Architect Neil Crawford from Studio E gives evidence about design decisions, building control liaison, and admits to not checking material compliance with building regulations, relying instead on subcontractors.
00:01:38 yes sir Joss mr. Crawford to come back please
00:01:55 all right mr. core food yes mr. Crawford's evidence yeah can I just make a short and procedural announcement subject to you to you Amma's Estefan and that is the next pair
00:02:08 Amma's Estefan and that is the next pair of witnesses after mr. Crawford's evidence today we will move then to mr. wreck and we will finish him during the course of tomorrow and then move back to mr. stones who is very kindly indicated
00:02:19 mr. stones who is very kindly indicated that he wishes to return to complete his evidence and that will be the rest of tomorrow and Thursday yes and possibly beyond that but we will see that's that that's the best program thank you very
00:02:30 that's the best program thank you very much mr. Crawford can I ask you to be shown again please um har zero zero zero zero three eight six nine which is what
00:02:42 zero three eight six nine which is what we were looking at before before the break where you have a stamp be on the specification notes on the 26th of
00:02:55 specification notes on the 26th of January 2015 see that yes um and I just want to look with you please now at the glazing p2 panels which we looked at briefly before and you and you can see there that kingspan t p10 rigid insulation is
00:03:09 kingspan t p10 rigid insulation is prescribed as the core for the p2 panels yes yes did you ever discuss the use of kingspan TP 10 within the external wall build up with anybody within studio II
00:03:20 build up with anybody within studio II recall did you ever raise the issue or question with Harley or Ryden about the use of TP ten rigid insulation within P - no never calm how do you actually have
00:03:31 - no never calm how do you actually have a heard of the product kingspan TP ten before I'm aware of various Kings ban installations
00:03:42 specifically that one at that time and I can see did you take any steps to familiarize yourself with King's bounty p10 and its specification I may have
00:03:55 p10 and its specification I may have done I don't recall but it's really what I said it start which shows commenting from architecture and tenant perspective right now the p1 and p2 panels were part
00:04:06 right now the p1 and p2 panels were part of the external surface of the building weren't they and they were part of the window units they were and let's see if
00:04:17 window units they were and let's see if you agree with my next question and the do you agree with me that the insulating material used within those panels should have been a material of limited combust ability in order to comply with
00:04:29 ability in order to comply with paragraph 12 point 7 of approved document b or else be the subject of an eight four one four test to comply with BR one three five criteria and to comply to those criteria yes yes now looking at
00:04:43 to those criteria yes yes now looking at if we can ry d zero zero zero four six eight two two please page one of that four six eight two two this is a
00:04:55 four six eight two two this is a revision D of the Harley specification notes this time you see against the D in the bottom box 15th of July 2015 r2 and
00:05:07 the bottom box 15th of July 2015 r2 and r3 added fire and you stamp this with a status a can you see that on the 17th of July just a day or two later see that
00:05:18 July just a day or two later see that yes
00:05:22 do you accept well let me put it to you this way did when you stamped it a did you notice that the specification for p1
00:05:34 you notice that the specification for p1 was styrofoam and p2 was kingspan T p10
00:05:41 as stated before I was looking at spec and the drawings from there for the perspective of architectural intent yes did you notice that the
00:05:55 intent yes did you notice that the specification for the material for p1 for the core with styrofoam and the material for p2 for the material was kingspan TP 10 I don't recall and if
00:06:11 kingspan TP 10 I don't recall and if those were not if you if you had not satisfied yourselves well let me ask this and did you take any steps to satisfy yourself that styrofoam and
00:06:22 satisfy yourself that styrofoam and kingspan TP turn were materials of limited combust ability or else had confirmed my understanding of all forms plastic forms is they could be treated
00:06:33 plastic forms is they could be treated with retardant to limit the combust ability did you take any steps to find out whether those materials had in fact been treated with retardant to limit their combust ability eternal calm if
00:06:46 their combust ability eternal calm if those materials were not neither compliant with the requirements for limited combust ability nor had passed a full-scale eight for one for test in accordance with BRE 135 how could their
00:07:01 accordance with BRE 135 how could their specification conform to design intent as you had stated as you had specified it all you had standard and darkish 110 had a performance performance criteria
00:07:12 had a performance performance criteria thinit which they were required to average how they were required to conform to and so ever their proposals before were required to conform to that
00:07:24 don't issue have come of sorry I'm sorry you want to finish your answer I ever spoke do you want to finish that answer no that's fine
00:07:38 how could a drop a drawing or a specification conformed to design intent if it didn't comply with the statutory requirements had to comply with
00:07:49 requirements had to comply with employers requirements in terms of
00:07:54 checking that it complied with such requirements that is for this subcontractor to seek to ensure that they complied with certain requirements
00:08:12 how could a drawing or a specification be signed off as complying with design intent or architectural intent if you like if in fact it did not comply with
00:08:24 like if in fact it did not comply with statutory requirements
00:08:29 but we were on the counter from the properties of architectural intent the the means of satisfying statutory
00:08:40 the means of satisfying statutory compart compliance was for the subcontractor to satisfy themselves they had a from specification which they were
00:08:52 had a from specification which they were required to meet we were you not checking we're not marking we're not giving marks at ten we're not proving we're commenting with architectural intent yet and really my question is and I'll ask you one more time did you think
00:09:03 I'll ask you one more time did you think at the time when marking this state as a conforms to design intent that in doing so you didn't have to satisfy yourself either styrofoam or that Kings ban TP 10
00:09:16 either styrofoam or that Kings ban TP 10 complied with the stack with the statutory requirements I fell out for Harley to satisfy Holly did you take any steps to satisfy yourself that Harley had satisfied themselves that those
00:09:28 had satisfied themselves that those materials complied with the statutory requirements
00:09:36 this for them to satisfy themselves did did you know generally at the time that
00:09:47 did you know generally at the time that styrofoam was extruded that sorry expanded polystyrene XPS as BS indeed I think I mention before XPS and XPS XPS
00:09:59 think I mention before XPS and XPS XPS is used an external aspects of buildings retardant in it so would it what would it not have been obvious to you when you saw the word styrofoam on this document
00:10:11 saw the word styrofoam on this document as the material for the core in the p1 panel that it that it was being XPS manifestly not compliant with statutory requirements not told not necessarily it
00:10:24 requirements not told not necessarily it could have retardant and it was part of the windows that wasn't part of the padding and it could have been encapsulated so when you saw styrofoam are you telling us that you actually made the assumption I made no that I
00:10:37 made the assumption I made no that I made no judgment on it for the reasons I've already mentioned right so if in fact you didn't know whether or not any fire retardant had been added to the styrofoam would it not be a manifest
00:10:50 styrofoam would it not be a manifest error to any architect to see styrofoam sitting there in the specification for use in the external wall construction as it was I think I've answered the
00:11:01 it was I think I've answered the question well I don't think you have if you don't mind but you might not bring it again then can you repeat it please yes if you didn't know whether or not a fire retardant had been added to the
00:11:12 fire retardant had been added to the styrofoam wouldn't it be a manifest error to any architect who sees styrofoam sitting there in this spec for use in the eternal external wall construction as it was not not if you
00:11:25 construction as it was not not if you believed it was the responsibility of the subcontractor to ensure that it was compliant then you'd assume that it exercise that duty
00:11:38 and you say it wasn't your job to take I stated already we were looking the drawings to the purposes for architects from 10
00:11:47 from 10 we don't mark them we don't grade them don't prove them now I'm going to turn to a totally different topic mr. Crawford Building Control and I'm going
00:11:58 Crawford Building Control and I'm going to ask you some questions about your interaction with our bkc Building Control all right yeah now I may sometimes use the shorthand BC or BCE B's building control or building control
00:12:10 B's building control or building control body but if I do I mean any of the same people and just taking a step back for a moment in terms of your own personal experience at the try at the time of your involvement in the green field our
00:12:22 your involvement in the green field our project so 2014 summer of 2014 to 2016 did you have personal professional experience of preparing and submitting full plans applications I would have
00:12:37 full plans applications I would have done in past projects yes would you agree that doing that is standard work for an architect yes
00:12:48 for an architect yes now turning to the requirements of the building regulations do you agree with me that the level of detail in a full plans application should be sufficient at least to allow a building control
00:13:02 at least to allow a building control person whether it's inside the council or an approved inspector to be able to assess whether the proposed works would comply with the building regulations in general terms yes yes and would you
00:13:15 general terms yes yes and would you agree with me that it's good practice to make a full plans application before any work commences on site that's the normal process and would you agree with me that
00:13:28 process and would you agree with me that a completion certificate issued by a building control body doesn't conclusively prove that the building regulations have been complied with
00:13:39 regulations have been complied with well that'd be a matter of interpretation interpretation of what and if it didn't if it didn't imply that
00:13:51 and if it didn't if it didn't imply that then it would be a worthless certificate
00:13:59 yes now as a designer you would have to check for yourself wouldn't you whether or not the completion certificate was
00:14:15 or not the completion certificate was comported with the building regulations
00:14:24 in order to issue completion certificate you need to have the building the building control approval yeah yes it
00:14:36 building control approval yeah yes it might I don't want to take time showing you the regulations but can I take it that you were familiar at the time with regulation 17 1 and 17 for of the building regulations we can look at the
00:14:47 building regulations we can look at the text if you like yes show me the tax okay if you go please to BME are zero zero zero zero is zero zero one page 23
00:15:00 six zeroes there it is now there's regulation 17 completion certificates and that's let's look at one a level authority shall within the specified
00:15:11 authority shall within the specified period give a completion certificate in all cases including a case under 17 a where they are satisfied after taking all reasonable steps that following completion of the building work carried out on it a building complies with the
00:15:23 out on it a building complies with the relevant provisions and then some sub regulation for which is on the next page page 4 if we can just have that up please
00:15:33 please it says a certificate given in accordance with this regulation shoddy evidence but not conclusive evidence that the requirements specified in the certificate have been complied with so you were familiar with that at the time were you in general terms yes yes okay
00:15:46 were you in general terms yes yes okay we were where of regulation 38 of the building regulations at the time of the grenfell tower project
00:15:54 I'm I don't think pacifically okay let's look at the the page 23 same document
00:16:17 and if you go to page 24 as I said 23 in fact it's 24 Regulator 38 fire safety information you see that and if we look
00:16:28 information you see that and if we look together a please at sub regulation to the person carrying out the work shall give fire safety information to the responsible person not later than the date of completion of the work or the date of occupation of the building or extension whichever is the earlier see
00:16:41 extension whichever is the earlier see that see that yes was that something you were familiar with at the time of your involvement in the project not specifically no not specifically right
00:16:53 specifically no not specifically right can I just ask you then about every KC's Building Control itself and you I think had worked with RB k C's Building Control Department on the Cal project
00:17:04 Control Department on the Cal project yes and what was your impression of RB KC your general impression of RB KC's Building Control Department before you started working with them on the grenfell project
00:17:22 I think on the the calc project the preference of the main contractor would have been have gone with approved inspector and over the left without the
00:17:36 inspector and over the left without the option as the required to use RB KC's Building Control however in the process
