UKAS Evidence - Monday 7th February 2022 (2/2)

Full transcript

00:00:28 would you ask mrs turner to come back in please thank you

00:00:43 all right mr turner you're ready to keep going yes thank you very much yes of course thank you uh mrs turner before the break we were talking about the extra assessment of the bba in july 2017. can we return to

00:00:57 the bba in july 2017. can we return to the assessment report at ucas301077

00:01:11 and again we see that that is the extra visit report and it is july 2017. can we go to page three please

00:01:21 under the executive summary and i want to start at the fourth paragraph down starting with the ukass yes the ucas assessment activity can i

00:01:32 yes the ucas assessment activity can i have that scrolled up a little bit

00:01:36 thank you the ucas assessment activity comprised a review of the records associated with the certification and the recent triannual reviews that have taken place

00:01:47 triannual reviews that have taken place the certification processes were considered alongside the records and the requirements of the current conformity assessment standard iso 17065.

00:01:58 assessment standard iso 17065. during the assessment mandatory findings were raised in connection with the clarity of the certificate and the change in the certificate holder's name in addition recommendations were made in relation to possible improvements to the

00:02:10 relation to possible improvements to the competence management system to improve the time interval between training and authorization as competent the overview information included within the front page of the certificate

00:02:23 the front page of the certificate and knowledge of training and awareness in fire testing so

00:02:29 so do you understand that when an assessment is conducted to the standard of iso 17065 it will involve an assessment of the

00:02:40 it will involve an assessment of the body's processes it's themselves yes and whether they followed those processes as a separate issue

00:02:48 issue yes and when the report says the certification processes were considered alongside the records that's that's really the report acknowledging that the assessor has

00:02:59 acknowledging that the assessor has considered those processes and the robustness of them is that right i would assume so yes

00:03:07 does yukas consider whether that process is robust and fit for purpose yes

00:03:16 yes now we

00:03:19 now we we saw i think a report that the report included the assessment oh sorry that they recess the assessment included a review of the records can we go to page six of this report

00:03:32 can we go to page six of this report please

00:03:34 please and under evaluation 7.4

00:03:39 it says a review was made of the records of the evaluation that had taken place along with the content of the certificate particular focus was made on the fire

00:03:52 particular focus was made on the fire test reports and the evaluation reports completed at the time of the assessment and in the next paragraph the report lists these certificates

00:04:04 report lists these certificates that were considered if we pick it up three lines from the bottom of the paragraph starting with test results have you found that

00:04:16 have you found that i'm sorry yes sorry test results stated in all above reports were consistent with expectations of the testing

00:04:26 testing carried out on the two products and reflect the data for behavior in relation to fire information in section six of zero eight four five one zero certificate that is the brainerbond

00:04:37 certificate that is the brainerbond certificate now that

00:04:40 now that rather reads to me as though the assessors looked at the fire classification reports and made sure that they were correctly stated on the reynabond certificate

00:04:52 stated on the reynabond certificate without obvious error does is that how you read that

00:04:58 um yes yes i think so in his witness statement mr randall confirmed that the assessors didn't consider all of the documents

00:05:10 didn't consider all of the documents in the bba's technical file but rather sampled documents with a focus on the information which directly supported the certificate content in relation to

00:05:21 the certificate content in relation to fire performance is that the approach that you would have expected the assessors to have taken what not not sorry which i'm not sure of the question

00:05:33 sorry which i'm not sure of the question do you mean in relation to not looking at all of the documents yes effectively um

00:05:40 would it be helpful to go to mr randall's statement to see exactly what he says

00:05:46 he says um

00:05:47 um yes yes potentially i i think if the question is

00:05:54 this this was a this was a um

00:05:57 um an extra assessment with a as a purpose of looking at the um the certificates in relation to the products of concern um

00:06:09 um so i think in his statement the reference to not looking at all of the um

00:06:15 um all of the records is his statement i suppose if that if that was the case but there may be with without being familiar with the content of the of what would be in the technical file what would it be in the

00:06:26 technical file what would it be in the file there may be a good reason as to why not all of the documents were looked at certainly and of course the technical file will include an assessment of durability of coating of painting those

00:06:38 durability of coating of painting those sorts of issues but if mr randall and mr patterson were looking at the classification reports with relation as listed there in the document in the

00:06:49 listed there in the document in the document on your screen if they were looking at those reports and making sure that they were recorded accurately on the bba certificate would that be

00:06:58 that be the sort of approach you would expect a necessity

00:07:02 necessity you wouldn't expect i gather for the assessors to look at every page in the technical file on this assessment not necessarily

00:07:13 on this assessment not necessarily can we now turn to the assessment report at page 10.

00:07:21 that's this document page 10.

