Richard Burnley, Kingspan Managing Director UK & Ireland (2014-2019), gives evidence on his knowledge of K15, the merger of technical and marketing departments under Adrian Pargeter, and his response to Ivor Meredith's warnings about test failures and fabricated stories.
00:13:11 yes mr miller yes mr chairman thank you i now call richard burnley
00:13:18 please
00:13:28 i swear by almighty god that the evidence i shall give shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth thank you very much mr burnley would you like to sit down and make yourself comfortable thank you
00:13:46 mr bernie good afternoon can i start by thanking you very much for attending this public inquiry uh to give your evidence we very much appreciate it uh if you have any difficulty understanding any of my questions i'm
00:13:57 understanding any of my questions i'm very happy to repeat them all or put them in a different way we're going to take a regular break regular breaks through the evidence mid-afternoon today but if you need to break it any other time
00:14:08 need to break it any other time please let us know can i also please ask you to keep your voice up so that the person who sits to the right of you there can get down everything you're going to say also it helps if you don't
00:14:19 say also it helps if you don't shake your head or nod your head because the no or yes is the case maybe doesn't come out on the transcript so you actually have to say yes or no as the case may be now you provided a witness statement to the metropolitan
00:14:30 metropolitan police and i think two witness statements to the inquiry i did that's correct
00:14:34 correct and uh those will appear one by one on the screen in front of you but you should also have them in the file on the desk in front of you as well your first witness statement to the metropolitan police is dated the 14th of august 2017 and that's at kin
00:14:48 august 2017 and that's at kin 6096 can we please look at that please
00:14:54 and if you go to page one of that there's a signature there next to the date 14th of august 2017. is that yours it is yes and uh there's a signature i think on the bottom of every page of this document i didn't need to show it
00:15:05 this document i didn't need to show it all to you but is that is that right it is yes that's correct and your first witness statement of the inquiry is dated the 28th of september 2018 kin 50554
00:15:16 kin 50554 is that the first page of your first witness statement it is yes could you please go to page 13 where we can see a signature that signature yours
00:15:27 signature yours it is yes uh there's also a second witness statement dated the 25th of september 2020 then that's at kin3022622 please
00:15:37 please is that your second witness statement to the inquiry it is yes and can you please go to page 90.
00:15:46 there's a signature there above the date of the 25th of september 2020 is that your signature it is yes
00:15:52 is yes have you read all of these with the statements recently i have and do you say that the contents are true i do yes and have you discussed your statements or your evidence that you're going to give today
00:16:03 going to give today with anybody before coming here no i haven't now i'm going to begin by asking you about your background your previous employment and your role at kingspan can we go to your first witness statement please the uh uh the um
00:16:15 please the uh uh the um uh first win the statement of kin408838 please
00:16:21 please and i'd like to go to page two in that
00:16:30 at paragraph 2.1 on page three on page two there you say um you graduated uh i'm sorry that's not the right one uh you're right um can we go back to
00:16:41 uh you're right um can we go back to your
00:16:41 your first witness statement at kin five zeros 96 please six zeros 96 please uh which is your police witness
00:16:53 uh which is your police witness statement and you identified there that you joined kingspan in june 2014 as managing director for britain and ireland for the insulation business
00:17:02 business yes that's correct yes and then now if we could go to your first witness statement to the inquiry at carrion50554 please and look at page three
00:17:18 and look at page three you say then you did you graduated from loughborough university in 1987 with a bsc in chemical engineering that's correct yes yes and at 2.2 you say i've been working in the rigid insulation products and insulation in
00:17:29 insulation products and insulation in the
00:17:29 the systems industry for over 14 years becoming product director at dow europe gmbh in
00:17:34 gmbh in january 2004 in that role i was responsible for the profitability of the polyurethane business across the european market driving and implementing the european strategy for the business was that pur insulation
00:17:47 for the business was that pur insulation products
00:17:49 products it was the raw materials for making pir and some pur products right i see from dao
00:17:55 dao then i think you joined sig or sig in january 2005 didn't you i do that's correct joined as a divisional director managing a number of their distribution branches yes and then in august 2008 you were
00:18:06 yes and then in august 2008 you were promoted to managing director of special markets at sig weren't you i was here what was special markets um it was actually a number of businesses that probably didn't really fit anywhere
00:18:17 that probably didn't really fit anywhere else
00:18:18 else um most of sig's businesses were arranged geographically so within special markets i had a number of things from the business in ireland um i had purchasing in china
00:18:30 purchasing in china i was setting up a business in the middle east i had an air handling distribution business there were a number of things including a contracting business in the uk so there's about six i think six different business units
00:18:41 i think six different business units right um you say there are a number of things from the business in ireland what was that
00:18:45 was that no it was just it was i had responsibility for sig ireland i think so i was the managing director of sig island and then there were a number of other business units that were also underneath right did any of those special markets involve the
00:18:57 those special markets involve the manufacture sale or testing or distribution of uh phenolic phenolic phenolic insulation
00:19:08 phenolic insulation so the irish business would have been distributed of kingspan cool firm right um
00:19:17 we may have sold some cool firm in the middle east as well as we were developing that business but i i can't be sure right what about celetex's
00:19:26 celetex's uh pir products yep selatex pir we would have sold
00:19:29 have sold would have been representatives for them in ireland right and also in the middle east
00:19:33 east right now from that role at special markets
00:19:37 markets you are appointed managing director as we've seen from your statement in june 2014 for kingspan britain and ireland
00:19:44 ireland yes that's correct were you specifically head hunted for that role or did you apply um no they actually i was head-hunted they contacted me actually about a different role which
00:19:55 actually about a different role which we agreed wasn't suitable and then some time later a matter of weeks they contacted me about something else and it turned out to be this one right
00:20:04 right um what was the role they contacted you for it was a commercial director role i i found out afterwards they didn't tell me to start with but i believe it was a commercial director role in
00:20:16 was a commercial director role in kingspan what was then called energy i believe kingsman energy right sorry may i just it wasn't kingspan that contacted me it was a headhunter i think who was
00:20:25 who was putting a shortlist together i see and when was when was that can you remember um that would have been around october 2013. right
00:20:37 around october 2013. right 2013 i see yes so some nine months or so before you actually joined that's correct when you did join did you join the main board of kingspan insulation limited the company
00:20:48 insulation limited the company the main i joined the i was a statutory director of kingspine insulation yes but i wasn't
00:20:53 i wasn't what i would call a main board director of kingspan group right so let me just go a little bit further with that you became a statutory director of kingspan insulation limited on
00:21:04 kingspan insulation limited on joining kingspan yes but you weren't a member of the main board in other words the board of the parent company kingspan group plc yes i think well if that's the name yeah but no i wasn't were you ever
00:21:17 but no i wasn't were you ever no right uh were you a director or did you occupy a senior executive position in any other kingspan company in the kingspan group no right
00:21:31 uh now in your first statement you refer to your employer as kingspan namely kingspan insulation limited which you define i think is kingspan but in your second statement you refer to the
00:21:42 your second statement you refer to the company's kingsman insulation uk which you define as insulation uk can you account for the difference um it's
00:21:51 it's clearly me writing it badly i mean i should have referred to it as kingspine insulation limited i mean that was the business that i was employed and paid through right it's the same company the same company so did your employer
00:22:02 the same company so did your employer change
00:22:03 change in the four and a half years odd that you were there no no oh i'm sorry well yes it did actually because i did move out of the insulation business sorry i correct myself
00:22:14 correct myself i moved out of insulation in december 2018 and joined the access floors business
00:22:20 business as the managing director for europe middle east africa and that was the rather then left later that year in late 2019. right now as managing director of
00:22:31 right now as managing director of kingspan insulation you think about installation limited or kingspan
00:22:36 kingspan as you refer to it uh did you report to anybody on the main board yes i reported to peter wilson peter wilson he was my boss yeah he was your boss did he have any position in kingspan insulation limited
00:22:48 position in kingspan insulation limited yeah i believe he was a statutory director as well i disappeared i was there but was he also a main board director
00:22:55 director of the group group yeah he was yes i followed he was your boss was he always your boss
00:23:00 your boss he was my boss until i joined the access floor business so late 18 end of 18 and yes at the end of 18. now you left i think in early 2019
00:23:11 now you left i think in early 2019 didn't you uh late it was october actually october 2019 yeah
00:23:15 2019 yeah right uh and what was the reason for your departure well so i i left insulation kingspan insulation to go into the access floors business because it was an opportunity to
00:23:25 to learn some new products that i didn't know anything about and there was a plan to develop it across europe and it just didn't work out i i didn't do particularly well the business wasn't doing particularly well
00:23:36 business wasn't doing particularly well and i wasn't enjoying it and um in fact we had a very close family bereavement early in the january of that year
00:23:42 year and it was i just really needed a break right i see was your move from insulation to access flaws
00:23:50 flaws uh what why did you make that move um i think uh peter knew that i was keen to develop my career in kingspan and i'd been in that role then for
00:24:02 and i'd been in that role then for four years was it um and it was there was an opportunity available and so i i thought it was a good chance to try and get some broader experience within the group did your departure have anything to do with the issues uh then being uncovered by the inquiry
00:24:15 uh then being uncovered by the inquiry no absolutely not how often did you report as managing director to peter wilson um formally uh it was we had a monthly uh review for
00:24:26 uh it was we had a monthly uh review for the britain and ireland business but we would speak informally uh two three four times a month depending on what the issues were and but formally once a month we had a
00:24:37 but formally once a month we had a review meeting and actually a second review meeting where um
00:24:41 where um i think as i've said in one of my statements the group chief exec was there as well and that was a divisional level review yeah now we know because you've told us that you were at sig in a senior position
00:24:52 sig in a senior position from uh january 2005 until may 2014 that's right isn't it yes although your position with insight changed
00:25:02 changed during your time in those positions at sig is it right that sig was a distributor for kingsman k15
00:25:15 distributor for kingsman k15 yes i mean yes i'm trying to think did we sell k-15 we were definitely able to sell k-15 yes but did you did you have a distribution agreement with kingspan for the distribution of k-15
00:25:28 for the distribution of k-15 we had a distribution agreement for all of kingspan's products right so the answer is yes yes and did your distribution agreement with kingspan for k-15 include use of k-15 on buildings over 18 meters i wouldn't know you wouldn't know did
00:25:41 i wouldn't know you wouldn't know did was it something that crossed your desk at all no i i mean i i to be honest i i don't think i even knew of k15 in my time at sig i wasn't the product i knew i knew some
00:25:52 i wasn't the product i knew i knew some of their other pir products um and one or two of their cool firm range but it wasn't something i was wasn't it was the particular product
00:26:01 product i knew i follow um did you know anything about its success during your years and how well it was received by customers no did sig uh generally undertake
00:26:15 no did sig uh generally undertake compliance or other safety checks of its own on products which had been manufactured by manufacturers with whom sig had a distribution agreement i don't believe they would do i think
00:26:27 i don't believe they would do i think they would rely on the manufacturer's literature right and you say they would rely on the manufacturer's literature whether to the best of your recollection any provisions in any of the
00:26:38 any provisions in any of the distribution agreements that sig had with manufacturers such as kingspan which would give contractual force to the map to the marketing literature or warrant the safety of the products
00:26:50 could you rephrase the question sure i entirely understand this do you remember whether sig would would generally have contracts with manufacturers to distribute uh the products
00:27:03 to distribute uh the products that's the first question okay i'm sorry i we would have commercial agreements yes
00:27:07 yes but the contractual liability around the performance of the product would sit with the manufacturer indeed and my question is in those agreements do you recall even in general terms any express provisions which stated that the
00:27:19 provisions which stated that the manufacturer was responsible for regulatory compliance statutory compliance and product safety um i wouldn't have seen those agreements so i wasn't involved in setting them up so i wouldn't be able to answer the question
00:27:30 question right so you can't tell me whether kingspan gave any contractual warranty to sig about the compliance of k-15 no i can't right
00:27:41 can we take it that if if when you were at sig you were discovered and i know this is a hypothetical question so forgive me for asking it but if you had discovered that kingspan had asked you to distribute a product that was not in fact compliant with the
00:27:52 was not in fact compliant with the building regulations uh would you have been concerned yes would you have wanted a full explanation i would yes and would you have stopped distributing the product
00:28:03 the product or at least suspended would have yeah would have had to have a discussion and internally decide if it was the right thing to do i mean i i wasn't in a probably a role at the level at which that decision would be made but i would of course have
00:28:15 would be made but i would of course have made my concerns no now when you joined kingspan in 2014 did you have a handover or induction session not not what i would call a formal handover now i mean
00:28:26 would call a formal handover now i mean i
00:28:26 i the morning i arrived i remember i sat down with peter for an hour or so and actually i remember he gave me a
00:28:34 gave me a it was a printed powerpoint slide of the organization the team that i was um going to be managing and there were two empty boxes and the rest had names in place right
00:28:45 and the rest had names in place right that's peter wilson peter wilson sorry yes i see
