Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation Evidence - Thursday 24th June 2021 (2/2)

Full transcript

00:00:31 if would you ask mr black to come back in please

00:00:43 in please thank you

00:00:51 all this is black ready to carry on good thank you yes mr millet mr chairman thank you mr black i'm going to ask you some questions now about

00:01:00 about tmo's fire safety strategy in april 2016.

00:01:04 2016. do you remember that in april 2016 janice ray circulated a note about potential fire safety strategy review you remember that moment at tm010024351

00:01:18 you remember that moment at tm010024351 we can see that note

00:01:22 tmo one double zero two four three five one

00:01:26 one uh it's paper four so it appears to have been presented to a meeting it's entitled review of fire safety strategy do you see that yes did you play any

00:01:37 do you see that yes did you play any part in that review i can't recall at the moment thank you did you see this document at the time uh again i can't recall imagine if it's been circulated as i would have

00:01:49 been circulated as i would have right janice ray told us that she had assumed that it went to the executive team

00:01:53 team at the time do you know whether it did i i can't recall the stage now um now take it from me uh and if i'm wrong i will be corrected i'm

00:02:04 and if i'm wrong i will be corrected i'm sure but there's no mention in this review paper of any issue regarding the closing out of fra actions can you comment

00:02:13 comment no do you know why there is no mention in this document of any issue relating to the closing out of fra actions no do you remember maybe you don't uh

00:02:26 do you remember maybe you don't uh thinking

00:02:27 thinking to yourself at the time that it's surprising that there was no mention of any closing out of fra actions in this document

00:02:33 document no apologies can we look at tmo double zero

00:02:36 zero eight four two two one one please

00:02:53 this is an email sent by janice ray on the 7th 7th of june 2017 2017 to barbara matthews attaching papers for a health and safety team meeting to take place on the 13th

00:03:05 team meeting to take place on the 13th of june

00:03:07 of june 2017. if you just take a moment to look at the header of the email there you will note that you are not it appears

00:03:16 appears cc'd on this uh or or an addressee of it uh but do you remember did you think you received this email or saw it in some other way i i sorry i

00:03:27 saw it in some other way i i sorry i can't recall at the moment the subject is papers for health and safety committee 13th june 10 am they weren't on the health safety committee

00:03:35 committee said can you tell us whether as a matter of normal procedure you would have received this set of documents sorry i can't call

00:03:46 set of documents sorry i can't call i can't recall no um help me if you look down the screen and you can see a list of 14 papers for the following week's health and safety committee meeting in the ordinary course

00:03:57 committee meeting in the ordinary course of things would you have received these documents even though you were not to attend at that meeting i don't recall receiving these no but in the ordinary course

00:04:08 the ordinary course would you i'm not sure really right i'm not copied in so it's she said i think the question mr black is did you normally receive copies of papers produced for the health and

00:04:19 papers produced for the health and safety committee yes i think usually would right

00:04:25 right uh now we can see as you see that there was an executive team meeting scheduled for the 14th of june and attached to that email was paper four

00:04:37 four as you can see that uh fras in fact it's paper it's paper four but it's item five fra action stats fire safety update paper for a as you

00:04:50 fire safety update paper for a as you can see from that email yeah um let's look at paper four um this is tm00842218

00:05:09 now this was the last in a series of statistics provided periodically by janice ray to the executive team from 2016.

00:05:18 2016. uh and i say it's the last in a series before

00:05:22 before the grenfell tower fire on the 14th of june 2017. looking at the numbers the outstanding total outstanding actions was 142.

00:05:34 you see that under under total in the outstanding column yes sorry yeah just can you see that one sorry i was just reading that table and that's a that's uh at

00:05:47 and that's a that's uh at 7th of june 2017 and the figures in brackets

00:05:51 brackets are expressed to be as to a 10th of march

00:05:54 march 27 2017 and the figure for totally the total figure for partially complete was 165. you see that yes yes so a combined total of

00:06:05 yes yes so a combined total of incomplete actions was 307 as at the 7th of june 2017. yes yes yes if we look at page 2 we have the age profile of outstanding actions

00:06:19 if you turn to that you can see uh that across the across the page uh you've got uh total outstanding actions that are

00:06:30 uh total outstanding actions that are four months or older is 250. and you get that by adding 750 and 72 and 128.

00:06:40 and 128. yeah you see that yes oh sorry i was just looking at yes uh

00:06:48 uh and indeed most of the incomplete ones are 12 months plus aren't they yeah yes i mean of the of the 250 128 are 12 months plus

00:07:01 128 are 12 months plus were you a mate were you made aware of these figures at the time i

00:07:09 i can't recall i'm afraid would you agree that those figures were a cause for serious concern yes and that's because isn't it i'm inviting you to agree with me

00:07:21 i'm inviting you to agree with me because they show the reverse of what ought to be the case which is that most outstanding should be the youngest not the oldest i agree yes do you know why the trend was rising and not falling and no

00:07:35 and not falling and no and if you look at it closely you you can see

00:07:39 can see that the core of the problem is responsive repair where the figure goes up exponentially the older you get you see that yeah yes do you know why that was i

00:07:51 that was i not at this stage now at that stage i'm not looking at this i don't right do you remember

00:07:58 remember uh and this is only a week or so before the fire any discussion about why it might be that within responsive repairs you were experiencing an exponential rise in outstanding actions

00:08:10 exponential rise in outstanding actions the older they became i can't recall sorry would that not have indicated to you at the time that there was a

00:08:16 was a fundamental problem uh in the tma's management of outstanding actions and in particular repairs responsive repairs i i unless i saw the detail i don't know

00:08:27 i i unless i saw the detail i don't know what they are sorry right to do i'm getting the impression mr black that you don't remember anything about it but also didn't do anything about it maybe because you didn't know anything about it

00:08:37 it yeah i think that's not a bad assessment

00:08:42 right are you able to explain to us how it came about that you weren't made aware of this profile what i'm saying is that so maybe i was i

00:08:54 what i'm saying is that so maybe i was i don't know this five four or five years ago i'm just trying to remember it's that thing about did i see it did i not see it it's quite hard to remember uh all right

00:09:08 uh all right now we can't see from this document whether these outstandings are red or amber are green do we no again i'm assuming from your evidence just now that you've got no recollection

00:09:19 just now that you've got no recollection of having any impression of whether the age profile of these in particular the responsive repairs was in respect of mainly reds or mainly greens or

00:09:28 greens or i can tell from this any balance between them right

00:09:34 standing back do you agree that the evidence collated by the tmo on fra actions

00:09:38 actions at this stage this is a week before the fire

00:09:42 fire in light of the long history we've been examining today shows that the the tmo had a long term and systemic problem in addressing fra actions in a timely manner

00:09:55 i'm not sure if i'd say that but i recognize that the 12 months are looking great

00:10:07 there was no review mechanism as i think we established yesterday at senior management level of fire risk overall

00:10:14 overall was there apart from the health and safety

00:10:18 safety committee yes and i don't know if repairs direct had something in place in their organization

00:10:27 do you accept that you as ceo had ultimate

00:10:30 ultimate responsibility to ensure that the tmo carried out its fire safety obligations adequately yes uh and responsibility to review and make changes where necessary to ensure that the tma was meeting its

00:10:42 that the tma was meeting its statutory fire safety obligations yes do you agree that you didn't do so no i agree that we've actually improved the situation

00:10:50 situation and continue to try to do that so you don't agree that you failed in your responsibility i have to accept responsibility do you agree that you fail to discharge it

00:11:01 agree that you fail to discharge it i i accept responsibility do you agree that you failed to discharge it i discharged my duty through other people so when i'm looking here

00:11:12 here uh the the sort of repairs day-to-day repair sat with repairs direct so that duty would have sat with

00:11:22 sat with the managing director will you agree with me that the tmo of which you were the ceo and therefore for this purpose its

00:11:34 and therefore for this purpose its embodiment did not make suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks to which the relevant persons and in particular your residents were exposed at grenfell tower

00:11:47 i'll have to accept that let's go to your witness statement please tmo 50888 page 17.

00:12:04 and go please to paragraph 88 you say here

00:12:08 here under the heading the fire and safety measures within the building at the time of the fire tmo sought to comply with its health and safety and fire safety duties by adopting safety management systems involving policies and strategies

00:12:20 involving policies and strategies monitoring its safety performance conducting audits and reporting its safety performance if that is true how come there was so many outstanding

00:12:31 how come there was so many outstanding fra actions that's as at the date of the fire i would say we'd reduce the number of outstanding actions over a piece of time

00:12:42 outstanding actions over a piece of time that's in the sense of what we've been talking about earlier today i can't understand because i don't know details what are the ones that have caused such problems to clear in the older 12 months

00:12:55 the older 12 months i think it's a problem as i said that trying to clear these fire actions are not easy and we focused on it and and didn't try to not take it

00:13:06 and and didn't try to not take it seriously

00:13:08 seriously is your evidence that the legislative requirements were not reasonably achievable

00:13:16 i think with the fire risk assessment actions are challenging to achieve

00:13:23 achieve constant uh getting rid of them i think it's a struggle

00:13:30 struggle yes that wasn't my question my question i'll try once more is your evidence that the requirements of the rro the legislative requirements on the tmo as the responsible person

00:13:41 on the tmo as the responsible person were not reasonably

00:13:46 achievable

00:13:51 we sought to achieve it

00:13:57 is the truth mr black that the tmo never really faced up to the degree of failure to comply with its obligations under the rro and recognize that there was a fundamental

00:14:08 was a fundamental systemic problem with closing out rro actions in accordance with your own fire risk assessors time scales as understood by janice ray

00:14:21 we found it challenging

00:14:26 standing back

00:14:29 why were you in that position let me suggest

00:14:32 suggest three possibilities and if you can think of another please tell us was it the age and condition of your social housing stock and its size which meant

00:14:41 meant that keeping residents reasonably safe from fire was impracticable

00:14:47 i think the the shape of the store could be an issue in terms of actually uh we had specific issues could you ever i mean you had this stuff after the pre-war

00:14:58 pre-war but the stuff in the 60s 70s 80s in terms of created problems in terms of the design so i think that that sort of contributes sometimes to the problem to try to resolve these issues

00:15:09 resolve these issues certainly leaks you know are completely different things i think historically i don't think the stock in terms if you look at investment in stock

00:15:20 terms if you look at investment in stock because the way government finance local authority

00:15:23 authority that actually long-term investment had only started really in 2012 when hr freedom was given up until then the government controlled the finances which went

00:15:34 the finances which went into yes there was an uplift in terms of decent homes which was a program but a lot of times that dealt with the interior the kitchens the bathrooms

00:15:45 interior the kitchens the bathrooms rather than actual sort of structure of the buildings which decay over time sort of thing given that answer that takes us to another possibility

00:15:56 another possibility your inability or unwillingness to resource proper fire safety measures appropriate to the age and size of your stock

00:16:04 stock i wouldn't accept that or was it just a blind spot about how serious it all was i don't think it's a blind spot i think we tried with the resources we had to meet our obligations

00:16:17 you knew you weren't meeting them but you never asked for any more money no

00:16:26 no you agree or no you disagree

00:16:31 we it's uh can you say the question again yes

00:16:35 again yes was it i asked you whether it was a blind spot you didn't you didn't think it was

00:16:39 it was i'm suggesting that you knew you were not meeting the legislative requirements but never asked for any more money

00:16:47 i i'm not sure of that one let's turn to a totally different topic which is ader tower um first can we look at the deficiency

