Evidence from Claire Williams (TMO) regarding the infamous 'Lakanal moment' email of November 2014. Reveals TMO knew of fire risks from cladding but failed to act on concerns raised about flame retardance.
00:00:15 yes would you ask ms williams to come back in please
00:00:35 all right miss williams ready to go on yes yes thank you mr chairman miss williams
00:00:39 williams um this morning during your evidence about the fire consultant you told us and it's at page 77 of today day 55 that a dda consultant
00:00:53 that a dda consultant had been appointed eventually yes is that your recollection yes it was first specifically for the new build
00:01:01 new build flats right who was the dda consultant um i think it was a lady's name i think it was jane somebody it was via studio e
00:01:13 it was via studio e via studio e yes it was a dda compliancy for the new flats and when was the dda consultant appointed do you remember
00:01:24 remember no i'm afraid i don't remember at what stage in the in the project do you recall i would suspect not till 15 but i i can't what is your understanding
00:01:37 but i i can't what is your understanding of a dda consultant and their role the its disability discrimination act it was looking at the
00:01:50 act it was looking at the the layout of the new flats to make sure they may
00:01:54 they may met their requirements which would be about accessibility would a dda consultant normally be able or be expected to comment or make
00:02:05 or be expected to comment or make recommendations about issues like access or exit for disabled people
00:02:13 yes and i believe they did because there was issues over the main front door the dda consultant that was eventually retained for the grenade tower project now that you recall it
00:02:24 now that you recall it um i think you say it was really in relation to the new flats those are on the lower floors weren't they that's right yes were they instructed to to consider dda issues more generally
00:02:36 issues more generally no they wouldn't why is that because the rest of the building was an existing occupied building and the contract
00:02:48 and the contract didn't impinge on many of the existing tenancies
00:02:56 does the name claire wise mean anything to you
00:03:04 to you i'm not sure i i don't know if it's my name so
00:03:08 name so i'm not sure
00:03:12 right let me see it's your name because you're claire as well yes but i can't think of it right okay um
00:03:20 do you know whether well who was responsible within the tn the tmo for retaining the dda consultant that you remember was retained
00:03:31 you remember was retained the dda consultant i'm talking about was required
00:03:35 required in terms of the building contract in the new build flats the tmo would not have retained a dda expert if we had residents who had an
00:03:46 expert if we had residents who had an occupational therapy requirement if they needed their flats amended then we would go to the local authority rbkc whose occupational therapist
00:03:54 therapist provided that support to existing residents right that i think was clear wise was that yeah you don't know all right the name might be familiar but there are many people i dealt with right but that
00:04:05 many people i dealt with right but that person the rbkc occupational therapist was not a dda consultant was it or she no no they were an occupational therapist yeah no um so there was no dda consultant
00:04:17 no um so there was no dda consultant in respect of the remainder of the refurbishment is that right that's right yes and we've seen references repeated through the progress meetings from april
00:04:28 from april until october of 2014 not only of the intention to appoint a fire consultant but also a dda consultant it looks as if it was on the radar repeatedly for
00:04:39 it was on the radar repeatedly for months but then fell off the radar come november 2014. do you know why that was
00:04:45 was i believe you would only appoint them at the time you had the information available
00:04:50 available which is why i suspect it was 15 because they would want to actually look at the physical flats that were built so
00:04:57 built so that's why i suspect it was 15 because there'd be something tangible for them to look at rather than just a planned form do you actually know anything about the circumstances in which a dda consultant was
00:05:08 consultant was appointed i had understood from studio e in early days that it was part of our planning requirement
00:05:23 yes that's not an answer to my question my question again do you actually know anything
00:05:28 anything from your own knowledge or and recollection of the events about the circumstances in which as you told us this morning a dda consultant was appointed
00:05:41 only would have just said that it was via studio e for the contract so you can't really help us beyond that i see
00:05:49 i see [Applause] were you we've understood from your statement as i showed you i think before that your role was to be focused on the residents
00:05:58 residents yes did you ever undertake any um survey of residents physical abilities disabilities and needs and in order to understand
00:06:11 needs and in order to understand better their requirements in the event of a need to evacuate the building
00:06:17 no why is that
00:06:22 the residents who were there were quite an established group um
00:06:30 group um they would have been in a similar situation if there was a fire beforehand and residents would have to
00:06:41 and residents would have to self-refer if they needed medical help advice to the appropriate authority so i wouldn't have been the appropriate party i see so even though you were
00:06:53 party i see so even though you were resident focused you tell us it wasn't your role
00:06:56 your role to understand the individual needs of each resident i would have been aware of the any issues which would have impacted on
00:07:07 issues which would have impacted on access for the building contract but otherwise know they're an existing group of tenants residents and that they would if they had any
00:07:17 had any medical issues they would have to self-refer or maybe the housing manager would refer them to um occupational therapist or for a medical transfer if that was required maybe you can't help us with
00:07:30 required maybe you can't help us with this
00:07:30 this question and maybe it's a question for a later module ms williams but was there anybody within the tmo who was responsible for understanding the physical needs
00:07:42 the physical needs and abilities and disabilities of the residents
00:07:46 residents when considering means of escape
00:07:52 it's a question i don't think i can answer i i don't know don't know did you know that res that ryden themselves undertook a residence
00:08:03 residence profiling exercise and provided their results to the tmo yes who do they provide them to housing management apart from anybody
00:08:15 housing management apart from anybody who
00:08:16 who would need help in order to facilitate the contract i don't understand who did sorry let's
00:08:28 i don't understand who did sorry let's try again
00:08:29 try again who did whom did ryden provide the results of their survey to that was the housing management team and who is that um it would siobhan rumble at the time was
00:08:40 it would siobhan rumble at the time was the
00:08:40 the housing management lead and also the neighborhood housing officer who was jan jones
00:08:51 i take it from those names and that answer that that wasn't something with which you were concerned
00:08:57 concerned as i say we identified people who had needs
00:09:01 needs which meant that we needed to help them during the building contract i follow but not but not after not after the works were finished and the building
00:09:12 the works were finished and the building was in occupation no as you say it was my involvement with understanding the residents needs was in relation to getting the building contract works completed i'm going to turn to a different topic
00:09:24 i'm going to turn to a different topic uh and just to say the topic i've just covered with you is one which to which we may return to module three just so people don't think that it's
00:09:31 that it's that that's it um lachlan moments um i want to ask you about your internal knowledge and
00:09:42 your internal knowledge and communications about the latin house fire during the currency of the grenfell tower project so that's where we're going with this before i get into the detail can i just ask you some general questions about what you knew about lachnal
00:09:54 knew about lachnal because you've mentioned it a number of times in your statements um so that we're clear what we're talking about do you understand that there was a fire in july 2009
00:10:06 that there was a fire in july 2009 in a building called lachnal house in camberwell in south london yes yes uh as a result of which six people lost their lives yes do you remember when you first became aware of the latino house fire
00:10:19 became aware of the latino house fire i believe i saw it on television in july 2009
00:10:24 2009 yes right
00:10:27 did you follow what happened after that by which i mean the inquest
00:10:34 inquest and then the recommendations after the inquest no you didn't at the time you were appointed to the tmo
00:10:41 tmo which was in the september of 2013 just looking at other fires for a moment were you aware of other fires that had occurred in clad
00:10:52 of other fires that had occurred in clad high-rise buildings such as noseley heights
00:10:55 heights in 1991. no what about garnet court in irvine in scotland in 1999. what about cladding fires in high-rise residential buildings in other parts of
00:11:06 residential buildings in other parts of the world
00:11:06 the world for example dubai no no what about um and this is later this is 2014 the la crosse fire in melbourne have you heard of that
00:11:20 coming back to lachnall in your 23rd of february
00:11:24 february 2020 statement uh you say that you attended a seminar on the latino house fire organized by rbkc um would you like to look at that that's
00:11:35 um would you like to look at that that's um tmo double zero eight six six five eight zero uh at page two paragraph six
00:11:51 uh page one paragraph six um that you say i'm i'm unable to recall whether the presentation referred to above
00:11:59 above which appears to have taken place on 10th of january 2014 was the presentation i described a paragraph for of this statement i'm i'm taking this slightly backwards because that that's the effect of the evidence
00:12:09 evidence but if you look at paragraph four of the statement please on page one higher up
00:12:16 um you refer that to paragraph 66 of your 20th of january statement where you recall attending a presentation on lachel house i've been able to recall the date of this presentation uh i do recall that it was organized by
00:12:28 uh i do recall that it was organized by the rbkc and held at the town hall i also recall the presentation was led by a man however i can't recall what organization he was from i believe there were between 15 and 20 people in attendance at the time i attended this presentation i was fairly
00:12:40 attended this presentation i was fairly new
00:12:41 new to the tmo
00:12:44 um you recall this um this presentation do you remember whether it was compulsory for you to attend or whether you volunteered i was invited i think via the health and
00:12:57 i was invited i think via the health and safety manager who'd asked my manager does does anyone to go and i think it was said that it was important that i attended obviously because it was a high-rise block right
00:13:09 it was a high-rise block right um and the date of the presentation you say was january 2014 if we go to tm010040126
00:13:22 if we go to tm010040126 we can see that there's a bit of a run-up to it this is an email
00:13:31 from janice ray to peter madison and others at the tmo you see it's dated the 18th of november 2013.
