Smoke and flames engulfed towers of Wang Fuk Court during rescue efforts at night a scene that triggered a broad investigation implicating multiple firms, including Denmark’s ISS.
Credit: Shing Chan
On November 26, a devastating blaze erupted at Wang Fuk Court, a residential complex in the Tai Po district of Hong Kong.
What began as a renovation project quickly turned into a catastrophe: bamboo scaffolding covered in plastic netting went up in flames and fire – fuelled by flammable foam panels and defective safety measures – tore through seven of the estate’s eight towers.
The death toll climbed rapidly. As of early December, Hong Kong authorities confirmed at least 159 victims, spanning ages from one to 97. Over 79 people were injured, and dozens remain missing.
In the aftermath, responsibility and oversight have come under the spotlight.
Among those being scrutinised: ISS A/S, a Danish facilities‑management giant whose Hong Kong subsidiary ISS EastPoint Properties Limited (ISS EPPL) served as property manager for Wang Fuk Court.
From Copenhagen to Tai Po: ISS’s Ties to the Estate
ISS EPPL was contracted by the building’s “Incorporated Owners” – effectively the residents’ association – to deliver administrative support and on‑site services for Wang Fuk Court.
However, ISS stresses it did not commission or supervise the contractors hired to carry out the major renovation works; nor did it install, maintain or inspect fire‑safety equipment in the buildings. That legally mandated work – in Hong Kong – must be performed by licensed registered contractors.
In short: ISS’s declared role was limited – administrative and security support, not renovation execution or oversight.
Markets Reacted Hard
Despite ISS’s insistence that it played no active role in renovation, the mere association with the disaster proved damaging. On the day the investigation was announced, ISS shares dropped around 10% – the steepest dive the company had suffered since August 2023.
Analysts and media reports suggest that even if ISS is not yet named as a target of the inquiry, every company tangentially involved with Wang Fuk Court’s management – from property managers to contractors – could face scrutiny.
As one summary put it, “Denmark’s ISS faces investigations ahead after deadly Wang Fuk Court fire.”
Hong Kong Inquiry: What Went Wrong at Wang Fuk Court
The fire at Wang Fuk Court unfolded with horrifying speed. Investigators believe it started in the protective netting draped over bamboo scaffolding on one of the towers – netting that did not meet fire‑safety codes.
At the same time, windows had been covered with polystyrene foam boards – another suspected accelerant. Bamboo scaffolding, wrapped in flammable netting, provided a “chimney‑effect” pathway for flames to climb floor by floor, while failing fire alarms and allegedly disabled alarm systems prevented the blaze from being detected quickly.
The scale of the disaster is staggering: building records indicate Wang Fuk Court housed some 4,800 people across its towers. Numerous residents said they had voiced concerns about renovation works previously, but say those warnings went unheeded.
As investigations proceed, local authorities have made arrests. So far, around 14 individuals – including construction‑company directors and sub‑contractors – have been detained on suspicion of gross negligence, manslaughter and potential corruption linked to shortcuts in renovation works and use of substandard materials.
These findings have led to further fallout: regulators in Hong Kong have suspended nearly 30 other building projects managed by the implicated contractor, and ordered a broad review of housing‑estate renovations across the city.
Why ISS – a Danish Firm – Matters Now
For citizens in Denmark – and across Europe – the involvement of ISS raises broader questions about accountability, global corporate governance and the responsibilities of multinational firms operating abroad.
From Copenhagen’s headquarters to a fire‑ravaged estate in Hong Kong, ISS’s name now appears in headlines not for growth or performance, but for tragedy and scrutiny. For many investors and observers, the case illustrates how reputational risk can travel fast across continents.
That said, ISS has not been formally charged in the Hong Kong inquiry. The firm maintains its limited role and emphasises it is cooperating fully with authorities.
But in a disaster where regulatory oversights, deceptive materials and possibly corruption played a role – where accountability might be diffuse and complex – the question of “who is responsible” may remain contested for years.
The flames at Wang Fuk Court may have died down, but the repercussions are far from over. For ISS, the coming weeks and months could determine whether its name becomes a footnote in a tragic accident – or a symbol of how global corporate linkages can complicate justice, accountability and the demand for safer housing worldwide.