THE NEWS THAT Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC) in the floors and roofs of UK buildings is failing is not new, despite it only recently receiving mass (and seemingly government’s) attention.

RAAC was first welcomed as a cheaper, easier to install material in 1950s post-war construction. However, it was always known to have a relatively limited lifespan of around 30 years. That being the case, industry has been alerting government that buildings with the material were due for renewal with increasing urgency over at least the past 30 years. In the past five years, those alerts have become more and more strident and blunt.

Given that history, and the lack of maintenance of some buildings with RAAC, the prospect of professional indemnity claims on the horizon is looming in potentially ‘Grenfellesque’ proportions.

Any Flat Roofed Building

While the current focus is on school flat roofs constructed between the 1950s and 1990s, as well as other public buildings such as hospitals and courts, the truth is RAAC could be found in any flat roofed building built between the ’50s and the ’90s.

Added to the RAAC issue, is the complication of the known presence of asbestos in many schools and other buildings. It means that even investigating whether roof decks are constructed with RAAC could be impossible. While asbestos poses little threat undisturbed, investigations could release asbestos particles that once breathed in are carcinogenic.

Such difficulties faced in assessing the safety of buildings might mean the most practical solution will be to replace buildings. This is unlikely to be a quick process, apart from issues of cost, the capacity for work on this scale does not exist in the construction industry – which was one cause of the delay in assessing schools.

The recent flurry of theatre closures while investigations are urgently launched, as well as the latest warnings about social housing, will most likely be the start of an avalanche across the built environment.

Counting the Costs

The government has said it will meet the costs of RAAC mitigation in schools and has allocated £1.8bn for this so far from the public purse. However, it is yet to be seen how the costs of remediating the rest of the public estate, not to mention privately owned buildings, could be met.

The administration of the Building Safety Fund, designed to address fire safety defects, might suggest one way to meet the enormous costs of RAAC removal and rebuilding.

The government has forced housing developers and builders into contributing towards Building Safety costs. Could contractors and construction professionals involved in the specification and installation of RAAC be facing similar demands?

Professional Indemnity Insurance

Professionals could potentially be facing claims on their professional indemnity insurance, particularly those involved in the design and construction of more recent buildings from the 1980’s and 1990’s, who may yet still be in practice.

Professionals affected could include:

Architects
Contractors/subcontractors
Designers
Facilities Managers
Engineers
Surveyors
Valuers

If designs including RAAC were issued without warnings about its expected lifespan or the need for maintenance, it might be that the professionals involved would be held liable. Likewise, because RAAC is cheaper than traditional concrete, its introduction into a design could be the outcome of contractor value engineering.

Similarly, facilities managers could be held responsible for RAAC failures. The material is susceptible to the effect of water ingress, basically acting as a sponge absorbing moisture, which reduces it to crumbling fragments. If it’s found that facilities managers ignored maintenance regimes, they might be considered to have contributed to a RAAC roof’s failure.

Where these roofs have been surveyed and approved as safe, it might be that the surveyor involved will be deemed to have provided incorrect advice, especially if the roof has collapsed.

For privately owned buildings, surveyors and valuers could also be in the firing line if a property’s value falls because RAAC is present.

Professional liability will be impacted by the degree of knowledge of RAAC a competent professional could be considered to reasonably possess before the current crisis.

This is likely to be considerable. The National Audit Office report Condition of School Buildings published in June 2023, refers to the history of concerns raised about Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete by several bodies as far back as the 1990s, when the material was finally prohibited.

Limitations

While limitations of time and responsibility will apply, in the case of dangerous cladding the government has retrospectively extended liability in order to hold developers and builders to account. It’s not inconceivable that the same could happen in the case of RAAC roofs.

In fact, if buildings are occupied as a ‘dwelling’ and are considered to be a safety risk, they might already fall under the auspices of the Building Safety Act 2022.

The professional indemnity insurance industry will surely be concerned that they could face lengthy and complex cases to identify the scope of professional involvement, hypothetically going back decades. No doubt they will be introducing policy exclusions for RAAC to limit any claims from now on.

Just to add to this possible witch’s brew of liability and claims, is the presence of asbestos in public and private buildings, also known about for many years.

John Wallace, MD at Ridgemont, a specialist construction and real estate law firm, warns: “Recent building safety legislation means that liability for unsafe buildings (whether in respect of their construction or maintenance) can fall at the feet of developers, building owners and other participants in the construction sector.

“Where RAAC panels may contain asbestos, considerable care will need to be taken in any invasive testing of the RAAC. Asbestos, once disturbed, is a serious hazard.

“The need to remove RAAC, and any asbestos, across schools and other buildings provides an opportunity for schools to be made safer places and improved. However, those responsible for such buildings and those engaged to undertake the work carry a heavy burden. Serious consequences follow for those that do not meet their obligations under the relevant legislation.”

>> Read more about RAAC roofs in the news

The post Is RAAC a Professional Indemnity Crisis? appeared first on Roofing Today.