chrisp65 Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 Yes, fires happen, they're pretty close to inevitable where you have people and cooking facilities etc.. If a fridge hadn't caught fire, it would have been a dropped cigarette, or a faulty toaster, or fireworks. The point was not the source, but that buildings are supposed to be built and maintained to protect life from such predictable incidents. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, bickster said: The source is pretty much irrelevant if it wasn't for the cladding the fire would probably not have spread past the one flat, certainly not as fast and certainly not with cyanide gas being given off, most people died as a result of the gas inhilation I understand your point.....but disagree with it, in principle. The single flat was the sole cause of this fire.....yes it should have been confined to that flat, but that is another/additional issue and it seems to me the main one being investigated.....for me it should be the other way around or of equal importance. The cladding created the devastation of the whole building, that is without question, but issues happened way before that.......without that Flat causing the fire that cladding as ineffective as it was and as disgustingly pointless as it was, would still be featured in situe as it was misguidedly intended. Not enough is being said about that flat in my opinion. Who was the occupant? Are they alive? what can they tell us? Was the refrigerator faulty, what is the responsibility of the manufacturer? How was the refrigerator sited/positioned? Was the electrical wiring/power faulty powering it? What is the occupants comments, if they are alive? Too many questions that are most relevant to that flat are not being addressed IMO.......Maybe they have been and i am not aware? The cladding did not cause the fire, it just massively exaggerated it. Edited May 25, 2018 by TRO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 43 minutes ago, TRO said: Too many questions that are most relevant to that flat are not being addressed IMO.......Maybe they have been and i am not aware? These things would have been looked at as part of the fire investigation carried out after the incident. Do you think that an investigation hasn't taken place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 (edited) 19 minutes ago, snowychap said: These things would have been looked at as part of the fire investigation carried out after the incident. Do you think that an investigation hasn't taken place? I have to be mindful that I have not followed it in detail as much as I would have liked. It just seems in the debates, I have heard, that is my opinion......I have not heard enough on the source of it all....that might be my fault. Edited May 25, 2018 by TRO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, TRO said: I have to be mindful that I have not followed it in detail as much as I would have liked. It just seems in the debates, I have heard, that is my opinion......I have heard not enough on the source of it all. Because it's rather unimportant. Fires happen. It could have been a faulty fridge, a chip pan, a discarded cigarette, a power surge. Edited May 25, 2018 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 1 minute ago, snowychap said: Because it's rather unimportant. Fires happen. It could have been a faulty fridge, a chip pan, a discarded cigarette, a power surge. Fires happen. We look at it somewhat different. I accept what you imply.....but without that fire in that flat.....the cladding too, would be irrelevant. e.g If a car was subject to a thermal incident on a motorway and several cars caught fire as a result......I would be sure the initial car would be the focus of the investigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 5 minutes ago, snowychap said: Because it's rather unimportant. Fires happen. It could have been a faulty fridge, a chip pan, a discarded cigarette, a power surge. How fires happen, is probably the most important topic worth talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 6 hours ago, chrisp65 said: Yes, fires happen, they're pretty close to inevitable where you have people and cooking facilities etc.. If a fridge hadn't caught fire, it would have been a dropped cigarette, or a faulty toaster, or fireworks. The point was not the source, but that buildings are supposed to be built and maintained to protect life from such predictable incidents. that is correct. But IMO the source is very much the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 (edited) 25 minutes ago, TRO said: We look at it somewhat different. I accept what you imply.....but without that fire in that flat.....the cladding too, would be irrelevant. e.g If a car was subject to a thermal incident on a motorway and several cars caught fire as a result......I would be sure the initial car would be the focus of the investigation. What investigation are you going on about? This is now a public inquiry not a fire investigation. I don't doubt (having unfortunately had to hear the results of a fire investigation given) that the source of the fire would have been investigated by whoever conducted the investigation after the incident took place. As far as it is relevant to the public inquiry (whilst the reports may well be submitted in evidence) and the wider debate about fire safety in tower blocks, how the fire was caused is of little importance. Your analogy shows that you clearly don't get it. Edited May 25, 2018 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 8 minutes ago, TRO said: How fires happen, is probably the most important topic worth talking about. No, it really, really is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 13 minutes ago, TRO said: How fires happen, is probably the most important topic worth talking about. There are many reports readily accessible. A fridge fire in flat 16, fourth floor. First call to fire brigade 0:54a.m. fire brigade arrived within 6 minutes and put out the small kitchen fire. That episode was terribly mundane. Bread n butter work for the emergency services. 