Connect with us

Published

on

Legal powers introduced since the Grenfell Tower fire to force building owners to fix serious fire safety issues are being ignored, Sky News can reveal.

One of the UK’s first Building Remediation Orders, issued by a judge last year, gave the owners of a block of flats in Bristol six months to fix serious fire safety defects including removing dangerous Grenfell-style insulation. The court’s deadline has now passed and nothing has been done, leaving residents fearful in their homes.

As a major report is published tomorrow to name and shame those responsible for the devastating fire at Grenfell Tower that killed 72 people on 14 June 2017, there are still hundreds of thousands of people living in buildings they know to be unsafe.

Seven years on from the disaster, legislation enacted to end Britain’s building safety crisis has failed to be enforced.

At least 3,280 buildings are known to still have unsafe cladding, with only 949 of those having started works, according to the latest government data.

‘Scary to think about’

Steph Culpin
Image:
Steph Culpin

“It’s something you think about every day,” says Steph Culpin, 37, who owns a flat on the second floor of the colourful block needing repair in Bristol.

“There are people in the building that might struggle to get out if there’s a fire…the best we’ve got is that a fire hasn’t happened. And that’s scary to think about.”

Ms Culpin bought her two-bedroom flat in Orchard House, a former office building that was extended and converted into 54 flats in 2018, a year after the Grenfell Tower fire.

Read more:
The Grenfell children who survived the blaze
Tower block that went up in flames was having cladding replaced

Orchard House
Image:
Orchard House

It wasn’t until 2019 that she and other residents were informed through new fire surveys required post-Grenfell that there was a litany of alarming safety risks.

Flammable material around Ms Culpin’s windows and installed between the two buildings of her block was labelled “high risk”.

And the shock discovery of combustible insulation manufactured by Celotex, one of the firms who gave evidence at the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, meant Orchard House was given the lowest fire safety rating available on a five-point scale.

The Building Safety Act, which was drawn up in the wake of the Grenfell fire and took effect in 2023, placed responsibility on building owners to replace defective materials.

But the owner of Orchard House, Stockwood Land 2 Limited, currently run by Amarjit Singh Litt and previously by members of the Litt family, has refused to engage with any of the problems found.

In November 2023, Ms Culpin and a fellow resident became one of only a handful to take their freeholder to court to try to force action.

Orchard House’s owner didn’t attend the court hearing despite the judge ruling they “knew or ought to have known about these proceedings”.

The tribunal ruled in favour of the residents and ordered the owner to carry out the work by June 2024.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘I realised the burning building was my own home’

However, the deadline came and went, the work has not been done and no one from Stockwood Land 2 Limited has responded to the many attempts to contact them.

“When you talk to somebody that isn’t in this situation, it’s actually really difficult to get across the severity of it and how it makes you feel,” Ms Culpin says. “From a mental health point of view, from a financial point of view.

“Because they just go, ‘surely somebody is going to make sure they do that. Are you sure you’ve spoken to the right people?’ and those are [the] sort of questions that you get and you go, ‘yeah, I’ve knocked on every door we have. And they’re all just shut’.”

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

Ms Culpin can’t sell the flat because until the work has been done no mortgage lender will approve an application from a buyer.

She is now paying interest on a Help To Buy Loan she cannot pay off.

All government schemes to help fund remedial works have to be agreed upon by the building owners and cannot be instigated by residents.

‘You live with it all the time’

Across the country, there are thousands of examples of buildings where work should have been done but hasn’t because the owners have delayed it or disappeared.

Paul Baston
Image:
Paul Baston

In Birmingham, Paul Baston, 66, lives on the top floor of Liberty Place, a high-rise canal-side development.

Standing on his balcony, the problem is clear. Banned aluminium composite (ACM) cladding covers the outside walls from floor to ceiling.

ACM is the same cladding that was on Grenfell Tower and was immediately forbidden from being used on buildings after the tragedy.

“It is very, very stressful. It’s very worrying. You live with it all the time,” says Mr Baston, who keeps his passport, driving licence, keys and wallet on his bedside table in case he has to evacuate the building in a hurry.

He worries about others in the building with young families or elderly relatives.

“You’ve got to be mindful and be prepared. And this is as prepared as I can be,” he says.

Mr Baston’s building is owned by Lendlease, who told Sky News it plans to carry out replacement work later this year.

Jim Illingworth
Image:
Jim Illingworth

‘Half-safe’

In another part of Birmingham, Jim Illingworth, 65, has new cladding which was replaced by his building’s owners under the government’s Building Safety Scheme.

