Uncertain Building Remediation Costs
Persistent uncertainty and lack of updated estimates regarding the costs and scope of remediation for thousands of residential buildings.
Source spread
Where this theme appears
This theme appears across 5 independent accountability sources, so the source mix matters as much as the headline total.
3 PFD reports
114 committee recs
3 NAO recs
19 LGO/SPSO decisions
Browse by source
Source-grouped records are useful for tracing where a concern came from. Large sections show the 50 strongest matches for that source; counts still show the full theme total.
Prevention of Future Deaths reports(3)
Isabella Pritchard
Concerns: The coroner identified a lack of regulation and safety standards for the design, manufacture, and installation of stone fireplaces. This includes insufficient quality standards for heavy components and an absence of building control regulations for installation.
Response (Department for Communities Local Government): • The department worked with external partners to make good practice guidance on fireplace installations more widely available. • The department will ask the Building Regulations Advisory Committee to re-consider … (AI summary)
Responded
John Alliston
Concerns: The coroner notes there is no mandatory requirement for electrical inspections in private rental properties to BS7671, and it is unclear when new legislation will come into force, leaving a risk of further deaths.
Response (Ministry of Housing Communities Local Government): • The Government stated it would introduce a mandatory requirement for landlords in the private rented sector to ensure electrical installations are inspected at least every five years. • The … (AI summary)
Responded
Bernadette Faulkner
Concerns: The coroner raised concerns about the unsafe height and placement of electricity meters, particularly prepayment meters which require frequent access. The report notes a lack of industry standards for meter accessibility and insufficient records from the installing company regarding placement considerations.
Response (Energy Industry): • Energy UK stated it would work with consumer groups to promote existing guidance on meter safety and encourage customers to contact suppliers with concerns. • Energy UK committed to … (AI summary)
Response (Department of Health and Social Care): • Ofgem introduced new rules in November 2023 restricting involuntary prepayment meter installations for certain vulnerable groups. • These new rules require suppliers to make contact attempts and conduct site … (AI summary)
Responded
Select committee recommendations(114)— showing 50 strongest matches
#57 —
Recommendation: The Government should ensure that remediating brownfield sites is not disincentivised by biodiversity net gain requirements. Local planning authorities should be able to moderate biodiversity net gain requirements for sites on their brownfield registers.
Response attribution not verified
#22 —
Recommendation: While leaseholders have been unable to move or remortgage, some have seen their insurances premiums rise significantly. For those in buildings with serious fire safety defects, there are examples of premiums rising by over 400%.69 This is on top of …
Response attribution not verified
#21 —
Recommendation: We made it clear to the Department that professional indemnity insurance has been regularly brought to our attention by the industry and needs sorting as a priority.67 The Department told us that it is working with the Fire Industry Association …
Response attribution not verified
#20 —
Recommendation: In response to our concern that leaseholders are receiving nil valuations, the Department told us that this is an “industry issue” but it is engaging with lenders and involving the Treasury on this.63 UK Finance wrote to us to say …
Response attribution not verified
#19 —
Recommendation: However, the process has not been working as intended. The process can be expensive and lasts for only five years, with costs often passed onto leaseholders.57 The process has been slow; the demand for the work to inspect external walls …
Response attribution not verified
#18 —
Recommendation: Leaseholders in blocks with dangerous cladding have had their properties valued nil, making it impossible for them to sell or remortgage. This issue was raised with us many times in written evidence from across the sector and confidentially from residents.54 …
Response attribution not verified
#17 —
Recommendation: We asked the Department if it knew of any impact to social sector rents as a result of cladding replacement. It told us that it does not collect the information currently, but it has received information from social landlords, and …
Response attribution not verified
#16 —
Recommendation: Additional costs may also arrive through wider fire safety issues discovered during remediation works and need correction. The National Audit Office found that cladding inspection has revealed other significant flaws in construction and fire safety in many 42 Ministry of …
Response attribution not verified
#15 —
Recommendation: Private leaseholders’ emotional strain has been compounded by rising costs passed on to them by their building owners. These costs are often as a result of interim fire safety measures. The Department estimated a common interim measure, waking watches (overnight …
Response attribution not verified
#13 —
Recommendation: The number of residents living in buildings with unsafe cladding is not clear. The Department estimates there are over 20,000 homes in around 240 high-rise buildings yet to be remediated with unsafe cladding similar to that used on the Grenfell …
Response attribution not verified
#10 —
