APPG leasehold chairs call on Lords to support McPartland-Smith amendment tomorrow

The chairs of the All Party Parliamentary Group on leasehold and commonhold reform are calling on Lords to support the McPartland-Smith amendment to the Fire Safety Bill to be debate tomorrow.

The chairs write: “The Bill in its present form places the costs burden for building safety remediation solely on residential leaseholders. Those liable for the safety defects should put right that which is wrong.

“The amendments would prevent the freeholder/landlord from passing the cost of fire safety works onto leaseholders.

Sir Peter Bottomley, Father of the House, additionally writes:

“The Fire Safety Bill in its present form places an automatic, unchallengeable financial burden on residential leaseholders for building safety remediation costs, even in circumstances where a Lease may have excluded the obligation.

“The proposed amendments to the Bill are intended to protect leaseholders from being solely responsible for these costs. The Bill strengthens landlord/freeholder’s legal right over leaseholders. The amendments provide for more balanced liability for costs. The amendments should be supported. The alternative wrongly and disproportionally disadvantages innocent leaseholders. Many are unable to pay and are frightened.”

Florence Eshamlomi, the Labour MP for Vauxhall who called last week’s Westminster Hall debate, adds: “These are leaseholders who bought their homes in good faith, and who now find themselves saddled with a crippling financial liability for problems they had absolutely no part in causing, and living with the stress of knowing that their home is not safe.

“Current Government support is welcome, but it is partial and unfair. Despite repeated
reassurances that no leaseholders will have to foot the bill, their actions to date do not bear
this out in practice.”

Full briefing document from the Bishop of St Albans, who is moving the amendments are here:

Fire Safety Bill: House of Lords Ping Pong Briefing

The Fire Safety Bill Ping Pong stage will occur in the House of Lords on Wednesday the 17th
March 2021 after question time (approx. 13:30)

Lords amendment 4B, 4C, 4D, 4E – Prohibition on passing remediation costs
on to leaseholders and tenants

The full amendment can be found here https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/58-01/173/5801173(a).pdf

Background
Lords amendments 4B, 4C, 4D, and 4E would prevent freeholders from passing on the costs of exterior fire safety work on to leaseholders. This has been tabled by the Lord Bishop of St Albans after the House of Commons disagreed with the Lords Amendment 4, proposed by Baroness Pinnock, which also sought to prevent remediation costs from being passed onto leaseholders.

These amendments known as the McPartland-Smith amendment, were originally tabled by Stephen McPartland MP and Royston Smith MP in the House of Commons, and commanded signatories from across all parties. The Government however prevented a vote on these amendments hence why they have been re-tabled in the House of Lords.

What does the Fire Safety Bill do?

The current Law on fire safety regarding common parts of flat blocks is found in the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. Presently, the Order 2005 does not apply to external walls and cladding on blocks of flats and there is considerable ambiguity around whether it applies to the front doors of flats if those flats are demised to the leaseholder under the terms of the lease. The Fire Safety Bill amends the 2005 Order so that it will apply
to external building walls and the front doors of individual flats.

How the legislation solves and creates the problem

The legislation will deal with the problem of dangerous cladding by creating a quick and easy mechanism to force freeholders to remove dangerous cladding and to replace the front doors of individual flats. Whilst this is undoubtably a good thing, the legislation adversely affects leaseholders.

A consequence of the Fire Safety Bill will be that leaseholders are forced to pay for remedial cladding work, or other fire safety build defects like inadequate fire breaks. Once this bill comes into force, the fire service will be able to serve a notice on the freeholder requiring the cladding to be removed or fire safety defects remedied. The freeholder will comply and inform leaseholders of the costs incurred and require leaseholders to reimburse all of thesecosts. Depending on the terms of the lease and the costs involved, this could easily be a requirement for a leaseholder to pay £50,000 within weeks.

On top of these costs, leaseholders are already being saddled with the cost of interim fire safety measures until the buildings are deemed safe. Government figures show the average monthly costs of waking watch in England is estimated at £17,897 per building and £331 per dwelling, rising to £20,443 and £499 respectively in London. New alarm systems are not cheap either with cost estimates ranging from £50,000 to £150,000 depending on the size of
the block.

Given the mounting present and future costs, bankruptcy is a real possibility for many leaseholders.

How does the amendment solve this problem?

The amendments tabled by the Lord Bishop of St Albans would prevent the freeholder from passing on the costs of remedial fire safety works onto leaseholders, thereby solving the problem created by the Fire Safety Bill.
Unfortunately, this does not extend to the interim fire safety costs currently being incurred by leaseholders. However, by preventing remedial costs from being passed on to leaseholders, a significant portion of the financial burden being placed on leaseholders should be eased.

Supporting this amendment

The Government is right to solve the fire safety defects that lay at the heart of the Grenfell tragedy, but they are wrong to force leaseholders to pay. Leaseholders purchased apartments in good faith under the assumption they were safe. They are the innocent party and should not be forced to pay for the remediation costs of defects that were deemed safe when they purchased their apartment.

Those responsible should be the ones that pay. Only the government can provide the capital upfront to pay for these works, and only the government can introduce the levies on those responsible to claw back that money over the next ten years.

An injustice is currently been done to leaseholders, and a fair resolution is needed.

The Fire Safety Bill Ping Pong stage will occur in the House of Lords on Wednesday the 17 th
March 2021 after question time (approx. 13:30)

Read messages from our supporters in the House of Commons on the following page:

‘Our thoughts and prayers continue to be with the families, friends and loved ones of those lost in the tragic Grenfell Tower fire disaster. Much reflection and change has taken place still, there is much to do.

“The Fire Safety Bill in its present form places an automatic, unchallengeable financial burden on residential leaseholders for building safety remediation costs, even in circumstances where a Lease may have excluded the obligation. The proposed amendments to the Bill are intended to protect leaseholders from being solely responsible for these costs. The Bill strengthens landlord/freeholder’s legal right over leaseholders. The amendments provide for more balanced liability for costs.
“The amendments should be supported. The alternative wrongly and disproportionally disadvantages innocent leaseholders. Many are unable to pay and are frightened’.

Sir Peter Bottomley
Father of the House
Member of Parliament for Worthing West, Conservative Party

‘As we approach the four year anniversary of the horrific Grenfell Tower fire, it is shameful that thousands of leaseholders are still living in unsafe buildings blighted by fire safety defects. These are leaseholders who bought their homes in good faith, and who now find themselves saddled with a crippling financial liability for problems they had absolutely no part in causing, and living with the stress of knowing that their home is not safe. Current Government support is welcome, but it is partial and unfair. Despite repeated reassurances that no leaseholders will have to foot the bill, their actions to date do not bear this out in practice.

“If the Government will not fix this injustice for all leaseholders then we must use our collective voice to compel the Government to act fairly and with urgency. The McPartland-Smith amendment would protect leaseholders from extortionate remediation costs in law, and focus minds on efforts to compel the building industry to take responsibility for the consequences of their historic negligence.

“I urge all Parliamentary colleagues to support this vital amendment to the Fire Safety Bill, and help to end this living nightmare for our constituent leaseholders across the country’.

Florence Eshalomi
Member of Parliament for Vauxhall, Labour Party

Brief prepared by the Office of the Lord Bishop of St Albans, Rt Revd Dr Alan Smith