Bruce Crawford of Studio E gives evidence about the distinction between 'commenting' and 'approving' drawings, Studio E's role limited to 'architectural intent' after novation, and the NBS specification including the CWCT fire performance standard.
00:00:00 thank you so I want to look another passage in mr. Crawford's witness statement that's at SC a triple zero one four to seven five at page 17
00:00:23 you know that's not the right document so it's some FCA triple zero 147 five at the page 17 yes and I want to look at
00:00:38 the page 17 yes and I want to look at paragraph 41 can we zoom in on the top half of that so this is mr. Crawford saying while I understood studio was a
00:00:51 saying while I understood studio was a pointer to carry out various services post contract a key concern for me through the construction phase was to maintain the integrity of the architectural intent established at planning and tender stages this did not
00:01:04 planning and tender stages this did not necessarily involve commenting on the finer detail or technical aspects of designs all the selection of materials but was from the view of architectural intent which covered aspects such as
00:01:15 intent which covered aspects such as siting spatial arrangements amenity tolerances dimensional coordination the appearance proportions colors or finishes of the products do you see that
00:01:27 finishes of the products do you see that there yes
00:01:28 there yes now do you agree with mr. Crawford's description of studio ease role here post Novation if I had read that as I am
00:01:41 post Novation if I had read that as I am now in isolation I would have said that would apply to a specialist item reading which I'm not sure it is playing because I'm not as familiar I'm not familiar with statement I see so what you're
00:01:55 with statement I see so what you're saying is commenting on the finer detail or the technical aspects of the design or the selection of materials wouldn't have occurred in relation to the cutting is that what you're saying I I think if
00:02:09 is that what you're saying I I think if requested on an architectural aspect doors for instance where there wasn't a specialist involved we would get involved in the finer
00:02:23 we would get involved in the finer detail but not not on a specialist package so is it as simple as that if there's a specialist subcontractor involved in a package I am Not sure the context of this of this comment so well
00:02:36 context of this of this comment so well this is about what studio is services were post contract so it's consistent with the topic we've been discussing earlier
00:02:46 he uses the word architectural intent is that a phrase that you're familiar with yes and what do you take it to mean do you take it to mean the same as what he's saying here probably yes yes
00:03:01 he's saying here probably yes yes did you ever advise riding in terms that you were only commenting on architectural intent I don't recall
00:03:16 architectural intent I don't recall discussing or advising I think that is quite typical markup process but again
00:03:31 quite typical markup process but again how how is that consistent with the deed of appointment that we looked at this morning which Ryden signed in 2016 so in which studio he signed in 2016 my
00:03:44 which studio he signed in 2016 my understanding is the the obligation for the detailed design falls to the specialist unless it's an architectural element
00:03:55 unless it's an architectural element which the architect is responding or responsible for how is it consistent with item 8 of that schedule seek to ensure that all designs comply with relevant statutory requirements
00:04:13 you asked me earlier what I understood by Sikh and I said I think it would be interpreted in that context as liaison
00:04:24 interpreted in that context as liaison with Building Control so I don't I see so you read that seek to ensure that all designs comply with the relevant
00:04:35 designs comply with the relevant statutory requirements as synonymous with coordinate with Building Control and pass on any of India's and coordinate with Building Control but that was dealt with separately wasn't it
00:04:46 that was dealt with separately wasn't it in the schedule of services building control coordination this is a separate item there's two clauses one after the
00:04:59 item there's two clauses one after the other yeah they were separate clauses can we go to paragraph 42 of mr. Crawford's statement so just down there
00:05:14 Crawford's statement so just down there and he says in the second sentence I did not consider that the review of drawings of others during the project was to double-check that they were technically
00:05:25 double-check that they were technically correct or necessarily compliant with building regulations above and beyond their consistency with the architectural intent so just taking that in stages is
00:05:36 intent so just taking that in stages is it your evidence that you understood Studios E's role did not involve checking that the drawings were technically correct correct or compliant with the building regulations
00:05:51 they those of Fred broad terms I I did say earlier that I we were not engaged
00:06:02 say earlier that I we were not engaged to confirm compliance on anything I did I felt and technically correct of course
00:06:12 could apply to to anything within the package and when you say you were not engaged to confirm compliance I felt what why what had led you to to be of
00:06:24 what why what had led you to to be of that belief yeah why did you think you weren't engaged to be checking compliance with the building regulations
00:06:37 what was it it's it's I would argue beyond most architects to do that so it's not the job of an architect to check whether the drawings are
00:06:49 check whether the drawings are technically correct and complying with the building regulations the building regulations are distinct from the approved documents which is I'm not
00:07:00 approved documents which is I'm not talking about the approved documents I'm just talking about the building regulation laws is it the role as you understand it of an architect to check that the drawings are complying with the building regulations no and you didn't
00:07:15 building regulations no and you didn't believe it was your role on the ground floor project no and looking what he's saying there he's used the word above
00:07:26 saying there he's used the word above and beyond their consistency with the architectural intent again the way he's used architectural intent do you agree with that that all you're checking for
00:07:37 with that that all you're checking for is architectural intent
00:07:42 is again under design and build specialist contract that is what I would expect the architect to be looking at yes so am i writing that this is was an assumption you made from the fact that
00:07:54 assumption you made from the fact that there was a design and build contractor that your role would be limited to checking for architectural intent which is effectively kind of aesthetics
00:08:14 I think I think you would comments on what you see and that is usually comparing it to to the original architectural intent and seeking to
00:08:27 architectural intent and seeking to ensure that the contractor is achieving it by architectural intent do you mean anything other than aesthetics in this
00:08:39 anything other than aesthetics in this context I don't think it did no and who
00:08:50 context I don't think it did no and who did you think was responsible for checking compliance with the building regulations during the ridin phase of the project from from the applicant side
00:09:03 the project from from the applicant side who else should have been checking Building Control as I understood at the time we're primarily responsible for
00:09:14 time we're primarily responsible for confirming compliance I see so do you think it's building controls role to look at what all the drawings on a project and check that they all comply with Building Regulations
00:09:29 that's not usually what they do and they usually will ask questions to satisfy themselves that the works are in accordance with the guidance or an
00:09:42 accordance with the guidance or an alternative means of demonstrating compliance so does that mean that on this project you were totally reliant on Building Control flagging any concerns about compliance with the building
00:09:54 about compliance with the building regulations and we went the applicant so I don't feel you asked me if we were
00:10:05 I don't feel you asked me if we were relying I don't think we were the applicant but does this mean on the project that you thought the only people who were looking out for Building Control compliance for building regulation compliance was Building
00:10:17 regulation compliance was Building Control I think there's a statutory duty on behalf of the applicant I think it
00:10:32 on behalf of the applicant I think it starts with the client I think he devolved it on to the contractor it's the person carrying out the work but you
00:10:44 the person carrying out the work but you didn't think it was any part of your role to be checking that no just to finish off on the contract documents
00:10:55 finish off on the contract documents there was a collateral warranty that was signed in favor of the TMO can we just look at that that's TMO two zeros eight three five seven six three so this was a
00:11:13 three five seven six three so this was a consultant deed of collateral warranty this was signed at the same time as the studio a limited deed with Rhydon and if we go on page four under item three do
00:11:28 we go on page four under item three do you see there 3.1 it says the consultant warrants and undertakes that it has performed and shall continue to perform all of its duties and obligation under or arising out of the appointment do you
00:11:40 or arising out of the appointment do you see that yes and then at three point two it says it has exercised and will continue to exercise in the performance of the services the reasonable skill and care to be expected of a properly
00:11:52 care to be expected of a properly qualified and competent structural engineer experienced in the provision of services and works for projects of a similar size scope value character and complexity to the project can you explain why that clause refers to a
00:12:04 explain why that clause refers to a structural engineer there as a pros to an architect I we didn't prepare the document
00:12:13 document I I can't explain it this is a deed this is an important document isn't in yeah and it's signed by Studio E would there
00:12:24 and it's signed by Studio E would there be a process within studio II for checking these kind of deeds before they were signed to check for points like that the first point of call of course
00:12:39 that the first point of call of course was referring it to the insurer I I would have read it director Andre would have read it but
00:12:52 director Andre would have read it but that was missed okay I now let's come to a different topic which is to look at some statutory requirements so we looked this morning
00:13:04 requirements so we looked this morning at studio e ll P's appointment to the TMO and we looked under state D that there was reference to investigating the effect of statutory standards do you
00:13:15 effect of statutory standards do you remember that under stage D and construction safety on concept design do you want to look at that again yeah yeah it's se a four zero is nine eight two
00:13:26 it's se a four zero is nine eight two four and page nine
00:13:39 so there this is on the stage Reba stage D at the top of the page second line down investigating effective statutory standards and construction safety on concept design and I think you agreed
00:13:51 concept design and I think you agreed with me this morning that at least stage D I think we actually referred to stages C and D studio II was required to consider compliance with statutory standards do you agree yes and that
00:14:04 standards do you agree yes and that would include the building regulations yes and would you agree that this ought to be done at the earliest opportunity in the design process to investigate the
00:14:17 in the design process to investigate the effective statutory standards yes and it ought to comprise an evaluation of all applicable building regulations and associated relevant guidance that will
00:14:28 associated relevant guidance that will affect the question of compliance do you agree that's a bit more difficult to agree I read it back to you again it ought to comprise an evaluation of all
00:14:40 ought to comprise an evaluation of all applicable building regulations and associated relevant guidance that will affect the question of compliance what is it you don't agree with there
00:15:02 it's suggesting you would try and investigate the impacts of any standards without having a design to compare it to
00:15:15 without having a design to compare it to or to come to to use as a stand as a as a study well it's suggesting that knowing the type of project that you're
00:15:26 knowing the type of project that you're involved in may be sensible to investigate the parameters the statutory parameters within what you at which you're working do you agree with that that's broader yes I think it has to be
00:15:39 that's broader yes I think it has to be broad
00:15:40 broad before you you start looking into detail but here for example we have a building high-rise building over 18 meters so would you agree that it would be sensible to investigate the standards
00:15:53 sensible to investigate the standards that would apply to a high-rise building the statutory standards and any relevant guidance yes and do you agree that it
00:16:04 guidance yes and do you agree that it would be best practiced to reduce that research into a series of memos or in diagram diagrammatic form with notes have you seen that before where someone's provided a note that
00:16:18 someone's provided a note that summarizes the statutory standards and any relevant statutory guidance and you haven't come across that at all within your work in studio E no one I've worked
00:16:31 your work in studio E no one I've worked with has proposed that or undertaken that to my knowledge so can you explain how it's studio e you would learn about
00:16:42 how it's studio e you would learn about the relevant statutory standards and guidance if you're not producing that kind of research note for the team how would you gain that knowledge and how would that be communicated
00:16:58 by statutory standards are you focusing on building control building regulations and associated guidance so I guess the
00:17:10 and associated guidance so I guess the approved documents being particularly important yeah
00:17:17 those documents obviously break down the the requirements and to into different categories which tend to fall to
