An Apex Insurance Brokers deep-dive for directors, partners, brokers and risk managers in the built-environment sectors.
The Building Safety Act 2022 ("BSA 2022") is the most consequential piece of legislation for UK construction professional indemnity insurance since the Defective Premises Act 1972. It did three things that fundamentally change how PI underwriters look at your business: it extended limitation periods by decades, it created new statutory duty-holder roles that attract criminal as well as civil liability, and it imposed a layered remediation framework for unsafe cladding that pulls original designers and contractors back into the firing line years — sometimes decades — after practical completion.
The Act was a direct response to the Grenfell Tower fire of 14 June 2017, in which seventy-two people died. The Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety led by Dame Judith Hackitt ("Building a Safer Future", May 2018) concluded that the regulatory regime governing high-rise residential buildings was "not fit for purpose". The BSA 2022 is Parliament's attempt to remedy that. It is also, inevitably, a redistribution of liability — and PI insurers have noticed.
This hub page is the overview. It explains what changed, why, what the four biggest implications are for PI buyers, what insurers are doing in response, and what practical steps you should take at proposal stage and at renewal. Eight in-depth spoke articles sit underneath it, each focused on a single technical area; links appear in context throughout this page and again in a complete index at the foot.
If you only have ten minutes, read the Act in 600 words and the quick-reference cover table. If you have an hour, read the whole hub. If you have an actual problem, call us.
The Act in 600 words
The Building Safety Act 2022 received Royal Assent on 28 April 2022. It runs to 173 sections and 11 schedules across six Parts. The most operationally significant provisions are spread across Parts 3, 4, 5 and 6, and most of them only made sense once the secondary legislation arrived in 2023.
Part 2 established the Building Safety Regulator ("BSR") inside the Health and Safety Executive. The BSR is the new building control body for higher-risk buildings ("HRBs") and the system regulator for the wider building control profession.
Part 3 amended the Building Act 1984 to give the Secretary of State power to make Building Regulations that create dutyholder roles and competence requirements. The substantive duties were put in place by the Building Regulations etc. (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2023 (SI 2023/911), which inserted a new Part 2A into the Building Regulations 2010. From 1 October 2023, every construction project subject to the Building Regulations in England has had to have a Client, a Principal Designer and a Principal Contractor (with single-discipline projects having simplified equivalents). These are statutory duty-holders, not contractual ones — and the duties attract criminal sanctions.
Part 4 created the in-occupation regime for HRBs. Sections 71–75 set up the "Accountable Person" and "Principal Accountable Person" framework. They must register their building with the BSR, prepare a safety case, and discharge ongoing duties to manage building safety risks. Failure attracts criminal liability under section 74.
Part 5 is a grab-bag of cross-cutting changes. The two most important for PI buyers are sections 123–125 (Remediation Orders and Remediation Contribution Orders, applied for in the First-tier Tribunal) and section 135.
Section 135 is the limitation provision. It rewrote section 1 of the Defective Premises Act 1972 ("DPA 1972") and inserted a new section 4B. The retrospective limitation period for claims under section 1 DPA 1972 (defective dwellings) is now 30 years for buildings completed before 28 June 2022, and the prospective period is 15 years for any work completed after that date. The retrospective extension came into force on 28 June 2022. It is the largest single change to construction limitation since the Latent Damage Act 1986, and it is unique in that it operates retrospectively to revive claims that were already statute-barred.
Section 135 also created a new section 2A in the DPA 1972, extending the Act to refurbishment works (not just original construction) carried out after the section came into force, and extended section 38 of the Building Act 1984 — the civil cause of action for breach of the Building Regulations — to apply on a similar 15-year prospective basis.
Part 6 deals with construction products. New civil rights of action exist for failures to comply with construction product regulations and for cladding products specifically.
In summary: an HRB regulatory regime with new duty-holders and criminal liability; a remediation framework with the financial waterfall designed to push cost back up the supply chain; and limitation periods stretching back three decades and forward one and a half. For PI underwriters — who price tail risk for a living — the second-order effects of all this are enormous.
