Huge Fire In Block Of Flats

[Glade]

My spider senses are tingling over this cladding test 100% failure rate.

A few contractors taking a flyer I could envisage... but every building seeming to suddenly fail when the design and installation would have been checked separately, at separate tines by different people... and no-one noticed?

They can't be testing to the same specification. I bet the goalposts have been moved.

[speedking31]

See above.

1. What was considered as fascia or cladding or rainscreen, is now being tested as 'insulation'.

2. Previous testing played a flame on the surface which, being aluminium, didn't catch fire. Now they are burning the plastic core.

BBC article.

[Glade]

If they are now testing it "correctly", then a lot of people have been paid a lot of money to do things incorrectly up to this point.

But really did all these people manage to mis interpret the requirements FOR SO long and on such a wide scale.

I hope the government didn't cock the test up, and start panic with this 100% failure rate business!!!

Will be interesting watching this legislation develop!

[austinsmirk]

Ganglandboss said:

jsf said:

There has to be an annual inspection and certification for gas appliances in rented accommodation. Old appliances fail.

I would expect any private owners in these blocks would have to maintain that.

OldGermanHeaps said:

Ganglandboss said:

Not all. My parents old cooker had no flame failure device, and they only replaced that a few weeks ago. I expect there will still be plenty about, especially in poorer households.

I doubt social housing tenants would be allowed these, most tend to be quite tightly controlling of tenants gas appliances, but privatly owned is pretty much a free for all.

My nan lives in a warden controlled housing association bungalow. Last year, we had to have her cooker disconnected as she was forever leaving the gas on with the hob unlit, so clearly the requirement for annual inspections do not provide the protection suggested. Age of the appliance does not always render it unsafe. Another issue in tower blocks is that some flats are privately owned.

Edited by Ganglandboss on Wednesday 28th June 12:14

I've been involved in the design and build of a lot of sheltered and extra care housing over the years. Also some schemes for severely disabled young adults. it is common sense to make them all electric, naturally- even if yr doing bungalows or 3-4 storey, 50 bed units.

Anyway, we're still happily letting flats in high rise blocks. my staff have just let a 12th floor flat today.

[Colonial]

austinsmirk said:

I've been involved in the design and build of a lot of sheltered and extra care housing over the years. Also some schemes for severely disabled young adults. it is common sense to make them all electric, naturally- even if yr doing bungalows or 3-4 storey, 50 bed units.

Anyway, we're still happily letting flats in high rise blocks. my staff have just let a 12th floor flat today.

Same. We do a lot of design here in Oz for seniors living and disabled options. Electric is a given. Convection on high end retirement villages. Common sense.

[kev1974]

Glade said:

Will be interesting watching this legislation develop!

And what the rest of Europe / The World does

Have any other countries started ripping cladding off buildings yet? Or is the rest of the world taking time to think things through and thinking about what else they might put on the buildings instead.

[Gareth79]

jmorgan said:

Gareth79 said:

Earlier in the year a friend posted a photo of a block opposite where a tenant had a shed and a BBQ on the balcony. I guessed the shed would have been gone within a few weeks but apparently as of yesterday it was still there, as was the BBQ.

Intrigued now, small shed or big balcony? Suppose he can keep the mower in it......

Small shed, probably to store furniture and bits:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2OFef2WgAA7nue.jpg

[Blue Oval84]

kev1974 said:

And what the rest of Europe / The World does

Have any other countries started ripping cladding off buildings yet? Or is the rest of the world taking time to think things through and thinking about what else they might put on the buildings instead.

I get the impression that many other parts of the world weren't as gung ho as the UK about installing flammable cladding with some notable exceptions.

To be fair, this isn't the first time it's happened on such a scale, it's just the first time it's happened to scale here. We ignored it when it happened elsewhere, I'd expect other countries will ignore Grenfell until dozens of their citizens burn to death.

[Munter]

Gareth79 said:

Small shed, probably to store furniture and bits:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2OFef2WgAA7nue.jpg

Shed's an issue. But the BBQ (and fire pit on the one below), look ok to me. What's going to catch fire...(except the shed)

[Blue Oval84]

jsf said:

Is your flat part of a social housing block?

I am surprised your leasehold agreement doesn't specify safety checks for a flat in a block.

No, all private, with a mix of owner/occupier and BTL. The point being that the checks for people living in a flat are basically no different to the checks you're required to have in a house.

Social housing may have slightly more stringent rules, but I'd be surprised.

[BlackLabel]

"Final death toll from Grenfell Tower will not be known for many months, with 80 currently presumed dead, police say"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/40434741

[WatchfulEye]

Blue Oval84 said:

I get the impression that many other parts of the world weren't as gung ho as the UK about installing flammable cladding with some notable exceptions.

To be fair, this isn't the first time it's happened on such a scale, it's just the first time it's happened to scale here. We ignored it when it happened elsewhere, I'd expect other countries will ignore Grenfell until dozens of their citizens burn to death.