00:07:27 at the top we see it's an appendix it's the technical assessor's notes and this is dan patterson's notes and he lists the documents that he's seen first there is the

00:07:38 that he's seen first there is the certificate itself then we see the european classification reports and then we see copies of reports

00:07:45 reports from juarez which we understand to be body now known as warrington fire and there follows a whole page of commentary about his examination of the

00:07:56 commentary about his examination of the reina bond certificate including a number of improvement actions can we take from this that the assessment included a detailed review

00:08:07 assessment included a detailed review of the contents of the certificate it would appear to be the case yes can we have this document up side by side with the rayna bond certificate which is arc

00:08:18 arc 50687

00:08:28 so on the left we've got the assessment report and on the right we have the vba certificate can we go to page five of the document on the right the certificate

00:08:39 certificate and we see it clause 6.3

00:08:43 it says as a consequence of section 6.1 and 6.2 the products may be regarded as having a class 0 surface in relation to

00:08:53 to the approved document b now if we look at the third bullet point on the document on the left where the warriors reports are set out

00:09:02 set out you can take it from me that these are explicitly for the version of rayna bond with a fire retardant core there is no evidence on the bba file

00:09:13 there is no evidence on the bba file that the polyethylene cord product ever achieved national class zero now i appreciate your not a cladding expert nor a fire expert but is that the

00:09:24 expert nor a fire expert but is that the sort of detail you would expect an assessor to have considered in an assessment

00:09:35 yeah yes i i think so now if we stay on this page in the assessment report the document on the left but can we go up to page three of the document on the right the reinaborn

00:09:46 the document on the right the reinaborn certificate at the bottom we see a diagram which shows the product in a flat form sometimes we call that the riveted form and one which is folded and we can see

00:09:58 and one which is folded and we can see at the top we see that's called a cassette system now looking at the documents listed in the report on the left you can take it from me that the

00:10:09 you can take it from me that the european

00:10:10 european uh classification reports are specifically and expressly for the product in the flat form not the cassette form and the

00:10:21 and the reports that are known as the warriors reports

00:10:25 reports they're of a test that only tests the material in a flat form as no mention in this diagram of the tech or in the text of the certificate that the fire performance claims are

00:10:36 that the fire performance claims are only for the product in its flat form is that something you might expect to be considered in an assessment

00:10:48 yeah yes i think from the we would expect the certification body to

00:10:54 to to take that information into account

00:10:58 but not just the certification body when ucas comes and inspects sorry inspector not being the credit when ucas comes and assesses

00:11:07 assesses a conformity body isn't ucas looking to see that the bba has

00:11:13 has effectively got that right

00:11:17 um yes for the for the sample of the certificates that they're looking at yeah and when they're looking at this as a sample in the context of a fire and ucas

00:11:28 fire and ucas thinking this might be a product of concern that is the sort of thing that you would expect a technical assessor to look at isn't it yes

00:11:38 yes i want to turn now to competence and

00:11:43 and i think it's been all your evidence already but to confirm this is competence of staff is an aspect that ucas will routinely assess isn't it staff of the staff of the conformity

00:11:54 staff of the staff of the conformity assessment body yes yeah and

00:11:57 and in fact ucas did consider the competence of

00:12:02 of people at the bba in this assessment and i can tell you that ucas considered the competence of valentina amaroso who was the project manager of the rayna bond certificate uh in 2017

00:12:16 bond certificate uh in 2017 and i can also tell you that in the follow-up assessment in august 2017 ucas also analyzed mr pereira como's records and he was had more senior responsibility

00:12:28 responsibility for this certificate in 2017. so ucas has clearly assessed the competence of the people

00:12:37 people in post

00:12:38 in post in 2017

00:12:41 in 2017 but at initial certification in 2008

00:12:46 in 2008 the project manager was hammeh gregorian and his senior was mr brian haynes and in fact we saw him referred to in the assessment plan

00:12:58 assessment plan can i just go to something that carrie randall says about this in his witness statement ucas2011424

00:13:06 18.

00:13:15 paragraph 23.1

00:13:21 it was noted during the extra visit that records of training and authorization for the staff that conducted the original certification were not reviewed during the assessment and should be reviewed at a later date

00:13:33 reviewed at a later date this will be included within the 2022 assessment during the ucas assessment there was a focus on the competence management procedures that were in place at the time of the ucas assessment

00:13:45 time of the ucas assessment and the records relating to staff that were current at the time of the ucas assessment now if ucas was looking at the initial certification work of rayna bond

00:13:58 certification work of rayna bond shouldn't the competency of mr gregorian and mr haynes have been considered at that time

00:14:05 that time um yes i think it's part of part of the looking at the records for for that certificate that that would be potentially included in the assessment do you know why it wasn't on that

00:14:16 do you know why it wasn't on that occasion

00:14:18 occasion no i don't and we saw mr randall said that it will be included in 2022 the assessment to come

00:14:25 come there's been a full four year cycle since this extra assessment can you account for why it's only in 2022 that this will be considered only in so much as

00:14:37 only in so much as i think when this request was made i believe kerry's had a look to see whether it has been covered since then and there isn't a record of it so that

00:14:48 and there isn't a record of it so that doesn't necessarily mean it hasn't been covered but the fact that there isn't a record

00:14:52 record means that that would be um something that must be revisited yeah is it something that's just been missed it would appear so and mr gregorian i can tell you retired

00:15:03 and mr gregorian i can tell you retired in 2010

00:15:05 in 2010 mr haines retired in 2008 and he has since sadly died the bba certificate for rayna bond was actually withdrawn in 2019.

