Module 2 Opening Statements - Monday 9th November 2020 (1/2)

Full transcript

00:00:16 good morning everyone welcome to today's hearing today we're going to hear further opening statements beginning with uh council for some of the bereaved survivors and

00:00:29 some of the bereaved survivors and residents

00:00:30 residents so i'm going to ask without further ado to hear from mr steen on behalf of his clients

00:00:41 or is it mr williamson going first williamson please if i may yes of course i'm sorry mr williamson i've got both you and mr steen down on my running order

00:00:51 order and uh his his name happened to come first so

00:00:54 first so but i'm very happy that we should hear from you yeah i thank you so that's the um alphabetical discrimination for which those with uh w surnames

00:01:05 for which those with uh w surnames always suffer from freedom uh good morning sir ms esteban mr akbar in these oral submissions i will be dealing broadly speaking with what went wrong with the production

00:01:17 what went wrong with the production marketing testing and certification of the relevant products and mr stein will discuss the broader context

00:01:24 context the fundamental issue for module 2 is how unsafe and dangerous products came to be used by those concerned with the grenfell tower refurbishment

00:01:35 tower refurbishment the evidence of how dangerous those combustible cladding materials were is irresistible indeed since the fire at grenfell we continue to see images of buildings engulfed in flames

00:01:47 images of buildings engulfed in flames such as the november 2019 fire which overwhelmed the cube a hall of residence at bolton university any assertion that such products could

00:01:58 any assertion that such products could ever have been appropriate for use at grenfell

00:02:01 grenfell must be scrutinized against the weight of the evidence this reveals an industry in which arconic celetex and kingspan were content to push hazardous products

00:02:12 were content to push hazardous products into the marketplace and sought to market them dishonestly these products should have been safe they should have been tested and certified rigorously and they should have been marketed

00:02:23 and they should have been marketed marketed in an honest and transparent fashion none of that happened

00:02:28 happened and the testing and certifying bodies such as the bre and the bba were quite happy to go along with this process the marketplace was itself a place of astounding ignorance

00:02:40 astounding ignorance in particular many of those involved did not seem to know or care what was meant by terms such as limited

00:02:47 limited combustibility or class zero the manufacturers were of course only too happy to exploit this ignorance for their own commercial game at all times they concentrated on the

00:02:59 at all times they concentrated on the route to market not the route to safety as early as 2004 arconic were well aware that their rainer bond pe

00:03:10 that their rainer bond pe cassette product had failed a cstb test could i please have up arc three zeroes

00:03:18 zeroes double zero five three six at page seven

00:03:30 please

00:03:34 and one one sees there the report that at 630 seconds there was ignition inside the cassette by 700 seconds there was large ignition that the test

00:03:46 there was large ignition that the test was stopped after 850 seconds with the results not being usable it should be noted that this cassette product should be contrasted

00:03:57 contrasted with the rivets riveted rayna bond pe product

00:04:01 product which did achieve euro class b thank you that's all i need with that document

00:04:08 document at two years after that kingspan began to market their k15 product however their test experience was as disastrous as our comics

00:04:19 comics a 2008 test reported as follows and that's kin three zeros two zero seven one three at page 3 please

00:04:42 seven one three at page 3 please and one sees that the report that the phenolic was burning on its own team at our own steam that the bre had to extinguish the test early because it was endangering setting fire to the

00:04:53 endangering setting fire to the laboratory it burnt very ferociously and gave the top cavity barrier a serious hammering and there was a slim chance that it may have held long and held out long enough

00:05:04 long enough that for the crib to start burning down and that this test would have been successful thank you for that despite this kingspan managed to pursue persuade the labc to issue a document

00:05:16 persuade the labc to issue a document signifying its approval of k-15 cool firm in march 2008 however it should be noted that this approval was read carefully limited in its ambit

00:05:27 was read carefully limited in its ambit stating that when used as part of an overall wall construction in line with the above

00:05:33 the above and reflecting the standards set out below cool therm k-15 can be deemed acceptable as the insulation element of the system subject to any limit set out or referred

00:05:44 subject to any limit set out or referred to within the certificate kingspan were delighted with this certification and decided to stop testing what mattered was not safe products

00:05:54 products or thorough certification but getting ahead of their rivals in the marketplace and could i please have a kin3005382 at

00:06:05 and could i please have a kin3005382 at page one

00:06:12 that's an internal report by mr heath of kingspan

00:06:16 kingspan where he notes that following the success of achieving the labc accreditation accreditation that um the k-15 could now be installed above 18 meters

00:06:27 above 18 meters but they should cease further tests and that they were now putting pressure on what was described as other component suppliers of this method of construction that is

00:06:38 of this method of construction that is to say

00:06:39 to say their rivals in the field thank you for that and that can go down now those other component suppliers were up to the same tricks and pulling the wool over the eyes of their supposed

00:06:50 over the eyes of their supposed guardians in the same way arconic had approached the bba in 2007 to obtain a certificate for its rhinobot product

00:06:59 product providing only the riveted system test report

00:07:02 report at euro class b in failing to disclose the cassette system test report arconic set out to mislay mislead the bba

00:07:13 bba this led to the 2008 bba certificate stating that a quake's standard sample of the product close quotes achieved euro class b and that the product might be regarded as having a

00:07:25 product might be regarded as having a class

00:07:26 class zero surface this classification was based upon the bba mistakenly equating the euro norm with the british national class zero in circumstances

00:07:37 national class zero in circumstances where our comics submitted no test reports

00:07:39 reports at all to prove that rayna bond pe achieved

00:07:43 achieved this class arconic were well aware uh that this certificate should never have been issued messiah knew the 2004 test on rayna bond

00:07:55 messiah knew the 2004 test on rayna bond pe cassettes was not a rogue result but reflected the products far performance in an internal email in march 2010

00:08:06 internal email in march 2010 he commented and could i please have up met

00:08:11 met six 3064 nine eight eight at page one two

00:08:14 two five

00:08:19 so once he's there mr vela miss jovel is saying that larson had based themselves on the cassette tests contrary-wise he said to what

00:08:31 tests contrary-wise he said to what might be expected the above type of test is much less favorable for the composite than for riveted products and reynabond pe uh in cassette form doesn't obtain level b

00:08:42 in cassette form doesn't obtain level b either

00:08:43 either having said that this shortfall in relation to this standard is something that we have to keep as capitals

00:08:50 capitals very confidential for exclamation marks thank you

00:08:54 thank you arconic persisted in this deception for the next decade covering the period in which its products were specified for and used at grenfell for example in a 2016 internal email

00:09:07 2016 internal email mr remy emailed vela i really feel like i'm dealing with something that's not clear-cut

00:09:13 clear-cut they're coming to do a review and i'm informing them that what they're coming to review

00:09:17 to review has been completely modified without them knowing anything about it to which velar responded we'll talk about the situation before distribution in order to

00:09:28 before distribution in order to alleviate this bad impression for you smiley face

00:09:34 our comics abuse of the testing and certification regime extended beyond their conduct with the bba

00:09:42 bba they manipulated the testing regime to obtain

00:09:45 obtain high classifications for their products prioritizing sales over safety moreover arconic were well aware that their product was dangerous

00:09:56 aware that their product was dangerous their own word on high-rise buildings in july 2009 verla emailed our comic management regarding a high-rise fire which had occurred

00:10:07 occurred in bucharest flames had spread along the facade made up of acm pe panels he said here are some pictures to show you how dangerous

00:10:18 show you how dangerous pe can be when it comes to architecture mr scheideker then marketing and sales director commented it was clear it was acm in pe

00:10:30 it was clear it was acm in pe likewise in 2016 just 18 months before the grenfell fire velar emailed the french sales team about a news story to say we were very lucky

00:10:41 lucky the wallet tower where fire had occurred is in rayna bond pe 10 meters from the far

00:10:48 far fortunately the wind didn't change direction but we really need to stop proposing pe in architecture we are in the know and i think it is up to us to be proactive in capitals at

00:11:00 to us to be proactive in capitals at last

00:11:01 last selling the product was all that mattered to our comic and they were more than happy to mislead their customers information was only to be supplied in a selective form and then only to customers who

00:11:13 and then only to customers who specifically pressed for it for example in july 2010 vela assured a customer that he could rely on the european certificate for the reynabond pe riveted system

00:11:24 reynabond pe riveted system class b at that time as applicable to the cassette system also because the riveted system performed worse than the cassette system in terms of fire performance

00:11:36 fire performance vela was clearly lying about the fire performance of the rayna bond pe cassettes and in 2013 uh an internal archonic email stated that

00:11:49 an internal archonic email stated that after talking talking with claude that's vana we agreed

00:11:53 agreed that we must not write anything relating to fire regulations which has not been validated or issued by the archonic technical department why is that after

00:12:04 technical department why is that after showing documents that they send to specifiers and customers vella advised me not to do the same

00:12:10 same since these documents involved too much our responsibility on a quite touchy close quote subject so i passed this info to the the whole

00:12:21 so i passed this info to the the whole french sales dream team see so as to avoid potential mistakes well what might those potential mistakes have been

00:12:29 been well again archonic knew internally that something was very wrong but certainly did not let that knowledge escape from their company only a month after this internal email

00:12:41 only a month after this internal email ms french

00:12:42 ms french our comics uk sales manager informed her colleagues and could i please help m e t three zeros five three one eight underscore capital p10

00:12:54 three one eight underscore capital p10 at page 153

00:13:05 so she told them just to make you aware i sent this link to claude w that's svela

00:13:10 svela last week concerning a bbc report covering afar in uae using acm richard gieta the luca bond rep in the uk is emailing all

00:13:21 luca bond rep in the uk is emailing all fabricators explaining that the luca bond is now using a farc or only a standard the attached email from mr gita dealt in graphic terms with the situation in the uae and said

00:13:34 situation in the uae and said that the trouble is that the cladding system here in particular but all over in general using pe is like a chimney which transports the fire from bottom to top or vice versa within

00:13:46 from bottom to top or vice versa within shortest time we've taken random samples and done a live test in bangkok in front of architects they almost fainted in this indeed this panel is a whole cheat and

00:13:58 indeed this panel is a whole cheat and burns fiercely thank you ms french however was at payne's to reassure our comics uk customers that there was nothing to worry about

00:14:09 nothing to worry about telling them soothingly in may 2013 and could i please have up cep three zeros four nine seven one seven

00:14:24 she told them as you may be aware there have been some reports via bbc concerning a fire on a building in uae regarding acm as a business we're aware of this report and our technical team are following the

00:14:36 and our technical team are following the details

00:14:37 details but in the meantime i wanted to add some thoughts that may help if you get questions

00:14:42 questions regarding the supply of rayna bond in the uk as you know we supply both p and fr core and can can control and understand what core is being used

00:14:53 and understand what core is being used in all projects due to the controlled supply route we have by only supplying raynerbond to a very small group of approved fabricators and working very closely with them on all projects

00:15:05 all projects we are able to follow what type of project is being designed developed and then offer the right rona bond specification including the core at this stage we will continue to offer both p

00:15:16 continue to offer both p and fr core archonic were however well aware of the distinction in performance between rayna bond p

00:15:24 bond p and fr and their suitability or lack of it

00:15:27 it for high-rise buildings in october 2015 for example vella replied to photos shared with him by a colleague of the aftermath of afar at a building

00:15:38 of the aftermath of afar at a building in china

00:15:39 in china with fr paneling he said fr showed a very good behavior in pe the fire would have spread over the entire height of the tower when in this case

00:15:50 in this case only the area near the fire is affected long live

00:15:53 long live fr smiley face despite this miss french never proposed that fr should be used at grenfell in fact in these negotiations she appears not to have discussed the core

00:16:05 appears not to have discussed the core of the product at all nor did arconic change its policy of selling reynabond pe for high-rise architectural applications except in countries where the regulatory

00:16:16 except in countries where the regulatory regime required archonic therefore exploited weaknesses in national regulations to continue selling products for applications it knew would be dangerous thus the minutes of a

00:16:28 would be dangerous thus the minutes of a meeting in 2011 between verla and representatives of a company called 3a

00:16:34 called 3a record for the moment even if we know that pe material in cassette has a bad behavior exposed to fire we can still work with national regulations

00:16:46 regulations which are not as restrictive in 2013 celetex decided that they wished to sell their products into this market they also were well

00:16:57 into this market they also were well aware of the fire safety problems to which this would give rise above 80 meters and as to the weakness of the testing and certification system in number two november 2013

00:17:10 system in number two november 2013 mr roper sent an internal email outlining a possible strategy and could i please have up cel three zeros [Music]

00:17:24 you know he asked do we take the view that our product realistically shouldn't be used behind most cladding panels because in the event of a far it would burn what kingspan have done extremely

00:17:36 burn what kingspan have done extremely well is save very little but build confidence if challenged by having fire barrier manufacturers showing tests achieve bba validation and subsequently gain

00:17:47 gain labc approval there's always the chance they do have the piece of paper in the top drawer from somebody that states for use with any system but i doubt it thank you

00:17:58 thank you these companies therefore both competed with each other but also built upon what others were doing

00:18:04 doing where kingspan led others followed indeed solitex emulated kingspan assiduously when it came to testing and marketing their product

00:18:16 their product in february 2014 the first bs 8414 test was carried out for the seller sex product as to which mr clark of the bre comments in his witness statement

00:18:27 in his witness statement that the test was terminated early due to excessive flaming and flame spread as such the test was terminated on the grounds of safety

