Research into post-Grenfell building safety remediation calls for a resident-centred approach

Reports and Proceedings

UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD

• Over five years from the Grenfell building safety scandal, leaseholders in apartment buildings are still living through significant disruption whilst fire safety issues are addressed
• Among leaseholders living in buildings undergoing remediation, the most frequently mentioned problems included noise, the erosion of privacy at home, and the loss of a sense of safety and security
• Communication during works was often challenging, with significant demand from leaseholders for more frequent and detailed information about the work that was being carried out on buildings
• Experts call for a greater involvement of leaseholders in the planning of work, and a focus on promoting a liveable environment during works

Leaseholders in England still living through remediation work to their buildings years after the Grenfell tragedy are not having their views or experiences heard, according to a new report published today [Friday 4 November 2022] from the University of Sheffield.

In the wake of the Grenfell tragedy, in which 72 people lost their lives due to the rapid spread of a fire on 14 June 2017, apartment buildings around the country were found to require the replacement of flammable cladding systems and other fire-safety defects. 

This work often requires buildings to be covered in scaffolding and wrapped in mesh or plastic for many months – or even years – whilst external walls are stripped back and replaced with safer materials. This often takes place whilst people are still living in the building. 

The new study, which interviewed leaseholders about their experiences of living through those building safety remediation works, forms the basis of an online exhibition for the ESRC Festival of Social Science opening on Saturday 5 November and featuring images and stories from those affected.

The research found little evidence that the views, preferences and opinions of leaseholders had been considered in the planning remediation works, with the result that many leaseholders felt that they were not viewed as an important stakeholder in the remediation process, resulting in a range of negative impacts affecting their quality of life and mental wellbeing.

Dr Jenny Preece, from the UK Collaborative Centre for Housing Evidence at the University of Sheffield authored the study, she said: “Earlier this year MPs discussed the conditions in buildings undergoing remediation for fire safety problems, with Tom Hunt MP arguing that he would feel guilty about an animal living in such conditions, never mind a human being. Speaking with leaseholders living through remediation, our research shows clear negative impacts on mental wellbeing.

“The fundamental problem in many cases is that there has been little attention to the experiences of those living through the work, and whose homes and day-to-day lives are affected. Many leaseholders feel that they are not viewed as having an important viewpoint when remediation works are being planned, nor is the experience of those living in homes through building work at the forefront of decision-making for those responsible for these projects.”

In the study, many leaseholders reported significant impacts on their ability to feel at home during on-going works. The most frequently mentioned problems included the noise of the works, the way in which work infringed on privacy at home, and the loss of a sense of safety and security.

“I’m not comfortable at home…When there are builders working, they’re walking around. They like to have a good look in, so there’s…no privacy at all…In the bedrooms the blinds are down constantly, and I worry about my safety.”

(Alana*, female, 35-44, South-East)

Leaseholders also experienced the loss of light from scaffolding and coverings such as plastic wrapping and mesh, restricted ventilation, and the loss of access to outside private and communal space. Many leaseholders reported that contractors working on site seemed unfamiliar with working on occupied buildings, highlighting issues such as people staring into their homes, eating lunch outside their windows, and smoking.

Many leaseholders experienced difficulties in communication with the different individuals and organisations involved in remediation projects. They described negative experiences, such as being unable to get answers to questions about the building work, or being ignored or dismissed as a nuisance.

These experiences added to the feeling that there was a lack of care and attention to the fact that these are people’s homes, and that they are often occupied by people working during the day. Because of the way in which remediation was undertaken, in some cases leaseholders were living in these conditions for years.

“They didn’t need to scaffold the whole building…they rushed to scaffold the whole building and cover it in plastic…People on the lower floors…they’re just sitting there… when what you could have done is scaffold one part, finish that work, move on…Or okay, scaffold it, but don’t cover the whole damn thing in plastic. Work in stages.”

