Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:

To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what financial support he plans to make available to leaseholders in homes with unsafe cladding seeking to take legal action against the developers of their homes.

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 is not currently possible for hundreds of buildings, potentially benefitting thousands of leaseholders.

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 the Government is taking action, providing a route to redress so that those who caused these problems can be held accountable.

Under the Defective Premises Act, compensation can be claimed by the person who originally commissioned the work, or by any person subsequently acquiring a 'legal or equitable interest' in the dwelling. This includes the freeholder of a block of flats, as well as leaseholders. The Government's position is that it is freeholders who are responsible for ensuring their buildings are safe, and that they should meet the costs of remediation without passing them on to leaseholders wherever possible.

The Building Safety Bill further protects leaseholders by imposing a legal requirement on building owners to explore alternative ways to meet the cost of remediation works before passing these onto leaseholders, along with a requirement (in regulations) to provide evidence to leaseholders. Alternative sources of funding which must be explored before passing costs on include recovering costs from applicable warranty schemes, or from the developers or contractors who were responsible for the defects. Claims under the Defective Premises Act are one additional route that we expect building owners to explore, and our reforms will extend that option to hundreds of blocks where it is not currently possible.