BRE ends relationship with Kingspan over ‘reputational risk’ following Grenfell Inquiry revelations

It said it was also refusing to take work from Celotex, which made a much larger amount of the insulation ultimately used on Grenfell Tower.

Kingspan told Inside Housing in a statement that its products achieve “full compliance with relevant building regulations”, and added that the products made by its insulated panels division are typically used in a wide range of non-residential building types.

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry, which completed its oral evidence last year and is currently in the process of writing its final report, spent weeks investigating the relationship between the BRE and Kingspan and Celotex.

In particular, it heard that Kingspan had paid for a test on a cladding system at the BRE’s facility in 2005 that placed its combustible phenolic foam insulation boards behind external cladding panels made of non-combustible cement fibre. 

This test pass meant the insulation could be used on high rises in accordance with government guidance, but only in an exact replica of the full system tested, including the cement fibre external panels. 

Kingspan, however, marketed the insulation for general use on high rises, ultimately becoming the market leader and seeing its insulation installed in systems that were far more dangerous in fires.

This was despite the chemical formula for the product changing shortly after the 2005 test – which meant the insulation on the market was effectively a different product from the one tested.

The inquiry heard that Kingspan ran further tests on other systems involving its product, including one in 2007 that was said to have “burnt very ferociously” and resulted in a “raging inferno”. These tests were not made public until the inquiry released them.

The inquiry also saw internal Kingspan correspondence that showed its staff saying “all we do is lie in here” in regard to one of its claims about fire safety, and threatening to “sue the arse off” a consultancy that raised questions about the suitability of its product for high rises. 

Kingspan’s witnesses were forced to deny that their claims about the safety of the product were a “house of cards” based on a single test from 2005. Lawyers for bereaved and survivors described the firm, alongside Celotex and cladding manufacturer Arconic, as “little more than crooks and killers” following the revelations.

The inquiry also spent time focusing on a further Kingspan test in March 2014, where helmet camera footage appeared to show Kingspan representatives discussing the wording of the test report with the BRE. 

After flames passed the top of the rig, which meant it had failed, one Kingspan staff member was recorded saying: “Can’t you just delete the whole sentence?”

Further emails showed BRE staff describing test reports for Kingspan as “potentially a huge source of income over the coming years” in 2015. 

Celotex, meanwhile, was shown to have added secret fire-resisting boards to a testing rig in 2014, in order to boost its chances of passing. 

Witnesses from the firm said this was done with the full knowledge of the BRE staff member present – with helmet camera footage recording him saying “see how that flame seems to have ceased now that the board is there”. He firmly denied knowing about the addition of these boards when questioned.

The majority of the insulation used in Grenfell Tower’s cladding system was Celotex’s RS5000 product, while a smaller amount of Kingspan’s K15 was also used due to a product substitution. 

Expert evidence before the inquiry suggests the rapid flame spread at the tower was caused by the external aluminium composite material (ACM) panels, with the plastic insulation making a minimal contribution. 

A spokesperson for the BRE said: “BRE no longer accepts any new work on behalf of Kingspan or Celotex following evidence heard during the course of this Inquiry.”

It is understood that the decision was first communicated to Kingspan by the BRE last summer.

A spokesperson for Kingspan said: “Kingspan Insulated Panels [‘Kingspan’] notes the decision by BRE that it wishes to discontinue their relationship with any company that is part of the Kingspan Group, irrespective of product type, despite our products being in full compliance with relevant building regulations and with the test performance requirements of the relevant LPCB Loss Prevention Standards.

“There is no product performance or compliance basis for BRE’s decision, which Kingspan has already communicated to a majority of our customers last week.

“Kingspan Insulated Panels is committed to manufacturing and supplying products that adhere to leading global quality and testing standards, supported by extensive testing and certification of the highest integrity.  

“Independently of BRE, whose certification is regionally focused on the UK and Ireland, Kingspan is certified by the globally recognised insurer testing regime FM Approvals, which carries out annual factory surveillance audits to verify our products comply with its global approval standards. 

“Kingspan Insulated Panels’ products manufactured in the UK remain in full compliance with relevant building regulations and supported by independent certification via FM Approvals. 

“Kingspan Insulated Panels are typically used in the external envelope and internal fit-out of a wide range of non-residential building types.”