Evidence from Ben Bailey of Harley Facades regarding ACM cladding panels, installation procedures, building control inspections, and cavity barriers. Cross-examination reveals knowledge gaps and failures to follow manufacturer requirements.
00:00:26 good morning everyone welcome to today's hearing
00:00:29 hearing today we're going to continue hearing evidence from mr ben bailey did you ask mr bailey to come in please
00:00:45 did you ask mr bailey to come in please [Music]
00:00:51 good morning mr bailey good morning everyone ready to carry on i am good thank you very much yes mr mr chairman good morning thank you mr bailey good morning good morning um i'm going to turn to the topic
00:01:02 topic of acm panels and specifically pe and fr options um but i'm going to begin in november 2015 with an email about the o m manual so that's the context for the next few questions
00:01:15 context for the next few questions could you please be shown h a r four zeros two
00:01:18 zeros two five five five
00:01:23 now this is an email from you to steve roberts and neil wilson at cep who are the fabricators of the acm panels dated the 4th of november
00:01:34 acm panels dated the 4th of november 2015. did you say steve and neal could you provide copies of the warranties for the following items
00:01:41 items for inclusion in our o m manual and then you've set out four items there the last of which is reyno bond plus any other technical information so we do we take it from that that you
00:01:54 so we do we take it from that that you were involved in collating the information for the harley operation and maintenance or o
00:02:00 or o m manual yes can we now look at that document it's
00:02:07 seven three rbk3027339 nine
00:02:18 is that is this the harley o m manual in in 2015 that you saw at the time do you think oh i
00:02:29 saw at the time do you think oh i believe so yes yeah can we look at page 182 and here we see an alcoa
00:02:40 information sheet for reyno bond and rayleigh lux products and if you look under the heading fire certificates for rhino bond architecture we can see that the united kingdom classification
00:02:53 that the united kingdom classification for both pe and fr is class naught do you see that yes did you ever read this document i don't remember you don't remember
00:03:08 did you remember that there was both a pe and an fr core available
00:03:17 i i don't recall being aware of an fr panel at the time right
00:03:25 when do you think you did first become aware that rayna bond acm came in an fr core version i believe after the um
00:03:37 core version i believe after the um after the fire right
00:03:43 do you remember whether there was any discussion within harley or the industry generally from your knowledge and experience at the time of the availability of acm panels with an fr core as opposed to a pe core
00:03:56 an fr core as opposed to a pe core i don't recall any conversations right um can i show you the bba certificate for the reyno bond acm product it's at bba 6047 please
00:04:14 acm product it's at bba 6047 please it's the certificate number zero eight four five
00:04:17 four five one zero uh issued uh in uh january 2008 as you can see from the bottom there um have you ever seen this document
00:04:28 um have you ever seen this document before
00:04:31 i have um but i i think as i was saying yesterday i've seen this document since i don't remember if i my memory of it is
00:04:42 don't remember if i my memory of it is post or free fire i see so can we be clear you didn't to the best of your recollection look at this at any time during your involvement on the ground one shot right um
00:04:55 one shot right um let's see how we go with it can i ask you please to turn to page three and you'll see there page three uh it says
00:05:06 uh in the third paragraph under general at the top of the page it is important for designers planners contractors and or installers to ensure that the installation of the
00:05:17 to ensure that the installation of the cladding
00:05:18 cladding is in accordance with the certificate holder's instructions and the information given in this certificate and did you know even if you didn't read this document at the time did you know generally that you
00:05:30 generally that you had to ensure that the installation of the clatting was in accordance with the certificate holder's instructions and the information in the bba certificate did you know that
00:05:41 in the bba certificate did you know that as a general proposition in the fact that the people using it to follow that yeah so do you accept that you knew not the
00:05:53 so do you accept that you knew not the standing you hadn't read the certificate that those installing the rain screen cladding
00:05:59 cladding on grenfell tower had to follow the in instructions of alcoa archonic and the information in this certificate
00:06:17 i'm unsure what they're in what their instructions are or were right well let me see if i can get it this way did you take any steps to ensure that those responsible for the
00:06:29 to ensure that those responsible for the installation of the cladding saw this certificate even if you hadn't uh understood it and obtained specific instructions from alcoa as to the installation
00:06:43 from alcoa as to the installation i don't recall doing so no
00:06:47 does that mean that you yourself took those steps to make sure that the installation that the osborne berry was carrying out was in line with the requirements in the certificate
00:07:06 as i said i'm unsure whether i've seen a certificate so if i hadn't seen the certificate like the answer is no did you ever say to osborne berry or either of them uh i haven't seen the bba
00:07:19 of them uh i haven't seen the bba certificate but you must sure you get it and follow it
00:07:23 it i wasn't aware of um that is something to ask them so is the answer to my question you that you did not
00:07:32 not i don't recall now i think it's right that you drafted the method statement for the installation of the cladding didn't you correct yes when you did that did you
00:07:43 correct yes when you did that did you review any instructions or directions from reino bond alcoa to make sure that the method statement was in line with the instructions that they gave
00:07:54 with the instructions that they gave i don't believe so let's look at it bba uh well we'll come to that back to that in a moment actually can i just ask you something else on the certificate bba six zeros 47 at page six please
00:08:08 bba six zeros 47 at page six please and i want to show you section 10 in this same document and i know you didn't read it but i just want to show you what it says 10.2 installers must be trained and
00:08:19 10.2 installers must be trained and approved by the certificate holder who can provide technical assistance at the design stage and at the start of the installation did you take any steps to ensure that osborne berry were appropriately trained
00:08:33 uh i did not did you take any steps to ensure that osborne berry were approved by alcoa the manufacturers and and therefore the certificate holder no
00:08:46 certificate holder no if you look at section six on page five just back a little bit please um it says that at paragraph 6.1
00:08:58 um it says that at paragraph 6.1 the standard sample of the product with a gray green duragloss 5000 coating when tested for reaction to fire achieved a classification of bs2d naught in accordance with en 13501 2002.
00:09:12 13501 2002. i know you didn't read it but did you did you know that at least in general terms that that there was a certificate that said those things um my my memory of
00:09:26 this in relation to fire was that it was a classic product
00:09:32 how did you know that i think i was told that do you remember by whom i i do not okay but i think we are telling us is that you learnt that it was a class naught product from somebody but not from
00:09:43 product from somebody but not from reading the certificate correct very well
00:10:00 were you aware that the bba certificate specifically recommended the inclusion of cavity barriers around the windows to prevent internal fire spreading to the cladding system
00:10:14 um as i said on this certificate i'm unaware of that wording at that time right
00:10:27 now let's then turn to um the way in which these panels were ordered to site that's the new topic
00:10:38 the new topic can i ask you to start please with
00:10:44 ryd3018272
00:10:50 um this is an email from simon lawrence to daniel anchor to jones on the 19th of september 2014 and you can see that ray bailey is cop is copied in on it as
00:11:01 ray bailey is cop is copied in on it as is rob maxwell and simon o'connor now this is obviously before you became uh
00:11:07 uh project manager for harley um so you may not have seen this email but he says in it um in the second sentence
00:11:16 sentence uh the planners have been told that the discussion needs to be made asap as the order needs to be placed third of october
00:11:23 october and the subject of the email is cladding panels at the time were you made aware of that deadline i don't believe so right
00:11:37 now just as a bit of background did you know
00:11:41 know that the decision to use smoke silver rain screen panels manufactured by alcoa i.e rayna bond was formally agreed on the 30th of september 2014.
00:11:53 on the 30th of september 2014. i don't know didn't know that no okay um can i ask you to turn to cep five six six zeroes five one two please cep
00:12:03 cep six zeros five one two
00:12:07 this is an email from mark stapley to jeff blades of cep copy to you 25th february 2015 and he attaches something called
00:12:19 and he attaches something called acm panel requirements and he says hi jeff please find attached our cladding panels requirements for grenfell tower please can you provide us with your most competitive price and also confirm
00:12:31 price and also confirm lead times now by this time 25th february you i think had taken over as a project manager i believe i was involved at that time yes yeah and we can see that he's asking for the
00:12:44 and we can see that he's asking for the most competitive price are you aware given that the acm panels had been formally signed off by planning in september 2014 why it was that harley didn't start
00:12:57 why it was that harley didn't start ordering
00:12:58 ordering uh or even obtaining quotes for the fabrication of panels until late february 2015 something like five months later i don't know you don't know
00:13:09 know you don't know did you know that cep had provided a quotation
00:13:13 quotation um to harley for the fabrication of acm panels on the 21st of january 2014
00:13:25 14 yes um i'm unaware of that you didn't know that i don't remember okay well we'll come we'll come back to that um can i ask you then to
00:13:37 back to that um can i ask you then to look at the attachment to this email you'll find that at
00:13:46 cep60513
00:13:55 and if we go to the first page at the bottom
00:13:59 we have to blow that up but we can see i think you'll see there it says material rhino bond finish smoke silver metallic duragloss 5000
00:14:10 smoke silver metallic duragloss 5000 satin you see that yes that's rayna bond acm isn't it i believe so yes now if we look at page four of this document
00:14:22 we can see here that this is a list of notional material requirements rayna bond cladding and it says that they are to be made of raynor bond cladding and you can see
00:14:34 raynor bond cladding and you can see um down the right hand side the color and working your way to the to the towards the left the location the girth and the quantity um neither in the pic the drawing that
00:14:47 um neither in the pic the drawing that we saw the box at the bottom nor in this list does it say what the core of the acm is is to be
00:14:57 is to be do you know why that is
00:15:00 um i i don't know why mark hasn't put that on
00:15:05 that on you so you don't know my work my mark hasn't put that on would does that tell us that you at the time expected or would have expected him to identify the core of the acm panel
00:15:16 to identify the core of the acm panel so my memory of um my awareness of the point at the time i think i said yesterday i wasn't aware of
00:15:25 of um different cause and i don't remember being having a pe in the description when i saw it referred to no so was there an assumption that an acm panel would have a pe core i
00:15:38 an acm panel would have a pe core i don't think that was an assumption
00:15:42 you don't think it was an assumption so if it wasn't an assumption what was it actually thought about
00:15:51 it's not something i ever thought about right
00:16:00 if the core wasn't specified as pe specifically as opposed to fr how would cep is the fabricator know which core
00:16:11 which core to order from reynabon alcoa if it wasn't set out in the requirements
00:16:18 i don't know you don't know well you were copied in on this email was it your assumption at the time that it would just be pe with and that
00:16:30 that it would just be pe with and that and the cep would would know or assume that it was to be pe as i said before i didn't have an awareness of the yeah
00:16:43 can we look at cep60528 please
00:16:52 this is an email from you to neil wilson at cep dated the 13th of march copy to jeff blades and um if we turn to the second email down
00:17:07 you'll see that this is a copy of an email sent earlier the same day from neil wilson to mark stapley at harley and you're responding by sending him a
00:17:19 and you're responding by sending him a purchase order as we can see from the top email
00:17:23 top email and in the second email down to which you are responding uh mr wilson says hi mark following our telecom yesterday i confirm our revised price for the supply
00:17:34 confirm our revised price for the supply and fabrication of the acm panels to the above project reynabond smoke silver panels as detailed on schedules and he sets them out
00:17:42 out um at a price of 127 500 pounds inclusive of discount x works i also confirm
00:17:49 confirm we will supply the remainder of the panels yet to be finalized and then he gives the measurements making the complete order value around 300 000 pounds now it looks
00:18:00 value around 300 000 pounds now it looks as from this as if mark stapley had asked for a discount from neil wilson on the telephone on the 12th of march that's the telecom yesterday he refers to
00:18:13 yesterday he refers to and it looks as if he was being given one by neil wilson do you know um whether harley did ask cep for a discount on the acm panels i i don't know um the details of the
00:18:25 i i don't know um the details of the conversation that neil's referring to you don't know the details
00:18:29 details do you know what discount mr stapley asked for i don't um i don't do you know why harley was pushing for a discount from cep on this order
00:18:39 order i do not
00:18:42 i do not you see your your um you'll sent this email because it's at the top of the email chained does it follow that you simply didn't have a discussion with mr stapley at all about the discount
00:18:55 um i don't remember i mean you sent him the
00:18:59 the purchase order did you just cut and paste it from something or did you compile it yourself
00:19:08 um i think from what i saw of the time stamp on the email that i sent it was it was an hour or two after this email so
00:19:19 an hour or two after this email so mark may have asked me just to write as i said i said it's in order to cover this okay
00:19:25 this okay now note the price uh that's given uh and the complete order value
00:19:33 value of around 300 000 pounds we see that can i keeping that in mind ask you to look at a document h h a r three zeros one five two nine
00:19:44 h h a r three zeros one five two nine nine please
00:19:50 this is cep's original quote of the 21st of january 2014 which i mentioned about five minutes ago and you
00:19:59 and you expressed surprise that it was 2014 i think
00:20:02 think this is the original quote by cep of that date
00:20:06 that date sent to mike alberston and mark harris at harley
00:20:10 at harley and it's the price on which harley based its tender to ryden and if i ask you to go to page two
00:20:19 you can see on that page that the rain screen price is quoted there by cep to harley as 525 394 pounds
00:20:32 as 525 394 pounds given that that was the price that quoted in january 2014 are you able to explain why in uh march 2015
00:20:44 in uh march 2015 uh cep were quoting around 300 000 pounds for the complete order in other words around 200 000 pounds cheaper than the
00:20:55 around 200 000 pounds cheaper than the initial cep quote the year before
00:21:00 i don't know is it fair to say that harley were able to get the acm panels from cep for a far cheaper price than the price that harley had quoted to
00:21:11 the price that harley had quoted to ryden
00:21:15 um well i i don't remember the price that we equated to ryden no but i'm asking you to accept something that i'm putting to you and i'm suggesting to you
00:21:27 you and i'm suggesting to you that harley were able to get the panels from cep
00:21:31 from cep for a price that was far cheaper than was quoted to ryden on the assumption that what was quoted at writing was based on the 525 000 pounds that we saw
00:21:39 saw in the quote given in january 2014. um
00:21:49 as i say i don't know the level of i don't know the difference between the two but
00:21:54 two but obviously um i wouldn't be surprised that we're paying less for a material than we're selling it for right you wouldn't be surprised about that okay was there any discussion to
00:22:05 that okay was there any discussion to your knowledge at the time within harley about um making a turn um on the difference between what you were quoted by cep and what you were equating to ryden for these panels
00:22:16 to ryden for these panels when you say making your turn making a profit
00:22:20 profit pocketing the difference well i wouldn't use the term pocketing the difference i think um in a business
00:22:36 there has to be an element of profit but i don't think pocketing the difference is a phrase that i'd use all right i just wanted to understand um how the price build up worked but you
00:22:49 how the price build up worked but you sounds as if you can't really help me on that
00:22:52 that yeah in terms of the the difference in the price we pay in the price we sell it why i don't know that the ins and outs of that no all right
00:23:11 do you can you help me with uh the quotation that was given um by booth murray do you remember anything to do with murie
00:23:22 with murie um i i
00:23:25 um i i don't remember that interaction at the time but i've since seen a quotation from them yes booth murie were a cladding fabricator like cep
00:23:33 like cep weren't they yes and did you know that um uh mr stapley had approached boov murray and asked them for a quotation did you know that at the time
00:23:45 um what for the whole grandfather
00:23:53 well let's look at the document um it's blm
00:23:57 blm six zeros 14.
