BESA building safety survey highlights competence and client risks

Contractors are growing more confident in meeting Building Safety Act requirements, but demonstrating competence and securing changes in client behaviour remain significant challenges, according to BESA’s third annual survey.

Nearly two-thirds of respondents (64%) felt confident they could demonstrate their duty holder requirements “very well”. However, 74% said they had seen no significant change in client behaviour since the Act came into force, with some questioning whether procurement practices and clients’ understanding of their responsibilities were keeping pace with contractors’ efforts.

The Building Engineering Services Association contacted more than 6,000 firms for the research. It reported widespread awareness of the requirements, alongside frustration over the volume of information businesses must absorb and the commercial pressures involved in applying them.

Rachel Davidson, BESA’s director of specialist knowledge, said: “Four years after the Act came into force, more firms are building the knowledge and behaviours needed for a safer built environment.”

She added: “This represents real progress and we are now moving from raising awareness to helping firms meet the assurance challenge i.e. demonstrating their competence and compliance in practice.”

Respondents described difficulties when their approach to compliance conflicted with client expectations. One said: “This results in conflict as we resist, and ultimately we get commercially punished for standing our ground and doing the job properly.”

BESA published a Client’s Guide to the Building Safety Act earlier this year, explaining client responsibilities and their practical implications. The survey nevertheless found continuing concern about whether changes being made by contractors and specialists were being matched elsewhere in the procurement process.

Around one-third of respondents identified demonstrating competence in practice as one of their biggest challenges. They highlighted the distinction between holding a qualification and being able to carry out the work, while 40% said competence issues were identified “frequently or occasionally”.

Providing assurance across the supply chain was another difficulty. Around one-third reported challenges in demonstrating the competence of those they appoint.

The findings also showed differences in the pace of adaptation by business size. Among micro and small organisations, 21% said they had made no significant changes, compared with 5% of medium and large organisations.

Davidson said some firms were still not engaging with the process, although their numbers were declining. Businesses that were responding continued to face information overload and clients who were “not on the same page”, she said.

Evidence relating to older work presented a further concern. Only 30% of respondents felt confident they could provide evidence of competence and compliance for projects carried out more than ten years ago. Some described historic compliance as a “ticking time bomb”.