# Grenfell Tower fire (London) **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [June 14, 2017, 5:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926 "2017-06-14T05:45:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![SciFiSam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/47e85d/32.png) [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2017, 10:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/261 "2017-06-23T10:50:12Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > That would make a great deal of sense, though, of course, it is up to fire departments to some extent how to spend their money. > > I know there are many local cases around here where fire departments are literally bankrupting their own towns with bloated budgets that can’t, politically speaking, be reduced, but fire inspections and prevention aren’t being done any more than they ever were; the fire departments prefer to spend their money on firefighters and shiny vehicles, not inspections. > > That said, the importance of real inspections, with real consequences for noncompliance, can’t be overemphasized. That’s not how it works here. The lack of inspections by the fire dept is down to the law meaning they can’t do them, not down to the fire service cutting back. Obviously here I mean full inspections of the structure of the building, not cursory inspections to make sure there are smoke alarms, etc; the fire service does do those (often at the request of residents; I requested one once) and indeed did one at Grenfell the Saturday before it burned. ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2017, 10:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/262 "2017-06-23T10:55:28Z")
> [@](#): > > The social housing residents often even have their own “poor door” entrance. Is this true? How is such a thing possible in the 21st century? How is this not taken as straight up discrimination? You have to wonder what the goal is here. Housing people where they are exposed to constant reminders of the cars, services, preferential treatment, better services, that they can never attain seems like a recipe for resentment and conflict, to me. But a ‘poor door’, seems like an 18th century concept. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2017, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/263 "2017-06-23T12:11:15Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > “…working for the council…” > > How is that NOT self certification? Because the inspectors are council employees, not servants of the councillors. And - speaking as an former council employee - if they can demonstrate their worth by finding problems, they will. That said, if the inspectors were not employees but subcontractors then that’s a different matter and their relationships with local building companies and in particular the ones involved here should be investigated and in which case: > [@](#): > > Are the inspectors also protected from any liability? I expect there will be some weasel wording absolving them. ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2017, 12:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/264 "2017-06-23T12:24:43Z")
That seems a hair splitting difference, to be honest. Because if they can demonstrate worth by overlooking issues, they’ll do that too. That’s the problem with employees, they tend to curry favour with those employing them. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2017, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/265 "2017-06-23T13:29:58Z")
[Possible manslaughter charges, but that’s not all: > [@](#): > > In its most detailed briefing on the criminal investigation, the Metropolitan Police on Friday confirmed residents’ suspicions that the June 14 inferno at Grenfell Tower was touched off by a refrigerator fire. The department also said exterior cladding attached to the 24-story public housing project during a recent renovation failed safety tests conducted by investigators, and that police have seized documents from a number of organizations. > > “We are looking at every criminal offense from manslaughter onwards,” Detective Superintendent Fiona McCormack told reporters. “We are looking at all health and safety and fire safety offenses, and we are reviewing every company at the moment involved in the building and refurbishment of Grenfell Tower.” ]([http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU\_BRITAIN\_LONDON\_FIRE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-06-23-08-56-54](http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_BRITAIN_LONDON_FIRE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-06-23-08-56-54)) ---
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2017, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/266 "2017-06-23T17:27:37Z")
\*\*casdave \*\*- great post ( #251 ) up top there! ---
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2017, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/267 "2017-06-23T17:33:06Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > Is this true? How is such a thing possible in the 21st century? How is this not taken as straight up discrimination? > > You have to wonder what the goal is here. Housing people where they are exposed to constant reminders of the cars, services, preferential treatment, better services, that they can never attain seems like a recipe for resentment and conflict, to me. > > But a ‘poor door’, seems like an 18th century concept. It is, and it isn’t. London is a hugely mixed up place; every culture everywhere, right across the socio-economic scale. No ghettos, few particularly poor neighbourhoods, few rich. If there were rich neibourhoods Grenfell would be in it. The ‘poor door’ idea is relatively recent and is clearly a misstep - something not regulated for that developers have adopted, but it is a product of ensuring new developments have some social housing element contained within them i.e. maintining the mix that makes London unique. ---
**Author:** ![Celyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9dc877/32.png) [@Celyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Celyn)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2017, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/268 "2017-06-23T18:04:11Z")
I agree entirely. ---
**Author:** ![Celyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9dc877/32.png) [@Celyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Celyn)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2017, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/269 "2017-06-23T18:17:30Z")
Eek. Internet fell down, therefore not able to edit that I meant the thing with which I agreed is > [@up\_the\_junction](#): > > \*\*casdave \*\*- great post ( #251 ) up top there! Sorry. ☹ I have, of course, thoughts about this, and I have lived in flat in high rise multi-storey flats for many years, but I must be off now, Not quite trusting computer or connection. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2017, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/270 "2017-06-24T12:11:57Z")
BBC: “Cladding fire tests failed by 27 high-rise blocks” > **[Cladding fire tests failed by 34 blocks in 17 areas](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40391395)** > > So far, 34 cladding samples from 17 areas have been sent to the government's laboratory - and every one has failed fire safety tests. In 15 different council areas in England. Camden Council is evacuating its affected towers because it cannot guarantee the residents’ safety. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2017, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/271 "2017-06-24T14:53:58Z")
