24 January 2023: Government response to key building information and parts of a building consultation sections
Updated 18 October 2023
© Crown copyright 2023
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/consultation-on-the-new-safety-regime-for-occupied-higher-risk-buildings/outcome/government-response-to-key-building-information-and-parts-of-a-building-consultation-sections
1. Introduction
1.1 On 20 July 2022 the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities published a consultation to seek views on proposals for improving the building safety regime for occupied higher-risk buildings. The consultation sought views on a number of new regulatory requirements for higher-risk buildings when they are occupied.
1.2 The new regime for occupied higher-risk buildings was a fundamental part of Dame Judith Hackitt’s recommendations on managing fire and structural safety risks in high-rise multi-occupied residential buildings in her Building a Safer Future Report, commissioned by government after the Grenfell Tower tragedy.
1.3 The new regime puts in place stronger oversight, clearer accountability for, and stronger duties on, those responsible for the safety of high-rise residential buildings throughout design, construction, and occupation, with stronger enforcement and sanctions to deter and rectify non-compliance. The new regime places legal responsibilities on those who participate in the design and construction of higher-risk buildings, commission higher-risk building work and those who are responsible for managing structural and fire safety in higher-risk buildings when they are occupied.
1.4 Included in the consultation were questions relating to the parts of an occupied higher-risk building for which an accountable person is responsible and the key building information that needs to be submitted to the Building Safety Regulator (“the Regulator”) for occupied higher-risk buildings. This document sets out the information submitted in response to the consultation on these aspects and the government’s response. For ease, throughout the document, the phrase “occupied higher-risk buildings” is shortened to “higher-risk buildings”.
1.5 The parts of a building for which an accountable person is responsible and key building information provisions are being implemented through affirmative secondary legislation (The draft Higher-Risk Buildings (Key Building Information etc.) (England) Regulations 2023) which has been laid in Parliament at the same time as the publication of this consultation response.
2. Consultation process and overview of responses
2.1 The public consultation on the new building safety regime for occupied higher-risk buildings ran for 12 weeks from 20 July to 12 October 2022. It was published on the department’s online consultation platform Citizen Space, as well as on GOV.UK. Responses were accepted via online survey and via email.
2.2 The consultation question relating to the part or parts of a building for which an accountable person is responsible received 63 responses (45 responses via online survey and 18 responses via email). Of the 63 responses reviewed as part of the consultation analysis, 61 provided background information. Two respondents said they were residents/leaseholders and 59 respondents identified themselves as replying to the consultation on behalf of an organisation. Two respondents did not provide background information but appeared to be responding as individuals.
2.3 The key building information section of the consultation received 65 responses, 44 via online survey, 20 via email and 1 via post. Two responses were found to be exact duplicate responses of previously submitted responses. The duplicates were disregarded. Therefore 63 substantive responses were considered as part of the consultation analysis. Of the 63 responses reviewed as part of the consultation analysis, 61 provided background information. Two respondents said they were residents/leaseholders and 59 respondents identified themselves as replying to the consultation on behalf of an organisation. Two respondents did not provide background information but appeared to be responding as individuals.
2.4 For both areas, responses were received from a diverse range of stakeholders, including local authorities and registered social housing providers, developers and house builders, fire and rescue authorities, fire engineers, engineering consultants, product manufactures, representative bodies and leaseholders.
2.5 The document contains tables which provides both figures and percentages of respondents for each questions. For the percentage assessments we have rounded when the figure is not a whole number, and this can result in the sum of the percentages totalling 101 in some tables.
3. Parts of the building for which an accountable person is responsible
Overview of proposal
3.1 Sections 72 and 73 of the Building Safety Act 2022 (the Act) defines the accountable person and the principal accountable person in relation to their legal interest in a higher-risk building and whether they have an obligation to repair the common parts of that building. For commonhold buildings, only the commonhold association will be the accountable person.
