This Grenfell Tower enquiry, isn't looking too good for the LFB!

**saga_lout** · 11-10-18, 15:48

Originally Posted by Julian_Boolean

Agreed, I just hope if the enquiry indentifies improvemnets that can be made in the procedures used to fight fires that they are put into place without the whole thing becoming a political football or somebody having to be blamed.

A blame culture isn't good for any organisation, and I don't think it's good for the UK, but that's what we seem to have.

A couple of points I'd like to make before the pitch fork brigade get started

1. The fridge manufacturers didn't build a fridge knowing it could catch fire
2. The firefighters didn't intentionally let the fire spread to the cladding and did their best to contain the fire

So if you want to blame someone then you have to ask the following

1. Did whoever paid for the cladding think it was safe?
2. Did the supplier of the cladding think it was safe?
3. Did the manufacturer of the cladding think it was safe?
4. Did whoever tests cladding think it was safe?
5. Was the cladding fitted in a safe way?

Answer those questions and you'll see who is to blame.
Though if the building had never been clad, the fire would not have spread, so you could ask who allowed the building to be clad?

...
6. How old was the fridge?
7. Had it been repaired/refurbished? If so, who did the work?
8. Was the fault something the manufacturers knew about? (It was obviously faulty, it burst into flames.)

**moth** · 11-10-18, 16:03

Originally Posted by saga_lout

...
6. How old was the fridge?
7. Had it been repaired/refurbished? If so, who did the work?
8. Was the fault something the manufacturers knew about? (It was obviously faulty, it burst into flames.)

Which? are running a campaign to get plastic backed fridges banned. Grenfell wasn't an isolated incident.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/plastic-backed-fridges-remove-sale-fire-risk-which-a8288681.html

https://www.which.co.uk/news/2018/04/250-fridge-freezers-fridges-and-freezers-named-which-dont-buys-over-fire-safety-concerns/

https://publications.parliament.uk/p...is/503/503.pdf

**Screwdriver** · 30-10-18, 17:30

It's not looking too good for the insulation company Celotex.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44200041

It seems they did the dirty and doped a test panel to pass the fire regs and then used a different recipe in manufacturing. One that was flammable and gave off cyanide

They then compounded the issue by overselling the fire retardant properties the material didn't have to use it where it shouldn't be used anyway!

**Yambo** · 30-10-18, 17:34

Originally Posted by Screwdriver

It's not looking too good for the insulation company Celotex.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44200041

It seems they did the dirty and doped a test panel to pass the fire regs and then used a different recipe. One that was flammable and gave off cyanide

Sounds like that could end up as Corporate Manslaughter if proved to be correct. Have panorama ever been wrong?

*Edit* It seems Panorama agrees with me.

**Screwdriver** · 30-10-18, 17:36

Originally Posted by Yambo

Sounds like that could end up as Corporate Manslaughter if proved to be correct. Have panorama ever been wrong?

I don't know, I'm not really into hats.

**Yambo** · 30-10-18, 17:37

**moth** · 30-10-18, 17:43

Originally Posted by Screwdriver

It's not looking too good for the insulation company Celotex.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44200041

It seems they did the dirty and doped a test panel to pass the fire regs and then used a different recipe in manufacturing. One that was flammable and gave off cyanide

They then compounded the issue by overselling the fire retardant properties the material didn't have to use it where it shouldn't be used anyway!

Oops!

Someone's going to get their collective arses kicked. Especially if the HSE do some digging into previous use.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-45982810

**Screwdriver** · 30-10-18, 17:44

Originally Posted by moth

Oops!

Someone's going to get their collective arses kicked.

It does have the faint whiff of the emissions scandal about it.

I think that's two puns in one

**crust** · 30-10-18, 18:26

'Deemed to comply' < brilliant, so why would we pay £10,000 for a fire test if our competitors are doing desktop reviews?

They'd better save some shoe leather for the fire door people as well because they are due a proper shoeing.

It's a proper clusterfuck all round.