Cross-examination of fire risk assessor Carl Stokes on his fire risk assessments for Grenfell Tower, focusing on disabled residents, personal emergency evacuation plans, and firefighting lifts
00:00:32 we have tapes here i think i got you in one slide but not the other
00:00:38 the other so you if you spoke again i can only hear one side well you that's better sorry it's probably my fault but anyway it's mr millet you need to hear well yes mr miller when you're ready
00:00:49 well yes mr miller when you're ready thank you very much mr chairman mr sex can you hear me yes thank you we were in the middle i think of talking about uh evacuation plans can we look then back
00:01:00 back at your uh letter of the 27th of september 2010 about the meeting that you'd had with janice ray on the 24th of september 2010 cst cst403061 please
00:01:23 and there's the letter and if you go to page three please and look at the second heading on that page you can see there's the heading
00:01:35 personal emergency evacuation plans or peeps
00:01:38 peeps and it says the suite of personal emergency evacuation plans peeps documents you've showed me are the ones used as best practice in the hm government guidance documents for risk assessment
00:01:49 for risk assessment so by using these documents you are following the guidance in the government risk assessment guides and therefore best practice you explain that the residence newsletter carries articles asking any resident to contact tmo if
00:02:00 asking any resident to contact tmo if they are experiencing any mobility or sensory problems tmo have recently introduced a comprehensive program to gather information about residents including any disabilities
00:02:12 including any disabilities and their physical ability and mobility to respond to any emergency situations this information will be imputed i think it was inputted onto a tp tracker system and held
00:02:24 onto a tp tracker system and held centrally
00:02:25 centrally the additional information will be used to assess if residents may require additional devices to provide them with early warning of smoke stroke fire in their home and or development of a personal emergency
00:02:37 personal emergency evacuation plan peeps do you recall having that discussion with janice ray on the 24th of september 2010 yes all right i've written this document
00:02:51 yes all right i've written this document so yes i understand did you have a discussion such as that as any other time after the 24th of september 2010
00:03:02 september 2010 it doesn't spring to mind if it was a conversation but it would have been an ongoing
00:03:10 ongoing now you say in the letter that janice ray showed you a suite of peeps documents
00:03:15 documents can you explain what peeps documents she showed you it would be the hm government guide which is a
00:03:23 pinky colored
00:03:27 booklet and then there is a suite of documents
00:03:30 documents tick box questions to ask i see so your your reference to suite of uh of documents uh was not a tier ones that had already been filled
00:03:42 a tier ones that had already been filled out by the tmo and used in practice it was just the template it's the templates in those documents booklet right you go on to say uh in the in the third line second sentence
00:03:53 in the in the third line second sentence that by using these documents you are following the guidance in the government risk assessment guides and therefore best practice and is that's the guide you're referring to is it the pinky guide um i'm just trying to identify what that
00:04:05 um i'm just trying to identify what that is was it the sleeping guide no so it's there's a suite of documents for risk assessment all the different building types then
00:04:16 all the different building types then there was a another document brought out specifically disabilities right let's let's see if we can identify rather than guessing can we can we look please together at hom
00:04:27 can we look please together at hom five zeros five five zero
00:04:35 this is um let me i'm getting a word in my ear that i i've given that that is
00:04:46 that i i've given that that is um there's a better reference rather than the wrong reference can i try another one i n q i n q 0 0 0 one four seven three two
00:04:59 i n q zero zero zero one four seven three two i wrote it down
00:05:14 right that is the color i think you were identifying earlier yes is that yeah it's called fire safety risk assessment endorsed by the disability rights
00:05:25 endorsed by the disability rights commission is that the document you were shown
00:05:26 shown yes were you showing any other document my memory i can't remember but this would be the document i would refer to i see
00:05:43 were you told that the tmo would be looking to you to produce peeps in uh accordance with this document if i
00:05:54 uh accordance with this document if i was asked yes you say if i was asked what was the conversation did janice raider say to you if i ask you you must produce a peep in accordance with this document or did you
00:06:06 accordance with this document or did you say to you um uh you must produce a peep for whichever people i identify how did the conversation go i can't remember per se but it would have been along the lines of
00:06:18 have been along the lines of could you undertake a peep for me if i require you to right and your understanding was was it that she would identify the specific resident in the specific building in respect of which you would then apply
00:06:29 in respect of which you would then apply this document yes i see can we then go back to the letter please um cst403061 page three
00:06:40 please um cst403061 page three in the peeps section i've read it to you before but i'll get back to it where you say that you were told that the resident's newsletter would carry articles asking any resident to contact the tmo if they are experiencing any
00:06:52 the tmo if they are experiencing any mobility or sensory problems that was my understanding yes did you ever check that information for yourself no why is that what but did i check that there was
00:07:02 there was any newsletters with that information in well you did you ever check for yourself that the tmo uh was providing or publishing articles to
00:07:13 was providing or publishing articles to its residents in its stock asking any resident to contact the tmo if they were experiencing any mobility or sensory problems no i never checked up on whether they undertook what they were saying why is
00:07:24 undertook what they were saying why is that
00:07:26 that because they would provide me with the information i'm the risk assessor not the person who would be asking coordinating their um
00:07:37 coordinating their um information gathering was it not part of your job to make sure that your client the tmo or bkc it matters not which for this purpose uh was managing their fire safety in
00:07:49 uh was managing their fire safety in such a way as to impart information to residents that if a resident needed specific assistance uh because of mobility or sensory problems that they had that they should contact the tmo
00:08:02 that they should contact the tmo if i was told that that was in the document i would believe that it was in the document i don't cannot ever remember
00:08:09 remember going through every one of their documents or link magazines to check whether that item or article was in there was it your opinion at the time or understanding at the time
00:08:18 the time that that approach was consistent with best practice in accordance with that government guidance document i'm going to say yes because i wouldn't know any other way of them collect
00:08:30 know any other way of them collect collecting that information now in the second
00:08:34 second part i've read you already halfway down that
00:08:37 that chat that text it says tmo have recently introduced a comprehensive program to gathering information about residents including any disabilities and their physical ability and mobility to respond to any emergency situations
00:08:50 to respond to any emergency situations what was that comprehensive program that ms ray told you about it would be information i was given by her this is what the word it would have been this is what we're doing what was the what was
00:09:01 what we're doing what was the what was your understanding about what that comprehensive program was or entailed
00:09:07 over the years i've understood it to mean that if information was given to the tmo by a resident or if the tmo
00:09:18 by a resident or if the tmo because of residents asking for other items or equipment or having problems because they couldn't use lifts or staircases that information would then be collated and
00:09:30 information would then be collated and given to me if required because it affected their mobility i'm just trying to get to the bottom of what you understood by the comprehensive program you were told the tmo had recently introduced a computer system software system as far
00:09:42 a computer system software system as far as i was aware right and what did you understand that the tmo was doing by way of gathering information about residents including any disabilities my understanding was that they had
00:09:54 my understanding was that they had information that was coming in from residents and they were going on to a
00:09:59 a central point where it could be accessed by people who had authorization to access that information i see so your understanding was that this comprehensive program to gathering information
00:10:10 information was really a repository of information that residents volunteered to the tma rather than was was gathered from the residence by the tma
00:10:20 tma it could be both i suppose and also from um
00:10:23 um what was your sorry you say it could be both i suppose what did you understand both because their employees as they walked around the buildings the caretakers would be their ears and eyes to gather that information as well so
00:10:35 to gather that information as well so there was different routes for that to come back to the tmo i was just the recipient or would have been the recipient of the information once they
00:10:44 once they had collated it and had that information and i was
00:10:47 and i was asked to undertake a peep or include it in the risk assessment if required and you say in the last line of that paragraph the information would be
00:10:57 would be inputted on a tp tracker system and held centrally did you ever see or check the tp tracker no i would not have access to that how often did you understand that that information would be collected
00:11:09 that that information would be collected and put onto the tp tracker i have no idea
00:11:12 idea no did you not ask no did you not ask what the program entailed in terms of regularity of collection well i would assume it was ongoing right but why you made a lot of assumptions why did you not want to get
00:11:24 assumptions why did you not want to get to the bottom of precisely what it was that janissary was doing by way of getting the information from residents and putting it into the system regularity who they were approaching how they were going about it
00:11:37 it would be beyond what i would expect a fire risk assessor to do
00:11:45 given what we've seen in pas 79 yes was that that that was the case was it even after 2012 yes i mean in past 79 i believe
00:11:57 yes i mean in past 79 i believe 2012 there isn't even a dedicated section for disa disabled and you uh if you look a little bit lower down the paragraph that we're still looking at it says the additional information will be used
00:12:08 additional information will be used to assess if residents may require additional devices to provide them with early warning of smoke stroke fire in their home and or development of a personal emergency evacuation plan did you understand what who did you
00:12:19 did you understand what who did you understand would would carry out that assessment occupational health
00:12:27 inspirational health isn't a who it's a night it's who whoever they employed to undertake so can i go back a stage there yes please
00:12:38 please so there was more than once um one was to provide standalone sprinkler systems for heavy
00:12:50 standalone sprinkler systems for heavy smokers
00:12:52 smokers which was run by lfb and i know that the tmo then
00:12:56 tmo then [Music]
00:12:58 [Music] put in a bid for money for these systems they had systems in place where if deaf people they could have flashing beacons installed in houses or flats so these syst i knew there was
00:13:10 or flats so these syst i knew there was the
00:13:13 existence of these items of equipment systems and someone was actually looking at all this and more than once janice actually spoke to me
00:13:23 to me and said what do you think of this device or
00:13:27 device or can this be used by this sort of person so i knew this was ongoing yes who was it who would assess whether a
00:13:38 who was it who would assess whether a particular resident might need a peep tmo to start with and i know if one was required and i had undertaken a few for the tmo i would been but ask could i undertake this one
00:13:52 been but ask could i undertake this one so the tmo would identify who would need a peep and then who would carry out the peep who would actually develop it using the word in the letter i would if i was asked to do so right i see
00:14:02 see um apart from what you were told in this meeting did you ever see this um system so to speak in action no between your meeting on the 24th of september 2010
00:14:14 24th of september 2010 and the fire at grenfell tower on the 14th of june 2017 did you ever seek any further information from janice ray or anybody else at the tmo about how
00:14:26 or anybody else at the tmo about how the tmo would carry out its obligations in respect of gathering information on vulnerable residents no it was my assessment it was ongoing they would inform me if there was any issues and i would then
00:14:39 if there was any issues and i would then include them in the fra right were you ever asked for advice about how the tma should carry out their obligations on this particular subject no
00:14:52 now as i think we've established already the information that you've set out in your letter here was information that you obtained from janice ray before the commencement of your medium
00:15:04 before the commencement of your medium risk fra program yes because you started that in the october of 2010 didn't you following months yes um
00:15:15 following months yes um is it right that that information would then be applied generally to all of your fire risk assessments yes that's what this letter was about to actually get some baselines to include items all the items
00:15:28 include items all the items on the page one in that list i think it's right that at this point uh namely september 2010 grenfell tower was not considered specifically because it wasn't part of
00:15:39 specifically because it wasn't part of the medium risk program was it it was a high-risk building that would be correct but can we please have
00:15:46 have up on the screen your fra for grenfell tower of the 29th of december 2010 which is uh the first that you did for grenfell tower once you had become
00:15:57 grenfell tower once you had become contracted uh outside salvas okay and and look it's cst403181 and i'd like to go in init please to page 16.
