An Introduction to the Tort of Nuisance – Part 1

….an interference or disturbance must be shown to be unreasonable in order to pursue an action in nuisance, which by default must means that there are some occasions when interferences or disturbances will be reasonable

Source: http://www.mylubbock.us/

I have recently written a number of articles which discuss the Tort of Negligence which tends to get a great deal of publicity with legal specialists offering their services on a no win no fee basis.  You will see television adverts, billboards, newspaper and magazine articles, unsolicited emails and sometimes cold calling from legal companies trying to convince us that we have a legitimate claim in negligence for one reason or another.  A further area of Tort law which is just as significant, but less well known is the Tort of Nuisance.

In the case of Walter v Selfe (1851) the definition of nuisance is defined as: ‘…..an inconvenience materially interfering with the ordinary comfort, physically, of human existence, not merely according to elegant or dainty modes of living, but according to plain and sober and simple notions among the English people’.  It is always interesting to read a judge’s decision and particularly the language that is used in ‘older cases’.  The vast majority of nuisance cases relate to an ‘unreasonable’ interference with the use and enjoyment of land or property.  What is also interesting is the fact that an interference or disturbance in nuisance must be shown to be unreasonable in order to pursue an action, which by default must means that there are some occasions when interferences or disturbances will be reasonable.  As an example let us consider a person who is working night shifts and therefore has to sleep during the day.  Does noise from a neighbouring property (during the day), constitute an unreasonable interference or disturbance?  It is unreasonable to expect the neighbour to be completely silent and an action in nuisance by the night worker is highly likely to fail.  On the other hand if the noise complained of can be proved to be excessive and persistent then the outcome could be very different.   The definition of what is considered as unreasonable interference is further clarified in the case of Carley v Willow Park Golf Course Ltd. (2002), ‘Interference must be such as would not be tolerated by the ordinary occupier. No use of land is reasonable if it produces substantial discomfort to others, or materially damages their property’.

Source: http://metro.co.uk/

Examples of what may constitute nuisance are not limited to noise as per the example above, and can include things such as odour, lighting, waste, air quality, bonfires and so on……  Nuisance can be categorized as public nuisance, private nuisance and statutory nuisance and I will endeavour to explain the difference between each over the course or this and the next few articles.

Public Nuisanceis defined as an unlawful act or omission which endangers or interferes with the lives, comfort, property or common rights of the public. As it is the general public that are affected, actions in public nuisance will mean that a number of people are affected (sometimes a considerable amount of people), not just an individual. Public nuisance is considered as a criminal action, where proceedings are brought by the Government who will typically seek an injunction to remedy the nuisance, not damages.  Sometimes however damages will accrue as a result of a successful injunction resulting in a defendant suffering financial consequences to rectify the impact of the nuisance. For example, a manufacturer who has polluted a river or stream may be served with an injunction preventing them from further pollution (the nuisance) and be fined for the costs of any clean up or re-mediation works.  Also, in some situations a criminal sentence may also be handed down by the courts.

There are a number of previous cases which provide examples of public nuisance including Benjamin v Storr (1874). For the purposes of his business, Storr kept horses and vans standing outside Benjamin’s coffee house throughout the day which caused an obstruction to the highway (a public nuisance). Benjamin complained that he had suffered special damage due to the vans and horses obstructing light, resulting in increased expense incurred for keeping gas lights burning throughout the day.  He further alleged that the smell of the horses was offensive and deterred customers from using the coffee house.  The court found in favour of the plaintiff (Benjamin) and demonstrates that a defendant can be found guilty of public nuisance (the obstruction of the highway) and also be faced with an action in tort for the loss and disruption resulting from the nuisance. 

Other examples of cases of public nuisance to look at include Tarry v Ashton (1876), Attorney General v PYA Quarries Ltd (1957), Dollman v Hillman (1974) and Tate & Lyle Industries v Greater London Council 1983), however, to conclude this article I would like to finish with a case that always generates some discussion with my students, the outcome of which, at first glance does seem a little unfair;

Wandsworth London Borough Council v Railtrack plc (2001), The defendant (Railtrack) owned a bridge which attracted large numbers of pigeons.  Interestingly, although the owner was not at fault, they were held liable to contribute to the local authority's costs of the bridge to deal with the nuisance.  As stated above, at first glance it does seem unfair that the defendant could be held responsible for what is effectively ‘the forces of nature’.  The justification from the courts for their decision was that the number of pigeons were enough to constitute a public nuisance, and the defendants became liable where they had not remedied the nuisance after a reasonable time. The judge went onto state; ‘the fact that the pigeons were wild, and that the nuisance was one of inconveniencerather than the causing of actual damage were not relevant. The local authority's request was reasonable’.

