2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-05-012025-04-30iso4217:GBPxbrli:shares2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782023-05-012024-04-30iso4217:GBP2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-04-302138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-04-302138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-04-30ifrs-full:IssuedCapitalMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-04-30ifrs-full:SharePremiumMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-04-30ifrs-full:CapitalRedemptionReserveMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-04-30ifrs-full:OtherReservesMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-04-30ifrs-full:RetainedEarningsMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-05-012025-04-30ifrs-full:IssuedCapitalMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-05-012025-04-30ifrs-full:SharePremiumMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-05-012025-04-30ifrs-full:CapitalRedemptionReserveMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-05-012025-04-30ifrs-full:OtherReservesMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-05-012025-04-30ifrs-full:RetainedEarningsMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-04-30ifrs-full:IssuedCapitalMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-04-30ifrs-full:SharePremiumMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-04-30ifrs-full:CapitalRedemptionReserveMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-04-30ifrs-full:OtherReservesMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-04-30ifrs-full:RetainedEarningsMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782023-04-30ifrs-full:IssuedCapitalMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782023-04-30ifrs-full:SharePremiumMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782023-04-30ifrs-full:CapitalRedemptionReserveMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782023-04-30ifrs-full:OtherReservesMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782023-04-30ifrs-full:RetainedEarningsMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782023-04-302138009OQSSLVVHQAL782023-05-012024-04-30ifrs-full:IssuedCapitalMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782023-05-012024-04-30ifrs-full:SharePremiumMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782023-05-012024-04-30ifrs-full:CapitalRedemptionReserveMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782023-05-012024-04-30ifrs-full:OtherReservesMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782023-05-012024-04-30ifrs-full:RetainedEarningsMember
2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Homes
Communities
People
The Berkeley Group Holdings plc 2025 Annual Report
Contents
STRATEGIC REPORT
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Read more on
pages 02 to 91
Read more on
pages 92 to 167
Read more on
pages 168 to 237
Gasworks revival
wins global
design award
Regent’s View, by St William and
RSHP, has been named ‘Best
Future Residential Project’ at the
2024 World Architecture Festival.
The site’s two Victorian
gasholders are being carefully
restored to form the centrepiece
of the new neighbourhood,
with five distinctive cylindrical
buildings providing 555 private
and affordable homes, as well as
45,000 square feet of commercial
and community space.
Now under construction, the
project will open up a stretch of
Regent’s Canal and create new
green open spaces in the heart
of Bethnal Green.
The former Bethnal Green gasworks
Our purpose
Our passion and purpose is to
build quality homes, strengthen
communities and make apositive
difference to peoples lives.
We use our sustained commercial
success tomake valuable and
enduring contributions that benefit
all of our stakeholders.
Who we are
Berkeley builds homes
and neighbourhoods
across London,
Birmingham and the
South of England.
Brownfield focus
We fulfil our purpose through
long-term brownfield regeneration.
We believe that reviving underused
urban land is the most sustainable
form of development, delivering
good green homes where they
are needed most, and driving
the growth and productivity our
country needs.
Read more on
pages 06 and 07
92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 01
Strategic
Report
Pages 02 to 91
02 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
STRATEGIC REPORT
04 | Highlights of the year
06 | Brownfield regeneration
at scale
08 | Driving growth and value
10 | Case study: Grand Union
12 | Our business model
14 | Chairman’s Statement
16 | Chief Executive’s Review
26 | Market overview
29 | Trading and Financial Review
32 | Key Performance
Indicators(KPIs)
34 | Responsible business
at a glance
36 | Our Vision 2030
strategyoverview
38 | Our Vision 2030 progress
56 | ESG performance
58 | Climate-related disclosures
76 | Section 172(1) Statement
77 | Non-financial and Sustainability
Information Statement
78 | How we manage risk
81 | Viability Statement
82 | Risk tables
Prince of
Wales Drive,
Wandsworth
Set within 2.5 acres of beautifully
landscaped gardens, Prince of
Wales Drive has transformed
a former industrial site into a
peaceful new neighbourhood.
92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 03
92%
of homes delivered during
the yearare on regenerated
brownfield land
Brownfield
67%
of homes had zero defects
reported by customers,
compared to just 6% across
the industry (HBF, March 2025)
Quality
4,047
homes delivered (plus 282 in
jointventures), including some
10% of London’s new private
and affordable homes
Homes delivered
32
long-term regeneration sites, of
which 26 are underconstruction
Regeneration
>1,200
acres of new or measurably
improved natural habitats
across 57 biodiversity net
gain sites to date
Regreening cities
£580m
of subsidies provided to
deliver affordable housing and
committed to wider community
and infrastructure benefit
Community benefit
Communities
+81.6
Net Promoter Score (NPS)
from our customers, compared
to an industry average of +59
(HBF, March 2025)
Customer satisfaction
8.7%
of our employees are
graduates, apprentices
or sponsored students
Skills training
27,000
UK jobs supported per annum
over the last five years, an
average of 6.2 jobs per
completed home
Jobs
PeopleHomes
See our Trading and Financial
Review on pages 29 to 31
1 Read more about our alternative performance
measures on pages 221 and 222 (Note 2.25)
Financial highlights
£529m
2024 | £557m
Profit before tax
14.9%
2024 | 16.2%
Pre-tax return on equity
1
£337m
2024 | £532m
Net cash
£35.95
2024 | £33.63
Net asset value per share
1
£1,403m
2024 | £1,701m
Cash due on
forward sales
1
£6,722m
2024 | £6,929m
Future gross margin
in land holdings
1
Highlights of the year
04 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Accreditations
S&P Global Corporate
Sustainability Assessment 2024
Member of Dow Jones Best-
in-Class World Index and Dow
Jones Best-in-Class Europe Index,
Sustainability Yearbook
Member; Top 10% S&P Global CSA
Score and Industry Mover
Sustainalytics ESG Risk
Rating2025
Low risk rating and Industry
Top-Rated Company
FTSE4Good
Listed since 2003
ISS ESG Corporate Rating 2025
Prime status
Berkeley named ‘BritainsMost
Admired Company2024’
MSCI ESG Rating 2024
AAA
LSE: Britain’s Most Admired Companies
We were proud to be named
Britain’s Most Admired Company
for 2024, topping therankings
among over 230 FTSE-listed firms
across 27 industry sectors.
The honour, unveiled at the London
Stock Exchange, reflects the results
of a detailed survey of corporate
reputation, as judged by leading
businesses, analysts, and industry
commentators. Alongside the
overall award, we were pleased to
be recognised for coming top in key
areas such as ‘Clarity of Strategy,
‘Long-term Value Potential’, and
‘Reducing EnvironmentalImpact.
Financial Times
Europe’s Climate Leaders 2025
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 05
London
Bridge
Waterloo
St.Pancras
Paddington
City
Airport
Heathrow
Victoria
2
3
4
22
11
8
9
19
2
21
25
24
5
1
26
23
20
15
16
17
6
13
12
3
14
18
5
6
4
1
10
7
Berkeley is the only large
UK homebuilder to align
with the Government’s
brownfield-first
housingagenda.