00:24:14 blm 6-0 is 14.
00:24:26 yes and if we can go to the third page of that email run please this is an email from mark stapley to stuart murden at booth
00:24:37 stuart murden at booth murray dated the 25th of february 2015 and uh you are copied in on that as you see
00:24:47 see and he says hi stu further to our earlier telephone conversation please find attached our panel requirements for grenfell tower please can you provide us with your most competitive price and also confirm lead times
00:24:59 confirm lead times do you know why harley approached booth murie
00:25:03 murie for a quotation
00:25:07 and specifically no right now can we you're copied in on this so when you receive this email but in
00:25:19 so when you receive this email but in copy
00:25:20 copy did it occur to you to find out what was going on
00:25:23 going on given that cep were also being approached
00:25:30 um
00:25:34 yeah i don't remember this email right okay you don't remember the email all right well let's see how we go on can i ask you to go to blm six zeroes i'm sorry seven zero is nine
00:25:45 zeroes i'm sorry seven zero is nine seven zero is nine
00:25:53 and uh if you look at the bottom of the first page we can see an email from you
00:25:59 you this is later in the year 6th of july 2015
00:26:05 and it's sent to inquiries
00:26:09 uh and we know that that is uh booth murray
00:26:13 murray and uh you say alan as discussed please find drawings attached to quote against for our grenfell tower project please can you quote unexpected lead time as well i would need these panels
00:26:25 time as well i would need these panels on site week commencing 17th of august 2015.
00:26:30 now we've already seen that cep had started supplying the renault bond after you'd sent the purchase order on the 13th of march 2015 why were you asking booth murray for a
00:26:41 why were you asking booth murray for a quote if you'd already engaged cep to fabricate the panels for grenfell
00:26:48 um from my of from the time of the
00:26:56 um deliveries we were getting from cep um my recollection is that we were not getting
00:27:06 getting the quantities um and so the quantities of the types of panels that we'd requested on a schedule so i think there was concern on that regard of
00:27:18 cp's ability to keep up with progress on site so i think my recollection is the exploring
00:27:30 avenues to try and reduce that bottleneck right and when you sent the emails in email in july early july 2015 did you not look back at
00:27:41 not look back at the discussions you'd had with booth murray earlier in the year harley had had
00:27:52 um i'd like to turn to another topic which is
00:27:56 which is john hoban the building control officer for grenfell tower um he was one of the building control officers responsible for
00:28:07 officers responsible for the grenfell tower refurbishment i think you know that yes um can i ask you to look at his statement please um this is rbk rbk3033934
00:28:22 and if you go to page 7 in that document
00:28:28 you'll see paragraph 65. and a paragraph 65
00:28:32 65 you'll see uh this is an answer to a question
00:28:36 question after paragraph 64. what advice or information was available and what assessments were made about the components that comprise the exterior of the building their fire safety fire resistance
00:28:47 resistance and compliance with safety standards including information or advice from manufacturers of relevant components and he starts with an answer or starts
00:28:58 and he starts with an answer or starts his answer at paragraph 65 and says i was provided with initial drawings and details and discussed the works with the architect and his specialist consultant dealing with fire matters i also had
00:29:10 dealing with fire matters i also had a brief discussion with the engineer from the contractors installing the cladding system to the exterior of the building at the commencement of the works to the exterior
00:29:19 exterior and then he goes on at paragraph 66 during that discussion i recall that i was advised by the engineer that tests had been carried out to the metal framework supporting the cladding i also recall that i was advised that
00:29:31 i also recall that i was advised that the system had been fitted to many buildings throughout england and wales to buildings of a similar height and construction and then he goes on at 67 to say um i also looked up information on the
00:29:43 i also looked up information on the insulation and then in the third third line he says i was also advised at the initial meeting on site by the specialist consultant that the cladding would comply
00:29:54 comply with the standard set out in approved document b now i've read you quite a bit from his statement because i want you to have the entirety of the context for my questions that follow
00:30:05 questions that follow um now we know uh from other documents and i don't need to show you these the initial meeting to which mr hoban is referring took place on the 24th of november 2014.
00:30:17 place on the 24th of november 2014. now that's before your detailed involvement yes in the project do you remember whether you or someone else from harley attended a meeting on site with mr hogan
00:30:29 attended a meeting on site with mr hogan on the 24th of november 2014. i don't recall
00:30:32 recall you don't recall when mr hoban is is referring to someone here from harley as the specialist consultant um can you help me who that might be
00:30:43 um can you help me who that might be i don't know did you give any assurances to mr hoban at any stage
00:30:51 stage in the way he describes here i don't believe so and you're sure that it wasn't you uh who told
00:30:59 who told uh the specialist consultant that the cladding would comply with the standards set out and approve document b
00:31:08 sorry say that again are you sure that it wasn't you who told him that the cladding would comply with with the standard set out in approved document b i don't think so
00:31:23 now in your statement and we don't need to get back to it you say and it's paragraph seven that you attended the site once you did become involved in detail from february 2015 two or three times per week
00:31:35 two or three times per week when you were there what were you doing
00:31:39 many things can you give me a very summary bullet point list of what you did um meeting the
00:31:52 people on site from ryden meeting our contractors
00:31:58 um um checking our stocks of materials um you know seeing where we are seeing where we are checking the deliveries that have come in the
00:32:10 deliveries that have come in the quantities
00:32:13 making sure we're up to date topped up with fixings um checking mass climbers um
00:32:23 i'd also visit go up the mask climbers and
00:32:27 and just have a have a look at the progress of the
00:32:30 of the installation again with reference to how many materials we have on site
00:32:42 how many materials we have on site now mr hughes david hughes of ryden when he gave evidence to the inquiry in july suggested that you might have gone up the master climbers with mr hoban is that correct i have a recollection of
00:32:56 is that correct i have a recollection of uh doing so on at least one occasion
00:33:02 he also said that during that time or his his time on the project and yours you or one of the other installers would brief mr hoban on the works do you remember that
00:33:16 um i think i have a slightly different recollection than dave does i think i would say i remember taking mr hoaven up on the mass camera at least once maybe twice but
00:33:28 camera at least once maybe twice but that was a i was there to operate the mask climber to enable his inspections you have any other meetings with mr
00:33:39 you have any other meetings with mr hoban on site other than other than the one you've just referred to i don't believe so did you ever have any meetings with mr hogan anywhere else it's not that i recall
00:33:53 it's not that i recall so just going back to the one meeting you do recall which is when you say you you took mr hogan up on the master climber but to operate the master climber to enable his inspections
00:34:04 enable his inspections did you accompany mr hoban on his inspection
00:34:09 uh on that occasion yes that occasion yes
00:34:12 yes do you remember when that was uh i couldn't give you a date well can you give me a rough idea of at what stage the refurbishment had reached i believe
00:34:25 refurbishment had reached i believe it was the um
00:34:30 it was on it was before we put the panels on the first of the elevations that we put panels onto so
00:34:38 onto so in terms of that's a that's a chunk of time but
00:34:41 time but i have to look at other records to
00:34:45 tell you that date uh let's try it a different way how soon after february 2015 and you're taking over the role of project manager do you think you had that meeting with mr hogan
00:34:58 i'd be guessing right and during that um meeting or inspection did you discuss
00:35:09 inspection did you discuss the work that had been done or the design or the materials
00:35:18 my regulation is of uh mr open asking several questions but i don't remember those questions it was a long time ago does anything specific stand out to you
00:35:31 does anything specific stand out to you and your recollection of that meeting
00:35:44 of that meeting i mean i think the questions were generally about the installation and um the components but further i don't really remember were there any particular problems that mr
00:35:56 there any particular problems that mr hoban was interested in that you recall
00:36:00 um i don't remember him relaying any problems no do you remember at all whether there was
00:36:11 do you remember at all whether there was any discussion of the building regulations or approved document b in relation to any aspect of the clatting that he was inspecting
00:36:26 of the clatting that he was inspecting not that i recall
00:36:35 is there any discussion at all
00:36:39 between you about compliance with any aspect of what you were inspecting
00:36:47 again i don't recall
00:36:51 and it would follow with it that you wouldn't recall let me ask it do you recall either him asking or you giving
00:36:59 giving any any assurances about whether the design
00:37:04 design or the materials or products that you were inspecting with him or he was inspecting with you were compliant with the building regulations and approved document b i don't recall
00:37:17 can we go to a document ryd3082733 please
00:37:26 this is a site inspection report compiled by john rowan and partners who are clerk of the works and you can see this is dated or the inspection is dated 16th of june
00:37:37 or the inspection is dated 16th of june 2015. and
00:37:38 2015. and can i go with you to please to page two of the document towards the bottom of the page where you'll see a heading
00:37:52 uh and it's the second entry from the bottom review site inspection log building control you see that yes and underneath it says last building control site visit was the
00:38:04 last building control site visit was the same as before friday 15 may 2015 the only observation was the further details of the cladding fire breaks were required ryden to confirm if they have done this
00:38:16 confirm if they have done this were you or anyone else's harley to your recollection ask to provide further details on the cavity barriers to ryden for them to pass to building control
00:38:31 i i don't remember
00:38:34 this doesn't trigger a recollection with you about discussion of fire breaks or cavity barriers with building control
00:38:50 i think i remember a site meeting previous to that and the meet and then one of the actions in the meeting minutes were to
00:38:59 provide um drawings with those locations on
00:39:03 on but from i don't remember i don't call um
00:39:12 specifics in this report did you discuss cavity barriers with john hoban on any inspection that you can remember
00:39:25 i would imagine so but i don't have a firm recollection right now just going back to the answer before one you say i think i remember a site meeting previous to that do you mean the one previous to this one
00:39:37 do you mean the one previous to this one on the 16th of june 2015 or the the previous one as noted here on friday the 15th of may 2015.
00:39:47 2015. i think the meeting minutes were from april i remember right so you have a recollection of a meeting in april at which is this right john hogan asked
00:39:59 at which is this right john hogan asked oh no sorry no if that was a john hogan's nightmare meeting it was a um writing meeting did you provide mr hoban with the drawings that he'd asked for
00:40:13 oh sorry to be clear the meeting i'm referring to it was a ride and request in april right hence my question do you remember whether you or anyone
00:40:25 do you remember whether you or anyone else at harley was asked to provide further details on cavity barriers
00:40:33 to john hype and um i don't recall right do you remember whether you passed anything directly to building control on cladding fire breaks as is referred to here
00:40:44 to here you can see the expression cladding fire breaks um
00:40:48 breaks um there was discussion of the um cavity barriers
00:40:53 barriers um previous to this was that a discussion you were involved in um there's quite a long email chain in march i think yes indeed and we're going to come to that later on apart from
00:41:05 that later on apart from apart from that and we can read that and we'll go through it together apart from that do you recall any face-to-face discussions or telephone discussions with john hogan at which the subject of cavity barriers or
00:41:17 cavity barriers or fire breaks as he as they are referred to sometimes was discussed as before i don't have a clear recollection of a conversation like that very well we'll
00:41:29 a conversation like that very well we'll come back to that email chain in due course can i then ask you about workshops now um during the course of mr crawford's evidence to the inquiry in march
00:41:41 evidence to the inquiry in march this year he said that there were a number of informal what he called workshops with rbkc building control where drawings were discussed
00:41:51 discussed do you recall any such meetings
00:41:56 yes i remember attending meetings on site where i would sit in on meetings with our team ryden and the
00:42:08 meetings with our team ryden and the architect my question though was whether you recall meetings with rbkc building control where drawings were discussed
00:42:21 where drawings were discussed i don't recall meetings with building control being in attendance
00:42:28 right
00:42:35 leaving aside building control you remember you say meetings where with ryden and the architect were cavity barriers discussed during those meetings
00:42:51 i believe they would have been um again no
00:42:54 no firm recollection right did you have a did you ever have any meetings on site with ryden at which a representative of studio he was not present
00:43:06 that's possible
00:43:10 do you remember whether bill any occasion on which building control were provided with drawings of the cladding system as you understood it
00:43:24 i believe they must have been
00:43:29 that's not quite an answer to my question my question is do you remember any occasion on which building control were provided with drawings of the cladding system as you understood it to be
00:43:42 um
00:43:47 i think other than what they would have been provided with as i say in that email chain we've i've referred to i don't have any direct knowledge of in our details
00:44:03 now you referred earlier on to a single meeting with john hogan at which you accompany him accompanied him up the mask climber uh can i show you paragraph 13 of your witness statement
00:44:14 witness statement page five
00:44:17 and see if we can get a little bit more on that uh you say in paragraph 13
00:44:31 um and it's it's in the middle of the paragraph
00:44:35 paragraph but let's start with five lines down you say in relation to the cladding that the cladding rails were secured with the correct fixings correct centers and levels i then took building control up to see the work
00:44:47 building control up to see the work i believe that taf and bears which are osborne berry were also inspecting the workers i remember them i remember asking them at various points and they would confirm that they were i recall they also took building control
00:44:58 i recall they also took building control up to see what had been installed prior to the cladding panels being installed when i was not on site i was not aware of any issues being raised by building control
00:45:06 control now i just want to focus on where you say i then took building control up to see the work is your reference there the reference to the meeting that you're recalling now today
00:45:17 i believe so yes and
00:45:21 you're sure it was john hoban you took up is it are you
00:45:26 uh i'm reasonably sure yes yeah did you customarily keep any records of the visits made by rbkc building
00:45:39 of the visits made by rbkc building control where you would take them to see the work
00:45:43 the work even that one occasion i may have made notes of it um right but i i don't have those
00:45:54 right but i i don't have those right did you keep a day log or or day-to-day diary of what was happening on site um not a a day-to-day diary but more of a
00:46:06 a day-to-day diary but more of a a notebook of um
00:46:10 various things that come up or need ordering
00:46:13 ordering things of that nature right sort of reminders do you remember whether you're meeting with mr hogan where you took him up in the mask climber was something you entered into your notebook
00:46:24 entered into your notebook i don't
00:46:31 when you went up with him in the mask climber did from what you could see did mr hoban check every elevation on every floor
00:46:42 every floor when i was there um i believe so i believe we'd either travel from the bottom working our way up or travel they just often work our way back down right do you remember whether the
00:46:53 right do you remember whether the inspection addressed any more than the framework for the cladding
00:46:58 i believe he was looking at every element
00:47:09 right well mr bailey um it is important that we can all hear you without too much difficulty so can you make sure you keep your voice off as best you can
00:47:20 did rbkc building control look at the internal works or only the external works
00:47:30 um
00:47:37 sorry
00:47:41 as far as i in my experience um i was only there for the external parts
00:47:49 parts with mr hogan
00:47:55 in respect of the window installations do you remember what mr hoban looked at in particular
00:48:08 um i don't have a
00:48:12 firmware collection
00:48:22 can i ask you to turn back a page in your witness statement to the beginning of paragraph 13 which is on page four
00:48:33 and you say that in terms of the work done by the installers i remember that i made
00:48:37 made ad hoc informal checks to the window shelf angles and weather sealing details before the frames were fitted there's a large part of this worker taking place before i had full involvement in the project
00:48:50 uh so you say um you checked those did you also conduct can conduct a visual check of the windows and the insulation and the cavity barriers and the cladding rails yes
00:49:02 and the cladding rails yes yeah and
00:49:06 yeah and a little bit further down that paragraph you also
00:49:09 you also say um that you would generally check this is
00:49:13 this is about halfway down the paragraph before the bottom of the page you'd say you would check in relation to the windows that the shelf angles were securely fitted and fixed at the correct centers to retain the window frames that the epdm sealed to the top of the
00:49:26 that the epdm sealed to the top of the head angle was applied to a good standard
00:49:28 standard to see if any gaps that would allow water ingress around the fixings were sealed
00:49:32 sealed and later on when the frames had been fitted the window frame was securely fitted free from damage and foam was applied along the whole length of the frame
00:49:39 frame but the window jams were sealed with epdm to a good standard and the mastic seal was applied along the length of the window at the head and base
00:49:47 base that the glass and gaskets of the glasses were fitted at the time were in good condition and whether bars and drain caps were fitted it's a very long sentence you did all of those things and on page
00:49:59 you did all of those things and on page five we can see you then go on to say in relation to the insulation that it was securely fitted fixed to the building and joints taped and secured in relation to the cavity barriers that they were fitted securely with the end of the fixing strap split and bent
00:50:11 of the fixing strap split and bent joint joints were taped and secure in relation to the cladding that the cladding rails were secured with the correct fixings at correct centers and levels
00:50:18 levels and that is what that is the work you say you checked and then you so i then took building control up to see the work to your knowledge or recollection did you ever take building control up to
00:50:29 you ever take building control up to inspect
00:50:30 inspect uh the exterior prior or before the panels were installed
00:50:38 yes you did so that was there an earlier inspection by building control or or just the one that you were referring to
00:50:49 referring to the um visit that i've referred to and this is
00:50:55 this is immediately before the cloning panels are
00:50:58 are installed because when one reads the paragraph
00:51:03 paragraph you say in relation to the cladding which i think you mean the panels the cladding rails were secured with the correct fixings and correct centers and the levels i then took building control up to see the work do i take it from
00:51:14 up to see the work do i take it from that that
00:51:15 that that that that point when you took building control up to see the work the rails were
00:51:21 were secured with correct fixings and correct centers and levels but the panels hadn't yet been fitted correct that's correct is it right i see
00:51:29 so that would mean would it that the insulation and the cavity barriers would have been visible to mr hoban absolutely i see now can i ask you to
00:51:40 absolutely i see now can i ask you to look at mr hughes's evidence david hughes writing day 27 page 100 please
00:51:59 uh he says at lines one to fourteen
00:52:07 this is put to him he's asked a question about
00:52:12 about building control going up to see what had been installed prior to the cladding panels being installed and the question that's asked by miss grange is was your understanding that building control would be taken up before the panels were inspected
00:52:24 before the panels were inspected so that's this is what he's being asked about and his answer is i don't know whether he's getting confused this is you getting confused with building control and the clerk of works here
00:52:33 here from my statement well from what i remember we only went up twice with building control up the mast climbers and those are the ones i said in my statement so i took them up once when there were
00:52:44 so i took them up once when there were still some unfinished panels and i took them up once with the clerk of works at the same time to do what i would consider to be a handover inspection um do you agree that you might be getting confused between building
00:52:55 getting confused between building control and clerk of works no no
00:53:01 no no do you recall that there were more than two inspections as he says sorry let me put that again he says that he recalls that there were two inspections with building control of
00:53:12 two inspections with building control of the mass climbers do you recall that there were two
00:53:20 is they um so i think dave uses we the we there
00:53:32 um so i think dave uses we the we there so i'm assuming he means we mean being me and him um i don't recall um going on the mastermind with dave and building control
00:53:42 control i see i i can be i think i can be sure about the difference between clerk i can build and control um because um i do remember the two
00:53:53 because um i do remember the two different john's very clearly in my mind but so i'm you know i'm
00:54:02 i'm confident that the visits i did um right i think was only me and john hogan right
00:54:11 right now it follows from what you're saying is that there was only one builder control mass climb of trip that you recall and that was at a time before the cladding panels were fitted does it follow from that
00:54:23 were fitted does it follow from that that you never took building control john hoban to see the work after the panels were installed
00:54:33 i believe those visits were the ones i was present anyway with the clerk
00:54:40 so i don't understand that did you say you believe those visits were the ones i was present anyway with the clerk of works and could you just explain that so i think
00:54:51 could you just explain that so i think your question was did john hope and visit on the mass climb after the panels have been installed yes and um what i'm
00:55:03 and um what i'm trying to say is that my recollection the only person i can remember taking up in the mask liner once the panel has been installed once the cloud works right thank you
00:55:16 now we've identified a gap in building control inspections over the summer of 2015 can you help us with what stage the facade installation had had reached between may and october
00:55:32 2015 um i think my recollection is the
00:55:42 plan from the inspection side was to sign off an elevation at a time and so we would only put panels on the elevations that had been inspected by building control so
00:55:56 inspected by building control so as i sit here now i wouldn't be able to tell you the exact stage we were out
00:56:03 right do you think the installation of the insulation had been finished [Music]
00:56:10 [Music] by may 2015
00:56:14 um just by the um evidence we saw yesterday with purchase orders first insulation into september and october i don't think it would have been finished
00:56:25 don't think it would have been finished though
00:56:26 though yeah so i think we can take it from that answer and you're right about the documents that the insulation was still being fitted after october 2015.
00:56:42 i think it would have been yes it's likely that would have been um confined to the lower floors right
00:56:52 and what about the rain screen
00:56:55 did you remember when that started to be fitted
00:57:05 i think i was i think may was suggested as a date yesterday and i was a little unsure um over the specific days but i thought
00:57:17 um over the specific days but i thought yeah it would be may june kind of time i think right i'm trying to get a picture in my head of of what building control would have missed if it is the case that they
00:57:28 missed if it is the case that they didn't visit between may and october 2015.
00:57:32 2015. and can you just help me with what they might have missed
00:57:39 i think
00:57:42 in terms of whole elevations we wouldn't have put any panels on unless they didn't expect that
00:57:52 elevation and during that period if they hadn't visited what what what would they not have seen
00:58:10 um
00:58:13 as i said the one visit that they do before the panels went on was of a um a was considered to be a complete
00:58:24 a was considered to be a complete um build-up before the panels went on so if
00:58:28 if there was a gap between those months i don't think any panels would have gone on without a visit on on on an unexpected elevation
00:58:39 on on on an unexpected elevation right i see now can we look at paragraph 49 of your statement on page 15 please paragraph 49
00:58:52 you you say there as far as far as i am able to recall building control inspections were carried out on each elevation
00:59:04 carried out on each elevation and then you say i believe the clerk of works carried about approximately two inspections per elevation as described in detail above i also carried out checks but before and after the panels were installed
00:59:16 now when you say the clock of works carried out approximately two inspections per elevator per elevation um what does that mean or what did that involve
00:59:27 involve so my recollection is that the clerk works
00:59:31 works visited um once the panels had been installed
00:59:35 installed and the first visit
00:59:39 he would capture snags or issues that he found um and then the second visit was to
00:59:50 and then the second visit was to tick those off ensure they'd been done or attended to i see so much elevation so building control
00:59:58 control would inspect before the panels went on to the best of your recollection and involvement but the clerk of the works would only do inspections after the panels went on that's the recollection of my
01:00:09 that's the recollection of my involvement yes right i see i've got that clear have i that's how i remember it yes i see so does that tell us that the clerk of works never inspected
01:00:21 works never inspected the insulation of the cavity barriers before the panels were applied um not that i was
01:00:32 um not that i was present for not that you were present for
01:00:36 for what about those you weren't present for but heard about or knew about or read about
01:00:43 at the time i wasn't aware of the clerk of works
01:00:51 doing those inspections can i ask you to go to har 50224 please
01:01:10 can i ask you to go to har 50224 please and this is a photograph of the facade of grenfell tower during its construction and it's been disclosed by harley do you happen to know who took it maybe me maybe you do you remember when
01:01:23 maybe me maybe you do you remember when i am i do not no uh we can see from the foliage that it's clearly sometime between the spring and the autumn of a particular year but looking at the uh looking at the stage at which the
01:01:35 uh looking at the stage at which the facade
01:01:36 facade construction has reached are you able to tell me roughly when during that period i couldn't tell you just by looking at the picture all right um now we can see on the
01:01:47 all right um now we can see on the photograph that the insulation has been installed to the spandrel panels can't we
01:01:53 we yes and we can see that cavity barriers have been installed as well you can see them yes
01:02:01 and we can see i think also that no insulation or cladding has been installed to the columns
01:02:10 yes and that i think we can is this right we can also see that there is some uh there are some rainy bond cladding cassettes which have been installed onto the panels yes spandrel panels you
01:02:22 onto the panels yes spandrel panels you see that
01:02:23 see that yes yeah now based on how the cladding installation had progressed to at the point at which you took this photograph do you know roughly when it was likely
01:02:35 do you know roughly when it was likely to be have been taken
01:02:45 i think i didn't need more information to work that out right what information would you need to know to work it out
01:03:01 date stamp on the photo yes that would obviously be very helpful but apart from that looking at the photograph the contents of the photograph is there any other information you'd like to know to be able to
01:03:13 like to know to be able to date the photograph i think one thought has sprung to mind um yes recollection
01:03:28 yes
01:03:39 this is a vague recollection i think some may have been put on as a way of storing them um to get them out
01:03:52 um to get them out of the very constricted site we had but they would definitely have been removed before an inspection if this was before um an inspection are taking place right
01:04:04 an inspection are taking place right without a date mr bailey i'm finding it a little difficult to hear what you're saying sorry i'll speak a bit closer it looks as though he's having a problem too can you keep your voice up of course yes when you say
01:04:19 i think some of i think some may have been put on as a way of storing them what is the them what do you refer to the cassette panels the cassette panels
01:04:30 the cassette panels the cassette panels right how does that help us date the photograph
01:04:38 i don't know if that helps date it um
01:04:43 but
01:04:47 yeah i i i can't help you with the date at this point in time all right um just a minute while we've got this on the screen um can you just for my benefit if no one
01:04:59 um can you just for my benefit if no one else's
01:04:59 else's just please help me understand what it is that we can see but we can see on the spend rules um insulation with uh markings on it is that right
01:05:15 um i might be able to help with that no that
01:05:18 that i was about to come to that mr chairman let me ask let me ask the question if you look at the um the spandrel panels they've got cladding panels on them and would you agree that they are
01:05:30 agree that they are clearly branded raino bond yes that's the that's the protective film on them oh right thank you and that's the protective field so i'm sorry mr chairman i i've interrupted your
01:05:41 your questions no well that's all right because you've answered one i was obviously under a misapprehension because um so can we just make sure what we see in
01:05:52 so can we just make sure what we see in this we see cladding panels with their protective film coating whatever
01:05:59 whatever yeah and above if we take the second bay from the left as an example um above that we can see a cladding panel without a protective film
01:06:10 panel without a protective film or is it something else um so the one is up in the middle on the left it's the film was partially removed and the one to the right of that the film has been removed right thank
01:06:21 the film has been removed right thank you now but below the one with the no with no film we see the one of a number of pale yellow
01:06:30 um material what is that is that the one with the silver foil on that's the insulation with the foil on it is it
01:06:42 it is it um when you say pale yellow well below the cladding panel which has lost its protective film yes what are we seeing there's another um that's the window in the field sorry
01:06:53 um that's the window in the field sorry that's the window yeah yeah yes right and then we go to the right of the panel which hasn't got any protective film we on either side we can see um
01:07:08 again a pale yellow area with what we now know the cavity barriers what are we seeing there
01:07:16 i'm unsure what that is
01:07:20 any offering mr millet yes it looks as if what you have on the uh
01:07:27 on the uh you have in that section there is this right is the gray rectangle is a a rhino bond cassette without the protective film on
01:07:38 cassette without the protective film on it
01:07:39 it yes and to the left and right of that is the unbranded insulation yes yes and over the top of that running horizontally
01:07:50 horizontally in black is the cavity the vertical ones barrier cladding around the cladding rails and the club right
01:08:04 all right well thank you that's probably as far as we can take that exactly that attacking and i think it probably is as far as we can take that does that does that
01:08:15 um tell us that anybody looking at the cladding cassettes
01:08:23 cassettes would realize at this stage at least that they were rainer bond from the protective film correct
01:08:32 and we could see that the insulation here is uh is unbranded can you tell me which it is uh the celetex rs 5000 at the unbranded four faces
01:08:50 do you know how long the cladding panels the rayna bond acm that is were left on the building with branding like this in other words before the protective film was pulled off
01:09:02 i think it was quite a long time
01:09:10 and what about lying on lying in piles in store
01:09:13 in store on site would it have been obvious from anybody coming to the site that if they weren't on the building but were kept on the site and i know you say it was a constricted area but that they were rain upon panels i'd
01:09:26 but that they were rain upon panels i'd say so yes yes do you know if cladding panels were ever present on site either on the building with the protective layer on them or in storage on site with the
01:09:37 or in storage on site with the protective layer on them when building control came on a site visit
01:09:44 my feeling is that they must have been your feeling as they must have been that's only a feeling do you have a recollection um not a firm recollection right
01:09:55 not a firm recollection right at the time you went up the mast climbers with mr hoban do you remember whether there were any
01:10:02 any rayna bond acm cladding panels on site either on the building or whether for storage or final fitting or in storage on site
01:10:13 or in storage on site um in terms of the first visit i have a definite recollection of um they may have been on on site in the second visit i said i wasn't i wasn't crystal clear
01:10:24 i said i wasn't i wasn't crystal clear about um
01:10:25 about um if that had taken place um
01:10:28 they would have been panels of the wall i expect
01:10:32 i expect right mr chairman i'm going to turn to a different topic it's a little early for the for the break and i'm happy to continue um perhaps i can should continue
01:10:43 um perhaps i can should continue i'd like to see if you can run for another 10 or 15 minutes certainly i'm going to turn to the subject of cavity barriers now and um i want to ask you one or two very general questions first of all
01:10:55 general questions first of all were you aware of the fact that the nbs specification expressly required the design of a system which conformed to the cwct
01:11:07 system which conformed to the cwct standard for systemized building envelopes
01:11:11 envelopes um not in those explicit terms no right i think you told us yesterday that you were aware of the existence of the organization cwct but you hadn't read
01:11:22 organization cwct but you hadn't read the standard yes uh right were you aware at the time of your involvement as uh as project manager on the grenfell tower project of the functional requirement in the
01:11:34 of the functional requirement in the building regulations um that the building should be designed and constructed so that the unseen spread of fire and smoke within concealed spaces in its structure and fabric is inhibited
01:11:48 again in those explicit terms now but it's a concept i was aware of right that's functional requirement b3 sub requirement four but you didn't know it in terms but you knew it in general what
01:11:59 knew it in general what did you underst did you understand uh that there was such a thing as a cavity barrier
01:12:06 barrier yes yes what did you understand the purpose of a cavity barrier to be uh to slow down the unseen spread of fire and smoke and
01:12:19 fire and smoke and had you also heard of something called a fire stop
01:12:23 fire stop um yes
01:12:27 um yes did you understand that there was a difference between a fire stop and a cavity barrier yes well did you understand that difference to be a fire stop
01:12:38 to be a fire stop um would be between a slab edge and an internal wall and that would provide a two hour um rating similar to a concrete wood and a
01:12:49 rating similar to a concrete wood and a cavity barrel sits on the outside of the building
01:13:02 right do you know who it was who specified the type of cavity barriers that should be used on grenfell tower
01:13:18 that should be used on grenfell tower um type in terms of um
01:13:25 um so what let's yeah lamboth um i think i think that might be in the mbs spec right did you and do you did you yourself
01:13:37 did you and do you did you yourself undertake any investigations uh with the manufacturer of the lamithar which is siderise as to whether they'd been tested in a rain screen system
01:13:49 i think that's implied by their um
01:13:54 literature right can we go to mr lam's evidence this is the transcript for day 37 and i'd like you to go please to page 172
01:14:15 i'd like you to go please to page 172 page 172 and i'd like to start at line 12. i miss grange is asking mr lam some questions here and at line 12
01:14:26 and at line 12 uh and she asks him in the context there was talk about cavity barriers around window openings and the question is at line 15 can you
01:14:39 and the question is at line 15 can you just tell us when there was talk about cavity barriers around window openings answer around the table at harley and who did you have those discussions
01:14:50 and who did you have those discussions with answer by this point it may well have been ben certainly ray and can you help us as to what was discussed about cavity barriers around windows only the broad requirement whether there
01:15:02 only the broad requirement whether there was a requirement and it was deemed that the architect's drawing showed explicitly what was required and our drawings were fully were issued for him to comment upon and which he approved fully see that
01:15:14 and which he approved fully see that do you recall any meetings at which you were present as mr lam puts it around the table that harley
01:15:24 harley and yeah i think certainly we um had meetings that i was present at right and it was any of those meetings do you remember where the cavity barriers were discussed
01:15:35 barriers were discussed or the cavity barrier strategy
01:15:43 not with any uh clarity
01:15:47 not with any clarity [Music]
01:15:50 [Music] do you remember whether you attended round table meetings with kevin lam at harley at which cavity barriers were discussed even if you don't remember the details
01:16:00 details i'm sure they would have been
01:16:04 do you recall whether specific consideration was given to putting cavity barriers around the windows
01:16:12 i'm unsure you're unsure um in general terms would you agree that
01:16:23 um in general terms would you agree that the specification the nbs specification would take precedence over the drawings
01:16:35 precedence over the drawings i think
01:16:38 as the architect um
01:16:42 reviewing drawing our drawings as well i think
01:16:45 think you know we expect what the arctic puts on their drawings or comments on our drawings to you know what we
01:16:54 what we follow through with do you accept that the mbs specification at least in respect of cavity bar cavity barriers around the windows
01:17:05 cavity barriers around the windows wasn't prescriptive it was a performance spec
01:17:14 um
01:17:20 but if that if that's what you're putting to you mean
01:17:27 i can't remember what it says to agree or disagree right
01:17:33 well let me ask you this way if you had thought that there was a difference between the requirements of the nbs spec on the one hand and the drawings on the other then the nbs step spec would take
01:17:44 other then the nbs step spec would take precedence
01:17:46 um but
01:17:54 i think my view looking backward was it's the other way around right when there was a divergence between the two would did you think that it was appropriate to
01:18:05 did you think that it was appropriate to refer the matter back to the architect for clarification um i i think the arctic was um we do we did queries of character power
01:18:16 we do we did queries of character power to the architect so
01:18:20 we you did in a specific respect and we're going to come to that in a moment but just in general terms if you had come across a divergence between the drawings on the one hand
01:18:31 between the drawings on the one hand and the nbs spec on the other would you have referred that back to the architect for him to clarify which should take precedence possibly right you remember doing so i don't
01:18:42 right you remember doing so i don't remember
01:18:44 remember okay um let's then turn to the run of emails in march 2015. um mr chairman this is as you know i think already a fairly um labyrinth yes would you be better try
01:18:56 um labyrinth yes would you be better try and take it shortly have a break before we do that yes mr bailey will have a break now then um we'll come back at um 25 to 12 please okay thank you very much and
01:19:08 12 please okay thank you very much and uh remember not to talk to anyone about your evidence or anything relating to it while they're out of the room thank you all right good i'd like to give the usher please thank you
01:19:27 thank you 25 to 12 please
01:36:05 would you ask mr bailey to come back in please
01:36:21 right mr bailey all ready to carry on i am good thank you very much yes thank you mr chairman mr bailey um earlier on this morning i was putting to you some questions about the frequency of building control visits to site
01:36:33 visits to site and i put to your questions on the footing that there were no visits between may 2015 and october 2015. in fact we have been corrected by that
01:36:45 in fact we have been corrected by that by our bkc and there is some evidence that there was a meeting or a visit on site around about the 17th of august 2015 by building control to the grenfell tower
01:36:57 building control to the grenfell tower site
01:36:57 site now with that correction in mind um do you recall what in that two-month period june and july where there were no building control visits
01:37:10 there were no building control visits happened in terms of the progress of the installation of the cladding of the rain screen and the insulation
01:37:23 it would have been progressing in specifics
01:37:26 specifics right i don't remember do you remember what stage the installation had reached in about mid august 2015.
