Daniel Room gives evidence about selling RS5000. He describes the 'honeymoon period being over' when Kingspan achieved Part 2 testing, failed Hadley tests showing RS5000 combusted before GA4000, and his awareness that further testing was needed but never happened. Reveals early contact with Harley about Grenfell Tower project.
00:00:06 i guess would you ask mr room to come back in please
00:00:24 all right mr room ready to carry on i am yes thank you thank you very much yes mr miller thank you mr chairman mr room uh can i ask you please to go to cel401069
00:00:39 this is a month-end report from february 2015
00:00:43 2015 which i think you uh wrote didn't you yes we've got your name on it yeah can we go to page five we can see here what you're doing with this george london dog project which we
00:00:55 this george london dog project which we were discussing before the lunch break and on page five it says major project contract activity overview there are four projects there the last of which is this george london dock
00:01:06 of which is this george london dock meeting with specialist fire consultant h h to look at how to specify the rs 5000 product in the facade awaiting redraw of section detail to show exact buildup
00:01:17 show exact buildup before comment
00:01:20 now this is obviously for customers who wanted that is it right that for such customers like lux and george at london don't you would engage on precise differences between the system tested
00:01:31 the system tested and the proposed cladding system for the project yes if we were asked that information if you were asked for that information is it fair to say that harley turning to grenfell never engaged you on that issue
00:01:42 that issue no they didn't and you didn't insist on seeing the exact build up at grenfell tower in order to advise them as to whether rs 5000 was suitable i didn't no can we we'll come back to
00:01:53 i didn't no can we we'll come back to grenfell later on can we then go back to uh the discussion about
00:01:58 about kingspan letters cel40 is 1066 please
00:02:07 uh and i'd like to go to the second email down on page one please and over to page two that you see there this is an email from you to paul evans debbie burger and richard millwood a copy to john roper and it's about
00:02:20 a copy to john roper and it's about london
00:02:21 london some george barkley group high team feedback from meeting with h h fire on thursday
00:02:26 thursday we were reviewing the facade details for this george london dot project we all feel that we me and hh need to review the section drawings as they need to be amended i will follow up with all parties next week in a joint meeting and report back
00:02:38 week in a joint meeting and report back interesting conversations around how the nhbc and kingspan are viewing issues of 18 meters see that and then you give further information in the second paragraph on the next page
00:02:50 in the second paragraph on the next page under the heading kingspan we can just flip over to that and you say there
00:02:55 say there kingspan had been offering their quotes professional opinion on quotes letters for each project i've had a look at one of these letters and the only sentence that had anything of relevance was it is in our opinion that k-15 would be
00:03:08 it is in our opinion that k-15 would be fit for purpose if installed onto a non-combustible substrate with fire barriers at 3.5 meters all the remainder of the letter referred to the previous testing and in my opinion was just padding as far as h and h are understanding the
00:03:20 as far as h and h are understanding the situation even the letter confirming acceptance by the manufacturer is no guarantee of acceptance by the nhbc
00:03:26 nhbc h suggested that if we were to perform form further testing and there was an issue with cost or being able to book tests
00:03:32 tests in a timely fashion we might want to investigate approaching chilton fire to see if they're able to perform a bs8414 test or even investigate european test houses hope this info is useful
00:03:43 useful um just focusing on what you say about the professional opinion letters um first of all um you say you've had a look at one of these letters who gave you that
00:03:53 you that was that agent h i can't say it might have been do you know how else you could have come across a kingspan professional opinion letter unless it was from a potential customer yeah i can only
00:04:07 a potential customer yeah i can only imagine it would have been former a customer yeah right uh and you say the only sentence that had anything of relevance was you quote there and i've read it to you it is our opinion that k-15 will be fit for purpose it's a pretty bald statement that but
00:04:20 it's a pretty bald statement that but was that your understanding at the time that kingstown kingspan were providing these assurances in those terms to potential customers such as georges at london dock
00:04:32 at london dock i think that was the idea of these these letters as they were called yes right did celetex ever adopt a similar practice
00:04:40 practice not that i know no did you consider adopting a similar practice i personally didn't no um this was just something that was brought to my attention
00:04:50 attention of what was happening in the industry and as
00:04:53 and as as you can see here i was putting it into writing and then sending it back up the chain of command to the the team or the management team within celestex but it's clear from this that at this
00:05:04 but it's clear from this that at this stage you understood is this right that there was at the very least serious uncertainty about whether rs 5000 could safely be used above 18 meters
00:05:13 meters other than in the exact system as tested
00:05:18 it it was just reinforcing the state that
00:05:21 that the the view my view was that the stakeholders needed more physical testing
00:05:28 testing or desktop studies so you're you're saying that your concern at the time was the the one test that had been passed by rs 5000 in the may of 2014 was
00:05:39 passed by rs 5000 in the may of 2014 was insufficient for stakeholders as you call them and they wanted more tests that's it yes i mean all of these emails that you're presenting to me that i wrote are
00:05:52 presenting to me that i wrote are collating information from the market of what
00:05:56 what people are expecting what potential customers or clients or specialists are expecting to have to potentially consider the use of this the
00:06:04 the rs 5000 material in their projects and was part of but was another aspect of that that you were having resistance from customers because uh you couldn't give them an
00:06:15 because uh you couldn't give them an assurance
00:06:15 assurance that rs 5000 could be used in a different cladding system that's true yes yeah
00:06:24 were you concerned that kingspan were able to keep uh successfully offering k15 as a which is a phenolic product for use above 18 meters simply on the basis of these
00:06:35 basis of these letters that you refer to professional opinion letters i don't i think the main thing is with kingspan is that they the products have been around for i think it was around
00:06:46 think it was around 10 years and so they had performed a lot more physical tests the professional opinion letters i don't know if that had any um gravity with the specialists i don't
00:06:58 um gravity with the specialists i don't think it did and this is what i was basically
00:07:01 basically putting out there in my email to the management team right can we then go to a different topic which is marketing concerns can we start with
00:07:14 cel4012026 please this is an email from you to fiona fiona at whiteink.co.uk
00:07:28 fiona at whiteink.co.uk uh i don't know if she's got a surname um perhaps you don't remember it do you i don't i'm afraid no um fiona it's dated the 25th of september 2014 so back to the end of september 14.
00:07:40 so back to the end of september 14. fiona further to my first email please find below our response to your query on the decision to test to bs84142 as opposed to bs84141 and then you set out the relevant part
00:07:51 and then you set out the relevant part of section 12 12.5 it is in adb you see that i do and um your your
00:08:04 and um your your response is set out below that um citation there can you uh recall if she explained why she was asking the question she was asking i can't no i'm afraid
00:08:15 asking i can't no i'm afraid you were clearly getting questions about the basis on which you'd done the test day weren't you by this stage i was yes and
00:08:26 i was yes and your um response that we see in the next paragraph down after the quotation
00:08:33 quotation um says uh in the fourth line from the end having consulted with the bre they acknowledge that part two is the more stringent of the two tests
00:08:44 more stringent of the two tests as a steel frame structure is less resistant to fire than a brick or block masonry construction building control reaffirmed this view and advised the testing worst case to part two would allow scope for constructions using celotex onto masonry
00:08:59 now had you actually consulted with the bre about that point i myself personally hadn't no but this section may have been lifted
00:09:10 no but this section may have been lifted from
00:09:10 from john roper's uh response that we looked at earlier indeed and then i was going to ask you that can we look back at that which is
00:09:20 cel401027
00:09:25 this is the email from john roper at 1659
00:09:30 which we saw before to which you respond thanks mate at 1714. do you see that i tell you yes and you can see below uh the pink quotation in the second
00:09:41 uh the pink quotation in the second email down that we've got exactly the same text so you did you just cut and paste uh from john roper's email your response into into your email to fiona at whitelink it looks like i did yes yes okay
00:09:52 looks like i did yes yes okay so the consultation with the bre and building control is him rather than you consulting with the bre that's correct that's what you're telling us do you know who at the bre was consulted i don't know
00:10:03 i don't know or anyone at building control you don't know who no i don't did you yourself believe at the time that you could extrapolate between the two
00:10:10 two tests in this whale or extrapolate from one to the other i was led to believe that having the part two test which was against the the metal wall was i would say better
00:10:23 the metal wall was i would say better but
00:10:24 but um it was i suppose more indicative of modern construction methods and more relevance than the the part one which was a test against a solid
00:10:35 solid wall um was your view that if it passed a part two test which was on a steel structural system it would therefore pass
00:10:46 pass a part one test which was on a masonry system
00:10:49 system that's what i was led to believe right you were led to believe what by just by looking at john rapper's email or anything independently of that but by i think it was from the presentation that was given to us
00:11:01 presentation that was given to us in the launch of the product by by the team the marketing team so john roper essentially yes right um can i ask you to go to your statement please at paragraph 55 on page 17.
00:11:20 you say there and this is at a time mark just before the next paragraph 15th of january 2015 you say i continue to push celotex management to commit to further investment in testing or desktop studies
00:11:32 investment in testing or desktop studies to demonstrate the rs 5000 product as being suitable for use in a wider range of clouding systems as kingspan were doing with k-15 why did you feel that it was necessary to push celetex management to commit
00:11:44 to push celetex management to commit further investment well i think this is shown in my presentation my market analysis presentation to explain
00:11:55 analysis presentation to explain the investment and why the investment was needed it was to if we were to compete with kingspan who had
00:12:02 who had i think 10 years in that particular field with their k15 product that to achieve the specifications i suppose that k15 was being used for that celotex would
00:12:13 was being used for that celotex would have to
00:12:14 have to put that investment in to at least catch up
00:12:17 up um with the amount of testing that kingspan had done with their product how soon after the launch in august 2014 did it become apparent to you that this further investment in testing and desktop
00:12:29 investment in testing and desktop studies was going to be needed in order for you to be able to uh sell uh rs 5000 in a wider range of clouding systems as kingspan were doing with k15 i i can't give you a particular date but
00:12:42 i i can't give you a particular date but it was something that built up over time but over over a lot how much time was it was this by the end of october september
00:12:50 september or or into the new year i was just looking at the the next item 56 this was sort of a follow-up to that with
00:12:57 that with i say so quite so within weeks after the launch
00:13:01 launch can we take it that it would become apparent to you that the single test wasn't going to do it wasn't going to let you sell rs 5000 to the breadth of market that you had hoped i would hazard a guess
00:13:12 i would hazard a guess if i was pushed that it would be i suppose within the first three four months all right after the the launch of the product
00:13:26 and your impression as we get from that paragraph was was it that kingspan had had invested in testing and desktop studies and therefore we're able to market k15 into a wider
00:13:37 we're able to market k15 into a wider range of cladding systems than you were able to do with rs 5000 with its one test that's correct yes i see and was that because of the feedback you've had from customers
00:13:48 had from customers that's right yes yes can we look at cel401057
00:13:58 and i'd like to go to page three in that email run please this is an email you sent to paul evans on the 14th of january
00:14:04 january we look at page three
00:14:07 i probably have to go to the bottom of page two i apologize um you can see you send this email to uh paul evans on the 14th of january copper copied to a large number of executives
00:14:19 copied to a large number of executives within
00:14:20 within uh celetex including rob warren uh who was head of technical and john roper
00:14:27 roper and debbie burger too uh and the subject is greenwich wharf cool firm k15 importance high and can we go over please to page three
00:14:39 and can we go over please to page three uh team it says uh it seems from the email trail below involving kingspan and their k15 product that our honeymoon period with rs 5000 is over we've been sent an email
00:14:50 is over we've been sent an email inadvertently with an email trail between durkheim developer kingspan and squirer partners architect
00:14:56 architect kingsman are purporting to have passed bsa-414 part two and most interestingly they use a cement particle board of 12 millimeters thick in the process i know from another project and to be
00:15:07 i know from another project and to be wharf greenwich peninsula with barrett's where they will be using k-15 against cp board which is far cheaper than an a1 a2 euro class board as far as i can tell from reading through a proof document b there's
00:15:18 through a proof document b there's nothing that specifically states that a non-combustible sheathing board must be used although this is probably up to interpretation i'll be in contact with the architect to discuss rs 5000 but it is worth reading through the email drill to see what kingsmen are
00:15:30 email drill to see what kingsmen are claiming in the current marketplace you see that i do
00:15:38 now was your view there that the honeymoon period
00:15:44 period with rs 5000 was over based on this email trail or was this is something that you were coming to learn gradually before this time mid-january 2015.
