Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation Evidence - Thursday 29th April 2021 (2/2)

Full transcript

00:00:17 yes would you ask mr madison to come back in please okay

00:00:32 right mr madison are you ready to carry on yes thank you very much yes mr millet mr chairman thank you mr madison um i'd like just to before i go back to the flow we were in

00:00:43 before i go back to the flow we were in before the lunch break just to explore one thing with you that we're not quite clear about can i ask you to look please at mr bosman's witness statement of the inquiry which is at tm00880562

00:00:57 inquiry which is at tm00880562 i'll show you the first page of that there it is and if we go to page three please can we get a paragraph 12. and in paragraph 12 he says i've been asked to set out a summary of my roles and

00:01:08 a summary of my roles and responsibilities while working for tmo up to the date of the grenfell tower fire on 14th june 2017. the set of contracts management i was responsible for the development and implementation of strategic vision

00:01:19 and implementation of strategic vision to deliver service contracts compliancy responsive repairs and m e capital works to the ten thousand homes managed by the tmo across the borough in respect

00:01:30 by the tmo across the borough in respect of responsive repairs particularly that he refers to there who is mr bosman's line manager

00:01:38 um when i was alex's line manager in respect of responsive repairs he was responsible for responsive repairs to mechanical electrical contracts that he

00:01:50 mechanical electrical contracts that he managed

00:01:51 managed so that was the gas electrical and the sort of the m e piece um right so when he refers there to responsive repairs

00:02:02 responsive repairs and it looks as if he's referring to responsive repairs across the piece unqualified do you say that's wrong that's that's wrong in the sense of

00:02:13 that's that's wrong in the sense of so at the at the outset of alex's employment he had a client role within uh for the for the internal client for the internal um repairs

00:02:24 client for the internal um repairs direct contract and there was a team but that team transferred into repairs direct and reported into graham webb who reported into the executive team right who was responsible if not alex bosman for

00:02:37 responsible if not alex bosman for responsive repairs that were not m e connected graham webb now graham weber's understand it joined the tmos that's right in 2015. i don't know the date here

00:02:49 2015. i don't know the date here it wasn't there when you started was no so who was responsible for non-m e responsive repairs from 2013.

00:03:00 responsive repairs from 2013. there were two people um paul gervais and um andy i can't remember his name um there were some yes so they were the heads of

00:03:10 heads of um the heads of repairs direct at that time right paul wasn't paul javon

00:03:17 javon part of repairs direct yes so he was the managing director of repairs direct sorry so so forgive me but help me with this who at the tmo

00:03:29 this who at the tmo was responsible for non-m e responsive repairs

00:03:36 the the managing director of repairs direct who would report in to the executive team

00:03:44 i see so when alex so you're saying that alex bosman's responsive repairs role related only to emini and not to non-eminy and the non-m e was repairs direct

00:03:57 and the non-m e was repairs direct themselves so there was a period when alex's alex alex bosman in his role had a client role

00:04:05 role for repairs direct but it wasn't a managerial role it was very much about the client scrutiny but that team transferred into repairs direct and all reported into

00:04:17 all reported into graham webb when graham when grain was there or probably before when paul's your vote was in post right so it repairs direct was essentially the tmo body

00:04:28 essentially the tmo body that's this right the internal tmo body responsible for responsive repairs that are not or were not m related is that is that how it worked yes i follow

00:04:39 yes i follow now let's just pursuing that a bit further look at a document can we go please to tm01 triple zero 9447

00:04:54 uh and i'd like to show you the first page of that first of all this is uh a minute of the operational health and safety meeting held on the 12th of may 2015 and you we

00:05:05 held on the 12th of may 2015 and you we can see that you were present as was alex bosman and if you look please at page five i'd like to show you paragraph 5.3

00:05:19 i'd like to show you paragraph 5.3 this is under fra stats 8th may and under 5.3

00:05:24 under 5.3 it says jw to send pm that's janice ray to send you a schedule of the responsive actions and pr pm to pick up with paul gervais that's

00:05:35 pm to pick up with paul gervais that's the same paul gervais that you referred to isn't it yes and he's of repairs direct wasn't he yes yes so can you tell us why that particular

00:05:47 question schedule the responsive be picked up by with between you and paul gervais was your responsibility um

00:05:58 your responsibility um i can't remember at that time but i i mean i suppose in some cases there would be

00:06:04 be a discussion to be had about which team was responsible and so maybe it was around something like that right did you become responsible for the non-m e uh repairs direct

00:06:15 for the non-m e uh repairs direct governed responsive repairs no so can you explain why you are getting involved in picking up a schedule of responsive

00:06:26 in picking up a schedule of responsive actions

00:06:27 actions with paul gervais of repairs direct um i'm assuming that there may have been some issue where there was a judgment as to which team was going to deal with some of these issues and so maybe it was something like that

00:06:38 and so maybe it was something like that i don't i don't recall the conversation but at a point um my team alex bosman had a client

00:06:49 um my team alex bosman had a client role but it wasn't a managerial role over over

00:06:52 over over um repairs direct paul gervais was an interim and then when um and i think at the time when paul was there that's when the client role went into the client

00:07:05 the client role went into the client team rather went into repairs direct as a as a whole and reported him to sasha germans and barbara matthews did you discuss the schedule of responsive repairs with paul shadow

00:07:17 responsive repairs with paul shadow i can't remember what that discussion was did you discuss overdue repairs with him

00:07:21 him at all or anybody else from repairs i can't remember what the discussion was about

00:07:26 about right well let me just see if i can prompt your memory can we go please to your diary um from 2015 tmo double zero eight seven nine seven seven six page thirty eight

00:07:48 uh and if you go to uh

00:07:55 if you go to the second page on that you can see that this is may

00:08:02 2015. uh if you go to the top right hand corner

00:08:09 you see you see there's some writing up there

00:08:14 and uh

00:08:20 first of all can you confirm that these are notes that you made of the operational meeting on monday the 18th of may

00:08:27 of may i don't know what they relate to but it may be those right and at the very top you could see the name paul javo is that right yes yes and then there's a

00:08:40 is that right yes yes and then there's a little arrow which points up and it says and again correct me if i'm misreading your handwriting it says uh overdue uh responsive repairs fras

00:08:52 responsive repairs fras is that right yes

00:08:56 and then something underneath it fra is it voids

00:09:00 it voids or volumes works works costs stroke process

00:09:04 process does this prompt your recollection about having a discussion with paul gervais in may 2015 about overdue responsive repairs

00:09:13 repairs for the purposes of fras it doesn't prompt my memory now but it looks like the primary reason for the meeting was to talk about fire fra works

00:09:25 fire fra works the costs of those works in the process so maybe there was an issue about moving budgets from one place to another or how we would i can't remember exactly what the issue was i can't help

00:09:36 was i can't help right it looks from the document though that you at least at this stage got involved will with paul chavez on the subject of of uh overdue responsive repairs for the purposes of

00:09:47 responsive repairs for the purposes of fras

00:09:47 fras is that a fair way of reading the document it looks like i had a conversation with them about that you can't recall it no right let's then get back to where we had left off before the lunch break um can we go to tm00869184

00:10:02 this is a chain of email correspondence in october 2015 and i'd like to start on page six please of that email run

00:10:13 this is an email from janice ray to rebecca burton of the lfb on the 22nd of october 2015 in respect of further potential deficiency notices for fire-related um fire-rated flat front doors which

00:10:26 um fire-rated flat front doors which were missing self-closers i'm summarizing the topic just before i show you the change do you just remind you of the chronology do you remember that a deficiency notice had been issued

00:10:39 that a deficiency notice had been issued by the lfb in respect of adair tower on the 12th of october 2015. only 19 days before a fire there on the 31st of october 2015. i don't think i was aware of that

00:10:53 2015. i don't think i was aware of that right

00:10:57 let's go to page three where we see rebecca burton sending an email to janice ray on the 4th of november 2015. so after the adair fire towards the bottom of page 3 she says hi

00:11:09 towards the bottom of page 3 she says hi janice

00:11:11 janice tried to call believer in a meeting just wanted to touch base regarding the fire at a tower as i've been on leave and i'm currently pulling all the pieces together

00:11:18 together i do have some questions that i need to feed into my post-fire review report that i'm hoping you can help me with uh they will also feed into our meeting next week

00:11:29 next week and then over the page she asks a series of questions with bullet points and in the last two bullet points she

00:11:40 and in the last two bullet points she says

00:11:41 says well she asks these questions what is the current status regarding fras undertaken for your estate and reviews undertaken do you have a railing program that is completed by carl on an ongoing basis what systems are in

00:11:53 on an ongoing basis what systems are in place to act on significant findings identified by the fras you see that yes so those are the questions uh now just to

00:12:05 now just to show you uh the email chain itself the top of the email chain if you go to page three sorry page um page two bottom of page two

00:12:17 um page two bottom of page two you can see that you are copied in to the email chain by janice ray when sending around the list of queries fought from the lfb

00:12:29 fought from the lfb do you see that yes primarily sent to alex bosman and david gibson but you're copied into the chain yes and i've read to you the last two bullet points there uh d do you remember

00:12:42 uh d do you remember where you were aware that there were potentially more deficiency notices in the pipeline in part to do with door self-closers at that stage i don't think i was

00:12:55 at that stage i don't think i was now just looking at the two points if we can get back to them please on uh page four

00:13:02 the two the two final bullet points or bullet questions in rebecca burton's

00:13:09 email the first question is whether the atmo is completing an in-house investigation there sorry i'm so sorry

00:13:20 there sorry i'm so sorry that's the pre-penultimate one are you completing an in-house investigation you see that

00:13:24 see that just above it so i didn't draw that to your attention which i should have done that the first question is are you um do you remember whether an in-house investigation was carried out

00:13:35 investigation was carried out um i wasn't directly involved in any discussions around this it was handled through the health and safety team and the executive team right was was any investigation ever discussed

00:13:46 was was any investigation ever discussed within the tmo in respect of the adair tyre fire

00:13:48 tyre fire i don't know if it was an investigation there was certainly a lot of communication a lot of meetings happened but i wasn't directly involved in i can use them now we then see that she asks about the

00:13:59 we then see that she asks about the systems in place to act on significant findings

00:14:02 findings that's the last bullet point was that um something that the tmo had been struggling to grapple with no i think there was there was a system in place there was a system in place

00:14:15 in place there was a system in place yes uh let's have a look at your response please it's uh at page two in this email chain on the same day

00:14:27 your response to janice ray when you got this email thanks janice can i please have sight of the fra actions before it's issued on the scaffold we need to remind the brigade that they carried out an

00:14:38 brigade that they carried out an inspection of the block recently and did not pick this up as an issue why did you think it was necessary to make that point there

00:14:49 make that point there the second point yes um because we'd been

00:14:53 been we've been on site some of my team had been on site with the the fire brigade and they'd seen the arrangements that were in place and seemed happy with them before and then subsequent

00:15:04 then subsequent to the fire had raised them as an issue so it was just a case of actually understanding whether they've changed their view and and why it wasn't highlighted at the time that the inspection had

00:15:17 at the time that the inspection had happened

00:15:17 happened were you were you trying to push back against any criticism from the lfb no i think i was trying to make sure that there was a positive relationship between the two parties and that there was a common understanding and

00:15:28 there was a common understanding and obviously there was it appears that um arrangements that had been in place before the fire were now seen not to be sufficient or

00:15:42 were now seen not to be sufficient or needed addressing so it was about understanding what had changed and whether we needed to it was basically trying to understand how we dealt with things going forward really

00:15:51 really now by this point the idea fire tower had happened only a few days before and did you realize at this point that the idea fire was quite a quite a serious fire yes necessitating a partial evacuation of the tower yes

00:16:04 a partial evacuation of the tower yes yes

00:16:05 yes did that event prime the tmo to be very keen not only to hear what the lfb was saying and asking but to be able to provide them with the very best

00:16:17 provide them with the very best information they could you could yes there was um a lot of focus they say between

00:16:24 between this the health and safety team and the inject the executive to respond to the issues that were being raised right well let's see how this then

00:16:32 then the night of that answer let's see how this develops can we then go please to rebecca burton's witness statement to the inquiry lfb3084098

00:16:49 i'd like to get in that statement please to page nine paragraph 16.

