Categories: Editors Comment

Investigating what issues can be addressed to ensure this never happens again

As we pass the first-year anniversary of the Grenfell Tower tragedy it will ever remain an extremely sensitive issue; an event that should never be forgotten and one that should never be able to happen again. The inquiry into the disaster has been a horrific reminder of the severity of the fire and has attempted to dissect the complex issues surrounding the spread of the fire. Jose Torero, who was commissioned by the public enquiry to investigate how the flames spread, and Dr Barbara Lane, a chartered fire engineer, have both attempted to dissect the causes and have identified a number of key events. They are in agreement that there was a culture of non-compliance with fire measures at the tower. Importantly, the construction industry needs to react to the findings of the enquiry. It was extremely disappointing to hear that the company that made the combustible cladding was claiming its panels were “at most, a contributing factor.” Evidence from Dr Barbara Lane concluded the cladding “contributed to the most rapid of the observed external fire spread” and said the cladding system, including the insulation, was “substantially to blame for the tragedy.” The cladding company further suggested that no one would have died had the windows been constructed properly; this was all contradicted by the evidence from Lane and Torero. We also heard how the fire doors ‘contributed significantly to the spread of smoke and fire to the lobbies’ – doors that should have resisted fire for 60 minutes only resisted for as little as 20 minutes.

As an industry, we need to take a close look at the findings and investigate what issues can be addressed to ensure this never happens again. The onus and duty of care are very important considerations. Products are tested and deemed fit for purpose but are these tests stringent enough and are the building regulations fit for purpose? The installation process needs careful investigation. In the case of the PVC-U windows, combustible synthetic rubber was used to join the new window frames to the original structure. The windows were installed without fire-resistant cavity barriers and were surrounded by a combustible material. It’s an extremely emotive subject, but there is a fear that we won’t tackle the issues and all will be forgotten until the next tragedy. As an industry, we owe it to the 72 people who lost their lives to stand up – to react progressively and put into place procedures, standards and actions to ensure it can never happen again.

winactive

Recent Posts

Marketing shouldn’t be the first casualty: Why businesses should keep investing in brand visibility

With the industry facing economic pressure, marketing budgets are often first on the chopping block.…

4 days ago

Haffner positions for stability and growth amid industry upheaval

Amid a period of transformation across the glazing and fenestration sector, Haffner’s Managing Director, Matt…

5 days ago

Scientists unveil hydrogel smart window offering cooling and heat recovery

A team of researchers from Fudan University and collaborating institutes has unveiled a bionic hydrogel-based…

1 month ago

Unique Window Systems acquires AluFold Direct’s business and assets

Unique Window Systems, a multi-award-winning fabricator of PVC-U and aluminium windows, doors, and curtain walling…

1 month ago

Expanded UKAS accreditation and bespoke testing support from Winkhaus

Winkhaus Laboratories has once again demonstrated its leadership in the fenestration testing sector with the…

1 month ago

Google’s AI Business Calling is coming — and it could turn retailers into price-only vendors

As AI takes over more consumer interactions, small firms in the home improvement market must…

2 months ago