They saw it coming.

他们早就预料到了。

Before the fire ripped through their homes and raged for two days, before it killed many of their neighbors and friends, residents of the Wang Fuk Court estate spent years warning Hong Kong officials about a renovation project they feared was becoming dangerous.

在大火吞噬他们的家园、连续燃烧两天之前，在它夺走许多邻居和朋友的生命之前，宏福苑的居民数年来一直向香港政府官员发出警告，称一项翻修工程正变得越来越危险。

The government had ordered repairs on the eight aging towers in the complex. But residents complained they were paying extortionate sums for shoddy work that used flammable materials, and they suspected it was because a corrupt syndicate had taken over the project.

政府曾下令对该屋苑内八座老旧楼宇进行维修。但居民抱怨，他们被迫为质量低劣的工程支付高得离谱的费用，施工中使用的还是易燃材料。他们怀疑，这是因为一个腐败的利益集团接管了整个项目。

They told the authorities that the leaders of the owners’ board and the construction firms were acting at times against residents’ interests and safety. They told local news media that a politician was most likely working with the board’s leaders. At least one resident burned a piece of the polystyrene foam used in the renovation to show how easily it caught fire.

他们向当局反映，称业主立案法团和建筑公司负责人的行事时常损害居民的利益和安全。他们还告诉本地媒体，一名政治人物很可能正在与业主立案法团串通一气。至少有一名居民曾点燃翻修工程中使用的聚苯乙烯泡沫，以此展示这种材料是多么容易起火。

Their complaints led various government agencies to conduct inspections and to issue warnings, notices and citations to the contractor. But there were also mixed messages, and no one stepped in to address the dangers on the whole. In an email to residents, one official described the fire risk from netting on the scaffolding as “relatively low.”

这些投诉促使多个政府部门展开检查，并向承包商发出警告、通知和传票。但各方莫衷一是，也没有任何部门从整体上介入处理这些危险隐患。一位官员在给居民的电子邮件中将脚手架上的防护网造成的火灾风险描述为“相对较低“。

Now, 161 people are dead and thousands are displaced.

如今，已有161人死亡，数千人失去家园。

搬到临时安置地点的宏福苑居民，摄于11月27日。火灾席卷了小区八座大楼中的七座，令许多住户失去住所。

What caused the fire is still unclear. Officials have focused on substandard materials, including the netting used to catch debris and the foam panels protecting windows, both of which had been the subject of complaints by the residents as far back as August 2024.

火灾的具体起因仍不清楚。官员们将注意力集中在不合格的材料上，包括用于防止坠物的防护网以及用于保护窗户的泡沫板，而这些材料早在2024年8月就已成为居民投诉的对象。

But a review of hundreds of tender documents, meeting minutes, emails, newsletters and videos spanning nine years, as well as interviews with residents, experts and current and former government officials, shows that regulators also failed to act decisively on repeated warnings about potential corruption in the renovation project, which may have contributed to the use of the materials.

然而，对跨越九年的数百份招标文件、会议纪要、电邮、通讯和视频的梳理，以及对采访居民、专家和现任及前任政府官员的采访显示，监管部门同样未能对有关翻修工程可能存在腐败问题的反复警告采取果断行动，而这或许正是这些材料被使用的重要原因之一。

The Hong Kong authorities have long acknowledged corruption in the construction industry. Activists have warned that some companies inflate costs while using cheap materials. Those same practices went unchecked at Wang Fuk.

香港当局长期以来承认建筑行业存在腐败问题。活动人士警告称，一些公司虚报成本，使用廉价材料。而在宏福苑，这类做法始终未受到有效遏制。

Residents’ emails and official statements suggest that multiple government agencies played down concerns, performed perfunctory inspections or relied on reassurances from contractors. Officials also missed other lapses, including fire alarms that failed in seven buildings.

居民的电子邮件和官方声明表明，多个政府机构淡化了居民的担忧，敷衍地进行了检查，或者轻信了承包商的保证。官员们还忽视了其他失误，包括七栋楼的火灾警报系统失灵。

The government has since ordered the removal of scaffolding netting at more than 200 construction sites across Hong Kong after finding that some contractors had faked safety certifications. It has also begun an independent investigation led by a judge and arrested at least 21 people on suspicion of manslaughter, corruption or fraud in connection with the Wang Fuk Court fire.

