Fire in London Apartment building - Grenfell Tower

[Guinevere]

I think that the central story really should be about the fact that there were warnings over and over and over about the lack of safety issues with this building. Criticisms of the government reaction, or lack thereof, wouldn't even be needed if earlier warnings had been heeded and there was no fire in the first place!!! As noted earlier, there was a blog on the dangers of this building. How could the Kensington and Chelsea Council ignore it? No fire alarms, no sprinklers in a 24 storey building? How was this not acted upon immediately? I personally feel there should be some sort of criminal charges. Not sure if it is accurate, but I read the only way people found out about the fire is that there were many Muslim occupants who were up at 1am due to Ramadan and they were able to alert whoever they could. If the entire building was asleep at 1am, I am certain the death toll (currently 79) would be much worse.

Also, I think the delay in identifying the victims and having a final number of victims is very difficult for various reasons. The nature of the occupants (sub-lets, immigrant families, etc.) will make the number of missing uncertain. I believe they found five people originally reported missing by their English language teacher and presumed dead. They had escaped and were with friends and didn't even know they had been reported missing. That would be an indication on how they have to tread carefully in announcing who died in the fire. Also, the very nature of fire (destroying the body, as well as destroying the actual DNA) can compromise the ability of the authorities to identify people. If there are no dental records on file or the teeth were destroyed in the fire, how can they determine who they were? There was an article in the Daily Fail that apparently several victims were found in one room, a group of people who had been trying to escape together. How do you separate and identify each victim? I feel the police, coroners, etc. who are trying their best to get the work done accurately shouldn't be criticized. Personally, what does Lily Allen really know about what it takes to identify people in the aftermath of a fire? Rather than helping, she's just making things worse. It just gets under my skin when celebrities feel they have the knowledge about the inner workings of crisis response to criticize those who actually do it.

I think it's the council that gets me the worst. I read that a council leader said something when asked if he felt guilty, he said that he feels terrible about the whole position they found themselves in. What. The. Actual. F***???? People are dead despite several attempts to prevent this!!!!!!

 

[Guinevere]

Also, I work in insurance and we were discussing this at work today and it would appear that it was most likely the exterior cladding that was the problem. I believe in Canada the type used on this building is banned on buildings higher than a certain number of storeys, like 4 or 5. High-rise buildings are meant to contain fires within the unit, which is why they were asked to stay inside during the fire. But the exterior cladding was flammable so it went up the entire building.

I believe the exterior cladding was two metal panels with insulation in the between, but the problem is the insulation was flammable. Once the fire broke through the wall into the insulation, it went straight up. Also, the firefighters wouldn't have been able to put it out because their water hoses wouldn't be able to penetrate the metal cladding on either side. That's why it went up so quickly.

One guy at work thought it was a wood frame building because it went up in flames so quickly but I told him wood frame buildings can't be built to that height. That's how fast and intense that fire was. And the worst part is that the exterior was refurbished to "look nice" but interior safety measures like sprinklers and fire alarms were not upgraded or fixed.

 

[JanetB]

I read that the non flammable siding would have cost $5000 more that what they used, tells you what a life is worth to some people.

 

[mella]

Or 80+ lives.

 

[allezfred]

Life is cheap and the poorer you are the cheaper it is.

 

[Guinevere]

Just came across this article that says as far back as 2004 residents were trying to bring attention to the problems with the building:

http://www.insurancebusinessmag.com...ll-cladding-guideline-inadequacies-70823.aspx

I find it interesting that the London Fire Brigade had complained of compromised access to the building, and in fact, it is one of the issues brought up in the email in 2014. I just can't figure out how this was not addressed!!!

Also, they had just recently (three months ago) switched insurance companies to a cheaper one:

http://www.insurancebusinessmag.com...d-be-europes-biggest-ever--reports-71072.aspx

It seems like cutting corners was a fact of life for the owners or managers of this building. Reports say the payouts could reach £1b. They better hope that there is enough liability coverage in there.

I have read that other councils are now having their high rise towers inspected and are notifying residents immediately if the same cladding is found. If it is found, they are now are actively working to remove the cladding immediately, like having contractors there within days and having round the clock fire watches. I'm glad those councils are acting on it, which is exactly what the one that ran Grenfell Towers should have done to begin with.

 

[judiz]

The cause was officially listed as a faulty refrigerator and the manufacturer has asked homeowners to check to see if they have that model in their homes (Refrigerator would be 8 years old by now).

Possibly manslaughter charges may be filed against those responsible for purchasing flammable cladding.

 

[Tinami Amori]

Life is cheap and the poorer you are the cheaper it is.

Not quite true…… at least in this case. No need to contribute to class-warfare.. as if "rich" is evil. Most people strive to become rich, not to stay poor... just like all athletes want medals, but only some get them...

Siding/Covering of the same composite became an issue world-wide since 2012, and the cause of fire in several locations world-wide in LUXURY apartments, hotels, and office high-rises.

But the fact that the builders are either idiots for not checking safety issues, or criminals for trying to save money regardless of safety, is yet to be determined.

“In both of the 2012 fires, a specific building material was isolated as the main reason for the blazes. To insulate large buildings while keeping overall weight down, many supertalls have what’s called a thermo-plastic core, which is essentially layers of polyurethane sandwiched between aluminum cladding. But that polyurethane can also be flammable. After the 2012 fires, these aluminum composite panels (ACPs) were outlawed for new structures. To prevent fires from sparking on existing thermo-plastic core structures, the city required buildings to add additional fire-retardant panels and exterior sprinklers. Supposedly the Torch Tower and The Address complied with these new regulations. But they still ignited.”

Dubai

http://gizmodo.com/when-will-dubai-fix-its-burning-skyscraper-problem-1751398645
http://www.thenational.ae/business/...fore-2012-have-non-fire-rated-exterior-panels

La Crosse Docklands Tower, Australia

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/c...lacrosse-docklands-tower-20170116-gtslcj.html
https://www.corporatekeysaustralia....crosse-1412-675-latrobe-street-docklands-3008

 

[misskarne]

Possibly manslaughter charges may be filed against those responsible for purchasing flammable cladding.

Screw that, 80+ counts of murder, please, because this stuff was proven dangerous, to go with a couple hundred counts of attempted murder.

 

[Japanfan]

Screw that, 80+ counts of murder, please, because this stuff was proven dangerous, to go with a couple hundred counts of attempted murder.

Murder requires intent. If the intent in this case was to save money on materials, the charge would be manslaughter.

 

[allezfred]

Not quite true…… at least in this case. No need to contribute to class-warfare.. as if "rich" is evil.

Where did I say "rich" is evil?

The better off you are means that, in general, the better your life outcomes will be. This is not a controversial statement or "class-warfare".

Also you kind of proved my point by posting those two examples. How many people died in those fires in those luxury apartments?

 

[Tinami Amori]

Life is cheap and the poorer you are the cheaper it is.

Where did I say "rich" is evil?
The better off you are means that, in general, the better your life outcomes will be.
This is not a controversial statement or "class-warfare".

you're fun to argue with, good points....... yet:
In the given context, there is a big difference between the two phrases:

“The better off you are means that, in general, the better your life outcomes will be“ is a summary of facts; for example can mean that one who earns more money can buy better products; those who earn less have less choices.

“Life is cheap and the poorer you are the cheaper it is“ is a “monetary evaluation” which suggests that “those in power” assigned a “price” to poor people’s lives in “safety” considerations; it also suggests that "poor people" are at the mercy of the "rich and powerful".

As it has been discovered recently, the faulty siding/covering has been used on many luxury buildings, and for quite a long time, decades. There are no indicators that “rich people got fire-resistant siding” and “poor people got fire-conductive siding”.
It is the same situation as with asbestos, initially the side effects were not known, and material widely used.

Also you kind of proved my point by posting those two examples. How many people died in those fires in those luxury apartments?

I proved no such point, but it is a fair question to ask...... Illogical, but fair.....

"Illogical" because many factors affect the number of casualties in a building fire, other than economics of its residents: location and cause of fire; time of day and occupancy of the building; weather; available fire brigades and equipment;

- In December 2015, a fire broke out on the 20th floor of 63-story hotel and residential tower, the second tallest in Dubai. One person died and about 15 were injured. At the time it had VERY low occupancy, as visitors from the West were “home for Christmas”. Most guests were placed in the lower floors and out to dinner, or in the restaurant on the bottom floor as it was 7:15 PM when the fire started. If at the time of fire it was a high tourist season, fire took place in 6 am when everyone is sleeping, and on the 8th vs. 20th floor, there would be higher number of casualties.

