The Blame Game?

[cee-dee]

The aftermath of the tower block fire is leading to recriminations and, it seems to me, people are blaming everyone but themselves? (That is, those in "officialdom")

Now, they're throwing people out of their homes with very little notice and if they won't leave, they're going to "remove" them?

Where do you begin? Leaving aside the installation of the flammable nature of the cladding for the moment, I suppose the design of the buildings in the first place left a lot to be desired?

However, since then, there must have been inspections of some sort regarding the fire "regulations" and the current state didn't just happen overnight? Those buildings were "OK" last week but suddenly they're so dangerous those living there must leave "right now"? Seems a massive over-reaction?

Fire doors are supposed to hold a fire back for a while and they're supposed to have closers on them so that they're never left open. Used regularly, they're a nuisance for those passing through them and many are either jammed open or have the closers removed or inactivated.

In the end, "blame" will be levelled at "someone" or some official body but who is really to blame if blame there is?

Returning to the cladding, it seems pretty clear that a massive "mistake" was made in not checking the fire resistance or otherwise of the cladding before it was installed?

At the moment, no-one can say whether the cladding used was "to a specification" or whether the cladding was a substitute for what was originally specified when the cladding was replaced?

No-one can say (yet) whether someone knowingly allowed the substitution of a specified type of cladding with a cheaper type or if that was done deliberately to make more money by charging for the more expensive type but using the cheaper one. Such things happen and once a certain product has been "approved", those supplying it will try to get their cheaper product substituted to make more money. It goes on, but is anyone checking?????

[right-then-petal]

they say a faulty fridge started the fire

[margaret*e]

Yes, but if all regulations had been followed that should have been contained in the flat it started.

Evacuating people with no, or very little notice is a massive over reaction.

After all they've lived there for years.

How are they supposed to make arrangements for pets etc with such little notice.

I  saw one wman say  she had told she couldn't be rehomed because she had a dog and was she supposed to get rid of it.

[fallen-archie]

I agree with Marge it is terrible to remove people in the way that has happened in Camden! Yes they have a duty of care and yes they would be crucified if another block went up, however the use of fire marshalls along with provision of fire extinguishing equipment along with training which is straightforward would/ should enable people to continue to live in their homes, you are far more likely to get killed in a road traffic accident than in a high rise fire we would be insane to try and ban all cars from the roads!
I think as aside it would be a good opportunity for councils to check on who is sub letting properties and how many people are actually resident in some of their housing, this whole question of sub letting needs to be addressed as does the housing market generally!

[cee-dee]

The mention of sub-letting is another issue really but is perhaps another point surrounding "affordable housing"?

This "affordable housing" or "social housing" has little regard to either affordable or social. It's another word for the slums of tomorrow. Small "housing units" all crammed together isn't very appealing at the best of times and those proposing them should be made to live in them?

I thought the "right to buy" scheme was a bad idea from the off because not all Council properties were really suitable for selling off. Drive round some of the Council estates now and have a look at the houses. Many of the estates have had the houses "modernised" by the local authority and those in private ownership stand out now. The roofs are old as are the facias, windows, doors, gutters and downspouts while the modernised ones have new roofs etc and some have solar panels. Some of the ones in private ownership are also rented out and are occupied by a transient population who don't care about the conditions they live in or their effect on their neighbours either.

On the other hand, there are houses on the fringes of Council estates which have been sold off and stand out as well preseved and well presented properties with nice gardens and only the style gives away their "Council" heritage.

Going back to the tenants being thrown out of the tower blacks, it wouldn't take much to supply fire fighting equipment, proper fire alarms and as FA suggested, fire marshals as a stop-gap measure while other remedies are effected? The only thing is, there are those around who vandalise fixtures and fittings, steal anything not nailed down or load communal corridors and entrances with all sorts of junk because they can't be bothered to dispose of it properly.

In the end, it's people who make some short-comings a death trap?

Just after the fire, one chap was on TV saying his neighbour said "his fridge had exploded" so the fridge angle was known about from day one. The things is, if it was your fridge wouldn't you try to extinguish it just after it happened?

Oh yes, another thing, when there's a largish fire, didn't the fire brigade say "Get out and stay out"? At that tower they were telling people to stay put?????

Surely these days the electrical system has circuit breakers instead of fuses so that the electrical supply is cut off (and the power to sockets is separate from the lighting) meaning that you could safely use water to put out a fire in an appliance before it gets out of control?

There's many questions and very few answers at the moment?

[astrologica]

The tenant of the flat where the fire started tried to put out the fire, but when he realised that it had taken hold, he decided to pack all his belongings in suitcases before alerting his neighbours. Unbelievable.

There was also a report in my newspaper that there were plans to install sprinklers, but some residents complained because of the disruption that it would cause. No doubt all these facts will emerge during the enquiry.

[joe_bloggs*]

Daily mail readers eh,milk of human kindness

[theelench]

As someone living in an ex-local authority low rise flat I've been surprised that I haven't heard much mentioned about the following.

When CFCs were banned the gas used in fridges was replaced by a much more flammable gas that fire authorities have noted as potentially more dangerous because of the intensity of any fire.

Although in my block each flat is isolated with concrete floors / ceilings and brick dividing walls the flats are connected vertically by the service ducts which in this and other blocks I've seen are situated in the kitchen.  To provide some storage space the duct is partitioned by ply-wood from a cupboard with gas and electric meters.  As storage space is limited the cupboard is crammed with all kinds of flammable material.

The other point that seems to have been largely ignored is the weather..  This disaster happened at night, during a heat-wave.  In my block every flat had doors and windows open to get a draft of cool air circulating.  In the tower block it would have been the same and once a fire started the flames would have been fed by the up-draft.  Once a fire gets into a service duct it would be sucked upwards with flammable partitions on every floor and no fire resistant barrier into the cupboards. 

Although the fire was visibly racing up the external cladding this must have also been aided by the air sucked in through open windows feeding the fire inside.  I can't help thinking that the fire would not have spread so fast if it had happened in winter when most of the windows would have been closed.

[cee-dee]

That's a very well thought out line of thinking.

How'd they go on in America where the skyscrapers are much taller?

[theelench]

I don't know anything about America or their building regs.,  so don't know how they go on.

Thinking back to the Sunday morning when I first heard of the fire, one of the first videos I watched was from someone in the adjacent tower.  It showed the side with the blazing cladding but also shows the corner and the next side around the block with what looked like a corner flat on fire.  The camera moves to show the flames heading up the cladding then goes back to the corner flat and shows the flat above on fire but the cladding on the second side is not on fire.  From that I would say that as well as in the cladding the fire was also spreading inside the block and moving up the ducts.