Steve Blake, Rydon director, gives evidence about private contacts with TMO decision-makers before tender award, discussions about value engineering, and steering the architect's opinion on ACM panels. Admits 'that's what we were doing' when asked about misleading tactics.
00:30:09 good morning everyone welcome to today's hearing today we're going to hear further evidence from mr blake one of the employers of ryden so would you ask mr blake to come back
00:30:20 so would you ask mr blake to come back please
00:30:38 good morning mr blake get settled in and then we'll
00:30:48 start all right ready to carry on i'll just pour some water oh do yes of course
00:31:08 right yes mr chairman mr blake good morning i want to go back over
00:31:14 over some evidence that you gave us yesterday about the discussions on the 11th of march and the email of that day could you please turn to ryd 403279
00:31:33 could you please turn to ryd 403279 this is the email from jeff henton to alan sharrick's and a group of others at ryden of the 11th of march of 2014 that i asked you about yesterday
00:31:44 of 2014 that i asked you about yesterday uh and uh you can see and you said that you weren't copied in on it and i think you couldn't explain why you do you recall your evidence about that yesterday yes
00:31:56 yesterday yes yes and just to give you a little bit of a background about what you said yesterday as well you told us that you couldn't explain how it was that jeff henton was having a conversation with peter madison about
00:32:08 conversation with peter madison about the bid
00:32:09 the bid at that time that was day 28 pages uh well page 148 24 to 1498 and you couldn't tell us anything about that conversation that was day 28
00:32:20 that conversation that was day 28 page 149 at line 25 and also that you didn't know at this time that ryden's appointment would be conditional upon upon its ability to
00:32:31 conditional upon upon its ability to accommodate the tmo's desire for value engineering and that that only became clear to you when you were contacted by the tml on the 13th of march 2014 a couple of days after
00:32:42 of march 2014 a couple of days after this email and that was day 28 page 152 lines 10 to 21.
00:32:48 21. do you remember giving that evidence yesterday i do yes yeah now i want to show you uh some emails of this time can i ask you please first to look at ryd3086650
00:33:06 now just taking it slowly at the bottom of the page is an email from
00:33:14 from sandra guest to you on the 10th of march at 1712 and sandra guest was jeff henton's assistant wasn't she
00:33:25 assistant wasn't she that's right yes and
00:33:30 she says steve jeff wants to push the note below around to all internally who have been involved in this
00:33:38 this bid and asked if you could provide me their names please thanks s and then the note below under the asterisks says this hi team i have spoken with peter madison at kensington and chelsea
00:33:50 peter madison at kensington and chelsea tmo limited who informs me that our price for the above is in first place allied to which our presentation and documentation is also in first place therefore subject to a small amount of
00:34:01 therefore subject to a small amount of value engineering peter should be in a position to recommend our appointment on this scheme to his board early next week i would personally like to thank you all for your efforts in achieving this excellent results and look forward to a successful scheme
00:34:13 and look forward to a successful scheme regards jeff
00:34:17 now if we look at the response from you at the top of that chain we can see that you replied the following morning to sandra guest on the 11th of march 9 13 in the morning
00:34:30 on the 11th of march 9 13 in the morning and you simply set out a list of the members of the team who went on to receive that email alan that's alan sharrick's simon zach katie sue christina peter a and frank just pausing there
00:34:43 peter a and frank just pausing there does this trigger a recollection for you uh it doesn't i haven't got um any recollect of this are you able to
00:34:54 any recollect of this are you able to assist with what gave rise to sandra guest sending you a draft which we can see in the bottom email
00:35:04 um
00:35:07 [Applause] only that i would have been out otherwise she would have come and asked me
00:35:14 me were you already aware
00:35:17 when she sent you this email on the evening of the 10th of march of jeff henson's discussion with peter madison um i don't recall when i was um
00:35:30 um i don't recall when i was um uh exactly told um but reading that um would have told me that right how do you discuss jeff henton's contact with peter madison
00:35:41 jeff henton's contact with peter madison before sandra guest sent you this email on the evening of monday the 10th of march no you say no sorry can you repeat the question
00:35:51 question yes had you discussed jeff henton's contact with peter madison where he says in the text underneath the asterisks
00:35:59 asterisks asterisks i have spoken with peter madison had you discussed jeff henton's contact with peter madison with jeff with jeff penton before you received this email from sandra guest
00:36:10 received this email from sandra guest i i can't recall right do you accept now sitting there seeing this email to you on the evening of the 10th of march that it's not correct to say that the first you knew
00:36:21 first you knew about ryden's appointment being subject to value engineering was when you were contacted by the tmo on the 13th of march
00:36:31 march um yeah against um this email that's that's not correct no do you now recollect how it was that jeff henton came to be in contact with peter madison
00:36:42 came to be in contact with peter madison about your bid no don't now that we've seen this email can you
00:36:49 can you recall any other discussions either with mr henton
00:36:52 mr henton or with peter madison or anybody else at the tmo
00:36:55 the tmo around this time about the requirement to undertake value engineering in order to secure the grenfell tower project contract no now we discussed yesterday
00:37:09 no now we discussed yesterday the fact that you had met representatives at a conference on the 4th to the 6th of march 2014 at brighton did you talk to anyone from
00:37:20 at brighton did you talk to anyone from the tmo
00:37:21 the tmo between that conference and the meetings at that conference and the time of their contact on the 13th of march 2014 i can't recall
00:37:33 2014 i can't recall can we look at another document this is
00:37:38 ryd403274
00:37:42 again let's look at it slowly here is at the bottom of the page i should just explain to you what this is it's an email chain between peter
00:37:54 is it's an email chain between peter madison jeff henton and someone called judela ferreira who we believe to have been sasha jevons his pa
00:38:01 his pa and the whole chain is on the 10th of march 2014 and i'd like to look with you please at the bottom of page one it's from peter madison
00:38:13 one it's from peter madison it's the 10th of march at 16 57 so just a little earlier in this in the day on which you got the message from sandra guest that she sent
00:38:24 message from sandra guest that she sent to you that we started this morning with and
00:38:26 and and peter madison says to jeff henton copy to judela ferreira subject sasha's pa hi jeff sasha's pa is judela
00:38:34 judela i have copied her into this message so your pa can contact her to arrange a meet up with sasha and i regards
00:38:42 regards peter do you recall discussion at this time of a meet-up between jeff henton and peter madison and sasha jevons of the tmo
00:38:54 the tmo i don't call let's look higher up the chain the next email comes back from jeff henton uh to sandra guest
00:39:05 back from jeff henton uh to sandra guest i say back comes to from jeff henton to sandra guest at 1826 sandra please could you arrange lunch or evening meal if they would prefer
00:39:15 prefer venue tba but central london mid-april jeff you see that and then he correct himself
00:39:21 himself two minutes later at 1827. one minute later at 1827 where he says sorry peter sascha steven me jeff
00:39:33 now do you know what the purpose of this meet-up was um it would be to recognize the
00:39:46 um it would be to recognize the um award of the of the contract
00:39:54 right how did that arise how did this discussion about meeting up to discuss the award of the contract arise i don't know do you know when it was first discussed between jeff henton
00:40:06 first discussed between jeff henton and peter madison no do you know who first suggested that the meeting or a meeting between ryden and the tmo to discuss the award of the contract i don't know
00:40:17 contract i don't know you don't know so you telling us that jeff henton didn't discuss this with you even though you had been in charge of the bid
00:40:28 he's informed me via this email so let's look at ryd-3094368 please
00:40:44 this is the same email string that we've seen
00:40:47 seen if you look a little bit lower down page one you can see mr henton's message to sandra guest and his message two minutes later correcting the list of
00:40:59 two minutes later correcting the list of attendees
00:41:02 attendees and steve would be you in that and then he
00:41:05 he sends this email string to you same evening this is now 7 20 in the evening of the 10th of march 2014
00:41:17 in the evening of the 10th of march 2014 and it says spoke to peter this is from you to jeff henton spoke to peter about the award and they are keen to get going they need to do a fair amount of value
00:41:29 they need to do a fair amount of value engineering which should be achievable all in all feels like a result looking at that mr blake it looks as if by the evening of the 10th of march 2013
00:41:43 by the evening of the 10th of march 2013 you had spoken to peter madison directly about the award of the contract to writing
00:41:49 writing that's is that correct yeah that appears that way
00:41:53 that way yeah i do not have a recall of that
00:42:00 when did that conversation with mr madison take place i don't know
00:42:07 you don't mention this contact or these discussions in your witness statement can you explain why that is i i didn't see anything and you didn't
00:42:19 i i didn't see anything and you didn't mention it in your evidence yesterday when i showed you the 11th of march email on which you won't see seed can you explain why you didn't recall this discussion i have
00:42:30 this discussion i have like i said got no recall of this that's i've not seen that um email for six years so um i have not got a recollection of it
00:42:41 um i have not got a recollection of it and that's why it didn't go in my statement
00:42:48 well you said a moment ago that it didn't go into your statement because you didn't see any need to mention it but you now say you didn't go in because you couldn't recall it um which is it do you think well because
00:42:59 um which is it do you think well because i
00:43:00 i i don't recall it it didn't go into my statement
00:43:05 can you look at the second line of your email to jeff henton at the top of the page there that you sent at 7 20 on the 10th of march 2014
00:43:16 20 on the 10th of march 2014 which says they need to do a fair amount of value engineering which should be achievable
00:43:22 do you accept that you were clearly aware by that time that value engineering was required by the tma yeah that's fair enough
00:43:30 enough and indeed they required a as you say fair amount of it yes yes
00:43:40 yes yes did you have any idea about what fair amount
00:43:44 amount meant how big the value engineering required by the tmo was
00:43:52 um
00:43:56 i at that point in time i don't know what
00:43:59 what fair amount meant
00:44:04 did you know that the award of the contract was dependent upon whether you could indicate that you would do a fair amount of value engineering
00:44:14 um but my understanding is that we we won the tender on the basis upon which we tended
00:44:28 upon which we tended and a secondary aspect was value engineering was required by the by the client and that that was discussed by you with peter madison
00:44:42 was discussed by you with peter madison on or prior to the 10th of march 2014.
