EWS1 Issues and Advice

annetheman

nightingale101 said:

annetheman said:

nightingale101 said:

annetheman said:

nightingale101 said:

annetheman said:

nightingale101 said:

I am now avoiding all properties that have cladding regardless of whether the certificate is valid or not.

Probably best to avoid flats full stop. It’s not just cladding (which virtually all modern buildings have, eg brick cladding, glass cladding, concrete = “non flammable” cladding; ACM, EPS = “flammable” cladding). 

I know of many buildings that are brick clad and have B2 because the insulation underneath is flammable. 

The valuer could ask for it for ANY flat building and they do, even maisonettes. Best to just buy a freehold house! Then at least it’s your problem only as the freeholder

I've started looking at conversion flats now from old Victorian/Georgian/Edwardian houses. They come with other problems but less likely this cladding issue and even if there is, it'll be a remedial work of 3/4 flats together rather than 100s if that makes sense?

Yes, if you are in a smaller building the remediation building is obviously smaller. 

The risk is still there, just go for a freehold house. Read section 7.9 of Approved Document B: once any building is converted, document B applies. I.e. do the flat conversions have adequate compartmentation? Are all materials used in the external wall system meet requirements for "class 0" (non flammable)? Any change to the regs would still apply to a conversion.

Issue is that valuers can and are asking for it on anything, even maisonettes, so it's being applied all over the place to buildings that really shouldn't need it (this seemed to be a revelation to govt, who only admitted around Nov that they "know it's being asked for where it is not required") - we all knew this since Jan 2020 advice note. 

The thing about the misnomer-ed cladding scandal (really a building safety scandal) is that until central govt acts, it just gets worse every day. More people get dragged into it when they try to move/sell/remortgage. Lenders not budging, RICS scared to make things even worse. Until central govt get on with risk-classification and propose their own solution mandated by law, since EWS1 is not, lenders' valuers will ask for it whenever they see "flat". The odd one might not.

MESS!

It says that if there is a material change of use. That's if the building contains combustable cladding but if it has no cladding at all then I don't see why that particular conversion flat would be subject to obtaining an EWS1 certificate? Also haven't looked too into it but according to this article https://www.ftadviser.com/mortgages/2020/11/23/ews1-forms-scrapped-for-buildings-without-cladding/ the forms won't be needed for buildings without cladding?

@nightingale101
Yes - a conversation is a material change of use from a single occupancy building to a multiple occupancy building, to which Document B applies. 

EWS1 has never been for buildings "with cladding" - they are for buildings above 18m. Again, all residential buildings have sort sort of cladding. Here is my thread about that Nov announcement you linked to, which the chief executives of both the Building Societies Association (representing all building societies) and UK Finance (basically all mortgage-lending banks) said they did not agree to anything he said and have no idea where the numbers he quoted came from.

You can search the hashtag #EndOurCladdingScandal on twitter to see just how wide the scope of application is. Every single type of multi occupancy building (i.e. flats) has to comply by document B i.e. walls must meet the standards set in there - apparently, nobody has any faith in the building industry and rightly so (Grenfell inquiry revealing some open secrets). It'll just get even more ridiculous unless central govt act effectively. Inevitable knock on effect on rest of market too.

As I mentioned above, govt moved goal posts before. They could again; it's a total a mess you can only avoid by buying a freehold house.

The older Victorian conversions are definitely not 18m so they wouldn't fall into this category though right? But are you saying that lenders because they don't know where 18m came from will still be hesitant to lend for any residential flat even if it is an old house from 1900s that has been converted and definitely doesn't have any cladding?

Yes I'm aware you won't have this issue with a freehold house but not like everyone can get that as a FTB. A flat is the only achievable way to get on the ladder.

I know - trust me! That's why I'm buying a flat!

Yes, that's what's happening. Most HMOs are definitely not 18m, the vast majority, at least 15,000, are <18m compared to less than 2,000 >18m in the UK. The EWS1 was and is only to be used for the 2,000 >18m, but as we are now well aware and govt only slowly beginning to admit, it is affecting 2 storey maisonettes just as well.

We are seeing that one of the most commonly used insulation material, Kingspan K15, is non compliant. Where the insulation is compliant, there is no compartmentation. Where there is compartmentation, there is inadequate ventilation. Etc etc.

If EWS1 survey is done on a 2 storey conversion vs 15m vs 18m, all will still fail with K15/no compartmentation/lack of fire breaks etc in the external wall system. The valuers know this and that is why they want it for every HMO (that must comply with Document , not the height (by the way here is the 'govt expert' explaining why they chose 18m.....)

