RBKC (Building Control) Evidence - Wednesday 30th September 2020 (2/2)

Full transcript

00:00:20 yes would you ask mr hogan to come back in please

00:00:41 all right ms tobin yes thank you carry on yes

00:00:44 on yes mr chairman thank you mr hoban i have just a couple of follow-up questions arising from this morning's evidence the first is that you mentioned to us earlier that you after about september 2013 you had some

00:00:57 2013 you had some to 120-130 projects to oversee and can you give us a feel for how many of those were small simple domestic projects as opposed to larger buildings more complex projects

00:01:30 it's hard to answer that question because sometimes the the simple what were considered to be the smaller projects would be difficult in that uh there could be issues regarding the workmanship

00:01:42 issues regarding the workmanship or or

00:01:46 sometimes you had difficulty getting getting into properties or or there was things wrong wrong with the with the work so although it could be small in nature

00:01:57 so although it could be small in nature it could be difficult from from other other aspects but uh

00:02:06 maybe 50 maybe more i was dealing with a lot of basements at the time right and also i um i had a number of projects

00:02:17 um i had a number of projects scattered around the borough uh on on the partnership scheme uh i had 18 projects so

00:02:28 it was quite time consuming getting from one part of the borough to the other because i used public transport so it would take up a uh a lot of my day in in traveling arrangements yes if if

00:02:41 in in traveling arrangements yes if if i i don't know whether that that helps slightly yes i think that does help thank you

00:02:46 thank you and can i also ask you about lachnal house and you told us this morning and it says day 45 which is today page 86 lines eight to 16. um that you remember latino for the fire

00:02:58 um that you remember latino for the fire stopping yeah um what did you think before the grenfell tower fire occurred what did you think was the problem with fire stopping at lakinwa house that hadn't been provided or it hadn't

00:03:10 that hadn't been provided or it hadn't been done properly and when you say fire stopping do you mean fire stopping in the technical sense or do you mean cavity barriers i fire stopping uh there may have been cavity barrier

00:03:21 uh there may have been cavity barrier issues as well internally right uh as i say uh uh

00:03:30 how much you know it's uh a long a long time ago so i can't can't recall how much uh detail i know obviously there was

00:03:43 detail i know obviously there was recommendations put in by by by the inquiry

00:03:50 at the inquest sorry at the inquest about about about certain uh regulatory matters did you ever receive any training to learn the lessons of the latino house

00:04:02 learn the lessons of the latino house fire

00:04:03 fire at all i i i think it could have been mentioned in in in-house seminars a specific training no right

00:04:14 a specific training no right but it you know in in-house in-house uh uh training or or seminars it may have been mentioned in in in the actual presentation what about

00:04:27 in the actual presentation what about shirley towers does that fire mean anything to you is that the one in hertfordshire yes yes i i remember it being on the news because uh a couple of or three people

00:04:40 because uh a couple of or three people lost their life two of them were fire firemen yes yes all right um but you don't remember any training in relation to the shirley towers no no

00:04:52 can i then turn to the question of the involvement of mr hansen and the means of escape group now we know that within rbkc there was something called a means of escape group that could be consulted by building

00:05:03 that could be consulted by building control officers such as you is that is that right uh well or we we we did use their services but uh

00:05:13 uh we had a originally uh uh the fire regulations group uh would have dealt with all aspects under b b

00:05:24 all aspects under b b uh but there was a a change in policy i can't remember when uh it was prior to the restructuring where where they uh management said that

00:05:36 uh management said that that the surveyors were to deal with b2 3 and 4 on on on buildings whereas prior to that uh section 20 buildings

00:05:47 prior to that uh section 20 buildings because this was what was known as a section 20 building under the old london building

00:05:51 building yeah would have been been dealt with by the fire regulation i think so so there was a group uh called a means of escape group

00:06:03 well i i think they were actually called the fire regulations group right although primarily it would be b1 does the division of responsibilities

00:06:14 b1 does the division of responsibilities that you've just described to us whereby surveyors were to deal with b2 b3 and b4 mean that you as a surveyor had not dealt with b2 b3 and b4 specifically on buildings

00:06:26 b3 and b4 specifically on buildings prior to this restructuring ah no we we on on on smaller jobs uh you know like a uh a house or a low rise block yes we

00:06:38 or a low rise block yes we we would deal with those on on high-rise buildings

00:06:43 buildings such as grenfell uh prior to that instruction the the the fire regulations group would have dealt with all aspects right and you were not part of that

00:06:55 right and you were not part of that group

00:06:56 group no uh i

00:06:59 i stopped i became a general assistant in 1985. yes at the time of the grenfell tower project paul hansen was

00:07:11 project paul hansen was part of the means of escape group i think he was the only person he was the means of escape group was he was right and he's a was a qualified fire engineer isn't he

00:07:22 was a qualified fire engineer isn't he yes and you say in your first statement they need to turn it up it's paragraph 36

00:07:27 36 that paul hanson would make decisions on b1 and b5

00:07:30 b1 and b5 yes the building regulations and that was so in relation to grenfell was it yes but is it fair to say that strictly he was a consultant who could make observations that's how he's described his role in

00:07:41 that's how he's described his role in his statement at paragraph 31 would you agree with that um no well he he he was the person that did all the

00:07:49 all the as it uh the consultation arranged for the consultation uh with with the uh fire authority he he would do all the paperwork with that

00:08:01 that the the process was when when we got his observations

00:08:08 i i would sit down with him and we go through

00:08:11 through through his observations and i i would i would get his advice from from time to time

00:08:18 time on on on other matters because

00:08:25 on on grenville uh there was there was a number of emails relating to cavity barriers i think it was in march 2015 where i sought his advice yes

00:08:38 2015 where i sought his advice yes on on on on that we'll come to that and

00:08:46 when i was dealing with the academy and the leisure centre he he he gave he was involved with with considerations other other than b1

00:08:59 with considerations other other than b1 in relation to no sprinklers being provided to the academy and there was uh consideration over the uh

00:09:11 consideration over the uh the hose hose reel lengths can i just see if i can cut through this a bit um on grenfell who was ultimately responsible for b1 and b5

00:09:20 and b5 was that paul hansen

00:09:25 i would say yes because he was the person that i would go to for

00:09:33 sorry i'm hesitating here he's the expert so i would not go against his advice but did you divide up responsibility he would do b1 and b5 and

00:09:45 responsibility he would do b1 and b5 and you would do b3 two three and four or were you responsible for all of those parts for the building regulations with him giving specialist advice on b1 and v5

00:09:57 well ultimately i would say i'm the area surveyor but he he was the expert and i would i would he would do the negotiations

00:10:08 i would he would do the negotiations with the fire brigade and and if we had meetings he he was the person with with the architect he was the person that would would lead those those

00:10:21 would would lead those those meetings would you generally defer to paul hanson on all fire related

00:10:28 building control issues if they arose in a building control application yes if if he pointed something out to me uh uh yes i would

00:10:40 uh uh yes i would so his advice and obviously uh when consider when considering uh an application uh under b you have to consider all all

00:10:52 uh under b you have to consider all all aspects

00:10:52 aspects in my view so would you say that you consulted with paul hanson on b2 to be as well as b1 and b5 i i sorted advice from time to time

00:11:06 i i sorted advice from time to time yes and did mr hansen refer matters on b3 and b4 back to you to decide yes but uh but again as i say if i wanted

00:11:17 but uh but again as i say if i wanted clarification on some on on on b2 i was aware of the standards and or not aware i understood the stand standards but where there was

00:11:34 new codes came in and he would be be he'd be working with them all the time he's on various committees right so i would defer to to to him

00:11:47 right so i would defer to to to him yes now um beryl menses who's one of the inquiries experts has considers that it was a failure on the part of rbkc not to have used the resource of a

00:11:59 not to have used the resource of a qualified fire engineer for the benefit of the

00:12:01 of the building control department as a whole do you agree yes do you also agree with her that the working relationship between the means of escape

00:12:10 of escape group in other words mr hansen and the other part of the building control department was undefined and clear to the

00:12:16 the unclear to those involved do you agree with that

00:12:31 well i i as i say i would refer for to paul from time to time it would have been it could have been a lot clearer

00:12:43 lot clearer do you agree that the working relationship

00:12:48 didn't necessarily support project surveyors like you in reaching the best decisions under or for the purposes of compliance with part

00:12:59 with part b yes building regulations yes you do can i just show you a document before we turn to a different topic rbk3048682

00:13:12 turn to a different topic rbk3048682 please again this is another internal ryden

00:13:17 ryden document so you won't have seen it mr holden it's an email of the 5th of september 2014. i'm sorry i'm so sorry it's from you actually you will have seen it it's from you to simon lawrence and simon o'connor at

00:13:29 simon lawrence and simon o'connor at ryden

00:13:30 ryden and you say there in uh the second sentence i would confirm that i'm the building control surveyor charged with dealing with all building regulations and matters for the project paul hanson is

00:13:42 matters for the project paul hanson is the building control surveyor fire regulations for the scheme and he'll provide me with technical advice and observations on the proposals submitted under parts b1 and b5 in schedule one of such regulations as

00:13:54 in schedule one of such regulations as that is his reference for this project should you have any proposals and or issues that you desire technical advice on from this office under parts b1 and b5 of the building regulations i'd be grateful if you would contact

00:14:05 grateful if you would contact myself in the first instance so that i'm aware of these matters as they may impact on other parts of the building regulations do you agree with what you said there about the respective roles of you and paul hanson in relation to this project

00:14:18 paul hanson in relation to this project that's what we were instructed to uh do of uh from uh as i said previously mentioned uh instruction uh prior to the

00:14:31 uh instruction uh prior to the restructuring that we were we were to deal with these two

00:14:35 two three and four right the impression given by this email from you is that in relation to b two three and four matters of the building regulations you would be the person

00:14:46 you would be the person to give technical advice and it was only mr hansen

00:14:50 mr hansen who would be giving technical advice on b1 and b5

00:14:54 b1 and b5 is that is that what you wanted to impart

00:14:59 impart yes but as i say i would i would go back to go back to to paul from time to time on to get advice on matters

00:15:10 on to get advice on matters so does it come to this that paul hansen would be the the go-to man for b1 and b5 you would be the go-to man for b2 b3 and b4 but he would be your private in-house resource for any quite particular

00:15:21 resource for any quite particular technical questions you had on b2 3 and 4. yes and he would come out with me on site from time to time thank you can i then turn

00:15:29 then turn to your specific involvement with grenfell tower uh now we know that rbkc is the freehold owner

00:15:37 owner of grenfell tower would rbkc building control

00:15:42 control treat applications that it received in relation to buildings owned by rbkc in in exactly the same way that it would in relation to applications for buildings owned by other people

00:15:54 for buildings owned by other people yes as regards the regulations we wouldn't

00:15:58 wouldn't we wouldn't give them any as it were favorable consideration uh may uh um

00:16:11 may uh um i know when i was dealing with uh the academy and the leisure centre i spent a lot of time on there because i was instructed to do that yes um there is some evidence of that um now

00:16:24 um there is some evidence of that um now we know that john allen had been the primary point of contact with studio e in 2012

00:16:28 in 2012 and that will be explored with him perhaps um by the time you became involved

00:16:33 involved uh rbkc building control had already met studio e

00:16:36 studio e and had received some documents such as the x over outline fire strategy can you confirm that yes yes now mr allen john allen suggests in his first statement that he

00:16:47 suggests in his first statement that he allocated the calc so klc stroke grenfell project to you after he was appointed building control manager in the september of 2013.

