Entire high rise alight in London

[Irufushi]

Khan has just said that not just current government at fault.

You're wasting your time with him, wired to the moon.

[Rudolf's Mate]

You're wasting your time with him, wired to the moon.

[emoji3]

[Jambo-Jimbo]

'The cladding on the building was illegal and did not meet the required standards'. London Mayor Khan.

 

'Banned' is how Philip Hammond described it on the BBC & Sky News earlier today.

 

The cladding used can be used up to a certain height, it's not illegal to use it up to 10 metres or so, over that height it's banned as the dearer fire-proof cladding has to be used.

In the USA & Germany this cladding is also banned over a certain height but can be used below that height.

 

The manufacturers clearly state that this cladding should not be used over 10 metres.

Rydon sub-contracted the work out to Harley Facades and it was they who carried out the work of fitting the cladding.

 

Now it's just been said there on Sky News that they have seen the original planning permission submissions and there is no mention of any use of fire-proof cladding to be used.

When the council approved the planning permission there was still no mention that fire-proof cladding was to be used.

 

Pure speculation on my part, but who would draw up the planned refurbishment, I'm assuming that it would be architects who would have drawn up the plans, am I right?

However it makes no difference if it were as surely the Council, then Rydon and then Harley Facades would have noticed the omission for the use of fire-proof cladding on the plans and pointed out the error, well you would have thought so, wouldn't you.

[aussieh]

Just crawled out of your effing s*******e again? What a wankstain on the face of humanity you are!

What you on about?

Hardman!

[Jeff]

?5500 been transferred to each family for temp accommodation. Shocking figure in my opinion

[Ricardo Shillyshally]

?5500 been transferred to each family for temp accommodation. Shocking figure in my opinion

Why is it shocking?

[Jeff]

Why is it shocking?

I just don't think its enough if you think that these families lost absolutely everything. Im sure they would rather not have to sort accomodation themselves either whilst constantly worrying about what happens next

[Ricardo Shillyshally]

I just don't think its enough if you think that these families lost absolutely everything. Im sure they would rather not have to sort accomodation themselves either whilst constantly worrying about what happens next

It's described as a down payment on Sky news and a minimum amount they will receive, not a maximum payment.

[Don Dan]

'Banned' is how Philip Hammond described it on the BBC & Sky News earlier today.

 

The cladding used can be used up to a certain height, it's not illegal to use it up to 10 metres or so, over that height it's banned as the dearer fire-proof cladding has to be used.

In the USA & Germany this cladding is also banned over a certain height but can be used below that height.

 

The manufacturers clearly state that this cladding should not be used over 10 metres.

Rydon sub-contracted the work out to Harley Facades and it was they who carried out the work of fitting the cladding.

 

Now it's just been said there on Sky News that they have seen the original planning permission submissions and there is no mention of any use of fire-proof cladding to be used.

When the council approved the planning permission there was still no mention that fire-proof cladding was to be used.

 

Pure speculation on my part, but who would draw up the planned refurbishment, I'm assuming that it would be architects who would have drawn up the plans, am I right?

However it makes no difference if it were as surely the Council, then Rydon and then Harley Facades would have noticed the omission for the use of fire-proof cladding on the plans and pointed out the error, well you would have thought so, wouldn't you.

 

Indeed. You (contractor) are invited to submit a price based on a Specification you are given by (?) You submit a price based on that Spec. You're letter of Tender should say it's in accordance with the Spec to supply and fit X and our price is Y.

Two things appear to be wrong, the type of material and standard required may not have been correctly specified or omitted. The Contractor failed to notice the Spec was wrong.

Experience has taught me when involved in a tendering process everyone knows what the job is. I'm gobsmacked nobody picked up on the glaring error.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jambo-Jimbo]

?5500 been transferred to each family for temp accommodation. Shocking figure in my opinion

 

No the money isn't for temporary accommodation the Government is picking up the bill for that.

'It is in addition to a guarantee of funding for temporary accommodation for the families unable to return to their homes, and funding for legal representation to ensure residents' voices are heard during a planned public inquiry.'

 

The ?5,500 is an interim payment, not a final payment.

 

http://news.sky.com/story/grenfell-tower-families-to-receive-minimum-of-1635500-from-no-10-10919544

[Francis Albert]

I wonder what the purpose of the cladding was (to make the building look like a fancy new block to those passing on the A40?) and how much of the 12m refurbishment the cladding cost.