3.2 Although section 72 of the Act defines who is the accountable person for a building, it does not set out for which parts of the building they might be directly responsible where there are multiple accountable persons. This means that, although a person may meet the definition of an accountable person, the Act does not set out which parts of the building that person has the accountable person duties under Part 4 of the Act.
3.3 The proposed regulations under section 74 of the Act will assign responsibility for Part 4 duties to specific accountable persons, in the main, based on their legal estate in possession, or to the area for which they have a repairing liability as set out in a lease or by virtue of an enactment[footnote 1]. This can be for the whole or a part of the building as demised under a lease and encompasses the common areas and residential units within that part.
3.4 The government’s intention is that there is a whole building approach to safety. The accountable person will be considering fire and structural building safety risks, and their mitigation, within occupied residential units under sections 83 and 84 of the Act, including in those flats which are let on long leases. Our expectation is that, where the potential for a building safety risk materialising is identified as coming from a leasehold flat, the accountable person will normally be expected to enforce the duties of the leaseholder and their obligations under the lease (we have enabled them to issue contravention notices under section 96 of the Act).
3.5 For those residential units which have been let on long leases[footnote 2], the accountable person duties apply only to mitigate or prevent risks so as to protect the common parts or other residential units which are under the control of the accountable person, or to mitigate or prevent known risks to those leasehold residential units emanating from the common parts or other residential units under their control. For example, the accountable person will have a duty to ensure that, where a fire does occur, it is either contained within that leasehold flat or does not enter into any leasehold flat if it originates from the common parts or other area it has control over.
3.6 The duties assigned to an individual accountable person do not extend to those duties or functions under the Act, or in regulations, which are the responsibility of the principal accountable person, unless that accountable person is also the principal accountable person because they meet the definition in section 73(1) of the Act.
Consultation analysis
Question: Do you agree with the approach to the accountable person as set out in the consultation?
| Category | Number of responses | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Agree | 45 | 71% |
| Disagree | 5 | 8% |
| Neither agree nor disagree | 11 | 17% |
| Don’t know | 1 | 2% |
| Not Answered | 1 | 2% |
| Total | 63 | 100% |
3.7 Of the 63 responses received, 45 respondents (71%) agreed with the proposals, stating that they aligned well with current building ownership and fire safety management in the sector. However, while the majority of respondents agreed with our proposals, 9 respondents requested that the government publish timely guidance to enable building owners (including enfranchised leaseholders), and those who manage buildings, to identify who the accountable person should be and for which parts of the building they are responsible.
3.8 Five respondents (8%) disagreed with our proposals. The key reasons (across these respondents) given were:
- freeholders should not have fire and structural management duties over premises for which they have no direct control
- access to residential properties was a concern in relation to the accountable persons being responsible for those parts
- accountable persons should not be responsible for hazards caused by residents or contractors
- there should only be a single person who is responsible for the fire and structural safety of the whole building
3.9 11 respondents (17%) neither agreed nor disagreed - one stated that they didn’t know, and one didn’t reply to this question. This may reflect the complexities of building ownership and indicate that we will need to publish clear guidance as requested by other respondents.
3.10 Some respondents took the opportunity to voice their disagreement with other sections of the proposals for the in-occupation regime for occupied higher-risk buildings, for example, the scope of the regime or the ability of the accountable person to serve a contravention notice on residents[footnote 3]. We have passed these concerns to the relevant policy officials to consider as part of the development of their policy proposals.
Government response
3.11 The government proposes to set out in regulations a framework for accountable persons to ascertain who is responsible for Part 4 duties for particular parts of an in-scope higher-risk building.
3.12 Within the Act, provisions define the accountable person by reference to their legal estate in possession[footnote 4] of the common parts for leasehold buildings. It also sets out that those who are responsible for the repairing liabilities under a lease are also accountable persons. For commonhold buildings, the commonhold association is responsible for the repair of the common parts. These accountable persons are responsible for the duties under Part 4 of the Act for the whole or part of the building.
