Celotex Evidence - Wednesday 11th November 2020 (1/2)

Full transcript

00:00:17 good morning everyone welcome to today's hearing today we're going to start hearing evidence from witnesses for celetex who were the manufacturers of most of the

00:00:28 manufacturers of most of the insulation that was used in the refurbishment yes mr millet mr chairman good morning i'm now going to call mr jonathan room please thank you

00:00:52 okay if you can just repeat after me i do solemnly sincerely and truly i do solemnly sincerely and truly declare and affirm declare and affirm

00:01:05 declare and affirm declare and affirm that the evidence i shall give that the evidence that i shall give shall be the truth shall be the truth the whole truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth nothing but the truth

00:01:16 truth nothing but the truth thank you very much mr roon would you like to sit down and make yourself comfortable thank you

00:01:25 thank you right yes mr miller mr chairman thank you mr

00:01:29 you mr room good morning uh can i begin by thanking you very much for coming to the inquiry today and giving us your evidence that you're going to give us if you have any difficulty understanding any of my questions

00:01:40 any of my questions that i'm asking you i'm very happy to repeat the question or put the question in a different way if you need a break at any point and just let us know we will be taking scheduled breaks mid-morning and

00:01:51 scheduled breaks mid-morning and mid-afternoon and could you please also try and keep your voice up so that the person who sits to your immediate right who's the transcriber can get down your evidence

00:02:02 can get down your evidence now um you've made one statement dated the 28th of september 2018 i think could i please show you that it will be at cel301031

00:02:17 uh it should also be on the screen in front of you as well as in the folder on your desk

00:02:21 your desk can you confirm that that is your statement uh there's nothing coming up on the screen just to explain you haven't got it on your screen yet no there's nothing coming up on the screen now

00:02:29 now right well i'm going to solve that i can just see you just a minute right that's not going to help you well we'll just see if we can can we solve that problem solve that no

00:02:40 that problem solve that no yes it's up very good thank you very much if anything happens again with your screen please let us know straight away we'll solve it um is that your statement looking at the first page it seems to be

00:02:51 looking at the first page it seems to be yes yes okay can i show you page 24 please

00:02:55 please is that your signature it is yes above the date and the name it is have you read this witness statement recently i have and are its contents true can you confirm they are and have you discussed your evidence

00:03:06 and have you discussed your evidence with anybody before coming here today no i'm going to begin some questions about your qualifications if i may um can i show you your statement at page four

00:03:16 four and look at paragraph 17 and 18 with you at 17 you say you have five gcses in mathematics english language english literature physics and chemistry

00:03:27 literature physics and chemistry and a b tech national diploma in business and finance from brooklyn's college

00:03:32 college and the cscs construction skills certification scheme construction related occupation card registration 026-2251

00:03:43 and you also set out your experience at paragraphs 19 through to 22 and you say and i'm not going to read it all out to you but in 1994 you joined savile and holdsworth

00:03:55 in 1994 you joined savile and holdsworth as a client support executive they were psychometric testers in 1997 you joined ge lighting as part of general electric as a pricing specialist and if we go over the page to page five

00:04:06 and if we go over the page to page five and go to paragraph 21 we see that you would then joined great eastern trading in 2004 as a national account manager looking after the company's account with b and q

00:04:17 after the company's account with b and q and in 2007 march 2007 you joined hilti as an account manager in the m e mechanical and electrical division for the west london region

00:04:28 the west london region as you say there and then after three years you became a project manager in the company for all client construction and engineering relationships on the heathrow airport campus and you explain a little bit more there

00:04:39 and you explain a little bit more there about

00:04:40 about your experiences at hiltic um hilti am i right in thinking that uh beyond your btech in business finance and your cscs

00:04:49 cscs card you have no technical qualifications that's correct and you've got no professional qualifications either no that's correct and you've never worked as an architect no or a designer

00:05:00 no or a designer no or in a building control body no before you join celetex had you ever done any professional training on the building regulations no i hadn't and so

00:05:11 building regulations no i hadn't and so you

00:05:11 you didn't have any training either on approved document b or the uk or european

00:05:16 european testing regimes for materials no now you joined celetex in march 2014 i think didn't you that's correct and prior to that you'd worked at hilti since 2007 as you say paragraph 22 in

00:05:29 since 2007 as you say paragraph 22 in your statement that's correct now hilti is a company is it that provides technology and services for the construction industry is that right yeah that's correct and from 2012

00:05:40 from 2012 is it right that you worked as a sales specialist in hilty's building envelope division

00:05:45 division correct and uh you i think say that that was the design and build of exterior of a building correct that's that's what it involved and did that include working on projects with rain screen cladding

00:05:57 with rain screen cladding it did it did so did we take it from that

00:06:00 that that you had some knowledge of cladding projects by the time you joined celetex i did yeah let's look at cel301031 page

00:06:11 i did yeah let's look at cel301031 page five this is your statement of paragraph 22 and the last sentence there

00:06:16 there uh you uh you say that it was that experience and namely your experience at hilti's building envelope division that led you to join celetex in march 2014

00:06:27 2014 that's right is it that's part of the reason yes what was the other part i was looking for a new position and a different company to work for i'd

00:06:39 and a different company to work for i'd decided that i wanted to leave hilti and experience a new job with better pay uh were you recruited specifically

00:06:50 uh were you recruited specifically because of your understanding of sales in relation to building envelope systems no when you joined celetex your job title i think was major project stroke specification manager that's

00:07:02 stroke specification manager that's correct

00:07:03 correct and is that effectively or was that effectively a sales role basically yes right now we look at paragraph 27 of your statement on the next page please page six

00:07:16 next page please page six uh you uh identify uh a an exhibit an email exchange there and if we look at um paragraph 27 you say my role at celetex

00:07:29 paragraph 27 you say my role at celetex was to promote its insulation products and services to key stakeholders such as architects developers main contractors installers and consultants in london and the home counties can we take it from that

00:07:40 counties can we take it from that that the potential customers for celetex products

00:07:43 products that you were expecting to deal with would include some highly qualified professionals that's correct and those professionals might well ask you difficult technical questions

00:07:56 you difficult technical questions from time to time they would yes was there a support system or resource within celetex that you could go to if you had trouble answering any technical inquiries from potential

00:08:08 technical inquiries from potential customers

00:08:08 customers such as architects or developers there there was yes who was that how what was it so the the system was that there was a technical

00:08:19 technical team within celestex who were basically desk bound who would be taking incoming calls or emails any sort of inquiries namely or mostly significantly the

00:08:32 namely or mostly significantly the thermal calculations requested and if there's any other further performance-led criteria that needed to be answered then that team would be the the one that would predominantly

00:08:44 the the one that would predominantly deal with those inquiries i said who ran that desk who ran the technical team um i think at the

00:08:53 the do you have a picture of my organogram that you can bring up yes we do um it might be useful to have a look to refresh my memory it's cel 301298

00:09:08 it's cel 301298 so if we look at the the third column i don't know if you can blow that up a bit more

00:09:12 more um the the head of technical for celetex was

00:09:16 was um rob warren and below him then there were different uh areas so the person who headed up the sort of the call center team the technical team

00:09:28 the call center team the technical team under rob warren would have been jamie hayes so he would have been dealing with the sort of the day-to-day running of inquiries that were coming through by email by phone yes and

00:09:41 yes and we can see louise garlic's name there and also jamie hayes jamie hayes is the person i just referred to who was looking after the technical team yeah now you say that your role

00:09:54 yeah now you say that your role involved delivering cpd presentations that's correct what kinds of presentations did you give it would have been it or it was sorry i

00:10:05 it would have been it or it was sorry i should say a cbd which was all-encompassing to explain the

00:10:10 the the role of celetex the products that they offered and the services they offered so things like the thermal calculations the products where they could be used and

00:10:21 and also sap and s-bem assessments which was a separate company which

00:10:28 which was under the celotex banner who would be able to work out the complete uh thermal performance of a building

00:10:36 building did you um give cpd presentations to architects habitually i did yes so you would go to their offices would you and present when when requested i would yes

00:10:47 would yes right and what was the commercial purpose of celetech sending somebody like you to make those sorts of presentations it was to engage with the the architects at sort of the beginning of the design

00:10:59 at sort of the beginning of the design process

00:10:59 process as it were not necessarily on a particular project but just to instigate a sort of an interest in the use of celotex products over one of their competitors i see so

00:11:10 over one of their competitors i see so with an eye to them selecting teletex correct instead of another competitor of yours yes i see and did you ever give presentations on uh

00:11:21 did you ever give presentations on uh fire performance of any celetex product i didn't know did you ever give any presentation cpd presentations involving anything technical no not there was just the one general cpd that

00:11:33 there was just the one general cpd that covered

00:11:35 covered all of the products and the services

00:11:39 did any of those presentations include the fr-5000 product before august 2014 when rs 5000 was launched

00:11:48 launched it would likely be one of the products that was in the whole mix so i would have gone through

00:11:55 through each of the products and where that would have been relevant to be used or potentially used on on the building right did you uh present if that's the right word

00:12:06 uh present if that's the right word where fr 5000 could be used on a building

00:12:11 building it would i can't recall but it would it's likely what claims do you remember in general you would make to those listening to your cpd presentations about where fr 5000 could

00:12:24 presentations about where fr 5000 could be used

00:12:25 be used i suppose before any um above 18 meters or any reference to the the high-rise buildings it would just be a generic

00:12:37 a generic application on a wall of a building right

00:12:42 did you ever say it can't be used above 18 meters in those initial stages no that wasn't part of the presentation did you ever give cpd presentations to

00:12:54 did you ever give cpd presentations to other colleagues of yours within celetex no the whole purpose of the cpd was to present to professionals who needed to earn points towards their professional development

00:13:05 towards their professional development i follow did you ever give these cpd presentations to building control officers

00:13:11 officers not that i can remember no or approved inspectors no i don't think so what about local authorities more generally not that i can remember no right

00:13:20 no right can i then turn to another topic which is the properties of celetex pir products and i want to understand your understanding of fr 5000 and rs

00:13:31 your understanding of fr 5000 and rs 5000 at the time of the grenfell tower project

00:13:34 project how much technical knowledge do you have or did you have at that time in relation to the manufacturing of celetex's products very little i suppose the extent was to

00:13:47 very little i suppose the extent was to be shown around the factory and given the bullet points as to the performance of the material you understood at the very least that that celetex fr 5000 and then latterly rs 5000 were pir

00:14:00 5000 and then latterly rs 5000 were pir boards poly poly isocyanurate yes i was aware of those and that they were thermo setting in insulins correct definition yeah yes now

00:14:11 insulins correct definition yeah yes now um mr bailey ray bailey of harley said and i'll show you what he says in his statement it's har3010184

00:14:24 his statement it's har3010184 at page 32 please and i just want to show you what he says at paragraph 126

00:14:33 and this is under the question that he's been asked how commonly used are one these particular cladding panels to this type of insulation etc and i don't need anything else and in

00:14:45 and i don't need anything else and in 126 para126 he says the introduction of part

00:14:48 part l requiring the upgrade of insulation values led to the development of rigid foam boards made from pir or pur and these were aggressively marketed to the industry as a whole

00:15:00 marketed to the industry as a whole in order to meet the government's demands for energy conservation do you agree with him that the need to meet thermal efficiency requirements was at your time at celetex a major driver of the insulation market

00:15:14 driver of the insulation market i think in all aspects of the the application of insulation products it was

00:15:18 was a driver from the for the government to save energy basically yeah and the use of these types of products was

00:15:26 was one of the ways of retaining energy within the building yes so thermal efficiency effectively means reducing the amount of heat transfer in and out of the building the amount of heat lost in the amount of

00:15:38 the amount of heat lost in the amount of energy and cost lost yes heat loss or cold gain if you like yes exactly is it fair to say that better insulation prevents heat transfer and therefore the better the insulation for that purpose the better

00:15:50 for that purpose the better for marketing purposes that's true yes and and were you aware at the time that um

00:15:58 um the performance of the thermal performance was represented by something called a lambda value that's correct now you may be aware the the product um that was originally specified for use

00:16:11 um that was originally specified for use on grenfell tower was fr5000 did you know that i was made aware

00:16:18 of that at some point yes at some point during your involvement with the grenfell tower project so far as you were i think it was brought to my attention by harley yes do you remember when

00:16:31 i i can't remember off the top of my head but it may have been late 2014 right we'll we'll look at some documents which might help the recollection in in due course thank you before i go

00:16:43 in due course thank you before i go there can we look at max 50216 please

00:16:49 this is the data sheet for celetex fr 5000 and it's issue 2 and if you look at the top right hand corner of this

00:17:00 the top right hand corner of this document you can see that it's dated january 2012 so that's before you joined in 2014 as we know um when you arrived at celetex in march 2014

00:17:12 arrived at celetex in march 2014 did you become familiar with this document

00:17:17 i i would have been able to reference it if i needed to look at particular data within it yes did you uh after you arrived have an opportunity or a need to look at it in any detail

00:17:29 or a need to look at it in any detail in order to answer any questions that a customer might have posted i may have done yes i often used documents like these to refresh my memory and to be able to give over facts

00:17:40 to be able to give over facts are you able to tell us who within celetex compiled this document i from experience it would have been the product between the product

00:17:52 the product between the product management and marketing departments who won basically

00:17:58 can we look at the first paragraph

00:18:04 it says under the introduction celetex fr 5000

00:18:07 fr 5000 is our premium performance pir solution and then it says it's rather a long sentence

00:18:15 sentence through ongoing product innovation and breakthrough design fr 5000 represents pioneering progression with the pir market offering an insulation board with then you read down a little bit and

00:18:26 with then you read down a little bit and it says class naught fire performance do you see that i do

00:18:31 i do and then if you look at the third chunk of text down there are six bullet points underneath a sentence that says with with fr 5000 you are specifying an insulation board

00:18:43 you are specifying an insulation board that

00:18:43 that and then it says has class naught fire performance throughout the entire product

00:18:49 product in accordance with bs476 and did you ever have an occasion to look at those references to

00:19:00 occasion to look at those references to class not fire performance that i've just read to you in this document at the time

00:19:05 so in in what respect did you ever have a need to look at fr 5000 fire performance and look at this document in order to check it um i may have done if i was

00:19:15 if i was if i was asked what did you understand the significance of fr 5000 having class naught fire performance to have been just that it met with a

00:19:27 to have been just that it met with a particular british standard what did that signify to you

00:19:36 that my understanding of this these types of products or this product was that classo represented a particular two references in the bs 476 standard

00:19:49 two references in the bs 476 standard for i think it's surface spread of flame and fire propagation and having those both passed would then relate to the um

00:20:00 would then relate to the um the class o or sorry class zero it was in the industry reference class o quite often performance and what would be the benefit of a product having class

00:20:12 product having class naught b did you think

00:20:17 i was told that it was it was a laboratory test and it was it was some sort of resistance to to fire

00:20:24 to fire right did you know anything more than that no

00:20:28 that no did you ever go and look at the tests on which this claim was based no i didn't i wouldn't have had access to those sorts of documents you wouldn't have had access to them does that mean you were barred access or

00:20:39 does that mean you were barred access or you wouldn't have had access easily well i don't think any anyone within the sales team would have ever had access to any of the test data behind any of these products what if you were

