Grenfell Tower Inquiry - Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (TMO) Evidence - Monday 12th October 2020 (1/2)
00:00:15 good morning everyone welcome to today's hearing
00:00:18 hearing today we're going to start hearing evidence from witnesses uh from the tenant management organization yes mr canoe uh thank you sir may i call mr paul duncan
00:00:42 [Music]
00:00:46 um i do solemnly sincerely and truly declare
00:00:49 declare and affirm that the evidence i shall give shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth thank you very much mr duncan thank you good morning do sit down make yourself comment
00:00:59 comment thank you all right
00:01:02 yes thanks sir um good morning thank you very much for attending today to give evidence
00:01:08 evidence if you have difficulty understanding anything i say please say so and i'll repeat the question or reformulate the question um if you feel that you need a break at any time please don't hesitate to say so
00:01:20 any time please don't hesitate to say so finally try to keep your voice up so that the transcriber can hear you and keep a record of what you say
00:01:27 you say now the first thing i'd like to do is take you to your statements and it's right that you've made two statements to the inquiry they will be in a folder on the table and they will also flash up on the
00:01:39 and they will also flash up on the screen for you the first statement is dated the 7th of february 2019 and the reference is tmo quintuple 085
00:01:50 and the reference is tmo quintuple 085 and the second is dated the 7th of november 2019 and that reference is tmo double zero eight four seven double three six um first of all have you read your
00:02:01 first of all have you read your statements recently yes and can you confirm that their contents are true yes have you discussed your statements your evidence with anyone before coming here today no
00:02:13 here today no and for the avoidance of doubt all the exhibits
00:02:16 exhibits are taken to have been formally added to the inquiry record now mr duncan i'd first like to start with
00:02:24 with questions about your background your qualifications and your experience thank you now first of all it's right that you're a carpenter by trade yes and after starting work you later
00:02:35 yes and after starting work you later returned to college is that right correct yes and that in 2003 and 2004 you completed a higher national certificate and a higher national diploma in building studies is that
00:02:47 diploma in building studies is that right
00:02:47 right yes and whilst you were pursuing your hnc and hnd studies did they involve an element of project management studies yes i did yes and is it right that you
00:02:59 yes i did yes and is it right that you received training in project management at the spring grove property maintenance between 2001 and 2005. yes they assisted me through my um my sort of
00:03:10 assisted me through my um my sort of training period yes and did those projects involve predominantly maintenance and repair and those type of tasks yes i did yes
00:03:22 you then worked as a project manager at acton housing management is that right yes and how long were you at acton um off the top of my head i'm not entirely sure sorry is it probably two
00:03:34 entirely sure sorry is it probably two years if i had to have two maybe three years sorry i'm not entirely sure and what type of projects did you manage during your time there um they were small type of um refurbishment or maintenance type
00:03:47 um refurbishment or maintenance type projects
00:03:48 projects were any concerned with high-rise buildings no there wasn't now next you got a job as a project manager at hammersmith and fulham homes is that right that's correct yes and how long were you
00:04:00 that's correct yes and how long were you at hammersmith and fulham again i'm not entirely sure but possibly a little bit longer than acton house in possibly
00:04:06 possibly two probably three possibly four years and what type of projects did you manage whilst you were there um similar type of refurbishment project but a little bit on a larger scale
00:04:17 but a little bit on a larger scale and we're only concerned with high-rise buildings can you remember they were not to know
00:04:21 to know now is it right that you came to the tmo through the oyster partnership that's correct yes and the oyster partnership is that an employment agency it is yes and do you remember whether
00:04:32 it is yes and do you remember whether the tmo
00:04:33 the tmo were specifically looking for a project manager at the time um they initially they were looking for a project manager to manage some of their smaller refurbishment type projects and i was
00:04:46 refurbishment type projects and i was appointed to work with them on managing their they called it the decent homes program which is a kitchen bathroom type of refurbishment program and after you'd completed that project or whilst you're still on that project
00:04:58 or whilst you're still on that project is it right that you moved on to the hidden homes project that's correct yes and what were your responsibilities as part of that project um working with working and
00:05:09 project um working with working and bringing some of the projects together some of the design team some of the the um organizations technical team um so trying to bring all the projects all the aspects of a project together
00:05:20 all the aspects of a project together for delivery and part of the tmo was that the team was working with the maintenance teams to identify areas that had hidden opportunities to create larger family homes
00:05:31 larger family homes thank you and then you were later involved in the fire door replacement program is that right yes i says a project i inherited that i i saw through to the conclusion and what were your responsibilities as
00:05:42 and what were your responsibilities as part of that program um i at that particular program i and like i said i inherited the pro project as the tmo um didn't have a project manager in place
00:05:53 didn't have a project manager in place at a particular time to see through the end of the project and it was near conclusion uh at the final account stage where i was asked to look to take control management of the project
00:06:04 control management of the project to see the final account in the last stages of the project looking at the decent homes project the hidden homes project and the door replacement program did any involve managing a large
00:06:15 managing a large and complex refurbishment of a building no
00:06:20 no thank you the next topic um i'm going to ask you questions about is training mr duncan
00:06:25 duncan okay now first of all before joining the tmo did you receive any training on fire safety requirements in relation to high-rise buildings no before joining the tmo did you
00:06:36 no before joining the tmo did you receive any training or have any experience of assessing the suitability of different materials and design features required for high-rise residential buildings no i didn't before joining the tmo did
00:06:48 no i didn't before joining the tmo did you receive any training or have any experience of cladding on high-rise buildings and their relevant fire safety considerations no did you receive any training from the
00:06:59 did you receive any training from the tmo to allow you to perform your job on the grenfell tower refurbishment project
00:07:05 project no was there any specific fire safety training or advice provided to tmo employees
00:07:11 employees about the lessons to be learned from the lachnal house fire which happened in 2009
00:07:17 2009 not that i'm aware of no um during your time at the tmo did you receive any training in relation to the potential fire risks uh from cladding on high-rise blocks following the fire at lachnal
00:07:28 following the fire at lachnal in 2009 no
00:07:32 what was your understanding first of all were you aware of the fire in lachnal house in 2009 at that particular time i can't i'm not entirely sure i am aware of it now but at the time i can't say if i was aware of it or not
00:07:44 i can't say if i was aware of it or not and when you say at the time that's during the time of your employment by the tmo is it yes
00:07:52 the next topic i'd like to discuss with you is your role in the refurbishment project now could i ask you to turn to paragraph 12 of your first witness statement
00:08:03 first witness statement and the reference for that is tmo quintuple zero double eight five and forward slash two
00:08:14 and at paragraph 12 you say this
00:08:20 the early stages of this project were managed by mark anderson the director of asset investment and engineering at the time i sat next to mark at the main tmo office known as the hub and he asked me to provide
00:08:32 and he asked me to provide administrative help to help him on the project
00:08:34 project in this respect i was a project manager reporting directly to mark anderson first of all when did mr anderson ask you for administrative help on the project
00:08:45 project i can't recall a specific conversation with him um so i can't recall exactly when he asked me but
00:08:53 me but i think it was more to do around at the point when he asked was around the consultation period with the with the refurbishment of the scheme
00:09:03 so would it be fair to assume that it was about spring 2012 or thereabouts possibly yes and what kind of administrative help did you provide to mr anderson um i i helped mark in something like i
00:09:15 um i i helped mark in something like i said in the com and the at the consultation period uh i helped mark with some of the development of some of the newsletters uh some of the writing to residents um holding some of the consultations
00:09:27 um holding some of the consultations with mark setting up the the the equipment or the samples that were available
00:09:32 available and filing some documents and just a general administration to assist in in the refurbishment who is the project manager in the sense of being the responsible decision maker
00:09:43 of being the responsible decision maker within the tmo so making decisions in relation to budgets contractors maintenance of the program etc i reported to mark anderson and it's my belief that mark anderson
00:09:54 and it's my belief that mark anderson was the main lead for that project now in the next paragraph of your witness statement you say this in the second sentence and it says page three of your statement with the hidden homes
00:10:07 of your statement with the hidden homes project i was very much a project manager who was in control of the project
00:10:11 project in that the consultants contractors and clerk of works on this project all reported to me conversely with the grenfell tower project i was predominantly there to provide administrative assistance to mark
00:10:22 administrative assistance to mark anderson
00:10:23 anderson in the early stages of the project i never worked exclusively on this project and continued to progress the hidden homes project and fire door replacement program
00:10:32 program at the same time now first of all when you first became involved in the grenfell refurbishment project how would you say your time was divided between that and the other programs you
00:10:43 between that and the other programs you were managing at the time the well the administration of the grenfell tower wasn't a full-time position then and i wasn't constantly spending my time on on the
00:10:55 constantly spending my time on on the project
00:10:56 project and similarly with the other projects i was
00:11:00 was probably more involved with the um with the hidden homes project at the time the final accounts was uh and just going through some procedures that didn't need
00:11:11 procedures that didn't need full attention for the five door replacement so um i've sort of managed my time between the three projects uh can you give us an estimate maybe in percentage terms of how much of your
00:11:23 percentage terms of how much of your time was spent on grenfell compared to the other programs you were involved in um possibly 60 on the hidden homes project possibly
00:11:35 on the hidden homes project possibly um say 30 percent or so on the on the um door entry oh sorry the fire door project and the rest was probably spent on the
00:11:46 was probably spent on the administration for mark on the grenfell tower refurbishment project thank you now in your statement you say that you were there to provide diminutive assistance to mr anderson in
00:11:58 diminutive assistance to mr anderson in the early stages of the project did your role change at any point in the project
00:12:04 project um oh yes i got a little don't say change no but i i become a little bit more involved in the scheme and certainly when mark anderson left the organization i was a little bit more
00:12:15 the organization i was a little bit more involved
00:12:16 involved so from january 2013 onwards until you left
00:12:21 left i wouldn't say onwards to our left no there was a small period when mark was left the organization they hadn't appointed a director or asset manager for
00:12:32 asset manager for housing or forget the title with a role but
00:12:36 but peter madison took the role over in that small period of time i took a little bit more of a proactive role in a project and can you give us an idea of what additional responsibility you performed during that period of time
00:12:48 during that period of time i i wouldn't say necessarily responsibility but i was a little bit more involved with some of the keeping the the presentation for the for the tmo available in attending some of the meetings maybe
00:13:00 in attending some of the meetings maybe a bit more on some of the documentation filing through and being a little bit more involved in some of the aspects of the project thank you now at paragraph 15 of your first
00:13:09 first witness statement which can be found at tmo quintuple zero double eight five four
00:13:15 four three you say this as stated earlier i was essentially administered to support to mark anderson in the time he worked on the grenfell tower regeneration project i had no involvement in defining the
00:13:26 i had no involvement in defining the scope or setting the budget for the regeneration project i also had no involvement in the procurement of consultants designers or contractors nor do nor did i have any input into decisions
00:13:37 i have any input into decisions made about the design or materials used now first of all did anyone report to you
00:13:44 you during mark anderson's time at the tmo in relation to the grenfell project
00:13:51 not directly to me as no did you monitor the budget for the project
00:13:57 project um no when you say monitor i followed the the the proceedings of the budget but i wasn't either wasn't authorization to make decisions on the budget okay
00:14:09 decisions on the budget okay were you responsible for giving any instructions to any contractors um no were you responsible for monitoring the work carried out by contractors no
00:14:22 carried out by contractors no were you responsible for ensuring that any work done was within budget um not necessarily no were you responsible
00:14:33 not necessarily no were you responsible for keeping the work on time not necessarily no beyond helping with uh admin during mark anderson's time at the tmo what kind of decisions were you
00:14:44 what kind of decisions were you permitted to take i i was more of a presence in some of the meetings and i would take instructions or authorization to and from the meeting
00:14:55 from the meeting to the tmo predominantly mark anderson and who at the tmo was responsible for making the decisions about design and the materials used was that mark
00:15:06 the materials used was that mark anderson
00:15:08 anderson mark anderson had an influence in it yes and after mr anderson left who is responsible for making those types of decisions um my belief is peter madison had quite heavy influence over the design of the
00:15:20 heavy influence over the design of the project
00:15:25 and when you say heavy influence what do you mean by that could you give us an example
00:15:30 example um well he had a good um perspective of what he how he wanted to see the project proceed and i think he had good influence over
00:15:41 and i think he had good influence over some of the decisions and the type of design for the building
00:15:46 now paragraph 16 of your first statement you say this by the time mark anderson resigned towards the end of 2012 it had become clear that there was a need for full-time management of the grenfell
00:15:57 full-time management of the grenfell tower refurbishment project i was asked to take on more responsibility however i made it clear that i did not want to be a lead on the project
00:16:06 project why had the need for full-time management become clear at that point so the end of 2012 because of the absence of mark anderson and what further responsibility were you
00:16:19 and what further responsibility were you asked to take on um i don't recall any specific tasks to be taken on i was just taking a bit more of a proactive role
00:16:28 role in being a presentation for the presence for the council in particular attending meetings and past documentation for the scheme um did you interview for
00:16:39 for the scheme um did you interview for the full-time job left by mr anderson sorry for for mr anderson's role yes or at least a project management role i interviewed for a project management
00:16:50 i interviewed for a project management role yes not not for the not for the grenfell to our refurbishment project um mr david gibson has said that you interviewed for that role but were unsuccessful is that right um i interviewed for a project manager's
00:17:03 um i interviewed for a project manager's role
00:17:04 role it wasn't the project manager's role for the grenfell tower refurbishment project they needed a project manager whether they
00:17:11 they decided to give the role to that project manager i don't know but the role was advertised for a project manager but it wasn't grenfell not as far as i'm aware it might have been part
00:17:22 might have been part of the project that it managed when when i moved on but the title and description of the job was for a project manager were you told why you were unsuccessful
00:17:33 were you told why you were unsuccessful uh
00:17:33 uh i don't know i'm not entirely sure why no so you weren't told you can't remember i can't remember and i know i can't remember were you told by uh david gibson or
00:17:44 were you told by uh david gibson or anyone else at the tmo what they were looking for in terms of the qualifications or experience for the project manager's role that was advertised um i do recall having a conversation with david gibson yes i can't recall
00:17:55 with david gibson yes i can't recall what the conversation in town to know now going back to your witness statement your first one you say this at paragraph 17. peter madison was then appointed as
