Massive West London Apartment fire

First topic message reminder :

London fire: fears of people trapped as major blaze engulfs tower block


(CNN)A huge fire has engulfed a 24-story apartment block in West London.

Around 200 firefighters and 20 fire trucks have been deployed to tackle the blaze as rescue workers try to evacuate the building in Lancaster West Estate in North Kensington, London Fire Brigade said.


The fire broke out before daybreak local time Wednesday. In a statement posted to Twitter, London police say two people are currently being treated for smoke inhalation and they're waiting updates on further injuries.

Photos and video shared on social media show the tower block engulfed in flames.
"The whole building is on fire (and) spreading fast," witness Goran Karimi told CNN.
He said he saw people jumping from the building.

Grenfell Tower

The 24-story Grenfell Tower was built in the 1970s and recently subject to a $10.9 million redevelopment, according to property firm Rydon.

Close to Notting Hill, the tower block is around a five minute walk from the Latimer Road Underground station and near the Westfield shopping center in the west London suburbs.
According to property website RightMove, the average rent in the building is around $2,500 a month.

News is just now breaking.  This is all there is, save for live TV.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Syl wrote:

Oh God...it goes up daily.

I don't think the protestors were being fair when they accused the police of a cover up re the number of dead.
I'm sure they know there are many more, but till they actually find the bodies they cant be counted as dead.

I agree. The low number they gave at first seemed unrealistic, but they were presumably just counting the people they knew for sure had died. It has only just happened, and they need to search the flats before they make assumptions.

Exactly, and its obviously a slow and dangerous painstaking job to search each individual flta and landing.
I can understand the frustration of the people who fear their loved ones are still in there, but you cant up the body count till you have actually found the bodies.

It won't be all 'bodies' they find. They will be sieving through tons of ashes for DNA.

eddie wrote:It won't be all 'bodies' they find. They will be sieving through tons of ashes for DNA.

Precisely, some will be unrecognizable even has human remains.

eddie wrote:It won't be all 'bodies' they find. They will be sieving through tons of ashes for DNA.

Yes, its heart breaking to imagine.....I doubt the people waiting to hear whether their loved ones have been found can bare to think in cold hard facts.

The point is still the same. They can't go around saying that a particular person died until they have some kind of evidence.

Raggamuffin wrote:The point is still the same. They can't go around saying that a particular person died until they have some kind of evidence.

You are correct, but!

There should be a list of residents readily and immediately available from the local council and names can be ticked off. Those that aren't in hospital, a hotel, with friends or family, or listed as dead....in other words "The Missing" are obviously dead.

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:The point is still the same. They can't go around saying that a particular person died until they have some kind of evidence.

You are correct, but!

There should be a list of residents readily and immediately available from the local council and names can be ticked off. Those that aren't in hospital, a hotel, with friends or family, or listed as dead....in other words "The Missing" are obviously dead.

Who's to say they didn't have extra people living there? or they'd sub let? It happens.

HoratioTarr wrote:

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:The point is still the same. They can't go around saying that a particular person died until they have some kind of evidence.

You are correct, but!

There should be a list of residents readily and immediately available from the local council and names can be ticked off. Those that aren't in hospital, a hotel, with friends or family, or listed as dead....in other words "The Missing" are obviously dead.

Who's to say they didn't have extra people living there?  or they'd sub let?    It happens.  

All that could be true. So that could mean there's more dead than even a council list may suggest?

eddie wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

Who's to say they didn't have extra people living there?  or they'd sub let?    It happens.  

All that could be true. So that could mean there's more dead than even a council list may suggest?

Who knows? But you can understand the logic behind not revealing names until they are confirmed dead. Imagine if you got it wrong or there was a mix up?

Raggs said...

Of course it must be investigated. Anyone could say that a fridge caught fire, but they need to make sure that actually happened and why.






Yes Raggs... thats what i've been getting at already on this thread...

And my above post was in reply to you, but was really more aimed at other posters here who are so busy jumping around with the knee jerks that they have lost touch with the common sense thinking of the rest of us here on terra firma...




Quill... there are many questions that need to be answered... nobody is disputing the fact that the fire appeared to spread quickly around the outside of the building...

Although I still find it very hard to believe that building regulations would allow materials to be used that could be the sole contributing reason for this fire to happen as it did...