00:16:57 and she says that i met with janice ray on

00:17:01 on on 13th november 2015 and i raised the concerns that i've outlined above my concerns regarding the fra's treatment of the ventilation system increased after the fire at their tower on 31st of october given

00:17:13 their tower on 31st of october given that smoke had compromised both staircases through internal and external means at that meeting i also made some more general comments about the risk assessor i was very frank

00:17:25 about the risk assessor i was very frank and told her that i did not think that he was providing a good service to the kctmo

00:17:29 kctmo as illustrated by the quality of the fra for adair tower which was mirrored in the fra for its sister tower hazelwood tower which i'd also reviewed following the adair tower fire

00:17:40 adair tower fire enforcement notices were subsequently issued for adair and hazelwood towers did janice ray inform you of her discussion with the lfb on that day as set out here

00:17:53 with the lfb on that day as set out here in ms burton's statement no she did not right

00:17:57 right but you were aware generally of the lfb's concerns about the tmo's fire risk assessor no so janice ray never raised this with

00:18:08 no so janice ray never raised this with you

00:18:09 you no jealous wouldn't have done her line of communication with to barbara matthews

00:18:16 now the same day 13th november 2015 uh alex bosman emails carl stokes with some fra queries and i want to ask

00:18:28 with some fra queries and i want to ask you about that the email is at cst40203

00:18:45 and it's the second email down on that page and it's copied to janice ray now you're not copied in on it um so we'll see how we go the subject is fra action queries hi carl i've been

00:18:56 fra action queries hi carl i've been working through completing a number of fra actions and i've identified a number of queries please could you review the attached and provide a response against each action i'm keen to reduce the number of actions we receive and

00:19:07 we receive and ensure that those that are raised are proportionate to the risk that that is present on the site at any at the time i understand that you may wish to highlight concerns in addition to formal fra actions

00:19:18 addition to formal fra actions however it would be helpful to raise these outside of the fra process to ensure the process is manageable and we are able to focus on and address the key concerns in a timely manner

00:19:29 manner were you aware that alex bosman was making

00:19:32 making such requests of carl stokes no did you not specifically i knew there was a dialogue between alex and janice about how we could make this

00:19:42 this process as clear and streamlined as possible so do we take it from that that you didn't direct alex bosman to email mr stokes in these terms no did mr bosman

00:19:54 no did mr bosman discuss the gist of what he was going to tell mr stokes in this email with you before he sent it i don't think so now right

00:20:05 i'm not sure i understand what the issues are that he's referring to on the face of it would you accept that this is your team alex bosman trying to interfere

00:20:16 team alex bosman trying to interfere with the independent fire risk assessment in order to suit your own or the tmo's own resources and limitations no absolutely not i think that

00:20:29 no absolutely not i think that this is part of the dialogue that i described this morning where we were trying to make sure we had a clear concise streamlined process that got actions identified as quickly as possible and closed yes

00:20:42 as quickly as possible and closed yes he says in the second paragraph as we've seen that he's keen to reduce the number of actions we receive and ensure that they are raised proportionate to the risk that is present on site at the time

00:20:55 why was it helpful to raise those outside the fra process

00:21:08 i think what he's suggesting is for example when when i described using the keystone system where you so rather than generating actions for axa's team to provide information regarding

00:21:20 to provide information regarding compliance and certification giving access to the carl stokes to review that information himself would avoid generating time consuming in time and actions that

00:21:33 time consuming in time and actions that were inefficient so it's that's an example of the sort of process we were trying to

00:21:38 trying to review and also earlier we looked at suggesting that maybe um job orders could be issued at source rather than going through a slightly convoluted

00:21:49 going through a slightly convoluted process it was i think they're the sort of things that we were investigating how we could do this better right did you and mr bosman have a discussion

00:22:00 did you and mr bosman have a discussion on the subject of any need to ensure that mr stokes's actions were proportionate to the risk present on site

00:22:14 my assumption is that

00:22:17 well what's your rem what's your recollection i don't have a recollection right see looks from this do you accept that mr bosman at the very least was

00:22:30 mr bosman at the very least was wanted to

00:22:33 double check is perhaps a neutral way of putting it or challenge perhaps mr stokes's judgment about the risk level attributed

00:22:45 about the risk level attributed to actions um

00:22:50 it may be that some of the actions that were allocated to alex's team through the fra process nice in isolation alex might be asking

00:23:01 nice in isolation alex might be asking for clarification is whether that's the right priority put on them whether maybe too high or too low did you did you actually have any discussion along those lines with mr bosman with a view to reducing the

00:23:12 bosman with a view to reducing the number of actions as i've described you know in terms of trying to streamline the process yes that was the intention was how do we achieve these outcomes in the

00:23:23 how do we achieve these outcomes in the in the most time timely fashion right did you tell mr bosman to go to carl stakes and ask him

00:23:30 him to have a look at the risk allocations or risk levels in some of his actions and see if he could bring them down a bit

00:23:37 bit um no i didn't but i would have encouraged alex to be engaging with janice right to ensure that the process was working effectively i see let's look at uh zero eight six six

00:23:50 let's look at uh zero eight six six four nine three please

00:23:59 i'd like to go to an email on page three

00:24:12 if we go to page three we can see that there's an email

00:24:20 at the foot of the page

00:24:23 which comes from sasha chevins as you can see

00:24:26 can see 2u on the 19th of november so that's six days only after the email we've just been looking at from alex bosman to carl stokes

00:24:38 and it says dear all following our review of carl stokes's record of significant findings in action plan yesterday afternoon i've reflected on what carl said i do

00:24:49 i've reflected on what carl said i do not think that the recommendation to install

00:24:51 install door closes throughout the building is appropriately prioritized currently high for the following reasons

00:25:01 and then you can see a and b a it is not a statutory requirement to install self closers retrospectively therefore should not automatically default to high priority

00:25:12 priority b i assume that the leasehold flat entrance doors are demised the leaseholder daniel can you please confirm

00:25:19 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

00:25:31 to enforce 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 that we don't have the power to enforce

00:25:42 that we don't have the power to enforce i suggest that the priority is reduced to low

00:25:46 to low or advice and that we make reference to the fact

00:25:49 the fact that we can't enforce this in leasehold properties and then at the bottom it says peter and then again peter now as i've shown you this

00:26:00 peter now as i've shown you this email appears to have been sent from sasha jevon's email account but it's signed peter can you confirm that you drafted this email

00:26:11 email um i think i probably did yes and then i think you forwarded it to sasha jevons if we go above it on page three go back

00:26:24 if we go above it on page three go back to page three you forwarded it to sasha jevons the next day 20th of november copied to janice ray um well the email you've got here is from sasha to me which i don't

00:26:35 here is from sasha to me which i don't really understand um well

00:26:40 um well it's difficult i know to understand this email chain but what looks as if has happened is that you've drafted the email it's come back to you or come from sasha evans to you and then you have then sent it to sasha

00:26:52 then sent it to sasha javen's and janice ray copied to barbara matthews robert black alex bosman and daniel wood but that's that it looks like something that i've drafted yes at any rate you accept that now

00:27:05 at any rate you accept that now going back to page four in this email run

00:27:10 run you say that you were concerned uh that you i.e the tma would it would leave yourselves exposed what do you mean exposed there exposed to what

00:27:24 sorry this is in the penultimate paragraph in the last sentence um well i think that if we if we are committing to carry out works that

00:27:36 are committing to carry out works that we don't have the authority to carry out if we're committing to the fire brigade to do certain works in certain time scales and we don't have the ability to deliver that work

00:27:47 that work for because it's we can't get access to the building to the property rather and because actually these doors were leasehold doors

00:27:55 doors and there'd been there'd been an ongoing issue about leasehold doors renewals so if we committed to do something that wasn't in our control it would leave us exposed to criticism

00:28:06 it would leave us exposed to criticism so because in this instance the as i remember

00:28:09 remember the the least that the leaseholders owned the doors so we had no powers to compel them to renew those doors and there'd been a longer long standing

00:28:21 longer long standing dialogue between the tmo and the council and the fire brigade in terms of where the enforcement powers might be for this

00:28:33 for this so exposed to what exactly exposed commercially exposed to the risk of criminal prosecution um i don't i think that i hadn't thought in that level of detail

00:28:44 i hadn't thought in that level of detail certainly to criticism if we said we would do something and then we couldn't do it

00:28:47 do it and when you say uh that you would be exposed if we commit to completing work we don't have the power to enforce and enforce against against whom so the leaseholder owns the door

00:28:59 leaseholder owns the door yes um we don't have the power to renew that door

00:29:03 that door so if we or to put a door closer on it so if the leaseholder refuses or says i've got a door of my own and i'm quite happy with it we didn't have we don't as far as i understand have the power to enforce

00:29:15 understand have the power to enforce them to renew it or to let us put a door closer on it so that was that was a big question in terms of the the door renewal program that was run through the throughout the council

00:29:26 through the throughout the council before i arrived and there were still some issues about how those things could be enforced and i had understood that um there was there was a dialogue going on between

00:29:37 there was a dialogue going on between the tmo and the fire brigade about whether

00:29:40 whether which how it could be enforced

00:29:45 yes i mean why not just ask the leaseholders absolutely to to change their doors if they needed to or install door closers and tell them that it was for their own fire safety in some cases people would

00:29:57 fire safety in some cases people would be delighted with that in other cases where people had already renewed their doors for example or didn't want their doors or didn't want a door closer then there was a different issue about how we would enforce that

00:30:09 how we would enforce that right now you already i think said you said it yesterday that you had no expertise in fire safety no when you refer to there being no statutory requirement to install

00:30:20 statutory requirement to install self-closing devices retrospectively where where did you get that information from

00:30:25 from um

00:30:28 it was it was my understanding that i don't remember to be honest i can't remember that's actually to be corrected there if that was incorrect but i understood that the doors that were initially installed

00:30:40 the doors that were initially installed there was no retrospective requirement to go and install door closers in this instance in their tower i seen remember the doors were on with a lot of the doors were original doors which had

00:30:52 original doors which had rising but hinges so they were as designed uh in that structure and i wasn't i was under the my understanding was that there wasn't a requirement to go in retrofit

00:31:04 retrofit door closers i mean did you seek any advice from anybody with fire safety expertise before uh setting out what your understanding of the statutory position was well i think the the intention of this

00:31:16 well i think the the intention of this was to start a dialogue with our fire risk assessor on this point well maybe but sorry you're making a statement here about it not being a strategy requirement to install self-closures retrospectively the question is where did you get that

00:31:28 the question is where did you get that from that understanding i can't remember right now um

00:31:34 this email that we are looking at was sent

00:31:38 sent to janice ray as i've shown you do you remember whether miss ray responded to tell you that in fact

00:31:44 fact the nfb considered that self-closers did need to be fitted to all flat entrance doors at that stage um i don't think i was involved in that

00:31:57 um i don't think i was involved in that conversation going forward i think that um there was a conversation within the tmo within the executive team and with janus and probably with

00:32:08 with janus and probably with other members of the organization like repairs direct because there was they were the people who were going to be delivering the works i don't think i was involved in that discussion right did janice ray tell you that at that stage they had had

00:32:20 tell you that at that stage they had had concerns

00:32:21 concerns worries if you like about what carl stokes was advising the tmo in this respect

00:32:25 respect no i've never had a conversation with jonas along those lines before you sent this email can we assume from what you told us yesterday

00:32:36 yesterday that you did not look at or have any training on the lga guide fire safety and purpose-built blocks of flats published in may 2012. no no

00:32:50 published in may 2012. no no no can i show you that guide very briefly

00:32:54 briefly double zero uh four two two seven nine please

00:33:00 i'll have the first page up uh because it's a document which may be familiar to others uh so we know what we're looking at there it is

00:33:12 it is uh if we go please to page 50

00:33:19 we can look please together at 62.19 which says this it is essential that irrespective of which option is chosen far resisting flat entrance doors and doors provided

00:33:30 flat entrance doors and doors provided to protect common corridors lobbies and stairways

00:33:32 stairways should be fitted with suitable positive action self-closing devices the self-closing device should be capable of closing the door in its frame from any angle and overcoming the resistance of any latch rising butt hinges

00:33:43 latch rising butt hinges used to be acceptable under previous benchmark guidance but are no longer considered suitable devices because they are unreliable in the in the effective closure of a door

00:33:53 door and then 6220 the fitting of suitable self-closing devices whether to replace rising butt hinges pictured below or because the doors are not fitted with self-closing devices must be undertaken

00:34:05 self-closing devices must be undertaken in the

00:34:05 in the short term as a matter of priority now do you agree looking at that that your views on the priority for fitting the self-closing devices set out in your

00:34:16 the self-closing devices set out in your email

00:34:17 email are in direct conflict with the guidance given here in the lga guidance i would say that my my understanding was incorrect

00:34:26 incorrect but i was flagging that up as an issue to be clarified with an expert in the field so the fire risk assessor well mr millet i do think we have to bear in mind the distinction between guidance and regulatory requirements uh yes

00:34:40 and regulatory requirements uh yes that that that's uh a point for you mr chairman it is but you're putting it to the witness that what he

00:34:48 what he i can't remember exactly but how he expressed himself in the email statutory requirement yeah so he was purportedly at least expressing your view about the statutory requirement

