By clicking “Allow all cookies”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, and to up the ante on your user experience.
Essential Cookies cannot be disabled, however you can opt-out of your data being stored. Click here to read our Cookie policy.
Close
Unsafe Cladding: How Do I Know?

RTM leaseholders should know how to identify unsafe facades and ensure compliance with the latest UK fire safety regulations.

The Grenfell Tower disaster in 2017 was a turning point concerning fire safety in high-rise buildings. In response, the UK Government introduced stringent regulations to ensure that such a tragedy would never happen again.

If you’re a property owner or Right to Manage (RTM) leaseholder, it’s important to understand whether the external walls are safe and whether further action is required. This article outlines how you can spot unsafe cladding and what steps to take next.

What buildings are most at risk?

Residential buildings within the UK have essentially been split into three main categories:

  1. Higher Risk Buildings.  These are broadly defined as buildings at least 18 metres or 7 storeys in height with at least 2 residential units.  These are the highest risk category of buildings and the most stringent regulations apply with a ban on combustible materials in the external wall buildup as per Building Regulation 7(2). 
  2. 11-18 metres.  Whilst these buildings are typically considered lower risk they have not traditionally been subject to any restrictions for the use of combustible materials in the external wall.  This can result in an unacceptable risk of fire spread across the external wall.
  3. The rest.  Below 11 metres the impact of a fire spreading across the external wall is reduced and these buildings are generally considered lower risk with remediation unlikely to be required.

Within your Fire Risk Assessment the assessor will advise whether they consider a FRAEW (Fire Risk Assessment External Wall) is required.  Their advice should be followed and a FRAEW (also known as a PAS9980 assessment) conducted if there are concerns about the safety of the external walls.

What cladding types are unsafe?

This is a very complicated subject as we have often found that while the outside facing material is non-combustible the buildup behind can contain significant quantities of combustible material and a lack of cavity barriers to prevent fire spread.

We have prepared a specific article which looks at the 6 main types of external walls found on buildings in the UK and the potential issues that can be found with each.

How do I confirm if I have unsafe cladding?

The external wall should be considered in the Fire Risk Assessment for your building, with the assessor advising whether a specific Fire Risk Assessment External Wall (FRAEW) is required to review the external wall in more detail.

If you have concerns or believe your building may have unsafe cladding then you should engage a suitably competent person to carry out this FRAEW assessment.  The FRAEW is also commonly known as a PAS9980 assessment.  PAS9980 sets out a consistent methodology to assess external walls, ensuring a holistic and proportionate approach that considers the context, materials and configuration amongst other factors.

The FRAEW or PAS9980 assessment also forms the basis of the EWS1 form which is required to demonstrate to lenders if remediation works are required to the external wall or not.

Who should I engage with to produce a FRAEW?

There are numerous consultants that produce FRAEWs.  When selecting the best consultant to use there are a number of key points to consider:

  1. Competency

To produce a FRAEW, individuals must have relevant fire safety qualifications, along with knowledge of UK Building Regulations and recent updates. They must also be familiar with various cladding systems and external wall materials, as well as fire testing standards. Practical experience in identifying fire risks related to these materials is essential.

You should ask consultants to submit a competency statement covering these areas and that is specific to the individuals who will be working on your building.  Consider contacting the IFE (Institute of Fire Engineers) or other relevant bodies to validate competency.

  • Proposed Approach

Ask consultants to explain in detail the process they will go through to produce the FRAEW.  Look for consultants that ask detailed questions about the record information available and that request thorough intrusive surveys to verify buildups.

  • Previous Reports

Ask for examples of previous reports produced on similar buildings.  Look for detailed reports that follow a consistent methodology for each area and that conclude with clear detailed recommendations as to whether remediation measures are required or not.

It can be very tempting to go ahead with the lowest quotation or quickest process, however please consider that this is a crucial step in the process.  The FRAEW is a crucial document that identifies life safety considerations with your building, and if remedial works are required becomes the backbone for everything that follows.

If remediation is required the FRAEW will set the scope of works, will be the basis of any funding applications, will be leaned on heavily by the building regulations submission and ultimately may need to be updated and signed off at the end of works by another fire engineer who may disagree with recommendations and request additional scope.  A low quality FRAEW results in delays and questions at every stage in the process and could leave you with an unsafe building.

Make sure your FRAEW is robust.

What will the FRAEW process include?

Once you have engaged a consultant the process will typically commence with a detailed review of any record information that is available for the building.  This may be held in paper copy in the building itself, or electronically.  Detailed searches online, including contacting the original architect, contractor and structural engineer can all help in this step.

Following this intrusive surveys are often required to validate that the solutions shown on the record information are what has actually been built.  Depending on the size/scale of your building these surveys will typically take 2-3 days on site and disruption to residents is usually minimal.

The report will then be produced, working through each area of the external wall and assessing it in accordance with the methodology set out in PAS9980.

Throughout the process it is crucial to check that your chosen consultant is considering all areas of the building, the full wall buildup in each location and any attachments to the façade. 

Once completed the FRAEW should contain detailed recommendations confirming either that each section of the external wall does not require remediation, or setting out a detailed description of the works required to achieve a safe wall buildup.

Taking the Next Step

If you’re concerned that your building may have unsafe cladding, don’t delay in seeking professional advice. Envoy Projects are experts in remediation, offering a comprehensive service to assess, remove and replace non-compliant materials with safe, certified alternatives. With many years of experience in the construction industry, we can guide you through the process from start to finish, ensuring your building meets the latest fire safety standards.

For more information or to book a consultation, contact Envoy Projects today.

Calling in the Remediation Professionals

Essential tips for RTM leaseholders choosing a remediation professional for cladding projects.

If you are a Right to Manage (RTM) leaseholder for your place of residence, you are responsible for ensuring that – among other things – any exterior cladding meets the latest fire safety requirements. This can easily feel overwhelming, so it’s important you place any remediation work into the hands of the professionals.

Selecting a professional cladding remediation company requires due diligence and clear communication. By gathering key information, conducting a thorough review and involving stakeholders, RTM leaseholders can ensure a smooth, efficient process that prioritises both safety and cost-effectiveness. Remember, this decision isn’t just about remediation—it’s about peace of mind for everyone involved.

Follow our guide to appointing a professional remediation team for our project.

Request Competitive Quotes

Obtain at least three quotes to compare services, pricing and timelines. This will help you make an informed decision based on value rather than just cost alone.

Conduct Interviews

An interview process can help you gauge each contractor’s communication style and expertise. Consider including a board member or representative who understands the building’s requirements to ask targeted questions. Here’s a guide to what you should be asking them:

1.    Experience and Credentials

  • Can you provide examples of similar cladding remediation projects you’ve completed?

If your building is a higher-risk building (HRB) ask for experience in submitting and gaining approval for Gateway 2 submissions. Examples of an HRB include buildings that are at least 18 meters tall or have at least seven storeys, contain two or more residential units, or is either a hospital or care home.

  • What relevant certifications or accreditations does your team hold?

Look for qualifications that indicate compliance with health and safety, quality management and environmental management standards. These include FIRAS, Achilles, Constructionline Gold, ISO 9001, ISO 14001 and ISO 45001.

  • How do you keep your team updated with the latest building safety regulations?

This reveals the contractor’s commitment to ongoing training and compliance with evolving regulations.

2. Project Approach and Management

  • What is your proposed approach for our building’s remediation project?

An outline of how they develop a methodology and programme for a project.  What level of delivery do they use; are they self-delivery or do they subcontract the works?

  • Who will be the primary contact throughout the project, and what is their experience level?

How do they manage the Resident Liaison Role? Is this supervised by employed staff or subcontracted out?

  • How do you handle unexpected issues or delays during the project?

Knowing their process for resolving unforeseen complications gives insight into their adaptability and contingency planning.

3. Compliance and Safety Standards

This ensures the contractor’s awareness of legal requirements specific to cladding and building safety.

  • What safety measures do you put in place to protect residents during the remediation work?

Understanding their safety protocols helps ensure that residents’ well-being remains a priority.

  • Can you walk us through your process for quality assurance and post-completion checks?

A robust system must be in place to verify the quality of work at each stage. Look for evidence that they use a cloud-based QA system such as Viewpoint Field View or Procore.

4. Timeline and Cost Management

  • What is your anticipated timeline for completing a project of this size?

Ask for a realistic estimate based on previous projects, to avoid prolonged disruptions.

  • How do you manage project costs, and what measures are in place to avoid budget overruns?

A contractor should demonstrate transparency around financial management to reduce the risk of unexpected expenses.

  • Are there any foreseeable factors that might affect the project timeline or cost?

This reveals their ability to foresee potential challenges and allows you to plan accordingly.

5. Insurance and Liability

  • Can you provide proof of insurance coverage for both public liability and professional indemnity?

Design responsibility may be in the hands of the main contractor or subcontracted to another party. It is essential that you see the proof of insurance (PI) document relative to the policy that is covering the project; to confirm there is sufficient cover for the scale of the project and to check that an IUA (International Underwriting Association) clause is included on the policy.

  • Have you ever encountered disputes related to cladding remediation, and how were they resolved?

This question offers insight into their problem-solving skills and approach to resolving conflicts.

6. References and Reputation

  • Can we speak with past clients or visit completed projects?

This can be an excellent way to verify their track record and understand the quality of their work.

  • What feedback have you received from previous clients about your work on cladding remediation?

Asking about client feedback gives a sense of how well they handle client relations and project challenges.

Review Contracts Thoroughly

Once you’ve selected a contractor for cladding remediation, it’s vital to review the contract meticulously to avoid potential issues down the line. A well-drafted contract should outline every aspect of the project, from scope to timelines, and set clear expectations for both parties. Here’s what RTM leaseholders should look for in the contract:

Scope of Work

The contract should provide a detailed breakdown of the work to be completed. This includes everything from the removal and replacement of cladding to fire safety checks, insulation, and any necessary repairs. Ensure it’s clear what tasks are included and what may incur additional costs if needed later. A defined scope will help prevent misunderstandings and “scope creep,” where extra work is added without corresponding approval or budget increases.

Project Timeline and Milestones

Look for a clearly defined timeline with milestones for each stage of the remediation. These milestones help you track progress and can act as checkpoints to ensure the project remains on schedule. Confirm what will happen if there are delays and whether the contractor has included contingency plans to address unforeseen issues that could impact timelines.

Cost Breakdown and Payment Terms

The contract should include a detailed cost breakdown, outlining labour, materials, and any other associated expenses. It’s also essential to understand the payment schedule – typically, contractors may request an initial deposit, with subsequent payments tied to specific project milestones. Avoid paying large upfront sums and clarify if any penalties apply for late or missed payments.

Penalties for Delays

Addressing delays is crucial for a large-scale project like cladding remediation. Check if there are penalties for missed deadlines and what constitutes a reasonable delay due to circumstances beyond the contractor’s control (such as adverse weather or material shortages). This keeps both parties accountable and ensures the project is completed within a reasonable timeframe.

Quality Assurance and Standards Compliance

The contract should specify the quality standards the contractor is expected to meet, particularly concerning fire safety and building regulations. You may want to include clauses on quality checks at various stages and a final inspection upon completion. Look for language that confirms compliance with standards such as PAS 9980 and Building Regulations, ensuring that the work will satisfy current safety regulations.

Insurance and Liability

Confirm that the contractor holds valid public liability and professional indemnity insurance, and make sure it’s outlined in the contract. This protects the RTM company and leaseholders from financial responsibility for any accidents, damages, or mistakes made by the contractor during the project. Review the coverage limits and ensure they’re adequate for the size and scope of the project.

Warranties and Maintenance

Many contractors offer warranties on the work completed, so check if the contract includes a warranty period for materials or workmanship. Warranties provide reassurance that any defects discovered after the project’s completion will be resolved at no additional cost. Additionally, clarify if there are maintenance responsibilities or inspections needed post-completion to maintain compliance with safety standards.

Change Orders and Additional Work

It’s common for issues to arise once the work begins, sometimes requiring additional tasks or changes to the original plan. The contract should outline the process for change orders, including how additional work will be approved and priced. Avoid agreeing to vague language; instead, specify that any changes must be documented, reviewed and signed off by both parties before they proceed.

Dispute Resolution

No one expects disputes, but they can occur even in well-planned projects. The contract should outline a clear process for handling disagreements or disputes. Many contracts include clauses on alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods, such as mediation or arbitration, which can help resolve conflicts without resorting to litigation. Knowing how disputes will be managed can help prevent delays and extra costs if issues arise.

Termination Clauses

Ensure the contract includes terms outlining how either party can terminate the contract if necessary. For example, there may be specific terms under which you, as the client, can cancel the contract due to non-performance or significant delays. Understanding the conditions for termination and any associated penalties or requirements will help protect the RTM company if the contractor fails to meet expectations.

Who Agrees and Approves the Proposal?

In RTM companies, decision-making around major works usually involves both board members and the wider leaseholder community.

Board Approval

Initially, the board of the RTM company will review and approve the contractor’s proposal. This may involve discussions around cost, feasibility and timing to ensure all aspects align with the building’s needs and budget.

Leaseholder Consultation

Major works often require leaseholder consultation, especially if the costs will be passed onto residents through service charges. Clear communication of the project’s details, benefits and potential impact on fees helps in gaining leaseholder support.

Legal Review (if necessary)

In some cases, a legal review of the contract is advisable to safeguard the RTM company’s interests. This ensures compliance with all legal obligations and minimises future risks.

We hope this guide will help you navigate the process of selecting and appointing a professional remediation contractor. Envoy Projects Ltd, a Colorminium company, has extensive experience and expertise in cladding remediation and RTM projects and is happy to help with any further questions you may have.

Whitepaper on Cladding Remediation and Building Safety in the UK

Derived from the presentation and questions arising from the FPRA Cladding Remediation Webinar, held in association with Envoy Projects Ltd, on Wednesday 23 October 2024. 

Executive Summary 

This whitepaper addresses crucial questions and concerns related to cladding remediation and the role of the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) in ensuring the safety of high-rise and high-risk residential buildings in the UK.  

Prompted by a recent FPRA webinar on this topic, this document outlines the current state of UK building safety regulations, clarifies the responsibilities of stakeholders, and offers recommendations to support residents and leaseholders.  

Topics covered include the BSR’s Gateway processes, funding options and financial liabilities for leaseholders. The paper concludes with actionable insights aimed at enhancing transparency, regulatory efficiency, and long-term building safety. 

Introduction 

In response to widespread safety concerns following the Grenfell Tower fire, the UK Government has implemented several regulatory changes to address unsafe cladding in residential buildings. At the forefront of these efforts is the Building Safety Regulator (BSR), which oversees the compliance of building safety standards.  

The Federation of Private Residents’ Associations (FPRA) recently held a webinar to clarify these regulations and discuss the implications for residents affected by cladding remediation. 

This whitepaper expands on the discussions raised during the webinar, presenting a structured overview of the issues, solutions and regulatory guidance available to residents and leaseholders. The information presented is aimed at demystifying the complex regulatory landscape of cladding remediation, with a focus on accessibility and practicality for those unfamiliar with construction or regulatory terminology. 

Challenges in Cladding Remediation and Building Safety 

The need for cladding remediation has exposed significant challenges for residents, leaseholders and building owners. Issues include the complexity of navigating regulatory requirements, understanding eligibility for government funding, coping with high insurance premiums, and securing financing to cover potentially extensive remediation costs.  

In addition, many stakeholders are uncertain about their financial liabilities, inspection requirements, and the procedural steps involved in remediation. This lack of clarity has created financial stress and confusion for affected residents. 

The challenges outlined below encapsulate some of the most pressing issues raised during the FPRA webinar: 

Complex Regulatory Standards 

The introduction of the BSR and its Gateway processes has added new layers of regulatory oversight, requiring building owners to meet rigorous safety standards but often leaving residents and leaseholders unclear about their responsibilities. 

Financial Uncertainty 

Funding sources such as the Building Safety Fund (BSF) and Cladding Safety Scheme (CSS) offer support but with restrictions, leading to concerns about coverage limitations and the process for securing additional funds when costs exceed initial budgets. 

Lack of Understanding of the Safety Remediation Process 

Many residents are unsure about the precise steps required to ensure a building’s compliance with safety regulations. While the BSR’s Gateway processes aim to standardise safety across buildings, stakeholders report difficulty in understanding the exact timeline, procedural steps, and necessary documentation to complete each phase of remediation.  

This lack of understanding can lead to delays, potential cost increases, and concerns about meeting regulatory requirements. 

Strategy for Effective Cladding Remediation 

To address these challenges Envoy has prepared a Project Journey in collaboration with MHCLG and Mott MacDonald which sets out all the steps required from the initial discovery of non-compliance to the completion and signoff of remedial works on site.  The purpose of this Project Journey was to help clarify the steps and work with the market to identify areas in which the intervention was required from professional teams. This will ensure that when a project reaches site it is carried out in a way that works for all stakeholders and works to minimise the level of disruption as much as is possible to the lives of those living in the development.  The simple pathway of steps required is shown in the graphic below.  In working through this, Envoy was able to identify areas which early engagement could work to identify risks and mitigate delays and additional costs once the works onsite have begun.

Key Insights and Recommendations 

Based on the insights shared in the FPRA webinar, we present the following recommendations for stakeholders navigating cladding remediation: 

1. Engage Quality Consultants 

To avoid delays, building owners should engage with competent consultants, especially in the early stages when a FRAEW (PAS9980) assessment is being prepared. This document sets the foundation for funding and building control applications.  

Errors or items missing from the FRAEW can cause significant delays with funding and building control approval. Building owners should thoroughly check the FRAEW to ensure that it is detailed and that all areas of the façade have been covered. 

2. Identify Appropriate Funding Sources 

Building owners should determine at the earliest opportunity whether their project qualifies for the Building Safety Fund or the Cladding Safety Scheme, based on building type and cladding material.  

The BSF covers all buildings over 18 metres (typically 7 stories) in London Boroughs and the CSS covers all buildings 11-18 metres (typically 4-7 stories) nationally. More recently, the scope of the CSS has been expanded to include buildings over 18 metres high outside London.  

Residents should consult the www.gov.uk website for the process and how to determine eligibility. 

3. Explore Additional Funding Options 

If a project’s costs exceed the allocated budget, building owners can submit requests for additional funding. This can be essential to cover unforeseen expenses without shifting the financial burden to leaseholders. Early budgeting and accurate cost estimations are critical. 

4. Contact Authorities with Concerns 

During the remediation process, residents can reach out to their building safety manager, the local council’s building safety team or the BSR. For questions about funding or financial matters, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) can provide support. 

5. Understand Remortgaging Timelines Post-Remediation 

For leaseholders looking to remortgage after cladding remediation, the earliest time typically aligns with the completion of all required remediation work and the final sign-off from an official inspection. This sign-off verifies compliance with the BSR’s safety standards. However, mortgage lenders may have varying policies regarding remortgaging after remediation, so leaseholders are advised to consult their specific lender or a financial advisor to confirm eligibility and timing. 

Conclusion 

Cladding remediation is essential to ensure the safety of residential buildings across the UK, but it presents a range of regulatory, financial, and logistical challenges. Through this white paper, the FPRA aims to clarify these complexities and offer practical guidance for residents and leaseholders. Effective collaboration with the BSR, strategic use of government funding, and advocacy for fair insurance practices are critical to supporting safe, affordable, and efficient remediation processes. 

By following the recommendations outlined above, residents, building owners, and leaseholders can navigate the remediation process with greater confidence, enhancing safety and financial stability in the long term. 

References 

  • Building Safety Regulator (BSR) – Detailed information on the BSR’s role and the Gateway processes is available on the Health and Safety Executive’s official website: https://www.hse.gov.uk/building-safety.  
  • EWS1 Ratings and Fire Safety Assessments – The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) provides information on EWS1 ratings and their implications for building safety. Further details are available here: https://www.rics.org/uk/ews1.  
  • Insurance and Cladding Remediation Costs – The Association of British Insurers (ABI) has discussed issues around insurance premium increases related to cladding remediation. For more on this, see their recent publications: https://www.abi.org.uk.  
  • Financial Liabilities for Leaseholders – More information on the capped contributions for leaseholders in remediating unsafe cladding is available in the FPRA’s guide on cladding and building safety: https://www.fpra.org.uk/resources.  
September Roundtable Event: What does pace and value for money mean in cladding remediation?

Hear from Rehanna Chaudhri of Homes England, Jim Parkinson of Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and Chris Peters of IPM on their thoughts on the Envoy Roundtable Event.

Featuring representation from Homes England, Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) and the Health and Safety Executive, the conversation was insightful, touching on the balance between pace and value for money, transparency in public spending, and the hurdles faced by the industry. Click here to read our blog with key takeaways from the event.

Key Takeaways from Our Recent Envoy Roundtable Event

Last week’s Envoy Roundtable discussion at The Gherkin brought together industry professionals and government representatives to explore the pressing challenges of cladding remediation. The conversation was insightful, touching on the balance between pace and value for money, transparency in public spending, and the hurdles faced by the industry. Below are some key highlights from the event: 

Balancing Pace and Value for Money 
There was consensus around the need to improve the speed of cladding remediation efforts, particularly in response to criticism that progress has been too slow. However, it was emphasized that while identifying gaps and streamlining processes is important, the pace cannot always be controlled directly. The real goal should be ensuring value for money—not simply choosing the cheapest option, but delivering the right quality at the right price. Cutting corners to save costs risks compromising safety and long-term durability. 

Transparency and Accountability 
Public money is at the core of cladding remediation, and transparency and accountability to residents are essential. The process should be focused on ensuring funds are used appropriately, not just to meet budgetary goals but to genuinely enhance building safety. Reducing delays in decision-making and minimizing variation in processes is critical to ensuring timely progress. 

Case workers, divided between handling backlogs and new cases, are supported by operations teams who step in when complications arise. For projects facing financial strain, there’s a hardship fund available through the Cladding Safety Scheme, with further review by the DLA as needed. 

Challenges with PAS/FRAEW and Inconsistencies in Approach 
Concerns were raised over the perceived subjectivity of the PAS/FRAEW process. This lack of clarity has led some experts to avoid the government’s route entirely, opting instead for alternative methods to achieve compliance. 

Another challenge identified was inconsistency in the way building control applications are handled. With a significant portion rejected for non-compliance, the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) encourages the industry to submit clear, detailed evidence of compliance. The BSR doesn’t actively seek information but expects submissions to meet the necessary standards. A functional approach is necessary, though the BSR acknowledges that a checklist alone won’t suffice due to the complexity of different buildings. 

Resources and Support 
The BSR is providing useful guidance through various channels, including a YouTube series on building control, safety cases, and compliance expectations. These resources are designed to help clarify what meets the necessary standards, and case studies are available to showcase both successful and subpar examples. Although the BSR doesn’t offer direct building control advice, they can assist with navigating the regulatory process. 

As cladding remediation efforts continue to face scrutiny, it’s clear that collaboration, transparency, and a focus on quality over cost-cutting are key to driving progress. Stay tuned for more insights in our upcoming video, which will be available on our website and LinkedIn page very soon! 

You are invited!

We are gearing up to host our forth Roundtable Event at the Gherkin on the 24th of September.

Featuring representation from Homes England and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), this event provides a comprehensive platform for industry professionals to connect and collaborate on the latest developments and challenges in cladding remediation.

We have limited spots available. If you’re interested, register for our upcoming event here or drop a note to contact@envoyprojects.com if you have any questions about the event.

We can’t wait to see you there!

Crown Wharf Video

Crown Wharf, a residential building in Stratford, has recently obtained an EWS1 form after completing extensive remediation works. As the Principal Contractor, we delivered a comprehensive turnkey solution to replace the combustible cladding materials on this project.

Hear from our stakeholders about what they have to say about our involvement on the project and click here to read more about this project.

Crown Wharf Drone Video

Take a look at the aerial footage showcasing Crown Wharf from a drone’s perspective.

Insights from the BSR Conference 2024

We are thrilled to share that our team attended the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) Conference 2024, organized by the Health and Safety Executive at the NEC Birmingham today.

The conference was a great opportunity for us to engage directly with industry experts and the Building Safety Regulator, gaining valuable insights into the changes brought by the Building Safety Act. Our team benefited greatly from the discussions, which will help us continue to drive the essential culture change needed across the built environment.

Click here to find out more about our approach.

Reflecting on Grenfell: Our Commitment to Building Safety and Compliance

Today marks the 7th anniversary of the Grenfell Tower tragedy, a day that forever changed the lives of the families and communities involved. Our hearts go out to all those affected by this devastating event. This tragedy highlighted the critical importance of building compliance and safety, emphasising the urgent need to address and remediate other unsafe structures to prevent future loss of life.

Envoy was formed to help our clients make their buildings safe. Providing a turnkey package we remove layers of complexity, to simplify the process and effectively remediate these unsafe buildings.

Click here to view our approach.

Need advice or support?
Our team are here to help – contact one of our experts today> support@envoyprojects.com

Charting the Project Pathway with BSR Expertise: Insights from the April Roundtable Event

It was great to host another Roundtable event last Tuesday, and have the opportunity to network and collaborate with like-minded persons across the remediation industry. We explored ways to better support Freeholders, Managing Agents and Project Administrators in delivering safe and secure living environments for residents, with a focus around Charting the Project Pathway with BSR Expertise.

Here are some key takeaways from the event:

  • Clarification on Building Regulations: Emphasized that there are no alterations to the regulations themselves; rather, a procedural adjustment is in place.
  • Client-Side Support’s Role: Highlighted the invaluable contribution of client-side support representatives in resolving challenges related to BSF applications. Having representatives from various disciplines within the remediation process provided a comprehensive overview of existing procedures and market opportunities.
  • Expectations of Information Quality: Discussed the importance of meeting the expectations of both BSR and client-side support teams regarding the level and quality of information submitted for BSF and BSR applications for a seamless progression and avoiding any delays.
  • Key Requirements for BSR: Identified essential requirements for BSR, particularly emphasizing the significance of a comprehensive construction control plan and building control report. The inclusion of a narrative to justify decision-making processes was highlighted as crucial for reassuring the BSR.
  • Clarification on Emergency Works Procedures: Discussed the two primary criteria used to assess emergency works, which are:
    • Emergency Nature: This criterion evaluates whether the situation constitutes an emergency, such as a burst pipe or gas leak, where immediate action is necessary to prevent harm or damage.
    • Practicality of Waiting: Explored whether waiting for standard procedures is practical in the given emergency scenario. For instance, a burst pipe is typically deemed impractical to wait for due to the potential for extensive damage if not addressed promptly.
  • Dispelling Myths: There hasn’t been a change to the building regulations! Stressing the procedural changes for approval and the importance of thorough applications over rushing on-site.
  • BSA PD Role: Highlighted the importance of authority figures taking on the PD role and the recommendation for Building Control experience in applications.
  • BSR Review Costs: Discussed the fee structure covering BSR and team time, as well as the inability to accurately forecast review time due to insufficient benchmark data.

In conclusion, the Envoy Roundtable Event provided a valuable space for industry professionals to collaboratively address challenges, share insights, and pave the way for safer and more efficient building processes. Make sure you don’t miss out on our upcoming roundtable events by subscribing to our newsletter. 

Click here to subscribe. 

Building Safer Futures: Insights from the November Roundtable Event

In a collaborative effort to enhance the efficiency of building remediation processes and contribute to overall safety, we recently held a Roundtable event to discuss how we can unite industry expertise to foster a holistic approach for residential fire remediation. This open forum brought together minds from Client-Side Support, Managing Agents, Freeholders, Project Quantity Surveyors, Client Administrators, and Fire Engineering. 

The event served as an exceptional platform for participants to openly discuss challenges and share experiences. Attendees had the opportunity to explore common hurdles and gain insights into successful navigation and resolution of similar obstacles. The collaborative atmosphere emphasized the shared commitment to making buildings safer and more secure. Here, we’ll dive into the key takeaways from the Envoy Roundtable event and explore the insights shared by industry experts. 

1. Streamlining BSR Responses and Pre-site Assessments 

Participants emphasized the potential challenges associated with obtaining timely responses from the BSR on building safety cases. There was a collective recognition of the importance of assessing buildings before they reach the site to enhance remediation efficiency. 

2. Funding, Insurance, and Life Safety Perspectives 

The discussion highlighted the multifaceted considerations in building safety, with an emphasis on funding not being the sole concern. Insights were shared on the crucial role of insurance and the necessity of adopting a life safety perspective, as often perceived by insurers from an asset-oriented standpoint. 

3. Defining Ideal Safety Cases and Collaborative Standards 

David Baker discussed the challenge of defining an ideal safety case and the collaborative efforts to establish standards. As well as acknowledging the uncertainty in the industry. 

The discussion extended to the realization that the safety case is not the end of the journey, with concerns raised about varying interpretations of PAS reports. This highlighted the need for clarity and consistency in understanding and implementing safety measures. 

A participant expressed concerns about lending issues for leaseholders, underscoring the importance of safety cases in the context of building lending. This perspective emphasized the broader financial implications tied to safety considerations. 

4. Challenges for Managing Agents and Addressing Risk Aversion 

Abigail Blumzon shared insights on the challenges posed to managing agents by legislation changes and the establishment of a BSR. She mentioned that they have set up a working group with varied in-house experts from across their multi-disciplinary teams, working to review legislation, guidance and information, and to act as an advisory group to help mitigate risks and keep projects running smoothly. 

5.Thorough Building Investigations and Design Trade-offs 

A prominent concern echoed by many at the roundtable was the the need for thorough building investigations to avoid issues. Discussed the potential safety trade-offs between introducing design at the second stage and traditional approaches. Is the introduction of the BSR process moving the market to a 2 stage PCSA tender process? 

6.Improving Communication with DLUHC 

The need for enhanced communication between DLUHC and the industry was explored, with suggestions including industry calls, regular updates, and the establishment of a market expert panel. This emphasized the importance of cohesive and transparent communication channels within the industry.   

Attendee Takeaways: 

Martyn Francis acknowledged the uniqueness of each project and the need for bespoke solutions, particularly regarding the wide-reaching implications of the BSR. 

Danny Carty encouraged perseverance in the ever-changing building industry environment. 

David Baker recognized obstacles in the industry-wide remediation of High-Rise Buildings (HRBs) and the need to resolve funding process issues. 

Chris Peters emphasized the strong skill set within the sector and acknowledged the industry-wide obstacles. 

Darren Wilkes-Brough highlighted the collaborative nature of the sector and proposed a review of the delivery method, suggesting a Risk/Contingency allocation for all projects. 

In conclusion, the Envoy Roundtable Event provided a valuable space for industry professionals to collaboratively address challenges, share insights, and pave the way for safer and more efficient building processes. The key takeaways underscored the need for ongoing collaboration, adaptability, and proactive solutions in the ever-evolving landscape of building safety. 

Make sure you don’t miss out on our upcoming roundtable events by subscribing to our newsletter. 

Click here to subscribe. 

The Final Stages of Crown Wharf

As the works on-site are drawing to a close, we find ourselves in the exciting final stages of this project. The journey has been long and challenging, but the progress has been truly remarkable.

With the brickwork replacement making excellent progress and slated for completion by the end of this month, we are on track to have all the scaffolding removed before the end of the year.

We are delighted to share some heart-warming feedback from the residents at Crown Wharf, who have stood by our side throughout this journey. One resident expressed their gratitude by saying, “Just wanted to say a thank you to everyone on the team for the work over the last 18 months and how lovely it is to have the sky back again! But seriously, an absolutely fantastic job. The place looks brand new.” Such feedback is a testament to the dedication and hard work of our team.

Click here to hear more about what our residents have to say.

We would like to take a moment to express our sincere gratitude to all the residents at Crown Wharf for their incredible patience and understanding during the disruptions that occurred over the past three years. Your support and cooperation have been invaluable and have played a significant role in enabling us to complete the necessary remedial works. It has been an absolute pleasure to work on this site, and we are honoured to have been a part of this transformative project.

Stay tuned for the upcoming developments and the grand unveiling of the revitalized Crown Wharf. We can’t wait to share the final results with you all!

Click here to find out more about this project.

Interested to hear insights, the latest news, exciting events, and much more? Click here to subscribe to our newsletter.

Navigating Construction Challenges: Insights from the Envoy Roundtable Event

In a dynamic and ever-changing construction industry, staying ahead of the curve is essential for success. Recently, at the Envoy Roundtable Event, industry leaders came together to discuss the topic and question around the pressing concerns and challenges they face daily and how we can unite industry expertise to foster a holistic approach for residential fire remediation. This event creates a platform for collaboration, learning, and networking to better support freeholders and developers in delivering safe and secure living environments for residents. From labour shortages to compliance issues and the need for standardized information, the event shed light on the complex landscape of construction and remediation. Here, we’ll dive into the key takeaways from the Envoy Roundtable event and explore the insights shared by industry experts.

Labour Shortage and Its Impact

A prominent concern echoed by many at the roundtable was the shortage of skilled labour in the construction sector. Following Brexit and COVID, a significant number of workers returned to Europe and the Baltic States, adding additional pressure, as a good number of the skilled workforce originally came from these regions. The scarcity of skilled workers poses challenges in meeting project deadlines and budgets.

David Baker highlighted the struggles of obtaining good contractors within a reasonable timeframe. He emphasized the sluggish bureaucratic processes involved in government applications, taking up to two years to secure funding approval. The backlog of processing and registering buildings further exacerbates the issue.

The Challenge of Compliance and Environmental Credibility

Contractors and developers face a growing need for compliance with environmental regulations. This includes ensuring the competence and credibility of contractors and maintaining environmental standards.

One of the participants underscored importance of selecting contractors based on capacity, compliance, competence, and lead times rather than solely focusing on cost. He also highlighted the trend of individuals breaking away from subcontractors to establish their own companies, further straining the labour pool.

Procurement Routes

The conversation around preferred contractors vs. competitive tenders was raised by attendees. It’s clear that the industry is inclined to move towards a new approach.

Standardized Information and Building Knowledge

One common frustration among industry experts was the lack of readily available building information. Property managers often lacked critical knowledge about the buildings they oversee. The absence of ‘as-built’ information can lead to complications and delays when issues arise.

To address this issue, participants stressed the importance of the new standardised “golden thread” of information for each building. This would provide essential data for contractors and property managers, reducing uncertainty and risks associated with remediation and construction projects.

Fire Engineers and Façade Understanding

The role of fire engineers in the remediation process was another significant topic of discussion. It is a challenge for fire engineers to work through the process of reporting on a building with very little ‘as-built’ information, and the reports can only be based on select areas of opening up. This limits the ability of fire engineers to deliver a detailed guaranteed report of the complete wall build-up, making the reports somewhat subjective.

Material Innovation and Skill Development

The need for investing in training and facilities was emphasised to address the skill shortage in the industry. Pay increases may be necessary to attract and retain skilled workers, especially when safety is at stake.

The Debate Over PAS and Peer Review

One of the participants expressed reservations about the current PAS (Publicly Available Specification) route and advocated for a more holistic approach to external wall assessments. He stressed the importance of building upon existing frameworks to ensure stability in the industry.

In conclusion, the Envoy Roundtable event brought to light several critical challenges facing the construction and remediation industry. From labour shortages to compliance issues, standardized information, and the role of fire engineers, the discussions underscored the need for collaboration, innovation, and a commitment to training and safety. By addressing these challenges collectively, the industry can navigate its way towards more efficient and sustainable construction practices.

“It was a very beneficial morning sharing experiences, solutions, and ideas on how to navigate through an ever-changing regime of Building Safety. I look forward to attending future events. Envoy, thank you for the invite and for being great hosts.” – Robert McMillan

Due to the high demand and requests from the industry to hold another one as soon as possible, we are planning another Roundtable event in November. Make sure you don’t miss out on our upcoming roundtable event in November by subscribing to our newsletter.

Click here to subscribe.

Hear What They Have to Say…

Resident liaison is so critical in #cladding #remediation projects. The residents safety is paramount, but also to treat them with compassion for what they have and are experiencing everyday should be front and centre of what we do.

We ensure occupant safety is our topmost priority, and are fully committed to achieving consistent compliance.

Click here to hear what our residents have to say.

Need advice or support?
Our team are here to help – contact one of our experts today> support@envoyprojects.com

New Project Secured – Crown Wharf

We are excited to announce that we have secured the Crown Wharf façade remedials project in Stratford.