00:18:06 peter madison was then appointed as director of asset investment and engineering and he had a very clear view of how he wanted to manage the project peter almost immediately took over any involvement i had in it um
00:18:18 in it um after he took over uh did your role revert to primarily admin assistance yes can you help us what view did
00:18:29 yes can you help us what view did peter madison have of how he wanted first of all to run the project um i i think mark peter madison wanted to have a bit more
00:18:41 peter madison wanted to have a bit more of a proactive and overall management of the scheme
00:18:47 and what do you mean more proactive relative to what well instead of
00:18:54 attending meetings for example some of the documentations from some of the administration duties i was performing um he took more ownership of them than duties
00:19:06 and can you give us an idea how did mr madison's approach differ to that taken by mr anderson
00:19:13 um i i i i i'm not sure i'm not entirely sure i i feel that he was probably a bit more um a bit more hands-on than
00:19:24 a bit more um a bit more hands-on than mark
00:19:25 mark and he wanted to be um more in control directly
00:19:28 directly with the designers uh whereas mark would um be a bit more um a bit more wasn't available as much as
00:19:39 a bit more wasn't available as much as he was to go to some of the meetings thank you now i'm now going to turn to a different topic and that is uh you're starting to work on the grenfell project itself now can we look at a document which is
00:19:53 now can we look at a document which is art quadruple 0 6 4 1 which ought to be the design team minutes from a meeting on the 24th of may 2012
00:20:05 on the 24th of may 2012 and we see you there on the first page second identified as an attendee
00:20:12 now first of all do you remember this meeting
00:20:16 meeting um i don't not specifically no but obviously i was there um can you remember whether this was the first meeting you attended in relation to grenfell
00:20:27 to grenfell i'm not entirely sure um can you remember being briefed by anyone before you attended this meeting as to what the issues were in any position you were to articulate
00:20:40 position you were to articulate no i can't um before you attended the meeting did you know any of the members of the design team for example uh yes
00:20:51 uh yes did you know them all or just certain individuals uh just certain individuals can you remember which individuals those were
00:20:59 were um what from the list i see in front of me yes
00:21:02 me yes okay um i obviously i know ricky sam's from the tmo um alan dawson i was aware of david howell's aware of and chi lim
00:21:15 david howell's aware of and chi lim and bruce souness
00:21:19 and before the meeting did you know the specific roles that those individuals were performing on the project yes
00:21:28 now if we scroll down the page we'll see the first introduction is that of alan dawson as project manager assisted by david hale given that you described yourself
00:21:40 given that you described yourself earlier as having some functional role of the project manager were you surprised that mr dawson had been introduced as the project manager no i i was a project manager for the
00:21:52 no i i was a project manager for the for the tmo not specifically for this project
00:21:56 project and this is why they outsourced it to a multi-disciplinary contractors which was apple yards on the time they changed them
00:22:06 them to artella and part of that multi-disciplinary role will be project management and so following from that you had no reason to question whether mr dawson was
00:22:17 reason to question whether mr dawson was the project manager during that meeting no now can you see under the introduction itself the fourth point says this contractor procurement options to be
00:22:29 contractor procurement options to be evaluated by apple yard studio e tmo board need to be persuaded that keeping with the iese contractor under calc
00:22:37 calc is in the project's best interests now had you been briefed on the options for procuring contractors for the grenfell refurbishment before this meeting
00:22:48 refurbishment before this meeting possibly i'm not entirely sure can you remember what the options were in relation to procurement not specifically no looking at the particular phrase
00:22:59 particular phrase quotes the tmo board needs to be persuaded close quotes had the board expressed any view that you're aware of on the merits of any procurement options at that stage
00:23:11 at that stage not that i can recall um no now can we scroll down to the third page of this minute where it refers to
00:23:22 of this minute where it refers to initial scope
00:23:28 and it says the first priority
00:23:35 walls new windows and cladding to the whole tower now can you remember who determined those priorities i'm not sure we can see that part of the document can we if we scroll back up
00:23:48 perhaps
00:23:56 and you see under costs yeah and then you've got apple yards prepared budget initial scope identified on drawings and prioritized as follows one new windows and cladding to
00:24:08 follows one new windows and cladding to the whole
00:24:08 the whole tower can you remember who determined those priorities no i can't sorry did you have any say in determining those priorities
00:24:19 determining those priorities no
00:24:23 can you remember when you were first aware that new windows and cladding were the tmo's first priority
00:24:31 i can't specifically recall when i knew what was involved in the scheme um i do understand that part of the cladding and the windows would to form thermal efficiency of the building and
00:24:43 thermal efficiency of the building and that's probably the spec i did know we need to make this probably the building more firmly efficient to ensure that we can try and make energy savings
00:24:52 savings um and that would fall in place with the windows and doors and the cladding okay but you can't remember not specifically no sorry um did rbkc have any involvement to the
00:25:04 um did rbkc have any involvement to the best of your knowledge in determining the priorities for the project at this or any later stage they possibly did but not to my knowledge and i wasn't involved in discussions with them okay thank you
00:25:16 discussions with them okay thank you now following that meeting bruce soon emailed mr anderson on the 12th of june 2012 and he attached a proposed fee letter
00:25:25 letter and if we could turn up that fee letter it's a s-e-a quadruple zero four five six two
00:25:35 and mr soon says in that letter's opening sentence i'm writing to clarify our proposed fees and conditions of service for the proposed
00:25:44 proposed upgrade and he sets out a suite of documents
00:25:48 documents now first of all i'll just let you have a a quick scan of that letter so you can familiarize yourself with it
00:26:01 now can you remember ever seeing that letter before
00:26:08 um possibly i'm not entirely sure can you remember
00:26:15 remember seeing or reading the documents that were attached um possibly i'm not entirely sure sorry were you aware of what fees studio e were proposing to charge at this stage
00:26:27 were proposing to charge at this stage i.e mid-june 2012. not specifically i wasn't heavily involved in the procurement or negotiation their fees at this stage
00:26:39 negotiation their fees at this stage were you aware of the time at which they were proposing to pay those fees they'd be in the tmo not not i recall possibly there was a few
00:26:51 not i recall possibly there was a few design um fees that were paid that i was aware of but i i can't recall that there was a stage payment plan um did mark anderson discuss this letter
00:27:02 um did mark anderson discuss this letter or the attachments with you um not i recall can you remember who decided that studio e should be appointed
00:27:14 e should be appointed no i can't sorry um at the time were you aware of what checks had been carried out to verify whether studio e had the competence and experience to do the proposed job
00:27:26 the proposed job no i don't so [Applause] um i'm now going to ask you to look at another letter which is dated the fourth of july and is a letter that you sent to residents and
00:27:38 a letter that you sent to residents and we can find that at tmo1004901
00:27:47 and i'll just let you refresh your
00:28:00 memory
00:28:04 yeah now in the second sentence you say this we have appointed studio e as architects on our behalf and they will be writing to you requesting access to your home so they can carry out internal surveys
00:28:17 so they can carry out internal surveys who confirmed studio e's appointment to you for the purposes of writing this letter
00:28:22 letter um i mark anderson advised me that they were working with studio e and i i remember this he's saying that we needed to write a letter to the residents
00:28:32 residents to allow the residents the opportunity to let residents in so it was introduced in studio e at this time did you have any reason to look at the terms and conditions upon which studio e had been appointed no i i was just asked
00:28:46 had been appointed no i i was just asked to
00:28:46 to draft a letter to the residents and so so far as you can remember you wouldn't have looked at the suite of documents that studio e had sent to mark anderson in his letter in their letter i don't
00:29:00 looking back now are you able to help us as to whether you know whether anyone at the tmo
00:29:04 the tmo checked the documents that mr soones had sent um to mr anderson with his letter of the 12th of june i'm sure someone did but i i'm not specifically aware of who checked the documents
00:29:16 checked the documents can we next look at the minutes for project meeting number five which was held on the 18th of july 2012 and the references art quintuple zero one six eight
00:29:31 and again i'll just let you refresh your memory briefly you're the listed first in the list of attendees
00:29:46 yeah um do you recall the meeting at all not specifically can you remember receiving the minutes um i received quite a few
00:29:57 um i received quite a few minutes from most of the meetings that i would file and keep on record um did you read minutes when they came through to you i would have done yes and do you pass them or did you pass the minutes to mark anderson
00:30:09 minutes to mark anderson i would have done yes um did you update him following the meeting uh that was part of my role that he said that as i said earlier that if he was unable to attend some of these meetings
00:30:21 unable to attend some of these meetings i would attend on his behalf and then give him a briefing what the discussions were now if we can scroll down you'll see under the heading appointments it states a dawson gave verbal confirmation that
00:30:32 a dawson gave verbal confirmation that all appointments are approved however the tmo would like to subcontract all consultants via studio e up until stage d with the total fee up until stage d
00:30:43 until stage d not exceeding 174k which is the odu threshold
00:30:47 threshold for requiring work to be tendered this will probably mean deferring some fees post stage d now did the reference to deferring fees mean that the appointees would be paid by the contractor
00:30:59 would be paid by the contractor after novation for work that they had done for the tmo before the novation i can't recall sorry i i wasn't involved heavily with the fee negotiation
00:31:10 negotiation um did that mean to the extent that you that you can now recall that the actual cost of the services required under the contract with the tmo was expected to be more than 174
00:31:21 was expected to be more than 174 thousand pounds sorry i recall i just i wasn't involved in some of the negotiation fee negotiations um can you remember who at the tmo gave the instruction in relation to
00:31:33 the instruction in relation to the structure of payment of fees as i say the project was managed by mark anderson so i'm going to take the assumption that mark anderson would have made the
00:31:44 mark anderson would have made the agreements okay can i next turn to an email dated the 27th of july 2012 and the reference for that is art quintuple 0 9 8 1.
00:31:58 quintuple 0 9 8 1. now there are a number of bullet points set out in that email but i'll let you just refresh your memory briefly before i
00:32:03 i ask you questions in relation to it
00:32:33 okay now you were copied into this email do you agree that at this stage so end of july 2012 studio e were amending the figures to ensure that they fell below
00:32:45 ensure that they fell below 174 000 pounds by applying a 50 deferment no i can't i'm not entirely sure what their intentions were sorry now can you remember any discussion of
00:32:57 now can you remember any discussion of the deferment arrangements or not no i i wasn't like i say i wasn't involved in the fee negotiation sorry can you remember raising any questions with mark anderson regarding the
00:33:09 with mark anderson regarding the structure
00:33:10 structure of fees and payment for studio e not that i recall now i'm now going to turn to a new topic and that's studio e's terms and conditions
00:33:22 that's studio e's terms and conditions now we looked at the email from bruce soon to mark anderson which attached studio e's terms and conditions and they can be fined at s e a quadruple zero four five six one
00:33:36 and that's the email now as part of your admin responsibilities were you required to record and retain the project's contractual documents
00:33:48 the project's contractual documents yes i would have i would have been part of filing the contractual documents um now as part of your responsibility for filing them um do you know whether anyone at the tmo signed studio e's terms and conditions
00:34:00 signed studio e's terms and conditions during
00:34:01 during 2012 sorry i can't recall i'm not entirely sure would you have been responsible for making sure that contractual documents had been signed or not no who would have been i would afford
00:34:13 no who would have been i would afford the tmos legal team or the procurement team
00:34:19 um can you cast any light on why the terms and conditions were not signed by the tmo during 2012 no i'm not entirely sure okay um
00:34:30 no i'm not entirely sure okay um can we turn to another document now which is at s e a quadruple zero nine eight two three now this is among the sweeter suite of documents that were sent by mr
00:34:42 suite of documents that were sent by mr soon's
00:34:44 soon's and it is hopefully yes the project dated document now on page five it lists the project appointments now working down from the top um studio
00:34:57 now working down from the top um studio e
00:34:59 e or just panel or the second entry i should say studio e are listed as being the lead consultant uh lead designer and architect as designer did that reflect your
00:35:10 designer did that reflect your understanding of studio e's role at the time
00:35:13 time yes my understanding was there were lead designer yes and we see the very first entry is apple yards as the cdm coordinator and also as the contract administrator
00:35:24 and also as the contract administrator the employer's agent and cost consultant again did that accord with your understanding of the role at the time yes thank you now can we look at a separate document which
00:35:36 can we look at a separate document which is at
00:35:36 is at sea quadruple 09824 and if we turn to page 4 within that
00:35:47 and if we turn to page 4 within that document
00:35:50 document we have here a definition of various roles and the first definition is that of project manager which says preparing the client's initial statement of project objectives taking into account the client's core
00:36:02 taking into account the client's core operations and identifying constraints then establishing the requirement for professional skills including development of the brief procedure and program management and legal insurance and financial services
00:36:15 insurance and financial services can you help us who are carrying out those jobs for the tmo on the project
00:36:22 um for this particular project at the time my understanding is mark anderson was taking on these responsibilities so all of them as far as i'm aware but again we do discharge some duties
00:36:36 again we do discharge some duties and one of those would be to multi-disciplinary contractor which was apple yards
00:36:43 can you remember now going through each element
00:36:46 element of uh the functions set out here which ones mark anderson performed and which ones apple yards performed
00:37:27 yes can you help us with which ones mr anderson performed um he preparing the client's initial statement of the project objectives
00:37:38 of the project objectives taking into account the court the client's core operations and identifying constraints and would he be responsible for establishing the requirement for professional skills and development of the brief etc yes yes
00:37:52 and development of the brief etc yes yes would he be responsible for identifying the roles of client reps and stakeholders um yes he would be part of that yes managing the appointment of consultants
00:38:03 managing the appointment of consultants and specialists uh part of it yes because i say part of that would be appointing a multi-disciplinary contractor and they would then give you some advice and
00:38:15 would then give you some advice and guidance on other types of consultants to appoint a project thank you issuing information decisions approvals and instructions the lead consultant would that be mr anderson or someone else
00:38:25 else uh he were part of that but i think when stu apple yards were appointed i think
00:38:32 think they they were more uh in charge of that duty
00:38:37 duty implementing of any feasibility studies and or options appraisals required mr anderson or apple yard i would say apple yards developing and maintaining a project
00:38:48 developing and maintaining a project strategy
00:38:50 strategy um again apple yards i suggest
00:38:55 managing development of the brief and overseeing its implementation um i'd say that's a dual purpose with apple yards and mark anderson okay if we can scroll down
00:39:07 mark anderson okay if we can scroll down slightly further so we can see the balance of this page
00:39:12 and identifying project procedures would that be apple yards or mr anderson uh
00:39:25 i'd say apple yards and the penultimate one preparing and maintaining the master cost plan etc uh again i would say that would be apple yards and finally monitoring performance
00:39:36 yards and finally monitoring performance and activity etc
00:39:44 yeah i'd say apple yards thank you now we're now going to turn on to a separate topic which flows from that which is apple yards and artelia's terms and proposals
00:39:54 proposals can we turn to an email sent by simon cash to mark anderson on the 2nd of may 2012
00:40:00 2012 which can be found at a r t quadruple 0 6 3 0 9.
