search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
Industry news


Grenfell Tower style safety worries continue to emerge


firefighters involved in tackling the fire, but disquieting news continued to emerge about safety failings potentially affecting millions of residents. Concerns about the quality of fire doors used


O


across the housing sector grew when it was revealed that doors manufactured by five different companies had failed tests. The fire doors have been withdrawn from sale and one of the leading manufacturers contacted over 100 organisations advising them that the doors had not received third-party accreditation An advice note sent out by the Ministry of


Housing, Communities and Local Government on behalf of its expert advisory panel on fire safety, said flat entrance front doors should be replaced if landlords or building owners “suspect they do not meet the fire or smoke resistance performance in the building regulations guidance”. Meanwhile, guidance about what materials can


be used to clad tower blocks is still unclear. Some of the products that are still on sale includes insulation products of limited combustibility that were used at Grenfell Tower. The Government has committed £400m to fund


the removal of cladding in the social housing sector, but the work is progressing very slowly and Ministers are not putting any money into the removal of the material from private blocks. No


ver the Summer months the Grenfell Tower public inquiry took a break after hearing harrowing evidence from


commitment has been made to help leaseholders with bills to remove dangerous cladding, although Ministers continue to say they will “not rule anything out”.


CLADDING REMOVAL According to the latest Building Safety Programme data release issued by MHCLG, the remediation of buildings with ACM cladding (removal and replacement) has struggled to move forward at any great pace despite the understandable concerns of residents. There are still an estimated 466 buildings that fail to meet current building regulations guidance. Of the 159 social housing buildings that failed


large-scale system tests, removal work has started on 121 of them with work completed on 14 tower blocks. These have received sign-off from building control where necessary. In the private sector it is believed there are 293


residential buildings with cladding systems that are unlikely to meet current Building Regulations guidance. MHCLG is aware of plans for remediating 93 buildings, work has started on 34 buildings and been completed on just nine. Excluding student accommodation and hotels, remediation is complete or there is a clear plan or commitment to carry out remediation for 59 private residential buildings. The cladding status of approximately 60 private sector residential buildings is still to be confirmed.


The Government has committed £400m to fund the removal of cladding in the social housing sector, but the work is progressing very slowly and Ministers are not putting any money into the removal of the material from private blocks


Details on all of these buildings have been passed to fire and rescue services. Enforcement notices have been issued for the vast majority of these buildings so that councils can get information on building construction from owners and pass this to the Government. Housing association Peabody has promised not


to pass on the costs of replacing cladding onto its leaseholders in four privately-owned blocks. The landlord has written to residents of 101


affected shared ownership flats in four developments across London (in Lambeth, Greenwich, Paddington and Poplar) informing them that it will not be seeking to recoup remediation costs through service charges. Meanwhile, a number of housing associations


around the country are facing issues involving dangerous cladding on blocks of flats leased from private owners, typically under Section 106 agreements. Where associations do not own the freeholds of buildings it is unclear if they will qualify for any financial help with the cladding removal costs.


www.housingmmonline.co.uk | HMM September 2018 | 15


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52