00:16:15 and this is section 13 at the top of your screen top of the page disabled people
00:16:20 people it is considered and always a question it is considered that the building is provided with reasonable arrangements for means of escape for disabled people tick yes you see that and then the text in the box says this
00:16:32 in the box says this at the time of the risk assessment there was no evidence of any resident within the premises who suffers from sensory impairment that would prevent them from hearing a shouted warning of fire tmo have recently introduced a
00:16:44 of fire tmo have recently introduced a comprehensive program to gathering information about tenants including any disabilities and their physical ability and mobility to respond to any emergency situations this information will be imputed
00:16:55 this information will be imputed inputted on a tp tracker system and held centrally
00:16:59 centrally the additional information will be used to assess if residents may be may require additional devices to provide them with early warning of smokestroke fire in their homes and or development of a personal emergency evacuation plan
00:17:10 of a personal emergency evacuation plan peeps
00:17:11 peeps both the lifts in this building are evacuation stroke firefighting lifts and could be used in the evacuation of any disabled residents from the building now um do you agree that apart from the first sentence the information that
00:17:23 first sentence the information that you've included in that uh text is exactly the same as what you wrote in your letter of the 27th of september 2010 that we've just looked at correct
00:17:35 2010 that we've just looked at correct including the typo for inputted yes yes so it's a cut and paste yes even though that meeting as you've told us you were only considering medium risk fras or fr is
00:17:46 considering medium risk fras or fr is for medium risk buildings weren't you
00:17:50 but on that letter and there is also what
00:17:53 what went into the lifts which was for over 18 meters in height which would be high-rise buildings so that whole thing that letter would have been for all their buildings regardless of the risk level height
00:18:05 regardless of the risk level height level what do you mean well no no let's be clear medium risk was the program sorry when you was wrong definition of risk you were talking about yes
00:18:16 about yes so just to back up a little bit um even though the meeting of the 24th of september
00:18:21 september as captured in your letter of the 27th of september 2010 you were only looking at that stage at doing fras or medium risk buildings but i was looking the letter was
00:18:32 but i was looking the letter was for looking in future because the lifts would have been included would have been for high-rise buildings over 18 meters high so
00:18:41 high so i'm going to say the letter includes all buildings
00:18:44 buildings you're right so i follow so even though at that stage you were only discussing the medium risk program because that is the tender that you had just won
00:18:55 just won nonetheless you say that your letter in fact comprehended uh buildings in all levels of risk yes i see
00:19:01 see um did you have any discussion at that meeting about whether the information you were being given would be applied to uh all buildings regardless of risk
00:19:12 uh all buildings regardless of risk level
00:19:12 level yes why was that given that you'd only been you'd only tended for the medium risk program because i could be asked to go to any building any time that was the contract
00:19:23 building any time that was the contract the contract was i yes it was the medium risk but my understanding was if i was asked to go to any other building i could and this is 2010 and i was going to grenville
00:19:34 grenville well indeed um that was i thought we'd established before that that was before that you were essentially opened up for all buildings without a tender
00:19:45 all buildings without a tender i was future proof in the document if you want to call it that i was looking at everything that could be used in the future
00:19:51 future right now when you wrote what you wrote in this text here uh clearly it's not specific to grenfell tower is it no no uh and you hadn't checked the tp tracker had you
00:20:02 tracker had you no no or established if any residents had or should have a peep that would be information given to me you hadn't established if any residents
00:20:15 you hadn't established if any residents should have or had a peep correct i had not asked specifically but my understanding was ongoing they would tell me as the risk assessor if
00:20:25 if he had in the building had a peep when you say
00:20:28 you say at the time of the risk assessment as you do there there was no evidence of any resident within the premises who suffers from sensory impairment uh when you say there was no evidence
00:20:43 uh when you say there was no evidence what evidence had you looked for was given to me no what evidence had you looked for none was i hadn't looked for it none was given to i asked the question there to give to me not for me to
00:20:56 there to give to me not for me to interrogate this why didn't you write at the time of the risk assessment i have not been instructed that there was any resident
00:21:07 was any resident i don't know that was the uh words that were
00:21:10 were written at the time between myself and janice right maybe a lawyer's distinction some might think it is but do you realize that there was a distinction between stating that you had not been
00:21:21 that you had not been told something on the one hand and stating that there was no evidence of it on the other if there is a distinction it's it eluded you yes right um so really
00:21:35 um so really uh what you were saying in the first sentence was an assumption i was given no evidence i was given no documentation no evidence to say there was anyone in the building indeed and therefore you assumed
00:21:46 assumed that there was nobody who needed a peep yes yes
00:21:50 yes yes um now why did you focus only on people who suffered from sensory impairments that would prevent them from hearing a shouted
00:22:01 prevent them from hearing a shouted warning of fire in other words someone with a hearing impairment why not other disabilities such as mobility or visual impairment
00:22:12 such as mobility or visual impairment because in this particular case there's no communal fire alarm system so the only time that they would actually it would be a hearing problem if
00:22:19 if they were trying someone to knock on the door and someone was shouting fire well it's quite a narrow interpretation of disability isn't it
00:22:29 this here is 2010 but don't the later ones expand out
00:22:38 to include hearing and sensory loss well we'll look at the later ones in a moment so these evolved over time well we'll see how they evolved over time but just at this time
00:22:49 at this time why did you limit your um uh the scope of disability to those people with hearing impairment as opposed to visual
00:23:00 opposed to visual impairment mobility impairment mental health impairments
00:23:07 cannot give you a comprehensive answer but the
00:23:10 but the disability bomb ability mobility would be covered in the physical abilities covered in the next sentence tmo would inform me if they had anyone with their any of those problems
00:23:22 anyone with their any of those problems in the building did you ask i take it you didn't ask janice ray the question is there anybody in this building who is disabled i would expect them to tell me
00:23:38 when you say this information will be inputted on a tp tracker system can you explain why you didn't check the tp tracking system yourself to make sure that there truly was no evidence of any resident within the
00:23:49 evidence of any resident within the premises suffering from even from a sensory impairment to their ears
00:23:54 ears well i'm not an employee of the tmo i was a contractor i couldn't just walk into their building and say can i look at your systems but you could ask them well i would have asked and as part of an ongoing
00:24:06 ongoing um and expect they aren't them to tell me if they knew of anyone as well and i expected janice knew anyone she would tell me when you were preparing this you identify the system on which the information would be inputted
00:24:17 information would be inputted did you not ask janice ray janice please will you go to your tp tracker system and tell me from it who as at today is a disabled person for the purposes of my fra
00:24:28 the purposes of my fra did you ask her that question no why not because it would be the onus would be on the occupier or the responsible person to tell the risk
00:24:39 responsible person to tell the risk assessor
00:24:40 assessor that information is that not a very incurious
00:24:43 incurious approach for a fire risk assessor
00:24:48 no i don't think so so it was your approach
00:24:53 approach quite simply to assume that there were no disabled people in the building regardless of there being a system whereby you could find out or you could be told from it who they were until you were actually told
00:25:05 were until you were actually told expressly in terms but i believe that's the criteria that's used in past 79 where in the general needs block of flats it's very hard to find out if
00:25:16 flats it's very hard to find out if anyone
00:25:17 anyone has got disabilities it's the landlord or the
00:25:20 or the tech management organization or the managers
00:25:23 managers agents of the building would have that information not the risk assessor no indeed and uh the the risk of sensor isn't
00:25:30 isn't uh i take your point required necessarily to collect it at source but what would be the point of having a section in your fire risk assessment for disabled people unless unless you could
00:25:41 disabled people unless unless you could contemplate reasonably that you might be given it
00:25:44 given it well it was an ongoing i would be asked these questions and it was ongoing and well in my view i would expect that they would tell me if they had anyone
00:25:55 would tell me if they had anyone like that because it's the onus is on them as the responsible person to tell me the risk assessor of information they have on this topic and subject
00:26:05 subject do you remember any occasion over the the
00:26:08 the seven years six years you did fras seven years you did fras for grandfather being told of anybody who had any kind of disability in the building which might warrant you're referring to it in your in your fra or for who may peep should
00:26:21 in your fra or for who may peep should be prepared in grenfell yes i cannot remember for grenfell per se other buildings yes and as i alluded to earlier on
00:26:32 and as i alluded to earlier on after going around the building ah in november 16 after my last fra i saw a mobility scooter and then asked the question about mobility of that person in that
00:26:43 about mobility of that person in that flat yeah we'll come to that did it never strike you as as strange that in all those years you've never been given any information about anybody with any disability of any kind
00:26:55 any disability of any kind for whom reasonable arrangements for means of escape might be required for that building no because other buildings i was given that information so therefore i rely on the tmo to give me that information as they had for other
00:27:08 information as they had for other buildings
00:27:08 buildings i see um let's go to your fra completed on the 20th of november 2012 next
00:27:17 next cst403084 page 20 section 13 again and what we're going to do is we're going to trace the same section
00:27:23 section through the years so i'll take this quite quickly because we can same text
00:27:32 zero eight cst403084
00:27:38 page twenty
00:27:51 towards the bottom of your screen
00:27:55 same text in the box same tick yes same text in the box except after the words in the third line shouted warning on fire or allowed knocking on their entrance door
00:28:06 allowed knocking on their entrance door to warm them and then it goes on tmo have recently introduced a comprehensive program etc etc and the next sentence this information will be imputed meaning inputted on
00:28:18 imputed meaning inputted on tp tracker system etc say cut and paste it again except for the words or allowed knocking on their entrance door to warn them so it's not a full cut and paste it's been deed amended yeah why did you amended to add
00:28:30 amended yeah why did you amended to add that
00:28:32 because a lot knocking on it would be as the document evolved shouted warning or knocking on the door because obviously that was missing in the first one but what right well
00:28:44 but what right well i can understand the difference in one sense between a shouted warning of fire all loud knocking on the entrance door what was it that prompted you to add those words in this 2012 fra i can't give you a specific but if
00:28:57 fra i can't give you a specific but if it's in changed on this one it would have been changed on all of them because of
00:29:01 of a incident that's happened or information that came to light that i'd missed it on the first one right and then uh looking at the 2014 fra cst403157
00:29:14 fra cst403157 page 21.
00:29:25 this one is identical to the november 2012
00:29:28 2012 text isn't it
00:29:34 including the typo for inputted again they're slightly different again this has been
00:29:38 has been so the last paragraph there's more information added these are live documents where information is added as and when it comes to line yes i take your point on the last four lines
00:29:51 i take your point on the last four lines but the rest of it is essentially cut and paste isn't it from the 2012 because nothing has changed so therefore it is reasonable to accept that it is the same information yes yes
00:30:03 that it is the same information yes yes and you didn't even really reread it in order to cure the typographical error did you
00:30:10 to be honest if it hadn't come up as spell checker i wouldn't have looked at it now right well that may explain a number of uh felicities which are repeated but uh against the 2016 april 16 fra
00:30:24 against the 2016 april 16 fra cst403161 page 22.
00:30:35 same section again same question same tick
00:30:38 tick same text except uh that at the end of the first paragraph we can see a shouted warning of fire but no reference now to the loud knock
00:30:49 but no reference now to the loud knock the
00:30:50 the the sentence has now reverted back to the december 2010 version without the loud door knocking addition why was that i can't answer that don't know did you
00:31:01 i can't answer that don't know did you just cut and paste the wrong document do you think
00:31:03 you think no because i've had to cut and pasted it it'd been the previous one so no i can't answer that question but there is additional information now at the bottom
00:31:14 and if we go to the june 2016 version cst403145
00:31:27 that's the first page of page one if we can go please in that to page 23 bottom of page 23 we can see the start of section 13 disabled people and again the first
00:31:40 disabled people and again the first paragraph there and shouted warning of fire no loud door knock again why was that why had that reverted back to the 2010 version
00:31:49 version no answer sorry
00:31:52 but uh apart from that and apart well let's go to the next page can we just turn over as well to page 24. that's the same as the previous isn't it
00:32:04 that's the same as the previous isn't it yes i'm going to say so yeah in training the stuff yes so looking at all of those we've looked at everyone up to june 2016 in every fra you did for grenfell tower
00:32:16 every fra you did for grenfell tower after
00:32:17 after september 2010 and your discussion as reflected in your 27th of september 2010 letter
00:32:24 letter do you accept that you used the same information about residents in the tower that you'd used in your first fra in december 2010
00:32:35 december 2010 similar information yes you'd taken that information from the meeting that you'd had with janice ray in september 2010 yes
00:32:42 yes even though that meeting had nothing to do with grenfell tower specifically across their portfolio buildings it was a general meeting and you never updated that information
00:32:53 and you never updated that information by reference to any particular people or particular system as far as i'm aware the system was still the tracker system and no information had been given to me to
00:33:03 to warrant changing it because there was no information given to me that there was any disabled people in the building that would need a peep and it never struck you as strange that not once in the seven years you were doing fras in
00:33:14 the seven years you were doing fras in respect to grenfell tower janice ray had never identified anybody anybody who might need assistance in the event of a fire no because other buildings she had had identified other people in other
00:33:26 had identified other people in other buildings so why would this building be any different if there was someone she would have identified them to me
00:33:36 on the basis that you hadn't inquired about whether there were people with disabilities in the very broad sense uh that that pas 79 from august 2012 identifies or what basis
00:33:50 august 2012 identifies or what basis could you reasonably conclude that adequate provisions were in place to protect those people in the event of a fire
00:33:56 a fire power 7912 is a broad document that predominantly covers workplaces if you hadn't inquired about those people with disabilities in grenfell tower on
00:34:08 with disabilities in grenfell tower on what possible basis could you have concluded reasonably that there were adequate provisions in place to protect such people in the event of a fire because i did inquire because i wasn't given positive information to say there
00:34:20 given positive information to say there was
00:34:20 was anyone in there that did require with great respect mistakes that answer makes no sense
00:34:26 no sense because i did inquire because i wasn't given positive information that's not an inquiry is it information was given to me on other buildings
00:34:34 buildings where people required assistance or peeps to be undertaken or even broadening out to hoarding
00:34:45 i was under well nothing was given to me reference grenfell tower so therefore my assumption is that there was no one in grandfather that needed the extra assistance
00:34:56 assistance you you agreed with me earlier that you underpass 79 were required under the guidance to identify occupants especially at risk in the event of a
00:35:07 especially at risk in the event of a fire which included disabled occupants do you accept that you failed to carry out your obligations under the fire safety order 2005 and the guidance in past 79 in identifying such residents no i don't
00:35:20 in identifying such residents no i don't and that by relying merely on whether or not you were provided by miss ray you were not doing your job under that enactment or the guidance by relying on miss ray i was under the
00:35:33 by relying on miss ray i was under the past 79 is guidance i was relying on the tmo to provide me that information i asked the question at the beginning
00:35:42 beginning and the tmo if they had that information would have given it to me now let's just examine what you say about the tp tracker a little bit more closely because you deal with this in
00:35:53 closely because you deal with this in your second statement um can we go to that please cst 303
00:36:00 at paragraph 143 on page 38.