But what I do know, as i have seen it loads of times, and i think it may have been a significant factor involved in this fire, is that many buildings here in uk have the mains gas supply pipes running up the outside of the buildings...!

I'm sure that the tower block my friend (with the pigeons) lived in had the main gas pipes running up the outside of the building... then there was a series of smaller supply pipes running off of it at each level, one going to each flat to the kitchens to where the mains cupboards with the gas meters were...

And in a low rise 3 story place i used to live, all the new gas combi boilers fitted were mounted on the inside of kitchens next to window on external walls, with new gas supply fitted to outside wall and into the meter cupboards that were just next to the kitchen windows...!

Could well have been gas that was fueling the fire up the outside of the building...?

Im sure its probably better to have as much of the gas supply pipework on the outside of building as possible, with risk from gas leak minimised as it would be carried off in the wind rather than fill up an area inside the building etc...


But if a building with outside gas pipes is wrapped in cladding... and all those tiny leaks art then trapped inside that cladding wall...!?


What would happen is exactly what we have witnessed at Glenfell...

Tommy Monk wrote:Although I still find it very hard to believe that building regulations would allow materials to be used that could be the sole contributing reason for this fire to happen as it did...

But what I do know, as i have seen it loads of times, and i think it may have been a significant factor involved in this fire, is that many buildings here in uk have the mains gas supply pipes running up the outside of the buildings...!

Perhaps you have identified a second area in which the Tory government has been recalcitrant.  

But I saw no evidence during the fire that a natural gas pipe was feeding the flames.  I think that would have been detected right off.

eddie wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

Who's to say they didn't have extra people living there?  or they'd sub let?    It happens.  

All that could be true. So that could mean there's more dead than even a council list may suggest?

There is also another possible scenario to be added onto those you people are discussing...

After disasters of this scale, sometimes people who are listed as "missing" could have actually 'done a runner' and disappeared deliberately --  maybe someone wanted to run away for one reason or another (e.g. bad debts, bad marriage, family feuds, death threats, simply 'fed up' with their current situation..), and start a new life with a new identity somewhere far away ?

As outlandish as that seems to some people, there are many cases of "missing persons" cropping up 20, 30 or 40 years later..

********************************************************

And what about people who are away on holidays, or away for work, and may be in_communicado for a few weeks ?

Maybe not so common,  but it does happen..

It's been revealed that the firemen found 42 bodies huddled in one flat in an effort to evade the fire.   It hurts your heart.

Apparently, the council spent millions on hosting a fucking opera.

In a press release from when £5million was given to the opera in 2015, Cllr Tim Coleridge, cabinet member for the arts, insisted: 'Our final grant gives them a strong financial foundation in which to flourish and grow and I look forward to enjoying the company's performances for years to come.'

HoratioTarr wrote:Apparently, the council spent millions on hosting a fucking opera.

In a press release from when £5million was given to the opera in 2015, Cllr Tim Coleridge, cabinet member for the arts, insisted: 'Our final grant gives them a strong financial foundation in which to flourish and grow and I look forward to enjoying the company's performances for years to come.'

Most local authorities support the arts, to varying degrees, and it's difficult to argue with the principle because as I understand things, it is a statutory requirement on them.

However, hindsight being a wondrous thing, anger at the council's generous treatment of the arts compared to what appears to be, shall we say, deeply flawed prioritisation of other resources is bound to cause anger. And rightly so.

What is going to be interesting and in many cases, I suspect, very embarrassing for many former local authority administrations, portfolio-holding councillors and senior executive staff is the actual history of some of these housing projects and re-furbishment schemes up and down the country.

Local government has always been a case of the mills grinding exceedingly slowly and some major schemes take years from proposal to completion, understandably so given the many issues and legal and consultative requirements to be met.

I'm currently dealing with a public rights-of-way issue on my property that I first raised in 2005! Only now, 12 years on, has my local council finally got down to responding to a legal challenge that I lodged back then and to giving me a timescale for the final resolution of the problem.

Tower blocks have been around for a long, long time and many refurbishment schemes have probably been ongoing for some years, and it's a fair bet that the present government and the political control of councils will paint a somewhat different picture to that which existed when commissions and contracts were first being agreed.

Firstly the cladding was only put on last year. Philip Hammand said on Marr THAT IT WAS BANNED and the Council have been so useless as dealing with the results that others have had to take over.

