Carl Stokes (fire risk assessor) continues evidence on FRA methodology. Questioned about firefighter switch testing, reliance on monthly inspections rather than weekly testing as per guidance, and the door replacement program where he advised FD30 doors when FD30S with smoke seals were required.
00:00:28 good morning everyone welcome to today's hearing today we're going to hear more evidence from mr carl stokes so would you ask mr carl stokes to come back in please
00:00:53 good morning mrs dicks good morning sir [Music]
00:00:56 [Music] ready to carry on yes sir good thank you very much mr millet when you're ready thank you mr chairman good morning and good morning to members of the panel mr stakes good morning to you um i'd like to turn now
00:01:07 like to turn now please to the question of the fire control switch can we please go to your first statement
00:01:15 cst403063 page 44.
00:01:20 paragraph 127 on that page towards the foot of the page and you say there uh it has been queried whether uh
00:01:31 uh it has been queried whether uh the it has been queried whether the lifts installed at the tower can rightly be described as firefighting lifts etc and then you go on to say in the middle of the paragraph at no point was i given to understand
00:01:43 at no point was i given to understand that the primary function of a fire fighting lift i.e the ability for the fire service to control the lift was impaired on and on all occasions when attending the tower i observed the firefighter override drop
00:01:55 i observed the firefighter override drop key switch which sat in between the two lifts see further paragraph 129 below xavier's fire strategy document of november 2013 which also described them
00:02:06 november 2013 which also described them as firefighting lifts now can we go please first to some handwritten notes that you wrote on your october 2014 significant action plan
00:02:17 action plan during your april 2016 fra visit we'll find those at cst 702 please
00:02:29 just to confirm for us these are your handwritten notes aren't they correct uh now if you go please to page 15 in this
00:02:37 this document run and look at point two it says there uh next to the figure two no ff switch you see that correct what
00:02:48 no ff switch you see that correct what does no ff switch indicate
00:02:52 firefighter switch right and if you look at number one above it what does that say can you read that out for us no firefighters switch main entrance door
00:03:01 door well it doesn't say no sorry firefighters switch main entrance doors main entrance door let's see and then two no firefighter switch
00:03:10 switch yes internal inner door inner doors and then
00:03:13 then how do you access this door yes right i see
00:03:18 see uh has that anything to do with the firefighter switch in at the lifts no these are the override switch for access to the building and the doors next to them
00:03:29 next to them i see nonetheless did you realize that the fire control switch installed at grenfell tower was not compliant with bsen 8172
00:03:40 was not compliant with bsen 8172 of 2003 in the it was operable with a drop key
00:03:44 drop key rather than a triangular key as required by the standards because it wouldn't comply with that standard because it's not a new lift it would comply with the old stand which was compliant
00:03:57 is that why you never raised that question with anybody correct because it's not a en 81 left h2 lift can we go back to your statement please page 44
00:04:11 sorry i'm so sorry your second witness statement uh at page 34 that's cst 303 186 page 34 paragraph one two
00:04:22 page 34 paragraph one two seven and you say there i would not have checked the actual operation of a fire switch on the day of my fra but would have made sure that there were records of monthly
00:04:34 there were records of monthly inspections of the lifts by competent lift engineers selected by kctmo
00:04:38 kctmo i would have expected those inspections to have included checking that whether or not the fire switch worked i also understood that this would have been checked by esa's and should have in any event been checked by the
00:04:49 have in any event been checked by the lfb during their visits why did you not check it for yourself because first of all it's only uh visual
00:05:02 because first of all it's only uh visual i wouldn't check that the function of the lift
00:05:06 the lift i would doubt whether my insurance would cover me if i damaged it or anything like that
00:05:11 like that and it's being checked by a competent person who is um a third party on contract and maintenance contract with the tmo
00:05:22 maintenance contract with the tmo to undertake that function for them i see so you i'm getting from that answer the idea that you wouldn't actually try to operate any of the machinery or active or passive
00:05:34 active or passive fire safety measures in the building yours would be an entirely documentary exercise
00:05:38 exercise correct visual vision documentary so checking up that explains why you didn't test it correct i see were you aware or were you made aware of
00:05:49 made aware of the lfb having previously reported an issue
00:05:53 issue with the fire control switch during the f during the fire at the grenfell tower uh site in april 2010 or in the tower in fact
00:06:02 fact in april 2010 2010 yes i might have been but uh there's been some subjects since then i
00:06:13 there's been some subjects since then i uh know that they had that undertaken exercises there and it worked all okay and also the
00:06:22 maintenance company would have highlighted this along with the monthly checks would have highlighted if they had been
00:06:28 had been had not worked correctly was it operator error
00:06:31 error did you ever actually witness somebody operating the fire control switch yourself
00:06:36 yourself yes when was that uh at a meeting or a visit to the tower with some lfb and they actually operated the lift and went through all the procedures yes when was that
00:06:47 was that sorry i can't tell you the day was that was that part of the 2016 uh fra visits or earlier than that it was an exercise i believe right and can you describe what you saw
00:06:59 right and can you describe what you saw on that occasion the lfb actually taken control of the lift by using the drop key yes and it worked did it yes
00:07:13 i want just to ask you then about maintenance because you refer to records can we please go to your statement now your letter of the 27th of
00:07:24 statement now your letter of the 27th of september 2010 cst403061 please page four
00:07:40 and on page four you see there there's a list of
00:07:44 list of uh items that were discussed uh and at item six it says annual comprehensive servicing and maintenance contract is in place
00:07:55 and maintenance contract is in place for all lifts this includes monthly inspections seven tmo employs a dedicated lift engineer who is responsible for the supervision and monitoring of the contract
00:08:04 contract stroke contractors eight the council's insurers carry out six monthly inspections which include a full safety check
00:08:10 check nine estate staff caretakers porters inspectors and neighborhood officers carry out regular estate inspections which include visual inspection of the lift car
00:08:18 lift car and testing of the lift alarm now after your meeting with janice ray on the 24th of september 2010 which is the time when this letter was written did you ever receive any updated
00:08:30 written did you ever receive any updated information about the maintenance of the lifts
00:08:34 lifts i believe the lift maintenance company changed
00:08:37 changed and i'm going to go for from apex to another company in the timer in the seven year period right do you know do you remember when that was roughly no sorry
00:08:50 but i understood that the contract and maintenance and everything was the same now robin carlon retired in 2012. did you receive any updated information about the maintenance of the lifts at
00:09:01 about the maintenance of the lifts at that stage i i knew that the lift engineers were the department that they worked for and all the lift engineers were going and but everything was staying in place so there were still monthly inspections
00:09:14 so there were still monthly inspections the caretakers were still undertaking call button testing of the lifts as part of their routine and the insurance and maintenance contracts were still all in place well i've read to you items six to nine
00:09:26 well i've read to you items six to nine on that page are part of a run of uh a run of details about the lifts which we looked at yesterday um is it the case that what you recorded here in these paragraph numbers
00:09:39 recorded here in these paragraph numbers in this 27th of september 2010 letter always remained your understanding of the maintenance and testing regime across the whole of the tma stock correct depop the only one is that the
00:09:51 correct depop the only one is that the lift engineer department was actually um not in being anymore so there was no dedicated lift engineer as such
00:10:00 as such and when the lift engineer department ceased to be did you get any updated information about what was going to happen next with regard to the
00:10:11 to happen next with regard to the maintenance program it was undertaken by repairs and maintenance who's been overseen by them did you get any information yourself about what they were going to be doing staying
00:10:23 what they were going to be doing staying the same as far as that would be the information everything stayed the same yes what i'm really trying to get at is did do you remember receiving any new information about how the maintenance program was
00:10:35 about how the maintenance program was going to be conducted from that point on
00:10:40 no because the maintenance program would have been with the state the same uh now uh in section 23 of all of your fras you included
00:10:52 of all of your fras you included uh and i'll show you one example um some text about the maintenance of the lifts don't you yes yes let's use the april 2016 fra as an example
00:11:04 an example cst403161
00:11:06 cst403161 page 31 please and if we look at the fourth question down you can see that there's the standard question monthly inspection of or inspections i'm
00:11:17 monthly inspection of or inspections i'm sorry monthly inspections of switches and annual testing of the firefighting stroke evacuation lifts with records kept and on this occasion you've ticked it yes correct now if you look at past 79
00:11:31 correct now if you look at past 79 2012 edition at cta 703 page 94 please cta 703 page 94
00:11:42 page 94 please cta 703 page 94 you can see at the template here
00:11:46 which of course is is informative and not
00:11:49 not normative as we know um but it says uh here that the responsible person should be carrying out weekly and monthly testing if you look at 27
00:12:02 monthly testing if you look at 27 7. we need to scroll down to the bottom i'm so sorry scroll down to the bottom of the page you can see 27 7 weekly and monthly testing six monthly inspection
00:12:13 inspection and annual testing of firefighting lifts you see that yes i'm just focusing on weekly or monthly testing and six monthly inspection
00:12:24 and six monthly inspection why do did you amend the question in your fra
00:12:27 your fra pro forma so as to exclude weekly testing
00:12:33 my understanding is it is regular testing in the british standard documentation regular
00:12:43 is no time scale monthly testing by a specific professional third-party maintenance company in my view was acceptable and for my
00:12:55 in my view was acceptable and for my understanding that is what is now being proposed by the review of all documentation is it is monthly
00:13:02 monthly testing it is a regular testing it is documented and i checked the lift record book in the lyft motor room every time when i went to
00:13:12 went to undertake a assessment in light of that answer perhaps we can just have back up on the screen at the same time as this document section 23 of your april 16 fra we've
00:13:24 section 23 of your april 16 fra we've just been looking at at cst 403161 page 31.
00:13:31 that's some now on the left hand side of your screen mr stakes and on on the right hand side uh no we want to have
00:13:39 have on the right hand side we want past 79 cta 703 page 94 at the foot thank you that's there now if you compare
00:13:51 compare the two you've got monthly inspections and annual testing pass 79 has weekly and monthly testing and sixth
00:14:02 has weekly and monthly testing and sixth monthly
00:14:02 monthly inspection and annual testing weekly monthly testing six monthly inspection and annual testing why is yours different
00:14:14 different mines the six monthly testing is the insurance inspection my understanding as long as the annual testing is there along with the
00:14:25 annual testing is there along with the monthly that would as far as i would be aware satisfy the requirements of the documentation for lift testing what about weekly testing why didn't you
00:14:37 what about weekly testing why didn't you have weekly testing well weekly testing was undertaken of the call point um within the lift by their caretakers well what's required is weekly testing
00:14:50 well what's required is weekly testing of firefighting lifts it doesn't confine itself just to the call point is it a weekly testing is is testing of the lift is ongoing
00:15:01 lift is ongoing this is a guidance document which says weekly monthly testing six monthly inspections an annual testing of a firefighting lift they will all be
00:15:10 all be undertaken in different ways shapes and forms by
00:15:14 forms by the maintenance contract in place let's take a step back we're looking at the 2016 fra now we know that this question that you're asking in your fra
00:15:25 you're asking in your fra was the same from 2010 yes it appears in 2010 2012 and 2014 and the boat and the two fras in 2016. we know that past 79 was
00:15:37 fras in 2016. we know that past 79 was published in august 2012 uh between august 2012 and november 2012 when you did your november 2012 fra did you
00:15:48 november 2012 fra did you have any training or do any cpd on pass the new pass 79 i can't remember that's a long time ago did you do any training or cpd on
00:16:00 did you do any training or cpd on pass 79 uh before october 2014 i would have done yes right at that stage would you have realized that the template
00:16:11 realized that the template if you'd studied it closely uh was requiring or recommending it's a better word weekly and monthly testing six monthly inspection and annual testing of firefighting lifts that is the guidance on that document
00:16:24 that is the guidance on that document i for my document there i am my view is that i was complying with what was the requirements there was weekly testing which was carried out by the caretakers monthly
00:16:36 carried out by the caretakers monthly testing by a third party and six monthly insurance followed by annual inspections by a third-party lift maintenance company was all being undertaken right it's not quite an answer to my
00:16:47 right it's not quite an answer to my question i'm going to press you a little bit what i'm really practicing i can help mr stokes i think what council is inviting you to deal with is this the pass pro former
00:16:58 deal with is this the pass pro former 27 certain refers to weekly testing yes your document halfway down the page on the left that we're looking at doesn't refer to weekly testing is there
00:17:10 doesn't refer to weekly testing is there is there a reason for that no it is their weekly testing was undertaken by this yeah it may have been done the question is why is it not referred to
00:17:22 why is it not referred to in that part of your document i have no idea sir
00:17:25 idea sir right i think that was your point wasn't it it was it was it was an aspect of my point certainly uh
00:17:32 uh let me let me try and get to the other aspect of it which is this do you ever sit down with your pro forma which you see on the left-hand screen uh and compare it with the uh pro forma
00:17:44 uh and compare it with the uh pro forma on the right-hand side of your screen and make a conscious decision not to change your question about inspections and testing of lifts so as to conform with paragraph 27.7 at
00:17:57 so as to conform with paragraph 27.7 at the foot of pay of the page in the past pro forma i would have done and it's the same if you look at 27.4 where it says annual maintenance maintenance of fire extinguishing appliances on mine it says monthly
00:18:09 appliances on mine it says monthly an annual you see yours is traceable back to a time before past 79 2012. what i'm really asking you is this did you ever sit down and
00:18:22 is this did you ever sit down and consciously address whether the pro forma questions within at least this part of your fra conformed to the new pro forma forming
00:18:33 conformed to the new pro forma forming appendix b to pass 79 of august 2012. yes i would have done you would have done
00:18:40 have done do you remember actually doing that exercise yes when was that i i can't tell you but i would have done because my i would have worked to this as you
00:18:51 my i would have worked to this as you can see as i said there there right i've got different for the fire extinguishers monthly included in mine as well as annual so you made we can take it then can we that you made a
00:19:02 take it then can we that you made a conscious decision not to change your pro forma so as to bring it in line with 27.7 which is guidance sorry please answer my question
00:19:11 question yes you made a conscious decision yes yes yes
00:19:15 yes yes and the reason in brief for that conscious decision not to update your pro forma to bring it in line with the pass
00:19:23 pass pro forma was what
00:19:27 my understanding is that this was the requirements as would be required and they met the criteria of
00:19:39 they met the criteria of inspections of a lift now um if we look at the lga guide which is a further piece of guidance hom 30 is 45964 please at page one two
00:19:52 hom 30 is 45964 please at page one two five
00:19:53 five can i ask make a observation please yes of course
00:19:57 of course weekly testing of a firefighting lift is also undertaken because the lift is interfaced with the fire alarm system within a building and the lift grounds
00:20:08 within a building and the lift grounds on the activation of the fire alarm system
00:20:10 system so weekly testing
00:20:14 of the lift can be undertaken at the same time as the fire alarm system is tested weekly but in the case of the tower there is no communal fire alarm system so therefore weekly testing because there's no
00:20:26 weekly testing because there's no interface would not occur i think um if we look at the lga guidance that i'm about to show you at
00:20:38 at um patients so can i make another observation please is i'm thinking this through in my mind path 79 there and that guidance is not just specific to residential buildings past 79
00:20:51 residential buildings past 79 is all buildings with all firefighting lifts
00:20:54 lifts and in that case they would have a lift interfaced with a fire alarm system as there's no fire alarm system i've made my document site specific for
00:21:05 i've made my document site specific for the tower
00:21:06 the tower so therefore is more relevant to the tower and the systems in place in the tower
00:21:11 tower rather than a generic document of past 79 that covers all buildings residential and commercial yes you say that uh
00:21:25 you say that uh uh you've made your document site specific for the tower in fact i think the question uh in that part of your fra we've looked at was the same for other residential towers in the tma
00:21:37 for other residential towers in the tma stock wasn't it it's because they're residential no no communal fire alarm systems fitted so so not it's not tailor-made for the tower but tailor-made for the tmo stocks
00:21:48 but tailor-made for the tmo stocks towers or for buildings with no fire alarm systems fitted now can we just go then to what we want to look at or what i want to look at which is um paragraph 81 26 under firefighting lifts and it says
00:22:01 26 under firefighting lifts and it says this lifts used for firefighting i'm sorry i should tell you this is the lga guide published in 2011 lifts used for firefighting need to be subject to tests and
00:22:13 need to be subject to tests and maintenance on a regular basis this will involve
00:22:15 involve weekly operation of override switches and monthly inspections and annual testing and maintenance of the lifts were you aware of that principle after 2011 correct yes
00:22:29 do you agree with mr howkins's conclusion and for the record it's paragraph 462 of his report at rho 703 page 181
00:22:41 703 page 181 uh that uh best practice would have required
00:22:45 required testing of the operation of the fire control switch on a weekly basis by an individual on site best practice yes
00:22:53 yes yes do you agree with him yes yes so why did you choose not to follow the british standard and the lga guide
00:23:01 guide and check uh if there was a weekly testing of the override fire control switch
00:23:07 switch because in my view monthly testing by a competent person is a lot better than having a employee test it on an ad hoc basis
00:23:18 hoc basis well it wouldn't be ad hoc it would be week weekly basis but the problem with that theory is isn't it that a month is four times longer than a week
00:23:29 longer than a week and that an awful lot can go wrong during a month rather than a period of seven days but when you test it you're only testing it for that moment in time it could go
00:23:40 it for that moment in time it could go wrong 10 minutes later but well that's an argument but do you accept that by leaving it four times longer
00:23:47 longer there is a greater risk that something will have gone wrong in the meantime i do accept that but also that regular testing is regular testing i believe the government guidance that is coming out
00:23:58 government guidance that is coming out is going to suggest monthly testing now well can we steer away from what is happening
00:24:05 happening now and everything that's going into that please mr stakes i'm quite interested in in what's happened in the past but i think you accept don't you that you were not
00:24:16 that you were not in compliance with best practice according to mr hawkins opinion in his opinion uh now uh then can we go please to your second witness statement
00:24:28 please to your second witness statement cst 3030
00:24:32 cst 3030 at page 34.
