Grenfell Tower Inquiry - National House Building Council - Tuesday 14th December 2021 (1/2)
00:00:21 good morning everyone welcome to today's hearing
00:00:25 hearing today we're going to hear evidence from a witness on behalf of the national house building council yes mr william mr chairman good morning good morning members of the panel i now
00:00:36 good morning members of the panel i now call
00:00:36 call mr steve evans please thank you very much
00:00:47 good morning mr evans good morning i guess i'm going to uh take the oath i am uh there should be a testament on the desk next to you could you take it in your right hand please and read the words on the screen
00:00:58 words on the screen i swear by almighty god that the evidence i shall give shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth thank you very much do sit down make yourself comfortable there's
00:01:08 there's water there if you want some
00:01:14 all right thank you yes mr minute mr chairman thank you very much mr evans good morning to you can i start by thanking you very much for coming to the inquiry and assisting us with our investigations
00:01:25 and assisting us with our investigations we're extremely grateful to you uh if you have any difficulty understanding any of my questions or you'd like me to repeat the question i'm happy to do that or to rephrase it can i also ask you please to keep your voice
00:01:37 also ask you please to keep your voice up so that the person who sits to your to your right the transcriber can get down everything you say clearly also please don't nod or shake your head yes or no will have to do
00:01:48 your head yes or no will have to do because it is only those words that go onto the transcript gestures don't if you want to take a break at any time other than the scheduled breaks that we'll take at about 11 15 and at about 3
00:01:59 we'll take at about 11 15 and at about 3 15 this afternoon then please just stay and we can take a break i'm going to be showing you documents during your examination which will appear on the screen in front of you so if you have any difficulty with the
00:02:10 so if you have any difficulty with the documents as we go through please indicate and we can take it more quickly or more slowly as the case may be now uh you provided a witness statement to the inquiry it will appear on your screen in front of you at nhb
00:02:25 403020 please
00:02:29 it's dated as you can see 10th of september 2021 this year is that the first page of your witness statement to the inquiry it is yes yes and can we please go to page 119
00:02:41 and can we please go to page 119 you'll see a signature there above the date is that your signature it is yes have you read this witness statement recently i have can you confirm that its contents are true yes
00:02:52 yes for completeness although we won't be going to it i think you also gave a statement to the metropolitan police yes i did yes
00:02:59 i did yes and we'll put that on the screen that is at met triple zero eight zero six four five
00:03:13 m e t triple zero eight zero six four five
00:03:17 five it's dated as you can see the 27th of may
00:03:21 may 2021
00:03:24 2021 you can see that there have you read this witness statement recently
00:03:28 recently i have yes you have and again can you confirm that its contents are true yes have you discussed either of these statements all the evidence that you're going to give today with anybody before
00:03:39 going to give today with anybody before coming here today only with my legal team
00:03:42 team thank you now i'm going to start by examining your background including your qualifications and your experience before we get to your work at the nhbc can we go please to paragraph seven uh
00:03:54 can we go please to paragraph seven uh on in your statement at the bottom of page two your your inquiry statement at nhb403020
00:04:02 at paragraph seven under the heading qualifications training and career you set it out over onto page eight and uh
00:04:12 and uh to summarize i think you have a degree in building surveying and an mba yes that's correct yes uh and you have an ordinary national certificate and higher national certificate in building surveying correct i do yes yes and it's
00:04:24 surveying correct i do yes yes and it's right i think that you are a fellow of the chartered association of building engineers and a chartered engineer yes that's correct yes looking at 7c specifically on page 3
00:04:36 looking at 7c specifically on page 3 there
00:04:37 there you say this i recall attending training as a building control surveyor on the 1992 version of approved document b of the building regulations which was run by the institute of building control
00:04:50 have you undertaken training on any subsequent versions of adb after 1992 not specific training no right when you say not specific any general
00:05:01 when you say not specific any general training on the job training and uh things in the office if we've done cpd and things like that right
00:05:08 right um just pause there mr chairman i don't know whether it's me uh or whether it's general but my transcript has stopped working
00:05:16 working well as i think i'll work it is just me continue yes but you might need to have yours working it is now good i've just done something to it mr evans forgive me um
00:05:28 mr evans forgive me um your answer uh was on the job training and things like that cpd um was that formal training or was that learning by experience when you say on the job training learning by experience
00:05:40 the job training learning by experience i see and cpd have you done or did you do any cpd specifically on any post 1992 versions of adb i i can't remember right
00:05:52 i i can't remember right does the nhbc in general provide its building control surveyors with regular or indeed any refresher training on adb if there are specifics to be trained on
00:06:03 if there are specifics to be trained on yes
00:06:04 yes when would there be specifics to be trained on so for example uh given the um combustible insulation progress we went through we did training at
00:06:15 at conferences but also disseminated information through a cascade system through the managers down to their team meetings right what do you mean by the combustible trade insulation progress we
00:06:27 combustible trade insulation progress we went through but i think that's sorry that's the the issues we'll be discussing today with kingspan right so during the price during the period is this right during the period 2013 to 16 there was there was formal training
00:06:40 there was there was formal training uh
00:06:41 uh at conferences and dissemination through the through the organization yes yes that's internal through nhpc right who and let's break that down then who designed that training
00:06:53 designed that training so that would have been designed by john lewis our fire engineer right and then approved by myself diane marshall as the head of technical services as it was then right and what
00:07:04 services as it was then right and what what was the nature of the training materials
00:07:06 materials so that would be taking them through establishing what the what um
00:07:11 what um the the the issues we had with with kingspan um what the solutions were the building control alliance guidance note uh and the procedures that they should follow
00:07:21 follow uh in doing in when they encountered these uh the applications with uh combustible results so it was this after june 2014 then once the once technical
00:07:32 june 2014 then once the once technical guidance note 18 had been developed yes it would have been after that
00:07:37 before that time was there any general training provided by the nhbc to its building control officers on the provisions of adb
00:07:48 the provisions of adb approved document b i can't specifically remember if there is if there was any now at 7d on the page in front of you you you say over my career i've gained experience in fire safety since then i have kept up to
00:08:00 safety since then i have kept up to speed in this area by gaining experience through my day-to-day work and ongoing training when you say you gained experience in fire safety what do you mean so throughout the course of my career uh
00:08:12 so throughout the course of my career uh i'd have been checking applications for building regulations compliance um all the way through from small house extensions through to airport terminals
00:08:23 airport terminals uh football stadiums so that involved obviously keeping myself abreast of the approved document b and he fired safety provisions within it right have you completed any qualifications or courses
00:08:34 completed any qualifications or courses in relation to fire safety engineering no
00:08:37 no are you a member of the ife i'm not you're not are you a member of any other specialist fire safety or fire engineering institution i'm not now you go on to um [Music]
00:08:49 [Music] say i've kept up to speed in this area through my day-to-day work and ongoing training what was the ongoing training that you've referred to there so that would have been cpd or if there were revisions to the building regulations such as in 2006 we may have had cpd
00:09:02 such as in 2006 we may have had cpd sessions in the office with our principals and things like that but i can't specifically remember if there's any formal training or specific training on that and who supervised the um
00:09:13 supervised the um distribution or delivery of the training which would result in cpd that would generally be the principals or the seniors in the in the office at the time yes now so who that have been in 2012 2013
00:09:26 in 2012 2013 um they would have been our uh so originally that would be any cascade system would be um through our manage through the managers through the team managers and then down through to their team meetings right
00:09:40 other than what you told us do we understand that you in fact hold no formal qualifications in relation to fire safety engineering and wouldn't hold yourself out as an expert in that regard
00:09:51 regard i'm not a fire engineer no no now before you came to work at the nhbc you were i think a building control surveyor at various councils weren't you
00:10:02 weren't you uh yes i was i was a burning troll surveyor at uh northwest leicestershire district council i started there as a trainee in 1991 and progressed through to a principal um and then i left
00:10:14 um and then i left there and moved to wichita district council is the building control building consultancy manager and then i think you were chief building control surveyor at milton keynes council in and from 2005 is that right
00:10:27 council in and from 2005 is that right that's right and i think it's right also that you worked at the local authority building control labc is that right i was a member of the um what was previously the district surveys
00:10:38 previously the district surveys association which then became labc um and i was there with the permission of my employer um to do work on their behalf yes i see
00:10:50 um to do work on their behalf yes i see and your employer was who that would be uh initially um at northwest station district council uh and then with witch haven and then laterally with milton keane's council i see so you weren't employed by the labc
00:11:03 see so you weren't employed by the labc you were not you you were a member there as a delegate yes i was a delegate on behalf of my authority i see yeah and
00:11:12 and i see and when you moved to the nhbc did you move from milton keynes yes district council there yes i left milton keynes district council and moved to uh nhbc right now you've explained in
00:11:23 to uh nhbc right now you've explained in your statement the roles that you held at nhbc since 2010 which is when i think you started there and let's look at those parts of your statement which deal with that please
00:11:34 statement which deal with that please can we go to page three at the bottom paragraph nine if we scroll down it says the roles i've held at nhbc with corresponding start dates are set up below and then you have six sub-paragraphs
00:11:45 sub-paragraphs january 2010 building control manager august 2011 building control manager business development december 2012 building control manager development and support july 2014 senior area technical
00:11:58 support july 2014 senior area technical manager november 2018 senior technical operations manager and september 2019 head of technical operations i currently hold this position
00:12:10 in your roles as a building control manager up to august 2011 as you say there would you have had any dealings with manufacturers of building products
00:12:21 products um very rarely very rarely and what about in those two later roles from august 2011
00:12:30 again very rarely right what was the difference between building control manager business development and building control manager development and support that we can see at paragraph 9c
00:12:41 support that we can see at paragraph 9c so as the building control manager i managed um five surveying managers who then managed teams of building control surveyors beneath them
00:12:52 control surveyors beneath them i then moved into the building control manager business development role which was i had no direct line management i sorry had line management of a couple of assistants marketing assistants but that was more focused towards business
00:13:04 was more focused towards business development and that sort of thing so i moved away from the the manager of uh managers if you like so you moved away from the actual business of um managing
00:13:15 um managing surveyors
00:13:16 surveyors the day-to-day management day-to-day management and into business development and support yeah i think i see um we may come back to that in due course but just on that what were your main functions and responsibilities as
00:13:28 main functions and responsibilities as building control manager development and support again that was around the business development side but also uh then support around technical areas i i've all the way
00:13:39 technical areas i i've all the way through i would have managed a team of specialist surveyors um
00:13:44 um so they were they were um sort of removed from the day-to-day dealings with
00:13:51 with builder customers and they would be so um
00:13:55 um they would do specialist tasks like research on different parts of the regulations if we had new regulations they would do the the heavy lifting in terms of looking through what those regulations what the changes were what we needed to do
00:14:07 changes were what we needed to do working with our training department on developing the training and that sort of thing right and you had technical specialist surveyors can you name some of them uh gary jarvis right uh and then john lewis joined uh
00:14:20 right uh and then john lewis joined uh the team as a fire engineer and he joined when um i can't be certain of the data we can find out from him i think um now you then became a senior area technical manager on the first of july 2014.
00:14:32 manager on the first of july 2014. what did that new role encompass so at that time we we merged our surveying department and our engineering department together so we had separate um entities within the in the country at so in the
00:14:44 within the in the country at so in the company of engineering and surveying we merged those to form technical services right a much larger department and i took on the role of syria senior area technical manager which was then
00:14:55 technical manager which was then managing um five or six area technical managers which then managed the multi-disciplinary teams beneath them i see and did that role still involve development and support of the business
00:15:07 development and support of the business um it didn't involve quite so much development but obviously supporting those managers supporting the engineers and surveyors that reported into them yes right and was it the same colleagues who reported to you as had reported prior to first july 2014 or was it a
00:15:20 prior to first july 2014 or was it a different group or bigger um there was a bigger group so it was a different group so obviously what we did as we emerging the two departments the managers from the two departments obviously became so engineering managers and surveying
00:15:31 engineering managers and surveying managers became area technical managers and they managed multidisciplinary teams at that time i see and once you were senior area technical manager from the 1st of july 2014 to whom did you report
00:15:43 1st of july 2014 to whom did you report i reported to the head of technical services diane marshall right and what about before that what about from august 2011 so sorry december 2012. uh i've reported to diane marshall at
00:15:55 uh i've reported to diane marshall at that time then who's the group head of building control right so
00:15:59 so uh is it right that you reported to diane marshall really from december 2012 until
00:16:04 until 2018 or
00:16:06 2018 or i still report time are you still reporting marshall marshall's now the um the operations director
00:16:12 director and was there a specific area for which you were responsible um as i recall um as a scenario technical management there was two of us and i looked after the area technical
00:16:24 and i looked after the area technical teams in the south of the country and the south west who was the other senior area technical manager um to start off with i think that was film uh phil neville bill neville
00:16:37 um then jerry crouch right and what uh geographical area did so they would look after the north of the current the north
00:16:48 after the north of the current the north part of the country if you like up into scotland northern ireland where part of wales that sort of area so it's sort of a line between the the wash straight across the north south divided in all south divide yes right
00:17:00 divided in all south divide yes right uh
00:17:01 uh and how did that roll your new role differ from that of the building building control manager development and development and support so in terms of when i was the building control manager i was purely responsible
00:17:12 control manager i was purely responsible for building control when the role evolved into the senior every technical manager we then decided to look at some warranty areas as well so i was also responsible for
00:17:23 as well so i was also responsible for some of the warranty risk management for nhbc and in that role did you deal with manufacturers of products in any way the role generally meant liaison with customers so builder customers
00:17:34 customers so builder customers occasionally manufacturers if there was a specific problem with a specific question around a
00:17:41 a product or something like that and you then became senior technical operations manager in november 2018 before moving to your role of head of technical operations in september 2019
00:17:53 technical operations in september 2019 and that's still that's the role you held in september is that the role you still held as at today it is yes it is can i then turn to look more closely at the functions and divisions of the nhbc
00:18:04 the functions and divisions of the nhbc as an organization you've explained in your statement that the nhbc is divided into various departments and subsidiaries um now leaving aside the consultancy and the research arms of nhbc for the moment
00:18:17 the research arms of nhbc for the moment which i think you touch on in paragraph 20 of your statement is it right that the nhbc's two main functions are first providing warranties or insurance for properties and second
00:18:29 or insurance for properties and second providing building control services for properties yes that's correct and am i right that nhbc provides over 80 percent of the warranty cover
00:18:40 over 80 percent of the warranty cover for new build properties in the united kingdom
00:18:44 kingdom it's somewhere between 17 80 yes and was that the percentage in the period 2013 2014 1516 around that yes it's very between
00:18:57 1516 around that yes it's very between between 70 and 80 percent yeah and i think it's correct uh and we have this from nhbc's solicitors september this year that in 2019
00:19:08 september this year that in 2019 that encompassed some 160 000 properties would that be about right that sounds about right yes it's also right i think that the nhbc is the largest private sector building
00:19:20 the largest private sector building control body in the united kingdom yes in england and wales yes in england and wales yes we don't know there are no approved inspectors in scotland or northern holland and is that through its subsidiary nhbc
00:19:32 is that through its subsidiary nhbc building control services limited it is yes yeah now in his inquiry statement mr lewis john lewis estimates that that is a a market share of some 60 percent of
00:19:45 a a market share of some 60 percent of the residential market would you agree with that
00:19:49 with that yes yes yes it's also right to think and correct me if this isn't right as an organization offering financial services the nhbc is regulated by the bank of england through the prudential regulation authority it
00:20:01 the prudential regulation authority it is yes yeah and it's subsidiary nhbc building control services bcs in its role as an approved inspector for building control services is regulated
00:20:14 building control services is regulated by the construction industry council approved inspectors register limited or see care is that correct it is yes and there's no need to go to this but you tell us a paragraph 15 of your
00:20:25 you tell us a paragraph 15 of your statement on page four that the nhbc is a private company limited by guarantee and has no shareholders is that correct that's correct that's correct so it's a it's a non-profit distributing
00:20:36 so it's a it's a non-profit distributing company but nonetheless makes profits yes yes
00:20:40 yes yes now that's not the case is it for nhbc bcs that's a limited company with shareholders isn't it it has a single shareholder which is nhbc correct and therefore if the building control services subsidiary
00:20:52 building control services subsidiary makes profits it distributes it or can distribute it or them to an hbc yes okay so in essence uh the nhbc makes money
00:21:05 uh the nhbc makes money uh makes profits out of approved inspectors
00:21:11 it functions as its own business in its own business uni yeah yeah with the aim is the aim though for nhbc is to make profits
00:21:19 profits yes yes
00:21:20 yes yes now
00:21:22 now we we could see this let's let's have a look at it actually inq3015087 [Music]
00:21:31 what i'm showing you is the annual report and accounts for the nhbc for the financial year 2017 to 18.
