The Grenfell Tower fire that occurred on 14 June 2017 and its tragic consequences prompted major concern regarding the effectiveness and reliability of the construction products testing regime in the UK: the process of evaluating and assessing the performance, safety, and compliance of construction products to ensure they meet the required specifications and regulations.

To address these concerns, an independent review was commissioned by the UK government in April 2021 to evaluate the current testing regime and propose recommendations for improvement. The much-anticipated report – produced by the Department for Levelling Up, Housing, and Communities (DLUHC) – was finally published on 20 April 2023.

‘Testing for a Safer Future: An Independent Review of the Construction Products Testing Regime’ represents a major step forward in mapping the complexity and opacity of the current construction product regime. Split into six parts, the report highlights the “historic failings in the system by which construction products were tested, assured, and made available for sale”.

Key gaps in the system

The 174-page report identifies six key gaps in the system:

• Coverage: Only construction products for which there is a designated standard are covered by the Construction Products Regulations (CPR) – while around two-thirds of products remain unregulated.
• Purpose: The regulation was mainly established to create a level playing field for a single market, not to ensure a safe or sustainable product or building. Consequently, there isn’t a specific UK system for testing the safety of construction products.
• Standardisation: Everything hinges on the development of relevant standards. The report highlighted that this process can be “slow, insufficient and of variable quality” – resulting in standards that are outdated, inconsistent or non-existent.
• Complexity: The complex CPR assessment process means few people properly understand it. This has created a worrying disconnect between those involved in the assessment process and those who design and construct buildings.
• Capacity: The entire system – standard setting, conformity assessment and oversight – is overloaded and slow. This poses a threat to quality and presents a barrier to reform.
• Enforcement: This has been found to be “almost totally non-existent”, encouraging bad actors to feel that they can bypass regulations without consequence.

Key recommendations

The government’s former chief construction advisor Paul Morrell OBE and barrister Anneliese Day KC, who led the independent review, summarised their recommendations in light of the findings:

·       Setting standards which, if met, will deliver assurance of desired and defined outcomes.

·       Ensuring that the conformity assessment process is conducted independently.

·       Requiring manufacturers to make a full, honest declaration of the performance of their products.

·       Requiring declarations to be backed by the information that designers, contractors and building managers need.

·       Establishing an organisational structure that engages government, the industry, and relevant actors in a shared endeavour.

·       Creating and operating an effective surveillance and enforcement regime.

·       Simplifying and clarifying both the system itself and the way it is communicated, so that compliance is not hindered by an actual or alleged lack of comprehension.

According to Dame Judith Hackitt, who wrote the foreword for the report: “The task now is to use the wealth of information mapped out here to create a new framework that drives the right behaviours, which enables effective enforcement by the regulators and delivers buildings where people can have confidence in their quality and safety.”

Global sourcing seems the most prudent procurement strategy for construction businesses amid red-hot inflation. By harnessing regional efficiencies in the production of raw materials they can shield themselves from rising prices and control their cash flow with confidence – or can they? The old saying “buy cheap, buy twice” springs to mind. And what about fractured supply chains in the wake of the pandemic?

Let’s drill into some of the main reasons why global sourcing might lead to costly challenges further down the line.

Product quality

Ideally, you want to guarantee that your suppliers have the necessary quality control measures in place in both their supply chain and production processes. However, evaluating the quality of products manufactured by global suppliers is challenging, to say the least.

A reliance on different technical or industrial standards, which may or may not meet UK requirements, can result in the production of inferior products overseas. Take the production of steel for example. This labour-intensive raw material is manufactured in China at a low cost but often contains impurities as a result. Meanwhile, British-made steel – often considered the best in the world – is produced using exacting standards and quality materials that make it more durable and, therefore, more cost-effective in the long term.

Even if you receive a sample product from a potential overseas supplier that appears to meet your quality control requirements, the bulk delivery often fails to match up – leaving you with raw materials that don’t meet your standards.

Supply chains

Leaving lead times at the mercy of international supply chains can result in lengthy delays – a challenge that has been exacerbated by the pandemic. This seismic event has created ongoing weakness throughout these vital networks that the world takes for granted – and the result has been challenging for the construction industry: shortages of key raw materials, order backlogs, delivery delays, and a spike in raw material prices.

Whereas materials produced in the UK rely on robust domestic supply chains – and the benefits are compelling: faster lead times, more environmentally sustainable, greater quality control, and reduced cost.

Currency risk

Businesses that adopt a global sourcing procurement strategy expose themselves to currency risk. The value of the pound against other currencies is constantly changing – not just daily but by the minute – under the influence of economic and political variables. Even slight fluctuations in the exchange rate can make a huge difference to the price of your globally sourced products when the time comes to pay for them.

Take the pound’s recent performance against the dollar, for example. Over the last 12 months, GBP/USD fell almost 30% to all-time lows of near parity amid UK political turmoil and a highly aggressive US central bank. Bad news for construction companies that must settle invoices with US-based suppliers.

Buy British

Don’t rush into sourcing materials overseas because the price tag is tempting. Be mindful that a lack of quality control can leave you lumbered with inferior products that might be delayed anyway due to supply chain bottlenecks – extending lead times and driving up costs.

