That’s according to an independent review of the company, commissioned by Persimmon itself, conducted by Stephanie Barwise QC of the law firm Atkin Chambers.
The investigators found that the housebuilding giant was responsible for a “systemic nationwide” failing when fitting cavity barriers which could prevent a fire, with them either missing or improperly installed. It put this failing down to a “manifestation of poor culture coupled with the lack of a group build process”.
Persimmon has now moved to inspect 16,000 properties to determine whether cavity barriers have been correctly fitted, with promises to put right any errors it finds.
The report was also damning about the approach of the firm, noting that it has “traditionally been more a land assembler and seller of houses rather than a housebuilder”, suggesting that this had fed through into a lacklustre oversight of the quality of the homes being produced.
It argued that Persimmon’s current pledge to inspect the work at all stages of the build process is not actually being met, adding: “Persimmon cannot afford the stigma of a corporate culture which results in poor workmanship and a potentially unsafe product.”
Earlier this year the builder confirmed it was slowing down its building process in a bid to improve the quality of homes produced, while its former chief executive left following controversy over the size of his bonus.
Persimmon has welcomed the findings of the report, and noted that changes are already being made.
Roger Devlin, chairman of the firm, said: “The review found that Persimmon had focused on policies around inspections immediately before and after the sale of a home, rather than those governing build quality inspections.
“In my view, this is one of its central findings and I am encouraged that the company is already embracing the review’s recommendations in this area through significant operational investment and procedural change. Our Construction Working Group will focus on ensuring that our new policies and processes fully address this critical finding.”
