This morning we've seen that the former technical manager at Kingspan reacted to queries about the fire safety of its insulation by saying "they're getting me confused with someone who gives a damn" and "they can go fuck themselves".
It was among the insulation used on Grenfell.
He added in one email "imagine a fire running up this tower!!!!!!" and said "we will sue the arse off them" about a consultancy which was raising concerns.
Its use on high rises was justified on the basis of a test which was not representative of real world systems.
It was also justified based on testing which used an older version of the product, with the newer version burning like a "raging inferno" when tested. Kingspan did not release this information to the market. The insulation is currently on hundreds of high rises around the country
In some of which, I should add, innocent flat owners are currently facing life changing bills to remove it (as well as a multitude of other unsafe products). How have consumers ended up paying for this mess?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1. I would challenge anyone who believes in the sanctity of deregulated free markets to read this and tell me how their position can stand. The behaviour described points to a problem so much wider than building safety.
If we want to solve almost any of the problems which face us - starting most obviously with the looming climate disaster we all face - we have to get much, much better at policing the actions of big businesses. It's completely fundamental. It is the problem.
This is a very fair point - which I accept having added my name to those who said it was terrible this week.
I agree with Jonathan that the faith placed in the regs (and those who enforce and describe them) is a part of the picture alongside many other factors
To add just a few more, evidenced by the inquiry so far:
Doctors get struck off for poor or dishonest practice. Where is that accountability for individuals engaged in building homes?
Why does the end consumer (the person that lives in the home) have so little power?
The blurring of the line between marketing and official advice or (even worse) building science. This is something that extends well beyond the incorrect use of insulation.
It is basically impossible to have watched the Grenfell Tower Inquiry and not feel that the construction industry is rotten from top to bottom: architects, contractors, product manufacturers, certifiers. The entire industry has come across as venal, careless and negligent.
I base this on not just the acts but the way they were treated by most of those involved as normal behaviour. An industry desperately in need of tough, independent regulation and an entirely new culture. Grenfell was the inevitable consequence of years of bad practice.
I'd add as well, the groups who have been talked about this week - LABC, NHBC, BRE - are unheard of to most people but are major industry bodies in the sector. These are groups with real influence. All had roles to play in the post Grenfell Hackitt review
Here's the story: in 2014/15 Celotex could not get its insulation past NHBC inspectors for use on high rise buildings. In September 2014, the body said Celotex had "no relevant testing information" for the product
In January 2015, a contractor emailed Celotex to say NHBC had rejected its insulation from a high rise it was working on.
“They [NHBC] are claiming that it does burn, as does the Kingspan K15 product and they are very nervous of it being used in high rise buildings,” email said
It got worse a couple of months later when Ardmore, another developer, was ordered to remove Celotex from a job in progress at great cost because it was not compliant with the regs.
Former head of marketing at Celotex denies any responsibility for "thoroughly dishonest" marketing of product used on Grenfell
So let's go through some of the things that were put to Mr Evans and what he said. Another Celotex employee, Jamie Hayes, says Paul Evans agreed to putting the additional fire barriers into the test, and had sign off
Mr Evans says: "I can't remember having any discussion about that with these three people... On the basis of what I can remember I would have to say this discussion didn't happen."
LABC issued a certificate for the insulation used on Grenfell Tower which simply copy and pasted Celotex's 'intentional, dishonest and deliberate' description of it as suitable for high rises
So who are LABC? It stands for 'Local Authority Building Control' and they are a representative group for council building control officers. But they are also a commercial entity that offer product certification for a fee.
After manipulating a large scale test to get a pass (see tweets yesterday), Celotex wanted an LABC certificate to convince building control officers that the testing was all correct and the product could be used on high rises (their big rivals Kingspan also had one of these certs