And asbestos lawyer Tanya Segelov, who represented late asbestos campaigner Bernie Banton in his fight against James Hardie, says the residual fibres will lead to an ongoing increase in people diagnosed with the terminal disease.

A second asbestos litigation specialist has already successfully acted for a "handful" of clients in the ACT who contracted mesothelioma from Mr Fluffy asbestos.

Ms Segelov, who is a member of the national Asbestos Safety and Eradication Agency, said there was no safe level of exposure to asbestos and "we've certainly seen people develop mesothelioma from very small incidental exposure".

"Statistically speaking those exposures will result in an increased level of mesothelioma when you get within the latency period and if there is still material there then we will still see an ongoing increase reflected in years to come."

Ms Segelov said legal action could be expected from those who contracted an asbestos-related condition from the residual loose-fill insulation and the ACT and federal governments could be targeted.

Who the action would be against would depend on the circumstances of the exposure, she said, but the two governments involvement in the Loose Fill Asbestos Program could be examined. If the exposure to the deadly fibres has occurred since the program concluded, almost two decades ago, she said the claim would either be against those who removed the asbestos "or against the government who supervised it and signed off on it".

While Ms Segelov said a class action could be a possibility it is unlikely in asbestos exposure litigation because it requires all of the participants to be sick at the same time.

"People may all be living in these houses but they don't have a claim unless they can show some damage [illness]," she said.

Ms Segelov said because the Mr Fluffy asbestos could not be removed it forever remained a threat to people living in and working on the houses.

Unlike typical bonded asbestos, which can be physically removed, the residual loose-fill fibres in at least 1050 Canberra homes would always present a risk.

"If you are exposed to asbestos you have a 3 per cent risk that you will develop mesothelioma, but it's a risk that shouldn't be there at all," she said. "It may be a very, very small risk but we know that very small risks come home for some people and the result of that risk is so devastating if it does come home - it's death and it's a really horrible death.

"I've got young kids and I wouldn't live in one of those homes."

Maurice Blackburn asbestos lawyer Theodora Ahilas has represented a "handful" of people in Canberra who had developed asbestos-related diseases from Mr Fluffy insulation.

"They've been successful cases but we've never really got to the bottom of the Mr Fluffy saga, to be frank," she said.

Due to confidentially agreements Ms Ahilas could not discuss the cases in detail but said generally in the ACT there were a lot of government houses, situations involving the Commonwealth and rental properties.

"There's other avenues in law of being able to get a resolution of a matter without actually finding a culprit," she said.

But she said finding the man behind the Mr Fluffy company would make things easier.

"You'd assume that someone like Mr Fluffy, or within that space doing the work that they were doing, they would have had some industrial knowledge of the dangers of it at the time they were doing it," Ms Ahilas said.

The Asbestos Safety Eradication Agency called last week for Canberra's 1050 Mr Fluffy homes to be demolished but ACT Attorney General Simon Corbell dismissed it as both prohibitively expensive and unnecessary as the government had been proactive in dealing with the situation.

But Yarralumla resident Mark Harradine, who lives in one of the houses with his wife and four children, questions the proactive approach following his family's purchase of a Mr Fluffy property in 2009.

While the conveyancing report contained an asbestos removal certificate and general advice on asbestos, the Harradines were not aware of the dangers until they got an asbestos assessment done following renovation work that exposed them and workers to the fibres.

Mr Harradine said he found it difficult to accept the government saying people's predicaments were not its problem when the facts were not made known to the family when they bought their house.