Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lizzie Zoom]

Now 60 tower blocks have been checked out for fire safety, 100% of them failed the inspections!

Have we started on schools, hospitals, libraries yet? 

Oh, that is to come!!

[STEMO]

Fire stations? 

I shouldn't 

[aaronjb]

Better finish what the Germans started in the 1940s and flatten the whole country, just in case.

[Doctor Gollum]

Better finish what the Germans started in the 1940s and flatten the whole country, just in case.

Start with Lundun and Glastonbury...

Followed by a vigil.

[TheBoy]

Now 60 tower blocks have been checked out for fire safety, 100% of them failed the inspections!

Have we started on schools, hospitals, libraries yet? 

For that to happen, you need to call the BBC, and express outrage...

[Viral_Jim]

Now 60 tower blocks have been checked out for fire safety, 100% of them failed the inspections!

Again, I think there is something of a media hype around this. What they are saying is that 100% of cladding tested is not up to current building regs (well, thats what the news @10 were saying last night). But this has never been the test applied to buildings, and nor should it be. The correct test to apply is whether it passed regulations at the time it was put up, and was it put up in the prescribed manner to allow it to perform correctly.

Taking our house as an example, built in 1908(ish), almost everything in here would not pass modern building regs, with the exception of the work we have done to it in the past couple of years. Does that make the place a death trap? - of course not.

Similarly, you cannot retrospectively apply the current regulations to existing public buildings, unless you want to set about re-fitting substantial portions of the building every few years. The requirements for fire doors, alarm systems, electrical safety and in this instance cladding all change with each iteration of the regulations and render previous installations non-compliant.

However, the problem you have now with the media hype is that no-one is going to stand up and say "this doesn't meet the latest fire safty regs, but that doesn't make it unsafe." As they'll be hung by the Mail, drawn by the Sun and quartered by the Express  .

[Kevin Wood]

Again, I think there is something of a media hype around this. What they are saying is that 100% of cladding tested is not up to current building regs (well, thats what the news @10 were saying last night). But this has never been the test applied to buildings, and nor should it be. The correct test to apply is whether it passed regulations at the time it was put up, and was it put up in the prescribed manner to allow it to perform correctly.

Taking our house as an example, built in 1908(ish), almost everything in here would not pass modern building regs, with the exception of the work we have done to it in the past couple of years. Does that make the place a death trap? - of course not.

Similarly, you cannot retrospectively apply the current regulations to existing public buildings, unless you want to set about re-fitting substantial portions of the building every few years. The requirements for fire doors, alarm systems, electrical safety and in this instance cladding all change with each iteration of the regulations and render previous installations non-compliant.

However, the problem you have now with the media hype is that no-one is going to stand up and say "this doesn't meet the latest fire safty regs, but that doesn't make it unsafe." As they'll be hung by the Mail, drawn by the Sun and quartered by the Express  .

Yes, absolutely correct. However, if we're prepared to accept that a building will only ever meet the fire safety parts of the building regulations that were current at the time of construction, why are we not able to accept that its' environmental performance will only meet that standards that were current at the time of construction? It is the the practice of bodging insulation onto the side of buildings under cladding in the hope of "upgrading" this that has compromised the original fire safety measures incorporated into these buildings.

[Doctor Gollum]

My cars MoT was only good on the day of it's test... Can I apply for a new one?

[aaronjb]

This reminds me of the opinion of a structural engineer I paid to do a structural report (odd, that) on a Victorian terrace, it basically boiled down to:

"All these old properties are low grade housing and should be flattened"

See, I'm right back to "Flatten the country and start again" apparently

[STEMO]

I had a bit of a nasty evacuation this morning. It was touching cloth and go for a while.

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

I had a bit of a nasty evacuation this morning. It was touching cloth and go for a while.

Make it in time?

[Sir Tigger KC]

I had a bit of a nasty evacuation this morning. It was touching cloth and go for a while.

Make it in time?

He's been very quiet since.... 

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

I had a bit of a nasty evacuation this morning. It was touching cloth and go for a while.

Make it in time?

He's been very quiet since.... 

Leakage in the elderly is a common problem.

[STEMO]

Cheeky bastids. I've been quiet since because I've been for a good walk with the dog. Looks like the rest of the week could be a write-off with the weather.

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

Cheeky bastids. I've been quiet since because I've been for a good walk with the dog. Looks like the rest of the week could be a write-off with the weather.

'Whippet walking' a good was to relax.