00:16:58 manager in the september of 2013. now in your second statement of the inquiry and just for reference purposes this is paragraph five on page two you say you were you think you were appointed in december 2013. were you appointed in september or

00:17:11 2013. were you appointed in september or in december of that year do you think i believe

00:17:13 believe that john allen had some some dealings with

00:17:17 with with uh with uh

00:17:21 studio e in the september time i think i believe as i say uh from my recollection that he was he had

00:17:32 from my recollection that he was he had some involvement and then i was told in the in november that uh or the december where uh when i when i when i wrote that that statement

00:17:43 when i when i wrote that that statement okay

00:17:43 okay well let's explore some more detail who was the building control surveyor in respect of the grenfell tower project during the period september to december 2013 do you remember i would say john

00:17:55 2013 do you remember i would say john allen was

00:17:56 allen was until it was handed to me right this may help you yeah just to fix it if if you may yes of course i don't know whether i actually attended a a meeting with with bruce sones prior to

00:18:08 a meeting with with bruce sones prior to that date

00:18:10 that date well let's look at the document that's what i'm not not certain i understand thank you for that clarification um sea 3010232 i think we may be able to use this

00:18:21 i think we may be able to use this document to pin down a time this is an email of the 31st of december 2013 from you and you say in the first paragraph thank

00:18:33 and you say in the first paragraph thank you for your preliminary submission it's addressed to bruce zones i have now been appointed the surveyor responsible for

00:18:39 for the part of the borough where your project is situated and you say please find attached marked up plans

00:18:47 up plans and observations relating to the fire strategy for the grenfell tower project for your information straight records so that gives a date of the 31st of december 2013.

00:18:58 the 31st of december 2013. do you think you had any involvement with grenfell before that point the only any uh question mark is i i i had a meeting

00:19:11 i i i had a meeting paul hansen and myself had a meeting with bruce simes at some stage but i'm uh i'm not certain of that date

00:19:24 but i believe that it would have been after that but as i said i can't say without absolute certainty no i understand when you did take over as you say you

00:19:35 as you say you had been and or as at the 31st of december what steps did you take to familiarize yourself with the project uh i looked i looked at the information that was given to me

00:19:47 that was given to me at that stage i looked at the uh john allen sent me some emails

00:19:57 emails and uh and of a fire strategy but uh and then as i say until until an application came

00:20:09 until until an application came because i believe uh

00:20:13 there was very little contact uh until until i met with bruce simes whenever that that date may be did you have a handover

00:20:24 that date may be did you have a handover meeting with john allen about grenfell tower

00:20:26 tower no no no just just the the email and and uh as i say that that contents right do you remember what the documents were

00:20:39 do you remember what the documents were more specifically you say emails and the fire strategy uh we'll we'll come to look at that in due course um but do you remember what emails

00:20:53 um but do you remember what emails were about it was to mainly to do with smoke fencing right

00:21:01 this stage this is the pre-application phase was there a project file on accolade

00:21:07 accolade for you to look at no what about a hard copy file for you to look at i don't recall right did you discuss the project with paul hansen at this stage late december

00:21:18 late december 2013. i would have only discussed it with him when when we met with bruce

00:21:25 can we go to rbk 30s please

00:21:33 this is an uh and this is what you have yes this may well you say all right that's that's helpful this seems to trigger a recollection just to explain what it is it looks like an outlook

00:21:44 an outlook a diary entry for the 30th of december 2013

00:21:47 2013 [Music]

00:21:49 [Music] to you and paul hansen subject grenfell tower

00:21:52 tower can you tell us what this is signifying

00:21:57 when i was saying our all right i remember

00:22:00 remember uh neil crawford at some stage uh mentioning when i was dealing with with

00:22:09 with uh the academy he spoke briefly to me uh during a a site visit there right uh this uh i can only assume that

00:22:21 right uh this uh i can only assume that there was a meeting

00:22:24 but the the date the date the date is is christmas time so i i don't know whether we would had anybody in the office for a meeting around that time

00:22:36 around that time because that's uh the day before new year's eve yeah well indeed but we've seen that you sent an email on new year's eve uh the next day to bruce sohn saying that you had been

00:22:48 to bruce sohn saying that you had been appointed yeah the bca for the grenfell tower project so you were in and working at that stage oh yes does this email does this outlook diary entry signify

00:23:00 does this outlook diary entry signify that there was a meeting between you and paul hansen on that day 30th of december that i i i i couldn't say and was paul i would was paul working that week

00:23:14 do you remember prior to your appointment at the end of december 2013 whether you had any discussions at all with either paul hansen or john allen about the cladding and risk

00:23:26 john allen about the cladding and risk of eternal external fire spread no can i ask you to go to sea409805 please this is an email from john allen to

00:23:37 this is an email from john allen to studio e

00:23:40 studio e of the 11th of november 2013. now it's not

00:23:44 not copied to you

00:23:49 and it explains that rbkc's view and this is about the far um it's about the smoke extract system as you can see from the third paragraph

00:23:59 paragraph um but it explains that rbkc's view is the information submitted to date was not adequate to enable effective consultation with the fire authority were you aware

00:24:11 with the fire authority were you aware of this email or discussions about that topic at this time

00:24:21 i'm not certain i could i can't i can't give you an answer on that all right well if we turn to the second page of this email run this is an email from bruce sowns to

00:24:33 this is an email from bruce sowns to john allen dated the 25th of october 2013 uh which attached the proposed fire strategy for grenfell

00:24:45 strategy for grenfell uh and that included the fire access and fire strategy drawings and the x over issue number two of the outline fire safety strategy

00:24:56 outline fire safety strategy as you can see from the list of documents that are said to be attached do you see that yes now that document the ofss issue 2 was dated the 24th of october 2013.

00:25:08 the 24th of october 2013. so a little bit uh well the day before i think probably uh by the time this email is sent do you remember

00:25:16 remember reading the x over outline fire safety strategy

00:25:20 strategy issue two when you started working on the project i can't say what issue i i looked at i did look at a fire strategy right issue three was

00:25:31 fire strategy right issue three was dated the 7th of november 2013. do you do you think you might have looked at that it's not a great deal of difference between them i i i really really can't kind of

00:25:42 i i really really can't kind of say were you told at the time why it was that either john allen or paul hansen or both of them had reached the view that the information provided by studio e which included this outline fire safety

00:25:55 which included this outline fire safety strategy

00:25:56 strategy about the smoke extract system was insufficient no can we go to sca50154 please

00:26:10 no can we go to sca50154 please this is a run of emails in early december

00:26:14 december 2013. the top one is uh dated the 3rd of december 2013 which attaches fire strategy pdf

00:26:26 see that uh

00:26:33 do you remember seeing or being aware of these emails at the time not at the time because as a as as i said

00:26:42 said uh i believe i took the project over at the end right because you said earlier in your evidence that as part of the handover you were shown some emails was this yeah i i don't think there's

00:26:53 was this yeah i i don't think there's some email was this one of the emails you were shown do you think no i don't don't believe so right can we then go to sea three zeros one zero two three two again

00:27:04 three zeros one zero two three two again this is the 31st of december 2013 email we looked at um five minutes ago or so where you tell bruce zones that you've been appointed the surveyor responsible

00:27:15 been appointed the surveyor responsible for

00:27:16 for the area where grenfell was situated and you refer

00:27:20 you refer in the second paragraph down to marked up plans and observations relating to the fire strategy for the grenfell tower project

00:27:27 project for your information and records you see that yes um and just uh for the transcript um the documents that you returned to studio e are

00:27:39 studio e are sca3018369

00:27:42 sca402629 and sca402630 just so we have those on the transcript um

00:27:50 um i just want to ask you about the markups and comments were they paul hansen's yes yes did you have any input into those markups and observations yourself

00:28:02 those markups and observations yourself uh we we would have discussed them prior to

00:28:09 the usual practice as i said i don't know whether i had had that we would usually go into an office

00:28:15 office and we look at look at the plans because uh so that i was familiar with what was going on

00:28:25 um yes did you discuss with paul hansen the market plans and observations with him specifically before sending this email to mr sames

00:28:37 to mr sames that would have been the practice common practice right i can't i can't say that i did but generally that's how i would do it and might that have been the day before yeah according to the outlook diary

00:28:49 yeah according to the outlook diary maybe yes maybe that that is sorry do you remember that i mean i i can't possibly we had a meeting and maybe that was it that we agreed to

00:29:00 and maybe that was it that we agreed to sit down

00:29:01 sit down and go through go through uh so that i was aware of what was going on can we go to sca3010369

00:29:14 this is a memo from paul hanson to john allen

00:29:19 allen date of the 6th of december 2013 b1 means of escape observations and in it he gives his comments about the smoke then proposals do you think this was a document you

00:29:30 do you think this was a document you were shown or saw before you took over i don't recall it ever if we look at page four

00:29:36 page four of that document please at the very bottom of that page uh it says that paul hansen had not yet consulted the fire authority was it your understanding at this point

00:29:48 was it your understanding at this point that paul hansen was still not satisfied that

00:29:50 that that building control had sufficient information from studio to enable him to consult the fire authority or did you know anything about this

00:29:59 this i don't know anything about this but reading that

00:30:05 would have you know paul has said said that he hasn't information enough information yes just physically in the office at a derby kc did you sit in the same office as john allen or paul hanson or or

00:30:18 as john allen or paul hanson or or we could you overhear each other's work we had a hot desking system so you would uh you could sit wherever you you wanted

00:30:29 you could sit wherever you you wanted generally we would sit in the same area but sometimes if you wanted or if i wanted a a quiet time in order to

00:30:37 to uh to ex uh do do some particular thing i might i might go and sit in a corner all right okay sorry um

00:30:49 all right okay sorry um all right when you did come into the project as you can see at the very end of december 2013 were you aware

00:30:57 aware that the grenfell tower project involved uh overcladding the building yes you were yes who told you that

00:31:04 you that i could see that on the drawings right see it on the drawings now then can we go to