00:24:37 we've touched on this and so i'll take this quite quickly paragraph 127 i've shown you
00:24:42 shown you and and i've read that to you now as to what you say in paragraph 127 there at the foot of your screen um let me show you what dr lane says
00:24:53 um let me show you what dr lane says can we go please to blarp to and then there are five zeros two seven page two five six
00:25:06 two seven page two five six it's b l a r p
00:25:10 two five zeros two seven two five six
00:25:19 and this is paragraph 12.2.34
00:25:24 where she says they needed to satisfy that's the that's the lfb uh
00:25:32 lfb uh uh well actually it could be the lfb could also be you and miss ray if you look at the previous paragraph uh they needed to satisfy themselves they could rely on the lift to operate
00:25:43 they could rely on the lift to operate as it was required to do and so not pose a risk to the relevant persons do you agree with that yes we do now in your 2016 significant finding
00:25:55 now in your 2016 significant finding schedule
00:25:56 schedule can we go to that cst403098 at page six paragraph 19 g you can see towards the top of the screen or middle of the
00:26:07 top of the screen or middle of the screen really you've got a red item there
00:26:10 there it is not known if the fire service controls for the lifts be moved back down to the street level and then under actions to be taken you've put can it be confirmed
00:26:21 you've put can it be confirmed that the fire service controls for the lifts have been moved back down to the street level if not then this must be undertaken immediately was that not an opportune moment for you to check the operation of
00:26:32 moment for you to check the operation of the override switch especially given your concern about whether it had removed as part of the refurbishment but as a risk assessor i wouldn't undertake actual practical physical um operation
00:26:44 physical um operation of a system and you say in your statement that you would have expected those in
00:26:48 those in those inspections to have included checking whether the first switch worked but you didn't specifically check that with the tmo yourself
00:26:58 as i physically asked the question i had the information from the logbook in the lyft motor room to say that monthly inspections were undertaken i physically did not check the lift and
00:27:09 i physically did not check the lift and i don't think it would be a risk assessor's job to actually opt take undertake that operation did you ask the
00:27:17 ask the tmo specifically the question
00:27:22 have the esa's checked or have the lift engineers checked yes by that question well you say i would have expected in your statement
00:27:33 would have expected in your statement you say i would have expected those inspections to have included checking etc did you ever ask the tmo that question the monthly inspections were undertaken by a
00:27:44 monthly inspections were undertaken by a company
00:27:44 company whose sole purpose was to check the lifts including the operation of the firefighter switches on a monthly basis and i had evidence of that from the lift
00:27:55 and i had evidence of that from the lift motor room logbook that had been undertaken my question in that in that significant finding was has the
00:28:06 significant finding was has the override switch which is now not in use at that floor level been taken back down or disconnected and taken back down to the street level which would now be the operational fire
00:28:18 which would now be the operational fire service entry point now sorry can i just um understand something sorry mr miller
00:28:29 your ifray notes that it is not known if the fire service controls have been moved why why was that unknown so the
00:28:41 unknown so the where we're looking at here this item while the
00:28:44 while the uh the tower was under refurbishment sorry i'm going to use my hands ground floor
00:28:49 floor was the entry point but under the refurbishment uh there was a walkway level four floors up that came in from grenfell walk
00:29:00 up that came in from grenfell walk that's the what i'm talking about here so how there was two sets of controls at that point so the people entered the building at this fourth floor level
00:29:11 fourth floor level that bridge had now been taken away so these controls were now redundant well presumably you could see whether there was a switchbox at that previous entry level there was
00:29:23 at that previous entry level there was it was still on the wall and you could see whether there was a switchbox at street level there was so is your question really you don't know which is operative no my question is is not known if the
00:29:34 no my question is is not known if the fire service controls for the lifts have been moved back down to the street level only well isn't that the same thing well at that time i believed that there was two lots of switches in use right what gave you
00:29:47 in use right what gave you to believe that well because that was the walkway was an entry point to the building for the residents did you think both were working
00:29:55 working i don't know that's why i've asked the question please can you confirm that the fire service controls have been moved back down to street level uh now going back if we can or sticking with
00:30:06 with paragraph 127 of your second statement which we have on the screen just focusing on uh the uh last sentence there which says i also understood that this
00:30:17 understood that this would have been checked that's the first switch by esa's and should have in any event been checked by the lfb during their visits and in light of that can we just look
00:30:27 look at your fras where you detail maintenance of the lifts in section five can we go
00:30:34 can we go and again by way of example to to the 2000 the 2014 fra cst403157 page 14.
00:30:48 and if you go to the foot of the page in the box
00:30:52 the box uh you see that it says uh four lines down there is a planned maintenance program of inspections for the lift machinery stroke plant within the building which is carried out by a third party
00:31:03 is carried out by a third party contractor express lifts limited the records kept centrally in the hub in kensil road but there is a record book kept in the lyft motor room to aid the service engineers
00:31:13 engineers the last service dates in the lift record books is 12 september 2014 both lifts installed in this building are firefighting evacuation lifts according to the tmos document documentation these fire
00:31:24 documentation these fire fighting oh sorry these fighting evacuation lifts have their own independent dedicated power supply and fire
00:31:30 fire fighters control switch would you agree that in that text you don't say that you believe the esa's or the lfb are undertaking inspections correct
00:31:41 are undertaking inspections correct because it's not in that sweats part of the document and there's no we don't have to go to them but we can if you like but there's no subsequent action that you set out in your significant finding schedule that they should that
00:31:52 finding schedule that they should that that should be checked and that inspection should be implemented because it if you go back to the previous page so it actually says monthly inspections are being undertaken
00:32:04 being undertaken let's go back to the previous page
00:32:08 records 12th of september 14.
00:32:13 there's planned maintenance program of inspections for lift machinery
00:32:21 yes would you help me just find out where it says that there is a monthly inspection or any inspection by the lfb or the esa there is no inspection by the lfb because they wouldn't test the lift on a
00:32:33 because they wouldn't test the lift on a monthly basis the monthly inspection is there recorded 12th of september 14. yeah yes that service dates i'm just do you accept that you don't
00:32:45 i'm just do you accept that you don't mention there anywhere in this fra that you believe that the esa's or the lfb are undertaking or should be undertaking those inspections because this is afra they wouldn't
00:32:57 because this is afra they wouldn't undertake sorry the lfb would not undertake inspections of a lift if they undertook a 72d um visit to the building they would check the lift
00:33:11 the lift but well you see i'm puzzled by this because you say in your statement that the the switch should have been checked or would have been checked by the esa's the caretakers and in any event by the lfb during their visits
00:33:22 event by the lfb during their visits that
00:33:23 that all i'm putting to you is that there's no hint of that in your fra because you accept do you accept what i'm putting to you i accept what you're putting to me but the lfb during the lfb visit so if the lfb
00:33:34 during the lfb visit so if the lfb visited and did a set undertook a 72d that i would expect them to check the lift
00:33:41 this is not about lfb visits here i'm just making a statement that if the lfb visited the building to do a 72d i would expect them to check the lifts if if you had believed that the esa's
00:33:52 if if you had believed that the esa's the caretakers were required to inspect the firefighter switch
00:33:58 switch um that was something you could have checked with paul stedman for the purposes of grenfell tower anyway if i expect they would take the esa's were checking the call points
00:34:09 esa's were checking the call points their
00:34:13 manual button inside the lift for voice and it was undertaken on a monthly basis by the company that was employed by the tmo
00:34:24 employed by the tmo to undertake monthly inspections of the lift which included testing the drop switches and if you're going to go back to paragraph one two seven of your second statement
00:34:35 statement in the last three lines of the paragraph i read to you you say i would have expected those inspections to have included checking that that whether or not the fire switch
00:34:46 that that whether or not the fire switch worked i also understood that this would have been checked by esa's did you ever ask paul stedman whether he had checked the fire switch
00:34:57 the drop switch well you refer to fire switch days fire switch which is the um
00:35:08 i would have expected those inspections and checking whether the fire switch
00:35:14 worked
00:35:18 so i would ex so the month inspections during those monthly inspections i would have expected those instruct inspections to have included checking of whether the file switch worked or not so that's the monthly inspections
00:35:30 that's the monthly inspections i also understood that this would have been checked by esa's and should have have in any event been checked by the lfb during any of that during their visit so yes yes my question
00:35:43 so yes yes my question did you ever ask paul stedman who was the esa
00:35:47 the esa for grenfell tower whether he had checked
00:35:52 checked what you say you understood he would have checked on the lifts no why not because it's not for me to challenge if
00:36:03 because it's not for me to challenge if i ever saw him on site it was not for me to check what he's actually doing his job this belief that you refer to here i would have expected is that hindsight really or was this a something that you
00:36:15 really or was this a something that you always assumed at the time without ever actually checking for yourself
00:36:23 i understood that that was what was under being undertaken yes but you didn't think to ask paul stedman about it
00:36:31 about it no you see he says in his statement and i'll just read it into the record it's tmo double zero eight seven zero nine four four
00:36:38 four four page two paragraph six that he would not check the firefighter switch so the drop switch well he says the firefighter's switch and that's that you're using the word fire switch so fire switch is the drop
00:36:49 fire switch so fire switch is the drop switch
00:36:50 switch yes and he's saying which switch the the the firefighters switch is there some confusion here between the call button inside the lift and the actual drop switch on
00:37:02 the lift and the actual drop switch on the outside which is for firefighter use only
00:37:05 only let's have a look and see exactly what he says in case it's my my confusion tmo double zero eight seven zero nine four four page two please paragraph six
00:37:25 that's tmo.00870944 page two paragraph six
00:37:48 um well we can't it can't be found no it may be found the reference you want i'll try it again tmo double zero eight seven zero nine four four
00:38:02 page two all right
00:38:14 thank you very much and paragraph six i wish to clarify that in my earlier statement where i said i would check the lfb drop key was working
00:38:22 working i was not referring to the drop key that would be used by the lfb to take control of the lift i would not touch that lfb drop key for the for the lift and i suspect this this was checked by the lfb during their
00:38:33 was checked by the lfb during their regular visits what i was referring to was the lfb drop key for the main door to the tower which is a different type of key to the key used on the lifts this drop key which i had a copy of would work on most
00:38:44 which i had a copy of would work on most door entry systems and permit the lfb to gain access to the building to a building without a fob it is very easy to use so that's what he says he says he would not
00:38:55 not check the lfb drop key was working my understanding was that so well you tell me uh
00:39:08 so well you tell me uh it's right isn't it i think that he is saying that he would not check the the switch that brings the lifts under the control of the first service but reading this he's confused on which
00:39:19 but reading this he's confused on which one he's talking about as well i don't want you to comment i'm just showing you his evidence my question is did you ever ask mr stedman no no here is my understanding
00:39:33 no here is my understanding right now can we then look at mr todd's opinion
00:39:37 opinion that cta six zeroes eleven page ninety
00:39:46 and we go please to paragraph eight point eighty six on that page and this is what mr todd says
00:39:54 says he says in that second witness statement mr stokes also states that in relation to the fire fighters switch he understood that this would have been checked by esa's and should have in any event
00:40:04 event have sick been checked by the lfb during their visits i've been presented with no evidence that would form a basis for mr stakes is understanding in relation to the esa's the esa's were required to check that
00:40:16 the esa's were required to check that lifts operated correctly but this would not imply to me that they were required to confirm the correct operation of the firefighters switches
00:40:24 switches it is a matter of evidence of fact as to whether they were trained to do so or even in possession of the drop keys required to operate the switches moreover at the time of mr stakes's most recent fras
00:40:35 recent fras lfb had long since ceased to test firefighter switches on a routine basis nor was it in my opinion incumbent on them to do so now just focusing on the last part of
00:40:46 now just focusing on the last part of that paragraph um do you agree with what mr todd says there
00:40:52 there in the last sentence that it wasn't the other
00:40:56 other the lfb had ceased to test firefighter switches
00:40:59 switches is that there are that's the last sentence yes i would be not privy to them the lfb changing their operational procedures but my understanding of when i undertook 72d
00:41:10 my understanding of when i undertook 72d visits it was part of the requirement you tested the drop switch but as an f as an
00:41:16 as an experienced fire risk assessor why wouldn't you be privy to and if not privy to at least have an understanding of lfb practices
00:41:27 of lfb practices i wouldn't have access to their operational procedures or practices and if if you had continued to believe that the lfb would carry out these tests or inspections on firefighter switches
00:41:39 or inspections on firefighter switches and that practice had changed uh then uh you ought to have known that that practice had changed so that you could no longer reasonably rely on it well lfb should
00:41:50 reasonably rely on it well lfb should have been following guidance in gra 3.2 and if they changed it internally they're not going to advertise it to a fire risk assessor i would expect them to follow national guidance on 72d
00:42:03 them to follow national guidance on 72d checks and visits do you accept that if it's if it was the case that lfb had long since ceased to test firefighter switches on a routine basis and was no longer or and not incumbent upon them to do say
00:42:15 or and not incumbent upon them to do say then you could not reasonably have relied on the lfb checking the switch as you've said in your statement i have not was not privy to the lfb's internal information i could only go with the information i had at the time
00:42:27 with the information i had at the time which is under 72d it would be reasonable for them to check that the actual system work
00:42:41 flat entrance doors uh i want to start with the door replacement program now if we go to your second witness statement please at cst
00:42:54 3030186 page 15.