00:21:40 to 18. uh first of all have you ever seen these before i haven't seen these no but they would be familiar documents to you yes yes let's go to page 14.
00:21:53 this is the chief financial officer's statement
00:21:56 statement and if you um look at the figures on the right-hand side you can see that in 2017 uh the nhbc recorded a post-tax profit
00:22:09 uh the nhbc recorded a post-tax profit of 65.2 million pounds yes yes and if you look at the left hand side of the page under financial highlights uh in the second in the last paragraph
00:22:23 uh in the second in the last paragraph in fact
00:22:24 in fact you can get to it from the second paragraph but if you look at the last paragraph it says nhpc's invested assets including cash decreased uh to 1.56 billion
00:22:35 billion uh in 2018. in 2017 it had been 1.595 so a little bit more billion pounds by way of invested assets um are those
00:22:48 by way of invested assets um are those figures familiar to you they're familiar in terms of us holding assets yes yes and the profits that we saw on the right-hand side of the bottom that 65.2
00:22:59 right-hand side of the bottom that 65.2 million pounds for the period ended 2017 would be invested back into the nhbc because it doesn't have any shareholders to whom to distribute them yes it's it's invested back into
00:23:11 yes it's it's invested back into whatever the the functions of nhmcr now you say in your statement page at paragraph 16 and again we don't need to look at it unless you'd like to that the nhbc board contains executive and
00:23:22 nhbc board contains executive and non-executive directors from across the insurance and construction sectors is that correct that's correct and the aggregate remuneration for each of the four executive directors of nhbc in the
00:23:35 four executive directors of nhbc in the year 2018
00:23:37 year 2018 ranged between 466 and 334
00:23:42 and 334 000 per annum now i can show you some figures but does that sound about right to you
00:23:47 to you i wouldn't know if not i think we can take that as a matter of public record but who who sits on the remuneration committee do you know i don't know
00:23:58 do you know i don't know presumably nobody from central government or is that a wrong presumption i don't know you don't know no um
00:24:07 no um the the figures we have that i've given you
00:24:09 you um 466 000 uh for ian davis uh and 334 000 as the lowest for paul hosking do you know how those salaries are
00:24:21 do you know how those salaries are arrived at or benchmarked i don't know you don't do you know whether there's an element of performance-based reward in those senior executive salaries i don't know you don't
00:24:33 i don't know you don't um can i then turn to nhbc's standards of guidance can we go please in your statement to page five i want to show you paragraph 18 you say there nhbc has several separate
00:24:46 you say there nhbc has several separate departments that are relevant to the information i provide below then you go on to say the standards and technical department is responsible for the development of nhbc standards this is the guidance with which builders registered with the nhbc must comply to
00:24:59 registered with the nhbc must comply to enable nhbc to provide warranty cover in respect of those builders developments in the period 2013 to 15 graham perry or held a senior role in nhbc's standards
00:25:10 held a senior role in nhbc's standards and technical department and david alexander white was a senior technical officer in that department this team did not sell their services externally they simply provided guidance internally to
00:25:21 simply provided guidance internally to nhbc for the purposes of warranty cover in particular they did not provide guidance in respect of nhbc's building control services now just to be clear
00:25:32 now just to be clear is this right that builders who wish to have an nhbc warranty on properties that they were building had to be registered with the nhbc is that right yes that's correct right and
00:25:44 that right yes that's correct right and is it also right that they had to comply with the standards that were set from time to time by the nhs nhbc in the standards uh set by the standards and technical department
00:25:55 technical department that's correct yes um you refer to nhbc standards with a capital s what are those
00:26:01 those that's a document of standards a document which covers how or gives recommendations on how a house dwelling should be built and do they
00:26:13 dwelling should be built and do they require anything over and above what is required by the building regulations and the associated practical guidance in some areas yes in some areas what about in fire safety
00:26:24 in some areas what about in fire safety no
00:26:25 no generally in fire safety uh the the minimum standard would be um to meet the nhpc standards would be compliance with the building the national the national building regulations or building standards if you're building in scotland
00:26:37 standards if you're building in scotland i see so if if you meet the building regulations then you comply with nhbc standards at least so far as far safety is concerned yes yes then if you look at 18b you say this
00:26:48 then if you look at 18b you say this separate to nhbc's provision of warranty cover are the building control services it provides through its subsidiary and hbc bcs these services are provided through the approved inspector regime
00:26:59 through the approved inspector regime whilst while nhbc bcs would be paid fees for its services by the builder such fees are also charged to builders by local authority building control departments when they provide the building control services
00:27:10 building control services and hbc bcs predominantly provided its services on projects or developments where nhbc was also providing warranty cover
00:27:19 cover while there were some rare instances where nhvc bcs would provide building control services and nhbc would provide would not provide warranty cover this was not something that nhbc
00:27:31 cover this was not something that nhbc actively sought to do there were also far more situations where nhbc would only be providing warranty services for a project as it was not a condition of that warranty cover to use nhb cbcs for building
00:27:43 cover to use nhb cbcs for building control
00:27:45 control now
00:27:46 now i'm just just approaching that in in stages is there an element of competition between
00:27:53 between uh
00:27:54 uh nhbc bcs and local authorities yes there is yes and how does any the nhbc bcs seek to achieve and maintain a competitive edge
00:28:05 achieve and maintain a competitive edge over local authorities when it comes to building control services
00:28:12 we would generally work closely with builders
00:28:14 builders and we try to ensure that um we have we are superior in terms of technical knowledge so we sell our technical expertise to the to our builder customers
00:28:31 when you say working closely with builders do you mean more closely than a local authority building control officer um
00:28:41 um no
00:28:42 no the difference is obviously operating as a national approved inspector we can work with a builder where they're working across boundaries so across the whole of the country um whereas in a local authority
00:28:53 um whereas in a local authority environment you work up to your boundaries so generally you would you would you would only work with a builder in that area
00:29:01 area um so it's a national developer for example you would only work with that person when they're working within the boundaries of your local authority as an approved inspector and hbc we can work with that builder
00:29:12 with that builder across the country which gives them consistency of interpretation and a consistent level of service which they
00:29:20 they which they expect consistency of interpretation consistency of level of service economies of scale of course there are economies of scale then yes so you can compete on price
00:29:31 then yes so you can compete on price is that right with local authorities generally as far as i'm aware certainly for my knowledge from working within local authorities and then coming to nhpc and hbc are generally more expensive than a local authority building control
00:29:45 and in your experience what is the priority your customers in other words builders
00:29:51 builders have when it comes to building control approvals
00:29:55 approvals they wish to attain the building control final certificate yes um in doing so what is their priority is it let me help you is it price and speed or is it safety and compliance
00:30:09 price is important but as i said nhbc uh in my experience are more expensive than local authorities it is about the support we can give them in building a safe home right
00:30:21 in building a safe home right now the question i put to you may be regarded as unfair because it posits a false
00:30:25 false opposite
00:30:26 opposite is it possible to have fast cheap safe and compliant certificates of building control
00:30:38 sorry can you repeat the question yes i i put to you was it was it price and speed or safety and compliance another way of putting the question would be is it possible to have a a a
00:30:49 would be is it possible to have a a a cheap or competitive fast
00:30:52 fast and safe and compliant process whereby a building control certificate is obtained i would like to think that at nhbc it's an efficient service but it is based on
00:31:04 an efficient service but it is based on my primary role and those of my teams is to ensure that it's a safe building
00:31:12 if we continue nhbc
00:31:17 nhbc it says predominantly provided it's uh and we've seen this already predominantly provided its services on projects
00:31:23 projects or developments where nhbc was also providing warranty cover i think that's at the foot of the previous page if we can just flick back to that please page five
00:31:35 foot of page five and you say there um there were rare insta some rare instances where nhbc bcs would provide building control services and
00:31:45 and not warranty cover that was not something that nhbc actively sought to do now just breaking some of the points of that sentence up what would be a reason in those rare
00:31:56 what would be a reason in those rare cases that the nhbc would provide building control services but not provide warranty services so that would be in instances where the customer did not require a warranty so
00:32:07 customer did not require a warranty so that could be a commercial premises or it could be student accommodation or something like that so somewhere where they didn't need a warranty
00:32:21 and why was it that the nhbc would not actively seek that situation nhbc
00:32:29 nhbc provides building control services to support its warranty customers
00:32:34 so and generally the standard of work which a builder would do to get onto our register would mean that to a certain standard
00:32:44 standard and
00:32:45 and as an approved inspector you can choose which customers you you work with so we chose that we want as nhpc where we can choose to work with customers who want to work with us because they're on our register we would
00:32:57 because they're on our register we would prefer to do that i see
00:33:01 i see now you say that it wasn't a condition of the warranty that nhbc be used for building control services that's correct why was that i believe that goes back to the um some
00:33:13 i believe that goes back to the um some competition authority
00:33:15 authority um
00:33:16 um with 80 of the market if we started to demand that people always also use us for building control that could be seen as uncompetitive i see now the extended warranty cover that the
00:33:27 now the extended warranty cover that the nhbc provides for years two to ten of the building's life for non-compliance with the building regulations i think is only available if building control was provided by nhbc's bcs that's correct
00:33:39 provided by nhbc's bcs that's correct isn't it
00:33:41 isn't it sorry could you repeat the question is it right that the extended warranty cover
00:33:45 cover that the nhbc provides so years two to ten of a building's life in other words pace to practical completion
00:33:56 to practical completion where it's warranting compliance with the building regulations is only available if building control was provided by an hbc bcs
00:34:08 no that's not correct that's not correct you say that's wrong so just to be clear are you saying that extended warranty cover for compliance is available or was available even
00:34:20 is available or was available even though it was the local authority building control officer who had signed off so if the local authority building control department is signed off and well it doesn't matter if we're
00:34:31 and well it doesn't matter if we're if we're not providing the the building control
00:34:36 even if providing we're happy that that home has been built in accordance with the standards we will offer the 10-year warranty
00:34:49 i see and and so is it right that in relation to the provision of an nhbc warranty nhbc's standards must have been met but it wasn't a requirement that um the
00:35:01 wasn't a requirement that um the customer undertook the building control work on the project through bc um through nhbc's bcs that's correct right i see
00:35:13 so you just to be clear you you don't tie in use of your bcs offering with the cover no
00:35:20 no nonetheless is it right that you um but let me let me ask you this
00:35:26 this um
00:35:27 um where the nhbc does offer warranty cover where its own bcs through
00:35:35 through building control services has
00:35:39 has signed off on the building control certificate and hbc is effectively ensuring builders against risks substantially within within its own control through the bcs
00:35:50 within its own control through the bcs subsidiary
00:35:56 yes we have obviously where we're providing building control we have more yeah we have more of a presence on site well we have more of a presence on site yeah yeah but in fact you're you're doing two things aren't you
00:36:07 doing two things aren't you in those in the vast majority of cases i think this is right namely providing building control services and then ensuring uh the
00:36:19 services and then ensuring uh the correctness of those building control services
00:36:24 we're we're ensuring against our nhpc standards
00:36:27 standards yeah so they're two functions so the the insurance is offered on the basis that these um the builder has built in accordance with nhpc standards building control is a statutory function
00:36:39 building control is a statutory function and as a b as as building control we issue a building control final certificate yeah so the result of which in very overall terms is is this right that the nhbc is underwriting
00:36:51 is underwriting the correctness of nhbc bcs's surveyor's certificate on the certificate of practical completion not through its warranty we do that through our scheme of
00:37:03 we do that through our scheme of insurance again as an approved inspector oh i see so let me ask then who pays the premium for the warranty that is paid by the by the by the builder by the builder
00:37:15 by the by the builder by the builder uh and who pays the fees for the approved inspector that's paid by the builder and who pays the
00:37:22 the premium for the
00:37:27 scheme of insurance
00:37:31 so the scheme of insurance is paid by bcs
00:37:37 bcs i see so that's professional indemnity insurance is it yes the bcs with which it protects itself so in order to operate as an approved inspector we have to have a um an agreed scheme of insurance right
00:37:50 an agreed scheme of insurance right i see but coming back to these two income streams it's right i think that that you've got uh two income streams the income stream for building control services and in the vast majority of cases also building con
00:38:02 vast majority of cases also building con also
00:38:03 also premium for the warranty yes
00:38:06 yes yes
00:38:08 yes and the warranty itself covers
00:38:13 covers doesn't it compliance with the building regulations
00:38:17 yes in years one to two it covers everything yeah um and then in years three to ten it would cover um structural uh mainly structural issues yeah i see
00:38:29 yeah i see so at least in the first two years you're getting an income stream from your building control officer and an income stream for selling insurance against the risk the building control
00:38:41 against the risk the building control officer got it wrong
00:38:51 nhbc derives income from both of those areas yes yeah and so that's how you compete with local authorities isn't it local authorities don't offer the warranty
00:39:04 local authorities have a partnership with mdis md insurance services who offer labc warranty so
00:39:15 so too many of our builder customers they're seen local authorities are seen as a direct competitor nhbc able to provide warranty and building control and when you're offering a warranty on
00:39:28 and when you're offering a warranty on the building control officer getting it right
00:39:32 right presumably that's an underwriting exercise is it undertaken by nhbc's underwriters
00:39:40 so nhbc aren't offering a warranty on the building control being right nhbc are offering a warranty based on the builder building in accordance with nhpc standards
