Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation Evidence - Thursday 10th June 2021 (2/2)

10 June 2021 · TMO Representative, Counsel to the Inquiry · 1:56:41
▶ Watch on YouTube Open in interactive viewer

Continuation of TMO evidence addressing organizational responsibilities, reliance on external consultants for Building Regulations compliance, failure to respond to residents' fire safety concerns, and acknowledgment of inadequate project monitoring.

Key moments

Full transcript

00:00:15 yes would you ask ms ray to come back in

00:00:28 please

00:00:32 all right mrs ray ready to carry on well done thank you very much yes mr miller yes mr chairman thank you um miss ray i just want to follow up on one or two uh exchanges we had during the morning

00:00:43 exchanges we had during the morning session today and the first is where you and i discussed

00:00:49 discussed uh fire specialist consultants in the email that we saw that you'd sent to judith blakeman you'll recall and you'd said that you hadn't consulted senior consultants from specialist fire

00:01:01 senior consultants from specialist fire engineering companies but in ixova we're engaged to work as part of the project team you'll recall that exchange can i just show you one or two documents um

00:01:11 um can i look please with you at cst402141

00:01:21 now this is an email from uh uh you uh to carl stokes yep and it appears

00:01:35 yep and it appears that you are sending him what you call another copy of the x the x over fire strategy and floor plans which you raised in the ffr are a action plan are these plans now

00:01:46 are a action plan are these plans now sufficient and that's an email dated 23rd of may 2016. so it follows on from his uh april 2016 fra

00:01:57 uh april 2016 fra let's look at the document that you attach it's cst402142

00:02:04 and you can see from that first page that it's a an outline fire safety strategy for grendel tower dated the 7th of november 2013 issue number three so first of all do you accept that this

00:02:17 so first of all do you accept that this document

00:02:17 document was in your hands as may 2016. yes it must have been it must have been yes

00:02:25 been yes did you read it when you received it from claire williams i honestly don't know i i would normally read things which are sent to me but i honestly don't know yes well let's see how we go page 8 please

00:02:40 on page 8 you can see that there is a paragraph dealing with compartmentation towards the bottom of the screen 3.13

00:02:52 the bottom of the screen 3.13 uh fire resistance of elements of structure

00:02:55 structure and then if you go to page 9 you can see 3.14 compliance with b4 external fire spread

00:03:02 spread i just want to focus on this with you xavier say it is considered that the proposed changes will have no adverse effect on the building in relation to external fire spread but this will be confirmed by an analysis in a future issue

00:03:14 analysis in a future issue of this report right uh now uh

00:03:21 you could did well first of all did you read that

00:03:24 read that do you remember reading that particular paragraph

00:03:27 paragraph i don't remember reading it but um i can't say that i did or i didn't sorry would you agree that this report leaves the question of compliance with b4 open as at the date of the report november 2013. it seems to yes yes

00:03:40 november 2013. it seems to yes yes do you agree that that would be relevant whether a stay put policy would be appropriate for grenfell tower

00:03:48 tower um yeah i presume so yes did you did it occur to you to ask claire williams or anybody else uh whether in may 2016

00:04:00 uh whether in may 2016 uh uh an analysis and a future issue of that report had been received from x over

00:04:07 over i don't recall that it did um i believe as you alluded to that this was um in reference to the april fra and the actions arising from it um and i think

00:04:20 um and i think my policy in in terms of anything that was relatively complex that carl had requested i let him make a judgment on whether that complied with his um his request for

00:04:31 complied with his um his request for documentation so i would have passed it to him

00:04:34 to him um and i don't know if he'd come back to me then i would have chased it up but i'm not sure that i would have taken it on board so does that tell us that although this

00:04:46 does that tell us that although this letter this report left open the question of compliance with b4 external fire spread as of november 2013 you didn't uh notice the the

00:04:57 you didn't uh notice the the or didn't didn't ask the question has a a future issue of this report yet come in the

00:05:03 in the uh three odd years i didn't i think this was the first time that i'd ever received this the works are near and completion um i hadn't seen it before so i passed it on to carl to make an assessment if

00:05:15 it on to carl to make an assessment if this is what he required um and if this was what he required i i may not have done anything further i i can't recall do you recall whether we've seen no document on this but do you recall

00:05:26 document on this but do you recall whether he came back to you and said this is a very interesting report

00:05:31 report is there a future issue of the report as promised because this is now some three years out of date um i i don't remember i'm sorry um

00:05:43 i i don't remember i'm sorry um i would if he had then i would have gone back to claire to point out exactly what he was saying i mean i i think i would have read it but it i

00:05:51 but it i depending on what other things were going on i may not have focused the degree of attention that that you would um would want to can i ask you to look at your first witness statement please

00:06:02 your first witness statement please yeah of course and go to page

00:06:08 if you go to paragraph 39 you see you say there

00:06:11 say there i learned after the incident that the project team were working with x over warrington fire who were tasked with producing a specific grenfell tower first strategy in the context of the refurbishment

00:06:22 refurbishment yeah just pausing there looking at the email i've just shown you the 23rd of may 2016 it's not correct is it to say that you only left learnt after the incident that the

00:06:33 learnt after the incident that the project team were working with xover yeah it clearly isn't i'd obviously forgotten having had sight of it in may 16. right

00:06:43 can you explain how you thought or came to think

00:06:47 to think that you only discovered that the project team were working with x over after the incident i can't explain other than um i knew i had no

00:06:59 other than um i knew i had no input into it i certainly didn't receive anything prior to that stage um and the project was effectively almost finished at that point so i didn't have any input or access to the information

00:07:12 any input or access to the information at a point in time where i could have influenced it right and do i take it that you when you made this statement simply did not recall

00:07:20 recall the email i've just shown you no i i genuinely didn't and um i i thought it was after the incident but

00:07:27 but clearly that i was wrong and presumably nobody showed you that email just to be clear no no i don't think they did now um when we left off we were talking about

00:07:36 about door closers and you made the point and i probably i will probably miss summarize it but you made the point that you you considered that the lfb were after 100 compliance

00:07:49 100 compliance is that a fair way of summarizing i think that's what they were trying to get us as the landlord to achieve right and and to be fair some some um fire officers felt more evangelical about it than others too

00:08:00 evangelical about it than others too you'd enjoy it well well that all right perhaps that's not a great term but we're more inclined to be pushing for 100 than some others yes uh i understand now can we look at cst4079

00:08:13 cst4079 please cst 407904 this is an email exchange from august 2016 and i'd like to start on page two

00:08:30 cst four zero is nine seven zero four yes and if we go to page

00:08:42 what's been put up is seven zero nine four yes uh what i want is nine seven zero four please

00:08:50 that's what i said

00:08:53 now um if we go to page two we can see that uh uh at the top of that uh page and the context of this is lonsdale house

00:09:04 context of this is lonsdale house but at the top of this page you can see perhaps we'll go to the very bottom of page

00:09:08 page one i think the heading has become separated from the text you can see that you send an email on the 1st of august 2016 to james swindles now do you remember who he was

00:09:19 swindles now do you remember who he was um he's not somebody i dealt with a great deal but it clearly is a fire safety inspecting officer a fire safety inspecting officer at the lfb yes now let's go over to page two and you see you say there

00:09:30 and you see you say there um thank you for your email my colleague advises that it's your intention to issue a deficiency notice in relation to this block it would be helpful if you could confirm the flat numbers of the front doors you consider may not be nominally fire rated

00:09:42 consider may not be nominally fire rated so we can

00:09:42 so we can investigate further on the issue of fire action notices i did discuss with this with rebecca burton at our recent meeting and she advised that she would raise this with you we discussed the possibility of us writing to all the residents at the

00:09:53 writing to all the residents at the block to outline the fire procedure as an alternative to putting up notices can you please advise if you have discussed this with rebecca with regard to the doors and this is the key paragraph i would highlight

00:10:04 key paragraph i would highlight that the majority of the tenanted doors in this block were replaced with fully compliant

00:10:07 compliant self-closing fd4 fd30 door sets in 2012 to 13 as part of a larger door replacement program and clearly at the time of installation

00:10:18 and clearly at the time of installation the doors were fitted with operational self-closing devices just note in passing the absence of the s there

00:10:26 s there i will investigate the time frame you've requested regarding in reinstating any self-closers which have been disabled or removed but i would emphasize we cannot control the action of residents it is possible

00:10:38 residents it is possible that once reinstated you or one of your colleagues could return to this block and find

00:10:41 and find that a number of tenants have again removed or disabled their self now you've set out the nature of the problem there let's see what um mr swindles

00:10:50 swindles returns to you with can we go to page one

00:10:55 uh he comes back and he says same day uh hi janice thanks for getting back to me with regards to this uh and then in the uh third paragraph

00:11:06 uh and then in the uh third paragraph that main paragraph down he's he says uh i'm sorry yeah third main paragraph dan that's right he says at the time although at the time of installation in 2012 to 13 these doors may have been

00:11:18 2012 to 13 these doors may have been compliant

00:11:19 compliant article 11 of the rro places an onus on the responsible person to monitor fire safety systems in place and article 17 requires you to maintain fire safety systems

00:11:30 fire safety systems i understand that residents may cause problems but if you have you put a system in place to monitor and maintain and the doors and the residents are not cooperative you've shown due diligence and the residents then become

00:11:41 and the residents then become responsible under 5 roman 3 and article 22 with regards to cooperation and communication it might be appropriate to remind residents of this and the fact that the self-closer on their own front door is

00:11:52 self-closer on their own front door is not for their protection but for their neighbours now do you remember that exchange not especially no well i mean clearly but do you accept

00:12:04 no well i mean clearly but do you accept that that exchange as a result of that exchange

00:12:06 exchange the nfb was not being as you might put it evangelical but was simply pointing out to you that you don't have to ensure 24 7 that every single door closer in your estate

00:12:17 closer in your estate is is working but simply that you put in place

00:12:20 place a a reasonable system to monitor and maintain the door closers i think the point i was trying to make is that there was inconsistency in some of the fire safety officers that we