00:15:56 this time mid-january 2015. now i think this was the the first proof because um right kingspan up to that point had only had a part one test
00:16:05 test completed um and this is why the celetex rs 5000 with its part two test which was
00:16:13 which was um when it was launched um was i don't know if it was a breakthrough but it was something that the kingsman product didn't have at the time so by the time we had i suppose written
00:16:25 so by the time we had i suppose written confirmation that kingspan had achieved part two i as you can see from here forward this information directly up the chain of command again to to the management team very good well
00:16:37 to to the management team very good well let's look down the chain a bit if we go to page five
00:16:42 five we can go there we can see here on page five an email um at the very bottom of page five from adam heath at kingspan uh to
00:16:54 kingspan uh to uh matthew college and dave cummings who were uh at nhbc it seems and there was
00:17:01 was he says dear matthew and dave as a gesture of good faith i've attached a copy of our most recent test to bs8414 part 2. in this test we use 80 millimeters thick cool foam k15 behind a
00:17:13 millimeters thick cool foam k15 behind a terracotta rain screen the test report shows that the tested system has met the core criteria of bi-135
00:17:20 bi-135 and then goes on to say continuing with the testing regime to further expand the scope for insulation thickness and cladding finish and then goes on to say after that we will stress that this report is only for use with this project and must not
00:17:31 for use with this project and must not be circulated outside of square and partners or the nhbc the reason for this is because this report will require some minor adjusting of the text for commercial reasons please note any such amendments will not
00:17:42 please note any such amendments will not affect the result of the test the sheathing board used in the test was actually 12 millimeters thick and this will be reflected in the revision of the report and then there's a real iteration of the requirement not to pass it on to anybody
00:17:53 requirement not to pass it on to anybody else
00:17:54 else and um and then it comes [Music]
00:17:58 [Music] to as a response just a fire test report and then squire and partners send that to certex it seems
00:18:13 we don't need to get into why they thought it appropriate to breach the confidence perhaps that doesn't matter then he says um could you please provide confirmation on a bs-135 compliance certificate
00:18:24 on a bs-135 compliance certificate foreign
00:18:24 foreign celetex rs-5000 insulation this is an urgent requirement for building control we look forward to your response so what's that sorry excuse me would you follow this just a minute
00:18:36 have you got that on the screen i haven't no no i'm so sorry i'm still on uh
00:18:40 uh i'm so sorry you're quite right i'm on page four oh well we're not you're not we are now we yes okay
00:18:50 that's that's that's the email i was referring to you see matthew college of square partners sending it to celetex i'm so sorry i was running a little bit ahead of you not paying attention thank you yes but if you it's dear sarah
00:19:03 thank you yes but if you it's dear sarah madam it says following our conversation regarding building control requirements for rain screen
00:19:07 screen insulation br135 certification please see below
00:19:11 see below and there is then a request for information and a bs 135 compliance certificate for the celetex rs 5000 insulation this is an urgent requirement for building control we look forward to your
00:19:23 building control we look forward to your response
00:19:23 response so it's that that starts off your what prompts your uh email isn't it yeah it doesn't seem that i've i was copied on that um
00:19:35 on that um i don't i don't think there was any attachment to that email by the looks of it but
00:19:38 it but my name isn't on that no well what then seems to happen is if you look up to page three you get this email stream
00:19:51 uh the bottom of the page from celetex technical to debbie burger copy to you uh okay
00:19:56 uh okay yeah that's how you get it and that is what then prompted your response which is the email trail below right i'm so sorry i wanted to make sure you saw it all um was it the discovery as i think
00:20:08 um was it the discovery as i think you've confirmed in fact of the fact that kingspan had now done an 8414 part two test that had prompted your remark that the honeymoon period was now over
00:20:21 that the honeymoon period was now over that's right yes that explains that uh did you uh take the view that further tests
00:20:29 tests now needed to be carried out on rs 5000 more on the need to compete with kingspan rather than the need to comply with building regulations
00:20:40 i think looking back on it it was they were hand in hand really right can you just explain a little bit more about what you mean by that well to to make the product more acceptable it needed to be
00:20:52 needed to be run through further testing yes and that in hand would have allowed building control to make informed decisions about its use
00:21:01 its use did you discuss with debbie berger or anyone else in management at celetex the fact that buyers of rs 5000
00:21:08 5000 couldn't comply with the building regulations if they weren't provided with further rs 5000 test results which you thought needed
00:21:16 needed uh investing in i i don't know if i had specific conversations but these conversations were being had by email anyway it's a fact i think you'll accept
00:21:28 anyway it's a fact i think you'll accept that there was no further testing ever carried out on rs 5000 was there no not my time at the
00:21:33 the at the company no why was that i couldn't i couldn't tell you i'm afraid were you ever given an explanation by anybody as to why there was no further test carried out despite your protestations that there should be no i
00:21:45 protestations that there should be no i was never given a reason did you ever ask for one
00:21:49 no i i can't remember i think i mean looking at those emails so i was asking for investments but i was never provided a reason i'm afraid
00:22:02 i was never provided a reason i'm afraid by this stage mid-january 2015 did the feedback that you were getting from the market about the difficulties of complying with the building regulations but simply because of the single test
00:22:13 because of the single test lead you to have concerns that rs 5000 might be unsafe on high-rise buildings buildings over 18 meters it was not concerned
00:22:21 concerned no it was it was not concerned so that means you had no concerns about safety i had no i had no concerns over safety it was a product that had been tested
00:22:32 a product that had been tested as much um that i knew and that was the evidence
00:22:37 evidence i was given although in limited form in the four and twelve page document so i had no reason to believe it was um
00:22:46 it was um you know a risky product as such um back to the subject of further testing then can i ask you to look at ceo401042 please
00:22:59 this is an email the title of which this is an email from you to andrew
00:23:10 this is an email from you to andrew jones
00:23:21 uh and i think you need to go down to page three to start with please yes that's right and it's the title is uh celetex rs 5000
00:23:32 is uh celetex rs 5000 bre testing 190 strand and it's from you to andrew jones on the 14th of november 2014. do you see that i do um
00:23:44 if we go to the email uh in the first paragraph pair one you can see it's divided into paragraph two
00:23:55 it's divided into paragraph two uh you say i met with stephen howard from the bre last tuesday to discuss the option of further testing of our rs 5000 product for bs 8414 and choice of materials one thing that steve mentioned was that he would like to understand better the
00:24:07 he would like to understand better the decision-making process for designing a facade system he's privy to manufacturers tests at the bre but would like clarification from the other side of the fence would you be interested in arranging to speak with steve this will
00:24:18 arranging to speak with steve this will certainly help with our future discussions when deciding what we what we should test you see that and then
00:24:24 then uh if you go to the next paragraph uh the bottom of page three and over onto page four
00:24:29 page four it says we are currently looking to expanding
00:24:32 expanding our test data next year and would like to understand from you the materials that you think we should look to test for bs 841 for and then over the page we understand that further testing should involve
00:24:43 that further testing should involve a non-combustible sheathing and board for bs8414 part two realistic thinnest and thickest insulation solution cladding panels class norfolk euro class a1 stroke 2. the biggest area for interpretation are
00:24:55 the biggest area for interpretation are the cladding panels because even if they have class naught there is no guarantee that they will perform well in the bs 8414 part 2 test your input here would be highly valuable finally we never got down to speaking about 190 strand
00:25:07 about 190 strand are you around over the next couple of weeks at some deadwood to run through the current specs have a good weekend and speak
00:25:12 and speak soon just the first point to get it out of the way mr roon the um project at 190 strand was that relevant to the rest of the email or is it just a
00:25:23 to the rest of the email or is it just a follow-up separate point i think it was because i knew that andrew had been attending that particular product
00:25:31 product a project even sorry for saint edward and that would i think he had a temporary base there that was the only reason now if we go back to the earlier part of the email
00:25:42 the email on page three
00:25:47 uh you say in the first line there in the first paragraph i met with steve howard from the bre last tuesday do you see that do you remember that meeting
00:25:55 meeting yes that was the meeting i think that um debbie
00:25:59 debbie berger had arranged and i attended with her i see
00:26:02 her i see and we'll we'll i think come later to how that meeting came to be arranged but did mr howard give you any advice in relation to the design of further tests
00:26:14 i don't think he did no at the time
00:26:20 you say you discuss the option of further testing what what what did you discuss in that respect with mr howard do you remember i think it's to better understand from the um the respective
00:26:33 the um the respective from respect to bre as to what routes celetex i suppose
00:26:41 could go down to perform further testing or further further there was no desktop studies at that stage but um
00:26:52 that stage but um the other options that the bre could help celetex with who was at that meeting was debbie berger there yes debbie and stephen and myself i see
00:27:04 and stephen and myself i see and it looks as if by this point at least so
00:27:07 least so late november 2014 that you were aware that further testing would be needed to make sure that rs 5000 could be used with with class naught or euro class a1 or 2 cladding panels is that is that
00:27:19 or 2 cladding panels is that is that fair
00:27:20 fair i think this was the direction that was i would say obvious to people outside the industry but obvious within celetex that a broader spectrum of
00:27:29 of panels was going to be one of the options which is shown on the i think the second page exactly the third bullet point we can go over to that go to the second page
00:27:41 if we can just look at the second page in that please you can see the third bullet point cladding panels class north or euro class was that because customers were actually asking you whether it was safe to use rs 5000 with chatting with cladding panels
00:27:54 5000 with chatting with cladding panels which were rated class naught or euro class a1 stroke 2 as opposed to the mali eternity rain screen you'd used in the test i don't think the word safer to come up it
00:28:05 don't think the word safer to come up it was really just the permissible permissible yeah i mean that's a that's a word that could be used um because approved document b talks about panels being class
00:28:16 about panels being class o or sorry class zero or euro class a1 a2 above 18 meters yes and just just to repeat the question because we might have got
00:28:24 have got tangled up on the word save let me try it again but by this time were you getting concerns from customers or requests from customers as to whether it was permissible for them to use class naught
00:28:37 permissible for them to use class naught or a1 stroke a2 rain screen panels with rs 5000 given that the rain screen panel in the test was a cementitious fiberboard i think i
00:28:48 was a cementitious fiberboard i think i think i must have been yes and is it right that until such a test was done
00:28:54 was done namely one incorporating a class naught or euro class a a1 and 2 or 2 cladding panel you realize there was no
00:29:01 was no fire safety test which any system incorporating class naught or euro class a panels had passed there was no test bs8414 test
00:29:12 there was no test bs8414 test at that time um with anything other than that marley turn it board yeah and that route to compliance yes so that in a nutshell meant that you
00:29:23 yes so that in a nutshell meant that you couldn't market rs 5000 uh to a customer or any customers who wanted to use or planning to use anything other than the malia turnit
00:29:35 anything other than the malia turnit natura
00:29:35 natura rain screen cladding board
00:29:39 unless there was a specialist involved a fire safety specialist who was following one of the guidance criteria in the bca garden
00:29:47 garden and you wanted further testing with a class north or a1 or a2 panel in order to expand your potential market that's basically correct yes yes yes thank you
00:30:01 could you go to page one of this email run please and i'd like to look with you at the email halfway down that page from you to paul evans and debbie berger
00:30:13 from you to paul evans and debbie berger on the 28th of november 2014 at 10 52. same title celetex rs 5000 bre testing 190 strand and you say hi hi paul debbie i've spoken to total
00:30:25 hi paul debbie i've spoken to total facade solutions about potentially giving us guidance as to how to move forward with rs 5000 testing we would need to employ them directly
00:30:32 directly andy james is one of the most knowledgeable people in the facade industry and advises the likes of barclay group as to what products comply please let me know if you will you would be willing to employ them as a consultant even if it's only for one day
00:30:44 only for one day [Music]
00:30:46 [Music] and if we go to page one at the top paul evans comes back to you a few days later first of december 2014. let's discuss a part of our plans for 2015 when we meet on the 19th