We are taking forward
32 complex regeneration
projects. Each will deliver
over1,000 new homes,
alongside new investment
in public infrastructure,
amenities and the green
open spaces a strong
community needs.
In production
1 Alexandra Gate, Haringey
2 Beaufort Park, Hendon
3 Bermondsey Place, Southwark
4 Bow Green
5 Camden Goods Yard
6 Chelsea Creek
7 Grand Union, Brent
8 Green Park Village, Reading
9 Hartland Village, Fleet
10 Heron Wharf, Poplar
11 Horlicks Quarter, Slough
12 Kidbrooke Village, Greenwich
13 King’s Road Park, Fulham
14 Lombard Square, Plumstead
15 London Dock, Wapping
16 Oval Village
17 Prince of Wales Drive, Wandsworth
18 Royal Arsenal Riverside, Woolwich
19 Silkstream, Barnet
20 South Quay Plaza, Docklands
21 The Exchange, Watford
22 The Green Quarter, Ealing
23 TwelveTrees Park, Newham
24 West End Gate, Paddington
25 White City Living
26 Woodberry Down, FinsburyPark
Brownfield regeneration at scale
* Pipeline sites
Future sites
1 Aylesham Centre, Peckham*
2 Borough Triangle
3 Bromley-by-Bow
4 Queensmere, Slough
5 Sutton
6 Syon Lane, Brentford*
Our brownfield-first approach
will not only ramp up
housebuilding, but also
create more jobs, deliver
much needed infrastructure,
and boost economic growth
across the country.
Sir Keir Starmer | Prime Minister
06 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Read more about
Grand Union on
pages 10 and 11
Key benefits
of urban
regeneration
Meeting housing needs
our sites are concentrated in
London and other severely
undersupplied towns and cities
where the housing crisis is
atits worst.
Driving economic growth
our investment is focused
within established urban
economies, delivering
greater growth and
productivitybenefits.
Strengthening communities
we deliver new homes, jobs,
amenities and infrastructure
in the heart of existing
communities where they are
most needed.
Regreening cities
ourprojects bring nature
andbiodiversity back to
neglected urban sites,
reducecar dependency and
preserve thecountryside.
Skills and social mobility
by investing in designated
regeneration areas we createa
lasting source of skills training
and job opportunities to
disadvantagedcommunities.
Challenges
Large scale urban regeneration sites
present challenges that few developers
can overcome:
Building trust with communities and councils
Complex planning and regulatory regimes
Complex land assembly
High up-front capital investment
Site specific constraints
Major infrastructure delivery
Solutions
Berkeley is the only developer in the country
with the skills, resources and operating model
to deliver urban regeneration at scale:
In-depth community engagement
Design-led approach and
placemakingexpertise
Partnership working model
Diverse in-house expertise
Strong capital base and long-term
operating model
Before: Hornsey Gasworks
After: Alexandra Gate, Haringey
92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 07
EY completes an Economic Impact
Assessment each year based on
Berkeley’s financial data as well
aspublicly available statistics.
Driving growth and value
Berkeley specialises in unlocking the long-term value
of derelict and underused urban land. Our carefully
chosen brownfield sites are located within existing
communities, where new investment can deliver
greater economic, social and environmental value.
These pages summarise the key benefits of our
brownfield focused model over the last five years.
On average, every new
home built by Berkeley
in the last five years has
generated £290,000 of
value to thestate through
taxation and contributions
tothecommunity.
EY 2025 Economic Impact Assessment
27,000
jobs
Berkeley has supported, on average, 27,000 UK jobs per
annum directly and indirectly through its supply chain
overthe last five years.
20,779
homes
Berkeley built 4,329 private and affordable homes in
2024/25 and a total of 20,779 over the last five years
(including joint ventures).
Economic value
EY’s independent Economic
Impact Assessment of Berkeley’s
activities highlights the following
keycontributions
:
£13.6bn
GDP
Berkeley’s contribution to UK GDP was £2.7 billion
in 2024/25 and £13.6 billion for the last five years.
£3.8bn
tax
Berkeley’s total tax contribution was £0.8 billion in 2024/25
and £3.8 billion during the last five years. This includes taxes
paid directly by Berkeley and the taxes paid by its customers
and suppliers as a result of Berkeley’s activities.
£2.3bn
community contribution
Berkeley made a community contribution of £0.6 billion
in 2024/25 and around £2.3 billion over the last five years.
This includes £1.8 billion in affordable housing subsidies
andadditional payments of £0.5 billion to fundlocal
facilitiesand services.
08 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 09
Social value
1,440
apprenticeships
Berkeley has supported 1,440 apprenticeships in the last five
years, including 370 directly and 1,070 gaining experience
working on our sites through our contractor workforce.
10%
of London homes
Berkeley delivered some 10% of all private and affordable
homes built in London over the last five years. This is
where new homes are needed most.
88%
of homes on brownfield sites
Berkeley has delivered 88% of new homes on brownfield
land over the last five years, with 92% of homes delivered in
2024/25 on regenerated brownfield land.
>100,000
people engaged
Berkeley teams have engaged with over 100,000 people
in the last five years and reached 43,000 people in
2024/25 through a mix of community engagement
activities, site tours, school visits and careers fairs.
535
public amenities
Berkeley is delivering a range of public amenities on live
development sites, including indoor community spaces,
schools, shops, sports facilitiesand children’s play spaces.
Environmental value
>1,200 acres
of natural habitats
Berkeley is set to deliver more than 1,200 acres of new or
measurably improved natural habitats across the 57 sites
with biodiversity net gain plans in place to date, helping to
regreen our towns and cities.
>60
embodied carbon
assessments
Berkeley has completed more than 60 embodied carbon
assessments over the last five years which are enabling
our teams to drive down future emissions.
14%
water saving
Berkeley incorporates water savingfeaturesin new homes
and developments. Over the last five years our homes
have been, on average, 14% more water efficient than
building regulations requirements.
18,000
electric vehicle
charging points
Berkeley incorporates electric vehicle charging points
into developments as part of wider sustainable
transport strategies. Across our live development sites,
more than 18,000 are planned to be installed.
Case study | Grand Union
Building good
green homes
where they are
needed most
In partnership with the
London Borough of
Brent, this previously
derelict industrial estate
is being transformed into
a welcoming new part of
Alperton, centred around
a beautiful canal-side
piazza and landscaped
open spaces.
A network of walking
and cycle routes
are connecting the
neighbourhood with its
surrounding community,
along with a riverside
meadow, shops, cafés,
restaurants, flexible office
space, health centre,
nursery and 5,000 square
foot community centre.
22-acre
brownfield site
3,350
private and affordablehomes
240%
biodiversity net gain
Grand Union Community Hub
SEGRO V-Park
Grand Union
Highly sustainable six-storey
industrial building providing
134,500 sqft of flexible
floorspace from just a 1.7-
acre footprint, delivered in
partnership with SEGRO.