00:43:03 you say it paragraph 57 there in relation to the door replacement program
00:43:09 program undertaken by the c.s stokes had no specific role other than providing advice on the requirements for fire doors set out in relevant guidance this advice was provided in the abstract
00:43:20 this advice was provided in the abstract i did not advise on the acquiring of a procurement company the procurement process the selection of mance masterdoor or any tender bids submitted the advice that you provided was in
00:43:31 the advice that you provided was in addition to your work as a fire risk assessor wasn't it correct
00:43:37 correct and it was therefore is this right ad hoc advice as as provided for in your contract
00:43:41 contract yes yes and you provided that advice a thing to abigail acosta of the tmo the request came by january indeed uh and i was going to ask you you also
00:43:53 uh and i was going to ask you you also provided that advice to janice ray i would have gone that route anyway my point of contact was janet ray indeed and it's right i think as you say in your statement than in the next paragraph
00:44:03 paragraph um that it was janice ray who provided instructions to you to provide that advice
00:44:07 advice correct yes and if we stick go back to paragraph 57 of this statement you say this advice was provided in the abstract
00:44:17 in the middle of that paragraph as i've read to you what do you what did you mean by
00:44:21 mean by in the abstract can you provide us some information on the standards required to fire doors for flats i see as far as you were aware was anybody else providing advice to the
00:44:32 was anybody else providing advice to the tmo
00:44:32 tmo about the requirements for fire doors i would have no preview or knowledge of that information i was just i undertook what the job was from janice ray now paragraph 58
00:44:43 job was from janice ray now paragraph 58 of your statement you say along with my letter of 24th of june 2011 and you exhibited i did author the document titled criteria for prioritizing the fitting of new entrance doors to
00:44:54 the fitting of new entrance doors to flats at the request of miss ray again this was provided to assist the kctmo navigate its way through the door replacement process i'm not aware of how this document was
00:45:05 i'm not aware of how this document was used and if i was ever aware i cannot now recall other than those documents referred to above i do not recall providing further specific advice on new entrant stores but we'll have discussed the contents of those letters
00:45:17 discussed the contents of those letters with miss ray to what extent was janice ray
00:45:20 ray involved in the door replacement program from what you could see
00:45:26 facilitator as far as i was aware
00:45:31 uh meaning that she contacted me and asked for information right
00:45:39 do you know whether she had any input uh any decision decision-making functions and from what you could tell into the type of door chosen
00:45:51 into the type of door chosen no i wouldn't have any knowledge of that at all if
00:45:55 at all if right now if we go to your first statement please uh at cst 403063 and turn to page 29 foot of that page let's look together at
00:46:07 foot of that page let's look together at paragraph 88 you say they're under the heading replacement doors in 2012 the kc tmo undertook a wide-ranging flat door replacement scheme across its
00:46:19 door replacement scheme across its buildings 2012 replacement this included the tower the doors were replaced by man's master door and i was provided with product literature from man's master door door which purported that the doors
00:46:32 door which purported that the doors they would be supplying were 30-minute fire-rated fire doors fd30 and then you go on having exhibited some documents
00:46:41 documents to say this there was some initial concern at the time about the requirements necessary for fire doors and you exhibit some further documents an fd30 rating was however sufficient
00:46:54 an fd30 rating was however sufficient to maintain compartmentation in accordance with the building regulations and when asked about this that is what i confirmed
00:47:01 confirmed as can be seen i was only able to comment on the information available to me
00:47:07 me i'd like to look back at the advice that you gave at the time about the requirements for flat entrance doors can we start please with cst402660
00:47:20 this is a letter that you sent to janice ray on the 10th of november 2010 and it's entitled uh subject the replacement of fire doors to
00:47:32 subject the replacement of fire doors to some entrance doors of residential flats and then underneath that it says criteria
00:47:38 criteria for prioritizing the fitting of new entrance doors to flats and first why do you remember how janice ray asked for that advice at that time
00:47:49 ray asked for that advice at that time my belief was that
00:47:54 where would the priorities lie if we have x amount of money to provide x amount of doors what where would you suggest we start did you have a discussion with her which
00:48:06 did you have a discussion with her which led to this letter being written i would have done right can you remember anything about it backwards and forwards discussion how what do you think about this how does this go
00:48:17 this go right was that on the telephone or by email i would have thought it was by telephone
00:48:21 telephone right now um if we uh look at the number of criteria you can see there are eight yes and those are the priority lists that is the priority list and then
00:48:32 that is the priority list and then underneath that you say this once the locations of the entrance doors or corridor subdivision doors in buildings
00:48:38 buildings has been decided upon the following options could be implemented and then you see options at the foot of the page and then there are three options the first is
00:48:49 there are three options the first is this one
00:48:49 this one replace the old door and frame the door set with new 30 minute fire rated door set incorporating intumescent strips and cold smoke seals fd30s with a self-closing device
00:49:02 fd30s with a self-closing device and then over the page page two option two
00:49:06 two replace the old door with a new 30 minute fire rated door inserted into the old frame incorporating into mess and strips and cold smoke seals in the new door fd30s with a self-closing device
00:49:19 fd30s with a self-closing device three fit intumescent strips if not fitted
00:49:22 fitted and cold smoke seals in the existing door at a self-closing device to the door so in this letter it's clear that you advised janice ray that that
00:49:33 that you advised janice ray that that uh what was required for a replacement door
00:49:36 door in all of these options and certainly the first two uh was an fd30s door correct yes
00:49:47 when you'd sent this letter to janice ray do you remember any follow-up discussion with her about it there would have been probably a follow-up discussion i can't remember any details
00:49:58 remember any details did you explain to her at any stage that there was a need for doors to be tested for smoke leakage as a separate test to the test for fire resistance that's part of the testing undertaken on
00:50:10 that's part of the testing undertaken on a door anyway to make it an fd30s on a new door yes yes do you agree that doors were required
00:50:19 required to be 30 fd30s and not fd30 in order to be compliant with approved document b depending on location of door
00:50:31 location of door uh depending on location of door can you just enlighten us further about what so you only would have to have an s the smoke seal which is the uh
00:50:42 marking that has a cold smoke seal on it if the door is off an internal or protected route or corridor if it's on an external balcony or it's an external door it does not have to have
00:50:53 external door it does not have to have the s
00:50:56 so if it leads to the outside it doesn't need an s correct i see um now um if you go next please to
00:51:04 cst3013074 this is another letter that you sent janice ray this time on the 7th of march 2011
00:51:13 2011 and uh it's up it's an update or rather it has been updated after meeting with simon throp on thursday 10th march 2011
00:51:24 thursday 10th march 2011 and the subject is the replacement of entrance doors to some residential apartments
00:51:32 do you remember why you met simon throp and janice ray about the replacement doors
00:51:41 only to probably go over the door we've been a meeting requested by janice let's let's um see if we can help a bit better can we go to cst 3013074 please
00:51:57 at the foot of the page
00:52:01 i'm sorry page two page two we've got the note of the meeting there underneath your name it says updated
00:52:12 underneath your name it says updated information after 10th march meeting with
00:52:14 with j ray and s throp and underneath that it says simon confirmed that the replacement doors would have self closers and coal smoke seals fitted to them also the letter boxes would be fire rated it was also agreed that i would be
00:52:26 rated it was also agreed that i would be present
00:52:27 present when the first doors are installed and abigail a cost of the project manager will arrange the dates and times etc do you remember what why you met simon throp and janice ray i would have
00:52:39 simon throp and janice ray i would have thought to go over that and look at the criteria of the doors right now let's go back to the letter itself on page one
00:52:51 and uh in if we scroll down on your screen please we get to the third paragraph down and it says this on the mans master door limited company website
00:53:01 website it states that their doors meet the requirements of part m of the building regulations and fire check versions have also been successfully tested to bs 476 part 22
00:53:12 successfully tested to bs 476 part 22 one can it please be confirmed that the doors
00:53:16 doors that are to be fitted under the contract are the 30-minute fire doors fd 30 version and could the company forward all the relevant documentation to confirm this was that advice there
00:53:29 to confirm this was that advice there not
00:53:30 not inconsistent with the advice that the doors needed to be fd30s that we had seen in your letter to janice ray of the 10th of november 2010 no why is that because
00:53:43 no why is that because this
00:53:49 so that we're talking of the door there is
00:53:52 is 30. the s is the smoke seals and they were in the frames of the door for my memory they're in the frames of the doors
00:54:04 i'm i'm sorry i'm not really following you um in your letter of the 10th of november your advice under two of the three options was that the doors needed to be fd30s correct now you're saying that
00:54:15 fd30s correct now you're saying that they needed to be the fd30 could you explain why the advice is different
00:54:21 different so the s is the same is an addition so the door itself is an fd30 rather than an fd60
00:54:34 rather than an fd60 the s would be a standard fit because it's off an internal corridor if that's where the door is going to go so this question here is does it meet the requirements of being a 30-minute door
00:54:45 door not a 60-minute door 20-minute door is it a fire-rated door are they so that under the contract are
00:54:57 are they so that under the contract are the 30-minute door version are they the 30-minute door version but you put fd30 yes why did you not put fd30s as you had before
00:55:08 fd30s as you had before because the the door would be a 30 i'm asking the question here under the contract are there 30 minute fire door version as in they are not the 60 or any other version
00:55:21 they are not the 60 or any other version are they the 30
00:55:32 right uh let's go over the page then paragraph two can it please be confirmed uh can we scroll to the top of page two
00:55:43 uh can we scroll to the top of page two please
00:55:45 please uh no we'll need the very top of page two
00:55:49 two for the question thank you yes paragraph two can it please be confirmed that the doors will meet all the requirements of the current building regulations and of the hm government fire safety risk
00:56:00 the hm government fire safety risk assessment guide for sleeping accommodation this includes the hinges letter boxes call letter plates and any securing or locking mechanisms yes and then you go on
00:56:15 under note in the second paragraph underneath the italics to say
00:56:21 to say this and i think please can we scroll down a little bit further on the screen to see it
00:56:29 to see it you say i have attached the relevant pages from approved document b fire safety volume 2 for your information section 5 general provisions and appendix b fire doors and i draw
00:56:40 doors and i draw your attention to items 5.2 5.5 5.6 and 5.11
00:56:45 5.11 of section 5 general provisions also to item 2 of appendix b and item 2a of table b1 now um just help us please try to get to the bottom of what that was a
00:56:57 get to the bottom of what that was a that was that you attached can we please look at cst 706.