But not all fire risks have been removed.

Internal surveys routinely carried out by mortgage lenders and insurance companies have revealed a design flaw that means fire could still spread rapidly between flats.

Mr Illingworth, who lives in the one-bedroom flat with his wife, says it leaves the building “half-safe”.

Now categorised as just one rating above Ms Culpin in Bristol, his risk is deemed low enough that remedial works are not required.

“According to the government, it’s nice and safe – according to the insurers and the mortgage people, it’s not safe.

“So we’ve got the government saying one thing and the practicality on the ground saying something totally different.”

It means Mr Illingworth is paying three times as much in building insurance compared to when he moved in.

He says there are estate agents who “won’t touch the buildings” due to banks still being reluctant to offer mortgages on the flats.

Recommendations in the final report from the Grenfell Tower Inquiry will focus on the technical aspects of the fire at the west London building “to prevent a similar tragedy from happening again”.

But people across the UK are raising the same warnings and living with the same combustible materials which made up Grenfell Tower, as well as uncovering new fire risks every day.

Continue Reading

UK

Firm linked to Tory peer Michelle Mone breached £122m PPE contract, judge rules

Published

on

By

Firm linked to Tory peer Michelle Mone breached £122m PPE contract, judge rules

A company linked to Tory peer Baroness Michelle Mone breached a government contract of nearly £122m to supply surgical gowns during the COVID-19 pandemic, the High Court has ruled.

The £121.9m sum, the price of the gowns, must now be repaid by the company, PPE Medpro.

The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) brought the case, saying it provided 25 million “faulty”, non-sterile gowns.

Money latest: Citroen C3 drivers told to stop using cars immediately

On Wednesday, the High Court said the gowns did not comply with the requirement of having a validated process to demonstrate sterility, and it was not possible for the DHSC to have sold them and recoup the loss.

The company, a consortium led by Baroness Mone’s husband, businessman Doug Barrowman, was awarded the government contract after she recommended it to ministers.

As well as wanting to recover the costs of the deal, the government wanted to recoup the costs of transporting and storing the items, which it said amounted to an additional £8.6m, though the High Court denied the latter request, saying the loss was not proved at trial.

PPE Medpro’s counterclaim that the DHSC should have advised it on how to comply with the contract also failed.

Denied wrongdoing

Both Baroness Mone and Mr Barrowman denied wrongdoing, and neither gave evidence at the trial in June.

She had initially denied involvement in the company or the process through which it was handed the government contract.

However, it was later revealed that Baroness Mone was the “source of referral” for the firm getting a place on the so-called “VIP lane” for offers of personal protective equipment for the NHS.

Yesterday, Baroness Mone accused the government of making her and her husband a “poster couple for the PPE scandal”, in a lengthy online tirade.

The response

In response to the ruling, Baroness Mone said it was “shocking but all too predictable”.

Mr Barrowman said it was “a travesty of justice” and the judge gave the DHSC “an establishment win despite the mountain of evidence in court against such a judgment”.

“Her judgment bears little resemblance to what actually took place during the month-long trial, where PPE Medpro convincingly demonstrated that its gowns were sterile,” he said.

“This judgment is a whitewash of the facts and shows that justice was being seen to be done, where the outcome was always certain for the DHSC and the government. This case was simply too big for the government to lose.”

Ahead of the ruling on Tuesday, PPE Medpro said it intended to appoint an administrator.

The news has been welcomed by Chancellor Rachel Reeves and COVID-19 Bereaved Families for Justice UK.

“We want our money back. We are getting our money back. And it will go where it belongs – in our schools, NHS and communities,” Ms Reeves said.

“Profiting and corruption during the pandemic cost lives,” the families group said. “Those responsible must be held to account.”

Continue Reading

UK

All GP surgeries in England must offer online booking from today

Published

on

By

All GP surgeries in England must offer online booking from today

All GP surgeries in England are required to offer online appointment bookings from today.

Practices must keep their websites and app services available from at least 8am to 6.30pm, Monday through Friday, for non-urgent appointments, medication queries and admin requests.

Many surgeries are already offering online bookings and consultations, but services are typically less effective in working-class areas.

The Department of Health and Social Care says there is a lack of consistency, as some surgeries that offer online services are choosing to switch the function off during busier periods.

The British Medical Association (BMA) has argued safeguards have not been put in place, nor have extra staff been brought in to manage what it anticipates will be a “barrage of online requests.”