00:12:31 of the fire safety officers that we that we were dealing with um james wendell's has made his position very clear and that's that's completely what it should be we've had other dialogue with other

00:12:42 we've had other dialogue with other individuals who felt that they were taking

00:12:44 taking a different stance that was the point i was making right but in that context did you ever go to those individuals whom you might describe as evangelicals uh point to this email and say well look

00:12:55 uh point to this email and say well look this is what i've been advised by mr swindles what's wrong with that uh i can't recall if i did that or not let's um

00:13:02 let's um in light of that let's look uh a little earlier in the in the in the chronology at rebecca burton's involvement uh lfb 3084098

00:13:15 uh lfb 3084098 and this is rebecca burton's second witness statement to the inquiry can we go in that place to page 9 paragraph 16. now we were

00:13:34 now we were uh yes and in in paragraph 16 she refers to a meeting on the 13th of november 2015 with you as you as you can see and if you turn to page

00:13:44 page 10 paragraph 17 she says the issues outlined above were discussed formally in the meeting on fifth january 2016. after that i did not ask for the matter

00:13:55 after that i did not ask for the matter to be listed again as specific agenda items for the bi-monthly meetings as i did not feel it necessary to do so rather in my mind they would have been followed up under the standard straight recurring items of enforcement stroke deficiency notices

00:14:09 of enforcement stroke deficiency notices now that meeting was the bi-monthly meeting of the 5th of january 2016. let's go to the minutes of that but before i do can i just ask you do you remember

00:14:18 remember uh the contents of that meeting at all we looked at the name yeah we looked at the minute yesterday on a different topic okay um we'll obviously have spent a fair bit of time talking about the adair fire

00:14:30 of time talking about the adair fire because of the date but i wouldn't necessarily remember what else we but but usually the minutes were a relatively good reflection of what we did discuss let's go to the minutes lfb three zeros three two three

00:14:41 three two three three zero let's go straight into page three

00:14:45 three we've already seen the first page of this on an earlier topic page three point seven deals with flat entrance doors let's look at that it says this rebecca advised that the lfb requirement is for all flat entrance

00:14:57 lfb requirement is for all flat entrance doors

00:14:58 doors to be self-closing specifically landlords must ensure that self-closing devices are fitted and in caps all say that effective procedures are introduced to ensure that

00:15:09 procedures are introduced to ensure that these devices remain operational and are not disconnected or removed by the resident further rebecca advised that carrying out checks on self-closers when properties became void would not in itself be considered by the

00:15:20 would not in itself be considered by the lfb to be

00:15:21 lfb to be a sufficient level of checking in relation to leaseholder doors the lfb also expect the tmo to carry out regular checks were you surprised when rebecca burton indicated that the lfb expected

00:15:34 indicated that the lfb expected the tmo to carry out regular checks on self-closing devices no no because we'd had our meeting in november and that was one of the things that we've discussed and so i'd already started to escalate it to barbara indeed and can we take it

00:15:48 to barbara indeed and can we take it from that answer and the previous meeting and what you've done that you didn't object at that meeting that what she was asking you to do was impracticable or unreasonable no i didn't think it was

00:16:00 or unreasonable no i didn't think it was impractical and that wasn't stopping me trying to get it progressed i just the point i was making is that there's sometimes inconsistency with the individuals you're dealing with was there anything but rebecca was not one of those individuals

00:16:11 not one of those individuals so we've now got two we've got james swindles not an evangelist and rebecca burton who's not an evangelist fine yes you agree yes yes i do just

00:16:22 fine yes you agree yes yes i do just trying to work out who these are um do you recall why the lfb said that carrying out checks on self-closures only when properties became void would not be sufficient well as i think i i said this morning

00:16:33 well as i think i i said this morning that their view would it would take too long to get full coverage in the stock

00:16:40 do you remember whether you discussed the type of effective procedures that would be required no um because actually the lfb's view rightly so that it was for us to figure out how we did

00:16:52 it was for us to figure out how we did it they didn't mind the how they just needed it to be done right

00:16:56 right now let's go to her first witness statement please this is lfb303231 let's look together page 4 paragraph

00:17:07 let's look together page 4 paragraph paragraph 10.

00:17:11 page 4 paragraph 10. it's got a long paragraph

00:17:15 paragraph if you go to the last three lines on the page she's talking about the meeting of the fifth of january 2016 and she says we discussed ways in which the tmo could implement a new management process for maintaining self-closures

00:17:26 maintaining self-closures and fire doors which included incorporating a check with any annual checks already being carried out such as electrical and gas safety checks now do you remember that topic being discussed

00:17:38 discussed no not especially and i would have normally minuted um and sent draft minutes to be commented on by by those attending but but

00:17:45 but it may well be perhaps her memories better than mine i see i mean you don't dispute her recollection of the fact that uh you could have uh a check incorporated as part of a an

00:17:56 uh a check incorporated as part of a an electrical gas safety check no um and i think we've already discussed that we had investigated and i think investigated again and the option of checking this at gas safety checks

00:18:08 checking this at gas safety checks electrical inspections i think are five gear lisa that wouldn't have been appropriate um yeah at this stage and this is this is january 16 what had been done

00:18:19 this is january 16 what had been done to look into the question of whether you could carry out a check on the self-closers at the same time as electrical and gas safety checks well as i say electrical checks were

00:18:30 well as i say electrical checks were five yearly which i'm confident would not have been sufficiently frequent for the brigade so that largely ruled those out and

00:18:41 largely ruled those out and gas safety checks um i i don't know in terms of the time frame but i think i have already said that we did investigate with our gas contractors

00:18:52 investigate with our gas contractors it may be that we don't it probably is that we'd already investigated with the previous contractors if they've changed contracts we may well have investigated again but really that was something that alex

00:19:03 really that was something that alex bosman would have led on so i i can't be clear about the time frame you accept that this is the in essence the same advice that you'd already been given by andy jack at the 8th of november 2012 meeting

00:19:16 some three and a bit years before yeah did you agree at the meeting about what procedures the tmo would put in place to inspect and maintain self-closing devices or even

00:19:27 self-closing devices or even discuss that i wouldn't have been in a position to agree um i would have had to go back and investigate with technical colleagues and

00:19:35 and escalate it to people who have access to contractors uh et cetera and perhaps a range of solutions that i wouldn't have thought of and did you did you go back and investigate with technical colleagues

00:19:46 investigate with technical colleagues that escalated in the way you've just described yes and that led to barbara talking to laura johnson at the council um

00:19:57 laura johnson at the council um in terms of and a program to install self-closures but also an ongoing monitoring um yeah that's that's where that led to but it being escalated to that level and at

00:20:09 it being escalated to that level and at that level that was the decision the way that they thought it should be taken forward um and by then on at least one occasion the gas contractors weren't happy to take on board the work

00:20:20 weren't happy to take on board the work so does this tell us that despite the advice or instruction or whatever you might call it given by andy jack at the 8th of november 2012 meeting

00:20:32 jack at the 8th of november 2012 meeting the position remained pretty much the same nothing had changed uh by the time of the fifth of january 2016 meeting that you had with rebecca burton in respect of the monitoring and maintenance system for

00:20:44 monitoring and maintenance system for self-closing devices i don't think it had no and why was that

00:20:49 was that i i don't know that i can add much to what i i've already said in in that we were

00:20:53 were always looking for ways that we could do it looking for ways that we could ensure that we had access to do it but we did fundamentally have resource a resource issue you can call

00:21:04 resource a resource issue you can call it bodies you can call it staff you can you can call it finances but i was unable to persuade people with budgets

00:21:13 budgets that this should be what they spent their money on because they had new heating systems and new roofs and other things which were equally important yes did you ask carl stokes about the lfb's views as expressed by rebecca

00:21:24 lfb's views as expressed by rebecca burton at this meeting on this topic he wouldn't have been at our meetings i didn't invite him to the liaison meeting no but did you ask for his advice separately as to for example what procedures should be put in place in

00:21:35 procedures should be put in place in light of

00:21:35 light of rebecca burton's view i i it's likely that i certainly will have passed on her her view it's likely that i did ask for his input what did he say i i can't remember at this stage i mean

00:21:47 i i can't remember at this stage i mean it was for us to find a way of doing it that was my my view very very clearly so i would have had to try and find a way of doing it

00:21:53 it i'm not sure that carl would have been able to

00:21:56 able to to advise in terms of our internal processes

00:21:59 processes what he would recommend no uh now before i come to his april 2016 fra let me just ask you i've see we've seen the swindles ray

00:22:10 i've see we've seen the swindles ray correspondents of early august 2016 which is a little bit later in time than this discussion um but at any time before that did you yourself consider enforcing

00:22:23 did you yourself consider enforcing uh the provision in the tenancy agreements with tenants that they should let you in if you wanted to inspect their door closed yes and actually we investigated that pretty thoroughly

00:22:35 we investigated that pretty thoroughly in terms of the dare tower because the enforcement notice required us to ensure that all of the doors regardless of tenure were self-closing so we anticipated that

00:22:46 were self-closing so we anticipated that there might be an issue so we worked with the council's internal legal team to agree a procedure whereby we could clearly evidence how many attempts um we had made to gain access there was

00:22:57 um we had made to gain access there was a sort of series of letters and and phone calls a whole access procedure that we agreed some of which we did and then passed to the contractor but the records had to be quite rigorous so so we had that in place and

00:23:08 so so we had that in place and ultimately as part of the discussions that barbara had with laura um that it was agreed that that access procedure would be used so so we we were looking at that and and um

00:23:20 we we were looking at that and and um agreeing that when was that when was when was that agreement that the access procedure would be used um well as part well that's my understanding anyway it was part of the discussions that barbara and laura had

00:23:31 discussions that barbara and laura had um whenever that was

00:23:35 february march something like that february march what 2016. no 2017 wasn't it by the time they agreed them right but the access procedures were in um agreed to ensure that we had access to

00:23:48 agreed to ensure that we had access to all of the dwellings at adair and hazelwood tower so the access procedures must have been prepared in about march perhaps 16. i can't remember the date but they were there or should we need them

00:23:59 need them can you account for the fact that it took you until early 2017 on your evidence just now to come to a process whereby you could enforce your access rights

00:24:10 rights in order to carry out inspections i can't we have an access process in relation to that specific piece of work at those two blocks um and i think in the end i don't think

00:24:22 um and i think in the end i don't think we had to to use it on many occasions i think we were able to facilitate access um and it had been escalated and i barbara may be able to advise

00:24:33 be able to advise now in the april 2016 fra let's just look at that cst 403161

00:24:42 mr stakes includes uh detail for the first time about what the tmo's policy is on self closes and i think we see that at page 21.