The above introduces the tort of nuisance and provides some case examples to demonstrate the point.  As with all areas of law, further reading will help to deepen understanding where I have provided some other cases for further reading and research. In my next article I will consider private nuisance.

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with friends, family and colleagues who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Negligence – Part 3 - Defences to Negligence

In today’s extremely litigious society there will always be those who are willing to pursue a claim in negligence if they feel a professional has been negligent which has resulted in them suffering some loss or damage. Unfortunately this is the World we now live in and due to the fact that a defendant (the person accused of negligence), does not intend for the bad consequence to happen, many who are accused of negligence are likely to be surprised that they find themselves in that predicament.

Source: http://imgarcade.com/

In my two recent negligence articles (Link 1) & (Link 2) I have introduced the basic principles of the tort of negligence and discussed the ‘ingredients’ necessary to establish a claim in negligence. I have also considered the significance of this area of law to the professional person and in particular those working in Construction and the Built Environment. In today’s extremely litigious society there will always be those who are willing to pursue a claim in negligence if they feel a professional has been negligent which has resulted in them suffering some loss or damage.  Unfortunately this is the World we now live in and due to the fact that a defendant (the person accused of negligence), does not intend for the bad consequence to happen, many who are accused of negligence are likely to be surprised that they find themselves in that predicament.

In the event that someone is found to be negligent there are a number of defences in UK law that may be used to reduce or nullify any damages or compensation that can be claimed.  These defences do not remove the fact that a person has acted and has been proved to be negligent, moreover, to help them to reduce the impact and consequences of their actions.  The three defences of Contributory Negligence, Volenti non fit injuria and Ex turpi causa will be considered within this article. The latter two are Latin terms which are typical of terminology within the UK legal system which have been used over many hundreds of years and continues to be used today.  I will provide a translation for each together with the explanations below.

Source: http://www.barberandsims.com/

Contributory Negligence – This defence has been used for many years where a person who has been found to be negligent will try to prove that an injured party has contributed to their own loss or damage by their actions (or omissions).  A passenger who is injured in a road traffic collision and is not wearing a seat belt is a good example.  The driver of the vehicle may have caused the injury to the passenger and negligence may have been established, so there is no question of the driver’s negligence.  The driver however may argue that, yes, they may have acted negligently and caused the accident and the injury and loss to the passenger, however if the passenger had been wearing their seat belt then in all likelihood the injuries sustained would have been less severe.  Therefore, by not wearing the seatbelt the passenger has contributed (to the negligence) and to the extent of their injuries. These circumstances appear in the case of Froom v Butcher (1976), where the Court of Appeal reduced the amount of damages payable to the claimant by 20%.

Prior to 1945 if a person found liable in negligence could prove that the injured party had contributed to the negligence then this could negate any damages completely.  Basically the rule was all or nothing, however, in 1945 a general power to apportion damages was given to the courts by the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945.  This meant that as in the case of Froom v Butcher the courts have the discretion to consider the extent of contributory negligence and to award damages accordingly.

Volenti non fit injuria (‘to a willing person, no injury is done’) - If a defendant can demonstrate that the claimant (the person/party who have suffered loss, damage or injury as a result of the negligence of the defendant) voluntarily agreed to undertake the legal risk of harm at their own expense then this can negate any damages completely.  Unlike contributory negligence which allows the courts to apportion damages, volenti non fit injuria is a complete defence. When using volenti as a defence the defendant must show that the claimant acted voluntarily in the sense that they were able/capable of exercising free choice. The courts will consider the ability of a person to be able to make a free choice and therefore whether they are able/capable of making a voluntary assumption of risk.  This will be a matter of fact in each individual case and the courts will consider things such as mental capacity, alcohol and substance consumption etc.

The case of Morris v Murray (1991) is a commonly quoted case in respect of Volenti; The plaintiff (Morris) agreed to be flown by the defendant (Murray) in his light aircraft though he knew the defendant was inebriated. The plaintiff drove the car which took them to the airfield and he helped to start and refuel the aircraft, which was piloted by the friend. Shortly after take-off the aircraft crashed, killing the pilot and severely injuring the plaintiff. At first instance the court found the defendant failed in his claim of volentii non fit injuria, but the plaintiff succeeded in negligence.

