In the early hours of June 14, 2017, residents of Grenfell Tower were caught by a deadly fire that would transform the building into an international symbol of negligence and injustice. This started as a small kitchen fire in the 24 -storey residential building in North Kensington, London, quickly spread out of the outside, ultimately resulting in the death of 72 people.
The tragedy is revisited in the documentary Grenfell: Discoveredwhich will be presented on Netflix on June 20. The film gives the floor to the victims, reveals the details of the behind the scenes of the investigation and explains how the interests of the companies and the failure of the government contributed to the disaster. But what exactly happened that night-and what followed?
How did the Grenfell tower fires start?
The fire is from flat 16, on the fourth floor. The resident, Behelailu Kebede, was woken up from the back of the smoke and saw flames near the refrigerator and the freezer, which had been burnt down. He immediately called the firefighters at 12:54 p.m. and the first crews arrived at the building five minutes later.
The first firefighters entered the apartment around 1:07 am, they made a quick scan but reached the kitchen until seven minutes later. According to a story by a firefighter, there was a “fire curtain” rising on the ceiling. The thermal images captured by the team suggest that the gases and flames were already escaped by the kitchen window, which was located near the refrigerator. From 1:09 am, the fire began to break into the outside of the building – marking the start of a devastating spread.
In the 30 minutes following the arrival of the firefighters, the fire had climbed the east side of the tower and reached the last floor. At 4:30 am, the whole building was on fire and more than 100 apartments had been affected.
Why has the fire spread so quickly?
Several structural and design defects have contributed to the rapid and catastrophic propagation of the flames. The most critical factor was the external coating installed during a 2016 renovation. The Grenfell tower was covered with aluminum composite panels (ACM) which contained a polyethylene nucleus – a highly flammable plastic which releases enormous amounts of heat when burned, essentially acting as fuel for fire.
In addition, the thermal insulation installed under the coating – in polyurethane foam – was also fuel and helped the fire to spread, just like other building materials. The renovations of the windows included the use of flammable materials, which allowed the fire to go from one floor to another by gaps in the structures.
Experts presented in Grenfell: Discovered Underline that the ACM coating – made of composite aluminum material with a polyethylene nucleus – had already been reported in previous and dangerous fire tests, with quick burn, intense heat and heavy smoke release. These test results were kept secret by companies like Armonic, the manufacturer of the material used in the Grenfell tower.
The failure of the emergency plan
Like many residential buildings in the United Kingdom, Grenfell Tower has followed a fire safety policy known as “stay” – the idea that in the event of a fire, residents should remain in their apartments, trusting that building design would prevent the flames from spreading.
But this plan failed catastrophically that night. At 1:26 a.m., less than 30 minutes after the firefighters arrived, it was clear that the situation was out of control. In desperation, some people have climbed in the neighboring apartments on higher floors, others jumped from the building, and many ignored the official advice and fled the stairs in search of security.
Despite this, an evacuation prescription was not made until 2:47 p.m., Richard Millett QC, the main lawyer for the Grenfell Tower investigation, said in a hearing on June 4, 2018, that 144 people had evacuated the building before 1:38 in the morning after this point – when the “stay” councils were finally abandoned – but 3:38.
The role of government in tragedy
Although the negligence of the company was a key factor in fire, government surveillance – or its absence – has also played a central role. The coating equipment used in the Grenfell tower had already been prohibited in countries like the United States due to its flammability. However, in the United Kingdom, it remained legal, largely due to the years of deregulation of the construction industry.
The policies implemented have encouraged the relaxation of safety standards in favor of cost reduction and efficiency measures, creating a regulatory vacuum in which dangerous materials could be approved and used.
In addition, internal documents later revealed that the local authorities responsible for Grenfell – the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC) and the Management Organization for Kensington & Chelsea (KCTMO) tenants – were aware of the potential risks. Cost reduction decisions when renovating the tower led them to choose the cheaper and more dangerous coating, instead of safer alternatives as zinc.
Residents had long raised security problems. Six months before the fire, a group of local tenants had warned of fire risks in an open letter. Their pleas have been ignored. The fire at Lakanal House in 2009, which killed six people and also involved a flammable coating, should have served as a awakening. But again, the authorities did not act.
The investigation and the pursuit of justice
After the fire, an in -depth public inquiry was launched. The Grenfell tower investigation, established to determine the causes, was divided into two phases. The first began in September 2017 and ended in October 2019, focusing on the events of the night itself thanks to the witness’s testimony. The second phase, which started in January 2020, examined wider structural problems, including decisions made during building renovation and the participation of companies that provided flammable materials.
After years of in -depth hearings, the final report was published on September 4, 2024. It awarded the disaster to the failures of the government, the construction industry, and in particular companies responsible for installing a flammable coating outside the building. The report noted that the coating did not respond to fire safety regulations and was the main reason for the rapid spread of the fire. He also criticized the passage of the passage of the London Fire-Brigade of the “Stay Put” to a complete evacuation order, which has considerably compromised the rescue efforts. In total, 58 recommendations were made, including updates to construction regulations.
The conclusion of the official investigation, it is now up to the police to identify potential criminal cases and refer them to the Crown accusation (CPS), which will decide to bring official accusations. Due to the complexity of the equipment gathered, the authorities have declared that it is unlikely that criminal accusations will be deposited before the end of 2026.
