Residents fear new rules could mean dangerous cladding is left on flats

But cladding campaigners believe a better approach would be to make sure all fire safety defects in tower blocks were addressed, not just cladding on exterior walls.

Ed Daffarn, who was the first person to warn about the dangers posed by cladding being added to Grenfell, watched the tower burn on the night of the fire.

He said he cannot believe, nearly ten years after the fire, that government officials, the fire safety industry and developers are still wrestling with the definition of what is safe.

“It shows the indifference and incompetence of the two different colours of government we’ve had in the last ten years,” he says.

Daffarn said the building industry should also be made to fix fire safety defects in the buildings beyond the cladding if they’re found to have not met the building regulation at the time of construction – a consideration removed from the new rules.

This approach is also supported by the insurance industry, and the Association of British Insurers says all flammable cladding should be removed.

When Natasha and other residents at her block were told a fire risk assessment showed the cladding needed to be removed, she says her buildings insurance went up by 94%.

As the flat is leasehold, the premium is included in her maintenance charges, which are now nearly £8,000 a year.

She and other residents are concerned that if her building is not fully fixed, and insurance premiums remain high if all the fire and safety risks not are addressed, it could remain unmortgageable and unsellable.

“I feel like I’ve been punished for getting onto the housing ladder so early,” she says.

“It should be you buy a home, it’s a safe place to be, no-one should have to be compromised or deciding whether they might live or not based on the home they buy.”