And Victorian houses definitely did not require compartmentation, so it's the faith in modern builders that they did comply with Document B - again, who has faith in modern builders or their suppliers now? 

My building is a <18m solid brick-clad building with wool insulation (non-flammable), sprinklers in the hallways and centralised alarms, compliant cavity barriers and fire breaks. Completed in Nov 2019, you would think it was an A1/2 - in fact, you would think it wouldn't be needed at all - but the rules changed about "attachments" i.e. balconies -- boom B1.

Until govt stops putting its head in the sand, it will just get worse. 12 months ago it was just a handful of CAGs on Twitter; now it's tens of thousands tweeting about it daily.

nightingale101

annetheman said:

nightingale101 said:

annetheman said:

nightingale101 said:

annetheman said:

nightingale101 said:

annetheman said:

nightingale101 said:

I am now avoiding all properties that have cladding regardless of whether the certificate is valid or not.

Probably best to avoid flats full stop. It’s not just cladding (which virtually all modern buildings have, eg brick cladding, glass cladding, concrete = “non flammable” cladding; ACM, EPS = “flammable” cladding). 

I know of many buildings that are brick clad and have B2 because the insulation underneath is flammable. 

The valuer could ask for it for ANY flat building and they do, even maisonettes. Best to just buy a freehold house! Then at least it’s your problem only as the freeholder

I've started looking at conversion flats now from old Victorian/Georgian/Edwardian houses. They come with other problems but less likely this cladding issue and even if there is, it'll be a remedial work of 3/4 flats together rather than 100s if that makes sense?

Yes, if you are in a smaller building the remediation building is obviously smaller. 

The risk is still there, just go for a freehold house. Read section 7.9 of Approved Document B: once any building is converted, document B applies. I.e. do the flat conversions have adequate compartmentation? Are all materials used in the external wall system meet requirements for "class 0" (non flammable)? Any change to the regs would still apply to a conversion.

Issue is that valuers can and are asking for it on anything, even maisonettes, so it's being applied all over the place to buildings that really shouldn't need it (this seemed to be a revelation to govt, who only admitted around Nov that they "know it's being asked for where it is not required") - we all knew this since Jan 2020 advice note. 

The thing about the misnomer-ed cladding scandal (really a building safety scandal) is that until central govt acts, it just gets worse every day. More people get dragged into it when they try to move/sell/remortgage. Lenders not budging, RICS scared to make things even worse. Until central govt get on with risk-classification and propose their own solution mandated by law, since EWS1 is not, lenders' valuers will ask for it whenever they see "flat". The odd one might not.

MESS!

It says that if there is a material change of use. That's if the building contains combustable cladding but if it has no cladding at all then I don't see why that particular conversion flat would be subject to obtaining an EWS1 certificate? Also haven't looked too into it but according to this article https://www.ftadviser.com/mortgages/2020/11/23/ews1-forms-scrapped-for-buildings-without-cladding/ the forms won't be needed for buildings without cladding?

@nightingale101
Yes - a conversation is a material change of use from a single occupancy building to a multiple occupancy building, to which Document B applies. 

EWS1 has never been for buildings "with cladding" - they are for buildings above 18m. Again, all residential buildings have sort sort of cladding. Here is my thread about that Nov announcement you linked to, which the chief executives of both the Building Societies Association (representing all building societies) and UK Finance (basically all mortgage-lending banks) said they did not agree to anything he said and have no idea where the numbers he quoted came from.

You can search the hashtag #EndOurCladdingScandal on twitter to see just how wide the scope of application is. Every single type of multi occupancy building (i.e. flats) has to comply by document B i.e. walls must meet the standards set in there - apparently, nobody has any faith in the building industry and rightly so (Grenfell inquiry revealing some open secrets). It'll just get even more ridiculous unless central govt act effectively. Inevitable knock on effect on rest of market too.

As I mentioned above, govt moved goal posts before. They could again; it's a total a mess you can only avoid by buying a freehold house.

The older Victorian conversions are definitely not 18m so they wouldn't fall into this category though right? But are you saying that lenders because they don't know where 18m came from will still be hesitant to lend for any residential flat even if it is an old house from 1900s that has been converted and definitely doesn't have any cladding?

Yes I'm aware you won't have this issue with a freehold house but not like everyone can get that as a FTB. A flat is the only achievable way to get on the ladder.

I know - trust me! That's why I'm buying a flat!

Yes, that's what's happening. Most HMOs are definitely not 18m, the vast majority, at least 15,000, are <18m compared to less than 2,000 >18m in the UK. The EWS1 was and is only to be used for the 2,000 >18m, but as we are now well aware and govt only slowly beginning to admit, it is affecting 2 storey maisonettes just as well.