01:37:43 again without any certainty i'm sat here now it's likely that the west north and
01:37:56 the west north and east elevations would have been progressing right and that's as much i can tell you okay and as at august 2015
01:38:10 august 2015 were any rainer bond cassette rain screen panels on site yet um i believe they would have been
01:38:21 um i believe they would have been okay now do you recall any conversations at all with john hoban of building control about the cladding
01:38:32 other than in general terms not specifics if mr hogan had been having discussions with the specialist subcontractor
01:38:46 with the specialist subcontractor for the cladding who would it have been on site who would it have been if it hadn't been you um it could have been one of the um
01:39:00 supervisors from osmonbury
01:39:04 who i think also accompanied him on some visits and who can you name them to the mark osborne
01:39:15 to the mark osborne and or granberry right but they're not from the specialist subcontractor they are the specialist subcontractors sub subcontractor for installation only
01:39:26 sub subcontractor for installation only aren't they
01:39:28 uh yes can you explain why as project manager for the specialist subcontractor on this project to the best of your recollection you had
01:39:40 to the best of your recollection you had so little
01:39:41 so little interaction with building control
01:39:48 i think and my experience on my previous site where
01:39:58 building trophies were handled by the main tractor on this job i thought it was unusual that we were being asked to deal directly with building control i cannot get this i get the senses that's
01:40:20 unusual so do you think the best of your recollection that mr hoban when he refers to uh specialist consultants is not referring
01:40:33 specialist consultants is not referring to
01:40:33 to you but somebody else
01:40:39 remember the passages from his statement i referred to you've read you two earlier
01:40:43 earlier i think he said that wasn't a meeting wasn't it
01:40:47 let's then turn to the march 2015 emails um can we start with your witness statement please a paragraph 37 it's on page 11.
01:40:59 and you say there at paragraph 37 in relation to the cavity barriers installed at grenfell in around march and april 2015 i was involved in all being copied into
01:41:11 i was involved in all being copied into or having forwarded to me email correspondence between ryden studio e harley and siderise chris mort and ricky k national facades manager as well as rbkc
01:41:22 national facades manager as well as rbkc building control john hoban discussing what the cavity barriers stroke fire stopping requirement was then you go on to say a side rise were the specialists their advice was sought
01:41:32 sought however the final decision in relation to
01:41:35 to what was installed reflected the advice of john hoban rbkc senior building control surveyor now the first question is would it be normal in your
01:41:47 normal in your admittedly limited experience at the time for the requirement of cavity barriers
01:41:51 barriers to be the subject of widespread discussions such as that that we see in the email run when work on site had already been started
01:42:08 um no because i think this stemmed from a specific question
01:42:17 i see um it did stem from a specific question
01:42:21 question but would it be normal in your administrative limit experience for that specific question to be raised at a time when work on site had already been started i don't know right can we look at the
01:42:33 i don't know right can we look at the emails then um start with sea three zeroes one two nine five three please now this is an email dated the 18th of
01:42:45 now this is an email dated the 18th of march 2015 from you to neil crawford at studio e and simon lawrence at wright and copied to among other people daniel ankita
01:42:56 people daniel ankita jones and john hoban you see that yes um and you are responding as we can see lower down page one to an
01:43:08 as we can see lower down page one to an email from neil crawford earlier in the month
01:43:10 month 10th of march 2015 to kevin lam on which you were copied and and this is where neil crawford is
01:43:22 and and this is where neil crawford is sending kevin lamb paul hansen of rbkc's response relating to the question about cladding fire breaks
01:43:28 breaks that's the the background to it i don't think i need to go through all that and you then say to neil crawford and simon lawrence in the second uh well
01:43:39 and simon lawrence in the second uh well i'll show you the whole thing but i want to focus on the second sentence but you start by saying the fire break supplier who it seems was involved with grenfell at the specification stage has made a comment and i'd like to
01:43:51 has made a comment and i'd like to clarify what fire breaks are required could you confirm what the vertical and horizontal requirement is please the spec and supplier technical rep say very different things when you say
01:44:02 say very different things when you say very different things what did you mean um to my recollection it was the
01:44:13 insulation and integrity um
01:44:17 value of the cavity barriers who was saying one thing and who was saying another so the specification i believe was for
01:44:31 i believe was for a higher
01:44:35 period of resistance the technical rep gave a lower based on
01:44:46 an excerpt from approved document b
01:44:52 yes i see um now following that exchange we can see that on the 25th of march 2015
01:44:59 2015 you were then copied into an email from kevin lam
01:45:03 kevin lam that's at har3017781 we can just have that up please
01:45:11 so this is the next week and kevin lamb sends simon lawrence um a raft of uh drawings as the attachments and
01:45:21 and um you are copied in among other people do you see that yes and it says simon further to our meeting yesterday please find attached details for the fire breaks all now upgraded to 120 minutes
01:45:32 upgraded to 120 minutes do you know why kevin lam had upgraded the resistance of the cavity barriers um i
01:45:42 um i i think that was to reflect architects drawing did you have your own view at the time as to the appropriate integrity and insulation time no i was um following the architect's
01:45:54 no i was um following the architect's lead on that right do you know why you were being copied in on this
01:46:00 um
01:46:04 it was part of the um the project team on the job site you had asked a specific question as we've seen from the email we looked at earlier
01:46:13 earlier yes um had you had a clear answer to your question by this point um by that point i think not right um now he says does mr lam in his email
01:46:25 um now he says does mr lam in his email to simon lawrence further to our meeting yesterday so that would be the 24th of march 2015. um were you at that meeting do you think i don't recall we don't
01:46:37 do you think i don't recall we don't recall
01:46:38 recall do you recall anything about that meeting
01:46:44 um no right
01:46:53 do you know from discussions with those who were or might have been at that meeting what was discussed at that meeting
01:47:02 meeting i don't remember i'm sorry i don't remember okay now let's go on to har four zeros double please this is an email from you mr bailey to ricky k at siderise
01:47:15 you mr bailey to ricky k at siderise date of the 27th of march 2015 copy to kevin lam and mark stapley and also sue shepard uh and uh it's um
01:47:27 uh and uh it's um in response to as you can see below the email from ricky k to you of the same
01:47:34 same day a little bit earlier that day and um
01:47:42 you can start i've shown you the top of the email so you can see you were part of the chain let's then go to the bottom email on page three because this is how it ends but let's
01:47:53 because this is how it ends but let's see how it starts it starts the day before when you send ricky k an email on the 26th of march hi ricky as discussed yesterday could you forward the relevant building rigs
01:48:05 you forward the relevant building rigs to support the advice that 30 stroke 15 fire breaks are what is required i've got to have this approved by the client before i can order anything so time is of the essence now it looks as if this email followed a
01:48:16 now it looks as if this email followed a conversation that you had with ricky k do you remember it
01:48:22 um i don't know if i remember a specific not this specific conversation but i do recall some conversations with ricky right do you remember in general terms the gist of the conversation that you had
01:48:34 gist of the conversation that you had had the day before this email 25th of march
01:48:38 um i'm unsure of the conversation i had on that date you're unsure of it do you have any recollection at all of what it was about
01:48:57 i think we made it originally we made an order the cavity barriers that reflected the 120 minute um
01:49:10 requirement that we were given i think this whole issue um came up when sideways the supplier questioned why we were ordering and what
01:49:21 questioned why we were ordering and what they were
01:49:21 they were for and i think their reaction was that's not required um so
01:49:32 i think just by reading that that could be the conversation okay now you asked him to forward you the relevant building regulations is that because you yourself were not familiar with them
01:49:44 familiar with them uh at that time yes yes so you were wholly dependent on siderise the manufacturer and seller for advice about building regulations in the context of this question
01:49:58 and me at that time yes yes was there some pressure on site to avoid having to specify the cavity barriers with a fire resistance of 120 minutes as had earlier been requested by for
01:50:10 as had earlier been requested by for required by mr hoban
01:50:14 um as i said the only
01:50:20 resistance i said we met was from siderise
01:50:26 right
01:50:30 now scrolling up the email chain we can see that mr harley then i'm sorry mr k then sends you a an extract from table a1 we just scroll up to page two please
01:50:43 he sends you an extract from table a1 from approved document b and that confirms that the appropriate integrity and insulation of a cavity barrier was 30 for integrity
01:50:54 of a cavity barrier was 30 for integrity and 15 for insulation you got that in response to his request didn't you yes yes and did you study that i remember looking at that yes yes
01:51:09 and he says uh underneath the extract here you can see that it clearly states that 30 minutes for integrity and 15 minutes insulation is all that is required from a cavity fire barrier
01:51:22 from a cavity fire barrier and he goes on to explain why and then he goes on to say in the last sentence rrh25 1930 will offer 90 minutes fire integrity and 30 minutes fire insulation therefore exceeds minimum requirements
01:51:34 therefore exceeds minimum requirements then he says 120 minute fire rating is generally the industry standard for curtain wall to concrete slab edge fire stopping where the fire stop is located on the inside of a building and is considered to be a continuation of the floor slab
01:51:48 to be a continuation of the floor slab now um did did that what he says there reflect your understanding of the distinction between cavity barriers and fire stopping
01:52:01 i think that helped me clarify it for me yes right
01:52:05 yes right it helped you clarify okay let's then look at ryd3037117
01:52:14 so we come out of this email chain and look at another
01:52:20 and this is ray bailey to simon lawrence on the 27th of march now
01:52:27 now copied to you and also to kevin lam daniel anchor till jones hi simon reading the email from the specialist suppliers facade manager it should be fairly straightforward
01:52:38 fairly straightforward a fire stop is required to stop fire spreading between floors or party walls if it's inside the building i.e inside of the window curtain wall a cavity barrier is required to stop fire spreading inside the cavity for the fire to enter the cavity it has
01:52:50 for the fire to enter the cavity it has to have gone through the window or curtain wall in our situation the cladding is outside of the windows and therefore it should have a cavity barrier as opposed to a fire stop
01:53:01 again did that email when you saw it reflect your understanding of the distinction between cavity barriers and fire stopping yes and if we turn then
01:53:15 yes and if we turn then uh to the email at the bottom of page one from neil crawford to which um this is a a response to a response if you see
01:53:26 a a response to a response if you see because you've got simon lawrence's intervening um neil crawford's to simon lawrence bottom of page one over to page two says
01:53:37 bottom of page one over to page two says uh and you'd have you would have seen this at the time because you've got ray bailey's email
01:53:45 you can see what he says there
01:53:49 and he says hi simon have spoken with john and he wasn't happy with harley's email as we are talking about fire stopping as opposed to cavity barriers i've
01:54:00 as opposed to cavity barriers i've explained again the specifics of our scenario and he will have a conversation with paul hanson to see if there's a reduced spec they can agree to and will then speak to harley's directly
01:54:14 so you could see the exchange what was your impression at this stage when you got the
01:54:20 got the email from a bailey attaching this string below it including what neil crawford is telling simon lawrence what was your impression of the professionals understanding of the differences between fire stopping
01:54:32 of the differences between fire stopping and cavity barriers i i think there was a confusion there was a confusion did that concern you did it concern you that there appeared
01:54:43 did it concern you that there appeared to be a significant level of confusion among the professionals as shown by this chain even at this late stage of the of the process so i recall a another conversation with
01:54:54 so i recall a another conversation with ricky
01:54:55 ricky k um where he had this is my regulation that he'd said to me that this confusion between carriageboard and firestop in regards to ranged green
01:55:07 firestop in regards to ranged green clouding was a confusion that they'd come across before really
01:55:13 really when did you have that conversation it may have been in the same conversation um i spoke about earlier on and actually siderise
01:55:21 siderise um had produced a drawing it's like a i don't know if you're familiar with that it's like a cruciform type drawing and it does um help clarify
01:55:33 um help clarify the difference between um a character and firestop
01:55:40 right well we may need to explore that in a bit more detail but let's just stick with this email chain can i ask you to go please to har four zeros six five eight five
01:55:55 this is uh another part of the early email chain we were looking at earlier if we go to the bottom email