00:31:09 go to uh rbk3048649

00:31:16 please um and look at the second email down on that

00:31:22 that page page one

00:31:26 this is an email from bruce zones to you and paul hansen 6th of january 2014. and in it he says your comments are split roughly between the smoke vent and

00:31:37 split roughly between the smoke vent and fire separation the formal will be covered by the engineers the latter mostly by studio e the design has been the subject of lengthy deliberation and while i can understand some of the requests for additional separation

00:31:48 additional separation there are reasons why we hadn't indicated them and we would like to understand these with you in further detail

00:31:53 detail access to the risers refuse shoots etc the priority for the our client the tmo is to eliminate the risk of significant design changes before appointing a contractor

00:32:04 contractor and i believe the consultation with the fire authority is key to this i hope this can be made before we arrange another meeting with you will the response to the smoke ventilation be enough

00:32:12 enough for this to happen did you get the impression from from this that studio e was putting you under time pressure to consult the fire authority at this

00:32:24 [Music] stage

00:32:31 yes but we we wouldn't uh until we were happy

00:32:36 happy with it we you know we wouldn't put an application in right you can see that there there they're doing that go to the top email

00:32:47 they're doing that go to the top email then this is paul hanson's suggestion to you internally where he's recommending the following response he'd been copied in on the email and was recommending a response to you

00:32:58 recommending a response to you you see that yes

00:33:06 and it's sent to you at about 1506 on that day and just look at the text he says i recommend the following response we are happy to pass on the question to the

00:33:17 happy to pass on the question to the fire authority regarding changes to the smoke vent system as a separate exercise to the building control submission etc i'm not going to read it all out to you

00:33:26 you clearly that's what he was suggesting you should say to studio e if we now go to rbk403854 please you can see your response to bruce zones

00:33:38 you can see your response to bruce zones sent up 1520 the same day so just about 15 minutes later you see that yes and that looks like a cut and paste from mr hanson's

00:33:49 cut and paste from mr hanson's suggestion in his email 15 minutes early is that right yes i see so you were simply passing on paul hanson's comments that he suggested to studio effect yes

00:34:01 i think in the event uh studio he didn't have

00:34:05 have uh didn't provide the further information related to the smoke vent system that you'd asked for did they um that i can't comment i'm sorry and i think that's right there

00:34:16 i'm sorry and i think that's right there was no consultation at that stage of the fire authority either okay now then let's move on in time please go to art403931

00:34:33 these are minutes of progress meeting number 10

00:34:37 number 10 on site 21st of april 2015.

00:34:45 it's a long way ahead in time but if we look at page three

00:34:54 uh you can see at the bottom of the page

00:35:00 uh it it says um there uh simon lawrence meeting with building control

00:35:07 control on 17th of april that must be 2015 to inspect

00:35:12 inspect the reinforcing to the mezzanine prior to the concrete pour do you remember was it you who was the building control officer attending that meeting

00:35:21 it most probably was but i can't be absolutely certain right

00:35:29 can we go back then in time um

00:35:34 rbk3052478

00:35:39 this is a record of the rbkc site visits now i just want to be clear with you what document this is because it's a document that we will be going to

00:35:50 it's a document that we will be going to um quite a lot in the course of your evidence to come mr hoban it's a document that was compiled on the 14th of june 2017. so the same day as the fire

00:36:02 day as the fire and it's sent to claire williams of the kc tmo

00:36:06 kc tmo and it's the records from building control john allen of the site notes for the application there's a long document and it uh it

00:36:20 there's a long document and it uh it it ends on page one so you will start at the bottom end of it can we go to page eight

00:36:30 uh this is the first entry or site visit taking place on the 29th of august 2014. now i should just tell you this is the first rbkc record of any site visit we

00:36:41 first rbkc record of any site visit we uh we have by building control to the grenfell tower refurbishment site is that right was that your first site visit do you think i believe so well from that yes um

00:36:57 okay now if we go to uh rbk403810

00:37:12 this is an email uh from you to neil crawford dated the 17th of july 2014. you see that yes uh so this is

00:37:23 you see that yes uh so this is after the fire no this is before i'm so sorry

00:37:27 sorry it's 2014. i'm sorry uh neil please find detail below the last emails i have in my possession relating to the grenfell tower project for your information

00:37:38 and the email you sent him is the 8th of january 2014 from paul hanson to you which is the one of 1506

00:37:47 of 1506 that we saw i think earlier on and that then became the one you cut and pasted and sent on

00:37:55 this suggests looking at it that there'd be no further email contact between you and studio e between the 8th of january

00:38:06 and studio e between the 8th of january in the email we saw before and mid-july 2014 was that correct yes i believe so do you know what prompted you to send this email to neil crawford

00:38:17 you to send this email to neil crawford of the

00:38:17 of the 17th of july he asked for information he asked for information i think he he he i believe he he became

00:38:28 he i believe he he became involved up until that that time i've been dealing with him on the uh academy extensively do you remember how he contacted you pun

00:38:40 do you remember how he contacted you pun do you remember how he contacted you

00:38:45 ah well the there's obviously the email there

00:38:48 there uh i i don't know whether he he whether he said in in in conversation while i was at the uh

00:39:00 in conversation while i was at the uh dealing with the academy whether he said to me

00:39:06 that he he wanted to talk to me about about grenfell but i bet only be speculating just so that i'm clear you take over as building control officer on the grenfell

00:39:18 building control officer on the grenfell tower project at the end of december 2013.

00:39:21 2013. were you still after that time building control officer on the calc project yes so you're running both of those

00:39:28 those yes right i see do you remember in these initial discussions with mr crawford about grenfell tower uh what it was you discussed

00:39:39 uh what it was you discussed i think it was i'll be dealing with it and i need to see you i see did he give you any further information about the refurbishment at that time

00:39:47 that time not at that stage did you mention overclouding the building do you think no i think it was just that he would now i think you then made this visit on

00:39:58 now i think you then made this visit on the 29th of august 2014 um which is referred to in the document we looked at a moment ago was that before you'd seen any

00:40:09 that before you'd seen any drawings for the building other than perhaps the marked up version that was sent

00:40:15 sent on the 31st of december i believe 2013 right can we look at a note of the site visit rbk30 page 8 which we just looked at a moment

00:40:28 page 8 which we just looked at a moment ago

00:40:35 and you can see that it says 29th of august 2014 action pre-start visit result satisfactory officer john hoban

00:40:46 notes visited site met project manager had brief discussion about the project asked to be contacted when construction works commence on site gave advice as to what stages of the works we need

00:40:58 works we need to contacted to inspect workman's still presently carrying out demolition works nothing to check at time of visit demolition works to go on for some time also inform the project manager that i had yet to receive up-to-date

00:41:10 that i had yet to receive up-to-date details of the works the reference to meeting the project manager was that simon o'connor of ryden i believe so do you think you met mr

00:41:21 i believe so do you think you met mr crawford

00:41:22 crawford uh neil crawford of studio e on site at that meeting as well no i don't believe i did it refers to a brief discussion about the project do you remember what the content of that discussion was just generally what the

00:41:34 discussion was just generally what the works were to be right did you look at any drawings at that meeting uh may have you may have yes do you have any

00:41:46 yes do you have any do you have a specific recollection of it i i i can't remember that meeting but uh or i can remember having the discussion but i can't uh i can't specifically uh remember

00:41:58 uh i can't specifically uh remember uh saying we got the drawings out generally i would when i go on site i would look at drawings right would you look at drawings that you brought with you or would you be provided with drawings when you got to site they would be the

00:42:09 when you got to site they would be the drawings on site i sometimes i would bring uh drawings at the ends in order that i in order to check that that they

00:42:21 in order to check that that they corresponded with the fire strategy but up until that that time i would i would look at the drawings on site because obviously right that's what i would be

00:42:32 obviously right that's what i would be checking against i understand so to get to the drawings on site where would you go the site office and who would who was running that at that time it was simon lawrence oh no

00:42:44 at that time it was simon lawrence oh no simon o'connor so they would say the up-to-date drawings that you would want to see would be held in the site office yes i see

00:42:52 yes i see i don't know how much information he would have had at that time at that meeting do you remember whether you discussed

00:43:00 discussed the cladding proposals the overcladding proposals with mr o'connor not in specific detail i would have would have known that that the building is is being

00:43:11 that that the building is is being over-clad was there any discussion about the materials that were planned for use in the uh external wall construction no i don't believe so did they tell you that they had an

00:43:22 did they tell you that they had an outstanding planning application for approval of the materials on the facade which had not yet been resolved no i don't believe so now mr crawford says in his witness

00:43:34 mr crawford says in his witness statement

00:43:34 statement this is paragraph 206 that he recalls meeting you on site in the week commencing the 25th of august 2014.

00:43:44 2014. now he was also asked about that in his oral evidence and that's day 11 page 137 at line 12 and he said i'll just put to you the gist

00:43:53 gist of his evidence that he had with him the basic project drawings and he says he recalls sitting and discussing the project and that you took drawings away with you

00:44:05 and that you took drawings away with you did you did you sit and discuss the project with mr crawford in in late august 2014. don't recall that did you have any discussion with mr

00:44:16 that did you have any discussion with mr crawford

00:44:17 crawford in late august 2014 which included the basic project drawings not that i can recall do you remember taking any drawings away with you from any meeting with mr

00:44:29 with you from any meeting with mr crawford in late august 2014. i don't say as far as uh i recall i didn't were you ever given drawings in any face-to-face meetings

00:44:40 drawings in any face-to-face meetings that you had with with mr crawford

00:44:43 not that i can recall what about another member of the grenfell design team

00:44:53 i don't know whether bruce left any drawings with us when he had had the meeting

00:45:00 in our office

00:45:03 uh which meeting you refer paul and i had a meeting with bruce soames at some stage i mentioned this previously yes does this prior to this site visit or

00:45:14 does this prior to this site visit or afterwards i can't i can't recall generally i wouldn't take information way away with me because i'd be out on site all day

00:45:25 all day and i would i wouldn't be i wouldn't be carrying uh draw drawings with me because as i said be going in and out of science

00:45:37 going in and out of science do you remember telling mr crawford at this time that you were primarily concerned with fire related matters and that those were your priority no i'd be concerned with all aspects of

00:45:50 no i'd be concerned with all aspects of the building regulations now your site visit note here says

00:45:55 here says that you inform the project manager that you had yet to receive up-to-date details of the works yes was that a matter of concern to you at the time

00:46:07 it was but it wasn't unusual that we didn't have uh we were on lots and lots of jobs we it would be uh chasing people for

00:46:18 we it would be uh chasing people for for for drawings and information right so it wasn't it wasn't unusual was there any particular aspect of the project that you had in mind when you asked for up-to-date information on that

00:46:30 asked for up-to-date information on that occasion

00:46:31 occasion no it was generally details of the work did you see a mock-up of the cladding on site during your visit no so we know that there was a mock-up presented in july