00:17:47 Building Control however in the process of getting completion certificate for the Academy I think the main contractor
00:17:58 the Academy I think the main contractor worked with the building control ones and were able to make the relationship successful I think my view probably be
00:18:11 successful I think my view probably be the same I'd rather have a an improvement specter then have used our pkc building control right and had you been required to deal with fire safety
00:18:22 been required to deal with fire safety issues as part of the calc project when you see deal with I'm not quite sure what I mean well had you had any involvement in fire safety issues as
00:18:34 involvement in fire safety issues as part of the Cal project well yes and what were those well for example the
00:18:45 what were those well for example the fire strategy fire strategy drawings yeah and did you in that capacity liaised with our vkc control over those fire safety issues on calc yes who was
00:18:57 fire safety issues on calc yes who was the person primarily that you liaised with at RB Casey and it was John and Paul was her a coal say the same incentive John Hoeven and Paul Hanson
00:19:08 incentive John Hoeven and Paul Hanson yes now let's look at your statement please I'd like you to go to page 66 and look at paragraph 206
00:19:23 you say
00:19:30 there's I think leggo to the beginning of the paragraph at page 65 where we can start paragraph off you say towards the
00:19:43 start paragraph off you say towards the start of our involvement in the project I recall meeting John Heyburn Building Control with Simon O'Connor ridin on site and then you said that may have been during the week commencing 25th of August 2014 I remember that John was very clear
00:19:55 I remember that John was very clear about how he wanted information issued you say and such he was specifically in primarily concern with fire related matters wanted a basic set of information so that he could so that he
00:20:07 information so that he could so that he could request further information if he required it and then he says you say he says he often stressed that I was supposed that he was supposed to oversee
00:20:18 supposed that he was supposed to oversee several hundreds of projects however I also had experienced him to be very diligent for example I noted that on the Cal project he had quotes crawled into every all into almost every conceivable
00:20:29 every all into almost every conceivable cavity possible with a torch unquote during the several weeks of fire stopping checks did his diligent approach on calc include to your
00:20:41 approach on calc include to your recollection his approach to fire safety issues
00:20:53 I think
00:20:56 with the two separate officers working on the project they had quite a clear split at least in their minds in terms of which parts of the building
00:21:08 of which parts of the building regulations they dealt with so for example Paul Hanson dealt with B 1 and B 5 I mean I think the common means of escape group and Paul Hanson was the
00:21:20 escape group and Paul Hanson was the main point of contact as the severe but angry call himself building officer severe something like this my expense is that Paul Hanson had
00:21:33 this my expense is that Paul Hanson had more fire experience than John and the split you just talked about you say Paul Hanson tell would be 1 and B 5 what did
00:21:46 Hanson tell would be 1 and B 5 what did John - deal do I have two three and four so B 2 B 3 and B 4 or say including 30 on fire yes he's also he'd also deal with 1 & 5 as a point of contact right
00:22:02 with 1 & 5 as a point of contact right I see say when he was very diligent crawling into almost every conceivable cavity possible with the torch you say in your statement that he was doing
00:22:13 in your statement that he was doing several weeks of fire stopping checks yes is that B 3 yes yes I see now I
00:22:25 yes is that B 3 yes yes I see now I think that I mean that course has been used that I've it's been taken from an email it has if I recall I saw it this morning in fact but I didn't take you to that part of it it's one of the run of
00:22:37 that part of it it's one of the run of emails at the end of March we saw when there was discussion cavity barriers and first off yes and I was using it to try and push forward yeah the notion let's indeed yeah now can I ask you please to
00:22:49 indeed yeah now can I ask you please to be shown se a what a 0 0 0 1 1 5 6 0 this is an email from you on the 2nd of September 2014 - Simon Lawrence and
00:23:01 September 2014 - Simon Lawrence and others including Paul Hanson and you say Simon
00:23:06 Simon Paul is a fire engineer and best place to answer questions regarding the dry riser and a Ovie's Paul hoped John Hoeven won't be able to provide any answers on his own and tends to prefer
00:23:17 answers on his own and tends to prefer to refer to Paul all the time which can be frustrating when you want answers and then you provide the contact details for Paul Hanson and was it your impression
00:23:29 Paul Hanson and was it your impression at the time looking at this email that John Hoeven was not experienced with fire safety matters I don't want to see
00:23:44 fire safety matters I don't want to see something that would be unfair but I think he's true to say that that Oh Paul Hanson I think was ex London Fire Brigade and he had contacts in lfb and
00:23:57 Brigade and he had contacts in lfb and so was very well-informed on fire related matters and so when it came to in this specific instance something fairly well as was particularly
00:24:11 fairly well as was particularly specialist the mechanical Maori system he be far more likely to be able to comment in an informed way ice John yes
00:24:24 comment in an informed way ice John yes I mean you point out in this email the pool is a fire engineer did you have any view about whether mr. Hoban was a fire engineer or are you drawing a
00:24:35 engineer or are you drawing a distinction in their qualifications it would be for them to to see what their qualifications were but as Stacey done I'm just I'm not even sure if fire
00:24:48 I'm just I'm not even sure if fire engineer is cracked but I I understood Paul to be X London Fire Brigade since we had they see a level of understanding that I understood to be fairly high for
00:25:00 that I understood to be fairly high for someone in that position now you say in this email that John Hoeven won't be able to provide any answers on his own and tends to refer to pull all the time was that true in your experience of him
00:25:13 was that true in your experience of him in respect of B two three and four issues which you say fell on his side of the
00:25:19 the no no I think if if the questions were tricky I mean perhaps I said wrote this email for certain amount of frustration of the back of something you notice I don't know but I mean it'd be unfair to
00:25:32 don't know but I mean it'd be unfair to see it right you've your view at the time I think as you say in your statement which was that dealing with
00:25:43 statement which was that dealing with him was somewhat frustrating I think that's what it says there it's in that email as well yes it was it was that limited to fire safety issues or was that a it was that your general
00:25:55 or was that a it was that your general impression of his of his way of going about things he had his own way of doing things right it just helped me with this
00:26:09 things right it just helped me with this you say that he would be given to referring issues to Paul Hanson rather than dealing with them himself and that was frustrating but also you found him
00:26:21 was frustrating but also you found him very diligent as you say in your statement I think you I think he's somebody who meant well I needed tried to do the right thing but for example we
00:26:32 to do the right thing but for example we had scenarios and calc that repeated themselves on the tower where for example in service riser cupboards
00:26:43 example in service riser cupboards there's only a requirement fire stopped at the floor not enclosure and he's insistent in both which became frustrating I see so there wasn't they didn't mean well it's just that his
00:26:54 didn't mean well it's just that his interpretation it could be frustrating for me right we can see in the in the statement the paragraph 206 that I've
00:27:05 statement the paragraph 206 that I've just shown you that you refer to the email where he was quoted as saying that it proved in two cavities during fire stocking checks on couch did he ever do anything similar on site at Grenfell do
00:27:17 anything similar on site at Grenfell do you recall he may have done and but in a sense John had as I understood John had scheduled visits to inspect the
00:27:29 had scheduled visits to inspect the works as they progressed and that he was going to use those as a means of satisfying himself that things were being done and being done in a compliant fashion but those visits were done in in
00:27:42 fashion but those visits were done in in leasing with Simon Lawrence and his team and so they were do or not I was not
00:27:53 and so they were do or not I was not involved and I brought into those visits right so you weren't at the site visits where he might or might not have crawled into carriages with the torch crying I see did you say that in a statement we
00:28:04 see did you say that in a statement we can get back to it if you want to that he was supposed to oversee several hundreds of projects what you say in your statement did you get the impression that mr. Hoban was overstretched I thought the sense they had the tendency to exaggerate exaggerate
00:28:20 tendency to exaggerate exaggerate exaggerate what sort of things numbers numbers numbers of what projects you've ever seen Isaac did you think that he
00:28:33 ever seen Isaac did you think that he was overseeing hundreds of projects at the same time no right I suspect if he was very busy as as well all are in the construction industry and but he he you know he went he'd make sure you knew
00:28:45 know he went he'd make sure you knew that was it your experience that our bkc could drag their feet about things when asked well suddenly the planning side
00:29:01 yes let's look at your statement page 66 paragraph 207 just below where we were looking at before you say there from
00:29:12 looking at before you say there from fairly early in my involvement in the project I flagged to writing the importance of sitting down with Building Control to eliminate the risk that Building Control would disagree with design decisions that have been made and require late changes to the design yes
00:29:23 require late changes to the design yes and then you say in September 2014 I suggested reconsidering this in the fire strategy plans in light of revised drawings albeit this as a process subject to a settle decision on the
00:29:35 subject to a settle decision on the layout of the lower floors and then you
00:29:42 you you so you you identified the importance of early liaison with Building Control there but if you look at an email se a zero zero zero 1 1 7 0 7 which is the one you refer to in the
00:29:56 7 which is the one you refer to in the body of paragraph 207 do you see we go to that email usually that's from you - Simon Lorentz 18th of September 2014 and you you have some attachments to that
00:30:09 you you have some attachments to that Simon not sure if you're aware of these building control preliminary observations that were made at the end of last year attached they raised a number of concerns in relation to additional doors specification fire
00:30:21 additional doors specification fire ratings venting they will also have ironmongery implications based on our experience at calc where the press has dragged on over a long period I'm keen to sit with John and Paul and go through these issues and clarify them all in
00:30:33 these issues and clarify them all in order to eliminate risk so I don't think I need the last sentence with you because my question is you can see that he refers to the process dragging on over a long period in relation to calc
00:30:45 over a long period in relation to calc does that tell us that your experience at least as at September 14 was that our DKC
00:30:53 DKC and could be slow could be could drag their future things
00:30:58 yeah I think that the the general process yes yeah now let me ask you some questions about your liaison with Building Control shortly after you started working on the Grenville tower
00:31:09 started working on the Grenville tower project studio ii submitted the full plans application to Building Control we know that and that happened on the application was sent in on the 4th of August by mr. stones can we look at that
00:31:22 August by mr. stones can we look at that it's ry d zero zero zero one four three seven eight and it says did john further
00:31:37 seven eight and it says did john further to your email last tuesday please see attach the completed full plans application form for grenfell tower hard copy and drawings to follow you see that yes and how had you and mr. Sains
00:31:48 yes and how had you and mr. Sains decided to divide up the labor on the full plans application or were you not involved in it at all at that point I think at this point I wasn't involved you don't think you were involved in
00:31:59 you don't think you were involved in that point I see did mr. Sains discuss the full plans application all the proposed full plans application with you
00:32:11 proposed full plans application with you when you came into the project I don't recall what was discussed right do you know whether any record was kept of what was sent to building controlled
00:32:22 of what was sent to building controlled by studio II as part of the full plans application yes there was a record and and would you agree that on large
00:32:33 and would you agree that on large projects like Granville tower it's common for information and drawings to be supplied to Building Control as the project proceeds yes yeah and actually that's what happened with grenfell isn't it that's correct did you keep a track of which drawings
00:32:45 did you keep a track of which drawings and information was being submitted to Building Control and when I personally didn't keep a track you personally didn't who did anybody I don't know whether well my assumption is building
