> they did two sort of cladding, one less flammable than the other OK, so everything is flammable at a certain temperature, even rock, but as I said on another thread ... People talk about "cost-cutting", "it would only have cost £5000 more to clad the building in a better material", etc. but this misses the point. There is no way on earth that "flammable"...
Ummm...as I have said on another thread this morning, this scandal could be huge, if it is proved that safety checks and inspections ignored the facts.
if they are considering charges then I assume that the regulations were not adhered to as originally claimed by the firm that did the refurb. The building must have had a fire certificate so that process needs looking at too.
I really feel for those people that unnecessarily lost their lives, do you think the council in every Town / City should stipulate as part of the agreement, each Flat should house a Fire Extinguisher, the person's said it was his Machine that caught fire, do you think this could have been stopped if he had had one, I don't know if he did or not.
It would appear that the residents in the lower flats mostly, if not all, got out OK. The problem for the poor people on the upper floors is that the fire spread so quickly, that there wasn't enough time to them to escape.
Many of them may have died from smoke inhalation, probably somewhere on the central stair well.....the only stair well, and the only means of escape from the building.
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.