The Big Four implications for PI buyers
1. Extended limitation under section 135 — the retrospective 30-year horizon
This is the headline change for PI. Until 28 June 2022, a claim under section 1 DPA 1972 had to be brought within six years of practical completion. From that date, the period became 30 years for any building completed before commencement and 15 years for buildings completed afterwards. The Court of Appeal confirmed in URS Corporation Ltd v BDW Trading Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 772 (and the Supreme Court agreed on the principal point in 2025) that section 135 does revive previously statute-barred claims, and that it applies to claims between contracting parties in a contribution chain, not just to claims by occupants.
For a designer who finished work on a residential building in, say, 2002, the limitation period that expired in 2008 has now been replaced by a period that runs until 2032. A whole generation of historical projects has been brought back inside the limitation window for any claim that can be framed under section 1 DPA 1972 — which, broadly, means any claim alleging that a dwelling was not built "in a workmanlike or professional manner, with proper materials, and so as to be fit for habitation when completed".
Read the full analysis: Spoke 1 — Section 135 and the new DPA 1972 limitation regime.
2. New duty-holder roles — Principal Designer and Principal Contractor under the Building Regulations
The dutyholder regime under Part 2A of the Building Regulations 2010 is structurally modelled on the CDM 2015 regulations, but it operates under the Building Regulations rather than the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015. That distinction matters: breach of the BSA dutyholder regime can attract criminal prosecution under section 35 of the Building Act 1984 (as amended), with maximum penalties including unlimited fines and, for the worst HRB breaches, imprisonment.
For an architect or engineer holding Principal Designer status, the role brings statutory responsibility for planning, managing and monitoring the design work and coordinating matters relating to compliance with the Building Regulations during the design phase. There is a statutory competence requirement: the dutyholder must have the skills, knowledge, experience and behaviours ("SKEB") proportionate to the project. PAS 8671:2022 (designers) and PAS 8672:2022 (contractors) describe the competence baseline.
Read the architect-facing analysis: Spoke 3 — Principal Designer under BSA 2022.
Read the contractor-facing analysis: Spoke 4 — Principal Contractor under BSA 2022.
3. The Higher-Risk Building regime — gateways and registration
The HRB regime is the substantive heart of the new system. Under section 65 BSA 2022 and the Higher-Risk Buildings (Descriptions and Supplementary Provisions) Regulations 2023 (SI 2023/275), a building is an HRB at the design and construction stage if it is at least 18 metres tall or has at least seven storeys, and contains at least two residential units. (A slightly different definition applies in occupation under Part 4.)
HRB projects must clear three gateways:
- Gateway 1 — planning. Fire safety statements must accompany the planning application.
- Gateway 2 — pre-construction. The BSR must approve the design and construction control plan before building work starts. This is hard-stop approval; you cannot begin substantive work until the BSR signs off.
- Gateway 3 — completion. The BSR must approve the completed works before the building can be occupied.
Gateway 2 in particular has had a significant real-world impact: published statistics from the BSR in 2024 and 2025 showed approval rates well under 50% on first submission, with decision times stretching far beyond the statutory targets.
Read more: Spoke 2 — The HRB regime and what it means for cover.
4. Cladding and external wall systems — the retrospective wave
Section 1 DPA 1972 was always available against the designers and constructors of unsafe dwellings; what changed in 2022 is that the limitation horizon got long enough for it to bite at scale. Add to that:
- The leaseholder protections in Schedule 8 BSA 2022, which insulate "qualifying leaseholders" from liability for non-cladding remediation costs above prescribed caps and from any cladding remediation cost at all for buildings over 11 metres.
- Remediation Orders (s.123) and Remediation Contribution Orders (s.124), which the First-tier Tribunal can make against landlords, developers and "associates" — pushing the financial cost of remediation onto the original developer corporate group.
- The Building Safety Fund and the Cladding Safety Scheme, which fund remediation up front but have subrogation and recovery rights against original constructors.
The combined effect is that original designers and D&C contractors on any residential block over 11 metres built since the early 1990s — and especially since the use of MCM/ACM panels became widespread in the 2000s — face a real and continuing risk of being pulled into a remediation claim, often as a third party or contribution defendant, often long after the original limitation period had run out.
