微密圈

A building control body has denied that it had taken a 鈥渂enevolent鈥� attitude towards a combustible cladding product used on Grenfell Tower because it was facing financial difficulties.

Local Authority 微密圈 Control (LABC) head of education David Ewing said there was 鈥渧ery little in terms of profit鈥� resulting from the body鈥檚 decision to repeatedly issue misleading certificates for Kingspan鈥檚 K15 insulation.

Monday鈥檚 hearing of the Grenfell Inquiry was shown emails from Ewing in 2014 in which he told colleagues that Kingspan was seeking certificates for 30 of its products.

His colleague Cathal Brennan replied 鈥淲e鈥檒l save this failing company yet! Seriously, that鈥檚 really good news鈥�, while Lorna Stimpson, now the LABC鈥檚 chief executive, wrote 鈥淔anbloodytastic!!!!!鈥�.

Asked why his colleagues had responded in this way, Ewing denied that the body was in financial trouble but said it was 鈥渘ever making any money鈥� from a 鈥榬egistered details鈥� scheme for product certificates.

The purpose of the scheme was to offer in-depth evaluation by LABC teams of certified products with the information necessary to consider them against building regulations.

Ewing said it was helpful for manufacturers because it provided them with a 鈥渃onsistency of approach鈥� by local authorities in their assessments of products鈥� compliance.

Inquiry counsel Kate Grange QC asked if the reason he was so 鈥渂enevolent鈥� towards Kingspan was that the LABC needed the work and the firm鈥檚 endorsement of the scheme as the market leader.

Ewing admitted that there was 鈥渃ertainly a bit of kudos鈥� to having Kingspan on the scheme but said there was 鈥渧ery little in terms of any profits that were being made out of doing the whole venture鈥�.

The inquiry has already heard how the LABC鈥檚 certificates for K15 wrongly claimed the product could be considered a material of 鈥渓imited combustibility鈥� and suggested that it was fit for use in a wide range of cladding systems, rather than the single system covered by its fire test.

Witnesses from the firm have admitted that the certificates, which were used by Kingspan as a key element in its marketing material, were inaccurate.

K15, which attained a dominant position in the insulation market in the years leading up to the 2017 Grenfell fire, was never specified for the tower鈥檚 refurbishment but was found to be included in its cladding system following the disaster which claimed 72 lives.

Last week the inquiry heard how the LABC had sought a lucrative sponsorship deal with Kingspan, in which the insulation manufacturer was offered 鈥渄irect outreach鈥� to customers 鈥渢hrough referrals鈥�.

The LABC鈥檚 former director of technical policy Barry Turner had said that the body needed income as it was not being provided by either the government or from local authorities.

Yesterday, Ewing denied that Brennan鈥檚 comments suggested the work offered by Kingspan was 鈥減retty significant鈥� for the company and said the email was 鈥渁 bit of humour鈥�.

By the time of the email, the National House 微密圈 Council (NHBC), another building control body, had flagged concerns about K15鈥檚 certificate to the LABC.

The Inquiry heard last week that NHBC risk teams had been 鈥渏umping up and down鈥� because several large sites were 鈥渁ll using the material outside of the tested specification鈥�.

The LABC was also told that fire tests of K15 had shown it continuing to burn for 20 minutes after the laboratory flame was stopped.

Grange asked Ewing: 鈥淥ne of the things that鈥檚 puzzling is that at the very moment when you鈥檝e been made aware of some pretty serious concerns about Kingspan鈥檚 statements over its K15 product, as opposed to having serious conversations with Kingspan about those problems, you appear to be having mainly conversations about extra work for Kingspan, at that very moment.

鈥淭hat鈥檚 puzzling, do you accept, looking at it now?鈥�

Ewing replied: 鈥淚n terms of the emails that you鈥檝e shown me, I accept what you鈥檙e saying, but from my perspective, that was never the case.

鈥淚 suppose we could argue that Kingspan [were] sweetening us up by offering us the additional work.

鈥淎nd that might well have been the case, to try and take some pressure off the fire testing side of it. But, I suppose naively, I didn鈥檛 see that.鈥�

Grange then asked Ewing if he thought he had been 鈥減layed鈥� by Kingspan, to which he replied: 鈥淚 think we were. We were played all the way along, both Kingspan and Celotex.鈥�

Celotex is another product manufacturer which supplied insulation used on Grenfell tower. Last year, the inquiry heard how the firm 鈥渢ook advantage鈥� of Ewing鈥檚 apparent confusion over the 鈥楥lass 0鈥� fire rating to obtain an LABC certificate clearing its product for use on high rise buildings.

This week is the inquiry鈥檚 last week of hearings before it resumes on 24 January. The NHBC will be giving evidence today, Wednesday and Thursday.

The inquiry continues.