You are logged in as a guest. 
  Home Forums Home  Search our Forums Search our Forums    Log in to the Forums Log in to the Forums  register Register on the Forums  

 Forums ->  General Chat -> Chatterbox
Format:  Go
Grenfell Tower
AuthorMessage
userBulletguy
Posted: 18 May 2018 3:51 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


The special one

Posts: 10496
50005000100100100100252525
Location: Cheshire. Ford Transit Autosleeper Duetto


pelmetman - 2018-05-18 8:43 AM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 12:26 AM


The Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety final report conducted by Dame Judith Hackitt released today. She told C4 news how shocked she was over the building sectors 'lack of moral responsibility,


I'm more shocked by the lowlife that have tried to profit from the tragedy including a Grenfell activist ......

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/grenfell-tower-fire-man-charged-fraud-a8309611.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/grenfell-tower-fire-woman-fraud-support-false-joyce-msokeri-police-a7930071.html

https://news.sky.com/story/man-who-claimed-family-died-in-grenfell-fire-pleads-guilty-to-fraud-11109982

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5432261/Grenfell-campaigner-hotel-room-uses-home.html

Only three out of the four links you posted committed an offence, been charged and rightly sentenced. The Wail appears to be little more than it's usual attempt at whipping up hate as no offence is reported at all. For balance it was reported there were approx 350-400 residents living in Grenfell, 72 of whom lost their lives.

Perhaps you should consider more seriously the comments from Dame Judith Hackitt over 'people flouting the system' using non-compliant materials. Had you lost your entire family in a property fire caused by shoddy working practices and use of non-compliant materials, i think you would be singing a very different tune.
userBrian Kirby
Posted: 18 May 2018 4:21 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


5000500050001000500
Location: East Sussex. Motorhome: Knaus Boxstar 600 Street


pelmetman - 2018-05-18 3:37 PM

Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 3:31 PM
The report makes recommendations to tighten the controls in the kind of way that was normal 30-40 years ago.



You mean before we joined the EU ..............

No, Dave, I don't, because it has no relevance whatever, to either Building Regs approval procedures, or to the Grenfell fire.
userBulletguy
Posted: 18 May 2018 4:28 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


The special one

Posts: 10496
50005000100100100100252525
Location: Cheshire. Ford Transit Autosleeper Duetto


Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 3:31 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 12:26 AM


The Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety final report conducted by Dame Judith Hackitt released today. She told C4 news how shocked she was over the building sectors 'lack of moral responsibility, the attitudes, and the practices' within it. Though a highly qualified engineer her expertise is in the field of building chemical plants, not accommodation, so quite why she was asked to head the inquiry i'm not sure.

She mentions about 'people flouting the system' using non-compliant materials and said they 'must be held to account'. She hasn't called for a total ban on cladding which is confusing, but explains her reason here;.................................

I think if you download and read both (especially) the interim report and the final report, you will begin to glimpse why she was asked to head the inquiry. It's a long read, though. The interim goes at some length into the reasoning behind her call for a centralised approval authority. What the report identifies is the way in which the system has been degraded over time, both to allow self-certification, and to introduce price competition into the approvals procedure. She can't be specific over the shortcomings, because the police are still running a criminal investigation into how non-compliant materials came to be used.

Regarding a ban on flammable materials, I don't think it is that simple. It is already the case, as she acknowledges, and as confirmed by Brokenshire yesterday in parliament, that the cladding system used on Grenfell does not meet Building Regs requirements and was used illegally. In short, it is already "banned" under the regs. It is the degraded approvals procedure that led to its use. The report makes recommendations to tighten the controls in the kind of way that was normal 30-40 years ago.

The bigger question is whether a naïve, free-market oriented, deregulating, government will bite the bullet of accepting that the private sector has to be regarded as a potential poacher, meaning that its employer has to be prepared to employ a gamekeeper to keep it on the rails!

From what she said on the C4 interview she seemed to be genuinely shocked and surprised at the lax attitude within domestic property builds. I've no idea of the field of engineering she specialises in but she obviously believed the controls were as strict.

The part you mention in second para (emboldened) is what i found disturbing but she said that will be a matter for the building regulator now. As you say it is already banned......it needs properly enforcing. There seems to have been a culture of cost cutting and riding rough shod over any regulations. I doubt that same culture applied when developing Hyde Park One or Canary Wharf apartments.

Seeing how 'new builds' get thrown up in a matter of weeks today with residents moving in before the cement has barely had time to set, has always baffled me how developers get away with it. And they aren't cheap either. A small development near my village went up a few years ago, tiny little 'rabbit hutches' at £200 - £250k and all were sold.
userpelmetman
Posted: 18 May 2018 5:41 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


Walks with the gods

Posts: 27041
50005000500050005000200025
Location: 1990 Ford Travelhome.Currently of no fixed abode..


Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 4:21 PM

pelmetman - 2018-05-18 3:37 PM

Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 3:31 PM
The report makes recommendations to tighten the controls in the kind of way that was normal 30-40 years ago.



You mean before we joined the EU ..............

No, Dave, I don't, because it has no relevance whatever, to either Building Regs approval procedures, or to the Grenfell fire.


Point of order ......That's not what you said .......

The implication "IS" before we joined the EU we were getting it right? .......

Just sayin .....



Edited by pelmetman 2018-05-18 5:43 PM
userpelmetman
Posted: 18 May 2018 5:49 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


Walks with the gods

Posts: 27041
50005000500050005000200025
Location: 1990 Ford Travelhome.Currently of no fixed abode..


Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 4:28 PM

From what she said on the C4 interview she seemed to be genuinely shocked and surprised at the lax attitude within domestic property builds. I've no idea of the field of engineering she specialises in but she obviously believed the controls were as strict.



Blimey Bullet I could've told you that decades ago .......

I once went to fit a blind in a show house I was fitting out, and just the force of my bradawl made the wooden window fall out ........

So the fact that the window was made of wood should indicate how long ago that was ...........

....and folk wonder why I don't buy "new" stuff made this century.......Because from experience its even worse ........





Edited by pelmetman 2018-05-18 5:58 PM
userBrian Kirby
Posted: 18 May 2018 5:57 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


5000500050001000500
Location: East Sussex. Motorhome: Knaus Boxstar 600 Street


Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 4:28 PM......................From what she said on the C4 interview she seemed to be genuinely shocked and surprised at the lax attitude within domestic property builds. I've no idea of the field of engineering she specialises in but she obviously believed the controls were as strict.