00:15:17 actually withdrawn in 2019. um my question is if ucas were going to uncover something relevant about the bba's historic work on the reiner bond certificate wasn't the time to investigate this in 2017 while the

00:15:30 to investigate this in 2017 while the certificate was still in circulation uh yes i think in in the context of the assessment it was identified i think that first extra assessment wasn't a particularly

00:15:41 extra assessment wasn't a particularly long assessment it was picked up to be followed up and it was missed or it appears to have been missed there is no record of it at least yes

00:15:53 i'm going to turn now to outsourcing we know from the file on this on the bba's work of this certificate that the bba emailed sarah colwell from

00:16:05 that the bba emailed sarah colwell from the bre

00:16:06 the bre to ask about an aspect of fire performance of rayna bond i want to talk briefly

00:16:12 briefly about subcontracting or outsourcing can we go to bsi401913

00:16:22 this is the british standard en bsen 45011 this was one of the predecessor standards

00:16:32 standards for

00:16:33 for 17065.

00:16:36 and we can see it's called general requirements for bodies operating product certification systems can we go to page 7 please

00:16:47 paragraph 4.4 in the left-hand column

00:16:53 subcontracting and it says when a certification body describe decides to subcontract work related to certification for example testing or inspection

00:17:05 inspection to an external body or person a properly documented agreement covering the arrangements including confidentiality and conflict of interest shall be drawn up

00:17:17 of interest shall be drawn up and then it goes on the certification body shall and there's a number of requirements including at sea for example obtain the applicant's consent do you see that

00:17:28 do you see that yes i do yeah that's right that under

00:17:32 under this standard which would have been applicable in 2008 a body most certainly can outsource certificate evaluation activities can't it

00:17:43 it yes it can but if it does it has to be within the parameters set out in this standard doesn't it yes now

00:17:51 now i'm afraid we can't say whether the bba had a properly documented agreement in 2007 with the bre but isn't the relevant point for ucas that

00:18:02 that if the bba were subcontracting they should have had a relationship documented shouldn't they if they were subcontracting yes yeah and ucas would need to see those documents

00:18:14 ucas would need to see those documents to make sure that they were in conformance with this standard wouldn't they yes we would can we go to the exchange between the bre and the bba briefly it's in the technical file at bba

00:18:26 technical file at bba 4080

00:18:34 and can we go to page 505 please

00:18:40 now this is midway through an email exchange which starts on page 507 can we start at the second email from the top on this page and it's from sarah colwell to hammer

00:18:52 and it's from sarah colwell to hammer gregorian copying brian haynes on the 29th of november 2007 and she says we would need to see the test data to be

00:19:03 we would need to see the test data to be able to make any meaningful comment on the potential product performance if you would like us to complete a review we would be happy to look at this for you

00:19:12 for you and provide a proposal if necessary for any additional work or formal assessment and if we scroll up to the top email on this page we can see that mr gregorian has responded

00:19:24 has responded i was not able to contact you by telephone hence email the attached documents are classification reports for the standard and fire retardant versions

00:19:34 versions he goes on to talk about the tests and invites her to telephone him and we can see

00:19:40 can see that there's attachments and they appear to us to be the relevant fire classification reports now

00:19:49 now should

00:19:50 should ucas have seen from the file that the bre had been approached to provide advice on fire performance for the issue of this certificate

00:20:02 sorry can you repeat the question should ucas have on inspection of this file seen that the bre had been approached to provide fire advice

00:20:14 provide fire advice um if if it was in if this document was in the file this store i can certainly confirm this document was in the file um then

00:20:23 um then we should have seen it should the bba have alerted the assessors

00:20:30 assessors during the extra visit that this request for advice had happened

00:20:36 happened um possibly if if this had then been the mechanism by which they'd

00:20:44 gained the expertise or the advice to do the work yeah should the bba have recorded somewhere that it had had technical input or at

00:20:55 that it had had technical input or at least that a request had been made for technical input from the bre

00:21:03 yes if if that was the the the course of action that they took i suppose there is a potential that they may not have pursued this and this was an inquiry and they took an alternative route yes

00:21:16 alternative route yes in in the event this is more or less all we have of this inquiry there is

00:21:24 there is on this file no further response from ms caldwell or anyone from the bre on this

00:21:32 on this point

00:21:33 point would

00:21:34 would ucas

00:21:36 ucas in the event that bre declined to respond or didn't respond would you guys expect to see documents recording that and discerning what the next step was

00:21:50 and discerning what the next step was yes i think our main focus would be on

00:21:53 on how they access the expertise to perform the certification activity yes and in the event that the bre did not respond

00:22:04 that the bre did not respond on a technical question would you

00:22:08 would you want to see how that response had been closed out and that technical question resolved

00:22:15 resolved i think the latter more would be more significant rather than because if they're taking another route then

00:22:22 then what happened with this correspondence perhaps would be less significant yes so it's your evidence that uh

00:22:30 uh ucas would want to see how that technical question was resolved is that right yes

00:22:35 right yes assuming

00:22:36 assuming this was the subject of the of the assessment this was included with yes assessment yes should ucas have investigated and assessed the formal arrangements

00:22:47 assessed the formal arrangements that may or may not have been in place between the bba and the bre at this time um

00:22:54 um actually at this extra visit i think that may have depended on what the assessment team saw um generally yes there are potentially sort of two types

00:23:06 there are potentially sort of two types of arrangement you described from the the clauses in 45011 en 45011 subcontracting there is also scope for the certification body to contract in

