None of the delight frothing and fizzing inside Shirley had been apparent while Howard (1) had been in the room. They had merely exchanged the comments proper to sudden death before he (2) had taken himself off to the shower. (The Casual Vacancy, by J. K. Rowling)
For my mother tongue, we don’t necessarily require the tense agreements both (1) and (2), says a member of Korean national language institute (국립국어원) - we can, but we usually don’t, because we can understand by contexts. As it were, we don’t backshift the tense of subordinate clauses, and rather we recognize the non-shifts as the tense agreements - but both the expressions don't always deliver the same meaning, commented the same person.
And English seems to recognize kind of same way, I guess, from this sentence: “I should have liked to have met her.” They say on CGEL p.148 that the perfect tense in the infinitive is pleonastic. Probably they would say that the ‘have’ is an excessive word.
What about both (1) and (2)? Can you use simple past for both (1) and (2)?