Dangerous revisionism

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Just seen about grenfell on the news, French managing director (one of em anyway, the other three won't appear still) of the company who provided the cladding for the block.

Obviously not his fault.

Can't find the older grenfell thread
 
Gonna be a whitewash bro.

Verdict: Nothing to see here.

Basically the end scene of The Big Short for dodgy cladded blocks.

Revisionism at its most dangerous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sucky
Sucky said:
Just seen about grenfell on the news, French managing director (one of em anyway, the other three won't appear still) of the company who provided the cladding for the block.

Obviously not his fault.

Can't find the older grenfell thread
Click to expand...

Don’t know enough about it but it’s pretty conclusive that if their data sheets have misrepresented the performance of the cladding then they’re fully responsible.

I do think any building that has cladding which hasn’t been fully tested inside the U.K. against existing regs needs to have its fire strategy revised and retrofitted if necessary. Stay-puts are modern man’s worst idea imo, so much grey area.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sucky and Diego
Tel said:
Don’t know enough about it but it’s pretty conclusive that if their data sheets have misrepresented the performance of the cladding then they’re fully responsible.

I do think any building that has cladding which hasn’t been fully tested inside the U.K. against existing regs needs to have its fire strategy revised and retrofitted if necessary. Stay-puts are modern man’s worst idea imo, so much grey area.
Click to expand...

When it first happened, I genuinely thought that putting cladding up which wasn't fire resistant (worse still an accelerant) was illegal and the developers would be thrown to the wall.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sucky and Diego
Treble said:
When it first happened, I genuinely thought that putting cladding up which wasn't fire resistant (worse still an accelerant) was illegal and the developers would be thrown to the wall.
Click to expand...

Well yeah it will have been but if the data sheets show it as non-combustible then there’s not a lot the contractor can do, especially if it’s spec’d by the architect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sucky and Treble
Sucky said:
I reckon duggies bird is the oldest tbh
Click to expand...

How old is Duggie ? Think Fosse is in his 70's so his missus his is defo getting her free bag of firelighters and kindling.

Think Big Smiddy is the oldest one on here isn't he ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sucky
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back