00:17:28 categories which tend to fall to individual consultants at the outset of projects all those consultants would bring their experience to bear on the
00:17:41 bring their experience to bear on the initial proposals and so would the architect of course so so I would say in a sense you you bring with you what you
00:17:54 a sense you you bring with you what you learnt on previous projects to begin with but if this is a new project and we know this was a new project for studio II wouldn't it be good practice to do
00:18:06 II wouldn't it be good practice to do some detail research on the statutory standards early in the design process
00:18:16 I think your
00:18:27 and now I'm still not sure you haven't said fire but I think you mean fire it could be fire it could be other key building calculations requirements it
00:18:38 building calculations requirements it could be a proof document L could be a proof document B would you agree with a new project it was particularly important to make sure the statutory
00:18:51 important to make sure the statutory standards were understood it was a refurbishment project so the standards we understood would be complex and
00:19:04 we understood would be complex and require some detailed consideration from each consultant so did that mean that you were going to be beholden to what those consultants told you about the statutory standards and you didn't
00:19:16 statutory standards and you didn't beholdin benefic take part L it clear was an interpretation to follow through the guidance to show compliance which in
00:19:30 the guidance to show compliance which in this instance I I believe max Fordham would have undertaken I see so you relied on max Fordham to interpret Part L and approved document L
00:19:41 interpret Part L and approved document L and largely communicate that to you does that mean you wouldn't read approved occupant L yourself at this stage D
00:19:58 occupant L yourself at this stage D probably not okay I have read but and I probably might have read them on this project but I it's not the guidance isn't
00:20:13 it's not the guidance isn't it's usually referred to as required there is no documented statutory compliance review relating to Granville
00:20:24 compliance review relating to Granville tower is there that was produced by Studio E itself do you agree that producing a basic design scheme which
00:20:35 producing a basic design scheme which was compliant with statutory requirements should have been on hand for studio II against which to check the design of Harley as the design work developed not aware we've we've done
00:20:51 developed not aware we've we've done that all that it's requested required in any document how else would Studio e
00:21:03 any document how else would Studio e satisfy itself that Harley's designs complied with the statutory requirements or is it your evidence that as per before you wouldn't be checking Harley's work for statutory compliance correction
00:21:21 work for statutory compliance correction we
00:21:26 can we go on now you mean you did not expect to check all his work is that what you're saying for compliance for compliance I want to ask you some more
00:21:38 compliance I want to ask you some more detailed questions about the building regulations in a predock ument B we're going to come back to some points of detail later when we look at some different elements of the facade at the
00:21:50 different elements of the facade at the outset of your work on the ground fault our refurbishment we're you aware of the requirements of Schedule one Part B fire safety of the Building Regulations 2010 I think you asked me that yesterday I
00:22:03 I think you asked me that yesterday I think yes did you take any specific steps to familiarize yourself with the requirements of Schedule one Part B fire safety at any stage during the Grenville
00:22:14 safety at any stage during the Grenville tower project I kind of call doing so now do you agree that said you're one Part B of the
00:22:25 that said you're one Part B of the Building Regulations is of key importance when embarking on a project to over clad an existing high-rise residential building I think it's a key a key of key importance do you agree
00:22:37 a key of key importance do you agree that schedule one Part B of the Building Regulations is of key importance when embarking on a project over clad an existing high-rise residential building
00:22:54 I'm not sure what is going to flow from that
00:22:58 that can you explain well would you would it be fair to say that meeting the requirements of schedule one part be on fire safety is one of the most important aspects of any design of a high-rise
00:23:09 aspects of any design of a high-rise building yes and do you agree that fire safety is fundamental to the work of an architect practice yes and that any
00:23:22 architect practice yes and that any competent architect would have at least an awareness of the existence and importance of the fire related provisions in the building regulations and approved documents I believe most
00:23:35 and approved documents I believe most architects are would be aware of them yes yep can we look at a predock ument be now so can we turn to that let's see LG five zeros 173 now this is the 2006
00:23:53 LG five zeros 173 now this is the 2006 edition with 2010 amendments so this is what would have been available in 2012 when Studio E were first working on the ground floor tower project at the outset
00:24:05 ground floor tower project at the outset of your work on the project where you were where of the statutory guidance in approved document be on fire safety in
00:24:16 approved document be on fire safety in the general sense yes you've asked me if I was aware which you could you wear that there was something called a pre document you might mean that I knew no
00:24:30 document you might mean that I knew no were you aware of its existence yes what was your understanding of the purpose of approved document b what was it there to do its guidance it's a guidance document
00:24:45 do its guidance it's a guidance document its statutory practical guidance would that be consistent with your understanding yeah and at the outset of the refurbishment
00:24:57 and at the outset of the refurbishment what steps did you take to familiarize yourself with the guidance in approved document b at the outset we we knew that
00:25:09 document b at the outset we we knew that it would not be possible to form an opinion on compliance of the provisions
00:25:22 opinion on compliance of the provisions without a consultant so although we as a team and myself have certainly worked with the approved documents in the past I did not expect
00:25:35 documents in the past I did not expect to be able to use them necessarily on on grenfell did you actually read a proof that i'm of the gram full project I referred to it on occasion but I said he
00:25:49 referred to it on occasion but I said he didn't read it from start to finish when you say I referred to it on occasion what do you mean by that well usually because because it's so wide-ranging you
00:26:00 because because it's so wide-ranging you you find yourself or an architect will find themselves referring to specific sections to try and understand whether
00:26:13 sections to try and understand whether they are meeting their requirements okay can we turn to page 69 within this document where we see regulation and reseed b3 of schedule 1 set out on
00:26:25 reseed b3 of schedule 1 set out on internal fire spread structure do you see that so it says b2 b1 that buildings should be designed or constructed so that in the event of fire at stability will be maintained you see that there and then at 3 where reasonably necessary
00:26:39 and then at 3 where reasonably necessary to inhibit the spread of fire within the building measures still be taken to an extent appropriate to the size and intended use of the building comprising either or both of the following and then we've got subdivision of the building
00:26:50 we've got subdivision of the building with fire resisting and struck construction installation of suitable automatic fire suppression systems and then it be three four at the bottom the building should be designed and
00:27:01 building should be designed and structured so the unseen spread of fire and smoke within concealed spaces in its structure and fabric is inhibited were you familiar with these parts of b3 at the time of the Grenfell project yes
00:27:17 at the time of the Grenfell project yes I was it all come up on previous projects and did you read this section of the approved document during your
00:27:29 of the approved document during your time on the ground-floor project the b3 section no can we then turn to be for that page 93 they sets out the
00:27:45 that page 93 they sets out the requirements in sheduled one of the building regulations in terms of external fire spread and at b41 the external walls of the building still adequately resist the spread of fire over the walls and from one building to another having regard to the height used
00:27:57 another having regard to the height used in position of the building you see that there yes were you familiar with this at the time of the ground-floor project
00:28:10 partially I was yes the certainly the protecting one building from another and
00:28:21 protecting one building from another and the roof was spread a fire across the roof oh I was aware of that those two aspects and the resisting spread of fire
00:28:33 aspects and the resisting spread of fire I think was I guess more self-evident to me rather than being aware though that it was stated explicitly did you read
00:28:44 it was stated explicitly did you read this b4 section of a predock youment B during your time on the ground floor project can we just look within this
00:28:55 project can we just look within this document that pays 95 and I want to look in the bottom right hand corner at 12.5 so there we have the external envelope
00:29:07 so there we have the external envelope of a building should not provide a medium for fire spread if it it is likely to be a risk to health or safety the use of combustible materials in the cladding system and extensive cavities may present such a risk in tall
00:29:18 may present such a risk in tall buildings
00:29:19 buildings and then it goes on external wall should either meet the guidance given in paragraphs twelve point six to twelve point nine or meet the performance criteria given in the BRE report fire performance of external thermal
00:29:30 performance of external thermal insulation four walls of multi-story buildings BR one three five four cladding systems using full-scale test data from BS eight four one four so we see those two paragraphs there did you
00:29:44 see those two paragraphs there did you understand at the time of the Graham four project that the pre document B contains these two potential routes to compliance with the functional requirement of Part B for one of the building regulations are you
00:30:01 one of the building regulations are you able to confirm which of these routes was actually followed on Granville tower no and then if we go to twelve point six
00:30:13 no and then if we go to twelve point six at the bottom of that page and on to the next page the external surfaces of the walls should meet the provisions in diagram forty we see that there can we
00:30:25 diagram forty we see that there can we go to diagram forty this is on page 97
00:30:33 did you ever look at this diagram at any time during your work on the ground for tower refurbishment I I'm not sure I'm
00:30:48 tower refurbishment I I'm not sure I'm familiar with it but I
00:30:52 I can't be sure that I did did you know that it was the the diagram II in the
00:31:03 that it was the the diagram II in the bottom right hand corner which would have applied to Granville Tower did you know that at the time no and just
00:31:14 know that at the time no and just looking at that for a moment we can see there there's very shading on the building and we can see from the arrows on the right hand side that any dimension over 18 meters is in the dark
00:31:25 dimension over 18 meters is in the dark gray shading and if we go to the key on the right hand side it says their class naught national class or class be s 3 D
00:31:37 naught national class or class be s 3 D 2 or better do you see that there yes did you know what these classifications meant at the time of the ground floor tower project I
00:31:50 I certainly had come across the crossover class in the past how did you come across that before it had been
00:32:03 come across that before it had been required for
00:32:08 I think it comes up quite often fall for finishes internally as a requirement protecting a public building what did
00:32:20 protecting a public building what did you know about class naught what did that mean to you what was your understanding of what it was resistance of spread of flame across the surface you knew that much yeah did you know
00:32:32 you knew that much yeah did you know about the specific test that had to be undertaken to get class nought no and what about reference there to Class B s 3 D 2 what did you know about that were
00:32:54 3 D 2 what did you know about that were you familiar with any of the European classifications so had you heard of a 1 a 2 B can we then go to paragraph 12
00:33:13 a 2 B can we then go to paragraph 12 point 7 on page 96 and we have a paragraph there head of insulation materials straight products and it says in a building with a story 18 meters or
00:33:26 in a building with a story 18 meters or more above ground level any installation product filler material not including a gasket sealants and similar etc used in the external wall construction should be of limited combust ability do you see
00:33:38 of limited combust ability do you see that yes we're you aware of that guidance at the time of your work on the ground floor tower project no had you
00:33:51 ground floor tower project no had you heard of the phrase limited combust ability I don't recall where you were where that there might be different rules that apply to buildings over 18
00:34:04 rules that apply to buildings over 18 meters with different guidance which made certain recommendations about buildings over 18 meters we aware of that at the time of your work on the ground floor project no I was away that they may exist
00:34:15 they may exist but I myself did not refer to Part B so just to be specific
00:34:26 just to be specific we're you aware that buildings over 18 meters had different guidance associated with them the 18 meters I can't recall
00:34:38 with them the 18 meters I can't recall if I was aware of that so it follows that you didn't apply your mind at the time of the Granville project how this
00:34:49 time of the Granville project how this Clause applied to the materials that you were selecting as I wasn't myself preparing documents we'll come back to
00:35:08 preparing documents we'll come back to what you didn't didn't prepare a little bit later finally can we just look at paragraph twelve point eight on this page at 96 and it says cavity berries