00:18:38 terminated on the grounds of safety in may 2014 celestex managed to secure a pass on a second bs 8414 test and the way ahead was clear to sell their product

00:18:49 their product into an unsuspecting market according to the celetex witness evidence a six millimeters magnesium oxide board was placed behind the cladding and this was used in conjunction with a

00:19:00 and this was used in conjunction with a 12 millimeter thick layer of the cladding

00:19:04 cladding in a chilling power point presentation entitled

00:19:07 entitled crates above 18 meters closed quotes in may 2014

00:19:11 may 2014 the results of the bs 8414 test retest of fr 5000 were recorded together what was said to be market research which had been carried out

00:19:23 research which had been carried out showed that nobody understood the test requirements architects used asked that it could be used above 18 meters to which the answer was going to be yes

00:19:34 was going to be yes and building control had hugely different levels of understanding of the subject shortly after this celestex issued their data sheet for rs 5000

00:19:45 5000 which asserted that with this product you were specifying an insulation board that and could i piece them up cl30

00:19:57 mr williams and we i'm sorry to say we've lost your sound so um can you make an we've lost you all together now so i'm going to suggest that we pause there

00:20:09 going to suggest that we pause there until we can uh resume on the usual footing

00:20:15 mr uh so i'm here oh good no well no you had just um i was just about to take you to um rs 5000

00:20:26 5000 rs 5000 exactly right right we got you back so would you like to pick it up there

00:20:31 there yes indeed i'm sorry that sir thank you very much um it was said so that the

00:20:38 that the document is uh cel30411 [Music]

00:20:46 [Music] which recorded that this was the first pir pir insulation board to successfully test

00:20:52 test 28414 to meet the criteria set out in br135

00:20:57 br135 and therefore is acceptable for use in buildings above 18 meters and was also said to have class zero performance throughout the entire uh product thank you

00:21:08 you there was no suggestion in this document of the failed test or of any of the other uncertainties of which celetex were well aware

00:21:16 aware moreover the assertion of class zero fire performance throughout the entire product

00:21:21 product was itself misleading as it was not class zero throughout since class zero only related to the spread of fire on the surface what furthermore the

00:21:32 the surface what furthermore the standard for installation in a building above 80 meters was higher than class zero it was limited combustibility celatex were well aware of the confusion within the industry between class

00:21:44 within the industry between class zero and limited combustibility and used it to their advantage this was consistent with the approach which

00:21:53 which celetex took the mock took to the market in general and in their dealings with harley relating to grenfell in particular in january 2015 in response to a queue from mr ankertle james

00:22:05 from mr ankertle james mr room of celestex advised he had that he had attached the 12-page bs-8414 report showing the build-up and components used

00:22:16 showing the build-up and components used and he had also attached a data sheet confirming the products having a bs-476 test

00:22:23 test which gave it a class zero performance in addition to the bs 8414 test however if the full 32-page bs-8414 test report had been supplied

00:22:35 report had been supplied this would have revealed worrying images of extensive charring and fire damage as well as the extra layer of magnesium oxide that had been employed employed nobody should have been

00:22:47 employed nobody should have been surprised

00:22:48 surprised at the extensive flaming charring and fire

00:22:51 fire damage from these insulation products both

00:22:55 both the celotex rs 5000 and the kingspan k15 were rigid foam products whose liquid family flammable components were changed into a rigid foam by the

00:23:07 were changed into a rigid foam by the use of a blowing agent which was itself extremely flammable pentone

00:23:13 pentone at this same time and while grenfell was being designed and built arconic were likewise cynically aware that their products were highly dangerous

00:23:25 thus vella advised his colleagues in the summer of 2015 that his opinion was that p is dangerous in capitals on facades and everything should be transferred

00:23:36 should be transferred to fr fire resistant as a matter of urgency the nfp 92 standard should have been discontinued over 10 years ago this opinion is technical and

00:23:48 this opinion is technical and anti-commercial it seems these three companies arconic celetex and kingspan were in fierce competition but also learned deadly tricks from one

00:23:59 but also learned deadly tricks from one another

00:24:00 another their products were dangerous tests and testing and certifying bodies was seen as something to be gained and got round not engaged with honestly

00:24:12 and got round not engaged with honestly once successful results were obtained by fair means or foul any failed tests or contrary data were ruthlessly suppressed then the products were marketed hard and

00:24:24 then the products were marketed hard and misleadingly the fact that the industry was ignorant of many of the issues relating to terms such as class zero and limited combustibility was both known and exploited

00:24:38 was both known and exploited arconic celetex and kingspan were the principal wrongdoers but they operated in a very murky world other corporate bodies were also at

00:24:49 other corporate bodies were also at fault

00:24:50 fault in particular simcoe knew that the rig it was instructed to build for the 2014 bs 8414 test differed significantly from the drawings

00:25:02 differed significantly from the drawings they were therefore providing practical assistance to celetex in manipulating the test

00:25:08 the test siderise knew its client harvey had recently carried out the defective installation of fast stopping products at weyland house it then supplied cavity barriers to

00:25:19 it then supplied cavity barriers to harley

00:25:19 harley for use on grenfell in 2015. siderise failed to ensure that no similar issues occurred with the installation of its products there

00:25:29 there sig supplied rs 5000 and some k15 for grenfell even though they seem to have had major doubts internally as to the safety of these

00:25:41 internally as to the safety of these products

00:25:42 products indeed mr stern of sig observed in an email to celetex in april 2015 never has the expression smoke and mirrors been more appropriate

00:25:53 mirrors been more appropriate i think i'll adopt a version of caveat emptor

00:25:56 emptor and if specifically challenged use the rock fiber options if i'm not challenged it will be rs 5000 panel systems limited supplied glazing and infill panels

00:26:08 and infill panels which contributed significantly to the tragic events of the grenfell fire they failed to pay any attention to the suitability or lack of it of their

00:26:18 their class e rated products i turn now to the possibilities not merely to the industry but also to society at large

00:26:29 society at large they should have been rigorously independent their testing needed to be thorough and exacting the results of their test should have been open to full public scrutiny and the testing bodies

00:26:42 scrutiny and the testing bodies bought always to have kept themselves suitably distant from those who sought their services in fact

00:26:49 fact the bre the bba and others signally failed to discharge these responsibilities adequately they were far too close to their customers testing was inadequate and certification

00:27:02 testing was inadequate and certification haphazard it is not as if they were unaware of the risks indeed in may 2013 at a crucial point in the development of the grenfell design

00:27:14 the development of the grenfell design the bre circulated a newsletter with the headline

00:27:18 headline quotes the latest high-profile fire in the uae has reaffirmed the need for properly approved installed and maintained cladding systems

00:27:29 systems in high-rise buildings by their failures the testing and certification bodies contributed significantly to the grenfell disaster in january 2008

00:27:42 to the grenfell disaster in january 2008 the bba issued its certificate 08-4510 for rayna bond acm this provided in effect a kite mark for our comics

00:27:53 in effect a kite mark for our comics product

00:27:54 product but it was a deeply misleading document crucially the bba did not consider the fact that the tests were carried out on two types of cores used in the acm cladding

00:28:06 used in the acm cladding and their differing smoke production when reacting with fire the bba also failed to identify whether the fixing system used was riveted or cassette moreover

00:28:18 was riveted or cassette moreover although as the bba were aware rayna bond acm panels came in what was described as an almost unlimited diversity of surfaces

00:28:30 unlimited diversity of surfaces and with an extensive selection of colors and gloss levels the 2008 certificate contained only the following note these performances may not be achieved

00:28:41 these performances may not be achieved by other colors of the product and the designations of a particular color should be confirmed by test or assessment in accordance with approved document b

00:28:52 approved document b this note was clearly inadequate to alert potential customers to the fact that

00:28:58 that for the versions of the product with other colors the reassurance apparently offered by the certificate was meaningless and it was not only archonic

00:29:08 archonic who benefited from the bba's benevolence later that same year the bba issued its certificate zero eight four five eight two for kingspan's cool firm k-15

00:29:21 kingspan's cool firm k-15 which stated at section seven behaviour in relation to fire this product is classified as class zero or low risk as defined in the documents supporting the national building regulations

00:29:34 the national building regulations the product may therefore be used in accordance with the provisions of approved document b this same section 7 also stated that the tested system included 60 millimeters

00:29:45 tested system included 60 millimeters thick

00:29:46 thick board quotes mechanically fixed to a non-combustible substrate close quotes this substrate was in fact a masonry wall kingspan had insisted that the

00:29:57 kingspan had insisted that the certificate refer to non-combustible substrate so that it could make the claim that k-15

00:30:05 k-15 could be used with any non-combustible substrate

00:30:08 substrate and not just a masonry wall crucially the certificate did not state anywhere that the classification was limited to the specific system tested kingspan then ruthlessly

00:30:22 system tested kingspan then ruthlessly exploited the bba certificate in order to obtain an labc certificate in 2009 from herefordshire building control

00:30:32 control this asserted in relation to requirement b4

00:30:35 b4 external fast spread that quotes since k-15

00:30:39 k-15 can be considered a material of limited combustibility it is suitable for use in all situations shown on diagram 40 of approved document b

00:30:49 b including those parts of a building more than 18 meters above the ground kingspan were in internally quite brazen about the methods employed

00:31:01 quite brazen about the methods employed to persuade mr jones of hbc and could i please have up kin3020714 at page one

00:31:23 and we see them referring to being very convincing when they need to be throwing every bit of fire data we could at him that's mr jones we probably blocked his server in

00:31:34 jones we probably blocked his server in the end i think the labc convinced themselves that cool firm is the best thing since sliced bread we didn't even have to get any real ale down him real or not the result for

00:31:48 down him real or not the result for kingspan was spectacular spectacular and they were suitably jubilant at having a certification which misleadingly conflated class zero with limited combustibility later in

00:32:01 with limited combustibility later in that same

00:32:02 that same email chain [Music]

00:32:08 they noted that there was great news the highlight of this certificate and supporting documentation is the requirement under b4 of approved document b

00:32:19 document b since k-15 can be considered a material of limited combustibility it is suitable in all situations shown on diagram 40 of approved document b

00:32:30 b including those parts of the building more than 18 meters above ground k15 remains the only insulation board that has successfully met the requirements of the bba

00:32:42 requirements of the bba [Music]

00:32:43 [Music] and labc system approval the successes of kingspan in certification did not occur by accident and they did not happen without the

00:32:54 and they did not happen without the collusion of the certifying bodies these bodies were seemingly aware that they were being played by the manufacturers but appeared powerless to do anything about it

00:33:04 about it for example in 2010 mr meredith of kingspan approached the bre with the intimation that he had two new insulation products which he wished to test in bs8414

00:33:17 which he wished to test in bs8414 he commented quotes potentially i would like two official tests however it may also be two indicatives this depends on costs close quotes as to

00:33:28 this depends on costs close quotes as to which mr baker of the bre observed internally if we do indicatives how would this be reported

00:33:36 reported just reading between the lines of ivor's email it seems as though he would try to pass off

00:33:41 pass off indicatives as being full tests or am i just being a cynic nor did the certifying bodies shine any light on the widespread

00:33:52 shine any light on the widespread confusion in the industry about class zero often incorrectly referred to as class o thus the labc's david ewing emailed

00:34:03 thus the labc's david ewing emailed roper of celetex in january 2014 to say essentially as the board is described as class zero it can be termed a material of limited combustibility

00:34:15 combustibility and so in terms of the uh relevant parts of document b it is suitable for use within the wall construction

00:34:26 construction even at heights over 18 meters moreover the testers and certifiers bent over backwards to help the manufacturers get positive results

00:34:38 manufacturers get positive results thus in july 2014 mr howard of the bre emailed kingspan in the following terms we need to work out what we need to test the critical decision will be what is on

00:34:49 the critical decision will be what is on the front face of the system do we go with the assumption that it is the panel system used in the 8414 test if i have this correct have you a data

00:35:00 if i have this correct have you a data sheet

00:35:00 sheet with any reaction to far infay for that panel

00:35:04 panel the testers and certifiers were also remarkably unconcerned about what the companies

00:35:10 companies they were supposed to be regulating were producing

00:35:13 producing and developing during the second review of its certificate the bba requested certification on at least

00:35:21 least 12 occasions that there had been no changes in the design specification context of use or other details that would invalidate the certificate no

00:35:34 that would invalidate the certificate no response was provided by our comic and the bba took no action they should have done so in failing to disclose information

00:35:46 disclose information despite numerous opportunities to do so arconic

00:35:50 arconic knowingly breached its contractual obligation to notify the bba immediately of any new or additional information concerning the product

00:35:59 product or its suitability the rayna bond pe cassette panel was eventually retested under the european standard achieving class e in 2011

00:36:11 standard achieving class e in 2011 2014 and 2015. none of these test results

00:36:15 results was disclosed to the bba moreover in january 2014 riveted

00:36:24 riveted rayna bond pe was classified euro class e and then consistently classified euro class c

00:36:32 class c none of these results were disclosed to the bba either thus from january 2014 the bba certificate statement that rainer bond pe achieved euro class b

00:36:43 euro class b was untrue for both cassette and relative products

00:36:50 why were the

00:36:53 um certifiers so indulgent and so unconcerned a desire not to buy bite the hand that fed them

00:37:03 fed them may well have been an important factor and we think that that will be a matter to be