00:40:12 and if that could be amplified slightly it says please find attached our proposal for the provision of quantity surveying
00:40:19 surveying employers agents and cdm coordinator services a hard cop is gone in the post to you today um first of all did you ever see that email
00:40:27 email you're not copied in on the face of it i can't recall seeing that email
00:40:34 um we now turn to a separate email and that's mark anderson's email to alan dawson sent some three and a half months later on the 21st of august 2012
00:40:46 the 21st of august 2012 which is at art quadruple zero six two five nine
00:40:59 now you were copied into that you're the last named individual on the list and it stated that the appointment of apple yards was confirmed on the basis of the second of may
00:41:11 on the basis of the second of may proposal um first of all is that a fair reading of that email yes is it fair to say that at this point you and the tmo understood artelia's role to be limited to quantity surveying
00:41:23 role to be limited to quantity surveying employers agent and cdn coordinator um that's what it says in a letter but i can't
00:41:30 can't specifically say i remember that the the balance of the project management role was
00:41:37 was partly done in house by the tmo and partly done along the lines you've identified by apple yards oh yes that that's my understanding yes can we now move forward in time to a meeting on the 6th of june
00:41:49 meeting on the 6th of june 2013 and the minutes are at art quadruple zero nine one zero
00:42:00 six and if we can look at item 1.1 on that first page please
00:42:09 and i'll let could i invite you to read 1.1
00:42:13 1.1 joyce you want me to read it just read it to yourself not out loud
00:42:38 okay now would you agree that refers to the approval of a revised project brief yes that's what it says now can we turn to the revised brief which is a art quadruple 0 1
00:42:50 which is a art quadruple 0 1 2 1 9 and in particular page 2. and if that could be amplified particularly the top half thank you
00:43:04 under contract and procurement the third paragraph
00:43:07 paragraph last sentence says this apple yards who had previously acted as eaqs will take on a full pmea role in addition to their qs responsibilities
00:43:18 addition to their qs responsibilities and will fulfill the lead consultant role now first of all do you remember reading that revised brief
00:43:25 brief i can't recall reading this in detail though
00:43:28 though do you remember receiving it
00:43:32 no i can't recall receiving it um to the best of your recollection were you expecting apple yards to take on the full project management role at that stage so june 2013
00:43:43 stage so june 2013 yes was there any discussion between you mr madison and mr gibson about apple yards taking on that full role
00:43:51 role at that time i can't recall
00:43:57 can you not remember whether there was a conversation or can you not remember the substance of any conversation i can't remember if there was a conversation thank you
00:44:07 now can i turn to a separate topic which is the competence of the pre-contract design
00:44:12 design team now first of all would you describe the grenfell refurbishment project as complex
00:44:18 complex in that it was major lengthy multifaceted which involved over cladding
00:44:22 cladding and replacing windows of a high-rise residential block with residents in situ yes i would um because of its complexity do you think you had the required experience for the role you carried out
00:44:33 experience for the role you carried out on that project um i was carrying out administration roles i was capable of carrying out administration um given that i assume that please say
00:44:46 um given that i assume that please say if you disagree that you wouldn't have considered it part of your role to have verified the competence of contractors seeking to be engaged is that fair not not the the
00:44:57 engaged is that fair not not the the involvement i had at the project no i wouldn't have been had that responsibility at the tmo whose responsibility would it have been to have verified the competence and experience of contractors seeking to be retained
00:45:08 retained um if that at this particular time it would have been mark anderson or peter madison they both had full active roles in the scheme
00:45:19 scheme to the best of your knowledge do you remember whether anyone within the tmo carried out checks on the competence of the pre-con of the pre-contract team for the grenfell project i'm sure there was but
00:45:30 grenfell project i'm sure there was but i
00:45:31 i i wasn't part of that so i'm not sure um so you can't say one way or the other i can't say one way or the other i i'm only assuming that mark anderson or peter madison would have took that responsibility
00:45:43 have took that responsibility did you ask if anyone at the tier mode carried out such checks or did you assume
00:45:47 assume it would be done and didn't ask i just assumed it would be done
00:45:53 was it your understanding that studio e and apple yards had been appointed to the grenfell project because they had worked on the calc project
00:46:01 project um no not i was i was advised with my mark it was as a letter said earlier that we've appointed studio e um i'm not entirely i know they were part of the calc
00:46:13 part of the calc project i'm not sure how they were asked to
00:46:17 to manage the refurbishment of grenfell tower okay so you can't speak to the reasons for their appointment no okay um i'm now moving on to a separate topic which is the decision to retender and could we look
00:46:29 decision to retender and could we look first please at art quintuple zero 637
00:46:38 now this is an email from laura johnson of rbkc to cliff thomas at leadbitter dated the 3rd of january 2013. could i ask you to
00:46:49 could i ask you to read the third paragraph of this to yourself
00:46:55 joy the third paragraph formula number three that was originally a total of
00:47:08 around
00:47:25 okay now you're not uh included in the distribution list for this email have you seen this email before today can you remember no i i don't recall seeing this email um
00:47:38 no i i don't recall seeing this email um were you aware of the time of the view within rbkc that led better should not be appointed to the grenfell project
00:47:47 no i wasn't aware they weren't going to be appointed to the grenfell tower project i was aware that peter madison had intentions to re-procure this project
00:47:58 and that would have been after this email was sent this email is dated the 3rd of january 2013. possibly yes now mark anderson was copied into this email do you know whether he thought that led
00:48:09 do you know whether he thought that led bitter should not be appointed to the grenfell project no i don't recall mark saying they shouldn't be appointed do you remember any discussion with him regarding the continuing role of lead bitter in the project
00:48:21 bitter in the project um no not they were going to be removed from a project um but there was negotiations over some of their costings for the project but nothing more than that nothing more
00:48:32 but nothing more than that nothing more than that thank you now um could i ask you to turn to the minutes of a project review meeting on the 11th of january 2013 and they can be found at
00:48:47 three tm0084732
00:48:51 now just looking at the list of attendees at the top the first one is mike hellermann he was there for the tmo what role did he have on the project um
00:49:02 what role did he have on the project um mike hallams was effectively who i used to report to um and in the tmo was like my effectively line management but on this specific particular project
00:49:14 but on this specific particular project as far as i'm aware he had very limited involvement now looking at the first paragraph of the minute it says that mark anderson had left a difficult question can you
00:49:26 had left a difficult question can you remember
00:49:27 remember a more precise date when he left in january 2013. no sorry okay now if we can scroll down to item
00:49:35 to item three which i'm sorry i'm sorry mr perhaps i'm a bit slow in the uptick um that was the first uh
00:49:46 first uh the first of those numbered paragraphs was it yes and mike informed yes yeah all right my fault thank you sorry sir um let me scroll down to item three which is ledbetter's estimated
00:49:59 three which is ledbetter's estimated cost thank you and it says there that the the ledbetter's estimated cost being two million pounds higher than apple yard stage d
00:50:06 stage d cost plan and if we look down at paragraph five there's a reference to advising tmo on the validity of the lead bitters cost plan to allow consideration of reprocuring
00:50:17 reprocuring now would you agree that timo was considering re-procurement of the project at this point i.e 11th of january 2013. there was discussions of reprocurement
00:50:29 there was discussions of reprocurement that no decision had been made at that point as far as i'm aware can you remember given it was the 11th of january 2013 who within the tmo had suggested that
00:50:40 who within the tmo had suggested that reprocurement ought to be considered i can't specifically recall anyone saying that i do know peter madison was involved in some of the re-procurement later
00:50:51 the re-procurement later can you remember whether mark anderson ever raised it with you before he left in january 2013. not that i recall before mr anderson left did he give you
00:51:03 before mr anderson left did he give you a handover briefing can you remember no no no where do you know whether he gave mr madison a handover briefing i'm not sure
00:51:17 now in your first witness statement you refer to a tmo program board meeting that you attended on the 17th of january 2013
00:51:28 on the 17th of january 2013 and if i might ask you to turn to paragraph 42 of that statement and the reference is tmo quintuple 085 forward slash eight now paragraph 42 you
00:51:39 forward slash eight now paragraph 42 you state
00:51:40 state uh amongst other things i attended a program board meeting in which we discussed the two million pound overspend on the project and at paragraph 43 you go on to say this
00:51:51 this while i cannot recall this particular meeting i'm confident that i would have been updating the executive team in the absence of mark anderson i do recall that the pricing specifications put forward by apple
00:52:03 specifications put forward by apple yards and lead bitters were two million pounds apart which was very concerning
00:52:10 with the benefit of that aspect of your statement
00:52:14 statement could i ask you again whether you remember whether mr anderson had any discussions with you regarding
00:52:22 regarding procurement options before he left um i don't recall anything specific about
00:52:28 about procurement so i'm not entirely sure now could i ask you to turn to the minutes from that project board meeting on the 17th of january 2013
00:52:39 on the 17th of january 2013 which are tmo one double zero four double nine zero eight uh first of all um the program board is for the senior executive team at the tmo
00:52:51 for the senior executive team at the tmo is that correct yes that's correct now grenfell is at item three which is on the third page and i might just ask you to read to
00:53:04 and i might just ask you to read to yourself the first paragraph to refresh your memory
00:53:20 [Applause] okay now looking at what is said in that first paragraph was it the case that because the cladding costs for calc were being reviewed the proposed
00:53:32 were being reviewed the proposed cladding cost for grenfell would also be reviewed
00:53:36 reviewed possibly yes i i i do know there are various different options that we've considered was there any discussion at this meeting about whether the cladding would be too
00:53:47 about whether the cladding would be too expensive and should be dropped from the proposed works can you remember no sorry i can't recall can you give us now
00:53:55 now your recollection of the gist of the discussions regarding the cladding during the course of that programme team meeting
00:54:03 meeting um i can't recall specific discussions of the cladding no sorry okay can i ask you to scroll down and look at the third paragraph under this heading
00:54:13 heading which starts uh we we would have to go back to
00:54:17 back to rbkc and you see in particular the sorry the second sentence says clarification required on whether we had to have the same
00:54:28 on whether we had to have the same standards as those for the calc project now first of all was that clarification sought by the programme board
00:54:41 um i think we're missing key point here the most cost effect the key point of the project was about firmware efficiency of the building and i think we was looking at what would
00:54:52 and i think we was looking at what would provide the best thermal efficiency for the building whether it would be cladding or some other types of insulation
00:55:01 can you recall who prompted the request for clarification which turned on the board i can't recall
00:55:11 what's the effective suggestion that the tmo didn't need the standard to be as high as
00:55:15 high as for grenfell as it had been for calc no no i recall were you able to give the board the clarification that they sought after the meeting
00:55:27 i i would have done but i don't recall i would have fed back information from the meeting okay can we turn to the next paragraph which notes that you would keep the
00:55:38 which notes that you would keep the executive team updated on progress on getting back to the 9.4 million budget
00:55:43 budget can you remember whether you did update them
00:55:46 them as i said i i may have done i can't recall a specific conversation with them now mr madison started at the tmo on the 21st of january 2013.