00:24:55 if we go to page 21 and look at the lower half of the page is a long block of text and they're quite difficult to navigate but if you bear with me you could see that about

00:25:06 bear with me you could see that about halfway down

00:25:09 uh you can see there's a list of numbers the original flat entrance tools in this building are flat numbers and then there's a list then it says this it is tma's policy

00:25:21 then it says this it is tma's policy that if flats are refurbished or when new tenants move into a flat then the self-closing device fitted to the flat entrance door is accessed if the self-closing device does not close the door fully or is or one is not fitted to the door then a

00:25:33 or one is not fitted to the door then a new appropriate self-closing device is fitted

00:25:35 fitted some of the original flat entrance doors have more than one lock fitted to them it is assumed that the occupants of these flats can exit the flat in an emergency

00:25:41 emergency without any undue delay now do you know what it was that prompted mr stokes to include this in his fra no pretty well presumably it was the enforcement notices but i i can't say

00:25:52 enforcement notices but i i can't say for sure the approval notices for for adair and hazelwood yes now it appears to be the policy that rebecca burton had explained in the january

00:26:00 january the 5th of january 2016 was not acceptable to the lfb that's right isn't it yeah yes absolutely did when you saw this were you not surprised that mr stokes had

00:26:11 surprised that mr stokes had thought it appropriate to include in this a policy which was contrary to what you'd been told by the lfb i didn't pick this up you didn't pick it up no i don't think i did

00:26:22 up no i don't think i did can you explain why not no i can't just the sheer volume of things that i'm reading i

00:26:26 reading i i didn't pick it up right can we then look on in the year now it's september 2016.

00:26:34 2016. uh tmo double zero eight four seven

00:26:44 this is the minute of the meeting for the 13th of september 2016 health and safety committee meeting now we've seen this document i think at least twice now and we come back to it

00:26:55 least twice now and we come back to it on this topic you can see if you go to page five paragraph 6.1 under the heading review of the safety policy and strategy we've looked i think

00:27:06 policy and strategy we've looked i think that the first two bullet points before in relation to those uh respective topics now we look at the fifth bullet point down self closers and it says this self

00:27:18 self closers and it says this self closes

00:27:19 closes the need to have a more proactive policy on installation of these devices in order to meet the lfb requirements was acknowledged suggestion that this could be included in cyclical decorations projects was discussed

00:27:29 discussed but further work required on this in tmo and with rbkc self closers next bullet regular inspection and maintenance how and when can this be undertaken

00:27:41 do you apart from that minute do you have a recollection of the requirements relating to maintenance of self-closers which had been laid down by the lfb being discussed at that meeting i think we had quite a

00:27:53 at that meeting i think we had quite a wide-ranging discussion the reference to cyclical projects was i think peter madison suggesting that it may be something that we

00:28:04 may be something that we the difficulty is that we we're it looks like we're still looking at plugging it into something else as opposed to having a dedicated um inspection program

00:28:15 um inspection program yes was this the first time that the regular inspection and maintenance requirement for self-closures was raised with the health and safety committee i doubt it but uh right yeah i don't see

00:28:27 i doubt it but uh right yeah i don't see how it could have been because we would have had at least one or two meetings in the intervening time and both barbara and i were well aware of what the the fire brigade were asking

00:28:38 of what the the fire brigade were asking we all had a copy of the enforcement notice

00:28:40 notice so i am i can't see that that would be the case would you know why this was only raised with the health and safety committee at this time and not immediately after the meeting with the nfb on the 5th of january well

00:28:52 nfb on the 5th of january well no that's i would have expected that that's when it would have been discussed uh in the last part of the bullet point that starts itself closes the need to have a more proactive policy

00:29:03 the need to have a more proactive policy you can see that it says further work required on this in tmo and with rbkc what further work was required funding it'll be about the funding aspect because it's new work

00:29:16 funding aspect because it's new work um and it'll be about budgets for the work

00:29:19 work required on this that's about money is it it's about money and sorry sorry um and also it's possibly a policy issue which which i think is what it ended up being a discussion on policy

00:29:31 what was the discussion on policy about um

00:29:35 um well i i can only tell you what barbara fed back to me but so barbara raised their joint management team

00:29:41 team and um we made a proposal that it'd be a three-year program and of installation and rbkc uh wanted it to be five-year and they

00:29:52 uh wanted it to be five-year and they they didn't accept that there should be an ongoing program of inspection now i think you've drafted a paper for this meeting on the topic uh can we go to tm00840660 please

00:30:10 um this is a document called paper six review of fire safety strategy for discussion see that yes uh and uh i i'm not entirely sure well we have

00:30:22 i i'm not entirely sure well we have seen this before yeah because we looked at we looked at it before but can you look please in that document with me at page two and you can see that there's a reference halfway down the page to self closers you see that yes

00:30:35 to self closers you see that yes and the second last bullet point self closes inspection and maintenance of fitted self closers and you say lfb advised that the rro

00:30:47 and you say lfb advised that the rro requires regular inspection strike maintenance of these devices to ensure that

00:30:51 that that are still operating effectively and have not been disconnected straight disabled

00:30:55 disabled the lfb have advised that landlords must not in caps must not rely exclusively on void checks to undertake these inspections how can this be progressed is this something that esas can assist with

00:31:06 something that esas can assist with are there any ppm contractors such as gas servicing contractors who could assist

00:31:09 assist could it be included in the tenancy checks could rd be forced to feedback after visiting a property how else can this be progressed additionally the possibility of regular publicity

00:31:19 publicity either general to all of our link or website etc or targeted with personalized letters to specific blocks to promote the need to ensure that self-places are not disconnected should be considered uh

00:31:32 be considered uh now uh those questions that you set out there

00:31:37 there were set out in this paper for the september meeting why were these questions not set out in any earlier paper for any earlier meeting

00:31:44 meeting and the matter was left for for nine months i've already said i would have expected this would have gone to an earlier meeting and i can't give you an explanation because we were well aware that that's what the requirement was i i can only think that at that time we

00:31:56 i i can only think that at that time we were pretty consumed with making sure that darren hazelwood the enforcement notices were complied with and that was a significant amount of work on my behalf so i i can't give you an explanation i'm

00:32:07 so i i can't give you an explanation i'm sorry i would have intended it to be set out earlier this is a discussion paper as you know for all the things that we need to be reviewing

00:32:16 reviewing and considering for for the revised strategy statement so i'm just putting down questions to enable you know promote some debate and and get people to think outside the box or give me their views

00:32:27 or give me their views you see we've seen no evidence either in people's statements or in any documents that this point and series of questions that you're raising in this in this paper in september 2016

00:32:39 in this paper in september 2016 had been raised at all between the 5th of january 2016 meeting with rebecca burton and september 2016. we've seen no

00:32:50 and september 2016. we've seen no evidence of that can you explain that no i can't i'm sorry i can't it absolutely was on my radar and

00:32:57 radar and um and and also barbara's we were very clear you know that i met with rebecca in november and in january so it would have been my intention um to raise it um and i i can't give you

00:33:09 um to raise it um and i i can't give you an explanation because i don't have one now let's go on into october 2016 tmo double zero eight four zero six nine seven

00:33:26 and if we go to the bottom of page one you could see in the last two thirds of the

00:33:34 the screen there's an email from you to ian lines of the 6th of october 2016. now in lines as you can see from the next email up his head was head of strategic investment at the tma wasn't he yes

00:33:46 tma wasn't he yes and if you uh look at the very foot of page one you can see that you say to him our policy at the time of the idea of fire which we had shared with the lfb had been

00:33:57 with the lfb had been that where new flat doors are fitted these would be self-closing fd30s with intubation strips and cold smoke seals and be fully compliant with building regs in addition we would fit retrofit self

00:34:09 in addition we would fit retrofit self closers to the flat entrance doors of void properties into doors in locations where our fire risk assessor

00:34:15 assessor highlighted the need for these to be installed finally several years ago we completed a program of flat entrance door set replacement of approximately 1200 tenanted properties these doors had been highlighted as potentially non-compliant by the fra

00:34:27 potentially non-compliant by the fra and then surveyed by stock condition surveyors to clarify whether they were sufficiently fire resisting and those that were not were included in the program the lfb had gone over the page had

00:34:38 the lfb had gone over the page had audited at air tower several weeks prior to the fire there and it issued a deficiency notice which had highlighted the need to ensure all flat doors in this block were self-closing i've spoken at length with the lfb's

00:34:50 i've spoken at length with the lfb's fire safety team leader and her view is that all of our flat infant stores should be self-closing and that with our existing policy it would take too long for all of our flat doors to comply i consulted peers at similar

00:35:02 i consulted peers at similar organizations and in general they confirmed that their policy was to ensure

00:35:05 ensure all flat entrance doors were self-closing therefore it is likely straight possible going forward that every time one of our blocks is audited by the lfb they will raise this as a requirement and issue a notice of

00:35:17 and issue a notice of safety deficiencies unfortunately the lfb interpretation of the regulatory reform order goes further than this and they're requiring landlords to have procedures in place whereby self-closures are inspected