00:36:11 we've looked at this section of your second statement before uh and the paragraph 143 we've also looked at that before
00:36:22 looked at that before and you've identified the fact that uh you were told by ms ray that the tmo had a
00:36:29 a quotes comprehensive program to gather information about tenants and that's a quotation from the letter we've we've seen um does this mean that that you i'm so sorry i should go on um
00:36:42 that you i'm so sorry i should go on um you you say uh
00:36:46 uh in the bottom part of that paragraph uh whilst i was told by ms ray that the tp tracker system was in existence in relation to individual residents i was
00:36:57 relation to individual residents i was not asked
00:36:57 not asked to review or consider it does that tell us that
00:37:01 us that you never asked her to see it yes and just explain we covered this a moment ago but forgive me for going over it again why did you not uh
00:37:12 did you not uh review or consider the tp tracker just to see what it said on it because it would my view would be with outside the remit of the fire safety order or what i was asked to do is a risk assessor i
00:37:24 asked to do is a risk assessor i wouldn't ask to see the software system that was holding information on or how it was held on information on the dry riser as
00:37:36 held on information on the dry riser as long as i had the information available to me ie given to me i wouldn't
00:37:42 wouldn't want to see the software the same as i wouldn't want to see what was wrong with your software this morning and why it didn't work but you knew it contained relevant information about
00:37:53 information about occupants disabilities didn't you that's what i was told yes say why didn't you ask to see the tracker in order to look at that
00:38:04 the tracker in order to look at that information in order to see whether there was any evidence
00:38:08 evidence for the purposes of the particular building well if i asked if there was anyone in the building and it was relevant and i was told not given any information why would i then want to inspect
00:38:21 why would i then want to inspect something when janice ray as a person had told me there wasn't
00:38:26 wasn't if she didn't know but would it not have helped you in your risk assessment filling out the part you filling out you're filling out and knowing
00:38:35 knowing that there is a source of evidence just to ask her whether you can go to that source of evidence and see for yourself as an independent fire risk assessor
00:38:46 fire risk assessor what that source of evidence told you about the building for which you were doing a fire risk assessment but i would rely on them for to give me that information i wouldn't be one or privy to any medical information
00:38:59 one or privy to any medical information that was
00:38:59 that was on that system and would i would they want me to look at any medical information on that system if i was told that this person was in a wheelchair and
00:39:10 that this person was in a wheelchair and could i
00:39:10 could i assess by undertaking a peep i would go and do that it's not for me as the risk assessor to manage their system for them i i'm not suggesting that it's for you
00:39:22 i i'm not suggesting that it's for you to
00:39:23 to manage their system i i am suggesting to you
00:39:26 you that it was your responsibility to collect
00:39:30 collect data for the purposes of your fire risk assessor
00:39:33 assessor from the source whether by asking for it interpolated by janice ray or by taking it directly from the tp tracker to which you refer repeatedly
00:39:44 repeatedly and i would went to the person and asked is there any information or that was a given that i would be given the information if there was any to give to me so do you say you did ask her
00:39:55 her i was told there was nothing well at the beginning
00:39:58 beginning the letter they would tell me if there was any information to be given to me did you know that the subscription held by the tmo for the
00:40:09 the subscription held by the tmo for the tp
00:40:10 tp tracker was not renewed after it expired in september 2013. no no one told you that no is that does that explain why you continue to make reference to it in your fras in october 2014 april 2016 and
00:40:23 october 2014 april 2016 and june 2016. yes if i wasn't told it wasn't available i wouldn't have known not to take to take it out well i was going to ask you is that something that you would have expected to have been told
00:40:33 been told and if i would have been told that i said well what system have you got in place now to maintain um information on people in the building did janice ray never come back to you and say
00:40:43 and say the reference to tp tracker is now outdated we're no longer either taken out if i'd have known that now you say also in your second statement we can see it on the page if we just scroll up a little we can see the whole thing para 142 at the top
00:40:56 the whole thing para 142 at the top that you were not required to carry out any personal emergency evacuation plans peeps in relation to the tower as a matter of course but wood is specifically requested to do so in fact my records show that i only
00:41:08 so in fact my records show that i only carried out two peeps for the kc tmo in spring 2014 markland house and gilray house my understanding was that ms ray's team generally carried out peeps in respect
00:41:19 generally carried out peeps in respect to the tmo's housing stock
00:41:24 [Applause] so is it right that in the entire time that you were the fire risk assessor for the
00:41:33 the tmo and the whole of its stock you were only ever asked to carry out two peeps that's if i've put that down that's my records that's what i would have yes
00:41:43 apart from the two instances you identified were you given any other information about any other disabled person
00:41:54 about any other disabled person in occupation in any other building
00:41:59 general needs or sheltered housing general needs
00:42:06 the answer would be no no well unless it was
00:42:09 was relevant to what i needed to know so so help me with this leave aside sheltered housing is it your evidence that in the seven years you
00:42:20 evidence that in the seven years you were the first assessor for the tma stock you were only told of two instances of disabled occupants yes there must have been a there must have
00:42:32 there must have been a there must have come a time when you were struck by that no i wouldn't know what the state or the abilities of people within their buildings were well how many properties were there in the
00:42:44 how many properties were there in the tma stock
00:42:45 tma stock on average over the seven years you were its fire risk assessor
00:42:51 total buildings yes i've got no idea i would have a guess at 400 500. there's more than that almost 10 000 in fact is that bed that is that
00:43:02 000 in fact is that bed that is that swelling sorry we might need to distinguish between units and buildings all right leaving aside the figures because i can't give you a precise number i won't debate it with you did it not
00:43:13 won't debate it with you did it not did there not come a time when it occurred to you that it was very odd that janice ray had given you no information about any disabled person for the purposes of section 13 of your fire risk assessments
00:43:24 fire risk assessments other than the two instances we see at paragraph 142 of your second witness statement
00:43:29 statement no i would have um it would have been a general item we would have asked for it if we had meetings and it never came up the fire service would have looked at these documents and risk
00:43:41 have looked at these documents and risk assessments as well and they've never raised it
00:43:43 raised it and janice ray's never helped me or come to me with any information either nor anyone else in the tmr i had
00:43:55 nor anyone else in the tmr i had [Applause]
00:44:00 um you mentioned the mobility scooter i think twice in your evidence let's look at that i said i'd come back to it can we look please at cst 402175
00:44:20 this is a letter you wrote to janice ray on the 19th of october 2016. so this is after the last fra you did for grenfell tower before the fire in june 2017
00:44:34 before the fire in june 2017 and the subject is grenfell tower itself you see that and if you uh go please in this letter to page
00:44:40 to page 12
00:44:45 you can see that under item one under my comments
00:44:50 comments are the caretakers checks being undertaken and recorded additional items as a result of my visit are one there is a mobility scooter being parked and charged on the landing area outside flat
00:45:01 area outside flat nine and then there's a photograph of the scooter with a cable running through into the front door and it says underneath that in bold the charging of mobility scooters must
00:45:12 the charging of mobility scooters must not be undertaken in the common parts of building
00:45:15 building this practice must stop immediately flatline was on the third floor wasn't it correct a mobility scooter is a good indicator isn't it of a resident whose physical state may impair
00:45:26 resident whose physical state may impair their ability to respond to a fire yes yes did you consider whether the resident of flat 9 needed to be assessed for a peep i would probably yes
00:45:38 if that is so why did you not include in your letter a proposal for an assessment for a peep because this particular letter here was to do with going around the common parts of the
00:45:49 going around the common parts of the building
00:45:50 building before an audit by the fire service i would just i would have discussed that as a separate issue with ms ray did you i'm going to say yes because i definitely would have not walked away uh
00:46:02 definitely would have not walked away uh let this go without asking about a peep later
00:46:05 later well you say you wouldn't have done do you actually recall having a conversation with janice ray about the occupant of flat 9 being appropriate for repeat i'm going to say yes because
00:46:16 yes because i would not have left well the mobility scooter is a giveaway to say that they would have mobility problems my i'm going to say the questions i would have been along the lines of
00:46:27 would have been along the lines of who put a person with a mobility scooter on the third floor of a tower block how did they get it up here what's it doing being parked there well what's it doing being parked there i can understand that's obvious
00:46:39 understand that's obvious that what i'm what i'm really seeking to understand is is whether you really did have a discussion with janice ray about a peep
00:46:45 a peep having been alerted to the need for one i would have done yes because i wouldn't award when or wouldn't have gone back and not had a discussion with that there right i don't think i don't think you've touched on that in your witness
00:46:56 touched on that in your witness statement have you any of your witness statements or have you i've no idea i can't remember sorry no we will check um
00:47:06 did you you i think we're aware that nine new flats in grenfell tower had been created by the refurbishment on the lower floors yes yes were you aware that some of
00:47:17 yes yes were you aware that some of those flats had been expressly adapted for disabled residents
00:47:22 only because of the way the layout of the uh this internal smoke detectors in the flats yes right so do i take it from that you weren't actually
00:47:32 actually told this by janice ray you worked it out for yourself were you aware that residents had moved in by the time of the fire only when i walked around there and saw these i don't think all the flats were occupied right i was not told
00:47:45 flats were occupied right i was not told of
00:47:46 of occupancy people moving in were you aware that at least one resident in each of those flats had some degree of mobility impairment no you weren't would you have expected to have been told that yes yes by whom miss ray right
00:48:01 now i asked you earlier on if the information included in the 27th of september 2010 letter was meant to apply more generally to all of your fire risk assessments and broadly speaking your answer is yes i
00:48:12 broadly speaking your answer is yes i think yes yeah in respect of your fire risk assessment for other tmo properties do you agree that when it came to considering and recording disabled people in section 13 of your
00:48:24 disabled people in section 13 of your risk assessments you adopted the same approach as you did for the grenfell tower fire risk assessments as we've seen
00:48:29 seen yes yes uh let's just look at one or two of the others uh deemed by the tma to be high risk uh uh and and which were also high rise
00:48:40 uh uh and and which were also high rise buildings
00:48:41 buildings given your answer yes we can take this quite quickly first the adair tower fire risk assessment 28th of october 2010 uh 11. i don't think we've looked at this one before cst full zeros 4307
00:48:56 cst full zeros 4307 page 15.
00:49:10 uh disabled people bottom of the screen section 13 same question tick
00:49:20 and then the familiar words i think now at the time of the risk assessment there was no evidence of any resident within the premises who suffers from sensory impairment that would prevent them from hearing a shouted warning of fire no no now door knock there
00:49:34 no no now door knock there tmo have recently introduced a comprehensive program to gathering information about tenants etc and you can read what's in the box there and then over the page please to page 16 at the top of the page
00:49:46 page 16 at the top of the page additional information will be used to assess if the residents may require additional devices to provide them with early warning of smoke stroke fire in their home and or development of a personal emergency evacuation plan peeps and then lifts you refer to
00:50:00 peeps and then lifts you refer to [Applause] it's a straight cut and paste isn't it including the typo if we're imputed no it's not a straight cut and base because each building would be different because in some buildings
00:50:11 be different because in some buildings both
00:50:12 both lists would be other buildings maybe one only this is the same text though including
00:50:19 including the building's similar in design and layout yes so it's a straight cut and paste including the typographical error that you'd used in the grenfell tower risk assessment in uh in december 2010.
00:50:31 uh in december 2010. agreed yes gilray house is another one uh this time it's the next year
00:50:37 next year 19th november 2012. tmo.00854930 page 18.
00:50:50 section 13. again tm00854930
00:51:13 and you can see the data of that uh 19th of november yes 19th of november
00:51:24 19th of november yes 19th of november 2012.
00:51:26 2012. bottom of page 18 disabled people same question
00:51:29 question same tick same text in the first in the box and the bottom except that here and now we've got the loud knocking again
00:51:37 again which has come in and then if you turn to page 19 you see the same
00:51:44 the same text in the next two sentences as we've seen before and and in the next paragraph the same and then you've got something about the lifts
00:51:53 lifts you see that which is different which is different
00:51:57 different uh but leaving aside the lifts another straight cut and paste including the imputed well it's not a straight cut and pace is it because it is different because the lifts in this
00:52:08 is different because the lifts in this building are different and therefore it's been looked at and the information is similar because the building is similar the management information is
00:52:20 is similar the management information is similar
00:52:22 similar i have been given no it's cut and paste humor me it's cut and paste down to the word peeps in the middle of that box isn't it
00:52:30 isn't it because the information is the same yes yes all right now it's right in fact that you had written a peep for a residence of gilray house and you said in your second statement of paragraph 142 on the
00:52:42 second statement of paragraph 142 on the 18th of october 2010 hadn't you yes i i mean that's not a uh i don't know to ask you to guess this is
00:52:54 cst405610 please and this is one of the two peeps that you referred to in your second statement
00:53:00 statement can we can we just see that up on the screen
00:53:12 cst405610
00:53:16 uh there it is uh and uh it's dated 18th of october 2010 which i think is the first day you started under contract for the tma wasn't it
00:53:28 under contract for the tma wasn't it yeah if you say so yes yes and the address is gilray house and there's a description of the building
00:53:36 building present evacuation procedures for the building if you just go down the screen and then on to the next page you can see page two personal information what it is that the occupant suffers from quite a
00:53:48 that the occupant suffers from quite a lot of detail there i'm not going to read it out and then personal disability or vulnerability when the condition affects her physical sensory and other and there's
00:53:59 physical sensory and other and there's got there's a lot of detail about personal abilities has the evacuation procedure been explained to her in this case her mother yes can the person evacuate the dwelling without help
00:54:10 help and there's quite a lot of detail about about that and it goes on uh at some length and then on page three about the procedure with an attachment for a plan if required
00:54:21 an attachment for a plan if required communication of information at the bottom of page three and then on page four
00:54:27 page four change to your condition uh and then dates for review reasons for review compiler
00:54:34 compiler etc nice uh
00:54:40 when you came to do your fire risk assessment that we've been looking at for gilray house
00:54:47 house did you check to see if this resident for whom you had done a peep at two years previously uh was still in residence at gilray house
00:54:59 from the top of my head i can't answer that question because i can't remember right
00:55:08 what ought you have to have done given that there had been a resident with a peep
00:55:13 peep in that building included into the risk assessment indeed and we see nothing in the risk assessment about that person do we have they moved out well that is my
00:55:24 have they moved out well that is my question to you well i would have asked that question because this would have been this should have been reviewed a year later indeed and was it we see no documentary evidence that it was and see
00:55:35 documentary evidence that it was and see nothing in your witness statement that it was
00:55:37 it was what happened i can't comment hazelwood tower
00:55:42 tower 20th of february 2014 fra
00:55:47 three tmo100438 zero four please page
00:55:55 [Applause] twenty uh
00:56:10 uh page 20 please thank you bottom of the page disabled people
00:56:19 people same question same tick same comments in the box we've got the loud knocking adjunct there next page please page 21 tmo recently introduced etc
00:56:33 so down to the reference to lifts after the peeps
00:56:37 the peeps at the end of the sentence in the middle of the middle of the text down to that point straight cut and paste again yes yes yes
00:56:44 yes yes [Applause] uh markland house 21 january 2016 tm010047159 page 21.
00:57:03 tmo10047159 page 21.
00:57:11 top of the screen disabled people same question same tick down to peeps cut and paste yes slightly different the the bottom of
00:57:22 slightly different the the bottom of reference the lifts yes i know but down to cut down to peeps cut and paste yes yes yes
00:57:32 in the case of martin house though again as we've seen from your second witness statement you had compiled a peep for this building on the 8th of march 2014.
