Talk:Grenfell Tower fire

Introductory section should cover responsibility
I think the introductory section of the article should conclude with a sentence indicating who was ultimately held responsible for the fire. Or, if no one has yet been held responsible, it should clearly state that. Right now this omission is quite glaring. Reading the "Investigations" section, I believe nobody has been held responsible yet, but I am actually not certain. 90.240.154.167 (talk) 19:22, 25 September 2021 (UTC)


 * This is taking several years and will be a work in progress for some time. David Crayford &#9742;  14:08, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Valencia fire
Another similar fire. Cladding and rapid spread. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68374811

Just a suggestion, but maybe the list of similar fires should be a separate article, with this page a member of it?

David Crayford &#9742;  20:48, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree. It's out of place here, although there is relevance.  All the best: Rich Farmbrough 23:15, 12 June 2024 (UTC).

Cost
I'm a bit chary about the "4000 x" although it is sourced to the Guardian. Three main reasons:


 * 1) It's implying that it would have been financially cheaper to "do the right thing".
 * 2) * That's only true if we only take this particular risk and this particular building into account. There may be many risks that would have appeared to be of similar magnitude in many projects with associated savings.  We would be required to analyse these risks according to a formula to establish if the mathematical expectation is positive.  I don't believe anyone at the Guardian would suggest this is the way to make decisions.
 * 3) * It's also not true if the same cladding could have been fitted in a different way, safely.
 * 4) The moral argument is not about saving money, it's about saving lives.
 * 5) Our table seems to double count costs.
 * 6) * the £150 M settlement was partly funded by Aconix. It's not clear if this is double counting their liability. The same applies to the other 21 defendants.
 * 7) * Kensington's expenditure on new property is partly funded by their insurance. It's not a loss in any event, it's capital expenditure to acquire assets.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough 23:26, 12 June 2024 (UTC).