00:44:47 it certainly seems that way from that email yes
00:44:51 email yes do you know whether there are any records of this conversation other than this email chain
00:44:58 i don't
00:45:06 you said to mr henton that the value engineering should be achievable but but you didn't know i think how much it was going to be at that point so how did you know it would be or
00:45:17 so how did you know it would be or should be achievable
00:45:21 value engineering is in the main decisions that the client is going to make about changes to the scope of works so they they're able to achieve it
00:45:33 so they they're able to achieve it by omitting a section of work should they choose to do that um so
00:45:42 well how would you know that that would fit within your own budget doesn't make any difference to our budget did you have any other contact with mr madison between this time and
00:45:53 with mr madison between this time and the 18th
00:45:54 the 18th of march 2014 when as we saw yesterday ryden attended a meeting with the tmo and later that day
00:46:02 day received formal notification that it had become the preferred bidder um i can't recall can we look please at
00:46:13 four ryd30943 six nine
00:46:26 this is an email to you mr blake from allison
00:46:29 allison finer who we can see from the bottom of her
00:46:35 her email is the team secretary at ryden at 12 59 pm on the 12th of march 2014 subject telephone message
00:46:46 subject telephone message hi steve please can you call peter madison of kctml he said you know his number did you speak to him
00:47:00 uh i can't recall
00:47:04 it's clear from this that he had rung and left a message for you to call him did you call him
00:47:15 um i i would have thought i would have done
00:47:20 done but i cannot recall that conversation
00:47:26 can you look at ryd403295 please
00:47:37 this is the email we looked at together yesterday mr blake of the 12th of march from you to katie bachelier and others at three o'clock that day so
00:47:48 at three o'clock that day so just a little over two hours after receiving the message from alison finer to call peter madison
00:48:00 and you say there and i'll put it to you again we are going to be asked by k and c to find some further value engineering savings in addition to those identified in our tender let's wait until this approach is made
00:48:11 let's wait until this approach is made before going to the supply chain in terms of value allocation we took care to make provision against a specification that was exactly compliant
00:48:19 compliant peter m is going to forward some ideas tomorrow
00:48:25 now i asked you yesterday about this email as you'll remember but let's look at what you said please it's yesterday's transcript day 28 if we can please have that up at page 158
00:48:38 and i'd like to go to line 16 on that page and i'm going to read to you what you said from line 16 down to the next page at
00:48:49 from line 16 down to the next page at line 25
00:48:51 line 25 and the question was peter m is peter madison is it answer yes question yes it appears he had been in contact with you personally is that right no
00:49:04 is that right no question when you say peter m is going to forward some ideas tomorrow how did you know that answer that must have been off the emails that i didn't get
00:49:12 get question if it was an email you didn't get how did you know he was going to do it
00:49:17 it answer then someone must have told me right
00:49:20 right i see did you know who that was answer no
00:49:23 no if you go back to the email please and i give the reference there's nothing in that email which indicates that peter madison is going to be forwarding some ideas on the 13th of march is there answer no would it therefore follow that
00:49:35 answer no would it therefore follow that when you found out that peter madison was going to be forwarding some ideas about value engineering savings tomorrow you must have got that from somewhere on say yes and therefore you must have either spoken to someone
00:49:46 you must have either spoken to someone else in order to know that or seen it in writing somewhere yes yes question do you remember who you spoke to who told you that peter madison was going to be forwarding some ideas
00:49:57 was going to be forwarding some ideas the next day answer no i can't remember would question would it have been peter madison
00:50:02 madison answer it wouldn't have been peter question how can you be so adamant about that
00:50:07 that answer because i know i didn't speak to him
00:50:10 him now mr blake i've shown you the head of that exchange in fairness to to you so that you know the context for my next question when you say you know i didn't speak to
00:50:21 when you say you know i didn't speak to him
00:50:22 him i know i did not speak to him there at line 25
00:50:25 line 25 that was not in fact true was it um yeah i
00:50:32 um yeah i i made that because i um had absolutely no re as i said no recall of those emails obviously i shouldn't have made that statement because it's it's not right so do you accept you
00:50:44 it's not right so do you accept you clearly did speak to mr madison directly on the 12th of march about the need to find value engineering savings
00:50:51 savings because the email trails demonstrate that
00:50:55 that um i made that statement on the belief that i didn't speak to him because i cannot
00:51:02 cannot i have not got recollect
00:51:06 of that of those emails do you accept now having seen those emails that uh you knew that peter madison was going to forward some ideas ideas tomorrow which will be the 13th of
00:51:17 ideas tomorrow which will be the 13th of march because you had spoken to him between about one o'clock and about three o'clock on the 12th of march that certainly says that yes yes thank you
00:51:27 you now i asked you yesterday about a comment that simon cash had made in october 2015 that your relationship with peter madison had um went back a long way and that you talked to him direct
00:51:39 to him direct uh and the full exchange there is day 28 at pages 94 line eight to 96 line five you recall that evidence yesterday do you i do yes and you said that it was very very
00:51:51 yes and you said that it was very very rare that you spoke to him directly and also that the dialogue between you on this project started when you took the role of contract manager in october 2015 and the reference for that is day 28 at page 85
00:52:03 28 at page 85 line 15. do you accept that that evidence
00:52:07 evidence uh was not accurate having now seen these emails yeah i do yeah
00:52:14 standing back from this exchange in
00:52:20 the middle of march 2014 isn't the truth that you and jeff henton had personal and private access to the top decision makers
00:52:30 makers at the tmo on this project
00:52:36 yes we did yeah and is it not also true that you are seeking to use that personal and private access to maximize ryden's chances of winning the tender for the grenfell tower
00:52:48 the tender for the grenfell tower refurbishment project um not to maximise the due process was undertaken and we submitted a fair bid
00:52:59 undertaken and we submitted a fair bid and you were using the access that you had
00:53:02 had with the tmo decision makers in order to do the best you could for ryden to win that bid um no that didn't that wasn't part of
00:53:15 um no that didn't that wasn't part of then
00:53:15 then any um
00:53:18 any um tender process we we submitted our tender as i said in an appropriate manner um and it was as simple as that
00:53:29 um and it was as simple as that and then had private chats about value engineering to make sure you secured the bid that that is not on the basis of the tender was awarded the value engineering exercise is a
00:53:41 the value engineering exercise is a secondary event after the tender has gone through scrutiny from artelia but as we discussed yesterday you had
00:53:53 but as we discussed yesterday you had not at this stage 10th 11th 12th 13th of march been told anything other than informally that you were in pole position and that formerly you had not been told that you were the preferred bidder
00:54:10 that you were the preferred bidder i don't see that has any bearing on the the tender award that's as i said it's that this is a not unusual step after uh attend the
00:54:22 not unusual step after uh attend the process
00:54:22 process has been through for the for the client to
00:54:26 to um explore um avenues for further savings avenues for savings sorry just one more question it must have crossed your mind
00:54:38 question it must have crossed your mind that if you had resisted the tma's request for value engineering there was at least a real risk that you would not have been awarded for tender bid
00:54:51 there was a yeah i mean if the client hasn't got the full budget to um complete against their tender then they'll have to find a way of
00:55:02 they'll have to find a way of engineering their scheme to fit their budget
00:55:07 budget now turn to a different topic i just want to ask you a little bit about alan sharrick's um i asked you yesterday why alan sharrick suddenly disappeared from the scene
00:55:18 the scene once you've won the tender bid in mid-march or on the 18th of march 2014 uh and you said that he'd been assigned to another project now it's right i think that he had been
00:55:30 now it's right i think that he had been project manager on the chalcott's project no that's wrong what was his role on the on the childcare project he wasn't at charcots i see uh what was he on ferry a
00:55:41 charcots i see uh what was he on ferry a point
00:55:42 point yes what was his role on ferrier point um
00:55:47 um contracts manager so is it right to say that mr sharrex had high rise refurbishment over cladding experience uh on
00:55:58 over cladding experience uh on a project which i think you told us yesterday was comparable at least to the grenfell tower project
00:56:08 that's right is there a reason why you didn't
00:56:12 didn't appoint alan sharrick's to the granfell tower project as contract manager rather than simon lawrence who was promoted to be contract manager
00:56:23 um no no particular reason other than helen was assigned to uh different projects what what what was the other project to
00:56:35 what what what was the other project to which or the projects to which mr sharrick was assigned um one of them was the ashmol estate
00:56:46 which is by the oval which is an ongoing project that he he remained in charge of
00:57:01 was there a reason for deciding to to allocate mr sharricks who did have experience of overclouding high-rise residential buildings
00:57:12 high-rise residential buildings to up to another project and promoting simon lawrence as contract manager when he didn't have experience of the role of contract manager on a high-rise residential overclouding
00:57:23 high-rise residential overclouding project
00:57:24 project alan was already the incumbent contracts manager on the ashmole estate and that's where he remained
00:57:36 if he was already the incumbent on the ashmore estate can you explain why he was so involved in the tender bid at least up to march 2014 because we
00:57:47 march 2014 because we share the work out amongst our team in order to
00:57:52 order to present um the tenders to the prospective clients right now i want to turn back to the story
00:58:02 story about the selection of cladding material can i ask you to go to ryd40
00:58:10 this picks up the story mr blake where we were
00:58:13 we were yesterday afternoon when we finished your evidence these are the minutes of a meeting that was held on the 8th of may 2014 between ryden and
00:58:22 ryden and rbkc's planning department and if you can look under present in the fifth entry
00:58:27 entry you can see that you were there do you recall the purpose of the meeting yes do you recall offering to attend this meeting in place of mr lawrence who couldn't be there yesterday can you go to ryd404142 please
00:58:45 this um is a quite lengthy email from simon lawrence to you on the 6th of may 2014. i'm not going to read it all to you but i just want to show you one or two parts of it if you
00:58:57 show you one or two parts of it if you look at the second paragraph there it says um the basis of the meeting is to propose the material change from zinc to acm aluminium cladding and the removal of the external
00:59:08 cladding and the removal of the external window louvers so kctmo can achieve their maximum ve target on what basis did you understand the material changed from being from zinc to acn was being proposed
00:59:22 um i knew that zinc was the uh [Music]
00:59:27 [Music] primary um was attended um material and the acm was a alternative that we were asked the price
00:59:38 alternative that we were asked the price for that was
00:59:43 yeah the aluminium cladding so yeah i knew that what was the tmo's maximum ve target
00:59:54 um there must be the 800 000 that they were uh targeting is that how you understood it at the time yes okay can we look at the first
01:00:05 yes okay can we look at the first paragraph
01:00:06 paragraph uh simon lawrence says i've got allison to print out all the attachments above and others and you can see what's attached relevant to the meeting and put a pack together for you ready for thursday the pack will include location map
01:00:18 the pack will include location map without nd contact numbers on on attached above technical information stroke warranties for rayno bond and photos of camden and ferrier for relevant for reference if required
01:00:30 relevant for reference if required do you remember getting that pack
01:00:34 um i don't remember guessing it but i i can see it's part of this email yeah yeah did you remember looking at it um i can't recall do you remember whether you read the
01:00:45 do you remember whether you read the information when it was given to you um i can't recall that either do you remember what technical information or warranties mr lawrence was referring to no i don't what did you understand mr
01:00:56 no i don't what did you understand mr lawrence to be expecting you to do with that information that he was giving you um have that in case it's asked for uh at the meeting do you remember
01:01:08 uh at the meeting do you remember whether mr lawrence gave you the bba certificate for the acm panels
01:01:14 um if it's part of that email then he would have done so i don't remember that specifically
01:01:26 do you remember whether you ever discussed the bba certificate with mr lawrence
01:01:33 i don't recall now mr lawrence says uh in uh the third paragraph i've been working
01:01:45 uh the third paragraph i've been working i should say with bruce soames from studio e on evated architect on details colors etc for the meeting so i would expect him to lead on our behalf in the light of that statement
01:01:57 behalf in the light of that statement uh what did you consider your role at this meeting to be
01:02:02 um to ask if there's any what if there's any questions of construction i how how does it go together
01:02:13 i how how does it go together um and and being a representative of the of the contractor for for the tmo
01:02:25 who did you expect to be responsible for any issues which might arise in respect of compliance of the acm rain screen cladding panels with the building regulations and approved document b well that would
01:02:38 and approved document b well that would be a
01:02:39 be a design team [Music]
01:02:43 [Music] of studio ian and and harley's now we can see that mr lawrence says in the middle of that long paragraph that i've just shown to you he says uh
01:02:54 that i've just shown to you he says uh six lines down we've already had quite a lot of debate about the shadow gaps fixing and fabrication details of the cladding panels so he is more than aware of that there are cost implications of adding in architectural details that in
01:03:06 adding in architectural details that in my opinion you can't see at height just pausing there have had you been involved in any of those discussions
01:03:14 no
01:03:18 was it your sense reading what mr lawrence was telling you that the uh that there had been heavy involvement uh by others at ryden and in particular
01:03:29 uh by others at ryden and in particular mr lawrence in discussions relating to material selection
01:03:37 um not respect to material selection well okay so when he says a lot of debate about
01:03:48 about fixing and fabrication details of cladding panels you don't read that as material selection is that is that what you're saying you didn't read that at the time as indicating that mr lawrence had been
01:03:59 as indicating that mr lawrence had been involved in the selection of materials the fixing and fabrication is uh mechanics all right and then he goes on to say
01:04:13 and then he goes on to say in the stand-alone sentence just above cladding i've listed a couple of items below relating to the changes which may be useful for the meeting
01:04:24 and that includes as the first bullet point
01:04:28 point this reyna bond acm panels have bba certification class naught and service life in excess of 30 years good appearance should be retained for 20 years
01:04:41 20 years what did you understand mr lawrence to mean by his statement that acm panels have a bba certification of class naught
01:04:53 this email has given me a briefing um in into a meeting that i'm attending and it's a good briefing and very detailed um
01:05:06 and very detailed um so i didn't think anything of that at all what did you understand mr lawrence to mean by his statement that acm panels have a bba certification of class naught exactly that
01:05:19 of class naught exactly that what did you understand him to mean by class naught that that's the fire rating on that bba
01:05:31 the fire rating on that bba certificate for that panel what did you understand a fire rating of class naught for that panel to mean well i know class nor or class zero um
01:05:42 well i know class nor or class zero um fast not sorry um that that