ALSO:

Grenfell Tower firefighters put out fridge blaze 'and were just leaving when flats erupted in flames'



Firefighters had put out the initial fridge fire at Grenfell Tower and were leaving the building when the blaze suddenly flared up, it has emerged.

Crews believed they had put out the fire at the London high-rise and were astonished to see flames rising up the side of the building, new reports have claimed.

Shortly after dealing with the fridge fire early last Wednesday, firefighters were telling residents that it was out, BBC Panorama reported.

But, soon after, the 24-storey building was consumed by flames in one of Britain's biggest ever tower block fires that left at least 79 people dead.

Panorama on Monday night reported that firefighters had seen flames "shooting up" the side of the building.

Those reports will add weight to claims that it was the cladding on the exterior of Grenfell Tower that caused the fire to spread so rapidly.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/20/grenfell-tower-firefighters-put-fridge-blaze-just-leaving-flats/




So, that is BANNED CLADDING put on last year after residents had been having problems with electrical surges and appliance fires caused by them since back in 2013 at least.

The people in the Council who made the decision to do that should be jailed, as should May's Chief of Staff who was given a report about the dangers while her aide, and fucking sat on it.

sassy wrote:Firstly the cladding was only put on last year.   Philip Hammand said on Marr THAT IT WAS BANNED and the Council have been so useless as dealing with the results that others have had to take over.

ALSO:

Grenfell Tower firefighters put out fridge blaze 'and were just leaving when flats erupted in flames'



Firefighters had put out the initial fridge fire at Grenfell Tower and were leaving the building when the blaze suddenly flared up, it has emerged.

Crews believed they had put out the fire at the London high-rise and were astonished to see flames rising up the side of the building, new reports have claimed.

Shortly after dealing with the fridge fire early last Wednesday, firefighters were telling residents that it was out, BBC Panorama reported.

But, soon after, the 24-storey building was consumed by flames in one of Britain's biggest ever tower block fires that left at least 79 people dead.

Panorama on Monday night reported that firefighters had seen flames "shooting up" the side of the building.

Those reports will add weight to claims that it was the cladding on the exterior of Grenfell Tower that caused the fire to spread so rapidly.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/20/grenfell-tower-firefighters-put-fridge-blaze-just-leaving-flats/




So, that is BANNED CLADDING put on last year after residents had been having problems with electrical surges and appliance fires caused by them since back in 2013 at least.

The people in the Council who made the decision to do that should be jailed, as should May's Chief of Staff who was given a report about the dangers while her aide, and fucking sat on it.

I was, of course, referring to the general question surrounding the past planning, construction and refurbishment of such tower blocks "up and down the country", several of which, I understand, are in my own local authority area.

Had you actually taken the trouble to read my post properly, you might have recognised that there was absolutely no political "angle" or bias to what I wrote and that your predictable Labour-defensive, anti-May, "let's-hang-a-Tory" tirade was entirely superfluous and irrelevant.

...if typical and fully expected of someone who appears simply to be incapable of accepting that someone may hold opinions that differ from your own blinkered views and blind, unquestioning party political zealotry.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

sassy wrote:Firstly the cladding was only put on last year.   Philip Hammand said on Marr THAT IT WAS BANNED and the Council have been so useless as dealing with the results that others have had to take over.

ALSO:

Grenfell Tower firefighters put out fridge blaze 'and were just leaving when flats erupted in flames'



Firefighters had put out the initial fridge fire at Grenfell Tower and were leaving the building when the blaze suddenly flared up, it has emerged.

Crews believed they had put out the fire at the London high-rise and were astonished to see flames rising up the side of the building, new reports have claimed.

Shortly after dealing with the fridge fire early last Wednesday, firefighters were telling residents that it was out, BBC Panorama reported.

But, soon after, the 24-storey building was consumed by flames in one of Britain's biggest ever tower block fires that left at least 79 people dead.

Panorama on Monday night reported that firefighters had seen flames "shooting up" the side of the building.

Those reports will add weight to claims that it was the cladding on the exterior of Grenfell Tower that caused the fire to spread so rapidly.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/20/grenfell-tower-firefighters-put-fridge-blaze-just-leaving-flats/




So, that is BANNED CLADDING put on last year after residents had been having problems with electrical surges and appliance fires caused by them since back in 2013 at least.