Recommendation: The Department said it was unacceptable that buildings of any height had unsafe cladding, not just high-rise buildings (i.e. those above 18 metres in height). Nevertheless, it said it was not funding the replacement of cladding in buildings below 18 …
Response attribution not verified
#8 —
Recommendation: The Department told us it estimated the costs of replacing this cladding as between £3 billion and £3.5 billion; the new £1 billion fund would therefore be expected to cover up to a third of these costs. It said the …
Response attribution not verified
#1 —
Recommendation: On the basis of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (the Department) about the remediation of dangerous of cladding on high-rise buildings.1
Response attribution not verified
#4 —
Recommendation: The Department has not done enough to address spiralling insurance costs and ‘nil’ mortgage valuations. Private leaseholders in blocks with dangerous cladding have received ‘nil’ valuations for their properties, meaning they have found it impossible to sell or remortgage, while …
Response attribution not verified
#2 —
Recommendation: The Department is not fully funding the replacement of forms of dangerous cladding which are different from that used on Grenfell Tower, nor is it prioritising spending according to greatest risks or need. While the Department has established a new …
Response attribution not verified
#9 —
Recommendation: The Government should abolish the loan scheme. We reiterate our call on the Government to re-establish the principle that leaseholders should not pay anything towards the cost of remediating historical building safety defects. Instead, as we have stated, costs should …
Response attribution not verified
#8 —
Recommendation: It is disappointing that the Government’s proposed loan scheme, whereby leaseholders contribute up to £50 a month to pay for cladding remediation works on buildings between 11m and 18m high, does not satisfy the previously agreed principle that leaseholders should …
Response attribution not verified
#1 —
Recommendation: We are concerned that, despite our previous recommendation on this issue, the Government still lacks data on the full scale and extent of remediation needed for buildings both below and above 18m. In order to know how much it will …
Response attribution not verified
#15 —
Recommendation: As they stand, the Government’s proposals create a bizarre lucky dip in which some leaseholders may see their costs capped at £10,000 (£15,000 in London); some, because they have not yet paid for cladding remediation, may pay nothing at all; …
Response attribution not verified
#11 —
Recommendation: Governments share responsibility for the building safety crisis on account of their regulatory failings. Everyone involved would instantly have more funds to spend on remediation if the Government played its part by removing VAT on building safety activity, which would …
Response attribution not verified
#22 — Home Office failed to adequately assess acquisition risks and costs for Northeye site.
Recommendation: When the Chief Secretary to the Treasury approved the acquisition of the Northeye site on 25 March 2023, he noted that the value-for-money case was marginal and based on assumptions that were highly uncertain.71 The cost of remediating the building …
Response attribution not verified
#14 — Home Office acquired Northeye site with incomplete information and insufficient contamination surveys.
Recommendation: The Home Office assessed the acquisition against the Accounting Officer tests, concluding that the proposal met the tests of regularity, propriety and feasibility, presented in the Accounting Officer Advice. The assessment also found that the use of the site for …
Response attribution not verified
#11 — Home Office failed to fully action Northeye site survey recommendations on contamination and costs.
Recommendation: The Home Office commissioned some surveys but not a complete ‘Red Book’ survey and sought some additional professional advice on the state of the Northeye site before deciding to purchase it. Preliminary surveys of the site warned of potentially high …
Response attribution not verified
#19 — HMPPS extended Dartmoor lease despite radon, requiring further investment for reopening
Recommendation: To help with capacity pressures, HMPPS recently extended its lease for HMP Dartmoor by 25 years, starting in 2023–24, despite the detection of radon gas in 2020. It closed the prison temporarily in July 2024, following the detection of high …
Response attribution not verified
#46 — MHCLG expects Building Safety Levy to have minimal impact on housing supply.
Recommendation: We asked MHCLG about the potential impacts of the Building Safety Levy on housing provision. MHCLG said it had not published any impact assessment or produced specific numbers, but believed the impact would be relatively small. It told us that …
Response attribution not verified
#45 — Building Safety Levy raises concerns about impact on new housing delivery and smaller developers.
Recommendation: In its written evidence to us, the Home Builders Federation (HBF), which represents the home building industry, told us of its concerns about the possible impact of the Building Safety Levy on new housing delivery. MHCLG currently expects to raise …
Response attribution not verified
#44 — MHCLG acknowledges remediation spending by social housing providers reduces new home building commitments.
Recommendation: We asked MHCLG about its understanding of the impact that £3.8 billion of self–remediation costs might have on social sector housebuilding, and whether it had undertaken any assessment of how many houses would not be built because money was being …
Response attribution not verified
#43 — Social housing providers diverting funds for cladding remediation impacts new home construction significantly.