'The point', is that it then transpired that this utterly everyday domestic incident was turned in to disaster by incompetent or criminal building work on the fabric of the building. It's got very little to do with fridges. If we ban fridges and allow criminal use of killer materials, it will happen again. If we keep the fridges build the buildings properly, it won't happen again. Is that any clearer? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 (edited) 20 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: There are many reports readily accessible. A fridge fire in flat 16, fourth floor. First call to fire brigade 0:54a.m. fire brigade arrived within 6 minutes and put out the small kitchen fire. That episode was terribly mundane. Bread n butter work for the emergency services. 'The point', is that it then transpired that this utterly everyday domestic incident was turned in to disaster by incompetent or criminal building work on the fabric of the building. It's got very little to do with fridges. If we ban fridges and allow criminal use of killer materials, it will happen again. If we keep the fridges build the buildings properly, it won't happen again. Is that any clearer? No not at all......It just means all the deaths will be confined to one Flat.....Oh Great, I don't think. The extent of the incident is fair comment and I am in no way dismissing the cladding.....but I think the source is being dismissed and I do not accept your playing down of the original source...I simply don't accept your view in that context. Edited May 25, 2018 by TRO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 fine, good night Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 23 minutes ago, snowychap said: What investigation are you going on about? This is now a public inquiry not a fire investigation. I don't doubt (having unfortunately had to hear the results of a fire investigation given) that the source of the fire would have been investigated by whoever conducted the investigation after the incident took place. As far as it is relevant to the public inquiry (whilst the reports may well be submitted in evidence) and the wider debate about fire safety in tower blocks, how the fire was caused is of little importance. Your analogy shows that you clearly don't get it. The analogy should be something like a car is involved in an accident and a safety device fails to do what it is supposed to (like perhaps airbags not going off) and as a result a number of the occupants of the car are killed. In that case, you'd be utterly wasting time if you focused on what type of accident it was rather than why the safety devices failed (especially if the safety devices probably failed because they weren't up to scratch and lots of other cars have similar probably faulty safety devices and they were installed instead of the proper safety devices, &c.). My analogy shows I have an alternative view. Lets leave it there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted May 25, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted May 25, 2018 Mechanical faults and electrical failures happen. They don't usually cause an entire block of flats to go up in flames and the deaths of dozens. Hence the investigation. The source isn't the point. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 6 hours ago, chrisp65 said: Yes, fires happen, they're pretty close to inevitable where you have people and cooking facilities etc.. If a fridge hadn't caught fire, it would have been a dropped cigarette, or a faulty toaster, or fireworks. The point was not the source, but that buildings are supposed to be built and maintained to protect life from such predictable incidents. I agree with that. I just do not accept that the source has no point, sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted May 25, 2018 Share Posted May 25, 2018 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Chindie said: Mechanical faults and electrical failures happen. They don't usually cause an entire block of flats to go up in flames and the deaths of dozens. Hence the investigation. The source isn't the point. so why do so many mechanical or electrical devices get recalled by manufacturers,if it just happens? why is so much work put in the fire regulations i.e. fire doors and do's and don'ts for tenants, sprinklers fitted etc....because it is not meant to happen. of course the source is relevant. What if someone wilfully set fire to the flat, is that not accountable? My point is the knock on effect is devastating and understandably being investigated, I just have alternative views on other aspects of it. just my opinion FWIW. Edited May 25, 2018 by TRO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted May 25, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted May 25, 2018 2 minutes ago, TRO said: so why do so many mechanical or electrical devices get recalled by manufacturers, why is so much work put in the fire regulations i.e. fire doors and do's and don'ts for tenants, sprinklers fitted etc....because it is not meant to