00:37:08 to be investigated carefully in the evidence strikingly after the grand fall fire the bba at last recognized the significance of the difference between the riveted

00:37:20 of the difference between the riveted and cassette archonic systems and their far performance they apparently discovered this via an approach from a journalist who had been himself prompted by a

00:37:31 who had been himself prompted by a whistleblower however even in these circumstances and even given the appalling loss of life which had occurred the bba seemed most concerned to protect

00:37:42 the bba seemed most concerned to protect its own commercial interests with an internal email in april 2018 almost a year after the fire recording as follows whilst the facts are faint fairly

00:37:54 whilst the facts are faint fairly straightforward the handling has not been we have a contractual position with all our clients

00:38:00 clients including our comic in which information is confidential it has taken considerable effort to persuade our lawyers that this was a case where the bba had to speak up

00:38:11 to speak up imagine how the bbc would have responded if the bba had declined to comment on whether we were told or not what all this shows is that the inquiry

00:38:23 what all this shows is that the inquiry in module two will need to undertake an unsparing investigation into the tockit toxic and incestuous culture and practices of

00:38:34 and incestuous culture and practices of this industry how did it come about that unsafe products

00:38:39 products were manufactured marketed and sold how did the test testing and certifying bodies

00:38:46 bodies allow this to happen as regards the investigation which is required in module 2

00:38:53 module 2 the bereaved survivors and residents are grateful

00:38:57 grateful that the inquiry has provided an interactive platform for these openings which we're all now using however they have felt somewhat marginalized

00:39:08 they have felt somewhat marginalized since the hearings resumed in july as mere spectators on youtube

00:39:15 youtube they trust therefore that the panel will continue to offer these platform facilities once the oral evidence starts so that the bsols and their lawyers can

00:39:26 so that the bsols and their lawyers can feel that they are fully integrated into the process of this inquiry

00:39:32 inquiry moreover despite their protestations to the contrary the consumers of these products so supposedly specialists in their right in their own right cannot be exonerated

00:39:45 in their own right cannot be exonerated in any way in any way why was there so much ignorance

00:39:50 ignorance amongst those involved at dreadful as to at grenfell as to such concepts as class 0 0 and limited combustibility why did they not ask searching questions

00:40:03 why did they not ask searching questions of the likes of arconic celetex and kingspan why did they specify and use dangerous materials it is important to appreciate

00:40:14 appreciate that the findings of responsibility which the inquiry must make are not on an either or basis very many parties are to blame for this disaster

00:40:25 disaster but the mendacity of the manufacturers and the gullibility or worse of the testing and certifying bodies do not in any way exculpate ryden studio e

00:40:37 exculpate ryden studio e harley and others for their part in this tragedy

00:40:43 tragedy finally i should say something about the stance which the parties under the spotlight in module 2 are taking

00:40:50 taking in his opening statement on 27th of january of this year mr milit qc observed that he had invited the core participants not to indulge

00:41:01 the core participants not to indulge in a merry-go-round of butt passing but that regressively that invitation had not been accepted save for rbkc

00:41:13 save for rbkc the same is true once more in the opening submissions presented for this module three things

00:41:22 stand out from those submissions

00:41:26 the first is that once again the corporate participants have decided to devote their extensive resources

00:41:34 resources to blaming others for this tragedy thus our comic assert that it quotes was the responsibility of others to decide whether or not to choose their

00:41:45 to decide whether or not to choose their product for a particular project how to specify and utilize that product in the construction or refurbishment of grenfell close quotes

00:41:54 quotes and celetex unctuously and unnecessarily assure us that it is quote not a building's designer it does not install exterior installation on buildings

00:42:05 installation on buildings and did not do so at grenfell tower nor does celetex manufacture supply or install cladding systems secondly such as missions as have been

00:42:18 secondly such as missions as have been made

00:42:18 made are very limited and highly qualified for ins instance kingspan accepting in relation to product marketing only that

00:42:28 that creates certain statements made in k-15 product literature and advice provided to customers were not sufficiently clear or emphatic in explaining the

00:42:39 or emphatic in explaining the limitations of the bs 8414 testing undertaken finally those opening submissions are couched in very general terms and do

00:42:51 are couched in very general terms and do not engage in the detail of the widespread and persistent wrongdoing in which arconic

00:43:00 arconic celetex and kingspan engaged and which the bre

00:43:05 the bre and the bba failed to deal with adequately error at all

00:43:14 with those observations i now hand over to mr stein qc who will be delivering the balance of the opening submissions on behalf of team two

00:43:24 team two thank you very much thank you very much mr williamson i'll now invite mr steen to pick up where you've left off

00:43:35 yes mr steen

00:43:42 good morning sir good morning miss estefan and uh um mr akbar what has already been said by mr williamson qc

00:43:53 williamson qc and others has demonstrated that in hearing the evidence within module two that sir you and the panel may well come to the conclusion that the manufacturers archonic kingspan

00:44:05 that the manufacturers archonic kingspan and celetex are little more than crooks and killers these companies knew their materials were dangerous to life they knew their materials would burn

00:44:16 they knew their materials would burn with lethal speed and yet they marketed their products into

00:44:22 into an uncaring and underregulated building industry

00:44:26 industry which spread them around residential buildings like a disease

00:44:31 just as arconic hid behind false and outdated data so we hear that some of our comics key witnesses are hiding behind the french blocking statute if arconic

00:44:43 blocking statute if arconic truly has nothing to fear then that obstacle can be overcome these iconic witnesses are vital and we have came mr millett qc's words last thursday when he said

00:44:56 words last thursday when he said do the right thing we suggest they should be fearless they and they should come forward and tell our clients the truth

00:45:08 one of the truths identified by dame judith hackett in her report was identified as a race to the bottom in the building industry but

00:45:19 in the building industry but dame judith did not have the evidence that which we now have within this inquiry which shows

00:45:26 shows how far companies like celetex were going to spread around their combustible materials

00:45:35 the product training presentation by seller texas jonathan a room at and then if we can please have it on the screen at the following reference c e l

00:45:46 at the following reference c e l four zeros 1097 page one please make this point clear

00:46:01 make this point clear as we see here this document is dated the 30th of april 2015 and describes itself as rs 5000 product training

00:46:15 product training we then please go to page 18 of this document

00:46:21 document we'll see how this matter is then being dealt with this is training that's being delivered

00:46:30 delivered to the southern regional meeting within celetex

00:46:35 celetex located in maidenhead

00:46:40 what we have here is the way that matters are being described therefore internally within the company as the best way to promote their products i see the market for rs

00:46:52 their products i see the market for rs 5000 being split into three defined potential customer tiers

00:46:59 tiers helpfully in terms of this presentation there then is a color description used on the face of the next few pages

00:47:10 used on the face of the next few pages which assists us in understanding and no doubt those that we're going to sell these products into the market the first one please at 0 0 19 so over the page please

00:47:22 red red is no use in other words no go for celetex combustible materials as this is

00:47:33 combustible materials as this is a description of the part of the market where it cannot be sold zero zero twenty

00:47:50 next page please thank you 0 0 20 is in yellow now this particular slide demonstrates the part of the market where some of the

00:48:02 the part of the market where some of the combustible materials can be sold and next page please zero zero 21

00:48:12 green green for go go go this is where combustible materials can be sold

00:48:19 be sold this is where we can make our money says mr room we can target buildings as you'll see from the middle part where the 18 meters restriction on combustible materials

00:48:30 combustible materials does not cause an issue and in the middle of that page under reason the third bullet point and where builders are not aware of

00:48:41 builders are not aware of 80 meter restriction or whether contractors or whether contractors have always used combustible materials thank you we can take the document down there

00:48:55 but celetex were not alone this marketing strategy was little different from that employed by arconic and kingspan

00:49:04 kingspan so we can ignore the clever and well worked out oral submissions made on behalf of the manufacturers these manufacturers knew that the regulations were poor and they used that fact

00:49:16 and they used that fact but in the end it is the combination of the module two companies and those we have considered in module one

00:49:24 one which are responsible for creating the perfect storm that stole the lives of 72 people and destroyed the lives of countless others we must not forget that

00:49:38 the module one evidence shows ryden and the tmo

00:49:42 the tmo rigged the tender in ryden's favor to make dangerous cost savings this evidence appears unavailable and fraudulent

00:49:53 the police we suggest should be examining the documentary evidence and instituting prosecutions in this regard as soon as possible there is no reason and there is no

00:50:04 there is no reason and there is no excuse for any delay let me pause briefly to note that the eternal generals undertaking does not provide any restriction on the use of oral evidence within

00:50:16 on the use of oral evidence within disciplinary proceedings we suggest that the royal institute of british architects reba should review the architect's testimony from module 1 to consider whether the documentary and oral evidence which

00:50:28 documentary and oral evidence which demonstrated a failure of professionalism and supervision can be

00:50:34 be considered by them and should be considered by them to see what regulatory and disciplinary actions

00:50:40 actions can be taken

00:50:45 turn now to the system of testing certification and control we say that the system was weak and ineffectual the primary agencies of regulation have been captured by the manufacturers

00:50:57 been captured by the manufacturers and become little more than outsourced research

00:51:00 research and development departments for the cladding and insulation industries the failure of regulation is so stark that as said by mr hyatt a few days ago a root and branch

00:51:12 a few days ago a root and branch investigation is required and changes must be made to these regulatory structures the change in this area does not come easily

00:51:23 easily it pays to remember that during the lachenal house fire the dead were three adults and three young children one of the adults spent 40 minutes on

00:51:34 one of the adults spent 40 minutes on the phone

00:51:35 the phone with 999 responders who urged her to stay in the flat at the end of the call the responder could no longer hear her breathing

00:51:46 such events were to echo repeatedly in the grenfell tower

00:51:53 if the lachen or house fire did nothing to change industries or to change the way that architects were trained or to assist the fire services

00:52:04 or to assist the fire services a point you noted sir in your phase one report

00:52:08 report then we suggest that this inquiry has the clearest of duty arising from its knowledge of the evidence to make its views known as soon as possible and without any

00:52:20 as soon as possible and without any unjustifiable delay

00:52:24 it will be shown within module 2 instead of reacting to the lacrimal house fire in a positive way by making changes the manufacturers put themselves into positions

00:52:35 into positions where they sought to influence regulation in the worst possible way

00:52:41 within the system of regulation the testing and certification bodies were highly

00:52:45 highly regarded for example a certificate from the

00:52:49 the british board of agreement the bba was widely believed to be a gold standard relied upon without question

00:52:59 in the words of the labc registered details manual a bba certificate does provide absolute assurance

00:53:07 assurance and materials should not then be interrogated further the fact is that the public should have been protected from these ruthless and criminal manufacturers by the bodies

00:53:20 and criminal manufacturers by the bodies who are responsible for testing and certification but the testing and certification bodies provided no such protection instead they reinforced the dangerous

00:53:31 instead they reinforced the dangerous and dishonest culture within the industry

00:53:36 demonstrating how close the testing agency the bre was to industry either meredith of kingspan emails mr philip clarke and dr sarah caldwell at the bre on the 9th of january 2008.

00:53:48 9th of january 2008. relatively reference please if we can show it

00:53:51 show it k i n 4 0's three six nine three page one

00:54:05 so you will there see the quote which is that having cross referenced with previous tests it would seem there was

00:54:13 was more fire spread from the insulin however please don't coat me on that and the cavity bearer may have failed slightly

00:54:21 slightly you're off the record and on the record comments

00:54:24 comments may prove helpful

00:54:30 is it in any way acceptable for a body that is meant to be protecting people to be working in such a way that kingspan feels able in open emails to refer to off the

00:54:42 in open emails to refer to off the record

00:54:43 record and on the record comments

00:54:47 take the quote down please thank you

00:54:51 but it gets worse on the 17th of october 2014

00:54:55 2014 the re stephen howard emails john roper and debbie berger at celetex reference referencing a conversation they had

00:55:04 they had and that was regarding i i'll read it rather than going to the quote regarding the content of the classification reports and the level of technical detail they contained we need to put a lot of info in but you

00:55:16 we need to put a lot of info in but you don't want your competitors to see it we have come up with a way of doing it

00:55:25 it seems that mr howard at the bre was working to support celetech to support celetex as against its competitors

00:55:36 and the evidence shows that the bre regarded itself as a dependent business relatively reference please on screen bre

00:55:45 bre four zeros six page 105.

