The safety of high-rise buildings has been under scrutiny since dozens of people lost their lives in the Grenfell Tower fire.
The Government has pledged to take fresh action to relieve the burden on leaseholders, who have so far faced eye-watering costs for remediation work.
It says it will not hesitate to introduce a developers’ tax to hit those responsible for dangerous cladding if firms do not voluntarily step up to fix safety defects.
Here is what is known about the plans so far:
What is the problem?
A spotlight was cast on the use of flammable materials in the construction of high-rise buildings following the Grenfell Tower fire in 2017, which killed 72 people.
Many leaseholders have since been left facing potentially ruinous bills after discovering that cladding on their homes could be dangerous.
Some have reportedly been hit with costs of more than £100,000 to replace the unsafe materials or pay for so-called “waking watches”, where someone is employed to patrol a building checking for fires.
What action has been taken so far?
In February 2021, the Government announced a multibillion-pound package in a bid to ensure no leaseholders in high-rise blocks in England face charges for the removal of cladding.
The measures were intended to protect those who own homes in taller buildings.
They mean leaseholders in blocks over 18 metres (59ft) in height can access grants to replace unsafe cladding.
The case has so far been different for those who own homes in smaller buildings.
For blocks of between 11 metres and 18 metres (36ft and 59ft), the Government said in February it would introduce a “long-term, low interest” loan scheme under which “no leaseholder will ever pay more than £50 a month towards the removal of unsafe cladding”.
But Michael Gove, who subsequently took over the housing brief, said in November: “I’m still unhappy with the principle of leaseholders having to pay at all, no matter how effective a scheme might be in capping their costs or not hitting them too hard at any one time.”
What is the plan going forward?
Mr Gove has now said developers must agree a £4 billion plan to fix dangerous cladding on lower-rise flats by early March or risk new laws forcing them to act.
The Cabinet minister threatened that he is “prepared to take all steps necessary” to fix the “broken system” in a letter to the industry ahead of detailing the plans on Monday.
Potential action also includes restricting access to Government funding and future procurements, the use of planning powers, and pursuing firms through the courts.
Under the plans, leaseholders in buildings between 11 metres and 18 metres tall will no longer have to take out loans to cover the costs of remediation work – despite no new money coming from the Treasury.
Instead, developers have been told to agree to start contributing this year to cover the “full outstanding cost”, which Mr Gove estimates to be £4 billion.
What do campaigners and MPs make of the news?
A spokesman for the End Our Cladding Scandal said they were “cautiously optimistic” over the plans, but noted the “devil is in the detail”.
“It’s a welcome step in the right direction but there’s still a long road to travel,” he said.
David Renard, housing spokesperson for the Local Government Association, which represents 350 councils across England and Wales, warned that leaseholders were “not the only innocent victims” of the scandal.
“The construction industry must also be made to fix the fire safety defects it has built into blocks owned by councils and housing associations,” he said.
Shadow housing secretary Lisa Nandy said “promises are no substitute for a plan” as she urged the Government to go further to protect leaseholders from the costs.
“We must have legally binding protection for leaseholders in law to defend them from the costs of these appalling failures, a fixed deadline which will bring an end to this nightmare and a Secretary of State who is able to marshal the resources and political will to take on the might of big money interests – and win,” the Labour MP said.
Meanwhile, Stewart Baseley, the executive chairman of the Home Builders Federation, accepted that leaseholders should not have to pay for remediation, but said builders should not cover the costs alone.