Quality luggage solutions for you and your sports car. If it fits into the bags, it fits into the car. Unashamed classic car nuts! Proud to manufacture in UK
Seven years on from Grenfell, the highly dangerous ACM cladding on the tower's walls remains a serious risk both in the UK and globally. A bit by me for The Developer:
Alan Bates, the campaigner who highlighted the Post Office scandal, will be given a knighthood after being recognised in the King's Birthday Honours list.
Well deserved.
@FreeLeasehlders From now until election day MPs wont care a jot about leasehold reform or any other legislation. Getting re-elected will consume their every moment.
@FreeLeasehlders@RishiSunak@michaelgove@Conservatives release 10m+leaseholders from the feudal leasehold system and from the freeholders' financial pressure cookers. 10m+ voters could change the anticipated GE outcomes.
7/7 Very interesting to see the BSA work its way through the system.
Hippersley Point is going to the Court of Appeal later this year. We will see whether the Court of Appeal decides the retrospective ban on recovering costs holds up.
6/7 This site involves a Resident Management Company, but seems also to be covered by the Developer Pledge (a Taylor Wimpey development bought back after completion by the original landowner), and only one leaseholder appealed.
The decision does not address what happens to those leaseholders who may have already paid on the basis of an invalid demand. Perhaps a claim in mistake?
5/7 Upper Tribunal also considers what counts as a cladding defect and an external wall, giving broad interpretations to both. Decision concludes that the works are not chargeable to leaseholders because they are cladding remediation works.
4/7 Upper Tribunal decides that the demand cannot be rectified by supplying the correct landlord's name and address because, after Hippersley Point, the protections apply to costs that have not been demanded before 28 June 2022, the date Schedule 8 came into force.
3/7 The demand was to cover the costs of works to replace insulation and add vertical cavity barriers.
There was a dispute over whether the relevant provisions of Schedule 8 were engaged by these works, because they did not involve the wholesale replacement of the external wall.
2/7 This case concerned a service charge demand dated 8 February 2021 for £1,244.85, so before the Building Safety Act came into force.
The demand was invalid in any event because it was issued in the name of the wrong landlord and therefore did not contain the landlord's name and address.
1/7 Interesting to read this Upper Tribunal decision on what counts as "cladding" and "external wall" under Schedule 8 of the Building Safety Act.
I believe this is the first UT decision on these issues so far:
https://t.co/b5zIGHZtvC
❌ No one is really holding developers to account, so they’re essentially taking as long as they want.
❌ There has been a lot of warm rhetoric but the reality on the ground is that leaseholders are still paying the price.
@Lee4NED@MichaelGove 👇
https://t.co/7zVxxNSwDU
We need an urgent statement from @michaelgove & @luhc on how leaseholders who leave a flat empty for 12 months due to #cladding works & loss of light due to scaffolding will be treated.
No one wants to rent such a flat. Imprisoning leaseholders in such conditions is inhumane.
@NLC_2019 It is precisely by interfering with the market by way of the Fire Safety Act and the Building Safety Act that the @Conservatives have tanked the market.