by Clair Mooney | 21 Jul, 2025 | Building Safety Act
Following concerns raised by Industry that delays in approvals by the BSR have slowed down the delivery of new buildings and homes, the House of Lords Industry and Regulators Committee, chaired by Baroness Taylor of Bolton, has launched an inquiry into building safety regulation, with a particular focus on the work of the Building Safety Regulator, which was established following the Building Safety Act 2022.
The Committee invites interested individuals and organisations to submit evidence here by 31 August 2025.
by Clair Mooney | 21 Jul, 2025 | Building Safety Act
Safety, accountability, and residents’ voices were the three key principles of a landmark building safety Bill that was laid before the Senedd earlier this month, according to Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government, Jayne Bryant.
The Building Safety (Wales) Bill forms part of a wider programme of reforms aimed at improving safety in these buildings, and is part of the Welsh Government’s broader response to the Grenfell Tower tragedy which seeks to prevent such a tragedy from ever happening again, and includes:
- A programme of work aimed at addressing fire safety issues in multi-occupied residential buildings of 11m and above;
- Significant reforms to the building control system;
- Introducing new regulations for high-risk buildings;
- Clearer responsibilities for duty holders;
- Mandatory registration and regulation of building control professionals.
The Bill will require building safety risks to be assessed and managed while buildings are in occupation, for the benefit of residents and others, with a robust enforcement regime to back that up. Fire safety duties will also apply to certain Houses in Multiple Occupation.
The legislation will also create clear lines of accountability for duty holders. These duty holders will have legal responsibility for assessing and managing building safety, ending confusion over who is responsible for the safety of residents and others.
Additionally, the Bill will see residents in all regulated buildings provided with greater reassurances about the safety of their homes and clear routes for redress to raise building safety complaints. While also placing responsibilities on residents to play their part in keeping their building safe.
Cabinet Secretary Jayne Bryant said:
This landmark Bill will fundamentally transform safety in multi-occupied residential buildings across Wales.
Its key principles are safety, accountability and residents’ voices, and it goes wider and further than existing legislation in other parts of the UK.
It creates clear legal responsibilities for owners and others, gives residents new rights and pathways to raise complaints, enables standards for professional assessments, and provides robust enforcement powers when safety requirements aren’t met.
Because the safety and wellbeing of people in their homes must always be our priority.
This Bill is part of a wider programme to ensure that buildings in Wales are safer, and that people are protected in their homes.
The legacy of Grenfell Tower must be meaningful change. We owe it to those who lost their lives, their families, and the survivors to ensure that such a tragedy can never happen again.
There are several differences between this and the UK Building Safety Act 2022. The Welsh bill:
- Applies to all multi-occupied residential buildings with two or more units regardless of height whereas the UK Act primarily applies to higher-risk buildings over 18m or seven storeys
- Expands the definition of higher-risk buildings to include hospitals, care homes and children’s homes while the UK Act focuses solely on residential buildings
- In Wales, local authorities will regulate the occupation phase with the HS&E overseeing registration. In England, the HSE Building Safety Regulator oversees both construction and occupational phases.
For more information on the Welsh Bill click here.
by Clair Mooney | 1 Jul, 2025 | Building Safety Act, Technical
Build UK has published an updated version of the Common Assessment Standard, and the Building Safety section is now mandatory for completion by all companies that carry out work under the Building Safety Act. Version 5 also contains updates to the Corporate & Professional Standing; Environmental; and Fairness, Inclusion & Respect sections.
Under the Building Safety Act, anyone appointing individuals or organisations to undertake design or building work has a duty to ensure they are competent. Organisations must demonstrate ‘organisational capability’, and the Common Assessment Standard is being used by a growing list of clients and contractors across the public and private sectors to demonstrate compliance.
Companies will be required to complete the updated question set when they next go through the certification process for the Common Assessment Standard with a Recognised Assessment Body, and a number of Build UK members will be specifying that members of their supply chains must have successfully completed the Building Safety section by 1 October 2025.
Jim Parlour, FIS Head of Technical, said:
“These ongoing changes to the common assessment standard are welcomed by our members who strive for best practice and wish to distinguish themselves. Demonstrating compliance with the now mandatory Building Safety criteria is not without challenges, and FIS have been working with our members to provide direct intervention and guidance over the last few months on approach to this deadline.
Members who are struggling to demonstrate fulfilment of the criteria should contact the FIS for advice and support.”
by Clair Mooney | 30 Jun, 2025 | Building Safety Act
Delays to building new high-rise homes will be unblocked through a new package of reforms to the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) announced today. These reforms, which include a new Fast Track Process, changes to leadership and fresh investment, aim to support the delivery of 1.5 million safe, high-quality homes and take early steps toward establishing a single construction regulator – a key recommendation from the Grenfell Tower Inquiry.
