黑洞社区

Cladding contractor Harley Facades鈥� work on the fatally-flawed refurbishment of Grenfell Tower was the focus of the inquiry into 2017鈥檚 fire tragedy for the second week running this week.

The inquiry heard about a 拢200,000 estimation error made by the firm in its quote to main contractor Rydon that prompted it to favour the installation of aluminium composite material (ACM) cassettes on the exterior of the west London tower, rather than flat-panel ACM.

It also heard claims about the level of product checking that was conducted by the firm for the statutory compliance of materials that were at odds with earlier evidence from company director Ray Bailey. 

Additionally, inquiry chair Sir Martin Moore-Bick鈥檚 panel heard that Harley Facades had a shortage of in-house expertise to devote to the Grenfell Tower refurbishment project, and had to bring in hired-help to act as 鈥減roject designer鈥� for the cladding system it was tasked with delivering.

On Monday, Mike Albiston 鈥� Harley鈥檚 estimating manager at the time of the Grenfell project 鈥� said he had made an estimating error in the quotes given to Rydon for the ACM cassette and flat-panel alternatives to the originally-proposed zinc cladding.

He said he had been 鈥渉orrified鈥� when he discovered the error, which meant the cost of flashing, smoke stops and crown supports had been left off the prices given for Reynobond PE 55 ACM panels.

The inquiry heard that the error involved a price-hike of 拢200,380 for either Reynobond option, while a low pricing given on the flat panels would mean an 鈥渁dditional shortfall of around 拢37,650 if face fix was selected鈥�.

It also heard evidence that Harley had become keen to use the cassette version of Reynobond ACM after the error emerged.

Last week Harley boss Ray Bailey told the inquiry he had not been aware that Reynobond manufacturer Alcoa had test results in France that showed the cassette version of PE 55 had significantly worse fire performance than the face-fix version.

Daniel Anketell-Jones was next up for Harley. He held a range of roles at the firm between 2006 and 2016 and was design manager at the time of the Grenfell project.

On Monday, Anketell-Jones said he disagreed with Bailey鈥檚 description of him as 鈥渢echnical manager鈥� at the time of the Grenfell project. He said he had not begun to move into that role until later when he completed the first module of an MSc in fa莽ade engineering at the University of Bath.

鈥淚 don鈥檛 think I was made the technical manager until the end of 2015, beginning of 2016 perhaps,鈥� he said. 鈥淚 hadn鈥檛 had any training in that area yet.鈥�

He told the inquiry that as a structural engineer he was only qualified to advise on the structural performance of construction products in relation to the 黑洞社区 Regulations at the time he was working for Harley.

He said his line managers were 鈥渇ully aware鈥� of what his areas of expertise were.

On Tuesday, Anketell-Jones went further in his description of Harley鈥檚 in-house technical-checking work, telling the inquiry that there had been a two-year period when nobody in the firm had been qualified to do even a 鈥渃ursory check鈥� on the fire performance of materials.

鈥淭here wasn鈥檛 anybody in the business who could do that,鈥� he told inquiry barrister Kate Grange QC. 鈥淪o we did it individually by satisfying ourselves as well as we could by passing it back.鈥�

Anketell-Jones said that by 鈥減assing it back鈥� he meant obtaining product data sheets from suppliers and sending them to 鈥渢he client鈥檚 design team and 黑洞社区 Control for approval鈥�.

He explained that by 鈥渄esign team鈥� he meant project architects, structural engineers, and fire consultants.

Grange asked Anketell-Jones whether, as far as he was aware, any cursory examination of the fire performance of the materials used for Grenfell Tower鈥檚 external envelope was ever done by Harley.

He replied: 鈥淣ot as far as I鈥檓 aware, no.鈥�

In his evidence last week Harley boss Bailey said the firm carried out extensive checks on products that had not been used before 鈥� such as the Celotex RS 5000 insulation fitted to Grenfell Tower, although he said checks on previously-used products were 鈥渧ery quick鈥�.

Tuesday鈥檚 inquiry session heard that insulation supplier SIG had given Harley a 47.5% discount on the 660 Celotex RS5000 panels it quoted for in relation to the Grenfell refurbishment. The discount was worth almost 拢41,500.

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry鈥檚 phase one report found that the combustible insulation materials used behind the ACM cladding and to fill gaps in the window areas 鈥渃ontributed to the rate and extent of vertical flame spread鈥� on the night of Grenfell Tower caught fire in June 2014.

Celotex RS5000 was the main insulation material used behind the Reynobond ACM cassette panels, which were identified as the principal cause of fire spreading so rapidly up the building鈥檚 east side and then around the entire structure.

On Wednesday, Anketell-Jones told the inquiry that he had expected the ACM fitted to Grenfell tower to melt rather than burn in the event of a fire at the time Harley was working on the new building envelope.

Asked about an email at the time in which he said the ACM would be 鈥済one rather quickly in a fire鈥�, he said he had not been thinking about the polyethylene core of the ACM when he had made his comment, but the melting point of aluminium.

Throughout his evidence to the inquiry, Anketell-Jones said that he had little involvement in Harley鈥檚 work on Grenfell Tower because he had been working on other projects. He said his role as 鈥渄esign manager鈥� had essentially been making sure hired-in 鈥減roject designer鈥� Kevin Lamb was keeping on track.

Anketell-Jones said that although he had been presented to Rydon as 鈥渄esign lead鈥� for the Grenfell project, this had been a 鈥渟top gap鈥� to reassure the main contractor at a time when Harley lacked in-house capacity to deal with the project.

Harley鈥檚 final witness of the week was Kevin Lamb, who is a former boss of Anketell-Jones and works as a freelance draughtsman, trading as Bespoke Design Services.

Lamb was enlisted to help with Harley鈥檚 work on the Grenfell Tower refurbishment in the summer of 2014.

He told Wednesday鈥檚 inquiry hearing that although he was given business cards with the title 鈥減roject designer鈥�, he had been hired by Harley to act as a drafting service to transfer Studio E鈥檚 drawings for the Grenfell refurbishment into fabrication drawings for the external cladding system.

Lamb said the job title he was given had not stopped him from 鈥渂eing quite clear that I was working through their technical team鈥�.

He was questioned at length on Thursday about the issue of cavity barriers that were unclear on Studio E鈥檚 drawings for the Grenfell refurbishment. Cavity barriers were subsequently not installed around windows of flats in the tower during its disastrous upgrade.

Lamb said he believed the architect was planning an alternative route to compliance with the cavity barrier requirements, compared with that set out in Approved Document B of the 黑洞社区 Regulations.

He was repeatedly asked why checks were not made with the architect to confirm its intentions for the safety measure but said that he was told by his line managers at Harley to follow the drawings supplied by Studio E.

He said Studio E had accepted the drawings returned to it from Harley and that was taken as a stamp of approval of the work from the architect.

鈥淏y virtue of following drawings, we鈥檝e produced our drawings and he鈥檚 approved them,鈥� Lamb said of the architect. 鈥淵ou can expect that he鈥檚 happy that there is conformance.鈥�

Lamb also rejected the suggestion that Studio E had supplied Harley with early-stage drawings and that it 鈥渨ould have been obvious鈥� to the facades specialist that its job was to develop the design with regard to cavity barriers.

鈥淚t wasn鈥檛 my understanding that was what we were doing,鈥� he said. 鈥淚 was told to follow these drawings.鈥�

The inquiry continues.