00:46:43 presented in july 2014 but we're not sure when it was taken down did you see anything on site i don't know seeing anything on site right we know that the full plans application

00:46:55 we know that the full plans application had been submitted already on the 4th of august so much earlier in that month were you concerned that there were no up-to-date details given that the full plans application was already live

00:47:11 was already live we got in applications uh on from time to time with no drawings it was it was validated that that's the way

00:47:23 way the office worked so well it was it was a con concern but it wasn't

00:47:29 wasn't it wasn't unusual yes i see but was the absence of plans given that there was at this stage a live full plans application something

00:47:41 live full plans application something which drove you to ask for more details oh yes yes i guess um

00:47:48 the note also refers to the stages of works that you'd need to be contact for for inspection you see it says advice as to what stages of the works we needed to be contacted to inspect and what were

00:48:01 be contacted to inspect and what were those

00:48:02 those stages do you remember it was mainly the structure

00:48:06 structure dpc's

00:48:13 drainage the no the notifiable uh the notifiable notifiable notifications as as specified in in the building regulations

00:48:27 specified in in the building regulations and for a project involving cladding over cladding and i know you say you've not done a high rise before did you have any sense of what stages you would expect to carry out

00:48:38 you would expect to carry out inspections at from that point on i i would go along uh and do interim

00:48:51 i i would go along uh and do interim visits

00:48:53 visits uh and see what was going on at the at the time

00:48:57 the time and then if anything concern me then i would uh react react accordingly so you'd say you do interim visits and you told us this morning that

00:49:08 visits and you told us this morning that these were you set these at monthly for yourself yeah so it was that just a diary entry or your site visits related to particular stages of the project no it will i think at the start

00:49:20 at the start we with simon o'connor we after i finished one visit i would agree a date for another and that didn't didn't

00:49:30 didn't continue right more specifically

00:49:36 would you expect to inspect particular elements like insulation and cavity barriers where they'd been installed

00:49:43 installed but hadn't yet been covered up by cladding panels i i did uh well i did go and see as works was progressing uh on

00:49:55 as works was progressing uh on certain occasions yes it will come to those can i let me put the question slightly differently because i'm not sure i

00:50:02 sure i i've really got the point across when you um

00:50:05 you um were saying is this note says give advice as to what stages of the works we needed to contact to inspect or to be contacted to inspect did you have in mind that even though you might be

00:50:16 you might be doing site visits monthly you needed to inspect

00:50:20 inspect each element of the cladding system as it was installed to make sure that it was installed correctly and compliantly before it was covered up by the next element no no no you didn't now we're moving

00:50:33 no no no you didn't now we're moving we move forward a little bit in time not much sea 50189 3rd of september 2014 we see here an email to you from simon

00:50:45 we see here an email to you from simon lawrence

00:50:47 lawrence on that day copy to simon o'connor and neil crawford and he says morning john we haven't been introduced properly yet but i'm ryden's contracts manager for the grenfell tower project

00:50:59 project i understand you dropped into our site office recently and had a brief introduction to the project and drawings from our project manager simon o'connor you see that yes uh now first of all you you hadn't

00:51:11 yes uh now first of all you you hadn't had any contact i think with simon lawrence

00:51:13 lawrence before that point had you no i don't believe that and looking at the second sentence of this email is this your visit

00:51:19 visit on the 29th of august do you think yes i believe so um and he says uh that you'd had an introduction to the product and drawings it looks very much from this a

00:51:31 it looks very much from this a contemporaneous document that simon o'connor did show you some drawings yes it would appear so but you can't remember what drawings he showed you is that right yeah and then if we look at the um

00:51:43 yeah and then if we look at the um uh the last sentence uh he says uh that he is going to arrange a meeting uh with yourself on on site shortly with

00:51:55 uh with yourself on on site shortly with studio e

00:51:57 studio e does that help you remember whether you had already met neil crawford on site in the week of the 25th of august as he says or not met him yet i i don't believe i had me as i say that's but i meet

00:52:10 as i say that's but i meet i meet so many people and i was meeting neil on on on the the academy yeah so

00:52:22 the the academy yeah so it's it's uh

00:52:27 like i can just say say that but i i don't believe i had well it's it's my belief that i didn't have a meeting with you before before right

00:52:40 before before right is it possible that you met neil crawford on the calc site in in the week of the last week of august 2014 and met simon o'connor on the grenfell

00:52:52 and met simon o'connor on the grenfell site in the same week

00:52:56 maybe i can't i can't remember can we just go up a little bit in this email to the long first paragraph and halfway through that simon lawrence says

00:53:06 says to be honest we would have liked to have got yourself on board earlier but there has been some clutch design changes which we're hoping to confirm before our application so as not to

00:53:17 before our application so as not to confuse issues in the future would you expect to have had more involvement with a project of this nature before a full plans application was formally submitted

00:53:28 submitted yes and would you expect a contractor or an architect to ask for your input on particularly oh the overcladding proposals as part of the pre-application

00:53:39 proposals as part of the pre-application advice or input from you

00:53:45 uh yes yes did you think at this time that the full plans application was coming

00:53:52 coming uh rather late in the day

00:53:58 yes yes did you get the sense that it would have been better to involve you at a much earlier stage so that you had had input from a

00:54:09 so that you had had input from a building control perspective into the full plans application before it was submitted yes yes now were you aware at this point so early september 2014 that rbkc's

00:54:21 so early september 2014 that rbkc's planning department was considering ryden's proposal to install acm polyethylene core panels on as the rain screen

00:54:32 core panels on as the rain screen instead of zinc panels with a metal honeycomb core i wouldn't wouldn't have been aware of that

00:54:41 can you help me at that time would you expect the planning department to flag matters like that to the building control department as part of its integrated cooperative approach

00:54:55 as i said as i said previously we would have uh contact with the planners when they asked for for advice on on certain matters

00:55:07 for advice on on certain matters it wasn't they were i'm i'm not aware of uh any policy there may have been a policy but i wasn't actually aware of it as i say we with planners

00:55:19 aware of it as i say we with planners they would come to me occasionally uh with uh plans for example if if they were altering a listed building and they would concerns uh uh about

00:55:32 and they would concerns uh uh about uh a particular type of construction but generally the planners uh didn't didn't consult us on

00:55:43 uh didn't didn't consult us on a regular basis no would you i mean would you expect the planning department to come to you and ask for your view as a building control officer

00:55:52 officer where something like the panels on the exterior

00:55:57 exterior of an overclouding system were to be changed from zinc to aluminium could

00:56:05 did you expect them to do so at the time as a matter of fact they they as i say we might my contact with

00:56:14 with with with uh planning officers uh was they would come to us when they felt it was necessary right

00:56:26 was there any communication to your knowledge between the planning department and the building control department within rbkc about grenfell tower at around this time no

00:56:36 no that's my knowledge can we then inch forward in time to rbk three zeros five two four seven eight please

00:56:47 this is another record

00:56:51 on page six of this document this is another record of a visit

00:57:04 5th of september 2014 and it copies in into the document an email from you mr hoban to simon lawrence and simon o'connor of the 5th of september

00:57:18 and it's labeled an interim site visit did an

00:57:21 did an actual site visit take place on that date do you think

00:57:29 i would have to see my my my diaries that's what i was asking for for my outlook calendar to confirm that right i believe that it would have happened right

00:57:40 it would have happened right but without without without access to to my outlook calendar or all the other i i can't confirm that you can't confirm i mean clearly somebody who compiled

00:57:52 i mean clearly somebody who compiled this thought that your action was an interim visit by reference to this

00:58:01 i'm sorry could you repeat what you just said i said that would have been me i believe i would have put that i think i was still waiting for it well you can see it's unsatisfactory i'm still wait waiting for information i believe i

00:58:12 waiting for information i believe i follow uh

00:58:17 if we can go to page seven of that document

00:58:25 we can see that you're sending as part of that entry or the email or you're recording the email

00:58:36 email from neil crawford to simon lawrence copied to paul hanson you see that which says that paul hanson is fire

00:58:47 which says that paul hanson is fire engineer best place to answer questions regarding the dry riser and aovs and then your email above that that we saw earlier on

00:58:58 looking at those two together are you saying there that all queries should come to you first

00:59:05 first yes so that i'm aware that what's uh going on on the project yes exactly the question is did ryden and studio e comply with your request after you've made it clear to them i think that

00:59:17 think that sometimes there was direct contact with paul

00:59:21 paul i see now moving on in time to later in september can we go for these two ryd3018742

00:59:33 two ryd3018742 this is an email from neil crawford to you of the 24th of september 2014

00:59:44 to you of the 24th of september 2014 and it attaches a zip file containing a pack of drawings it's also copied to paul hansen and simon lawrence as we can see now this is about seven weeks after the

00:59:55 now this is about seven weeks after the full plans application had been submitted on the fourth of august was this the first time that you would receive drawings relating to the project other than those that had been marked up

01:00:06 other than those that had been marked up by mr hansen at the end of december 2013.

01:00:09 2013. yes and in the second sentence of the email he says i believe yourself and paul hanson sat down earlier in the year and did an initial appraisal of the proposed layout changes to the lower

01:00:20 proposed layout changes to the lower levels with bruce sainz from our office

01:00:26 is that correct had you done that that's the meeting i was referring to earlier do you remember when in the year earlier in the year you'd done that initial appraisal um um i i can't recall

01:00:39 um um i i can't recall uh that they as i say them there may be records

01:00:43 records in in paul hanson's files like on that do you remember whether that appraisal um covered the design construction or makeup of the

01:00:55 the design construction or makeup of the the overcladding system proposed that i couldn't tell you looking at this pack of of um drawings that comes in did you review this pack when it came in yes you did did you take notes about the

01:01:07 yes you did did you take notes about the drawings or on the drawings yes you did can you recall in general terms what your impression was about the quality or the completeness of the drawings that were submitted they weren't complete weren't complete

01:01:19 they weren't complete weren't complete now these drawings were issued to you clearly outside the statutory five-week time limit for a decision on the full plans application uh did that concern you

01:01:32 it did concern me that i wasn't getting information uh from them to in in my view uh the original application wasn't wasn't a valid application

01:01:43 wasn't a valid application [Music]

01:01:45 [Music] because it was wasn't complete but our office would accept just just a form as a valid submission

01:01:57 just just a form as a valid submission was there any policy within the building control department concerning compliance by surveyors with the five-week time limit

01:02:04 um i don't know whether there was any anything written down generally we would work to those those timetables but

01:02:16 timetables but as i say with this particular project the drawings weren't there and so we were waiting for information and i was i was trying to work with with

01:02:28 and i was i was trying to work with with the

01:02:28 the uh with the contractor and the architects was there any policy within the building control department for enforcing compliance by applicants

01:02:39 compliance by applicants with the time limit so for example rejecting applications that were out of time yeah

