The Building Safety Regulator’s plan to introduce a more proportionate and targeted approach to building assessment certificates could be a positive step for higher-risk building safety, provided the reset improves clarity without weakening legal duties.
Published on 9 July 2026, the announcement confirms that BSR plans to modify how it issues building assessment certificates, known as BACs, for occupied higher-risk buildings. The proposed approach is intended to be more risk-based, intelligence-led and supportive, particularly for resident-led principal accountable persons.
For construction, building owners, managing agents, designers, fire engineers, structural engineers and accountable persons, the important point is not that safety duties are being relaxed. They are not. The important point is that the assessment process is being recalibrated so that evidence, support and regulatory attention are better aligned with real building safety risk.
The positive construction message is clear: BSR is recognising that a system built only around formal process compliance can create cost, delay and avoidable refusals if duty holders do not understand what good evidence looks like. The new approach aims to keep legal duties in place while making assessments more proportionate, targeted and easier to prepare for.
Jump to: What this means | By the numbers | Why the reset matters | New approach | Resident-led PAPs | Key voices | Industry impact | FAQ
What This Means
Building assessment certificates are part of the occupied higher-risk building regime introduced under the Building Safety Act 2022. They sit within the wider system of duties for principal accountable persons and accountable persons responsible for managing fire spread and structural safety risk in occupied higher-risk buildings.
The BSR announcement says the new building assessment certificate foundation plan responds to feedback from principal accountable persons, financial institutions and other stakeholders. It aims to apply learning from the first stage of the BAC regime, improve assessment processes, prioritise applications already under assessment and offer more targeted support to duty holders.
For the built environment, this is a significant development because occupied higher-risk building compliance is not only a legal issue. It affects leaseholder costs, building management, remediation priorities, professional evidence, insurance, funding, resident confidence and the way responsible organisations demonstrate that buildings are being actively managed.
By the Numbers
| Area | BSR Announcement | Construction and Building Safety Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Legal duty holders | More than 6,000 legally responsible PAPs and APs of higher-risk buildings across England. | Shows the scale of the occupied HRB compliance regime. |
| Buildings called in | Nearly 2,000 buildings directed to apply since the BAC process started in April 2024. | Demonstrates significant regulatory activity across the higher-risk building stock. |
| Refusal rate | 66% of applications have been refused so far this year. | Highlights a gap between submitted evidence and what BSR needs to see. |
| Processing times | Assessment processing times are twice as long as initially expected. | Creates pressure for duty holders, residents, consultants and building management teams. |
| Resident-managed HRBs | More than 2,000 resident-managed higher-risk buildings may receive targeted support. | Could reduce avoidable refusals and unexpected leaseholder costs. |
| Updated resources | Initial updated resources expected from September 2026. | Gives duty holders a near-term date to watch for clearer guidance and expectations. |
Why the Reset Matters
The BAC regime has made considerable progress, but BSR has also acknowledged that the first rollout created significant challenges. Processing times have been longer than expected, and a high proportion of applications have been refused.
The most important detail is why refusals have occurred. BSR says refusals often happen because applications focus on process compliance rather than effective management of safety. That distinction matters. A duty holder may produce documentation, but BSR still needs to see that the arrangements genuinely address the risks of fire spread and structural failure.
For the construction and building management sector, this is a useful clarification. The direction of travel is away from paperwork for its own sake and towards evidence that shows buildings are being managed safely in practice.
Related LCM Intelligence
This issue connects with LCM’s wider coverage of BSR Gateway 2 approvals and remediation progress, BSR Gateway guidance for London projects, regulation, approvals and construction delays, and proportionate regulation and infrastructure delivery.
A More Intelligence-Led and Risk-Based Approach
BSR says it will shift towards a more proportionate, intelligence-led and risk-based approach. During the transition, it will concentrate on working through existing applications until future processes are finalised. The proposed change includes modifying the risk-based approach, initially concentrating on organisations responsible for multiple higher-risk buildings. It also includes sample interventions based on risk or intelligence about buildings, organisations or duty holders.