00:39:51 standards yeah that's why we don't insist on you using an hbc building control so where you're using another approved inspector or local authority building control
00:40:01 control providing you built in accordance with nhbc standards then we will be able to offer you warranty
00:40:14 let's um look at the bottom of page 2 of your statement
00:40:20 at 5d there you say and this is in relation to the nhbc's guidance
00:40:27 guidance where nhbc issued guidance this would not be of general application in the industry and hbc external guidance would be issued to our customers and it would indicate our requirements for a builder to obtain an nhbc warranty and where
00:40:39 to obtain an nhbc warranty and where applicable nhbc building control sign-off but it would not and did not purport to set standards throughout the industry as detailed below further checks would be carried out by nhbc before a building was able to obtain an
00:40:51 before a building was able to obtain an nhbc warranty and before nhbc bcs gave any building control sign-off in particular through our escalation process where the issue was one of fire safety
00:41:02 safety now just pause there and let's go also please to another part of your statement page 13
00:41:07 page 13 paragraph 36
00:41:10 you say there under 13 a it is important to understand that nhbc was only assuming its guidance for the purposes of its own customers this was so that those customers could see what
00:41:21 so that those customers could see what nhbc required both in terms of building control and warranty cover if the builder could show it followed the guidance we were likely to accept the project in question although we would always check each project on a
00:41:32 always check each project on a case-by-case basis and then at b nhbc was only issuing guidance if a builder came to us with an alternative way of demonstrating compliance with the building regulations or nhbc standards we would consider that
00:41:44 or nhbc standards we would consider that in terms of warranty cover the concept was that if a builder followed nhbc standards
00:41:51 standards an hbc would be willing to offer warranty cover as it considered that this would be an appropriate risk to ensure
00:41:58 and then you talk about benchmarking at the labc in paragraph c now you say here that nhbc are only issuing guidance to its own customers but in effect i think you've agreed
00:42:09 but in effect i think you've agreed before those customers make up a very significant proportion of the english and welsh construction industry yes
00:42:17 yes and they're builders and architects uh and those involved in in construction yes yes yes and do you accept i think i think you do that the nhbc covered the
00:42:28 i think you do that the nhbc covered the majority of the market in terms of warranty and building control services the majority of the market in terms of warranty
00:42:36 warranty but not necessarily the majority of the market for building control certainly we had a high proportion for new homes in building control
00:42:47 building control but obviously the building trial market is much bigger than just new homes yes and
00:42:53 and as you say there are other bodies in the industry the labc being one that who also use those standards
00:43:04 they can choose to use those standards but that is their their choice they're not issued for those bodies their issue we issue guidance for our customers yes yeah yes as you say you don't actively
00:43:15 yeah yes as you say you don't actively encourage or promote it but that's what people do
00:43:18 people do nabc being one example
00:43:22 i have myself when i was at local authority building control i used nhbc standards as a benchmark occasionally um yes yes benchmark is your word uh
00:43:36 yes yes benchmark is your word uh it's right i think if we haven't established this then then correct me but nhbc has no legal or regulatory standing to issue guidance to industry it's it's a private company like any other
00:43:48 like any other yes that's correct yes
00:43:52 and i think you say also in the next paragraph done if we can just look at that please just scroll down page 13 i was involved apparent 37 i was involved in issuing
00:44:03 apparent 37 i was involved in issuing external guidance from nhbc on fire safety and when you say external guidance do you mean for customers of nhbc or for the general building industry
00:44:14 industry for
00:44:15 for um nhpc
00:44:17 um nhpc if it was nhpc guidance it would be for nhbc customers if it was through the bca it would be for the building control industry
00:44:28 yes and we we see that the guidance we will come to this but the guidance that the nhbc sent out to builders in march 2015 that adopted the bca technical guidance
00:44:39 that adopted the bca technical guidance nate 18
00:44:41 nate 18 issue naught from june 2014 that was guide was that guidance for industry regardless of whether they were nhbc customers or was it only for customers of nhbc
00:44:54 for customers of nhbc only for customers of nhbc right and what about the nhbc guidance released in 2016
00:44:59 2016 entitled acceptability of common wall constructions containing combustible materials in high-rise buildings was that for industry or was it only for nhpc customers only for nhpc customers
00:45:14 well we'll come back to those in due course and their influence but let's turn next to the bca that was established in 2008 i think while you were working at labc wasn't it
00:45:27 while you were working at labc wasn't it yes it was yes who in terms of act the actual individual or individuals had the idea of creating the bca
00:45:37 i couldn't say who the individuals were whose idea it was to to bring that grouping together why was it created so originally it was created to tackle
00:45:48 so originally it was created to tackle the
00:45:49 the the challenges at that time that the building control industry was facing
00:45:55 facing um a particular example of that would be there was a an article by george monbiot the uh journalist um with a headline in the times that building control surveyors in england and wales were
00:46:08 surveyors in england and wales were killing children in africa that that wasn't the exact um
00:46:14 um title but the um the thrust of the article was that
00:46:20 was that by not in or by not um enforcing the new um thermal regulations um building control in this country all the constructions in this country was
00:46:31 the constructions in this country was affecting obviously children in africa is a
00:46:34 is a so there's those sort of challenges that were around so i believe the professional institutions labc
00:46:40 labc association of consultant approved inspectors rics and cabe at that point of the charter association of building engineers
00:46:49 engineers um got together to sort of form an alliance
00:46:53 alliance that
00:46:54 that could dispel those sort of um
00:46:59 um sort of headlines and actually illustrate the good word which building control did so using your example of the george monbiot article
00:47:08 article was the
00:47:09 was the purpose of forming the bca to protect the reputation of the building control industry or profession whatever you might call it it was to
00:47:21 whatever you might call it it was to um increase the uh or to demonstrate the good work which we felt the building control profession did i see
00:47:33 and the nature of the challenge is that you'd come together to address on your example at the very least were reputational rather than to address particular technical failings
00:47:45 to address particular technical failings is that right
00:47:48 i'm not sure reputation would be the right word we wanted to get out the the the the intention was to get out the good work which building control did so actually illustrate the
00:47:59 so actually illustrate the the majority of the the good work we did right yeah so this wasn't just to be just to press you a little bit the purpose of the bca on what you're telling us i think was is not to correct technical errors of the past by um
00:48:11 technical errors of the past by um through a group uh but uh to get a message out that the good work you about the good work you were doing to correct an impression the the formation of the bca was on that basis yes yeah now the members of the
00:48:23 basis yes yeah now the members of the bca are five industry groups i think and just i'll just run through them with the acronyms
00:48:29 acronyms um the acai yes and the nabc yes c-a-b-e yes c-i-o-b i believe cib wasn't a founding member i believe i seem to remember they joined
00:48:40 believe i seem to remember they joined a few a few months later and the other and rics that's correct right who was it or rather why was it that why was it decided that those organizations would be members of the
00:48:51 organizations would be members of the bca rather than individuals themselves um i felt uh at the time obviously they were the the two groups labc and acai represented the the building
00:49:04 and acai represented the the building control bodies themselves so the local authorities and um approved inspectors and then individuals of those and so and then to working labc and
00:49:15 then to working labc and you would generally want to be professionally qualified and you would be professionally qualified to either rics
00:49:21 rics cabe or ciob so those groupings together represented both the building control bodies but also the individuals working within building control i see now the bca
00:49:32 building control i see now the bca describes itself on its website and i'll just quote this to you but because there's no need to go to the website but it's as follows a unique industry group made up of representatives from clients
00:49:44 made up of representatives from clients stakeholders and all the organizations directly involved in building control in england and wales now we've discussed the fact already that the nhbc is the private the largest
00:49:55 that the nhbc is the private the largest private building sector controlled body uh in at least england and wales if not the uk why was it not a member of the uh of the bca when its main
00:50:06 of the uh of the bca when its main competitor the labc was so
00:50:11 so um we are nhbc we're members of uh the acai
00:50:17 acai as an organization labc
00:50:21 labc actually represents all of the individual local authorities so our direct competitors as approved inspectors are the local authorities themselves not labc the body so labc is the at that time was the
00:50:33 so labc is the at that time was the marketing and promotion arm of local authority building control and it represented the individual local authorities so in many ways it was the equivalent of the asia well it was the equivalent of acai
00:50:44 equivalent of acai in terms of representing local authorities so nhbc
00:50:49 so nhbc was amen was or the association with the bca was through its membership of the association of consultant approved inspectors
00:50:57 um but why
00:50:59 but why but it was also a direct member wasn't it
00:51:02 it it wasn't too dark he's never been a direct member of the bc so it was nhbc also um
00:51:08 also um an influencing voice in the same way as the nabc through its membership of the acai
00:51:13 acai yes we
00:51:15 yes we we we allowed such a amount of people such as myself to be involved with bca through the aci so we put people forward excuse me
00:51:24 excuse me the reason i asked you will put to you that the labc was a was a member is because you agreed that it was one of the five that was
00:51:33 that was sorry i was speaking so labc is
00:51:37 labc is abc itself so local authority district surveys association which is local authority which is lebc is not a competitor of nhbc it is a labc district surveys
00:51:49 it is a labc district surveys association is a is a member association representing the local authorities who are competitors of nhbc yes yes
00:51:59 yes yes the abc doesn't represent nhbc does it no aci
00:52:03 no aci yeah represents yes so we see let's not get across across across purposes nhbc is is not the labc and not a member of the labc is it no no
00:52:16 of the labc is it no no the nhbc is a member of the acai the association of consultant approved inspectors yes correct yes so the labc and you agree i think the labc is a
00:52:27 and you agree i think the labc is a competitor for building control services on of nhbc isn't it you agreed with me earlier on in your examination that was the case
00:52:36 the case when i spoke when i spoke about labc i was speaking generally about all the local authorities so within aci they are there are 80 other approved inspectors who are
00:52:48 80 other approved inspectors who are also members of acai they're our competitors as well yeah
00:52:54 yeah i'm getting it positive i'm getting a bit confused so yeah our competitors are the local other building control bodies
00:53:03 bodies and they could be either local authorities or other approved inspectors yes approved inspectors are members of aci and aci represents
00:53:14 are members of aci and aci represents the private sector building control bodies
00:53:16 bodies labc
00:53:18 labc represents the individual local authorities so labc itself district surveys association trading as labc is not a direct competitor of nhbc it represents
00:53:30 it represents the local authorities who are our competitors yes so to be clear then when one looks at the membership of
00:53:39 of the
00:53:40 the uh of the bca the labc is a member yes the nhbc is not a member but participates through its membership of the acai
00:53:51 membership of the acai yes that's correct yes
00:53:56 given my question coming back to it given that the nhbc is the largest private sector building control body in the united kingdom or perhaps at least in england and wales why was it not a member when its main competitor the labc
00:54:09 member when its main competitor the labc was i'm sorry mr malin i think this is introducing another confusion mr evans evidence is that labc as a body is not its competitor the competitor
00:54:22 is not its competitor the competitor is are the local authorities for whom labc operates as an umbrella body for some purposes is that a fair reflection of what you're saying yes sir
00:54:34 reflection of what you're saying yes sir that's correct thank you yes nonetheless its members are our nhbc's competitors
00:54:44 as are yeah the remainder of the aci members now you began your membership of the bca i think at the labc as you told us yes yes
00:54:55 yes and i think it's right to say that you were a founding member of the bca and a member of its executive board you yourself personally yes i was one of the two representatives of labc and in its second year of existence you were chair
00:55:06 second year of existence you were chair of the bca and also performed its secretariat function i was chair yes i was chair and then labc provided the secretariat
00:55:16 not myself it was provided by labc the organization yeah what was the period of office of chair of the bca one year one year i think you were then chair of the bca's technical group from
00:55:27 chair of the bca's technical group from may 2010 until december 2019 i think yes that's correct and you say and you designated to go to it it's paragraph 168 of your statement that that involved coordinating the work of the technical
00:55:38 coordinating the work of the technical group including setting the agenda coordinating the minutes and organizing the follow-up actions yes yes and you took on the role of publishing the guidance notes as well i think didn't you
00:55:49 think didn't you yes yeah and why did you stop being the chair of the technical group in december 2019
00:55:55 2019 uh in august of 2019 i was promoted to the head of technical operations um and frankly i had enough to do right and who took your place in that role
00:56:04 role um so the committee decided that brian stevenson
00:56:08 stevenson um
00:56:09 um would take that role now you say in your statement at page two if we can just go back to that please paragraph 5b
00:56:18 uh nhbc was committed to improving the building regulations regime for instance it permitted me to take a significant amount of time to carry out work on behalf of the building control alliance bca
00:56:28 bca now if the if the nhbc was not formally represented at the bca other than perhaps through the acai why would the nhpc allow you to take a significant amount of time to carry out work on its
00:56:39 amount of time to carry out work on its behalf
00:56:42 so it it um it provided um
00:56:47 um resources to fo so to to contribute to the work of the builder alliance to the aci so aci would
00:56:55 would um so for example on the the technical group
00:56:59 group uh the aci were asked to put forward four members of that group um nhbc allowed me to volunteer for that work how much time was the quite significant amount of time on quotes
00:57:10 significant amount of time on quotes that you would spend carrying out work on behalf of the bca while still working at nhbc
00:57:21 at its height it was probably two days a month two three days a month and can i just show you barry turner's statement we saw this when he gave evidence it's at labc001202
00:57:34 now page 28 please paragraph 92.