政府发现部分承建商伪造安全证明后，已下令全港200多个建筑工地拆除脚手架防护网。同时启动了由法官主导的独立调查，并以误杀、贪污或欺诈等罪名逮捕了至少21名与宏福苑大火有关人员。

官员们把注意力集中在不达标的材料上，包括用于接住掉落物的防护网，以及用来保护窗户的泡沫板——居民早在2024年8月就已经对这些材料提出过投诉。

The Housing Bureau, the Labor Department and the police declined to answer questions, citing the continuing investigation. Other departments also did not respond to detailed questions.

由于调查仍在进行中，房屋局、劳工处与警方都拒绝回答相关问题。其他部门也没有就具体问题作出回应。

The Hong Kong Fire Services Department said it told responsible parties at the estate in October and November to repair minor damage to equipment, including manual fire alarm switches.

香港消防处表示，已于10月和11月通知该屋苑相关责任方，要求修复手动火警报警开关等轻微损坏的设备。

The Road to the Inferno

走向火海

In 2016, the government ordered the homeowners at Wang Fuk Court to repair the facades and some structural elements of the estate’s eight towers, which were built in 1983 and housed about 2,000 families. The residents were also required to replace aging fire doors and other equipment to bring the building up to code.

2016年，政府要求宏福苑的业主修缮大厦外墙以及部分结构部件。宏福苑建于1983年，共有八座大楼，住有大约2000户家庭。住户还被要求更换老化的防火门和其他设备，使大楼符合安全规范。

The order was part of a citywide program requiring buildings more than 30 years old to undergo inspections and repairs. It was introduced after a five-story tenement building collapsed in 2010, killing four people.

这项指令源于全港强制楼龄超30年的建筑需检验维修的政策。该政策是在2010年一栋五层唐楼倒塌、导致4人死亡之后推出的。

The policy was a boon for the construction industry and, as anti-graft officials as well as lawmakers later acknowledged, a breeding ground for corruption. Overnight, apartment owners across the city had to pool funds for major repairs. Some contractors and consultants formed cartels to bypass competition and corner lucrative contracts, past convictions show.

这项政策给建筑行业带来巨大商机，正如廉政公署官员和立法会议员后来承认的那样，它也成了滋生腐败的温床。一夜之间，全港业主都被要求筹款进行大规模维修。过往的判决显示，部分承包商和顾问公司组建垄断组织规避竞争，垄断利润丰厚的合同。

右图为2016年的宏福苑。该屋苑建于1983年，居住着大约2000户家庭。

Renovation costs surged by 40 percent, according to one study. “As a contractor, you have all the bargaining power,” said Leung Tin Cheuk, an associate professor of economics at Wake Forest University in North Carolina, who is an author of the study. “Homeowners, on the other hand, they don’t.”

 一项研究显示，翻修成本上涨了40%。“作为承建商，你拥有全部的议价权，”该研究报告的作者之一、现任美国北卡罗来纳州维克森林大学经济学副教授的梁天卓说。“而另一方面，业主则完全处于被动。”

By the time Wang Fuk residents received the repair order, the government had recognized that the process was susceptible to corruption by private firms. It introduced changes to curb abuse, including a centralized online platform overseen by the quasi-governmental Urban Renewal Authority, or U.R.A.

等到宏福苑居民收到维修令时，政府已经意识到这个过程很容易受到私营公司操纵而滋生腐败。当局推行改革措施遏制滥用行为，包括由半官方的市区重建局监管的集中线上平台。

The platform allowed homeowners to solicit bids for work and offered them technical help, including an independent adviser they could hire to estimate costs. It also monitored tenders.

这个平台让业主可以公开招标，并向他们提供技术协助，包括可以聘请独立顾问评估成本。平台同时负责监督投标过程。

Still, Chiu Yan Loy, a founder of the Hong Kong Property Owners Anti-Bid Rigging Alliance, said that some contractors conspired with homeowners boards to steer projects toward members of their cartel and charged residents for expensive materials while using cheap substitutes.