3.13 Our proposals will not make freeholders responsible for fire and structural safety for premises for which they have no direct control.
3.14 To complement the definition set out in the Act, the government’s proposed regulations mandate that the accountable person, who is the landlord of residential units, will be responsible for meeting Part 4 duties in relation to those residential units. Where the accountable person has no control over a residential unit – either it is a commonhold unit or a flat held on a long lease – the accountable person will be responsible for ensuring that relevant safety information and advice is provided to the resident and mitigating the building safety risks within such a flat so far as it impacts on the common parts and other flats. The Regulator will issue guidance to support the accountable person with regard to managing their building safety risks and safety case requirements.
3.15 The accountable person will need to take reasonable steps to manage building safety risks and limit the impact should an incident occur for the parts of a building for which they have responsibility, ensuring they coordinate and cooperate with other accountable persons so that safety arrangements across the whole building are compatible.
3.16 The behaviour of persons in or about the building may give rise to a building safety risk. In relation to residential units, the accountable person will be required to engage with residents via its residents’ engagement strategy and provide advice about fire and structural safety. Where necessary, it can use contravention notices under section 96 of the Act to compel residents within units to cease any behaviour which lead to contravention of Part 4 duties. The extent of what is reasonable will be set out in guidance and will be made available by the Regulator to support accountable persons in meeting these duties for their part of the building, which we propose will include residential units.
3.17 Where there is more than one accountable person, the proposed regulations will assign responsibility for certain parts of a building to particular accountable persons, based on their legal estate in possession or repairing obligation for that part. The accountable person will be responsible for meeting their Part 4 duties under the new regime for that particular part. The proposed regulations will also determine which accountable person is responsible for parts of a building to which the Fire Safety Order does not apply. This is to ensure that, where there is a complex ownership structure, there is a clear line of responsibility for every part of a building and that a whole building approach to building safety management is achieved.
3.18 We judge that it is not possible for there to be only one designated person who is responsible for the fire and structural safety of the whole building, as it would be unfair to make an accountable person responsible where they may have no legal control, or to make them criminally liable for an offence based on the action or inaction of others and in which they played no part. Instead, the Act includes a duty to cooperate to ensure that accountable persons, and the responsible person under the Fire Safety Order, work together to maintain the fire and structural safety of a building.
3.19 The department is working with the Regulator on developing guidance to support stakeholders with the new regime. This will include guidance on how accountable persons can effectively manage the fire and structural safety for their part of a building.
4. The information to be included in the key building information
Overview of proposal
4.1 The Regulator needs to be able to make an assessment of building safety risks both now and in the future. Collecting and analysing data centrally about the characteristics of buildings will enable the Regulator to make this assessment and advise government on trends and changes over time across all higher-rise buildings.
4.2 The government’s proposals, therefore, require the principal accountable person to provide the Regulator with key building information about their building. The principal accountable person will be required to submit this key building information to the Regulator alongside, but not as part of, their application for registration. They will also have to provide updates to the Regulator whenever the key building information changes.
Consultation analysis
Question: The key building information is to be provided to the Building Safety Regulator to enable oversight and analysis of the building industry. Do you agree or disagree with the information being required as part of the key building information?
| Category | Number of responses | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Agree | 47 | 75% |
| Disagree | 8 | 13% |
| Neither agree nor disagree | 6 | 10% |
| Don’t know | 0 | 0% |
| Not Answered | 2 | 3% |
| Total | 63 | 100% * |
* Due to rounding, the sum of the percentages total 101%
Question: Please select any specific data requirements you believe should be changed.