00:57:12 can we please look at cst 706. uh do you think that this was the document that you attached it looks the document that would be the correct one at the time uh can we please scroll up to the very
00:57:23 uh can we please scroll up to the very top of the yes thank you it says there at the top good morning after the meeting yesterday here is the here is relevant information regarding flat entrance doors i have highlighted the two parts in green carl
00:57:35 green carl yes it looks from that that this is what you you sent yes now if we look down the document at page two please
00:57:44 uh it says appendix b fire doors you see that yes and then if you look at uh one on the left hand side at the top of the
00:57:57 on the left hand side at the top of the screen
00:57:58 screen you haven't marked it in green but it nonetheless says all fire doors should have the appropriate performance given in table b1
00:58:08 b1 by either a by their far sorry by their performance under test to bs 476
00:58:15 bs 476 22 fire tests on building materials and structures methods for determination of the fire resistance of non-laid bearing elements of construction in terms of integrity for a period of
00:58:26 in terms of integrity for a period of minutes
00:58:27 minutes eg fd30 a suffix s is added for doors where restricted smoke leakage at ambient temperatures is needed now you didn't highlight that but you
00:58:39 now you didn't highlight that but you you um
00:58:40 you um you were aware of that weren't you correct yes why didn't you highlight that you know i'm going to say because the questions asked at the time where this is only relevant to the
00:58:53 where this is only relevant to the questions that were asking me at the time at the meeting so self-closing so i've highlighted the parts that i answered their questions from
00:59:04 i answered their questions from right uh and then if you look a little bit lower down the left-hand column if we can please scroll down to the foot of page
00:59:10 page two you can see at the very bottom of the page
00:59:13 the page the requirement in either case you see the requirement in either case is for test exposure from each side of the door separately except in the case of lift doors which are tested from the landing side only
00:59:24 landing side only and now if we look at the right hand side of column the right hand side column of page two you've highlighted in green paragraph two and particularly the last part of that
00:59:36 and particularly the last part of that self-closing devices are still necessary on flat entrance doors correct and then on page three
00:59:44 paragraph two a in table b one
00:59:51 under two a in a compartment wall if it separates a flat from a space in common use and then you see it says fd30s
01:00:02 and then you see it says fd30s correct so you've advised in your uh seventh and then revised 10th march 2011 letter that we were looking at that the
01:00:13 letter that we were looking at that the mance master door should confirm that the doors should be fd 30 but you've highlighted here the provisions of adb that specifically say that the door needs to be fd 30s correct can you explain that
01:00:26 fd 30s correct can you explain that because the door needs to be an fd30 and if it's being located in any situation where the flat is on to a common space in common use it must have the s
01:00:42 space in common use it must have the s yes so why not say fd30s in your letter rather than fd30 because the door is fd30 depending more on its use you put the s
01:00:53 depending more on its use you put the s in or not
01:00:57 in or not right but going let's let's so i can understand this better uh because i confess i'm slightly puzzled at the moment if we go back to your letter please at one cst 30130 seven
01:01:10 please at one cst 30130 seven four
01:01:13 page one your first question
01:01:22 if we just scroll back down please to the bottom part of the of the screen why are you asking
01:01:31 that the doors that are to be fitted under the contract are fd30 as opposed to fd30s because the s is an additional item on
01:01:42 because the s is an additional item on the door so i'm i'm asking there there to confirm that the doors are fd 30 doors but did you think that the fd30 doors were not going to be flat front doors leading onto a communal area
01:01:56 they would be fd30 does i'm asking for them to confirm there are fd30 and then the second part of the information is if they're on any route
01:02:07 information is if they're on any route onto a common area they must be third uh have the s fitted you don't make it clear in this letter do you that for those doors that are not leading
01:02:19 for those doors that are not leading from a flat to a common area they don't need to be fd30 s but but need only bfd30 but for flat front doors they need to be fd30s if they're off a protected route
01:02:33 fd30s if they're off a protected route but you don't make that clear here do you this would have been the this letter is
01:02:36 is after a meeting and discussion and this letter is relevant to that meeting so the parties in that meeting would have been we we've all had this discussion at the time i'm providing this as an
01:02:47 this as an update to clarify from the meeting
01:02:56 right so just just to be absolutely clear can we go to the second sentence
01:03:04 uh you say here this might be relevant i believe that in the first phase the entrance doors that are being replaced are in protect the protected staircases
01:03:15 are in protect the protected staircases i.e internal doors on staircases of buildings not entrance doors off open walkways balconies i.e external doors
01:03:22 doors correct does that help you yes because could you explain well if they were off external balconies open walkways they would be
01:03:30 would be fd not require the s i i i i get that point
01:03:35 point but what about internal doors on staircases of buildings we'd have to have the s sorry would need the requirement of the s exactly they would need the requirement of the s and therefore given that you're talking here about uh
01:03:48 given that you're talking here about uh doors that need the s why is your question in one limited to fd30 because i'm asking the question in one can they confirm the doors or fd30
01:03:59 one can they confirm the doors or fd30 doors to start with and not any other rating of door why because you can get other ratings of doors
01:04:10 you can get 60s 20s
01:04:13 did you ever standing back from this debate did you ever explain the provisions of approved document b relevant
01:04:21 relevant to fire doors in these locations to janice ray and particularly the need for smoke leakage testing on both sides
01:04:32 whether smokey's leaky testing on both sides would ever come up as a i don't know but we would have had the conversation about um smoke seals being required on doors
01:04:43 um smoke seals being required on doors off common parts on new doors as they're fitted to comply with building regulations requirements you say you would have had the conversation i would imagine we've
01:04:54 the conversation i would imagine we've had it more than once yes well i don't imagining is is is always insightful but can you remember a conversation that you had with janice ray
01:05:02 ray or abigail acosta when you told them that the doors needed to restrict smoke leakage the internal doors needed to
01:05:09 to restrict smoke leakage it would have been because this letter would have been the result of that meeting so therefore it would have been discussed otherwise i wouldn't have sent the building regulations requirements
01:05:20 regulations requirements highlighted in green why they are required
01:05:23 required um just help me with this if you would as a matter of structure so the
01:05:30 so the smoke seals are fitted where can be fitted on the door edges can be fitted in the door frames different doors different how it's
01:05:42 different doors different how it's constructed the door is how the door is been tested at the test laboratory yeah but if i've understood you correctly
01:05:55 and a door with smoke seals fitted around the edges and we can forget for a minute the door frame for this purpose
01:06:06 frame for this purpose could be regarded as an fd30 if it's a 30
01:06:10 30 s so if you were going to fit smoke seals into the door frame so you could then draw a distinction between the door
01:06:21 between the door and the door set correct [Music]
01:06:28 but so actually to refer to the doors as being fd30 isn't in opposite because the seals might be fitted to the door itself correct and these are us upvc doors
01:06:41 correct and these are us upvc doors and in when you have that sort of structure
01:06:45 structure normally the smoke seals are always in the frame
01:06:49 the frame yeah all right thank you sorry mr military i just wanted to understand clearly whether we were talking about the door the door set or something somewhere between the two yes can i confuse you as well sir by
01:07:01 yes can i confuse you as well sir by saying
01:07:02 saying there is no uh products on the market where you don't have it in the door edge or in the door frame is actually on the horizontal plane it's called a
01:07:15 horizontal plane it's called a one of the product names is batwing and it actually goes into the groove and you just self-adhesive and put it in the groove right yes thank you yeah now um can we
01:07:26 right yes thank you yeah now um can we go to cst
01:07:28 go to cst 403063 please
01:07:39 yes um now uh this is your second
01:07:46 i'm sorry your first witness statement page uh 30 paragraph 89 if you can go to that please cst 403 page 30. paragraph 89
01:08:04 yes thank you and paragraph 89 you say at the request of miss ray and abigail acosta
01:08:11 acosta i uh a kc tma project manager i attended the trial
01:08:15 the trial installation of the first installed fire door at the tower on 11th of may 2011. as it so happened this was flat 16 along with a representative from lhc the survey is instructed by the
01:08:26 from lhc the survey is instructed by the kctmo
01:08:28 kctmo to observe the replacement door installations and then if you go on to paragraph 61 of your
01:08:35 your second witness statement at cst 3030186 page 16
01:08:43 page 16 paragraph 61 you explain further your the purpose of your presence at that meeting and you say in respect of my attendance on site on 11th may 2011 to observe
01:08:55 11th may 2011 to observe lhc's inspection of the door installed by master door at flat 16 i have little to add to my comments at paragraph 89 of my first statement
01:09:06 paragraph 89 of my first statement and the documents referred to therein i understood that i was asked to attend by the kctmo
01:09:12 the kctmo to observe a single sample door being installed
01:09:15 installed although therefore i observed the installation of this door on this one occasion
01:09:20 occasion the purpose of my presence was to ensure that lhc's inspection process you've underlined that for all other doors in the building that were to be changed by master door the installation of which i would not
01:09:31 the installation of which i would not witness
01:09:31 witness was sufficient for me and or kctmo to rely on
01:09:35 rely on when to rely on when addressing this issue in an fra can you explain a little bit further why did you need to check lhc's inspection process
01:09:50 for personal um comfort that the actual door had been fitted
01:09:59 soundly correctly proficiently but i can understand you attending to make sure that they fitted the door
01:10:10 fitted the door soundly incorrectly but you make a a point in this paragraph twice that your purpose of your presence on site on that day was to observe lhc's
01:10:22 on site on that day was to observe lhc's inspection or inspection process rather than installation why is that the documentation that was being used at the time
01:10:33 being used at the time at this particular time if my memory serves me correctly there was very much within the world of door fitting a contract that had gone
01:10:44 door fitting a contract that had gone horribly wrong i'm going to say stoke on trent it cost the council millions to put right where the doors were
01:10:53 were not fitted correctly and that was in my mind at the time and also the documentation
01:11:01 copy you know i was looking at did it have all the information that was needed because i was going to have to rely on this that the installation was correct they are the third party inspecting all
01:11:13 they are the third party inspecting all these doors and i just for my own comfort i mean when i first read this paragraph i thought you might have made a mistake and instead of installation put the word
01:11:26 and instead of installation put the word inspection but do you actually mean inspection there as opposed to installation
01:11:36 yes if that's what i've put that was there so
01:11:40 there so my inspection of the doors to see that the doors
01:11:44 the doors under the architrave was it being filled correctly were the gaps well i followed that but but that doesn't tell you anything about the inspection process to be undertaken by nhc that tells you about the installation
01:11:56 about the installation yes it does yes so can we read instead of the word inspection in those two places in that paragraph the word installation yes right now you
01:12:09 yes right now you you were able to watch the installation do you remember whether there was any discussion about the fire safety standards of the door or the door furniture or door frames
01:12:21 i would have checked at the time whether they were whether there was a discussion i wouldn't have discussed it with the contractors fit in the door because they were the con they were the fitters of the door but i would have checked
01:12:32 would have checked with that the door was an fd30 door and how would you check that well um normally on one of the doors there would be a sticker on the door
01:12:43 be a sticker on the door to show me that the door is would have fd on that somewhere right fd 30 or fd30s
01:12:54 fd 30 or fd30s remember the door would be 30 because the s is in the frame right were you given any product literature uh in relation to these doors that were being installed on that
01:13:05 doors that were being installed on that occasion other than that which you've exhibited to your statements that's what i had now after this site visit
01:13:12 visit in may 2011 you wrote to janice ray cst 5-0 is 991 please
01:13:27 mr german i'm just looking at the time we can certainly go to this letter but there are a number of questions about it would you rather probably take this past
01:13:36 this past the break you're probably sensible to break at this point yeah well it's slightly earlier than usual mr stokes but we'll take a break now uh when we come back please half past 11. so
01:13:45 11. so and don't talk to anyone about your evidence when you're out of the room please
01:13:49 please sir right thank you very much
01:14:05 right how fast the level is
01:32:38 yes would you ask mr stokes to come back in please
01:32:54 in please all right mr stokes ready to keep going thank you yes thank you very much yes mr miller yes uh mr stokes can i go back please to the letter we were looking at we're about to look at
01:33:05 look at cst 991
01:33:09 cst 991 this is a letter of the 23rd of may 2011 if we can just scroll to the top of that to see the date
01:33:20 and the subject is the fitting of the first replacement entrance door to flat 16
01:33:24 16 grenfell tower and you say thank you inviting me to view the installation of the first
01:33:31 the first replacement entrance door to flat 16 of grenfell tower on the 11th may my comments are limited to that of the fire requirements needed to be compliant with the fire safety order 2005.
01:33:43 order 2005. from the information given to me by the installation team on site and the technical sheets beforehand by yourselves the door fitted was a fire rated version fd30 of the shore door grp range manufactured
01:33:56 of the shore door grp range manufactured by mance master door
01:33:59 so after the trial door installation it seems that you provided your opinion on whether the door or doors complied with the requirements of the fire safety order and approved
01:34:10 of the fire safety order and approved document b yes correct and you confirmed that they were a fd30
01:34:15 a fd30 yes from the information i was given yes yes
01:34:18 yes and that was contrary to your advice wasn't it
01:34:22 wasn't it um of the requirements for the doors which you gave before the installation which was that at least according to the parts of adb that you highlighted in green they should be fd30s i disagree
01:34:34 they should be fd30s i disagree the doors are fd30 and as it says in this document the so it says here the door fitted was a fd30
01:34:45 the door fitted was a fd30 and then it says there is fitted reinforced frame the door was fitted with self-closing device intermissions and
01:34:53 and cold smoke seals so therefore that makes it the
01:34:58 s so you're referring are you to lower down the paragraph correct it doesn't say anything about fd30s in there does it you don't refer to that no but it says
01:35:10 you don't refer to that no but it says on there intermittent and cold smoke seals on fire rated letterbooks when you sent the green highlighted version of approved document b to janet's ray under cover of your earlier letter that we saw 10th of march
01:35:24 earlier letter that we saw 10th of march 2011 you didn't explain to her did you that the fd30s uh in the table we looked at was to be arrived at as
01:35:35 arrived at as by way of a uh an accumulation of characteristics first of all an fd30 door but some s added by virtue of the
01:35:46 door but some s added by virtue of the presence of cold smoke seals somewhere you didn't do that did you well i can't tell you like i didn't do it and i can't tell you i did it but it's a long time ago but documentary evidence in the information
01:35:58 documentary evidence in the information i gave her would have that information in it but i'm sure i would have covered it the same as i've covered it with you this morning the door is an fd30 the s can come in the frame
01:36:09 can come in the frame you don't say here that because the door is fd30
01:36:13 is fd30 and because there are cold smoke seals therefore the door isn't it should be regarded as or was an fd30s door and therefore compliant with the proof document b
01:36:24 document b now we don't see you say that here do we no why is that
01:36:29 the the information here would make it an fd30s
01:36:33 an fd30s where were the cold smoke seals in the door frame in the door frame now do you remember what information you were given by the
01:36:45 what information you were given by the installation team on site if any
01:36:50 uh no honest answer do you remember what technical sheets you looked at before your visit it would be the information i've provided if i've still got that information
01:37:01 information right uh was that what you exhibited into your second witness statement if that's the information i have yes all right well let's look at that it's uh it exhibited the power 59 uh uh
01:37:12 it exhibited the power 59 uh uh uh uh page 15 of your statement let's have a look at that cst 3030186 page 15.
01:37:24 let's go into the statement first and then look at the exhibit you say there at para59 i was asked to comment on certain man's master door literature see and then there are some exhibits
01:37:37 see and then there are some exhibits that you've referred to which i believe i downloaded as a pdfs from masterdoor's website my review of this material was desktop in nature only and i was really only checking that the doors were available
01:37:48 checking that the doors were available as
01:37:49 as 30-minute fire doors which were required as i had informed the kctma and you refer to three exhibits there
01:38:01 seven cst4023062070 and five zeroes one one six
01:38:04 one six did you look at all three of those documents on the same occasion without seeing the documents i can't tell you that uh well let's look at the first and second of those
01:38:15 second of those cst four zeros two three zero six and two zero seven zero first cst four zero two three zero six
01:38:26 first cst four zero two three zero six and this says master door information and if you cast your eye down the page it runs on in fact it doesn't run onto
01:38:37 it runs on in fact it doesn't run onto two pages that's the limit of it actually
01:38:39 actually um you can see that it says under far doors
01:38:43 doors uh that they achieved 30 and 60 minutes fire resistance you see that yes
01:38:52 they don't say what standard the doors are do they no they don't say what tests the doors have undergone do they in this document no no so on that document
01:39:02 document you couldn't have made your assessment of the standards of the doors could you only in as much as it says our doors have been developed to the highest specification
01:39:13 highest specification and tested to the exacting standards of yeah but that didn't tell you what the standards were no but that's the information i'm going on at the time i've been given you could certainly see that it doesn't
01:39:25 you could certainly see that it doesn't say that they are either 30 sorry fd30s or even fd30
01:39:33 great yeah now that's the first document let's look at the second one
01:39:39 seven cst402070
01:39:43 that's what we have for that uh which is what you exhibit
01:39:51 and this is available style options and there is some
01:39:58 nomenclature or or tag beneath each one but they aren't uh fire safety standards are they
01:40:08 are they they're just serial numbers i think it's the flame
01:40:12 the flame at the bottom right is the legend says available as a 30 minute fighter yes but no not f d 30 or fd30s you can't tell
01:40:23 f d 30 or fd30s you can't tell can you fd30 it says available as a 30 minute five dollars fd30 all right but that's that's his most that's the that's as much as you can tell isn't it correct
01:40:39 uh now that's just telling you what's in the range it doesn't tell you uh what was fitted and whether that was a 30 minute fire door whether 30 s or 30 alone
01:40:50 or 30 alone correct yes then let's look at the third document you've exhibited which you say you looked at
01:41:02 cst50116 this is the sure door specification
01:41:11 if you go please to page six in that
01:41:16 document uh it does say composite fire door fd30
01:41:24 so that tells you that it was an fd30 so this document tells you it's fd30 yes correct but not fd30s correct but it says tested to 476 part 22.