00:30:57 2015 when we meet on the 19th uh do you know what happened to that proposal the proposal to retain the advice of andy jones um as far as i my knowledge
00:31:09 um as far as i my knowledge he was never employed as uh to give guidance did you ever push it
00:31:19 i mean i didn't i didn't have any sway within celotex um i was just a salesperson and i was providing this information to try and give my best guidance from the feedback
00:31:30 give my best guidance from the feedback i was getting and i can only i must it must be that i was i was told no that option wasn't available or wasn't going to be considered
00:31:42 can we go to ceo403439
00:31:51 this is an email chain between you and roger taylor at hadley steel framing and on the 22nd of december the second email down you
00:32:02 email down you send him an email saying hi roger i have a confirmation we can get you the boards to the test center for around 11am on the 5th
00:32:09 the 5th if i don't speak to you before have a great christmas and then he comes back to you the same day basically thanking you uh do you remember uh why
00:32:20 uh do you remember uh why uh hadley steele framing were carrying out tests
00:32:24 out tests on rs 5000 boards this yes this was a a company who make metal steel framing met set
00:32:35 make metal steel framing met set metsec type framing systems and they had something called a head of wall test which i hadn't been privy to before but they'd run a particular fire test it wasn't a
00:32:48 run a particular fire test it wasn't a sort of an 8414 but it was a particular fire test
00:32:50 fire test that they'd run with a previous celetex and they wanted to replicate the test with
00:32:58 with the newer product um the relationship there was from my second sales manager after me and like lakeland
00:33:09 lakeland left richard millwood who was my then sales manager for the south and he had had a pre uh sort of
00:33:20 and he had had a pre uh sort of relationship with hadley prior to him joining celetex um so that's how that came about actually so this wasn't subjecting rs 5000 to another
00:33:32 subjecting rs 5000 to another recognized br test it was a recognized test but it wasn't the eight four one four ten the test was it you know i can't recall all right i'm afraid can
00:33:43 i can't recall all right i'm afraid can we go on then to ceo four zeros three four five
00:33:50 one
00:33:55 this is an email on the 8th of january 2015 which follows the test it seems and here we see roger taylor emailing you uh and richard millwood and debbie
00:34:08 you uh and richard millwood and debbie berger
00:34:09 berger uh and he says in the first line can we put the performance of the rs 5000 ball at the top of our agenda for meeting on the 27th
00:34:17 the 27th i've just come back from our first fire test using the rs 5000 board and the results are not good
00:34:24 uh and then he goes on to say we're doing a load-bearing wall test with two number layers of 15 millimeter fire line expect which i expected to achieve a comfortable 90 minute result of 120 minute result
00:34:36 minute result of 120 minute result and then he goes on and explains what happened in the test and three paragraphs up from the end he said to put this in perspective our previous test
00:34:43 test you're using a ga4 thousand achieve 83 minutes with two layers of sound block not fire line and failed through the expected manner of the boards giving way and then the fire reaching the back of the insulation
00:34:55 the insulation in other words or in other words the ga4000 performed better in the fire condition than the rs 5000 exclamation mark the result of this is that we're now six thousand pounds out of pocket as the test did not give us
00:35:06 of pocket as the test did not give us the result we're looking for even though the elements which we were providing the fire protection were still performing when the insulation combusted please can you consider the above and give me any feedback otherwise we will have no alternative
00:35:17 otherwise we will have no alternative but to continue to recommend the kingspan k15 board in situations over 18 meters
00:35:27 now you can see in the last line there that he's referring to have no alternative other than to continue to recommend k15 above 18 meters is it right that the reason they were carrying out testing was to look at the
00:35:38 carrying out testing was to look at the suitability of use of rs 5000 above 18 meters in the context of the test they were carrying out
00:35:45 out i i don't know if it's specifically above 18 meters i don't think that test was specifically for the 18 meter criteria is it it's a different type of test
00:35:56 different type of test yes i think in fact the test was a test under bsa
00:35:59 under bsa force bs 476 part 21 load-bearing wall right do you remember that ring a bell with you not specifically but i'm aware of it
00:36:10 right do you know what relevance the test had to fire performance and 18 meters i don't know it's clear from the last
00:36:21 i don't know it's clear from the last paragraph there that mr taylor clearly thought that because it rs-5000 had failed the test they were carrying out they would have to go to kingspan k-15
00:36:33 would have to go to kingspan k-15 for use over 18 meters what did that tell you
00:36:38 well it tells me looking looking at me now that it would be for each wall up to and over 18 meters
00:36:52 did it tell you also that yet again k-15 were going to dominate in the over-18 market because of problems that uh the rs-5000 was encountering in testing regimes
00:37:03 testing regimes i'm not sure i can't i can't say that i knew i don't know if kings they had tested their system with kingspan at that time right might have been there a degree of confusion here about the use of k-15 over 18 meters given the
00:37:16 the use of k-15 over 18 meters given the test they were carrying out
00:37:19 i don't know you can't help me all right um
00:37:22 um in the first line it as we've seen uh he refers to an agenda for the meeting on the 27th do you know whether that meeting took place
00:37:31 i don't know um i mean if it did i've i've got no record of it so i may not have been in attendance did you discuss this test
00:37:42 attendance did you discuss this test uh with um mr taylor's email with uh debbie berger or paul evans or richard millward i think well i i'm pretty sure
00:37:54 i think well i i'm pretty sure i would have done yes what was the upshot
00:37:58 upshot do you remember i think that richard and debbie took the lead on this and and took it forward and i i'm pretty sure that it was re-tested
00:38:09 i'm pretty sure that it was re-tested and it and it passed on on the second attempt but i can't be absolutely sure of that right can we go to uh cel403481 please
00:38:21 right can we go to uh cel403481 please and go to page two in that email run and i'd like to look with you at the email at the bottom of the page
00:38:29 this is an email from debbie berger to you and richard miller dated the 15th of january 2015 about the meeting with hadley on the 27th
00:38:41 27th of january at hadley are we still going to meet with the first assad consultant and steve howard from the bre to better understand fire performance of a range of facades and testing options
00:38:54 of facades and testing options and you respond the same day if you just look up the page please you respond the facade consultant would need to be appointed and paid for i thought i'd mention this to you in paul
00:39:06 thought i'd mention this to you in paul evans last year
00:39:10 did the meeting with the facade consultant and steve howard as debbie berger expresses it in her email to which you're responding here take place at all i don't think so no
00:39:24 take place at all i don't think so no and again why is that do you know well i think it says it there because they they weren't going to pay for a facade consultant right did you get a response uh
00:39:37 i don't know is there any further response there is then the response you get from debbie burger the same day if you go up to page one is
00:39:49 if you go up to page one is yes but then christmas got in the way with a smiley face we should probably meet up to discuss plan of action you me and richard personally i think we could learn a lot from a facade engineer consultant would be our input bre input
00:40:01 consultant would be our input bre input help better inform our design decisions and then
00:40:05 and then at the top debbie berger writes uh the same day when are you guys next in the office or i can come to where you are
00:40:14 are so that's i think how the matter was left in the middle of january did the do you remember whether the meeting took place at hadley on the 27th with roger taylor to discuss the results of his test i
00:40:27 to discuss the results of his test i i if it did i wasn't there right and do you know what happened to this proposal to talk to a facade engineer and bre where it was left off in the middle of january 2015. i
00:40:40 in the middle of january 2015. i no again i can't help you with that i'm afraid
00:40:44 afraid now at this point mid-jan 2015 is it fair to say summary summarizing where we've got to that you and other others within celetex have become aware that more testing had to be done
00:40:55 aware that more testing had to be done to enable rs 5000 to be used in any system
00:40:58 system different from the one that was tested in may 2014. yes yes and until such tests and certifications were received you would struggle
00:41:07 struggle to compete with k-15 in the market for high-rise buildings correct thank you can i then turn to your relationship and dealings with harley can we start with
00:41:18 with cel409
00:41:23 this is a salesforce entry and it's quite difficult to read so i'm going to ask it for it to be blown up as small as possible
00:41:29 possible sorry as large as possible uh we can see that it relates to merit house if you look at the right hand side of it and it's assigned to mark willoughby uh
00:41:41 and it's assigned to mark willoughby uh with the due date of 10th of june 2014. can you see that okay and
00:41:48 okay and the entry under comments says um ben called to ask if we had an alternative to kingspan k15
00:41:59 alternative to kingspan k15 project is over 18 meters so it could not help at this time needed product on site in two weeks let me know that they have just been awarded two new overcloud projects
00:42:10 been awarded two new overcloud projects in london in autumn once we have 18 meter fire test inform ben
00:42:15 ben and team so we can win spec now
00:42:22 is this a record of a call that you think you had with ben bailey or harley yes i think this is something that needed to be cleared up the the records
00:42:33 needed to be cleared up the the records of celetex with the assigned to field this chat mark willoughby um seems to be a current employee
00:42:44 um seems to be a current employee and i think what happens with the database
00:42:47 database is that for each person that is assigned that role their name would appear so i can only imagine that this would be a record that i might have put in in my time at celetex
00:42:59 might have put in in my time at celetex and the license as it were for that i was allocated within celetex has now been allocated to mark willoughby so this is
00:43:10 this is likely why mark willoughby's name is on a lot of these documents yes i i i thank you and that has that's clarified that for those looking at the document um my question just looking at it is do
00:43:22 um my question just looking at it is do you recall this conversation with ben bailey of harley's
00:43:27 harley's at this time 10th of june 2014. not specifically but my memory is not brilliant and this is why i write things down when when they happen so i've got a record of them
00:43:39 i've got a record of them right did you know ben bailey at this time june 2014 i did yes how did you know him he was an employee of
00:43:50 of holly um harley curtin warning and the the son of the owner and how come you when did you first come across him
00:44:02 i don't know when he started with the company but um i i got to know harley from my time at hilty
00:44:11 hilty yes and so it would have been any time from
00:44:14 from hilty to to celebrate so i'd have met him
00:44:18 him we can see that this conversation is assigned to merit house as the project if you look at the top right hand corner
00:44:28 and that you've recorded in the conversation project is over 18 meters so it could not help at this time was that a reference to the merit house project being over 18 meters
00:44:39 project being over 18 meters i'd imagine so yes and you can see as i've shown you it goes on to say once we have a 18 meter fire test ben in informed ben and team you see yes and so you must have been
00:44:51 you see yes and so you must have been aware by this time june 2014 that celetex was working on developing a project
00:44:57 project a product that could be used above 18 meters
00:45:01 meters i must have known by then yes yes
00:45:07 so that's the good two months before the actual launch or about two months before the actual launch wasn't it it must have been at that time common knowledge then between the sales force that
00:45:18 that something was in in production or in development do you know why ben bailey was asking you if you had an alternative to kingspan k15
00:45:30 [Music] maybe because i'd had a relationship with the company previously and they knew i was at an insulation company and they'd they'd ask me that specific question did you tell mr bailey that you were
00:45:41 did you tell mr bailey that you were developing an insulation product as an alternative to kingspan k15 that could be used above 18 meters i can't recall
00:45:51 as at this date did you know that the test had actually happened i didn't know because it had happened on the 2nd of may 2005 and and 14. you didn't you didn't know
00:46:02 and and 14. you didn't you didn't know that that happened no i just i just knew that behind the scenes the product was being developed right
00:46:11 going back to the record it also says that ben bailey
00:46:16 told you uh or it says let me know that they have just been awarded two new overcloud projects in london in autumn was one of those grenfell tower i can't
00:46:27 was one of those grenfell tower i can't be certain did he mention grenfell tower do you think at the time if he did i didn't write it there can we then go to cel409877
00:46:45 if we could just blow that up as large as possible as well please this is also a sign to mark willoughby but i'll assume that it's yours it also relates to merit house if you look at the right hand side
00:46:56 look at the right hand side and it says ben bailey and the activity type is technical assistance if you look in the left hand column there task topic 18 meter fire test
00:47:10 there task topic 18 meter fire test due date 31st of august 2014.