00:56:02 four zeros six page 105. page 105 we have the quote that states this kingspan are getting very indignant about the delay we need to report to them immediately if

00:56:13 we need to report to them immediately if we are not to completely piss them off and lose

00:56:16 and lose their customer

00:56:22 turning now to emails from uh jonathan rope roper of celetex to phil clark and others within the bre

00:56:32 we know that what is said and please put it up on the screen cel

00:56:40 three zeros one double zero five two page twelve

00:56:50 thank you the quote there states for the relevant quote there states following the end of the test rob ian cooper phil and i had a discussion whilst at the bre testing center phil said he had seen

00:57:04 testing center phil said he had seen worse

00:57:04 worse fails and suggested that celetex might want to strengthen the outside of the test rig

00:57:10 test rig to counteract the cracking of the mali ethernet panels that these are not uh thank you down from the screen

00:57:21 thank you down from the screen these are not the actions of an independent and professional testing and certification body these types of suggestions being made by bre employee showed that the bre was working to

00:57:32 showed that the bre was working to support the manufacturer's financial goals

00:57:38 in october 2013 mr wrote from celetex cynically emailed stephen howard

00:57:45 howard the bre business group manager in relation to kingspan products reporting which were purporting to be compliant with the bs 8414 test

00:57:55 8414 test i don't need to go to these emails i'll read out the relevant parts

00:58:02 what mr howard is being told by mr roper from celetex is this we are aware that this product is used in buildings above 18 meters using a wide variety of construction

00:58:13 construction we are surprised that they feel confident they be in kingspan enough to allow their product to be used in buildings their fire test doesn't cover

00:58:21 cover unless they have a report to say other so here we have celetex trying to give information about a competitor obviously seeking to gain a commercial

00:58:32 obviously seeking to gain a commercial advantage

00:58:33 advantage now instead of the res mr howard saying he and the bre will thank you very much we'll look into this issue he said he said instead i'll read the quote rather than going to it

00:58:46 quote rather than going to it if we have issued a test report on a system

00:58:49 system then the onus is on the building owner and building control to ensure that the system being installed is covered by a test report

00:59:01 in summary therefore mr howard at the bre

00:59:05 bre told that products are being misused outside of the test limitation and shrugs off responsibility by saying that the product is not for the bre but the problem is not the bre

00:59:16 not the bre but for the building owner or building control

00:59:22 what does this all add up to well we suggest that the bs 8414 test had become a route to market

00:59:30 market rather than a route to safety

00:59:35 we should remind ourselves of what happens to polyiso cyanurate and polyureth urethane within the cladding and insulation under fire conditions

00:59:48 fire conditions professors professor person's phase one report

00:59:52 report said this this is a page 77 the contribution of each of the major products individually is sufficient to produce dense toxic smoke

01:00:03 produce dense toxic smoke within the flat and adjacent lobby within a few minutes

01:00:08 but in practice the contributions from each burning item are summed as they penetrate into the flat

01:00:16 flat further increasing the concentrations of smoke and toxic acid what are these toxicity well they are carbon monoxide nitrogen dioxide and

01:00:29 carbon monoxide nitrogen dioxide and hydrogen

01:00:30 hydrogen cyanide hc

01:00:35 hydrogen cyanide is well known familiar to

01:00:39 to wall it's a killer even in small quantities

01:00:51 mr steen i'm sorry we've lost the sound from you

01:00:57 and now we've lost you as well i'm afraid

01:01:03 so we'll pause for a minute while the connection's restored sorry i the feed seemed to have gone for a moment can you hear me now sir we can

01:01:14 a moment can you hear me now sir we can hear you now and you had just been making the point that uh hydrogen cyanide one of the gases produced when these materials oh i've lost you again

01:01:36 nope

01:02:29 right thank you well i think we'll just sit here for a moment patiently while we see if the connection can be restored

01:03:56 hmm

01:04:05 so i think that there were some technical difficulties there that have now kind of been sorted out by the inquiry team yes you're back with us and i take it we can hear you i hope you can hear me

01:04:16 can hear you i hope you can hear me um yeah just to remind you we lost you at the point where you were saying that hydrogen cyanide one of the gases produced when these materials burn is a killer so yes

01:04:29 materials burn is a killer so yes so i'm very great right so you pick it up from there

01:04:36 by 2015 assessments to br 135 becoming very popular as a way of demonstrating clients with the building regulations and they provided therefore a

01:04:47 and they provided therefore a significant source of income for the pr re on the 20th of april 2015 tom lennon principal consultant at bre global

01:04:58 global emails stephen howard regarding the assessments again i won't put this up on the screen i'll simply agree this will potentially be a huge source of income

01:05:08 of income but could also be a huge liability if not managed properly mr howard responds stating agreed i have both testing and assessments flying in from all directions at present

01:05:21 flying in from all directions at present plus each test we generate seems to spawn

01:05:24 spawn further openly

01:05:27 we suggest that this demonstrates that there is a commercial reality behind the operation of the bre that commercial reality should not be

01:05:38 that commercial reality should not be present we suggest in an independent testing organization in june 2012 the bre prepared a report for kingspan entitled an assessment of the external wall

01:05:49 an assessment of the external wall system for the riverlite project

01:05:57 this provided an opinion on whether the proposed external wall system complied with approved document

01:06:04 document b the proposed external wall system from this project included combustible materials k15 the report highlighted that it expected

01:06:16 the report highlighted that it expected the panel to fall away from the rig in a bs 8414 test

01:06:26 again i don't need to go to document what it states is the low melting point of this type of framing

01:06:33 framing normally leads to an early deformation and collapse of the system when exposed to fire

01:06:40 to fire however although br 135 requires that such a performance is recorded

01:06:47 recorded it is not part of the path fail performance criteria

01:06:55 on its website the bre states that the bre trust is an independent charity dedicated to improving the built environment for the benefit of all it is

01:07:06 environment for the benefit of all it is though we suggest questionable whether the bre was or it or is improving the building environment for all

01:07:12 all or whether it was more simply improving the financial environment of the few the vre's customers used the bre as a research and development department

01:07:23 research and development department it had in effect become part of the marketing strategy for manufacturing companies provide a veneer

01:07:29 veneer of respectability instead of doing what it should have been doing instead of acting as an impartial and independent guarantor of safety

01:07:41 it's only now to the bba the british board of agreement the bba website states that bba certification is recognized throughout the construction industry as a symbol of

01:07:52 construction industry as a symbol of quality and reassurance it's the vital ingredient in the provision of assurance quality and integrity to a plethora of stakeholders in the construction industry we suggest

01:08:05 in the construction industry we suggest that the bpa as an organization was beset by fundamental issues those issues compromised its ability to discharge its safety

01:08:16 its ability to discharge its safety critical function those issues included a lack of independence arising from a fear of losing business competing commercial interests and a

01:08:27 competing commercial interests and a drive for cost efficiency over accuracy

01:08:34 the dba dba also permitted arconic an extraordinary degree of control over the entire certification process mr album the chief scientific officer of the bba

01:08:46 the bba confirms arconic requested the bba to consider the riveted and cassette versions

01:08:53 versions as different fixing systems rather than as separate products and it appears the bba simply acceded to this

01:09:02 this so rather than imposing its requirements on our conic the bba allowed our comic to dictate that riveted and cassette versions of the cladding system should be considered different

01:09:13 system should be considered different fixing systems rather than separate products

01:09:18 now any form of regulatory control should include updating and checks on currency of testing and certificates and once

01:09:31 of testing and certificates and once that bba certificate was issued it was then the bba's duty to regularly review the subject of the certificate to ensure it remained regulation compliant

01:09:43 although the bba states that ongoing validity of an agreement certificate is dependent on ongoing surveillance and certificate views being satisfactorily carried out

01:09:55 views being satisfactorily carried out during a series of reviews over several years arconic failed to produce its marketing literature when requested by the bba despite this persistent and

01:10:06 by the bba despite this persistent and deliberate failure to comply bb-8 failed to exercise its powers to withdraw and suspend certificates in the event of non-compliance normal regulatory bodies certification

01:10:19 normal regulatory bodies certification bodies

01:10:20 bodies have a system highlighting risk risk is normally a product of a variety of different issues that come to the attention of that body

01:10:31 come to the attention of that body and it means that where risk is identified and where there are repeated failures by organizations which are have dealings with the regulatory and certification body then normally it means that action is

01:10:42 then normally it means that action is taken here that wasn't the case

01:10:46 as a result of the inadequate review process in which the problem regarding cassettes was never fully investigated and realized it was determined that the certificate remained valid even though the only reinerborn 55 pe

01:10:59 even though the only reinerborn 55 pe panel

01:11:00 panel that had successfully obtained class b on the en

01:11:04 on the en 13501 was raynabond 55pe riveted rather than pe generally and arconic had no en13501

01:11:15 and arconic had no en13501 test data demonstrating class b the rayner bond 55 pe cassette on at least 12 occasions the vba requested

01:11:26 requested written confirmation from arconic that there'd be no changes in the design specification context of use or other details that would invalidate the certificate it's met with no response from our conic

01:11:39 it's met with no response from our conic and the bba took no action on the face of the document the bba certificates were misleading the front page of the rainy bond certificate claimed class o for both fr and pe products

01:11:53 class o for both fr and pe products but the abuse of the bba certification process was not limited to arconic major competitor kingsman also manipulated this process to bring a product to market

01:12:04 product to market with a fire performance that did not conform to the information on the bba certificate

01:12:12 the bba was meant to provide the highest standard of citizen of certification but the bba we suggest was not an independent regulator

01:12:24 was not an independent regulator the relationship with manufacturers was not conducted at a proper distance and the bba relied upon manufacturers who wanted their product certified for income

01:12:38 so the fact is that this incline now has the evidence from which it can make its views clear for module one and as we go through modules two and three later on you will be shown

01:12:52 two and three later on you will be shown the appalling state of this industry which in turn should compel you sir and the panel

01:12:58 the panel to make your vote to make your views known sooner rather than later we have suggested within our written submissions that some points are already clear some examples

01:13:12 points are already clear some examples companies selling potentially dangerous products to the construction industry should be required to have a compliance officer to manage regulatory risk the testing and

01:13:23 regulatory risk the testing and certification bodies such as a bre bba labc and the oversight regulator ukas must be overhauled to make sure their systems

01:13:34 systems and tests are first-rate and their operations entirely independent the bre and the bba should be placed under a legal obligation to disclose full details of tests

01:13:45 to disclose full details of tests undertaken including any fail any failures

01:13:53 let us turn to the inquiry timetable set out in the letter dated the 4th of september september of this year within module 2 we will be dealing with cladding products testing

01:14:05 dealing with cladding products testing certification product marketing the timing for this or subject of course to delays caused by

01:14:12 caused by factors outside approximately 2020 to january 2021 moving then on to module 3 dealing with complaints and communication with

01:14:24 complaints and communication with residents

01:14:25 residents active and passive fire safety measures approximately february to may 2021 and after the end of the first three modules

01:14:36 modules the inquiry will then have closing submissions for all three modules in one go

01:14:43 but instead of stopping to take stock and consider the implications of the first three modules when matters are fresh and complete the inquiry intends to just keep going

01:14:57 the inquiry intends to just keep going that means that the inquiry continues straight after module 3 after submission has been made with modules 4 aftermath of the fire module 5 firefighting module 6 the oversight of regulation to

01:15:10 module 6 the oversight of regulation to take place in approximately october to december 2021 module 7 further evidence from expert witnesses approximately december 2021 moving then after that

01:15:24 december 2021 moving then after that to the inquest function clearly in 2022 so if we generously estimate the inquiry evidence stages finish in march

01:15:36 evidence stages finish in march 2022 we will then i expect have written all submissions with a final report with a final report won't be issued until what at best will be

01:15:46 be december 2022 but more likely to be in 2023

01:15:54 the date of the fight we all know was the 14th of june 2017. margaret atwood says if you're going to speak truth to power make sure it's the truth so let me give

01:16:06 make sure it's the truth so let me give that a try we suggest that the truth is that this inquiry must evolve itself in the process of change this inquiry should not just sit on the sidelines

01:16:18 should not just sit on the sidelines and listen to the evidence over the next two years whilst change goes on all around you so we know you to be and you've proven yourself to be a very

01:16:44 i'm sorry to interrupt you but we lost you there for a moment um i don't think we lost a lot but i don't think we got it on the transcript that's the point so could i trouble you about

01:16:54 about trouble you to go back to the point at which you were saying we shouldn't sit on the sidelines yes sir well so i i repeat that um perhaps usefully

01:17:05 so i i repeat that um perhaps usefully hope so i hope for emphasis we suggest that this inquiry must involve itself in the process of change not just sit on the sidelines

01:17:16 the sidelines and listen to the evidence over the next two years whilst change goes on all around you and then went on to say sir that you sir are

01:17:24 are at the chair of the of the grenfell tower inquiry are are well known to be very experienced and expert as a judge and you proved yourself that you didn't need to through phase one to be capable

01:17:35 need to through phase one to be capable of providing a report which analyzes evidence and makes clear recommendation and currently this inquiry is certainly on a pathway to pursue the directly

01:17:46 on a pathway to pursue the directly causative facts but there are issues we suggest with whether the inquiry is considering properly the less obviously caused it for contributing issues such as class

01:17:58 for contributing issues such as class race mobility and a so you identified in the phase one report that as regards the brain screen the principal reason why the flames spread so rapidly

01:18:10 spread so rapidly up and down and around the building was the presence of the aluminium composite material acm rain panels with polyethylene cores which acted as a source of fuel

01:18:21 which acted as a source of fuel as regards the insulation materials you said this

01:18:25 said this the presence of the poly iso cyan urate pir

01:18:28 pir and phenolic phenolic foam insulation boards behind the acm panels and perhaps components of the window surrounds

01:18:36 surrounds contributed to the rate and extent of vertical fire spread so where we got to now as a result of change since your first report the public accounts

01:18:47 your first report the public accounts committee

01:18:48 committee reported on the progress in remediating dangerous padding on the 16th of september of this year

01:18:56 three years after the grenfell tower disaster in which 72 people lost their lives only a third of high-rise buildings with grenfell style

01:19:07 style flammable cadding have had their cladding replaced with a safe alternative and the affirm progress has been unacceptably slow a conclusion accepted

01:19:19 conclusion accepted by the ministry of housing communities and local government say the public accounts committee so where has been the voice of the inquiry in promoting change