Andy Roe KFSM has been appointed as non-executive chair of a new board of the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) to take on the functions of the BSR as part of initial steps towards creating a single construction regulator.
Andy brings a wealth of experience in safety regulation and leadership from his previous role as Commissioner of London Fire Brigade and he will be supported by a new Chief Executive Officer for the BSR, Charlie Pugsley.
Alex Norris, Minister for Building Safety, said:
“The establishment of the Building Safety Regulator has been fundamental to centralising safety in the construction process and it’s time to take the next steps to build on that precedent and create a system that works for the sector whilst keeping residents and their safety at the heart of the process.
“That’s why we’re announcing a package of reforms to the BSR today to enhance operations, reduce delays, and unlock the homes this country desperately needs – delivering on our Plan for Change.”
This new organisational structure reflects the government’s commitment to prioritising building safety in its drive to build 1.5m new homes, and builds on the strong foundation created by the HSE in establishing the BSR, which has played a pivotal role in placing raising safety standards across the sector.
To support industry in achieving the government’s ambitious housebuilding targets, the BSR is also introducing a new Fast Track Process which will bring building inspector and engineer capacity directly into the BSR to enhance the processing and review of existing newbuild cases and remediation decisions. This will respond to concerns in the sector around delays whilst crucially keeping building and residents’ safety at the core of the process.
Alongside these improvements, long-term investment in the capacity of the BSR is being bolstered with the addition of over 100 new members of staff to support with enhancing operations, reducing delays and supporting progress towards building 1.5m safe, high-quality homes as part of our Plan for Change.
Andy Roe, non-exec Chair of the BSR, said:
“The creation of the new Building Safety Regulator was a watershed moment for housing and construction in this country.
“However, it is also clear that the BSR processes’ need to continue to evolve and improve, to ensure that it plays its part in enabling the homes this country desperately needs to be built.
“I look forward to working with colleagues both in industry and the BSR to tackle the current issues and delays head on and help get those homes built safely.”
HSE Chair, Sarah Newton said:
“Setting up an entirely new regulator has been complex and huge progress has been made in a short space of time.
“Protecting residents and making sure there is never another tragedy like Grenfell has been our priority throughout this process. We wish the new BSR team well in this most important mission.
“We are very proud of the work we have done to establish the BSR. It was always an option that once the new regulator was established that it would move out of HSE to enable the Government to implement the Grenfell Public Inquiry recommendations and we will work hard to enable the smooth transition to the next stage.”
by Clair Mooney | 29 May, 2025 | Building Safety Act, Contractual and Legal, Legal cases, Main News Feed
On 21 May 2025 the Supreme Court handed down Judgment in the case of URS Corporation Ltd -v- BDW Trading Ltd [2025] UKSC 21.
This Judgment is perhaps one of the most significant since the Building Safety Act came into force as it starts to give us an indication of how Developers claims are going to impact the wider market. The case addressed important issues such as:
(1) the scope of duty and the recoverability of loss in negligence;
(2) limitation periods under section 135 of the Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA);
(3) whether section 1(1)(a) of the Defective Premises Act (DPA) applies to developers; and
(4) whether a judgment or settlement is required to enable a party to bring a contribution claim under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 (Contribution Act).
The facts
BDW is a major property developer and includes Barratt Homes and David Wilson Homes. URS, was engaged by BDW to act as a structural design consultant in connection with multiple high-rise residential developments which completed some considerable time ago. In the aftermath of the Grenfell Tower tragedy BDW reviewed its portfolio. Two of its high-rise residential developments contained design defects.
Even though BDW had disposed of its interest and sold the developments, in 2020 and 2021 BDW undertook remedial works to the properties at significant cost. At this stage no claim was made against BDW by any third party and in any event, at the time, any such claims would have been time barred.
In March 2020, BDW brought a defects claim against URS to recover its losses. BDW successfully amended the claim in June 2022 following the coming into force of the BSA which retrospectively extended the limitation period for claims under section 1 of the DPA from 6 to 30 years. The case ended up the Supreme Court where Seven Justices of the Supreme Court heard 4 grounds of appeal in December 2024:
Decision
All four grounds the Court found in favour of BDW (URS’s appeals were dismissed):
| Ground 1 |
Is loss that is otherwise recoverable in the tort of negligence irrecoverable if it is incurred (i) without an enforceable legal obligation to do so, and (ii) in respect of property in which the claimant has no proprietary interest, because such loss is voluntarily incurred, and that means it falls outside the scope of the defendant’s duty of care and/or is too remote?