不过，全港业主反贪腐反围标大联盟的发起人赵恩来表示，一些承包商仍然与业主委员会串通，将工程导向其垄断集团成员，向住户收取高价材料费，却使用廉价替代品。

Some Wang Fuk residents say they suspect that these violations took place at their estate.

一些宏福苑居民表示，他们怀疑这些违规行为就发生在自己的屋苑。

In 2019, the Wang Fuk owners board used the government’s online platform to hire a firm, Will Power Architects, to inspect the estate towers. The company’s report showed that serious fixes were needed. Water was seeping into apartments after heavy rain, and chunks of the mosaic facade were chipping off.

2019年，宏福苑的业主委员会通过政府的线上平台，聘请了鸿毅建筑师有限公司对屋苑楼宇进行检查。该公司的报告显示，需要进行重大修缮：暴雨后有雨水渗入住户单位，马赛克外墙存在剥落的情况。

Next, the homeowners had to hire a consultant to supervise the work and take charge of selecting the contractor. This is when things started to go south, according to residents.

接下来，业主们必须再聘请一名顾问公司来监督工程，并负责挑选承建商。据居民反映，事情就是从这一步开始变得不对劲的。

The Ignored Red Flags

被忽视的警示信号

A local politician, Peggy Wong, who did not live on the estate, got involved in key decisions, residents said.

居民表示，并不住在该屋苑的社区政界人士黄碧娇介入了关键决策。

The Wang Fuk homeowners board had long encouraged residents to vote for Ms. Wong, a district councilor for the pro-Beijing Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong since 2003. (She briefly lost her seat during antigovernment protests in 2019.)

自2003年以来，宏福苑业主委员会一直鼓励居民投票支持她——她是亲北京的“民建联”的区议员。（在2019年的反政府抗议期间，她一度失去议席。）

She served the board as an adviser while in office, according to records of the board’s meetings.

根据业主委员会的会议记录，她在任期间曾担任法团顾问。

She generally urged residents, many of whom are retirees, to back the board’s decisions and sometimes went from door to door, persuading people to sign letters authorizing her to vote on their behalf, according to seven residents who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution.

据七名因担心遭到报复而不愿具名的居民表示，她经常敦促以退休人员为主的居民支持法团的决定，有时还逐户劝说居民签署授权书，让她可以代表他们投票。

Hong Kong’s anticorruption commission has highlighted the use of proxy voting to influence homeowners’ decisions as a common marker of corruption in renovation projects.

香港廉政公署曾指出，在修缮工程中利用授权投票影响业主决策，是腐败的常见标志之一。

Ms. Wong has not been accused by the authorities of any wrongdoing, and she did not respond to questions. Beyond the votes, her exact role in the contract award remains unclear.

目前当局没有指控黄碧娇有任何违法行为，她本人也未回应提问。除投票事宜外，她在合约授予过程中的具体角色仍不明确。

The former leader of the owners board could not be reached for comment. The current leaders of the board declined to comment, citing ongoing investigations. Will Power Architects did not respond to questions.

前任业主委员会主席无法取得联系置评。现任法团负责人以调查仍在进行为由，拒绝置评。鸿毅建筑师有限公司未回应提问。

At a December 2021 meeting to choose the consultant, several residents realized that Ms. Wong was about to cast votes in their names without their knowledge. One resident, who gave only his surname, Mak, said Ms. Wong had persuaded his mother, then in her 70s, to sign an “authorization letter” that robbed him of his vote. His mother did not have a right to sign the letter, he said.

在2021年12月举行的顾问公司遴选会议上，多位住户发现黄碧娇正准备在他们不知情的情况下代其投票。仅透露姓麦的居民表示，黄碧娇曾说服其年逾七旬的母亲签署“授权书”，而这份授权书剥夺了他的投票权。他强调母亲并无签署授权书的法定权利。

Herman Yiu, a former district councilor from a rival party who attended the meeting, said he confronted Ms. Wong about proxy votes. She became agitated and walked away, he said.

来自竞争政党的前区议员姚钧豪当时也在场，他说自己当面质问黄碧娇代理投票的问题。结果她情绪激动，拂袖而去。

That afternoon, Will Power won the contract with a majority of votes.