00:32:57 whether well my assumption is building control and order order to satisfy themselves that they were signing stuff off would have kept their own tracker maybe they did maybe they didn't mr. grouper but I'm asking really about studio II
00:33:07 studio II - can you track you didn't keep the tracker do you know why that is and we went prior to her and ask - you weren't required to always ask - did you have any other method other than a tracker of keeping track of which drawings and
00:33:19 keeping track of which drawings and documents were being submitted from time to time to building controlled by Studio II I think there will captain some of
00:33:30 II I think there will captain some of the stuff is kept on file and it's all out full run some was kept in emails you
00:33:43 out full run some was kept in emails you say some of the stuff was kept on file and I'm afraid the transcribers not picked up what you then said I said some in emails yeah so someone files some in emails say and how was it organized
00:33:55 emails say and how was it organized within studio II this material and more Hawaiian descent and I think this is covering my witness statement I talked John being very categorical but what he wanted and not wanting to be
00:34:07 what he wanted and not wanting to be flooded with information did they start so he issued him a pack of it drawings the broadly in align with what he requested and what we understood he'd requested we sent him these to him and
00:34:21 requested we sent him these to him and then he his instructions were that huge satisfy himself of Building Control compliance through his site visits and asking for information as and why only
00:34:33 asking for information as and why only required it yeah but my question was how was the material organized within studio II how did you keep a track internally within CoA of what material you were
00:34:45 within CoA of what material you were sending to him we had a consult out folder with information in it now
00:34:53 looking at paragraph 206 of your witness statement again we've just looked at it and I scampered past the meeting that you say you had on the 25th of August if
00:35:06 you say you had on the 25th of August if we can just go back to that it's the previous page of 65 the bottom of the page you say they're in the second first line I could recall meeting John Heyburn on-site this may have been during the
00:35:19 on-site this may have been during the week commencing 25th of August 2014 you see that yes and you say that you remember him being very clear about how he wanted the information issued now did
00:35:31 he wanted the information issued now did you have any drawings with you during that site visit do you remember yes I think you probably did did John Hoeven look at them I think he probably would
00:35:42 look at them I think he probably would have them and take taken them away you think he took them away yeah do you know which they were they'd have been the basic project drawings I believe he was on site and and looked at drawings prior
00:35:54 on site and and looked at drawings prior to me being there as well with them Sam Lawrence all right but I'm asking about your recollection so do you have a recollection to you of meeting him on site on that day and giving him showing
00:36:05 site on that day and giving him showing him drawings as he then took away yeah you say you thought they were the basic project drawings and those the employers requirements drawings I don't recall I just remember sitting and discussing the project
00:36:15 project do you remember whether by then you had seen any of the drawings that have Harley were doing bearing him either Harley's first production of drawings was I think that's really a second of
00:36:27 was I think that's really a second of August yeah it's been I suspect that's have been too early too early yes all right now you say at the meeting before you go to the very foot of that page and they over to page 66 that he was very
00:36:39 they over to page 66 that he was very clear about how he wanted information issued such that as that he was specifically and primarily concerned with fire related matters you see that yes you say he wanted a basic set of
00:36:50 yes you say he wanted a basic set of information so that he could then request further information if he required it so that he was not overwhelmed with information yes in
00:37:01 overwhelmed with information yes in general terms the idea was that he would get basic information he could ask for more if he wanted it and he would drip feed him as yes I see is that how you worked with John Hoban on the Cal project in broad
00:37:16 John Hoban on the Cal project in broad terms yes except the main contractor there who would have done they're all riding dudes is he on site visits and so on I believe
00:37:28 is he on site visits and so on I believe they maintained a tracker right and did this conversation was anybody else present at it was it just you and mr. Haven together no Shannon Lawrence almost certainly would have been adapt
00:37:39 almost certainly would have been adapt it Simon Lawrence would have been it was a formal meeting with it orab yeah it's an initial introductory meeting right what about Simon O'Connor he may well
00:37:50 what about Simon O'Connor he may well have been better I can't say definitively did you keep a note of this conversation at the time or otherwise recorded in writing I did you did you
00:38:05 recorded in writing I did you did you have you looked for a note of this conversation and I might have done with in my sketchbooks right okay
00:38:16 when he said he wanted basic set a basic set of information what did you understand that would comprise I understood that to sum to basic Gaz
00:38:28 understood that to sum to basic Gaz plans sections elevations enough to give him an understanding what's going on give him an overview of the project did
00:38:39 give him an overview of the project did it include details of the materials to be used within the building envelope that the new facade I can't remember
00:38:51 that the new facade I can't remember that seeing precisely what's in fact to be honest is there any reason to think why you wouldn't have given him a basic set of information including the details of the materials to be used in the
00:39:02 of the materials to be used in the facade no except it obviously had a number of meetings with ourselves as Gerry explaining the progress of the
00:39:15 Gerry explaining the progress of the building up to them but no unanswered question did it occur to you at the time to bring specifically to his attention as part of that basic set of information
00:39:27 as part of that basic set of information the design even though basic of the facade at that time and the materials specified to be used within it and I
00:39:38 specified to be used within it and I think he knew what they were already but did you you say you think you did was that a thought you had at the time who he's my understanding from conversations with Bruce and the fact that we Bruce
00:39:51 with Bruce and the fact that we Bruce had had meetings with them prior to my involvement right I see so let me be clear
00:39:57 clear was this an assumption that you made or was was your understanding something that you had derived from a discussion you had with mr. stones prior to meeting mr. Hoban on site
00:40:09 I'm not sure I can recollect not level of precision [Music]
00:40:19 do you agree with me that if if you were providing mr. Hoban with a basic set of information that he wanted you would have wanted to make sure he had the details of the materials to be used in
00:40:31 details of the materials to be used in the in the new facade I wanted to have an understanding of the project at that point in time where it was the basic build up some materials yes can I ask
00:40:42 build up some materials yes can I ask you to go to paragraph 40 of your statement please on page 17 of this same same document you say in paragraph 40
00:40:54 same document you say in paragraph 40 about halfway down Building Control set its own agenda for checking off items and it made clear to me I would be contacted should further information be
00:41:06 contacted should further information be required
00:41:07 required Ryden style was very much of dealing with issues directly I believe for expediency and because writing was efficient at doing so to this end my understanding is that I was not party to
00:41:18 understanding is that I was not party to everything Building Control agreed on I just want to focus with on the sentence that contains the word set its own agenda for checking off items is that a reference to your conversation that you
00:41:29 reference to your conversation that you had with John Hoeven on site in the week of the 25th of August 2014 yes right is it common for in your experience or was it common in your experience then for
00:41:41 it common in your experience then for Building Control to tell the contractor what they needed to see on a project
00:41:49 ultimately building control us to satisfy itself that he's performed its duty and building the control itself
00:42:01 duty and building the control itself would know what those things were
00:42:07 yes let me ask the question again is it common for Building Control to tell the contractor what they needed to see on a project as opposed necessarily to the architect the project architect so say
00:42:22 architect the project architect so say that again yes was it common in your experience for Building Control to tell the contractor what Building Control needed to see on a project as opposed necessarily to the
00:42:34 project as opposed necessarily to the architect
00:42:35 architect I think Building Control speaks both its bands in the contract of type of project the level of involvement the type of weather using all in control approve
00:42:46 weather using all in control approve inspector inspect there's a lot of factors that can influence that right that's a simpler question was the experience that you were having with Jon Hogan's approach an experience that you
00:42:58 Hogan's approach an experience that you had with other building control inspectors on Park on previous projects
00:43:06 not similar not dissimilar do you agree that in relying on Building Control to tell you what information building
00:43:18 tell you what information building control needs runs the risk that relevant information may well not be provided to them oh it's a two-way process and it was a two-way process in as much as he's explaining the scheme
00:43:29 as much as he's explaining the scheme explain how things work give them a set of information and then they they're satisfying themselves against building
00:43:40 satisfying themselves against building regs that they're satisfied that they've been met you need to understand the project to be able to do that and you do that with them right well let's
00:43:53 you do that with them right well let's see how we gonna turn please to ry d zero zero zero one six nine nine zero
00:44:00 this is an e relative the 3rd of September 2014 in which simon lawrence wright's to john hoeven copy to you and
00:44:13 wright's to john hoeven copy to you and Bruce owns as well as Simon O'Connor morning John you see that yes and if you look at the second substantive paragraph down studio
00:44:25 second substantive paragraph down studio it says this studio errr Connors you see that studio errr architects lead designers who will fall all relevant drawings etc in the future I believe you
00:44:37 drawings etc in the future I believe you already know them from your work on the calc project next door so hopefully this will make things easier I will ask them to arrange a meeting with yourself on site shortly now looking at that would
00:44:49 site shortly now looking at that would you agree with me that that email suggests that the drawings had not yet formally been submitted by that time and bearing in mind that this is the 3rd of September 2014 was that the case I can't
00:45:06 September 2014 was that the case I can't remember in other words that delay in issuing them which was agreed by between Bruce and the case T CMO and Bruce and Simon Lawrence because KCT mor making
00:45:20 Simon Lawrence because KCT mor making changes are still in the process of making changes to ground floor plans an idea was that the changes would be completed before the drawings were submitted to avoid confusion I see
00:45:34 submitted to avoid confusion I see if you go back then to se a 0 0 0 1 1 7 0 7 this is an email from you - Simon
00:45:45 0 7 this is an email from you - Simon Lawrence of ridin on the 18th of September 2014 you see that yes and you attach some drawings or plans
00:45:57 attach some drawings or plans and you say Simon not sure if you're aware of these building control preliminary observations that were made at the end of last year attached see that yes based on its our experience at
00:46:11 that yes based on its our experience at calc where the process dragged on over a long period etcetera now we've seen this before my question this time is a bit different you were providing him with preliminary comments from Building Control that I think had been sent to
00:46:22 Control that I think had been sent to you sorry sent to you studio II perhaps not you yeah fifty nine months earlier in other words at the end of 2013 that that's right isn't it yeah they'd have been sent to Bruce at that point I guess
00:46:33 been sent to Bruce at that point I guess exactly now my question is what had prompted you to send these to Simon Lawrence at that point well I was relatively new and the project was
00:46:46 relatively new and the project was starting the project and so I want you to check how much he knew I guess there's my interpretation that you your
00:46:58 there's my interpretation that you your interpretation of it but I'm trying to recall obviously writing the email on what it was in relation to right well
00:47:09 what it was in relation to right well I'm sending them the primary and observations that were made by Building Control to make sure that he was aware of them not that necessarily would expect him not to be but also because
00:47:22 expect him not to be but also because some of these items I was dealing with at the time for example the new doors to the lower levels and ironmongery
00:47:34 the lower levels and ironmongery before you sent this email did it not occur to you to check with Bruce owns whether or not in fact those building controlled preliminary observations had already been sent to Ryden