00:20:50 any of these products what if you were challenged by a knowledgeable customer or architect or designer who actually asked for these tests well i would i would pose the question to those that had access to those documents and and ask them to you know either

00:21:03 and and ask them to you know either release those documents if if they would i don't think they ever did um because i was not party to those those documents

00:21:12 documents you in the last two answers giving me the impression and please correct it if it's the wrong impression mr roon that the sales team was was essentially barred from having it from actually

00:21:24 barred from having it from actually seeing the test data in other words that is something that you wouldn't be allowed to see is that right it's something we were never given we were

00:21:35 something we were never given we were it's a it's only late lately i suppose in the

00:21:38 in the uh in my tenure within celetex when i was posed those exact type of questions could i have access or could this specialist have access to

00:21:48 access to things like the the fire testing documents that i was told that they were i suppose trying to think of the word um

00:22:01 i can't think of the word but they weren't allowed out of out of the business

00:22:05 business out of um the custodian of custodians of those documents right but but within within celetex just to pin the point down a little bit more do i take it that there was a

00:22:16 do i take it that there was a effectively a wall between the sales team and the technical team whereby the sales team would not be allowed to have access to the technical data the test data yes we were only allowed we were only

00:22:27 yes we were only allowed we were only shown what we were allowed to be shown looking at the um fourth bullet point down has class naught fire performance throughout the entire product in accordance with bs476

00:22:40 entire product in accordance with bs476 what did you understand at the time if if anything by the expression class naught fire performance throughout the entire product in accordance with bs476

00:22:51 accordance with bs476 it's focusing on the words throughout the entire product

00:22:56 i think it meant for my recollection it meant that the the whole product so the the product was comprises of the foam board but also of the

00:23:06 the aluminium what they call the phaser on either side and as far as i can understand the close class

00:23:13 class o or zero related to the full product or all of the components combined did you do you know whether fr

00:23:25 did you do you know whether fr 5000 5000 as opposed to 4 000 ever was ever subjected to a bs 476 test of the core i wouldn't be able to

00:23:36 test of the core i wouldn't be able to tell you that right did you know that fr 5000 was not a material of limited combustibility i knew that yes you knew that yeah did

00:23:48 i knew that yes you knew that yeah did you know that it had not passed a test which met criteria under br135

00:23:53 br135 using full scale test data under bs8414 i knew yes i knew once rs 5000 that was the reason that rs 5000 was brought to the market indeed and

00:24:04 brought to the market indeed and therefore did you understand that fr 5000 couldn't be used in external wall constructions on buildings over 18 meters i did you did did you always know that

00:24:15 always know that after you joined celetex i can't remember when exactly but it was asked

00:24:22 asked of us at one point um for a project and i passed that question to the technical team and they responded that fr 5000 could not be used

00:24:34 fr 5000 could not be used in a building above 18 meters now let's go to

00:24:37 go to clg 50224 please at page 119 and i'd like just to show you um this

00:24:49 and i'd like just to show you um this part of appendix a of approved document b now mr room i'm going to proceed on the basis that you're not familiar with this document or at least weren't familiar with it at the time you were at celetex

00:25:00 with it at the time you were at celetex would that be fair it was a document that i was introduced to so it was one that i would would have been become more familiar with during my time at celetex thank you

00:25:13 during my time at celetex thank you let's look at this on the page appendix a performance of materials products and structures note two any test evidence used to substantiate the fire resistance rating of a construction

00:25:25 of a construction should be carefully checked to ensure that it demonstrates compliance that is adequate and applicable to the intended use small differences in detail such as fixing method joints dimensions and the introduction of insulation materials etc

00:25:37 introduction of insulation materials etc may significantly affect the rating [Music]

00:25:40 [Music] were you aware of that note within appendix

00:25:43 appendix at a of adb when you joined celetex or at any time thereafter when you worked at celetex i think latterly after the launch of rs

00:25:55 i think latterly after the launch of rs 5000

00:25:57 5000 and just to complete the tour of the document

00:26:00 document um can we go please to page one two two and look at paragraph 16 in the bottom left-hand corner uh

00:26:07 corner uh it says there results of tests on proprietary materials are frequently given in literature available from manufacturers and trade associations any reference used to substantiate the surface spread of flame rating of a

00:26:19 surface spread of flame rating of a material or product should be carefully checked to ensure that it's suitable adequate and applicable to the construction to be used

00:26:25 used small differences in detail such as thickness substrate color form fixings adhesives etc may significantly affect the rating again were you familiar with that provision in in approved document b

00:26:41 i i would have read this document at some point um again at some point uh through my tenure within saturday's most most likely after the launch of rs5000 right

00:26:52 right were you trained or equipped to answer any questions from customers who did choose carefully to check the test evidence supporting the claim for class naught

00:27:01 naught in the fr 5000 data sheet for example like i would only be able to respond to them with the literature that i had available to me what would you do or would have done uh

00:27:13 what would you do or would have done uh if

00:27:13 if an architect or designer or a consultant had come to you with paragraph 16 that we can see on the page there and says and said uh i want carefully to check

00:27:25 and said uh i want carefully to check your reference which you're using to substantiate your class naught surface spread of flame claim i would have forwarded that question directly to the technical team

00:27:37 directly to the technical team to to be answered yes i see

00:27:47 um we've been we're looking very briefly at lambda values um now we can see if we can go back to the data sheet perhaps we don't need to but that was marketed as having a a lambda value of 21 0.21 do you

00:28:01 a lambda value of 21 0.21 do you remember that i do yes were you aware of how celetex went about quantifying the lambda value of its products in general it from when i joined the company i was

00:28:15 it from when i joined the company i was there was a there was an introduction to the company so um i had things like um a factory tour for instance and that involved sort of walking around with members

00:28:26 with members uh within the factory um to take a look at the the different production lines and also the sort of um i suppose the little testing area they had where

00:28:37 the little testing area they had where they sort of tried to show me the cribs in which they performed the um well the class solar class zero uh testing the bs467 which um

00:28:49 uh testing the bs467 which um they needed to take samples of each of the products to uh validate and one of which was the um the lambda value there was a way of testing the lambda value i didn't really pay too much attention i

00:29:01 i didn't really pay too much attention i wouldn't be able to tell you too much about the process but i knew that they did it

00:29:04 did it in house within the factory and they had to take spot checks of each of the production runs of the material right now can we go to cel401200

00:29:15 now can we go to cel401200 this is an email from jonathan roper john roper as he calls himself to you on the 28th of april 2014 and there are some attachments to it as you can see

00:29:26 you can see and he says jonathan has promised find attach the training presentations we've gone through this morning as well as bs 13165 the standard all pir manufacturers produced to and bs 84141

00:29:38 manufacturers produced to and bs 84141 the cladding fire test any questions give me a shout

00:29:44 do you remember uh attending that training presentation all those training presentations he's referring to not specifically but this might have been part of my

00:29:56 been part of my oh it would have been part of the sort of initial training that was given to me uh as would have been given to anyone who started with the company was there any discussion during those

00:30:07 was there any discussion during those presentations to which he's referring of what came to be launched as rs 5000 later in the year i can't be sure and let's look at

00:30:20 i can't be sure and let's look at cel401201 please

00:30:25 this is the first of the attachments the ce marking of best in class slides if you look at that it's entitled technical training and if you look at the next page

00:30:37 you look at the next page it says ce marking best in class and q a with um 45 minutes being allocated to best in class and if you go to slide 25 if we can there's a quiz uh and

00:30:50 there's a quiz uh and and uh i don't even remember this quiz do you remember this quiz not right previously no no uh look at question four um it says which two tests must be

00:31:01 um it says which two tests must be passed to obtain class naught fire rating you see that i do and uh

00:31:06 uh we could see the answer which is given on the next slide at page 26

00:31:12 um bullet point 4 bs 476 part 6 and 7. does it follow that by this point this is late april 2014 at the very

00:31:24 this is late april 2014 at the very latest you were aware of what class naught was and what tests um you had to pass in order to obtain it that would be correct yes yes

00:31:35 um the slides then go on to address the history of the celetex fr 5000 range don't they remember that

00:31:43 let's look at them if you're yes please yeah going to puzzle over it that paragraph 28 sorry slide 28 on page 28 we can pick that up history of fr stroke

00:31:54 we can pick that up history of fr stroke cg and it says at the top of the page there fr 4000 launched in april 2008 with a lambda of 22 and class naught

00:32:06 with a lambda of 22 and class naught fire performance strategy to complete compet sorry strategy to create competitive advantage with phenolic solely on fire now just pausing there did you understand that the reason for the

00:32:17 understand that the reason for the development of celetex's fr range was to compete with phenolic products on fire performance i don't recall that particular statement no right did you get the impression at this

00:32:29 right did you get the impression at this time late april 2014 that the development of pir products was to compete with kingspan cool firm k15

00:32:41 k15 particular as a particular product not not particularly no i call firm as a range was or is their highest performance range of boards and

00:32:52 boards and i can only deduce that the idea that celetex were launching the 5 000 over the 4 000 would mean that they would bridge that thermal gap make the make it more competitive thermally

00:33:07 if we go to page 51 we can see slide 51

00:33:16 and that says you see it it sets out a comparison there between phenolic and fr 5000 and it look it says in the fourth bullet point down class naught throughout the entire product

00:33:28 throughout the entire product um was that a claim in relation to fr 5000

00:33:31 5000 looks like it was it looks like it yes do you remember whether there was any elaboration of that point during this training presentation

00:33:42 i think it was something to do with the way that kingspan and their statement of class o or zero um didn't apply to the full product

00:33:53 um didn't apply to the full product the complete product but i can't be sure exactly what element of it

00:34:00 did not meet that criteria so you refer to kingspan in that answer so do we take it from that that the reference to phenolic in the title banner celetex

00:34:13 phenolic in the title banner celetex fr 5000 versus phenolic should be read as versus kingspan k15 i would say so yes because kingspan were or are the

00:34:24 kingspan were or are the the largest uh manufacturer of the phenolic type of insulation boards in the in the country does the fourth bullet point down therefore tell us that the view in celeste at the time

00:34:37 that the view in celeste at the time was that kingspan k15 did not have class naught throughout the entire product well i think the the k range not just k15 because fr 5000 wasn't up against any particular

00:34:49 fr 5000 wasn't up against any particular product of kingspan that would have been the rs 5000 that came later so the the k relates to cool therm and that would have been that range of boards high performance boards

00:35:01 range of boards high performance boards and just to repeat the question does that tell us that the view in celotex at the time was that the k range sold by kingspan did not have class naught throughout the entire product

00:35:12 product i think that's what was

00:35:15 was being put out there yes and was there any discussion that this presentation about what class not throughout the entire product meant i can't be sure but i think it was

00:35:27 i can't be sure but i think it was something to do with the the foam and the aluminium faces being the the complete package right so classo was class zero related to the whole thing rather than

00:35:39 thing rather than just the aluminium or just the foam but i can't remember which way around it was can we look at cel401203 please

00:35:55 this is one of the other presentations that john roper sent you on the 28th of april

00:35:59 april she attached this is about third party approvals

00:36:03 approvals as you can see from the first page can we go to page 13 in that please

00:36:10 which is the last slide in the deck and it says as a title what we don't have dot dot dot uh lpcb fm approval

00:36:22 uh lpcb fm approval above 18 meter fire test now do you remember this particular slide does it ring a bell with you not particularly nice um do you remember

00:36:34 not particularly nice um do you remember whether you had any calls to ask yourself

00:36:37 yourself what does above 80 meter fair test mean

00:36:42 i think i may have known that term from um

00:36:45 um being in cladding or being around sort of cladding products before that time when i was at hilti so that wouldn't have been a new term to me right what did you think it meant well certain products of a certain

00:36:58 well certain products of a certain nature or flammable nature could not be used

00:37:01 used above a certain height in a building right um

00:37:04 right um just to try to tease out the point did that

00:37:08 that mean that uh celotex didn't have a material of limited combustibility well they i don't think they ever have had a product of limited combustibility

00:37:20 had a product of limited combustibility it could never have been classified as that right um what what was that what would have been the test in the above 80 relative fire test

00:37:28 test that you understood this slide to mean would it be a test for limited combustibility or a test under bs8414 it would have been a test under bs8414

00:37:45 and that would have been distinct from whether a product had class naught clearly it yeah because class class o or class naught would not have qualified that pr a product to be used

00:37:57 qualified that pr a product to be used above 18 meters if it was an insulin yes exactly and just just to be clear on this it's right to think that fr 5000 had passed the tests to achieve a class naught

00:38:06 naught classification but hadn't passed an above 18 meter fire test correct in your experience as it stood at the time was this understanding

00:38:17 at the time was this understanding in in other words there was a difference between class naught and a a test under 8414 one that was generally shared by your customers

00:38:27 customers i think the professionals in that in that market was yeah the answer would have been yes right

00:38:34 in general at the time was your experience that the customers you were dealing with knew that as an insulation material fr 5000

00:38:46 5000 either had to be a material of limited combustibility or else had passed a full-scale test under bs 8414 to br 135 criteria in order to be used

00:38:57 to br 135 criteria in order to be used above 18 meters i would i would hope they would yes but i can't i can't be sure

00:39:06 now i'm going to ask you a few questions about approved document b

00:39:12 were you aware in and from march 2014 when you joined celetex that um approved document b was part of the building regulations

00:39:23 building regulations i would have known yes yes were you familiar with part b not specifically no right were you familiar with the requirement in uh part b4 of the building regulations

00:39:34 uh part b4 of the building regulations themselves relating to external flame spread not until after the launch of the rs-5000

00:39:42 rs-5000 when it became far more important were you aware of the general principle under b4 that the external walls of the building shall adequately resist the spread of fire over the walls not at

00:39:55 spread of fire over the walls not at that stage within my tenure at the company when did you become aware during your tenure of the company of that requirement this would have been after the launch of the rs 5000 that and that sort of voyage of discovery of

00:40:06 and that sort of voyage of discovery of finding out a bit more about the regulations or about feedback from potential customers

00:40:12 customers so you you embarked you on a voyage of discovery about approved document b after the launch of rs 5000 it it made me more aware of the document and my need to sort of better understand

00:40:25 my need to sort of better understand that document just from the questions that were being asked by certain customers did you go away and read

00:40:31 read the bits of approved document b that you felt you needed to in order to be able to address your customers concerns i generally uh familiarize myself with

00:40:43 i generally uh familiarize myself with parts of the document that i was being referred to i can't say that i particularly understand understood everything within that document implicitly but i at least knew where

00:40:54 implicitly but i at least knew where to look if i was directed did you at least lean this much from approved document b when you did look at it that there were special requirements in relation to buildings above 18 meters so far as concerned

00:41:05 far as concerned the external wall construction i did yes now we've seen from the 28th of april email

00:41:14 email that we looked at at cel401200 let's just go back to that but we can see from that that mr roper sent you uh bs 8414 part one

00:41:28 uh bs 8414 part one as well as other things didn't he he did yes the last attachment was that the first time that you became aware

00:41:37 aware of uh bs a414 part one or as he calls it the cladding fire test it may have been yes right did you open the attachments and have a look at the

00:41:49 the attachments and have a look at the at the test i would have i would have thought i would have done yes right you say you would have done was it because you were it was your habit to open attachments to documents when you were sent them

