The requirement to retrofit buildings stems from the 2017 Grenfell Tower tragedy in London, where a fire claimed 72 lives. In its aftermath, new regulations were introduced, mandating the remediation of life-critical fire safety defects across thousands of UK buildings.

Under the Responsible Actors Scheme, introduced in England in 2023, developers such as Watkin Jones are obligated to take responsibility for addressing safety issues in buildings 11 metres and higher that they developed or refurbished over the 30 years up to April 4, 2022.

By September 2023, Watkin Jones had earmarked nearly £55 million for such works. A year later, its provision stood at £48m, with costs expected to run until 2030. Some affected projects include student housing developments.

Meanwhile, Scotland’s proposed new Building Safety Levy (BSL) aims to support the funding of the Cladding Remediation Programme, which addresses building safety concerns linked to unsafe cladding materials.

“Watkin Jones has been at the forefront of cladding remediation within its legacy portfolio for a number of years, at considerable cost,” the company said in a statement to the Irish Independent. “It, as any prudent developer in a similar position would do, will now explore all options of recovery against its subcontractors and supply chain.”

Kingspan declined to comment directly on the case.

However, in a statement, it said: “Although we cannot comment on individual cases, Kingspan Insulation Ltd has engaged with and responded to all remediation enquiries received to date, the volume of which remains low. When used correctly and in accordance with the UK government’s own PAS 9980 guidance, there are occasions when facade systems containing K15 can be retained on high-rise buildings.”

Filings at London’s High Court show Watkin Jones is pursuing claims not only against Kingspan Group PLC and its subsidiaries but also against Encon Group, a UK distributor of insulation products.

The final report into the Grenfell fire, published last year by inquiry chair Martin Moore-Bick, delivered strong criticism of Kingspan. While noting that the company was not directly responsible for the fire’s impact, it concluded that Kingspan had shown “complete disregard” for fire safety in how it marketed one of its products.

Kingspan’s K15 insulation made up around 5% of the insulation used at Grenfell and was installed without the company’s knowledge.

The inquiry report stated: “From 2005 until after this inquiry had begun, Kingspan knowingly created a false market in insulation for use on buildings over 18 metres in height by claiming that K15 had been part of a system successfully tested under BS 8414 and could therefore be used in the external wall of any building over 18 metres in height regardless of its design or other components.”

In response to the report, Kingspan admitted to “wholly unacceptable historical failings” within part of its UK insulation business, but stressed: “These were in no way reflective of how we conduct ourselves as a group, then or now. While deeply regrettable, they were not found to be causative of the tragedy.”

The company also argued that the report “explains clearly and unambiguously that the type of insulation – whether combustible or non-combustible – was immaterial, and that the principal reason for the fire spread was the PE ACM cladding, which was not made by Kingspan.”

Meanwhile, Watkin Jones continues to bear remediation costs. In its half-year results, the company reported using £4m net of its provision to cover works at two sites. As of March, it held a gross provision of £57m, partly offset by nearly £12m in reimbursement assets.