Conclusion 3

We are appalled that those living in affected buildings continue to suffer an unacceptable financial and emotional toll. Far too many people continue to feel trapped in unsafe homes, many facing financial uncertainty and many unable to sell their homes and move on with their lives. Residents face ongoing delays to works starting, often due to disputes over which safety risks are considered tolerable, and disruption when work is underway. MHCLG’s promise of a formal dispute resolution process is yet to materialise. The previous Committee recommended greater transparency and communication in 2020, yet information for many residents is still poor. MHCLG asserts that its 2023 Code of Practice for remediation puts residents at the heart of the process, but adherence is not mandatory and there is little evidence it is achieving this. Homes England’s ‘Tell Us’ tool, which enables residents to ask if Homes England is aware of their building, sounds promising but Homes England acknowledges there is more to do to publicise it. It is too early to say whether the resident surveys required for the Cladding Safety Scheme are making a difference. 5 recommendation MHCLG and Homes England should write to the Committee annually, starting alongside its TM response, with an update on how effectively it is putting residents at the heart of its remediation efforts, including: i) the usage and effectiveness of the ‘Tell Us Tool’ to help identify affected buildings; ii) the effectiveness of its dispute resolution process and whether it is using restrictions on developers; iii) how it is measuring and monitoring adherence to the Code of Practice and what action it is taking for any breaches; and iv) the outcomes of resident surveys conducted for the Cladding Safety Scheme.