Firms have begun announcing they have signed up to Michael Gove鈥檚 cladding deal. Here鈥檚 what we know so far

The country鈥檚 biggest housebuilders have this week been putting out statements confirming they have signed up to Michael Gove鈥檚 fire safety costs deal to remediate blocks over 11m in height.

Under the deal, firms agree to pay for the costs of fixing 鈥榣ife critical fire safety issues鈥 in blocks they have developed over the past 30 years, without using funds from the government鈥檚 黑洞社区 Safety Fund.

shutterstock_1592003509

Source: Shutterstock

The amount housebuilders are paying under the initiative ranges from 拢35m throught to 拢400m

The compromise deal has been reached after housing secretary Gove tabled legislation which, when enacted, could restrict housebuilders鈥 ability to trade if they don鈥檛 sign up.

He has also called for them to pay into a larger 拢4bn fund, which would have covered 鈥榦rphan blocks鈥 built by developers who can鈥檛 be identified or reached, with negotiations over that issue parked in order to get the pledge agreed.

The statements put out this week by those listed firms confirming support for the deal vary in length and detail, with some simply stating they are signing up and others outlining estimates of extra costs and number of buildings affected.

See also>> More housebuilders sign cladding pledge

See also>>The true cost of Gove鈥檚 new cladding policy on the housing sector

For many housebuilders there is still a lack of clarity around which buildings will definitely need work doing and how much of the cost may ultimately be recovered from contractors and other parties.

Scroll down to see what each of the 10 housebuilders announcing pledges so far have said.

HousebuilderAnnual Turnover (拢)Estimated extra cost from pledge (拢)Number of buildings covered by pledgePrevious amount set aside for fire safety work (拢)Comments
 
Taylor Wimpey 4.28bn 80m   165m 鈥淲e will continue to work with building owners, management companies and leaseholders and remain committed to resolving these issues as soon as possible for our customers.鈥
Crest Nicholson 786.6m 80m-120m   47.8m 鈥淭he group will continue to work at speed to refine its latest estimate of these costs.鈥
Persimmon 3.61bn 0   75m 鈥淲e continue to believe that the 拢75m provision set aside for the rectification works remains appropriate.鈥
Gleeson 288.6m 0 15 to be reviewed   鈥淭he board is not aware of any material fire safety issues in respect of the 15 buildings it was involved in.鈥
Redrow 1.94bn 164m   36m 鈥淲e will work with leaseholders to remediate their buildings and, where possible, pursue recoveries from main contractors, warranty providers and other third parties.鈥
Berkeley 2.2bn No figure given     鈥淏erkeley confirms that it has signed the Developer Pledge Letter which sets out the principles under which life-critical fire safety issues on buildings that they have developed of 11m and above will be remediated.鈥
Barratt 4.8bn 350m-400m 79 201m 鈥淲e intend to seek recoveries from other entities involved in the development process who may have a responsibility to share the costs of remedial works.鈥
Vistry 2.4bn 35m-50m   25.2m 鈥淲e are increasing our dedicated resource to effectively manage these remediation works.鈥
Countryside 1.5bn No figure given 221 to be reviewed 41m 鈥淢any of these buildings will not require remediation. Any further liabilities arising cannot currently be accurately quantified.鈥
Bellway 3.1bn 300m   186.8m 鈥淭he group will continue to pursue further recoveries from suppliers, subcontractors, professional advisors and others, where they have a liability, although we note that these are likely to be unavailable where contractual limitation periods have expired.鈥