The Grenfell Tower Inquiry Statement of Mustafa Abdu
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
THE GRENFELL TOWER INQUIRY STATEMENT OF MUSTAFA ABDU TOWER RESIDENTS I, Mustafa Abdu, former resident of 184 Grenfell Tower, Lancaster West Estate, London, W 11 1TQ, WILL SAY AS FOLLOWS: 1. I make this statement to provide evidence to the Grenfell Tower Inquiry on matters relevant to module 3 (fire safety measures) and module 4 (aftermath) as specified in the document entitled 'List oflssues for BSR phase 2 witness statements' . It is not possible to convey the extent of the difficulties I have suffered by limiting myself to the seven days following the fire. I am, however, aware of the purpose of the module, which is to capture an understanding of how bereaved, survivors and residents experienced the immediate aftermath of the fire. The events I describe in this statement are rooted in that seven day period and I therefore address them in this statement. The statement I make is from my own knowledge or belief unless otherwise stated. If not from my own knowledge I will identify the source. 2. I first address briefly complaints I raised in relation to disrepair and health related matters before turning to address fire safety measures more generally. I then address the aftermath ofthe fire. 3. I address complaints about repair issues at my flat before turning to matters concerning fire safety complaints. I believe complaints about repair issues are relevant because they provide the Inquiry with an overview of how complaints were dealt with by the TMO and RBKC. In my view, the response to non-fire safety complaints were inadequate and reflect 1 Mr Mustafa Abdu IWS00001956/1 IVVS00001956_0001 the attitude of the TMO and RBKC towards residents' complaints generally and explains why I lost my resolve to raise complaints at all. 4. I have made previous statements to the Metropolitan Police Service and the Grenfell Tower Inquiry. This is my second statement to the Inquiry because I made a statement during Phase 1 of the Inquiry, which has the Relativity reference IWS00000307 Complaints o(Disrepair 5. I raised the following complaints to RBKC/TMO. a. Leaking 1. There was a leak from Flat 194 on the 22nd floor, which was the fl at above mine. The water from the leak would seep into my flat. I think the leak in his flat was caused by the central heating system. The leak commenced shortly after the refurbishment works had been completed; around 201 5. n. I had approached the resident of Flat 194 in relation to the leak about two months after it started. 111. When I asked if he had reported the leak, he confirmed that he had reported the disrepair to the TMO many times; he said over 50 times. I had also reported the leak to the TMO. IV. The leak was so bad and went on for so long that it also started to affect the flat below me. The person from the flat below complained to me about the leak and I told them that it was not a leak in my flat but from the one above. I think this person complained to the TMO also. v. I would call the generic repairs number to raise a complaint but no work was carried out to rectify the issue. Often I was told that the contractors would be attending my property to carry out repairs. I would then take a day off to keep to the appointment but the contractors would regularly not attend. 2 Mr Mustafa Abdu IWS00001956/2 IVVS00001956_0002 ' ' v1. When I would ask why no one had attended my property I would be told the person who was to attend the appointment was on holiday and had not arranged for cover. As I was self-employed, this would mean that I would often lose a day's pay. vn. When someone did finally attend my property to deal with the repair work they did not repair the leak. The leak was never repaired. Instead they painted the walls in my flat but they did not replace the panels which were affected by the disrepair or re-plaster the walls. The cupboards in the kitchen were also damaged by the leaking and these were not repaired or replaced. 6. There is no evidence in the housing file of the complaints I made and when further documents were requested by my solicitors, such as complaints and repair logs, RBKC confirmed that it did not have any other written records of the repair requests that I made. 7. When my file was provided to my solicitors by Rydon it contained email correspondence between Rydon and the TMO regarding the damage to the panel in my hallway from the leak upstairs, the picture of this damage is at (MA/1 ). There are further pictures of the damage to my property at (MA/2 ) which come from an email between Rydon and the TMO, also attached at (MA/2 ). 8. In the email dated 23 November 2015 Chris Holt from Rydon says that the leak was fixed. This cannot be true because after this date my property was still being damaged by the leak from the flat above mine. I note that Claire Williams from the TMO also said that she "did not want to instruct additional work" (MA/3 ). 9. I also note that Chris Holt from Rydon produced a snagging report naming a number of issue at my property on 1 December 2015. This noted holes in pipes in my property as well as issues with my windows, attached at (MA/4 RYD00059720). I was never made aware that there was damage to my radiator pipes nor did anyone ever fix these. 10. As shown by (MA/5 ) there was also a high degree of asbestos in my property. I was never informed that there was asbestos in my property. Also I do not remember any repairs works to deal with the flaking artex in my property. At 3 Mr Mustafa Abdu IWS00001956/3 IVVS00001956_0003 (MA/6 ) there is an email exchange between Janice Wray, Claire Williams, John Tatham and Adrian Bowman stating that work was to be done at my property to deal with the asbestos issue as soon as possible, there was then a completion certificate dated 29 May 2015 at (MA/7 ). Though it seems the certificate's issue date is June 2013 and the certificate is dated on the same day as the email stating that Rydon had not yet attended my property. 11. I remember that work was done on 29 May 2015, I was not in the property but had given my key to the care taker so they could let the workers into my property. However, I believe that the completion certificate is inaccurate, the ceiling of the living room was only painted over and nothing was done in the kitchen as the certificate says. After this date, there was also still the brown spotting and flaking which you see in the picture at (MA/2 ) in the property. 12. When my solicitors showed me the details of the asbestos in my property, as detailed in the papers from Rydon, I was shocked because this was the frrst time I heard about this. I am appalled that I was living in a property with asbestos but never informed of this. 13. I did not feel that my complaints nor those of the other residents I spoke to were effectively dealt with and this made me reluctant to report any other issues when they occurred. Fire Safetv Measures Fire Safety Systems 14. I moved into Flat 184 Grenfell Tower in or around August 1990. Whilst living there I noticed various issues which concern the fire safety systems. I address each of these below. Lifts Pre-refurbishment 15 . There were two lifts at Grenfell Tower and these were often out of service, maybe every couple of months. This would mean having to take the stairs all the way up to the 21st floor. Although a contractor would be called to repair the lifts, this would take time and it was never resolved swiftly. This was an ongoing problem that kept occurring. 4 Mr Mustafa Abdu IWS00001956/4 IVVS00001956_0004 I ' Post-refurbishment 16. The lifts kept breaking down roughly on the same regular basis after the refurbishment as they did before. Flat doors 17. I remember that my flat door was replaced but this was done before the refurbishment period, though I do not remember the exact year; at this time the lock on my door was also changed to one which would self-lock if the door closed. I remember, because of the new lock, I had to be careful not to let my flat door close behind me because if I did it would lock me out. As I was conscious of this, I remember that I could let go of the door and it would not automatically fully self-close, although sometimes the wind would blow it shut and lock me out of my flat. Communal doors 18. I remember that both pre-refurbishment and post-refurbishment, the reception door would generally be left open. We had a security system which required a fob to open the front door but this would often be broken so anyone could come into the building. I remember it being broken and it taking two to three weeks for anything to be done about it. 19. When the reception door was fixed it would often be broken again soon after. 20. There was also a communal door on my floor which lead to the stairwell.