.png)
The property management industry in the UK has undergone a seismic shift. What was once an unregulated profession focused primarily on keeping grass trimmed and corridors clean has evolved into a safety-first discipline governed by stringent legislation and professional standards. But this transformation hasn't been without its challenges, or its lessons.
In a recent conversation on Minute by Minut: Stories from People in Property, Polly Dyer, Property Director at Principal Estate Management, shared her two-decade journey through the industry and offered a candid look at what it really takes to manage residential buildings in today's regulatory landscape.
From navigating the complexities of the Building Safety Act to balancing leaseholder expectations with operational realities, Polly's insights reveal both the progress made and the work still ahead.
Like many in the profession, Polly didn't set out to become a property manager. She started in property as an estate agent in Hertfordshire and simply fell in love with the work. What kept her engaged for over 20 years was the variety.
"Some days in property management, you're dealing with really high-end specifications, cladding remediation, looking at remediation orders through the courts," Polly explains. "And then other days, you really are just trying to get the gardening right for someone who's very particular about where they live."
But beyond the day-to-day diversity, it's the people that make the industry special. Despite negative media portrayals and references to "fleecehold," Polly describes property management professionals as mostly genuinely caring about the homes they oversee and the people who live in them. It's a collaborative industry where best practices are freely shared, which is a culture that becomes especially important when navigating complex safety challenges.
Polly's background brings an unusual perspective to property management: as a teenager, she joined the Air Force, where she was immersed in a rigorous safety culture. In aviation, a faulty part grounds an aircraft. Components are replaced before they reach end-of-life because the consequences of failure are catastrophic.
When she first entered property management, the safety standards seemed excessive, and leaseholders would often question the need for yet another report or assessment. Why spend money on things that might never be needed?
But experience changed her perspective entirely.
"Seeing how a building performs when it's managed correctly versus how it can perform if it hasn't been managed correctly, the safety elements of that for me was a complete game changer," Polly reflects.
She witnessed major incidents, including the Barking Riverside fire and another fire in Luton. These events revealed a stark truth: when an emergency strikes and residents don't know what to do, panic ensues. The aesthetic appeal of a building means nothing if its occupants aren't prepared for the worst-case scenario.
This realization transformed Polly's approach. What once seemed like unnecessary expenditure became a professional passion, and one that would prove timely as the industry faced the Grenfell tragedy.
The Grenfell Tower tragedy in 2017 exposed fundamental failures in how the UK approached building safety. For too long, the industry had prioritized appearances.
Polly explained that in the early 2000s, a "good building manager" was someone who ensured the gardener showed up, the cleaners were on time, and everything looked pristine.
"What Grenfell revealed to everyone was that it doesn't matter how tight the grass is, it doesn't matter how clean the corridors are. If people don't know what to do in an emergency, the building is not safe," Polly states plainly.
The result was the Building Safety Act and a comprehensive regulatory framework that transformed property management from an unregulated profession into one requiring degree-level competency and ongoing professional development.
Legislation is one thing. Implementation is another entirely.
One of the most significant hurdles has been the competency requirements for both property managers and contractors. For professionals who hadn't already begun their qualification journey, becoming fully competent can take two to three years, potentially while maintaining a full-time job and managing personal responsibilities.
"It's been a huge challenge," Polly notes. "Anyone who wants to stay in the industry ultimately [has] to study about a degree-level amount of information alongside a full-time job."
Another unexpected challenge has been resident education and engagement. The Building Safety Act requires robust communication with leaseholders and residents, but what form should that take?
When Polly's team rolled out engagement surveys, the feedback was surprising. Residents didn't necessarily want emails, they wanted information on notice boards in lifts where they'd naturally read while waiting. Sometimes the simplest approaches are the most effective.
But there's a deeper issue: when safety information comes from the managing agent, leaseholders who have strained relationships with their property manager may dismiss it entirely. This creates a critical gap in safety awareness that individual managing agents can't close on their own, and it’s why Polly would like to see centralized leaseholder learning from either the government level or the regulator level.
Not all buildings face the same safety challenges. Polly identifies three distinct categories, each with its own complexities:
These are the easiest to manage under the Building Safety Act. Documentation is in place, operation and maintenance manuals exist for all safety equipment, and fire strategies are clearly defined. Property managers can readily understand how the building should respond in an emergency and educate residents accordingly.
Buildings from this era present significant challenges. Paperwork is often incomplete or missing entirely. Sign-offs may not have been properly documented. Property managers find themselves almost pulling apart buildings — removing architraves to check compartmentation, inspecting lift shafts — because the as-built drawings don't exist.