Held: The defendant’s appeal was allowed. The defence of volenti non fit injuria applied, and the claim failed. The plaintiff willingly embarked upon the flight, knowing that the pilot was drunk; that the danger in embarking upon the flight was both obvious and great and the plaintiff was not so drunk as to be incapable of appreciating the nature and extent of the risk involved, and, therefore, he was to be taken to have fully accepted the risk of serious injury and implicitly discharged the pilot from liability for negligence in relation to the flying of the aircraft; and that, accordingly, the maxim volenti non fit injuria applied as a defence to the plaintiff’s claim. Source: www.swarb.co.uk

There are however statutory restrictions on the use of volenti In the case of car passengers. Section 149 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 prohibits any restriction on the driver’s liability to his passenger when required to be covered by insurance. Therefore a driver who is found to be negligent which cases injury, loss or damage to his passengers cannot use volenti as a defence.

Ex turpi causa no oritur action (‘from a dishonourable cause an action does not arise’) - A person who is injured whilst involved in a criminal act may be denied an action. In these circumstances the courts are likely to find that no duty of care is owed. The case of Ashton v Turner and Anr (1981) provides a good example; ‘The Claimant was injured when the Defendant crashed the car in which he was a passenger. The crash occurred after they both had committed a burglary and the Defendant, who had been drinking, was driving negligently in an attempt to escape. The judge dismissed the claim holding that as a matter of public policy the law would not recognise a duty of care owed by one participant in a crime to another. He held in the alternative that, even if a duty of care was owed, the Claimant had willingly accepted as his the risk of negligence and injury resulting from it’. Source: www.e-lawresources.co.uk/

UK case law is well established with many other case examples that demonstrate the application (or not) or each of the three defences discussed above.  Law can often appear unclear and complicated at first glance and I always advise my students that the most effective way of understanding the law is to research previous cases.  Anyone who wants to find out and understand more about this area of law will find that a simple internet search will provide you with all of the information you need.

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with friends, family and colleagues who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Negligence – Part 2 – Reducing the risk of negligence claims

There are a number of areas of civil law or tort which may be considered by an ‘injured’ party such as Nuisance, Trespass and numerous others however in many cases built environment/construction professionals find themselves defending a claim in negligence.

Source: http://davidlaw.com/

In Part 1 (Link) of this article I explained how the tort of negligence is particularly relevant to the role of the built environment/construction professional and why it so important to act with professionalism, vigilance and attention to detail at all times.  The consequences of not doing this could result in a mistake/omission/error, albeit unintentionally and may lead to a loss, damage or injury occurring.  If this does happen then an action may be sought in negligence to recover the loss. There are a number of areas of civil law or tort which may be considered by an ‘injured’ party such as Nuisance, Trespass and numerous others however in many cases built environment/construction professionals find themselves defending a claim in negligence.

As also identified in Part 1 of this article; In order to assess whether a person has acted negligently the courts will consider a person’s conduct and actions against how a reasonable person would act in the same circumstances. Although important this is just one consideration in establishing negligence. Over many years through the doctrine of Judicial Precedent, case law has developed a method of establishing negligence based upon decisions made in previous cases. The landmark case of Donaghue v Stevenson (1932) established the modern version of negligence and set a precedent for the main principles of establishing negligence and ‘the neighbour test’.  It is not the purpose of this article to discuss the circumstances or detail of the case, as this is information is widely published however it is worth exploring the principles that arose from the case and how negligence is measured and proved.

Source: http://legemetevangelium.wordpress.com/

In order to establish negligence there are four main ingredients for which all need to be proved. If just one of these are missing or cannot be proved then any action in negligence will fail.  Firstly, a duty of care must be owed to the plaintiff (the ‘injured’ party) by the defendant (accused of the negligence).  Next, if a duty of care is established then it must be shown that the defendant breached this duty.  Thirdly, if the first two elements are in place then proximate cause must be established. In other words, but for the breach of duty, the injury or loss would not have happened. Finally, if all three previously discussed elements are established the plaintiff must demonstrate that the loss/injury was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the defendant's action or inaction.

Source: https://sielearning.tafensw.edu.au

The first two elements of negligence require the establishment of a duty of care and if shown that this has been breached, but what is a duty of care? A common definition of a duty of care is: ‘A requirement that a person act toward others and the public with watchfulness, attention, caution and prudence that a reasonable person in the circumstances would. The Oxford Dictionary’s definition is a little more concise; ‘A moral or legal obligation to ensure the safety or well-being of others’. As built environment/construction professionals the understanding of duty of care and how it applies is fundamental.  If there is a contractual relationship with a Client, then any loss/damage that may occur is usually dealt with through the contract and any dispute through contract law.  If you read the details of Donaghue v Stevenson you will note that a claim for negligence can be brought in the absence of a contract, so if a Client’s claim were to be unsuccessful in contract law, they may pursue a claim in negligence instead.

