Insight Local Government Lawyer Insight July 2017 33 At the time of writing, at least 259 aluminium composite material (ACM) panels from separate high-rise buildings have failed fire safety tests. Investigations are also revealing other problems with installed cladding; for example, that the installed cladding is not the same as that specified before construction. Local councils, housing associations and other landlords are justly concerned about their responsibility to occupiers. What should they now be doing? Where does it leave them with building operators/ owners and/or with the contractors who carried out works? Leasehold liability If remedial works will be significant or if an adequate fire safety strategy cannot be put in place it is likely occupiers will need to be re-housed until remedial works are complete. Landlord covenants Landlords will usually have a right to carry out fire improvement works under a lease. However, the right to do works will not extend to works which require the residents to be moved out. Forced relocation may be a breach of landlords’ quiet enjoyment and non-derogation from grant covenants. Consequently, occupiers will probably have a valid claim for damages, which is likely to include all costs relating to breach of leasehold covenants, decanting of residents (removal, storage and professional costs) and temporary accommodation. Unfit for habitation? Claims may also be brought under the Defective Premises Act 1972 (“DPA”). If a dwelling is “unfit for habitation” on Cladding, high rise and remedial works: risks and responsibilities Charis Beverton assesses the legal risks for local authorities and social landlords associated with cladding materials following the Grenfell Tower disaster.