Solving the Block Safety Conundrum

Safety is a key aspect of block management, but who should be responsible for ensuring the safety of residents? In the wake of the tragic fire at Grenfell Tower in 2017, Dame Judith Hackitt was tasked with reviewing building regulations, bringing safety concerns into sharp focus.

The Call for a Dutyholder

Dame Judith Hackitt chaired the Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety following the Grenfell tragedy. In her final report, she proposed that a named individual—a dutyholder—should be ultimately responsible for a building’s safety. Her recommendation suggests that this dutyholder should be the building’s owner, ensuring clear accountability.

The Complexity of Leasehold Structures

While the idea of a named dutyholder makes sense in principle, it becomes complicated in the context of leasehold properties. Many blocks are owned by leaseholders or commonholders through structures like Residents Management Companies (RMCs) or Right to Manage Companies (RTMs). This means that one of the resident directors would have to take on the legal responsibility for the block’s safety.

The Risks and Responsibilities Involved

Although day-to-day safety management can be delegated to an agent, the dutyholder remains legally responsible. If something goes wrong, they could face serious consequences—including potential imprisonment. This raises concerns about whether residents will be willing to take on such a significant legal burden.

Challenges in Implementation

Andrew Bulmer, CEO of the Institute of Residential Property Management (IRPM), predicts that resident meetings could become contentious as directors debate who should assume this responsibility. Similarly, developers may struggle to hand over completed sites if no one is willing to step forward as the dutyholder.

The Need for Leasehold Reform

This issue highlights why leasehold reform is urgently needed. The leasehold reform team at the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government (MHCLG) is exploring potential solutions, but as Andrew Bulmer notes, overhauling a long-standing system is complex and fraught with risks. Until a clear resolution is found, the debate over leasehold reform is likely to continue.