10 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
The former industrial estate at Grand Union
92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 11
Read more about our investment case on page 17
Read more about our culture
and values on pages 108 and 109
Our values
Excellence through detail
Be passionate
Respect people
Think creatively
Have integrity
Our business model
Added-value development company
Berkeley is a unique asset-focused development business
that seeks to manage risk and generate long-term value
through market cycles, via its land and planning strategy
andgreat placemaking.
We seek to find the optimum development solution for each
site in terms of both the social, environmental and economic
value for all stakeholders, and the returns we deliver to
our shareholders. We firmly believe these two are mutually
compatible and reinforcing.
Berkeley’s inherent value is rooted in its land holdings and
the pace at which homes are delivered is determined by the
prevailing operating environment. Berkeley will always adopt
a long-term approach to value creation, prioritising financial
strength which brings optionality to capital allocation.
Our brands
100% owned:
Joint venture:
For more information
www.berkeleygroup.co.uk
Capital allocation policy
First, ensure financial strength reflects the cyclical
nature andcomplexity of brownfield development and is
appropriate for the prevailing operating environment.
Second, invest in thebusiness (new land and work-in-
progress, including Build to Rent assets) atthe right time.
Third,make returns to shareholders through dividends
andshare buy-backs.
Bow Green
12 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Land acquisition
Acquire land at the right time in the
cycle, targeting sites where we can add
value over the long-term through our
regeneration and placemaking expertise
Adopt an innovative approach to
partnering with land owners, such
aswith joint venture partners and
localauthorities
Focus on complex, large-scale
brownfield sites in undersupplied
markets where we can take a bespoke
approach to each development
Designing and
planning new homes
Reputation for successful regeneration
delivery underpins the planning process
Embrace a highly collaborative
approach toplacemaking
Design unique and beautiful places
in partnership with local authorities
andcommunities
Continually evolve development plans
to generate the best outcome for
allstakeholders
Building new homes
and places
Consistent health and safety, building
safety and quality assurance standards
embedded into operations
Highly experienced and expert in-
house site management teams and
direct partnerships with building trades,
rather than main contractor-led sites
Utilising modern methods of
construction and investing in digital
technologies to enhance and modernise
our production processes
Marketing and selling
new homes
Berkeley’s brand leadership and
reputation for lasting product quality
provides a clear competitive advantage
in core markets
Diversified sales channels across
owner-occupiers, private and
institutional investors, retirement living
and affordable housing providers
Placekeeping
and stewardship
Demonstrable long-term track record
of high levels ofcustomer service
andsatisfaction
Long-term strategies for effective
estate and community management,
working in partnership with residents
andmanagingagents
Our Vision 2030
responsible business
strategy
Drives our performance, fosters
innovation and maximises our
contributions to society, the economy
and the environment
Strong focus on climate action, nature
recovery, strengthening communities
and future skills
Focus on urban brownfield regeneration,
which is inherently sustainable, socially
inclusive and supports a lower carbon
model for modern living
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 13
In a year marked by continued
economic and regulatory
uncertainty, we have remained
focused and disciplined. Our
delivery teams have maintained
build quality and controlled costs,
and we have adapted to the current
market conditions.
We met our shareholder returns
target for the twelve months to
30September 2024, with dividends
paid in the 2025 financial year of
£68.0 million, a special dividend of
£183.8 million and share buy-backs
totalling £129.7 million. In respect of
the annual £284 million due to be
returned by 30 September 2025,
there is a further £121.0 million
remaining which will be returned
either through share buy-backs
ordividends.
Progress against Strategy
In December, we set out a new
10-year strategy with an agile
capital allocation framework, to
enable the Company to create
long-term value for shareholders
while taking account of the volatility
that persists in the operating
environment. We are pleased with
the progress made to date, as set
out in this report, including the
initial steps to establish our Build to
Rent platform.
We continue our primary
commitment to brownfield
urban regeneration. Recognised
as the most sustainable form
of development, providing the
strongest economic, environmental
and social outcomes, it is the most
complex and our long experience in
this area puts us in a uniqueposition.
Our Vision 2030, Berkeley’s
responsible business strategy,
continues to guide our operations,
ensuring that we remain at
the forefront of the industry in
important areas such as skills and
training, customer service, carbon
reduction, biodiversity net gain
andcommunity engagement.
This focus is important in building
trust with the communities we
serve, the partners with whom we
work, and the policymakers who
shape our operating environment.
We continue to play a proactive
role in working with all levels of
Government to help influence
policy around providing deliverable
solutions to the housing challenges
facing the country.
Board Changes
I will step down from the Board
at the conclusion of the Annual
General Meeting in September.
William Jackson will also leave the
Board at that time. I would like
to thank William for his valuable
contribution to the Board.
It is proposed that Rob Perrins will
be appointed Executive Chair at the
conclusion of the Annual General
Meeting and Richard Stearn Chief
Executive. Rachel Downey, the
Senior Independent Director, will
consult with major shareholders
onthese appointments.
Richard Dakin, with a career in
banking, capital markets and real
estate at Lloyds Bank and CBRE,
will join the Board as a Non-
Executive Director at the conclusion
of the Annual General Meeting.
Looking Ahead
As we enter the first year of the
Berkeley 2035 strategy, we do so
from a position of strength. The
macroeconomic and regulatory
environment remains challenging,
but our distinctive approach,
experienced leadership team,
and proven track record provide
resilience and opportunity.
Berkeley has a proud and distinct
heritage and a great deal of potential.
It is an honour to have played a role.
Rob has been a great Chief Executive
for 16 years and I wish him and the
Company all the best for the future.
Michael Dobson | Chairman
20 June 2025
Chairman’s Statement
Berkeley delivered strong operational and
financial performance in the year ended
30April 2025. Pre-tax profit of £528.9 million
was in line with guidance, we have a robust
net cash position and we are on target to
complete thescheduled shareholder returns.
The external environment remains challenging,
with demand down by approximately 30%,
but the Company’s performance reflects
the strength of our business model and the
expertise and commitment of our people.
Michael Dobson | Chairman
14 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Woodberry Down, Finsbury Park
92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 15
Berkeley is fully committed to the
Government’s housing-led growth
agenda, and we are submitting
planning applications on all our sites
to accelerate delivery. We continue
to work with all levels of Government
to ensure planning consents are
appropriately viable following a
number of years of extreme cost
inflation and regulatory change and
can move into production.
We welcome the Government’s
efforts to unblock housing supply
and advocate focused action
to accelerate the completion
of Section 106 agreements and
clearance of pre-commencement
conditions; improve and speed-up
the Building Safety Regulators new
Gateway approval system; increase
funding for the Affordable Housing
sector; and ensure Planning
Authorities have the resources and
pro-active mind-set to facilitate
housing delivery.
We were therefore delighted to
see the increase in Affordable
Housing funding and the 10-year
social housing rent settlement
announced in last week’s Spending
Review, which represent positive
progress towards achieving their
housingambitions.
