Deputy Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, Angela Rayner confirmed the Government’s response and adoptions of the recommendations of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry report this week (Wednesday 26th February). Phase 2 of the report was a watershed moment, exposing systemic failures in tall residential building safety and outlining clear recommendations to prevent another tragedy. I was proud to be in the Chamber and place on record my support for the Government’s response and raise some questions on behalf of the construction industry.
This weekend, Labour politicians from across local and national government are gathering at the East Midlands and West Midlands Labour Conferences. While London has the highest concentration of tall buildings, it is important to highlight the challenge outside of the capital. Recent data shows that cities including Leicester, Nottingham, Wolverhampton, and Coventry all have between 11-50 buildings over 11 metres requiring remediation. Birmingham has the highest number outside of the London boroughs, with 201-400 buildings still awaiting safety work. This leaves many people living in high-rise blocks across the Midlands in danger in their homes.
Since my election last year, I have worked with The Property Institute (TPI), which campaigns for the regulation of property managers to improve building safety. Many property managers have stepped up since Grenfell to protect residents by becoming key drivers of critical repairs and multi-million-pound remediation efforts, despite this not being within the original remit of their role. Many are professionally qualified and competent. However, the absence of regulation allows dangerously under-qualified operators to take on this vital role, putting residents at further risk – from both the homes in which they live and the people they trust to manage them.
Across the country, thousands remain stuck in unsafe homes, anxiously awaiting remediation. Government data shows that 70% of buildings over 11 metres identified with dangerous cladding have yet to be fully remediated. The Grenfell Inquiry exposed the failures of the Tenant Management Organisation (TMO), which neglected fire risk assessments and basic maintenance, directly contributing to the tragic loss of life. While the Social Housing (Regulation) Act 2023 addressed competency issues in the social housing sector, no equivalent legislation exists for the private sector, leaving a dangerous gap in oversight for those living in the private sector.
Astonishingly, anyone in the UK can become a residential property manager or start a managing agent company without formal qualifications or experience. These individuals oversee fire safety, building maintenance, insurance, and leaseholder finances—critical responsibilities that directly impact lives. Yet, without regulation, there is no system to ensure they are competent or held accountable when things go wrong.
Building management is an increasingly complex field requiring expertise in safety regulations, legal compliance, tenant rights, financial accountability, and environmental rules. Without mandatory qualifications and continuous professional development, we cannot expect property managers to navigate this evolving landscape effectively.
As Labour politicians meet this weekend, and with The Property Institute hosting an event on building safety at Labour’s East Midlands conference in Leicester, now is the time to push for change. Having worked in the construction industry before becoming an MP, I know that when gaps in regulation exist, lives are put at risk.
The sensible solution is the introduction of mandatory professional qualifications for property managers, backed by a strict code of practice and enforced by an independent regulator with legal authority. I’ll be lobbying for this to be included in the remit of the new ‘single Construction Regulator’ proposed in the Deputy PM’s speech this week. These critical changes would ensure that those managing residential buildings are both competent and accountable.
We owe this to the thousands of residents across the Midlands and beyond who continue to live in unsafe homes.
3 replies on “Ensuring resident safety: driving up property management standards”
I understand that the Government intends to recognise ROPA (Regulation of Property Agents) as a part of the Leasehold and Commonhold legislation.
Competent property management is important, but it’s a significantly lower factor down the list of those which caused the safety of hundreds of thousands of people to be put at risk in their homes. Ambigous building regulations, lack of transparency and rigour in product testing and building control, systemic issues of shoddy construction practices such as missing cavity barriers and compartmentation… to name but a few. I hope our MPs continue to focus on these factors too, regardless of whether their background is in the construction industry.
I worked with 11metre plus blocks in Property Management, and I understand first hand how making residents safe in their homes is not as clear cut as imagined. Often for an individual Property Manager, there is a strict regulatory and legal regime that has to be met, indeed is met daily by hard working people across often vast geographic portfolios with little resource available. My concern is that often there is a disconnect between high level management, industry bodies and regulation. I agree that legal regulation and accountability is required in the industry, but the roll out of any new regime has to be effective with those in operations actually carrying out the day to day job. It is all too easy for statements to be made, agreements to be made and everyone to shake hands on a job well done, but you have to take the industry with you from the bottom up.
You have to consult with those beyond management. In my personal experience, those employed in the industry need more than just blanket codes of practice, regulations and legal duties forced on them. A lot of people working doing the day job need to be reassured by government, and discussed with. Abilities for individuals to communicate concerns to any regulator, or voice independent opinion is a good start.