‘LET’S HOPE OUR LUCK HOLDS’: THE DAMNING EXCHANGES THAT HIGHLIGHT THE FAILURES AT GRENFELL TOWER
The cladding consultants knew the ACM panelling could be dangerous: “The ACM will be gone rather quickly in a fire!”
Email by Harley Facades employees, March 2015
Fire safety consultants criticised architects’ plans: “They are making an existing crap conditions worse.” Email by employees of Exova, August 2012
The lead contractors pocketed savings from switching to a cheaper type of cladding:
“First part of the battle won. Now we will agree to give them 10 per cent of savings back and we are quids in!!” Email between employees at Rydon, June 2014
The cladding consultants were offered an expensive meal after choosing the cheaper panels:
“You will be taken out for a very nice meal very soon somewhere nice.”
Email sent to Harley Facades by a sales director at CEP, which cut and sold the panels, September 2013
Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation was warned not to ditch the original contractor to save money: “Unless the project, in its current guise, is stopped and a review embarked upon to redefine the scope, programme and cost, it will fail.”
Correspondence between consultants Artelia and KCTMO, spring 2013
The manufacturer of the flammable cladding kept selling the panels despite failing a fire test:
“It’s hard to make a note about this because we are not clean.”
Email sent by Claude Wehrle, senior Arconic manager, to colleagues in 2010
The firm that provided most of the insulation for Grenfell was concerned the product would never pass fire tests: “Do we take the view that our product realistically shouldn’t be used behind most cladding panels because in the event of a fire it would burn?”
Email exchanged between Celotext employees, 2013
One of the insulation manufacturers knew its insulation product had failed a fire test:
“By 17 minutes, the top fire barrier had breached and the raging inferno moved up to the top thermocouples and pushed them past 600 degrees, thus failing the simple criteria of (building regulation) 135.”
Report on the fire test prepared for Kingspan, January 2008
Kingspan employees joked about marketing the insulation with a better fire safety rating than it had achieved:
“Doesn’t actually get class 0 when we test the whole product tho LOL!” “WHAT we lied?” “Yeahhhh tested K15 as a whole – got class 1 an inferior standard wheyy lol.” “Alls we do is lie in here.” Text exchange between Kingspan employees, 2016
The safety concerns of Grenfell residents were dismissed:
“As I understand Colin has been challenged by one of the residents that the current redesign of the landscape surrounding Grenfell Tower compromises the fire access to Grenfell Tower (the individual concerned is a known trouble maker).” Email sent by Studio E Architects to Exova, the fire engineers
The smoke control system in the tower took six years to replace:
“Let’s hope our luck holds and there are no fires in the meantime.”
Email sent by health and safety manager at the KCTMO to a colleague, 2014