A fire broke out in the Hong Kong Tai Po Wang Fuk Court, where a five-level fire investigation committee held its first round of hearings with 9 residents of Wang Fuk Court and 2 exterior wall cleaners summoned to testify.
Wu Ai-shi, residing in Room 305 of Wang Cheung House, testified first, mentioning that she moved into the unit in 1983. On the day of the fire, she left her unit around 7 a.m. and returned home by minibus from Sha Tin around 2 p.m., where she heard the driver mention the fire at Wang Fuk Court. She saw thick smoke passing through the water filtration plant bridge around 3 p.m.
During the major maintenance period, she smelled cigarette smoke entering her apartment through the windows in the living room, kitchen, bedroom, bathroom, and front door, which was more noticeable than before.
She peeked out of the window and saw cigarette butts and construction debris on the platform, including foam, straps, and paper, hanging on bamboo scaffolding or falling on the window sill and the ground below the exterior wall.
She also mentioned that during the fire, while the rear staircase smoke door could usually be opened, she had experienced difficulty in pushing the lobby smoke door open a couple of times, making it hard to escape.
Another Wang Cheung House resident, Wong Ka-yuen, testified that around 2:50 p.m. on the day of the fire, she smelled smoke in her apartment while cooking. She checked the kitchen stove but found nothing abnormal. Later, she opened the window and heard a worker shouting “fire,” so she closed the window and left.
Upon leaving her apartment, she first saw a man leaving through the rear staircase and then saw a neighbor opening the door. She asked the neighbor if they could smell something awful, and the neighbor mentioned that the shed had caught fire. Wong then called emergency services.
She was the first resident to call 999 on the day of the fire, mentioning that she heard the “line busy” recording two to three times after the call connected, not anticipating such a delay. The emergency operator advised her to evacuate via the stairs.
As she descended the stairs, she smelled smoke but initially didn’t see any flames, not feeling immediate urgency, so she descended at a normal pace. However, she noticed that the rear staircase window turned red, prompting her to hasten towards the lobby.
When Wong arrived at the lobby around 2:55 p.m., she immediately called her family. As she described her entrance to the lobby, she heard a bang as the door opened and saw people waiting for the elevator. Firefighters and management staff were present. After someone shouted about the fire, she immediately left and ran to the park, glancing back to see the fire growing higher than Wang Cheung House.
She later retreated to her mother’s unit at the nearby Kwong Fuk Estate for rest, closely monitoring the situation at Wang Fuk Court. Subsequently, embers from the fire spread to other buildings at Wang Fuk Court, leading to evacuations, including the building where her mother resided.
She expressed hope that the investigation would uncover the cause of the fire and reasons behind the lack of sufficient water sources for firefighting, believing that prompt control could have prevented the rapid spread of the fire.
Another Wang Cheung House resident, Chan Chuen, testified that he smelled a burning odor around 2:51 p.m. on the day of the fire and later noticed fire on the exterior wall. He called the management office and then requested help after finding a lot of smoke in the kitchen, which turned from white to black quickly.
After leaving his unit, he considered returning for the keys but found the living room filled with thick smoke, prompting his departure. He encountered a neighbor on the way out, with both initially struggling through the ordeal before parting ways briefly. Chan then turned back to help the neighbor before leaving together.
During their escape, there were no alarms sounding, and no one was shouting for help, according to Chan. He believed that the management office should have used a loudspeaker for immediate evacuation instructions and couldn’t understand why no alarms were activated.
He had witnessed workers smoking at least twice before the fire and had seen someone holding a cigarette while driving a cart, indicating significant issues with the supervision of the construction contractor.
Eighty-year-old Hong Tai House resident Sin Sin-ching testified that on the day of the fire, she was sorting items in her unit in the afternoon, preparing to go out when she noticed smoke around 2 p.m. She stayed in the unit, ran the exhaust fan, and opened windows to dispel the black smoke. She mentioned that she had called emergency services multiple times, being able to connect successfully, unlike the previous testimony from Wong Ka-yuen.
She thanked the firefighters for their rescue efforts and recalled being reminded by firefighters to step over a “big doll” when evacuating to the 12th floor. She later found out it was a body. Two firefighters took the body away, leaving her moved by their professionalism in handling the situation promptly, sparing the family from further distress.