00:28:49 yes i see did you ever have a meeting or induction session with adrian parchetta no what about john garbett um i would have had an informal chat
00:29:00 um i would have had an informal chat with john i don't think there was a specific agenda but so there were members of the i was as the md of kingspan insulation in the uk britain and ireland we referred to it um
00:29:11 britain and ireland we referred to it um i would be a member of peter's divisional team as were all of the regional mds and then there were a number of other peers as you would um who were doing functional roles and i would have had informal meetings
00:29:22 and i would have had informal meetings with all of them during the first month i'm sure would that have included uh tony milichap who was until may 2015 head of technical so tony milchap reported to me as the i
00:29:33 so tony milchap reported to me as the i think he was technical manager um so i would have i think i met tony on my first day right did you have a discussion with him about generally what your job would entail yeah we had a very informal chat for
00:29:45 yeah we had a very informal chat for probably
00:29:46 probably best part of an hour i would imagine were you given an introduction to the different insulation products in the kingspan range
00:29:56 no i don't think i was were you that would say we could take it you weren't given an introduction therefore to k-15 in particular no i wasn't right when do you think you
00:30:07 i wasn't right when do you think you first became familiar with k-15 as a product
00:30:16 i mean i became aware that it was one of the range because i was as i was getting into my role i was looking at some of the sales literature um
00:30:25 um i don't think i probably properly took notice of it until it was brought to my attention that was some issues with the nhbc and that would have been when can you remember
00:30:37 remember i think it was late 2014 where the volume of issues started to take you know my attention do you remember
00:30:48 you know my attention do you remember what share of the above 18 meter market kingspan k15 had in 2014 no i don't i mean i know it's something we looked to try and assess
00:30:59 something we looked to try and assess over time but it was something that was very difficult to do were you specifically told about uh issues which k-15 was facing relating to fire performance in tests no i wasn't
00:31:13 fire performance in tests no i wasn't so when you joined this is june 2014 were you aware of the planned large-scale fire test which was scheduled for the following month july 2000 no i wasn't
00:31:26 month july 2000 no i wasn't do you were you given an overview of the fire performance issues or fire performances of the product including the four large-scale fire tests
00:31:35 tests in 2007 and 2008. no did kingspan bring you up to speed on the various blends that they'd been trialling and fire retardants that have been used
00:31:47 and fire retardants that have been used to try to improve the fire performance of k-15
00:31:51 of k-15 no was there ever a time when they did that
00:31:55 that no the only conversation i do remember being involved with was there was a i i think it was more of an informal conversation was about a blend of blowing agents which i didn't completely follow but i
00:32:06 which i didn't completely follow but i remember being in the room when that was discussed do you know when that was well it was around
00:32:11 around it was when we were looking at launching the lower lambda cool therm range um and it was a conversation about the consequence of
00:32:22 consequence of trying to get a blend that worked with k15
00:32:25 k15 and at that point it took my notice that they were talking because that would affect that we'll have to have to do some more testing on that product
00:32:33 product to underpin its performance well i think we may come to that i think that's in 2014 there wasn't it was quite soon after you arrived yeah i think i i can't be sure of the date all right now can we look at your second witness statement please at page
00:32:44 second witness statement please at page 16
00:32:49 and uh let's look together at paragraph 4.2 you say i understood that k15 is a rigid phenolic foam insulation board i do not know the precise technical description of k15 being sold to the market during the period june 2014 to
00:33:01 market during the period june 2014 to june 2017
00:33:03 june 2017 and as explained at paragraph 3.1 above it would not be part of my role to have this detailed level of knowledge about one specific insulation uk product were you aware of the basic chemicals used to produce k15
00:33:17 used to produce k15 i may have been i i couldn't tell you what they are now i mean i remember there were some names but yeah were they familiar to you no you were a chemical engineer by yeah but phenolic foam was not one of my
00:33:29 but phenolic foam was not one of my with my experience at dow in a polyurethane foam i knew the raw materials for those products but phenolic was something very new to me right did you familiarize yourself
00:33:41 right did you familiarize yourself with the makeup of k15 as a composite product so the foil facer the perforations the screen
00:33:49 screen things like that no i didn't do it for any of the range to be honest including their pir products did you familiarize yourself with the product literature for k15 not immediately no i think the first
00:34:01 not immediately no i think the first piece of literature on k15 that i took note of was the um the roots to compliance document that i remember being sent just before it was launched which i've seen
00:34:12 before it was launched which i've seen from
00:34:12 from looking at documents that was july and august 2014 and 15. 15 i believe a year or so after you've arrived yeah yes we'll come to that um so that's the first time is it you say you familiarize yourself with k15's
00:34:24 say you familiarize yourself with k15's product literature other than a an initial look at all of the i mean there was a a large range of brochures so right i'm sure that i'd asked for a couple of binders for both the pir range
00:34:37 couple of binders for both the pir range and the cool firm range when i joined and i think they were on my desk for some time and i would occasionally flick through them did you study them i didn't study them now did you look at a data sheet for k-15
00:34:47 k-15 dated march 2011. now the only time i saw a data sheet i know that from reviewing documents i was asked to sign all of the data sheets right uh i think there was certificates of conformity actually
00:34:58 of conformity actually was the md i was asked to sign them as the managing director why were you asked to sign the data sheets i think because they'd previously been signed by peter wilson and of course he was no
00:35:09 peter wilson and of course he was no longer the managing director and so it was my role i don't think there were data sheets i think there were certificates of conformity for whom for which organization for kingspan insulation limited for all of their range of products did
00:35:21 for all of their range of products did you sign a certificate of conformity for k-15 do you remember yeah i believe we submitted it i think and when did you do that i don't remember signing it if i'm
00:35:32 i don't remember signing it if i'm truthful i know it's my signature i i remember gee the one thing i do remember is there was about 30 and they were presented to me and i sat and did it i think before a
00:35:44 i sat and did it i think before a management team meeting right did you actually investigate uh the text of the marketing literature of the data sheets for these products no i didn't so you just signed off on them without reading them i did why is that i just saw it as my job
00:35:59 why is that i just saw it as my job what was my position as the md to sign them and i trusted that the information would have been correct you didn't ask members of your team uh about any of the aspects of the i can't remember asking but it would have
00:36:10 can't remember asking but it would have been my nature to have looked at somebody and said i assume that i can sign these but i can't prove to you that i said that but i just know my nature would have been to said to make some remark now
00:36:22 said to make some remark now you say that you didn't know the precise technical description of k-15 between june 2014 and and 2017 june 2017.
00:36:31 2017. do we take it that it was only after the fire at grenfell tower in june 2017 that you acquainted yourself with the precise details of k15 i would say that i
00:36:42 details of k15 i would say that i started to take a much more detailed um interest in it i mean i still wouldn't profess to being
00:36:50 being anywhere near an expert on the product but i obviously was yeah interested to know what it was and how it performed now you had been working in the insulation industry for some 10 years or
00:37:01 insulation industry for some 10 years or so when you joined kingspan um can we take it that you had a reasonable knowledge of the building regulations uh and guidance uh about high-rise buildings and fire
00:37:13 uh about high-rise buildings and fire safety no that would be a mistake that would be a mistake with it right when you joined were you not familiar with the safety requirements under part b of schedule one to the building regulations no i didn't i
00:37:24 building regulations no i didn't i wasn't
00:37:25 wasn't and so not adb either proven b no i got to know about adb really after the uh the tragedy i see you say really after the tragedy did you ever have calls to look at it
00:37:36 did you ever have calls to look at it before
00:37:37 before no right what about the uk fire testing regime
00:37:41 regime did you did you become familiar with that in any way between june 2014 and june 2017
00:37:47 june 2017 i mean i was starting to gain knowledge around bs8414 and that was my the area that i if anything
00:37:57 anything listened to but i again i i had some knowledge which really gathered momentum sort of through the late part of 2017. right when did your
00:38:09 your knowledge about bs8414 start to be
00:38:16 gained meaningful knowledge i would have said it was probably during 2015 right so the you know the year after i mean i was
00:38:27 you know the year after i mean i was aware of it and then actually as tony miller chap was leaving the one thing that he myself and adrian had agreed was we need to do much more bs8414 testing because that
00:38:38 bs8414 testing because that seems to be the way of providing evidence to people right did daydream sit you down and explain what bsa414 meant and involved um he explained what it involved
00:38:50 um he explained what it involved i mean i've subsequently learned what it is meant to mimic but i didn't learn it at that meeting then now you say that meeting was there a meeting well i don't think there was a formal meeting
00:39:01 i don't think there was a formal meeting i think we were probably it was around the time tony was leaving right and and we may have not all been in the same room but i know that i had a conversation with tony and i remember one of the things he was talking about was eight four one four
00:39:12 talking about was eight four one four and i remember talking to adrian and going well eight four one four seems to be the way forward do you know what it was
00:39:18 it was and all i knew at that point probably was it was a large-scale fire test did you know there was a system test uh i probably didn't even then know it was a system test now you know what the criteria
00:39:28 criteria were which told you whether you passed or failed the test no i didn't did you go away and study it no did you ask adrian pogito well what are the criteria no but i i understood that adrian was familiar with
00:39:40 understood that adrian was familiar with it and clearly could speak to it so i had confidence in that
00:39:44 that right um were you aware in june 2014 when you arrived of the alternative routes to compliance with
00:39:55 alternative routes to compliance with approved document b for external wall constructions on buildings over 18 meters
00:40:01 meters at what date sorry is it june 2014 no i had no idea uh where you did you become aware after that
00:40:07 that that there were alternative routes to compliance
00:40:13 i would have become aware around the time of the routes to compliance document that was when i because i know i looked through that and i i i'm assuming that um
00:40:27 that being so you didn't become familiar with the
00:40:30 with the build um the bcaa technical guidance note 18
00:40:34 note 18 from june 2014 which established that a further route compliance would be desktop
00:40:41 desktop analyses yeah no that i i wasn't i mean the first time i became aware of the bcaa
00:40:46 bcaa document was i think ahead of an nhbc meeting
00:40:49 meeting right that would have been 2015. yes i believe it was um and i'm assuming this must
00:40:56 this must follow from what you've been telling us that you had never and were never involved in any fire testing of phenolic foam either small scale or large testing large scale no i it wouldn't have been part of my
00:41:07 no i it wouldn't have been part of my responsibility either
00:41:14 were you aware
00:41:17 that bs8414 part one test 2002 was a system test for masonry construction as opposed to a part two test 2005
00:41:29 as opposed to a part two test 2005 for steel framed construction i am aware now i wasn't aware when i joined kingspan when did you then first become aware of that distinction um if i'm honest i think there was i i
00:41:41 um if i'm honest i think there was i i realized in 2015 that there were clearly a part one in a part two i don't think it was until again late 2017 where i started to understand the difference between masonry and uh structural steel i see
00:41:54 masonry and uh structural steel i see were you aware in june 2014 when you joined that k-15 was not a material of limited combustibility yes because i think it was brought to my attention probably fairly quickly that
00:42:06 attention probably fairly quickly that kill them wasn't of limited combat stability
00:42:09 stability would you have known as a matter of common knowledge and i say common knowledge i mean common knowledge in your industry that being a phenolic foam product k15 would not and could not be a
00:42:20 k15 would not and could not be a material of limited combustibility not as a matter of common knowledge and it would have been something i've had to specifically know i see
00:42:30 i see uh when you joined what was can you recall what was kingspan's strategy for k-15
00:42:40 i i don't i wasn't aware of a specific k-15 strategy i was aware of a cool firm strategy and that was just covering the whole product range which is they were looking to try
00:42:51 range which is they were looking to try and
00:42:52 and sell that range which is of higher thermal performance into the marketplace i see and what was that strategy um it was a specification strategy so it was to try and get
00:43:04 was to try and get um our people our sales people to get the product specified by architects into buildings
00:43:14 which were the products in that range which could or purportedly could be used above 18 meters
00:43:21 was it any k-15 or were there others are you at
00:43:24 you at what date well let's start with your arrival when i arrived i mean i wouldn't have known i wouldn't have discussed it with anybody right but at what point did you discover what the strategy was for the over 18 meter market
00:43:37 meter market it would have been during 2015 realistically as late as that so six more than six months after you arrived
00:43:46 i can't be sure
00:43:49 were there any discussions in the months between
00:43:52 between june 2014 when you arrived and say early 2015 about maintaining or increasing market share for the above 18 meter market for insulation
00:44:10 i can't remember one specifically about that i would have definitely been involved in conversations about growing our cool therm share of the market and by that i would therefore assume that k-15 would be one of those products
00:44:21 that k-15 would be one of those products were you informed about recent i say recent i mean as june 2014 recent or potential challenges to k-15 from the market
00:44:32 from the market for example new market entrance i mean information was definitely given to me i mean the first few months i remember being bombarded with a lot of things from a lot of different
00:44:43 things from a lot of different departments i can't be sure when i was made aware of other products but i would have in certainly my first 12 months have been made aware of competitive product
00:44:54 made aware of competitive product without a doubt right and i think you say you became aware about the challenges for k-15 from the nhbc around about the early part of 2015.
