Building Safety Regulator takes over as the building control authority for high-risk structures in England

by Building ManagementConstructionFeatured News

As of 1 October, the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) has assumed the role of the Building Control Authority for all higher-risk buildings (HRBs) in England.

As part of the change, developers constructing new residential buildings over 18-metres or those comprising seven storeys and having at least two residential units will no longer have the discretion to choose their preferred building control body.

The same rule applies to hospitals and care homes that match the same height criteria.

The role and responsibilities of the new building control authority

Developers are now mandated to seek building control approval from the BSR before initiating any construction project associated with HRBs.

Neil Hope-Collins, Operational Policy lead for Gateways and Building Control, elaborates on the modifications to the building safety protocol and the pivotal role of BSR in this new setup: “The Building Safety Act, 2022 (BSA) imposes fresh legal obligations on individuals engaged in the design, construction, and occupation of HRBs.”

Everyone involved in construction activities must ensure that they are compliant with the law.

They must also be prepared to furnish tangible proof of this compliance if required.

This stringent oversight aims to guarantee absolute accountability for the safety of HRBs throughout their lifespan.

Adding to this, The Building (Higher-Risk Buildings Procedures) (England) Regulations 2023, effective from 17 August 2023, detail the building control processes relevant to all HRB projects.

Recommendations and the new regime

The new regulations, which encompass the technical specifics, embody the recommendations presented by Dame Judith Hackitt in her report titled “Building A Safer Future”.

They delineate the enhanced regime for the design, construction, and in-occupation safety standards for HRBs.

From October onwards, the BSR will execute its duties as the Building Control Authority with the support of multi-disciplinary teams (MDTs).

Comprising a registered building inspector and other essential specialists, these teams, under the guidance of BSR, will play a decisive role in evaluating building control application submissions, ensuring efficient regulatory verdicts, and structuring inspection schedules.

Though the assessment of plans and site inspections isn’t novel, the method of delivery is certainly a fresh approach.

The Three-Gate Approval Process

To augment regulatory oversight, construction projects on HRBs will now navigate through a rigorous three-gateway approval process, necessitating BSR consent:

  1. Prior to the commencement of building work.
  2. Before any major changes during construction.
  3. Upon completion of the construction.

Starting construction without BSR’s nod is now an offence, and the regulator possesses the power to enforce penalties for violations.

The article further details the three planning gateways and their requirements, with the third gateway emphasising the need for registration of the building with the BSR post-completion.

Registered buildings will undergo periodic checks by the BSR to ensure consistent management of fire and structural risks.

For additional insights, readers can refer to ‘The three gateways to building safety’ leaflet and the ‘FAQ Explainer – Building Safety Regulator as the Building Control Authority’, which provides responses to frequently posed queries.

All these details and more can be accessed here.

IFSJ Comment

Such reforms present a clear path towards enhanced building safety, addressing long-standing concerns in the industry.

By implementing a centralised control mechanism via the BSR, there’s a more unified approach to building oversight, ensuring that HRBs in England adhere to the highest safety standards.

This move, inspired by Dame Judith Hackitt’s recommendations, also underscores the country’s commitment to improving the structural and fire safety standards, a pivotal step for the safety and well-being of its residents.

Engage early to solve puzzle of the Building Safety Act

by Breaking NewsBuilding ManagementIFSJ ExclusivesSafety

Supplying good information helps to build compliance

Three Gateways signpost the way to getting it right

The terms under the new Building Safety Act 2022 start to become enforceable from October 1st, 2023.

Here, Bob Glendenning, Fire Design Engineering Manager of Sherwin-Williams Protective & Marine Coatings, looks at how early engagement can help engineers and those in the supply chain negotiate their way through the challenges it presents.

The new Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA) has been developed as a new framework for the design, construction and occupation of ‘higher risk’ buildings.

These buildings are defined as being a minimum of 18 metres or seven storeys in height and comprise of at least two domestic premises.

These new regulations require that all existing occupied high-risk buildings should be registered with the new Building Safety Regulator (BSR) from April 6, 2023 and no later than October 1, 2023.

The BSR is an independent body which forms part of the Health and Safety Executive, which aims to raise building safety standards and the performance of buildings whilst also monitoring the competence of regulators and industry professionals.

The reality of this new legislation is that under the terms of the Act, a Principal Accountable Person who fails to register an occupied higher-risk building ‘without a reasonable excuse’ will be liable to either a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.

The Principal Accountable Person is described as the organisation or person who owns, or has responsibility for, the building.

It may also be an organisation or person who is responsible for maintaining the common parts of a building, for example corridors or lobbies.

Engaging multiple stakeholders is key

At Sherwin-Williams, our policy of early engagement and collaboration between all parties aims to clarify any points up front before they become a problem with the subsequent knock-on effect on time and cost.

It is proven that engaging multiple stakeholders – including designers, fabricators and applicators – early and consistently throughout the process is key to delivering a successful, safe and cost-efficient solution.

