A complaint alleging historic breaches of the health and safety at work act by Arlington House head lease holder Metropolitan Property Realizations Ltd (MPRL) – part of the Freshwater Group -has been lodged with the Building Safety Regulator.
The complaint follows on the heels of Freshwater representatives being grilled by Thanet council’s scrutiny committee last week over a number of safety issues with the 18-storey building.
The Building Safety Regulator found the 1963-built structure is posing a danger to residents and the public, with concrete cladding at risk of falling to the ground.
Works are likely to cost flat leaseholders some £40,000 per property. Comments at the meeting by MPRL company secretary and group solicitor Martin Bale that residents could ‘remortgage’ get a loan or sell up to meet the costs were met with fury.
Now Cllr Rob Yates, a former Arlington resident and one of the area’s ward councillors, has lodged the BSR complaint with supporting documents including a 2015 engineering report, 2019 and 2021 concrete survey reports plus tenant testimony over a delay in initial scaffolding works.
Previous survey findings
A 2015 survey concluded: “The structure was found to be suffering from low cover in areas with the advancing carbonation having reached the reinforcement in places, as well as chloride contamination of the concrete and hence a reinforcement corrosion problem. The ingressed chloride levels found presented a low to extremely high risk of chloride attack on the reinforcement. It was also found that previous repairs had frequently failed.”
While in 2021 a report by the same company found: “The concrete column was found to be suffering from chloride contamination of the concrete in conjunction with carbonation to the reinforcement in places, and hence a reinforcement corrosion problem. The external window panel and gable panel tested exhibited no visible signs of reinforcement corrosion but were found to be suffering from chloride contamination of the concrete and hence a potential reinforcement corrosion problem.
“The chloride levels found in all elements tested were sufficiently high in places to present a significant risk of reinforcement corrosion in uncarbonated concrete, as well as exacerbating reinforcement corrosion in carbonated concrete in the column.”
The report adds: “Previous concrete repairs must be considered suspect as they had addressed the effects of reinforcement corrosion, rather than the cause.”
Current issues
Currently, safety concerns about Arlington House include the deterioration of the main concrete structure and the cladding panels “to such an extent that they both present a risk to the health and safety of residents and members of the public.”
Other issues include the adequacy of fire safety measures, concern relating to one flat on each floor not being fitted with smoke detection or sounders; smoke control as many windows in the escape staircases cannot be opened due to disrepair and service ducts which are not fully protected and could allow the spread of fire and smoke.
In 2023 a ‘substantial’ risk to life was concluded in a fire risk assessment carried out for Arlington House by CS Todd Associates, who found numerous defects including to fire resisting doors, deficiencies in the protection to the risers between the flats and to the fire resistance of flat entrance doors.
In 2019, 15 fire safety failures were listed on an enforcement notice to Freshwater for the block.
Until recently there was a waking watch at the block due to Kent Fire and Rescue Service concerns over the fire evacuation strategy. This has now been stood down following the installation of a whole building fire alarm and detection system.
Other issues have included water leaks which forced some tenants to move out until a cracked pipe was fixed, lifts out of action for almost one month, lights on the stairs not working and the ventilation system not working – which prompted A Better Arlington residents association to seek legal advice.
In June last year, “significant concerns” were raised when insurer, Covea, restricted Property Owners Liability cover from £10 million to £1 million and imposed a 25% co-insurance clause for fire damage (with a minimum £1 million contribution).
The insurer also indicated that it would not be inviting further cover after the expiry of the previous policy on 1 September 2025. MPRL has since provided evidence of a new policy.
Enforcement options
Issues dating back to 2013 are documented in a Thanet council report from that time with then- Cabinet members asked to review the terms of the council’s Head Lease of the Arlington site and agree steps to be taken by officers to ensure compliance by MPRL.
The report looked at issues with insurance, discussed the full repairing lease obligation and looked at possible methods of enforcement, including forfeiture, action in damages, injunction, and specific performance.
It was suggested TDC: “Should enforce the tenant’s covenants in the Lease to the fullest extent, particularly in relation to insurance, inspection rights and the preservation of amenity.”
Last year a notice of enforcement action was issued to MPRL due to structural issues with the building’s concrete that first came to light a decade ago and fire alarm system improvements that were still awaiting completion after five years.
The Building Safety Regulator refused to issue a safety certificate for the All Saints Avenue block.
Thanet District Council also served a Hazard Awareness Notice. The council has regulatory powers which can require MPRL to take action to address health and safety hazards. A council inspection identified a Category 1 hazard for Fire and a number of other Category 2 hazards, including one relating to structural integrity.
Freshwater group has owned the building for decades and has historically had management companies to oversee day to day repairs and maintenance but in November 2024 took back management through Metropolitan Property Realization Limited.
‘Planned improvements’
At last week’s meeting, Steve Thorpe, of HJP surveyors, which is contracted by the group, detailed some of the planned improvements which would be paid for by the service charge. The meeting was also told Freshwater pays a quarter of the overall service charge.
