Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (TMO) Evidence - Tuesday 13th October 2020 (2/2)

Full transcript

00:00:08 thank you would you ask mr anderson to come back in please

00:00:25 [Music]

00:00:29 all right ready to carry on yes thank you good thank you yes mr kenneth sir thank you before um i recommence examination of mr anderson i should say that uh the council team have been reviewing

00:00:41 uh the council team have been reviewing the evidence of mr anderson and mr gibson

00:00:44 gibson over the course of the short adjournment and particularly having regard to the timetable

00:00:48 timetable in view of the volume of module 3 questions properly to properly to be put to both witnesses and in order to accommodate the module 1 questions within the timetable we've decided not to examine module 3

00:01:00 we've decided not to examine module 3 issues

00:01:01 issues with these two witnesses now instead consideration will be given to seeing which module 3 questions can be investigated by further rule 9 requests and a recall of these witnesses for oral evidence

00:01:12 for oral evidence if necessary at module 3. yes very well thank you very much thank you

00:01:20 mr anderson um now turn to the topic of studio e's terms and conditions and we looked a little earlier at the letter a day letter sent by bruce

00:01:31 letter a day letter sent by bruce soons together with a suite of documents and could we turn that document up which is essie a quadruple zero four five six two

00:01:43 and i'll just let you familiarize yourself again with that letter

00:01:52 okay

00:02:31 essentially the contract documents being sent by bruce soon to you to sign would you agree yes did you read those documents uh i reviewed them not necessarily at a great

00:02:44 reviewed them not necessarily at a great level of detail because at this point they

00:02:47 they they were draft or considered to be draft and so you read them yes yes did you sign them no and why didn't you sign them at this stage uh um if you look down at the second

00:02:59 uh um if you look down at the second paragraph

00:02:59 paragraph immediately after the bullet point items you'll note there it is not possible to finalize the documents until the stage of the proposed novation is decided exactly and our scope of work is clear

00:03:11 exactly and our scope of work is clear and at this stage that wasn't clear exactly and that leads up to my question is that the explanation as to why these documents were not signed at this stage in 2012 correct thank you now among the suite of

00:03:23 correct thank you now among the suite of documents that were sent by mr suns was the document we can see at s-e-a quadruple zero nine eight two three

00:03:35 now this is a project data document and if we could turn to page five

00:03:43 it lists there the project appointments i'll just let you have a quick read of that so you know what i'm asking you

00:03:55 yes now studio e are listed as being the lead consultant lead designer and architect as designer did that reflect your understanding of the contractual relationship between the tmo and studio e yes it did

00:04:09 and just for the avoidance of doubt at which reba stage were you expecting studio

00:04:14 studio e to work until uh it was unclear whether it would be the end of stage d or the end of stage e at this point in time thank you apple yards are listed as being the cdmc

00:04:25 apple yards are listed as being the cdmc contract administrator employers agent and cost consultant again did that reflect your understanding of the contractual relationship between the tmo and apple yards

00:04:37 yes bar the fact that contract administrator is also oh sorry they are immediately below that employer's agent apologies so the answer to my question is yes yes yes thank you

00:04:48 is yes yes yes thank you um could we now turn on to uh tmo's relationship with apple yards artelia uh you send you were sent an email from simon cash of apple yards on the 4th of april 2012. now that is at art quadruple 0-6309

00:05:06 now that is at art quadruple 0-6309 internal page 3. and he says there i understand that you have started discussions with studio e in connection with improvement works to

00:05:17 in connection with improvement works to grenfell tower peter wright has asked me to make contact with you to discuss cost consultancy services now peter wright was from rbkc is that right that's correct uh were you expecting this email from simon

00:05:28 were you expecting this email from simon cash

00:05:29 cash i'd expected it much earlier than this but yes

00:05:33 but yes had you been told by peter wright or someone else at rbkc to use apple yards yes yes and who gave you the instruction again that was in a similar vein to that for

00:05:43 for the remainder of the pre-construction professional team uh through a variety of contacts at rbc now you responded to that email after a

00:05:54 now you responded to that email after a chaser on the 12th of april 2012 and we can find that at internal page one between in this email chain

00:06:05 and that you say there in the second paragraph

00:06:08 paragraph essentially what i require at this stage is the development of a project works cost budget based upon the proposals being developed by the design team

00:06:19 so at this stage is it right to say that you're instructing apple yards as cost consultants at this point uh my that's what this specific communication relates to

00:06:30 relates to uh although they were from my inquiries of rbkc so i i'd asked rbkc what conversations they'd had

00:06:41 they'd had with apple yards but also what their services were in relation to calc because that was the basis upon which we would be engaging them and you understood that apple yards were

00:06:52 and you understood that apple yards were separate and distinct to the design team is that right yes although whilst they wouldn't have a direct design role i still class them as a member of

00:07:04 role i still class them as a member of the design team why because they're an intrinsic part of the overall composite makeup of a design team

00:07:14 team a cost consultant advises on costs employers agent advisors upon the administrative aspects of it and probably more importantly the cdmc role

00:07:25 probably more importantly the cdmc role is the one that should be focusing upon health and safety matters so is it right to say that you weren't intending to instruct them to carry out any design role

00:07:36 role not specifically designed no cost consultancy yes that was uh so as you highlighted earlier on cdmc role employers agent

00:07:48 cdmc role employers agent which incorporates contract administration who would you expect to advise tmo on the design and any design changes proposed by studio e or any other designers i would have expected either apple yards

00:08:01 i would have expected either apple yards in its cdmc role to advise upon health and safety implications or regulatory implications or apple yards as employers agent

00:08:12 agent to advise as to whether or not the design evolution had compromised uh or derogated uh the employers requirements can i take it from that do you consider there was

00:08:23 it from that do you consider there was insufficient knowledge and expertise in-house at the tmo to provide advice on design and design changes

00:08:31 changes i think whilst kctmo and my directorate and team had appropriate skills experience competencies resources

00:08:42 experience competencies resources we very much operated on the basis of being a thin client and that we outsourced that element of the function to the pre-contract professional team you

00:08:56 the pre-contract professional team you go on to say i anticipate your commission being on the same basis as that for calc and the team working on ground for must be separate to calc as it must not impede progress on that project um so just to make clear a point you

00:09:09 um so just to make clear a point you made earlier on what you wanted was to use apple yards but with different personnel on the different projects that's correct

00:09:18 did anyone give you an express instruction or indeed an implied instruction that progress on calc ought not to be impeded

00:09:26 impeded i think there was there was an implied instruction from rbkc that we our work the work of the pre-construction professional team uh should not

00:09:37 uh should not impede the work that was to be progressed and was being progressed on calc thank you if we can go to the top of this email chain

00:09:49 and we see there that simon cash attached a proposal for provision of qsea and cdmc services um did you request those services yes

00:10:00 um did you request those services yes did you request any other services from appleyard

00:10:03 appleyard um no

00:10:07 um no could we now go to the minutes from the second design team meeting on the 24th of may 2012 which can be found at art quadruple zero six four double one

00:10:22 now these are minutes prepared by studio e

00:10:26 e you ricky sams and paul duncan were present from the tmo and if we look under item 1.00 introductions it says alan dawson is introduced as the

00:10:37 it says alan dawson is introduced as the project manager assisted by david hale did you understand that to be the case that mr dawson was undertaking the project manager role um

00:10:48 if i may explain um if you could answer the question first and we can take it from there mr anderson i i didn't believe that um or it certainly wasn't my understanding that

00:10:59 certainly wasn't my understanding that apple yards were performing the role of project manager in its industry sense

00:11:08 can you explain to us why apple yards had formed the view that one of their own would be the project manager

00:11:16 my recollection is that alan dawson and one other from apple yards were introduced to me as project managers not necessarily that they would fulfill the role of

00:11:27 they would fulfill the role of ae project manager on the project

00:11:32 that gives rise to the question who did you think would be carrying out the project manager role

00:11:41 within the context of the pre-construction professional team every member of it was performing a project management duty

00:11:53 isn't it orthodox to have an individual identified as the project manager

00:12:01 on some construction projects you may appoint a project manager in its industry recognized sense on this particular project there was no

00:12:12 on this particular project there was no such role

00:12:13 such role and there wasn't a requirement for it primarily because we had a lead designer in the form of studio e

00:12:21 studio e we had an employer's agent in the form of apple yards simile cdmc and a cost consultant

00:12:33 now if i can ask you to turn to art quadruple zero six two five nine

00:12:43 and if that could be amplified just to complete this chain again you confirm the appointment of apple yards as outlined in the proposal the 2nd of may

00:12:53 may is that correct correct thank you now can i turn to a separate topic which is the tmo's relationship with exover first of all can you help us first of

00:13:04 first of all can you help us first of all how you or the tmo first came to be aware of exova there was a

00:13:13 design team meeting i cannot recall whether it was hosted by studio or it was hosted by apple yards the um it was an expansion of a

00:13:25 the um it was an expansion of a discussion around fire safety i recall that studio e had suggested again that they would like to engage or

00:13:36 again that they would like to engage or they felt that we as clients should engage

00:13:39 engage a fire safety consultant and it

00:13:45 thank you now if we can turn to paragraph 21 of your first witness statement

00:13:49 statement which is at tm010048968 internal four and you say there that part of your primary involvement in the

00:14:00 part of your primary involvement in the grenfell project was consultant team appointment and management is that correct correct now if we can turn to paragraph 67 within

00:14:08 within this same witness statement which is a page 14.