Recommendation: The Government has pledged to build 1.5 million homes during this Parliament and expects social housing to be at the heart of the UKs’ housing supply. Against a backdrop of the construction sector reporting workforce shortages (paragraph 20), we asked …
Response attribution not verified
#38 — Taxpayer exposure to building remediation costs could exceed the stated £5.1 billion cap.
Recommendation: HM Treasury has agreed to provide short–term funding that would allow remediation to progress in advance of the Levy recouping funds in later years. Based on MHCLG’s financial planning, the NAO highlighted that total taxpayer exposure could reach a maximum …
Response attribution not verified
#36 — MHCLG's building remediation number estimates remain outdated and highly questionable.
Recommendation: In written evidence, the Home Builders’ Federation (HBF) was very sceptical about the basis of MHCLG’s estimates of building numbers and the lack of any updates. It told us that MHCLG’s estimate of the likely number of buildings in need …
Response attribution not verified
#35 — Published remediation unit costs reflect older standards, not the lower-cost PAS 9980 methodology.
Recommendation: In December 2024, MHCLG published remediation cost information per square metre for high–rise buildings over 18 metres in the Building Safety Fund with a view to helping building owners understand the expected 56 Qq 31, 93, 93, 118; CA&G’s Report …
Response attribution not verified
#33 — Building remediation cost estimates for thousands of buildings remain uncertain without updates.
Recommendation: Almost eight years on from the Grenfell Tower fire, MHCLG’s latest estimate, in February 2024, was that there were between 9,000 and 12,000 residential buildings in England taller than 11 metres that will need remediating. Based on this modelling, MHCLG …
Response attribution not verified
#32 — Insurance premiums will remain high without full property protection alongside life safety.
Recommendation: In written evidence, the ABI called on government to adopt an approach that priorities property protection and building resilience alongside risk to life. It said that without a standard requiring the removal of combustible material in external walls (insulation and …
Response attribution not verified
#31 — Insurance premiums may remain high despite remediation due to PAS 9980 life safety focus.
Recommendation: MHCLG told us that, as well as options for intervening in the market to reduce premiums while buildings are awaiting remediation, it expected the insurance industry to hold to its word in reducing premiums as risk is reduced. It said …
Response attribution not verified
#30 — Risk-pooling arrangements have not effectively reduced extreme building insurance premiums for leaseholders
Recommendation: MHCLG told us that it was bringing forward statutory changes to ban insurance brokers from paying commissions to freeholders and managing agents, and capping what freeholders can charge leaseholders for arranging insurance.51 MHCLG told us that the risk–pooling arrangements it …
Response attribution not verified
#29 — Exorbitant building insurance costs continue to impose severe financial hardship and debt risk
Recommendation: The Home Builders Federation (HBF) raised concerns that insurance companies were seeking to profit from the building safety crisis. The Shared Owners Network similarly wrote that many shared owners were struggling to pay housing-related costs such as insurance. End Our …
Response attribution not verified
#28 — Spiralling insurance costs and 'nil' mortgage valuations for leaseholders remain largely unaddressed
Recommendation: In 2020 the previous Committee concluded that MHCLG had not done enough to address spiralling insurance costs affecting leaseholders and ‘nil’ mortgage valuations. It found that private leaseholders in blocks with dangerous cladding had received ‘nil’ valuations for their properties, …
Response attribution not verified
#23 — Millions of residents trapped in unsafe, unsellable flats face severe financial and emotional hardship
Recommendation: As many as 3 million people may have been affected by the cladding crisis. The NAO found that residents continue to suffer ongoing financial and emotional consequences. In its written evidence to us, End Our Cladding Scandal (EOCS) told us …
Response attribution not verified
#15 — Manufacturers of non-compliant construction products have yet to contribute financially to remediation.
Recommendation: Despite promises in 2022 of tough new measures to force industry to pay to remove cladding, MHCLG accepted that it has yet to find a way to secure a financial contribution from manufacturers. We observed that while developers were contributing …
Response attribution not verified
#14 — Leaseholders continue to face significant, 'life-changing' costs for non-cladding fire safety defects.
Recommendation: We asked MHCLG about what it was doing to support residents with non– cladding defects. MHCLG told us that it was developing a new standard with the British Standards Institute to give the sector more certainty over what work needed …
Response attribution not verified
#9 — Persistent and new barriers hinder accelerated progress of cladding remediation efforts.