“The scope of works is renewing the main roof and entrance roof, cleaning down the concrete, undertaking concrete repairs and then treating the concrete,” he said.
“Anti-carbonation paint will give it improved endurance long term, and that will come with a 15-year guarantee.
“We’ll be overhauling the windows which will include renewing the gaskets to make sure they’re weather-tight and cleaning them.”
Works – and the service charge bill for them- are expected to start this Summer.
A Better Arlington
Following the meeting, residents association A Better Arlington slammed comments by the building’s owner as ‘disgraceful’ and ‘morally indefensible.’
A spokesperson said: “Martin Bale’s comments and attitude at the Scrutiny committee were nothing short of disgraceful.
“To suggest residents facing an astronomical £40,000 bill should simply “sell their homes” if they cannot afford it is beyond insensitive – it is morally indefensible. These are not investment assets; they are our homes.
“They promise they’ll be better at communication, promise they’ll comply with the building safety regulator, promise they’ll comply with the councils hazard awareness notice and promise they’ll engage with us more, but this has all been said in the past, and it’s never happened, so we’re suspicious of their words.
“The reality is they’re scaffolding the building imminently and putting an approximate £40k bill through the letterbox without an agreed programme of works and while there is still unresolved litigation.
“Freshwater have yet to demonstrate the reasonableness of the costs but they’re pushing ahead anyway without the consultation of residents.”
At the meeting Mr Bale said: “We are engaging with all the regulators and we are doing what we can as a responsible landlord.
“It is easy to draw up a list of complaints in a building like Arlington House…. we are looking at these issues and we will deal with them comprehensively and as soon as we can.
“With everything there is to do it is bound to take a lot of time and money and at the end of the day we have to raise that money. All I can ask leaseholders, tenants and the public is to bear with us, we know what needs to be done and we are addressing it.”
MPRL holds the site on a 199 year lease, which runs until 2160. The buildings were constructed between 1963 and 1965, and the final version of the head lease was signed in 1965, backdated to commence 1961.
Thanet council is the freeholder of the whole of the Arlington site, including all of the land and all of the structures on it.
Was Cllr Rob Yates evicted?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-43940873
Mr Checksfield – thank you for the reminder – this same individual elected as Labour who jumped ship to Green Party! Says a lot in my opinion of a wannabe politician!
He keeps quiet about it nowadays!
It is notable that it has been left to the Greens to push the agenda concerning Arlington House. TDC’s senior officer BoB Porter as Director of place continues to side step and avoid taking any responsibility for the failings of his department of many years in not placing pressure on Freshwater to resolve health and safety and fire safety breaches in the communal areas, not to mention general health and safety breaches through out the building and its immediate external surroundings .
But compared to the bills TDC put to some of their leaseholders, 40k is a pittance.
https://theisleofthanetnews.com/2021/04/28/ramsgate-residents-at-royal-crescent-in-shock-over-proposed-council-repair-bill-of-some-200k-each/
Pols Apart – ALL political parties regardless of make up of TDC have been guilty of allowing this situation to develop over many years and did nothing at all – please don’t try to blow trumpet of one party as being flag bearer and leading from the front NOW. This situation will come back and bit TDC hard.
Should read ‘bite TDC hard’
Tdc should really pipe down, search IoTN “royal crescent” and find the story a couple of years back of TDC leaseholders being given charges in excess of 200k. Those sort of repair bills don’t just suddenly arise.
Tdc are just as bad if not worse in such things.
I had previously tried to add a link to the article but it seems to have fallen foul of the moderation software.
But it is one party/one person – a Green councillor – who is raising this. Other councillors and council officers have been complicit in the shocking demise of this building over decades. With flats now unsaleable, the building unsafe and those for whom it is their only home left worried and stressed about the future, it may be too late, or now cost too much, to call a halt to the decay in the block. But it is certainly worth a try and well done Rob for trying.
Once again, Many thanks Kathy for a most detailed update. I genuinely appreciate these articles on Arlington house.
It is of serious concern that with Cllr Yates raising and pursuing these matters some commentators seem focused on discrediting him.
The issue seems to be TDC not managing its freeholder oversight effectively. I wonder why, who has hoped to benefit?
Who’s discrediting him? Fact remains, he’s whining about thee state of the place, yet he was threatened with eviction (and possibly evicted?) for contributing to the overall shabbiness of the building.
Peter if you want to criticise Yates do that for not doing enough when he ( Yates ) was a labour councillor to support residents in challenging TDC’s indifference to their situation. As I understand it Freshwater dropped their threat of eviction due to a legal loophole.
Regardless what one thought of his silly campaign and his unsightly window posters it’s a bit of a red herring and irrelevance compared to the valid issues now raised by him and the greens.
Fair comment. I support anyone who actually attempts to do something.