Barry Hembling on how to start assessing liability for buildings with flammable cladding in the wake of the Grenfell disaster
After the human tragedy of Grenfell Tower, interested parties are starting to assess their potential liability for buildings with flammable cladding. But it can be hard to know where to start.
Over 200 Aluminium Composite Material (ACM – not to be confused with Asbestos Containing Materials) panel samples from high-rise blocks in 54 local authorities have currently failed combustibility tests. Further tests are being undertaken to establish how six ACM panel types behave in a fire in combination with different insulation types. There is also increasing concern about non-ACM panels with a near identical construction to those used on Grenfell Tower and mounting pressure for non-ACM panels now to be prioritised for testing. While some panels may not be dangerous by themselves, it is important that the correct type has been used and/or only used on buildings up to six storeys.
With hospitals, universities and schools having at-risk panels and owners and managers in the hotel, office, commercial and leisure sectors, among others, realising that buildings within their portfolios may be at risk, we could be facing a repair bill that exceeds the £12 billion current estimate.
While it will be some time before we fully understand how the fire started or why it took hold in the way it did, there are questions that interested parties can start considering now, in advance of further Government guidance and the conclusions from the inquiry.
Has there been a breach of the Building Regulations?
The Building Regulations (Paragraph 12.7 of Approved Document B) require that in a building over 18 metres above ground level any insulation product or filler material (excluding gaskets, sealants etc.) used in external wall construction should be of limited combustibility or Class A2.
Class A2 is the standard against which the Government have been testing cladding. However, elsewhere the Building Regulations suggest a lower safety score of Class 0 (Euroclass B) for all external surfaces for tall buildings. Evidence following the fire indicates that some in the construction industry have been applying the Building Regulations to Class 0 (Euroclass B) standard for years. This is an issue that the inquiry must thoroughly investigate.
In the meantime, the Government clarified on 22 June that the non-combustibility requirement does not just apply to thermal insulation within the wall construction, but extends to any element of the cladding system, including the core. If the Building Regulations are found to be ambiguous or contradictory, changes can be expected.
How, and why, were buildings inspected and signed off by building control?
Many buildings requiring remedial works would have been subject to third party inspection and approval and so questions are now rightly being asked