(Priya*, female, 45-54, South-East)

The research findings suggest a number of steps that those responsible for remediation projects, and contractors working on-site, can take to improve the experience of those living through building work:

1.     Involvement and liveability in planning remediation – leaseholders should be recognised as key stakeholders in remediation, with their views, opinions and preferences helping to shape the approach

2.     Consultation and choice – leaseholders should be given meaningful choices relating to the conduct of remediation works and the materials used.

3.     Communication – a communications plan should set out responsibilities and expectations around communication between different parties and leaseholders.

4.     Daily working practices for those working on-site – all individuals working on site should be mindful of working on occupied buildings, making adjustments to working behaviour.

5.     Assurance – quality assurance mechanisms should be built into remediation projects, with outcomes communicated to leaseholders.

One of the key reasons that leaseholders gave for taking part in the research was their desire to help improve conditions for others who would be going through remediation work in the future.

As there are many buildings in which work is yet to start, there is a real  opportunity to take some simple steps to reduce the negative impacts for people who are living through these major programmes of work.

Dr Preece said: “Promoting a liveable environment and mitigating negative impacts of works on leaseholders should be a top priority. This includes more frequent and detailed information about what work is taking place, to help people to anticipate disruption and minimise the negative impact; for example by rescheduling some work activities, or leaving the home at particular hours.

“Many contractors may also be more familiar with working on empty buildings during construction or refurbishment. So contractors working on-site should be briefed about the building safety context, and the measures that can be taken to minimise disruption for those living through works. Small changes like eating and chatting away from homes, being mindful of language, minimising noise, respecting privacy and tidying up each day can make a real difference for people, showing that you have thought about the experience for those at home.

“As people are often living in buildings through some or all of the remediation works, we need to start thinking about how to maximise and promote liveability as part of these projects. In many cases, leaseholders are living through months of disruption, which can really wear people down. Those responsible for remediation need to recognise that leaseholders should have a voice in the decisions that affect their homes. This means involving them in the planning of remediation work, and taking account of their views when making key decisions.”

Read the full report and recommendations here: https://housingevidence.ac.uk/publications/learning-from-experiences-of-remediation-in-the-building-safety-crisis 

ENDS

Media contact: Rebecca Ferguson, Media Relations Officer, 0114 222 3670, r.l.ferguson@sheffield.ac.uk

Notes to editor:

• * All names are pseudonyms to protect the anonymity of participants.
• The work was funded by the Crook Public Service Fellowship at the University of Sheffield, and the UK Collaborative Centre for Housing Evidence.

The University of Sheffield

With almost 29,000 of the brightest students from over 140 countries, learning alongside over 1,200 of the best academics from across the globe, the University of Sheffield is one of the world’s leading universities.

A member of the UK’s prestigious Russell Group of leading research-led institutions, Sheffield offers world-class teaching and research excellence across a wide range of disciplines.

Unified by the power of discovery and understanding, staff and students at the university are committed to finding new ways to transform the world we live in and develop solutions to society’s biggest challenges.

Sheffield researchers use their expertise to tackle some of the biggest issues of our time together with partners ranging from SMEs to some of the world’s biggest companies, from across the South Yorkshire region, the UK and beyond.

The University of Sheffield provides an outstanding student experience for its students, with the number one Students’ Union in the UK and both undergraduate and postgraduate degrees that help its students stand out in the jobs market and develop successful careers after graduation, wherever they choose to live and work.

Sheffield has six Nobel Prize winners among former staff and students and its alumni go on to hold positions of great responsibility and influence all over the world, making significant contributions in their chosen fields.

Global research partners and clients include Boeing, Rolls-Royce, Unilever, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Siemens and Airbus, as well as many UK and overseas government agencies and charitable foundations.

The UK Collaborative Centre for Housing Evidence

The UK Collaborative Centre for Housing Evidence (CaCHE) is a multidisciplinary partnership between academia, housing policy and practice, funded by the Economic and Social Research Council, Arts and Humanities Research Council, and Joseph Rowntree Foundation. 

UK government asks Mercedes to reconsider Grenfell supplier sponsorship

Jonathan Noble 

Ahead of the Saudi Arabian Grand Prix, Mercedes announced a new deal with international firm Kingspan, whose logos now appear on the nose section of the W12 car.