当天下午，鸿毅建筑师有限公司以多数票拿到了合同。

The company charged just over $68,000 for both the inspection and supervision work. The fee amounted to less than 1 percent of the value of the eventual construction contract, far lower than the 6 percent to 8 percent consultants typically charge in Hong Kong.

该公司对检查与监督工程这两部分收费合共约50万港元，费用不到最终工程合同金额的1%，远低于香港顾问公司通常收取的6%到8%。

“Because the consultant fee was not much, people did not realize it was an important decision and would affect the following renovation,” Mr. Yiu said.

“因为顾问费不高，大家没有意识到这是一个重要的决定，而且会影响后面的翻修工程。”姚钧豪说。

Hong Kong officials, including the former chief executive Carrie Lam, have warned homeowners that very low consulting fees are often a sign of bid rigging because they suggest that consultants are accepting kickbacks.

包括前行政长官林郑月娥在内的香港官员曾多次警示业主，过低的顾问费用往往是围标的信号，因为这意味着顾问公司可能通过收取回扣获利。

But representatives from the Urban Renewal Authority who attended Wang Fuk residents’ meetings never questioned the fee, according to residents and the board’s meeting records.

但据居民与业主委员会的会议纪录显示，出席宏福苑居民会议的市区重建局代表从未对这笔费用提出质疑。

In an emailed response to questions, the authority said that it was “not involved in the deliberation or decision-making process regarding the award of the consultancy.” Its review of tenders is limited to checking for errors and ensuring that technical assessments meet the project’s requirements, it said.

在一封电邮回复中，该部门表示，它“没有参与顾问公司合约授予的审议或决策过程”。它对标书的审查仅限于检查错误及确保技术评估符合项目要求。

The government platform’s objective is “to reduce the risks of collusion or at least make collusion very difficult,” the authority said.

该政府平台的目标是“降低串通的风险，或至少让串通变得非常困难”，市区重建局表示。

“The system cannot completely eliminate corruption or collusion,” it added.

“这个系统不可能完全杜绝贪污或串通行为，”该局还称。

The Unchecked Record

失察的审核记录

Nearly 60 contractors submitted bids for the Wang Fuk renovations on the government’s online platform.

通过政府的线上平台，近60家承建商提交了宏福苑翻修工程的投标。

Will Power endorsed a company called Prestige Construction and Engineering, saying it had an unblemished record, according to tender documents reviewed by The New York Times. In fact, over 16 years in Hong Kong, Prestige has faced dozens of civil suits, many related to labor disputes, and was brought to criminal court, mostly over worker safety, according to a Times review of court cases.

《纽约时报》查阅的投标文件显示，鸿毅建筑师有限公司推荐了宏业建筑工程有限公司，称其拥有完美记录。但根据时报对司法案件的核查，宏业建筑工程在香港运营16年间涉及数十起民事诉讼（多与劳资纠纷相关），并曾因工人安全问题被刑事法庭起诉。

The Urban Renewal Authority had missed the contractor’s past infractions, and later said that “crime detection does not fall within the remit of the U.R.A.” But residents say they believed that firms like Prestige were in good standing because they were included in the authority’s published list of renovation firms.

市区重建局未能发现该承建商过往违规记录，后称“犯罪侦查不属于市区重建局职责范围”。但居民表示，他们之所以相信像宏业建筑工程这样的公司信誉良好，是因为它们列入了市区重建局公布的修缮企业名录。

Will Power also did not mention that two bidders had submitted identical prices for some of the work, according to tender documents reviewed by The Times. This is unusual because bids are submitted independently and it indicates the two bidders likely were part of the same cartel, according to Mr. Chiu, the anticorruption activist.

根据时报查阅的招标文件，鸿毅建筑师有限公司亦未提及两家投标公司在部分工程项目上报出的价格一模一样。反贪腐活动人士赵恩来指出，这种独立投标却出现相同报价的情况极不寻常，表明两家投标方很可能属于同一围标集团。

Prestige also had close connections to at least three other companies that participated in the bid, The Times found. The three companies are run by former and current business partners of the owner of Prestige, according to company registration records.