00:14:15 page 14. 15.

00:14:21 when you say you had responsible for ensuring that systems were in place to assess tmo properties for health and safety risks an example of this is that i would need to be satisfied that there was a system in place for

00:14:33 that there was a system in place for assessing properties for fire risk now does that mean that you had responsibility for ensuring that there was a fire safety strategy at grenfell

00:14:48 within the tmo health and safety and fire safety matters were dealt with by the health and safety team in my role i wish to be satisfied and i wanted to

00:14:59 i wish to be satisfied and i wanted to be satisfied uh the appropriate processes were in place and that the relevant documentation was evident and i did satisfy myself for that your specific point about a fire safety

00:15:11 your specific point about a fire safety strategy

00:15:14 strategy i i would say on that that

00:15:19 it wasn't a statutory requirement to have fire safety strategy and there are many buildings i'm going to interrupt you i apologize mr anderson the question you were asked was clear

00:15:30 was clear did you have responsibility for ensuring that there was a fire safety strategy what's your answer to that question please no thank you

00:15:41 no thank you where did you think that responsibility lay

00:15:45 lay as i said there wasn't a statutory requirement to have a fire safety strategy

00:15:49 strategy there's a statutory requirement to have fire risk assessments and where did responsibility lie do you say for conducting those assessments uh for ensuring that those assessments were

00:16:00 for ensuring that those assessments were carried out that was the tmo health and safety team and for who where did responsibility lie for ensuring there were systems for those fire risk assessments to be carried out again that was the health and safety

00:16:11 again that was the health and safety team

00:16:14 in this regard we go to discuss xover at paragraph 63 of your first witness and if you could turn to that

00:16:25 my understanding is that xover were initially paid directly by the tmo which provided the tmo with the direct contractual link to them i believe this direct link was important

00:16:37 i believe this direct link was important as the fire safety strategy and advice was going to be quite crucial to the success of the refurbishment of grenfell tower and the ongoing management of grenfell tower can you explain why did you think it was

00:16:48 can you explain why did you think it was important to have that direct contractual link for me fire safety and the health and safety of residents was was a key requirement we were talking about doing

00:17:01 requirement we were talking about doing quite a lot of work to grenfell tower and some fairly major elements of that would

00:17:09 would be the reorganization of the escape routes for example from the original construction and i wanted to be sure that we had a relevant resource

00:17:21 sure that we had a relevant resource that

00:17:21 that had the competencies and experiences beyond those of the pre-construction professional team to carry out those duties and advise us accordingly so put differently you wanted to ensure that xover's

00:17:32 wanted to ensure that xover's contractual obligations were sufficient to provide the advice and strategy to the tmo that the tmo felt was necessary and desirable yes thank you

00:17:43 can you explain in more detail why you thought that the fire safety strategy and advice would be quotes crucial to the success close quotes of the refurbishment um as i touched on uh in the previous

00:17:55 as i touched on uh in the previous response

00:17:55 response we would we were proposing to do a lot of

00:17:59 of changes to the grenfell tower particularly around means of escape fire safety detection

00:18:11 fire safety detection and whatever proposals we ended up finalizing or crystallizing they would have an impact on that and i wanted an organization in place with a direct relationship with

00:18:24 in place with a direct relationship with kctmo

00:18:26 kctmo were there any particular aspects the refurbishment project particular aspects that caused you concern um although we were at a fairly early stage in the design development um certainly the

00:18:40 design development um certainly the means of escape was one the smoke ventilation system was another in terms of what did we do about that how do we comply

00:18:51 how do we comply there was whatever we ended up doing with the external fenestrations

00:18:58 and i think there was the the other one uh

00:19:01 uh was actually more to do with um access to the the tower itself in the event of a fire thank you could we turn to your second

00:19:12 thank you could we turn to your second witness statement and paragraph 20 which can be found at tm0084734 internal five and it's the third

00:19:24 internal five and it's the third sentence where you say i did not express any view or comment in any way

00:19:31 any way on the scope of xover's work for the tmo given that you thought the direct contractual link was important why did you not express any view

00:19:42 why did you not express any view or comment in any way on this precise scope of the work to be carried out by xover

00:19:48 xover i i'd i'd provided the pre-construction professional team with an overview of what uh i believe to be critical matters from our perspective as

00:19:59 critical matters from our perspective as in the kctmo perspective i'd also made it quite clear to the pre-construction professional team that direction to xover about their final role in relation to the evolving

00:20:12 final role in relation to the evolving design

00:20:13 design will be dealt with through studio e now can we follow that through and if we can turn to give some context to paragraph 21 of this statement where you say this i

00:20:24 of this statement where you say this i did not carry out reviews of the reports produced by xover nor did i read their reports rather i would have taken guidance from the pre-contract professional team in particular studio e and apple yards

00:20:36 particular studio e and apple yards i did not review a draft fire safety strategy before i left the tmo nor did i act on any recommendations made by exover that i was aware of before i left the tma this was the role of the

00:20:47 tma this was the role of the pre-contract professional team now which pre-contract professional team member did you expect to act on the recommendations made by xover studio e and apple yarns

00:21:01 apple yards were retained as ea qs and the cdmc

00:21:05 the cdmc did you expect any guidance to come from them in relation to fire safety strategy uh yes what particular guidance would you have expected given their contractual roles

00:21:17 contractual roles for studio e as lead designer i would expect them to follow codes of practice regulations legislation [Music]

00:21:26 [Music] and the like and from apple yards particularly in its role as cdmc is to advise on any divergence from regulation or recommendations

00:21:37 from regulation or recommendations around that do you know if anyone at the tmo had read any of the reports of fire safety strategies by the time you left the tmo

00:21:47 i i didn't read them my understanding is that paul duncan may have read them and that they were also shared with the health and safety team within tmo

00:22:00 the health and safety team within tmo thank you

00:22:01 thank you could you be shown that the minutes from the client meeting that took place on the 28th of march 2012 which can be found at max max quadruple zero treble zero

00:22:13 quadruple zero treble zero eight

00:22:19 now you'll note that you were at that meeting and if we could turn to the entry on page two

00:22:28 where it says fire safety advice may be required which is the penultimate entry under section 4.0 additional

00:22:38 consultants can you recall whether there was any discussion at that meeting about the need for fire safety advice it was only in very general terms that

00:22:52 it was only in very general terms that because we were at an early stage of the design development uh that as that design evolved there may be a requirement for it and did mr suns mention which aspects of

00:23:04 and did mr suns mention which aspects of the project would require safety fire sorry fire safety advice or why such advice was necessary i don't recall it at that stage

00:23:14 but it was left that studio e were to engage a fire safety advisor is that right

00:23:19 right subsequent to this yes did you ask them to do so or did they volunteer to do so uh they put forward eggs over warrington fire

00:23:30 eggs over warrington fire as a suggestion um i confirmed that that was acceptable to kctmo and that we would progress that so put differently in apologies for

00:23:41 so put differently in apologies for putting maybe the same point differently did you recommend that xover were used was it something that studio e was solely to investigate studio you recommended them thank you did you know xover by

00:23:54 thank you did you know xover by reputation before uh this time i i knew of vex over and i have used xova previously did you carry out any checks yourself to

00:24:07 did you carry out any checks yourself to ensure that they were competent to work on the grenfell project or was that something you left a studio e i left that with studio e although i was aware

00:24:15 aware um that they were very much viewed within that sector as being the market leader were you aware that xover would be required to advise on the over cladding aspect of the project um that was my intention it was your

00:24:28 um that was my intention it was your intention yes can we now look at the minutes of the first design team meeting on the 19th of april 2012 which is at tmo one treble zero double one four three

00:24:48 and again see that you're present and also a representative of exova

00:24:54 now if we de-amplify

00:25:02 that we can see that you gave an outline the project brief can you remember who'd arranged for xover to attend that design team meeting in april 2012. my recollection is that was studio e

00:25:14 my recollection is that was studio e now studio sorry xover sent a fee proposal to bruce soon's on the 9th of may 2012

00:25:20 may 2012 and if we could turn that up please it's a tmo

00:25:23 a tmo 1 treble 0 3 8 5.

