The Building Safety Act 2022 has fundamentally changed the risk profile for architects, engineers, fire consultants and other construction professionals involved in higher-risk buildings.
The introduction of the Building Safety Regulator and the three-stage Gateway regime has increased scrutiny of design information, competence and regulatory compliance, creating new areas of potential exposure to professional negligence claims where projects are delayed or approvals are refused. We are now seeing these types of claims emerge in practice.
In this article we explore the risks in the Building Safety Act 2022 that could expose construction professionals to negligence claims.
Historically, professional negligence claims against consultants often arose following the discovery of defects after completion. Under the Gateway regime, however, substantial losses can occur much earlier during the design and delivery stages.
A consultant's error may result in:
rejection of a Gateway application,
project delays,
additional design and construction costs,
increased financing costs,
delayed occupation; and
loss of development revenue.
This creates a direct link between professional advice and potentially significant financial loss suffered by developers, contractors and funders.
Gateway 2 requires detailed design information demonstrating compliance with the building regulations before construction can commence. The Building Safety Regulator expects coordinated and comprehensive design information rather than incomplete or evolving proposals.
Potential negligence claims may arise where architects:
fail to coordinate design information,
provide inaccurate compliance statements,
fail to identify design conflicts,
omit key fire safety details; or
advise that a project is Gateway-ready when it is not.
Where an application is rejected because of deficiencies in the design information provided, developers may seek to recover the resulting delay-related losses.
Fire engineers also face increased exposure under the new regime. Fire safety is central to both Gateway 1 and Gateway 2, and consultants may face allegations relating to:
defective fire strategies,
incorrect evacuation assumptions,
inaccurate calculations or modelling,
failure to identify non-compliant materials; or
inadequate advice regarding regulatory requirements.
Given the emphasis placed on fire safety by the Building Safety Act, courts are likely to scrutinise the conduct of fire consultants particularly closely.
The Building Safety Act places significant emphasis on competence. Those undertaking work on higher-risk buildings must be able to demonstrate the necessary skills, knowledge, experience and behaviours required for their role.
Claims may arise where a consultant:
accepts work outside its area of expertise,
uses insufficiently qualified staff,
lacks effective quality assurance procedures; or
fails to maintain appropriate competency systems.
Further risks arise at Gateway 3, where consultants may face claims arising from inaccurate certification, incomplete compliance records or failures to maintain the required "golden thread" of information.
The Building Safety Regulator's most recent data demonstrates the challenges facing project teams seeking Gateway approval. During the 12-week period to 29 March 2026, 72 new Gateway 2 applications were received. Of the applications determined, 19 were approved and 12 were rejected, resulting in an approval rate of 61%. In addition, 11 applications were invalidated and three withdrawn. The median approval period was 22 weeks.
These figures highlight the rigorous scrutiny being applied by the Building Safety Regulator, and the exposure to delay related losses are high.
Consultants should take proactive steps to reduce their exposure, including:
clearly defining Gateway responsibilities within appointments,
maintaining robust design review procedures,
evidencing competence at both an individual and organisational level,
keeping comprehensive project records; and
reviewing professional indemnity insurance arrangements.
As Gateway related disputes become more common, those organisations that invest in compliance, record-keeping and risk management will be best placed to avoid costly professional negligence claims.
Our construction team advises developers, consultants, architects, contractors and insurers on Building Safety Act compliance, professional negligence claims and dispute avoidance strategies.
Whether you are dealing with a Gateway rejection, facing allegations of defective design, or seeking to manage your obligations under the new regulatory regime, our specialists can help you assess risk, protect your position and resolve disputes efficiently.
For further information, please contact Mark Manning or Sian Barrett.