00:57:46 8th of march 2014. yes we don't need to go to it we can the reference is cst 3020896 but i think you accept that because you referred to it in your in your statement did you ask
00:57:58 in your in your statement did you ask janice ray or anybody else at the tmo if that resident was still living in the building
00:58:03 building in 2016
00:58:07 well i'm going to say i would have done because there would have been a review date on their peeps and therefore if i hadn't gone back i would have asked was the person still there well let's look at the peak then uh
00:58:18 look at the peak then uh we can look at it cst4 cst 3 cst3020896
00:58:27 let's look at the and see the review date in it the peep is dated the 8th of march 2014
00:58:39 and you can see that from the top right hand corner of your screen the review date is
00:58:48 on
00:58:53 pay at the same page but first of april 2015
00:58:56 2015 yes as you can see there yeah i would recommend a review date of 1st of april 2015.
00:59:03 2015. yes yes and the marklet house fra is dated 21st of january 2016 so that not long afterwards in nine months or so
00:59:17 do you remember whether there was a review
00:59:21 review i don't know you probably don't remember but if if there had been a review why not record the fact in the fra well did this did i not say in here sorry i i
00:59:33 did this did i not say in here sorry i i trying to do this from memory that the person should be moved at the bottom
00:59:51 well uh i'm not going to stand here and read it to check no i just think you'll be able to answer your questions but um so if they my recommendation would they would have been moved had
01:00:02 would they would have been moved had they been moved the time i undertook the fra
01:00:05 fra well i mean you only did two yes do you not
01:00:08 not you don't remember no if they had been moved
01:00:12 moved uh even if they had been moved uh why would that not be something that you would put in your in your fra
01:00:20 colon side question a trellic tower
01:00:27 well let me before i get to that do you actually recall asking janice ray whether or not that disabled person for whom you've done a peep was still resident in the building uh as
01:00:38 was still resident in the building uh as at
01:00:39 at the 21st of january 2016. top of my head no
01:00:43 no i can't remember um trellic tower 26th of april 2017. we've looked at this before tm0084255
01:01:05 page 24
01:01:22 again section 13 bottom of the page disabled people same question same tick uh same text as we see on page 24 this time uh you've got the loud door knock
01:01:33 door knock addition to the sentence we didn't have that in the last one and again it's the same paragraph if you go to page 25 you'll see the rest of it
01:01:45 down to the word peeps and a little excuses on the lifts but down to the word peeps and they and the bit about the lifts again straight cut and paste from all the other uh fras
01:01:56 other uh fras we've seen with the exception or not with the exception of the loud door knock addition to the first sentence yes and the lifts yes lifts are different in each one well lifts may or may not be different
01:02:07 well lifts may or may not be different on each one some of the lift parts are similar as well and we'll come back to lifts and due course it's right to say just looking at the survey we've done that you adopted the same approach
01:02:18 that you adopted the same approach across all of your fire risk assessments for the tma yes yes so in all of the fire risk assessments you did for the tma between 2010 and 2017 mr stakes you never identified and considered disabled
01:02:30 never identified and considered disabled residents or occupants especially at risk
01:02:33 risk except in those two cases where you happened to do peeps but even then they weren't reflected in the fras for whatever reason correct yes can we take it from that that you never yourself considered how
01:02:45 yourself considered how any of the disabled residents in the tma's properties for which you did fras would be protected and able to escape in the event of a fire i did undertake that yes and it took so
01:02:57 undertake that yes and it took so can you answer your question again please you never considered how any of the
01:03:01 the disabled residents in any of the tma properties for which you did fras would be able to escape in the event of a fire i considered it where i was told there was disabled residents
01:03:15 and those number two occasions yes that's it i was not told of any other disabled residents that and that would alter my opinion in a general needs block of
01:03:26 opinion in a general needs block of flats that there was someone in there with problems that would need additional assistance
01:03:36 mr would i would we be right in understanding this that you are saying that you were told by janice ray right at the outset that she would
01:03:46 she would tell you about the presence of any disabled
01:03:49 disabled residents correct that she told you about two disabled residents and those are the two we've seen you did peeps for correct and the fact that she had told
01:04:03 correct and the fact that she had told you of those two
01:04:07 led you to regard her failure to mention any others as being in effect a statement that there weren't any others correct right thank you
01:04:21 did she tell you that in terms of any time
01:04:25 time that was a given as well the understanding that i had uh it's the understanding you have my question was did she tell you that in terms that was what
01:04:35 what the letter at the beginning was she i would be told if there was anyone and that is broadly in compliance with past 79 which actually says
01:04:46 actually says it's in a general needs block of flats disabled people they is for the landlord to inform the risk assessor did you ever say to her
01:04:59 did you ever say to her that you would proceed on the basis that there were no disabled people in any of the buildings unless she specifically drew them to your attention uh on the occasion of your fire risk
01:05:10 uh on the occasion of your fire risk assessments or fra reviews my assumption was that she would tell me whether we had the conversation that i implied to her you must tell me
01:05:21 implied to her you must tell me i would not know about that oh i can't remember that conversation like that happening
01:05:26 happening it is implied on my part that she would tell me if she knew and she did on two occasions and therefore
01:05:34 therefore i assumed that is it now you say in that answer
01:05:38 answer your assumption was that she would tell me and you said it's implied on my part she would tell me i understood that that's your understanding yes what was there that you could see
01:05:50 what was there that you could see which would which led you at the time to be clear in your mind that she knew that you were proceeding on that understanding i was never questioned
01:06:01 understanding i was never questioned and all the information all the risk assessments go back and she never told me anything was wrong with the statement that was in there and where they were audited by the fire
01:06:12 and where they were audited by the fire brigade they never mentioned anything either
01:06:15 either so if they had any additional information
01:06:21 now can i then look at an email in december 2012
01:06:29 involving the lfb cst3016416
01:06:42 cst zeroes one six four one six
01:06:50 uh you can see that
01:06:54 uh at the second half of the screen janice ray is sending you an email on monday the 3rd of december 2012 for info received this late friday haven't even read it yet
01:07:06 haven't even read it yet jay and it's an email from nicholas cummery
01:07:10 cummery of london fire to her janice ray and claire wise at rbkc and others subject lfe sprinkler initiative you see that yes
01:07:23 that yes uh and summarizing it he comery had requested assistance from janice ray to identify vulnerable people in local authority premises who could benefit from automatic fire suppression systems
01:07:35 from automatic fire suppression systems in their building that's that's the gist of his his request
01:07:40 request uh and if we go up the screen so can i stop you there this is individual systems not building systems so this is portable sprinkler systems for smokers
01:07:52 portable sprinkler systems for smokers which i alluded to earlier on yes well i'm just taking it from what he said in the first and second sentences i'll read it to you if you like it says the uh in the first line apologies this should have
01:08:04 first line apologies this should have been sent out earlier the lfb will be writing
01:08:06 writing to all local authorities to outline the business case for the installation of automatic fire suppression system afs in premises housing those most at risk from fire and its effects
01:08:17 risk from fire and its effects and he talks about risk factors of the inhabitants and goes on to ask for assistance in identifying suitable vulnerable persons in local authority premises
01:08:29 in local authority premises and he's got a deadline now what i want to focus on is your response back to janice rail on the same day about half an hour later and you say thanks for this
01:08:40 hour later and you say thanks for this janice i would say i would say you have nobody that this refers to
01:08:45 refers to because if you had you would have undertaken a peeps for them and implemented any findings which would have included additional fire safety measures
01:08:53 measures if you identify anybody now questions like
01:08:57 like why were they not included in the buildings fra spring to mind a good response i believe would be thank you for this information if we find anyone in future we will let you know
01:09:08 you know and i will pass this on to the person oversees our list of persons who this may be applicable to now um janice ray hasn't specifically asked you for any advice in her
01:09:20 asked you for any advice in her email did she no so do you know why she was forwarding this
01:09:27 this to you forwarding mr cummery's email to you
01:09:32 i would have said i would not have responded unless i had a phone conversation with her about this well you don't refer to a phone conversation in your email do you no but i'm just saying that i would not
01:09:44 no but i'm just saying that i would not have just sent a letter like this without having a phone conversation well there was half an hour between 1005 when she sent it to you and 10 33
01:09:55 to you and 10 33 when you responded so we're looking at a half an hour on a monday morning in december 2012 it's hard to remember of course but are you how confident are you that you would
01:10:07 you how confident are you that you would have spoken to her before you sent this document was your email to you to her
01:10:17 to her you can't be confident can you no i can't but i would have thought i would have done because i wouldn't have said responded back to say well why have they sent this to you in the first place now you suggest in your advice
01:10:29 now you suggest in your advice that there are no vulnerable persons that this applies to but by that were you referring to residents in all tma-managed properties
01:10:41 i'm going to say yes because that's what it refers to in here indeed were you suggesting that there were no vulnerable residents in any of the tmos
01:10:52 in any of the tmos stock no this is to do with sprinkler systems
01:10:57 systems for heavy smokers i believe well heavy smokers which would be why you would install a portable sprinkler system
01:11:08 portable sprinkler system because of people falling asleep vulnerable people falling asleep while smoking
01:11:14 smoking all right well let's pick them as vulnerable persons how do you know how did you know that there were no people with those vulnerabilities because as it says on here you would
01:11:26 because as it says on here you would have identified it under the process if there had been it's actually an odd idea that i i never thought of this maybe you're right but is a heavy smoker a disabled person for the purposes of the
01:11:37 purposes of the of past 79 and section 13 of your fras well they're a vulnerable person because of if they are heavy smoke this is
01:11:45 is this system here is portable sprinkler systems
01:11:49 systems it's a system of pipes that you put behind a chair with i suppose the better word best way to explain it is like a fire
01:12:00 to explain it is like a fire extinguisher on the bottom and if the detector goes off
01:12:04 off it covers the person the chair and extinguishes the cigarette mr steaks i'm going to come to the text of mr cummery's email in a moment but i just want to explore
01:12:15 want to explore where what you've just said takes us are you let me be clear are you suggesting that a heavy smoker however you determine that i don't know is a vulnerable person for the purposes
01:12:26 is a vulnerable person for the purposes of past 79 it could be yes if they've got other underlying issues as well oh well no i mean you didn't mention that a heavy smoker who might drop a cigarette down the back of the sofa is that of
01:12:37 that of did you understand at the time that that was a vulnerable person for the purposes of past 79 and therefore section 13 of each of your fras
01:12:46 if that was just for heavy smoking no but they would have under could have underlying other issues as well because i was going to say you couldn't possibly have proceeded on the basis
01:12:57 possibly have proceeded on the basis uh that there were no heavy smokers so let's then look at the text of the email i'll read it out given your qualification to it or your gloss
01:13:08 qualification to it or your gloss on it lfb will be writing to all local authorities to outline the business case for the installation of automatic fire suppression systems afss in premises housing those most at risk from fire and its effects as part of
01:13:20 from fire and its effects as part of this communication we would like to include a list of 10 suitable premises within each borough which lfb considered would benefit from installation of afss due to risk factors of the inhabitants
01:13:32 of the inhabitants using the attached appendices i am to assist the lfb borough commanders for h f and k and c with this identification process
01:13:39 process at hammersmith and fulham and kensington and chelsea please could i request your assistance to identify suitable vulnerable persons in local authority premises
01:13:48 premises my current deadline is 20th of december 2012. now
01:13:51 2012. now all he's asking for is identifying suitable vulnerable persons in local authority premises where he's talking about the uh installation of
01:14:02 installation of afss in premises
01:14:06 so how did you understand what he meant by vulnerable persons because it's an automatic uh mobile
01:14:18 because it's an automatic uh mobile automatic suppression system where does it say that it's a afss automatic fire suppression system where's mobile that is what my understanding of this letter is right
01:14:36 and i'm going to say that i would have had the phone call and got that information because that's what i would have responded to so was it really your belief regardless of how widely or how narrowly you define suitable vulnerable persons
01:14:48 you define suitable vulnerable persons was it really your belief that there was not one single vulnerable person even defined as you define it
01:14:54 define it in the borough under the tmas otherwise you'd have taken a peep for them
01:15:04 well great respect that's circular isn't it because you would only undertake a pete if janice ray had told you that there was a vulnerable person for whom they was needed
01:15:16 so were you proceeding on the basis is this right that because janice ray by the third of december 2012 had not identified a single vulnerable person there weren't any
01:15:34 yes but in fact that's wrong isn't it because
01:15:40 because we know that in 2010
01:15:44 you've done the gilray house peep but they wouldn't want an automatic suppression system why not because an automatic suppression
01:15:55 why not because an automatic suppression system is normally for heavy smokers or people that have um problems and smoke a lot and fall asleep when they have a cigarette
01:16:07 when they have a cigarette now you go on to say in the next sentence if you identify anybody now questions like why were they not included in the buildings fra spring to mind
01:16:17 mind why did you say that because it's a risk heavy smoke is a risk the same as a hoarder
01:16:22 hoarder sorry why did you say if you identify anybody now questions like why were they not included in the buildings fra spring to mind
01:16:29 mind why did you say that because if she had that information why wouldn't she have given to me beforehand were you advising her not to identify anybody now because if you did that would prompt the lfb to ask questions about why they hadn't been known
01:16:41 about why they hadn't been known for as mr stakes no because i would be questioning why i hadn't been told before
01:16:46 before indeed so
01:16:49 indeed so why are you telling her if you identify on anybody now that rather looks like you're advising her not to identify anybody who there might be because otherwise it might provoke questions on the part of the lfb isn't that right no that's the way i
01:17:02 isn't that right no that's the way i read it i read it is you would have had peeps the high risk an automatic suppression system is used for heavy smokers and therefore why when
01:17:16 and therefore why when i why wasn't i informed of this if you knew of anyone that had this problem were you more concerned about questions being asked about the fras than in identifying vulnerable residents as the lfb had asked no i was more
01:17:28 as the lfb had asked no i was more concerned about my under concern would be about vulnerable residents if they knew about them why wasn't this identified before
01:17:40 i don't understand that answer because i don't because that doesn't tally with the what you write in that second line
01:17:47 line well if she if she knows anyone if she goes back to him now and says we have these people why wasn't i informed of that to put include into the fra well precisely mr stokes
01:17:59 fra well precisely mr stokes that's the question but what i don't know what the follow-up to this is what does she come back and say no we haven't got anyone therefore why are you advising her with
01:18:10 therefore why are you advising her with your good response which was i believe which was thank you for this information if we find anyone in the future we will let you know why didn't you advise her to identify the suitable vulnerable
