Enforcing authorities are facing increased scrutiny as another residential building, clad in unsafe materials, caught fire just a week before the final report of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry is due to be published.

Dagenham cladding fire ahead of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry's final report

The recent fire in a residential tower block in Dagenham, East London, highlights the continuing crisis surrounding unsafe cladding. As the Grenfell Tower Inquiry prepares to release its final report this coming Wednesday, this latest fire safety incident brings back painful memories of the Grenfell Tower tragedy in June 2017.

In the seven years since Grenfell, significant steps have been taken, including the banning of combustible cladding and the overhaul of building safety regulations – especially for “Higher-Risk Buildings” of at least seven storeys or 18 metres in height – under the Building Safety Act 2022 and its accompanying secondary legislation. Yet, whilst a recent government report highlights that remediation work has been completed on about 30 percent of the residential blocks identified as having unsafe cladding, 3,280 buildings across the country still pose a fire risk.

Fortunately, the Dagenham fire did not result in any fatalities, though two people were hospitalised with minor injuries. The cladding on the building was slated for replacement, and both the Health and Safety Executive and the London Fire Brigade (LFB) have launched investigations into the incident, as confirmed in a statement issued late last week.

Rise in Enforcement Notices under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005

This most recent incident is likely to strengthen the proactive enforcement stance of the LFB and other enforcing authorities nationally, consistent with the recent increase in enforcement notices to "Responsible Persons" under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (the RRO 2005).

Under the RRO 2005, relevant authorities can issue an enforcement notice when they consider that breaches of fire safety regulations need to be rectified. The notice specifies a compliance deadline, giving the Responsible Person the opportunity to address the alleged breaches. Failure to comply is a criminal offence, and the enforcing authority may choose to prosecute those who fail to comply.

Enforcement notices are not always legally justified and may impose disproportionate demands, exceeding what the RRO 2005 and Building Regulations require. In such cases, appealing the notice is advisable. The appeal period is brief – just 21 days from when the notice is served. On filing an appeal, there may be an opportunity for negotiation with the enforcing authorities, with a view to settling matters amicably rather than via court proceedings.

How can Capsticks help

At Capsticks, we have extensive experience in appealing enforcement notices in the Magistrates’ Courts. We can provide expert advice on your options, the merits of lodging an appeal, and the preparation required. Whether representing you in court or in out-of-court meetings with enforcing authorities, our goal is to secure the best possible outcome by resolving matters amicably.

Please contact David Firth or Mathieu Quenin for more information and to find out more about how Capsticks can help.