The challenges in fixing the cladding crisis

In December 2024, the government published its plan for accelerating the pace of remediation for buildings with unsafe cladding. As part of this plan, it was mandated that by the end of 2029, all buildings above 18m will have been remediated, and that all buildings between 11-18m will either have been remediated or have a date for remediation. An ambitious target, but a necessary one in a world where so many residents’ lives have been disrupted by the long shadow of cladding crisis.

Knowing our homes

For Clarion to develop a long-term programme of works that can achieve these goals, it was crucial to understand the extent of the issues in our stock.

As one of the largest landlords in the country, Clarion is directly responsible for over 500 buildings that are greater than 11m in height.

Each one of these buildings requires a detailed external wall assessment to determine whether there are external wall risks and – crucially – whether these risks are intolerable. This has been no easy task, particularly when faced with changing government guidance, shifting attitudes from consultants, and an insurance industry keen to insulate itself from risk.

We have been completing external wall assessments in one form or another since the publication of the consolidated advice note in 2020. It was clear to us from the outset that if we were to make informed decisions about our stock and our possible risk exposure, then we needed as much data on our buildings as possible. And truthfully that data wasn’t there. Whilst we held significant property data for our stock, one key gap we found was detailed and reliable information on the make-up of our external wall systems. Without this, it would be impossible to even grasp the scale of the problem, let alone begin to tackle it.

Therefore, we embarked on a stock-wide programme of visual surveys so we could prioritise our entire portfolio for further risk-based appraisal. Now, six years later, working with valued partners, Clarion has completed appraisals to over 4,000 buildings, including all our 11m+ buildings. We are in the process of creating a long-term remediation programme to meet the targets outlined in the government’s remediation acceleration plan. Our inspection programme covered a wide variety of different stock types and provided invaluable insight into what actually drives external wall risk.

What we found

We found that whilst height, much-discussed and understood, is of course a key indicator in establishing building safety risk, it isn’t actually the most reliable or revealing one.

Similarly, whilst problematic cladding materials, such as ACM or HPL, can be catastrophic in certain quantities or configurations, these again, in our experience, are not the main driver of external wall appraisal failures.

Our investigations found, time and again, that what pushes a building into the intolerable bracket for an appraiser is the quality of construction. Meaning that in most cases the materials used in the building make-up were perfectly acceptable at the time of construction and do not in themselves constitute an intolerable risk. Instead, it is the failure to construct the building properly that has meant works are required.

The most common and consequential construction quality defect we found is in the provision of cavity barriers - designed to stop fire from being able to spread rapidly across a façade. The near-total failure to install these properly so they can perform their function has meant many buildings that might otherwise have been deemed tolerable now require costly remediation.

The truth is that many of the risks we are dealing with today were not created by historic ambiguity in guidance and regulation but rather by the dismal skills shortage in the construction industry over the last 10-20 years. In every building we have investigated from this period, we have found evidence of this deficit.

More worryingly, this lack of skill can extend to every other part of a building. If an external wall system hasn’t been constructed properly, then it is more than likely that similar deficiencies exist throughout the structure. These failings are particularly stark in non-standard forms of construction (such as timber frame or modular) where the design is so reliant on the provision of key building safety features such as compartmentation. If these aren’t in place, then the problems that arise can be almost impossible to rectify retrospectively.

It’s not about materials – it’s about quality

Whilst shoring up regulation and strengthening guidance can help eliminate some of these risks, without significant upskilling of all those involved in the built environment, we will never achieve the outcomes we so vitally need. 

This is particularly relevant at a time when there is a much-needed push from government to greatly expand and accelerate residential development. Without the requisite skills and behaviours, we risk creating the next generation of building safety issues, despite much-needed changes to regulation and the creation of the Building Safety Regulator.

So much of current industry capacity is now tied up in righting the mistakes of the past, we must ensure the steps we take now future-proof the national stock and do not repeat the same behaviours that generated this crisis. Our properties will only ever be as good as those that build and maintain them and so it is incumbent upon those of us who work in the built environment to always be learning and improving and at Clarion, that is central to our approach to building safety.