00:35:00 view about the statutory requirement well let's see not the requirements on guidance right let's see how this goes when let's go back to the the precise words you used and enlightened mr chairman's uh

00:35:11 and enlightened mr chairman's uh point to me uh can we go back to the previous email when you said it a it is not a statutory requirement to install self-closures retrospectively

00:35:22 retrospectively were you seeking to draw a distinction between what the statute required as a matter of legal obligation on the one hand

00:35:31 one hand and the guidance on the other

00:35:37 um i think i was trying to

00:35:42 highlight that there wasn't we didn't have statutory powers to enforce this work and that's really where i was coming from and maybe i was incorrect in the way that i've uh put the first bullet there well let

00:35:54 uh put the first bullet there well let me try it this way if you had read what i've just read to you about door closers from the lga guidance

00:36:00 guidance would you have written what you've written in a um irrespective of what i'd read on my understanding i would be looking for an expert view on what we needed to do to address our obligations

00:36:11 obligations and also to understand you know how we can practically deliver them yeah so i wouldn't my my interpretation of what the requirements are i would always be looking for

00:36:22 always be looking for an expert view in this case this was being flagged to the fire risk assessor can we leave it like this that your a there reflected a belief

00:36:34 your a there reflected a belief that uh wasn't let us say reflected in the stat in the guidance at the time that i've read to you

00:36:47 um to this point i mean the context of this conversation was that we

00:36:55 that we had a fire risk assessment of this building the fire brigade had visited this building and nobody had flagged at the need to install door closers so i was trying to understand how we'd been through this this process where two

00:37:07 been through this this process where two experts

00:37:08 experts in my view had looked at this and hadn't recommended we installed door closers so that was part of this and i was this was me trying to set

00:37:16 set out the issues that i as i saw them um because now we appear to be having having a different conversation very shortly after the inspection where we are being required to install

00:37:29 where we are being required to install door closers and i was concerned about some of the practicalities of that particularly in terms of whether we could enforce it

00:37:38 yes that's not quite an answer to my question but i think i think i understand where you're coming from with that going back to your email of the 19th of november 2015

00:37:48 2015 uh at page three please tmo double zero eight six six four nine three page three

00:38:02 you you say there

00:38:09 that you don't think that the recommendation to install door closes throughout the building is appropriately prioritized currently high

00:38:23 you were suggesting were you not in that that the priority rating in respect of the installation of self-closing devices should be reduced from

00:38:32 from high to something lower yes i mean high

00:38:38 gives a three week time scale to carry out works

00:38:42 out works which may be quite challenging to deliver if we don't have ability to enforce work to lethal properties yes so i think the answer is

00:38:54 yes so i think the answer is my question is you were suggesting that the priority rating for self-closing devices should be reduced from high to something level i was questioning whether that priority was correct well you're saying i don't think the

00:39:06 well you're saying i don't think the recommendation is right aren't you but it's not i'm not the expert here the expert view would be to tell me if that view is appropriate or not absolutely now you'll recall that this debate had

00:39:18 now you'll recall that this debate had come out of the adair fire do you remember that the deficiency notice that the tmo had received after the or well

00:39:29 the tmo had received after the or well before the dare fire but uh only a few days beforehand had had said that the flat entrance doors had not been fitted with self-closing devices and that was that was the problem at a dare tower do you remember that

00:39:41 dare tower do you remember that i don't remember that specific right well what difference did it make to you or your team if the priority for self-closing doors self-close self-closing devices on doors were to be reduced from high to

00:39:52 were to be reduced from high to low or to advice my concern wasn't so much about that it was more about um having realistic time scales within which works could be done

00:40:04 which works could be done so if if if i was if it was my team or in this case it probably wouldn't have been my team being required to install these door closers and if you can't get access to

00:40:17 if you can't get access to a leasehold property to install them then you are likely to fail so it was about being realistic about the time scale so it may be that if the the priority is high but it's by

00:40:28 if the the priority is high but it's by recognizing that it may not be possible to do that work in the three week time scale that's been delivered

00:40:33 delivered yeah being detailed there now you said just a moment ago that you were not making a suggestion you were simply questioning whether the priority was correct

00:40:44 correct i wonder whether that's really right mr madison because when we look at page four

00:40:51 the way you end this email or draft email you say 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 so you were suggesting

00:41:05 properties so you were suggesting weren't you a change in the priority rating

00:41:08 rating uh suggesting that the the carl stokes could

00:41:11 could take that view on board and make a decision about whether that was appropriate or not you were challenging the judgment of your fire risk assessor on this matter weren't you um no i was questioning i mean i was it

00:41:23 um no i was questioning i mean i was it was a it was i think it's i was getting clarification to how we could make sure that this was appropriately prioritized in a complex situation

00:41:33 situation it isn't the case of a simple it isn't a simple situation of go and do these works it's it's more complex than that and that's what i was trying to flag up well the great respect doesn't really

00:41:44 well the great respect doesn't really read that way does it because if you are simply asking and trying to understand more you would have expressed yourself differently you would have said can can somebody please explain to me while carl states thinks

00:41:55 states thinks that this is a red item a high priority item

00:41:59 item instead you're suggesting that the priority

00:42:02 priority is reduced which is why i asked my question

00:42:05 question the only person who could reduce that priority would be carl and he wouldn't do that unless he felt that that was appropriate so it was a suggestion you didn't have any fire risk assessment

00:42:17 you didn't have any fire risk assessment expertise

00:42:19 expertise whether he did or didn't is a different question

00:42:22 question why did you think that you were in any position

00:42:25 position to suggest that the priority is reduced to low or advice i think probably when i said the priority and i was talking about the time scales for delivering these works because as i've said i don't have a problem with carrying out those works

00:42:37 problem with carrying out those works in result of the learning it's about being realistic about the time scales within which they can be delivered well is that really correct mr madison because if we go back to the bottom of page three and over to

00:42:50 to the bottom of page three and over to the top of page four you're saying i don't think the recommendation to install door closes

00:42:57 throughout the throughout the building is appropriately prioritized currently high

00:43:02 high for the following reasons and you set out the reasons so it does look very much on the face of it is that you are actually challenging the fire risk assessor's decision no

00:43:14 the fire risk assessor's decision no it's i think it's as i read that it seems very clear to me that the issue i'm flagging up is that we don't have the ability it's the program it's the reason is that i'm assuming that the leasehold flat entrance doors are

00:43:25 leasehold flat entrance doors are demised the leaseholder and we do not have the powers to enforce that's my concern here it's about time scales

00:43:30 scales about delivering the works i don't have a problem with the actual works it's being clear about whether we can deliver them in practical practice that's the purpose of the email right if i've

00:43:41 right if i've if i've worded it wrong in this that's that's a mistake why not simply suggest that the tma go back to carl stokes and say

00:43:51 say can you please rethink the time scale required for these uh repairs i think that's what i was trying to say i think that's a would have been a better way of me wording it well it's it's not a better way of

00:44:03 well it's it's not a better way of rewording the same thing i'm bound to suggest to you it's a completely different approach it's not the same thing as re-categorizing priorities simply asking for an extension of time on existing items i'm very clear to

00:44:14 on existing items i'm very clear to the the reason i wrote this was that i was

00:44:17 was concerned about the time scales and the abilities to enforce very well it's right isn't it we saw the fire safety strategy that

00:44:30 we saw the fire safety strategy that janice ray had created in november 2013 earlier today that if not classed as a red or high fra action then you wouldn't be required to put in interim measures

00:44:43 that's right isn't it

00:44:47 um i wasn't aware of that specific thing at that time i mean is the reason why you wanted on the face of it to reduce the priority to low or advice

00:44:59 to reduce the priority to low or advice was the need to avoid having to do urgent works or interim repairs no i think that as it's very clear in this email i don't have a problem with doing the work it's about ensuring that

00:45:12 doing the work it's about ensuring that we don't set ourselves up to fail and that we have clear process and ability to carry out the works if there were to be a program of replacements or checks

00:45:24 replacements or checks and installation of self-closing devices to all flat front doors then that would fall to your team to program and then implement wouldn't it not necessarily know so um

00:45:35 not necessarily know so um in in this event um repairs direct took on responsibility for installing installing the door closes there was a um so this at this stage repairs directly responsible for that

00:45:47 responsible for that if it wasn't within your area of responsibility then why are you drafting this email at all i was trying to be helpful

00:46:00 i was trying to be helpful trying to be helpful but whose area of responsibility was it then if not yours um

00:46:12 i can't remember what i can't remember the meeting that i can't remember the meeting that preceded the this email but i was obviously involved in a meeting but

00:46:23 in a meeting but and had forwarded this thought because i was concerned in a way um my team probably had more experience of delivering capital works

00:46:36 experience of delivering capital works to

00:46:36 to leasehold properties than repairs direct whose works were probably more discreetly to the tennis properties and so i was flagging up an issue that i saw that my team had previously experienced

00:46:49 that my team had previously experienced in relation to this issue in enforcing access to lethal properties and carry out works

00:46:58 now let's look at barbara matthews's response to your email can we go up the pages to page two over to page three

00:47:13 uh at the very foot of page two she responds

00:47:17 responds to you sasha jevons and robert black copy to alex bosman daniel wood and janice ray dear all and then over the top of page three

00:47:25 three she says this i agree with peter's view that his findings should be low right that this finding should be low rather than high as there is no regulation requiring the retrofit of self-closers

00:47:37 requiring the retrofit of self-closers and we could not enforce this for leaseholders i've asked janice to raise this with carl to amend the level of this finding the current the action currently reads

00:47:48 currently reads as a recommendation which we should annotate to reflect that we will initiate a program to complete the work promptly with the exception of leaseholders where we can only recommend that they be fitted

00:47:58 fitted the fire brigade have requested our significant findings in action plan and janice has agreed with carl that he will review this report later today and remove any actions where the work has been completed janus is chasing up the various teams to

00:48:10 janus is chasing up the various teams to ensure we are able to complete some actions before we send the updated version later today regards barbara had you had any further discussions with

00:48:21 had you had any further discussions with barbara matthews before this email was sent

00:48:24 sent i don't believe so now

00:48:29 and if we go up the email chain you can see

00:48:39 that at page one

00:48:46 barbara matthews writes to robert black and you and sasha jevons on the 20th of november

00:48:55 dear all carl has amended the significant findings to amend the item on spitting self-closers to be a strong advice item which is not colored

00:49:04 colored i think this is a good proposal this has no regulatory requirement or defined time scale but is advisory only do you know whether mr stokes undertook

00:49:15 undertook an independent and expert reassessment of the risk level for door closers i don't know did mr stokes explain to you or to your

00:49:26 did mr stokes explain to you or to your knowledge anybody else at the tmo on what basis according to this email he considered he was able to downgrade the risk level from red to non-colored strong advice only i had

00:49:37 to non-colored strong advice only i had no conversation with carl were you not keen to know yourself that there was a reliable and it and scientific basis for mr stokes's downgrade

00:49:50 mr stokes's downgrade um i wasn't responsible for the management of that fra so that would be that was something that was dealt with by the health and safety team and barbara being the manager of that team

00:50:02 being the manager of that team or was the truth that mr stokes agreed to re-rate this risk simply because you and others at the tmo asked him to do so

00:50:09 do so i don't know i don't know what conversation was had with carl looking at this email chain which you got as i've shown you it looks very much as if mr stokes did agree to re-rate this risk simply

00:50:21 agree to re-rate this risk simply because he was asked to do so by the tmo that's right is it not i don't have a i've never had a conversation with him no but i'm asking you i can't ask you to accept that on the face of this email

00:50:33 accept that on the face of this email i recognize your opinion but i don't i can't

00:50:36 can't i can't say anything more if there was no reliable and scientific basis for the downgrade affected by mr stokes

00:50:43 stokes how could you be confident that you were not compromising fire safety in your buildings

00:50:52 um sorry could you could you ask a question

00:50:57 unless there was a reliable and scientific basis for mr stokes's downgrade how could you be confident that you as

00:51:09 how could you be confident that you as in you and the tmo were not compromising fire safety in your buildings

00:51:14 buildings i'm sure that would be something that carl stokes would take into consideration as would barbara matthews and our head of health and safety but you didn't know what that was i

00:51:25 but you didn't know what that was i wasn't directly involved in this conversation other than giving my opinion about the practicalities of installing these works in leasehold properties in a very short period of time

00:51:34 time see isn't there a problem here let me spell it out to you if if you had a fire risk assessor who was prepared to do what you asked him in matters of judgment of risk how could you trust his risk assessments

00:51:45 how could you trust his risk assessments at all

00:51:47 at all that wasn't my experience i mean i had a limited amount of contact with carl but his um i saw a lot of work that he produced

00:51:55 produced um and it all seemed very thoughtful and

00:52:01 appropriate and i had no reason to doubt his concern his and i'm sure that he would take on board concerns i don't think this is about

00:52:10 about manipulating figures or actions it's about

00:52:13 about having a conversation about the practicalities of these issues and how they're presented mr madison would you accept that there's a more

00:52:21 a more practical point here and namely that if mr stokes thought that door closes ought to be fitted as a matter of safety

00:52:32 ought to be fitted as a matter of safety it wasn't something that had to be considered just to keep your housing stock safe yes and i'm sure that that's what i would expect that's what he would do is put that with the appropriate

00:52:43 is put that with the appropriate priority and what i didn't understand and

00:52:46 and personally from this point of view and part of the reason i was having this conversation was why these doors hadn't been identified to have door closers installed previously by either the fire risk assessment process or by the fire

00:52:58 risk assessment process or by the fire brigade at their more recent inspections so i was trying to understand that process but it had been agreed that we would carry out these works it was

00:53:09 carry out these works it was what my concern was was really just about the practicalities of physically doing the works when we didn't necessarily have enforcement abilities

00:53:17 abilities all right thank you

00:53:21 did mr stokes tell you all to your knowledge anybody else at the tmo that he had

00:53:26 he had initially made a mistake in his risk rating for self-closing doors or otherwise explain why he was prepared to downgrade the risk category for door closers from red to a

00:53:37 category for door closers from red to a non-colored strong advice item i had no conversation with carl he was managed by janice ray and barbara matthews jenna so that's where the conversation happened did you not wonder to yourself why mr

00:53:49 did you not wonder to yourself why mr stokes was so pliable i didn't take a view i didn't i'm sure he wasn't pliable i'm sure that he would have given due consideration to what was said

00:54:01 due consideration to what was said uh can we look again at what you said in your first statement please a paragraph 113.