Without documentation, assessing the fire strategy or structural integrity becomes detective work, piecing together how the building was actually constructed versus how it should have been built.
Victorian mansion blocks and other historic properties represent the toughest category. There's often no documentation whatsoever, not even building regulations from the period to reference.
"It's really difficult to retrospectively take a building from the 1800s and make it 2025 fire compliant," Polly explains.
The recommendations can seem unthinkable: replace stunning 200-year-old oak doors with modern fire doors. Understandably, leaseholders resist, and property managers must work with fire inspectors to find solutions that balance safety with preservation.
The challenge is compounded by a fundamental problem: the only way to truly test if a historic fire door can hold back flames for 30 minutes is to set it on fire, which obviously isn't an option. Property managers must make judgment calls based on expert opinion, but few professionals carry the public liability insurance necessary to make those calls in writing.
While property managers are working hard to implement new safety standards, they're also bearing the brunt of failures that occurred decades ago, particularly during the 1980s through early 2000s.
Polly's analysis points to a perfect storm of policy changes:
Before the 1980s, local authority building inspectors were highly visible on construction sites, checking that work met standards. They had real authority and could shut down a site or refuse to sign off on a building.
During the 1980s, this system shifted to insurance-backed products like NHBC warranties. While well-intentioned, these private sector solutions lacked the same enforcement teeth.
At the same time, the construction industry moved toward zero-hour contracts and self-employed tradespeople rather than direct employees. This fragmented responsibility and accountability.
As a result, buildings from this era often have serious defects: poor compartmentation, improperly installed safety systems, and corners cut to meet productivity targets rather than safety standards.
Polly shares a telling example: a building where an entire automatic vent system (AOV) designed to remove smoke during a fire was adjusted for aesthetic reasons, and then signed off by building regulations. Fixing it properly will cost approximately £300,000.
"That should never have happened," Polly states. "At the moment, it's the property management industry that are having to pick up the flack for that happening."
The human cost is even more troubling. Imagine a young person buying their first flat, managing their service charge comfortably, only to suddenly face a £5,000 bill for their portion of remediation work that should have been done correctly in the first place.
The good news? The pendulum has swung back. The new Building Safety Regulator has real authority. Gateway 2 requirements ensure proper oversight during construction. Modern buildings are being built to proper standards with appropriate documentation.
But, Polly says, developers who built defective properties during that problematic period need to step up and fund remediation rather than forcing leaseholders to bear the cost or dragging cases through expensive litigation.
Here's an uncomfortable tension in UK property management: leaseholders want lower service charges, but the legal framework makes it difficult to achieve the economies of scale that would drive costs down.
Property managers could add enormous value by leveraging economies of scale, using one broker across an entire portfolio, engaging competent contractors for multiple buildings, streamlining administration. This would reduce costs and improve environmental sustainability (as Polly puts it, they could be in a position where “we’re sending 42 different gardeners in 42 different vans to 42 different sites that could all just be a mile apart”).
But leasehold law requires that every individual building has a say in who they use and how. It's a democratic process, and while resident participation is important, it also prevents the efficiency gains mentioned above.
"All of our leaseholders are telling us that their number one priority is to not have extremely expensive service charges," Polly notes. "But unfortunately, we're really limited on what we can do."
The move toward commonhold, which gives even more autonomy to individual leaseholders, will exacerbate this challenge. It makes little sense from a net zero or sustainability perspective, but it reflects leaseholders' desire for control and transparency over their homes.
From a leaseholder's perspective, the resistance is understandable. During a cost-of-living crisis, they want control over who comes to their building. They want transparency. Large consolidated contracts can feel like monopolies with hidden costs and add-ons.
As Polly acknowledges: "Having no control over which roofer I bring to my house, having no control over which insurance broker I use feels like a lack of transparency. It's your home. It's very personal."
Finding the balance between efficiency and autonomy remains one of the industry's ongoing challenges.
What does the future hold for property management in the UK?
Polly's hope is simple: that building safety becomes business as usual.
"We've got an enormous hump to get over to get to that point because there are a lot of buildings that require a lot of remediation," she explains. "But my hope is that we upscale everyone that needs to be upscaled, we move into a more regulated industry, and building safety just becomes business as usual the way it should have been throughout."
She draws a parallel to when fire risk assessments and health and safety requirements first became compulsory. Initially, they seemed like massive headaches, but now they're simply part of the workflow.
💡 Want to learn more about how technology can support safety and operational efficiency in property management? Discover Minut’s privacy-first sensor.
