Search the Community

Lenders are already steering away from certain flats with cladding unless they have the required certificates - Most don't. Even one of our most accommodating specialist lenders today made it clear that they will be unable to lend on: "Flats with cladding and/or balconies that stack vertically above each other containing combustible materials or the balconies are directly linked by combustible materials where the EWS1 form identifies that remediation work is needed and has not been carried out" Read the article for more background. https://www.mortgagefinancegazette.com/market-news/surveying/blog-cladding-crisis-forward-06-09-2021/ Steve Walker www.promisemoney.co.uk

Hi all. I'm looking for a bit of advice as I'm in a bit of a frustrating position with a remortgage I'm currently going through and it's costing me money the longer it goes on. I listen to the podcast religiously and know there is a great community here so really hoping to get some advice if anyone can provide any. I've outlined my predicament below. I own a flat in Hinckley, Leicestershire which I rent out. The building is three stories high, and my flat is on the top floor. I've been trying to get the flat remortgaged recently but the lenders are asking for an EWS1 form to confirm the cladding on the building isn't flammable. On the RICS website it states that these forms only really apply to apartment blocks over 18m, or six stories, in height, or with balconies. Mine doesn't sit within these guidelines but having pointed this out to the lender and showing that it is clad in brick, they are still requesting the form. I have been trying to get this EWS1 form from the management company, Warwick Estates, but it is taking a long time. I've been emailing them for well over a month as they are currently not taking calls due to reduced staff as a result of Covid-19, and a Property Assistance has been speaking with their risk assessment department, who have said they are starting to look at quotes to get the surveys done, but they can't confirm a timeline. I've asked for a direct line to someone in the risk assessment department, or someone higher up their, but I doubt I will get this as their communications are abysmal. The really frustrating thing is my other mortgage is now outside of its fixed rate terms so I am paying a lot more per month for that mortgage whilst this gets sorted. Rent is coming in, which I am very grateful for at this time, but the profit is taking a serious dent. I've looked into getting a survey done myself but have had a quote back of around £2000, which I'd rather not pay as it's not my responsibility to do so, it's the management companies. I was wondering if anyone has been through this situation at all and can provide any advice? Do I go to one of the governing bodies and put a complaint in about Warwick Estates? Or is there something else I can do? I fear this could go on for months and months. Thanks in advance for anyone that can impart any information. Cheers, Joe

Government proposes changing legislation to enforce combustibles ban for high rises NEWS18/06/184:30 PMBY PETER APPS The government has proposed legislation to ban the use of combustible materials anywhere within the wall of a high-rise building, with potentially unlimited fines for breaches. A consultation document fleshing out last month’s surprise proposal to ban combustible materials on high rises was published by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government today. Currently, building regulations allow the external surfaces of walls on high rises to be ‘Class 0’ rated materials and insulation to be ‘limited combustibility’. Alternatively, combustible materials can be used if they pass a fire safety test. Today the government proposed amending legislation to implement a total ban on combustible materials in the walls of high rises in all buildings over 18m. Full story here: https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/government-proposes-changing-legislation-to-enforce-combustibles-ban-for-high-rises-56822

Hello all, hope this is the right place. I thought it would fit with the expertise of the sub-group. Looking at a property for cash purchase: https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/100919183#/ As it happens, I was looking at another property in the area with a very similar design. I managed to obtain some of the information for that property. There was one concerning material: Single Ply Mechanically Fixed FR/ALU. https://www.xtratherm.com/products/fr-alu/ "Xtratherm FR/ALU is a high performance Polyisocyanurate flat roof insulation with vapour-tight aluminium foil facings suitable for use with single ply membranes. FR/ALU is part of the comprehensive range of Xtratherm’s high performance flat roof boards providing total solutions for flat roof projects." The walls seem to be covered in two materials: The grey sheet metal is "Euroclad Vieo Roof Systems" material https://www.euroclad.com/roofs/vieo-roof-profile/ The brick material is "Wienerberger Caldera Red multi facing", I am assuming some kind of plastic https://www.jewson.co.uk/p/wienerberger-caldera-red-multi-65mm-BRICK535 From the look of the building shared above, assuming the materials are similar, what is the level of concern with regards to cladding fire risk and the likelihood that remedial works will be necessary? Is it possible that the walls contain the Xtratherm material? Or some other concerning material other than concrete? If remedial work would be necessary, any idea of rough costs? Thank you so much. Jan