| Category | Number of responses selecting data requirement should be changed | Percentage of responses selecting change |
|---|---|---|
| Principal accountable person or accountable person(s) name (if changed from registration) | 2 | 3% |
| Building work – the date the Building Safety Regulator issued a completion certificate for building work carried out in a higher-risk building under the requirements of the new safety regime (where applicable) | 4 | 6% |
| Declaration of a change of use within the building (where applicable) | 3 | 5% |
| External wall system material, insulation and percentage coverage | 4 | 6% |
| Type, material and percentage coverage of roof covering or roof system | 4 | 6% |
| Types and materials of external features | 3 | 5% |
| Energy supply to the building | 3 | 5% |
| Building frame material | 3 | 5% |
| The fire standard that applies to the building | 3 | 5% |
| The total number of staircases and the number that serve all floors | 3 | 5% |
| The evacuation strategy of the building (e.g. stay put, simultaneous evacuation) | 4 | 6% |
| A list of the fire and smoke control provisions and equipment within the building | 4 | 6% |
| Structural information of a building | 6 | 10% |
4.3 Forty-seven respondents (75%) agreed with the information being required as part of the key building information and the building owners and managers should already have this information about their building.
4.4 Out of a total of 63 respondents, 56 respondents (89%) did not select any specific data requirements that needing changing. As outlined in the table above, only a small minority of respondents selected that certain data requirements should be changed. However, most respondents did not provide suggestions about how they wanted them changed. The ones that did suggested the key building information should include the height of the building, floor plans and number of occupants.
4.5 Five respondents raised a concern about the cost of providing this information for existing buildings and whether a structural survey would be necessary to provide the information.
4.6 Six respondents had concerns that the key building information was an unnecessary duplication of the golden thread requirements, and felt that the building owners and managers should already have this information about their building.
Question: Please select any data requirements which you believe will require additional guidance or resource to provide.
| Category | Number of responses selecting data requirement should be changed | Percentage of respondents selecting change |
|---|---|---|
| Principal accountable person or accountable person(s) name (if changed from registration) | 4 | 6% |
| Building work – the date the Building Safety Regulator issued a completion certificate for building work carried out in a higher-risk building under the requirements of the new safety regime (where applicable) | 5 | 8% |
| Declaration of a change of use within the building (where applicable) | 4 | 6% |
| External wall system material, insulation and percentage coverage | 9 | 14% |
| Type, material and percentage coverage of roof covering or roof system | 9 | 14% |
| Types and materials of external features | 9 | 14% |
| Energy supply to the building | 5 | 8% |
| Building frame material | 5 | 8% |
| The fire standard that applies to the building | 9 | 14% |
| The total number of staircases and the number that serve all floors | 5 | 8% |
| The evacuation strategy of the building (e.g. stay put, simultaneous evacuation) | 5 | 8% |
| A list of the fire and smoke control provisions and equipment within the building | 8 | 13% |
| Structural information of a building | 12 | 19% |
4.7 Out of a total of 63 respondents, 43 respondents (68%) did not select any specific data requirements that would require additional guidance or resource to be provided. Four respondents set out that the preferable option was for the information to be provided through a fixed template with a limited choice of options accompanied by guidance, as this would provide clarity on the information being requested, and would enable statistical conclusions to be more easily developed from analysis of the information.
Government response
4.8 The government is committed to and believes in the importance of data analysis to support building safety. We have also been clear that the new regime is intended to provide robust and proportionate oversight.
4.9 The key building information is for the Regulator to use to deliver its functions and duties and we have worked with the Regulator, and other stakeholders, to ensure that the key building information is not an overly burdensome requirement, and the department has assessed that the cost to the sector of providing the key building information to the Regulator would be minimal.
4.10 Identifying information about the building and collating it will be a wider requirement of the regime and a necessary step to ensure the safety of a building and enable a building assessment certificate application. A separate impact assessment covering the cost of identifying, and where necessary gathering, the information and getting experts to verify it, will be produced to accompany the regulations regarding the wider duties set out in Part 4 of the Act that will be published in due course.
4.11 Key building information has a distinct and different purpose and objective to the golden thread of information. The golden thread is for those responsible for higher-risk buildings to ensure the right people have the right information, at the right time to support compliance with building regulations and safe management of these buildings during occupation. This information is owned by those responsible for the building in order for them to make informed safety decisions. Find further information on the golden thread.