00:47:49 I may have done I don't look home right is it your impression at the time that Studio II had rather sat on these comments for nine months before sending them on to Brighton who by this time were your client well you're saying that
00:48:03 were your client well you're saying that I don't know if that's the case I think Bruce would have to comment a nun I think the situation is that I was getting involved in the project I was
00:48:14 getting involved in the project I was just making sure that everyone was in the same place that I was I mean he for example Simon for example may have known of more comments or I don't know know you say in the second substantive
00:48:28 you say in the second substantive paragraph in that email that you wanted to sit down with building controlled Inc yeah I said that in several emails you you you do do we take it that we you
00:48:40 you you do do we take it that we you were advising riding there that early liaison with Building Control was particularly important yeah I was just I guess I was stressing the importance of getting with process moving yeah and to
00:48:53 getting with process moving yeah and to initiate that process and make it meaningful yes and is that partly because at this point this was not early on in the project construction had in fact already started by this point doesn't it well it was only one project
00:49:06 doesn't it well it was only one project for me construction had started but I don't know what pre-construction agreements do we may or may not be in place that's between right and right authorities I mean it's fair to say that
00:49:19 authorities I mean it's fair to say that there was an element of urgency about this wasn't there now well if you're working construction there's always an element of urgency right now you say it was important to eliminate risk do you
00:49:32 was important to eliminate risk do you see at the end of you know the first sentence of the last paragraph but is it right that you didn't seek any earlier engagement with Building Control on the facade and I appreciate you only just come into the project but I think it now
00:49:44 come into the project but I think it now before that let me just clarify what I meant by that statement first yes this was me coming into the project and I mean the other minute risk I mean risk to program this risk to
00:49:58 right in being able to deliver everything on time so the earlier you get them involved the quicker you can get things signed off the quicker things can be procured and built right I see so
00:50:09 can be procured and built right I see so this is project risk not health and safety risk I mean you could read it it's all forms of risk but I think it probably would have been referring to right moving I'm sorry about to
00:50:24 right moving I'm sorry about to interrupt you finish you provided a batch of drawings to off to building control a little bit later in September if we go to our yd zero zero zero one
00:50:37 if we go to our yd zero zero zero one 874 to please you can see you've did that on the 24th of September this is an email from you to John Hogan copy to
00:50:48 email from you to John Hogan copy to simon lawrence and you attach a zip file building control set do you see that yes and you say john following our
00:50:59 and you say john following our conversation on site looking whilst looking at the academy on tuesday I am forwarding a pack of drawings for the Granville tower project as mentioned I believe her cell phone Paul Hanson sat down earlier in the year and did an
00:51:10 down earlier in the year and did an initial appraisal of the proposed layout changes to the lower levels with Bruce sounds from our office and then he goes on iíve included Paul's initial markups of the fire strategy from this time as well as a new set of shows has been some
00:51:22 well as a new set of shows has been some simplification simplification to the arrangement on these floors I know you like to go through the drawings on an agreed process of release rather than just being swamped with everything at once so I'm just sending the following
00:51:33 once so I'm just sending the following drawings to start with and then you see them all listed they're not gonna read those outs so um I've read you a text of that and had you discussed with Bruce owns which drawings
00:51:45 discussed with Bruce owns which drawings would be sent to Building Control before you send this email to mr. Hoban I don't know Cole
00:51:52 know Cole right how did you decide for yourself which drawings would be some sent to building controlled if you hadn't discussed it with mr. sounds given that this was reasonably early on in your
00:52:04 this was reasonably early on in your involvement well first of all I may have done but also it I think at this point I'd already met John on site and maybe
00:52:15 I'd already met John on site and maybe he I suspect he'd indicated what he expected see I see and so we can see
00:52:27 expected see I see and so we can see that the list is divided into three parts fire strategy drawings from previous meeting the Paul Hanson's markup new fire strategy drawings showing modifications to the office area
00:52:38 showing modifications to the office area and a mission on eternal office stare and the basic plan sections and elevations G a set yes so the first two bullet points are to do with the podium the lower part of the building
00:52:54 or is that not right there fire strategy drawings generally through the whole building right okay looking at let's
00:53:10 building right okay looking at let's look at our yd zero zero zero one eight seven five zero please
00:53:20 this is one of the drawings that you sent him and if you look at the key on
00:53:34 sent him and if you look at the key on the top left hand side I'm afraid this is gonna have to be it's pretty substantially expanded anyone can read it but if you if you and this may not
00:53:47 it but if you if you and this may not work then we ask the question can you see if you look at the key top left hand side it refers to his zinc spandrel
00:53:58 side it refers to his zinc spandrel panel as item five I can see one thing I William is not very clear but if you look at there's a key at the top which runs from 1 to looks like 12
00:54:11 runs from 1 to looks like 12 I'm afraid it is hard to read and I'm sorry about but item 5 says zinc spandrel panel do you recall that I'm
00:54:22 spandrel panel do you recall that I'm not sure I can't see anything all right I'm not surprised do you remember then there are other references to zinc in that list dear Amit where you were where that the
00:54:34 dear Amit where you were where that the drawing still had cladding panels labeled are zinc if these were from the employer's requirements at yes this yes
00:54:48 employer's requirements at yes this yes but do you remember that by that stage so late September 2014 ACM had now been agreed in principle by
00:54:59 ACM had now been agreed in principle by RB Casey's Planning Department and had been a since that july also the only outstanding issue being the color I think Bruce was definitely still holding on to the notion that would be
00:55:11 holding on to the notion that would be that we may use sync as the finish and the the color and the final planning had to be agreed as I recall I think these
00:55:22 to be agreed as I recall I think these drawings should sink cm as opposed to a cm it's effectively the same product
00:55:33 these drawings didn't include D any details of the installation that was going to be used on the columns or behind the spandrel panels the research ei trying not and they didn't include
00:55:47 ei trying not and they didn't include any details of the cavity barrier strategy that we see on the ER drawing movement this this type of problem and they would I think is this right they
00:55:58 they would I think is this right they were one in a hundred and one in fifty drawings so they were as you say generally arranged channels too detailed yeah is there any reason why you didn't
00:56:09 yeah is there any reason why you didn't provide building control at this state with the most up-to-date drawings that you had well these foot these drawings is a call from the employers
00:56:21 is a call from the employers requirements at this point Harley were working up the detail drawings so the idea was to give them the project overview you know with land sections elevation as far as strategy give them
00:56:33 elevation as far as strategy give them the basic pack of information and then as the detailed design package got developed by Harley provide them with the information as that became available
00:56:46 the information as that became available right if we go back to the email our whitey zero zero zero one eight seven four two can you confirm with me that
00:56:58 four two can you confirm with me that the list you sent out there is a selection of drawings it isn't the entirety of the employers requirement drawings that studio he had prepared in 2013 was it is
00:57:10 2013 was it is yeah it's pissing plans and sections and the fire strategy drinks right now we know that you didn't provide the NBS specification - but we can see that in
00:57:21 specification - but we can see that in this email why is that and because he asked for a basic set of drawings yes and the the final choice of materials
00:57:33 and the the final choice of materials for example in the cladding and build up to be confirmed with the detailed designs that came from Harley is there any reason why but let me ask it this
00:57:48 any reason why but let me ask it this way did it occur to you that it might be a good idea at the time to send mr. Hoban the NBS specification so that he could at least see the basis on which Ryden had won the tender and might be
00:58:00 Ryden had won the tender and might be dove might I has I emphasized be dividing up his work packages and instructing its subcontractors on I'm not sure they may have had the stage he report and they may have had the NBS
00:58:13 report and they may have had the NBS spec from bris eyes my involvement did you check I don't recall
00:58:29 when you refer to the stage II you refer to stage II report do you mean stage II or do you mean something I'm sorry I mean I mean the employers requirement the 10% that we produce
00:58:41 the 10% that we produce now you also don't refer in this email to any emails that you'd sent which asked Harley or Ryden for up-to-date details of the cladding design to to send on to building control at this
00:58:54 send on to building control at this point
00:58:54 point Harley were engaged in starting that process did you go back to Harley at any point to say well look we're now sending building control all this detailed information please give us your
00:59:05 information please give us your up-to-date designs as fast as you can no but we there was a meeting which Building Control sat in with Harley in the workshop one of the workshops fairly early on so they would have been aware
00:59:18 early on so they would have been aware of what was going on and things were being thank you right so just to be clear about this when was the meeting you do you say in which building controls sat in with Harley in a
00:59:30 controls sat in with Harley in a workshop and I think who's after one their lead DTM's one or two I can be precise right is there a is there a note of that meeting that no can I ask you
00:59:41 of that meeting that no can I ask you first of all will you at that meeting yes I remember sitting with her and did you take a note of that meeting I might have done but I don't I can't find reference to it right did you ever ask
00:59:54 reference to it right did you ever ask Harley to prepare a standalone cladding package for a submission to building controller that contained all the relevant information no do you accept
01:00:07 relevant information no do you accept that it was important to send building control accurate information so that they could do their job properly it's important for building control to understand what was being built so they could do their job properly now could
01:00:19 could do their job properly now could you please go to your statement paragraph 65 and 66 which you'll find on page 26
01:00:31 you say here at the top of page 26 paragraph 65 on the 22nd of August 2014 Kevin lamb Harley emailed Simon Lawrence ridin and stated he attached some
01:00:43 ridin and stated he attached some preliminary drawings and they're all listed there and in Paris 66 excuse me paragraph 66 you say on the 26th of
01:00:54 paragraph 66 you say on the 26th of August 2014 I emailed Kevin Lam Harley and Simon Lawrence ridin and included some initial observations on the preliminary drawings I referred to discussing them at a design team meeting
01:01:05 discussing them at a design team meeting the next day the meeting didn't go ahead on the 27th of August I provided further comments and a markup on the preliminary drawings and said I would call Harley the next day to discuss the comments I did not have a record of that call and
01:01:17 did not have a record of that call and then 67 the Harley drawing register show states the Harley issued a copies of a number of drawings on 29th of August now
01:01:28 number of drawings on 29th of August now what I'm interested in is is do you agree with me that the drawings that you refer to at paragraph 65 and 66 represented the most up-to-date design
01:01:41 represented the most up-to-date design of the cladding system as at the 24th of September a month later when you sent the list of drawings to John Hoagland it's horrible oh it's the data sent the
01:01:54 it's horrible oh it's the data sent the drawings John Holdren 24th of September we've seen the email we can go back to it again if you like yes oh I D no that's fine so we showing you a question on this one so let's just take it in stages then
01:02:05 so let's just take it in stages then I've shown you what you say in a statement
01:02:07 statement yeah showing you the original email so it just to be clear you provided the batch of drawings to our bkc on the 24th of September 2014 but a month before that on the 22nd of August you'd receive
01:02:20 that on the 22nd of August you'd receive some preliminary drawings from Simon from Kevin Lam yes and heard and had made some initial observation on on those yes on the 26th and again on the 27th August my question is do you agree
01:02:32 27th August my question is do you agree that those drawings including your comments represented the most up-to-date yes design of the cladding system at that stage yes yes but you didn't send them to the building control as part of