00:42:01 documents when you were sent them yeah generally can we go to clg 50224 at page 95 please

00:42:13 i think given the answers you've given us just a moment ago we can take this quite quickly um here is section 12 of the proof document b construction of external walls and if

00:42:24 construction of external walls and if you look at the right hand column under the heading external wall construction you can see that it says that paragraph 12.5

00:42:35 the external envelope of a building should not provide a medium for fire spread if it is likely to be a risk to health

00:42:42 health or safety the use it says the use of combustible materials in the cladding system

00:42:48 system and extensive cavities may present such a risk in tall buildings and then it goes on external walls should either meet the guidance given in paragraphs 12.6 to 12.9

00:42:59 paragraphs 12.6 to 12.9 or meet the performance criteria given in the bre report for performance of external thermal insulation for walls of multi-storey buildings br-135 for cladding systems using full-scale

00:43:12 for cladding systems using full-scale test data

00:43:13 test data from bs8414 part 1 2002 or bs 8414 part 2 2005. i don't think i need the rest of that

00:43:25 did you uh

00:43:28 discover this paragraph or section of uh the approved documents uh during your voyage of discovery after august 2014 or do you think you looked

00:43:39 august 2014 or do you think you looked at this before that

00:43:42 it's hard to tell but ultimately celestex did not have a product that was usable above 18 meters so at that point

00:43:53 above 18 meters so at that point of this document um this would have just confirmed

00:43:57 confirmed the case that the reasoning why the products like fr 5000 would not be used

00:44:03 used so it's more likely that this document i'd have become more familiar with this document after the launch of the rs 5000 product

00:44:13 i see did you understand from this document and we can turn the page that there are essentially two routes to compliance if you were going to put

00:44:24 going to put an insulation on a building above 80 meters

00:44:28 meters either it had to be a material of limited combustibility under 12.7 or else as a separate route to compliance it had to meet the performance criteria

00:44:40 performance criteria in br 135 by means of successfully passing a full-scale test under bsa414 this would have been i suppose more relevant after or i would have been more knowledgeable

00:44:52 i would have been more knowledgeable after the launch of rs 5000 when it was more better defined that this was the criteria that was needed for the use of rs

00:45:03 was needed for the use of rs 5000 right prior to the launch before the launch in august 2014 can you give us an idea of

00:45:10 of what you understood to be uh how a a insulation material could comply if it was going to be used above 18 meters

00:45:23 i i can't remember the timing of things but

00:45:28 at the time prior to the launch of rs5000

00:45:31 rs5000 i i would have just been of the mindset that celetex did not have a product

00:45:37 a product so as long as i for sorry high-rise buildings above 18 meters so as long as i had

00:45:43 i had this as a reference document i don't think i would have needed to understood in the early part of my tenure within the company the rhymes and reasons why the product couldn't be used

00:45:54 if we look at just the completeness probably rather than anything else paragraph 12.7 you can see it says insulation materials straight products in a building with a story 18 meters or

00:46:05 in a building with a story 18 meters or more above ground level any insulation product filler material not including gaskets sealants or simmer and similar etc used in the external wall construction should be of limited combustibility see

00:46:17 should be of limited combustibility see appendix

00:46:18 appendix a were you aware of that requirement from march 2014 or did you only become aware of that requirement after the launch of rs 5000 in august 2014

00:46:27 2014 do you think it's hard to tell but i mean up until the launch of rs 5000 there was no celotex product for high-rise buildings at the very least

00:46:38 high-rise buildings at the very least did you know that there was a distinction between class naught on the one hand

00:46:42 one hand and uh limited combustibility i knew that yes can i ask you to go to cep3057294

00:46:55 five seven cep30572 nine four please this is a guidance note

00:47:01 produced by the bca the building control alliance

00:47:06 alliance and it's entitled bca technical guidance note 18

00:47:10 note 18 and this is issue nought june 2014 now you say in your statement i don't think there's a need to look at it it's page 17 of paragraph 57

00:47:21 page 17 of paragraph 57 that this document was brought to your attention by your customers um just looking at it and trying the best you can with your memory when do you think you first had that technical guidance note brought to your attention

00:47:38 guidance note brought to your attention i i don't remember an exact date but i would hazard a guess that it would have been following the launch of the rs 5000 product and in what context do you remember

00:47:50 remember in that it was a way of qualifying the product to be used in buildings above 18 meters in a certain um in one of the ways that was described in the this

00:48:01 the this document when you say a way of qualifying the product what do you mean well the the route to compliance so there was

00:48:09 there was i think three routes to compliance in this initial document one of which was to have non-combustible materials which celotex did not have and the other two were to have a

00:48:20 and the other two were to have a full-scale fire test which they did once they'd launched well before they launched the bsa

00:48:26 bsa sorry the rs-5000 product and the third one was to i mean get a specialist a fire specialist basically to look at the

00:48:37 specialist basically to look at the performance of the building to look at escape mechanisms and other

00:48:43 areas of the building to gauge their knowledge of the of the risk or of the building

00:48:52 building and look at the suitability of products that way but in a nutshell either use non-combustible have a fire test

00:48:59 test with that exact build up or involve a specialist do we take it from that that nobody within celetex brought technical guidance note 18 this document to your attention

00:49:10 attention i don't think so no were you surprised to discover its existence

00:49:18 i don't know if surprise was the word it was just

00:49:21 was just as a i suppose i described it as a voyage of describe discovery for myself i was given certain information initially at the launch of the product and then certain other things came to light whilst i was working for the

00:49:32 light whilst i was working for the company and interacting with customers or potential customers who were involved in in this side of the market were you surprised to discover the existence of this document from a potential customer as opposed to from within celetex itself

00:49:45 as opposed to from within celetex itself uh

00:49:47 not i can't i can't say the word is surprised but [Applause] i would have thought if if a company is launching a product and the timing of this document of june

00:50:00 and the timing of this document of june of the preceding the year they may or should have been no should have known about this document maybe if we look at page one under key issues

00:50:15 it has a set of bullet points in the in the third paragraph down and says a surface spreader flame classification does not infer any resistance to combustibility

00:50:26 resistance to combustibility it is solely a measure of the spread of flame across the surface i think you say you you knew that and then it says in the first bullet point thermosetting insulins rigid polyurethane foam boards

00:50:37 polyurethane foam boards do not meet the limited combustibility requirements of adb2 table a7 and should not be accepted as meeting adb2 paragraph 12.7 however if they are included as part of

00:50:49 however if they are included as part of a cladding system being tested to br 135 and bs8414 the complete assembly may ultimately prove to be acceptable now did you understand when you saw this

00:51:00 now did you understand when you saw this document at least that fr 5000 and indeed any other pir products were not materials of limited combustibility i did yes told us that before

00:51:08 before and that that meant that at least from this point onwards when you saw this document if no other the only way you could use a par product above a building in a building above 18 meters in height

00:51:19 in a building above 18 meters in height was a part of the system that had successfully passed the bsa414 test and met the br 135 criteria correct um i then want to turn to class

00:51:31 um i then want to turn to class naught again if we could just go back to approve document b at clg 50224 please and go to page 95 um i want to show you page 95

00:51:43 um i want to show you page 95 over to 96 and then also diagram 40. at the very foot of 95 there's a heading that says external surfaces and you see section 12.6 the external surfaces of walls should meet

00:51:55 surfaces of walls should meet the provisions of in diagram 40. you see that

00:51:58 that then if we look at diagram 40. that's on page 97

00:52:03 page 97 and if you look at that

00:52:08 and look at e any building you can see that diagram there and you can see that

00:52:20 can see that in a nutshell there is a qualification for external services for buildings over 18 meters that the material should have class naught national class or class b s3 d2 or better european class

00:52:32 or better european class you see that i can see that you see that did you know that and at the time let's say at the time from march or april 2014 or is that something you came to learn later

00:52:43 learn later i think that specific information was something um that was brought to light either during the launch of rs 5000 or afterwards yes

00:52:56 now um can i ask you to look at what mr ray bailey told the inquiry in his oral evidence

00:53:03 evidence can we go to the transcript for his evidence at day 33 please which is the 9th of september 2020 page 10.

00:53:15 page 10. and if we look at that together he is asked the question that line six i'll probably start at line one where it's put to him that it's clear

00:53:27 where it's put to him that it's clear from this technical note and that's technical guidance in 8018 we've just been looking at mr room but class naught and limited combustibility were different did you understand that they were different at the time

00:53:37 the time answer yes did you and understand at the time that they weren't interchangeable concepts and he says actually they are and he says and i then he's asked

00:53:48 are and he says and i then he's asked the interchangeable are they and his answer to line ten well if you look at table eight in appendix a it actually says class north and then the european equivalent which is the uk class north is described as

00:53:59 class north is described as non-combustible limited combustibility or a composite that complies with section 13b so class naught covers all of those three conditions

00:54:09 and then if we go on in the same transcript of page 12 and look at lines 12 to 15.

00:54:18 he says there no sorry let me just rephrase if it's class naught for surface spread of flame it's on the outside if it's throughout i took that to mean it was of limited combustibility

00:54:30 combustibility now without characterizing his evidence in any way do you understand what he's saying in both of the passages i've read to you

00:54:42 the only thing i can deduce is that he's confused between a british standard and a european standard what about a confusion between uh class

00:54:53 what about a confusion between uh class naught and limited combustibility and their interchangeability it's not a statement that can be made were you aware that this sort of confusion existed in the market

00:55:04 confusion existed in the market with which you were dealing at the time you were at celetex i not not that particularly but it the longer i spent within the company

00:55:15 the longer i spent within the company the longer or the more it seemed that some people were unsure of um what could or couldn't be used on on buildings above 18 meters right

00:55:28 on on buildings above 18 meters right did that surprise you

00:55:31 it what it did considering the people that i was talking to or the vast amount of people i was talking to were specialists in this arena were you aware that some customers at

00:55:44 were you aware that some customers at the least in the united kingdom market in and after 2014 thought that class naught meant limited combustibility i can't say that for sure

00:55:54 for sure right did you ever get the sense that celetex was effectively seeking to capitalize on the confusion

00:56:01 confusion between the two in the market that might have existed no i don't think that was their intention though

00:56:10 and i then want to go to rs 5000 and ask you some questions about the development of that product um can we go back to your witness statement please

00:56:20 please at page two

00:56:24 and you say in paragraph seven on that page

00:56:28 page that you were not involved in the creation and testing of rs 5000 you said that in the first sentence i'm not involved in the production of the marketing material i

00:56:39 production of the marketing material i did not have any input into his contents i did not know who created the product how it was physically different from the other products and didn't have any involvement in or knowledge of the testing of the product apart from seeing abbreviated versions of the br

00:56:50 of the br 135 test report etc when did you first become aware that rs 5000 was being readied for launch

00:57:00 i suppose in the weeks preceding the actual launch

00:57:05 we've seen mr roper's email of the 28th of april 2014 which referred to the bsa414 test um can we take it from that that you were aware by that point said late april

00:57:17 were aware by that point said late april 2014 that celetex was seeking to develop an insulation product that could be marketed for use above 18 meters i can't be sure the date but that might have been yeah

00:57:28 have been yeah around the time okay and if we could continue in your statement to the next paragraph uh you

00:57:39 paragraph uh you say that my knowledge of the rs 5000 product was based on the internal presentation on 5th of august 2014 and the marketing material given to me and if we look at paragraph 29 on page 7

00:57:57 under the heading rs 5000 you give some more detail there about the launch and in the second line you date it as the 5th of august 2014 and in the

00:58:09 as the 5th of august 2014 and in the fourth line from the bottom of that paragraph you say the launch of rs 5000 was seen as a big development for celetex

00:58:15 celetex john roper gave a presentation giving an overview of approved document b and br135

00:58:19 br135 and then gave a presentation on the launch of rs 5000 lizzie seaton then presented the marketing communications plan for the product um i've shown you that

00:58:29 that were you aware as august 2014 that there had been a bs 8414 test carried out in february 2014 in which rs 5000 had failed i

00:58:41 in which rs 5000 had failed i wasn't privy to that knowledge no

00:58:46 mr chairman i'm just anxious not to ask the next question how's it about to interrupt

00:58:49 interrupt yourself um today as you and everyone else knows is armistice day and together with the courts and other public bodies we shall observe two-minute silence in memory of those

00:59:01 two-minute silence in memory of those who died in two world wars and indeed in other conflicts around the globe so i invite you to join me in standing to observe the two-minute silence

01:01:08 thank you very much

01:01:15 yes just a minute thank you mr chairman um mr room my last question to you and your last answer was that you were not aware

01:01:26 that you were not aware uh as in august 2014 that there had been a bs 841 for tests for rs 5000 in the february of that year that had failed my next question is um

01:01:37 failed my next question is um did you later become aware of that fact i did much much later yes um at some point in 2015 i can't i can't remember the exact date

01:01:48 remember the exact date what were the circumstances in which you became aware in 2015 of the 2014 failure testified i think what it was was that one of my customers had questioned the edition

01:02:02 questioned the edition or the the br 135 document the bs8414 test

01:02:07 test because somewhere along it it says revision 2 or edition 2 something like that and they questioned why this was a second document as opposed to

01:02:19 this was a second document as opposed to the first of which i didn't know so i started asking questions and who told you do you remember that there had originally been uh an earlier test the first test of rs

01:02:31 uh an earlier test the first test of rs 5000

01:02:32 5000 which had failed i think it may have been uh jonathan roper right what was your did you discuss any uh reasons for the failure with him i don't think it was elaborated on no

01:02:44 i don't think it was elaborated on no just that it did not pass and they had to do a second test

01:02:49 test do you understand why it didn't pass

01:02:53 i can only deduce that it it failed one of the criteria to to allow it to pass either through the heat and the thermal couples or flame seen out of the top of the uh the test rig

01:03:04 test rig you say you can only deduce does that mean that you didn't actually have a detailed discussion with anybody at celetex about precisely why the test had been failed no i can only

01:03:13 only i can only deduce from the facts of how a test would fail right now i take it you did know that a successful test of rs 5000

01:03:23 rs 5000 had been carried out in may 2014 yes because that allowed celatex to launch the rs 5000 product yes and you weren't i think involved with that test as you've told

01:03:34 involved with that test as you've told us in your statement you weren't involved in the testing no i wasn't were you involved in any way in the design of the system build up that was used for testing no let's turn to the presentation then

01:03:45 no let's turn to the presentation then in august 2014. can we go to cel409709 please

01:03:52 please this is the agenda for the launch presentation on the 5th of august 2014 as you can see from the uh heading celetex rs 5000 launch 5th of august 2014

01:04:04 august 2014 um time nine o'clock in the morning till 1 o'clock

01:04:07 1 o'clock tuesday the 5th of august 14 attending john roper paul evans lizzie seton and then below that paul reed chris nichols

01:04:16 nichols northern sales team and southern sales team

01:04:20 team do i take it that you were present because you were part of the southern sales team that's correct now uh we can see uh from the agenda that there was as the first item on it

01:04:33 that there was as the first item on it uh approved document b and br 135 overview

01:04:36 overview jr and jr is not you it's john roper isn't it that's correct you share the same initials and that's confusing all right that's john roper and then there was a 45 minute

01:04:48 and then there was a 45 minute presentation of rs 5000 also by john roper