01:41:38 but it says tested to 476 part 22. indeed now you then say is it that document which you reviewed which told you that the fire door was an fd30
01:41:49 that the fire door was an fd30 the information in front of me yes and i asked for the clarification of this in my letter
01:41:54 my letter now if we go to cst403149 please
01:42:03 this is a letter you wrote to abigail acosta of the tmo on the 24th of june 2011
01:42:10 june 2011 and again the subject matter is the required fire standards for entrance doors to residential flats and if you look at paragraph one it's quite lengthy but if you look at the very end of it
01:42:21 very end of it the last four lines of paragraph of the first paragraph before the break uh it says the the specifications of the fire door
01:42:32 fire door and the standard required in a particular location is specified by part b of the building regulations in appendix b fire doors and the performance of fire doors is judged by subjecting them to the standard test procedure specified in
01:42:43 the standard test procedure specified in bs 476 part 22 1987 or bsen 1634 part 1 2000 and then if you skip the next paragraph
01:42:53 paragraph and go down to the bottom well sorry let me just read to you in light of your answers the last sentence of that paragraph i was going to skip do you see it says also incorporated in the
01:43:04 you see it says also incorporated in the door
01:43:04 door could be fire rated glazed panels and in new fire doors would be cold smoke seals and intumescent seals or strips
01:43:15 so are you saying there that in new doors
01:43:18 doors uh there would be cold smoke seals and intune essence strips which would make them
01:43:22 them fd30s correct yes then you go on the current building regulations requirements for an entrance door to a dwelling
01:43:29 dwelling stroke flat etc off a protected staircase or corridor is that it should be a minimum fire resistance of 30 minutes when tested for integrity to bs 476 part 22
01:43:40 for integrity to bs 476 part 22 fitted with the self-closing device and intumescent strips and cold smoke seals i.e suffix s and then if we turn to page 2 conclusion
01:43:52 and then if we turn to page 2 conclusion you say from all the technical information provided by the manufacturers and the inspection sheets provided by lhc
01:44:00 lhc the new flat entrance doors supplied and fitted by mans master door meet the requirements of the building regulations in the the doors are fd30s this includes all the door
01:44:11 are fd30s this includes all the door furniture fitted to or on the doors any glazing fitted in the doors is fire rated according to the information provided as is any glazing fitted surrounding the doors now you say you looked at the technical
01:44:23 now you say you looked at the technical information provided by the manufacturers there was that the same literature as we've just looked at the three pieces of data that we looked at you exhibited to your second witness statement
01:44:35 your second witness statement this is later isn't it would i have not seen anything else uh late today i never did see the actual um test certificates but for the information i was given
01:44:46 information i was given it all appears that the doors meet the requirements of the building regulations as fd30s doors if that was what was needed on an internal corridor or fd30 if often open
01:45:00 or fd30 if often open external door well just let me just be clear
01:45:05 clear you attended on the 11th of may and you'd seen the three pieces of information you've exhibited yes you're now writing in june was there any further technical
01:45:17 june was there any further technical information provided by master door mance master door that you saw between your 11th of may visit
01:45:25 visit and your writing to abigail acosta on the 24th of june 2011. i'm going to say no no so that's visual on
01:45:34 on the day of the inspection what i saw on the day and information provided so can we proceed then on the basis that the technical information provided by the manufacturers to which you fare you refer under your conclusion here are
01:45:47 you refer under your conclusion here are the or is the three pieces of information you exhibited to your second witness statement correct the only looking at this the only other probably a piece of information i would have been provided would have been lhs
01:45:58 would have been lhs l h c's
01:46:02 l h c's a report on that door what had you seen in the technical information to tell you that the doors that were fitted or supplied and fitted as you say
01:46:15 or supplied and fitted as you say were fd 30s doors as you say seen in the technical information would have been the standard to bs 47622 visually on-site
01:46:28 47622 visually on-site actually seeing the door with the seals in the frame
01:46:36 did man's master door provide the frame as well yes it's a whole door set it's a door set
01:46:41 door set isn't it yes so is what you're saying here that the new flat entrance doors supplied and fitted by mance master door are rfd30s correct but with the literature we saw
01:46:53 literature we saw doesn't say that does it the literature we saw says that the fire doors are fd30 and only in one place the door is correct
01:47:01 correct but this is the whole door frame the whole door set we're talking right now and the seals are in the door frames but the technical information told you that the door was fd30
01:47:12 that the door was fd30 so why are you telling abigail acosta that the technical information told you that
01:47:16 that the door supplied and fitted the new flat entrance doors supplied and fitted are fda 30 s because visually i would have seen the
01:47:28 because visually i would have seen the yes on site so not the technical literature your personal observation yes that's not what this letter says the new flat door supplied and fitted so
01:47:39 new flat door supplied and fitted so and fitted i was on site when they were fitted
01:47:44 do you also agree that what you're saying here was contrary to your letter to janice ray of the 23rd of may 2011 where you said that the doors were fd30 or only need only required to be fd30
01:47:56 or only need only required to be fd30 the doors are fd30 the s is in the frame but the whole door set makes up fd30s with the self-closer the letter box fire rated the spy hole etcetera
01:48:08 rated the spy hole etcetera can you see from the debate we've been having over the last hour or so how there might be room for confusion here
01:48:17 no i can't because we're talking uh people i'd like to think would understand the in this particular context here this is the project manager who is understanding
01:48:29 the project manager who is understanding the
01:48:29 the specification that she is required i can understand for a lay person picking up the documentation but that's no different from a lay person picking up
01:48:40 different from a lay person picking up building regulations and trying to understand appendix b with all the different boxes in it
01:48:47 in it in your letter you say also that the fd30s standards includes all the door furniture fitted to or on the doors
01:48:57 doors any glazing fitted in the doors is fire rated etc not the s doesn't yes it's just a suffix to say that it's got a cold smoke steel fitted yeah how did you know that the door furniture complied with the building regulations
01:49:12 on that door because it says on there it's part
01:49:16 it's part there's 476 part 22. door furniture well it comes with the furniture it would have been fire tested with the furniture on it there's no there's nothing in the literature about the door furniture
01:49:29 literature about the door furniture i haven't shown it to you in detail but there isn't my question is was this just an assumption you were making or did you actually verify this from any data i would not have known that but the door phone the door set
01:49:40 set would come as per with the door furniture as it was tested i see so it is what you're saying here your
01:49:49 your interpolation of the mere fact that the manufacturer said that it had passed 476 part 22.
01:49:55 part 22. and also lch have looked at it and i would like to think that someone in tmo would have had all the certification for that door which was part of the
01:50:08 for that door which was part of the documentation i asked for from them that they should have the test certificates for that door
01:50:16 self-closing devices did you ask for product information on those no that was part of the door furniture becomes door set were you asked did you didn't ask to see
01:50:27 were you asked did you didn't ask to see the test certificates for the self-closers no right um that's that's
01:50:34 that's the whole project was overseen by a project manager and each door was overseen by a third party lhc
01:50:41 party lhc who i was relying on to undertake the inspection of the door as fitted to comply yes that's not really an answer though is it because you actually ask for specific advice
01:50:52 ask for specific advice about the fire safety compliance of the doors
01:50:55 doors the new doors being fitted correct as an independent fire risk assessor i was just giving you factual information that as far as i was aware i undertook
01:51:06 was aware i undertook as a fire risk assessor from what i had in front of me the door was compliant looking at the technical information would have been lhc and the project manager's responsibility
01:51:18 and the project manager's responsibility which
01:51:18 which i was doing the part that i was asked to do
01:51:23 do can we then focus on self-closing devices
01:51:27 devices a bit more closely can we go back in time then to 2010 and your letter of the 10th of november of that year cst402660
01:51:41 we looked at this earlier this morning and can we go please to page two in that letter
01:51:47 letter under items to consider
01:51:52 that's cst402660
01:52:05 that's the first page of that and you can see options at the bottom
01:52:11 and then items to consider is on page two
01:52:16 two uh just looking at it reminding yourself of it
01:52:20 of it generally speaking do you remember what the purpose of that advice was
01:52:26 i would have been asked for it well what were you asked for i can't tell you at the time that if i was asked for something i would have written it down afterwards right
01:52:37 have written it down afterwards right um a paragraph c you say this an inspection system to make certain that the occupants of the flats do not disconnect or disable the self-closing devices once they've been fitted
01:52:49 been fitted at the time of this letter to november 2010
01:52:52 2010 what was your understanding of what inspection system was required four fire doors no no for self-closing devices
01:53:04 self-closing devices they should be fitted to fire doors
01:53:09 um sorry what was your understanding of what inspection system was required at that time self-closing devices on fire doors
01:53:21 devices on fire doors at that time i believe this standard was regular inspection should be undertaken did janice ray discuss that issue with you at this time i've got no idea 10 years ago whether
01:53:33 i've got no idea 10 years ago whether that was discussed at that time now did you provide any advice to janice ray about what was required by way of an inspection system for self-closing devices on fire doors
01:53:44 doors if i'd have been asked i would have provided the stat the requirements of the time or whatever time i was asked which i would yeah i would just provided that
01:53:55 i would yeah i would just provided that information right now moving into 2011 can we go please to tmo
01:54:00 tmo double zero eight four seven three one eight
01:54:07 this is a letter dated 30th of april 2011
01:54:11 2011 from you to janice ray and if we scroll a little bit down the screen you can see that it says a summary of items and topics in the
01:54:23 a summary of items and topics in the document fire safety and purpose-built blocks of flats draft 18th of april 2011. so just to be clear for everyone else's benefit you're giving her advice it looks like on the contents
01:54:36 advice it looks like on the contents of the draft lga guidance correct which hadn't yet been published but was in draft and presumably in circulation in the in the industry yes yes
01:54:46 yes yes and presumably you'd read it and made comments on it and indeed now um if we look at this document a bit more closely um first do you remember were you asked
01:54:57 um first do you remember were you asked to buy janice ray to provide you with advice on that document or did you volunteer it i can't answer i wouldn't know if i had that information i would have passed it on because it was relevant to the
01:55:08 on because it was relevant to the door replacement program yes then let's go to
01:55:12 go to page uh one at the bottom if we just scroll down uh you cite from the then draft paragraph 68.2
01:55:24 the then draft paragraph 68.2 and which says this as flat entrance doors are required to be self-closing there is a risk that any self-locking security devices fitted to the doors could accidentally lock residents outside of their own flats
01:55:36 outside of their own flats as well as being a general nuisance for residents who may leave their keys inside the flat there is also a risk during a fire if residents leave their flat and dependent family members remain inside the flat the danger in these circumstances is
01:55:48 the danger in these circumstances is that residents may resort to removing or disconnecting the self-closing device now just just pausing there would you agree that at this time which is at the time of the door
01:56:01 which is at the time of the door replacement program or certainly before it
01:56:04 it um i should just make the point that this letter is april 2011 not april 2010 as it says it's an error but this time you made it clear to
01:56:15 but this time you made it clear to janice ray uh that it was important that there be self-closing devices and brought to her attention the risks that residents might remove or
01:56:26 that residents might remove or disconnect those devices correct yes did you ever have a conversation with her about that risk
01:56:34 risk do you remember removing self-closing devices about the risk that residents might remove the self-closing device i think they would have probably had on more than one occasion
01:56:45 now uh if we go to uh yeah is there any reason why you didn't set out in your letter the provisions from the draft lga guide
01:56:56 provisions from the draft lga guide about setting up a program of planned preventative maintenance for flat entrance doors no no can we then move on in time
01:57:07 no no can we then move on in time into june 2011 tmo double zero eight six seven three seven seven this is an email on page two of that email run
01:57:18 email run that you sent to abigail acosta
01:57:30 towards the foot of your screen on the 24th
01:57:33 24th of june 2011 abby good morning you say i visited king charles house yesterday
01:57:41 yesterday and two residents showed me their new flat entrance doors and then in the third paragraph you say flat 13
01:57:48 flat 13 the self-closing device has come out of the door the occupant contacted tmo and explained this that it was a newly fitted door etc and the tmo cool person stated that morrisons who come out and fix it
01:58:01 morrisons who come out and fix it do you remember that not off the top of my head but i've written it so yes right do you agree that it it's a it's a good example of how self-closing devices might fail
01:58:12 devices might fail yes yes and that happens from time to time doesn't it yes yes and then if we go to 21st july 2011 and another email to abigail acosta at tm0086783
01:58:28 page 3 email at the foot of the page please entitled re-new doors at grenfell tower abbey good morning on tuesday i was at
01:58:41 abbey good morning on tuesday i was at lancaster west and was informed that the self-closing device on three of the new flat entrance doors have come away from the door this is the same problem as in king charles house are you aware of this recurring
01:58:52 aware of this recurring fault now just to clarify these are three doors at grenfell tower yes i don't suppose you can remember the numbers of the flats no no did you note the flat numbers down
01:59:06 if i haven't put them in there i would probably wouldn't no why's that i've no idea sorry it's quite important isn't it you know exactly which flats no longer have
01:59:17 exactly which flats no longer have self-closers no well it is but i don't know what context this is in so it says here i was at lancaster west it doesn't say i was in the building i
01:59:29 it doesn't say i was in the building i could have been passed that information on by
01:59:32 on by one of the caretakers
01:59:36 yes if i'd have known and if i'd have asked them which ones and they said i don't know i don't know what context all i'm doing on is passing relevant information are you aware of this
01:59:47 information are you aware of this reoccurring fault yes what's the answer yes and to be fair to you your email says i was informed that the self-closing device on three of the new flat front doors
01:59:55 doors etc did
01:59:58 etc did taking a step back did you ask whoever it was who told you that what the flat numbers were well i would have done that would have right and so why didn't you note that down and pass that on to abigail acosta said that she could fix them
02:00:09 said that she could fix them maybe they didn't know and it was a conversation that ended there well you're speculating i'm speculating yes okay um you either but if i hadn't known sorry sir to interrupt if i hadn't and i would
02:00:21 sir to interrupt if i hadn't and i would have written them down right now you say are you aware of this reoccurring fault uh were you concerned that there was
02:00:29 was a recurring fault with self-closing devices on these master door doors yes because otherwise i wouldn't have gone to her when i didn't need to to say there is a problem are you aware of it yes and we can see her response
