Kings Tower vs RAQ
Cladding Matters – Friday 6th June at 1pm
Hosted by Gareth Wax, with regular contributors Stephen Day, Wendy Gibson and Hamish McLay.
When a building falls short of fire safety standards, the first instinct is to look at the developer. Yet the response of the local authority can be just as defining – especially for leaseholders trapped in limbo. On Friday 6th June at 1pm, Cladding Matters returns with a comparative look at two Barratt-built developments: Kings Tower in Chelmsford and Royal Artillery Quays (RAQ) in Greenwich.
At first glance, the parallels are hard to ignore. Both developments have been caught up in the cladding crisis. Both have left residents stuck in unsellable flats. And both reveal uncomfortable truths about the way even well-known developers can fall short of expectations.
At Kings Tower, issues surfaced back in 2020, when residents discovered combustible cladding, timber balconies, and missing fire breaks. The building failed its EWS1 check, and one resident saw a property sale collapse overnight. It took years before remediation was even on the cards, and many owners are still waiting on firm timelines. Yet there’s at least been some engagement – Barratt agreed to cover the cost of remediation, and the area’s MP, Vicky Ford, has publicly monitored the situation. Chelmsford City Council has also issued accessible guidance on cladding and building control, signalling some awareness of residents’ concerns.
By contrast, residents at RAQ report an even more fraught experience. While Barratt has now put forward a remediation plan for approval by the Building Safety Regulator, residents remain unconvinced. There is widespread uncertainty over whether all fire-risk materials will actually be removed, and key information about the work remains withheld.
Compounding the problem is the role of Greenwich Council. Unlike Chelmsford’s more open approach, Greenwich has been criticised by RAQ residents for negligence and inconsistency. From the absence of clear updates to a perceived reluctance to hold developers fully accountable, the council’s response has left residents feeling unsupported and exposed.
This contrast becomes even starker when looking at how Greenwich handled the case of Mast Quay – another development in its borough. There, the council took a bold stance, issuing enforcement notices and securing a £7.82 million settlement from Comer Homes. At RAQ, by comparison, council action has been muted.
So what does this tell us? That remediation isn't just about developers doing the right thing. It's also about councils stepping up – or not. The difference between proactive local leadership and slow-moving bureaucracy can have a huge effect on residents’ lives.
Join us as we compare these differences in our next podcast. In the chair is Gareth Wax, alongside Stephen Day from RAQ, Hamish McLay, and Wendy Gibson from The First Time Buyers Club. We’ll also reflect on what leaseholders across the UK can learn from these two very different journeys – and why council behaviour may be the missing link in cladding remediation success.
On Friday 6th June at 1pm, only on Cladding Matters.
Never miss an episode of Spilling the Proper-Tea again, subscribe to our YouTube Channel to catch or watch live:
https://www.youtube.com/@SpillingTheProper-Tea
PS:
For content enquiries: hm@searchandconveysolutions.co.uk
For podcast/media info: gareth@mphats.com
Hosted by Gareth Wax, with regular contributors Stephen Day, Wendy Gibson and Hamish McLay.
When a building falls short of fire safety standards, the first instinct is to look at the developer. Yet the response of the local authority can be just as defining – especially for leaseholders trapped in limbo. On Friday 6th June at 1pm, Cladding Matters returns with a comparative look at two Barratt-built developments: Kings Tower in Chelmsford and Royal Artillery Quays (RAQ) in Greenwich.
At first glance, the parallels are hard to ignore. Both developments have been caught up in the cladding crisis. Both have left residents stuck in unsellable flats. And both reveal uncomfortable truths about the way even well-known developers can fall short of expectations.
At Kings Tower, issues surfaced back in 2020, when residents discovered combustible cladding, timber balconies, and missing fire breaks. The building failed its EWS1 check, and one resident saw a property sale collapse overnight. It took years before remediation was even on the cards, and many owners are still waiting on firm timelines. Yet there’s at least been some engagement – Barratt agreed to cover the cost of remediation, and the area’s MP, Vicky Ford, has publicly monitored the situation. Chelmsford City Council has also issued accessible guidance on cladding and building control, signalling some awareness of residents’ concerns.
By contrast, residents at RAQ report an even more fraught experience. While Barratt has now put forward a remediation plan for approval by the Building Safety Regulator, residents remain unconvinced. There is widespread uncertainty over whether all fire-risk materials will actually be removed, and key information about the work remains withheld.
Compounding the problem is the role of Greenwich Council. Unlike Chelmsford’s more open approach, Greenwich has been criticised by RAQ residents for negligence and inconsistency. From the absence of clear updates to a perceived reluctance to hold developers fully accountable, the council’s response has left residents feeling unsupported and exposed.
This contrast becomes even starker when looking at how Greenwich handled the case of Mast Quay – another development in its borough. There, the council took a bold stance, issuing enforcement notices and securing a £7.82 million settlement from Comer Homes. At RAQ, by comparison, council action has been muted.
So what does this tell us? That remediation isn't just about developers doing the right thing. It's also about councils stepping up – or not. The difference between proactive local leadership and slow-moving bureaucracy can have a huge effect on residents’ lives.
Join us as we compare these differences in our next podcast. In the chair is Gareth Wax, alongside Stephen Day from RAQ, Hamish McLay, and Wendy Gibson from The First Time Buyers Club. We’ll also reflect on what leaseholders across the UK can learn from these two very different journeys – and why council behaviour may be the missing link in cladding remediation success.
On Friday 6th June at 1pm, only on Cladding Matters.
Never miss an episode of Spilling the Proper-Tea again, subscribe to our YouTube Channel to catch or watch live:
https://www.youtube.com/@SpillingTheProper-Tea
PS:
For content enquiries: hm@searchandconveysolutions.co.uk
For podcast/media info: gareth@mphats.com
Members In This Video
No users are tagged in this video
