“The thing I remember is just people out on the street in pyjamas, crying, some with small children.
“I saw people wandering the corridors with their possessions in bin bags, with no idea where to go.”
These are the images which have stuck with Nathan and Josh, from the night they and their neighbours were forced to leave their homes.
They’re just the latest victims of the post-Grenfell building safety scandal.
In early October, three years after fire safety issues such as wooden cladding were uncovered at Skyline Chambers in Manchester, residents were suddenly handed “prohibition notice” letters from Greater Manchester Fire Service, telling them the risk was now “so serious” that they had to leave.
That made it illegal for anyone to live at Skyline until the building had been made safe – and families were temporarily scattered into hotels across the city.
But campaigners worry that what happened at Skyline Chambers is actually part of a growing trend.
Data by the Building Safety Register shows 38 buildings with an estimated population of 9,600 people living in them have been forcibly evacuated (decanted) since Grenfell for fire or structural issues.
Of these, 15 (nearly 40%) happened in 2023 alone, and BSR founder Matt Hodges-Long fears the numbers will only keep rising.
“It’s because regulatory authorities have reached the end of the rope, waiting for these buildings to be made safe.
“You’re making building owners go and look in more detail at the buildings, maybe taking the external walls off to expose the structure, and once you see something wrong you can’t unsee it.
“So that leads us down a path of evacuating buildings to put them right.
“And that’s why we’re going to see this acceleration of forced evacuations over the coming one, two, three years as this housing stock gets investigated more.”
Building Safety Register founder Matt Hodges-Long
‘That was my home’
If there are going to be more buildings evacuated, the residents at Skyline want to make sure there are more protections for residents.
When I visited the £15m block on Ludgate Hill I was struck by how much it looked like any other modern high-rise.
The lights were off, but through the windows you could see furniture, plants, and even a towel still hanging out to dry on a balcony; all left by people in a hurry.
There’s also no sign of any building work; despite it being promised that remediation would start in November.
Residents and leaseholders are furious about the delays, and the “patchy” amount of support being offered to them.
Nathan (L) and Josh are the latest victims of the cladding crisis
While Josh Morris and the 14 other leaseholders who own their own flats will be re-housed until the building is safe, renters like Nathan Jones only have until the new year to find somewhere new to live.
“I feel hurt more than anything that I found out they were going to make over a hundred people homeless two weeks after Christmas, after meetings where they promised to look after everybody,” Nathan tells me.
He fights back tears as he explains how, in the current housing climate, he can’t afford to rent in Manchester anymore:
“That was my home, it had been my home for eight years, I made a life there, and the rent stayed affordable.
“So now I’m faced with another dilemma. After 18 years living in Manchester, with the rents as they are now, I can’t afford it – so I’m having to look outside of the city centre now.
“My friends are here, my job is here, but I have to leave.”
Landlords are struggling too
Other tenants, I’m told, have similarly been forced to leave the city, with one man moving back in with his parents.
But the landlords who rent out their flats are also struggling.
With the termination of tenancies, they fear losing thousands of pounds in rent, while still paying mortgages, increased insurance costs, and service fees they’re still being asked to pay.
Paul Roberts has two flats in the building – he says the loss of rent will cost him £25,000 a year.
Landlord Paul Roberts
He’s desperately worried that some of his fellow landlords won’t survive financially, and angry that Wallace Estates, which owns the freehold of the building, hasn’t promised more support past January.
“It’s not going to be a very good Christmas for many of them,” he says.
Leaseholder-resident Josh thinks there should be rules in place to give everyone in this position proper support and compensation.
He says: “At the end of the day, it’s still someone’s home, and we should all be treated equally.”
He thinks it’s wrong that the government allows prohibition notices to be put in place, with seemingly little follow-through for what should happen next to the people who live there.
“It feels like they’re just making it up as they go along, and that’s causing massive, massive mental health problems for everyone involved.”
