This month
April was a month of technical detail becoming live operational reality. New fire evacuation requirements came into force, the BSR published its first strategic plan as a standalone regulator alongside sharply improved Gateway 2 data, and a cluster of consultations on Approved Document B, construction products, and the proportionality of the higher-risk regime means the deadline pressure on industry is building fast. A significant TCC judgment on building liability orders adds a further note of urgency for developer groups with complex corporate structures.
Regulatory update
As anyone who is involved in building safety will know, the building safety regime applies to HRBs: buildings in England that are at least 18 metres or seven storeys high and contain at least two residential units. For every HRB, there must be a principal accountable person (PAP) who is legally responsible for the building’s external structure and common parts. There may also be one or more accountable persons (APs) responsible for other parts of the building. The duty to prepare and maintain a resident engagement strategy falls primarily on the PAP, though APs also have responsibilities to distribute it and support its delivery.[1]
RPEEP regulations now in force
The Fire Safety (Residential Evacuation Plans) (England) Regulations 2025 came into force on 6 April 2026. These require responsible persons to prepare, maintain, and regularly review individual Residential Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (RPEEPs) for residents with disabilities or impairments in buildings containing two or more domestic premises that are over 11 metres in height. For housing associations and managing agents, this is not a box-ticking exercise: the duty requires active outreach to identify relevant residents and produce tailored plans, not simply update a generic fire risk assessment.
Approved Document B consultation opens
On 25 March 2026, the BSR launched a long-anticipated 14-week consultation on proposed amendments to Approved Document B (fire safety). The proposals are significant: revised guidance on external wall systems and combustible materials, a new recommendation for evacuation lifts in residential buildings above 18 metres, updated provisions on solar PV panels on roofs, and changes to fire resistance ratings for open-sided car parks. The consultation closes on 1 July 2026 and is the first output of the BSR’s commitment to continuous review of ADB following the Grenfell Inquiry recommendations.
Proportionality in building control
Also launched on 26 March 2026, MHCLG’s consultation on proportionality in building control addresses a genuine operational problem that has been widely flagged by housing associations, developers, and residents alike. The current system unintentionally classifies a significant volume of small-scale or minor works in existing higher-risk buildings as Category A, requiring the full suite of documentation originally designed for large-scale new builds. As of February 2026, the BSR had received 1,944 non-cladding remediation Category A applications, roughly five times more than expected. The consultation proposes two changes: excluding most building work within individual flats from Category A, and redefining small-scale works in communal areas (broadly, work completable by a team of three or fewer people within five working days, and not affecting active fire safety measures or load-bearing walls) as Category B. Crucially, neither proposal changes the safety standards the work must meet, or removes BSR approval as a requirement before work begins. The consultation closes on 28 May 2026.
Construction products: final call
The Construction Products Reform White Paper consultation, covering the proposed General Safety Requirement for construction products, also closes on 20 May 2026. If your organisation specifies or procures products at scale and you have not yet responded, time is short.
Enforcement and decisions
BSR Gateway 2: best data yet
The BSR has published its latest Gateway 2 data, covering the 12 weeks to 29 March 2026, alongside its 2026/27 strategic plan. The numbers are the most encouraging yet: 284 decisions were made across all Gateway 2 categories, with an overall approval rate of 67%. Remediation approvals are improving too, with 92 decisions in the first quarter of 2026 alone, compared to just 228 across the whole of 2025. The batching model, which bundles applications for assessment by external engineering firms under BSR oversight, is outperforming the previous multi-disciplinary team model, with initial assessments being turned around in a median of just four weeks.
The strategic plan also sets out new targets: by March 2027, the BSR aims to respond to non-complex new-build Gateway 2 applications within 18 weeks, and remediation applications within 12 weeks, both with a target approval rate of 65%. A formal remediation improvement plan has also been published, including a recruitment drive to cut individual regulatory lead caseloads from around 25 to 10, and a commitment to reduce the live remediation caseload to 80 to 100 cases by September 2026.