01:02:43 time yeah yes well what was that what was that policy for enforcement i don't know whether it was written down uh but uh

01:02:51 uh but uh if if uh

01:02:54 sometimes if if i had a an application there was no no drawings i would actually uh write down that plea rejection please

01:03:05 write down that plea rejection please submit

01:03:06 submit details a b c d e f g h do you know why you didn't reject the full plans application at this stage is out of time because because i was trying to work with right with with the contractor and

01:03:18 with with the contractor and studio studio e right now ms menses says that paragraph 326 of her report

01:03:28 report just for the it's bmer 60 704 page 101 that you should have rejected the full plans application due to a lack of supporting documentation

01:03:39 to a lack of supporting documentation to enable the application to be decided within the statutory time limit do you agree with that in hindsight yes but as i say at the time i was trying to work with them yes i understand okay now

01:03:50 work with them yes i understand okay now before we look at the details of these drawings i just want you to look at the last sentence of neil crawford's email he says uh i know you like to go through the drawings on an agreed process of release

01:04:02 drawings on an agreed process of release rather than just being swamped with everything at once so i'm just sending the following drawings to start with now if we go to his statement i do want to show you this this is sca

01:04:13 show you this this is sca 3014275 please at page 17. i'd like to show you paragraph 40 on that page and he says there that uh

01:04:27 there that uh this is the middle of the paragraph building control set its own agenda for checking off items and it made it clear to me that i would be contacted should further information be required so that's what he said in his witness

01:04:38 so that's what he said in his witness statement on day 11 at page 142 he told us that that reference was a reference

01:04:46 reference to his conversation with you on site in the week

01:04:49 the week of the 25th of august 2014 do you remember saying something along those lines to mr crawford at that time you don't is it right that you told

01:05:01 time you don't is it right that you told neil crawford that you didn't want to be swamped with everything at once

01:05:06 we would have it instead generally in stages that's how how how it would work but i don't actually

01:05:13 actually recall actually saying that saying though those words when i was dealing with the academy as i said things came in stages yes what

01:05:24 things came in stages yes what did you tell him that your workload is particularly heavy at this point and therefore you don't i don't believe right right

01:05:33 do you agree that only asking or only getting things in pieces tranches runs the risk that relevant information might be missed or might not be given to you because the relevant professionals are

01:05:44 because the relevant professionals are waiting for you to ask for it in other words when you were ready you would take on more

01:05:49 on more oh as i say it's their responsibility to to provide us with with information and i was

01:05:56 and i was i was chasing them for information or i don't

01:06:00 don't perhaps chasing isn't isn't the word i did mention it on on numerous occasions

01:06:08 occasions uh um as i say it sort of highlighted with the

01:06:12 with the with the calculations they didn't come in until

01:06:15 in until whatever date so i was always after them for information and i think it was yes it's coming let's now look at the drawings contained in the zip file that mr crawford

01:06:27 in the zip file that mr crawford attached and sent to you on the 24th of september 2014. can we please bring back document ryd 3018742

01:06:39 now

01:06:44 i just want to start with a general proposition the inquiries expert by whom i mean miss menses dr lane and mr hyatt each of those experts to the inquiry

01:06:56 each of those experts to the inquiry have looked at this zip file and come to the conclusion that the drawings listed in the covering email don't match the drawings in the zip file did you yourself do any checks of the

01:07:07 did you yourself do any checks of the drawings

01:07:08 drawings that you had in the zip file against the list to see if there were discrepancies um no i don't believe i i i would have uh i would have i would

01:07:19 i would have uh i would have i would have asked for uh somebody to process these drawings

01:07:26 so that i would have a number so as i say i don't know whether i actually emailed

01:07:33 emailed paul hanson this or whether i actually got them printed and filled in a a consultation form because there's a formal consultation form that i have to

01:07:45 form that i have to fill in and and send to the fire regulations group when consulting with them right did you note that the drawings named in the list were missing from the zip file

01:07:57 the list were missing from the zip file some of them were no i don't believe i did i mean for example did you note that fire access plan 1279

01:08:08 did you note that fire access plan 1279 sea brackets 08 brackets 100 b which is listed as the second i can't recall was missing

01:08:19 as the second i can't recall was missing you didn't exactly let me just go to an example of what those drawings did show

01:08:28 can we go to ryd3018750 now before you do this is this is drawing 1279 05 100 rev double zero south elevation and that's

01:08:40 double zero south elevation and that's the sixth

01:08:42 the sixth drawing down under basic clans can we just go to that there's ryd30 is one eight seven four five zero so the email says it's

01:08:53 five zero so the email says it's included

01:08:57 and this is that drawing

01:09:04 did you generally check the revision numbers for drawings to see if they match the covering email

01:09:15 sometimes i did sometimes i didn't okay looking at this drawing can we just zoom in on the top left-hand side this is the south elevation

01:09:30 side this is the south elevation we're going to have to do our best i think with this unless we can make it a little bit clearer but i want to show you item five

01:09:38 in the top right hand corner

01:09:44 i can read it to you um item five says perhaps we can't zoom in any further but it says zinc spandrel panel for cladding

01:09:57 it says zinc spandrel panel for cladding to residential floors item seven says zinc crown elements and item nine says zinc column cladding do you remember seeing a drawing like

01:10:08 do you remember seeing a drawing like this at that time telling you that zinc cladding panels were proposed yes you do yes it doesn't say what kind of panel whether it's a zinc panel with a metal core or zinc

01:10:20 with a metal core or zinc with a composite core which did exist did you think to yourself at the time what kind of panel is this

01:10:31 what kind of panel is this yes yes you did think it did you i i believe so did you ask anyone at the time

01:10:36 time what kind of panel is this i can't i can't recall right well you were aware that they were available in the market two kinds of zinc panels at least two kinds one with a a a honeycomb core

01:10:49 one with a a a honeycomb core in other words a metal inert core and one with a with a composite core no you didn't there's also no mention here

01:11:01 of any type of insulation that would be installed behind the panel did you spot that

01:11:07 that yes did you take that up with anybody i i did i was waiting for details did you say to anyone at the time well this drawing is incomplete because it doesn't tell me what the insulation is

01:11:18 doesn't tell me what the insulation is as i said i was waiting for dee uh further details because that wasn't quite

01:11:22 quite my question did you actually say to anyone what's the insulation i don't see it on the drawing i can't recall right

01:11:32 how would you be able to assess if the cladding was likely to comply with b4 of the building regulations if you didn't know

01:11:39 know the type of zinc rain screen panel or the insulation being proposed i think i

01:11:46 i i've the contractor told me what they were using at some stage and obviously on site i could see that they were using

01:11:57 on site i could see that they were using celetex

01:11:58 celetex when it arrived on site whatever date that was

01:12:01 that was well that's looking forward in time and will come to that but at this stage given these drawings you can see what you can see and you see you can see what you can't see yeah my question is did you take up at

01:12:12 yeah my question is did you take up at that stage with either the architect or ryden

01:12:16 ryden the fact that you did not see what kind of for example insulation was being prepared i asked for more details on the insulation specifically on the job

01:12:26 job right job

01:12:29 let's move on sea 50231 please this is a few days later 29th of september 2013 this is an email from neil crawford to

01:12:40 this is an email from neil crawford to you

01:12:42 you in which if we go to page three of that document

01:12:46 document we can see that there is a an email

01:12:53 to to you uh john please see attach the current x over study which was written prior to the fire strategy rev b changes and also attached the correspondence with x over relating to

01:13:04 correspondence with x over relating to the rev b

01:13:04 the rev b changes which we will modify accordingly

01:13:09 when that came to you did you read the x over outline fire safety strategy version three

01:13:21 i would assume so i can't i as i say i i can't

01:13:25 can't it doesn't stand out right do you think you made a record of your thoughts

01:13:32 thoughts or comments about it anywhere may i highlighted something on it i i would have sent this on to paul as well right at that time well let's just look

01:13:44 right at that time well let's just look at

01:13:45 at the document he sent you and we can't see from the face of the email what it is he's sending you but from another document we can and it is cst

01:13:56 another document we can and it is cst 50702 please

01:14:03 this is the grenfell tower outline fire safety strategy issue number three 7th of november 2013. just looking at its first page does it does it trigger a recollection that this

01:14:15 does it trigger a recollection that this is a document you've seen before i can't remember which can't remember no right

01:14:24 no right well let's look at page nine and see if this triggers a recollection i'd like you to look please at paragraph 3.1.4

01:14:32 3.1.4 under compliance with b4 external fire spread now this was your domain yes it is considered say x over that the proposed changes will have no

01:14:43 that the proposed changes will have no adverse effect on the building in relation to external fire spread but this will be confirmed by an analysis in a future issue of the report when you receive this document on the

01:14:54 when you receive this document on the 29th of september 2014 did you notice that did you notice that i was aware of that about that statement but whether it was at that particular

01:15:05 but whether it was at that particular time

01:15:05 time because i'd seen it in in the initial uh initial fire strategy the initial first action

01:15:14 action for or some sorry using my hands there uh let me see if i can help you had received uh issued which had been dated the 24th of

01:15:26 the 24th of uh october 2013 or rather it had been received by building control do you think you'd seen that

01:15:34 that i had seen that right as i say that uh this one uh i feel i would have read it but i can't i can't

01:15:46 i can't i can't say that i read it on a particular day did you

01:15:53 did you come to any conclusion about whether this document as far as you can recall it at all was sufficient for the purposes of a full of the full plans application

01:16:06 the full plans application now it'd be it'd be it would be

01:16:12 could you sorry could you repeat yes when mr crawford sent you this document and i know you say you can't remember reading it but did you have any thoughts at the time about whether it was sufficient for the purposes of the full the full

01:16:24 for the purposes of the full the full plans application it was part part of it right now we know that no future analysis uh on b4 had ever was ever carried out

01:16:35 uh on b4 had ever was ever carried out after november 2013. did you note the fact that it had been promised

01:16:47 i may have what i would say is uh when when i was uh issuing the certificate

01:16:58 when i was uh issuing the certificate uh at the end

01:17:06 i may not have gone back to the file and and done

01:17:09 and done things as i should have done i think it would follow from that answer that you never as a matter of fact went

01:17:20 that you never as a matter of fact went back to ryden or studio e and asked for this report to be updated with a future analysis i don't think i do do you know why that is

01:17:31 as i say at the end there was a lot of outside influences going on [Music]

01:17:41 [Music] and i was

01:17:46 i was having difficulty in in dealing with with with things generally due to a

01:17:57 generally due to a family matters that were going on at that time

01:18:01 that time and uh

01:18:06 mr chairman i'm in the middle of a line of questions but i think it's probably a right i think we should the right time for a break yes we'll have a bit of a break now right um we'll come back at 20 to four please and

