You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles
Residents at Grenfell Tower have told how new windows fitted in the tower as part of a refurbishment prior to the fire in June 2017 were not fit for purpose, leaving gaps, and drafts in the apartments.
Key points
Giving evidence, Petra Doulova, resident at flat 174 of Grenfell Tower on the 20 floor of the tower with her husband told how the new windows in her flat left a physical gap which needed to be filled.
The resident also told of difficulties both she and her husband had faced when resisting plans put forward by the tenant management organisation to replace doors in the building.
Speaking to the inquiry Ms Doulova said: “Everyone on the 20th floor, except for us, had their front door changed and found it difficult to open.”
“There was a choice of three new front doors. They were all made of PVC/ Aluminium and some had frosted glass panel. However, my husband told the TMO we wanted to keep our original front door.
“The way it was put was, ’these doors need to be changed’ we didn’t like these new doors, we didn’t like the quality, the old doors felt more secure they felt like hard wooden doors.
“It was quite upsetting behaviour from the TMO and the council threatening action if we didn’t have the doors changed”.
“Our new bedroom window had a gap on one side between the frame and the wall. We complained to the TMO and the response was along the lines that ’no one will see it there,’ but we saw the gap everyday. The quality of the workmanship was simply not up to scratch throughout the refurbishment and this is just one example.”
Asked to describe the gap in the windor Ms Doulova said: “It was not a physical gap, it was the way the windows were installed and the attitude of the work, and was why we raised a complaint about compliance.”
“The council and contractors were completely disregarding out complaints. I slept close to the wall and our flat was never cold, suddenly the wall was cold [after the refurbishment works] and I could feel the draft. It was a new experience for me, it was obviously something with the design.”
Mrs Doulova’s bed was by the wall, on the west side of the tower by the window and the resident was able to feel drafts when in bed.
Asked what the gap between the wall and window looked like: “Basically the gap between the wall and the frame widened as it went down. At the top it was snugly fit, and by the time it was down to the sill it was one centimetre or a centimetre and a half.
“I don’t think the windows were fitted properly.”
Despite complaints, and the fact that Ms Doulova’s husband never signed off the work, the problem was never fixed.
“It was generally a problem with the contractors, there was always a problem with signing off on work for them.”
Asked about the “stay put” policy in place in case of a fire in the tower Ms Doulova said that she had discussed safety in the tower on a number of occasions with her husband and that they agreed to not follow the advice in case of a fire and would seek to leave the tower immediately.
The couple had also packed a bag in which they kept valuable possessions such as passports that they kept in the bedroom in case there was an emergency in the tower and they had to evacuate.
Discussing the difficulties she encountered when trying to leave the building Ms Doulova said: “We were initially the 17 floor then we were the 20 floor [after refurbishment work changed the floor numbers]. I remember it was quite dark in there [the stairwell] and some of the lights were not working. I don’t know if it was because the lighting wasn’t working or if it was badly painted but I struggled to see some of the numbers.”
Doulova said that at one point she left the stairwell to check on the floor number to know how for down the building she had descended.
Giving evidence in the afternoon session Grenfell resident Jose Viero, who had lived in the tower for 41 years in his flat on the seventh floor, told how contractors at Grenfell had filled gaps in the windows with “thick white sheets”, after he noticed a breeze coming from the windows.
In his evidence Mr Viero said: “I am not a surveyor, and I am not a window fitter, but I did not like the way that Rydon [the refurbishment contractor] worked. I did not mind the window itself. The new windows were installed 10cm further out from the wall of the flat than the location of the old windows. There was also a very big windowsill.
“I recall that despite the distance between the walls of the flat and the windows, the windows themselves were noticeably smaller than the old windows that they were replacing. I noticed that there was a 2 or a 3 inch gap between the edge of the window and the wall of the building.
“To fill that gap, the window contractors used thick sheets of a white foamy material. I would describe it as being very similar to polystyrene but I cannot recall much more about the material that they used. I do not recall observing the installation of my kitchen window, but on all of the windows I did see being installed this material was used.”
Mr Viero said that Rydon staff were different from other workers who had visited before to undertake the work.
“After the installation of the new windows, I noticed that there was a breeze coming into the flat from underneath all of the windows. I complained about this to the window installers themselves.
“The people that installed the windows told me that they were doing as they were told. I complained to Rydon, in person, that there were gaps. I cannot recall to whom I complained, but eventually Rydon staff did come to the flat to observe the problems about which I was complaining.
According to Mr Viero Rydon proceeded to fill the gaps in the windows with silicone or another sealant, which blocked the air entering into the flat from his bedroom and kitchen windows.