01:19:30 of the inquiry in promoting change the public accounts committee continued most residents in blocks with dangerous cladding face exorbitant costs

01:19:37 costs of funding interim safety measures such as waking watches while waiting for the cladding to be removed leaseholders have been trapped in this situation unable to sell their flats which are

01:19:48 unable to sell their flats which are worth nothing many residents have reported worsening mental health as a result of worries about their safety and the life-changing bills they face for remediation works

01:20:00 they face for remediation works and again so far no voice from the inquiry in this there has been astonishing and inspired work

01:20:10 work from the cladding campaigners and they are doing their very best in order to push forward the timetable for change and the removal of dangerous padding but

01:20:22 and the removal of dangerous padding but how much more could have been done if the inquiry were involved the 2020 the october 2020 monthly report from the mayor's office

01:20:33 monthly report from the mayor's office update

01:20:34 update on progress of the grenfell tower inquiry recommendation states the government is responsible for building regulations including those that relate to fire safety issues relating to the

01:20:46 safety issues relating to the construction refurbishment and management of grenville tower are being examined in more detail in phase two of the inquiry but it is vital that the government housing and building industries

01:20:57 housing and building industries do not wait for the inquiry's next report to take action on such an important issue

01:21:05 in the opening to module one i commented on the need potentially to call evidence from the minister from the mayor's office as to what change is taking place in order so this inquiry

01:21:16 order so this inquiry can be satisfied that change is taking place and appropriately so now we have a different turn of events the government quite rightly is not waiting for the inquiry it goes

01:21:28 is not waiting for the inquiry it goes ahead with change without this inquiry's recommendations the building safety bill and the fire safety bill's timetable and and for that legislation to come

01:21:40 and and for that legislation to come into effect is 2021 next year at present those bills the building safety bill and the fire safety bill

01:21:48 bill are going through the committee stages in the house of laws what these bills do is they'll create a system of building regulation for building owners and a new system of

01:21:59 for building owners and a new system of building safety managers for each building each qualifying building will have a safety certificate which will require regular updating and checking the system

01:22:10 checking the system will ensure that qualifying buildings in future

01:22:13 future will have an accountable person upon whose shoulders responsibility lies all of this to be dealt with under the health and safety executive

01:22:24 under the health and safety executive system

01:22:25 system but also proposed is a construction product safety committee with membership which we are told will be comprised of technical experts and academics

01:22:36 technical experts and academics it will advise the secretary of state for housing on whether voluntary industry

01:22:40 industry standards or construction products should also become uk regulatory standards

01:22:47 within this legislation residents remain sidelined

01:22:51 sidelined into their own committee within the new regulatory structures and appear not to have been thought capable of assessing the risks posed by construction products and yet

01:23:03 posed by construction products and yet again there is the concern that the profit driven and focused industry

01:23:08 industry which has repeatedly proven itself incapable of being trusted will no doubt try its best to pervert any system that can be put in place and push forward perhaps

01:23:19 be put in place and push forward perhaps the technical experts may be all too close to industry but are these the right changes do these bills go far enough

01:23:30 bills go far enough this panel should be making that assessment and making its views known the terms of reference define the scope of this inquiry's investigations they were set on the 15th of august of

01:23:42 they were set on the 15th of august of 2017

01:23:44 2017 and in this regard they include obviously the immediate causes of the fire

01:23:49 fire design and construction of the building and the refurbishment the regulation and arrangements made by local authorities for receiving and acting upon information obtained by residents and crucially

01:24:03 residents and crucially the terms of reference require this inquiry

01:24:07 inquiry to report its findings to the prime minister as soon as possible and to make recommendations do any of us think

01:24:15 think that 2022 or worst 2023 does that sound as soon as possible

01:24:24 miss barwise queen's council set out in all submissions the need for this inquiry to engage earlier than currently considered in the process of recommendations we agree but we suggest that this issue

01:24:37 we agree but we suggest that this issue requires deeper analysis sir if you and the panel continue on the current course within the current timetable

01:24:45 timetable the consequences will be that any recommendations you make as regards the proposals

01:24:51 proposals set out within the fire safety bill the building safety bill and the product and product safety will come after they've all been enacted and the new structures put in place

01:25:02 and the new structures put in place already

01:25:02 already government is setting up a shadow regulator so that she or he can be in place when statute is enacted on behalf of the families and survivors we've often complained

01:25:14 we've often complained that the current system of engaging with the inquiry forced upon us by the pandemic has relegated us to the status

01:25:21 status of youtube watchers and we have said in the past that this process means we are not able to effectively participate in the inquiry process i agree with mr

01:25:32 in the inquiry process i agree with mr williamson that this platform and ability to interact with the panel is welcome the term effectively participate is a

01:25:43 the term effectively participate is a term drawn from the case law but what would be worse we suggest is that this inquiry is not effectively participating in the process of change going all

01:25:55 in the process of change going all around it

01:26:00 the sister found mr ackball you must have come into this inquiry because you saw that this was a chance to make a difference apologies mr agbor i bet you're thinking you're fairly warm with your feet

01:26:12 you're fairly warm with your feet but if you miss estefan and mr agbor don't discuss the process and timetable of this inquiry with the chair there is a real danger that you will also become

01:26:23 also become bystanders to the inquiry in relation to the process of change

01:26:31 so you will recall what it's like on the other side of the courtroom where an advocate is trying to change a judicial mind

01:26:38 mind when new facts arise and after a ruling has been made that is what the final report will do in the end of 2022 at best more likely 23

01:26:51 at best more likely 23 because the change will have occurred without your input so what are the options

01:26:59 the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse works with a system of investigations that is similar to the grenfell

01:27:07 grenfell modular system but different from the grenfell tower inquiry in that at the end of the abuse inquiry investigation it then reports on its findings and makes recommendations as to change

01:27:19 makes recommendations as to change and so far therefore the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse has had a number of investigations and a number of reports

01:27:28 the infected blood inquiry chair sabrine langstaff

01:27:32 langstaff writes to government and comments on issues that require attention in other words there are ways of making your views clear as the inquiry continues

01:27:43 as the inquiry continues and to an extent this inquiry has done this already but only in part by splitting its process into phase one and then reporting and then on to phase

01:27:54 and then reporting and then on to phase two

01:27:57 as i've already said built into our current program our combined module one to three submissions at the close of modules one to three as a panel

01:28:09 one to three as a panel you may want to consider that this would provide

01:28:12 provide the best time to invite written and oral submissions on what this evidence means in modules one to three and its effect on the changing on the changes

01:28:23 changes taking place within the legislative and regulatory structures

01:28:30 whether you would call that the end of phase 2 and create a new phase 3 phase 3 will be a matter for you

01:28:39 if you don't do this and don't participate in the process of change whilst it takes place the voice of this panel

01:28:47 panel will not be heard as it should and one of the main reasons to have an inquiry will be lost surely the duty of an inquiry is to be effective

01:28:58 effective to use its knowledge at a time when that knowledge is required in order to affect change

01:29:04 change and so you'll remember that the close of the evidence of all of the fight survivors who spoke to you in phase one all of them said that they wish for this inquiry

01:29:17 said that they wish for this inquiry to support change there is a danger there is a real danger that the survivors and family members of the rainfall tower fire

01:29:28 the rainfall tower fire will be let down by this inquiry if it doesn't participate in the process of change

01:29:36 and let me finish with one last point if you the panel adopt the suggestion we make

01:29:42 make to report perhaps the following way after modules one to three as a whole at the close of those modules then this would also encourage the currently stagnated police investigation

01:29:54 stagnated police investigation and the dpp to to reconsider the current halt policy on the criminal process pending the conclusion of this inquiry

01:30:05 once modules one two three are finished there is no good reason whatsoever to not go ahead with the criminal investigation and to bring the criminals who killed so many to justice

01:30:16 many to justice as soon as possible sir if you wish us to work with team one and prepare

01:30:23 prepare short submissions into what should be looked at and reported on in the end of modules one to three we will of course get that done

01:30:33 so those are my submissions thank you very much indeed mr steen um i'm sorry that we had one or two slight hitches during the course of your uh submissions but

01:30:44 uh submissions but uh i don't think we lost anything i think you were always able to go back to where

01:30:49 where we'd left off so we've got a full transcript of what you have said to us and we've

01:30:53 and we've obviously welcomed hearing from you thank you very much indeed

01:30:59 we'll take a short break at this point and

01:31:03 and come back to hear our next legal representative at i think 10 to 12 please 10 to 12.

01:50:33 i didn't

01:50:42 at this point i'm going to ask mr taverner queen's council to address us on behalf of ryden so are you there mr taverner i am indeed sir

01:50:52 sir thank you you can obviously hear me and we can hear and see you so when you're ready please uh make your opening statement good morning mr chairman mr fan and mr

01:51:03 good morning mr chairman mr fan and mr akbar and all those attending the inquiry has ryden's module two written opening submissions dated the 16th of october 2020 and they can be found at ryd triple zero

01:51:16 and they can be found at ryd triple zero nine four five six one those written submissions have the electronic references for the documents to which i will refer to today ryden thank the inquiry for the opportunity to make oral submissions

01:51:28 opportunity to make oral submissions the dreadful human consequences of the tragedy continue to remain very much in the consciousness of all those i represent writing's interest in this module arises in this

01:51:39 interest in this module arises in this way

01:51:40 way the inquiry is explored with those who specified and approved products for use at grenfell how they came to be chosen and the reliance placed on marketing material and certification

01:51:51 and certification there is little doubt that rightly or wrongly such material played an important role not only in their selection for use at grenfell

01:51:59 grenfell but also in many other projects involving other construction professionals ryden were at the top of the supply chain at grenville and has acknowledged that it has a contractual liability for

01:52:10 that it has a contractual liability for those designers and specialists is engaged as well as those

01:52:15 those it employed today ryden focuses on two products reyna bond polyethylene 55 which i'll call rbp 55 and celatex rs 5000

01:52:29 55 and celatex rs 5000 other cps consider in their opening submission detailed other products such as k-15 and the role

01:52:36 the role and involvement of the testing and certification bodies this of course is not the right place to consider legal liability of the manufacturers or others whether in the context of the statutory

01:52:47 whether in the context of the statutory duties

01:52:48 duties contractual obligations or potential tortious conduct i'll deal with archonic and celitex separately if i may turning first to iconic

01:53:00 iconic certain themes have been developed by arconic in the course of this inquiry to the effect that arconic were mere manufacturers of the product but it was up to others to make sure that it's rb55pe

01:53:12 that it's rb55pe or any other pe product was lawfully and safely used as a result of this and in any event says iconic it did not need to know and indeed knew little or nothing of the

01:53:23 and indeed knew little or nothing of the relevant regulations which governed or restricted its use nor it says that it concern itself with whether it's rbpe 55 product whether in riveted or cassette form was

01:53:35 whether in riveted or cassette form was suitable for use on particular types of product

01:53:38 product such as the above 18 meter market arconic says that it was exclusively for others to decide based on the material it disseminated to the market including that relating to

01:53:50 the market including that relating to testing and certification we submit that iconic's position is simply not borne out by the facts and is indeed insensible putting on one side it's legal duties commercial common

01:54:02 side it's legal duties commercial common sense dictates first that any common uh that any company manufacturing a product for distribution and use needs to know it is safe to use and is compliant with relevant regulatory requirements

01:54:14 relevant regulatory requirements for no other reason then it is likely to be easier to sell a safe compliant product

01:54:19 product than one which is not and secondly if an industry

01:54:23 industry in this case the construction industry habitually relies on independent certification endorsing the use of a product a company such as arconic will need to establish whether it can legitimately

01:54:36 establish whether it can legitimately gain such certification to advertise the safe use of its product it is obvious false or misleading certification can only lead to unsafe product being used when it should not

01:54:50 used when it should not arconic had dedicated personnel responsible for ensuring the safety of their products understanding and keeping up with national and international regulations as well as individuals charged with

01:55:01 as well as individuals charged with overseeing independence testing and certification of their products

01:55:06 products our colleagues internal documents are replete with consideration of and discussion about first safety of rbpe

01:55:14 rbpe 55 secondly its compliance with regulations and thirdly its certification in europe by the ctsb and in this jurisdiction

01:55:25 by the ctsb and in this jurisdiction by the bba what is shocking about these internal documents is first as to safety archonic concluded well before and repeatedly by the time of the sale

01:55:37 repeatedly by the time of the sale of rbp 55 for use of grenfell that it was so highly dangerous that it should not be used in what it called architecture certainly not on residential tower blocks over 18 meters

01:55:50 residential tower blocks over 18 meters and most definitely not in its cassette form

01:55:53 form iconic discussed these matters internally right up to the time of the fire in june 2017. secondly internal documents establish

01:56:05 secondly internal documents establish that arconica concluded that regulations precluded the use of rbp 55 in many jurisdictions certainly at any height above 18 meters in residential power blocks

01:56:17 in residential power blocks as to the uk the continued opacity of the uk regulations was such that uh iconic view that they could be worked with to use arconic's own words to allow it

01:56:28 to use arconic's own words to allow it to market and sell for use in the above 18 meter uk market what it knew to be dangerous pe thirdly as to certification arconic

01:56:39 thirdly as to certification arconic proactively relied on the 2008 bba certificate to promote use of rvp pe 55 cassette as being safe and compliant with the uk

01:56:50 as being safe and compliant with the uk regulations not just at grenville on the basis that being tested and achieved either a class b euro rating

01:56:59 rating or a class 0 bs 476 uk classification when it knew that it did not it apparently saw a gap in the certification to be exploited

01:57:10 certification to be exploited it could only have knowingly allowed false information to remain in a certificate in order to mislead

01:57:16 mislead construction professionals into specifying a product which with clear and accurate information they would not otherwise specify in our submission any one of these three

01:57:27 in our submission any one of these three factors would be sufficient to condemn our comic

01:57:33 to illustrate the above points we turn to what happened in four periods we we've split it up uh perhaps artificially into four periods the inquiry will excuse me for referencing certain parts

01:57:45 referencing certain parts of that uh chronology already referred to the requirey but they are important documents the first period is between

01:57:56 the first period is between 2008 when the bba certificate was issued and the 18th of november 2012 the date of the tamweel fire in dubai the second period is from the date of

01:58:08 the second period is from the date of the tamriel due by fire to the end of may 2013 the third period 2014 and 2015 when rbp 55

01:58:21 when rbp 55 was selected ordered and installed at grenville

01:58:25 grenville and the final period from the installation of rb55p cassettes of grenfell tower to the fire turning to the first period if i may

01:58:37 turning to the first period if i may from 2008 when bba certificate was issued

01:58:41 issued and the date of the tam wheel fire in dubai that was the 18th of november 2012.