The part you mention in second para (emboldened) is what i found disturbing but she said that will be a matter for the building regulator now. As you say it is already banned......it needs properly enforcing. There seems to have been a culture of cost cutting and riding rough shod over any regulations. I doubt that same culture applied when developing Hyde Park One or Canary Wharf apartments.

Seeing how 'new builds' get thrown up in a matter of weeks today with residents moving in before the cement has barely had time to set, has always baffled me how developers get away with it. .....................

It isn't just domestic, Paul, the same procedures apply to all construction approvals; commercial, residential, private and public.

She is a chemical engineer, but was head of the Health and Safety Executive 2009 - 16. Have a look at her biog: it is impressive! One clever lady.

It goes beyond enforcement, which I see as post hoc. It has happened because over time government has allowed self-certification, licenced private firms to become Buildings Regulations approvers who compete on price for the job, allowed "desk studies" on fire engineering to be carried out by non-specialists, and generally de-regulated the approvals system.

The regulations were written by professionals for professionals, but are now widely being interpreted by non-professionals. So, decisions have been taken by people who lack the necessary understanding. The result has been confusion over who does what to whom and when, and who is responsible if it all goes wrong. That, I hope, is about to get sharply clarified, and I rather fear some poor souls will end up in the dock as a consequence. They may be rogues, or just people who had insufficient understanding of the implications of what they were doing - but in either case I wouldn't like to be in their shoes!

Assuming the initial approvals procedures are properly brought back in line (big assumption!), so one can be confident that what gets approved for construction is as fully compliant as it can be made, it will be possible to move to enforcement - so that what gets built is what was actually approved, and hopefully to management - so that what is built is maintained in its approved state.

It's a far worse mess than I had realised, but I've not been closely involved for years so haven't had hands-on experience of the shifting goal posts. When I saw the pictures of the fire I was incredulous that it could be happening.

On a ban, it might be helpful to issue a temporary ban until the approvals systems is re-jigged, but beyond that I think the problems of definition and who is authorised to rule on compliance would run into trouble in the longer term. People keep inventing new materials, particularly insulants, and new ways to use existing materials and combinations of materials - which is where Grenfell (and seemingly a number of other buildings) came unstuck.

This will cost government (i.e. us!) the thick end of £500,000 at present estimates - so expect costs to rise as the true scope becomes clear - just for the local authority and housing association properties. Personally, I can't see how they can leave private owners to fend for themselves (their properties are now effectively valueless and un-saleable) as the same system granted approval in all cases. That should be a salutary lesson for someone on the true cost of ill-considered deregulation. But, will it?
userantony1969
Posted: 18 May 2018 5:58 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


The special one

Posts: 10906
50005000500100100100100
Location: Sunny Huddersfield


Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 4:28 PM

Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 3:31 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 12:26 AM


The Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety final report conducted by Dame Judith Hackitt released today. She told C4 news how shocked she was over the building sectors 'lack of moral responsibility, the attitudes, and the practices' within it. Though a highly qualified engineer her expertise is in the field of building chemical plants, not accommodation, so quite why she was asked to head the inquiry i'm not sure.

She mentions about 'people flouting the system' using non-compliant materials and said they 'must be held to account'. She hasn't called for a total ban on cladding which is confusing, but explains her reason here;.................................

I think if you download and read both (especially) the interim report and the final report, you will begin to glimpse why she was asked to head the inquiry. It's a long read, though. The interim goes at some length into the reasoning behind her call for a centralised approval authority. What the report identifies is the way in which the system has been degraded over time, both to allow self-certification, and to introduce price competition into the approvals procedure. She can't be specific over the shortcomings, because the police are still running a criminal investigation into how non-compliant materials came to be used.

Regarding a ban on flammable materials, I don't think it is that simple. It is already the case, as she acknowledges, and as confirmed by Brokenshire yesterday in parliament, that the cladding system used on Grenfell does not meet Building Regs requirements and was used illegally. In short, it is already "banned" under the regs. It is the degraded approvals procedure that led to its use. The report makes recommendations to tighten the controls in the kind of way that was normal 30-40 years ago.

The bigger question is whether a naïve, free-market oriented, deregulating, government will bite the bullet of accepting that the private sector has to be regarded as a potential poacher, meaning that its employer has to be prepared to employ a gamekeeper to keep it on the rails!

From what she said on the C4 interview she seemed to be genuinely shocked and surprised at the lax attitude within domestic property builds. I've no idea of the field of engineering she specialises in but she obviously believed the controls were as strict.

The part you mention in second para (emboldened) is what i found disturbing but she said that will be a matter for the building regulator now. As you say it is already banned......it needs properly enforcing. There seems to have been a culture of cost cutting and riding rough shod over any regulations. I doubt that same culture applied when developing Hyde Park One or Canary Wharf apartments.

Seeing how 'new builds' get thrown up in a matter of weeks today with residents moving in before the cement has barely had time to set, has always baffled me how developers get away with it. And they aren't cheap either. A small development near my village went up a few years ago, tiny little 'rabbit hutches' at £200 - £250k and all were sold.


Youve obviously never worked on sites or redevelopments ... You can be sure cost cutting through materials or other will have happened on Hyde Park One and Canary Wharf ... I dont do redevelopment or site work anymore as tha's no money in it for moi but back in the day when I did site work everyone who could from foundation to roof cut corners , if you didn't you made no money ... Your "rabbit hutches" as sh8tty as they are the demand is there for them ... Our new lazy homeowners prefer to move into something already finished rather getting their hands dirty ... Trouble is 6 months after buying a rabbit hutch they do have to get their hands dirty
userpelmetman
Posted: 18 May 2018 6:04 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


Walks with the gods

Posts: 27041
50005000500050005000200025
Location: 1990 Ford Travelhome.Currently of no fixed abode..


antony1969 - 2018-05-18 5:58 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 4:28 PM

Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 3:31 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 12:26 AM


The Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety final report conducted by Dame Judith Hackitt released today. She told C4 news how shocked she was over the building sectors 'lack of moral responsibility, the attitudes, and the practices' within it. Though a highly qualified engineer her expertise is in the field of building chemical plants, not accommodation, so quite why she was asked to head the inquiry i'm not sure.

She mentions about 'people flouting the system' using non-compliant materials and said they 'must be held to account'. She hasn't called for a total ban on cladding which is confusing, but explains her reason here;.................................