00:57:42 now he says there i should explain that the bca was set up as a result of a government review of the building control system and possible changes to the regulatory environment on this issue
00:57:53 the regulatory environment on this issue there was common ground between local authority building control and approved inspectors who were opposed to the proposals to relax building control requirements from this initial purpose of support and promotion of building control the technical group was
00:58:05 control the technical group was established chaired by nhbc with the aim of agreeing where possible the technical interpretation of building regulations so as to reduce the scope for competition based on different
00:58:16 competition based on different interpretations and to achieve consensus a number of organizations are represented on or participate in the bca and the relevant government departments were i understand consulted or advised on the work of the bca and copied into
00:58:28 on the work of the bca and copied into papers circulated to the technical group now general question mr evans do you agree with what mr turner says in that paragraph that i've just read to you
00:58:39 paragraph that i've just read to you that's not all as i recall though right um no i'm sorry to do this to you but let's go back to the bottom of page 28 can you tell us what it is in this paragraph you don't agree with
00:58:51 so my as i say my recollection of the how why the bca was set up was not as a as a result of the government review it was a result of the direct challenges that we were seeing uh in and the misinformation that we
00:59:03 uh in and the misinformation that we felt
00:59:04 felt um about building about the building control industry right so you say he's wrong when he says that the bca was set up as a result of quotes possible changes to the regulatory environment that wasn't it
00:59:16 regulatory environment that wasn't it you say my recollection is different i see
00:59:21 see do you have any idea about a government review which stimulated the creation of the bca any kind of review there was a review of building control i seem to remember when i was at milton
00:59:33 seem to remember when i was at milton keynes council right i can't i can't remember the specifics at this point i see
00:59:39 see were there any proposals to relax building control standards
00:59:47 not that i can recall no right now when barry turner refers there to we better go to the next page if we can please page 29 but when he refers there
00:59:59 please page 29 but when he refers there to a technical group being established and chaired by the nhbc is that a reference to your role chairing the bca technical group from 2010. so prior to the formation of the bca
01:00:10 so prior to the formation of the bca there was a group the labc labc and aci had a joint technical group so as a profession we didn't want to compete on technical standards so there
01:00:22 compete on technical standards so there was a
01:00:23 was a an labc aci liaison group that group was on the formation of the bca subsumed into the the bca adopted that group if you like and renamed it the bca technical group
01:00:35 the bca technical group so there was already a joint technical group in being as between the labc and acai yes that's correct so if that was the case
01:00:45 what was the purpose or was there a purpose to the creation of the bca beyond perhaps the messaging that you've referred to earlier in your evidence
01:00:58 i'm sorry i don't understand the question well um you've already got an organization or joint organization to ensure consistency of technical standards
01:01:08 standards so um given that that was the case what else could the creation of the bca bring to the bring to the party as it were so the yes sorry so the easy of messaging
01:01:17 messaging the labc aci technical group was purely to address technical issues so where there were matters of interpretation of the building regulations if some of the real regulations weren't clear so it's purely a technical right and that group would
01:01:28 a technical right and that group would issue could issue technical guidance out of the profession yes i see the bcaa as an organisation was to address the more procedural sort of joint issues which addressed all of the other challenges to building
01:01:39 of the other challenges to building control if you like and when was the labc and acai joint technical group established do you remember i don't know right do you know from your own knowledge
01:01:50 do you know from your own knowledge whether there had been any instances of competition perhaps prior to the creation of the bca at least based on different interpretations of the building regulations
01:02:09 i'm aware in my career that i have was a pr i have been approached by builders
01:02:16 builders who had received a different interpretation from another building control body and asked if my interpretation was the same
01:02:25 same so you had you come across instances where some building control bodies or approved inspectors perhaps had been more favorable to the builder than others in their interpretation of the building regulations and approved
01:02:36 building regulations and approved documents in those instances where i'd been approached it was generally because the
01:02:41 the the customer felt that the billing trial body was being too onerous they would come to me and ask if i had the same interpretation right my approach would generally be then to pick the phone up to the bill control body
01:02:52 the phone up to the bill control body and say
01:02:54 and say give me the other side of the story please
01:02:57 please i see and
01:02:59 i see and to dig a little bit deeper was that the reason or a reason that the bca was established in other words to ensure consistency in approach to interpretation of the building regulations
01:03:13 the labc aci technical group was formed to
01:03:17 to because as a profession we were in competition for customers but we didn't want to compete on technical standards we wanted to ensure that there was where
01:03:29 we wanted to ensure that there was where in in matters that the guidance within the approved documents gives one way of doing things in most cases and there are alternative approaches there's also some very gray
01:03:40 approaches there's also some very gray areas in there so the the technical group was formed between the two sides of the profession so public and private sector to form consistent interpretations
01:03:53 to form consistent interpretations which
01:03:55 which informed building control bodies what we what the bca would consider would be a benchmark to go by
01:04:01 to go by but would also give our customers um
01:04:07 um you know
01:04:08 you know the view that actually whichever whether they went to public or private sector building control they would get the same interpretation they shouldn't be shopping around for lower standards now this technical group the labc acai
01:04:20 this technical group the labc acai technical group um was it was anybody from nhbc in that technical group
01:04:28 i couldn't i couldn't say by the time by the time i joined nhbc uh and joined the technical group it was the bca technical group i see so the the the joint technical
01:04:40 i see so the the the joint technical group labc acai was merged into is this right emerging yes yes it was subsumed into the bca it was adopted by bca as the bca technical group i follow and when you joined a nhbc who ran that
01:04:52 when you joined a nhbc who ran that technical group uh steve cook right who was a um a surveying manager at nhbc was the chair of that group i see
01:05:00 see now um thank you now can we go please to paragraph 164 of your statement page 59. and look at subparagraph f
01:05:11 and look at subparagraph f you say that in terms of its organization the bca was a professional body that later became a limited company i was not involved in that change as it occurred after my time as an executive
01:05:23 as an executive and then at um
01:05:25 um if you go to page 60 little i
01:05:30 little i you say
01:05:33 you say as it was a professional body regulated itself
01:05:36 itself now first what do you mean by professional body
01:05:43 my view is it represented a profession yes and when you say it regulated itself what do you mean
01:05:54 so as an executive it would decide on who the members of that executive or the who the member bodies were um
01:06:00 um it had a terms of reference right
01:06:04 right i mean in reality it was an unregulated non-statutory voluntary group of trade associations or professions wasn't it
01:06:14 yes yes
01:06:19 uh now we'll come on to some of the guidance notes that we see that the vca issued
01:06:24 issued um you you were asked in your request for a witness statement what the basis was on which the bca was authorized to issue guidance for industry and let's
01:06:35 to issue guidance for industry and let's look at on this same page at your answer at 165a
01:06:42 the bca is a professional organization so the five member bodies were authorizing it to issue guidance that their own respective members may then find helpful the bca wanted to build consensus as to good practice within the
01:06:55 consensus as to good practice within the building control industry now just just to be clear i think you've answered this already but let me ask it one more time the bca never had any regulatory standing with in respect of giving advice or
01:07:06 with in respect of giving advice or providing guidance to industry no no
01:07:11 no no and if you look at 165b mhclg was a papers only quote some quotes member of the technical group it would be copied into emails in minutes mhclg did not authorize the
01:07:23 minutes mhclg did not authorize the issue of any bca technical note but it did see the relevant papers i cannot recall receiving any significant objections from mhclg at any time in my view richard harrell and later
01:07:35 in my view richard harrell and later brian martin who were the key contacts at mhclg would have raised an objection had they seen something that concerned them
01:07:43 them now on what basis did you believe that richard harrell or brian martin or both of them would have quotes raised an objection had they seen something that concerned them what was the basis for your belief in that
01:07:55 was the basis for your belief in that respect
01:07:56 respect i knew both richard and brian through my dealings with mhclg through various working groups or saw them at functions um
01:08:07 functions um and i felt that if they had they were the type of people that if they did see something which they were unsure of or had an objection to they would pick up the phone or contact me or contact a member of the group to
01:08:19 me or contact a member of the group to say they had some views on that right what were the various working groups through which you dealt with richard harrell and brian martin so i've contributed to working groups
01:08:31 so i've contributed to working groups with mhclg um through the the standard review or the optional regulations a housing standards review as it was called so that was a review of the
01:08:40 the the building regulations um and i met so i i work with both richard and brian through those right let's just look at that a bit more closely first of all
01:08:52 closely first of all when was the standards review the housing standards review uh set up
01:09:00 uh set up when did it start i can't be sure of the exact date when did your involvement in it start so i was in i was invited to join a working group which was looking at uh approved document m
01:09:12 at uh approved document m right um access and facilities uh where was this jones again i got it was part of that review i can't remember the exact date i think the the optional regulations were introduced in 2013-14 right let's see
01:09:25 introduced in 2013-14 right let's see and you're the options regulations rights you were the nhbc at that time yes i was yes yeah and that was a working group on which what brian martin was a member you were a member i believe richard harrell
01:09:36 were a member i believe richard harrell uh was the chair of that group right i i'd also through labc as president of labc
01:09:42 labc um i'd had various uh membership or invited to join various groups with mhclg um looking at ad hoc regulations or whatever like that so i i suppose through my career i've
01:09:55 i i suppose through my career i've developed a relationship with those people at mhclg yes i see um you say that in the last sentence that uh richard harrell and later brian martin would have raised an objection had they
01:10:06 would have raised an objection had they seen something that concerned them did that ever happen so far as you were aware
01:10:11 aware not that i can recall no now let's go to page 60 a little bit higher up the page j scroll up to that in the previous
01:10:22 scroll up to that in the previous paragraph 164 j you say this i'm aware that representatives from mhclg and the welsh government would sometimes attend the bca's executive meetings as observers although that practice did not
01:10:33 observers although that practice did not occur in the period during which i was chair of the executive in the early years of the bca's existence i did not know why they did not attend during that period although it may have been because the bca was newly established
01:10:44 the bca was newly established and still developing its profile when did the mhcl mhclg representatives or those from the welsh government begin to attend bca
01:10:55 the welsh government begin to attend bca meetings
01:10:57 meetings i don't know don't know do you know how often they would attend so occasionally as the chair of the bca technical group i was invited to attend those executive meetings to give an
01:11:08 those executive meetings to give an update from the technical group and
01:11:11 and on the occasions i did that i can recall um a couple of occasions i did that there was a representative from mhclg and a representative of the welsh government also dialed in
01:11:23 government also dialed in and
01:11:25 and who was it generally from mhclg that would attend um
01:11:31 um on a couple of occasions i can remember um
01:11:35 um i believe it's a lady called sandra
01:11:39 i can't remember a second name i'm sorry right and the welsh sorry from the welsh government it would have been colin blick
01:11:45 blick and did they ever say anything during those meetings they did they contributed yes yes yeah yeah i think sorry i think they saw the bcaa as a good way of talking to the industry
01:11:57 a good way of talking to the industry both sides of the industry yes basically now and i just before the break if i can just show you two paragraphs from paragraph from page 61 of your statement if we can turn to that first look at paragraph 170. you say
01:12:09 first look at paragraph 170. you say there i was involved in the liaison between the bca and the and other member organizations in my role as chair of the technical group the members of the technical group comprised members of two organizations acai and labc each
01:12:22 organizations acai and labc each organization would provide four members each however we would always ensure that one or more of the technical groups members was also a member of the royal institution of chartered surveyors the chartered institute of building and the chartered association of building
01:12:34 chartered association of building engineers in fact my role as in my rollers chair i would need to check this annually and report to the executive board the reason for that was to ensure that the work of bca was industry-wide having been formed based on the input of
01:12:45 having been formed based on the input of a range of industry bodies the bca guidance would often be used by those bodies as well as technical surveyors and professionals within the building control industry the technical group meetings i chaired would be held at nhbc's offices because i was the chair
01:12:58 nhbc's offices because i was the chair and the bca did not itself have premises i use my nhbc email account for all of this bca correspondence because the bca does not have its own email addresses now then you go on to say my role at bca
01:13:10 now then you go on to say my role at bca was in my capacity as a representative of acai and in turn i was a member of acai as a representative of nhbc in other words i was there with the permission of my employer nhbc
01:13:23 permission of my employer nhbc not as its formal representative that said there are close links between nhbc and bca
01:13:30 and bca also i appreciate that my day-to-day role at nhbc equipped me with the knowledge to carry out the role of chair of the technical group from hbc's point of view my involvement had the benefit of ensuring that we
01:13:41 had the benefit of ensuring that we understood views from across industry and that we were contributing to driving consistency across the industry with a view to raising standards now just a few questions about that
01:13:52 now just a few questions about that is it right that you took time out of your nhbc work to do the work of the bca yes yes
01:13:58 yes yes and you chaired and hosted bca meetings at nhbc
01:14:02 at nhbc at its premises yes yes yes and you used your nhbc email address when corresponding on behalf of the bca yes and drafted and published bca guidance from time to time
01:14:13 from time to time that would generally fall on me to do yes yes so rather than close links as you suggest it's right to think that the nhbc through your involvement um
01:14:21 um was at least in that ex to that extent one of the same as the bca wasn't it no
01:14:27 no you don't say that you don't say no can well can you think let me try it differently can you think of any occasion on which the bca did something in the face of opposition from nhbc
01:14:42 the group would the bca technical group would build consensus within the group i can't actually think of any i can only think of one occasion where the group
01:14:53 where the group disagreed on anything which one of the members brought to the table so the agendas for the group were put together by by me but they weren't all my items i would go out to the group and ask for
01:15:05 would go out to the group and ask for items that they wish to raise we would then discuss them um and generally
01:15:12 generally um the group would would through discussion would agree on an approach or on the question that was being asked and what was the one occasion where you
01:15:23 and what was the one occasion where you can think of that the group disagreed on something that one of the members brought to the table so we were discussing um travel distances within um protected staircases what was the
01:15:34 protected staircases what was the disagreement um we couldn't agree on the distance the the the maximum distance um that would be allowed uh that you could extend the lobby to a protected
01:15:45 could extend the lobby to a protected staircase when you say disagree were you disagreeing about the interpretation of the building regulations the building regulations is silent on the subject the approved document the approved documents are silent on the subject right
01:15:56 are silent on the subject right but we saw some approaches to say for example limit travel distances from a flat entrance door to the staircase um we saw some instances where actually the the lobby to the staircase would be
01:16:07 the the lobby to the staircase would be extended
01:16:08 extended to actually make that distance what we couldn't now that the the the feeling around the table both from labc and from the uh
01:16:16 the uh approved inspectors and as i was actually you know we needed to limit that
01:16:21 that uh on what would be a sensible distance uh and there was we couldn't decide on it on a distance thank you mr chairman is that a convenient moment yes i think it is thank you very much well as mr millet uh
01:16:33 thank you very much well as mr millet uh mentioned earlier we have a break during the morning and this is a good time to have it
01:16:37 have it we will stop now please we'll resume at 25 to 12.
01:16:41 25 to 12. and i have to ask you as i have asked every other witness please don't discuss your evidence or anything relating to it with anyone when you're out of the room thank you all right thank you very much would you like to go to the arsher
01:17:02 thank you mr elliott 25 to 12 please
01:37:21 would you ask this to endless to come back in please
01:37:37 all right mr adams ready to carry on yes thank you thank you very much yes mr millet yes mr chairman um now mr evans we're going to come back later on to the bca but i want to move now to asking you some questions about
01:37:49 now to asking you some questions about when it was that the nhbc first had concerns regarding the use of combustible materials uh in external wall constructions on buildings with a story over 18 meters so that's the topic
01:38:01 story over 18 meters so that's the topic when did that issue first come to your attention
01:38:05 attention first came to my attention in 2013. yes and what position did you hold at the nhbc at the time i think we we know that but just remind us i was the building control manager you're a building control manager what was it that brought
01:38:17 control manager what was it that brought that issue to your attention uh my fire engineer john lewis um i believe we we would have discussed it at one of our one-to-ones um
01:38:28 um and i believe that he mentioned he'd had an approach from wintec at that point right yes um let's see if we can cut through this can we go to nhbc
01:38:39 this can we go to nhbc 50583
01:38:42 please now this is an email run from august 2013
01:38:52 uh you refer in your statement to some emails around this time but not specifically this email and i wonder if we've got the right one if we just have that up please nhb 50s
01:39:03 if we just have that up please nhb 50s 583 if we go to page one second email down here is an email from steve cook to you of the 28th of august 2013 subject kingspan k12 and k15 importance hi steve
01:39:17 kingspan k12 and k15 importance hi steve this issue of using a non-combustible cavity insulation for all floors where there is a floor over 18 meters and the use of cementitious backing boards or not
01:39:26 not is causing a lot of concern to customers compounded by nhbc's apparent change in stance now that we are picking up on it do we have any guidance if so can it be released to all
01:39:37 if so can it be released to all if not can you provide some can we get kingspan to test their k12 stroke 15 insulins to be non-combustible create a niche for themselves in the market
01:39:48 market and solve the issue once and for all now that first was was that an email that you were referring to in your statement when you say in your statement that you recall an email on the topic from steve cook yes yes now
01:40:02 from steve cook yes yes now um
01:40:03 um to the best of your knowledge at this time august 2013 did steve cook believe that k-15 was non-combustible
01:40:16 from reading his email yes i would i would assume that would you have expected that your colleagues at the nhbc would know that phenolic foam was a combustible insulation product as at
01:40:28 combustible insulation product as at that time
01:40:32 yes i would have expected that
01:40:38 what was the issue that steve cook is describing in this email
01:40:44 email do you know as i recall from this the the question was not necessarily around the combustibility of the insulation it was the use of that insulation without a a non-combustible backing board at this
01:40:55 non-combustible backing board at this point
01:40:59 and going to the first paragraph in the
01:41:03 in the the um
01:41:05 the um in the brackets there it says compounded by nhbc's apparent change in stance now that we are picking up on it what was the apparent change in stance that steve cook's referring to there
01:41:18 that steve cook's referring to there i can't recall were you aware of any cases where um this had been picked up on as steve cook says
01:41:25 cook says namely the use of a non-combustible cavity insulation and the use of cementitious backing boards
01:41:33 boards this may have been more an issue in terms of the the change of position may have been around the picking up the fact if they weren't using a a non-cementitious backing board but i
01:41:44 non-cementitious backing board but i can't be i can't be absolutely uh i can't recall i've seen clearly right you you can't help then about what what he meant let's then go to the response that you sent to steve
01:41:56 that you sent to steve uh cook immediately above that can be scrolled to the top you respond to him on the 30th of august 2013 copy to john lewis and you say this steve firstly not for us to get kingspan to do
01:42:08 firstly not for us to get kingspan to do any testing as far as i'm aware they are aware of the issue and it is for them to decide what their strategy is as for their guidance as for guidance we don't have any but happy to ask john to
01:42:20 don't have any but happy to ask john to look at it and if required we can draft something john can we chat about this next week
01:42:25 next week now again can you explain what issue it was that kingspan were aware of that you say when you say as far as i'm aware they are aware of the issue what's the issue there
01:42:40 i can't recall exactly but it may have been around the the use of a uh a non-cemeterious backing board
01:42:47 do you mean by that the use of a non-cementitious backing board um as distinct from the cementitious
01:42:58 um as distinct from the cementitious particle board that was used in the
01:43:01 in the 2005
01:43:03 2005 test
01:43:04 test of k-15
01:43:06 of k-15 and they're therefore a departure from the build-up of that test is that what you mean you know from what i can recall this this original issue
01:43:17 i can recall this this original issue was around um
01:43:20 um builders who or the design would not incorporate the the backing board which in turn would not
01:43:27 not at that point we were also looking at the um
01:43:31 the um the racking effect that that would have on the the lightweight steel frame backing
01:43:35 backing so it sits in front of the the lightweight steel frame and actually in some cases provides some rigidity to that frame so it's a dual issue as well i see um we'd had discussions around that
01:43:47 discussions around that um
01:43:49 we had discussions around that with it internally within an hbc when that had been raised so we get enquiries from surveyors such as such as this so this was from one of the managers but we also get you know my
01:44:02 managers but we also get you know my team of specialist surveys would get enquiries from surveyors as well on different jobs now when you say as far as i'm aware they are aware of the issue
01:44:14 how did you know that kingspan were aware of the issue you've just identified had you discussed it with them as of august 2013
01:44:24 i don't believe i discussed it with them but i believed it was around this time also that um john lewis said we were having conversations about um he'd had conversations with wintec and things
01:44:35 conversations with wintec and things like that so i was aware of the the issue around with kingspan the board that sort of thing so i believe that was referring to
01:44:47 yes um i'm sorry you say as far as i'm aware they are aware of the issue that's kingspan isn't it yes yeah how did you know that kingspan were aware of the
01:44:58 know that kingspan were aware of the issue
01:45:00 i can't remember exactly how it may have been through conversations that i had with john
01:45:04 with john um
01:45:05 um and then
01:45:07 and then so yeah right did you have any conversations with kingspan themselves at this time about this issue at this point i'd had no conversation with the king's fan though now you say in your response that the nhbc didn't
01:45:18 in your response that the nhbc didn't have any guidance on the issue of combustible insulation so what was the nhbc stance or procedure at that time for dealing with buildings incorporating kingspan k15 or indeed any
01:45:30 incorporating kingspan k15 or indeed any other combustible insulation in an external wall buildup at that time that was beginning to cause concern to customers
01:45:41 as far as i'm aware at this point there were it wasn't starting to cause concern with our customers um
01:45:47 um but we so um but our surveyors would have referred back to the bba certificate for the product
01:45:57 product when you say it at this point it wasn't starting to cause concern with our customers
01:46:01 customers as far as you're aware but steve cook is telling you that it is isn't he
01:46:06 isn't he he is but at this point i wasn't aware until stephen and i exactly i i'm struggling i can't recall whether steve was actually and i can't make out clearly from his
01:46:17 and i can't make out clearly from his email whether it's about the the combustibility of the insulation or if it's the fact that combustibility that the the cp borders are the the fact that they're missing cp board
01:46:29 that they're missing cp board so this is the start of us starting to to sort of look into this this problem is it has it manifested itself and what was the nhbc's stance or its procedure for dealing with buildings
01:46:41 its procedure for dealing with buildings incorporating k-15 above 18 meters in the external wall build-up at that point we had no specific guidance
01:46:51 and no guidance but what about its stance did it have a position even informally so the stance would be that providing the material was used in accordance with its bba certificate is third-party certification then
01:47:04 is third-party certification then that was that would satisfy ourselves for building regulations compliance right and was that so not only for building regulations compliance but also for the issuing of warranties
01:47:15 warranties yes i mean yeah yes
01:47:20 it does that tell us that up to that time
01:47:23 time uh august 2013 k15 was being accepted in external wall buildups on buildings taller than 18 meters by nhbc both for building control and warranty services
01:47:37 building control and warranty services yes
01:47:38 yes on what basis on the basis that um it met its if it met its bba certificate
01:47:48 now in that email there you say john can we chat about this next week did you actually have a discussion with john lewis the following week
01:47:59 i can't remember specifically if i did
01:48:04 do you remember what transpired at all even generally well we started to get an understanding of this
01:48:10 of this um so i know john had an approach from um i don't know how i don't know how but he he had an approach from wintec at that point i don't know if it's this point or just after all around that
01:48:21 point or just after all around that period as well so we started to to so we would have started to look at some guidance to issue to our surveyors and but then also digging into a little bit deeper right now you say you
01:48:32 now you say you i think in essence you followed the bba certificate uh
01:48:38 let me just show you what diane marshall says about that so that we can um square the circle can i please ask you to be shown nhb four zeros three four three four
01:48:51 at page seventeen
01:48:56 uh this is her witness statement to the inquiry and you've told us about her role and at the time this is 2013 she was head of technical services at nhbc
01:49:07 at nhbc so just to be clear was that the head of the department which dealt with compliance covering both the issue of warranties and building control approval
01:49:17 it would have been so technical services was responsible for doing the um for the primary for delivering the building control
01:49:25 control but also the risk management of some areas of the of the warranty yes yes thank you now um can we please look at page
01:49:33 page 17
01:49:35 17 paragraph 72 she says this prior to 2015 nhbc's approach towards k-15 which was allowed by approved document b was to rely on the bba certificate for k-15
01:49:46 rely on the bba certificate for k-15 that was first issued on 27th of october 2008. this bba certificate stated that k-15 was acceptable for buildings over 18 meters tall provided that the manufacturer's approval for the
01:49:57 manufacturer's approval for the arrangement was obtained do you agree with that i do yes yes so to be clear on what you've told us this morning just now and what she says
01:50:08 this morning just now and what she says in her statement is this right that before 2015 k-15 was accepted on nhbc pro projects and warranted on the basis only of the kingspan k15
01:50:20 on the basis only of the kingspan k15 bba certificate going back to 2008. that was the basis we accepted it for building control yes does that tell us that there was no separate
01:50:31 that there was no separate independent investigation by nhbc of k15's fire performance
01:50:39 that's correct by
01:50:41 by those
01:50:42 those um in building control in the subsidiary the bcs
01:50:46 the bcs subsidiary and for the purposes of aspects of the underwriting of the warranty so for building control our surveyors would refer back to the bba certificate the third party certification yes um and
01:50:59 the third party certification yes um and ensure that the material and that not just k15 but all the materials would be used in accordance with their third-party certification and what about the underwriters underwriting the
01:51:10 the underwriters underwriting the warranty would they also rely solely on the bba certificate or would they conduct an independent investigation of k-15's fire performance it would be a similar position for the warranties product as well yes were any other
01:51:22 product as well yes were any other combustible materials accepted as suitable for use in the exterior wall construction of buildings above 18 meters
01:51:29 meters uh by the nhbc in and up to late august or august 2013.
01:51:38 i don't know you don't know
01:51:45 now can you tell us what steps the nhbc would take if any when considering a project that was purporting to use acm uh in its cladding system its external
01:51:57 uh in its cladding system its external walls build up now first in relation to building control services
01:52:04 at what period at this time up to august 2013. so again we would have referred to the building regulations and the guidance within the proof document be right and would that be so of those providing building
01:52:16 be so of those providing building control services and the underwriters providing a warranty
01:52:22 so the the our underwriters wouldn't necessarily don't look at every project so we have obviously we have our technical services would offer and would
01:52:33 technical services would offer and would offer the um the technical risk management our inspection teams would then look at that on site and providing our regime doesn't doesn't pick up anything
01:52:44 anything should we about that it our underwriters will not necessarily look at every project
01:52:48 project right okay well we may come back to that in due course um do you remember at the time whether there were any acm products that were accepted for use over 18 meters by virtue of a bba certificate or
01:53:01 meters by virtue of a bba certificate or rather similar certification i can't be sure at that time
01:53:09 now
01:53:12 uh you you say in your august email we've just looked at that you were happy to ask john lewis to look at that that's john as john lewis i think he had just finished a master's
01:53:23 i think he had just finished a master's degree in fire engineering at that time hadn't he
01:53:27 hadn't he around that time yes yes now as a result of this exchange did his position or rather as a result of his just finishing his masters did his position in the nhbc
01:53:38 his masters did his position in the nhbc change to being a specialist building control surveyor due to the fact that he was now a
01:53:43 was now a uh a fire engineer yes
01:53:45 yes so he did he in effect become nhbc's in-house fire engineer he did yes yes now before john lewis became the in-house fire engineer at nhbc who had provided or had anyone
01:53:58 nhbc who had provided or had anyone provided specialist advice in that area
01:54:02 no not not internally at nhpc right was there a reason why the nhbc required the skills of an in-house fire engineer at this time august 2013 having never had one prior to that
01:54:18 there was no particular reason but it was for we'd sponsored john through his degree he'd expressed a desire to become a fire engineer and specialize in that area but always been something i understand he'd been
01:54:30 something i understand he'd been been interested in was sponsoring through his degree and
01:54:35 and it i was
01:54:36 it i was of the idea of what i think myself and diana discussed the possibility of bringing him into the specialist team to use him as a fire engineer but also to strengthen the specialist team because at that point it was it was just
01:54:47 because at that point it was it was just gary and me now going back to the subject of k-15 as at august 2013 doing the best you can to recall it were you aware that k-15
01:54:59 that k-15 was a combustible product
01:55:05 until this issue had started to be around that time i if i'm honest i wasn't aware of the of issue even that it was an issue uh it came onto my radar about this time but i'd never regarded
01:55:17 but i'd never regarded the insulation as a material within the commerce stability
01:55:24 you'd never regarded the insulation as a material of limited combustibility are you saying you'd always known that k-15
01:55:32 that k-15 was not a material of limited combustibility my view would have been that it was a major i'd i've never since 2013 when i first heard about k-15
01:55:44 2013 when i first heard about k-15 specifically as a product i've never regarded it as a material of limited combustibility right
01:55:51 right was there a time that you did think that pir pur phenolic insulation products
01:56:00 products were
01:56:01 were either non-combustible or materials of limited combustibility
01:56:08 not that i can specifically recall no let's move then to october 2013. can we please go to nhb 50587
01:56:24 and we can start i think in the middle of the email chain on page one we scroll down this is an email of the 16th of october 2013
01:56:34 2013 from dave cummins who was the projects of their technical services department i think to john lewis copied to uh
01:56:45 uh this is the one at the foot of page one we scroll over to the top of page two sorry thank you uh we see the email hi john i attended a presentation by bre
01:56:57 hi john i attended a presentation by bre today at london fire headquarters and got drawn into a conversation at the interval by an ai who obviously has had dealings with ourselves over the issue of insulation materials on high rise i.e over 18 meters he's copied me in an
01:57:10 over 18 meters he's copied me in an email below i believe came from john bien that is basically going against what my thoughts are on the use of limited combustibility i don't believe k-15 meets this and one that if this is something that
01:57:22 and one that if this is something that has been considered by yourself as maybe a policy for tech zone could i have your thoughts on this please and if we look at the email below this one
01:57:32 this one if you scroll down you can see it's an email from andrew maple who's an approved inspector to dave cummins who's sending this on to you the same day
01:57:43 the same day and
01:57:46 he says uh dave good to meet you this morning below is an extract of email to designers for a couple of high-rise blocks we are dealing with in stratford colleague at nhbc was john bien
01:57:57 bien and then here's the extract in italics we are happy to provide agreement in principle the use of kingspan k15 so far as part b is concerned we require one fire strategy to document proposal two
01:58:08 fire strategy to document proposal two section drawing showing cladding and insulation and lining makeup three drawings showing cavity barrier stroke fire break provision to openings and junctions between compartment walls and floors with external walls four treatment of penetrations through the
