Architect launches legal action against Kingspan over ‘dishonest’ insulation marketing

In its claim form filed last month, BDP said if it is found to be liable to Laing O’Rourke for the removal and replacement of the insulation, Kingspan would be liable for the “same damage”. 

In this case, “BDP is entitled to a contribution, amounting to an indemnity, from Kingspan Insulation on account of any liability it may have to Laing O’ Rourke”, the form states. 

BDP designed the specification for the building’s external walls in 2007, which included 1,717 sq m of cladding made up with K15 Insulation.

The architect claims its specification relied on Kingspan’s guidance, marketing and technical literature for “the suitability of K15 for residential buildings with a storey above 18 metres”.

However, the claim alleges that statements, marketing and flyers which stated that K15 Insulation was suitable for use in a compliant external wall were “false”.

It also alleges that the firm “acted dishonestly” in obtaining certification for the product, in its marketing of the product and guidance it produced, and in how it answered questions in relation to individual projects.

“Specifically, Kingspan Insulation acted dishonestly in representing that K15 Insulation, used in the external wall build up of buildings over 18 metres, complied with the relevant building regulations,” the claim states. 

BDP said its claim “relies on the findings” of the Grenfell Inquiry’s phase two report as evidence. The court document includes three pages of text from the report’s section on Kingspan, which sold a small amount of K15 insulation found on the tower.

One part states: “The story of the development and marketing of K15 for use on buildings of over 18 metres in height between 2006 and 2019 is one of deeply entrenched and persistent dishonesty on the part of Kingspan in pursuit of commercial gain coupled with a complete disregard for fire safety.”

In 2023, the Building Research Establishment (BRE) re-certified insulation products made by Kingspan, after previously ending its commercial relationship with the firm over its role in the Grenfell Tower fire.

Kingspan’s Loss Prevention Certification Board certificates were previously withdrawn as a result of BRE’s decision to no longer carry out new business with Kingspan and Celotex, the companies that manufactured the insulation used on Grenfell Tower.

BRE – a former state-owned testing and research facility privatised in 1997 – had a major commercial relationship with the insulation manufacturer before and after the Grenfell Tower fire in 2017. 

But the inquiry into the fire has exposed serious issues with Kingspan’s testing and marketing of its products, with much of the testing having been carried out at BRE’s facility. 

Kingspan was shown to have misleadingly advertised its combustible plastic K15 insulation as suitable for use on high-rise buildings, on the basis of a 2005 test on a cladding system that combined the product with cementitious external cladding panels.

But this test only justified the product’s use in an exact replica of the system tested. It also utilised a legacy version of its product that was no longer on the market and was withdrawn by Kingspan in October 2020, just before the inquiry made its revelations public.

BDP, Kingspan and Laing O’Rourke were approached for comment.