Grenfell Inquiry - Phase 2.

Mr Pigeon

Illiterate Flying Rat
Scout
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
26,291
Location
bin
Can these people who are "losing evidence" be charged with anything? Perverting the course of justice? Being a massive cnut?
 

Sweet Square

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
23,632
Location
The Zone
Mr Pigeon said:
There should but they already put the blame on the firefighters after the first phase so the public have already been told who to hate.
Click to expand...
Its was so depressing watching that unfold.

The last few years have really taught me that a large percentage of the population are unwilling to change their views even when faced with the mass death(Grenfell and Covid).
 

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
57,410
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
The details from this inquiry are relentlessly grim. Profiteering, zero due diligence, outright fraud and somehow 240 other blocks of flats also bought the insulation that failed so many fire tests.

Feels like no-one cares cos this has become Jarndyce and Jarndyce from Bleak House.

Technician for Grenfell Tower insulation firm had 'serious drug habit'

A senior technician responsible for safety tests on combustible insulation used on Grenfell Tower had “a serious drug habit” and fell asleep at work, the inquiry into the disaster has heard.

Kingspan knew Ivor Meredith, a technical manager, used drugs from 2010 when his landlord reported him, the inquiry heard, but the problem was “brushed off” until he was sacked in 2015.

He told the inquiry that even though the plastic-based insulation foam burned in tests, several of which it failed, the company claimed it had limited combustibility and sold it for use on at least 240 towers in the UK.
Click to expand...
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-tower-insulation-firm-had-serious-drug-habit
 

Mr Pigeon

Illiterate Flying Rat
Scout
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
26,291
Location
bin
For all the people in the last thread who said "Why are you getting annoyed at them blaming firefighters. It's just the first phase of the inquiry and if others are to blame that'll come out too". THIS is why we were pissed off. The first phase was when Grenfell was part of the public consciousness. Now the public couldn't give a shit because the media have moved on to Brexit and vaccines.

I want to dig up that old thread and see what those posters think of the situation now. Absolutely deplorable scapegoating from this Government.

Take a big fat shit on Boris' fat face. Not saying he's to blame but he's a cnut as well so why not. He looks like a ham sandwich with some roof insulation plopped on top.
 

Drainy

Full Member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
14,824
Location
Dissin' Your Flygirl
Mr Pigeon said:
For all the people in the last thread who said "Why are you getting annoyed at them blaming firefighters. It's just the first phase of the inquiry and if others are to blame that'll come out too". THIS is why we were pissed off. The first phase was when Grenfell was part of the public consciousness. Now the public couldn't give a shit because the media have moved on to Brexit and vaccines.

I want to dig up that old thread and see what those posters think of the situation now. Absolutely deplorable scapegoating from this Government.

Take a big fat shit on Boris' fat face. Not saying he's to blame but he's a cnut as well so why not. He looks like a ham sandwich with some roof insulation plopped on top.
Click to expand...
Didn't the first phase not actually model for smoke either?

So saying an earlier call to vacate flats would have saved lives was ignoring the biggest threat to life
 

noodlehair

"It's like..."
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
16,326
Location
Flagg
Jippy said:
I was reading up on phase2 yesterday and it's obviously damning re the company looking to cut costs and the one that helped them but creamed off £126k of that.
You mentioned new rules will increase accountability- I take it no-one in the industry expects any criminal convictions to result from this?
Click to expand...
Missed this at the time. I think most people in the industry think there should be prosecutions, but if they happen it will likely take many years. Look how long Hillsborough has dragged on for. The problem isn't the lack of willingness to hold people to account, it's finding the actual people who were at fault or responsible.

There's so many people in the supply chain and then on top of that you have the insulation manifacturer's themselves being deliberately misleading. They will say the responsibility is on the product user/contractor to ensure it's safety. The suppliers/contractors will say they believed it was safe because they were mislead by the manifacturers...and then they'll say the building control authority should have picked it up...except they were never even given drawings with the correct detail, were understaffed, and it seems never properly checked anything at all.

It's a pretty big mess to unwravel. No one's coming out looking blameless and the more evidence comes out the worse it seems to get!

The bigger concern in the industry at the moment I think is what it means for other existing buildings. There's a lot of panicking from insurers, and there's a lot of buildings that need bringing up to standard that no one wants to fork out the money for. The proposed new legislation will bring any existing high risk building into the same set of requirements, and a lot are in such a state that no one's going to want to put their name down as being responsible for them.

A single staired high rise with no sprinklers and long escape travel distances seems mad by today's standards even before the changes that are coming in, but there's probably thousands of older buildings like that in the country...and that's before you even get to the cladding issue.
 
Last edited:

noodlehair

"It's like..."
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
16,326
Location
Flagg
DavidDeSchmikes said:
Click to expand...
Mail getting it's facts wrong shocker.

The Government already agreed to pay to remove ACM cladding (i.e. the type used on Grenfell) from any other high rise buildings it's been used on...and you can get a grant to remove non ACM type cladding if it might not meet fire safety regs. There's also law now saying the cost can't be passed on to homeowners by the building owner. The funding is there it's all just taking far too long to sort out.

Insurers are causing hassle by getting themselves confused over what's classed as unsafe cladding and what's classed as a high risk building. The regs ban flammable material on any building over 18 metres in height, but other stipulations such as sprinklers now apply to anything over 11 metres in height. Insurers are pulling up things like two storey buildings because there's a bit of decorative cladding around the windows, which is just dumb because that's going to be basically any building if you want to look hard or be picky enough.

