Industry News


Extra £3.5bn for removing unsafe cladding derided as being too little and too late


criticised for not being enough, for taking too long and for focussing solely on cladding – while ignoring other serious safety concerns such as fire stops and water sprinklers, as well as failing to address soaring insurance costs and the inability of residents to sell their homes. In promising an extra £3.5bn to remove unsafe


T


cladding from high-rise buildings over 18 metres high in England "at no cost to residents", Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick said it was the "largest ever Government investment" in building safety. It is estimated that around 274,000 flats have


been fitted with dangerous cladding, according to the Association of Residential Managing Agents, affecting more than 650,000 people. That figure is likely to reach into the millions when those living in lower-rise structures where problems have also emerged are taken into account. But even before Jenrick sat down his


Conservative colleague Stephen McPartland, was tweeting his disappointments: “I am listening to the announcement with my head in my hands. Wondering how he can have got this so wrong. It is a betrayal of millions of leaseholders. It is not good enough. It is shocking incompetence. It is clear the PM has to step in now” and “The statement is all smoke and mirrors. He is very careful to just state cladding. No mention of fire safety defects, Waking Watches or Excessive Insurance Premiums which are often the main costs for millions.”


he long awaited Government announcement on how it will resolve the cladding scandal were almost immediately


The £3.5bn is on top of the £1.6bn funding that


was announced for the removal of unsafe cladding last year, but Ministers have come under increasing to step up their help for the many thousands of residents in affected blocks, many of them leaseholders. The Grenfell Tower fire took place over three and


half years ago and since then there have been at least two other significant fires in residential blocks below 18m in England. Grenfell also exposed a wider range of building safety issues including poorly fitted fire breaks, a lack of water sprinklers, poor quality fire doors, confused policies over exacuating residents or advising them to stay in their homes, the use of inappropriate materials and a host of other problems.


ARBITRARY DIVISIONS Jenrick told the Commons that leaseholders in high-rise buildings above 18m, or with six storeys or more, would face no costs for cladding works, while those living in shorter buildings would have access to low interest loans with their contributions capped at no more than an extra £50 a month for removing unsafe cladding. He said the risk was "significantly lower" for the estimated half a million residents of lower-rise blocks of flats. He said the scheme’s costs would not be


funded exclusively by taxpayers and a new levy would be placed on the developers of future high-rise buildings. Jenrick described the action as an "unprecedented intervention" without which building owners would simply


pass on the costs of remediation work to leaseholders. However, Labour's shadow housing secretary,


Thangam Debbonaire, called the proposals "an injustice" that would "pile financial misery" on homeowners. She said there were many questions left unanswered, including on "skyrocketing" insurance costs, homes potentially remaining "unsellable", and the amount leaseholders would be expected to pay. The "arbitrary 18m height limit" could "mean the


difference between a safe home and financial ruin", she said. Labour is instead calling for an independent taskforce to be established to take the matter out of politicians' hands and ensure funds are distributed fairly. Grenfell United, the bereaved families


and survivors’ group, also said the measures failed to “deal with this mess once and for all”. “Residents living in unsafe homes will go to bed tonight worrying if their building will qualify or be left out once again,” a spokesperson said. “And bereaved and survivors of Grenfell will lie awake fearful that what happened to us could still happen again.” “Residents shouldn’t be forced into loans and


new debt just because of the height of their building. It’s completely unfair to pile more financial strain on leaseholders for a problem that has been caused by developers and the construction industry. The industry needs to be held fully responsible for what they have done – small levy doesn’t cut it.”


Decrease in number of social lettings


The number of lettings to social rent homes fell again last year and is now almost 25 per cent below its peak of six years ago, as more use was made of the higher ‘affordable rents’ regime which charities and campaingers claim are too expensive for low income households. This trend may be about to change as a small but


growing number of housing associations are reversing their use of affordable rents, and are letting all their properties on the lower social rents. These include L&Q and Housing 21. In total there were 306,000 new social


housing lettings in the year to April 2020, a decrease of 2.5 per cent or 8,000 lets from the previous year. This continues the fall from the


peak of 396,000 new social housing lettings in 2013/14 (a 23 per cent decrease) after a temporary flattening last year. This was driven by social rent tenancies, which make up the majority of new lets, while use of Affordable Rent products rose. Overall, new social housing lettings decreased by


17 per cent while stock increased by 3 per cent over the past decade. 59 per cent of new social housing lettings in 2019/20 were to tenants not in social housing immediately prior. Other facts of note on last year’s lettings, are:


• There were 1.15 million households on local authority waiting lists at 31 March 2020, a slight


10 | HMM February/March 2021 | www.housingmmonline.co.uk


decrease of 1 per cent from 1.16 million in 2018/19;


• Over half of households (58 per cent) with a new social letting in 2019/20 were on the waiting list in that area for less than a year;


• 18 per cent of new lettings in 2019/20 were to statutory homeless households;


• Lifetime tenancies comprised nearly three- quarters of new social lettings in 2019/20, mostly let by councils;


• Employment in lead tenants of new General Needs lettings steadily increased from 32 to 40 per cent between 2008/09 and 2019/20;


• In Supported Housing, lead tenants unable to work due to long term ill- ness or disability increased from 17 to 23 per cent over the same period; and


• Households in a new social letting in 2019/20 paid an average rent of £81 per week.


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