As a construction professional it is always worth thinking about your activities and asking yourself if you are meeting your duty of care and acting reasonably.  The measure of reasonableness of a built environment/construction professional will be established in a number of ways. Firstly, by the standards set within an individual’s particular profession. Then, if a mistake has been made and if an appropriately qualified and experienced person taking reasonable care would not have made the mistake, then the professional person may be liable in negligence.  To establish what are reasonable standards in a profession, either the plaintiff or defendant can call an eminent practitioner to give evidence in Court as an expert witness, which is another measure of reasonableness. 

How can we reduce the risk of negligence claims? - The tort of negligence can be a legal minefield for all professionals and something that should not be underestimated.  Before undertaking any professional services it is worth establishing precisely what is expected for your fee, a robust scope of services and knowing exactly who the services are being provided for and who will be relying on your advice.  This may sound simple and obvious to many however it is these simple things that can help to avoid confusion and reduce the possibility of cutting corners and of possible negligence claims in the future. 

Underestimating a fee or confusion over the scope of services does not diminish a professional’s responsibilities in respect of duty of care, and this would certainly be a very weak defence if a claim for negligence was brought by a Client. Acting with watchfulness, attention, caution and prudence will help to avoid these types of scenario, however in the fast paced World of commerce where everything seems to be done at 100mph, sometimes working to impossible deadlines, it is easy to see how we can sometimes ‘drop the ball’. Good robust quality assurance procedures will help to identify issues/mistakes before they leave the office, however it is also worth reviewing and training staff on an ongoing basis to improve knowledge and competence, all of which will help to minimize the risk of negligence (and other) claims in the future.  How much of this are you or your organization currently doing?  Something to think about maybe?

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with friends, family and colleagues who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Negligence – Part 1 – An Introduction - Construction & Built Environment

As professional people our Clients pay for our services with the expectation that we will provide a high quality service and give good appropriate advice.  In the event that we do not meet this expectation and our Clients suffer some loss or ‘damage’, then they may attempt to recoup any losses through the courts

Source: http://www.claimsjournal.com/

Professional people should have a good understanding of the law and especially those areas of law which are relevant to their own particular field.  There are however some areas of law that are better know and understood than others. Law (in general terms) does not discriminate between specific professional roles and practices. Moreover it relates to the manner, conduct, attention to detail and professionalism in which we undertake our day to day professional duties. Yes, there will undoubtedly be ethical standards and codes of conduct to follow which may vary from profession to profession, however the underlying principles will be the same.  These ethical standards provide a level of protection however they will not make a professional immune from acting and becoming negligent.

As professional people our Clients pay for our services with the expectation that we will provide a high quality service and give good appropriate advice.  In the event that we do not meet this expectation and a loss or ‘damage’ is suffered, then our clients may attempt to recoup any losses through the courts.  A particular area of law where professional people can find themselves brought into question in this respect is the Tort of Negligence. For the remainder of the article I will refer to the role of the built environment professional however the principles of negligence are relevant to all professional roles. I will introduce negligence and consider how it is defined and how it is measured and in part 2 I will discuss the main ‘ingredients’ necessary to prove negligence.

Source: http://www.albanyworkerscomplawyer.com/

A quick internet search provides numerous definitions for negligence.  Yourdictionary.com states negligence as ‘failure to use a reasonable amount of care when such failure results in injury or damage to another’ and lectlaw.com provide; ‘the failure to use reasonable care. The doing of something which a reasonably prudent person would not do, or the failure to do something which a reasonably prudent person would do under like circumstances. A departure from what an ordinary reasonable member of the community would do in the same community’.These definitions are interesting because throughout you will notice the word ‘reasonable’ or the term ‘reasonably prudent person’.  In order to assess whether a person has acted negligently the courts will consider a person’s conduct and actions against how a reasonable person would act in the same circumstances. As a construction/built environment professional, this assessment will consider whether an experienced person taking reasonable care would not have made the same mistake, then the professional person may be liable in negligence. This is worth thinking about when carrying out our day to day duties and why it is so important to act with professionalism, vigilance and attention to detail at all times.  I wonder how many of those who have been found liable in negligence, with hindsight will wish they had paid closer attention to these things.