00:23:19 the certification body to contract in expertise to work within their own management system which which although the sort of outcome is the same because they accessing expertise to perform their conformity assessment work

00:23:31 their conformity assessment work the mechanisms by which they contract that

00:23:34 that expertise might be different yes but do you understand that it was that second route that the vba was contracting in the bre i

00:23:45 the vba was contracting in the bre i don't know i suppose there is a potential

00:23:48 potential a potential for it to be either right and if the bba were contracting the bre

00:23:56 the bre in as you say or as i say the second route

00:23:59 route you would ucas would want to see the documentation and the management of that wouldn't wouldn't yes yes

00:24:06 i'm turning now to triennial reviews earlier we saw that the whistleblower said that

00:24:13 said that the rainer bond certificate had not been reissued since 2008. and certainly in his view it should have been we can tell from the assessment report

00:24:25 we can tell from the assessment report that ucas considered the bba's triennial reviews can we go to that report ucas 301077

00:24:34 301077 at page seven

00:24:43 and at the bottom we see a header triennial certificate review so that's the start of the report can we go over the page

00:24:54 the report can we go over the page of that subject in the report can we go over the page to page eight and if we go down to the conclusion of that section just above the header reissue

00:25:05 reissue and it says this overall the information viewed gave good confidence that bba are following their processes

00:25:15 processes relating to surveillance including those for triennial reviews of certification in addition the information gave confidence that the review process is effective

00:25:28 is effective now this inquiries heard evidence that at least from 2013 the review process included writing to the client so the manufacturer in this case

00:25:39 case to request confirmation that there had been no changes that would invalidate the certificate and the documents on the bba's technical files show that

00:25:50 the bba's technical files show that archonic did not provide any confirmation nonetheless the bba decided to close out the review without that information

00:26:01 the review without that information now the effect of that is that the bba did not receive new fire test

00:26:07 test data or

00:26:08 data or classifications between the years of 2008

00:26:12 2008 and 2017

00:26:14 and 2017 and some might say that the certificate lacked information because of that we asked carrie randall about that can we go to his witness statement at page 20

00:26:25 20 ucas2011424

00:26:39 at question 28 did you consider the fact that in project reviews between 2013 and 2017 iconic did not respond to bba project

00:26:51 iconic did not respond to bba project manager requests for information confirmation that there had been no changes in the product and the response is this yes during the assessment

00:27:02 yes during the assessment records were viewed that showed there was a period where the certificate holder did not respond the more recent information viewed showed that the review process was being followed and the information supporting

00:27:14 followed and the information supporting the certificate had been reviewed the records of factory production control were also viewed in connection with this

00:27:22 with this during the follow-up visit it was noted that the certificate holder had responded to information requests following threats from the vba that the certification would be withdrawn

00:27:34 certification would be withdrawn and inquiry question 29

00:27:39 is if not should you have noted and or acted on any of the above and the response at 29.1 is not applicable um

00:27:49 um it appears from that that the ucas assessor did note that arconic hadn't responded is that what you take from that

00:28:00 is that what you take from that yes

00:28:01 yes is it not relevant to ucas that for years arconic failed to respond to confirm that there were no changes affecting the validity of the certificate

00:28:14 it would be relevant to the to the assessment yes surely it's of the utmost relevance to the integrity of the bba's review

00:28:23 it's it's certainly something that would need to be considered yes this assessment was of the entire history of the reynabon certificate as far as i understand it and several years seem to be entirely

00:28:35 and several years seem to be entirely unaccounted for in those circumstances shouldn't newcastle pay very close attention to the fact that the bba simply closed the review without information from our conic about the fire performance of the

00:28:47 conic about the fire performance of the product

00:28:50 i think it would will depend on the the information that they saw at the assessment as to whether there was an impact when they did receive the information

00:29:01 when they did receive the information whether that what the date what the data showed

00:29:04 showed well if we look at what mr randall said that they did show can we just scroll up to 28.1

00:29:10 to 28.1 on the witness statement he's saying that that the review process was followed information supporting the certificate had been reviewed that information

00:29:21 had been reviewed that information was as listed at page 10 of the assessment report we saw the 2005-2006 european certificates the 2003 certificates

00:29:32 the 2003 certificates uh classification reports i mean the records of factory production control that's the where an auditor goes and

00:29:40 and watches

00:29:41 watches the material being made but there were no further fire classification reports that were viewed in this period

00:29:52 that were viewed in this period so

00:29:53 so the information that that is the total of the information certainly from mr randall's account that had been assessed

00:30:02 assessed so

00:30:03 so shouldn't newcast have paid very close attention

00:30:07 attention to what

00:30:08 to what may well have been a gap in the data that was provided to the bba i i would have i would expect so yes it is

00:30:20 is i think we have to look at the report again

00:30:23 again um and also consider um not having been present at the assessment it's it is difficult to tell but i appreciate we've only got the records to go from yes but we we can tell from those

00:30:35 yes but we we can tell from those records

00:30:36 records that there wasn't any further fire classification reports provided

00:30:42 provided for that period 2013 and 17. and it it is almost as though that it was considered enough that there was factory production control and information from 2005 and the missing

