Grenfell Tower Fire - London

in reality, all of this has been a total load of old bollocks
User avatar
LeBaron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 42611
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby LeBaron » 22 May 2018, 16:17

Diamond Dog wrote:
yomptepi wrote: And they will all walk away with their pensions in tact whilst people flap about trying to blame politicians.


And I'm not trying to blame politicians.


So long as yomp can take his shot at those nasty public servants!
Quaco wrote:Are you fucking high?

take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.

User avatar
yomptepi
BCB thumbscrew of Justice
Posts: 35034
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 17:57
Location: well

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby yomptepi » 22 May 2018, 16:20

Copehead wrote:
OMG you're right! Whos's thinking about the poor politicians in all of this?
All they had was political oversight and final responsibility for all of it, how can we blame them?


Because all this was done by the local authority. It is what they are supposed to do. It is what you pay your council tax for. They caused this, not the cabinet. The government do not deal with maintenance to local authority owned properties. The blame must be laid squarely at the feet of those incompetent local authority employees who caused this terrible event. That will never happen.
You don't like me...do you?

User avatar
yomptepi
BCB thumbscrew of Justice
Posts: 35034
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 17:57
Location: well

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby yomptepi » 22 May 2018, 16:21

LeBaron wrote:
Diamond Dog wrote:
yomptepi wrote: And they will all walk away with their pensions in tact whilst people flap about trying to blame politicians.


And I'm not trying to blame politicians.


So long as yomp can take his shot at those nasty public servants!


They are wholly to blame.
You don't like me...do you?

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 65617
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby Diamond Dog » 22 May 2018, 16:21

Actually the problem is that Celotex did indeed get a safety certificate for a cladding which they then altered to one that was less fire retardant.

Another problem is that the Celotex cladding was okay to use on towers about 18 meters but only if the cladding around it wasn't combustible. Which this cladding was.

And the people that were supposed to test the two together before approving it never did.

And that's not the Fire Brigade.
Mason Cooley wrote:Worried about being a dull fellow? You might develop your talent for being irritating.

In the future, in case you're wondering, "Crime, boy I don't know" is where I decided to kick your ass.

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 65617
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby Diamond Dog » 22 May 2018, 16:22

And I've not mentioned politicians yet, to make it easy for you.
Mason Cooley wrote:Worried about being a dull fellow? You might develop your talent for being irritating.

In the future, in case you're wondering, "Crime, boy I don't know" is where I decided to kick your ass.

User avatar
Copehead
BCB Cup Stalinist
Posts: 23631
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:51
Location: at sea

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby Copehead » 22 May 2018, 16:26

yomptepi wrote:
Copehead wrote:
OMG you're right! Whos's thinking about the poor politicians in all of this?
All they had was political oversight and final responsibility for all of it, how can we blame them?


Because all this was done by the local authority. It is what they are supposed to do. It is what you pay your council tax for. They caused this, not the cabinet. The government do not deal with maintenance to local authority owned properties. The blame must be laid squarely at the feet of those incompetent local authority employees who caused this terrible event. That will never happen.


Kensington and Chelsea Councilors are politicians too aren't they :?
And sometimes I ride on bus x82, say what!

Image

Bear baiting & dog fights a speciality.

User avatar
yomptepi
BCB thumbscrew of Justice
Posts: 35034
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 17:57
Location: well

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby yomptepi » 22 May 2018, 16:27

Diamond Dog wrote:Actually the problem is that Celotex did indeed get a safety certificate for a cladding which they then altered to one that was less fire retardant.

Another problem is that the Celotex cladding was okay to use on towers about 18 meters but only if the cladding around it wasn't combustible. Which this cladding was.

And the people that were supposed to test the two together before approving it never did.

And that's not the Fire Brigade.


Once the cladding was installed, it was the fire brigade. But it was also the clerk of works, the building inspector and the building control officers job to check. All card carrying PS workers. All failed. All will escape any responsibility or punishment.

Non of these materials are fire proof. they are fire resistant. That is a crucial difference. The problem was not the combustibility of the materials, but the shoddy and haphazard installation. The problem was the amount of air getting into the gap between the cladding and the insulation. This joint should be sealed tight with aluminium tape in such a way that air cannot get between the two layers and feed a fire. Once the fire took hold, that gap allowed the flames to become like a blow torch. Even the most fire resistant of the materials would have failed in those circumstances.
You don't like me...do you?

User avatar
yomptepi
BCB thumbscrew of Justice
Posts: 35034
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 17:57
Location: well

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby yomptepi » 22 May 2018, 16:28

Copehead wrote:
yomptepi wrote:
Copehead wrote:
OMG you're right! Whos's thinking about the poor politicians in all of this?
All they had was political oversight and final responsibility for all of it, how can we blame them?


Because all this was done by the local authority. It is what they are supposed to do. It is what you pay your council tax for. They caused this, not the cabinet. The government do not deal with maintenance to local authority owned properties. The blame must be laid squarely at the feet of those incompetent local authority employees who caused this terrible event. That will never happen.