00:13:41 2013. you see that yes now you're not copied in on it but it describes a seminar describes a seminar uh which one might be the one that you you went to
00:13:53 be the one that you you went to she says hi all laura johnson has suggested we consider approaching david crowder
00:13:57 crowder from the building research establishment and arranged for him to come and talk to us about his extensive investigation into the fire at lachnal house
00:14:05 house whilst it has acknowledged that we have no blocks of a similar design there are clearly lessons for all landlords cause is why and how the fire spread
00:14:12 spread issues related to refurbishment works on the block etc so we are keen to arrange this briefing robert has asked me to identify which tma staff should be invited to attend this and so i would be grateful if you could
00:14:23 and so i would be grateful if you could advise me of the offices from your team who you would wish to nominate see that yes
00:14:29 yes um did the training that you went to cover causes of fire and where and how the fire spread and issues relating to refurbishment works that janis
00:14:36 janis ray describes there
00:14:41 i yes probably yes was there a view within the tma that there were no blocks of a similar design in the tma stock
00:14:53 that's what janice has said so i assume so
00:14:57 so did you connect what you learned at the seminar with the refurbishment project for grenfell tower
00:15:05 what i had taken forward onto grenfell as a result of the seminar was about the internal ventilation system where the people who
00:15:17 system where the people who unfortunately died were in a bathroom whether
00:15:21 whether an internal bathroom where the ventilation system wasn't working as it was
00:15:29 was proposed because somebody higher up on the
00:15:32 the the building had installed an extractor fan
00:15:35 fan which meant that the system was similar to grenfell that it had a roof mounted fan so it extracted from all the internal bathrooms and what happened at lucknow was that somebody had put an extraction
00:15:47 was that somebody had put an extraction fan somewhere on the block and so their air wasn't properly extracted so they they didn't get the benefit of that properly working system so what i did
00:15:59 properly working system so what i did take forward to grand fault was when we cleaned all the air ducts of our internal bathrooms that ryden were instructed to remove any extractor fans was that did did you make any connection
00:16:10 was that did did you make any connection in your mind between exterior cladding and lachlan house no and i have to say i don't remember an exterior briefing it could be that i came in a bit late but what i took away
00:16:22 came in a bit late but what i took away from that session was about the internal fans in the bathroom about the layout of the flat where they had an alternative means of escape right so i i don't know whether it was i
00:16:33 right so i i don't know whether it was i missed the outside bit or whether it
00:16:38 wasn't um something that caught my imagination but i don't think so i i understood about the internals i don't remember anything on the external files was there any other presentation you went to or document
00:16:50 presentation you went to or document you saw after january 2014 but before let's say november 2014 which led you to draw a connection
00:17:02 which led you to draw a connection between lachen or house the event and cladding specifically exterior rain screens
00:17:09 screens no right
00:17:15 before i come to a document then let me just ask you one or two remaining questions about about la canal itself did you know at the time you came into the project in september 2013 that in the march of that
00:17:26 september 2013 that in the march of that year
00:17:27 year the coroner at the lacanal inquest had recommended retrofitting sprinklers into existing housing stock no you didn't
00:17:35 didn't no do you know whether during your time on the grenfell tower project
00:17:43 project you were ever involved in any discussions about retrofitting sprinklers as part of the grenfell tower refurbishment i think it was discussed with the fire brigade
00:17:55 brigade and i i think there were different views
00:18:02 and there were concerns as to the effectiveness of sprinkler systems and whether
00:18:13 of sprinkler systems and whether the fire brigade recommended them i think there was still a dichotomy of opinion as to whether they were always appropriate
00:18:25 whether they were always appropriate you see a dichotomy of opinion that means a split yes a split between the tml on the one hand and london fire brigade on the other or within the london fire brigade itself
00:18:34 itself within the discussion group yes who was on the discussion group um
00:18:41 within the fire brigade it would have been the people i met at the um the bi-monthly meetings but i think we also discussed it as a project group and again i think there were different
00:18:53 and again i think there were different views and
00:18:55 views and um but there was no clear suggestion that it would be
00:19:03 a usable system was the question of the cost of retrofitting sprinklers part of the consideration no we were looking at the principle i don't think a cost was ever mentioned
00:19:17 given the size of the budget for the grenfell tower refurbishment was it ever realistic to consider retrofitting sprinklers into this building
00:19:27 building i i think the budget would have been a lesser consideration if we'd needed it as part of a fire safety regime we hadn't had any um recommendations to
00:19:40 we hadn't had any um recommendations to put it in nobody had um promoted it as part of a legal arrangement so i i think if we've been told this is the legislation you have to do it the budget
00:19:52 legislation you have to do it the budget would have been found it was clear right through 2013 that it wasn't part of the legislation i think that's probably universally accepted was there ever to your knowledge a cost benefit
00:20:05 to your knowledge a cost benefit analysis
00:20:07 analysis ever applied to the grenfell tower project when it came to the retrofitting of sprinklers not in my time not not right then let's go to art
00:20:18 then let's go to art four eight
00:20:25 this is an email exchange between you philip booth and nick valente the latter two both from artelia on the 12th of november 2014
00:20:38 and these i'd like to start with the second email down on that page this is an email from you on that day to philip booth and nick valente chaps
00:20:49 to philip booth and nick valente chaps you say and then it has two topics windows and then cladding i just want to look at cladding with you i've been look just been looking at the cladding as our database is asking for
00:21:01 cladding as our database is asking for costs
00:21:02 costs i've put something together however i do not know
00:21:05 not know if there is any issue of flame retardance requirement i know at lachnal house one issue was that the replacement paneling for the asbestos cladding was not flame retardant i don't know if
00:21:17 was not flame retardant i don't know if this is in the specification but want to make sure it is raised please advise [Applause] what was it about your investigation of the costs of the cladding that led you
00:21:29 the costs of the cladding that led you to consider whether the rhino bond acm cassette fix panels
00:21:34 panels that you'd been intimately involved in choosing all through the summer of 2014 were fire retardant i don't know that i was intimately involved in choosing them but um
00:21:47 in choosing them but um in terms of our database i wonder if there'd been a flag put up in another column saying is it flame retardant
00:21:58 saying is it flame retardant i i that would probably be what would flag it up to me so just exploring that this flag in another column in your database
00:22:09 another column in your database just explain that to us what what is this column and how does it work um i i i don't know if it exists but i i would
00:22:18 would suggest that that might have been added by janice ray sorry what would have been added another column that the database was the stock condition database which
00:22:31 was the stock condition database which um was done by block and it would have the different components so it's a roof flat or pitched tile or slate so it would be a tick box database so it would say windows
00:22:42 box database so it would say windows single glaze double glazed aluminium frame timber frame whatever so i think that there may have been a external envelope masonry cladding
00:22:55 a external envelope masonry cladding and then they could have been another box because i i probably wouldn't have thought of it unless i'd seen
00:23:05 a box i i but i am speculating which i know
00:23:09 know isn't appropriate but that's the only reason i can think why i would have asked because they'd added another column
00:23:14 column after advice well let's just see if we can
00:23:18 can get the best of your recollections to what actually happened by looking at the first sentence closely you say i have just been looking at the cladding as and this is the explanation our
00:23:29 as and this is the explanation our database is asking for costs now when you say our database is asking for costs
00:23:35 for costs what does that mean what's it referring to
00:23:39 to it was quite a clunky system and it was asking for i think it was cost per square meter it was
00:23:52 just trying to establish maybe a benchmark but as we hadn't any other building of this level of cladding i suspect it was for data purposes only
00:24:03 suspect it was for data purposes only so it was asking you just just to give an indicative price because then because it was for stock data condition it would then work out um would you call it that their capital
00:24:14 it that their capital cost of replacement or think what the word is
00:24:18 word is yeah so it would look at what the the capital cost of replacement is in 20 years time it's that sort of thing just to give them a figure to work i see so you go into the database what were you doing in the database to
00:24:30 what were you doing in the database to start with what were you looking at it for
00:24:32 for um it was part of my role to update the information in the database every time we change things for example i added the new flats into the database and you're telling us i think that when
00:24:43 and you're telling us i think that when you went to the database it asked for costs but then put up a flag which prompted you to go and look at the clatting is that what you're saying i suspect would have said external
00:24:55 i suspect would have said external envelope solid masonry cavity masonry cladding and then i see i follow so you then go and look at the cladding
00:25:06 at the cladding next question then is when you say i've just been looking at the cladding what were you looking at effectively i would have been looking at it all but this was one that i
00:25:18 but this was one that i um was less familiar with and so i i was checking i had the cost there but so i was just asking at the same time
00:25:31 so i was just asking at the same time because i think it flagged up about fire and so i was saying i've just been looking at this but it was for the reason of actually putting in the cost for capital depreciation that's the word um
00:25:45 capital depreciation that's the word um but i hadn't done anything with the area that said about flame retardants and that was why i was asking our employers agent
00:25:57 was asking our employers agent so if there was any any issue that i needed to do to include in our database but it was also a prompt to them to check
00:26:07 right so to from that answer do we take it that somebody who designed the database within the tmo had made the connection between cladding
00:26:20 had made the connection between cladding and fire retardancy as a question to ask i believe so i would have to look at the database again and i hope this isn't something that i'm um putting tuned to
00:26:32 something that i'm um putting tuned to together and making five but i i think that was why the flame retardance issue came up because the database may have flanked it well you see and again we don't want to trespass on either
00:26:44 trespass on either a bad memory or speculation but you go to the database because it asks for cost so you go and look at the cladding what i want to know is whether what you looked at on the cladding was what
00:26:56 looked at on the cladding was what prompted you to ask about flame retardants or whether the database asked about flame retardants yeah no i believe the database had something that would say is there any issue of flame returns or
00:27:08 is there any issue of flame returns or something of that sort about fire and that's probably what would have done it but it could have been that i put in cladding and then this i thought oh hold on i haven't asked them this
00:27:18 this so it could have been either on i thought i'm on i thought i can't thank guarantee all right um i i i i either way so say something asked you to ask about
00:27:29 so say something asked you to ask about flame retardance so you say it could have been the database raising it as a flag or it could have been whatever you were looking at about cladding just on that last point just pressing it a little bit more what was it you think you looked at
00:27:41 you looked at by way of the cladding was it a specification was it the hard material the mock-ups you'd had
00:27:49 you'd had in the june of that year what was it i was looking at it just as a phrase because i had to complete how many square meters it was and what the cost per square meter was it would be of that right extent so you
00:28:01 it would be of that right extent so you hadn't looked at a separate document or separate thing no i'm just looking at a word on a spreadsheet that says external envelope now was this a question that you had
00:28:12 now was this a question that you had raised earlier when talking to ryden about the acm panels and your discussions with the planners back in the may and june of 2014 that year
00:28:21 year no i hadn't asked it before
00:28:26 um and you refer in the second line there to
00:28:30 there to an issue of flame retardance requirement what did you mean by requirement
00:28:38 uh i would i was asking probably about the regulations that covered the cladding did you know there were regulations which covered the cladding
00:28:49 i know there's something in the specification and i know there's the discussion about class o so i know there is something but i'm not clear exactly what right and what was it about the costs
00:29:01 right and what was it about the costs issue that led you to think about the regulatory issue
00:29:06 i yeah i don't think it was the cast it was just that i was filling in a line on a database that said cladding i had to input the cost and obviously this issue of flame retardance came up
00:29:18 retardance came up so it wasn't actually the cost that was the main driver it was the fact that i had to input it into the database do you remember whether the database flag that you've referred to which could have been the prompt for
00:29:29 which could have been the prompt for this referred to a requirement regulatory or statutory requirement no it was a big database it would have had maybe two or three words on it right so is it you that added the word
00:29:40 right so is it you that added the word requirement in there yes i see so you saw flame retardants and you thought well there may be a requirement for that is that right yes i'm just trying to i honestly can't
00:29:51 yes i'm just trying to i honestly can't remember how the database was phrased but i think there may have been a flag on it that would have asked about
00:29:58 about it so i'm just taking this forward and taking this database as an electronic document it is it's the um property
00:30:11 it is it's the um property database for the whole organization it's online it's not a paper document it's totally online and it because it's about capital depreciation you you put in well and also for
00:30:22 you you put in well and also for maintenance use etc you put in what what the building comprises and then that then can throw out many figures in terms of what you'd expect from a maintenance program
00:30:33 expect from a maintenance program what would you did you give this database a name or nickname um
00:30:40 it was keystone was the over riding name i think yeah well we we know about that database and we may have to look into it yeah to see whether what you're saying
00:30:53 yeah to see whether what you're saying reflects what's in the in in that electronic piece of work now if we move on to the reply to philip booth this is at page one of
00:31:05 to philip booth this is at page one of this email chain and this is timed the same day at 4 55 back to you and he says hi claire i'm delighted to hear you've delivered the contract big master
00:31:16 you've delivered the contract big master achieved
00:31:18 achieved and then in the third paragraph he deals with your cladding request he said i had a quick review of the nbs spec in the tender docs for cladding and it does specify the cladding must comply with the following standards one of which i would anticipate requires