Closing statements
Day 85: victims' lawyers attack the fire brigade
Further expert evidence
Including some additional evidence from emergency call handlers, bereaved and relatives
Day 84: further evidence from survivors and relatives
Day 83: swift evacuation of tower possible if residents alerted
Day 82: initial fire was extinguished but then returned to the flat
Day 81: overheating fridge-freezer most likely cause of fire
Day 80: fire doors installed did not match product tested
Day 79: resident advised to stay put despite fire in flat
Day 78: insulation and cladding material below required standard
Day 77: molten plastic spread blaze down tower
Day 76: 'stay put' should be dropped when fire spreads across floors
Other witness evidence
Police, ambulance, gas suppliers, council, TMO and call room operators give evidence
Day 75: call room operators give evidence
Day 74: further evidence from TMO officers
Day 73: TMO boss failed to pass information to firefighters
Day 72: fire finally extinguished when gas switched off
Day 71: further questions over stay put advice
Day 70: the police evidence
The bereaved, survivors and relatives’ evidence
Day 69: video shows smoke billowing through fire door
Day 68: KCTMO removed self closing mechanism and never replaced it
Day 67: gaps in cladding fixed with duct tape
Day 66: 'don't fix broken system with a sticking plaster'
Day 65: survivor dragged disabled man down nine floors to safety
Day 64: KCTMO 'did not replace broken fire door'
Day 63: foam insulation inside cladding 'exposed' says survivor
Day 62: father gives harrowing account of son's death
Day 61: council’s management organisation slammed for faulty electrics
Day 60: stay put advice ‘led to deaths’, residents say
Day 59: residents describe problems with new windows
Day 58: survivor describes how daughter saved his life
Day 57: firefighter evidence ‘a slap in the face’, says survivor
Day 56: relations with contractor were ‘toxic’
Day 55: resident 'never happy' with stay-put advice
Day 54: tenant gives evidence about housing association
Day 53: stay put advice 'felt like trap'
Day 52: resident saved by son's phone call
The firefighters’ evidence
Day 51: firefighter feared encouraging residents to jump
Day 50: the LFB commissioner
Day 49: fire chief reveals frustration over lack of building plans
Day 48: internal fire spread 'bigger story' than cladding
Day 47: fire officer considered evacuating crews over building collapse fears
Day 46: 'we were improvising' senior firefighter admits
Day 45: firefighter urged for abandonment of 'stay put' policy
Day 44: firefighter recalls radio signal difficulties
Day 43: call hander 'uncomfortable' with insisting residents stay put
Day 42: residents only told to leave if they called fire brigade back
Day 41: breathing equipment delay 'hampered rescues on upper floors'
Day 40: chiefs told firefighters to abandon policy
Day 39: firefighters reveal dramatic rescue of children
Day 38: firefighters issue aplogies to families
Day 37: council 'unable to provide tower plans'
Day 36: QC defends inquiry process
Day 35: Javid would welcome interim recommendations
Day 34: water from hose 'too weak' to reach the flames
Day 33: 'oh my god, we've been telling people to stay put'
Day 32: further fire fighter describes lack of equipment and low water pressure
Day 31: 'incredibly difficult' task of recording information outlined
Day 30: struggle to maintain control over rescue operation described
Day 29: fire service 'overwhelmed' by survival guidance calls
Day 28: 'the building beat us'
Day 27: firefighters 'forced to abandon plans to reach roof'
Day 26: poor signage hindered rescue efforts
Day 25: water pressure left firefighting equipment 'like garden hose'
Day 24: decision to abandon 'stay put' explored
Day 23: TV images 'could have assissted' rescue effort
Day 22: description of hectic scenes in the control centre
Day 21: account from the fire service 'nerve centre'
Day 20: firefighter describes 'huge volume' of calls from trapped residents
Day 19: firefighter 'given no training on cladding fires'
Day 18: evacuation would have been 'huge catastrophe'
Day 17: firefighters describe access and lift issues
Day 16: scenes of carnage likened to 9/11
Day 15: firefighters recount trauma of survival guidance calls
Day 14: firefighters describe spread of blaze
Day 13: firefighters recall radio difficulties
Day 12: "it was like a war zone"
Day 11: questions raised over fire fighters' radios
Day 10: watch manager emotional under questioning
Day nine: lead firefighter 'not trained in stay put policy'
The expert reports: authors give evidence to inquiry
Day eight: where the fire started
Day seven: what was in the cladding?
Day six: the cause and spread of the fire
Day five: expert highlights key issues
Day four: firefighters defend response to fire
Day three: council and contractors appear for the first time
Day two: lawyers for the survivors make their case
Day one: expert evidence released on cladding and stay put
The commemoration hearings
30 May: Grenfell Council 'recognised it should not house disabled victim above four storeys'
29 May: Anger on day six of the Grenfell Inquiry
25 May: Grenfell families 'forced to live in chimney with stay put policy'
24 May: Grenfell family complained about father being housed on 17th floor
23 May: Tributes to children on third day of Grenfell hearings
22 May: Emotions run high as Grenfell bereaved shown footage of the tower burning
21 May: Grenfell victims share tributes as inquiry opens