Fire Safety Update

Last updated: Thu, 08-Oct-2026.

, ,

This information is provided as-is, and is accurate to the best of my knowledge understanding from correspondence with various parties. (I.e. I am not a lawyer or fire safety expert. If someone has given me wrong or misleading information, this page could also contain that.)

I will try to update this page whenever I receive updates, or to correct any inaccuracies.

Use the 'Manage Subscriptions' option on the menu on the right to receive email notifications whenever this page is updated.

UPDATE 10/09/2026

  • Q1 2026 came and went… :(
  • After a long delay, the contract is now hopefully nearing completion.
  • Main issues remaining: Parking Spaces, Schedule of Documents, Insurance, Other costs.

UPDATE 12/2025

  • Taylor Wimpey held a meeting with residents online to present the plan for the remediation works.
  • They estimated Q1 2026.

UPDATE 05/12/2024

  • Contract negotiations are underway via our solicitors and Taylor Wimpey's solicitors for the remediation work. They estimate June/July 2025.

UPDATE 03/09/2024

UPDATE 26/02/2024

  • BWMC Ltd received a draft works contract from a solicitor acting on behalf of Taylor Wimpey. We will in turn pass it to solicitors to review.
  • No response yet to my letter to Taylor Wimpey which I sent on 13 February.

UPDATE 24/01/2024

  • Apologies for the lack of updates, This was posted to the WhatsApp group but not to this page.
  • I have been forwarded from another leaseholder this letter from Taylor Wimpey, dated 5 December 2023. This letter confirms that they have completed their assessment in line with PAS9980 and that they will carry out the required remediation works. Finally.
  • TW also sent this "Letter of comfort"
  • It is less clear to me who will end up paying for the PAS9980 survey - they do not mention this.
  • There is not yet any firm commitment on date.

UPDATE 19/07/2023

  • I have been forwarded from another leaseholder this letter from Taylor Wimpey, dated 27th June 2023. This suggests that the required PAS9980 survey will be carried out between 3rd-14th July. Well, it is now 19th July, and there has been no signs of activity…

UPDATE 17/07/2023

  • On 26/06/2023, I was forwarded this letter from Taylor Wimpey, dated 28th March 2023. It confirms […]“that Taylor Wimpey will carry out a new EWS1 assessment, in line with PAS9980 guidance. This will take place in May.” - Well, May has come and gone, and there have been no signs of any survey being carried out, and no update as promised.

UPDATE 23/01/2023

This response does not address the original question I asked, which was “Does Taylor Wimpey have to pay for their further investigations?” (i.e. the Leasehold Advisory Service already advised me that TW does not have to pay for such investigations.

The response is basically just copied and pasted from the guidance on the government website. It does not address or clarify anything I asked.

It also states this about lenders:

I hope you will welcome the news that on 20 December the six largest mortgage lenders confirmed, subject to their normal policy requirements, that from Monday 9 January 2023 they will lend on buildings in England of 11 metres (or five storeys) and above in height requiring remediation. This is subject to the building being part of a developer, including Taylor Wimpey, or government remediation scheme or protected by the leaseholder protections in the Building Safety Act, as evidenced by a leaseholder deed of certificate. This statement can be found here. The lenders' statement follows on from new valuation guidance for properties with cladding published by RICS, which reflects the leaseholder protections in the Building Safety Act and the solutions in place to fix buildings 11 metres and above. This provides welcome reassurance to leaseholders, who should complete the deed of certificate in the Leaseholder Information Regulations to demonstrate they have a qualifying lease and benefit from the protections. Further guidance for leaseholders on the leaseholder protections and completing the certificates has been published by the Department here.

I tried the Deed of Certificate back in October 2022, but the bank eventually refused to lend. Maybe worth another try?

UPDATE 20/01/2023

This states:

1.2 Taylor Wimpey received an EWS report from MDB Properties in June 2022. However, after conducting a review of the report, Taylor Wimpey informed MDB Properties that a supporting EWS1 form must be issued with it for it to be valid. Following this, we were informed by MDB properties that a valid and signed EWS1 form by the surveyor who wrote the report was not available. Because of this, we have not been able to move forward the funding application for Benedicts Wharf.

[…]

1.4 Taylor Wimpey is not in possession of an EWS1 form for Benedicts Wharf. When we asked the managing agents, MDB Properties, to provide a suitable EWS1 certificate, they informed us that it is not [currently] available. This exchange took place in June 2022.

Since June 2022, I have always been led to believe that the reason TW won't proceed was because they had come back requesting further investigations be carried out, but that they would not pay for it. Then we get a letter from TW making no mention of this, but saying the reason they won't proceed is because MDB never sent them the complete report. (Presumably because it has not been fully paid for.)

UPDATE 12/01/2023

MDB Properties have informed me that:

  • They are working on some sort of (unspecified) “letter”/solution to persuade banks to lend. They did not go into any detail on what, exactly, this is.
    • (Good luck with that! I've tried since April 2022, despite sending a Deed of Certificate) - another “magic letter” that lenders are supposed to accept. Not any of the lenders I've tried. After searching almost the entire UK mortgage market via two brokers, only two lenders would even consider it once they knew about the EWS1. Neither of them knew what the government's “deed of certificate” is. Both said no. Maybe MDB will have more luck….
  • They apparently want to go ahead and get the PAS 9980:2022 survey done. This might help get Taylor Wimpey to finally proceed with the remediation. It doesn't remove the EWS1, which the banks will use until it expires in 2026, unless replaced by another EWS1 carried out to PAS 9980:2022.
  • Leaseholders will have to pay for the PAS 9980:2022, and presumably the outstanding EWS1, and then another PAS 9980:2022 survey after any remediation works.