00:47:17 uh comments update harley curtin wall on 18 meter fire test to close two overcloud projects raised by ben bailey on last call and and then underneath
00:47:29 and and then underneath that it says system information created by mark willoughby 10th june 2014.
00:47:36 can you just help me with what this record is
00:47:47 it it may be a relative a reference to giving harley some sort of information that the the product was due for release at some
00:47:59 product was due for release at some point in time yes it looks very much like it's a reminder to yourself to update harley by or on the 31st of august 2014 about
00:48:10 by or on the 31st of august 2014 about the 18 meter fire test would that be would that be right i don't know if it's a
00:48:15 a phone call that i've had with him or a reminder i can't be certain uh underneath uh the reference to mark willoughby in the
00:48:26 the reference to mark willoughby in the second line on the left-hand side it says celitex task type phone advice does that help you unless it was a telephone conversation i'd had with ben
00:48:37 i'd had with ben just giving him an update on when the release date of the rs5000 would be there's a date in the bottom right hand corner last modified by mark willoughby 18th of july 2014. does that
00:48:49 willoughby 18th of july 2014. does that help
00:48:51 help it no it doesn't right
00:48:55 uh is it fair to say that at this time and we can pick a range of dates between the 10th of june 2014 and the 31st of august 2014 you saw harley as a potential target or
00:49:07 you saw harley as a potential target or customer
00:49:08 customer for sales of rs 5000 they were yeah they were numb one of of many
00:49:15 many customers involved in that market yes can we look at cel409875 please this is another salesforce entry
00:49:26 again can we blow that up as large as we can
00:49:30 can and again it's merit house on the right hand side as you can see underneath that name ben bailey on the left-hand side mark willoughby celetex task type report activity type rain screen contractor
00:49:42 rain screen contractor task topic 18 meters fire test due date 18th of july 2014 and then it says underneath that met ben on the merit house project to discuss
00:49:54 on the merit house project to discuss current demands on site and future projects
00:49:56 projects i've had to use kingspan k15 as we do not currently have a product have and i think there should be two number i have two new projects that they are on the verge of winning to start later this year grenfell tower
00:50:08 to start later this year grenfell tower white city telford office they've also taken on two more designers in the office follow up in office once we have a k-15 solution you see that yes i do uh now um
00:50:21 is it your understanding that competing with kingsman k-15 was the driving force behind the development of rs 5000 at least according to this record i
00:50:32 at least according to this record i think with it's quite clear that celetex wanted a piece of that that market yes thank you and that market as you refer to it saw
00:50:44 and that market as you refer to it saw uh rs 5000 or you would want it to see rs 5000 as an equivalent if not better product than k15 that's correct yes
00:50:55 than k15 that's correct yes now here we do see grenfell tower referred to as one of the two projects that
00:51:00 that quote they are on the verge of winning to start later this year do you remember what information ben bailey gave you at that meeting about the grenfell tower project
00:51:12 i don't it no i don't i mean it just named
00:51:16 named two projects it would have been a sight meeting so i don't think he would have had he would have been concentrating on that particular project he was on merit house which is
00:51:27 project he was on merit house which is listed there yes so a site meeting at marriott house yeah not grenfell of course no do do you remember whether uh he told you that celetex fr5000 had
00:51:38 uh he told you that celetex fr5000 had originally been specified as the insulation material for use at grenfell tower i don't think so no did he tell you as a project over 18 meters in height i can't recall no
00:51:51 i can't recall no but what at this stage did you know if anything
00:51:54 anything about the cladding system proposed to the grenfell tower
00:51:59 i think at this point nothing now if we get your witness statement page three can we look at paragraph eleven
00:52:13 uh you say they're following the meeting on the 5th of august i started emailing the marketing material to my contacts
00:52:23 and one of the people i emailed you say was a designer called ben sharman at harley curtin wall limited a company that designed and installed tattling systems for construction projects and then you go on to say i was contacted by one of ben's
00:52:35 to say i was contacted by one of ben's colleagues daniel and jones a design manager a few weeks later in connection with the refurbishment of grenfell tower i had received some further marketing material for rs 5000 and sent to daniel all the marketing
00:52:47 and sent to daniel all the marketing material i had at that time and let's just take that in stages uh just in relation to the emailing to ben sharman can we look at that email
00:52:58 to ben sharman can we look at that email please at cel cel401237
00:53:07 this is the email you send ben sharman on the 6th of august 2014 subject celetex rs 5000 rain screen insulation launch now the date 6th of august is the day
00:53:18 now the date 6th of august is the day after
00:53:19 after the launch isn't it that's correct on the 5th of august and you can see the attachments you send him uh you send him the product comparison matrix premium and core the rain screen cladding compliance
00:53:30 the rain screen cladding compliance guide
00:53:31 guide the product data sheet and the rain screen clouding data sheet you see that i do hi ben good to speak to you again just pausing there have you spoken to him in the past did you know him
00:53:45 him in the past did you know him yes i think i've made that you know do you think ben oh sorry ben sharma um it's because he he was present in the office of harley it's quite a small office
00:53:58 i have you go on good to speak to you again i have the pleasure of informing you
00:54:01 you as of yesterday we have now launched the first pir board to successfully meet the performance criteria in br135 for insulated rain screen cleaning systems therefore acceptable for use in buildings above 18 meters in height
00:54:13 buildings above 18 meters in height i'd like to come into the office when everyone is around to present formerly the new product in the meantime if you would like me to run any u-value calculations please let me know that's what you say why did you send
00:54:24 that's what you say why did you send this email to ben sharman and not ben bailey given your previous note that you would inform ben and the team once celetech's had a suitable product it's possibly because ben was in the
00:54:36 it's possibly because ben was in the design side of the the company so ben sharman was in on the design
00:54:41 design side of the company rather than ben bailey who is on the sort of on-site delivery side of things
00:54:53 on-site delivery side of things i see did uh you actually have a conversation with mr sharman following which you sent in this email
00:55:04 following which you sent in this email i can't recall right
00:55:09 was the text of the email underneath the words good to speak to you again which starts i have the pleasure of informing you was that the standard initial email you sent out to all your customers
00:55:22 yes it was yes now the wording looks from the capitals that are used in every word in the um description of the product to be the title to a document was it the title to a document
00:55:34 title to a document yeah i think it yes so i think it might be another example of my sort of copy and paste technique i see
00:55:43 now your email uh
00:55:51 uh shows the attachments and we'll come to those again but looking at the wording in your email and i think we've been over this ground a number of times this morning mr mr rube do you accept that it's not
00:56:03 mr rube do you accept that it's not correct that meeting the br 135 criteria means that a product is therefore
00:56:09 therefore generally acceptable for use on buildings above 18 meters it's not um i suppose specific enough it doesn't show any caveats there but it's it's the term or the phrase that the
00:56:21 it's the term or the phrase that the marketing team had put out right and you adopted it unquestioningly i did yes
00:56:32 and i would you accept that such a description of the product is potentially misleading because it doesn't contain the caveat potentially yes can we
00:56:44 potentially yes can we look at cel401381 please
00:56:50 and i'll come back to this email to ben sharman in a moment i just want to take a diversion and look at a different document which is this one this is an email run
00:57:00 uh in september 2014 say a month on or so six weeks on and if we go to page three to start with we can see that uh
00:57:13 we can see that uh here you are sending claire ryan a lady called claire ryan uh the same text you say dear claire i've been past
00:57:25 text you say dear claire i've been past your details by dawn in the office and then you can see the the
00:57:29 the the same cut and paste paragraph we saw in the email to ben sharma of the 6th of august
00:57:34 august and you said i've attached a number of relevant documents that give details of rs 5000.
00:57:40 rs 5000. and that is sent to claire ryan now claire ryan was at sotech wasn't she remember i don't remember no i think we
00:57:52 remember i don't remember no i think we can work it out so bear with me she then forwards that uh on uh to uh
00:58:02 uh to uh john eggington and michael egginton as you see from just above the fyi it comes from graham todd in fact but it goes up the chain to the eggingtons
00:58:14 eggingtons we can't see that mr millet we well we can we might know oh here we go yeah you can graham todd to the eggintons and then if we go to the bottom of page two
00:58:31 we can see that michael egginton sends that on
00:58:37 that on or some sends it back to you saying can we please have the supporting documents i don't need to go back again to that but if you look further up page two dear michael here are all the supporting documents for you if you have any questions related to rs 5000 please
00:58:49 questions related to rs 5000 please don't hesitate to call now looking at michael eggington's email address as you can see from the foot of page two he's at safe tech isn't he yes he's so you were you and you knew so tech from from your customer base did
00:59:01 tech from from your customer base did you
00:59:02 you i i knew of them um they yeah they weren't part of my direct contacts as such right now if we continue on with the
00:59:13 right now if we continue on with the email string to the middle of page two if we go up please
00:59:20 uh we can see that michael egginton uh comes back to you on the 15th of september
00:59:27 september subject resellatex rs 5000 rain screen insulation board for use above 18 meters and he asks you a question and the question was are you saying you are warrantying ventilated aluminium systems over 80
00:59:39 ventilated aluminium systems over 80 meters with this product your original email and advertorial you see that i do and you then pass that up to paul evans if
00:59:51 you then pass that up to paul evans if you look up to page one
00:59:58 uh the foot of page one you say to paul evan same day hi paul what reply should i give here now just pausing there does that show us that you knew that you were not
01:00:09 that you knew that you were not warranting the use of rs 5000 with ventilated aluminium systems over 18 meters
01:00:15 18 meters but we're reluctant to tell him so without clearing it up with management first
01:00:20 first well i think it shows that i was unsure as to
01:00:25 as to the answer and the relevance of the tests that have been performed with the rs-5000 as to the types of panels that sotek make or distribute
01:00:39 well were you unsure of the answer you knew from your own marketing literature that the the rs 5000 could only be used with the exactly the same components
01:00:50 exactly the same components as had been used in the bre test in may 2014
01:00:55 the test in particular yes so you couldn't possibly be warranting its use within a
01:01:00 within a vented aluminium system i personally couldn't know but i didn't know if paul or so the management team were looking to develop further tests with those types of products so i didn't want to sort of
