It seems that the building regulations stipulated that this cladding shouldn't be used above a certain height, but the wording was such that it could be read as a guideline only. It's clearly been ignored by both the building industry and the inspectors who with a nod and a wink have basically indicated that builders can use the inferior cladding.
Given all that, given that the reason the fire spread the way it did still hasn't been established beyond speculation and that the spread confounded the fire experts, I can't see how a prosecution could succeed.
The council was surely entitled to rely on what the experts were telling them and on the fidelity of the buildings inspection system.
__________________
-
"The whole of anything is never told." - Henry James
"Political language... is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable." - George Orwell
|