The close of the 300-day-long inquiry into the devastating 2017 Grenfell Tower fire in London saw attorneys for the victims pinning the “primary responsibility” on the building's designer, Studio E Architects, adding that a “rogue's gallery” comprised of Arconic Architectural Products and the engineering concern Exova were also to blame, along with the “rolled-back state” and a coterie of Grenfell subcontractors. 

“The full extent of the disaster was caused by a complex combination of corporate greed with complete disregard for safety, professional incompetence, oversight and organisational failings, and facilitated by an insufficiently robust regime,” Barrister Stephanie Barwise said during her final statement.

A representative for Kingspan, makers of the faulty K15 insulation used in 5% of the facade, added their view that “responsibility also rests with those responsible for the design, construction, and approval of the refurbishment.”

Arconic’s counsel Stephen Hockman shot back later in the day with his own assessment blaming construction firm Rydon and contractor Harley Facades while arguing that the main accelerant of the fire came from the contents of the cladding. He also stated a failure of the subcontractors to properly read the fine print of the safety certificate issued by the British Board of Agrément after the product’s “entirely lawful” manufacture.

Finally, Hockman dismissed the non-disclosure of a 2005 test that showed the cladding material was 10 times more flammable when modified into cassette form, saying it was a “non-issue” owing to the availability of said certificate, which “makes it crystal clear that the product was combustible.” He then told the inquiry his client was the victim of a pre-established agenda on the part of the other subcontractors, whom he said colluded to “condemn” Arconic in the public’s eye before the hearing even began.

The state’s two-pronged inquiry had previously found that the insulation’s manufacturer Celotex had acted unethically by rigging fire tests and making misleading claims about its product safety performance metrics. Phase I’s proceedings also saw blame placed on the London Fire Brigade’s “inadequate” preparedness for such a blaze, in addition to the Arconic-produced panels, which were said to have caused the fire to spread more rapidly.

The culmination of Phase II is still forthcoming. The inquiry’s panel will deliver a full report of conclusions and recommendations towards the end of next year, at which point the London Metropolitan Police will decide on an investigation into possible criminal charges that could be levied against multiple parties. A news report released earlier today indicated that such a process has already begun concerning former employees of the now-abolished Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTM), which oversaw Grenfell as an extension of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC) until shortly after the fire.