The news story mentions 14 people being trapped, and from the picture I'm guessing an HMO? I wonder if it was legal and corresponded to proper fire safety measures - I'd have thought a building with that number of people would be required to have other ways of exiting it than going down the main stairway (which was blocked by the fire).
A "considerable number" of people (who were not "Rescued") also fled onto a flat roof at the rear.
It is still unknown how many people were in the property.
Permalink Reply by matt on February 7, 2010 at 22:34
The building (image of which Paul links to above) has only just been refurbished. Scaffolding only just taken away. Probably an electrical problem. Yes there should be another exit.
What on earth is going on when 14 people (or more) end up living in this place. When you look at the photo Paul posted it's not that big. Can one of the ward councillors (or David Lammy's office) see if they can get further information on this one. If it was yet another illegal HMO it's proof that it's not just about the harm they cause to the area but the potential harm they could cause to the occupants.
The Standard (I know I know) say the fire stated in the shop and destoyed the stairs up from the ground floor. How terrifying, I hope nobody was badly hurt. I would really like to know the story behind this and just hope it isn't a case of one more greedy landlord cramming in as many people as he can.