Sanctuary wrote: At the end of the day the buck stops at Building Control as it was them and their man/woman who's job it was to ensure all the correct safety materials were used as specified and alternatives equally approved of.
My guess is that BC are keeping a low profile right now!
Thing is... that may not actually be the case. Over the past few years there has been a trend towards "self-certification" for things like fire-safety and disabled-access compliance. All part of the grand project of "deregulation".
Therefore, *IF* the aspect of the building that breached regulations (for the sake of argument... let's say it was the external cladding) was legally "self-certified" by a contractor, it may have nothing whatsoever to do with a public building compliance officer.
I'm not saying it's a *good* thing that contractors can self-certify. In fact, I'm fairly sure it's not. But that's been the trend in construction over the past few years and Grenfell may be a case where this system is exposed as dangerous.
Or not. It's all still speculation based on incomplete info.
|