01:01:12 of products so i didn't want to sort of cut him down immediately or not cut him down but you know make a reply without having
01:01:16 having some sort of management input because i didn't know what was going on behind the scenes
01:01:20 scenes what management input could there be given that the on the simple answer to a simple question from mr eggington was no no you're not warranting its use with anything other than the um
01:01:31 with anything other than the um components which we used in the test but but at that specific time that's correct but i wasn't sure what might have been going on behind the scenes with the management developing the product or future testing potentially i see
01:01:45 or future testing potentially i see and then let's look up the page then to page one where we see paul evans response
01:01:49 response to you of the same day a little bit later on hi jonathan as part of the development work for rs we met and spoke with sotech john roper knows michael liggington and is happy to
01:02:00 knows michael liggington and is happy to discuss with him in more detail should you wish
01:02:03 you wish once you're back from holiday please let me john i know how you wish to progress with this
01:02:10 now we can see that response and the suggestion of speaking to sotech did anyone ever speak to sotek in response to mr egginson's
01:02:21 response to mr egginson's question do you know yes eventually i i can't be sure of the date but myself and uh
01:02:28 and uh john roper because he he was a product manager and he also had a prior relationship with sotech we went to
01:02:35 to visit the team at sotech and what was the upshot of that meeting
01:02:45 i can't be 100 sure but we i can't be 100 sure
01:02:49 100 sure well can i suggest you that whatever it was it certainly wasn't that you could freely use rs 5000 with ventilated aluminium rain screens was it no that would that would not have been the case no so in the end did mr egginton ever get
01:03:02 so in the end did mr egginton ever get the answer to the question he was asking not implicitly no no or explicitly no can we then go back to the email to ben
01:03:12 ben sharman to ceo401237 please
01:03:19 you say in that email in the third line that you'd like to come into the office when everyone is around to present formerly the new product did that ever happen
01:03:30 happen i i don't think i ever managed to have a uh
01:03:33 uh a formal presentation to the team as a whole no
01:03:37 whole no can i show you what mr anchor jones says in his statement this is at zero one four har3010149
01:03:48 and i'd like to go to page six please and look at paragraph 23 with you
01:04:01 and he says there in relation to the use of celetex i do remember a representative of celetex visiting harley's offices a number of times to discuss the celetex product i cannot remember exactly what he said
01:04:12 remember exactly what he said but i do remember that part of the celetex sales pitch that was that was that celetex could be used on buildings over 80 meters tall i also remember the bright pink celetex
01:04:23 i also remember the bright pink celetex brochures which were handed out did this include you formally presenting the new product it would have been me yes right do you
01:04:34 it would have been me yes right do you remember who was present on that occasion or those occasions i i don't know
01:04:43 now mr ankle jones uh in his oral evidence said that you were in uh harley's offices every couple of weeks and perhaps 30 times a year
01:04:54 weeks and perhaps 30 times a year that's day 36 at page 77 line six to nine i don't think we need to go to it do you agree i don't know the frequency but
01:05:03 but being in sales i was always talking to customers or potentially cus potential customers
01:05:09 customers um either in built business development you know with people i had not met previously or irregular relationships someone like harley who i
01:05:20 relationships someone like harley who i knew quite well to keep an understanding of which projects were on um on the periphery and you know keep my own
01:05:30 own knowledge of potential projects
01:05:34 um so i had a good understanding of potential pipelines i suppose as at august 2014 at the time of the rs 5000 launch
01:05:45 launch do you remember roughly how many projects
01:05:48 projects celetex had had current with harley
01:05:56 maybe two i think right
01:06:00 and were they both high-rise projects i don't think so no was either of them a high-rise project
01:06:09 i i don't think so no right
01:06:13 so it was the position that although you only had two projects with them at that time you were hoping for more more projects from harley and that's why you kept visiting them i think that's the the idea yes yes and
01:06:25 i think that's the the idea yes yes and after all you are in marketing and sales rather i mean sales yes so that's your job i suppose it is yes can we then go um to mr bailey's witness statement ray bailey
01:06:36 bailey's witness statement ray bailey har3010184 please page eight
01:06:44 now paragraph 31 on page eight
01:06:48 he says
01:06:51 uh he says this and he's talking about the nbs specification harley's assumption would be that the product specified as suitable for the project
01:07:02 suitable for the project however if harley had any concerns that any product was not suitable we would have raised an objection equally had there been a product or material that harley was unfamiliar with in the nbs specification that inquiries would have been made
01:07:14 that inquiries would have been made including contacting the manufacturer and if necessary asking them to demonstrate that their product was suitable for a project in this case by way of example inquiries were made with celetex a product harley had not used before and
01:07:27 a product harley had not used before and he refers to the nbs specification at age 92 there then he says celitex informed us that the relevant product was in fact the rs rainscreen product rather than the fr flat roof product
01:07:39 rather than the fr flat roof product which had been specified now we can't find any documents which reflect
01:07:46 reflect that discussion that he recalls here do you recall any such discussion i don't know you don't know or you don't
01:07:58 don't know you don't know or you don't no i don't no yeah um if it's not you do you can you help us with where mr bailey or with whom mr bailey might have
01:08:09 bailey or with whom mr bailey might have obtained that information i suppose if if it wasn't a conversation with myself who held a sort of a good relationship with harley then the only other
01:08:20 then the only other point of contact would have been the the technical team back in the office on the on the main contact number right while we're on this paragraph and
01:08:31 right while we're on this paragraph and the reference to fr being flat roof was mr bailey correct that fr stood for flat roof
01:08:39 flat roof i i can't remember exactly what those initials meant right going back to mr ankle jones's statement if we can this is har3010149
01:08:51 this is har3010149 we go to page six please
01:08:56 and look at paragraph 23
01:09:02 we've looked at this a moment ago he says
01:09:05 says he says that i cannot remember exactly what he said that's the representative but
01:09:09 but i do remember that part of the celetex sales pitch was that celetex could be used on buildings over 18 meters tall now that is consistent isn't it his recollection of what was said is
01:09:20 recollection of what was said is consistent with the communications strategy we looked at earlier isn't it that's correct yeah did your sales pitch mention the fact that uh
01:09:31 mention the fact that uh the test
01:09:34 the test for use over 18 meters was confined to the tested configuration
01:09:41 i can't be sure but i'm going from the documents i would have talked them through the documents as as they were presented do you remember discussing the
01:09:53 do you remember discussing the specification guide and compliance guide with mr anchoral jones
01:10:00 i i can't be certain i know i know that we had some email um uh conversations and i sent him all the details that i had on the
01:10:11 all the details that i had on the product or any test literature that i had available to myself to myself to uh to give to to dan and any other person within the office
01:10:21 office um but i can't remember having a specific conversation explaining the way the um the way it was tested right he's referring to two things in
01:10:32 right he's referring to two things in this paragraph he's referring to the sales pitch and the bright pink celetex brochures um do you remember pitching rs 5000 to him
01:10:44 do you remember pitching rs 5000 to him i mean look if you call a sales pitcher a conversation that's maybe what happened um i mean if he's got recollection of the bright prick pink brochures it's either because i physically had them to hand
01:10:56 because i physically had them to hand and i gave them to him and i showed them him
01:10:58 him them to him or he opened the email attachments which again would have shown exactly the same but in the pdf format
01:11:06 format do you remember ever saying to mr ankle jones
01:11:10 jones during a conversation or showing mr ankita jones physically the caveat the rs-5000 could only be used over 18
01:11:23 the rs-5000 could only be used over 18 meters
01:11:24 meters in a rain screen cladding system which corresponded exactly to the system as tested i i can't remember
01:11:32 remember specifically saying that to him no do you remember specifically drawing his attention to that caveat in the compliance guide and the specification guide i can't be certain though
01:11:45 given the importance of that caveat
01:11:49 was it not important to you to make sure that mr ankle jones was thoroughly familiar with it and therefore thoroughly familiar with the the limited use
01:11:59 use to which rs 5000 could be put above 18 meters
01:12:02 meters it it would have been important yes it would have been important i i think we can agree that but did it occur to you at the time it's sufficiently important to point it out to him expressly so that
01:12:13 to point it out to him expressly so that he really understood it no it didn't why is that i'm not sure um it was all there in the in the information um i was dealing with a specialist in
01:12:24 um i was dealing with a specialist in that field and i was expecting i suppose expecting the knowledge to be there to disseminate the information that i was i was giving him and others within the
01:12:35 i was giving him and others within the team
01:12:39 was there a sense in which you perhaps didn't strenuously strive to draw attention to the caveat in the hope that he might not pick it up and therefore fall into what you later categorized as a green
01:12:51 categorized as a green use category of customer that wouldn't have been my intention though was it part of your thinking no mr chairman is that a convenient
01:13:02 no mr chairman is that a convenient moment
01:13:03 moment yes i think it is thank you very much we'll have a short break now in mr room we'll come back at uh 25 to 4 and resume that and no talking to anyone about your evidence
01:13:14 about your evidence when they're out of the roof course all right thank you very much would you like to go to the ocean
01:13:30 thank you 25 to 4 please
01:29:11 yes would you ask mr roon to come back
01:29:22 in
01:29:27 all right mr room happy to carry on thank you thank you very much yes mr millett
01:29:32 millett yes can we then go on mr roon please uh with your early contacts with harley is the next topic we've already looked at the salesforce entries that show by july 2014 ben bailey had
01:29:43 that show by july 2014 ben bailey had mentioned grenfell tower to you can we then look at cel409876 please this is another entry from the salesforce
01:29:55 salesforce database and again can we please have it enlarged as for as much as possible and just look at it a little bit more
01:30:06 and just look at it a little bit more carefully uh merit house is what it relates to named daniel anchored jones and then on the left hand side it's again it's assigned to mark willoughby
01:30:17 again it's assigned to mark willoughby celetech's task type report activity type rain screen contractor task topic 8 18 millimeter 18 meters rain screen product and then due date 11th of what looks
01:30:29 and then due date 11th of what looks like august 2014 and just for more dates at the bottom it seems that it's created on the 18th of july 2014 and last modified on the 13th
01:30:40 july 2014 and last modified on the 13th of october 2014.
