![\"Homes](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/newsletter_hnp_embed_desktop.png\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
When Nadia Bhamla got a letter from her freeholder telling her that if the fire alarm sounded in her building she must get out as quickly as possible she felt a strong sense of dread.<\/p>\n
Nobody has actually officially confirmed to Nadia what is wrong with the block, in Bow, east London \u2013 and not for want of asking. But the change of policy regarding staying put and waiting for the fire brigade to come and deal with the fire versus evacuating did not sound like good news. \u201cIt has got to be something bad if they are saying that,\u201d said Nadia, 36.<\/p>\n
She bought her one-bedroom flat for \u00a3370,000 in December 2017, six months after the devastating Grenfell Tower fire, which happened eight years ago this week killing 72 people. <\/p>\n
Back then the causes of the blaze were only just being pieced together and the fire safety crisis which has since left tens if not hundreds of thousands of people trapped in potentially unsafe and unsellable homes was only just beginning.<\/p>\n
\u201cInformation came in dribs and drabs,\u201d said Nadia, who works in finance. \u201cBut by the time that Covid hit lenders had stopped lending on our flats and we were all stuck.\u201d<\/p>\n
Nadia\u2019s nine-storey block is classified as a tall building. In 2019 a new fire safety system for tall buildings was launched, the External Wall Safety 1 (EWS1) inspection, which checked how well a building would hold up to a fire. <\/p>\n
Any cladding needs to be fire retardant, and fire breaks should prevent a fire spreading rapidly from home to home.<\/p>\n
Confusion surrounds whether Nadia\u2019s building has yet been tested. She says landlord Peabody, one of the UK\u2019s oldest housing associations, has been \u201cvery coy\u201d about offering residents any information about what its inspections have revealed or whether an EWS1 has even been carried out.<\/p>\n
\u201cThey have never formally given us an inventory of problems, just that in the event of a fire we should evacuate immediately,\u201d said Nadia. <\/p>\n
\u201cWe have just had piecemeal information for four or five years but I think the crux is that Peabody and Vistry (the original developer) are in a legal deadlock about what needs to be done.\u201d<\/p>\n
Vistry declined to comment on the impasse, saying it was a matter for Peabody. The housing association claimed remediation work would need to be carried out on the building before an EWS1 survey was carried out, and pointed out that ten mortgage firms will now lend on such properties. <\/p>\n
\u201cWe share this resident\u2019s frustration about the length of time it is taking to get an EWS1 for their building,\u201d said a spokesman. <\/p>\n
He said Vistry is responsible for carrying out repair works, and footing the bill. \u201cUnfortunately, the process for reaching an agreement with other developers in these circumstances is often complex and can take time.\u201d<\/p>\n
There are, according to City Hall, 1,513 buildings in London and on Government remediation programmes where work has yet to start on site. <\/p>\n
The full number of people trapped in potentially dangerous flats is not known. But, anecdotally at least, Nadia\u2019s account of delay and obfuscation is a common complaint from leaseholders trying to find their way through the fire safety maze.<\/p>\n
A mire of confusion and red tape<\/p>\n
It has certainly been Jan Brasching\u2019s experience. Back in 2016 the 48-year-old bought a 30 per cent share in a \u00a3500,000 flat in Brixton.<\/p>\n
Home ownership should have given him a sense of certainty and security but he and his husband, Edward Williams, 45, have found themselves caught in a mire of confusion and red tape.<\/p>\n
Jan, an IT consultant, and Edward, a data analyst, first realised there could be a problem with their two-bedroom flat when a neighbour tried to sell \u2013 her buyers were refused a mortgage because it lacked an EWS1.<\/p>\n
The residents approached their landlord, housing association L&Q, and were initially told that, because the building is lower than 11 metres tall it was not a priority. Then, when the EWS1 was finally carried out they learned that there was combustible material beneath its timber cladding that would need to be removed and replaced.<\/p>\n
So far Jan and Edward have struggled to find out when this might happen, who will pay for it, and how much it might cost.<\/p>\n
The wait to find out could be long. According to the National Audit Office the current rate of progress in identifying and fixing dangerous buildings is going so slowly that the Government is at risk of missing its own estimated completion date of 2035.<\/p>\n
In the meantime the uncertainty means that the value of Jan and Edward\u2019s home has plunged \u2013 its latest valuation put it at just \u00a3370,000.<\/p>\n
The plus side of this is that the couple could take advantage of the price fall to buy a larger stake in the property. As shared owners they are currently paying more than \u00a3600pcm in rent on the portion of the flat they don\u2019t own. <\/p>\n