01:58:19 treatment of penetrations through the dry lining five clarification of how plaster dabs achieve an r-value within the u-value calculation six if we scroll to page three six
01:58:32 how proposal is supported by nhbc who according to bba certificate for k-15 still seek drained cavity construction seven actual condensation risk analysis for make-ups proposed
01:58:44 for make-ups proposed so basically is this right dave cummins looking at this email believes that k15 is not a material of limited combustibility can't be used over 18 meters and is now querying that a
01:58:55 meters and is now querying that a colleague seems to have a different view and is accepting k15 now that's my reading of the email i mean you you were copied in on it at the time is that a fair is that how you read it at the time
01:59:08 i can't recall reading it at the time but looking at it now yes yes now we can see steve cook's response at the top of the email chain on which you are copied the next day 17th of october page one
01:59:19 the next day 17th of october page one top please as you can see and it's sent to dave it's sent to dave cummings and john lewis copy to you and
01:59:26 and steve cook says this the extract does not look like it came from john and in any case the pms are advising customers that insulation in cavities on high rise over 80 meters all needs to be of
01:59:37 over 80 meters all needs to be of limited combustibility as per a stroke d that's a proved document obviously k15 does not need a backing board stroke wall it's rigid and is attractive to customers but does not
01:59:49 attractive to customers but does not have that does not have test evidence that it meets the limited combustibility rating k12 does need a backing board wall and does have limited combustibility so is okay for 18 meters plus but is not as attractive as k15 is
02:00:02 plus but is not as attractive as k15 is to customers so is it right that what steve cook here is saying in october 2013 is the k15 is not a material of limited combustibility and so although it's
02:00:13 combustibility and so although it's attractive to customers it can't be used over 18 meters
02:00:24 well what he's saying is it's uh it is it's not a material limited combustibility so it couldn't it should necessarily be used in terms of the linear routes yes and is it fair to say that at that time october 2013 whatever
02:00:36 that at that time october 2013 whatever you might have been aware of before that time you were well aware that k-15 at least according to these um these uh individuals was not a material of limited combustibility
02:00:48 of limited combustibility yes and you knew that as such
02:00:51 as such in accordance with approved document b uh it should not be used over 18 meters should not be used in in accordance with paragraph 12.7 correct i've got the proof document b and at that time the
02:01:03 proof document b and at that time the project managers in nhbc were advising their customers that insulation on high-rise buildings should be of limited combustibility well this email actually says that questions whether that extract comes
02:01:14 questions whether that extract comes from john
02:01:16 from john now at that time yeah i'm saying sorry dude sorry no sorry question it questions whether or not it comes from john the end certainly uh but to be clear
02:01:27 to be clear did you take from this email that by this time pms project managers were telling customers that insulation on any high-rise buildings
02:01:37 buildings should be of limited combustibility yes yes
02:01:42 yes yes at that point mid-october 2013 did you begin to question the bba certificate that for so long nhbc had been relying on
02:01:52 i believe it was around this time that we started to to look at what the bba said and
02:01:57 said and trying to understand what the bba say what it did yes right now do you recall that although these internal emails were being sent within nhbc a little earlier
02:02:09 being sent within nhbc a little earlier that month october 2013 the problem about
02:02:13 about materials of limited combustibility above 18 meters had come to the attention of the nhbc from wintec you remember that i remember a conversation with john
02:02:25 i remember a conversation with john where he informed me yes and wintec were facade engineering consultants weren't they yes yes can we go to nhp 50s 585 please
02:02:36 and let's scroll down to the bottom of the email chain at the foot of page one and over onto page two staying with the foot of page one this is an email from chris macy at wintec of the 4th of october 2013 to dave white
02:02:50 october 2013 to dave white copy to paul savage subject forward kingspan k15 insulation david and then if we scroll to page two it was good to meet at the cwct this
02:03:01 it was good to meet at the cwct this week
02:03:02 week as discussed please find attached a document that infers that k15 is suitable for all applications and is compliant with part b i have marked the relevant text in yellow
02:03:13 yellow our con our concern is that k-15 does not as a material meet the requirements of part b of the building regulations in that it isn't of limited combustibility quite some quotes the regulations do
02:03:24 quite some quotes the regulations do have allowed the use of this material on buildings over 18 meters tall subject to a specific test on the exact form of construction used or alternatively a report from bre that supports the use of
02:03:36 report from bre that supports the use of the material based on an assessment of its specific application or alternatively if it's used in masonry constructions the sales literature from kingspan is not wrong in its content but infers that
02:03:48 not wrong in its content but infers that all applications of the use of k-15 will be acceptable in all events which we believe is not the case k-15 is widely used in industry having spoken to bru we believe it should not
02:03:59 spoken to bru we believe it should not be without the supporting report documentation or test data to confirm its acceptability all underlined as the mode of failure can be affected by subtle changes in design
02:04:10 by subtle changes in design that occur between forms of construction i hope the attached and above are of assistance and we would welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you further in due course
02:04:21 further in due course do you agree with mr macy's summary here about the ways in which k-15 could be used consistently with the building regulations and approved document b
02:04:35 yes so just to be clear in order to be able to use k15 over 18 meters the exact construction would have to be tested yes
02:04:46 yes yes
02:04:47 yes or a report from bre which supports the use of material based on its specific application would need to be obtained yes
02:04:55 yes or from a the bre would be one of the bodies you could get that report from yes
02:05:00 yes and it could only be used in a masonry construction because that's what the k-15 test had been the test that the um the bbo certificate referred to was a part uh one test not one test 2002.1
02:05:14 part uh one test not one test 2002.1 test
02:05:16 test does that approach there from chris macy accord with the way in which nhbc were accepting k-15 on projects in and before october 2013.
02:05:31 we would accept it on the basis of its bba certificate yes so is that a no to my question
02:05:45 double negative there no yes yeah
02:05:52 why was nhbc not insisting that it was only where the design and the buildup of the external wall construction was identical to that which had been tested by kingspan in its
02:06:04 had been tested by kingspan in its ps8414 part one test
02:06:09 so as i accepted
02:06:12 accepted so we would um as a building troll body uh regulation seven allows us to um accept
02:06:21 um accept a
02:06:22 a product
02:06:23 product where
02:06:24 where uh it is installed in accordance with its bba certificate where the bba certificate refers to the fact that it meets certain areas of the regulations so
02:06:36 in this particular case the bba certificate at that time said that the material could be used over 18 meters subject to reference to the certificate holder
02:06:48 reference to the certificate holder which was kingspan right so your answer to that is regulation seven yes
02:06:56 yes so does that tell us we'll come to regulation seven shortly but does that tell us that uh the nhbc uh in relying simply on the bba certificate up to this time
02:07:07 certificate up to this time was
02:07:08 was approving the use of k-15 above 18 meters without seeing the full test data without seeing the details of the wall build up without seeing any br 135 report for what it's
02:07:21 seeing any br 135 report for what it's worth
02:07:24 and without any of the data um indicated by approved document b
02:07:32 so at that time we would refer to the bba certificate and the bba certificate we would assume at that time would have looked at all of that information in order to make the statements it did and
02:07:43 order to make the statements it did and did this email not ring alarm bells with you that perhaps all in the bba certificate that you had been relying on was not well and that you should start
02:07:54 should start immediately examining uh the technical data relating to each individual wall build up being used by customers where they were using k-15 above 18 meters i don't think i was copied into this
02:08:06 i don't think i was copied into this email so i don't necessarily think i saw this one
02:08:10 this one but
02:08:11 but through conversations i had with john lewis we did start to question what was on the bba certificate and that's why i asked john to approach kingspan to
02:08:22 to um
02:08:23 um seek further information as to what information it provided with the bba with in order to for it to make those statements yes now before we move on to the subsequent meeting that nhbc had with windtech in the following month
02:08:35 had with windtech in the following month november 2013. i want to show you two more
02:08:38 more internal nhbc email chains from this time
02:08:41 time october 2013. the first of those is at nhb 50589
02:08:51 all right you're you're not uh on the email chain at this early stage if we go to the first email at the bottom of the chain of page two you'll see who who is involved this is paul williams to brian stevenson steve
02:09:03 paul williams to brian stevenson steve cook jerry crouch and martin white 31st october 2013 morning amanda thorpe has received feedback from a customer that nhbc no longer accepts this
02:09:15 that nhbc no longer accepts this and it's kingspan k-15 on buildings above 18 meters at is as it's considered combustible is this something surveyors have been advised on and if we go up the next email in the chain here's the response from steve
02:09:26 chain here's the response from steve cook copying you in this is where you get involved 31st of october 2013 and he says most are aware and we have discussed at atm meeting
02:09:38 atm meeting steve evans and john lewis are looking to provide some better guidance than a meeting on the subject soon
02:09:46 atm is that what is that area technical managers right and if we go to the top of the email chain we can see the response from brian stevenson the same day
02:09:55 day you see
02:09:57 you see uh and you're copied in on that email i certainly wasn't double exclamation mark please see attached our findings when this was last raised can you explain and i should just say brian stevenson is an area technical
02:10:09 brian stevenson is an area technical manager he's one of the atms can you explain why one of your area technical managers was under the misapprehension that k-15 a phenolic insulation board was a material of limited combustibility
02:10:22 was a material of limited combustibility i can't know it's a pretty major gap in knowledge isn't it for an institution providing building control services and ensuring compliance [Music]
02:10:33 [Music] i would hope his understanding would have been better yet it's a pretty major gap in his knowledge isn't it
02:10:40 yes it is it's a dangerous gap
02:10:47 yes now he attaches three documents to his email
02:10:50 email uh
02:10:51 uh although we can't see this from this version
02:10:54 version um take it from you that there are three um
02:10:57 um one of them is kingspan's k-15 marketing literature uh and uh
02:11:04 uh and uh uh
02:11:05 uh the other two are email chains if we then go to nhb 50592592
02:11:17 uh we can see that this is one of the email chains that he attaches to his email so you would have seen this email chain and this is an email chain between
02:11:28 and this is an email chain between people called kds associates an architecture firm and nhbc and you can see from the top email what the topic is it's canada water a2
02:11:39 the topic is it's canada water a2 insulation on building above 18 meters kingspan cool phone k15 range screen board
02:11:46 board now if we scroll down to the third email down on page one we see
02:11:52 we see uh that here is an email at the bottom uh from juan alberts to chris cooley uh
02:12:00 uh uh
02:12:02 uh chris cooley is at nhbc and juan
02:12:07 and juan alberts is at ads
02:12:11 at ads and
02:12:13 and he says chris the majority of the block 4 which is greater than 18 meters is brickwork with small elements of metal and timber cladding up to seventh floor the eighth floor is set back and will be constructed of a metal rain screen
02:12:25 constructed of a metal rain screen and then if you turn the page he says can we use the standard insulation board kingspan tw55 to the brickwork zones and the k-15 rain screen board to the
02:12:36 the k-15 rain screen board to the cladding zones including the eighth floor
02:12:39 floor is the kingspan cool thumb k15 acceptable to use in our building above 18 meters according to the documentation it is acceptable by building control
02:12:50 it is acceptable by building control and below that email on page two there is an extract from the documentation and if you scroll down under fire performance kingspan cool therm k-15 will achieve the results
02:13:02 therm k-15 will achieve the results given below it says which enable it to be classified by the building regulations as being class naught and low risk by technical standards in scotland and then go down if you pass the test results
02:13:14 go down if you pass the test results to the very bottom of the screen which if we could scroll up we can see the rest of it says this kingspan cool femme k15 rain screen board meets the criteria within br135 for our performance of
02:13:25 within br135 for our performance of external thermal insulation for walls of multi-storey buildings and is therefore acceptable for use above 18 meters in accordance with the building regulations stroke standards
02:13:37 now that's what that's what he says now if we then um uh go to the other email chain so this this is illustrating what it is that that has been sent um if we go to the other email chain that brian
02:13:48 the other email chain that brian stevenson attaches to his email which you saw this is at nhb 50590
02:13:58 and if we look at the bottom of that chain
02:14:01 chain there's an email from chris cooley on the 8th of april 2011. so way back in time if we go to page
02:14:09 2 chris cooley to brian stevenson 8th april 2011 cavity insulation buildings over 18 meters kingspan k15 brian attached the details of kingspan k15 that we agreed could be used in this
02:14:22 k15 that we agreed could be used in this situation i've attached i've i have informed the arch that the k-15 should be used throughout the elevations where the walls are 18 meters or 18 plus
02:14:34 meters or 18 plus not just the areas above 18 meters as he proposed he confirmed that they would carry this out but said that the thermal insulation value was not as good as the tw55
02:14:48 value was not as good as the tw55 now given the dates of the emails uh that you that these two strings that you saw
02:14:54 you saw about three weeks apart can we take it that k-15 had been accepted by nhbc without asking for large-scale fire testing data or an assurance that the
02:15:06 testing data or an assurance that the buildup was exactly the same as the rig in which the k-15 had been tested to bs-8414
02:15:14 bs-8414 part one
02:15:21 the use of kingspan k-15 would have been in accordance or should have been accepted in accordance with its bba certificate and that's all
02:15:31 that providing the builder could demonstrate that they'd met
02:15:37 met the conditions within the bba certificate then yes i would have um assumed that it would have been accepted so to cut a long story short can we take it from this that during 2011 2012 and up at least to late 2013 the nhbc was
02:15:50 up at least to late 2013 the nhbc was sanctioning the use of k-15 in buildings above 80 meters without question as to the underlying data
02:15:58 data we would have accepted the bba certificate for demonstrating compliance right and what about metal cladding that was proposed for build ups what kind of
02:16:09 was proposed for build ups what kind of testing was um
02:16:11 um was that subject to before nhbc would approve it for building control in 2013
02:16:18 um the surveys would have checked if again third-party certification if it met the various clauses within the building regulations right so again just checked against the bba certificate if it had one yes if it had what if it
02:16:30 it had one yes if it had what if it didn't
02:16:31 didn't um then we would exit i would i would have expected um the surveyors project managers to ask for additional information to to satisfy then the building regulations all the standards and all the standards
02:16:47 do you accept looking at what i've just shown you that even at the end or towards the end of 2013 employees of nhbc were unfamiliar with the building regulations and specifically approved document b and the circumstances in
02:16:59 document b and the circumstances in which combustible insulation materials could be used in external wall buildups above 18 meters no i don't accept that but brian stevenson says i certainly wasn't
02:17:11 stevenson says i certainly wasn't and we've seen that that's his comment at the very top of the first email chain in which he attaches the emails i've shown you
02:17:17 shown you and he was showing you those to demonstrate that he was not aware that k15 could not be used above 18 meters so he's not aware that the kingspan can't be used over 18 meters he may well
02:17:29 can't be used over 18 meters he may well be aware of all the building regulations which govern its use i see
02:17:38 so this this is all about the misunderstanding in terms of k-15 how it could be used how it was classified and that started us asking questions of of kingspan itself and the bba
02:17:49 bba now the second email chat i want to show you is that nhb50594
02:17:55 and if we start on in that email run please at page three
02:18:02 the very bottom the second email chain from the bottom uh in fact i can show you the last email chain it's probably best it's from paul williams who's an area technical manager
02:18:13 williams who's an area technical manager and atm
02:18:14 and atm to the southwest area technical team that was i think your team at the time wasn't it
02:18:19 wasn't it it was one of my teams it was one of those below the wash yes yes um surveyors all amanda raised a question on the use of kingspan k15 insulation the wall constructions in buildings over 18 meters
02:18:30 18 meters steve evans and john lewis are currently reviewing whether we can accept this product for use in this situation as we have doubts with respect to the combustibility aspect of the product we will continue to accept it in ongoing
02:18:42 we will continue to accept it in ongoing projects that have started and where it is being built in we won't be accepting it on new projects until we've carried out further investigation stroke research into the combustibility aspect
02:18:53 research into the combustibility aspect of the product
02:19:00 and then if you go up the email chain to the next one we have an email at the foot of page three from chris cooley to brian stevenson a few days later 8th november 2013.
