The Building Safety Act 2022 is sending financial shockwaves through the UK property market by introducing stringent new requirements for building safety, including mandatory remediation of historical fire risks, strict compliance documentation, and enhanced responsibilities for property owners regardless of when the defects occurred through the UK property market. Introduced following the Grenfell Tower tragedy, the legislation has created far-reaching obligations for landlords and developers, many of whom are now grappling with unexpected and substantial remediation costs.
Get Living’s €210 Million Provision as Legal Appeal Looms
Among the most high-profile cases is that of Get Living, the build-to-rent operator that owns over 2,800 apartments in East Village, Stratford. The firm is appealing a tribunal ruling that obliges it to cover €18 million in fire safety remediation for five buildings. The dispute hinges on whether Get Living should be liable for safety defects inherited through acquisition, despite not having constructed the buildings.
Get Living has earmarked approximately €210 million—an amount that includes the €18 million currently under appeal—for potential liabilities across its portfolio in its 2023 accounts to cover potential liabilities across its portfolio. This comes as the total estimated remediation bill for the East Village development has ballooned to €500 million, reflecting widespread internal wall defects and cladding issues.
More Landlords Under Pressure
Get Living is not alone. The Building Safety Act has placed similar burdens on property owners across the UK. In another precedent-setting case, the Yianis Group was ordered to pay €24 million to remediate unsafe cladding at the Canary Riverside development in London.
Other property owners are facing urgent demands to issue compliance certificates to leaseholders within a strict four-week window. Failure to comply not only removes their right to recover costs via service charges but also exposes them to unlimited financial liability, legal disputes, reputational damage, and potential regulatory sanctions. to issue compliance certificates to leaseholders within a strict four-week window. Failure to meet this requirement removes their right to recover costs via service charges and leaves them solely responsible for all safety-related expenses.
One such example is Portland House in Sheerness, Kent, where leaseholders are contesting bills of around €16,000 per flat for fire safety works in a case now headed to court.
Government Steps In
The UK government is actively defending the Building Safety Act’s enforcement. In previous cases, such as those involving the remediation of high-rise buildings in Manchester and Leeds, the government intervened to ensure building owners complied with safety standards. These interventions highlight a consistent approach to shifting the financial burden away from leaseholders and onto property owners, reinforcing the seriousness with which these obligations are being pursued. Housing Secretary Angela Rayner is intervening in the Get Living appeal to uphold the principle that current owners, not leaseholders, bear financial responsibility—regardless of who created the defects.
This stance signals that further landlord challenges may be met with resistance at the policy level, underscoring the government’s commitment to systemic safety reform.
A Shifting Legal Landscape
For landlords, the financial implications are potentially devastating. Legal experts warn that the Act’s retrospective provisions could see owners of thousands of buildings across the UK held accountable for past construction failings, even when developers are no longer operational.
While the Building Safety Act was designed to protect residents and improve transparency, it is also expected to drive long-term structural changes in the housing market—potentially reshaping how risk is assessed, how developments are financed, and how accountability is enforced across the sector and improve transparency, it is fast becoming a watershed moment for UK property law—one that forces landlords to navigate an evolving and high-stakes regulatory terrain.
Outlook
With litigation mounting and safety costs rising, the Act’s impact on housing investment, insurance, and development strategies will be significant. For institutional landlords like Get Living, the next few months could determine not just legal precedent but the financial future of an entire asset class.