00:35:22 page at 96 and it says cavity berries should be provided in accordance with section 9 do you see that yes
00:35:32 did you understand at the time of your work on the Graham for tower project that cavity cavity barriers were required in external walls yes did you
00:35:45 required in external walls yes did you understand that they were required to limit fire spread within the cavity yes and did you under also understand they were required to limit the fire spread from a compartment into the cavity did
00:36:02 from a compartment into the cavity did you ever read section 9 on cavity barriers section 9 of approved document b during your time on the ground for tile project sorry did I ever read
00:36:21 tile project sorry did I ever read section 9 yeah during your time on the ground floor project section 9 on cavity barriers and I cannot recall doing so
00:36:34 barriers and I cannot recall doing so Peter I wasn't necessarily in most cases I was not preparing the drawings or the specifications at the time when you mind okay and had you heard of I mean just
00:36:47 okay and had you heard of I mean just going back to page 95 and paragraph 12.5 had you heard of BS 8 for one for testing did that what about br 135
00:37:07 testing did that what about br 135 that's there that that's the report the BRE report fire performance of external thermal insulation for walls br 135 were you aware of that guidance at the
00:37:18 were you aware of that guidance at the time of the ground floor project no I wasn't now if we look at paragraph 240 of your witness statement this is a SE a
00:37:29 of your witness statement this is a SE a triple zero one four 273 at page 105
00:37:39 so there you are referring to an email from mr. Ashton Ashton of curtains yeah
00:37:52 from mr. Ashton Ashton of curtains yeah so you say at the beginning of that I also note that on the 1st of November 2013 curtains they were the structural engineers on the project when they yes curtains emailed Artie Lea attaching structural specifications presumably to
00:38:04 structural specifications presumably to be included as part of the employers requirements one of the documents was titled structural performance specification for the design supply and application of overcrowding systems to Granville tower on reading this document
00:38:15 Granville tower on reading this document in preparation of this witness statement paragraph seven point one point three thirteen states the system should comply fully with the recommendations of the BRE document and then we have the title
00:38:26 BRE document and then we have the title second edition 2003 so that that document was referred to in the curtains
00:38:38 document was referred to in the curtains specification did you ever read it during your time on the ground floor project no paragraph wasn't brought to my attention that arrived and first of
00:38:49 my attention that arrived and first of November can we look at BR 1 3 5 the 2nd edition so it's at BRE four zeroes 5 5 5
00:39:02 edition so it's at BRE four zeroes 5 5 5 4
00:39:08 and if we can go on page 2 we'll see the front page there we go so we can see it their fire performance external wall thermal installation second addition at
00:39:21 thermal installation second addition at the bottom so if you could confirm that you didn't read this document at the time I just want to look at a couple of passages in here and page 7 can we go to
00:39:34 passages in here and page 7 can we go to page 7 there's reference there in a picture of the Ghana caught fire in Irving in Scotland that was in the summer of 1999 can you see that there
00:39:47 summer of 1999 can you see that there yes
00:39:48 yes were you aware of that and going it caught fire at the time of your work on the rental project no can we go to page 9 within this document and we get a
00:40:02 9 within this document and we get a pictorial representation of rapid fire spread can you see that there and you see if the external cladding contributes
00:40:14 see if the external cladding contributes to the flame spread there's a risk of secondary fire spread to all levels do you see that if I was breaking out the bottom and breaking back in have you ever seen a diagram like this or during
00:40:26 ever seen a diagram like this or during your time at the Granville project were you aware of these mechanisms this rapid fire spread frames breaking back out and
00:40:39 fire spread frames breaking back out and back in and up the external cladding was that something you had an awareness of when you were working on the ground floor tower project
00:40:51 sorry the rapid fire spread no I had no knowledge of this and on page 10 paragraph 3 under the heading cavities
00:41:08 can we see if we look there together it says cavities cavities may be incorporated with an external cladding system or may be formed by the delamination of differential movement
00:41:19 delamination of differential movement and then this sentence if flames become confined or restricted by entering cavities within the external cladding system they will become elongated as they seek oxygen and fuel to support the
00:41:30 they seek oxygen and fuel to support the combustion process this process can lead to flame extension of 5 to 10 times that of the original flame lengths regardless of the materials used to line the cavities do you see that yeah now is
00:41:41 cavities do you see that yeah now is that something that you were more generally aware of at the time of your work on the ground floor project well I think that that would fall within fire
00:41:53 think that that would fall within fire spread within cavities yes I think ok can we look at page 17 under the heading
00:42:04 can we look at page 17 under the heading performance of materials in fire installation so it's towards the bottom of the page there's a heading there we go yeah performance of materials in fire installation so it says there the
00:42:17 installation so it says there the performance of insulating material when subjected to this type of fire scenario has been outlined in the previous section typically non combustible materials are used in these systems as it's difficult to prevent fire entering
00:42:28 it's difficult to prevent fire entering the cavity and spreading through the insulating material is that something that you were aware of at the time of your work on the ground floor project that typically non combustible materials
00:42:39 that typically non combustible materials are used in these systems because of the difficulty preventing the fire entering the cavity and then spreading and then
00:42:50 the cavity and then spreading and then right at the bottom under the heading external panel and then there's a subheading there non combustible materials and materials of limited
00:43:02 materials and materials of limited combustible see can we just go over the next page and just read that do you see the lasts and two sentences of that it says metal
00:43:15 and two sentences of that it says metal panels such as aluminium may fall from the system if the strength of the fixings is affected by the local fire source they may also melt generating molten metal debris if exposed directly
00:43:27 molten metal debris if exposed directly to the sustained flame envelope do you see that yes again were you aware of of those that potential for aluminium metal
00:43:38 those that potential for aluminium metal panels during your time on the ground floor project I'm aware that aluminium
00:43:50 floor project I'm aware that aluminium is has a lower melting temperature than steel so it would fail first I knew that but were you aware specifically of
00:44:01 but were you aware specifically of issues surrounding aluminium panels and their propensity to melt generating molten metal debris no not in
00:44:13 molten metal debris no not in temperature was quite high so that was the second edition of VR 135 the third edition of br1 35 came out in 2013 and
00:44:24 edition of br1 35 came out in 2013 and it contained some further warnings I just want to turn up the front page of that that CEO four zeroes three three six four
00:44:40 now we're you aware of this document I think it follows from your earlier answers that you weren't aware of any addition of BR 135 is that right now
00:44:55 addition of BR 135 is that right now this contains some further warnings it talks about the increase in the volume of combustible materials being used in external cladding applications driven by
00:45:07 external cladding applications driven by the need for energy efficiency in buildings were you generally aware of that trend at the time of your work on the ground floor project I either use of combustible materials driven by this
00:45:19 combustible materials driven by this energy efficiency push I was not aware they were combustible and this
00:45:31 combustible resin this guidance also draws close attention to the use of cavity barriers within external wall systems where you aware of the
00:45:42 systems where you aware of the importance of cavity barriers in external wall systems yes can I ask you
00:45:53 external wall systems yes can I ask you now a bit more about your knowledge of other cladding fires at the time of working on the ground floor project were you aware that they'd been previous fires involving external cladding
00:46:04 fires involving external cladding facades on high-rise residential buildings I was not so you weren't aware of any at all did you heard of the fire
00:46:19 of any at all did you heard of the fire lakyn or house in Southwark in 2009 and that's mentioned in my inquiry but I did did you know that that related to or
00:46:30 did you know that that related to or part of it with involved external cladding panels an external flame spread what about a spate of fires in the united arab arab emirates and in
00:46:41 united arab arab emirates and in particular in dubai in between 2013 sorry 2012 2013 also 20:15 it you heard of any dubai cladding fires I don't recall hearing of them not
00:47:00 fires I don't recall hearing of them not at the time and I want to come to ask you some questions about the selection and specification of materials and I'm
00:47:13 and specification of materials and I'm going to ask you some general questions about how studio II went about specifying the materials which complies the over cladding system at ground for tower later in my questioning I'm going
00:47:24 tower later in my questioning I'm going to look very specifically at the insulation material that was chosen and the ACM panels okay so we're going to come back to that but I'm wanting to look at your overall approach which studio II took to the specification
00:47:36 studio II took to the specification particularly in the NBS specification which was part of the tender documents okay yeah so is it right that studio we prepared the NBS specification for
00:47:48 prepared the NBS specification for Grandville tower from August 3 to November 2013 I I recall that we had started work long before that on the specification yeah yeah possibly the
00:48:02 specification yeah yeah possibly the beginning of the year or even sooner but something it towards the beginning of the year is it right that NBS stands for national building specification Thanks
00:48:14 national building specification Thanks and were you personally responsible for compiling the NBS specification on the ground floor project no who was within
00:48:25 ground floor project no who was within studio II as I say I believe that we started earlier in 2013 because I believe agian Chet Adrian Jeff started work on it so what was your role in
00:48:38 work on it so what was your role in relation to the NBS specification
00:48:43 [Music]
00:48:49 one person prepared it but I was usually consulted and agreed the content so does that mean you read the content and checked you happy with it before it
00:49:00 checked you happy with it before it formed part of the tender documents for Ryden that obviously came later but
00:49:08 usually the individual preparing it would go through each clause complete them and we would have a conversation about so I'm just checking it's fair
00:49:23 about so I'm just checking it's fair enough for me to ask you questions about its content yes yes and was Thomas rec involved in there putting together the MBI specification yes so it was it Adrienne Jess and Thomas Rec who worked
00:49:35 Adrienne Jess and Thomas Rec who worked on it in my recollection primarily those two yes and I think what you're saying is they would do the initial work on it and then they would potentially discuss all of the clauses with you or just some of them just some I think I trusted them
00:49:52 of them just some I think I trusted them both equally to be able to complete her specification okay and would you agree with me that on a project like this the
00:50:04 with me that on a project like this the employer's requirements are key setting out for the main contractor what the core requirements of the project are yes I think you say at paragraph two three
00:50:17 I think you say at paragraph two three six of your statement that they are the NBS is a core part of the employer's requirements yes you do with that and would you agree that it's on the basis
00:50:29 would you agree that it's on the basis of the content of this specification that a tendering company can undertake an assessment of how much it will cost to undertake the project and ultimately whether it will put in a bid I'll show
00:50:46 whether it will put in a bid I'll show why you added the last bit but before we consider the NBS in any detail can you explain what a specification for a project like this is what information
00:50:58 project like this is what information does it typically contain
00:51:06 specification is broken down into sections I think I think I provide a description in my yeah I'm coming I'm coming today I just been interested in you explaining
00:51:18 I just been interested in you explaining how you understand a specification to work and what it is it's a written description exactly it's a written description isn't it yeah not not drawings usually no and where does a
00:51:30 drawings usually no and where does a specification sit in the suite of documents that an architect will prepare on a project like this where does it sit in those documents that will be prepared
00:51:44 in terms of its importance typically I think most my recollection is most building contracts stipulate
00:51:55 is most building contracts stipulate that the specification takes precedence over drawings can we go to paragraph 2 3 6 of your witness statement this is a se a triple 0 1 4 273 at page 103 so there
00:52:08 a triple 0 1 4 273 at page 103 so there you've explained what a specification is and you've explained what an N the NBS is and you've explained that the NBS
00:52:22 is and you've explained that the NBS which is a product produced by an entity owned by Reber began as a standard template for the specification of workmanship products and design and has been developed into a full digital authoring application it's widely used
