Sign in to follow this  
Old Frightful

Grenfell Tower Block fire in London.

Recommended Posts

Unfortunately, yes. This is something like the third or fourth conviction in relation to Grenfell, including people who got money by claiming to be victims when they weren't. How low can people sink?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JohnM said:

Unfortunately, yes. This is something like the third or fourth conviction in relation to Grenfell, including people who got money by claiming to be victims when they weren't. How low can people sink?  

I think there have been more than that - about ten in total I think.  Some have stolen enormous amounts.  All the incidences have been shocking IMO.  That anyone would steal this money regardless of the means is unfathomable to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Mark S said:

Any news on when the people who signed off on the non FR cladding will be prosecuted? 

Good question. What have you found out? Or do you want someone else to do it for you?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I predict nobody will be prosecuted over the cladding or at least no one will be convicted - it will be found that a number of people each made assumptions/errors which added together to create the issue. 1 team specced cladding of a certain type, anther will have made their plans assuming that is what was actually happening whilst elsewhere as various bits of the refurb were contracted out and subcontracted below that at each writing of a contract someone will have said "can you do it cheaper" and the subbie will have said yes if "x changes to y" and by the time all those changes added together you ended up with the disaster.

UNLESS it can be shown there was actually 1 person who was responsible for checking the overall result and signing off - but i bet that every subcontracting contract had  liability limiting clauses in it

Edited by SSoutherner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, SSoutherner said:

I predict nobody will be prosecuted over the cladding or at least no one will be convicted - it will be found that a number of people each made assumptions/errors which added together to create the issue. 1 team specced cladding of a certain type, anther will have made their plans assuming that is what was actually happening whilst elsewhere as various bits of the refurb were contracted out and subcontracted below that at each writing of a contract someone will have said "can you do it cheaper" and the subbie will have said yes if "x changes to y" and by the time all those changes added together you ended up with the disaster.

UNLESS it can be shown there was actually 1 person who was responsible for checking the overall result and signing off - but i bet that every subcontracting contract had  liability limiting clauses in it

I reckon that the police will find it hard to charge anyone over the cladding not only because of the number of companies involved in that aspect of the refurbishment but also because of the number of other factors that played into the disaster: the original build design, the Fire Service stay put policy, the failure of other aspects of the maintenance and refurb work (such as the windows).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎9‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 8:53 PM, Saintslass said:

I reckon that the police will find it hard to charge anyone over the cladding not only because of the number of companies involved in that aspect of the refurbishment but also because of the number of other factors that played into the disaster: the original build design, the Fire Service stay put policy, the failure of other aspects of the maintenance and refurb work (such as the windows).

The stay put policy would have worked if the correct cladding had been used. and they said what, who signed what and who passed what should all be logged but I suspect they will all have been lost probably with one day they'll be found again with paedophile files.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The old ‘catalogue of errors, but no one agency is to blame’ verdict.

IMHO whoever signed off on the non-FR cladding should go to prison for a long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mark S said:

The old ‘catalogue of errors, but no one agency is to blame’ verdict.

IMHO whoever signed off on the non-FR cladding should go to prison for a long time.

A cynic might suggest that the whole multi agency approach is specifically designed with that objective in mind.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mark S said:

The old ‘catalogue of errors, but no one agency is to blame’ verdict.

IMHO whoever signed off on the non-FR cladding should go to prison for a long time.

From my brother-in-law who worked in external metal cladding for buildings (architectural copper in his case) and has ex colleagues who sort of know what happened I believe it was a case of Architect specced a look, designers specced a build method and overall cost, main building contractor found a sub contractor to do the cladding side, they asked suppliers for quotes and got a variety of different ones dependant upon grade of material, went back to main builder with the costs they chose the one they wanted to go with (not the cheapest but not the most expensive) but without double checking with the designers (as it still fitted the spec that was passed to them) the whole build was then signed off by the council building inspector but he is likely to have looked at the orignal plan as signed off by the planning dept and just checked what was built matched that.

So who would you blame to the level of criminal culpability ?

 

Edited by SSoutherner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, SSoutherner said:

From my brother-in-law who worked in external metal cladding for buildings (architectural copper in his case) and has ex colleagues who sort of know what happened I believe it was a case of Architect specced a look, designers specced a build method and overall cost, main building contractor found a sub contractor to do the cladding side, they asked suppliers for quotes and got a variety of different ones dependant upon grade of material, went back to main builder with the costs they chose the one they wanted to go with (not the cheapest but not the most expensive) but without double checking with the designers (as it still fitted the spec that was passed to them) the whole build was then signed off by the council building inspector but he is likely to have looked at the orignal plan as signed off by the planning dept and just checked what was built matched that.

So who would you blame to the level of criminal culpability ?

 

I work in the cladding industry (supplying fall arrest safety netting, edge protection and Haki stair towers) one of the directors of a company I do work for stated exactly what had gone wrong the very next day.

Edited by Marauder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another Grenfell fraudster.

My guess is that had there not been all that aggressive political nonsense in the immediate aftermath of the disaster, the Council would have felt more comfortable to investigate claimants fully before distributing funds (ditto for the charities) and most of these frauds would have been avoided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Saintslass said:

Yet another Grenfell fraudster.

My guess is that had there not been all that aggressive political nonsense in the immediate aftermath of the disaster, the Council would have felt more comfortable to investigate claimants fully before distributing funds (ditto for the charities) and most of these frauds would have been avoided.

I doubt it. You will always get opportunistic schisters taking advantage of tragedies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Marauder said:

I work in the cladding industry (supplying fall arrest safety netting, edge protection and Haki stair towers) one of the directors of a company I do work for stated exactly what had gone wrong the very next day.

In my humble, the end of the line is the Building Inspector. Regardless of what the Architect specified, the main contractor  put forward via the cladding contractor, the old Class O is still required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, getdownmonkeyman said:

In my humble, the end of the line is the Building Inspector. Regardless of what the Architect specified, the main contractor  put forward via the cladding contractor, the old Class O is still required.

I understand the type of cladding that was approved had been certified (class O was outdated in 2000 and was supposed to have been phased out,  but it is still used along with the EU standards cladding) as fit for purpose by the manufacturer so that saves the inspectors Bu tt, do we know if all the stops had been put in place correctly and at the right distances

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Marauder said:

I understand the type of cladding that was approved had been certified (class O was outdated in 2000 and was supposed to have been phased out,  but it is still used along with the EU standards cladding) as fit for purpose by the manufacturer so that saves the inspectors Bu tt, do we know if all the stops had been put in place correctly and at the right distances

I imagine lads who worked on that will be shitting themselves. As this is more likely to stop at them rather than go up the chain. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

I imagine lads who worked on that will be shitting themselves. As this is more likely to stop at them rather than go up the chain. 

I believe the actual firm who did the work went bust

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


League Express - Online Now

League Express - Every Monday



Rugby League World - Sept 2018

Rugby League World - Sept 2018

Rugby League Books On Sale Here