00:35:28 inspected and those which are faulty or have just been disabled or removed are replaced whilst the nfb state that it is up to the landlord to set the frequency and arrangements for the inspection of self-closures they have confirmed that

00:35:39 self-closures they have confirmed that the waiting for the property to become void would not be considered sufficient they recently audited lonsdale house where the tenant stall sets were replaced in 2013 as part of the program referred to above and the inspecting officer has stated

00:35:51 and the inspecting officer has stated that he wants us to ensure all doors are self-closing i pointed out that they had been relatively recently replaced with fully compliant door sets and we were unable to control a new resident who wish to disable the door closer he still sees this as our

00:36:02 closer he still sees this as our responsibility and believes this is the correct interpretation of the rro it is also worth pointing out that laura johnson rbkc is not keen on the idea of a borough-wide programmer fitting self-closers to all doors

00:36:13 self-closers to all doors however in discussion of the recent health and safety committee there was a general consensus that we needed to be more proactive about fitting these and the possibility of including this in the cyclical des programme complete in

00:36:24 the cyclical des programme complete in seven years query appeared to be the most effective way of preceding question mark yeah i don't apologize for reading that email in its entirety um because it's an important document

00:36:35 um because it's an important document and there's a lot in it but um question by this time this is early october 2016 is it right that you and those on the health and safety committee were well aware that the tmo's

00:36:46 committee were well aware that the tmo's policy of only fitting self-closing devices on doors where the property became void did not meet the required standard under the absolutely yes why did you think that the lfb's interpretation of the rro

00:36:58 interpretation of the rro goes further than this and they're requiring landlords to have procedures in place whereby self-closures are inspected and those which are faulty or been disabled or removed are replaced which is your

00:37:10 which is your fourth bullet point on page two okay ian lyons

00:37:13 lyons is relatively new doesn't know any of the history he um has an overview of things like i've misspelted but it was the cyclical decorations program cyclical dex program

00:37:24 decorations program cyclical dex program i believe that i've been asked to contact him to see whether what peter madison suggested at the health and safety committee in terms of cyclical decorations program

00:37:37 in terms of cyclical decorations program having this as an additional item is an effective way of going forward so i was trying to give him all of the history and all of the dialogue um so that he could investigate further

00:37:49 um so that he could investigate further my question is let me try to let me try the question in a different way in what way did the lfb's requirement did you think to have landlords inspect self-closing

00:38:00 to have landlords inspect self-closing devices and replace faulty ones go beyond what the tmo was required to do under the rra i didn't think it did i was just trying to explain to him that it's not i'm not just looking at installing

00:38:11 installing we are also looking at an inspection program clearly i didn't set it out very very well so it's an installation program

00:38:19 program and um an inspection program where we need to figure out how how we're going to be able to do them and he had been tasked with looking at whether

00:38:26 whether there was a way that we hadn't considered or whether the cyclical dex program

00:38:30 program might be a vehicle for moving this forward i see i think i understand your answer are you saying in that bullet point that the lfp's interpretation of the regulatory reform order so far as

00:38:41 of the regulatory reform order so far as inspection regimes are concerned it goes beyond that order because there's nothing in it about inspection um i'm just it's probably just a bad form of words i'm just trying to say there are these two

00:38:52 there are these two issues i'm mentioning the regulator reform order which he possibly knows about but if not he'll need to in order to investigate this further it's a long email and i probably didn't word it terribly well in places

00:39:04 word it terribly well in places and do you accept that if the tma were not inspected i think you do accept that if they weren't inspecting self-closing devices other than whenever voids came up which was still the policy then

00:39:15 then uh the tma was not complying with article 17 of the rra agreed which is why i'm trying to move it forward and i'm trying to do what the subcommittee or the health and safety committee

00:39:23 committee has asked me to do and peter madison particularly had raised this as a possibility so i'm i'm trying to exhaust that i don't

00:39:30 don't my personal view is i don't think that that's going to end up being a goer but i've been told to investigate so i'm trying to investigate

00:39:40 yes and and would you accept that when according to your text in that bullet point

00:39:50 point you are referring to what it is the lfbr after

00:39:53 after that what the lfp were after was consistent with the lga guide which required uh as good practice inspecting timber fire resisting doors on a six monthly basis as part of a

00:40:05 on a six monthly basis as part of a program

00:40:06 program planned preventative maintenance yes etc and that also covers the devices right and then move on in time to december 2016. and i'll just want to ask you about the

00:40:17 and i'll just want to ask you about the change in policy and the proposal for that

00:40:20 that can we go to tm00843 892. and i'd like to show you this board update

00:40:30 december 2016. did you draft this um it looks like i might have done does it say well

00:40:37 say well uh it doesn't say on the first page uh nor on the last page so that's why i'm asking you does it look familiar to you could you spin down because i'll know just yes certainly let's scroll down to the bottom of page one

00:40:48 scroll down to the bottom of page one and then and then page two we're gonna look at page two yeah i'm pretty sure i would have done very good let's look at um item six l fb

00:40:59 item six l fb deficiency notice received this is december 2016 and at the bottom of paragraph six uh

00:41:10 and at the bottom of paragraph six uh it says the tenant's doors at this block uh and you can see that there are a number of blocks there referred to these blocks i should have said sorry uh

00:41:22 these blocks i should have said sorry uh well i was going to ask you that which one you were referring to but i think that's all of them the tenant stores at this block which which should be read as these blocks were replaced with fully fire rated self-closing compliant door sets within the last four years

00:41:33 within the last four years and say we are surprised to have received this notice and require a clear steer from the lfb on their specific additional requirements now uh sorry what was the date of this

00:41:44 now uh sorry what was the date of this document well that's what i was going to ask you

00:41:48 it says december 2016 on the top of page one

00:41:53 one are you able to date it any more accurately than that um sorry it could be could we scroll up because i might be able to tell yes of course i'm so sorry quite right page one fine um

00:42:06 it's because it extended time scales it might help you the second half of the first paragraph that's a reference to the

00:42:16 the uh it must have been sorry it must be in december because it refers to the inspection at hazelwood which was the post no dis inspection yes i mean it says board update deck 16 at the very top yeah right now well

00:42:28 16 at the very top yeah right now well let's look on um let's look at lfb three zeros three two three three three

00:42:37 this is the minute of the next bi-monthly meeting with the lfb

00:42:42 which you can see took place on the 18th of january 2017. and i was just wondering

00:42:47 wondering uh say i must ask you was the document we've just been looking at mark december 2016 drafted for or produced at that meeting no um it's a it's a board update so i

00:42:59 no um it's a it's a board update so i think it must have gone to tmr board yes of course it is a board update and in fact that the uh next board meeting we have was on the 10th of january 2017.

00:43:12 was on the 10th of january 2017. do you think it was perhaps drafted for that meeting um perhaps i can't you don't know all right

00:43:20 right so anyway let's look at the minute of the bi-monthly which is on the screen in front of you 18th of january 2017 you are there rebecca burton is there if we look at page three please you can see item seven

00:43:32 item seven enforcement action deficiency notices and correspondence with the lfb and then in the second paragraph um you can see uh that you raise a query with why nine colville square had

00:43:44 with why nine colville square had received a deficiency notice you see that yes uh and

00:43:51 uh you can see as i think we've already heard the rebecca burton gives a pretty clear indication as to what was required yes yes yes um did you consider that her

00:44:02 yes yes yes um did you consider that her comments

00:44:02 comments as set out there uh gave the tmo the clarity that it needed or felt it needed yes that wasn't the first time though surely

00:44:13 that wasn't the first time though surely that that clarity had been received what was it that she was telling you you didn't already know so this is regarding the deficiency notice of kohl's square yes yes um so

00:44:25 yes yes um so we there was a deficiency notice and it had had

00:44:30 had had a broadly compliant and at all intense and purposes it didn't appear to have changed so i think it was legitimate to just

00:44:35 just find out why um it had moved from one to the other

00:44:40 the other and it appeared that must have gone off my radar that that it had there were some issues raised previously or identified at the previous time when we were given broadly compliant um but i just didn't have any

00:44:53 um but i just didn't have any recollection of them so that's fair enough and and what she was saying is with that and something additional or then it it brought it into the deficiency notice territory right

00:45:04 deficiency notice territory right in relation to grenfell the only thing you can see is on page four and the only thing discussed there is the presence of a mobility scooter in the communal area which i think is something would have

00:45:15 which i think is something would have been picked up by carl stakes yes there wasn't any any reference there to the self closers in that building is that because no clarification was required yeah yeah we had the notice so

00:45:28 required yeah yeah we had the notice so yeah it was just it was just if we had queries or if we were unclear sometimes um sometimes it's very general and it's um unclear whether they're talking about all doors or just communal doors or

00:45:40 all doors or just communal doors or sometimes it's just it's just helpful to clarify now at some point between january and march 2017

00:45:48 uh well let me show you a document uh tmo double00840769 this is a document called fire safety

00:45:59 this is a document called fire safety board update for march 2017.

00:46:04 okay could you just help me when did you start doing these fire safety board updates i've wondered that actually um

00:46:15 i've wondered that actually um i suspect but i don't know for sure i haven't checked that um robert had started to ask me to do them

00:46:23 them certainly certainly at the time at all just after the adair fire i mean i used to regularly be asked for information but it became a bit more comprehensive and a bit more wide-ranging in relation to fire safety at that time

00:46:34 at that time i believe so he asked you to give board updates regularly did he he asked for a regular fire safety board update i think prior to that he had a chief executive's report and so

00:46:46 he had a chief executive's report and so sometimes there would be specific things he would want me to incorporate but this this was um more sort of comprehensive i see and that started after the ada tower i could be wrong but that's what my recollection recollection

00:46:57 my recollection recollection yes looking at this document you can see on page two

00:47:04 it starts on page one but there's a list of the recent deficiency notices and if you look at page two paragraph four self-closing devices on entrance doors

00:47:12 doors and it says uh the need to adopt a more proactive approach towards the retrofitting of self-closing devices on flat entrance doors throughout the housing stock was recognized as part of the thorough review of our fire policy and strategy

00:47:24 review of our fire policy and strategy this is necessary to satisfy the lfe's requirements as they've confirmed that they consider our previous policy would take too long to ensure 100 of tenanted doors are fitted with these devices a change should also reduce the likelihood of further lfp

00:47:35 reduce the likelihood of further lfp deficiency notices being issued on the basis of absent self-closers the tmo is therefore currently in discussion with rbkc about the possibility of introducing a three-year program to install

00:47:46 a three-year program to install self-closing devices across the stock there's no mention there as far as i can see

00:47:52 see that there should have been a regime in place for inspection and maintenance of the self-closing devices is there no that was an oversight i was going to ask you why that you said it's an oversight yeah it wasn't a deliberate policy i

00:48:04 yeah it wasn't a deliberate policy i think i was sometimes mindful of how much information i was putting in in these um reports but yeah it should it should have been there it wasn't deliberately excluded it was just um can you explain why it wasn't i can't

00:48:16 um can you explain why it wasn't i can't explain

00:48:17 explain i know it was being discussed barbara and i were discussing it and i knew that she was raising it with jmt and i'd been asked i think probably by that stage to go to repairs and get some um uh you know an indication of prices

00:48:31 um uh you know an indication of prices and if things were going on i don't know why isn't there what i would say is if it's a board um update then barbara would have been aboard and she'd have been able to pick up on anything that i'd

00:48:42 that i'd inadvertently admitted omitted even right

00:48:53 now um there's then a meeting of the health and safety committee on the 16th of march 2017 and the reference for that is at tm00847305

00:49:07 and that's actually your third witness statement

00:49:10 statement at page 19 paragraph 62 you refer to that meeting uh

00:49:18 now you drafted a paper for that meeting

00:49:23 at rbk 50 is 988.

00:49:28 let's look at that

00:49:34 and this is a document dated first of march 2017 installation of self-closing devices on flat entrance doors for discussion am i right in thinking that that document was drafted full discussion

00:49:45 document was drafted full discussion at the health and safety committee meeting on the 16th of march um actually i don't know if it was it was i think it was drafted for for jmt the joint management team meeting

00:49:56 jmt the joint management team meeting because that's where they were going to have a discussion about the policy and and the the budget i see so there's been a price that's a prior meeting is it a joint management team yes it's well it says jmt the first of march so i think it must have gone there

00:50:08 march so i think it must have gone there i don't know if it went on to health and safety committee or whether we just gave some

00:50:11 some barbara gave some verbal feedback all right now was the purpose of this paper in part at least to assist the jmt in making a decision about whether the tma should have a system of monitoring uh and maintenance of the self-closing

00:50:23 and maintenance of the self-closing devices across the stock i believe so yes

00:50:25 yes if you look at the third paragraph on the first page under paragraph two uh it uh it says fire safety requirements for flat entrance doors and in it if you look at the third

00:50:37 doors and in it if you look at the third paragraph

00:50:39 paragraph uh under that it says

00:50:44 we have emphasized our concern that even even regular inspections and maintenance where access is readily available will not ensure that all devices remain operational as we cannot control residents who either deliberately choose to disconnect or disengage

00:50:55 to disconnect or disengage or do not report defects to enable us to instigate any necessary repair inspecting officer's response to these concerns was as follows etc was it your view even at this time first

00:51:07 was it your view even at this time first of march 2017 that you can't control residents who either deliberately choose to disconnect or disengage or do not report defects to us i think that's always the case was that

00:51:20 i think that's always the case was that a routine experience yes not necessarily with cell closures but with

00:51:25 but with a variety of things um well was it a routine experience that residents chose to disconnect or disengage self-closing devices

00:51:37 self-closing devices i don't know it did happen um but i think

00:51:41 think i'm sure laura's a housing professional she'd been aware that there was there's always the possibility that um it's it's going to happen so we may as well consider it now and think do we need to put anything additionally

00:51:52 do we need to put anything additionally in place to to supplement it but i i try to be balanced and give the brigade's response well you say you're trying to be balanced and that may be a fair point because if you look at up the page you can see that what you're

00:52:04 up the page you can see that what you're doing is setting out in the two bullet points what the lfb are requiring yes namely you need to be significantly more proactive about retrofitting and regular inspection and maintenance

00:52:16 and regular inspection and maintenance of all self-closing devices to ensure that they remain connected and functioning correctly and then you record the fact that the lfb you have confirmed their view that a self-closing device is a fire

00:52:27 that a self-closing device is a fire safety system etc and then you then say we've emphasized our concern which is the the countervailing argument isn't it i don't think it's an argument i think it was just i think it's there's value

00:52:38 it was just i think it's there's value in acknowledging it that we we no matter no matter what we do we can't be sure we've done 100 um we're just flagging it up and we've raised that with the brigade and this is their response so that she knows what their position is

00:52:50 so that she knows what their position is yes but as you say it's a balanced view but it's not a strong

00:52:55 strong case for having a monitoring system is it

00:52:58 it um i don't think that's what i was being asked to put forward i was being asked to

00:53:02 to to provide information in relation to where we currently were at and barbara was presenting the paper and was more than capable of being persuasive and providing anything additional um i didn't i didn't think it

00:53:13 additional um i didn't i didn't think it was

00:53:14 was that i think that was what my remit was right well on this can we look at page two of this document and look at section four you at the foot of that

00:53:25 section four you at the foot of that page you say under the heading self-closing policy of other social housing landlords the tmo has contacted a number of similar organizations seeking information on their policy with regard to self-closing devices all

00:53:37 with regard to self-closing devices all respondents to date include city west haringey notting hill housing

00:53:43 housing have confirmed that their policy is to ensure that all flat entrance doors are fitted with self-closures however approaches to inspection strike maintenance of these devices are much less clear what was much less

00:53:54 are much less clear what was much less clear

00:53:55 clear about the inspection or maintenance policies of those social housing land um i um so i probably mentioned it before

00:54:01 before there was a london southeast um housing group fire safety group yeah and we would

00:54:08 would often contact each other if it was just a question um if you were doing some benchmarking um and

00:54:15 um and so i i contacted a number just to find out

00:54:18 out if there was something that we were missing or that is it a quick win in terms of how we could progress this and i think as i say here they were all pretty proactive about

00:54:29 they were all pretty proactive about installing self-closures and and when you asked them if they were regularly inspecting them they would say yes but when you asked for the detail it was a bit similar to world voids and major works and there wasn't

00:54:41 major works and there wasn't uh my recollection from the people who responded there generally wasn't a dedicated inspection regime of the kind that we were trying to set up so i was just trying to kind of give a flavor of

00:54:53 kind of give a flavor of yes i said what's going on i see well in case somebody asked you for a comparative well it's quite likely that's often the first thing that people say well what are the people doing is there a clever or slicker way for us to do it what is it

00:55:04 to do it what is it yes i see now on page three of this document you can see that there's a table

00:55:11 uh it's not on your screen but we need to scroll down to see it which is the cost of installing and inspecting and you can see that

00:55:25 you can see that it has program and cost and the program for installation program for total stock has a cost of 619 000 pounds and for inspection and maintenance program it has 288 000 pounds

00:55:36 has 288 000 pounds first did you prepare that table or did somebody give it to you um somebody gave me the information and um and the breakdown so i've slotted in what was provided to me i think it was possibly graham webb

00:55:47 was possibly graham webb because i think we saw it as a responsive repair issue so i think it was likely to have been him i see and under the heading inspection straight maintenance program you indicate the assumptions behind the estimated cost of

00:55:59 assumptions behind the estimated cost of 288

00:56:00 288 000 um there are three three assumptions uh sixty percent fully compliant twenty percent

00:56:06 percent uh repair adjusted twenty percent replaced

00:56:09 replaced and ten percent no access um were the doors that you were considering doors that had been replaced as part of the

00:56:17 the flat entrance door replacement program we were considering all doors um this was just i don't know why he decided on these figures but they were just indicative costs just to give

00:56:28 give gave laura something to to base that on right do you know the basis of the figure of

00:56:33 figure of 20 doors required closer to be repaired or adjusted no i don't even know whether it was just picked randomly out of the air in order to provide an indicative cost i don't know sorry right the same applies to the other percentages i

00:56:44 applies to the other percentages i assume is that correct yeah that is correct were you not concerned that uh that your assumptions or the assumptions that you had received and were putting forward in turn show that 40

00:56:55 turn show that 40 of doors did not have working self-closing devices no i mean they really were i think figures plucked out of the air in order to give an indicative cost so i think we we didn't know we didn't have

00:57:08 i think we we didn't know we didn't have that figure um did you ask graham webb whether his assumptions were realistic or whether they were just fantasy i don't remember asking i mean is there any reason you could think of why graham webb would not have well would

00:57:20 graham webb would not have well would have put forward percentages that were not reasonably realistic no but he had to start somewhere and i suppose um

00:57:31 suppose um perhaps it's easier if you start thinking you've got more non-compliant get a budget that you can handle and then you can work within i don't know i'm speculating yes it may very well be a worst-case scenario but did you have any reason to think that it

00:57:42 did you have any reason to think that it was an unreasonable worst case scenario miss ray i didn't know no so therefore even if a a a reasonable worst case scenario did it not give you concern

00:57:53 concern that just under half of the doors in your stock had no operating self-closing devices no because because i don't know what that was based on and i was more anxious to get the

00:58:05 and i was more anxious to get the program approved and on site and and and going forward and then really to ponder the figures too much i just wanted approval

00:58:16 so you didn't apply your mind to the potential fire safety consequences of the facts indicated by the assumptions well they're not facts are they that's

00:58:27 well they're not facts are they that's the point he's he's giving an indicative cost

00:58:30 cost based on something that you know you have to start somewhere don't you you have to

00:58:34 have to to go back to the director of housing saying this is this is on the basis of this this is what it will cost we don't know whether it's on that basis but but you need somewhere to start i i

00:58:45 but you need somewhere to start i i um and really

00:58:49 i don't know what more i can add sorry now i understand the point you're making entirely

00:58:53 entirely it's a starting point and it's based on assumptions but did the fact that you were starting from just under half of the doors in the borough are having either broken or no wouldn't uh self-closers give you cause for

00:59:06 uh self-closers give you cause for concern

00:59:07 concern no because i think that the purpose of the exercise was to get the budget agreed rather than to to from my perspective that's what i thought we were trying to achieve get the budget degree get on and do um in fact if it were down

00:59:19 get on and do um in fact if it were down to me i probably would have made the fully compliant number less in order in order to

00:59:23 order to to give us a slash going forward but it wasn't down to me um

00:59:31 now in your first witness statement let's go to it page 19.