00:16:58 um first can we look at the deficiency notice

00:16:59 notice for that building and the date so that you've got it firmly in your mind is the 12th of october 2015 uh tmo double zero eight four two two seven

00:17:10 seven [Music]

00:17:16 one

00:17:25 uh and this is the uh deficiency notice itself of that data addressed to janice ray in respect of

00:17:34 did you ever see this document i

00:17:41 can't recall apologies there are i think we found documents that suggest that you you might have done and i just want to try and pin down whether you actually did or not i think if you find documents i'll i'll

00:17:53 i think if you find documents i'll i'll accept that i've seen it uh okay all right but you can't recall i kind of know the moment no no i i i take it did you read it before coming into the witness box this oh yes yes do you agree with me

00:18:05 this oh yes yes do you agree with me that it highlights significant failings with carrying out works identified in fire risk assessments relevant to our dare tower so this is sorry the the i'm just trying

00:18:18 so this is sorry the the i'm just trying to remember what the action can you is this before the fire sorry it is

00:18:23 is but and that's the point if we go to page three yeah you can see the schedule

00:18:31 article eleven at the time of the audit your preventative and protective measures have not been planned organized controlled monitored or reviewed where required

00:18:38 required it was found that significant findings had not been monitored and reviewed to ensure

00:18:41 ensure works had been completed and it goes on to page four articles 17 1 and article 8. if you just look at those do you agree that those highlighted

00:18:52 do you agree that those highlighted significant failings with carrying out works identified in far risk assessments

00:19:03 specific i accept that it might have been a bit of a general question look at article eight at the time of the audit the general fire precautions as identified in the significant findings of your fire risk assessment had not been implemented

00:19:14 assessment had not been implemented it was found that you were unable to confirm if the significant findings in your fire risk assessment had been addressed

00:19:19 addressed just just on the face of it that's that's quite a it's about a serious concern isn't it yes yeah so given that it was a serious concern which potentially at least exposed tmo to criminal prosecution

00:19:31 criminal prosecution for a regulatory offence that's something that really should have been brought to your attention at the first opportunity shouldn't it yes yes now the fire itself took place on the 31st of the same month october

00:19:42 on the 31st of the same month october 2015.

00:19:44 2015. let's look at a chain of emails that were exchanged on the morning of that fire

00:19:48 fire tmo double zero eight six nine one five 159 please

00:19:59 and if we start with page two and your email to jan is ready at 10 57 you can see that copied sasha germans uh teresa brown and pete griffiths fire at

00:20:10 teresa brown and pete griffiths fire at a tower hi janice and sasha

00:20:15 uh now just before i show you the text um the fire occurred that morning and it looks from this email chain that you

00:20:25 you have had a discussion mid-morning with janice ray and sasha jevons and you're now following up following up with some questions yeah you say as discussed it's attracting attention of the press and three areas

00:20:36 attention of the press and three areas emerging in terms of speculation and then you have one two three uh and then underneath that you say janice you you say overall it's stay and be rescued and fb do not require fire extinguishers

00:20:47 and fb do not require fire extinguishers you said you had recent audit with fb and we got some notice small risk bit of concern to me so i need to understand the risk now the reference to some notice what was that

00:20:58 was that well i think that might be the deficiency notice yeah do you guess it might be but uh i i i agree that that is a possibility sitting here but do you remember whether it was

00:21:11 remember whether it was i can't remember reading this that's what i would imagine i was saying right uh looking at that then

00:21:18 then uh d do we take it that you hadn't received the notice because you say some notice

00:21:25 notice uh and just recording back to janice what she had told you yes would that mean that janice ray had not brought the deficiency notice to your attention

00:21:36 deficiency notice to your attention until there was a fire at the end of that month it would appear so can you explain why she didn't do that no i mean would you agree with me that is a serious failure on her part

00:21:49 is a serious failure on her part yes do you know why

00:21:54 you wrote the word small risk did she say it's a small risk and you were recording it or was it your assessment that there was a small risk well i think it would have been what i was told in terms of otherwise that i

00:22:06 was told in terms of otherwise that i said big risk i think right now um we can see your draft announcement to all the staff at tm0086647

00:22:21 uh and this is an email at the top of the page from pete griffiths to you tweaking the announcement below for forwarding purposes is this right that

00:22:33 purposes is this right that pete griffiths had drafted uh a a the text of a

00:22:37 text of a an announcement to go to all the tma staff

00:22:40 staff and was giving it to you for approval yes

00:22:44 yes or he tweaked it and we're giving it to you for approval now uh if we go to page one lower down please and look at the last paragraph in the draft message

00:22:56 the draft message it says the effective response we have provided reflects our strengths as a locally based tenant-led organization and the professional skills of teams in the tmo and repairs direct as well as those of our contractors

00:23:08 as well as those of our contractors pedders

00:23:08 pedders and our m.a stuart see that yes now just pause there let's also look at your email to the tmo board um tmo double zero eight six six four

00:23:20 um tmo double zero eight six six four eight zero

00:23:24 dear board members

00:23:28 this is i should just show you from you because it says on 2nd november 2015 of 1538 robert black wrote um we're not looking at the right yes that's right it's about a fifth of the way down your

00:23:40 it's about a fifth of the way down your screen do you see that yes yes uh dear board members this is to update you on the situation at ed tower and then if you cast your eye through your message

00:23:52 through your message uh down uh to the bottom you say at the bottom of one page one overall our response to the fire was very rapid so thank you again to mary faye and councillor mason who alerted me

00:24:03 faye and councillor mason who alerted me this allowed me to start our emergency process i'll provide details of all the stuff it took part later and then over the page you say very good response from the contractors and thanks to the local catholic church

00:24:17 and thanks to the local catholic church um would you agree with me that in general both of the messages that i've just shown you your announcement at least in draft form to the staff and your note to the board presented tm's reaction to the adair tower fire as

00:24:31 reaction to the adair tower fire as and in successful yes the message to the tmo board members doesn't mention the deficiency notice that the tmo had received on the 12th of october does it no why is that i don't know i mean

00:24:43 no why is that i don't know i mean that's why i need to confirm if i knew about it

00:24:46 about it yes you are chief executive and head of the executive team yes and your responsibility was to keep the board fully informed uh and up to date with anything that might affect the tmo's

00:24:58 might affect the tmo's legal position yes yes so can are you able to explain why the board wasn't told in your own message uh or or at all about the deficiency notice received

00:25:09 notice received only two and a half weeks before the fire

00:25:12 fire do you know when the board was first informed about the pre-fire deficiency notice for adder tower i can't recall so from our records please correct me if this is wrong for my records it wasn't until march 2016

00:25:24 my records it wasn't until march 2016 so three months later more i'm sorry five months later

00:25:29 would you are you on a position to correct that i i i just have to believe it can you explain it no uh can we please look at tm00880329

00:25:44 this is barbara matthews notebook uh and uh i will

00:25:51 that's the first page of it i'm so sorry page 101

00:25:54 page 101 is what we want

00:25:58 now this is my reading her handwriting but if you look at it it says fire meeting 3rd november 2015 hub flat 15 fire people in temporary accommodation

00:26:11 fire people in temporary accommodation want to get as many back as possible and then

00:26:15 then ogs or acs to do cleaning fire brigade have visited assessed is structurally safe and they're a little bit lower down [Music]

00:26:23 [Music] you can see in the penultimate entry on that page it says discussion about fire brigade needs to have doors having self closers

00:26:34 needs to have doors having self closers fire consultants to visit to make assessment and take photos now you can see that there's a

00:26:42 a it's the meeting on the 3rd of november were you at that meeting

00:26:48 i can't recall would it be usual that you would attend a meeting with barbara matthews on a matter such as this i imagine so yeah um even if you weren't

00:26:59 i imagine so yeah um even if you weren't there

00:27:00 there can we take it you were nonetheless made aware

00:27:04 aware either at this meeting or around this time of the lfb's concern about self-closures uh i can't recall

00:27:15 uh i can't recall can we then look at the next uh document tmo double 0-869-184

00:27:31 just to be clear barbara matthews evidence was that you were at this meeting that's dave 148 page 54 line 18 to 55 line 20. that was her

00:27:43 line 18 to 55 line 20. that was her recollection are you in a position to dispute that sorry dispute what sorry that you were at the meeting of the 3rd of november 2015. well i'm not going to be the speaker if she said i was there right

00:27:53 right so can we therefore take it that you were you were aware from this time of the lfb's concern about self-closures i'll have to accept that yeah yes so now um if we look at this chain of correspondence i'd like to go to page

00:28:04 correspondence i'd like to go to page six please with an email from january to rebecca burton you know rebecca burton was the local lfb fire safety team leader

00:28:13 leader and this email is dated 22nd of october 2015.

00:28:18 2015. so just in date terms this sits between the date of the deficiency notice on the 12th of october 2015 and the date of the fire on the 31st of october

00:28:30 31st of october 2015. uh and she says hi rebecca could we urgently arrange a meeting please to discuss the issues that you put on the agenda for our meeting on tuesday that you were then

00:28:41 on tuesday that you were then unfortunately unable to attend i'm concerned to hear from julie that she's about to receive five deficiency notices one each for five separate staircases at balfour house at least in part

00:28:52 least in part due to the fact that nominally fire-rated doors do not have self-closures fitted our approach our approach to self-closures has been dictated by our fire risk assessor following clarification he received from

00:29:04 following clarification he received from a discussion the lfb head of policy and head of enforcement and we've provided many fras to the lfb over the years but but not been challenged about this approach therefore in good faith we considered we

00:29:16 therefore in good faith we considered we were applying the appropriate standard if that's not the case or if the lfb standard has changed its position on this i need to understand this not least because of the potential impact on our organization now that that's her

00:29:27 organization now that that's her her email and we can see if you go up a little to page

00:29:33 three

00:29:37 over to page four on page three rebecca burton responds to janice ray on the 4th of november and explains in the first two paragraphs

00:29:49 and explains in the first two paragraphs that she's she wants to touch base she's been on leave and has some questions you see that

00:29:55 that uh and then janice ray on page two

00:29:59 if you go to page two janice ray uh responds or writes rather to alex bosman and david gibson

00:30:10 bosman and david gibson but copies in peter madison barbara matthews and you you see that yes hi alex and david please see below a list of queries from the lfb inspecting team leader are you both able to advise on points in

00:30:22 are you both able to advise on points in green would we have original plans anywhere

00:30:25 anywhere david something about scaffold i will draft response to the fra queries you see that yeah did you uh did you read that email when you got it do you think

00:30:35 you think i am yes did you look down the chain uh i can't recall do you remember being made aware that there were potentially five more deficiency notices

00:30:47 potentially five more deficiency notices in the pipeline in part at least to do with door closers self-closures i can't recall so look on the face of the documents it's a fair assumption isn't it that you

00:30:58 it's a fair assumption isn't it that you were yes well i'll have to accept that yes now you then attend a scrutiny meeting with the rbkc on the 5th of november 2015. so the day after

00:31:13 this document that you get from janice ray this email and two days after the meeting you attended with barbara matthews it's at rbk30484

00:31:27 it's at rbk30484 48049 these are the minutes of the the rbkc scrutiny committee

00:31:36 and if we go to page six please you can see you're in attendance from page one but on page six if we go to that a7 live issues report by the director of

00:31:48 live issues report by the director of housing

00:31:50 housing and it says mr black provided an update on the major fire at uh at ed air tower which had occurred on saturday 31st october on the third floor he reported that the investigation was ongoing but the emergency planning in

00:32:02 ongoing but the emergency planning in place had worked and the fire doors had also worked well he explained the timelines for tenants regaining access to their flats and the rehousing of those unable to return