The thing is that when it happened in places like Dubai and Australia - they decided to take parts of the UK legislation.

For example, UAE incorporated the BS8414 cladding test into their legislation; as did Australia. Essentially bringing their code for use of combustible cladding into line with the UK. Presumably, they wouldn't have done that, if they hadn't believed it to be an appropriate model.

https://www.bre.co.uk/news/Australia-adopts-Britis...

[Blue Oval84]

WatchfulEye said:

The thing is that when it happened in places like Dubai and Australia - they decided to take parts of the UK legislation.

For example, UAE incorporated the BS8414 cladding test into their legislation; as did Australia. Essentially bringing their code for use of combustible cladding into line with the UK. Presumably, they wouldn't have done that, if they hadn't believed it to be an appropriate model.

https://www.bre.co.uk/news/Australia-adopts-Britis...

Didn't know that!

Richard North has explained why this has become such a problem, and the EU has their fingerprints on it...

http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86522

In a nutshell and as I understand it, we have BS8414 which is quite robust, but we aren't allowed to set rules that are more stringent than EU rules in areas defined as an EU competency. So in this case, UK developers have a choice, they can choose the BS8414 if they want, but the law can't force them to...

ETA - I bet the council could have specified BS8414 if they'd wanted, but they probably didn't know, and probably specified something like "compliant", which the EU test is (total guessing on my part)

[Vipers]

Blue Oval84 said:

WatchfulEye said:

The thing is that when it happened in places like Dubai and Australia - they decided to take parts of the UK legislation.

For example, UAE incorporated the BS8414 cladding test into their legislation; as did Australia. Essentially bringing their code for use of combustible cladding into line with the UK. Presumably, they wouldn't have done that, if they hadn't believed it to be an appropriate model.

https://www.bre.co.uk/news/Australia-adopts-Britis...

Didn't know that!

Richard North has explained why this has become such a problem, and the EU has their fingerprints on it...

http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86522

In a nutshell and as I understand it, we have BS8414 which is quite robust, but we aren't allowed to set rules that are more stringent than EU rules in areas defined as an EU competency. So in this case, UK developers have a choice, they can choose the BS8414 if they want, but the law can't force them to...

ETA - I bet the council could have specified BS8414 if they'd wanted, but they probably didn't know, and probably specified something like "compliant", which the EU test is (total guessing on my part)

You mention BS8414, wouldn't that now be BSEN8414, which if it follows other standards would be a European. Standard adopted in to our regulations? I am only basing this on the European standard for breathing gases, which is BSEN12021.

Grasping at straws of course

[Foliage]

British standards are pretty much bullst, companies don't have to follow them, and can even claim they do, they aren't independently tested.

Building regulations approved document B is a more relevant topic for discussion.

[BlackLabel]

I can understand why it would take many months to identify the dead however to come out and say that the death toll won't be known 'until at least the end of the year' is surprising - surely skulls, bones, teeth etc would give them an accurate enough idea?

[plfrench]

Foliage said:

British standards are pretty much bullst, companies don't have to follow them, and can even claim they do, they aren't independently tested.

Building regulations approved document B is a more relevant topic for discussion.

Might be worth reading up before making unfounded statements, although facts are a bit boring I suppose...

Approved Document B section 12.5 states that a means of compliance is meeting performance requirement of BR135 using full scale test data from BS 8414-1:2002 or BS 8414-2:2005.

Also, a manufacturer making claims to have carried out a test to a standard without having done so via a UKAS accredited facility would find themselves on a sticky wicket. Specifiers or consultant engineers would often request to see evidence of independent testing, i.e. a test report from a suitable 3rd party.

[Eddieslofart]

badboyburt said:

Is there a list of the blocks affected ?

The list will never end. We have been commisioned and given 5 weeks to cut a 250 mm square panel for sending to the BRE for testing from almost 220 blocks, low and high rise.

The 3rd block i looked at on the list is clad in rockwall ( Hardrock) ffs !

[Blue Oval84]

BlackLabel said:

I can understand why it would take many months to identify the dead however to come out and say that the death toll won't be known 'until at least the end of the year' is surprising - surely skulls, bones, teeth etc would give them an accurate enough idea?

As I understand it they think they'll be lucky to find a few bone fragments in the upper floors, almost everything burned up. It must be like looking for a needle in a haystack.

[Vipers]

Blue Oval84 said:

BlackLabel said:

I can understand why it would take many months to identify the dead however to come out and say that the death toll won't be known 'until at least the end of the year' is surprising - surely skulls, bones, teeth etc would give them an accurate enough idea?

As I understand it they think they'll be lucky to find a few bone fragments in the upper floors, almost everything burned up. It must be like looking for a needle in a haystack.

If they said 3 months, and after 3 months they still havnt identified the bodies, there will be more riots me thinks, play safe and say the end of the year, cant be an easy task anyway, you have to compare DNA with samples from relations etc I think. No doubt some of the dead had no relations, amlost impossible task.