Background

An EWS1 survey was carried out at Benedicts Wharf in August 2021. This survey identified issues deemed a sufficient fire safety risk to rate the external wall system B2, (requiring remedial works).

This survey was carried out without the knowledge or consent of the leaseholders, and was arranged in such a way by the (former) Managing Agent, MDB Properties)that it was not paid for through the service charges. A consequence of this is that we are unable to obtain the full, detailed report. (Unless individual leaseholders pay £2,500 to obtain a copy of it. Even then, we can't share it.)

This means we do not know the exact nature of the fire safety risks, as nobody will discuss with us the detail of the issues identified in the report.

Although there appears to be no large amounts of ACM cladding (of the type involved in the Grenfell fire of 2017), there is apparently some other material on the building which requires remediation.

Because leaseholders did not “pay” for the report, the MDB Properties has also refused to respond to mortgage lenders' questions regarding fire safety. Some lenders are now prepared to lend on flats with outstanding EWS1 issues since the Building Safety Act 2022, but they still require information from the Managing Agent which is currently impossible to obtain.

This situation means leaseholders have been unable to sell or remortgage their flats, as they have been unable to answer the lender's questions concerning fire safety.

Current Situation

When contacted by a leaseholder earlier in 2022, Taylor Wimpey, (the developer of Benedicts Wharf) agreed to pay for the remediation work to be carried out. (It is now required by the Building Safety Act 2022 which makes clear that leaseholders should not be forced to pay huge sums of money to fix fire safety issues they did not cause.).

In order to assess the extent of the remediation works, they required a copy of the full EWS1 report. Due to the issue above, it could not be forwarded to Taylor Wimpey. (The surveyors who carried out the survey have not been fully paid.)

After three months of deadlock, failed mortgages and sales, in June 2022, the surveyors (ORSA) finally agreed to send the report to Taylor Wimpey. They were being contacted directly by frustrated leaseholders unable to sell or remortgage.

This should have been good news. However… Taylor Wimpey have since responded asking for further investigations to be carried out, but that they would not pay for this further survey work to be completed.

Given the huge hike in energy costs and other service charges, there is (apparently!) no money available for us to pay this via the service charges.

Following legal advice from the Leasehold Advisory Service fire safety solicitors, they contended that:

And therefore this ancillary cost of further investigations requested by TW is not recoverable from the leaseholders.

  • The government have said, and the Building Safety Act says specifically in the legislation, leaseholders cannot be charged for cladding remediation.
  • The intention of Parliament was that Leaseholders should not be paying for remediation, costs arising from (a problem created by a developer that they've admitted.)

“This established the principle that leaseholders must be protected and that the industry responsible should pay to fix the problems it created.”

// “As at 8 July, 48 developers have signed a pledge committing to remediate life critical fire safety works in buildings over 11 metres that they have played a role in developing or refurbishing over the last 30 years in England”//

Taylor Wimpey disagree, and are so far refusing to pay for the further investigations that they require to determine their liability.

It is completely unacceptable that despite years of campaigning, and a law protecting leaseholders, Taylor Wimpey are still asking leaseholders to pay.

This position has been sent to Taylor Wimpey, and to the local MP.

I await their response.

Further update from Leasehold Advisory Service

On 25 August 2022, I again contacted the Leasehold Advisory Service for advice on what to do next as Taylor Wimpey are apparently not complying with the Building Safety Act 2022.

They responded on 30 August, this time with a new interpretation of the law. In summary:

  • …the problem is that Taylor Wimpey is not a party to the lease and is not making a service charge to leaseholders for the costs of an additional survey. They are simply refusing to pay for it themselves, so the above clause does not really help.
  • The building safety pledge letter they signed in March this year does not specifically state if they will pay for further investigation work to be done.
  • It sounds like Taylor Wimpey is not complying with the spirit of the pledge, if not the exact wording.
  • The Pledge was supposed to be made into a contractually binding obligation between the signatories and the DLUHC . However, in early August the developers, via the House Builders Federation, refused to sign the contract on the basis that the wording of the contract went further than their initial pledge.
  • You could consider contacting the DLUHC about this possible failure to honour the pledge.

It is now very unclear who should pay for this. Possibly this cost may land with the freeholder. The law would seem to imply that someone will have to pay for this additional survey work to be carried out, but that they would potentially not be allowed to recover the cost via the service charges.

What about the £2,500 and mortgage problems?

As for the problem of leaseholders having to pay £2,500 for a copy of the report, MDB Property's refusal to respond to lender's questions, hence being unable to satisfy lenders requirements:

  • I have attempted to engage with the directors of Benedicts Wharf (Barking) Management Company Ltd to discuss this and come to some sort of solution.
  • Despite repeated requests since July 2022 via the managing agent and several letters sent to all registered addresses, so far I have received no response…

- Rob

Task Runner