© Sam Bloxham / Motorsport Images Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes W12

But with Kingspan’s involvement in the 2017 Grenfell Tower disaster which claimed the lives of 72 people still under scrutiny, amid an ongoing public enquiry into its K15 insulation that was among the products installed on the side of the building, there has been a backlash from those affected by the tragedy.

Pressure group Grenfell United, made up of survivors and bereaved families, wrote to Mercedes boss Toto Wolff urging him to reconsider the deal.

Wolff wrote back to them and said that, while remaining committed to the Kingspan sponsorship, he was prepared to meet those affected by the tragedy to understand more.

Now Michael Gove MP, who is Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, has also stepped in and urged Mercedes and Wolff to think again.

In a letter to Wolff, published on Twitter, Gove made it clear how disappointed he was with Mercedes’ decision to go ahead with the deal.

“The Grenfell bereaved, survivors and wider community have been failed in the past by both the state and the private sector,” he wrote.

“They are right to feel deeply hurt and aggrieved by your decision to sign this sponsorship deal whilst the public inquiry continues.”

Gove also warned that the Kingspan situation could be enough to prompt the UK government to change the jurisdiction it has over advertising and sponsorship in sport.

While current limitations mainly involve products related to tobacco, alcohol and gambling, Gove said he could not rule out the government stepping in to prevent deals like the Mercedes/Kingspan one being allowed.

“As Secretary of State, the planning controls for outdoor advertising spaces in England are a statutory responsibility that falls to me,” he wrote.

“Currently, broadly speaking, adverts displayed on enclosed land, such as within sports stadia, or those displayed on vehicles, are excluded from direct control of the relevant authorities.

“My cabinet colleagues and I will keep this system under constant and close review to ensure that the advertising regime remains fit for purpose and reflects the public interest.

“I am conscious that there are very real questions about whether Parliament would support a statutory regime that enabled a core participant in a public enquiry in to how 72 people lost their lives to advertise its products publicly to millions of families across the country.

“The achievements of Mercedes and Sir Lewis Hamilton in recent years represent a British success story of which we are all proud. I hope you will reconsider this commercial partnership, which threatens to undermine all the good work the company and the sport have done.”

Gove said that he also sent a copy of the letter to F1 CEO Stefano Domenicali and Nadine Dorries MP, Secretary of Sporting for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.

UK
Developers 'must foot £4bn cladding bill or face exclusion from government schemes'

Harry Yorke
Sun, January 9, 2022

Government proposals come more than four years after the Grenfell Tower fire which killed 72 people - TOLGA AKMEN

Michael Gove will tell developers they must cover £4 billion worth of new cladding costs or face being excluded from Government-backed property schemes.

The threat will include blocking firms from the Help to Buy scheme for first-time buyers, with ministers also understood to be looking at a new levy on profits.

The Levelling Up Secretary will issue the ultimatum to the sector at a crunch meeting in the coming weeks, having decided to offer greater protection to flat owners who need to remove dangerous cladding from their buildings in the wake of the Grenfell Tower fire.


In a statement in Parliament on Sunday, Mr Gove will also confirm that he is shelving plans for a loan scheme which would have forced leaseholders in flats between 11 and 18 metres tall to shoulder the costs themselves.

Michael Gove, the Levelling Up Secretary, will tell developers they must foot a £4 billion bill for new cladding - Leon Neal

Instead, the costs of the major remedial works on thousands of flats across the country will be met by developers and firms responsible for the scandal.

The Government estimates the funds required to do so will total £4 billion, on top of the £5 billion already provided in grants to strip unsafe cladding from buildings over 18 metres tall.

A Whitehall source confirmed on Sunday that Mr Gove would tell developers that they will initially be given the opportunity to propose their own solutions for meeting the additional costs.

However, should they fail to do so, he will warn that the Government will be forced to legislate to raise the funds, either through new levies or taxes on the industry.