[Francis Albert]

Khan has just said that not just current government at fault.

 

Khan once again speaking as mayor of London not some partisan politician. Impressive.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

Indeed. You (contractor) are invited to submit a price based on a Specification you are given by (?) You submit a price based on that Spec. You're letter of Tender should say it's in accordance with the Spec to supply and fit X and our price is Y.

Two things appear to be wrong, the type of material and standard required may not have been correctly specified or omitted. The Contractor failed to notice the Spec was wrong.

Experience has taught me when involved in a tendering process everyone knows what the job is. I'm gobsmacked nobody picked up on the glaring error.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

There was something else I read about the tendering process.

 

The Council had set a ceiling of ?10m for the work, but the lowest bid was ?11m so the council put it out to tender again, this time Rydon bid just over ?8m and thus won the contract.

 

Like yourself I find it amazing that nobody noticed, there was if I'm reading it right a minimum of 3 opportunities to have rectified the mistake, before work began. 

[kingantti1874]

Those individuals who managed to escape Grenfall see it as political. Who are you to disagree with them?

it wouldn't matter which government is in Westminster, Labour, lib dems, SNP, the tories or the monster raving loonies.. That building would have been clad with the same material and this tragedy would sadly still have occurred.

 

The residents of grenfell have every right to protest in whichever fashion they want at whichever government is in power..regardless of my opening point someone or some body needs to be held to account but My point was more directed at people on here peddling their usual ill informed moronic shite to suit their own political agenda. That's pathetic.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

I wonder what the purpose of the cladding was (to make the building look like a fancy new block to those passing on the A40?) and how much of the 12m refurbishment the cladding cost.

 

Weather proofing, better Insulation and to spruce them up and make them look better, so I've read.

[maroonlegions]

Absolutely pathetic to be trying to point score politically using a subject like this..

 

 

 

 

Why Gary Lineker, Lily Allen and you shouldn't comment | JOE.co.uk

No comment

JOE.CO.UK

 

 

[Rudolf's Mate]

Khan once again speaking as mayor of London not some partisan politician. Impressive.

Have to agree.

[felix]

it wouldn't matter which government is in Westminster, Labour, lib dems, SNP, the tories or the monster raving loonies.. That building would have been clad with the same material and this tragedy would sadly still have occurred.

But it does matter which government's in power.

It's the government who set the building standards.

Don't really want to point score for the SNP - but I'll reiterate - this couldn't have happened in Scotland, because of tighter regulations on over-cladding high rise buildings.

 

I'm sure the same is true for Germany and Switzerland. Not Dubai, as witnessed in 2016.

[kingantti1874]

Why Gary Lineker, Lily Allen and you shouldn't comment | JOE.co.uk

No comment

JOE.CO.UK

 

No one said you couldn't comment (or in your case some post someone else's views) .. But your using this subject to make a point relative to your own politics.

 

Poor it really is.. My last post on this subject

[elvoys]

Khan once again speaking as mayor of London not some partisan politician. Impressive.

Like Obama he is good at cutting a figure. But not sure he is at all as vigilant or on top of his brief behind closed doors and history suggests he has very bad judgement.

Always got the sense he was using this as putting himself in window for the recapturing of the Labour mantle but that would seem to be gone with the left grassroots revival.

[Don Dan]

 

 

This information has been around for awhile. Maybe the witch hunters need to refocus their ire.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited June 18, 2017 by Dannie Boy

[H1B5 Owner]

Back to the events, an interview with the incident commander on the night.

 

Had to decide whether to commit teams to the building interior without a structural assessment being available.

 

Tough call and despite the risk, they went in. Respect.

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Damn, just realised I omitted the link.

 

"London fire brigade boss: ?It was a massive risk, but it?s our job to go in? "

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/17/london-fire-brigade-dany-cotton-grenfell-tower

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[Francis Albert]

Like Obama he is good at cutting a figure. But not sure he is at all as vigilant or on top of his brief behind closed doors and history suggests he has very bad judgement.

Always got the sense he was using this as putting himself in window for the recapturing of the Labour mantle but that would seem to be gone with the left grassroots revival.

What's the history about his bad judgement?

[H1B5 Owner]

Blog from a fire fighter who attended that night. A humbling read.

