好色先生TV

 

鈥楪oing into people鈥檚 homes and ripping out the entire wall finish was just an unimaginable amount of disruption,鈥� Andrew McQuatt told the Grenfell Tower inquiry one morning in September. 

McQuatt, a project engineer at consultant Max Fordham and part of the original Grenfell refurbishment team, said the idea of insulating the insides of Grenfell鈥檚 exterior walls to improve the thermal efficiency of the block was 鈥渧ery quickly discounted鈥� in 2012 in favour of overcladding.  

Five years and 拢10m of regeneration work later, the highly combustible aluminium composite material cladding and flammable insulation added to the 24-storey west London block would catch fire, delivering catastrophic disruption, claiming 72 lives and shattering hundreds more.

The story of Grenfell Tower鈥檚 overcladding would be a comedy of errors were it not for the horror of what happened on that night of 14 June 2017 and the long-lingering pain of its aftermath.

The official probe into the disaster has just finished examining the role played by contractors, consultants, project client Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO) and the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea鈥檚 (RKBC) building control department. The inquiry鈥檚 chair, Sir Martin Moore-Bick, and his panel still have more than a year of evidence left to feed into their Phase Two report on the root causes of the fire.

But cutting through the buck-passing in the just-concluded 鈥渕odule one鈥� hearings, construction industry professionals can take some lessons from the evidence of firms and the inquiry鈥檚 expert advisers. 

Focusing on the role of design-and-build main contractor Rydon Maintenance Ltd and its interactions with key members of the project team and its advisers is as good a viewpoint as any from which to do that.

In the beginning

Project client KCTMO began work on the Grenfell refurbishment in 2012, bringing in contractor Leadbitter, architect Studio E, M&E consultant Max Fordham, fire consultant Exova and Artelia 鈥� then known as Appleyards 鈥� as employer鈥檚 agent, QS and CDM co-ordinator. All were working on RBKC鈥檚 neighbouring Kensington Academy and Leisure Centre (KALC). The worked-up Grenfell proposals also introduced new flats at the block鈥檚 lower levels, relocated existing office space and a boxing club, improved facilities at a nursery and upgraded the tower鈥檚 heating system.

Leadbitter fell out of favour in the first half of 2013, despite cutting its price for the works from 拢12.1m to 拢10.0m. An OJEU procurement process saw Rydon Maintenance Ltd come in cheapest at 拢9.2m, beating rival contractor Durkan鈥檚 拢9.9m price and Mulalley鈥檚 拢10.4m bid. Rydon was confirmed as preferred main contractor in March 2014 after a secret meeting with KCTMO agreed a further 拢800k in savings would be found to match the actual project budget. 

> Grenfell Tower: A lesson in how not to manage a project

Studio E was novated to Rydon and the main contractor appointed facades subcontractor Harley to design and deliver the building鈥檚 new cladding system: the cassette version of Alcoa鈥檚 Reynobond PE 55 ACM with Celotex RS5000 insulation behind it. The insulation was fundamentally the same as the Celotex FR5000 listed in the NBS statement in the tender documents. The product was proposed by Max Fordham鈥檚 McQuatt in 2012 because of its thinness and ability to deliver 鈥渁spirational鈥� thermal efficiency targets. Its fire performance was never properly scrutinised by any team members. Reynobond ACM had been included on the NBS specification as a potential alternative to Studio E鈥檚 proposed zinc-skinned Proteus HR honeycomb rainscreen panels. KCTMO鈥檚 need for value-engineering savings made switching to cheaper rainscreen options an obvious step.

There are many items which need looking at by our proposed construction team, and therein lies the problem: we don鈥檛 fucking have one!! To say I鈥檓 concerned about this is an understatement

Email from Harley commercial manager Mark Harris to Harley contracts manager Rob Maxwell in June 2014 

According to the inquiry鈥檚 Phase One report, the cladding combination added to Grenfell 鈥渁ctively promoted鈥� the spread of fire instead of 鈥渁dequately resisting鈥� it, as demanded by Requirement B4(1) of Schedule 1 to the 好色先生TV Regulations 2010 (see 鈥淔atally flawed cladding鈥�, below).