The people in the Council who made the decision to do that should be jailed, as should May's Chief of Staff who was given a report about the dangers while her aide, and fucking sat on it.

I was, of course, referring to the general question surrounding the past planning, construction and refurbishment of such tower blocks "up and down the country", several of which, I understand, are in my own local authority area.

Had you actually taken the trouble to read my post properly, you might have recognised that there was absolutely no political "angle" or bias to what I wrote and that your predictable Labour-defensive, anti-May, "let's-hang-a-Tory" tirade was entirely superfluous and irrelevant.

...if typical and fully expected of someone who appears simply to be incapable of accepting that someone may hold opinions that differ from your own blinkered views and blind, unquestioning party political zealotry.

I'm not discussing opinions, I'm discussing facts. Fact the cladding went on last year, fact Philip Hammond said it is banned and after numerous power surge, fact Mays aide sat on the report but she has just promoted him, fact as I put on another thread three other ministers were warned, fact the council has been so fucking useless Ealing council has had to take over and another bloody fact I have just learned, some of the victims are sleeping in parks because the council can't get it's bloody finger out

sassy wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

I was, of course, referring to the general question surrounding the past planning, construction and refurbishment of such tower blocks "up and down the country", several of which, I understand, are in my own local authority area.

Had you actually taken the trouble to read my post properly, you might have recognised that there was absolutely no political "angle" or bias to what I wrote and that your predictable Labour-defensive, anti-May, "let's-hang-a-Tory" tirade was entirely superfluous and irrelevant.

...if typical and fully expected of someone who appears simply to be incapable of accepting that someone may hold opinions that differ from your own blinkered views and blind, unquestioning party political zealotry.

I'm not discussing opinions, I'm discussing facts. Fact the cladding went on last year, fact Philip Hammond said it is banned and after numerous power surge, fact Mays aide sat on the report but she has just promoted him, fact as I put on another thread three other ministers were warned, fact the council has been so fucking useless Ealing council has had to take over and another bloody fact I have just learned, some of the victims are sleeping in parks because the council can't get it's bloody finger out

People are being denied access to money due to lack of ID. Now, what is to stop unscrupulous people saying they are Grenfell tenants and tapping into this while the genuine ones may be diddled out of funds? Also, people are concerned that this might affect their benefits. People have been offered temporary homes out of the borough but have refused. They want to stay, which is understandable, and some are housed in hotels. I agree the Council need to prioritise this, and I'm no fan of Borough Councils, but it takes time.

With a bit of luck the survivors will get some massive compensation, but it could take years.

Grenfell Tower Death Toll: How Many Are Dead And What You Need To Know About Conspiracy Theories:

“They’re down-playing the number of dead,” one local resident told HuffPost UK. “They’re not telling us the real figure because they know we will be angry.”

As the number of people dead and missing presumed dead following the Grenfell Tower disaster rose to 79 on Monday - five days after the inferno engulfed the 24-storey building - dozens of residents are still waiting for news about their missing loved ones.

Walk around west London and you will be faced with hundreds of posters appealing for information about those still missing following Wednesday’s tragedy.

Although there are stories of hope, such as five people believed to have been missing now found “safe and well”, there are growing conspiracies as to the true number of deceased.

Metropolitan Police Commander Stuart Cundy said the search operation will be “painstaking” and that the complex investigation will take many weeks to conclude.

But many aren’t satisfied with this response, calling for a quicker release of information and accusing the media and authorities of lying about the true number of deceased.

How many people are officially dead and missing?

Police said that five of the 79 people dead and missing presumed dead have been formally identified.

Why isn’t the official figure higher?

With hundreds of people living in the tower, residents have voiced their concerns that the number will be much higher than 79.
Yet despite the number of dead likely to increase, the authorities do not release the official number until they are certain.

Commander Cundy said on Monday that, due to the intensity of the fire, investigators may not be able to identify everybody that has died.

How many people were in the building at the time of the fire?

We don’t know. There were 120 homes in the high-rise, with the number of occupants varying.

Authorities are working to establish how many residents were at home during the fire and whether there were any guests in the building at the time.

The Grenfell Fire Response Team has confirmed that 201 households have received emergency accommodation to date.

A spokesman from the response team said that survivors they have temporarily rehomed have been rehoused locally in the area.

What are the conspiracy theories and why don’t they stand up?