Hi all, A big topic for you today - if dangerous cladding is found on a block of apartments, who pays to fix it? One of the properties I own is a flat in a block with 100+ leaseholders. I can't divulge too much information because it is an ongoing legal case, however we are currently pursuing several avenues of legal proceedings in order to determine whose responsibility it is to pay for the potential 7 figure cost of replacing all of the cladding on the building. Will it be the leaseholders, who are supposed to be responsible for maintenance and repair of the building, or the landlord who owns the building and is responsible for remedial action? Of course, when the building was completed less than 10 years ago, everything was approved to building standards at the time. It is because of the recent tragedy at Grenfell that everyone is suddenly realising that the standards are not good enough now. To be clear, nobody is disputing that the cladding needs to be replaced. At the moment, the leaseholders are paying six figure sums for 24 hour fire marshalls to guard the building so that it can stay operational for tenants. We are also being coerced into paying increased service charges (2-3x the normal amount) to pay for other remedial fire safety actions even though it hasn't yet been determined who is responsible. Although I can just about afford it with the rent (I am now essentially making £0 on that property) for some owner-occupiers or smaller portfolio leaseholders this increased service charge and potential astronomical charge to eventually do the cladding itself is going to wipe them out. As a leaseholder, I have a biased opinion but surely it shouldn't be us leaseholders, who each paid six figure sums to buy a product in good faith, who pays to fix something that isn't actually fit for purpose?? Please let me know your thoughts, I would be grateful for any advice.

Please help: Cladding prisoner looking for cost effective way to move house! Background: Currently I own a flat (Leasehold) in East London and live there with my partner and our 8month old son. It was purchased off plan in 2015 and we have lived in it since construction was completed. Last year we tried to do an equity release on the flat to fund an onward purchase and were told by the lender they couldn’t do this without an EWS1 form. We lobbied our Freeholder (Peabody) and 8 months later the block recently had a Fire Safety inspection for an EWS1 Form and received a B2 rating, meaning that remediation is required to make it EWS1 ‘compliant’. Whilst remediation work remains outstanding, no lenders will lend against the building. This means leaseholders are unable to sell their properties to prospective buyers who require a mortgage to complete a purchase essentially rendering Leaseholders mortgage prisoners. If we are to believe reports in the press, these issues will take years to remediate (5+ years), meaning we are unable to sell our homes until they are remediated. The building is not ACM clad, and the scale of the remediation work that will be required is unclear since the Freeholder (Peabody) is withholding the Fire Safety Report accompanying the EWS1. The Freeholders justification for withholding the report is that it is subject to ‘legal privilege’ as they are pursuing the Developer (Bellway) for the costs of remediation on the grounds of a ‘design defect’. This is a contentious issue, as leaseholders believe the report is not subject to Legal Privilege. Currently, Leaseholders have no visibility on how safe their flats are to live in nor any visibility of potential costs of remediation that may ultimately passed on to them by the Freeholders. Reports in the press state these could be as high as £75K per leaseholder (source p64: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/901877/Draft_Building_Safety_Bill_Impact_Assessment_web.pdf Upon receipt of the failed EWS1 a ‘waking watch’ was installed in the building, costing £8k/per week. At this stage it remains unclear whether the Freeholder or Leaseholder will cover the cost of the waking watch. There are 58 flats in the block so the implications are severe. Proposed solution & questions We are a young family and are looking at the most effective way to move house working around the current constraint where we are unlikely to be able to sell our flat for years. Since we currently own the leasehold on the flat, if we try to purchase a further property we would be subject to the second rate stamp duty. Given it could take years (potentially 5+ years) lenders will lend against the flat and we would be able to sell it, there is a risk that if we were make an onward purchase we would not be able to reclaim the excess stamp duty on our second purchase. This would mean that we’d be paying this second home stamp as well as being on the hook for remediation costs for the building. There is also the additional risk that Rishi Sunak introduces CGT on property next year, so any remaining capital gain on the flat would be eroded. One option we are considering is selling the East London flat we own to a SPV Limited Company so that we are not subject to 2nd home stamp duty on our onward purchase. We would look to sell the Flat to the company at a value reflective of the fact the present value of the flat is far below the value of a comparable flat with a fire certificate. We understand the company would pay 3% Stamp Duty on the purchase on amounts <£500k in value. Other questions: Ø Would selling the leasehold to the SPV Limited company (owned by me), enable me to pursue an onward purchase with my partner without being subject to 2nd home stamp duty? Ø Does anyone know any other costs associated with running the SPV Limited Company? E.g. annual charges that we would be subject to that we might not be subject to if the property was privately held. Ø Are there any cost considerations we should take into account? Grateful for anyone that can provide any help guidance here. Would also be interested in speaking to anyone else in a similar position, ie trapped in home due to cladding legislation. Thanks in advance