During evidence sessions in July, senior Rydon officials repeatedly stressed they relied on their specialist advisers to make sure the products used in the refurbishment complied with 好色先生TV Regulations and that they were installed properly.

Original Grenfell contracts manager Simon Lawrence told the inquiry the business 鈥渨ould not be able to check to the technical detail鈥� of proposals in-house. 鈥淲e employed specialist designers that should have been designing and installing to the regs,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t was then checked by not only an independent clerk of works but it was also checked by building control.鈥�

Inquiry expert witness on architecture Paul Hyett said Studio E 鈥渟imply failed鈥� to produce the proper amount of design work before the project was tendered and that it 鈥渆ntered production stage, with inadequate design and specification work鈥�. He said that after it was novated to Rydon, Studio E had tried to offload some of its design responsibilities to Harley.

I had enough. I wasn鈥檛 able to do the job how I was trained to do and it was affecting my health. I just decided that I didn鈥檛 want to work there anymore

RBKC building control surveyor John Hoban on why he quit the authority in March 2017. Hoban said he had a caseload of around 130 projects to oversee at the time of the Grenfell refurbishment

Hyett said an 鈥渙ngoing major failure鈥� on the part of Studio E was not recognising that Celotex PIR insulation was unsuitable for Grenfell (see 鈥淲hat the experts said鈥�, below). He said that issue and the non鈥慶ompliance of Reynobond PE 55 should have been picked up by routine design reviews the architect and Rydon were supposed to be conducting under their ISO 9001 quality-management registration. 

Rydon and Harley had worked together on tower block overcladding projects before, but Harley had lost technical expertise through staff changes. One of Hyett鈥檚 reports said the firm 鈥渃learly did not understand鈥� the requirements of the 好色先生TV Regulations and produced 鈥渇undamentally flawed鈥� detailed design work.

Former Rydon commercial manager Zak Maynard told the inquiry in September that the firm had struggled to find cladding contractors other than Harley who were interested in taking on the Grenfell job. Meanwhile Harley struggled to pull together a team for the job.

Hyett said he would have expected an experienced design and build contractor such as Rydon to have checked drawings produced by its architect and subcontractors and to have raised queries on any errors or omissions. But he 鈥渇ound little evidence鈥� that it did.

鈥淚 am surprised that Rydon did not routinely spot many of the serious omissions and errors contained in the drawings,鈥� he said.

Shirking responsibilities

Hyett added that Rydon鈥檚 failure to establish a matrix of responsibilities for the project team was a crucial problem that allowed Studio E to shirk some of its responsibilities. He also said a 鈥渃ompetent and responsible鈥� design and build contractor would have insisted on the creation of a 鈥渢racker鈥� to manage and co-ordinate the staged submission of documents to RBKC鈥檚 building control officers.

I do not think I have ever worked with a contractor operating with this level of nonchalance

Internal email in 2016 from Neil Reed of Artelia to the firm鈥檚 project lead for Grenfell, Simon Cash, complaining about Rydon鈥檚 perceived dwindling commitment to the project鈥檚 final stages 

But Hyett said the way that the process was actually handled had been a 鈥渟hambles鈥� of submissions that were 鈥渋nadequately prepared, ill co-ordinated and incomplete鈥�, which would have made it harder for building control officers to do their jobs. RBKC building control surveyor John Hoban told the inquiry he was overworked at the time of the Grenfell project and could not devote as much time to the Grenfell refurbishment as he wanted. But Hoban said he 鈥渉ad a confidence in the architects and the other professionals and Exova鈥� because of their work on the neighbouring KALC project. 

The inquiry also heard that the independent clerk of works responsible for checking Grenfell鈥檚 new external envelope, Jonathan White of John Rowan & Partners, only conducted weekly inspections and was 鈥渘ot specifically鈥� evaluating design compliance.