01:02:43 them to the building control as part of your full concept education no and the reason environment is because of preliminary drawings and we use those basis we use those drawings for the basis of the first meeting we had with Building Control and that's
01:02:55 had with Building Control and that's when the whole issue for example of gravity barrier ratings came up and kept the barrios strategy so those drawings for example didn't have the cavity barriers on them I think I see and is
01:03:07 barriers on them I think I see and is there any reason why you didn't send those drawings as possible 24th of September email they weren't ready to send myself is there I don't think we see in that email anything from you to
01:03:19 see in that email anything from you to say to John Hoban we are in at the moment in the process of examining preliminary drawings from Harley in relation to the over cladding and we'll
01:03:31 relation to the over cladding and we'll send you those as soon as they're ready we don't see that why did why is that why didn't you forewarn them that they were coming because we had a sit-down workshop and most drawings are discussed and just to be clear in terms of dates
01:03:43 and just to be clear in terms of dates when was that work so I was far as even before this problem I think after design one design team meetings so we've been I
01:03:54 one design team meetings so we've been I don't know September a shoot or bury something in this right mr. chairman we can't have a break and I just yes we one little anything more
01:04:07 just yes we one little anything more round this off just a bit and can I ask you to go to paragraph 44 of your statement please [Applause]
01:04:19 oh gee
01:04:25 and this is a page 18 where you deal with a number of meetings you see that yes and we can see the dates of some of
01:04:36 yes and we can see the dates of some of them and the most recent one before the 24th of September is the 23rd of September 2014 and we got your notes of that meeting and there's one on the 2nd
01:04:50 that meeting and there's one on the 2nd of September looking at the list you've put you've set out there which is the meeting do you think at which you discussed the with Holly Holly drawings
01:05:05 discussed the with Holly Holly drawings with Building Control
01:05:12 which of these three meetings well which of the meetings in around September time it's possible could have been forty four point three or could have been another one to be fair to you these meet these
01:05:27 one to be fair to you these meet these meetings continue right through into 2015 but we've turned the page we can see the next one over the pages February 2015
01:05:35 2015 do you think it was as late as that you discussed the Harley drawings with Building Control or was it around September time I do definitely a meeting before Christmas I mean it precipitated the world cafeteria conversations you
01:05:51 the world cafeteria conversations you know between 17 to 18 September and end of March so the it would have been round about September
01:06:02 about September very well mr. chairman we may need to pursue that after the break there's a convenient point it it will work well yeah well have a short break now mr. Crawford 20 24 3 please
01:16:58 [Music]
01:17:04 would you like us mr. Crawford to come back do you see
01:17:23 right mr. Crawford yes right last lap four than you'd like yes mr. Crawford can I ask you please to be shown our BK zero zero zero five two
01:17:36 shown our BK zero zero zero five two four seven eight at page five and now
01:17:48 four seven eight at page five and now this is an accolade record from Harvey Casey of a note of a meeting and it's the third box down plot one pre-start
01:18:00 the third box down plot one pre-start visit 24th of November 2014 officer john hoeven notes meeting on site with myself Paul Hanson and various persons from the design team to go through their proposal with particular
01:18:12 through their proposal with particular regard to the fire strategy for the scheme see below okay now note the date of that now I should tell you that mr. Hoban in his witness
01:18:24 tell you that mr. Hoban in his witness statements say it says that the main meeting with you happened on the 24th of November 2014 and that it was that it was then that he was provided with
01:18:37 was then that he was provided with initial drawings and details and discussed the work with as he says the architect and Dan is a reference he makes to this note now obviously we will
01:18:48 makes to this note now obviously we will be asking him some questions about that when he comes to give evidence but I want your take on this you referred earlier on to a workshop when the Harley designs what were
01:18:59 when the Harley designs what were discussed with John Hoeven and might it be as late as the 24th of November when you eventually discussed the Harley
01:19:10 you eventually discussed the Harley drawings with mr. Hoban
01:19:23 it's possible but I don't think so because the the conversations around the cavity bearers were from run by
01:19:34 cavity bearers were from run by September and it's for sure something that was prompted by the conversations with Nolan control so it's possible but I just can't recall right now we know
01:19:49 I just can't recall right now we know that our bkc planners approved smoked silver ACM panels on the 25th of September 2014 if you want I can give you a reference to that but does that does that ring a bell with you yes the builders have
01:20:05 bell with you yes the builders have followed our submission to planning for a non-material amendment that went in after wasn't that in relation to the windows window size yes but don't worry about that like the the approval of
01:20:19 about that like the the approval of smoked silver ACM panels was clearly an important milestone in this project wasn't it yes sorry boys the date you gave 25th of September 2014 right
01:20:31 gave 25th of September 2014 right same day ironically as your as your meeting with mr. Hoban and studio e would need to update building control of the change from zinc to ACM wouldn't it
01:20:46 yes I would argue that both essentially same product well you may argue that mr. Crawford but just to be clear you are accepting I think by your yes in the
01:20:58 accepting I think by your yes in the last answer that Studio II would need to update building control of the change from zinc to ACN do you agree with that proposition yes yes and do you agree
01:21:10 proposition yes yes and do you agree that you didn't do that no why is that um because the person where offer would have right by this stage studio II had
01:21:23 have right by this stage studio II had as you told us yesterday in his possession a copy of the BBA certificate for the ACM panels yes yes do you agree that the BBA
01:21:36 yes yes do you agree that the BBA certificates for the ACM panels should have been sent on to Building Control
01:21:46 well I'm not sure if they didn't have that already from conversations with Bruce and the development of design hell they're on well did you yourself take any steps to find out whether Building
01:21:58 any steps to find out whether Building Control had the BBA certificate for the Iranian Bund I don't recall now you've we know that you forwarded the X / OFS s
01:22:14 we know that you forwarded the X / OFS s the outline fire safety strategy version 3 dated 7th November 2013 to John Hoeven on the 29th of September 2014 because we
01:22:25 on the 29th of September 2014 because we have an email yeah to that effect we can we can look at that if you like and it's se a zero zero zero zero zero two one five
01:22:49 in fact can I just go back a question can I just get back a question could you please be shown again it's the document ID I think scampered over and I should have shown you it's ibi
01:23:03 zero zero zero zero one eight zero two I just want to pick you up on the answer you gave a minute ago and you said you you didn't send on to building control
01:23:16 you didn't send on to building control the update from zinc to ACM because you didn't you weren't aware of it can I just see if that's really right if you go to that document you see it there on the screen
01:23:27 the screen I didn't think because I wasn't aware of it today
01:23:31 it today well what you said was because if I was aware of it if I went I would have what kind of
01:23:42 if I went I would have what kind of let's be clear maybe I've misunderstood were you aware that there had been a change from zinc to ACM by September 2014
01:23:56 I mean I think could have understood that for and apparently we're progressing the designs on well were you
01:24:07 progressing the designs on well were you was aware by September 2015 that planning Adobe Casey had essentially approved smoke silver metallic ACM from
01:24:21 approved smoke silver metallic ACM from the sea mill I would certainly copied into yes yes given that did you not think it was appropriate to update our bkc Building
01:24:33 appropriate to update our bkc Building Control which is not the same as planning and tell them that instead of zinc all information they had should show that the eight that the panels were
01:24:44 show that the eight that the panels were ACM I may have done I mean we sat down had meetings with them and discussed the scheme so that was probably discussed in the meeting can you recall yourself I
01:24:56 the meeting can you recall yourself I don't it's gusting it I don't have specific recollections cific what said it specific times
01:25:11 you forwarded the xover outline fire safety strategy version 3 7th November 2013 to John Heyburn on the 29th of September 2014 now let's look at that it's se a zero
01:25:24 now let's look at that it's se a zero zero zero zero zero one two five please there it is was that in response to a request from John Hoeven or did you simply volunteer it I don't recall
01:25:38 it I don't recall I mean am I've been off the back of one of the meetings workshops on sites it's not clear to me right I'm not sure we
01:25:52 not clear to me right I'm not sure we have a record of any workshop or meeting on site well the ones were subletting to earlier I mean we've had this discussion about potentially when we had a meeting and I think it was Rowan about the end
01:26:04 and I think it was Rowan about the end of September is there any reason why you didn't attach that document to the email below it in the chain on the 24th of September I don't recall I mean although
01:26:18 September I don't recall I mean although it C is obviously what four days between them yes something may have prompted me to do that I don't know I can't recall right well we know that you met mr. Hoban on site on the 25th of September
01:26:29 Hoban on site on the 25th of September and she's after the 24th of September email but before your 29th of September 2014 email to him about there we go that's probably from the discussion so I
01:26:40 that's probably from the discussion so I had an that that may have prompted me to send her afterwards
01:26:46 it's very difficult to I'm sure you appreciate unpick these things from so far so long ago when you've you've only really got the email just gone which is only part of this story yes I mean part
01:26:57 only part of this story yes I mean part of the problem I think mr. Crawford is that we don't have a full written record of it each and every one of these meetings you tell us your hands were attended because I'm going to do my best with my recollection your witness statement can these emails as you'll
01:27:09 statement can these emails as you'll understand now in your covering email you say please see attached the current observer study which was written prior to the fast director the far strategy read the changes and also attach the correspondence with x over relating to
01:27:21 correspondence with x over relating to the Rev B changes which we will modify accordingly did you mean that you planned to modify the fire strategy
01:27:35 I think that's
01:27:44 yes sir this this because should been changing the layouts and the look and the law floors I think we'd added a flat right the government of the EMB office state manager's office which we configured the
01:27:57 manager's office which we configured the ground floor community room and the thing that was added to flats I think it was an amazing level though in its to do with internal changes I see ya say and I
01:28:10 with internal changes I see ya say and I see we know that that current takes a the study as you refer to it there issue 3 7th November 2013 didn't contain any B
01:28:22 3 7th November 2013 didn't contain any B for analysis of the facade external fast bread we went through that yesterday and you didn't flag here to building control that X over was yet to update their
01:28:33 that X over was yet to update their analysis on D for external fire spread did you know why was that well the cladding was still being developed at
01:28:44 cladding was still being developed at this stage the detailed design the cladding was still being developed by Harley was it not important to you at the time to alert John Heyburn to the fact that because the cladding was still
01:28:56 fact that because the cladding was still being in development with Harley at an early stage perhaps xover would be asked in future to provide a final version of OFS S which did provide an analysis of
01:29:10 OFS S which did provide an analysis of external fire spread not we thought it was not a risk did you think it wasn't a risk from what we from what I saw up in
01:29:21 risk from what we from what I saw up in the report no but we've seen it yesterday and I didn't want to get back over old ground mr. Crawford but they said that and the proposed changes and I'm summarizing would would not
01:29:32 I'm summarizing would would not adversely affect compliance with b4 but that would be confirmed in a future analysis well okay but you're telling us that in fact by this time you weren't going to do if you ask them for to do a
01:29:43 going to do if you ask them for to do a future analysis no I didn't say that so what are you saying what I'm saying is that we were not alerted to any risks and we weren't aware of any risks and we didn't have any reason to believe there were any risks
01:29:54 were any risks and Harley were still developing their design at that point so there's no reason for me to caveat everything in that fashion coming back to it was it
