Grenfell Tower block disaster

[Gabriel]

Is that still ongoing or is that the final number they gave?

I believe it is the latest and ongoing figure, sadly.

 

[SilverFox2]

The DCLG has confirmed that the lower spec material is indeed illegal on buildings over 59 feet (no confirmation from the DCLG as to the reasons why it is illegal) and Councils have ordered to send high-rise cladding for urgent fire tests after Glenfell Tower blaze. The company supplying the panels has disagreed but from what I've read the wording is very much subject to interpretation and of course the fact it caught fire and spread at brethtaking spread means it clearly wasn't in any way fire retardant - and the regs are clear on that point above 59 feet.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...iveapp_androidshare_AlsCVWKwF5nX;AlsCVWKwF5nX

Thanks BA, sorry but for some reason cannot open the link so to be clear is it banned on buildings taller than 59 feet or is the maximum height a section can have is 59 feet. ?

 

[vonkeynotvenky]

I am getting the feeling that the authorities didn't know who was in the flats.

 

[BlueAnorak]

Thanks BA, sorry but for some reason cannot open the link so to be clear is it banned on buildings taller than 59 feet or is the maximum height a section can have is 59 feet. ?

That is what the article says. That was the mobile link - ill try and dig up a web one.Shadow ministers have been giving the same opinion yesterday so the legal eagles must have a pretty consistent opinion. I think I will have to read the British Standards docs for clarification.
The data sheet is clearly wrong if there are restrictions. Which indicates removing physical fire inspections during construction in 2006 was a very bad idea - just one of a litany of issues that have been allowed to fester for years and years that need tightening up.
- Sprinklers to stop the fire getting hold in the first place.
- The safety of power distribution in high rise buildings. Seemingly the cause of the fire causing a fridge/freezer to catch fire.
- Cladding materials used for energy efficiency.
- The number of stairwells in high rise buildings. Should be at least 2 and in new buildings 3.
- Stairwell desugn to prevent smoke getting into building stairwells. Two doors to Stairwell probably with fire curtains inside outer door.
- The power of residents committees viz owner not wanting to spend cash to fix things.
- Governments and Local Authorities of all shades sitting on possible changes to fire and building regs for years in light of coroner and investigative reports. It is pretty clear that the only agenda was Energy Efficiency.
- Regulation clarity.
- Building materials must be fire proof on high rise buildings and at least as retardant as seasoned treated wood on low rise buildings.

 

[cibaman]

I am getting the feeling that the authorities didn't know who was in the flats.

Is there a requirement that they should? Clearly there will be tenants who will not have been in the building for a number of reasons such as holidays, working etc. There will also be visitors staying overnight. There will undoubtedly have been some illegal sub letting. Is there any requirement for tenants to constantly update the council on who is living there? Do they have to notify them if they have a baby, or separate from their partner, or if a child leaves either temporarily or permanently?

 

[willipp]

Is there a requirement that they should? Clearly there will be tenants who will not have been in the building for a number of reasons such as holidays, working etc. There will also be visitors staying overnight. There will undoubtedly have been some illegal sub letting. Is there any requirement for tenants to constantly update the council on who is living there? Do they have to notify them if they have a baby, or separate from their partner, or if a child leaves either temporarily or permanently?

Im not sure if there is any requirement, but maybe there should be in terms of permanent residents living in council property. Doesn't sound too unreasonable to have up to date lists (updated every 3 months maybe) of people living in these properties - if there isnt already.

 

[Gabriel]

BBC reporting that some of the hospitalized remain in induced comas and that some face months of recovery.

BBC also reporting that some survivors are reticent to come forward and help the investigation for fears over their immigration status.

 

[kaz7]

At least 79 people are confirmed dead or missing, presumed dead after the disaster, although the number is expected to rise. Only five victims have been formally identified.

http://news.sky.com/story/grenfell-...ery-from-smoke-inhalation-after-fire-10921381

 

[cleavers]

Again, can we keep political commentary for the appropriate threads. Thanks.

 

[Corky]

Im not sure if there is any requirement, but maybe there should be in terms of permanent residents living in council property. Doesn't sound too unreasonable to have up to date lists (updated every 3 months maybe) of people living in these properties - if there isnt already.

Or they could just use council tax records?

Is there a thread on the politics behind the failings to comment on this properly, as no one is mentioning the obvious?

 

[bluethrunthru]

I am getting the feeling that the authorities didn't know who was in the flats.