 

http://michaelrosenblog.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/a-firefighter-who-attended-grenfell.html?spref=tw&m=1

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[Zico]

Like Obama he is good at cutting a figure. But not sure he is at all as vigilant or on top of his brief behind closed doors and history suggests he has very bad judgement.

Always got the sense he was using this as putting himself in window for the recapturing of the Labour mantle but that would seem to be gone with the left grassroots revival.

I'm not a fan of his but, unlike Corbyn, I dont think he's looked to gain political capital and unlike May, he appears to be able to express genuine empathy.

[luckyBatistuta]

Blog from a fire fighter who attended that night. A humbling read.http://michaelrosenblog.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/a-firefighter-who-attended-grenfell.html?spref=tw&m=1

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

It really is, I remember getting in a few arguments with folk who were moaning about them trying to get a pay rise and they were saying exactly what he did, that they just lie in their beds and sleep...really pissed me off.

 

Some of the things these guys encounter must be truly horrific.

 

I know a cops job is completely different to a firefighter, but they have to sit a fitness test when joining just the same. I've always wondered why the police force bother, when once they're in the door, they can just let themselves go. An unfit cop could cost possibly cost a fellow officer, or member of the public their life. Can't even begin to imagine 60 year old firefighters going into that situation to save people.

[William H. Bonney]

79 now feared dead.

[maroonlegions]

On the point of political point scoring.

 

 I  think is an easy cop out for those in positions of decision making ,and  those who are responsible for local council budget constraints to divert responsibility and accountability for any serious  failings  in safety and budget cuts by manipulating the "political point scoring"  angle.

 

The  point is  that those that are responsible do not  want the above points to take hold .

 

They do not want  the failings from local and senior government sources ,to be seen in such a light.

 

  That they played a big part in contributing to a blatant disregard for fire safety  is transparent here.

 

Through linking it to budget cuts that forced choosing the cheaper cladding to save a few bucks and the failing to install sprinklers that would have bought time for more people to escape is inexcusable.

 

The fact is that any austerity cuts that effect fire safety  protocols in such tower blocks or anywhere  else for that matter should never have been sanction never mind  endorsed.

 

I would be saying the same if it was a Labour /Lib Dem or SNP run  local council or government , my point is ,all who are guilty, and  even by association ,should be held accountable and not be allowed to slithery away  in the night from their responsibility.

 

Take this below , we have a blatant and desperate  political point scoring  attempt by the Chief Editor of Breitbart, Raheem Kassam,

 

He is praying that his readers don't do any research whatsoever. Because if they did, they'd find out that he is a shameless and calculating fraud.

 

 

 

 

 I always find it somewhat interesting that people always wail "don't politicise the tragedy" after a tragedy that is intrinsically political occurs.

 

If you don't think there's a link between Government policy and the sad events that happened then thats your right to that opinion but we need to look at all the facts.

 

I for one do think there is a link between Government polices and the avoidable and sad events of this tragic incident .  

 

Politics is about preventing tragedies such as this and those prevention's are directly related to governmental and local council  heath and safety laws. 

 

The decisions of landlords and the local authority regarding where to spend money, and where to not, is explicitly political also.

 

I cannot think of anything more political than people losing their lives in avoidable tragedies.

 

What is the other alternative here, to keep ones mouth shut about any factual discrepancies linking political decision making affecting or contributing to such a tragedy . As opposed to allowing the party whose political  ideology is responsible for this tragedy  to sweep it under the rug.

 

May tried it at the very start by trying to  play a very low back door profile but was rightly called out about it.

[maroonlegions]

Forgive the link for this articule , hate the rag myself, but it has the video of Piers Morgan loosing it with Grove boy.

 

Piers also calling for sprinkler systems to be installed in tower blocks, agree with him, they might not put out an intense fire but they give people that one precious advantage , and that is TIME, time to get out.

 

 

Piers Morgan tells Michael Gove 'stick it where the sun don't shine' over Grenfell Tower

PIERS Morgan and Michael Gove got into a heated debate on Good Morning Britain today.

DAILYSTAR.CO.UK

 

 

Edited June 19, 2017 by maroonlegions

[William H. Bonney]

 

Forgive the link for this articule , hate the rag myself, but it has the video of Piers Morgan loosing it with Grove boy.

 

Piers also calling for sprinkler systems to be installed in tower blocks, agree with him, they might not put out an intense fire but they give people that one precious advantage , and that is TIME, time to get out.