Read the analysis: Spoke 5 — Cladding and external wall claims.
What insurers are doing in response
PI underwriters have not absorbed all this passively. From late 2018 onwards — and accelerating after the BSA 2022 received Royal Assent — the market has reshaped cover for construction professionals in ways every buyer needs to understand.
Fire safety exclusions and carve-outs. The most common single response has been some form of "fire safety" exclusion or sub-limit. Forms vary widely: some are full exclusions of any liability arising from fire safety advice or design; others are aggregate sub-limits (commonly £500,000, £1m or £2m in the aggregate) with defence costs inside the limit; others apply only to cladding or to EWS1 work. A small handful of insurers continue to write the cover with no relevant restriction at all, but capacity is finite and pricing reflects it.
Cladding exclusions. A separate stream of exclusions specifically targets cladding, ACM, MCM and external wall systems. These are usually drafted to exclude both original design and survey/remediation work, though the wording matters and the trigger language is not standardised across the market.
Sub-limits and aggregate erosion. Where cover is available, expect aggregate sub-limits for fire-related claims, with defence costs typically eroding the same aggregate. This means the headline £5m limit may shrink rapidly under a single contested cladding claim.
Heightened proposal-form scrutiny. Insurers have rewritten their proposal forms to ask far more detailed questions about HRB work, EWS1 sign-off history, intrusive surveys, cladding design, and supplier diligence. They want disclosure of every relevant project, not just the live ones. See Spoke 7 — Proposal-form disclosure in the BSA context.
Run-off implications. Because section 135 has stretched the latent claims tail to 30 years, the traditional six-year run-off offered to a closing or merging practice is increasingly inadequate. Some insurers will not offer extended run-off at any price; others will, but at significant cost. See Spoke 8 — Run-off and the 30-year horizon.
Capacity contraction in mid-market. Several insurers have either withdrawn from construction PI entirely or pulled back to a narrow band of risks. The result for buyers — particularly mid-sized multi-disciplinary practices with any HRB or cladding exposure — is a thinner market with more searching disclosure and more aggressive pricing.
For the current state of the market in detail: Spoke 6 — PI availability for fire safety, EWS1 and cladding work.
What buyers need to do — proposal stage and renewal
At proposal stage
Get your project history complete. Insurers expect a full schedule of HRB and over-11m residential work going back at least to 2008, and increasingly the full 30-year retrospective window. Omissions — even genuinely innocent ones — risk a fair-presentation argument under section 3 of the Insurance Act 2015 at the point of claim.
Be explicit about EWS1 sign-off and any intrusive survey work. These are high-frequency loss triggers and underwriters expect you to volunteer the detail, not be drawn on it.
Identify any work as Principal Designer or Principal Contractor under the new regime, and any work as Accountable Person or fire engineer. The duty-holder roles attract specific underwriter interest.
Disclose any current or threatened claim or circumstance under section 1 DPA 1972, the BSA 2022 remediation framework, or any cladding survey or remediation engagement.
A practical disclosure framework is in Spoke 7.
At renewal
Re-check the proposal even if "nothing has changed". The market and the law are moving so quickly that even a static project list can attract a new exclusion or sub-limit at renewal. Ask your broker explicitly whether your existing fire safety / cladding wording has tightened — many policy schedules quietly carry new endorsements.
Negotiate the sub-limit position. A flat aggregate sub-limit with defence costs inside is the worst form; a higher sub-limit with defence costs outside (or a more generous "any one claim" structure) is materially better. The headline number is not the only lever.
Project the tail. If you intend to close or sell the business within the next decade, model the cost and availability of run-off cover before you stop trading. See Spoke 8.
