Developers in England will be forced to pay to repair surfacing under new laws | Lodging

Ministers gave more details on how the government intends to ensure that developers and manufacturers in England’s housing sector meet the costs of replacing hazardous surfacing in a bid to protect tenants.

The Department of Upgrading, Housing and Communities said that under the plans, developers and manufacturers could effectively be locked out of the housing market if they do not help address security issues. coatings.

He said the changes would enshrine in law a commitment to protect tenants living in mid-rise and high-rise buildings from being paid for the removal of unsafe flooring.

The government has said that if the changes become law, it will significantly reduce the bills sent to tenants for the removal of cladding, which in some cases have exceeded £100,000.

Outlining the plans on Monday, the government said it would go further to protect leaseholders by limiting the amount they can be asked to pay for non-coating costs, such as charges for “wake-up watches to patrol sites – with some property owners and developers. expected to pay the bill.

The proposed changes, which will be introduced through amendments to the Building Safety Bill currently before parliament, would also allow building owners and landlords to take legal action against manufacturers who used faulty products on a house that had since been deemed unfit for habitation, the government said, adding that the power would go back 30 years and allow for recovery where costs have already been paid.

To ensure manufacturers found guilty of misconduct are also held accountable for fixing the problems they cause, the government has said cost contribution orders could be placed on manufacturers who have been successfully prosecuted under the building product regulations, requiring them to contribute financially to buildings in need of rehabilitation.

The government has said proposed changes to the bill would also allow it to apply a proposed building safety charge – paid for by developers seeking building control approval for high-risk residential buildings in England – to more of developments.

Ministers hope they won’t have to use powers and want responsible developers and manufacturers to operate freely.

Courts would also be given new powers to prevent developers from using shell companies that make it difficult to trace or identify who they are running and thus avoid liability, the government has said.

Discussions with industry leaders on the issue of hazardous coatings are ongoing, the government said, but added that progress was being made.

Upgrading Secretary Michael Gove said: ‘It’s time to end this scandal, protect tenants and see the industry work together to find a solution.

“These measures will prevent building owners from passing on any costs to tenants and ensure that any repairs are proportionate and necessary for their safety. The whole industry needs to play a part instead of continuing to profit while hard working families struggle.

“We cannot allow those who do not take building safety seriously to build homes in the future, and for those who do not want to play their part, they must face the consequences.”

As part of plans to reduce non-cladding costs for tenants, the government said developers who still owned a building over 11 meters that they had built or renovated – or landlords tied to a developer original – would be required to pay in full to repair the historic building. security issues at their property. Building owners who were unrelated to the developer but could afford to pay in full could also be required to provide the money, the government said.

A cap on tenant costs would then be in place for what the government has described as the small number of cases where building owners do not have the resources to pay.

He said the cap would be set at levels similar to what is known as Florrie’s Law, which applies to certain social housing repairs – £10,000 for homes outside London and £15,000 for the houses of the capital.

The government said this would limit the amount tenants could be asked to pay for non-coating costs, including standby fees.

All costs paid by tenants over the past five years would be factored into the cap, which would prevent tenants from paying more, the government said, but added that it would consult further before finalizing the details.

Amendments to the bill are due to be debated in the House of Lords next week.

Comments are closed.