16 COMMENT THE INDUSTRY ADVOCATE


Brian Berry, chief executive of the Federation of Master Builders


TAKING POOR WORKMANSHIP SERIOUSLY


Brian Berry of the Federation of Master Builders discusses how a mandatory licensing scheme has the potential to tackle the rising trend of homeowners reporting serious defects in new-builds.


T


here is no doubt that the housebuilding sector is under the spotlight. There isn’t a week that goes by without coverage of a


disappointed new homeowner reporting serious defects in what was supposed to be their dream home. It is also a hot topic for politicians, with many MPs reporting that their postbags are full of complaints from constituents about snagging issues in new builds. Unfortunately, as we all know, this focus is


not unwarranted. According to the Home Builders Federation’s and NHBC’s 2019 National New Home Survey, 99 per cent of new homeowners reported problems with their new builds including snags and defects (up from 91 per cent in 2012) and 70 per cent of these had over 5 problems, and a quarter had over 16 problems. It is not surprising then that the Government


THE FMB IS WORKING WITH THE GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY TO DEVELOP A MANDATORY LICENSING SCHEME


WWW.HBDONLINE.CO.UK


has made the quality of new builds and consumer redress a key priority, with the announcement of a New Homes Ombudsman and a new single Code of Practice for housebuilders. These are things the FMB supports and believes are a step in the right direction. However, while such steps will help address problems after they have occurred, they will not address the underlying issue of poor workmanship. The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG)


for Excellence in the Built Environment’s report from 2016, ‘More Homes, Fewer Complaints’ makes clear that the responsibility for the construction of a defect-free house should rest with the housebuilder and not with the regulatory inspectors. The report calls on housebuilders to put consumers at the heart of what they do by creating new mechanisms and a fresh culture at every step of the process. A key ask in this report was for a way of holding developers to account. The FMB is working with the Government


and industry to develop a mandatory licensing scheme for the UK construction industry. While the drive for this came out of the domestic and


repair sector, where rogue traders are rife, we believe that the housebuilding sector would also stand to benefit from such a scheme, and would help address many of the issues raised in the APPG’s report. A mandatory licensing scheme would act as a


legally understood signal, a legal minimum that all consumers and businesses would expect. It not surprising that this has widespread support among consumers with 78 per cent backing it, but construction SMEs do too, with 77 per cent supporting such a scheme according to a survey of FMB members as part of our report ‘License to build’ issued last year. A licensing scheme would not only provide a


mechanism for housebuilders to demonstrate their own quality and professionalism but would also allow them to quality control their sub-contractors. There would be a publicly assessable database of all licensed construction companies so it would be easy for any house- builder to check to ensure their sub-contractors have been vetted. If a housebuilder finds that one of its sub-contractors is not up to scratch, and doesn’t meet the licensing standards on competency or health and safety, the company could report them to the relevant authority. Finally, there would be a requirement to renew the license every three years, and this could be used to promote upskilling and continued professional development in areas such as technical competence, regulatory understanding and customer service. It could have the potential to drive a transformation in the culture and professionalism of the construction industry. If the housebuilding sector were to embrace


mandatory licensing, it would send a clear signal to the Government and the general public that housebuilders are taking issues around poor workmanship seriously, and want to create a new mechanism to prevent this happening in the first place. What this would look like in practice we don’t yet know, but we are looking at establishing a Licensing Task Force to develop this proposal further.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52