00:30:54 information from 2005 and the missing years

00:30:55 years didn't matter is that not a fair assessment i don't think it's fair to say that the missing years didn't matter i think we can't tell from the records what the

00:31:06 what the what the position was of the assessors because if they had been missing the information it wasn't necessarily the case that the tests

00:31:15 tests would have been repeated but they would they would need to seek confirmation that the test data that they had was valid which i think is that which which is the key point is understanding that the basis on which the certification

00:31:28 basis on which the certification continues

00:31:29 continues is that the information that has been taken into account is still relevant or been updated the the information taken into account is still relevant or updated we see here

00:31:41 updated we see here during the follow-up visit it was noted that the certificate holder had responded to information requests following threats from the bba that the certificate would be withdrawn i i can tell you the bba did not ask for

00:31:53 i i can tell you the bba did not ask for every updated uh fire classification report issued since 2005. and we know that because this inquiry has seen those classification reports giving a very

00:32:05 classification reports giving a very different fire performance so

00:32:08 so in that circumstance isn't it fair to say that ucas did not pursue

00:32:14 pursue the bba's

00:32:15 the bba's collection of data for those years

00:32:20 if that would seem to be the case we've heard evidence uh in this inquiry from mr nakomo he was a technical expert at the bba he said that if a certificate holder did

00:32:32 he said that if a certificate holder did not reply such as in this example it was the bba's practice to conclude that the review of the information to conclude the review just with the information from previous

00:32:44 just with the information from previous years

00:32:46 years now if that were the process that that should be documented shouldn't it yes well it should be yes and if that were the process would you consider

00:32:59 would you consider the merit and robustness of that as a course of action for the bba to take here for example whether it is just acceptable to proceed to certify in absence of an answer from our connect

00:33:12 absence of an answer from our connect no we we should yes

00:33:17 would inspire as you can say would you cast consider a process where a certification body can simply ignore a client's failure to respond as

00:33:28 ignore a client's failure to respond as being robust no

00:33:32 no can we go to the improvement actions raised as a part of this assessment it's in a native document ucas 301074

00:34:00 can we go to the worksheet called actions please thank you now in row this is a

00:34:07 is a how ucas produces uh

00:34:10 uh its reports isn't it for improvement actions yes now if we go to row nine we can see that this action is i can summarize it

00:34:21 that this action is i can summarize it this is an action to change the name from alcoa to arconic and that's a we can see

00:34:28 can see in column i there's an m meaning it's a mandatory action so

00:34:33 so the bba will change the name on the studio to the correct legal entity can we scroll down to 13 row 13.

00:34:47 now this in column e says since there is no 18 meter height limit stated in the zero eight four five one zero certificate and the certificate is only applicable for up to 18 meters use

00:34:58 only applicable for up to 18 meters use because of the tests detailed in the certificate the photograph of the building on the front of the certificate is misleading as it is clearly above 18 meters in height

00:35:10 height and again in column i we can see that's a mandatory

00:35:15 mandatory action and column h we can see this is already in progress so that's the bba's response they will change the picture

00:35:26 picture when they

00:35:27 when they reissue the certificate and i can tell you in fact the certificate was reissued in august 2017 and it did have the right name and it did have a shorter building

00:35:38 name and it did have a shorter building on it

00:35:41 on it as far as this assessment is concerned those two mandatory actions were closed weren't they yes but the certificate was in circulation for nearly 10 years by then

00:35:53 circulation for nearly 10 years by then is it enough for ucas to say well the era has now been spotted and from now the certificate will be right

00:36:02 right is that sufficient

00:36:09 do you mean in terms of any other action yes that is needed um

00:36:14 um well um i think the clearly there would need to be communication between the certification body and the customer in that circumstance where the certificate has been issued what becomes more

00:36:27 been issued what becomes more problematic is then what happens to because the the certification body issues the certificate to the manufacturer what happens to it after that

00:36:38 where it might be given to other other people um for example passed on so the certification body we would expect them to have a conversation with the

00:36:50 conversation with the organization that they've issued this certificate to yes

00:36:55 yes and

00:36:55 and to ensure that actions are taken to prevent any other misunderstanding in relation to the original certificate yes that's not recorded as any kind of

00:37:07 yes that's not recorded as any kind of improvement action is that

00:37:11 is that is that in keeping with what your with your evidence that it wouldn't necessarily be recorded as an improvement action it's an expectation or i i can't account for why it's not been recorded i can

00:37:23 for why it's not been recorded i can just say that would be my expectation yeah

00:37:28 yeah there was an a further extra visit in august 2017. i just want to touch on that very briefly can we go to the assessment report at

00:37:39 report at ucas301083

00:37:48 and we can see it at the top it's an extra visit and we can see it's the august 2017 one and on the left part way down we can see that carrie randall and sam giles

00:38:00 that carrie randall and sam giles were in attendance for ucas let me just scroll down yes thank you

00:38:08 now you can take it from me that the objective of this review or this um further assessment was to follow up on the actions from the july assessment

00:38:20 july assessment and to assess work done to reissue a number of certificates covering acm which was similar to the rayna bond certificate can we go to page five of the assessment report please

00:38:34 and here we see in the table a list of nine certificates which the bba were reissuing now one of the points that ucas