01:04:51 roper yes that's correct yes now can we go to ceo408668 please next

01:05:04 this is a 59-page slideshow entitled celetex rs 5000 launch 5th of august 2014 do you remember that this slideshow

01:05:16 do you remember that this slideshow accompanied the launch presentation

01:05:20 it must have been the one yes or do you remember being shown as a long slideshow it yes i would have been shown the documents can you remember who ran through the slides who who spoke to

01:05:31 ran through the slides who who spoke to the slides i i think it was john roper now let's look at it in detail um page three first of all

01:05:42 um page three first of all it says above 18 meters and uh my writing thinking and that's the only thing on that page this was the pithy focus of this whole exercise

01:05:53 exercise looking at the use of rs 5000 above 18 meters

01:05:58 meters this was the reason for the product to be launched yes right that's another way of putting the same point can we then look at page four we can see here that the presentation addresses the legislative background

01:06:09 addresses the legislative background we've got

01:06:10 we've got uh approved document b on the left bsa414 part two in the middle and then br135 on the right

01:06:17 right so that everyone in the room presumably could see what was being discussed uh uh was there a detailed discussion about that legislative background by mr roper do you remember did he explain

01:06:29 roper do you remember did he explain bs8414 and br 135 in any detail i can't recall did he go through the requirements of the approved documents do you think remember i think it's likely he would have gone

01:06:41 i think it's likely he would have gone over the salient points in each that were relevant to the product can we then go to page seven please

01:06:49 uh a few slides on and we can see here a table which sets out national classes and euro classes and we can see that there are three columns risk category british standard and euro class

01:07:00 british standard and euro class do you know where the risk category on this slide was derived from i don't was it suggested that this was an official classification of risk

01:07:11 i i couldn't tell you or do you remember whether it was it was just presented as an approximate rough guide i i don't know what was behind those that terminology right you don't know are you aware that this

01:07:24 you don't know are you aware that this risk and that categorization has got no basis at all in any guidance in england and wales i don't you don't um did the suggestion on this slide that class naught is low

01:07:35 on this slide that class naught is low risk

01:07:36 risk um influence your decision about your understanding about class naught

01:07:43 naught or you're not your decision your understanding about class naught i know

01:07:51 did anyone tell you that the first line was about combustibility and the tests there are for combust for non-combustibility or limited combustibility

01:08:02 combustibility bs476 part four bs476 part eleven but the rest from class naught down was about surface spread of flame

01:08:12 i don't recall the the information there on the face of the document it looks like there's a confusion even within this slide but the first line is about non or limited combustibility with a

01:08:23 non or limited combustibility with a euro class a1 or a2 but from low medium high very high risk categories you're talking about class naught 1 2 and worse than class 3 which is not

01:08:36 2 and worse than class 3 which is not the same as combustibility is it it doesn't look like it no so there's a confusion inherent in this slide itself do you accept that it seems to be yes yes

01:08:49 on the next slide at page uh we have section 12.5 of adb we've looked at that already and then it goes on to address br135

01:09:03 and if you go to page 16 we can see that this is annex b of br135 where the performance criteria and classification are identified did you

01:09:14 classification are identified did you understand that this was a reference to it

01:09:16 it annex b of br135 when it was presented to you

01:09:21 to you you see yeah the test card here now if you look at the right hand side you can see that there's an extract from the text which starts uh the classification applies only to the system do you see that i do i'll just read it to you the

01:09:33 i do i'll just read it to you the classification applies only to the system as

01:09:35 system as tested and detailed in the classification report the classification report can only cover the details of the system as tested it cannot state what is not covered when specifying or checking a

01:09:47 covered when specifying or checking a system

01:09:47 system it is important to check that the classification documents cover the end use application and there's an arrow that points to that paragraph which and

01:09:58 that paragraph which and in red it says system classification this suggests that this presentation highlighted the fact that br 135 only applied to the

01:10:09 the fact that br 135 only applied to the system

01:10:10 system and not to its individual components is that fair that's fair is that your takeaway or recollection of what this present part of this presentation was telling you it is yes and you understood that at the

01:10:22 it is yes and you understood that at the time did you clearly i did yes

01:10:27 and would you agree that this presentation so far as i've shown it to you this morning sets out the various routes to compliance with the proved document be in some

01:10:34 in some detail it does yes if we go to page 25 we can see slide 25 it says here seletex rs 5000 key

01:10:47 it says here seletex rs 5000 key properties and then in the penultimate bullet point it says

01:10:53 it says suitable for use in buildings above 18 meters in height and if we go to the next slide

01:11:01 26 it says product proposition that's the banner the first in red pir board to successfully meet

01:11:12 in red pir board to successfully meet the performance criteria in br135 also in red for insulated rain screen cladding systems therefore acceptable for use in buildings above 18 meters also in red in height do you

01:11:26 also in red in height do you except sitting here that the words therefore acceptable for use in buildings above 18 meters in height suggests that it's generally suitable for use above 18 meters yes in other words because it's past the

01:11:39 yes in other words because it's past the test it can be used in any rain screen cladding above 18 meters it could be read that way yes

01:11:48 let's go back a little bit in the slideshow please to pages 11 to 14 slides 11 to 14 and i'm just going to take these quickly on page 11 we can see fastbread in building envelopes and there we have

01:11:59 building envelopes and there we have nosley heights 1991 and if we turn the next page on uh beijing stoke 1992 and the next one on thirteen this is irvine in 1999 with a fatality in a

01:12:12 irvine in 1999 with a fatality in a parliamentary inquiry and then in the last one at 14 we can see dubai 2012. do you remember what you were told about each of those fires or all of them

01:12:23 each of those fires or all of them together i think it's only in relation to why

01:12:27 to why it was important to have a bs 8414 test and what could go wrong if if that wasn't followed i see so this was an

01:12:38 was an uh as it was a warning from history i think that was the the idea yes did you know about any of these fires before this presentation

01:12:49 i i can't be sure i may have known about one or two but i wouldn't have known about the you know the reasons behind the fire or the materials used do you remember when you say about one

01:13:01 do you remember when you say about one or two do you remember any discussion and market intelligence what people were saying in the cladding industry generally

01:13:08 generally about these fires or any of them not not at this point no did there come a point when you did hear information in market intelligence of

01:13:19 information in market intelligence of that nature i i may have heard things sort of later sort of within my tenure at celetex what sort of things we're just just a general

01:13:29 general sort of view about materials being used insulin panels i mean some of those fires i think were glazed systems it wasn't just

01:13:43 a risk from incidents for instance was there any discussion either at this presentation or at any time in fact to the effect that these files were well known to celetex's customer base

01:13:55 known to celetex's customer base i can't be sure [Applause] looking at the dubai slide which is on the screen in front of us here we can see an image of the fire at tamweel tower but in fact did you know

01:14:06 tamweel tower but in fact did you know that there were actually other fires a spatifiers in dubai or the uae in the period 2012 to 13. i wasn't aware

01:14:16 aware was there any discussion about what materials were used in the dubai fire on the exterior of the building no

01:14:27 there were also dubai fires in 2015 and 16

01:14:31 16 which i think was covered in some depth by industry publications at the time um such as the address and the torch were you aware of those i was aware of those yes right

01:14:43 i was aware of those yes right were you aware that in those fires the external cladding had ignited and caused flame spread up the exterior of the building

01:14:52 i i don't remember the exact details but i remember it being in the in the press you know this was a good few years after i'd left the company right was there any

01:15:03 the company right was there any discussion at the time of this presentation about the use of polyethylene as a core for aluminium composite panels or other metal

01:15:14 or other metal composite panels nothing that i would recall no

01:15:18 recall no were you in general aware of the danger presented by aluminium composite material with a polyethylene core not specifically no

01:15:33 was there any discussion at this presentation about whether aluminium composite panels with a polyethylene core could be used as part of a system incorporating rs-5000 i don't think it was mentioned tonight

01:15:48 mr german we're still in the slides i've probably got about five minutes or so or maybe a little bit more on the slideshow before we turn to a different topic

01:15:56 topic would you like to finish this topic that would be very helpful mr room you're happy to go on for another 10 minutes before we have a break of course yes yes thank you can we then turn to slide 19 in this slide pack please and this

01:16:07 slide pack please and this is the product range five thousand five thousand range features and you can see an

01:16:13 see an arrow with dots which increase in size from approvals to thermal and do the dots which grow in size indicate their relative importance in some way

01:16:25 i i can't be sure i didn't i didn't write this slide no was there any discussion then on this slide about about each of these topics there's potentially a discussion about each of

01:16:36 potentially a discussion about each of these topics but whether or not they grew in relevance like i couldn't tell you okay i mean what do we take from the fact that fire is in the middle it's above

01:16:43 above approvals or larger than approvals and environmental but smaller or below than emissivity emissivity and thermal i i couldn't tell

01:16:54 emissivity and thermal i i couldn't tell you why that was placed as it was right did you take the impression from the away from the presentation that thermal performance was more important than fire safety

01:17:05 safety looking at this slide in particular i wouldn't have deduced that no

01:17:14 can we go to beside 27 please in this deck page 27 this is a diagram of a system

01:17:23 did you understand what this was yes what was it it's a section through a wall as if you're standing at the edge of a wall and looking at each of the components

01:17:34 and looking at each of the components that made up a wall as if you cut a slice

01:17:38 slice through it

01:17:42 and it says celatex on br135 perhaps we can blow it up a little bit more did you understand that this was the system that had passed the

01:17:53 the system that had passed the bs 8414 test in may 2014 i think this image may have been taken from the

01:18:02 from the test report was there any discussion at the

01:18:06 the presentation about what this image did represent

01:18:11 i i think it must have been discussed yes as to

01:18:15 yes as to the build-up so how it was used in the actual

01:18:18 actual fire test that was carried out now let's just look at it a little bit more closely it identifies uh the helping hand bracket and then if one casts the eye down a little bit

01:18:31 one casts the eye down a little bit more then there's a 12 millimeter mali eternity

01:18:35 eternity panel as the rain screen just pausing there that's a cementitious fiberboard isn't it or was

01:18:45 was it's yeah it's a well as far as my knowledge allows me to know it's a

01:18:52 it's a decorative panel that's used on uh in cladding and then below that there's reference to a 12 millimeter magnesium oxide board

01:19:04 magnesium oxide board that would sit behind the insulation towards the or on the concrete wall and then a simcoe system

01:19:16 concrete wall and then a simcoe system and then an aluminium continuous rail and then you can see a hundred celatex rs 5000 insulation

01:19:25 so did you understand at this presentation that that was the build-up of the individual components and their dimensions that had passed the bsa414 test in may

01:19:38 that had passed the bsa414 test in may 2014.

01:19:39 2014. that's correct because that was the information that was also provided in all of the literature the breakdown of the build-up it was and we will come to that can i ask you then to go to cel 301027

01:19:54 can i ask you then to go to cel 301027 at page 35.

01:19:57 the witness statement of dna sullivan who is the chief executive officer of celetex and i'd like you to look with me please at paragraph 118.5 on that page just below halfway down

01:20:08 halfway down i'll read it to you he says in the course of work following the grenfell tower fire information came to light which suggests that there were differences between the system

01:20:17 system as tested and that described in the bre reports and the celetex product literature for rs 5000 in particular i now understand that the system on which the test was conducted in may 2014 included

01:20:28 test was conducted in may 2014 included another component in addition to the components described in the previous sub-paragraph at certain levels in the tested system namely adjacent to the lambotherm fire barrier at level two

01:20:39 barrier at level two and at the top of the rig the outer cladding panel was an eight millimeter marley eternity cladding panel and at those levels only there was immediately behind this panel a six millimeter

01:20:50 panel a six millimeter magnesium oxide board 12 millimeter marley eternity cladding panels were used

01:20:56 used on the remainder of the rig were you aware at the time of the august presentation that an additional layer of six millimeters of magnesium oxide had been

01:21:07 millimeters of magnesium oxide had been used at the thermocouples and at the top of the rig when tested in may 2014. i was not no

01:21:17 so just going back then to slide 27 in light of that answer if we can uh that's ceo408668 a page 27 looking at the

01:21:29 27 looking at the diagram of the test as presented to you can we take it that you weren't told indeed nobody was told at that presentation about the use of the six millimeters magnesium oxide that

01:21:40 magnesium oxide that had been that has been referred to as we've seen by mr o'sullivan in his witness statement we had not been told any of that no and ditto

01:21:49 ditto in relation to the eight millimeters of malia turn it board at the thermocouples correct we were just

01:21:56 were just literally shown the documentation that you see before you were you ever told subsequently during your time at celetex that the rig actually tested by the bre had a six

01:22:07 actually tested by the bre had a six millimeter magnesium oxide board behind eight millimeters of malia turnip panel at the thermocouples and at the top of the rig i didn't know any of this whilst i was with celestex no

01:22:18 with celestex no right had you ever come across a cladding system in real life which had incorporated a 12 millimeter magnesium oxide

01:22:29 a 12 millimeter magnesium oxide substrate

01:22:34 on which face on the you see it in the diagram there at the back of the installation yes um yeah it's it's a it's what's known as

01:22:46 um yeah it's it's a it's what's known as a sheathing board so you you have your metal met sec or steel frame system spanning between

01:22:53 between the slabs the concrete floors and then that might be filled with insulation on a modern build and then you close that exterior cavity with a sheathing board and

01:23:04 with a sheathing board and magnesium oxide was one of those types of products now do you ever come across the use of a fiber cement rain screen panel as the rain screen panel not

01:23:16 as the rain screen panel not no it was just one of many panels that were on the markets i can't tell you implicitly that i had come across those types of panels before

01:23:27 before right mr chairman that's a convenient moment from the perspective yes good all right well we're going to have a short break now mr room um

01:23:38 room um we'll come back at 20 to 12. and i'm going to say this every time you leave the room please don't talk to anyone about your evidence or anything related to it while you're out of the room

01:23:49 out of the room okay thank you very much would you like to give the usher then we'll see you in uh 2012. thank you

01:24:05 thank you 20 to 12 please

01:40:19 yes would you ask mr roon to come back in please

01:40:38 all right mr room ready to carry on yes thank you thank you yes thank you mr chairman mr room can i now ask you to go please to cel403422 i'm going to turn to the topic of the br

01:40:50 i'm going to turn to the topic of the br 135 investigation now this document here is your month end report of november 2014 and uh i'd like you to look please

01:41:02 and uh i'd like you to look please at slide 4 in that document

01:41:06 that is entitled cpd's stroke architect activity overview

01:41:16 and uh underneath other activity you can see in the second bullet point it says bre

01:41:22 bre rs 5000 testing and bs 8414 stroke br135 investigation what does br what is the bs 8414 135 investigation mean or refer to that

01:41:35 135 investigation mean or refer to that i think if it's the meeting i can recall it was with um stephen howard from the bre so debbie had arranged a meeting debbie

01:41:47 so debbie had arranged a meeting debbie berger who was the uh the product manager who took over from jonathan roper later later down the line um to really and i tagged along because it was a

01:41:59 and i tagged along because it was a meeting to look at the best way to [Music]

01:42:05 [Music] find out how that product could be further developed or further tested

01:42:10 to meet the the questions that were coming out from the market i follow this is a a you say a meeting with stephen howard from the bre was that in early november 2014