00:54:06 113. this is um tmo 50892 at page 21.

00:54:23 uh you say there as stated above

00:54:28 uh in relation to the refurbishment of grenfell tower i deferred all fire safety issues to the experts responsible i had no input to strategies or equipment required and can only speak as

00:54:39 equipment required and can only speak as to the contractual side of fire safety installations at the tower and my understanding of what they aim to achieve now i appreciate your dealing with grenfell there and the email we were looking at earlier was more general but is it really right

00:54:51 was more general but is it really right to say that you deferred all fire safety issues to the experts responsible in the light of the email we've just seen yes and the email that you've just seen

00:55:02 yes and the email that you've just seen was referred to the expert too well you weren't deferring to the experts i'm bound to suggest you were making a suggestion to the experts which was in fact taken on making a suggestion or making a query or asking a

00:55:14 suggestion or making a query or asking a question

00:55:16 question now in due course it's right do you remember that an enforcement notice was served by the lfb in respect of the dare tower do you remember that i don't think i saw that but i think i i understood that there was an

00:55:27 i i understood that there was an enforcement right well let's in light of that answer let's let's take this quite quickly if we can tmo double zero seven

00:55:36 this is the notice and it's dated the 23rd of december 2015. you see it there and it's addressed to the tmo company secretary and it's an enforcement notice in

00:55:48 and it's an enforcement notice in respect

00:55:49 respect of ad air tower as you can see

00:55:55 do i take it that you didn't see this at the time i don't think so what about later did you see it later no i don't think so can we go to page four please

00:56:08 and on that page you can see a series of articles on the left hand side and under article 9 1 and article 10 you can see that

00:56:20 and article 10 you can see that the notice identifies insufficiency in respect under item 2 of self-closing flat entry doors do you see that yes and also under article 10 in

00:56:33 that yes and also under article 10 in the second section of that also the fitting of self-closing devices to flat entry doors there

00:56:41 there did anybody tell you even if you didn't see this notice that the absence of self-closers on flat front doors at our tower was one of the bases

00:56:52 was one of the bases of the enforcement notice i didn't see this i wasn't really involved in the conversations around the works that emerged as a result of the notice that was done

00:57:03 as a result of the notice that was done through

00:57:04 through um executive team with the um

00:57:10 the health and safety team and the repairs direct as far as i understand so this didn't come back to you no no um uh

00:57:17 uh following receipt of that notice then janice ray we now had a meeting with rebecca burton on the 5th of january 2016.

00:57:23 2016. let's quickly look we'll quickly look at the minutes of that tmo double zero eight four one eight nine one

00:57:38 there they are this is one of the bi-monthly meetings 5th of january 2016. you can see who is present claire williams and janice ray and in the bottom of page one you can't

00:57:49 and in the bottom of page one you can't see it on the screen can we please scroll up item three uh tower enforcement notice did you ever see these minutes no in particular this section of it uh

00:58:03 can we just look at the third paragraph on page two just ask you to see to see whether this triggers a recollection with you janice thought she says janice saw

00:58:15 janice thought she says janice saw clarification on some of the items on the schedule can you see that yeah immediately above that it also says janice asks the confirmation that this notice refers exclusively to this block

00:58:26 notice refers exclusively to this block and that the tmo is not required to apply this to the rest of the blocks rebecca agreed that this does not this does relate directly to our air tower however the lfb could expect that standards required in one block are

00:58:37 that standards required in one block are also required in other blocks did you did you know that that janice was asking for that confirmation

00:58:51 for that confirmation no

00:58:54 [Applause] can we look at item seven in the minutes on page three

00:59:07 flat entrance doors rebecca advised that the lfb requirement is for all flat entrance doors to be self-closing specifically landlords must ensure that self-cleaning devices are

00:59:18 ensure that self-cleaning devices are fitted and all say that effective procedures are introduced to ensure that these devices remain operational and are not disconnected or removed by the resident now on the face of it do you know

00:59:31 now on the face of it do you know do you accept that that requirement applied across the whole of the tmo housing stock there was a conversation that happened um at um health operation

00:59:43 um at um health operation sorry at the strategic uh health and safety meetings and with the council regarding this matter yes so you understood that requirement and that it applied across the whole of the

00:59:54 that it applied across the whole of the tmos

00:59:55 tmos yes and there was a discussion about how that could be delivered and maintained was it your operational responsibility to ensure that all flat entrance stores had self-closing devices no it wasn't were you ever made aware

01:00:07 no it wasn't were you ever made aware by janice ray of this lfb requirement as i say it was discussed there i see that's the discussion right and what did you do about what did you do as a result of that

01:00:18 what did you do as a result of that discussion um that would be on the record but it was discussed through the health and safety operation health and safety meeting and with um

01:00:29 and safety meeting and with um um

01:00:29 um [Music]

01:00:33 so yes it was discussed with the council and there was a plan put in place to review how to address this going forward right now do you remember roughly when that discussion was i don't but there will be records of

01:00:44 i don't but there will be records of that right um let's look later into the year october 2016. tmo double 0-866-319

01:00:55 october 2016. tmo double 0-866-319 please this is an email run in october 2016.

01:00:59 2016. and can we go please in that to page four

01:01:07 it's an email from ian lyons to janice ray

01:01:12 ray on the 6th of october subject a dare fire

01:01:17 fire peter advises that following the adair fire the the fb wants us to install automatic closing devices

01:01:23 devices to doors and just pausing there i'll come back to the rest of this email in a moment

01:01:29 moment ian lyons was the head of strategic investment at the tmo that's right how did his role relate to yours

01:01:38 yours at that time so he was the third head of the third team within my division who dealt with the strategic data management and so program planning right and uh stock

01:01:51 so program planning right and uh stock condition information management of keystone etc i see he reported to you did he yes i see uh and he goes on is there a report

01:02:03 and he goes on is there a report available re ad air which might help with the setting where to consider upgrading doors and closers if possible i'd like to gain an understanding overview based on existing fra actions in any likely fb enforcement

01:02:14 fra actions in any likely fb enforcement anticipated it would be good to get to the bottom of what the fb intended as their recommendation quotes unquote eeg doors in communal areas feds and relevant flat lobbies depending on protection systems

01:02:25 lobbies depending on protection systems etc

01:02:26 etc peter is aiming to coordinate a report to exec which considers the enforcement stroke legal straight technical and logistical aspects of the issue any help would be welcome many thanks and we can see the response to that

01:02:37 and we can see the response to that at the same day at the foot of page 2 if we go there please

01:02:45 she says it might be high and it might be helpful if we meet to discuss but here is some of the background to this

01:02:54 and then she sets out on page three have attached a copy of the enforcement action

01:02:58 action notice for ed air tower and highlighted the references to the requirement for all flat

01:03:03 all flat entrance doors to be self-closing our policy at the time of the adair fire which we had shared with the lfb had been that when new flat new flat doors are fitted these would be self-closing

01:03:15 self-closing 30s with intumescent strips and cold smoke seals and be fully compliant with building regulations in addition we would fit retrofit self-closers to the flat entrance doors of void properties and to doors in

01:03:26 of void properties and to doors in locations where our fire risk assessor highlighted the need for these to be installed

01:03:34 and then she goes on finally several years ago we completed a program of flat entrance door set replacement of approximately 1200 tenanted properties these doors had been highlighted as potentially non-compliant by the fra and

01:03:45 potentially non-compliant by the fra and then surveyed by stock conditioned surveyors to clarify whether they were sufficiently fire resisting

01:03:51 resisting and those that were not were included in the program

01:03:56 the lfb had audited a tower several weeks prior to the fire there and it issued a deficiency notice which highlighted the need to ensure all flat doors in this block were self-closing and she goes on at length i spoke to the

01:04:07 and she goes on at length i spoke to the lf at length to the lfb's fire safety team leader her viewers that all of our flat entrance doors should be self-closing and that with our existing policy it would take too long for all of our flat doors to comply

01:04:18 doors to comply i consulted peers at similar organizations and in general they confirmed that their policy was to ensure all flat entrance doors

01:04:26 doors were self-closing therefore it is likely stroke possible going forward that every time one of our blocks is audited by the lfb

01:04:33 lfb they will raise this as a requirement and issue a notice of safety deficiencies and then she goes on i'm sorry to read this at length to you but it's important unfortunately the lfb

01:04:45 but it's important unfortunately the lfb interpretation of the regulatory reform order goes further than this and they are requiring landlords to have procedures in place whereby self-closers are inspected and those which are faulty or have been disabled

01:04:56 disabled or removed or replaced whilst the lfb state that it is up to the landlord to set the frequency and arrangements for the inspection of self-closures they have confirmed that waiting for the property to become void would not be not be considered

01:05:09 void would not be not be considered sufficient they recently audited lonsdale house where the tenants door sets were replaced in 2013 as part of the program referred to above and the inspecting officer has stated that he wants us to ensure

01:05:20 that he wants us to ensure all doors are self-closing i pointed out that they had been relatively recently replaced

01:05:24 replaced with fully compliant door sets and that we were unable to control any resident who wished to disable their door closer but he still

01:05:32 still sees this as our responsibility and believes this is the correct interpretation of the rro it is also worth pointing out that laura johnson at rbkc is not keen on the idea of a borough

01:05:44 is not keen on the idea of a borough wide program of self fitting self-closers to all doors

01:05:50 doors however in discussion at the recent health and safety committee there was a general consensus that we needed to be more proactive about fitting these and the possibility of including this in the cyclical des programme complete in seven years appear

01:06:02 programme complete in seven years appear to be the most effective way of proceeding

01:06:08 hopefully this gives you most of the background etc uh now i've read that to you at length because it sets out a lot of the background um just following the email chain through if we go to page two

01:06:19 through if we go to page two you can see that on the 7th of october the inline sends this to you

01:06:26 peter janice's response below compliance versus

01:06:31 versus desire for borrow-wide door program the enforcement notice for adair is useful reading too once we've looked at the data which at first glance doesn't appear to be what we need we might be clearer

01:06:44 to be what we need we might be clearer there might be information from existing fras

01:06:46 fras which might guide us and i'll pick this up with janice next week

01:06:54 now just pausing there it looks very much from that as if at this point you were sent the adair enforcement latest that we saw dated the 23rd of

01:07:02 23rd of december 2015 i showed you earlier yeah it looks like it was cop was i copied into the email above from janus

01:07:10 janus but just just just just just go with where i am do you remember receiving and seeing the enforcement notice for our for adair at this time that's my question is that

01:07:21 at this time that's my question is that if i could see if i was copied into the email from ian lyons to janus i see uh

01:07:29 i see uh you're not copied in to the email itself uh but uh when you go to page one you re you send an email to be in lines on the 11th of october

01:07:43 on the 11th of october and as details in daniel's email attached

01:07:46 attached the council is seeking council's opinion on this matter now this this email sits at the top of the string which contains the two emails i've just read to you um so can i take it that you had seen