01:58:48 2012. it of course starts with the issue of the bba certificate on the 14th of january 2008. to summarize as the inquiry is aware section 6.1 of the certificate

01:58:59 section 6.1 of the certificate stated that rb55fr and pe when tested for fire achieved a classification of b in accordance with en 13501

01:59:10 in accordance with en 13501 1. i'll refer to that as class b at 6.3 of the certificate on the same page

01:59:17 page it certified the pe panels where the riveted or cassette as a result of its class b classification and tests on fr panels may be regarded

01:59:28 and tests on fr panels may be regarded as having a class zero surface in relation to approved document b of the building regulations both statements were then false with regard to the classification cassette notable features of the story

01:59:42 cassette notable features of the story thereafter before the tan wheeled fire include the following the 17th of july 2009

01:59:49 2009 where as mentioned by mr williamson this morning

01:59:53 morning arconic discussed a fire that had taken place in romania an archonics mr verla to whom reference has already been made in this inquiry commented and i quote here are some

02:00:04 commented and i quote here are some pictures

02:00:05 pictures to show you how dangerous pe can be when it comes to architecture on the 16th of march 2010 mr verla let's

02:00:16 on the 16th of march 2010 mr verla let's slip in an email conversation with the mr scheideker and i quote and reynabond pe in cassette form doesn't obtain level b either

02:00:26 either having said that the shortfall in relation to the standard is something that we have to keep very confidential to which mr scheideker responded and i quote

02:00:38 quote this shouldn't even have been mentioned iconic knows that the bba certificate wrongly passes off rbp 55 cassette as having achieved class b and in the uk therefore

02:00:51 achieved class b and in the uk therefore could be treated as having a class 0 rating for the purposes of approved document b it knows that even mentioning what it causes the shortfall displays in writing

02:01:02 writing arconic's knowledge of the misrepresentation being perpetrated on the market it's clear from an email dated the 5th of july 2010 from our connex isabel

02:01:13 of july 2010 from our connex isabel moyes

02:01:15 moyes that our conics personnel are representing the cassettes have a more favorable rating than riveted when arconic knows the exact opposite is true

02:01:24 true mr verner knows this and expressly acknowledges that archonic is not clean not clean it is suggested can only mean in this context we are conic are knowingly

02:01:36 we are conic are knowingly misrepresenting the suitability of rb cassette to the market

02:01:42 on the 29th of june 2011 mr verla recorded pe cassettes as having received the class

02:01:49 the class f designation commenting oops the consequence of this were obvious as reported by mr verla on the 30th of june 2011 the

02:02:00 on the 30th of june 2011 the f classification meant that b rb 55 cassettes are and i open quotation marks

02:02:08 marks not suitable for use on building facades likely there are no qualifications this statement to the effect that it might or would be suitable in combination with other particular materials

02:02:19 other particular materials or with particular measures in place it was not suitable full stop and no ifs and no buds

02:02:28 did arconic therefore ensure that it was never sold for use on building facades and worn those where it had been regrettably not instead as evidenced in an email dated

02:02:39 instead as evidenced in an email dated the 5th of july 2011 arconic's corporate response was this quotation marks for the moment even if we know that pe material in cassette

02:02:49 cassette has a bad behavior exposed to fire we can still work with national regulations who are not as restrictive

02:03:00 who are not as restrictive i turn now to the second period which starts with the tan wheel dubai fire to the end of may 2013. in this period the 34-storey tamweel

02:03:11 in this period the 34-storey tamweel tower caught fire in dubai was clad in pe

02:03:15 pe this occurred on the 18th of november 2012.

02:03:19 2012. the press reported on the fire stating and i quote the fire spread down the building the cladding acted as a fuel on the 28th of november 2012 mr verla

02:03:32 on the 28th of november 2012 mr verla commenting on the fire identified the pe cladding as good bond commenting and acknowledging that quote all pe composites react in the same way

02:03:45 on the 25th of april 2013 there are internal iconic emails in which iconic personnel state this quotation marks the tests that we

02:03:56 quotation marks the tests that we conducted

02:03:58 conducted are not really reflective of the riveted system in general also alcohol aligns with the market classification and does not use it anymore preferring a

02:04:09 and does not use it anymore preferring a classy regardless of the system isabel responds quote yet we still won't stop proposing the riveting product in pe question mark to which mr verda

02:04:22 in pe question mark to which mr verda responds

02:04:24 responds yes that's the thing it's a gap in the certification that we continue to make use of note that the not reflective comment

02:04:35 note that the not reflective comment tallies with claude werner's later note of the 24th of june 2016 recording regarding inquiries about a project in finland when in a disturbing exchange mr verda

02:04:46 when in a disturbing exchange mr verda says this

02:04:48 says this we also had a class b at the time in pe but by arranging the system to pass so this report is really not a reference arranging is inverted commas

02:05:01 arranging is inverted commas on the 9th of may 2013 miss french iconic's uk representative reports to arconic's high command including mr verna that arrest mr

02:05:12 including mr verna that arrest mr richard guitar a representative in the uk for al you co-bond

02:05:18 co-bond an iconic competitor and in the aftermath of the tamweel tower fire has emailed alcubon fabricators explaining that alcubond is now using a fire core

02:05:31 that alcubond is now using a fire core only a standard the email chain includes mr keith's strident attack on the use of acmp in the middle east he says the systems in the middle east are like a chimney which transports the

02:05:44 are like a chimney which transports the fire from bottom to top or vice versa in the shortest possible time he comments that pe burns fiercely the forwarded email by uh miss french had a link to the bbc

02:05:58 by uh miss french had a link to the bbc report

02:05:59 report which reported on the use of acm with a pe

02:06:02 pe core in the uae and which referred also to several other fires it informed our comic personnel of what they already knew quote when the panel ignites fire

02:06:14 quote when the panel ignites fire spreads rapidly racing to the top of the building

02:06:17 building and sending flames debris flaming debris hurtling to the streets below close quotes this was another opportunity for arconic to come clean and to withdraw its dangerous pe

02:06:28 clean and to withdraw its dangerous pe from the market it is quite clearly what arconic ought to have done instead on the 13th of may 2013 iconic wrote to its fabricator cep

02:06:41 iconic wrote to its fabricator cep and apparently other customers as well and this was written to the knowledge of those at our comics uh headquarters including mr werler and

02:06:52 uh headquarters including mr werler and mr

02:06:53 mr peter frohip

02:06:56 the email was sent to ashore cep and other iconic customer customers it was referred to this morning by mr williamson and referring to the bbc reports ms

02:07:07 and referring to the bbc reports ms french said regarding any inquiries made to suppliers such as cep and i pick it up in the third paragraph if i may quote regarding the supply of rayna bond

02:07:18 quote regarding the supply of rayna bond in the uk

02:07:19 in the uk as you know we both we supply both pe and fr

02:07:23 and fr core and can control and understand what core is being used in all projects due to the controlled supply route we have

02:07:32 have by only supplying rainerbond to a very small group of approved fabricators and working very closely closely with them on all projects we're able to follow what type of

02:07:43 we're able to follow what type of project is being designed developed and then offer the right rainer bond specification including the call at this stage we'll continue offer

02:07:54 continue offer both pe and fr core and continue the close working relationship we have with our approved fabricators to make sure that the right technical support

02:08:03 support rayna bond specification and materials are being used and installed on reynabond projects close quotes so here our conic announced its

02:08:15 so here our conic announced its responsibility

02:08:18 did not as we know see that responsibility throughout uh through to grenfell and now arconic in their submissions deny its

02:08:29 arconic in their submissions deny its very

02:08:29 very existence to make good on this announcement arconic would not have put the pe up for consideration of grenfell tower let alone allowed it to be used

02:08:41 let alone allowed it to be used so the third period 2014 and 2015 when rayna bond pe was selected order installed at grenville over this period of time even the

02:08:52 over this period of time even the riveted form of rbp e55 was downgraded by the ctsb from b2c however the bba certificate not only remained unaltered but was used to sell rb55pe cassette on

02:09:05 but was used to sell rb55pe cassette on grenville

02:09:06 grenville iconic continued to receive reports of yet more fires involving pe again referring to certain important events on the 31st of july january 2014 ctsb published the

02:09:18 january 2014 ctsb published the certificates which cancels and replaces previous certificates and certified class e for both rbp 55 riveted and cassette

02:09:30 55 riveted and cassette notwithstanding this and miss french's knowledge of the downgrade the misleading pba certificate in the same form as being issued in 2008 was on the 23rd of april 2014

02:09:41 april 2014 sent by arconic to harley and cep and then by harley to ryden in support of the use of rb55 at grenville town on the 25th of july 2014 miss french was

02:09:54 on the 25th of july 2014 miss french was told that the grenville architects had chosen rbpe 55 in cassette format on the 31st of july 2014 miss french sent a picture of the tower which shows

02:10:05 sent a picture of the tower which shows it to be well over 18 meters on the 17th of october 2014 arconic's serge vala reports to mr verla that miss french had told him that pe is

02:10:17 that miss french had told him that pe is used regardless of the project and that there's no specific legislation he commented debbie pushes hard for the pe prescriptions

02:10:29 pe prescriptions notwithstanding the insurance is given in the 13th of may 2013 emails and knowledge of the misleading bba certificate pe was being peddled by iconic in the uk market

02:10:41 market later that year on the 4th of december 2014 out of the blue two certificates from ctsb one confirming cassettes at e and the other for rivet at c even if the

02:10:52 and the other for rivet at c even if the reddit class c was typical and not an arranged classification it was inappropriate for use in europe and the bba certificate remained wrong for both vivit and cassette

02:11:03 for both vivit and cassette notwithstanding all that archonic new arconic confirmed a cep order for a significant amount three thousand square meters of rbpe 55 on the 26th of

02:11:14 square meters of rbpe 55 on the 26th of march 2015 for use at grenfell tower from april may 2015 the panels were being supplied fabricated installed at grenfell during that time

02:11:26 at grenfell during that time on the 5th of may 2015 a report was forwarded to our comic mr verla and others concerning the melbourne lacrosse docklands fire a post-incident analysis report

02:11:38 a post-incident analysis report appendix 12 of that report documents seven fires in high rise buildings clad with aluminium polyethylene composite panels in which fire spread rapidly over each

02:11:49 in which fire spread rapidly over each tower either from bottom to top or top to bottom on the 29th of june 2015 consistent with his view over many years and reinforced by the many fires taking place

02:12:00 taking place all over the world mr verdo writes in a way which can only be interpreted as him recording the fact that he's been told

02:12:08 told not to talk about the selling of pe into the

02:12:11 the french market and of pe being represented as m1 standard under the french certification system when it was not he clearly considered he should put his now often referred to

02:12:22 should put his now often referred to opinion in writing quotes pe is dangerous on facades this opinion is technical and anti-commercial it seems

02:12:32 in june 2015 a narcotics sales meeting was told that the technical teams claude verda

02:12:38 verda was managing arconic's regulatory watch and product system certification and that another individual was managing fire certification the slideshow

02:12:50 fire certification the slideshow produced

02:12:51 produced included a slide which identified with regards to pe quote limitations given by the smoke production and fame flaming droplets close quotes and under

02:13:02 flaming droplets close quotes and under what is said typical application quote maximal building height of 8 meters to 12 meters depending on the country on the 16th of october 2015 whilst the

02:13:14 on the 16th of october 2015 whilst the refurbishment works continued arconic discussed the fire at the king phaedi medical center which used alcuco bond fr it was referred to by mr williamson this morning

02:13:26 morning steroida commented quote in pe the fire would have spread over the entire height of the tower while in this case the only area near the fire is affected

02:13:37 the fire is affected long live fr close quotes the fourth period is the uh and the final section of the chronology runs from the installation of rb

02:13:48 runs from the installation of rb pe 55 cassettes at grenfell to the date of the fire this period shows continued cynicism on the part of our comic and disregard for the serious potential consequences of

02:13:59 the serious potential consequences of supplying product that are already already been released into the uk market on the 19th of january 2016 mr verde was reporting on another fire

02:14:10 reporting on another fire the wolf tower fire as again referred to by mr williamson this morning quote we were very lucky the rolex tower is

