After the Grenfell tragedy, councils and colleges awarded contracts worth millions of pounds to the building company that was found to be “considerable responsible” for . This is due to its “casual approach to fire safety”.
Rydon, a property group, was the main contractor for the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower from 2014 to 2016, which included the installation of combustible wall cladding. The investigation found that the company should have known “the risks associated with using combustible material in the external walls high-rise building”.
Since its founding in 1978, this Kent-based company has been awarded construction and maintenance projects mainly throughout London as well as south-east England. Rydon Maintenance was one of the group’s subsidiaries that delivered on the Grenfell contract.
In June 2018, Sadiq Khan signed an order that stated the construction arm of Rydon would not be allowed to bid on any contracts for a development scheme until the Grenfell Tower investigation had reported the extent to the which Rydon group employees or companies contributed to the cause or exacerbation of the Grenfell Tower Fire.
Robert Jenrick, then the housing secretary at the time, stated that Rydon would not be allowed to bid on any further work until the “truth” was known. He wrote, now X on Twitter: “I can understand why the survivors and the bereaved don’t want public contracts to go to the main contractor of the Grenfell Tower (refurbishment).”
In December 2021 Rydon Homes was barred from participating in the government’s Help to Buy loan scheme. The decision was made due to concerns about “unacceptable” business practices within the group.
According to an analysis by Stotles (a platform for public sector procurement intelligence), Rydon has won a number of contracts worth millions of pounds despite the bans imposed in the aftermath of the fire that killed 72 people in 2016.
Maidstone Council awarded Rydon, a contract worth £9.9m in September 2019 for the construction of a new Innovation Centre to be used as a hub by medtech, healthcare and life science. In 2019, the council stated that it was “appropriate” to wait until after the public inquiry had concluded before making judgements.
The following month, the Labour-controlled Ealing Council in west London awarded Rydon a £99m (£89m) contract for the renovation of the 264 homes on the High Lane Estate, built in 1970 and plagued by damp and mould.
Rydon transferred its regeneration and construction projects in 2021 to Real Contracting Group. This group later went into administration. Ealing Council now says on its website that “due to the council’s developing partner entering administration in late-2023, at this stage it is unknown when the redevelopment project will be completed.”
Liberal Democrat councillors criticised “appalling” decisions made when choosing construction partners. Jon Ball, Ealing’s Liberal Democrat housing spokesperson, said that the choice of contractor has delayed construction of hundreds properties. Residents are waiting for homes they desperately need. He said: “It raises questions about why Ealing Labour’s administration awarded a Rydon contract in 2019, when they knew the horrifying Grenfell legacy.”
In 2019, the University of Bath also awarded Rydon an additional PS30m contract for construction of a new research facility for automotive propulsion, as part of its Institute for Advanced Automotive Propulsion Systems.
Saint-Gobain supplied the glass for the project. It is a French multinational that was formerly owned by Celotex which produced the combustible insulating material used in Grenfell.
Since the Grenfell Fire, Rydon has won several maintenance contracts from NHS trusts. One of these was a £4.3m contract that Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust awarded in April. Oxleas NHS Foundation trust, which offers a variety of healthcare services to south-east Londoners, awarded Rydon Maintenance £6.6m in July 2022.
revealed previously that around £250m in deals were made in the last five years with companies involved in refurbishing Grenfell Tower, based upon searches of public contract by outsourcing data firm Tussell.
The Grenfell report concluded that the Rydon team responsible for the Grenfell Tower was “notably inexperienced”. They also lacked even the basic knowledge about the regulatory framework.
The report of the inquiry strongly criticised Studio E – a now-defunct architectural firm involved in the refurbishment – and Harley Facades – the cladding contractor. The report also revealed that Arconic (the US company that supplied the cladding panel) had sold them knowing of the dangers. Insulation firm Celotex was found to have “engaged in a dishonest plan” to deceive customers.
Kingspan has long admitted “unacceptable” historical failures that were not representative of the group. Celotex, on the other hand, said it has reviewed its marketing controls and processes to comply with best industry practices.
Keir Starmer announced that after the Grenfell report was released, the government would send a letter to all companies who were found to be part of “horrific failures” by the Grenfell investigation. He said that it would be “a first step in stopping them from being awarded government contract”.
Ealing confirmed that it initially chose Rydon to be a partner in the High Lane Development in April 2017, before the fire. The council stated that Rydon is no longer involved with the project. “The council continues to work with residents in order to determine a way forward”.
The University of Bath and Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust said that they had adhered to all applicable procurement rules. Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust, Rydon and Rydon were asked for comments.
Post Disclaimer
The following content has been published by Stockmark.IT. All information utilised in the creation of this communication has been gathered from publicly available sources that we consider reliable. Nevertheless, we cannot guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this communication.
This communication is intended solely for informational purposes and should not be construed as an offer, recommendation, solicitation, inducement, or invitation by or on behalf of the Company or any affiliates to engage in any investment activities. The opinions and views expressed by the authors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Company, its affiliates, or any other third party.
The services and products mentioned in this communication may not be suitable for all recipients, by continuing to read this website and its content you agree to the terms of this disclaimer.