I think if you download and read both (especially) the interim report and the final report, you will begin to glimpse why she was asked to head the inquiry. It's a long read, though. The interim goes at some length into the reasoning behind her call for a centralised approval authority. What the report identifies is the way in which the system has been degraded over time, both to allow self-certification, and to introduce price competition into the approvals procedure. She can't be specific over the shortcomings, because the police are still running a criminal investigation into how non-compliant materials came to be used.

Regarding a ban on flammable materials, I don't think it is that simple. It is already the case, as she acknowledges, and as confirmed by Brokenshire yesterday in parliament, that the cladding system used on Grenfell does not meet Building Regs requirements and was used illegally. In short, it is already "banned" under the regs. It is the degraded approvals procedure that led to its use. The report makes recommendations to tighten the controls in the kind of way that was normal 30-40 years ago.

The bigger question is whether a naïve, free-market oriented, deregulating, government will bite the bullet of accepting that the private sector has to be regarded as a potential poacher, meaning that its employer has to be prepared to employ a gamekeeper to keep it on the rails!

From what she said on the C4 interview she seemed to be genuinely shocked and surprised at the lax attitude within domestic property builds. I've no idea of the field of engineering she specialises in but she obviously believed the controls were as strict.

The part you mention in second para (emboldened) is what i found disturbing but she said that will be a matter for the building regulator now. As you say it is already banned......it needs properly enforcing. There seems to have been a culture of cost cutting and riding rough shod over any regulations. I doubt that same culture applied when developing Hyde Park One or Canary Wharf apartments.

Seeing how 'new builds' get thrown up in a matter of weeks today with residents moving in before the cement has barely had time to set, has always baffled me how developers get away with it. And they aren't cheap either. A small development near my village went up a few years ago, tiny little 'rabbit hutches' at £200 - £250k and all were sold.


Youve obviously never worked on sites or redevelopments ... You can be sure cost cutting through materials or other will have happened on Hyde Park One and Canary Wharf ... I dont do redevelopment or site work anymore as tha's no money in it for moi but back in the day when I did site work everyone who could from foundation to roof cut corners , if you didn't you made no money ... Your "rabbit hutches" as sh8tty as they are the demand is there for them ... Our new lazy homeowners prefer to move into something already finished rather getting their hands dirty ... Trouble is 6 months after buying a rabbit hutch they do have to get their hands dirty


What Brian get his hands dirty??? ........

Bullet can only polish Bullets and his ego .......

I doubt they've ever set foot on a building site ......

I got out of the game when building regs said I had to wear a hard hat and steel toe capped boots to fit curtains .......Then I knew the lunatics were in charge .......

userantony1969
Posted: 18 May 2018 6:09 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


The special one

Posts: 10906
50005000500100100100100
Location: Sunny Huddersfield


pelmetman - 2018-05-18 6:04 PM

antony1969 - 2018-05-18 5:58 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 4:28 PM

Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 3:31 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 12:26 AM


The Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety final report conducted by Dame Judith Hackitt released today. She told C4 news how shocked she was over the building sectors 'lack of moral responsibility, the attitudes, and the practices' within it. Though a highly qualified engineer her expertise is in the field of building chemical plants, not accommodation, so quite why she was asked to head the inquiry i'm not sure.

She mentions about 'people flouting the system' using non-compliant materials and said they 'must be held to account'. She hasn't called for a total ban on cladding which is confusing, but explains her reason here;.................................

I think if you download and read both (especially) the interim report and the final report, you will begin to glimpse why she was asked to head the inquiry. It's a long read, though. The interim goes at some length into the reasoning behind her call for a centralised approval authority. What the report identifies is the way in which the system has been degraded over time, both to allow self-certification, and to introduce price competition into the approvals procedure. She can't be specific over the shortcomings, because the police are still running a criminal investigation into how non-compliant materials came to be used.

Regarding a ban on flammable materials, I don't think it is that simple. It is already the case, as she acknowledges, and as confirmed by Brokenshire yesterday in parliament, that the cladding system used on Grenfell does not meet Building Regs requirements and was used illegally. In short, it is already "banned" under the regs. It is the degraded approvals procedure that led to its use. The report makes recommendations to tighten the controls in the kind of way that was normal 30-40 years ago.

The bigger question is whether a naïve, free-market oriented, deregulating, government will bite the bullet of accepting that the private sector has to be regarded as a potential poacher, meaning that its employer has to be prepared to employ a gamekeeper to keep it on the rails!

From what she said on the C4 interview she seemed to be genuinely shocked and surprised at the lax attitude within domestic property builds. I've no idea of the field of engineering she specialises in but she obviously believed the controls were as strict.

The part you mention in second para (emboldened) is what i found disturbing but she said that will be a matter for the building regulator now. As you say it is already banned......it needs properly enforcing. There seems to have been a culture of cost cutting and riding rough shod over any regulations. I doubt that same culture applied when developing Hyde Park One or Canary Wharf apartments.

Seeing how 'new builds' get thrown up in a matter of weeks today with residents moving in before the cement has barely had time to set, has always baffled me how developers get away with it. And they aren't cheap either. A small development near my village went up a few years ago, tiny little 'rabbit hutches' at £200 - £250k and all were sold.


Youve obviously never worked on sites or redevelopments ... You can be sure cost cutting through materials or other will have happened on Hyde Park One and Canary Wharf ... I dont do redevelopment or site work anymore as tha's no money in it for moi but back in the day when I did site work everyone who could from foundation to roof cut corners , if you didn't you made no money ... Your "rabbit hutches" as sh8tty as they are the demand is there for them ... Our new lazy homeowners prefer to move into something already finished rather getting their hands dirty ... Trouble is 6 months after buying a rabbit hutch they do have to get their hands dirty


What Brian get his hands dirty??? ........

Bullet can only polish Bullets and his ego .......

I doubt they've ever set foot on a building site ......

I got out of the game when building regs said I had to wear a hard hat and steel toe capped boots to fit curtains .......Then I knew the lunatics were in charge .......



As normal grasping reality of what takes place proves a little difficult for the drips ... Talking of Grenfell what ever happened to the tests on that magical exploding fridge and the fella who packed all his belongings before raising the alarm
userpelmetman
Posted: 18 May 2018 6:20 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


Walks with the gods

Posts: 27041
50005000500050005000200025
Location: 1990 Ford Travelhome.Currently of no fixed abode..


antony1969 - 2018-05-18 6:09 PM

pelmetman - 2018-05-18 6:04 PM

antony1969 - 2018-05-18 5:58 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 4:28 PM

Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 3:31 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 12:26 AM


The Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety final report conducted by Dame Judith Hackitt released today. She told C4 news how shocked she was over the building sectors 'lack of moral responsibility, the attitudes, and the practices' within it. Though a highly qualified engineer her expertise is in the field of building chemical plants, not accommodation, so quite why she was asked to head the inquiry i'm not sure.

