A woman from Hitchin has reacted to housing minister Michael Gove insisting leaseholders will not have to pay large sums to remedy fire defects in blocks of flats that go beyond cladding.

The move comes following concerned campaigners slamming the £4bn package that will try to ease the burgeoning cladding crisis because it does not go far enough.

The housing minister has said he will be "absolutely willing to use legal rules" to make builders pay for the removal of unsafe cladding from lower-height buildings.

Michael Gove has written to firms, giving them until March to agree a plan to protect leaseholders trapped in 'unsellable homes'.

When homeowner Sophie Bichener, 30, purchased her Stevenage flat for £230,000 back in 2017, she was unaware of the crippling costs that would come to blight her life.

Marketing professional and school governor Sophie moved into her flat a short time before the fatal fire at Grenfell Tower that saw official numbers state that 72 people lost their lives in the tragic blaze.

Like many thousands up and down the country including North Herts, Sophie bought her Stevenage flat under the assumption that it was safe because it complied with building regulations.

However, like so many others, the flat mandarins have labelled the residence to be unsafe in the wake of the Grenfell fire - leaving many with crippling bills.

So far, residents in blocks 11-18m high have been ineligible for government support to remove unsafe cladding.

However, there is uncertainty that Gove's move will cover flatowners facing large bills not only for cladding but for potential fire risks such as wooden balconies and missing fire doors.

Speaking to Hitchin Nub News, Sophie said: "It's welcome news that the government have finally come to the conclusion that leaseholders should not be on the hook for life changing bills but I am very concerned this announcement does not go far enough.

"Firstly, it does not cover 'non-cladding' related items.

"For my building, we have a bill of over £60,000 per leaseholder for those items such as flammable insulation, missing fire breaks and smoke seals and emergency lighting."

Sophie explained that until all fire safety defects, many of which were against regulation when the buildings were completed, are covered, there will be leaseholders facing financial ruin.

Secondly, many buildings have spent all of their reserve funds and leaseholders life savings on interim costs such as fire patrols and insurance hikes of up to 3000%.

[I]"There is nothing left for cleaning or general maintenance in many cases," Sophie added.

"It's hard to see how the announcement will help those people out of a very tight spot right now."

Sophie said that while the announcement is very strong on the need for developers to pay though it is just asking for voluntary contributions at this point.

"In many cases, developers and freeholders were and are just shell companies who have avoided any responsibility so far by closing that business down and simply starting a new one."[.I]

Mr Gove has stated he will be getting to the bottom, or rather the top, of these chains – but how long will that take Sophie asks. Bills are with leaseholders now and the buildings remain unsafe, she says.

"It's clear there are holes in the announcement and I hope that this u-turn in government attitude towards the buildings safety crisis is just the beginning or the Department of Housing working with campaigners to ensure no leaseholders are left behind."