Industry news


Government warns private block owners over cladding costs


Housing Secretary James Brokenshire has written to private building owners threatening them with financial penalties if they fail to remove dangerous combustible cladding from tower blocks. Around 60 building owners and


developers have received letters telling them that “enforcement action” will be taken if they do not strip unsafe material from their blocks. The firms include Lendlease,


Pemberstone, Paddington Development Corporation and GLA Land & Property – a subsidiary of the Greater London Authority. Meanwhile developers such as Barratt, Mace Group, Legal & General and Taylor Wimpey have already agreed to meet the costs of cladding removal works.


Building owners that do not take urgent steps to remediate buildings clad in flammable ACM could be restricted from accessing government schemes, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) said.


Mr Brokenshire said: “There is a moral


imperative for private sector landlords to do the right thing and remove unsafe cladding quickly, and not leave leaseholders to cover the cost. “A number of leading developers have


stepped up to the mark and agreed to pay for work, and we urge others to follow their lead. If they don’t, we have not ruled anything out. At the last count, 291 private sector


residential high rises had been identified as being clad in ACM, which is unlikely to meet building regulations. MHCLG has not been informed of action plans for 121 of these buildings. The Government has promised to “fully


fund” the removal and replacement of dangerous ACM cladding in the social housing sector, at an estimated cost of £400m.


Right to buy is costing councils £300 million a year


according to new analysis from the Chartered Institute of Housing. Cutting the discounts available could lead to an


T


extra 12,000 homes being built a year, the CIH has calculated. But the organisation says the right to buy should be suspended altogether to stem the loss of social rented homes. The extent of the cost to the public sector is


revealed in the UK Housing Review 2018 Autumn briefing paper. RTB discounts were increased to £80,000 (£108,000 in London) by former PM David Cameron in April 2012. Since then 69,467 homes have been sold while


only 18,958 have been started or acquired. This trend is continuing with figures for the first quarter of the year showing 2,452 homes were sold by councils in England, while just 837 homes were started or acquired to replace them. CIH chief executive Terrie Alafat CBE said: “Not only are we failing to build enough new


homes for social rent, we are losing them at a time when we need them more than ever. Our research shows that we lost more than 150,000 social rented homes between 2012 and 2017


10 | HMM November 2018 | www.housingmmonline.co.uk


otal right to buy discounts have climbed to £1 billion a year – leading to a net loss of some £300 million to local authorities,


due to right to buy and other factors, and that figure will reach 230,000 by 2020 unless we take action now. “This research reveals just how much right to


buy is costing the public sector every year. Suspending the scheme means the Government could invest the savings in more homes for social rent – which is often the only truly affordable option for people on lower incomes – and also in fairer and more cost-effective ways to help tenants access home ownership.” Ms Alafat continued: “We support the principle


of helping tenants move into home ownership but it cannot be at the expense of other people in need. About two-thirds of the discount that a tenant who buys their home now receives is justified because they are sitting tenants paying sub-market rent. But one-third is an excessive discount, which if clawed back, would lead to more money coming to councils to build new homes. “We know the Government is consulting on ways


to make it easier for councils to replace the homes they sell under right to buy, which is welcome – but we still believe ministers should suspend the scheme to stem the loss of social rented homes and look at more effective ways to help people access home ownership.”


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