00:31:30 one of which i would anticipate requires flame retardance however as as client i suggest you seek clarification from ryden um and then he sets out something which looks as if
00:31:41 looks as if and indeed philip booth confirmed this in his evidence this was a cut and paste from the nba specification itself is that right yes it is
00:31:52 and
00:31:58 uh
00:32:03 yeah can we then go to the next document which is ryd3023468 please
00:32:20 and this is a few minutes later same day where you write to simon lawrence copy to philip booth subject grenfell cladding simon i'm just
00:32:31 subject grenfell cladding simon i'm just writing to get clarification on the fire retardance of the new cladding i just had a lachnal moment and you spelt it
00:32:41 double l-a-c-k-n-a-double-l there just not the spelling um why did you think that that knob was spelt like that
00:32:50 i i don't know i think it's about many different ways in different correspondence but i i understand it is the wrong spelling right did you always spell it like that or did you spell it in various different ways
00:33:02 in various different ways i i probably would have spout i would have spelled it in different ways over a period i think i would spell it differently now right yes it's l-a-k-a-n-a-l isn't it
00:33:13 right yes it's l-a-k-a-n-a-l isn't it now
00:33:13 now yes that is the true spelling um this isn't about your spelling i'll come to the reference and relevance of the spelling perhaps later on but looking at this email you say you've just had a latin moment
00:33:25 you say you've just had a latin moment and we can see below that the specification that he sent you and it looks like you copied and pasted this from philip booth's email is that right yes i see
00:33:37 now can we go to your 20th of january statement of page 14 please i'd like to get a paragraph 66 in that
00:33:50 document and you say there as stated above i do not recall sending these emails until being shown them recently however when i refer to having a latino moment i cannot recall what prompted
00:34:01 moment i cannot recall what prompted this
00:34:02 this now but do recall attending a briefing at rbkc about a fire that took place at latino house and it is possible that this was prompted this is which prompted and it was this which prompted
00:34:14 prompted and it was this which prompted me to raise this with the professionals listed above i did not recall now that i received a written response from simon lawrence however
00:34:20 however i believe i would have had a response now we asked simon lawrence about this when he came to give his evidence i just want to show you two extracts
00:34:31 i just want to show you two extracts from his
00:34:32 from his transcript first can we go to day 24 page
00:34:35 page 164 please
00:34:44 he says at line one
00:34:49 line one we have no record of any response by you to her question or request for clarification if i can put it that way is that right did you respond
00:34:57 respond answer we can't find any record of it so i
00:35:01 i no question on the basis that there isn't any record of a response by you why is there no record of any response by you to her lacking a moment question and his answer is i don't know i would have i would have assumed that i would
00:35:13 have i would have assumed that i would have taken that email because i wouldn't have answered it directly and i would have passed that to probably harley's so whether there's other emails around the date or not connected i don't know normally i would have expected just to
00:35:24 normally i would have expected just to take that email and i would forward that straight to harley's and i would keep claire copied in so if there was any backwards and forwards correspondence then it would be and i presumably it's the question you've had
00:35:35 the question you've had quite a long time before today to think about this email yes and i've seen it recently
00:35:39 recently etc uh and then if we go over to page 65 165 go to line eight
00:35:51 165 line eight um
00:35:56 he says um
00:36:00 uh i'm sorry it's line four actually i want i would have taken that email because it's not one that i would i could answer from a technical point of view i would take that email and i would pass that on to i think i
00:36:11 and i would pass that on to i think i would have passed that on to harley's question at line eight you think sitting here now you would have done answer at line nine yes if that had come to me now then i would take that and i would pass that straight to harley's and i would keep claire and philip copied in
00:36:23 i would keep claire and philip copied in claire particularly copied in so they could respond accordingly to her because i couldn't provide a response to that
00:36:31 now we see from those two passages that simon lawrence doesn't think that he could answer the question and would have called on harley's for a response copying you in first does that sound
00:36:42 copying you in first does that sound like the way in which simon lawrence would typically have responded to a technical inquiry from you i think it depends on the level of technical
00:36:53 technical inquiry some of the inquiries that were probably more straightforward he would have just been able to respond himself but this one he's obviously saying he would refer it to a specialist
00:37:05 would refer it to a specialist now we've found no record in our documents across all core participants ryden you harley i say you tmo harley or artelia um
00:37:17 harley or artelia um when you say in your witness statement that you believe that you would have had a response what's that belief based on simon was a good administrator
00:37:30 simon was a good administrator he generally didn't leave loose ends and he would normally be quite quick back with a response
00:37:41 and i'm aware that we had a site meeting the following week
00:37:46 and so it would be likely he would have said something to me at that meeting so so about the 20th of november you think
00:37:56 think orally yes i say there was a site meeting
00:37:59 meeting following the following week so i think he would have taken that opportunity to speak to me well you say would have do you have a recollection that he responded to this question of yours no i don't but
00:38:10 question of yours no i don't but generally he was prompt in responsing and responding and to say didn't like to have issues outstanding because obviously i would be asking him
00:38:22 because obviously i would be asking him the question again so i believe he would have given me a verbal answer and what would that answer that you believe he would have given you was he would have said of course it meets those standards of course it meets those standards he
00:38:34 of course it meets those standards he would have said to you of course it meets those standards he doesn't have any recollection of him actually answering that question no no
00:38:44 now we see no written record that you chased this question up
00:38:53 is it possible that you just forgot about it
00:38:57 i believe simon would have given me a verbal response when i saw him at the meeting the following week now presumably by your reference to lachnal you were
00:39:08 by your reference to lachnal you were as i know now referring to the latino house fire in which six people died given that the question you raised was a question raising a serious matter of life safety
00:39:20 of life safety why did you not press ryden for a clear written answer to your clear written question
00:39:32 i in hindsight i wish i had i'd clearly copied in my employer's agent who was there to
00:39:41 ensure the contract was adhered to and also italia had cdmc um response
00:39:54 so i i believe that i had made an open question in an open forum and i believe simon responded
00:40:10 and i believe simon responded now if we go back to the email that prompted this art 408794
00:40:20 under the heading cladding it's page two please of that email run um in the third line sorry third sentence second line you say
00:40:31 sorry third sentence second line you say i know at lachnal house one issue was that the replacement paneling for the asbestos cladding was not flame retardant
00:40:40 retardant now you told us a few moments ago perhaps 10 minutes ago or so this afternoon
00:40:47 afternoon that you in learning about lachnal had not made a connection between the exterior walls build up the rain screen and the fire at latin house what connection were you now making when
00:41:00 what connection were you now making when you sent this email between the fire at latin house and the replacement paneling not being flame retardant
00:41:09 retardant at the presentation
00:41:13 i don't remember anything about the external area but i did work with somebody who'd worked on lachnal house in a previous employment and
00:41:24 in a previous employment and i remember him mentioning that that was one issue that they'd had to respond to in a setting like this
00:41:35 in a setting like this so i just break this down sorry so you'd work with somebody who had worked on latino house who was that somebody um james cousins
00:41:46 who was that somebody um james cousins who worked for apollo right and what what had been their role on lachen house was that in the construction or in the investigation in construction and what what role did
00:41:57 in construction and what what role did the
00:41:59 apollo have on the construction at latin house
00:42:06 i i believe they're a main contractor right
00:42:10 right and your connection between the lack of house fire and the replacement paneling not being flame retardant came from that person did it
00:42:21 retardant came from that person did it yes when did you make that was that as a result of a conversation you've had with uh with james cousins yes when was that conversation um i
00:42:34 yes when was that conversation um i worked with him between 2008 and 2013 and this was towards the end so probably 12 13
00:42:42 12 13 i suspect right now we know that the inquest finished in the january of 2013 and the rule 33 recommendations by the coroner were made at the end of march 2013. do you think the conversation you
00:42:55 2013. do you think the conversation you had with james cousins was up between the march
00:42:58 the march of 2013 and when you joined the tmo in september 2013. the conversation was very circumspect it was very careful
00:43:09 circumspect it was very careful and it was a conversation that was
00:43:17 brief because obviously at the time it was probably still under discussion so my conversation with him wouldn't have been more than five minutes because it was a very
00:43:28 five minutes because it was a very sensitive subject still now i can understand that but a question was a timing question was it uh was it before march 2013 or after march 2003
00:43:39 march 2003 i i don't know was it before you joined the tma or after you joined the tma it would have been before i joined the team there right
00:43:48 i see was this occasion the first occasion that you were you had as it were put two
00:44:01 that you were you had as it were put two and two together by linking the issue about problem with non-flame retardant rain screen paneling with lack of house and grenfell tower
00:44:17 i suspect so but i didn't know enough about the external of la canal house apart from the picture i'd seen on television despite having this discussion with james cousins
00:44:28 james cousins on this sensitive topic before you join the tmo
00:44:35 it looks very much as if this isn't a discussion you then took forward once you came into the project until mid-november 2014. is that right yes yeah why is that
00:44:47 i hadn't i wasn't clear enough on the external construction of lachner house to
00:44:55 to know there was a similarity or if there was a similarity but it was the word cladding that perhaps
00:45:04 perhaps jolted me to think of maybe this is a good question to ask but you knew right from the very start of your involvement in september 2013 that the grenfell tower refurbishment
00:45:15 that the grenfell tower refurbishment involved overclouding with a rain screen so why did you ask the question only in november 2013 and not in and from september 2013 when you became involved
00:45:26 became involved sorry november 14 i should have said and not in november september 13 when you became involved the
00:45:33 the project had been on the books for a long time
00:45:36 time 2012 and
00:45:40 2012 and there was a professional team on site then there were lots of discussions over the cladding i assumed that at the time that many of those conversations would have been had
00:45:51 conversations would have been had earlier
00:45:52 earlier but then obviously when i was involved the the cladding choices were still at large um but i i've believed on our cladding that
00:46:04 but i i've believed on our cladding that it met class o and it met the regulations but to say this was obviously uh just a double checking here you see you'd had this conversation with
00:46:16 you see you'd had this conversation with james cousins which drew the connection in your mind between the fatal fire at lachel house and rain screen cladding you come into the project you know there's going to be rain screen
00:46:27 you know there's going to be rain screen cladding for grenfell and yet you don't ask the same question earlier than november 2014. why is that the conversation i had with
00:46:39 why is that the conversation i had with james cousins was very sketchy as i say it was very sensitive for all involved but i was aware that that was there
00:46:50 that that was one of the issues that he had been
00:46:53 had been dealing with but i didn't know enough about the lachner house external construction to know that it was a similar type to grenfell i'm not putting two and two
00:47:06 to grenfell i'm not putting two and two together here i'm thinking that this is a cladding issue but i don't know that it's the same as as grandfather and until
00:47:17 as grandfather and until the issue of flame retardance requirement comes up from the database possibly yeah well you say possibly you haven't given us any other explanation exactly
00:47:30 now mr lawrence told us that when uh he got the email he thought the conversation was about
00:47:42 conversation was about cladding on the lower four floors of the building did you have any discussion with mr lawrence around this time about fire retardance of the cladding on the lower four floors
00:47:58 [Applause]
00:48:04 now [Applause] now i want to turn to something that you and david gibson
00:48:15 something that you and david gibson recalled in your witness statements um can we go first to david gibson's witness statement of the 23rd of january 20 to 20.
00:48:26 20. this year at page 18. and i'd like to look with you please a paragraph
00:48:37 paragraph it's quite a long section i'll and i'll read it to you paragraphs 95 to 99. and at 95 he says
00:48:50 i recall however i'll wait wait for it to come up
00:48:55 [Applause] this is a tmo 50887
00:49:07 at page 18. and he says at paragraph 95 i recall however at one of our monthly design development meetings simon lawrence of ryden indicating that there was disparity between the delivery
00:49:18 there was disparity between the delivery times for insulation and rain screen and to avoid delaying the project he indicated their intention to install the insulation first and fit the rain screen later this was the first time i was aware that the two items were separate and it
00:49:29 the two items were separate and it raised some concerns in my mind having then recently read recommendations following the latin house fire inquest where i understood that a gap between the insulation and the rain screen had created a chimney flue effect which
00:49:41 had created a chimney flue effect which contributed to fire spread and had not then fitted any cladding other than the sample that was on display
00:49:46 display i had understood that the sample planning to have rain screen flush with the insulation and it came as a surprise to me to learn that they were fitted separately this was shortly after planning permission had been given for amendments to the windows i raised this with simon
00:49:59 to the windows i raised this with simon lawrence as a matter of serious concern and asked him if he could give some assurance that we would not have a lachenal type problem with the separation of rain screen and insulation and if you turn the page please to page
00:50:11 and if you turn the page please to page 19.
00:50:12 19. in paragraph 99 it continues or he continues the meeting was chaired by philip booth of artelia and simon lawrence assured us that this would create no problem because the materials used were completely inert
00:50:23 completely inert and would not burn at all the meeting accepted his assurances in this regard and nothing came to my notice subsequently prior to the fire to question that these assurances were not accurate
00:50:34 accurate now we'll come back to the question of the minutes which he covers in paragraph 100 following in a moment now you provided your first witness statement to the inquiry
00:50:45 statement to the inquiry in february 2019 didn't you yes i'm 18.