00:45:06 early part of 2015. yeah i mean i think there was there were things brought to my attention late 2014 yes
00:45:10 yes but it was 2015 probably where i sat up and thought there's something i need to get involved in here very good because we're not getting to a result right now let's go to your second witness statement to paragraph 1.8 please at the bottom of page two
00:45:24 please at the bottom of page two um i just want to ask you a little bit about that paragraph you say when i started as managing director in june 2014 the business was structured so that i had 14 heads of functional departments who reported directly to me
00:45:35 directly to me and were primarily responsible for their specific departments including marketing technical and technical processing in may 2015 i am algorithm two of the functional departments technical and marketing the heads of
00:45:46 technical and marketing the heads of functional departments reported to me and were primarily responsible for and involved in the day-to-day work done in their department due to the scope of my role usually matters would only be flagged to me by the heads of functional departments
00:45:57 the heads of functional departments if they were of particular importance to the business or required my input now do you mean by this paragraph mr burnley that you merged the technical and marketing departments
00:46:08 departments while keeping the technical processing as a distinct functional department yes technical processing was completely separate right but you merged technical and marketing yes and by technical that is essentially
00:46:21 yes and by technical that is essentially what i would have called more technical service and technical a small amount of technical r d i see but what was the reason for your decision
00:46:32 decision to merge technical or technical services you describe it and marketing um so we've had a lot of trouble so i think i said when i first joined there were two spaces that weren't filled one was
00:46:44 spaces that weren't filled one was um the head of operations and one was head of marketing we had a lot of difficulty filling the marketing role and actually when tony miller chap left and because of
00:46:55 tony miller chap left and because of adrian pardita's background i thought actually he was an excellent candidate to really be the head of technical
00:47:02 technical and so what we then decided we would i thought it was a good idea to bring the two together and then try and bring somebody in underneath adrian to lead the marketing team
00:47:12 team that we could actually grow into a more senior role
00:47:17 so why not simply just appoint a new head of technical
00:47:23 well in effect i did that by amalgamating the two departments right why did you want to keep them why didn't you want to keep them separate
00:47:33 um partly because i had far too many people reporting directly to me i'd already seen that i was getting so much information thrown at me and actually i thought adrian was an
00:47:44 and actually i thought adrian was an excellent person for that role right because he was very pragmatic and it allowed us to do some bring some different levels in to show some progression for people within both teams
00:47:55 teams did you consider when you made the decision to amalgamate these roles and give them to adrian parchetta whether that amalgamation might run the risk that technical might become subservient to marketing
00:48:09 might become subservient to marketing um i didn't think that there was any way that was happening i did have a conversation with adrian parker about his time
00:48:14 his time my biggest concern was he would have a bright amount of time to balance both jobs right and was your was part of that concern because he was doing um extramural study correct
00:48:26 doing um extramural study correct yes that is correct was it the plan when amalgamating these departments that technical should become subservient to marketing
00:48:35 marketing no absolutely not how could the head of marketing also have the required skills ability and resource to head up the technical department
00:48:50 i think as i've explained adrian has a technical background and actually the intention was to bring somebody in as we did into the marketing team
00:48:59 team to lead that team but not at the level of the management team because we've had so much difficulty finding somebody at that level right now i think you've answered this
00:49:11 right now i think you've answered this question but just so i get it get it right we know that the amalgamation uh coincided with the departure of tony miller chap as head of technical did he leave because of the amalgamation
00:49:22 amalgamation or was his departure the catalyst for the amalgamation i mean what tony miller chap told me was i know that he'd thrown his hat in the ring for one of the divisional roles reporting to peter
00:49:34 the divisional roles reporting to peter i think there was a technical director role and and he hadn't got it i think he was disappointed by that i didn't want to lose tony um but he'd been offered another job and so you know he he left be left on good
00:49:45 so you know he he left be left on good terms
00:49:47 terms that's not quite an answer to my question did he he he left but did he leave because of the amalgamation or was his departure the catalyst for the amalgamation i'm sorry his his departure ultimately led to the
00:49:58 his his departure ultimately led to the amalgamation sorry now adam adrian pargeter i'm sorry adrian pogita was the head of marketing at that time wasn't he and he'd only occupied
00:50:08 occupied that role for about six months namely from november 2014. yep um was it you who decided to appoint him as head of the amalgamated department
00:50:19 department it was but in discussions with peter wilson right was there a selection process or was he just a shoe-in
00:50:28 um there was a selection process for the head of marketing role and i i think i mean i'm not able to check my emails anymore but
00:50:39 check my emails anymore but i do think i discussed with hr whether or not we needed to actually advertise the amalgamated role or because it was amalgamated we could just a point and i can't be sure but i think
00:50:51 a point and i can't be sure but i think under their advice i was able to just appoint him into the amalgamated role right we touched on this a little bit a moment again but what particular skills did you
00:50:59 did you perceive in adrian partiter that suited him for this blended role that you've created
00:51:05 created um very organized very methodical um very trustworthy very good at managing people and one of the things we needed to do in both the marketing team
00:51:16 both the marketing team and the technical team was start to show some progression for people and make sure
00:51:21 sure we were developing them
00:51:24 were you looking for somebody with enough technical knowledge and experience to deal with people like the nhbc
00:51:30 nhbc and their technical queries from the market and also enough marketing now to know how to do so whilst advancing k15's commercial interests
00:51:40 interests i mean k-15 didn't come into the decision
00:51:43 decision i was looking for somebody that had the skills to manage two departments bearing in mind that we were planning on elevating people in both departments it was about managing a a team and being pragmatic about how he
00:51:56 a team and being pragmatic about how he did that
00:51:57 did that yes forget k-15 then for the moment did the role you were creating involve somebody with enough technical knowledge to be able and experienced to be able to deal with
00:52:09 and experienced to be able to deal with the difficulties with the nhbc and matters of that nature on the one hand but also enough marketing now's instinct to know how to do so whilst at the same time advancing
00:52:20 whilst at the same time advancing kingspan's commercial interests um i don't believe that that role particularly was focused on advancing the commercial interests i needed somebody that
00:52:31 interests i needed somebody that actually understood the technical aspect of our product because i didn't and that actually had the skills to manage a marketing team i felt adrian was the man i mean the job you created did you
00:52:42 i mean the job you created did you accept this was was a job which might actually involve walking something of a tight rope on occasions
00:52:48 occasions type rape strung between technical queries and challenges from the market and from nhbc on the one hand and at the other end maximizing kingspan's commercial standing and interests
00:53:00 interests um i didn't think it was a title i don't know what your phrase you used but no i didn't think that at all right you wanted somebody is this right fair to
00:53:08 fair to who you saw knew enough about the technical side of things to be able to use that
00:53:14 use that in support of kingspan's best commercial interests and to market products i'm sorry i still don't really understand the question that you're asking well well i'm really suggesting to you
00:53:25 well i'm really suggesting to you perhaps up a little bit more bluntly you were looking for somebody who knew enough uh technical uh information experience and know-how to be able to talk his way out of trouble when posed by
00:53:36 when posed by a difficult customer okay no that's not the reason not what was looking for at all
00:53:40 all actually i was looking not for somebody with enough technical in knowledge i was looking for somebody with a lot of technical knowledge that actually could manage the teams who were providing the data
00:53:49 data that would of course go to the marketing team but i was looking for somebody with a lot of technical knowledge and and i thought adrian was that person was either meredith ever considered for this role
00:54:00 um
00:54:04 no i don't believe he would have been why is that um well there were already some issues over his performance um and actually he was you know he was at
00:54:15 and actually he was you know he was at the time from what i could see the person that really understood fire um and so i think he was well suited to that role we were trying to build a team around him and he wasn't too keen on that so that was a job in itself
00:54:28 on that so that was a job in itself so what was the problem with him really understanding fire no he didn't have a problem i'm saying he was the person that understood fire which is why i asked the question why not promote either meredith to the role
00:54:41 not promote either meredith to the role um well he hadn't had any experience i don't think of managing a team of people and i don't think he had the from what i've felt
00:54:48 i've felt the broad breadth of experience that i would have expected somebody in that role
00:54:53 role when um uh adrian pargeter arrived did he report to you
00:55:01 you or did he report to others you remember when adrian parted to arrive andrew arrived in the blended position you'd created for him he reported directly to me
00:55:10 me yes how often did he report to you um again we would have informal conversations regularly um but formally once a month
00:55:22 and what about john garbett how often did he report to you john didn't report to me john reported to peter wilson so john was on the divisional management so that was a parallel reporting line was it yeah there was a bit of a matrix right
00:55:34 yeah there was a bit of a matrix right structure really i was how i would describe it right now i want to ask you some questions about the 2005 bs8414 test and i appreciate that it was done some nine years almost exactly before
00:55:47 some nine years almost exactly before you arrived at kingspan um when you arrived in june 2014 we were made up were you made aware of this test
00:56:00 k15 i mean i would have been made aware of the test i i honestly cannot remember when i was made aware of that test in general terms were you aware
00:56:12 in general terms were you aware either on or after your departure your arrival i'm sorry at kingspan in june 2014 that kingspan were relying on the 2005 bs8414 test
00:56:23 were relying on the 2005 bs8414 test both in its marketing literature and generally
00:56:26 generally well i definitely know that when i read the roots to compliance document it was one of the tests that was in that document
00:56:33 document yes and and what i'm struggling to remember is did anybody sit down and tell me before i read that document
00:56:39 document this is a 2005 test which i believe was part one
00:56:44 part one and he's i i never had that conversation sir
00:56:48 sir when you did read the uh roots to compliance document which was sent to you in late july 2015 and was published in august of that year um you would have realized that k-15 was
00:57:01 um you would have realized that k-15 was being marketed for buildings over 18 meters