Fortune Tower, Dubai, in January 2007, four workers died and more than 50 were injured at the under-construction 34-story residential skyscraper. There were no tenants but most of the workers got hurt.

Pemex Executive Tower, Mexico City, a luxury office for Pemex Petrol Co. In January 2013, 37 people were killed and more than 100 injured when an explosion and fire hit this 54-story building. It happened in the middle of a work day. Same incident at night would probably result in less or no casualties.

MGM Grand Hotel, Las Vegas - 87 guests and employees were killed when a blaze that started in a casino restaurant spread through the hotel. This casino hotel is ALWAYS booked up, and caters to middle-class to upper-class guests. All segments randomly got hurt.
Etc…

I don't see "economics at play" in London's Block Tower evacuations either. Firefighters arrived in plenty and on time, did their duty and beyond, etc.

The fire engine ladders were SHORT, could not reach top floor, and that was an important factor which affected number of casualties.
But had it been a Luxury Block caught on fire due to same faulty covering, the fire ladders would be the same length... Fire fighters did not bring "shorter ladders" or "saved people with less enthusiasm" because it was a "Council Housing".

It's like an airplane crash, sometimes it's nose down, and First Class passengers get the impact; sometimes it's tail down, and Economy Class passengers get the impact.

What i was wondering myself, in terms of "economics" (aside from the fact that this is a great tragedy, and regardless of economics, ANY HOUSING must be safe):

- Why the heck BBC anchors keep stressing "so much tragedy next to wealthy Notting Hill Mansions".... As far as I am concerned, UK laws watch very carefully to make sure people earn their money honestly and pay their taxes. Brits are, over-all, are very law-conforming citizens. If someone made enough money to buy a flat or a house in Notting Hill, its his to enjoy without "guilt tripping".

- In the burning tower block, there was a woman with 6 children, she lost 2 of them while running out. Question: Why the HECK did she have 6 children, when living in Council Housing? Maybe she should not have any if she can't afford it.... Poor kids, those who are gone, and those who have to live with this irresponsible mother.

- Also..... why the heck immigrants live (without buy-out) in Council Housing for 20-30 years? So you come to a new country, and live partially on government subsidies which come from the taxes paid by the original residents for 20 years? Silly me does not believe that immigrants should come to "take" for 20 years. 2-3-4 years, get on your feet, and get going..... or go back. Poor Brits...

 

[mella]

@millyskate I suspect this will be blocked as it should be subscriber only. It references back to an earlier discussion in this thread though.

http://news.costar.co.uk//en/assets/news/2017/June/Furious-mayor-Khan-urges-rethink-on-Battersea-Power-Station-affordable-homes-revision/?utm_source=CoStar Daily News&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=8421943_[CoStar] Email : Daily News Bulletin: 23/06/2017 16:25:47&dm_i=UQT,50IEV,LFGJG5,J490C,1

In summary if affordable housing quotas wasn't high on Khan's agenda before it is now. But as I mentioned above he doesn't really have the power to over ride council decisions.

" 'Furious' mayor Khan urges rethink on Battersea Power Station affordable homes revision
By Paul Norman - Friday, June 23, 2017 11:26

Mayor of London Sadiq Khan has slated Wandsworth council’s planning committee and its decision last night to back a Deed of Variation amendment to the affordable housing at Battersea Power Station. But while he has urged a rethink he claims he has no power to over-rule the decision, while Wandsworth council has questioned why the mayor has only intervened at the 11th hour."

For now the developer claims they will still be Building 15% affordable housing but have requested more flexibility than the original S106 agreement gave for the timing of that housing being released.

From that perspective Khan is merely flexing his muscles for now. However, the various reasons they have given for requesting flexibility suggest to me that they will eventually request a reduction in the quota. It's a fairly frequently played game. So Khan's thinking may be to draw his lines on the issue now to position himself for any subsequent requests for further changes to the S106. So he would put pressure on the council not to make further concessions.