Most damning thing in the inquiry so far is still Celotex admitting they were deliberately selling their insulation for use on high rise buildings despite knowing it wasn't suitable. There's a powerpoint presentation you can find on the inquiry website where they are literally encouraging their sales people to target customers of high rise buildings who might "Not understand the 18 metre rule".
 

DavidDeSchmikes

Full Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2013
Messages
17,249


December
Guardian said:
A major shareholder in Arconic, the company that made Grenfell Tower’s combustible cladding, donated nearly £25,000 to Boris Johnson and the Conservative party, it has emerged. The most recent donation was recorded in 2017, the year in which Arconic’s plastic-filled panels were the main cause of the rapid spread of fire that killed 72 people.

The bereaved and survivors on Tuesday night called on the prime minister to return the money to Elliott Advisors UK, the British arm of a US private equity company that has a 10% holding in the $14bn (£10.4bn) annual turnover business.
Click to expand...
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...shareholder-in-grenfell-cladding-firm-arconic[/quote]
 
Last edited:

FireballXL5

Full Member
Joined
May 9, 2015
Messages
10,084
But who could have predicted a devastating fire? Well actually Arconic themselves did, with a pretty accurate body count too.

Grenfell Tower inquiry: Fire predicted a decade before, memo shows

The firm that made the Grenfell Tower cladding was warned of the risks of a building fire that would kill "60 to 70" people a decade before the tragedy.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56350123
 

UmbroDays

Full Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Messages
738
I still can't talk about this as it makes my blood boil.

My boy used to live in the block, and my other g was a first responder and told me it was horrible.

Obvious coverup from root to branch, for nothing other than money. Completely fecking disgusting
 

Green_Red

New Member
Joined
May 29, 2013
Messages
10,296
blue blue said:
It appears a number of witnesses will only give evidence if they get immunity. Seems unfair on the victims families and friends who just want some honesty and closure.

Should they be allowed to withhold what they know?
Click to expand...
Depends, what if they are the workmen who installed the facade but did so under duress from a boss who told me to either install it or look for a new job? Same could be true if someone pointed out that it didn't pass the safety standard but was told to keep their mouth shut or look for a new job. That can happen, being a whistle blower doesn't always get the results you think it will. If they're scumbags involved in setting the thing ablaze then no they shouldn't get immunity from prosecution, in fact if they withhold information and are later found to be involved their sentence should be automatically doubled. 76 people lost their lives, countless other loss their homes, others have to live with PTSD.
 

blue blue

Full Member
Joined
May 23, 2016
Messages
1,143
Supports
chelsea
Green_Red said:
Depends, what if they are the workmen who installed the facade but did so under duress from a boss who told me to either install it or look for a new job? Same could be true if someone pointed out that it didn't pass the safety standard but was told to keep their mouth shut or look for a new job. That can happen, being a whistle blower doesn't always get the results you think it will. If they're scumbags involved in setting the thing ablaze then no they shouldn't get immunity from prosecution, in fact if they withhold information and are later found to be involved their sentence should be automatically doubled. 76 people lost their lives, countless other loss their homes, others have to live with PTSD.
Click to expand...
Thats an old post and the participants have agreed to give evidence.
I can't agree with your comment about what if somebody had been told to do the wrong thing. They should then blow the whistle on the person who told them. It is morally wrong to not help prevent this from happening again and the wrong doers in this case have caused the death of many people. There are no circumstances under which people should not tell the truth about this building. It sounds to me like you think its more important to hang onto your job than to do the right thing. This is what caused the deaths in the first place.

Bad bosses making bad decisions should not be hidden.
 

Green_Red

New Member
Joined
May 29, 2013
Messages
10,296
blue blue said:
Thats an old post and the participants have agreed to give evidence.
I can't agree with your comment about what if somebody had been told to do the wrong thing. They should then blow the whistle on the person who told them. It is morally wrong to not help prevent this from happening again and the wrong doers in this case have caused the death of many people. There are no circumstances under which people should not tell the truth about this building. It sounds to me like you think its more important to hang onto your job than to do the right thing. This is what caused the deaths in the first place.

Bad bosses making bad decisions should not be hidden.
Click to expand...
Well the you haven't read my post correctly.
 

FireballXL5

Full Member
Joined
May 9, 2015
Messages
10,084
From the Guardian... 'There was envy at the sight of swimmers 10 floors up, followed by disgust that only the richest residents had a key, leaving those in the shared ownership flats sweating jealously below.'

No doubt that was built properly so the rich folks could get their jollies.
 

jojojo

JoJoJoJoJoJoJo
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
38,284
Location
Welcome to Manchester reception committee
For UK viewers, C4 aired a documentary a couple of weeks back. It's mostly a program about the people who lived in the building not the technology etc.

It tells an awful but important story. It's particularly punishment as you look at meetings of the residents committee. The stonewalling by the management company and the officials as people complained about shoddy work and bodged solutions as contractors did the internal update. It's no surprise that the work being done where the residents couldn't see it was even worse.

Grenfell: the untold story on C4 catch-up and:
https://www.channel4.com/programmes/grenfell-the-untold-story
 
You must log in or register to reply here.