I said at the outset that this will expose the degree to which London's social housing is illegally sublet by tenants to other poor sods in a worse boat than them who cannot get a house just to make a fast buck. There will be loads of flats let to " Mr and Mrs Smith" officially that were actually occupied by a family of 6 or more. Its one more scandalous part of the scandalous social housing situation in London

 

[bluethrunthru]

Or they could just use council tax records?

Is there a thread on the politics behind the failings to comment on this properly, as no one is mentioning the obvious?

that pre-supposes that the occupants were the ones paying the council tax and were registered to vote and took part in the last census.

 

[Corky]

that pre-supposes that the occupants were the ones paying the council tax and were registered to vote and took part in the last census.

The census is anonymous and the council does not get any info that identifies people from it, as does no other body bar the organisers who do not share it. Voting registration has nothing to do with it either as there is no requirement to register at all, as well as children unable to vote.

I doubt tenancy fraud is as rife as you make out, it is not that easy these days unless you spend nothing but cash. However how any people in private owned housing and private rented also fiddle for council tax purposes or to maximise benefits/ reduce tax etc?

 

[bluethrunthru]

The census is anonymous and the council does not get any info that identifies people from it, as does no other body bar the organisers who do not share it. Voting registration has nothing to do with it either as there is no requirement to register at all, as well as children unable to vote.

I doubt tenancy fraud is as rife as you make out, it is not that easy these days unless you spend nothing but cash. However how any people in private owned housing and private rented also fiddle for council tax purposes or to maximise benefits/ reduce tax etc?

Errrr.... quite easy actually. Recent dealings at work with a housing association with over 30k properties in their stock its clear as long as the rent is paid nobody checks it out. When the legit tenant sets up the D/D to pay thats where the rent comes from end of. The cash payments you refer to come from the illegal secondary tenant to the legit tenant.

Not sure the census is anonymous either - I am sure names were on the 2011 one we did and on Who Do You Think You Are past census without names would be pretty useless and they get a lot of info from them so I suspect you aren't right there

 

[cibaman]

Or they could just use council tax records?

Is there a thread on the politics behind the failings to comment on this properly, as no one is mentioning the obvious?

Even if they could use accurate council tax records it still wouldn't tell them who was in the building that night.

 

[The Northern Baptist]

Or they could just use council tax records?

Is there a thread on the politics behind the failings to comment on this properly, as no one is mentioning the obvious?

Council Tax records won't give a full picture, for example they will definitely not show anyone under the age or 18.

Some councils will also not keep a record of every person over 18 either. If you have a mother who is the main tenant who has 3 adult children living with her, most council tax records will just have the mother on. That's all they need because that's who they are charging the council tax to,

I would say a combination of council tax records, benefit claims, electoral register, landlord tenant lists and just word of mouth from surviving tenants will give a good approximation as to how many people may have been in there.

Won't confirm who actually was but it would give us a starting point

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

Its being rumoured (in the Indy) that the death toll might be as high as 329. thats the number missing / unaccounted for

 

[quiet_riot]

Its being rumoured (in the Indy) that the death toll might be as high as 329. thats the number missing / unaccounted for

Radio this morning on the way in going with the line "The Grenfell Tower fire, which killed 79 people last week"

Utter bollocks, there's no way only 79 people were stuck inside.

 

[cleavers]

Even if they could use accurate council tax records it still wouldn't tell them who was in the building that night.

Correct, 127 flats, anyone of them could have been empty that night, and any other one could have had family or friends staying the night. Its not a hotel where everyone is on a register (and even then I bet there are many in hotels at night, who the hotel don't know are there), so there is no way of knowing who was in there, just a list of who might be.

As requested previously, please can we keep the political comment to the politics threads, this one is about the fire, the causes of it, and what is happening to those affected by it.

 

[kaz7]

The Government has purchased apartments at an upmarket development to rehouse survivors of the Grenfell Tower blaze.

Sixty-eight new social housing units at the Kensington Row development in Kensington High Street have been acquired, Communities Secretary Sajid Javid said.

Prices for homes on the site - which includes a private cinema and a 24-hour concierge service - range from £1.5m to £8.5m.

The flats purchased by the Government will be offered as one of the options to permanently rehouse residents from Grenfell Tower.


"The residents of Grenfell Tower have been through some of the most harrowing and traumatic experiences imaginable and it is our duty to support them," said Mr Javid.

"Our priority is to get everyone who has lost their home permanently rehoused locally as soon as possible, so that they can begin to rebuild their lives.

"The government will continue to do everything we can as fast as we can to support those affected by this terrible tragedy."