Are We Sure That What We Design Gets Built Correctly?

Since the Grenfell fire and subsequent inquiry, construction professionals have been forced to reassess whether the way projects are procured and delivered allows sub-standard work to go unchecked.

During our early careers (1970s & 80s), monitoring of the quality of contractors’ work was typically carried out by members of the design team, resident engineers and/or clerks of works employed by the client, to protect their interests and ensure that contractors delivered what was specified in the contract documents.

Whilst the cladding was clearly the major factor in the catastrophic spread of fire at Grenfell Tower, there were many other contributing factors concerning poor quality workmanship and sub-standard materials.

The Building Safety Bill currently progressing through the parliamentary process will, when enacted, compel clients and their design teams to consider fire risk at each stage of the project.

Being confident that completed work is compliant is a subject that will need far greater consideration than has previously been the case on many projects, and systems to encourage compliance needed to be put in place at the strategic planning stage.

Evidence shows that relying entirely on contractors to produce compliant work without autonomous scrutiny does not result in compliant buildings.

Clients might decide that paying additional fees to designers or to other fully independent inspectors to undertake detailed inspections of critical elements, represents a sound investment.