\u201cBut then we wonder if we are just digging ourselves into an even deeper hole,\u201d said Jan. \u201cThe cladding will have to be replaced at some point and if it was \u00a35,000 per flat we could just about do it. But what happens if it is \u00a350,000? I don\u2019t think that L&Q is going to pay.\u201d<\/p>\n
David Lewis, executive director, property Services at L&Q, sympathised with residents still caught up in the building safety crisis but said that with 2,000 buildings to check L&Q had to prioritise those considered highest risk \u2013 and although Jan\u2019s building needs work he could not confirm when this work would be carried out. <\/p>\n
\u201cL&Q is also committed to protecting residents from remediation costs wherever possible, and we have applied for government funding to cover the cost of remediating this development,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n
\u2018Hugely, hugely stressful\u2019<\/p>\n
The shifting sands of regulations surrounding building safety requirements \u2013 you need an EWS1 certificate, you don\u2019t need a certificate, you need a certificate for all buildings, no, you only need one for buildings above 11m or 18m, this kind of cladding is safe, no, it is flammable \u2013 has left Matthew Terry marooned in his Stockwell flat.<\/p>\n
Matthew, 31, who works for a tech startup, paid \u00a3370,000 for his one-bedroom flat in 2021. The purchase was straightforward because although mortgage lenders have been requiring EWS1 certificates since 2919, they only needed them for buildings more than 18 metres tall. Matthew\u2019s building fell outside the guidance. <\/p>\n
In April 2021 this was expanded to include buildings over 11 metres tall, and suddenly things changed.<\/p>\n
Matthew only became aware of the change when he decided, at the start of the year, it was time to sell up and move on. He lives with his partner and they want to pool their resources and buy a bigger place.<\/p>\n
Matthew\u2019s landlord is Lambeth Council, and he says it has declined to commission an EWS1. <\/p>\n
\u201cThis means we don\u2019t actually know if there is anything wrong with the property,\u201d he said. \u201cLambeth Council\u2019s position is that the EWS1 is not a legal requirement, it is only there for the purpose of mortgaging a property, and you can sell your flat to someone without a mortgage.\u201d<\/p>\n
There are a handful of banks which will lend on EWS1-free buildings but, unfortunately, the buyers who have made an offer on Matthew\u2019s flat have their mortgage offer with one that does not. He is now waiting to see if they are willing \u2013 and indeed able \u2013 to change lenders. <\/p>\n
In the meantime he is keeping his fingers crossed that the owners who accepted his offer on a larger home in Walthamstow last month will bear with him. \u201cIt is hugely, hugely stressful,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
A spokesman for Lambeth Council said is committed to ensuring tower blocks meet the highest safety standards, and had set up a task torce to identify and deal with cladding issues. <\/p>\n
“There is no legal obligation to undertake an ESW1, nor is one required by Notting Hill Genesis who manage Oval Quarter,” he added. “Owners of flats in buildings without cladding no longer need an EWS1 form to sell or re-mortgage their property.”<\/p>\n
Back in Bow Nadia would also like to sell her flat and move on \u2013 now that she works from home her flat is too small, and costs are high because service charges have doubled since she bought it.<\/p>\n
But she is doubtful anybody will take it off her hands unless she cuts its price to the bone and walk away after eight years with a loss.<\/p>\n
Late last year some banks did start to offer loans on a limited selection of homes with cladding and fire safety issues, and a few of Nadia\u2019s neighbours tried their luck. <\/p>\n
\u201cThe properties that have gone on to be sold have sold at a loss compared to their original price five years ago,\u201d said Nadia. <\/p>\n
\u201cThere are quite a few on sale, but very few selling. Unless I want to take a loss I am stuck. Everyone is definitely quite anxious, we have had a couple of small fires in the last few years and so there is that fear of having to evacuate all the time.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"When Nadia Bhamla got a letter from her freeholder telling her that if the fire alarm sounded in…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":180833,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7757],"tags":[748,74435,393,4884,29898,257,21658,16,15],"class_list":{"0":"post-180832","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-london","8":"tag-britain","9":"tag-cladding","10":"tag-england","11":"tag-great-britain","12":"tag-grenfell-tower","13":"tag-london","14":"tag-london-property-news","15":"tag-uk","16":"tag-united-kingdom"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/114675573325643188","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/180832","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=180832"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/180832\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/180833"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=180832"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=180832"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=180832"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}