Why would they even sell cladding that isn't fire resistant for building purposes?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Massive Fire in High Rise Apartment in London
- Thread starter superdeluxe
- Start date
I don't really see anything in this post that contradicts what I said, but thanks, I guess? Never mind then, austerity is a myth spread by the socialists. There definitely isn't a division between the poor and rich, and because tory led councils always make cost cutting decisions that makes it completely acceptable. Why should the council spend £2 more per square on the cladding to ensure that it fire proof? The Tories actively vote against improving safety for rented homes, never mind I suppose, it's not their fault the regulations are not fit for purpose.
Billy_Pilgrim
Member
This is the most blindingly obviously class-tinged disaster in quite some time. It would require impressive feats of mental gymnastics to convince yourself that ultimate responsibility does not lie with the government and its policies.
JonnyDBrit
Member
Well, the purpose in this is not to be fire resistant, but act as an insulator. And as an article somewhere in the thread brought up, the focus for a lot of companies providing such cladding has been to maximise heat efficiency vs cost within existing regulations. Add in the uncertainty by most of us as to what exactly the standards for passing said safety regulations are, and it may be the most bare minimum product possible - because they know people like the Kensington and Chelsea council will buy it. Plus if it's cheaper for the company to produce, it may be the profitable even at the lower price.
Don't worry, apparently every step was taken to ensure that the building abides to the necessary safety rules*.
*pending investigation.
Toytown Assassin
Member
It's not intended for high rise buildings.
from this bbc article
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40272168
TwiztidElf
Member
Why are there no names yet? Why is no-one in jail yet?
No-one is going to jail are they?
It's no wonder people are angry.
No-one is going to jail are they?
It's no wonder people are angry.
They fitted insulation on this property that exceeded current insulation regs by 50% which would have added far more cost over insulation that just performed to regs.
I just think it's an over sight, a bad one. No politics, sorry if that doesn't suit an agenda.
FortuneFaded
Member
These things take time. They are still searching for bodies.
Jezbollah
Member
What, it hasn't even been a week. It needs to be properly investigated, or should everyone just get locked up, regardless of if they were to blame or not?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...te-from-kensington-and-chelsea-is-blood-money
tl;dr the council in question underspent on services so they could funnel cash to the richer residents.
It reminds me of the scene from Torchwood: Miracle Day (don't watch, it's terrible) where the investigating doctor explains to the beancounter who's turned a hospital into a death camp but is under budget that he was given that money to spend it.
tl;dr the council in question underspent on services so they could funnel cash to the richer residents.
It reminds me of the scene from Torchwood: Miracle Day (don't watch, it's terrible) where the investigating doctor explains to the beancounter who's turned a hospital into a death camp but is under budget that he was given that money to spend it.
Someone has already been jailed
In the grand scheme, disgusting what he did, he has less blood on his hands than others
Wrestlemania
Banned
Addressing the poor insulation levels was one of the primary reasons for the refurbishment (https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-grenfell-tower-fire-and-the-daily-mails-green-targets-claim). Just because they went above and beyond one regulation doesnt mean they wouldnt make a conscious decision to cut corners elsewhere.
frankie_baby
Member
A disgusting tax cut for the rich, pretty sure that cant actually be legal
Jezbollah
Member
Sharing a photo on Facebook is completely different to performing an investigation, charging and trialling the persons responsible for this incident - which was what the previous poster was implying.
And how often does a first time offender receive a three month sentence within one day of being charged?
If this guy was a double-barrel making a trust funded documentary do you think he would be spending tonight in carcer
If they didn't get permission, yes?
Not sure what you're trying to say here - the fact this man took those pictures and posted them on Facebook is disgusting and he deserves to spend time in jail for it.
This fucking world where the most important thing is showing a bunch of mugs how "exciting" your life is on social media.
TwiztidElf
Member
Yes I'm serious. The building owner, or the head of the owning group should already be in custody.
Sure, investigations will follow to round up all responsible.
But we all know how these things go. As time drags on there will be inquiries, investigations and committees. There will be lots of finger pointing, obscuring the facts, missing documents, and rich folks with high priced lawyers making up their own narrative.
Sorry to be so cynical, but I just feel like this is how things unfold all the time these days. The villains just keep on keeping on. I need the "they can't keep getting away with it" gif.
Mark my words, the real people responsible for these deaths are going to walk away here.
the_darkness
Banned
The Costa Concordia captain was convicted years after the fact.
It will take years before we get to that point. The investigation and evidence gathering just for the inquiry will potentially take years. There's so many questions and investigations ranging from simply how the fire started right through to building design, the various renovation works, the cladding, no alternative escape route, the concerns previously raised by residents, the fire alarm system, the exposed gas lines, the advice by emergency services to stay in the flats rather than leave, fire brigade having no cherry pickers or cranes to get water to upper floors until much later, etc.
It goes on and on.
Of course they'd look to save costs where they can, they'd also look to be regulation compliant too.
This is normal, whether it's a new Trump towers or a Grenfell.
Jezbollah
Member
Indeed. The inquiry over this will take months, if not years. The right people have to be punished here, the right lessons have to be learned over a tragedy like this.
You don't do either by just slinging the first people you blame into the slammer.