00:25:31 i'll just let you have a quick read of that so you can refresh your memory [Applause]

00:25:41 can we skip to the next page please

00:25:49 thank you

00:25:52 now mr anson my first question you don't need to read all of it but do you recall seeing that fee proposal uh yes now if we can look at the second paragraph

00:26:03 paragraph on page two which is the page that's on the screen now which reads the aim of the fire safety work would be to ensure a high standard of fire and life safety for the occupants of the building

00:26:14 for the occupants of the building whilst highlighting any areas of the building's design that may represent an approvals risk do you see that correct do you remember reading that i don't remember reading it but i did

00:26:26 i don't remember reading it but i did read this

00:26:27 read this feed proposal did you carry out any checks to make sure that what xover were offering to produce would meet their aim of ensuring a high standard of fire and life

00:26:38 fire and life safety for the occupants of the building i didn't

00:26:42 i didn't is that something you left a studio e i i relied on both studio e to advise on that

00:26:47 that and apple yards in its role as cdmc did you ask the question of studio e whether what was proposed met that aim of ensuring a high standard

00:26:58 met that aim of ensuring a high standard of fire

00:26:59 of fire and life safety for the occupants my recollection is i asked both studio e and apple yarns as cdmc and that they both confirmed that that this was

00:27:10 this was acceptable to them thank you now under the heading reba stage d e which is slightly further down this page the second paragraph states the fire

00:27:23 the second paragraph states the fire safety design would be documented in a fire safety sorry fire strategy report this document would ultimately be submitted to the building control authority in order to achieve regulatory approval

00:27:36 in order to achieve regulatory approval were you aware that xover were to produce a fire strategy report yes were you aware that the report would be submitted in order to achieve regulatory approval yes

00:27:47 yes do you know if such a report was in fact submitted to building control i don't who would have been responsible for ensuring that had been done

00:27:57 my understanding of the process and my expectation would be that through studio e that would be submitted did you ever respond to either studio e

00:28:08 did you ever respond to either studio e or xover in relation to this fee proposal

00:28:12 proposal or did you leave it with studio e to deal with i um no i recall delegating responsibility to paul dunkerton to go back to exover

00:28:23 paul dunkerton to go back to exover following discussions with studio e and apple yards of cdmc to confirm the fee proposal as acceptable so if i can be more precise

00:28:38 so if i can be more precise you decided that it was acceptable and you directed mr dunkerton to confirm that

00:28:43 that on on the basis of guidance from studio e and apple yards yes but you made the decision there yes can we look next at the minutes of the project design team meeting on the 25th

00:28:54 project design team meeting on the 25th of june 2012 which can be found at e a quadruple zero four eight six four

00:29:06 now you're not there but mr duncan was but you're first on the distribution list do you remember reading these minutes

00:29:19 i don't remember reading them but i didn't routinely read design team meetings thank you could we go to page three of these minutes and the heading previous actions

00:29:31 and the heading previous actions at the bottom half of the page and you'll see the second entry reads there is no existing fire strategy for the building xover will need to prepare one as part of the upgrade works

00:29:43 of the upgrade works se studio e to chase do you remember reading that yes given

00:29:50 yes given your role in relation to systems and ensuring there are proper systems in place were you concerned that was no existing fire strategy for the building

00:30:01 existing fire strategy for the building i wasn't concerned it is common for buildings of that age not to have an original fire strategy we are talking about a property that was

00:30:13 we are talking about a property that was occupied in 1974 what i did seek clarity on was that we actually had a fire risk assessment that was in accordance with the

00:30:24 that was in accordance with the regulatory reform order

00:30:28 and that was confirmed to me that's not minuted there is it i don't think it isn't i wasn't at the meeting to ask that question did you email mr duncan for example

00:30:40 did you email mr duncan for example afterwards um i can't recall whether i emailed or he emailed me we had a discussion around this the fire risk assessment was obtained from the kctmo health and

00:30:54 was obtained from the kctmo health and safety team and it was provided to the pre-construction professional team and xover now can we look at the minutes for the next project meeting on the 18th

00:31:05 for the next project meeting on the 18th of july 2012 which are at sea quadruple 0-5254

00:31:16 now again you're not present but mr duncan is

00:31:25 before we go on to previous actions at page four you mentioned earlier in your evidence that you juggled a number of your commitments at this time is this the type of meeting

00:31:36 at this time is this the type of meeting which you wouldn't have attended but would have sent mr duncan to represent the tmo's interests

00:31:44 yes now if we go to page four and the heading previous actions

00:31:52 you'll see there's the final item there is no existing fire strategy for the building xover to proceed can you remember reading that entry i'm sure i did

00:32:05 reading that entry i'm sure i did and can you remember whether at this time

00:32:09 time given the absence of an existing fire strategy you chased mr dungaton as to what was happening about the fire risk assessment can you remember what you did in response to seeing that entry i

00:32:20 in response to seeing that entry i recall

00:32:20 recall paul and i having conversations i can't recall when um around providing well one checking that fire risk assessment was in place uh that was subsequently

00:32:31 was in place uh that was subsequently confirmed by the kctmo health and safety team and subsequently a copy of that was provided to the pre-construction professional team endigs over were you aware or did you

00:32:43 endigs over were you aware or did you ask

00:32:44 ask what steps xover had taken to produce a fire strategy when you saw this no did you know whether xover had even visited the tower by this state

00:32:55 visited the tower by this state my understanding from the feedback i'd had was that xover had visited uh but it was an external view only um can we go to the design team meeting on the 26th of july 2012

00:33:08 on the 26th of july 2012 and that is s e a quadruple zero five six zero six

00:33:16 and again your present with mr duncan and if we can go to page four

00:33:28 under quantity surveyor the final entry there is no existing fire strategy for the building now i think that is the third time

00:33:40 now i think that is the third time that absence had been noted in the minutes

00:33:44 minutes can you remember what steps you asked to ensure that xover had started work on obtaining or preparing a fire safety strategy

00:33:53 strategy uh i can't recall um what i'd asked in relation to that i'm i'm finding it slightly perplexing given that the

00:34:01 that the the wording and the phraseology there is exactly the same as the previous meeting

00:34:10 but equally there's no reference to your seeking an update regarding the fire risk assessment is there no uh excuse me mr kenil

00:34:23 uh excuse me mr kenil i believe you meant fire safety strategy rather than fire risk assessment no i asked you about fire risk assessment yeah my my understanding um

00:34:34 yeah my my understanding um is that i don't know exactly when but the fire risk assessment uh which was fro uh from much earlier uh had been provided okay now

00:34:45 uh had been provided okay now the drought fire straight sorry a drought fire strategy was produced by xover on the 16th of august 2012 and we see that at tm01 trouble zero one nine two five

00:35:03 one nine two five now did you read that report no i didn't why i don't recall

00:35:14 but you're absolutely certain you didn't read it yeah definitely

00:35:24 can you give us an explanation as to why you didn't read it i don't know whether it was issued to me um

00:35:32 um i even if it had been issued to me i would have very much been relying upon the pre-construction professional team and apple yards in the role of cdmc

00:35:43 and apple yards in the role of cdmc to review the detail of it and bring back any recommendations or alterations that are required to it

00:35:52 you didn't think you'd bring to bear some of your experience and expertise and the benefit of your continuing cpd to read its contents and satisfy yourself as what have been done

00:36:03 yourself as what have been done again i can't say whether i i don't recall seeing this document now could i ask you to go to an internal ex-over

00:36:15 ask you to go to an internal ex-over email

00:36:16 email sent by the author of this report kate cooney

00:36:19 cooney sent on the 16th of august and that can be found at exo quadruple 0-1279

00:36:32 and if you can see the large paragraph at the start and three lines up kate cooney said and i quote they are making an existing

00:36:43 and i quote they are making an existing crap condition worse so it's a matter of working the worst bits out and making the new stuff work no sprinklers wanted labc building control kensington chelsea

00:36:54 labc building control kensington chelsea do we have any contacts there now were you ever told either by studio e or anyone else that the proposed changes would be making the existing building worse from a fire safety point of view

00:37:07 worse from a fire safety point of view i've never had that relay to me i've not seen this email before now you were at the meeting on the 26th of july 2012 which was attended by claire barker from exover can i ask you the specific question did

00:37:19 can i ask you the specific question did she raise anything at that meeting along the lines of this comment i don't recall anything of that being arranged now in that uh penultimate and final

00:37:30 now in that uh penultimate and final line of that sentence it says no sprinklers wanted can you remember was that the tmos considered view at the time that you didn't want to install sprinklers

00:37:41 didn't want to install sprinklers i i don't recall that specifically and certainly didn't give an instruction to

00:37:48 to the pre-construction professional team that we shouldn't install sprinklers i am aware that the the general view within building control fire

00:38:00 view within building control fire authorities etc was not to install sprinkler systems if they weren't

00:38:05 weren't essential that comes on to my next question

00:38:09 question um which is what sprinklers ever discuss as a possible option at grandfather i i do recall there being general discussion around it but nothing further beyond that can you

00:38:21 but nothing further beyond that can you remember

00:38:22 remember who the participants were in the general discussion were you involved as a starting point no i didn't start that discussion i my recollection is the studio e fed back following conversations that

00:38:35 e fed back following conversations that they'd had with building control okay thank you now you attend a design team meeting on the 6th of september 2012