 

Piers Morgan tells Michael Gove 'stick it where the sun don't shine' over Grenfell Tower

PIERS Morgan and Michael Gove got into a heated debate on Good Morning Britain today.

DAILYSTAR.CO.UK

 

2 wankers behaving like wankers.

[Jeff]

2 wankers behaving like wankers.

 

Piers' views have actually been pretty decent on this subject

[maroonlegions]

This is heartbreaking, straight from the mouth of a professional fire fighter who was involved with the fire at Grenfell tower block. 

 

Cuts to the fire service have had a big impact , austerity on public services seems even more immoral and barbaric.

 

 

 

A firefighter who attended Grenfell tower has written this:

 

[This piece of writing is up on the Facebook 'Save the Fire Service' page and begins with 'Sent to us at STUKFS, powerful and emotional story from a firefighter who attended Grenfell Tower']

STUKFS = Save the UK Fire Service

 

"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".

 

 

"I've always been very proud of the job my colleagues and I do week in week out as part of the fire service. At times its hard, at others not so much but the uncertainty of what might happen is always there".

 

"We are a funny bunch, we like to laugh to play jokes on each other, sometimes we are silent and won't tell you what we are thinking about". 

"We laugh off the good natured banter directed at us from outside the service and mostly manage to do the same with the insults we get as a public service, even when it's not always easy to do so".

 

 

For anyone who can be bothered to read the rest the the link is proved below.

 

This is from another professional who is once again raising concerns about continuing cuts to the fire service  and the impact it is having on the safety of the public.  

 

 

A firefighter who attended Grenfell tower has written this:

[This piece of writing is up on the Facebook 'Save the Fire Service' page and begins with ' Sent to us at STUKFS, powerful and emotional sto...

MICHAELROSENBLOG.BLOGSPOT.COM

 

 

[Armageddon]

_{Many many sad facts and unanswered questions about this horrific disaster.}

 

_{The ultimate aim of this work was to please the rich from outside the tower block, that has cost the people their lives.} 

_{The work wasn't done properly to insulate the flats to make life better for those inside, it was done to make the block look nicer for those in the surrounding area.} 

_{The work was then done on the absolute cheap and a project group have made a decision to use this material to clad the building.} 

_{The spec, value and quantity wouldn't have been able to be signed off lightly.} 

_{Who sold the materials knowing it was banned?} 

_{Who ordered knowing it was banned?} 

_{Who installed knowing it was banned?} 

_{Whoever it was must have used this product elsewhere.}

 

_{The quantity of people in those flats should also raise questions regarding our housing situation.  The numbers being quoted as dead/missing will relate to those registered to be living there, there's no doubt those flats would have been rammed and over-occupied.  A Fire Risk Assessment must have been carried out, either way, if it's been done then its shocking and if it's not been done then it's shocking.}

 

_{Sad times.}

[Jambo-Jimbo]

On the point of political point scoring.

 

 I  think is an easy cop out for those in positions of decision making ,and  those who are responsible for local council budget constraints to divert responsibility and accountability for any serious  failings  in safety and budget cuts by manipulating the "political point scoring"  angle.

 

The  point is  that those that are responsible do not  want the above points to take hold .

 

They do not want  the failings from local and senior government sources ,to be seen in such a light.

 

  That they played a big part in contributing to a blatant disregard for fire safety  is transparent here.

 

Through linking it to budget cuts that forced choosing the cheaper cladding to save a few bucks and the failing to install sprinklers that would have bought time for more people to escape is inexcusable.

 

The fact is that any austerity cuts that effect fire safety  protocols in such tower blocks or anywhere  else for that matter should never have been sanction never mind  endorsed.

 

I would be saying the same if it was a Labour /Lib Dem or SNP run  local council or government , my point is ,all who are guilty, and  even by association ,should be held accountable and not be allowed to slithery away  in the night from their responsibility.

 

 

 

 

I would have thought that the Police are better placed to determine whether anybody has shown 'A blatant disregard for fire-safety' rather than you are.

 

You keep going on about budget cuts and austerity playing a big part in this and maybe in the fullness of time that may be the case, however.

