Karen Richardson, Associate Director, has been closely involved in shaping our response to the Building Safety Act (2022). With a strong background in construction law, she’s led the development of our compliance strategies and played a key role in guiding both our teams and clients through the practical implications of the Act—particularly around the evolving responsibilities of the Principal Designer.

The introduction of the Building Safety Act (2022) has brought about a fundamental shift in how we all think about the design and delivery of buildings. It sets out clearer lines of accountability and introduces new roles and responsibilities, particularly around the Principal Designer function. While the intentions behind the Act are clear, the practical implications can still feel complex, especially for clients and project teams trying to navigate the requirements alongside day-to-day delivery.

We have been actively working to understand the Act’s impact and to support our clients in doing the same. Internally, we’ve put systems in place to help us carry out the Principal Designer role, while externally we’ve prioritised engagement and shared learning, whether that’s through informal catchups, structured workshops or tailored guidance to help clients shape their own processes.

One of the biggest challenges so far has been uncertainty: the regulations are wide-ranging, but in many places, they leave space for interpretation. For example, while the Act talks about planning, managing and monitoring design work, there is little in the way of clear instruction on what that looks like in practice. This has made open conversation even more important, particularly in understanding what processes to ensure compliance works best for different types of projects, procurement, programme and teams.

In response, we’ve developed tools like compliance strategies and design responsibility matrices that are designed not just to meet requirements but to support meaningful conversations and clarity at the outset. These aren’t one-size-fits-all documents—they work best when adapted to the project’s scale and complexity. Whether we’re working on a large mixed-use scheme or a small retail fit-out, applying the same regulations requires careful calibration. Being flexible, rather than rigid, has been essential.

Timing has also emerged as a critical factor. Appointing the Principal Designer early gives space to think things through properly and avoid delays later on. When that doesn’t happen, the risk is that important design decisions need revisiting at a much later stage, which can hold up progress and add pressure across the board. Getting involved early means we can help plan for compliance from the beginning, rather than needing to retrofit it.

Higher-risk buildings bring added complexity, particularly with the new Gateway 2 process. The level of detail required can be hard to gauge, but what’s become clear is that well-structured, clearly cross-referenced submissions prepared with input from the whole team stand a much better chance of being approved without unnecessary delay. We have undertaken a comprehensive review of the Building (Higher-Risk Buildings Procedures)(England) Regulations 2023, informing the production of template documents to suit the new mandatory requirements, building on over 18 months ‘market intelligence’ as more information was gathered. This early preparation has aided the submission of the first higher risk building applications to the building safety regulator, expediting the process for our clients.

Ultimately, this is still a learning curve for everyone involved. The industry is adapting in real time, and while there are still grey areas, there’s also a shared ambition to raise standards. For us, the focus remains on helping our clients understand what’s required, supporting their decision-making, and continuing to learn alongside them as the regulations evolve.