00:38:42 2012 and we can see the minutes sea quadruple zero six one five seven and if we turn to the second page

00:38:56 and if you could amplify down there you see below halfway there's a heading fire and there's a second entry there which says the draft fire strategy needs detailed interrogation

00:39:07 detailed interrogation and a meeting was arranged with studio e early next week to review now do you remember any discussion about the substance of the fire safety strategy at that meeting

00:39:21 my my recollection is that um following the initial draft which as i said i hadn't read there were some

00:39:31 some elements of it that required clarification um and that that clarification could either come from kctmo in terms of its management of the building

00:39:43 building so the stay put policy or vacate

00:39:47 lfepa london fire and emergency planning authority

00:39:51 authority or from building control um was it any cause of concern for you that the draft required uh further detailed interrogation um

00:40:04 it wasn't at this stage and i go back to the point earlier that

00:40:09 this building didn't require a fire strategy at that point in time the fire strategy was intended to baseline the design to be implemented

00:40:20 baseline the design to be implemented and there would be a further fire safety strategy required as part of the um the works that have been completed the what was in place and i did need to

00:40:31 what was in place and i did need to satisfy myself and did was that under the regulatory reform order fire safety that a fire risk assessment had been carried out

00:40:42 carried out and that the requirements of that had been communicated across kctmo and to residents and when you say you wanted to ensure that its contents have been communicated out

00:40:53 its contents have been communicated out to casey timo and to residents can you help us

00:40:57 help us as to who you to whom you gave the instruction to do so um i wouldn't have given that instruction that would have come from the health and safety team but what i do know is that part of the process was that that information was

00:41:09 process was that that information was shared with residents via the housing management function and the through the local estate management office and that within excuse me

00:41:21 and that within excuse me within kctmo it was the health and safety team that community forward communicated that to each of the relevant departments did you satisfy yourself that the procedures were in place to do that or

00:41:33 procedures were in place to do that or did you satisfy yourself that the substance was actually communicated which one was it uh both and how did you what did you do to ensure that the substance had been communicated who did you ask who did you

00:41:44 communicated who did you ask who did you email

00:41:45 email i i didn't need to ask i'd actually seen it

00:41:48 it for myself at grenfell tower it was evident on the notice board and so it was the notice board

00:41:59 and just to be more precise what was it on that notice board that satisfied you it was the fire risk assessment thank you there was also a copy of it in the

00:42:08 the information box and you double checked that yourself did you yeah and a copy in fact the one i did check is the the wardens

00:42:19 is the the wardens the estate wardens was that they had a copy as well thank you

00:42:27 could we turn now to the outline fire safety strategy provided by xover on the 31st of october 2012 which can be found at exo quadruple zero

00:42:39 zero five one nine

00:42:48 can you remember did you receive this report

00:42:52 report i i don't know i don't recognize it would it follow therefore that you don't know whether you read it or is it likely that you didn't i don't recall reading it

00:43:06 if we can turn further into page section one in the outline strategy

00:43:16 and if i could ask that to be amplified now if i could just ask you just to skim read that

00:43:19 read that for me mr anson

00:43:32 okay would you agree with me that there's no reference there to cladding or overclouding

00:43:39 no there isn't

00:43:43 so given is it fair to say that you weren't aware that cladding slash overclouding was not mentioned there i wasn't

00:43:57 could i ask you to turn to paragraph 3.1.4 on page 8 of this outline

00:44:08 3.1.4 on page 8 of this outline thank you i'll just let you read that mr anderson

00:44:14 okay um assuming you didn't read this outline were you made aware of what was set out of paragraph 3.14 namely it is considered that the

00:44:25 namely it is considered that the proposed changes will have no adverse effect on the building in relation to external fire spread but this will be confirmed by an analysis in a future issue of this report

00:44:35 report i wasn't if you had been made aware of it

00:44:39 it would you have been concerned that given the overcladding the report did not confirm there would be no adverse changes from that i would find that very alarming and one of my first actions would

00:44:51 and one of my first actions would probably be um you know as polite away as possible uh how do you expect us to comply with that requirement of the approved document

00:45:07 could i turn to paragraph 64 of your first witness statement which can be found at tm0100

00:45:16 48968 where you say the fire safety strategy had not been finalized by the time i left the tmo did you meet or speak to peter madison as part of a handover arrangement

00:45:29 as part of a handover arrangement uh peter and i had three maybe four handover discussions uh prior to him starting originally peter was

00:45:40 was expected to start with kctmo

00:45:45 end of december beginning in january um that was subsequently postponed um did you discuss the question of finalizing the fire safety strategy in any of those three or four meetings

00:45:56 in any of those three or four meetings you had with him i i can't recall it specifically we did cover

00:46:01 cover salient points to do with the project um the more detailed handover i had was actually with paul dunkerton in terms of outstanding issues and what needed to be progressed

00:46:12 needed to be progressed can you remember whether you raised the question of the fire safety strategy with him as part of those discussions i i don't know if i raised the strategy

00:46:23 i i don't know if i raised the strategy specifically i did raise fire safety and how did you in what way did you raise fire safety what substance concerned you sufficiently to raise it with him

00:46:32 with him it wasn't so much a concern it was more about the fact that as part of the evolving design um the fire safety strategy going forward

00:46:44 the fire safety strategy going forward needed to be finalized and it was something

00:46:47 something i was quite keen to make sure uh he was aware of

00:46:51 aware of are there any notes or minutes of the meetings you had with mr madison did you make any

00:46:56 make any uh i didn't i know that um peter took notes himself he did or didn't he did

00:47:03 did he did and did mr did you make any notes of your

00:47:07 of your handover in the vertical meetings discussions with mr duncan uh no paul did that

00:47:12 did that paul did that

00:47:15 now there's one final point before we leave this topic it relates to the duration of exover's retainer if i could ask an email to be put up on the screen

00:47:26 the screen e x o

00:47:30 triple zero double zero five four nine an internal page two

00:47:42 and it's an email of the 18th of july and artelia emailed exover and it starts the email starts terry

00:47:53 terry i just wanted to drop you a short note to confirm that the client has now confirmed your proposed fee is approved to which end we would now ask that you engage with bruce at studio e in respect to the above project

00:48:04 in respect to the above project forthwith we are currently reviewing how to formalize consultant appointments as it may be that we have one main appointment studio e who then sub consult to all all other parties including

00:48:16 all all other parties including yourselves which may take a week or so to resolve um

00:48:22 the question is this did you expect xover to be retained for the duration of the project yes i did subject to if there were to be an ovation

00:48:34 if there were to be an ovation and they would be retained client-side and that was also part of the driver for kctmo commissioning them in the first instance thank you i now turn to a separate topic a new one which

00:48:46 turn to a separate topic a new one which is the budget and could i ask you to turn to your second witness statement

00:48:52 statement which is at tm0084734 and paragraphs 24 through to 26.

00:49:05 can i let you might be useful if i just let you refresh your memory of those three paragraphs mr anderson thank you that's 24 25 26 yes please thank you

00:49:39 thank you thank you mr anderson now you've noted that paragraph 24 that you were involved in constructing and presenting the initial budget to the board which was 6.2 million pounds funds which

00:49:50 which was 6.2 million pounds funds which were to be derived from the sale of elm park gardens and 3 million pounds from the capital budget

00:49:56 budget now what role did you have in setting that budget um the the budget setting process was very much informed or i was

00:50:08 process was very much informed or i was guided very much by apple yards in their cost consultancy capacity and so i i very much relied upon them to provide construction budget figures

00:50:21 provide construction budget figures and from that then derived an overall project

00:50:25 project thank you and can you help us how was the figure of 6.2 million calculated and by whom uh the 6.2 million was calculated by

00:50:36 uh the 6.2 million was calculated by rbkc um it was on the basis of receipts that they received from the sale of elm park gardens sub-basement areas that was a matter

00:50:48 sub-basement areas that was a matter that they took forward to their cabinet you

00:50:51 you you drew attention to that report earlier today the the overall budget estimate at this point in time construction budget estimate at this point in time

00:51:04 estimate at this point in time actually no apologies the overall project construction project budget at this point in time was 9.2 million the balance that came from capital programme funds

00:51:15 programme funds being apologies for the crudity of it but is it fair to say that the budget was primarily based on availability of funds at this stage uh no um if

00:51:26 uh no um if if that were to follow then the budget would only be 6.2 million

00:51:32 there was a realisation that the 6.2 million from the sale wasn't the full budget and that things like kitchens bathrooms electrical upgrades would be funded through the capital

00:51:44 would be funded through the capital program you say in paragraph 25 that you are unable to recall exact dates the detailed substance of any discussions in relation to the budget and you refer there to directors of

00:51:56 and you refer there to directors of housing finance at various points when you say directors of housing just be clear you're referring there to rbkc's director of housing i laura johnson is that right and the director of finance as well yes

00:52:09 now could we turn to the project brief as prepared by apple yards on the 30th of august 2012 which is a art quadruple zero six two eight four