00:57:05 meters yes and and it was reliant upon that one bs-8414 test in order to justify that application um well i think at the
00:57:16 that application um well i think at the time when i read it i was aware of all of the there were a number of things at the back of the document that were used as evidence and and i took it at that point that that was
00:57:27 that was valid information that's a different question and i take that point but you would have been you would have thought that k15 was being marketed for buildings over 18 meters in
00:57:40 marketed for buildings over 18 meters in reliance on one single ps8414 test namely the one done in 2005. um i'm not sure i know that i can answer that question
00:57:52 that question i know there'd been other tests done and i can't now remember from the document if there were other test passes that were referred to right i assume any bs 8414 tests that we'd passed would have been in that document
00:58:05 passed would have been in that document right and you've answered a question actually which which is a better answer than the question i posed to you um let me try it a different way because i think i may have confused you a little bit
00:58:16 have confused you a little bit um when you read the roots compliance document in 2015 and we'll go to it if we need to and we will indeed go to it anyway
00:58:28 will indeed go to it anyway did when you read it did it strike you that before 2014 when you arrived the only test being relied on to market k-15 over 18 meters was a bs 8414 test that didn't occur now you say in your
00:58:41 that didn't occur now you say in your state second statement of paragraph 3.3 or page 10. um you say there i was made aware
00:58:55 um you say there i was made aware that there was a change in the manufacturing process of k-15 where the process changed from old technology to new technology i have no further recollection of this when were you made aware of that change i really don't remember how did you
00:59:07 i really don't remember how did you become aware of it
00:59:10 i would describe it as an anecdotal comment that i picked up on from whom i don't remember right well you were made aware that the only
00:59:21 well you were made aware that the only new technology came were you made aware that only new technology k15 have been sold since 2006 i didn't know the date but i certainly knew that from the date i joined we were
00:59:32 knew that from the date i joined we were selling new technology phones so i assumed it went back quite some time but i wouldn't have known the exact year right
00:59:42 [Music] when you discovered that there'd been a change in manufacturing process did you think to look at the 2005 test i didn't know
00:59:58 right and did you think back to your days at sig before june 2014 and ask yourself where the sig had been selling k-15 on a false basis
01:00:09 false basis namely that it was a product which had passed a fire safety test when it hadn't no i had no reason to think that
01:00:17 now the inquiry's heard evidence from ivor meredith and has gone through the notes of his appeal uh hearing that he had with you on the 3rd of september 2015
01:00:28 on the 3rd of september 2015 do you agree from your recollection of that process that you were told of the fact of the change in technology from old to new by iva meredith at least
01:00:40 from old to new by iva meredith at least by then at that time by the time of his appeal
01:00:44 appeal yes yeah i would have known i think i knew about it during i mean i would imagine i picked it up during 2015. right and so before of his appeal yeah no i would have been away yes i was going to ask you because you don't
01:00:56 going to ask you because you don't appear from the notes of the disciplinary appeal hearing to display any shock or surprise on hearing that either meredith was telling you about the change in yeah no i definitely knew of it before then right
01:01:07 right and when you discover the fact that there'd been a change from old to new technology you didn't ask yourself whether or not the it had been new technology on which the 2005
01:01:18 been new technology on which the 2005 test
01:01:19 test had been conducted or old technology i didn't think to ask i think i'd just assume
01:01:24 assume that all of the tests that were being referred to were on the new technology phone
01:01:28 phone right it wasn't until sometime later that i realized i was told that it was actually a i think it was after the all of the work started for the inquiry right now can we go to page 79
01:01:41 right now can we go to page 79 of this statement please
01:01:45 this is the middle of the page question 144 and question 144 is what tests do you think mr meredith asserted that kingspan were unable to repeat
01:01:57 that kingspan were unable to repeat did you agree with him and your answer is a paragraph 1380 and 1381 and you say 1380 my understanding is that either was referring to the 2005 bs8414 test
01:02:09 referring to the 2005 bs8414 test i understood that insulation uk were no longer able to manufacture old technology k15 famous they did not have the same manufacturing equipment and therefore could not repeat the test on that basis i agree with either that
01:02:20 on that basis i agree with either that the 2005 bs8414 test could not be repeated
01:02:24 repeated this is still my understanding
01:02:28 now you say this is my understanding can we look
01:02:32 we look at the notes of the disciplinary hearing at kin408681 please
01:02:48 at kin408681 please and go to page five in that just just these are the appeal hearing notes on the third of september 2015 conducted by you mr burnley and on page
01:02:59 conducted by you mr burnley and on page five there you can see uh that iva meredith
01:03:06 says under the second i am entry yes i would say i've been put in a situation where i've had to maintain performance that perhaps our products don't deserve i have the ability to show that our products can be used in areas
01:03:18 that our products can be used in areas where you would normally require material which would be non-combustible from a critical lifesaver perspective i've performed in a number of tests in 2005. kingspan changed the technology of our phone when we couldn't
01:03:29 technology of our phone when we couldn't repeat those tests we were outed by a consultant who we then had to fabricate a story to that the product still said what it did not on the tin although i bucked at that point and said
01:03:40 although i bucked at that point and said to my manager at the time that we are stretching the truth here and what we are going into an area where we cannot support the performance of the product
01:03:47 product i wasn't the senior person there we produced documentation and we inferred to the industry that our product could do something that potentially it couldn't
01:03:55 couldn't now clear from that i would suggest to you mr burnley that mr meredith is uh telling you that the problem wasn't just due to a change in manufacturing equipment
01:04:07 manufacturing equipment but meant that the changing technology meant that the product didn't perform in a far test as it had before but at that time i don't think that i'd realize that the 2005 test
01:04:19 realize that the 2005 test was on the old foam i i i hadn't put the two together that we were referring to it i just hadn't made that connection and what i was hearing was a lot of the things that were thrown up in um his disciplinary hearing
01:04:33 um his disciplinary hearing and also i must say at this meeting whilst it's a lot easier to read it some time later it was he was all over the place
01:04:40 the place i mean it was he was very emotional he didn't make a lot of sense i mean of course the punctuation even he's added some of these things he was just saying it was it was a difficult meeting
01:04:52 saying it was it was a difficult meeting yes well let's make all all allowances for that clearly you were there and and we were not and we can only go on the document but it's right isn't it that at no stage in
01:05:05 it's right isn't it that at no stage in this meeting this interview at least according to the record of it do you express any surprise about what mr meredith is telling you here that i've read out to you no and as i
01:05:16 that i've read out to you no and as i say i think a lot of what he was saying the claims and some of the things he was saying
01:05:19 saying he'd already said in the disciplinary hearing which i'd read the handwritten notes for well one can take a number of different views about that but nonetheless here it is
01:05:31 about that but nonetheless here it is are you telling us that nothing that he was telling you here in the passage i've read out to you came as a surprise to you when he said it
01:05:40 the what i remember from the meeting was it was
01:05:43 it was an extremely emotionally charged meeting um and he was as a lot of people do when they're in that type of a meeting he was very emotional and so a lot of things you know they
01:05:54 and so a lot of things you know they people do say things to grab your attention
01:05:57 attention and i wasn't you know there was nothing here that i went blimey i need to check that we were already
01:06:04 already i'd spoken to we were already checking a lot of the things around ivor's work as a consequence of his performance well let's just break it down then i've tried the general approach and i hear what you say about that
01:06:17 what you say about that he says uh i've it's fourth line down i performed in a number of tests in 2005. kingspan changed the technology of our fame and we couldn't repeat those tests
01:06:28 fame and we couldn't repeat those tests now just pausing there was that something you knew or was that news to you which piece sorry
01:06:35 sorry the sentence i've just read to you would you mind reading this of course fourth line
01:06:40 line i let's read it together i have performed in a number of tests in 2005. kingspan changed the technology of our foam and we couldn't repeat those tests now was that something that you were
01:06:51 now was that something that you were hearing for the first time or was mr meredith telling you something you already knew well no i was aware that we'd changed how we made the foam so i didn't think we could make that foam again
01:07:03 we could make that foam again so we wouldn't have been able to test it so you knew that there'd been a change in technology and when he says we couldn't repeat those tests was that news to you again my reading
01:07:15 was that news to you again my reading and
01:07:15 and from my memory is i thought he was referring to fact we couldn't make that foam anymore so we couldn't have repeated the test yes with the old foam and because you couldn't make that foam
01:07:26 and because you couldn't make that foam anymore the test that done in 2005 was a test done on now outdated phone which you were no longer selling yeah and i didn't connect that you
01:07:37 yeah and i didn't connect that you didn't connect it it's quite clear isn't it that's what it would tell you no it is very yeah and then he goes oh he goes on we were outed by a consultant who we then had to fabricate a story to but the product still said what it did
01:07:49 but the product still said what it did not
01:07:50 not on the tin now just pausing there was that news to you um
01:08:04 i don't think it was but i don't think i i don't really know what he was referring to did you we don't have a record here of you asking him i mean you don't say to him well mr meredith what are you talking about
01:08:17 meredith what are you talking about i mean he was his answers were very rambling very quick
01:08:22 so to some extent i was i was taking what he was saying with a pinch of salt this was a man who'd admitted to a serious drug um problem and was just
01:08:36 serious drug um problem and was just making a lot of spurious claims and a lot of it i just felt was wrapped up in his emotion of if i say something they might keep me well
01:08:47 help me with this there are two reasons aren't there for not reacting one is this is not a surprise to you and you've heard it all before anyway and he's not telling you anything new yes that's one possibility and the other possibility is that you don't believe a
01:08:58 possibility is that you don't believe a word of what he's saying which was it um well i would have to say that it was
01:09:09 um well i would have to say that it was probably the former that i must have known about somebody believing that there was a story and somebody must have told me that that had been closed but i can't i mean i'm not for a minute saying he was
01:09:21 mean i'm not for a minute saying he was telling lies but it wasn't something i know well i need to check that uh but i just can't remember
01:09:27 remember well i can understand that but you can't remember exactly but i'm showing you this record and you say as you said a minute ago that he was making a lot of serious claims what spurious claims was he making um
