Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

In the shadow of Grenfell Tower- thread four

999 replies

RhythmAndStealth · 17/06/2017 14:02

Rest in Peace

Isaac Shawo, 5 Flowers
Khadija Saye, 24 Flowers
Mohammed Alhalaji, 23 Flowers

At least thirty people confirmed to have died Flowers

Six further deceased victims provisionally identified Flowers

Many more people feared to have died. They have yet to be reunited with their names Flowers

Nineteen people still in hospital, with ten in critical care Flowers

Many people homeless and dispossessed Flowers

Many bereaved Flowers

Many traumatised Flowers

“…it is difficult to escape a very sombre national mood.” The Queen.

Three investigations launched- Fire, Police and Public Inquiry
£5m Government Emergency Fund created
£3m donated by public
Peaceful protesters demand justice and answers.

Thread three (includes links to threads one and two)

OP posts:
Thread gallery
25
StatisticallyChallenged · 17/06/2017 16:27

There are presumably others who got out under their own steam but weren't in the "saved by firefighters" number - the people who ignored the "stay put" instructions.

Original poster
RhythmAndStealth · 17/06/2017 16:30

That's why it's so confusing Sylvia. Reports are not the same as an official list from e.g. The housing association.

He didn't say they didn't have such a list either. It's possible they did and cross checked it with the public's missing people reports.

Even an official list of tenants would be fallible though, due to sub-lets, people being away etc. Unless an accurate sign-in list was kept at the door, they would still be in the dark a bit.

It is a disgrace if an accurate tenant list cannot be produced though.

The Police are doing the best with the information they have was the general gist I think. But of the c400reports of people they had, they are only still seeking 58.

OP posts:
Original poster
RhythmAndStealth · 17/06/2017 16:33

I think one of the most horrendous things is that it is always going to be a bit unclear, it's always going to be uncertain.

OP posts:
mpsw · 17/06/2017 16:35

That's not quite right rhythm

Police have said that today's working total of dead and missing presumed dead is 58. They have also said they expect the total to rise.

BBC says there are c,70 missing (which I assume is in addition to the 58) but has not given a source. I think they may well have had access to things like tenant lists or an off-the-record briefing from those who are working on exactly the type of reconciliation of figures that posters here are saying should happen.

I expect drone footage might also be relevant, but final figure (as far as one can ever be reached) will only come some time after the building is safe for investigators to enter.

StatisticallyChallenged · 17/06/2017 16:38

It doesn't surprise me in the slightest that there's no accurate tenants list

I got my council flat on my own, then now DH moved in. Council never notified (council tax knew but they're not exactly joined up). If I'd had a child whilst living there the council wouldn't have directly known - medical services etc might have, but the housing element would have been uninvolved.

Similarly the house I lived in with my mum; it was originally me, her and older brother but only her on the tenancy. He moved out, I moved out, other brother moved in. Only mum recorded as tenancy

Other family flat; originally mum plus 2 kids, oldest kid has a child so there's 4 now. Then she moves out. Then back, this time with 2 kids. So they're up to 5. Then she moved out, back down to 2. Then son moves his girlfriend in. Then she gets pregnant. Through all of this, only mum is on the tenancy.

IME this is pretty much the norm. They will need to cross reference numerous sources to try and come up with a list of who lived there.

BeyondStrongAndStable · 17/06/2017 16:40

There could be crossover in the saved by firefighters/hospitalised list though? In fact, someone died in hospital, so they could be included in figures if people saved, people hospitalised and people who died?

Original poster
RhythmAndStealth · 17/06/2017 16:41

I think the BBC just haven't updated their figures yet mpsw. The c70 missing the police were talking about previously has been reduced to 58 today.

My reason for this is the BBC were reporting 24 in hospital, 12 critical earlier today, after the NHS had issued an update to it being 19 in hospital, with 10 of those being critical. The Guardian reported that update at 9.56am and the BBC were quoting 24 and 12 right up til the beginning of the Police Press Conference.

I could be wrong of course and they do have additional sources. However, I do think they would be duty bound to share those with police.

OP posts:
keeplooking · 17/06/2017 16:41

I don't think that many on the upper floors would have been aware of the fire, until it was too late for them to escape. There was apparently no audible central fire alarm, and neighbours were having to alert each other. Given that the fire spread from bottom to top in the space of about 20/30 mins, and many who managed to phone relatives were confirming some time later that they had been told to 'stay put', and were abiding by this, I fear the final death toll will be higher than the police are estimating.