When the council originally put this contract out to tender their budget for the works was just under ?10m (?9.67m to be precise)

Leadbitter the original proposed contractor bid ?11.27m to do the work, which was ?1.6m over the councils budget, so the council put the contract out to tender again and this time Rydon offered to do the work for ?8.7m, which was some ?2.5m lower than Leadbitter's bid and ?1m below the councils budget, therefore it is little surprise that Rydon who won the contract.

http://www.itv.com/news/2017-06-15/grenfell-tower-original-proposed-contractor-was-dropped-to-reduce-cost-of-refurbishment-project/

 

The point I'm trying to make here is that the council was prepared to pay ?1m more for the works to be carried out but Rydon offered to carry out the works below the councils budget.

That doesn't sound to me to have anything to do with budget cuts or austerity, indeed it sounds more like it was a good piece of business for the council as they saved ?1m which then could be used elsewhere, such as in keeping an old folks home open for example.

 

And finally, Sky News obtained copies of the original planning permission submissions and they clearly show that whilst the firm of Architects employed to carry out drawing up of the plans state which brand of cladding to be used, they failed to specify which particular type of cladding was to be used, i.e. PE (the cheaper version) or FP (fire-resistant) or both, as it should have been.

Now why nobody within the council, Rydon or Harley Facades failed to notice that omission is something which I'm sure the Police will want to know as well

 

So what do we have.

There is as far as I can see, no evidence at this stage to suggest that budget cuts or austerity played any part in this particular tragedy, far from it going by the ITV link

From the above document, it would seem to suggest that Human Error may have played some part in this tragedy, how much a part the subsequent investigations hopefully will discover.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

_{Many many sad facts and unanswered questions about this horrific disaster.}

 

_{The ultimate aim of this work was to please the rich from outside the tower block, that has cost the people their lives.} 

_{The work wasn't done properly to insulate the flats to make life better for those inside, it was done to make the block look nicer for those in the surrounding area.} 

_{The work was then done on the absolute cheap and a project group have made a decision to use this material to clad the building.} 

_{The spec, value and quantity wouldn't have been able to be signed off lightly.} 

_{Who sold the materials knowing it was banned?} 

_{Who ordered knowing it was banned?} 

_{Who installed knowing it was banned?} 

_{Whoever it was must have used this product elsewhere.}

 

_{The quantity of people in those flats should also raise questions regarding our housing situation.  The numbers being quoted as dead/missing will relate to those registered to be living there, there's no doubt those flats would have been rammed and over-occupied.  A Fire Risk Assessment must have been carried out, either way, if it's been done then its shocking and if it's not been done then it's shocking.}

 

_{Sad times.}

 

There is some confusion over whether this cladding is or is not banned in the UK, yesterday Government Ministers didn't help by coming out and saying it's banned, when the manufacturers say it's not banned.

The manufactures state that it shouldn't be used over a certain height, but it's perfectly legal to use it below that height.

It has also been reported that this cladding is banned in the USA & Germany, which is true but again it's not the whole story because it's only banned for use over a certain height and is perfectly legal to be used below that height.

[Armageddon]

I would have thought that the Police are better placed to determine whether anybody has shown 'A blatant disregard for fire-safety' rather than you are.

 

You keep going on about budget cuts and austerity playing a big part in this and maybe in the fullness of time that may be the case, however.

When the council originally put this contract out to tender their budget for the works was just under ?10m (?9.67m to be precise)

Leadbitter the original proposed contractor bid ?11.27m to do the work, which was ?1.6m over the councils budget, so the council put the contract out to tender again and this time Rydon offered to do the work for ?8.7m, which was some ?2.5m lower than Leadbitter's bid and ?1m below the councils budget, therefore it is little surprise that Rydon who won the contract.

http://www.itv.com/news/2017-06-15/grenfell-tower-original-proposed-contractor-was-dropped-to-reduce-cost-of-refurbishment-project/

 

The point I'm trying to make here is that the council was prepared to pay ?1m more for the works to be carried out but Rydon offered to carry out the works below the councils budget.

That doesn't sound to me to have anything to do with budget cuts or austerity, indeed it sounds more like it was a good piece of business for the council as they saved ?1m which then could be used elsewhere, such as in keeping an old folks home open for example.

 

And finally, Sky News obtained copies of the original planning permission submissions and they clearly show that whilst the firm of Architects employed to carry out drawing up of the plans state which brand of cladding to be used, they failed to specify which particular type of cladding was to be used, i.e. PE (the cheaper version) or FP (fire-resistant) or both, as it should have been.