01:42:23 that in early november 2014 i i can't recall these people in documents okay later but in general terms is it the one that originated from your attendance at the cwct general meeting in october

01:42:34 at the cwct general meeting in october possibly yeah there was only ever one meeting that i attended at the bre right

01:42:41 while we're on that slide can you just explain the last bullet point riba guerrilla tactics event

01:42:48 um the the riba the royal institute of british architecture they had a um i think they had a an event called the gorilla tactics event and apologies i can't remember exactly

01:43:00 and apologies i can't remember exactly what that entailed right okay i mean leaving aside the spelling of gorilla um apologies i'm assuming it's a reference to uh

01:43:12 to uh the the kind of guerrilla that wages war rather than anything else does one get the impression from that there was

01:43:23 that there was some kind of discussion about an aggressive marketing strategy alongside the riba

01:43:28 the riba i no i don't think so i think it was just an event that i may have attended or was going to intended to attend all right can we um then turn

01:43:37 then turn to the marketing of rs 5000 um go to rbk3059351 please

01:43:51 uh this is a document produced by the british standards institute entitled don't be a flaming liability memo to manufacturers and we think that it dates back to the late 1980s

01:44:03 it dates back to the late 1980s but it was certainly going the rounds in our bkc's building control department at the end of 2013 mr room just looking at it it's a fairly memorable document is it a

01:44:15 it's a fairly memorable document is it a document that you think you've ever seen before

01:44:17 before i can't recall seeing that image or that document no right just just look at the detail of it briefly then on page one if you look at the left hand column in the first paragraph there

01:44:29 column in the first paragraph there it says that any information regarding the fire characteristics of materials products structures or systems must be clear

01:44:36 clear accurate and adequate do you accept that principle

01:44:41 principle yeah i would agree was it a principle that was part of celetex's culture at the time you were there do you think i couldn't i couldn't comment well you could

01:44:52 i couldn't comment well you could comment i could comment um i'd like you to okay um at least on the surface so that would that would follow yeah would follow on the surface as a matter

01:45:03 would follow on the surface as a matter of logic it's certainly desirable did it happen was it a principle within seletex that its marketing information relating to the characteristics of materials

01:45:12 materials products structures or systems should be clear accurate and adequate i have no reason to question otherwise right

01:45:21 right at the bottom of the right hand column on the same page

01:45:29 you can see that it says a little knowledge is a dangerous thing seek expert advice on how to present information on fire performance to your knowledge did celetex ever seek

01:45:41 to your knowledge did celetex ever seek advice

01:45:41 advice about how it should present its information about fire performance i couldn't tell you but i i say to your knowledge said that's a no no right and can we go to page four then

01:45:55 no right and can we go to page four then page four sets out some points to bear in mind when writing about characteristics can you see that and in the first paragraph it says do

01:46:06 and in the first paragraph it says do not use terminology which makes a claim which cannot be substantiated and then the second one is may give him his leading impression of performance were you aware as a marketing or salesperson that that was an important

01:46:17 salesperson that that was an important principle

01:46:18 principle when writing about fire characteristics yes

01:46:22 yes about any characteristics i'd say and uh looking at the right hand column paragraph four avoid coining brand or trade names which may misleading implicitly imply fire safety were you aware that that was

01:46:35 fire safety were you aware that that was something

01:46:36 something that was important to keep in mind when writing marketing literature i don't know and what about five avoid vague implications that the

01:46:47 avoid vague implications that the material complies with british standards building regulations et cetera again was that a principle

01:46:52 principle that you are alive to as a as a uh essentially a proper a prohibition when writing marketing literature i've i've never had to write marketing literature um

01:47:03 literature um presenting when presenting the product to the public well yeah i would i mean myself personally i would always promote or present the facts that were available to me

01:47:16 and i take it from your last answer was that these precepts were never discussed within celetex when it came to how to present

01:47:22 present rs 5000 to the uk construction market if they were it was not something that i was privy to can we go back to the agenda then to the fifth

01:47:33 fifth august presentation this is a cel40 is 9709

01:47:44 there it is and you can see that there is a fourth item done after the coffee break

01:47:50 break a marketing communications plan to be presented by ls who was ls that would have been lizzie seaton is he seated yes

01:48:01 seated yes and lizzie seaton's role at the time i think has been explained by other celetex witness statements but could you just

01:48:06 just tell us what it was um she was part of the the marketing team

01:48:14 and maybe at that time she may have headed up

01:48:17 headed up the marketing team under uh paul evans can we then go to uh ceo408668 again please which is the launch presentation

01:48:28 please which is the launch presentation slides

01:48:29 slides and this time go to page 38.

01:48:36 this is a slide created called creative concept

01:48:41 concept what did that mean i think these were the images that would be used in advertising within trade journals

01:48:52 i see and you can see that it's based around the tagline achieving new heights you see cello takes reaching new heights yes yes and is that a reference

01:49:05 yes yes and is that a reference to the fact that rs 5000 was being marketed for the above 18 meter market i think that's correct yes right and indeed it's right that it actually

01:49:17 and indeed it's right that it actually emphasizes i think above 18 meter applications if you look at the text at the top right hand corner of the slide yes

01:49:28 top right hand corner of the slide yes and it's a first for pir correct we don't see any caveats in there do we no

01:49:35 no [Applause] and when it says in the second bullet point that above 18 meter applications plural

01:49:43 plural was that really right because in fact it could only have one application namely within the system tested

01:49:51 that's correct so actually above 18 meter applications in the plural would have been misleading or was misleading wasn't it if presented to potential customers i

01:50:02 if presented to potential customers i suppose at that specific time that's correct yes is there any discussion about that point not that i'm aware of now

01:50:13 that point not that i'm aware of now was the marketing strategy for rs 5000 if essentially to emphasize as it's selling hook if you like that it could be used above 18 meters

01:50:26 could be used above 18 meters i think that's the predominant reason why that particular product was created and marketed if we move on to page 40

01:50:35 page 40 two pages on or two slides on as part of the general section marketing support

01:50:43 uh within the slideshow um this makes a reference to case studies here do you see the third bullet point down

01:50:50 down yes

01:50:53 yes what was that about what did that indicate

01:51:00 i i think that would have been a reference to particular products where projects sorry where

01:51:08 where the product had been used or would be used

01:51:14 but at that time i don't think there were any case studies that i knew of presumably because rs 5000 hadn't been used yet because it hadn't been launched yet

01:51:23 yet exactly right so the idea was that is it that there would later be case studies i think that's what that means what would those case studies involve um a lot of the time um within cellotex

01:51:36 um a lot of the time um within cellotex there was often a sort of a one-page almost like a flyer as it were which would just explain the project the application and a bit of information about

01:51:47 information about about the project when you say a flyer you

01:51:50 you mean a piece of paper which would tell customers about past projects in which rs 5000 had been used or was being planned

01:51:59 planned correct right what would be studied within a case study

01:52:07 i couldn't tell you off the top of my head but

01:52:10 head but it would it would just generally be a few facts about the the project the product and the application i see was there any discussion at this launch presentation about what those

01:52:21 launch presentation about what those case studies would actually involve not at that time no there had been

01:52:27 been preceding case studies with other celetex products would that include fr 5000 they it may have done i can't recall the exact details right

01:52:40 the exact details right if we go on to page 57 in this slide pack

01:52:43 pack this slide is headed route to market and we can see that there are two little light bulbs in a cloud and a balloon in the middle

01:52:53 and on the left hand side we can see underneath the technical drawing there pull eg architect contractors installers and then on the right hand side

01:53:04 then on the right hand side underneath the sig insulation brand logo push eg distributors merchants

01:53:15 uh just pausing with the logo of sig was sig a major distributor for celetex it was one of a few major distributors

01:53:26 it was one of a few major distributors of of celetex and other installation products

01:53:29 products and other construction products did the marketing strategy rely in part on getting distributors to push rs 5000

01:53:40 push rs 5000 i think it was i don't know i didn't have and deal with the strategy at all but

01:53:47 but i can only imagine that it was something to do with them stocking the product for instance

01:54:02 was there any discussion about what incentives celetex would give to distributors such as sig i think i'm not sure if it's part of this presentation but there was a

01:54:13 presentation but there was a um there's some sort of competition to do with you would win a balloon ride for x amount of people if you'd

01:54:26 bought the material or distributed or stocked the material

01:54:32 it may be later in this presentation as part of the marketing pack

01:54:40 and that would be a generic incentive for all distributors were there specific was there a plan to have give specific distributors specific incentives not

01:54:52 and on the left-hand side it looks like you wanted to get architects and other professionals to specify rs 5000 as a pool factor would that be fair i think that's the general marketing idea of the product and if we go to page

01:55:05 idea of the product and if we go to page 32

01:55:06 32 back a little bit in the slide pack you can see that uh the heading of this slide is celetex rain screen cladding solutions

01:55:15 solutions below 18 meters you can see rs 5000 above 18 meters rs 5000 uh and 4 000 not above 18 meters as you can see there

01:55:27 not above 18 meters as you can see there and in the last bullet point it says incurred substantial development costs is that a reference to the development cost of rs 5000 itself it looks like it can you confirm i i

01:55:40 it looks like it can you confirm i i can't confirm but

01:55:43 it might be deduced that that is the case did you get the sense that the sales team was under pressure to achieve sales of rs 5000 in order to recoup those development costs

01:55:54 those development costs no were you ever instructed to offer discounts to customers to achieve sales no were you ever rewarded on the basis of how many successful sales you made of rs 5000 no

01:56:05 you made of rs 5000 no was there a particular bonus for selling rs 5000 that you were you would expect or anyone in the sales team would expect not that i can remember no right can i then turn to the question of market knowledge um can we go to cel40s

01:56:18 market knowledge um can we go to cel40s 3543 please this is an email from you uh to debbie

01:56:31 this is an email from you uh to debbie berger

01:56:32 berger is it berger or burger burger burger yeah uh

01:56:35 yeah uh and paul evans on the 11th of february 2015 the subject rs 5000 spin presentation hi deb stroke paul please find slides that you can consider for use in the

01:56:46 that you can consider for use in the spin meeting on friday i've tried to keep it as simplified as possible let me know how you get on now spin it's got capital letters what does it stand for it was an acronym cellotex had a lot of

01:56:58 it was an acronym cellotex had a lot of acronyms

01:56:59 acronyms and this was some sort of management tier um group that met i don't know if it's every friday or every month um

01:57:14 i don't know what they were looking at maybe development of products generally or marketing or what have you but it was not something i was involved in directly now you refer to the slides there

01:57:26 now you refer to the slides there um they are at

01:57:31 cel403544

01:57:36 just to show you what they are and they're entitled rs 5000 market analysis and just go to the first page to refresh your memory of the document

01:57:48 uh you see i it says i see the market for rs 5000 being split into three defined potential customer tiers now before we look at the document a little bit further had these slides that you were

01:58:00 further had these slides that you were sending

01:58:01 sending debbie berger and paul evans been prepared by you alone they had yes they had

01:58:09 when do you think you prepared them

01:58:13 i can't be sure i mean the i think the email did it say the february 2015 11th of february so it'd have been yeah leading up to that what caused or prompted you to produce

01:58:25 what caused or prompted you to produce these slides

01:58:28 i think it was due to the the feedback that i was getting from specialists contractors architects and the questions that they were raising

01:58:39 and the questions that they were raising um regular sort of repetitive questions that were coming up and i wanted to put it into some sort of format because i was in london it seemed to be a lot of the the major contractors and

01:58:50 a lot of the the major contractors and the major specialists and major architects were involved in high-rise buildings so i wanted to distill the information and present it in a form that i could give to the management

01:59:01 give to the management to explain what i saw was needed with the product right so you did you made these slides off your own bat yes i did you weren't asked to do that do it by john roper for example

01:59:11 example no right um can we then look at the slides in a little bit more detail um i've shown you page two you see i see the market for rs 5000 being split

01:59:22 being split you say that was your personal view was it that was my personal view yes and over the next three slides we can see them

01:59:30 see them uh as three defined potential customer tiers and you've given them a traffic light coloring haven't you uh red no use tier one and as we'll

01:59:41 uh red no use tier one and as we'll we'll flip to slide two which is amber is this right uh limited use

01:59:46 use and then the third slide or third tier is page five green use two three yes yes now let's just um we'll go back to

01:59:57 to to the to these look just looking at slide three then which is tier one let's just look at that together a little bit more closely uh you say there tier one no use and you can see the view is only use non

02:00:10 and you can see the view is only use non or limited combustibility insulation product using guidance set out an approved document via the building regulations reason easiest route to compliance not happy with current test data on combustible insulation products pir

02:00:22 combustible insulation products pir phenolic having enough satisfactory evidence of performance in broad specific

02:00:25 specific spread of applications field of application tests and then influencer client insurer building control specialist consultant

02:00:37 now just looking at um the reason list in the second bullet point you i you identify one of them as their unhappiness with current test data having evidence of performance in broad

02:00:49 having evidence of performance in broad spread of applications does that mean that

02:00:54 the the market this particular part of the market was refusing to use or would refuse to use rs 5000 um because there wasn't enough

02:01:05 um because there wasn't enough satisfactory evidence of performance in a broad spread of applications in other words applications beyond the very test in which it had been proved to pass that's correct there's only a singular

02:01:16 that's correct there's only a singular test at that point and some people and this is literally just feedback from um questions i was being asked or statements that were being made that they some people wanted to see a

02:01:29 that they some people wanted to see a wider

02:01:30 wider spread of tested applications yeah so this is

02:01:33 this is as you've said before this is how you saw the market at that time that's correct yes and looking at influencer you've identified as the fourth bullet point specialist consultant um was that a reference to specialist fire consultants or specialist

02:01:45 fire consultants or specialist facade consultants all encompassing basically yes and building control did you understand that there were building control officers who were not happy with the available test data

02:01:58 available test data i can't be specific to any one particular building control body but yes indeed um if we can then turn to slide four tier two the amber tier

02:02:09 tier two the amber tier limited use view consider use of combustible insulation reason

02:02:16 reason cost restricted wall space happy that they have enough test data to satisfy influencers and then influencer main contractor subcontractor building control

02:02:25 control and again a specialist consultant and looking at the list of customers who would consider use of combustible insulation does that mean that they might sometimes use it and might sometimes not

02:02:36 use it and might sometimes not if if the application was correct so if potent

02:02:39 potent potentially if the building was below 18 meters for instance right and you can see under the list of influences that it still includes specialist consultants but there is no insurer there referred to

02:02:51 to no is that is that is there a significance in that not that i can remember no does it tell us that insurers if they had any part in the decision-making process as to what should go on the building

02:03:02 should go on the building would generally take a very negative view of rs 5000. i don't think that was the case no right how can you account for the absence of insurers then in that list i can't give you a reason unfortunately

02:03:13 i can't give you a reason unfortunately um we see the appearance of subcontractors in that list does that tell us that although they weren't in the red list um they

02:03:21 they do appear in the orange list uh does that tell us that subcontractors tend to be a little bit more amenable to using rs5000 i don't think so i think it was more to

02:03:32 i don't think so i think it was more to do with

02:03:34 do with them being on sort of low rise buildings below 18 meters because this this document wasn't just for above 18 meters in particular