01:08:00 um so can i take it that you had seen both the long email i've read out at length to you and also ian lyons's response

01:08:06 response sorry my question was whether i was copied into to janice's response to ian lyons yes i understand i understand that my question to you was did you read the enforcement notice for

01:08:18 did you read the enforcement notice for adair at this time october clear until i know that i was copyrighted i can't see well let me let me try to try it this way

01:08:29 way mr madison when you receive mr lyons's email on the 7th of october which we know you did partly because it was sent to you did you ask to see the enforcement notice for a dare tower

01:08:41 for a dare tower unless i've responded to him i don't think i would have done well he says it's useful reading did you read it not that i'm aware was that i'm

01:08:52 read it not that i'm aware was that i'm not aware that i had copy of it and um i don't remember was there a problem for you getting hold of a copy of it i'm not sure that i well i'm sure if i'd

01:09:04 i'm not sure that i well i'm sure if i'd thought that i'd wanted a copy of it i don't know that i needed a copy of it it wasn't

01:09:08 wasn't something that i was personally dealing with that was being dealt with by the um

01:09:18 the the health and safety team and the executive team who were dealing with the issues that were arising from that and i wasn't part of that conversation

01:09:30 um well i'd all right uh you're told by ian lyons who reports to you

01:09:38 you on this issue that the enforcement notice for adair is useful reading do i take it from that answer you've just given me that you didn't take up his invitation i don't

01:09:49 didn't take up his invitation i don't remember whether i did or not i don't i don't recall it's not something that i was directly dealing with i can't really i mean i'm assuming that ian lyons

01:10:00 lyons here was it would be really useful to see the first email you showed me because i could then understand the context of what ian was doing

01:10:09 doing right because i'm assuming that my assumption here is that um the from the conversation that was being had here was that we needed to incorporate door closers

01:10:23 we needed to incorporate door closers into our cyclical decks program as part of a

01:10:27 of a so that was part of ian's role was looking at stock condition information programming works and planning works so i'm assuming that that's what he was doing it was getting clarification from janus as to the type of works that

01:10:39 from janus as to the type of works that needed to be incorporated into that program

01:10:41 program forgive me but but if you i i can't tell you from this run of documents uh i can't assure you that it was attached

01:10:52 attached but if you go to the top of page three of the email string you can see that janice ray does attach the enforcement notice for adair tower in her email

01:11:03 in her email to ian lines and he then uh emails this on to you so i've assumed perhaps wrongly

01:11:15 so i've assumed perhaps wrongly that the attachment to janice ray's email to ian lines would also have followed he enlightens his email to you on the 7th of october my question is so what i'm just trying

01:11:27 my question is so what i'm just trying to understand is was i copied into this email

01:11:30 email well i just i thought i'd show you that it's at page two yes well i think it's forwarding as it was forwarded to you yes it was forwarded this this email exchange from janus was forwarded to me we'll have a look shall

01:11:41 forwarded to me we'll have a look shall we

01:11:41 we yes page two it's been a long day i appreciate him we're probably coming up for a break but on page two i showed you that ian lyons

01:11:51 lyons sent you the email that he had received from janice ray the day before you see okay that's helpful thank you right so a question again do you remember

01:12:02 question again do you remember seeing the enforcement notice at that stage no

01:12:06 right now uh on page one let's go to that uh you can see that you respond to the end lines on the 11th of october 2016.

01:12:17 end lines on the 11th of october 2016. and i've shown you the first line there going on with it we need to give a brief to the rbkc solicitor by tomorrow detailing the issues that we need to clarify

01:12:25 clarify some of these are detailed in my initial email included in the attached have you been able to pull together what data we hold have you made inquiries about other authorities approaches what questions do we want to be included

01:12:36 what questions do we want to be included in the brief to cancel my initial thoughts on the key questions we want to counsel to clarify include do all feds need door closers in order to comply with the regulatory

01:12:47 in order to comply with the regulatory reform order straight building regs and is this retrospective can we enforce door closers under the terms of our leases and tenancy agreements

01:12:58 so it's clear from this that first of all you want to know what other local authorities are doing about this issue yes yes and also whether you have to take action

01:13:09 take action to comply with the rro yes and also whether you could challenge the lfb's requirements that's what this was about wasn't it no it's about clarifying what was

01:13:20 no it's about clarifying what was required so that you could then respond to the lfb no that we could comply with what our requirements are yes but the context of this was the lfb's requirements wasn't it as the enforcing

01:13:32 requirements wasn't it as the enforcing that was the trigger of this issue and we were trying to explore what exactly needed to be done to comply with regulation yes all right and let's go to

01:13:43 yes all right and let's go to tma-00840-715 the story continues this is an email from you to janice ray

01:13:54 on friday the 14th of october 2016 copied to barbara matthews and sasha jevons

01:14:02 jevons subject reader tower fire 31 october 15 lfb's notification to the tmo of investigation of offenses

01:14:12 and the the topic is largely about what should go into the instructions to cancel

01:14:18 cancel on the subject of inspections of self closing devices on flat entrance doors

01:14:30 you say in the third line at health and safety committee it was suggested that door closes should be installed to all doors in the stock would a more precise definition be that

01:14:41 would a more precise definition be that door closers would be will be installed where it has identified as a fundamental part of the fire strategy for the building as defined by our fire risk assessor

01:14:52 assessor this would not therefore apply to homes where the door opens directly onto the street or potentially onto open balconies with alternative means of escape

01:15:01 escape for example the low rise at world's end by clarifying this point we can start to focus on the areas of greatest rift what was what

01:15:07 was what lay behind that that you were seeking to resist a wholesale program of inspection of self-closers and instead trying to limit it to instances where the fire risk assessor

01:15:18 instances where the fire risk assessor deemed it fundamental on a building by building basis i was trying to establish what needs to be done to comply with

01:15:29 what needs to be done to comply with regulation yeah that's a an even broader description of what you were doing but at the more slightly more granular level mr madison was your purpose in doing what you've

01:15:40 was your purpose in doing what you've just said in order to resist a wholesale program of inspection of self-closers and limit it instead to those cases where the fire risk assessor had said that dors that automatic door closes

01:15:51 that dors that automatic door closes were fundamental to the fire strategy for each building it was clarifying the point is whether we were putting in every property irrespective or whether there were some properties where it actually wasn't necessary

01:16:03 necessary clarification i'm so sorry i cut across you

01:16:08 i'll finish your eyes let's finish man okay do you and that would place responsibility wouldn't it for identifying the need for self-closers on the fire risk assessor for each building

01:16:20 risk assessor for each building potentially i think the answer to this was that

01:16:23 was that in reality in the stock there were very few built buildings of that nature anyway most of the properties were in blocks where it was you know we didn't have many houses and individual dwellings so

01:16:36 and individual dwellings so most of them were flattered blocks and would have required a door closer it was just a way of trying to understand where it was essential under the regulations to put these closes in place and to ensure that we

01:16:48 closes in place and to ensure that we could do that in the most effective way possible did janice ray not tell you that of the lfb's requirement that i showed you in the minute of the

01:16:59 that i showed you in the minute of the 5th of january 2016 meeting that self-closing devices needed to be fitted to all flat entrance doors and not only those identified on a building by

01:17:10 those identified on a building by building basis by the relevant fire risk assessor

01:17:13 assessor i wasn't aware of that i don't remember being aware of that right do you accept that your suggestion that door closes would be installed

01:17:27 that door closes would be installed where it's identified as fundamentally part of the fire strategy fire strategy for the building was inconsistent with the nfb's global requirement that door closer should be

01:17:38 door closer should be fitted and maintained throughout the stock mine wasn't a suggestion mine was a clarification of what the regular what we were required to do under the regulations i don't have the technical ability or

01:17:49 i don't have the technical ability or experience and fire safety to make that assessment so i was asking for a professional opinion all right let me rephrase the question do you accept that your request for a clarification

01:18:03 if accepted would mean that that the policy or strategy would be at odds with what the lfb was after um

01:18:14 odds with what the lfb was after um it was about establishing facts and agreeing a process so i wasn't we whatever we were going to do we were going to need to make sure we complied with regulations and agreed an approach with the fire

01:18:25 and agreed an approach with the fire brigade that was my that was my understanding but i wasn't managing that relationship with the fire brigade either so i was just trying to clarify the issues that i felt that we should be getting

01:18:36 that i felt that we should be getting while we were getting legal advice on how to do this these were some suggestions of things we should be clarifying just so we are absolutely clear on our obligations and your suggestion for clarification through the legal

01:18:47 for clarification through the legal advice

01:18:49 advice was in if you're if your clarification met the answer yes would mean that that was different from and irreconcilable with what the lfb had

01:19:01 and irreconcilable with what the lfb had told

01:19:02 told janus ray on the 5th of january 2016. i don't think it could be reconcilable i think we would have to work with the lfb to agree what we were doing and it's about understanding the

01:19:13 understanding the legal grounds on which we stood because clearly it appeared certainly it appeared to me and maybe incorrectly that things were changing in terms of the way that enforcement notices were being

01:19:26 that enforcement notices were being being issued and i wanted a full understanding of what the context of that was so we could anticipate that and build that into our programs wasn't the case of challenging what the fire brigade was saying it was about

01:19:37 fire brigade was saying it was about understanding regulation and making sure that

01:19:39 that we had something in place that prepared us for that mr chairman i'm i'm afraid i'm doing this i'm halfway through this email but i'm not going to finish it before an appropriate moment for a break well then

01:19:50 appropriate moment for a break well then we better take one now it's been a long day marooned again but yes

01:19:55 yes all right mr madison we'll have our break now we'll come back at 25 to 4 please

01:20:00 please and the usual requests don't uh speak to anyone about your evidence while you're out of the room okay thank you thank you very much

01:20:16 right 25 to 4.

01:40:04 would you ask mr madison to come back in please

01:40:11 [Music]

01:40:29 all right i'm ready to carry on yes thank you thank you mr chairman thank you mr madison uh thank you for coming back um can we go back please to the email we were on just before the

01:40:40 to the email we were on just before the tea break tm00840715 and i would like to pick it up about halfway down the screen

01:40:52 about halfway down the screen where you say the second point do you see that

01:40:55 see that the second do you see that the second point is whether

01:41:02 halfway down the screen on page one there no sorry oh yes yes yes i thought you said yes um the second point is whether we have the powers

01:41:11 powers under the terms of the tenancy at least to enforce the installation and maintenance of door closers

01:41:18 closers under the terms of the tenancy agreement we have a right to gain access to carry out essential works i'm sure we can argue that these works fit in this category however what is not clear is what action

01:41:30 however what is not clear is what action could be taken in the event that a tenant

01:41:32 tenant removes or disables the door closer what action is reasonably required by the landlord

01:41:37 landlord to check that door closes are in good repair how can we best transfer responsibility to the tenant for this uh under the terms of the lease it's probably less clear

01:41:48 it's probably less clear i think we need to be clear regarding our ability to require door closers to be fitted and maintained now is it right that your concern was whether the tmo had the legal right to enforce

01:41:59 enforce installation and maintenance of door closes

01:42:02 closes respectively against tenants and against leaseholders yes now you ask as we can see a number of questions of janice ray and one of which is the one i

01:42:13 janice ray and one of which is the one i just read out to you how can we best transfer

01:42:16 transfer responsibility to the tenant for this why did the tma want to transfer responsibility for that to the tenant um it didn't want to transfer responsibilities that attended it was a

01:42:27 responsibilities that attended it was a question about how we can make tenants responsible for ensuring that door closers are are left in good repair i.e not removed or if or or repaired or reported for

01:42:39 or if or or repaired or reported for repair if broken because there is a tendency sometimes people who door closes can be inconvenient if you get locked out

01:42:50 inconvenient if you get locked out of your building or may be locked out repeatedly and if those close behind you so people sometimes disable them because it doesn't suit the way their their lifestyle so

01:43:01 the way their their lifestyle so what what this was saying if we were responsible for ensuring that door closers

01:43:06 closers remained in working order tenants needed to share some of that responsibility in leaving them intact and reporting them to us if they needed repair right did you not understand that the

01:43:18 right did you not understand that the tmo

01:43:19 tmo as the responsible person under the rro was responsible for ensuring that the flat front doors had door closes which is i think which is i think what the lfb had said

01:43:31 the lfb had said this discussion here is about how we the practicalities of this installing door closes on all properties and ensuring that they remain in place and in good repair and how we check that

01:43:42 and in good repair and how we check that and how we ensure that our customers

01:43:47 agree with that and help us right you see you talk in terms of transferring responsibility to the tenant what did you mean by that

01:44:00 so i think that the last two sentences are probably should be read together over the last three so i'm saying however it's not clear what action is could be action could be taken in the event of a tenant removes or disables the door closed

