-
The manufacturer provides a range of grades of cladding each at a given price/specification ratio.
But the manufacturer does not decide which grade of cladding is nailed to the building. The decision as to which grade of cladding used is the one that could possibly be negligent.
I say possibly because their are multiple parties involved in a major building project all involved in the decision and any decision on negligence will depend on each parties exact terms of reference.
fidbod-
If the manufacturer,
http://omnisexteriors.com/
had only the one grade of ACM,
thay could possibly claim that they merely 'suppiled' a requested material.However,
http://omnisexteriors.com/roofing-and-cladding/metal-facade-systems/acm/
shows they offer three grades,
PE, FR and Mineral Core,
clearly indicating that the PE is only suitable for the applications where flammability is not the deciding factor.Every manufacturer has a 'Duty of Care' to ensure the material they offer for sale is 'Fit for Purpose'. The 'PE' grade should never have been sold for the Grenfell Tower refurb project.
mespilus
One grade, the 'PE', is offered where flammability is not a deciding factor in the application, as 'PE' has inherent flame soreading/propogation properties.
The manufacturer knows the 'PE' grade is an inherent, avoidable hazard where flammability is a deciding factor, so also offers an 'FR' grade with some flame retardancy. Seems to me a clear case of 'Duty of Care', and the saving of <£5k has cost >100 lives.