Now why nobody within the council, Rydon or Harley Facades failed to notice that omission is something which I'm sure the Police will want to know as well

 

So what do we have.

There is as far as I can see, no evidence at this stage to suggest that budget cuts or austerity played any part in this particular tragedy, far from it going by the ITV link

From the above document, it would seem to suggest that Human Error may have played some part in this tragedy, how much a part the subsequent investigations hopefully will discover.

 

It will be interesting to see where the failing has happened, what ever comes of it is utterly tragic.

[I P Knightley]

_{Many many sad facts and unanswered questions about this horrific disaster.}

 

_{The ultimate aim of this work was to please the rich from outside the tower block, that has cost the people their lives.} 

 

 

_{The work wasn't done properly to insulate the flats to make life better for those inside, it was done to make the block look nicer for those in the surrounding area.} 

 

_{there's no doubt those flats would have been rammed and over-occupied.}  

None of these is a fact; they're your agenda points. 

 

Do you know the area at all? It would take a lot more than sprucing up one high-rise to make the views pleasing for "the rich". 

[maroonlegions]

Both of these women were fighting the Kensington and Chelsea Tennant  Management Organisation for building improvements .

 

They were then bullied and harassed by the Kensington and Chelsea Tennant  Management Organisation and told to shut it.

 

Lets hope that for their sake those responsible for any failings are brought to justice.

 

 

 

Read more: Two women feared dead in Grenfell Tower were ?threatened with legal action? for raising alarm about fire safety;

 

Edited June 19, 2017 by maroonlegions

[Armageddon]

None of these is a fact; they're your agenda points. 

 

Do you know the area at all? It would take a lot more than sprucing up one high-rise to make the views pleasing for "the rich". 

 

I do know the area well.  I worked at Imperial College London for 4 years which isn't far away at all and I stayed closer, there's been a shed load of new buildings going up round there, I was last at ICL in 2014, and the towers stuck out like a sore thumb then across the skyline.

[maroonlegions]

And it starts, the doubts, that any actions by the government, will  not be swift enough to seize any documentation from contractors , firms and councils pertaining to the causes of this sad tragedy.

 

Given the time frame allowed until a chairman is appointed to any inquiry that then makes it a criminal offence for anyone or firm to destroy  any documentation under section 35 of the Public  Inquiry Act, he just might have a point.

 

One firm Harley Facades, which supplied and fitted this cladding, have already removed some stuff  from their website,  saying it was out of a mark of respect.

 

But at the same time it is also staggering to now know that chancellor Philip Hammond has publicly stated that the cladding used is already banned in Britain or words to that effect.

 

That fact in its  self surely makes Harley Facades guilty by association on the grounds of supplying and installing banned material,  and also the council for allowing it to be used ,and not  simply fact checking Harley Facades  health and safety documentation on the cladding, which i imagine they are required to have and retain by law.

 

 

Surely heath and safety laws are created to prevent such negligence, if not  then what is the point of them????

 

 

Interesting times ahead of just how these developments pan out and what road they go down.

 

 

Read more: Fears of a Grenfell Tower cover-up as Labour MP who lost artist friend urges police to carry out raids to stop firms and councils from destroying evidence ;

[Jambo-Jimbo]

And it starts, the doubts, that any actions by the government, will  not be swift enough to seize any documentation from contractors , firms and councils pertaining to the causes of this sad tragedy.

 

Given the time frame allowed until a chairman is appointed to any inquiry that then makes it a criminal offence for anyone or firm to destroy  any documentation under section 35 of the Public  Inquiry Act, he just might have a point.

 

One firm Harley Facades, which supplied and fitted this cladding, have already removed some stuff  from their website,  saying it was out of a mark of respect.

 

But at the same time it is also staggering to now know that chancellor Philip Hammond has publicly stated that the cladding used is already banned in Britain or words to that effect.

 

That fact in its  self surely makes Harley Facades guilty by association on the grounds of supplying and installing banned material,  and also the council for allowing it to be used ,and not  simply fact checking Harley Facades  health and safety documentation on the cladding, which i imagine they are required to have and retain by law.

 

 

Surely heath and safety laws are created to prevent such negligence, if not  then what is the point of them????

 

 

Interesting times ahead of just how these developments pan out and what road they go down.

 

 

Read more: Fears of a Grenfell Tower cover-up as Labour MP who lost artist friend urges police to carry out raids to stop firms and councils from destroying evidence ;

 

ML do you ever read what your copying and pasting before you put it out?