02:14:18 is r-e-b-p-e ten meters from the fire fortunately the wind didn't change direction

02:14:24 direction but we really need to stop proposing pe in architecture we are in the know and i think it is up to us to be proactive at last the specialist manufacturers and with their monitoring of fires worldwide

02:14:36 their monitoring of fires worldwide worldwide on archonic were very much in the know

02:14:40 the know on the 9th of february 2016 one herve maraches wrote to mr werler with regard to what he described as a typical french market case

02:14:52 quote do you quote with fr with your conscience clear or pr so you get the

02:14:59 get the business what a dilemma that it could even be posed as a dilemma gives an insight into the profoundly irresponsible profitable cost culture prevalent within our comic

02:15:11 our comic by the third of may of 2016 it seems in france at least the obvious dangers of pe

02:15:17 pe and its lack of compliance with requisite french standards meant that in france at least the corporate decision was forced on our comic

02:15:27 comic it had to come clean and it's worth reading

02:15:30 reading this and i wonder if i could ask the operator

02:15:34 operator to bring up m e t triple zero five three one five eight underscore p o six underscore

02:15:45 p o six underscore o nine nine that's met triple zero five three one five eight underscore p06

02:15:59 one five eight underscore p06 and score 009. having set out what he describes as an ambiguous situation we haven't got it up yet that's right

02:16:13 we haven't got it up yet that's right um and we got it there no i'm sorry it looks as though we aren't going to be able to bring it up would you like to quote from it i will indeed say thank you thank you so he sets out in this uh email what he

02:16:26 so he sets out in this uh email what he describes

02:16:28 describes as an ambiguous situation that's mr alair

02:16:31 alair falcon what he describes an ambiguous situation when seeking to align the french

02:16:36 french nf p92-501 standard to the european en 13501 standard and i quote

02:16:47 quote you and he's referring there to arconic personnel

02:16:51 personnel or your customers regularly specify arena bomb products on large-scale architectural projects as such our comic finds itself

02:17:02 as such our comic finds itself as a knowledgeable entity and therefore accepts its responsibility and image as a specialist in this field in view of the potential calorific benefits of rayna bond fr

02:17:14 rayna bond fr versus raynabond pe and consequently its superior performance we have taken the proactive habit of favoring fr as the only solution in our

02:17:25 as the only solution in our specifications as from today i ask you to go even further and to systematically confirm in writing

02:17:32 writing the requirements for fr for all projects on which arena bond specification is involved

02:17:38 involved regardless of the nature and size of the building project claude that's claude verla

02:17:43 verla will give you all the necessary information to justify this choice and advise the specifiers as best as possible regarding the solution which is by far the safest on the 12th of june 2017 two days before

02:17:55 of june 2017 two days before the fire at grenville mr wuerler wrote with regards to inquiries originating in israel

02:18:02 israel rotation marks in europe normally pe should no more be used on a building for external planning close quotes iconic however having sold the dangerous pe for use of

02:18:13 sold the dangerous pe for use of griswolf grenfell notified no one rather ensuring that the right product with the right core was used on the right project iconic sought actively to exploit the lack of clarity in regulatory regimes

02:18:25 lack of clarity in regulatory regimes which was slow to respond to the dangers of p whether in cassette or riveted form they issued and relied upon the misleading bpa certificates which their knowledge wrongly represented if cassettes had a euro b

02:18:36 represented if cassettes had a euro b classification and relied on an old superseded and arranged tests they sought to use what they considered with gaps in the certification process and all this against the backdrop of

02:18:47 and all this against the backdrop of their explicit knowledge of fire after fire in tower blocks clad in pe where they understood that all pe acts in the same way and their explicit recognition that pe was

02:18:58 their explicit recognition that pe was dangerous

02:18:59 dangerous and should not be used in architecture in other words in buildings such as grenfell tower yet they manufactured and sold rbp e55 knowing

02:19:07 knowing it was to be used at grenville it is suggested

02:19:11 suggested that the fire at grenfell could not have come as any surprise to those in many positions

02:19:15 positions of responsibility within the iconic uh organization turning now if i may to sell a text and the use of their rs 5000 installation board within the cladding system

02:19:28 in 2013 celetex was looking enviously at kingspan sales and in particular the success of its k-15 insulation board in the above 18 meter

02:19:39 insulation board in the above 18 meter exterior cladding market in the uk at a meeting in durham in june 2013 celetex considered with a cladding system company sotek and fire experts

02:19:50 system company sotek and fire experts ifc how kingspan could possibly and legitimately seek to support the use of k-15

02:19:56 k-15 within within systems using acms when the bs-8414 tests used by them to obtain the bre-135 certification had only tested k-15

02:20:07 certification had only tested k-15 together with non-combustible cladding a note prepared by celetex is john roper of at durham meeting stated under the heading k15 bba

02:20:18 stated under the heading k15 bba certification and literature and i quote astonished as to how k15 is used so widely

02:20:25 widely based on testing involving a cement particle board as the outer face to represent a typical cladding panel identified the kingspan used promiscial fire barriers fixed to a galvanized

02:20:37 fire barriers fixed to a galvanized steel sheet so tech convinced that the system quoted using a standard cladding panel would fail

02:20:44 fail as the post flashover that occurs would penetrate and melt the panel allow the flame to enter the cavity cleverly designed and worded i.e

02:20:55 cleverly designed and worded i.e non-combustible substrate wording used in literature could be interpreted as applicable for part one and part two in parenthesis cb board and masonry face

02:21:07 in parenthesis cb board and masonry face outer face using cp board classified as six mil non-combustible cladding in product literature there was a further meeting this time at peter lee on the third of

02:21:18 this time at peter lee on the third of october 2013 attended by sotek and ifc again and by jonathan roper and jamie hayes of celetex

02:21:26 celetex to discuss the kingspan tests and whether what was then called fr 5000 could also pass the test the summary of the meeting states this quote fire test

02:21:38 quote fire test very problematic to pass kingspan failed twice with standard cavity barriers john at sotex skeptical about pass with decorative cladding still no idea how kingspan support the

02:21:50 still no idea how kingspan support the use of decorative cladding as their fire test uses a non-combustible padding very unlikely to pass on the basis that celetex fr 5000 is slightly better than phenolic

02:22:02 is slightly better than phenolic according to ifc testing close quotes during the course of an email exchange later that month on the 31st of october 2013

02:22:11 2013 regarding the possible design of the cladding system to be submitted for bs 8414 testing mr ropa said this quote the big issue we have is that we know that standard aluminium panel

02:22:22 aluminium panel will melt and amount to a failure in this particular test close quotation marks in an email of the first of november 2013 from ropa to evans

02:22:33 2013 from ropa to evans mr roper sets out the position at length it sets out celetex's view of the lack of knowledge of the industry and consideration of whether to exploit that lack of knowledge

02:22:45 that lack of knowledge this can be found at cel

02:22:49 one 50716 underscore triple zero one and i'll quote from this at length quotation marks well i think we have two

02:23:00 quotation marks well i think we have two possible solutions for testing in which both david ifc and i have confidence in will explain more on monday but essentially since the beginning of the project we've been looking at testing

02:23:12 project we've been looking at testing worst case scenario with an improved fire barrier to them to be then supported by an assessment report which broadens the scope of potential systems that we

02:23:23 the scope of potential systems that we are applicable for after much research i don't think this is possible and i don't believe kingspan have a similar report this must be a reference to the assessment report

02:23:34 assessment report we cannot seem to find or design a suitable barrier in which we have enough confidence that it can be used behind a standard acm panel which we know will melt and allow fire into the cavity

02:23:45 into the cavity speaking to simcoe on wednesday in birmingham with il he confirmed that architects will specify k15 with a standard fire barrier and panel

02:23:56 with a standard fire barrier and panel when the work is contracted and then subcontracted to cladding contractors such as simcoe h.a marks stanmore etc they value engineer that system to be

02:24:07 they value engineer that system to be competitive a tender this means changing fire barriers changing panels the architect's only guarantee is that k-15 will be used because there's no other alternative

02:24:18 because there's no other alternative available

02:24:20 available then the third paragraph of that summary an architect will be told that k-15 is applicable for above 18 meters in accordance with

02:24:31 for above 18 meters in accordance with approved documents and that suffices from their perspective kingspan have done a great job at the spec

02:24:36 spec end and according to simcoe has specified much more than rockwool duo slab for thermal performance as discussed above contractors opt

02:24:48 as discussed above contractors opt for more cost-effective solutions and although they are liable for what goes into that building they do not know enough about the fire test

02:24:57 test to challenge the only figure who might possibly challenge your project's eligibility for use in buildings above 18 meters is the building control officer

02:25:08 officer kingspan i would suggest do not have a piece of paper that states they can specifically be used behind any cladding panel

02:25:14 panel what they have done is got bba certification stating the fire test method

02:25:19 method and taken that to labc to get a registered document detail which states that k-15 can be used in a variety

02:25:27 variety of cladding systems and complies with approved documents through passing br 135 a building control officer is unlikely

02:25:38 a building control officer is unlikely to challenge a document that is approved from the head of building control the note then goes on to discuss options and in the fourth and fifth paragraphs before then at the seventh paragraph

02:25:50 before then at the seventh paragraph says this

02:25:51 says this do we in fact need to spend 25 30 k for a bba to be able to gain this document from labc which in my mind gives us very little chance of being challenged from building control

02:26:02 control do we partner with a few fire barrier manufacturers who have tested with k-15 currently to gain confidence in the market that way and then this or do we take the view

02:26:14 and then this or do we take the view that our product realistically shouldn't be used behind those cladding panels because in the event of a fire it would burn

02:26:23 but the eighth paragraph of that email what kingspan have done extremely well is said very little but build confidence if challenged by having five

02:26:34 having five fire barrier manufacturers showing tests with k15

02:26:38 with k15 achieve bba validation and subsequently get

02:26:41 get gain labc approval there's always the chance they do have the piece of paper in the top draw from somebody that states for use with any system but i doubt it

02:26:53 on the 8th of november 2013 mr roper emailed luke creswell and john simmons discussing bre test week details in that email and talking about the bre test he says this

02:27:04 test he says this quote as much as they limit the scope of the tested system they that's the bre do accept that although one system was tested by

02:27:17 they understand that commonly this allows insulation products to be used with a variety of systems in practice i think testing with an ethernet panel is the route to go but shouldn't cause us any issues with

02:27:29 but shouldn't cause us any issues with regards to using celetex behind rayna bond on the up-and-coming job

02:27:35 job i've also got labc involved to issue a report

02:27:40 report stating that celetex can be used behind a variety of systems above 18 meters to prevent any challenge from building control close quotation marks in our submission

02:27:51 close quotation marks in our submission five things can be taken from celotex's document as to the state of play at the end of 2013. first celetex were impressed rather than appalled

02:28:00 appalled that kingspan's k-15 was taken in the marketplace as being suitable for use with a variety of canning systems including acn cladding above 18 meters

02:28:11 including acn cladding above 18 meters second celetex market research told them that building contractors did not know about

02:28:16 about enough about the fire test the challenge presumably by challenge celetex meant challenge any suggestion implicit or explicit

02:28:24 explicit as the suitability of the use of the products in a variety of systems not in fact the subject matter of any bs 8414 test third celatex believed that if an architect was

02:28:35 believed that if an architect was somehow told that k15 was suitable for use above 18 meters in accordance with approved document b that statement would or at least could suffice from the architect's perspective

02:28:46 suffice from the architect's perspective fourth celetex has concluded or had concluded that any challenge to a product's eligibility for use in buildings

02:28:53 buildings above 18 meters by the building control officer

02:28:57 officer could be deflected with an approval from the body known as the labc a body who could be counted on to issue a report stating that celetex could be used behind a variety of

02:29:08 could be used behind a variety of systems above 18 meters fifth celetex fatefully turned its back on the accurately expressed view that the product realistically shouldn't be used behind most cladding panels

02:29:19 be used behind most cladding panels because in the event of a fire it would burn

02:29:24 i turned now to 2014 with that backdrop celetech's first step in 2014 was to get some sort of bre-135 certificate based on bs 8414 testing having made one

02:29:36 based on bs 8414 testing having made one failed attempt on the 14th of february 2014

02:29:40 2014 using eight mil marley etternite a2 cladding panels celetex tried again on the 2nd of may using thicker 12 mil marley atomic cladding and

02:29:52 12 mil marley atomic cladding and further

02:29:52 further adding a six mil non-combustible magnesium oxide board as reinforcement in the area of the cavity barriers it passed obtaining bre-135 accreditation

02:30:05 passed obtaining bre-135 accreditation celetex's knowledge the bre test reports omitted reference to the six mil non-combustible magnesium board soon after the bre pass celetex had and

02:30:16 soon after the bre pass celetex had and held an internal meeting on the 14th of may 2014

02:30:20 may 2014 a presentation at the meeting was entitled above 18 meters that presentation again was referred to earlier this morning slide 10 of the presentation contained a review of king span's k-15 and how

02:30:32 review of king span's k-15 and how kingspan had tested k-15 using a non-combustible cladding as a facade

02:30:37 a facade and obtained labc approval commenting that kingspan had created a strong perception of firesafe cool firm board it went on and produced

02:30:50 it went on and produced slide 11. again if it's possible to get up this slide um mr operator i'd be grateful it's cel four zeros eight six four eight