01:09:38 what spurious claims was he making um well there were a number of things i mean if if you read all of the document it was just he was saying some silly things well what spurious claims was he making
01:09:46 making mr burnley well i'd have to look at i mean if we went through the document and we could
01:09:51 we could right a number of things i just think right i mean well my belief based on my belief it's like there where we cannot support the performance of the product my understanding was that we could so when
01:10:02 understanding was that we could so when he said that he couldn't be you you were either surprised by that or you didn't believe a word of what he was saying i believe well my belief at the time was what we could so you didn't believe a word of what he was saying i was struggling to
01:10:14 was saying i was struggling to put a lot of credence behind what he was saying and partly because of the way he was saying it and what was the basis at the time of your belief that the performance of the product
01:10:26 that the performance of the product could be supported by a test because that was what i was being told by
01:10:32 told by the people around me right
01:10:36 when he said we had to fabricate a story to that
01:10:40 to that to that the product still said what it did not on the tin did you believe him or had you heard it before
01:10:49 i don't think i'd heard that before i mean there were lots of people asking us questions rightly about the performance of the product and i generally believed that it did because that's what i was being told
01:11:01 that's what i was being told and he says at the end there i wasn't the senior person there and i've skipped over a couple of sentences we produced documentation and we inferred to the industry that our product could do something that potentially it couldn't have you heard that before or was that
01:11:13 have you heard that before or was that another instance of where you didn't believe a word of what he was saying no i i thought he was making statements because he felt he was the only person who really was handling fire at the time we tried to put people around him and
01:11:24 we tried to put people around him and he'd
01:11:24 he'd i think he saw that as a threat and so i think he was making claims for reasons for us to keep him because he would be the only one that could deal with fire matters um well did you take what he was saying here in
01:11:36 did you take what he was saying here in this last sentence seriously or not the bits that i took seriously were actually things that came out of the original disciplinary hearing i was very concerned
01:11:45 concerned about how he may be communicating with customers and industry bodies and so i remembered adrian i talked about so we need to just i want to be sure that what we're telling people
01:11:57 sure that what we're telling people is correct and accurate and i know that adrian went with the team and and looked at all of that information
01:12:05 did you institute an investigation internally as to precisely what had happened
01:12:09 happened and how it had been allowed to happen as mr meredith was describing it no i didn't why is that because i think based on the nature of
01:12:20 because i think based on the nature of that meeting which was the the um appeal hearing my approach had been looking at all that was said in the uh disciplinary hearing minutes there was a
01:12:31 disciplinary hearing minutes there was a number of things that were repeated here and so i was worried about the accuracy of his work and what we would be telling people and i was comfortable that adrian and the people
01:12:42 comfortable that adrian and the people in the technical team would go and investigate that well after this hearing so that is what it was did you review these notes
01:12:54 did you review these notes um i reviewed them when they were typed and given to me yes when was that within a matter of days i mean it wasn't within a week no i can understand that so you reviewed them and when he reviewed them did it not
01:13:05 and when he reviewed them did it not occur to you even though you may have been skeptical about either meredith because of his conduct or because of his his agenda as you saw it nonetheless to undertake an investigation internally
01:13:18 to undertake an investigation internally as to whether there was a grain of even a grain of truth in what he was saying to you
01:13:22 to you um i didn't i mean the person that i spoke to about the minutes was the head of hr
01:13:27 of hr who wasn't in the meeting but had also i think it was susan you that brought me them i i read through them and i asked and i said do you think there's anything else i need to do and susan said no i think
01:13:38 i need to do and susan said no i think that's fine
01:13:42 so you didn't undertake an investigation and only talked to hr did you did you even ask adrian parchetta whether what you've been told by either meredith at this hearing
01:13:53 either meredith at this hearing had any basis in reality well at this point
01:13:57 point i was referring again of the minutes from the disciplinary here and there was overlap between things that he was saying so i was i knew that adrian was checking his work area so i was
01:14:09 checking his work area so i was comfortable that if there were issues it would come out of that investigation did you ask mr pargeter to investigate whether there was any truth in what mr meredith had told you no i
01:14:20 in what mr meredith had told you no i didn't why is that because i felt that from what we'd already got going on that was going to be enough
01:14:31 what was already going on so adrian and the team around that area were looking at iva's work and and the quality of it now you would
01:14:43 and and the quality of it now you would have known by this point this is early or early september 2015 that within the last six weeks or so previous six weeks or so
01:14:51 or so you had released to the market your roots to compliance document yes yes and that reached compliance document among other tests referred to the 2005 psa 414 test i can show you the document take it from
01:15:04 i can show you the document take it from me that it did but did it not concern you that only six weeks later you're being told by either meredith who was present at that test as you would have known telling you that you were stretching the
01:15:15 telling you that you were stretching the truth and couldn't support the performance of the product and that they've been a change in technology of the phone and you couldn't repeat the tests i didn't link the two i had one was a
01:15:26 i didn't link the two i had one was a document being provided to me by the team who were in a far better place than i was to know whether the content was accurate and then i had a gentleman who sadly had lost his way and in my opinion
01:15:38 sadly had lost his way and in my opinion was doing anything he could to create some emotion that i would go i will actually we need to reconsider and and keep him employed so i just didn't connect the two things
01:15:49 connect the two things you didn't connect the two things so you didn't connect the obs the obsoleteness of the 2005 test
01:15:58 test as mr meredith was telling you the misleading of the market in the meantime on the one hand with the fact that kingspan was still trumpeting the bsa414 test
01:16:08 test as the basis or one of the bases for stelling
01:16:11 stelling selling k15 as in august 2015. i didn't connect them now can you explain why you didn't make that connection i can try i mean i think the thing again
01:16:23 i can try i mean i think the thing again i saw them as two separate matters so there was a a um an appeal into somebody who'd been suddenly decided to fire and then there was a document and
01:16:35 was a document and my view was that there were there was such a sort of um safety net around the technical group that would have been approving the documents and the accuracy of the information
01:16:47 information i had no doubt to question the accuracy of that document and then i had a very sad situation here on an employee
01:16:56 employee and i didn't i just didn't connect the two i mean the the only connection was from the work that i i was concerned is the accuracy of
01:17:05 of communication coming out from our fire team
01:17:11 team proper is it correct looking down the page
01:17:15 page in the last but one i am entry he says after the
01:17:19 after the question about the date uh what's happened in the last 18 months longer than that actually a lot of these projects which we have sold into started to come back and start to question that performance
01:17:31 question that performance i've been under a great deal of pressure to actually maintain that performance when it's evident through testing that our product struggles with that we've obviously had to i've been very busy doing a large amount of testing there was technology that could pass but
01:17:43 there was technology that could pass but we were struggling to get the technology to pass to justify our lie now leaving aside the last few words of that entry there
01:17:55 of that entry there you did know because of your involvement with at least with the nhbc that what mr meredith was saying here was correct yeah and i remember at this stage i was aware that we were failing to provide
01:18:06 aware that we were failing to provide the right evidence to the nhbc forgive me on the dates i can't remember this is before i think i started to go and meet with the nhpc um
01:18:17 started to go and meet with the nhpc um but i was aware of that and so that was one of the things we were talking about well i i was i was starting to get frustrated because the nhbc were clearly getting frustrated so i was aware of of people questioning
01:18:29 so i was aware of of people questioning the evidence we were providing yes and given that mr meredith was telling you there
01:18:33 there something that you recognized to be exactly correct and chimed with your own experience as you'd had it why would you have dismissed what he'd said a few minutes before that higher up the page uh as the ramblings of
01:18:47 uh as the ramblings of a an upset employee with an agenda well on this i was aware so i was i was
01:18:58 well on this i was aware so i was i was already hearing that you know we had issues with the nhbc so in my mind i was linking this to the nhbc and thinking
01:19:06 thinking that's on my radar i know we're dealing with that i'm sure that's what he's referring to yes and to justify our lie does that not jolt you into life
01:19:20 i mean it's i have to accept that when you read it on the paper now it's something where you just go i can't believe
01:19:27 believe you don't do something about that but at the time and the way he was said it had less impact than the written word well all right making all allowances for being there
01:19:38 making all allowances for being there and i accept you were there and we were not and it may have been an emotional moment and he may have been in a state but you are being told at least in two places
01:19:47 places in the context of something that you recognize much of that kingspan was perpetrating a fraud on the market you could you must have understood that from this i didn't because
01:19:58 from this i didn't because again this is one person compared to a safety net of people around the technical function with a lot of history in the business whose opinions and knowledge are
01:20:10 whose opinions and knowledge are respected
01:20:12 respected but this individual had of course been there in 2005 and been there at the tests
01:20:18 tests and seen through the period from 2005 to date
01:20:23 date why didn't you why were you prepared to give him any credence in what he's telling you here i i think with hindsight it was a mistake on my part i mean i was i was probably impacted by the fact that
01:20:38 i was probably impacted by the fact that it wasn't a great meeting i mean even getting him to an appeal i think there was a week where he was allowed to appeal and i and i actually said to susan knew it has i mean i was expecting him to appeal
01:20:49 has i mean i was expecting him to appeal i said has he not appealed yet and i think he went into the hr department the very day that the period ran out for him to appeal and he was asking for a copy of the
01:21:00 and he was asking for a copy of the staff handbook and they asked him are you are you planning on appealing because
01:21:05 because the deadline is five o'clock today and i i even remember my recollection is it was probably already five past or ten past five
01:21:12 past five and he said oh yes and i want to and he actually wrote his appeal letter on the inside cover of the staff handbook and then ripped it off and gave it to the hrp because i saw it