00:52:25 if that could be expanded particularly the central section dealing with budget

00:52:34 it says the refurbishment has secured funding of six million pounds inclusive all fees etc from rbkc for carrying out the refurbishment but we have been advised by the client that it should be necessary as per

00:52:46 that it should be necessary as per recent cost budget cost appraisals a further 2 million

00:52:50 million pounds can be sourced from capital expenses first of all did you see this brief no i can't say whether i did or not can you help us on whether it was correct to say

00:53:02 help us on whether it was correct to say that

00:53:03 that 6 million was being funded by rbkc and 2 million

00:53:07 million would be derived from capital expenses could you tell me the date of this again yes if you scroll up it's the 30th of august 2012. 30th of august 2012. um certainly the 6

00:53:18 30th of august 2012. um certainly the 6 million is correct 2 million's not because by the time we got to that point in the year the the overall project budget was 9.5 million and presumably 2

00:53:30 9.5 million and presumably 2 the 2 million would come in capital expenses would come from the council rather than the tmo

00:53:37 yes all all funds came from rbkc thank you and to whom would you speak at rbkc in relation to uh consideration discussion of the budget

00:53:48 discussion of the budget um

00:53:52 just clarifying one point so the of course what's described there as capital expenses is actually capital programme i understood um any funds coming out of the capital program would have been predetermined so on an

00:54:05 would have been predetermined so on an annual basis kctmo informed rbkc as to what capital programme funds were required they were approved separate to grenfell

00:54:16 they were approved separate to grenfell tower

00:54:18 tower in terms of who those conversations would have been with at rbkc again that would have been um uh it would have certainly been uh laura johnson director of housing

00:54:29 uh laura johnson director of housing potentially others within her team or directorate uh also possibly director of finance um at rbkc but certainly the uh the capital accountant for the hra

00:54:42 the capital accountant for the hra housing revenue account and who would that be

00:54:46 i can't recall his name again if apologies for the the blunt question but if there needed to be an increase in budget to whom would you

00:54:58 increase in budget to whom would you turn

00:54:58 turn rbkc for that discussion uh initially that would be a conversation with laura

00:55:04 johnson can you assist us with what our bkc's reaction was when there was a case for a budget increase uh we we'd always made it clear from the

00:55:17 uh we we'd always made it clear from the outset that the six million generated from elm park gardens receipts uh would need to be combined with funds from the capital program and i believe that you'll see from the

00:55:29 and i believe that you'll see from the documentary evidence that that was a position at a very early stage in 2012. thank you now following that project brief you were sent an email from david hale of appleyard on the 13th of

00:55:40 hale of appleyard on the 13th of september 2012 and that can be found at art quadruple zero six

00:55:45 zero six two double three

00:55:50 okay page one if i could just ask for that to be amplified

00:56:00 i'll just let you have a quick read of that mr mr anderson

00:56:16 that mr mr anderson okay now the email before said that the cost was estimated 9.28 million pounds i.e over uh the then current budget now in david hale's email he says we

00:56:27 now in david hale's email he says we need to evaluate the scope of works in line with the brienne pre-assessment issued by

00:56:32 issued by sintegra and bottom out where we can achieve savings if possible what was your reaction to the fact that the proposed scope of works was projected to cost over budget in the first place

00:56:43 first place i think my first point is that the budget was 9.5 million for quite some time

00:56:49 time and apple yards knew that as well i i'm aware that they didn't necessarily share the entire detail of that with the pre-construction professional team members um

00:57:00 members um this particular or that particular paragraph

00:57:05 paragraph i'm aware that through discussions with building control and planning that there was a late desire for us to achieve briem level

00:57:17 us to achieve briem level 3 i believe it was which is an environmental assessment approach originally developed by the building research establishment and that hadn't been factored in

00:57:29 and that hadn't been factored in originally and so that then potentially gave raise to a cost pressure

00:57:37 pressure that needed to be addressed and when you communicated that this information on within the tmo did you put that explanation on it when you explain it to others uh not at that stage because the full

00:57:48 uh not at that stage because the full impact of it wasn't known can you remember what the reaction was at the tmo to the to the news that the cost was over the then specified budget

00:58:00 then specified budget uh within the tmo the project budget was always known as being nine and a half million pounds and so caused no undue concern yeah there was a desire within the tmo uh to bring it in below

00:58:14 within the tmo uh to bring it in below that

00:58:15 that um but the the the ultimate cap as approved at that point was 9.5 thank you

00:58:21 you now following the email from mr hale bruce soon sent an email on the 14th of september

00:58:26 september and could we bring that one up please art quadruple zero 6540

00:58:34 6540 excuse me bless you

00:58:39 now just above the box entitled cost plan the third sentence in that paragraph states the magnitude of the extra cost

00:58:51 the magnitude of the extra cost means that unless the budget is increased or the scope reduced or value engineered we are at an impasse now the first question is this mr soon

00:59:02 the first question is this mr soon seemed to be less relaxed than your evidence just recently given ten suggest

00:59:12 did this observation cause you surprise if you'd known about it um i didn't know about it sorry it was the email

00:59:23 email i've been sent it sorry i'm just getting used to the uh the date format that's on here i apologize some of them are americans yes um yes i was aware of this communication

00:59:37 um yes i was aware of this communication and i wasn't particularly surprised because around this time there were some other dynamics being introduced into the mix so rbkc for example had asked us if we

00:59:49 rbkc for example had asked us if we could

00:59:50 could broaden the scope of work

00:59:54 and within the pre-construction professional team that caused some angst uh because they obviously got it to a point where they thought they'd bottomed everything out

01:00:05 thought they'd bottomed everything out only to then have some additional elements introduced apologies mr anthony uh what did you understand bruce seems to mean when he suggested value engineering

01:00:16 mean when he suggested value engineering the scope

01:00:17 the scope um how could we uh achieve the same outputs for a reduced sum of money

01:00:28 for a reduced sum of money and were you in favor of that course provided it didn't compromise what the outputs were all the technical aspects those i i

01:00:39 all the technical aspects those i i would be more than happy to entertain those as discussion items if it had been put more bluntly as cost cutting as opposed to value engineering what would have been your response then

01:00:50 response then then we'd have a more serious conversation about where they were coming from could we look next at the minutes of the project meeting held on the 4th of october 2012 which can be found at art quadruple zero

01:01:08 6468 now you weren't there but you're on the distribution list and can we turn to the second page

01:01:24 and can we turn to the second page and that we see their m a confirmed stage c cost over budget thank you final entry on that page sorry

01:01:37 thank you final entry on that page sorry but there was sufficient scope for value engineering to proceed beyond stage c studio e to issue stage c report for sign off including design options above

01:01:49 sign off including design options above mr kneer could i ask a question here it's not the usual dynamic but no please do it it's just that the record

01:01:56 record indicates i wasn't at the meeting but the detail indicates i was it could well it could well be that mr duncan communicated as well right it could be okay um

01:02:09 right it could be okay um sorry back to your uh back to your point um

01:02:13 um the final could actually if you scroll up i may misled you there did you see just sorry not that far back

01:02:25 did you see just sorry not that far back onto the page where we're at and you can see yes can you see there further meeting with mark anderson thank you

01:02:30 you there you go right thank you very much well done right yeah would you mind scrolling down again yes of course it go to the very bottom

01:02:41 yes of course it go to the very bottom entry thank you end of the page um and apologies you're you you you know around that point valuable interruption how do you determined the scope of value engineering to be

01:02:52 the scope of value engineering to be able to say that you could proceed beyond stage c

01:02:58 i can only deduce that the figure that had been included in the stage c cost report

01:03:05 report was actually less than the budget we had available

01:03:09 available and had you discussed the substance of value engineering with anyone else at the tmo

01:03:14 the tmo at this time no because no detail had been provided at that point not even in some broad outline terms no no and would the same apply to

01:03:25 no and would the same apply to discussions with anyone at rbkc correct thank you now you provided an update to the tmo board at a board meeting on the 15th of november 2012.

01:03:36 november 2012. um if we could turn up the minute tmo one

01:03:39 one treble zero one seven double six and internal page 92

01:03:51 and we look at paragraph 6.2 you reported

01:03:56 reported that the total project budget for the combined works is 9.4 million this comprises 6 million pounds regeneration works 2.5 million cattle program works and 0.9

01:04:07 2.5 million cattle program works and 0.9 million

01:04:10 contingency can you help us where had the increase in the budget come from

01:04:20 um the the increase in budget provision as a

01:04:24 as a as i'd said right from the outset we as in casey tmo our thinking was that uh overall budget was likely to be around 9.5 million um that the the actual

01:04:37 um that the the actual projected cost plan or construction cost i believe started at five to six million

01:04:44 million following the hunters report and then as the pre-construction professional team developed their design apple yards took that and issued uh forgive me i believe it was monthly

01:04:57 uh forgive me i believe it was monthly cost reports that ultimately brought us to this position so had the budget whether it's 9.4 or 9.5 million been signed off by the tmo executive at that at that stage so november 2012 uh there

01:05:09 at that stage so november 2012 uh there were various stages uh i can't recall the precise figures um you've certainly put up two two board reports uh that indicated

01:05:20 two two board reports uh that indicated that

01:05:22 that now the issue budget culminated in a report going to rbkc and if we can go to the report you submitted to the tmo

01:05:33 the report you submitted to the tmo board first of all on the 8th of january 2013

01:05:37 2013 which i think is incorrectly referred to as 2012

01:05:40 as 2012 and that increased the budget to 9.768 million pounds if we can go to that it's at tmo one treble zero one eight nine eight

01:05:58 and if we can go to the budget at

01:06:03 72.