02:31:02 four zeros eight six four eight underscore double zero eleven but if we can't i'll quote from it

02:31:11 quote well just

02:31:27 is that the one you wanted oh no no it's it's not i'm afraid it's it's it's um i'll i'll i'll i'll continue a quote from the document if i may yes all right

02:31:38 document if i may yes all right you carry on quote under the heading market research bullet point

02:31:44 point everybody uses k-15 as there's no alternative bullet point nobody understands the test requirements architects ask if it can be used above

02:31:56 architects ask if it can be used above 18 meters

02:31:57 18 meters the answer is yes bullet point building control have hugely differing levels of understanding on the subject and the final bullet point give us a

02:32:08 and the final bullet point give us a board that is an alternative

02:32:12 this restated the deeply held view in celetex that nobody understands the test requirements and celetex set out to exploit that belief

02:32:23 belief the centex marketing team appeared to be being told that if they are asked a practical question by an architect is it suitable for use above 18 meters you can answer yes simply and without qualification

02:32:35 simply and without qualification presumably by reference to a test of a system

02:32:38 system which for all intents and purposes would never be replicated in reality celetex then turned their attention on getting the product approved by the labc such approval to be used to show building control officers

02:32:50 building control officers though those who sell a text assessed as being unlikely to challenge a document that is approved from the headache building control so on the 17th of june 2014

02:33:01 so on the 17th of june 2014 celetex emailed labc with details of the registration celetex was seeking and the verbatim wording it required and ultimately obtained on the 21st of august 2014

02:33:13 on the 21st of august 2014 celetex was granted labc registration for rs 5000 the register system related to the celetex rs5000 insulation board

02:33:24 celetex rs5000 insulation board for use within rain stream construction with quote limitations of use detailed in the attached drawing and document list drawing and document is stated as

02:33:35 list drawing and document is stated as follows

02:33:37 follows quote limitations of use for use in rain screen wall construction including

02:33:43 including above 18 meters height the required thickness of board for a particular construction must be established with the use of celotex online calculator

02:33:55 celotex online calculator this refers to the insulation values advice notes rs 5000 can be used with a variety of cladding systems

02:34:07 systems including masonry or rain screen systems and can be fixed back to a structural steel frame using a sheathing board or direct back to masonry

02:34:18 to masonry celotex rs 5000 has successfully tested to bs 84142 meets the criteria set out in br135 and

02:34:30 meets the criteria set out in br135 and therefore is acceptable for use in buildings

02:34:34 buildings stories above 18 meters in height subject to the board being fixed to a non-combustible substrate alternative compliance to adb the product has been tested and achieves

02:34:46 the product has been tested and achieves a class zero spreader frame

02:34:51 this wording not only gave for all intents and purposes unqualified approval for rs 5000 to be used above 18 meters

02:34:58 meters in steel frame cladding systems such as that tested by celatex under bs 84142 but also extended that unqualified approval to masonry fixed systems

02:35:10 approval to masonry fixed systems falling within bs84141 which celatex had not even tested note also note also the use of the words non-combustible substrate which echoed

02:35:23 non-combustible substrate which echoed the kingspan's phraseology which you'll really recall that celetex is regarded as clever at the june 2013 durham meeting since it was liable to be misunderstood

02:35:36 since it was liable to be misunderstood as applying to the masonry wall in short by securing labc registration in the terms that did celetex now had unrestricted labc approval for rs 5000 to be used in any

02:35:49 approval for rs 5000 to be used in any above 18 meter cladding system which could then be confidently presented to any building control officer

02:35:56 officer on the 29th of september 2014 celetex prepared

02:36:00 prepared what it called a standard response which was to be issued to anyone inquiring of celetex about the use and application of rs 5000

02:36:08 rs 5000 and whether it had bba certification the standard response should be read in full but include this quote celetex rs 5000 has successfully tested the bs84142

02:36:19 successfully tested the bs84142 and therefore complies with the requirements of adb for buildings that exceed 18 meters in height

02:36:27 height it goes on celatex rs 5000 is current certification from the bre confirming the product has met the criteria set out in vr103 and therefore is acceptable in rain screen clouding

02:36:39 is acceptable in rain screen clouding systems above 18 meters in height the bre has also validated that celatex rs 5000

02:36:45 rs 5000 achieves class zero fire performance celetex rs 5000 has also achieved local authority building control labc approval for using rain screen cladding

02:36:56 approval for using rain screen cladding systems

02:36:57 systems please find this attached to confirming the product is suitable for using masonry

02:37:01 masonry and steel frame constructions and achieve the performance criteria set out in br135

02:37:07 in br135 there's nothing in the standard response that would alert anyone making an inquiry

02:37:11 inquiry to the reality that in fact the br135 certification applied only to celetex being used in an unusual and atypical combination of products one of which

02:37:22 of which was to celetex's knowledge undisclosed on the 6th of august 2014 the very next day after the launch of rs 5000 mr room emailed ben

02:37:33 emailed ben sharma of harley as follows hi ben good to speak to you again i have the pleasure informing you as of yesterday we've now launched the first pi artboard to successfully meet the performance criteria in br135 for insulated rain

02:37:46 criteria in br135 for insulated rain screen cladding systems therefore acceptable for use in buildings above 18 meters in height the unqualified email highlighted that celetex assistant resistance was available with regards

02:37:57 available with regards to the installation u-value calculations but not the fact that the bs-8414 test will carry that using cellotex as part of an unusual atypical non-standard

02:38:08 non-standard cladding board system and further undisclosed magnesium oxide board used as a fire barrier nor did they point out the statement therefore acceptable for use in buildings above 18 meters in height was

02:38:21 buildings above 18 meters in height was for all practical purposes because of the nature of that test thoroughly fanciful celatex was marketing rs 5000 to a contractor whom celatex had already assessed and hoped as not

02:38:32 had already assessed and hoped as not knowing enough about the fire test the challenge

02:38:35 challenge room in this email attached the rs5000 product data sheet the rain screen cladding compliance guide an application data sheet and a product comparison matrix

02:38:47 product comparison matrix the message in the email to harley was reinforced reinforced on the first page of the rs 5000 product data sheet to which we were referred to this morning it was under the whole heading suitable for buildings above 18 meters

02:38:59 suitable for buildings above 18 meters in height

02:39:02 in height i won't quote the whole of that document again other to point out that within that first page quote was added

02:39:10 added has class zero fire performance throughout the entire product in accordance with bs 476 and under a bullet point five supported by labc approval

02:39:23 five supported by labc approval it also said under applications on the same opening page celetex rs 5000 is specifically designed for use in mainstream cladding systems

02:39:34 for use in mainstream cladding systems for both new build and refurbishment products the application data sheet also said the harley was was on page one almost verbatim to the same

02:39:45 on page one almost verbatim to the same uh in the same terms and sent the same clear message suitable for use above 18 meters on the 28th of august except some additional material uh a rain stream planning specification

02:39:56 a rain stream planning specification guide a four-page abridged bre classification of course the labc certificate and drawings and document list say now that they were entitled to

02:40:08 say now that they were entitled to expect that contractors architects and building officers would ensure

02:40:13 ensure either that one rs 5000 was only used in accordance with the internet cement board tested system and it seems the magnesium oxide fire barrier

02:40:24 barrier or two that the rs 5000 should be bespoke

02:40:29 bespoke bs 841 tested with the actual system to be used on any particular project or three would be otherwise justified by an assessment report a desktop study or some other holistic

02:40:42 a desktop study or some other holistic approach

02:40:43 approach which could extrapolate from the br135 test

02:40:48 test celetex say now in effect that they were entitled to expect that the very people they set out to dupe or that they deemed insufficiently equipped to understand the ramifications of the material it disseminated would

02:41:00 of the material it disseminated would not be duped and so free straight the very aim of celetex's marketing strategy with regards to rs 5000 celetex points in its written

02:41:11 celetex points in its written submissions to what they say was information which made the position clear for example on the last pages of the rs 5000 application data sheet and similar wording in the rainscram

02:41:22 wording in the rainscram rain screen clouding compliance guide wordings such as and i quote the fire performance and classification report issued only relates to the components detailed

02:41:33 components detailed any changes to the components listed will need to be considered by the building designer if that consideration took the form of inquiries of celitex they no doubt

02:41:44 inquiries of celitex they no doubt plan to give the standard response that response and told suitable for use above 18 meters

02:41:50 18 meters celatex point to other similar texts which concentrate on components as being suitable

02:41:55 suitable not the components being suitable only part of the system the mainstream cladding compliance guide which included wording to the same effect

02:42:03 effect as above was the only document that reproduced tucked away the limitation and warning applicable to br one three five certification and that it was important to check that the classification

02:42:14 to check that the classification documents

02:42:15 documents over the end use application there are the following points celetex knew that the tested system using the thick mali cement

02:42:26 using the thick mali cement boards either alone altogether with the magnesium oxide board was not only not standard but would never be used in practice celetex must have known that no properly

02:42:38 celetex must have known that no properly conducted bs841 tests with standard panels would ever achieve br e135 certification if that was the case celetex could have

02:42:50 if that was the case celetex could have arranged for those tests themselves it would have been marketing gold celetex must have known that an assessment report or desktop study based on its bs 8414 testing could not

02:43:02 based on its bs 8414 testing could not sensibly verify the use of celetex rs 5000

02:43:05 5000 in the acm cladding market above 18 meters

02:43:09 meters and certainly for use with a product similar to rbp e55 again celetex have considered that strategy of getting such a rapport or assessment but had abandoned it

02:43:21 or assessment but had abandoned it celetex knew that to use rs 5000 in a cladding system was unsafe it knew that it should not be used behind most cladding panels because in the event of fire it would burn

02:43:33 the event of fire it would burn it follows we suggest that celatex must have known that either the br 135 certification was of no practical value whatsoever in the real market it was seeking to break into or that the certification together with

02:43:46 or that the certification together with how that certification was going to be presented

02:43:49 presented would likely result in use of rs 5000 in circumstances above 18 meters and in cladding systems such as those used in granville and where it was not suitable for use

02:44:02 and where it was not suitable for use the icing on the cake in terms of its marking materials was the nonsensical false

02:44:06 false and irrelevant assertion that its product complied with class zero throughout this can only have been included in order to give weight to the premise

02:44:16 premise of the certificate it satisfied bre 135 and therefore was safe and suitable to use with acms in buildings above 18 meters

02:44:25 meters celetec's only explanation for its inclusion so far as it is understood is that it was useful information without explaining why or indeed why it wrongly said that it was class zero

02:44:37 was class zero throughout when it was not a real mischief in the language of the product literature is that by referring to the rs 5000 as the first pir insulation board to meet

02:44:48 the first pir insulation board to meet the performance criteria of br135 and that it was therefore suitable acceptable for use above 18 meters the impression was given that rs 5000

02:45:01 that rs 5000 on and of itself satisfied the approved document

02:45:05 document that implies compliance via the linear route i.e that it was safe to use on its own

02:45:10 own irrespective of what other components it was combined with to make up a complete canning system

02:45:17 system celatex referenced the br 135 alternative route to compliance for a system but used it to imply compliance via the linear for a single component of that system

02:45:29 for a single component of that system the reference to class zero throughout contributed to the impression that it satisfied the linear route

02:45:36 route neither tranches of literacy sent to harley in august 2014 included the health and safety data sheet relied heavily upon by celetex last thursday in its opening

02:45:47 by celetex last thursday in its opening oral submissions none of the product literature was sent to harvey that was sent to harm he said that ars 5000 was combustible further a health and safety data sheet is not where you'd

02:45:58 and safety data sheet is not where you'd expect to have to look to find details about the fundamental properties of the insulation that affected the range of applications for which it was or was not suitable the product literature did not direct

02:46:10 literature did not direct readers to the health and safety data sheet to find out it was building regulation compliant as now suggested by celetex after the contract

02:46:20 contract made by celetex with harvey there were further correspondence between them throughout the rest of their year on the 17th of november 2014 grenfell tower was identified on a list of must-win projects which

02:46:32 on a list of must-win projects which were sent to paul lake the managing director of songkoba uk during november 2014 as outlined in our written submissions celetex was sent information during those exchange exchanges which showed

02:46:44 those exchange exchanges which showed that

02:46:45 that the celetex was to be used with rain upon four millimeter acm but it was to be used in cassette format and that the rs-5000 was going to be fixed directly to the existing concrete

02:46:56 fixed directly to the existing concrete walls of grenfell tower and not to a steel frame what celatex hoped would happen on the back of the bre-135 certificate the labc approval and its market material

02:47:07 material in fact happened its product was chosen with an acm which to its knowledge was rb55 for use at grenfell tower block over 18

02:47:18 for use at grenfell tower block over 18 meters in height what celetex also knew would happen happened the celetex in the case of fire burned with tragic consequences

02:47:28 in conclusion the aim of both arconic and celetex was to have their products used in the circumstances in which they were in fact used at grenfell in the knowledge

02:47:40 grenfell in the knowledge that the understanding of construction professionals was such that it was likely that they would be duped

02:47:48 duped they were both expressly aware of the potential consequences and has occurred at grenfell tower chairman members of the panel thank you for your patience

02:47:59 for your patience mr taverner thank you very much indeed for your submissions our next speaker is scheduled to appear at two o'clock so at that point

02:48:12 appear at two o'clock so at that point we will

02:48:13 we will stop for the morning and resume then it is at two o'clock thank you very much

02:48:48 you