The lead fire safety consultant of the Grenfell Tower refurbishment ignored documents outlining proposed cladding and insulation materials, the inquiry into the fire has heard.
Terry Ashton said he did not read an email from project architects detailing a planned cladding system because he was not the “primary recipient”.
The hearing was told he also failed to read the architect’s progress report.
The inquiry returned this week after a four-month break due to coronavirus.
In its first phase, the inquiry concluded that cladding fuelled the fire in the west London residential block in June 2017, in which 72 people died.
This second phase of the inquiry is looking at the refurbishment of the block.
Mr Ashton, of fire engineering firm Exova, ignored an email from architecture firm Studio E on 23 October 2012 which included attachments containing details and drawings of a planned cladding system.
Asked why, he told the hearing on Wednesday that he was not among the email’s “primary recipients”, adding that people are often copied into emails on big projects in “a sort of scattergun approach”.
The Inquiry’s counsel, Kate Grange QC, asked him: “Wasn’t that a really important document prepared by the architects that would inform your work on the outline fire safety strategy?”
Mr Ashton said he would not have read it unless “specifically asked to do so”.
He added: “To just send me a link … without any instruction as to what I should do with it, then I would ignore it, which is what I did.”
The inquiry also heard that he did not read the architect’s progress report which he was sent on 31 October, and failed to mention plans to cover the tower block in cladding at all in his first fire safety report published on the same day.
He said: “It was not on my mind at that time, I guess.
“Had we had some sort of preliminary details of the cladding for us to consider then we might have incorporated it in the list.”
Mr Ashton, a fire consultant of 25 years and with no formal training as a fire engineer, said his main focus was on the refurbishment of the lower four floors of the 24-storey tower block at the time
Ms Grange showed Mr Ashton the architect’s 2012 Stage C report – which he was seeing for the first time – that included drawings and proposed cladding and insulation materials.
She asked him whether he agreed that it contained “specific information” about what was proposed, including the type of insulation to be used in the tower block’s outer cladding.
He replied: “I can see that now, yes.”
Exova has previously said criticism of it is “unjustified” because it was not consulted about the flammable materials which eventually coated the building in North Kensington.
The firm’s counsel, Michael Douglas QC, has told the inquiry the company had been “left out” of planning discussions and had been effectively sidelined after Rydon became the main contractor in 2014.
The inquiry heard on Monday that Dr Clare Barker, the former principal fire engineer at Exova, did not raise the need for any proposed cladding system to have a separate fire safety assessment during a meeting in July 2012.
On Tuesday, a lawyer representing survivors told the inquiry that it “must not ignore” the impact of race and poverty on the disaster.