A year on from the introduction of Phase 1 of Awaab’s Law, requiring social landlords to fix reported damp, mould and emergency repairs within strict timetable, the imminent arrival of Phase 2 adds a further dimension, both for the scope of hazards it captures and to the implications for landlords in assessing construction-related risk.
The wider range of hazards Phase 2 brings may well trace back much more significantly to how a building was designed and built, making it no longer just about managing the tenant relationship but about managing a longer-term and more significant underlying issue, in addition to the more immediate statutory obligations the Awaab’s Law requires.
In this article, we look at what is changing, what these new risks mean for you, and what steps can be taken to mitigate them.
What’s changing?
Phase 1, in force since 27 October 2025, covered damp, mould, and hazards presenting an emergency risk of harm, and imposed strict timetables for addressing them.
Phase 2, expected to come into force on 30 November 2026, adds excess cold and heat, falls, structural collapse and explosions, fire, electrical hazards, and hygiene, sanitation and food safety.
From a construction perspective, this is a significant expansion. These hazards go to the core of a building to things like electrical installations, insulation, heating and ventilation, building envelopes and structural elements.
These are less likely to be straightforward maintenance issues. Excess cold, for example, can trace back to poor insulation. Falls, structural hazards and electrical problems may be attributable to original construction or installation.
So it’s not just a question of immediate repair, but of dealing with a more fundamental underlying issue.
What’s on the table?
Awaab’s Law doesn’t create new housing standards but builds on existing regulations. Its most significant addition however is a statutory timetable for dealing with relevant hazards. Breaching this timetable can expose landlords to claims for repairs, compensation and legal costs.
The key timeframes:
- Emergency hazards – investigate and make safe within 24 hours.
- Significant hazards – investigate within 10 working days.
- Written summary – provide the tenant with one within three working days of the investigation ending.
- Safety works – complete within five working days of the investigation ending.
- Preventative works – begin within five working days of the relevant day (or, where not reasonably practicable, as soon as reasonably practicable and in any event within 12 weeks), and complete within a reasonable period.
Landlords must also keep tenants informed and, where safety works cannot be completed within the initial remediation period, secure suitable alternative accommodation.
Crucially, these are maximums, not targets. The clock starts when the landlord becomes aware of a potential hazard, which can be before the cause is known.
It’s also worth noting that the Government is updating and clarifying the definitions of “emergency” and “significant” hazards introduced in Phase 1, and that fire risks relating to parts of buildings already covered by existing fire safety legislation (e.g. communal areas) will be dealt with under those rules rather than duplicated under Awaab’s Law.
The first response: make safe and investigate
This creates a real practical challenge. Landlords may need to act before the technical investigation is complete.
The response has to run on two tracks at once: protecting the tenant and investigating the cause.
For an emergency, the property may need to be made safe within 24 hours (a full diagnosis will have to wait). For a significant hazard, temporary measures may be needed while the investigation continues.
At that point, several things are happening at once: the landlord is protecting the tenant, complying with the statutory timetable, establishing the cause, identifying a permanent solution and preserving evidence.
Who ultimately pays (whether that’s the designer, contractor or maintenance provider) is a later question and must not delay the immediate response.
Keeping Evidence
Making a property safe can create a second problem: the remedial works may destroy or disturb the evidence needed to establish what caused the hazard.
A structural defect may need to be opened up or removed, and the same applies to insulation or MEP installations. Landlords need to think about preserving evidence at the same time as remediating, for example, photographs, video, test results and technical reports.
This is not just about preparing for a future dispute. A clear evidential record shows that the decisions taken at the time were reasonable, and that appropriate steps were taken to comply with Awaab’s Law.
The goal should be an auditable trail covering the whole process, from notification and inspection through to diagnosis, attendance, temporary measures, permanent remediation and completion.
Don’t leave the legal issues until the end
Legal input shouldn’t wait until remedial works are finished.
Where a hazard may have a construction-related cause, landlords should consider early notification of potentially responsible parties and insurers, locate relevant contracts and warranties, think about limitation periods, and decide how investigation and opening-up works should be carried out.
The written summary to the tenant also needs to be accurate and consistent with the technical findings, as it will form part of the documented history of the defect and how it was handled.
The aim of this is not to turn every tenant complaint into a construction claim, but to recognise, early enough, when a problem could become a significant legal issue and protect the landlord’s position without slowing the immediate response.
Can landlords pass the risk down the chain?
Using a contractor or managing agent doesn’t reduce the landlord’s own responsibility for compliance. The obligation to investigate and address the hazard within the statutory timeframe stays with the landlord.
If a contractor can’t mobilise quickly enough, the landlord remains exposed and may need to arrange alternative accommodation or fund the works itself.
Recovery is a separate question, addressed once the immediate risk is dealt with, through contractual defects provisions, collateral warranties, professional negligence claims and professional indemnity insurance.
This makes front-end contractual drafting particularly important. Development and construction contracts need appropriate contractual rights, warranties and insurance protection. For repairs and maintenance contracts, response times, escalation procedures and an obligation to evidence completed works are all critical.
What are the key risks?
- Getting the initial assessment wrong – missing a potential emergency or significant hazard creates immediate statutory exposure.
- Responding too slowly – the statutory clock keeps running regardless of how remediation is organised. Contractor activity alone doesn’t amount to compliance.
- Losing evidence – remedial works can destroy what’s needed to establish the cause of a defect.
- Losing legal rights – especially with older stock, where original contractors, warranties and other protections can be hard to trace. Contracts, insurance and limitation need considering while the investigation is still live.
- Poor coordination – repairs teams, technical consultants, property managers and legal advisers all need to work from the same information, towards the same goal.
The risk isn’t simply the defect itself but how the defect is managed.
What should landlords be doing now?
Two points matter most.
- At the front end: development and construction contracts should provide protection for defects that emerge later, through appropriate contractual rights, warranties and insurance provisions.
- When an issue arises: legal involvement may be needed from the outset, to identify potentially responsible parties, protect limitation periods, notify insurers, preserve evidence and coordinate the legal and technical investigation.
For existing stock, landlords should review housing stock, inspection processes and property data before 30 November 2026, identifying risks before they become tenant-reported hazards and making sure the organisation can meet the statutory timetable. There is a strong case that the best way to avoid problems under Awaab’s Law is more proactive defect identification, rather than relying entirely on reactive repairs.
Final thoughts
Phase 2 brings a much wider range of building-related hazards into a regime with very short statutory timescales.
For landlords, the first response matters enormously. It means identifying the risk, protecting the tenant, investigating properly, managing the timetable and preserving evidence — all at once.
Compliance isn’t just about getting the repair done in time. Landlords need to be able to show they took the necessary, reasonable steps to protect the resident and address the hazard, documenting what was reported, what was assessed, what action was taken, and what was done to try to meet the deadline, and why.