4.12 It is essential that the key building information enables the Regulator to both analyse and understand trends and risks across higher-risk buildings, and to be able to effectively prioritise their assessment of existing higher-risk buildings through the building assessment certificate process. Following analysis of the consultation responses and ongoing work with the Regulator, the government has decided to include additional, and alter some, data requirements within the key building information.
4.13 The additional data requirements are:
- the primary use and other uses of the building, including any below ground floors
- types of energy storage in the building
4.14 The altered data requirements are:
- whether the building is structurally attached to other buildings
- structural type (for example if the structure was a large panel system or a timber frame) and the main material of that structure
4.15 These additional and revised data requirements reflect the feedback from respondents that some of the data requirements needed more precision with regards to structure, and that more information about use and energy was needed.
4.16 We have also decided the provision of the following information to the Regulator will be optional rather than mandatory key building information:
- type and date of significant building work carried out in a higher-risk building under the requirements of the new safety regime
- fire safety design standard (for example whether the building followed a certain Code or Standard to ensure the fire safety of the building)
4.17 We have made this change due to feedback from the sector that demonstrated it was not possible to provide this information for existing buildings within the proposed timeframes without significant cost, and that in the majority of cases this information would not be available for existing buildings so it could not be used to help prioritise the building assessment certificate applications. The government, therefore, considers that these data requirements should be voluntary and only provided where the duty holder has the information already.
4.18 While 2 respondents requested that information about the number of residents in a building be included as part of the key building information, we are not proposing to include this requirement as it is unlikely to be a static figure and could quickly become out of date. Instead, principal accountable persons will be required to provide the number of storeys and the number of dwellings in the building when they register the building. This will allow the Regulator to approximate the number of residents within the building.
4.19 We are also not going to require principal accountable persons to provide layout information for each residential floor as part of the key building information, as requested by 2 respondents. This information is primarily of use to the fire and rescue service for use in an emergency. The government has already consulted on changes to the Fire Safety Order which sought feedback on whether building plans that included floorplans should be shared with fire and rescue services. These plans would show where individual flats are located. The government response to that consultation agrees that floor plans are likely to be useful and relevant to the local fire and rescue service in assisting it to plan and deliver an effective operational response to a fire incident in a higher risk building. The consultation response is published on GOV.UK.
4.20 We agree that the data requirements need to be clear, and that guidance is needed, so principal accountable persons can have clarity about the information they are expected to provide. The Regulator intends to publish guidance on the regulations once they are approved by Parliament and to create an online tool to make data entry of the key building information as easy as possible for duty holders.
5. When the key building information is first submitted for new and existing buildings
Consultation analysis
Question: Do you agree or disagree with the timescale for submitting the key building information for new unoccupied buildings?
| Category | Number of responses | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Agree | 46 | 73% |
| Disagree | 3 | 5% |
| Neither agree nor disagree | 5 | 8% |
| Don’t know | 1 | 2% |
| Not Answered | 8 | 13% |
| Total | 63 | 100% * |
* Due to rounding, the sum of the percentages total 101%.
5.1 Forty-six respondents (73%) agreed with the timescale for submitting the key building information for new unoccupied buildings (that is either with registration or within 28 days of registration). Most of the respondents who commented on this question noted that the information would be readily available.
5.2 Of the respondents who either disagreed or neither agreed nor disagreed (13% of respondents), there was a split between those who considered more time was required and those who considered less time was required. Two respondents felt that the information should always be provided alongside registration information, while 4 respondents felt it would require longer than 28 days to collate this information. There were concerns from 2 respondents about the ability of Right to Manage companies, in which a resident would be the principal accountable person, to meet these requirements. One respondent suggested that the Regulator should allow people to apply to extend the deadline where it was reasonable to do so.
5.3 One respondent who had concerns with the timeframe noted that it was not because of this particular requirement, but concerns about the cumulative impact of all the requirements of the new regime, the challenge this would place on the sector and the impact on resources. Eight respondents (13%) did not answer this question.
