ao link
Twitter
Facebook
Linked In
Twitter
Facebook
Linked In

Home Office faces legal challenge over plans to reject Grenfell Inquiry recommendation on evacuation plans for disabled people

The Home Office has been threatened with a legal challenge from two disabled residents of buildings with fire safety risks, over its plan to ditch a critical Grenfell Tower Inquiry recommendation on the provision of evacuation plans.

Linked InTwitterFacebookeCard
Picture: Lucy Brown
Picture: Lucy Brown
Sharelines

The Home Office has been threatened with a legal challenge from two disabled residents of buildings with fire safety risks, over its plan to ditch a critical Grenfell Tower Inquiry recommendation #ukhousing

In a pre-action letter sent last week, seen by Inside Housing, the residents’ lawyers said it was “difficult to convey the degree of upset, outrage and betrayal” among the Grenfell community and affected disabled residents from the decision. 

The Home Office revealed last month that it would not introduce mandatory personal emergency evacuation plans, known as PEEPs, despite its recommendation by the first phase of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry. 

In a consultation response, the government claimed the plans would not be practical, proportionate or safe, and that disabled residents should either stay put or rely on rescue by firefighters. 

The Grenfell Tower fire disproportionately killed residents with disabilities who were unable to evacuate. None of them had been provided with PEEPs in accordance with official guidance which said such plans were “usually unnecessary”. 

The judicial review is being brought by Sarah Rennie and Georgie Hulme, two of the founding members of Claddag – a group representing disabled residents of buildings with dangerous cladding. 


READ MORE

LFB holds no data on escape plans for disabled residents in more than 1,000 buildings with serious fire safety issuesLFB holds no data on escape plans for disabled residents in more than 1,000 buildings with serious fire safety issues
Government’s rejection of Grenfell Inquiry proposals for disabled residents branded ‘shameful’ and ‘reprehensible’Government’s rejection of Grenfell Inquiry proposals for disabled residents branded ‘shameful’ and ‘reprehensible’
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 78: ‘The abandonment of the ‘stay put’ strategy for high-rise residential buildings is essential’Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 78: ‘The abandonment of the ‘stay put’ strategy for high-rise residential buildings is essential’

Both women live in multi-storey blocks with known fire safety issues and both have struggled to secure PEEPs in the absence of any government guidance or clear requirements. 

In the letter to the Home Office, their lawyers, Bhatt Murphy, said the Home Office’s decision amounts to “endorsing the status quo, as it was at the time of the Grenfell Tower fire”.

They argued that the decision was unlawful on a series of grounds, including a breach of human rights and public sector equality duties, an unlawful consultation and the ‘legitimate expectation’ created by pledges from politicians up to prime minister Boris Johnson that the inquiry’s recommendations would be fully implemented. 

This is the latest in a line of threats of legal action served by Bhatt Murphy in an effort to prevent the government from ditching the proposal for PEEPs. 

The government had initially proposed limiting it only to buildings where there was a waking watch in place due to known fire safety issues. 

But an action brought on behalf of the family of a disabled woman killed in the fire resulted in the Home Office opening a specific consultation on the implementation of PEEPs last summer. 

This consultation produced overwhelming support for the concept, with 83% of respondents endorsing the proposal.

But the government then held a series of one-to-one meetings with housing providers and elected to reject the consultation proposal on the basis of practical concerns raised at these meetings. 

The letter to the Home Office said this response “discloses a failure to identify and have regard to the rationale” of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry recommendation and “in particular fails to address the need for evacuation under a stay put strategy”. 

It said the Home Office had presented “a false dichotomy” between “changing the entire building strategy from a stay put strategy to a simultaneous evacuation strategy”, adding that this “forms no part of the PEEPs recommendations whatsoever”. 

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s recommendation was founded on the idea that buildings should have Plan B: a workable plan that can be activated if stay put unexpectedly becomes untenable for some or all of the residents due to the building failing. 

The letter also said the PEEPs consultation “did not invite views on new and fundamental issues which led the Home Office to decide not to implement the PEEPs recommendations”, branding it unlawful as a result. 

The issue of PEEPs has caused a storm of debate in the housing and fire safety sector in recent years. 

While some argued it is impossible to achieve without permanent staffing, others pointed to the use of buddies, such as neighbours and relatives, who could be called upon to assist with the evacuation. This is the approach taken in office blocks, where they are a legal requirement. 

The ‘buddies’ approach was endorsed by the National Fire Chiefs Council in draft guidance it prepared for buildings with fire safety issues last September. This guide was not published, but has been obtained by Inside Housing

A government spokesperson said: “Our fire reforms will go further than ever before to protect vulnerable people as we are determined to improve the safety of residents whose ability to self-evacuate may be compromised.

“That is why we have launched a new public consultation seeking views on an alternative package of initiatives, building on the information garnered from the Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans consultation, that enhance the safety of those residents.”

The PEEPs saga: a timeline

Sakina Afrasehabi (left) was one of the disabled people who died during the Grenfell Tower fire in 2017. Her family has since advocated for PEEPs
Sakina Afrasehabi (left) was one of the disabled people who died during the Grenfell Tower fire in 2017. Her family has since advocated for PEEPs

June 2017

The Grenfell Tower fire kills 72 people, after they were advised to ‘stay put’ despite flames ripping through the building. Fifteen of those killed had mobility issues which hindered their ability to escape.

October 2019

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s first phase report follows advice of internationally respected experts to recommend legal requirements for personal emergency evacuation plans (PEEPs) and general evacuation plans for all buildings. Prime minister Boris Johnson promises to implement the recommendations in full.

April 2020

A behind-closed-doors meeting sees housing and fire industry experts criticise the proposals for evacuation plans and PEEPs, branding them “completely impracticable and not doable”. 

July 2020

The government quietly waters down the recommendation of PEEPs in its first consultation on the implementation of the inquiry’s recommendation, suggesting they be introduced for buildings with known fire safety issues only.

October 2020

The relatives of Sakina Afrasehabi (pictured above), a disabled woman killed in the fire, threaten a judicial review of the decision not to implement the inquiry’s recommendations

June 2021

The Home Office launches a new consultation specifically on the issue of PEEPs

April 2022  

Building safety minister Lord Greenhalgh tells the House of Lords that the government will not implement PEEPs and will pursue information sharing instead

May 2022

A consultation document published by the Home Office says PEEPs and evacuation plans for all buildings are not proportionate and suggests introducing information sharing for buildings with known fire safety issues only

Sign up for our fire safety newsletter

Sign up for our fire safety newsletter
Linked InTwitterFacebookeCard
Add New Comment
You must be logged in to comment.