She mentions about 'people flouting the system' using non-compliant materials and said they 'must be held to account'. She hasn't called for a total ban on cladding which is confusing, but explains her reason here;.................................

I think if you download and read both (especially) the interim report and the final report, you will begin to glimpse why she was asked to head the inquiry. It's a long read, though. The interim goes at some length into the reasoning behind her call for a centralised approval authority. What the report identifies is the way in which the system has been degraded over time, both to allow self-certification, and to introduce price competition into the approvals procedure. She can't be specific over the shortcomings, because the police are still running a criminal investigation into how non-compliant materials came to be used.

Regarding a ban on flammable materials, I don't think it is that simple. It is already the case, as she acknowledges, and as confirmed by Brokenshire yesterday in parliament, that the cladding system used on Grenfell does not meet Building Regs requirements and was used illegally. In short, it is already "banned" under the regs. It is the degraded approvals procedure that led to its use. The report makes recommendations to tighten the controls in the kind of way that was normal 30-40 years ago.

The bigger question is whether a naïve, free-market oriented, deregulating, government will bite the bullet of accepting that the private sector has to be regarded as a potential poacher, meaning that its employer has to be prepared to employ a gamekeeper to keep it on the rails!

From what she said on the C4 interview she seemed to be genuinely shocked and surprised at the lax attitude within domestic property builds. I've no idea of the field of engineering she specialises in but she obviously believed the controls were as strict.

The part you mention in second para (emboldened) is what i found disturbing but she said that will be a matter for the building regulator now. As you say it is already banned......it needs properly enforcing. There seems to have been a culture of cost cutting and riding rough shod over any regulations. I doubt that same culture applied when developing Hyde Park One or Canary Wharf apartments.

Seeing how 'new builds' get thrown up in a matter of weeks today with residents moving in before the cement has barely had time to set, has always baffled me how developers get away with it. And they aren't cheap either. A small development near my village went up a few years ago, tiny little 'rabbit hutches' at £200 - £250k and all were sold.


Youve obviously never worked on sites or redevelopments ... You can be sure cost cutting through materials or other will have happened on Hyde Park One and Canary Wharf ... I dont do redevelopment or site work anymore as tha's no money in it for moi but back in the day when I did site work everyone who could from foundation to roof cut corners , if you didn't you made no money ... Your "rabbit hutches" as sh8tty as they are the demand is there for them ... Our new lazy homeowners prefer to move into something already finished rather getting their hands dirty ... Trouble is 6 months after buying a rabbit hutch they do have to get their hands dirty


What Brian get his hands dirty??? ........

Bullet can only polish Bullets and his ego .......

I doubt they've ever set foot on a building site ......

I got out of the game when building regs said I had to wear a hard hat and steel toe capped boots to fit curtains .......Then I knew the lunatics were in charge .......



As normal grasping reality of what takes place proves a little difficult for the drips ... Talking of Grenfell what ever happened to the tests on that magical exploding fridge and the fella who packed all his belongings before raising the alarm


Makes you wonder dont it .......

He had time to pack??? ........

I wonder if he was a Momentum member? ........

Not to mention he knocked on his neighbours door and left his open so she could see the fire in his kitchen .......

Well a good fire does need a bit of draught ........



Edited by pelmetman 2018-05-18 6:32 PM
userBulletguy
Posted: 18 May 2018 6:34 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


The special one

Posts: 10496
50005000100100100100252525
Location: Cheshire. Ford Transit Autosleeper Duetto


Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 5:57 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 4:28 PM......................From what she said on the C4 interview she seemed to be genuinely shocked and surprised at the lax attitude within domestic property builds. I've no idea of the field of engineering she specialises in but she obviously believed the controls were as strict.

The part you mention in second para (emboldened) is what i found disturbing but she said that will be a matter for the building regulator now. As you say it is already banned......it needs properly enforcing. There seems to have been a culture of cost cutting and riding rough shod over any regulations. I doubt that same culture applied when developing Hyde Park One or Canary Wharf apartments.

Seeing how 'new builds' get thrown up in a matter of weeks today with residents moving in before the cement has barely had time to set, has always baffled me how developers get away with it. .....................

It isn't just domestic, Paul, the same procedures apply to all construction approvals; commercial, residential, private and public.

She is a chemical engineer, but was head of the Health and Safety Executive 2009 - 16. Have a look at her biog: it is impressive! One clever lady.

It goes beyond enforcement, which I see as post hoc. It has happened because over time government has allowed self-certification, licenced private firms to become Buildings Regulations approvers who compete on price for the job, allowed "desk studies" on fire engineering to be carried out by non-specialists, and generally de-regulated the approvals system.

The regulations were written by professionals for professionals, but are now widely being interpreted by non-professionals. So, decisions have been taken by people who lack the necessary understanding. The result has been confusion over who does what to whom and when, and who is responsible if it all goes wrong. That, I hope, is about to get sharply clarified, and I rather fear some poor souls will end up in the dock as a consequence. They may be rogues, or just people who had insufficient understanding of the implications of what they were doing - but in either case I wouldn't like to be in their shoes!

Assuming the initial approvals procedures are properly brought back in line (big assumption!), so one can be confident that what gets approved for construction is as fully compliant as it can be made, it will be possible to move to enforcement - so that what gets built is what was actually approved, and hopefully to management - so that what is built is maintained in its approved state.

It's a far worse mess than I had realised, but I've not been closely involved for years so haven't had hands-on experience of the shifting goal posts. When I saw the pictures of the fire I was incredulous that it could be happening.

On a ban, it might be helpful to issue a temporary ban until the approvals systems is re-jigged, but beyond that I think the problems of definition and who is authorised to rule on compliance would run into trouble in the longer term. People keep inventing new materials, particularly insulants, and new ways to use existing materials and combinations of materials - which is where Grenfell (and seemingly a number of other buildings) came unstuck.

This will cost government (i.e. us!) the thick end of £500,000 at present estimates - so expect costs to rise as the true scope becomes clear - just for the local authority and housing association properties. Personally, I can't see how they can leave private owners to fend for themselves (their properties are now effectively valueless and un-saleable) as the same system granted approval in all cases. That should be a salutary lesson for someone on the true cost of ill-considered deregulation. But, will it?

