Content

Background:This year, we have
passed the seventh anniversary of the fire in Grenfell Tower, which
burned for more than 60 hours taking 72 lives. The Grenfell fire
exposed a crisis of fire safety in high-rise building across our
country, with a considerable number of buildings in the Royal
Borough of Greenwich being found to have various levels of breaches
of building regulations and the use of dangerous
materials.
We believe that it is
imperative that the developers and owners of all buildings over 18m
in need of fire remediation work must be able to proceed with the
removal of unsafe material as quickly as possible, and leaseholders
should be protected from the costs of this work being passed on
through fees and charges.
However, the response to this
crisis from the previous Government was woefully slow, piecemeal,
and created competing and contradictory safety standards for
remediation work that has left residents burdened with high
insurance premiums and mortgage difficulties.
 
Motion: This Council notes with deep concern the
following:
 
1.   
Disparity in safety ratings between developers and
insurers
 
Flammable material on homes
poses a risk and while we cannot eliminate all fire risks, it is
about managing them. The disparity arises from insurance
companies and developers having varying priorities and
perspectives.
 
In the wake of the Grenfell
fire, insurance companies have added the heightened risk of whole
block fires in many over 18m buildings. In many cases the risk is
too high for single insurers are not able to cover on its own. So,
leaseholders have left unable to get cover or brokers have turned
to sourcing cover from multiple firms. The latter meaning
thatseveral insurers are involved in covering one building,
creating a ‘layered’ effect and driving up the
cost. 
 
Developers often rely on
building regulations and standards that they meet during
construction, which may vary depending on the specific
interpretation of safety requirements. These ratings can sometimes
be less stringent than the criteria used by insurers, who often
apply more rigorous standards based on their risk models and the
potential liability they face in the event of a claim.
·       
Developers are focused on the present safety and
adherence to construction standards, while insurers look at
potential risks and historical data to predict future
incidents.
·       
Developers aim to ensure the building is safe from
the start, adhering to codes and best practices. Insurers, however,
evaluate the likelihood of future incidents and how well risks are
managed.
·       
Developer ratings are often based on current and
immediate safety measures, whereas insurer ratings consider
long-term risks and past performance.
·       
Insurers are focused on the EWS1 certification
process, which is a set way for a building owner to confirm for
insurers that an external wall system on residential buildings has
been assessed for safety by a suitable expert, in line with
government guidance. It is however not a legal requirement to
remediate to A1 standard with requirements for fire safety being
B1, and this disparity creates confusion and frustration for
leaseholders and unfairly increases premiums.
·       
There is a risk from flammable materials and the B1
rating have not given certainty to all stakeholders i.e. residents
of Royal Artillery Quays and Insurance providers. 
 
These differences in standards
creates a gap between what developers consider "safe" and what
insurers deem "insurable," resulting in challenges for leaseholders
in securing affordable coverage. Although this mitigates the risk
for individual insurers, they also escalate overall insurance costs
for leaseholders, further exacerbating the financial strain on
residents.
 
Council Calls upon the Government to:
 
1.
    Act upon the findings of
the Grenfell Inquiry.
 
2.   
   Bring forward a review how to better protect
leaseholders from costs and take steps to accelerate the pace of
fire remediation across the country. It is imperative that this
review considers the findings from fires in Barking and Dagenham
and determine what is acceptable on buildings, with a view of
ruling out flammable materials. It must provide clarity for
residents on if an A1 rating is necessary to ensure the highest
standards of safety.
 
3.   
The Government should back a risk-pooling
reinsurance scheme to help ensure quicker and more substantial
reductions in the costs paid by leaseholders.