01:18:22 to identify the suitable vulnerable people as the nfb had asked make a list of them and send them to the lfb and copy you in while you were at it isn't why didn't you give her that advice i can't answer that question but my concern would be well why haven't i
01:18:34 my concern would be well why haven't i been informed that there's anyone that's got
01:18:37 got would need this system in their building you can't answer that question mr stakes but i can suggest an answer and it lies in the
01:18:42 in the immediately preceding sentence that if you actually if she had actually positively done what mr cummery had asked and identified people who were vulnerable that would have immediately
01:18:53 that would have immediately prompted the question from the lfb why are they not referred to in your fras that must be right mustn't it no if that's your take on it so yeah my response would be why haven't i been informed of putting them in the fra
01:19:06 been informed of putting them in the fra and in the last sentence there you say you'll pass this on to the person who oversees our list of persons who this may be applicable to who is the person or was the person overseeing your
01:19:18 overseeing your list of persons no this was response to janice wasn't it i believe a good response i believe would be to say thank you for this information if we find anyone in
01:19:29 this information if we find anyone in the future we will let you know and i will pass this on i see and who was that person um the other person named on this clearwise
01:19:41 the other person named on this clearwise a barbie casey [Music]
01:19:48 why didn't you just simply ask to advise miss ray
01:19:51 miss ray to do what the london fire brigade asked well that's why i'm saying that i wouldn't have i would i would have asked or had a phone conversation from when i received this to when i wrote the reply
01:20:09 wasn't this the opportunity to confirm your assumption that you have been laboring under for two years with miss ray namely if they really were vulnerable residents
01:20:21 vulnerable residents however you defined them uh living in tma properties then now is the time to tell you who they were well i would have thought she'd have told me up until that point as i say
01:20:31 as i say automatic fire suppression systems like this are indicative of heavy smokers but so far from continuing to labor under the assumption you actually told her to keep quiet about it no i didn't mr chairman it's a little
01:20:42 no i didn't mr chairman it's a little bit early but i'm about to switch topics and we just started well we did start early so i think that's probably a good time that any of you yes
01:20:48 you yes thank you yes um mr text is time we had a short break and during the afternoon so we'll
01:20:54 so we'll we'll take it now we'll come back at 20 past
01:20:58 past three please okay so all right and um please don't talk to anyone about your evidence when you're out of the room so right thank you very much
01:21:20 thank you 24 3 please yes
01:35:23 you ask mr stokes to come back in please thank you
01:35:39 all right mr steaks ready thank you carry on thank you very much yes mr miller yes mr chairman lifts mr stakes
01:35:47 stakes lifts definition of a firefighting lift is the first topic under this main topic heading
01:35:53 heading can i ask you please to go to your first statement at page 43 paragraph one two four
01:36:04 you might need the reference oh sorry thank you cst 403063 page 43
01:36:25 page 43 and uh if you look at paragraph one two four the very foot of that page under the heading firefighting lifts you see you say this in the fras i note that the two lifts at the tower
01:36:37 i note that the two lifts at the tower were quotes firefighting lifts on quotes this was based on confirmation from the kc tmo that this was the case both when i was first and if you turn the page
01:36:47 the page uh involved with the tower and subsequently when i was provided lists of the kctma buildings which had firefighting lifts see email 6th june 2012. a copy of which is
01:36:58 email 6th june 2012. a copy of which is at the back of the kctms fire safety policy now according to your schedule of certificates attached to your second statement
01:37:08 statement that we looked at yesterday it's right isn't it that you had completed a fire protection association uh certificate uh on firefighting lifts on the 27th of june
01:37:19 june 2005. one of the topics of that document was firefighting lives yes indeed and that just for the reference that's cst 3030155 that's the certificate we don't
01:37:31 3030155 that's the certificate we don't need to turn it up can we take it that you were aware therefore as a result of having done that training and obtained that certificate that there were a number of features that must be present in a firefighting lift
01:37:43 present in a firefighting lift in order for it to meet the applicable standards and for it to be designated as a firefighting lift correct and you've set out some of those at paragraph 126 of your statement on the screen as
01:37:56 of your statement on the screen as follows a firefighting lift has various features
01:37:59 features eg two-way communication devices minimum car size dedicated power supply fireman's control switch etc and it goes on um were you aware that a
01:38:10 and it goes on um were you aware that a firefighting lift required amongst other things
01:38:13 things first an escape hatch if it was under the
01:38:16 the standard of a firefighting lift yes en 82 etc
01:38:24 en 82 etc so yes under that standard a secondary power supply under that standard and that type of lift yes
01:38:31 lift yes water protection yes lift control systems
01:38:37 when you say lift control systems do you mean
01:38:41 mean external as in drop key if you want to call it a drop key switch or do you mean lift control switching inside the car to the you tell me what a fire fighting lift
01:38:52 you tell me what a fire fighting lift required by way of lift control systems well two there's two one is the external switch is what i'm thinking you're talking right a lift service communication system yes
01:39:05 a lift service communication system yes yes fire resistant landing doors yes and would you agree that if a firefighting lift does not have all of the features set out in the applicable standards then it
01:39:16 out in the applicable standards then it can't be designated as a fire fighting lift
01:39:19 lift as understood in the british standard which is bs 558 part five that was the oldest standard that's not a new standard
01:39:30 uh double five double eight five is the old standard superseded i'm gonna say 82 72 81 or whatever about early 2000's well bsa5588.5
01:39:45 early 2000's well bsa5588.5 goes back to 1991. you have to be clear uh en 72 is 2003. yes right we'll look at both of those in a moment let's just take it in stages
01:39:56 a moment let's just take it in stages then
01:39:56 then um can we go to your second statement page 27 cst 303 186 page 27.
01:40:08 186 page 27. paragraph 105 on that page
01:40:18 and you say there
01:40:26 by the time of the refurbishment an almost identical definition of fire fighting lift is found in both adb-2 and the lga guide a lift designed to have additional
01:40:37 a lift designed to have additional protection
01:40:39 which controls with controls that enable it to be used under the direct control of the fire and rescue service when fighting a fire a similar definition is provided in bs 9991
01:40:49 9991 2015 and you set it out on the page there
01:40:54 there um you say that the fire service's ability to control the lift is the primary function of a firefighting lift is that how you understood it could you say that again for me yes the
01:41:06 could you say that again for me yes the pr the primary function is that your understanding that the primary function as you understand it uh of a firefighting lift is the fire service's ability to control it
01:41:17 service's ability to control it it's one of them yes it's one of them um but not the only one yes no let's just look then at the 1991 standard
01:41:27 standard we started with bs 5588 part five please and now we'll find that at bsi five zero seven nine seven at page twenty six
01:41:45 seven nine seven at page twenty six and i'd like to look with you please at section 3
01:41:49 section 3 subsection 10 under general
01:41:56 and if we look on that page in the second paragraph it says this a firefighting lift unlike a normal passenger lift is designed to operate so long as is
01:42:08 is designed to operate so long as is practicable when there is a fire in parts of the building beyond the confines of the firefighting shaft as it is used to transport firefighters and their equipment to a floor of their choice
01:42:20 choice now that's how that's defined there if we go and then and look at the 2003 standard bsen 72 which is in bsi four zeros one seven two five please at
01:42:33 four zeros one seven two five please at page 18.
01:42:48 bsi four zeros one seven two five page eighteen annex a firefighting concept for high-rise buildings
01:43:00 it's gone it's back again and if we look at under a2 second paragraph fire service personnel faced with the task of firefighting on a floor high above the ground need to be able to reach the
01:43:12 the ground need to be able to reach the fire quickly and safely taking with them their equipment physical safety and lives their own and the occupants of the building as well as the preservation of the building and its contents may can well be put at risk by delay on reaching the fire firefighters must have
01:43:24 reaching the fire firefighters must have sufficient energy left for the arduous and prolonged task of firefighting
01:43:30 and and then it goes on in the third paragraph
01:43:34 paragraph the emergency services are therefore dependent on the foresight of designers in providing them with the necessary facilities to operate effectively within the building once they've arrived this means that in high rise premises the provision of a
01:43:46 high rise premises the provision of a fire fighter's lift is essential a firefighter's lift needs to be readily available and have suitable design for this is for the use of firefighters and remain in use for as long as possible during firefighting operations
01:43:57 possible during firefighting operations it is recognized that it is neither technically nor economically viable to design and provide a lift which is ensured never to fail however designers and installers need to be aware that the fire service is operationally
01:44:08 operationally highly reliant on the use of a of the lift
01:44:11 lift now i've shown you both of those principles and were you aware of first of all the 1991 standard and then the 2003 standard we've just been looking at reasonably yes yes so do you accept that
01:44:24 reasonably yes yes so do you accept that a firefighting lift is designed with a range of features that make it suitable to assist firefighters in their firefighting operations that's the point of it
01:44:32 of it yes yes and bringing the lifts under the control of the fire service is a feature which can assist in fighting a fire but it's not the primary function of a firefighting lift is it apart from
01:44:43 of a firefighting lift is it apart from moving things up and down well well i suppose so but it it's one of a number of important functions and features yes yes yes now um turning to grenfell can we go to your
01:44:54 turning to grenfell can we go to your first statement please cst 50 cst403063 page 43 paragraph 124
01:45:10 you you say there i'll wait for it to come up onto your screen
01:45:22 uh as i've shown you uh the the two lifts at grenfell tower were firefighting lifts and i just want to explore how you came to that knowledge first can we go to cst403102
01:45:39 first can we go to cst403102 page one
01:45:46 this is an email from andrew furness of salvas of the 3rd of march 2010 sorry from janice ray to andrew furness 3rd of march 2010 you
01:45:57 andrew furness 3rd of march 2010 you need to go to the bottom of the screen to see it
01:46:04 can we scroll down please to the bottom of the screen
01:46:10 there it is janice ray to andrew furness third march 2010 uh andy further to the discussion at the recent progress meeting robin and i that's robin catalan
01:46:23 robin and i that's robin catalan or kalan as i think it's pronounced have put together the following information which relates to tmo lifts serving blocks over 18 meters in height and then she sets out the standards which they meet
01:46:35 which they meet and you can see that at the bottom of page one and over to the top of page two if you look at that please we go to page two and you can see the
01:46:47 we go to page two and you can see the features there set out and if we go then please to mr furnace's response on page one of the email top of page one
01:47:00 the same day he responds and says hi janice
01:47:04 janice thank you for the information we will include the following statement in relation to firefighting lifts based upon the details attached tmos confirmed that lifts servicing the block over 18 meters in height meets the
01:47:15 over 18 meters in height meets the requirements for firefighting lifts as per specification provided by tmo's senior lift engineer and then there's a some more text now you're not copied into this email chain
01:47:27 you're not copied into this email chain do you know how you got hold of it i would have been forward i would have thought a later date were you involved in the meeting that took place that janice ray refers to
01:47:38 janice ray refers to no no um it looks to us as if that meeting took place on the 23rd of february 2010 do you think you were told about that meeting i wouldn't known too long ago sorry all
01:47:50 i wouldn't known too long ago sorry all right well let's look at the minutes and see if it helps s a l six zeros four two
01:48:08 this is a progress meeting on the 23rd of february 2010 entitled fire risk assessments in high risk blocks janice reyes present andrew furnace is present
01:48:18 present robin carlon is present and if you go to item 2 you can see it says lifts requirements of firefighting lifts etc and then it
01:48:29 of firefighting lifts etc and then it says robin carlon tmo lift engineer attended for this item janus advised that a number of the fra action plans had raised specific queries in relation to lifts and these have been referred to robin who was seeking confirmation from salvas
01:48:40 who was seeking confirmation from salvas that his interpretation of what constitutes a firefighting lift in quotation marks is the same as theirs the specific points from the action plan were as follows and then um it says in the box one is
01:48:53 and then um it says in the box one is recommended that the tmo confirms if any of the lifts installed in the building are either fire fighter or evacuation lifts as required by building regulations as the building is over 80 meters high
01:49:04 as the building is over 80 meters high two confirmations should be sought that where the lifts installed in the building are either firefighter or evacuation lifts that they have been subject to maintenance and testing in line with current guidance and british standards
01:49:16 current guidance and british standards three should any installed firefighter or evacuation lifts not to be subject to testing in accordance with current british standards and guidance it is recommended that competent engineers be engaged to undertake
01:49:27 engineers be engaged to undertake such testing and then it goes on rc then outlined the three different classifications of lifts in terms of fire
01:49:35 fire fireman's lift fire fighting lift and evacuation lift after some discussion the group concluded that most of the borough's lifts meet the majority but not all
01:49:47 the majority but not all of the criteria which define a fire fighting lift it was agreed that for the purposes of the action plans jw and rc would document the criteria that tmo do
01:49:58 would document the criteria that tmo do lift do meet rc clarified that the requirements for lifts below a certain size
01:50:03 size are less onerous and so these lifts are less likely to comply with a significant number of these criteria
01:50:12 now did andrew fernandez ever explain any of this to you no did he never didn't i think psycho i apologize no no
01:50:23 didn't i think psycho i apologize no no you're going to say something i was just going to say i was looking there um
01:50:27 there um i couldn't see andrew fairness his name but i think he's further up isn't it yes he was at the meeting i take it that you then never never saw this minute and never told about this meeting from my recollection noah
01:50:39 this meeting from my recollection noah right now let's then move on in 2010 to the all letter of the 27th of september which we've visited a number of times now
01:50:46 now cst 403061 and let's go to page three in that please and i'd like to have that at the same time
01:50:55 same time on the screen uh as the text of janice ray's email uh of 3rd of march 2010 at cst
01:51:04 403102
01:51:13 so what we're trying to do is put up on the screen the 27th of yes we've got that we've got both that's excellent thank you now um what we see here is if you if you
01:51:24 now um what we see here is if you if you look at the text of her email page one at the bottom we need to scroll up uh on the right hand side of the screen
01:51:35 hand side of the screen please do we to get the full amount of the
01:51:40 yes so let's just track this through what i want to do is to on the left hand side of the screen if we can have page three of that
01:51:51 so we've got we should have page three of your letter of the 27th of september and pages one and then over to two of the third of march 2010 email from jenny's ray let's just compare and contrast so uh
01:52:03 let's just compare and contrast so uh looking uh and we'll go from right to left looking at janice ray's letter of the third email of the third of march minimum car size 1100 millimeters wide times 1400 millimeters deep for eight
01:52:14 times 1400 millimeters deep for eight persons capacity 630 kilograms you see that that's made its way
01:52:19 its way into your 27th of september letter yes yes yes uh and turning the page we can please in on the email right hand
01:52:31 we can please in on the email right hand side can we go to page two
01:52:35 uh you see item two dedicated power supply serving lift three phase additionally ancillary items such as lift alarm lighting etc are also served by their own dedicated power supply and that's word for word what you've put
01:52:47 and that's word for word what you've put into your letter just pausing here thus far do you think she gave you this email in order for you to compile your letter to her of the 27th of september 2010.
