Last year, residents were told to pay £31,300 per flat to fund works at the building, owned by Proxima GR Properties, which stated it was ‘not its responsibility’ to pay for replacement of materials that failed government fire safety tests. Fire wardens have been patrolling ‘constantly’ at a cost of around £4,000 per week, which Proxima was ‘planning to pass on to leaseholders’.
The situation had then been that removal would not begin ‘until £2m in costs are paid, either by residents or the government’. Leaseholders were then ordered to pay after a tribunal decided against them, but original developer Barratt intervened to say it would fund works in April.
However, Construction News has now reported that work has ‘yet to begin’ due to FirstPort being ‘unwilling to start’ until it receives ‘absolute clarity’ on the materials it can use from the government’s review of Approved Document B of the Building Regulations (ADB). It had ‘already scrapped’ one round of procurement after a specification was agreed in May and a tender put out, before the ADB review announcement saw it ‘pause’ the process.
This is until it ‘received further clarity’ on regulatory changes, and FirstPort has since drawn up an ‘alternative’ specification, which it believes ‘could cover any changes to regulation after the review is concluded’. The company has sent out a new tender to ‘ensure work can begin as soon as the review is completed and new regulations are made clear’.
A spokesman for FirstPort said: ‘We have a responsibility on behalf of our customers to navigate what is a complex and evolving policy environment. This means waiting for absolute clarity from government on the appropriate re-cladding materials and drawing on the available expert technical advice to comply with up-to-date regulations.
‘When we replace the cladding at Citiscape, it’s vital that we provide a long-term solution which ensures residents are safe and gives them peace of mind. We’re grateful for the patience of the Citiscape community and hope that the government will conclude its review soon so we can progress work on site as swiftly as possible.’
Last week, Communities Secretary James Brokenshire stated that private landlords have a ‘moral imperative’ to remove flammable cladding, with the government considering enforcement, and sent a letter to around 60 developers and building owners explaining actions to take to avoid penalties, with punishments potentially including fines or being barred from government schemes.
In June, the government revealed that 156 further private high rises were wrapped in combustible cladding, and it ‘expected’ numbers to ‘rise further’, as another 170 blocks’ status was ‘still to be confirmed’. Progress on private buildings is ‘proving slower’ as freeholders are arguing that leaseholders should pay bills, Mr Brokenshire later urging ‘swifter progress’.
A taskforce was to be set up to help councils identify cladding types on private buildings ‘amid growing concern that officials still do not know’, with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) having ordered councils to identify buildings wrapped in aluminium composite material (ACM) ‘by the end of May’.
Ministers are said to be frustrated that private landlords ‘have not come forward in sufficient numbers’ to confirm cladding types. In July, only two new projects ‘got under way’ in a month, while only a quarter had plans in place. Of all private buildings with ACM cladding, 23 had started removal by 12 July, ‘only two more’ than by 14 June. Four further buildings with ACM had been identified in that time, taking the total up to 301, with 74% of buildings with ACM ‘having not informed’ MHCLG of ‘any plans to remove the cladding’, a small fall from 76% a month before.
Around 100 buildings’ status, the MHCLG added, was ‘still to be confirmed’, with between 3 to 5% expected to have ACM cladding. Only 77 of 301 private buildings had provided MHCLG with work plans, and as of August, 293 private buildings had ACM cladding, and MHCLG ‘had not been informed’ of plans for 200.
Residents of a range of privately owned blocks have either been charged for fire safety measures or have been taken to tribunals to order them to pay for removal, including Babbage Point in Greenwich; Vallea Court and Cypress Place in Manchester; the NV Buildings in Salford Quays; and Victoria Wharf in Tower Hamlets.
A few building companies and insurers elected to cover the cost of replacement after tribunals and loss of value, including at New Capital Quay and Greenwich Square in Greenwich. Recently, a director of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) stated that some private landlords are 'trying to hide the fact that their buildings' have the same cladding as Grenfell Tower.