00:52:34 authoring application it's widely used by architects to prepare construction documentation in the you a in the UK it's broken down into sections that are line approximately with the trades one typically finds on site and then further
00:52:47 typically finds on site and then further down you say it's a core part of the employers requirements and the tender is then use it to come up with their proposals so in practice is it right that you use the NBS software as like a
00:52:58 that you use the NBS software as like a technology platform or a tool kit which helped you prepare a specification for the works yes now I want to explore the different
00:53:09 now I want to explore the different types of specification which can be put together for a project like Granville do you agree that you have three basic options when you're choosing each package or each item of each package
00:53:21 package or each item of each package there could be a performance specification there could be a prescriptive specification and a propriety specification are you familiar with those three things let's have a
00:53:33 with those three things let's have a look there's there's some useful Reber guidance in a rebus CPD note dated the 17th of August 2017 can we go to that that's the inq three zeroes 1 1 3 2 6 so
00:53:51 that's the inq three zeroes 1 1 3 2 6 so this is a publication a CPD publication produced by Reaper it tells us if we go on to page 2 it has a section what is a
00:54:03 on to page 2 it has a section what is a specification and it gives the definition we don't need to go through all of that but it says in there that it's a written description the main purpose of which is to define the
00:54:14 purpose of which is to define the materials and the products to be used do you agree with that tails and products and yes and then on page four we can see
00:54:27 and yes and then on page four we can see there's three principal types of specification outlined there if we could blow that up so that says there there are three principal types of specification that designers can use
00:54:38 specification that designers can use either singly or in a combined manner depending on the type of project contract or procurement method and then they say their performance prescriptive and proprietary had you heard of these
00:54:51 and proprietary had you heard of these three different types of specification no performance or prescriptive or non proprietary okay so just taking them each in stage
00:55:02 okay so just taking them each in stage as a performance specification is one in which you specify a desired performance outcome in respect of any part of the refurbishment do you agree
00:55:13 I do yeah so it could have required for example the cladding system to achieve a certain fire performance do you agree
00:55:26 certain fire performance do you agree with that I don't think we have it well I have ever done a strictly performance-based specification okay so
00:55:37 performance-based specification okay so look in a moment at the NBS that you did and can you see there it gives an example two lines up under that paragraph performance specification it says eg external fire performance of
00:55:48 says eg external fire performance of reefing two BS en 1:3 501 now that's the European and classification standard so do you see there it's saying you could give a classification of fire
00:55:59 give a classification of fire performance classification as part of a performance spec do you see that yes and do you agree that that form of
00:56:11 do you agree that that form of specification would give the main contractor and all their subcontractors a large amount of discretion and flexibility as to the type of products and ultimately actual materials to be used to achieve that outcome yes so then
00:56:28 used to achieve that outcome yes so then here it says as an alternate route we've got the prescriptive specification and there it's defined here is something which would set out the full details of the product type material and
00:56:39 the product type material and workmanship but would not actually specify the product itself sorry that the prescriptive would not actually so it's quite helpful to look at the little
00:56:51 it's quite helpful to look at the little box at the bottom do you see they've got examples of the three types so performance we've got a door set that is to a particular fire a
00:57:02 door set that is to a particular fire a particular standard sorry that's BS en one four three five one fire integrity thirty minutes a prescriptive would be to say it's got to be clay brick type HD
00:57:14 to say it's got to be clay brick type HD and it's got to be this size but it falls short of actually saying what product
00:57:19 product it's got to be do you see that yeah and then finally it talks about a proprietary specification which actually names the specific product so here we get example of a washbasin if you want a
00:57:31 get example of a washbasin if you want a particular washbasin to be used in your project you say manufacturer Armitage shanks product reference Sandringham 21 so you've you've told the tenderer this
00:57:42 so you've you've told the tenderer this is the product that we want you to use you see that yeah and do you agree that that latter type of specification is
00:57:53 that latter type of specification is much more narrowly defined because it doesn't give the tenderer much flexibility it's that product that you want do you agree that I think I want to
00:58:04 want do you agree that I think I want to say I haven't seen this before and I'm not sure as I said we've never done a purely performance-based specification because it it's extremely difficult as I
00:58:15 because it it's extremely difficult as I recall and I don't agree that you wouldn't include performance requirements under a prescriptive specification with proprietary products I think to be fair to you on first sight
00:58:31 I think to be fair to you on first sight this is this is an artificial separation of types yes I think to be fair to you it does state that these can be used
00:58:42 it does state that these can be used singly or in a combined manner I didn't see and this is emphasized at the end of that page so do you see the the line immediately above the box it says in many cases a project specification will
00:58:54 many cases a project specification will include a mixture a performance prescriptive and proprietary information do you see that there are you section cuz you include oh yeah yeah yeah understood
00:59:07 but do you agree that it's the architects role taking into account the clients requirements to decide what type of specification to have and how prescriptive it is for each aspect of the project it's largely the architects
00:59:24 the project it's largely the architects role that's not to say the client wouldn't have a view at all can we look now at the NBS specification for the
00:59:35 now at the NBS specification for the Granville project we're going to come back to this a number of times we can find the final version of that at SC a five zeroes one six nine
00:59:53 and we can see the date' on the first page it's there in red it's the 30th of January 2014 and then it says their l20 doors revised so is it right that this
01:00:06 doors revised so is it right that this was the last version of the NBS spec that was prepared for the ground floor project yes I think it was and then can we go to Section eight ninety two which
01:00:17 we go to Section eight ninety two which is the rainscreen cladding section which starts at page 63 and if we go within
01:00:29 starts at page 63 and if we go within that to page 65 if we look at the top half of that page we can see there under clause 120 that you've named a specific
01:00:42 clause 120 that you've named a specific product in that section to be used by the Proteus HR honeycomb panel manufactured by kme architectural
01:00:56 manufactured by kme architectural solutions do you see that there yes and if we can go to page 73 and look at item 776 at the top of the page we see
01:01:12 776 at the top of the page we see they're under so this is the thermal insulation section within h92 we can see there that the thermal insulation is
01:01:23 there that the thermal insulation is Celotex F R 5000 do you see that yes so would you agree that if we are following their threefold distinction these
01:01:35 their threefold distinction these particular clauses are following the proprietary route they're putting particular products in that the tenderer is being asked to use they invade I
01:01:46 is being asked to use they invade I agree they do include proprietary references but I think there are standards yes yeah we'll come back to that so let's go back to page 64 on the top of the page
01:02:06 so we can see at the top of the page in the second bullet it says the manufacturer is needed within this specification or indicative and may be substituted with similar or equal
01:02:18 substituted with similar or equal alternatives do you see that and we can see from the bottom of that same page that tenderers were also asked to submit comparative supply earnings store costs
01:02:29 comparative supply earnings store costs for three alternative materials we can just pull that up
01:02:41 sorry we need to go right to the bottom of that page yes so there under Clause 11 it says in addition to the cladding specified in clauses below that was 120 that we looked at submit comparative
01:02:56 that we looked at submit comparative supply and install cost per meter squared of the whole cladding system for the following alternative materials and then we have Reina Bonjour glass 5000 a Lucca bond zinc quartz Inc do you see
01:03:07 Lucca bond zinc quartz Inc do you see that there yes do you agree that that's the wording there says submit comparative supply and install costs do
01:03:20 comparative supply and install costs do you see that yes so do you agree it's not actually saying you have a discretion to use alternatives it's just one things comparative supply and install costs that was the intent yes
01:03:36 but looking at all of that do you agree that you primarily adopted a prior to specification by naming specific products ie the Proteas honeycomb and the fr 5,000 Celotex product I'm sorry
01:03:52 the fr 5,000 Celotex product I'm sorry did I do you agree that the primary clauses here were telling you that there were particular products studio he wanted to be used yes and did you do
01:04:05 wanted to be used yes and did you do that can you explain why you did that was that for a sense essentially aesthetic reasons because you wanted a particular aesthetic finish that you were looking for the rain screen
01:04:18 were looking for the rain screen yeah well the the specification of the rain screen obviously took a long time to to arrive at there was a lot of research undertaken I don't think it was
01:04:30 research undertaken I don't think it was just aesthetic if it were just but it's um it's
01:04:41 if it were just but it's um it's obviously covered in great lengths in my statement but the proposal to use they came very early and we we kept with it and and proposed what we thought was a
01:04:54 and and proposed what we thought was a sundown was we did research it with the supplier yeah we will come to all of that and that was our preferred solution
01:05:06 that and that was our preferred solution yeah
01:05:08 yeah specification so that's why we put it first now as we've seen you'd gave some latitude to the contractor because you talked about similar or equal products
01:05:19 talked about similar or equal products that was the top of page 64 we were just looking at at that and I think in the contract preliminaries that we need to go to this it makes clear that if alternative products are to be proposed
01:05:32 alternative products are to be proposed one of the things that has to happen is the contractor has to provide reasons for the substitution do you recall that the preliminaries the section 82 that's
01:05:45 the preliminaries the section 82 that's prepared by I'm less familiar with okay
01:05:49 [Applause] do you accept that if you'd wanted greater input from the design and build contractor in terms of performance including fire safety performance you
01:06:00 including fire safety performance you would have drafted a performance specification which would have expressly included requiring fire safety to be addressed
01:06:15 so what why would we it's really if you'd wanted greater flexibility and input from the design and build contractor do you agree that you would have adopted instead a performance
01:06:28 have adopted instead a performance specification rather than a proprietary one yes now in fairness to you it is relevant to point out that it paragraphs
01:06:39 relevant to point out that it paragraphs 310 and 3 for 42 of the NBS specification if we can go to page 69 of this document so if we look at 310 and 3
01:06:54 this document so if we look at 310 and 3 for 2 you've got there some design straight performance requirements and it there's reference there to this CW TC
01:07:05 there's reference there to this CW TC standard for systemized building envelopes which had as part of it part 6 power performance do you see that yes we're going to look at that in some detail later first of all did you read
01:07:17 detail later first of all did you read that performance specification at the time of working on the ground floor project
01:07:30 can you recall whether this was a clause which was suggested to you as part of the NBS specification suggested I think it is a clause that is standard yes so
01:07:43 it is a clause that is standard yes so that's what we think and I take you to something this is iron Q's triple zero one one three three nine so this is an
01:07:56 one one three three nine so this is an extract from the MBS software so what's happened is the NBS have provided the inquiry with its original software from 2013 and this would have been the software that was available as at
01:08:08 software that was available as at November 2013 can you recall whether you would usually update the NBS software with all the relevant NBS updates was that studio ease practice I think I think it was
01:08:22 automatic I think we had - yes I see yeah and so looking at this screenshot this is a screenshot taken from the NBS software this is a standard NBS clause
01:08:33 software this is a standard NBS clause that can be inserted into the h92 section do you see that yes and there's a another screenshot if we look at int
01:08:44 a another screenshot if we look at int triple zero one one three six five
01:08:53 here we see another standard clause that's inserted into the NBS software do you see that yes and and it would appear that studio II took that and included it as part of its package in the NB aspect