Company defends ‘immediate action’
Before the decant, the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) instigated legal action around Skyline Chambers, and three other buildings in Manchester, to force Wallace Estates to begin remediation. The hearing will take place in March.
A spokesperson for Wallace Estates said it took “immediate action” to relocate all residents when fire safety concerns were discovered recently.
They added: “We are prioritising the remediation of Skyline so residents can return to their homes as soon as the building is safe.
“In the meantime, all owner-occupiers have been placed in alternative accommodation until Skyline is remediated, and Wallace has provided accommodation for tenants of Buy-To-Let investors for three months – giving landlords time to liaise with tenants they are responsible for.
“Neither leaseholders nor freeholders are responsible for the existence of fire safety defects at Skyline. The full extent of the negligence of building controllers overseeing the construction of the building has only recently become apparent, and the defects themselves are the result of decisions taken by the original developer.
“It is astonishing that, across the country, leaseholders and freeholders are having to deal with the failings of reckless developers, irresponsible product manufacturers and central and local government who oversaw a deficient safety regime.”
The number of buildings that have been evacuated since Grenfell, by year
A DLUHC spokesperson said: “Freeholders have a legal duty to ensure the safety of their residents. We have been clear they need to get on with the job of remediation because every day they delay is another day that people can’t get back into their homes.
“Residents and their safety are our utmost priority in any decant and we must ensure they feel supported and have somewhere safe and decent to live while their homes are made safe.”
The last blast furnaces left operating in Britain could see their fate sealed within days, after their Chinese owners took the decision to cut off the crucial supply of ingredients keeping them running.
Jingye, the owner of British Steel in Scunthorpe, has, according to union representatives, cancelled future orders for the iron ore, coal and other raw materials needed to keep the furnaces running.
The upshot is that they may have to close next month – even sooner than the earliest date suggested for its closure.
Read more: Thousands of jobs at risk as British Steel consults unions over closure
The fate of the blast furnaces – the last two domestic sources of virgin steel, made from iron ore rather than recycled – is likely to be determined in a matter of days, with the Department for Business and Trade now actively pondering nationalisation.
The upshot is that even as Britain contends with a trade war across the Atlantic, it is now working against the clock to secure the future of steelmaking at Scunthorpe.
The talks between the government and Jingye broke down last week after the Chinese company, which bought British Steel out of receivership in 2020, rejected a £500m offer of public money to replace the existing furnaces with electric arc furnaces.
The sum is the same one it offered to Tata Steel, which has shut down the other remaining UK blast furnaces in Port Talbot and is planning to build electric furnaces – which have far lower carbon emissions.
These steel workers could soon be out of work
However, the owners argue that the amount is too little to justify extra investment at Scunthorpe, and said last week they were now consulting on the date of shutting both the blast furnaces and the attached steelworks.
Since British Steel is the main provider of steel rails to Network Rail – as well as other construction steels available from only a few sites in the world – the closure would leave the UK more reliant on imports for critical infrastructure sites.
However, since the site belongs to its Chinese owners, a decision to nationalise the site would involve radical steps government officials are wary of taking.
They also fear leaving taxpayers exposed to a potentially loss-making business for the long run.
The dilemma has been heightened by the sharp turn in geopolitical sentiment following Donald Trump’s return to the White House.
The incipient trade war and threatened cut in American support to Europe have sparked fresh calls for countries to act urgently to secure their own supplies of critical materials, especially those used for defence and infrastructure.
Read more:
Car manufacturers fined £461m for collusion
There were no winners from Trump’s tariff gameshow
Gareth Stace, head of UK Steel, the industry lobby group, said: “Talks seem to have broken down between government and British Steel.
“My advice to government is: please, Jonathan Reynolds, Business Secretary, get back round that negotiating table, thrash out a deal, and if a deal can’t be found in the next few days, then I fear for the very future of the sector, but also here for Scunthorpe steelworks.”
British Steel declined to comment.