An important factor of negligence is that a defendant (the person accused of negligence), does not intend for the bad consequence to happen.  If intent could be proved (the courts refer to this as mens rea, which is a latin term meaning ‘a guilty mind’), then this would more than likely result in a criminal prosecution and not a civil action.  There are however circumstances where a person can face a criminal action and later also face a civil action from those who have suffered the consequences of a negligent act.  As an example let us think about a passenger injured in a motor vehicle collision.  Drivers do not generally get into their vehicles each day with an intention to injure, however road traffic collisions occur on a regular basis.  A driver who exceeds the speed limit may face a criminal prosecution under the Road Traffic Regulations Act 1984, which could lead to a fine or imprisonment depending upon the severity of the offence. In addition the driver may also face a civil action in negligence from the passenger who was injured in the collision (or anyone else who is injured in the incident). This interaction between criminal law and civil law (in our example, negligence) is also something that can occur with the construction/built environment professions and something that all working in the sector should be conscious of.

It is not necessary to search too far to find examples of where construction/built environment professionals have been found to be negligent. One such example is the case of Theodore Goddard v Fletcher King Services (1996). Fletcher King had overall responsibility for a commercial letting. Theodore Goddard (Solicitors), which drafted the lease, accidentally deleted the upwards-only rent review clause. A Surveyor at Fletcher King reviewed the draft lease but did not notice the error. The judge found that although the Solicitor had primary liability for the terms of the lease, the amendment to the clause was 'such a blunder' that an experienced Surveyor should have noticed the deletion. The Surveyor was ordered to contribute 20% of the loss. This decision has potentially wide-ranging consequences for professionals who work together on a transaction and have some input in one another’s drafting, a common relationship between construction/built environment professional and legal professional.

In Part 2 I will discuss negligence in more detail and consider the main ‘ingredients’ necessary to prove negligence and in particular ‘duty of care’ and how this relates to the construction/built environment professional.  I will also discuss the famous case of Donaghue v Stevenson (1932), and how the decision in this landmark case formed the modern tort of negligence as we know it today.

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with friends, family and colleagues who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Built Environment Professions – Part 2 – Building a brighter future

Due to the decline in the amount of people choosing a career as a construction professional as well as the inevitable skills shortage that will ensue over the coming years, there is an argument for categorising certain building professional roles as ‘at risk’

Source: http://www.theguardian.com/

In my previous article I identified a number of quite alarming statistics that showed a 24% reduction in entrants onto undergraduate building related courses in the five years between 2007/08 and 2011/12. In addition, the number of enrolments onto Architecture, Building and Planning courses is much lower than the vast majority of other subject areas such medicine, sciences, business, social studies and many others.  I then went onto discuss a number of possibly reasons that may explain this, and emphasised the importance of addressing the decline in order to try to safeguard the future of the Construction Professions as we currently know them, in the UK. The main content of this article will therefore consider what can be done to encourage more entrants in to the Construction Professions. I appreciate that there are similar issues with recruitment at other levels of the construction industry, particularly some of the traditional trades (something I will tackle in a later article), however for the purposes of this article I want to focus on Construction professions.

1. Raise awareness of professional career opportunities with the built environment

As I mentioned in my previous article I regularly encounter Careers Advisors in Schools that have little to no knowledge of the range of career opportunities that are available within the built environment.  Careers Advisors are the people that interact with large groups of school kids and have the ability to influence their future career choice.  If we can raise the profile of built environment careers, particularly the relationship with Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics and educate Careers Advisors about these opportunities we then ‘have the ear’ of a much larger pool of potential future professionals.  It goes without saying that you cannot expect a young person to choose a career that they have never heard about!  We therefore need a national strategic approach to bring built environment careers into the classroom, targeting Careers Advisors as a focal point.

Source: http://www.realstreetstaffing.com/

2. Change the perception of Careers in Construction

Many young people I speak to think that a career in the construction industry only relates to wearing a hard hat, working on a muddy site, lifting heavy materials and primarily involving the physical construction of a building.  If this is the general perception of a career in the construction industry it is easy to understand why other subject areas may seem to be an attractive alternative choice for a young person.  Therefore most young people associate working in construction as becoming a bricklayer, carpenter, plasterer, plumber etc.  Whilst these are obvious career routes for which a person can enjoy and make a perfectly good living, there are many other professional roles that are available. Part of addressing this issue can be achieved by raising awareness of professional built environment careers as described in point 1 above, however more needs to be done to portray a professional career in the built environment for what it really is; ‘exciting, diverse and challenging which leads to good career prospects and a good salary’.

