Change of focus, elevation of skills and use of tech: how building control must modernise post-Grenfell

Not since the introduction of privatised “approved inspectors” in 1984 has building control been through such a seismic culture shift as it has in the past 12 months. And no one could dispute that a reset in the wake of Grenfell was long overdue. Of course not. The Grenfell Inquiry itself judged building control to be unfit for purpose and in clear need of change.

When competition between building control inspectors came in 40 years ago, surprise, surprise, we witnessed a “race to the bottom”, and over the years a pursuit of client satisfaction crept into the new inspection regime. As Building regulations become ever more complex, control officers were used to come up with design solutions to help schemes comply.

In doing their best to aid and collaborate, lines were blurred and at times the job the public thought they were doing – ensuring, say, that fire stopping had not been left out and wall tiles were in place – inevitably became compromised. And even when local authorities wanted to prosecute those contravening Parts, A, B or the alphabet of others, they had no real resource to do so, and if they did proceed to court, the penalty fines were paltry.

Now, building control has been overhauled. There is a new governance in the form of the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) governing both public and private building control services. The BSR is also acting as the building control authority itself for higher risk buildings.

Alongside this are new training and competence requirements, building control officers are now known as Registered Building Inspectors and with this new identity comes a brand new culture. Out go friendly emails offering advice, and in comes a laser-like focus on checking plans, inspecting building work and coming down hard on developers, contractors and designers when the rules have been breached.

Giving building control teeth is proving a shock to the system. It would be odd if it didn’t. The number of higher-risk projects failing to pass muster and thus having starts on site delayed reveals the gulf in thinking between inspectors and developers.

Between 1 October 2023 and 16 September 2024, the Building Safety Regulator received 1,018 Building Control approval applications for higher risk building work, of which only 146 were approved. And instead of the 12 weeks the BSR had pledged, developers are looking at 18 weeks or longer to wait before they get the thumbs down to say, no they can’t start on site, or yes they can. Who knows what hold-ups lie in store at Gateway 3 – we’ve not got there yet.

The BSR says it is trying to bolster its numbers to tackle this. It was pledged £42m by the last government to fund the recruitment and training of around 110 new building control inspectors and 111 fire protection officers, but this cannot translate into boots on the ground overnight.

Developers might argue that the BSR should have been better prepared – the delays confirm in a sense industry’s worst fears, knowing how under-resourced the whole set-up appeared to be. You wonder how the system would have coped in a busier market, rather than one so currently moribund.

By all accounts the BSR seems to have been caught off guard with its new responsibilities and the degree of competence it would be up against.

Delivering the CIOB’s annual Sir James Wates lecture before Christmas, Dame Judith Hackitt laid the blame well and truly at the feet of developers and their designers and contractors. She said the delays in obtaining a decision were because applications were so poor.

By all accounts the Building Safety Regulator seems to have been caught off guard with its new responsibilities and the degree of competence it would be up against

Though we have not seen prosecutions yet, Dame Judith was in no doubt that these would come as defects were inspected. “We are almost in a grace period at the moment where people get the benefit of the doubt and the regulator errs on the side of being more helpful in what ‘good’ looks like. But there will come a point in the not too distant future when they will say, ‘You have no excuse anymore’.”

With such a monumental change in culture, it is only fair there has to be some give and take for a while longer.

Meanwhile, developers are not the only ones struggling with this stricter and less flexible approach. It is not surprising to hear that some of those building inspectors on the front line are feeling uncomfortable with the new enforcement-first approach, especially when developers push back or when they feel unsupported by their own organisations.

It is understandable, too, if some officers feel torn between enforcing strict regulations and wanting to maintain their traditional role as a helpful guide for builders. Confrontation rather than collaboration is exhausting for anyone.

If that is the case, then it really isn’t the job for them today. Being the bad guy may not be easy, but it’s the right thing to do. It has to be.

Every building control officer through the land must have etched in their mind the devastating consequences of cutting corners. Arguably they are the last line of defence. And,  if they want to continue working up ways to meet regulations, there are ample opportunities working for the other side and ensuring that applications comply with the rules.

What must also be factored in to this debate is that there are not enough building inspectors with the right skills to go round. Over-work and underpay is encouraging early retirement and it is hard to attract newcomers.

Every building control officer through the land must have etched in their mind the devastating consequences of cutting corners. Arguably they are the last line of defence

The average salary of a building control officer (as was) in the UK is apparently £35,604 per year or £18.26 per hour. That’s about £20,000 less than the average salary of a quantity surveyor.

Could this change of focus, elevation of skills and spotlight on the importance of getting it right provide an attractive new calling card? Could being liberated from the tyranny of having to offer bargain-basement prices provide the opportunity to cost the services at the true value and increase salaries for good people? And with fees ring-fenced from general local authority coffers? (I note that mid-level roles for H&S inspectors with three to five years-plus experience are in the region of £40,000 to £50,000, according to Prospects).

>>See also: Grenfell: a tale of systemic failures

>>See also: ‘We will deliver a generational shift’… Why the Grenfell Inquiry report means another building safety shake-up

At the same time, this is where we really do need to develop technology – and quickly. I was told by a frustrated expert last week how both Singapore and Dubai authorities are pushing on with automating compliance checks, but that there is little appetite in the UK to do so.

Yet, in a month when the government launched its AI action plan with a great deal of fanfare, investing in systems to automate some of the more straightforward compliance checks would be money well spent. Especially if we want to come anywhere near meeting those housebuilding targets we hear so much about – and, at the same time, make the job attractive to Gen Zers.

Planning has its own government-funded programme of research and work to help harness digital technology, so why not building control?

So, huge change already – but let’s not stop there. For too long building control has been a Cinderella profession that has never made it to the ball. Now its carriage awaits.

Denise Chevin is a writer and policy advisor in the built environment, utilities and technology. She is the former editor of Building and Housing Today