00:59:39 you say it paragraph 83 on that page on 16th of march 2017 i produced a paper reviewing the first strategy in respect of self-closers which suggested that the tmo adopt a

00:59:50 which suggested that the tmo adopt a five-year installation program for retrofitting self-closing devices across our stock

00:59:55 our stock jw25 and you give it the title and that document is at tm00842281

01:00:05 and it's a paper as you can see when it comes up

01:00:10 comes up for the health and safety committee okay uh uh for this for its meeting on the 16th of march 2017 paper five

01:00:21 on the 16th of march 2017 paper five for information and if we go to page two we can see your name appears above the date 10th of march 2017. yeah so we're clear that you're dr you drafted it

01:00:32 drafted it uh if we go to item three on page one you could see that you set out there what what is the jmt's decision that the tma would not be instigating a dedicated inspection or maintenance

01:00:44 dedicated inspection or maintenance program for self-closing devices you see that yes yes uh that

01:00:54 uh that that was not what you recommended was it no can you explain why uh the jmt had set its face against your recommendation

01:01:05 recommendation i wasn't at the meeting um but well i i the feedback i had received was that laura wasn't convinced that it was being applied consistently

01:01:17 that it was being applied consistently across london and and i think i had the impression she would have been happier to implement it if she was confident that everybody was being treated equally and

01:01:26 and and held to the same standards but i don't know because i wasn't at the meeting you went to the meeting and that's a fair point but what you do is set out the reasons given for the decision if we look at point three first paragraph

01:01:38 point three first paragraph in the if we pick up the third line it says consumers expressed that the real value of such a program in terms of improving resident safety is impossible to quantify so it is difficult to justify committing

01:01:49 so it is difficult to justify committing limited resources to a program which would then be ongoing indefinitely now do i take it that you're setting out your understanding of the joint management team's reasoning

01:02:00 management team's reasoning yes i think that might have even been a direct quote from laura that's that's i was just passing on what i'd been advised did you agree with the reasoning

01:02:08 reasoning no did you express your disagreement with the reasoning uh most likely i did but it would have been to no avail do you remember you said it was a direct quote how was that decision conveyed to

01:02:21 quote how was that decision conveyed to you did you see a document

01:02:25 sorry i can't recall actually it may have been from barbara or it may have i may have seen sight of a document i'm not sure when you say you most likely would have expressed your disagreement do you remember

01:02:37 remember well i would have spoken to barbara and said i think this is the wrong decision i think this is what we should be doing and i appreciate laura's got some reticence

01:02:45 reticence but actually if we don't do it now then we're putting off the inevitable do you remember what barbara matthews said to you in response uh no i don't i know that she my view

01:02:56 uh no i don't i know that she my view was that she was disappointed also to get the the our three-year proposal moved to five years and um i think she was you know to be fair she supported it and she wanted us to get on and do it

01:03:07 to get on and do it um you can see that in the next paragraph you go on to record this further if the london fire brigade lfb were to make this a priority and look to introduce this as a

01:03:18 and look to introduce this as a london-wide standard that they would enforce against rather than on a borough by borough basis we would take legal advice

01:03:23 advice and make representations to the gla in advance of instigating an inspection program uh was it your view that the lfp were wrong to ask the tmo to have an inspection and

01:03:35 to ask the tmo to have an inspection and maintenance policy no and again that is more or less a direct

01:03:40 direct what was fed back to me from the meeting so that is also not my view um no they weren't wrong and was it your understanding that the lfp did not in fact have a london-wide standard for inspecting and maintaining

01:03:51 for inspecting and maintaining self-closing devices i didn't know i knew that

01:03:54 knew that from the correspondence with colleagues in the sector um that it hadn't been something that had been was being raised with them on any kind of regular basis

01:04:02 basis so generally the feedback i was getting was that it it wasn't um being applied consistently at um at sort of fire safety officer level

01:04:13 at sort of fire safety officer level necessarily but but but i hadn't gone beyond a handful of no um

01:04:19 um no and from your interactions with the lfb and we've seen a number of them did you ever get the sense that they were picking the tmo out for special treatment

01:04:26 treatment no no that wasn't my my view but but um i mean laura's sat on a fire safety group with london directors so she'll have had different interactions that may have given her a

01:04:37 interactions that may have given her a different information

01:04:42 at any rate is it right do i take it from this being blunt that pushing your case or your belief about this any further would have been as it were above your pay grade um it wouldn't have gone anywhere yeah unfortunately now let's look at the

01:04:56 yeah unfortunately now let's look at the minutes of the health and safety committee meeting for the 16th of march 2017 for which this document was prepared

01:05:06 tm00847312 uh we can see

01:05:14 that you attended that meeting

01:05:18 the list of today's present third item down yes

01:05:21 down yes yes and if you go please to page five

01:05:28 and look at paragraph 4.2 under the heading

01:05:32 heading review of fire safety you can see it says bm that's barbara matthews advised that our bkc had been consulted and had confirmed their view that we adopt a five-year installation program for self-closers but that at this stage we should not

01:05:44 but that at this stage we should not instigate an inspection program and then it goes on at 4.3 i should show you uh pm suggested that any clarification from council or rbkc legal be incorporated in to the fire strategy

01:05:57 be incorporated in to the fire strategy to formalize tma's position on where self-closers would be fitted and which doors would be inspected now bm is obviously barbara matthews uh

01:06:08 what was the purpose of formalizing the tmo's position in writing i don't know to be honest i don't think i did it right did you understand that to require the fire safety strategy to

01:06:19 to require the fire safety strategy to be

01:06:19 be amended or mended further to up to include reference to the inspection and maintenance of self-closing devices i think peter had a view that

01:06:30 i think peter had a view that that there were maybe locations across the stock

01:06:34 the stock where self-closers weren't fitted because of the way the doors were located and we did have a number of street properties where the front entrance door would have been to the street and and didn't leave to lead the communal area so there were a small number but

01:06:46 area so there were a small number but actually

01:06:46 actually um i didn't think it was worth investigating any further because it was it was such a small small number right and you can see from paragraph 4.3 that mr madison suggests the clarification be

01:06:58 the clarification be incorporated into the first strategy and the action initial next to that sub paragraph is yours jw did you action it

01:07:10 paragraph is yours jw did you action it no why is that um actually i think usually the way this works is it's the initial against the individual paragraph so i don't think we'd ever put anybody against that even does that mean it

01:07:21 against that even does that mean it wasn't to be actioned at all that can't be right uh i think i think what i was going to do was was get clarification of the small

01:07:32 was get clarification of the small number of

01:07:33 number of situations where self-closers wouldn't needed to be fitted in the stock i wasn't going to take legal advice for council's opinion because i think that wasn't really required

01:07:45 and i think i did do that right well let's look at the final version of the june 2017 fire safety strategy agreed on the 13th of june 2017. it's a

01:07:59 agreed on the 13th of june 2017. it's a tmo.00847324 we've seen it before we'll come back to it now

01:08:04 it now page 12 paragraph 18.1.1

01:08:20 and on page 12 you can see that in the last paragraph above 18.2 it says this the tmo has a variety of ongoing methods of

01:08:31 has a variety of ongoing methods of ensuring that self-closing devices remain in place and remain operational these include but are not confined to included in works to all void stroke empty properties in advance of new tenant moving in

01:08:42 advance of new tenant moving in included in six monthly checks of all sheltered dwellings included in monthly inspections of all temporary accommodation when undertaking comprehensive fra reviews the assessor access permitting

01:08:53 reviews the assessor access permitting will inspect a number of flat entrance doors in their self-closing devices now before june 2017 those were were they not the the four

01:09:05 those were were they not the the four points or actions that the tmo was already undertaking that was the policy and had been for some time yeah but we hadn't got a permission to um

01:09:16 um to do regular comprehensive checks so we we weren't able to move it much forward at this stage we we tried we identified the need we'd um escalated the lfb's view but it

01:09:30 um escalated the lfb's view but it didn't get approved well this policy that you uh that i've just read to you and these four parts of it was precisely the policy that rebecca burton had indicated was

01:09:41 that rebecca burton had indicated was insufficient back in january of the previous year although

01:09:45 although we did get approval to do the installation so at least we would be more confident about cascading that across the stock what we didn't have was that i think we hoped that we would be able to

01:09:56 be able to chip away at any resistance but we wanted to

01:10:01 wanted to um expedite the installation program and then keep on raising the need for the inspections or look at other methods of for example the dialogue with ian lines to see was there anything that we could

01:10:12 there anything that we could be doing more more holistically yes but do you accept what i just put to you i think you do that so far as an inspection regime is concerned this was not sufficient i completely accept it yes so

01:10:23 sufficient i completely accept it yes so why was it included in the new fire safety strategy well because at the moment it's the only thing that we've got to move forward with i i mean i could have omitted it but

01:10:35 i mean i could have omitted it but actually

01:10:36 actually i'm not sure that would have been right either would it i i mean just to reiterate at this stage i had no access to a maintenance program i recognized the

01:10:48 a maintenance program i recognized the need for it i escalated the need for it and i would go keep escalating it and do what i could to get support or or to to find um perhaps a way that we hadn't