Recommendation: The Plan identified several barriers to remediating at pace and outlined the steps MHCLG was taking to address them. Some of these barriers are those MHCLG told the previous committee about in 2020, including landlord reluctance to come forward, limited …
Response attribution not verified
#8 — MHCLG's cladding remediation targets considered too slow and incomplete, with works extending to 2035.
Recommendation: We asked MHCLG how its new plan would speed up the remediation process. MHCLG told us that its Ministers were committed to speeding up the pace of remediation. The Plan introduced a target that by the end of 2029 all …
Response attribution not verified
#5 — Uncertainty remains regarding dangerous cladding remediation scope, costs, and completion timelines.
Recommendation: Eight years on from Grenfell, we are concerned that MHCLG still does not know how many buildings have dangerous cladding, how much it will cost to address, or how long it will take. MHCLG’s latest estimate, that 9,000 to 12,000 …
Response attribution not verified
#4 — Undertake urgent review of building insurance premiums and propose actions to reduce costs for residents.
Recommendation: MHCLG is not doing enough to manage the risk that residents in affected buildings face exorbitant insurance premiums in the long term. The previous Committee raised concerns in 2020 about the spiralling insurance costs faced by residents awaiting remediation and …
Response attribution not verified
#3 — Publish annual report on effectiveness of resident-centric remediation, dispute resolution, and Code of Practice adherence.
Recommendation: 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 …
Response attribution not verified
#12 — UKHSA's ageing high containment laboratories pose significant public health risk due to remedial investment needs.
Recommendation: UKHSA’s purpose is to prevent, prepare for and respond to infectious diseases and environmental hazards, and to provide scientific and operational leadership to protect the public’s health and to build the nation’s health security capability.UKHSA owns high containment science laboratories …
Response attribution not verified
#35 — Publish compensation position for unused border infrastructure and prevent future stranded investments.
Recommendation: The Government should set out how it will learn lessons from the implementation of the Border Target Operating Model (BTOM), including the handling of costs for unused or under used border infrastructure. It should publish its position on compensation for …
Response attribution not verified
#34 — Lack of compensation clarity for redundant border infrastructure negatively impacts government relationships.
Recommendation: Local authorities and businesses have invested heavily, at the Government’s instruction, in border infrastructure that may become redundant under a new SPS regime. A lack of clarity from HM Treasury regarding compensation has had a negative impact on relationships between …
Response attribution not verified
#9 — Shift funding from short-term repairs to comprehensive upgrades and rebuilds for high-risk schools.
Recommendation: Funding should move beyond short-term patching and repairs toward comprehensive upgrades and rebuilds, prioritising schools beyond their design life and those posing the greatest safety risks. (Conclusion, Paragraph 49)
Response attribution not verified
#8 — RAAC crisis highlights ageing, fragile school estate requiring more than incremental fixes.
Recommendation: The RAAC crisis highlighted a deeper, systemic issue: the ageing and fragile condition of England’s school estate. RAAC is not the only issue of concern within the wider school estate. While we welcome the Government’s commitment to publish a long-term …
Response attribution not verified
NAO audit recommendations(3)
Dangerous cladding: the government’s remediation portfolio
MHCLG should consider whether there is additional information and data that it could publish about the portfolio that would: ? give residents in buildings not yet in a programme, or not yet being remediated privately, an indication of how long …
Accepted
Dangerous cladding: the government’s remediation portfolio
If the number of buildings within the individual programmes and progress with remediation have not picked up by the end of the year, MHCLG and Homes England should consider other actions to incentivise responsible entities to apply to its programmes, …
Accepted
Dangerous cladding: the government’s remediation portfolio
MHCLG should evaluate its code of practice for the remediation of residential buildings to ensure that it is helping residents of buildings where remediation works are planned or underway to understand whether progress in their buildings is reasonable. This is …
Accepted
LGO / SPSO decisions(19)
21-018-494 — London Borough of Bromley
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint that the Council wrongly issued a completion certificate for substandard work to a property she has since bought. This is because we cannot hold the Council responsible for the work and we cannot therefore achieve any worthwhile outcome for Miss X by …
LGO (Local Government & …
Planning
Apr 2022
24-007-471 — London Borough of Newham
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with a report of dangerous masonry. The Council has satisfied its obligation by ensuring temporary safety measures were taken to make building safe. Responsibility for ongoing maintenance and repairs lay with the freeholder of the property. There …
LGO (Local Government & …
Planning
Oct 2024
24-021-619 — Broadland District Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the amount charged by the Council for building control services. The information we have seen shows the Council is charging according to its current policy. We have not seen enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
LGO (Local Government & …
Planning
Jan 2026
PSOW-202301057 — Trivallis
Miss L complained that Trivallis had failed to act on concerns regarding a damp and mouldy property. She further complained that works had been delayed and caused further damage to her property. The Ombudsman concluded that there had been a significant delay in resolving Miss L’s concerns, and that it …
PSOW (Public Services Om…
Jun 2023
PSOW-202300060 — Cardiff Council
Miss L complained that Cardiff Council failed to resolve issues of Anti-Social Behaviour. She further complained that although the Council confirmed a neighbouring greenhouse was the main cause of damp within her property, it failed to take any action since 2020. The Ombudsman concluded that there had been a significant …
PSOW (Public Services Om…
Local Government
Jun 2023
25-000-246 — London Borough of Havering
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint the Council has delayed in reviewing the condition of a property she leased to it following the end of the rental agreement. That is because the courts are best placed to consider the matter.
