Why Your Next Commercial Fit-Out Is Secretly a Building Safety Act Project 

By

Anna K. Cottrell

Last Updated Jul 24, 2026

By

Anna K. Cottrell

You’re not in the HRB regime, but you’re still not off the hook anymore

I want you to imagine a common building scenario. The location is somewhere in England. A veteran developer - let’s call him Gareth - is overseeing a 50,000 sq ft logistics shed. The building is nine metres tall, none of it residential. The steel is up, the physical work is pristine. It is true that Gareth’s phone is full of unstructured data: blurry photos, missing certificates, and informal approvals. But - Gareth believes that, as far as his project is concerned, this won’t be an issue. After all, his is definitely not an HRB (High-Risk Building) project, not even close: it’s not 7 storeys or 18 metres tall. He doesn’t need to submit lengthy applications to the BSR (Building Safety Regulator) and is not subject to the stringent Building Safety Act rules.

What could possibly go wrong here? What Gareth doesn’t know is that he is, in fact, subject to the BSA regulations after all. Part 3 of the BSA amends the Building Act 1984 for all building work: it very clearly defines a “building” to mean “any permanent or temporary building in England.” It doesn’t have to be a residential project or meet HRB criteria to fall under the scope of the regulations.

That building completion certificate is not automatic for non-HRB projects: as it turns out, as the owner of a non-HRB building project, you have many of the same responsibilities as someone leading an HRB one, albeit without the formal application and approval ‘Gateway’ process overseen by the BSR. Instead, the appropriate local authority oversees your project’s compliance with the building safety rules.   

So, what does this mean in practice, and what exactly must Gareth do to ensure his project is compliant? And what could happen if he isn’t? Let’s dispel some of the common myths about how the new rules introduced by the Building Safety Act apply to non-HRB projects in England, and consider some of the finer details of what compliance means in a non-HRB context.

Dutyholders & Competence: Familiar Frameworks, New Requirements

The great news is that the BSA is not asking the industry as a whole to do anything radical. It’s simply forcing consistency around the key areas that are integral to every building project anyway, namely:

• Design what you’re going to build
• Build what you designed
• Track what changes
• Make sure the people doing it are competent
• Be able to prove it

For most project owners, complying with the new regime will simply be a case of developing a more advanced understanding of how all of these steps are always interconnected. This can be challenging in an industry where different aspects of the building process often have separate processes with separate record-keeping.

Let’s take the requirement to be able to prove dutyholder competency. The concept of the dutyholder is already very familiar for most project owners; even the the terminology used to define the new dutyholder responsibilities under the BSA has essentially been cloned from the Construction (Design and Management ) Regulations 2015 (CDM). As in the CDM 2015 regulations, there is a  ‘client’, ‘a ‘Principal Designer’ (PD), a ‘Principal Contractor’ (PC) (where more than one contractor is working on the project), ‘designers’, and ‘contractors’. 

As with HRB projects, the ‘client’ in this ecosystem has to appoint a PD and PC before the construction phase of the project begins - at the same point in the process HRB project owners submit their Gateway 2 applications. 

The BSA regulations make a big emphasis on the client demonstrating that the project’s dutyholders meet relevant competency requirements, i.e. they  possess the necessary "skills, knowledge, experience and behaviours" to have the "capability" to perform their roles. 

If you’ve worked with CDM regulations, you’ll be familiar with the first three requirements; the addition of “behaviours” to the list of competency requirements is what sets the new regime apart. “Behaviour”, in this context, implies a continuous, practical demonstration of best practices, which can include:

• Complying with the current building regulations
• Refusing to perform work for this the dutyholder does not have a competency
• Cooperating with others involved in the project
• Asking for assistance when needed.

When broken down in this way, it’s obvious that this requirement carries a different burden of proof from just providing training certificates on demand. This doesn’t mean that all building projects in England are suddenly subject to the same stringent documentation requirements as those imposed on HRB projects, but developers will need to seriously reconsider how they collect and keep what could become a defensible record of competencies, should they be required to furnish it.

Gareth might think at this point, “no problem, I’ll just reach out to my local authority for guidance on what type of information they might accept as proof of competency.” Unfortunately, this is not quite the way to go. Since the end of the six-month transitional period in April 2024, local authorities are not responsible for providing such guidance.  Rather than reaching out to their local building regulator with questions on whether they meet the competency standards, clients should be setting up their own information management systems and, where required, submit acceptable paperwork to demonstrate compliance throughout the project. 

To reiterate: unlike HRB project developers, non-HRB clients do not need to meet stringent rules on exactly the type of documents they must submit, but screenshots of informal chats or references to lost emails and hastily put-together PDFs do not count. 

The Enforcement Mechanism – New Powers Granted to Local Authorities

Our project developer may be thinking, “even if my dutyholders don’t have extensive proof of competency, I know they’re all good. I’m not working on an HRB project. How bad can it really get?” 

The answer is: the consequences can still be pretty bad for the project, causing costly project delays. While the BSR handles only HRBs and won’t come after you with the threat of a prison sentence, non-compliance with BSA regulations, including failing to furnish proof of dutyholder competency, can land you with a compliance or temporary stop notice from your local authority. 

Under Section 38 of the BSA, local authorities have been granted the powers to either issue a project owner with a compliance notice within 12 months of the date of the contravention of the rules, or, if the non-compliance is more serious, to issue a temporary stop notice to the whole project until the non-compliance issued has been remedied. 

Unlike a planning stop notice, which has a time limit of 56 days, a stop notice due to non-compliance with building regulations doesn’t have such a limit. That means a potentially indefinite delay to your building project, until the council is satisfied with the remedial action. Of course, if you have the data to back up your dutyholders’ competencies, the issue can be resolved quickly. But what if data is lost, or if record-keeping has been poor throughout the project? The financial consequences in this case can be severe.

The Solution – Transitioning to a Defensible Reality

The proverbial Gareth, as any building developer, must have a reasonable question: ‘So, what does qualify as an appropriate demonstration of compliance’? 

The safest way to make sure you are compliant is to look for HRB regulations as a blueprint. As Runnymede Council explains:

“The client has overall control over the project and, therefore, they are ultimately responsible for the provision of information to others involved in the project. For HRBs this is known as The Golden Thread - both the information that allows you to understand a building and the steps needed to keep both the building and people safe, now and in the future - but it is important to keep an information trail for all building work.”

The much-discussed Golden Thread is a constantly evolving record of data about an HRB project. Non-HRB projects are not formally required to create a Golden Thread - but it just makes sense to take it as a blueprint for best information-keeping practices. Having a centralised repository of detailed, time-stamped records of design changes and project decisions is a much more efficient, failproof way to generate the evidence necessary to prove ongoing competencies to your local authority. 

Remember: as a project owner, you are responsible for compliance, not the council; you should never wait for them to descend with an inspection and then start asking questions about the right way to meet the current regulations. You need to be proactive in collecting and managing all relevant information about your project as it evolves.  

The easiest way to make sure none of the relevant data gets lost is to create a Common Data Environment (CDE) for all your projects. A CDE allows teams to capture time-stamped competence records, track design changes, and maintain a "golden thread" of information in one centralised hub.

When the physical build and digital build are synced, contractors don't just hand over a building - they hand over a "defensible reality", protecting their margins and proving their operational excellence. 

Written by

Anna K. Cottrell

Writer and Editor | Freelance

14 articles

Anna K. Cottrell is a writer and researcher with an expertise in the property and finance sectors.

View profile