StatisticallyChallenged · 17/06/2017 16:42

My understanding is the same RyhthmAndStealth - it's not 58 plus 70, the bbc 70 was before the 58 announcement. They're not two separate groups.

Original poster
RhythmAndStealth · 17/06/2017 16:43

Yes, I agree Statistically.

I would hope they would cross check that before they had the press conference Beyond. But I also expect they are working with a large number of information sources, so mistakes do happen. I think they know the stakes are high though, that is why they are refusing to be drawn about anything they aren't absolutely sure about.

OP posts:
Original poster
RhythmAndStealth · 17/06/2017 16:45

I think you're right that it be higher than the number they are going just now keep. It will be higher than 58 most likely. But they have said they do expect the number to rise. Sadly, IMHO, because they know that it's likely that there were people in the building who no-one has reported/has an official record of.

OP posts:
SylviaPoe · 17/06/2017 16:48

Even though 58 is terrible, it does at least mean that most residents from the floors the fire fighters could not reach did not die. Many presumably did leave quickly before the smoke filled the staircase.

Original poster
RhythmAndStealth · 17/06/2017 16:48

I will just make it clear that everything I have said is just my understanding/interpretation of what he said in the Police Conference. I have no other sources.

Lobster he's Police Commamnder Stuart Cundy, of the Metropolitan Police. Sorry for taking so long to say that, I was just trying to get my head round the statement.

OP posts:
Original poster
RhythmAndStealth · 17/06/2017 16:49

It could mean that Sylvia, and I very much hope it does. It could also mean that no-one has reported/has official record of those on the top floor.

That's what's bad about this messy, unclear situation. It's really difficult to infer anything.

OP posts:
Original poster
RhythmAndStealth · 17/06/2017 16:50

Flowers for the 58

OP posts:
retainertrainer · 17/06/2017 16:50

A professor I once worked with who investigates cases within the NHS where complaints have been made once made an analogy that rings true here.

He said a piece of Gorgonzola has many randomly placed holes. Very rarely all the holes line up. All the holes lined up that night-the initial fire,the cladding,lack of sprinkler system, residents told to stay inside.

Absolutely tragic. Sorry if my comment isn't following the flow of this thread,it was just something that I'd been thinking about. I understand his analogy completely now.

thatdearoctopus · 17/06/2017 16:50

It's been reported that no one escaped from the top three floors, but there have been people interviewed who have said they lived on , say 21st.
If there were 6 flats on each floor, with, let's say an average of 4 people in each one, then that's 72 people on the top three floors for starters. Sad

StatisticallyChallenged · 17/06/2017 16:53

It's also possible that it wasn't as many as 500-600 in the building.

Assuming the planning application was correct (there are a few variants!) then there were:

40 1-bed flats
80 2-bed flats
3 - 3 bed flats
4 - 4 bed flats

If those flats were at full occupancy (so 2 people in a 1 bed, 4 in a 2, say 6 in a 3 and the same in the 4s (they were only just built and designed for 6) then that would be 80+160+18+24 = 282 residents.

We know some of the flats were overoccupied - families of 5 in a 2 bed and so on. But, equally, there will have been many which were under occupied - there have been reports of people who lived alone, older people who raised their family there but were now 1 or 2 in a 2 bed. The 4-600 might be too high.

AuntieStella · 17/06/2017 16:54

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40315194

BBC article.

I read it as the first part being 58 missing presumed dead, and then the later paragraph was 70 missing not yet officially categorised as presumed dead.

Though I suppose it could be read either way. Any other media any clearer?

StatisticallyChallenged · 17/06/2017 16:55

Ignore my maths, miscalculated the 2 beds!

Deux · 17/06/2017 16:56

This thread has been my go-to source to find out what's going on. Thanks to all of you who've been collating news and comment.

Amazingly, some people from higher floors did manage to get out by themselves. How they managed I just don't know. I can't imagine the fear. There was a woman on the 19th floor who carried her 2 children down and was met by fire officers and directed out.

StatisticallyChallenged · 17/06/2017 16:59

if the flats were all at occupancy it would be

40x2 =80
80x4=320
3x6=18
4x6=24
Total = 442

It's been a long day, sorry!

OublietteBravo · 17/06/2017 17:00

Presumably some of the residents weren't there when the fire happened. For example, I imagine quite a few would've been at work. Plus visiting friends/family for Ramadan must mean that whilst some flats had extra occupants at the time of the fire, others had fewer occupants or were vacant.