Camden evacuates tower block over fears cladding plus something else

35
Posted 23rd Jun 2017
theguardian.com/uk-…ngs
.
Speedy actions - knocks on the tenants' doors at 21:00 Friday night! Some found out from the news that they are meant to move.
.
looks like *they* can test now how many are sublets and have illegals too
.
3,000 tenants are involved in this Camden weekend evacuation, huge logistical nightmare at such short notice.
.
Thursday night Camden held a tenant-council meeting when tenants tabled some safety issues (not just cladding). Today it was declared that Taplow block is unsafe and no one could guarantee its safety without some modifications. News is very confused at the moment as to what are the immediate issues, gas pipes in the landing?
Community Updates
Misc
Top comments
davewave

Labour council...just like Tory council, where has the focus shifted from … Labour council...just like Tory council, where has the focus shifted from to focus on the hot topic! let's march!



Change the record.
Labour council...just like Tory council, where has the focus shifted from to focus on the hot topic! let's march!
35 Comments
Labour council...just like Tory council, where has the focus shifted from to focus on the hot topic! let's march!
Just don't set them on fire till it can be fixed
davewave

Labour council...just like Tory council, where has the focus shifted from … Labour council...just like Tory council, where has the focus shifted from to focus on the hot topic! let's march!



Change the record.
I'd have thought it would be a good idea to make sure that flats in these apartment blocks are not sublet or overcrowded as part of safety precautions. Any illegal occupants only add to the problem in the aftermath of disasters.
Edited by: "Predikuesi" 23rd Jun 2017
A simpler option until they could be made safe would be to have a fire crew on standby with a fire watch man. They could then tackle any fire within a few minutes.

As well as arming flat tennant's with fire extinguishers, blankets and alarms. Making sure they work too etc.

Going to cost billions.
Edited by: ".MUFC." 23rd Jun 2017
Could be quite a scene for the tenants to return on Friday night and then be evacuated for weeks/months. (If any such tenants are up to this scam of sub-lets as they may not exist.) What happens if the original tenant is living in Ibiza?!
.
However the number of such sub-lets is not a great , rbkc.gov.uk/bus…aud
Since 2010 over 100 properties have been recovered due to tenancy fraud ..so this is ~20 cases of fraud a year (out of a stock of ~7,000 council tenant properties , excluding leaseholds) which is ~0.3% recovery per year. They shall never know how many unknown sub-lets there are in RBKC.
shauneco

A simpler option until they could be made safe would be to have a fire … A simpler option until they could be made safe would be to have a fire crew on standby with a fire watch man. They could then tackle any fire within a few minutes. As well as arming flat tennant's with fire extinguishers, blankets and alarms. Making sure they work too etc. Going to cost billions.


Good idea , isn't it the case that the fireman's ladder only reaches up to 10th floor? Additionally this stuff burns rapidly in 15 mins.
May be feasible just to have a firemen team camping out on site on duty (on stand-by to use the dry-riser). Salaries of firemen is going to be cheaper than putting 3,000 in hotels?!
splender

Good idea , isn't it the case that the fireman's ladder only reaches up … Good idea , isn't it the case that the fireman's ladder only reaches up to 10th floor? Additionally this stuff burns rapidly in 15 mins. May be feasible just to have a firemen team camping out on site on duty (on stand-by to use the dry-riser). Salaries of firemen is going to be cheaper than putting 3,000 in hotels?!



If what I read in another thread is true, it would make very little difference. The fire spread to the outside of the building as the firemen were packing up after putting the fire out inside the flat. They hadn't known it had spread to the outside as they were doing that. They were in the building when it happened, they still couldn't tackle it fast enough.

This stuff should just be ripped off buildings asap and residents shouldn't have to stay in them until it's done.
Edited by: "MSK." 23rd Jun 2017
One of the tower blocks they are evacuating has survived two fires without burning down. I wonder if it was the one mentioned on a news item the other day that had the same exterior cladding, but had non-flammable mineral wool insulation instead of the combustible stuff and fire breaks around the windows.

Lets hope they are not moving them to any of the hotel tower blocks that are covered with the flammable cladding.
MSK.