00:55:57 21st of january 2013. um did you brief him on the state of the project when he arrived yes i would have done
00:56:03 done but can you remember now the gist of what you told him about no not entirely no sorry would you have covered procurement options can you remember no i would have covered
00:56:15 covered where the project was and the cost difference within the project some of the consultation processes we've already gone through with some of the residents
00:56:24 residents um not entirely sure i went through the procurement stage of with peter madison
00:56:31 madison um when you say you're not entirely sure are you saying that you can't remember i am saying i can't remember yes can you remember whether you had any specific discussion regarding cladding and cladding choices and cost
00:56:43 cladding choices and cost i i can't remember the conversations in that detail now um could i ask you now to turn to an email
00:56:50 email you received um from bruce soon's on the 28th of january 2013 which is at tm008
00:57:06 and the first sentence that email says i'm writing to follow up our conversation on friday regarding outstanding fees now take it from me the 28th was a monday
00:57:15 monday so the friday before was 25th of january do you recall that meeting
00:57:26 do you recall that meeting or the conversation i should say
00:57:31 so can we repeat your question please yes of course you'll see in the first line of the email it says i'm writing to follow up our conversation on friday regarding outstanding fees
00:57:43 outstanding fees do you recall that conversation regarding outstanding fees no not specifically
00:57:52 can you remember whether it was a conversation on a phone or a meeting
00:57:59 i'm sorry i can't recall okay can you recall any meeting between you peter madison and bruce soon at this time in january regarding outstanding fees
00:58:11 outstanding fees i i had a few meetings i can't recall specifics and discussions in the meeting sorry
00:58:16 sorry okay now if we turn to the next paragraph the third sentence states the design team agreed to defer half their stage d fee to ensure the total cost to kctmo fell below the odu threshold for
00:58:28 fell below the odu threshold for services
00:58:29 services the spreadsheet implies that the team was sub-consulted to studio e but this was not the case and all consultants fees were paid direct now by this stage were you aware of the meaning and consequence of deferring
00:58:41 meaning and consequence of deferring fees to fall below the odu threshold for service contracts i think that has already been agreed prior to my involvement the scheme this is i'm just repeating i think what was already said earlier in
00:58:53 think what was already said earlier in someone else's statement so you had no specific knowledge of your own
00:58:57 own regarding the arrangements and the rationale for those arrangements no as i said i i wasn't involved in negotiation of the fees uh did you give any briefing to mr madison regarding the
00:59:08 madison regarding the arrangements for the payment of consultants fees generally i would have explained to him as far as i knew what the arrangements were
00:59:21 would you have discussed the odu threshold during those discussions with mr madison i can't recall sorry i'm sure that he would have seen his email when you say
00:59:34 email when you say you're sure he mr madison would have seen this email why are you confident of that no i'm not
00:59:44 so if you were able to brief mr madison regarding the arrangements uh were you first of all aware of the importance of the og threshold i'm aware of the og process
00:59:55 threshold i'm aware of the og process yes
00:59:56 yes and are you aware of what it means to fall
00:59:59 fall above the odu threshold um i'm aware yes and what do what are you aware of what's the consequence of the value of a contract being above
01:00:10 the value of a contract being above the threshold there's a certain value that
01:00:14 that that the project needs to then go to the stands for the open you open journal european union and then you advertise it for other companies to put their bids forward before your
01:00:26 put their bids forward before your involvement in grenfell had you had any involvement in any public procurement process yes okay how many um on a smaller scale
01:00:37 yes okay how many um on a smaller scale for
01:00:37 for previous uh organizations yes i can't give you an example how many and you would have been aware that if the value of a contract was above the threshold
01:00:47 threshold there had to be a competitive exercise undertaken by the procuring authority yes
01:00:55 so can i take it from that you be aware that
01:00:59 that arranging matters so that the value of the contract was below the threshold would mean there would be no competitive exercise undertaken as i say this this negotiations of the fees was arranged
01:01:11 fees was arranged prior to my involvement so i was just repeating what had already been said i think by bruce in the previous statement
01:01:21 in your conversations with mr madison at this time
01:01:25 this time did he ask you what checks had been done to verify the competence and experience of first of all studio e and the rest of the design team uh
01:01:36 and the rest of the design team uh i can't require any conversations with peter i'm not entirely sure sorry can you remember any conversation with mr madison in which he raised any concerns
01:01:44 concerns that uh there had been no reprocurement or no tendering exercise in relation to the retention of studio e i can't require any conversations with peter sorry
01:01:58 now in that uh in the third paragraph of that email mr uh soon gives a summary of the history of studio e's work and he makes a reference to value engineering he says led
01:02:09 engineering he says led bitter have indicated the project needs significant value engineering to be affordable what did you understand led bitters to be suggesting cost cutting or value engineering
01:02:22 my understanding was value engineering now mr soones continues on the issue of outstanding fees in his email the 5th of february 2013 to alan dawson and that can be found at tm00848959
01:02:45 now both you and mr madison were copied into the email we can see from the first paragraph that it appears that you had a conversation with mr soon about holding back on making further
01:02:56 about holding back on making further submissions to the planners at rbkc do you recall that conversation regarding submissions to the planners
01:03:10 no don't sorry no can you remember why a decision had been taken to hold back on further submissions at that other time no i can't i can't recall why we would do that sorry
01:03:21 we would do that sorry mr soon mentions the possible cost to undertake value engineering which sounds inevitable was it your understanding that value engineering exercise was likely to be embarked upon at that stage
01:03:33 at that stage yes we were looking at various options for the design project yes
01:03:41 right can i now turn on to a separate topic which follows through on these various value engineering matters and can we now start by looking at what you say at paragraph 47 of your first witness
01:03:53 paragraph 47 of your first witness statement
01:03:55 statement which is tmo quintuple a five
01:04:01 nine and you say this i have been shown documents recording that by 23rd of may 2013
01:04:07 2013 apple yards had begun to look at our procurement options as lead bitters were proving difficult to work with the value engineering exercise had begun by this stage but i had no involvement in it now
01:04:20 but i had no involvement in it now before we come on to the questions can you look please in an email sent by you on the 27th of february 2013 to alan dawson
01:04:27 dawson which is at tm00849255
01:04:37 and in particular pages 14 to 15 within this chain
01:04:49 and we have here at the bottom your email
01:04:52 email 27th of february and if we go to page 15
01:04:59 the second substantive paragraph says if we looked at v i suggest the following then you set out a number of possibilities i'll let you refresh your memory just by
01:05:11 i'll let you refresh your memory just by reading those briefly yes i'm aware of this okay would you agree that this email indicates at the very least you had considered views on the scope of the proposed value engineering exercise
01:05:22 engineering exercise yes i'll put before some suggestions
01:05:30 and on what what matters what research had you done to help you identify these proposed measures
01:05:39 measures had you discussed these measures with anyone beforehand yes i think we was in discussion with chi
01:05:46 chi lim about some of the design options for the scheme and the overall project itself [Music]
01:05:55 [Music] and in particular there was some there was some
01:05:58 was some discussions around the garages refurbishment of the garages was it was necessary
01:06:03 necessary for the scheme or not and various other options as well now can you give the panel an idea of what the extent of your involvement was at this stage so late february 2013 in
01:06:15 at this stage so late february 2013 in consideration of value engineering the first element appears to be discussions regarding proposals what other matters in terms of its consideration were you involved in
01:06:26 consideration were you involved in i say i i was more administration i would put i would put forward some suggestions and my own thoughts of what we could look at as um as option for value engineering did you discuss any of those options
01:06:38 did you discuss any of those options with mr madison before you sent the email to alan dawson i'm sure there have been discussions with peter madison around the designs of the scheme yes
01:06:51 would you have put forward these individual proposals to mr madison before you committed them to an email to mr dawson i think it's possibly the other way around that peter may have said to me
01:07:02 around that peter may have said to me these are options that we can look at and then i again as my administration juices i would send this out
01:07:11 now looking at the list of things that ought to be considered a lot involves removal of works from the project is that a fair overview yes there was consideration of
01:07:22 overview yes there was consideration of removing some elements of the design now would you agree with this proposition that a value engineering exercise promotes the substitution of materials and methods with less expensive alternatives but
01:07:34 with less expensive alternatives but without sacrificing functionality i wouldn't say that specifically the aspects of the value engineering i would say as it suggests is there what can we
01:07:45 say as it suggests is there what can we afford to do and remove items from the design to see how to bring the project back in line with
01:07:53 line with the available budget so given that answer
01:07:56 answer what these proposals look like is more akin to cost cutting rather than value engineering isn't it mr duncan no not not exactly no i would disagree with that i would say that this was looking at
01:08:07 was looking at what we could afford to do within the budget
01:08:11 budget and looking at areas that were weren't necessary
01:08:14 necessary to achieve the outcomes now one of the things you suggest is look at alternative material for cladding that's the second bullet point um
01:08:24 point um was that your suggestion was it from mr madison i think that was already muted within the project team with frozen aware and there were very the various
01:08:35 and there were very the various different valuable types of samples available to residents and a tmo to look at the cladding can you remember who'd suggested it first of all in the meetings you've
01:08:46 first of all in the meetings you've attended
01:08:47 attended no sorry i can't recall you suggested it was it someone at the tmo was it someone from
01:08:53 from the contractors i'm not entirely sure sorry
01:08:56 sorry um did you or mr madison or indeed anyone at the tmo have a particular alternative material in mind
01:09:05 no not particularly no um did you discuss any particular material with uh mr gibson or mr madison before the email was sent
01:09:16 um not that i recall now might i ask you to look at a separate email chain which was sent on the day before us on the 26th of february 2013
01:09:28 the 26th of february 2013 and we can find those at a r t quadruple zero
01:09:31 zero five nine double one
01:09:39 and the
01:09:42 if we can go to page three scroll down and you'll see i'll just let you reread that email before i ask you questions on
01:10:00 it
01:10:10 okay now um the chain starts off with that you see mr dawson asking studio in the second paragraph of that email for quotes a radical rethink of the scope spec
01:10:20 spec close quote and if we scroll up to the bottom of the first page of this chain
01:10:27 chain we hopefully see a response from mr soons at 11 48 where he says it's not really possible to rethink without further information he then lists targets for savings
01:10:38 savings if we go to page two the second of which is close quo to quote change zinc cladding material to something cheaper i think planning will need a sweetener to swallow this perhaps copper ceramic
01:10:50 to swallow this perhaps copper ceramic terracotta or more glass at low low level now did you discuss that suggestion with mr madison or mr gibson that you can remember not that i recall no um would you have
01:11:02 not that i recall no um would you have discussed these type of suggestions with either of those gentlemen i'm sure these discussions would have come up yes and if the email had come from mr soon's prompting this with that and all likelihood have prompted a
01:11:13 and all likelihood have prompted a conversation between you mr madison or mr gibson
01:11:18 sorry if mr soons had made suggestions regarding particular alternatives would that have prompted you to have a conversation with mr madison or gibson regarding those alternatives
01:11:29 regarding those alternatives um it wouldn't have prompted me to have it i'm sure that the discussions were had so i don't require specific discussions with following this email with that mindful that this email
01:11:41 with that mindful that this email correspondence was on the day before uh you responded to alan dawson on the 27th of
01:11:47 27th of february looking for alternative material for cladding would it have been this conversation that prompted that email
01:11:53 email the suggestion of looking at alternatives yes part of value engineer was looking at all aspects of the design can you remember now whether aluminium was considered at this stage as an alternative
01:12:06 at this stage as an alternative there was various different products available um at the time yes now can i ask you to go back to paragraph 46 of your witness statement
01:12:18 you say this quotes by april 2013 alternative cladding options to zinc were being circulated i've been shown emails that i was copied into between bruce soon and peter madison
01:12:28 madison which recalled that several aluminium composite material acm cladding options were being circulated as samples well i do not recall this correspondence i'm confident that i was never asked my opinion about the composition of the
01:12:40 opinion about the composition of the cladding
01:12:41 cladding nor did i offer it now you refer um in your witness statement to an email sent by bruce soon's on the 17th of april 2013 and could we go to that which
01:12:54 april 2013 and could we go to that which is at tm01 triple zero two six zero two
01:13:08 thank you and if we can go to the second page
01:13:13 and you'll see at the top half the heading samples and then it says going beyond the meeting i think it is worth circulating the samples we have been collecting of alternative
01:13:24 alternative cladding options to zinc so this is an email from mr sooms and then he lists a number of different acm options now can you remember was there any discussion about what acm
01:13:35 discussion about what acm was first of all
01:13:39 no i not that i recall
01:13:43 is it fair to assume that all of the options set out in this email were being discussed as cheaper alternatives to zinc at the time um i wouldn't necessarily
01:13:54 at the time um i wouldn't necessarily say cheaper ascend there was there were options available but is it fair to assume that those options were being discussed at the time yes acm was discussed at the time
01:14:06 yes acm was discussed at the time um was there any discussion as to why those alternatives were cheaper than zinc
01:14:14 not that i recall can you recall any discussion the fire safety aspects of these proposed alternatives no no i recall
01:14:23 recall thank you right can i now turn on to a separate topic which is a recommendation made by mr madison on the 25th of march 2013 to the programme board and for that
01:14:36 2013 to the programme board and for that purpose can we go to
01:14:39 tm01003 triple eight three
01:14:44 which are the minutes of the tmo program board meeting of the 25th of march
01:14:51 we see there
01:14:55 under the first item that uh yourselves yourself rather mr madison mr gibson attended for this either grenfell tower item and the hidden homes agenda items and if we can scroll down
01:15:13 it was stated in the penultimate sentence at the bottom of that page there has been no clear audit trail to explain how decisions were made first of all was that a
01:15:24 were made first of all was that a concern that peter madison had raised with you
01:15:26 with you before the meeting um i don't recall having that conversation with peter do you recall having that conversation with anyone at the tmo
01:15:38 with anyone at the tmo no not i recall can you recall whether mr madison felt that the absence of a clear audit trail was your responsibility in some way no i can't see that you're saying it's
01:15:49 no i can't see that you're saying it's my responsibility um was he being critical of mr anderson for example
01:15:54 example not that i'm aware you might have to ask him can you help us as to whether the problem of a uh the absence of a clear audit trail how that was resolved no sorry i can't recall
01:16:09 do you have any recollection of anyone expressing a concern about the absence of the clear audit trail i'm raising it with you i can't recall this time back now i can't recall any specifics around the um
01:16:22 specifics around the um around that conversation sorry can we turn over the page
01:16:29 and it's the fourth complete paragraph on that page which starts with the word procurement as a procurement would be an issue
01:16:37 issue as the project was recommended to board on the basis that we're doing it this way for efficiency savings can you help us what was the anticipated issue with the procurement that was being discussed
01:16:51 i can't recall that far back sorry can you remember whether there was any discussion as to the basis upon which mr anderson had recommended the procurement
01:17:02 anderson had recommended the procurement should be conducted no sorry i can't recall
01:17:09 can you remember any discussion regarding the basis of the various procurement options proposed by mr anderson did you have those conversations with him for example no not to say we there was discussion
01:17:21 no not to say we there was discussion about
01:17:22 about the re-procurement but not the current procurement as i recall okay now looking at the next paragraph in these minutes it says and i quote peter has spoken to
01:17:35 it says and i quote peter has spoken to laura johnson about the present situation
01:17:37 situation and also mentioned it to the board so hope mentioned the board so hopefully there will not be a huge issue if we say we need to start again paul is working with the architects to look at an alternative
01:17:48 an alternative what discussions did you have with studio e about the prospects of starting again
01:17:55 i did i say i do recall there was consideration of talking to appiah what our options were if there was a discussion if there was consideration of re-procuring the project
01:18:08 project do you remember whether laura johnson rbkc was involved in any of these discussions regarding the reprocurement of the grenfell project no i can't recall sorry
01:18:21 do you recall ever being in any meeting between peter madison and laura johnson in relation to which reprocurement was discussed not for the top no i can't recall sorry
01:18:34 um the paragraph in the minutes refers to
01:18:37 to the present situation can you remember what mr madison might have said about the present situation no i can't record a conversation now if we can go down two further
01:18:49 now if we can go down two further paragraphs in this minute which starts the recommendation from peter is for us to reprocure now is it right to say that at this
01:19:00 now is it right to say that at this stage so march 2013 the tmo had not received the breakdown of ledbetter's proposed costs um
01:19:08 um as far yeah i think that's as far as i'm aware yes
01:19:11 aware yes can you explain why therefore peter madison was recommending re-procurement without the benefit of ledbetter's proposed costs no i'm sure you'll have to ask peter thank you the final paragraph on that
01:19:23 thank you the final paragraph on that page says this it needs to be thoroughly explained that lead bitters are trying to overcharge now am i right in understanding that you'd been told that lead bitters and apple yards were two million pounds apart
01:19:34 apart yes i was aware there's a difference in costs yes and that alan dawson was saying uh not to place too much weight on that difference at this stage is that fair i don't recall when saying
01:19:47 is that fair i don't recall when saying that no
01:19:50 that no would it help if i took you to a project minutes to refresh your memory please could we go to art quadruple zero eight four six nine
01:20:06 and page one and if paragraph four on that page
01:20:26 can you remember him saying anything along the lines of not putting too much weight on the difference
01:20:34 between the two figures at that stage
01:20:38 i know i'm not entirely sure i remember adam saying that to me sorry well going back to the program board minutes which is at one double zero three triple
01:20:51 which is at one double zero three triple eight three
01:20:56 and going back to the bottom of the second page
01:21:02 and you'll see their lead bitters are trying to overcharge can you remember who was suggesting that lead bitters were trying to overcharge no sorry i know that their costs were higher whether there was consideration
01:21:14 higher whether there was consideration that was overcharged not i don't recall
01:21:19 um now i want to if we can turn away from that document can we now turn to uh your email to alan dawson the 27th of february 2013. now we've looked at that before but can
01:21:31 now we've looked at that before but can we go back to that email chain which is at tm00849255
01:21:40 and if i might ask the opus operator to take us to page 18
01:21:48 [Music] and we see at the bottom an email from alan dawson the date the 26th of february 2013
01:21:59 the date the 26th of february 2013 sent at 10 55 and if we can go on to page 19
01:22:05 page 19 he says in the first sentence it refers to a significant deficit between the approved cost plan and lead bitters do you see that yes now if we go further up that email chain to page 13.