We are seeing that one of the most commonly used insulation material, Kingspan K15, is non compliant. Where the insulation is compliant, there is no compartmentation. Where there is compartmentation, there is inadequate ventilation. Etc etc.

If EWS1 survey is done on a 2 storey conversion vs 15m vs 18m, all will still fail with K15/no compartmentation/lack of fire breaks etc in the external wall system. The valuers know this and that is why they want it for every HMO (that must comply with Document , not the height (by the way here is the 'govt expert' explaining why they chose 18m.....)

And Victorian houses definitely did not require compartmentation, so it's the faith in modern builders that they did comply with Document B - again, who has faith in modern builders or their suppliers now? 

My building is a <18m solid brick-clad building with wool insulation (non-flammable), sprinklers in the hallways and centralised alarms, compliant cavity barriers and fire breaks. Completed in Nov 2019, you would think it was an A1/2 - in fact, you would think it wouldn't be needed at all - but the rules changed about "attachments" i.e. balconies -- boom B1.

Until govt stops putting its head in the sand, it will just get worse. 12 months ago it was just a handful of CAGs on Twitter; now it's tens of thousands tweeting about it daily.

Wow so many wrong things!! Where could I find more information on the whole "Where the insulation is compliant, there is no compartmentation. Where there is compartmentation, there is inadequate ventilation. Etc etc.". I just went to see a flat that's only 3 storeys high but apparently surveyor has checked and there is no cladding. How can I be sure before putting an offer in? Don't wanna go through the whole process only to find out the lender gonna reject it. 

annetheman

nightingale101 said:

annetheman said:

nightingale101 said:

annetheman said:

nightingale101 said:

annetheman said:

nightingale101 said:

annetheman said:

nightingale101 said:

I am now avoiding all properties that have cladding regardless of whether the certificate is valid or not.

Probably best to avoid flats full stop. It’s not just cladding (which virtually all modern buildings have, eg brick cladding, glass cladding, concrete = “non flammable” cladding; ACM, EPS = “flammable” cladding). 

I know of many buildings that are brick clad and have B2 because the insulation underneath is flammable. 

The valuer could ask for it for ANY flat building and they do, even maisonettes. Best to just buy a freehold house! Then at least it’s your problem only as the freeholder

I've started looking at conversion flats now from old Victorian/Georgian/Edwardian houses. They come with other problems but less likely this cladding issue and even if there is, it'll be a remedial work of 3/4 flats together rather than 100s if that makes sense?

Yes, if you are in a smaller building the remediation building is obviously smaller. 

The risk is still there, just go for a freehold house. Read section 7.9 of Approved Document B: once any building is converted, document B applies. I.e. do the flat conversions have adequate compartmentation? Are all materials used in the external wall system meet requirements for "class 0" (non flammable)? Any change to the regs would still apply to a conversion.

Issue is that valuers can and are asking for it on anything, even maisonettes, so it's being applied all over the place to buildings that really shouldn't need it (this seemed to be a revelation to govt, who only admitted around Nov that they "know it's being asked for where it is not required") - we all knew this since Jan 2020 advice note. 

The thing about the misnomer-ed cladding scandal (really a building safety scandal) is that until central govt acts, it just gets worse every day. More people get dragged into it when they try to move/sell/remortgage. Lenders not budging, RICS scared to make things even worse. Until central govt get on with risk-classification and propose their own solution mandated by law, since EWS1 is not, lenders' valuers will ask for it whenever they see "flat". The odd one might not.

MESS!

It says that if there is a material change of use. That's if the building contains combustable cladding but if it has no cladding at all then I don't see why that particular conversion flat would be subject to obtaining an EWS1 certificate? Also haven't looked too into it but according to this article https://www.ftadviser.com/mortgages/2020/11/23/ews1-forms-scrapped-for-buildings-without-cladding/ the forms won't be needed for buildings without cladding?

@nightingale101
Yes - a conversation is a material change of use from a single occupancy building to a multiple occupancy building, to which Document B applies. 

EWS1 has never been for buildings "with cladding" - they are for buildings above 18m. Again, all residential buildings have sort sort of cladding. Here is my thread about that Nov announcement you linked to, which the chief executives of both the Building Societies Association (representing all building societies) and UK Finance (basically all mortgage-lending banks) said they did not agree to anything he said and have no idea where the numbers he quoted came from.