If what I read in another thread is true, it would make very little … If what I read in another thread is true, it would make very little difference. The fire spread to the outside of the building as the firemen were packing up after putting the fire out inside the flat. They hadn't known it had spread to the outside as they were doing that. They were in the building when it happened, they still couldn't tackle it fast enough.This stuff should just be ripped off buildings asap and residents shouldn't have to stay in them until it's done.



The firemen would be more prepared in the future, They could for example fight the fire from the above flats. Arm the tenants with an extinguisher and any fire could potentially be put out within seconds.

A lot must be learned from the catastrophe, There will be hundreds of buildings at risk using similar cladding. Not viable to evacuate them all, It'll cost billions.

melted

Lets hope they are not moving them to any of the hotel tower blocks that … Lets hope they are not moving them to any of the hotel tower blocks that are covered with the flammable cladding.


Out of the frying pan and into the fire?
They could just partially evacuate the towers, say from the 7th floor upwards or from the maximum reach of ladders available. Seems like a possible over reaction, giving the tenants fire extinguishers and having say a couple of fire marshal/wardens on site 24/7 until the cladding is replaced would probably be enough.
Avatar
deleted156223
Certainly sets the stall for what action all other councils are now expected to take.

In many respects, councils are now damned if they evacuate and damned if they don't.

How about private blocks, surely they must now follow suit? How about offices, where does evacuation stop?

I can see months of chaos ahead.
MSK.

Change the record.


He'll have an orgasm if Diane Abbott gets involved.
I can just imagine a fireman coming to my door to tell me that the same disaster that happened could also potentially happen to where I live and then to hand me a fire extinguisher and a blanket. Not a chance would I stay there, and I don't even have kids to worry about.
buddhabelly

He'll have an orgasm if Diane Abbott gets involved.



​jeremy has her primed fella
Avatar
deleted1637027
davewave

jeremy has her primed fella



To do what? Count up the number of buildings affected?

I'm curious, since everyone wants to point fingers of blame on May. Were any buildings cladded with these panels prior to Cameron?

Are MPs meant to be expects in construction or would you think builders would enquire about the safety aspects of using them first and manufacturers would obviously be thinking of the fire implications and risks on the materials they use and how fitted.

Just seems a bit crass to blame politicians for the failures in the building, maintenance and manufacture of this and why corporate manslaughter charges are in the balance once enquiries are finished.
shauneco

A simpler option until they could be made safe would be to have a fire … A simpler option until they could be made safe would be to have a fire crew on standby with a fire watch man. They could then tackle any fire within a few minutes. As well as arming flat tennant's with fire extinguishers, blankets and alarms. Making sure they work too etc. Going to cost billions.



Sounds so easy. Just employ a night watchman on each floor for the duration of the repairs. Surely that would be more cost effective than finding accommodation for hundreds of families?

Kittles, ok, have one night watchman walking round the block keeping dog on the outside

Edited by: "deeky" 24th Jun 2017
3dprince

To do what? Count up the number of buildings affected?I'm curious, since … To do what? Count up the number of buildings affected?I'm curious, since everyone wants to point fingers of blame on May. Were any buildings cladded with these panels prior to Cameron?Are MPs meant to be expects in construction or would you think builders would enquire about the safety aspects of using them first and manufacturers would obviously be thinking of the fire implications and risks on the materials they use and how fitted.Just seems a bit crass to blame politicians for the failures in the building, maintenance and manufacture of this and why corporate manslaughter charges are in the balance once enquiries are finished.


You brought up an interesting question, "Are MPs meant to be expects in construction ", no, they don't have to be experts but they do need to know as much sciences, maths and technology as they know in English literature, history and geography, otherwise they could not combine common language with technical language. Moreover they need to know costs of technology plus processes against quality and risks. For example, politicians would need to have a grasp of what is minimum legal requirement versus a real life ground condition which typically needs over-design or over-engineered so as to give extra contingency to unknowns or unforeseen situations. Moreover politicians would need to grasp that a number of components with each of the constituent part meeting individual legal requirement do not necessarily lead to a safe total system. (For us ordinary folks here in MISC, we detect these flaws in statements when politicians or experts just utter that the (parts) thing is built in accordance with regulations (without saying that the each of the parts may comply minimally but all the parts working together may not be safe.)
.
Without the personal competence in cost-risks dynamics the politicians will be unable to drive the politics so as to effect quality and risk management for their voters in all the politics that is in technology and science driven, which in this case is construction. For example, in the inquest for Lakanal, the judge that was appointed specialises in construction.
.
Where you don't have speciliased knowledge you will have to rely on experts, in this case the likes of senior fire safety analyst, construction, borough planner , chief enginner. However the governance process is that a lower ranked Chief Engineer or Chief Fire Safety Officer can override CEO authority in the application of serious risks that could lead to fatality. The CEO cannot override these technical experts as Chief Engineer or Chief Fire Safety Office. This was illustrated by the world renown case in the Spaceship Challenger.
I believe this was how this Camden evacuation was decided yesterday in an exception governance process (The Leader of the Council took on the advise of the experts after a series of inspections this week.)
Avatar
deleted1637027
splender

