Massive fire in London - Grenfell Tower in Shepherds Bush

[Hillian1]

There could be a whole host of possibilities regarding specification, certification, implementation, on-site quality control and inspections, existing cladding and materials, testing conditions etc. Very early to be speculating I feel on where the fault lies with the cladding.

Yeah your right, pure speculation on my part, probably not helpful.

 

[Titanic]

...Final point - a lot has been made of this '£5,000 saving' - suggestions that there's no way the compromise would be made over such a small figure. It might. Main contractors work to insanely small margins (sometimes as low as 2.5%). They will ALWAYS use the lowest price option that meets the spec.

So, the problem is the 'spec' ?

 

[Bozza]

Its naïve to think like that though, I'm afraid.

To explain (apologies for massively simplifying):

1. The client wants a big construction job done. They write a specification of what is required (more accurately, pay someone else to write a spec). Various experts and consultants may have input into the spec. Various organisations and suppliers will happily provide free 'consultancy' that leans towards their preferred products being specified. Once your product is specified, the final contractor HAS to buy from you.

2. The client, invites main contractors to tender for the job of delivering the agreed specification. Most tender processes will lay out the criteria for choosing the successful bidder. 'Value' (ie price) is normally the highest weighted of the criteria. Other criteria will include experience in similar projects, quality of products, etc.

3. The company that wins the contract, undertakes to deliver the spec, in return for their quoted sum (lets say for example, £10m)

4. That Main Contractor may do some work themselves. Some main contractors these days (Wilmot Dixon, for example) don't really do any. They split the job up into smaller contracts, and invite sub-contractors to tender for those. (For example the cladding contract at Grenfell). Once again the tender process will 'weight' different criteria, to choose a winning bidder. I've personally worked on tenders for council projects (Leisure Centres) where the 'Value' is stated as the ONLY criteria. The companies tendering against those smaller contracts will each be working to an agreed spec, but each will want to strike a balance between winning the contract (so quoting as low as possible) whilst still making profit (keep costs as low as possible).

5. The subcontractor will then try to buy products to complete the job at lowest cost to themselves, without falling below the agreed specification. If there is any ambiguity in the spec they WILL seek to exploit it, by using materials / products that meet the wording rather than the spirit of that spec. We see this on a weekly basis in our industry.

Final point - a lot has been made of this '£5,000 saving' - suggestions that there's no way the compromise would be made over such a small figure. It might. Main contractors work to insanely small margins (sometimes as low as 2.5%). They will ALWAYS use the lowest price option that meets the spec.

Maybe, yes. Probably even. But like almost everyone right now, you're speculating.

Why not wait for what we hope to be a full independent, transparent, no-stone-left-unturned inquiry to highlight all the failings at play here, and how they can be learned from?

 

[hans kraay fan club]

So, the problem is the 'spec' ?

I'm not saying that is the case here - I couldn't possibly know.

Just that the sub-contractor and the main contractor are trying to turn what profit they can by keeping costs as low as possible, whilst staying within the confines of that specification.

The COULD be an error in the spec, or it COULD be ambiguous and thus exploited, or the spec might be fine and the work might not actually meet it. The enquiry / inquest will be seeking to decide that, amongst many. many other things, of course.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Maybe, yes. Probably even. But like almost everyone right now, you're speculating.

Why not wait for what we hope to be a full independent, transparent, no-stone-left-unturned inquiry to highlight all the failings at play here, and how they can be learned from?

Absolutely. My post was meant to be a general layman-explanation of the tendering processes, rather than this actual case, of which I obviously have ZERO inside information.

 

[beorhthelm]

Final point - a lot has been made of this '£5,000 saving' - suggestions that there's no way the compromise would be made over such a small figure. It might. Main contractors work to insanely small margins (sometimes as low as 2.5%). They will ALWAYS use the lowest price option that meets the spec.

which is fair enough, though that would point to a flaw in the specification, rather than saving on an inferior product as implied.

 

[Hillian1]

Absolutely. My post was meant to be a general layman-explanation of the tendering processes, rather than this actual case, of which I obviously have ZERO inside information.

I’ve lost count of the amount of Local Authority Tenders I’ve put together now, the last page always explains how the Tender is weighted, costs always being 50%.

It doesn’t ever surprise me though that the eventual winner is the one who comes in with the lowest cost.

 

[marlowe]

2. The client, invites main contractors to tender for the job of delivering the agreed specification. Most tender processes will lay out the criteria for choosing the successful bidder. 'Value' (ie price) is normally the highest weighted of the criteria. Other criteria will include experience in similar projects, quality of products, etc.