01:06:11 if we scroll down

01:06:16 again

01:06:22 and again

01:06:26 you see there at 6.2 the 9.78 sorry 9.768 figure

01:06:37 now was that then put forward to rbkc mr anderson

01:06:42 anderson it was put forward to rbkc prior to this board report being considered so in the december 2012 uh there was a conversation with rbkc

01:06:53 conversation with rbkc uh about the projected costs coming out rising out of the stage d cost plan assessment stage d sorry stage d

01:07:00 d cost plan assessment by apple yards and there was a subsequent conversation on the back of that with rbkc which was both laura johnson and their finance team

01:07:12 finance team and so is it would it be right to say that there were concerns if not pressures about budget coming from both tmo and rbkc because of those stage d costs

01:07:23 d costs um i yes there were concerns um but in terms of the funding from certainly from the discussions i'd

01:07:34 from certainly from the discussions i'd had my knowledge of them was that it was funding that could be managed right and because of these discussions uh were you

01:07:43 you uh obliged to have any discussion with professionals contractors consultants about

01:07:48 about their costs no not at this stage no and my my recollection from those discussions in december was that rbkc's perspective on it was that

01:08:00 rbkc's perspective on it was that as long as we kept it below 10 million uh they were comfortable and of course i think i'm right in saying the 8th of january 2013 was your last day

01:08:08 last day it was indeed thank you now you if i could ask you to turn to your second witness statement which is a

01:08:17 tmo-0084734 and paragraph 26 which is where we started some time ago

01:08:29 you say that you recall concerns arose in late 2012 as ledbetter's proposed costs were not in line with the indicative cost plan produced by apple yards this disparity led to conversation about the realism of

01:08:40 led to conversation about the realism of lead bitters costings and their potential future involvement in the project um were these the concerns we've just been discussing uh not no um i don't believe they were

01:08:54 uh not no um i don't believe they were my recollection of this is that um as you've seen in that previous item that was on display we were 9.7 billion approximately

01:09:07 approximately on a monthly basis apple yards were trying to

01:09:11 trying to obtain uh more definitive cost proposals for the construction work from leadbitter that had proved extremely difficult to realize

01:09:24 extremely difficult to realize and i don't believe it ever was realized but they would give ballpark figures and my recollection around this time was that the ballpark provided by ledbiter

01:09:36 that the ballpark provided by ledbiter was 12 to 13 million construction cost and you say you recalled concerns are rising and can you help us from whom did they arise well i certainly had concerns about

01:09:48 certainly had concerns about that uh because it either meant that uh lead bitter were inaccurate with their figures apple yard's cost

01:09:59 yard's cost analysis and breakdown was inaccurate or it was a combination of the two and can you remember any concerns arising from anyone at rbkc

01:10:10 from anyone at rbkc um not in terms of the specific about that uh but there were conversations uh probably from about november

01:10:22 uh probably from about november 2012 onwards i certainly had conversations with laura johnson about lead bitter in general terms uh in in terms of their collaboration or lack of

01:10:34 lack of engagement with progression et cetera anyone else at rbkc that you can remember now but there were others in the room but uh you know it was meetings cheered by a

01:10:46 you know it was meetings cheered by a lot of russian understood

01:10:50 were the rest of the project team aware of the concerns that are arising late 2012 they certainly were because um i i think from

01:11:02 um i i think from uh certainly november onwards possibly even october 2012 um the cost plan information and the figures coming back from lead bitter we we weren't keeping it secret we were

01:11:14 we we weren't keeping it secret we were sharing it with the pre-construction professional team apple yards were being quite open about their analysis of it and that was shared with the

01:11:25 and that was shared with the pre-construction professional team i'm sorry to interrupt i can take you to some contemporaneous emails just to help um here can i ask you to turn to tm0084

01:11:36 um here can i ask you to turn to tm0084 8 11

01:11:39 internal four

01:11:46 and that ought to be an email there 29th of november 1326 is an email from you to colin chiles who's at lead bitter isn't he

01:11:54 isn't he or was i should say um and you registered dissatisfaction with lack of engagement project progression that's what you were

01:12:05 progression that's what you were referencing earlier on is that right thank you now if we could put that down actually if we can go just further up the next email actually just

01:12:16 further up the next email actually just for the sake of completeness

01:12:19 and further up again apologies and colin charles replied there on the third of december i share your frustration and then sets out his mitigation

01:12:35 and then if we scroll down oh sorry i have

01:12:39 just for the sake of completeness

01:12:45 there we go now if i can ask the opus operator to take us up to the first page in this chain of email correspondence

01:12:55 and hopefully there is an email there yes from alan dawson to you

01:13:04 to you in which he says rb case sorry in which he says that ledbit are deliberately not progressing the project unless and until six thousand pounds of pca fees are finalized which wasn't the

01:13:15 fees are finalized which wasn't the approach they took at calc which is in the uh last paragraph on that page does that ring a bell with you it it does and i i recall having the conversation

01:13:28 i recall having the conversation uh certainly with alan dawson i think with simon cash as well at apple yards about this string of uh email string uh because they're they're

01:13:40 email string uh because they're they're as the string evolved there appeared to be disparity amongst the parties and their contention and recollection of the situation does the correspondence and or did it indicate to you as a broader breakdown

01:13:51 indicate to you as a broader breakdown in the relationship with lead bitter um it it was it was quite a surprising situation because um in face-to-face

01:14:03 situation because um in face-to-face meetings with ledbitter representatives this wasn't their tone um but when they were pressed for information etc it became

01:14:15 information etc it became quite defensive almost adversarial

01:14:20 could we turn to art quadruple zero zero six three nine

01:14:36 now this is a draft email you can see from the header date of the third of january 2013

01:14:45 and you're the last on the copy list and the email says in the third paragraph towards the end of the line

01:14:56 of the line our bkc will now no longer be recommending the tmo proceed with you on the latter and will advise them to re-tend to the works to a list of contractors not including lead bitter

01:15:07 bitter was that draft well it given you left on the eighth this draft was prepared whilst you were still in post that's right isn't it that's correct um can you flesh out for us the discussions that had been had

01:15:19 discussions that had been had at rbkc tmo before this that resulted in this draft being prepared

01:15:26 prepared um as as is actually indicated in the draft there um at laura johnson's sro calc meetings grenfell tower was

01:15:37 calc meetings grenfell tower was always uh discussed um and um from sometime october november um in fact i believe the date here

01:15:49 um in fact i believe the date here december 2011 is incorrect that should be december 2012 in the first line

01:15:56 was that there had been discussions about difficulties in getting lead bitter one to engage with the governance arrangements around the

01:16:06 the iese framework agreement and two to actually get them to dedicate resources to progress the project through to a point where novation and the pca could be

01:16:19 where novation and the pca could be completed

01:16:20 completed um and that had been um discussed as as laura indicates there certainly at the november meeting and the december meeting of 2012.

01:16:31 the december meeting of 2012. my recollection is that this was a draft that was discussed at the january meeting i don't know if it was sent but that was very much where this had

01:16:43 but that was very much where this had come from

01:16:44 come from um i understand in parallel because i attended those meetings that there had been some issues with lead bitter in relation to the calc project not so much to do with

01:16:55 the calc project not so much to do with the academy element of it but the leisure center element understood now want to leave that topic and come on to deal

01:17:03 to deal some matters arising in relation to the cladding well now mr clear i'm just wondering whether that is a convenient point at which to have a break or are you very near the end

01:17:16 break or are you very near the end probably got a quarter of an hour to go sir

01:17:19 sir so like your estimation council's estimate so all caveats and health warnings apply sir um it may well be probably a useful place to break for 10 minutes probably well we'll take

01:17:31 for 10 minutes probably well we'll take our usual break 15 minutes yeah thank you mrs johnson we're going to have a break at this point in the afternoon um we'll stop now and come back at 25 to 4. uh mr

01:17:42 stop now and come back at 25 to 4. uh mr canelo says he's only got 15 minutes more questions so perhaps that's what it'll be we'll see anyway um you go with the usher if you would please and um remember not to talk to anyone about

01:17:53 um remember not to talk to anyone about your evidence while they're out of the room please thank you mr chairman thank you very much

01:18:06 all right 25-4 thanks

01:35:21 yes would you ask mr anderson to come back in please

01:35:35 [Music]

