Inside Suffolk's building safety crisis: Imprisoned at home
In the first of our special reports into the county's building safety crisis, we speak to a leaseholder who can't sell and is therefore stuck in an unsafe house
Last updated 20th Dec 2021
Today, we begin our investigation into the building safety crisis in Suffolk, which has meant that hundreds of people in the county are living in homes with flammable cladding or other fire risks.
"I'm just stuck, in what feels like a mental and physical prison."
As per Government regulations following the tragic fire at Grenfell Tower in 2017, a flat cannot be sold if it doesn't get an EWS1 certification, that indicates that it is safe from fires. It has transpired that a building which has such a certification, and has a reduced fire risk, is deemed to unsafe by lenders.
That is what's happening at the tower block in Ipswich where John lives. We've had to change his name as he's afraid that other leaseholders in his block who are trying to sell their flats will be in jeopardy by him going public.
"My whole plan was to be in this flat was to be here for the duration of my five-year fixed term mortgage and then look to sell, which would have been at this time, last year. But, I can't do that now.
"Mentally, its been really difficult."
The original group that built John's tower block filed for insolvency and it is now managed by a Residents Management Company (RMC) that the leaseholders created. He says the amount of service charge they are paying per flat to maintain the building has doubled, owing to the various fire safety certifications they needed to obtain.
"It's not gonna come down any time soon and it's not something that I've accounted for when I went ahead and bought this property. I don't think anyone has to be honest. Not to this scale."
John acknowledges that the level of fire risk in his block isn't as serious as in the case of Cardinal Lofts and St Francis Tower. Leaseholders in Cardinal Lofts are having to pay large sums every month for waking watch, the service whereby someone is trained to patrol all floors and the outside of the building to look for fires.
Claire Hamblion, a resident at the tower block told us last year: "It's an absolute injustice that leaseholders are being expected to pay these costs when we've bought these properties in good faith.
"These buildings must have been signed off by building regulators when they were built as being safe in terms of fire. We should not be having to pick up the cost for this."
Leaseholders in St Francis Tower did manage to get access to the Government's ÂŁ5 billion Building Safety Fund for remedial work, but that has come with its own issues, which we will touch on later in this series.
John tells us they planned on applying to the Building Safety Fund for remediating their own fire risks but were asked to show enough funding up-front, a cost that leaseholders couldn't bear themselves.
"The builders are the ones who built this place so they should be held accountable for at least a part of the problem. So should the Government, for their lack of regulation and oversight because a lot of this is down to a failure in regulating as well as shameless profiteering", he says.
As we approach Christmas, John and other leaseholders will mark the festive season in dangerous homes, through no fault of their own.
"There probably isn't a day that goes by that I don't want to be here. I just can't see a way out and it's so frustrating.
"I just want the choice to come back in my hands so that I can move on and get on with my life" he explains.
The new Housing Secretary Michael Gove said in Parliament last month that he will announce measures that could offer leaseholders some relief 'shortly'. John says the noises coming out of Westminster are positive but adds that he is finding it difficult to stay optimistic as the crisis drags on.
"At last count, Government ministers said leaseholders shouldn't have to pay, and that language has slowly changed to should not have to pay unaffordable costs unfair costs, just tweaking and language slightly.
"I want to be hopeful, but it's difficult because we've been here and heard it all before. It's time for the government to step up and say look, this is what we're going to do."
A spokesperson from the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities says, "“It is unacceptable and unfair that leaseholders are facing excessive bills – they are innocent parties in this and we recognise the impact it can have on their mental health.
“Building owners and industry must make buildings safe without passing on costs to them. As the Secretary of State has made clear, we are committed to ensuring leaseholders are supported and we will be setting out further proposals in due course.
“Our Building Safety Bill, which marks the biggest improvements to building safety in 40 years – will bring more rights and protections for residents, and make homes safer across the country.”
The new Building Safety Bill, which has passed the committee stage and is expected next year, stipulates that every building with at least two residential units which are at least 18 metres in height or have at least 7 storeys will need a Building Safety Manager. He says, "That is apparently going to cost us around about another additional ÂŁ3000 per building. It just keep stacking up.
So what does it mean for John and leaseholders like him if these issues aren't addressed?
"It means I'm stuck here. For how long? That's anyone's guess."
We'll have more on the impact of the cladding scandal on people in Suffolk over the coming weeks.