The BMA has said GPs are considering a range of actions after voting to enter a dispute with the government over the plan.

Health Secretary Wes Streeting has urged the BMA to embrace the plan, saying the union’s resistance is “a real disservice to so many GPs” who have already introduced the service.

Health Secretary Wes Streeting says booking a GP appointment should be as easy as booking a takeaway. Pic: PA
Image:
Health Secretary Wes Streeting says booking a GP appointment should be as easy as booking a takeaway. Pic: PA

‘As easy as booking a takeaway’

The minister said the government will help practices that need assistance to implement the plan, “but we’ve got to modernise”.

Mr Streeting told the Labour Party conference: “Many GPs already offer this service because they’ve changed with the times.

“Why shouldn’t be booking a GP appointment be as easy as booking a delivery, a taxi, or a takeaway? And our policy comes alongside a billion pounds of extra funding for general practice and 2,000 extra GPs.

“Yet the BMA threatens to oppose it in 2025. Well, I’ll give you this warning; if we give in to the forces of conservatism, they will turn the NHS into a museum of 20th century healthcare.”

Read more from Sky News:
Starmer will take ‘no more lectures’ from Farage
Streeting says Labour ‘need Angela Rayner back’

The measure is part of the broader government pledge to transform the NHS.

Sir Keir Starmer has revealed plans to establish a nationwide “online hospital” by 2027, enabling patients to receive treatment and care from home.

The government said the initiative could provide up to 8.5 million additional NHS appointments within its first three years.

Available via the NHS app, it will allow patients to schedule in-person procedures at local hospitals, surgical hubs or diagnostic centres, reducing delays.

Continue Reading

UK

Farage isn’t racist, says PM – as he’s challenged over Trump’s ‘Sharia law’ comment

Published

on

By

Farage isn't racist, says PM - as he's challenged over Trump's 'Sharia law' comment

Sir Keir Starmer has said he does not believe Nigel Farage or Reform voters are racist – and also refused to label Donald Trump’s claim that London wants “Sharia law” as such.

The prime minister told Sky News political editor Beth Rigby the president’s claim – made while criticising the capital’s mayor, Sir Sadiq Khan, during a UN summit last week – was “nonsense”.

Asked if it was racist, considering Sir Sadiq is a Muslim, Sir Keir said: “I have been really clear that the idea that in London we’re introducing Sharia law is rubbish.”

He said the mayor – who has branded Mr Trump “racist, sexist, misogynistic” – was doing a “very good job”, but also pointed to his “very good relationship” with the president.

Sir Keir also insisted he does not think Mr Farage or Reform supporters are racist, after targeting the party in his Labour conference speech and claiming its leader “hates Britain”.

Earlier in the week, Sir Keir called Reform’s freshly announced immigration policies “racist” and “immoral”.

Asked if he thinks Mr Farage is a racist, he said: “No, nor do I think Reform voters are racist.

“They’re concerned about things like our borders, they’re frustrated about the pace of change.

“So I’m not for a moment suggesting that they are racist.”

He said he was “talking about a particular policy”, which would see Reform axe the right of migrants to apply for indefinite leave to remain, ban anyone who is not a UK citizen from claiming benefits, and force those applying for UK citizenship to renounce other citizenship.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

How did the PM perform at conference?

Reform ‘taking country down road of toxic division’

Sir Keir also refused to say whether he thinks Mr Farage is dangerous, saying: “I think the fight at the next election is going to define us as a country for years to come.

“I think it’s a dangerous moment for the country.”

He said he would not “get into labelling the man”.

“I’m talking about the ideas and what he stands for and what I stand for,” he added.

“I think that taking our country down the road of toxic division where you don’t want to fix problems because if they’re fixed, you lose your reason to exist, I think that is dangerous for our country.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Starmer’s ‘anti-Reform party’ gamble

Farage: Starmer unfit to be PM

Mr Farage reacted to Sir Keir’s speech by accusing him of being “unfit to be the prime minister of our country”.

“I used to think the prime minister was a decent man, somebody that I could talk to and chat to,” he said.

“We might disagree on our worldview, but I thought he was a profoundly decent human being. I am completely shocked at his behaviour.

“I hope when he wakes up tomorrow morning he feels ashamed of what he has done. This is a desperate last throw of the dice for the prime minister who’s in deep trouble, a prime minister who can’t even command the support of half of his own party.

“But I’m sorry to say, I now believe he is unfit to be the prime minister of our country.”

Continue Reading

Trending