01:05:49 means about spread of flame across the surface of a material did you know that at the time yes i did you did
01:06:00 did you get the sense reading what mr lawrence
01:06:04 lawrence was providing you by way of preparation for this for this meeting that it was important to know and to be able to say that the panels had class naught
01:06:17 i took this as um
01:06:21 a detailed briefing uh in preparation uh for the meeting um but as simon says earlier on in his
01:06:33 but as simon says earlier on in his email
01:06:33 email um that studio is leading um
01:06:41 that that part of the meeting this is this is background information for me what did you understand mr lawrence to want you to do with the information that these panels had a class naught
01:06:52 these panels had a class naught certification nothing he's just telling me that's
01:06:58 some detail
01:07:01 he's telling you some detail does that tell us
01:07:05 tell us that to your understanding at the time mr lawrence wanted you to give assurances or at least to be able to be prepared to give assurances to
01:07:16 to be prepared to give assurances to uh kensington and chelsea's planners as to the fire performance of these acm panels no so what did it what did you ask yourself therefore what the point of him
01:07:28 therefore what the point of him preparing you with that information for this meeting was no i simply saw it as information
01:07:38 did you ever raise with mr lawrence the issue of whether you or indeed he were qualified to speak of class naught and the certification for these panels
01:07:49 panels no can we go to
01:07:55 five ryd404154
01:07:58 this is an email from simon lawrence to claire williams of the sixth of may 2014. so two days before this meeting and you as you can see are copied in on
01:08:09 and you as you can see are copied in on it as is bruce sones and she says afternoon or he says i'm sorry afternoon all due to a pre-booked training course commitment that i have i will not be able to attend thursday's meeting with
01:08:21 able to attend thursday's meeting with the rbkc planners however fortunately steve blake my director has offered his services to attend on my behalf i'll bring steve up to date with all of the information that i currently have
01:08:32 the information that i currently have and then he promises in that email that he will
01:08:35 he will as he says
01:08:40 well he says he will probably he will bring you up to date did he actually do that other than in the email that he sent you
01:08:47 sent you um i can't recall if we had a conversation about it but he certainly did that with the email he goes on in the last sentence they're just above agenda points to say
01:08:58 just above agenda points to say just to clarify my understanding of the meeting agenda and goals i've listed them below and then we can see there's some agenda points and the first one is proposal of material change to the facade
01:09:09 facade from zinc to aluminium composite acm put forward
01:09:12 forward our case that acm is not an inferior product to zinc do you know what information had been determined used to determine whether acm wasn't an inferior product
01:09:24 whether acm wasn't an inferior product to zinc
01:09:25 to zinc no and that sentence there i take to be put forward our case our case being the project and
01:09:37 the project and acm is a choice that we price for in in the tender so that was it was already identified in the
01:09:50 in the tender process do you accept that this was a clear briefing by mr lawrence to you
01:09:56 to you to push rayna bond acm panels in over zinc instead of zinc with the planners
01:10:03 planners i don't see it's uh to push it at all and you had a case to to push because acm generated a much bigger profit to ryden
01:10:14 profit to ryden didn't again it goes back to the the client's choice of value engineering
01:10:25 go to ryd404204 please i'm interested in the timing as much as the content of this document this is an email from
01:10:36 of this document this is an email from zack maynard to you grenfell cladding and here he sets out the savings available for the different cladding options that we discussed yesterday at the end of your evidence
01:10:48 yesterday at the end of your evidence and we can see running down the page ali face fix saving offered 376 odd over harley 577 odd ali cassette saving of 293 odd over harley's 420 odd
01:11:01 saving of 293 odd over harley's 420 odd uh alternative zinc face fix saving offered 202 000 pounds over harley's 280 000 an alternative zinc cassette saving offered a hundred thousand over
01:11:13 offered a hundred thousand over harley 157 000 odd so this shows in neat format what harley had offered ryden and what ryden was proposing to offer the tmo now
01:11:24 was proposing to offer the tmo now there's nothing else in that email other than that information how do you requested this information from mr maynard before he sent it
01:11:31 sent it um i can't recall if i requested it but he sent it to me for uh for my viewing so that that is uh that was a development of the uh
01:11:45 uh that was a development of the uh some value engineering options uh with respect to the cladding yes and uh did did you ask for it because you felt you needed it at the meeting you were about to go to that day um i would not
01:11:57 about to go to that day um i would not uh have volunt you know that wouldn't have been put to the meeting no but it was information that you wanted to to have at the meeting was let me rephrase the question was this information information that
01:12:09 was this information information that you wanted to have at the meeting you were about to go to
01:12:14 um yeah but not for that meeting
01:12:20 when you say not for that meeting what do you mean well i wouldn't that's that information wasn't um for the purposes of that meeting
01:12:33 and we can see that these figures match the ones sent by katie bachelier to david gibson on the 20th of march
01:12:40 and is the reason why mr maynard distinguishes between the saving offered to the tmo and the saving offered by harley the reasons we talked about yesterday afternoon that ryden was going to take the difference
01:12:53 um that that was the intention yeah yes so at this stage 8th of may you is this right you must have realized that ryden wasn't intending to pass on
01:13:05 that ryden wasn't intending to pass on to the tmo the full savings on the cladding panels that harley had offered that's correct
01:13:20 now we don't need to go to the document but just to remind you of what you had said in your statement about the about the process you say that the writer's role was not to take
01:13:31 the writer's role was not to take not to undertake any design work or carry out the construction work itself i think you remember that from your statement because i asked you about that yesterday
01:13:38 yesterday yes yes yes and also you said that ryden and in my experience principal contractors in general rely upon the specialist designers and consultant team who specify the
01:13:50 consultant team who specify the materials to be used now reminding you of your previous evidence on that my question is do you agree that the emails we've just been looking at including this email on the screen at
01:14:02 including this email on the screen at the moment suggest that ryden was in fact intimately involved in the process of the selection of materials for grenfell tower
01:14:14 i think my statement remains the same we went to the supply chain
01:14:22 chain um for them to
01:14:26 come up with or identify value engineering engineering options um for uh
01:14:35 um for uh ultimately the the client to consider and do you accept that ryden was not remaining
01:14:42 remaining neutral on the selection of the choice of materials or product for the rain screen but was making a positive case for the use of the rayno bond pe55 acm
01:14:54 for the use of the rayno bond pe55 acm range screen panels on this project um but that had already been identified through the the tender we were just offering some further
01:15:04 further options we the design team because the um the second option there ali cassette um was the um
01:15:16 um was the um identified tender option for us to price well it goes a bit further than that doesn't it mr blake you weren't simply laying out a series of options for the client to choose you ryden were
01:15:28 for the client to choose you ryden were pushing a positive case for the use of acm panels over zinc weren't you and we're not neutral on that issue um it was there for the client
01:15:42 to exercise that option if they wished and i'm bound to suggest to you that you were pushing the case for the use of acm panels to the
01:15:53 for the use of acm panels to the planners
01:15:54 planners because ryden had a financial interest of its own in those materials and those products being selected no i think we were
01:16:05 no i think we were i think neutral is a good word um the options were presented to the the client um
01:16:16 to the the client um and and to the planners by the architect for them to make their decision very well go to har 3010160 please and
01:16:29 very well go to har 3010160 please and i'd like
01:16:30 i'd like you to be showing page seven this is a document we looked at a couple of times yesterday mr blake in your evidence and it's mark harris's sales uh or sales stroke tender progress report
01:16:41 stroke tender progress report and if we look at the bottom of page seven at the eighth of may we can see that
01:16:45 that uh there's a file name do you see that and it says steve blake called just before his meeting with the planners to say that the architect had a pattern a sample with him
01:16:56 sample with him and wanted to know what the extra cost would be for this mah text message returned to steve stating that the passenger product is not currently available as per debbie french email but that aside the extra cost would be
01:17:08 aside the extra cost would be around 40 000 pounds to the cladding package based on 10 square meters times 600 square meters rounded up to the nearest 10 000 pounds
01:17:20 nearest 10 000 pounds mah suggested to steve that this product was not shown to the architect do you recall that conversation i don't
01:17:31 do you recall that conversation i don't so you don't you can't tell us what your response to mr harris was no was it common for you to conduct business by text message with your subcontractors uh not common
01:17:43 with your subcontractors uh not common no what about harley in particular no
01:17:49 can you explain why we haven't seen any records of your text messages with harley which are referred to here no everything everything um
01:18:02 no everything everything um there's no reason not to see those right
01:18:09 do you still have your texts from that time
01:18:14 i don't know it's a company phone so
01:18:20 do you accept well let me ask before this did mark harris suggest to you that you shouldn't show the pattern of product to the architect because it was 40 000 pounds
01:18:32 architect because it was 40 000 pounds more expensive um
01:18:38 i'm reading this um and if the architect um was offering the planners a product
01:18:50 was offering the planners a product that was something that hadn't been considered then um
01:18:58 it would be uh counter-intuitive to the the whole meeting if they're offering a more expensive product to the planner to consider
01:19:10 to the planner to consider and that would be why
01:19:15 i would be asking that question of harley's was the reason not to show it to the architect because the architect might like it and go for it and that would eat into ryden's own
01:19:27 ryden's own profit or its ability to recoup its 212 000
01:19:31 000 it would simply be something that would price again um do you agree that the email chain or and this comment show that ryden and harley were steering the architect's
01:19:42 harley were steering the architect's opinion
01:19:43 opinion about what materials should be used um no i think that's um identifying that the
01:19:53 patina product is not um
01:20:00 not available that that's it was so that the uh the clarity of the meeting
01:20:09 meeting was that the the renault uh panels with the the finishes um was kept distinct to that suite
01:20:23 but it looks like the architect had a pattern of sample with him and wanted to know what the cost was
01:20:30 so he already could see it yeah yes so what was the so what was the point of
01:20:36 point of as you understood it of mr harris's suggestion that the product wasn't shown to him
01:20:42 by keeping the suite of materials to
01:20:52 what was previously suggested can you look at ryd404218 please this is an email same day 8th of may 2014 from you to mr lawrence and
01:21:07 may 2014 from you to mr lawrence and zach maynard 1606 in the afternoon and you say there
01:21:17 any meeting with the planners tends to be tiptoey and this was no exception we were up front about the face fixed panels and the colors they remained to be convinced about the rivets but importantly
01:21:28 rivets but importantly did not say so did not say no did not say no i'm so sorry did not say no
01:21:37 is it fair to say that what you meant by tiptoei is that you had to be careful not to push too hard for what you wanted namely
01:21:46 namely acn face fixed it's not what we we wanted it's what what the client wants to achieve um the the meeting with the planner is
01:21:57 um the the meeting with the planner is that there was a planning consent uh granted on a different product um and
01:22:06 so they they you know the purpose of the meeting was to present an alternative for the planners to consider um that's that's what that means
01:22:20 now when we see you saying they remain to be convinced about the rivets but importantly did not say no
01:22:28 say no i explained the rivets were the same colored
01:22:32 colored and discrete we see that just below yes is it the case that you were trying to persuade the planning department that the perceived problems with the
01:22:43 that the perceived problems with the appearance of riveted panels were not as bad as they might think i was doing what i was asked to do at the meeting was to present to the planners what um what the
01:22:54 present to the planners what um what the different alternatives look like and you understood from this that your brief
01:22:59 brief as it were from mr lawrence taking his place at that meeting as you were was uh to keep the planners on side about the use of
01:23:11 on side about the use of face fixed aluminium ac face fixed acm rain screen panels
01:23:18 my brief was to present um the alternatives um if asked by the planners uh to say what they were so they understood
01:23:30 say what they were so they understood um what they've been asked to look at you see you say they remain to be convinced about the rivets but importantly did not say no i just wanted to focus with you on the word importantly
01:23:41 word importantly importantly to ryden it was important to ryden that the planners didn't rule out using
01:23:48 using face fixed aluminium panels it was important to the the client that they're the ones making the choice the the reference to importantly if they
01:24:00 the the reference to importantly if they had said no then base fix as an option disappeared as an option that was what that means but not only
01:24:12 that was what that means but not only important to the to the client mr blake important to ryden as well well we're part of the process and the team so um it's we're we're together on that
01:24:28 and you were relieved weren't you i think it seems from this that the planners had not ruled out the use of
01:24:35 of face fixed aluminium panels
01:24:40 as i've just said yeah if they had then half the options um would not be available you then go on to say they were also aware of the
01:24:52 say they were also aware of the financial implications of not changing did you explain to the planners the financial implications of not changing um i i didn't present um or my memory of the meeting is that i
01:25:03 um or my memory of the meeting is that i had a very very uh limited uh involvement in the meeting and it was uh chaired by um
01:25:16 or led by the tmos planning consultant was the purpose of having the information in mr maynard's email before going to the meeting so that you at least in your own head
01:25:27 least in your own head could understand the financial implications of any change from the currently proposed zinc um yes that's that's fair to say
01:25:42 if you look at the bottom of the email under the postscript ps claire mentioned building control submission as the department is swamped use someone else can you remember what you've been told
01:25:53 can you remember what you've been told about the building control department
01:25:56 um i i don't uh remember that as a note um okay
01:26:04 um okay can we turn sorry do you want to finish your answer no no can i ask you then to go to ryd40421
01:26:17 now you might not have seen this document it's an email from claire williams to simon lawrence later the same day
01:26:23 same day in the evening 1718 you're not copied on it she says under the in the first line under one planning steve blake did a good job of
01:26:34 planning steve blake did a good job of standing in today answered questions read the system proposed and could talk through the photos it was a good session but the main issue is over the face fixing of the panels the change to aluminium was played down
01:26:45 the change to aluminium was played down and did not seem to be a major issue they asked about the cost differential in terms of the proposal and appreciate that the proposal is the more economic one but we did not labor this at the first meeting
01:26:56 first meeting just focusing on answered questions read the system proposed do you remember what questions you answered about the cladding system no i don't do you know on what basis you
01:27:07 no i don't do you know on what basis you could consider yourself qualified to answer