01:22:28 as you go slightly further up to page 12.
01:22:36 you have an email from you and then there are further emails in the chain if we go up to page nine
01:22:49 and it's an email you sent on the 27th of march
01:22:52 of march 2013 which says we would also like cost analysis if the tmo re-procured this project to include abortive fees and outstanding fees additional fees etc now is that
01:23:05 additional fees etc now is that something you decided to request was it something you had been told to request
01:23:10 request yeah i would have sent that under um instruction from the senior management team
01:23:17 team senior management team can you was it mr madison mr gibson are you able to remember
01:23:21 remember no sorry i can't remember who but i wouldn't give that type of um instruction without some senior management giving me guidance okay if we can stay with this chain but
01:23:33 okay if we can stay with this chain but move further up to page five to an email from robert powell on the 3rd of april
01:23:42 now there we go he refers to a paper on ve
01:23:46 ve options and says that he will issue a status report next week and if we go up to page 4 of this email chain it's your response of the 10th of april
01:24:04 and then if we can get the full email sorry brought up on the screen if that's possible
01:24:11 and you open by saying just to confirm our quotes requirements close quotes when you say our requirements who at the tmo had specified them
01:24:25 i can't i'm not entirely sure who would have given that but it would have either been peter or um sorry it's jumped around a bit it would have been peter or mark anderson at this stage 10th of
01:24:38 or mark anderson at this stage 10th of april
01:24:38 april 2013 it would have been peter madison wouldn't it yes i i'm sorry the dates of who left and when peter got involved as i'm not
01:24:49 when peter got involved as i'm not entirely sure so you may be ignorant yes well mr anderson left in january 2013 january yeah okay so we're now april 2013. so given your previous answer i'm
01:25:04 2013. so given your previous answer i'm assuming
01:25:04 assuming it would have been mr madison who would have given you those instructions possibly yes now mr powell responds substantively on the 10th of april and if we go up to the first page of
01:25:17 and if we go up to the first page of this email chain in an email he sent to you and simon cash and if we go on to page two and if i can ask you i'll just let you briefly refresh your memory of that
01:25:38 email
01:25:51 okay now in the second bullet point it says this
01:25:54 says this there are similar questions over the design team whose fee claims raise a number of procedural questions with regards to proper procurement now did you understand that suggest that there had not been a proper
01:26:05 that there had not been a proper procurement of the design team no sorry i'd like to say i wasn't part of the previous procurement of the scheme now looking at the third bullet point
01:26:17 looking at the third bullet point it says there are a number of legal and procedural matters which will require some legal input to resolve regarding the ability to usurp the incumbent contractor should that be the desired course of action now assuming
01:26:28 action now assuming that to usurp means to sack was sacking lead bitters tmo's preferred option at that point no i'd say peter madison would probably
01:26:39 no i'd say peter madison would probably be best to answer that do you remember any discussion regarding i just i remember i remember options available about re-procurement
01:26:50 available about re-procurement but no decision to be made at the time can we turn to the fifth bullet point which says this there does seem to be a fundamental disconnect with the advised construction budget of 8.5 million and the figures we are estimating when
01:27:02 and the figures we are estimating when the disparity between our figures and those which led bitters appear to be entrenched on is considered it suggests that a fundamental rethink is required now did you discuss that point with
01:27:13 now did you discuss that point with either mr madison or mr gibson or both of them i'm sure they would i don't recall specific conversation but i'm sure would have there have been some discussions can you remember what their response was
01:27:25 can you remember what their response was no sorry
01:27:28 do you remember at this stage any discussion about whether the tmo could afford to proceed with the refurbishment project as planned
01:27:37 planned there were discussions about re-procurement for to see if we can get different contractors to provide better options that was one discussion um but i say it was it was on the table
01:27:50 um but i say it was it was on the table all options were available at that time
01:27:54 and you're quite certain when you say at that time april 2013 yes it would have been the time when this email was around now you attended a tmo capital investment meeting on the 11th of april
01:28:07 investment meeting on the 11th of april 2013 and if we go to the minutes which are tmo
01:28:10 are tmo one triple zero two six eight eight
01:28:20 now grenfell is at item 3.5 on page two where it's minuted thus
01:28:32 at the bottom there apple yards have advised the tmo it would be beneficial to value engineer the scheme to bring within 8.5 million construction budget my first question is who proposed the
01:28:43 my first question is who proposed the 8.5 million construction budget it's the best you'll recall i'm not entirely sure how the budget was set sorry
01:28:51 sorry is it correct or fair to say that the budget was set at 8.5 million at that meeting not not i recall sorry okay can we now turn to the artelia
01:29:02 okay can we now turn to the artelia status report of the 23rd of april 2013 and that can be found at art zero nine one zero one
01:29:13 nine one zero one mr how are we getting on in if this would be a good time for a break because i'm just about to start a new topic well that's what i wondered yeah then i think it would mr duncan we have a short break during each session
01:29:25 a short break during each session and this would be a good time to take it so we're going to stop uh and we'll resume a course two to twelve please
01:29:31 please thank you um i'm going to ask you please not to talk to anyone about your evidence or anything to do with it while you're
01:29:37 you're out of the room thank you all right so would you like to give the usher please
01:29:49 good question cents
01:47:03 yeah would you ask mr duncan to come back in please thank you
01:47:15 thank you
01:47:18 all right mr duncan thank you ready to carry on thank you yes good thank you very much yes mr mrs duncan once you pour yourself a glass of water we were about to look at the artelia status
01:47:29 about to look at the artelia status report of the 23rd of april 2013 and that is at art quadruple zero nine one zero one excuse me
01:47:43 um first of all do you remember receiving this report yes i think i remember seeing this and was this the report that you expected to receive following robert powell's email of the 10th of april that we looked at
01:47:55 of the 10th of april that we looked at before the break yes i would have thought this is a report uh would you have read that report
01:48:01 report yes i'm sure i'd read this could we go to
01:48:05 to internal page 14 within this report
01:48:13 so he needs to go on four more pages thank you and we see at the in the bottom half of that page
01:48:24 page a number of numbered points but the overall recommendation is to stick with lead bitters i'll let you read that uh material in the bottom half sorry
01:48:36 uh material in the bottom half sorry what
01:48:37 what can you what yes can you look at um the bottom half that is set out on the screen so whilst this exercise is still underway
01:48:45 underway okay
01:48:51 just let you refresh your memory
01:49:39 okay thank you would you agree that the thrust of the recommendation is to stick with lead bitters that's what it says yes and if we could now turn to page 25
01:49:54 thank you and the second paragraph down from the top of the page starts with the phrase the project is currently over budget with little expectation that if left to iterative reviews
01:50:05 left to iterative reviews with the contractor giving diminishing returns that cost will be aligned or reduced significantly to make the scheme affordable and if we go to the third paragraph from the bottom
01:50:18 of this page which starts accordingly it is apple yard's opinion that unless the project in its current guise is stopped and a
01:50:30 current guise is stopped and a fundamental review embarked upon to redefine the scope programming cost it will fail
01:50:35 will fail now in short apple yard's opinion reflects the points made in robert powell's email of 10th of april would you agree
01:50:42 you agree yes what was your assessment of the recommendation
01:50:50 um i think they i don't recall specifically what my faults were at the time but this would have been passed on to my senior management team for their consideration
01:51:01 management team for their consideration and can you remember would you have passed it up to mr madison and mr gibson then
01:51:05 then i would have done yes and can you remember them expressing any view on the merits of the recommendation i can't recall what their thoughts were sorry don't worry now you attended a tmo programme board meeting on the 24th of april 2013
01:51:18 meeting on the 24th of april 2013 if we can turn up those minutes which are tmo
01:51:21 are tmo double zero eight four nine two nine eight
01:51:29 and if we can turn to page four and the third paragraph under the heading grenfell tower says this there would be a meeting with
01:51:41 says this there would be a meeting with the design team on the 25th of april we were going ahead with kitchens and bathrooms but there would now be no change to the nursery and boxing club in order to reduce costs rbkc were aware
01:51:52 in order to reduce costs rbkc were aware of the situation on costs but may not know all the detail now the suggestion had been at the march tmo programme board that new kitchens and bathrooms would be included in the project
01:52:04 included in the project and that the move of the boxing club and nursery should be reconsidered is that your recollection yes i say part the overall consideration was the review the whole design of the overall scheme
01:52:17 the whole design of the overall scheme and if we can go back to these minutes they go on to say if we can scroll down the page
01:52:24 reassurance was requested that rbkc were in agreement with our approach can you remember why tmo wanted to seek rbk's reassurance
01:52:36 no i i can only imagine it was because we were looking at the design and various options of the design
01:52:44 design um that they they have their overall approval
01:52:47 approval of the considerations can i ask you next about a meeting that took place between robert powell simon cash and peter madison
01:52:56 madison on the 21st of may now reference is made to that meeting by mr powell in an email we can see at art quadruple zero double eight five eight
01:53:15 and if we could just expand that i just asked you to read that quietly to yourself and ask you
01:53:36 okay now were you at that meeting i don't recall i'm not sure
01:53:43 given its subject matter is it likely that you
01:53:46 that you were there or unlikely that you were there
01:53:50 there probably unlikely that i'd be at that meeting can you remember any uh comment from mr madison in which he said he'd been overruled by laura johnson or indeed anyone at rbkc
01:54:02 anyone at rbkc no sorry i wouldn't you'd have to ask peter
01:54:05 peter now the report that email says in its fourth
01:54:09 fourth sentence also pm so peter madison not keen on progressing with lead bitter our report kicking this all off was based upon the objective of preserving program
01:54:19 program this now not so important value for money is accordingly we are likely to reprocure scheme via oju
01:54:28 oju first of all why was peter madison not keen on progressing with lead bitter at this stage can you remember i'm not entirely sure other than the they were difficult as it says in some
01:54:39 they were difficult as it says in some of the other statements to to provide information so we can make some informed decisions and did you understand that value for money was to take precedence over preserving the program or timetable i felt that we were just
01:54:52 or timetable i felt that we were just trying to
01:54:52 trying to achieve as much as we could for the budget available do you know where the prioritization of value for money came from no i again it wasn't uh it was
01:55:04 no i again it wasn't uh it was just trying to achieve as much as we could for the money that was available and so
01:55:07 and so um and ledbetter would find we was finding it difficult at the time to negotiate with them to provide
01:55:15 provide their understanding the breakdown of the cost so we can interrogate it a bit more now you intended you attended the tmo programme board on the 23rd of may 2013 the minutes can be found at tm0104960
01:55:31 the minutes can be found at tm0104960 now you attended for grenfell which is item six on page five
01:55:40 uh you reported there in the second sentence the first paragraph
01:55:46 paragraph reconfiguration the project was still underway as rbkc wanted the boxing club and the nursery to remain in the project and for environmental issues to be addressed costs were being agreed so that we
01:55:57 costs were being agreed so that we remained within budget when did rbkc tell you that the boxing club and nursery were to remain in the project they wouldn't have specifically told me it would i would have got that
01:56:08 it would i would have got that information directly from a line management in this case would have been peter madison okay you go on to report uh further down in the third paragraph apple yards were looking at our procurement options as lead bitters were
01:56:19 procurement options as lead bitters were proving difficult to work with options were being reviewed can you help us what was the particular problem with lead bitter at this stage um as it's stated in previous documents you've
01:56:32 stated in previous documents you've shown there was a two million pound deficit between um apple yards cost of the project compared to lead bitters and to understand that difference we needed a full breakdown of how our led bit has arrived to their
01:56:44 of how our led bit has arrived to their evaluation and he was getting that full breakdown that was proven difficult and i'm not entirely sure to this day they provided that breakdown could i now ask you to turn to art
01:56:57 could i now ask you to turn to art quadruple zero six two three two now this is an addendum status report from artelia
01:57:08 artelia sent on the 24th of may 2013. do you remember receiving that addendum um possibly yes i remember the document i'm not totally
01:57:19 i remember the document i'm not totally sure sorry this is the addendum yeah i okay yes so well if we turn to page five
01:57:31 and if we look at the first set of bullet points on that page in particular the penultimate one if we could scroll down
01:57:44 if we could scroll down that page you'll see a second set of bullet points now if i could ask you to look at the third bullet point in that second one reprogram the project
01:57:55 reprogram the project in light of revised design and project parameters in short would you agree that artelia had performed a vault fast following the meeting with the tmo on the 21st of may and now
01:58:07 the 21st of may and now effectively say that there was no substantive problem with reprocurement
01:58:20 substantive problem with reprocurement yeah they're saying we procuring the project utilize no dual or appropriate framework to identify it is now favored to clearly establish a competitive
01:58:31 to clearly establish a competitive market price for the works thank you now can we look at the email under which this was sent which is art quadruple zero
01:58:42 quadruple zero one two zero six that says please find the addendum to our report we discussed
01:58:54 our report we discussed this should now give you the comfort you are looking for to proceed with looking to re-procure the construction against our earlier recommendation which is based on now obsolete information
