Grenfell Tower: Fire-Risk Tests On Cladding On '600 High Rises'

[mikey4444]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40366646

So, what happened over the years, when these places were "inspected" ?

...are we to believe that no one noticed that there was a fire-risk with the cladding until a couple of days ago ?

[ivor4781]

there was (is)two types of cladding one fire proof and one not so fire proof, so why make one that no so fire proof in the first place?

[douglas9401]

IF the cladding was detailed in the plans, IF the contractors supplied the cladding as specified, IF the cladding was fitted as per instructions, IF inspectors checked cladding type against specifications, IF it complied with regulations at the time of installation and was deemed safe then it would seem that the fire risk was unknown or within acceptable limits.

Maybe that's why there are to be endless enquiries into the matter instead of the powers that be coming on here for a guess or two.

If pressed though, I'd say that someone, somewhere is getting a bit twitchy about the precise specs of materials used instead of the proper gear.

Documentation needs to be secured as a matter of extreme urgency.

[mikey4444]

Dougie....my point is that now that we have had this tragedy, checks have been ordered into every other such building in Britain.

But surely, these checks must have been regular occurrences, perhaps annual events, so what happened last year, or the year before, when the checks would have found that the cladding was flammable and therefore dangerous?

[hellywelly4]

If they didn't know the cladding wasn't fireproof, how could they be blamed. It is all so easy with hindsight to play the blame game. I'm sure no-one deliberately used flammable material on these flats. Yes they used cheaper material, but it was all described as safe.

[douglas9401]

I suppose you could stretch the point to asbestos too, if you like.

It was safe until it wasn't but in the meantime relatively cheap, easy to work with and fire resistant. We live, we learn.

[mikey4444]

But it wasn't safe Helly, and that is my point. All building materials have a "spec" and this would have been known every time the buildings were inspected.

Grenfell Tower's cladding was a very recent addition, and the firm that provided the raw materials would have it made it quite clear to the Council if they were flammable or not. It would have been in the "spec"

It would seem to me that the outcome of previous "inspections" were not worth the paper they were written on.

[douglas9401]

"Inspections" might be taken to imply that the lads sat in the van for their shift and ticked some boxes, Mikey.

Maybe take a step back from that one.

[mikey4444]

Dougie....if you know the history of asbestos, you will know that it was used for years after it became known that it was dangerous. We have a certain morbidly fat, deceased Liberal MP to thank for a lot of the delay.

My original point still stands as regards to Grenfell Tower. The type of cladding used was used because it was a cheaper option, not because it was safer.

We shall have to wait until the outcome of the Enquiry to find out if the flammability of that cladding was a significant factor in the deaths of so many people.

[nailit]

I live in a high rise. Not yet cladded, but all the tower blocks here in stoke are in the process of been cladded. Weve received a letter from the council reassuring us that the cladding been used is safe and also, in the light of the Grenfell disaster, that sprinkler systems will be fitted throughout stokes high rises.

[mikey4444]

Dougie (18:06)...you may be right...if that is the case, then I am sure it will come out in the Enquiry, or perhaps in the criminal investigation, that will precede it.

[mikey4444]

Nailit...good news for you...lets hope there is no delay in fitting those sprinklers !

[Gromit]

Mikey,

// In the UK there are no regulations requiring the use of fire-retardant material in cladding used on the exterior of tower blocks and schools. But the Fire Protection Association (FPA), an industry body, has been pushing for years for the government to make it a statutory requirement for local authorities and companies to use only fire-retardant material. Jim Glocking, technical director of the FPA, said it had “lobbied long and hard” for building regulations on the issue to be tightened, but nothing had happened. //

[mikey4444]

I smell a giant scandal erupting over the whole issue of fire and building regs.

If flammable materials can be used to clad a building, then any rules and regulations are an ass.