Quick-reference cover table
A snapshot of how the main areas of BSA-related exposure are typically treated in the UK construction PI market as at mid-2026. This is a generalisation across the market; individual insurers and individual policies vary. Always read the policy.
| Exposure area | Architects / Multi-disc | Engineers (struct.) | Fire engineers | Surveyors (EWS1) | D&C contractors |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| General PI for non-HRB residential design | Available, mainstream | Available, mainstream | Restricted capacity | Available, mainstream | Available, mainstream |
| Principal Designer duties under BSA dutyholder regime | Available, sub-limit common for HRBs | Available, sub-limit common | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Principal Contractor duties under BSA dutyholder regime | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | Available, sub-limit common for HRBs |
| HRB design work | Restricted, sub-limit | Restricted, sub-limit | Heavily restricted | N/A | Restricted, sub-limit |
| EWS1 sign-off work | Sub-limit / excluded | Sub-limit / excluded | Sub-limit / excluded | Sub-limit / often excluded | N/A |
| Cladding remediation design | Sub-limit / excluded | Sub-limit / excluded | Sub-limit / excluded | N/A | Sub-limit / excluded |
| Cladding remediation contracting | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | Sub-limit / excluded |
| Fire safety opinion / strategy | Sub-limit / excluded | Sub-limit / excluded | Heavily restricted | N/A | N/A |
| Historic over-11m work pre-2022 | Subject to existing PI; aggregation issues | Subject to existing PI; aggregation issues | Subject to existing PI | Subject to existing PI | Subject to existing PI |
| Run-off for past HRB / cladding work | Available, expensive, often sub-limited | Available, expensive | Often unavailable | Often unavailable | Available, expensive |
Headings to translate the table:
- "Available, mainstream" — multiple insurers willing to write, competitive pricing.
- "Sub-limit common" — cover available but with an aggregate sub-limit, usually with defence costs inside.
- "Restricted" — limited capacity, materially higher pricing, more searching questions.
- "Heavily restricted" — only a handful of markets, often London Market only.
- "Excluded" — most policies in the market exclude.
- "N/A" — not a relevant exposure for that sector.
For sector-specific guidance: Architects PI, Engineers PI, Surveyors PI, D&C Contractors PI.
Frequently asked questions
1. Does the section 135 retrospective extension apply if my old project was already statute-barred when the Act came into force? Yes. That is precisely the point of the retrospective extension. The Court of Appeal confirmed this in URS Corporation Ltd v BDW Trading Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 772. A claim that expired under the old six-year DPA limit can be revived if it falls within the new 30-year window. There is a narrow Human Rights Act 1998 / ECHR Article 6 carve-out but it is rarely available in practice.
2. Does section 135 apply to non-residential buildings? No. Section 1 DPA 1972 is limited to dwellings. A commercial building outside the scope of section 1 is not caught by the extended period. But section 135 also extended section 38 of the Building Act 1984 (civil action for breach of the Building Regulations) on a 15-year prospective basis, and that does apply more widely.
3. Are Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish buildings caught? Section 1 DPA 1972 extends to England and Wales. The BSA 2022 dutyholder regime under Part 2A of the Building Regulations applies in England only. Wales has a parallel but distinct regime under the Building Safety (Wales) Bill / Act framework. Scotland has its own building safety regime under the Building (Scotland) Act 2003. Always check the jurisdiction.
4. What counts as a "higher-risk building"? At the design and construction stage, a building of at least 18 metres or at least seven storeys (whichever is reached first) containing at least two residential units. The detailed definition is in regulation 5 of the Higher-Risk Buildings (Descriptions and Supplementary Provisions) Regulations 2023.
5. I only do small-scale residential work. Am I in scope? The HRB regime is not. The dutyholder regime under Part 2A is. Every project subject to the Building Regulations in England since 1 October 2023 has had to have a Principal Designer and a Principal Contractor (with simplified equivalents for single-discipline projects). So yes, you are in the dutyholder regime even on a single-house refurbishment.
6. My PI policy excludes cladding. Am I uninsured for an old project I have no cladding involvement in? Read the wording carefully. A cladding exclusion usually targets liability arising from cladding work specifically; it does not necessarily exclude all liability on any project that happens to have cladding. But the scope varies and some wordings are very broad — talk to your broker.
7. What is the difference between a "fire safety" exclusion and a "cladding" exclusion? A fire safety exclusion is normally broader. It can extend to any liability arising from fire safety design, advice, opinion or strategy. A cladding exclusion is normally narrower and targets external wall systems. Both forms exist on the market, and some policies carry both.