01:30:44 uh let's take the date of the last modification as the relevant date and let's look at the comments met dan at the cwct
01:30:55 at the cwct members meeting things have been especially busy recently as they have issues with one of their designers getting things wrong costing them money tim bennett has now left and gone back to i'm not sure what that says is it prater
01:31:07 i'm not sure what that says is it prater that's right right as rs was not launched at the time we've missed the boat with merit house agree to meet up later in october to update on projects and look at future specs
01:31:20 do you remember this discussion with dan at the cwct members meeting
01:31:28 i'm i remember attending the cwct meeting
01:31:32 meeting and i think dan was there like quite a few people um that were in that industry yes do you remember having this discussion along these lines as recorded
01:31:44 discussion along these lines as recorded in this
01:31:44 in this entry with daniel language jones at the cwct
01:31:47 cwct members meeting i can only say it's my entry so i must have had that conversation
01:31:56 again can we then look at the meeting and the slides that you sent around afterwards first of all can we go to
01:32:08 afterwards first of all can we go to cel401255 please this is an email that you sent on the 21st of october 2014. there's a round robin within celetex do you see i do and it's
01:32:21 within celetex do you see i do and it's uh subject is cwct agm and members meeting rs 5000 high team as some of you may know i recently attended the cwct members meeting up in london
01:32:34 the cwct members meeting up in london the cwct
01:32:35 the cwct is the center for widow sorry window and chanting technology based at bath university and is seen by the industry as leaders in guidance what is accepted in the construction of rain screen curtain wall builds
01:32:48 and then you attach a list of attendees as you say in the third paragraph and then in the fourth paragraph you say this the day was a mix of opinion and fact
01:32:57 fact and a lot of the opinion was pretty one-sided the use of non-combustible materials only in caps exclamation mark a lot of lot of people
01:33:05 people that i spoke to afterwards disagreed with a lot of what was said the most useful presentations were from dr sarah colwell business group manager fire suppression bre global
01:33:16 bre global co-author of br135 and a lead in the field of fire and facade technology presentation attached nb ignore the typo on a couple of slides we're off the page as far as we're concerned i'm sorry i thought that
01:33:28 concerned i'm sorry i thought that it was going to come up and it probably will but it hasn't done yet no there we are thank you just below the bold co-author of br 135 and a lead in the field of fire and
01:33:40 and a lead in the field of fire and facade technology presentation attached nb ignore the typo on a couple of slides mentioned bs841 ps84 sorry bs 8141 as it should read bs8414
01:33:51 bs8414 debbie berger and i will be meeting with sarah and a colleague on the 4th of november
01:33:55 november to discuss how we can better tailor our rs 5000 approach in this market as we have nearly all found out the whole issue around bs 8414 is far more complex than we first
01:34:06 is far more complex than we first thought
01:34:08 thought and then there's a a link linked in for hugh mcnamara at arab in edinburgh
01:34:16 now uh
01:34:21 first of all um can i just ask you about the fourth line when you say in brackets there a lot of the opinion was pretty one-sided the use of non-combustible materials
01:34:32 the use of non-combustible materials only
01:34:34 only does that tell us that the um direction of travel or the thrust of the views of the meeting was in general that you could only use non-combustible insulation above 18 meters or is that something else
01:34:46 meters or is that something else i think what it was was there's a number of different presentations i can't be exactly sure about all of them but um dr sarah carwell presented her
01:34:57 dr sarah carwell presented her slides on the br 135 the route to compliance using the full test bs8414 test um but there were some other presentations by
01:35:09 presentations by other people um sort of putting doubts about about you know using non
01:35:15 using non sorry combustible products um on high-rise buildings but as i said there a lot of people i spoke to after has disagreed with a lot of what was said because um
01:35:30 a lot of what was said because um you know going back to the point about you having to use a lot thicker material of non-combustible material to reach the um the modern um insulation guidelines that were being given out um
01:35:42 guidelines that were being given out um and basically saying it was sort of unrealistic to think that non-combustible materials were the only solution um going forward right at this point this is october 2014 had
01:35:56 at this point this is october 2014 had you
01:35:56 you heard of or were you familiar with cwct's technical number 73 which they published in march 2011
01:36:07 was that something you were familiar with can i take a look at that yes absolutely it's at cwct 5019
01:36:21 technical note 73 and uh if you look at the bottom of the page
01:36:29 page not that page but the bottom of page one it says march 2011 and then go up to the top
01:36:35 top of the page is that a familiar document it i recognize the logo i can't say that i remember that right specifically let me show you two things in it specifically and see if you remember them from the time
01:36:48 see if you remember them from the time can you go to page six we could see a title on that page which says use of combustible material in this in the left-hand column and if you look at the second paragraph
01:37:00 you look at the second paragraph it says to satisfy the recommendations in adb
01:37:03 in adb insulation and filler materials in walls of a building with a floor more than 18 metres above ground level are required to be of limited combustibility and if you go down three paragraphs
01:37:17 and if you go down three paragraphs on it says just above alternative approaches the only commonly used insulation material that will satisfy the definition of limited combustibility is mineral wool
01:37:28 mineral wool it is sometimes argued that thermoset insulation materials with non-combustible facings may be regarded as satisfying the requirements noting
01:37:36 noting that their decomposition in fire will release smoke as at october 2014 so some three and a half years on from the date of the publication of this guidance
01:37:47 date of the publication of this guidance were you aware of either or both of these statements made by cwct
01:37:52 by cwct that i've just read to you i can't be sure no right
01:38:00 can we then go back to your email at cel401255
01:38:12 and you say you say in the middle there that the most useful presentations were from sarah colwell at the bre and that hers was one of the most useful why was that
01:38:25 because um the if we looked at a slide or one of my presentations earlier um to the sales meeting and the the good thing about dr sarah coldwell
01:38:38 the good thing about dr sarah coldwell colwell's presentation was that it gave us step-by-step introduction to the testing regime and the the pass sort of criteria to bl
01:38:49 and the the pass sort of criteria to bl 135
01:38:50 135 um with images it's a lot easier for me to understand and i thought it would be easier it's a good presentation to forward on to the team internally you go on in the last part of the email
01:39:02 you go on in the last part of the email as we've seen to say that you and debbie berger would be meeting sarah colwell and a colleague on the 4th of november to as you put it discuss how we can better tailor our rs 5000 approach in this market
01:39:15 5000 approach in this market i think you did have such a meeting didn't you on that date we did have a meeting but i don't think dr sarah colwell could attend in the end
01:39:23 the end and was it stephen howard of the bre who intended instead it was yes yes that's the meeting you you referred to earlier in your evidence yes did you think at the time that it was appropriate that the bre which was a
01:39:35 was appropriate that the bre which was a testing house should be advising celetex as to how better to market rs 5000
01:39:42 rs 5000 i didn't have a view on that no did you think at the time that it was part of the bre's role to advise uh manufacturers for whom it had done tests as to how to
01:39:55 for whom it had done tests as to how to tailor
01:39:56 tailor their marketing approach i did not know
01:40:01 you didn't think that it was part of their role i i didn't question that no right
01:40:11 as we've seen you say as we have nearly all found out the whole issue around bsa414 is far more complex than we first thought
01:40:22 more complex than we first thought when you say nearly all found out that's quite a qualification who were the people who hadn't found out that the issue around 8414 was more complicated than you'd first thought
01:40:36 complicated than you'd first thought i don't know as to who i'd be referring maybe it's the the team within celetex possibly i see and what in what way was the whole issue
01:40:49 and what in what way was the whole issue around bs8414 far more complex than you had first thought
01:40:57 i think i meant by that the the different
01:41:00 different routes to compliance about the the variability i suppose of the different materials involved um yeah the the different routes to
01:41:11 um yeah the the different routes to compliance how it wasn't sort of a linear route as such other than having a non-combustible material those other options
01:41:23 other options that could be used
01:41:26 you you had originally clearly understood that there were two routes to compliance the linear route and the bsa for one full route what was complex about that well no it
01:41:37 what was complex about that well no it was
01:41:38 was the that um there was things like desktop studies and um
01:41:45 and um uh i think it's holistic fire solutions that are available um by by specialists now i don't know if that was at that particular point but there was
01:41:57 there was there wasn't just one route no that's correct but you're saying here that there is an issue around 8414 which
01:42:08 that there is an issue around 8414 which is one of the four routes to compliance what was the issue around 8414 that was far more complex than we first thought
01:42:18 well possibly that it was
01:42:22 the testing there was we couldn't or celatex could not be reliant on just the one test
01:42:29 one test so you had discovered is this right that 8414
01:42:32 8414 did not produce a one-size-fits-all test and in fact it was a one size fits one test
01:42:38 test seemingly yes yes now we'll come back to this meeting later i think but can we go back to your contact with harley in relation to grenfell tower and look
01:42:50 relation to grenfell tower and look at mr bailey's statement ray bailey's witness statement har30101 please on page 29 and i'd like to get a paragraph 113 in
01:43:02 and i'd like to get a paragraph 113 in that please now he says there about seven lines up
01:43:13 now he says there about seven lines up from the end of the paragraph can you see he says in addition you see that yes a representative of celetex jonathan room also attended harley's offices to talk
01:43:25 also attended harley's offices to talk with harley's staff about the benefits of the rs 5000 product specifically for the grenfell project do you recall such a meeting
01:43:38 project do you recall such a meeting i can remember having a meeting or meetings generally at harley um i don't know to which meeting he's
01:43:50 referencing there um
01:43:55 do you remember going to harley's offices and talking to harley staff about the benefits of rs 5000 specifically for the grenfell tower project
01:44:04 project i think i'd i'd spoke
01:44:08 i must have i'd spoken to the people at harley generally at the launch of the product and i have a feeling i spoke to
01:44:19 it may have been mark stapley or dan and cartel jones following that launch when they highlighted that they had a potential use for the product
01:44:29 on on the grenfell project
01:44:36 and did you tell them that rs 5000 would bring benefits specifically for the grenfell tower project
01:44:47 i don't think i would have said something like that no
01:44:55 when you did present rs 5000 to harley did you discover either at this meeting or the meetings you had with mark stapley or
01:45:06 you had with mark stapley or daniel and james that grenfell tower was a building above 18 meters in height yes i was aware yes did you tell harley that rs-5000 was
01:45:18 did you tell harley that rs-5000 was suitable for grenfell tower being a building in excess of 18 meters in height i don't think i would have said that specifically no did harley ever ask
01:45:29 specifically no did harley ever ask specifically whether rs 5000 could be used above 18 meters
01:45:35 i don't know if they would have asked that specifically but that's what was presented to them in the literature that i would have sent to them
01:45:44 them as a result of you sending them that literature did anybody at harley ever ask you for further information relating to the bs 8414 test that is described in the marketing literature
01:45:56 marketing literature i think further down the line um dan had requested further information about a bs-47476 test that celetex had um
01:46:09 test that celetex had um and more information but i can't recall if that was directly just for grenfell or for i think you mentioned it was to do with a client request is that the headache email
01:46:20 request is that the headache email i have a headache for you i think that's the one we'll come to that yes but apart from that leave that on one side in relation to grenfell specifically did anybody at harley ever ask you for further information
01:46:32 ever ask you for further information relating to the bs 8414 test over and above that described in the marketing literature i don't think so no did you ever volunteer the information about what precisely had been tested beyond
01:46:43 beyond what was in the marketing literature i think i'd already i'd already sent them all the documents that i had to hand including the full page test document that's
01:46:54 that's i had available
01:46:58 can we then look at cel 50555
01:47:11 uh and i'd like to look at the second email down [Music]
01:47:15 [Music] on that page which is in front of you at 954
01:47:20 954 from you to paul lake 17th of november 2014.
01:47:24 2014. morning paul please find the list of must-win projects apologies there was a little confusion at our end looking forward to seeing you tomorrow
01:47:35 tomorrow kind regards see that i'd say and then uh a minute later i think just about a minute later you send him
01:47:46 just about a minute later you send him the file
01:47:47 the file correct so i think you have not attached that's correct as often happens can we i just first of all who is paul lake
01:47:56 lake he from his email he worked for another sun gaban company so sangaban was the umbrella company who owned the likes of celotex
01:48:05 celotex so paul was i think the managing director of echofon which is another business and he headed up a
01:48:16 he headed up a a meeting that was run i think monthly um
01:48:19 um where different members of different businesses attended and shared knowledge about projects where
01:48:26 where different sangerband products could be used
01:48:29 used so the must-win file was a an ongoing document that had been running for some time where people would put in the information about the projects that they were working on
01:48:41 projects that they were working on could we go to ceo50556 please
01:48:50 is this the spreadsheet that you attached it seems to be yes if you look at it the first entry is grenfell tower isn't it it is so
01:49:00 it is so clearly by november 2014 grenfell tower was a must-win project what did must win mean in this context i think it's just a
01:49:11 in this context i think it's just a reference to the larger projects they just the the the project file had always been called must win
01:49:20 must win projects what qualified it for a must-win project was it the size of the order value or the proximity of the delivery date or what i think it was really the
01:49:31 what i think it was really the yeah the order value or potential order value i should say and what approach would celetex take to a must-win project which qualified as
01:49:42 must-win project which qualified as such as opposed to one which was a mustn't win project if you like or one which was less of less importance i don't think there was any differentiation from my part i kept i tried to keep an
01:49:53 from my part i kept i tried to keep an eye on
01:49:54 eye on all projects right why won't all projects must win projects another way of putting the question well because of the the potential order value i suppose
01:50:02 i suppose now we can see that um grenfell tower here is number one it's the first entry in the list but it's not the largest uh in terms of order value why is that why is it number one it may have been the one that i've been
01:50:14 the one that i've been um it may have been the newest project um i can't tell from that how that document was sorted
01:50:23 i was going to ask you because it doesn't look as if it's been compiled in any particular order it's certainly not in order value order uh uh
01:50:30 uh uh and nor does it appear to be in delivery date order no so do you know why the order exists in that way that these projects are set out in are they listed in that way i can't be
01:50:42 are they listed in that way i can't be certain i'm afraid
01:50:48 right we could see it was number one in here does that mean it was the number one
01:50:55 one must-win project or or it was the the most recent addition to the existing list
01:51:03 or some other reason it it may have been the most
01:51:07 the most recent entry yeah there's no i can't be sure because there's no date against the the
01:51:12 the time it was or the date it was put on into that file given that it was a must-win project and on the face of it appears as number one in the list of must-win projects were you under
01:51:23 must-win projects were you under specific pressure as as a sales executive to secure the project for celetex
01:51:32 no
01:51:36 given that it was a must-win project it must have
01:51:40 must have been of priority at least to you to secure it as opposed to other projects um not particularly there's no way that i could influence the
01:51:51 i could influence the purchasing of a material what purpose did a must-win list have it was a way of sharing information between the san gaban businesses because if there
01:52:03 san gaban businesses because if there was potential for other products from other manufacturers under the sangaban banner to be involved then this is a way of
01:52:12 of being able to see which projects were being worked on by different businesses well i can understand that it'd be useful to share broad share information about projects so that other parts of the business might also have an interest
01:52:24 the business might also have an interest in it but
01:52:24 in it but it's really the must-win aspect i'm interested in what was the point of having a list of must-win projects as opposed to all projects well as i said this was to do with the the size or the potential income
01:52:36 the size or the potential income from the the project so any of the larger projects were put into this file which ultimately went into
01:52:44 went into i think it went into some sort of master file which was um accessible from each of the businesses given that this was a must-win project because of its size uh i would suggest to you that given
01:52:57 uh i would suggest to you that given that you're a salesman your role was to influence the purchasing of products on that project in order to be able to bring it home
01:53:07 i could only influence them with the information that i had available to give them yeah and what i'm suggesting to you is that because it was a must-win project there was particular pressure on you to
01:53:18 there was particular pressure on you to win it
01:53:19 win it i don't think there's any undue pressure no well i wasn't suggesting undue pressure
01:53:23 pressure necessarily just some pressure um it never felt that way my role was a salesperson and i was selling products whether that i felt pressure
01:53:34 i felt pressure i i don't think i i do feel pressured from selling products i mean i've had projects in the past which i think whalen's house there was an email about waylon's house where
01:53:46 an email about waylon's house where i had to walk away from the projects it would would have been nice to secure that with harley but at the time there there's no suitable product it would have from a salesman's perspective it would have been
01:53:57 perspective it would have been undesirable to walk away from a must-win project or at least
01:54:02 at least more undesirable than walking away from any other kind of project is that fair you could say that yes can we look at cel four
01:54:13 can we look at cel four three zeroes one one nine six zero cel three zero is one one nine six zero please
01:54:23 please uh here is an email from you to daniel lancaster jones on the 27th of august 2014.