01:44:11 the door closed right so on whom did you think that chance that responsibility for ensuring that the door closers were

01:44:22 for ensuring that the door closers were in good repair rested that's with the tml

01:44:29 and and if that is the case why were you looking

01:44:33 looking or asking how you could best transfer that responsibility to the tenant i think that's badly worded i think it needs to be read in the context of the two bullets above and what it's what the obligation is

01:44:46 and what it's what the obligation is that the landlord is to check the door closes are in good repair however in the event that residents remove them or disable them ensuring that we are clear

01:44:57 disable them ensuring that we are clear that

01:44:58 that you have the ability to enforce or take action if necessary but also transfer responsibility to residents if their door closer breaks for example that they report it

01:45:10 that they report it so that we can repair it and keep it in good repair otherwise it's very difficult to ensure that the doors of 10 000 homes all have door closers that are in good repair

01:45:22 repair were you aware at the time of those parts of the lga guide the numbers paragraph numbers are 82.3 and 82.4

01:45:34 and 82.4 which set out what good practice was in respect of inspections i wasn't aware of that now right uh were you aware and i suppose the answer will be no

01:45:45 will be no that flat entrance doors which should be included in a program of inspections to ensure

01:45:51 ensure that defects such as or ineffective self-closing devices or damaged doors or frames would be

01:46:02 damaged doors or frames would be rectified did you know that no that's not right but the responsibility within the tmo for identifying that sort of issue would be with uh

01:46:11 with uh the health and safety team responsible for the policy and that would that would that answer also extend to the fact that the guide recommends six monthly inspection programs including flat entrance doors

01:46:22 flat entrance doors i wasn't aware of that you weren't aware of that

01:46:26 of that did we take it from that that you yourself did not understand that the tmo were responsible not only for installing self-closing devices but also for ensuring that the flat entrance doors including the self-closing devices were

01:46:38 including the self-closing devices were regularly and inspected and maintained there was um so there was discussion

01:46:46 this this was a

01:46:49 the document that we're looking at here was part of a clarification process with um council's opinion about what our obligations actually were and how we could

01:46:57 could uh ensure that they were met that was so that was part of the reason for getting council's opinion in this and to ensure that our processes were

01:47:06 were addressing these things we were also encountered in dialogue with the council on this matter as right did you think at the time the responsibility for installing and maintaining and inspecting flat

01:47:18 and maintaining and inspecting flat front door closers was something that you could shift onto the tenant no that's not what i was suggesting what i was suggesting the tenants had a part of responsibility under their

01:47:29 a part of responsibility under their tenancy to ensure that the building that they

01:47:32 they reported repairs so is making sure that that was that tenants didn't disable their self-closing devices and reported repairs as necessary i mean within the tmo there was this

01:47:45 i mean within the tmo there was this you know there were different layers of inspection already going on in terms of communal areas in terms of fire risk assessments

01:47:54 but there wasn't a program specifically they understand it looking at door closers

01:48:01 closers i see if that was how you intended the expression best transfer responsibility to the tenant can you explain why you wanted that to be a matter for council to advise on

01:48:17 um i don't i mean i i assume so because i mean council might have an opinion on what the terms were of the existing leases or the terms were of the existing

01:48:28 or the terms were of the existing tenancies so there may be some legal view on on whether there were requirements already within those documents that gave us powers to make sure that um

01:48:40 gave us powers to make sure that um that door closes remained in good repair i mean if it was simply a question of ensuring that all your tenants kept their door closes in good repair you wouldn't need to ask council's opinion about that would you

01:48:53 um but if somebody if one of our tenants removes the door closer do we have the ability to reinstate it do we have the ability to take any action in the event that they

01:49:05 take any action in the event that they don't want us to reinstate it or won't report it so it i think it was about understanding the whole piece about how we could effectively manage this now

01:49:17 effectively manage this now do you remember that on the 17th of november 2016 a deficiency notice was issued by the lfb in respect to grenfell tower after an lfb inspection i don't think i was

01:49:28 an lfb inspection i don't think i was aware of that right well let's look at the notice

01:49:33 tmo10017254 please

01:49:45 this is the uh deficiency notice sent to janice ray premise is grenfell tower lancaster west estate

01:49:54 estate and if we look at page five well sorry still on page one you can see that the um action should be taken by 18th of may it's in bold in the first main paragraph there do you see that yes what's the date of the actual letter

01:50:06 yes what's the date of the actual letter 17th of november in 2016 you should be able to see that on the screen yeah

01:50:17 if we go to page five we can see that here is the schedule of fire safety audit observations

01:50:27 the default property is grenfell tower and then we can see in the left-hand column a list of articles which are said to be infringed and then in the second column

01:50:38 infringed and then in the second column issue

01:50:39 issue and then actions to be taken on the right hand side

01:50:44 and you can see that under articles 11 and 17

01:50:50 and 17 just on the page we've got there is a reference to fire doors not fitting fully into their frames

01:50:59 and fire doors protecting the escape route not closing fully in their frame and then under article 17.1 17 bracket 1

01:51:11 halfway down it says during audit it was found that the responsible person for management of the access route has not prevented or addressed deficiencies in the fire resistance of the protected root

01:51:22 root and then a the bottom protected which has been compromised by the fitting of doors that do not self-close flats 44 and 153 were checked at audit and did not self-close

01:51:34 at audit and did not self-close same again under article 14 second reference there on that page

01:51:42 and then you can see under article 8 at the time of audit the general fire precautions required to prevent fire and smoke spread via shafts rises or ducting inadequate

01:51:54 or ducting inadequate etc uh

01:51:58 etc uh there are others as well i'm not going to leave it all out to you now you say you didn't see this at the time did you see this do you think you remember at

01:52:09 see this do you think you remember at any time

01:52:10 any time after the 17th of november 2016. no

01:52:19 do you remember when you first saw this notice

01:52:22 notice or is this the first time you think this is the first time i've seen it is it really right

01:52:29 do you agree just looking at it now that it was it was plain to the tmo at the time that the lfb had taken the absence of or defects in

01:52:40 had taken the absence of or defects in self closers on flat front doors as a serious issue putting in putting you

01:52:46 you that is the tmo in breach of the rri provisions yes yes in respect of grenfell tower itself

01:52:54 itself in respect to this and do you agree that given the deadline of the 17th of may 2017 for action to be taken that time was of the essence

01:53:05 the essence yes and that the actions set out in in the notice would fall to be addressed by by your department wouldn't they no no right

01:53:16 no no right so the repairs to doors and uh communal doors would be with repairs direct and what about the the doors in the protected route same

01:53:27 the doors in the protected route same right do you remember any discussion within your reporting line up or down of repairs necessary within grenfell tower in order to put it into

01:53:38 into compliant condition at this time in relation to these actions now

01:53:50 what about maintenance of the doors do you remember any discussion about maintenance uh either of the flat front doors

01:53:56 doors or lease holder front doors or the fire doors between the communal lobbies of the escape route all of those were repaired and maintained by

01:54:08 maintained by repairs direct right so i had no directors but at this time let's be clear

01:54:12 clear to november 2016 through to may 2017 who was responsible for overseeing those repairs or maintenance program the responsive

01:54:25 or maintenance program the responsive repairs

01:54:27 repairs who was responsible for ensuring that the defects identified in this deficiency notice were cured so i'm assuming that this this letter was

01:54:36 was written to janice ray i'm assuming that janice ray would have communicated the actions required out of this to the relevant people i'm assuming that would have been repairs direct and that they would have been

01:54:47 and that they would have been responsible for action in the repairs

01:54:54 can we look at tmo-00840-763

01:55:09 these are minutes of the health and safety committee meeting on the 19th of january 2017. we can see from the third name down that you were there can we go please to page five item 6.1

01:55:26 and this is under the heading review of the safety policy and strategy and if we go halfway down that block of text it's the fifth bullet point down we can see the topic self-closers

01:55:37 self-closers and it says the need to have a more proactive

01:55:42 proactive policy on installation of these devices in order to meet the lfb requirements was acknowledged suggestion that this could be included in cyclical decorations projects was discussed for further work required on

01:55:54 discussed for further work required on this

01:55:55 this in tmo and with rbkc self regular inspection and maintenance how and when can this be undertaken then there's a reference to leasehold of

01:56:07 then there's a reference to leasehold of flat entrance doors seek further legal advice do you remember that discussion um i do remember discussing these issues yes

01:56:20 do you remember whether there was any discussion at all at that meeting that only two months or so beforehand there had been

01:56:27 had been a deficiency notice for grenfell tower received

01:56:31 received i say i wasn't aware of the the efficiency notes of grenfell tower but there was

01:56:35 there was clearly an ongoing dialogue between within the tmo and with the council regarding

01:56:43 regarding door closers inspections and

01:56:54 retrofitting uh do you know why it had taken more than a year since the adair tower fire in october 2015

01:57:02 2015 to acknowledge the need for a proactive self-closure installation program or policy

01:57:09 policy it wasn't an area of my responsibility so i don't know

01:57:18 do you know why at least according to this note

01:57:21 this note the tma was only starting to consider how regular inspection and maintenance regimes could be achieved i don't know the timeline of what conversations were happening around this

01:57:32 conversations were happening around this i know that i was party to some conversations with the council about the practicalities of this and i knew there was um legal advice being sought um i don't know the timeline and so i can't really

01:57:43 know the timeline and so i can't really comment on what happened between that point and this point so and this discussion was happening around you but not with you

01:57:55 around you but not with you um is that a fair way of looking at it well it wasn't my area of responsibility so the responsibility was with the health and safety team and the um the only aspect of this might have

01:58:08 um the only aspect of this might have been if the who's decided to incorporate some of these works into my programs of work that were being delivered in my team so for example in the if it was included some of this into the external decorations program that would be something that would be

01:58:20 that would be something that would be incorporated into my team but otherwise there would be works that would be planned and delivered through the responsive repairs or the responsive repairs program or

01:58:31 or the responsive repairs program or the inspections could be carried out by estate services staff for example i i don't know but they were none of this was going to be delivered through my team as far as i could tell unless it was incorporated

01:58:43 unless it was incorporated into the external decorations program but that

01:58:47 but that was a six-year program which you know may not have met the requirements here when it says as we can see in the bullet points self-closures regular inspection

01:58:58 points self-closures regular inspection and maintenance how and when can this be undertaken were you not involved in that discussion no because i wasn't responsible for repair and maintenance was that was self-closures not part of the assets for which you were

01:59:10 the assets for which you were responsible for a contracts team well the whole all of the buildings were part of the

01:59:15 of the at that level but the repair and maintenance of those assets was partly done by

01:59:19 done by was was exclusively done by repairs direct

01:59:23 direct i don't quite understand why that is given that they're not responsive repairs

01:59:26 repairs but uh but ensuring maintenance was that not part of your responsibility um the the decision had been made that repairs direct would deal with that when was that decision made in

01:59:38 that when was that decision made in respect of self-closures specifically i don't know as i say there was a lot of conversations the only issue that i had my eye on here was whether it needed to be incorporated into the plan maintenance program did anybody ever tell you

01:59:50 program did anybody ever tell you that uh regular inspection and maintenance of door self-closers was not to form part of your remit so could you ask that question yes did

02:00:01 so could you ask that question yes did anybody ever tell you that main regular inspection and maintenance of door self-closures in high-rise blocks

02:00:07 blocks was not to be part of your area of responsibility your remit

02:00:24 um i'm trying to understand how i yeah it seems a bit like a double negative i'm trying i'm struggling to answer the question

02:00:31 question let me try to answer here did anybody ever say to you you are not responsible mr madison or peter for uh in regular inspection or maintenance of

02:00:42 regular inspection or maintenance of flat front door door closers

02:00:46 but nobody would say that because i wasn't responsible so no that it wasn't part of the question and so the responsibility here was with the responsive repairs team that right we tried a different way

02:01:00 that right we tried a different way if we want to know within whose area of responsibility the responsibility for regular inspection and maintenance of flat front

02:01:11 inspection and maintenance of flat front door

02:01:12 door self-closers lay what would we look at

02:01:17 maybe if i could put it another way my areas of responsibility were strategic planning of investment and strategy was and then the delivery side of things

02:01:28 was and then the delivery side of things was the capital program which is the largest scale capital program including the cyclical program and the mechanic and electrical engineering piece they were the discrete areas that were my responsibility

02:01:39 areas that were my responsibility all other repairs were carried out by the plan maintenance but by the resp the repairs direct team if something was going to be incorporated into one of those programs

02:01:50 incorporated into one of those programs so for example to run a capital investment program to install doors that might be something that

02:01:56 that would be delivered through that program but it wouldn't be routine inspections of small scale items like door closers that will be done through the responsive repairs team or the resistance

