Correspondence: Malcolm Hollis, Chartered Surveyor and Building Pathologist, 6 Rydal Road, London SW16 1QN, UK. Tel: +44 020 8769 9927; Fax: +44 020 8769 2670; E-mail: mh@malcolmhollis.org

¹is Professor of Building Pathology at The University of Reading as well as being a practitioner. Malcolm Hollis Chartered Surveyors is a surveying practice with representation throughout England.

Received 6 November 2006; Revised 6 November 2006.

Abstract

The collapse of a 26-year-old office building in 1995 raised questions about the discoverability of the condition of a building and the risks inherent in remedial work. The failure to discover the errors in the original construction resulted in the loss of the lives of four people working within the building when it collapsed. The subsequent court case determined that liability fell on those who were involved in the original construction of the building in 1969. The Court decided that 26 years after being responsible for the design and management, ultimate responsibility rested upon the shoulders of the original company who developed the land, even though they had engaged independent builders to erect this building. The investigation into the cause of the collapse revealed the limited value of the original drawings, the problems caused because a collapsed building is not treated as a crime scene, the merits of a systematic deconstruction of the remaining building, and the benefits and weaknesses of the methodology adopted.