8. Are defence costs inside or outside the limit? This is one of the most important questions to ask. Many BSA-related sub-limits are "costs inclusive", meaning legal defence costs erode the same sub-limit. A contested cladding claim can absorb seven-figure defence costs before any indemnity is paid.
9. We were the consultant on a 2014 building that is now subject to a Remediation Contribution Order. Are we in the line of fire? Quite possibly. The freeholder or developer paying under the RCO will be looking for routes to recover from the original supply chain. Section 1 DPA 1972 is the obvious legal hook; contribution claims under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 follow. Notify your insurer now under the "circumstances" clause — do not wait for a formal letter before action.
10. Do the new duty-holder duties under Part 2A apply to projects that started before 1 October 2023? Transitional provisions in the 2023 Regulations addressed the cut-over. Broadly, projects that had already submitted a building control application before 1 October 2023 could continue under the old regime, but anything starting after that date is caught.
11. My business has stopped trading. Do I still need PI cover? If you did any design or construction work on any dwelling or HRB in the last 30 years, almost certainly yes. Section 135 has made the traditional six-year run-off obsolete for designers and engineers. See Spoke 8.
12. The Building Safety Fund paid for our building's cladding remediation. Is the cost gone? No. The Fund retains subrogation and recovery rights, and the relevant deeds of grant typically require the freeholder to pursue recoveries from the original supply chain. The cost has been redistributed in time and in legal form, not extinguished.
13. Is criminal prosecution under section 39 BSA 2022 covered by PI? PI is a civil liability cover. It does not indemnify against criminal fines (and could not lawfully do so for many types of penalty). Legal defence costs for a criminal investigation may be available under a separate Directors' and Officers' policy or via the legal expenses extension on some commercial combined policies — but not by default under PI.
14. We use a consultant fire engineer on every HRB project. Does their PI cover us? No. Their PI covers them. You will need your own cover for your own liability, and you should check that your subcontractor's PI is adequate before you bring them onto the project — and ideally take an assignment of warranties or a collateral warranty so that recovery is feasible if needed.
15. Where does the Apex Insurance Brokers cladding / BSA risk-review service start? With a structured project audit going back to 1996, mapped to the new dutyholder roles and the section 135 limitation horizon. Talk to your broker contact, or call the office. We are FCA-regulated under FRN 724952.
Where this fits in the wider Apex content
- Run-off cover hub — what run-off is, how long you need it, how the BSA 2022 has changed the calculus.
- Insurance Act 2015 hub — fair presentation, remedies for breach, the relevant case law.
- Aggregation hub — how multiple cladding claims may or may not aggregate under your wording.
- Proposal form guides — sector-by-sector walk-throughs.
Sources and further reading
Statute — Building Safety Act 2022 c.30 (legislation.gov.uk); Defective Premises Act 1972 c.35; Building Act 1984 c.55; Insurance Act 2015 c.4; Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 c.47.
Secondary legislation — Higher-Risk Buildings (Descriptions and Supplementary Provisions) Regulations 2023 SI 2023/275; Higher-Risk Buildings (Procedures) (England) Regulations 2023 SI 2023/909; Building Regulations etc. (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2023 SI 2023/911.
Case law — URS Corporation Ltd v BDW Trading Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 772; Naylor & Others v Roamquest Ltd [2021] EWHC 567 (TCC) and [2022] EWHC 1591 (TCC); Martlet Homes Ltd v Mulalley & Co Ltd [2022] EWHC 1813 (TCC).
Reports — Building a Safer Future: Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety: Final Report, Dame Judith Hackitt, May 2018; Grenfell Tower Inquiry: Phase 2 Report, September 2024.
Standards — PAS 8671:2022 (Built environment — Framework for competence of individual Principal Designers); PAS 8672:2022 (parallel for Principal Contractors); PAS 9980:2022 (Fire risk appraisal of external wall construction).
Disclaimer
This is legal and insurance commentary, not advice. The Building Safety Act 2022 regime is technical and fact-sensitive — consult specialist counsel and your broker on your specific position. Apex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority, FRN 724952.