You can search the hashtag #EndOurCladdingScandal on twitter to see just how wide the scope of application is. Every single type of multi occupancy building (i.e. flats) has to comply by document B i.e. walls must meet the standards set in there - apparently, nobody has any faith in the building industry and rightly so (Grenfell inquiry revealing some open secrets). It'll just get even more ridiculous unless central govt act effectively. Inevitable knock on effect on rest of market too.

As I mentioned above, govt moved goal posts before. They could again; it's a total a mess you can only avoid by buying a freehold house.

The older Victorian conversions are definitely not 18m so they wouldn't fall into this category though right? But are you saying that lenders because they don't know where 18m came from will still be hesitant to lend for any residential flat even if it is an old house from 1900s that has been converted and definitely doesn't have any cladding?

Yes I'm aware you won't have this issue with a freehold house but not like everyone can get that as a FTB. A flat is the only achievable way to get on the ladder.

I know - trust me! That's why I'm buying a flat!

Yes, that's what's happening. Most HMOs are definitely not 18m, the vast majority, at least 15,000, are <18m compared to less than 2,000 >18m in the UK. The EWS1 was and is only to be used for the 2,000 >18m, but as we are now well aware and govt only slowly beginning to admit, it is affecting 2 storey maisonettes just as well.

We are seeing that one of the most commonly used insulation material, Kingspan K15, is non compliant. Where the insulation is compliant, there is no compartmentation. Where there is compartmentation, there is inadequate ventilation. Etc etc.

If EWS1 survey is done on a 2 storey conversion vs 15m vs 18m, all will still fail with K15/no compartmentation/lack of fire breaks etc in the external wall system. The valuers know this and that is why they want it for every HMO (that must comply with Document , not the height (by the way here is the 'govt expert' explaining why they chose 18m.....)

And Victorian houses definitely did not require compartmentation, so it's the faith in modern builders that they did comply with Document B - again, who has faith in modern builders or their suppliers now? 

My building is a <18m solid brick-clad building with wool insulation (non-flammable), sprinklers in the hallways and centralised alarms, compliant cavity barriers and fire breaks. Completed in Nov 2019, you would think it was an A1/2 - in fact, you would think it wouldn't be needed at all - but the rules changed about "attachments" i.e. balconies -- boom B1.

Until govt stops putting its head in the sand, it will just get worse. 12 months ago it was just a handful of CAGs on Twitter; now it's tens of thousands tweeting about it daily.

Wow so many wrong things!! Where could I find more information on the whole "Where the insulation is compliant, there is no compartmentation. Where there is compartmentation, there is inadequate ventilation. Etc etc.". I just went to see a flat that's only 3 storeys high but apparently surveyor has checked and there is no cladding. How can I be sure before putting an offer in? Don't wanna go through the whole process only to find out the lender gonna reject it. 

I dont mean to put you off. Just to be aware as so many people are upset because they didn't know. This article from RICS is pretty thorough in explaining the requirements without too much technical hoola-hooping; it's long but the last paragraph is basically your answer.

How can you know your conversion is compliant? Intrusive survey.

That's the only way to actually know if any HMO complies with Document B requirements. An intrusive survey is otherwise known as..... EWS1 survey!

Hence valuers are asking for it for everything - because they can't trust what's on the plan, they can't trust the test certificate from Kingspace/Arconic etc, they can't trust the signed building control certificate of compliant - an expert who knows and can assess the fire risk on the basis not just of whether something is flammable or not but if it is flammable, what actual fire risk to life is there in the context of the exact system it is in - and there are 290 of them capable of doing that, for 10,000s of buildings.

Mess. Govt NEEDS to step in. Until they do, it just gets worse daily. You can see it on this forum for example; when I first posted about it year ago, no one knew what it was. Now there's a new thread every day.

nightingale101

@annetheman yeah that makes a lot of sense. I also see that there are some lenders that are more lenient than others. Like Barclays who don't even require ews1 at all. Now it's a question of whether do I proceed with a more lenient lender if it becomes an issue so I can finally be a home owner but then taking on the risks that I may get charged a hefty amount if a material is later found to be combustible or do I wait until gov sorts this out which could be years?

I think you mentioned that yours was a B1 rating and that you found remedial works would only be on the balcony so costs shouldn't be more than 5k if it does need to get done. Are you not worried that as gov guidelines changes this could potentially change to B2 (maybe another material is found to be combustable that we do not yet know of). And you might be subject to hefty bills as well? Or are you taking the risks? I guess what I'm tryna understand is how are you weighing up the risks?

Also I've read a lot of your posts in other threads etc and just wanna say thanks for being a hero in all of this and reporting all the gov updates!!! 

nightingale101

@annetheman also thanks for linking that RICS article!! I've only been reading the latest ones and didn't know older articles would be relevant