That is a positive direction for the sector if it means regulatory attention is focused where it can have the greatest safety impact. Large landlords, local authorities, housing associations and organisations responsible for multiple buildings may need more structured engagement because their systems affect many residents at once. At the same time, smaller volunteer-run resident management companies may need more time and clearer support to prepare evidence. BSR’s announcement recognises that these organisations have often struggled to navigate new legal requirements.
Why Resident-Led PAPs Need a Different Support Model
One of the strongest parts of the announcement is the recognition that resident-led principal accountable persons need targeted support. Volunteer-led resident management companies, commonhold organisations and Right to Manage bodies do not always have the same internal resources as large professional landlords.
BSR says difficulties in navigating the regime have led to refusals where applications did not show adequate arrangements to address the risks of fire spread and structural failure. These difficulties have also created added or unexpected costs passed on to residents.
The proposed approach aims to reduce avoidable refusals by helping resident-managed buildings prepare for future inspections while continuing to meet their legal duties. For leaseholders, that could be important. A clearer and more supportive regime may reduce unnecessary cost without reducing the standard of safety expected.
Clearer Guidance and Assessment Criteria
BSR says work is already underway to help duty holders submit high-quality evidence showing how they meet ongoing fire and structural safety duties. The measures include simplified assessment criteria, clearer technical guidance with professional bodies, a single point of contact for PAPs responsible for multiple higher-risk buildings, and exploration of pre-application advice with a named BSR contact for resident-managed buildings.
This could be a practical improvement for the whole sector. A common problem in building safety compliance is not lack of willingness. It is uncertainty over what evidence is enough, who should prepare it, how much detail is needed and how BSR will judge it. Clearer assessment criteria should help responsible duty holders focus their effort on the evidence that actually demonstrates safety management, rather than producing large volumes of documentation that may not answer BSR’s core questions.
Duties Remain in Place
The announcement is positive, but it should not be misread as a pause in legal duties. BSR is clear that ongoing duties under the Building Safety Act remain firmly in place.
All PAPs and APs must continue to manage buildings to ensure residents are safe from the risks of fire spread and structural failure. Obtaining a certificate or approval is not the end goal. The ongoing duty is to proactively prevent and mitigate risk. PAPs must also continue to maintain an effective mandatory occurrence reporting system and implement a comprehensive resident engagement strategy. They must not wait for future assessments before preparing safety case reports. These legal duties have been enforceable since January 2024.
Key Voices on the BSR Reset
Lord Roe, BSR Board Chair, said the first rollout of the building assessment certificate regime presented significant challenges and costs for duty holders, with determination times and refusal rates falling short of expectations. He described the shift as a practical targeted package of measures to reset the system while supporting accountable persons to carry out their essential and ongoing legal duties.
Charlie Pugsley, Acting CEO of BSR, said speed cannot come at the cost of safety, but neither can unnecessary complexity. That is the key balance for construction. A safer system must still be workable, understandable and proportionate if duty holders are expected to produce good evidence consistently.
The tone of the announcement is important. BSR is not stepping away from safety standards. It is acknowledging that the route to demonstrating compliance must be clearer, more targeted and better supported if the regime is to command confidence from residents, duty holders and the wider market.
What This Means for the Built Environment
| Group | Likely Impact | What to Do Next |
|---|---|---|
| Principal accountable persons | More targeted assessment expectations, but ongoing duties remain enforceable. | Continue preparing safety case reports, resident engagement strategies and mandatory occurrence reporting arrangements. |
| Resident-led management companies | Potentially more time, clearer guidance and more tailored support. | Use the transition period to organise fire and structural safety evidence properly. |
| Large landlords and housing associations | Likely focus where organisations are responsible for multiple higher-risk buildings. | Strengthen portfolio-level governance, escalation, evidence management and building safety systems. |
| Fire and structural engineers | Clearer technical guidance may shape what is expected from risk assessments. | Align reports with the purpose of demonstrating effective risk management, not only technical observations. |
| Contractors and remediation teams | Better evidence expectations may improve how remedial work is prioritised and documented. | Keep records, specifications, as-built information, photographs and handover evidence organised for duty holders. |
A Positive Step, But Not a Shortcut
The BSR reset should be welcomed as a practical improvement, especially if it reduces avoidable refusals and unnecessary leaseholder cost. A more proportionate system can still be a strong system if it focuses on the right evidence and the right risks.