Question: Do you agree or disagree with the timescale for submitting the key building information for existing buildings?
| Category | Number of responses | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Agree | 38 | 60% |
| Disagree | 5 | 8% |
| Neither agree nor disagree | 5 | 8% |
| Don’t know | 0 | 0% |
| Not Answered | 15 | 24% |
| Total | 63 | 100% |
5.4 Over 38 respondents (60%) agreed with the timescale for submitting the key building information for existing buildings, with only 5 respondents (8%) disagreeing. 15 respondents (24%) did not answer this question.
5.5 Of those who did respond, the respondents who agreed with the proposal considered the timescale was reasonable. One respondent noted that although they agreed with the timescale, the government would have to ensure there was clear guidance available in advance of the requirements being introduced so that industry was aware of their responsibilities.
5.6 Four respondents, who disagreed with the proposal, raised concerns about limited resources and skills within the sector and that building owners and managing agents would need longer to provide this information. Four respondents set out that the 6-month window to transition from the ‘old’ regime to the ‘new’ regime was quite short given the significant changes being implemented. One respondent suggested a 12-month transition period was needed to enable industry to ensure it was adequately resourced, educated and up to speed in order to comply with new requirements.
Government response
5.7 The government considers that the key building information needs to be submitted as early as possible from April 2023 to enable the Regulator to have the data necessary to prioritise the scrutiny of building assessment certificate applications for the 13,000 existing higher-risk buildings and to analyse and understand trends and risks across both new and existing higher risk buildings.
5.8 The majority of responses supported the timescale for submitting the key building information for new unoccupied buildings (73%) and for existing buildings (over 60%) and we will therefore retain the proposed timescales, without allowing for extensions.
5.9 The government has noted the concerns about costs and limited resources within the sector. We are clear that the requirements of the regime are proportionate to risks identified by Dame Judith and not unduly burdensome. As outlined in paragraph 4.10, the key building information should not be a burdensome requirement and the information required should not be costly for the sector to produce.
5.10 To make sure the key building information is proportionate and to minimise costs where information is not readily available, the government has made provision of some information to the Regulator optional rather than mandatory key building information.
6. When the key building information is updated
Consultation analysis
Question: Do you agree or disagree that any relevant updates to the key building information must be provided alongside the building assessment certificate application?
| Category | Number of responses | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Agree | 51 | 81% |
| Disagree | 2 | 3% |
| Neither agree nor disagree | 3 | 5% |
| Don’t know | 0 | 0% |
| Not Answered | 7 | 11% |
| Total | 63 | 100% |
6.1 Fifty-one respondents (81%) agreed that any relevant updates to the key building information must be provided alongside the building assessment certificate application. Many of those who were supportive commented that it was a reasonable proposition and a sensible approach.
6.2 One response from a local authority disagreed with the proposal due to concerns about resource and having to provide this information for all the higher-risk buildings in their area.
6.3 Two responses stated that the key building information itself or any updates to it should not be submitted separately to the Regulator, as the Regulator would already have access to this information through scrutinising the golden thread.
Question: Do you agree or disagree that key building information must be updated by the principal accountable person within 28 calendar days of any change or within 28 calendar days of them becoming aware of the change?
| Category | Number of responses | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Agree | 39 | 62% |
| Disagree | 9 | 14% |
| Neither agree nor disagree | 8 | 13% |
| Don’t know | 0 | 0% |
| Not Answered | 7 | 11% |
| Total | 63 | 100% |
6.4 Thirty-nine respondents (62%) agreed that the key building information should be updated either within 28 calendar days of any change, or within 28 calendar days of the principal accountable person becoming aware of the change.
6.5 Those who agreed felt that the time limit was reasonable but that more guidance was needed on the information the Regulator would require. Respondents also wanted the Regulator to make it easy to provide timely updates and ensure any IT portal/system was user friendly.
