Building Control should never have signed off on Grenfell Tower’s refurbishment, the council has admitted.
A lawyer for the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC) issued an “unreserved apology” to victims of the deadly blaze, after owning up to a string of failings including not asking for full details of the cladding.
It came as key witnesses due to give evidence launched a legal bid to protect themselves from incrimination in a fresh blow to victims and their families.
RBKC counsel James Maxwell Scott QC told the public Inquiry on Wednesday: “The council has identified a number of failings in the way its building control services processed and considered the application for building control approval during the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower.
“On behalf of the council, it apologises unreservedly for those failings.”
He added: “Grenfell Tower is a tragedy which should never have happened.
"This council could have done and should have done more to stop it happening.”
In a shocking list of admissions, he said the council’s Building Control had failed to ask for comprehensive details of the cladding system and decorative crown that have since been found to be primary causes of the fire’s spread.
It also failed to identify that the insulation and materials used in the cladding were combustible and failed to meet building standards, and further failed to request an up to date fire safety strategy report in the later stages of the project.
However, victims refused to accept the apology, adding that “no true remorse” had been shown.
A spokesman for Grenfell United said: “RBKC do not get any credit for their statement this morning, it is insulting to survivors and bereaved families for them to suggest they are being honest about their role in our suffering.
“There is no confession here, barely any honesty and certainly no true remorse.
“They have no choice but to accept that it was a total failure for their building control to sign off the refurbishment.”
Meanwhile key players in the renovations, who are due to give evidence next week, issued a last-minute application asking chairman Sir Martin Moore-Bick to apply to Attorney General Geoffrey Cox QC for an undertaking to prevent their evidence being used against them in future criminal proceedings.
Without the pledge, the hearing was told many could refuse to answer questions by claiming privilege against self-incrimination.
The law preventing self-incrimination has been used in other high-profile inquiries including the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry, the Bloody Sunday Inquiry and the Ladbroke Grove Inquiry.
The application, made on Tuesday night, was signed on behalf of core participants including Harley, subcontractors for the building’s cladding, workers at main contractors Rydon and the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant’s Management Organisation, who were responsible for maintaining the west London tower.
It said a number of witnesses had already been interviewed under caution as the Metropolitan Police conduct a parallel investigation into the 2017 fire which claimed 72 lives, with offences as serious as gross negligence manslaughter being probed.
Michael Mansfield QC, representing victims, told the central London Inquiry the timing of the application was “highly reprehensible and highly questionable”.
He said: “We have a major question over why it has been done today.
“It has caused immense anxiety, distress and anger at a time which has come throughout a much longer period of waiting after this disaster, of waiting to get to the point of accountability, as it were, to be almost thwarted at the doors of the court.”
Chairman Sir Martin Moore-Bick said: “I agree this application has come very late in the day and at a most inconvenient time.
“It’s very disappointing, I might even use a stronger word.”
Responding to the application, Unite the union said it would be “mockery of justice” if the witness evidence is privileged.
General secretary for legal affairs Howard Beckett said: “If the companies involved in installing the cladding knew it was flammable and unsafe and then allowed it to be installed anyway they should of course be prosecuted.”
