"Financial nightmare" for Ipswich tenants affected by cladding crisis is nearing an end
Some people are now protected from huge costs of cladding and fire safety repairs
Last updated 30th Mar 2022
"The financial nightmare" for some tenants caught up in Suffolk's building crisis is nearing an end - but not everyone will benefit from this Government announcement.
The Government says leaseholders who live in or own up to three properties where their value is lower than ÂŁ175,000 pounds won't have to pay for remediation work.
We spoke to Ipswich Cladiator Alex Dickin to see how this news has impacted the tenants and what other issues still need to be resolved: "For me personally, this is really good news that by law, I'm going to be protected from all costs, both in cladding and non cladding related fire safety defects.
"Looking ahead, the financial nightmare that has been hanging over my head for the past year and a half Is about to be resolved as soon as that piece of legislation becomes law."
However Alex also spoke about the people who are still facing massive costs and the impact this is having: "In my building there will be leaseholders where they own more than three properties in the building.
"And they are going to have unlimited bills, potentially falling on their doorstep or in their letter boxes.
"It creates is a kind of divide in a building, whereas before we were all fighting the same crisis, all facing an equal share of the costs.
" I really don't see that as fair.
"There's that added element of what happens if the leaseholder with three or more properties cannot afford to pay those 10s of thousands of pounds.
"But there's now almost an equal split down the middle, where some of us are gonna receive zero pounds zero pence in bills and others are going to receive 10s of thousands still."
Although Alex said there is a sense of relief, he also told us this announcement is also causing more questions and concerns: "That also adds an extra concern, that is this going to further delay the building actually becoming safe.
"So although the the financial aspect has been relieved from me. I'm still looking at years and years where the building could still be unsafe.
"I think it shows that the level of stress that the the financial crisis has caused on us leaseholders.
"That we were more anxious and worried about the bills that we were going to receive compared to the actual safety of our lives.
"I think that really shows that I'm sitting here saying I'm relieved that the financial side has been resolved when I should be more worried about the actual safety of the building.
"And I guess, that's the gamble that the government are making.
"They're potentially saying that Grenfell yes, it was a terrible tragedy.
"That they're risking and holding on and hoping for other parties, other companies and organizations to now step up and pay to fix these buildings.
"But from my experience being a leaseholder, these lease holders and developers are going to drag their feet.
"They're going to take as long as they can. They're even potentially gonna take the government to court to fight the these laws that are gonna put the financial responsibility onto their shoulders instead."
Part of this new announcement in the Building Safety Bill also includes the scrapping of a building safety manager.
The role of the building safety manager was to have a professional that would monitor and survey the buildings on a more consistent basis.
Alex explained that the leaseholders saw the building safety managers annual salary would be in-between ÂŁ60,000 to ÂŁ80,000 per year.
A cost, which would have been put onto the lease holders in the building as an ongoing expense.
Alex told us they "really campaigned strongly against this in meetings and communications that we've had with the Department for Housing.
"So it is promising to see that they've now dropped that requirement.
"And we hope that no buildings actually introduce this and forced this costs onto leaseholders."
The announcement also included that the building safety charge has been scrapped.
Which meant the building safety costs such as cladding and more internal fire safety defect costs, could have been passed on to leaseholders, with a 28 day notice put on it.
Alex explained: "Let's say the cost was ÂŁ20,000 and that could have landed on any of our doorsteps at any point with 28 days to pay it.
"And that would have put us in a completely impossible situation and the majority of us would lose our homes in that scenario.
"So the fact that that's now been scrapped and any costs are passed on are now done via the normal service charge route.
Alex reaffirmed that "None of us should be paying these costs at all."
"So even though we have progressed to a better situation where I predict that half of my building no longer has to pay a penny towards this crisis. It should be 100%.
"We did not build these buildings.
"We did not choose the unsafe materials used on the buildings and we didn't design them either.
"So for all those reasons, we should all be paying ÂŁ0, zero pence."