00:32:12 return the chairman stressed the severity of smoke damage and how that can affect one's possessions mr black said that the tma was working with tenants to ascertain what they could still use and he said that it was compulsory for all tenants to have their own home

00:32:24 all tenants to have their own home insurance

00:32:25 insurance councillor blakeman asked why tenants were led out of smoke-filled stairways and consequently had to be treated for smoke inhalation mr black explained that the policy was to stay in your flat and wait to be rescued by

00:32:37 rescued by by the natural reaction of people was to flee

00:32:40 flee he said that there was no main alarm system but the fire brigade had arrived within two to three minutes and then there's a discussion about temporary accommodation and the local church providing

00:32:52 church providing teas and coffees now just focusing on your report i just read to you

00:32:59 to you what was the basis for your statement to the

00:33:02 the uh to the scrutiny committee that the fire doors had also worked well i was talking about the fire bills on the floor on the floor where the fire was so it's uh

00:33:14 i think there was six or six uh flats per floor uh and five of the doors had been kept closed and

00:33:25 of the doors had been kept closed and the residents had stayed there one person had came out and used the wrong stairwell and i think that's the one that got the smoke inhalation

00:33:36 smoke inhalation that's what the fire doors i was talking about there right now in response to councillor blakeman's question about tenants being led out of smoke-filled stairways you say that the natural of reaction of people was to flee

00:33:49 was it your or were you meaning to say that

00:33:53 that that people had fled through smoke-filled stairways instead of being led

00:33:57 led i'm slightly confused by the minute because

00:34:04 a lot of people had left the property it was quite early in the day so a lot of people when the fire came uh brigade came had left uh

00:34:19 so i don't understand it because they when the fire began evacuated the building it was later uh so i don't know if they led people out but i thought the building was mostly empty

00:34:31 building was mostly empty and it's on a different aspect we can see

00:34:35 see here no mention at all uh by you of the pre-fire deficiency notice ferrado tower do we no why is that i

00:34:47 do we no why is that i can't recall by this time as we've seen from the email you had been told by janice ray that there had been a notice why did you not pass that information so far as you knew it to the scrutiny

00:34:59 far as you knew it to the scrutiny committee

00:35:00 committee i can't recall sorry uh now of course we know

00:35:04 know that there were doors uh with problems with the doors and the smoke ventilation system

00:35:09 system do you agree that that fact was material for the hpsc to know i i should have probably mentioned it yes

00:35:20 yes yes

00:35:23 in fact isn't it the case that given the problems with door closers as reflected in the notice of deficiency for our dare tower you materially misrepresented the facts by saying that

00:35:34 misrepresented the facts by saying that the fire doors worked well

00:35:37 what well what i was talking about is the fire deals on the the floor of the fire operated they were they

00:35:44 they they held back the fire and the smoke and the people inside were safe stayed well that would have no doubt true

00:35:52 true drawn the eye to a successful part of the operation but drawn the eye away from other inherent defects in the building that by then you knew about

00:36:04 that by then you knew about i can't i can't remember apologies do you accept that you presented the hpsc with a misleadingly rose tinted view of the fire safety measures in that building

00:36:15 building no i don't accept that both councillor marshall and councillor makover told the inquiry

00:36:22 inquiry that they regarded the notice of deficiency as a material matter to be brought to their attention are you able to explain why they were not told about it no i can't

00:36:33 not told about it no i can't can we then move to carl stokes's um fra and action plan for tower of the 11th of november 2015. can we start with tm00840415

00:36:57 now this is an email from janice ray the 13th of november 2015 to you barbara matthews and sasha jevons subject at tower meeting with the lfb

00:37:08 subject at tower meeting with the lfb fire safety team leader

00:37:12 and it appears to follow her meeting janice ray's meeting with rebecca burton

00:37:18 and it says robert barbara sasha as you know i met with rebecca burton this morning to seek clarification on the lfb's response to the fire she advised that there are certain trigger events that caused the lfb to undertake a review following a fire

00:37:31 undertake a review following a fire in the case of ada there were two trigger factors one fire survival calls and two people rescued from balconies and then she goes on this lfb review was undertaken by rebecca

00:37:42 undertaken by rebecca who confirms this has now been completed and presented to the deputy assistant commissioner part of the review required an audit of the block and also of hazelwood tower as design identical to be undertaken within 24 hours of the fire

00:37:53 24 hours of the fire this was undertaken by inspecting officer matthew ramsey on monday 2nd november

00:37:57 november and his audit resulted in both blocks being assessed as level 5 the highest level

00:38:02 level which would generally result in enforcement action stroke prosecution

00:38:08 now if we go to page two at the bottom of the email janice ray says

00:38:14 says this uh however it's the last but one paragraph

00:38:19 paragraph however it seems typically they're focusing on self-closers on flat entrance stalls and ventilation her stated preference would be to have both staircases closed as opposed to one unenclosed however she's keen to see the

00:38:32 unenclosed however she's keen to see the reviewed risk assessment i asked if she needed to see action on both these points if we fitted self-closers could she accept the ventilation and she reiterated that she needed to see the revised fra i had the impression that if the fra

00:38:44 i had the impression that if the fra recognized the need to fit cell closers and this was programmed swiftly for both blocks this might be acceptable

00:38:51 was this email the first occasion on which you became aware that these as set out here were the lfb's principal concerns yes right

00:39:04 notwithstanding the fact that you've seen a deficiency notice by this time right yes

00:39:09 right yes [Music]

00:39:11 [Music] then let's look at double zero eight six six four eight nine

00:39:20 this is an email chain uh in a little bit later the same month november

00:39:26 november 2015 and if we go to page two the bottom email on the chain we can see that john is on the 18th of november

00:39:36 november janice ray uh sends you and barbara matthews the revised fra for adair tower and she says just received the reviewed

00:39:48 and she says just received the reviewed fra and action plan now i'm sorry i put this to you on the basis that she sent it to you it's not actually clear from the email um did she send it to you or did you just tell you she'd received it

00:39:59 just tell you she'd received it i i can't tell sorry right

00:40:04 if we go um

00:40:07 up the email chain to page one we can see that sasha jevens writes to peter madison uh and it looks as if this comes to

00:40:20 uh and it looks as if this comes to everybody because at the top of the email chain it comes to you as a cc and she says there dear all following our

00:40:31 she says there dear all following our review of carl stakes his record of significant findings and action plan yesterday afternoon i've reflected on what carl said i'm just pausing there that rather suggests that janice ray had had sensed the fra

00:40:41 the fra an action plan do you remember that i can't recall you're seeing it it looks like it yeah um and she says i've reflected on what carl said

00:40:52 said i do not think that the recommendation to install door closes throughout the building is appropriately prioritized currently high for the following reasons a it's not a statutory requirement to

00:41:04 a it's not a statutory requirement to install self-closures retrospectively therefore should not automatically default to high priority b i assume that the leasehold flat entrance doors are demised to the leaseholder daniel can you please confirm

00:41:15 confirm we do not have any enforcement power to install self-closures on these doors the way this is currently drafted would compel us to carry out work that we don't have the power to enforce i don't have a problem with us setting

00:41:26 i don't have a problem with us setting out to install door closes following the learning from the fire and completing the work promptly however we would be leaving ourselves exposed if we commit to completing work we don't have the power to enforce i suggest that the priority is reduced

00:41:38 i suggest that the priority is reduced to low or advice and that we make reference to the fact that we can't enforce this in leasehold properties peter now uh it's not clear to us who actually

00:41:49 it's not clear to us who actually drafted this but this was intended i think to come from peter madison even though it had come from sasha jevens's email account do you remember whether it was peter madison who had made these suggestions it looks

00:42:01 who had made these suggestions it looks like peter right now yes

00:42:04 now looking at what he said it it it appears to be the case that carl stokes his original view was that self-closures could be high priority or should be a high priority action yes yes

00:42:16 a high priority action yes yes but peter madison doesn't agree with that and thinks that the action should be either low or advice yes did you ask on what basis peter madison was qualified so to speak

00:42:27 peter madison was qualified so to speak to correct the fire risk assessor's risk rating

00:42:30 rating i i think sorry i don't i think i have some memory there's there's something about the doors in in there whether they've got these

00:42:41 in there whether they've got these risers so they're whether they were acceptable so quite sketchy about that well that is the case in fact there's a point of minor detail and rising butt hinges were

00:42:54 and rising butt hinges were um disapproved of by the lga guidance as i'm sure you know but i don't know why that is an answer to my question i was just trying to remember

00:43:03 remember well um we've got the text of the document here you see it my question is did you ask peter madison what his basis was

00:43:14 peter madison what his basis was for correcting your apparently independent fire risk assessor's risk rating i can't recall

00:43:21 recall and did you know why mr stokes's risk rating was was up for debate at all i think there's something about the time scale in terms of if it was high they all had to be done in three weeks

00:43:32 all had to be done in three weeks i think the issue was if we sign up to three week and can't get it all in then you have to add for an extension so it's all then about could you have

00:43:43 so it's all then about could you have changed the time scale to more that's actually achievable if you've got lisa doesn't

00:43:47 doesn't have to go through the whole process that's the way i i saw that so i don't think it was i didn't get the sense it was really saying you know you don't want to do it but in sense of actually if we're going to sign up to do this we

00:43:59 if we're going to sign up to do this we need to have a time skill we can achieve yes but your route to doing so is to try to lean on him to get him to reduce the risk

00:44:06 risk rather than to advise you specifically that a

00:44:09 that a longer time frame for doing this high-risk item was acceptable i'm not sure if i like the word lean i think there's a discussion and i think that the point was it went back to carol stokes for that discuss

00:44:20 back to carol stokes for that discuss those discussion points to be taken on board and he's our fire expert so

00:44:26 so you know in the end it's up to him to decide i don't see this as bullying or leaning it's more clarification and having a discussion right the suggest at the end of the

00:44:38 right the suggest at the end of the email

00:44:38 email it is mr madison's suggestion that the priority is reduced to low so it was the route to getting more time

00:44:46 more time the reduction of the risk level as opposed simply to asking mr stakes for his professional independent advice about whether you might be able to take a bit longer in curing the problem yeah that's what i would expected him to say

00:44:57 would expected him to say but but that wasn't the way it was presented was it well that's how it was presented by peter who then i think barbara and janice took it to carol stokes for for that discussion would you agree with

00:45:09 for that discussion would you agree with this

00:45:10 this that peter madison's input here isn't to do with

00:45:13 do with far isn't to do with the fire safety need for self-closers as a risk level but to do with the tma's ability to meet that need

00:45:25 i think it's peter suggesting something and we wait to see what carl stokes says

00:45:35 yes the suggestion leaving us outside what mr stokes might say the suggestion is that he changes his view about the risk level isn't it not because he'd misassessed it

00:45:47 not because he'd misassessed it but in order to allow the tmo more more capably to meet it i i i'm not sure

00:46:02 you're not sure i'm just i let me try maybe misunderstood my question let me try it a different way okay mr madison's suggestion isn't anything to do with the

00:46:13 suggestion isn't anything to do with the fact

00:46:14 fact is it that the tma thought he misunderstood the level of risk it was it was to do with enabling the tmo

00:46:22 tmo more readily to carry out the suggested action that's the way i would read it

00:46:32 in which case why not simply ask mr stokes

00:46:35 stokes as opposed to changing his risk level uh whether he could advise you as to the maximum

00:46:39 maximum time it would it would be safe to take to cure

00:46:43 to cure the defect i wasn't at the meeting with mr stoke so i didn't see this part of the evidence of barbara or janice about how the conversation went let's look and see what mr stokes says

00:46:54 let's look and see what mr stokes says about this this is his impression of this exercise can we please have the transcript for day 138 page 201.