02:00:42 yes and we can see her response page three second email up the page if we scroll up we'll see it she says carl hi no i'm not thanks for bringing to my attention i will raise
02:00:54 attention i will raise as concerned at our next site meeting i will send you invite if you wish to attend
02:00:57 attend do you know why this may be happening manufacturing you see what plane incompetence by the installer and you replied if you stay on the same page and look up to the email above it you say
02:01:07 you say as far as i can tell and remember from the king's charles the king charles house door the screws securing stroke holding
02:01:13 holding the closer into the door are very short and we can see from the rest of the email chain from page two up if we just scroll up to page two that that was then
02:01:24 that was then raised by the tmo with andy uh with andy webster of masterdoor who said that they were going through the block
02:01:33 block changing the fixings if necessary you see he says changing the fixings if necessary do you see that yes now at the time were you aware of that remedial work being undertaken in
02:01:44 that remedial work being undertaken in grenfell tower in response to what you identified as a the recurring problem i can't honestly say one way or the other but
02:01:53 other but i would expect something to happen yes do you know whether all the fixings have been changed or any of those where uh andy webster deemed it to be necessary
02:02:02 necessary well i would like to think that all of them were changed but that would be a maintenance policy or procedure between abigail acosta and the company did you seek to check any
02:02:13 the company did you seek to check any other doors at grenfell tower or ask the tmo about whether there had been any checks on the other doors at grenfell tower to make sure that the problem wasn't recurring beyond those doors you'd identified as part of the risk assessment process
02:02:25 as part of the risk assessment process as i went around the building i would have asked that question if i had access or asked anyone on site is there a problem
02:02:32 problem right did you do that yes right
02:02:39 if there had been problems it would have been highlighted in the significant findings as well as i went around the building well you say significant findings as i went around the building this is july 2011 and your effort your next fra
02:02:51 july 2011 and your effort your next fra is not until november 2012 is it just so when i woke up that was correct yes
02:02:58 yes is there any advice you recall giving about this recurring problem before the next fra in november 2012 i've got no recollection can we uh look
02:03:09 i've got no recollection can we uh look at your advice of the 4th of august 2011 which is on self-closing devices but a very slightly different aspect of it tm00867927 please
02:03:41 now this is a letter you wrote to janice ray and the subject is the removal of the self-closing device on a flat instant entrance door so the topic isn't failure or the screws it's it's about removal by tenants
02:03:54 it's it's about removal by tenants i'm going to show you the text of that before i do can i just show you what prompted you to give that advice can we go to tm00 867 924 please
02:04:12 this is uh yeah this is an email uh
02:04:23 second email in this in the string [Music]
02:04:30 uh could we turn to page two well very bottom of page one because we can do with the top of page two it's from janice ray and it's on the 28th of july 2011
02:04:42 28th of july 2011 uh forwarding a concern raised by lorna cunningham with abigail acosta and the title is door installation elderly carl would welcome your view on
02:04:54 elderly carl would welcome your view on the attached and if you scroll down page two
02:04:58 two you can see what was attached lorna cunningham who was a resident liaison officer
02:05:03 officer uh with the tmo uh raises with abigail acosta the a problem she identifies there's a lot of detail about it we don't need to go to it but
02:05:14 go to it but the basic point is uh that this is a lady of a certain age having trouble opening or closing the door
02:05:21 door uh and having difficulty with it uh and the lady finding that the door was very heavy and hurting her back um and therefore she wedges it open when
02:05:33 um and therefore she wedges it open when she has to come in and out now leave aside the personal difficulties with that you're asked for your view that that was the run-up to this and the email asks you for that you then respond in your letter of advice of the fourth of august and if we
02:05:45 advice of the fourth of august and if we can get back to that please we can look at it
02:05:51 tm00867927
02:05:59 she wants to remove the door closer and you say from the emails i've received if we just scroll down to the first part of the letter itself from the emails i've received and from the
02:06:10 emails i've received and from the conversations with yourself and avigila costa
02:06:12 costa the issuing question is that some elderly tenants are finding it difficult to open their flat entrance doors when the flat entrance door is fitted with a self-closing device you've asked if a self-cleaning device fitted to a flat entrance door located
02:06:23 fitted to a flat entrance door located in a protected staircase or a protected corridor
02:06:26 corridor can be removed so as to aid the person opening the door and then you then refer to the relevant legislation under the rro and if we go over to um pay
02:06:38 and if we go over to um pay well at the bottom you say i believe that by removing the self-closing device from a fire door if we scroll down
02:06:46 i believe that by removing the self-closing device from a fire door this could place the other residents of the building at risk because if a fire was to occur within the flat the entrance door would not close automatically so the smoke and flame
02:06:58 automatically so the smoke and flame could enter the common parts of the building and would not be confined to the dwelling of origin this is because there was an adva a device fitted and you have now disabled or removed it
02:07:13 removed it and then if you turn on you can see you refer to the building regulations uh the lga guidance just released earlier that month or first of august
02:07:25 earlier that month or first of august 2011.
02:07:27 2011. and then if you go to uh paragraph three on page two
02:07:36 uh it says uh the flat entrance doors are critical to the safety of the common parts and then if you go to page three we can
02:07:48 and then if you go to page three we can see the conclusion section and if you look at the first paragraph in that you say i would advise that self-closing devices were fitted to a flat entrance door located in a protected staircase or a protected corridor should not be
02:08:00 or a protected corridor should not be removed because the existing situation is being made worse a building regulations term and by removing the self-closing device you could be quotes placing one or more relevant persons at risk of death
02:08:11 relevant persons at risk of death or serious injury in the case of fire close quotes there are alternative solutions to removing the self-closing device from the flat entrance door if you would like me to attend a meeting with the providers of the doors or with
02:08:22 with the providers of the doors or with yourselves please instruct me were you asked to attend a meeting to resolve the problem i can't remember were you told whether the problem was
02:08:34 were you told whether the problem was resolved
02:08:39 i'm going to say i can't remember but there would be other solutions and if i was asked i would provide alternative solutions and one of those could be an automatic new device fitted to the
02:08:50 an automatic new device fitted to the door so it opened uh releasing a bit of the tension on the d
02:08:55 d closer but there are other solutions as long as the door still shuts do you remember giving that advice in respect of this particular flat or occupant i can't say i remember
02:09:07 flat or occupant i can't say i remember per se giving that advice but if i would have been asked i would have given it right
02:09:11 right do you remember whether you followed up on this problem
02:09:16 i've got no i can't remember but as it says there if you want me please instruct me to do so now here we are in august 2011. you've had knowledge or information
02:09:29 you've had knowledge or information first self-closing devices were coming away from the door frame or from the door and secondly self-closing devices were causing the door to be too heavy for some occupants
02:09:40 for some occupants causing them to remove it or want to remove it
02:09:45 remove it did those uh pieces of information give you any calls for concern that these doors and particularly the self-closing devices on them were not fit for purpose no this is
02:09:58 were not fit for purpose no this is standard um
02:10:02 the goes for the elderly person first of all answer that question that is a standard uh problem um it's overcoming other like residential care homes and that by
02:10:14 like residential care homes and that by having what's called a swing free closing device on the door or a emr electronic magnetic release hold open device on the door there is other ways of um solving the problem
02:10:27 of um solving the problem by still having the self-closing device on there still having the door as a fire door
02:10:33 door and making certain it complies with building regulations but also helps the occupier open the door with those solutions that you've just very helpfully identified ever
02:10:44 helpfully identified ever even considered for any of the buildings in the tma stock
02:10:52 sitting here now i can't actually say yes or no to anyone because my mind's uh whirling around but if anyone would have asked me we would have gone through that
02:11:01 that but i can't give you a specific say at this flat at this time in this block this was done but i'm sure it would have been done if it had been asked for if it had been asked for but not you didn't suggest it well if i'd have
02:11:13 you didn't suggest it well if i'd have been asked like here we were having the conversation now janice would have had this conversation with me is there anything we can do and the answer would have been yes the same as i've just given you the information
02:11:24 information now do you ever recall we see no evidence of it you see but do you ever recall ever saying to janice ray that one solution might be for residents who are finding the self-closing devices as fitted
02:11:35 self-closing devices as fitted particularly problematic that she should investigate uh fitting alternatives that you've identified but that conversation would have happened yes
02:11:46 happened yes say it would have happened do you remember it happening no no uh fras uh are on the subject um let's look at that
02:11:57 that um so i could answer your second other part of the question sorry
02:12:04 sorry was the there was a defect highlighted that the devices self-closures were coming away a site meeting was undertaken and as far as i was concerned
02:12:16 as i was concerned it was rectified by the manufacturer by going back to site and i heard no other comments made in the future of mass
02:12:27 comments made in the future of mass store failings or self-closers failing right
02:12:30 right and i would have asked that question and no information was ever given to me about that did you know if the recurring problem with the self-closing devices persisted at grenfell tower or did you just assume
02:12:41 grenfell tower or did you just assume from the silence about it that it didn't
02:12:46 i would have i'm going to say that it was
02:12:49 was resolved and my understanding of the tmos policies and procedures is if there is any damage to a door the tenant would inform the tmo
02:13:02 the tenant would inform the tmo and i met with repairs well they changed their name maintenance repairs direct and i would like to think if there was reoccurring problems either janice or them would have told me you'd like to think that but did you
02:13:14 you'd like to think that but did you know as a fact whether the recurring problem with the self-closing devices persisted at grenfell tower or do you did you just assume that because
02:13:23 because you didn't hear otherwise they didn't
02:13:28 i assumed that it was rectified and i would have asked if i um like when i did my sample of door checks i would find out if there was closers fitted
02:13:38 fitted did they work if they hadn't worked i would have asked the person the question how long has this not worked why has this been reported now let's look at your fire risk
02:13:50 now let's look at your fire risk assessments for grenfell tower and the specific topic of flat entrance doors if we can
02:14:00 uh if you
02:14:06 uh never had a target number of doors to inspect did you no no and really is this right that on your tours around the building you would
02:14:17 would really sort of sort of take potluck with who was in and do what you could potluck yes um were you sent the lhc site visit reports
02:14:31 were you sent the lhc site visit reports i received some initial on the initial stages
02:14:34 stages i think i was getting them all the time but i was getting a thousand odd and i think that after a while i was i expressed a um comment that
02:14:47 i expressed a um comment that unless there was any failures or i needed to know if they were all okay that was it now can we look at one at one of them cst four zeroes two one eight three
02:15:10 this is an nhc site visit report external doors
02:15:16 and it is from june 2011 we know that because if you scroll
02:15:23 scroll down please to the bottom of the page first page you can see date of visit 6th june 2011 and it's signed off by the technical officer and technical
02:15:35 the technical officer and technical manager
02:15:37 manager and if you turn to page two
02:15:45 it says grenfell tower [Applause] 134 door was inspected externally and it appeared to be professionally installed however fixings and operation of door closer were not checked
02:15:58 closer were not checked one and then 162 this was a second visit to check that issues reported earlier have been rectified 113 door was inspected externally and it appeared to be professionally installed however fixings and operation
02:16:10 installed however fixings and operation of door closer were not checked did you see this report at the time do you think june 2011. i can't tell you whether i saw it or not were you provided with it do you think as
02:16:22 provided with it do you think as part of your 2012 fra i could have been i wouldn't know will you afford were you generally afforded access to reports such as these
02:16:34 yes um now
02:16:39 if you had access to this document can we assume that you would have looked at it yes
02:16:46 at it yes and and having looked at it can we proceed on the basis um that you would have read this part under grenfell tower well i sort of read under most of them
02:16:58 well i sort of read under most of them because
02:16:58 because most of them it says here fixings then door not
02:17:02 door not um operation closed and not checked not checked yes and and when you then did your rounds of the relevant building whether it's grenfell tower or whitstable house
02:17:13 it's grenfell tower or whitstable house for the purposes of your fras did you go to the flats or try to go to the flats to
02:17:17 to to check the door closes for yourself i would try and check as many as i could whether i had this document on or not i would try and check as many doors as i could indeed but would it not have been useful
02:17:29 indeed but would it not have been useful for you to have this document in your hand
02:17:32 hand when going around the building so that you could make a note or point of going to flat 134 and attempting to get access to the flat to see whether the door closer was working or not correct if i had this
02:17:43 working or not correct if i had this document or was provided it's the same with all the other dockers do you remember any occasion when you turned
02:17:49 turned grenfell tower with a document such as this in your hands identifying which flats had door closes which had not been checked by lhc no no
02:18:04 do you accept this that if your fras had identified no problems with self-closing devices and no problems with the internal elements of flat entrance doors
02:18:17 elements of flat entrance doors that the consequence would be or might be
02:18:21 be that your fras might be relied on as evidence that there were no problems with self-closing devices
02:18:30 yes i accept that but as i said isn't it the tmo's policy that if there is a problem with the door the resident should inform the tmo and the caretakers actually undertake
02:18:41 and the caretakers actually undertake regular inspections of doors anyway so mine is my fra is only a snapshot in time every at this time i believe every three or four years
02:18:52 four years where they're in the building on a daily basis
02:18:56 basis let's look at your 2014 fra uh
02:19:07 let's look at your 2014 fra uh but before i ask you that can i just ask you um to the best of your recollection did you ever identify yourself a fault with a self-closing device
02:19:17 device on any door of any flat to which you did obtain access i'm going to say yes because i would have come across one in the tower or anywhere else oh yes
02:19:29 in the tower or anywhere else oh yes you did and and what would you do having uh
02:19:32 uh discovered that would you notify would you note that down in your fra on the synonym findings on the significant findings would you do that as a matter of course
02:19:46 yes so can we take it that
02:19:54 the specific instances of specific flats where
02:19:58 where store closers were found by you to be defective
02:20:02 defective are identified in your significant findings
02:20:05 findings and where your significant findings are silent it's because you found none correct yes i see
02:20:13 [Applause] now um if we can look please at your 2014 fra
02:20:19 2014 fra it's at cst403157
02:20:32 uh and
02:20:37 if we look please at page 19.