No. There is no rule of law which means that the voluntary carrying out of the repairs by BDW render the repair costs (1) outside the scope of the duty of care owed or (2) too remote. Whether these costs were recoverable is a question of fact and depends on legal issues of causation and mitigation which will be assessed when considering liability. The effect of this is that developers who incur costs to remedy building safety defects, even in the absence of a claim from a third party, may be able to recover these costs from the negligent builder or designer. |
| Ground 2 |
Does section 135 of the BSA (extended limitation period) apply in the present circumstances and, if so, what is its effect?
Yes. Section 135(3) BSA applies to claims which are dependent on s.1 DPA. To make a claim, a developer would need to establish that it applies to actions arising out of a liability that is dependent on section 1 of the DPA even though it is not an action brought under section 1 of the DPA. Such actions are clearly “in respect of damage or defects in relation to buildings”. The Supreme Court said the alternative would undermine the purpose of the BSA i.e. to ensure those responsible for historic building safety defects are held to account.
There is a possible sting in the tail for developers or other relevant claimants seeking to recover losses incurred despite the existence of a potential limitation defence. This is because section 135 (3) BSA does not retrospectively affect the answer to the questions of causation, mitigation and remoteness which determine whether a developer can recover compensation from a negligent designer or contractor for the cost of remedial work carried out before June 2022. This will be a matter to be addressed when considering liability. |
| Ground 3 |
Does section 1(1)(a) of the DPA also apply to property developers?
Yes. The Supreme Court have said that there is no reason why a developer cannot both owe a duty and be a owed a duty, particularly where the developer is the first owner. |
| Ground 4 |
Is BDW entitled to bring a contribution claim against the URS under section 1 of the Contribution Act when there has been no judgment or settlement between BDW and any third party and no third party has ever asserted any claim against BDW?
Yes. The Supreme Court held that the right to contribution arises when: (i) damage has been suffered by C for which D1 and D2 are each liable; and (ii) D1 has paid or been ordered or agreed to pay compensation for the damage to C. On the facts, BDW paid compensation (in kind) for the damage suffered by the homeowners by carrying out the repairs. The fact that there has been no judgment against the developer or admission of liability or settlement between it and any of the homeowners, nor any claim, does not prevent the claim for contribution. |
It is worth noting too that, as intervener, the government made written submissions relating to the background to the BSA, the structure of the BSA and the policy and purpose underlying the BSA in general and section 135 in particular. These submissions were very much supportive of BDW’s case.
The consequences
The Supreme Court has provided encouragement and motivation to developers to be proactive in carrying out repairs by clarifying the law and signifying that there are a host of options available to them to seek to recover those costs.
This gives “teeth” to the BSA and the policy underpinning the Act.
The Supreme Court’s decision will likely have a significant impact on historic claims for building safety defects. However, there are some wrinkles to be ironed out. Whilst the policy behind the decision may be clear, some of the legal issues remain complex and nuanced and the effect of this judgment will be subject to further debate and discussion and clarification by the court and for future cases to involve arguments around causation and mitigation.
This article is an abridged version of an article originally written by FIS Legal Advisors Hill Dickinson, the full article can be seen here.
by Clair Mooney | 16 May, 2025 | Building Safety Act
FIS members have access to Build UK’s guide to the validation stage at Gateway Two, which sets out the documents that should be included within an application for Building Control Approval for a Higher-Risk Building (HRB). The May 2025 version confirms the following in line with the most recent guidance published by the BSR:
- Building Control Approval is not required for building work which consists only of exempt work, work carried out under a Competent Person Scheme, or an emergency repair to an existing HRB
- For ‘staged applications’, applicants are advised to contact the BSR prior to submission
- The ‘Description of Proposed Work’ document is being used by the BSR as a ‘project summary’ to demonstrate the skills, knowledge and experience required of the Registered Building Inspector (RBI) when assembling the Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT)
- Clarification on what should be included within the Construction Control Plan
- In the event an application is rejected, the BSR has advised that any new application should reference the previous one to enable the same MDT to be appointed.
In light of the significant issues with Gateway Two and the potential impact on the Government’s target to build 1.5 million homes, Building Safety Minister Alex Norris held a roundtable with industry leaders to understand what can be done to overcome them. The industry called for a ‘reset’ and urged the BSR to review the process, including providing greater clarity on what is expected within applications for Building Control Approval and increasing engagement with applicants. There was also a clear view that the BSR should share information on why applications are being rejected and publish regular updates on performance against the statutory timescales.
BSR charges increased from 1 April 2025
The Building Safety Regulator (BSR) has increased its fees for carrying out a range of building control functions from 1 April 2025. This includes processing an application for Building Control Approval at Gateway Two which now incurs an application fee of £189 plus the time spent reviewing it charged at £151 per hour per person working on the application.