Kensington and Chelsea Councilors are politicians too aren't they :?


They are local Councillors.Don't be glib. This is serious.
You don't like me...do you?

User avatar
Copehead
BCB Cup Stalinist
Posts: 23631
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:51
Location: at sea

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby Copehead » 22 May 2018, 17:14

yomptepi wrote:They are local Councillors.Don't be glib. This is serious.


That's who I thought we were talking about.
They have responsibility and oversight, they are politicians.
National government shares some blame for ruthlessly cutting the budgets of local governments, even Tory ones, but the local government must be held ultimately responsible for this as that is what democracy means.
And sometimes I ride on bus x82, say what!

Image

Bear baiting & dog fights a speciality.

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 65617
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby Diamond Dog » 22 May 2018, 17:59

yomptepi wrote:
Diamond Dog wrote:Actually the problem is that Celotex did indeed get a safety certificate for a cladding which they then altered to one that was less fire retardant.

Another problem is that the Celotex cladding was okay to use on towers about 18 meters but only if the cladding around it wasn't combustible. Which this cladding was.

And the people that were supposed to test the two together before approving it never did.

And that's not the Fire Brigade.


Once the cladding was installed, it was the fire brigade. But it was also the clerk of works, the building inspector and the building control officers job to check. All card carrying PS workers. All failed. All will escape any responsibility or punishment.

Non of these materials are fire proof. they are fire resistant. That is a crucial difference. The problem was not the combustibility of the materials, but the shoddy and haphazard installation. The problem was the amount of air getting into the gap between the cladding and the insulation. This joint should be sealed tight with aluminium tape in such a way that air cannot get between the two layers and feed a fire. Once the fire took hold, that gap allowed the flames to become like a blow torch. Even the most fire resistant of the materials would have failed in those circumstances.


I notice you've now failed on more than one occasion to condemn a manufacturer that got a safety certificate for one product, and then downgraded that product and sold it to the people procuring the materials for Grenfell. Without advising them of that.

Or maybe you think that's okay ?

And no one, besides you, has mentioned 'fire proof'.
Mason Cooley wrote:Worried about being a dull fellow? You might develop your talent for being irritating.

In the future, in case you're wondering, "Crime, boy I don't know" is where I decided to kick your ass.

User avatar
yomptepi
BCB thumbscrew of Justice
Posts: 35034
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 17:57
Location: well

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby yomptepi » 22 May 2018, 18:33

Diamond Dog wrote:
I notice you've now failed on more than one occasion to condemn a manufacturer that got a safety certificate for one product, and then downgraded that product and sold it to the people procuring the materials for Grenfell. Without advising them of that.

Or maybe you think that's okay ?

And no one, besides you, has mentioned 'fire proof'.


I would need to see proof, but as I say, and this is absolutely basic to construction law ( which I am sure you are familiar with) that once a product has been installed, it is incumbent upon the installer to make sure that it is the correct material. If the board had been downgraded, ( as often happens with fire resistant materials as the law changes) are you absolutely sure that neither the main contractor, nor the council procurement team knew about it. Are you sure that the material was purchased as part of a deliberate fraud being carried out by a prestigious and reputable company, or as part of a pattern of incompetence on the part of the management team?
You don't like me...do you?

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 65617
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby Diamond Dog » 22 May 2018, 18:44

yomptepi wrote: Are you sure that the material was purchased as part of a deliberate fraud being carried out by a prestigious and reputable company, or as part of a pattern of incompetence on the part of the management team?


You say that like the two scenarios are mutually exclusive.
Mason Cooley wrote:Worried about being a dull fellow? You might develop your talent for being irritating.

In the future, in case you're wondering, "Crime, boy I don't know" is where I decided to kick your ass.

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 65617
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby Diamond Dog » 22 May 2018, 18:46

And, yet again, you fail to comment on whether you think a company obtaining a fire safety certificate for a product, and then selling an inferior product under the same banner, are doing anything wrong - either morally or in law?
Mason Cooley wrote:Worried about being a dull fellow? You might develop your talent for being irritating.

In the future, in case you're wondering, "Crime, boy I don't know" is where I decided to kick your ass.

User avatar
yomptepi
BCB thumbscrew of Justice
Posts: 35034
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 17:57
Location: well

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby yomptepi » 22 May 2018, 19:01

Diamond Dog wrote:And, yet again, you fail to comment on whether you think a company obtaining a fire safety certificate for a product, and then selling an inferior product under the same banner, are doing anything wrong - either morally or in law?