《纽约时报》还发现，宏业建筑工程与至少另外三家公司关系密切。根据公司注册纪录，这三家公司由宏业建筑工程的现任及前任商业伙伴经营。

今年3月，超过500名宏福苑业主参加了与新一届业主立案法团的特别会议。

In January 2024, hundreds of Wang Fuk residents held a vote on an outdoor basketball court to select the contractor. The board announced later that Prestige had won, and that residents had chosen the most expensive of three work proposals put forth by the consultant, Will Power.

2024年1月，数百名宏福苑居民在户外篮球场举行投票选择承包商。业主立案法团后来宣布宏业建筑工程获胜，居民选择了顾问公司鸿毅提出的三个工作方案中最昂贵的一个。

The project was to cost just over $43 million.

该项目估价达3.3亿港元。

Some residents said their votes had been stolen again. This time, anger swelled into action.

一些居民表示，他们的投票再次被窃取。这一次，愤怒转化为行动。

A few residents set up petitions and filed a case in the Lands Tribunal to overthrow the board. (They later withdrew the case after they received a letter from the board’s lawyer, which they saw as a message to back off.)

几名居民发起请愿，并在土地审裁处提起诉讼解散业主立案法团。（他们在收到业主立案法团律师的信后撤回了诉讼，他们视此为警告信。）

A few months later, the board signed a contract with Prestige.

几个月后，业主立案法团与宏业建筑工程签署合同。

The Fire Risk Deemed ‘Relatively Low’

被认为“相对较低”的火灾风险

In June last year, residents received a letter from a law firm hired by the owners board telling them that each household owed the contractor and consultant at least $20,000 for the renovation. The first installment, about $4,000, was due within a month.

去年6月，居民收到业主立案法团聘请的律师事务所的一封信，告知每个住户欠承包商和顾问公司至少16万港元的翻修费用。第一期约3万港元在一个月内付清。

Stunned by the price and the deadline, more residents pushed to oust the owners board and to delay the payment. They signed a petition, distributed fliers and endured mosquito bites to hold evening discussions in the estate’s playground, residents said.

面对这个令人吃惊的价格和截止日期，更多居民推动罢免业主立案法团并推迟付款。居民说，他们签署请愿书、分发传单，并在屋苑的游乐场忍受蚊虫叮咬举行夜间集会商讨对策。

Some went to the police and the anticorruption commission to file complaints accusing the contractor, the consultant and the owners board of collusion. They told officials that they had been misled by the board and the consultant into approving unnecessary, expensive work.

一些人向警方和廉政公诉投诉，指控承包商、顾问公司和业主立案法团串谋。他们告诉官员，他们被业主立案法团和顾问公司误导，批准了不必要、昂贵的工程。

But construction began anyway. In July, the contractor put up bamboo scaffolding around the buildings and wrapped it with green netting to catch falling objects. The owners board called a meeting in which Prestige’s project manager demonstrated how polystyrene boards would be installed to protect windows and said his company barred workers from smoking.

但施工还是开始了。7月，承包商在建筑物周围搭起竹脚手架，并用绿色防护网包裹以防止坠物。业主立案法团召开会议，宏业建筑工程的项目经理演示了如何安装泡沫板保护窗户，并表示他的公司禁止工人吸烟。

The residents were not reassured. Some looked up building ordinances and asked for proof that the contractor’s materials and workmanship adhered to building codes, according to interviews and social media posts.

居民并没有放心。根据采访和社交媒体帖子，有些人查阅建筑条例，并要求证明承包商的材料和工作符合建筑规范。

“I’m starting to see a sea of green,” one resident wrote in a Facebook group, referring to the green netting outside the window. “I also see photos of cigarette butts.”

“我开始看到一片绿海，”一名居民在Facebook群组中写道，他指的是窗外的绿色防护网。“我还看到香烟屁股的照片。”

Some residents formed a new “accountability” group, took over the owners board in September 2024 and urged their neighbors to document and report code violations. Residents watched as the foam panels were installed; at least one person set a panel on fire to prove that it was flammable.

一些居民成立了新的“问责”小组，在2024年9月接管业主立案法团，并敦促邻居记录并报告违规行为。居民看着泡沫板被安装；至少一人点燃一块板以证明它是易燃的。

The residents asked why the materials on site appeared to be made by a brand that was some $2 million cheaper than what had been agreed to in the contract. The materials had been approved by the previous board and the consultant.