Local resident and volunteer DJ Isla claimed in a clip viewed more than 9.8 million times on Facebook that the aid effort for Grenfell Tower victims is in vain as “everyone’s died”.

Questioning the reason for the relief effort, she said: “Where is everyone [the residents]? Where are the victims? Why are we [the volunteers] doing this?”.

She added: “Fifteen minutes it took to burn. Who’s alive? Where are they? Where are the victims? I haven’t met one and I’ve been here for two days.”

Yet relief organisations are providing emergency accommodation for more than 200 households.

The Grenfell Fire Response Team said that they are assessing the housing needs of all Grenfell Tower and Grenfell Walk families to “identify suitable accommodation in Kensington and Chelsea and neighbouring borough”.

So far, 126 hotel placements have been found for Grenfell Towers and Grenfell Walk residents.

Others have accused the media of under reporting, or suppressing, the true death toll.

Most of the media are using the police figures as guidance, as many people are still officially issuing.

Victims have to be found and identified. Their families are then informed.

While this process is taking place, it would be irresponsible to start peddling unsubstantiated figures until the official number has been released.

And officials are warning that it may be impossible to identify everyone killed in the blaze.

What has the official response been like?

There’s no doubt that the official response on the ground has been chaotic, adding to the public’s scepticism and mistrust of authorities.

Prime Minister Theresa May admitted at the weekend that the support for victims of the inferno was “not good enough”.

While the community and volunteers have turned up in their thousands to help the relief effort, residents asked HuffPost UK on Friday: “Why does it fall onto our community’s shoulders to organise everything?

“Why did it take more than 24 hours to have a designated area for all these car packs and donations coming to us... it shouldn’t have taken as long as it has.”

Although there is growing hostility towards Kensington and Chelsea borough council and TMO, both of whom were criticised for their alleged lack of presence in the aftermath of the blaze, firefighters have been praised for their work.

Firefighters were given a hero’s goodbye as they left the scene on Sunday, with local residents applauding the servicemen and servicewomen.

It was also announced at the weekend that residents whose homes were destroyed will receive a Government down-payment of at least £5,500 from Monday.

The money comes from the £5 million government emergency fund previously announced, and support workers will help those who need it access it.

By Monday, £202,000 of Government funds had been distributed to 180 families.

These are being made up of a £500 cash payment and £5,000 delivered through DWP into bank accounts or similar in a single payment.

The cash payment is available now – either at the Westway Centre, or through the Post Office in Portobello Road. The £5,000 payment is available and assigned key workers will assist households in accessing this.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/grenfell-tower-death-toll-how-many-are-dead-and-what-are-the-conspiracy-theories_uk_594793bce4b01eab7a2ecc23?utm_hp_ref=uk

Now, how's this for irony.

The cladding was meant to improve the view, for the affluent residents in the area. So that they would not have a chavvy looking grey towerblock in their direct line of vision. Too reminiscent of "sink estates"

So what has it been replaced with?? I challenge anyone to conjure up a worse eyesore than this. Could take  months to demolish too.


The best laid plans of mice & men ...

sassy wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

I was, of course, referring to the general question surrounding the past planning, construction and refurbishment of such tower blocks "up and down the country", several of which, I understand, are in my own local authority area.

Had you actually taken the trouble to read my post properly, you might have recognised that there was absolutely no political "angle" or bias to what I wrote and that your predictable Labour-defensive, anti-May, "let's-hang-a-Tory" tirade was entirely superfluous and irrelevant.

...if typical and fully expected of someone who appears simply to be incapable of accepting that someone may hold opinions that differ from your own blinkered views and blind, unquestioning party political zealotry.

I'm not discussing opinions, I'm discussing facts. Fact the cladding went on last year, fact Philip Hammond said it is banned and after numerous power surge, fact Mays aide sat on the report but she has just promoted him, fact as I put on another thread three other ministers were warned, fact the council has been so fucking useless Ealing council has had to take over and another bloody fact I have just learned, some of the victims are sleeping in parks because the council can't get it's bloody finger out

Then why attempt to hijack my post, which was in direct response to one by HT and simply went on to refer to the likelihood of many local authorities throughout the country now having to face up to the same sort of long term engineering, technical and social issues?

And please don't try to deny that it was exactly what you did, purely for the purposes of spreading your drearily repetitive anti-Tory propaganda, otherwise your opening word would not have been "Firstly..."