Alongside this, officials pointed out that they had a range of “tools” available to force concessions from the developers, including the ability to freeze them out of Government-backed property and finance schemes.

This includes the Help to Buy scheme, which provides first-time buyers with the opportunity to secure a 20 per cent low-interest equity loan - rising to 40 per cent in London - meaning they only need a five per cent deposit.

The Government has already announced that developer Rydon Homes will be excluded from the scheme due to its sister company being the lead contractor of the Grenfell Tower refurbishment.

Workmen remove the cladding from a building in Paddington, north London - Aaron Chown /PA

Making clear that others could soon join the developer, an ally of Mr Gove told The Telegraph: “We don’t claim to have all the answers to this crisis yet but this is an important step. We will be guided by three principles - the polluter must pay, leaseholders must be protected and common sense and proportionality must be restored.

“Developers now have the chance to come forward and do the right thing. If not, we will impose a solution in law.”

The proposals to alleviate the scandal that has trapped leaseholders in unsafe and unsellable homes come more than four years after the Grenfell Tower fire in June 2017, in which 72 people were killed.

According to a draft of Mr Gove's Commons statement, he will warn developers: "I am putting them on notice. If you mis-sold dangerous products like cladding or insulation, if you cut corners to save cash as you developed or refurbished homes, we are coming for you."

While the move is likely to trigger a backlash from the industry, officials have pointed out that Britain’s biggest developers have amassed huge profits since the blaze.

Whitehall sources highlighted that the chief executives of the country’s four biggest building companies have received at least £50 million in pay, bonuses, shares and dividends since 2017.

Meanwhile, Barratt, Persimmon, Taylor Wimpey, Berkeley, Bellway, Redrow and Vistry have made £16 billion in profits over three years.

UK

FCA changes rules for insurers of leasehold buildings after Grenfell

August Graham, PA Business Reporter
Fri, 29 September 2023 



Insurers will be forced to act in the best interests of people who own flats in apartment blocks and other leaseholders under new rules from the City watchdog.

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) said that from the start of the new year, insurance firms will have to treat leaseholders as customers when designing products.

They will also be banned from recommending insurance policies based on the level of commission or remuneration they can get.


It comes after a letter from the watchdog in January 2022 which told companies to take leaseholders into consideration, and said that it had seen significant shortcoming from some brokers.

Typical commissions ranged from 30% to 49%, the FCA said, with some as high as 62%.

Later that year a report from the FCA found that insurance premiums had risen significantly for leasehold buildings after the Grenfell fire, which left 72 people dead. The rises were particularly large for high and mid-rise buildings.

The new rules mean that insurers will have to make sure they are providing fair value to leaseholders and give them important information and their policy and its pricing. This should include the details of any commission paid, the FCA said.

“Insurance firms must now act in leaseholders’ best interests and ensure that their policies provide fair value,” said Sheldon Mills, executive director of consumers and competition.

“Our reforms will help to strengthen the insurance market by providing new protections for leaseholders. We will not hesitate to take action if firms breach these rules.”

The FCA has previously said that there are many issues highlighted by the Grenfell fire which are outside its remit.

It cannot take into account issues driven by construction issues or involving companies it does not regulate.

'This building has no sprinklers': Grenfell United's 12-storey high guerrilla messages
Group beamed huge projections on high-rises to highlight fire safety crisis

“This is not something we should have to fight for,” said Hannah Reid, 24, a dental nurse on the estate. “We are afraid the same thing [as #Grenfell] could happen to us. The demands of the people of Grenfell were ignored and the same thing is happening to us. Not just us but all across the country.”

More focus needed on climate and social impact of dull buildings – top designer

Thomas Heatherwick said the public need to demand better from designers and the wider building industry (Ian West/PA)

By Rebecca Speare-Cole, PA Sustainability Reporter

Yesterday at 12:55

The world-renowned designer behind London’s new buses and the 2012 Olympic cauldron has called for a national conversation to confront the public health and climate issues caused by boring buildings.