01:56:07 if we go to the very last page of this email run please we can see this is the email we looked at earlier the one from ricky k of the 26th
01:56:18 ricky k of the 26th of march 2015 where he sends you the extract from approved document b and if we then scroll up
01:56:27 we can see that you uh send this excerpt to simon lawrence i'm sorry you should start at the bottom of page two
01:56:35 two here it is ben bailey to simon lawrence and simon o'connor copied to others including ray bailey 26 march and then over to page three we can see what you say you say as discussed please
01:56:47 what you say you say as discussed please see the email below from the fire break supplier
01:56:49 supplier there is quite a large cost difference between what cideris and the spec recommend
01:56:53 recommend and upgrading to the 120 mins barrier we discussed on tuesday can you forward this to the client's representative for approval please is it fair to say mr bailey that the additional cost
01:57:04 additional cost influenced the decision to try to get a lower specification cavity barriers approved
01:57:15 um i don't think so did you consider whether the potential reduction in cost would have any knock-on effect on fire safety
01:57:24 safety no now scrolling up further we can see that mr lawrence simon lawrence of ryden sends the email to neil crawford at studio e and you can just see it at the top of
01:57:35 and you can just see it at the top of the page there on page two ben i'm sorry um
01:57:43 sorry go up middle of the page that's it a high neal following tuesday's design meeting hardly via the supply chain of questioning the rating of the cladding fire breaks apparently by going to two hours as we
01:57:55 apparently by going to two hours as we discussed it has a cost increase of around twelve thousand pounds the supplier is saying it only needs to be 30 minutes everywhere as per the regs extract below could you take a look to see what you think and discuss with john hogan please
01:58:06 think and discuss with john hogan please you see that yes uh
01:58:11 uh and then we can see that ray bailey sends this email to daniel anchor jones says again i'm afraid it comes out of this chain it's har
01:58:22 this chain it's har 406585
01:58:29 and
01:58:33 he asks him for his comments do you see he says
01:58:36 he says it's the second email down on that page dan do you have any comments ray did you see that
01:58:41 see that yes uh and you weren't copied in on that were you aware of that email i was not at the time right and they would then see mr anchor jones's reply if we go if we scroll down a little bit
01:58:54 if we go if we scroll down a little bit or scroll up rather to the top of page one
01:58:57 one or a little bit higher on page one we could see daniel language of james's response
01:59:01 response to ray bailey and again you're not copied on that but he says just that it's ridiculous there's no point in fire stopping as we all know the acm will be gone rather quickly in a fire
01:59:13 rather quickly in a fire the whole point is to stop quotes unseen on kuwait's fire spreading in the cavity and moving to other parts of the building
01:59:20 building were you aware of this email no did you have any discussion with either mr ankle james or ray bailey about its contents
01:59:28 contents about the subject matter i don't think so
01:59:32 so now we can see that mr anthol jones appears from this to realize and says as we all know the acm will be gone uh rather quickly
01:59:43 the acm will be gone uh rather quickly in a fire
01:59:45 in a fire i know there's a semicolon between the as we all know and the statement the acm will be gone rather quickly in a fire did you know that there was no point fire stopping because acm would be gone rather quickly in a
01:59:57 acm would be gone rather quickly in a fire no
02:00:03 can i then turn to another part of the subject at the same time late march 2015 on the subject of cavity barriers
02:00:17 har406560
02:00:22 and if we can start please at page seven of this email chain
02:00:32 it starts on the 26th of march 2015
02:00:39 and this is where the email chains weave in enough for the previous email chain that i was showing you before um if we start at page seven we can see
02:00:51 um if we start at page seven we can see uh the email that we've looked at before at 1342 on the 26th of march from mr k to you where he sends you the extract from adb
02:01:03 from adb we've looked at that before but then we scroll up
02:01:06 scroll up and we can see that on the 27th of march 2015
02:01:10 2015 neil crawford um sends this on it looks as if he sends this on to the building control officer john hogan at rbkc
02:01:21 at rbkc copy to terry ashton and paul hansen
02:01:27 and you can you see that and then
02:01:31 above that
02:01:35 mr crawford on the 30th of march tells john hoban ben bailey from harley's is who you might ask for you see that
02:01:46 you see that yes he gives your phone number uh can you explain why mr crawford might have been giving
02:01:58 mr crawford might have been giving john hogan your private your details uh for him to talk to you
02:02:09 i can't speak for neil i don't know it looks from this as if neil crawford thought that you were the contact point at harley so far as building control were concerned
02:02:20 were concerned would that be right were you the contact point harley for building control
02:02:30 um
02:02:36 i i don't think my role um is a technical role in terms of being able to agree um or sorry
02:02:47 um or sorry specifically discuss these things with um
02:02:50 um john hogan but i could probably facilitate that discussion um right with our team well maybe we'll come
02:02:58 come but maybe we can deal with that now um we can we can see that um do you remember whether you had a discussion with mr hoban i'm not sure at this time about cavity
02:03:09 i'm not sure at this time about cavity barriers
02:03:09 barriers on the phone i'm on sure
02:03:12 you're unsure that means you might have done or might not have done but you can't recall okay i don't remember well i mean you tell me can you remember anything about having a discussion with mr hoban on the telephone or even face
02:03:23 mr hoban on the telephone or even face to face about cavity barriers in late march 2015 the only discussions i remember having of john hope is via email
02:03:41 right in relation to this in relation to this thank you um so then can we go back to the email chain
02:03:50 chain and then look uh up a little bit please to page five we can see there that john hoban replies on the 30th of march 2015 at 1422
02:04:02 on the 30th of march 2015 at 1422 um to pretty much everybody you see that including you so you got this email yes and uh he says um
02:04:13 says um i would advise and this is in the second paragraph i suppose it's really the main paragraph
02:04:20 paragraph i would advise you that it is my interpretation of diagram 33 of approved document b is that the detail between compartment floors and external cladding is not a cavity barrier
02:04:31 cavity barrier therefore it must be fire stopped to at least the standard of the existing compartment floor 120 minutes therefore the methods described in clause 9.13 would not be appropriate in this
02:04:42 would not be appropriate in this particular case
02:04:45 and what did you understand by that response there i think at that point in time um
02:05:03 it didn't make um sends to me and i didn't feel that i was able to make an interpretation of that
02:05:14 it looks as if and would this be right that mr hoban thought that the gap between the compartment floor and the external cladding needed a fire stop of 120 minutes
02:05:30 so my understanding at the time was that
02:05:40 well i'm being told two different things basically by different people and i didn't have a particular understanding of that requirement at the time what was the purpose did you think at the time of being copied in on this
02:05:52 the time of being copied in on this exchange um for information okay and what information did you glean from this communication
02:06:05 that john hoeven had a different interpretation to what siderice had all right now we then see the response from ricky k just at the top of the page
02:06:16 from ricky k just at the top of the page um it it it it's uh you have to go to page four at the bottom to see the full email let's just quickly
02:06:24 quickly do that very bottom of page four ricky k 30th of march 2015 and then if we can go to the top of page five we can see that you are copied in fact you're a recipient of
02:06:35 are copied in fact you're a recipient of it along with john hogan you're not just a copy party you're actually a recipient all complete can please can someone putting forward over a drawing the build up of the cladding so that my technical officer
02:06:47 cladding so that my technical officer can evaluate and afford an official response with the siderise product specification
02:06:56 and i think in fact he you then send him uh a drawing later the same afternoon um if we look at that um if that's har406560
02:07:10 page two
02:07:14 so you then respond to him and sent in the drawings representing the window head and the window sill
02:07:22 you see that because we don't have a drawn detail to cover what chris is requesting so you respond to his request and then if we scroll up to page one on this email chain this is the email sent to you by chris
02:07:34 this is the email sent to you by chris mort
02:07:36 mort on the 30th of march 2015 a little bit later
02:07:40 later in that afternoon and he says this hi ben uh and it's his copy to ricky k nobody else
02:07:51 else hi ben i have reviewed the drawing sent over and sketched a proposal to alleviate the issues raised by the bco also on the second page of the attachment i've highlighted the weak link
02:08:01 link so to speak in terms of fire and i think the bca
02:08:04 the bca would also have noticed this you see that yes what did you understand by that passage there um i think i interpreted that passage
02:08:15 um i think i interpreted that passage along with the drawings they attached to that email and the my understanding on interpretation of email then and now is that they were intending
02:08:27 then and now is that they were intending to provide a solution for a fire stop um to satisfy the pci
02:08:39 and he goes on in the next uh paragraph just to explain his proposal and he says it requires the installation
02:08:50 installation of a 90 stroke 60 product in two layers one at the head of the window aligning with the compartment floor and the other at the top of the existing up stand therefore two layers of 60 minutes
02:09:01 therefore two layers of 60 minutes protection that overall would provide if tested
02:09:03 tested over 120 minutes protection at the window locations
02:09:08 and he's providing that as us as a solution
02:09:11 solution to the difference in opinion between building control on the one hand and the on-site contractors on the other isn't he
02:09:23 i think it's a difference of opinion between
02:09:26 between slide rise and bco i think well was the solution that he was proposing ever communicated to mr hoban i don't believe it was given
02:09:39 i don't believe it was given what mr mort says i think the bca would also have noticed the weak link he refers to did you not take
02:09:47 take up with mr hogan whether he had noticed it or not or what he thought about it
02:09:56 uh no but i think i should say again my my interpretation of that email is as i um
02:10:04 i um explained to you um and i think quite quickly after we received this there was another i tried to explain the cruciform diagram to you early on earlier on i think there's a
02:10:15 early on earlier on i think there's a reply to that saying that from bco saying he
02:10:18 saying he made it a lot clearer for him and that they
02:10:21 they agreed with our temptation that side rises interpretation well let's just stick with what we've got at the moment your your reaction to this is to send
02:10:32 your your reaction to this is to send this on to ray bailey and kevin lam and mark stapley as we can see at the top of the page and you say still going around in circles yes right um
02:10:43 yes right um you told us a moment ago that you didn't pass on the proposed solution that cider eyes
02:10:51 eyes were recommending to the building to building control why was that again because my interpretation of that diagram was
02:11:02 my interpretation of that diagram was that they were offering a solution to offer a 120 minute fire stop gravity barrier um
02:11:13 fire stop gravity barrier um and quite shortly after this email was received there was a clarification from the pco
02:11:20 the pco given what chris mort had said about the weak link
02:11:24 weak link and namely that there was a weak link in terms of fire
02:11:31 and that he thought the building control officer would have noticed it why did you not think to pass his concern about a weak link in terms of fire
02:11:40 fire to john hogan
02:11:44 i've read this that that issue in the context of a two-hour fire stop
02:11:55 two-hour fire stop which was then later on device we received was that was not required
02:12:09 did you we'll come to the drawing in a moment which explains exactly where the weak link was but just just on this email for the moment did you
02:12:21 moment did you not think to pass the concern about a weak link
02:12:25 weak link in terms of fire to neil crawford
02:12:32 i think my answer is the same to that that's what i've previously answered and would the answer be the same to explain why you didn't as far as we can see past the concerns to simon lawrence yes yes kevin lamb i think kevin lam was
02:12:46 yes yes kevin lamb i think kevin lam was copied in on the um forwarded email
02:12:51 what about daniel and jones um he wasn't
02:12:58 yeah he i don't think he was
02:13:04 now is it fair to say that you were alerted
02:13:07 alerted by this email that in order to alleviate the weak link that mr mortad identified harley should install a cavity barrier at the window head and another at the top of the up stand
02:13:20 you were alerted to that i i don't think i don't think so why is that why don't you think so my understanding of what the
02:13:32 my understanding of what the email said and what the drawing showed was that their proposal was to try and achieve the 120
02:13:43 was to try and achieve the 120 minute rating that the pca was asking for and that that the weak link as it refers to is part of the issue in achieving that
02:13:54 it's one that is all it read in that context
02:14:02 well let's look at the at the picture of the drawings then um
02:14:10 we can see that mr mort had confirmed in the
02:14:13 the email that without specific details of the overall construction of internal linings
02:14:18 linings or and or site of fire strategy for the product project uh he could only offer the proposal um did you not think to send him specific details that he was lacking and