Yes i saw that and she is obviously highly qualified. As you say, pretty damn impressive! What i meant re 'domestic builds' she seemed genuinely shocked to find the same level of controls to what she's been used to dealing with in her own field, was not throughout the industry as a whole. It look like as you said, a case of too many non-professionals interpreting the rules however best suits them.

It was interesting that the LFB spokesman mentioned having competent people making decisions and seeing more robust tests are strictly adhered to is more important than a blanket ban.

My only experience of fire so far has thankfully not been at home, but once at work when we had an explosion in one of the powder cell rooms. Fortunately nobody was working the block at the time it occurred otherwise there would certainly have been loss of life. That was a major serious matter and involved months of investigations.

The only 'fire issue' i do have at home is a conifer issue with a crazy neighbour whose planted a 40ft fireball. Council aren't interested as you can plant these damn things......but put a fence up higher than 2mtrs and you'll be in trouble!
userpelmetman
Posted: 18 May 2018 6:40 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


Walks with the gods

Posts: 27041
50005000500050005000200025
Location: 1990 Ford Travelhome.Currently of no fixed abode..


Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 6:34 PM

My only experience of fire so far has thankfully not been at home, but once at work when we had an explosion in one of the powder cell rooms. !


Is that all Bullet ......

Every vessel I served on caught fire at least once .......

The only one that didn't ....sunk .......

Even had a fire at HMS Rooke in Gibraltar......and that was a shore base .......

userBrian Kirby
Posted: 18 May 2018 6:41 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


5000500050001000500
Location: East Sussex. Motorhome: Knaus Boxstar 600 Street


pelmetman - 2018-05-18 5:41 PM

Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 4:21 PM

pelmetman - 2018-05-18 3:37 PM

Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 3:31 PM
The report makes recommendations to tighten the controls in the kind of way that was normal 30-40 years ago.



You mean before we joined the EU ..............

No, Dave, I don't, because it has no relevance whatever, to either Building Regs approval procedures, or to the Grenfell fire.


Point of order ......That's not what you said .......

The implication "IS" before we joined the EU we were getting it right? .......

Just sayin .....

No. 40 years ago we were in the EEC. We joined on 1/1/1973. Grenfell tower was completed in 1974, and will have originally been approved by RBKC District Surveyors under section 20 of the London Building Acts. At that time we had just joined the EEC.

Neither the London Building Acts, nor the present Building Regulations, nor the present building regulations approvals system have ever been subject to EEC or EU regulation or intervention.

Certain materials testing procedures have been harmonised across the EU, so that materials approved in one country can be used in others without further testing but, as neither the cladding nor the insulation used in the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower comply with UK building regulations they were illegally used.

Membership or otherwise of the EEC or the EU has no relevance to this whatever. This was an entirely home grown catastrophe, largely facilitated by governments besotted with "light touch" regulation and de-regulation, which so degraded the approvals procedures that it was possible for non-compliant materials to be used. The resulting death toll was a consequence of UK government regulatory laxity, no more, no less.

Just sayin'.
userBulletguy
Posted: 18 May 2018 6:46 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


The special one

Posts: 10496
50005000100100100100252525
Location: Cheshire. Ford Transit Autosleeper Duetto


pelmetman - 2018-05-18 6:04 PM

I got out of the game when building regs said I had to wear a hard hat and steel toe capped boots to fit curtains .......Then I knew the lunatics were in charge .......

How many "jobs" is this now? They keep mounting.

Banana boat deckhand, 'soldier', bus driver, pelmet maker and now suddenly you're claiming to have been employed on building sites.

Demolition would be more likely.
userBulletguy
Posted: 18 May 2018 6:55 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


The special one

Posts: 10496
50005000100100100100252525
Location: Cheshire. Ford Transit Autosleeper Duetto


pelmetman - 2018-05-18 6:40 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 6:34 PM

My only experience of fire so far has thankfully not been at home, but once at work when we had an explosion in one of the powder cell rooms. !


Is that all Bullet ......

Every vessel I served on caught fire at least once .......

The only one that didn't ....sunk .......

Even had a fire at HMS Rooke in Gibraltar......and that was a shore base .......

Why am i not surprised to read that? With you on board they'd got a one man trouble making disaster. I'm more surprised they didn't have you walk the plank.

Incidentally an explosion is much more than just a fire......but then you wouldn't know that.

Edited by Bulletguy 2018-05-18 6:58 PM
userpelmetman
Posted: 18 May 2018 7:07 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


Walks with the gods

Posts: 27041
50005000500050005000200025
Location: 1990 Ford Travelhome.Currently of no fixed abode..


Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 6:55 PM

pelmetman - 2018-05-18 6:40 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 6:34 PM

My only experience of fire so far has thankfully not been at home, but once at work when we had an explosion in one of the powder cell rooms. !


Is that all Bullet ......

Every vessel I served on caught fire at least once .......

The only one that didn't ....sunk .......

Even had a fire at HMS Rooke in Gibraltar......and that was a shore base .......

Why am i not surprised to read that? With you on board they'd got a one man trouble making disaster. I'm more surprised they didn't have you walk the plank.

Incidentally an explosion is much more than just a fire......but then you wouldn't know that.


Then you'd be wrong .......

As the boiler blew up on HMS Devonshire as we were heading out for a 9 month far east tour .........

Only got as far as Lisbon ........

BTW unlike you land lubbers we either had to put fires out or die ..........

Coz there was no where to run ..........





Edited by pelmetman 2018-05-18 7:10 PM
userantony1969
Posted: 18 May 2018 7:08 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


The special one

Posts: 10906
50005000500100100100100
Location: Sunny Huddersfield


pelmetman - 2018-05-18 6:20 PM

antony1969 - 2018-05-18 6:09 PM

pelmetman - 2018-05-18 6:04 PM

antony1969 - 2018-05-18 5:58 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 4:28 PM

Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 3:31 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 12:26 AM


The Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety final report conducted by Dame Judith Hackitt released today. She told C4 news how shocked she was over the building sectors 'lack of moral responsibility, the attitudes, and the practices' within it. Though a highly qualified engineer her expertise is in the field of building chemical plants, not accommodation, so quite why she was asked to head the inquiry i'm not sure.

She mentions about 'people flouting the system' using non-compliant materials and said they 'must be held to account'. She hasn't called for a total ban on cladding which is confusing, but explains her reason here;.................................

I think if you download and read both (especially) the interim report and the final report, you will begin to glimpse why she was asked to head the inquiry. It's a long read, though. The interim goes at some length into the reasoning behind her call for a centralised approval authority. What the report identifies is the way in which the system has been degraded over time, both to allow self-certification, and to introduce price competition into the approvals procedure. She can't be specific over the shortcomings, because the police are still running a criminal investigation into how non-compliant materials came to be used.