02:02:07 repairs team or the resistance there was an estate services team who did inspections of communal areas they would be the sort of the parts of the organization that would be able to take that level of responsibility

02:02:18 responsibility but mine was more about larger scale program works and responsive repairs of mechanical electrical aspects right the topic under discussion here is regular inspection and maintenance

02:02:29 regular inspection and maintenance how and when can this be undertaken do i take it from your answers that you that at this meeting you did not think that that was or was going to be part of a capital program or a a cyclical

02:02:41 a capital program or a a cyclical program i suggested that we could incorporate it into a cyclical program but that would be a seven year program it would be a longer term term thing

02:02:52 term term thing and it could be part of the brief to ensure that as part of that works we check

02:02:56 check but i don't think that was we needed something that was more reactive and targeted here to ensure that that the devices were kept in

02:03:07 that the devices were kept in in repair and they were installed where they weren't already in place now if we go to the foot of page uh six please

02:03:15 please sorry can i just um clarify something i think i understand that if someone reported a door closer not working the uh

02:03:28 not working the uh team to respond would be repairs direct yes

02:03:33 yes who would carry out uh an ongoing um inspection of tenants doors to find out whether the door

02:03:44 doors to find out whether the door closes were working or not i don't think that had been established and i think that was part of this conversation it wouldn't be repairs direct would it it could have been potentially i mean it's one of the options uh because it

02:03:56 it's one of the options uh because it could have been part of a say a regular health check in in in repairs um repairs it could have been one of the options or it could have been

02:04:04 been the estate services staff or the house management staff even there were different ways of looking at it and i think that was really part of the the nut of the the conversation here was actually what what do we need to do who's best place

02:04:15 what do we need to do who's best place to do it what's the most practical way of managing it yeah thank you

02:04:28 uh can we go down to page six please and look uh just below halfway down we're still under the same item within

02:04:39 we're still under the same item within section six of this minute flat entrance doors specifications for replacement doors and self-closures have now been received nfb's expectation is that the tmo install cell closes and

02:04:50 install cell closes and maintain them the committee discussed the feasibility of installing the self-closures and the risk that the tma would be open to legally if they are not installed other options will need to be explored and agreed with

02:05:01 will need to be explored and agreed with the council the quantity of doors requiring self-closures is not known at present what were the options other than self-closing doors

02:05:12 other than self-closing doors i don't know right

02:05:17 why were the tmo still at this point seeking to avoid self-closing doors in other words by exploring other options

02:05:32 um i don't think they were trying to avoid

02:05:38 um i don't know i don't know i can't remember the context of that comment well you can't remember the context of other options will need to be explored

02:05:47 explored is that is that what you're what you can't recall

02:05:54 other options we need to agree with the council i don't know what the conversation was with the council so i don't understand the minute right i mean it looks looks to the naked eyes if

02:06:03 eyes if at this meeting the the the the the tone of the discussion was one of resistance to the lfb's expectation that the the tmo installed self closes and maintain them

02:06:14 and maintain them no i don't i don't agree with that i think that there was an acceptance that that this needed to be done there was some concerns about the practicalities and how they were going to be delivered

02:06:25 and how they were going to be delivered if there was an acceptance of that that would

02:06:28 would needed to be done why was there a discussion of other options needing to be

02:06:31 be explored and agreed with the council i don't know what those options were they needed to be explored

02:06:42 why was this matter even being debated at this meeting the que my question is

02:06:50 why was the only why weren't you just discussing getting on and curing the deficiencies by the deadline and getting the working door closes actually fitted and operating

02:06:59 operating um this wasn't my agenda this was barbara mati's meeting she was used she used the forum to raise awareness of health and safety issues across the organization

02:07:11 issues across the organization so there was a the attendance here wasn't

02:07:14 wasn't um wasn't just senior managers it was through it was it was up and down the organization it was trying to raise awareness of the importance of these issues and how everybody had a responsibility for ensuring health and safety within

02:07:25 for ensuring health and safety within the organization and if this was nothing to do with you because it didn't fall within your area of responsibility can you explain why you got involved in uh the november of the previous letter

02:07:36 uh the november of the previous letter yeah in discussions about what instructions to send to council on the question of door closes i can't remember

02:07:43 remember right now there's a joint management team meeting on the 1st of march 2017 with the rbkc executives which

02:07:54 with the rbkc executives which you attended and we'll look at the minutes of those those are rbk zero zero zero one four zero seven two

02:08:06 please

02:08:09 and i say the rbk executives it's a joint management meeting and there are some executives there uh you can see who's there from rbkc laura johnson amanda johnson

02:08:20 laura johnson amanda johnson etc and from tmo we could see that you were there as well as robert black and barbara matthews uh if we go to uh page two please we can see that the

02:08:33 uh page two please we can see that the door closer issue is dealt with at item five there at the foot of the page installation of self-closing doors and annual inspection will be a huge cost if wants to do this

02:08:45 will be a huge cost if wants to do this nobody has an inspection process at present as it's not a legal requirement to have yearly checks could be an option to include in the fire strategy need to develop a program and take to

02:08:56 and take to take to scrutiny liability if the doors are broken would be with the tmo laura agreed to hold off recommending inspections program at present

02:09:07 why was it a question of wanting to do this as you can see in the first line will be a huge cost if wants to do this you'd been told by the lfb some time before this that it had to be done

02:09:18 before this that it had to be done no this i wasn't i hadn't been part of this conversation i had i was involved in the very outset of the conversation um and this whole dialogue has been taken

02:09:29 and this whole dialogue has been taken over here by the executive team and i had very limited involvement in this so i i don't can't really shed any light on this i'm afraid

02:09:41 and when you say you weren't involved in this

02:09:45 this conversation hadn't been part of this conversation does it mean you weren't do you mean you weren't that part of the meeting i was at this meeting but the all of the exploration of the issues around door closers and how they were

02:09:57 around door closers and how they were going to be delivered was being dealt with outside of i wasn't involved in that discussion so well let me see if i can recreate the scene you were at this

02:10:08 recreate the scene you were at this meeting from beginning to end were you yes right um when this topic as item five came up uh who led the discussion from the tmo side i'm assuming it was

02:10:20 from the tmo side i'm assuming it was barbara matthews do you remember that or um i don't really remember the meeting to be honest but it was i'm assuming it would have been barbara because she had her responsibilities under the

02:10:31 under the um as as executive director for health and safety but she was also um line managing jointly managing the repairs direct director was there a

02:10:43 the repairs direct director was there a reluctance by tmo or rbkc to carry out installations or inspections because of the huge cost that would be incurred i don't think it was about i wouldn't have thought cost would have been an

02:10:54 have thought cost would have been an issue i think there were probably concerns about the practicality of how we could achieve this

02:10:59 this what somebody certainly seems to have said at the meeting will be a huge cost if want to do this can you explain the context as i say i don't i didn't have any detailed understanding of this

02:11:10 any detailed understanding of this conversation i was part i was party to it not part of it right

02:11:17 are you able to explain what liability if the doors are broken would be with the tmo

02:11:21 the tmo meant no

02:11:28 on the face of it it looks to the naked eye the untutored those who went to the meeting that what the what tmo and the and our bkc were doing here were

02:11:39 and our bkc were doing here were prioritizing cost and liability exposure over safety i don't think so i think they were considering practicalities right would it have been your department

02:11:51 right would it have been your department that would have carried out this global installation program no i asked you that because it would have been a major capital program wouldn't it um i think it was it was

02:12:04 wouldn't it um i think it was it was it was this the sort of work that repairs direct were very keen to take on so it was a rather than being a reactive repair something you could plan for and deliver in larger volume it was very

02:12:15 and deliver in larger volume it was very much along the lines of where the repairs direct organization was looking to develop so it felt like a it was a it was a project that they were going to take forward if you go back to page one you can see who was there

02:12:27 who was there was anybody from repairs direct there no nobody from repairs direct would attend any of these meetings no was anybody there who was there who who

02:12:38 was anybody there who was there who who to whom repairs direct reported barbara matthews

02:12:41 matthews right so when you say

02:12:47 that this was something that repairs direct was very much looking to develop did barbara hughes did barbara matthews actually say that um i don't know

02:13:02 um i don't know there's no hint in this note that a program to be taken to scrutiny would fall outside the capital regeneration and investment

02:13:17 regeneration and investment remit that you had my understanding was that this was going to be delivered through repairs direct who gave you that understanding from what from any of the discussions

02:13:28 from what from any of the discussions that we've had through through this process can you just help with this um had any attempt been made by the time of this meeting this is march

02:13:41 the time of this meeting this is march 2017

02:13:42 2017 to assess the number of doors which would require new or even replacement self-closing devices

02:13:50 devices um well certainly that's part that's why ian lyon's dialogue initially was enough was he was working with janice ray so ian lyons would have had access into our stock

02:14:01 would have had access into our stock condition database so would have been able to try and access whatever information was available in there although i suspect that that wouldn't have gone down to the granular detail of door closes it would have probably stopped at a door

02:14:12 stopped at a door and it may have been able to tell you whether it was a self-closing door or not

02:14:16 not but um so that was probably where ian lyon's involvement was was but from that point forward all of the planning of this

02:14:27 planning of this was being done through repairs direct and i had no direct involvement in it now i asked the question because we see i think no reference in these minutes to any uh to give us any indication of the

02:14:40 any uh to give us any indication of the size of the undertaking now we know that there were self-closers fitted to doors in grenfell tower although in some cases they were broken or missing

02:14:52 cases they were broken or missing we have we know that there were no self-closers i think fitted in a dare tower there were a lot of other properties had no one taken any steps by this time to assess the size of

02:15:05 steps by this time to assess the size of the problem i think there was a mixed picture i think that certainly in a dare some of the

02:15:09 the where doors had been replaced they'd been replaced with doors with self-closing devices but where they were original doors they wouldn't have been so i think that was part this was a mix and i think that where before my time at

02:15:21 and i think that where before my time at the tmo they'd instead had been a program with fire door installations which so i my my under my crude understanding was that

02:15:30 was that all doors were fire doors that had been recently fitted and installed other than a few outliers that that the health and safety team were aware of however what we didn't have an accurate

02:15:41 however what we didn't have an accurate record of

02:15:42 record of was whether were the instances where door closes may have broken or may have been removed and so the inspection process was going to have to be an ongoing process from

02:15:54 to have to be an ongoing process from the

02:15:55 the basically from the beginning and starting from scratch i think and it was trying to find the vehicle to do that and assess the process yes thank you yes mr willett

02:16:06 the process yes thank you yes mr willett yes can we please now look at the minutes of the tmo health and safety committee meeting

02:16:13 meeting from the 16th of march 2017 at tmo one six seven four one

02:16:29 uh and if you look please at page four we can look

02:16:38 at sections 3.3 and 3.4 feedback from lfb an audit was carried out by lfb on whitchurch house sheltered scheme in

02:16:49 on whitchurch house sheltered scheme in february

02:16:49 february at the time of the previous lfe audit in march 2016 the block had been confirmed as broadly compliant the same fra remains in place and there have been no material alterations or other significant changes

02:17:00 alterations or other significant changes which would impact on fire safety however on this occasion the lfb have issued a deficiency notice with many issues

02:17:06 issues jw confirmed that in consultation with carl stokes hc and jj she had drafted a response setting up the tma's position or policy in relation to each point raised and this had been sent to the

02:17:17 raised and this had been sent to the inspecting officer and fire safety team leader a response is awaited and then you say or it records you suggesting that it may be possible to strengthen tma's position by using an

02:17:29 to strengthen tma's position by using an independent fire safety expert to review challenges from the lfb jw to investigate and that's a jw action point why did you make that

02:17:40 action point why did you make that suggestion i think what um what appeared to be happening is that there had been a couple of serious incidents that um you know in relation to the idea fire and um

02:17:51 and um and and the approach from the fire brigade seemed to have changed and i thought it was important that we understood the position really clearly from a

02:18:01 from a from a professional perspective so that we could plan our programs effectively so it was all about trying to get ahead of things rather than being reactive

02:18:10 reactive so it felt at the moment that the fire brigade were issuing notices and we were being reactive to that whereas i felt that we needed to be more proactive and we should get some

02:18:21 more proactive and we should get some professional advice to help us understand if the if the position had changed well with respect it's not quite what it says

02:18:31 says i mean tell me if this is an inaccurate minute by all means but what you're on the face of it suggesting here

02:18:41 here is using an independent fire safety expert to review challenges from the lfb not to give you better fire safety advice so

02:18:52 to give you better fire safety advice so that you could get ahead that's right isn't it i think it's poorly minuted but i think when reviewing challenges i mean i guess these minutes were taken by janice and maybe that's how janice saw them but i would like it was about reviewing

