Government will fund cost of replacing unsafe cladding for all leaseholders 6 storeys and over

It's about time.

What are your thoughts for those living in flats less than 18m high?

As LKP website states:- Freeholders who own the buildings still not being asked or forced to make a contribution to cladding costs.
Some unfairness in that leaseholders above 18 metres will get grants to meet the recladding costs whereas those below 18 metres will get loans instead costing £50 per month probably taking at least 30 years to pay off which will affect selling prices of those properties as new buyers of those flats will presumably have to continue to make those loan payments.
It does not help the situation that some managing agent are also adding 15% on top of the cost of remedial works as their fee for supervising the work.
A lot of builders/developers are trying to get out of doing remedial work by saying the flats were built to building regulations at the time. Some conveniently forget that to mention that they left out firebreaks in the cavities which were part of building regulations at the time. I do not know whether this was due to expense or just laziness? After all it will all be covered up by the cladding anyway, who will notice?

The UK government has actually just paid lip service to a building scandal that they hope appeases the situation. It resonates with such egregious misunderstanding, whether deliberate or ignorant, as to make me even more furious as one of those leaseholders caught up in this fiasco. I should never have been made responsible to correct building defects at ANY time.
The issue of further fire hazards ie fire breaks, cavity walls, wooden balconies et al has been ignored but will still need addressing by leaseholders under the elusive EWS1 certificate. And to add insult the huge costs of waking fire watches, spiraling building insurance costs, or no insurance at all as insurance companies won't insure buildings with inflammable products, has been dismissed.
The UK government has failed innocent leaseholders who bought property built in accordance to all the existing legislated building guidelines at the time. Surveyed and signed off by all the appropriate organisations and happily provided with mortgages by various lenders.
Building development companies have earned in excess of GBP15 billion since Grenfell burnt down and had a further GBP10 billion tax payer funds given to them to carry on building.
Leaseholders have had their properties assigned a nil value and are unable to sell or rent them. Instead of being compensated for a not fit for purpose property they have been told to correct the defects at their cost whilst having no input in it's initial construction.
There is no other industry that would be permitted to supply a sub standard product and not be held responsible to replace it at full value once that defect was known.
I can only deduce from the above that, although the UK government blather on about home ownership, it is not committed to home owners. It is committed to those big business party line donors who swell their coffers come election time.
Shame and shame on them again and again.

Reply to the comment left by Ly at 11/02/2021 - 10:35
It's a travesty of injustice. Unsafe is unsafe and is not limited to height or cladding.
ALL leaseholders affected by buildings that can be classed as fire hazards should be compensated fully.

Do you think it's possible that we are being drip fed an acknowledgement of liability by local /Central government bit by bit on the basis that say £5 billion sounds much better than maybe £20 billion or whatever the true cost is.
If this was America you would see a joint action against all the perpetrators which include the dreadful US/French company that conned the industry into believing that this stuff had zero spread of flame and then managed God knows how to get an agre'mont certificate to enable it's sale, followed by the consultants whose PI insurance should be paying for some of this, followed by the design and build contractors, followed by the building inspectors and their councils.
I studied for a building engineering degree in 1973 and we were taught not to design and construct in the way that many of these buildings seem to have been put together. We have gone backwards here and unless someone does time for it we will not learn the lessons.
When Director's think they may serve time for doing wrong it changes their behaviour. Of course not all are bright enough to know they are doing wrong but the French sales directors for the Grenfell cladding did know.

Sorry Dale I should have added that I agree with all you have said and you have my deepest sympathy. Is there any joining up of the wronged leaseholders or property owners that are suffering here? Now Jenrick has come out and said this surely legal opinion is necessary as to whether this makes an action for all buildings available viable. Since it happened historically is there any chance of the European Court of Human rights getting involved because that's the kind of boot Jenrick needs up his arse to sort this.

Reply to the comment left by Christopher Marsden at 11/02/2021 - 14:27There is no doubt that the UK government is attempting to appease leaseholders in order to protect the industry and its players Chris. There are various Facebook cladding groups who have attempted to bring this building scandal to the notice of public servants and media. It definitely warrants a class action. A defective product has been sold to unsuspecting and innocent buyers who have been forced to accept liability because the building industry and it's allies are a powerful conglomerate who appear untouchable. That should be challenged in a court of law as it would be were this a defective vehicle. Unfortunately I do not live in the UK and never have. If I did I would galvanise a swell of like minded owners to seek legal assistance in being compensated for a litany of woeful building regulations, that go far beyond just cladding, and has resulted in all of us living in or owning what are essentially death traps that we can do nothing with. Several million owners that for the last 4 years have stagnated in the property market and whose homes are considered worthless and hazardous whilst being forced to reside in them.
It should be untenable to any homeowner. And the people who should be held responsible are escaping due attribution because the UK government has fumbled a desultory response that protects those people.
Why do we allow it?

When a conservative MP (Stephen McPartland) tweeted the following it sums the whole sorry mess up: “It is a betrayal of millions of leaseholders. It is not good enough. It is shocking incompetence." I think it might well become the Tories' 'student fees' albatross come the next election.

why was cladding needed? who decided?