Building standards enforcement and sanctions: consultation

In situations where the owners have permitted occupation prior to completion of the Building Certificate then they should be held accountable.

There are situations in which you simply cannot retrofit or alter works and still ensure it meets the current safety standards. Particularly with fire resistant products or structural alterations where removal of work may be the only way to comply to regulation.

Agree with this in two scenarious.
Firstly when alternate products may have been used that are have not been checked as compatible with other materials as a result of something such as value engineering.
Secondly in a situation as per the Building Safety Regulator in England where the authority is not notified of what is termed a notifiable change from the original warrant.

The clear ideal is to ensure that there is a system in place where this is not needed but not all products are easily identifiable or can be checked to exactly match the original warrant so whilst we agree it may be needed. And whilst there are concerns that having this in place may put additional reliance of retrospective inspection or investigation and will have less reliance on conformity prior to issue of completion certificate.

Page 6 suggests that this is to align with the Building safety Act which our understanding is that the time limit is extended to 30 years retrospectively for claims accruing before 28 June 2022 and to 15 years for claims accruing after 28 June 2022.

Unsure of any guidance on what would constitute the issue of the maximum fine but agree unless this is amended then there is little deterent for those who do not ensure the buildings are made as per warrant and compliant

Unsure of any guidance on what would constitute the issue of the maximum sentence but agree unless this is amended then there is little deterent for those who do not ensure the buildings are made as per warrant and compliant

In this particular proposal there is not anything of concern but equally there needs to be easy access for those with protected characteristics to know what to do in the event of potential non compliance. Not everyone can use a computer so whilst not directly linked to a protected characteristic ensuring there are mechanisms for those where difficulties should be accounted for

If the regulatory framework does not cause delays then do not see it causing a problem. If however there are significant hold points it could be more costly and impactful to a project deemed higher risk within an island community and prevent the investment.