00:50:52 yeah well it's february 2019 i think now um you you do give some evidence in your september
00:50:59 september 2019 statement about this conversation which we'll go to in a moment but when you uh did your first statement to the inquiry
00:51:07 inquiry you didn't recall this conversation at all did you no in my first statement i concentrated or
00:51:16 or we were concentrating on my what i said and what i did
00:51:27 well you don't record this conversation when you prepared your first statement no presumably you didn't record it
00:51:34 record it because you didn't recall it
00:51:38 i think though there was a lot of discussion over what i did when i did it and so it didn't get it wasn't discussed and it wasn't recorded yeah
00:51:49 recorded yeah um a conversation of this nature where ryden were giving the tmo its client an unequivocal assurance that the cladding
00:52:00 cladding was completely inert and would not burn at all
00:52:03 at all would be something that you would have remembered when you saw that building burning that must be right surely no
00:52:14 surely no it wasn't on the top of my mind i had other emotions not that one but it was a long project a lot was discussed we've talked this morning about
00:52:24 about my omitting something about a fire risk assessment there was a lot of material that you could have put in these statements they would have been huge tombs i forgot this it was a
00:52:35 huge tombs i forgot this it was a an oversight which i think was corrected in my second statement
00:52:41 leaving aside the other emotions that you and i'm quite sure all of us felt looking at that building burning in the early morning of the 14th of june 2017 miss williams i have to suggest to you that one of the
00:52:53 i have to suggest to you that one of the thoughts that would have gone through your head
00:52:56 your head had you recalled this meeting at all would have been simon lawrence told me it couldn't burn how come it's burning now do you accept that as a matter of common sense
00:53:08 um no that wasn't uppermost in my mind at the time right so when did you first recall this conversation [Music]
00:53:18 [Music] i believe as we started to be asked other questions or what happened then and we obviously with my legal advice realized there
00:53:28 there were areas of my statement that perhaps should be beefed up because things were omitted
00:53:35 omitted or things were unclear and so at that point
00:53:40 it was one of the items that was if i should have gone in the first statement
00:53:47 statement right can we then go to what you you say in your second statement your september 2019 statement and this is after david gibson had
00:53:58 and this is after david gibson had provided his statement which i've just been reading to you and your september statement is at
00:54:05 tm00842312 and can we go in that please to page 15 paragraph 64.
00:54:13 and you say there i do recall that during an early site meeting my line manager david gibson asked about the performance and fire retardancy of the cladding materials proposed by ryden david's query was whether the
00:54:25 ryden david's query was whether the cladding proposed could have the same effect as the cladding installed at lachen or house should a fire take place
00:54:31 place i recall that he sought assurance from ryden that an incident such as the fire at latin house would not take place now you're you say there that the meeting was an early sight
00:54:43 that the meeting was an early sight meeting by that do you mean a meeting at the tower um it was in a meeting room in a adjacent building yes an adjacent
00:54:55 adjacent building yes an adjacent building
00:54:56 building to the tower yes which building was it
00:55:01 my recollection was that it was what we call the caretakers rooms right
00:55:08 so not in the sight cabins that have been erected or were being erected by ryden but yeah there were no meeting rooms other than those
00:55:19 other than those in existing adjacent buildings david gibson says or said that the meeting was a design development meeting does that mean anything to you we did
00:55:31 does that mean anything to you we did used to talk about design and then have a site meeting or vice versa at the site meeting and then talk about design so i suspect that's what he's suggesting
00:55:43 so i suspect that's what he's suggesting well
00:55:44 well i don't quite understand first of all did you
00:55:48 did you call meetings by name design development meetings
00:55:53 meetings did you did you refer to them as design development meetings i think they were called different things i think they were design reviews at some point
00:56:04 at some point but that that's that's a likely name yes did those happen at site yes in the room you're talking about or different areas this is the building
00:56:16 or different areas this is the building um proceeded it started off in one room then it moved to another room and then it moved into um yeah different rooms that were available
00:56:27 available it it it looks to us from the records that the design team meetings that were minuted by artelia
00:56:34 artelia uh were held at tmo's offices that's generally right isn't it the ones prior to tender were i believe yes
00:56:45 believe yes what about after the tender during the currency of the project we would tag them on generally to a site meeting
00:56:54 meeting either before or after depending on the um what with our teleport availability um yes artelia would usually do the minutes
00:57:05 minutes now artelia minuted progress meetings but not design team meetings that's right isn't it they yeah they did the design reviews but you know i can't think of any design
00:57:18 but you know i can't think of any design development meetings as such that they called but you know we did discuss things either side of the site meeting so
00:57:28 i'll tell you would have been the people to admit them but i can't think of any minutes specifically
00:57:35 and you say it was an early sight meeting the paragraph 64. can you give us
00:57:40 us a more precise idea of the time it would be after july 14 when the contract was in place
00:57:50 and then not before or rather not after um
00:57:58 i think did david say that it was about he he
00:58:01 he he had been there and the mass climbers were going up so that would set the date but i don't know what date well i'm asking you for your independent recollection independent of mr gibson's recollection yeah no i i don't remember
00:58:12 recollection yeah no i i don't remember part of that i thought it was fairly early on
00:58:15 early on well the mass climate started going up in august 2014. did they okay so anytime from july 14 probably to early 15.
00:58:28 july 14 probably to early 15. right and it's mr gibson that recalls the mass climbers in his evidence but you say you recall it during an early sight meeting i want to know what it is
00:58:37 it is please that gives you the recollection that it was an early site meeting in other words after july my recollection is that
00:58:48 recollection is that we were sitting at a long table and there was at my end of the table was the tmo artelia and ryden and other people were
00:58:59 artelia and ryden and other people were at the other end so other parties and david asked the question when we were sitting in that caretaker's room all at one end of the table but i'd say that's why i don't remember
00:59:11 but i'd say that's why i don't remember the date i remember it was comparatively early but i don't remember it was a big meeting i think there was quite a lot of people there who else was there we say ryden were
00:59:23 who else was there we say ryden were there
00:59:24 there who who at ryden simon lawrence yes i don't remember whether simon o'connor was there
00:59:32 was there but there was i think david myself i don't know that peter was there
00:59:42 and i i don't know that um if philip was there but i don't know that peter blythe was there so i can eliminate people but i can't
00:59:56 so i can eliminate people but i can't say who definitely was there i'm really interested in the timing of this you see yeah no i appreciate and i've got no better memory apart from that
01:00:04 that was in the caretakers rooms and we're all sitting at this end of the table and there are other people at the other end but the question was around one end of the table not not
01:00:16 around one end of the table not not um yeah let's see if i can prompt you along a little bit do you think this meeting
01:00:21 meeting that you are recalling occurred before our bkc's planning department approved
01:00:28 approved the the rainer bond pe55 smoke silver rain screen
01:00:37 i i don't remember i'm not clear enough okay let's then turn to the records of the conversation go back we can't david gibson's statement um tmo
01:00:49 david gibson's statement um tmo 50887 please at page 19. and we can start at a page 19 paragraph 100.
01:01:08 and he says the minutes of this meeting were produced by artelia and they definitely existed because i recall reading them i recall that lachnal had been spelt incorrectly in the minutes i understand these minutes cannot be
01:01:19 i understand these minutes cannot be located in tmo files you see that yes just pausing there you see he notes that his recollection is that lachenal was misspelt in the document he remember
01:01:31 misspelt in the document he remember seeing
01:01:31 seeing just note that and then a paragraph 101 he says this i have a clear recollection of the discussion and of the minute recording it
01:01:39 it my recollection is that it was raised at a design development meeting and the minute was produced in time for the next monthly meeting it was produced in hard form at that time and may not have been scanned onto tma's system or received electronically
01:01:51 tma's system or received electronically i know i did not receive the minute electronically before the meeting because it was handed to me in hard form at the meeting until the occurrence of the fire at grenfell tower i had always believed the cladding installed was inert
01:02:02 cladding installed was inert as had been assured by simon lawrence and i had no reason to consider otherwise
01:02:06 otherwise i cannot recall the date of the meeting but i have given some details in my statement as to when it was i think it may have been about march or april or march 2 april 2015 or possibly earlier
01:02:20 2015 or possibly earlier and then he says i'm confident that philip booth simon lawrence and claire williams were in attendance along with the regular minute taker from artelia whose name i cannot recall but his name will be on all the progress report minutes or at or about that time
01:02:33 minutes or at or about that time it is likely that others were in attendance but i can't recall who i also i also recall that i did not receive the minute of the meeting electronically in advance of the next meeting as was normally the case they were handed to me in hard form at
01:02:44 they were handed to me in hard form at the beginning of next month's meeting one month later i know this because i specifically looked for it and that is when i noticed that latin had been spelled incorrectly and is my and it is my recollection that the minute recorded the gist of
01:02:56 that the minute recorded the gist of that conversation and i mentioned that fact declare because i was keen to note that it had been recorded
01:03:06 now i'll just before i come to some questions about that miss william just show you what you say about that in your september 2019 statement
01:03:14 statement which we can go to page 15 that's tmo double zero eight four two three one two and i'd like to get paragraph 65 now
01:03:28 you say i've been advised in preparing this statement that the minutes of this meeting cannot be located i was given a hard copy of the minutes by artelia during the meeting
01:03:39 by artelia during the meeting and i recall standing in the tmo office and reading them out to david and handing him a copy i do not recall scanning the minutes into our system and saving them
01:03:51 now again this is an important event isn't it
01:03:55 isn't it clearly yes yes yes and yet you don't mention that the meeting of the minutes in your february 2019 statement do you
01:04:06 in your february 2019 statement do you i don't no now david gibson says that it was important for him to have a record of this conversation do you agree that he he wanted a record
01:04:17 do you agree that he he wanted a record i do because as that paragraph 65 i remember him saying to me is it minuted and i i had to hand a copy of the hard copy and
01:04:29 had to hand a copy of the hard copy and i stood in the office and i read it out verbatim and he was happy and i said oh do you have that and i i instead of just giving him my copy to read i
01:04:38 to read i i copied him a set and gave it to him but i think he already had he might have already had a set i don't know but i remember physically standing in
01:04:49 but i remember physically standing in the office and reading it because you're right at the time he was incredibly particular to make sure it was recorded and so we both felt some comfort in seeing it actually recorded there right let's just chase this
01:05:01 there right let's just chase this through
01:05:04 you receive is this right the soft copy from artelia
01:05:11 i was given a piece of paper is that a hard copy
01:05:14 hard copy well okay let's let's start again you say i was given a hard copy of the minutes
01:05:19 minutes by artelia during the meeting so this is which meeting was it presumably it was a meet the meeting following the meeting of which
01:05:28 which the minutes uh had been recorded which you were being given
01:05:34 yes i was definitely given a hard copy at the next meeting so i don't know whether the next meeting was a progress meeting or another type of meeting right what was it the normal practice of
01:05:46 what was it the normal practice of artelia to send you soft copies of the minutes in draft for you to review before they were approved at the next meeting
01:05:57 generally we did get a version emailed to us
01:06:01 to us before the next meeting yes right when were you given a hard copy of the minutes as you say here
01:06:12 i remember that i'd been to a meeting and i don't know it was one that dave had been to it might have been an interim one and they said oh here's the copy of these minutes and i
01:06:23 minutes and i took them then and then you went back to the office did you yes and then another day totally another day
01:06:33 day when the next site meeting was due or before the next site meeting was due david said to me oh i don't know if i've seen the minutes can we have a look and make sure my comment
01:06:45 we have a look and make sure my comment is minuted because as you say he was really clear that it was an important question and it was clearly minuted and i read it out in the middle of the room
01:06:56 and it has been a point of contention that we haven't been able to find this bit of paper because obviously it's important to us well it is it is a point of contention as you put it you're right about that i
01:07:07 as you put it you're right about that i just want to see why um you say you were given a hard copy of the minutes and you read them out to david gibson well sorry can you ask the question
01:07:16 question um my current understanding from what you've told us is that each of you was given a hard copy at the next meeting is that correct i might have gone to a meeting with others what can you remember yeah no i i remember i had a copy of the
01:07:29 yeah no i i remember i had a copy of the minutes at the point where david said to me
01:07:32 me was my comment minuted right just jog back one do you remember being at a subsequent meeting at which you were handed a hard copy of the minutes of the previous meeting
01:07:45 of the previous meeting i remember being given a hardcover meeting minutes i don't know which previous meeting it was that's probably mine you recall this being receiving a hard copy yes
01:07:56 copy yes do you recall whether mr gibson was given a hard copy at the same meeting i don't think he was at the meeting that i was at right then you took it back to the office yes you're going to tell us about