01:52:59 to her of the 27th of september 2010. was i not giving this email before this date
01:53:03 date well you asked i'm sorry i'm trying to think in my own mind i'm sure i have been because i think i yes i'm sure i've i've seen this email as in part of this uh you say as in part
01:53:16 as in part of this uh you say as in part of this
01:53:17 of this part of what so the right hand side one i apologied in on it and there's no evidence we've seen that you afforded it so i'm asking you later how you got hold of it apology
01:53:29 you later how you got hold of it apology a later date i would have thought right okay i mean let's just continue and see how far we get can we please turn to page four in the uh 27th of september letter on the left-hand side of the screen
01:53:40 the left-hand side of the screen and continue with the text on the right hand side
01:53:46 yes so three looking at the right hand side two-way communication on new lifts includes connection to customer service center out of our's monitoring service when lift
01:53:55 when lift alarm is activated same as item three on the top
01:53:58 the top and indeed if you look down um one can make the same point across yes across it it's essentially a a cut and paste or as near a cut and paste from the email into the letter is that right correct yes thank you now
01:54:11 is that right correct yes thank you now am i right in thinking that this was the only information that you were ever given by the tmo about the features that the lifts in tmo stock had
01:54:24 in tmo stock had and i was given a list of lifts and which buildings they were in and what their designations were
01:54:34 you were you were right about that uh but
01:54:37 but um my question was was this the only information you were ever given by the tmo about the features that tmo lifts had
01:54:47 lifts had particulars such as size uh dedicated power supply communications fireman's control switch um without seeing the rest of the zoomer does it mention there there is no lift hatch
01:54:59 mention there there is no lift hatch because i include that the lifts do not have a lift hatch you do say that we'll come to the hatch in a moment right my question is was this the only information that you were ever given by the tmo about the
01:55:10 were ever given by the tmo about the features
01:55:11 features that tmo lifts had or was there other information that you were given it doesn't spring to mind right no so just by looking at this list is it right that you knew or understood
01:55:22 is it right that you knew or understood at the time that the tmo lifts in their stock did not have an emergency trap door correct a secondary power supply correct water protection most
01:55:36 correct water protection most lifts my understand so it's not here but they were yes
01:55:42 and she'd given you knew no detail about lift control systems it's not in the list is it well the lift would have i would you
01:55:53 well the lift would have i would you would see that physically on the outside of the lift right and apart from number four fireman's control switch fitted um apart from that no detail about lift control systems well that to me would be lift
01:56:05 well that to me would be lift firefighter fireman's control switch fitted would be a lift control system all right a fast service communication system no detail about that
01:56:13 that what do you mean by fire service communication system well what did what do you understand the fire service communication system to be well in the latest documents it's
01:56:24 well in the latest documents it's normally
01:56:27 it can be on every floor and it can be on the fire services entrance level and top floor where there is a
01:56:38 press button control system on the outside of the lift fire resistant landing doors no information about that um
01:56:50 it's here it says item five fire lift car doors composer stainless steel not less than 16 sjwg 2r5 resistant
01:57:02 2r5 resistant right
01:57:05 and that satisfied did it yes did did the absence of the emergency trap door secondary power supply and water protection taking those at
01:57:16 and water protection taking those at their
01:57:17 their as the minimum did that not suggest to you that the lifts were not fire fighting lifts no because they would be firefighting lifts under double five double eight even though
01:57:28 double five double eight even though they didn't have those three uh features yes did you ever ask or double check with janice ray whether those features were present
01:57:39 those features were present sorry memory i had a meeting with the lift
01:57:42 lift engineer and went over some of the items with the lift engineer and we talked through them
01:57:53 through them was that robin catalan i'm going to say yes
01:57:57 yes uh which i would have known him robin yes right robin yes all right um i mean the reason i'm asking you these questions is because mr todd has expressed an opinion about it can i can you show can i show you his report please cta
01:58:09 please cta 6011 the page 85 cta 6011 page 85 paragraph 8.62
01:58:44 cta six zeroes 11 page 85.
01:59:05 okay
01:59:14 it's taking a little bit of time mr stokes i apologize for that i don't know why
01:59:18 why sorry
01:59:26 cta six zeroes eleven
01:59:52 ah movement thank you right uh now on that page paragraph 8.62
02:00:03 on that page paragraph 8.62 middle of the screen mr todd says uh
02:00:10 says uh in the middle of that paragraph
02:00:14 well let me actually i'll read the whole paragraph to you nevertheless it is clear that mr stokes did have some knowledge of the requirements of modern firefighting lift standards for example he identified in his fra that the lift cars at grenfell tower
02:00:25 that the lift cars at grenfell tower were not provided with an escape hatch for use by firefighters trapped in the lift this feature was not included in the early requirements for firemen's lifts accordingly while in
02:00:36 for firemen's lifts accordingly while in my opinion many fire risk assessors would have overlooked or at least considered it unnecessary to comment on the absence of the trapdoor this absence and mr stokes's awareness of its absence presented mr stokes with
02:00:47 of its absence presented mr stokes with something of a tell-tale sign that the lifts were not firefighting lifts though this emission was probably of no major concern to lfb would you agree with mr todd's opinion
02:01:00 would you agree with mr todd's opinion that it was a telltale sign that the lift was not a firefighting lift no i wouldn't why not hasn't mr todd had a supplementary document out since this one was written
02:01:13 document out since this one was written well can you answer my question please why do you disagree with his opinion because it is a sign that awareness were not firefighting
02:01:26 awareness were not firefighting elizabeth they were firefighting this to the standard at that time
02:01:33 so you say do you that mr mr todd is wrong in this part of his opinion
02:01:40 opinion no i say that he says that there were a telltale sign that the lifts were not fire fighting this with the absence and your knowledge of the absence of a trapdoor
02:01:51 the absence of a trapdoor is a tell-tale sign that the lifts were not firefighting lifts do you say that to the current to the standard of where the trap door would be included but they were still firefighting lifts to a previous standard
02:02:05 to a previous standard well was that standard a standard that applied at the time you did your fire risk assessments from 2010 onwards yes so do you therefore disagree with mr todd that the absence of those
02:02:20 todd that the absence of those uh trap doors escape hatches was something of a tell-tale sign that the lists were not firefighting lifts and i acknowledged in my document that the lift hatches were not there so they
02:02:32 the lift hatches were not there so they weren't to the modern the current standard yes so i'm sorry i'm just thinking to do just want your evidence as to whether you agree or disagree with mr todd's opinion here
02:02:40 here well i disagree that
02:02:44 so he's saying to me that there is an awareness because of the telltale sign that they were not firefighting lists that is incorrect they are firefighting lifts but to a different standard of the current stat
02:02:55 a different standard of the current stat of the current british standard
02:02:59 and when you say to a different standard of the current british standard do you mean
02:03:02 mean a standard different from the current yes so do you understand what you're saying
02:03:06 saying are you saying that even though they didn't have an escape hatch they once would have qualified as firefighting lifts even though they no longer do under under prevailing standards yes right and the prevailing standards were
02:03:17 right and the prevailing standards were those prevailing at the time you did your ifras or not my understanding is yes so they would have been a telltale sign that the lifts although firefighting lives under previous standards were not firefighting
02:03:28 previous standards were not firefighting lifts under the standards which pertained at the time of the fras i'm confused on what you just said so at the time you did your fras did the prevailing standards for firefighting lifts require firefighting lifts to have trap doors
02:03:42 lifts to have trap doors the standard would have done but whether the lifts installed in the building had them is
02:03:46 them is true they were different i think all that mr miller is asking you is to simply tell us whether the lifts as you
02:03:58 tell us whether the lifts as you saw them when they when you started doing the fras were firefighting lifts and in accordance with current standards i.e 2010 or they're about standards and i think what you're
02:04:10 about standards and i think what you're telling us is that they were firefighting lifts uh as defined in the standards that had been
02:04:17 been applicable when they were installed probably
02:04:21 probably correct yes but we're no longer in accordance with current 2010 standards for firefighting lists
02:04:28 lists that's correct yes sir yeah thank you and therefore thank you sir is that the reason is that the reason why you disagree with mr todd yes i see
02:04:39 with mr todd yes i see so you just to be clear you say do you that mr todd is wrong to say that the absence of trap doors presented you with the telltale sign that the list were not firefighting lifts because at the time they were installed
02:04:51 because at the time they were installed those would not have been a telltale sign
02:04:53 sign at all correct i follow now can we go to your first statement paragraph one two five page forty four cst four zero three zero
02:05:04 page forty four cst four zero three zero six
02:05:04 six three page 44
02:05:10 and you refer to email correspondence with robin cahilan the senior lift engineer
02:05:16 engineer at the tmo and you've exhibited it
02:05:23 so that's where you exhibit it let's go to the correspondence
02:05:32 cst403080 page one foot of the page so bottom of the screen please that's cst four zero three zero eight
02:05:43 that's cst four zero three zero eight zero
02:05:44 zero page one foot of page yes email from robin catalan to janice ray 28 february 2011
02:05:55 to janice ray 28 february 2011 subject firefighting stroke evacuation lifts
02:05:59 lifts as recently discussed standards on firefighting stroke evacuation lifts which are not retrospect have become a lot clearer over the last year none of the tmo lifts are firefighting or evacuation lifts
02:06:11 firefighting or evacuation lifts the tmo stock do have some of the requirements but the cost to meet the recommended standards would prevent us upgrading our lifts and then uh janice ray forwards this on
02:06:23 and then uh janice ray forwards this on to you
02:06:25 to you in the middle of the page can you see that yes on the 28th of february same day 2011. uh and uh you come back to her
02:06:36 and uh you come back to her can we just go up scroll up a little bit please
02:06:40 please uh also on the 28th of february uh hi janice
02:06:44 janice as far as i know the requirements for a firefighting lift strike evacuation lift did not change in the march 2010 edition of the building regs next time i'm in the hub we can sit
02:06:55 next time i'm in the hub we can sit could we sit down with robin as he might have a different information than me does he have copies of the information he is taking he is talking about he could forward to me
02:07:06 me and then janice ray says at the very top i'll ask him did you ever meet robin catalan to find out what he meant yes
02:07:17 yes at that meeting did he give you any reassurance that the lifts did in fact meet the requirements yes what did he say
02:07:26 say enough information that to make sure they met the requirements soon but do you recall in what respect uh he gave you the reassurance that you were after they had dedicated power supplies
02:07:37 after they had dedicated power supplies it was everything apart from virtually the lift hatch right you see he says that none of the tmo lifts a firefighting or evacuation lifts
02:07:48 firefighting or evacuation lifts yes because i think you pro the conversation and this is a long time ago but the conversation for memory was along do they have a complete secondary power supply
02:08:00 complete secondary power supply so at that meeting did did mr calhoun change his mind i think we accepted that they were met the standard of the previous
02:08:13 document which is dedicated power supply did you
02:08:16 did you double check whether mr kahalan was right that none of the tmo lifts are firefighting lifts as he says in his email and i came away and kept it into the document so my
02:08:27 and kept it into the document so my understanding would be apart from the items that i put into the document
02:08:32 document they were firefighting lifts to our standard right do i take it from that that they were almost firefighting lifts but not completely can you have that uh that's but that's
02:08:43 can you have that uh that's but that's the question well they would met they met the standard at time of installation you see mr caroline says
02:08:53 that standards which are not retrospective have become clearer none of the tmo lifts are firefighting or evacuation lifts
02:09:04 and you tell janice ray that the requirements for a firefighting lift didn't change then you have a discussion did you
02:09:17 did you discover anything which led you to think that in fact although the firefighting lifts were not no longer firefighting lifts in accordance with current standards they had been uh firefighting lifts in
02:09:28 they had been uh firefighting lifts in accordance with the standards that applied when they were installed yes and what was that my comment here is the building because there was a new edition of building regulations came out in 2010
02:09:41 building regulations came out in 2010 looking at this
02:09:44 the changes to the building regulations in 2010
02:09:48 in 2010 but maybe that's what we were talking about because that's what i say there is no as far as i know the requirements for firefighting lift evacuations did not change in the march 10
02:09:58 10 edition of building rigs correct and therefore why did you think that
02:10:08 he was why did you think that he was well why did you understand that in fact mr cahillon's initial statement that none of the tma lifts of firefighting was uh was wrong because as there's something in the
02:10:19 because as there's something in the building next further down the page or there was a telephone conversation this is 2011 so the previous email was 2010
02:10:30 so the previous email was 2010 we clarified the lifts to the tmo stock in the letter of my letter to janice ray before i undertook a risk assessment so this is additional so something came
02:10:41 so this is additional so something came out must have come out in 2000 and late 10 early 11 the only thing that could have changed then was the building regulations edition and we then went
02:10:52 regulations edition and we then went through that that's what my assumption and to the best of my knowledge what i can answer here
02:10:57 here well i think the story continues let's go on can we go to your first witness statement again please uh cst403063 at page 44. and let's look together at paragraph
02:11:08 and let's look together at paragraph 125.