01:18:19 we'll come back at 20 to four please and uh

01:18:20 uh again please don't talk to anyone about your evidence while you're away thank you

01:18:35 24 empties

01:36:59 yes would you ask mr haven to come in

01:37:04 please

01:37:18 right mr tubin ready to carry on yes i am

01:37:21 am thank you i don't know

01:37:27 [Music]

01:37:31 all right just take your time

01:37:36 would you like to go out for a moment and just

01:38:00 should we have a couple of minutes no i'll be okay sure yes no uh in relation to my

01:38:11 uh in relation to my my last answer uh about about not not asking for uh the fire strategy

01:38:23 uh the fire strategy i don't know whether it be appropriate for

01:38:27 for for uh for me to tell you what was going on

01:38:31 on on in my in my personal life at that particular time well can i suggest you we just pass over that for the moment all right all right thank you

01:38:43 all right all right thank you i think we all understand that you were going through a very difficult time yes and we don't want to pry into your right right right right thank you um so just take a moment to all right

01:38:55 so just take a moment to all right close to yourself right all right yes thank you thank you thank you right yes right sorry mr hogan it's quite all right um

01:39:06 right um just coming back to where we were before the break

01:39:11 the break just focusing on the question of the cladding package is it is it right that no comprehensive cladding package was ever provided to you

01:39:19 you not not full comprehensive right and i think it's right you didn't request one either i did ask for information yes i did as i say i i repeatedly asked for information i

01:39:32 i repeatedly asked for information i i found out certain information myself through uh talking with the contractor and actually seeing what was done on site

01:39:42 site yes can we look at a document rbk3048693 please

01:39:52 now just to put it in its precise time context uh this is an email from you mr hogan of the 29th of september 2014

01:40:04 2014 to mr hansen uh and you forwarded you forward to him on that day the email that you'd had from neil crawford

01:40:15 email that you'd had from neil crawford on the 24th of september you can see that and you ask him you say please may i have your observations onto part b

01:40:22 part b of the building regulations for the attached proposals for the grenfell tower redevelopment

01:40:29 now this is looking at the timing um quite curious because you can see that you

01:40:37 that you um you get the uh

01:40:43 you get the um x over ofss that we asked that we saw before on the 29th of september as we saw before and this is an email you're sending to

01:40:55 and this is an email you're sending to mr mr hanson 10 minutes before you got that so it looks on the emails that you are asking him for

01:41:02 him for his observations only a few minutes before you actually then receive the outline

01:41:08 outline fire safety strategy did my question is did you intend mr hansen to comment on b3 and b4 or the whole of b

01:41:22 um the whole

01:41:29 where it was b1 and b5 but in concert when you're considering b1 and b5 you also look at other other aspects right now as i say just to

01:41:40 other aspects right now as i say just to be clear we saw earlier that you'd received on the same day the 29th of september the email from neil crawford at 1637 that was sca50231 where he sent you the

01:41:53 that was sca50231 where he sent you the x over

01:41:54 x over ofss the outline fire safety strategy version 3. here we see you 10 minutes before that at 1627

01:42:02 at 1627 se uh asking mr hansen for a view did you send the outline fire safety strategy you then got 10 minutes later to mr hansen that i don't know right

01:42:16 to mr hansen that i don't know right it looks as if you could have done but we don't see any record of you doing so can you help us with why you didn't do so on the facebook i i'm very certain that i would have sent it because

01:42:28 sent it because in order for him to consider it it would have

01:42:33 you know been part of that

01:42:37 how would you have sent it to him if not by email

01:42:40 by email would you have printed it off and put it on his desk i may have right generally what what what happened as i say that there's a special form to be filled in as well right that we had it was a standard form

01:42:53 right that we had it was a standard form uh that we would have to fill in uh which i would generally hand write and

01:43:00 and that was part of the process we we we had together with drawings now we can see you sending this request on the 29th of september

01:43:11 on the 29th of september it appears that paul hansen didn't reply to this request for comments until the 10th of november 2014 and i'll show you a document in a moment to show you that but would

01:43:22 in a moment to show you that but would that would does that correspond with your recollection yeah long gap yeah from what i've read through the information that i've received right rbk let's have a rbk3033895

01:43:36 rbk let's have a rbk3033895 please this is his response on the 10th of november 2014

01:43:46 and i think we need to go to page two and this is over a month after you'd asked him to give comments do you know

01:43:57 asked him to give comments do you know the reason for the delay

01:44:01 that would have been uh i can only surmise it was his workload at the time right and it deals with b1 means of escape observations there's nothing in here about b3 and

01:44:13 there's nothing in here about b3 and critically nothing about b4 external fire spread and about the cladding do you know why that is um that's a standard form that he uses

01:44:24 um that's a standard form that he uses and as i say i was i was

01:44:29 responsible for b2 and b3 before but as i mentioned to you when when considering b1 you have to look at other aspects of

01:44:41 you have to look at other aspects of of the scheme as well it as a whole yes but you told us earlier that you hadn't limited as indeed we see from the email

01:44:50 email yeah you haven't limited paul hanson to comments on b1 you'd said part b he made it very clear but here you were only getting comments on b1

01:45:00 on b1 uh and given that he was your go-to man for fire issues on b four why did you not go back to him and say

01:45:10 say well paul this is fine for b1 but can i please have your comments on b4 why didn't you do that

01:45:21 let's look at page three of that document

01:45:25 about halfway down page three um he says under the heading new non-residential access to residential stairway

01:45:36 stairway and he makes a comment about the boxing club

01:45:39 club limited uh connected to a single stairway

01:45:42 stairway and then a comment about the fire um consultants providing our 0.4 square meter natural ventilated lobby connections and he then says therefore rbkc are not

01:45:53 and he then says therefore rbkc are not in a position to approve the proposals at this stage due to the need for the design team to establish an acceptable extract rate for the power lobby powered lobby ventilation system and the provision of ventilated lobby protection

01:46:05 provision of ventilated lobby protection to all stairway connections to residential and other uses now can we take it from that statement that paul hanson's view limited though it was to be

01:46:16 it was to be one with was that the full plans application could not be approved at that stage yes or he couldn't send it to the uh to the

01:46:24 the uh lfb lfepa right for consultation and if it couldn't be approved at that stage uh or even be submitted to the epa for consultation

01:46:35 consultation uh it couldn't be approved at all yeah is that right yes yes now you um also went to site on the 29th of september 2014 and we can see that from your note um rbk3052478

01:46:50 note um rbk3052478 again please page six this time

01:46:58 and

01:47:02 halfway down that page we can see this date entry and the action is described as a pre-start visit and you say visited site met project manager had brief discussion about the project workman's still presently carrying out demolition works

01:47:14 presently carrying out demolition works nothing to check at time of visit demolition works to go on for at least another month also inform the project manager that i just received up-to-date details of the works

01:47:23 works was the reference to receiving up-to-date details of the works a reference to neil crawford's email of the 24th of september 2014 in which he sent you that zip file full of drawings yes it was do you remember whether you

01:47:36 yes it was do you remember whether you looked at those drawings before going to site

01:47:39 site um no i don't recall okay what did the second

01:47:43 second quotes brief conversation about the project unquotes involved do you remember

01:47:51 remember i i can't recall it uh right now now it could as i say now we then go on in time to the full plans decision uh which is a different topic you say in

01:48:03 uh which is a different topic you say in your second statement and just for reference purposes to save time this is paragraph 11 on page four of your second statement you say that the rbkc document p60

01:48:14 you say that the rbkc document p60 sorry p6 sets out the formal process used by the building control department for the full plans application that's right is it yes yes now if you go to the p6 this is rbk3052486

01:48:29 go to the p6 this is rbk3052486 please five two four eight six um this is a it looks as if this is a p6

01:48:41 looks as if this is a p6 and this one is dated at the 10th of august issue 3 prepared by john allen is this a standard form it's it's a form

01:48:53 is this a standard form it's it's a form that he

01:48:56 the p6 is a document that was produced by john allen i see and if we look at the fourth box down in the last sentence it says for fpa full plans application

01:49:10 it says for fpa full plans application meaningful response made to applicant within 10 days from receipt of application and noted on accolade you see that do you agree that that did not happen with the grenfell tower full plans

01:49:22 with the grenfell tower full plans application correct why is that why didn't it happen i was waiting for observations from paul right from paul hansen yeah which you then didn't get until mid-november or the 10th of november

01:49:35 mid-november or the 10th of november and that was only on b1 yeah and even then it wasn't enough to pass the application as i say meaningful response was

01:49:50 could mean a meeting request for details that's how general it was in in our office

01:49:57 office right you say that's how generally it was in our office i wonder if that is quite right can we look at what john allen says can we go to his first statement which

01:50:08 can we go to his first statement which is

01:50:08 is rbk

01:50:12 and i'd like to go to page three please and on page three we go to paragraph 15 and he says as a surveyor the typical process of checking a building regulation

01:50:24 checking a building regulation application would be to sort out the drawings you need to look at look at each drawing make a list as you go along thinking through the building regulations and then usually write a letter

01:50:36 and then usually write a letter suggesting amendments with a commentary which includes reference to the building regulations for example one might tell the applicant that they have not provided structural calculations [Applause]

01:50:48 [Applause] do you agree with that summary

01:50:53 um no that that wasn't the case in our office um at all uh i beli that's my

01:51:05 at all uh i beli that's my my view so let's just go through this in in bits if we can would you say that it wasn't a typical process within the rbkc department that you would

01:51:14 you would sort out the drawings you needed to look at uh well you would would do that but it wasn't

01:51:18 it wasn't uh yes she would do that but that that there was requesting information as well

01:51:25 well uh or having a meeting would be classed uh to discuss proposals that would be classed as a meaningful response so that you i think i'm getting the

01:51:36 so that you i think i'm getting the sense from your answers that was an iterative process a little bit sorry you would you would you'd do it as you you wouldn't do it in one go you might do it in in stages yeah is that right

01:51:47 in stages yeah is that right yes um mr tobin would it be fair to

01:51:52 understand that mr hans uh mr allen here is um

01:51:56 is um assuming that you've got a full plans application in front of you with all the plans

01:52:01 plans yeah yeah and then he's describing how difficult you'd go about yes processing it yes yes if you did have all the plans would you do it in this way or would

01:52:12 you do it in this way or would typically be done in this way yes so that wasn't always the case oh well that's so just following up on that when he

01:52:24 so just following up on that when he says the typical process is a is a process typical when applied to the full plans application how typical was it that you would have a full plans application with to which this process could be

01:52:42 applied

01:52:47 in most cases it would it depend on on the size of the project obviously yes in most cases it would i think is yeah yes yes

01:52:55 yes yes so does that tell us that grenfell tower was an exception to the norm no as i say there were cases where where you got