00:47:11 and let's look at line 10

00:47:15 uh and he's being asked about a different document

00:47:21 and he's asked leave aside who filled in that box under tmo action we can see that you downgraded this to strong advice did you do that because you were under pressure to do so from the tmo

00:47:32 pressure to do so from the tmo that's what it looks like yes yes did you think it was appropriate at the time that the tmo should be challenging your professional judgment on what priority should be given to an item in your fra answer i'm going

00:47:45 to an item in your fra answer i'm going to say probably yes question why didn't you stand up robustly and independently to the tmo on a matter of what was your professional judgment

00:47:53 judgment answer some battles you fight the work is being undertaken whether i put high in there on a priority are red but the work is still being undertaken

00:48:02 do you accept that mr stokes was placed under pressure to downgrade the fra action

00:48:07 action by the tma i don't accept that i mean that's his perception of the conversation i wasn't at

00:48:15 as we can see from this exchange what in fact eventuated was that mr stokes did change his high priority to strong advice

00:48:28 did you ever think that that exercise rather undermined the point of seeking the advice and input of an independent fra in the first place no i i as a independent

00:48:40 no i i as a independent professional it's down to him if he changed the and he doesn't agree with i don't quite understand it like i said i wasn't there at the meeting when they had this meeting about it so i don't know

00:48:51 meeting about it so i don't know if uh barbara and janna's strong arum there it's his perception i mean i don't know what those two said it when you took over things from them well let me try let me

00:49:02 things from them well let me try let me leave it with you this way was it your impression from this exercise uh that mr stokes had revisited his opinion about the relevant

00:49:13 revisited his opinion about the relevant risk level for this item and revised it in accordance with his own professional view or simply given in no i would say the first you said it first what's the basis of that because he's a

00:49:24 what's the basis of that because he's a professional and that's how you should make his decision well maybe that is how he should make his provision on that i think i agree with you but um what leads you to think that he did so on this occasion given his evidence

00:49:35 so on this occasion given his evidence to the inquiry i think you know he said this is his narrative not mine i would seem strange as a professional he hasn't followed his own rules and i think that so i just find it very

00:49:48 i think that so i just find it very weird

00:49:49 weird um can we then go to december 2015 and what the board gets told tm00902

00:50:06 the first email i'd like you to look at with me

00:50:09 with me is the 2nd of december 2015. yep dear board members now uh it looks as if this is a draft because it passes between you and sasha jevons

00:50:22 it passes between you and sasha jevons would that be right i i can't recall dear board members we updated you were bored

00:50:30 bored uh you we updated you at board about a fire

00:50:35 fire about the fire and i've been having conversations with the with the fb since the fire they have been reviewing the fire and have a matrix which identifies a number of issues which results in a response which is split into three

00:50:47 response which is split into three and they are deficiency notice enforcement and prosecution the level of response from fb comes from a matrix they do following a fire in discussions with them they have said

00:50:58 them they have said they received 15 to 20 calls saying residents could not get out of their flats because of smoke and or sorry or and smoke in the stairways and they rescued two people from balconies because of these

00:51:09 balconies because of these two issues they have deemed both adair and hazelwood to be high risk and therefore the actions are enforceable we've been told we will get these enforcement notices next week with we think a six-month time scale to

00:51:22 with we think a six-month time scale to complete the works now it appears to be that this is your suggested text for sasha jevens to send to the board is that right or to check it

00:51:35 is that right or to check it or to check it your suggested text gives an explanation of the three potential responses to the fire doesn't it yes you probably haven't spoken to janus been drafting this

00:51:47 been drafting this right i see um or barbara sorry barbara and jonas

00:51:51 and jonas yes at all events you can see that there's no trace of any reference in that paragraph to the 12th of october 2015 deficiency

00:52:02 to the 12th of october 2015 deficiency notices there no where's that i can recall apologies was this not the perfect opportunity to tell your board that two weeks two

00:52:15 to tell your board that two weeks two and a half weeks before the fire you had received a notice of deficiency about the very building that caught fire

00:52:23 yes and not least that you were actually explaining the three the thesis three-stage process yes now in due course barbara matthews sends

00:52:34 now in due course barbara matthews sends this email to the board let's look at that

00:52:36 that tmo double zero nine zero two nine two zero

00:52:44 dear board members in robert's absence i've been asked to provide you with the following update and this is dated now the fourth of december and you can see from the first copy list that you are copied into it yes

00:52:54 yes yeah again barbara matthews makes no reference to the three potential responses that you'd set out

00:53:03 in fact i say again let me rephrase the question

00:53:09 you see that barbara matthews makes no reference even to the three potential responses that you'd set out does she no do you know why the text of this message was changed in

00:53:21 the text of this message was changed in that way no did you take it up with barbara matthews i can't recall apologies now we can also see that she makes no mention of the 12th of october 2015 deficiency latest does she

00:53:33 2015 deficiency latest does she no and did you not ask her to do that you would have thought so did you ask her not to do that no now you sent if we go to tm00902921

00:53:48 now you sent if we go to tm00902921 we can see that on the same day 4th december 2015 you sent an email to barbara matthews and sasha jevens the

00:53:59 barbara matthews and sasha jevens the same day

00:54:02 which has underneath it the very email i've just been showing you yeah sent to the board barbara and sasha thank you great note robert so you

00:54:14 robert so you read it approved it approved the rather reduced version of events even from your own draft yeah why

00:54:26 can you explain why you were giving the board um

00:54:30 board um a version of an event that was so potted that it even omitted the vitally important reference to the deficiency notice of the 12th of october i can't explain it now you were keeping the board in the dark

00:54:41 the board in the dark no i didn't wouldn't do that well you did

00:54:44 did i'll accept that

00:54:48 now in due course the importance enforcement notice was served by the lfb wasn't it yes tm00840703

00:55:03 there it is 23rd december 2015 addressed to the company's secretary of the tmo and if we look at tmo double zero nine zero two

00:55:12 zero two uh nine three three please we can see that this was sent to you on the fourth of january 2016.

00:55:23 what appears to have happened if we look at that email run at the very bottom of the page rebecca burton writes to janice ray on the 3rd of january uh

00:55:34 3rd of january uh and apart from the um the um the rather welcoming tone of the first sentence the second paragraph uh says please find attached a copy of the enforcement

00:55:45 attached a copy of the enforcement notice

00:55:46 notice uh we and that email uh is then a copy to what is copy to barbara matthews and at the top of the chain you can see that barbara matthews sends that on to you on the 4th of

00:55:57 sends that on to you on the 4th of january sent last night yeah so it appears that what's happened is that although formally uh the notice was dated the 23rd of december 2015 and sent

00:56:09 december 2015 and sent a copy is sent in by rebecca burton early in january to janet's reign she sends it on to you through barbara matthews yeah yes

00:56:19 did you read it when you saw it yes yes

00:56:23 [Applause] now if we go then to tm00902 nine three eight nine zero two nine three eight you you get this

00:56:35 nine three eight you you get this document through a different route as well on the fourth of january 2016. uh this time from nicholas holgate if you go to page 2

00:56:47 you can see that it comes to you yeah which

00:56:50 which he's received

00:56:54 from rob davis uh and you respond to that at the top of page two bottom of page one if you just look at that

00:57:08 uh and there's discussion about having a meeting that's that's the effect of it yeah and in the end uh in fact there was a meeting set up for the 6th of january 2016 at your suggestion

00:57:19 suggestion yes well i think so yes that was the date but the the meeting was at your suggestion yes now before that meeting do you remember that janet well perhaps you don't you weren't there let me show you a document tm00841891

00:57:34 me show you a document tm00841891 meeting between janice ray and rebecca burton on the 5th of january 2016. so the day before the meeting that you were setting up here and let's just look at the minutes of

00:57:45 and let's just look at the minutes of that it's a bi-monthly meeting that customarily took place between janice ray and representatives of the lfb sometimes with claire williams in attendance as she was on this occasion

00:57:57 she was on this occasion adair tower enforcement notices item three

00:58:00 three which you need to scroll down on your screen for you see that uh janice confirmed receipt of rebecca's email attaching this enforcement notice she expressed concern that the time scale the notice gives for completing

00:58:11 scale the notice gives for completing the necessary steps is 23rd of june 2016. janus requested that this deadline be extended to reflect the fact that the tmo only just received the electronic copy of the notice on 4th january

00:58:22 notice on 4th january and as yet no hard copy has been received rebecca confirmed that the paper copy of notice had been posted on the 23rd december and as per nfp procedures the six-month period to undertake the necessary work starts

00:58:33 to undertake the necessary work starts from the date the notice is posted therefore 23rd of june deadline will stand however she did advise that a request

00:58:40 request for an extension of time could be submitted and would likely to be looked upon favorably providing the tmo could clearly demonstrate sufficient uh progress with meeting the requirements of the schedule and then it goes on to say janice asked for confirmation

00:58:52 to say janice asked for confirmation that this notice refers exclusively to this block and the tmo is not required to apply apply this to the rest of the blocks rebecca agreed that this does this does relate directly to our dare tower however the lfb

00:59:04 tower however the lfb could expect that standards required in one block are also required in other block

00:59:11 now

00:59:17 do you remember having uh any discussion about this time with janice rail as a result of this meeting

00:59:25 no right after this meeting after this meeting i can't recall let's go

00:59:31 go to page three of this document item eight

00:59:39 risk assessments rebecca raised her concern that our fire risk assessor sometimes makes statements which are not justified or supported and that fra reports need to include justification for statements made

00:59:50 justification for statements made in particular reference to discussion with senior lfb officers must provide names dates and confirmation of outcome of discussions etc also in relation to balfour the fra needs to be reviewed to clearly

01:00:01 needs to be reviewed to clearly demonstrate that the impact of the missing doors in front of the hop ahead area in the event of a fire has been assessed and documented janus agreed to raise these issues with our assessor but did comment that we have frequently provided copies

01:00:13 that we have frequently provided copies of fras to the lfb in recent years and until now these have been well received considered to be comprehensive and no criticism had been fed back did janice ray raise with you

01:00:24 with you at any point but particularly after this meeting 5th of january 2016 lfb's concerns about carl stakes is work no

01:00:32 no i can't recall did you yourself have any concerns about the quality of his work by this point no did the fact that the tma was receiving deficiency notices and enforcement

01:00:43 deficiency notices and enforcement notices is not lead you to think that mr stakes might be missing something i think we received the if the enforcement notices because of the files and that's i think the first time in our history we received one or ones

01:00:56 history we received one or ones because of two blocks uh in terms of deficiency notice i think over nine years we got if you was it seven or something like

01:01:07 if you was it seven or something like that

01:01:08 that so um

01:01:11 so um i you know i i think it's the far beginning of doing the job and we having to respond to it

01:01:21 breaking that answer up it's wrong to say isn't it that the enforcement notice was because of the fire it was because of non-compliances yeah the enforcement notices

01:01:31 notices because there was a fire and as far as i remember the narrative the fire the fire brigade says after a fire they reassess

01:01:40 the buildings and because of that they they provided two enforcement notices based on that so their assessment changed before the from from before the fire to after the fire

01:01:54 from before the fire to after the fire that's the way i read it

01:01:59 are you saying going back to your answer that really the number of enforcement notices and deficiency notices received by the tmo in all these years was negligible so i

