Govt to Explore Licensing Contractors & Subcontractors

As part of the wider post-Grenfell regulatory overhaul, the government is in the early stages of exploring different approaches to the licensing, regulation and registration of contractors or subcontractors, including those working on smaller scale and domestic dwellings. This work will contribute to a Professions Strategy, due to be published in 2027.  

If you have thoughts on licensing, please contact [email protected] 

Why government says change is needed: 

• It points to long-standing, repeatedly identified failings: fragmented accountability, inconsistent competence, weak ethical behaviour, and a "race to the bottom" on price. 
• Competence is often a one-time credential rather than ongoing; professional/trade body membership is largely voluntary with limited power to stop bad actors continuing to practise. 
• Clients and consumers can't tell good performers from bad, especially in the domestic/RMI market, where redress is weak, insurance rare, and fraud reportedly under-pursued. 

What NFRC needs evidence on:  

Skills/competence, behaviour and culture, and accountability. NFRC wants to submit evidence of what does not work in the current system by sharing the worst stories our Members have seen on site.  

Please share your worst stories from the past five years or answers you to any of the questions below. The more specifics, the better. All responses will be anonymised. Contact [email protected] 

Questions for NFRC Trade Members: 

• If roofing contractors had to be registered or licensed to trade, what would change for your business, for better or worse? 
• What would worry you about mandatory registration or licensing? (Cost, paperwork, shutting out legitimate small firms, etc.) 
• Have you observed a breakdown on a job because roofers were not consulted during the pre-design/stage? 
• What’s an example of shocking quality work you’ve come across and what was the cause? 
• Have you ever lost a bid to a cheaper firm and then been called back to fix or finish their work? What did you find, and what did it end up costing the client? 
• Where on site do you most often see corners cut? 
• What's one practical change that would make it harder for bad operators to keep working in roofing? 
• Any other particularly bad stories that highlight problems associated with a lack of regulation of contractors. 

Questions for NFRC Supplier Members: 

• When you supply a product, how often does what's specified on paper match what actually gets ordered and installed? Where does it drift? 
• Tell us about a time the wrong product was specified for the job — too cheap, wrong application, incompatible with the rest of the roof. What happened, and who caught it (if anyone)? 
• How often does someone try to swap a specified product for a cheaper alternative partway through a job? Who usually drives that — the contractor, the client, the main contractor? 
• You see how your products get used across hundreds of sites. Where do you most often see them installed wrongly, and is it a skills problem, a time/cost problem, or a "didn't read the instructions" problem?   

If you have answers to share on any of these questions, please contact [email protected] 

If you want to submit your own response to the government’s call for evidence, you can do so here. There are 79 questions, but you only need to answer those which you have thoughts on, you can skip the rest. The call for evidence runs until August 12, so respond before then. However, NFRC will be engaging with the MHCLG team looking into this over the coming years and we can share your feedback or reflections at any time.