Building Control: Council or Private?

Council or Private Building Control? That Is the Question

Before Christmas, a few of our projects were unexpectedly “returned to sender.” Not by Santa — by Building Control.

Out of the blue, our Approved Inspector had gone out of business and, like a slightly awkward custody arrangement, the projects reverted to the local authority. It wasn’t something I’d encountered before. After years of using private inspectors on around 90% of jobs, it made me pause: is it time to reconsider the balance?

The building control landscape is shifting. Since the introduction of the Building Safety Act 2022, the oversight and regulation of building control professionals has tightened significantly. Approved Inspectors have transitioned into Registered Building Control Approvers under the Building Safety Regulator, with stricter competency and operational requirements.

In short: it’s a more serious, more regulated environment than it used to be.

So where does that leave us — private or council?

The Case for Private Building Control

Private inspectors (now Registered Approvers) have long been the default choice for many architects and developers. The advantages are familiar.

Speed and responsiveness
Plan checks are often quicker, and inspection slots can be more flexible.

A collaborative mindset
Private inspectors tend to understand programme pressures and work with you to find compliant solutions. A few years ago that was certainly my experience, with building control often offering practical ways to resolve areas of concern — though I have to admit that feels slightly less common now.

Continuity of relationships
You often deal with the same surveyor throughout a project. If you build a strong working relationship, they can also pick up projects across different local authority areas. With councils, you’re tied to the specific authority, which usually means starting fresh each time.

When it works well, private building control can feel less like a regulator and more like a pragmatic consultant sitting alongside the team.

But — and here’s the plot twist — private firms are still businesses. They can merge, restructure… or occasionally cease trading. When that happens, projects revert to the local authority. It’s not catastrophic, but it can be administratively messy and may cause delays while responsibility and paperwork are transferred.

There’s also a practical reality: elements previously agreed — perhaps solutions that deviated slightly from the textbook “gold standard” but were considered reasonable — may be reassessed. In some cases, works may need to be opened up to demonstrate compliance to the new building control body.

No one enjoys revisiting covered-up details.

The Case for Local Authority Building Control

Local authority building control has sometimes (perhaps unfairly) been stereotyped as the slower, more rigid cousin at the party. But that’s not always the reality.

There are some clear advantages.

Stability
Councils rarely go out of business mid-project. What you start with is generally what you finish with.

Local knowledge
Surveyors often have a strong understanding of recurring site conditions, local construction practices, and the planning environment.

A direct line to enforcement
Local authorities are the enforcing body. If issues arise, that link can bring clarity and authority quickly.

On complex or sensitive schemes, that enforcement role can provide a level of certainty that is reassuring.

The trade-off is that some authorities remain under-resourced, and responsiveness can vary significantly between areas. As with private providers, quality and speed often depend on the individuals involved.

So… Which One?

For straightforward residential schemes — and as someone working heavily in new-build housing, that’s often our bread and butter — private approvers can still offer clear programme advantages.

We also work with contractors who maintain long-standing relationships with particular inspectors. That familiarity brings real benefits: shared expectations, consistent interpretation, and a level of trust in how each party works.

But recent events were a useful reminder that organisational resilience matters too.

Perhaps the real answer isn’t either/or, but choosing the right approach for the project:

• Time-critical, repeatable house types: private approvers may edge ahead.
• Unusual sites, heritage contexts, or politically sensitive schemes: local authority building control can offer stability and authority.
• Higher-risk buildings under the new regime: early engagement with regulators and local authorities becomes essential anyway.

For me, the lesson wasn’t that private building control is risky. It’s that the market is maturing — and perhaps we shouldn’t be quite so on autopilot when making appointments.

Building control isn’t just a statutory checkbox. It’s a professional relationship that can materially affect programme, risk, and delivery.

And occasionally, just before Christmas, it can provide an unexpected plot twist to liven up the office conversation.