02:11:19 in the second line of the paragraph you say
02:11:23 say however as the lifts were later listed to be firefighting lifts in the summary document
02:11:27 document provided to me in 2012 i understood this to mean that the kctma had satisfied themselves that these were firefighting lifts i would have expected the lifts to be firefighting lifters i understood that
02:11:39 firefighting lifters i understood that they were installed in 2005 at which time all new lifts installed in high-rise buildings were required two by two b firefighting lifts and would have had to comply with en 81 in order for them to be
02:11:50 with en 81 in order for them to be accepted again by building control that's what you say there correct um now the email that you're referring to
02:12:00 uh you you refer to an email there that is 6th of june 2012. you referred to it in the previous paragraph in fact can we look at the list which is at
02:12:18 cst403094
02:12:22 also referred to in paragraph 124 but uh let's look at the list it's an email from janice ray from uh to nick cummery of the lfb we look at the second email down there you can see
02:12:33 the second email down there you can see it
02:12:34 it 29th of may 2012
02:12:38 and she in paragraph 3 says this in discussions with your predecessors we clarified that many of our lifts meet the majority but not all
02:12:49 our lifts meet the majority but not all of the criteria for lip fire fighting lifts for example we do not install the trapdoor stroke hatch in the roof of the car etc it was agreed that we would clarify the criteria that our far fighting lifts do meet
02:12:59 meet and i have attached an email to the then borough commander brian dean setting out these criteria additionally i attached a list of the blocks where these lifts are located and you will see this includes trellic tower you see that
02:13:13 tower you see that pick up the words for example we do not install a trap door stroke hatch of the roof of the car etc you then get this email on the 6th of june as you look at the top of the of the screen
02:13:24 the screen you can't see it at the moment it will come to you in a second there it is johnny ferret sends it to you on the 6th of june
02:13:30 of june carl hope you had a good holiday and thanks for the anchor house fra for info here is my response to the lfb nick phoned on thursday to say he and colette and an operational colleague were visiting trellick the following day so i met them there
02:13:41 following day so i met them there seemed to go okay but colette was carrying out her audit so we'll no doubt get something in writing as a follow-up there's nothing in the text of the email that i want to ask you about but it's quite clear from this that you you would have read can we
02:13:53 this that you you would have read can we proceed on the basis that you would have read janice ray's email to nicholas comrie below it correct and you would have read paragraph three yes so you would have seen that she said for example we do not install the trapdoor stroke hatch of the roof of the car
02:14:06 stroke hatch of the roof of the car uh etc and by by using the word etc she was clearly indicating wasn't she to your understanding that there were other features uh that did not meet the criteria for firefighting lifts
02:14:17 firefighting lifts yes
02:14:20 but she doesn't list them no she doesn't so that leads to the question having read this email did you think to follow up with janice ray and ask her what other features there were in addition to the absence of a trapdoor or hatch in the roof of the car
02:14:31 or hatch in the roof of the car that meant that the criteria for a firefighting lift was not met
02:14:38 unless you pointed out the word etcetera though i would have not even looked i would have said we do not install a trapdoor right so right so you didn't notice the et cetera is that no no i see um you didn't ask it then in what other
02:14:51 um you didn't ask it then in what other ways the lifts don't meet the requirements of a firefighting lift then it then goes on to say we agree that we would clarify the criteria with our firefighter in this do meat and i was aware of that anyway
02:15:03 meat and i was aware of that anyway yes again it was obvious from what she was telling the nfb that the lifts meets some perhaps most of the criteria
02:15:14 some perhaps most of the criteria to qualify as a firefighting lift but not all of them correct yes and therefore my question is how could
02:15:25 and therefore my question is how could you have understood that as you say in your statement that the lifts were firefighting lifts if they were missing even just the trapdoor because the
02:15:37 even just the trapdoor because the definition of a firefighting list is a lift that could be controlled and used by the fire service but you must have realized from this email that at the time of this email that was not good enough there's no sense in this email is there
02:15:49 there's no sense in this email is there uh from janice ray uh to tell the lfb that in fact you they could be regarded as firefighting lifts because they satisfied the standards prevailing at the time of installation that would have been a simple enough thing to say but she doesn't does she
02:16:01 thing to say but she doesn't does she well you'd have to ask her why she didn't say that no but i'm asking you because you received it and so clearly it was obvious to you at the time wasn't it that the continue that the absence of a uh a trapdoor in
02:16:12 that the absence of a uh a trapdoor in the roof of the car was relevant for the definition as at may
02:16:16 may or june 2012. but i put this in the risk assessment so i i knew this anyway but you're getting ahead of the question do you accept that the absence of a trapdoor was a relevant
02:16:29 of a trapdoor was a relevant consideration when defining the lifts even in may 2012 june 2012. depending on which standard that they were installed at a time of installation
02:16:43 let's look at paragraph 125 of your first statement again you you this is cst403063 page 44 we've just been on you go on to say in that paragraph
02:16:56 say in that paragraph uh and i've read it all to you but i'll just pick it up with you again i would have expected the lifts to be fire fighting lifts as i understood that they they were installed in 2005 at which time all new
02:17:07 installed in 2005 at which time all new lifts installed in high-rise buildings were required to be firefighting lifts and would have had to comply with en-81 in order for them to be accepted again by
02:17:13 by building control did you actually make that assumption at the time when i say at the time at the time of the exchange in may 2012 that we've just been looking at because i yes i agree with that your
02:17:26 because i yes i agree with that your statement because i would um the lifts were installed in 2005.
02:17:32 yes and my question is did you make did you make the assumption at the time that because they were installed in 2005 it didn't matter for the purposes of defining them as firefighting lifts
02:17:43 defining them as firefighting lifts that they didn't have a trapdoor yes right um did you actually ever seek confirmation that these lifts had been signed off by building control
02:17:55 the answer is probably no why is that because this would be in six years before i undertook a risk assessment into late 2010. you never thought you never asked for the certificate
02:18:07 asked for the certificate uh or the sign off by building control simple matter of asking for a document
02:18:16 probably not now did you actually ever ask the question did these lifts qualify as far fighting lifts at the time of installation
02:18:27 lifts at the time of installation i would expect them to but did i ask for it in writing no right did you ever ask for any documents from the lift manufacturers or installers
02:18:38 manufacturers or installers that they were firefighting lifts and therefore in compliance with en-81
02:18:44 they wouldn't be in compliance with the n-81
02:18:48 n-81 no uh because the n81 wouldn't com wouldn't be applicable to this building uh well
02:18:55 uh well was it not applicable in 2005 when they were installed i thought it was dated 2003. it is but en
02:19:02 en sorry 81 for firefighting lifts is only for
02:19:06 for new new builds it's not for existing buildings or refurbishments right asking the question a slightly different way did you ever ask to see any documents from the lift manufacturers or
02:19:17 from the lift manufacturers or installers as to whether they were firefighting lifts properly so called as at the date of sale or installation no
02:19:25 no why is that this was well the documentation from bill uh the tmo says they were five said they
02:19:36 the tmo says they were five said they were firefighting lifts i would not go back
02:19:38 back and ask for something that was six seven years old
02:19:41 years old at the time when i was there would you accept that in essence your repeated reference to the lifts as firefighting or evacuation lifts was based really only on
02:19:50 only on your assumption that they should have been you know they met the definition of a firefighter an evacuation lift as in building control other docu lga guidance pat 79 and
02:20:02 lga guidance pat 79 and numerous other documents notwithstanding the absence of the at least the three features we've identified because they've met the criteria
02:20:11 criteria now moving on can we look please at the same time i'm sorry to interrupt you again mr exciter it seems to me that what we are debating is whether it is appropriate to refer to
02:20:23 is whether it is appropriate to refer to a lift as a firefighting lift
02:20:27 as of the time when you are writing your report
02:20:30 report because it might be said that your fra by describing the lift as a firefighting lift is suggesting that it is a firefighting lift by the current standards
02:20:43 by the current standards um i see where you're coming from so the definition of a firefighting lift giving in
02:20:49 in the sleeping guide paths building regulations is a lift that can be controlled by the fire service that's the definition of a firefighting lift that i was using
02:21:00 that i was using i did not use the definition a firefighting lift two where in other cases so for instance a fire alarm system within the dwellings
02:21:11 a fire alarm system within the dwellings i would put down two bs-5839 part six
02:21:16 this is the definition used here is the definition used in building regulations for a firefighting lift which is a lift that can be you controlled by the fire service without
02:21:27 controlled by the fire service without reference to the particular standards for what we've been calling firefighting lifts yes because that standard en 81 only came in in 2003
02:21:41 81 only came in in 2003 and that is for new buildings only so when we see you refer to firefighting lifts we ought to understand you to be using that term in a relatively limited sense as the
02:21:55 in a relatively limited sense as the definition given in all the guidance documents right thank you yes yes mr chairman thank you uh
02:22:04 in the light of that exchange i might be able to take this a little bit more quickly but let's see how we go cst 6013 please
02:22:20 this is an email to you by from matt smith of max fordham on the 24th of january 2014 halfway down your screen morning carl it was good to meet you yesterday
02:22:32 was good to meet you yesterday it would have been useful to have known about your existence at an earlier stage and then if we turn the page please uh to page two first bullet point we see that you uh
02:22:46 are asked the question i should just explain what this this looks like this email the text of the email is in black with some questions in bold or
02:22:55 bold or topics and you respond in red and tell me if that's wrong that soon to be correct yes yes no at the top of page two you say well he says or asks both lifts within grenfell are
02:23:06 grenfell are ff effect lifts these are not up to current standards due to the lack of an escape hatch and you say correct both lifts are fully functional ff
02:23:19 you put lifts the hatch item is not relevant
02:23:22 relevant see information below as well yes
02:23:29 what did you mean when you said the hatch item was not relevant
02:23:34 because it wouldn't be to that standard that's um
02:23:37 that's um the escape hatch was to the en standard when that came in these lifts were to an older standard as at time of installation and then on page two in the
02:23:48 installation and then on page two in the third paragraph from the end uh
02:23:53 it says also if the lifts are far fighting lifts then there should be secure dual supplies to them this is not shown on the schematics and your response to that is in the red
02:24:05 and your response to that is in the red text
02:24:05 text sorry i cannot answer any of the above questions including that one but below is the information from the tmo lift register and then you you set that out on page
02:24:16 and then you you set that out on page three
02:24:16 three yes and then on page three you go on to say
02:24:20 say uh as these are newly refurbished installed lifts i can only assume that they comply with all the electrical requirements of an ff evac lift otherwise the maintenance stroke installation company would have
02:24:32 stroke installation company would have raised this item at the time of the work being undertaken now we can see in that email that the you're being told that the schematics don't show that there was a secondary power supply
02:24:44 power supply so your assumption that they must be firefighting lifts was clearly wrong you know but why not because they have a dedicated power supply to the standard that was required at the time of installation but is this another example
02:24:57 installation but is this another example of them being compliant at the time but not any longer with the definition of firefighting lifts yes so now we've got two have we we've got the escape hatch and we've got the power supply no the dedicated power supply is a
02:25:09 no the dedicated power supply is a requirement that is there you do not even i think even for the newer standard you can have two power supplies from the
02:25:20 you can have two power supplies from the same substation it doesn't have to be a completely separate
02:25:25 separate it has as long as it's dedicated and there
02:25:29 there that the standard it was applicable to the standard at the time there's i think we all agreeing with me mr
02:25:35 mr smith is identifying the fact that there should be secured dual supplies to the lift to make them a firefighting lift at the time and you're saying uh
02:25:46 at the time and you're saying uh you assume that they comply with the electoral or were quite requirements of a firefighting lift uh other
02:25:53 other otherwise that would have been raised at the time of installation so you're working on the assumption that they complied with the requirements at the time yes yes so you didn't even know whether or
02:26:05 yes so you didn't even know whether or not the secure dual supplies were actually in place at the time dual supplies no dual supplies no so that's a second category
02:26:14 category of potential disqualification for these lifts as far fighting lifts even by the stand even in in fact by the standards of the time of installation
02:26:25 time of installation no because it's dedicated power supply at time of insulation right but we've now become a dual supply all right we're leaving aside the time of installation by the time of your rip fire risk assessment certainly from 2012
02:26:36 fire risk assessment certainly from 2012 am i right in thinking it's a second category of potential difference you've got hatch and you've got dual power supply now
02:26:52 but the en standard would only apply to new buildings yeah i i understand that but but unless not it's not retrospective so if
02:27:03 unless not it's not retrospective so if there was only a dedicated power supply and it was accepted by building control at 2005
02:27:10 at 2005 that in my view would sign off an acceptance that dedicated supply is sufficient at the time yes but no longer by
02:27:21 at the time yes but no longer by 2012. but they as my comment there this would have been raised by the maintenance installation company at the time of installation or 2005. right and then
02:27:34 or 2005. right and then if we go back to your first statement please cst403063 page 44 paragraph 127.