01:30:09 that fashion coming back to it was it not your intention once Harley had completed their design work to put it to x over and ask them to perform the analysis that they said they
01:30:20 perform the analysis that they said they would perform in relation to external fast bread well as you said we did cover this yesterday and he discussed the
01:30:31 this yesterday and he discussed the conversations and the emails that we had with ik solver and in that train of conversation my understanding was that the I think as I recall intended to go
01:30:45 the I think as I recall intended to go in and revisits it completely work but I I told a call anything after that right now if we go please to se a zero zero
01:30:58 now if we go please to se a zero zero zero zero zero two three one this is John ho burns sending you comments on the full plans application on the 18th
01:31:09 the full plans application on the 18th of November and I'm sorry I should have told you this is page two if you go to it John Heyburn 18th November two you copy to Paul Hanson and here are Hillary is a raft of revisions to the
01:31:21 is a raft of revisions to the preliminary scheme and his comments on it you see that yes and he says at the very start of the email after the thank you a decision natus will be forward to do shortly on the proposals submitted
01:31:33 do shortly on the proposals submitted did you ever receive a decision notice
01:31:38 I don't recall receiving did you ever chase the one I don't recall you know is right isn't it that a decision nature's can't contain conditions yes and
01:31:50 can't contain conditions yes and therefore would it not have been important to you to have the decision notice so that you knew what work had to be done and what conditions if any were to be imposed I don't think he could issue the decision not to still heat and
01:32:03 issue the decision not to still heat and satisfied himself that the schemers in the right place now let's get a paragraph two one nine of your statement which is on page 69 you say there that I
01:32:21 which is on page 69 you say there that I forwarded building controls comments on submission one to Terry Ashton on the 20th of November you see that and you refer to an email and you set out in detail the comic contents of that covering email yes and you say we can
01:32:34 covering email yes and you say we can take it from your statement you can say I'm due to meet with them on Monday etc on the Academy project we have a situation where Toni Pearson managed to
01:32:45 situation where Toni Pearson managed to argue some of their comments away just pausing there Toni Pearson is x over isn't he yes I see if you had any observations particularly where you think their comments may be excessive I'd be grateful to knows I can take
01:32:57 I'd be grateful to knows I can take these with me to the meeting on Monday
01:33:01 is it fair to say that you did not yourself consider those comments you just pass them on I think that's what
01:33:14 just pass them on I think that's what I'm asking Terry Ashton as a forming source and authority on on fire regulations beasts from his expert knowledge and insight to
01:33:26 from his expert knowledge and insight to comment accordingly so is it that you didn't feel sufficiently competent to comment on fire matters no that's not what I said
01:33:36 you don't that's fair I think that's very unfair I think that's very unfair yeah can I ask you whether you actually did yourself have any input into
01:33:47 did yourself have any input into building controls comments and what went to Terry Ashton's but without actually seeing them I can't even remember precisely what they were I'd need to see
01:33:58 precisely what they were I'd need to see those comments to me well it perhaps just look at the email I don't want you to think that I'm asking you an unfair question if you go to the email it's se a zero zero zero one two one eight nine it's the email you refer to yourself in
01:34:10 it's the email you refer to yourself in the in the paragraph in the statement
01:34:15 and it is as as set out on top of the page it's from you too Terry Ashton and you you say Terry I've received these markups from Building Control regarding
01:34:27 markups from Building Control regarding the fire strategy yes I would take time to look at all of them if you like but it looks from that short email you sent to mr. Ashton that you were simply passing those comments on to mr. Ashton
01:34:40 passing those comments on to mr. Ashton yes but can't see the comments where in the comments well the comments are in the email below in the John Hope Ann's email to you and also the attachments
01:34:51 email to you and also the attachments there yes this is what I'm saying unless I can see these comments given the accusation you've made I'm not making any accusations are not making any accusation I'm asking for your your comments
01:35:26 don't keep going on this visit it'll take me some time to dig out those precise comments but I was actually referring to the comments in the email itself below yes if I want to be shown
01:35:38 itself below yes if I want to be shown those comment I'm very happy to spend time digging around to find a thought you respect these comments have been I remember how the comments were made they'll meet his markups on the drawings so there's a lot of comments some of
01:35:49 so there's a lot of comments some of those comments may have been obvious to me some of them may not or a bearing in mind that the related to the fire strategy which exuberant produced is
01:36:00 strategy which exuberant produced is only right they exhort us saw those comments and commented on them in relation to their fire strategy if you see what I'm saying so yes I would have looked at them and for more an opinion
01:36:11 looked at them and for more an opinion on some of them it was also highly important they saw I saw them given that they related to the fire strategy and potentially any changes to that stress I understand that but perhaps I can take this more shortly rather than grubbing about trying to find the documents do
01:36:23 about trying to find the documents do you remember receiving these attachments from John Hoeven which are the markups and adding today's before you send them on to X / Addington I will necessarily
01:36:36 on to X / Addington I will necessarily add to Matt and I look through the comments trying to understand them yes make more an assessment of them send them on takes over to to get their take on them for example things like the
01:36:49 on them for example things like the ventilated lobbies thinking it's definitely different certain interpretations sometimes in what size ventilated Lobby should be one square
01:37:02 ventilated Lobby should be one square meter a point for school a meter or so on different scenarios who is only right bearing in mind that they had a relevance to the the high level war outline fire fire strategy that big
01:37:15 outline fire fire strategy that big silver were able to see them and comment on them I mean they're effectively comments on their high level strategy I mean generally when you do when you produce the fire strategy for any
01:37:26 produce the fire strategy for any building the the fire specialist would produce the actual strategies a document but architect would do the drawings and they do them in tandem with the the fire
01:37:37 do them in tandem with the the fire consultant so for example you do drawings they would mark them up it usually the architect does the fire strategy drawings but they're always read in conjunction with the fire strategy itself or at least that's my
01:37:49 strategy itself or at least that's my experience right now let's move on in time can I ask you to go please - paragraph 230 of your statement page 71 of that document you say on the 6th of
01:38:06 of that document you say on the 6th of March 2015 I emailed Building Control regarding the fire rating to allow for within the cladding at the lines between apartment stating where we are over cladding what fire rating do we need to allow for within the wall build-up
01:38:18 allow for within the wall build-up between apartments now that is an email that you will recall from this morning yes you then go on to say we didn't focus all this this morning I attached Harley drawings and you list them all there yes and then you say I note by the
01:38:31 there yes and then you say I note by the combination of Harley drawings and C 105 900 rev a building control could have been aware of a number of the materials proposed for the over cladding system
01:38:43 proposed for the over cladding system we've been through those already but my question here is apart from these drawings
01:38:51 drawings did you send any more Harley drawings to Building Control no but we sat with Building Control and discussed the drawings including the specification with them workshop and the two drawings
01:39:05 with them workshop and the two drawings away from these workshops and I said so most who are not sure whether well I know Harley met Building Control separately right so this is back to where we were
01:39:16 right so this is back to where we were this morning and the same evidence you've given in relation with these workshops yeah
01:39:25 and do you know if Harley ever sent drawings of the planning system to our vkc directly I know they had meetings
01:39:37 vkc directly I know they had meetings with our bkc Building Control whether they handed them stuff in those meetings or sentient directly I see would you
01:39:48 or sentient directly I see would you agree with this proposition that if building control didn't have full materials of what was to be used in the cladding system didn't have full details of the location of cavity barriers and
01:40:00 of the location of cavity barriers and didn't have full details of the crown design if all those three things are the case then our bkc building control would not have been provided with sufficient information for the purposes of being
01:40:13 information for the purposes of being able to progress the full plans application and if they didn't have that information I'm now going to turn to a meeting in April 2015
01:40:24 meeting in April 2015 can I ask you to look on in your statement please to page 75 at paragraph 245 in you say they're in a meeting
01:40:37 245 in you say they're in a meeting which I believe took place in April 2015 possibly the client designs sign-off meeting on 30th of April 2015 I recall being told by Simon Lawrence Wright and something along the lines of that there was no need to ask any more questions as
01:40:49 was no need to ask any more questions as the cladding has been signed off by Building Control see that yes is that just a I say just is that a recollection that you have or had when you sign this statement or did you refresh your memory
01:41:02 statement or did you refresh your memory from a document I think that's a recollection and it comes back to the fact it's and again this release - okay September session of emails on the
01:41:15 September session of emails on the cavity bearers and then the March session yeah and there's a cease of workshops taking place or informal meetings taking place with all in control entirely not always the
01:41:28 all in control entirely not always the two two together and it by the time we got to I think you end of March start of April we are greet the cavity by our
01:41:40 April we are greet the cavity by our strategy and we've also talked through the whole cladding scheme I see right now this conversation I think as you
01:41:51 now this conversation I think as you have just alluded to followed some queries that are arisen in relation to cavity barriers or fire stopping in March 2015 and we've seen I think that
01:42:02 March 2015 and we've seen I think that building controls final position on that subject matter was to agree with the positioning of the cavity barriers in the in your did the drawing you sent mr. Hoban and you said we're all miffed you
01:42:14 Hoban and you said we're all miffed you know over that one yes yeah for the record it's se a triple zero one three zero six one for the record may need to look at it but it's right isn't it and here's the question
01:42:25 right isn't it and here's the question that Building Control had not expressly signed off on the cladding as a whole at that time had they not just marijuana no did you take mr. Lawrence's statement to
01:42:37 did you take mr. Lawrence's statement to you as you've recalled it that that there was no need to ask any more questions of Building Control because a there was let me start the question
01:42:48 there was let me start the question again did you understand mr. Lawrence's statement to you that there was no need to ask any more questions did you take that as an instruction to you by writin to stop querying any matters about
01:42:59 to stop querying any matters about cladding with Building Control
01:43:03 I think um
01:43:12 I think they'd been quite series of meetings and correspondence and perhaps Simon was frustrated that the process
01:43:29 Simon was frustrated that the process was not complete and then he just wanted to go get the stuff constructed and up right did it trouble you that Simon Lawrence was telling you that the cladding had been signed off by Building
01:43:41 cladding had been signed off by Building Control not necessarily because I think as I mentioned I know the garlic attracts had been meeting at met building control early sit and felt that he had met building control probably
01:43:54 he had met building control probably with right and when I wasn't there for example so there's a who sees for informal meetings going on on site and we were not always party to that information because the nature of how we
01:44:08 information because the nature of how we were appointed in how we've been used as a consultant was that we were contacted as in when will needed so I was aware of things obviously I'm I'm only on site when I'm asked to attend a meeting but
01:44:20 when I'm asked to attend a meeting but there's a whole world of other meetings and are things going on that I'm not party to and yeah well this came off the back of that I think did you ask Simon Lawrence to clarify or
01:44:32 did you ask Simon Lawrence to clarify or confirm when and by what means Building Control had signed off on the cladding no I think had probably changed that praise he said something that had been effectively signed off I mean I don't
