Forum Topic

Bolton student apartment block fire and Grenfell parallels

Fire in student apartment block raises Grenfell parallelsEyewitness reports suggest the fire, which broke out Friday evening in the town of Bolton, moved swiftly up the building’s exterior cladding, raising uncomfortable parallels to the Grenfell fire. Two people were injured in the blaze.https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/fire-in-student-apartment-block-raises-grenfell-parallels/ar-BBWRqtH?ocid=spartanntpJust the thought of it is frightening!!!

Ivonne Holliday ● 2552d16 Comments

This block is only SIX storeys high and an aerial platform was used.  It seems it has fire alarms but unfortunately there are often false alarms so students may ignore them.  More attention still urgently needs to be paid to the safety of buildings particularly housing.  Who are the landlords who have not taken action?  Complacency is not an answer.

Philippa Bond ● 2551d

I hope the landlords are sued/jailed. The block is not owned by the university - it was a privately leased building.

Lucille Grant ● 2551d

I agree with you Lucille, the landlords should be sued and jailed, just as the landlords of Grenfell.The parallel drawn with the fires was not the height of the building, but the cladding.  It beggars the question as to why building control approved and/or certified the buildings as "safe".

Ivonne Holliday ● 2551d

agree, however it was not the same cladding. And also, the responsibility fully lies with governmentIf they have said (as they did years ago) that certain types of cladding and insulation are safe and the landlord or builders use it - who's fault is itIt turns out that the cladding used here was not the same as that of Grenfell, but that it was on the list of cladding that 'should' be bannedThe government still has not banned this, so no landlord should be sued but government and their relaxed testing systems and building controls should be sued and jailed (imo)

Emarisa Battoia ● 2551d

The fact that this cladding 'should' be banned  cannot have been lost on the landlords Emarissa.Report from the Independent:'And while it has been confirmed the building did not have the same aluminium composite material (ACM) cladding that led to the deaths of 72 people at Grenfell Tower in 2017, the local authority was aware the building had been covered with a high pressure laminate (HPL) variety of the building material.In July government experts said HPL cladding should be removed from any high-rise building more than 18m tall over concerns that some varieties of the material are unsafe – with an advice note saying some grades of the panelling were “very unlikely to adequately resist the spread of fire”.It is not yet known what type of HPL cladding had been fitted to the student building.'So while the government is  also to blame, the local authority and private landlords also have a responsibility to their tenants.

Lucille Grant ● 2551d

but the landlord built this before Grenfell non?And the governement can MAKE private owners and local authorities take this down cant theyI honestly am not disagreeing with you, but at the end of the day a private landlord wants to make money and not spend it. That is its job / roleThe Governments job is to protect us and act in our interest. That is its prime fundamental role and function in societyThe fact that it has not instructed people to remove cladding immediately is awful, and as at the time of these buildings being built the cladding was lawful therefore the government should provide the funds immediately to do soAll it is doing is sitting there waiting, why? Why is in not paying for it? in July the government RECOMMENDED it did NOT make it law nor did it provide fundingAgain, (as i know you always misunderstand me) i am not disputing the role of landlords and local councils, but i AM saying that the buck stops with the Government and all they are doing is twiddling their fingersJust so you know, some of my customers are the solicitors involved with the enquiry and they voice the same thoughts

Emarisa Battoia ● 2551d

me again, if you have the time its actually worth reading this ( i havent made my way through all of it yet, but it explains a bit) https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/news/the-paper-trail-the-failure-of-building-regulations-55445

Emarisa Battoia ● 2551d

Thanks for this Emarissa.

Lucille Grant ● 2551d

I agree that the ultimate "buck" stops with the national Government, but a local council is part of the local government and they are all responsible for building regulations, from those who propose them, to those who approve them and those who enact them.  But builders and landlords also have a share of the blame just because they are cutting corners without measuring the consequences.In my view, they are all responsible and blaming the fire brigade was a travesty of common sense if not an insult.As your article states, in the case of Grenfell:“A kilogram of polyethylene is like about one-and-a-bit, one-and-a-half litres of petrol. If you look at a one metre by one metre square section [of cladding] that will have about three kilograms, the equivalent of about five litres of petrol.”  It further states that all tests carried out after Grenfell, the cladding failed every single fire test.I am still reading the article.

Ivonne Holliday ● 2551d

Building Control has been largely privatised.There seems to be a lot of self-regulation of things nowadays - just look at how it seems anybody can now do Fire Risk Assessments.Isn't it the same with the testing of materials?The Building Research Establishment is no longer a Government body.

Philippa Bond ● 2551d

Yes Phillipa BRE sold tk a management buy out on the last few weeks of the tory govt in 1997. Although labour vehemently objected they did not reverse the sale 6 weeks later when Tony Blair won the landslide victory of that year.

Andy Pike ● 2551d

The whole thing is SO depressing!Where are British standards coming from these days?I dread to think!

Ivonne Holliday ● 2551d

It seems that the determination to slash regulations without fully understanding them and the consequences in the desire to privatise has caused all sorts of problems.  Regulations need to be clear and easy to understand so that mistakes are not made.  That means not having to have refer to several different documents at the same time.  They also need to be regularly updated to take into account new materials and new methods of construction.  The mix and match of old and new design and construction and materials has to be taken and made with great care.  In the past you seemed to get really good teamwork between the different responsible professions involved and those supervising, a great many with years of experience.  Fire Risk Assessments were done by the Fire Brigade or retired Fire Brigade members.There is something very wrong if so many people can make the same mistakes.Why is it that the Scottish Building Regulations are preferred by those who work all across the UK?Why weren't lessons learnt and changes made after the Lakanal House fire and before Grenfell?

Philippa Bond ● 2551d

When you have MPs who say the British public are fed up with experts and that we could easily reduce our famous good standards here what  hope is there?

Philippa Bond ● 2551d

Thanks Emarisa for the link.I can think of any reason why the whole Union should not have the same high standards. “But north of the border the story was different. Since 2005 Scottish building regulations have stated that cladding and insulation on high rise domestic buildings should either be made of non-combustible materials or the whole cladding system subject to a full scale fire test. These regulations applied not only to new high rise domestic buildings but also if an existing high rise domestic building was being re-clad.”

Ed Robinson ● 2551d

There is also a very interesting document regarding fires in student accommodation online and the ways in which most of these in the past have been caused.  Which has recently reported on smoke detectors and carbon monoxide detectors which are don't buys because they have been imported and don't meet British Standards.  They have also recently reported on false reviews on items - very serious when relating to safety equipment.Interestingly there was also report recently that children do not hear smoke alarms when asleep and are more readily woken up by noisy voices.  Everybody needs to know their plan of escape in event of fire.

Philippa Bond ● 2550d