Industry News
Private sector cladding removal plan fails to satisfy critics and leaves many questions unanswered
blocks, but critics have been quick to point out this is not new money and it is insufficient to pay for all of the costs of removal and replacement with a safer alternative. Housing Secretary James Brokenshire
T
previously said the bill for removing dangerous cladding should be met in full by the building owners, not by the taxpayer. In May he eventually gave in to pressure just short of the tragedy’s two-year anniversary, but also admitted the money was coming from existing budgets at the Housing Ministry. Brokenshire acknowledged the long wait for
remedial work to be carried out had caused anxiety and strain for thousands of people living in high- rise blocks. Critics say the money is insufficient for the average £4m to £5m removal cost per tower block and it fails to answer questions about the funding of other fire safety measures, such as water sprinkler systems and 24-hour watch patrols. They said the Housing Secretary’s solution had created a “cladding and safety lottery”. In addition the fund has only been set up for the
remediation of the ACM cladding that was used on Grenfell Tower and not for any other type or form of cladding, such as high-pressure laminate, some of which are considered to be just as unsafe. At present there is no respite for the residents of tower blocks covered in the non-ACM cladding, although these are the subject of further safety tests. Brokenshire suggested it was too early to make a decision on whether these cladding systems would be included or not, at a later date. Similarly residents of nine tower blocks in
Salford were caught in no-man’s land where the city council’s Pendleton Together blocks are considered to be owned by a PFI firm and therefore fail to qualify for either this funding scheme or the £400m remediation scheme set up last year for social housing. Instead the council and Together Housing arranged a deal to finance the cladding removal and put interim fire safety measures in place.
RESIDENTS’ STRESS In his statement to Parliament, the Housing Secretary was critical of many owners of private tower blocks saying they had been trying to offload the costs on to leaseholders. He said the new fund would allow removal work to start urgently, even though almost two years had already passed since the Grenfell Tower fire. Latest figures show 166 private residential
buildings are yet to start works on removing and replacing aluminium composite material cladding,
he Government has established a £200m fund for replacing Grenfell Tower-type cladding from more than 150 private tower
compared with just 23 residential tower blocks in the social sector. Building owners have until early August to claim
the funds, with one condition being that they take "reasonable steps" to recover the costs from those responsible for the use of the cladding. Mr Brokenshire admitted he had changed his
mind on demanding freeholders pay up for safety work. He said some building owners had threatened residents with bills running into tens of thousands of pounds per household and saying that safety works could not start ahead of payments being received. "What has been striking to me over recent weeks
is just the time it is taking and my concern over the leaseholders themselves - that anxiety, that stress, that strain, and seeing that we are getting on and making these buildings safe." He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "We've
seen a number of building owners and developers coming forward and doing the right thing.” The Housing Secretary was forced to write to his most senior civil servant in the MHCLG after Melanie Dawes, his Permanent Secretary, raised concerns over value for money aspects of the private cladding removal fund.
AN UNNECESSARY FIGHT Grenfell United, a group of survivors and the bereaved, said the news offered hope to people feeling at risk at home. "This result is a testament to residents themselves, in social and private blocks,
who refused to be ignored. The truth is we should never have had to fight for it," the group said. It asked the Government to consider financial
support for residents as they continue paying for night watches and wait for the remediation work to begin. Rituparna Saha is one of the founders of the UK
Cladding Action Group (UKCAG) who lives in the Northpoint block in Bromley where leaseholders are facing a combined £3.5m cladding replacement bill. She said the announcement also introduced a “cladding lottery” because it only covered ACM panels of the type which helped spread the fire at Grenfell. Combustible non-ACM cladding and other fire safety problems such as faulty or missing fire breaks in wall systems would not be covered. Lord Gary Porter, the chair of the Local
Government Association, said: “This announcement will come as an enormous relief to leaseholders who are in no way to blame for the dangerous cladding on their homes. They have suffered for far too long. Reputable developers have done the right thing and paid for buildings to be fixed, but it would be wrong if the taxpayer had to pay the bills of those developers and contractors who are responsible for this crisis.” Building owners and developers who have
already fully funded the remediation of buildings are Pemberstone, Aberdeen Asset Management, Barratt Developments, Fraser Properties, Legal & General, Mace and Peabody.
www.housingmmonline.co.uk | HMM June/July 2019 | 5
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
