Massive fire in London apartment block

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
TheFoX said:
As with most things in life, the authorities will make waves to appease the masses, making us believe that they are doing something, and that someone within the authority will be held accountable, whereas in real life those civil servants will get off scot free with a massive pension pot for early retirement.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with you there. I believe that the chaotic scenes in council meetings with survivors put pressure on the authorities to be seen to be doing something. But "Corporate Manslaughter" charges aginast a (local) government body makes no sense morally.
 
Lest we slip into the trap of using loose terminology in the interest of clarity the term civil servant is defined as follows.
Civil Servants are those who are employed by the Crown, excluding those employed by the Monarch herself. The UK Civil Service therefore does not include those who are employed by Parliament, nor does it include those public servants employed by other public bodies. Only 1 in 12 UK public servants are therefore classed as civil servants.
Other public bodies are defined here and would include

Non-Departmental Public Bodies (NDPBs), often known as Quangos.
The National Health Service
The Armed Forces
Public Corporations
Local Authorities
I would suggest the term "those working in the public sector" as a more accurate description the proportion of which in the general employment pool depicted here.
nosimage1.png



UK Civil Service - Definitions - What is a Civil Servant?
 
markjay said:
Dies this mean that no individual will face criminal charges?
Click to expand...

Extremely unlikely anyone will face criminal charges unless trails of decisions which led to the event can be clearly put down to an individual. Obviously the residents and those affected will want heads on steaks but a hefty fine will be the only punishment for the council.
 
Last edited:
In terms of the possible corporate manslaughter charges being a non custodial offence its pretty much to be expected in cases of this magnitude and complexity. As usual its the foot soldiers who are expected to take the blame for policy decisions taken at a much higher political level. While they have undoubtedly a share of the blame their role was to advise not decide- that role is vested in the political structure of the organisations subject to investigation . Evidence of that might be gleaned from a comparison of the initial plans submitted and those finally implemented which I suggest are evidence of political decisions to reduce costs and not merely technical incompetence. That brings us to the more difficult concepts of what constsitutes best industry practice, duty of care etc. I don't expect anyone to go to jail for this but hopefully if such charges were to go to court that decisions and attitudes may be revealed that a lot of people would prefer to remain hidden rather than subject to public scrutiny. :dk:
 
grober said:
Meanwhile back in the Building Research Establishment______??
Grenfell Tower: Sixty blocks 'fail new fire test' - BBC News

Seems a much more realistic test of cladding "systems" rather than discrete "components":dk:
Click to expand...

Difficult to see how "Corporate Manslaughter" charges can be justified when these buildibg methods appear to have been standard across many councils?

The cynic in me says that this is a creative way for the authorities to satisfy the baying mob demanding blood, and who won't accept that it was an industry-wide oversight, and that no one deliberately housed them in dangerous buildings.

Sometimes there are lessons to be learnt but no one to blame.... accidents do happen and things can go horribly wrong.
 
Last edited:
grober said:
"Baying mob " would seem to be a slightly uncharitable even provocative description of the friends and relatives of the 80 people who were gassed and then incinerated in their own homes.
Grenfell Tower fire: Who were the victims? - BBC News
Click to expand...


This is what I said about survivors:

markjay said:
I have to agree with you there. I believe that the chaotic scenes in council meetings with survivors put pressure on the authorities to be seen to be doing something. But "Corporate Manslaughter" charges against a (local) government body makes no sense morally.
Click to expand...

The 'baying mob' comment was aimed wider parts of the population who got involved in this issue, mostly for political reasons.
 
markjay said:
The 'baying mob' comment was aimed wider parts of the population who got involved in this issue, mostly for political reasons.
Click to expand...


Or to put it another way, those who are jumping on the Band Wagon for their own personal, political or financial gain.

Friends and family of those affected have every right to be angry, but as for the rest of us, we can only comment, and not demand, as we have not been affected.

But, as we have seen time and time again, there is an element of society that will protest even though they have no genuine reason to protest, just for the sake of protesting.
 
Dubai's Torch tower catches fire -- again - CNN.com

'The Civil Defense Office said the building was successfully evacuated and the emergency responders had brought most of the fire under control.
There were no immediate reports of injuries, the Dubai Media Office tweeted.'

Let's hope for the best.
 
This frightens the life out of me as my only child, his lovely wife and their as yet unborn daughter live in a tower block on the Marina in Dubai...
 
Hi,
We have friends who live in the Torch.
Around 475 people were evacuated in 10 minutes.
All the flats were searched by Civil Defence and the tower security for sleeping/trapped people and pets.
Fire was doused within two hours.
The emergency services are very well equipped and trained is this country and their response to this incident was very well coordinated.
Cheers
Steve
 
Thanks for your comment Steve. It is reassuring. When I was last there, I struggled to sleep knowing I was on the 29th floor in a building with so many people/families. I would so like them to buy a villa...
 
Guilt by implication??
quote :-
The London Fire Brigade was closely consulted over the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower that included the installation of flammable cladding, the BBC has learned.

splitting that two part statement up.

The London Fire Brigade was closely consulted over the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower - check

The refurbishment of Grenfell Tower included the installation of flammable cladding. - check

The implication being that the London Fire Brigade were closely consulted about the installation of flammable cladding- altho the sentence doesn't actually say that. :confused:
 
image-502624545.jpg

Could this case law (from defective roof tiles in the fifties) have relevance to the Grenfell Tower cladding?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Similar threads

D
East London fire.
Replies
1
Views
839
Cymruambyth
Cymruambyth
brucemillar
Vauxhall 'reckless' over Zafira fires, say MPs
Replies
6
Views
1K
markjay
markjay
Ade B
Fire!
Replies
6
Views
693
Benzowner
Benzowner
Back
Top Bottom