Property expert John Howard explores the need for greater collaboration between freeholders, developers and the Government to reduce obstacles in tackling the cladding crisis
When Grenfell Tower residents fell victim to one of the UK’s greatest development tragedies seven years ago and exposed the cladding crisis, the government rightly vowed to take measures to protect other high-rise dwellings from the same fate.
Indeed, by 2029, Labour hopes to have replaced all dangerous cladding on multi-storey residential buildings completely. The question is whether existing measures are enough to meet this ambitious target.
The cladding crisis poses a towering challenge
Official government estimates suggest that between 4000 and 5000 buildings in England are still wrapped in unsafe cladding. This is an enormous figure considering the expertise and number of remedial hours of work required to rectify each one, already putting strain on Labour’s 2029 target.
Nevertheless, actual figures of buildings in need of remedial action could be much higher, with the National Audit Office (NAO) revealing that 60% of UK buildings with unsafe cladding are still to be identified and reported. This puts the 2029 target into perspective, highlighting the need for improved implementation and much more rapid action if both the government and developers are to prevent goals from being missed.
Slow progress
Whilst the government has introduced several key solutions to address UK cladding, the country still seems to be suffering when it comes to scheme uptake. Take for example the Building Safety Fund (BSF) introduced to fix the cladding on properties more than 18 metres high, which has had just 809 successful assistance applications since November 2024 – or the Cladding Safety Scheme (CSS) launched in 2023 for buildings measuring between 11 and 18 metres tall, which has seen just 124 transfers since the same date.
It’s not that funding for improved cladding isn’t available, but that the red tape stands as a significant barrier, preventing developers and freeholders alike from filing applications. Plus, we don’t have enough qualified professionals to process those applications that have been made – not to mention the lack of experts capable of implementing the work – which only means continued delays.
The responsibility of freeholders and developers
More must clearly be done to address this, with the government taking additional measures to ease bureaucracy for both developers and building freeholders. Smaller developers in particular need further support, with the costs of updating buildings by the 2019 weighing heavily on those struggling to turn enough profit. Beyond costs, these developers also lack the time needed to handle high stacks of paperwork, which is why a much simpler application process is required.
Then, there’s the hesitation generated by the fact that most developers who previously installed sub-par cladding are yet to face any real consequences for their actions. Only a handful of building owners have successfully received compensation, making it less likely for others to follow suit and take remedial action.
The process has simply become too costly, time consuming and legally fraught.
The need for greater collaboration
With the clock ticking, it’s not enough for the government to simply allocate funds. It must streamline the process to ensure that work can commence without delay, doing all it can to encourage collaborative participation from all concerned parties. This means introducing measures that prompt developers, freeholders and residents to get involved and work together.
With more funding and better guidelines for accessing this support, we are likely to see much greater uptake in shared responsibility, with freeholders and property developers helping to push change forward by taking immediate action. Of course, clearer communication channels between stakeholders will be required to support this, alongside broader, industry-level action. The pooling of resources and the sharing of best practices is the only way we can achieve timely, mutually beneficial change.
Naturally, we will also need to bolster the availability of much-needed professionals – be it cladding contractors or safety inspectors – in order to even begin to approach full 2029 remediation. Without this expertise, it will be impossible for the country to identify all its ill-clad buildings on time, let alone fix them.
A worthy yet challenging target
Undoubtedly ambitious, it may be necessary for the government to extend its original deadline, even with more remedial action. Nonetheless, this is far preferable to the alternative of allowing efforts to fall flat, with increased support and participation of all stakeholders – property owners, freeholders and developers alike – serving to maintain momentum on a critical venture that upholds safety as one of the core values of life in our country.
When it comes to building safety, cutting corners is never an option – and we owe it to those who have already suffered to get things right, remedying this fundamental problem as quickly as possible, before moving on to more ambitious housing strategy.