01:08:08 office yes you're going to tell us about the conversation and i think what you've told us so far suggests that you made a second copy and gave it to him i did yeah so there were at least two copies in existence at the tmo
01:08:20 two copies in existence at the tmo offices
01:08:21 offices is that correct yes good thank you yes
01:08:26 so the next question which follows from that is what did you do with your copy
01:08:32 i would have filed it in my progress meeting
01:08:37 um file or whatever meeting it was i would have filed it chronologically with the rest of my papers
01:08:45 would it have been your usual practice to scan the minutes into your system and save them
01:08:50 save them generally i would have been given them by email anyways i would have saved them from my email straight to the directory but this was a one-off that i had a hard copy
01:09:01 a one-off that i had a hard copy and not a scanned copy
01:09:05 you say i do not recall scanning the minutes into our system and saving them
01:09:11 why didn't you do that
01:09:14 i presumed at the time that everybody else would have a an email copy and the author would have an email electronic copy and i'm obviously aware that no copy has
01:09:25 and i'm obviously aware that no copy has been found never mind that you then you then said you say that you gave a copy to david gibson so
01:09:36 david gibson so you had the hard copy you photocopied one kept it and filed it and then gave him
01:09:43 him the other one yes so does that tell us that within the tmo there were at one point so far as you recall it two hard copies yes do you know why david gibson filed his hard copy
01:09:55 his hard copy no do you know why he didn't put it onto the
01:09:58 the system electronically no and this may sound like a silly question but i take it they were typed or printed documents yes they were it wasn't handwritten do you remember what standing back what
01:10:11 do you remember what standing back what the
01:10:11 the the basic thrust of the meeting was what was it about
01:10:20 i i thought it was a meeting on site um yes it was the normal format that's what um i recall
01:10:38 so yeah it was one item of a list of many items but to say i know that nobody's been able to locate it but say i held it in my hand so i know it's um not a figment of anybody's
01:10:50 um not a figment of anybody's imagination now given the importance to david gibson of this statement that you read it out aloud to him across
01:11:02 that you read it out aloud to him across the floor of the office
01:11:05 can you explain how it could come about that neither he nor you scanned the document into the system
01:11:13 system so that like all other artelia minutes an electronic record existed no i i don't in hindsight most of the
01:11:24 no i i don't in hindsight most of the things that cross my desk i insured were in my directory but this i didn't do and i obviously wish i had because it would be important to evidence it today but
01:11:36 important to evidence it today but so i i had a hard copy but i i don't have it anymore did you look for this document immediately after the fire in june 2017
01:11:48 i don't think so why is that
01:11:53 i i was being asked to provide other information to appropriate parties so this document wasn't
01:12:02 wasn't um a priority at the time but to say obviously it's become more important and i would love to
01:12:13 important and i would love to find it on somebody's directory but it's not in the tmo directory i'm clear on that
01:12:17 that i i i'm sure you would love to find it ms williams but just think about what you've just told us you say the document wasn't a priority at the time
01:12:28 at the time here is a written record so important that you make two copies and read it out aloud to david gibson because he wanted a written record of it that's what you've told us
01:12:39 and yet when the fire happens it isn't your first reaction or perhaps early reaction to go and look for it
01:12:46 for it why is that you're right it wasn't my first early reaction because i was being asked for other information from other authorities and more pressing demands perhaps um but what was very quickly it became
01:13:00 um but what was very quickly it became clear it would be useful to find this document and then i search through the office and say it wasn't available i don't know where it was why do you think it would have
01:13:11 it was why do you think it would have been
01:13:12 been useful because you've implied it's a document evidencing that we asked the question at an early stage and that we were
01:13:23 and that we were mindful of
01:13:27 the problems that may arise so it would have been very useful you see anybody watching that building burning in the early hours of june 2017 who had not only been given the
01:13:38 who had not only been given the assurance but whose boss had insisted that it had been recorded so importantly that it was run out across the floor of the office would as one of their first thoughts
01:13:49 would as one of their first thoughts have been
01:13:50 have been i have been misled or i have been told something that was fundamentally and catastrophically wrong and i'm having difficulty forgive me miss williams understanding why that
01:14:02 miss williams understanding why that wasn't your thought at the time
01:14:05 we were being asked by advisors to find different documents and this was obviously one that people
01:14:17 and this was obviously one that people weren't aware of and it was a very busy time now we asked simon lawrence about this and i do need to show you his transcript day 24
01:14:25 day 24 please one page 169. [Applause]
01:14:36 and line 14 on that page you can see that
01:14:42 that uh i quoted mr gibson's statement to mr lawrence which we just looked at you can see i quote paragraph 98 to him
01:14:53 you can see i quote paragraph 98 to him and uh and then from line 18 onwards uh or rather line 14 onwards which leads up to line 18. do you recall mr gibson raising this matter with you at a meeting
01:15:05 matter with you at a meeting answer no not at all question right answer rain screen by the nature of rain screen there's a gap between rain screen and the insulation so no i don't recall this at all
01:15:16 this at all and then if we go over the page to page 170
01:15:19 170 line 10.
01:15:24 line 10. uh
01:15:28 uh he he he's asked the question
01:15:34 uh at line six i'm sorry let's say line ten line six did you give such an assurance to mr gibson answer no i don't agree with that statement at all question do you recall seeing the minutes which match this
01:15:45 seeing the minutes which match this description answer no and then at line 17 having quoted having had paragraph 100 quoted to him he's i say i think you're saying you're
01:15:56 he's i say i think you're saying you're clear in your mind you've never seen such minutes answer no you see that yes and then at page 171
01:16:09 at line eight i've cited more of his statement to him and it's clear from line 10 that mr lawrence says i don't agree with it at all
01:16:18 all question that 9 11 writes so you say mr gibson is wrong answer yes line 13 question right now leaving aside mr gibson's recollection did you ever yourself personally assure him that the cladding at grenfell was to
01:16:30 him that the cladding at grenfell was to use his word inert answer no i wouldn't give technical assurances unless i had that information from the designers or specialists that's something we've seen before but you can see from that that simon lawrence has no recollection at all
01:16:43 lawrence has no recollection at all of that and in fact not only that he actively denies ever having given you that assurance are you saying he's wrong
01:16:52 wrong i'm saying it was a conversation a long time ago and he's probably forgotten but it was minuted and i'm aware that there's been a lot of interrogation into the papers to try and
01:17:04 interrogation into the papers to try and evidence this minute now let's look and see what philip booth's evidence was about this can we first look at his first statement of page 52 this is a rt408527
01:17:16 this is a rt408527 page 52 and i'd like to go to paragraph 173
01:17:19 173 please
01:17:27 and he just says there uh in the uh fourth line up from the bottom he says i do not recall any other occasions where any party raised the
01:17:38 occasions where any party raised the fire at latino house or sought any assurances as to the fire performance or fire specification of the cladding
01:17:44 cladding system being installed in the project you see that yes and in his oral evidence he was asked by ms grange about that statement and can we go to the transcript of his evidence on day 50
01:17:56 the transcript of his evidence on day 50 please
01:17:57 please go to page 77
01:18:06 and at page 77
01:18:10 of day 50.
01:18:13 uh at line four uh he says i was definitely not at a meeting that was disc that that was discussed all the meetings i was at were minuted we produced them it may i didn't go to
01:18:24 we produced them it may i didn't go to design development meetings because i wasn't part of the design at that time so i'm not saying it didn't happen it may well have happened but it wasn't a meeting that i was at so i don't have any recollection of that discussion point at all
01:18:35 discussion point at all okay and and all of our other meetings have got clear minutes issued for them yes answers so maybe it was a write-in meeting that he remembers but i wasn't there
01:18:45 there question line 18. do you ever recall anyone using the word inert or completely inert in the context of the cladding
01:18:53 cladding answer at line 21 no i had no other than that one email which is the 12th of november email miss williams i didn't have any nothing was raised to me about fire retardance or anything around the
01:19:04 retardance or anything around the cladding
01:19:05 cladding all of my cladding discussions were around what it was going to look like and how it was fixed to the building now looking at that do you still say that mr booth was present at the conversation with david gibson
01:19:17 conversation with david gibson yes so you say mr booth is wrong as well in his recollection it was a conversation [Music]
01:19:24 [Music] 14 15. it was so uh david asked the question he got a response and it was minuted i i'm not surprised people don't
01:19:36 i i'm not surprised people don't remember it's it was a fair while ago but it was critical at the time and that's why we were pleased it was minuted
01:19:42 minuted can you remember who else was present at the meeting
01:19:46 i only remember people at this end of the table there were other people but well who can you recall as being president
01:19:55 president so i said myself david philip simon lawrence i wasn't clear whether peter blythe was there or not and i have been looking believe me for this um there was a gap i found in
01:20:09 for this um there was a gap i found in the minutes of february 15 but i don't know if that was the minutes that are missing or not it could be something else anyone else you can remember anyone else you can remember
01:20:22 no no i remember some other principles were sitting at my end of the table and there were other people at the other end but i don't know whether it was a a larger conversation but i say the only
01:20:35 a larger conversation but i say the only gap i found in the minutes is february 15
01:20:37 15 so that's my only um all right thank you very much
01:20:43 and february 15 wouldn't be an early sight meeting within it wouldn't in terms of a three-year project yes for me it was because july 14 was when the contract started
01:20:55 you know mr booth strike he was the sort of person who would fail to record such an important conversation it was minuted so whereas he might not remember it it was minuted
01:21:07 i'm bound to suggest you miss williams that you didn't recall this discussion in your first witness statement at a time when of course you hadn't yet seen david gibson's witness statement because you had no independent
01:21:18 statement because you had no independent recollection of it [Music]
01:21:20 [Music] i i am a little bit hazy about which meeting it was when it was but i was in the room and i was at the end of the table with david i heard the question
01:21:31 question and then say he said he hadn't seen the minutes i had them and i stood in the middle of the office and read it out so i'm very clear on that are you sure that your evidence isn't
01:21:42 that your evidence isn't an attempt to reconstruct a conversation that never actually took place no i wouldn't do that right do you think this conversation happened before or after your latino moment email
01:21:58 i don't know i would have thought it might be after but i don't know you see had it happen before your lack of email
01:22:05 of email you wouldn't have had to write the latin email would you but david wouldn't have been party to my email
01:22:13 email i would you know i wouldn't feel um to ask that question twice isn't an issue it's better it's asked twice than not at all which is why it would be very useful to find this
01:22:24 it would be very useful to find this minute
01:22:27 well let's just let me ask the question again
01:22:31 we've seen the latino email lateral moment email in which you're prompted to ask the question about fire retardancy because you're looking at the database that would strongly suggest wouldn't it that that question had not to your
01:22:43 that that question had not to your knowledge been posed to ryden before the 12th of november 2014.
01:22:51 2014. or i was asking the question again why would you ask it again
01:22:58 just to keep the thought in one's mind that doesn't make any sense with great respect miss williams if you'd had a meeting
01:23:05 meeting and there'd been a minute of it yeah where this clear assurance had been given by simon lawrence of ryden yeah the cladding was in urton wouldn't burn at all you wouldn't not have sent you wouldn't
01:23:17 you wouldn't not have sent you wouldn't have had a lachnal moment let alone sent an email that you did first of all to philip booth and then to simon lawrence shortly
01:23:26 i i might have done it say either as a second prompt i might have forgotten the first one the parties changed a lot over the course of the project
01:23:37 course of the project bear in mind the atelier team changed the ride and team change so it wouldn't be unusual to ask the same question again either for belts and braces or to
01:23:48 again either for belts and braces or to make sure that a new audience was aware if you were asking for a belt and braces as a second time or to make sure the new audience was aware you would have taken care to refer to the meeting and indeed the minute which you're so
01:23:59 and indeed the minute which you're so adamant existed if it did exist before the 12th of november 2014 surely not if it was a new audience it wouldn't mean anything to them they would be
01:24:08 would be only looking at perhaps what they had on the table in front of them how could it be a new audience given that as you say philip booth had chaired the meeting and simon lawrence had given the assurance this was the same audience
01:24:22 yes no i understand what you're saying but there were different parties over the course of the project and i i would be happier to make sure it was said twice than not at all
01:24:34 than not at all come on miss williams it's obvious isn't it that if this meeting had happened and there'd been a minute and it had been recorded
01:24:41 recorded then either you wouldn't have had to send the latter moment email at all or if you had you'd have made sure that you recorded the conversation and the minute recording that conversation in it
01:24:52 conversation in it no i i disagree one because obviously david's question wasn't one that i
01:25:00 that i put it was one that was probably more on his mind than mine and i asked a question as well which was something that was on my mind so um i don't think there's
01:25:11 so um i don't think there's any um sort of doubt that both of them happened and i'm quite clear that i'm sitting here in evidence saying that well looking at the alternative
01:25:22 well looking at the alternative possibility which is that this conversation happened i think as you resist curiously but happened after the 12th of november 2014.