01:59:05 is based on now obsolete information why do you think he used the words comfort you are looking for in that covering email i can't say i'm not sure why did tmo need
01:59:16 need comfort in relation to reprocurement
01:59:20 i can't say i'm not sure you'll have to ask robert powell and peter madison was it likely to have been mr madison who sought comfort from artelia in this regard possibly now simon cash emailed mr
01:59:34 possibly now simon cash emailed mr madison copying you in on the 19th of june
01:59:38 june so three weeks or so after you received the addendum and that's at art quadruple 0-1-2-4-1
01:59:51 and the second sentence says i am aware that you have a board meeting tomorrow and may not have sufficient time to review what i have written but in essence i've taken on board your comments and reworded sections to read
02:00:02 comments and reworded sections to read in a better light can you remember now why do you think simon cash rewrote sections of the report to read in a better light to quote
02:00:12 to quote i don't know i'm not sure i'm in this place to answer these you're probably better asking peter madison simon cashew okay can i now turn to the x over and the question of fire strategy
02:00:24 x over and the question of fire strategy first of all can you help us with how you or the tmo came to be aware of xover
02:00:31 i don't i thought about this before i don't know and i don't recall on my understanding how
02:00:38 how xover were introduced to the scheme i can't
02:00:41 can't can't remember how they were put forward um
02:00:45 um i unders i can't recall sorry okay could we turn to paragraph 50 of your first witness statement which is at tmo eight quintuple and it's at page nine and you say there
02:00:56 and you say there i recall that in around july 2012 it became clear that a new friar strategy was needed for grenfell tower as it was unclear whether the assembly point should where the assembly point should be xover
02:01:08 assembly point should be xover warrington fire were therefore instructed by the tmo to review and report on the existing fire safety arrangements and to produce a fire strategy for the tower i cannot recall how it came to be
02:01:19 tower i cannot recall how it came to be that xover warrington fire were the company hired i did not have any input into or review the strategy produced by xover warrington fire though i may have passed it on to the health and safety team and carl stokes
02:01:31 health and safety team and carl stokes now you were asked about this statement by the inquiry and you responded in your second statement at para11 and the reference for that is at tm0084736
02:01:44 at tm0084736 and you say there as a project manager i would not have the technical expertise to advise on the fire strategy now pausing there do you think that you had the technical expertise to understand the various reports and
02:01:56 understand the various reports and strategies produced for the tmo by exover and the recommendations they made no it wasn't my expertise did you read any of those
02:02:07 any of those reports and strategies they produced i i'm sure i would have read for him yes you go on to state that xover was employed on the basis
02:02:19 that xover was employed on the basis that it would report to studio e who were the lead consultant and therefore responsible for pre-contract stay
02:02:26 stay sorry for pre-contract design and then you go on in paragraph 12 to say i would have expected that this document would have been read for information by the tmos health and
02:02:37 for information by the tmos health and safety team and mark anderson what do you mean by for information do you mean
02:02:42 you mean not for decision i'm not sure what the the the contents of the report was whether it was for information or for them to make an informed decision but i would assume that they would have
02:02:53 but i would assume that they would have read the document and if there was a decision to be made it would have been based around the information in the documents now in the last two sentences of paragraph 12 you say this however it'd be quite wrong for the tmo
02:03:05 however it'd be quite wrong for the tmo to make decisions in relation to the fire strategy for a property unless these decisions were informed by the advice of professionals for this reason xover were instructed to report directly to studio e
02:03:17 report directly to studio e now do you agree that it would be wrong for the tmo to make decisions in relation to fire strategy for a property without reading and comprehending the strategy itself yes they would have had to read the document yes do you agree that the tmo
02:03:30 document yes do you agree that the tmo should at very least have read it not just for information but to make sure it covered all of the necessary aspects of the building that they had discharged all relevant foreign safety obligations yes i believe
02:03:42 foreign safety obligations yes i believe they should have read it yes and also to ensure that all necessary aspects the refurbishment project had been considered properly yes can we now turn to what mr anderson said about the instruction of
02:03:54 anderson said about the instruction of exxova in his first witness statement of paris
02:03:57 paris paragraph 63 and the reference for that is at tm01048968
02:04:08 and page 14
02:04:14 and paragraph 63 thank you he says four lines down my understanding is that exova were initially paid directly by the tmo
02:04:25 initially paid directly by the tmo which provided the tmo with a direct contractual link to them i believe this direct link was important as the fire safety strategy and advice was going to be quite crucial to the success
02:04:35 success of the refurbishment of grenfell tower and the ongoing management of grenfell tower
02:04:41 tower um did you agree with mr anderson's opinion that a direct contractual link was important to the tma um i do agree with it but at the time like i say i i would have felt mark
02:04:53 like i say i i would have felt mark anderson had the more of the authority to making judgment calls
02:04:57 calls do you feel that uh your role and experience and expertise allowed you to form a view as to whether the fire safety was quite crucial to the success of the refurbishment as mr anderson thought
02:05:09 mr anderson thought i i at this stage we might say i wasn't i was still administration so i didn't have the authority to make judgment calls on this can i now ask you to look at the minutes of the first design team meeting on the
02:05:20 of the first design team meeting on the 19th of april 2012 which can be found at tmo 1 treble 0-1143
02:05:33 now uh as you can see xover was present at that meeting represented by uh jay lee who'd arranged now who had arranged for xover to be there was it you or someone else i can't
02:05:45 was it you or someone else i can't recall sorry now xover sent a fee proposal to bruce sowns on the 9th of may 2012 and can we look at that it's a tmo
02:05:56 2012 and can we look at that it's a tmo 1 treble 0 3 8 5.
02:06:07 do you recall seeing that fee proposal
02:06:11 uh i i would have seen a fee proposal put forward yes can i ask you to look at page two and the second paragraph on that page which says the
02:06:22 paragraph on that page which says the aim of the fire safety work would be to ensure
02:06:24 ensure a high standard of fire and life safety for the occupants of the building whilst highlighting any areas of the building's design that may represent an approvals risk do you see that yes do you remember
02:06:35 do you see that yes do you remember reading that i mean i can't recall specifically but i read this document did you carry out any checks yourself to make sure that what exova were offering to produce
02:06:46 to produce would meet their aim of ensuring a high standard of fire and life safety no as i say it's not my expertise i wouldn't understand what they their what forms of fire strategy
02:06:57 what forms of fire strategy were you expecting or was the team expecting generally studio e to ensure that the scope of xover's work was sufficient for those purposes
02:07:07 i would have thought the design team has some input and then given a brief for the x over yes
02:07:14 could we scroll down to the heading reba stage d slash e and the second paragraph it states this the fire safety design would be
02:07:25 the fire safety design would be documented in the fire strategy report this document would ultimately be submitted to the building control authority
02:07:31 authority in order to achieve regulatory approval were you aware that exxova were to produce a fire strategy report they were providing yes were you aware that the report should achieve
02:07:42 that the report should achieve regulatory approval sorry can you see the paragraph i've just quoted the fire safety design would be documented in the
02:07:53 safety design would be documented in the fire safety report this document would ultimately be submitted to the building control authority
02:07:58 authority in order to achieve regulatory approval were you aware that that would be the purpose or one of the purposes of the report no so i wasn't aware that this report had to go to building control
02:08:09 control are you able to help us whether this report or
02:08:12 report or or a report rather was submitted to building control in due course no i'm not aware sorry
02:08:20 did you respond uh in relation to that fee proposal or would someone else have done so
02:08:25 done so um i may have responded but on the authorisation from either mark or peter at the time i can't recall which one was in
02:08:33 in in management at that stage when you sent matters for example let's assume for this that you did respond to that fee proposal would
02:08:44 proposal would mr madison prepare the draft for you to send
02:08:47 send or would you prepare a draft that would then be reviewed and approved by mr madison more than likely it would be um something i would have drafted and then asked them for their
02:08:58 then asked them for their for their opinion and authorization would that be a routine process you followed whenever you were corresponding with contractors or anyone else involved in the refurbishment project
02:09:11 refurbishment project for this particular project it was yes now in june 2012 you liaised with xover regarding fire safety arrangements at the tower and then an email date of the 13th of june
02:09:22 then an email date of the 13th of june 2012
02:09:23 2012 and that can be found at a r t
02:09:29 treble zero treble zero six nine
02:09:41 a new state second line for the moment i'm only assisting mark and all instructions or sign procedures remain with mark again that appears to be a fair
02:09:52 again that appears to be a fair reflection of the nature and extent of your role
02:09:55 your role in june 2012 would you agree yes now can we next look at the minutes of the project design meeting on the 25th of june 2012 which is at s e a
02:10:07 which is at s e a quadruple zero four eight six four
02:10:19 now we can see there that you attended the first attendee on that list and if we could go to the bottom of page three
02:10:26 three to the section headed previous actions
02:10:31 and it says there in the second paragraph there is no existing fire strategy for the building xover will need to prepare one as part of the upgrade works
02:10:42 of the upgrade works sc so studio e to chase do you remember reading that um
02:10:51 i was at the meeting yes i would have i would have read these minutes at the meetings
02:10:55 meetings well you were there yes were you concerned that there was no existing fire strategy for the building when you were told that it wasn't my expertise and i say i i it
02:11:06 it wasn't my expertise and i say i i it wasn't for me to make the call on that but if you were told that there was no existing fire strategy for a building which was fully occupied isn't that something that you ought to
02:11:17 isn't that something that you ought to have raised with your superiors i would have thought that the tmo had the head health and safety team and a fire safety officer i saw that this consultant cole stokes and i
02:11:29 that this consultant cole stokes and i it wasn't my area to make an opinion on that sorry but sorry to press you on this but you were the one at the meeting yes you were told there was no existing fire strategy
02:11:41 strategy did you notify your superiors that that is what you had been told at that meeting i i would have these minutes would have been distributed into mark anderson so they have also seen that comment as well
02:11:52 seen that comment as well can we now look at the minutes for the project meeting on the 18th of july 2012 which can be found at sea quadruple
02:12:04 0-5254
02:12:08 again you're you attended your first on the list of attendees can we turn to page four
02:12:17 and you'll see the final item under the heading previous action states this there is no existing fire strategy for the building xover to proceed did it concern you that
02:12:29 xover to proceed did it concern you that at that stage no progress had been made on putting together an existing fire strategy um i thought that excover were appointed to look at the fire strategy so
02:12:40 to look at the fire strategy so i would assume that they they were taking that in consideration would you have notified your superiors that there was still no existing fire strategy again i'm sure
02:12:51 no existing fire strategy again i'm sure they would have read the minutes of this meeting
02:12:54 meeting could we go to the design team meeting minutes
02:12:59 minutes for the meeting on the 26th of july 2012 which are
02:13:02 which are at s-e-a quadruple zero five six zero six
02:13:10 now again you attended
02:13:14 second attendee identified and if we go to page four
02:13:20 see the final item under the heading quantity surveyor again there is no fire existing fire strategy for the building can you remember whether mr anderson who
02:13:31 can you remember whether mr anderson who was also in attendance whether he was concerned that there was no existing fire strategy for the building um you'd have to ask mr anderson that question sorry okay could we now turn to an email date of
02:13:44 could we now turn to an email date of the 13th of august 2012 which is a e x o quintuple zero one nine four
02:14:00 now ex over emailed you requiring information relating to the current risk assessment which i think is further down the chain now other than forwarding the email onto janice ray
02:14:12 email onto janice ray can you remember what steps you took to familiarize yourself with the fire risk assessments um it wasn't my responsibility in that stage sorry sorry i'm not sure why okay um can we turn it out because the
02:14:24 okay um can we turn it out because the answer
02:14:25 answer you didn't take any steps uh i don't recall what steps i would have taken at the time
02:14:30 the time but um i would i would have relied on janet trader health and safety advisor for the tmo if there was any steps to be taken she'll have given advice bluntly would you have acted as a as a
02:14:41 bluntly would you have acted as a as a postman and a mailbox for these purposes i i yeah i was as i mentioned at the beginning i was more of administration role model making any judgment or any authorization or instructions
02:14:55 authorization or instructions uh could we turn to the draft fire strategy produced by xavier on the 16th of august 2012 we can find that at tm01 treble 001925
02:15:14 do you remember this document at all mr duncan
02:15:17 duncan i'm sure i read through this document yes now there's an internal x-over email that was sent by the author of that report
02:15:23 report kate cooney on on the 16th of august 2012. and if we could look at that briefly together it's an ex0 quadruple zero one two seven nine
02:15:39 and we can see in that big paragraph the final three lines they say they are making an existing crap condition
02:15:50 making an existing crap condition worse so it's a matter of working the worst bits out and making the new stuff work now in the various meetings you attended before this report arrived were you told
02:16:01 before this report arrived were you told either by studio e x over or indeed anyone else that the proposed changes would be making the existing building worse from the fire safety point of view no sorry i wasn't aware of that
02:16:14 now if i could ask you to turn to minutes of a meeting on the 26th of july 2012. so
02:16:22 2012. so three weeks or so before the draft arrived and that's at art quintuple zero treble
02:16:30 2.
