A pretty extraordinary morning just gone where we saw video footage from a January 2016 conference where a cladding fabricator warned of the wide-use of ACM (the cladding used on Grenfell) and the chair described it as a potential "ticking time bomb"
Audience member was Nick Jenkins, then of Euroclad. He warned that the material was in wide use in the UK and as a result "You could have an exact repeat of the Dubai fire in any number of buildings that we supply product to in London"
Steve Evans of the NHBC (largest building control body in the UK) was on the panel and agreed with Jenkins that an "anomaly" in official guidance this type of cladding "would meet the regulations". He told the inquiry today this was not his view and it was "badly worded"
Asked by the chair if the issue was "a time bomb", Mr Evans responded that "you'll have to ask our customers" (house builders).
Incidentally, I've found slides of his presentation where he outlined the risks to the industry of dangerous cladding. He mentions manslaughter.
Jenkins then took this up with Brian Martin (senior govt official) via email following the conference. He told Mr Martin the product was in very wide use and said he had "grave concerns" about it. Asked for govt to provide clear statement that it was banned.
Martin declined, telling him he did not think the guidance was "all that ambiguous" and "it is for the designer and the building control body to consider if [the regulations] have been met". Huge opportunity to sound the alarm missed.
The government is understood to be considering preventing Rydon Homes accessing the Help to Buy programme, due to Rydon's involvement in the Grenfell Tower refurbishment. A couple of thoughts below:
If enacted this would be the first major govt level sanction for any organisation involved in the Grenfell Tower fire. They have talked tough in the past, but have never matched it with action.
However, you would have to ask: why now? Bereaved and survivors group Grenfell United have been pushing for this exact move since 2019. Below is a letter they sent to Robert Jenrick in August 2020:
NHBC continued to permit the use of Kingspan insulation on high rises despite its own fire engineer concluding the combustible material was "an accident waiting to happen"
NHBC fire engineer John Lewis wrote this about Kingspan's K15 insulation in November 2014. But the firm (Britain's largest building control inspector) continued to sign off high rise projects containing the insulation
At March 2015, NHBC estimated it had 300 high rise buildings on its books using K15. Asked whether he was concerned that changing course would reveal a "cladding crisis" in all the facades signed off by NHBC, Mr Evans said no:
A senior manager at the NHBC has denied the firm was "captured by Kingspan" and "used as their poodles" over its acceptance of combustible insulation on high rises
The NHBC - the largest private building inspector in the country and a major warranty provider for new homes - was warned Kingspan's K15 insulation was not compliant on almost all high rises in summer 2013. But it carried on signing it off.
Today's witness Steve Evans blamed a misleading third-party certificate implying it was acceptable, and said NHBC was willing to wait for the firm to provide additional testing to demonstrate it was safe
The firm which issued a certificate saying Kingspan’s combustible insulation could be used on high rises was “gamed”, “played”, and “sweetened up” by the manufacturer, a senior staff member has said
The inquiry saw an email showing that when Kingspan approached LABC asking for a large range of certificates another senior staff member wrote “We’ll save this failing company yet! Seriously, that’s really good news.” They had already been warned about its combustibility
When another building control operation (the NHBC) was considering rejecting the use of Kingspan's K15 on high rises due to fire safety concerns, internal emails show LABC staff describing it as "business opportunity" for LABC
LABC was warned that its misleading certificate about Kingspan's K15 insulation and told it was "extremely important with regard to life safety" that it was corrected. It did not act. The letter was also forwarded to a senior govt official
LABC is a membership organisation represting council building inspectors. It also had a sideline where companies paid it to provide certificates confirming the status of their products. These then helped get the products signed off in construction projects.
In 2009, LABC provided a certificate to Kingspan. It said the product can be considered a material of limited combustibility and could be used on high rises. Both LABC and Kingspan witnesses have accepted this was misleading. Previous report here: insidehousing.co.uk/news/news/king…
I think it is probably worth explaining in a bit more detail why the government's 'apology' for Grenfell yesterday was inadequate and disingenuous... 🧵
In its opening statement the government ultimately accepted two failures:
- Not realising local authority building inspectors were failing to properly enforce the rules
- A 'misplaced' trust in product manufacturers and contractors which was 'abused'
The implication was that it learned of these issues after the Grenfell Tower fire. However, the evidence simply does not support that claim. It is clear it knew, in some cases in quite specific terms, about both problems before the fire. Let's take the misplaced trust first.