Grenfell Tower enquiry

maryeliza54, apologies, I did not realize that you were referring to bodies outside the inquiry.

I would imagine that the Daily Mail and suchlike have had all the answers for months. So, no need for an inquiry, only have to look at what Paul Dacre has concluded

Thank you Maw and Mostly for your positive posts regarding the work of the men and women on the ground in the Fire Service.

We cannot imagine what those firemen who attended the call out saw and heard

You know, looking at this thread has set me wondering exactly what Jingles was banned for....

Blinko some of us have tried to move this thread onwards and upwards now

And some, despite my best intentions, have not.
To save further faffing about.
What
Is
LWB?

I met one of the fireman who had been at GT as our area had the longest ladder available so a crew went with it. It was about a month afterwards and it’s hard to describe how he looked - I found myself quite haunted by him afterwards and imagine that the enquiry must be bringing it all back to him( and all the other front liners involved both paid and voluntary)

I think it might be "Love Writing Bull", MawBroon.

Some of us have moved onward and upward MB . Please try and keep this thread respectful and put any goady comments elsewhere.

ican there’s a whole other thread devoted to that - could I ask you to leave this thread alone now re that subject?

Our previous worst tower block fire was Lakanal House, Camberwell in July 2009. There was a coroner's inquest on the three women and three children who died. It became clear that 'stay put' was not always the best advice in a Tower block fire.
Window surrounds at Lakana had been replaced in the 1980s. There was an obvious opportunity for both fire brigade chiefs and council housing departments to learn from this tragedy. I almost wish I hadn't googled Lakanal inquest. ?
Apparently they didn't.

Lessons never seem to be learned Elrel

Elrel, that is troubling to learn

After reading your post Elrel I found this article - it does make for chilling reading

www.shponline.co.uk/grenfell-tower-predicted/

I'm currently reading Andrew O'Hagan's long piece on Grenfell in London Review of Books. It is harrowing and the confusion and complications of the tragedy and its aftermath myriad.
One quote: 'The plastic insulation industry is one of the most litigious in the world, but it is common knowledge among fire safety experts that their advertisements and their tests are bogus.'
A second: 'The number of experienced firefighters available in London is constantly under threat.'

What an unnecessary tragedy, let's hope that, finally, lessons are learned.

We have a relative who was part of an elite band of firemen who were trained in Urban Rescue - for 'specialised' events that needed people to be dug out of collapsed or bombed buildings or just the kind of unexpected extra emergency that the Grenfell Tower tragedy proved to be. They were disbanded a year or so ago, which seemed like insanity given terrorist attacks and the increasing density of London. Money again, of course We can have every service that we need and want in the capital if there is money there to pay for it but cost cutting seems to be the criteria.

I certainly feel that the criticism of the fire service is at this stage of the inquiry very harsh. Anyone only has to imagine the dilemma the commander at the scene had to deal with on arrival.

In any situation such as he/she was confronted with, what is known as a Dynamic risk assessment has to be worked out within minutes. Upon that assessment the lives of all in the building plus the lives of all the fire officers under command will rely.

The basis of any Dynamic risk assessment is always the information that the emergency services have to hand in regards to access, overall fire resistance of the building, the placement of hydrants, etc. Undoubtedly that information would have stated that fire in any one flat could not spread to adjoining flats.

However, what the scene commander could without doubt witness was the rapid progress of the fire up the outside of the building. In that, the commander may well have believed for some time that, however dramatic that may have looked that fire could not spread to the inside of the building, (which in reality should have been the case)

It may well have been that it was only when his officers started reporting that large amounts of smoke and toxins were in the stairwells, along with reports from residents that the fire was indeed entering their homes, that a true picture of the situation became available to the fire service commander.

Again, anyone only has to imagine as that situation became clear what that commander must have gone through mentally as the horror unfolded. Emergency service lift not working, officers not being able to get up the stairs with all their equipment, and even the ladders not being able to gain close access to the building for some time because the large vehicle gate was locked and the keys were not available.

The inquiry as it proceeds along with the police and H&SE investigation will bring forward what decisions were made, at what time and why.

Until all the above information is available to everyone and we have heard from the services commander on the scene that night personally give an account of events and the thinking in all that, then everyone should wait before prejudging the advice given to residence as some sections of the press are doing today.

I certainly feel that the criticism of the fire service is at this stage of the inquiry very harsh. Anyone only has to imagine the dilemma the commander at the scene had to deal with on arrival.
I agree Grandad.

Were the Fire Service ever informed of the updates to the tower block? Were they ever asked to go in and do a re-assessement?

Jalima1108, it use to be that those responsible for the safety of large public buildings would supply the emergency services all details in regard to hazard reduction at their buildings. That would include risk assessments carried out, details of key holders, access for large vehicles etc, or any details that could be useful to the emergency services in a time critical situation.

Sadly, that no longer seems to be the case as deregulation has seen that compulsion now gone or simply not upheld. As was seen at Grenfell when the first fire appliances arrived, they did not even have the key code to access the main door and had to wait for someone to exit the building before they could gain entry.

Fire service's inspection has to be carried out by reference to unverified risk assessments that have been drawn up by the owners or those managing the building.

The Health & Safety Executive still have the power of inspection and verification, but after years of financial restriction by governments of all colours, their ability to carry out such work is very much diminished.

Grenfell is the result of many years of press campaigns against "elf & safety" and 'red tape" and in that governments giving way to those campaigns.

Thanks Grandad

It beggars belief, doesn't it. Having worked somewhere where there were regular fire and bomb drills, it is horrifying to think that these regulations and rules do not apply to high rise blocks of flats like these.

Today, one year on from Grenfell there have been many fitting tributes to those that paid the ultimate price on that night and all others that have been affected by the disaster. As David Dimbleby stated on BBC1 yesterday the further time takes us all from the night of the tragedy, then as ever more becomes known in regard to the circumstances surrounding the fire, the worse this all becomes.

Many who lost everything they owned that night are still to be rehoused. As one former occupant of the tower has stated," moving can be a traumatic event, but when you move with absolutely nothing from your past then it is truly traumatic in every sense of the word".

I believe next week sees the enquiry move to first statements from those representing the Westminster District Council, the management company of the building and those that were involved with the refurbishment of the building including the fitting the cladding.

It way well be that those bodies will argue that they carried out all that legislation demanded of them when it came to the changes that were made to Grenfell Tower. Again, it may well be that the above argument will be sufficient to keep many of those involved with the refurbishment from facing true justice.

Let us all hope that the foregoing does not become the case, for if ever true justice needed to be served then it surely must be in the case of the Grenfell victims

Are you not judging before evidence has been given?

Anniebach, if you read my above post I used the words " it may well be", therefore I am not prejudging anything. I will also not be drawn into an argument with you on this day being one year since the disaster.

I asked a polite question, nothing to make anyone think it was an argument surely.

Just leave it today of all days ab just leave it.