You brought up an interesting question, "Are MPs meant to be expects in … You brought up an interesting question, "Are MPs meant to be expects in construction ", no, they don't have to be experts but they do need to know as much sciences, maths and technology as they know in English literature, history and geography, otherwise they could not combine common language with technical language. Moreover they need to know costs of technology plus processes against quality and risks. For example, politicians would need to have a grasp of what is minimum legal requirement versus a real life ground condition which typically needs over-design or over-engineered so as to give extra contingency to unknowns or unforeseen situations. Moreover politicians would need to grasp that a number of components with each of the constituent part meeting individual legal requirement do not necessarily lead to a safe total system. (For us ordinary folks here in MISC, we detect these flaws in statements when politicians or experts just utter that the (parts) thing is built in accordance with regulations (without saying that the each of the parts may comply minimally but all the parts working together may not be safe.) .Without the personal competence in cost-risks dynamics the politicians will be unable to drive the politics so as to effect quality and risk management for their voters in all the politics that is in technology and science driven, which in this case is construction. For example, in the inquest for Lakanal, the judge that was appointed specialises in construction..Where you don't have speciliased knowledge you will have to rely on experts, in this case the likes of senior fire safety analyst, construction, borough planner , chief enginner. However the governance process is that a lower ranked Chief Engineer or Chief Fire Safety Officer can override CEO authority in the application of serious risks that could lead to fatality. The CEO cannot override these technical experts as Chief Engineer or Chief Fire Safety Office. This was illustrated by the world renown case in the Spaceship Challenger.I believe this was how this Camden evacuation was decided yesterday in an exception governance process (The Leader of the Council took on the advise of the experts after a series of inspections this week.)



Like you said. You rely on the experts. The question you needed to ask, was should the experts be replaced?
shauneco

A simpler option until they could be made safe would be to have a fire … A simpler option until they could be made safe would be to have a fire crew on standby with a fire watch man. They could then tackle any fire within a few minutes. As well as arming flat tennant's with fire extinguishers, blankets and alarms. Making sure they work too etc. Going to cost billions.



Just been on the news that this was considered but the fire service said that they would need four tenders outside each block for them to be effective if an issue arose but they do not have the resources to do this as it would leave the rest of london under manned so was not viable, was not about the cost.
3dprince

Like you said. You rely on the experts. The question you needed to ask, … Like you said. You rely on the experts. The question you needed to ask, was should the experts be replaced?


Replace or not depends on how the experts put as recommendations with costs benefit analyses and read with risk, assumptions, issues and dependences. Then it is up to the CEOs and MPs as to how they make executive decisions as to what they resolve to do. In this process they may choose to appoint or replace with further experts.
barriey

Just been on the news that this was considered but the fire service said … Just been on the news that this was considered but the fire service said that they would need four tenders outside each block for them to be effective if an issue arose but they do not have the resources to do this as it would leave the rest of london under manned so was not viable, was not about the cost.


In order to deal with unknowns and the expected, any service needs to have x% of contingency labour resources to deal with extras. So it is a failure in contingency planning in delivery of a full service, that of failure to have extra costs for surplus capacity.
Retro fit outside sprinklers to all tower blocks, and helipads on roof if structurally sound. Army helicopters with those massive water buckets if viable.
barriey

Just been on the news that this was considered but the fire service said … Just been on the news that this was considered but the fire service said that they would need four tenders outside each block for them to be effective if an issue arose but they do not have the resources to do this as it would leave the rest of london under manned so was not viable, was not about the cost.