01:54:29 2014. uh subject grenfell tower hammersmith rs 5000 data
01:54:34 5000 data attachments rain screen zip hi dan good to speak to you again as always for now here is all of the info that i have on the rs5000 rainscreen product
01:54:43 product for use over 18 meters when you have a moment please can you send me across some drawings and an idea of who you would look to use for the supply chain speaking again in a couple of weeks p.s has the weyland's house ship sailed
01:54:57 p.s has the weyland's house ship sailed i think the answer to that last question was yes it had
01:55:01 do you remember having a conversation with daniel andrew jones as you refer to in the first line of that email
01:55:11 i must have done yes and when you said that as always was that because you had frequently had conversations with daniel lancaster jones well it's someone within harley is a customer i knew well and
01:55:23 customer i knew well and um someone that i'd formed a relationship with from supplying them other materials whilst it's hilti prior to me coming to celetex
01:55:34 celetex now just trying to piece together the timing a little bit given the subject matter of the subject line is grenfell tower hammersmith is it safe to assume or take from that
01:55:45 is it safe to assume or take from that that you had already discussed grenfell tower
01:55:47 tower with harley by or before the 27th of august 2014.
01:55:55 i i may have done it may have been ben merritt house when i had that site meeting who'd mentioned it it was on on the cards there's a future potential project
01:56:04 project and do you think it was you you'd had your visit to the office which had been referred to by ray bailey in his witness statement we saw earlier by that time i i mean looking at the
01:56:15 by that time i i mean looking at the date of that email the end of august and the
01:56:18 the i think the launch was at the beginning of that month then it may have been that i'd i'd managed to speak with some members of the team about the product before dan then or this conversation with dan
01:56:32 dan then or this conversation with dan and in that conversation did you have a conversation about rs 5000 specifically it looks as such yes did you tell him that you'd he would need to order rs 5000 as opposed to
01:56:44 5000 as opposed to the fr 5000 specified in the nbs specification i can't i can't be sure did you discuss the differences between fr 5000 and rs
01:56:55 the differences between fr 5000 and rs 5000
01:56:58 again i can't be sure did you tell mr ankle james that rs 5000 was suitable for use above 18 meters
01:57:08 i might have done because that was the only product available that would have suited that application and again did you explain or tell him about any of the caveats that we've discussed
01:57:20 any of the caveats that we've discussed in other words it was only compliant with the proof document b for use above 18 meters if the whole system was exactly the same as that which had been tested i can't be sure if you didn't tell him
01:57:33 i can't be sure if you didn't tell him that
01:57:34 that why is there a reason why you didn't well the information was in the documents in in every one of the documents that i sent to him
01:57:46 yes but given the importance of the caveat is there a reason why you didn't see fit to bring home to him specifically in the conversation
01:57:57 specifically in the conversation no
01:58:01 is this an occasion on which you just let him
01:58:05 let him do his best with the documents rather than alerting him specifically to the caveat and saying look dan i've got to tell you you can't use rs 5000 unless it's in exactly the same rain screen system you
01:58:16 exactly the same rain screen system you do understand that don't you do i take it you didn't tell him that not specifically no because i was dealing with a specialist and a specialist company who this is
01:58:28 and a specialist company who this is their
01:58:29 their this is their bread and butter this is what they do do i take it from that that in this conversation you're referring to here he never asked you about what the
01:58:43 he never asked you about what the clouding system that had been tested was so that he could compare it with what was going on the building i i can't recall the specifics unfortunately the conversation now the zip file you attached to take it from me um
01:58:54 from me um com comprised five documents the product comparison sheet the labc certificate and registered details drawing and document list the bre global classification report
01:59:06 report say the a version of it the rain screen cladding compliance guide and the rain screen cladding specification guide now we've already discussed the compliance guide and the specification
01:59:17 compliance guide and the specification guide can we then turn to the labc documents
01:59:21 documents first what did you understand the role of the labc to have been
01:59:27 well the certificate i understood to be a third-party endorsement of the product
01:59:38 now let's go then to cel401017 sticking with the nabc documents
01:59:50 let's see how that comes about this is an email of the 29th of august 2014 at the bottom of the page see there from john roper to the
02:00:01 see there from john roper to the uk celetex sales team and marketing and tech department and the subject you see is
02:00:08 see is labc registered detail approval celetex rs 5000
02:00:13 rs 5000 all please find attached our labc registered detail certificates for celetex
02:00:17 celetex rs 5000. now just pausing them you'll make the date is the date two days after you'd sent the email to uh
02:00:24 uh to mr axel jones did you have the labc certificate uh two days before this email email came around
02:00:31 around do you think was that in my was that sorry was that attachment it was it was part of the zip file attachment did i sent it on yes i must have done then yes right
02:00:44 now do i take it from the fact that it goes to the sales team that you would have received this email
02:00:52 email yes that's correct um mr raper says in the uh i suppose third paragraph just at the very bottom of the page these certificates confirm that celetex rs 5000
02:01:02 rs 5000 is applicable for use in rain screen clouding applications below and above 18 meters in height it confirms that we have successfully tested to bs 8414 part 2 2005 meet the criteria set out in br135
02:01:15 2005 meet the criteria set out in br135 and is therefore applicable for buildings with a story height greater than 18 meters did you understand that to have been the celetex sales line as to what the labc certificate said or
02:01:27 as to what the labc certificate said or meant
02:01:33 i think it yeah if it follows that way yes
02:01:36 yes did you tell dan and dan angkoff james at any point whether two days before or after this that the labc certificate confirmed that
02:01:47 that the labc certificate confirmed that celetex rs 5000 was applicable for buildings higher than 18 meters
02:01:54 again i don't think i did i literally just bundled any piece of information that i had any certificate any documents that i was provided with and and sent that out right
02:02:05 right when you received mr roper's email on the 29th of august and you could see in that last sentence on that in that paragraph at the foot of the page
02:02:14 the page where it says is therefore applicable for buildings with a story height greater
02:02:19 greater than 18 meters did it not occur to you that his summary of what the certificates confirmed couldn't be correct
02:02:28 i i didn't say that no because it can't be correct can it certificate can't confirm that just because the um the test of 8414 part 2 had been
02:02:39 um the test of 8414 part 2 had been passed
02:02:41 passed rs 5000 was applicable for all buildings with a story height greater than 18 meters
02:02:46 meters that would be thoroughly misleading wouldn't it that wouldn't be correct no well it would be misleading yes yes
02:02:54 yes yes it didn't occur to you at the time that such a description of the product if that's what the certificate had said was misleading it didn't no it didn't occur to me can we then look at the certificate itself
02:03:06 we then look at the certificate itself this is cel six zeros nine
02:03:12 sorry seven is nine i apologize
02:03:17 uh and this is uh the nabc's registered details drawing and document list uh and we can see just taking it slowly together it says rs 5000 pi
02:03:28 together it says rs 5000 pi our insulation board and then supporting document reference numbers documentation reference numbers celestex 18 meter product quality production extract
02:03:40 quality production extract and um five done from that you see bre report 14th july 2014 indicating class naught spread of flame typical
02:03:51 class naught spread of flame typical illustration for rain screen cladding bre letter 17 june 2014 read bs8414 test bre letter 17th november 2011
02:04:04 bre letter 17th november 2011 re-class naught testing bre global test report number five two five five issue two dated 11th august 2014
02:04:15 august 2014 and it goes on limitations of use for use in rain screen wall construction including above 18 meters in height the required thickness of board for a particular construction
02:04:26 particular construction must be established with the use of the celitex online calculator
02:04:33 did you see this certificate when it was sent to you by mr roper on the 29th of august did you look at it i must have done yes and when you read
02:04:45 i must have done yes and when you read limitations of use did you understand well what did you understand the limitations of use to be there
02:04:52 there or mean
02:04:58 it's well i mean looking at this document now it's not particularly clear the first line states that it can be used in wool construction including above 80 meters
02:05:09 construction including above 80 meters height and the second one is more about i think this is alluding to the the thickness of the material needs to be assessed by way of um
02:05:20 needs to be assessed by way of um i think the online calculator there was a
02:05:24 a quite basic thermal calculator that was on their website which could be used to ascertain the thickness of material but to get anything specific you
02:05:35 anything specific you i think the clients potential clients had to go to the technical team make an enquiry for them to do a full insulation u-value calculation so the second sentence under the
02:05:47 so the second sentence under the limitations of use was about you values the first sentence for use in rain screen wall construction including above 18 meters height is hardly a limitation on use at all is it
02:05:59 hardly a limitation on use at all is it no not at all so when you saw this did you know did it not cross your mind to ask yourself the question well what does that mean how could that possibly be correct i didn't at the time no no no
02:06:11 i didn't at the time no no no did you understand that or think that there was a risk that anyone reading this could look at it and think that it was acceptable to use rs 5000 in any beat any building
02:06:22 to use rs 5000 in any beat any building above 18 meters i didn't know and then under advice notes it says celetex rs-5000 can be used with a variety of cladding systems including masonry or
02:06:34 cladding systems including masonry or rain screen systems and can be fixed back to a structural steel frame with a sheathing board or direct mason direct back to masonry has successfully tested to bsa414
02:06:46 tested to bsa414 part 2 2005 meets the criteria set out in br 135
02:06:51 in br 135 and therefore is acceptable for use in buildings with stories above 18 meters in height
02:06:55 in height subject to the board being fixed to a non-combustible substrate alternative compliance to adb the product has been tested and achieves a class naught spread of flame
02:07:06 flame now i've read it all to you but just looking at uh the first part of that part of the advice notes can be rs 5000 can be used with a variety of cladding
02:07:18 can be used with a variety of cladding systems
02:07:21 well that's incorrect isn't it so far as it it concerns use above 18 meters looking at that now yes yes and then it goes on
02:07:30 goes on in the fourth line rs 5000 successfully tested to bs 8414 part 2 2005 meets the criteria set out in br 135 and then this
02:07:40 then this and therefore is acceptable for use in buildings with stories above 18 meters in height
02:07:45 in height just pausing there again that's the same misleading mantra as we've seen in in celetex's marketing literature isn't it it seems to be yes do you know how labc got that text
02:07:56 do you know how labc got that text and uh agreed to put it into their certificate unfortunately not no i was not involved in this
02:08:04 in this and then you see in the brackets there's a caveat subject to the board being fixed to a non-combustible substrate close brackets but that's misleading because that suggests that's the only caveat
02:08:16 caveat which it wasn't was it no it wasn't
02:08:21 alternative compliance to adb what does that mean at the end of that sentence the part which says alternative compliance toward adb yes i would imagine that means it's an
02:08:33 i would imagine that means it's an alternative or way that the board can be used with the non-linear route yes did you understand looking at the advice notes that
02:08:45 advice notes that at least in the respects i have put to you this was a thoroughly misleading text
02:08:50 text again looking at this now i would agree with you yes but you didn't think it was misleading at the time is that what you're telling us
02:08:57 us i don't think i'd reviewed it in that much detail now knowing what i know now as to what i knew back then
02:09:06 now you turning to the bre report that you sent to daniel andrew jones on the 27th of august let's look and see it it's cel
02:09:16 3011965 now this is i'll wait for it to come up i'm sorry
02:09:23 i'm sorry this is
02:09:26 on its first page and i'd like to look at this carefully with you a document that says bre global test report classification report in accordance with the requirements of
02:09:37 in accordance with the requirements of br 135 2013 nxb prepared for celetex insulation limited date 11th of august 2014 report number 295
02:09:47 295 255 issue 2.
