Stamping out the rogue builders: 80% of builders and consumers support licensing construction, says FMB

News
Construction helmets FMB

Almost 80% of builders and home owners are calling on the Government to introduce a licensing scheme for the UK construction industry to stamp out rogue traders once and for all, according to LABC partner, the Federation of Master Builders (FMB).

In work that LABC has strongly supported, the FMB has published an independent research report by Pye Tait entitled ‘Licence to build: A pathway to licensing UK construction’, which details the benefits of introducing a licensing scheme for the whole construction industry and puts forward a proposal for how it could work.
 
Also, new consumer research undertaken by the FMB reveals the impact poor quality building firms are having on consumers and demonstrates that most home owners support the introduction of a mandatory licensing scheme. Key results from both pieces of research include:

  • 77% of small and medium-sized construction firms support the introduction of licensing to professionalise the industry, protect consumers and sideline the cowboys; 
  • 78% of consumers also want to see a licensing scheme for construction introduced;
  • Nearly 90% of home owners believe that the Government should criminalise rogue and incompetent builders;
  • Over half of people (55%) who commission home improvement work have had a negative experience with their builder.

Commenting on the research report, which was launched at a high profile event in the House of Lords on the afternoon of Monday 2nd July, Brian Berry, Chief Executive of the FMB, said: “The vast majority of builders and home owners want to see the construction industry professionalised and it is time for the Government to act. It’s unacceptable that more than half of consumers have had a negative experience with their builder. However, we shouldn’t be surprised by this given that in the UK, it is perfectly legal for anyone to set up a building firm and start selling their services without any prior experience or qualifications. This cannot be right given the nature of the work and the potential health and safety risks when something goes wrong. In countries like Australia and Germany, building firms require a licence and we want to see the UK Government regulate our industry in a similar manner.”
 
Berry continued: “Aside from the obvious health and safety benefits, the advantages of a licensing scheme are manifold. Licensing would bar from the industry the very worst firms operating in the construction sector. Consumer protection would increase and with it, the appetite among home owners to undertake more construction work. We also believe that if we can improve the image of the industry through licensing, young people, parents and teachers will have a more favourable impression of our sector and therefore be more likely to pursue, or recommend, a career in construction. Over time, this would gradually help ease the construction skills shortage we currently face. For too long, the very worst construction firms, most of which undertake private domestic work, have been giving the whole sector a bad name. So that’s why this scheme should be of interest to the whole sector and not just small local builders.”
 
Berry concluded: “In terms of how the scheme might work, it needn’t be too costly or bureaucratic. Our report draws on the experience of experts from across the construction industry and puts forward a clear proposal. We are suggesting that the scheme covers all paid-for construction work by firms of all sizes, not just those working in the domestic sector. Fees should be tiered and could start at as little as £150 every three to five years, with the largest contractors paying around £1,000 over the same period. In terms of how it’s governed, the licence should be administered by a single authority with a broad range of scheme providers sitting underneath. We are now keen to reach out to the whole construction sector to get their input on the proposal. If we can demonstrate broad support for this approach, we are optimistic that the Government will take it forward.”

Editor's note: Links to the FMB report ‘Licence to build’ were added in January 2019.

 

Comments

NICEIC

Submitted 5 years 7 months ago

Hi, I am in the electrical trade and we are members of the NICEIC why cant builders have a similar scheme.

Fee-paying?

Submitted 5 years 7 months ago

Will this end up like all the other initiatives, ie pay a fee and your in? I also assume that the 491 builders which were canvassed were members of the FMB? Will the new scheme involve inspecting previous work as was the case in the old days when applying for membership to the NHBC? Once the scheme has been established, how do you deal with rogue traders who simply advertise their membership but haven't passed the tests/paid their fees?

Fees

Submitted 5 years 7 months ago

Just another fee for the councils and government doesn’t protect the consumer at all. More funding for trading standards and the police would work.

Contract needed

Submitted 5 years 7 months ago

The sample population for both surveys are miniscule and accordingly the results are meaningless. To derive policy on this basis suggests that enforcing a warranty on all building works is a plot by the insurance industry to increase revenue. A General Builder qualification would raise standards but how many people within a company would have to have it, just the boss, just each project foreman or every person on every site? The best means to improve accountability on domestic projects is the use of a Contract. Perhaps FMB could enquire of all it's members the number who always use something like JCT Homeowner which sets out who is going to do what, at what time, for what money and when the money is payable.

Again?

Submitted 5 years 7 months ago

How many time have we heard this? Unfortunately it's not a vote winner, so parliament's not too interested. Plus, it would probably involve public money to administer a scheme - another reason to kick it into the long grass.

Personally I think LABC should be lobbying parliament to set up local authority registers of recommended building firms the public can reasonably rely on. And the on-site inspection process needs to be tightened up e.g. so that what is specified is what gets built.

