Building Warrant Fees: consultation

Strongly agree, but on the proviso that the money does lead to a strengthened system. Currently it is difficult to equate the fee level to the service provided by some Building Control departments.

Provided correctly allocated, increased fees would assist with increasing resource and skillset but also consistency and understanding of Building Standards throughout Scotland. However an understanding of the proposed fee levels would need to be provided and agreed prior to introduction and what will be offered for this additional cost.

The current situation where interpretation of the Building Standards can vary widely between local authorities is ridiculous and it is inappropriate for LABSS to be on only a voluntary basis. It is vital to have a centralised body to provide a basis for a consistent approach. It would seem logical for this to be linked to the Building Standards Division who write the standards in the first place and are surely best placed to offer guidance on their interpretation.

However we would query the estimated £1 million per annum initial costs. If the Hub was created as a sub-division of the Building Standards Division, could it be more economically run?

This would assist with transparency of the additional fee expenditure is being targeted providing the industry with an understanding of where these additional fees are being spent.

It would be good to see this being opened to public scrutiny with developers given an opportunity to feedback and comment on performance and success or failure, and also identify where areas are not working as they should be and what could be done to improve.

Yes, it makes sense to relate fees to the project complexity rather than just on construction value - appreciate that this would be hard to define so this makes sense as a step in the right direction. Perhaps consideration could also be given to a fee reduction for simple projects, ie larger scale developments with a lot of repeated house types?

This would be on the assumption that the ‘compliance enforcement roles’ intention was to work in co-ordination and support of developers/contractors rather than work against them. The Building Standards are becoming increasingly complex and difficult to follow and more assistance is required within the industry, particularly in relation to sustainability, fire etc.

However, we have issues where Building Control site inspectors take a different opinion/interpretation to the Building Control Officer who granted the warrant leading to accusations of non-compliance even when we are building to the approved warrant information. We would not want to see our fees going to more of this!

We do not think it is appropriate for enforcement on dangerous and defective buildings to be funded from Building Warrant fees. This should be funded separately by the Scottish Government.

We strongly believe that fees should be set at a national level. The whole process needs to be controlled more at a national level to ensure a more consistent approach and service. There is no reason for a warrant to cost more in one local authority than another, it is only fair and reasonable for this to be consistent across the country.

Increased fees will have a direct financial impact on our business in costing us more, but this would be more than offset if we will receive a more consistent and efficient service as a result. We waste a lot of resource having to navigate between the different interpretations currently taken by different authorities.

The potential for fees to be set at a local level could impact on island communities.