02:19:12 a few days later 8th november 2013. brian any idea how long steve and john will take as we are involved with the design team meetings we need to pass on our requirements at the outset of the design process if we are not going to accept k15 what are the alternatives
02:19:24 accept k15 what are the alternatives as far as we are aware there are no other fame insulation boards that meet the requirements so all high-rise will be forced to use rockwool as you can imagine this will cause a major issue with our customers as they
02:19:36 major issue with our customers as they all use board insulation to gain their u-values i hope steve is ready to take the barrage of inquiries
02:19:45 do you agree looking at that that many if not all nhbc high rises were using rigid foam insulation predominantly for cost reasons and to meet you value requirements
02:19:59 meet you value requirements it was used on a high proportion of those buildings yes high proportion do you know what and and generally to because of its performance in terms of thermal uvos i couldn't i couldn't
02:20:10 thermal uvos i couldn't i couldn't speculate on the cost aspect and can you give us an idea of how high these proportions were what sort of proportions are you talking about i couldn't know
02:20:22 do you agree that that for nhbc to say that they would no longer accept those forms of insulation combustible insulation on buildings above 18 meters was going
02:20:33 on buildings above 18 meters was going to have a massive effect on its own business
02:20:38 it would have a massive effect on our builder customers in terms of then asking them to change their specification yes
02:20:48 and that is is this right why it was uh that chris cooley anticipated uh that
02:20:55 uh that you steve evans that's the steve i think was gate was had to be ready to take the barrage of inquiries yes yes
02:21:03 yes yes let's then go back to the meeting and with wintec in november 2013. can we please go to nhb
02:21:11 nhb 506
02:21:15 and page four in that email run
02:21:25 now uh this is an email from john lewis to you graeme perrier dave white and gary jarvis of the 15th of november 2013 subject combustible cladding systems in buildings exceeding 18 meters in
02:21:37 in buildings exceeding 18 meters in height notes from wintec meeting and if we look at the first line of the email we can see that john lewis says this hello all some notes from this morning's meeting together with the first draft of an internal guidance note
02:21:51 first draft of an internal guidance note now we'll look at the internal guidance note shortly i just want to focus with you if i can please on the notes of the meeting
02:21:58 meeting and at point 2 it says this wintec outlined the route to compliance as recommended in adb2 the procedure is and then there are four bullet points set out there
02:22:10 bullet points set out there um in some detail uh and i don't want to read them all out to you because it long but you can see that the first bullet point refers to paragraph 12.7 of adb
02:22:21 paragraph 12.7 of adb limited combustibility requirement uh then the second bullet point use of a material of limited combustibility or malk will meet the requirements of adb2
02:22:32 malk will meet the requirements of adb2 and say b4 that's external flame spread uh definition is stated in table a7 european classifications a1 or a2 third bullet point is the alternative route
02:22:44 bullet point is the alternative route para 12.5
02:22:47 para 12.5 and i'll read that to you is for the client to submit evidence to us that the complete underlined proposed external cladding system has been assessed according to the acceptance criteria in pr 135 the method of determining this is
02:23:01 pr 135 the method of determining this is to carry out a fire test in accordance with bs8414 part 1 if the cladding is fixed to the face of an external masonry stroke concrete wall external wall or
02:23:12 or bs-8414 part 2 if the cladding is fixed to and supported by a structural steel frame the bs 8414 tests do not give a pass fail answer because the data obtained is used by different bodies
02:23:24 obtained is used by different bodies with different minimum requirements however for building regulations any test using this method needs to be supported by proof that the acceptance criteria of br135 have been met
02:23:36 criteria of br135 have been met refer to pages 19 and 23 of br 135 2013 for details of these and then the fourth the client may instead submit a desktop study report
02:23:47 instead submit a desktop study report from bre
02:23:48 from bre stating whether in bre's opinion br135 criteria will have been met such a report will be based upon test data which bre already has in its possession and so this option will be of no benefit
02:24:00 and so this option will be of no benefit if the products have not been already tested by bre in multiple situations uh stroke arrangements other test bodies chilton warranted fire would also be acceptable but these bodies are not known to have any test data
02:24:13 known to have any test data now uh
02:24:16 that information is there set out and then paragraph three if you just scroll down deals with uh thermosetting insulants
02:24:23 insulants and it says thermosetting insulins rigid polyurethane foam boards are combustible
02:24:30 one large manufacturer undertook a successful br-135 bs-84141 test using their insulation as part of the cladding build-up and are now stating that it is an acceptable product for use in walls exceeding 18
02:24:42 product for use in walls exceeding 18 meters however this statement appears to be flawed because and then it sets out what that is what those flaws are you can see them there in those three bullet points i didn't want to read them out aloud now um the general question
02:24:54 out aloud now um the general question just having shown you some of the detail here in this email is this was the information as recorded here in john lewis's note of the meeting provided by wintec at that meeting about the use of combustible
02:25:06 meeting about the use of combustible materials
02:25:08 materials new information to you and your colleagues
02:25:13 uh no i don't believe it was yeah
02:25:18 does what he sets out here accord with your recollection of what was discussed at that meeting i wasn't at that meeting you weren't at the meeting no
02:25:29 in the third paragraph as the references i've read you one large manufacturer when you received this email did you know who it was that john lewis was talking about
02:25:40 talking about yes who was that kingston yes and the
02:25:44 and the insulation was
02:25:47 was uh k-15 yes
02:25:51 now among other notes that john lewis takes from that meeting there's a point at page five i want to ask you about we can turn to page five next page paragraph six class naught
02:26:03 class naught does not infer any resistance to combustibility it is solely a measure of the spread of a flame across the surface was that something that you were aware of in 2013
02:26:15 of in 2013 yes
02:26:15 yes was that something that so far as you were aware was well known to your colleagues at nhbc in 2013. yes
02:26:23 did you know well do you know now why it was that wind tech felt they had to mention this in this meeting i don't know i believe it was just a general discussion around the uh
02:26:34 general discussion around the uh regulatory framework right
02:26:37 right you don't know did you have a discussion with john lewis about why it was that class naught had come up for discussion in this context
02:26:44 context oh i didn't know
02:26:49 might it be the fact and tell me if this is wrong but this very basic principle had not been understood by your customers and needed to be clarified
02:26:58 um
02:27:08 it could be but i say i wasn't at the meeting so i can't understand the context i can't give you any information in the context it was
02:27:14 it was it was raised just in general thames at the time were you aware of any degree of confusion in the construction industry about
02:27:22 about what class north meant and what it what it stood for certainly subsequent meetings i had with builders yes there was some confusion
02:27:34 and in summary what was that confusion builders would often see if a product had class o that they would also uh assume that it was also a material of limited
02:27:45 was also a material of limited combustibility were you surprised to learn that your customers had uh were laboring under that confusion in some cases yes
02:27:56 in some cases yes right
02:27:59 right uh and if we stick with this page and look at the next paragraph it says this there is a problem that other bcb's are not applying the criteria this is likely to be as a result of a lack of knowledge we should
02:28:11 result of a lack of knowledge we should be aware that by following the above approach we may be seen as being awkward stroke obstructive if another bcb is willing to accept it as such should the issue be raised via the building control via the building control alliance etc
02:28:23 via the building control alliance etc wintek would be willing to give talks straight presentations on the subject was john lewis uh a a delegate at the bca at the time no no
02:28:36 a delegate at the bca at the time no no do you know who it was and i know you were not on this um at the meeting but do you know who was who raised the idea of having the bca issue guidance on the matter it may have been john
02:28:47 it may have been john um it may have been that as a result of um if wind tech was seeing different building control bodies applying different standards which um that
02:28:58 that john put it forward as a the building control alliance as a a way of addressing all of building the whole of the control industry
02:29:13 now paraphrasing some of the rest of this email chain if we scroll up from page three up up page three we can see that john lewis forwards the notes of this meeting on to brian
02:29:24 notes of this meeting on to brian stevenson
02:29:26 stevenson at the bottom of that page and then byron stevenson uh responds to you uh guys has this technical guidance note being approved as if so i'd like to cover at my team meeting on friday
02:29:38 cover at my team meeting on friday and then if we go up to page two john lewis responds to that and says hello brian no not yet it's just the first draft at this stage please don't circulate it and if we go to the next
02:29:50 circulate it and if we go to the next email up in the chain at the top of page two we can see that you then write to john lewis and others including diane marshall
02:29:57 marshall on the 19th of november 2013 and you say hi all i have a bca technical meeting on 9th december if we can format this note into bca format i can get it tabled and hopefully agreed as bca policy guidance
02:30:09 hopefully agreed as bca policy guidance john how will this affect the kingspan boards that sparked pardon the pun the issue off
02:30:15 issue off first do you know whether any of those who are copied into this email chain were either members or delegates at the bca
02:30:24 i think i think diane marshall was a member of the executive through her professional association the chartered association of building engineers
02:30:37 was this first draft of what was to become the bca technical guidance note 18
02:30:42 18 yes i believe it was and then we can go to john lewis's response
02:30:49 response if we go to the bottom of page one this is also 19th november 2013. you you are a recipient of this together with brian stevenson hello steve no problem i'll change the format and recirculate it and then he
02:31:01 format and recirculate it and then he says this from what i gather from wintec kingspan k15 was tested in one instance on a masonry wall construction on this basis kingspan claim that it is suitable for use in buildings over 18 meters high
02:31:12 for use in buildings over 18 meters high but when you dig down to the detail it's only acceptable if the wall construction is exactly the same as that tested most of our old most of our schemes are still framed with a metsec or similar external
02:31:24 framed with a metsec or similar external wall buildup and so the kingspan test doesn't hold true and if we follow the adb and br 135 guidance we shouldn't be accepting it even with a cementitious liner board the
02:31:36 even with a cementitious liner board the product is still combustible and so doesn't meet adb2 recommendations according to wintek kingspan proposed to test multiple combinations of cladding liner and insulation but didn't see this
02:31:49 liner and insulation but didn't see this through
02:31:50 through after the first test hope this helps now first do you disagree with what john lewis says here about nhbc accepting k15 or other combustible
02:32:02 accepting k15 or other combustible materials over 18 meters
02:32:06 i agree in terms of the the linear routes
02:32:09 routes however the product then had a bba certificate which said it could be used in accordance with paragraph 12.7 of adb2
02:32:18 adb2 over 18 meters where it was referred to the certificate holder
02:32:22 holder so in that in that basis that was on the basis that we could we could accept it well um
02:32:29 well um hold on
02:32:31 hold on you're referring there to the bba certificate version which referred to 12.7 which is the linear route yes sorry yes yes right so i'm not following then
02:32:42 so i'm not following then because if it's not a material of limited combustibility it could not satisfy the linear route under 12.7 this this started to cause the questions that we had in terms of why was bba
02:32:57 that we had in terms of why was bba saying that it was a material combustibility indeed so can we take it from that that as at november 2013 at the latest looking at this email
02:33:08 the latest looking at this email the nhbc knew that they shouldn't be accepting combustible materials in
02:33:14 in an external wall buildup of a building over 18 meters except in the specific circumstances set out by wintek at the meeting and as recorded in the email
02:33:25 recorded in the email or where it had a bba certificate which verified that it could be used in that position well you say that but would that not be susceptible to the
02:33:36 would that not be susceptible to the problem that the bba certificate was not covering any any buildings other than those specifically
02:33:47 other than those specifically with the build up as tested by kingspan whereas your you are accepting many more
02:33:55 the bba certificate at that time did not put a restriction on was not clear and did not put a restriction on the fact that it could only be used in the tested configuration the bba
02:34:07 the tested configuration the bba certificate at that time stated that it could be used that was suitable could be used in accordance with paragraph 12.7 and could be used in buildings over 18 meters
02:34:18 meters subject to reference to the certificate holder
02:34:23 so on on that basis as a building control body we accepted that well sorry i'm interested in this can i just ask you this
02:34:35 you had to be satisfied presumably before you gave approval to the use of k-15 that it the use
02:34:41 the use was covered by the certificate if it wasn't going to be employed in the configuration as tested which wasn't the case in mostly you would have to get
02:34:53 the case in mostly you would have to get some assurance wouldn't you that there had been a reference to the certificate holder and that the certificate holder had given
02:35:00 had given approval did you ever do that
02:35:06 um i can't verify every job that we accepted k-15 if that was done though well can you can you give any comfort uh about the
02:35:17 can you give any comfort uh about the fact that you ever did it i can certainly say from the 2nd of december of this year in 2013 when i um issued an email around to
02:35:28 um issued an email around to all of our teams that that should be the case
02:35:32 case so should we understand that before you sent that circuit around people did not get an assurance from kingspan no
02:35:41 no i would hope as i said i would rely on my surveys referring to the the bba certificate seeing that it needed reference to the to the
02:35:51 to the certificate holder and either and seeking assurance from the builder that they had that did you ever or do you know if any of your surveyors actually
02:36:02 actually saw
02:36:05 saw a copy of some form of assurance from kingspan
02:36:09 kingspan i'd be interested to know what it said you see yeah i don't i don't but there are examples which we may come to um they're where kingspan where we've seen letters from kingspan
02:36:20 letters from kingspan and which were issued on that basis right well perhaps i better be a patient and see if we come to them yes mr miller thank you and we will um
02:36:31 and we will um just at this point though you were aware weren't you that the majority of the schemes that the nhbc were providing services for whether it's uh underwriting uh or whether it's uh
02:36:44 uh or whether it's uh building controlled approval were still framed
02:36:50 word uh with sorry um yeah so the buildings themselves could be steel or concrete frame but they they there was a lightweight steel frame infill yes
02:36:59 and the majority of those steel frame buildings above 18 meters where they used insulation were using k15 yes
02:37:07 i was aware that our high proportion of them were yes i couldn't tell you the exact figure yes
02:37:18 even though in fact the bba certificate uh
02:37:21 uh referred made no reference to any test done
02:37:24 done by kingspan in respect of k-15 under bs-8414
02:37:29 bs-8414 part 2 2005 for steel framed buildings the bba certificate referred to a test but the bba certificate in its
02:37:39 in its conditions of use did say that the material could be used in accordance with paragraph 12.7 well we'll come to the bba certificate which is now
02:37:50 which is now a little bit like banquo's ghost we will come to it in due course before we do can i just take you then to the attachment that john lewis refers to as the first draft of an internal guidance
02:38:01 the first draft of an internal guidance note
02:38:02 note um that we will find at nhb50605