01:21:23 and gave it to the hrp because i saw it i saw the written document and that sadly
01:21:28 sadly you know it's a mistake you can't help but be influenced by people who were reacting like that at the time he wasn't in control of his faculties so you just helped me with this you um
01:21:40 so you just helped me with this you um you say by way of explanation that you were surrounded by other people who seemed to know about the business and and were able to reassure you that things were actually all right after you'd had this
01:21:55 actually all right after you'd had this interview with um mr meredith and and he'd said these things which at least have been recorded as they have in the in the did you go back to anyone and say well look he's telling me this that and
01:22:06 well look he's telling me this that and the other
01:22:07 the other is there anything in it i can't remember i mean i'd be amazed if i didn't but in my statement i've tried to give factual information
01:22:18 information i mean i would be amazed if i hadn't spoken to somebody like peter wilson or phil heath or chris guest i mean
01:22:29 phil heath or chris guest i mean there was a lot there was a large divisional team i mean i i just can't remember and i can't i didn't feel it was right
01:22:35 was right to refer to conversations that i cut you know i'd be giving somebody's name and not sure that i'd done it but my nature is inquisitive but if i can't honestly remember doing it i didn't feel
01:22:46 honestly remember doing it i didn't feel i could put it down but i did feel that the security net the safety net around our technical no know-how was secure enough that i could rely on the opinions of
01:22:57 that i could rely on the opinions of others
01:22:58 others all right thank you and yes mr smith
01:23:03 i'm assuming that it didn't occur to you at the time that philip heath and perhaps adrian podgetter as well might have had a personal reason not to be entirely candid with you about this
01:23:18 i don't believe that anybody in my time at kingspan definitively told me a lie to cover something up so i don't i don't agree with that statement i can't
01:23:29 statement i can't including mr meredith well we're looking at something written down here
01:23:36 here the meeting was highly charged emotional and he was doing everything he possibly could to he i mean anecdotally he he was he was told that i would hear his appeal
01:23:49 he was told that i would hear his appeal and again i can't prove it but i know that he said oh well i'm screwed then because richard will do it by the book and i did do it i felt i was doing it
01:24:00 and i did do it i felt i was doing it actually
01:24:00 actually i was concerned about his mental health i made a comment to susan you had straight after the meeting and i said whilst i'm upholding the decision i am seriously concerned that in two weeks time there's an you
01:24:12 that in two weeks time there's an you know something in the newspaper that something awful would happen to him he was in a bad way mr burnley i am not standing here asking you questions about the due process of kingspan's disciplinary procedures or
01:24:23 of kingspan's disciplinary procedures or real role in the disciplinary process itself
01:24:25 itself what i'm seeking to get to the bottom of is having been told what i've shown you on the record either meredith told you in the places i've shown you in the record of that you then didn't do
01:24:36 record of that you then didn't do anything about it it's with regret that i didn't do more well understand that and at the time let me try did you did you consider
01:24:46 consider withdrawing k15 from the market until you had got to the bottom of whether it was accompanied by a valid bs8414 test i i didn't know but i what i do know is
01:24:58 i i didn't know but i what i do know is that this did trigger my interest in k-15 and from this point on i started to go well i need to get involved
01:25:05 involved i mean certainly it did something to me because then i was in front of the nhbc i think not long after this
01:25:16 let's turn to a different topic mr chairman that might be an appropriate slightly early for an afternoon break you know
01:25:23 you know if you're going to a new topic i suggest we do give our break now thank you um mr bernie we do have a break during the morning and the afternoon and it's not usually quite as early as this but i think this is a good time so we'll stop now and we'll uh
01:25:36 time so we'll stop now and we'll uh resume at half past three please okay and i have to ask you not to talk to anyone about your evidence or anything to do with it while you're out of the room of course thank you very much would you like to give the ocean please
01:25:57 thank you how far sweet then please skip
01:50:09 yes would you ask mr burnley to come back in please
01:50:23 back in please mr burnley i'm sorry we've kept you waiting longer than i'd expected something cropped up which we're going to have to deal with but we're ready to go on now thank you thank you mr chairman mr burnley i'd like to look
01:50:34 mr chairman mr burnley i'd like to look to take you to four one kin30s four please
01:50:41 three zeros two four one zero four this is a letter written by kingspan on the 23rd of october 2020 by adrian pargeter to the bre now of course i appreciate that you had left
01:50:53 course i appreciate that you had left uh kingspan about a year before that so i well understand that you have not seen this letter and it's addressed to debbie smith at bre watford and he says we're writing to
01:51:05 bre watford and he says we're writing to you with reference to a number of bs 8414 test reports and corresponding classification reports featuring our product cool them k-15 which kingspan will formally be withdrawing from calcul from circulation
01:51:18 from calcul from circulation as you may be aware kingspan is currently involved as a core participant in the grenfell tower public inquiry as part of our cooperation with requests for information from the inquiry we have undertaken a comprehensive review of all past and current test data
01:51:30 review of all past and current test data which relates to k-15 including psa for one for
01:51:33 one for tests through our review we have now concluded that tests carried out in 2005 and 14
01:51:39 and 14 featured product that was not sufficiently representative of the product currently sold into the marketplace we've listed these reports in a small summary of their construction buildups below
01:51:48 below now were you aware before you left kingspan in 2019 of whether any internal review was being undertaken by kingspan on whether the 2005 bs 8414 test
01:52:00 on whether the 2005 bs 8414 test could be relied on
01:52:04 yes i believe i was aware that we were trying to
01:52:07 trying to repeat the test i think to see that the standard foam performed the same conditions would be my understanding i think
01:52:18 think now you say you believe you were aware were you involved with that effort no not directly how are you aware
01:52:28 um well i mean i don't know i mean i i have in my mind i mean i have a lot in my mind um
01:52:40 with not with not being able to prepare with my i'm an email person who would not be able to check all of the emails that i would have received it's hard to know
01:52:49 know i just know there was a very thorough investigation taking place of every single
01:52:54 single test certificate test report and so i know
01:52:57 know there was an issue around the 2005 test so i'm
01:53:01 so i'm sure i was aware that there was things going on you say i'm an email person so not being able with not being able to check all the emails that i would have received when you were preparing your statements for the inquiry did were you not shown
01:53:13 the inquiry did were you not shown all of the emails that you received in relation to all of the issues being investigated by the inquiry i was given access to a lot of documents yes i can't give access to all of my emails by the way
01:53:24 emails by the way but i mean there's only so much i can do and i've done the best i can right now in the three and a half years between either meredith's disciplinary appeal hearing in early september 2015
01:53:39 uh is it right that you did nothing yourself to examine or um procure the examination of the truth of his claims about the 2005 test and simply left the k15 test out there
01:53:51 and simply left the k15 test out there on the market trading on the basis that the 2005 test applied to the product as sold
01:53:59 i don't think i did nothing the i think the issue that you're referring to is the fact i have not connected the fact to the reliance on the 2005 test and it not being the product that was being sold
01:54:12 being the product that was being sold what i was focused on and what i was doing was trying to drive forward a better understanding with people that needed information and that was what i know adrian pardito and his
01:54:24 was what i know adrian pardito and his team were focused on was trying to work out
01:54:26 out what what tests do we need to do that give people information in relation to representative systems at the point you left in 2019 how far
01:54:38 at the point you left in 2019 how far had been
01:54:38 had been how far had an investigation into whether standard k-15 being sold in the market
01:54:46 market uh was the same product as tested in 2005.
01:54:50 2005. how far had it got i don't know i can't remember
01:54:56 i want to ask you about 2007 2008 testing
01:55:00 testing at the time you joined kingspan in june 2014
01:55:04 2014 do you agree first of all that there had at that date as yet been no successful tests undertaken with k15 to bs 8414 for part two steel frame
01:55:16 to bs 8414 for part two steel frame systems um there were some tests done the year i arrived i can't recall if they were part two test or not i also can't recall
01:55:27 part two test or not i also can't recall if there were passes or fails i i think that's correct yes i think you're right a director level how was the absence of
01:55:38 a director level how was the absence of the successful testing under that uh test regime reviewed how is it viewed i'm sorry could you repeat them yeah part of the question was there any
01:55:49 part of the question was there any discussion at the director level about the importance of the fact that you didn't have a pass at bs 8414 part two
01:56:01 at bs 8414 part two i would assume there would be but it would be with people in there in the functional silo if you like were you made aware of the four
01:56:09 the four large-scale fire tests that kingspan had completed in 2007 and 2008 and which had failed
01:56:16 not when i joined i mean i think i became aware of them again probably around the time that we started the work
01:56:23 the work to help the inquiry right can we look at kin 40884
01:56:28 kin 40884 please
01:56:35 this is a report written by iva meredith dated the 7th of january 2008. uh can we look please at page two
01:56:47 he this is an executive summary you see that yep
01:56:54 and uh it uh explains the test that was done under part two bs 8414 part two
01:57:05 uh and identifies the project's project stakeholders and then the result at the bottom of the page
01:57:13 page by 17 minutes the top fire barrier had breached and the raging inferno moved up to the top thermocouples and pushed them past 600 degrees thus failing the simple criteria of br 1 3 did you see
01:57:26 3 did you see this report at any time after your arrival at kingspan in june 2014 i don't believe i've ever seen this report did anybody tell you that back in 2007
01:57:37 2007 k15 had been subjected to a bs 8414 part two test
01:57:41 two test uh and a raging inferno had resulted i don't recall i know you'd have remembered that how would the words i would remember
01:57:51 was it made clear to you when you arrived at kingspan that obtaining a successful pass to bs8414 part 2 was a priority for kingspan
01:58:03 i mean i would have thought so yes but you say you would have thought so do you recall
01:58:07 recall i don't recall no right um now i want to ask you about the labc certificate for k15 can we look at your second witness statement please and go to paragraph 9.4 at the foot of
01:58:18 and go to paragraph 9.4 at the foot of page 39.
01:58:24 now you say there
01:58:28 under your response to question inquiry question 52 what did you understand to be the purpose of obtaining an labc system type approval certificate or registered details certificate for k-15
01:58:39 k-15 i did not know for sure the purpose of obtaining an labc certificate for k-15 and i still do not know however i assume it would be to demonstrate that the product was fit for purpose
01:58:48 purpose now you've been in the building industry uh products uh industry for many years and you'd been at sig for uh about nine years 2005 to 2014.