happen. of course the source is relevant. What if someone wilfully set fire to the flat, is that not accountable? My point is the knock on effect is devastating and understandably being investigated, I just have alternative views on other aspects of it. just my opinion FWIW. They get recalled when enough incidents occur to suggest or confirm an issue is present that is dangerous. Products, however, do fail and not necessarily because of systemic inherent faults, something comparatively common in fridges and freezers. I'm not sure why you're mentioning fire regulations. The cladding is a failure of building and fire regulations, as it's failure circumvented any other precautions and made the disaster. Of course this isn't similar to arson. That's a criminal act. Someone's fridge having a fault isn't. If this was arson the investigation wouldn't be different, there would just also be a criminal case alongside it. But it isn't. It's a faulty fridge. Which could happen anywhere. The scandal is an accident turned into a disaster, that's the investigation. If the block doesn't erupt, as it shouldn't have, there isn't an investigation. But it did. So there is. As there should be. The source isn't the point. This cannot be clearer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted May 26, 2018 Share Posted May 26, 2018 (edited) 7 hours ago, TRO said: I think the source is being dismissed Are you actually of the opinion that a fire investigation which would have reported on the whole incident from the perspective of fire experts (including looking at the seat of the fire, &c.) was not initiated as soon as practicable after the fire was put out and it was safe to go inside the building? It would seem so because your posts all seem to be labouring under an apprehension that no one's even bothered to investigate. Met police link (I haven't read all of the page, I just searched for the word 'fridge'): Quote Latest update - Friday, 23 June: Speaking at New Scotland Yard at circa 10:00hrs on Friday, 23 June, Detective Superintendent Fiona McCormack who is overseeing the investigation into the fire at Grenfell Tower said: ... "The Met has drawn together a huge team in response to this incident and since the weekend around 250 specialist investigators have been working hard on all aspects of this investigation and our response. "We now have expert evidence that the fire was not started deliberately - the fire started in a fridge freezer - the make and model is a Hotpoint FF175BP. "We are working with the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy who are talking to the manufacturer of the fridge freezer. "But we do know that that this model has not been subject to any product recall. "Further testing on the fridge freezer is being carried out by the manufacturer. "Our investigation is seeking to establish how the fire started and the speed that it spread as it took hold of the building. "We have been told the speed it spread at was unexpected, so importantly we will establish why this happened. "This investigation will be exhaustive and, as we learn more, the scope and scale may well grow. "We will examine the construction of the building including the refurbishment. "Whilst of course we are examining, with experts, the aluminium panelling we are also looking at the entire exterior of the building. "What that means is the aluminium composite tiles, the insulation behind it, how the tiles were fixed to the building as well as how it was installed. "Our tests will look at each aspect individually as well as how they how all worked together as part of the building's cladding. "Preliminary tests show the insulation samples collected from Grenfell Tower combusted soon after the test started. "The initial tests on equivalent aluminium composite tiles failed the safety tests. "Such are the safety concerns with the outcome of these tests we have immediately shared the data with the Department for Communities and Local Government who are already sharing that information with local councils throughout the country. "The shocking images from that night clearly show just how quickly and ferociously the fire spread across the external surface of the building. "As an absolute priority - and I completely understand the high public concern about safety - we will share any concerns about public safety with the relevant agencies. "We will identify and investigate any criminal offence and, of course, given the deaths of so many people we are considering manslaughter, as well as criminal offences and breaches of legislation and regulations. "We will seek to understand what happened to each and every person who died in that fire." ...much more on link Edited May 26, 2018 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted May 26, 2018 Share Posted May 26, 2018 2 hours ago, snowychap said: Are you actually of the opinion that a fire investigation which would have reported on the whole incident from the perspective of fire experts (including looking at the seat of the fire, &c.) was not initiated as soon as practicable after the fire was put out and it was safe to go inside the building? It would seem so because your posts all seem to be labouring under an apprehension that no one's even bothered to investigate. Met police link (I haven't read all of the page, I just searched for the word 'fridge'): Now that is most helpful.....thank you Snowy, for taking the time and trouble to type it. I was not aware of those comments.....but of course thats my problem. i am much more enlightened now. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts