Building regs are due to change in 2010 again in 2013 and again in 2016 with the last date being Zero Carbon time! Other than that I am unaware of any plans to make CSH madatory. That's not to say more and more planning departments might make it a condition of planning and insist on it.

2010 = level 3
2013 = level 4
2016 = level 6

i think you're right agu. bamptons post relates to the energy section and it is being left for the market to be the driver for widespread use in private development. the difference is where housing associations, funding bodies,etc insist on achieving mandatory levels (generally around 2-4 years ahead of the equivalent b.reg's energy section upgrades).
in wales is a bit different - welsh assembly government have a proposal to make level 3 mandatory for all domestic from april and breeam v.good for non.dom. reason is the time it would take for devolution of building reg's to achieve zero carbon home aspirations for 2011, 5yrs ahead of england. breeam and c4sh is being used as the vehicle to achieve that aspiration... or at least have a good go, with planning app's required to include design stage review certificate of compliance.

- seems to me to be a good idea- takes the pressure off building control, puts the emphasis on 'competent persons' to achieve target energy levels and should drive improvements in quality control/management. gives the buyers an identifiable standard (as opposed to a mickey mouse surveyors report) and promotes growth of a professional job role towards building the 'knowledge economy'.... bit off-track, but i've just spent 3months working on a business plan, please excuse the rambling.

so to answer simon, mandatory levels are not being driven by uk legislation, at present. it is to be market driven by consumers wanting more than a nil-rated dwelling.

http://www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/buildingregulations/legislation/englandwales/codesustainable/
http://www.breeam.org/page.jsp?id=86

With the cost implications involved government wont dictate mandatory achievement of cfsh levels. but the government will dictate cert targets that will then be reflected in cfsh levels. so cfsh acts as an independent self-certification scheme.


http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file46535.pdf
strategy for sustainable construction - section 8.

on the contrary, i think you're right jon. i read on the back of the cfsh addendum
"The Government’s ambition for the Code is that it becomes the single national standard for the design and construction of sustainable homes, and that it drives improvements in home building practice."
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/technicalguideaddendum.pdf

i forgot the difference with cfsh is that it is government property after being created for them by bre which is an independent company so not sure how they'll deal with monopoly issues over training and certification.

Planning Portal - Code for sustainable homes.
http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/england/professionals/en/1115314116927.html
I've probably downloaded the documents, if any links dont work let me know.

oops - i was going to post the mandatory ratings consultation doc's but the files too big. put a message up if you cant get them elsewhere and i'll email them.

Lee is that actually for the whole Code rating or just DER Vs TER? If it's for the whole code where did you get that info please.

Right lets try to tidy this up a bit.
There are two terms, 'mandatory rating' and 'mandatory assessment'.
HM Gov consultation document, 'The future of the code for sustainable homes: making a rating mandatory' sets out the government decision to propose a mandatory rating as opposed to a mandatory assessment.

The dates and code level references above refer to the "equivalent energy/carbon standard in the code" when considered against the "carbon improvement as compared to Part L B.Regs 2006" ie. 2010-25%; 2013-44%; 2016-zc

Developers can choose to construct to the Building Reg's but not instruct a code assessment as the assessment process is not mandatory but they would need to market each property with a hip that contains a code 'zero' rating as the rating itself is mandatory.
Which takes us back to my previous point that it is being left to the market to dictate the actions of the developers.
If any would like to disagree please reference the documents used for the basis of your opinion.
Keith, I look forward to reading that article.