Frankly, I am no more in the slightest interested in your regurgitated Labour Press Office briefings and your endless manic diatribes about how the Conservatives are the sole perpetrators of central and local government incompetence, maladministration and rank stupidity than you are in the opinions of anyone who does not slavishly share your party political allegiance and sycophancy.

And a red stripe against any my posts has far less effect upon me than one of my dog's occasional farts.

HoratioTarr wrote:With a bit of luck the survivors will get some massive compensation, but it could take years.

If the government have any sense they will fast track the procedure, at the very least in the initial stages, with substantial payments.

Once the matter progresses into the hands of the courts they will not, constitutionally, be able to do anything about it.

If not, they will rightly be condemned for it.

sassy wrote:Firstly the cladding was only put on last year.   Philip Hammand said on Marr THAT IT WAS BANNED and the Council have been so useless as dealing with the results that others have had to take over.

ALSO:

Grenfell Tower firefighters put out fridge blaze 'and were just leaving when flats erupted in flames'



Firefighters had put out the initial fridge fire at Grenfell Tower and were leaving the building when the blaze suddenly flared up, it has emerged.

Crews believed they had put out the fire at the London high-rise and were astonished to see flames rising up the side of the building, new reports have claimed.

Shortly after dealing with the fridge fire early last Wednesday, firefighters were telling residents that it was out, BBC Panorama reported.

But, soon after, the 24-storey building was consumed by flames in one of Britain's biggest ever tower block fires that left at least 79 people dead.

Panorama on Monday night reported that firefighters had seen flames "shooting up" the side of the building.

Those reports will add weight to claims that it was the cladding on the exterior of Grenfell Tower that caused the fire to spread so rapidly.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/20/grenfell-tower-firefighters-put-fridge-blaze-just-leaving-flats/




So, that is BANNED CLADDING put on last year after residents had been having problems with electrical surges and appliance fires caused by them since back in 2013 at least.

The people in the Council who made the decision to do that should be jailed, as should May's Chief of Staff who was given a report about the dangers while her aide, and fucking sat on it.

They thought the fire was out? Well that's suspicious - firefighters wouldn't leave until they were sure it was safe and there was no fire.

Jules wrote:Now, how's this for irony.

The cladding was meant to improve the view, for the affluent residents in the area. So that they would not have a chavvy looking grey towerblock in their direct line of vision. Too reminiscent of "sink estates"

So what has it been replaced with?? I challenge anyone to conjure up a worse eyesore than this. Could take  months to demolish too.


The best laid plans of mice & men ...

The cladding was put there for other reasons as well.

Grenfell Tower firefighters put out fridge blaze 'and were just leaving when flats erupted in flames'

Firefighters had put out the initial fridge fire at Grenfell Tower and were leaving the building when the blaze suddenly flared up, it has emerged.
Crews believed they had put out the fire at the London high-rise and were astonished to see flames rising up the side of the building, new reports have claimed.

Shortly after dealing with the fridge fire early last Wednesday, firefighters were telling residents that it was out, BBC Panorama reported.

But, soon after, the 24-storey building was consumed by flames....

Huh??

eddie wrote:

Grenfell Tower firefighters put out fridge blaze 'and were just leaving when flats erupted in flames'

Firefighters had put out the initial fridge fire at Grenfell Tower and were leaving the building when the blaze suddenly flared up, it has emerged.
Crews believed they had put out the fire at the London high-rise and were astonished to see flames rising up the side of the building, new reports have claimed.

Shortly after dealing with the fridge fire early last Wednesday, firefighters were telling residents that it was out, BBC Panorama reported.

But, soon after, the 24-storey building was consumed by flames....

Huh??

There is nothing particularly strange about a situation like this -- similar scenarios can occur in bushfires, where an initial fire has been extinguished, but a second fire is smouldering away in underground roots, or off in the scrub in the background somewhere, only to flare up after firefighters thought they nad that primary fire out, controlled or contained..

Or imagine a hidden smouldering fire reigniting a building after firemen had extinguished the original fire ?

In this case, it was an illegal (i.e. non-compliant, banned in other places..) highly-inflammable material, hidden between the buildings outside wall and new "cosmetic" cladding, with enough air space and opemings as to allow that second fire to accelerate out of control..

That council was warned years ago, so 'heads are going to roll' eventually, once they have completed the coroner's report...