01:58:59 for uh about nine years 2005 to 2014. was it really the case that you were unaware and are still unaware at the time you wrote this statement of the purpose of obtaining a system approval from the nabc
01:59:10 approval from the nabc um i'd never heard of of the reference to an labc i mean i've heard of
01:59:16 heard of um registered details i know of um but the when i joined kingspan everything was focused on bs8414
01:59:27 focused on bs8414 testing and so i it was not something i was familiar with you say you've never heard of the reference to
01:59:34 to an labc how has that june 2014 had you actually heard of vladc yeah i knew of the labc uh so
01:59:47 uh so you were aware of the labc were you really not aware of the purpose of obtaining an abc certificate i can't say i was no i mean i've never
01:59:58 i can't say i was no i mean i've never had a technical role in the building industry i've always been involved in the commercial side but an labc did you never come across the usefulness of having an nabc certificate on the commercial side in order to sell products to customers
02:00:12 order to sell products to customers and the honest answer is no really in all the time at sig did no customer ever ask you for an labc certificate that's why i made comment on the registered details i was aware of registered details
02:00:23 aware of registered details not in any great knowledge but i was aware
02:00:26 aware that when i was first at sig we got involved in acoustic products and there was
02:00:33 there was uh there were robust details so yeah i'm not a building technician if we go to the bottom of page 50
02:00:43 page 50 41 let's look at question 59 the inquiries question 59 uh was does kingspan at any stage bear any responsibility for checking the accuracy of the content of an labc certificate
02:00:55 of the content of an labc certificate if not why not if so please set out how this responsibility is met and by whom and your answer there was i don't think that insulation uk bears any responsibility however i expect that insulation uk would check
02:01:06 i expect that insulation uk would check the accuracy of the certificates and draw any inaccuracies to the attention of the labc was that an expectation that you had at the time and when i say at the time i mean throughout your career yeah i think i've answered in a similar
02:01:18 yeah i think i've answered in a similar way there's similar questions about other aspects and i've answered the same i would have thought insulation uk would check the accuracy what was the basis for that belief
02:01:28 it was just my belief it's just what i own what's it based on well it's the right thing to do well a belief is normally based on some data some empirical foundation
02:01:40 data some empirical foundation no i'm not all beliefs i accept but but i mean
02:01:44 i mean a commercial belief or a technical belief must be based on something to go on
02:01:49 on what were you going on in order to have the belief that you that the labc details were correct well okay i think i mean i've answered the question in the same way that
02:02:00 the question in the same way that answered the questions about test reports i think earlier in in the witness statement where i've just said the same ending where i said well i do think that we would you know insulation uk would have
02:02:12 you know insulation uk would have checked because it's a logical thing to do that if you're doing testing and you're getting a report you make sure that it's the right content now let's look at nhb
02:02:25 content now let's look at nhb 50798 please this is the new registered details certificate issued by the labc
02:02:38 certificate issued by the labc on the 20th of august 2014 if you look at the foot of the page you see that i do so you'd been at kingspan about two months or so uh as a managing director do you
02:02:50 uh as a managing director do you remember reading this certificate at the time i don't uh well let's see how we go then under validity it says the certificate was first issued on the 28th of august 213
02:03:01 28th of august 213 2013 and was valid until 30th of november 2014 issue dated 20th of august 2014. do you know why there was only a three-month period of validity
02:03:13 three-month period of validity no i have no idea going over to page three in the middle of the page there you'll see a heading adb fire safety do you see that i don't it says note
02:03:24 says note from the results it can be considered as a material of limited combustibility and meets the criteria for class naught classification for spread of flame since k-15 can be considered a material of limited combustibility
02:03:36 of limited combustibility it is suitable for use in all situations shown on diagram 40 of approved document b volume 2 including those parts of a building more than 80 meters above the ground
02:03:48 now do you have any idea why it was that labc was telling the public
02:03:56 public that k-15 was a material of limited combustibility i don't and in fact it's now triggered to me i remember this from somebody else's
02:04:05 else's evidence and that was the first i'd heard about it when you say that was the first i'd heard about it can you just elaborate
02:04:16 heard about it can you just elaborate when i didn't recall knowing anything about the statement here of it being a material of limited combustibility or indeed i hadn't seen this certificate
02:04:27 i i just i'm clear are you telling us that it was only during the evidence of this inquiry that you saw the certificate and realized that you didn't know about it um
02:04:40 about it um could you ask that i tried to understand your evidence let's take the stages in august 2014 when this was issued did you see it no i really don't think i did did you see it at any time
02:04:51 think i did did you see it at any time after that i don't recall seeing it at all
02:04:53 all so is it right that the first time you you saw this and focused on what i'm putting to you here was during the evidence in this inquiry yeah i'm not sure i saw it when the evidence was but i heard i
02:05:04 evidence was but i heard i i heard it talked about right do you accept
02:05:08 accept that that certificate was incorrect and misleading because k-15 cannot be considered the material of limited limited combustibility on any view i would agree that's my understanding can you explain how it was that this
02:05:19 can you explain how it was that this certificate was allowed out into the public domain on your watch
02:05:25 no i can't
02:05:31 it's right isn't it as i think you would accept that k-15 is not suitable for use in all situations as shown in diagram 40 is it
02:05:39 is it i'm not familiar with diagram 40 i'm afraid but now mr milichap said that this was a stretch it's day 81 page 144 can you explain how you were allowing labc to produce certificates for your
02:05:51 labc to produce certificates for your product which could only be made to be true
02:05:53 true by even at its most generous a stretch i can't and you can't explain how the errors in this certificate came to be there
02:06:01 there no i can't as i say it's the first time i've actually seen it right you were the managing director at the time of issue was it not your responsibility to ensure that the highest standards of property and
02:06:12 highest standards of property and technical excellence were being maintained in the departments for which you were responsible
02:06:18 i would say yes and that you are accountable for these misleading and erroneous statements
02:06:27 i'm not sure that i can be accountable then i was two months into the company i don't understand necessarily the technical detail i'm not technically qualified i mean i can obviously see it saying i it would certainly make
02:06:39 see it saying i it would certainly make me ask the question why are we saying it's limited combustibility because my understanding was that k15 wasn't under the test that they use so it would have at least made me had i read it say
02:06:50 read it say you know why why is that in there but i didn't see it so i right so i don't think i can be held accountable for it right well how can you account then for how
02:07:01 well how can you account then for how can you explain how such a fundamental error and such a misleading statement could be made to the market without you uh knowing about that i don't know
02:07:14 2014 test i'd just like to ask you about that
02:07:17 that do you recall that on the 7th of july 2014 just after a month or so after you joined kingspan kingspan tested a product that it called k15 to bs8414 part 2 using a terracotta tile
02:07:30 to bs8414 part 2 using a terracotta tile cladding rain screen system at the bre
02:07:35 i mean i think i would have been aware that there was a test going on i wouldn't have understood the relative importance of part two i do remember
02:07:46 part two i do remember the terracotta tile part i remember and clearly that became more important to me as
02:07:51 as my knowledge developed
02:07:56 is it right that when that test was passed
02:07:59 passed what purported to be kingspan k15 had passed for the first time since 2005 a large-scale fire test
02:08:11 this was the first let me try again you're looking puzzled i'm trying to understand that it was a long question i'm really sorry well this was the first time since 2005 wasn't it that kingspan k15 or what purported to be
02:08:22 purported to be kingsbound k-15 had passed a large-scale fire test
02:08:27 you're asking me at that time when the test was done i wouldn't have known i wouldn't have known i've been there a month or two right let's look at your second witness statement please page 23 question 30 b
02:08:46 um you say there in relation to the question
02:08:50 question set out the question who within kingspan held overall responsibility for planning and arranging testing to bs 8414 on systems incorporating k15 and your answer at the foot of the page
02:09:01 and your answer at the foot of the page was
02:09:01 was more broadly i'm sorry i think mem i'm so sorry
02:09:05 so sorry uh i think the members of the technical team would have held overall responsibility for planning and arranging bsa414 testing and then b more broadly who was responsible for kingspan's strategy in relation to tests
02:09:16 relation to tests to bsa414 and for planning testing programs
02:09:20 programs and then if you turn the page to paragraph 5.27 you say my understanding is that the head of technical or the head of technical and marketing post may 2015 and the technical team would
02:09:32 may 2015 and the technical team would make proposals in respect of the strategy in relation to bsa414 tests and suggest plans for the testing program these proposals would be discussed with members of the divisional team for example at the britain and
02:09:43 team for example at the britain and ireland review meeting i understand that the testing strategy in the program would have developed each year
02:09:48 year depending on the outcome of previous tests
02:09:51 tests and you then say 531 on page 25
02:09:58 my understanding was that the divisional managing director divisional marketing director and divisional technician processing director had input into the bsa414 testing strategy and program and will make decisions on strategy and
02:10:09 and will make decisions on strategy and testing programs in the light of the proposals put forward by the technical team
02:10:13 team as described in paragraph 527 it would then be the responsibility of my team particularly the technical team to implement the agreed testing strategy can you just explain who held the roles that you described when you
02:10:25 that you described when you began at kingspan into 2014. who was the divisional managing director first peter wilson and the division marketing director was john garcia john garbert and the divisional technical processing director
02:10:37 divisional technical processing director he's gwen davis gwyn davis right so is it right that those gentlemen at divisional level would have had knowledge of the testing programs in light of the decisions that were being made on strategy
02:10:50 being made on strategy yes they would and can you confirm that those plans for testing once you arrived were discussed with you and the divisional director peter wilson
02:11:05 i was i mean i would say i was made aware of them i wouldn't say they were disgust with me i mean i wasn't providing any great input right were you briefed about the july 2014 test before it took place
02:11:18 the july 2014 test before it took place no don't believe so were you briefed after it took place i think briefed would be a strong word i was probably told
02:11:29 was probably told that it you know what had happened uh but
02:11:33 but i didn't see a report on the test or right
02:11:38 right did you you say you were probably told it had what has happened who would have told you that i think
02:11:49 who would have told you that i think it's like the tony miller chapwood no i say tony miller chap would uh and do you remember what he told you i don't know is it was was there a
02:12:00 i don't know is it was was there a report to you about what has happened at the test no i mean tony used to write emails so he may well have sent me an email on it but i wouldn't i didn't see a test i
02:12:11 but i wouldn't i didn't see a test i don't remember seeing a test report sure and he probably wouldn't have sent it to me because he probably would have realized i'm likely not to read it did he tell you that the test had been undertaken
02:12:22 that the test had been undertaken on solstice blown k-15 with a 50 micron phaser perforated on one side only i don't know did he tell you that in fact k
02:12:33 fact k standard k-15 being sold unlike what was tested
02:12:36 tested uh had a 20 micron foil 25 micron foil i'm sorry and was perforated on both sides
02:12:43 sides i don't recall i doubt it but i don't recall and that it was made with a different blowing agent
02:12:49 no i mean i've i've heard this in other evidence and i
02:12:54 i don't think it came to my knowledge that it was a solstice foam probably again until we'd started doing all of the detailed work around the inquiry doing the best you can with your recollection
02:13:08 were you under the impression at the time july 2014 that the test that had been carried out in that month under bsa414 part two had been done on standard k-15 being
02:13:20 two had been done on standard k-15 being sold
02:13:20 sold i did yes right when did you learn that that was not the case and that what had been tested was in fact a research and development product again i can't be sure but i i don't think i became aware of that until we
02:13:32 think i became aware of that until we probably started doing a lot of analysis for information for the inquiry right but i'm not certain even hearing the evidence so i can't even i'm not sure if it's not from here in
02:13:44 i'm not sure if it's not from here in the evidence that i'm now aware it's difficult tony miller chap told the inquiry in its day 82 page 77 line 3 uh following that it was common knowledge at kingspan at the time that
02:13:55 knowledge at kingspan at the time that the test was undertaken on a trial product that was different from the product being sold he said it was common knowledge do you agree with that
02:14:05 it may have been common knowledge amongst the technical fraternity but i i wasn't my common knowledge
02:14:14 i i want to ask you now moving forward in the year 2014 to november about an email
02:14:19 email sent to you by tony miller chap on the 12th of november that year kin30s 21810
02:14:34 now the subject heading as you can see the email
02:14:38 the email is k-15 testing direction and it's an email sent from iva meredith at the top of the page on the 14th of november to adrian parjita
02:14:48 parjita sending on an email that he and you had received from tony miller chap on the 12th of november and i want to focus on the the main email there and
02:14:59 the main email there and it refers as you can see to a meeting earlier that day and talks about the successful bs8414 part 2 test that celetex had recently passed
02:15:11 that celetex had recently passed do you remember that meeting no i don't remember meeting i mean i've seen this email before in documents in preparation for this yes what was the meeting about can you
02:15:23 yes what was the meeting about can you recall