02:19:05 but i would like it was about reviewing the

02:19:06 the actions that were coming from the deficiency notices and understanding how we could best proactively respond to those issues

02:19:17 well again you say it's poorly minuted but i don't think we've got any record of you ever going back to janice ray and saying that's not what i said or that's not what i suggested i think the

02:19:29 suggested i think the broad action of investigating bringing in an expert view i would stand by i think it seems like a sensible approach and the the semantics around whether that's

02:19:40 the the semantics around whether that's reviewing challenges or reviewing actions just from deficiencies i think is is

02:19:45 is is a bit of a moot point i i i i agree with that so far as it's my agreement is relevant my point is that you were suggesting bringing in an

02:19:56 that you were suggesting bringing in an independent fire safety expert in order to look at what the lfb were asking you to do and see if you really needed to do them um

02:20:10 there'd been there's been a series of i was being i was re i was recognizing there'd been a shift here in the way that the fire brigade were

02:20:17 were were approaching or it appeared to be from what i could see in terms of the number of deficiency notices that were being issued in the way that they would be and some things that had been previously

02:20:28 and some things that had been previously compliant were then being identified as non-compliant so there's clearly a shift so what i was suggesting was we get somebody somebody a specialist in to help

02:20:38 help look at what we're doing and ensure that it met with regulations and that we knew we were being proactive in in doing that

02:20:46 that why not simply accept the challenges from the lfb and take them at face value

02:20:51 i think we did but i think this was about looking forwards if this is an ongoing thing are there other issues that we ought to be considering because if if we're getting a series of deficiency nurses it implies that

02:21:02 deficiency nurses it implies that something's wrong so why wouldn't we get some expert view as to what we're doing and whether we need to correct it but you say if we're getting a series of deficiency notices

02:21:13 getting a series of deficiency notices it implies something is wrong do you mean something is wrong with the lfb or something's wrong with the tmo i don't know that's why i would want a fire

02:21:22 fire expert to come and tell us to review what the situation is and ensure what action we would need to take to ensure that we were doing the best we possibly could the reality is isn't it looking at this is that you were suggesting

02:21:34 is that you were suggesting retaining an independent fire safety expert in order to strengthen the tma's defensive position against the nfb well that's not my role on my position what i was what i was trying to do is to anticipate the sort

02:21:47 trying to do is to anticipate the sort of investment levels the standards that we needed to be achieved to make sure that they were reflected in the standards that were being delivered in the works that my team delivered and we could plan that into our investment programs going forward

02:21:58 our investment programs going forward right let's look at the item next one down

02:22:02 down it starts at the very foot of the page review of fire safety item four and goes over the goes over the page to 4.1

02:22:10 4.1 to the top of page five and it says this with regard to an installation program for self-closures jw confirmed that since

02:22:18 since cynthia vercino or vakino our bkc legal services have been asked to review the access procedure used to facilitate the fire safety works required by the enforcement notices at air and hazelwood towers it was

02:22:30 air and hazelwood towers it was suggested that this be referenced to in the reviewed fire strategy bm advised that rbkc had been consulted and had confirmed that their view

02:22:41 and had confirmed that their view that we adopted a five-year installation program for self-closers but that at this stage we should not investigate an inspection program and then pm suggested that any clarification from council or rbkc legal

02:22:53 council or rbkc legal be incorporated into the fire strategy to formalize the tma's position on where self-closers would be fitted and which doors would be inspected why were you making that suggestion if

02:23:04 why were you making that suggestion if this topic was outside your remit um

02:23:10 remit um so these these are helsin said well i'm part of a health and safety committee is part of a corporate responsibility and i was making a suggestion i don't know why i was trying to be helpful

02:23:21 why i was trying to be helpful right

02:23:25 right um in light of the lfb's stance on the need for self-closing devices on all flat front entrance doors as we've seen do you know why rbkc had decided not to implement

02:23:37 why rbkc had decided not to implement an inspection program i don't did rbk to your knowledge did rbkc know of lfb's stance

02:23:45 stance on the need for self-closing devices throughout the borough i don't know

02:23:52 know do you know whether rbkc had taken account

02:23:55 account of that stance at all when making decisions i don't know did anybody to your knowledge at the tmo question the wisdom of rbkcc's decision i don't know

02:24:08 why did you suggest recording the advice of council or rbkc legal in the tmos fire safety strategy so we were clear on what the position was there was a clear policy decision so

02:24:19 was there was a clear policy decision so we could

02:24:20 we could make sure that that was addressed was it in order to be able to show it to the lfb

02:24:26 lfb well i don't think the lfp would be interested in our policy really i think they'd be interested in what they felt they could enforce so

02:24:36 were you concerned that the decision not to inspect might be challenged by the lfb

02:24:43 lfb i didn't have a view or challenged by somebody else i didn't have a view do you know if any such clarification about access was in fact recorded in the fire safety strategy i don't

02:24:57 in the fire safety strategy i don't do you know what the upshot of this suggestion was no moving on a month you afforded an email uh by janice ray on the 19th of april

02:25:09 uh by janice ray on the 19th of april 2017

02:25:11 2017 and the best way i think of dealing with this is in your state second witness statement please if we can go to that at paragraph 52 on page 11.

02:25:31 uh and you say in paragraph 52 in the i i have also been asked whether i had any knowledge of fire risks arising out of the use of cladding or cladding systems

02:25:42 cladding systems uh i recall that the findings of the latino house inquiry were referred to and considered by the tmo as were the findings made in relation to the fire at shepherd's court in relation to the shepherd's court fire i recall being forwarded by janice ray a

02:25:54 i recall being forwarded by janice ray a copy of the letter from the lfb entitled tall buildings external fire spread in april 2017 i recall discussing the contents of this letter with janice ray however my recollection is that the letter was referring to the risk

02:26:06 letter was referring to the risk associated with non-compliant clouding and i understand i understood the clouding of grenfell tower to be fully compliant with building regulations as building control issued a certificate of completion

02:26:18 could we look please at tm00

02:26:35 this is uh well can we go to page four in fact

02:26:38 in fact to start with page four which is an email from laura johnson

02:26:45 uh to robert black on the 19th of april

02:26:52 uh which encloses under an fyi at the very bottom of page four

02:26:59 four a hannah a letter from hannah lofer or lua i'm not sure how it's pronounced to laura johnson on the 6th of april 2 weeks before

02:27:11 weeks before subject letter from lfb external first bread

02:27:14 bread and the email reads dear mrs johnson for your information please find attach the letter regarding our advice relating to the issue of external fire spread

02:27:28 and we can see if you go up the chain on page four through through four to page three

02:27:41 through through four to page three janice ray sends this on on the 19th of april

02:27:45 april to you as well as others including alex bosman

02:27:49 bosman graham webb etc etc copy to barbara matthews

02:27:56 and if we go to page two of this email chain at the bottom we can see that barbara matthews responds to janice ray

02:28:07 and asks whether she asks this question do you know which of our buildings has the type of infill panels etc that are referred to in the letter

02:28:17 letter i also assume the cladding recently installed at grenfell would be compliant

02:28:24 my question to you do you know why grenfell tower was specifically singled out for mentioned by barbara matthews uh it was a very high profile project right and it was

02:28:35 right and it was the only building that we'd overclad right if we go to page one please and over the

02:28:42 over the uh the foot that of the page over to page two we can see janice ray's response she says this is the top of page two hi barbara to the best of my knowledge we

02:28:54 barbara to the best of my knowledge we do not have this type of cladding on any of our buildings but we'll discuss again with a and r carl has asked a lot of questions about the grenfell cladding and is happy that the material and the fixings are compliant

02:29:04 compliant but have copied this document to him as well regards janice now did you do you remember looking at the letter that had come to laura johnson

02:29:12 johnson from hannah lauer on the 6th of april i do you do we can look at it it's a lengthy letter and i'm not going to read it all

02:29:21 it all to you rbk3026888

02:29:33 it's dated 6th of april the title is tall buildings external fire spread and it's a lengthy letter did you read it at the time yes you did i'm not going to read it all

02:29:46 yes you did i'm not going to read it all out

02:29:47 out to you can i uh ask you just to look at the third and fourth paragraphs on page one we've seen a number of cases where it appears on the basis of the information available to us that the level of fire

02:29:59 available to us that the level of fire protection to the external face of the building did not comply with the requirements of part b of the building regulations insofar as they limit seek to limit the speed at which a fire can travel and spread over the external face of a

02:30:10 and spread over the external face of a building or may contribute to a fire testing of panels has found that the combustibility of the composition of the panels at shepherds court did not meet the levels expected for conformity with the building regulations on testing it was found that panels may

02:30:22 on testing it was found that panels may deform or delaminate exposing any combustible core or constituent material resulting in the panel becoming involved in the fire and allowing the fire to spread

02:30:30 spread and enter flats other than the flat of or flat of origin of the fire then if we turn to the next page please uh you'll you can see that the last paragraph says this i would therefore strongly urge you urge

02:30:41 i would therefore strongly urge you urge that you consider this issue as part of the risk assessment process for premises under your control i suggest that you make sure all relevant information about any replacement window and facade schemes is fully available to fire risk

02:30:53 is fully available to fire risk assessors but no reliable information is available for a given property it is our general expectation that the strategy to assess the risk and when necessary implement short medium and long-term actions to address the risk

02:31:04 the risk this assessment will need to take account of other fire safety measures already in place in the building as well as potential mitigation measures to ensure that any potential fire spread does not pose a risk to health and safety

02:31:17 a risk to health and safety did you look into the issue of whether the cladding on grenfell tower may have presented a fire risk at this stage

02:31:27 and i i discussed this with janice ray and she agreed to speak to carl stokes and get

02:31:34 and get his opinion and this the way that this letter was phrased was very much about there are some of these works which may not meet building building rags right and we had a project

02:31:46 building rags right and we had a project at grenfell tower that had been was still within defects at this time and had a

02:31:50 had a building reg sign off so there's an assumption that it did meet building rags but we did get um carl stokes to take to take a look at this

02:31:59 this in the context of grenfell and he obviously gave his comments back to janus

02:32:03 janus so janice checked with carl stokes but you didn't is that right that's right right did anybody think of asking mr stokes specifically to confirm that the cladding at grenfell tower was

02:32:14 that the cladding at grenfell tower was safe as part of his fire risk assessment i don't know what conversation janice had specifically with carl did you raise this question with claire williams and ask her whether she could help with the specific response in

02:32:25 help with the specific response in relation to the grenfell cladding i don't remember if i did but i don't it may be that janice ray did i can't remember did you

02:32:37 check or ask to be checked the x over uh fire safety strategies reports to see what they said about the cladding not in the context of this i've followed the advice and got

02:32:49 the advice and got the fire risk assessor to to consider this

02:33:02 did you contribute to a response back to laura johnson no was that ever done as far as you're aware

02:33:09 aware i don't know right do you know whether robert black sent laura johnson a message

02:33:15 message i don't know

02:33:24 mr chairman it's it's 4 30. and i am pretty much at the end of this line there's not an inconvenient moment but i do regret to say that i'm not finished uh with my

02:33:36 that i'm not finished uh with my questions from mr madison and i'm going to have to invite you to invite him to come back on on tuesday i regret the inconvenience to you and to everybody else but i'm afraid there is still um

02:33:48 afraid there is still um some material yet to cover for mr madison's benefit if not for everyone else's can you give an idea of how long you might be using yes i would think um

02:34:00 yes i would think um that it would uh uh

02:34:05 i would take until lunchtime on on tuesday

02:34:09 tuesday um now that there is a knock-on effect with the next witness after that who is an expert yes jonathan sakula well but i don't think that causes any difficulty with

02:34:20 that causes any difficulty with with him although it may be that we have to address precisely it is when we start with him but i'm thinking of this witness

02:34:27 witness oh yes i just wanted an indication of um yes how much more time you thought you might need all right well that's helpful thank you very much mr madison i'm sorry we were hoping that we would manage to complete our questions today but i'm

02:34:39 complete our questions today but i'm afraid it hasn't been possible so i'm going to have to ask you to come back on tuesday okay it sounds to me as though you could reasonably hope to get away by lunchtime but i wouldn't put it higher than that i'm afraid

02:34:51 i'm afraid there's going to be quite an interval between leaving here this afternoon and coming back on tuesday so please uh i will ask you not to speak to anyone about your evidence or anything relating

02:35:02 about your evidence or anything relating to it

02:35:03 to it over the long weekend okay all right thank you very much well we'll see you on tuesday morning at ten o'clock thank you

02:35:09 you if you'd like to give the usher thank you

02:35:22 right mr millet well that's it for today we

02:35:26 we we should not be seeing on monday it's a bank holiday and so it's 10 o'clock on tuesday

02:35:29 tuesday very good mr chairman thank you very

02:35:38 much

02:35:46 you