Crest Nicholson v Ardmore [2026] EWHC 789 (TCC)
On the litigation front, the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) handed down a significant judgment on building liability orders in Crest Nicholson v Ardmore [2026] EWHC 789 (TCC). Crest sought BLOs against associated companies in the Ardmore group after the principal contractor, Ardmore Construction Ltd, entered administration just one day before an adjudicator awarded Crest approximately £14.9m in respect of fire safety defects at a Portsmouth development. Mr Justice Constable granted the anticipatory BLO, confirming that such orders can be made before any relevant liability against the original body has been established at trial. The court also rejected the argument that Crest’s greater commercial profits should weigh against making the order: the purpose of the BSA, the judge held, is to hold those who caused historic building safety defects accountable, not to redirect liability to whoever has the deepest pockets. Tellingly, the Ardmore group’s own restructuring, carried out specifically to ringfence the contractor’s historic liabilities, was treated as a factor in favour of making the order rather than against it.
In practice
Housing associations and managing agents: act on RPEEPs now
For housing associations and managing agents with higher-risk residential buildings, the RPEEP duty needs to be in hand now if it is not already. The regulations place a clear obligation to identify relevant residents proactively: waiting for residents to come forward will not meet the standard. Communications to residents about what the new regime requires, and how they can notify you of their needs, should be part of your approach.
Developers: Gateway 2 improving, but quality of submission still matters
For developers, the Gateway 2 trajectory is positive, but the picture for remediation remains more pressured. If you have remediation applications in the pipeline, the BSR’s new plan introduces account managers and direct engagement with multi-disciplinary teams: the message from the regulator is that it wants to resolve issues faster, but submission quality remains the key variable. Poor or incomplete applications are still the primary cause of delay.
Developer groups: corporate restructuring is not a safe harbour
Crest Nicholson v Ardmore is a timely reminder that the BLO regime operates in parallel to the RCO regime and is now being used actively in the TCC. For developer groups with associated companies, the judgment signals that corporate restructuring undertaken in response to BSA liability exposure is unlikely to provide shelter: it may actively count against you. If your group structure has changed in recent years in ways connected to building safety risk, that is a conversation worth having with your legal advisers now rather than when a claim arrives.
Consultations: three deadlines, little time
The ADB consultation is relevant across your portfolio. The proposed requirement for evacuation lifts in new residential buildings above 18 metres, aligning with the second staircase threshold coming into force in September 2026, will affect design briefs now in development. The same goes for the proposed changes to external wall and combustible materials guidance. Developers and their design teams should read the proposals and consider whether to submit a consultation response before 1 July. The proportionality consultation is similarly worth engaging with: housing associations and local authorities that manage existing higher-risk stock, and that regularly commission works to occupied buildings, have a direct interest in shaping how Category A and B are redefined. Responses are due by 28 May 2026.
One to watch
The Supreme Court has granted permission to hear the appeals in Triathlon Homes v Stratford Village Development Partnership and Adriatic Land v Hippersley Point during 2026. Both cases turn on whether the Building Safety Act 2022’s leaseholder protections and remediation contribution order regime apply retrospectively to costs incurred before the Act came into force. The Court of Appeal confirmed that they do; the Supreme Court’s ruling will be the final word on a question that affects RCO strategy across the sector. Worth monitoring closely and of course, we will keep you updated.
As ever, if any of this raises questions about how you communicate with stakeholders in your projects or portfolio, please do get in touch.
The Keeble Brown team
Disclaimer: This newsletter is produced for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal or business advice. Whilst we take care to ensure accuracy, the building safety regulatory landscape changes rapidly and readers should not act on the contents of this newsletter without taking specific legal or professional advice appropriate to their circumstances. Keeble Brown accepts no liability for any loss arising from reliance on the information contained herein. If you would like to discuss any of the issues raised, please contact us directly.