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

eddie wrote:

All that could be true. So that could mean there's more dead than even a council list may suggest?

There is also another possible scenario to be added onto those you people are discussing...

After disasters of this scale, sometimes people who are listed as "missing" could have actually 'done a runner' and disappeared deliberately --  maybe someone wanted to run away for one reason or another (e.g. bad debts, bad marriage, family feuds, death threats, simply 'fed up' with their current situation..), and start a new life with a new identity somewhere far away ?

As outlandish as that seems to some people, there are many cases of "missing persons" cropping up 20, 30 or 40 years later..

********************************************************

And what about people who are away on holidays, or away for work, and may be in_communicado for a few weeks ?

Maybe not so common,  but it does happen..

Further to my point above, about other possibilities why some people could be thought to be "missing" after such disasters..

Here is one report of a family being found safe and well, after initially being thought missing earlier on, after the fire --

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/19/family-thought-missing-grenfell-tower-fire-has-found-alive/

Jules... try reading thread... cladding was for insulation to meet eu rules on green/environmental targets primarily...

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

eddie wrote:

All that could be true. So that could mean there's more dead than even a council list may suggest?

There is also another possible scenario to be added onto those you people are discussing...

After disasters of this scale, sometimes people who are listed as "missing" could have actually 'done a runner' and disappeared deliberately --  maybe someone wanted to run away for one reason or another (e.g. bad debts, bad marriage, family feuds, death threats, simply 'fed up' with their current situation..), and start a new life with a new identity somewhere far away ?

As outlandish as that seems to some people, there are many cases of "missing persons" cropping up 20, 30 or 40 years later..

********************************************************

And what about people who are away on holidays, or away for work, and may be in_communicado for a few weeks ?

Maybe not so common,  but it does happen..

Further to my point above, about other possibilities why some people could be thought to be "missing" after such disasters..

Here is one report of a family being found safe and well, after initially being thought missing earlier on, after the fire --

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/19/family-thought-missing-grenfell-tower-fire-has-found-alive/

Wolf I have a feeling some of the dead / missing may have been here illegally and their families may never know they are dead....and that's too awful to contemplate.
Horrible.

Horrible to think about, but many will have been beyond cremated, simply turned to ash with no residual DNA. They wilm forever be unaccounted for.

eddie wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:


Further to my point above, about other possibilities why some people could be thought to be "missing" after such disasters..

Here is one report of a family being found safe and well, after initially being thought missing earlier on, after the fire --

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/19/family-thought-missing-grenfell-tower-fire-has-found-alive/

Wolf I have a feeling some of the dead / missing may have been here illegally and their families may never know they are dead....and that's too awful to contemplate.
Horrible.

Eddie... I already posted something about it being known that many of the residents there had illegal immigrants renting rooms off them...

You are simply voicing an opinion Tom. I dont entirely disagree that there MAY have been some illegal residents, but it is unlikely ever to be proven, therefore it will have to remain an assumption rather than absolute knowledge of the fact.

Angry Andy wrote:Horrible to think about, but many will have been beyond cremated, simply turned to ash with no residual DNA. They wilm forever be unaccounted for.

There's always something left. Cremation of a dead body is done at between 1400 to 1800 degrees Fahrenheit. That fire was around 1000 degrees F.

Angry Andy wrote:You are simply voicing an opinion Tom. I dont entirely disagree that there MAY have been some illegal residents, but it is unlikely ever to be proven, therefore it will have to remain an assumption rather than absolute knowledge of the fact.

No... it was being discussed on the radio after a police appeal to residents to come forward to tell authorities about others living with them and saying it didnt matter the circumstances and they wouldnt get in trouble etc...

Documents submitted to Kensington and Chelsea Council's planning department show residents were consulted in 2012 over the renovations and were asked what cladding they wanted.

They show they chose a fire-resistant product called VMZ Composite which was said to have "many benefits".

A newsletter handed to tenants and submitted with the planning application stated: "Various cladding options have been shown to residents with the composite cladding system being favoured by the majority."

The document clearly stated the cladding had "fire retardancy".

Two years later, a cheaper scheme was agreed and new proposals were approved by council planners.