02:16:36 again you were there the second attendee identified can you remember whether claire barker from exover you'll see her listed there on the
02:16:44 on the schedule of attendees did she say anything
02:16:47 anything to you along the lines of making a crap situation worse no i don't remember
02:16:54 remember recall her saying that to me
02:16:59 can we now go back to xover's internal email of the 17th of august 2012 which is exo quadruple zero one two seven
02:17:07 seven nine and if that could be amplified and then you will see in the penultima or the penultimate and final
02:17:19 or the penultimate and final line of the first paragraph no sprinklers wanted
02:17:25 yes was that the tmo's view at the time uh i don't recall that being an opinion can you remember any discussion of sprinklers as an
02:17:36 sprinklers as an option at grenfell i can't say i do know you attended a design team meeting on the 6th of september 2012. we can see the minutes at s e a quadruple zero six
02:17:49 s e a quadruple zero six one five seven
02:17:59 again we see use an attendee second on the list
02:18:03 the list and if we can turn to page two
02:18:06 you'll see the heading fire in the bottom half of that page
02:18:12 if we look at the second entry which says this draft fire strategy needs detailed interrogation and a meeting was arranged with se studio e early next week to review do you remember the discussion or
02:18:25 review do you remember the discussion or at least it's gist about the fire strategy at that meeting no sorry i can't recall the specifics of that
02:18:32 that discussion were you briefed would you know of anyone who was briefed on the substance of the detailed interrogation that was thought necessary no
02:18:46 do you remember any concern that the draft strategy required any further detailed work no i i i did pass i've never passed this document to a gentleman called carl stokes
02:18:59 gentleman called carl stokes um for some advice uh i'd actually i'd no
02:19:03 no i'm gonna distract that because it wasn't this document it was about the design of the building not not this
02:19:10 this the current strategy fire strategy sorry could we go to the outline fire strategy provided by xover on the 31st of october 2012 which is at exo quintuple 0519
02:19:32 first of all do you recognize this report
02:19:36 yes i think i recognize this report did you read it i'm sure i read this report did you appreciate or were you made aware that in the bullet points under section one
02:19:47 section one no mention is made of the intention to overcloud the building we can go to section one if that assists
02:20:14 hmm okay did you appreciate that none of those bullet points refer to cladding
02:20:24 but i'm not sure what you mean sorry i appreciate you didn't refer to cladding no
02:20:28 no did
02:20:32 did you appreciate or were you made aware that cladding had been admitted as a feature of the refurbishment no could we turn to page 8 in this
02:20:43 no could we turn to page 8 in this document
02:20:43 document and paragraph 3.1.4
02:20:50 did you read or were you made aware of what was stated there namely it is considered that the proposed changes will have no adverse effect on the building in relation to external fire spread
02:21:00 spread but this will be confirmed by an analysis in a future issue of this report
02:21:05 i would have read through this report yes um
02:21:08 yes um were you concerned that given uh involved cladding the report didn't confirm that there would be no adverse changes as a result of the fitment of cladding
02:21:19 fitment of cladding no i say i i wasn't in a position to give
02:21:22 give judgment on specifics and so you wouldn't have made a note to have reminded yourself no to consider future reports and how they addressed this issue no well i wasn't
02:21:33 addressed this issue no well i wasn't it wasn't my specific role just to analyze these in great detail now earlier on you mentioned correspondence with carl stokes could i ask you to turn to cst quadruple
02:21:47 could i ask you to turn to cst quadruple 03104
02:21:49 03104 which is an email you sent on the 10th of january to mr stokes with instructions to comment on xover reports and assist on liaison with the lfb
02:22:00 lfb now i'll let you just refresh your memory of that email
02:22:20 so
02:22:25 thank you now in the second line of that email you say you engaged over with particular emphasis on means of escape and access and facilities for the fire service who decided that particular emphasis
02:22:39 who decided that particular emphasis okay now as i said earlier i wasn't part of writing the brief for excover
02:22:48 is this one of the emails you would have passed before others more senior to you before dispatching it to carl stokes uh no this type of email will have been something i would have drafted myself to carl stokes
02:23:02 would have drafted myself to carl stokes okay then so on what basis did you say that xover had been retained to provide a fire safety strategy quotes with particular emphasis on means of escape and access and facilities for the
02:23:13 escape and access and facilities for the fire service close quote because i think that's what they're appointed to look at but my question is do you know who decided that particular emphasis no i'm not saying i'm not always part of
02:23:24 no i'm not saying i'm not always part of the brief to put together for makes over now
02:23:31 the next uh issue i'd like to discuss with you is wheelchair accessible flats um in the tower
02:23:40 tower now if i could ask you first of all to turn to an email of the 11th of september 2012 which can be found at rbk 0026104
02:23:57 and if we go scroll down it's on the second page of the chain
02:24:04 thank you now mark anderson asked you to provide floor plans for the new residential units in grenfell tower to clairwise
02:24:10 clairwise rbkc do you remember that email at all um i don't specifically remember it but it was obviously passed to me yes now if we go um
02:24:21 we go um uh further up the chain to an email from claire wise on the 8th of november 2012 so
02:24:27 so roughly two months afterwards and then email timed at 11 49.
02:24:38 you can scroll up that chain
02:24:48 sorry we've got that can we go slightly fun though we can't go further up
02:24:53 i might come back to that email because i don't think the references are right now could i ask you to turn to rbk triple zero five nine four three four
02:25:10 five nine four three four now this is a statement from claire wise and if i can ask you to turn to paragraph 45 which is at page 12.
02:25:21 she says this i have discussed above the access appraisal i undertook in respect to grenfell tower in 2012.
02:25:28 in 2012. this was different from an access audit an axis audit would only consider the ex accessibility to the public of publicly accessible areas of a building by contract the access appraisal that i
02:25:40 by contract the access appraisal that i undertook specifically considered access to and within the new flats that were proposed as part of the grenfell scheme
02:25:47 scheme now did you understand the access appraisal only considered a wheelchair user's access to and within the flat no so i was just asked to pass on
02:25:58 i was just asked to pass on documentation which i did okay now could i turn next to the question of consultation with residents and if i can ask you to turn to paragraph 60 of your first witness
02:26:09 to paragraph 60 of your first witness statement
02:26:10 statement which is a tmo quintuple 085 internal page 11 and you say this in my view there was heavy resident
02:26:21 in my view there was heavy resident consultation about the refurbishment during the time i was a project manager this consultation period began in february 2012 and was still occurring when i left the organization residents were consulted
02:26:32 organization residents were consulted about matters including a new canopy the communal areas in security cladding
02:26:37 cladding the children's play area flat sizing gas heating hot water and windows now were you involved in planning the residence consultation from the beginning are you from february
02:26:48 from the beginning are you from february 2012 onwards not not at the very beginning of the project no i was asked to to assist mark in future um resident consultation meetings which
02:26:59 um resident consultation meetings which i did
02:27:00 i did was there a plan in place for consulting residents before the planning application was submitted um we did consultation with the residents around the planning application
02:27:11 application um so yes there would be a plan in place was that written down i i don't recall seeing anything specific no so
02:27:21 no so how did you become aware of the substance of this plan for the consultation which you were involved in well discussions with mark anderson
02:27:28 anderson as i suggested he asked me to help him with the consultation process which were many parts which is with newsletters resident evening consultation sessions uh drop-in sessions which is worse
02:27:40 uh drop-in sessions which is worse they drop in in and out and also being available for calls to receive calls and answer calls relating to the project now you say at the beginning of this paragraph there was heavy resident
02:27:52 paragraph there was heavy resident consultation what was the basis of your view that there had been such heavy resident consultation well as i suggested i'd done evening drop-in sessions
02:28:03 drop-in sessions evening sessions with the residents with the project team during the working day hours with drop-in sessions we set up a project room within the base
02:28:16 we set up a project room within the base of the grenfell tower displaying proposal designs as a little model they displayed as well again there was newsletters that we drafted out
02:28:28 newsletters that we drafted out for residents again i was taking calls and
02:28:31 and discussing with residents some of their specific concerns around the scheme so i would say that was fairly heavy consultation and how would you go about ensuring that you secured the views of a
02:28:43 you secured the views of a representative uh spread of the residents of the tower there were as i recall there were various different um involvement with the um concerns from
02:28:55 involvement with the um concerns from not only just residents but local areas as well
02:28:58 as well um i think there was a leaseholders i can't remember the specific name of the group
02:29:04 group grenfell tower leaseholder association i recall
02:29:09 recall the residents association and there was a very few other various bodies that uh they suggested they were representing the voice for the rest of the rest of the building or all the residents
02:29:21 residents but did you take any other steps to ensure that there was a representative sample of views obtained we done questionnaires that were sent out to residents as well asking their views
02:29:32 residents as well asking their views to put forward which they did so i think that there was plenty of opportunities for residents to come forward
02:29:39 forward and express their concerns or views of the scheme and once you've received uh residents views um how did you consider them what was the process whereby people read and evaluated the
02:29:50 whereby people read and evaluated the feedback
02:29:51 feedback in in the newsletters that we drafted in in conjunction with mark anderson as well we would display and and advertise what some of
02:30:02 display and and advertise what some of the feedback was from the residents or some of their concerns can i now look at the means of consultation and a consultation strategy was drawn up as part of the studio
02:30:14 was drawn up as part of the studio engagement statement and that can be found at tmo1
02:30:26 now can you remember who drafted the engagement statement document no sorry i can't recall studio e i would have put it together did you have any role in it that you remember no i didn't
02:30:38 remember no i didn't um could you turn to page 14 of this
02:30:44 document now this is a summary of the consultation with residents of the of the tower between february 2012 and august 2012 and in the box at the top of that page
02:30:55 and in the box at the top of that page you're recorded as the project manager now did you prepare this consultation summary yourself
02:31:04 um i'm not sure i would have put this together myself no i would it would have been some input with
02:31:13 with various members of the design team and mark anderson as well if this was my document did you draft it i can't specifically recall drafting this so i'm not sure
02:31:24 this so i'm not sure did you attend all of the resident consultation meetings between february and august 2012. i would say i would attended majority of them but not all of them
02:31:35 them but not all of them um how would you characterize the number of
02:31:39 of attendant attendees at these consultation meetings so i can how would i was it high low medium
02:31:47 medium it varied um depending on the type of consultation such as the road show or the evening resident consultation meetings so it was varied some were attended more than others which
02:31:59 than others which mechanism attracted the greater turnout uh i would say the evening consultations in my opinion were more attended now looking at the summary for the 15th
02:32:11 now looking at the summary for the 15th of may 2012 and it says second stage resident consultation took place with lancaster west emb and ra representatives now am i right in thinking that ra stands for residents association
02:32:22 stands for residents association yes can you remember now which ras were invited
02:32:26 invited um no sorry i can't specifically recall which
02:32:30 which there was one group
02:32:33 and i can't sorry and their name escapes me it may have been the residence association group of grenfell and i think
02:32:41 think who selected the resident associations to be invited um the estate the lancaster estate state office uh advise us who would be
02:32:53 state office uh advise us who would be the best people to um provide the invite to and they would distribute to the to the rest of the residents can you help us as to why no feedback is recorded for the meeting on the 15th of
02:33:04 recorded for the meeting on the 15th of may
02:33:06 may no sorry now a questionnaire in may 2012 asked if residents wanted to be involved in the development proposals and 13 replied that they did
02:33:18 and 13 replied that they did now we can see that at page 10 of this document
02:33:26 now was a note kept of those of who those residents were who responded
02:33:34 responded i'm sure there'd be some details that who responded yes can you help us as to whether the tmo ever went back to those who had responded
02:33:42 responded to ask them to be involved in greater detail with the project i'm sure they would have done yes when you say you're sure they would have done do you know that they that's what
02:33:53 do you know that they that's what happened no i said an assumption it was an assumption
02:33:57 can we now turn to um a project meeting on the 18th of july we've looked at this before but it's an art quintuple zero one six nine
02:34:14 and if we can turn you see your list as an attendee and if we can turn to page four
02:34:20 four and again look at resident actions on page three oh sorry look at resident actions and the second action is recorded as quotes resident focus group to be set up by tmo
02:34:30 by tmo to interface with design team and contractor who had responsibility for setting up that resident focus group um i believe mark anderson was working
02:34:43 um i believe mark anderson was working uh
02:34:44 uh and myself actually with the state office team and they they were helping us in the consultation process as well do you know why the resident focus group was not in fact created
02:34:56 was not in fact created i don't know sorry did you personally contact any of the residents who responded to the may 2012 questionnaire to ask them to participate in this focus group i don't recall contacting them
02:35:07 group i don't recall contacting them myself no
02:35:09 myself no if i could turn back to your first witness statement and paragraph 62 which is at tmo quintuple 085 you said that you put together the
02:35:21 you said that you put together the newsletters first of all what help did you receive when preparing the content of these newsletters from whom um it depending on when the news was
02:35:31 news was letters were sent some input was from the design team on some of the designs that we
02:35:38 that we provided as samples in the meetings mark anderson had some input into the content of the newsletters as well uh and i believe just for formatting and
02:35:52 and i believe just for formatting and the grammar of some of the the newsletters he went through rbk's communication team did any single person uh review the contents of the newsletters for accuracy yes
02:36:03 accuracy yes and who was that i can't remember the lady's name but she worked for the tmo she was part of the communications team do you know how she went about assessing the accuracy of the contents
02:36:14 contents i i'm not sure what she how she operated no sorry
02:36:18 no sorry now could we go back to tmo one triple zero one four zero one
02:36:28 and go to page forty
02:36:35 now this is a newsletter you prepared explaining the cladding systems and how it would be used on the tower now if i could ask the opus operator to
02:36:47 now if i could ask the opus operator to amplify the bottom half of this page
02:36:53 and you will see underneath the diagram and the right hand corner the second item refers to fr fire retardancy and then
02:37:04 fire retardancy and then go to the bottom under the middle column in somewhat obscure lettering you can see the phrase fire retardancy there as well
02:37:12 well do you have them both yes
02:37:16 now to what extent to your recollection will residents inform the fire retardancy of zinc or any other material used for cladding during the consultation process um
02:37:30 during the consultation process um i'm not aware of of anyone asking specific questions around the fire retardancy of any material provided that's not quite an answer to the question put did anyone
02:37:43 put did anyone from the tmo or any of their contractors provide residents with information regarding the fire retardancy of zinc or any other material not that i'm aware were samples of
02:37:55 not that i'm aware were samples of cladding shown to residents at any of the meetings yes and what can you remember what samples were provided um there was um
02:38:07 um there was um i can't recall specifically no but there was there was all i know is a selection of different samples of cladding and other materials laid out on the big table for residents to to view and feel and touch
02:38:18 residents to to view and feel and touch was an explanation given to residents of the different properties of each type of cladding
02:38:25 cladding um i can't specifically i personally didn't give that discussion to residents can you recall when the samples were put before the residence
02:38:33 residence whether there was any explanation given of their fire retardancy or resistance properties i don't recall having that discussion with any residents myself were residents consulted about the type
02:38:45 were residents consulted about the type of cladding as opposed to the colour of it the cladding
02:38:50 cladding yes as i say the the clad in all various types of
02:38:53 types of cladding materials was was provided to residents to feel in touch within the consultation meetings could i ask the opus operator to take us to page 42 within this document
02:39:08 now this is a newsletter of the 9th of august 2012.