3. Encourage more females into Professional Construction Roles

Source: http://www.constructionweekonline.com/

The Guardian (online) published a recent article (21^st March 2014), entitled; ‘High-tech, multi-skilled construction industry needs more women’ (Link); Given the stereotype I have just described above it is interesting that the main image within the article is a female with a hard hat and safety goggles, standing in front of a half finished building! The article provides interesting reading and states;

‘Women are transforming the world of work. The number of women in the workforce has increased by more than 20% over the past 20 years, and today they make up nearly half of the workforce. More women than ever before are going to university and more are in vocational training. Women now account for 50% of all staff in financial services, 49% of all those working in the media, 46% all doctors, 27% of all police officers and 24% of all judges.

But not every industry is welcoming women into the workplace. As the latest Smith Institute report shows, construction remains largely a no-go area for women. Despite the fact that the sector is a major employer and is desperately short of skilled people, women only account for 11% of the workforce – and only 1% of the manual trades.

We need to attract this vast amount of ‘untapped’ female potential in order to address the disparity between the number of males and females within the construction industry. Clearly, encouraging more females into the Construction Industry provides a huge opportunity for the future of the Construction Professions.  Addressing points 1 and 2 above will help, however more needs to be done to promote these exciting careers to females who may not have contemplated this type of career before. A strategic targeted events programme, providing a ‘taster experience’ of different construction professional roles should be introduced to encourage more females into the construction industry, in addition to other events and marketing activities.

4. Government Support

Given the significant contribution made to the economy by the construction industry each year (circa 8% to 10% of GDP), the UK Government should be lobbied to provide support and assistance to safeguard the industry for future generations. Due to the decline of the amount of people choosing a career as a construction professional as well as the inevitable skills shortage that will ensue over the coming years, there is an argument for categorising certain building professional roles as ‘at risk’.  This should then attract funding to those identified careers to encourage more people into the professions and could take the form of grants or subsidies to help support tuition fees, funding of targeted marketing campaigns, funding of education programmes in Schools and Colleges and numerous other initiative.

The above represents a number of suggestions of how we can address the current decline in the numbers of people, particularly young people choosing a career as a construction professional. The suggestions are far from exhaustive and will hopefully act as a starting point and generate debate on how we can react to the problem in order to safeguard the future of the Construction Professions.  Ignoring the problem really in not an option!

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with friends, family and colleagues who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Built Environment Professions – Part 1 – An uncertain future?

In the vast majority of cases school children have very little knowledge of careers or opportunities that are available within the built environment and in most cases have never heard let alone understand professions such as Building Surveyors, Architectural Technologist, Construction Managers, Building Services Engineers and the like

Source: http://www.accessaudits.com.au/

Working as a professional within the built environment provides an exciting, diverse and challenging career that in most cases leads to good career prospects and a good salary.  Evolving technologies, innovation and ever changing regulations require the modern construction professional to be knowledgeable, adaptable, and objective to meet the challenges of the future.  All in all working as a built environment professional offers so much diversity that there is a career available for almost anybody who wants one.  Despite all of these positive attributes, recent statistics from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) show that student enrolment in undergraduate Architecture, Building and Planning courses are in decline:

The table above shows the relatively small number of enrolments onto Architecture, Building and Planning courses compared to the vast majority of other subject areas. These statistics relate to full time undergraduate enrolment only.  The issue of part time undergraduate and post graduate enrolment are articles in their own right and something I will discuss in later postings.  For the purposes of this article I therefore want to focus on full time undergraduate enrolment.  The decline in entrants onto building related disciplines is even more evident if we isolate these from Architecture and Planning disciplines.  The table below shows a 24% reduction in entrants onto building related courses in the five years between 2007/08 and 2011/12, which is particularly worrying.

The HESA statistics above highlight two primary questions: 1. Why are Architecture, Building & Planning courses deemed to be a less attractive option compared to other subject areas; and; 2. Why are numbers of student enrolments on Building related courses in decline? I will attempt to answer these questions in a moment, however, to compound the issue it is also worth noting that UCAS have indicated that the 18 year old cohort is set to fall by circa 10% by 2020.  So not only are numbers currently declining for Architecture, Building and Planning courses but there will be a steady decline in 18 year olds applying for courses generally over the next five years, resulting in further pressure on recruitment for these courses.