02:03:44 and then if you go to slide three slide five tier three

02:03:53 uh i mean it's green tier three use view always use combustible insulation reason cost 18 meter restriction not

02:04:04 reason cost 18 meter restriction not relevant

02:04:05 relevant below 18 meters not aware of 18 meter restriction always use combustible insulation materials restricted wall space and then influencer main contractor subcontractor building control

02:04:16 building control now mr room you say he said a moment ago the doc the document was not just for 18 meters in particular but the the traffic light system was very strongly focused on

02:04:25 on the above 18 meter below 18 meter usage wasn't it

02:04:28 wasn't it it was referenced yes well it's more than reference it's it's a critical uh it's a critical factor isn't it yes yes

02:04:35 yes um and if we look at tier 3 customers who always use combustible insulation um under reasons you list as one reason

02:04:46 um under reasons you list as one reason not aware of 18 meter restriction were you aware from your survey at this time that there were customers out there using or who might use rs 5000 above 80 meters because they didn't know

02:04:57 above 80 meters because they didn't know about the restrictions on use above 18 meters

02:05:02 i can't give you any specific reference but

02:05:07 but it seemed to be that some and this is just market intelligence not specifically using the rs product but preceding that you know things like the um the kingspan type of products

02:05:19 products there seemed to be contractors out there that had been using these types of products for sort of 10 odd years

02:05:26 right and

02:05:31 the influences now as we can see our main contractor subcontractor building control

02:05:39 but no reference to specialist subcontra specialist consultant advising them do we take it from that list

02:05:50 list the the less their technical knowledge and expertise the more likely that you'd be able to sell rs 5000

02:05:58 i don't think it was a real sort of a reference

02:06:01 reference to sales it was just more to do with you know my

02:06:05 know my understanding of the market because the latest slides show my views about what investment the company needed to make to help

02:06:16 company needed to make to help strengthen the the products in the marketplace i mean if there's a single thing one can derive from this

02:06:26 from this slide show these three slides these three tiers is it this that the more ignorant of the restrictions above 18 meters and the less equipped to ask difficult technical questions

02:06:37 technical questions uh the more likely it was that you'll be able to achieve sales of rs 5000 i wouldn't have put it like that no how would you put it this was my view of the market

02:06:47 market and this was my understanding it wasn't any sort of sales tool or um targeting it was just my understanding of who was out there did you not see at the

02:06:59 who was out there did you not see at the time a connection between green use and uh lack of awareness of use about lack of awareness of the 18 meter restriction and the absence of a

02:07:11 restriction and the absence of a specialist consultant did you not see a connection between the two not really no it's an obvious connection to make isn't it respect well i mean it could have i could have put all of the influence in

02:07:23 put all of the influence in influencers in each of those three tiers quite easily i don't know why i used them in that respect or like that laid it out like that

02:07:34 one of the other reasons in the middle column

02:07:37 column in that green column there is cost were you aware

02:07:41 you aware of uh cost as a driver for the likelihood that rs 5000 would be used not in particular it's just costs

02:07:52 not in particular it's just costs generally

02:07:53 generally which was a consideration for those types of products because being thermally more efficient they needed less of the material compared to a non-combustible solution

02:08:06 compared to a non-combustible solution so by having something like mineral wool in there as opposed to a pir phenolic type board it meant that it was a wider system a deeper system

02:08:17 it was a wider system a deeper system as it were and would therefore need uh it would

02:08:20 it would lead to a heavier weight on the facade and it would have knock-on effects to the

02:08:25 the the cost of the the structure as well supporting so what was the relevance of cost as the reason for use because it was a lighter more thermally efficient system these

02:08:36 more thermally efficient system these types of products that's not cost that's performance what was the relevance of cost well because of cost it's linked to performance because of

02:08:47 it's linked to performance because of the

02:08:48 the the application because if you use a thinner more thermally efficient board then you have a less weighty system which then requires fixings and

02:09:00 which then requires fixings and materials to support that system of less i suppose it would be less robust so if therefore less cost generally the whole thing would be less costly

02:09:09 costly and if we look at the next slide on page six we can see some project examples

02:09:20 and product examples of rs5 in tier 2 and tier 3 are rs 5000 we see no clearly no rs5000 in

02:09:31 rs 5000 we see no clearly no rs5000 in tier one

02:09:32 tier one we do see mineral will we also see we see rs-5000 in tier two and we also see it in tier three do you remember which projects rs 5000 was being used on in

02:09:43 was being used on in tier two i can't recall no what about tier three this is february 15 remember well only the one that i've i've detailed there which was a low-rise

02:09:54 i've detailed there which was a low-rise building was that arsenal youth academy that's correct

02:10:02 it is is um i see is that single project then it's a single project say arthur use arsenal youth academy being built by century facades using rs 5000.

02:10:12 5000. that's correct yeah right

02:10:17 uh if we go to slide seven which is uh the next page please we can see you set out next steps which are do nothing in red medium investment in yellow and large

02:10:28 medium investment in yellow and large investment in green you see that i do um and you identify a risk under do nothing but in fact it's it's referred to in all

02:10:39 but in fact it's it's referred to in all three

02:10:40 three columns that a change in the market may outlaw use of combustible insulation in facades above 18 meters you see that i do yes yes did you have any specific basis for

02:10:51 did you have any specific basis for considering that as a risk i think it's only from people who are giving me feedback of those who only used non-combustible

02:11:02 of those who only used non-combustible materials

02:11:08 if we look at the final slide slide nine

02:11:16 you could set out you can see you've set out a personal view there again that's your personal view was that to support your view that there should be medium investment in developing rs 5000

02:11:30 as a salesperson it was my view that to be able support the sale of this type of product in the marketplace

02:11:41 in the marketplace these were the things that people were asking for and i was expecting the company to invest in the development or the further

02:11:53 invest in the development or the further development of the product to get different certification which i outline here to make it a product that was more readily saleable

02:12:04 readily saleable by myself and my colleagues within the sales team i think that's a long way of saying yes you wanted medium medium investment which corresponded to the middle column in the slide before

02:12:15 slide before yes yes and let's just look at um your uh reasons uh you say i think we should at least invest in a bba is that a bba certificate that's correct

02:12:26 certificate that's correct and is a bba certificate from your experience a key that unlocks the market it's one of the significant documents yes and then you say if we do not have a bba the only proof that rs 5000 has gone

02:12:37 bba the only proof that rs 5000 has gone through the bsa414 testing is to show evidence

02:12:41 evidence face to face with influencer with the bre test report now this is february 2015 uh was showing evidence face-to-face with an influencer with the bre test report

02:12:52 an influencer with the bre test report a problem did you think at that time well it's something i could not do because i did not have the uh the test report

02:13:03 the test report did you not no not not the one the all-encompassing one that i later found

02:13:09 found uh that was what was being requested did you think at the time you'd made this slideshow 11th of february 15 that you needed the

02:13:20 11th of february 15 that you needed the full

02:13:22 full uh as it turns out 33 page uh bre test report in order to be able to have the discussion with the influencer i thought so i didn't quite understand

02:13:33 i thought so i didn't quite understand that

02:13:33 that initially when the product was launched there was i don't know if you're going to

02:13:37 to present this but there were different versions of the report there was a truncated version of full page one which just

02:13:45 just literally distilled the information about the build up and the test and the um the signature behind the test there was a 12-page version which had a bit more

02:13:56 a 12-page version which had a bit more information about images of the build ups and then i later found out

02:14:02 found out after i'd left the company that there had actually been a full report with photographs of the crib and before and after photographs

02:14:13 before and after photographs which enlightened me as to the the test basically and how it was built which you've alluded to with the um extra material that had been added

02:14:27 um extra material that had been added yes and we'll come to those three different documents later on in your evidence but just on this document at the moment it looks from the second bullet point

02:14:38 it looks from the second bullet point that you are telling debbie berger and paul evans that in the absence of a bba certificate you would have to show evidence face-to-face with an influencer with the bre test report

02:14:50 bre test report um which would either be the 12-page version or the four page version and that would be a problem i mean it looks from this as if that would be a problem

02:14:59 problem or undesirable is that is that fair

02:15:04 well it's undesirable for me because i don't have the information to hand i wanted confidence that i could give to the specifier so i see so so the problem from a sales

02:15:17 so i see so so the problem from a sales perspective is getting into technical details you might not be able to explain or stand by yes i could you could put it like that yeah can we then look at the penultimate bullet point you say

02:15:28 bullet point you say in london i'm seeing my fair share of high-rise projects um almost all of the larger developments that i'm involved with have specialist consultants and influencers who are highly knowledgeable of the adb

02:15:39 who are highly knowledgeable of the adb and fire rates above 18 meters just pausing on that does that tell us or you telling debbie berger and paul evans that customer expertise was a barrier to

02:15:50 customer expertise was a barrier to market entry which needed investment

02:15:54 yeah i'd say yes

02:15:57 now at the time and we're going to come to this in some more detail later mr room but did you consider that that consideration applied to grenfell tower from your dealings on the project to date

02:16:11 not implicitly no no

02:16:16 looking at the last bullet point

02:16:20 if we're not prepared to validate the use of rs 5000 on projects as one of our competitors is doing it is inevitable that we will not be able to play in the market of most of the larger developers in london on 18 meter plus

02:16:31 in london on 18 meter plus high-rise facades and the reason for that

02:16:35 that is is it seems is this right is that those projects had knowledgeable specialist consultants who wouldn't accept rs 5000 it's because of the lack of the

02:16:46 it's because of the lack of the range of testing or the certification at that point when the product was launched it did not have any further certification other than one that one particular test report and

02:16:58 one that one particular test report and the most of the clients i was dealing with in

02:17:01 with in london were looking for that extra information as it were

02:17:08 and that wasn't a problem though that you were encountering on smaller projects

02:17:12 projects is that right well on low-rise projects it wasn't

02:17:15 it wasn't an issue um no but you're dealing with high-rise projects here some of the high-rise

02:17:20 high-rise i was giving all the information i had to people and they were processing it and involving specialists if they needed to

02:17:31 with celestex in effect relying on the lack of expert knowledge or technical expertise within the industry to achieve specifications i don't think that was the case no

02:17:42 that was the case no now let's look at cel401096 this is a further presentation

02:17:52 that you sent on the 1st of may to various colleagues including mr roper i think

02:18:02 and is this a document that you prepared [Applause] is this the one titled rs 5000 market analysis yes on the screen

02:18:15 i need to see the

02:18:18 so it's gone blank yes you come back don't worry okay

02:18:35 so yes this is the email from you to

02:18:40 a number of people at uh celetex including john roper you see yes and the subject is region meeting rs 5000 presentation and you say hi team

02:18:52 5000 presentation and you say hi team please find attached my presentation relating to rs 5000 the competition and introduction to the bs 8414 testing if you have any questions or you find that you need advice please let me know

02:19:05 that you need advice please let me know uh and let's look at that presentation that is

02:19:08 that is at cel401097

02:19:16 and it's entitled rs 5000 product training is that the slide show that you attach to this email that's correct yes and uh if we um look on it says at page

02:19:27 and uh if we um look on it says at page 12

02:19:31 bs8414 and then sets out uh the uh summary of the classification for a bs8414 part two system you see that i do and uh external

02:19:44 you see that i do and uh external fastbread and internal fastbread are there identified and if you look at page 14

02:19:49 page 14 slide 14 we can see the guidance set out in bca technical guidance note 18

02:19:56 18 issue nought from june 2014 that you and i looked at earlier on this morning yes so can we take it from that that by this time

02:20:03 this time this is first of may 2014 uh at 15. sorry you were aware uh of well aware of the above 18 meter requirements and the details about the tests

02:20:14 tests i was yes yes and if we go to page 18 in that

02:20:19 that we can see slide 18

02:20:23 and here again we see this within this slide deck is your 11th of february slide deck that you'd originally sent to debbie berger and paul evans that's correct with the three

02:20:34 paul evans that's correct with the three tiers you see that yes uh and if we look on we can see page 19 tier 1 page 20 tier 2

02:20:48 page 21 tier 3 but then if we look onto page 22

02:20:55 example there are some project examples we've had those before but we look on again to take page 23 we don't see

02:21:05 in fact that's the end of the slide there is no page 23. and and my point to put to you is that we don't see your personal view or the next steps that you'd originally included in your slides

02:21:16 your slides no no do you know why that is why did you take those out i think it was common knowledge about

02:21:24 what my opinion was and that last slide was really for the management team to explain to them the investment that they needed to make this was more of a

02:21:35 they needed to make this was more of a presentation to the um to my colleagues in the sales in the southern sales team um really about a bit more information that i'd

02:21:45 that i'd sort of put together myself in layman's terms almost about the testing procedure and um the the way in which

02:21:56 um the the way in which i saw the market exactly the same as before

02:21:59 before um my team were well aware of my team the team that i was within and were quite well aware of what i wanted or what i would like to be seen

02:22:11 wanted or what i would like to be seen to be done within the company to invest further within that product but what your colleagues didn't get was your views in the last slide we saw which justified

02:22:24 in the last slide we saw which justified your

02:22:25 your argument if i can put it that way for a medium investment including the difficulty with presenting bsa414

02:22:31 bsa414 tests results to influences and the last two bullet points on that slide we saw we but we had already spoken about that as

02:22:40 as you know that we're quite a cohesive team

02:22:43 team and it was quite well known about my views so can we take it the people like john roper would have been familiar with the views you had been expressing in that in that slide even though you hadn't included it in this slide deck

02:22:55 hadn't included it in this slide deck yeah by yes sorry by by that stage john roper was in the southern sales team so he'd transitioned across and then debbie berger had backfilled his position in product management so

02:23:06 position in product management so and any questions that would have come to light

02:23:09 to light i had john roper there from the sort of the technical product management standpoint although he was now in a different

02:23:15 different position within sales now turning then to the question of marketing materials can we go to paragraph six of your witness statement please

02:23:28 and uh you can see that we you can say there you you see that you say there and this is back to the fifth of august meeting

02:23:37 meeting uh at the meeting i was provided with the rs 5000 marketing material to pass to potential customers this meeting was the first time i'd been provided with details about the product however i was aware a few weeks earlier

02:23:48 however i was aware a few weeks earlier that a new product was in the offing

02:23:51 i think you were provided weren't you on that occasion with the compliance guide and the specification guide among other documents is that right correct there was about

02:24:00 was about i think four or five yes documents were initially released yes from the marketing team indeed and they've been listed in your statement and indeed elsewhere

02:24:10 elsewhere let's just look at the compliance guide first please cel 6012

02:24:18 [Applause] and if we can go to page two in that document you can see what the guide says at the very top of the page next to the pink box it says this document provides guidance on

02:24:30 this document provides guidance on complying with approved document b2 adb-2

02:24:33 adb-2 for external wall cladding systems fixed to steel frame or masonry constructions it provides a step-by-step guide to an alternative route compliance for adb2 through meeting the performance criteria set out in br

02:24:44 the performance criteria set out in br 135 through testing to bs 84141 2002 or bs 84142 2005.