02:27:45 paragraph 127. you say there and i think we need to look
02:27:48 look that's it in the last line uh you say x over's first strategy document of november 2013 which also described them as firefighting lifts
02:28:00 firefighting lifts um are you saying that you relied on x over's outline fire safety strategy for grenfell tower at the time to support your own conclusion about the definition of the lifts
02:28:09 lifts no just an observation that is an observation you make one doing your statement
02:28:13 statement yes i see so that's not ev that's not evidence of what happened at the time that's an observation right i was going to ask you how you got hold of the uh of xover's fire safety
02:28:25 uh of xover's fire safety fast strategy document but presumably that was in disclosure in the inquiry um if i strengthen no i believe i had ex nova's fire strategy given to me sometime
02:28:38 given to me sometime by someone at tmo i'm gonna say paul duncan
02:28:42 duncan right was that the outline fire safety strategy you exhibit namely the one from november 2013. an earlier one from 2012. no i'm going to say what you just said the outline
02:28:53 the outline i see do you remember the circumstances in which he gave it to you was i not to do with the lead better and asking me to whether i would help lead better as part of the construction
02:29:04 of the construction well i mean you tell sorry yes
02:29:09 sorry sir i think you're in a better position to answer questions than i am i'm i'm in the position to ask them sorry sorry
02:29:20 um yes
02:29:29 um if we go to your 29th of december 2010 fra please uh
02:29:42 which is uh
02:29:46 no well perhaps i'll come back to that um
02:29:53 let's i'll come back to that later um would you agree that in fact given the qualifications that we've been talking about and the fact that
02:30:04 talking about and the fact that by 2012 the standards were different putting it neutrally that it would have been much better had you referred to these lifts as fireman's lifts in your fras rather than
02:30:15 fireman's lifts in your fras rather than fire fighting lifts no because there's no definition for fireman's lifts in any of the documents the reason i suggest this is because by calling them firefighting lifts
02:30:28 by calling them firefighting lifts you are at least potentially leading the reader to think that they were compliant with standards prevailing at the time of your fra rather than the time of the installation
02:30:39 rather than the time of the installation and no sir because the use of the word definition firefighting lifts is a direct lift from building regulations and all the other documents as their definitions of a lift
02:30:50 of a lift in a building called the firefighting lift did you agree with mr cahillan in the email i showed you earlier that in fact there are three categories of love left
02:30:59 love left lift firefighting lift and evacuation lift yes
02:31:02 lift yes and therefore by calling them firefighting stroke evacuation lifts that was liable to cause confusion no i don't i disagree and to indicate quite wrongly that they had the requisite features to to be able to be
02:31:14 requisite features to to be able to be used for firefighting and evacuation purposes
02:31:17 purposes i disagree because they are the definitions in all those documents why did you never say in any of your fras that
02:31:24 fras that the time of the installation these conformed with the definition of firefighting lifts but no longer do because i use the i
02:31:35 because i use the i if they would have been up to date brand new lifts
02:31:38 new lifts i would have put firefighting lifts two
02:31:45 8271 whatever the standard is
02:31:49 i'm sorry that's not an answer to my question why did you never simply say when they were installed they conformed to the definition of firefighting lifts but they no longer do because that is not the way i
02:32:00 not the way i understand it they conform to at time of installation and retrospective or if newer standards come out it's not retrospective to upgrade the
02:32:13 it's not retrospective to upgrade the lift
02:32:14 lift to a higher standard of today can i ask you to look please at cta 6011 page 84.
02:32:25 6011 page 84. what i'm going to show you is mr todd's colin todd's conclusion on this on that page at paragraph 8.60
02:32:44 and on page 84 if you if you go there 8.60
02:32:49 8.60 he says however it is clear to me that while it might have been reasonable for mr stokes to accept the original information agreed between salvas and the tmo
02:32:58 the tmo in which as discussed in paragraph 4.34 above he had no involvement mr stokes did appear to lack knowledge in the standards for lifts designed for
02:33:10 in the standards for lifts designed for use
02:33:11 use by the fire and rescue service both modern and historical do you agree with that no
02:33:18 now i want to turn in the in the 10 minutes we have until 4 30 to start on a new topic or new ish topic the use of fras and effect on disabled person evacuation strategy can we go back to
02:33:29 evacuation strategy can we go back to the same page of your first witness statement
02:33:32 statement cst
02:33:35 cst page 44 and go to paragraph 126.
02:33:42 you say there
02:33:46 uh from the information available to me and from any observations when inspecting the tower it seemed that these lifts had these features except for the fact that there
02:33:57 features except for the fact that there was no escape hatch in the top of the lift car
02:33:59 lift car this was noted in section 19 of the 2014 fra and subsequently in my april and june
02:34:04 june 2016 fras would you agree that in your 2014 and 2016 fras there are a number of places where you do not provide the caveat that the lifts do not have an
02:34:15 the caveat that the lifts do not have an escape hatch uh or that they do not meet the requirements of a firefighting or evacuation lift
02:34:22 so for the for this building for this building yes 2014 fras for grenfell tower and the two 2016 frs do you accept that there's a general proposition there are
02:34:34 there's a general proposition there are a number of places in those fras where you don't provide the caveat that there is no escape hatch or that it doesn't meet the requirements of a firefighting or evacuation lift no so i don't sorry sorry i don't don't
02:34:47 no so i don't sorry sorry i don't don't understand that you don't understand well
02:34:49 well it's probably best to get to it by way of some examples can we start with the two
02:34:52 two the 2014 fra please uh cst403
02:35:06 page five and i'm using this as an example but take it from me that it's the same across
02:35:16 across both of the 2016 fras as well page 5
02:35:23 under use and layout of the building at the top of your screen if we look uh about three quarters of
02:35:34 if we look uh about three quarters of the way down the box of text there it says on the ground floor level there is an electrical substation the building's electrical room and the bin room and then it says the two lifts in this building service all the
02:35:45 in this building service all the residential floor levels and both are evacuation stroke firefighting lifts so it can be used for disabled evacuation if needed do you agree no mention there of the absence of a trapdoor
02:35:57 of the absence of a trapdoor in the roof correct because this is the definition at the top is use and layer of the building that information would come further in the document under firefighting lifts page 14
02:36:10 under firefighting lifts page 14 plant and fixed equipment
02:36:16 which is section 5 yes comments or observation about lifts and lyft motor room and then towards the bottom of the text
02:36:27 and then towards the bottom of the text box
02:36:28 box it says in the second but last line both lifts
02:36:31 lifts installed in this building are firefighting evacuation lifts according to the tma's documentation and then over the page these fighting evacuation lifts
02:36:43 these fighting evacuation lifts have their own independent dedicated power supply and fire fighters control switch again no mention there of the absence of a trapdoor on the ceiling correct because it's further carried on
02:36:54 correct because it's further carried on further down in item 18 or 19 where is the whole section on firefighting lifts page 21 section 13 disabled persons we've seen
02:37:07 section 13 disabled persons we've seen this before yes but we didn't look at this part because this this was one of the parts you said was tailor-made um three-quarters of the way down the text box
02:37:16 text box both of the lifts in this building and firefighter stroke evacuation lifts and could be used as part of the evacuation strategy for disabled persons but if these lifts were used this would be under the control of the fire service if they were in attendance
02:37:28 fire service if they were in attendance no mention there the absence of an as an escape hatch correct because it's mentioned further on under the part dedicated to firefighting lifts
02:37:39 but i think i've shown you that in all of the
02:37:43 of the areas of the fra which detail the evacuation strategy for disabled persons you don't provide any caveat that in fact these are not firefighting evacuation lifts uh under
02:37:54 firefighting evacuation lifts uh under present standards by virtue of the absence of the trap door and the ceiling correct because the disabled people wouldn't be using the trap door in the scene and if you carry on further down the document please under the heading for firefighter lifts
02:38:06 under the heading for firefighter lifts it will cover in there mr todd says in his report that you made an incorrect assumption that these lifts could be used for the purposes of firefighting or
02:38:17 for the purposes of firefighting or evacuation that's uh we can see it if you like do you agree with him no why is that because
02:38:25 because under the definition of a firefighting lift and evacuation lift these lifts could be used for both those purposes
02:38:34 do you accept that your statement that these were firefighting or stroke evacuation lifts would have misled the reader of this document who wanted to know
02:38:45 document who wanted to know the evacuation strategy for disabled persons in grenfell tower no you don't and you don't accept i imagine all say that that that your statements posed a risk to life to anyone who sought to use them in that
02:38:56 anyone who sought to use them in that way no now can we go to lfb uh five zeroes one five four please
02:39:23 uh this is the letter of the 17th of february 2014 to all heads of heads of housing in all london boroughs and almos and social housing landlords and
02:39:34 and social housing landlords and the topic is advice on smoke ventilation systems and maintenance of lifts for fire service use in residential blocks of flats
02:39:41 of flats you see that um did you ever see a copy of this letter it doesn't look familiar it doesn't look familiar were you familiar with the guidance that steve
02:39:52 familiar with the guidance that steve turek
02:39:52 turek who was the author of this letter issued with it
02:39:55 with it or within it i should say what guidance well
02:39:59 well it's a fair question just let me just show you uh if you turn please to page uh two well page three in fact is where it
02:40:10 well page three in fact is where it starts maintenance for lifts for fire service use there's um a long page of guidance there
02:40:19 about maintenance of lift for fire service use in housing stock above 18 meters in height do you remember ever seeing this this looks like a direct lift in um double nine double nine
02:40:32 in um double nine double nine well uh that's certainly referred to you're right uh let's just look and see what it says under uh this section if we start with the fourth paragraph here it says
02:40:43 paragraph here it says where it has been identified that a fireman's
02:40:47 fireman's quotes lift as opposed to a fire fighting lift is installed within a building
02:40:51 building then we would request that the responsible person liaises with the relevant london fire brigade local safety
02:40:57 safety regulation team to advise them of the premises address and style of lift present in accordance with sharing of information detailed in article 13 3c of the regulatory reform fire safety order of 2005.
02:41:08 of 2005. this allows any necessary pre-planning to be undertaken in consideration of a familiarization visit to the premises by our crews
02:41:15 our crews and then he goes on the type and functionality of lift for fire service use should also be included in the fire risk assessment for the building and consideration given to the potential impact that a fireman's quotes lift may have on any fire
02:41:27 quotes lift may have on any fire incident that may occur on the upper floors of a high-rise building if crews are not able to use the lift beyond the initial stages of an incident then the potential effect of of this on safety of residents must be considered and recorded within the fire risk assessment now even
02:41:40 within the fire risk assessment now even if you weren't aware of this letter at the time mr stokes do you agree that the reason for identifying correctly whether there is a fireman's lift or a fire fighting lift in a building
02:41:51 in a building is first of all to allow for pre-planning to be undertaken by the crews
02:41:54 crews correct yes and also to consider and record the potential effect on the safety of residents if the crews are not able to use the lift beyond the initial stages of the incident
02:42:04 incident correct yes do you agree that by you're not correctly identifying and advising the tmo
02:42:09 the tmo that the lifts were only fireman's lifts uh as opposed to fire fighting left by current standards that meant that the requisite
02:42:18 requisite consideration and planning set out in steve churrick's letter could not be undertaken i disagree why do you disagree because where there were firemen lifted in buildings i identified those
02:42:30 buildings i identified those and they rebuild older buildings that the tml had and were not firefighting lifts so let's go back then to 24 to the 2014
02:42:41 so let's go back then to 24 to the 2014 fra
02:42:42 fra at cst403157 and look at page 26.
02:42:54 at cst403157 and look at page 26. this is where you refer to the absence of the hatch 26
02:43:06 it's a long piece of text uh but if you look up it's about a quarter of the way down both the lifts in this building do you see that yes our
02:43:17 see that yes our fighting evacuation stroke firefighting lifts and i i apologize i should have shown you this the page before which is the the section this sits under which is section 19 fixed
02:43:28 section 19 fixed fire systems and equipment and if if you flip back please to page 25
02:43:35 25 you'll see it
02:43:39 uh second item there evacuation stroke fire
02:43:43 fire fighting lift so you've identified it clearly there with a tick yes and if we go to page 26 we'll see the qualification the view so can i just yes of course so the tick go back to
02:43:56 yes of course so the tick go back to page 20 sorry if you go back to page 25 please in this document so type the type of systems in this building
02:44:04 building dry rising main evacuation automatic opening vent and hose rails tick those are the systems in that building so those would change depending on what was in each building
02:44:15 depending on what was in each building so that is not a standard that is you add those in so the tick in this box represents so the question is type of system in this building those four and they they are in that
02:44:27 those four and they they are in that building
02:44:27 building well your ticket you're saying that this building has an evacuation firefighting lifts in it yes so i'm just explaining that the number of items can change
02:44:38 the number of items can change in there depending on which building you're in no i understand that but my my suggestion to you was that here is
02:44:46 here is a simple and unqualified tick yes against the existence of firefighting lifts in grenfell tower yes yes
02:44:53 yes yes 2014. now let's go to the text that i wanted to show you if we go to page 20 um six please
02:45:04 a quarter of the way down it says both the lifts in this building are evacuation stroke firefighting lifts the lifts
02:45:10 lifts have the standard fire fighter override controls fitted say that the fire and rescue service can take control of these lifts and use them as they see fit to do so in the event of an emergency please see significant finding
02:45:21 emergency please see significant finding sheets regarding the relocation of these lifts
02:45:26 and then you can skip um the next few lines
02:45:30 lines and then pick it up uh just below that uh where it says the the power supplies to each lift are as required for a fire fighter evacuation lift along with all
02:45:43 fighter evacuation lift along with all other requirements for weight and size etc
02:45:45 etc but there is no roof hatch in the lifts well it wasn't correct was it that the power supplies to each lifter is required
02:45:53 required for a firefighter evacuation lift because there was no dual supply there's a dedicated supply yes but there's no dual supply there's no there is no dedic dual supply correct because they are not to that standard
02:46:04 because they are not to that standard doesn't say that though does it doesn't say the power supplies to each lift are as was required at the time of installation for a firefighter lift does it it does not but it does not say
02:46:16 does it it does not but it does not say that these are power supplies to a lift to current standards either no but did do you agree with me just looking at it that it gives the impression that the power supplies to each lift are as required
02:46:27 each lift are as required as at 2014 for a fire fighter stroke evacuation lift as at 2014. no that is from what i read there the power supply for each
02:46:38 power supply for each is as required for a firefighter evacuation lift
02:46:43 mr chairman is that a convenient moment yes i think it is i think we'll stop there for the day mr stokes um again i'm going to have to ask you to come back and deal with some more questions tomorrow
02:46:54 deal with some more questions tomorrow so and we'll resume at 10 o'clock tomorrow please and again please don't talk to anyone about your evidence or anything to do with it
02:47:02 with it over the break okay all right thank you very much good you'd like to go to the ocean please
02:47:22 right thank you very much 10 o'clock tomorrow please
02:47:37 you