02:20:49 uh this starts on page 18 it says have let's have that up to start with please which is the beginning of the section this is means of escape from fire and if
02:21:01 this is means of escape from fire and if we turn to page 19 you can see the fourth from last tick
02:21:10 box [Applause]
02:21:18 uh the fourth from bottom you've it's now towards the top of your screen it says
02:21:22 says where appropriate are any fire doors fitted with self-closing devices and do these function correctly and you've ticked no you see that correct yes now to be clear was that in relation to
02:21:33 now to be clear was that in relation to flat entrance doors or the doors in the stairwell any fire door
02:21:39 door including flat entrance doors yes yes why did you why did you mark here that those were not functioning correctly those self-closing devices were either
02:21:50 those self-closing devices were either not fitted or not functioning correctly because there was some that were defective right
02:21:59 the question is where appropriate are any fire doors fitted with self-closing devices and do these function correctly well there is obviously somewhere i have found a fire door where the self-closing device is not
02:22:11 self-closing device is not functioning correctly so take no i see so that that's both fire doors and in the
02:22:19 the um in the protected stairway or rather between the protected stairway and the communal area and flat entrance doors and fire doors on any other corridor anywhere else in the building that has a self-closing device
02:22:31 that has a self-closing device i see but then let's let's see if we can just
02:22:34 just trace this down into your significant finding schedule just to be clear if you go to cst40403177 please
02:22:56 and go to page four
02:23:01 you'll see in there item 12
02:23:14 you can see that uh on page four
02:23:20 uh this is all about the access doors yes fire doors fire doors yeah yes the ac under uh b it's the access
02:23:31 yes the ac under uh b it's the access door to the external roof and then c uh cupboards d fire door to the refuge chute you see that yes
02:23:41 that yes and then e far door to the staircase from the lift yes lobby areas so that's all those uh and then if you turn to page five
02:23:57 uh you can see in something not marked in red but just for your information
02:24:04 the following flat entrance doors are the original fire rated flat entrance doors
02:24:09 doors and which were fitted with a self-closing device these are flush solid doors and all close fitting then you give a list of flats correct uh that list is not a list of flats where the self-closing device
02:24:21 of flats where the self-closing device was either missing or defective is it no this is just a statement yeah i'm looking at 2014 yes you are so uh on that basis can we can we take
02:24:34 so uh on that basis can we can we take it that
02:24:35 it that um the no tick box which we saw related to non-flat entrance doors in other words fire door to the uh um
02:24:47 in other words fire door to the uh um if you shoot room shoot for example yes yes yes yes i see um this list we're looking at in the for
02:24:59 um this list we're looking at in the for your information box
02:25:03 was that list derived from specific inspection by you looking at this and looking at the time as in the date i am going to say that
02:25:16 as in the date i am going to say that the these are leaseholder doors or doors in the building that have not been replaced with the new master doors
02:25:24 doors and therefore i'm just for your information if any of these flat entrance doors are replaced in the future
02:25:31 future their replacement door must comply with all requirements of the building regulations when installed right when you said that they were fitted with a self-closing device
02:25:43 were fitted with a self-closing device where did you get that information from well i would have checked one of the doors so did you check each of these flats well i can't say i checked every one of them but i would have checked a sample
02:25:54 them but i would have checked a sample and if they're all the same doors which were the original doors they would have had a self-closing device well this is my question you see just on that are you working on the basis that because these particular
02:26:07 because these particular flats are flats with entrance doors that were not replaced in the program but which were the original fire rated flat entrance doors you're
02:26:18 fire rated flat entrance doors you're assuming that they were fitted with a self-closing device or did you actually inspect each one to ensure that the self-closing device was present and working on each flat front door i would have
02:26:29 on each flat front door i would have checked
02:26:30 checked originally and made the assumption that as they were the original doors and fitted with them they all still had them and they all still worked
02:26:47 now can we then look at 2016. um do you remember that in july 2015 you were emailed about flat 45 of grenfell tower where there'd been an incident do you remember that
02:27:00 incident do you remember that no well i'll show you an email it's
02:27:03 cst402919
02:27:13 and if you go to page two is where we we start um there's a bit of a run-up to this uh there is an email
02:27:25 uh there is an email on the bottom part of your screen from glenn duggan of the metropolitan police to
02:27:30 to janice jones
02:27:33 and he says jan yesterday i visited 45 grenfell tower i examined the front door which appears to be a sure
02:27:41 be a sure door sg34 composite door fitted with a winkhouse hook lock multi-point locking system
02:27:48 system however i note a number of issues with the door set details of which are highlighted in the attached document a particular concern is the glazing and the locking mechanism the inner glazing appears to be pilkington georgian wired
02:27:59 appears to be pilkington georgian wired safety glass possibly toughened but i cannot tell whether the outer panel is laminated can you get confirmation of the glass specification depending on which i might need to add additional security to the glass
02:28:12 additional security to the glass according to gloria alba's sister there's a problem with the locking system which is causing the upper hook to catch on the lock housing i noticed that it was not sitting centrally within the lock i assume a new door closer will be fitted
02:28:24 door closer will be fitted to add security to the door my view would be to add a fireproof letter bag can you find out the answers to my query so i can finalize my specification and if you go to page one you can see
02:28:35 and if you go to page one you can see that adrian bowman forwards this to you uh on page one and then if you go uh to page one you we can see your full
02:28:47 to page one you we can see your full response uh and it says the first attachment this is 22nd of july 2015. adrian the first attachment is the master door information sheet as you can see the doors are police preferred specifications secured by
02:28:58 preferred specifications secured by design
02:29:01 from the photo you've attached this door will be code sg34 a self-closing 30 minute fire rated door with the glazing also 30 minute fire rated this door would have been signed off
02:29:11 off this door would have been signed off by lhc on installation please see the second attachment for the door type and the third attachment as an example of the independent inspector checking each installed door i do not have the document for 45
02:29:23 i do not have the document for 45 grandful tower this detachment is for some other flat doors in grenfell tower according to the photos and the police officer the door is now damaged do you want me to look at this flat entrance door next time i'm in the area
02:29:34 door next time i'm in the area i'm also concerned that the occupants have put additional locks on the door this was a fire-rated door it now might not be because the occupants have undertaken work on the door also who removed the self-closing device
02:29:46 also who removed the self-closing device the door is now not a compliant door as the self-closing device is missing additional features cannot just be added to this flat entrance door a fireproof letter bag any work must be undertaken by a competent contractor
02:29:58 undertaken by a competent contractor as this is a composite factory manufactured and assembled door set which comes as a complete unit i.e door and frame
02:30:07 and frame so you were aware by this point mr stokes
02:30:11 stokes that the front door to flat 45 was damaged and had a missing self-closer and also additional locks yes yes yes and in your view from what
02:30:22 yes yes yes and in your view from what we can see from this email it was no longer compliant correct yes now um moving forward in the chronology on
02:30:34 moving forward in the chronology on monday the 27th of july 2015 five days later
02:30:37 later we know that you visited the flat to inspect the door uh let's look at cst
02:30:44 50932 this is a letter of advice to janice ray on the 28th of july and you say flat flat 45 grenfell tower
02:30:57 flat flat 45 grenfell tower subject the flat entrance door dear janice i looked at this flat entrance door yesterday monday the 27th july the occupant allowed me to inspect this flat entrance door
02:31:06 door from both sides of the door please see the photograph of this flat entrance door below this is one of the certified fire rated doors fitted by master door as part of the flat entrance door
02:31:17 as part of the flat entrance door replacement program the glazing in the doors fan light area is georgian wired fire rated glazing on the interface when i inspected this door yesterday the door
02:31:27 door lock is slightly out of alignment it appears that when that when whoever attempted to force open this door that slight some slight damage has occurred i noted that the concealed self-closing device is missing from this door two additional
02:31:39 is missing from this door two additional bolts have been fitted to the rear of the door
02:31:41 the door and the inner part of the letterbox is missing please see the relevant photographs below there's no damage to the door's surface and no holes etc in the doors face stroke surface and you attach a
02:31:52 face stroke surface and you attach a photograph that's a page four of this uh document can we just look at that yes there it is and just could you just describe for the chairman and panel please what we're
02:32:04 chairman and panel please what we're looking at the concealed uh self-closing device right and then if we go back to the letter on page one last paragraph we can see your conclusion you say i believe that this door is still fully functional
02:32:15 functional as a fire rated door but adjustments should be made to the door so the lock aligns correctly and a new inner part of the letterbox should be fitted
02:32:24 fitted or the letterbox replaced the police officer's report indicates they recommended that a fire-rated letter bag is fitted on the interface of the door this could be fitted at the same time as
02:32:36 this could be fitted at the same time as or in replace of the existing letterbox i would recommend that the door manufacturers are consulted regarding the fitting of any items or of additional door furniture to this certified fire rated door
02:32:47 certified fire rated door this is in case any work undertaken on or to the door by non-qualified persons or additional features fixed to the door invalidates any fire rated certification of the door
02:32:58 of the door now you note here that the self-closing device was missing and we've seen the photograph if the door did not have a self-closing
02:33:09 if the door did not have a self-closing device why did you conclude that the door was a fully functional fire rated door is there any not anything else after this it says fix the the self-closing device
02:33:21 device well we can scroll down to page two i've read you i think all the letter actually uh look at page two to see uh what is not there it just ends
02:33:32 uh what is not there it just ends please feel free to contact me if you have require any further assistance you'll stay philly carl stakes and then you can see the first of the photographs underneath it so question again uh given that the
02:33:46 so question again uh given that the door was lacking a self-closing device why did you conclude that the door was a fully functional fire rated door
02:33:57 because the i'm going i i can't answer that question in as much as that i can answer the question as much as the door is not damaged but i would have had that conversation that the
02:34:08 had that conversation that the self-closure should have been refitted back that might have been a telephone call or i might have been told that the
02:34:14 that the self-closure was already being in process
02:34:17 process of being refitted back but it wasn't fully functional as a fire-rated door was it
02:34:23 was it but if i'd already been told that it was in hand to have a self-closer refitted to it
02:34:31 i can't answer the question what you're asking me but all i can say is i would have not have not said don't fit a self-closing device what did i have additional information
02:34:42 what did i have additional information that said that it was already in hand to repair the self-closing device but i haven't put that in the letter
02:34:51 i would not have left it the way it is well just looking at your words in the first sentence of your conclusion where you say this door is still fully
02:35:03 where you say this door is still fully functional as a fire rated door now at that time it didn't have a self-closer on it so it wasn't fully functional as a fire
02:35:15 so it wasn't fully functional as a fire rated door was it correct and therefore your advice is incorrect
02:35:26 is incorrect my advice in here is correct but i do not i looking back now from however many years ago i was there a self-closing i would not have
02:35:38 self-closing i would not have not said do not fit a self-closing device
02:35:42 device i note that concealed self-close eyes is missing on the door conclusion the door is still fully fully functional but i might have been told already that there is
02:35:52 there is in hand a repair to be the door to be fitted with a self-closing device but we don't see that qualification on the face
02:36:02 therefore on its face the advice is incorrect isn't it looking at that letter but without the additional information or context i can't
02:36:10 can't think back this long ago
02:36:14 let's look a bit later on in the year december 2015. can we go to tmo double zero eight five nine six 693 please page one this is an email
02:36:27 page one this is an email if we go down the screen to the bottom there from janice ray to siobhan rumble on the 17th of december 2015 and she
02:36:38 on the 17th of december 2015 and she says this
02:36:39 says this our fire risk assessor has raised his concern
02:36:42 concern that in conversation with a few of the tenants at grenfell tower they've advised that sheamus had disconnected the self-closers on their flat entrance door in at least one of these cases this was said to be due to the tenant perpetually
02:36:54 said to be due to the tenant perpetually locking himself out of his flat it is imperative that these fire doors are self-closing so i would be grateful if you could please impress this upon sheamus and insist
02:37:05 insist that he refrains from disconnecting and removing any other self-closing devices any queries please advise thanks janice
02:37:16 any queries please advise thanks janice and just to complete the run if you go to the top please of page one of this email string you'll see that
02:37:23 that siobhan rumble comes back to janice ray uh a few days later on the 21st of december 2015 and says told him now it looks from the email we've just
02:37:35 now it looks from the email we've just looked at from janice radio she born rumble
02:37:37 rumble that you as the fire risk assessor were the person who had raised the concern about sheamus disconnecting self-closing doors is that right correct yes so can we take it then that
02:37:50 correct yes so can we take it then that at this point in time or by this point in time
02:37:54 in time mid-december 2015 you were aware that seamus dunlee was disconnecting or removing self-closing devices for some of the grenfell tower tenants front doors
02:38:05 front doors that's what it looks like yes yes
02:38:09 and it's quite clear is that isn't it i think that janice ray
02:38:15 says that you were told about the disconnected self-cleansing devices during conversations that you had had with a few of the tenants in the building
02:38:21 building correct do you remember
02:38:26 how many people you spoke to no uh did you do you remember i don't imagine you remember who you spoke to so do you remember how many flats were
02:38:37 do you remember how many flats were affected roughly no did you take down any flat numbers it depends where the conversation is because i wouldn't this is not a time as an fra so i would have been there for
02:38:49 an fra so i would have been there for some other reason well that's another question why might you have been there i would only have gone there if i had been instructed to go there for some other reason
02:39:00 other reason do you remember what that was no nonetheless do you remember why you didn't take the flat numbers down given that a few of the tenants had told you that
02:39:09 you that seamus had disconnected their self-closing devices i can't answer that as an honest answer but if the conversation was um my flat entrance store has been
02:39:21 um my flat entrance store has been disconnected what's your flat name what's your number look i just i want to tell you that it's been disconnected as soon as i found out i
02:39:29 i informed janice ray immediately to get the situation resolved because you cannot not have the self-closing devices fitted no
02:39:37 fitted no i mean are you able to shed any light on the circumstances in which which gave rise to you alerting janice ray to
02:39:44 ray to the concern as she's expressed here well i'm looking at the date here um just before christmas in 2015. was i there for some other reason that janice had asked me to go there for
02:39:55 had asked me to go there for or tmo had asked me to go there for and this was just a side product that a side issue that was raised to me at the time and i dealt with it immediately that i knew about it
02:40:06 with it immediately that i knew about it now seamus dunley has provided a witness statement to the police let's look at that it is met3019959 i'll just show you the first page of it
02:40:17 i'll just show you the first page of it just go back to page one so that we can see what
02:40:19 see what we're looking at
02:40:23 uh and there it is it's a statement he gave to the police on the 6th of july 2018 and can we go to page six third paragraph
02:40:39 and on that page in the third paragraph he says just after the warranty ran out the doors started going wrong they had internal door closers that were pulling out
