"all 75 High-Rises Tested So Far Have Failed Fire Safety Regulations In England"

[vetuste_ennemi]

Reported on tonight's CNN.

All? I can think of only two plausible explanations for this.

One (the charitable version) is that today's standards are more rigorous than those applied at the time of the original build/upgrade/refurbishment.

If, however, the standards haven't changed, then I'm left with only two alternative explanations: that all the original inspectors were incompetent, or that they were all .

I invite younger, more agile and more inventive minds to suggest further explanations.

[vetuste_ennemi]

... or that they were all corrupt.

[jno]

or that there's a problem with the current tests.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/26/tower-block-cladding-tests-after-grenfell-fire-lack-transparency-say-experts

Not endorsing it but it may be rash to assume the problem was then and not now.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Well, that's interesting, JNO. From the Guardian article:

"Building safety experts have warned that government tests on tower block cladding in the wake of the Grenfell Tower disaster lack transparency and are too simplistic to be used to condemn blocks as unsafe."

[vetuste_ennemi]

Jno's answer hints at the possibility that today's inspectors are incompetent or corrupt.

O tempora, o mores!

[youngmafbog]

Something doesnt sound quite right, I would expect to see some issues but to have all tested failing is the other extreme. It is quite possible in the wake of the fire the testers are erring on the side of caution.

This is often the problem with knee jerk reactions and often then leads to the real or underlying problem being masked.

Just out of interest does anyone know if the rest of the world are doing tests on their tower blocks?

[albaqwerty]

Am unsure about the rest of the world YMB, probably won't be mentioned too much in the UK.

I still think it stinks of back-handers plus incompetence.

[mikey4444]

YMB....I was listening to the PM program yesterday, on my way home. There was a chap on there from some organisation, that was explaining how the building regs. are so complicated and convoluted, that there is little, clear agreement on whether something can be used for cladding or not.

As regards tower blocks elsewhere in the world, I would sincerely hope that they are being investigated. Fires in very tall buildings are not exactly unheard of.

I notice that the company making the cladding (Arconic) used on Grenfell ( Reynobond PE) is no longer selling it for use in tall buildings.

Its all a lot more complicated, than we thought at first.

[mikey4444]

That interview I heard on yesterdays PM Program is here ::

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08vwmxf

Interview starts at about 40:39.

[ToraToraTora]

it has to be bent from top to bottom

[Sqad]

Well......I just don't get this "cladding problem....mainly because I don't understand the procedure.
I am a Council Leader and i want to "smarten up" the high rise flats with...something.
Cladding is discussed at the Council meeting, agreed and sent to the Fire and Safety boys locally. It is passed.
The plans are then submitted to the Government body in Whitehall and permission is given.......fine.
As we are a member EU country the plans are submitted to the EU planning and Safety body in Brussels and given the "go-ahead."
So far nobody is to blame and three levels of supervisory bodies have given the go ahead.
Are AB members suggesting that in that procedure..somewhere...there is corruption and a case for litigation?
Doesn't ring a bell of authentic facts to me.
I doubt whether cladding paid a major part and I feel that it is a totally disruptive and knee jerk reaction to remove cladding nationwide. It smells of litigation and Political interest with questionable underlying facts for such actions.
Just a feeling.

[ToraToraTora]

sqad, however it came about, coating buildings in highly flammable materials must be against the regs, surely!

[anotheoldgit]

Just tell me how many residential buildings would pass the rigorous building regulations that we now see today?
It is only after certain maintenance work is carried out one is now issued with a safety certificate.

[benhilton]

I can think of another reason - many of these tower blocks were originally constructed with asbestos in them (before the cancer risks were known) . Over the years the asbestos has been stripped out of them - now the thing about asbestos is it's fireproof . The replacement materials are not likely to be anywhere near as fireproof .

[mikey4444]

Morning Sqad !

I am not sure the procedure happens in quite the way that you say.....not sure where Brussels comes in ?

We shall have to wait until the outcome of the Enquiry for a full verdict, but it seems most people accept that the cladding was in some way implicated in the rapid spread of the fire. There are lots of other factors involved, in why so many people were killed....lack of fire extinguishers, lack of sprinklers, only one staircase, etc, etc. But the cladding is still prime suspect for the huge loss of life.

Reynobond PE has now been found NOT to be fire proof, and that can't be ignored.

[Sqad]

TTT......cladding must have been tested.....long before the Grenfell tragedy....c'mon. Also the degree of inflammability varies between one expert and another. As far as I can tell ALL certificates of suitability and safety were obtained......so......why should there be any case for litigation at this stage and more importantly stripping off cladding in ALL high rise flats nationwide.

[Sqad]

Morning mikey.....an odd business. How are they tackling the problem of cladding lined tower blocks in other European cities?
Also the testing of inflammability of cladding seems to be some sort of secret, known only to a few.

[mikey4444]

"why should there be any case for litigation at this stage and more importantly stripping off cladding in ALL high rise flats nationwide ? "

Because the cladding material is now found to be highly inflammable Sqad, that is why.

"O tempora o mores"

[mikey4444]

Sqad...(09:09)....I don't know how other countries are behaving, but I would hope that they paying very close attention to what is happening here.

[ToraToraTora]

did you see that building burning sqad? They might as well have cladded it fire lighters. Someone somewhere done a deal to use cheap materials and pushed it through with bribery.

[Sqad]

mikey
"Because the cladding material is now found to be highly inflammable"

Highly inflammable is debatable as i have mentioned and one presumes that litigation would be made against the company who made the cladding and depending upon the description of it's marketing. I must be honest mikey, I only guessed the application procedure, but i am sure that it would involve European approval somewhere along the line.....and got it.
I say again...."Who do you sue?"