02:14:30 specific details that he was lacking and ask him to to to consider the proposal afresh or revise it in any way i think i'd already request that information from simon lawrence and i've been told it didn't exist right
02:14:43 i've been told it didn't exist right well let's just look a little bit more closely then at what he was saying if we can look at the attachment to his email uh it's at har403948
02:15:01 this is what he sent you and page
02:15:06 one uh we can see a drawing uh with the 1960 times two
02:15:12 times two equals 180 20 on it yes yes and that was the proposal wasn't it to alleviate the issues raised by the bco
02:15:23 by the bco yes i think yeah the issue being his different interpretation indeed but that was that and and then if we look at page two where he's talking about
02:15:34 he's talking about the weak link in his email that is where he identifies a weak link for fire you see that yes so he's got a proposal
02:15:45 you see that yes so he's got a proposal which deals with the the times to put it broadly but he's also identified a weak link for fire do you see that did and you saw that at the time presumably
02:15:57 and you saw that at the time presumably yes did you study this drawing at the time i saw it at the time yes yes so you would have known that um chris mort had identified a weak link for fire in the area identified in that
02:16:10 for fire in the area identified in that second picture yes and it was interpreted in the context of the text of his email and the previous drawing
02:16:17 drawing right now let's take this in stages going back to the first drawing at the right hand side we can see a hand drawn plan can you see it yes which corresponds to the orange line that bisects the window
02:16:31 the orange line that bisects the window yes you could see the orange line bisecting the window and then and then the
02:16:34 the uh the plan on the right and the blue section
02:16:37 section is labeled window can you see in manuscript with the little arrow yes and at the head of the side of the window we can see that chris mort has drawn some orange cavity barriers
02:16:47 barriers yes yes now did you therefore see at the time that that showed that mr mort thought that cavity barriers were required in those locations at the
02:17:00 were required in those locations at the window head and the window sill
02:17:04 i think it shows the carrier above the bracket that holds the head of the window
02:17:23 i think that's i think you're agreeing with what i'm putting to you in that answer
02:17:26 answer i in other words that mr mort thought that cavity barriers were required in the locations he's identified
02:17:38 yeah well i i don't know if i'm agreeing with you i think he shows above the above the bracket that holds the
02:17:45 the the head of the window well we can see that but it's above maybe above the bracket but it's it's just above the head of the window
02:17:56 just above the head of the window yes and also if you look at the bottom of it just below the blue oblong just below the sill yes almost immediately below the sill yes
02:18:07 almost immediately below the sill yes yes thank you and you could see that from the time at the time when you've got this drawing yes yes
02:18:17 and then if we go to page two we can see that here is the drawing of the window head
02:18:22 head upper levels
02:18:28 and mr mortar circled the window joint at the head there with a cloud of orange a bubble and there's written weak link for
02:18:38 for fire and you saw that at the time yes yes yes um given that there was a weak link as he has identified
02:18:51 has identified did you not consider that it was vital that cavity barriers were placed at the head of the window
02:19:00 i don't believe that was shown on the previous drawing saying no
02:19:10 when you say the previous drawing you mean the one immediately above it correct as i said i was reading this all in the context of the same issue
02:19:21 in the context of the same issue but mr mort's head of window cavity barrier is a lot lower down towards the head of the window it's immediately above the head of the window than the one shown on the harley drawing
02:19:32 than the one shown on the harley drawing isn't it he's he's drawn above the bracket as we have
02:19:40 well yours is a lot further above the bracket than his i i i disagree why do you disagree
02:19:52 i i i disagree why do you disagree to me it looks
02:19:55 representatively a similar drawing well it does it doesn't with great respect does it mr mort's head of window uh cavity barrier is drawn immediately
02:20:06 uh cavity barrier is drawn immediately above
02:20:06 above the bracket with no space for insulation in it whereas the harley drawing is quite a way above the bracket with a chunk of insulation below it i mean that's obvious from what we're looking at isn't it
02:20:21 the window bracket on our drawing
02:20:26 to my eye looks like it extends 200 250 ml above
02:20:32 ml above the slab edge and the cavity barrier is
02:20:37 maybe 10 20 millimeters above that i think on the sketch that mr mall provides this very it's a similar distance you know it's obviously a smaller scale but
02:20:48 but if mr moore was satisfied with your location of the cavity barriers did it occur to you to ask yourself why he thought it was necessary to add in orange
02:20:59 his own identification of where he thought cavity barrier should be as he has done on this first drawing
02:21:07 on the is this could you show me the first drawing please yes it's not yes of course if you scroll up there there and your question again was my question again is if if mr mort was
02:21:21 if mr mort was of the view that he thought it was necessary to add in orange his own identification of where he thought cavity barrier should be
02:21:30 should be why do you think he did that when he could see that you'd already added cavity barriers in your locations
02:21:39 again my understanding of this diagram is
02:21:42 is um it's in response to the vcos this specific or is it's a it's a
02:21:50 a response to alleviate that issue about the 120 rating that's my understanding of this
02:21:58 i'm anxious about what this diagram shows but it doesn't i don't think there's any suggestion but mr diagram is to
02:22:09 well what the witness is saying as i've understood him is that mr mort's manuscript drawing shows the cavity barrier at the head of the window just above the
02:22:22 the head of the window just above the bracket supporting the head of the window and the drawing also shows that but the i think he uh suggests that the difference apparent
02:22:35 uh suggests that the difference apparent difference may be attributable to the length of the bracket in the full-scale drawing i think that's what you were saying wasn't it
02:22:45 yeah yes right but it doesn't quite answer mr millett's question which is
02:22:52 is why on page two can we throw up page two please
02:22:57 please mr mort has identified
02:23:02 what he regarded as a weak link for fire around the actual well around the junction between the bracket and the head of the window itself
02:23:12 itself yeah you see that yes so i think the question you were being asked to consider
02:23:17 consider is what did that indicate to you
02:23:26 as i said i've read the two drawings in context of what was written
02:23:34 written in the email and that they're pointing out that that would be
02:23:41 would be an issue in terms of achieving the 120 minute
02:23:44 minute rate that the bco was asking for i think i can't say more more than that well let me try and get it this way
02:23:56 it this way mr bailey you could see if we go to pick the um bottom of the um drawing on page two there that mr
02:24:07 um drawing on page two there that mr morton identified a weak link for fire around the head of the window if he was happy
02:24:14 happy with the position of the cavity barrier as shown on that drawing why did you think at the time that he had thought that the head of the window presented a weak link for fire
02:24:24 i don't know did you not think to ask him
02:24:31 i didn't it's quite a serious warning isn't it from a for for a manufacturer who has provided you with some expertise on approved document b
02:24:42 b to be warning you that the design as harley had presented it offered a weak link for fire it was a serious matter was it not
02:24:54 i think looking at it now if they thought that um
02:25:02 other than the context i've already told you i've read this i read it in and i believe that's my interpretation if they thought that was um
02:25:15 going to be a
02:25:19 an issue that was not related to a two-hour
02:25:23 two-hour stop they would have marked in a different cavity power on that drawing they've marked up another drawing with the cavity ferrous one or this one
02:25:39 the cavity ferrous one or this one why didn't i ask my question again when you were told that the drawing of the head of the window represented a weak link for fire why did you not go back to mr malt and ask him what he meant
02:25:53 and ask him what he meant i don't know why did you not take this to the architect and say the manufacturer has identified a weak link for fire on our drawings could you please help us
02:26:04 because i read it in the context of a 120 minute fire stop and that issue was
02:26:13 shortly afterwards cleared up to my recollection this is not about 120 issue firestop this drawing is about a weak link for fire
02:26:22 fire which has been uh created by the position of the cavity barrier isn't it i disagree i my reading of it at the time is what i've told you
02:26:37 did you yourself check the drawings when it came to the installation of the cavity barriers
02:26:47 um
02:26:52 obviously i'd reviewed the drawings so i knew what to expect on site did you
02:27:01 were you surprised that cavity barriers have not been included in the drawings around the windows
02:27:10 um no
02:27:15 can you explain why that is at that time i didn't know of a requirement to do so right
02:27:24 does it follow from that that you didn't alert anyone at harley or studio e or ryden or indeed anybody
02:27:31 anybody that there were no cavity barriers around the windows provided for in the drawings
02:27:37 um i wasn't aware of the issue so right even though chris morton identified weak link for fire at the end of march 2015.
02:27:50 he doesn't indicate cavity by various directly around the windows so i wasn't alert to that issue well we can agree or disagree about what the drawings show
02:28:01 the drawings show um i've been through that with you um let's move on uh ryd3037478 please
02:28:25 now this is an email also uh on the uh 30th of march 2015 from you to simon lawrence
02:28:36 simon lawrence copper to simon o'connor at 1715 simon is there a building fire strategy document and some information on internal finishes so that you can send over
02:28:45 over for me for past for me to pass on to siderise
02:28:50 siderise and i think this follows on from this is later in the day on the 30th of march and follows on from uh chris mort's email
02:28:59 email to you of that day where he refers to the weak link because we saw that that was at 1621. this one's going at 17 15. so just under an hour later [Applause]
02:29:11 [Applause] did chris mort's email to you prompt you to ask simon lawrence
02:29:18 lawrence whether there was a building fire strategy document do you think uh yes and uh mr lawrence responds
02:29:30 and uh mr lawrence responds uh at 9 37 the next morning 31st of march and he says morning ben yes
02:29:38 yes there is but it only relates to the bottom four levels where we are constructing new as we are constructing new the fire ratings are in line with the current regs approved document b anything above that is existing and there is no record showing what fire
02:29:50 there is no record showing what fire rating the slabs and walls internal next door were constructed to when the building was originally built back in 1974. we know that it's unlikely that the party walls etc would be in line with current regs however this can't be proved without
02:30:01 however this can't be proved without extensive surveys and specialist analysis
02:30:04 analysis unfortunately that's what you get with refurb and because we can't prove otherwise the building control officers will revert to current regs on a better to be safe than sorry approach
02:30:13 approach now just i've read you all of that because i want you to see everything he's saying but he says there the fast strategy journey related to the bottom four levels anything above that is existing did you take from that that you then
02:30:25 did you take from that that you then knew that there was no fire strategy for the upper floors for this building
02:30:31 uh yeah it appears that way yes it does appear that way and is that how you understood it at the time yeah i took some advice right so did it
02:30:43 yeah i took some advice right so did it strike you as odd given that you were over cladding an entire building and building a crown made of aluminium composite material
02:30:55 um no someone gave me quite a lengthy expert explanation
02:31:05 well you could see the explanation he's given you
02:31:08 given you in the email are you referring to another explanation the in the email i think did you ever pass this response back to siderise
02:31:22 um i i don't remember no we can't see any record of you doing so so can we take it that you didn't yes
02:31:35 do you remember where the side arrives because you say you had telephone discussion with them but did did ricky k upside arise or anybody else at siderise ever raised any concern with you that they didn't appear to be a fire strategy for the upper floors
02:31:48 strategy for the upper floors um i don't believe so
02:31:53 did you think to bring to the attention of john hoban the fact that there was no fire strategy for the upper floors
02:32:05 um no and i think that's because of simon's um last uh two sentences he says that we would just revert to current riggs
02:32:18 just revert to current riggs so you know i believe that what he's saying with my mind is that the current regulations will be
02:32:26 kept to rather than older ones did you think to push simon lawrence and discuss with him whether you should be
02:32:37 discuss with him whether you should be putting together a fire strategy document for this building if there wasn't one for the upper floors
02:32:45 um
02:32:48 no my view was simon simon was experienced in this he didn't seem to be too concerned um
02:32:57 so yeah right now mr lawrence gave some evidence about this email and his evidence was that he was mistaken in his response and that he was in fact referring to fire strategy drawings
02:33:11 as opposed to a building fire strategy document
02:33:14 document and i'll just give you the transcript reference for that you don't need to see it but
02:33:18 it but it's really more for our purposes transcript day 23 page 103 lines 16 to 19. so that's on the record um we know that xover had provided a draft
02:33:30 xover had provided a draft outline fire safety strategy for the refurbishment in the november of 2013.
