Navigating Legal Risks in UK Housing Investments

Picture: Google Street View

A recent tribunal ruling demanding £18 million from Stratford Village Development Partnership (SVDP) and Get Living for cladding replacement is sending ripples through the UK housing sector, raising concerns for potential investors. Richard Gerstein, a dispute resolution partner at Mishcon de Reya representing SVDP and Get Living, suggests the case, initiated by Triathlon Homes under the Building Safety Act 2022, holds significant implications.

The dispute revolves around the short-term funding of cladding replacement, currently supported by the government’s Building Safety Fund. Gerstein clarifies that it’s not about the necessity of the work but rather a financial tussle between commercial entities, given Triathlon’s status as a commercial housing association.

The Building Safety Act 2022, covering fire and structural safety, aims to hold developers responsible for related expenses, with a 30-year limitation period. A key takeaway is the Act’s lack of differentiation between funded, completed, and pending works, potentially exposing developers to claims even decades later.

Gerstein underscores the risk for developers who worked in the 30 years preceding the 2022 Act, emphasizing the potential burden on new investors. The concern arises from the precedent set in this case, where Get Living inherited financial responsibilities after acquiring the corporate vehicle behind an Olympic development post-completion.

Amid the UK’s housing shortage, Gerstein expresses apprehension that this ruling may deter investors from engaging in residential real estate. As the parties contemplate appealing the decision within the next month, the industry watches closely, anticipating potential shifts in legal dynamics. Stay informed and vigilant in navigating legal landscapes for a resilient property investment strategy.