Daniel Bruce said Mr Starmer – his local MP – had made grand promises to tackle the national housing crisis, despite failing to achieve justice for a handful of residents in his own constituency.
Daniel, 41, is among buyers who purchased new-build flats at 53 Agar Grove, Camden Town. He paid £850,000 for his, only for the flats to be deemed structurally unsound and valued at £0.
The owners were left with unsellable, uninsurable homes. Years on, their warranty provider has still not agreed to a pay-out, despite surveyors saying the building is structually unsound.
Daniel spoke out after receiving a letter from Deputy Prime Minister and Housing Secretary Angela Rayner that still offered no intervention.
It said the Government would “listen carefully to those directly affected as we continue to do all we can to make people safe in their homes”.
He accused Mr Starmer of selling out leaseholders to curry favour with developers, saying the MP was “happy to admonish the Ministry of Housing whilst in opposition, but won’t fight for us now he’s in power.”
“It almost feels like they don’t realise they’re in government,” said Daniel.
“It’s alarming to see a response from a high-ranking government official such as Mrs Rayner that’s so devoid of any hope or ambition so early into her tenure.”
Soon after moving into 53 Agar Grove in 2019, buyers began experiencing persistent leaks. Walls started cracking and ceilings collapsed.
The building was deemed uninsurable. Surveyors said it was moving.
Years on, the warranty provider still has not paid out, leaving buyers trapped.
After appearing in the Ham&High, the story was featured on BBC1, prompting then-housing minister Michael Gove to say consumers had more protection buying a washing machine than a home.
Daniel now campaigns for legal reform.
In opposition, Mr Starmer wrote to Mr Gove: “I look forward to details of how your department will ensure that my constituents are put back in the place they should have been had their homes been built correctly.”
He also stated: “The Government must play their part and seek a resolution. My constituents cannot be left paying the cost of a broken system.”
published an open letter calling on Mr Starmer to urgently enact the changes he demanded in opposition.
Last October, DanielResponding days before Christmas, Mrs Rayner wrote: “I cannot imagine having to deal with the situation that confronts Mr Bruce and the other leaseholders of Agar Grove. It is simply unacceptable.”
She said the Government was “reviewing how we can better protect leaseholders from costs”.
But Daniel said the vague response fell far short of the decisive action Mr Starmer had demanded in opposition.
Then, last week, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) published a list of policy priorities for 2025.
Despite promising in its election manifesto to “bring the feudal leasehold system to an end”, leasehold reform wasn’t mentioned.
Daniel believes Labour is too chummy with developers.
Days before Mrs Rayner’s letter, the Guardian reported Labour had received £130,000 from an entity that turned out to be largely funded by developers.
Industry publication Property Week has reported on other donations to Labour by developers.
“It is undeniable that corporations have unbalanced and often unchecked influence over political parties,” Daniel said.
“Policy is never decisive on the side of the victim for fear of harming corporate relations.”
He said he therefore struggled to believe Labour would deliver any meaningful change.
“What I can’t understand is how he has all these assurances and stated missions but can’t resolve one issue in his own constituency,” said Daniel.
“It’s like somebody who’s never been to the gym telling the country he’s going to win the London marathon.
“Surely with his stated missions and being a man of justice, he should be aggressively resolving our case?”
Keir Starmer’s office said the Ham&High should direct its right of reply email to MHCLG.
An MHCLG spokesman said: “The situation faced by the innocent residents of Agar Grove is deplorable, and the pace of progression in this case is unacceptable.
“We are pushing those responsible to meet their obligations swiftly and will continue to ensure these leaseholders are supported.”