EWS1 form

GDB2222

I'll just add one more thing. Suppose the government puts pressure on lenders to relax their requirements, that only makes sense if there is no problem and lenders are being vastly overly cautious. But, you have to ask yourself whether they are? Lenders are in business to lend money, and they would not let a lack of inspection stand in their way, unless they think there’s a real possibility of ruinously expensive fire precautions being required.

pauldwaite

@GDB2222 I absolutely agree that the first priorities are dangerous buildings, and potentially-dangerous buildings, and all the people stuck living in them, and dealing with the current and potential costs.

I also have zero knowledge of fire safety, so I can't speak on what degree of expertise is needed to work out whether buildings are safe. My worry is that there might be lots of blocks of flats (containing lots and lots of homes) with external walls that don't pose a fire risk, and that don't require an extensive inspection to establish the lack of fire risk, but are un-mortgageable because lenders, surveyors and insurers aren't willing to risk being liable for the cost of any future remedial works.

I'm not sure I have as much faith as you do in lender's expertise in assessing risk — I don't think they have a private team of fire safety inspectors working out what the real-world risks are. I think they're as much in the dark as everyone else, and I don't think it hurts them to turn down borrowers, when all lenders are doing the same thing.

I agree it's difficult for any institution to fix this, government or others. I feel like the source of the problem is unsuitable fire safety precautions in construction over the past couple of decades: if external cladding had been tested more before being used in construction, maybe the problems could have been identified before anyone died. I'd be equally happy blaming the construction industry and government, but government's the one institution that can actually put people in prison for doing wrong, so I feel like they need to get in the mix, regulation-wise, given that it's a bit unrealistic to expect anyone who buys a home to become enough of an expert in fire safety to refrain from buying somewhere that might be at risk.

So I'm not suggesting pressure on lenders to relax requirements As I say, I know nothing about fire safety itself, which is the actual important part of all this. But it feels like we need more work on the regulation around fire safety, and the processes to establish where fire risk exists, and where it doesn't, to make it happen a bit faster, without sacrificing safety. As per paragraph 87 of "Cladding: progress of remediation, Second Report of Session 2019–21":

The G15, whose housing association members managed more than 600,000 homes across the country, told us that they had only received 17 successfully completed EWS1 forms as of March 2020, which at that rate would take nearly 50 years to complete the assessments on all G15 buildings within scope.

Fifty years feels like too long for people to be unable to re-mortgage their homes. 

Nazariah

LPT16 said:

Hi all. Has anyone (or does anyone know of a situation) where the EWS investigation has taken place and the building has actually been signed off as completely safe? I'm beginning to think this is an urban myth and we'll be stuck in a 1 bed flat forever....

Hi all, we have an update on our struggle with the EWS1 form.
As of yesterday the housing association got a signed off EWS1 form back with the all clear and no remedial works needed. As it is a building below 18m and has brick facade not cladding it was signed off with option b1 on the form. 
 Our solicitor thinks this will satisfy our mortgage lender and fingers crossed after months and months of delays we will be exchanging contracts and completing within the next 2 weeks! 

GDB2222

I own a flat in a building with brick/concrete walls, without any cladding whatsoever.   After a fire safety assessment, this is what is to be done to my flat:

• Installing smoke / Heat alarms in each room.
• Sealing up vents to the old ventilation column (1 vent in bathroom and 1 in the hallway cupboard between the bathroom and kitchen).
• Installing a new extractor fan and ducting system to the bathroom.
• Installing a new fire rated front door.
• Installing a new fire rated panel to the cupboard where the Water tank is located in the kitchen.
• Installing a new sprinkler system inside the property.

Freeholders are dead scared of being criticised, so this is a 'no expense spared exercise'. 

LPT16

Nazariah said:

LPT16 said:

Hi all. Has anyone (or does anyone know of a situation) where the EWS investigation has taken place and the building has actually been signed off as completely safe? I'm beginning to think this is an urban myth and we'll be stuck in a 1 bed flat forever....

Hi all, we have an update on our struggle with the EWS1 form.
As of yesterday the housing association got a signed off EWS1 form back with the all clear and no remedial works needed. As it is a building below 18m and has brick facade not cladding it was signed off with option b1 on the form. 
 Our solicitor thinks this will satisfy our mortgage lender and fingers crossed after months and months of delays we will be exchanging contracts and completing within the next 2 weeks! 

Congratulations this is the first time I've heard of this actually happening so this does give a glimmer of hope! You must be very pleased. Our HA have said that even if the initial invasive investigation comes back as no remedial works need doing they are going to get a third party to do another investigation (even though the first inspection was carried out by qualified professionals who can complete the EWS 1 form). It just seems that nobody is willing to be liable to say that a building is safe.

LPT16

GDB2222 said:

I own a flat in a building with brick/concrete walls, without any cladding whatsoever.   After a fire safety assessment, this is what is to be done to my flat:

• Installing smoke / Heat alarms in each room.
• Sealing up vents to the old ventilation column (1 vent in bathroom and 1 in the hallway cupboard between the bathroom and kitchen).
• Installing a new extractor fan and ducting system to the bathroom.
• Installing a new fire rated front door.
• Installing a new fire rated panel to the cupboard where the Water tank is located in the kitchen.
• Installing a new sprinkler system inside the property.

Freeholders are dead scared of being criticised, so this is a 'no expense spared exercise'. 

Wow. Can I ask how old is your building and have you been given a timeline for this? How frustrating for you 

Giammy85

Giammy85 said:

L&G refuses my EWS1 form because the property address is not reported. In fact 6 block numbers are reported (including mine), street, and postcode of the block on the side of mine. Is it worth explaining this as a simple Google Map search can demonstrate that the form covers 6 block numbers next to each other or is it a lost battle?

I moved my application from Natwest/L&G to HSBC/Countrywide. Also Countrywide rejected it:
"Thank you for the EWS1 form and accompanying letter. Unfortunately, the postcode for the subject address is not included on the EWS1 form and therefore we cannot process it. We cannot assume an EWS1 covers postcodes not listed on the form as the parts of the building covered by the missing postcodes may have been excluded from the form on purpose for some technical reason.
We would ask that the EWS1 form be amended to include “all built” postcodes as stated on the form itself"
At least communication from HSBC is 100 times better than Natwest. 
ORSA Projects Limited immediately amended the form as requested.

Andalucian

We have a flat in a building below 18m in height. The buyers' surveyor is insisting on having a EWS1. it is impossible to get one as stated on the form itself.... not to be used for any other purpose other than buildings over 18m. What on earth is going on when Mortgage lenders go against the nstructions of their own association?

AdrianC

annetheman said:

annetheman said:

Thank you but it’s a brick building.

Just going back several pages, nobody's addressed this...

Yes, it's brick-faced. No, that is not the same as "a brick building".

That brick will be, literally, skin-deep - just the same as the panelling on the central section will be.
Behind both, there will be the (steel, probably?) structural frame and whatever insulation. And they're the bits, together with that central panelling, that nobody wants to put their scrawl to.

GDB2222

I’m not sure that it’s covered by EWS forms, but there are also issues potentially with substandard fire doors, and ducts for the services that run through the building and can spread fire and smoke. 

In theory, there’s nothing simpler than a concrete building being essentially fireproof, but even if the exterior is not covered in flammable materials the contents of the flats are highly flammable. 

The truth is that people got rather lax about fire precautions, and Grenfell has shocked people back into awareness. There’s a lot of catching up to do.