01:02:10 in all these years was negligible so i think again i think these were the only enforcement notices we'd ever had as far from memory

01:02:22 yes that's what i'm saying you're saying you've got lots of them we've got two that came emitted from that fire

01:02:31 that fire and we got two because we've got two buildings that are very similar so if we'd only had one of them we'd only have one so it's just how that fire then changed the way the fire brigade looked at those buildings is that the way you saw it at

01:02:43 buildings is that the way you saw it at the time

01:02:43 the time yes and was it that thinking that led you to think that despite these regular fras and despite these deficiency notices and the enforcement notices there was nothing wrong with carl stakes's work

01:02:55 nothing wrong with carl stakes's work yes did janice ray ever bring to your attention the fact that she and carl stokes had had a a long-standing disagreement of almost doctrinal importance about whether the

01:03:06 doctrinal importance about whether the tma's lifts were firefighting lifts or not i have become aware of this but you have but did that's because presumably you follow the evidence but did she tell you about that disagreement at the time

01:03:17 disagreement at the time i i can't remember i don't recall telling me that did she never tell you that

01:03:21 that he was unshakably of the view that they were firefighting lifts and she equally implacably of the view that they were not

01:03:29 not but haven't followed the evidence that's not what i found did she ever tell you that he often cut and pasted in opposite passages from one fra into another no for example repeated observations about the excellence of the

01:03:41 observations about the excellence of the pigeon netting at grenfell tower when there was none she never brought that to your attention no

01:03:47 no i thought she would have brought that to his attention well i'm not sure she did uh now janice ray sent an email summary of the meeting we've just been looking at

01:03:56 at later the same day 5th january 2016 to you and barbara matthews we see that at tm00840451 can we go to that please

01:04:12 can we go to that please uh now it's a it's a pretty lengthy document i'm just going to select a number of parts of it uh could we please go to the

01:04:24 uh the the third and the fourth bullet points

01:04:27 points on the first page the the third one starts i

01:04:31 starts i i asked for confirmation you see that yeah i asked the confirmation that this notice

01:04:35 notice related exclusively to this block and i was advised that although this was technically the case the lfb view is the standards that we are applying to one block should generally be applied across all blocks

01:04:46 generally be applied across all blocks and and then the next one i saw clarification that when the notice refers to fitting of doors that do not provide 30 minutes fire protection that this relates exclusively to absence of self-closing devices

01:04:57 devices and is not a comment on the fire ratedness of the doors rebecca confirmed that matthew ramsey has inspected a considerable number of the flat doors and had only raised concern about the absence of self-closers

01:05:08 self-closers therefore the requirement of the notice is to fit self-closing devices to all flat doors in the block now just pausing there the effect of the requirement was wasn't it that

01:05:21 of the requirement was wasn't it that the tmo should ensure that self-closing devices were fixed to every door across all the tmo blocks in the estate that would have been a recommendation if you read that was the effect of the requ

01:05:33 you read that was the effect of the requ of the tma's requirement wasn't it yes yes now the time scale for doing that at least in relation to adair tower was six months according to the enforcement notice yes yes do you agree that

01:05:47 yes do you agree that it was clearly urgent particularly since a deficiency notice had been issued for the same reason before the adair tower fire

01:05:56 fire to undertake that work on the terrorists are across all the start across all the stock i think we focus on doing the towers rather than focusing on doing all the stock

01:06:07 focusing on doing all the stock but because you've got an enforcement notice so like answer because you've got an enforcement notice uh

01:06:16 i think

01:06:35 i can't answer that

01:06:40 let's go to page two and look at the penultimate paragraph rebecca had asked for an agenda item on flat entrance doors

01:06:51 flat entrance doors and at that point she stressed that the lfb required that all this is in caps all flat entrance stores throughout our stock are required to be self-closing i reiterated that our policy is to replace doors to current standard as and

01:07:03 replace doors to current standard as and when required and to retrofit self-closures when required by the assessor when properties of void etc however she did not accept that this went far enough i asked what the lfb's position was in relation to

01:07:15 the lfb's position was in relation to residents who remove stroke and disengage these self-closers once we've installed them and rebecca advised that we would need to have a procedure in place for regular checking of these and this would need to be documented as

01:07:26 and this would need to be documented as with all attempts at access i explained that this would be virtually impossible to achieve and could she confirm if this is what other landlords are doing at which point she admitted that this is what the lfb require

01:07:37 what the lfb require i specifically asked if h and f as hammersmith and fulham i think we're achieving this as this is also her area of responsibility but she'd not con she did not confirm i also asked about

01:07:48 she did not confirm i also asked about lessee flat doors and her view was that as these form part of the means of escape we have ongoing responsibility for ensuring that they are self-closing again

01:07:56 again more regular checking and record keeping required

01:08:00 required so from this document from this email which comes to you on the 5th of january immediately after her meeting with rebecca burton you could see that rebecca burton was

01:08:13 you could see that rebecca burton was making it crystal clear that all doors across the estate had to have self-closers and also they had to be subject to a regular checking regime

01:08:25 regular checking regime but she couldn't confirm that she's applying the same standards across the tri borough

01:08:32 indeed but i'm just asking you to well perhaps i would put a question could you understand from this email that rebecca burton's position was that she wanted the tmo

01:08:43 she wanted the tmo not only to to ensure that all self-closers in the estate all flats in the estate had self-closers but there should also be a regular

01:08:55 but there should also be a regular checking regime that was her requirement do you agree with that yes i can see that you can see that now leaving aside whether this was uh right on a comparative basis or not

01:09:06 right on a comparative basis or not was this the first time that you were aware of

01:09:09 aware of of that lfb requirement yes right and does that include the regular checking of self closers post installation yes because i think that's what they're

01:09:20 yes because i think that's what they're expecting yes now janice rayne notes that she told rebecca burton that this would i paraphrase it'd be virtually impossible did you agree with janice ray that it would be virtually impossible

01:09:31 that it would be virtually impossible i think it would be incredibly challenging yeah suddenly changed a position that has been held to suddenly saying you need to do all this within this time and

01:09:42 and so it's a fundamental change in terms of actually the way we were looking after our properties yes and that we knew or knew of no other local authority that

01:09:53 knew of no other local authority that was being asked to do this

01:09:56 you respond to janice ray the same day i i think

01:10:00 i think uh you think along the same lines as you've just explained if you go to

01:10:07 tm00902943

01:10:14 this is your email back to janice ray on the fifth

01:10:17 the fifth same day janice thanks for the note i think we need to discuss the implications of this at et and speak to laura

01:10:23 laura about how best to respond to these issues as it is a major shift can you just explain why you thought it was a major shift

01:10:32 because actually we we hadn't done it before there was no there was no program for

01:10:36 for a borough wide inspection of all doors for door closures and then to have a regular inspection uh situation once a year or four times a year

01:10:46 year whatever the requirement would be so that is a that's a huge change coming from this fire and it's something that our the reason sent it to uh or spoke to lawrence because

01:10:59 uh or spoke to lawrence because fundamentally we need to let them know and see how we take this forward you say a major shift a major shift by the lfb

01:11:09 the lfb do you mean a shift by the nfb well yeah because actually we've never ha like i say we've never had a program unlike gas and other things where you would actually enter a

01:11:20 would actually enter a tenant or leaseholders property to check door closure and check it once a year or twice a year [Applause] and actually i knew of no other

01:11:32 and actually i knew of no other organization that i'd worked with or worked alongside that had a program in place either what was the lfb's position about having regular

01:11:43 regular checking of self-closers on all doors in your stock before early january 2015. i can't recall that sorry well was it a position

01:11:53 position i don't think there was a position or that you had to check door close yours well we did check if we knew our door closure wasn't working if someone reported it those would be fixed if

01:12:04 reported it those would be fixed if someone saw them come off we would report it and get them fixed that was our sort of program or checking them when we did voids that the properties met those standards i'm just trying to get to the bottom of

01:12:15 i'm just trying to get to the bottom of what you mean by shift or change change from what so the key question is what was the lfp's previous position from which you were you were now saying it was shifting well the previous position i think was that

01:12:26 the previous position i think was that we weren't required to have a better wide program to check all the doors

01:12:32 doors closures not the doors and an annual system

01:12:35 system did the lfb ever tell you or tell the tmo to your knowledge uh that you were not required to have a borrowed program to check all the door closes no the fire brigade

01:12:47 the door closes no the fire brigade would never say that no now janice ray responds and mr chairman perhaps i'll just look at this one more documentary yes janice ray responds to you and you respond again let's look at the exchange

01:12:58 respond again let's look at the exchange of tmo double zero nine zero two nine four five

01:13:10 and she says i'm concerned that even if we manage to install self-closures across the stock the lfb expectations of how much checking we would need to we would be required to do would be

01:13:21 we would be required to do would be impossible for us to achieve it is therefore likely that in the event of a fire where a flat door did not self-close we are potentially always going to be held liable

01:13:30 liable and your response to that at the top of page one

01:13:35 page one same day fifth january 2016. i agree and that is the risk we need to raise with both our board and our bkc uh why did do you agree with janice ray

01:13:46 uh why did do you agree with janice ray that checking would be impossible to achieve

01:13:50 achieve so the so the whole thing is people take door closures off and therefore actually we could do a whole program of taking putting door closures on

01:14:01 closures on and then they could all be taking off and then if there was a fire the father come along said you haven't checked the door so i i think it's just trying to get your head around means so in terms of a sector

01:14:14 so in terms of a sector we have had gas checking for a number of years in terms of actually annual gas checks

01:14:20 checks which taken years and years to ensure that you have the legal courts in line that actually support you to be able to do that the reality with that is the court

01:14:31 the reality with that is the court backlogs results actually i don't know where it is now that when i'd left basically most organizations were doing gas checks over a nine month period rather than a year period

01:14:42 period rather than a year period because actually if you're doing a nine month period that gives you three months to actually chase people through the system to ensure you can actually get that gas check in place if they don't give you access

01:14:53 place if they don't give you access so that that is you know that's in place it can still get organizations into serious trouble if you don't do your gas checks and have all your certificates and here was another sort of process which is

01:15:03 which is in sense more complex and easier because actually people can take them off and how would you do so and actually with the court supporters of people who don't give us access to their property

01:15:14 don't give us access to their property what do we do with leaseholders we've already seen how long it took to to sort out uh the issues with leasehold doors because they're assigned to the leaseholder so i think it created this sort of thinking about how do you do it

01:15:26 sort of thinking about how do you do it when it's a not saying it's a bad thinking i think it's a thinking about then you have to actually process and there's a cost to that you then need to build in i think also you know it's also about

01:15:38 i think also you know it's also about this is a tri-borough uh local authority so are are they happening in the other boroughs as well because actually why would it happen just in kensington chelsea what's the thinking the fire will be good so we

01:15:49 thinking the fire will be good so we just do one but we can allow the other one

01:15:51 one you know so i think there's lots of questions there that actually through that decision that advice that you actually started thinking about

01:16:01 go back to what it was that the lfe was asking for page we can do it on this document page three

01:16:12 you'll see the penultimate paragraph of the email i read out to you at length and the nub of it is in the middle of that paragraph read with me uh she didn't accept

01:16:24 read with me uh she didn't accept that this went far enough i asked what the lfe's position was in relation to residents who removed straight disengaged these self-closers once we've installed them and rebecca advised that we would need to have a procedure in place

01:16:36 to have a procedure in place for regular checking of these and this would need to be documented as it all attempts at access and that's what she asked for why did you agree

01:16:45 you agree with with janice ray that it would be impossible to have a procedure in place for regular checking and documentation i think and generally i agree in terms of the whole thing that janice is raising i didn't say

