Grenfell: Cladding company employee criticized in report describes deaths as a “tragedy”

Claude Wehrle, who worked for Arconic, did not testify during the hearings despite being asked to do so and was described in the report as “by far the most important of the absent witnesses” the investigation wanted to hear about the company’s role.

When asked by the BBC, Mr Wehrle, who lives in France, is said to have described the deaths in the fire as “a tragedy and more than a pity”.

“I feel the same as every other person, whether they have no responsibility at all or not,” he told the broadcaster.

Arconic Architectural Products manufactured and sold the Reynobond 55 polyethylene (PE) core cladding panels used in the renovation of Grenfell Tower, which were later found to have fuelled the fire.

The 2019 Phase 1 report said the “primary reason” the flames spread so quickly into the building was the combustible exterior cladding, which acted as a “fuel source.”

The final report, published on Wednesday, said Arconic had “deliberately concealed from the market the true extent of the danger associated with the use of Reynobond 55 in cassette form, particularly on high-rise buildings.”

Investigators were told that in March 2010 – seven years before the fire – Mr Wehrle had replied in an email stating that it had to be treated as “STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL!!!!” because the company’s Reynobond cladding in cassette form (in three-dimensional structures) did not meet European Class B fire safety standards.

The final report concluded that, even without personal testimony from Mr Wehrle, it had been proven that he had been willing to “resort to deliberate dishonesty in order to facilitate the sale of the product for use in cassette form”.

The report also said that Mr Wehrle had withheld a test result from the British Board of Agreement (BBA) certification body “because it showed that the fire performance of the product was much worse when used in cassette form”.

When asked by the BBC why this had been withheld, he said: “There are people in this company who are better suited to make such decisions than I am.”

Relatives and survivors of the fire have renewed their calls for prosecution following the publication of the devastating final report.

The chairman of the inquiry, Sir Martin Moore-Bick, concluded that the high-rise block in west London was clad with flammable products due to the “systematic dishonesty” of the companies that manufactured and sold the cladding and insulation.

He denounced “conscious and persistent” manipulation of fire safety tests, misrepresentation of test data and misleading the market.

Grenfell United, which represents some bereaved families and survivors, said its report “demonstrates a lack of competence, understanding and a fundamental failure to fulfil the most basic duties of care”.

While the Metropolitan Police has pledged to review the report line by line, it said bereaved families and survivors will likely have to wait 12 to 18 months before learning whether charges will be brought.

A former director of public prosecutions warned that backlogs in the system could lead to an even longer delay in bringing those responsible to justice.

Lord Ken Macdonald told the British newspaper The Guardian that “justice is still a long way off unless proceedings are massively accelerated”.

He said: “The criminal justice system is still suffering terribly from the austerity measures which have caused enormous damage.

“The result is that it now takes years for cases to come to court after an indictment. The criminal proceedings resulting from Grenfell are likely to be numerous and complex.

“The prosecution is talking about decisions on charges in 2026. That is probably optimistic. But even if that is true, with the current trial schedule it could take two or three years before the negotiations begin.

“Some may be talking about 2028, 2029.”

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer told Parliament this week that it was “imperative that people are held fully to account” for the disaster, “including through criminal proceedings, and that this happens as quickly as possible”.

He apologised “on behalf of the British state” for the fire and the loss of life, which he said should never have happened.

Sir Martin acknowledged a “simple truth” that all the deaths were preventable and that the authorities had “seriously failed” the tower’s residents, “in most cases through incompetence, but in some cases through dishonesty and greed”.