麻豆约拍

Imagine you've saved up to buy your home, you move in and everything seems to be OK... then you learn the building isn't safe from fire, and what's worse - it would cost millions of pounds to put right and no-one is paying that for you.

That's what happening at the Morello Quarter development in Basildon. More than 400 flats are based there, but since the tragic Grenfell fire disaster in 2017 - which killed 72 people - residents have been told they're not safe and they'll have to foot the bill.

Jennifer Viccars is a former resident and the sole remaining member of Cherrydown Management Limited who manage the development. She's been trying to find solutions to new fire regulations that were brought in after Grenfell. She recently went to court with local solicitors Ellisons to stop Essex Fire and Rescue Service taking enforcement action to implement the new measures.

Weston 麻豆约拍s, which built Morello Quarter, says it is in touch with Jennifer and is carrying out its own investigations and are crucially assessing the building in line with the government's new guidance issued in 2020. It denies any suggestion the building didn't comply with building regulations before Grenfell.

A spokesman said: "In relation to the use of the cladding & insulation materials, the design of the building including details for the materials specified was accepted and approved by the local authority building control at the time of its construction."

Essex County Fire and Rescue Service told us they carried out an audit of the building in December 2020 and recommended a waking watch was put in place "until the installation of alarms and simultaneous evacuation plans were in place".

The fire service continued: "We recommended this should be in place within four months. Further engagement with the building led to an enforcement for work to be carried out in four weeks. A notice was served on 30 April 2021 requiring the implementation of a waking watch by 31 May 2021. The building appealed this enforcement and a court ruling extended the deadline.

"The court did not rule in favour of either party and both parties recognised the need for the measures in order to keep people safe. Both parties have continued to work amicably with the responsible persons to help make this building safer for residents by reducing the risk of a fire."

Show less