UK
Prince Andrew’s Pitch@Palace branded ‘crude attempt to enrich himself’ as Chinese spy documents set to be released
Prince Andrew’s efforts to make money from his Pitch@Palace project have been branded as a “crude attempt to enrich himself” at the expense of “unsuspecting tech founders”, as new documents may shed more light on what he and his team have been attempting to sell.
Today is the deadline for documents to be released relating to Prince Andrew‘s former senior adviser Dominic Hampshire and his interactions with the alleged Chinese spy Yang Tengbo.
In February, an immigration tribunal heard how the intelligence services had contacted Mr Hampshire about Mr Yang back in 2022. Mr Yang helped set up Pitch@Palace China, a branch of the duke’s scheme to help young entrepreneurs.
The alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo, has links with Prince Andrew
Yang Tengbo. Pic: Pitch@Palace
Judges banned Mr Yang from the UK, saying his association with a senior royal had made Prince Andrew “vulnerable” and posed a threat to national security. Mr Yang challenged that decision at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC).
Since that hearing, media organisations have applied for certain documents relating to the case and Mr Hampshire’s support for Mr Yang to be made public. SIAC agreed to release some information of public interest. It is hoped they may include more details on deals that he was trying to do on behalf of Prince Andrew.
So what do we know about potential deals for Pitch@Palace so far?
In February, Sky News confirmed that palace officials had a meeting last summer with tech funding company StartupBootcamp to discuss a potential tie-up between them and Prince Andrew relating to his Pitch@Palace project.
The palace wasn’t involved in the fine details of a deal but wanted guarantees to make sure it wouldn’t impact the Royal Family in the future. Sky News understands from one source that the price being discussed for Pitch was around £750,000 – there are, however, reports that a deal may have stalled.
Photos we found on the Chinese Chamber of Commerce website show an event held in Asia between StartupBootcamp and Innovate Global, believed to be an offshoot of Pitch.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Who is alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo?
Documents, released in relation to the investigations into Mr Tengbo, have also shown how much the duke has always seen Pitch as a way of potentially making money. One document from 21 August 2021 clearly states “the duke needed money at the time, and saw the relationships with China through Pitch as one possible source of funding”.
But Prince Andrew’s apparent intention to use Pitch to make money has led to concerns about whether he is unfairly using the contacts and information he gained when he was a working royal.
Norman Baker, former MP and author of books on royal finances, believes it is “a crude attempt to enrich himself” and goes against what the tech entrepreneurs thought they were signing up for.
Read more:
Who is Yang Tenbo?
Virginia Giuffre says she has days to live
Emails between Andrew and Epstein revealed
He told Sky News: “The data given by these business people was given on the basis it was an official operation and not something for Prince Andrew, and so in my view, Prince Andrew had no right legally or morally to take the data which has been collected, a huge amount of data, and sell it…
“And quite clearly if you’re going to sell it off to StartupBootcamp, that is not what people had in mind. The entrepreneurs who joined Pitch@Palace did not do so to enrich Prince Andrew,” he said.
Rich Wilson was one tech entrepreneur who was approached at the start of Pitch@Palace to sign up, but he stepped away when he spotted a clause in the contract saying they’d be entitled to 2% equity in any funding he secured.
He feels Prince Andrew is continuing to use those he made a show of supporting.
He said: “It makes me feel sick. I think it’s terrible – that he is continuing to exploit unsuspecting tech founders in this way. A lot of them, I’m quite grey and old in the tooth now, I saw it coming, but clearly most didn’t. And a lot of them were quite young.
“It’ll be their first venture and you’re learning on the trot, so to speak. So to take advantage of people in such a major way – that’s an awful, sickening thing to do.”
We approached StartupBootcamp who said they had no comment to make, and the Duke of York’s office did not respond.
With reports that a deal may have stalled, it could be a big setback for the duke – especially with questions still about how he’ll continue to pay for his home on the Windsor estate now that the King no longer gives him financial support.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports12 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway