You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles
Pressure on government as insurers refuse to pay out for cladding removal
The government is facing mounting pressure to clarify confusion over dangerous cladding, as insurers refuse to pay for its removal from a building and insist it complies with building regulations.
While the government has said the product breaches regulations, many within the industry disagree and claim the standards set in the official Approved Document B would have allowed its use.
In a letter seen by Inside Housing, BLP Insurance wrote to a leaseholder in Nova House in Slough, where the cladding has failed the government’s fire safety tests and the local council is preparing to take over the block.
The letter stated: “At present… the evidence would suggest that Nova House was compliant with building regulations at the time of its construction.”
Earlier this week a group of backbench MPs said they are seeking to form a cross-party coalition to pressure government to protect leaseholders in these blocks.
Steve Reed, the Labour MP for Croydon North who is leading this collective effort, said: “Ultimately, it was government-sanctioned building regulations that said this kind of cladding was safe, so the government must take responsibility and act.”
READ MORE
A further letter from BLP’s lawyers to a resident of Nova House said: “In the absence of actual or imminent damage a claim… would only be triggered in the event that it can be shown that the cladding was installed in breach of the building regulations.
“As you are no doubt aware, the use of [aluminium composite material] cladding was a common and accepted practice in the UK prior to the Grenfell disaster. Indeed the approved building inspector… confirmed the cladding was installed in accordance with the requirements of the building regulations.”
A further insurer is understood to have contacted residents of another cladded block with the same message.
The dispute centres on which section of the guidance applies to external cladding.
Paul Everall, chief executive of the Local Authority Building Control, which represents council-run building control authorities, told Inside Housing: “At the very least the guidance was unclear and there should be clarification on this point.
“We are putting pressure on the government to issue something immediately so that people know what to do with their buildings.”
Mr Everall was the civil servant in charge of building control from 1991 to 2005.
The dangerous cladding has been found on around 300 social housing tower blocks and hundreds of private buildings, schools, hotels and universities.
Leaseholders in Croydon have been told they could face a £2m bill for its removal. A tribunal ruled in favour of the freeholder of the Fresh building in Salford last week. This meant leaseholders are liable to pay a £100,000 bill for fire wardens in their block.
Social landlords are also locked in disputes with contractors over who is liable to pay for the removal of the cladding.
Contractors are understood to be arguing that since the product complied with regulations, they are not liable for breach of contract.
Additional reporting by Pete Apps