01:27:10 answer any of those questions
01:27:13 um from knowledge and experience now you told us that ryden wasn't involved in the design process because it had no design expertise in-house and relied upon specialist
01:27:24 in-house and relied upon specialist subcontractors for those tasks we also know that bruce sones was at this meeting my question is why were you answering questions about the system proposed rather than
01:27:36 the system proposed rather than a representative of studio e who was your sub consultant involved in the design
01:27:44 design um i'm i can't recall but i'm sure bruce would have um presented to the planners and as i say i had a very
01:27:55 say i had a very uh my memory is a very very uh limited uh role at that meeting
01:28:05 were you answering questions because you were the you actually yourself wanted to steer
01:28:09 steer the architect's own position and and steer k and c towards the use of acm no i would
01:28:20 of acm no i would i would still say that we played a neutral role she says that it was a good session but the main issue is over the face fixing of the panels
01:28:31 of the panels the change to aluminium was played down and did not seem to be a major issue do you agree that at this meeting the change to acm panels was played down and did not seem to be a major issue
01:28:44 um
01:28:48 yeah i would uh agree that the the planner
01:28:55 seemed um that provided the right mix of colors and finish could be provided
01:29:02 provided um that they seem to be open to the consideration of that so they were so the tmo and our bkc planners were receptive
01:29:14 planners were receptive to your recommendation of acm rather than zinc
01:29:17 than zinc it's not our recommendation it's it's already been identified but it was still being discussed and you were backing it let me put it that way we were
01:29:29 let me put it that way we were presenting it on behalf of the project indeed and backing it supporting it we were putting it forward as a as an
01:29:41 we were putting it forward as a as an alternative yes and our bkc planners were receptive yes i've just said that was there any consideration of fire safety of the acm
01:29:52 consideration of fire safety of the acm panels
01:29:53 panels at this meeting do you remember um i don't remember the simon lawrence has clearly put that on your radar in his briefing note of the 6th of may by reference to class
01:30:04 the 6th of may by reference to class naught which we see we saw earlier are you telling us there was no discussion about fire safety or class naught in particular at this meeting there was no uh discussion at all about that right
01:30:16 uh discussion at all about that right moving on in the story can i ask you to go to ryd3086 please
01:30:24 this is an email of the 13th of august 2014 between you and mr henton jeff henton
01:30:31 henton the managing director of ryden and i'd ask you to go to the bottom email and he says jeff sorry jeff to you steve looking through board notes what are the implications of the planner
01:30:43 are the implications of the planner choosing a cassette system
01:30:46 and your response to that on the same uh day a few minutes later uh no problem we allowed for them
01:30:57 uh no problem we allowed for them kctmo wanted a saving but i don't think they really mean it why did you say that you didn't think that kctmo really meant that they wanted a saving
01:31:11 um
01:31:14 i can't understand the the context of that email well um i understand the first statement that we'd um
01:31:25 that we'd um allowed for a cassette system um the the second statement i don't understand right no nor do we and that's why i'm
01:31:36 right no nor do we and that's why i'm asking you but you can't help us all right well maybe the reference the board notes would would help did you tell mr henton that
01:31:47 would help did you tell mr henton that your team
01:31:48 your team had made a 212 000 pound costing error in the bid um i would imagine that i did but i can't recall
01:31:59 can't recall um
01:32:03 whether i did buy um on this did you tell jeff henton that you were seeking to recoup as much as you could of that costing error out of
01:32:14 error out of the savings on the acm that harley were offering
01:32:18 offering uh i can't recall if i did that did you tell mr henton that the implications for ryden
01:32:24 ryden if cassette were chosen were that ryden would only be able to recoup one hundred and twenty six thousand two hundred and fifty nine pounds rather than two hundred
01:32:33 hundred thousand seven hundred and ninety eight pounds uh i i can't recall is not the honest and straight answer to mr henson's question precisely what i
01:32:44 mr henson's question precisely what i just put to you that the implications of the plan of choosing a cassette system uh were that you would only be able to recoup 126 thousand odd rather than two hundred thousand odd
01:32:58 uh i don't i don't know well i'm asking you to
01:33:02 you to i'm asking you to tell us why you didn't provide that answer to him given that that was the truth um i don't know what the board note is um well
01:33:13 well in a sense mr blake never mind the board note he just asked you a straight question was it a question you didn't understand do you think um well
01:33:25 um well yeah clearly i don't understand because i'm not answering it um so no and i'm really seeking to explore with you why that was
01:33:40 are you going to ask me can you repeat the question please because yes i'm just seeking to explore with you why you didn't answer mr henton's straightforward question financial implications of the plan of choosing the cassette
01:33:52 of the plan of choosing the cassette system
01:33:55 system um i can't i can't explain that was it because let me suggest something and you can either agree with it or disagree with it as the case may be but was it because you were
01:34:07 was it because you were embarrassed that your estimator team had made an error of that magnitude and you didn't want mr henton to know about it
01:34:16 um
01:34:20 it could have been but
01:34:24 i've answered the question at the top there saying no problem we've allowed for them see that answer was misleading wasn't it because in fact the implications of the planner choosing a cassette system
01:34:36 a cassette system was that you would be able to recoup the estimating error to a very much lesser degree than if the planner
01:34:43 planner had chosen a uh riveting system
01:34:51 yeah well i can't explain all right uh now
01:35:03 just a chronological point do you remember that in october 2014 formal planning condition formal planning condition approval had now been
01:35:14 planning condition approval had now been by then received for rain screen cladding
01:35:17 cladding in smoke silver metallic color and finish
01:35:23 um yes between the time of your meeting with planners in may 2014 that we've been discussing and october 2014 was there any discussion of the fire
01:35:35 was there any discussion of the fire safety of these panels when i say these panels i mean acm not not with me not with you
01:35:48 when it was decided whether panels were face fixed or cassette to your knowledge was any consideration given to the respective fire performances of those different systems not by me
01:36:02 of those different systems not by me by anybody at ryden um [Music]
01:36:06 [Music] i'm not aware of that to your knowledge was any consideration given of that subject
01:36:11 subject whether by ryden or harley or studio e or indeed artelia uh to the use of acm panels with fire retardant core as opposed to standard
01:36:22 standard um i'm not aware of that
01:36:27 was any consideration given by anybody else like studio e harley or artelia to the difference in fire performance between cassette and face fixed um again i don't know but
01:36:39 um again i don't know but i would um have thought that would have been part of the process of them identifying the material in the first place moving to june 2014 do you remember
01:36:52 moving to june 2014 do you remember harley then revealed that it had made an error when calculating the savings available
01:37:00 available by making the switch from zinc to acm you remember that in general in general yes i do yes well let's look at some documents could you go first please to ryd
01:37:11 you go first please to ryd four zero is nine three nine six now this is a long email string uh between zach maynard and mark harris discussing that issue and various other issues now you weren't
01:37:23 and various other issues now you weren't involved in those emails or copied in on them but i just want to look at the bottom of the first page there because we see uh here
01:37:35 because we see uh here at the bottom of page one over to page two
01:37:39 two that zach maynard sends you and mr lawrence an email on friday the 20th of june 2014
01:37:46 june 2014 fyi and if we just flip to page two you can see that it is the continuation of an email chain between
01:37:57 continuation of an email chain between zach maynard and mark harris about the savings on cladding options and if you go to halfway down page two
01:38:10 and if you go to halfway down page two you can see an email from mark harris to zach maynard hi zach we'll be coming back to you with a formal response today and then in the in the second paragraph he says as already discussed there was
01:38:21 he says as already discussed there was an estimating error at our end when calculating the savings for using acm this was unfortunately a six-figure sum son notwithstanding this we remain committed to the project it has already
01:38:32 committed to the project it has already stated we will stand by our bid however being totally honest the additional five percent discount is causing an issue i've been trying to pass the pain down the supply chain but having little success can we discuss this further
01:38:44 success can we discuss this further now when you got this email chain from mr maynard on page one under the fyi
01:38:52 fyi email we've just seen and did you notice or did you read the email chain
01:39:02 um i can't recall whether i did but i i can't i imagine that i would have done you imagine that you would have done yeah and therefore would it follow that you
01:39:12 you would have read mark harris's email to zach maynard earlier that day that we've just looked at about the yes that would make sense to me now let's go back to page one and your response to
01:39:26 back to page one and your response to zach maynard's fyi email uh you say there in the second email on that page
01:39:34 that page not actually surprised as they seemed relatively large in the first place on principle we should stick to five percent but agree a compromise on this evening and at some point in the future reverse pass it back
01:39:46 reverse pass it back up the chain
01:39:50 now you say you thought the savings seemed relatively large in the first place
01:39:56 place is it fair to say that that tells us that your
01:39:59 that your view at the time had been that origin originally harley was offering the acm more cheaply than you had expected
01:40:10 um
01:40:15 no i mean this is like i say again six years ago
01:40:20 years ago um
01:40:25 so yeah you could say that to explain that because they were um relatively large uh savings yes um
01:40:38 and when you say that the appropriate way to deal with it would be uh well let me just rephrase the question you go on to say that you should agree a compromise and at some point in the future reverse pass it up
01:40:51 point in the future reverse pass it up back up the chain did you mean that harley's costing error would be somehow absorbed by the tmo no that's it can only be absorbed by us
01:41:03 no that's it can only be absorbed by us so what did you mean by reverse pass it back up the chair i'm reading this and i don't know what i meant
01:41:11 is it that you didn't want ryden to lose any of the the difference between the original savings that harley had offered and the savings that ha ryden was prepared to pass on to the tma
01:41:24 pass on to the tma well you know this situation is uh saving has been offered to the client um and now our supply chain is saying that they
01:41:36 our supply chain is saying that they can't offer that um so we would have to um maximize um the saving for the for the chosen
01:41:50 um the saving for the for the chosen um uh
01:41:54 um uh arrangement and if it was one of the arrangements that hadn't been priced at tender we would have to if we couldn't
01:42:04 couldn't keep to our original price we would have to
01:42:09 to approach the tmo to say that the saving isn't as large as it as it was first suggested so who is up the chain well that that is
01:42:21 so who is up the chain well that that is um
01:42:22 um to the tmi see now you can see that simon lawrence sorry you asked simon lawrence do you have a better steer of what fixing method will be chosen
01:42:33 method will be chosen and he responds uh on the 23rd of june same day late a little bit later that morning
01:42:41 morning uh morning the planners will definitely be pushing for cassette fix but the final method agreed is likely to depend on whether peter madison uses his political influence within rbkc to make the planners accept
01:42:53 to make the planners accept face fix at the moment kctm are concerned about the pressure on their budget
01:42:58 budget so they may fight hard for maximum savings
01:43:01 savings the short answer is it could still go either way what political influence did you understand mr lawrence was referring to there
01:43:11 there um he he works for
01:43:15 the kensington and chelsea so
01:43:22 he may he says make the planners accept it
01:43:25 it um so i don't know you don't know he works for the same organization so um he does he's not in the planning department though is he no
01:43:38 department though is he no so it was your understanding that mr lawrence is at least as understanding was that peter madison had some kind of clout within the planning department even though he wasn't part of it he's a senior figure in that
01:43:51 part of it he's a senior figure in that organization and the the tmo um have a have a budget pressure that they need
01:43:59 they need uh to achieve that um can be either achieved or not achieved by a decision that their own planning department um include did anyone at ryden ask mr
01:44:13 um include did anyone at ryden ask mr madison to intervene with the planning department to accept face fix no not to my knowledge now you had a relationship with mr madison as we've seen
01:44:22 seen now did you not encourage him to use his political influence at all not at all right
01:44:33 mr chairman we're going to go we've got two more emails we've got two more emails and then i think i can finish off this live or at least cup bits later
01:44:45 or at least cup bits later um can i ask you to go to ryden 40958 and look at the top email on page one now this is an email from zac maynard of
01:44:57 now this is an email from zac maynard of the 24th of june to simon lawrence copy to you
01:45:04 and in this email mr maynard breaks down the harley error for you and for mr lawrence now let's just look at the whole email uh it's fyi
01:45:18 basically they are saying they have a two hundred thousand pound problem with face fixed and a hundred and sixty thousand pound problem with cassette i will continue to try and do the deal on the zinc plating at five percent
01:45:29 on the zinc plating at five percent discount
01:45:29 discount to get our baseline order this is where we've already pitched it so i can't get any better three percent is the minimum we need to achieve as as performance at tender uh
01:45:40 tender uh a potential revised position on the savings would be face fixed client saving 376 000 harley first offer 576 000 ride an expected gain 200 000 pounds
01:45:53 ride an expected gain 200 000 pounds split 50 50 with harley 100 000 pound gain
01:45:57 gain and then cassette client saving two hundred ninety three thousand pounds harley first offer four hundred and twenty thousand pounds ryden expected gain a hundred and twenty seven thousand pound split with fifty fifty fifty with harley
01:46:08 split with fifty fifty fifty with harley forty seven thousand pound gain harley's allegedly and that's in bold don't know what our savings are to the client so we can improve on these by not offering 50 50. but above would be a
01:46:19 not offering 50 50. but above would be a worst case position so i would want to go
01:46:21 go so that i would want to go to now i read that all to you uh is is it fair to say that uh the the ride and expected gain was
01:46:31 was clearly a reference to the to the turn or profit
01:46:35 or profit that ryden was hoping to make for itself on top of the saving passed on to the client
01:46:39 client that harley was offering originally that's right yes now looking at the last paragraph where he says harley's allegedly don't know what our savings are to the client is it fair to say that ryden was hoping
01:46:51 is it fair to say that ryden was hoping harley didn't know what savings were so that it could drive a hard bargain with harley and maximize the turn
01:47:01 sorry would you mind repeating that i didn't catch the beginning of the question
01:47:05 question well is it fair to say that ryden was hoping that harley didn't know what the savings
01:47:10 savings were that ryden was proposing to offer the tma
01:47:14 the tma um we wouldn't tell harley's that
01:47:20 no
01:47:24 can i ask you to go to ryd409681
01:47:30 i'd like you to look at page one of that email string which is uh how this then turns out mr maynard as you can see if you look at
01:47:42 mr maynard as you can see if you look at the middle email on that page uh receives an email from
01:47:49 mark harris
01:47:53 and he says
01:47:57 hi zach many thanks for your response i confirm we agree with the baseline figure based on the zinc option with the five percent discount with regards to the other items on your list i will send a separate response in response to your other email