01:35:40 all right mr anderson ready thank you mr jim thank you very much thanks sir mr anson we're now moving to the question of the cladding and you stated at paragraph 47

01:35:52 cladding and you stated at paragraph 47 of your first witness statement that over cladding of grenfell tower was a priority for the project as one of the primary goals was to improve the thermal efficiency of the building for benefit of residents now

01:36:05 for benefit of residents now given your knowledge of lachnal and the issues arising at lachnal given the cpd you'd undertaken which you said earlier covered the lessons from lachnal did that knowledge uh inform the

01:36:17 did that knowledge uh inform the approach you took when considering the design proposals for cladding on the tower i don't think it necessarily needed to inform

01:36:28 inform the thinking of the pre-construction professional team my understanding and recollection throughout my engagement with kctmo was the

01:36:39 my engagement with kctmo was the the the cladding regardless of the type or types that were being considered were that they

01:36:46 that they um

01:36:51 they encompassed uh inert or put another way non-combustible materials

01:36:57 materials that conformed with legislation and in particular um the approved document right if we come on to probably useful at this point to come to paragraph 51 of

01:37:08 at this point to come to paragraph 51 of your first witness statement which is at tm0100 48968

01:37:18 and you say that the overall concept in the second line for the cladding construction was an inert insulation material and zinc rain screen system with a self-coloration finish

01:37:29 self-coloration finish and that you have no knowledge of why a different cladding composition was ultimately used after you left and if i could take you to paris 16 of your second witness statement which is at tm0084734

01:37:46 which is at tm0084734 you've stated that this was a quote's design philosophy that had been developed by the pre-contract professional team however i do recall that studio e were very much the leading force behind the

01:37:57 very much the leading force behind the concept of a self-finished zinc rain screen system many design proposals were considered but at the time of these discussions the prominent material in the market was

01:38:08 prominent material in the market was zinc what's the suggestion that the cladding would be an inert ever discussed by you with the project team members i can't recall when

01:38:19 recall when uh but i do remember having conversations with the pre-construction professional team particularly studio e about the need for any form of cladding

01:38:30 about the need for any form of cladding to comply with legislative requirements particularly the building regulations and you're explicit about that were you mr yes do you remember what other design proposals were being considered in relation to the cladding

01:38:43 considered in relation to the cladding you've adverted to some earlier on but later on in the process uh no it was very much um i i would describe it as an iterative process we started off with a wide raft of

01:38:55 we started off with a wide raft of options

01:38:56 options that were available to us in terms of concept

01:39:01 concept those were presented to residents and on the basis of both feedback from residents

01:39:08 residents and how that might be delivered in a technical solution that was distilled down

01:39:15 down the the ultimate approach of uh that was settled on the one around a rain screen system uh was i i would

01:39:27 uh was i i would describe that as being the favored solution of uh studio e there was some further iteration

01:39:34 iteration and distillation of that through their conversations both with building control and probably more importantly with planning now um were the fire safety aspects of aspects of alternative materials ever

01:39:46 aspects of alternative materials ever discussed in in these conversations the fire safety aspects weren't i do recall some time towards the end of 2012

01:39:57 2012 um up until that point excuse me up until that point the rain screen system that was talked of had

01:40:07 had rockwool uh was the term that was used as in the product uh which i know to be non-combustible um as the insulation material

01:40:19 um as the insulation material there was then um again i can't say exactly when it was but towards the end of 2012 there was then discussion about the thickness of rockwell that would be required

01:40:30 would be required in order to meet the briem aspirations and from that there was then discussion around

01:40:40 around what alternative materials could be used that were of less thickness but giving the same properties now from

01:40:51 but giving the same properties now from that i took that that wasn't just insulation properties it was also fire resistance properties as well could we look at the minutes of the project meeting on the 18th of july

01:41:03 meeting on the 18th of july which are a r t quadruple 0 6 4 0 3.

01:41:15 and you're on the distribution list but weren't present um and if we can go on this uh on the second page please and the penultimate paragraph at the

01:41:26 and the penultimate paragraph at the bottom

01:41:27 bottom which starts zinc range screen emerging as front runner aesthetically for cladding vm zinc composite panel may be most cost effective for true

01:41:39 most cost effective for true zinc finish can you remember from whom the suggestion of zinc rainstream had come first come studio e

01:41:48 to the best of your knowledge what discussions have taken place regarding the

01:41:53 the aesthetic and fire resistant qualities of

01:41:56 of zinc rain screen and between whom uh dealing with the aesthetic first um this was one of a range uh that had been

01:42:07 this was one of a range uh that had been put forward uh by the pre-construction professional team um there were different types and variations of consultation with the

01:42:18 variations of consultation with the community in residence around the finishes um the whilst it may not have been the vm um it was a metal panel type system

01:42:31 um it was a metal panel type system that was the preferred option of residence

01:42:34 residence [Music]

01:42:36 [Music] although that was caveated with we don't want any garish colors so that that that was the aesthetic aspect that came from them i'm aware that there were subsequent conversations with

01:42:48 conversations with planning um and the architectural review panel

01:42:52 panel so this is a separate independent review panel

01:42:56 panel set up by rbkc to look at high profile or major architectural schemes

01:43:05 schemes and both planning and the arp had differing views about the aesthetic and that caused some issues for the team in terms of the

01:43:16 issues for the team in terms of the um the integral qualities of the material

01:43:20 material there were no discussions about the fire rating or fire proofing or non-combustibility of the zinc probably because the the products that

01:43:32 probably because the the products that were being displayed at the time were simply a zinc sheet and metal in its inherent nature is considered to be fireproof and is that something you knew

01:43:44 fireproof and is that something you knew anyway and so didn't seek specific assurance from the contractors or consultants on that point yes thank you um

01:43:57 could i ask you to look at tm01004989 these are minutes from the design team meeting on the 22nd of november 2012.

01:44:08 meeting on the 22nd of november 2012. you exhibited to your statement and you can see yourself identified there on the left hand column as an attendee and paragraph 48 of your first witness

01:44:20 and paragraph 48 of your first witness statement and i'll just read it out to you you said there had been preliminary feedback from our bkc planning department and i recall questions being raised about the color and finish of the zinc specified for this

01:44:31 specified for this for the facade now is it correct to say that

01:44:35 that only the colour appearance of the cladding had been discussed uh my recollection was that the the discussion was broader than that um i i seem to recall that

01:44:48 um i i seem to recall that um bearing in mind this was relayed third hand by studio e um that the planners had said they didn't want plastic there was mention of some tower blocks

01:45:01 there was mention of some tower blocks in croydon um but they specifically in relation to the planners whilst they weren't averse to a metal rain screen they wanted to see

01:45:13 a metal rain screen they wanted to see more variety in the the aesthetic appearance thank you mr anson now uh mr anderson that concludes my questions for now um sir might i ask for the usual

01:45:25 for now um sir might i ask for the usual indulgence and some time to consider whether

01:45:27 whether other matters which i ought to put a rising out of module one uh for mr anderson yes and i understand that

01:45:35 that uh there's been a request for a rather longer uh

01:45:38 longer uh break than usual at this stage is that right that's right sir yes well mr anderson council's got to the end of the questions he thinks he needs to put you but he needs a chance just to check that nothing's been left out by

01:45:51 check that nothing's been left out by mistake

01:45:51 mistake and we also need to provide an opportunity for those who are not present to suggest questions as well and uh today i've been asked to

01:46:02 i've been asked to allow rather longer than we normally do for that purpose and since we've got the time in hand i'm content to do that so we'll break now and not come back until quarter past four

01:46:13 quarter past four i'm sorry it's quite a long time for you to hang around but that's what we'll do and see then whether there are any more questions that we need to put to you i'm right

01:46:24 to you i'm right more than happy to uh accommodate that right thank you very much so quarter past four and in the meantime please don't talk to anyone about your evidence or anything to do with it certainly thank you very much

01:46:47 very well uh 4 15 please

02:14:52 yes would you ask mr anderson to come back in please

02:15:11 all right mr anderson well now we'll see if there are any more questions for you thank you mr chairman yes mr claire have you found some questions i have found some questions sir all right um if i may um

02:15:22 um if i may um mr anderson before the break i took you to the design team meeting number five on the 18th of july 2012 at which zinc composite was mentioned

02:15:33 at which zinc composite was mentioned can you help us what was your understanding of the properties of zinc composite cladding

02:15:40 as i described earlier the my my knowledge of zinc composite cladding was very much based upon the sample that was provided not only to

02:15:50 only to us as client so okay ctmo's client but the pre-constructed professional team and to the residents in the community and that was on the basis of a sheet of metal

02:16:02 metal probably about 1.5 millimeters thick and that through its inherent nature uh it was non-combustible that said

02:16:13 uh it was non-combustible that said if you heat something or expose something to sufficient temperature it will always burn thank you can i now turn on to a different matter and could i

02:16:24 different matter and could i ask you to turn to paragraph 11 of your second

