Grenfell Tragedy a private landlord’s thoughts

Please note Shelter is named here.https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/16/manufacturer-of-cladding-on-grenfell-tower-identified-as-omnis-exteriors

I don't think 2k per flat is a financial burden to council when you take 8.6 or 10 mil refurbishment cost over 100-120 homes, it's 71k each in this case.

In my garage conversion to room, I am installing fire proof door frame and doors and planed to remove and replace sound proof plaster board that builder put in to fire proof plasterboard, as the garage is next to kitchen. It was my plan before Grenfell happened, although my flat is excouncil ground floor. 26k to change single to double windows in 3 bed flat, council! Only council can make that cost! This shows level of corruption or at least ineffectiveness of council things. Everything excommunist, council/excouncil are not good, really.

Council don't have economic/business mind. Or their money making mind is somewhere unseen. £2 per meter cheaper between fire resistant to flameable cladding roughly 5k saved per 8.6-10 mil project, any non-council businessman would safely pass that cost-benefit analysis when he thinks about the day he sells the prop on...

Reply to the comment left by "Kath Jones" at "16/06/2017 - 14:09":

That's the problem with Councils. They only know how to allocate money as that is their function and nothing at all about generating it. Hence why they have no instinct for business.

Reply to the comment left by "Dylan Morris" at "16/06/2017 - 14:16":

In the corruptive country where I am from, gov official either must be very very very very... unsensible or have been bought with a LOTS of money to make this kind of "mistake". Although not being called businessman, being in council, you don't have difficulty making this kind of decision for your own home improvement project, especially when the money is not from your pocket. And you know you have political risk. A lot will be answered.

Reply to the comment left by "Kath Jones" at "16/06/2017 - 14:09":

Kath , You are on the mark. Only in Local authority world could anybody justify£26k To replace glazing in a three bed flat.. This avoidable disaster proves beyond doubt, that Councils while devoting huge resources to attempting to criminalise the private sector They, run a coach and horses through safety measures in public housing.
These Councils should be issued with enforcement notices immediately by The fire Service, and those failing to comply should have their assets sold to the private sector at a knock down price with a stipulation in the contract that remedial measures to make the accommodation safe are implemented immediately and a penalty clause for any delays or omissions.
What is obvious now to all ,is that Local authorities are failing badly.
Mr Corbyn and his reference to cuts as being a factor is nauseating. This is no time for gutter politics while the death toll rises from the Fire. We need Council accommodation all across the country, to now without delay be subject to the same safety standards as the PRS. To ensure this I urge the Government to amend the 2004 housing act and let us have legislation with teeth to protect tenants in Council Ghettoes.

Reply to the comment left by "Larry Sweeney" at "16/06/2017 - 15:06":

Hi Larry. What about sending these ideas to Alok Sharna? As the new Housing Minister he might welcome these ideas and be able to make his mark with them.

Thanks Rosalind,
I will do that if it helps prevent another such tragedy, although one would think that they should be on this now in the light of these events.

It seems the landlord haters have been on overdrive in their desperation to blame these events on people like us, and failing that, anyone who they deem to be on the "right" politically. Expect much more misguided effort to demonise private landlords in the months ahead.

I have seen articles, for example, that have mistakenly likened the Tenant Management Organisation that managed Grenfell to be, in effect, a private landlord (one even referred to "fat cat private landlord"). Yet, it is no such thing. It is simply a non-profit management board which includes resident representatives. Not unlike a school governing body in fact.

Then I have seen numerous articles "shaming" the 72 MPs who apparently rejected a Labour proposal to make it a requirement that all rental properties are "fit for human habitation". No matter that this piece of proposed legislation would have had no effect whatsoever on Grenfell even if it had been passed. No matter either that under the Housing Act 2004, we have the extremely extensive Housing Health and Safety Rating System giving local authorities powers to order landlords to deal with 29 different classes of defect, which, taken together, already have the effect of requiring landlord's properties to be fit for habitation.

I have seen other articles blaming the disaster on lack of money due to right wing penny pinching, despite the fact this block just had £10 million (mis)spent on it. For example, it is asked: why are there not sprinkler systems in all tower blocks? Yet sprinkler systems were first patented in 1860, so have been around for more than 100 years and therefore you could blame every government last century for not demanding their more widespread use. The UK is actually broadly in-line with most, in requiring sprinkler systems in many new buildings but not fitting in existing buildings. Maybe that has to change, but if it does, it will be a change to the policies of governments both left and right.

Residents are understandably angry, but seasoned observers have spotted many familiar faces from Trotsky-ist groups at the vanguard of the march on Kensington town hall; so we are now seeing a hard-core group capitalising on the tragedy of others and making mischief and violence before we are anywhere near to knowing the truth about this catastrophe. I suspect most residents locally will not think these interlocutors, with their violent and aggressive ways, have done them any favours.

I will be the first to agree that once the truth is out, culpable people need to go to jail if appropriate. But others already seem to have all the facts and have apparently already decided where the blame lies.

Appalling though the tragedy at Grenfell is, it is also worth remembering that tower block living is actually very safe. The fire box passive safety principle has actually been overwhelmingly effective, which is why, before this tragedy, very few people were calling it into question. While each and every week, an average of 33 people die on Britain's roads, prior to this disaster, fewer than 10 people have died in the last decade from fire in Britain's 4000 + tower blocks. Indeed, fire risk has actually been lower than for domestic houses. Safety has always been about risk assessment, not risk elimination.

Reply to the comment left by "Dylan Morris" at "16/06/2017 - 11:30":

Tory council. Labour MP. Largely irrelevant as the building was constructed in 1974 and then ignored by subsequent councils and governments. Presumably all these 'Buy to Rent' developments springing up in city centres around the country are licensed? Just a thought.

i will wait for full info--i have suspicions that this was no accident

and masses of fuss--i dont recall similar angst after london bridge--wrong religion perhaps???

Your hearts go out to those that have been lost, and i think you make excellent points Larry, if you search articles, there are as many unfit houses in the public sector if not more, Its time that a few things happened in my view,
1) If there is a standard, there is only one, and all must adhere to legally
2) It must be made very clear and transparent that the cost of Public housing is clearly no cheaper than PRS, they just lie about costs and who pays them, ie the £10m refit is lost as a rental income.
3) It has to be realized that Grenfell was built in 1970s where standards were very different to fire standards today. ie only one means of fire escape
4) This should NOT be political, the playing on TV is making me sick, you can't blame May for the council as a landlord decision making, when successive governments did nothing an dthe landlord has clearly made poor decisions.
5) New building all have sprinkler systems today, there are something like 4000 tower blocks, if 1/2 need modernizing, then you must start with simple fire alarms like HMOs, sprinklers are hard to retro fit due to building designs and expensive, but modern 'Mist' sprinklers can be fitted easily in sections on self contained reservoirs at much let money.
6) There really must be a minimum safe standard of retro fit. for modern fire standards.
7) Prosecutions are necessary, as PRS, not double standards.

Ive been appalled by the media making it a circus of rhetoric, casting dispersions without any evidence and fueling the anger and intensity of the story.
From what i saw, i would lay odds that
1) fire alarms didn't work, private test every week
2) Outside cladding was done for Eco reasons to meet internal targets (government) not aesthetics as people are suggesting
3) The building looked alight from the core from what i saw, so the cladding isn't even a cause just an outcome.
4) i would bet that fire barriers failed in the building core allowing it to spread, as it was built in 1970s.
In truth right from the start the people had no chance, a very sad tail indeed of probably incompetence too