01:53:03 you got little information

01:53:07 was it your experience that

01:53:11 you you wouldn't have a fully compliant or

01:53:14 or a full full plans application capable of being submitted to this typical process that's described where it was a design and build contract

01:53:24 um in your experience well the only one i can relate to is is the academy and the leisure center

01:53:36 is the academy and the leisure center and i i took those over at uh er when they were coming out of the ground and i i did a schedule

01:53:48 and i i did a schedule for both when they were coming out of the ground they schedules hadn't been done

01:53:53 done prior to them starting right

01:53:58 i don't think i could i've quite got a feeling for whatever well it takes me yeah but uh as i say so the full plans applications for those who went in and there weren't schedules

01:54:09 schedules uh i was asked to to or not asked i was instructed to deal with them and then had a meeting right and the process started

01:54:19 started so that was the design and build contract as well yes so you say your experience of design and build contracts it seems on certainly on calc it's it's it's very very limited to to to

01:54:31 it's it's very very limited to to to to those particular projects i think all right

01:54:35 right um

01:54:39 do you agree that a part b review of a full plans application for grenfell should have comprised a detailed scrutiny of the fire safety proposal set out of the plans and documents provided

01:54:50 out of the plans and documents provided by the applicant yes and an assessment by you as the building control officer as to whether there was an ad there was adequate detail to allow an assessment to be made yeah and a review of um

01:55:04 yeah and a review of um a record a record of the review noting any variations from recognized guidance um yes as i say that they had certain information on on the plan plans

01:55:15 certain information on on the plan plans but as i say as we know they they changed

01:55:21 and should it have comprised also an assessment of whether the proposal was generally compliant uh as regards b1 and b5 so as to allow the fire authority to

01:55:33 so as to allow the fire authority to have a proper consultation as far as i can recall there was two to two consultations with the brigade

01:55:44 yes my question is a general more general one should the full plans application have given you enough information to to allow uh consultation with the fire authority in relation to compliance

01:55:55 fire authority in relation to compliance with b1 and b5 yes and should it have comprised enough information um so as to allow the issue of a decision notice as a record of the approved or rejected works

01:56:08 of the approved or rejected works yes thank you um when you carried out your review did you use a checklist yes as i mentioned that that that um

01:56:21 i mentioned that that that um sorry that that document i i mentioned check check the the plans checker yeah i see did you record your review anywhere whether on that plan or in your

01:56:32 whether on that plan or in your notebooks or as i say it would have been on the sheet right and then there'd be a list of of of information now we've seen the memorandum prepared by paul hanson in response to your

01:56:44 by paul hanson in response to your question limited though it was to be one did you prepare a similar memorandum in respect of b two three and four yes you did yes in a formal way in in the

01:56:55 you did yes in a formal way in in the way we saw it we've seen it with him uh no it would be well cutting pasting clauses

01:57:03 clauses right but did you prepare a formal standalone paper report as far as i'm aware yes do you remember when you did that

01:57:14 when that application came in in the uh was it the september november time well it came in on the fourth of august oh sorry 2014 yes

01:57:27 now in your second statement if we can have paragraph 12 at page four please you say

01:57:36 that uh uh

01:57:42 and this is paragraph 12. this is the question is following receipt of the application form for the refurbishment works to grenfell tower from studio e dated fifth of august 2014.

01:57:53 of august 2014. that was july 4th of august was a decision notice ever issued if not why not

01:57:58 not and your answer is i don't know if a decision notice was ever issued if it was not then i do not know why not i completed the standard form p60 and the scheduler conditions and informatives in order for the decision-makers to be processed by the

01:58:09 decision-makers to be processed by the building control business support team um

01:58:16 now we know that this was around the 18th of november 2014 because i think you emailed studio e to say a decision notice would be forwarded shortly

01:58:27 shortly um and we we can have we have that at sea three zeroes one four two seven six at page twenty five there's no need to bring it up can we take it that you had concluded based on the information provided to you with the full plans

01:58:39 provided to you with the full plans application that the project was likely to comply with the building regulations no well there'd be it'd be conditions it would be

01:58:46 would be i don't know for example

01:58:52 the fire time on the building was two hours

01:58:55 hours uh lining shall be in accordance with such and suc of the building regulations uh cavity barriers shall be provided in accordance with

01:59:06 accordance with section nine is it uh it'd be it be conditions

01:59:14 and do you remember where you put those conditions was that into the standard form p60

01:59:19 form p60 it would be attached to that

01:59:23 yes i see now we've just looked at paul hanson's

01:59:27 hanson's view on the b1 proposals and that was that rbkc couldn't approve them for the reasons he sets out can you explain how it was that you were able to pass the full plans application although

01:59:37 although with conditions would it would be subject to conditions i see

01:59:46 now we've seen some of the information provided with respect to the facade and we noted

01:59:52 we noted zinc for elements of the of the exterior and also the absence of any mention even of insulation on the on the south elevation drawing i showed you

02:00:03 showed you given that that drawing you had on the 24th of september 2014 didn't contain sufficient detail about the type of cladding panel or insulation to be used how could you

02:00:14 or insulation to be used how could you conclude that the full plans application should pass will be with conditions we would do we would do that as a general a general standard for example if uh

02:00:28 standard for example if uh if structural details hadn't been submitted we would make that a condition right do you remember whether you did make

02:00:36 make a condition of the provision of details of the insulation a condition i can't recall i would have i would have said that the uh the insulation would be uh in accordance with uh have you got

02:00:50 uh in accordance with uh have you got could you call up the building regulations for me please is that possible um yes uh it's uh it's clg well which part do you want to see

02:01:04 maybe section 12 section 12. i think that's clg50224 from memory uh and that's 95 from memory

02:01:15 uh and that's 95 from memory uh but i think i showed you clg 173 well there it is yeah um it's one of them yeah

02:01:23 yeah insulation and cladding systems should be in the cor i i can't actually remember the words but it would as i say as a as a general rightly external

02:01:33 external you know the cloning system should be in compliance with section 12. please provide further information i i i can't actually as i say

02:01:45 i i i can't actually as i say no i mean cutting to the point do you agree that you should either have requested

02:01:49 requested further details of the facade works including the specifications for the insulation itself or else rejected the full plans application because the applicant had not demonstrated that the works complied with b4

02:02:03 that's how it was done in at that time i understand what you're saying but do you agree with me

02:02:18 you agree with me in hindsight yes but as i say we we would we would issue uh conditional approval with conditions well let's just go back to mr cruz i'll just interrupt you for a

02:02:29 to mr cruz i'll just interrupt you for a moment yes um i understand what you're saying about conditional improvement and approval and so on what would what steps would you

02:02:40 so on what would what steps would you take to make sure that the condition was properly satisfied by site inspection and further information coming in

02:02:51 information coming in would you expect the

02:02:54 the designer to submit drawings or a specification identifying the that's the sake of argument the insulation yes i did ask for that but as

02:03:06 insulation yes i did ask for that but as i

02:03:06 i found out what they were using on site but ideally you'd want to know what it was before they started using it well ideally yes and i'm wondering whether you required a

02:03:20 and i'm wondering whether you required a specification of the relevant material i don't recall receiving a specification

02:03:30 so the condition wasn't really a condition of satisfying you that the material was appropriate it was a condition of using the appropriate material

02:03:38 material yes with the risks that of course that they might not well as i say uh um i was looking at at what was on site and then i

02:03:49 and then i checked against the bba certificate yeah right thank you that's helpful thank you very much mr chairman i'm just going to follow that up a little bit more quickly i can with questions i've already got on this point

02:04:01 questions i've already got on this point can we go to mr crawford's email uh um i'm sorry the email to mr crawford 10th november 2014 which is rbk3033895

02:04:16 10th november 2014 which is rbk3033895 and i think we've looked at that before um i just want to show it to you um i

02:04:33 again i mean this is what was sent to neil crawford and again we've seen that this doesn't mention any lack of detailed information on b4 we can take that as red because it only deals with b1

02:04:42 b1 and i suppose b5 as well do you know why at this stage neil crawford was not told to provide detailed information which would help you decide whether

02:04:54 which would help you decide whether the design was compliant with b4 it would have come out in the decision notice

02:05:02 notice right well let's move on to the reason i haven't got the the

02:05:11 my email uh to neil crawford app got the memorandum form 53.

02:05:24 uh as i say it says this scheme has been sent

02:05:27 sent for consultation uh yes um well in relation to the decision latest itself

02:05:39 decision latest itself that would be done on a form 60 or from a form 60 wouldn't it yes i think you've said um we just have a look at

02:05:47 a look at the uh a blank form 60 a pro forma which is rbk3052487

02:06:02 forma which is rbk3052487 i think this is no more than what it says there it's a full plans decision tick sheet yeah see that uh it doesn't appear to be any room on

02:06:14 it doesn't appear to be any room on there

02:06:16 there for identifying what the conditions are it would be a schedule attached oh i see right

02:06:23 right we can't locate or rather rbkc i think are themselves unable to locate the actual form 60 for grenfell tower do you remember whether you did attach a schedule of conditions to the form of 60

02:06:35 schedule of conditions to the form of 60 that you filled out as far as i'm uh as far as i can did any of those conditions relate to the facade do you think yes do you remember what they were they said

02:06:45 said i can't now right did you record those conditions anywhere other than on the form 60

02:06:51 form 60 itself the schedule right now we've seen no record at all of any conditions in any documents

02:07:02 either in correspondence or in any documents or in any emails we certainly haven't seen any emails from you to neil crawford showing the conditions were attached certainly which related to the facade

02:07:13 which related to the facade are you quite sure that you did impose conditions i'm i'm certain as i can be right

02:07:22 and with that certainty can you help us with what the conditions were doing the best you can with your recollection i can't speak sorry i'll be only guessing was it not

02:07:33 sorry i'll be only guessing was it not important to record the conditions elsewhere other than on the p60 says to make sure

02:07:38 make sure that you could check that they complied with were complied with as the project progressed

02:07:45 it would have been important yes but did you do that i i don't know right once you've filled out the p60 form what

02:07:56 once you've filled out the p60 form what did you do with it do you remember go into a basket a basket yeah so uh a tray right for uh business support group to process

02:08:09 for uh business support group to process i see did you check if it had been issued after you put it in this basket i can't recall right would you normally follow up to check whether a just a conditional p60 paths

02:08:21 a just a conditional p60 paths of a full plans application had been issued formally not all the time right given that you were responsible for this project do you accept that you should

02:08:32 project do you accept that you should have checked whether the decision notice had actually been issued upon me yes yes would a decision notice normally be

02:08:40 be signed or stamped to authenticate it no i think it was had just had a normal uh

02:08:48 uh i believe it had a facsimile of a signature

02:08:52 signature as far as i can recall mr german i'm going to turn to a totally different topic or well it's a topic which emerges from the last one i think um i certainly won't finish it tonight but

