What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
There is no official percentage or pound uplift that can be applied to every project. The government’s cost-benefit analysis said it was not reasonably practicable to estimate the regime’s overall costs and benefits because the legal framework was not fully established when the analysis was prepared. A defensible estimate therefore separates compliance work, Building Safety Regulator (BSR) charges, the Building Safety Levy, post-completion management and any historic remediation exposure instead of applying a blanket multiplier.
What does the Building Safety Act add to construction cost?
The answer depends on the building, its height and use, the approval route, the number of design changes, whether a levy applies and whether you are costing construction only or the whole ownership period. The Act creates identifiable duties and processes, but the cited government analysis did not publish a standard cost per dwelling, square metre or project.
![Construction Project Management & Estimating for Beginners: [2 in 1] From Estimates to Execution - Mastering Project Bids, Estimating Techniques and Management Essentials for New Professionals](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/511FzD120CL._SL160_.jpg)
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
“It is the Secretary of State’s opinion that it is not reasonably practicable to produce estimates of the costs and benefits that will arise if the regulations are made.”
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Special offer. See more information about Outbyte and uninstall instructions. Please review EULA and Privacy policy.
That statement comes from the cost-benefit analysis for the Higher-Risk Buildings (Descriptions and Supplementary Provisions) Regulations 2023, published by MHCLG and the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities on 20 December 2022. It is a warning against inventing a sector-wide uplift, not a reason to leave safety costs out of an appraisal.
#1 Best Overall
This article uses the England-specific regime and figures available in October 2026. The Act contains UK-wide provisions, but the higher-risk-building, BSR and levy details below should not be applied automatically to Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.
First decide whether the project is in the higher-risk-building regime
Use the current GOV.UK higher-risk-building service guidance to test both parts of the definition: the building must meet the applicable height or storey threshold and the specified building-use test. A residential higher-risk building containing at least two units must be registered before occupation.
Record the decision in the cost plan, including the facts used to reach it. A change in height, use, unit count or the building’s arrangement can change the approval and occupation pathway. If the project is not a higher-risk building, some wider building-control and dutyholder requirements may still affect design, competence and records; do not treat “not HRB” as “no Building Safety Act cost”.
Use six separate cost buckets
Keep the following buckets distinct. They fall at different times, are paid by different parties and have different levels of evidence.
| Cost bucket | What to include | How to quantify it | Where it belongs in the appraisal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design and construction compliance | Named dutyholders, competence and training, evidence of compliance, BSR applications and changes, inspections, completion stages, digital golden-thread information and mandatory occurrence reporting. | Estimate staff hours, consultant fees, design iterations, document-control effort and programme effects from the project team. Label assumptions unless supported by records from comparable work. | Construction cost and programme contingency. |
| BSR charges | Published application, change-control, completion-certificate and case-working charges. | Use the current charging scheme and the project’s expected number of submissions, changes and hours. | Direct project fees, separate from internal compliance labour. |
| Building Safety Levy | A potential charge on eligible new residential development. | Test the unit or bedspace threshold, exemptions, effective date and rate against current legislation and guidance. | Development cost or development finance model, not a BSR fee. |
| Occupation and building management | Registration, Accountable Persons, the Principal Accountable Person, safety-case and safety-case-report work, resident engagement, golden-thread maintenance and occurrence reporting. | Model owner, managing-agent and specialist costs over the operating period. | Lifecycle or operating expenditure; show separately from construction. |
| Historical cladding remediation | Remediation of unsafe cladding on existing English residential buildings at least 11 metres high. | Use a project survey and scope. National figures are funding estimates, not a unit rate. | Existing-asset liability or transaction adjustment, never an automatic uplift on a new build. |
| Other historical fire-safety defects | Non-cladding defects in existing buildings. | Use intrusive surveys and explicit low, base and high scenarios because reliable national prevalence and cost data were unavailable. | Separate remediation risk allowance. |
Step-by-step method for building the estimate
- Set the scope. State England, the assessment date, building use, height or storeys, residential units or student bedspaces, procurement route and whether the model covers construction only or the full ownership period.