01:48:08 other email but would comment that most of the items are acceptable but i would need to make a comment against items 10 and 12. uh suffice to say in the last paragraph that we greatly appreciate the help you're extending to us i could only apologize for the position we've
01:48:20 apologize for the position we've presented you with
01:48:23 uh that said grenfell tower is a superb project to be associated with and we look forward to working with ryden again on another tower block project now then you receive that email
01:48:36 now then you receive that email from zach maynard the same afternoon on the 24th of june 2014 steve stroke simon first part of the battle
01:48:47 battle now we will agree to give them 10 percent of the savings back and we are quids in
01:48:52 quids in what did you understand that mr maynard meant when he said that you would be quids in
01:49:01 quids in um i i'm reading that as a reference to the overall procurement figure with with harley's
01:49:09 harley's um
01:49:12 for the contract indeed to your knowledge did anybody ever tell the tmo about these discussions
01:49:22 i i would um think that we didn't mr chairman is that a convenient moment yes it is thank you very much we're going to have a break now mr blake um please remember not to talk to anyone
01:49:34 um please remember not to talk to anyone about your evidence or anything to do with the refurbishment while you're out of the room and we'll resume at 25 to 12 please all right thank you you'd like to give the
01:49:54 ocean right 25 to 12 please
02:05:49 yes would you ask mr blake to come back
02:06:00 please
02:06:08 all right i'm ready to carry on mr blake yes
02:06:11 yes thank you very much yes mr chairman thank you mr blake i just clear something up which may have arisen as a misunderstanding from your evidence this morning about the status of the planning commission
02:06:22 the status of the planning commission can i just first of all show you your transcript from this morning page 31
02:06:27 31 line 21 that could just be flashed up for you
02:06:30 for you page 31 line 21 can you see there that you said
02:06:35 you said uh that the meeting with the planner is that there was a planning consent granted on a different
02:06:43 different product and so they you know the purpose of the meeting was to present an alternative for the planners to consider and i just want to explore whether
02:06:54 and i just want to explore whether that's really right can i ask you first to go please to your witness statement which is at ryd3094225 at page 12. i'd like to look together
02:07:06 at page 12. i'd like to look together with you at paragraph 6.6 where you say the original planning permission had been granted on the basis of zinc rain screen cladding the change from zinc to acm rain screen cladding
02:07:18 from zinc to acm rain screen cladding and the specif specific color and fixing face fix or cassette fix required planning permission now can i ask you then please to go to
02:07:30 art401999
02:07:39 this is the planning permission granted for the refurbishment uh on the 10th of january 2014 and if we look at it you can see
02:07:50 and if we look at it you can see that its permission for development conditional you see that in the second heading of the letter yes yes yeah and then the development
02:08:04 yes yeah and then the development is identified and then if you look at page two and look at condition three please you can see uh that there it says detailed drawings or samples of
02:08:15 detailed drawings or samples of materials as appropriate in respect of the following shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the relevant part of the work is begun and the work shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the
02:08:27 other than in accordance with the details so approved and shall thereafter be so maintained materials to be used on external faces of the buildings so that was one of the conditions
02:08:38 was one of the conditions so there needed to be detailed drawings and samples do you accept that permission granted was conditional on samples of whatever material was to be used
02:08:47 used being provided by the to the planning authority for approval um that's what that that shows yeah so when you say in your statement um the permission had been granted
02:08:58 permission had been granted on the basis of zinc rain screen that's not correct is it well that's what i understood um that's that's why there was a meeting with the planners to consult about making a change uh well
02:09:11 consult about making a change uh well maybe a change but the fact is that planning permission was conditional upon discussions with the planning authority about what materials should be used
02:09:23 about what materials should be used that's clear from this document isn't it oh
02:09:26 oh yeah i've agreed with that
02:09:31 so when you said this morning um that that there was planning consent for zinc that's not correct the planning condition the planning consent was conditional upon later discussions and satisfaction about
02:09:42 satisfaction about the materials to be used on the exterior of the building yeah but as i said my understanding was that the
02:09:49 that the um planner's expectation was that it was was zinc i'm not sure what's shown on the right
02:09:57 the right on the drawings themselves now going back to where we were before the break i was about to turn to your statement so we can go back to that please at page 51
02:10:09 ryd3094236 at page 51 and i'd like to look at paragraph 103 please
02:10:24 i'm so sorry this is the ryden company statement
02:10:27 statement your statement i i i may have misled you there
02:10:30 there mr blake para103 and it says there if you look at the second sentence as has been set out at section 5 above rml using harley as a subcontractor
02:10:42 rml using harley as a subcontractor had installed acm cladding over material wool insulation on two previous high-rise projects
02:10:50 so it's clear that there's a reference that a mineral wool insulation being used on prior projects did you know
02:10:58 know that fact at the time that you were discussing the use of acm cladding for the grenfell tower project
02:11:08 uh yes i worked on those projects so you knew
02:11:12 knew when you were talking to the tmo and rbkc that on the earlier projects
02:11:19 projects the acm cladding had been installed over mineral wool insulation yes did you ever consider the suitability of using polyethylene cored acm panels over
02:11:32 polyethylene cored acm panels over poly isocyanurate pir no so you never considered the suitability of those panels
02:11:44 suitability of those panels over that kind of insulation as opposed to
02:11:47 to rock wool or some other kind of mineral wool insulation no my my assumption was that it was a
02:11:58 no my my assumption was that it was a pre-identified material uh in the in the mbs um and that had been clouded but
02:12:06 but considered by the people that wrote it into that specification in circumstances where it was clear that the cladding system being proposed for grenfell was different from the system that you as
02:12:18 different from the system that you as ryden had used at chalcott's and ferrier point
02:12:21 point because on grenfell pir was to be used instead of mineral wool did you take any steps to verify that the system proposed for grenfell
02:12:34 that the system proposed for grenfell uh was equally suitable and safe as it had been
02:12:38 had been at chalcott's and ferrier point me personally well let's start with you personally uh i didn't know did anybody at ryden to your knowledge we uh over cladding tower block projects
02:12:53 we uh over cladding tower block projects we used acm pe core over mineral wool and not over pir could you please check it out and make sure it's safe did that ever occur to you no it didn't
02:13:06 is there a reason why they didn't occur to you
02:13:09 to you can you help us only as i've said the fact that they're clearly identified in the
02:13:20 project information the um assumption was that those governance checks had already been made
02:13:31 governance checks had already been made with respect to their suitability for use
02:13:36 use and combination on the project now i want to ask you some questions about childcards do you remember that in 2017 there was a problem that arrayed arose with an acm
02:13:48 problem that arrayed arose with an acm product
02:13:49 product used at the childcare's estate yes you remember it was delamination i think yes it was yes do you have do you have a recollection of that episode
02:14:00 recollection of that episode i do yes were you involved personally in dealing with that issue um i was i had a site meeting there yeah do you remember a mr
02:14:10 a mr vela if that's the right way of pronouncing his name of alcoa or arconic visiting the chalcotes estate project in may 2017 yes i do yeah and
02:14:23 yes i do yeah and indeed he says that there was a meeting on the 4th of may with you do you remember that i do right and i think also alan white
02:14:35 do you remember who it was that ryden decided that you and alan white should meet with mr vela
02:14:45 i don't
02:14:49 specifically remember but i would imagine
02:14:53 imagine uh jeff would have asked me to um attend that meeting do you remember whether there was anybody else at that meeting other than you and alan white um
02:15:04 than you and alan white um yes uh the um a man from ronabond had a a lady colleague with him and there was a representative
02:15:18 there was a representative of the distributor um or the sorry uk sales rep for um
02:15:29 uk sales rep for um for renamon did you say the man from reyna bond is that mr vala yes and the lady colleague was she from
02:15:36 she from reyna bond yeah i understood that they were work colleagues i see and the representative of the distributor do you remember who that was um
02:15:48 uh vince was his does the name vince meekin's ring yeah
02:15:54 ring yeah that that that's the guy right um do you remember whether harley was at that meeting uh no they weren't
02:16:07 given that i think you have told us uh or at least given us the impression that you're not a cladding specialist yourself
02:16:16 yourself how did you think that you would be able to understand what the representatives of arconic and mr meekins were saying to you at that meeting
02:16:28 that meeting um i i was the contracts manager responsible for for that job and it's normal that if there's a um an issue that um
02:16:41 um an issue that um comes up in the future then you would go to the person who um has most um information about the job to
02:16:54 information about the job to get to a resolution um the the the meeting was also um the front part of it was there was a representative from the architects there as well uh which
02:17:07 the architects there as well uh which architects hta i see who was alan white uh he was a site manager who worked up at chalcott's on the original charcoal's project
02:17:18 charcoal's project he did yeah and what was his role within ryden at the time of this meeting which was may 2017 um he was working on uh one of the
02:17:29 um he was working on uh one of the uh other reefer projects um but i can't remember which one all right now mr vella comments that at this meeting and this is from
02:17:40 that at this meeting and this is from his statement he he says that at this meeting he expressed his surprise that tall buildings had been clad in an acm
02:17:50 acm polyethylene cladding rather than an fr cord product do you recall those comments no i don't
02:18:03 do you recall one way or the other that the subject of acm pe cladding as opposed to fr cord products came up that wasn't discussed at all
02:18:14 discussed at all how sure are you about that do you think
02:18:18 uh as that's my recollection that it wasn't discussed at that stage may 17th so we're only about a month before the grenfell tower fire itself do you
02:18:30 the grenfell tower fire itself do you remember whether anybody else in the industry the cladding industry had made similar comments to you that it was surprising that buildings had been clad in a polyethylene core as
02:18:41 had been clad in a polyethylene core as opposed to a fire resistant or fr core product that's um i've no one said that to me mr verlo's recollection
02:18:52 said that to me mr verlo's recollection is that either you or alan white commented that the uk regulations permitted the use of such a product for these applications did you make that comment
02:19:02 comment that's not my recall at all did mr white make that comment i i can't speak for ellen but i don't recall him saying that
02:19:17 was it your understanding at the time that uk building regulations did permit the use of such a product for those applications um my my knowledge of
02:19:29 um my my knowledge of chow cuts is that all of the buildings were individually signed off by building control so therefore my understanding would be that
02:19:41 therefore my understanding would be that they were
02:19:42 they were compliant
02:19:45 i'm also very surprised that um the man from renault um
02:19:55 raised the issue about using the the cladding paddle on that building because um that they they they know where it was being used they they issued a warranty on the
02:20:07 they issued a warranty on the on the building do you remember whether there was any discussion at this meeting about the difference performance carrick sorry the different performance characteristics of rayner bond pe panels
02:20:19 characteristics of rayner bond pe panels in rivet form as opposed to cassette form there was no um conversation about that
02:20:28 did mr vana tell anybody at that meeting that tests carried out by iconic in and after 2011 had consistently shown that raynor bond pe panels in cassette form only achieved
02:20:39 pe panels in cassette form only achieved a class e classification he did not mention that at the meeting then
02:20:46 then and it would follow that he didn't mention is this your evidence that the same panels in rivet form achieved class c classification he didn't talk about that at all
02:20:58 did he say that arconic had concluded from those tests at that stage 2011 that the cassette form of panels
02:21:05 panels was liable to a flashover in the event of a fire
02:21:08 of a fire no he did not [Applause] now moving on to a different topic i can i just want to ask you some
02:21:20 i can i just want to ask you some questions about x over uh if i think you've helped us understand ryden's method of um operation and a design and build
02:21:32 um operation and a design and build contract such as this was to appoint specialist third parties to undertake aspects of work for which ryden had no in-house expertise can you explain why ryden did not appoint a fire safety engineer
02:21:47 because that is the remit of the architect to provide that did to your recollection did studio e is your sub-consultant architect ever
02:21:59 your sub-consultant architect ever advise you that no fire safety expertise from a fire safety engineer was required for this project
02:22:10 engineer was required for this project they they didn't advise that night right
02:22:14 to your knowledge did anybody at right never ask them for that specific advice no the uh um the assumption would be that that is
02:22:26 the assumption would be that that is that's their mandate can i ask you to go to art four zeros two two five five please
02:22:35 now this uh is a set of minutes for the contractor induction meeting held on the 1st of april 2014 and i think you weren't present at that meeting but you received these notes
02:22:47 meeting but you received these notes because we can see it says at the foot of the page in for information stephen blake refurbishment director but when you got these minutes uh well first of all do you recall
02:22:58 first of all do you recall receiving these minutes at all um i can't recall but obviously if i'm on electronic copy i would have had them yeah and would you have read them um i may have done right do you have a
02:23:11 um i may have done right do you have a recollection of reading them no if we look at page four and go to paragraph
02:23:17 paragraph it says that there x over completed the fire strategy at tender stage they have not been innovated but sl will contact them with the view of using them going forward
02:23:30 of using them going forward were you aware that mr lawrence had assumed the task of contacting x over with the view of using them and going forward
02:23:38 forward uh i didn't i didn't know whether he'd done that or not if you read the minutes you would have done yes
02:23:45 if i'd read the minutes yes but i can't recall them i see had you asked or instructed mr lawrence to to assume the task of contacting x over
02:23:53 over with a view of using them going forward i didn't know do you know whether anybody else at ryden asked him to do that i don't know given that you were responsible for overseeing the
02:24:04 responsible for overseeing the appointment of suitable contractors and consultants would the novation or appointment of consultants be something um that mr lawrence would discuss with you yes you would yes yeah was there any discussion between
02:24:16 yeah was there any discussion between you and mr lawrence about appointing x over
02:24:18 over um i have a a recall um that we did
02:24:25 talk about this
02:24:29 and the conclusion was that the fire strategy
02:24:34 strategy had been done
02:24:37 on the behest of studio e to inform their their drawings and indeed the layout of the of the block um and it's
02:24:48 of the block um and it's their their responsibility to um ensure that compliance
02:25:00 do you remember when that discussion with mr lawrence took place uh i don't before or after this meeting do you think uh it would well i imagine it would be after this this meeting do you remember what