They might earn more than 70k a year though so they deserve to be in jail.
muntersaur
Member
I do not understand how there could be a huge confusion over the number of possible dead by now.
Counting the number of dead bodies is obviously the official route but that will take a long time. This is a mostly closed investigation and all they need is a list of the names of the tenants of the building. Cross off the people who are known to have survived. The number of people not crossed off will be the estimated dead.
Counting the number of dead bodies is obviously the official route but that will take a long time. This is a mostly closed investigation and all they need is a list of the names of the tenants of the building. Cross off the people who are known to have survived. The number of people not crossed off will be the estimated dead.
Again, this does not contradict what I have said? This discussion will go nowhere if you do not acknowledge the wider context of what has happened and how little has changed since the fires in 2009.
I wonder if you would have the audacity to tell the victims of Grenfell that they are pushing an agenda out of this?
They have an estimate already of 56. Why it's only an estimate? Off the top of my head: people on holiday, people staying over, people who have moved in with others who aren't on any lists, people without relatives, people with out of date contact details. Those factors and any combination mean the estimated number may not be accurate.
muntersaur
Member
Sure, I get that, but the obvious starting point is determining exactly how many known residents have survived. After that the extra variables you bring can be considered. If they can estimate as low as 56 surely they can state that the vast majority of residents have been accounted for and survived.
Yeah, rich people are treated so badly...
I'm not sure what that number gives them though. Also I guess it's hard for them to determine how many have survived because they're all over the place, in temporary accommodation, with family or friends or elsewehere. They won't be in contact with all of them, that could take time. What's relevant to them is, who is being reported missing to the information line. If these people cannot be found and contacted they're presumed missing. It's hard to do the reverse because nobody is asking about people who have already been found and are safe.
Not all tenants were in the building that night and other tenants had friends or family visiting. It's not like an office where you sign in and out. And not all survivors will have reported that they're safe, there's not been a particularly organised process around that side of things either.
muntersaur
Member
I agree with everything you said here but I also think that knowing who has survived is just as important as knowing who has died.
Not only because those who have survived will have to be rehoused, but because it will help ID the dead. Not all who is missing will have had the benefit of someone reporting them missing and many of the bodies may only be identified via dental records. The less records they have to search for and go through, the faster bodies may get identified.
Dirtyshubb
Member
It's a but strange they haven't also put out a call for people who live in the building but we're out at the time. I appreciate most would have contacted but to be sure.
"Two women feared dead in Grenfell Tower were 'threatened with legal action' for raising alarm about fire safety" - The Independent
ferrasvansen
Member
This sort of shit should stop now, I expect a lot of people to face jail sentences and end of careers type scenarios. Lots of dodgy shit seems to have happened leading up to this.
MonorailCat
Member
I hate abuse of the law liket hat. It's all over the place. Corporations bullying private persons with mostly bullshit cease&desist or other fines. And no matter how bullshit it is, you mostly will have to comply even if you have done nothing wrong because almost nobody has the time + energy + money to battle the horde of corporation lawyers in court.
So you are just forced to give up.
Miles Quaritch
Member
One of the side effects of slashing legal aid.
CadetMahoney
Member
The Costa Concordia captain was arrested at least after the incident in 2012, even if the trial was long:
In China they gave the death penalty to contractors who were supposed to install anti-earthquake materials but instead stole the money and used aluminium instead. No steel reinforcement in concrete to cut costs. I can't find the original article though.
Of course in the UK we know if the 2009 incident is anything to go by nothing will happen (no compensation, no prosecution). Just "Lessons will be Learned" as officials stand in a row reading a poem in front of a plaque. 5 years later.
How convenient.
Hammond claims the cladding material is banned in the UK.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...in-uk-philip-hammond-germany-us-a7795696.html
Don't know if that's in the context of high rise only or what.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...in-uk-philip-hammond-germany-us-a7795696.html
Don't know if that's in the context of high rise only or what.
naweednrahman
Member
I read a story that some guy, his girlfriend and daughter they were in that room and a hell lot of people entered. They were advised to stay in their room but he said fuck it and legged it out. Him, his gf and daughter made it out alive...the other people in the building I guess they died from the smoke 😔
Check this video:
https://streamable.com/2gfr3
Check this video:
https://streamable.com/2gfr3
JonnyDBrit
Member
Trying to shift the blame back to the councillors and/or Rydon then.
I H8 Memes
Member
It is strange though that just 12 hours after the fire had started there were already neogaf members who knew people in the fire services who already knew it was 150+ dead. Go back to the first days posts and you will find it.
Incorrect, that was me, at 9:30 when a fireteam from another county turned up on they reported via a friend there was 180 people judged to be MISSING (not dead).
That's not really that strange. Imagine the confusion of a 20+ storey building filled with smoke and people streaming down the stairs. How could anyone reasonably be expected to maintain an accurate count of fatalities in such horrendous circumstances?
Well, 120 apartments in a building known to house a lot of families, you figure at least 2 people to an apartment and you have 200-300 people living in the tower. Also, the reports of very few people making it out within the first few hours of the fire breaking out making it immediately clear that the death toll was going to be high. It's simple maths really.
Similar threads
- Locked