She also brought up her tenure as treasurer of the Wang Fuk Court Residents’ Committee over three terms around 20 years ago, recalling three puzzling incidents at the beginning of her tenure, including proposals for freshwater installation in toilets, the suggestion for each of the eight buildings to form separate committees, and a resident accusing the then-committee chairman of corruption. The latter lost the case and had to pay a penalty of 30,000 dollars, covered by the then-district councilor Wong Pik-kiu, raising questions about the handling of such matters.
During his testimony, Cheung Chi-lim of Hong Tai House recounted discovering the fire around 3 p.m. on the day of the incident. He attempted to put out the fire by climbing onto the window scaffolding but got hit on the head by burning debris. Retreating to his unit, he found the rear staircase filled with smoke, with no power or water supply.
He, along with his family and an elderly neighbor, stayed inside the unit, using wet towels to seal the door and protect themselves until firefighters broke down the door to rescue them around 8 p.m.
He expressed the profound impact the incident had on his family, with himself needing psychiatric care and his wife unable to continue teaching yoga. He hoped the investigation would uncover the truth.
“I’ve lodged complaints so many times, but the government claims it’s not their responsibility. We lost 160 lives, all families shattered, and now we seek justice at such a high cost. I hope the government takes responsibility and faces it.”
Another Hong Chi House resident, Wong Suk-lan, mentioned that her unit was adjacent to the rear staircase door, which she had tried unsuccessfully to open for years, never hearing any alarm sound, raising concerns about management shortcomings.
She also mentioned hearing that district councilor Wong Pik-kiu and her volunteers had requested authorization from residents and had disputes with them over repair matters. She described the bidding process for major maintenance as “opaque” and costly.
Luo Xiaoqi, a resident of Wang Cheung House who lost her mother in the fire, testified as an involved party. She recalled receiving a call from her mother around 3 p.m. notifying her of the fire outside their unit. They spoke for about 5 minutes, with her mother sounding terrified, mentioning heavy smoke entering through the door gap, making it impossible to move and seeing flames through multiple windows.
Luo mentioned that her mother left a message before the call ended: “Take care of yourself and your brother.” Throughout the call, she claimed they heard no fire alarms sounding from the complex. As a family member, she demanded a thorough investigation into the rapid spread of the fire and the difficulties in firefighting, questioning if government departments and contractors should bear legal responsibility.
Regarding some involved parties such as Wang Yih, Hong Ye, and Wong Pik-kiu refusing to attend the hearing, she expressed disappointment, believing that they should have personally provided explanations to address public doubts rather than letting the public prejudge the situation.
Huang Zu-lian, a casual worker responsible for washing the exterior walls of Wang Fuk Court, shared that he joined the job in mid-November last year and only attended a one-hour “safety course” before starting work. She revealed that the content of the course was extremely limited, primarily focusing on wearing safety belts and prohibiting smoking, failing to provide guidance on firefighting equipment locations or escape routes during a fire.
Huang further stated that the foreman “Lai” had worked on-site just once after assigning tasks and never returned for inspection. On the afternoon of the fire around 2:30 p.m., while working on the Wang Cheung House scaffolding, she heard someone shouting “fire” from below and smelled burning plastic. With the black smoke blocking the rear staircase, she and her coworkers were forced to climb to the rooftop for safety, enduring a night in the cold until rescued by firefighters the next day. She emphasized that she never saw any fire extinguishers or firefighting equipment on the site during her work.
Living in Wang Kin House, Man Ka-chun recounted discovering a hole in the window scaffold and building materials burning below, trying to use the building’s fire hose for self-rescue. However, he found the water flow from the fire hose extremely weak, likening it to “just enough to wash hands,” rendering it ineffective in extinguishing the fire.
He decided to evacuate down the stairs, exhibiting instinctual reactions, running through each floor, shouting “fire” and attempting to ring the fire alarm on almost every floor. He shared his anxious state at that moment, expressing his desire for the alarm to sound, eager to activate it upon sight, but none of the alarm systems responded, whether glass breakage or button-operated alarms.
He also mentioned unclear signage on the rear staircase walls and, though the smoke doors were functioning correctly, some floors were filled with white smoke, hindering the evacuation process. Along the way, he encountered an elderly couple attempting to extinguish the fire. Upon realizing there was no water from the fire hose, he urged them to leave promptly. Committee Chairman Lu Qikang praised Man’s actions, acknowledging that he had done well under extreme circumstances.