Weeks after Building Safety Crisis announcement, leaseholders still in limbo
Campaign group Ipswich Cladiators welcome new measures such as waking watch relief fund but concerns over situation for buy-to-let leaseholders continue
Last updated 31st Jan 2022
Three weeks ago, Housing Secretary Michael Gove took to Parliament's despatch box to announce new plans that would ensure that no leaseholder affected by the Building Safety Crisis will have to pay for any remediation work.
In the weeks since, he has met with representatives from the construction industry, pressing them on their initial plans to help cover the costs of cladding and fire safety remediation work and extended the Waking Watch Replacement Fund to cover all building where the service was deemed necessary.
"We have seen a lot of positive movement in the last couple of weeks, and any positive movement is good and we are grateful because there have been times in the past where we've gone weeks and months without any news, no developments at all", says Alex Dickin from campaign group Ipswich Cladiators.
Previously, access to funding from the Waking Watch Replacement fund, to help fit fire alarms which negate the need for the practice, was only available to people living in buildings taller than 18m.
"We've been calling for this to happen for a long time now and it was really a pointless restriction to only fund buildings above a certain height and with a certain type of fire safety defects so it is good that now we have moved on from that restriction.
"As a leaseholder, living in one of those buildings which had a waking watch, I can't see how that would truly made a difference and how it would have save lives in the event of an emergency.
"So we really do need to see the evidence as to how useful and vital this waking watch service is but either way, leaseholders should not have to pay for either the fire alarm or the waking watch itself."
Although the fund covers the exorbitant cost of installing a fire alarm system, it doesn't help recoup the many thousands of pounds leaseholders have already had to shell out before they made their application.
A resident of Ipswich's Cardinal Lofts tower block on the town's waterfront, Mr Dickin says, "In my situation, we were lucky enough to be successful for the waking watch relief fund and that paid for our £90,000 fire alarm to be installed.
"However, we had the waking watch for 11 months in total and as a building that will cost us £250,000 or if you look at it per flat, that's £3000 each.
"So even though we were lucky in being awarded this funding for the fire alarm, the actual costs of the waking watch itself is almost triple and that's not covered by any funding as it stands."
"We are not at fault for the building being in such a position that requires people to monitor a building for 24 hours a day, seven days a week."
Another concern among campaigners has been the recent indication from Government that buy-to-let leaseholders will fall down the pecking order below those who live in the homes they lease. Mr Dickin says both parties are equally affected by the crisis and therefore should be treated on level footing.
He also adds that there is a practical difficulty in implementing this policy. "Let's say you have half the building where the flat owners live in their flats and the other half buy to let. How are you going to half-fund a building and expect it to be fully fixed?
"What we're seeing across buildings in this country is that unless for funding is given, the work doesn't start. So where in some places leaseholders have been billed build, if every leaseholder has not paid the full amount, the work has not started.
"So it's really difficult to see how the government are going to prioritize leaseholders who live in their their own flats."
A spokesperson for the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities told PA News Agency: “We are bringing this scandal to an end – protecting leaseholders and making industry pay.
“It is not right that innocent leaseholders – including those who have moved out and now sublet their properties – should pay to remove dangerous cladding for which they were not responsible.
“We will explore whether this support should extend to other leaseholders, such as buy-to-let landlords.”
But Mr Dickin says they are still pleased with some of the measures the Secretary of State Michael Gove has taken so far. "The housing secretary has been in post for a few months now and we've seen more movement in the building safety crisis than we have with any other housing secretary, so we can't complain.
One such positive development has been Michael Gove meeting both developers and manufacturers across the country. Mr Dickin explains, "I believe this is a genuine effort to get them to act but just meeting them is going to be enough.
"Previously the Government have asked the construction industry, both developers and manufacturers, to do the right thing and we've seen that just asking them isn't good enough, so now they've asked them and set a deadline, which is a further step that might work."
The Building Safety Bill is also back in Parliament for scrutiny and open for amendments. Mr Dickin says they'd like to see the discourse about leaseholders being the victims being borne out in legislation.
"The Government, in response to questions in debates, have talked about protecting leaseholders from all related costs and we'd like to see that in writing in law, as part of the building safety bill in an amendment
"Personally, I'm not confident that that will actually happen, because I believe that they were just warm words, but I'm happy to be proved wrong" he says.
Meanwhile, rising inflation has added further fuel to leaseholders' worries. He says, "Some of us are in a situation where due to inflation and costs going up, as well as the building safety crisis bills we've got our mortgage is going up as well".
This coupled with rising energy bills will mean that the next couple of months will prove an anxious wait for leaseholders affected by Suffolk's Building Safety Crisis.