Regenerating brownfield land
remains central to Government
policy with an estimated 88,000
homes required to deliver the
national annual housing target
to come from London. With our
focus on London, Birmingham and
the South-East, Berkeley is the
only large UK homebuilder with
a business model that prioritises
brownfield development and is
unique in having the expertise and
resources to unlock complex urban
sites and their significant economic
and social value.
92% of the 4,300 homes delivered
in the year are on regenerated
brownfield land and we have
provided some £580 million in
subsidies to deliver affordable
housing and commitments
to wider community and
infrastructurebenefits.
Berkeley has delivered £528.9
million of pre-tax profit for the year,
with net cash at £337.3 million, in
spite of ongoing geopolitical and
macroeconomic volatility. With
over 75% of sales secured for the
coming year, we are well-placed
to achieve our FY26 pre-tax profit
guidance of £450 million.
This represents an excellent
operational performance with highly
disciplined execution and close
control of costs. We have added
long-term value to the business,
both in our land holdings and
through our Build to Rent (BTR)
platform, while returning £381.5
million to shareholders; a great start
to the Berkeley 2035 strategy.
There is good underlying demand
for our homes, with transaction
volumes gradually improving over
the course of the year. However,
consumer confidence remains
finely balanced and a more
meaningful recovery requires
both improved sentiment and
macroeconomicstability.
Exceptional execution to deliver strong operational
and financial performance in volatile operating
environment and on track for FY26
Very supportive Government policy but regulatory
headwinds remain
92% of homes delivered by Berkeley in FY25 were on
brownfield land with some £580 million investment
insocio-economic benefits
Great start to Berkeley 2035 strategy, with first
4 buildings transferred to the BTR platform and
good progress on planning, creating long-term
shareholdervalue
We are the only large-scale UK
homebuilder focused on brownfield
regeneration, which is a vital driver
of growth and a powerful force for
good in our towns and cities.
Rob Perrins | Chief Executive
Chief Executive’s Review
16 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Long-term Shareholder
Returns
342% TSR
(Total Shareholder Return)
since 1 January 2007
Investment Case
Berkeley has a strong
track record of
delivery, profitability
and cash generation
through market cycles,
reflecting its long-term
business model, which
is underpinned by five
key features:
Royal Arsenal Riverside, Woolwich
1
Only large UK homebuilder
focused on brownfield
regeneration at scale
Delivering sustainable homes
and neighbourhoods on
brownfield land with significant
socio-economic benefits
Aligned with Governments
brownfield first agenda
Each project individually designed
in partnership with Local
Authorities and communities
2
Core London and South East
markets are systemically
under supplied
London has global appeal,
withdeep and proven demand
Berkeley delivers over 10%
of London’s new private and
affordable homes each year
3
Financial strength provides
strategic optionality
Net cash of £337 million, with
£1,200 million of debt facilities
Cash due on private forward sales
under exchanged contracts of
£1.4billion
Land holdings estimated future
gross margin of £6.7 billion across
52,700 homes
4
Unrivalled land holdings
sustaining delivery profile
Not under pressure to buy land
Over 70% of homes are in London
Over 90% of homes have outline or
full planning consent
5
Added value developer
maximising returns on eachsite
Bottom-up approach which
identifies the best development
solution and maximises absolute
returns from each site
Sales volumes important on a
site-by-site basis, but are not the
sole determinant for creating value
Instead, long-term value is
createdthrough the land and
planning strategy
Financial risk managed through
land approach and forward selling
Agile and responsive to the
prevailing operating environment
To capitalise fully on the
opportunity presented by large-
scale brownfield regeneration,
we advocate the use of bespoke
Section 106 agreements instead
of the Community Infrastructure
Levy (CIL), which would reflect the
significant on-site infrastructure and
amenities they provide and allow
for an increase in delivery of much
needed affordable housing.
We are delighted to have added a
large site in Slough town centre to
our portfolio in the year and also to
have been selected as development
partner by Birmingham City Council
for the regeneration of the 148-
acre Ladywood Estate, with the
potential to deliver over 7,500
new and refurbished homes. Both
are hugely exciting opportunities
to drive growth in our towns and
cities in partnership with energised
and forward-thinking public
sectorpartners.
Under our new Berkeley 2035
strategy announced in December,
which is fully aligned to the
Government’s increased housing
delivery ambitions, Berkeley can
allocate £5 billion of capital to new
investment over the 10-year period,
including delivering 4,000 homes
for rent through our own Build to
Rent (BTR) platform.
We have adapted our business to
current market conditions over the
last 18 months, which results in the
pre-tax profit guidance for FY26 of
£450 million, with FY27 likely to be
similar, based on current sales rates.
Our long-term target is to make a
pre-tax return on equity above 15%
over the cycle but will be below
this in the medium-term while the
current operating environment
volatility persists, and we invest in
our BTR platform to increase future
delivery and maximise long-term
value for shareholders.
Berkeley’s performance is a result of
the skill, passion and commitment
of our people. They continue to
deliver hugely positive outcomes
for communities, the economy and
environment through ambitious
brownfield regeneration and I thank
them for this on behalf of the Board
and shareholders.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 17
Berkeley 2035 – a strategy for value creation over the next 10 years
The Government’s aspiration to
deliver 1.5 million homes over this
current Parliament has been a
catalyst to unlocking the planning
system. Berkeley is well aligned
to Government’s ambition with its
brownfield land holdings and pipeline
in well-connected urban areas.
In December 2024, Berkeley
announced a 10-year strategy to
drive long-term shareholder value
by using its operating expertise and
balance sheet strength to capitalise
on investment opportunities as
they arise while taking account of
the volatility that persists in the
operating environment.
Berkeley 2035 is underpinned
by anagile capital allocation
framework through which it can
utilise its entrepreneurial property
expertise to invest in opportunities
in the near-term that maximise
long-term shareholder value.
Berkeley 2035 comprises three
principle value drivers:
1. Increase return on capital in
the core business
Land holdings – optimising the
value of existing sites through
re-planning activity, alongside
the delivery of high quality
placemaking and customer service
Pipeline sites – securing the
inherent value within our pipeline
sites through obtaining planning
consent and bringing them
forward intodelivery
Land investment – selective
investment in new sites where
Berkeley can use its added-value
development expertise to create
great places and homes, and
value for shareholders
2. Establishing a market-
leading Build to Rent
platform and significantly
growing its value
Accelerating delivery on our
large brownfield sites to meet the
strong unsatisfied demand for
quality residential rental property
built in andaround London, the
UK’s most under-supplied market
Creating a permanent route to
market with income generating
assets attractive to institutional
core capital, to capture the
fundamental BTR value drivers
of rental growth and stabilised
investment yields
A platform provides multiple
and flexible exit routes
post stabilisation of the
assets,including:
Disposal of individual
BTR buildings or a series
ofportfolios;
Introducing third-party
equity with Berkeley retaining
management under a fee
arrangement; or
Introducing debt, with
allocation to the BTR assets.
Maximises the opportunity to
capture superior returns through a
best-in-class platform and service.