6.6 Responses from those who either disagreed, or neither agreed nor disagreed, with the proposal varied. Three respondents felt 28 days it was too short, and that principal accountable person would not be able to collate the information within this time. Two respondents flagged that the new regime would introduce many new requirements at the same time and there would need to be a ‘bedding in period’ for the sector.
6.7 Four respondents had concerns about residents not updating the principal accountable person about work they have done in their property, and that this would mean the principal accountable person would not be able to keep the key building information updated or have a clear overview of safety in their building. These respondents wanted the government to legislate that residents had to inform their principal accountable person of any notifiable building work within their property.
6.8 A fire and rescue authority suggested that when a change would impact on the fire services operational planned response, then the local fire service should be notified immediately of that change.
Government response
6.9 We agree with respondents that it is important that the Regulator has accurate and timely information to prioritise their assessments of higher-risk buildings and to make sure their assessments are robust. We agree that principal accountable persons must be able to update their key building information easily and are working with the Regulator to ensure it has robust digital and data infrastructure to make data entry as easy as possible for duty holders to meet the timescales established in law.
6.10 We are considering the concerns raised about requiring residents to inform the principal accountable person when they commission notifiable building work in their property. We will respond to the consultation covering residents’ voice and duties on residents when we lay the regulations regarding the wider duties set out in Part 4 of the Act.
6.11 Home Office lead on the information provided to the Fire and Rescue Service and, as mentioned earlier, ran a public consultation in 2020 on information that should be passed on to the fire services in an emergency. We are continuing to work with Home Office to ensure that when the key building information is updated, should it be relevant to the Fire Services they are notified.
7. Publication of the key building information
Consultation analysis
Question: Do you agree or disagree with the proposal on publishing the key building information excluding any data that is a privacy, safety or security risk?
| Category | Number of responses | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Agree | 49 | 78% |
| Disagree | 3 | 5% |
| Neither agree nor disagree | 4 | 6% |
| Don’t know | 1 | 2% |
| Not Answered | 6 | 10% |
| Total | 63 | 100% * |
* Due to rounding, the sum of the percentages total 101%.
7.1 Forty-nine respondents (78%) agreed that the key building information should be published, providing that any data that is a privacy, safety or security risk is excluded. Respondents also commented that this would help support more openness and transparency within the sector and is necessary to ensure that building safety improves.
7.2 One respondent expressed concern about data protection and that the Regulator would need to ensure that there would be no security implications about any information that is published. One respondent had concerns that publishing the information without providing context or explanation would not aid public understanding of building safety issues and publishing this information could increase residents’ concerns about their building.
Government response
7.3 The government agrees that it is important that there is increased transparency in the sector and that any data published does not undermine the safety or security of higher risk buildings, or the privacy of those in and around these buildings.
7.4 The Regulator plans to publish the key building information, subject to exemptions on data that may have privacy or security implications. The Regulator will ensure that any publication is accompanied by a clear explanation of the purpose and content of the data.
8. Summary
8.1 We are grateful to all respondents for taking the time to submit responses to this consultation. All responses have been carefully considered and taken into account in the development of the regulations and this document.
8.2 In light of the comments received, we have made some amendments to the policies to ensure that the new regime delivers its safety aims in a proportionate manner.
8.3 The regulations are currently subject to the affirmative parliamentary procedure and will be debated by both Houses of Parliament in due course. If approved by Parliament, the regulations will be made and come into force in early 2023.
-
The Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 provides a right for leaseholders to acquire the landlord’s management functions by transfer to a company set up by them – the Right To Manage (RTM) company. ↩
-
The original lease for a flat which is longer than 21 years, but usually 99 or 125 years long. ↩
-
Under section 96 of the Act the accountable person is empowered to issue a contravention notice to a relevant person where it is evident that person’s behaviour is causing a building safety risk. The notice will set out the action that person needs to take to enable the accountable person to comply with its duties and effectively manage the building safety risk. ↩
-
A legal estate in possession is a legal interest or ‘type of ownership’ in either land or buildings. ↩