Regarding a ban on flammable materials, I don't think it is that simple. It is already the case, as she acknowledges, and as confirmed by Brokenshire yesterday in parliament, that the cladding system used on Grenfell does not meet Building Regs requirements and was used illegally. In short, it is already "banned" under the regs. It is the degraded approvals procedure that led to its use. The report makes recommendations to tighten the controls in the kind of way that was normal 30-40 years ago.

The bigger question is whether a naïve, free-market oriented, deregulating, government will bite the bullet of accepting that the private sector has to be regarded as a potential poacher, meaning that its employer has to be prepared to employ a gamekeeper to keep it on the rails!

From what she said on the C4 interview she seemed to be genuinely shocked and surprised at the lax attitude within domestic property builds. I've no idea of the field of engineering she specialises in but she obviously believed the controls were as strict.

The part you mention in second para (emboldened) is what i found disturbing but she said that will be a matter for the building regulator now. As you say it is already banned......it needs properly enforcing. There seems to have been a culture of cost cutting and riding rough shod over any regulations. I doubt that same culture applied when developing Hyde Park One or Canary Wharf apartments.

Seeing how 'new builds' get thrown up in a matter of weeks today with residents moving in before the cement has barely had time to set, has always baffled me how developers get away with it. And they aren't cheap either. A small development near my village went up a few years ago, tiny little 'rabbit hutches' at £200 - £250k and all were sold.


Youve obviously never worked on sites or redevelopments ... You can be sure cost cutting through materials or other will have happened on Hyde Park One and Canary Wharf ... I dont do redevelopment or site work anymore as tha's no money in it for moi but back in the day when I did site work everyone who could from foundation to roof cut corners , if you didn't you made no money ... Your "rabbit hutches" as sh8tty as they are the demand is there for them ... Our new lazy homeowners prefer to move into something already finished rather getting their hands dirty ... Trouble is 6 months after buying a rabbit hutch they do have to get their hands dirty


What Brian get his hands dirty??? ........

Bullet can only polish Bullets and his ego .......

I doubt they've ever set foot on a building site ......

I got out of the game when building regs said I had to wear a hard hat and steel toe capped boots to fit curtains .......Then I knew the lunatics were in charge .......



As normal grasping reality of what takes place proves a little difficult for the drips ... Talking of Grenfell what ever happened to the tests on that magical exploding fridge and the fella who packed all his belongings before raising the alarm


Makes you wonder dont it .......

He had time to pack??? ........

I wonder if he was a Momentum member? ........

Not to mention he knocked on his neighbours door and left his open so she could see the fire in his kitchen .......

Well a good fire does need a bit of draught ........



Those Hotpoint fridges ended being classed as low risk dint they ... Mr Behailu Kebede , typical Londoners name did pack all his gear away ... Weren't his family away that night ??? ... That was lucky wasn't it
userpelmetman
Posted: 18 May 2018 7:24 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


Walks with the gods

Posts: 27041
50005000500050005000200025
Location: 1990 Ford Travelhome.Currently of no fixed abode..


antony1969 - 2018-05-18 7:08 PM

pelmetman - 2018-05-18 6:20 PM

antony1969 - 2018-05-18 6:09 PM

pelmetman - 2018-05-18 6:04 PM

antony1969 - 2018-05-18 5:58 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 4:28 PM

Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 3:31 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 12:26 AM


The Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety final report conducted by Dame Judith Hackitt released today. She told C4 news how shocked she was over the building sectors 'lack of moral responsibility, the attitudes, and the practices' within it. Though a highly qualified engineer her expertise is in the field of building chemical plants, not accommodation, so quite why she was asked to head the inquiry i'm not sure.

She mentions about 'people flouting the system' using non-compliant materials and said they 'must be held to account'. She hasn't called for a total ban on cladding which is confusing, but explains her reason here;.................................

I think if you download and read both (especially) the interim report and the final report, you will begin to glimpse why she was asked to head the inquiry. It's a long read, though. The interim goes at some length into the reasoning behind her call for a centralised approval authority. What the report identifies is the way in which the system has been degraded over time, both to allow self-certification, and to introduce price competition into the approvals procedure. She can't be specific over the shortcomings, because the police are still running a criminal investigation into how non-compliant materials came to be used.

Regarding a ban on flammable materials, I don't think it is that simple. It is already the case, as she acknowledges, and as confirmed by Brokenshire yesterday in parliament, that the cladding system used on Grenfell does not meet Building Regs requirements and was used illegally. In short, it is already "banned" under the regs. It is the degraded approvals procedure that led to its use. The report makes recommendations to tighten the controls in the kind of way that was normal 30-40 years ago.

The bigger question is whether a naïve, free-market oriented, deregulating, government will bite the bullet of accepting that the private sector has to be regarded as a potential poacher, meaning that its employer has to be prepared to employ a gamekeeper to keep it on the rails!

From what she said on the C4 interview she seemed to be genuinely shocked and surprised at the lax attitude within domestic property builds. I've no idea of the field of engineering she specialises in but she obviously believed the controls were as strict.

The part you mention in second para (emboldened) is what i found disturbing but she said that will be a matter for the building regulator now. As you say it is already banned......it needs properly enforcing. There seems to have been a culture of cost cutting and riding rough shod over any regulations. I doubt that same culture applied when developing Hyde Park One or Canary Wharf apartments.

Seeing how 'new builds' get thrown up in a matter of weeks today with residents moving in before the cement has barely had time to set, has always baffled me how developers get away with it. And they aren't cheap either. A small development near my village went up a few years ago, tiny little 'rabbit hutches' at £200 - £250k and all were sold.


Youve obviously never worked on sites or redevelopments ... You can be sure cost cutting through materials or other will have happened on Hyde Park One and Canary Wharf ... I dont do redevelopment or site work anymore as tha's no money in it for moi but back in the day when I did site work everyone who could from foundation to roof cut corners , if you didn't you made no money ... Your "rabbit hutches" as sh8tty as they are the demand is there for them ... Our new lazy homeowners prefer to move into something already finished rather getting their hands dirty ... Trouble is 6 months after buying a rabbit hutch they do have to get their hands dirty


What Brian get his hands dirty??? ........

Bullet can only polish Bullets and his ego .......

I doubt they've ever set foot on a building site ......