LGO (Local Government & …
Housing
Jul 2025
25-000-693 — Central Bedfordshire Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delay and the Council’s decision not to issue a building regulations completion certificate. We have not seen enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation into the decision to issue the certificate. Also, we do not consider it a good use of …
LGO (Local Government & …
Planning
Jul 2025
25-010-463 — London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions following Ms X’s application to sell her discounted market sale property. We cannot achieve the outcome Ms X wants. This is because the courts are better placed to consider the matter.
LGO (Local Government & …
Housing
Nov 2025
24-008-947 — Pendle Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council requiring an increased fee for a Building Regulations application. The complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.
LGO (Local Government & …
Planning
Oct 2024
201102588 — West Lothian Council
Mr C complained that when his home was built in 1998 the council issued a completion certificate. This is a document that must be verified by the planning authority. It certifies that the work is complete and in accordance with the building warrant and relevant building regulations. He said that …
SPSO (Scottish Public Se…
Local Government
Not Upheld
Sep 2012
201503924 — Dumfries and Galloway Housing Partnership
Mrs C complained about the housing association on behalf of Mr A, a former tenant, regarding charges he had received for repairs required after he had left his property. He accepted that he had been asked at a pre-termination inspection to re-paint two walls but disputed the amount being requested, …
SPSO (Scottish Public Se…
Local Government
Upheld
May 2016
201502012 — Glasgow City Council
Mr and Mrs C complained about the standard of work undertaken at their property by a company installing insulated cladding. The company had a contract with the council, who were coordinating this work under Scottish Government grant funding. The company were responsible for offering the insulation works to owner occupiers, …
SPSO (Scottish Public Se…
Local Government
Not Upheld
May 2016
201501536 — Weslo Housing Management
Miss C complained that the housing association unreasonably failed to carry out work on her kitchen to the agreed specifications. Miss C raised a number of concerns, including that the association failed to supply and fit a breakfast bar and that the work took longer than the three days suggested …
SPSO (Scottish Public Se…
Local Government
Upheld
May 2016
201508161 — Glasgow City Council
Miss C complained that the council failed to act on concerns she raised about possible structural damage to her home caused by works carried out on the adjoining property. She was of the view that the building control team failed in their duty to protect her and her family from …
SPSO (Scottish Public Se…
Local Government
Not Upheld
Feb 2017
201608264 — Irvine Housing Association Ltd
Ms C complained about the housing association's response to her reports of damp in her property. The association investigated and they found no evidence of damp. They said that the problems were caused by condensation and they gave advice about heating and ventilation. We were satisfied that the association had …
SPSO (Scottish Public Se…
Local Government
Not Upheld
Jan 2018
201700758 — Fife Council
Miss C owns a property in a block of four. Some of the other properties in the block were believed to be owned by the council. Miss C complained that work undertaken on her property was not in line with the agreed mandate and that the council failed to provide …
SPSO (Scottish Public Se…
Local Government
Upheld
Apr 2018
201700318 — Yorkhill Housing Association Ltd
Please note: In the original version of this summary we defined agoraphobia as 'a fear of being outside'. We should have used the definition 'an anxiety disorder that can cause extreme panic attacks, which causes people to dread and avoid places and situations that may trigger anxiety or panic'. We …
SPSO (Scottish Public Se…
Local Government
Partly Upheld
Apr 2018
22-011-003 — London Borough of Sutton
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a building control matter. This is because it is unlikely we could achieve a worthwhile outcome for the complainant.
LGO (Local Government & …
Planning
Nov 2022
25-000-972 — Bromsgrove District Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council wrongly approved work which does not meet the building regulations. This is because an investigation would not achieve a meaningful outcome for Mr B.
LGO (Local Government & …
Planning
Apr 2025