Stephen Blake, Rydon鈥檚 refurbishment director at the time of the Grenfell refurbishment, was quizzed about the firm鈥檚 decision not to hire fire-safety consultant Exova as a full member of the project team. Blake said it had been Studio E鈥檚 responsibility to arrange 鈥� and pay for 鈥� any specialist fire safety advice it needed. Exova continued to advise the project on an ad-hoc basis and billed KCTMO, but the quality of its work has been strongly criticised by expert fire safety witness Dr Barbara Lane (see 鈥淲hat the experts said鈥�, below).

Cavalier attitude

Hyett said Rydon鈥檚 decision not to appoint Exova or another specialist fire consultant suggested a 鈥渃avalier attitude鈥� to fire safety or a fundamental lack of understanding of the complexity of 好色先生TV Regulations requirements for overcladding works. Studio E and Artelia were also criticised for failing to recognise more fire-safety expertise was needed. 

Elsewhere in Rydon鈥檚 evidence, it emerged that the firm had miscalculated its winning bid price for Grenfell by 拢212,000. It sought to hold back some of the value-engineering savings delivered by the switch from zinc cladding to ACM and to save money by ditching a plan for the new window reveals of Grenfell鈥檚 flats to be lined with wood. Instead, the gaps around the windows were packed with combustible insulation and lined with uPVC.

This was a traditional [鈥�]  design and build contract that seemed very straightforward and very ordinary in many ways, and that it鈥檚 ended up in this tragedy is just devastating

KCTMO director of assets and regeneration Peter Maddison鈥檚 hindsight reflections to the inquiry

Towards the end of the module one hearings, the inquiry heard that a member of the KCTMO executive board and one of its legal advisers had questioned whether Rydon鈥檚 拢9.2m bid had been unrealistically low, even before the client sought a further 拢800,000 in savings.

KCTMO director of assets and regeneration Peter Maddison said the bid had been evaluated by Artelia, which had raised no concerns, and Rydon had delivered the project on budget.

Inquiry lead counsel Richard Millett QC responded: 鈥淚f I may say so, the fact that the project was delivered on budget is not of great assistance to us, given that we know what happened to the building.鈥�

Earlier, the inquiry heard that when Artelia director of cost management Simon Cash was told Rydon had bid 拢9.2m he responded 鈥淕ood result, what did they miss?鈥� in an email to project QS Chweechen Lim.

At the end of his evidence, expert witness on architecture Hyett set out fears that the growth of design and build procurement was pushing risk 鈥渄ownstream鈥� onto insufficiently trained subcontractors, leading all too often to 鈥渄esign and technical failure鈥�.

He said design and build contracts also allowed far more swapping-out of products than traditional contracts and put pressure on timing and sequencing of projects that had potential consequences for quality.

Because we came so late to the party, we have assumed that everybody else has already run every scenario and got it right

Mark Dixon of SD Plastering on why he never asked Rydon for a proper specification for the window surrounds of Grenfell鈥檚 flats. They were packed with combustible insulation and trimmed with uPVC

Hyett鈥檚 report said one question for the construction industry prompted by the Grenfell disaster was over safeguards to ensure critically important work was checked by properly trained and regulated people. Another area of 鈥渃ritical importance鈥� was ensuring that people undertaking inspections understood what they were checking.

Studio E went into voluntary liquidation in April. But its staff, as well as Rydon, Artelia, Harley, Exova, Max Fordham and all the other firms involved, will have to wait until mid-2022 鈥� by current estimates 鈥� to find out how the inquiry鈥檚 phase-two report apportions blame and recommends change in the construction industry.

Readers of 好色先生TV鈥檚 extensive day-by-day module-one coverage can draw their own conclusions on the conduct of key players in the refurbishment. 

Module two is now looking at the products used in the project, including their testing, certification and the claims made in marketing literature. Hearings are set to continue into 2022.

> Click here for all our Grenfell inquiry news coverage