I got out of the game when building regs said I had to wear a hard hat and steel toe capped boots to fit curtains .......Then I knew the lunatics were in charge .......



As normal grasping reality of what takes place proves a little difficult for the drips ... Talking of Grenfell what ever happened to the tests on that magical exploding fridge and the fella who packed all his belongings before raising the alarm


Makes you wonder dont it .......

He had time to pack??? ........

I wonder if he was a Momentum member? ........

Not to mention he knocked on his neighbours door and left his open so she could see the fire in his kitchen .......

Well a good fire does need a bit of draught ........



Those Hotpoint fridges ended being classed as low risk dint they ... Mr Behailu Kebede , typical Londoners name did pack all his gear away ... Weren't his family away that night ??? ... That was lucky wasn't it


How lucky is that? .........

Dunno where he's gone? ........



userBrian Kirby
Posted: 18 May 2018 7:24 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


5000500050001000500
Location: East Sussex. Motorhome: Knaus Boxstar 600 Street


pelmetman - 2018-05-18 6:04 PM..........................I doubt they've ever set foot on a building site .................................

If all you've ever set foot on are itty-bitty house builder's sites, you're over-bidding your expertise!

My first experience of a building site was in 1962, and my last in 2004. I was on and off all kinds of building sites for pretty much the whole of the intervening 42 years. So yes, I've been on quite a few!

I even got my hands dirty - though I washed them afterwards! Strange, this preoccupation with people getting dirty hands, has it some hidden significance?
userantony1969
Posted: 18 May 2018 7:34 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


The special one

Posts: 10906
50005000500100100100100
Location: Sunny Huddersfield


Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 7:24 PM

pelmetman - 2018-05-18 6:04 PM..........................I doubt they've ever set foot on a building site .................................

If all you've ever set foot on are itty-bitty house builder's sites, you're over-bidding your expertise!

My first experience of a building site was in 1962, and my last in 2004. I was on and off all kinds of building sites for pretty much the whole of the intervening 42 years. So yes, I've been on quite a few!

I even got my hands dirty - though I washed them afterwards! Strange, this preoccupation with people getting dirty hands, has it some hidden significance?


Well it would be a miracle if you hadnt experienced cutting corners Brian ... Unless of course you were one of those the cutting corners crew were hiding it from ... Who's mentioned getting hands dirty ???
userantony1969
Posted: 18 May 2018 7:38 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


The special one

Posts: 10906
50005000500100100100100
Location: Sunny Huddersfield


pelmetman - 2018-05-18 7:24 PM

antony1969 - 2018-05-18 7:08 PM

pelmetman - 2018-05-18 6:20 PM

antony1969 - 2018-05-18 6:09 PM

pelmetman - 2018-05-18 6:04 PM

antony1969 - 2018-05-18 5:58 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 4:28 PM

Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 3:31 PM

Bulletguy - 2018-05-18 12:26 AM


The Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety final report conducted by Dame Judith Hackitt released today. She told C4 news how shocked she was over the building sectors 'lack of moral responsibility, the attitudes, and the practices' within it. Though a highly qualified engineer her expertise is in the field of building chemical plants, not accommodation, so quite why she was asked to head the inquiry i'm not sure.

She mentions about 'people flouting the system' using non-compliant materials and said they 'must be held to account'. She hasn't called for a total ban on cladding which is confusing, but explains her reason here;.................................

I think if you download and read both (especially) the interim report and the final report, you will begin to glimpse why she was asked to head the inquiry. It's a long read, though. The interim goes at some length into the reasoning behind her call for a centralised approval authority. What the report identifies is the way in which the system has been degraded over time, both to allow self-certification, and to introduce price competition into the approvals procedure. She can't be specific over the shortcomings, because the police are still running a criminal investigation into how non-compliant materials came to be used.

Regarding a ban on flammable materials, I don't think it is that simple. It is already the case, as she acknowledges, and as confirmed by Brokenshire yesterday in parliament, that the cladding system used on Grenfell does not meet Building Regs requirements and was used illegally. In short, it is already "banned" under the regs. It is the degraded approvals procedure that led to its use. The report makes recommendations to tighten the controls in the kind of way that was normal 30-40 years ago.

The bigger question is whether a naïve, free-market oriented, deregulating, government will bite the bullet of accepting that the private sector has to be regarded as a potential poacher, meaning that its employer has to be prepared to employ a gamekeeper to keep it on the rails!

From what she said on the C4 interview she seemed to be genuinely shocked and surprised at the lax attitude within domestic property builds. I've no idea of the field of engineering she specialises in but she obviously believed the controls were as strict.

The part you mention in second para (emboldened) is what i found disturbing but she said that will be a matter for the building regulator now. As you say it is already banned......it needs properly enforcing. There seems to have been a culture of cost cutting and riding rough shod over any regulations. I doubt that same culture applied when developing Hyde Park One or Canary Wharf apartments.

Seeing how 'new builds' get thrown up in a matter of weeks today with residents moving in before the cement has barely had time to set, has always baffled me how developers get away with it. And they aren't cheap either. A small development near my village went up a few years ago, tiny little 'rabbit hutches' at £200 - £250k and all were sold.


Youve obviously never worked on sites or redevelopments ... You can be sure cost cutting through materials or other will have happened on Hyde Park One and Canary Wharf ... I dont do redevelopment or site work anymore as tha's no money in it for moi but back in the day when I did site work everyone who could from foundation to roof cut corners , if you didn't you made no money ... Your "rabbit hutches" as sh8tty as they are the demand is there for them ... Our new lazy homeowners prefer to move into something already finished rather getting their hands dirty ... Trouble is 6 months after buying a rabbit hutch they do have to get their hands dirty


What Brian get his hands dirty??? ........

Bullet can only polish Bullets and his ego .......

I doubt they've ever set foot on a building site ......

I got out of the game when building regs said I had to wear a hard hat and steel toe capped boots to fit curtains .......Then I knew the lunatics were in charge .......



As normal grasping reality of what takes place proves a little difficult for the drips ... Talking of Grenfell what ever happened to the tests on that magical exploding fridge and the fella who packed all his belongings before raising the alarm


Makes you wonder dont it .......

He had time to pack??? ........

I wonder if he was a Momentum member? ........

Not to mention he knocked on his neighbours door and left his open so she could see the fire in his kitchen .......

Well a good fire does need a bit of draught ........



Those Hotpoint fridges ended being classed as low risk dint they ... Mr Behailu Kebede , typical Londoners name did pack all his gear away ... Weren't his family away that night ??? ... That was lucky wasn't it


How lucky is that? .........