In the case of Brighton and Hove City Council it seems that one of the criteria for awarding contracts was family connections which is why there is currently a £25 million corruption investigation ongoing against their former head of housing.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

In the case of Brighton and Hove City Council it seems that one of the criteria for awarding contracts was family connections which is why there is currently a £25 million corruption investigation ongoing against their former head of housing.

Ha.

I'd expect that the 'corruption' being investigated, in such a case, would presumably be the breaching OF the tender process, as set out.

 

[CHAPPERS]

How the **** has the Queen been to see the victims before the PM?

 

[Titanic]

How the **** has the Queen been to see the victims before the PM?

She hasn't. The Prime Minister has been visiting victims in hospital this morning.

 

[pb21]

How the **** has the Queen been to see the victims before the PM?

Because the Queen has far more backbone than May.

 

[CHAPPERS]

She hasn't. The Prime Minister has been visiting victims in hospital this morning.

Another protected environment.

She's showing just what kind of leader she is at the moment, unfortunately.

nb I'm not trying to score political points here.

 

[clapham_gull]

She hasn't. The Prime Minister has been visiting victims in hospital this morning.

Should have gone and met the community and taken the flak like the Mayor did.

She's obviously taken some very very bad advice.

Possibly from her chief of staff (and former housing minister)

 

[Bozza]

Another protected environment.

She's showing just what kind of leader she is at the moment, unfortunately.

nb I'm not trying to score political points here.

I wrote on another thread just last night that if Theresa May visited people in hospital she would be criticised. And you've just done it. Then followed up with "not trying to score political points". Incredible.

I'm out of these threads. The tragedy is depressing enough, without the way some people carry on about it afterwards.

 

[portlock seagull]

I understand people are angry, they are mistaken to blame May. She's just the incumbent. One guy even said had she come down here she would have been on the end of a torrent of abuse regardless. At least he was being honest. Lots of bigotted hotheads been on the airwaves recently talking utter shite just because they perceive (without any basis, just natural prejudices and speculation) matters one way or the other. Police are heroes this week but they'll be racist thugs again next etc. But it really does show how politicians are damned if do, damned if don't and in the current political and security climate it was arguably wiser not to go for a walkabout. At least she's visited families in hospital and emergency services. But to say she has a lack of humanity is just ridiculous. And seeking to score horrible crass points that's all. Irresponsible too when feelings running high. Her job right now and has been since last Sept. is to focus on Brexit. Let the delegated Ministers and Shadow Ministers scrutinise this national tragedy from here on. It's their job, not hers. People forget she doesn't run the country, tens of thousands of others do.

 

[symyjym]

Should have gone and met the community and taken the flak like the Mayor did.

She's obviously taken some very very bad advice.

Possibly from her chief of staff (and former housing minister)

That must have been the longest walk of his life (so far).

To be fair though May could have been lynched. Sadik Khanhad had bottles thrown at him apparently so there could have been riots.

 

[El Presidente]

I understand people are angry, they are mistaken to blame May. She's just the incumbent. One guy even said had she come down here she would have been on the end of a torrent of abuse regardless. At least he was being honest. Lots of bigotted hotheads been on the airwaves recently talking utter shite just because they perceive (without any basis, just natural prejudices and speculation) matters one way or the other. Police are heroes this week but they'll be racist thugs again next etc. But it really does show how politicians are damned if do, damned if don't and in the current political and security climate it was arguably wiser not to go for a walkabout. At least she's visited families in hospital and emergency services. But to say she has a lack of humanity is just ridiculous. And seeking to score horrible crass points that's all. Irresponsible too when feelings running high. Her job right now and has been since last Sept. is to focus on Brexit. Let the delegated Ministers and Shadow Ministers scrutinise this national tragedy from here on. It's their job, not hers. People forget she doesn't run the country, tens of thousands of others do.

Fair enough.

At least we have some consistencies in life, and The Sun lowering its (already low) standards in order to get a story on the tragedy is one of them.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/16/sun-journalist-grenfell-tower-victim-hospital?CMP=share_btn_tw

 

[pb21]

I wrote on another thread just last night that if Theresa May visited people in hospital she would be criticised. And you've just done it. Then followed up with "not trying to score political points". Incredible.

I'm out of these threads. The tragedy is depressing enough, without the way some people carry on about it afterwards.

She isn't being criticised for meeting people in hospital she is being criticised for not meeting people outside of hospital.

And I'm not trying to score political points either. Both parties have let a lot of people down in the most monumental way possible, I'm not criticising the right or the left, the tories or labour. I am criticising our PMs actions only.

 

[symyjym]

Fair enough.

At least we have some consistencies in life, and The Sun lowering its (already low) standards in order to get a story on the tragedy is one of them.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/16/sun-journalist-grenfell-tower-victim-hospital?CMP=share_btn_tw

Refuted though, however if true should mean jail time for someone.