02:09:52 this is that i should show you it's four page document well it runs over four pages i should say do you remember sending
02:10:03 say do you remember sending this document as a four-page document to mr anchor phil jones
02:10:10 not specifically but i think this four-page document was the only one that was available to myself and my colleagues in the sales team that to disperse between customers
02:10:24 to disperse between customers were you aware at that time late august 2014
02:10:28 2014 that in fact the classification report 295 255 issue 2 ran over some 12 pages at that time no let's just look at it together cel402133
02:10:51 and what i'd like to do if we can please is to have this document on one part of the screen and the four-page version
02:11:03 cel3011965 on the left-hand side of the screen if that's possible
02:11:26 now and just say we're clear the first page of these of these two documents are identical aren't they we can see that they're both dated the 11th of august and they're both numbered
02:11:38 11th of august and they're both numbered 295
02:11:40 295 255 issue 2. yes they seem to be yes yes
02:11:46 now if we
02:11:50 scroll down to the bottom of or look down to the bottom of the page
02:12:01 and it probably doesn't work on page one but let's go to page two of both documents
02:12:12 we can see at the bottom of the second page or page two of the document on the right-hand side a
02:12:23 document on the right-hand side a 12-page document but it's it's one of 11 pages you see that i do yes um but we don't see precisely what's on the
02:12:32 the uh
02:12:35 uh second page of the four page version but we can see that it's a different page can't we it looks to be a different page yes
02:12:44 page yes and if we let's just follow then turn the pages
02:12:48 the pages of the one on the right hand side first of all
02:12:52 of all just slowly turn the pages of the white one on the right hand side up to page 11. you can see that there's part one a part two section two which runs over the page to
02:13:03 section two which runs over the page to page three five and then you see system is tested
02:13:06 is tested on page six and then page seven if we go to that
02:13:09 to that it is a construction of the system showing key layers of the cladding system
02:13:13 system and then page eight is construction of the system page nine is the construction of the system showing the internal internal corner details ten is the construction of the system showing the fire break layout
02:13:24 system showing the fire break layout and eleven is the test reports in supported classification with the observations at the bottom which i'll come to later and then at page 12 which will be page
02:13:35 and then at page 12 which will be page 11 of 11
02:13:37 11 of 11 of the document internally we see some signatures over r jones and t baker you see that i do yes
02:13:45 yes let's now do the same exercise with the version on the left
02:13:50 we start on we started already with page one we don't need to get back to it it's identical
02:13:55 identical page two is now the the the same as uh can go back to page three perhaps
02:14:02 perhaps of the um
02:14:06 of the um one on the right oh we flipped over never mind let's just let's take it easily
02:14:11 easily to stick with the one on the left go back to page two if we can you can see that you've got details of classified product do you see yes 2.1 2.2 and then 2.2.2
02:14:23 yes 2.1 2.2 and then 2.2.2 you've got the cladding system described there
02:14:27 there and if you go over the page to page three you go you jump straight to section four test reports so there's clearly something missing section three for a start is missing as is the rest of 2.2
02:14:38 is the rest of 2.2 but if we if we go to um uh page four with on the right-hand side document we can see how 2.2 actually finishes
02:14:49 how 2.2 actually finishes at the bottom of page four we can see the first part of 2.2.2 cladding system and if you turn the page to page five you can see it goes over the page it has a 2.2.3
02:15:01 a 2.2.3 and a 2.2.4 you see that i do yes those are missing aren't they from the four-page version because it jumps straight from 2.2.2 skips over section 3 all together and goes to section 4.
02:15:13 goes to section 4. do you see that i see that yes yes and then we go to the signature page let's compare the signature pages and page 5 of the version on the left and page 12 of the version on the right
02:15:26 that's the same page to the at least to the naked eye isn't it it seems to be yes
02:15:30 yes and did you detect at the time that there was something or shadow around the signatures no i didn't left inside
02:15:42 now
02:15:46 we would like we've asked to see the original of the four page document so that we can work out how it was put together do you remember
02:15:54 remember when you sent the four page document to mr anthony jones on the 27th of august
02:16:01 august whether you noticed that it was only a partial document and that and that parts of it had been filleted i can't say i did no did you not look at it thoroughly before you sent it to mr anger till jones
02:16:14 you sent it to mr anger till jones i didn't know did mr agrable james not come back to you and say where's the rest of the classification report he didn't know do you know i think it would follow the answer his name but i must ask you anyway do you know who had filleted the
02:16:26 anyway do you know who had filleted the classification report done from a 12-page report to a four-page report i don't know do you know why presumably not
02:16:34 not it no it was it must have come from the product management team i'd imagine well we've done a bit of digging let's see how far we get can we go to cel409725 please
02:16:55 this is an email from lizzie seaton whose name's come up this morning i think she's in market communications isn't she that's correct yes uh uh on the 15th of august so
02:17:06 uh uh on the 15th of august so really two weeks or so not even 10 days or so after the launch 15th of august to you and john roper hi jonathan
02:17:14 jonathan as requested by john please see find please please find attached the classification report for rs 5000
02:17:24 and the john here i'm assuming must be jonathan
02:17:27 jonathan roper yes correct yes do you know what he had requested
02:17:35 i i don't know if this was the full page or the
02:17:39 or the the 12-page report or something different
02:17:43 different it's not clear we've we've looked at it you can take it from me that it's the four-page filleted version okay if need be we can find the actual attachment but i think it's what i was showing you in fact
02:17:54 showing you in fact okay so we can double check that if necessary overnight but take it from me that it's the four-page version when you received that from lizzie seaton didn't did you not notice that it
02:18:05 seaton didn't did you not notice that it was a
02:18:06 was a filleted or a bridged version of a longer document at that time no did you read it did you look at it i looked through it yes at some point i don't know if it was right that moment but
02:18:16 but but you didn't notice that it didn't have a section three i didn't know can we go to cel409728 please
02:18:37 your response to lizzie seton on the same day 15th of august 2014. thanks lizzy
02:18:42 lizzy i will speak to one of the facade consultants to see if this is what they need i'll get back to you what did you mean by that so this must have been
02:18:54 have been a request from a a consultant a facade consultant to ask me for the test document um so this is probably what prompted me to ask
02:19:05 to ask maybe john or lizzie for that particular document that i could then send to them was the facade consultant daniel andrew jones or
02:19:13 jones or someone else at harley or was it on a different project do you think i would imagine if i'd called them a facade consultant then it would have been a
02:19:19 been a specialist maybe a eight consultant rather than a contractor yes
02:19:28 and did you speak to one of the facade consultants and ask them whether this four-page document was what they needed it would have likely happened yes
02:19:39 happened yes and did they not come back to you and say it's an incomplete document can i please have the rest i think at some stage that must have happened because then the 12-page document came to light
02:19:52 then the 12-page document came to light at some point but i can't remember exactly who would have highlighted the the because i wasn't knowledgeable of these types of documents unfortunately right i see you're right
02:20:03 unfortunately right i see you're right about that and we're going to see that now but just just this time mid august did this facade consultant or any facade consultant come back to you and say you've sent me an incomplete document can i please have the full document
02:20:14 can i please have the full document with i can't recall unfortunately without
02:20:17 without knowing who that person was i couldn't can we then move on to ceo401377
02:20:25 this is an email you received from anthony harris just wait for it to come up on your screen
02:20:34 cel401377 and it's an email uh halfway down page one from anthony harris dated the 29th of august 2014
02:20:45 august 2014 and just note the date this is two days after
02:20:48 after you send the four-page version that you'd received from lizzie seton to daniel anchored jones at harley and anthony harris who is a celetex area
02:20:59 and anthony harris who is a celetex area sales manager isn't he he was a colleague of pi in your group south he was yes yeah good afternoon guys as per the email from robbie taylor below we are trying to secure a
02:21:10 are trying to secure a 6 000 square meter rs 5000 for a large vinci construction project in stratford the engineers need the full test report as
02:21:18 as the bre global test report 295 255 issue 2 you sent me has some pages missing it jumps from points 2.2.2 to 4 and within this is the information
02:21:29 to 4 and within this is the information the engineers want to see can you also comment on the other point robbie has sent regarding the reference to test report 295 369 as they are also wanting this information
02:21:40 information and and if we want to look at it the email he's sending on from robbie taylor is just below that i don't think it's necessary to look at it we can briefly look at it just so that you're clear of the context
02:21:52 the context and he says in that at the foot of page one anthony thanks for the documentation however it's been highlighted by the project engineers that this is actually not the bs84142 test report and then if you go to page two just to
02:22:04 and then if you go to page two just to finish
02:22:04 finish this email off uh he says in the second paragraph noted that the version of the bre global test report two nine five two five five issue two seems to have some pages missing from
02:22:15 seems to have some pages missing from the center of the document so that's the background that's why that is why anthony harris is sending this message can we go back then to page one
02:22:26 um and see his email which comes to you and to john roper as i've shown you um was it at that point when you realized that the four page document wasn't in fact the full classification report
02:22:37 report that's highly likely yes and then john roper sends on the full version of the br of the br-135 classification report
02:22:46 report as you see from the top of the page 29th of august 2014 see that yes as discussed he says there is a full 45-page version of test report 295-255
02:22:56 295-255 but the salient information is replicated in the br-135 classification so you must have realized at that point that those pages were missing did you ask mr roper why it was that only a four-page version
02:23:07 why it was that only a four-page version had been sent to you in the middle of august and not the full version
02:23:12 version i didn't know why is that
02:23:17 i i can't tell you why unfortunately sorry
02:23:22 did you go back to danny lancaster james straight away or really at all and say i'm very sorry i sent you only a partial report here is the rest of it or here is the full version of it
02:23:34 the full version of it i i don't think i did know because i'd as part of the no i didn't do you know why that is i can't think no mr chairman
02:23:45 i can't think no mr chairman we are i think mid-topic and i do have some way to go with this witness i'm afraid
02:23:49 afraid um but that might be a convenient moment yes
02:23:53 yes um it's been quite a long day and i think the wood has you probably feel you've done enough for one day didn't you um well but i mean uh there's a lot to come there's a bit
02:24:05 uh there's a lot to come there's a bit more to come and it'll last longer i think than we we might expect so i think we'll stop there i'm afraid it means i'll have to ask you to come back again tomorrow for some more questions but i'm
02:24:16 tomorrow for some more questions but i'm told you've been warned about that yes i have yes and you're able to make the arrangements to do that i can yes thank you well in that case we will stop there we'll resume at um 10 o'clock tomorrow morning
02:24:27 resume at um 10 o'clock tomorrow morning please
02:24:28 please and again uh please don't talk to anyone about your evidence or anything relating to it overnight all right thank you very much indeed you would like to go with the usher she'll look
02:24:39 like to go with the usher she'll look after you thank you
02:24:51 right mr millett thank you very much 10 o'clock tomorrow then thank you mr champion thank you
02:25:14 you