- Classify the building. Document the higher-risk-building test and the registration requirement before occupation where it applies.
- Map every duty and deliverable. Create a responsibility matrix for the client, principal designer, principal contractor, Accountable Persons, consultants and building manager. List each submission, inspection, record and report.
- Price effort, not just invoices. Multiply estimated hours by the relevant internal or consultant rates, then add document-management, design-review and programme allowances. Keep these assumptions visible so they can be replaced by project records.
- Add published BSR charges. Count applications, change-control cases, completion certificates and expected BSR staff hours. Check the live charging scheme before authorising the budget.
- Test levy liability. Apply the current threshold, exemptions and rate to the specific development. Do not infer a levy bill from the national revenue target.
- Separate lifecycle costs. Estimate safety-case, resident-engagement, reporting and golden-thread work for the owner or manager after completion.
- Stress-test uncertainty. Produce low, base and high cases for design changes, consultant hours, programme delay, levy treatment and any remediation scope. Explain the driver of each range.
Design and construction compliance: the largest project-specific bucket
The regime can require named dutyholders to demonstrate competence, coordinate design information, retain a reliable golden thread and report mandatory occurrences. It can also introduce additional review cycles when a design changes or when evidence is incomplete. None of those activities has a universal government unit cost.
Build a resource schedule
For each role, estimate hours by stage: concept, planning and technical design, procurement, construction, commissioning and handover. Include design-team coordination, contractor method reviews, specialist fire and structural input, information-management administration, training and close-out. A quantity surveyor should show the assumed hourly or daily rates and identify which allowance is already present in the baseline design fee.
Allow for programme effects explicitly
Do not bury approval or evidence delays in a generic contingency. Show the expected number of review cycles, the float available before a critical path activity and the cost of a delayed start or resequencing. If the project team cannot support a duration, present it as a scenario rather than a fact.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Price the golden thread as an information system
Cost the creation, checking, version control, access permissions, handover and ongoing maintenance of digital safety information. A low initial document cost can create a higher operating cost if records are incomplete or incompatible with the building manager’s system. Define the required information at each gate and assign an owner for approval.
BSR charges you can put directly into the model
The GOV.UK service guidance updated 1 October 2026 lists these charges for specified higher-risk-building service actions:
| Service action | Published charge | How to use it |
|---|---|---|
| Building-control approval application | £195 | Multiply by the number of applications required for the project route. |
| Change control | £195 | Apply to each chargeable change-control submission. |
| Full or partial completion certificate | £234 | Apply to each relevant certificate application. |
| BSR staff working on a case | £156 per hour | Use only for the hours chargeable to the case; include relevant costs incurred from authorities or third parties where applicable. |
These are service charges, not the cost of compliance. They exclude your staff time, consultants, redesign, records, financing and delay. The separate BSR charging-scheme page lists a 2026–27 scheme added in March 2026. Because charges can change, verify the applicable schedule immediately before using the estimate for a live project.
Illustrative fee arithmetic
If a model assumes one approval application, one change-control submission and one completion certificate, the published fixed charges total £624 (£195 + £195 + £234), before any hourly case work or third-party costs. This is an illustration of fee arithmetic, not a typical project total and not evidence that every project will incur exactly one of each action.
Crashes, No Sound, or Screen Glitches?
Random freezes, missing sound and display glitches usually trace back to one bad driver. Find and replace yours safely.Free scan · under a minuteWindows Errors? Fix Them Before They Spread
Repair common Windows errors and clear accumulated junk for a smoother, more stable PC - no reinstall needed.Free scan · no reinstallBuilding Safety Levy: a separate development cost
Do not combine the levy with BSR fees. GOV.UK guidance describes a major residential development as one creating 10 or more residential units, or 30 new bedspaces for purpose-built student accommodation. Levy payment is due to the collecting authority before BSR can issue a completion certificate.