01:25:30 2014. when the question was asked by david gibson at the meeting you say you were present why didn't you then jump up and say oh simon i asked you that question back in november actually and i thought it failed to
01:25:41 actually and i thought it failed to follow it up so what's the answer you didn't do that did you no i didn't do that i
01:25:47 do that i let the question be asked again you let the question be asked again either by my email or by david's question
01:25:54 question so which is it did you let the question be asked again having you asked it in november
01:25:59 november or did you send your november email it having been asked before that so i'm getting confused now well when was the conversation was it before or after
01:26:08 after you asked the question in the in the 12th of november email it's a simple question yes now i thought i'd ask my question the 12th november 14. i thought david had asked his
01:26:19 14. i thought david had asked his subsequent yes and when david asked this question subsequently and you had the minute why given that you were at the meeting why didn't you say oh that's a question
01:26:31 why didn't you say oh that's a question i want an answer to because i asked that question some months ago or some weeks ago what is the answer why did you just let the question get asked without prompting simon lawrence to the fact that you'd already asked him
01:26:42 to the fact that you'd already asked him and did so in writing
01:26:46 uh i i would have probably liked to have heard the answer twice rather than just once the reality is that
01:26:53 that wanting the answer twice you actually got the answer no times in writing did you that's true isn't that a bit peculiar it's disappointing
01:27:04 disappointing and it would be particularly useful if we had that written minute now but it's not a fabrication
01:27:12 mr chairman it's not a convenient man i think he probably is yes thank you very much we're going to have a short break now
01:27:17 now miss williams we'll continue at cough to 4 please
01:27:21 4 please again no talking to anyone about your evidence or anything to do with it while you're
01:27:25 you're out of the room please thank you very
01:27:30 much
01:27:38 thank you across the fort please
01:44:56 yes would you ask ms williams to come back in please thank you
01:45:11 righteous williams all right carry on yes thank you good thank you yes mr chairman thank you miss williams i now want to turn to the topic of design issues or problems or questions
01:45:20 questions during the build uh once construction got underway first can i look at the question of design changes in the process can we begin with art408620
01:45:32 can we begin with art408620 this is an email from you to philip booth in early december 2014 and you say it's getting confusing how the
01:45:40 the grenfell drawings are authorized my assumption is that max fordham vet them first which matt is doing i then get a final version to comment on as this is a dnb contract however ryden are referring me
01:45:52 contract however ryden are referring me to the tender drawings which are clearly not those that matt has commented on previously can you please agree a workable process with all
01:46:00 now by this time which is december 2014 as we can see from this was it your understanding that there wasn't at that stage an agreed process for
01:46:12 at that stage an agreed process for approving design
01:46:16 oh yeah it's full traffic
01:46:22 i think we had tried something but i don't think it was working so i think this is trying to formalize something what wasn't working i think
01:46:34 what wasn't working i think ryden had just tried to give me information and sometimes it just came on an email which wasn't appropriate
01:46:47 what information did ryden try and give you on email
01:46:52 i suspect that it would be i would just be looking at the um the radiator layouts or something for the new flats
01:47:06 is that an example of information which came on an email yes it would be rather than a
01:47:19 a formal sheet saying comment on this comment by this date to allow um works to progress so i think so
01:47:30 um works to progress so i think so are you saying that you would get you get specific information in trips and drabs
01:47:33 drabs rather than part of a formalized approvals process yes i see can we then go to uh art403197
01:47:45 now this uh is a color version of a flowchart
01:47:51 flowchart composed by phil booth at artelia do you remember this document yes did you understand it i'm not suggesting that it's immediately obviously comprehensible but
01:48:02 obviously comprehensible but did you understand it yes okay um now the explanation phil booth gave to us is that if there was a change to drawings then you would simply follow the arrows and the architectural changes indicated
01:48:14 and the architectural changes indicated in the bottom right hand arrow the green one and the process described there and in the big areas the middle row of the flow chart the steps that you'd be tip would be taken is that right yes yeah and does that
01:48:26 is that right yes yeah and does that tell us that if there is an architectural change it would go to the tmo to review i mean in summary yes yes i mean it it's a bit of a it's a bit of a waterfall but in the basic message is if
01:48:38 waterfall but in the basic message is if there's an architectural change it would go to the tma to review did you understand that the tmo was the point of review for architectural changes to the design
01:48:50 we had said we would deal with issues to certain areas and architectural change is probably quite a big phrase but um
01:49:05 yeah yeah i understand that we were going to be looking at things and so it wouldn't strictly be approval it'll be a comment under the design and build regime right
01:49:17 under the design and build regime right can we um go to your 20th of january statement please tmo double zero eight five three six nine seven page seven and look at paragraph 32.
01:49:28 page seven and look at paragraph 32. we've seen this before um and if you look at four lines up from the bottom of that paragraph um you say a design and build contractor must then refer back to the design team in respect of any further changes
01:49:42 in respect of any further changes um can you say that you're sure that that actually happened
01:49:50 they they generally did yes they must have if there's anything that had a contractual or financial impact they would definitely referred it back yes
01:50:02 right um
01:50:07 so the design team would be who in your phraseology
01:50:15 let me just understand at what stage this is
01:50:19 this is so this is
01:50:22 once the design and build contract is in place
01:50:26 place at least i'm working that out from what you say earlier on in paragraph 32.
01:50:37 so yes if there was any changes on the m e they would go back to max fordham
01:50:44 fordham who were our um designers for the m e side if there's anything related to
01:50:54 the social housing boxing club nursery they came back to us anything else they would go back to the project team
01:51:06 the project team rather than the design team i would say
01:51:11 because say anything that changed that may have an impact on cost or programme would have to come back for our employer's agent to instruct and where did the cladding part
01:51:24 instruct and where did the cladding part of the refurbishment sit in that taxonomy
01:51:26 taxonomy that order of things
01:51:31 that that would be within their own design remit because it was the specialist area that they were warranted to carry out
01:51:43 so is that the project team or the design team on your terminology
01:51:52 but if anything on their specialist area of design
01:51:56 of design was going to change it would come back to the project team who was the project team that would be artelio
01:52:03 artelio ourselves and then any other related contractor consultant sorry so probably i'll tell you and ourselves yes i see
01:52:13 i see thank you that makes it clear so any any changes in respect of design in relation to the cladding would have to be approved and they used that word loosely but approved ticked off okay if you like
01:52:25 but approved ticked off okay if you like by you and artelia if it was a change to the specification yes yes thank you and a change to the design as well yes yes
01:52:34 yes yes now can i then take you to something neil reed said i'd like to show you the transcript please for day 50 of page 156
01:52:43 156 i'd like to go to line one there this is where neil reed of artelia is being questioned by miss grange and at line one
01:52:56 she asked the question are you merely telling us about that and your statement this is about scope because you are cl seeking to demonstrate that artelia was always very clear about its scope of
01:53:07 was always very clear about its scope of its role
01:53:07 its role or are you telling us about it because you felt it that it was a significant problem on this project and then his answer is i'm setting out the facts of the matter we were regularly asked about design matters i never thought about it in any other way
01:53:19 never thought about it in any other way other than i was clear where the responsibility for the design function sat
01:53:23 sat i think claire knew that too that was evident
01:53:26 evident it just surprised me that it kept happening on occasion i think i probably got quite frustrated with it i didn't read into that in any other way that our client then our client keeps asking us to get involved in design and at some stage i think i'd suggest that
01:53:38 at some stage i think i'd suggest that assignment that he may wish to remind and escalate the issue and remind them this is not just part of our scope sorry this is just not part of our scope it shouldn't be happening
01:53:49 it shouldn't be happening and later the same day at page 159 if we can just
01:53:53 can just turn three pages on to that we can see it line five ms grange asks mr reed did you ever get the impression that miss williams was foundering in terms of design issues and was
01:54:04 in terms of design issues and was therefore reaching out to you for additional support and he asks did you say foundering what was the word you used yes foundering struggling did you ever get the impression that she was struggling to deal with the design
01:54:15 was struggling to deal with the design issues that were cropping up on the project and needed to reach out to you for help on it yes i can see that yes possibly now that was neil reed's recollection but i just want to ask you
01:54:26 recollection but i just want to ask you about it
01:54:27 about it um and i'm going to show you some documents recording conversations that you had with neil reid about the scope of artelia's role in design
01:54:35 design first do you remember that there came a time when an issue arose relating to designing a solution for access from the crown yes yes that in other words an abseiling
01:54:46 yes that in other words an abseiling rail yes remember that can we look at art406 please this is an email chain about that issue in the may and the june of 2015.
01:54:57 in the may and the june of 2015. if we look at page three please and go to the bottom of page three you can see that this is an email from simon lawrence
01:55:05 to you on the 28th of may 2015 and if we go over the page to page four it says it starts afternoon claire can you see that
01:55:16 claire can you see that yes uh and
01:55:20 um you can see that it's got a lengthy paragraph there about in access to or rather from the crown
01:55:30 now i'm going to read it all out to you but do you remember that issue in that email
01:55:35 email i do and do you remember at page five there were some diagrams that he attached if you look at page five you could see some rather um clear but perhaps on autistic diagrams
01:55:46 diagrams but it's attached to the email now if you go then up to page two you then write an email to neil reid
01:55:56 uh on the 12th of june uh so about two weeks later
01:56:04 uh and uh you send that to neil reed and you and you copy it to paul burrows who by then was the new cdmc cdm coordinator and you say gentlemen can you comment
01:56:15 can you comment i attach the email that refers with info and then if you go up to the top at page one neil reed says
01:56:26 at page one neil reed says in in uh his response to you of the same day friday 12th of june 2015.
