Why rising snag reports could signal better quality control, not worse building standards

 

The housebuilding sector is being asked to hit two tough targets at once: deliver 1.5 million homes by 2029, while meeting stricter quality and consumer protection standards under the updated New Homes Quality Code.

Hitting that pledge means sustaining net additions of roughly 300,000 to 370,000 homes a year at a time when planning permissions for new schemes are at their lowest levels in over a decade and planning departments are chronically short-staffed.

Set against that backdrop, headline snag figures can look alarming. Data shows 93.7% of new‑build buyers reported at least one issue to their builder after moving in, with 26.2% reporting more than 15, yet 93% of buyers in the latest National New Homes Customer Satisfaction Survey say they would still recommend their builder to a friend.

Jack Bristow, Managing Director at J3 Advisory, said developers should treat this correlation as evidence of a functioning assurance system under pressure, not a decline in quality:

“When viewed alongside delivery targets and increasing regulatory expectations, the figures tell a more balanced story than the headlines may suggest. A high volume of reported snags is not necessarily evidence of declining quality. It can also demonstrate that buyers are engaging with the processes designed to identify and resolve issues.

“The greater risk arises when defects are not managed consistently, documented properly or communicated effectively. That is where customer dissatisfaction and reputational risk are more likely to develop.”

What Code V2 changes for developers

The updated New Homes Quality Code introduces several compliance obligations that directly affect sales, technical and customer service teams.

Mandatory pre-completion inspection offer
Buyers must be offered a pre-completion inspection, either self-conducted or via a suitably qualified inspector, using the NHQB’s official checklist.

Schedule of Incomplete Work
Developers must issue a documented schedule of outstanding items with realistic completion timescales and cover alternative accommodation costs where major remedial work requires decanting.

Tighter sales conduct rules
A minimum seven-day consideration period on reservations, bans on drip pricing, and clearer disclosure of ongoing costs and material risks.

Jack says these changes need to be read alongside the delivery and planning context:

“The updated Code reinforces that quality assurance is no longer simply an operational consideration; it’s becoming a key part of project governance. Developers that embed robust quality management, clear communication and effective defect resolution into their delivery processes will be better placed to protect customer satisfaction, funding confidence and long-term brand reputation.”


Where developer risk actually sits

Jack identified three operational areas where non-compliance or poor process is most likely to surface as reputational or regulatory risk:

  1. Documentation gaps.

Without a formal Schedule of Incomplete Work, developers are more exposed to disputes over what was agreed versus delivered, particularly on complex regeneration and Build to Rent schemes.

  1. Resolution speed, not volume.

Guidance points to a 30‑day benchmark for resolving reported defects; slow turnaround  not the number of snags  correlates most strongly with poor satisfaction scores and complaints.

“The strongest-performing developers are rarely those claiming to have no defects. They are the businesses with consistent processes for identifying issues early, communicating openly and resolving them efficiently. That is what builds confidence among homeowners, lenders and investors alike.” Jack said.

  1. Warranty transition clarity

Confusion between the builder’s initial two‑year defects liability period and the subsequent structural‑only insurance-backed warranty remains a recurring source of post-completion disputes.

 

The delivery-at-scale challenge: why snagging data matters

Independent analysis of housing delivery and planning performance suggests that, without reforms, the 1.5 million homes target will be difficult to meet. Planning approvals for new home sites in England have fallen to their lowest levels in around 20 years, and many local authorities report severe staffing shortages


Jack argues that in this environment, snagging data becomes a strategic asset:

“As delivery targets increase and market scrutiny grows, quality data becomes an increasingly valuable management tool. It helps developers understand recurring issues, improve future projects and demonstrate that quality is being managed alongside programme and commercial performance.

“Increasingly, lenders, investors and regulators want confidence not only in what has been built, but in the processes used to manage quality throughout delivery.”


The commercial case for embracing snagging under the new Code

“Quality assurance now sits at the intersection of compliance, customer satisfaction and commercial performance,” Jack says.

“As regulatory expectations continue to evolve, the developers that treat quality management as a strategic discipline, not simply a technical exercise will be best placed to maintain buyer confidence, satisfy lenders and protect long-term project value.”