01:10:59 um perhaps a way that we hadn't considered but at the moment this is all we've got so i have to reflect it so do you also accept that this policy did not reflect the guidance in the lga guide to the effect that there needed to be a

01:11:10 be a six flee inspection and maintenance regime i do yes and that in that respect uh the tmo was and remained out of compliance with the rro yes

01:11:22 out of compliance with the rro yes yes yes uh mr chairman is that a convenient moment for a break yes we can have a break at that point i keep keep breaking earlier it's not going to become a habit

01:11:34 going to become a habit never mind we won't hold it against you right well the clocks will saying something different i'm going to say that we'll have a break until half past three

01:11:42 three and uh please don't talk to him about your evidence while you're out of the room

01:11:46 room thank you very much

01:11:58 very good hopefully then please thank

01:12:06 you

01:31:49 yes would you ask mr ray to come back in

01:31:56 please

01:32:00 yes all right yes good well done yes mr miller yes mr chairman

01:32:07 chairman um miss ray just a few more questions on self-closing doors and problems with them excuse me um do you remember a tmo

01:32:18 excuse me um do you remember a tmo handyman called seamus dunlee yes he gave a statement to the metropolitan police and it is of

01:32:27 met3019959

01:32:31 can we look at that please that's his first page and you can see that it's a statement dated the 6th of july 2018. yes and at page six he says

01:32:46 we just look at page six

01:33:06 so

01:33:16 uh yes at page six you see he says that uh the third paragraph just after the warranty ran out the doors started going wrong they had internal door closers that were pulling

01:33:28 internal door closers that were pulling out from the door because they had tiny little screws holding them in and they had a massive fat spring inside the door had a hole drilled into it had an enclosed spring that went into the door and would have a chain which

01:33:39 door and would have a chain which attached to the frame the springs were quite big and the screws that were holding them in was too small

01:33:43 small some of the screws were pulling out of the door and some are pulling out of the frame

01:33:47 frame if it's coming out of the frame or the door the chain goes around and you can't shut the door you can't reattach it because of the fixing so i would have no alternative but to remove it i think i did this to about ten doors one of the door closes that i took off i

01:33:59 one of the door closes that i took off i showed to someone from management in my office

01:34:01 office i can't remember who it was it could have been janice ray or claire williams i said that the closing mechanisms are far too much for the weight of the door i think that the closest they were using were old stock because the casings were

01:34:12 were old stock because the casings were rusty

01:34:12 rusty not that they stopped it working i got no response from management after i showed them the door closes that had removed not a thing it was basically sorted out obviously no one was going to come back to repair the doors and i couldn't

01:34:23 to repair the doors and i couldn't so all i could do was remove the door closer now this now made that an illegal door because with the door closer pulled out the door wouldn't self shut i said that to claire williams janice ray and i think

01:34:34 ray and i think i would have told nicola i've read that all to you uh do you remember speaking to seamus dunlee about the door closers at grenfell tower as he suggested no you don't do you recall

01:34:46 suggested no you don't do you recall carl stokes raising any issue about shameless donnelly removing door closers yes i do what did he tell you um that he had spoken to somebody when he was on the

01:34:57 spoken to somebody when he was on the estate

01:34:57 estate and been advised that sheamus had had removed

01:35:01 removed a number of door closers um i think it was i can't remember the reason i think it was to accommodate the resident for some reason i don't know whether they find them heavier

01:35:12 know whether they find them heavier i can't remember the detail but i do remember being told right let's look at a document

01:35:26 tm00859693

01:35:35 and this is an email the 17th of december

01:35:39 december if we look at the bottom of page one from you to siobhan rumble subject removing self-closers hi siobhan our fire risk assessor has raised his concern that in conversation with a few of the tenants at granville tower

01:35:51 of the tenants at granville tower they've advised that sheamus had disconnected the sell closers on their flat entrance door in at least one of these cases this was said to be due to the tenant perpetually locking himself out of his flat it's imperative that these fire doors

01:36:02 it's imperative that these fire doors are self-closing so i'd be grateful if you could please impress this upon sheamus and insist that he refrains from disconnecting or removing any other self-closing devices and if you look up

01:36:14 look up she comes back to you on the 21st of december

01:36:17 december we need to scroll up a little bit further and she says told him thanks um do you recall this exchange i think so so you were aware of

01:36:30 i think so so you were aware of self-closing devices being removed by a tmo handyman seamus donnelly at least in december 2015 even if not before that yes i i'm pretty confident i would have

01:36:41 yes i i'm pretty confident i would have followed that up with a phone call to siobhan

01:36:44 siobhan asking if sheamus could tell us the numbers of the flats that he had disconnected the devices and asked her to raise

01:36:52 to raise get him to raise orders to root to reinstate or fit a replacement self-closure but i don't suppose i put that in writing because i

01:37:00 because i i'm sure i would have spoken to her about his behavior right so you did take steps to locate or identify the flats where seamus donnelly had disconnected self lasers i'm sure that i i asked for

01:37:11 self lasers i'm sure that i i asked for it for him to be um interrogated did you take any further steps to follow up and make sure that where sheamus done lee had disconnected dorklet self-closures the self-closing devices have been

01:37:22 the self-closing devices have been replaced and we're working i don't recall i don't recall if i did why would you not have done well it's not a question of not a done but i i don't know right it's 2015 and i yeah

01:37:35 i don't know right it's 2015 and i yeah don't remember sorry we don't see any documentation on this in the disclosure so was it all done um i i would have spoken to siobhan i often

01:37:45 often often found that it was better to speak to siobhan than to put things in writing so i would have asked her to um to to speak to sheamus get him to identify the flats and then we could have raised repairs orders because it was possibly

01:37:57 repairs orders because it was possibly beyond the scope of the work that he could do as a handyman did you take any action to discuss

01:38:01 discuss this matter either with him directly sheamus don lee that is or more widely with the other handymen or estate service assistants we didn't have any other handymen he was

01:38:12 we didn't have any other handymen he was the only one in the whole stalk and the estate services assistance didn't have tools and didn't didn't undertake that kind of work um i i would be confident that i would have spoken to him about it but and it would have been speaking

01:38:24 it but and it would have been speaking not not right so um i wouldn't be able to demonstrate unfortunately right

01:38:33 and you don't know what siobhan rumble did

01:38:36 did next in response no i don't

01:38:46 uh i i think and i can't give you the reference while i stand here but siobhan rumble said that she didn't take any action in relation to the door closes because she didn't know that they were um as it were part

01:38:57 know that they were um as it were part of the fire regulations would you agree with that can you comment on well it's sort of i think i tried to explain in my initial email to her why it was crucial that it um that he

01:39:10 it was crucial that it um that he stopped doing it so i'm sure i would have i'm sure i followed up right but if that's her recollection

01:39:23 now you'll recall uh the deficiency notice of the 17th of this

01:39:30 this of november 2016 in respect of grenfell tower

01:39:34 tower let's just get back to it tm00873834

01:39:46 uh here it is and we saw your handwriting on this yesterday

01:39:53 uh and i think you you had said that when we looked at this proceed the procedure for this that before a notice was issued it was procedure for the lfb fire safety team to call you up and ask for confirmation about the maintenance arrangements and

01:40:05 about the maintenance arrangements and to outline the breaches to you yeah i mean they didn't always but that was generally their practice yeah now um we can see from the bottom of page two of this document if you go to it please that the person who conducted the audit that

01:40:17 the person who conducted the audit that had led to this deficiency notice was somebody called michelle mchugh inspecting officer michelle mchugh yes yes yes before she issued the notice did michonne hugh call you and ask for

01:40:28 did michonne hugh call you and ask for confirmation about the maintenance arrangements do you remember i don't remember i'm sorry you don't remember she she was somebody that i dealt with so it's possible that she did but i'm not sure if it was in relation to grenfell now if you go to go to page pages five

01:40:40 now if you go to go to page pages five and six

01:40:42 and six page five to start with you can see that uh

01:40:46 uh on that page uh we you you can see that under under these

01:40:54 these uh defects uh the maintenance of the self-closing devices on entrance doors was referred to wasn't it uh yeah yes uh do you remember having a discussion at all at all with michelle

01:41:06 discussion at all at all with michelle mchugh about that no i don't

01:41:13 and if you look at page five you can see over to page six article 17.1 if you look at the bottom

01:41:25 of page five it says the protected route has been compromised by the fitting of doors that do not self-close top of page six flats 44 and 153

01:41:37 top of page six flats 44 and 153 were checked at audit and did not self-close see that and then on page six under article 14 at the time of the audit the emergency

01:41:48 at the time of the audit the emergency roots or exits were inadequate it was found that doors to flats 44 and 153 did not self-close [Applause]

01:41:58 uh and uh under what it's right isn't it that article 17 1 of the rro is about ensuring that there is a suitable system of

01:42:09 there is a suitable system of maintenance yes do you remember whether the lfb asked you about the maintenance arrangements for self-closing devices i don't recall that they did no

01:42:22 do i take it from this that there was no prior discussion that you had that you can recall with michelle mchugh about the breaches or deficiencies set out in this deficiency notice

01:42:34 out in this deficiency notice not in this case no i i don't have any recollection i i feel sure if she had phoned me i would i would remember some of the conversation when you did get this deficiency notice you presumably must have understood that an issue had been raised in respect of

01:42:46 an issue had been raised in respect of the system of maintenance for the flat entrance doors yes yes yes and this is late 2016 this is something that that was in discussion with the joint management

01:42:57 in discussion with the joint management team as we'd seen from earlier on in the year yes

01:42:59 year yes yes the march of 2016 and also uh in september 2016 at the health and safety committee meeting yes yes it must have come with some considerable disappointment and frustration to you

01:43:10 frustration to you to receive this document from the lfb but not entirely unexpected no it's frustrating that um we knew there was an issue we would we were trying to progress it and the

01:43:21 we were trying to progress it and the progressing it took longer and was more protracted than i would have wished yeah now if you uh go to page one again we can see that you

