The origin of Monday’s fire that gutted a bond at the Gafoors Houston Complex has not yet been determined, according to Fire Chief Marlon Gentle.
The fire came six months after a massive blaze ravaged 60 percent of the same complex, leaving billions of dollars’ worth of damage and scores of employees having to be redeployed to other branches across the country.
Executive Chairman of the Company Sattaur Gafoor, when questioned about the circumstances surrounding the fire on Monday, was unable to give any details apart from the fact that the fire had started in one of several bonds located at the western end of the complex.
Asked specifically if there were any combustible items stored in the said bond, Gafoor was adamant that the bond was only used for the storage of white cement, tiles and sanitary wares.
However, during a visit to the site yesterday, Stabroek News observed the presence of aerosol cans and what appeared to be containers among the debris left behind in the wake of Monday’s fire. Two fire tenders were also on the scene as firefighters were seen rummaging through the rubble.
Attempts to raise the question of the presence of combustible items being stored in the bond with Gafoor yesterday were unsuccessful as Stabroek News was told that he was meeting with members of the Board of Directors of the company.
In a brief comment last evening, Gentle contended that if there were no combustibles in the storage area as claimed, the fire should not have happened. Nevertheless, he stated that investigations into the incident are ongoing.
Aside from the gutted bond, it was business as usual at the Houston complex yesterday as the fire did not stop customers from filling the unaffected area of the complex where the majority of the daily operations were being carried out in wake of the first fire.
On the other hand, a source from Gafoors said that the building was only recently completed and was not even equipped with electricity or sprinklers as yet.
According to the source, the blaze was contained to Bond Six because they took the advice of the Fire Service to install PVC instead of galvanized roofing. This caused the flames to go upwards and aided in the prevention of the fire spreading to the other buildings.
The source, while thankful that the fire was not as significant as the previous one, noted that it was still a major blow to the company and very devastating to the owner and staff.
On Monday evening, Gentle said that the Guyana Fire Service had received a call alerting it to smoke emanating from the complex at around 6 pm.
In response, units were dispatched from the West Ruimveldt and Alberttown Fire Stations. Upon their arrival at the scene, the firefighters reported that the complex was under threat from heavy fire conditions.
This threat prompted additional resources being dispatched to the scene. Fortunately, he said, units responded quickly enough and they were able to attack the fire at a very early stage and contain it to the single bond.
When asked about the possible cause of the fire, the Fire Chief said, “What I’m seeing here suggests that there was not enough diligence in this area. This fire should not have happened; that is all I am going to say right now.”
On May 9, tragedy struck the company when a fire, said to have started in the bond area, had quickly spread to the rest of the complex and saw all of the Guyana Fire Service’s available resources being utilised. While firefighters eventually succeeded in containing the fire, a total of six firemen had to be treated for injuries from smoke inhalation and as a result of a wall collapsing and pinning three of them under the rubble.
In its aftermath, that fire had left significant damage and scores of employees being redeployed to other Gafoors branches across the country. According to the Fire Chief, preliminary investigations conducted indicated that the devastating fire was “accidental in nature.”
In an exclusive interview with this newspaper a short while after, Gafoor had explained that the underwriters had said that this fire was one of the largest they had dealt with and the insurance payout was expected to amount to billions.
At that time, Gafoor had estimated that damage to the building was some $12 billion, excluding the cost of the merchandise destroyed. He had further stated that they had to answer a lot of questions and provide records for the value of the stocks up to the time of the fire to the insurance company.
“We have been able to provide stocks up to the date prior to the fire and we had some difficulties to get up records for the day of the fire but fortunately they [underwriters] have accepted a pro-rata basis for sales made and valuation of stocks around the same time. So by and large, I think we are about 80% where the stocks are concerned,” Gafoor had told this newspaper.