Cheap quotes

Submitted 5 years 7 months ago

A good & proper contractor pays as we do £000's in various insurances, £000's in various trade accreditation's and memberships. We spend on staffing and and have annual audits on ISO and for Health & Safety, we deal with risk & method statements, CDM matters and ensure waste is disposed correctly, while also ensuring we use proper sub-contractors such as scaffolders with the right qualifications and provide the correct plant & tools, good quality materials and ensure our staff are safe in work and that those around are always safe. All this cost is borne before we even get a job and as result our overheads are where they need to be, but as a start we will be £00's or likely £000's more than those unregulated, man and a van jobbing builders that are happy to charge a days work to cover their labour cost and maybe just a little on top for fuel. Then find the cheapest materials, ignore building control, skirt planning issues, have no idea or training for asbestos so simply rip that apart and have it dumped by the side of a country lane exposing everyone to the risks and both they and their labour have no training or understanding of H&S to even lift things or access areas properly. But yet these guys exist every day taking work they cant deliver correctly and Joe Public are happy most of the time to pay cash and avoid any vat to get the cheapest job possible -any wonder why things go wrong! Regulate every trade, reduce or remove vat on homeowner improvements like with new build, get Local authorities or approved inspections to apply on more areas of work. Even a garden fence erected poorly is a risk.
Will it happen - of course not. Why? because the public are allowed to engage anyone and normally happy for the cheapest quote, irrespective of rules and even their own family's safety, while regulation is easy to apply to proper companies who are an easy target for charging.
Apply for planning to make alterations - cost, time and usually a NO. Just go ahead a fit a massive satellite dish on the front of a house or shop - no-one will enforce or insist it is removed - so why bother asking if you can do it. Just one of many examples.

No to a licence

Submitted 5 years 7 months ago

I so agree with the comment posted on the 5th September. It nearly reflects my thoughts. I am a FMB member and board member and DO NOT support the licence. We spend a considerable amount of our funds in training, H&S and being compliant. When we take into consideration safety running sites with Site and project management, then these cost. For instance a good SMSTS Site manger ranges from £200 - £350 per day. If a contract last day for 2 months/60 days then without any profit this cost £12-15k alone. If like us, others have to work to CDM2015 regulations as just one of many task like Site welfare and other cost also kick in then you can see why good companies allow for these cost. Like many responsible contractors we are dismayed when we see ‘builders’ put all at risk when they flaunt basic safety rules regarding Asbestos, Silica, Working at height, excavations etc. I really don’t see the need to licence builders unless it can be enforced by law. I see DAILY others breaching CDM2015 rules and safety issues under the 1974 H&S act. These are the real issues as H&S officers need to get out in the field and do their job. Naturally if they did many of the so called cowboys would disappear.
Many what some call cowboys can construct if tested - many choose not too as cutting corners, saving time, effort and ripping clients off, are their focus.
Building control needs to take the lead on some issues regarding the build but I fail to see how, regardless of licensing how any government is going to stop the domestic client employing someone based on “they are cheap and don’t charge VAT”
If licensing comes in then it is another cost that good contractors have to add to thier cost.
I think one very quick fix would be to fine domestic & commercial customers for Breaching CDM2015 rules and for proper checks on VAT payments. I am sure once several types of works are checked ( extensions, loft conversions etc) Most of which authorities are aware, as many go through the councils hands!!
I do welcome the FMB taking an interest and the lead on this but I don’t feel as a member that have really researched this and that the focus is on thier membership and domestic works. I feel many views have not been listen to, no focus on safety and no real understanding on apart from issuing licences what is really happening in construction other than sound bites.

Money making scheme

Submitted 5 years 7 months ago

Oh wow, yet another money making scheme, utter waist of time like fensa and fmb, yea pay us £1200 per year, we will Inspect one of your jobs then you can have a sticker on your van, woopy great, more hassle for us credible builders and more money for us to ultimately charge onto the customer..I've a better idea, get the council's to employ building inspectors to randomly visit sites uninvited to do spot checks while also getting your regular inspections done by the legit building regs guys..it's all about squeezing money out of us and the customers....bit like agency's who charge a bomb to hire out Labour yet pay crap wages...

Webmaster note

Submitted 5 years 7 months ago

All comments posted earlier than this one have been transferred from our old website.

Robbed of all our money

Submitted 3 years 1 month ago

The builder we employed to renovate and extend our property breached health and safety and acceptable workmanship in every way possible including asbestos removal and then left us out of pocket and with no extension and unacceptable workmanship

Add new comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Sign up to the building bulletin newsletter

Over 48,000 construction professionals have already signed up for the LABC Building Bulletin.

Join them and receive useful tips, practical technical information and industry news by email once every 6 weeks.

Subscribe to the Building Bulletin