02:25:12 this meeting do you remember what prompted the discussion with mr lawrence that you recall i don't but if it's a an action on a set of minutes um that would be the probable um
02:25:26 that would be the probable um prompt
02:25:31 don't put words in your mouth but i is your evidence that you'd there was a discussion between you and mr lawrence about the appointment of x over by ryden as a fire safety engineer specialist
02:25:44 as a fire safety engineer specialist going forward but you'd have decided not to go ahead with it
02:25:48 with it because as you i think have said uh they had already uh produced a fire strategy yeah and it's the responsibility of
02:25:59 yeah and it's the responsibility of studio e
02:26:00 studio e um to um
02:26:04 um to um assure themselves of of that information
02:26:09 but if it was the responsibility of studio e to assure themselves of that information what do you know can you help us why mr lawrence
02:26:17 lawrence himself had proposed that he would contact them with a view of using them going forward as opposed to asking studio e to do so
02:26:30 asking studio e to do so um i don't know um that that's a minute from a meeting that someone's made isn't it now in your statement paragraph 7.2
02:26:43 now in your statement paragraph 7.2 and it's so short i'm not sure it's worth taking you to it you say i i was aware that a fire consultant xover had been engaged on behalf of kc tmo
02:26:56 did you make any assumption one way or the other that the x over was continuing after you had won the tender as part of the team retained by the tma
02:27:11 sorry i've i've missed the first part of that question did you well let me try it a different way did you assume that x over continued as part of the team retained
02:27:22 continued as part of the team retained by the tmo or did you not think about it uh i didn't i didn't make that assumption no
02:27:38 did you take any steps to check what if any contractual arrangements the tmo had in relation to the provision of fire engineering advice once ryden became principal contractor
02:27:52 no why is that i i didn't see a need to ask the client that
02:28:03 that did you take any steps to check that the appointment of x over continued during the construction phase of the project
02:28:09 project uh no did you personally communicate with x over during the project no
02:28:22 did you think anyone was providing fire strategy advice after you've taken over the project um but that again the fire strategy had been done at tender
02:28:35 fire strategy had been done at tender stage
02:28:36 stage and thereafter that lies in the ultimate responsibility of studio e's submissions to building control
02:28:48 submissions to building control right it's right though isn't it that on winning the tender ryden took over studio e's employment by the tmo
02:28:56 the tmo hence the novation is this right yes that being said how could it be for studio e to appoint a sub sub consultant in the form of a
02:29:06 of a fire safety engineer it would be for ryden to do that wouldn't it no why not because if they needed further advice
02:29:18 because if they needed further advice from a specialist then that's their remit to um to get that advice was that your
02:29:29 to get that advice was that your understanding at the time absolutely was it based on any
02:29:33 any contractual documentation you'd seen at the time
02:29:38 the time um not based on any contractual but that's uh
02:29:42 that's uh my experience of how that
02:29:47 obligation flowed so your experience is can i just understand this was it your experience that if if the novated architect on a design and build felt that they needed
02:29:59 design and build felt that they needed specialist fire engineer input they would go off and retain it themselves as opposed to coming to you and asking you to retain the fire engineer i would i would say exactly that
02:30:12 and who would pay the fire safety engineer then in that situation they would and what say would you have in who it was that they decided to go to
02:30:24 in who it was that they decided to go to and the scope of the appointment that's for them to determine is that your experience um that that is
02:30:36 well a my experience is that a fire consultant is generally employed
02:30:48 pre our involvement to inform the um that indeed the strategy layout means of escape
02:30:55 of escape that i'll put on the tender drawings
02:31:00 my experience is not to have a novated architect in the design and build scenario and if there is a fire consultant
02:31:14 and if there is a fire consultant that will be part of their remit because their responsibility is to discharge the obligations of building
02:31:26 discharge the obligations of building control
02:31:28 control let me just explore that your experience is that is you say not to have an evated architect
02:31:32 architect in the design and build scenario does that that's that's my experience is that right does that well in this case of course we know that studio e were novated to write was this york the first time you'd ever
02:31:43 was this york the first time you'd ever experienced that on this project that is correct yeah i see
02:31:56 that is correct yeah i see that tell us that you and indeed other people at ryden had had no previous experience of how to
02:32:07 had had no previous experience of how to manage an architect who had become a a sub-consultant by novation
02:32:16 i didn't see that that situation was any different to a non-novated architect it's it's employment of a schedule of
02:32:28 it's it's employment of a schedule of services
02:32:30 services the the fact that it's no baited is that's
02:32:34 that's the client um has wished that architect to
02:32:38 to stay involved with the project which made sense to me um in terms of previous knowledge working
02:32:49 in terms of previous knowledge working with the
02:32:51 with the the planners the building control the adjacent project um and so
02:32:59 um and so although i'm saying to you that's unusual to be no rated then um i i saw that as a very logical uh process
02:33:12 very logical uh process did you ever tell the tmo that the grenfell tower project was the first project you and the others on the team uh involved in it
02:33:22 in it had had of an innovation of an architect
02:33:27 no i didn't know
02:33:32 very often the in the majority of design and build contracts the the the architectural firm that has had the initial contact with the client
02:33:43 initial contact with the client uh to from the scheme inception to the planning consultation um you'll be you know encouraged to use
02:33:54 um you'll be you know encouraged to use them as the as the architect for the for the construction phase but did it not occur to you that it was a little bit more than being encouraged to use them
02:34:04 them as a result of the novation ryden was actually entering into a formal arms length
02:34:10 length contractual arrangement yeah with studio we where by studio we were providing you with services yeah and i was very happy with that that that i've seen a very logical step um against an architect that the
02:34:23 um against an architect that the the client was obviously uh happy with otherwise they wouldn't motivated him but for the first time of course in your experience the architect was now answerable to you as opposed to answerable to your client
02:34:36 as opposed to answerable to your client did you not perceive that to to create some kind of difference no right going back to the question of x over uh
02:34:45 over uh it would it would it have been normal at the time for a project of the size of grenfell tower to proceed through the construction phase without the principal contractor seeking specialist safety fire safety advice
02:34:57 specialist safety fire safety advice from a fire safety engineer as i said that that would be um flow through the architectural development
02:35:10 right so can we leave it like this uh or perhaps take it from you that so long as neither xover nor building control as you've mentioned them
02:35:22 control as you've mentioned them brought any issues to your attention you were not concerned
02:35:30 if they sorry would you mind repeating that well actually i'd like to go back to my prior question in fact my first question was would it have been normal
02:35:41 normal at the time for a project of the size of grenfell tower to proceed through the construction phase of the project without the principal contractor seeking specialist advice from a fire safety
02:35:53 specialist advice from a fire safety engineer
02:35:54 engineer i'm not sure i quite got an answer to that that that is uh uh normal yes right and and therefore can we take it that so long as neither xover nor building control
02:36:05 control brought to your attention any issues about fire safety you were not concerned
02:36:11 if they didn't bring me an issue then no i wouldn't be concerned no did you ever consider asking the tmo to be copied in on any communications going to and from over relating to the refurbishment mr
02:36:23 over relating to the refurbishment mr miller do you mean x over or do you mean studio e because the witness has said he expects studio e to deal with all this i'll ask it differently then i did mean x over yes all right
02:36:34 x over yes all right well let me put it this way did you know that in fact before you came on the scene uh xover's client was the tmo not studio e um i didn't know that i
02:36:48 not studio e um i didn't know that i i subsequently saw on the the report that it was uh x over four studio e but that's on behalf of the client so um
02:37:00 that's on behalf of the client so um yeah that same thing yes all right well let's let's try the same question again then
02:37:04 then that i asked before did you ever consider asking either the tmo or studio e if you could be copied in on communications going to and from x over with regards to the refurbishment
02:37:18 x over with regards to the refurbishment no i didn't i didn't no you didn't why not
02:37:22 not um because i was fulfilling the at a point in time i was either
02:37:30 either directorial responsibility and then
02:37:35 when i was contracts managing it i had no no contact with him now by september 2014 we've seen from uh
02:37:46 now by september 2014 we've seen from uh earlier records raised with earlier witnesses that xover were consulted on an ad hoc basis
02:37:54 did you know that at the time um i'm subsequently aware of that because i've i've seen the emails specifically at the time i wasn't aware
02:38:05 specifically at the time i wasn't aware of that
02:38:06 of that right now as part of the contract documentation that you were sent
02:38:13 sent in order to be able to prepare your tender bid did you see a report from x over um i i can't recall that let me see if i can
02:38:24 can show it to you this is c s t f 6085 please there are a number of references to this document mr blake this is the one i've
02:38:35 document mr blake this is the one i've got this is issue 3 of x over's outline fire safety strategy dated the 7th of november 2013. just looking at the first page there does this ring a bell with you uh it
02:38:47 does this ring a bell with you uh it does now
02:38:48 does now um but if you were asking me at the time of tender
02:38:51 of tender did it um then then no no so just to be clear you say you didn't see this at the time of the tender
02:38:59 tender i may have done but i don't record i can't recall um this particular document did you see x over's fee proposal and
02:39:10 did you see x over's fee proposal and scope of works for the carrying out of the refurbishment works uh no right
02:39:21 when you receive the tender documents were you not curious to understand what work had been done by a fire safety engineer and to read such work as they had done
02:39:33 and to read such work as they had done um not at the time no
02:39:42 can i just ask you did you ever read something called initial design note dated the 12th of september 2012. does that ring a bell with you from a
02:39:55 does that ring a bell with you from a well let me show you a document it's tmo100
02:39:58 tmo100 37827 please
02:40:09 does this look familiar to you uh no it doesn't right do you remember reading earlier issues of the outline fire safety strategy dated october 2012
02:40:21 fire safety strategy dated october 2012 or october 2013. no i don't okay
02:40:35 no i don't okay were you concerned or did it cross your mind to
02:40:38 mind to inquire about why you hadn't saw and seen a detailed fire strategy as part of the tender documentation
02:40:49 part of the tender documentation no okay well let's go back to issue three
02:40:55 three uh cst6085 this is issue three of the outline fire safety strategy for grenfell tower dated the 7th of november 2013. and can i ask you to turn to page
02:41:06 2013. and can i ask you to turn to page 9
02:41:07 9 and look please at section 3.1.4 this deals with requirement b4 external fastbread
02:41:14 fastbread and it says it is considered that the proposed changes will have no adverse effect on the building in relation to external fire spread
02:41:21 spread but this will be confirmed by an analysis in a future issue of this report
02:41:26 report do you remember reading that at the time no
02:41:29 no you don't do you remember the general idea
02:41:33 idea that xover had uh expressed the view that the proposed changes would have no adverse effect on the building but that conclusion would be confirmed by an
02:41:44 conclusion would be confirmed by an analysis and a future issue of their report
02:41:49 i didn't read it so no but did you did you have an idea in general did you know that in general that is what they had said no i didn't no okay
02:42:11 if we can just go back to the minutes of the meeting of the contractors the initial meeting on the 1st of april
02:42:24 the initial meeting on the 1st of april 2004
02:42:27 2004 [Applause] uh we find those uh at art402255 i just want to ask you about that
02:42:39 i just want to ask you about that i'd like you to go back to paragraph 5.3 at page four please we can see there that as we've seen earlier this morning mr lawrence says x over completed the fire strategy at tender stage
02:42:51 fire strategy at tender stage now whether you recall reading these minutes or not did you know at the time that lex over had completed a fire strategy at tender stage um well if i'd read that minute then i
02:43:04 um well if i'd read that minute then i would
02:43:04 would i would know that right did you ever ask mr lawrence to see that fire strategy no i did not why is that and
02:43:15 why is that and i i'm directing the project so that's not something i would ask for did you ever yourself even
02:43:26 ask for did you ever yourself even consider fire safety on this project
02:43:32 um at that point in time no well when you say at that point in time
02:43:40 time my question was directed at the entire time frame of the project in which you were involved during that entire time did you ever think about fire safety
02:43:51 about fire safety um i'm concerned from day one as to the um adequacy of any project
02:44:02 adequacy of any project um and
02:44:05 um and we we provide for that by the the appointment of the consultants to
02:44:14 to um make that as it should be so um i wouldn't look at an individual aspect um but i would always be
02:44:28 um but i would always be for any project concerned with its um adequacy that is um compliant given that we can see from this minute
02:44:39 given that we can see from this minute that xover had completed a fire strategy at tender stage or at least that was what the minute says uh did you ever or did anybody else at ryden
02:44:49 ryden ever subsequently take any steps to seek an update
02:44:53 an update of that report from x over um not not that i'm aware of and um
02:45:05 not i'm aware of no and is there any reason why not um again i'd put it back to the fact that um the
02:45:16 to the fact that um the tender stage strategy informs um the gas arrangements sections
02:45:26 um doors means of escape that the architects develop on their drawings
02:45:38 develop on their drawings did you ever think about consulting x over on the value engineering changes particularly to the rain screen panels that had been made since ryden's appointment
02:45:49 no why is that um in as much that the the change uh was and then originally
02:46:01 and then originally it was a requested um alternative for as part of the tender so i would have assumed that someone would
02:46:12 i would have assumed that someone would have considered that in the process of asking it for it to be priced as an alternative
02:46:35 can i ask you to go to exo500 please now this is a chain of emails from the 21st to the 23rd of december 2015.
02:46:49 and you're copied in on this i want to look at the bottom email first running over the page this is andy bridges 21st of december
02:47:00 this is andy bridges 21st of december 2015 to terry ashton and tony pearson uh and it's copied to you among others hello terry we are the electrical contractors on this project
02:47:13 contractors on this project i'm not sure if you've been made aware but there have been some fairly major changes to the lower level since you issued your last fire strategy document is 0-3
02:47:24 so if you hadn't been aware about issue 3
02:47:28 3 from x over at april 2014 you were certainly aware of it can we can we take it from this by december 2015
02:47:39 take it from this by december 2015 yes so
02:47:43 yes so do you remember when you first became aware of issue three of xover's fire strategy document um
02:47:55 fire strategy document um i can't recall exactly when um but i certainly know about it there right uh did you know yourself whether mr ashton of x over
02:48:05 of x over was in fact aware that there had been fairly major changes to the lower levels since
02:48:10 since uh his issue three of the fire safety strategy
02:48:14 strategy um i i didn't know that no now as i've shown you
02:48:17 shown you issue three was produced in november 2013.