01:16:57 janice is raising i didn't say specifically it'd be impossible to set up a procedure you can set up a procedure but then you have to deliver that procedure i think that's the bit that janice and i were saying you know yes impossible but you would eventually do it but it's without huge challenges

01:17:10 do it but it's without huge challenges why was it impossible to set up a procedure i'm not saying i think you're misusing me so i'll repeat you can set up a procedure to go to someone's door knocking it

01:17:21 someone's door knocking it open it check the check the door closure if it's not there fix it back on or say it's all right you take a box and you put it in the system it's more about how you actually get to that door how you get that door open

01:17:32 that door how you get that door open how you then check it how many times a year i mean she you're not even i think here she's sort of saying more so you might be doing it quarterly you know

01:17:43 know it's a huge job well we don't see any discussion in this email exchange of how often uh rebecca burton required the tmo to make checks do we

01:17:55 make checks do we regular tracking so regular so that could be a year that could be more exactly yeah well that's still one even if if it's just once a year that is

01:18:02 that is quite regular in terms of actually gaining access to a general needs property never mind a leasehold property did you i wonder whether the problem here is the way you understood this did you understand that the lfb was

01:18:14 did you understand that the lfb was asking you to put in place a position whereby you could essentially guarantee that all self-closers in your stock would always be working or simply that all you have to do is to take reasonable steps by means of a procedure of regular checking uh

01:18:26 procedure of regular checking uh to do your best to make sure that that was so well i would think that if you follow it down they would go for the first rather than the second that was your impression was it yeah mr german is that a convenient moment

01:18:37 german is that a convenient moment yes i think it is thank you i think it's time we had a short break mr black said we'll stop now we'll resume please at 25 to 4 and again please don't talk to anyone about your evidence thank you when

01:18:49 about your evidence thank you when you're out of the room thank you

01:18:57 thank you 25 to 4.

01:37:40 could you ask mr black to come back in

01:37:46 please

01:37:57 all right mr black oh thank you very much all right thank you were you ready mr mr chairman thank you um mr black you told us yesterday during the discussion i think about pete's

01:38:08 the discussion i think about pete's uh the you had some uh familiarity with the

01:38:12 the lga guy published in the summer of 2011. yes yes uh did you ever read that document

01:38:19 document i read it when it first came out i haven't read it uh since then because it was it was done a sort of policy group i went to

01:38:27 went to can we look at it yeah it's at hom

01:38:42 304596

01:38:48 no that's uh hom three zeros four five nine six four i'm afraid i left a digit off

01:39:03 there it is oh can we go to page one two five please

01:39:10 uh 82 inspections and repairs of other fire safety measures and if you look at 82.1 other fire safety measures such as fire resisting doors need also to be

01:39:21 resisting doors need also to be maintained the following details the basic requirements for routine attention in relation to these measures and then there's a heading fire resisting doors good practice is to inspect timber frame resist

01:39:33 inspect timber frame resist inspect timber resisting door sets on a six monthly basis as part of a program of planned preventive maintenance these inspections are aimed at identifying defects such as first bullet point missing or

01:39:44 as first bullet point missing or ineffective self-closing devices and then under 82.4 flat entrance doors should be included within this program where leasehold flats are involved this will only be possible if there is legal

01:39:55 will only be possible if there is legal right of access by means of a condition within the lease to carry this out it is important that any new leases include such a condition were you familiar with those provisions i'm assuming you were given that you read this document yeah i mean some time ago given that that is the

01:40:09 some time ago given that that is the guidance

01:40:10 guidance and the guidance is to have six monthly inspections of planned preventive maintenance particularly in relation to missing or ineffective self-cleaning devices and what was so extreme

01:40:23 and what was so extreme about the lfbs insisting that the lfb have a procedure for such inspection what i'm saying is that while it's guidance the

01:40:34 guidance the organizations i know doesn't do this that's so

01:40:37 that's so in a sense it's guidance so i'm saying in the sector because you're asking me and my knowledge in the sector it wasn't it wasn't a sort of uh

01:40:46 of uh done by everybody uh well you you described uh the lfb's attitude uh uh expressed at the fifth of january 2016 to janice ray

01:40:57 fifth of january 2016 to janice ray uh as a major shift and you did say again in your evidence a major change uh i i'm interested to know why it was such a major shift given what i've just read to you from the guidance

01:41:08 read to you from the guidance which was by then some four years old so i think it's guidance and what i'm saying is our practice in our bkc with the lfb hadn't been doing it just like they hadn't been doing it and hammersmith

01:41:19 hammersmith fill them in westminster but um with respect so what that you hadn't been doing at the lfp was now asking you to comply with the guidance why was that such a problem i think i explained it my previous answers so is

01:41:32 explained it my previous answers so is your evidence in fact that this lga guide was a council of perfection that in your experience it was perfectly reasonable for the tmo

01:41:44 reasonable for the tmo to ignore i wouldn't put it like that how would you put it mr black i'd put it there was a major change for the organization therefore we'd have to understand it and

01:41:55 therefore we'd have to understand it and as i say go to the council to make them understand that if you're going to do it then actually make sure we do it properly you can't blame the lfb though can you for asking you to do that which the

01:42:06 for asking you to do that which the la lga guidance of national application uh suggested you should i'm not blaming an lfb well you did suggest earlier that you thought that the lfe might be singling out ema for special treatment

01:42:17 singling out ema for special treatment given what i've read to you from the lga guide that can't be right any further

01:42:24 well do you agree with me that it would be wrong to suggest that the lfb was singling you out for special treatment when the national guidance suggested in fact required a six monthly

01:42:35 suggested in fact required a six monthly uh plan preventive maintenance relating to self-closers so the only thing i say again from my experience i knew of new organization that actually had that sort of regime in place

01:42:45 place unless it was a very sort of specialist one small but now let's go to tm00840465 please

01:43:00 this is the minute of a tmo executive team and smt meeting on the 7th of january 2016 as you can see

01:43:12 you can see and you were there dan wood in the chair barbara matthews also there can we go to page four in that document please

01:43:23 uh and under the heading of tower at the top of your screen you see it says this robert black noted that he and barbara matthews met with the london borough fire brigade commander rob davis on 6th january 2016.

01:43:34 january 2016. they were handed the hard copy of the enforcement order for adair tower the key issues are first bullet point all flat entry doors to be fitted with self-closing devices and then there are other

01:43:45 devices and then there are other matters as well we now need to go through this and look at the implications a joint press release with rbkc vulgar next month the enforcement notice for hazelwood tower is still to be received and do you remember what was discussed

01:43:57 and do you remember what was discussed at this meeting i'm sorry at that meeting the meeting with rob davis on the 6th of january

01:44:04 uh i can't recall straight away no one minute's taken we haven't seen any i i can't remember

01:44:15 we haven't seen any i i can't remember do you remember whether you raised the concerns expressed by janice ray uh anthony barbara matthews relating to the feasibility of a procedure for checking and maintaining self-closures namely that meeting the

01:44:26 self-closures namely that meeting the lfb's requirements would be impossible i can't remember sorry do you remember standing up to mr davis and telling him in no uncertain terms that uh he was

01:44:38 in no uncertain terms that uh he was asking

01:44:40 asking the tmo to do which no council had done in your knowledge and that it was quite unreasonable of him to make that suggestion do you remember saying anything like that to him

01:44:48 him is that what mr davis said in his evidence now i'm putting it to you as one way of expressing the the tma's approach so just confirm there's no record that i said that no i know you've confirmed apologize

01:44:59 no i know you've confirmed apologize well i i asked you whether there were any minutes taken so we haven't seen any you you can't help us let me try again to the best of your recollection of this meeting and the only notice that we've got is this document

01:45:11 got is this document to the best of your recollection did you tell

01:45:15 tell mr davis uh that the t that the lfb's requirement for an inspection a regular inspection regime of self-closing doors was impossible and therefore

01:45:26 was impossible and therefore unreasonable i don't have said that because if i read it we probably just talked about the issues they raised and i might have raised that in terms of actually what a challenge that be and and that because that's what what the minute is saying

01:45:38 the minute is saying do you remember whether you told mr davis that uh the tmo thought that the lfb was singling it out for special treatment and asking it to do things which no other authority had done

01:45:47 done no i don't remember saying that let's go to tmo double zero eight four zero four six one

01:45:59 six one this is an email from barbara matthews to members of the tmo board on the 12th of january 2016 and it relates to the adair tower fire enforcement notice as you can see from

01:46:11 enforcement notice as you can see from the subject line you are copied in on it dear board members

01:46:15 members it starts on 6th january we were formally served with an enforcement notice in respect of adair tower the notice was dated 23rd december 2015 and was hand delivered by the london fire brigade borough commander rob davis

01:46:27 fire brigade borough commander rob davis at a meeting with robert black

01:46:32 and then she goes on the key requirements of the notice steps considered necessary are as follows all flat entry doors must be fitted with self-closing devices you see that yes and then if you look

01:46:43 you see that yes and then if you look down she then talks about under paragraph two windows under paragraph

01:46:48 paragraph three corridors lobbies and stairs used for access are intended to use as a protected route compromised by flat entry doors without self-closures and where remedial work

01:46:59 self-closures and where remedial work may be required to ensure walls have a minimum 60 minute fire resistance at openings

01:47:04 openings doors entrance away service openings holes around trunking and pipe work have a minimum of 30 minutes for resistance four is about signage five is about obstructions to the dry rising main

01:47:15 rising main inlet and six is about storage handling and use of lpg cylinders found on the roof the notice requires if you go to the bottom of the screen the notice requires that all steps must

01:47:26 the notice requires that all steps must be taken by 23rd june 2016 and then over the page it should be noted that points one to four are a change in policy by the london fire brigade as a direct result of the

01:47:37 fire brigade as a direct result of the fire

01:47:38 fire and none of these points have been noted in any previous audits undertaken now the one thing that's missing would you agree with me from this email to the board is

01:47:46 board is is that the nfb require all flat entry doors across the entire tmo stock to be fitted with self-closing devices

01:47:57 it depends whether that first sentence at the top covers that yes that's a fair point um it's ambiguous isn't it yeah there's no uh reference in here either

01:48:09 there's no uh reference in here either to the

01:48:10 to the uh requirement by the lfb that there be a regular maintenance and inspection regime is there no do you know why that is no did you inquire i can't recall

01:48:22 no did you inquire i can't recall uh page uh two we'll just go back to stick with it uh where there's a reference to a change in policy um was the purpose of that sentence so far as you understood it at the time to

01:48:34 far as you understood it at the time to try to shift responsibility onto the lfb

01:48:39 no looks like it's an attempt to blame the lfb for why it was that the tmo had suddenly found itself in in in contravention of the rro that i think that's your interpretation

01:48:50 that i think that's your interpretation not mine it's not yours right um let's go to tm00852776 tmo executive team meeting 27th january 2016.