00:38:45 now one of the points that ucas considered in this assessment was the input of fire experts can we just go to the bottom of page five

00:38:54 five and the very very bottom you can see table two

00:38:58 table two and it says file review overview relating to certificate zero eight four five one zero which is the reynabont certificate now in that table if we just go over the page to page six

00:39:11 page to page six uh the fourth paragraph down it says the records relating to the fire experts comments were viewed now just pausing there

00:39:22 now just pausing there we did ask mr randall about this and it's his evidence that those comments were not just about the rainer bond certificate they were about all of the the further certificates that were being analyzed so just to be clear although

00:39:35 analyzed so just to be clear although that is in the rainer bond assessment it's actually as regards all of the certificates i can ask you just to carry on with this paragraph

00:39:46 paragraph the records relating to fire experts comments were viewed the bba demonstrated correspondence undertaken with x over warrington confirmation had been sought

00:39:57 confirmation had been sought that expert comments relating to fire performance previously made continued to be appropriate x over warrington confirmed that they would stand by comments made

00:40:08 would stand by comments made previously now we have a document in the ucas file for this assessment from xover and it's at ucas

00:40:19 and it's at ucas 301080

00:40:24 can we just go to that please

00:40:29 and can we go straight to page three please

00:40:35 and towards the bottom we see an email from nisha sharma of the bba and she's emailed janet morrell and andy kearns of x over

00:40:47 kearns of x over and the fourth paragraph down she says in the past you have provided your opinions comments on the assessment of the fire performance of various constructions in light of the recent fire incident can

00:40:59 in light of the recent fire incident can you please confirm that you stand by these opinions then if we scroll up to the bottom of page two

00:41:07 page two on the 17th of july from andy kearns is an email and can we just that so that's the beginning of the email can we just go down to page three

00:41:21 he says as most of these are yours can you respond back to nisha the middle of page two from janet morrill

00:41:30 morrill email timed yes that's it the middle 17th of july she says

00:41:36 she says nisha our opinions are based on test evidence interpretation of standards and regulations and also expert judgment x over warrington fire confirmed that

00:41:47 x over warrington fire confirmed that our responses to your questions were in our opinion correct at the time of provision

00:41:53 provision at the bottom of page one we see

00:41:58 we see ms sharma's response to mr albon a very prompt and good response for us received from janet regarding our question posed to x over last friday

00:42:09 question posed to x over last friday smiley face smiley face and then at the top of page one we go uh the very top of page one email from john albin to brian moore who was the executive

00:42:22 to brian moore who was the executive director of the bba we've received the assurance requested from ix over read their fire opinions please see below now

00:42:32 now looking at that correspondence and i've taken you through all of it that exchange is vague as to which advice from ex-soviet warrington fire relates to isn't it it

00:42:43 warrington fire relates to isn't it it would appear so yes it doesn't make clear that janet morrill looked at anything relevant to this assessment does it

00:42:50 does it you can't i can't see that from this correspondence no no it's something of a blanket statement isn't it that don't xavier would appear to be the case yes and it might be said that in this exchange the bba was not making a

00:43:02 this exchange the bba was not making a genuine inquiry about the certificates it was updating it was just covering itself do you agree with that

00:43:10 i can't really comment on the motivation for the for the question but it's not clear as to what

00:43:18 what opinions and advice that they're referring to from what i could see here carrie randall said in his witness statement that he was not aware of what work if any

00:43:29 work if any janet morrill had done to check her opinions were technically correct

00:43:34 correct such that the bba could rely on them isn't it

00:43:38 isn't it isn't it part of ucas's role to assess how the bba verified statements about the fire performance on which it relied that would be included in our assessment

00:43:49 that would be included in our assessment i would expect that to be included in the assessment yes should the assessor have satisfied himself that there had been a robust evaluation by x over warrington fire in

00:44:00 evaluation by x over warrington fire in order to make sure that the fire advice provided on the certificates was right

00:44:07 yeah yes um but i think i'd also say that although this was an extra assessment to look at this it would be

00:44:18 it would be um

00:44:19 um potentially difficult for the assessment team to look at everything so um i can't account for what they may have chosen to look at um i think the point is yes it would be

00:44:31 um i think the point is yes it would be included it's the sort of thing that we would expect to see whether

00:44:35 whether there is a particular reason for not looking at one aspect of it it's hard for me to justify one way or the other now

00:44:44 now very well

00:44:47 we saw that the bba was amending and reissuing

00:44:51 reissuing nine acm certificates and we can certainly see in the assessment report that they were looked at in some detail or at least some of them were looked at in some detail but

00:45:05 in some detail but if there were nine certificates being reissued all at the same time after the fire doesn't that or shouldn't that have put ucas on alert

00:45:16 ucas on alert that something had gone wrong with the certification process historically

00:45:23 that that is a possibility because but equally if if they've identified something

00:45:30 something with one certificate you would expect them to review all of the relevant certificates and make that make that change um

00:45:40 um i think if i speak generally of course it would be um

00:45:44 um it would would depend on the on the nature of that that problem because if for example a certificate template was um needed to be amended then then the whole all of the certificates would be

00:45:56 whole all of the certificates would be amended

00:45:57 amended um but but yeah i think that's a if all of the certificates needed to be changed because of material information contained within them then then yes that