02:33:38 do you recall ever seeing such a document i wasn't aware of that document you weren't aware of that document well let's just be absolutely clear i can flash it up on the screen it's ex040 ex0401107
02:33:51 let's just have it up so that we can be crystal clear
02:33:57 this is the grenfell tower outline fire safety strategy issue number three of the 7th of november 2013 mr bailey you've never seen this document i don't
02:34:08 you've never seen this document i don't recall saying it no at the time of your involvement on the project is that right correct okay
02:34:14 now going back to the email thread then if we can please um that we were looking at before can we go then to har 406560 and look at the top email and i showed you this before uh
02:34:27 and i showed you this before uh you've passed it on this is the um the chris mort weak link email which you then passed on to ray bailey kevin lam and mark stapley with the comments still going around in circles i showed you it before but i
02:34:39 circles i showed you it before but i didn't ask any questions about it what did you mean by still going around in circles
02:34:46 um from my understanding um of these emails and the conversation the conversations we've had via email on this issue is that siderise had told
02:34:58 on this issue is that siderise had told us
02:34:59 us the previous advice that conflicted with the food control officer's requirement or preference and then they sent us and
02:35:11 and then they sent us and suggestion for the 120 um 120 minute sort of solution or proposal um and to
02:35:23 sort of solution or proposal um and to me
02:35:23 me it felt like we weren't getting closer to a definitive answer
02:35:30 did you did the fact that mr mort had said
02:35:34 said in terms of his email in the first paragraph also on the second page of the attachment i have highlighted the weak link so to speak in terms of fire did that not ring an alarm bell with you
02:35:46 did that not ring an alarm bell with you no why is that
02:35:52 i don't know other than what it looks from your response here and from what you've told us earlier this morning in response to my questions that you focused only on the proposal to
02:36:03 you focused only on the proposal to alleviate the issues about the first stopping stroke the 1930 120 point but didn't actually uh take on board the second page of the attachment that we looked at
02:36:14 attachment that we looked at and the weak link in terms of fire is that fair
02:36:17 that fair well i think my answer is the same as before i read it as a that's the same issue right did you expect ray bailey or kevin lam or mark stapley to read the contents
02:36:29 lam or mark stapley to read the contents of chris mort's email and the attachment when you forward it to them um i suppose that's a reasonable expectation yes otherwise you wouldn't afford it
02:36:40 afford it i suppose yes yes yes
02:36:46 can we then look at sil um six zeros 78 please
02:36:55 and i'd like to look with you please at the second email on that string at the bottom of page one
02:37:03 um it's not that clear but you that's better you can see that it starts from you
02:37:10 from you ben bailey 30th of march to chris mort 1647
02:37:16 1647 so it's on the same day as the discussion about the weak link and if you scroll down to page two please
02:37:26 uh
02:37:29 this and this is your response to his weakling email you say thanks chris ricky sue could you provide a price based on chris's recommendation
02:37:40 chris's recommendation please and that's the recommendation i think
02:37:44 think in the second paragraph isn't it that's the proposal yes
02:37:51 um yeah yes i don't i don't remember this particular reply but
02:38:00 reply but right so it looks as if from this you were interested in his proposal which would alleviate the issues raised by the building control officer is that is that a fair reading of your response to him on that day
02:38:12 response to him on that day yes yes and then if we turn to the um uh if we turn to sl 6079 please
02:38:23 sl 6079 please we can see that you get a response on the next day 31st of march from sue shepard of sight her eyes and she sends you a quotation
02:38:36 hi ben good morning following your conversation with ricky and our technical officer chris moore we have pleasure in attaching our amended quotation
02:38:42 quotation ben please c has recommended the revised fire barrier we hope that our prices will again meet with your approval and look forward to receiving your further instructions and uh if you turn
02:38:56 and uh if you turn to page two
02:39:01 uh we can see uh that there is an attachment and there's a quote
02:39:09 a quote it's not terribly clear two four seven two two seven and if we look at page three as there's the quotation in full i think and and there it is and um it's dated
02:39:21 and and there it is and um it's dated the 31st of march 2015 it's sent to you and we can see um that there is a quotation for a horizontal open state cavity barrier fire rating e90 i60
02:39:34 fire rating e90 i60 and a fire stop of e120 i-120 and the price is there you see that yes and then if we go to the next document
02:39:46 and then if we go to the next document sil-6081 please this is
02:39:53 this is an email from chris mort sorry ricky k sorry ricky k on the 31st of march
02:40:04 ben how did you get on mate was everything clear with regards to chris's markup and subsequent quote give me a bell if you need did you reply to that email we can't find one i don't recall
02:40:17 we can't find one i don't recall um is there a reason why you didn't reply to it
02:40:23 um
02:40:28 probably just from the dates that i know surrounding these email chains i think after that the other day afterwards there was a clarification issued from the pco
02:40:38 the pco did you think to go back to ricky k and say i i i
02:40:42 say i i i didn't agree with chris's markup
02:40:59 don't recall this okay all right i'm going to get back then to the discussions with building control we looked at a lot of the chain before and
02:41:07 and we look we saw earlier that you were the person whom neil crawford thought john hogan should speak to at harley's we saw that on the 30th of march
02:41:23 just after that can we then go to the exchange with simon lawrence ryd ryd3037553 please
02:41:40 this is an email under which uh simon lawrence sends to you and only to you
02:41:48 uh a pretty typical day drawing and he's forwarding to you the email from neil crawford to john hoban and to him
02:41:59 him the same day earlier on in fact nine minutes earlier and he says ben just for your info only at the moment neil is discussing with bc that's
02:42:10 neil is discussing with bc that's building control he is aware of the urgency and cost implications studio e also have a vested interest in getting to the bottom of the issue as they wrote the spec let them do their stuff and we'll come back to you later
02:42:22 stuff and we'll come back to you later you see that yes um is it fair to say in the light of what you had then
02:42:29 then on the 31st of march that that is why you didn't respond to mr k's email asking you about the quote
02:42:43 as i said i don't remember at the time but it was possible yes in other words you were you were aware that ryden was still resisting john john hoban's position and you
02:42:55 john john hoban's position and you thought there might be a solution which is why you didn't go for mr k's quotation
02:43:02 that's possible
02:43:05 now can we then go to sca40 sorry three zeros one three zero seven six please
02:43:14 this is the first of april
02:43:21 and this is a final email from uh john hoban it's the second email down
02:43:29 down to neil crawford copy to simon lawrence
02:43:34 and he says he has no adverse comments to make on the cladding proposals we'll go back to the body of that email in a minute a minute but simon lawrence then sends that on to you
02:43:46 simon lawrence then sends that on to you and to ray bailey and he says gents this is the top of the page the building control officer is now in agreement with the fire protection in the cladding being a cavity barrier rather than a far stop as first thought
02:43:59 rather than a far stop as first thought now you saw that on that day as a result of that did you consider it unnecessary to consider the matter any further
02:44:16 i think i notified the side eyes of this clarification
02:44:30 how did you do that by email or by telephone do you remember i may have forwarded the email
02:44:37 right
02:44:42 had you had any hand in persuading john hoban
02:44:45 hoban to to um
02:44:48 to to um agree with your position on the fire protection in the cladding being a cavity barrier rather than a fire stop
02:45:00 fire stop um other than providing him with information he requested i don't think i had a did you have a conversation with him about about the subject on the telephone
02:45:12 i don't think so as i said at the time i um my view on sorry my view of what i knew about this at the time was that
02:45:23 at the time was that i wasn't able myself to be able to make a decision on something such as this so i was like deferring it to um people who knew more than me so i
02:45:34 um people who knew more than me so i don't think i would have you know influenced him i'm sorry i'm gonna have to keep ask you to keep your voice up sorry i couldn't hear that so you were deferring to people who knew more than me so i don't think i would
02:45:46 more than me so i don't think i would have influenced him right um given the solution that appears to have been arrived at at least according to simon lawrence did that did that mean or did that cause
02:45:59 did that did that mean or did that cause you
02:45:59 you not to take any steps to follow up and address the weak link for fire above the windows that chris mort had
02:46:08 identified as i said before i've um read that whole issue as a single issue so when um are you not as
02:46:22 um are you not as not
02:46:25 so basically when we got the definition of cavity barrier yes i felt that issue and went away do you agree that that a close and careful consideration
02:46:36 that a close and careful consideration of what chris mort was saying both in his email
02:46:38 his email and in the drawings would have led you to understand that there were two issues which mr moore was addressing
02:46:47 and that he was giving advice about the position of cavity barriers and saying that there was a weak link at the head of the window so far as regards fire
02:46:59 my interpretation is the same as i've told you
02:47:03 right now if we go on to har30s19412
02:47:12 we do see you going back to ricky k the next day 2nd of april 2015 and chris mort you see that and you say
02:47:24 and you fought on this message that you got from simon lawrence as you said you did
02:47:31 did morning ricky has discussed please see drawing attached showing the placement of the fire break at the head of the window
02:47:35 window the bcos agree to the definition of a cavity so i believe the 3015 equivalent product can be used question mark
02:47:51 you see that um
02:47:55 you say as discussed please see drawing attached
02:47:59 attached but what discussion are you referring to there
02:48:02 there i don't recall was there a telephone discussion between you and ricky k or you and chris mort
02:48:12 mort about the placement of the fire brick at the head of the window
02:48:19 that's what the email implies but i don't remember conversation right
02:48:27 can we look at the drawing that you attached
02:48:33 it's at har30 is 19413
02:48:48 now this is a studio e drawing not a harley drawing isn't it yes and we can see that on the right hand side there is a
02:48:59 that on the right hand side there is a proposed section typical bay
02:49:03 um heading if you like in the middle of the page halfway down the right hand side and above that is a big orange box can you see that
02:49:14 is a big orange box can you see that in in hatched markings there um there is a cavity barrier marked and it goes to the head of the
02:49:25 marked and it goes to the head of the window do you see yes and also right under the sill you see that
02:49:31 yes i can't see the one under this hill uh
02:49:37 i i'm sorry but my my misunderstanding of the of the hatching there's one it's the little thing immediately at the head of the window yeah
02:49:45 yeah i see the one for the arrow yes yes
02:49:50 now so far as cider eyes were concerned is it fair to say that they were going they were under the impression that you were going to install a cavity barrier at the head of the window in accordance
02:50:01 at the head of the window in accordance with the
02:50:02 with the drawing um based on them having a one of our drawings which is a later issue i don't think so
02:50:15 you don't think so
02:50:18 given that you could see from this drawing
02:50:22 drawing that cavity barriers had been provided for in this drawing at the head of the window
02:50:26 window by studio e can you explain why you put you permitted cavity barriers to be installed above the head of the window if you would discuss their location and
02:50:37 if you would discuss their location and told siderise that they were going to be placed at the head as you can see this drawing shows
02:50:44 i don't know
02:50:48 do you accept that you ought to have known that the location of the cavity barriers
02:50:52 barriers at the head of the window was an important matter to you otherwise you wouldn't have been discussing it with cydia eyes
02:51:04 discussing it with cydia eyes whilst i knew that um cavity barriers were an important um item in the build-up i wasn't aware as i am now specifically about the
02:51:16 um suggestion that they should be at the head of the window
02:51:22 i don't remember any specific instruction or otherwise of um why that wasn't done as in that
02:51:33 of um why that wasn't done as in that arctic story do you accept that by sending siderise this drawing which shows the cavity barrier
02:51:43 barrier at the head of the window and therefore in a different location from where you had had the cavity barrier on the weak link for fire drawing
02:51:54 drawing that we saw earlier that you were giving siderise the impression that you had moved the cavity barrier so that it sat immediately above the head of the window and had therefore taken their advice on that subject
02:52:06 um i think that was the case we would have sent them a harley drawing showing that but why did you send them this drawing then i don't know don't recall
02:52:19 you don't know why you sent them this drawing
02:52:22 drawing other than so i don't remember sending it so others in the context of the email you're showing me so i don't remember that conversation
02:52:33 because you say in the covering email please see drawing attached showing the placement of the fire break at the head of the window and i've got to repeat the suggestion that you were you were telling siderise in essence that you had taken their
02:52:44 in essence that you had taken their advice had moved the cavity barrier in response to the weak link for fire warning
02:52:51 warning no i don't believe so i think if that had been discussed we would have reissued a a harley drawing not not an architect's
02:53:02 a harley drawing not not an architect's drawing
02:53:07 mr mort's statement makes it crystal clear and we can go to it if you like uh that he was raising a a a separate concern about
02:53:19 a separate concern about a weakling for fire separate from the question of the the time periods for fire stopping or cavity barriers that's that's what he was doing but i think you're telling us that
02:53:30 think you're telling us that you read it as a single issue yes do you accept that you were wrong about that
02:53:40 i think knowing what i know now unfortunately yes
02:53:52 unfortunately yes now can we look at paragraph 31 of your witness statement please on page 10.
02:54:01 you say there i was not involved in any compliance issues or decisions in relation to the project until the fire i had no reason to question either the design or the
02:54:12 question either the design or the materials being used now mr bailey having considered the material the emails that we've been discussing particularly at the end of march regarding fire barriers do you now accept that you were indeed involved
02:54:24 accept that you were indeed involved in the discussion of location and specification of cavity barriers
02:54:40 insofar as asking the questions that i thought were pertinent and helpful trying to get to the bottom of the issue
02:54:53 indeed and therefore paragraph 31 is it has to be rewritten doesn't it it's not
02:55:00 correct
02:55:18 i think in paragraph 37 i um
02:55:24 do make reference to this issue in terms of advice sort
02:55:35 yes but at paragraph 31 though you say i was not involved in any compliance issues or decisions in relation to the project
02:55:42 project so far as cavity barriers is concerned that's not correct is it
02:55:48 i'm unsure well it's not a difficult question
02:55:52 question but given what we've seen in detail this morning mr bailey about your involvement in the cavity barrier question when you say i was not involved in any compliance issues or decisions in relation to the project
02:56:03 relation to the project that's not correct is it
02:56:09 as i said in paragraph 37 nothing but detailed
02:56:12 detailed that involvement so um
02:56:18 yes i know you say that at paragraph 37 i'm asking you and i'll ask you one more time given what we've seen about your involvement in the cavity
02:56:30 about your involvement in the cavity barrier question at the end of march 2015
02:56:33 2015 it is not correct to say that you are not involved in any compliance issues or decisions in relation to the project is it
02:56:47 as i said in so far as i've asked the questions
02:56:51 questions that was my involvement so asking the questions about the cavity powers yes would be a compliance issue
02:57:02 that's right and therefore paragraph 31 is incorrect in that respect
02:57:16 i think we'll put like that in that particular scenario
02:57:35 as i said i've had an involvement in that area
02:57:39 that area yes will you please accept therefore that paragraph 31 of your witness statement in that respect is incorrect
02:57:50 respect is incorrect for this particular issue yes thank you
02:57:56 [Applause] mr chen we're going to turn to a slightly different topic but one will i will not finish before one o'clock it would probably be better to stop there would limit a minute
02:58:08 there would limit a minute yes well mr bailey we're going to break knife and have some lunch we'll come back at 2 o'clock please and again
02:58:16 again please then talk to anyone about your evidence or anything to do with it while you're out of the room all right thank you thank you very much
02:58:35 thank you two o'clock please
02:59:31 you