In the news

Its not like its deliberately more flammable. its just not inflammable, for some applications this would be fine. Outbuildings, standalone walls etc. It's not really down to the manufacturer to decide what's used on a project, they just make the stuff.

You don't get Smith and Wesson getting blamed when someone is shot

guns don't kill people etc

Presumably to be followed up with a personal visit telling them "we have CCTV of your kid kicking a ball sometime in September 2015, I hope you will reconsider your little fire safety protest?"

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.

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.

(flammable = inflammable. the 'in' doesn't make it an antonym. )

Righteous anger bubbling over, high temperatures forecast over the weekend ahead, is unrest in the streets not fairly likely? I'm not in London, I'm not in any position to gauge the mood, but people seem pretty angry on the TV reports.

Yep

who thought they'd be hearing about the kensington riots of 2017

In August 2011, I went to Berlin, and the Tottenham riots broke out.

I'm currently in the airport, waiting for my flight to Berlin.

Let's see how much away I have over events this time...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_blackout_of_1977

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.

Don't worry, Boris will be badgering Maybot & Amber Rudd to pass emergency legislation to let his 3 knackered German watercannons to be used.

In the "which bastards are culpable" stakes here, I think the manufacturers are a long way down the list.

There are far more culpable people to focus your ire on.

I agree with the sentiment but in reality these kind of decisions are rightly made by the people who are paid professionals responsible for designing and specifying construction builds, and by the building control officers who are then paid to ensure that these plans and the actual construction of them, is compliant with all relevant laws.

It is not for someone working in a shop, with possibly no construction knowledge or experience, possibly being paid fuck all to simply administer orders, to advise construction companies on large scale refurbishments. The people who should have known better, and probably did, are the ones culpable, and they work for the construction firm and the council.

'shop'?
Do not understand how anyone working in a shop is involved in either the specifying or supply of flame retardant exterior cladding.

I think expecting a supplier to second guess the requirements of a project which will employ a large number of specialists is optimistic and unrealistic.

If they'd misrepresented the products that's one thing. Expecting them to have in depth knowledge of every customer's project is another.

uber gruber has put it more forcefully than me and i concur with him.

Shop meaning the person in the office of the manufacturer who took the order, I assume

Do not understand how anyone working in a shop is involved in either the specifying or supply of flame retardant exterior cladding.

Quite: they don't (apart from the "supply" bit, obvs).

Who's responsible if you buy Ferrero Rocher to serve as part of a thirteen course taster menu (c/w Prosecco and square plates)?

Not Monsieur Ambassadeur.

the council.

No-one from the council involved KCTMO is a stand-alone company,
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/grenfell-towers-management-company-who-are-kctmo-what-other-properties-have-they-worked-on-a3565311.html

Further up the thread it was established that 'buidling control' is, now, also essentially privatised, so afaik, no Council involvement in checking the works.

KCTMO is wholly owned by the Council.

Ah true. Famous infamous. You know what I mean though

The honeymoon for labour winning Kensington probably hasn't lasted long.

I thought they had already sold them