00:46:08 contained within them then then yes that would suggest that there is a um an issue

00:46:12 an issue when you say issue that something is that something is not happened as as it should have done yeah can we go now to ucas2010852

00:46:33 this is an email chain between the bba and ucas in july 2017. on page two there's an email from claire curtis thomas on the 13th of july it's

00:46:46 curtis thomas on the 13th of july it's time 17 21 yes and she says this she's writing to carrie randall the assessor carrie i've been asked to forward your report to our insurer who are not

00:46:59 report to our insurer who are not experts in these matters i've explained that the outcome of the audit was that ucas found our record in good order etc apart from your report is there also a covering letter which allows the

00:47:10 covering letter which allows the layperson to contextualize the outcome of the audit kindness regards claire and we can see at the bottom that she is the ceo of the british board of agreement or was at the time

00:47:22 was at the time now

00:47:23 now do conformity assessment bodies often ask ucas to write a letter to their insurers no this is not a common occurrence is it usual practice for ucas to agree to

00:47:34 usual practice for ucas to agree to write a letter to a body's insurers no do you take claire curtis thomas to really be asking ucas to explain to insurers that

00:47:45 ucas to explain to insurers that actually the assessment the bba did was good

00:47:51 i don't know at page one we can see that this was escalated to the chief executive paul stennett

00:47:58 stennett these email at the top

00:48:03 and four lines from the top starting at if we are asked have you found that yes if we are asked for any form of covering letter to accompany this or any

00:48:15 covering letter to accompany this or any future reports we should refuse to provide any interpretation or comment other than factual statements e.g

00:48:25 e.g this report relates to a surveillance cost carried out as part of the four year i think he means accreditation cycle or whatever the purpose was now

00:48:35 now that's a firm no isn't it yes are you aware of a direction to only provide factual statements about reports no interpretation or commentary

00:48:46 no interpretation or commentary that would be the usual thing yes in fact mr st is it your evidence that mr senna didn't need to really say that that should always be the case yes that would always be the case and and and also a general

00:48:58 and also a general um you know direct communication will be with a conformity assessment body rather than a third party it would be by exception that we would give information elsewhere in effect the report stands on

00:49:10 elsewhere in effect the report stands on its own it doesn't need any contextualization as far as ucas is concerned would you agree with that that's right yes can we go to ucas three zeroes one four one one

00:49:27 this is an email again from claire curtis thomas on the 22nd of august 2017.

00:49:33 2017. and she says second paragraph the last few months have been very challenging for all i just wanted to thank you for the way that you have managed your activities in relation to the bba

00:49:44 relation to the bba we value our relationship with ucas and our organization has benefited enormously from your comments and advice we look forward to working with you in the future and welcoming you back

00:49:55 the future and welcoming you back to the vba and if you go to the top you can see that mr giles has forwarded this within ucas to mr stennett and jackie burton he says paul

00:50:07 jackie burton he says paul please see below from bba ceo jackie i think this may be positive feedback now is he forwarding that to miss burton in her role as feedback

00:50:18 to miss burton in her role as feedback manager

00:50:20 manager yes i assume so does ucas collect positive feedback yes yes we do

00:50:26 yes we do can we go now to can we actually return to a document we've seen it's ucas2010860

00:50:38 this is mr giles assessment uh his summary of testing certification related to grenfell tower we have seen

00:50:49 related to grenfell tower we have seen this before this was from around september 2017. on page one there's a header certification of fire resistant materials

00:51:00 materials and

00:51:02 and do i understand correctly that mr giles would be referring to the bba in this section

00:51:09 section and possibly also x over as well

00:51:14 i would i would take it as red

00:51:20 he makes reference to bba yes

00:51:24 yes at the bottom of the page there's a header called summary

00:51:31 and it says and i

00:51:34 and i believe that i will stand corrected if i'm wrong he's referring to both

00:51:40 both the bba and quite possibly x over warrington and he says both organizations have issued multiple certifications thus it is impossible without unlimited

00:51:51 thus it is impossible without unlimited resource to review every file however a review of how sampling is carried out on certification may be required to ensure that a representative selection is assessed

00:52:03 representative selection is assessed thoroughly now by reviewing sampling do you understand mr giles to mean that ucas should look at how it selects certificates to assess

00:52:14 certificates to assess i think that's what that means yes and did ucas review how certificates were assessed for organizations such as the bba's agramont scheme

00:52:26 agramont scheme um

00:52:27 um i think the the recommendations from this work was fed back into our operations teams through the through the section heads um that work was coordinated by our

00:52:40 um that work was coordinated by our operations director um so i think yes it's it's been actioned

00:52:46 actioned on page two of this document this section summary section continues ucas assessors need to be more thorough in the evaluation of training records

00:52:58 evaluation of training records there may have been tenden there may have been in tendency in the past to accept lists of competencies without further documentation to support this

00:53:09 further documentation to support this for example training tests supervised working with sign off now do you agree [Music]

00:53:17 [Music] certainly on your view of the documents that there may have been a tendency for ucas to just accept a conformity assessment body's competence without full documentation

00:53:31 i think that has that that we have identified occasions where that has been the case

00:53:38 and in terms of products used on grenfell would you say that that identification that you have identified occasions where there has been a tendency just to

