Tower block fire - london

cheesyboy · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:13

MooMoo444 said:
Clearly trying to cover it up then, how abhorrent.

Probably just reducing website bandwidth requirement, to be honest.

It's not like the impending criminal investigation will miss it if the website's been taken down.

Rannoch · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:13

JohnnyG said:
He should shut up, it's a bit premature to be blaming anyone at the moment.

Exactly.

Fishbait · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:13

https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2016/11/20/kctmo-playing-with-fire/

Posted on November 20, 2016:

"It is a truly terrifying thought but the Grenfell Action Group firmly believe that only a catastrophic event will expose the ineptitude and incompetence of our landlord, the KCTMO, and bring an end to the dangerous living conditions and neglect of health and safety legislation that they inflict upon their tenants and leaseholders. We believe that the KCTMO are an evil, unprincipled, mini-mafia who have no business to be charged with the responsibility of looking after the every day management of large scale social housing estates and that their sordid collusion with the RBKC Council is a recipe for a future major disaster."

adolf hamster · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:14

MooMoo444 said:
Clearly trying to cover it up then, how abhorrent.

pretty poor effort if it's already known they were involved, plus the actual material doesn't look that incriminating to me

darael · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:14

Is anybody watching BBC news now? There's a guy acting a like a complete turd behind the presenter. Now isn't the time to be doing that mate.

LOAM · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:14

Dunks said:
Flammable foam coated in aluminium which is good at conducting heat and has a low melting point. Recipe for disaster.

These were Harely Facades (ACM) Aluminum composite panels but they do also come in fire retardant variety. No idea if they were or not, in new construction they would need to be.

Its really hard to speculate but under ADB2 S4 12.9 suggests that if the existing building is of a cavity construction then requirements for external cladding fire proofing isnt needed. Its likely this will come down to someone's interpretation of what cavity construction is. There will be lots of very nervous people this morning, the architects website is already down.

JohnnyG · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:16

That bird on Twitter should be careful as it hasn't been taken off their website :confused:

http://www.rydon.co.uk/what-we-do/r...ies/refurbishment-case-studies/grenfell-tower

ubersonic · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:17

JohnnyG said:
He should shut up, it's a bit premature to be blaming anyone at the moment.

A building with inadequate fire safety belonging to a shady landlord burns down despite residents begging said landlord to fix the fire safety and bring the building up to code for years, it's safe to assume that even if the company are not responsible for the cause of the fire they are at fault for how much damage/death it has caused.

snips86x · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:17

Fishbait said:
https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2016/11/20/kctmo-playing-with-fire/

Posted on November 20, 2016:

"It is a truly terrifying thought but the Grenfell Action Group firmly believe that only a catastrophic event will expose the ineptitude and incompetence of our landlord, the KCTMO, and bring an end to the dangerous living conditions and neglect of health and safety legislation that they inflict upon their tenants and leaseholders. We believe that the KCTMO are an evil, unprincipled, mini-mafia who have no business to be charged with the responsibility of looking after the every day management of large scale social housing estates and that their sordid collusion with the RBKC Council is a recipe for a future major disaster."

Wow, that's quite scary reading through that.

antijoke · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:19

Oh god, this kid claiming it wasn't a accident.

And he drops an F bomb.

JohnnyG · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:19

ubersonic said:
A building with inadequate fire safety belonging to a shady landlord burns down despite residents begging said landlord to fix the fire safety and bring the building up to code for years, it's safe to assume that even if the company are not responsible for the cause of the fire they are at fault for how much damage/death it has caused.

Morgan was having a go at the people who refurbed it apparently not the KCTMO (landlords) he has no idea what's happened.

Kainz · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:19

All those lives lost, and those evacuated have lost all their prized possessions

Combat squirrel · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:21

Wow horrible

devastating event

hope not to many injuries or deaths, although I read there is some

RIP

LOAM · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:23

JohnnyG said:
Morgan was having a go at the people who refurbed it apparently not the KCTMO (landlords) he has no idea what's happened.

That's equally as stupid really. Its been signed off by a fire officer and building control, both of which will inspect during the course of the work. That's not to say someone hasn't done something wrong during construction but to speculate now is just madness.

darael · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:25

With the talk of electrical problems within the block, I wonder if this has somehow caused this fridge that keeps being mentioned to set alight.

cheesyboy · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:25

LOAM said:
That's equally as stupid really. Its been signed off by a fire officer and building control, both of which will inspect during the course of the work. That's not to say someone hasn't done something wrong during construction but to speculate now is just madness.

I think it's legit to be shocked and angry that a recently refurbished building is able to go up in flames like this. What's the point in refurbing a building, and the regs that allow it, if it still ends up being a deathtrap in the event of a fire?

Schlong&Stable · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:27

JohnnyG said:
Morgan was having a go at the people who refurbed it apparently not the KCTMO (landlords) he has no idea what's happened.

I would expect contractors to be familiar with fire regulations. If they work on a building knowing their work is not compliant, there is an element of responsibility there. If it passed whatever requirements there were, then even the landlord isn't responsible surely?

ColdAsIce · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:27

cheesyboy said:
I think it's legit to be shocked and angry that a recently refurbished building is able to go up in flames like this. What's the point in refurbing a building, and the regs that allow it, if it still ends up being a deathtrap in the event of a fire?

This^

Housey · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:30

JohnnyG said:
That bird on Twitter should be careful as it hasn't been taken off their website

http://www.rydon.co.uk/what-we-do/r...ies/refurbishment-case-studies/grenfell-tower

Never let facts get in the way of ranting...

LOAM · 14 Jun 2017 at 10:30

cheesyboy said:
I think it's legit to be shocked and angry that a recently refurbished building is able to go up in flames like this. What's the point in refurbing a building, and the regs that allow it, if it still ends up being a deathtrap in the event of a fire?

I agree to be angry and shocked at the events but not at the contractors (yet). Its possible that the thing was done to the letter of the regulations and that its a case of the regulations needing to change. Our Building Regs are up there with the best in the world but occasionally things do happen which we need to look at why and change them accordingly.