Similarities and differences in BSA duties – HRBs & Non HRBs

The Building Safety Act 2022 introduces a range of significant changes to building safety regulations, with specific provisions differentiating the roles and responsibilities of the Duty Holders for Higher-Risk Buildings (HRBs) and Non-Higher-Risk Buildings (Non-HRBs). While the core duties in both categories are focused on ensuring safety through the design phase, there are notable differences in the level of responsibility, oversight, and complexity associated with HRBs compared to Non-HRBs. 

HRBs are typically buildings that are 18 meters or more in height or have at least seven storeys.

Non-HRBs are typically lower-risk buildings that do not meet the height or other criteria set out for HRBs

Below are the main differences in requirements for HRBs and Non HRBs under the Building Safety Act.

Main Similarities between HRBs and non-HRBs:

• The Client must still appoint the roles of Building Regulations Principal Designer and Principal Contractor, where there is more than one contractor.  
• Non-HRB dutyholders still have the responsibility for ensuring Building Regulations compliance.  
• Design and construction professionals working on non-HRB projects must also demonstrate and maintain competence. 
• For Non-HRBs, the Client is still required to declare the project compliant on completion before a completion certificate can be given.  
• Design work and building work must be planned, managed, and monitored to ensure compliance with the building regulations.

Main Differences between HRBs and non-HRBs: 

• Non-HRB projects are not subject to oversight by the Building Safety Regulator. 
• There are no formal Gateways in the process for non-HRBs.  
• Non-HRB projects retain the flexibility to choose their Building Control Authority. 
• Unlike HRBs, non-HRB projects are not bound by a set of prescribed documents. 
• While competency is still essential for non-HRB projects, the standards are less onerous than thse required for HRBs.  

In place of formal gateways, non-HRB duty holders are expected to submit appropriate reports to the Building Control Authority, demonstrating how and why their design and construction align with the functional requirements of Building Regulations – a shift from receiving advice and guidance from building control authorities to proactively demonstrating compliance. Building Control Authorities have been encouraged to adapt their approach in this evolving regulatory landscape, reducing their role as hand-holders throughout the process.  

Designers of Non-HRBs should transition from merely offering designs to the building control authority to ascertain if compliance has been achieved to providing compliant designs with confidence. Dutyholders are now tasked with taking ownership of the compliance process, reducing their reliance on Building Control Authorities. As the CIC Building Safety Committee emphasised, regulators now expect designs submitted to them to exude confidence in compliance “rather than an offer for the regulator to consider and offer advice as to whether compliance has been reached or whether change is needed.”  

Under the new dutyholder regime, the Building Control Authority will be less involved in advising on the design; putting the onus on the design team to develop their own systems and evidence of compliance.

Contact Spectra’s CDM team