However, proportionality should not be confused with leniency. Higher-risk buildings still require proper safety management, competent assessment, resident engagement, clear records and active control of fire and structural safety risk. The best outcome would be a regime that is easier to understand, easier to prepare for and harder to game. That means moving away from box-ticking and towards evidence that shows a building is being properly managed.
What Duty Holders Should Watch Next
Duty holders should watch for the simplified assessment criteria and updated guidance expected from September 2026. They should also watch how BSR develops pre-application support, named contacts for resident-managed buildings and fast-track reassessment options for previously refused certificates once standards are met.
In the meantime, the safest approach is to continue preparing evidence. That includes safety case reports, structural and fire risk assessment information, resident engagement strategies, mandatory occurrence reporting arrangements, remediation records and clear management systems. Waiting for BSR to call in an application is not a strategy. The duties are already in force, and the new approach appears designed to help duty holders demonstrate compliance more effectively when asked.
Evidence-Based Summary
BSR’s proposed BAC reset is a positive step for occupied higher-risk building compliance if it improves clarity, proportionality and support.
The regulator has directed PAPs to apply for certificates for nearly 2,000 buildings since April 2024, but assessment times have been longer than expected and 66% of applications have been refused so far this year.
The new approach will be more intelligence-led and risk-based, with targeted support for resident-led PAPs and clearer assessment criteria expected from September 2026.
The core legal duties remain unchanged. PAPs and APs must continue to manage fire spread and structural safety risk, maintain mandatory occurrence reporting and implement resident engagement strategies.
FAQ: BSR Building Assessment Certificate Reset
What has BSR announced?
BSR has announced plans to modify how it issues building assessment certificates for occupied higher-risk buildings, moving towards a more proportionate, targeted, intelligence-led and risk-based approach.
Does this remove the legal duties on PAPs and APs?
No. BSR is clear that legal duties under the Building Safety Act remain in place. PAPs and APs must continue managing buildings to protect residents from fire spread and structural failure risk.
Why is BSR changing its approach?
The change responds to feedback from PAPs, financial institutions and stakeholders, and reflects learning from the first rollout of the BAC regime, including long assessment times and high refusal rates.
How many buildings have been called into the BAC process?
Since the process started in April 2024, BSR has directed PAPs to apply for building assessment certificates for nearly 2,000 buildings.
Why have applications been refused?
BSR says refusals often occur because applications focus on process compliance rather than showing effective management of safety, particularly around fire spread and structural failure risks.
What support will resident-led PAPs receive?
BSR is exploring targeted support for resident-led PAPs, including clearer assessment criteria, technical guidance, pre-application advice and named contacts for resident-managed higher-risk buildings.
When will updated resources be available?
Initial updated resources are expected from September 2026, with further guidance and support to follow as BSR develops the new approach.
What should duty holders do now?
Duty holders should continue preparing safety case reports, managing fire and structural safety risks, maintaining mandatory occurrence reporting and implementing resident engagement strategies. They should not wait for future assessments before acting.
Source Context and Editorial Note
This article is a London Construction Magazine news analysis based on the Building Safety Regulator and Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government press release published on 9 July 2026 about changes to the building assessment certificate approach for higher-risk buildings.
This article does not provide legal, building safety, fire safety, structural engineering, regulatory, leasehold, property management, compliance or construction advice. Principal accountable persons, accountable persons, residents, building owners and professional teams should rely on official BSR guidance and project-specific professional advice.
|
Expert Verification & Authorship: Mihai Chelmus
Founder, London Construction Magazine | Construction Testing & Investigation Specialist |
