Reading the Gateway 2 rejection data
The Building Safety Regulator (BSR) has been unusually candid about how many Gateway 2 applications it turns away. In public commentary the regulator has described rejecting “around 70%” of applications for not meeting legal requirements. Underlying data to March 2025 showed roughly half of applications rejected, with approval rates recovering to about 77% by mid-2026.
These figures move quarter to quarter. We cite them with their dates rather than averaging them into a single number, because the trend — not a headline percentage — is what matters to a design team deciding when to submit.
Failures cluster around evidence
The pattern in the published commentary is consistent: applications fail because the record behind the design is incomplete, not because the structural engineering is wrong. Missing justifications, unstated assumptions, and checking that cannot be traced back to a clause are the recurring themes.
That is a solvable problem. A calculation package that arrives with every element recomputed, every divergence flagged against its source clause, and a chartered engineer’s signature behind it is far harder to reject on evidence grounds.
What this means for a submission
- Treat the checking record as a deliverable in its own right, not a byproduct.
- Make every value traceable: source page, clause, recomputed figure, disposition.
- Keep dispositions deterministic — pass, query, or fail — not confidence scores.
Independent recompute is exactly the kind of evidence a Gateway 2 package needs to stand behind. It does not replace your appointed checker; it gives them, and the regulator, a defensible record to review.
Figures as published by the Building Safety Regulator. Rates move quarterly — cited with dates, not averaged.