Dunno where he's gone? ........





Incredibly lucky ... His God sure was looking after him that night ... I bet hes holed up in some decent pad somewhere with his family this time though ... Hes a lucky fella
userpelmetman
Posted: 18 May 2018 8:00 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


Walks with the gods

Posts: 27041
50005000500050005000200025
Location: 1990 Ford Travelhome.Currently of no fixed abode..


Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 7:24 PM

pelmetman - 2018-05-18 6:04 PM..........................I doubt they've ever set foot on a building site .................................

If all you've ever set foot on are itty-bitty house builder's sites, you're over-bidding your expertise!

My first experience of a building site was in 1962, and my last in 2004. I was on and off all kinds of building sites for pretty much the whole of the intervening 42 years. So yes, I've been on quite a few!

I even got my hands dirty - though I washed them afterwards! Strange, this preoccupation with people getting dirty hands, has it some hidden significance?


So You'll know how standards have dropped .......

BTW the fact that you washed them say's everything Brian ........

Forgot to add I worked on all the big boy sites like Persimmon, Countryside, Bovis etc etc.......even Barratt .......So you can see I weren't fussy .......



Edited by pelmetman 2018-05-18 8:07 PM
userBrian Kirby
Posted: 19 May 2018 11:00 AM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


5000500050001000500
Location: East Sussex. Motorhome: Knaus Boxstar 600 Street


antony1969 - 2018-05-18 7:34 PM

Brian Kirby - 2018-05-18 7:24 PM

pelmetman - 2018-05-18 6:04 PM..........................I doubt they've ever set foot on a building site .................................

If all you've ever set foot on are itty-bitty house builder's sites, you're over-bidding your expertise!

My first experience of a building site was in 1962, and my last in 2004. I was on and off all kinds of building sites for pretty much the whole of the intervening 42 years. So yes, I've been on quite a few!

I even got my hands dirty - though I washed them afterwards! Strange, this preoccupation with people getting dirty hands, has it some hidden significance?


Well it would be a miracle if you hadnt experienced cutting corners Brian ... Unless of course you were one of those the cutting corners crew were hiding it from ... Who's mentioned getting hands dirty ???

Of course. Corner cutting is how some folk make money. Price the job, then see how much they can leave out without getting spotted.

Dave was preoccupied with dirty hands, possibly because he was only window dressing, so had to keep his clean!
userBrian Kirby
Posted: 19 May 2018 11:11 AM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


5000500050001000500
Location: East Sussex. Motorhome: Knaus Boxstar 600 Street


pelmetman - 2018-05-18 8:00 PM...........................Forgot to add I worked on all the big boy sites like Persimmon, Countryside, Bovis etc etc.......even Barratt .......So you can see I weren't fussy .......

Good for you. They must have had much prettier show-house windows when you left!
userBulletguy
Posted: 21 May 2018 11:06 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


The special one

Posts: 10496
50005000100100100100252525
Location: Cheshire. Ford Transit Autosleeper Duetto


The official inquiry hears testimony from survivors of Grenfell including parents whose baby was stillborn.

https://www.channel4.com/news/grenfell-inquiry-into-britains-worst-civil-disaster-in-21st-century-opens-with-moving-testimony

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RddAQ0pyUXE

There was an even more powerful and damning interview from a 16th floor resident who escaped thanks to a neighbour who phoned him as he slept and shouted "GET OUT NOW....IMMEDIATELY".

He had been on the Grenfell Residents Action group who had raised concerns over the cladding and numerous other issues with RBK&C and KCTMO, but were continually 'stonewalled'.

There has to be accountability and i expect at the very least to see custodial sentences.

His experience is chilling and staggering.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxMEAAOTt30




Edited by Bulletguy 2018-05-21 11:08 PM
userBulletguy
Posted: 5 November 2018 10:18 PM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


The special one

Posts: 10496
50005000100100100100252525
Location: Cheshire. Ford Transit Autosleeper Duetto



There are some extremely sick minded people out there that makes me despair what kind of society we've become. Their mindset has no place in any society at all.....and not even fit to inhabit the sewers.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/05/police-appeal-video-mock-up-grenfell-tower-burned

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-46099562
userantony1969
Posted: 6 November 2018 6:21 AM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


The special one

Posts: 10906
50005000500100100100100
Location: Sunny Huddersfield


Bulletguy - 2018-11-05 10:18 PM


There are some extremely sick minded people out there that makes me despair what kind of society we've become. Their mindset has no place in any society at all.....and not even fit to inhabit the sewers.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/05/police-appeal-video-mock-up-grenfell-tower-burned

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-46099562


Yes I saw some idiots had burnt a Boris Johnson look alike on their bonfire too ... Dont know whats going on
userJohn52
Posted: 6 November 2018 7:31 AM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


Forum master

Posts: 4480
20002000100100100100252525
Location: Pissindoon, Scotland


Yes I really dislike the idea of burning Grenfell Tower or anyone else including Boris Johnson.
But then I don't like the idea of burning Guy Fawkes either - and 'celebrating' that was compulsory until 1959.
userJohn52
Posted: 6 November 2018 9:26 AM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


Forum master

Posts: 4480
20002000100100100100252525
Location: Pissindoon, Scotland


Bulletguy - 2018-11-05 10:18 PM


There are some extremely sick minded people out there that makes me despair what kind of society we've become. Their mindset has no place in any society at all.....and not even fit to inhabit the sewers.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/05/police-appeal-video-mock-up-grenfell-tower-burned

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-46099562


Thats what I thought when Osborne said he wouldn't rest until Theresa May was chopped up in bags in his freezer: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/sep/13/george-osborne-criticised-for-gruesome-remarks-against-theresa-may
userpelmetman
Posted: 6 November 2018 9:46 AM
Subject: RE: Grenfell Tower
 


Walks with the gods

Posts: 27041
50005000500050005000200025
Location: 1990 Ford Travelhome.Currently of no fixed abode..


Bulletguy - 2018-11-05 10:18 PM


There are some extremely sick minded people out there that makes me despair what kind of society we've become. Their mindset has no place in any society at all.....and not even fit to inhabit the sewers.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/05/police-appeal-video-mock-up-grenfell-tower-burned

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-46099562


At least those sicko's didn't ripoff the taxpayer unlike some of the pretend victims ..........

Not seen you complaining about them though? ............

Is it coz they ain't white Brits? .........





Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread
Jump to forum :


(Delete all cookies set by this site)(Return to Homepage)

Any problems? Contact the administrator