Introduction
Chaplair Ltd, the owner of a tower block in east London, was found guilty over delays in replacing flammable cladding. Newham Council has become the first local authority to successfully prosecute a building owner for failing to remove flammable cladding.
What powers do Local Authorities have under the Housing Act 2004?
Local authorities have powers under the Housing Act 2004 to take action against building owners and landlords where there is concern of certain hazards based on assessment carried out under the Housing Act's risk assessment system, the Housing Health and Safety Rating System.
How did this turn into a criminal claim?
Prior to the verdict of the Deputy Chief Magistrate at City of London Magistrates Court, Newham Council issued an improvement notice (section 5(2)(a) of the Housing Act 2004). Chaplair Ltd failed to meet a deadline of March 2021 to remove the dangerous cladding and a claim for criminal liability was brought in front of the Westminster Magistrates Court. It was presented to the court that four types of flammable cladding were found on the block of flats, including the same type of aluminium composite material which contributed to the Grenfell fire.
Chaplair Ltd argued that the main reasons it missed the deadline was because:
- it faced unavoidable delays due to failure to agree with the original contractor.
- it was short of £1 million in government funding.
Ruling
On the 18th of October 2023, the judge found Chaplair Ltd guilty of failing to comply with the improvement notice. Although, the judge agreed that there was a delay in funding from the government, he expressed that blame for delays (due to the disagreement with the original contractor) ultimately sat with Chaplair Ltd. He held that Chaplair Ltd had choices to make and that they had failed to make a reasonable one. The judge expressed that the building was highly dangerous, and the defendant did not take the risk it posed to residents seriously enough. Chaplair Ltd was fined £30,000 and ordered to pay costs of £30,000 along with a £190 victim surcharge.
What's the Significance of the Decision?
The decision underlines the fact that a Council can effectively take action against a building owner that does not deal swiftly with remediation work and serves as a reminder that building owners need to keep in mind residents' safety.
This blog is part of a series published by Howard Kennedy LLP on the Building Safety Act. For more information, please contact Shade Mushayandebvu, Stuart Duffy or Mark Pritchard. For other blogs, please click here.
Want to hear more from us? 