Welcome to the New Gilded Age, when we’ve forgotten why all those government regulations were put into place and all those inspectors were hired in the first place. This is the end result of de-regulation, cutting down the size of government, and why a libertarian paradise would be a dystopia. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2017, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/272 "2017-06-24T18:19:38Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > Is this true? How is such a thing possible in the 21st century? How is this not taken as straight up discrimination? > > You have to wonder what the goal is here. Housing people where they are exposed to constant reminders of the cars, services, preferential treatment, better services, that they can never attain seems like a recipe for resentment and conflict, to me. > > But a ‘poor door’, seems like an 18th century concept. This doesn’t just happen in the UK. New apartment buildings in New York qualify for tax breaks if they contain some affordable housing units, and [some such buildings](http://nypost.com/2016/01/17/poor-door-tenants-reveal-luxury-towers-financial-apartheid/) have a “poor door.” New York actually changed the law in 2015, banning separate entrances, but buildings that had already been built or approved were grandfathered in. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2017, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/273 "2017-06-24T18:49:15Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > Welcome to the New Gilded Age, when we’ve forgotten why all those government regulations were put into place and all those inspectors were hired in the first place. The building was inspected. Did the inspectors do their jobs? That’s one question to be answered. > [@](#): > > This is the end result of de-regulation, cutting down the size of government, and why a libertarian paradise would be a dystopia. I disagree. This is a reach too far. In a libertarian world it would be up to the tenant to check that the building was fire-safe and decide to rent or not rent accordingly. As ever, there would be properties which would be fire-safe, and those which would not be. Caveat emptor would apply. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2017, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/274 "2017-06-24T18:50:43Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > BBC: “Cladding fire tests failed by 27 high-rise blocks” That’s a surprisingly - and thankfully - low number. I had feared many more. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2017, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/275 "2017-06-24T19:02:35Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > I disagree. This is a reach too far. In a libertarian world it would be up to the tenant to check that the building was fire-safe and decide to rent or not rent accordingly. As ever, there would be properties which would be fire-safe, and those which would not be. Caveat emptor would apply. You have a point. In some ways, this is worse than the libertarian ideal. In a corrupt or incompetent or underfunded regulatory environment, people who rent apartments BELIEVE that those apartments have been built and maintained in a way that properly safeguards the lives of the occupants, so they feel no need to make individual checks in order to confirm things like fire safety. They are, in a very real sense, lured into the places with false promises. And governments often do everything possible to give the illusion of regulatory security and safety without providing a sufficient amount of actual infrastructure or oversight to ensure that the social benefits of regulation are actually realized. Unfortunately, it’s not just nominally conservative governments who screw over their own people like this, although they are more committed to it. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2017, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/276 "2017-06-25T03:25:26Z")
So, in a libertarian paradise we’d all have to be fire safety experts in addition to everything else we need to be experts at? How would YOU go about determining if exterior building cladding is safe or not? That is why we have government oversight - because we can’t all be experts in everything, ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2017, 6:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/277 "2017-06-25T06:55:09Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > That’s a surprisingly - and thankfully - low number. I had feared many more. I don’t think they’re done yet. If I understand the article correctly, it’s now up to 34 failures…out of 34 samples: > [@](#): > > Cladding on 34 tower blocks in 17 council areas in England has failed fire safety tests, the government says. > > So far, every sample has failed the tests. The government plans to examine cladding from up to 600 blocks. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2017, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/278 "2017-06-25T19:14:22Z")
> [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > I don’t think they’re done yet. If I understand the article correctly, it’s now up to 34 failures…out of 34 samples: [60 now. Out of 60. > [@](#): > > The list of high-rise apartment towers in Britain that have failed fire safety tests grew to 60, officials said Sunday, revealing the mounting challenge the government faces in the aftermath of London’s Grenfell Tower fire tragedy. > > All of the buildings for which external cladding samples were so far submitted failed combustibility tests, Communities Secretary Sajid Javid said. As of late Sunday, that includes 60 towers from 25 different areas of the country- double the figure given a day earlier. ]([http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU\_BRITAIN\_LONDON\_FIRE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-06-25-14-34-32](http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_BRITAIN_LONDON_FIRE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-06-25-14-34-32)) ---
**Author:** ![SciFiSam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/47e85d/32.png) [@SciFiSam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SciFiSam)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2017, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/279 "2017-06-25T19:40:31Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > So, in a libertarian paradise we’d all have to be fire safety experts in addition to everything else we need to be experts at? How would YOU go about determining if exterior building cladding is safe or not? > > That is why we have government oversight - because we can’t all be experts in everything, Yeah, I mean we can check for smoke alarms and exit points but we wouldn’t even be able to check if any sprinklers were actually functional. It’s incredible that all the cladding so far is failing the tests. They said at first that they were testing the most likely to be dangerous samples first, so it wasn’t as surprising when the first few failed. But now, 60 samples down and they’re still no good! This is going to cost a fortune. In Camden residents have been told to leave their homes for a couple of months while work’s done. It’s not just the closing there but other fire risk issues, apparently. They’re going to be put up in hotels in various parts of London (at first it was just airbeds in a leisure centre). That’ll make it fun getting to work and school and getting carers in. Whole families in one room, and what do they do with their pets? It’s a farce. ---
**Author:** ![Randolph](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Randolph](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Randolph)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2017, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926/280 "2017-06-25T19:50:46Z")
[Herostratus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herostratus). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grenfell-tower-fire-london/788926.md?page=15)