02:38:10 and we can see the heading of this document
02:38:13 document nhbc branded nhbc building control services limited technical guidance note xx use of combustible cladding materials in residential buildings
02:38:24 and if
02:38:26 if you um
02:38:29 you um look at that uh sentence and the one underneath it use of combustible cladding materials in residential buildings we see the word cladding there don't we
02:38:38 don't we yes why why why cladding i don't know i didn't title this to starting
02:38:45 starting what did you understand by the the word cladding at the time so i think this note was to address the whole of the wall construction right so the entire uh build-up yes
02:38:58 so the entire uh build-up yes um now the red tracked amendments i think were yours weren't they it looks like it yes well we can i think we can make that good just by showing you a document just to be clear can we go to nhb 50604
02:39:15 we'll come back to this document in a moment but here's an email from you to john lewis 21st of november 2013. hi john my comments on the note that you put together along with the format of the bca guidance notes
02:39:28 the bca guidance notes and then you say in respect of kingspan i think we should put a note together of our concerns and approach them direct brian had them in his team meeting for some cbd some time ago so we'll have a contact to begin with happy for it to go
02:39:40 contact to begin with happy for it to go in my name that's your email so can we be can we be confident that the red tracked amendments in the um the guidance noted draft were yours yes yes and go back to it then let's go back to nhb50605
02:39:55 [Music] um now i'm back on the word cladding do you know whether and i know you weren't at the meeting but do you know whether wintec um and and nhbc had had a discussion
02:40:09 um and and nhbc had had a discussion along with the k-15 topic about the fact that modern cladding materials by which i mean rain screen panels or materials were combustible
02:40:20 were combustible i don't know we don't do you know whether there was any discussion at that time as between the nhbc and wintec about the use of acm particularly acm with a pe core
02:40:32 with a pe core i don't now looking at external surfaces on this document about a third of the way down your screen it says all external surfaces should comply with diagram 40 of adb2
02:40:45 diagram 40 of adb2 now what was your understanding at the time of what diagram 40 of adb-2 required
02:40:52 required so for buildings over 18 meters the external face of the uh the wall should be classo class o
02:41:02 class o anything else diagram that's what diagram um for my understanding at that time was of diagram 40. right
02:41:11 right um did you recall at the time that there was an uh a an equivalence of some kind at least drawn in diagram 40 between class naught
02:41:22 drawn in diagram 40 between class naught and
02:41:23 and european classification b um the s3 d2 probably not at that not probably not at that time i've been some time since obviously at this time since i'd used
02:41:34 i'd used um the diagrams in terms of practicing surveyor
02:41:38 surveyor added
02:41:40 added is that right you don't you wouldn't routinely look at them is that right not in in the role and unless there was a specific issue which i would then needed to dig into the building regulations for it wouldn't be something because i wasn't dealing day to day with those
02:41:51 wasn't dealing day to day with those projects
02:41:52 projects and then further down the page we can see
02:41:55 see just towards the foot of the screen if we can scroll up we can see the rest of it
02:41:58 it combustibility of cladding components in buildings exceeding 18 meters in height now under that heading it says
02:42:06 it says where the building exceeds 18 meters in height paragraph 12.7 of adb2 refers to the need for limited combustibility of all elements of a cladding system in
02:42:18 of all elements of a cladding system in other words all elements of a cladding system please and then you go on this includes the insulation internal lining board and the external facing material and note the
02:42:29 external facing material and note the words there external facing material the exclusions are smaller gasket parts and similar low-risk items and then over the page
02:42:41 and then over the page if you turn the page
02:42:48 uh
02:42:51 it says
02:42:56 uh yeah it says in the middle paragraph
02:43:02 um if no actual file test data exists the client may instead submit a desktop study report from unsuitable independent ucas accredited testing body bre chilton fire or
02:43:13 testing body bre chilton fire or warrington fire stating whether in their opinion br 135 criteria will have been met the report should be supported by test data
02:43:21 test data that uh the test how which that should be which the test house already has in its position possession and so this option may not be of benefit if products have not already been tested in multiple situations stroke arrangements
02:43:33 situations stroke arrangements the report should specifically reference the tests which they have carried out on the product and then there's something about something about thermosetting insulins there
02:43:46 now going back if we can please to the previous page
02:43:53 where you uh refer under the heading combustibility of planning components in buildings exceeding 18 meters in height to the bits i emphasized all elements of a cladding system and the external facing
02:44:04 cladding system and the external facing material
02:44:06 material um what did you understand the phrase all elements of a cladding system there to mean all of the wall including the rain screen panels including the range screen panels yes
02:44:19 including the range screen panels yes now what was your understanding therefore at that time about how diagram 40 on the one hand and section 12.7 of adb on the other
02:44:30 and section 12.7 of adb on the other interrelated diagram 40 would cover the external face of the cladding paragraph 12.7 referred to the insulation and fillers
02:44:42 insulation and fillers whatever yeah did let me try it differently uh because that by that answer that doesn't seem to be a relationship but but did did you understand
02:44:53 did you understand by uh endorsing the expression all elements of a cladding system which would include the external facing material that the external cladding panel
02:45:05 that the external cladding panel would have to comply with both diagram 40 and section 12.7
02:45:13 well 12.7 is specific in in talking about insulation diagram 40 then talks about the external face but it was our view um
02:45:23 um and i you know that the entire wall construction should be non-combustible i'm aware that there is an anomaly in the regulations and and an interpretation which is different
02:45:34 an interpretation which is different from that
02:45:35 from that i want to know what your understanding was at the time about that because you see you say here or the nhp is preparing to say here that all elements of a clouding system should be of limited combustibility but do you accept that in
02:45:48 combustibility but do you accept that in fact
02:45:49 fact there wasn't anything in the
02:45:52 in the in adb at the time that said that the external panels had to be of limited combustibility yes my understanding was the regulation said that at the time yet so say was it
02:46:03 said that at the time yet so say was it your understanding at the time
02:46:06 that well i mean that the external cladding panel
02:46:11 panel um had to comply with diagram 40 so far as the surface was concerned and be class naught or european class being as as reportedly equivalent
02:46:22 as as reportedly equivalent and also be a material of limited combustibility
02:46:31 the interpretation which you could have and this is the problem with guidance isn't it there's an inter that is interpretation the interpretation could be um and indeed was was relayed back to us
02:46:43 um and indeed was was relayed back to us um
02:46:44 um that
02:46:45 that the cladding itself as long as the cladding was class zero or european class b um that it didn't need to be a materialistic combustibility however
02:46:57 materialistic combustibility however i think through this our view was um that all of it should be become stability and did that extend to the core of an acm panel
02:47:10 to the core of an acm panel it would extend to the panel itself well does that include its core it would do yes
02:47:16 yes right
02:47:17 right and was that because of your understanding of 12.7 or
02:47:21 or any other aspect of adb or was it a a piece of just a view you had that in addition to what adb was saying the panel should be of limited
02:47:32 the panel should be of limited combustibility it was our view that that should be even though that view was not reflected in the language of adb
02:47:45 now on one interpretation of the language within adb what interpretation of adb would produce that view or support it it depends how you regarded a there was a a filler i suppose would be the answer
02:47:58 a a filler i suppose would be the answer to that
02:47:59 to that yes
02:48:00 yes did the word filler was that the subject of discussion within a nhbc at the time of the production of this draft to support the idea that the polyethylene core of an acm
02:48:13 that the polyethylene core of an acm panel had to be a material of limited combustibility if it were ever possible
02:48:21 was there a discussion about that at the time
02:48:24 time if i'm fair at the time we were discussing we were putting this forward this was more the focus at the time would more have been on um the combustible insulation
02:48:35 um the combustible insulation um and i
02:48:36 um and i assumed
02:48:38 assumed um i know she was a big word that when we were talking about um an external wall being resisting the passage of fire across it that that would extend across the all of the wall so you've pointed to the word filler and
02:48:50 so you've pointed to the word filler and we will come to the filler debate later in your evidence but i'm just see really seeking to understand as a matter of fact at the time whether there was discussion within the in hbc at the time about whether
02:49:03 the core of an acm panel should be treated as filler and therefore mean that the panel should be of material of limited combustibility there were no specific conversations at this time no so then what was it
02:49:17 this time no so then what was it uh that was the seed of the idea of the view as you call it that all elements of a cladding system including the external facing needed to be of limited combustibility
02:49:28 limited combustibility where did that come from it would originally come from john because he drafted the guidance and i didn't question it do you know where he got it from i don't you know whether he got it from his understanding of adb or whether it
02:49:40 his understanding of adb or whether it was a an idea he had to plug a gap in the adb or resolve an anomaly do you know i don't know you don't
02:49:53 now um if we go back to page two please
02:49:57 please um you can see in the paragraph i read to you
02:50:01 to you which starts however if no actual test data exists we there see the reference to desktops from a ucas accredited testing body
02:50:12 from a ucas accredited testing body was that the first time that the nhbc or
02:50:17 or next up the bca had considered that adb should be complied with in that manner in other words by the use of a desktop study report
02:50:28 from a testing body um no we were familiar with desktop study reports before this where from so you would see desktop study reports for
02:50:39 study reports for other elements of construction fire doors for example um
02:50:43 um [Music]
02:50:45 [Music] cavity barriers you may see them for other not just affecting fire fiber other areas of the regulations as well uh let me try the question differently then was this the first time that the nhbc or um the bca as it was going to be
02:50:59 nhbc or um the bca as it was going to be had considered that adb those parts of adb relating to the external wall uh should could be complied with by the use of a desktop study
02:51:12 it was certainly the first time that i had been aware of that yes yes do you know whether that option what became option three was discussed with wintec at the 4th of november meeting
02:51:25 wintec at the 4th of november meeting october meeting 4th of october meeting i would take it from the record of the meeting that yes it was i believe it was mentioned in that as one of the uh the routes to compliance do you know what their reaction to it was
02:51:37 um well i can't be certain that um whether we raised it with them or whether john raised it with them or they raised it with us after that meeting uh by which i mean in
02:51:48 after that meeting uh by which i mean in in the period between that meeting and mid-november when we see this first draft of what became tgn 18
02:51:57 18 was there any discussion internally within nhbc about which part of approved document b which section or what language permitted the use of a desktop study as a further
02:52:10 the use of a desktop study as a further alternative route to compliance for insulation material above 18 meters where that material was not a material of limited combustibility
02:52:21 of limited combustibility there were no specific conversations in terms of the acceptability in this application because we had we were used to receiving desktop assessments for other areas and
02:52:32 desktop assessments for other areas and other materials and other configurations right
02:52:36 right am i right in thinking therefore that there was no discussion at the time within nhbc of whether historically the use of desktop studies had been shown to be a robust and reliable way of achieving the functional requirement
02:52:47 achieving the functional requirement before
02:52:50 there was no discussion about that indeed there was no track record on which you could draw at all as was there so far as desktops for satisfying the functional requirement b4 was concerned
02:53:01 functional requirement b4 was concerned not for b4 but as a building control body we would be used to receiving desktop studies as part of our daily daily work on other materials and other and other
02:53:12 other and other makeups
02:53:13 makeups had there been any specific discussion within nhbc about the methodology to be adopted when generating a desktop study as a further alternative route to compliance in relation
02:53:24 compliance in relation to
02:53:25 to an external wall build up where the build up was going to include combustible insulation above 18 meters when you say the methodology can you just be yes you can expand on that
02:53:37 just be yes you can expand on that scientifically approved and proven steps uh by um which which create a method by which somebody sitting down to produce a desktop would do that exercise
02:53:50 would do that exercise i'm not sure at this time if there was a scientific way of doing that but you would the the accepted practice was to look at the the tests that have been carried out on um
02:54:01 um on those
02:54:02 on those if i take an example of a fire door um you can't test every size or every makeup of a fire door for example and how the components go together so you you do a range of tests and then a fire engineer would take a
02:54:13 and then a fire engineer would take a look would extrapolate from those tests or take information from those tests pull them together to illustrate how the particular makeup they were proposing would then work
02:54:25 they were proposing would then work using that evidence was there any discussion about whether or not it was appropriate to extrapolate from the use of desktops in relation to fire doors to the use of desktops as a further alternative route
02:54:37 desktops as a further alternative route to compliance for an entire cladding system
02:54:42 system there's no restriction in the building regulations on what that can and where those desktop studies can be used no that wasn't my question my question was whether there was any discussion as a matter of fact at the time about whether it was appropriate
02:54:53 it was appropriate to extrapolate from the use of desktop studies for fire doors to the use of desktops for clatting systems no there wasn't was there any discussion at the time about whether a desktop using data from
02:55:05 about whether a desktop using data from failed eight four one four tests would be acceptable or when i say failed what i mean is where the right where the data would not meet the criteria of br135
02:55:16 br135 not at this point that we were generating this guidance um
02:55:20 um but we did discuss the usefulness of failed tests at subsequent times we may come back to that then thank you for that but was there any discussion at this time within the nhbc about what the
02:55:31 this time within the nhbc about what the minimum qualifications of the person writing the desktop report should be no
02:55:41 mr german i'm going to go next to the bba certificates for kate of dean uh uh
02:55:47 uh uh would you rather not embark on that i think it might be better to take it in one go
02:55:52 one go rather than to break after four minutes yes
02:55:56 yes well i think but i don't want to lose five minutes so um i'm in your house it doesn't really matter i think five minutes isn't going to make all the difference i think that's probably right and by the time we leave the room it
02:56:07 and by the time we leave the room it might be five minutes anyway mr evans uh it's time we had a break for lunch
02:56:12 lunch so we'll stop there we'll resume please at two o'clock and um as i said to you earlier please don't talk to anyone about your evidence or anything to do with it that includes loyal lawyers by the way
02:56:23 that includes loyal lawyers by the way not not i suspect you wanted to discuss anything with them but um and we'll see you at two o'clock please thank you very much if you'd like to give the usher thank you
02:56:40 thank you very much two o'clock please
02:56:58 you