Working together, we share knowledge and help our clients to reach their goals, after all we are all now part of this renewed responsibility.

We want to help our customers to capture relevant data on the use of our intumescent coatings so that they can provide information digitally on safety and quality to their own customers.

This information also provides a sound basis for future decision making.

The Golden Thread will be a digital record of all aspects of the fire protection installed, including application records, theoretical product thickness, data sheets and anything relevant relating to the steel’s fire protection provision.

By following the requirements as set out in the Golden Thread, those involved can be assured that they are creating a safe, efficient building.

Under the terms of the act, the term competence is a core requirement.  As part of this part of the act, the BSR has introduced an Industry Competency Committee whose role will be to monitor and improve industry competence.

This will be done by regularly publishing guidance and advice available to the industry.

Building Safety Act: The three Gateways provide evidence

The Golden Thread runs through what is known as three gateways of the process.

All of the three gateways are important from the outset to completion and occupation so that end users can be assured of compliance, quality and safety and have confidence in the products used to provide fire and life safety – in particular ‘safety critical’ components.

For the protection of structural steel with intumescent coatings, the different parts of the engineering community and the supply chain will need to understand more detail of certain gateways than others.

For example, structural engineers, designers and specifiers will be more concerned with the requirements under gateways one and parts of two.

Applicators will need to understand parts of gateway two and gateway three, while fabricators will need to understand the wider picture across all three gateways.

Gateway 1 – covering the planning stage. This has been in force since August 1, 2021 and sets out the framework for the second and third stages.

Applicants need to demonstrate that fire safety matters have been incorporated into the planning stage for all buildings.

If a fire statement is required to be submitted with a planning application it will be an issue for consideration for the Local Planning Authority (LPA) when reaching its decision on the application.

Contractors should take note that if the LPA considers the statement inadequate it can refuse the application.

Gateway 2 – submitting building control approval to the Regulator to enable construction to start.

This should include written declarations covering the competency of the main contractor, designer, a description of works and plans and a planning statement from Gateway 1.

Importantly, there should be information about how evidence is being captured to maintain the Golden Thread.

The Regulator has a 12-week period to approve or reject these Building Control applications or to approve subject to fulfilment of certain requirements.

Gateway 3 – providing information to ensure the building is safe for occupation. There is a requirement to submit a completion certificate application and provide updated plans.

These plans should reflect the scale of the higher-risk building, key building information, a list of mandatory incident reporting and signed declarations from the main contractor and principal designer that the works and building comply with Building Regulations.

Finally, confirmation that the all-important information for the Golden Thread has been handed over to the accountable person should also be declared.

We all have a responsibility

Remember – responsibility lies with us all. Nobody in the supply chain can absolve themselves.

The Accountable Person must have assessed all building safety risks and taken all reasonable steps to control them, give the safety case report to the Regulator on request and apply for a building assessment certificate.

Remember, the information required for the Golden Thread needs to be accurate, easily understandable, up-to-date, readily accessible and in a digital format.

We should emphasise that it is the responsibility of each Principal Accountable Person to provide the right information to the supply chain – including those bidding the intumescent fire protection package – who in turn are then responsible for all information being passed onto us being accurate if we at Sherwin-Williams are to provide guidance.

Also, bear in mind that this commitment to best practice and gathering of evidence of compliance is not just for the short term but for the lifetime of a building and will be highly valuable should anything happen during its occupation. Think of it as future-proofing life safety.

The changing landscape of fire safety

by Breaking NewsBuilding ManagementConstructionIFSJ ExclusivesSafety

Navigating the maze of new fire safety regulations, FR Consultants’ Managing Director Dorian Lawrence sheds light on adaptive compliance strategies

The introduction of the Fire Safety (England) Regulations 2022 and the Building Safety Act 2022 has significantly altered the landscape of fire safety compliance in England.

These new standards present a complex challenge that requires diligent navigation and understanding.

FRC, under the leadership of Managing Director Dorian Lawrence, has been actively engaging with this shifting terrain.

By offering tailored services, conducting informative webinars, and providing essential guides to meet these regulations, FRC demonstrates a commitment to assisting clients in meeting and exceeding these new compliance standards.

In this exclusive interview, Lawrence outlines FRC’s strategies, challenges, and unique approaches, offering valuable insights into the evolving world of fire safety.

His perspectives provide a thoughtful examination of the industry’s response to the regulatory transformation, and how FRC contributes to the collective effort of building a more resilient and compliant future.

How is FRC helping clients navigate the shifting terrain of fire safety regulations?

First and foremost, FRC is there to understand and explain the regulations.

Working closely with industry experts and joining government panels and forums, we can be at the forefront of new developments and advisories so that we can feed back the latest developments to our clients.

Once we understand something, we try to make it as accessible as possible, and we regularly conduct webinars, undertake certified continuing professional development sessions and send out fact sheets and newsletters, all with the aim of breaking down the very technical guidelines into simple, actionable steps and providing the necessary information on how to meet compliance.

We also offer services tailored to what the market needs in order to meet the new regulations, such as the recent launch of our abbreviated site inspection service to confirm whether a fire risk appraisal of external walls (FRAEW), as specified by PAS 9980, is required.

What are the biggest challenges in adapting to the new legislation?

The biggest challenges are probably the short time frame and the cost.

The sheer scale of this legislation – in a relatively short time, the industry has gone from self-regulation to complete external regulation that brings in the fire services, government bodies and consultancies – has meant that many things are being introduced without a long lead-in or time to adequately prepare and produce documentation.

It leads to a large degree of ‘learn by trying’ as everyone tries to grapple with the exact requirements of the all-new legislation.

This isn’t helped by cases in which legislation overlaps itself and – in some cases – even contradicts itself.

To some degree, this is to be expected with such a huge change of legislation, but it does present challenges.

What strategies FRC has implemented to assist clients in adapting to new regulations?

The biggest thing we’ve done is develop a full, end-to-end service from report to completion of building safety case, with every step in between provided.

For clients who want complete compliance and peace of mind, we can take care of every step in-house.

For those who need only a helping hand, we have produced easy-to-read guides on different routes to compliance and a legal notices service, and, most recently, our abbreviated site inspection provides an economical solution for those who need assurances on whether a FRAEW is needed.

How is FRC pioneering the adaptation to the Fire Safety (England) Regulations 2022 and the Building Safety Act 2022?

FRC believes in the power of the new legislation to make the UK’s buildings safer, and we are doing everything we can to ensure the implementation is a success. That starts with education: webinars with partners to combine and share knowledge and ensuring that our clients can understand what is required of them.

We create as much collateral as is needed and try to leverage visual aids such as building information charts and fact sheets to condense and simplify the requirements.

Along with having staff undertake the Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB) Level 6 diploma to prepare them for looking after the day-to-day management of fire and structural safety in higher risk buildings and establishing a clear point of contact for residents for fire- and safety-related issues, we’ve spoken to legal partners for advice on how to ensure correctness on all points.

What insights can you provide to property owners or managers on how to stay ahead of the curve?

There are two main routes you can go, depending on how confident you are.

The first is, as mentioned, to use an all in-house, end-to-end service such as the one we provide; then you know without a doubt that everything is up to scratch and will meet compliance.

If you manage the process yourself, prioritisation is key: understand what you need to do, break it down into steps and tackle tasks one at a time.

There are also lots of things that will take time, so get things rolling straight away.

It’s always worth getting advice, though, and the most important thing is to ensure that you are listening to qualified, experienced professionals.

How has FRC’s approach aided clients in navigating new fire safety regulations?

Our approach to diligence and detail, combined with our goal to improve fire safety, means we are 100% committed to backing the legislation.

This has been proven on several occasions, but one recent example is when we provided a client, the property manager, with a PAS 9980 report.

The pledge developer of the building then sought out their own report, as is their right, but when this came back the property manager noted dissimilarities and asked us to peer review the report.

The new report that had been obtained by the pledge developer was absolutely non-compliant and suggested remediation proposals that were wholly inadequate, including that combustible materials be left in place on a high-risk building above 18 metres in height.

We were able to challenge the new report, and the developer’s suggestion that BS 8414 testing had been carried out, and to ensure that the unsafe measures proposed were not undertaken.

Unfortunately, in this instance, the developer was not forthcoming with their pledge and caused a series of delays, so we instead supported the property manager to find alternative means of funding for the life-critical safety remediations to meet the requirements of the Building Safety Act 2022.

Utilising our own report and the expertise of our fire engineering and building surveying teams, we helped to secure an alternative settlement offer from the building’s construction warranty provider that protected the leaseholder’s best interests while ensuring remediation proposals were carried out to provide a safe and fully compliant building.

We must remember the ultimate goal is to obtain a Building Assessment Certificate from the Building Safety Regulator.

Many works being undertaken by developers will not meet these requirements.

Be careful.

How is FRC helping clients prepare for the October 2023 registration deadline?

It’s important to me and FRC that the new legislation is a success that prevents fire disasters in high-rise and medium-rise buildings in the future.

We can provide an end-to-end solution to get them completely prepared for the October deadline, in which we guide and manage the whole process, step by step, to ensure all requirements are met and that the building is safe.

We also know that not everyone wants such a comprehensive service and have developed various single products to help people with only the advice they need, whether that is an abbreviated site inspection, a safety case report or a gap analysis to help them get back on track.

This article was originally published in the September 2023 issue of International Fire & Safety Journal. To read your FREE digital copy, click here.

Addressing legacy issues in the fire safety sector with Quelfire

by Building ManagementConstructionFeatured NewsPassiveSafety

A recent article from Darryl Wells, the Commercial & Development Director at Quelfire, sheds light on the pressing challenges faced by those in the construction industry, particularly concerning fire safety.