01:49:01 2016. these are the minutes there they are there you are should we go to item three on page one please adair tower enforcement notice

01:49:12 please adair tower enforcement notice uh robert noted that we will continue to update the board through the ceo report barbara played a video clip of the fire that was found on youtube barbara noted that we have got a genuine case to appeal the notice on hazelwood

01:49:24 case to appeal the notice on hazelwood tower

01:49:25 tower the clips show that the ventilation in the building worked well and the smoke escaped as it was supposed to the enforcement notice says to reinstate the protected route stairs lobby and lift area everything changed

01:49:36 and lift area everything changed when the fire brigade fought the fire from the ground below and from a neighboring balcony as the video clip demonstrated causing the fire to go in the ventilation route in theory if everyone had stayed in their flats with the door shut it would have been better

01:49:47 have been better we've got 21 days to appeal barbara will speak to laura about doing this and will show her the video clip we could commission a fire engineer to look into this further if the fire brigade agree with the findings for hazelwood they may possibly look again

01:49:58 hazelwood they may possibly look again at

01:49:59 at a tower robert asked over the page please i'll robert asked where we are with door closers the enforcement notices state that these have to comply with building regulations but some of the door frames are old and

01:50:11 but some of the door frames are old and wouldn't comply sasha noted that alex has read the notice and researched building regulations and and has advised it needs to be checked robert noted that if we have to replace all the doors and frames it could cost up to a quarter of a million

01:50:22 could cost up to a quarter of a million for both blocks and we would have to go to rbkc for this amount sasha and barbara will be speaking to our bkc about getting one of their qualified surveyors out to offer us this urgent advice we also

01:50:33 to offer us this urgent advice we also need to think about whether we charge leaseholders or not um now the minute records there that barbara

01:50:40 barbara matthews raised an issue with how the lfb fought the fire do you agree that the basic thrust of this is that that the smoke questions or problems were caused by the lfb

01:50:51 caused by the lfb as opposed to any deficiency in the building

01:50:56 i think barbara had had watched the video and got quite entrailed in it in terms of which is reflected in a minute the london fire get fighter fire the way

01:51:08 the london fire get fighter fire the way they do and we just had to accept it which is why i went on about door closures

01:51:13 closures yes i mean her point is i think is this right that she'd spotted from the video that she might have a case or you um you might have a case to blame the lfb for the spread of smoke at the fire

01:51:24 lfb for the spread of smoke at the fire uh uh and therefore it wasn't any deficiency on the part of the tmo that was to blame that might have been barbarians who have been i wouldn't i can't imagine taking legal action

01:51:35 i can't imagine taking legal action against the father because right that'd be my position right so you didn't think this was worth pursuing is that right yeah right

01:51:43 but did her attitude not tell you something

01:51:48 something worrying about the culture namely the barbara matthews who was head of health and safety supervising janice ray thought it appropriate uh to seek to defend uh and possibly

01:52:01 uh to seek to defend uh and possibly appeal the enforcement notice by seeking to blame the lfb for their own firefighting actions rather than addressing the problems the deficiencies which were set

01:52:12 problems the deficiencies which were set out in the enforcement notice i i don't think i think barbara has shown that she's completely committed to supporting health and safety and fire safety and i

01:52:23 health and safety and fire safety and i think it's just so she had a hobby horse about the firefighting thing that was it i don't we we never considered seriously to challenge the fire brigade

01:52:35 to challenge the fire brigade no mr black it shows not that barbara has shown that she's completely committed to supporting health and safety on the contrary she's completely committed to the tmo that's a different matter isn't it i disagree uh let's go to

01:52:48 i disagree uh let's go to a different topic altogether uh do you remember just casting your mind back that there was a fire uh in louisiana

01:53:01 uh in louisiana where the almo in lewisham had been fined 40 000 pounds as a result of the absence of door closers

01:53:11 if you can't remember you can't remember i'll show you a document um so it doesn't stick in your mind let's go to tma10012170

01:53:35 now um if we go please to uh page two of this email please at the very bottom

01:53:46 of this email please at the very bottom of page two you'll see that there is an email uh from you of the 1st of february 2016 to sasha evans and barbara matthews subject fire and risk can you review and

01:53:59 subject fire and risk can you review and check we are ok on this it's a reminder that we still need to manage the process going forward with our board and ensure we are completing the fra i need that bit of assurance please robert and then i think what you're doing here

01:54:10 and then i think what you're doing here help me with this is you're cutting and pasting into your email the text of an article in a publication uh elmo fined 40 000 pounds for fire safety failures 29th january 2016 by safe farms

01:54:24 29th january 2016 by safe farms and uh the uh it's i don't think it's easy to see what the publication was but the text says for lewisham homes has been fined forty thousand pounds for

01:54:35 been fined forty thousand pounds for failing to install secure fire doors and carry out regular risk assessments before a fire that caused the deaths of two women and then it goes on over the page uh third paragraph down at a previous hearing lewisham homes

01:54:48 at a previous hearing lewisham homes pleaded guilty to two charges relating to a failure to maintain fire doors at some of the flats and failed to carry out regular risk assessments in breach of the fire safety order 2005.

01:54:59 in breach of the fire safety order 2005. at the time of the fire in 2011 it had been over two years since a fire risk assessment had been carried out assessments are meant to be conducted annually

01:55:08 annually and then there's discussion about what the crown court judge said and then four lines or four paragraphs below that it quotes him as follows it says justice

01:55:19 it quotes him as follows it says justice here here

01:55:20 here here said that the failure to ensure all flats had functioning self-cleansing furthers was quote thoroughly dangerous situation which had in fact existed for some time close quotes he said high-risk blocks of

01:55:32 close quotes he said high-risk blocks of flats quotes can quickly become a death trap

01:55:35 trap when a fire breaks out

01:55:40 uh and then there's a an acceptance at the end by lewisham now you you then as we see forward this to sasha jevons

01:55:51 sasha jevons uh and we can see what you've asked them for which is a bit of assurance was it were you concerned that the tmo itself

01:56:02 were you concerned that the tmo itself might find itself in the same position as the lewisham elmo so i i know i can remember it thanks for showing me the thing so i knew the chief exec that was arnold

01:56:11 arnold at the time in lewisham yes i think it's one of the things that came up so i sent it on to them for to seek assurance and you were concerned were you at the part that the fra process might play in

01:56:23 part that the fra process might play in such a scenario yes yes would that not have been the perfect time to undertake a thorough review or internal audit of what was going on with fras particularly in

01:56:35 going on with fras particularly in respect

01:56:36 respect of door closers and particularly especially in light of the issues identified by the lfb uh in the enforcement notice and the earlier

01:56:47 enforcement notice and the earlier deficiency notice for ad air tower

01:56:52 i can't comment well you you can i think i'm inviting you to accept you try it differently would you accept that now was the perfect time to undertake a thorough internal review or

01:57:04 undertake a thorough internal review or audit

01:57:05 audit of the effectiveness of your fra closeout processes particularly with regard to store closers

01:57:13 closers and the wisdom of having a regular czech regime

01:57:23 okay

01:57:26 it could have been yes it was surely surely now is the moment to have a good look

01:57:36 no can you scroll up so i can see what the answer is

01:57:43 it but absolutely we can certainly do that um

01:57:46 that um barbara matthews writes to janice ray janice i'd appreciate your views on how we differ from lewisham to reassure robert

01:57:54 robert janice ray bottom of page one top of page two to carl stokes what do you know about this fire the chief executive is panicking

01:58:01 panicking so yeah uh uh

01:58:09 let's look it's it is actually educational uh a bottom of page one from carl stakes to janice ray first february in short two persons died in this fire uh she was something you're far no one

01:58:21 uh she was something you're far no one died

01:58:23 died janet's right back i know i read that they and they got an enforcement notice too but they're now carrying out annual fra's exclamation mark i'm anxious that because adrian has been out of action we're behind with low level reviews not sure how i can turn

01:58:34 level reviews not sure how i can turn them around quickly unless i can use the estate staff and then response at the very top of page one from carl stokes this was a high rise so an annual review undertaken in-house is okay use the

01:58:45 undertaken in-house is okay use the estate staff okay meeting the thursday 2pm rearranged grenfell to the morning at 10 a.m that's what you're that's what janice ray and carl stakes were discussing

01:58:58 yeah i can see that not very impressive is it really i mean to be frank it's their discussion i've not seen this before no i mean here you've got your high risk assessor essentially saying that don't worry no

01:59:10 essentially saying that don't worry no one died at a tower and therefore it's a different case

01:59:15 case i again i haven't seen this correspondence before no it's pretty shocking isn't it you think about it it's not brilliant no

01:59:26 do you agree with janice ray's characterization of your attitude that you were panicking

01:59:35 so and i'm just one moment panicking the other i i wouldn't describe myself i mean i'm trying to remember i don't imagine i was panicking i'm sure

01:59:43 i'm sure is because i just had picked something up either through discussion i wanted some advice in clarity it's her word again uh not mine yes well i put it to you something i'm

01:59:55 yes well i put it to you something i'm sure you'll accept that from panicking you were um asking her about a perfectly reasonable question about a very worrying event yes yeah now let's look and see what's discussed at the tma executive

02:00:06 discussed at the tma executive team meeting on the 11th of february 2016 at tmo double zero eight four 840502

02:00:14 you are present as is barbara matthews and if we go to page 2 please second paragraph item 3 under the heading idea tower and

02:00:25 under the heading idea tower and enforcement notice update uh it says this follow saying that the board will want reassurance from rbkc seen by laura and nicholas holgate and

02:00:36 seen by laura and nicholas holgate and the fire brigade happy with everything protected roof is the smoke test robert and barbara want clarity from the strategic part of the fire brigade rbkc don't want to do this work if not required

02:00:46 required folder reputation of rbkc and tmo everything to be addressed board may say a lot in the press about fires our risk off our risk assessments are all okay our bkc a key partner and we do

02:00:59 okay our bkc a key partner and we do what they want paper at the next board meeting will be in the open section uh now just looking at the the section or sentence that says robert and barbara

02:01:12 or sentence that says robert and barbara want clarity from the strategic part of the fire brigade rbkc don't want to do this work if not required can you just help us on what matter did you want clarity from the lfb

02:01:27 i'm afraid i can't recall

02:01:34 why didn't rbkc want to do the work

02:01:40 i i can't recall sorry the sentence are fire risk assessments are all okay do you know who said that where is that again i'm sorry it's in the penultimate paragraph

02:01:53 the penultimate paragraph last sentence

02:01:56 i can't remember who said that now do you know

02:01:59 you know what was it you i don't think it was me no

02:02:03 no do you know the basis for that statement no

02:02:10 the sentence rbkc a key partner and we do what they want was that record correct well they were a key partner and uh if

02:02:21 well they were a key partner and uh if they wanted us to do something we're trying to do it but i would see that as a you know positive they you know they they sort of work with this very impulsively

02:02:32 this very impulsively yes i can understand that pleasing one's client is obviously a goal if one can achieve it but did you appreciate that the tmo was a separate corporate entity with from rbkc with its own fire safety

02:02:43 from rbkc with its own fire safety problem yes so is says this wasn't a question simply of you dancing to rbkc's tune or was it no i i think because in the end we would be

02:02:53 be again as this goes forward it's about in the end that our bkc will have to find the funds to do it because it actually isn't in the it wasn't in the capital program and it would be a substantial budget

02:03:04 would be a substantial budget which therefore had come from the hra business plan

02:03:09 now the next document we need to look at i think on this topic is that rbk rbk401865

02:03:22 now it's a document called a dare tower enforcement update on lfe position as at 6th july 2016 and

02:03:34 2016 and it was emailed to you by janice ray at rbk401863

02:03:47 um let me show you the email first of all

02:03:50 all because it's where i can make good the fact that you saw it um giannis rated laura johnson copy to laura black it heard robert black subject i dare tower update on fb action

02:04:02 subject i dare tower update on fb action attachment adder tower article 27 letter to tma for residents dat

02:04:07 dat laura in advance of your meeting today robert has requested i sent you a briefing note on a telephone conversation had with the lfb inspecting officer yesterday i also attach a copy of the letter i subsequently