HM Treasury’s Spring Statement 2025 policy-costing document uses an effective date of 1 October 2026 and assumes exemptions including affordable housing and developments with fewer than ten units. Those assumptions do not replace a project assessment. Check the enacted legislation, current levy guidance, the collecting authority and the rate that applies to the development’s location and category.
Questions to record in the levy worksheet
- How many new residential units or purpose-built student bedspaces are created?
- Does the development qualify for an exemption, and what evidence is required?
- Which authority collects the payment and at what stage is it due?
- Is the rate applied to the whole development, a defined floor area or another statutory base?
- What happens to the programme if payment or an exemption decision is unresolved before completion certification?
The national £3.4 billion Building Safety Levy revenue target reported by MHCLG in May 2026 is a funding target for remediation. It is not a per-project bill and must not be divided by units to create an assumed rate.
Occupation and management costs belong in a lifecycle model
For a higher-risk residential building, registration must occur before occupation. The Accountable Persons, including a Principal Accountable Person, may need to prepare and maintain a safety case and safety-case report, engage residents, manage the golden thread and report mandatory occurrences. These obligations can continue for years after practical completion.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Show them in a separate operating-cost schedule. Include the management company’s personnel, specialist advice, resident communications, information-platform administration, periodic reviews and reporting. If your appraisal is strictly a construction estimate, exclude these costs visibly and state that exclusion; do not imply that the construction figure represents the owner’s total Building Safety Act exposure.
Keep historic remediation out of a new-build uplift
MHCLG’s Building Safety Remediation monthly data release of May 2026 estimates £11.8 billion to £22.7 billion to remediate unsafe cladding in English residential buildings at least 11 metres high. It estimates government funding of £6.7 billion to £15.2 billion and non-government funding of £5.2 billion to £7.4 billion once work is complete. The capital-cost estimate is stated as of March 2025.
These are national programme estimates. They do not provide a cost per dwelling or square metre and should not be applied as a surcharge to a new project. For an existing asset, obtain a building-specific survey, define the remediation scope, identify responsible parties and model access, decanting, temporary works, professional fees and inflation separately.
MHCLG also reports a £3.4 billion Building Safety Levy revenue target and notes that the target may be adjusted as cost estimates change. Treat that figure as a funding-plan assumption, not as proof that a particular owner or developer will pay a specified amount.
Recommended Free Tools
Non-cladding defects require explicit scenarios
The impact assessment on alternative cost recovery says reliable estimates were unavailable for the prevalence and cost of non-cladding historical fire-safety defects in buildings above 11 metres. Costs vary significantly by building, while limited information on defects and ownership structures makes a full macro-level assessment difficult.
A credible model should therefore use evidence from the specific building: survey results, compartmentation inspections, fire-door sampling, structural reviews, access constraints and ownership records. Until that evidence exists, show a low case for limited defects, a base case tied to observed issues and a high case for wider opening-up and replacement. Label the scenarios and list the trigger that would move the estimate from one case to another.
Rank #4
What the £150-per-dwelling consultation figure does—and does not—mean
A DLUHC consultation economic annex estimated about £150 per dwelling for an additional five working days before work commenced on a non-higher-risk building under a particular regulator-notice proposal. For an average 11–18 metre residential building with 22 dwellings, the annex said that equated to about £3,300.
That is a narrow consultation scenario, not a Building Safety Act percentage, a current tariff or a benchmark for every non-higher-risk building. Use it only when your appraisal matches the proposal, building type and assumptions in that annex. Otherwise, estimate the actual staff and programme effect for the project.