00:53:49 where there has been a tendency just to accept compensate competency i i don't know specifically but i would assume if this if this statement had

00:53:58 had been um

00:53:59 been um uh made as a consequence of that work those additional assessments then that would appear to be the case would it be fair to say that since 2017 ucas has focused much more on the

00:54:12 2017 ucas has focused much more on the bba's agramont scheme than before the fire yes

00:54:18 fire yes now just stepping back and looking at what is really a vast amount of information and documents accreditation by ucas confirm confers on the conformity

00:54:30 confirm confers on the conformity assessment body a degree of respect and confidence doesn't it yes

00:54:37 yes that's the point of accreditation it gives consumers confidence in product systems and services doesn't it yes the point of accreditation is to confirm the competence of the conformity

00:54:48 confirm the competence of the conformity assessment body which in turn where their results and information data is used to confirm product compliance or that it

00:54:59 confirm product compliance or that it meets specifications then yes well considering the topics that we've discussed in your evidence do you think that there might be some areas where ucas should have detected or dealt with weaknesses in those bodies earlier

00:55:12 weaknesses in those bodies earlier yes

00:55:13 yes looking back do you accept that ucas accreditation might have given confidence to users of products

00:55:20 products where that confidence was not completely deserved

00:55:25 deserved um

00:55:25 um it's

00:55:27 it's the

00:55:28 the information on the certificates issued by the conformity assessment bodies is is

00:55:34 is the

00:55:35 the the extent of that information and how that relates to the accreditation um where that information does relate to their

00:55:43 their um sorry

00:55:46 um sorry where that information is an outcome from an accredited process then then yes has ucas done anything particular to address any uh

00:55:58 address any uh any confidence it may have not may have given without full full evidence in relation to the conformity assessment bodies um

00:56:09 bodies um here then yes we've continued to focus on these areas when we've conducted their assessments we have also in not directly as a

00:56:20 we have also in not directly as a consequence of this work but um really as a since the standard that we use for product certification bodies was updated in 2012 and further guidance was has

00:56:31 in 2012 and further guidance was has been issued since then on schemes

00:56:34 schemes we have

00:56:37 we have increased our focus on conformity assessment scheme review and we've retrained the relevant staff on conformity assessment scheme review and we have undertaken our undertaking a

00:56:49 and we have undertaken our undertaking a review of

00:56:51 review of all of the product certification schemes and and in the case of the construction products that that work started last year

00:56:58 year yes

00:57:00 yes so i've come to the end of my prepared questions could we please take a break to see if there are any questions yes we'll do that in just a minute i've just got one question i'd like your help is before we have a break um

00:57:13 before we have a break um does ucas

00:57:15 does ucas concern itself with the extent to which there may be contact between the uh

00:57:22 uh the certifying body and the product manufacturer one can see there's a danger

00:57:31 a danger that there could be two case relationship between the manufacture of the product and the body certifying its fitness for purpose

00:57:41 purpose is that something which ucas is concerned by yes we are concerned by that because it's important that a product certification body is a third party so

00:57:52 party so the relationship clearly there will need to be a relationship with the manufacturers their client and how the certification body manages its impartiality monitors its

00:58:04 its impartiality monitors its impartiality is an important part of its meeting the requirements for uh in this case for seventeen or sixty-five and how do you

00:58:13 do you monitor that um well we'll look at the records we will look at um the

00:58:21 the any committee structure or mechanisms that they have to oversee their impartiality it's quite common that a certification body will have a what's called an impartiality committee that will will look at

00:58:33 that will will look at how that is being monitored they'll conduct audits so they themselves um in fact i think you've seen at least one of these certification bodies here they've engaged the their non-executive

00:58:44 engaged the their non-executive directors to have a to participate in impartiality audits for example yeah all right thank you very much and do you want to follow that off at all uh no not

00:58:55 want to follow that off at all uh no not at the moment not at the moment well when council gets the end of her prepared questions we have to have a short break both so that she can take stock and also to enable others who are not in the room

00:59:07 to enable others who are not in the room but are following the proceedings to suggest questions that perhaps we ought to have asked you so we'll stop now we'll resume at quarter past three please

00:59:17 please and then we'll see if there are any more questions that we need to ask you okay thank you thank you very much

00:59:30 all right quarter past three please

01:15:55 would you ask mrs turner to come back in please

01:16:09 right mr turner well we'll see if there are any more questions for you yes sir there are no further questions so it remains for me just to thank mrs turner for coming to help us okay thank you yes mr turner well i

01:16:21 okay thank you yes mr turner well i think i should thank you on behalf of all three members of the panel it's been very

01:16:25 very useful to hear what you have to tell us we find it very interesting and we're very grateful to you for coming to give your evidence and i'm sorry that it had to take over the weekend so to speak which must have been rather a problem

01:16:37 which must have been rather a problem but still couldn't be helped anyway thank you very much indeed and you're now free to go thank you thank you

01:16:52 thank you very much the signs well um there are other witnesses but not today i think not today not today we have mr metcalf coming tomorrow and mr millet

01:17:03 metcalf coming tomorrow and mr millet will be examining him good thank you very much indeed well in that case we'll close for today at that point we resume tomorrow at 10 o'clock when we shall see the next witness thank you very much

01:17:36 you