02:24:54 uh i'm assuming that this document was given to you at the marketing launch at the launch meeting on the fifth of august had you seen it before that time

02:25:05 august had you seen it before that time i had not know did you get an opportunity at that meeting to read this this document thoroughly all these documents as a suite no we we were presented with them after

02:25:17 no we we were presented with them after the fact

02:25:17 the fact uh i think when we i can't remember exactly whether it's before or after the meeting but not enough for us to digest the data within it

02:25:26 within it it was it was presented to us as part of that

02:25:30 that launch presentation that you showed us earlier yeah and when we look at the word step-by-step guide to an alternative route to compliance did you understand when you saw this document whether it was at the meeting

02:25:42 document whether it was at the meeting or later that it was an alternative to satisfying the combustibility requirements in section 12.7 and table a7 of approved document b i think that's what was covered in the

02:25:54 i think that's what was covered in the meeting yes i was going to ask you that there was discussion in the meeting about that was there i'm i can't be absolutely sure but i'm i'm pretty sure yeah so so just so we're not getting any doubt about it

02:26:05 doubt about it you were clear in your mind at this point

02:26:08 point seeing this document that rs 5000 would not provide a linear route to compliance i.e that it was not a material of limited combustibility correct yes

02:26:22 and if we look at page three in the far right hand column of that document it says there underneath the three little bullet arrows the classification applies only to the system as tested and

02:26:34 applies only to the system as tested and detailed in the classification report the classification report can only cover the details of the system as tested it cannot state what is not covered when specifying or checking a system it is important to check that the

02:26:45 it is important to check that the classification documents cover the end use application and then if you turn onto page four in the middle column we can see the the uh system that was actually tested and there's the diagram

02:26:56 actually tested and there's the diagram or drawing we looked at before which was contained in the slideshow presented by john roper at the launch meeting i think as you told us and again there's no mention in there of

02:27:09 and again there's no mention in there of an additional layer of six millimeters of magnesium oxide is there correct and there's no mention in there of a layer or level of eight millimeter mali

02:27:20 layer or level of eight millimeter mali alternate natura um cementitious fiberboard as the cladding material is that

02:27:28 and

02:27:32 again i'm assuming that that you didn't twig

02:27:35 twig that they were in there because you didn't know nobody discussed it i had no reason to think that that was not what was shown did you

02:27:48 did you or do you remember any discussion between you and john roper or paul evans or anybody else you dealt with

02:27:55 with which led you to which led you to think that this was indeed the system as constructive in other words did they actually tell you anything in addition to the documents that we've seen

02:28:08 to the documents that we've seen which would have led you to think that this test rig has identified in figure four on this page was the test rig that was tested no this i had no other conversations this

02:28:19 this i had no other conversations this this was what was presented to all of the sales teams myself and my colleagues now can we turn to cel6013

02:28:30 cel6013 this is the specification guide

02:28:34 and the questions i'm about to ask you are

02:28:38 are pretty similar to those i've been asking you for the last few minutes but let's just go through the document um if we look at page five of this document we can see

02:28:49 document we can see under the heading building above 18 meters

02:28:54 meters uh this is just below the left-hand pink box that says celetex rs 5000 has been successfully tested to bs 8414 part 2 2005 fire performance of external cladding

02:29:05 fire performance of external cladding systems and then under building above 18 meters

02:29:09 meters it says celetex rs 5000 has been successfully tested to bsa 414 part 2 2005 etc meets the criteria set out in br135 and is therefore acceptable for use in

02:29:20 is therefore acceptable for use in buildings above 18 meters in height and it goes on to clarify uh in the uh

02:29:30 third paragraph right hand column that the fire performance and classification report for celetex rs 5000

02:29:37 5000 only relates to the components detailed above any changes to the components listed

02:29:41 listed will need to be considered by the building designer is it fair to say that this explicitly warns

02:29:47 warns the customer who looks at this document and reads it that it that rs 5000 can only be used as part of the system as tested correct and you understood

02:29:59 as tested correct and you understood that at the time i did it now let's look at the components that formed part of the test according to this document middle column again or left hand column if you like the system tested to psa

02:30:11 if you like the system tested to psa four one four part two to 2005 was as follows and then you've got six bullet points 12 millimeter fiber cement panels that's the malia turnit supporting aluminium brackets and vertical rails 100 millimeters of

02:30:23 vertical rails 100 millimeters of celotex

02:30:23 celotex rs 5000 12 millimeters of non-combustible sheathing board 100 millimeters of sms system and 2 times 12 and a half millimeter plasterboard uh and again there's no reference there

02:30:36 uh and again there's no reference there to an additional six millimeters of magnesium oxide or eight millimeters of uh of mali um fiber cement panels at the thermocouples is there correct so the system tested

02:30:49 correct so the system tested the system described here and the components described in this list was not in fact the system actually tested was it

02:30:55 was it it seems not to have been no no this is a thoroughly misleading document isn't it even if you did read it thoroughly or one did read it thoroughly it turned out correct yes did you realize that at the

02:31:06 correct yes did you realize that at the time no it wasn't until much later when i was asked to attend a meeting with the lawyers for celetex a couple of years ago

02:31:15 years ago with link later so i was finally shown the full

02:31:19 the full test report did you consider at the time that there was a risk that the claim that rs 5000 meets the criteria set out in br 135 and is therefore acceptable

02:31:30 in br 135 and is therefore acceptable for use

02:31:30 for use in buildings above 18 meters might lead a reader to believe that it was suitable generally in combination with any system i didn't have any reason to believe that that was the case no

02:31:43 that was the case no if we go to well let me just press you a little bit on that it when it says as we've seen uh and is therefore acceptable for use in buildings above 18 meters i showed

02:31:54 in buildings above 18 meters i showed you that

02:31:55 you that terminology in the slideshow and i thought you had accepted that that that meant that there would be a risk that a reader might think that because it had passed the test it could be used generally in buildings over 18 meters in

02:32:06 generally in buildings over 18 meters in height

02:32:06 height that is also so is it not in respect of this marketing literature looking at it now with hindsight yes yes um now mr hyatt has

02:32:19 um now mr hyatt has considered these documents he's one of the experts who has been um enlisted to assist the inquiry and his opinion is that the rs is that rs 5000 or the

02:32:30 is that the rs is that rs 5000 or the claim that rs 5000 is acceptable for use in buildings above 18 meters in height is an erroneous claim i think you accept that

02:32:36 that yes yeah now in addition to the specification guide and the compliance guide which we've looked at celetex also produced a data sheet for rs 5000 didn't it it did you can look at that that's at

02:32:49 it did you can look at that that's at cel407961

02:32:50 cel407961 can we look at that please

02:32:58 was this a document that you received as one which was intended you should send out as your marketing effort or part of your marketing effort i think this was one of the documents

02:33:11 i think this was one of the documents that was part of the pack that we were given at the launch of the product yes right let's just look at the pink banner at the top of page one celatex rs 5000 premium rain screen cladding board

02:33:22 cladding board brackets suitable for buildings above 18 meters in height let's turn to the next page please

02:33:30 same pink banner same wording note the words in brackets suitable for buildings above 18 meters in height close brackets next page please

02:33:41 close brackets next page please same banner same wording again see that i do then that's the last page of that document

02:33:48 document so we can see this banner suitable for buildings above 80 meters in height is repeated on the top of every single page of this data sheet yes yes and i think it's right to say this is the shortest

02:34:00 is the shortest data sheet or the shortest piece of marketing material that uh that the marketing team had in relation to rs 5000 it may have been yes in fact it's correct isn't it that rs 5000 was

02:34:11 correct isn't it that rs 5000 was not suitable for buildings over 18 meters unless it formed part of the exact system tested under br135 correct and therefore do you accept that those words at the top of those pages in

02:34:23 those words at the top of those pages in the banner were apt to lead the reader to think that celetex rs 5000 was suitable for use in all buildings over 18 meters in height that that would be the case could be the

02:34:34 that that would be the case could be the case yes again the thoroughly misleading wording

02:34:37 wording do you accept that

02:34:40 it's not yeah it's not accurate it's misleading it could be construed as misleading yes but it is misleading because it doesn't contain the caveat yes thank you

02:34:54 and again this is the point we've revisited now i think a number of times but just on this document if you go to page

02:35:01 page one please in under introduction we can see the now familiar wording after the reference to the test in the fourth line it says the first pir

02:35:14 in the fourth line it says the first pir insulation ball to meet the performance criteria in br 135 for insulated rain screen clouding systems and then you see and therefore is acceptable for use in buildings above 18 meters in height

02:35:25 meters in height and that wording is repeated at the second bullet point uh just a little bit lower down under the words with celex rs-5000 you are specifying an insulation board that you see that i do and again same

02:35:38 you see that i do and again same question

02:35:38 question do you accept that that wording is potentially misleading because it might lead a reader to think that simply because it had passed a test it is suitable for any building above 18 meters in height yes potentially yes

02:35:51 let's look at ceo zeros please well it's actually worse than that in the end isn't it because if we go back to page three which deals with certification i think i

02:36:03 which deals with certification i think i think

02:36:04 think there it tells us that the system gives us some details about the system tested we should just not correct in relation to what was is now known yes i agree

02:36:17 was is now known yes i agree it is not a correct description of the system that was tested i agree yes thank you yeah yes and that was my next question sorry again

02:36:29 that was my next question sorry again i think that and just just to follow up on and finalize that that's because it doesn't mention the six millimeters magnesium oxide correct yes uh in fact taken as a sweet would you say that the celetex marketing materials

02:36:41 say that the celetex marketing materials you were given were misleading about rs 5000 and its use suitability and safety above 18 meters

02:36:47 meters it looks so yes thank you

02:36:52 now i'd like to look with you at some examples of marketing communications if we can

02:36:57 we can can we go to cel 50407 this is a press release uh

02:37:08 this is a press release uh and

02:37:12 it was prepared we think for the launch of rs 5000 are you familiar with this document mr broome do you think i'm not familiar but i knew it of its its existence

02:37:24 i knew it of its its existence and who wrote it do you think i should imagine it's the product management and marketing team right uh it's entitled

02:37:35 right uh it's entitled celetex reaching new heights celestex launched premium performance pir solution for rain screen cladding so that's the catch line or the but the strap line and then in the second uh paragraph

02:37:49 and then in the second uh paragraph uh it says the latest addition to the 5000 series product range celetex rs 5000 has successfully tested to bs 8414 part 2 2005 meets the criteria set out in br 135 and

02:38:01 meets the criteria set out in br 135 and therefore is acceptable for use in buildings over 18 meters in height now just uh looking at that i miss right in assuming i think that you weren't involved in wording this document that's correct did you say it at the

02:38:12 that's correct did you say it at the time do you think so did i did you see it at the time uh i must have done did you use it did you use it to market rs-5000 not from my recollection no i think it's

02:38:23 not from my recollection no i think it's more

02:38:24 more i would have sent out the the marketing literature that we'd looked at previously and if we look at the last paragraph

02:38:32 paragraph i've shown you the second one and and the by now almost mantric wording therefore acceptable for use looking at the last paragraph it says rs 5000

02:38:43 5000 and this is in quotation marks um since rs 5000 is the first pir our board to successfully test the bs-8414

02:38:50 bs-8414 making it acceptable for use in buildings above 18 meters in height close quotes said john roper product manager for celetex now just just pausing there

02:39:02 that that quotation

02:39:06 when he says making it acceptable for use in buildings above 18 meters in height

02:39:12 height that's misleading isn't it because it tends to suggest that because it has passed the bsa414 test it's acceptable for use in any building above 18 meters in height looking at that now yes yes and then he

02:39:24 looking at that now yes yes and then he goes on quotes as a company we are always looking to innovate and develop solutions

02:39:29 solutions for new applications rs 5000 will allow contractors architects and specifiers to use premium performance pir

02:39:36 pir in externally cladded walls for the first time in high-rise constructions that is a misleadingly general claim because what is missing is the extremely important caveat that it can only be used

02:39:48 it can only be used if it is used in exactly the same external wall construction as that which had passed the bsa414 test correct

02:39:55 correct yes

02:39:59 did you have any concerns at the time about these claims made in these marketing materials and in this press release

02:40:06 release not at the time no can we look at inq four zeroes one four one double zero

02:40:22 inq three zeroes one four one double zero

02:40:27 zero uh thank you this is a uh an article from specification online as we can see from the very top of the

02:40:38 as we can see from the very top of the document

02:40:40 document and it's uh it looks like it's dated tuesday 22nd of march 2016 uh do you know what caused this to be

02:40:52 uh do you know what caused this to be put out

02:40:55 i've no idea i don't had i left the company by that date uh yes i'm pretty sure i hadn't

02:41:02 hadn't i don't think you actually were there at this time

02:41:06 so you can't help us with this document i can't know well perhaps it's a document

02:41:10 document that's left for others then can we then look at ceo401382

02:41:18 this is an email sent by jonathan roper to you on the 29th of september 2014 as well as to others within celetex

02:41:28 and it says all please find below our standard response on queries regarding rs 5000 and bba certification any questions please call you see that i tell you uh and

02:41:43 um he sets out a long-ish text below you see that did you do you remember um being asked

02:41:55 did you do you remember um being asked by customers the kinds of things which had led to this standard response [Applause] i can't remember exact questions but

02:42:07 i can't remember exact questions but maybe this was put together because i i and my colleagues have started to give feedback to the product management team about questions that were being raised right now this is a month or so perhaps just a little

02:42:18 just a little under two months after the launch wasn't it end of september 14 yes and

02:42:25 yes and you can see that john roper is saying that it's a response on queries regarding

02:42:29 regarding rs 5000 and bba certification were customers coming to you and expressing concern that rs 5000 did not have a bba certificate

02:42:40 have a bba certificate i think that was one of the documents that was being asked for yes being asked for were you were they expressing concern that rs5000 didn't have such a certificate

02:42:51 have such a certificate and that they were encountering problems as a result of not being able to produce it

02:42:56 it i think it was because of the um my recollection of the events was that the the bba was one of the recognized documents that some insurers were looking for for

02:43:07 some insurers were looking for for materials going on to buildings generally

02:43:10 generally and because the product was so new and the timeline of the development of this particular product they hadn't

02:43:19 got a bba at at the time i don't even know if they had a bba at all by the end of my tenure within the company i don't think they did right then let's look down at the

02:43:30 did right then let's look down at the standard response we could see the first paragraph

02:43:32 paragraph which repeats um pretty much verbatim uh what we've seen in the data sheet and in the specification guide and the compliance guide we've got the um the mantra therefore

02:43:44 we've got the um the mantra therefore complies with the requirements of adb that for buildings that exceed 18 meters in height that's in there so that was part of the standard response and then uh there's a reference in the second

02:43:56 uh there's a reference in the second paragraph to the nhbc requirements you see that there i tell you yes and then in the third paragraph it says celetex rs 5000 has current certification from the building research

02:44:07 certification from the building research establishment bre confirming the product has met the criteria set out in br 135 and is therefore acceptable in rain screen clouding system above 18 meters in height

02:44:21 again for the same reason that you've given before do you accept that that is a thoroughly misleading response if it were given to a customer

02:44:32 response if it were given to a customer who asked

02:44:33 who asked looking at that now yes yes

02:44:41 now coming back to the second paragraph nhbc standards there's a reference there to

02:44:53 standards there's a reference there to chapter 6.9 were you familiar with the nhbc standards at the time no not all of them it was only this particular reference that was or so this particular

02:45:05 reference that was or so this particular chapter that was brought to light at some point again within my tenure at celetex after the launch of rs5000 that i think i don't know if it's just me but you know