01:43:33 go to page one again we can see that you add annotations in february 17 feb 17 there now we know the notice was raised on the 17th of november 2016. why were the um why were your notes oh

01:43:44 why were the um why were your notes oh updates only added about three months later

01:43:47 later can you explain i can't explain um i can't explain sorry i have no idea right uh we cited updates unless i transferred them across from

01:43:58 transferred them across from something else in february 17 sorry i really don't know right let's look in detail at one of the flats that's flat 44

01:44:08 44 one of the two i'd where the notice identifies the self closes is not working you um cover this in your witness statement at the 21st of august 2020 at tm008

01:44:21 at the 21st of august 2020 at tm008 934 page 20 paragraph 45

01:44:28 and you say in that paragraph there the annotation i've made on this document is responsive repairs requested

01:44:38 see that yes and then you go on to say in the last part of the paragraph i attached for information a screenshot from capita which shows that there is no record of a

01:44:49 which shows that there is no record of a repair order being raised in relation to the door or self-closing device of flat 44

01:44:54 44 was no repair raised because you yourself had failed to request the necessary repair well i can't see how i could have requested one for one of the flats and not for the

01:45:05 for one of the flats and not for the other that just beggars belief really so no i don't think so right are you able to explain why you didn't request a repair to to the door or the self-closing device

01:45:18 to the door or the self-closing device for flat 44 i i find it i don't believe i didn't request it right there is absolutely no way that i would make requests for one flat when there are clearly two i would have

01:45:30 there are clearly two i would have that i couldn't raise orders so all i could do was request orders and provide the detail of what i needed to be raised after that it went off to other people

01:45:41 after that it went off to other people in

01:45:41 in elsewhere and then i could check the system for the order number and the status of the repair at a later date i'll usually got a colleague to help with that um so i i cannot believe that i would have

01:45:52 i cannot believe that i would have raised one and not the other just but i would have raised them as two separate

01:45:58 separate requests so that they would have discrete numbers that i could track yes my previous question may have been a little bit unfair um let me try it slightly differently if

01:46:09 um let me try it slightly differently if as it uh appears do as you say you would have inevitably have requested a pair for both flat uh front door self closers can you

01:46:21 uh front door self closers can you explain why it didn't show up on the capital spreadsheet flat 44 no i can't um and i it's something i know nothing about to be honest so

01:46:29 honest so it there may be an explanation that i'm unaware of but the repairs um side of things up i didn't understand the software and i didn't need to really so sorry i i can't uh you didn't understand the software but didn't need

01:46:40 understand the software but didn't need to

01:46:41 to in the light of that would you agree that the error would probably not have occurred

01:46:46 occurred if you had used the w2 or crm management systems to progress the deficiency notice items actually no not necessarily that the problem seems to be

01:46:58 problem seems to be with the repair system i would have always had to request an order through the repair system and at that time

01:47:09 and at that time it may well have been that i could have uh raised the request through crm and then it went through to capita i don't know it was kind of um they they worked in some sort of

01:47:20 um they they worked in some sort of tandem which i didn't i didn't really understand the w-2 system was never directly linked to the repairs ordering system so it would still it could have been recorded in w-2 but it would still have had to have the action taken elsewhere right so that i don't think

01:47:33 elsewhere right so that i don't think that would have been foolproof but it might have come to your attention if a repair request had slipped through the net if you had been using wtw2 or the crm system to input requests

01:47:45 wtw2 or the crm system to input requests for repairs possibly it would yes to be perfectly honest i don't know why i didn't just put it all on a spreadsheet but as i've said before we did get so few

01:47:56 as i've said before we did get so few um until the last kind of probably posted air there were some years we had no deficiency notices at all there was some that we only had two and they may have raised two or three items and so

01:48:06 and so it wasn't on my radar as a big volume of work i had my own kind of little system that

01:48:11 that that i i thought worked and it had appeared to work so i hadn't really thought that it was something that i should work towards

01:48:22 should work towards now can we look at met 3039807 page 79.

01:48:35 what i'm going to show you is part of a report conducted by the bre after the fire

01:48:41 fire in february of 2018. i think this is a later version even of that

01:48:49 that uh this is actually 2019. no matter if you look at page 79 on

01:49:00 page 79 on in that document if you look at box 7 you can see that flat 44 is about halfway down there with red next to it no so door not in situ but if you read across

01:49:13 in situ but if you read across you can see that the entry for from the right is door closer present answer answer yes yes

01:49:24 answer answer yes yes door closer type concealed working door closer

01:49:27 closer no door open or closed open now that was the finding according to bre's survey

01:49:38 to bre's survey assuming it to be accurate would you agree that that suggests that uh if it's correct that on the night of the fire the door had a non-functioning door

01:49:50 the door had a non-functioning door closer

01:49:52 closer that it is at least possible that in the seven months between the lfb identifying the non-working self-closing device and the grenfell tower fire the self-closing device for flat 44 was

01:50:03 the self-closing device for flat 44 was never repaired it's possible yes it is also possible that it was repaired and then was either broken or disconnected again again it's possible yes you don't know which it is i'm sorry

01:50:15 yes you don't know which it is i'm sorry i can't know which it is now now as to flat 153 which was the second self-closing device identified by the 17th of november 2016 deficiency notice

01:50:26 17th of november 2016 deficiency notice you deal with that in your 21st of august 2020 statement at page 20 paragraph 45 that's tmo.0087393

01:50:39 tmo.0087393 page 20 paragraph 45 and there you say

01:50:46 that

01:50:51 yes in the second line the open contractor spreadsheet refers to job number 201631934 in respect to flat 1953 raised on 26th of october 2016.

01:51:02 of october 2016. with instructions front door not locking properly it is a multi-lock door please attend to overhaul lock and then you say the job is marked as being fully completed on third november

01:51:13 being fully completed on third november 2016.

01:51:15 2016. the capital record confirms that this was reported by a resident by the telephone which would indicate why the repair was raised before the nad was received do you accept that job number 201631934

01:51:27 do you accept that job number 201631934 was not done in response to the notice of deficiency because it predates the inspection by michelle mchugh which then gave rise to the deficiency notice her inspection was on the 27th of

01:51:38 her inspection was on the 27th of october 2016. right um that's the information that it says here is that it was reported by the resident um so yeah it wasn't generated by the

01:51:50 um so yeah it wasn't generated by the tuition

01:51:51 tuition yes yes and when you came to consider the deficiency notice why did you understand the issue with the door and the locking mechanism to be the same issue that had been raised that the door didn't self-close well i

01:52:02 that the door didn't self-close well i must have gone and spoken to somebody in the repairs team to find out more detail yes and did who was that you know sorry now did you ask

01:52:12 ask adrian bowman or an esa to go and check the flat entrance door when you've got the deficiency notice um i don't recall doing so

01:52:23 um i don't recall doing so why did you consider that the work done to the lock on flat 153 was an adequate response to the lfb's

01:52:29 lfb's finding that the door did not self-close well as i say i would i'm sure i would have spoken to somebody in repairs who would have checked the screen advised me that there was

01:52:41 the screen advised me that there was already an order and i have either made an assumption or they've been able to advise me that it was for both i i don't know i can't really

01:52:53 for both i i don't know i can't really answer you any more fully than at any rate do you accept that you and your team fail to address the issue because the nfb raised the deficiency notice in respect to the door self-closer

01:53:04 well

01:53:07 if the residents raised the repair and it's in the repairs ordering system whenever the the fire brigade attend then

01:53:14 then it's it's in the system it's it's like we said

01:53:17 we said we probably can't ever be 100 compliant at all times there will always be periods where things are being progressed but not not completed

01:53:29 and when you wrote in the yes yes yes thank you but i think you accept as you've just done the repair was unrelated to the issues highlighted by the lfb and was raised

01:53:40 highlighted by the lfb and was raised at an earlier time by the resident that's what it says yes that's right um now um mr ray you may or may not be glad to know that we've come to the end of

01:53:48 of a topic and are about to or could start a new one

01:53:53 a new one but it's been a long day and it's been a long week i anticipate that uh you may be a little bit tired that wouldn't normally be a good reason to stop but the next topic may require a bit of further examination

01:54:04 examination by me we won't finish it during the course of the day we're well on track mr chairman

01:54:08 chairman uh to finish uh miss ray well well within the scheduled time uh and so i was going to suggest and again highly uncharacteristically for me uh that we would call it a day at this

01:54:19 uh that we would call it a day at this stage yeah you're confident that um if we finish early today we will still finish miss ray within the time that she's been asked to make available in absolutely we will uh she's in fact

01:54:31 in absolutely we will uh she's in fact been asked to be made available until close of business on wednesday i'm completely confident that we will easily beat that target and we may even finish

01:54:40 finish by close of business tuesday but i can't guarantee that right well i suppose you'd be a verse to an early afternoon miss ray would you wouldn't

01:54:49 wouldn't that goes for other people as well right so we

01:54:52 so we in just a moment then we will um call the whole for the day before we do that i just need to mention one thing about arrangements for next week as everyone will know

01:55:04 for next week as everyone will know monday the 14th of june is the fourth anniversary of the the fire

01:55:10 fire the inquiry will not sit on that day out of respect for those who died and indeed the many others whose lives have been

01:55:17 have been so badly affected by the tragedy so we shall resume the hearing hearing evidence on tuesday the 15th of

01:55:28 hearing evidence on tuesday the 15th of june

01:55:29 june at 10 o'clock say miss ray i'm going to ask you now to come back and answer some more questions but not until tuesday so you've got a slightly longer

01:55:41 tuesday so you've got a slightly longer weekend in which i hope you can get a bit of rest but please don't take the opportunity to talk to anyone about your evidence or anything to do with it all right okay so thank

01:55:52 to do with it all right okay so thank you very much and we'll see you again on tuesday at 10 o'clock thank you thank you very much

01:56:08 right thank you very much mr millet well then as i've already explained which answered on monday and we adjourn till 10 o'clock on tuesday thank you very much mr chairman thank you very much

01:56:40 you

↩ All hearings