Instead of the fire-resistant panels chosen by residents, cheaper plastic-filled cladding was fitted.


http://news.sky.com/story/grenfell-tower-residents-were-promised-fire-resistant-cladding-five-years-ago-10921701

We need to know what was agreed to be fitted, by whom, and by what method, and whether it met building fire/safety regulations etc...?


But we also need to know what was ACTUALLY FITTED BY CONTRACTORS, and HOW IT WAS FITTED... ie was it the stuff specified or some cheaper alternative done on the sly? Did they install fire barriers at each level as required etc?


All the contracts and agreed job requirements need to be investigated... plus receipts for building materials used etc...




Any work agreed by the council MUST COMPLY with the relevant fire/safety/building regulations... AND MUST BE CHECKED AND APPROVED AND SIGNED OFF BY THE RELEVANT BUILDING INSPECTORS!!!


THE COUNCIL WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN APPROVING SOMETHING THAT DID NOT MEET THE STANDARDS SET BY THE FIRE/SAFETY/BUILDING RULES AND REGULATIONS!!!

Thorin wrote:Two years later, a cheaper scheme was agreed and new proposals were approved by council planners.

Instead of the fire-resistant panels chosen by residents, cheaper plastic-filled cladding was fitted.

That would be illegal.  You cannot have an contractual agreement to break the law.  That is invalid on its face. Only a legislature (council or parliament) can alter the law, and that doesn't include arbitrary action by "council planners".

Back to square one... If those guys did that, they will be up for a homicide...involuntary manslaughter at a minimum.

Tommy Monk wrote:Jules... try reading thread... cladding was for insulation to meet eu rules on green/environmental targets primarily...

Condescending post, TM.
Before I made that post I already saw numerous articles about the insulation issue, in the press and on YT.
Still does not detract from the fact that aesthetics was another reason though.

I wonder if Tommy works for that council ???

He seems to be the only one here so strenuously defending them..

Jules wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Jules... try reading thread... cladding was for insulation to meet eu rules on green/environmental targets primarily...

Condescending post, TM.
Before I made that post I already saw numerous articles about the insulation issue, in the press and on YT.
Still does not detract from the fact that aesthetics was another reason though.

But not a main reason... and anyway, the residents would be benefiting from the building looking nicer too...

Tommy Monk wrote:We need to know what was agreed to be fitted, by whom, and by what method, and whether it met building fire/safety regulations etc...?


But we also need to know what was ACTUALLY FITTED BY CONTRACTORS, and HOW IT WAS FITTED... ie was it the stuff specified or some cheaper alternative done on the sly? Did they install fire barriers at each level as required etc?


All the contracts and agreed job requirements need to be investigated... plus receipts for building materials used etc...




Any work agreed by the council MUST COMPLY with the relevant fire/safety/building regulations... AND MUST BE CHECKED AND APPROVED AND SIGNED OFF BY THE RELEVANT BUILDING INSPECTORS!!!


THE COUNCIL WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN APPROVING SOMETHING THAT DID NOT MEET THE STANDARDS SET BY THE FIRE/SAFETY/BUILDING RULES AND REGULATIONS!!!

Seems like the council did just that.

There would be arhitects and designers on some very big bucks who would be drawing up the plans for the work... an it must comply with the relevant fire/safety/building regulations... the council wuld just be saying yes to a plan that had already met regulations...

Blocks in Plymouth fitted with same cladding 15 years ago...

And met the building regulations then...


Wasnt it labour in govt then...?

Tommy Monk wrote:Blocks in Plymouth fitted with same cladding 15 years ago...

And met the building regulations then...


Wasnt it labour in govt then...?

You are most definitely not supposed to say things like that.

It will involve Sassy in much time and effort in contacting the Labour Party Press Office with an urgent plea for today's "briefing notes for activists" in the fervent hope that the answer to your question is included in "suggested responses to awkward questions."

This will, of course, amount to about 1,000 words and several links to articles in The Guardian, Daily Mirror and Morning Star (oops! Sorry. Shouldn't have let that out of the bag) that prove conclusively that the Labour Government had attempted to ban the practice but were prevented from doing so by the obstructive action of Tory MPs representing the vested interests of millionaire tax evading Tory donor businessmen....(and etc., etc., ad nauseam and ad infinitum.)

Tommy Monk wrote:Blocks in Plymouth fitted with same cladding 15 years ago...

And met the building regulations then...


Wasnt it labour in govt then...?

Maybe sassy could tell us...!?