01:09:06 as part of its package in the NB aspect do you agree yes now there's there was some later guidance from the CW CT that was entitled fire performance of curtain
01:09:17 entitled fire performance of curtain walls and rain screens technical note 73 of March 2011 did you read that guidance at the time of working on the ground floor project I do not recall seeing
01:09:28 floor project I do not recall seeing that and I'm not would that have been on the platform it doesn't appear to have been on the platform when when you wrote the NBS specification they're referring to this other CW CT standard which is
01:09:41 to this other CW CT standard which is from September 2008 but I wanted to know whether you were aware of other CW CT guidance mr. chairman I'm just going to
01:09:58 guidance mr. chairman I'm just going to finish this topic if that's okay few pages can we just look at your witness statement paragraph three point three point one three four three point one
01:10:10 point one three four three point one this is a se a triple zero one four two seven three at page one four seen
01:10:27 so looking at three 43.1 you say the specialist cladding subcontractor would hold responsibility for all aspects of their system and the successful contractor had the discretion to suggest
01:10:39 contractor had the discretion to suggest alternative products and materials do you agree that that's not entirely accurate given what we've just looked at because the discretion of the contractor was only to suggest similar or equal
01:10:51 was only to suggest similar or equal products to the ones that you'd identified in the spec under the contracts the the requests to change
01:11:12 products can't be unreasonably withheld so an agreement to change a product can't be unreasonably withheld if it's
01:11:23 can't be unreasonably withheld if it's equal whereas a contractor has freedom to propose anything as I understand it and if the client agrees that's yes I
01:11:36 and if the client agrees that's yes I follow that so I mean if Ryden suggested something completely different and provided the client was signed up to it I can see that might've been a change but I think you just agree with me that
01:11:47 but I think you just agree with me that in terms of what this NBS specification is envisaging it's similar or equal to the products that you've identified do you see that
01:12:02 can we now turn to some statements that ride and have made so if we can go to our yd triple zero nine four two three six this is a witness statement provided
01:12:13 six this is a witness statement provided to the inquiry on behalf of ridin right in the company can we look at page 37 sorry
01:12:22 sorry ry d triple zero nine four two three six
01:12:31 so this is the witness statement on behalf of ride and maintenance limited and if we can go within that to page 37
01:12:40 and what I'd like you to read you see at the bottom of that page may need to zoom in I'd like you to read under the heading the NBS specifications to
01:12:51 heading the NBS specifications to employers requirements we're detailed and prescriptive I'd like to read paragraph 75 and then over into 76 can you just read those to yourself we have
01:13:04 you just read those to yourself we have to scroll the page over
01:13:14 sorry I missed it
01:13:21 [Music]
01:13:28 so that's problem of the page and top of the page is that okay yeah and then can you read 76 as well
01:13:58 okay so I want to ask you about the statements that are made there do you agree that the NBS specification was unusual in that it was more detailed and
01:14:09 unusual in that it was more detailed and prescriptive than would normally be expected for us no not in your experience do you agree that the NBS specification can be described as highly
01:14:22 specification can be described as highly prescriptive I didn't think it was unusually prescriptive or I'm not entirely prescriptive now so if you go on and look at paragraph 77 on that same
01:14:34 on and look at paragraph 77 on that same page Ryden there say this meant that the design concept including the choice and combination of materials was in practical terms established by the time of the tender process with the detailed
01:14:45 of the tender process with the detailed design to be developed as is set out below tenders had to provide a tender which would comply strictly with the NBS specification employers requirements which ride and maintenance limited
01:14:56 which ride and maintenance limited confirmed that it had done do you see that there yes do you agree that in practical terms G do II had established the design concept by the time of the tender well they've said including
01:15:13 tender well they've said including choice and combination of materials yes I would use concept more loose term
01:15:25 do you agree that the materials were selected yes can we now go to pages 49
01:15:37 selected yes can we now go to pages 49 to 50 within this ride and statement and look at paragraph 99
01:15:51 so if you can read that to yourself so read 99 okay
01:16:17 okay do you agree there with the statement by Ryden that the specified products and systems would have had to have been considered for planning approval and compliance with amongst other things the building regulations by
01:16:29 other things the building regulations by the design team yes
01:16:42 now I think you accepted earlier that studio II itself hadn't done a compliance check of the materials is that correct correct yeah why is there no red flag or clear caveat
01:16:56 why is there no red flag or clear caveat within the NBS specification making clear that the products and the designs specified therein had not been checked for compliance with the building regulations well if we had reason to put
01:17:12 regulations well if we had reason to put a flag in I think there be reason not to specify them we have no knowledge of any concerns I see so are you saying that the reason you didn't put a red flag or
01:17:24 the reason you didn't put a red flag or clear I think a red flag is almost worse we didn't know there was any concerns regarding their compliance so you assume they were compliant when you put them in
01:17:36 they were compliant when you put them in the NBS bag my statement goes into some detail as to why we believe them to be compliant yes and we'll look at that
01:17:47 compliant yes and we'll look at that when it comes to particular product but I'm just looking at the the general proposition here and you hadn't yourselves checked for compliance had
01:17:58 yourselves checked for compliance had you we had referred but I don't well referred that we we had asked for advice
01:18:09 referred that we we had asked for advice but it wasn't for us as it were
01:18:16 satisfy ourselves on the reading of the regulations that it was compliant because I don't think that was within our ability okay mr. Chairman I think
01:18:28 our ability okay mr. Chairman I think that we're gonna have a short break now mr. Simms so we right to go to the usher and we'll resume and have us reason for
01:18:46 and we'll resume and have us reason for stream please
01:30:14 yes could we have mr. CERN's back please thank you
01:30:30 right yes yes respect thank you yes so I'm now going to turn to a different topic and I see some questions about studio EES involvement with X over on the project okay yeah and is it right
01:30:43 the project okay yeah and is it right that X over was the specialist fire consultant involved with the calc project and was subcontracted by Studio e itself on that project yes what I want
01:30:58 e itself on that project yes what I want to do first up is to bring up some minutes from a client meeting on the 28th of March 2012 this is a ma x 7 zeros 8 and if we so we see that this is
01:31:14 zeros 8 and if we so we see that this is a notes of a meeting in Greenville town refurbishment minutes of a client meeting and if we can go on page 2 under item 4 point naught headed additional
01:31:27 item 4 point naught headed additional consultants studio we are said to have noted this is in the last second to last item there can you see it says they're fine
01:31:36 fine safety advice may be required yes and then studio et yes and was that your suggestion that fire safety advice may be required yes
01:31:51 what was in your mind at that stage when you said fire safety advice may be required which aspects of the project were calling out in your view for fire
01:32:02 were calling out in your view for fire safety advice
01:32:10 I think a fire safety is fire safety at that point I wasn't mister I don't think I was restricting it although I was obviously thinking of our initial phases of looking at the changes so it just was
01:32:30 of looking at the changes so it just was clear on reflection after the meeting that the consultants would need to include a fire consultant that's I think as far as I went I may have discussed it
01:32:41 as far as I went I may have discussed it with somebody but I thought it was worth putting this minute into to be sure to pick it up later yep can we then go to SCA for zeros
01:32:53 yep can we then go to SCA for zeros three nine five seven if we can blow that up so this appears to be from what
01:33:05 that up so this appears to be from what we can tell studio is first contact with X over in respect of the Graham thought our project it's dated the 10th of April 2012 and we can see mr. Keefer of studio
01:33:18 2012 and we can see mr. Keefer of studio e emails mr. Lee and mr. Ashton with a number of drawings and asking for you see it three paragraphs down he said
01:33:29 see it three paragraphs down he said we'd like to ask you to provide us with your initial assessment regarding fire escape strategies for the above lay out proposals do you see that yes and you
01:33:40 proposals do you see that yes and you are cc'd on to this email I think we can see that at the top is that correct yes and did your colleagues at studio econ tactics over regarding the provision of
01:33:51 tactics over regarding the provision of this advice at your behest I can't recall what happened I think I would have made the initial contact but I do
01:34:04 have made the initial contact but I do not recall so thereafter xover attend the first design team meeting on the 19th of April 2012 for your notes that for the
01:34:16 2012 for your notes that for the transcript the minutes of that are at TM o 1 triple 0 1 1 4 3 we don't need to go to those but then what happens is you contact mr. Ashton FX over on the 24th
01:34:28 contact mr. Ashton FX over on the 24th of April 2012 can we bring that email up that's at se a 4 zeros 405 3
01:34:44 and can you just take a second to just familiarize yourself with that email yeah it's you too Terry Ashton on the 24th of April yes yes thank you and say
01:35:01 24th of April yes yes thank you and say in the second paragraph there we have thus far had no commitment in writing from you to a fire strategy on either the calc leisure center Academy Academy
01:35:13 the calc leisure center Academy Academy residential development or the Granville Tower upgrade we have had no concrete input by way of drawing markups or draft reports to support the developing designs this is becoming critical for us
01:35:26 designs this is becoming critical for us with three weeks to go before we submit the stage D report for calc with much of the work undertaken so far by the whole team relying on the fire safety advice we've received at meetings we fear that
01:35:39 we've received at meetings we fear that the designs have not had adequate scrutiny and that we are at considerable risk at this late stage of late changes abortive work and possible cost implications to the project you see that
01:35:52 implications to the project you see that paragraph there yes and then I see some questions in a moment but in the third paragraph you state if you are unable to reassure us that you are committed to the two projects by the end of this week
01:36:03 the two projects by the end of this week both agreeing contract terms and providing detailed advice we will regard this as a renunciation of the Commission and be forced to look elsewhere for fire safety advice do you see that so do we
01:36:16 safety advice do you see that so do we take it from that email that X overs performance on the CAO project was of concern to you at this stage III wasn't involved on the cut project and I I must
01:36:27 involved on the cut project and I I must have been relating other's concerns I said I think my recollection is that
01:36:39 I said I think my recollection is that the the agreement was cause for concern and that's I think what lay behind this female we see it's about the the calc
01:36:52 female we see it's about the the calc ledger Center project in particular but they also talk about the Granville Tower upgrade were you concerned about their lack of input I I didn't mention it and
01:37:03 lack of input I I didn't mention it and I think the timing doesn't suggest I would have been but I heard the subject
01:37:11 rather the attachments the appointment I think was our primary concern at that point I said as I recall I appreciate it does refer to coke but I was not as
01:37:24 does refer to coke but I was not as closely involved on coke was it your view that Xavier had not provided adequate scrutiny of studio E's designs oh no I wasn't my view that was
01:37:36 designs oh no I wasn't my view that was expressing a concern held by the team on on coke so was it the studio eview on the cow project that they haven't provided adequate scrutiny of studio E's designs it was a concern
01:37:49 of studio E's designs it was a concern that they hadn't provided adequate scrutiny and was there a concern that oral advice in meetings had been given but with little or anything provided on paper that was the concern yes we once I
01:38:05 paper that was the concern yes we once I assume it had all been verbal or at least we would we wanted something more concrete
01:38:14 concrete in short is it right that there had been no concrete input from xover on the cult project at that stage I'm sorry I'm calc
01:38:26 project at that stage I'm sorry I'm calc yes I'm not sure I wasn't involved so is your position that all you're doing here is relaying concerns by your colleagues I recall that the two
01:38:37 colleagues I recall that the two agreements we're becoming critical and I was tasked to follow it up with X over I may I may have been involved in preparing the sub
01:38:48 have been involved in preparing the sub consultant agreement as well do you know why x over were failing to give that the scrutiny and the advice on the cow projects that your colleagues were
01:38:59 projects that your colleagues were requiring did you ever have any discussions with mr. Ashton or anyone else at xover regarding resourcing issues at this time I may have done but
01:39:17 issues at this time I may have done but I don't recall usually you would before you send an email back that you would speak to someone so I assume I did speak
01:39:29 speak to someone so I assume I did speak to someone do you have a recollection