British products might be more expensive, but you can guarantee their quality, their delivery, and their price. This will save you time and money in the long run – and reinforce your reputation.

The Fire Safety (England) Regulations 2022 are an important step towards implementing the recommendations from the Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 1 report. This regulatory reform comes into force from 23 January 2023 under Regulation 10, Article 24 of the Fire Safety Order 2005 – and applies to England only.

From this date, the new fire safety regulations will make it a legal requirement for responsible persons for all multi-occupied residential buildings with storeys above 11 metres in height to:

• Undertake quarterly checks of all fire doors (including self-closing devices) in the common parts.
• Undertake – on a best endeavour basis – annual checks of all flat entrance doors (including self-closing devices) that lead onto a building’s common parts.

Responsible persons will also be required to provide residents with information on the importance of fire doors to the building’s fire safety.

Grenfell Inquiry

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry in the Phase 1 report states that: “Fire doors play an essential role in preventing or inhibiting the spread of smoke and toxic gases and in preserving the effective compartmentation of buildings.”

The Inquiry found that the fire doors in Grenfell did not, through damage and/or disrepair, act as they should to prevent smoke and gases from spreading.

What does “best endeavour basis” mean?

Responsible persons must determine the best approach to engage with residents to obtain access to each flat and undertake the annual checks of the entrance doors. This might include arranging a date with the resident to be granted access.

If the responsible person is denied access, they must provide evidence of their efforts to discharge this duty – such as correspondence from them to the resident requesting permission to access their residence.

Minimum requirements for fire door inspections 

The minimum requirement for the responsible person is to inspect the fire doors to identify any obvious damage or issues.

There are a range of factors they should consider – from ensuring the door closes correctly around the whole frame to identifying any visible damage (either deliberate or from wear and tear) to the door or door closer.

Buildings below 11 metres

The existing duty remains for a responsible person to implement general fire precautions in any premises covered by the Fire Safety Order, regardless of its height.

The Fire Safety Act 2021 clarifies that all residential buildings containing two or more sets of domestic premises fall within the remit of the Fire Safety Order.

Responsible persons for residential buildings below 11 metres in height are duty-bound to implement general fire precautions. This includes ensuring all fire doors – including entrance doors – provide adequate protection.

Responsible persons must also provide residents in residential buildings with two or more sets of domestic premises with relevant information about fire doors.

For help ensuring your risk assessments are fully compliant with the new fire door regulations, contact Doorview today. #responsibleperson #Doorview #firesafetyregulations #firesafety

Construction projects are at the mercy of an eyewatering number of variables that impact their success – from the weather to logistics. While you can’t stop it from raining, there are two variables you can control: the quality of the materials and labour used to complete the project.

Successful construction projects are underpinned by the integrity of their elements – which is typically dependent on two factors: the materials/products making up that element and the standard of workmanship used to install/construct the element.

To ensure this integrity, proactive project managers engage with construction products and services that have achieved third-party certification.

Benefits of third-party certification

Third-party certification reassures project managers that the product/service has been inspected and endorsed by an accredited, independent third party to determine that it complies with specific safety, quality, and performance standards – and the benefits are compelling:

·       Remain compliant by meeting regulatory requirements.

·       Achieve operational efficiencies through better processes.

·       Reduce financial risk exposure.

·       Reduce the risk of reputational damage.

·       Gain competitive advantage.

Certification process

To ensure the product/service complies with the necessary standards, the certification process typically includes three comprehensive steps:

·       An inspection and/or review of the element that is being certified.

·       An assessment of associated paperwork to make sure that it is accurate.

·       Periodic inspections and audit tests to verify ongoing performance.

Third-party fire door certification

Third-party certification tests and verifies a fire door’s design, performance, and manufacturing process, and provides quality assurance of procedures and supporting documentation.

This typically involves meeting specific criteria:

·       The fire test: The fire resistance of a door is determined by subjecting it to one or more tests in accordance with the appropriate fire test standard.

·       Auditing the manufacturing process: The manufacturer is independently audited by a UKAS-accredited product certification body to ensure that appropriate management and manufacturing processes and systems are in place.

·       The audit test: The door is subjected to ongoing scrutiny to ensure the initial test was not a one-off result.

·       Traceability: A unique, traceable labelling system allows the door to be linked to the test report and for manufacturers, door processors, installers, inspectors, and clients to check the history and use of the door. This also provides traceability through the supply chain, so the manufacturer can be contacted if information on the door is required.

Third-party accreditation

Reputable organisations that provide third-party certification services of construction products/services are accredited themselves. This is typically undertaken by the UK Accreditation Service (UKAS), the UK’s only national accreditation body that’s recognised by the government – but independent of it – to certify against internationally agreed standards.

UKAS has been appointed by the government to assess and accredit organisations that provide services including certification, testing, inspection, and calibration. It works in the public interest to determine the technical competence and integrity of such organisations.

Doorview

We are accredited by third-party schemes and industrial bodies that guarantee the quality of our products and services, contact us to find out more.#safety #quality #firedoors #buildingmangement #firesafety