02:40:48 out from the door because they had tiny little screws holding them in and they had a massive fat spring inside the door had a hole drilled into it had an enclosed spring that went into the door
02:40:58 door and would have a chain which attached to the frame the springs were quite big and the screws that were holding them in were
02:41:04 were too small some of the screws were pulling out of the door and some were pulling out of the frame if it's coming out of the frame or the door the chain goes round you can't shut the door you can't reattach it because of the fixings
02:41:15 reattach it because of the fixings so i would have no alternative but to remove it i think i did this to about ten doors
02:41:21 ten doors one of the door closes that i took off i want to i'll come on to that in a moment just just pausing there just pausing there did you
02:41:32 just pausing there did you did you ever meet sheamus donnelly i must have done right before december 2015 did he ever tell you about these problems with these self-closing devices
02:41:43 self-closing devices do you remember no yeah i wouldn't have thought he would have told me right
02:41:49 so your information about these self-closures came not from him you think possibly but from the tenants yes well i think that's what it says in my letter from the tenants were you aware that as
02:42:00 from the tenants were you aware that as shame as don lee has said here in his statement
02:42:02 statement he thinks he removes the self-closing devices from about 10 flat doors only from my letter to janice ray which is
02:42:10 is the tenants that told me i would not know the numbers do you know if siobhan rumble did actually tell sheamus dunley to stop disconnecting or removing them i would have no idea do you know what steps janice ray or anybody else at the
02:42:22 steps janice ray or anybody else at the tmo
02:42:23 tmo did take or was going to take to reinstate the self-closing devices on the doors where sheamus donnelly had removed them no but i made it quite plain in my letter that they must
02:42:32 they must have them unfitted so i would like to think that they would have undertaken their repairs having been told what you were told by the tenants as reflected in janice ray's email to siobhan rumble did you follow up on that
02:42:44 siobhan rumble did you follow up on that to make sure that the um the cure the remedy had taken place
02:42:50 place i would have taken it on if janice's word that
02:42:53 word that that had been uh rectified and on my next fra i would have gone around the building and checked doors right because the the advice to shame is done lee seems to have been
02:43:05 have been uh that he should stop removing them did you ever get any information that not that they had also been repaired rectified no you never thought no one told you that
02:43:17 no one told you that right
02:43:20 now can we then look at the 2016 fra 26th of april 2016
02:43:39 uh and go to cst403161 please
02:43:47 and this is page eight in there can we see
02:43:51 see uh this is the fra um and under any other relevant information on this premises towards the top of your screen
02:44:02 top of your screen it says uh the tmo tenanted flats in this building i'm sorry mr um mr miller i think we've got the wrong
02:44:12 uh right is it in fact appears twice well yes you want the first one the first one
02:44:17 first one it says the tm alternative flats in this building have been fitted with the new flat entrance door sets as part of a larger door replacement program undertaken by the tmo these new door sets for the tenanted
02:44:29 these new door sets for the tenanted flats have 30 minutes certified fire-rated self-closing doors which meet the requirements for the building regulations that's the same information that you had previously included within section 12 of
02:44:40 previously included within section 12 of your
02:44:41 your 2012 and 2014 fras for grenfell tower isn't it
02:44:46 isn't it it looks similar yes yes
02:44:50 do you know why that information was in a separate or additional section no it might have been that because more and more sorry what date was this this is
02:45:01 more sorry what date was this this is april 2016. so as more um i i've taken it out of section 12 put it into this because it's now um applicable to virtually all
02:45:14 um applicable to virtually all the buildings that had the door replacement program so it was in the same place in all of them this information was now four or five years old wasn't it yes why were you still describing the
02:45:26 yes why were you still describing the doors as new new flat entrance stores rather than the old original ones well they weren't new were they they were now four or five years old
02:45:37 were now four or five years old i live near oxford new college in oxford was built in 16 well between something sorry
02:45:47 whatever um the fact is that those flat entrance doors had were not newly refitted not newly fitted but had been in place uh for some years and the importance of
02:45:58 for some years and the importance of that
02:45:59 that it's not a trivial point mr stakes the reason i'm asking you that is because this is essentially cut and pasted from earlier fras but the doors have got older and older and therefore more and more liable um to
02:46:10 and therefore more and more liable um to um damage
02:46:11 um damage or replacement of the door closers but it says the tenanted flats in this building have been fitted with new so they were new to those flats and they were new doors
02:46:23 were new doors yeah to make a difference between the old doors which were the original doors now if we go to page 20
02:46:33 we can see in section 12 it starts on page 19 we don't need to go back to it uh you've ticked uh yes in both the box about dwelling entrance doors uh and the box about self-closing
02:46:45 uh and the box about self-closing devices haven't you we've which uh question please uh in the middle
02:46:50 middle of the column do the dwelling entrance doors appear to be fire rated tick yes and then two below that where appropriate are any fire doors fitted with self-closing devices and do these function correctly tick correct yes and if we turn to page 21
02:47:05 correct yes and if we turn to page 21 means of escape
02:47:08 third paragraph down [Music]
02:47:12 [Music] it says uh the the tenanted apartments do you see that it's just five lines down yes the tenant and apartments within this building had a few years ago their flat entrance
02:47:23 had a few years ago their flat entrance doors replaced with new door sets these door sets are self-closing 30-minute certified fire rated doors which meet the requirements of the building regulations if there's glazing in the new doors is
02:47:34 if there's glazing in the new doors is fire rated the letterbox on these new doors is fire rated and cold smoke seals are fitted as standard as a level threshold for compliance with part m of the building regulations a key is not needed to open these new
02:47:45 a key is not needed to open these new flat entrance doors from the internal face of the door again complying with building regulation requirements information on these new doors which have also which also have acoustic safety and security properties past 23
02:47:56 safety and security properties past 23 and 24
02:47:56 and 24 as well as fire along with the pad certification documentation is held at the hub in the tmo offices now here you have referred to them as being replaced a few years ago but
02:48:07 being replaced a few years ago but otherwise am i right in thinking that this paragraph is identical um or substantially similar at least to the ones we've seen before in earlier fras correct and again there's no suggestion here of individual sample
02:48:19 suggestion here of individual sample checks that you've done on any of the flats is there no no do you recall whether on your visit for the april 2016 fra you managed to get access to any flats to look at any self-closers or any other aspect of the
02:48:31 self-closers or any other aspect of the door
02:48:33 door i'm going to say i would have done because it was standard that i would have tried at least and got access to a few right there is the newer i believe the standard required
02:48:44 required or the standards of the time this was written you didn't have to note it down i believe the new pas 79 actually does say you should note down which doors and how many
02:48:55 down which doors and how many now at this time this is april 2016. it's only a few months after the december 2015 exchange that you've had about seamus dunley removing some of the door closers in
02:49:08 removing some of the door closers in grenfell tower did you make any effort at this point when preparing this fra to discover which flats had had their door closes removed by sheamus dunley to make sure that they had new door
02:49:19 to make sure that they had new door closes on them not individual flights but i would would have asked the question because it would have been a question that would have come up well we've seen nothing in this fra
02:49:30 we've seen nothing in this fra about that correct why is that
02:49:35 it's not written down well i know it's not written down but that's why i'm asking why is it not written down when i say it let me be clearer why have you not recorded the fact in this fra that
02:49:49 the fact in this fra that a number of self-closing devices on flat front doors in grenfell tower had been
02:49:56 had been removed by the tmo
02:50:00 i can't answer that question as i walked around the building i found them that were missing it's a snapshot my snapshot in time of what i
02:50:09 what i found on the day why did you not go around the building trying so far as you could to to check the flats
02:50:18 the flats which had self-closing devices which seamus donnelly had removed i wouldn't know which flats they were well
02:50:26 well why did you not make all attempts to find out which they were by asking the tmo
02:50:30 tmo that i reported back to the tmo and i as far as i was concerned that it was an
02:50:38 was an internal house pro something for the tmo to fix there on in with their maintenance department unless i was given information to the country i would expect that work
02:50:50 to the country i would expect that work to have been undertaken so you worked on the assumption but you were on notice weren't you that there were a number of flat frontals which had had the self-closing devices
02:51:00 devices removed by the tmo's own operative given that you're on notice of that
02:51:07 that why didn't you take the opportunity only a few months later to check to make sure so far as you could
02:51:14 could that those self-closing devices had been had been replaced but if i asked the question i would have that was
02:51:21 that was what i was doing have they been replaced if i asked the question i am taking it on good advice the answer i'm giving back we see no record of you writing to janice ray or siobhan rumble
02:51:33 siobhan rumble or anybody at the tmo saying i was concerned that there had been a number of self-closing devices removed can you please now assure me that that
02:51:44 can you please now assure me that that they have all now been replaced we've seen no record of that i recorded that i had concerns when i found out they've been removed i then passed the issue back to the tmo
02:51:56 i then passed the issue back to the tmo to resolve that situation and you just assumed without checking that they'd resolved it is that right it's the same as in my significant findings if there was a door closer missing on a staircase and
02:52:09 door closer missing on a staircase and the next
02:52:10 the next four years later when i went it was repaired i assumed that it's fixed in the meantime but this isn't four years this is three months
02:52:19 months four months at best okay the same applies
02:52:23 applies right so you just left it to them and unless you were told otherwise you had assumed everything had been fixed yes
02:52:33 was that not a dangerous assumption to proceed on for a fire risk assessor who is on notice that the absence of these absolutely critical pieces of equipment are missing
02:52:45 it is an assumption that i have made it's a dangerous assumptions what i'm putting to you it's no more dangerous than i check it
02:52:56 it's no more dangerous than i check it two days after i check it it fails i've got to rely on the tmo when i provide them with information that they act on that information
02:53:11 act on that information now if we go to
02:53:18 the same set of texts below oh it's about three-fifths of the way
02:53:26 way down your screen it says the original flat entrance doors in this building do you see
02:53:31 you see yes if we can scroll just a little bit up we can see more of the text it says the original flat entrance doors in this building are flat numbers 56 61 86 92 105 etc
02:53:42 flat numbers 56 61 86 92 105 etc uh running down to 206. you see that yes it was there it is it's in the middle of your screen now firmly and it goes on to say
02:53:53 screen now firmly and it goes on to say it's the tmos policy that if flats are refurbished or when new tenants move into a flat then the self-closing device fitted to the flat entrance door is is accessed if the self-closing device
02:54:05 is accessed if the self-closing device does not close the door fully or one is not fitted to the door then a new appropriate self-cleansing device is fitted some of the original flat entrance doors have more than one lock fitted to them
02:54:17 have more than one lock fitted to them it's assumed that the occupants of these flats can exit the flat in an emergency without any undue delay can you explain if the if the what do you mean if
02:54:28 you mean if the policy if flats are refurbished or when new tenants move into a flat then the self-closing device is accessed what do you mean by that
02:54:39 it is part of the refurbishment of the flat that they make certain that the flat end the self-closing invite works correctly on the door right probably access is probably the wrong word to use but
02:54:51 wrong word to use but in here the policy refurbished or new tenants moved in it means someone actually goes and checks the flat entrance door self-closing the device works correctly obviously did you mean assessed rather
02:55:03 obviously did you mean assessed rather than the test yes oh i see right it's apologies there's a typo that's all right now that's just clear now did that apply did that policy applied do you think to the 16
02:55:14 the 16 original flat entrance doors which you've listed in that paragraph um
02:55:23 i'm going to say no because those 16 elite holder doors so your understanding of the policy that you've set out there
02:55:34 you've set out there didn't apply to leaseholders so the leasehop the tmo's policy is they refurbished so that would only be under tentative control new tenants would move in
02:55:46 control new tenants would move in tenanted control if they're leaseholders they can't change their door without going to the tmo anyway and building regulations because it's a building regulations requirement uh right are you saying here that these
02:55:59 uh right are you saying here that these 16 flats
02:56:01 16 flats um haven't been assessed to make sure that they've got working door closers
02:56:07 these are the original ones and i would have checked them initially or a sample initially and my assumption is they still should have them
02:56:17 have them in working order but because they're leaseholders it's hard for the tmo to actually access them it's what i'm trying to do is work out the connection between the first sentence which lists these 16 flats
02:56:29 sentence which lists these 16 flats and the the second sentence which refers to the tma policy uh which seems to apply to tenants no sorry it's a full stop that could have been on the next line i think
02:56:41 been on the next line i think uh and the original flat entrance stores are all leaseholders but what are we supposed to read into that about whether or not they do have self-closing devices i think it's uh else where they document
02:56:53 i think it's uh else where they document the um
02:56:53 the um [Music]
02:56:55 [Music] the reason i think it's just a statement of fact that was a sentence with those these are the original doors okay um when you talk of the policy the tma's
02:57:06 when you talk of the policy the tma's policy
02:57:07 policy that if flats are refurbished or when new tenants move into a flat then the self-closing device fitted to the flat engine store is assessed are you referring to a written policy
02:57:17 policy i over the time yes that was the written policy that was going through at that time uh it was going through at that time had it been formalized and finalized i can't say
02:57:29 formalized and finalized i can't say internally whether it being finalized that's the information i was given that the policy was to be adopted or was being adopted right you say that was the information i was given were you given a document
02:57:41 given were you given a document i think we would this was discussed on more than one occasion on how was the best way to um i see access doors refer um make certain
02:57:52 i see access doors refer um make certain self-closers were there do inspections of doors
02:57:55 of doors what was the program etc etc can you explain why this policy only makes its first appearance in this
02:58:02 in this fra 26th of april uh because this is 16. this was ongoing so this policy would have been new right i was going to say it's something that's recently been on agreed or at least understood by you is that is that
02:58:14 least understood by you is that is that right correct uh was it something on which you had provided advice to janice ray i'm going to say yes you're going to say yes do you remember or not yes i mean she would have asked
02:58:25 or not yes i mean she would have asked me i would have provided some information right do you remember whether the lfb had any input into that policy from your for the best of your recollection
02:58:36 of your recollection i'm going to say yes because i know it was an agenda item on her meetings with the lfb on more than one occasion and also it was a um
02:58:47 and also it was a um a meeting was had with the lfb uh including legal from rbkc tmo about leaseholder doors etc etc and self-closures on doors
02:58:58 and self-closures on doors mr chairman it's one o'clock i'm mid topic really but we're going to go to a different
02:59:01 different sounds of the topic might take a little while to complete is that right well i think that yes we can we go to another document but possibly we should break it yes right mr stakes we're going to break
02:59:12 yes right mr stakes we're going to break at that point so we can all get some lunch we'll resume please at two o'clock and again i have to ask you not to talk to anyone about your evidence or anything
02:59:21 anything relating to it over the break all right okay so thank you very much we'd like to give the usher please
02:59:39 thank you two o'clock please