Written by Hamish McLay – background for Cladding Matters podcast

There’s a strange comfort in hearing something is “compliant,” isn’t there?
It’s the sort of word that lulls you into thinking everything’s fine.
That’s what makes PAS 9980 so dangerous.

It sounds official – like a safety certificate. In reality, it’s a guidance document. Not law. Not enforceable. Just a framework. And yet, this one piece of paper is being used to justify leaving buildings covered in questionable cladding.
It’s exactly the kind of misinterpretation that has left people like Stephen Day, a leaseholder at Royal Artillery Quays, stuck for years in a flat he can’t sell, insure properly, or even feel safe in.

A Shortcut Through Complexity?

PAS 9980 was meant to help fire engineers make structured decisions when assessing the safety of external walls. It promotes a “risk-based approach,” giving assessors flexibility to make calls on whether remediation is needed.
And that’s where the problem starts.
Because while it’s helpful to have room for judgement, what happens when professionals are using that room to avoid the harder questions? Or the harder work?

Visual surveys. Desktop exercises. Assumptions made from plans that may or may not reflect reality. That’s what’s happening in too many cases. No core sampling. No fire tests. Just a tick-box exercise and a sigh of relief from whoever didn’t want to foot the bill.

What You Won’t See in the Report

You won’t see the late-night worry from families who’ve been told their building is “low risk” – but still looks suspiciously like the ones that weren’t. You won’t hear the phone call from a mortgage provider saying no. Or the insurance quote that’s quadrupled.

But if you tune in Friday at 1pm, you will hear it on the Cladding Matters podcast. Gareth Wax brings the voices behind the paperwork – like Stephen Day’s – into the spotlight.

Because these aren’t just technical reports. They’re lived experiences.

It’s Not Enough to Say “We Followed PAS 9980”

What’s missing here is accountability.
If your assessment relies on guesswork, you’re not assessing anything. And if you’re leaning on a guideline to avoid costly remediation, you’re not protecting residents – you’re protecting balance sheets.
So no, PAS 9980 isn’t the villain. But its misuse absolutely is.

The Real Question

How many more residents need to be told their concerns are “tolerable risk” before we realise the standard is being used in a way it was never intended?

That’s the question we’re asking – loud and clear – on Cladding Matters, Friday 25th April at 1pm.

Listen in, or catch it on demand afterwards. Because some stories need to be heard in full.

🎙️ Hosted by Gareth Wax - This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
📚 Article by Hamish McLay - This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
🏢 Featuring Stephen Day, Zahrah Aullybocus and Wendy Gibson