02:45:16 you know customers or potential clients were bringing this to my attention at least right this is end of september 2014 are you saying that you at the time and

02:45:28 are you saying that you at the time and i know you were only one of a number of recipients of this document but you personally at the time weren't aware of the

02:45:33 the nhbc standards relating to curtin walling and cladding i wasn't no okay let me see if i can pinpoint the timing then if you can go to ceo40

02:45:43 to ceo40 please

02:45:49 and we'll come back to this email in just a moment this is an email from you dated the 22nd of october 2014. so about three weeks after the email we've

02:46:00 about three weeks after the email we've been looking at uh to debbie berger and paul evans hi team if any of you find yourself in conversations regarding a need for bba certificate for use of rs 5000 online hbc jobs you

02:46:13 for use of rs 5000 online hbc jobs you may want to be made aware of the following and then you set out the guidance at chapter 6.9 you see it there i do yes um and then if you go over the page to page two the email continues

02:46:25 page two the email continues um the top of the page first bullet point i've attached a copy of the nhbc chapter six guidance on curtin wall and cladding

02:46:33 and then you say rs 5000 is not classed as a whole system but neither would any other individual component as far as i know no one company manufactures a complete rain screen system

02:46:44 screen system i hope you can reference i hope that you can

02:46:47 can you reference to this document to help counter the argument for the need for of a bba for rs 5000 or nhbc

02:46:55 nhbc projects so this is three weeks after the email you've seen when do you think you first became aware of the nhbc standard that you're

02:47:07 of the nhbc standard that you're now sending up to uh debbie berger and paul evans on the 22nd of october 2014. i can't be sure was it between those two dates 29th

02:47:19 was it between those two dates 29th september and 22nd of october i would imagine it must have been yes right

02:47:26 and you were wanting them to refer to the nhbc

02:47:29 the nhbc guide in

02:47:33 guide in to counter the argument for the need for a bba why was that i think it was just to understand what the

02:47:40 the nhbc were looking for um and what documents that they would accept either a bba or a test report but the the option that they could have

02:47:53 but the the option that they could have used either so really for me it was a for me including this document sending it to those people it was to really say to them

02:48:02 to them look this is the importance of the likes of having a bba for instance but i was led to led to believe i i thought that it might be with the test

02:48:13 i thought that it might be with the test reports

02:48:13 reports a way of appeasing the nhbc on schemes where that buildup was being used you knew very well at least by that time that

02:48:21 that it was a system test not a product test correct

02:48:24 correct yes and we get that from your your last paragraph but one can we then go back to john roper's email of the 29th of september

02:48:37 that we were looking at before which is

02:48:42 ceo401382

02:48:46 and in the third paragraph there i've shown you this i'll show it to you again it says cenotex rs 5000 has current certification from the building research establishment confirming the product has met the

02:48:58 confirming the product has met the criteria set out in br 135 and therefore is acceptable etc it says the product has met the criteria uh not the system

02:49:10 uh not the system is it the case that that you and your your

02:49:13 your colleagues in the marketing team were effectively being told in in the sales team in the sales team were effectively being told to provide a response as standard that

02:49:26 to provide a response as standard that the product has met the criteria not the system

02:49:33 i didn't pick up on the wording of of that

02:49:37 that in particular it was looks like it was a statement that we could use literally copy and paste in response to any queries we were getting indeed and such a response would be

02:49:48 indeed and such a response would be thoroughly misleading because the rs 5000 product was never tested was it a system which incorporated that product was tested and passed the br 135 criteria correct yes

02:50:01 br 135 criteria correct yes so again is this another example of misleading marketing hindsight it could be construed as such yes

02:50:12 yes yeah you you told me with hindsight now a number of times can you explain why it didn't occur to you at the time that this was misleading marketing literature taken as a whole given the impressions

02:50:24 a whole given the impressions that you you accept today sitting here it gave

02:50:30 i think with the knowledge that i've gleaned since because i'm still in this the same market i was still i suppose new to the whole of

02:50:41 of insulation the world of insulation and i was building up my knowledge as i went and i was relying on you know the specialists within the the business ie um the product

02:50:53 the business ie um the product management and the marketing team to give me

02:50:55 give me and my colleagues guidance as to how to respond to professionals in the industry requesting certain information do you know if you ever gave

02:51:08 do you know if you ever gave uh this response as standard to any customer who asked about bba certification for rs 5000

02:51:15 5000 i i may have done as a sort of a copy and paste exercise but i i can't give you individual examples

02:51:27 did you ever come across any customer or potential customer who was proposing to use

02:51:32 use a rain screen cloud or install a rain screen cladding exactly the same as that which had been tested or at least according to the marketing literature had been tested not to my knowledge no

02:51:44 no

02:51:48 can we then uh go back to uh we'll go on in in the time to

02:51:57 ceo40101058

02:52:01 cel401058

02:52:08 now this is an email chain

02:52:12 in october 2015 and runs sorry 2014 and runs to january 2015. can we go to page three please to begin with

02:52:26 this is an email from you to debbie berger

02:52:29 berger on the 20th of october 2014 so two days before you center the nhbc document as we've seen before and you say hi debs

02:52:40 as we've seen before and you say hi debs can you see that it's on page three second email says hi debs i think we have

02:52:44 have although we have a product we are lacking

02:52:48 lacking a third party approval for the f sfs inner brickwork outer application kingsburn

02:52:54 kingsburn k12 have a bba for this application and we don't seem to be able to offer anything

02:52:58 anything other than a carefully worded email is this something that we are looking to address in the new year and it doesn't get picked up again until the top of the page you can see that when you ask paul evans to put it on his

02:53:10 when you ask paul evans to put it on his radar

02:53:11 radar you see that i do yes uh do you remember if this was in relation to

02:53:18 to rs 5000

02:53:22 i no i can't be sure

02:53:26 you can see that you say kingspan k12 have a bba certif a bba for this application and we don't seem to be able to offer anything other than a carefully worded email when you say

02:53:36 say carefully worded what was that email what what did you say in it well i don't think i said anything i don't know i think i was looking for

02:53:48 i don't know i think i was looking for some sort of support from the product management marketing team to give me guidance for a product or that we didn't have a product at the time what was the problem that

02:54:00 at the time what was the problem that you were identifying that kingspan k12 or it's k15 perhaps uh have a bba and you didn't have one

02:54:10 have one and instead had to write an email which was carefully worded no i think i mean the cool thing the k that that is reference there the cool therm range

02:54:21 therm range um there was different products for different

02:54:24 different applications and the k12 i think just reading the subject matter there it says brickwork outer sfs inner i follow um so in fact it's not a mistake for k-15 it is actually a

02:54:36 mistake for k-15 it is actually a different product potentially yeah i think that's likely right

02:54:40 right um and we may or celetex may not have had a product for that application i follow does this then tell us at least in general terms that if you don't have a

02:54:51 general terms that if you don't have a bba

02:54:52 bba you have to produce carefully worded marketing material or assurances to get around the problem well i think that it's looking for evidence

02:55:00 evidence people are looking for evidence full stop yes yes and a carefully worded email wouldn't be evidence and that's why you were putting it on debbie berger's radar yes yes

02:55:11 debbie berger's radar yes yes um can we go to cel401065 please this is later in time this is february 2015 and i just want to show you an email chain in that month and start at the bottom of

02:55:24 in that month and start at the bottom of the email chain

02:55:28 if we can

02:55:31 we go to page six i think is what we were after and uh you could see that it begins on the sixth of february with a an email from chris clark who is a technical coordinator at mciat and the

02:55:43 technical coordinator at mciat and the subject is london dock external wall detail you see that i'll tell you when it comes to you uh and copy to others within um

02:55:54 george plc who i think of the main contractor and if you look uh the third paragraph down

02:56:03 down he says the final thing we require is agreement of the insulation manufacturer that the detail we're proposing does not pose any risk over what's been tested that's a bit vague that so we'll try and find out a bit more about what it's

02:56:14 find out a bit more about what it's about because you you i think respond if you go up to page five

02:56:20 five um yeah you see that you write to paul evans internally copied to jonathan roper and debbie

02:56:31 copied to jonathan roper and debbie berger

02:56:32 berger and you say hi paul what are we prepared to say

02:56:36 to say in relation to the use of rs 5000 on the london dock project for some george this is a huge job that will be ongoing for ten years on the former news international society whopping

02:56:46 whopping you see that i do and that's the ninth of february so six days three days later and then looking up the chain uh debbie berger comes back to you the same day much much later the same

02:56:58 the same day much much later the same day hi jonathan have you had an answer on this yet presumably an answer from paul evans and if we go up the chain again uh we come to uh page four

02:57:11 uh we come to uh page four you go back to her and say nothing is yet and i need to get an answer back soon please and then we go up the chain again please to page three

02:57:22 again please to page three and uh

02:57:27 we have an email from you to debbie berger

02:57:31 berger you see that and you set out the differences there between the system there and the one that's tested and you say the inner build that matches ours up to the sheathing board the only elements

02:57:42 to the sheathing board the only elements that are different are the exterior panels are stone and metal cassettes which seem to be butted up against one another someone needs to make a call what we advise we will have to walk away from the job and just be happy selling the

02:57:53 the job and just be happy selling the product to others the problem that i have here is that most of the large rain screen jobs in london

02:57:58 london are being scrutinized by the specialists kingspan obviously want to hang on to as much business of this business as possible so our writing there quotes letters on quotes you see that

02:58:09 letters on quotes you see that i do and

02:58:14 does that tell us that celetex at least considered providing advice about suitability on certain projects such as this one i think that's the question i was asking

02:58:25 i think that's the question i was asking [Music]

02:58:28 [Music] really what what would we do or what would celetex do i should say um in relation to a response i.e i was seeking guidance about whether you

02:58:41 i was seeking guidance about whether you should give advice and if so what advice you should give or whether you should walk away yeah not the advice that i should give but the advice that the company would give or we we just face facts and walk away

02:58:52 or we we just face facts and walk away from

02:58:53 from this type of business you say this type of business can you be specific well where we're being asked to provide evidence or um

02:59:04 evidence or um i suppose desktop studies or something to appease people who are looking for a build up that was not as was tested and by specialists in that last

02:59:15 and by specialists in that last paragraph do you mean fire fire engineers or facade consultants

02:59:21 yeah any anyone who would be qualified to to give such evidence and by letters in quotation marks what are you referring to there i think at the time

02:59:29 the time kingspan were writing some sort of letter per project to

02:59:36 i'm not sure if it was to underwrite the use of the product but it was something to do with the give them give the contractor some sort of assurance that that buildup that had been used on that

02:59:47 that buildup that had been used on that particular project would be i don't know if acceptable or close to one of the tests that they had already performed that was the sort of my sort of

02:59:59 that was the sort of my sort of understanding of that i see

03:00:09 uh now can we just go on up the page mr chairman i think i'll finish this email run off

03:00:14 run off if that's convenient we can go on up the page to the bottom of page two

03:00:22 debbie berger writes back to you on the 10th of february and then i'm flipping back to page three she says in your opinion jonathan and i won't hold you to this but do you think rs is ready for major

03:00:33 but do you think rs is ready for major projects

03:00:34 projects what do you mean by specialists since she's asked the question i wish i could help you more in getting the product on on these projects it must be so frustrating to have to walk away from these opportunities you see that i do and then if you go

03:00:47 you see that i do and then if you go to your response to her back on page two please same day 10th of february 2015 you say just to keep you both in the loop i have a

03:00:58 keep you both in the loop i have a meeting with the fire consultant for the project that's this thursday in the meeting he will review our test report and look to establish what we in capital letters need to be prepared to say to appease the nhbc

03:01:09 to say to appease the nhbc i can't repeat what i was told about the nhbc in this email but just to say that they aren't particularly helpful in resolving the ongoing conversation regarding the use of combustible materials

03:01:20 the use of combustible materials what was that about and i said that what what what were you told by the nhbc well i don't think i directly was told anything from the nhpc this was

03:01:32 anything from the nhpc this was just feedback from um [Music]

03:01:36 [Music] so i'm just reading back through it again yes suppose i'll rephrase my question perhaps i wasn't entirely accurate

03:01:44 in the first sentence you are told that the fire consultant will review our test report and look to be look to establish what we need to be prepared to say to appease the nhbc what is it that

03:01:55 say to appease the nhbc what is it that you thought at the time the nhbc was um concerned about

03:02:04 well i just think the the nhbc had a view that

03:02:09 view that they wanted certification for the product

03:02:13 product in different build ups and this particular this particular situation was one that we didn't have a test

03:02:20 test for and

03:02:23 for and i mean looking back back at it now the nhbc were

03:02:27 nhbc were um i don't think they were being helpful i.e from a commercial team wanted to push things forward as in the contractor um but looking at this now the nhbc were

03:02:39 but looking at this now the nhbc were perfectly in their rights to require further evidence or testing data was the concern as you understood it from the nhbc side that they were not happy

03:02:52 side that they were not happy that a414 tests were being used for wider applications i couldn't tell you right and then finally on this email

03:03:05 if we uh go to the

03:03:14 to the top of the chain this is debbie burger coming back to you even later on the 20 on the 10th of february 2015 and she asks for a list of major projects where you've presented rs

03:03:25 projects where you've presented rs 5000 in the last few months and it wasn't specified she says i'm keen to learn from you as you're close to the specification process and probably have the most face-to-face experience of rs and major projects

03:03:36 projects so your opinion is really valuable in building up an honest picture of barriers to rs for each of these projects can you tell me who the specialists that decide rs 5000 was non-compliant i'm preparing a presentation for spin

03:03:48 i'm preparing a presentation for spin this friday where rs-5000 will be subject to a rigorous discussion regarding the nhpc i would kindly ask you not to pursue that line of inquiry at this stage we've received another letter from the nhbc only today

03:03:59 nhbc only today which will be discussed at spin so we're fully aware of what they're saying about rs 5000

03:04:04 rs 5000 on a positive note they have indicated they would like to work with us

03:04:10 did you um what did you take from that letter

03:04:13 letter that or that email

03:04:17 well there's two parts there really there's debbie requesting me for more feedback about the the projects and that where people didn't

03:04:29 and that where people didn't want to choose to use the material and to like

03:04:33 to like to uh to understand who the specialists were

03:04:37 were who were blocking the use or not accepting i suppose the the test data that was available

03:04:46 and then the third part is the nhbc apparently there's a there's a letter there but i wasn't privy to what was in that letter to the management team at celitex and why to the best of your understanding

03:04:58 why to the best of your understanding were the specialists not accepting the test data

03:05:02 test data i think it's mainly because going back to the

03:05:06 to the the case that the the celestex rs5000 only hand

03:05:10 only hand had a singular test physical test and at that stage the nhbc in particular weren't happy that that was enough

03:05:21 that that was enough proof or enough evidence to be used with um other other systems or extrapolate the data for other other buildups yes thank you mr german is that a convenient moment

03:05:32 is that a convenient moment yes i think it is um mr room again have a break now for everyone to get some lunch we will come back at five past two please and uh again as i say no talking to anyone about your evidence or

03:05:44 to anyone about your evidence or anything

03:05:45 anything relating to it over the break okay right thank you very much you'd like to give the usher please

03:06:00 the usher please thank you five past two please

03:06:22 you