01:44:45 effectively signed off I mean I don't know if he I think he said categorically signed off you do to be fair to you say something along the lines of so you've given us the gist yeah I get I take that entirely but my question again did you
01:44:57 entirely but my question again did you actually ask fine Lawrence to confirm to you when and by whom Building Control had effectively signed off the cladding I don't accountant and did you think to
01:45:09 I don't accountant and did you think to ask John Hoban did you go back to John Hoeven and ask him to confirm what Simon Lawrence was saying I don't know cold you know no no did you ask him for a document
01:45:21 did you ask him for a document presumably not confirming what side Johnson told you when you heard the gist of what you say Simon Lawrence told you
01:45:32 of what you say Simon Lawrence told you in late in April 2015 perhaps at the end of that month were you not concerned that Building Control had effectively signed off on the cladding when xover had not yet updated their be for
01:45:44 had not yet updated their be for external spread of fire analysis no why is that I understood that to be no risk from the conversations I had with X over
01:45:58 from the conversations I had with X over and you even have dawned on me to do that I mean I didn't see why I would have
01:46:11 you'd understood there to be no risk from the conversations you've had with xover when was the last conversation that you can recall that you'd had with xover prior to April 2015 when they told
01:46:24 xover prior to April 2015 when they told you or gave you the impression that the cladding system presented no risk in respect of external fire spread it's
01:46:36 respect of external fire spread it's probably in the March and March conversations and March conversations
01:46:47 do you remember speaking to mr. it would be mr. Ashton with it you spoke to about that it's when were discussing the the
01:46:58 that it's when were discussing the the capybara strategy in relation to built up insulation it's certainly mr. Crawford and we've seen the emails about that but I just want to be very clear
01:47:09 that but I just want to be very clear and sorry to keep revisiting this question of X overs promised future analysis are you saying that you had a conversation with mr. Ashton in late March and perhaps in the context of the
01:47:21 March and perhaps in the context of the cavity barrier debate that was going on are you saying that you had a conversation in which he told you that the cladding system for grenfell Tower presented no risk in terms of external
01:47:32 presented no risk in terms of external fire spread I think that's what he sort of said all the way through but we've seen the report in which they said that it would be confirmed in a future analysis in a report are you saying that
01:47:46 analysis in a report are you saying that you had a later conversation in which xover told you that no such report was necessary they didn't say that so what did they say everything I've setup to
01:47:58 did they say everything I've setup to know well that's quite a lot mr. Crawford and let's be precise what did - what do you recall xover told you about the need for a future analysis which in
01:48:10 the need for a future analysis which in there's a third issue of their 7th of November 2013 report said would be provided in the future okay I think as I mentioned this early this morning but I
01:48:21 mentioned this early this morning but I believe in the conversation I had in relation to the cavity barriers they alluded to the fact that we might have to go back and complete it at some point
01:48:34 to go back and complete it at some point again this vague recollection from conversations but after that I don't recall anything and my understanding was did what they presented an opinion that
01:48:49 did what they presented an opinion that what we were doing was acceptable therefore potentially there wasn't even the need for them to do and further report were you not concerned that Building Control had effectively signed
01:49:01 Building Control had effectively signed off on the cladding when so far as you knew Building Control had not been given any detail about the insulation product that was going to be used in the cladding system but they had the insulation product they knew an
01:49:12 insulation product they knew an insulation product was how do they know that we discussed it and we discussed though this back in meetings I see now
01:49:31 brief question on regulation 38 which I showed you earlier before the Building Control completion certificate was
01:49:43 Control completion certificate was issued were you ever asked to provide any drawings or information to the TMO for the purposes of regulation 38 know where you were where of any regulation
01:49:55 where you were where of any regulation 38 fire safety information being provided to the TMO by the rest of the design team you know did John Hoeven ever ask you to confirm that regulation 38 had been complied with I right now
01:50:13 38 had been complied with I right now the paragraph [Applause]
01:50:22 at paragraph yes 1 184 statement page 58 let's just look at that you say at
01:50:35 let's just look at that you say at paragraph 181 and this is under the heading building regulations and associated guidelines I considered that the tower did comply with the relevant big building regulations because as I
01:50:46 big building regulations because as I set out a further detail below one I did not recall I do not recall being contacted by writing or building control to provide any further information to build and control after building controls feedback on submission - in
01:50:57 controls feedback on submission - in January 2016 you see that yes now you give no other reason they're just your reliance on anything back from riding or Building Control is that right yes does that mean that you didn't
01:51:10 yes does that mean that you didn't undertake your own independent check of the design against the building regulations
01:51:19 if it wasn't we wanted to contract it to check we contracted seek to comply with Building Regulations boom well that's your understanding of the contractor
01:51:30 your understanding of the contractor circles on the first day in in the light of the information that we've been through and the gaps in the information do you accept that it wasn't reasonable of you to rely on Building Control when
01:51:41 of you to rely on Building Control when you hadn't provided them with a full cladding package of information and will rely on a lot of people to do that I understood that they did have all the necessary information and it's not quite
01:51:52 necessary information and it's not quite contacting Conn contrary to that I mean if if they signed off and they didn't
01:52:04 if if they signed off and they didn't what were they signing off did done site visits that had meetings that had drawings they knew what was being built - what were they signing off - final
01:52:15 - what were they signing off - final questions on Building Control if I may first of all do you remember not only the best you can sitting here whether there was ever a meeting with John Hope and where the route to compliance with
01:52:26 and where the route to compliance with ADB paragraphs six to twelve six to twelve nine was ever discussed I don't recall now you said on day nine the
01:52:37 recall now you said on day nine the first day of your evidence that highly confirmed compliance of the cladding with the building regulations - Building Control do you remember do you remember yourself there happening
01:53:04 she knew Rita again yes you said that on day nine the first day of your evidence that Harley had assured Building Control
01:53:17 that Harley had assured Building Control that the cladding was compliant with the building regulations if we could we can look at it if you like you want to look at it it's dead let's look at it then
01:53:29 at it it's dead let's look at it then it's day nine page one one three I wonder if that could be got up day nine page one month I don't need to look at it sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry
01:53:41 it sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry oh boy thing is I don't need to look at it you don't need okay all right so my question is do you remember when that happened
01:53:55 sorry exempted can't bit tired can you restate the whole question and yes of course and you just have your evidence which I was going to show you was that Harley had confirmed compliance of the
01:54:06 Harley had confirmed compliance of the cladding system with the building regulations and they confirmed that to Building Control do you know when they did that when not specifically been a
01:54:17 did that when not specifically been a member of being in meeting with Harley and Building Control discussing the old scheme and who was it do you remember at Harley who confirmed that specifically I
01:54:29 Harley who confirmed that specifically I can't remember I mean typically those meetings were been rebellion and or Kevin lamb and who at Building Control was that confirmation given to to the
01:54:40 was that confirmation given to to the best of your recollection it would have been John and was it done orally or was there a written document which recorded that I don't recall him selling I'll wherever in a document right and mr.
01:54:53 wherever in a document right and mr. chairman I'm conscious that this witness is getting quite tired a long time yes yes I wonder whether I've got a few more questions to go and I'm conscious at the time it may be worth a very short break
01:55:05 time it may be worth a very short break and I will endeavour to finish and well it's your soda I know yes I know I know
01:55:16 know well we could power through break yes well we'll get best endeavors reasonable
01:55:29 well we'll get best endeavors reasonable endeavors indeed mr. Chen I think a short break all right scuffle we'll have a break and past four please yes thank you very much ten plus
01:55:45 please yes thank you very much ten plus four please
02:06:40 yes would you ask mr. Crawford to come back please
02:07:00 hi mr. Crawford yes yes mr. chairman mr. Crawford I'm going to ask you one or two questions now about the technical review that took place on the 28th of October
02:07:11 that took place on the 28th of October 2015 if we could please have the record of that it's a SE a zero zero zero one three five zero eight can we please have that up on the screen now you can see
02:07:25 that up on the screen now you can see here that you are involved in it it's dated the 28th the meeting is the 28th of October issued 29th of October and the Assessor is Bruce sales associates
02:07:37 the Assessor is Bruce sales associates and project architect is Neil Crawford that's you yes and there's a long list of things that are done did you take part in any other technical review other
02:07:48 part in any other technical review other than this one not that or a comp on this project right to the best of your knowledge so this was the first and only technical review to have taken place yes
02:07:59 technical review to have taken place yes at this time October 2015 do you remember that the work was to the external facade was some 60% complete not specifically that number Berta
02:08:11 not specifically that number Berta I didn't know I know well advanced yes and mr. Koo shell says in his statement and we can look at it if you need to but he says that a technical review usually
02:08:23 he says that a technical review usually occurs at what was previously our IBA stage II stroke F technical design and production information do you agree with him
02:08:31 him yes yes and if this was the first technical review it's fair to say isn't it that it had been carried out really Waverly late I would say is that
02:08:42 Waverly late I would say is that although this is the first formal technical review we were discussing and I was discussing with Bruce Lee before this and technical aspects of the
02:08:55 this and technical aspects of the building
02:08:59 do you know why the technical review wasn't carried out until late October 2015
02:09:05 2015 I think the formal review was I think there'd been a lot of items that were
02:09:17 there'd been a lot of items that were the project had been delayed massively and from start to finish so far also Serena's most of them out without control all of them out of our control so the the work had been carried out
02:09:30 so the the work had been carried out sporadically the project's started and stopped and started and so although we reviewed internally and informally I think that probably no recognition at
02:09:41 think that probably no recognition at that point for management or we should do a formal and technical view and therefore that's what this was are there any records notes minutes of the internal informal reviews that you've
02:09:52 internal informal reviews that you've just referred to not I'm aware of look at page two please at this document under the heading project documents and
02:10:03 under the heading project documents and you can see there at the at the second item there Building Regulations assessment and there's a comment Building Control sign-off drawings have been issued and incrementally signed off
02:10:14 been issued and incrementally signed off agreed on site is that right is that actually correct that there were sign offs of drawings by Building Control um Berlin control asked for things and we
02:10:25 Berlin control asked for things and we gave them and they were satisfied with them right and for example those emails on cavity barriers reversed then we're joined says yes you satisfied this meets
02:10:39 joined says yes you satisfied this meets b2 b3 and so on yes they said we've seen all the emails I'm interested in the comment building controls sign-off drawings have been issued and incrementally signed off stroke agreed
02:10:50 incrementally signed off stroke agreed on site can I just ask who actually wrote this document was it you or was it mr. Sainz
02:10:56 mr. Sainz and I'm not sure probably mr. CERN's right
02:11:00 right did mr. stones ever get involved in building controls sign-off of drawings or site meetings nothing my wife knows so where it says Building Control sign-off drawings have been
02:11:11 sign-off drawings have been etc that would have to come from you to him and he would have recorded it it'd have been within our general discussion yes I see but the impression given by what he's written there Building Control sign-off drawings have been issued