02:48:21 2013. that's just a little bit more than two years before the date of this email yep during that time since you won the project until in march 2014
02:48:32 you won the project until in march 2014 had you yourself made any attempt to keep mr ashton updated as to any changes in the project no i hadn't had anybody else that ride into your knowledge
02:48:43 into your knowledge um not not to my knowledge and they again
02:48:46 again that that would be the um remit of the architects if as a consequence of um client changes uh there is an
02:48:57 client changes uh there is an implication to the fire strategy then that would be dealt with as a as a consequence of that change now looking at this email chain
02:49:10 now looking at this email chain we can see who's party to it it's andy bridges who's rj electrics yes uh okay and xover as the recipients copied to js wright
02:49:21 wright and max fordham and you and david hughes from ryden we did no architect
02:49:29 architect no no mr sones on that uh and and no mr crawford on that either no so when we look at the substance of it we
02:49:39 we can see that this is rj electrics asking x over for some advice if we look on this raises three questions for you
02:49:51 three questions for you yes and it goes on over the page perhaps we should just look over the page to page two please
02:49:57 uh and you can see that there are some questions and then answers come back in red from mr ashton did did you notice from this email that here is mr ashton
02:50:09 is mr ashton providing fire safety advice to rj electrical but not looping in the architects um
02:50:20 but not looping in the architects um yeah the the this was about um focused on the on the m e side of the uh of the questions yes but that wasn't my
02:50:31 of the questions yes but that wasn't my question
02:50:32 question my question was did you notice that here is mr ashton providing fire safety advice to rj electrical but not looping in the architect um
02:50:46 i didn't notice that no and i didn't see anything wrong with this communication either well is it right that ryden and its subcontractors still relied on xover to answer ad hoc questions in relation to fire safety
02:50:57 questions in relation to fire safety advice
02:50:59 advice without needing to trouble the architects on the question this was linked to um m e and that's why um max fordham were copied in
02:51:09 copied in yes that's sort of not quite answering my question mr blake i'm really asking about communications is it right that ryden and its subcontractors were content to rely on x
02:51:21 subcontractors were content to rely on x over to answer ad hoc questions without needing to trouble the architects to and to keep them in the loop to know what was being said and asked
02:51:29 asked um yeah i mean ideally the architects would have been copied into that um
02:51:36 that um but i still don't think that that's um
02:51:42 an issue because it's uh who did you think mr ashton was advising or acting for when he was giving this advice
02:51:53 giving this advice um acting on the behalf of the project on behalf of the project the project isn't a
02:52:00 isn't a company or a person which company or person did you think mr ashton was advising or acting on behalf of when giving this advice
02:52:11 um
02:52:14 against the the request from the art from the electrician who is our um
02:52:23 is our um our employee so he's he's providing some advice
02:52:30 for us to
02:52:35 answer the questions
02:52:40 well if xover we're going to charge a fee let's just assume for giving this advice
02:52:45 advice who would pay that fee yeah we would pay that you'd pay it well if we've gone to them uh in this instance
02:52:53 instance directly and we haven't um or our electrician has
02:52:59 so
02:53:04 in that instance yeah i would imagine that
02:53:07 that we would pay for that advice yes thank you
02:53:15 and in order to pay for that advice you would have to have some kind of contract with x over wouldn't you or they'd send us a bill well in order to take advice from a
02:53:26 in order to take advice from a professional it would be would it be your experience that before they gave any advice you would enter into a services contract um in the yeah in the majority yeah
02:53:39 in the yeah in the majority yeah did ryden have one with x over no we didn't
02:53:47 so you were content were you for your subcontractors uh to pick mr ashton's brains as and when it was needed uh and you would pick up the bill but without any formal contractual
02:53:58 without any formal contractual arrangements between you if uh xover had presented us a bill um then that would have been our consideration
02:54:12 the the approach to xover is that they did the fire strategy for the building in the first place so they must have had a an employment to do that so it's
02:54:24 an employment to do that so it's a question that's been asked against that
02:54:31 i can only explain it like that did you not wonder
02:54:38 who xover thought they were advising or responsible too for this advice that that would lead back to their
02:54:51 their report that they did in the first place
02:55:00 can i ask you to go to ryd3074436 please this is an email of the 14th of april 2016
02:55:11 2016 to you from matt smith of max fordham and i'd just like to look at the first line
02:55:17 line and it's copied to various people but again no architect
02:55:26 afternoon steve i've discussed your queries regarding the fire alarm with adrian brown from xover who's now replaced terry ashton and then there are some suggestions set out there so you could see from that
02:55:37 set out there so you could see from that that even at this late stage mid april 2016
02:55:41 2016 three months before practical completion xover was still being asked for advice yes yes in those circumstances did you even at that point consider instructing x over even even if only for
02:55:53 instructing x over even even if only for a sign-off opinion on the building as it stood then nope why is that because um as i just said that they
02:56:04 um as i just said that they um were providing advice um under their original remit and their original remit was with whom
02:56:16 and their original remit was with whom with the
02:56:17 with the fire strategy um that was produced for for the tmo
02:56:28 i just want to ask you some questions about carl stokes then if i may in your statement you refer to carl stokes the fire risk assessor retained by the tmo can you help us what was your understanding at the time of carl stokes
02:56:39 understanding at the time of carl stokes his role
02:56:40 his role in the refurbishment project if any um he's retained on behalf of the tmo who are the landlord of the building
02:56:52 tmo who are the landlord of the building um and he's to carry out a fire risk assessment of um of the building on behalf of the landlord
02:57:02 landlord to your knowledge mr blake was mr stokes or his company ever retained or appointed
02:57:07 appointed to undertake any consultancy or supervisory role in relation to the refurbishment works on the tower by us by anybody
02:57:18 by us by anybody um i understood he was the employee of the tmo
02:57:22 the tmo i see my question then is to your knowledge was carl stokes ever retained by the tmo to undertake any consultancy or supervisory works in relation to this refurbishment
02:57:33 refurbishment that's what i understood yes you thought he was
02:57:37 he was a tmo contractor to act as a consultant or supervisor in respect of the refurbishment is that right he was acting on behalf of
02:57:48 is that right he was acting on behalf of the
02:57:49 the the tmo to provide an fra not not um not consultancy about the refurbishment specifically
02:58:00 specifically right to your knowledge did he ever give any fire safety advice to ryden
02:58:08 ryden about the designed or the construction of the rain screen cladding facade uh no not to my knowledge did he ever give any fire safety advice to ryden about any other aspect
02:58:20 advice to ryden about any other aspect of the refurbishment uh he produced an fra um that had queries for us to respond against yes um we may come to
02:58:31 um we may come to um what i'd expect i i see do you know whether he ever gave advice either to you or through you to the tmo
02:58:43 either to you or through you to the tmo generally on fire safety aspects of the project itself
02:58:49 um no the the only advice we got was the issue of his fra report i think identifying actions for us
02:59:01 i think identifying actions for us did ryden ever rely on that advice by mr stokes
02:59:08 um no can we look at ryd30s please
02:59:22 this is an email of the 28th of january 2016 from you to carl stokes copying in david hughes and claire williams in that email you can see that you asked carl stokes for a
02:59:33 can see that you asked carl stokes for a meeting on the 4th of february 2016 and you say we are rapidly reaching
02:59:38 reaching the conclusion of the project and would appreciate the opportunity to ensure that we have covered all formalities in respect of fra why did you seek carl stakes as
02:59:49 fra why did you seek carl stakes as input
02:59:54 um uh
02:59:59 can i see the context of that request well um i can show you the emails below it for sir for sure if you go down to page two we can see that it starts off
03:00:10 that it starts off on the 27th of january with an email to janice ray from carl stokes arranging meetings at grenfell
03:00:21 arranging meetings at grenfell and then if we go to page one right we can see the next email up uh from uh claire williams to you and david hughes also dated 27th of january where she
03:00:32 also dated 27th of january where she says gentlemen rfra is available as below
03:00:34 below which date do you prefer this is on the basis of the meeting is on site at your offices
03:00:39 offices and then we see your response so that's the context um so yeah uh the question my question i'll repeat it why did you it looks from that as if you
03:00:50 why did you it looks from that as if you were seeking carl stokes his input and my question is why is that um in order to understand whether when he did a fire risk assessment of the building um that there's excuse me
03:01:06 um that there's excuse me any formalities for us to um either explain
03:01:10 explain or provide uh in respect of um the the virus assessment that he does uh carries out on behalf of the landlord
03:01:21 uh carries out on behalf of the landlord so did you understand it that you wanted this meeting in order to be able to to provide him with assistance as opposed to no in providing you with a system so providing us with assistance
03:01:32 providing us with assistance to make sure that we've this is a precursor
03:01:36 precursor to having the ability to um open the atrium to the public so we
03:01:47 so we obviously wanted to make sure that everything was in place in order for that to be done and i thought the best way of doing it would be to to meet carl
03:02:00 and go go and walk around the building with him
03:02:06 right can i ask you to go to ryd3066323 please
03:02:14 this is an email of the 29th of january 2016 a day later uh between you and carl stokes it's from carl stokes to you
03:02:25 carl stokes to you copy to claire williams yep grenfell fra meeting
03:02:30 meeting steve the list of items as discussed this morning see you on thursday next week at two at grenfell yep and then you can see underneath his name
03:02:38 name carl a list of a list of things you see that list
03:02:48 did you discuss looking at that list did you discuss all those items with carl stokes
03:02:52 stokes at a meeting um this is a a record of our walk around i see which is
03:03:03 i see which is exactly what i'd expect from from that meeting right
03:03:10 in addition was there any discussion at that meeting about the external facade do you remember no there wasn't no
03:03:21 can you go to tmo10012397 please these are meeting minutes from progress meeting number 20 which you attended
03:03:32 meeting number 20 which you attended it seems from it on the 23rd of february
03:03:38 2016
03:03:44 and we can see who was there various people from the tmo and then you're
03:03:52 you're listed as present can i ask you please to go to page four and look at the middle item 2.20 and it's under the heading fire compartmentation action update
03:04:03 compartmentation action update and it says sb met with carl stokes tmo fire risk assessor advised ryden not to introduce or alter any further works and nothing further is to be progressed
03:04:15 and nothing further is to be progressed cw to liaise with carl and confirm carl stakes will produce a report in the form of the fire risk assessment identifying any shortfalls which will be submitted to cw on or near completion and
03:04:25 and then the actioner is cw
03:04:30 do you remember what specific aspect or aspects of fur compartmentation mr stokes was advising on um yes i do um in the walk around in the communal areas
03:04:42 communal areas um that there are some service risers um either side of the lift shaft um that were covered by
03:04:56 were covered by um a chipboard panel um and there was um
03:05:07 i think uh kyle probably saw it before me but
03:05:11 me but there was um evidence of um some fire stopping um required in there right does this
03:05:23 required in there right does this show us that you are seeking advice from mr stokes
03:05:31 um it shows that i was understanding what his role is um and what we were required to do
03:05:44 to fulfill our obligations um
03:05:50 for this contract did you discuss the exterior facade with mr stakes in the context of far compartmentation no we didn't no
03:06:01 this was focus on what what he looks for as a fire risk assessor
03:06:08 assessor it was looking at the condition of the lobbies
03:06:12 lobbies it was looking at um the access points from the lobbies um and the level of um uh of of lighting
03:06:23 um uh of of lighting and and signage as to how he assembles his um his risk assessment can i ask you to go to tmo one double zero four five
03:06:34 zero four five zero five five these are the minutes of progress meeting number 22 which you attended on the 19th of april 2016.
03:06:43 2016. we can see we're there if you look at page two please at item 2.8 we can see the same note as before followed by an update
03:06:55 and the update appears to be the last paragraph nr you see that yes nr requested that this be included
03:07:06 yes nr requested that this be included in the health and safety file cdm on completion as formal recognition of a fire risk shortfall
03:07:12 shortfall and potential residual risk arising from the building in its previous form and then your initials sb are in the column to the right of this note can you help us what was the residual risk which had been
03:07:24 the residual risk which had been identified there um he must be referring to the um areas of the building that weren't part of our remit
03:07:35 part of our remit that required um fire stopping
03:07:43 did you see the fire risk assessment as completed by carl stokes dated the 20th of june 2016 um i i would imagine that i did
03:07:54 um i i would imagine that i did yeah but i can't recall without it
03:08:00 did you check whether it included the residual risk referred to at this meeting um
03:08:09 i i don't i don't remember um
03:08:15 uh actioning that minute in in the way that that's asked right well given that your initials are next to the action point was it not your responsibility to ensure that the
03:08:26 your responsibility to ensure that the fra was included in the health and safety file it's not asking for the fra it's asking for a note
03:08:38 well uh this we can quibble about this but in the previous paragraph it says carl stakes will produce a report in the form of a the fire risk assessment identifying any shortfalls
03:08:50 assessment identifying any shortfalls which will be submitted to claire williams on or near completion nr's neil reed requested that this be included in the h and s file okay uh uh i bet your pardon i've i've
03:09:02 okay uh uh i bet your pardon i've i've misread that um but with respect to a fire risk assessment um that is um absolutely the property of the of the client um
03:09:15 client um and that's for them uh to pick up in in the health and safety firm
03:09:23 firm or in in any respect let me put the question then again given that your initials are next to the action point was it not your responsibility to ensure that the fire risk assessment was
03:09:35 that the fire risk assessment was included in the health and safety file i was i was given that responsibility but um
03:09:42 our um remit was to provide information for the health and safety file
03:09:49 file it was for the uh the person responsible um for that file to collate that and who was that to your
03:10:02 collate that and who was that to your understanding well originally it was artelia and then they had the function of cdmc
03:10:09 of cdmc and then that responsibility changed um i think october 15 with a change of legislation
03:10:20 with a change of legislation and the the client took on that responsibility did you ever have a discussion after this note or this meeting 19th of
03:10:32 after this note or this meeting 19th of april 2016 with the client that although it said that you were going to include the fra in the health and safety file actually it should be then no i didn't know given that
03:10:44 then no i didn't know given that your action your initials are under the action note why is that um i i can't explain that i didn't do it now the
03:10:54 now the fra was not in the end included in the health and safety file can you explain why not
03:11:00 um no i can't no can i ask you to look at mr stokes's witness statement i'm just going to show you one part of it it's it's cst403063 at page 42.