01:39:34 against the background of this dissatisfaction with X overs work on the cat project can you explain why you sought to obtain their input as the
01:39:45 sought to obtain their input as the specialist fire consultant on the ground full project we understood X over to be
01:39:56 full project we understood X over to be competent and large and experienced consultant on fire advice and we would
01:40:07 consultant on fire advice and we would rather have maintained continuity with them on both both sites did X overdue you anything specific to allay the concerns such that you were content to
01:40:20 concerns such that you were content to continue with their appointment on the ground floor tower project I can't recall the exact sequence of what followed that i underst we they did
01:40:35 followed that i underst we they did satisfy us and you said earlier that somebody gave you from the calc team gave you information about X Ava's performance that you were relaying can you remember
01:40:46 that you were relaying can you remember who that was I can't remember who that was it would like the team as we've
01:40:58 was it would like the team as we've discussed was was led by Andre and Neil could it be mr. Crawford that can we now turn to EXO five zeros four seven four
01:41:12 turn to EXO five zeros four seven four this is your email to mr. Ashton dated the 3rd of May 2012 if we can blow that up a little great so this is your email
01:41:25 up a little great so this is your email to him requesting a fee proposal we can see that in your email the application for the funding goes before the cabinet
01:41:36 for the funding goes before the cabinet this evening with every likelihood that the six million asked for will be agreed and then in the next paragraph you say I anticipate Mark Anderson from the TM air our client to quickly follow up with
01:41:48 our client to quickly follow up with confirmation as to the scope of the project but the principles are probably going to be based on the attached sketch and then you've set out in numbered paragraphs what the refurbishment would
01:42:00 paragraphs what the refurbishment would comprise do you see that yeah and these include we've got new flats item one on the vacant office level and then we can
01:42:12 the vacant office level and then we can see over cladding can't we at her for yeah and then five we've got new boilers to all flats and six we configured entrance circulation area to the tower
01:42:23 entrance circulation area to the tower yeah so is it right that from this early stage you knew that x overs advice in respect of the over cladding would be required
01:42:37 I was merely giving you an overview of the project so you hadn't are you saying you hadn't thought at this stage whether
01:42:48 you hadn't thought at this stage whether each of these elements would be something that it's over would be to deal with in a general sense yes but not
01:43:02 deal with in a general sense yes but not in a specific sense clear I was giving him a description of the project so he understood the scope you say at the end there can you see underneath political
01:43:14 there can you see underneath political point six that you say please could I have your fee proposal for this based on the above and the attached information do you see that yes please break this down into stages cdef and beyond yes yes
01:43:28 down into stages cdef and beyond yes yes so is it right that the scope of X overs work that you wanted them to quote four would be in relation to each of these six items I think we would want them to
01:43:39 six items I think we would want them to cover anything and everything I I wouldn't approach someone with a limited scope yes so you wanted their fee
01:43:51 scope yes so you wanted their fee proposal to include item four over cladding is that correct if required yes yes what does that mean if required
01:44:07 but I
01:44:18 it wasn't a shopping list I was I was describing the project okay can we turn now to x over speed proposal itself that they came back with this is
01:44:30 itself that they came back with this is at t mo one triple zero three eight eight five
01:44:47 and we can see from this it's so it's x over Warrington fire there on the right-hand side to you mr. B students dated and this is data the 9th of May 2012 do you see that yeah and then it on
01:45:01 2012 do you see that yeah and then it on page 1 at the bottom of page one we see they've set out their company profile do you see that yes so they're talking about the they've been working in the field of fire strategy since 1965 etc
01:45:13 field of fire strategy since 1965 etc and they've given you indications of awards that they've won can we then go to the proposed scope of work on page 2
01:45:25 if we could look at the top of that page so we can see there that they're saying the planned fire safety work will be undertaking using the relevant design
01:45:36 undertaking using the relevant design codes and will facilitate the progression of the design from Reba stage C to F when they say using the relevant design codes what do you understand them to mean by that I'm not
01:45:54 understand them to mean by that I'm not sure exactly what they means but I assume they mean documents and anything else yeah may be applicable yeah and then in the second paragraph of that it
01:46:06 then in the second paragraph of that it states the aim of the fire safety work would be to ensure a high standard of fire and life safety for the occupants of the building whilst highlighting any areas of the building's design that may
01:46:17 areas of the building's design that may present an approvals risk do you see that yes and then can we look at what's Ted about RIBA stage C further down on this page and if we look at those
01:46:31 this page and if we look at those bullets under stage C we can see that it will provide we see in the second sentence at the top of RIBA stage C this
01:46:43 sentence at the top of RIBA stage C this will work will provide a level of confidence with regards to the fire safety design and fire safety approvals risk do you see that yes and then they say immediately after the work would
01:46:54 say immediately after the work would focus on issues that would either have an impact effect on a future application under the Building Regulations 2010 or would have a significant cost impact do you see that yes and it would include
01:47:06 do you see that yes and it would include they say a preliminary fire strategy report would be produced that's in the second paragraph yeah do you see that there which would summarize which
01:47:18 there which would summarize which summarize the main fire safety issues for the project yes you see that and they also say that their work at this
01:47:29 they also say that their work at this stage would involve attending we've got relevant attending relevant design team meetings in the first bullet do you see that there yeah and we also see
01:47:40 that there yeah and we also see providing in that same bullet of providing appropriate fire safety guidance to other members of the design team to assist the proposed development you see that yeah and they say it would
01:47:53 you see that yeah and they say it would include the creation of an outline faster a strategy document this is a third bullet to assist in early design development yeah and also last bullet
01:48:05 development yeah and also last bullet provision of an updated revision of the outline fire safety strategy report to reflect any agreed changes to the strategy during early design development do you see that yes now as we've looked
01:48:17 do you see that yes now as we've looked before RIBA stage C is the state of a concept design is that right yes did you ever consider whether at stage C xover would be identifying the relevant
01:48:28 would be identifying the relevant statutory controls and requirements for you did you take that to be implicit in what they would be doing yes was it of any concern to you that that was not
01:48:40 any concern to you that that was not expressly identified as part of this fee proposal
01:48:48 why not they've said that the work would
01:48:59 why not they've said that the work would review all relevant codes oh and I given their experience I assumed that would Carl what you're asking I see
01:49:10 Carl what you're asking I see yep the reference that we looked at in the first paragraph in the third sentence of the first paragraph - focusing on issues that would either have an effect on a future application
01:49:22 have an effect on a future application under the building regulations or would have a significant cost impact did this suggest to you when you were reading it a focus on commercial aspects
01:49:39 don't think I read it that closely at the time no can you explain why there's no reference to the CDM regulations in this fee proposal letter no did you ever
01:49:57 this fee proposal letter no did you ever query that with X over
01:50:07 obviously far as very much a safety issue but it I wouldn't normally associate them did you recognize that xover would be preparing or modifying
01:50:18 xover would be preparing or modifying designs based on their work on the fire strategy in a way which would make them designers under the CDM regulations can
01:50:35 designers under the CDM regulations can we look then at what said rebus stage D and E the second half of that page yes so it's stated there that the work at stages D and E would involve in the
01:50:47 stages D and E would involve in the first paragraph they say the work undertaken by xover during stage C would be further developed during the approval stage of the project and then they say
01:50:59 stage of the project and then they say the work would ultimately involve the creation of a detailed fire strategy for the proposed development which will be written in line with the requirements of the Building Regulations do you see that
01:51:10 the Building Regulations do you see that in the first paragraph yeah and they also say in the next sentence the fire safety design will be documented in a fire strategy report do you see that yes
01:51:23 fire strategy report do you see that yes and then in the third paragraph the fire safety strategy would be developed to comply with the relevant statutory requirements which would primarily be the building meggs2010 the rro the
01:51:36 the building meggs2010 the rro the regulator reform order 2005 in the London building acts 1939 do you see that yeah and they've also said they've that this fire safety strategy will consider the following items can you
01:51:47 consider the following items can you look at the fourth bullet point there it says determination of any external fire spread issues that there may be and the impact this may have on the architectural design do you see that yes
01:51:59 architectural design do you see that yes and in the fifth bullet it also says recommendations of complementation and structural fire protection standards do you see that yes and then if we go to
01:52:10 you see that yes and then if we go to the top of page three they say xover would attend in the first bullet attend relevant design team meetings that's under the scope of work for this stage
01:52:21 under the scope of work for this stage would include attending relevant design team meetings and provide the appropriate fire safety guidance to other members of the design team to assist the proposed development do you see that
01:52:31 see that yeah now it's right isn't it the reba stage d is the design development stage and stage II is the technical design stage yes so as we can see from the
01:52:45 stage yes so as we can see from the first paragraph under that heading if we go back one page it's talking about a in that first paragraph a detailed fire
01:52:56 that first paragraph a detailed fire strategy for the proposed refurbishment you see that did you have any view at that stage as to what a detailed fire strategy would include
01:53:11 [Music]
01:53:21 we obviously worked with fire consultants before so we knew it would be a document number of pages discussing the requirements did you form a view as
01:53:32 the requirements did you form a view as to how this detailed fire strategy would be different from the preliminary fire strategy report at stage C I expected it to be an update and to reflect the
01:53:47 to be an update and to reflect the increased detail on the drawings and the greater clarity on the design because it's stage C there often isn't much clarity on the layouts so I would expect
01:54:02 clarity on the layouts so I would expect it to be more detailed more more definitive yep and it's right isn't it that a detailed fire strategy at the end of stage II was required to provide sufficient information to enable the
01:54:14 sufficient information to enable the preparation of technical designs and specifications for tenderers yes now there's no provision in this stage de
01:54:27 there's no provision in this stage de bit of the proposal for reviewing the design documentation is there no do you
01:54:38 design documentation is there no do you agree that review by a competent fire safety engineer enhances the chances that the building design will meet the functional requirements of the Building Regulations yes and would you agree that
01:54:52 Regulations yes and would you agree that the reverse is the case I if there's no review of the design documentation by a competent fire engineer it increases the chances that the design won't meet the functional requirements of the building regulations yes would you agree that
01:55:06 regulations yes would you agree that this was a serious omission on X overs part in putting together this fee proposal I think it's mentioned determining determination of any
01:55:18 determining determination of any external fire spread issues as to whether that should be spelt out as a detail review of documentation out did this give you
01:55:33 of documentation out did this give you any cause for concern at the time that a a review of the detailed design was not the design documentation was not provided for at this stage in respective
01:55:49 provided for at this stage in respective I'm expecting any part of the project did you do you have any concerns about the scope of work at this stage that was being proposed no and it's also stated
01:56:05 being proposed no and it's also stated on page T the second paragraph under stage D and E that the fire safety design would be documented to the fire strategy report and this document would ultimately ultimately be submitted to
01:56:16 ultimately ultimately be submitted to the Building Control Authority in order to achieve regulatory approval so do you agree that it was clearly envisaged that the document that Xavier produced at state D stroke II would be submitted to
01:56:29 state D stroke II would be submitted to the Building Control to get their approval on the project yes I agree and then if we can move on to the proposal for RIBA state F on page 3 so this is
