3 ms·

Not only no consequences, it looks like they're trying to cash in by rinsing the occupants for the cost to remove the cladding on similar buildings!

• lupusreal 3y ago
  They're protecting property owners at every step. Why haven't they condemned large/tall buildings with inadaquate stairwells for fire evacuation (in fact, given the timeline of the fire, Grenfell's single staircase would have been amply adaquate to evacuate the building before people started dying)? Because that would totally hose the people who own such buildings. And why aren't they requiring large buildings to have adaquate staircases? Because that would eat into profitable floorspace. The UK prioritizes property owner profit.
  • FirmwareBurner 3y ago
    >The UK prioritizes property owner profit. So the US didn't fall far from the tree. It's just like 'daddy'. <wipes away imperial tear>
  • dukeyukey 3y ago
    > Why haven't they condemned large/tall buildings with inadaquate stairwells for fire evacuation They kinda have - check out the cladding scandal [1]. It's pretty major, a lot of properties are essentially unmortgageable until they get inspected to make sure they're safe. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_cladding_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_cladding_crisis