Obviously resources are limited, It's a simpler solution though. It might be worth employing a fire watchman/marshall or whatever on all high rises in the future.

Evacuating is going to be extremely expensive, That money could go towards the fire service etc..
This is a complete over reaction.

It is an absolute tragedy with what has happened. We now have clearer viability of potential problems. Stay put would probably now be suspended.
They could put fire breaks in the cladding similar to in forests. While work is carried out.
Carry out fire safety checks in every flat while checking official residency.
PAT test every flat.
Set up remote cameras and heat sensors to be monitored.

Short sighted political gain and political correctness is going to cost us as a nation a fortune. While contractors and businesses gain.

Health and safety does take a very high precedence but it must be managed responsibly.


The evacuations are all knee jerk reactions to a rare occurrence. The last big fire was what 8 years ago?
splender

In order to deal with unknowns and the expected, any service needs to … In order to deal with unknowns and the expected, any service needs to have x% of contingency labour resources to deal with extras. So it is a failure in contingency planning in delivery of a full service, that of failure to have extra costs for surplus capacity.



​the entire fire service is a contingency service, with limited resources.
deeky

Sounds so easy. Just employ a night watchman on each floor for the … Sounds so easy. Just employ a night watchman on each floor for the duration of the repairs. Surely that would be more cost effective than finding accommodation for hundreds of families? Kittles, ok, have one night watchman walking round the block keeping dog on the outside



What's a night watchman going to do?
Edited by: "MSK." 24th Jun 2017
MSK.

What's a night watchman going to do?



​Er, watch.
On a serious note, they have done this at three high rise blocks in Plymouth, they have employed 24 hour teams to physically patrol/monitor the buildings until they can start work to remove or replace the cladding.
sounds like to me, the powers that be , did this mainly for personal cover (in the wake of RBKC CEO who got told to resign).
.
latest is that the remaining residents will be forcibly removed..oh dear..(how about let them sign a disclaimer for the CEO if CEO just wants her backside covered?)
There was an informative item on channel 4 news about the insulation which was more combustible than the cladding:- channel4.com/new…sts

They test samples of insulation and show a proper full scale fire test of a cladding + insulation system.


Edited by: "melted" 29th Jun 2017
Avatar
deleted1737164
melted

There was an informative item on channel 4 news about the insulation … There was an informative item on channel 4 news about the insulation which was more combustible than the cladding:- https://www.channel4.com/news/high-rise-buildings-fail-fire-safety-testsThey test samples of insulation and show a proper full scale fire test of a cladding + insulation system.



Interesting.

However, under the building regulations any alteration to a building needs to leave the structure in a safer condition than to what it was prior to the alteration/update. There is no get out clause for any developer or basically anyone or any firm or any management.
WinglessNut

Interesting. However, under the building regulations any alteration to a … Interesting. However, under the building regulations any alteration to a building needs to leave the structure in a safer condition than to what it was prior to the alteration/update. There is no get out clause for any developer or basically anyone or any firm or any management.



Mass court cases are a real likely thing imho. We've been going cheap for years we sack experienced workers and import Eastern European builders for below minimum wage, i doubt they are fully checked to see if their experience and training rings true. We all know that happens so why be surprised about unscrupulous tactics throughout the industry after all fire officials don't have to check anymore, private companies can, how many of the private companies have the same parent company as the property developers for example
Avatar
deleted1737164
Error440

Mass court cases are a real likely thing imho. We've been going cheap for … Mass court cases are a real likely thing imho. We've been going cheap for years we sack experienced workers and import Eastern European builders for below minimum wage, i doubt they are fully checked to see if their experience and training rings true. We all know that happens so why be surprised about unscrupulous tactics throughout the industry after all fire officials don't have to check anymore, private companies can, how many of the private companies have the same parent company as the property developers for example



like I said "under the building regulations any alteration to a building needs to leave the structure in a safer condition than to what it was prior to the alteration/update. There is no get out clause for any developer or basically anyone or any firm or any management."

Court cases & convictions of corporate manslaughter will happen & they will start soon.
WinglessNut

Court cases & convictions of corporate manslaughter will happen & they … Court cases & convictions of corporate manslaughter will happen & they will start soon.


Hope so.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text

    Discussions