3. Making returns to
shareholders through share
buy-backs or dividends;
a strategy that will grow
the long-term value of
Berkeley, while retaining
financial strength
Targeting a minimum level of
shareholder returns of £2.0
billionover the next ten years
Of which, £0.9 billion will be
returned by 30 September
2030 (which includes the final
£260 million to be returned
under the 2011 programme of
which £139 million was already
paid and the remaining
£121million is due by
30September 2025); and
The remaining £1.1 billion
willbe returned by
30September 2034
Returns after September 2025
will be phased and delivered
through a combination of share
buy-backs and dividends,
with the actual level of returns
dependent upon the extent
to which the £1.3 billion of
flexibly allocated free cash flow
is deployed into investment
opportunities or returned
toshareholders.
Flexible Capital Allocation Framework
Berkeley has identified £7 billion of free cash flow to deploy over the
next 10 years to drive value. This is before introducing any external
funding to the BTR platform and anticipates an initial allocation of:
Land investment to replace land holdings used over 10 years £2.5 billion
Existing BTR commitment for initial 4,000 home portfolio £1.2 billion
Minimum level of shareholder returns committed £2.0 billion
Flexible allocation to be invested or returned to shareholders £1.3 billion
Free cash flow to be deployed over 10 years to 2035 £7.0 billion
This agile framework combines the necessary near-term resilience
with the ability to flex a greater allocation to new land, the BTR
platform or shareholder returns as the operating environment evolves.
Chief Executive’s Review continued
18 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
The Green Quarter, Ealing
Adopting this flexible capital
allocation strategy at this point
in the cycle enables Berkeley
to retain financial strength at a
time of persistent volatility in the
operating environment so that it
can maximise value from its assets
and make returns to shareholders
over the next 10 years.
Over the next 10 years Berkeley is therefore
targetingto:
Maintain operating margins in the historic
range of 17.5%to 19.5%
Maximise the value of our land holdings and
pipeline sites
Grow the value of its BTR platform and realise
best value for these income producing assets
Grow net asset value per share during the
investment phase of the 10-year period
The Green Quarter, Ealing
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 19
Chief Executive’s Review continued
Construction activity at Oval Village
For more detail see
pages 34 to 55
We continue to take
action on our ambitious
long-term responsible
business strategy, Our
Vision2030, helping to
drive our performance,
spur innovation and
maximise our positive
impacts on society,
the economy and
thenatural world.
Rob Perrins | Chief Executive
Our Vision 2030
Responsible
BusinessStrategy
20 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Sales
The value of underlying net sale
reservations for the year was 5%
ahead of FY24, weighted slightly
to the second half reflecting the
improved momentum we noted
in December’s interim results and
March’s Trading Update. While this
is encouraging, current sales levels
are below our long-term aspirations
and around 30% lower than FY23.
While transaction sales volumes
will only inflect in a meaningful
way once there is confidence in the
trajectory of interest rate reductions
and wider economic stability,
Berkeley’s unique and beautiful
developments with access to
nature and well connected to public
transport, alongside outstanding
customer service, continue to
differentiate our product and
generate good enquiry levels.
This underlying demand has
underpinned the launch of three
new developments in London
during the year: Wandsworth Mills,
Bermondsey Place in Southwark
and Trillium in Marylebone and the
next phases of a number of our
established developments, including
White City Living, London Dock
and TwelveTrees Park, amongst
others. These have all generated
good levels of forward sales, with
customers who are able to commit
funds recognising that this is a
good time to buy. In these market
conditions, demand levels do vary
between sites, depending upon
their individual characteristics,
and this is also reflected in pricing.
Overall, sales prices secured across
our portfolio have been slightly
ahead of business plan pricing
at the start of the financial year.
Forward sales are £1,403 million
(30 April 2024: £1,701 million) and
will moderate further over the
next 12 months under prevailing
marketconditions.
Our outlook for the sales market
is positive. The fundamentals are
strong and improving with good
employment, real wage inflation,
falling mortgage rates and strong
rental market dynamics. There is
deep-rooted undersupply of new
homes in Berkeley’s core markets.
Focusing on London, which remains
a fantastic global city, the latest
quarterly MHCLG data is stark with
just over 6,300 new-build starts over
the last 12 months to 31 December
2024, a year-on-year decline of
some 60%. London’s housing
need is now estimated at 88,000
homes per year based on the NPPF
assessment, while the current
London Plan (which remains in place
until 2026) has an annual housing
delivery target of 52,000 homes.
Construction
For Berkeley, build costs have
remained stable over the
course of the year. The sluggish
domestic economic backdrop,
with low housebuilding and
wider construction activity, is
leading subcontractors to absorb
underlying inflationary pressure on
materials and labour within their
tender pricing. As we look forward,
Berkeley expects this dynamic to
continue as subcontractors place
value on securing the forward
orders in a weak market.
We remain alive to inflation
risk, conscious of the recent
increase in Employers’ National
Insurance Contributions, but
more prominently from ongoing
regulatory change, including the
transition to a new regulatory
regime. In respect of the latter,
we continue to work with both
the MHCLG and the Building
Safety Regulator (BSR) to resolve
the ongoing process issues
encountered at Gateway 2 which,
if left unresolved, would lower
industry-wide delivery over the
medium-term.
CMA investigation
In February 2024, the Competition
and Markets Authority (CMA)
announced an investigation into
possible anti-competitive sharing
of information in the housebuilding
industry. We continue to cooperate
with the CMA and its enquiries.
Self-Remediation Terms
andContract
On 13 March 2023 Berkeley
entered into the Self-Remediation
Terms and Contract with MHCLG,
under which developers have
responsibility for any life-critical
fire safety defects in buildings they
have developed in the 30-year
period to April 2022.
For the 820 relevant buildings
Berkeley has developed over
this period, we have third party
assessments on over 95%. All of
the remaining buildings are where
Berkeley is not the freeholder and
has not yet been provided access.
There are 36 buildings where works
are still to be completed, 12 of
which are buildings where Berkeley
is reimbursing Government for
the works under the Developer
Remediation Contract. Where works
are required and yet to commence,
Berkeley intends to begin works as
soon as reasonably possible, subject
to access being provided by the
freeholder. It is Berkeley’s preference
to take full responsibility for all its
relevant buildings and to complete
any required works itself as this
will speed up the overall process
of remediation. We are seeking
recoveries from the supply chain
and insurers where appropriate.
We continue to work closely
with Government and the BSR to
complete any required remediation
work as quickly as possible which,
together with the actions taken
to date, should restore trust and
confidence to the housing market,
enabling it to operate efficiently,
effectively and fairly for all.
Housing Market and Operations
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 21
Chief Executive’s Review continued
The plots in the land holdings have
an estimated future gross profit of
£6.72 billion (30 April 2024: £6.93
billion), which includes the Group’s
50% share of the anticipated
profit on St Edward’s joint
venturedevelopments.