02:15:27 no i mean i don't think it was a formal meeting it was probably that he would have come into my office and would have sat down and talked around various things but i don't remember right is that meeting between you uh mr
02:15:40 is that meeting between you uh mr meredith and mr milly chap i don't know i can't recall okay do you remember having a discussion about celetex and its marketing blurb and it being vague about the test
02:15:52 and it being vague about the test construction at the time
02:16:00 um no i don't i'm just reading it because i'm not sure whether he was actually
02:16:05 actually i don't know whether that was part of the meeting i mean it could be
02:16:10 well it says in the first sentence further to our meeting of earlier today i've set out our understanding of the published teletex rs5000 result in its current impact yeah initially having sourced a copy of celetex marketing blurb we are we were not surprised with the vagueness
02:16:22 not surprised with the vagueness surrounding the specifics of the test construction notably around provision of fire breaks do you remember having a discussion along those lines before this email about celetex rs 5000
02:16:34 about celetex rs 5000 i don't i don't but i i actually think my reading of that is he's come and told me about
02:16:41 me about the result for celtics rs 5000 and i think he's now telling me they've sourced some material some literature right let's look at the fourth paragraph down we can see that mr milichapp says we are only aware of one project where
02:16:53 we are only aware of one project where the celetex product has been adopted which involved the same supply chain as their test program we have yet to be asked to defend specification against the product we are actively involved in supporting
02:17:04 we are actively involved in supporting us into supporting 50 sorry 60 plus projects specifically on the over 18 meter issue whilst we had to financially support the project of first street manchester this specification held and we have not
02:17:16 this specification held and we have not lost a specification since feedback from specialist subcontractors specifies that consultants all raised out
02:17:22 out over the celetex solution when he says uh um that they'd been asked to defend specification against celetex what did he mean
02:17:31 he mean did you think yet
02:17:37 i'm assuming that means that where there is a project where k-15 has been specified
02:17:45 specified nobody had yet contacted us saying we're thinking of changing the specification to the cool thing sorry to the celetex product is how i read that
02:17:55 when you he refers to supporting 60 plus projects specifically on the over 18 mis meter issue what does he mean i think he means that they're providing technical
02:18:06 means that they're providing technical evidence or support to those projects what was the over 18 meter issue did you understand
02:18:17 third line down i assume it means being able to be used k-15 right
02:18:28 and you say you think he means providing technical evidence or support to those projects what technical evidence did you think
02:18:34 think was being provided by tony miller chap on 60 plus projects specifically on the over 18 meter issue well i don't think it was specifically tony i think he's referring to the team
02:18:45 tony i think he's referring to the team right the team um i don't know i don't think my
02:18:49 think my knowledge of k-15 and its use was at the level where i would have known what to ask
02:18:54 ask so i would assume that he knew what he was talking about and what did you think he meant
02:19:03 well providing technical evidence that the product can be used to support this specification why was there a doubt about that did you think at the time that would justify or require support of
02:19:15 that would justify or require support of that nature i don't know i don't recall did you ask
02:19:22 nope i mean i yeah no i didn't why is that
02:19:28 as i probably didn't read the email closely enough to think that there was an issue there really this is about the testing direction of k-15 which was as i understand it maybe this isn't right one of kingspan's major
02:19:39 right one of kingspan's major uh products and the only product used over 18 meters well you're not interested to read the detail of what mr miller chap was sending to you well i was but i think so he's referring to seleto i mean i so i was a strong
02:19:50 to seleto i mean i so i was a strong believer and we ought to just stick to what we were good at and not really worry about what the competition were doing
02:19:55 doing and so i was i was aware that there was a
02:20:00 a some questions in the business about how celetex could have passed a test and so it's quite possible that i've read that seen celetex mentioned a number of times and my eye would have probably gone down
02:20:12 and my eye would have probably gone down to the solstice piece at the bottom and i wouldn't have really digested the bit in the middle about celetex [Music]
02:20:23 [Music] this was i've been out it's 12th of november 2014. yes and you've been there almost six months yeah no and i'm trying to focus i would have been trying to focus on the things that i thought were really important and solstice would have drawn
02:20:34 important and solstice would have drawn my eye
02:20:35 my eye because i did have some knowledge on the low lambda cool therm project well let's go to that he says
02:20:41 he says in the next paragraph in light of the fact that we cannot produce k-15 100 solstice either commercially or from a production perspective i would advocate advocate that we test the blended product once lambda and
02:20:52 the blended product once lambda and costs are acceptable they've included malcolm's cost assessment to revert to testing standard nt k-15 will not support the strategy we are pursuing with arabs and nhbc but will signal a backwards step with
02:21:03 but will signal a backwards step with significant consequence what had occurred in in relation to the development of the k-15 product between the july 2014 test on solstice blown k-15
02:21:14 solstice blown k-15 and this email in mid-november 2014 where solstice blown k-15 you're being told couldn't be produced um i don't know i mean what i do know so
02:21:25 um i don't know i mean what i do know so i mean
02:21:26 i mean when i reviewed this first time this reminded me so i i remember we were developing the low lambda cool therm range and the business knew that if we were going to move k15
02:21:37 going to move k15 to solve this blowing agent technology then it would need to be retested
02:21:44 and i didn't i do i have in my mind that i remember saying well actually
02:21:52 we don't have to move all of the products onto low lambda technology if we can't
02:21:56 we can't make it work so we could move the ones that do
02:22:00 that do that we have got qualified and k-15 would have to be later and there was i don't know why but there was the business was saying well we we want to do it at the same time i can't remember why
02:22:11 can't remember why but i remembered because tony tony and i were saying well actually we just have to leave it if it's not ready it's not ready so was this the first time you became aware or were you already aware
02:22:25 that the um product being tested in july 2014 was not kings ban k-15 as sold
02:22:34 sold i didn't realize that at this point i didn't realize that the k-15 that had been tested june that year was the um i think it was called k115 how would you read that paragraph i've
02:22:45 how would you read that paragraph i've just read to you though to revert to testing standard nt k15 will not support the strategy we're pursuing
02:22:53 pursuing but we'll signal a backward step with significant consequence what did you understand by that well i don't see he's not specifically talking about 8414 so it would i would have probably just thought he was
02:23:04 have probably just thought he was talking about the lambda the performance in terms of its uh thermal performance
02:23:14 so you're you don't think that's about fire testing at all is that we were telling well the second part of the sentence
02:23:19 sentence with arabs and nhbc would suggest it is but i'm not sure i would have drawn that connection what was the strategy that you were pursuing with the nhbc that relates to thermal performance as opposed to fire
02:23:30 performance as opposed to fire performance
02:23:34 well i don't know there was a strategy now my comment on thermal performance was around the blowing agent well indeed but uh he's talking a bit a bit more
02:23:44 bit more about bit more than that he's telling you to revert to testing standard newton nt well did you did you wonder what nt meant did you ask what does nt mean i would understand that to mean new
02:23:55 i would understand that to mean new technology yes so you know at this stage at least that there's new technology k15 and did you not ask him why testing standard new technology k15
02:24:08 standard new technology k15 would signal a backward step with significant consequence i'm sure we would have because this was around the time i was being involved with the nhbc i'm sure we would have had a conversation about that what would be the backward step with
02:24:19 what would be the backward step with significant consequence i don't recall
02:24:25 is this because kingspan had recognized there was no point testing standard k-15 as sold because it would fail no absolutely not and you you can't recall a time when standard ntk k15 was regarded as a product that would
02:24:37 k15 was regarded as a product that would pass
02:24:41 my recollection at this time was that actually
02:24:44 actually testing i mean new technology it was it wasn't new but the k-15 that we were selling
02:24:51 selling the whole strategy in my mind was we were looking to develop a bank of past 8414 tests to assist the nhbc that was what came out of sort of the meetings that i went to
02:25:02 meetings that i went to they were looking for more evidence and the way to do that was for us to get 8414 tests to show them that it could be used yes
02:25:10 used yes so not small scale tests full scale yes absolutely and then the next paragraph he says the above approach assumes we continue to acknowledge differences between the tested products both blowing agent and facing thickness
02:25:21 facing thickness have significant impact all testing has been referenced back to precise batches with control samples as is a requirement of bre however this does not include a description of the physical differences
02:25:33 now pausing there you realize surely by that stage november 2014 if not at an earlier stage the blowing agent and face of thickness had significant impact on fire
02:25:44 had significant impact on fire performance
02:25:48 yes sorry could you repeat the question for me do you realize i'm putting to you that you must have done by this stage on seeing this email if not earlier that the blowing agent and the face of
02:25:59 that the blowing agent and the face of thickness
02:26:00 thickness had significant impact on the fire performance of the k-15 as a product i don't know what time
02:26:08 what time around this but i face the thickness i can't pass comment on i do know that i my understanding was that we felt we would see an improvement from the blowing agent um and then again
02:26:20 from the blowing agent um and then again from hearing evidence i do remember that we didn't see that and when he refers to acknowledging the differences between the tested products who was he suggesting or to whom he was
02:26:32 who was he suggesting or to whom he was he suggesting that acknowledgement should be given
02:26:46 i'm not sure we continue to acknowledge i think he's just referring that we accept that there are differences right and he's referring to differences isn't he between solstice blown
02:26:57 he between solstice blown and new technology k15 yes no acknowledgement was given to anybody in 2014 of those differences was it um well no because we weren't selling
02:27:08 um well no because we weren't selling solstice blown foam this was a development project exactly and you knew that by this time oh yeah that's with my understanding yes and therefore i'm sorry i'm going to
02:27:19 and therefore i'm sorry i'm going to have to interrupt you i'm afraid because there is a matter that you need to deal with before we get to the end of the afternoon um an administrative matter has cropped up
02:27:30 an administrative matter has cropped up which i need to consider and deal with before the end of the afternoon so we're going to take a short break at this point i'm sorry to interrupt your evidence it's annoying for everybody but i'm
02:27:41 it's annoying for everybody but i'm afraid that's the case um we'll sit again at half past four and uh take the matter up then all right i'll post four please [Applause]
02:27:54 [Applause] oh i'm sorry i should have okay i'll get that yes you go first
02:41:46 yes would you ask mr burnley to come back in please
02:41:57 all right mr berlin only just wait there for a moment um i'm sorry to have to tell everyone that we learned earlier on today that uh one of the members of the inquiry team
02:42:09 members of the inquiry team has been tested positive for covid19 and as a result a number of members of the inquiry team and support staff are going to have to
02:42:20 and support staff are going to have to go into
02:42:21 go into self-isolation for a couple of weeks now in the ordinary way we might hope to continue notwithstanding that hiccup but unfortunately uh the reduction in staff numbers and most
02:42:33 reduction in staff numbers and most importantly the reduction in support staff makes that i'm afraid impossible we've considered very carefully whether there is any way in which we could carry on
02:42:44 which we could carry on uh on some revised basis but i'm afraid we've come to the conclusion that that simply is not possible
02:42:52 possible so uh regrettably at this point we're going to have to close the hearings for the time being uh we shall not be able to sit tomorrow mr burnley i'll talk to you about that
02:43:03 mr burnley i'll talk to you about that in a moment and we shall not be able to sit next week so that means that we're going to have to
02:43:11 have to close down the inquiry at least as far as hearings are concerned until the 11th of january when we shall resume
02:43:20 resume it's extremely disappointing i'm very sorry to have to give you all this news but we feel there is nothing we can do uh to keep ourselves going in the interim now mr burnley what that means
02:43:32 interim now mr burnley what that means as far as you're concerned i'm afraid is that we're going to have to ask you to come back
02:43:36 come back sometime in the new year i'm sure it's very inconvenient and we'll do our best to make sure that we can find another date at which which is as convenient to you as
02:43:47 which is as convenient to you as possible when you can come and finish giving your evidence but the other thing i need to say to you is please do not talk to anyone about your evidence or anything to do with it in the intervening period now i quite
02:44:00 in the intervening period now i quite understand um that may be difficult in some respects but you don't work for kingspen anymore dude no i don't so you have no need to see colleagues at kingspan or former colleagues at
02:44:11 kingspan or former colleagues at kingspan
02:44:13 kingspan and although i'm sure people will want to
02:44:16 to ask you about being at the inquiry and giving your evidence i'm afraid you must ask you please to tell them that you're not allowed to talk about it until you've finished giving your
02:44:27 until you've finished giving your evidence in the new year that's right yeah i fully understand it all right well i'm sorry to um because of this inconvenience but i'm afraid we have no choice so as far as you're concerned i'm going
02:44:39 so as far as you're concerned i'm going to
02:44:41 to let you go now and we'll be in touch with you as soon as we can to discuss alternative days okay and thank you very much for coming today we certainly didn't anticipate uh this
02:44:52 we certainly didn't anticipate uh this would be the problem and i understand it's difficult times yeah
02:44:56 yeah thank you for being here anyway thanks thank you
02:45:05 um i think there's nothing else we can do at this point and um we'll resume the hearings at 10 o'clock on the 11th of january thank you very much