the first line of the piece I linked: "A senior executive from the company that made the cladding fitted to Grenfell Tower is reportedly an adviser to the government on building regulations." It is further elaborated in the rest of the article, explaining that fire safety experts feel the advisory board is too heavily weighted towards the building industry (which has an interest in weakening regulation if it increases profit). When he was appointed, whether he is a director of the firm, and what his profession is, do not address this conflict of interest in any way, do they? "BRAC membership consists of independent volunteers appointed due to their experience and expertise across the construction sector." 17 hours ago, peterms said: When he was appointed, whether he is a director of the firm, and what his profession is, do not address this conflict of interest in any way, do they? Well, here's the membership of the committee: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/building-regulations-advisory-committee/about/membership "Members of the Building Regulations Advisory Committee (BRAC) are appointed by the Secretary of State for the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG). Members are appointed on an independent voluntary basis to represent particular areas of expertise or experience. They are usually appointed for 2 or 3 years. There is no prescribed minimum or maximum number of members. Members The current members are: Chair Neil Cooper – Chief Executive, MLM Group & Director, CIC Approved Inspector Management Board Ltd Members Antony Burd – Head of Sector (Construction), British Standards Institution Peter Caplehorn - Deputy Chief Executive of the Construction Products Association Emma Clancy - Chief Executive Officer of Certsure LLP and Ascertiva Group Alan Crane CBE – Construction Industry Advisor and Consultant - 3C’s Construction Consulting Services Nicholas Cullen – Research and Development Partner, Hoare Lea & Partners Gavin Dunn – Director of BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method), Buildings Research Establishment Julia Evans - Chief Executive, Building Services Research & Information Association Gary Ferrand – Assistant Chief Fire Officer, East Sussex Fire and Rescue Service Cliff Fudge - Technical Director, H&H UK Ltd Rachel Smalley – President of the Access Association Neil Smith – Head of Research and Innovation, National Housebuilding Council Paul Timmins - Managing Director, Approved Inspector Services Ltd Stephen Wielebeski – Senior Consultant, Home Builders Federation Dr Hywel Davies –Technical Director, Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers Lorna Stimson – LABC Deputy Managing Director Michael Finn – Group Design and Technical Director Barratt Developments PLC Mark Allen – Technical Director Saint-Gobain Delegation UK and Ireland Michael Sansom – Building Control Manager Sussex" BSI, East Sussex Fire and Rescue, Building Control, Access Association, Builkding Services Research, Building Research Establishment. None of those sound especially keen on making things as cheap and unsafe as possible, which was the point of the article you linked. That poor sod seems to have a background in sustainable architecture, and he's being hung out to dry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 21 minutes ago, Risso said: That poor sod seems to have a background in sustainable architecture, and he's being hung out to dry. Isn't the point about the company that he's representing rather than about the individual? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 Just now, snowychap said: Isn't the point about the company that he's representing rather than about the individual? Exactly. Regulatory capture. Like accountants writing the tax code. The thing Risso quotes calls them "independent volunteers". He's an industry representative, and in his particular case, his firm makes things which the regulations probably should regulate more tightly, and which his firm has a direct financial interest in not regulating more tightly. He's probably a lovely bloke, kind to animals, does the shoping for his elderly neighbour. Not the point, at all. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 (edited) 2 minutes ago, peterms said: does the shoping That should be enough to get him shote. Edited July 1, 2017 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts