London Fire and Aftermath RIP

Widdershins

I know of at least 2 London Labour MP Landlords.

devnull

Widdershins wrote: »

I know of at least 2 London Labour MP Landlords.

Politicians' being Landlords, who'd have thought it.

I'd be shocked if all parties didn't have some landlords in their ranks.

Would you like some more straws to clutch at?

wes

Fratton Fred wrote: »

good god, this thread is now going off in to pure political overload.

its actually pretty sickening that people use something like this just for petty point scoring. :rolleyes:

Sorry, but this was political long before the actual fire, seeing as not only were residents ignored about there concerns, but were threatened with legal action in one case.

Its disgusting that people want to brush the facts under the rug, under the guise of not politicizing the tragedy. There were clear failings that the residents knew about and even warned about, that were ignored.

You can choose to ignore the facts, but there plain to see. Greed killed these poor people.

Widdershins

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the people affected were still depending on charity on the 16th. nothing had actually been done. And what humanity are you referring to? hiding from residents and legging out a side entrance? Saying that the situation is too dangerous and yet a 90 year old woman managed to pay a visit? a little bit of humanity goes a long way in situations like this. May displayed none. Corbyn showed genuine empathy. he didnt photobomb anybody. he met this victims and actually spoke to them as people.

What do you expect, that theyd have their lives magically restored on the 16th?
Read the statement it's three pages of very useful actions.

The Queen learned after Diana's death when she got the same vitriol for not appeareing affected deeply enough on the outside. She has also praised May's effrts.

As for how you say Corbyn did and May didn't act toward victims, that's completely untrue propaganda. Here is someone who was *there* in person
and saw her ''well up'' and sit and hold the hand of a distressed woman. Just because it's not for show for the cameras does not mean much.

http://www.itv.com/news/2017-06-17/theresa-may-welled-up-in-meeting-with-grenfell-families-says-reverend/

123shooter

wes wrote: »

No it isn't, that is just nonsense from right wing rags like the Daily Mail, and there ilk. They have managed to convince people, that there own health and safety is a bad thing, with there constant lies and exaggerations. Those publications are imo utterly vile.

Health and safety culture is about stopping kids from doing sports in case they fall over and the like not like having proper fire safety/common sense in buildings.

wes wrote:

How is it not the governments fault? They took a stance against health and safety. A bunch of Tory MPs are land lords, who voted against this bill:

Tories vote down law requiring landlords make their homes fit for human habitation


Then, we have the residents who were ignored about there concerns in regards to the fire safety and in one case threatened with legal action:

Two women feared dead in Grenfell Tower were 'threatened with legal action' after questioning fire safety


It pretty clear, that the Tory's screwed up, as evidenced against there anti health and safety stance, and there votes against habitable homes. Again I note, that a lot of the MPs were land lords as well.

Yawn ..........and your probably find exactly the same from Labour, the Lib whoevers and The Raving Loony party...........but of course you won't mention that.

Problem you have is that this is an Irish forum and sod all to do with the UK. So all the Corbyn lefties won't change a thing here.

Fratton Fred

wes wrote: »

Sorry, but this was political long before the actual fire, seeing as not only were residents ignored about there concerns, but were threatened with legal action in one case.

Its disgusting that people want to brush the facts under the rug, under the guise of not politicizing the tragedy. There were clear failings that the residents knew about and even warned about, that were ignored.

You can choose to ignore the facts, but there plain to see. Greed killed these poor people.

threatened by the KCTMO. not the government.

wes

123shooter wrote: »

Health and safety culture is about stopping kids from doing sports in case they fall over and the like not like having proper fire safety/common sense in buildings.

That is what the right wing tabloids have convinced you of. To go against your own interests, after they have spread there bile and lies.

123shooter wrote: »

Yawn ..........and your probably find exactly the same from Labour, the Lib whoevers and The Raving Loony party...........but of course you won't mention that.

Labour weren't in power and in the most recent vote in regards to having homes safe for human habitation was a Labour amendment, which was rejected by the Torys.

72 of the Torys were land lords btw. So I think it fair to say as per the most recent vote, the Torys were against such a simple thing.

123shooter wrote: »

Problem you have is that this is an Irish forum and sod all to do with the UK. So all the Corbyn lefties won't change a thing here.

We are discussing a fire in London. I think the UK politics is rather relevant, considering that the residents were ignored and even threatened with legal action, for daring to bring up concerns about there own safety. Sadly looks like some of the people who warned about this have actually died.

wes

Fratton Fred wrote: »

threatened by the KCTMO. not the government.

Are they not part of the council or are they a private organization? The fact remains, fire safety concerns, were know long before the fire, and were actively ignored.

degsie

Thread getting derailed by political ranting, the political forum is over there =========> somewhere....

123shooter

degsie wrote: »

Thread getting derailed by political ranting, the political forum is over there =========> somewhere....

Totally agree even though I have been brainwashed by a Tory allegedly.

GM228

wes wrote: »

Are they not part of the council or are they a private organization? The fact remains, fire safety concerns, were know long before the fire, and were actively ignored.

They are private, the majority of their board are residents representing the properties they oversea.

Boom_Bap

Lads, seriously, give up the political stuff. Get yourselves a nice group PM thing going or something

A Dub in Glasgo

wes wrote: »

Are they not part of the council or are they a private organization? The fact remains, fire safety concerns, were know long before the fire, and were actively ignored.

GM228 wrote: »

They are private, the majority of their board are residents representing the properties they oversea.

From the KCTMO website

'About us

In the early 1990s, the tenants and leaseholders of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea decided to pursue their legal right to manage their own homes. Following two separate ballots in 1994 and 1995, the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO) was established on 1 April 1996 and the responsibility for managing 9,760 properties passed from The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea to the Tenant Management Organisation.

The Council still owns the properties and retains responsibility for strategic housing policies and homeless people. The relationship between KCTMO and the Council is governed by a Management Agreement, which covers all areas of the landlord business. Whilst KCTMO still enjoys a close working relationship with the Council, it is a completely separate company.'


'KCTMO is managed by a Board of Directors comprising of eight elected tenant and leaseholder members, four appointed Councillor members and three independent appointed other members. The aims of the organisation are numerous, as set out by strategic objectives in a business plan each year.'

123shooter

Look the Mail and Express are rags and no sane person believes/gets convinced that the stories are 100%.

If your trying to tell the world that Cameroon (utter fool) voted against health and safety laws so his Tory mates wanted poor Labour people to die in fires ........you really are on to a loser with it.

Back on topic.

Nobody could have for seen this happening but it most certainly could have been prevented. Some body or persons messed up it seems. But it appears so far that no government was involved...........until someone started twisting the facts that is.

Water John

If there is an absense of Regs in this area, it is the Gov'ts fault. I don't care whether it was a Labour or Consrevative Govn't that stalled on it.

Fratton Fred

tara73 wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/16/manufacturer-of-cladding-on-grenfell-tower-identified-as-omnis-exteriors

probably been posted before but here, at the end of the articel, I have my answer I was looking for since this tragedy happened:
In the UK there are no regulations requiring the use of fire-retardant material in cladding used on the exterior of tower blocks and schools. But the Fire Protection Association (FPA), an industry body, has been pushing for years for the government to make it a statutory requirement for local authorities and companies to use only fire-retardant material. Jim Glocking, technical director of the FPA, said it had “lobbied long and hard” for building regulations on the issue to be tightened, but nothing had happened.

shocking and very, very sad.

I'm no expert in this area, but I believe there is a difference between fire resistant and fire retardant.

I'm pretty sure though, that the industry that makes Fire retardant materials is represented by the FPA, so their lobbying isn't for purely altruistic reasons.

orangerhyme

"We’ve now put up samples of the cladding panels for the Council’s planners to look at and approve;
these panels overlook the walkway. "

"Cladding: the Council has selected a smoke silver metallic (grey) colour for the cladding.
You can still view a sample of this above the main entrance."

Some quotes from the KCTMO Grenfell Tower Regeneration Tower.

So, it appears the council chose the panels, as opposed to the TMO.

orangerhyme

"The external cladding and window frames were passed on 15 May by the Council’s building
control officer."

Another quote says the cladding was passed by the council.

Fratton Fred

orangerhyme wrote: »

"The external cladding and window frames were passed on 15 May by the Council’s building
control officer."

Another quote says the cladding was passed by the council.

links?

orangerhyme

http://www.kctmo.org.uk/sub/publications/138/bulletins-and-newsletters

Theres various newsletters and press releases here.

It will be difficult to pin the blame on any one public or private organisation I think. Its possible nobody will take the blame, maybe everyone followed protocol and regulations.

mikeybrennan

orangerhyme wrote: »

http://www.kctmo.org.uk/sub/publications/138/bulletins-and-newsletters

Theres various newsletters and press releases here.

It will be difficult to pin the blame on any one public or private organisation I think. Its possible nobody will take the blame, maybe everyone followed protocol and regulations.

That can't be true because the manufacturers instructions weren't followed

Fratton Fred

orangerhyme wrote: »

http://www.kctmo.org.uk/sub/publications/138/bulletins-and-newsletters

Theres various newsletters and press releases here.

It will be difficult to pin the blame on any one public or private organisation I think. Its possible nobody will take the blame, maybe everyone followed protocol and regulations.

a bit of help, like pointing to where the quotations actually came from would be handy.

mikeybrennan wrote: »

That can't be true because the manufacturers instructions weren't followed

were they though?

If you read this document https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/idoxWAM/doc/Other-1421792.pdf?extension=.pdf&id=1421792&location=VOLUME2&contentType=application/pdf&pageCount=1

which looks to have been prepared by Studio E Architects, they just specify Reynobond, not which type of Reynobond.

I would have thought the Architects would have been responsible for ensuring the materials selected were the most suitable for the particular application.

orangerhyme

http://www.grasart.com/blog/category/architecture

This also is interesting. It has an interview with the original architect of the tower from the 70's Nigel Whitbread.

" The design is a very simple and straightforward concept. You have a central core containing the lift, staircase and the vertical risers for the services and then you have external perimeter columns."

"Grenfell tower is a flexible building although designed for flats. You could take away all those internal partitions and open it up if that’s what you wanted to do in the future, This was unusual in terms of residential tower blocks. "

"While a lot of brick had been used in LCC and GLC buildings, we thought that putting bricks one on top of the other for twenty storeys was a crazy thing to do. We used insulated pre-cast concrete beams as external walls, lifted up and put into place with cranes and they were so much more quicker."

" The only thing I could play with was the windows and the infill between the windows. I treated it like a curtain wall, to get the rhythm of a curtain wall."

"This is the first and only tower block I designed." !!!!!!

The last quote is a little worrying.


Also, following on from his quote about internal walls and the ability to change them:
http://www.kctmo.org.uk/files/100428_kctmo_rydon_grenfell_tower_newsletter_may_2016_vff.pdf

Heres a quote from the last Grenfell newsletter:

"Alterations to the property by tenants or leaseholders
This is a reminder that if you want to change the layout of your home, knock down or build partitions
etc, change bathroom suites or renew kitchens, then you must write to us at the TMO as your landlord
to obtain our approval.
During the regeneration of the building we have come across alterations that have made properties
unsafe because they did not meet the building regulations.
We only approve changes that will be safe and legal, ensuring that all the building regulation
requirements will be met."

orangerhyme

I dont know the exact regulations but can you imagine the amount of changes on internal walls that took place over 40 years without thought given to fire resistance.
The fire didnt just spread quickly on the external walls but internally throughout the building.

Fratton Fred

orangerhyme wrote: »

I dont know the exact regulations but can you imagine the amount of changes on internal walls that took place over 40 years without thought given to fire resistance.
The fire didnt just spread quickly on the external walls but internally throughout the building.

I guess it depends on what you define as an internal wall.

Internal to an individual flat, or internal to the floor or the building, ie the walls between each apartment.

orangerhyme

It seems like the walls between flats could be changed if needed as they werent structural walls but had not actually changed. But the internal walls in the flats e.g. kitchen/bathroom etc were probably changed quite a lot over the 40 years.

devnull

BBC now reporting that the fridge that caught alight was put out by the fire brigade in that flat but they were unaware it had spread as they left the flat.

Apparently all will be revealed on Panorama on BBC1 at 8.30pm tonight.

orangerhyme

https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2013/05/29/grenfell-tower-from-bad-to-worse/

I think this has been posted before but its relevant.

"There have been two weeks of power surges in the building, most notably in the early hours of the morning "

" It is a fact that many households in Grenfell Tower have now lost the majority of their electrical appliances (washing machines, computers, televisions, etc)"

orangerhyme

devnull wrote: »

BBC now reporting that the fridge that caught alight was put out by the fire brigade in that flat but they were unaware it had spread into they left the flat.

Apparently all will be revealed on Panorama on BBC1 at 8.30pm tonight.

This is a controversial thing to say, but do think the Fire Brigade are getting an easy ride and protected from criticism?

They are responsible for inspecting the fire safety of buildings. They also enforced the "stay put" order despite knowing that the fire was spreading and out of control.

I'll probably get pilloried for saying that.

Junkyard Tom

orangerhyme wrote: »

This is a controversial thing to say, but do think the Fire Brigade are getting an easy ride and protected from criticism?

I'd say that telling people to stay in their flats was probably considered best practice and may now be redundant after this awful event.