Company was ‘dishonest’ over fire test, former employee tells Grenfell probe

A FORMER employee of the manufacturers of flammable insulation used on Grenfell Tower has admitted complying with acts which were “completely unethical” and a “fraud on the market”, the public inquiry into the disaster has heard.

Jonathan Roper, the former assistant product manager at Celotex, told proceedings the firm was “dishonest” by “overengineering” a cladding fire safety test to achieve a pass for its Rs5000 insulation product.

After a first test failure in January 2014, a second system passed in May 2014, which the firm used to erroneously market the combustible rigid foam boards as being safe for use on high-rise buildings, the inquiry has heard.

Yesterday, the inquiry heard Celotex added a 6mm fire-resisting magnesium oxide board to a cladding test rig made up of 12mm fibre cement panels for the second test.

The inquiry heard 8mm fibre cement panels were added over the magnesium oxide to “conceal” its presence, making the whole system almost flush – but for the 2mm difference.

Mr Roper agreed with the inquiry’s chief lawyer Richard Millett QC that the decision to use “a thinner layer was to make it less noticeable there was something else behind it”, which would aid to “see off any prospect of anyone asking questions”, about its make-up.

Mr Millett asked: “Did that not strike you at the time as dishonest?”

Mr Roper said: “Yes, it did.

“I went along with a lot of actions at Celotex that, looking back on reflection, were completely unethical and that I probably didn’t potentially consider the impact of at the time.

“I was 22 or 23, first job, I thought this was standard practice albeit it did sit very uncomfortably with me.”

Business studies graduate Mr Roper said his superiors ordered the removal of any mention of the magnesium oxide in marketing literature, which he agreed was

“misleading and intended to mislead”.

Mr Millett asked: “Did you realise at the time that if this was how the test was to be described to the market it would be a fraud on the market?”

Mr Roper said: “Yes, I did.

“I felt incredibly uncomfortable with it. I felt incredibly uncomfortable with what I was asked to do.”

Mr Roper said there was no-one in the firm he could tell about his concerns.