01:56:32 2015. claire i'm afraid this too is a design issue and our scope does not extend to cover off design related advice uh understanding that something needs to happen actions need to be tracked milestones need to be managed etc we can
01:56:44 milestones need to be managed etc we can will and do help with but you're asking us to comment on a design matter stroke solution and then it goes on paul that's paul burrows can comment from a cdmc perspective but his role is to ensure that h s is considered by those
01:56:56 that h s is considered by those responsible stroke involved and not per se on the solution itself the cmc cdmc is not a designer but he can comment on what is being proposed and what needs to be considered
01:57:07 proposed and what needs to be considered paul please feel free to comment correct or augment my point here what i will say is this claire this is a specialist area a designer can go so far you need to bring the stakeholders together
01:57:19 bring the stakeholders together and then he says the stakeholders in this instance mean the people who will be responsible for the procurement of the service scoping and defining the requirements of the service providing the service doing the cleaning health and safety officer for tma janice
01:57:31 health and safety officer for tma janice anyone else in tma who can influence or is influenced by the cleaning everyone can should and will contribute to providing a holistic well-considered solution providing a feature in one of these three camps
01:57:42 these three camps i hope this helps so i show you that and then before i examine the question with you let's go to another document art40656
01:57:52 art40656 please
01:57:57 this is a log that neil reed sent to simon cash so it's an internal uh artelia document in september 2015 as you can see from the email header at the top of that page
01:58:09 the email header at the top of that page and
01:58:09 and if you look at the summary he sets out below it there is a log running from the 3rd to the 11th of september 2015. and if you look at the entry for the 11th of september 15 do you see
01:58:20 11th of september 15 do you see under task it says in the second line catch up call from claire reef lift stroke fire issue mentioned our scope no being designed
01:58:31 mentioned our scope no being designed not being designed and apologized if i appeared to terse in some emails she understood and said this was fine thanked me for addressing lift query emails to matt at max fordham re-lift
01:58:43 emails to matt at max fordham re-lift queries just pausing there do you recall this phone call this just this discussion with neil reed on that date
01:58:56 not the call no
01:59:00 sitting here now have you any reason to think that what neil reid recorded there is
01:59:04 is is inaccurate to the best of your recollection in relation to that call to that specific issue sorry yes um
01:59:17 um no i i think neil was very thorough and conscientious so no i would say that that was his um that was his brief comment on the resume of the conversation
01:59:31 resume of the conversation the third document i want us to look at together is art406682 please this is a chain of emails relating to the subject of letterboxes in october 2015. do you remember the
01:59:44 in october 2015. do you remember the subject generally not letterboxes no right well let's look at page 2
01:59:50 at page 2 6682 page 2. this is an email um from you to andrew malcolm at artelia
02:00:02 uh at the top of page two well i'm sorry sorry bottom of page one over to the top of page two bottom of page one it's dated the 14th of october 2015 to andrew malcolm copy to neil reed and the
02:00:14 andrew malcolm copy to neil reed and the subject is letterbox quotes can you see yes yes and then if we look at the top of page two
02:00:22 we can see your questions that you sent to him can i ask the obvious letterbox and rear cage what is the spec including dimensions then you ask some other questions as well and if we
02:00:33 some other questions as well and if we if we scroll up to page one we can see that the next day 15th of october 2015 neil reed responds to you and he says claire these are design matters that need to sit with you
02:00:46 design matters that need to sit with you stroke tmo i'm afraid andrew is unable to assist you with these queries
02:00:52 now finally this is the last document i want to show you art406634
02:01:01 art406634 this is an email from neil reid to matt smith at max fordham on the 28th of january 2016 and we can see this scene at this time is about sleeving through risers
02:01:12 sleeving through risers and you can see the subject there grenfell
02:01:15 grenfell absence of sleeving and you're copied in on this email as you can see from the third line of the copies copy ease you see that yes and by this stage just to
02:01:26 and by this stage just to remind you you are both client and principal designer weren't you because this is now the winter of 2015-16 um and in the second last paragraph neil reed says
02:01:37 reed says uh the resolution of this design stroke specification is she rests with max fordham not artelia who are merely the employer's agent with no design responsibility on this contract
02:01:48 design responsibility on this contract now i've shown you a whole load of documents just now um having been shown days do you accept that on more than one occasion mr reed categorically told you that artelia did not have responsibility for
02:02:00 artelia did not have responsibility for design issues each in the context of the particular questions which had arisen
02:02:09 i would but i would tend to communicate with them one in case there was any program
02:02:20 in case there was any program impact or cost impact but also to keep them on board as to what i was looking at i think in the letterbox instance it was not there appropriate but the lift
02:02:33 not there appropriate but the lift conversation was appropriate because there was additional work required which had a cost
02:02:39 cost implication that would be a qs question not a design question wouldn't it exactly and uh but it would also have a programming implication
02:02:50 implication because there was additional work which would have a knock-on effect so the letterboxes i agree that that was something they shouldn't have been directed to them but the lift issue was actually an issue of cost and
02:03:03 was actually an issue of cost and programme
02:03:04 programme so that that falls into a different category so to be clear looking at these documents in the round do you accept that you didn't think that artelia was responsible for assisting you with design issues per se i didn't think they were
02:03:17 issues per se i didn't think they were responsible for assisting me with design issues unless there was an impact on the program or the cost but also it was important to keep communicating because you appreciate neil and andrew malcolm
02:03:31 neil and andrew malcolm were the second set of people on the project
02:03:34 project and again i was keeping them on board not always in the right way clearly in terms of the letterboxes but just trying to keep a continuity of conversation
02:03:46 conversation right the way you were asking them for assistance on design issues did you realize that you were asking them even though their scope didn't include desi design issues or design expertise
02:03:58 design issues or design expertise generally i would only refer design issues to them if there was an impact on cost or program i appreciate the letterbox instance you showed me i wouldn't have referred to them in hindsight but the
02:04:09 referred to them in hindsight but the other
02:04:09 other issues i would still have referred to them because there was something they needed to be aware of that actually got instructed but not as designer arts design and can i then turn to the question of the clerk of works
02:04:21 question of the clerk of works um now can we start with your february 2019 statement tm0084034
02:04:28 tm0084034 sorry zero three six four and i'd like to go to page seven paragraph thirty four and you say tma also engaged john rowan and partners as
02:04:39 also engaged john rowan and partners as clark
02:04:40 clark of works to inspect the various works on site this included inspection of workmanship and quality to ensure works were carried out as designed and to challenge ryden where necessary if there were shortcomings they also had a role to report on health
02:04:52 they also had a role to report on health and safety issues this was an additional tier of inspection to ensure works were completed to a good standard to ensure the landlord's future maintenance risk was limited was the appointment of john rowan as
02:05:03 was the appointment of john rowan as clark of works a direct appointment to the tma
02:05:09 yes the tma wasn't obliged to appoint a clerk of works was it no i mean there was no regulatory requirement or contractual obligation now you describe
02:05:21 obligation now you describe john rowan here as an additional tier of inspection you see that yes um additional to what
02:05:32 you see that yes um additional to what additional to that carried out by ryden themselves and their specialist contractors inspections right um was appointing a clerk of works
02:05:43 right um was appointing a clerk of works a way of boosting tmo's presence as client on the site
02:05:56 that's declined yes yes i would say so was there any particular reason why you felt that an additional client presence on the site was required or rather they reported to
02:06:09 or rather they reported to initially myself but then we expanded it to include artely when they were reporting issues that needed to be escalated it was because
02:06:21 escalated it was because the consultants for example max fordham were not going to be there every day and a lot of work was happening continuously and it gave us that extra
02:06:35 continuously and it gave us that extra pair of eyes to see that the work was being carried out properly
02:06:42 an extra pair of eyes on all aspects of the refurbishment
02:06:48 not on the design the clark works had no involvement with the design or the regulations they were looking at um workmanship health and safety and also progress
02:06:59 health and safety and also progress on all aspects of the refurbishment on those aspects of the refurbishment workmanship health and safety and progress
02:07:06 progress forgive me on all aspects okay they don't like the word aspects on all elements of the refurbishment so boxing club
02:07:14 club nursery on all the various areas yes there were two clerk of works you appreciate an m e unbiased cycleworks and a general building like of works
02:07:27 building like of works right
02:07:32 now peter madison has made a witness statement to this inquiry i think it's his second statement which sets out his understanding of the clock of works role here can we look at that it's tmo double
02:07:43 here can we look at that it's tmo double zero eight four seven three three seven and i'd like to go to page eight
02:07:52 and a paragraph thirty 37 he says while the client under a design and build contract is not required to appoint clerks of works the tma took the decision for added assurance to employ two clerk of works
02:08:03 assurance to employ two clerk of works john roan and partners and silcox dawson to report independently on the compliance of the construction work as it proceeded do you broadly agree with that if it was
02:08:14 do you broadly agree with that if it was the design compliance not the compliance to specification not the compliance to regulations well he hasn't drawn that distinction
02:08:27 well he hasn't drawn that distinction but i think you would you would qualify would you i i would that they wouldn't be reporting on compliance with regulations purely on compliance with design i see okay
02:08:41 compliance with design i see okay what about checking whether others were ensuring that the building complied with regulation
02:08:48 they would pose questions they were experienced chaps who would pose questions if they saw anything that was different from what they'd expect or
02:08:59 expect or if different from what they'd seen built previously by the same contractor so they would pick up elements that didn't look right in their experience or
02:09:11 didn't look right in their experience or didn't look like other areas that had been worked on i see so just to be crystal clear you're understanding of the clerk of works role was that they would check for compliance with the design
02:09:22 with the design what about checking for compliance with the materials
02:09:29 by which i mean making sure that the materials specified in the nbs specification or any changes were those put onto the building they they were looking at workmanship
02:09:42 they they were looking at workmanship health and safety and progress so they may ask the questions but but they they wouldn't
02:09:54 but but they they wouldn't particularly it was only in their experience if they spotted something that was
02:09:58 that was conspicuously wrong or unlikely that they would ask otherwise that they wouldn't know enough about the materials potentially so would you expect the clerk of works
02:10:13 so would you expect the clerk of works to
02:10:13 to pick up the fact that a different form of insulation had been put on the building
02:10:18 building from the insulation specified in the nbs specification
02:10:24 i would expect them to pick up a difference say if it went from blue to white
02:10:28 white [Music]
02:10:30 [Music] and asked the question why why is it why was it blue now is it why is it white is it a different product
02:10:39 but i wouldn't expect them to um do any more than just ask the questions of the specialists
02:10:50 ask the questions of the specialists or you know the specialist contractors within ryden's who were doing anything whether it was yemeni or the cladding when you said when qualifying peter madison's evidence about compliance of
02:11:02 madison's evidence about compliance of the construction work
02:11:07 its compliance with the design did you expect the clerk of works to have the design in front of them such as the drawings and the nbs specifications so that they could check what was
02:11:18 that they could check what was physically going on to the building against the design and the nbs specification is that what you expected them to do no clerk of works will never be
02:11:29 clerk of works will never be encumbered by all that sort of paperwork they will have access to it via the contractor's office but i wouldn't expect them to have the whole um bundle of paperwork
02:11:41 the whole um bundle of paperwork it would not be um viable that they are looking at what they're looking at using their experience and if they need to then go and talk to
02:11:52 and if they need to then go and talk to the contractor what is that why is that there
02:11:55 there why is it different but no i i wouldn't expect them to be carrying around the paperwork but i would expect them to have access to it if their role was to check for
02:12:06 if their role was to check for compliance with design if they didn't have the design in their hands or in their heads or on a tablet or somewhere how could they check what was going on to the building against it
02:12:17 to the building against it that they would be able to go into the contractor's office to see the information there but they would only do that if they thought there was some question that needed to be asked
02:12:30 yes i think that to be honest on this contract the two of them worked a little bit differently but the m e chap would
02:12:42 the m e chap would was probably a little bit more hands-on in terms of his m e stuff but the general building side chap had a lot of different areas to cover so he would have had to go into
02:12:53 to cover so he would have had to go into the office to pick it all up
02:12:58 so slightly different sort of working arrangements for both depending on their um role really let's see how we go with this um can we go to the oral evidence of gurpal verdi please
02:13:11 evidence of gurpal verdi please which is day 43 of the transcript of page 18.