18 year old cohort set to fall 10% or so by 2020

1. Why are Architecture, Building & Planning courses deemed to be a less attractive option compared to other subject areas;

As part of my role at Coventry University I am Admissions Tutor as well as lead for recruitment and outreach activities in my department.  Over the last few years I have had the opportunity to visit a number of local Schools and Colleges, where I provide careers advice and generally try to raise awareness of built environment professions.  Sadly, in the vast majority of cases school children have very little knowledge of careers or opportunities that are available within the built environment and in most cases have never heard let alone understand professions such as Building Surveyors, Architectural Technologists, Construction Managers, Building Services Engineers and the like. Quantity Surveying and Civil Engineering professions are often recognized, but not fully understood.  The only built environment career that is generally recognized is the role of the Architect. 

During my outreach visits I also take the opportunity to speak to careers advisors and worryingly in most cases the vast majority have as much knowledge of built environment careers as the school students themselves!  Careers advice in schools tends to focus on traditional career paths in computing, legal professions, medical professions, sciences etc, depending on the focus of the school.  When I speak to school students about the built environment they often think purely in terms of the practical trades such as bricklaying, carpentry, plumbing etc, and have no concept of professional roles.  I explain to them that there is absolutely nothing wrong with choosing a construction trade as a career, however, the opportunities for them are much wider and I then go onto explain the difference between a trade career and a professional career.  The situation is not so bad in Higher Education Colleges, however this is due to the fact that most of the Colleges I visit offer specific Built Environment courses.

Clearly, lack of awareness of built environment professions, particularly in schools, is a real issue because how can we expect someone to select a professional built environment career if they have never heard of them in the first place?  My visits to Schools and Colleges really just scratch the surface, but highlights what I think is a significant contributing factor to why Building & Planning courses in particular are deemed to be a less attractive option compared to other subject areas.

Also, I suspect the recent recession and all of the negative publicity, particularly around the construction industry that ensued, would not have given a great deal of confidence for those looking at a career in the industry. Historically the construction industry has always mirrored the UK economy and has been subject to peaks and troughs as the economy has dipped into recession and eventually recovered. When the economy bounces back the construction industry bounces back strongly and this in turn creates opportunity.  Even in times of recession there were still opportunities for built environment professionals and when the recovery starts to gather pace there will undoubtedly be a shortage of built environment professionals, due to high demand.

2. Why are numbers of student enrolments on Building related courses in decline?

Much of the answer to this question lies in the answer to the first question above in respect of the general lack of awareness of many built environment professions, as well as the impact of the economic downturn.  There are however other factors that could explain the reduction in student enrolments on Building related courses.

Most people will be aware of the significant changes to University funding over the last few years and in particular the significant increase in the amount a student is required to pay if they want to go to University.  In reality the cost of most undergraduate courses has not changed, what has changed is that the government no longer subsidise a large percentage of the fee (for the student) which they used too.  The outcome is that students are now faced with tuition fees of around £9,000 per year (fees vary between universities), resulting in an investment of between £24,000 and £27,000 for a three year course without even thinking about living costs and other expenses. Although a low interest loan can be sought to cover tuition fees, in addition to their degree, most graduating students will leave University with a large debt.  All of this has resulted in students thinking very carefully about the type of courses they will undertake or whether they will go to university at all.  Nowadays, apprenticeships and other vocational qualifications may be considered as an alternative to going to University to gain a career in the construction industry due to the high costs involved, although in most cases these routes will initially lead to trade careers as opposed to professional careers.

The UK construction industry is an extremely important sector within the UK economy, making a significant contribution to GDP.  For the future, we must ensure that we have a regular supply of knowledgeable, well educated and motivated people entering the construction industry at all levels and avoid the inevitable skills shortages that we often see when productivity progressively increases.  It is clear from the statistics above that less and less people are choosing to enter the industry, particularly in building related professions, which will inevitably impact on the progress of the construction industry and the wider economy as a whole. So what do we do about it? – This is something I will look at in my next post, where I will make a number of suggestions in respect of raising awareness/publicity of built environment professional careers, lobbying the government to support ‘at risk’ professions, encouraging a higher percentage of females into built environment careers, alternative modes of study and how Higher Education can influence the future of built environment professions.

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with friends, family and colleagues who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Construction Professions - Employability Skills – A Key Element of Undergraduate Education

I have heard many working in the construction professions comment that they do not think that Universities provide the depth of knowledge and skills necessary to prepare graduates for the rigours of the professional world. But is this a fair assessment?