Through the three new sites,
planning activity (including transfers
with the pipeline) and market
movements, Berkeley has replaced
£0.5 billion of the £0.7 billion of
gross profit taken through the
Income Statement in the year. The
estimated future gross margin in the
holdings at the end of the year was
24.7% (30 April 2024: 25.1%).
The estimated future gross
margin represents Management’s
risk-adjusted assessment of the
potential gross profit for each site,
taking account of a wide range
of factors, including current sales
and input prices; the political and
economic backdrop; the planning
regime; and other market forces; all
of which could have a significant
effect on the eventual outcome.
In the year, Berkeley has provided
some £580 million in subsidies
to deliver affordable housing and
commitments to wider community
and infrastructure benefits through
Section 106 agreements. At over
150% of post-tax profit, this rate has
doubled over the last 10 years.
As at
30 April
2025 Change
30 April
2024
Owned 52,714 -886 53,600
Contracted -481 481
Plots 52,714 -1,367 54,081
Sales value £27.2bn -£0.4bn £27.6bn
Average selling price* £522k +£6k £516k
Average plot price* £48k 1k £49k
Land cost % 9.2% -0.2% 9.4%
Gross margin £6,722m -£207m £6,929m
Gross margin % 24.7% -0.4% 25.1%
* Reflects joint venture sites at 100%
Land and planning
Berkeley has acquired three new
sites in the year. These include:
a strategic site at Maidenhead in
Berkshire for 220 homes, following
the grant of a planning consent; a
brownfield site in Hersham, Surrey,
for which a resolution to grant
planning has been received since
the year end for 260 homes; and
the Queensmere and Observatory
Shopping Centres in Slough, which
have the potential to deliver over
2,000 homes.
We have made good progress on
the planning front, securing five
new planning consents at Bromley-
by-Bow (2,150 homes), Leyton
(640 homes) and Stratford (245
homes) in London and Bath (611
homes) and the new Maidenhead
site outside London. In addition,
there have been over 30 other
planning amendments agreed
in the year, including additional
homes at TwelveTrees Park in West
Ham, London Dock in Wapping,
Heron Wharf in Poplar, and Horlicks
Quarter in Slough.
At 30 April 2025, Berkeley’s land
holdings comprise 52,714 plots
across 64 developments (30
April 2024: 54,081 plots across
70developments), including those
in the St Edward joint venture.
Over the same period new starts
across the industry in London have
more than halved.
The pipeline comprises approximately
12,000 plots at 30 April 2025,
following the transfer in the year of
the site at Bromley-by-Bow to the
land holdings on achieving planning
consent net of other movements.
The pipeline includes the first phase
of the St William site at Beckton
(2,800 homes) and the St Edward
site in Brentford (2,100 homes),
pending finalisation of its Section
106agreement.
Housing Market and Operations continued
22 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Build to Rent (‘BTR’) Platform
Berkeley has made significant strides toward establishing a market-leading
BTR platform during this period.
The first four buildings have been transferred to the BTR platform as at 30
April 2025. Comprising 762 homes, this is nearly 20% of the initial 4,000
home portfolio. The next two buildings (at Grand Union and Silkstream)
have been transferred since the financial year end:
Sites in the BTR Platform (30 April 2025) Location
Initial BTR
Homes
Total BTR
Homes
- Alexandra Gate, Haringey Zone 3 187 402
- Kidbrooke Village, Greenwich Zone 3 90 206
- Eden Grove, Staines Surrey 158 158
- Horlicks Quarter, Slough Berkshire 327 327
In the BTR platform 762
- Grand Union, Wembley Zone 3 177 326
- Silkstream, Hendon Zone 3 183 183
Total homes in production 1,122
- BTR future production 2,878
- Other sites 2,398
Initial BTR portfolio 4,000 4,000
A management team is in place,
led by senior Berkeley employees
augmented through external
hires from the BTR industry with
operational, customer service and
digital experience. Six planning
consents have been obtained to
revise the amenity provision or
optimise the unit mix for a rental
market in the relevant buildings. An
appropriate specification has been
determined and Berkeley is well
advanced in establishing a distinct
BTR brand identity targeting
a rental market that leverages
the existing brand credentials.
Berkeley will be launching its first
development to the rental market in
spring 2026 (Alexandra Gate).
The initial BTR portfolio homes are
included in the land holdings plots
and future estimated gross profit.
Sunningdale Park
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 23
Chief Executive’s Review continued
Kidbrooke Village, Greenwich
Shareholder Returns
Shareholder returns during the financial year totalled £381.5 million:
Shareholder Returns for the year ended 30 April
2025
£’m
2024
£’m
Dividends paid 68.0 98.1
Special dividend paid 183.8
Share buy-backs undertaken 129.7 72.3
Shareholder return in the financial year 381.5 170.4
Dividends paid in the year of £68.0 million comprised a £35.0 million
payment in July 2024 (33 pence per share) and a £33.0 million payment
inMarch 2025 (33 pence per share).
The special dividend in the year of £183.8 million (174 pence per share)
was followed by a share consolidation which reduced the Company’s share
capital, net of Treasury and EBT shares, by 3.7 million shares (3.5%).
The share buy-backs of £129.7 million were in respect of 3.3 million shares
(average price: £39.05 per share).
Under Berkeley 2035 there is £121 million due to be returned by 30
September 2025 which may be made through share buy-backs and a
dividend in September to the extent there is a residual amount following
any share buy-backs (which completes the annual return of £284 million
by 30 September 2025 under the 2011 Programme). Thereafter, the next
shareholder return hurdle is a further £640 million over the five year period
to 30 September 2030.
Outlook
Berkeley is determined to play a full part in helping Government meet
its growth ambitions and has been greatly encouraged by the tone set
by the brownfield-led housing agenda. Converting this into delivery
is challenging particularly as it comes after a period of extreme cost
inflation and complex regulatory change. However, the challenges
must not dampen the ambition as the prize is significant in the form
of economic growth, revitalised towns and cities and better prospects
for young people.
We have a clear plan for the next 10 years and are ready to invest
£5billion of capital into new sites and our new BTR platform, which
will deliver at least 4,000 additional homes over this period.
We are positive about the future, with strong fundamentals
supporting both the for sale and rental elements of our business
including structural under-supply and the prospect of falling interest
rates and a supportive lending market. Central to this is the UK and
London’s position in the global economy and the ability to attract the
investment required by both the public and private sectors to meet
the nation’s housing need.
As always, we are positioning Berkeley for the long-term and embark
upon the new financial year in a strong financial position with net cash
of £0.3 billion, £1.4 billion of cash due on exchanged private forward
sales and £6.7 billion of future gross margin in our land holdings.
