You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles
Fire engineer’s failure to analyse cladding was ‘evidence of professional negligence’, claims Grenfell inquiry expert
Advice by fire engineers that the refurbishment of the Grenfell Tower would have ‘no adverse effect’ on its fire safety performance despite not assessing cladding proposals equated to ‘very serious evidence of professional negligence’, an expert to the inquiry has claimed.
The inquiry today heard from Dr Barbara Lane, fire safety expert for the inquiry, who put together a report assessing the performance of Exova, the fire safety consultants during the Grenfell Tower refurbishment.
Exova was employed to put together the fire strategy for the refurbishment of the Grenfell Tower, this included comments on how the construction changes may impact on the building’s fire safety performance.
Two Exova reports written ahead of the refurbishment assessing how the changes may affect external fire spread, stated "proposed changes will have no adverse effect on the building in relation to external fire spread” but would be “confirmed in a future issues of this report”.
Commenting on this, Dr Lane writes: “Critically, Exova fails to identify that overcladding the entire building is a part of the definition of the refurbishment works in their report, but of more grave concern is they still go on to provide their advice that this part of the works would have "no adverse effect.
“Yet the records show the staff at Exova had never analysed the external wall construction proposals and so were not in any position to make this statement.
READ MORE
“Therefore, I conclude this was very serious evidence of professional negligence, from my perspective as a practicing fire engineer.”
When asked by Grenfell counsel Kate Grange if her position with regard to these comments had changed after hearing evidence from Exova employees, she said no.
Terry Ashton, a senior fire engineer for Exova published two editions of an outline fire safety strategy for the project in 2012 and 2013. In both he made no reference to the plans to clad the building and refurbishment would ‘have no adverse effect’.
Giving evidence to the inquiry back in July, Mr Ashton was asked by Ms Grange if he agreed that maintaining the wording in the report without clarifying the position about the cladding was and “abdication of his responsibilities”.
He said: “I wouldn’t put it in those strong terms. I don’t think abdication is the right word. I mean, we can only react to what we have been given.
He accepted he was aware of plans to overclad the building but said he was waiting on architects to raise it with him in order to offer advice.
He added: “I didn’t see fit to say to the design team, ‘We need to have a discussion about what you’re doing with the overcladding’,” Mr Ashton said.
“Now, maybe I should have said that, but it didn’t come from them – they didn’t say, ‘We would like to talk to you about what we’re doing with the overcladding’. I assumed that that would happen at some point in the future.”
In her report, Dr Lane said that the omission of an outline performance requirement within the report to comply with B4, the assessment of the external wall fire spread, was the “most serious of failures” in Exova’s production of its fire strategy.
She also said that failing to refer to the need for cavity barriers and omitting the requirement for compartmentation in a high rise with a stay put strategy, were ‘very serious omissions’.
The inquiry continues.
Exova Statement
Dr Lane is a fire engineer appointed by the Grenfell Tower Inquiry to give expert evidence. Dr Lane produced an initial report in November 2019, and a revised version of that report in May 2020.
Exova will have the opportunity to respond to Dr Lane’s report in submissions to the Inquiry in May 2021, once all evidence in the Inquiry’s first three modules has been submitted. Exova will comment in detail at that point.
For the time being, we draw attention to the following facts, which are not disputed:
- The primary reason for the spread of fire at Grenfell Tower was the unlawful use of ACM cladding panels with a PE core.
- Exova was never involved in, consulted on, or even informed of, the decision to use that type of panel. Exova was involved primarily at an earlier stage in the project and not at all in the critical decisions regarding the design of the illegal cladding system.
- Exova’s report – which was submitted at an earlier stage in the refurbishment project – made clear that the question of external fire spread was subject to analysis in a further report.
- Responsibility for the project – including for all outstanding questions of design and compliance – was then transferred to Rydon, who oversaw the choice of cladding material.
- They and their specialist subcontractors were then responsible for ensuring that their work complied with Building Regulations, and for seeking further input if they were uncertain how to do so.
- Rydon chose not to retain a fire consultant: nor did they request an analysis of external fire spread, either before or after the design work on the façade was carried out.
It is also worth noting that witnesses giving evidence in the Inquiry, from participants other than Exova, have stated:
- the architects “didn’t have a firm scheme”[1] for Exova to review in relation to the façade;
- Exova “obviously would need full details”[2] to carry out an analysis;
- Exova’s report was made available to Rydon and others during the tender process so that they could see what work had been done and what still needed to be done;
- the design was still evolving;
- responsibility rested with Rydon to deliver a final fire strategy at the end of the project.
Moreover, as Dr Lane acknowledges, the reports which had been prepared by Exova, at a much earlier stage in the project, did not form part of the material on the basis on which a completion certificate was sought from, and granted by, RBKC Building Control.
Exova remains committed to supporting the process of the Public Inquiry. It will respond in detail to Dr Lane’s commentary as part of that process.
1] Bruce Sounes, Studio E, 20 July 2020
[1] Tomas Rek, Studio E, 11 March 2020