03:11:14 it's it's cst403063 at page 42. and i'd like you to look at paragraph 120 with me
03:11:26 and he says there um when inspecting the tower
03:11:29 tower in april 2016 i spoke to various people including representatives from ryden however i cannot now remember exactly who i spoke to on this occasion because i had noted the isolated
03:11:40 because i had noted the isolated cladding test panel when visiting the tower
03:11:42 tower in 2014 and in particular the timber battens that were being used at that time
03:11:47 time i asked about how the cladding had eventually been fixed to the tower as can be seen from my handwritten notes following discussions with representatives of ryden i recorded ok fr no timber and cladding external
03:12:01 fr no timber and cladding external non-combustible metal fixings signed off by bc
03:12:05 by bc i do not remember the precise conversations i had however my understanding on leaving the tower after my inspection was that the actual cladding was compliant with the building regulations and the obvious presenting issue the
03:12:17 and the obvious presenting issue the timber battens had been dealt with etc do you recall having a conversation with carl stokes in april 2016 about the cladding uh no i don't
03:12:30 can you account yourself for how it came about
03:12:34 about that mr stokes recorded on his uh in his handwritten notes okay fr no timber uh niall khan did you or anybody else
03:12:45 uh niall khan did you or anybody else that ride into your knowledge tell mr stokes that the cladding was fr or fire resistant or fire rated
03:12:56 or fire resistant or fire rated um i've got no uh recall of doing that or that any other part of the building was fr
03:13:05 was fr again no that's not um
03:13:11 i'm going to turn to a different topic now which is the appointment of studio e [Applause] the original intention i think had been to novate s-e-l-p
03:13:22 to novate s-e-l-p but because of studio e's insolvency it's right i think isn't it that you appointed um studio e associates studio e architects limited that's right uh did you yourself have
03:13:35 that's right uh did you yourself have anything to do with the novation of studio e to ryden
03:13:40 uh not the novation though right who who did it who was it left to
03:13:47 um
03:13:51 you mean the employer of studio who took charge of
03:13:54 charge of the novation press the uh with all those uh um that employee would be under would be fire a deed um so
03:14:05 would be fire a deed um so the uh contract uh would be prepared by uh
03:14:10 uh um legal department yes um leaving aside the legal department on the business side who took charge of making sure that the novation of studio e to ryden
03:14:22 e to ryden progressed um that that would be a um
03:14:28 the commercial department and um usually the the contracts manager right do you remember
03:14:39 do you remember well let me show you a document if you can go please to um
03:14:44 ryd3064706 we can see an email chain between ryden and studio e and i'd like to look at the bottom
03:14:54 of the emails on the 17th of that's page one you can see at the bottom of that page there's an email
03:15:05 bottom of that page there's an email from simon lawrence to bruce sainz of the 17th of april 2014 bruce c attached the draft of the schedule of services that we're proposing to send you and then at the top of the page bruce and
03:15:16 then at the top of the page bruce and sends it back with markup on the 30th of april
03:15:19 april now you're not copied in on any of this um my question is were you involved in this process of back and forth about the terms on which ryden was retaining studio e no no
03:15:30 no no right did you see the terms in draft at this stage and studio e's
03:15:36 e's uh amendments to it proposed amendments
03:15:42 let's move forward in time well let me ask you this do you know yourself why the agreement itself wasn't signed in april 2014 but that in fact there was no formal agreement until
03:15:54 no formal agreement until february 2016 when the deed was signed you know what that is well in the first place we were employed under a
03:16:03 under a letter of intent if you like or an agreed expenditure so we weren't in the position to contract a deed that flows down
03:16:16 contract a deed that flows down um the responsibilities from the contract
03:16:20 contract um so until we were contracted which was whenever it was october 30th of october 2014
03:16:28 2014 yeah so then that would be the first opportunity to conclude an employee with studio e um and
03:16:39 studio e um and i can't explain why um there's any particular reason why there was a
03:16:47 was a gap between the um at the point in time when it eventually was signed did you see between between april 2014
03:16:58 did you see between between april 2014 and february 2016 did you see any draft terms between ryden and studio e draft contract terms um i don't believe so
03:17:09 um i don't believe so um i may have seen them at the end because i concluded the
03:17:19 chasing up of of getting the contract in place does that tell us that throughout 2014 and through throughout
03:17:31 throughout 2014 and through throughout 2015 you yourself had no idea about the terms or even draft terms on which studio we were acting as architects on this project
03:17:43 project um only that i'm familiar with what the schedule of services document uh provides for that's the standard
03:17:51 standard our iba shaded of services is it no that's the schedule of services that we provide
03:17:55 provide as part of the contract that would be entered into but is it right that
03:18:02 that you never actually explored whether or not studio e had any any objections to any part of that or any changes to it um i i didn't know
03:18:16 right um ryd3057355 please this is an email from daniel banks of ryden to zach maynard
03:18:27 ryden to zach maynard copied to you of the 11th of november 2015. now this is
03:18:34 over a year i think after the signing of the design and build contract with the tmo
03:18:40 tmo and i just want to look at the first bullet point
03:18:46 uh and one as i should show you that one of the attachments is the schedule of services letter 17th of april 2014. so this is 11th of november 15 and it's
03:18:57 so this is 11th of november 15 and it's attaching the schedule of services letter
03:18:59 letter from april 14 and then in the first bullet point it says studio e architects instead of levating i will appoint on our own standard terms
03:19:10 our own standard terms using the attached schedule of services and fees can you confirm you're happy with these including the amendments i also note that the fees are split into studio enlp and studio limited can you confirm in which name the
03:19:22 can you confirm in which name the appointment should be as i know that llp has gone
03:19:24 has gone since gone into liquidation
03:19:30 can you explain why this process of contracting was left for so long between april 14 and november 15.
03:19:43 uh i i can't explain that no would that be normal within ryden to leave the contractual arrangements between ryden and its novated architect if it
03:19:54 ryden and its novated architect if it had any ever or any other subcontractor for that matter up in the air for so long um it's not it's not normal it has happened before um
03:20:08 and i can't explain why in this instance you had had design contractu sorry contractual design responsibility to the
03:20:19 contractual design responsibility to the cmo
03:20:20 cmo from the 30th of october 2014 under the formal
03:20:24 formal signed and witnessed design and build contract
03:20:28 contract but no back to back if you like architect subcontract in place for that entire period
03:20:36 now wasn't that something of a risk um potentially so that's why it's best to employ everyone straight away and you had no warranty of any past work
03:20:47 and you had no warranty of any past work from studio e so you were on the hook for everything that studio e had done so far as tmo concerned
03:20:54 concerned but you had no comeback against studio e again
03:20:57 again was that not a real risk it's it's the same thing yes can i look at uh next document sea three zero is one three
03:21:06 one three seven four one this is a an email from the 14th of december 2015 which shows the near final text sent by daniel banks he was a trainee solicitor at ryden to
03:21:18 he was a trainee solicitor at ryden to bruce soames in respect of grenfell tower
03:21:21 tower let's just look at the three bullet points there mr dear bruce thank you for your email i'm conscious we have outstanding appointments and warranties for the following jobs lee bridge road frognal place grenfell towers
03:21:33 place grenfell towers uh now ryden's website tells us that those projects uh there's other projects lee bridge road and frontal place were worth respectively 6.1 million pounds and 7
03:21:44 respectively 6.1 million pounds and 7 million pounds so those were pretty substantial projects weren't they
03:21:50 um yeah reasonable size not do you know when studio e became ryden's architect sub consultant on those projects
03:22:01 projects um not specifically no now let's turn to ryd3064847
03:22:13 this th this is a
03:22:19 a letter
03:22:22 from ryden formal letter to bruce sowns 20th of january 2016 dear bruce grenfell tower london and he encloses two documents a deed of
03:22:33 encloses two documents a deed of appointment in duplicate and a collateral warranty in favor of the employer in triplicate
03:22:44 do you remember that um i don't remember that name
03:22:53 right let's just turn to a document of the same date sca3013878 please i just want to look with you at the middle email on that day
03:23:06 i'll give you the context
03:23:10 that's sca3013878 uh daniel banks tells you that he confirms the documents have been issued to studio he has per the letter attached
03:23:22 to studio he has per the letter attached we just saw that i will chase in a few days james could you possibly chase your end too in a few days
03:23:27 days thanks and then you go to neil crawford of studio e on the same day and you say neil hope all is good could you push this through your end especially the collateral warranty
03:23:40 especially the collateral warranty and then uh you all then neil crawford actually also responds or sends this on to bruce sowns bruce did you get this in the post um
03:23:52 given the the initial draft agreement was in circulation in april 2014 and barely amended from that time until it was signed on the 3rd of february 2016. that's the
03:24:05 the 3rd of february 2016. that's the deed
03:24:06 deed is it fair to say that it reflected the party's understanding as it had been back in april 2014
03:24:17 um yes i mean they continue to provide a service
03:24:22 service [Music]
03:24:23 [Music] so that's that's fine what was the rush to get it done do you remember um that's that's me um
03:24:34 that's that's me um chasing up the collateral warranty we're coming to the end of the contract um it's a requisite for pc um so therefore um
03:24:45 um so therefore um i'm i'm pursuing it well for in the first
03:24:48 first instance let's get the employee sorted out the collateral warranty is a record you know a requirement for pc um and that's
03:24:59 for pc um and that's that's my pursuit there would it have been normal at the time for ryden to have waited towards the end of the contract before asking its subcontractors to sign the formal contractual documentation
03:25:10 contractual documentation um as i said before it's not it's not the norm
03:25:14 the norm um but there can be a lag of time depending on other commercial pressures um but the
03:25:26 um but the the fact remains that the uh the employment is required so um that's that's closing it out did you at the time have any concerns
03:25:39 did you at the time have any concerns that studio e might not have understood what they were agreeing to when they signed the deed of appointment which i haven't shown you but um i've referred to no
03:25:50 um i've referred to no i know that there was a um a debate uh between um studio e and uh our legals on some of the points of
03:26:04 some of the points of [Applause] of the schedule of services um these are the technical points of legal matter
03:26:13 matter that um i would expect them to resolve um
03:26:17 um which they did now in his evidence uh uh and this is mr sones uh and it's day seven page 107 line four
03:26:28 and it's day seven page 107 line four and i don't need to to show you that it's just for our purposes mr thones told the inquiry that studio e's engagement uh in the deed was obtained under duress
03:26:43 was that your impression at the time that studio e was objecting in any way to assuming responsibility for past work um
03:26:55 for past work um no i do duress is a is a very strong word
03:27:01 word my um
03:27:04 energy was to get the thing concluded so i probably gave them a very small as soon as i
03:27:12 soon as i um started to chase it i could see no reason why it shouldn't be concluded um so therefore get on with it please
03:27:23 so therefore get on with it please did mr sainz ever give you reason to think that he was not prepared to agree
03:27:30 to take on responsibility for coordinating building regulation approval
03:27:34 approval for and on behalf of the contractor um i i do not request a conversation between bruce and i
03:27:47 on on that subject [Applause] in respect of the schedule of services generally forming part of the deed of appointment in february 2016
03:27:58 appointment in february 2016 did ryden place studio e under pressure financial or otherwise to accept the finalized wording
03:28:08 we asked them to accept it and if if anybody uh in terms of the um the exchange between two parties that they have an objection to
03:28:21 they have an objection to um a condition that's been put upon them then
03:28:26 then um that that is perfectly um standard practice for for that party to
03:28:34 to um present their argument and then
03:28:40 completely bring it to a conclusion which is my experience of
03:28:48 employing consultants did you ever tell studio e that you weren't prepared to pay their outstanding invoices unless they agreed to sign the deed of appointment no i didn't mr chairman i've come
03:29:00 no i didn't mr chairman i've come to a new topic and one minute to one that's very good timing
03:29:06 timing necklace and we'll break there mr blake we'll have a break for lunch at this point
03:29:11 point um please remember not to talk to anyone about your evidence or any other aspect of the refurbishment over the break and we'll resume at two o'clock please all right thank you now to give the usher
03:29:32 thank you two o'clock please
03:29:53 you