Written evidence submitted by Mr Edward Cassels [BSB 036]
Response to Call for Evidence on Building Safety Bill
I live in a building with wooden balconies and cladding, and a render that’s been deemed non-compliant with regulations by a fire engineer and surveyor.
After repeated public, parliamentary and documented assurances from government that leaseholder should not have to pay the costs for remediating their buildings if these fail fire safety checks, I was extremely alarmed to read the draft Building Safety Bill.
The introduction of a Building Safety Charge mechanism which routes these costs directly to leaseholders, as well as an impact assessment stating that costs may reach £78,000 per leaseholder, entirely cuts across the principle that the government has previously espoused, and it’s really disappointing to see legislation that is so clearly injurious to the interests of normal people, who have done their best (like me) to get on the housing ladder, and now find themselves potentially landed with entirely unaffordable bills. If my building’s management presented me with a Building Safety Charge for my share of the costs of remediating the building (which are estimated to be c.£40k per leaseholder), I will be unable to pay it. My lease could be revoked under its terms and my flat repossessed.
I cannot overstate how much the Building Safety Charge is concerning me – this could ruin my life. Please don’t allow developers and building managers to simply pass on the entirety of the costs of remediating a building to safe standards.
Please remove the Building Safety Charge, and ask freeholders or management companies to pay rather than leaseholders. If the Building Safety Charge must be used, then please ensure that the capping of same, as contemplated in the draft Bill, is set at an affordable level – a one off payment not exceeding £1000 for example.
Thanks for reading my submission.