01:56:45 for RIBA state F on page 3 so this is the state for production information to enable tenders to be obtained and if we look at stage F we can see that they've
01:56:56 look at stage F we can see that they've said on the first bullet and page 3 that again they'll attend relevant fire safety meetings with the design team and the appointed contractor to clarify the fire safety strategies used throughout
01:57:08 fire safety strategies used throughout the development do you see that yes and then in the second bullet they've put troubleshooting strategic fire safety issues that are identified by the contractors do you see that yes what
01:57:19 contractors do you see that yes what sort of assistance did you envisage xover would provide to the design team and the appointed contractor at this stage
01:57:30 it's the stage stager forward yeah what did you what input did you envisage
01:57:41 did you what input did you envisage xover will be having at stage F based on this fee proposal I expected it would be the query consult available for
01:57:54 the query consult available for consultation to answer any questions as in when required yeah but by the team was the
01:58:08 required yeah but by the team was the fee proposal in line with your previous experience of using fire safety engineers I'm not sure I didn't compare what previous experience did you have of
01:58:20 what previous experience did you have of working with fire safety engineers on projects
01:58:31 and the I think all the large schools we were involved in some of which I was not
01:58:43 were involved in some of which I was not full-time or involved in in significant detail but they would have all had fire
01:58:54 detail but they would have all had fire consultants ones I'm thinking of if I can name them they're going back to the beginning of my time as Chile that Berman's the Academy yeah Academy the
01:59:06 Berman's the Academy yeah Academy the skinners Academy he's all had fire strategies safety strategies and was that involving Xavier as well other fire consultants I permanently may have
01:59:18 consultants I permanently may have involved ex-owner I'm not sure okay now and if we can turn up now se a four zeros for two for two
01:59:34 at the very bottom of this first page is the email from Margaret Renner I think is an administrative member of the admin staff index over to you with the fee
01:59:46 staff index over to you with the fee proposal if you go over onto the top be safe please find attached Terry Ashton's fee proposal for the provision of fire engineering consultancy services on the above project do you see that yes sent
01:59:58 above project do you see that yes sent by email only hope it meets your requirements and if we move up back onto page one at the top of page one we can see your response on the 21st of May
02:00:10 see your response on the 21st of May this is 11 days later at 953 you say thank you for your feedback see may love the 4th of May the ground-floor project
02:00:21 the 4th of May the ground-floor project is proceeding and we need your stage C input to establish the feasibility of the proposals attached we have a meeting tomorrow which is short notice but it would be useful for one of you to be there to provide some feedback do you
02:00:33 there to provide some feedback do you see that yeah did you ever provide x over with any substantive response to the fee proposal
02:00:42 any comments on the fee proposal any I can't recall doing so I don't think there's any record did you yourself
02:00:53 there's any record did you yourself undertake any kind of analysis of the repeat fee proposal about what it included what it might not have included whether that was going to be sufficient for the requirements on the project
02:01:05 obviously don't have a record of you I know I've passed it straight on to the client but I believe I would have looked
02:01:16 client but I believe I would have looked at it yeah leads to covered was more or less than I thought I was expecting I wouldn't have scrutinize it as you are did you think it was someone
02:01:30 as you are did you think it was someone else's job to comment on the fee proposal you say you for did it to the client did he think that somebody else ought to comment on it no I I think the
02:01:41 ought to comment on it no I I think the client would be the client we wouldn't be appointing xover as a sub consultant I was passing it on to the client we can
02:01:54 I was passing it on to the client we can see that you forwarded the fee proposal to Artie Leah Apple yards and you did that on the 11th of June can we just quickly look at that that's se a four zeroes for five for two
02:02:17 and we can see there Allen and we see in the second paragraph I'm attaching the information we received from X over the far specialist I've not yet told them
02:02:29 far specialist I've not yet told them that they'll be working direct to the TM oh do you see that yeah so that's the fee proposal that goes on the 11th of June that that's over a month after the fee proposals been received on the 9th of May do you remember why there might
02:02:42 of May do you remember why there might have been a delay can you remind can you
02:02:53 have been a delay can you remind can you explain why it was that Studio II that you sought and received the fee proposal rather than RT Lea as employers agent and CDM coordinator I think I had agreed
02:03:07 and CDM coordinator I think I had agreed to do it or I had been asked to do it I mean because we had suggested X over who we were working with on count who asked
02:03:19 we were working with on count who asked you to do it do you recall I don't record her I would have been the client I think yeah can we now look at se a for zeros for 7:08
02:03:40 this is an email from mr. Dawson of Apple yards then Artie Lea - you dated the 18th of June 2012 in response to you forwarding X overs fee proposal and we
02:03:53 forwarding X overs fee proposal and we can see in that short email that he queries he says is there a particular urgency to get this one formalized do you see that yeah can you recall whether
02:04:05 you see that yeah can you recall whether you responded to that email I obviously can't recall in detail so long ago but I
02:04:17 can't recall in detail so long ago but I live I would have assumed that I would have perhaps by call rather than if you had responded wouldn't the answer have been emphatically yes given that there was no fire strategy for the
02:04:28 was no fire strategy for the refurbishment project at that time yes yes but I
02:04:44 I cannot remember the exact circumstances of this conversation but I do not recall them being held up by the
02:04:55 do not recall them being held up by the agreement if we can can we just look at your witness statement for a moment that's SCA three zeros one for 273 at page 37 and you say at paragraph 78 and
02:05:14 page 37 and you say at paragraph 78 and if we go into page 38 at the very end of that paragraph you're dealing with x over five lines up there's a sentence
02:05:25 over five lines up there's a sentence beginning you say I understand because I was copied into an email that six months later x over was still not sure whether this fee proposal had been accepted by Casey TMO although they had been working
02:05:37 Casey TMO although they had been working on the project since May 2012 and James Lee xover may have visited site on the 29th of May 2012 do you see that yes can
02:05:50 29th of May 2012 do you see that yes can we turn in the context of that to se a six zeroes 74 and look at the second
02:06:02 six zeroes 74 and look at the second email in the chain down at the bottom of page one so this is an email from Alan Dawson back to you on the 18th of July
02:06:13 Dawson back to you on the 18th of July 2012 and he says in the first paragraph I just wanted to drop you a short note to confirm that the client has now confirmed your proposed fee is approved to which end we would now ask that you
02:06:26 to which end we would now ask that you engage with Bruce at studio E in respect of the above project forthwith do you see that sorry it's an email from Alan Dawson - Terry Ashton copying you in do you see that so mr. Dawson is telling
02:06:38 you see that so mr. Dawson is telling mr. Ashton that the fees are approved you see that do you accept that in practice studio II had taken on the responsibility of liaison with X over
02:06:49 responsibility of liaison with X over and for curing the fire strategy
02:06:56 sorry taken on yes bye-bye seeking a fee proposal from them that you'd effectively taken on responsibility of liaison with xover and
02:07:08 responsibility of liaison with xover and procuring the fire strategy do you accept that the day-to-day liaison about it was with you studio II given that we
02:07:23 it was with you studio II given that we weren't appointing xover directly I think that the way you've expressed it takes it a bit far but I do agree that we were the ones liaison as lead
02:07:34 we were the ones liaison as lead designer most directly with effects oh yeah did you understand that the TMO and the rest of the design team were relying on Studio II to ensure that the scope of
02:07:47 on Studio II to ensure that the scope of X overs work was undertaken
02:07:57 yes I think well I think all consultants which would be expected to comment on
02:08:11 which would be expected to comment on any deficiencies that they received or could see so certainly as I mentioned studiously designer were most regularly regularly in contact with X over okay
02:08:27 regularly in contact with X over okay can we go back to se a for zeros for two for two and your email to mr. Ashton of the 21st of May 2012 and we can see
02:08:40 the 21st of May 2012 and we can see there in the first paragraph that you asked mr. Ashton for stage C input do you see that yes to establish the feasibility of the proposals can you
02:08:52 feasibility of the proposals can you just be clear what you meant by stage D input to establish the feasibility of the proposals
02:09:10 I can't I can't record this was before after you they sent their quote I think it's before I think it's after save the doctor their quote was the 9th of May
02:09:23 doctor their quote was the 9th of May 2012 so I I guess I'm I'm chasing teri for the first the first input from them
02:09:36 for the first the first input from them on the drawings yes were you anticipating referring to or using x overs stage the input in your own stage
02:09:47 overs stage the input in your own stage see report
02:09:56 I think I'm IX poq tation in paraná report is that you reach a point with
02:10:07 report is that you reach a point with the consultants where you youth
02:10:16 you have a design proposal that you think reaches stage C and each consultant prepares his information on that basis in the case of fire I would expect that to be a much closer
02:10:28 expect that to be a much closer integration between the stage C input and and the architectural input the architectural drawings if that makes sense so when you say stages the input I
02:10:39 sense so when you say stages the input I would expect the stages the input in terms of fire to be integrated and does that mean integrated in your own stage C report that you would put it into a puppet or so as I integrated into the
02:10:51 puppet or so as I integrated into the design into the design work at stage yes yes which at which I wouldn't necessarily expect of other consultants yes can we look at mr. Ashton's response to this request for stage t input if we
02:11:05 to this request for stage t input if we turn to se a six zeros 20
02:11:16 so this is mr. Ashton's response the following day on the 22nd of May can you just read that are you familiar with this have you looked at it recently no I have a read of this so Terry Ashton
02:11:30 no I have a read of this so Terry Ashton is providing you with his initial comments on your proposals you see that sorry however have a read
02:12:06 it's quite difficult to interpret what he's discussing there yes let's see what you say about it because that's
02:12:17 you say about it because that's consistent with what you said contemporaneously if we now look at EXO five zero six eight five
02:12:32 and we I want to look at the second email on that page at the bottom second half of that page you reply to mr. Ashton on the 22nd of May and you say thank you but I don't follow I obviously
02:12:46 thank you but I don't follow I obviously know the building quite well now the attached pictures might help and then you say mark Anderson would like to hold a design team meeting for Thursday I do not think it's essential you're there
02:12:57 not think it's essential you're there but I think it's important we get a more detailed appraisal of any issues do you see that yeah and then you say a site visit is probably essential yeah so it's
02:13:11 visit is probably essential yeah so it's clear isn't it I think from your response this you're not really following the advice he's given can you explain why what was in your mind
02:13:27 what was in my mind remember I think if you put the drawings that I had sent him and his comments side-by-side you could
02:13:40 and his comments side-by-side you could possibly go through each point but it is it is quite tricky difficult to follow yeah when you asked for stage C input is that that kind of thing you had expected
02:13:52 that that kind of thing you had expected to receive from x over no I would expect more than that that was just his off-the-cuff input yeah and is that why
02:14:05 off-the-cuff input yeah and is that why you've said in this Seema I think it's important we get a more detailed appraisal of any issues do you see that yes and then if we can move to the top of the chain that page one we see a
02:14:19 of the chain that page one we see a response from mr. Ashton and he says Bruce I can't look at the building this week due to other commitments and I'm afraid that on their own the photos don't help it would be better to visit the building before giving you the
02:14:31 the building before giving you the necessary advice do you see that yeah do you know whether mr. Ashton ever did undertake a site visit to Grenville tower at any stage of the project I
02:14:42 tower at any stage of the project I don't you don't know you don't I think I
02:14:53 don't you don't know you don't I think I think he did but I'd have to check I think there was a meeting which I didn't attend on site with ledbetter week I think he and Adrian attended right so
02:15:07 think he and Adrian attended right so it's effectively site yep was that in November 2012 kind of to discuss building control issues we may come to that later it could be
02:15:21 that later it could be we know that mr. Li of X / James Lee of X / undertook a site visit on the 29th of May 2012 and then we know that on the
02:15:36 of May 2012 and then we know that on the 30th of May 2012 EXO / provided some marked up drawings of the plans that you'd sent previously can we just look at these these are se a 4 zeros 4 3 2 4