02:13:18 he was a witness for john run partners
02:13:25 and at line seven
02:13:32 uh uh he uh says there if i was a full-time clerk of works on a traditional contract the risk is more with the client and the architect in terms of compliance
02:13:44 architect in terms of compliance and the extent by the architect by extension employs a clock of works to be his
02:13:48 his eyes and ears and traditionally he would be full time on site so he had a maximum exposure to a site you'll understand what's going on in meetings subcontractor meetings if anyone is turning up to the site
02:13:59 anyone is turning up to the site any issues which perhaps someone would want to keep to themselves your ear would be to the wall so you'll know and if we skip down to line 19
02:14:06 line 19 if we can please at line 21 on page 19. uh ms grogan asks um
02:14:21 is that different for a clerk of works who is only on site one day a week and he said yeah i understand what you mean now yes they would still be their eyes and ears but the difference is in the amount of information they'll be able to glean
02:14:32 able to glean on and if you go over the page that one day compared to there being five days a week
02:14:38 week you see now you're showing you that did you understand that there was a difference between a clerk of works appointed in a what one might call a traditional contract as opposed to the more limited
02:14:49 contract as opposed to the more limited role mr verdi is describing in his evidence yes you do yes
02:14:54 yes and in in this particular case the clerk of works were not to be contracted to be on the site full time were they no now in in their evidence both mr gurpal verdi and mr white john white describe their role it
02:15:05 white john white describe their role it was engaged to be a site inspection type of role would you agree with that yes i think there is a fine line between what the two do and i know john white had probably
02:15:18 and i know john white had probably worked on traditional contracts before where he had a full-time presence so yes i understand yes i mean the former which is a traditional clog of works real acts as a representative of the architect
02:15:29 the architect responsible for the build whereas a site inspector is looking at what's going on on site
02:15:33 on site at specific times that he's there is that a fair distinction you would understand it is yeah yes [Applause]
02:15:43 now given their evidence is it is it right that you didn't employ those clerks have worked in a full-blown traditional clock of work sense but in the sight inspector sense
02:15:57 their appointment said clerk of works and they did the clerk of works role they did end up attending meetings
02:16:09 role they did end up attending meetings they were heavily involved in the progress of the scheme um talking to our employer's agent so i think there's a a a line between the two i don't know
02:16:21 a line between the two i don't know whether their perception is clerk of works is more skilled and more permanent on-site but
02:16:29 they did inspections attended site meetings and produced reports which guided the progress meetings were you clear in your mind at the time that
02:16:39 that jrp john rowan partners would be performing more of a site inspector role than a traditional clerk of works in uh role
02:16:50 they were performing i would say a clark works role on a design and build contract
02:16:55 contract well let's go to jrp six zeros
02:17:03 this is the invitation to tender which the tma prepared for this role
02:17:11 and it's entitled invitation to tender site monitoring and supervision services improvements and enhancements and to grenfell tower so the title doesn't say clerk of works it's site
02:17:23 doesn't say clerk of works it's site monitoring and supervision services did you compose this document i believe jenny put together this document did you have any involvement in its composition i would have seen
02:17:34 in its composition i would have seen it but i didn't lead on it can we go to page four at the bottom of the page is a list of duties that the tmo
02:17:45 tmo set up for the tenderes to undertake
02:17:52 and that it is called the clerk of works and the duties are set out the duties of the clerk of work shall comprise but not be limited too and do you see there are some bullet points
02:18:03 there are some bullet points and the second bullet point is have access to the drawings and specification and be familiar with the same using them as a reference when inspecting the work what did the tma particularly want the
02:18:15 what did the tma particularly want the clock of works to do in fulfilling that obligation
02:18:21 in terms of the whole number of bullet points or just the one i just read the second one having access to the drawing specification be familiar with the same that they were
02:18:32 be familiar with the same that they were given access to the drawings and specification online but i believe that both of them would have found it more useful to use the contractors copies on site
02:18:43 contractors copies on site because they were hard copies and so that they would look at them and they would check them i'm aware that um both of them said oh you know we went back and we looked at this
02:18:54 back and we looked at this and you know checked what it meant so i'm aware they both did that
02:19:02 i'm looking generally at this list of obligations it was the tmo expecting the clerk of works to check the legal compliance of the works themselves when it says um using the drawings and
02:19:15 when it says um using the drawings and specification as a reference when inspecting the work and making general making visual inspections
02:19:26 you see that i can see making visual inspections what was your other comments sorry perhaps i can take it more shortly if you look at the third bullet point from the end
02:19:35 the end one of the duties was being familiar with legal requirements and checking that the work complies with them did you expect the clerk of works who won this tender
02:19:46 won this tender not only to be checking the design again sorry the the construction against the design but also against the legal requirements
02:19:58 but also against the legal requirements i would expect them to be familiar with many of the building regulations but not all and if they were aware that
02:20:09 but not all and if they were aware that they would then if they saw something that went against what they knew to not comply that they would pick that up which they both did well you see the duties of the clerk of
02:20:21 well you see the duties of the clerk of work set out in this invitation to tender
02:20:23 tender was second bullet point access to drawings and specification using as a reference to inspect the work and then
02:20:30 and then fifth bullet point down making visual inspections and then third bullet point from the end being familiar with legal requirements and checking that the work complies with them do you see
02:20:41 them do you see yes so my question is why did you think that
02:20:45 that the role that they had or the winner of this tender had was limited to checking compliance of the construction with the design as opposed to
02:20:57 design as opposed to checking the construction with legal requirements i think that bullet point is a little bit open
02:21:09 bullet point is a little bit open because if does legal requirements mean building regulations but i i think that the expectation was that they would both
02:21:20 the expectation was that they would both use the skills they have in terms of um familiarity with the regulations and and checking that what they saw met those
02:21:32 checking that what they saw met those regulations if they were aware of them there were areas that that possibly would have been new to them they're areas that were inaccessible physically perhaps inaccessible so they wouldn't have been able to check those areas
02:21:46 can we go further up the page if you look
02:21:49 look there in the first half of the page there's a table and in the first row it has mobilization period and you see if you read across it says both clerk of works will be needed for two to three days
02:22:00 two to three days total to attend pre-start meetings and familiarize themselves with the specifications and planning requirements and then in the second row it says construction period 62 weeks
02:22:12 construction period 62 weeks the current program indicates that these role will not be needed until august 2014 to be advised and then on the right hand side it says it is anticipated that the building clock of works will will be required of
02:22:23 clock of works will will be required of one days a week this could be seven hours split over say two days as appropriate throughout this period and the mechanical clock of works for one day a week this could be seven hours split over say two days as appropriate
02:22:35 over say two days as appropriate to increase as necessary during any period where there is significant work underway in commissioning the new systems
02:22:42 systems now it's right from this isn't it that the clerk of works or rather the person whoever won these this tender was never intended to be on site for extensive periods
02:22:53 extensive periods that's right they were just going to check in periodically weren't they yes yes
02:22:57 yes and did you consider that by only having clerk of works on site one day a week there would be a limit in what they could reasonably inspect and monitor
02:23:07 when we put this together we thought that would be adequate but what actually happened was that they did more days depending on the activities on site
02:23:19 depending on the activities on site for example when the boilers were commissioned and when the individual flat heating systems were put in the m e chap was around for two or even three days and the building clerk of works again
02:23:33 and the building clerk of works again we talked to ryden about what there was for him to see and we actually tailored their workloads around the activities on site so they actually both of them the hiatus of
02:23:46 they actually both of them the hiatus of the project we're on site for more than one day a week but just looking at the itt for the moment did you appreciate when this went out
02:23:54 out that there would be an element of chance as to what the clerks of works would get to see on there one or two days a week
02:24:03 as opposed to yes yes clearly they can only see
02:24:06 only see what's available to them but ryden had their own
02:24:11 their own site supervisors so as i said this was an extra tier so ryden had their own site supervisors their specialist designers had site supervisors so that this was say another layer
02:24:25 that this was say another layer to give tmo some reassurance that there weren't going to be any problems in the future with any of the areas of build yes but ryden were not client-side
02:24:38 build yes but ryden were not client-side the idea here was that the clerk of works would be yes and as i say that the ryden side had its own supervisors both their own internal supervisors their site managers
02:24:49 supervisors their site managers and then their specialist um works supervisors as well so these were client-side doing a similar job and just making sure
02:25:01 doing a similar job and just making sure that all was well but only one day a week i said that that increased as the activity on site increased
02:25:09 increased as you anticipated it only one day a week initially we thought one day a week but it it clearly wasn't enough as the scheme progressed and as the scheme progressed
02:25:20 progressed and as the scheme progressed obviously people realized more was needed but that was left to the chance wasn't it
02:25:24 wasn't it and and grew it evolved ad hoc it did evolve in a pattern when we established when they were needed can we look at
02:25:35 when they were needed can we look at j genre and partner's bid document that's jrp
02:25:41 450295 please
02:25:48 then here is a table on that page i think we've got page one up on the screen can we go to page 25
02:25:58 this is the bid document dated april 2014
02:26:03 2014 and you can see there is the form of tender
02:26:07 tender and if you look at the in the table at line two
02:26:12 line two um you can see that there is a cost of provision clarken works for mechanic with mechanical experience 70 days 33
02:26:23 experience 70 days 33 530 pounds on the day rate of 479 pounds and then under the second box the cost of provision of a clerk works with general building experience same again 70 days day rate of 479
02:26:37 same again 70 days day rate of 479 pounds
02:26:37 pounds total three thirty three thousand five hundred and thirty pounds with a total of sixty seven thousand and sixty pounds it split exactly fifty fifty um what was it envisaged that the
02:26:48 fifty um what was it envisaged that the general clerk of works would pick up all aspects of the work that were outside the m e specialization yes right now we know that jrp john rhone
02:27:00 right now we know that jrp john rhone partners were pre were appointed can we go to tmo1 triple zero six two double zero
02:27:12 this is a letter appointing john run and partners
02:27:16 partners as clerk of works dated the 12th of june 2014 and center gurpel verdi and they are told uh that it's successful and you can see from the bottom of the page that
02:27:27 see from the bottom of the page that it's sent by jenny jackson the procurement manager you see that yes did you have any part in writing that document no you didn't did you see it before it went do you think
02:27:38 went do you think i think she would have copied me in here i see it is in fact exhibited to your february 2019 statement and you give some evidence about it so i'm assuming you're familiar with it would that be fair not particularly with
02:27:49 would that be fair not particularly with the letter but i was part of the tender yeah right in the fourth paragraph it says uh um we apologize for the fact that this
02:28:00 um we apologize for the fact that this evaluation has taken such a long time with both submissions achieving exactly the same score in respect of quality and almost identical in terms of cost it was not an easy decision and then if you go to page two you can
02:28:12 and then if you go to page two you can see that there's some feedback on the on the bid
02:28:18 and uh under the comment
02:28:22 good explanation of how they chose clerk of works refer to adding value explain alliance with silcox dawson john white obviously knows kctm as he works on the electrical rewire program it is
02:28:34 on the electrical rewire program it is slightly disappointing that there is limited
02:28:36 limited detail of experience of cladding works referred to which has his own challenges there is a reference to working on natwest tower but limited details and cladding work for haringey there's a reference to external repairs to a block of flats for a private
02:28:48 to a block of flats for a private housing association 80 000 pounds due to the value this is probably not comparable his experience is mainly kitchen and bathroom and electrical works you see that
02:28:56 that yes did um well i'm sorry before i go onto my question but point three and point three um the case studies provider showed a
02:29:09 um the case studies provider showed a wide range of skills but no specific reference to cladding there's reference to external refurbishment works now just showing you both of those elements of feedback did the tmo try to get a clerk of works
02:29:21 get a clerk of works who had experience of overcladding projects
02:29:25 projects it was in the original invitation to tender
02:29:29 tender that that's what the project entailed yes and we did our specifically for people to
02:29:37 people to expand on any experience they had with it so that we would know that they had done that work before right
02:29:45 right but given the comments we see here it looks as if on the assessment these clerks of works who did win the tend to run fell rather short in respect of their experience of cladding projects
02:29:58 experience of cladding projects the in section two it says obviously about the nat west tower and cladding worked for haringey yes but as you say it didn't give much detail
02:30:09 detail no did the other bidder have less or even less experience with cladding than john rowan i can't remember i'm afraid right because we've seen that they were they were
02:30:19 were almost identical and my question is when it came to cladding did tma think about the other bidder and their experience in relation to cladding particularly
02:30:30 particularly yeah no i i i don't remember enough about the other video i remember who it was
02:30:35 was but i i don't remember and the feedback which would have helped me right thank you mr chairman it's now 4 30 and i've come to the end of
02:30:46 30 and i've come to the end of that sub-topic but i am still on the topic of clerk of works i certainly can't finish that off now wouldn't it be best to stop now and it will it would yes thank you but you can have further questions
02:30:57 can have further questions i will have further questions for tomorrow morning i don't think i'm going to take the entire morning with miss williams it's possible but it's unlikely but allowing for the 30 minutes we need to sweep for super questions
02:31:08 super questions perhaps other things which may emerge during the course of later today and tomorrow morning it's wise i think to allow the full morning for her and you should be guided accordingly if that's possible all right thank you very much well miss
02:31:19 all right thank you very much well miss williams we're going to stop there for the day
02:31:21 the day as you've heard i'm afraid we're going to have to ask you to come back again tomorrow morning for some more questions i think it would be wise to assume that you won't leave before lunchtime we'll try and do
02:31:32 leave before lunchtime we'll try and do better than that but it can't be very short thank you all right so
02:31:36 right so um please remember not to talk about your evidence or anything relating to it while you're away and now if you'd like to give the usher that'll be fine
02:31:44 be fine thank you very much
02:31:55 thank you very much 10 o'clock tomorrow thank you mr