Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Dangerous Cladding: Leaseholder Support

Monday 16 November 2020 · 3 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 1 Partly answered 2 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Minister pledged to continue engaging with Lucy Powell on issues related to dangerous cladding.
  • Government provided 600 million for ACM cladding remediation, with 97% of buildings progressing.
  • Government policy remains that leaseholders should not bear the costs of remediation for unsafe buildings.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Lucy Powell Labour (Co-op) Manchester Central
Housing Environment
Context

Leaseholders face serious issues due to dangerous cladding, including insurance difficulties and EWS1 form nightmares. Many buildings deemed out of scope of the building safety fund.

Question

What support are you providing to leaseholders with properties that have dangerous cladding? I thank the Minister for his continued engagement on these issues, but the difficult and serious issues facing tens of thousands of leaseholders around the country are growing. Buildings unable to get insurance, EWS1 form nightmares even for buildings without cladding, and many deemed out of scope of the building safety fund. Will you meet me and Manchester City Council to discuss an excellent piece of work done on these impacts?

Answer from Christopher Pincher

Of course I will continue to engage with her and will happily meet her, as I think I did in July. She raised the EWS1 form particularly; it is worth pointing out that this is not a Government document but devised by RICS. Not all lenders require it, some use other tools. Lenders that do require it are working with us to ensure more nuanced tools resolve leaseholders' concerns. We do not support a blanket approach to the use of EWS1 forms for buildings less than 18 metres in height.

Partly answered

How: Under Review, Working With Partners

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 Lucy Powell Labour (Co-op) Manchester Central
Housing Environment
Context

Three years after the Grenfell tragedy and a year since the Bolton Cube fire, over 203 high-rise blocks remain clad with flammable aluminium composite material or high-pressure laminate. Many thousands more are clad with equally flammable materials.

Question

Minister, is it not about time to come clean about the serious limitations of the size and scope of the building safety fund? Up to 1.5 million people are desperate, trapped in this nightmare. What bold, urgent action does the Minister intend to take?

Answer from Christopher Pincher

With respect to ACM cladding, £600 million is available for remediation; 97% of buildings with ACM have either completed or started their remediation. For non-ACM-clad buildings, a significant number of applications have been processed and further information requested to advance these applications. We will get the money out as quickly as possible while encouraging builders and owners to remediate themselves.

Partly answered

How: Working With Partners, Under Review

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q3 Mike Amesbury Lab
Housing
Context

On July 20, the Secretary of State stated that it is unacceptable for leaseholders to worry about fixing historic safety defects. By October 16, however, the Housing Minister mentioned solutions protecting leaseholders from unaffordable costs.

Question

Could you clarify the Government's policy on what costs leaseholders should bear for cladding removal? Not any costs but unaffordable ones. Does this change in stance cause great concern and upset among leaseholders expecting no costs?

Answer from Christopher Pincher

There has been no change in policy. The Government are clear that we do not expect, and we do not want, leaseholders to bear the costs of remediation for unsafe buildings they were not responsible for. The cost should fall on owners through warrantee schemes or builders.

Answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)