Agenda item

Fire Safety Update - Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Properties

Report of the Director of Community and Children’s Services.

Minutes:

Members received a report of the Director of Community and Children’s Services which updated them on progress in respect of Fire Safety matters since the last update in October 2018.

 

During the discussion on this item, the following points were noted:

 

  • Members noted that, under the Housing Act, local authorities had certain responsibilities relating to private residential buildings within their boroughs.  Following the Grenfell Tower tragedy, the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) had identified over 100 privately-owned high-rise residential buildings within the City’s area of responsibility. The MHCLG instructed that the City provided confirmation that none of these buildings had been fitted with ACM cladding that had been fitted at Grenfell. This was a considerably onerous task. The Assistant Director wrote to all these properties requesting information and identified one, a hotel, which had ACM cladding.  The hotel is working with the London Fire Brigade and, in accordance with the Housing Act, the City Corporation is required to monitor this.  Members noted that the Government continues to work with other cladding manufacturers to assess the safety of their products in the event of fire. Local authorities concerned have been alerted to the possibility of further investigations. 

 

  • Fire door testing continues in the specialist facility in Poland and once all the results have been analysed, priorities for the door replacement programme will be finalised. 

 

  • The City Corporation has a detailed review procedure for fire risk assessments across the whole of the Corporation, which is scrutinised by the Health and Wellbeing Board quarterly, in addition to internal reviews within the Community and Children’s Services Department. 

 

  • In accordance with case law, if the door replacement programme was classified as an improvement, then leaseholders could not be re-charged.  Furthermore, leaseholders were not required to allow the City Corporation access to replace their doors but Members noted that this could have serious implications in terms of other residents. 

 

 

RESOLVED, That – the report be noted.

 

 

Supporting documents: