Hopefully the Principle Accountable Person (PAP) will have now registered their high risk buildings, and they and/or their agents will be working towards creating a building safety case and safety case report in advance of 1st April 2024. From that date the Building Safety Regulator will start calling in Tranche One buildings (those over 30m, with more than 150 units or buildings where the Regulator is aware of existing safety issues) for assessment.
Clearing the registration and safety case report hurdles is essential, however it is only part of the requirement. In this article I have considered elements of what the Building Safety Act requires from a responsible entity, whether they be the PAP or Accountable Person (AP) i.e., landlord, RTM or resident ManCo. I have highlighted some of the risks along with several questions the responsible entity should consider.
What are the PAP’s Responsibilities under the Building Safety Act?
Historically many landlords delegated their health and safety responsibilities to their managing agent. The BSA makes it clear that the PAP cannot delegate its duties. In the event of fire or structural failure, the law sees the PAP and AP as the responsible entity. Failure to have complied with the requirements of the BSA could result in fines or criminal proceedings.
Regardless of whether the PAP has decided to meet its obligations under the BSA by self-delivering or with the help of its managing agent, it is essential that the PAP is aware of and is managing the risks and monitoring what is going on in the building. This is likely to be particularly challenging for RTM’s or Residential ManCo’s where the directors potentially may not currently possess a detailed knowledge of what the BSA requires.
Consequently, it is essential that directors in PAP organisations understand what the BSA requires.
What is the role of the managing agent?
It is important that the PAP is clear on exactly what BSA compliance services their managing agent is providing and the cost. There are managing agents that have chosen not to provide any enhanced BSA services, whist others are happy to offer a full range of support.
Managing agents should provide a detailed specification of what services they will deliver, and perhaps more importantly what they have decided not to deliver. It is unrealistic for PAPs to expect managing agents to provide enhanced services without increasing their management fee, as the time required, responsibility and specialist skills set are significant.
Given that ultimate legal responsibility for compliance with the BSA rests with the PAP, they need to be prepared to actively engage and manage their managing agents and any other parties providing related services.
Building Safety Act - Software
The Government see compliance with the BSA being delivered though a digital platform although they do not specify a specific product. The necessity is driven by, the requirement to establish a Golden Thread (a single source of truth in relation to the building), the need to integrate safety management system information (such as fire equipment testing and servicing records), and in the event a ‘mandatory occurrence’ needs reporting to the Regulator, a requirement to do this digitally and potentially to provide the Regulator with supplemental information..
If the PAP is relying on its managing agent to manage delivery of its BSA responsibilities, it is recommended that the BSA compliance software has a dashboard, providing client access. Critically the client should ensure that they login regularly to monitor performance.
The software should additionally be set up to allow the PAP to port its full suite of building information in the event it decides to switch managing agent or in some cases sell the building.
Competency
The BSA requires that those involved in the management of buildings can demonstrate that they are competent and qualified to undertake the role they have in the process, not only applies to individuals but to organisations. Competency is a critical part of BSA compliance.
The challenge is that the BSA requires new ways of thinking from the people that own, manage and occupy buildings. Occupiers need to understand that their actions within their apartments e.g. cutting holes in walls to install flat screen TV’s can alter the way a building will perform in the event of a fire, building managers need to adopt new procedures e.g. when dealing with tenant or landlord alterations and the PAP needs to be able to demonstrate that it and its directors have appropriate skills to ensure that their building is managed in accordance with the requirements of the Act, it is after all lives that are at risk if things go wrong.
Charles Seifert FRICS is a director at Inside the Box Advisory, he specialises in building safety cladding remediation and acts as an expert witness.
