You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles
RBKC building control checks contained ‘fundamental failings’, says expert Grenfell witness
Building control checks to assess whether the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower met building regulations included a series of “fundamental failings”, an expert witness for the inquiry has said.
According to a report by Beryl Menzies, which was read today at the inquiry, the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea’s (RBKC) building control department’s decision not to ask about the tower’s cladding system was a “fundamental failing” of their work during the refurbishment.
The report by Ms Menzies, who is the building control specialist for the inquiry, also identified a litany of other failures, including a failure to spot out-of-date information provided by the scheme’s project team.
She also said that she believed the initial full plan application to the building control department should have been rejected before work started.
In the report, Ms Menzies said: “The building control body does not appear to have sought details or sort to ascertain or corroborate that the materials or the cladding system as a whole, were in accordance with the recommendations of Approved Document B or BS9991 for a building of this height.”
“Failure to ask for detailed information about the cladding system was a fundamental failing.”
READ MORE
The combustible aluminium composite material (ACM) cladding was found to be the key driver of fire spread on the night of 14 June 2017.
Ms Menzies’ report also stated that the building control team failed to identify that some of the information about the building was “out of date and contradictory”.
This included a fire strategy from the refurbishment’s fire engineer Exova, which she said “did not address the actual proposals” put forward.
Ms Menzies also said the building control board had failed to recognise that no cavity barriers had been indicated in initial designs to seal the cavities or opening in the walls.
The evidence today focused on the role of building control in the lead up to and during the refurbishment of the Grenfell Tower. Ms Menzies described the role of building control as the “third line” of protection for a construction project and that it should ensure the construction meets building regulations.
Ahead of the construction, RBKC consulted with the London Fire Brigade (LFB) over the fire strategy for the building.
When asked whether RBKC’s building control officers should have highlighted to the LFB that there was a lack of information regarding the cladding proposals, Ms Menzies said: “I don’t think the application should have been accepted to start with, because building control body had categorically stated that they couldn’t say whether it was acceptable to them.
“I don’t think it should have gone at this initial stage to the fire brigade.”
Ms Menzies was also asked about the performance of John Hoban, an RBKC building control officer who worked on the Grenfell Tower project. Last month when giving evidence, Mr Hoban told the inquiry that he was swamped with work at the time of the refurbishment and was left with reviewing 130 projects at once.
When asked about Mr Hoban’s workload, Ms Menzies said that she felt that he was struggling and that he was badly managed.
She said: “Having heard the evidence of Mr Hoban and had sight of HR records, I feel he was struggling. It was stated and recorded that he was, at one stage, 50% behind on site record keeping, and yet during that time he was asked to, and took on, two additional patches.
“That seems to be bad management and a [bad] decision with regards to getting the best out of a building control officer.”
The Grenfell Tower Inquiry continues.