 

This stuff is old news, it's over 24 hours old, a lot has happened in that time to render your C & P jobs obsolete.

 

Go back a page or two and catch up.

[Guest]

ML do you ever read what your copying and pasting before you put it out?

 

This stuff is old news, it's over 24 hours old, a lot has happened in that time to render your C & P jobs obsolete.

 

Go back a page or two and catch up.

If he does read it, he'll probably be the only one here that does.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

MaroonLegions just for you, please take note.

 

Statement from CEP Architectural Facades regarding comments by the Chancellor 18 Jun 2017

Responding to comments made by the Chancellor this morning regarding the cladding material used on Grenfell Tower, John Cowley, managing director of CEP Architectural Facades, said: ?Reynobond PE is not banned in the U.K. Current building regulations allow its use in both low rise and high rise structures.

?The key question now is whether the overall design of the building?s complete exterior was properly tested and subsequently signed off by the relevant authorities including the Fire Officer, Building Compliance Officer and architect before commencement of the project?

 

http://omnisexteriors.com/division/statement-cep-architectural-facades-regarding-comments-chancellor/

 

 

[Geoff the Mince]

I think ML has finally been abducted by Aliens .

[Irufushi]

I think ML has finally been abducted by Aliens .

The guys relentless.

[I P Knightley]

I do know the area well.  I worked at Imperial College London for 4 years which isn't far away at all and I stayed closer, there's been a shed load of new buildings going up round there, I was last at ICL in 2014, and the towers stuck out like a sore thumb then across the skyline.

 

So you know that the area from just above Royal Circus, up St Ann's Road and Bramley Road to just north of the A40 is 'out of keeping' with the surrounding Holland Park, Ladbroke Grove and "North Kensington" areas. (North Kensington being the pretentious name applied by estate agents for people buying the bigger houses in St Quintin Ave etc - just off Wormwood Scrubs).

 

There is no way that the objective of cladding Grenfell Tower was to make it pretty for the rich residents nearby. 

[SE16 3LN]

None of these is a fact; they're your agenda points. 

 

Do you know the area at all? It would take a lot more than sprucing up one high-rise to make the views pleasing for "the rich". 

What's wrong with the area? It's a small strip of Social Housing, far from the worst in the country, in amongst the leafy, and stupidly expensive, areas of Holland park and Notting Hill. The motivation into the "sprucing up" of the block is a mute point to me, but was obviously done to improve the aesthetics of the area. Knowing the council I think that can reasonably be interpreted as improving the views for the rich.

[maroonlegions]

There is some confusion over whether this cladding is or is not banned in the UK, yesterday Government Ministers didn't help by coming out and saying it's banned, when the manufacturers say it's not banned.

The manufactures state that it shouldn't be used over a certain height, but it's perfectly legal to use it below that height.

It has also been reported that this cladding is banned in the USA & Germany, which is true but again it's not the whole story because it's only banned for use over a certain height and is perfectly legal to be used below that height.

 

You got any back  up evidence to support this.??

 

I mean what was the height restrictions of using this flammable material??

 

Perfectly legal to be used below that height you say, what height??

 

And this is hard for me to accept , since when does a fire risk flammable material stop becoming so when it reaches a certain height, for as we all know fire does not respect what kind of height any flammable substance is at.

 

This material  was banned in Dubai after it was responsible for a fire that damaged a building that was tall in its height design.

 

Are we also to believe that the contractor and  manufacturer  of this material are going to admit that this material is banned in the UK just after what has happened??

 

Total lunacy to rely on height restrictions of a flammable material , the fact its flammable in the first place should outweigh the fire hazard risks.

[maroonlegions]

WTF.  

 

 

#Grenfell video: ?move north or be ?intentionally homeless?, lose all support  

The scandal of the treatment of the survivors of the Grenfell Tower catastrophe goes from shameful to vile. As one of the survivors testifies in the video below,?

SKWAWKBOX.ORG

 

 

[Mikey1874]

The English system for housing does seem a bit harsher than here.

 

I'm really surprised the council didn't have a better emergency response. Generally this is the sort of scenario councils' emergency planning prepares for. Maybe cut backs have led to a drop in standards of preparation.

 

It's not that hard to have people on site organising things.

 

While the politics is perhaps distasteful just now there are signs of a real lack of care.