Source: http://www.tailoredrecruitmentservices.co.uk

During my many years in professional practice, I have worked with numerous graduate construction professionals, fresh from University and ready to enter the professional world, in many cases armed with little more than the knowledge they had gained from University.  When employing graduates in practice we were looking for potential in terms of attitude, drive, entusiasm etc and we would not have unrealistic expectations in terms of technical knowledge at this point (although this would be assessed through the recruitment process). I have heard many working in the construction professions comment that they do not think that Universities provide the depth of knowledge and skills necessary to prepare graduates for the rigours of the professional world. But is this a fair assessment? At University we try our very best to ensure that the content of our courses is continually updated and importantly relevant to the various built environment professions. Infact 75% to 80% of the content of built enviroment courses is determined by what our accrediting bodies require and expect.  We also try wherever possible to allow students to apply this knowledge in practically based, industry relevant assessments wherever possible.  In truth, and I am sure most would agree, the real learning/experience of each particular profession actually starts in the workplace.  Although we try our utmost to arm our students with relevant up to date knowledge and as many practical skills as possible there will always be limitations to what can be achieved in an academic environment. 

Most people will be aware of the significant changes to University funding over the last few years and in particular the significant increase in the amount a student is required to pay if they want to come to University.  In reality the cost of most undergraduate courses has not changed, what has changed is that the government no longer subsidise a large percentage of the fee (for the student) which they used too.  The outcome is that students are now faced with tuition fees of between £8,000 and £9,000 per year (fees vary between universities), resulting in an investment of between £24,000 and £27,000 for a three year course without even thinking about living costs and other expenses. Although a low interest loan can be sought to cover tuition fees, in addition to thier degree, most graduating students will leave University with a large debt.  All of this has resulted in students thinking very carefully about the type of courses they will undertake or whether they will go to university at all.  Nowadays, students should expect and demand a high level of service, high quality teaching, a modern learning environment and an overall positive experience throughout their time at University, which will ultimately provide them with good career prospects and good earning potential.  This is something our University has worked very hard to achieve. In fact Coventry University have recently leapt up 10 places in The Times and Sunday Times Good University Guide 2014; putting us 45th in the overall rankings. This is the highest listing for a modern university in the history of these guides; sealing our title as the UK’s top modern university. We still however have room for improvement and we will work hard to make further positive enhancement/improvement to the University, our courses and to the student experience.

Source: http://www.sqa.org.uk

As an Admissions Tutor and Senior Lecturer, teaching on RICS, CIAT, CIOB and CIBSE accredited courses I have noticed a significant increase in the amount of enquiries and questions that applicant’s and in particular thier parents ask, especially at open days.  Many of these questions, revolve around career opportunites available once they graduate, and not just focussing on questions relating to the course itself.  This has highlighted a very interesting and important point, as it appears that applicant’s are now thinking much more about the likely return on their (increased) investment and how their academic studies will translate into employability. 

In order to ensure the continued supply of construction professionals it is extremely important that undergradate teaching is underpinned with employability skills, to help ensure that graduates are as prepared as much as possible for the rigors of the professional world.  At Coventry University we adopt our own ‘activity led learning’ method of teaching and delivery, where our students are given practical, industry relevant activities, as often as possible, by providing them with projects that reflect as closely as possible situations that they will undertake in professional practice once they graduate. We try to move away from a traditional ‘chalk and talk’ style of teaching and learning wherever we can.  In adopting this style of delivery we are supported by a number of employers within the West Midlands area, who are happy to provide our students with projects and to give them the opportunity to present their findings and recieve feedback from those working in the industry.  One such employer is Severn Trent.  For the last three years they have provided our second year building surveyors with access to one of their buildings.  The assessment brief requires a professionally presented building survey report, with an analysis and explanation of defects and an option appraisal of what the client could do with the building.  Students then present thier findings to members of Severn Trent’s Property and Asset Managment Team, at their headquarters in Coventry, where they were challenged and questioned on their proposals. This is just one example of how we try to engage our students with industry partners in order to improve their employability skills.

A combined approach of undergraduate teaching and professional experience is fundamental to ensuring a continued stream of high quality graduates into the built environemnt professions. Our students are very popular with employers, particuarly in the Midlands area.  We encourage our students to secure a year out placement opportunity during their studies and we have some excellent students, some who will soon be starting the process of applying for positions for 2013.   If you are employer, who is thinking about placement or graduate positions now or in the future, please contact me at Coventry University. 

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with friends, family and colleagues who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.