居民质疑为什么现场材料似乎是比合同约定品牌便宜约1600万港元的品牌。这些材料已被前业主立案法团和顾问公司批准。

Prestige dismissed their concerns. At a meeting in September 2024, it played a video clip for board members and officials showing a polystyrene board catching fire briefly from a lit cigarette, then going out. Prestige did not respond to questions.

宏业建筑工程驳回了他们的担忧。在2024年9月的会议上，该公司为业主立案法团成员和官员播放了一段视频剪辑，显示泡沫板被点燃的香烟短暂着火，然后熄灭。宏业建筑工程没有回应提问。

The residents sought help at the Housing Bureau, which enforces building codes at developments like Wang Fuk Court. That department found no issues with the netting. Its officials visited the estate to oversee how the consultant and contractor sampled the protective net and burned it for a test. “No combustible feature was detected,” the bureau said last month.

居民向房屋署寻求帮助，该署负责执行宏福苑等开发项目的建筑规范。该部门没有发现防护网有问题。其官员前往屋苑，监督顾问公司和承包商如何采样防护网并进行燃烧测试。“未检测到可燃特征，”该署上月表示。

The residents also went to the Labor Department for help, but officials there downplayed their concerns, too. The risk of fire from the netting was “relatively low,” one official from the department wrote in October 2024, because the renovation did not include hot work with open flames.

居民还向劳工处求助，但那里的官员也淡化了他们的担忧。防护网的火灾风险“相对较低”，该处一名官员在2024年10月写道，因为翻修不涉及有明火高温的工作。

The department, which deals with worker safety, later told residents that the materials at the construction site met fire-safety requirements. It based its finding on a quality certificate submitted by the contractor.

这个负责工人安全的部门后来告诉居民，工地材料符合消防安全要求。其结论基于承包商提交的质量证书。

In emails to The Times, the department acknowledged that its initial response to the complaints had been “unclear and caused misunderstanding.”

该部门在给时报的电子邮件中承认，其对投诉的初步回应“不明晰并引起误解”。

The department also said that it had conducted 16 inspections of the project since July 2024 and warned the contractor to “take appropriate fire prevention measures” on its last visit to the site, about a week before the fire.

该部门还表示，自2024年7月以来已对该项目进行了16次检查，并在火灾前约一周最后一次巡查工地时警告承包商“采取适当的防火措施”。

Fooling Inspectors

愚弄检查员

Contractors working on the Wang Fuk Court project understood how site inspections worked and how to game them, according to Hong Kong’s anticorruption agency.

根据廉政公署，在宏福苑项目工作的承包商了解现场检查如何运作，也知道如何应付。

After the fire, the agency’s commissioner, Danny Woo Ying-ming, revealed that contractors had changed some of the netting after it was damaged by a summer typhoon.

火灾后，该机构专员胡英明透露，承包商在夏季台风损坏防护网后更换了一些网。

The new material, he said, was substandard and cost half as much as fire-safe material. (He did not say if the original netting was safe; much of it was consumed in the fire.)

他说，新材料不合格，成本只有防火材料的一半。（他没有说原防护网是否安全；大部分已被大火烧毁。）

But the contractors apparently were worried they would get caught in an inspection, he said, and installed fire-safe netting at the base of the scaffolding, where testers were most likely to take samples.

但据他说，承包商显然担心在检查中被抓到，并在脚手架底部安装了防火的防护网，因为测试人员最可能在那里取样。

Even after the fire, the ploy seemed to work. At one point, officials said that the netting on the one building that did not catch fire met fire-safety standards. After a public outcry, more tests were conducted, at different heights, and they found the material to be unsafe, too.

即使火灾后，这一伎俩似乎也奏效了。官员一度表示，未着火的那栋楼的防护网符合消防安全标准。在公众抗议后，在不同高度进行了更多测试，也发现材料不安全。

How much did the company save by using the cheaper netting in the summer repairs? According to the anticorruption agency, just under $14,000.

根据廉政公署，公司在夏季维修中使用更便宜的防护网节省了多少钱？约10万港元。

覆盖在宏福苑一栋大楼窗户上的白色聚苯乙烯泡沫板。