02:39:15 and it says in relation to the event on the 12th of july so on the left hand column halfway down
02:39:27 final sentence there were no concern from residents about cladding the building did you attend the event on the 12th of july
02:39:38 the 12th of july i'm sure i would have attended i can't like say i've attended majority of the meetings i can't remember which ones were
02:39:44 were or weren't attended i think there was an attendance um register taken so i said i can't recall let's see um
02:39:55 so i said i can't recall let's see um if i can jog your memory could we go to a draft newsletter of the 15th of july 2012 which is at tmo double zero eight three seven six
02:40:11 if that could be expanded please
02:40:16 and you'll see on the right hand page the middle column
02:40:25 penultimate entry says first consultation meeting held on thursday 12th of july was not well attended with only one resident taking the opportunity to meet with the team and discuss the project do you now remember
02:40:35 remember that 12th of july meeting given it only had one attendee um i can't say i specifically recall that meeting there was a few that were well
02:40:46 well attended attending some that weren't well attended and this was probably one of them
02:40:50 of them okay now bearing in mind there was only one
02:40:53 one attendee on the 12th of july 2012. could i ask us to go back to the newsletter of the 9th of august which is at tm01049897
02:41:16 at tm01049897 and page three
02:41:21 and if we could expand the entry for the 12th of july
02:41:28 it says there there were no concern from residents plural about cladding the building now given there was only one person attending how did you conclude that there were no
02:41:39 how did you conclude that there were no concerns from residents about cladding expressed on the 12th of july 2012.
02:41:47 well the the the consultation meetings evening meetings weren't the only part of the consultation as i suggested earlier there was a project
02:41:56 project room set up at the base of grenfell tower displaying the proposal of the scheme uh there was the questionnaire sent out to residents as well so i'm taking
02:42:07 as well so i'm taking assuming that that meant that all parts of the consultation were taken in consideration and not just this evening consultation so notwithstanding this information related to what
02:42:19 this information related to what happened on the 12th of july meeting where only 10d came your evidence is that there was no concern from residents about cladding
02:42:30 concern from residents about cladding and that was due to other sources of information from the consultation exercise yes now can we now compare the draft newsletter of the 15th of july 2012 and its final version the draft and if
02:42:44 and its final version the draft and if i'd asked the opus operator to show these side by side the reference for the draft is tmo double zero eight three seven six one six
02:42:53 six and the final version is tmo one triple zero one four zero one forward slash forty two
02:43:13 now
02:43:17 the the draft is on the left hand side of the screen and you can see there in the right hand
02:43:28 and you can see there in the right hand column
02:43:29 column the draft included questions put to resident and the number of the responses and now if we look at the final newsletter you see that
02:43:42 newsletter you see that it only has the conclusions drawn from the responses and it may help to de-amplify
02:43:48 the final version on the right hand side
02:43:55 there we go now do you agree
02:44:01 yes they're different yeah now looking at the third question in the draft it said what do you think the external cladding should look like
02:44:12 cladding should look like colourful robust white aluminium not reflective leave as is not sure now if we look at the published newsletter of the 15th of july in the right-hand column fourth point
02:44:24 in the right-hand column fourth point down it says there is no clear opinion about the color or type of external cladding sorry that's it
02:44:31 that's it if i can ask for tmo one triple zero one four zero one thirty three to be put up for that purpose
02:44:52 i don't think that's the right reference what we should have is one one treble zero one four zero one
02:45:03 one treble zero one four zero one forward slash thirty three
02:45:10 go forward on a page right fourth point down it says there is no clear opinion about
02:45:21 it says there is no clear opinion about the color
02:45:22 the color or type of external cladding do you agree yes
02:45:26 agree yes now looking at the questions which residents were actually asked do you agree that residents were not consulted on the type of cladding they were simply asked about the color
02:45:37 were simply asked about the color and it may help if the opus operator puts up the draft which is tmo double zero eight three seven six one six
02:46:02 so just waiting for that to be put on the screen
02:46:12 and if the right hands are there we go
02:46:16 so refreshing your memory looking at the questions are actually asked do you agree that residents were not consulted on the type of cladding and do refresh your memory looking at that document for your answer yes i i recall this because
02:46:30 yes i i recall this because the reason we were discussing colour schemes is because there was a clear preference from the planning department i was advised from studio e of the type of color that should be
02:46:42 of the type of color that should be displayed on the building and they wanted quite vibrant colors throughout the building escalating up to the top
02:46:54 escalating up to the top that wasn't consulted with the residents and part of the consultation is what your colour schemes and part of the consultation that we did we had various different colour charts
02:47:05 we had various different colour charts available along with the samples of the cladding that then residents can give a preference
02:47:14 my question was do you agree that residents were not consulted in relation to the type of cladding at this particular newsletter it didn't say that but they were advised the types of cladding because as
02:47:26 advised the types of cladding because as i suggested er there was different samples available for them to feel touch and pass their opinion on now can you explain the discrepancy between the question
02:47:37 between the question asked and the conclusion drawn in the final version of the newsletter so
02:47:44 so the final version the newsletter which is on the left hand side of the screen says four points down there is no clear opinion about the color or type of external cladding
02:47:56 looking over the right hand screen which shows
02:47:59 shows the draft
02:48:03 the draft they were only asked about the color weren't they
02:48:08 on the questionnaire that went out they were asked about the color yes and so can you explain how the conclusion was reached that there was no clear opinion on the type of external cladding given that the
02:48:21 type of external cladding given that the type of external cladding was not a question asked in the questionnaire um as i said the the samples the questionnaire put out was specific questions
02:48:32 questions that would try to target the residents feel of the color scheme of the of the display for the tower
02:48:42 and the samples were available for residents to feel and touch uh and perhaps it was before or after this meeting that that that happened can you help us whether it was when the
02:48:53 can you help us whether it was when the samples were shown to residents was it before or after i can't 15th of july i i would have to follow a sequence on some of these newsletters to get a bit of better understanding okay now can we just look at the
02:49:05 okay now can we just look at the draft on the far right hand side and you'll see the final question is would you like windows that you could clean yourself
02:49:12 yourself yes six no preference one now compare that to the published version the newsletter on the left hand side of the screen where it says quotes you do not have a clear
02:49:24 quotes you do not have a clear preference about whether residents should clean the windows or kc tmo now again can you give an explanation as to the apparent discrepancy between the answer in the draft
02:49:36 between the answer in the draft and the answer as summarized in the final version the i would put my version of a draft newsletter together that then went to management team mark anderson and then
02:49:48 management team mark anderson and then finally went to the communications team and that's my only explanation of how the changes in the format and some of the content would be different so is that possibly another question for
02:49:59 so is that possibly another question for mr anderson yeah i suggest
02:50:04 could i ask the opus operator to take down tm00
02:50:09 down tm00 but leave the other document on the screen
02:50:14 and could i ask the opus operator to take us to page 42 within the document on the screen
02:50:24 and go back to that's the newsletter of the 9th of august 2012 and you'll see their reference to a consultation on the 26th of july and then the newsletter reports external
02:50:35 and then the newsletter reports external cladding proposal favorable to residents seem to be for profiled zinc although we seem to have some feedback on the type of cladding it is still undecided on your preferred colour for the clyding for the cladding again just for the
02:50:49 for the cladding again just for the sake of completeness how did you conclude that residents had a preference for profiled zinc cladding um it will probably be through the consultation meetings that we have with
02:51:02 residents probably did you say yeah i i i i can only assume that through the evening consultation meetings and some of the feedback we've had from residents
02:51:14 of the feedback we've had from residents they expressed their preferred option as being the been cladding thank you now can i turn to the question of conversation with residents um you provided your contact details and the various newsletters
02:51:25 the various newsletters did residents contact you to ask about the detail of the regeneration project yes there were residents who contacted me about the project yes do you recall um promising ed defan
02:51:37 do you recall um promising ed defan during a meeting with residents in 2013 that residents would be consulted with and given the opportunity to view and comment on a variety of different windows and cladding options yes and that also the tmo would
02:51:48 options yes and that also the tmo would be open to engaging with residents and taking on board their feedback yes when you left the tmo did you tell either david gibson peter madison or anyone else at the tmo that you had promised that meeting to mr
02:52:00 that you had promised that meeting to mr defan
02:52:02 defan i i actually met mr stefan so the promise was probably been fulfilled and
02:52:08 and as for handover for peter madison i gave a full handover document to peter madison which included resident consultation thank you now during your time on the
02:52:21 thank you now during your time on the project there were changes to cladding and window options shown to residents and before leaving in july 2013 did you as part of the handover you provided for mr madison
02:52:33 mr madison provide or suggest that residents be notified of any proposed changes and given the option to select alternatives no i think that would be part of the design team
02:52:45 design team and why do you think that would be part of the design team's role because there was various different displays and um types of operation of the windows that were available so they would be best placed to give that information yes
02:52:57 that information yes um now as part of your role you were um tasked with liaising with residents about matters regarding the block and the refurbishment aspects of the refurbishment that were of concern to them
02:53:07 them is that a fair summary yes would you agree that it would be reasonable for residents to contact you regarding the status of planning applications for the refurbishment yes they did yes um could i ask you to
02:53:19 yes they did yes um could i ask you to turn up
02:53:22 tm00849
02:53:29 thank you page 5 within that thank you now on the 28th of march 2013 at 1501 hours
02:53:40 march 2013 at 1501 hours ed defahn forwarded to you an email exchange of francis o'connor about consultation on calc he then asked for an update regarding the planning application for grenfell you forwarded the email exchange to david gibson on the 9th of april
02:53:53 david gibson on the 9th of april at 1622 and that's at page 4 of this chain
02:53:57 chain if we go up to that and if that could be
02:54:04 expanded
02:54:08 there you go actually it's the email scroll down
02:54:19 no
02:54:23 can you scroll down a bit more
02:54:27 excuse me might just come back to this question
02:54:37 if i'm could i just ask the opus operators go up to page three
02:54:49 operators go up to page three now i'll come back to this so that the um email
02:54:52 um email reference can be checked can i turn on to complaints about lack of consultation um i now want to deal with concerns raised by residents during the planning for grenfell tower and if i could ask the opus operator to
02:55:04 and if i could ask the opus operator to turn up rbk triple zero four five six four two
02:55:12 [Music] and page six within that
02:55:19 and this is uh email dated the 12th of july 2012
02:55:22 july 2012 sent by tunde awadera of the gtla the organization referring to earlier and he sent it a complaint to you and if we could scroll down so we can see the substance of that
02:55:36 further can we scroll down so we can see the substance of it where he said in the second paragraph there is clearly an established lack of
02:55:47 there is clearly an established lack of a communication from the k and ctmo the tenant led organization and their sub agents since we did not receive the appointment of studio e letter before we pointed out that we'd not received it did you only send the letter
02:56:00 received it did you only send the letter of the fourth of july confirming the appointment to studio e after gtla had requested it i don't recall the timing of sending a letter sorry
02:56:12 letter sorry um had you tried to include gtla in consultations with residents before their letter was sent to you um i i was in when i was involved i tried
02:56:25 i i was in when i was involved i tried to
02:56:25 to do communication with all the residents prior to my involvement and the appointment of studio e i'm not entirely sure what consultation was with residents at that stage can you help us as to whether any
02:56:36 can you help us as to whether any consideration had been given at that stage as to whether leaseholders would be charged for the works of grenfell at that time
02:56:42 that time so i know i wasn't involved in that part of the scheme
02:56:50 now can i talk about complaint about doors consultation and maintenance of fire safety systems and if i could turn to tm00837229
02:57:13 thank you on page three on that chain i say hopefully and tunde owadera wrote to david ward on behalf of the gtla after receiving david ward's letter
02:57:24 after receiving david ward's letter that's the 11th of october we don't need to go to it for these purposes now david ward had written to all leaseholders notifying their responsibility to ensure their front door was compliant with fire safety regulations you were
02:57:35 with fire safety regulations you were copied into that email now he raised concerns about exclusion of leaseholders from the fire fire door replacement program the failure to notify leaseholders for 19
02:57:47 failure to notify leaseholders for 19 months that their flat entrance doors may not be fully compliant the tmo's lack of maintenance of fire systems
02:57:53 systems and a lack of consultation on improvements to the tower now your response is on the 14th of december 2012 and could be found at tmo
02:58:10 and page 2 of that chain
02:58:21 now if we can scroll up to page one there we go that shows it's from you and if we could uh ask a few questions in relation to
02:58:32 uh ask a few questions in relation to that can you remember why you were chosen to respond to his complaint um as i said earlier i was part of the administration to help manage the project and part that
02:58:43 to help manage the project and part that was looking at some of the complaints and concerns from residents and did you seek contributions from anyone else in preparing the response you sent to
02:58:52 to miss awadero on the 14th of december 2012
02:58:55 2012 yes i think i would have saw was some guidance from um from the tmo on this uh from janice ray yes
02:59:04 yes uh from daniel ward yes can you help us what daniel ward's role was um daniel ward as i believe was you'd have to give me was some time ago
02:59:15 you'd have to give me was some time ago he was part of the leaseholder service team
02:59:18 team i forgot his job title sorry did you have any direct knowledge from your work on the fire door replacement program as to why there was such a long delay in notifying leaseholders after the tenant's doors were replaced
02:59:30 tenant's doors were replaced no sorry i i said earlier i picked this project up to the tail end when it was coming to a conclusion so i'm not entirely sure what consultation had gone on prior to my involvement
02:59:42 had gone on prior to my involvement thank you so that might be a convenient place at which to stop well it would seem very suitable then thank you very much mr duncan it's one o'clock time we had a break so that everyone can get some
02:59:53 break so that everyone can get some lunch
02:59:54 lunch so we'll stop now we'll start again please at two o'clock and please remember not to talk to anyone about your evidence or anything to do with it over the break thank you all right
03:00:05 all right thank you very much would you give the usher then please
03:00:16 good two o'clock thanks thank you
03:00:57 you