24 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 25
5,000
40,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
45,000
50,000
55,000
60,000
London Starts (rolling 12 months)
England Starts (rolling 12 months)
200,000
100,000
75,000
125,000
50,000
25,000
150,000
175,000
225,000
250,000
275,000
300,000
-64%
-88%
2007 Q4
2008 Q4
2009 Q4
2010 Q4
2011 Q4
2012 Q4
2013 Q4
2014 Q4
2015 Q4
2016 Q4
2017 Q4
2018 Q4
2019 Q4
2020 Q4
2021 Q4
2022 Q4
2023 Q4
2024 Q4
England Starts
England Target
London Starts
London Plan Target
Pandemic
&
recovery
Market overview
Figure 2 – Regional housing supply
Figure 3 – Transaction volumes
The housing market is
sensitive to underlying
sentiment and the
prevailing geopolitical
and macro-economic
environment. It is
therefore cyclical in
nature, and Berkeley
is experienced at
operating in this
environment, with
a unique long-term
business model that
enables us to deliver
homes and outcomes
for all stakeholders
through market cycles.
The global economy continues
to be characterised by
heightened volatility and
uncertainty, with trade policies
emanating from the US
introducing a new source of
global uncertainty.
Against this global background,
the UK also faces its own
domestic headwinds, which add
to a complex and challenging
operating environment for the
housebuilding sector specifically.
Inflation was 3.5% in the year to
April 2025, higher than 2.6% a
year prior, but materially lower
than the double-digit levels in
2022. Towards the end of the
year, it is expected to reduce
again, before moderating to
theBank of England’s 2% target
by the end of 2026. Whilst
build costs are now relatively
stable and competitive,
inflationremains a risk in the
current environment.
100,000
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
200,000
100,000
50,000
150,000
1,250,000
250,000
250,000
1,000,000
500,000
750,000
2006 Q4
2007 Q4
2008 Q4
2009 Q4
2010 Q4
2011 Q4
2012 Q4
2013 Q4
2014 Q4
2015 Q4
2016 Q4
2017 Q4
2018 Q4
2019 Q4
2020 Q4
2021 Q4
2022 Q4
2023 Q4
2024 Q4
Mini Budget
3% SDLT levy
imposed
England (excl. London)
London
East of
England
East
Midlands
London
North
East
North West
South
East
South
West
West
Midlands
Yorkshire
and the
Humber
Homes
England Transactions (rolling 12 months)
London Transactions (rolling 12 months)
Pandemic
&
recovery
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25 (EPC data)
Assessed Housing Need
Berkeley’s core markets
Figure 1 – Construction starts activity
26 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Inflation and higher mortgage
rates continue to impact market
sentiment. However, with inflation
easing and the Bank of England
expected to continue measured
rate reductions towards a market-
implied rate of 3.6% by the end
of 2025, sentiment should
improve, with supportive mortgage
availability and rates amongst
competitive lenders.
The sector is often considered a
bellwether for the health of the
wider economy. It is encouraging
that the new Government is
focusing upon reforming the
planning system, identified as one of
the key barriers to housing delivery
that has exacerbated the historical
structural undersupply of housing.
The Government has pledged to
deliver 1.5 million homes over this
Parliament. At 300,000 homes
a year, this is a level consistent
with the previous Government
target, but one that has not been
achieved since the 1960s, when
the Government directly delivered
around 40% of all new build homes.
The National Planning Policy
Framework (NPPF) was revised at
the end of last year and contains
several measures to create a
favourable planning environment,
including the re-introduction of
mandatory local housing targets
and ensuring local authorities can
demonstrate a five-year land supply,
with a presumption for planning
decisions in favour of sustainable
development. An increase in local
planning department funding should
also alleviate capacity restrictions.
Whilst this much needed focus
on planning is welcomed, the
impact of these initiatives will not
be immediate. Other challenges
of the operating environment are
wide reaching, including the impact
of recent build cost inflation and
supply chain strength, affordability
constraints and a reduced demand
from affordable housing providers
due to their funding constraints.
The sector also needs to integrate
and comply with a number of
emerging regulatory regimes,
including the Building Safety Act
2022, the Building Safety Regulator,
the Future Homes Standard, the
Environmental Act 2021, biodiversity
net gain and other environmental
requirements. The introduction of
the Building Safety Levy places
further pressure on development
viability.
Affordability constraints and
evolving customer preferences
continue to drive strong demand in
the rental sector, sustaining rental
growth. With the rental market
accounting for a fifth of households
in England, the BTR sector is an
important part of the market and
2024 saw a record level of capital
deployed in the sector.
Whilst Berkeley supports positive
changes, the increasingly challenging
operating environment has resulted
in subdued construction activity
nationally, which is impeding much
neededsupply.
However, the long-term
fundamentals of the housing
sector and Berkeley’s core markets
in London and the South East
remainstrong:
London’s position as a global city
remains compelling;
systemic and compounding
under supply in London and the
South East of England continues;
unemployment remains at
low levels, despite economic
uncertainty, with strong
wagegrowth;
interest rates are reducing from
the recent peak and future
expectations are supportive
of restoring sentiment
andaffordability;
a competitive lender market
supports good mortgage
availability; and
strong growth in the rental
market means both home
ownership is a viable preference
despite higher interest rates, and
investors can achieve appropriate
yields, supporting the important
rental market.
London and the South East is
systemically under-supplied
The revised NPPF identified a
national housing need of 370,000
homes a year, which is higher than
the Government’s committed target
of 300,000 homes. Given current
delivery levels, sector activity will
require a significant scaling up.
During 2024/25, the number of
new homes completed across
England was around 205,000,
the lowest level since 2015/16.
This is around two thirds of
the Government’s ambition.
Future completions look set to
remain materially below targets,
based upon current permissions
and starts activity, further
compounding the supply issue.
There were 108,000 starts reported
in England in 2024, which is lower
than the pandemic impacted
period and the lowest level since
the start of 2013 (see Figure 1).
This is a little over a third of the
Government’scommitment.
The number of homes that
gained planning permission in
2024 nationally was the lowest
in a decade. Whilst most regions
declined, London was one of the
most significant, reducing by 14%,
having fallen by over a quarter in
the prior year to the lowest levels
since 2011.
Based upon the NPPF assessment
of housing need, the under supply
on a regional basis continues to be
concentrated in London and the
South East (see Figure 2).
London’s housing need is now
estimated at 88,000 homes per
year, which compares to the
previous identified need of nearly
100,000. The current London Plan
(which remains in place until 2026)
has an annual housing delivery
target of 52,000 homes. Even if this
current target were reached, this
would still represent a shortfall of
36,000 homes or around 41% every
year relative to the NPPF’s latest
assessment of need.
In 2023/24, there were 32,000
homes delivered in London, of
which 28,000 were new build.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 27
Market overview continued
Thedelivery in 2024/25 is
expected to be broadly similar,
a 64% shortfall compared to the
latest identified need, with the
requirement for upcoming London
Plan revisions to be consistent with
the new NPPF.
This supply constraint in London
looks set to continue in the medium
to long-term, with new build starts
of just over 6,300 in the last year
(see Figure 1), a year-on-year
decline of just over 60%. This
reduction in activity over the last
year is consistent across both the
private and affordable sectors.
The situation in the South East is
similar. The latest housing need
assessment for the region increased
to nearly 71,000 (from 51,000)
homes per year, compared to
average completions of 38,500 per
year over the last three years. 
This is an annual shortfall of 32,500
homes (46%), the second highest
regional shortfall behind London.
