黑洞社区

The founder of Studio E Architects has told the Grenfell Tower Inquiry panel that his firm would probably not have been appointed to refurbish the 1970s block if there had been a competitive process for the work.

Andrzej Kuszell told the panel probing the causes of the fire that claimed 72 lives in June 2017 that his firm had no track record of delivering high-rise residential projects or of re-cladding such buildings. He acknowledged that the firm鈥檚 lack of experience would have made it unlikely for the firm to be appointed had the work been put through the Ojeu tendering process.

But he insisted that the firm 鈥� which was appointed to the west London job because it was working on the adjacent Kensington Academy and Leisure Centre 鈥� had a track record of delivering high-quality schemes.

鈥淚鈥檓 the founder of the practice, and there was a time when every project that we did was a new project,鈥� he said.

Kuszell was the first person to give evidence after the inquiry resumed today following a month鈥檚 hiatus. New attorney general Suella Braverman , including Studio E, for an undertaking that nothing they say in the inquiry will be used in any prosecution against them, 鈥漷hereby giving them complete freedom to tell the truth without concern for the future鈥�.

Less than 10 minutes in to proceedings the inquiry was briefly halted by a disruption, with protestors claiming this was a 鈥渄isgrace鈥� and amounted to a 鈥渃over-up鈥�.

The implication that we were not capable of doing the project is false

Andrzej Kuszell

Kuszell went on to tell the inquiry: 鈥淭here was our first extension to a school; our first small sports facility. We did all of our proposals to a very high standard even though they were our first, receiving accolades and a lot of recognition.

鈥淪o the issue of whether a project poses new challenges鈥� the implication that we were not capable of doing the project is false.

鈥淲e had been dealing with projects of quite some sophistication and complexity as firsts 鈥� leisure centres are not at all straightforward projects, and we did them all to a very high standard.鈥�

Asked by Grenfell Tower Inquiry leading counsel Richard Millett whether Studio E鈥檚 lack of experience with high-rise residential and high-rise re-cladding work would have been a barrier in a competitive procurement process, Kuszell agreed that it would.

鈥淜nowing the way procurement works with local authorities, I think you鈥檙e right,鈥� Kuszell said.

I would rank him in the top 5% of people I鈥檝e worked with

Andrzej Kuszell on his part II colleague Neil Crawford

The architect 鈥� who was not directly overseeing the tower-block refurbishment 鈥� had earlier told the hearing that he believed Studio E had ability to deliver the scheme, even though he accepted that project architect Bruce Sounes had warned the firm would  when it was first appointed.

鈥淚 believed that we had the processes and experience with complex buildings to be able to undertake this commission,鈥� he said.

鈥淚t wasn鈥檛 just my belief, it was the belief of all senior members of my practice.

鈥淏ut it was clear that there was a need for CPD and research around the project to establish what the different issues around this project would be.鈥�

Studio E was appointed to the Grenfell Tower project by Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO) on a contract  priced at a level to avoid European Union procurement rules for a competitive tender process. At the time the cap was 拢174,000. The firm鈥檚 expected novation to a contractor was to make up for the balance of consultants鈥� fees.

Asked whether the 拢174,000 was sufficient, Kuszell said he had thought it would be 鈥� however he admitted there were concerns.

鈥淚 think that we were worried that the Ojeu limit that would be imposed on KCTMO could result in us having to do work that the fees wouldn鈥檛 cover,鈥� he said.

Last month, legal representatives for one group of bereaved families, survivors and residents 鈥� so-called BSRs 鈥� said Studio E had and then left him to 鈥渟ink on his own鈥�.

Kuszell said the part II-qualified architect, Neil Crawford, had a wealth of experience and had previously been an associate at Foster & Partners for a number of years.

鈥淲e were jolly lucky to get him,鈥� Kuszell said. 鈥淗e was an extremely competent individual and was immediately recognised as one of our better and more experienced people in the practice.

鈥淗e was made an associate fairly quickly, and I had absolutely no doubt that he had the ability to make a significant contribution to the project.

鈥淚 don鈥檛 think he had experience of overcladding of an existing building, but he definitely had high-rise design experience on commercial and residential-type buildings.鈥�

Kuszell added: 鈥淭he fact that he wasn鈥檛 qualified part III doesn鈥檛 reflect on his ability and skill. I would rank him in the top 5% of people I鈥檝e worked with.鈥�

The inquiry continues.