Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Grenfell Tower Enquiry

1356712

Comments

  • This door is at a site i work at. It has a key pad to open. Surely this is not legal???
    I should add it needs a 3 number code to open.

    So if I didn't know the code, I wouldn't be able to get out? ie there is no override or anything?

    That's terrible...
  • This door is at a site i work at. It has a key pad to open. Surely this is not legal???
    I should add it needs a 3 number code to open.

    It will have a failsafe on it in case of a power cut or the fire alarm going off.
  • Addickted said:

    This door is at a site i work at. It has a key pad to open. Surely this is not legal???
    I should add it needs a 3 number code to open.

    It will have a failsafe on it in case of a power cut or the fire alarm going off.
    I will ask tomorrow.
  • This door is at a site i work at. It has a key pad to open. Surely this is not legal???
    I should add it needs a 3 number code to open.

    Isn't the green pole, part of a panic bar?
  • No.

    But just noticed the ADT sign on the door - that will indicate the locking mechanism has an automatic failsafe.
  • Addickted said:

    No.

    But just noticed the ADT sign on the door - that will indicate the locking mechanism has an automatic failsafe.

    Thanks. Some of the staff have expressed concern as visiting contractors at the sloppy attitude to H&S.
  • H&S is everybody's responsibility.

    If you have concerns, raise them. I don't think anyone will mind and if it either eases your concerns or if there is an issue, something is done about it, then so much the better.
  • Addickted said:

    No.

    But just noticed the ADT sign on the door - that will indicate the locking mechanism has an automatic failsafe.

    In fact they don't and nobody knows why the ADT sign is there.
    The landlord / Client is looking into alternatives.
  • Wow.

    That needs to be resolved today. Fundamental flaw in their procedures if that cannot be opened in an emergency - even if you know the code.
  • worrying indeed.
  • Sponsored links:


  • First conclusions of enquiry about to be released.
    Damning report on the LFB reported.
  • I agree the Fire Service has been badly effected by cuts and have huge respect for firefighters but that doesn't give a free pass if operational policies and decisions are wrong and lead to avoidable tragedies.
  • I have been appalled by the attitude of those running the London Fire Brigade - they seem very reluctant to take responsibility or admit failings.

    Dany Cotton has shown appalling insensitivity in some of her comments and seems too arrogant to learn lessons. I'm sure she will retire on a nice pension. Rank and file firefighters have been let down by shoddy management as were those who lived in Grenfell.
  • As expected. Lets heap lots of blame on those that were there because the building was a death trap and reacted in a way that no fire service could have expected😡
    I spent 30 years in the London fire brigade and attended more high rise fires than I can count. 

    When you work as a firefighter or policemen or  whatever you have to follow precidures. 

    Had the cladding that surrounded the building then the fire would have been contained to the flat where the fire started. 

    Absolutely not one single person in the fire brigade who attended that night would have known that the cladding that surrounded the building was illegal. 
    Blame the cost cutting people who gave permission for that cladding to be used. 
    Do not blame the fire brigade. 
    The fire brigade failed the residents that evening with an adherence to a 'stay put' policy that made no sense given how the fire developed.

    People died uneccessarily due to the failings of the LFB management yet some seem more concerned with the reputation of those in charge rather than those who died. 

    As usual nobody wants to own up to their failings. At least Dany Cotton will retire on a nice pension.
  • Sponsored links:


  • thenewbie said:
    As expected. Lets heap lots of blame on those that were there because the building was a death trap and reacted in a way that no fire service could have expected😡
    I spent 30 years in the London fire brigade and attended more high rise fires than I can count. 

    When you work as a firefighter or policemen or  whatever you have to follow precidures. 

    Had the cladding that surrounded the building then the fire would have been contained to the flat where the fire started. 

    Absolutely not one single person in the fire brigade who attended that night would have known that the cladding that surrounded the building was illegal. 
    Blame the cost cutting people who gave permission for that cladding to be used. 
    Do not blame the fire brigade. 
    The fire brigade failed the residents that evening with an adherence to a 'stay put' policy that made no sense given how the fire developed.

    People died uneccessarily due to the failings of the LFB management yet some seem more concerned with the reputation of those in charge rather than those who died. 

    As usual nobody wants to own up to their failings. At least Dany Cotton will retire on a nice pension.
    The LFB gave advice based on what they believed to be the case, instead of there being a laundry list of cock ups that at the time they couldn't possibly have known.
    Stay put works.

    When a fire has taken hold of the whole of the building and the firefighters are struggling to contain the fire on several floors, it's time to get the people out and fecking quickly.

    From watching the film of the fire spread it was obvious that within 20 minutes of the LFB arriving on the scene a stay put policy was not suitable and total evacuation was needed.


    Rydons, who carried out the refurb, along with their main subbies, suppliers, site agents and especially the building control officers who passed the sub standard work should all be put in the dock.
  • DRAddick said:
    Err no, not fair play to her. She's done the old "apologies for any upset caused" crap instead of actually apologising and admitting she was wrong. 
    In fairness I think "I'm reassured race played no part in their response", is an admission that she was wrong.

    I think "apologies for any upset caused" is an apology.
  • DRAddick said:
    Err no, not fair play to her. She's done the old "apologies for any upset caused" crap instead of actually apologising and admitting she was wrong. 
    There's not a lot anyone could say to make her look anymore ill informed than what she said regarding the LFB the other day.

    But, my point is that she's said she was wrong and she has made herself right by saying "race played no part" in the response, for that, fair play imo
  • As expected. Lets heap lots of blame on those that were there because the building was a death trap and reacted in a way that no fire service could have expected😡
    I spent 30 years in the London fire brigade and attended more high rise fires than I can count. 

    When you work as a firefighter or policemen or  whatever you have to follow precidures. 

    Had the cladding that surrounded the building then the fire would have been contained to the flat where the fire started. 

    Absolutely not one single person in the fire brigade who attended that night would have known that the cladding that surrounded the building was illegal. 
    Blame the cost cutting people who gave permission for that cladding to be used. 
    Do not blame the fire brigade. 
    100% this.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!