As I said, fire products can be downgraded as the law changes. They may well have bought the stuff whilst it was legit, but by the time they had taken delivery it might have been downgraded. In any situation the specification should have been checked by the chain of inspectors BEFORE it was installed. In this scenario, the material complied when it was sold, but possibly not when it was installed. Cellotex is a huge and reputable company that sells millions of sq meters of insulation board every day. Do you think it is more likely that they deliberately and fraudulently sold the wrong product for this project? What would they have to gain? All materials delivered to site go through a what is supposed to be a vigorous checking system ( QA). Even if they had supplied the wrong sheets, deliberately and with malice aforethought, this would have been picked up by one of the several checks which were supposedly carried out by both contractors and the supervisory teams. God knows there enough of the bastards. Of course the reality is that the whole process is a sham, and no one does their job, far preferring to spend time by the sea at the either the suppliers or the contractors expense.
You don't like me...do you?

User avatar
yomptepi
BCB thumbscrew of Justice
Posts: 35034
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 17:57
Location: well

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby yomptepi » 22 May 2018, 19:05

Any way. I will leave this now. You are clearly satisfied with some journo looking to blame a supplier, rather than looking at the far more difficult and socially divisive possibility that those who who are very well rewarded for supposedly looking our safety , are in fact completely incompetent. And are also completely protected. I'd like to see the BBC get that past the censors...
You don't like me...do you?

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 65617
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby Diamond Dog » 22 May 2018, 19:16

So you won't comdemn. Just so we all know.

The usual bluster and bullshit from the Head of the Brigade.
Mason Cooley wrote:Worried about being a dull fellow? You might develop your talent for being irritating.

In the future, in case you're wondering, "Crime, boy I don't know" is where I decided to kick your ass.

User avatar
yomptepi
BCB thumbscrew of Justice
Posts: 35034
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 17:57
Location: well

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby yomptepi » 22 May 2018, 19:41

Diamond Dog wrote:So you won't comdemn. Just so we all know.

The usual bluster and bullshit from the Head of the Brigade.


I cannot condemn what is standard practice. I do this stuff for a living, so i know how it works. QA is all in the detail . I am sure you have similar systems. The board should have been check for suitability at least four times before it was installed, and again before the building was given its fire certificate. All failings with management, not the product. I am quite sure the systems were in place. I am equally sure that no one took a blind bit of notice of them.

Unless you are accusing Cellotex of massive fraud of course.
You don't like me...do you?

User avatar
yomptepi
BCB thumbscrew of Justice
Posts: 35034
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 17:57
Location: well

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby yomptepi » 22 May 2018, 19:42

Do you not think perhaps someone should have realised the wrong board had been supplied?
You don't like me...do you?

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 65617
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby Diamond Dog » 22 May 2018, 19:49

yomptepi wrote:
Diamond Dog wrote:So you won't comdemn. Just so we all know.

The usual bluster and bullshit from the Head of the Brigade.


I cannot condemn what is standard practice. I do this stuff for a living, so i know how it works. QA is all in the detail . I am sure you have similar systems. The board should have been check for suitability at least four times before it was installed, and again before the building was given its fire certificate. All failings with management, not the product. I am quite sure the systems were in place. I am equally sure that no one took a blind bit of notice of them.

Unless you are accusing Cellotex of massive fraud of course.


As the programme said the investigation had not ruled out "corporate manslaughter" against Celotex, what do you think?

yomptepi wrote:Do you not think perhaps someone should have realised the wrong board had been supplied?


I could have sworn I did actually say that the correct checks had not been carried out in my first post on this today. Let me check.

Diamond Dog wrote: Also the management company that was responsible for the decision to go with the cladding (which was not designed to be fire resistant) never tested both cladding and insulation together.


Ho hum.
Mason Cooley wrote:Worried about being a dull fellow? You might develop your talent for being irritating.

In the future, in case you're wondering, "Crime, boy I don't know" is where I decided to kick your ass.

User avatar
Samoan
Posts: 9983
Joined: 28 May 2008, 10:22
Location: The Steaming Metropolis

Re: Grenfell Tower Fire - London

Postby Samoan » 22 May 2018, 19:56

Diamond Dog wrote:
yomptepi wrote:
Diamond Dog wrote:So you won't comdemn. Just so we all know.

The usual bluster and bullshit from the Head of the Brigade.


I cannot condemn what is standard practice. I do this stuff for a living, so i know how it works. QA is all in the detail . I am sure you have similar systems. The board should have been check for suitability at least four times before it was installed, and again before the building was given its fire certificate. All failings with management, not the product. I am quite sure the systems were in place. I am equally sure that no one took a blind bit of notice of them.

Unless you are accusing Cellotex of massive fraud of course.


As the programme said the investigation had not ruled out "corporate manslaughter" against Celotex, what do you think?

I could have sworn I did actually say that the correct checks had not been carried out in my first post on this today. Let me check.

Diamond Dog wrote: Also the management company that was responsible for the decision to go with the cladding (which was not designed to be fire resistant) never tested both cladding and insulation together.


Ho hum.

You started off this morning spoiling for a fight, as is your usual wont.

Just stop posting and have some Respect.

This thread is not, and was not, about you.
bobzilla77 wrote:Those people who say the guitars sound like bagpipes have never really listened to bagpipes.