02:16:28 second witness statement which is at eight four seven double three four and you said they're just a refreshing memory the cost of the calc project was 58 million pounds

02:16:40 58 million pounds this gave me assurances that the pre-contract professional team were competent to carry out the grenfell tower project is my understanding that the board also took comfort in that can you help us what led you to make

02:16:52 can you help us what led you to make that point in your supplemental statement

02:16:54 statement can you remember i believe that was in response to either a question that was raised um or clarification that was sought can i

02:17:05 or clarification that was sought can i ask you to turn to tmo double double zero eight four seven double three seven

02:17:19 which is a supplemental statement from mr madison and if i could ask you to go to paragraph 12 on page three

02:17:30 in which he says as i explained in my earlier statement to the inquiry the pre-contract professional team used for the project had already been appointed i was also aware that the calc project was a significantly larger project

02:17:41 was a significantly larger project than the refurbishment of grenfell tower with a budget of 58 million pounds i do not recall ever having a reason to doubt that the pre-contract professional team were competent to undertake the role

02:17:50 role now mr madison makes the same point that you did in paragraph 11 of your second statement did you discuss

02:17:57 discuss uh that point with madison mr madison or indeed any other point before you uh completed your second statement now bear with me i'm just reading

02:18:09 um i never discussed uh the i don't recall discussing the issues raised in

02:18:17 raised in point 12

02:18:21 for the purposes of making your statement

02:18:24 statement correct and neither 11. have you had any discussions with mr madison regarding the content of your witness statements no i i can only deduce that

02:18:37 no i i can only deduce that because those figures and the the context there is contained within documentation that he would have had sight of on his arrival at kctmo that's where

02:18:48 on his arrival at kctmo that's where he's

02:18:48 he's gleaned that knowledge thank you now can i turn to a different question which was a fire safety strategy and in evidence you made the point that there was no statutory requirement to

02:19:00 there was no statutory requirement to have

02:19:00 have a fire safety strategy now whether or not there was such a requirement wasn't it necessary and prudent to have one

02:19:12 i i my understanding of my belief is that if you are seeking to undertake alterations to a built asset

02:19:25 to a built asset then it is good practice to put in place a documented fire safety strategy

02:19:39 thank you now could i take you to a different topic which uh we covered and that you had an emb meeting on the 15th of may 2012

02:19:50 an emb meeting on the 15th of may 2012 and the reference for the minute is at tmo

02:19:53 tmo double zero eight four eight eight zero seven and if i may ask opus operator to take us to page four

02:20:08 and we see in paragraphs uh 8.1 second paragraph actually it's third paragraph i think strictly speaking um edie asked if studio e have

02:20:20 um edie asked if studio e have experience with tower blocks and if not why are tmo using them now did that question cause you to reconsider studio e's competence

02:20:34 bear with me i'm just reading that of

02:20:42 course

02:20:51 in response to your question no that didn't uh that didn't cause me to revisit the appointment of studio e my recollection of the context in which that was put was more about

02:21:03 that was put was more about had studio e or any of its employees got residential yes residential property experience uh but it was more uh or the emphasis

02:21:16 uh but it was more uh or the emphasis uh my recollection of the emphasis was that it was much more about engagement with residents and communication with residents and how they were intending to do that thank you now before we broke earlier

02:21:28 thank you now before we broke earlier um we were discussing uh the consideration that was given to the qualities and the characteristics of various forms of alternative cladding can you help us were any of those

02:21:40 can you help us were any of those conversations discussions recorded in writing

02:21:45 in terms of minutes or anything like that my my recollection is that those discussions were had at the design team meetings

02:21:55 meetings um towards the end of 2012 and i would have expected there to be some form of reference or or record of that in the minutes of those

02:22:06 that in the minutes of those thank you now can i turn back to the point you made in evidence regarding the fire risk assessment and uh you were very clear in the reference

02:22:17 reference if needed to the transcript as a page one two nine lines 21 to 25 when you refer to a fire risk assessment which you saw fixed to a notice board now first of all

02:22:31 fixed to a notice board now first of all what can you remember the date of the fire risk assessment that was pinned to that board i don't recall the date of the fire risk assessment i know and i do know it was a valid fire risk

02:22:44 and i do know it was a valid fire risk assessment when you say valid what do you mean uh it had been carried out within one year's period prior to the the date upon which i noticed it

02:23:00 can you remember when you saw that fire risk assessment uh no i can't i i only recall that on one of the visits um uh

02:23:11 on one of the visits um uh with uh some of the consultants uh walking around the ground floor area that it was up on the notice board now we were discussing the

02:23:22 notice board now we were discussing the fire risk assessment in the context of the

02:23:25 the fire safety strategy and those meetings were in

02:23:30 were in mid-year 2012 so june and july

02:23:35 your evidence and correct me if i'm not summarizing this correctly please that um because the fire risk assessment had been carried out you felt that was what was required of the tmo at that stage

02:23:47 the tmo at that stage now is it likely that you saw the fra on the board roughly mid-summer 2012 because it would have been something in your mind because it was flowing from

02:23:58 in your mind because it was flowing from the fast uh safety strategy discussions it it would have my recollection is it would have been around the time we were having conversations around fire safety

02:24:10 having conversations around fire safety i can't say whether it was before or after that i appreciate you trying to pin me down to a date but i just can't recall that it's not so much pinning you down it's getting a rough idea would it have been mid-year

02:24:20 mid-year 2012 was it likely it would have been mid-year 2012 it would have been some time between march when i went round with bruce soon sorry

02:24:33 with bruce soon sorry was it march or february i went around with blue scenes it was some time between the visit with bruce students and that conversation i do recall it was before we

02:24:43 before we we had that meeting so it would have been sometime on that basis between march

02:24:47 march 2012 and june july 2012 uh yes that would be and you said you were satisfied that the fra you saw was valid because it had been within one

02:24:59 was valid because it had been within one year

02:25:00 year of your noticing it um as in the date on it

02:25:04 it was less than one year from when i noticed it okay now the fire risk assessments that are available are dated the 29th of

02:25:15 are available are dated the 29th of december 2010 and the 20th of november 2012.

02:25:23 so if you had visited the tower the time you think you did one the later one didn't exist and the earlier one wouldn't have been valid

02:25:37 i i can only deduce then that um it was actually a 2010 one um and that my recollection about it being within the year

02:25:48 being within the year was actually it was within the two years within the two years yeah where did you see it it was on the notice board and where was the notice board um

02:26:02 and where was the notice board um with the original construction uh you went in through the main entrance there was a almost like a concierge desk to the left-hand side

02:26:13 left-hand side and off to the left of that there was a room

02:26:16 room which had a residence notice board within it and it was in there and how large was that resident's notice board

02:26:23 board um there were actually two notice boards in there

02:26:27 in there well let's deal with this board first and uh well both boards were the same size they were probably about uh what i would call ao size

02:26:38 uh what i would call ao size a 0 size yeah to those of us who are not familiar with that reference can you give us a still fashion dimensions fetal meters

02:26:51 probably about

02:26:54 1.2 meters by 1.5

02:26:59 and do you say that the fire risk assessment was uh it was pinned on the board and was it readily or it wasn't cluttered by any other notices or posters or anything else like that on

02:27:11 posters or anything else like that on them

02:27:11 them there was other material on the board but it wasn't obscured by it

02:27:18 to me it was it was obvious what it was and was there a sign or anything else there advising that the first risk assessment was pinned on that particular part of the

02:27:29 pinned on that particular part of the board

02:27:30 board so label or anything like that um i don't recall do you know who put up the risk assessment i don't now

02:27:43 i don't now in the same piece of evidence you referred to an information box can you help us where was that information box again that information box was within that room

02:27:57 can you help us where proximity to the concierge desk you're referring to um you you uh you went in the entrance doors uh you

02:28:10 uh you went in the entrance doors uh you probably

02:28:11 probably took two or three paces forward so about two meters turned left there was a door there immediately next

02:28:22 there was a door there immediately next to the concierge and that was uh the residents room uh that i'm referring to thank you um mr anderson i have no further questions

02:28:33 mr anderson i have no further questions for you i'll just say uh thank you very much for attending to give evidence today

02:28:37 today thank you sir thank you mr clear well mr anderson we're very grateful to you for coming to give your evidence today it's been really helpful to hear from you uh and uh now we've uh answered all the

02:28:48 uh and uh now we've uh answered all the questions we need to ask you so you're free to go thank you very much indeed i'd like to thank you mr chairman and your colleagues um it's i hope that my time here today has been of value um not

02:29:00 time here today has been of value um not just to yourselves but to the 72 bereaved individuals many of whom i knew

02:29:06 i knew met and their family and relatives thank you very much right we'd like to give the usher shield look off to you thank you very much

02:29:30 that's very good timing thank you sir and that's it for this afternoon it is and we'll have another witness tomorrow mr gibson tomorrow who will be examined by mr millet right thank you very much well we'll

02:29:42 right thank you very much well we'll stop there for the day and resume 10 o'clock tomorrow please thank you thank you very much you