In his post, Wells brings attention to instances where firestopping installations may not have been entirely compliant. The full post can be found here.

Legacy issues: The cost of getting it wrong

“Like fixing anything that goes wrong, legacy issues are no stranger to a hefty price,” says Wells.

As an illustration of this, in July 2023, Barratt Development allocated £180m to address the safety concerns of legacy buildings, following a £434.6m provision in 2022.

Addressing legacy issues in retrofit projects can be particularly costly, with challenges such as limited access and significant disruptions to buildings.

Opting for competent products from trustworthy manufacturers during the initial stages of construction is highlighted as a more cost-effective and prudent choice.

Avoiding legacy issues: The proactive approach

For Wells, the solution is clear: “Do it right, do it once.” Early engagement, while it may seem to slow down projects initially, allows for timely identification of potential problems.

“Engaging all stakeholders in the early stages ensures installations that align with manufacturer guidelines, averting unforeseen costs and bolstering reputations.

Another crucial strategy highlighted is the “golden thread of information”, a concept born from Hackitt’s Building Safety Review.

This process ensures that vital information about a building’s lifecycle is collated and maintained consistently.

Such practices reduce the chances of oversight and potential legacy issues, aiming to maintain the safety of the building and its inhabitants.

Furthermore, industry software provides invaluable support. By maintaining up-to-date records, there’s a clear trail, eliminating potential vulnerabilities in the future.

For those grappling with legacy issues, Wells’s message is one of hope and urgency: To genuinely address these concerns, there’s a need to evolve past practices, learn from errors, and embrace a proactive approach.

IFSJ Comment

Darryl Wells’s insights are especially poignant in the current climate where the focus on fire safety has never been sharper.

Legacy issues not only have financial implications but also endanger lives.

Addressing these concerns isn’t merely about compliance; it’s about creating a culture of safety and responsibility.

Early engagement, up-to-date documentation, and collaboration across sectors can drastically mitigate the repercussions of past mistakes.

As the construction sector evolves, ensuring that fire safety remains paramount will be pivotal.

The Golden Thread: Beyond bricks and mortar

by Breaking NewsBuilding ManagementIFSJ ExclusivesPassiveSafety

Dan Rossiter, Built Environment Standards Lead at BSI, delves into the implementation, benefits, and challenges of the Golden Thread

Can you provide an overview of what the ‘Golden Thread‘ of information is in the context of building safety?

When I communicate about the golden thread, I often start by signposting to the definition that the then Building Regulation Advisory Committee (BRAC) published in their Golden Thread Report: “The golden thread is both the information that allows you to understand a building and the steps needed to keep both the building and people safe, now and in the future.”

This means that the golden thread of information encapsulates both the content (i.e. information and documents) as well as the process of keeping the content up to date (i.e. information management).

Within the BRAC Golden Thread Report there are also several helpful principles such as: Secure, Understandable, Accessible, and Longevity.

What is your perspective on the importance of having up-to-date premises information, particularly in high-stake situations?

What I have noticed is that over the past few years publications, such as The Vision for the Built Environment and Flourishing Systems, have conveyed a new narrative of considering the built environment as a system of systems.

This mindset demonstrates the level of interconnectivity needed for the overall system to operate effectively.

In this new mindset housing, for example, is considered social infrastructure. As infrastructure, they have their own outcomes to benefit society (one for example would be to protect occupants from the elements).

Up-to-date information is needed so that robust decisions can be made to realise such outcomes.

In a high-stake situation, there will likely be several immediate outcomes to realise.

Up-to-date premises information such as: materials used in the external wall and structure; the number of storeys and staircases, as well as Details of the evacuation strategy.

As requested by The Higher-Risk Buildings (Key Building Information etc.), Regulations will be pivotal in making robust decisions to realise these immediate outcomes.

Can you delve into the specific standards that can support the Golden Thread of information?

There are a myriad of standards that can support the Golden Thread of Information, the first being BS 8644-1 (Digital management of fire safety information). Whilst BS 8644-1’s scope extends beyond higher-risk buildings, it outlines an information management process that enables fire safety information to be managed and exchanged.

The information management processes within relate heavily to the ISO 19650 series, as well as the UK BIM Framework more generally.

In addition, there are standards which support the documentation that will likely be needed within the Golden Thread of Information.

These include: PAS 79-1 and the forthcoming BS 9792 (Fire risk assessments), ISO 7519 (General arrangement and assembly drawings), and BS 8587 (Facility Information Management).

Finally, there are standards relating to document management such as EN 82045-2 (Document management metadata) which can complement the BS EN ISO 19650-2 file naming convention to aid with the structure, management, and discoverability of information.

How can organisations begin to implement these standards and ensure they are maintaining the Golden Thread?

An effective way of doing implementing these standards would be to consider how their practices can be integrated into an organisation’s quality management plan.

Similar to when Building Information Modelling (BIM) was first introduced, it was ineffective for an organisation to have two ways of working (i.e. BIM projects and Traditional projects).

In the same manner, an organisation shouldn’t look to have “golden thread projects” but, instead, look to provide information aligned to the golden thread definition and principles on all projects. In doing so, regardless of the type of project, better information may be produced, managed, and exchanged as a result.

From a fire safety perspective, can you detail the benefits of being able to exchange fire safety information seamlessly?

As described within BS 8644-1, there are several instances across a project life cycle where fire safety information should be exchanged.

This can be as early as the briefing stage, where the fire safety outcomes and objectives should be identified, to the later stages, where risk assessments associated with the design and construction should demonstrate how risks have been captured and mitigated.

Being able to exchange such information with as little friction as possible will ensure that the right people have access to right information, to ensure that decision-making is done robustly.

In the context of emergency response, how might the Golden Thread facilitate faster and more effective action?

As opposed to having to access information on arrival (e.g via a premises information box), information can be accessed via the golden thread in transit or via remote colleagues who can inform the emergency responders of any pertinent information.

For example, this can include details of the fire evacuation strategy as well as the location of the assembly point.

What are some common challenges organisations might face when trying to implement the Golden Thread?

The biggest challenge will likely be that there are a wealth of software vendors who are trying to sell a “golden thread of information solution”.

Whilst their technology may enable the exchange of information and documents, without a more holistic organisational view, there is a risk of providing information that isn’t maintained; which would fail to meet the statutory instruments and the law.

As such, it is vital that organisations consider both how their processes need to change as well as what competencies are needed to realise the golden thread of information before investing in a solution.

What is the current status of the Golden Thread Regulations?

We have yet to see the Golden Thread Regulations themselves.

There is no doubt that the publication of this instrument will provide clarity around what is required in relation to the golden thread of information.

In the meantime, built environment professionals should engage with their respective professional institutions to keep up-to-date on relevant building safety activities as well as ensure that they continue to hold the competencies expected of someone performing their professional function.

This article was originally published in the September 2023 issue of International Fire & Safety Journal. To read your FREE digital copy, click here.

The road to standardisation

by Breaking NewsBuilding ManagementConstructionPassive

Craig Wells, Sales Director at Quelfire looks at enhancing building safety through the standardisation of processes

Today, firestopping solutions are typically selected by the main contractor as part of a ‘design and build’ contract.

Because of this, they have the responsibility to ensure the chosen solutions are compliant and installed accordingly.

To achieve the end goal of protecting people and property, many external trades need to be involved, making it a complex process.

That is why we strongly recommend that a standardised process is achieved and implemented for each project.

A recommended standardised process: what does it involve?

Like all processes, there are steps and measures that need to be thoroughly followed to achieve the wanted outcome.

Processes are there for a reason. And for high-rise and multi-occupancy buildings, the need for these have never been more glaringly obvious.

They save lives. But also limit the damage caused by fire to a building and its contents.

Consequently, when a compliant process has been established within your organisation and for any current projects, it makes sense that this should then be standardised and applied to any future projects.

This gives you the chance to optimise how you work, making the process more robust.

In our experience working with various parties involved in construction projects, the best practice for creating a standardised process will always be to engage early with your team and relevant trades to identify and bring together all the suitable tested details.

This is important from a compliance perspective, but also from a commercial liability and practical perspective.

1) Identifying the project’s requirements

The starting point is to understand the project’s wants and need. What comes under that, and is non-negotiable, are the fire strategy requirements of the project.

Once these have been established and the location of the walls and floors have been situated, how the compartment lines are going to be compromised can be determined.

In other words, the services that are going to be installed and maybe even a choice of services you want to be installed.

However, the success of early engagement does depend on the flexibility of all parties.

For instance, if there are no available tested solutions for the type of insulation desired, a level of compromise is crucial to identify alternative tested solutions.

The next step is to decide how the services should penetrate the wall or floor. Are you going to drill a hole and use a direct-to-wall seal, or create a letterbox opening and use fire batt or compound to seal the gap left behind?

At this stage, it’s important to have an idea of how you intend to execute the penetrations whilst ensuring they’re achievable.

2) Engaging with the relevant parties

Only when you have identified the project’s requirements should you begin to engage with the relevant firestopping manufacturer, like ourselves, to identify the available tested solutions for your requirements.

Once there is a portfolio of details, the designer can then gather all the information and communicate it to the supply chain.

This part of the process is paramount in ensuring that all the relevant, competent trades are not only happy with the design, but can also efficiently build it.

In the event that any grey areas or untested applications come to light, it becomes necessary to start the process from the beginning, identifying any changes that need to be made.

For instance, this could involve modifying the wall type to be able to utilise a tested, compliant detail.

3) It’s time to build

At this point, you will possess a finalised design.

This will clearly outline the precise firestopping solutions for each service, including spacing requirements, dimensions of the letterbox, and the necessary space between each seal, among other aspects.

Once the details have been approved, and everyone is in agreement, construction can commence.

This enables installers onsite to adhere to the provided design, guaranteeing that installations meet compliance requirements.

Cultural change: industry vs organisation

As we’re well aware, establishing a standardised process isn’t as straightforward as it sounds.

Cultural change does not happen overnight.

Therefore, employers must take on the role of influencers in the development of their organisation.

As well as employees being committed to doing what’s right and compliant.

With cultural change, it’s possible that once new processes are implemented, issues from past projects may arise.

Instances where firestopping installations were non-compliant may come to light, such as improperly fixed fire collars, wraps used in oversized holes, or incorrect use of PU foam around services.

We understand that the challenges of construction projects can sometimes lead to unintentional deviations from plans and regulations.

And, at times, adhering to guidelines might be hindered by tight deadlines, changing requirements, or even a lack of clarity in terms of industry best practices.

Whilst you may have been working to the best of your knowledge at that time, it’s crucial that these issues are addressed.

This involves areas of non-compliance and changing internal processes to ensure any future projects are in line with regulations.

Implementing an internal standardised process may involve ensuring your team adopts an approach which addresses the project’s needs from an early stage.

It also involves creating the golden thread of information to gather, store, and maintain key information about a building’s lifecycle.

And realising that you don’t have to go it alone.

Construction industry software can support accountable persons in maintaining the golden thread of information.

This ensures transparency and traceability, thus, reducing any potential future vulnerabilities.

The cost of not doing it right the first time around

Standardised processes also play an important role in minimising commercial liability.

The cost of having to correct errors once the building is occupied far outweighs the initial effort of optimising internal processes and adhering to regulations.

Yes, it may take longer to establish and implement new processes, but it is more beneficial in the long run.

Issues that come to light late in the design stage and during installation inevitably lead to extra costs and delays.

For instance, if there is no tested solution at the design stage, the application will need to be redesigned; if products are installed incorrectly, they will have to be rectified; and if issues are discovered during inspections, this will not only require the reconsideration of the firestopping products used, but the design of them too.

Ultimately, if errors are not identified during the final inspection and a fire breaks out when the building is already occupied, putting lives at risk and legal implications will be the price of cutting corners and compromising fire safety measures.

Standardising processes within the construction industry is undeniably challenging.

It requires not only an industry-wide cultural change, but also an organisational one.

Collaboration, standardisation, and optimisation: these are key takeaways. Equally important is to recognise that fire safety must be at the forefront of any project-based decision.

These decisions, whilst they seem small in the moment, are some of the most important choices we will ever make.

They are life critical.

That is why ensuring you have a compliant standardised process in place will encourage competency and, ultimately, enhance building safety.

This article was originally published in the September 2023 issue of International Fire & Safety Journal. To read your FREE digital copy, click here.

BESA president highlights the need for change in the building services sector

by Building ManagementFeatured News

BESA president Claire Curran has called for increased action in the building services sector, stating that the industry should focus more on tangible steps than merely discussing the challenges it faces.

At the annual BESA President’s Lunch at the Oxo Tower in London, she emphasised the need for proactive risk management and not just paying lip service to the ongoing changes in the sector.

Challenges and shifts in the building services sector

Addressing a group of industry leaders and association members, Curran said: “The biggest risk you can take…is taking no risks.”

She highlighted that while many talk about adapting to the changing culture in building safety and other sector advancements, not all are truly embracing these shifts.

BESA’s proactive measures and digital advancements

Curran provided insight into several initiatives by BESA aimed at enhancing competence and compliance across the industry.

These initiatives include the introduction of new SKILLcards, the updating of its Competence Assessment Standard, and the provision of comprehensive guidance supported by training programmes.

Underlining the importance of evolving with the digital age, she urged the sector to harness the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) and other digital tools.

She stated that the integration of AI with current digital advancements, such as 4D modelling, can greatly increase efficiency.

Furthermore, Curran stressed that the lack of such improvements could hinder building services firms’ profitability amidst shrinking profit margins.

She emphasised the importance of digitisation, especially in achieving net-zero emissions targets.

However, she also noted that investing in human capital is vital to fully utilise new technologies.

The potential of the digital age in building services

Curran believes the digital age presents an invaluable opportunity to attract a younger and more diverse workforce to the building services sector.

She said that encouraging the younger generation to join the industry can accelerate the pace of environmental change and technological advancement.

IFSJ Comment

Claire Curran’s message resonates with the broader objectives of safety and change across the building services sector.

As the industry grapples with challenges, ranging from digital transformation to environmental sustainability, it becomes essential for trade associations and companies to step up.

Curran’s call for action, particularly in harnessing digital tools and AI, aligns with the pressing need for the sector to adapt and innovate.

Moreover, her emphasis on attracting younger talent offers a fresh perspective on how the industry can shape the future.

Curran’s vision and BESA’s proactive measures reflect a roadmap that could define the sector’s trajectory in the years to come.

Meeting reveals cladding concerns brought before Secretary of State

by Building ManagementConstructionFeatured News

Recent discussions between Secretary of State Michael Gove and the End Our Cladding Scandal group have highlighted continued concerns surrounding the cladding issue.

These concerns were voiced in a post by representatives of the End Our Cladding Scandal group.

Industry’s role in the cladding crisis

One of the main topics of discussion was the role of construction product manufacturers in the cladding debacle.

The group asked: “Why construction product manufacturers, who are partly responsible for this crisis, continue to profit from innocent leaseholders?”

They pressed for accountability measures such as taxation or levies to be imposed on these companies.

Rising building insurance premiums and cladding

Another pressing issue was the steep increase in insurance premiums faced by leaseholders.

It was reported that many have seen their premiums rise significantly, despite reassurances about a Reinsurance Scheme.

A key concern was the shift in insurance justifications: “The insurers were now blaming escape of water for soaring insurance costs despite having previously told us and the Government that the premiums were due to the ‘fire risks associated with the buildings’.”

Challenges for social landlords and shared owners

Concerns were also raised about housing association shared owners. Some examples included individuals incurring losses of up to £1,000 a month, leading to severe health and mental health issues.

Gove acknowledged these concerns, noting that he had constituents experiencing similar challenges.

He stated that “there is more the Department could do” regarding housing associations.

IFSJ Comment

This meeting between the End Our Cladding Scandal group and Michael Gove, Secretary of State, highlights the far-reaching consequences and complexities of the cladding crisis.

For those in the fire and safety industry, understanding these developments provides a clearer picture of both the legislative landscape and public sentiment.

From insurance implications to the roles of manufacturers, every facet of this issue has a direct impact on how professionals approach building safety, risk management, and the broader conversation around construction integrity.

About End Our Cladding Scandal Group

The End Our Cladding Scandal Group is an advocacy organisation focusing on the issues arising from the cladding crisis.

They represent the voices of thousands of affected leaseholders and are committed to ensuring safe housing for all, holding those responsible accountable, and addressing the widespread financial implications faced by innocent homeowners.

BESA introduces a revamped HIU test standard in the UK

by Building ManagementFeatured NewsSafetySustainability

BESA’s updated HIU test standard

The Building Engineering Services Association (BESA) has launched a new testing system for Heat Interface Units (HIUs) in the UK.

This updated protocol replaces the original standard introduced in 2016 and later updated in 2018. More about the latest updates can be found here.

Aiming for consumer protection

The purpose behind BESA’s enhanced UK HIU Test Regime is to provide clearer information to specifiers and to optimise the experience for the end-users.

The standard was devised with the intent of safeguarding consumers and to ensure the industry aligns with the requirements of those involved in the creation and design of heat networks.

Boosting efficiency and choice

The test regime is a voluntary measure, offering manufacturers an independent means to evaluate, measure, and compare the effectiveness of their products.

The protocol has proven beneficial in elevating HIU performance within the industry. This enhancement has equipped specifiers with vital data, aiding them in making knowledgeable decisions when choosing HIUs for their ventures.

HIUs play a pivotal role in channelling heat from district heating systems to individual structures and residences.

Their functioning is integral to the system’s overall efficacy.

The BESA Standard was conceived from an efficiency research initiative backed by the UK government, aiming to bolster the performance of this vital technology.

The BESA HIU Steering Group, a collective of representatives from various stages of the testing procedure, has overseen its subsequent evolutions.

This group liaises with stakeholders spanning from developers, specifiers, and purchasers to manufacturers, suppliers, and ultimately, the consumer.

Enhancements in the latest standard

The third iteration of the HIU standard showcases notable advancements. It has been revamped into a modular design, allowing the evaluation of diverse HIU types, inclusive of space heating-only models.

This edition introduces a DHW load test and revises how the annual volume weighted return temperature (VWART) is determined.

Currently, the standard encompasses seven distinct HIU types, stipulating pass/fail criteria culminating in the documentation of a successful evaluation.

The test’s modular format is tailored to reduce the need for retesting while augmenting the data available to specifiers.

Trials adhering to this benchmark facilitate the comparison of varying HIUs under customary UK operational conditions.

This provides proof of adherence to other performance metrics, including domestic hot water response intervals.

A BESA technical consultant validates the outcome before it’s listed on the BESA HIU Test Register.

This catalogued data aids specifiers in making well-informed HIU choices for their projects.

BESA manages the regime as a not-for-profit initiative, reinvesting testing revenues into the scheme’s prospective growth.

Manufacturers choosing to list their test findings on the Register can label themselves as ‘BESA registered’, and are granted permission to utilise the Association’s emblem.

Industry reactions

“We’re thrilled to present the latest phase of HIU testing in the UK,” expressed Gareth Jones, Chair of the BESA HIU Steering Group.

“The foundational test standard has already fostered positive industry transformations.

“The latest standard symbolises a considerable progression, especially in acknowledging the transition to eco-friendly technologies.”

Jones further highlighted the relevance of the new standard with the upcoming Heat Network Technical Assurance Scheme and the impending heat network regulations.

He emphasised that the revised standard aligns seamlessly with these novel prerequisites, instilling enhanced confidence in the industry.

He also spotlighted the test’s contribution to market evolution, stating: “It exemplifies the constructive influence of consumer-driven initiatives on market growth.”

Looking ahead

With over 50,000 HIUs being set up annually in the UK, their role in the country’s decarbonisation blueprint is escalating.

This surge underscores the significance of establishing performance benchmarks, as articulated by BESA.

Jones added: “Ultimately, consumers stand to gain from the enhanced performance of heat networks.

“As manufacturers utilise the test results to further research and refine their offerings, specifiers are poised to make increasingly informed decisions.”

For further details on the BESA HIU Standard, click here.

IFSJ Comment

The revised HIU test standard by BESA showcases the industry’s commitment to continually elevate standards, ensuring consumers receive top-tier products.

As HIUs play a growing role in the UK’s decarbonisation strategy, it’s essential for benchmarks to be robust, transparent, and in line with contemporary needs.

This step by BESA is a testament to the industry’s forward-thinking approach and the emphasis on aligning with green initiatives.

The new standard, by enhancing transparency and promoting better-informed decisions, is set to drive both industry growth and consumer satisfaction.

White paper on building safety reveals improved management of information for safer homes

by Building ManagementConstructionFeatured NewsSafety

Making UK homes safer with better information

A recent white paper released by construction management software solution leaders Createmaster and Zutec has highlighted the significant role that digital technology plays in enhancing building safety and improving outcomes.

The study titled, “Building Safety in the Digital Age: Embracing Technology for Enhanced Building Information” is now available for access here.

The UK’s changing landscape of building safety

Published in anticipation of the next provisions of the Building Safety Act 2022, set to come into effect in October 2023, the report delves into the transformative journey the UK building industry has undertaken over the past five years.

It provides an in-depth examination of the strides made by asset owners and building operators in managing crucial information to meet regulatory requirements.

Particular emphasis is placed on the UK residential and rental market, corroborated by insights from two national sample surveys conducted with non-freehold tenants.

These surveys offer an understanding of the current resident perspectives on building safety, the availability of information, and service quality.

Understanding resident sentiments towards building safety

One of the standout findings from the paper is a notable increase in resident access to essential building information.

However, the report also acknowledges areas where the industry falls short.

There remain significant challenges in addressing maintenance requests in a timely manner, posing potential safety concerns for residents.

Another trend observed was the 22% spike in resident satisfaction regarding communication from asset owners over an 18-month span.

By 2023, nearly half of the participants demonstrated a better understanding of essential documents like fire certificates, with 90% being aware of the responsible party for these certificates.

Challenges and the road to improved building safety

While there is increased engagement and awareness, transforming this into actionable solutions for defects and damages remains a hurdle.

The majority of the respondents felt that their maintenance requests were not addressed promptly, with many reporting unresolved issues.

A further cause for concern is the decrease in service satisfaction by 10% over the same 18-month period.

The report suggests that residents today are three times more likely to inhabit homes with subpar maintenance.

On a positive note, only 2% of participants in 2023 felt somewhat unsafe in their homes.

This is a marked improvement from 2021, and it’s evident that residents now have a clearer understanding of fire safety protocols.

However, issues such as items stored in corridors, propped open fire doors, and faulty fire alarms still exist and warrant immediate attention.

Envisioning a safer future for UK homes

As the white paper underlines, while there are long-standing issues that still persist, asset owners and facility managers are on the right trajectory towards constructing a safer environment.

One of the central themes highlighted is the value of digital assets.

For the new regulatory landscape, maintaining the highest quality and ensuring safety will hinge on having complete, accurate, and easily accessible building information.

Zutec COO, Emily Hopson-Hill commented: “While there were significant advancements in information provision and communication, the time taken to respond to maintenance remains a sore point for tenants.

“Digitising property information is now a non-negotiable, especially for compliance. The report makes it abundantly clear that there are affordable tools available to ensure accurate, up-to-date building data.”

IFSJ Comment

The insights offered by the recent white paper by Createmaster and Zutec provide a comprehensive snapshot of the current state of building safety in the UK.

The advances in the last five years, especially in the realm of digital technology, offer hope for the future.

However, it’s also a stark reminder that there is much work to be done.

Maintenance issues and fire safety concerns cannot be ignored.

It’s essential that industry stakeholders take note of these findings and work collaboratively to ensure safer homes for UK residents.