Thomas Heatherwick, founder of the award-winning British design firm Heatherwick Studio, said the public need to demand better from designers and the wider building industry for change to happen.

It comes as he launches a 10-year global campaign to tackle the growing number of buildings that lack visual complexity, which coincides with the publication of his book Humanise.

Mr Heatherwick warned that the UK is demolishing more than 50,000 buildings a year while many buildings around the world are being pulled down within years of construction.

They're knocking down the buildings that society doesn't care about and nobody loves

Thomas Heatherwick

Speaking to the PA news agency, the designer said: “What do you think they knocked down?

“In general, they’re knocking down the buildings that society doesn’t care about and nobody loves, instead of adjusting and repairing and extending and adapting.

“There’s this sense of: ‘There’s a climate crisis. There’s an inequality crisis. There’s a health crisis. There’s a housing crisis – all these crises’ yet this is a problem for later.

“But in reality, it’s a problem for immediately now.”

Mr Heatherwick said the public needs to “fearlessly demand interestingness” to help put these issues higher on the agenda.

“Who are the people who are going to say: ‘Don’t knock something down?’” he said.

“It isn’t the designers. It isn’t really even the planners and it isn’t the property developers. Actually it’s us – the public. The public are the defenders.”

The designer added that global discourse around decarbonising the built environment, which accounts for 39% of annual emissions, pales in comparison to those around the aviation sector, which accounts for around 2%.

Thomas Heatherwick designed the new London buses (Dominic Lipinski/PA)

Mr Heatherwick is also calling for the social impact of boring buildings to be recognised.

A recent Think Insights poll of more than 2,000 British adults found that 76% of the UK public said boring buildings impact their mental health and that 67% feel powerless to get involved in how those in their area look.

Meanwhile, recent studies by those such as Canadian neuroscientist Colin Ellard suggest that buildings with a lack of visual complexity can spike cortisol levels and increase loneliness.

Mr Heatherwick also spoke about Grenfell Tower as an example of the poorest in society living in the worst buildings and research finding how rows of tower block buildings in Syria physically separated faiths, potentially contributing to divisions that led to conflict.

On why there are so many boring buildings, he argued that designers have been stuck under the influence of the post-Second World War fascination with mind over emotion as well as the Swiss-French architect Le Corbusier, who advocated for extreme functionality.

Mr Heatherwick said Grenfell Tower is an example of how the poorest in society live in the worst buildings (Victoria Jones/PA)

Mr Heatherwick also believes the industry has become an “echo chamber” that is “utterly disconnected” from the opinions of the wider public and is therefore failing to engage or bring joy to the millions of people who might walk past their buildings.

“What is now clear is that emotion is a function,” he said.

“When you are building the backdrop to public life, in effect your job is to some extent a public service and you need to make buildings that give something to public life.”

He said it is the current design mindset “coupled with chasing short-term profit” that has led to the current global landscape of unsustainable boring buildings.

Asked about higher costs associated with good design, Mr Heatherwick said: “Buildings are cheaper than they’ve ever been in history.

“While we do have immense challenges, we need to get perspective and look at the longer term and look at real value.”

He added that the industry openly acknowledges that there is a “green premium” where making a really sustainable, environmentally high building that strives to be net zero will cost a little bit more.

“But boardrooms, the investors, the companies who are going to use those office buildings or create them, they know that the investors, the big pension funds and the kinds of people who fund buildings – there is really now a moral compass,” Mr Heatherwick said.

The Olympic Flame at the Olympic Stadium in 2012, which was designed by Thomas Heatherwick (Adam Davy/PA)

“We’re still missing an ingredient though, which is the human premium.

“I think there’s a chance as mental health is starting to be discussed in different aspects of the world around us for it to be understood that there is not a disconnection between mental health and sustainability.

“They go together. Without things nourishing our mind, the environmental impact will be that we destroy things.”

Asked if he could face pushback against the campaign, Mr Heatherwick said he expects it from within the industry as he is taking “one of the most controversial approaches”.

“This is challenging the current way that teaching is done and practice is run,” he said.