Protect leaseholders from cladding removal costs, say MPs

The government must make clear how it will protect leaseholders from having to pay towards removing flammable cladding from their homes, MPs say.

The Commons housing committee said it was alarmed that under proposed legislation some individuals would be liable for correcting historic defects.

It said a £1.6bn government fund set up after the Grenfell fire was inadequate to cover the cost of repairs needed.

The government said it was looking at "developing affordable solutions".

After 72 people died in the Grenfell Tower fire in 2017, the government pledged safe alternatives to dangerous cladding would be provided on all buildings in England taller than 18 metres by last June.

Despite £1bn in new funding being announced in March's Budget, a report in September found that only 155 out of 455 high-rise buildings with similar cladding to Grenfell had had it replaced.

Appearing before MPs last month, housing minister Lord Greenhalgh said progress had been slower than he would have liked but insisted work would be under way on all buildings covered with aluminium composite material by the end of the year.

Answering questions about the government's draft Building Safety Bill, he also indicated leaseholders would be liable for "some costs" where owners would not pay and were not required to do so under the terms of their leases.

The government, he said, was determined to ensure the sums involved were fair and affordable and those affected could still continue to live in their properties.

But MPs, who have been scrutinising the draft legislation, said this was not good enough and ministers must provide certainty that leaseholders would be protected before the bill was introduced in earnest in Parliament.

The cross-party committee said the government should foot the bill for the work in the short term and "develop mechanisms" to recover costs from those responsible for historic failures in construction and maintenance.

It warned there was a risk that freeholders could seek to recover the cost of historic remedial work through the Building Safety Charge, which it said was designed to support forward-looking fire safety measures.

"Leaseholders should not be expected to foot the bill for failures that were not of their making," said Clive Betts, the Labour MP who chairs the committee.

"This has dragged on far too long now and the government must accept that it will have to step in to cover the cost in the short term.

"But we are equally clear in stating that this should be the first step ahead of establishing robust mechanisms to ensure that those who are responsible for fire safety failures finance their remediation."

It has been estimated that replacing unsafe cladding on buildings will cost £4bn in London alone.

Ministers have said the legislation - combined with a separate proposed law on fire safety - will deliver the biggest changes to building safety for nearly 40 years, ensuring greater accountability in law for the upkeep of buildings and enforcement of safety obligations.

The committee said there was a lack of detail in key areas and more safeguards were needed, including a central register of building safety managers and more rigorous regulation of construction products.

Responding to the committee, a housing department spokesperson said: "Our Building Safety Bill will implement the biggest improvements to the building regulatory system in almost 40 years - ensuring residents are safer in their homes.

"We are looking at developing affordable solutions where needed and will provide more details in due course."