Asked by: Lyn Brown (Labour - West Ham)
Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what (a) financial, (b) advisory and c) evidential support he plans to provide to leaseholders that are seeking to take developers to court in cases involving liability for fire safety remediation.
Answered by Christopher Pincher
The Government's proposed changes to the Defective Premises Act 1972 as part of the Building Safety Bill will more than double the time available to seek compensation for substandard building work from six to 15 years. These new measures will provide a legal route to redress that previously would not have been possible for hundreds of buildings, benefitting thousands of leaseholders.
There are various limitation periods set in the Limitation Act 1980 for different types of civil claim. These range from 12 months (for defamation or the late payment of insurance claims) to six years (for claims relating to some types of contracts) to a long stop of 15 years for cases involving negligence. A 15-year limitation period has been chosen to bring the Defective Premises Act in line with other types of serious civil claim.
The Government has been clear that those responsible must pay towards the cost of remediating defective buildings. It is fundamental that the industry that caused this issue contributes to setting things right. Some parts of the industry have done the right thing, funding remediation of serious historic defects, but this is not happening in all cases. In many cases, those who caused the problems are evading responsibility. That is why we are taking action, providing a route to redress so that those who caused these problems can be held accountable.
Along with retrospectively extending the limitation period under the Defective Premises Act, going forward we are also expanding the Defective Premises Act to include refurbishments, and we will be commencing section 38 of the Building Act 1984. These measures will also be subject to a 15-year limitation period. Together, these increased rights to redress will enhance accountability, with stronger incentives against shoddy workmanship, further reinforcing the culture change in the construction industry that the Building Safety Bill will drive.
These reforms are supported by more than £5 billion in direct grant funding for the remediation of dangerous cladding on high-rise buildings, where the risk to multiple households is greater when fire does spread; a significant proportion of this is funding the delivery of construction works now, or has funded work which has finished.
Asked by: Lyn Brown (Labour - West Ham)
Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what estimate he has made of the proportion of buildings marketed by developers within the last 15 years that are affected by fire safety problems where those developers remain solvent and capable of paying for remediation, legal and other costs associated with any successful court case brought by current building owners.
Answered by Christopher Pincher
The Government's proposed changes to the Defective Premises Act 1972 as part of the Building Safety Bill will more than double the time available to seek compensation for substandard building work from six to 15 years. These new measures will provide a legal route to redress that previously would not have been possible for hundreds of buildings, benefitting thousands of leaseholders.
There are various limitation periods set in the Limitation Act 1980 for different types of civil claim. These range from 12 months (for defamation or the late payment of insurance claims) to six years (for claims relating to some types of contracts) to a long stop of 15 years for cases involving negligence. A 15-year limitation period has been chosen to bring the Defective Premises Act in line with other types of serious civil claim.
The Government has been clear that those responsible must pay towards the cost of remediating defective buildings. It is fundamental that the industry that caused this issue contributes to setting things right. Some parts of the industry have done the right thing, funding remediation of serious historic defects, but this is not happening in all cases. In many cases, those who caused the problems are evading responsibility. That is why we are taking action, providing a route to redress so that those who caused these problems can be held accountable.
Along with retrospectively extending the limitation period under the Defective Premises Act, going forward we are also expanding the Defective Premises Act to include refurbishments, and we will be commencing section 38 of the Building Act 1984. These measures will also be subject to a 15-year limitation period. Together, these increased rights to redress will enhance accountability, with stronger incentives against shoddy workmanship, further reinforcing the culture change in the construction industry that the Building Safety Bill will drive.
These reforms are supported by more than £5 billion in direct grant funding for the remediation of dangerous cladding on high-rise buildings, where the risk to multiple households is greater when fire does spread; a significant proportion of this is funding the delivery of construction works now, or has funded work which has finished.
Asked by: Lyn Brown (Labour - West Ham)
Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what estimate he has made of the average legal costs incurred by leaseholders in pursuing claims against developers in court in cases involving liability for fire safety remediation costs.
Answered by Christopher Pincher
The Government's proposed changes to the Defective Premises Act 1972 as part of the Building Safety Bill will more than double the time available to seek compensation for substandard building work from six to 15 years. These new measures will provide a legal route to redress that previously would not have been possible for hundreds of buildings, benefitting thousands of leaseholders.
There are various limitation periods set in the Limitation Act 1980 for different types of civil claim. These range from 12 months (for defamation or the late payment of insurance claims) to six years (for claims relating to some types of contracts) to a long stop of 15 years for cases involving negligence. A 15-year limitation period has been chosen to bring the Defective Premises Act in line with other types of serious civil claim.
The Government has been clear that those responsible must pay towards the cost of remediating defective buildings. It is fundamental that the industry that caused this issue contributes to setting things right. Some parts of the industry have done the right thing, funding remediation of serious historic defects, but this is not happening in all cases. In many cases, those who caused the problems are evading responsibility. That is why we are taking action, providing a route to redress so that those who caused these problems can be held accountable.
