PAS 9980 was introduced to provide a consistent, risk-based framework for assessing fire risk in external wall systems. For building owners, asset managers and stakeholders, it was intended to support more proportionate decision-making and reduce unnecessary remediation.
In practice, however, progress across portfolios has remained inconsistent. Assessments can vary in timing, outcome and level of detail, making it difficult to plan with certainty or align stakeholders around a clear strategy.
Understanding where these challenges arise is key to managing both risk and delivery.
Availability of competent assessors
One of the most immediate constraints is access to appropriately qualified professionals.
PAS 9980 assessments require a combination of fire engineering expertise, construction knowledge and experience in existing buildings. Demand for these skills continues to exceed supply, particularly across large or complex portfolios.
For stakeholders, this can delay not only the assessment itself, but also the ability to define scope, secure funding and progress remediation works.
Variability in assessment outcomes
While PAS 9980 provides a structured methodology, it relies on professional judgement in its application.
As a result, outcomes can vary between assessors, particularly where information is limited or systems are complex. This can lead to differing recommendations on risk level and, critically, on whether remediation is required and to what extent.
For asset owners, this creates challenges in:
- Establishing a consistent approach across multiple buildings
- Accurately forecasting remediation costs
- Providing clear direction to design and delivery teams
Information gaps and investigation requirements
In many cases, the information required to complete a robust assessment is not readily available.
Intrusive investigations are often needed to confirm materials and construction details, introducing additional time, cost and coordination requirements. Where this information remains incomplete, recommendations may be more conservative, which can increase the perceived scope of remediation.
This stage is often where programmes slow, particularly if investigations, assessments and design development are not aligned.
Alignment with lenders, insurers and funders
PAS 9980 outcomes are rarely the final step. They inform decisions made by lenders, insurers and funding bodies, each with their own requirements and risk thresholds.
Even where an assessment is technically robust, further clarification or justification may be needed before stakeholders are aligned. This can delay approvals, impact funding eligibility and extend the path to remediation.
Clear, well-evidenced outputs, and the ability to communicate them effectively, are essential to maintaining progress.
Moving from assessment to remediation
A common challenge across the sector is the transition from assessment to action.
PAS 9980 identifies and contextualises risk, but it does not prescribe delivery. Without a clear route from appraisal into design, procurement and construction, buildings can remain in a state of uncertainty.
For many portfolios, this results in:
- Delays in defining remediation scope
- Difficulty prioritising buildings
- Uncertainty around programme and cost
- Prolonged exposure to risk and stakeholder concern
Bridging this gap requires a joined-up approach that connects technical assessment with practical delivery.
How HartDixon supports remediation and delivery
At HartDixon, PAS 9980 is considered within the context of wider asset and programme strategy.
Our approach focuses on providing clarity at each stage:
- Linking assessment to scope: Interpreting PAS 9980 outputs to define proportionate and deliverable remediation strategies
- Co-ordinating investigations, design and delivery: Aligning intrusive surveys, technical assessments and design development to avoid duplication and delay
- Portfolio-level planning: Supporting prioritisation, cost planning and programme development across multiple assets
- Stakeholder alignment: Presenting clear, evidence-based outputs to support engagement with lenders, insurers and funding bodies
- End-to-end delivery: Managing projects through design, procurement and construction, ensuring that identified risks are addressed in a practical and controlled way
This integrated approach enables clients to move forward with greater certainty, reducing delays between assessment and implementation.
A more co-ordinated approach
PAS 9980 has established a framework for assessing risk. The next step for the sector is ensuring that those assessments translate into clear, timely and deliverable outcomes.
For building owners and asset managers, this means adopting an approach that connects technical appraisal with programme, cost and stakeholder requirements from the outset.
If you are reviewing fire risk across a building or portfolio, or looking to progress from PAS 9980 assessment into a defined remediation strategy, HartDixon can support you at every stage.
To discuss your requirements or arrange an initial conversation, please contact the team.