02:04:19 a copy of the letter i subsequently received from the lfb going back to the doc previous document namely the note

02:04:29 it appears to be the note of a telephone call between ben dewis of the lfb and janice ray do you remember seeing this document and reading it at the time i must have seen it and i must have read

02:04:41 i must have seen it and i must have read it yes now in the third paragraph it says ben confirmed he needed this information which is contact details

02:04:50 details for residents because the lfb is still investigating the fire and in particular it is his intention to interview the three residents who were evacuated from their homes by the fire brigade and then if you look down just below

02:05:01 and then if you look down just below halfway down the page to the paragraph that starts further it says i challenged further i challenged ben on the ongoing investigation and advised him of my initial discussions with his manager

02:05:13 initial discussions with his manager rebecca burton specifically she'd indicated

02:05:16 indicated that the lfb would be collating all the information from their post via audit undertaken on monday 2nd november their investigations can confirmation that these would be undertaken by ben dewis all the planned

02:05:27 undertaken by ben dewis all the planned maintenance information provided by us at their request and would discuss with their legal team what if any action to take at that time rebecca confirmed that the options were deficiency notice enforcement notice or

02:05:38 deficiency notice enforcement notice or prosecution and then in the last paragraph on that page i was concerned to hear that investigations were ongoing and that we had not been made aware of this but ben was anxious to emphasize

02:05:49 this but ben was anxious to emphasize that he was obliged to investigate all avenues

02:05:53 avenues now when you looked at this when you received it did you understand from this note that the lfb were still considering a prosecution

02:06:04 prosecution of the tmo for failures at adair tower i think it confirms they were looking at a number of actions and prosecution might be one of them yes

02:06:15 and prosecution might be one of them yes and you could be in no doubt about that at latest

02:06:18 at latest after seeing this document on the 7th of july 2016. do you agree yeah um do you know when you first became aware that the lfe was considering prosecution of the tmo over at uh tower

02:06:31 prosecution of the tmo over at uh tower i'm not sure if it is here or right now let's go to tm010015934 please

02:06:42 this is the minute of a tmo executive team

02:06:46 team meeting on the 7th of july at now we don't see the time of that but uh if we go to page two we can see under item three adder tower

02:06:58 we can see under item three adder tower is dealt with and we can see there that barbara matthews

02:07:04 matthews uh says barbara nated that janice received a phone call from ben to say that we will be receiving a statutory information request asking for a list of residents and their contact details of residents that were living at a tower

02:07:16 that were living at a tower on the third fourth of fifth floors on 31st of october 2015. barbara nated that we were surprised to receive this as we have fully cooperated and kept nothing hidden from the fire brigade during their investigation

02:07:29 brigade during their investigation and then it goes on robert has spoken to laura and rock and their view is that we need to pass this to legal robert asked barbara to speak to laura and update her what was the conversation between you

02:07:41 what was the conversation between you laura johnson and rock fielding melon i'm assuming it's him minuted was it minuted or recorded in any way

02:07:49 any way i can't remember if there's not a new it was probably just a conversation you say just a conversation did you have casual conversations with laura johnson and rockfielding melon which you didn't mean it

02:08:00 mean it yeah because you saw laura and rockfield and melanin councils all the time they were about the borough right

02:08:11 did you speak to them together or was it a three-way call or did you speak to them separately i can't recall it might be in together i'm not sure if it'd been at the town hall right do you remember what laura and rock

02:08:22 do you remember what laura and rock advised

02:08:24 advised other than it needed to be passed illegal no i think that was their situation do you know whether barbara matthews spoke to laura johnson and updated her after the phone call i i don't know did

02:08:37 after the phone call i i don't know did now um we know that you then reported to the board

02:08:41 the board on the 20th of july a few days later let's go to the board pack please at tm0100

02:08:56 this is page one of the board pack if we go in it please to page 68 we can see your report

02:09:10 now if we go to 69 we'll see the start of your

02:09:15 of your report uh we can we can scroll slightly through it but we have looked in vain through this document

02:09:24 document for any mention of ada tower at all and if we're wrong about that i will stand corrected but can you explain

02:09:35 but can you explain why you didn't bring the udder tower threat of prosecution to the attention of the board on that occasion i can't recall sorry

02:09:51 do you know why you kept the pending threat of prosecution by lfb over at a tower from the board

02:10:01 can you how did you think at the time that the directors of of tmo could comply or um enable the tmo to comply

02:10:11 to comply with its obligations to and indeed comply with their own obligations to protect and promote the tmo if you had kept them in the dark about the fact that the tmo stood to be prosecuted for breaches of

02:10:22 stood to be prosecuted for breaches of the rra i

02:10:25 the rra i can't explain that i wouldn't want to keep the board in the dark about this so i don't understand no

02:10:33 and did you make a positive decision just to keep quiet about it don't tell the board

02:10:37 the board no what other explanation is there i i can't

02:10:40 can't i can't i don't know if we tell them later or whatever like yeah i can't confirm anything

02:10:51 uh now there's then a tmo executive team meeting on the fifth of october 2016. we're now in the autumn of that year

02:10:59 year tm00843 861.

02:11:04 you can see you were there

02:11:09 tmo double zero eight four three eight six one

02:11:13 six one fifth of october 2016 executive team meeting you are there barbara matthews also there if you go to page two please item three a tower item 3.2

02:11:27 a tower item 3.2 lfb are putting pressure on us to fit door closes on all our stock across the business

02:11:32 business laura johnson has said no to this but sascha feels that there should be a discussion at et the fire strategy is being updated with a recommendation that this work is done over a five-year period although it

02:11:43 done over a five-year period although it is

02:11:43 is likely that lfp will expect a shorter period sasha will speak to her team about doing some profiling on this as with 9 000 properties we would need to know the estimated cost for this and what also

02:11:54 what also what others are doing our bkc would need to be spoken to about this and given options now looking at the second sentence there laura johnson has said no

02:12:05 laura johnson has said no to this why was laura johnson able to control whether the tmo did or did not take steps to comply with the rro because in a sense it would

02:12:16 with the rro because in a sense it would have to come out the hra budget

02:12:19 in a sense the tmo couldn't commit itself to do that unless our bkc agreed which has started at that whole discussion which does does that mean

02:12:31 which does does that mean that whether or not the tmo complied with its obligations under the rra was a commercial decision for our bkc i don't know you'd need to ask the law i don't know if you asked laura no i'm asking you because you're the chief executive um

02:12:43 because you're the chief executive um laura johnson has said no to this on your answer you my question was why was laura johnson able to control whether the tmo comply with the rro and you responded

02:12:55 comply with the rro and you responded because in a sense it would have to come out of the hra budget does that tell us i'll repeat the question does that tell us that whether or not the tmo complied with its obligations under the rro was a commercial decision

02:13:08 under the rro was a commercial decision and what is more a commercial decision for our bkc i think you'd need to ask laura if that's what she said i don't understand all right all right

02:13:19 i don't understand all right all right so note the note records apologies sorry i'll let me say all right

02:13:27 i think this this is the beginning of a conversation with rbkc which eventually they recognized actually

02:13:35 actually they were going to have to do it and actually the decision was then about how to do it in terms of you know one to five three i think we suggested three years and then it changed to five sort of

02:13:46 and then it changed to five sort of thing

02:13:46 thing so i think it was the conversation we kept on going back to rbkc that actually you know

02:13:50 you know in terms of actually where we are it's something we're going to have to do and actually

02:13:54 actually we worked with laura to actually get her to understand that would it be right to understand that if you made a formal request to

02:14:05 you made a formal request to rbkc for additional funds that would be a decision for the council not for laura johnson yeah because they had very low approval ratings and accounts i think officers were only able to

02:14:16 officers were only able to commit up to 250 000 so anything over that would go to the full cabinet yeah thank you in reality doesn't this tell us that

02:14:28 in reality doesn't this tell us that whether or not the tmo complied with the rro was ultimately a commercial decision

02:14:35 decision for rbkc

02:14:39 i think it was a is about us convincing rbkc through a process because i get again i can't remember all the conversations about this in terms of

02:14:50 conversations about this in terms of actually

02:14:52 actually how why we were being why our vkc was being required to do it when the truck the tri or the double borough weren't able to do it so i think there's questions about the fire gate what's their strategy

02:15:03 their strategy you know so again this is a bit confused for me sorry there's a great respect mr black i'm not surprised

02:15:11 surprised um what i'm really struggling to get to is to understand how this was set up and it it sounds as if

02:15:19 if because laurel johnson controlled the purse strings about whether you should over taking steps to put the tmo into a position of compliance the decision as to whether or not tmo

02:15:31 the decision as to whether or not tmo should be permitted to comply with the rro was one not only lying in rbkc's hands but was a commercial one i think you would need to ask them

02:15:42 would need to ask them in terms of we went back to them developed the argument and got to the stage where they were agreeing to fund it if you had made a formal request to the council

02:15:53 the council for funding required for this sort of work

02:15:57 work presumably the council would either have had to grant you the funding yes or given you a formal response declining to grant you the funding and you would then have it on your records

02:16:08 you would then have it on your records that you

02:16:09 that you had asked and been rejected is that is that yeah it would work and what we as you say we start with laura because she was executive director of housing in a sense into because it wasn't ultimately her decision

02:16:20 ultimately her decision no it was that it would be rocks taking it to the rock food and melon taking it to the capitol yeah and if the cabinet said no presumably he or someone on behalf of the council would write you a formal letter yeah

02:16:32 would write you a formal letter yeah saying we've had this application and we've turned it down yeah yeah okay thank you

02:16:38 so as a result of that just one more question flowing from that does that mean that

02:16:43 mean that in the end the question of whether you took steps to comply to put yourself in compliance with the rro was the matter out of your hands

02:16:54 it's like the it was out of our hands until we continued to press to get agreement to have it done

02:17:12 i wonder uh chair i've since in here i've developed a headache and i just wonder is it just for my memory is it 4 30 we finish it would normally be 4 30. let me just

02:17:23 it would normally be 4 30. let me just see how we're doing how are we doing mr miller

02:17:25 miller mr chairman we are we're doing well in terms of page numbers and uh progress i i would be perfectly content

02:17:32 content to uh um stop now we're we've pretty well covered most of this document it may be that i need to come back to it but i'm perfectly happy to i didn't want

02:17:43 but i'm perfectly happy to i didn't want to finish l if it means i go over on to tuesday so that's that's always well i'm just that's really what i was going to find out

02:17:50 out mr minute you've obviously got more questions you want yes yes mr black so we're going to have to ask him to come back on monday so i knew that henry um but

02:18:01 so i knew that henry um but is there any danger that he won't finish on monday none well on that unequivocal assurance thank you inclined to say we could afford to stop early couldn't we

02:18:12 stop early couldn't we yes yes well would that that might be the better that would help me thank you very much right well we'll do that we'll we'll stop now then because i'd rarely stay down we're going to have to ask you to come back again on

02:18:23 to have to ask you to come back again on monday but you were expecting that anyway um so that'll be the resume at 10 o'clock on monday um it's we're now going into the

02:18:35 monday um it's we're now going into the weekend so to speak and so it's particularly important that i ask you not to talk to anyone else about your evidence or anything relating to it over the weekend okay and we'll see you

02:18:47 over the weekend okay and we'll see you again on monday morning at 10 o'clock thank you and thank you for allowing it

02:19:05 all right mr millet well this is becoming a habit on your part i know it's regrettable and out of character i'm not sure i'd say that but still um thank you very much well then it's 10 o'clock on monday morning

02:19:18 o'clock on monday morning thank you