02:15:52 now we don't need to spend too long on these but if we just go through them there's 4 pages if we just flick through them what I want you to confirm is that
02:16:08 them what I want you to confirm is that there's no commentary provided here and respect in respect to the proposal to over clad the building is there no now
02:16:21 over clad the building is there no now given your concerns about X overs performance in respect to the calc project and the concerns you'd raised with them about their commitment on the 24th of April why did you not insist on
02:16:33 24th of April why did you not insist on more detailed advice at this stage this was a very early stage and this wasn't short of what I might have expected so
02:16:47 short of what I might have expected so you weren't concerned about the level of input you're getting from x over at this stage
02:16:56 No so then moving forward there's a design team meeting on the 25th of June and at that time I think just for the transcript it's se a four zeros for 864
02:17:08 transcript it's se a four zeros for 864 it was noted that there was no existing fire strategy for the current building and that xover would need to prepare one as part of the upgrade works and it said
02:17:19 as part of the upgrade works and it said studio he were to chase six over do you recall that happening I think I did yeah if we can turn to se a four zeros four eight six zero we can see in an email
02:17:31 eight six zero we can see in an email from you to James Lee let's just bring that up sorry SCA four zeros four eight six zero this is an email from you to James lead a to the third of July but
02:17:42 James lead a to the third of July but you chase x over for the existing fire safety strategy at this point do you see that yes are you any closer to prevent pairing of our strategy foreground full
02:17:53 pairing of our strategy foreground full Tower as existing proposal attached and you'd had a separate proposal hadn't you in relation to a fire strategy for the existing building yes but there's no
02:18:06 existing building yes but there's no additional demand in this email for progress in relation to the fire strategy for the refurbishment why did you not ask for an update on that given there been no progress on that by this
02:18:17 there been no progress on that by this stage further I can't remember the circumstances can we turn to se a four zeros five to five for these are the
02:18:31 zeros five to five for these are the minutes of the project meeting on the 8th 18th of July 2012 and if you look at the final item item on page four under
02:18:44 the final item item on page four under previous actions can you see there there's a roundup of previous actions and it states at the end there is no existing fire strategy for the building x over to proceed do you see that yeah
02:18:57 x over to proceed do you see that yeah so that action hadn't changed from the previous meeting do you accept given the criticality of the fire strategy to the design of the refurbishment that higher priority
02:19:10 refurbishment that higher priority should have been given to that at this stage since July 2012
02:19:27 we have given it a high priority it's not just it's not the bottom of the list out of any sequence but that's about the existing fire strategy for the building
02:19:38 existing fire strategy for the building what about the refurbishment fire strategy I I think the one needed to
02:19:49 strategy I I think the one needed to follow the other maybe I I don't recall why I think we were expecting the one to follow the other okay we can see that the day before this meeting and if we go
02:20:02 the day before this meeting and if we go to se a six zeroes 35 follow what I mean I think they needed to do the existing before they could I follow through it so it needed to follow that see yes there needed to be a sequence we see if we go
02:20:17 needed to be a sequence we see if we go se a six zeroes 35 this is an email from mr. James Lee to you dated the 17th of July 2012 and he he makes it clear in
02:20:32 July 2012 and he he makes it clear in this email that he's informing you that I shall be leaving X over at the end of this week after my departure you'll be left in the capable hands of Terry Ashton see seed into this email he will take responsibility for my projects do
02:20:43 take responsibility for my projects do you see that yes so given it had been mr. Lee who had visited the site on the 29th of May and I think you understood did you understand him to have been the
02:20:56 did you understand him to have been the one doing the refurbishment strategy prior to this yes he had been the one to forward those comments
02:21:10 did you consider that this aya mr. Lee's departure might have been the reason for the lack of progress by x over at this point did you take any steps at this
02:21:30 point did you take any steps at this stage to bring mr. Ashton up to speed with the project
02:21:41 I can't obviously call phone calls if it's not in an email I'm got any evidence but I I know we did well I
02:21:52 evidence but I I know we did well I followed up with X over in here after
02:21:59 did you take any steps to satisfy yourself that the handover between mr. Lee and mr. Ashton had been adequate III
02:22:12 Lee and mr. Ashton had been adequate III wasn't I knew Terry had been our first point of contact I wasn't clear on the hierarchy between them but I didn't take
02:22:24 hierarchy between them but I didn't take any steps to crew the handover okay can we go forward a little bit forward in time to se a four zeroes five six zero six
02:22:35 six these are minutes from a design team meeting at the 26th of July 2012 and if we look in the the list of people present we can see three people up that
02:22:46 present we can see three people up that Clare Barker of X / is present do you see that yes and if we go to page 2 of these meeting minutes under architecture
02:22:57 these meeting minutes under architecture at the end of the second paragraph do you see it says their proposal to clad over the columns at ground with in situ high quality concrete finished you see
02:23:08 high quality concrete finished you see that it's the second sentence after sorry after window samples yes and then if you go over onto page three and the
02:23:20 if you go over onto page three and the services
02:23:29 do you see they're in the third item down it says coordination of cladding heating and seasons critical input required from Ledbetter do you see that yes and then under contractor in page
02:23:45 yes and then under contractor in page three at the bottom there we can see in the first paragraph it says Ledbetter have considered option of being able to complete over cladding before an independent removal of existing windows do you see that yes so do you agree that
02:23:59 do you see that yes so do you agree that clearly the proposal to over clad the building was made plain at this meeting which miss Barker attended yes I think that the proposal to overcrowd the
02:24:11 that the proposal to overcrowd the building was was plain to everyone yeah yeah and then it paid for final point under quantity surveyor we see again the
02:24:22 under quantity surveyor we see again the reference there's no existing fire strategy for the building x over to proceed you see that now can we just pick up your witness statement at this point SCA three zeros one four 273 at
02:24:34 point SCA three zeros one four 273 at page 51 and can we look at paragraph 108 in the middle of that page and you say
02:24:48 in the middle of that page and you say there after the meeting on the 30th of July 2012 I emailed Claire bar Kovac saver and thanked her for attending the meeting I said that I didn't expect to need another meeting with xover before submitting to planning and then possibly
02:25:00 submitting to planning and then possibly not again until we entered negotiations with Building Control this email was prompted by my having press 2x over to attend my recollection is that Claire was covering for others and had to
02:25:11 was covering for others and had to travel some distance and had little to contribute for much of the meeting despite this I felt it was important x over were represented given the importance of fire safety do you see
02:25:22 importance of fire safety do you see that yes can you just explain why you didn't think that you needed another meeting with x over before submitting to planning given that the design had not
02:25:33 planning given that the design had not been finalized and x over hadn't produced anything in respective the fire safety strategy for the refurbishment
02:25:44 sorry why we wouldn't need another meeting yeah I I would expect it provided they had understood the site and and existing condition that it would
02:25:57 and and existing condition that it would be possible to do that over the phone or through correspondence by email I see so it's a face-to-face meeting you didn't think was necessary yes can we then turn
02:26:13 think was necessary yes can we then turn to se a for zeros five five nine five at page two
02:26:27 and I want to look at the second email down on page two so on the 30th of July Claire Barker sorry I think it's the
02:26:41 Claire Barker sorry I think it's the it's the email one up from this app on apologies so this is miss Barker responding to you 16:29 yes on the 30th
02:26:55 responding to you 16:29 yes on the 30th of July and I just want to focus on what she says in the third and the fourth paragraphs so she says in terms of allocating resources to this project I'm
02:27:06 allocating resources to this project I'm happy to work on the fire strategy for the existing Granville tower from the Warrington office and will aim to get the report to you before the deadline of the 16th of August then she says July and August are fairly quiet months for
02:27:18 and August are fairly quiet months for the fire engineering division as it's holiday time for a lot of people however this year it seems to have gone a bit mad and we have had a number of large projects come in at once as I mentioned at the meeting my colleague Terry Ashton
02:27:29 at the meeting my colleague Terry Ashton will be back at work on the 6th of August so it may be better if he continued with the project during the rebus state seee stages as I am on annual leave for the last two weeks in August do you see that yes just picking
02:27:46 August do you see that yes just picking up on what we read first in that third paragraph did it concern you that xover were planning to work on the existing fire strategy from the Warrington office and not their London offices can you
02:28:00 and not their London offices can you explain why that wasn't concerning [Music]
02:28:07 I didn't think of face-to-face contact was necessary and I didn't think that I
02:28:19 was necessary and I didn't think that I needed to I didn't think they needed to visit site frequently so I I couldn't see why it couldn't be done elsewhere doesn't have to be London when you say
02:28:30 doesn't have to be London when you say they didn't need to visit site frequently is that because in your view the work of a fire engineer can be done without frequent visits to site I would expect so yeah no they don't it's yeah
02:28:42 expect so yeah no they don't it's yeah it's not it's not that type of assessment and then we've seen in the fourth paragraph she's explained that July and August have in her words gone a
02:28:53 July and August have in her words gone a bit mad and it may be better if mr. Ashton continues we're you concerned at this point that xover might have been having resourcing difficulties in terms of delivering what you were expecting from them this is the email the one
02:29:07 from them this is the email the one below is the email that's referred to in the previous extract from my witness statement yes I said I do recall pressing for attendance and I spoke to a
02:29:21 pressing for attendance and I spoke to a few people it may have been at this point but I think at some point Terry was I feel but I can't remember if this was now earlier let's go to the top of
02:29:35 was now earlier let's go to the top of the chain on page one mr. Toman if I can just finish this line of questioning it really won't take long and two minutes two minutes so there you respond to miss
02:29:46 two minutes so there you respond to miss Park on the 7th of August 2012 and then you say apologies for not responding sooner I've been distracted but I couldn't understand where you got the
02:29:57 couldn't understand where you got the 16th of August deadline this is the planning deadline any impact the fire strategy has on the overall scheme needs to be understood sooner than this ideal we should be submitting a stage C type document to the client for the end of
02:30:09 document to the client for the end of this week or next week and then you say it will be enough to know that you've reviewed the scheme and have no significant comments reservations to make and the strategy for fire safety is achievable and then read this and any
02:30:20 achievable and then read this and any implications on the layout and external works is understood by the rest of the design team do you see that so is it right that at this point you're being
02:30:31 right that at this point you're being clear with x over that you're looking to understand any implications of the external works on the fire safety strategy
02:30:38 strategy yes but external works is usually termed applied to landscape the landscaping yeah I see usually external work
02:30:52 yeah I see usually external work supplies to landscaping would that would what you have said there any implications on the layout and external works understood by the rest of the design team would that include the over cladding if it were to have any
02:31:07 cladding if it were to have any implications yes I think that that's
02:31:12 that's the purpose of a fire strategy to alert us to any concerns I mean my clarification of the external works that
02:31:23 clarification of the external works that I'm not sure Claire would follow them that that's that's a term perhaps of contractors more familiar with no fire consultant but external works usually is
02:31:36 consultant but external works usually is landscaping okay we can pause there
02:31:42 thank you yes all right thank you well you've got a few more questions when mr.
02:31:54 you've got a few more questions when mr. Sainz we're going to call a halt there for today been long enough day I'm short for you and but I am gonna have to ask you to come back there's some more kisses tomorrow or about that but the
02:32:07 kisses tomorrow or about that but the ground to cover right so over the adjournment please remember not discussing or evidence or really anything to do with it there no one else and we'll resume at 10 o'clock tomorrow please all right unite together the
02:32:20 please all right unite together the ocean look after
02:32:24 [Applause]
02:32:31 right ten o'clock tomorrow please thank you