Along with retrospectively extending the limitation period under the Defective Premises Act, going forward we are also expanding the Defective Premises Act to include refurbishments, and we will be commencing section 38 of the Building Act 1984. These measures will also be subject to a 15-year limitation period. Together, these increased rights to redress will enhance accountability, with stronger incentives against shoddy workmanship, further reinforcing the culture change in the construction industry that the Building Safety Bill will drive.
These reforms are supported by more than £5 billion in direct grant funding for the remediation of dangerous cladding on high-rise buildings, where the risk to multiple households is greater when fire does spread; a significant proportion of this is funding the delivery of construction works now, or has funded work which has finished.
Asked by: Lyn Brown (Labour - West Ham)
Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what targets the Crime and Justice Task Force has set for his Department.
Answered by Eddie Hughes
It is a long-established precedent that information about the discussions that have taken place in Cabinet and its Committees, and how often they have met, is not normally shared publicly.
Asked by: Lyn Brown (Labour - West Ham)
Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies on facilitating moving on from emergency accommodation of the findings published in paragraph 15 on page 8 of the National Audit Office Investigation into the housing of rough sleepers during the COVID-19 pandemic, published on 14 January 2021.
Answered by Eddie Hughes
This Government has taken unprecedented steps to protect rough sleepers during the pandemic. This work has not stopped, and through Everyone In, by November we had supported around 33,000 people with nearly 10,000 in emergency accommodation and over 23,000 already moved on into longer-term accommodation.
We have been in close contact with councils to develop plans for the coming months, supported by the Next Steps Accommodation Programme, which aims to ensure that as few people as possible return to the streets. This includes bringing forward 3,300 new homes this year for rough sleepers, backed by £150 million, leaving a national legacy of the Government’s support for these individuals.
Through this programme and as part of the move on process, local authorities could bid for support for individuals, in line with legal restrictions, to determine or resolve their immigration status. Local authorities were also able to bid for funding to facilitate reconnections with friends or family through voluntary returns and provide employment support. The Home Office has also put in place a dedicated Rough Sleeping Support Service to prioritise support work and help people who sleep rough resolve their immigration status.
For some people, who have received all available support, they may decide to return to their home country. For people who have no means of doing so, or who need some assistance, the Voluntary Returns Service can provide practical support to assist those who wish to return.
The Government is also providing funding for charities and voluntary organisations across the country to provide help and information to vulnerable EU citizens applying to the EU Settlement Scheme.
Asked by: Lyn Brown (Labour - West Ham)
Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the steps required to scale up Housing First programmes to reduce rough sleeping and homelessness.
Answered by Eddie Hughes
Housing First has an impressive international record in helping people with complex needs to recover and stay off the streets for good, which is why we awarded £28 million to pilot it at scale in three areas (the West Midlands, Greater Manchester and Liverpool City Region).
The Government committed to expanding Housing First in its latest manifesto. We will use the findings of our comprehensive evaluation that is already underway, together with the experience of the three pilots, to inform next steps.
Published Housing First evaluation reports can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/housing-first-pilot-national-evaluation-reports
Asked by: Lyn Brown (Labour - West Ham)
Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, with reference to the report, Implementing Housing First across England, Scotland and Wales, published by Crisis in August 2018, what recent estimate he has made of the number of people for whom Housing First homelessness provision would be effective; what the capacity is for Housing First homelessness provision; and how many additional Housing First homelessness places he plans to create over the next two years.
Answered by Eddie Hughes
Housing First has an impressive international record in helping people with complex needs to recover and stay off the streets for good, which is why we awarded £28 million to pilot it at scale in three areas (the West Midlands, Greater Manchester and Liverpool City Region). The pilots are now in their third year (ending in 2022/23) and have currently supported over 770 individuals across 23 local authorities into both permanent and temporary accommodation with over 560 clients moved into tenancies.
Government committed to expanding Housing First in its latest manifesto and we will use the findings of our evaluation, together with our experiences from the three pilots, to inform next steps.
Alongside Housing First pilots, the Government has funded a number of Housing First style schemes through the Rough Sleeping Initiative (RSI) and Rough Sleeping Accommodation Programme (RSAP) where local partners have identified a local need for this type of provision.
We are also putting in place an unprecedented level of support to tackle homelessness and rough sleeping over 2021/22. This includes £676 million in resource funding, a 60 per cent increase compared to the Spending Review in 2019. On 28 January we launched RSI 2021/22 and will continue to work closely with local authorities to understand their local needs.
Asked by: Lyn Brown (Labour - West Ham)
Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, when his Department plans to bring forward legislation to repeal Section 21 of the Housing Act 1988.
Answered by Christopher Pincher
The Government remains committed to abolishing Section 21 through a Renters’ Reform Bill which will enhance renters’ security. However, our collective efforts are currently focused on responding to the coronavirus outbreak.
Repealing Section 21 represents the largest change to renting in 30 years and it is only right that the reforms are taken forward in a considered manner. It is important that providing tenants with greater security of tenure is balanced with an assurance that landlords are able to recover their properties where they have valid reasons to do so. This is vital to ensuring the future supply of good quality housing in the rented sector.
We will bring forward the Renters’ Reform Bill at the appropriate time.