02:11:22 sign-off drawings have been issued rather in rather suggests that there was an act as a document which Building Control had issued in which it had signed off in other words approved okayed specific drawings no I think
02:11:34 okayed specific drawings no I think that's a general statement they consist what we understood had happened right
02:11:47 so in fact rather than having sign off of being issued it is what you're saying here is what is being said here is that building control that indicated approval
02:11:58 building control that indicated approval on drawings and aspects generally I mean if they were they were missing sight and for example with Italy kiss something this Saracens except that that what they
02:12:09 this Saracens except that that what they saw was acceptable in terms of their interpretation the building racks for example right with us not always there and if I asked you the question when was
02:12:20 and if I asked you the question when was that and who was it would you would you say this was doing these workshops that you kept having right no I mentioned their pacifically stairs because I
02:12:32 their pacifically stairs because I summation my witness statement through our site visits that Building Control were doing in conjunction with Rhydon are you able to point to any document in
02:12:43 are you able to point to any document in which you can say that Building Control signed off specific drawings and that big question for Building Control no I'm asking you because you were the one who told mr. Sains the Building Control had signed off drawings sign off droids had
02:12:55 signed off drawings sign off droids had been issued and incrementally signed off agreed on site so my question again well I think that terminology is a general understanding of what went on right you
02:13:06 understanding of what went on right you say is the answer to the question I've just asked you which I'd like you to answer I'll ask it again are you able to point to any document in which you can say building controls signed off specific drawings not a document not
02:13:19 specific drawings not a document not moving to the bottom of that page please the technical review design standards says comment designed to current housing approved document building regulations
02:13:31 approved document building regulations and British standards were applicable on what basis could you reach that conclusion
02:13:44 well Bruce and I Bob Bruce obviously has a long history project then myself towards the end during that period particularly during the design stage the
02:13:55 particularly during the design stage the design stage there were a number of meetings with Building Control and also Bruce was working up the plans and the layouts in relation to all the standards listed there and obviously the final
02:14:09 listed there and obviously the final assessment and sign off of the building acknowledged that they were in the days of Building Control were compliant but
02:14:20 of Building Control were compliant but that's a statement of fact I mean they were designed to cover housing approved document building regulations and building standards we're a platform in that is the basis in which the the the
02:14:32 that is the basis in which the the the building was designed if we look at page three then please technical performance under that heading we can see fire detailing you can see that just go half
02:14:46 detailing you can see that just go half way down that page comment completed you see that yes what does that comment relate to um fire strategy does it include or relate
02:14:59 fire strategy does it include or relate to the external facade of the building
02:15:06 I think it's a general comment to relates the fire strategy was the detailing of the cavity barriers by this stage October 15 complete October 15 yes
02:15:30 I'm going to ask you one or two questions about the CDM and own em manual we've already discussed I think your understanding in brief and it was brief of studioizar under the CDM of
02:15:44 brief of studioizar under the CDM of regulations and in terms of design risk assessment we know that studio II did carry out a design risk assessment and we've seen the email of that just for the transcript for later reference it's
02:15:56 the transcript for later reference it's se a zero zero zero zero nine three five zero and there's no need to turn it up it's we count our risks and latent risk assess yes just going back in time to
02:16:08 assess yes just going back in time to your hand over with mr. Soames did you discuss with him in your hand over the risk assessment which has which I think predated your involvement in the project I can probably I mean I cannot see
02:16:21 I can probably I mean I cannot see definitively right were you ever asked to update it I certainly read it if I felt do something irrelevant to be updated in that I would have updated it
02:16:33 updated in that I would have updated it okay can I ask you to go to se a zero zero zero one three seven five six please
02:16:40 please and this is a handwritten note of yours on the 16th of December 2015 you see that yeah 10 a.m. BC sign off that's Building Control sign
02:16:53 BC sign off that's Building Control sign off and then two items under that oh and M you see that yes can you can you
02:17:04 M you see that yes can you can you remember what that related to put the oil in em yes um operation and maintenance manual yes so what was discussed at their general site
02:17:16 what was discussed at their general site meeting on that day about M&M do you remember
02:17:25 I don't recall specifically a bit I suspect the fact that they were looking to assemble them are preparing them I
02:17:37 to assemble them are preparing them I see were you involved in the preparation of the O&M manual operation and maintenance menu no although we were asked very later on to provide us belt
02:17:50 asked very later on to provide us belt coins right do you know who was primarily responsible or who I should say took primary responsibility for the compilation of the O&M manual but if
02:18:02 compilation of the O&M manual but if someone was contracted to write it and someone and by ridin back I can remember precisely your voice or whether it was internally by riding were you ever asked
02:18:14 internally by riding were you ever asked to provide information for the health and safety files of the building
02:18:20 I don't recall now can I ask you please
02:18:33 I don't recall now can I ask you please to look to return you to a different topic can I ask you to look please at E X 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 7
02:18:51 this is an email from you in relation to ben rogerson of the 5th of november at 1430 - and others including mr. Soames
02:19:05 1430 - and others including mr. Soames and it's the second email down on the page and it's the subject is Grenville tower fire strategy and it says Ben can
02:19:18 tower fire strategy and it says Ben can you help with the query below from calling Charles that led bitter as I understand Colin has been challenged by one of the residents that the current redesign of the landscape surrounding Grantville tower comprises the fire
02:19:29 Grantville tower comprises the fire access to Grenfell tower and then you say this the individual concern is a known troublemaker you see that yes and this is what you send to ben rogerson
02:19:40 this is what you send to ben rogerson and ben sends that on to terry Ashton Ardex over at the top I don't know you need to worry about that the question I have is about your reference there to a known troublemaker how did you know that
02:19:52 known troublemaker how did you know that the resident in question was a known troublemaker being honest that can't even remember writing this email but it's dated um it's dated November 2012
02:20:04 it's dated um it's dated November 2012 dubois ben rogerson sorry cuz no there's no email address no there isn't well if you can't remember I'm not sure I can assist you maybe I could assist
02:20:17 I can assist you maybe I could assist you but I'm not sure we have time for me to assist you necessarily but I know it matters my question is really whether you can remember how you discovered that
02:20:28 you can remember how you discovered that the individual that you're talking about the resident was a quotes known troublemaker I'm not sure maybe whose problems we had in terms of trying to agree the landscape in notion into calc
02:20:41 agree the landscape in notion into calc and that's Omni why did you feel it necessary to draw to mr. Rogerson's attention that the individual who had made the challenge was quotes a known
02:20:52 made the challenge was quotes a known troublemaker unquote
02:21:00 to be honest I'm struggling to remember the contents I think the suggestion that might be made is that you were putting
02:21:12 might be made is that you were putting that the words in brackets the individual concerned as a known troublemaker into the email because he wanted to diminish the importance of the challenges that have been raised by that resident is that fair
02:21:27 let me read all the emails please don't I'm just trying to understand contacts here
02:22:15 I think it is trying to clarify this situation relative to firefighting access requirement and the the landscaping proposal which one when
02:22:26 landscaping proposal which one when inhibiting in that right just to say you know we've discovered ben rogerson is actually a senior consultant of the x over right so my question just once more say we're clear about it were you
02:22:37 say we're clear about it were you referring to the individual concerned as a known troublemaker in order to diminish the importance of the complaint I have enough thoughts oh no what was
02:22:49 I have enough thoughts oh no what was the purpose of the words in brackets I must have believed that at a time what did you get that information I kept this is eight years ago I hope don't even know - it refers I
02:23:00 I hope don't even know - it refers I mean less you really sight that just that this email is trying to establish whether anything's being compromised in terms of fire strategy which Chloe I don't think it was well mr. Crawford
02:23:14 don't think it was well mr. Crawford we've come to the end of your evidence and I'm grateful to you I have just one more question for you and it's one you may have heard me ask some people before who have had a significant responsibility for areas of the project
02:23:26 responsibility for areas of the project and it's this looking back on on it now and your role in the project from the summer of 2014 and looking at the material that we've spent time looking
02:23:38 material that we've spent time looking at over the past few days is there anything that you would have done differently
02:24:07 I think it designed I designed the building to a different set of regulations more in line with what has been implemented in 2019 although
02:24:21 been implemented in 2019 although arguably that doesn't go far enough but clearly clearly the risks of the current regulations at the time the building was felt were known were known
02:24:36 building was felt were known were known by government for example if you look at a select committee information from it is early it's 1999 you can see that the
02:24:49 is early it's 1999 you can see that the warnings were there about the risk of
02:24:55 fire and combustible building busting possible materials and buildings and I think the reality is that I'm the building regs aren't fit for purpose and
02:25:06 building regs aren't fit for purpose and the flight to the regular regularization of usage of dangerous than flammable materials and unfortunately then destroy
02:25:19 materials and unfortunately then destroy reacts to the regulations that are in place therefore you need to have regulations in place that are fit for purpose and unfortunately despite you
02:25:31 purpose and unfortunately despite you think of those there must have been an awareness there was an awareness as far back as then because you can see it in this light committee report and by watching to acted on it was in Scotland
02:25:44 watching to acted on it was in Scotland and so
02:25:55 right as a chairman I've come to the end of my questions for mr. Crawford mr. Crawford thank you very much for your patience over the last three days mr. Crawford I'd like to thank you for company to give you our evidence I'm sure it hasn't been an easy exercise to
02:26:08 sure it hasn't been an easy exercise to undertake and I'm sorry that it went on as long as it did but as you realize there are lots of things we get to ask you yeah thank you for coming you'll know free together can I also sorry can
02:26:19 know free together can I also sorry can I just add another better not last statement I think one of the implications of that that system that the regulatory system in the Pacific mistake that I think that was made is in
02:26:34 mistake that I think that was made is in before when you look at the classification of having the national class zero was a mistake and having a side that European class I mean if you
02:26:45 side that European class I mean if you just had a two years you have now effectively then then you wouldn't have had this situation where you could have put that panel on the building and not only that you wouldn't have this
02:26:56 only that you wouldn't have this situation where you had the panel which the problem was definitely component compounded by the fact that the panel was allowed to be retested and then
02:27:08 was allowed to be retested and then those results not disclosed because effectively it was still compliant under national class zero and this is a contradiction and this is also in my
02:27:20 contradiction and this is also in my view like to the fire sorry that's it didn't mean to remain selectively sometimes well thank you again and if you'd like to give the Archos you look
02:27:31 you'd like to give the Archos you look after you don't need your coat back
02:27:42 right so that's that's it for today it is it for today mr. chan tomorrow we will hear from mr. reck first thing tomorrow morning so we'll break there
02:27:53 tomorrow morning so we'll break there and resume at 10 o'clock tomorrow when we'll hear just a minute said from mr. rec who was also one of the architects at Studio e 10 o'clock tomorrow the keys thank you