Unsafe building cladding - who should pay?

[silvagti]

Been watching this on the news today and I'm surprised that nobody seems to be suggesting holding the building companies liable?

Right now it's looking like it'll either be homeowners/leaseholders or the taxpayer that are going to have to pay to fix problem properties.

Surely the building companies who fitted flammable cladding to buildings and profited from their sale should be the ones footing the bill?

 

[silvagti]

The builders are responsible to the leaseholders.
The certification companies and manufacturers are responsible to the builders.

If that's the case then it should be for the builders and the certification/cladding manufactures to fight it out. Rather then leaving the owners liable and forced to pay the costs.

At the end of the day if the owners bought the property off a builder the contract is between them and they can presumably hold the builder liable for any safety issues?

If I bought a car and years later where was a fault with the brakes/etc the manufacturer would be liable to fix the fault. To me this is like the car manufacturer saying they bought the brakes off another company and blaming them rather than fixing the problem.

I don't see why builders aren't being forced to fix this. Especially when many appear to be relatively recently built properties?

 

[silvagti]

I mean lots of people buy property that has problems with it but are liable to pay for the fixes, I feel bad for people in the situation with cladding but we've also had problems with the house we bought and there's no massive public outcry, just as there isn't for millions of people who buy property and have to spend thousands fixing problems with it.

That's why I don't think the government (taxpayer) should be forced to foot the bill. Seems unreasonable that the builders seemingly have no liability here IMO especially if the property was a newish build?

 

[silvagti]

The government shouldn't pay, but they absolutely should step in and sort the mess out.

I'd agree. Allowing builders/insurers/regulators to get away with sticking flammable cladding onto houses sets the wrong precedent. I can't think of another instance where health and safety issues with a private sector product/good (automotive, domestic goods, etc) would be left to the government to pay for.

In no way should the taxpayer be footing the bill for this.

 

[silvagti]

We have completely insulated any sensible business owner from the consequences of their bad decisions when it comes to making money. Make hay while the sun shines and when you get caught you have already pulled the money from the company.

I wonder how many of the companies that fitted the unsafe cladding are also making bank from removing it now.

I can't help but feel the law needs changing if a builder can fit flammable material to the side of buildings and suffer no financial penalty when the issue is discovered. As you say it's likely the same builders responsible will actually profit further removing the unsafe cladding they installed!

Seems crazy we have a system that seemingly provides incentive for builders to bodge a job and cut corners to save money in the knowledge that even if they're caught out they won't have to pick up the tab.

As the saying goes "socialise the losses ; privatise the gains!". Heads I win and tails the taxpayer loses! Moral hazard. Rewarding failure. It's all very similar to what happened during the 2008 financial crisis.