@Tinami Amori - with all due respect the number of British families living in council properties for generations most likely dwarfs the number of migrants in them for 20 years. For the record living in a council property in the UK doesnt necessarily mean you're not working and contributing to taxes etc and being a good citizen in general (whether first generation or 10th generation). And none of us know the specific circumstances of the woman with 6 children - for all we know her parents bought the flat under a right to buy scheme and she inherited it. Unlikely but not impossible. Not sure there's any need for your value judgements on those people's lives regardless.

The sad reality is they're dead because people made a series of bad choices relating to fire safety in the tower it's not just about the cladding. And having made bad choices they (or others) persistently ignored the concerns being raised by residents around fire safety. I think we can safely say if concerns were being raised about safety issues by some of their richer neighbours the council would not have ignored them or indeed threatened them with legal action as appears to have been the case at Grenfell.

In the case of the fire brigade it's been reported that a number of the trucks could get close enough to the building have to stop streets away. Thats reportedly in part due to obstructions the council had created on the routes to the Tower despite the issues around emergency service access being raised as a concern.

 

[Japanfan]

Life is cheap and the poorer you are the cheaper it is“ is a “monetary evaluation” which suggests that “those in power” assigned a “price” to poor people’s lives in “safety” considerations; it also suggests that "poor people" are at the mercy of the "rich and powerful".

Do you honestly believe that this doesn't happen?

People working in mines and factories, in different places and at different points in time (including today), is the first example of many that comes to mind.

 

[allezfred]

Am wondering where Tinami thinks people who work in the service sector and other low paying jobs in London should live - Sheffield?

 

[Aceon6]

Am wondering where Tinami thinks people who work in the service sector and other low paying jobs in London should live - Sheffield?

I'm guessing that TA wants them to disappear and just materialize out of thin air when some nasty job needs to be done.

 

[PRlady]

I would like to see a list of mining company executives who died from black-lung disease, building contractor executives killed in construction accidents, agribusiness CEOs suffering pesticide poisoning, and residents of Scarsdale, Chevy Chase or Pacific Palisades with irreparably damaged children due to lead in the tap water. Oh, and owners of clothing factories in developing countries who died in preventable fires.

Then we can have a fair debate about the equal worth of every life.

ETA: this short article http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/06/social-darwinism-is-what-truly-guides-trump.html explains the Republican rebuttal to the above perfectly. As Trump said a long time ago, if they were worth anything they would have gotten out of the damn mines.

 

[Japanfan]

In the burning tower block, there was a woman with 6 children, she lost 2 of them while running out. Question: Why the HECK did she have 6 children, when living in Council Housing? Maybe she should not have any if she can't afford it.... Poor kids, those who are gone, and those who have to live with this irresponsible mother.

Maybe she's never had access to contraception, or can't afford contraception, or belongs to a religion that doesn't approve of contraception or abortion. Maybe her cultures is one in which a woman doesn't have the right to say no to her husband for sex. Or, as Mella pointed out, maybe she inherited the flat.

And if people were rationale about having children, there would be a lot less of them in the world - among the better-off as well as the poor.

 

[SHARPIE]

I don't get the 'no one cares about the poor people' argument. It wasn't a sink estate in Bradford, it was a block full of smart flats with £2000 plus rents a month. Cheap by Kensington standards but just a normal tower block. How these were ever built with only one stairwell Ive no idea. The problem is the regulations and the builders/contractors interpretation.

 

[antmanb]

I'm not sure it's a problem with regulations and interpretations so much as councils opting for cheaper cladding, when slightly more expensive cladding would have done the trick.

I think the thing people are struggling with is the fact that the cladding makes very little difference to the residents of the tower blocks, rather it's more about the aesthetics of the buildings from the outside, so when taken all together, the decisions by the councils to clad these buildings with material to make them nicer to look at, the effect of which is to cause a building that is less safe for its residents, really does call into question the decision to do it in the first place.

All the reports I've been reading are suggesting that no buildings that have been investigated so far have actually been deemed to be safe. All the tower blocks in Manchester so far have failed.

 

[mella]

I think the comments re poor people relate to a few things:
1. The relative circumstances of the residents compared to the surrounding area;
2. The fact that a good proportion of the housing was reportedly social housing which indicates occupation by less well off people;
3. It's social housing owned by the council rather than housing association or other private organisation which points further towards less well off people

The choices made about what to do and what not to do in an £8m refurbishment appear to have contributed to a devastating outcome and so far the indicators are that aesthetics were prioritised over safety.

Be very interested to know why only one stair. Pretty rare even in a building of that age given how tall it is!

I found out at the weekend that my cousins boyfriend was previously housemates with the Syrian brothers who have been mentioned in the press. It's a scarily small world.

 

[JanetB]

One of the themes of the last few British governments is cutting red tape, in other words, deregulating industry. ‘Deadlier than terrorism’ – the right’s fatal obsession with red tape is a decent look at what lead to Grenfell. Ultimately when a building is being erected the only difference between a budget build and luxury build should be the finishes and the size of the suites all of the structural and safety futures should be the same.

 

[skatesindreams]

Surviving after the disaster:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/05/health/grenfell-tower-fire-psychology-of-survival-eprise/index.html

 

[vesperholly]

One of the themes of the last few British governments is cutting red tape, in other words, deregulating industry. ‘Deadlier than terrorism’ – the right’s fatal obsession with red tape is a decent look at what lead to Grenfell. Ultimately when a building is being erected the only difference between a budget build and luxury build should be the finishes and the size of the suites all of the structural and safety futures should be the same.

That happens in the US too - Republican-run states boast that they have "relaxed" regulations on businesses. Then a little kid gets decapitated on a water slide due to those lack of regulations and everyone gets all upset that there were no regulations in place. It seems like it always takes a tragedy to change laws. Disgusting.

 

[loulou]

Yes, you are. You're completely fixated on it

You're blessed with limited understanding.

even making gross comments

The one who's in the mood to laugh calls me gross. How's it in English? "The pot calling the kettle black".

about whether they counted and identified bodies as they came down from the towers on 9/11

The 9/11 victims couldn't be physically identified and counted (at least not in a reasonable time), but they were dignified with an estimation, and the number was relevant in history.

demanding to know why they won't tell us more. Why won't they tell us more? Because they don't know yet.

I'll let someone else comment.

I agree the current approach isn't working for this and didn't work well for at least the last two incidents. I hope they consider different approaches based on nature of incident. it does seem ridiculous to be 5 days on and still be stuck . At this stage a well organised response should have a better grasp on this and be in a position to communicate with survivors and families.

You harping on about the numbers, asking if the police will "hold their heads high" when telling us - which is a gross comment in itself

You have a funny understanding of police and firefighters roles: they don't show up for playdates, they are around when things go wrong.

Both can and should hold their heads up high when they do everything in their power, when they do their job well. And the community with them.

It'd be precisely the opposite of gross.

Your obsession with knowing the exact number has nothing to do with the story.

You refuse to consider anything outside your scope, which is the authority's scope. How's that served the victims so far?

Do they need to find out what happened? Absolutely. But this is more than just a story. This is a tragedy. People are dead. People lost their home. Real people. They suffered through something horrible that many will probably never forget and I think compassion matters more right now than the story.

The two aren't exclusive, on the contrary.

I think the victims should be dignified with acknoledgement, and they should at very least be asked on the matter.
But their stories are written already.

However, the next chapter is still to come, and we could have a more decent twist, avoid more uglyness, if we keep in mind the cost. Which means releasing an estimate during the short span of time the world will still care for it.

I dread to think what the response to Grenfell will be in terms of social cleansing in Kensington and Chelsea in the next 20years. I fear the prediction of one resident on Weds that they will use this to justify getting people out of their homes (and the area) and knocking down the blocks will be proven correct.

How many alredy don't live there, after the fire?

On a far less important city than London, with far less at stake, I've witnessed it. Or my family did. And in the nice areas, I know the story of almost every window in the past fifty years.
Different declinations, few patterns: you could, say, lay down all the circumtances for a tragedy to happen, and it likely will.

I read that the non flammable siding would have cost $5000 more that what they used, tells you what a life is worth to some people.

That also goes into the puzzle. On an eight million budget, that's a sneeze.