Track record
Track record.
The figures below describe the scale and the type of work the practice has held: portfolios rather than single buildings, and matters that were already difficult when they arrived.
The figures
Where the practice has been
Scale matters for one reason: it is what lets a practice recognise a situation it has met before, and know what a scheme, a lender, an assessor or a reviewer will ask for next.
- c.1,000buildings under fire and building safety governance
- £400m+combined project value across active assessment and remediation
- £50m+Cladding Safety Scheme remediation under management
- £60m+remediation liability reassessed and reallocated
- 75+FRAEW peer reviews
- 30+Building Safety Case Reports authored
- 10Building Assessment Certificates secured
- £3m+waking watch removal across c.25 buildings
Types of work
The instructions behind the figures
Much of it is portfolio and programme work for institutional owners and funds holding multiple buildings at different stages, with proportionate scope applied across the portfolio rather than building by building. Alongside that sits peer review and technical challenge: external wall appraisals, fire strategies, structural appraisals, safety case material and remediation proposals, each reviewed against the methodology it was produced under.
The rest divides between safety case authorship and review, Building Assessment Certificate applications and BSR engagement and RFI response; remediation and funding, from scope challenge and sequencing through Cladding Safety Scheme and Building Safety Fund applications to technical representation and drawdown; enforcement and dispute support, including Improvement Notice response and technical advisory to legal teams; and interim measures, where waking watch is reviewed and removed on evidence with the position before and after recorded.
Worked examples
Four instructions, described by type
Each of these is a real instruction, described as a type of situation rather than as an identified project. Client names, building names and outcomes are not published without written agreement.
- An external wall appraisal that read as settled
Peer review of a portfolio building's FRAEW questioned how the render system had been assessed, and the point went back to the assessing party rather than being resolved unilaterally. The assessment was revised, interim measures held the position, and the facade was remediated.
- A wall build-up assumed to be a problem
We recommended a BS 8414 test of the external wall system instead of relying on assumptions, and defined what it had to establish. It demonstrated the performance of the brick wall system, avoiding remediation the evidence did not require.
- A remediation scheme stalled after funding was refused
As Applicant Representative and Technical Representative for a resident-led management company we coordinated the FRAEW, directed the professional team and progressed the funding application. The scheme moved from stalled to funded and in delivery, reaching tender recommendation.
- A higher-risk building carrying enforcement and fragmented information
Independent technical leadership for the Principal Accountable Person, across the consultant team, managing agent, funding scheme, funder and board, alongside the safety case, the golden thread and the enforcement response. Separate workstreams became one programme on a recorded basis residents, leaseholders and regulators could follow.
What clients say
In their words
-
“Nick remains genuinely independent, even when this means delivering tough messages to clients. There really are few, if any, experts who understand the legal and regulatory position as well as Nick does.”
Penningtons Manches Cooper LLPPartner
-
“A rare ability to assess these issues holistically, challenge assumptions where necessary, and provide proportionate, evidence-based recommendations. His advice is balanced, practical and independent.”
ColliersHead of Residential and Living Group
-
“Perhaps the greatest contribution has been restoring confidence in a project that had become increasingly uncertain. As directors we are volunteers with no qualifications in building safety, and this gives us confidence the work will be done right first time, cost-effectively for leaseholders.”
Resident management companyPrincipal Accountable Person of a higher-risk residential building
-
“Under this leadership the project has moved from a stalled position to a fully funded and actively delivered programme. The greatest contribution has been restoring the confidence and trust of leaseholders after years of frustration.”
Right to manage companyExternal wall remediation scheme
Need a clear position from complex building safety evidence?
Send us the reports, the issue and the decision you need to make. We will tell you whether the evidence supports the position, what remains uncertain and what a proportionate next step looks like.