02:09:03 i certainly won't finish it tonight but i can certainly make some headway with it in the next 15 or 20 minutes or so if we may well let's see how far we can may we thank you that'd be very good um i wanted to examine with you mr hoban the facade and

02:09:15 examine with you mr hoban the facade and in particular the cladding by which i mean the external rain screen panels and the insulation the two major elements of the exterior wall system

02:09:26 exterior wall system we've already looked at the initial information provided with the full plans application you'd i start now then with the nbs specification you told us this morning uh almost in

02:09:37 you told us this morning uh almost in passing

02:09:38 passing that you had never seen a copy of the nbs

02:09:41 nbs specification for this project is that correct i haven't i don't believe it was sent to me i may have seen

02:09:48 have seen uh some of it on site while when uh when i was visiting but i can't be absolutely certain right

02:10:00 so you may have done right now the drawings

02:10:04 drawings do you remember that the drawings refer to sections of the nbs specification

02:10:12 what drawings are these please uh well um the drawings that you were sent on the 24th of september does they actually say that on the drawings well we can we can let's see how we go

02:10:25 well we can we can let's see how we go with this

02:10:25 with this do you remember let me try it this way do you remember seeing drawings which referred

02:10:29 referred to for example h92 in a little ring yeah you do all right now let's then start with the rain screen cladding panels we know from other

02:10:40 cladding panels we know from other documents that that formal planning permission was granted

02:10:44 granted eventually i think on the 30th of september 2014 to change the panels from zinc to aluminium composite material or acf and we know that from from the

02:10:56 or acf and we know that from from the records

02:10:57 records at the time did anybody within rbkc alert you to that development not to my knowledge right

02:11:06 now in your second statement at paragraph 25 for the transcript this is rbk3050416 at page seven you said that you had access to the

02:11:18 you said that you had access to the planning section of accolade but that you can't recall if that access was restricted did you ever check accolade to see what materials had been approved for use on

02:11:30 materials had been approved for use on the facade no you didn't why is that i generally wouldn't wouldn't uh right i would only go to playing drawings

02:11:42 i would only go to playing drawings if i was aware of uh a contravention and and get planning enforcement involved did anyone from the project when i say

02:11:54 did anyone from the project when i say from the project i mean the professionals involved on it such as studio e

02:11:57 studio e or ryden tell you that the rain screen [Music]

02:12:05 [Music] the materials or products had changed from zinc

02:12:09 from zinc to aluminium composite

02:12:12 that i can't recall that but obviously i i found that out at some stage i don't know whether i was uh and i know i met uh ben bailey uh

02:12:26 met uh ben bailey uh because he's the young person that i described in my when where whether he told me it was acm or

02:12:34 or or something else like i can't i can't i can't recall right well ben bailey as we know came into the project as harley's project manager from

02:12:46 harley's project manager from early february 2015. the change to aluminium composite panels acm was essentially approved at

02:12:57 panels acm was essentially approved at the end of july 2014 and formally approved by planning at the end of september 2014 so so five months before that my question is

02:13:07 is did anyone from studio e or ryden tell you in 2014 either in july or in september or early october maybe

02:13:17 maybe uh that the rain screen had changed from zinc to acn i i can't recall would you expect a contractor or a designer to update you about changes to the materials to be used in the facade yes i

02:13:28 materials to be used in the facade yes i would

02:13:29 would yes

02:13:33 if they hadn't done so would you keep tabs on the project to make sure that you at least could make satisfy yourself that no changes had been made or would you just rely on them to tell

02:13:44 or would you just rely on them to tell you and if they didn't tell you you'd assume that it was a well not as per the application i could clearly see when the works was being done that it wasn't zinc it's acme yes indeed and and

02:13:55 it's acme yes indeed and and we'll come to that but i i'm just interested to know whether anybody actually just told you at the time don't don't recall but obviously uh the original drawings had sync on there

02:14:06 the original drawings had sync on there and i could tell that it wasn't zinc right you could tell that it wasn't seen yes did you ever see any drawings that said acm that i can't i

02:14:17 that said acm that i can't i i i can't recall right um in your second statement

02:14:21 statement page 13 can we just go to that i want to show you paragraph 38a and ask you a question about it you say that top of the page

02:14:33 you say that top of the page you say from reports shown on television and given in the press evidence given to the pi

02:14:37 the pi that's the public inquiry i think by expert witnesses on the subject my belief is that celetex insulation boarding and filler material used on the project was not of limiting combustibility as perpendicular paragraph 9 of approved

02:14:49 as perpendicular paragraph 9 of approved document b what do you mean there by the term filler material making good full of material right

02:15:00 making good full of material right so you don't mean just to be very clear about this you don't mean do you the core of the acm now no i don't right

02:15:10 and was it your view at the time of your work on the grenfell tower project that filler material was making good material as opposed to the core of a panel correct right now you

02:15:23 correct right now you go on in that paragraph to say the external surfaces of the acm cladding used stroke fixed did not meet with the provision set out in 12.5 to 12.6 b4 approved document b

02:15:35 b4 approved document b when you say the acm external surface of the acm cladding did not meet with those provisions what do you mean by that

02:15:46 do you mean by that that it wasn't classo it was my understanding and from the information i had at the time that that the acm was classo uh in the news they said it

02:15:58 was classo uh in the news they said it wasn't

02:15:59 wasn't classo so i'm reporting on what was said in in the press and on television i follow

02:16:13 now in your first statement if we can just go back to that rbk3033934 page six please i'd like us to look

02:16:24 page six please i'd like us to look together at paragraph 57

02:16:29 and you say there in answer to the question was the exterior of the building including the clouding insulation fixing and windows compliant with the relevant building regulations fire regulations other legislation

02:16:41 fire regulations other legislation bushy standards including testing requirements guidance and industry practice

02:16:44 practice you say based on the information i had at the time it was my understanding that it was compliant however the cladding has now been shown not to be compliant as a result of the cladding that was specified would be used

02:16:55 used was not in fact used is it your evidence that you were never told that the panels have been changed from zinc to acm

02:17:05 as a staff well i go back to what i said before

02:17:09 before i'm not not certain of that but i actually uh i could see that they weren't zinc uh as i say i saw that on

02:17:20 i say i saw that on on site whether i was ever ever told or i don't recall it receiving an email saying that it had been changed right but

02:17:31 but it became a way of i became aware through my inspections whether i would as i say was told the time i can't i can't recall

02:17:42 the time i can't i can't recall did it not surprise you when you did first see rayna bond acm panels on the building that you hadn't been told

02:17:49 been told at any earlier stage that those panels were going to be on the building whether by studio e or by ryden and whether in a document or plan or drawing

02:18:01 at the time it didn't surprise me because things change things change though in accordance with the process and my question is

02:18:12 the process and my question is have it you haven't seen anything in the documents to alert you to this change when you did see it on the building eventually in 2015 did it not surprise you that the

02:18:23 did it not surprise you that the external uh surface had changed from zinc as per the drawings to aluminium as per what was on the building

02:18:31 as i say it's not not not something that comes to mind right so

02:18:40 you know as i say things things

02:18:46 i'll give you an example if i may uh with regards the the uh the sports center they were going to use a particular type of staircase

02:18:58 particular type of staircase and then all of a sudden a different staircasing

02:19:04 right well let me put it this way given that you'd seen that acm was on the building having been told in the drawings

02:19:11 drawings and we saw the south elevation in the september of 2014 that it was going to be zinc did it not make you wonder what else studio e or ryden hadn't told you about

02:19:22 studio e or ryden hadn't told you about the external facade and its makeup at the time it didn't register right should it have done

02:19:34 right should it have done in hindsight yes uh um what what i would say i'd work with a lot of the professionals on on on this project

02:19:45 on on on this project on on the other other schemes and i had a confidence in them uh you know the architects and and the various other professionals

02:19:57 various other professionals and x and x over so i had i had um

02:20:08 you know i dealt with them and and and i i considered that they knew what they were doing right do we take from that answer that because of your experiences with studio e and x

02:20:19 of your experiences with studio e and x over on the calc project you had perhaps a closer working relationship that you might than otherwise you might have done yes and did that lead you to trust them yes

02:20:28 yes did you know that exo at studio e had never done an external overcloud of a high-rise building no i didn't and and in evidence that come out

02:20:39 and and in evidence that come out since it was always my understanding that xover were fully involved in the project there's a number of emails that show mr ashton copied in nobody ever came

02:20:53 mr ashton copied in nobody ever came back to me and said well we're not using x it was always my understanding that every

02:21:00 every there was a team there dealing with the project

02:21:04 project uh did you take comfort from the fact that mr

02:21:08 that mr ashton was involved in something yes yes

02:21:14 and on studio e were you a little bit softer on them than you otherwise might have been

02:21:19 have been and because of your relationship no no but

02:21:22 but as i say i work with them for quite a considerable time on on the academy

02:21:32 and i considered that architects would it were reasonable to expect that they they would know and understand building regulations

02:21:46 know and understand building regulations was it not your job to hold them to the highest

02:21:49 highest standards of compliance with the building regulations completely independently and ruthlessly you know in hindsight yes but i'd work with them on

02:22:00 with them on on the other project and as i say working with them there you know it i spent a lot more time

02:22:11 you know it i spent a lot more time because of the uh dealing with it because i was only dealing with one area and this in this particular instance

02:22:22 and this in this particular instance i'd worked with them over a period of time and it was my understanding that they knew

02:22:27 they knew they knew what they were doing now just before we finish for the day mr hoban

02:22:34 hoban you mentioned a number of times in your evidence that you saw the bba certificate for these panels in other words the iconic manufactured rainy bond pe 55

02:22:47 iconic manufactured rainy bond pe 55 acm panels we're going to come to it in due course i think tomorrow now um do you remember the circumstances in which you saw that document

02:22:59 i would have looked it up at some stage did were you ever given it by anybody on the project i i don't recall do you know what prompted you to look it up on the

02:23:10 prompted you to look it up on the project

02:23:12 project to check that to see if it was classo do you know what stage you did you did that you remember no i can't presumably it was after having seen it on the building yes yes

02:23:27 mr chairman as i say we are mid topic but i think given it's been a long day it sounds as it might be a good point

02:23:34 point i think it but it's as good a point given that it's half past four i think it probably is yes well mr hogan we're going to break there for the day i'm afraid i'm going to have to ask you

02:23:45 i'm afraid i'm going to have to ask you to come back tomorrow for some more questions

02:23:48 questions but i think you were probably expecting that yes

02:23:51 that yes um after you leave the room please remember

02:23:55 remember not to talk to anyone about your evidence or anything to do with it over the break and we'll resume at 10 o'clock tomorrow morning please all right thank you very much we'd like to go with the usher please

02:24:23 thank you 10 o'clock tomorrow

02:25:15 you