Fire safety contractor defends inaction despite knowing alarms were disabled before fatal Tai Po blaze
A director of a Hong Kong fire safety contractor has defended his firm’s inaction despite knowing that the alarms at Wang Fuk Court were disabled a week before a massive blaze that killed 168 people. Chung Kit-man, a director and engineer at Victory Fire Engineering, continued his testimony on Tuesday before an independent committee tasked […]
In a shocking turn of events, a director of a Hong Kong fire safety contractor has taken the stand to defend his firm’s inaction despite knowing that the alarms at Wang Fuk Court were disabled a week before a devastating blaze that claimed 168 lives. Chung Kit-man, a director and engineer at Victory Fire Engineering, faced questions from an independent committee investigating the tragic fire that erupted on November 26, 2022. The hearing, which took place on March 31, 2026, revealed a complex web of negligence and miscommunication that led to one of Hong Kong’s worst residential fires in recent memory.
Victory Fire Engineering, along with China Status Development and Engineering, were responsible for maintaining the fire safety systems at Wang Fuk Court, a public housing estate in Tai Po. The committee’s inquiry has uncovered that China Status had disabled the estate’s fire safety system in April 2022 for repairs to the rooftop water tanks. Subsequently, the company applied for 16 extensions to keep the system offline, with the alarms remaining disabled at the time of the fire.
On November 19, just a week before the blaze, Victory Fire discovered that the master switch had been turned off, affecting both the fire alarms and the fire hoses. Chung Kit-man testified that he was never informed by China Status about the shutdown. This revelation has raised serious questions about the communication and coordination between the two contractors, both of whom were responsible for the safety of the residents at Wang Fuk Court.
During the hearing, lawyers for the committee highlighted an annual fire equipment check conducted by Victory Fire at Wang Fuk Court in March 2022. The checklists from that inspection revealed that the rooftop water tanks did not meet the required water levels and had failed to refill. However, a certificate signed by Chung did not list the tanks as defective. Chung admitted to the committee that he “overlooked” the checklists and maintained that no defects were found in connection with the tanks during the annual checks in March.
The committee is now examining whether Victory Fire’s failure to properly document and address the water tank issues contributed to the catastrophic fire. Seven months after the March inspection, in October 2022, Victory Fire conducted another inspection of the water tanks. Chung claimed that the tanks were found to be in good working order during this inspection. However, the committee is questioning whether this assessment was accurate, given the tragic consequences that followed just two months later.
The hearing has also brought to light the broader responsibility of fire safety contractors in Hong Kong. Lawyers for the committee have argued that companies like Victory Fire and China Status have a duty to ensure that their clients are fully informed about any disruptions to their fire safety systems. They have further contended that the contractors should not have proceeded with repairs without ensuring that alternative arrangements were in place to maintain the safety of residents.
As the inquiry continues, the committee is expected to delve deeper into the relationship between Victory Fire and China Status, as well as the role of the Fire Services Department (FSD) in overseeing the contractors. The FSD has been criticized for granting multiple extensions to China Status to keep the fire safety system disabled, without ensuring that adequate backup measures were in place.
The tragic fire at Wang Fuk Court has left Hong Kong grappling with questions about the adequacy of its fire safety regulations and the accountability of contractors responsible for maintaining critical infrastructure. The testimony of Chung Kit-man and the ongoing investigation are expected to shed light on the systemic failures that contributed to one of the deadliest residential fires in the territory’s history. As the inquiry progresses, it remains to be seen whether the contractors will face consequences for their perceived negligence, and whether changes will be made to prevent similar tragedies in the future.