How to present low, base and high cases
| Model element | Low case | Base case | High case |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design and evidence effort | Existing systems and limited iterations supported by a competent team. | Planned dutyholder, consultant and information-management hours. | Additional design cycles, specialist reviews or late evidence recovery. |
| BSR process | Expected applications and few changes. | Published fixed charges plus a supported estimate of case hours. | More change-control submissions, extended review and third-party costs. |
| Programme | No critical-path effect. | Defined float consumed by reviews and certification. | Resequencing, delayed start or extended preliminaries. |
| Levy | Documented exemption. | Liability calculated using the current statutory rate. | Liability or rate unresolved until authority confirmation. |
| Historic defects | Survey confirms limited scope. | Observed defects priced with defined access and professional fees. | Opening-up reveals wider defects, decanting or major replacement. |
Do not average these cases into a single unsupported number. State the selected case, the assumptions behind it and the evidence required to release or reduce the allowance.
Comparison checklist for options and tenders
When comparing designs, procurement routes or existing assets, use the same axes for every option:
- Building type, height or storeys and intended use.
- Residential unit count or purpose-built student bedspaces.
- Higher-risk status and registration requirement.
- BSR route, number of applications, expected change-control profile and completion stages.
- Levy eligibility, exemptions, collecting authority and payment timing.
- Construction-phase cost versus occupation-phase and owner-management cost.
- Baseline staff, consultant and document-control assumptions.
- Remediation scope and whether the risk is cladding, non-cladding or unrelated to the new project.
- Low, base and high treatment of uncertainty, including programme effects.
A cheaper tender can cease to be cheaper if it assumes fewer review cycles, omits information-management work or transfers lifecycle duties without pricing them. Require each bidder to identify assumptions and exclusions against the same checklist.
Common modelling mistakes and corrections
Applying a blanket percentage
Problem: adding an arbitrary 2%, 5% or 10% to construction cost. Correction: build the six buckets, price known fees and resource assumptions, and show uncertainty as scenarios.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems2Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches3Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsCalling BSR fees the compliance cost
Problem: using £195, £234 or £156 per hour as if they cover designers, contractors and records. Correction: put published BSR charges in a fee line and price internal and consultant work separately.
Best Value
Using national remediation totals as a unit rate
Problem: dividing £11.8 billion–£22.7 billion by dwellings or floor area. Correction: use surveys and a building-specific scope; the national figures are programme estimates.
Mixing new-build and historic liabilities
Problem: adding an existing building’s remediation exposure to a new-build construction uplift. Correction: show historic remediation as a separate asset or transaction risk.
Ignoring the operating period
Problem: presenting a construction-only number as the owner’s total cost. Correction: add a lifecycle schedule for registration, safety cases, resident engagement, reporting and golden-thread maintenance, or state that those costs are excluded.
Failing to refresh volatile figures
Problem: carrying forward an old BSR charge or levy assumption. Correction: verify the 2026–27 charging scheme, current levy rules and the latest remediation release before financial close.
A practical cost-model layout
Use a workbook or estimating schedule with one tab for assumptions, one for construction compliance, one for BSR fees, one for levy testing, one for lifecycle costs and one for historic defects. Each line should include the responsible party, timing, quantity driver, unit rate, evidence source, confidence rating and scenario treatment.
Total construction-phase impact = compliance labour and consultants + document and training effort + BSR charges + programme and preliminaries effect + applicable levyTotal ownership exposure = construction-phase impact + occupation and management costs + asset-specific remediation allowanceKeep the two totals separate in board papers and investment appraisals. The first answers what the project may spend to obtain approval and complete work. The second answers what the owner may spend over the building’s life.
Bottom line for developers and quantity surveyors
The Building Safety Act does not have a defensible, officially published construction-cost multiplier. The most reliable approach is transparent decomposition: quantify the published BSR charges, estimate dutyholder and evidence work from project resources, test levy liability against current rules, model occupation duties separately and treat historic cladding and non-cladding defects as asset-specific remediation risks. Refresh the assumptions at each design and approval gate, and never present a national remediation total or a narrow consultation example as a universal project rate.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