Transaction volumes
Transaction volumes over the last
year have settled around 30% lower
than prior to September 2022, at
levels comparable to the height of
the pandemic. This current level
of activity is less than half the
peak activity in 2006, prior to the
financial crisis (see Figure 3). The
gradual improvement of interest
rates should help stimulate activity.
The reaction to temporary SDLT cuts
in recent periods demonstrated the
positive impact a more permanent
rationalisation of the SDLT regime
could have on housing market
activity. Conversely, the introduction
of the 3% SDLT levy on additional
properties in 2016 showed the
adverse impact of increased
transactional taxation upon demand,
which initiated a contraction of
activity, exacerbated in London (see
Figure 3). Current volumes are now
35% and 43% lower nationally and
in London respectively than prior to
this policy change.
Such investment (including some
overseas purchasers, who have also
been impacted by the introduction
of a further 2% SDLT surcharge) is a
crucial element of new housing supply.
They typically invest early in the
development cycle, which allows
developers and their funders to
bring forward larger and more
capital-intensive developments, thus
creating significant additionality
beyond their direct purchases.
Setting the conditions
forgrowth
Berkeley strongly supports the
Government’s ambition to increase
housing delivery in a sustainable
manner and introduce supportive
measures. Initial reforms to the
planning and regulatory system
are setting a clear objective of
delivering more homes in the places
where they are most needed.
When individual homebuyers,
investors, and developers like
Berkeley have the confidence and
ability to invest for the long-term,
this supports significant economic
activity, improves social mobility,
and permanently increases the
country’s asset base. Berkeley
believes that the following further
actions could help support
sustainable housing delivery and
economic growth:
Optimise brownfield urban
regeneration by removing tariff
layering on strategic brownfield
sites and refocus on bespoke
section 106 agreements to deliver
on the priorities of local people,
whilst delivering more homes
and generating more taxrevenue
in the medium to long-term.
Embrace urban density on
brownfield land in our most
productive towns and cities,
particularly where those homes
are able to utilise and leverage
existing infrastructure.
Resolve the operational
challenges of the Building
Safety Regulator to ensure it
can fulfil its primary objective
and support the sector to
deliver on the Government’s
manifestocollectively.
Appropriately fund housing
associations and new affordable
housing, assisting with the
private sector’s efforts to
replicate historical record
delivery levels achieved in
tandem with significant
Government involvement.
Increase market liquidity through
reduced transaction taxes and
encourage a supportive lending
environment, enabling those who
can afford to buy homes in the
open market to be able to do so.
Sources:
(1) Office for National Statistics
(2) Bank of England
(3) MHCLG Live Table 244
(4) Savills
(5) MHCLG EPC data
(6) MHCLG Live Table 118
(7) MHCLG Live Table 213
(8) HBF
(9) House of Commons Library Debate
Pack, May 2025
(10) MHCLG Live Table 217
(11) Land Registry
King’s Road Park, Fulham
28 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Trading and Financial Review
Revenue of £2,486.5 million in
the year (2024: £2,464.3 million)
included £2,432.2 million of
residential revenue (2024: £2,395.7
million), £14.8 million of commercial
revenue (2024: £47.2 million) and
£39.5 million of land sales (2024:
£21.4 million).
4,047 new homes (2024: 3,521)
were sold across London and
the South-East at an average
selling price of £593,000 (2024:
£664,000) reflecting the mix of
properties sold in the year.
The gross margin percentage is
26.6% (2024: 26.2%), reflecting
the mix of developments on which
homes were completed in the year.
Overheads of £160.3 million have
decreased £4.5 million (2024:
£164.8 million). The operating
margin is 20.1% (2024: 19.5%).
The cost of borrowings and
amortisation of associated fees and
imputed interest on land creditors is
outweighed by interest earned from
gross cash holdings, resulting in net
finance income of £14.2 million for
the year (2024: £12.0 million).
Taxation
The Group has an overall tax
charge of £146.9 million for
the year (2024: £159.7 million)
and an effective tax rate of
27.8% (2024: 28.7%). The Group
manages its tax affairs in an
open and transparent manner
with the tax authorities and
observes all applicable rules
and regulations in the countries
in which it operates. Factors
that may affect the Group’s
tax charge include changes in
tax legislation and the closure
of open tax matters in the
ordinary course of events.
Total tax paid
(year ended 30 April 2025)
Corporate Tax £120.3m
SDLT £7.3m
PAYE £65.0m
Employees’ NI £8.6m
Employer’s NI £27.8m
For the year ended 30 April 2025, the
total tax contribution to the UK Treasury
was £229.0 million; split between taxes
borne by Berkeley of £155.4 million
(corporation tax, employer’s NIC and
SDLT) and taxes borne by our employees
of £73.6 million (PAYE and employees’
NIC). This total tax contribution does not
include the indirect tax contribution paid
by Berkeley’s suppliers and customers.
The wider indirect tax impact is set out
on page 08.
Berkeley’s share of the results of
joint ventures is a profit of £14.7
million (2024: £65.6 million), with
St Edward’s profits arising from its
South-East developments following
delivery of its central London
developments in the prior year.
The taxation charge for the year is
£146.9 million (2024: £159.7 million)
at an effective tax rate of 27.8%
(2024: 28.7%), which incorporates
the additional 4% RPDT and
Corporation Tax of 25%.
Pre-tax return on equity for the year
is 14.9% (2024: 16.2%) and return
on capital employed for the year is
16.5% (2024: 18.3%).
Basic earnings per share has
decreased by 0.6% from 373.9
pence to 371.8 pence, which takes
account of the share consolidation
which accompanied the special
dividend during the year and the
buy-back of 3.3 million shares for
£129.7 million under the Shareholder
Returns Programme.
Trading performance
Year ended 30 April
2025
£m
2024
£m
Change
£m %
Revenue 2,486.5 2,464.3 +22.2 +0.9 %
Gross profit 660.3 644.5 +15.8 +2.5%
Operating expenses (160.3) (164.8) +4.5 -2.7%
Operating profit 500.0 479.7 +20.3 +4.2%
Net finance costs 14.2 12.0 +2.2
Share of joint ventures 14.7 65.6 -50.9
Profit before tax 528.9 557.3 -28.4 -5.1%
Pre-tax return on equity 14.9% 16.2% -1.3%
Earnings per share – basic 371.8p 373.9p -2.1p -0.6%
£229.0m
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 29
Trading and Financial Review continued
Financial Position
The Group’s net assets are £3,560
million (2024: £3,561 million).
Investment Properties
Investment properties totalled
£145.7 million as at 30 April 2025,
measured on a cost basis, in relation
to assets under development which
have been transferred to the Group’s
BTR platform during the year.
Inventories
Inventories of £5,052.2 million
include £554.3 million of land not
under development (2024: £725.8
million), £4,160.1 million of work in
progress (2024: £4,347.7 million)
and £337.8 million of completed
stock (2024: £210.4 million).
During the year, five developments
(Milton Keynes, Wandsworth
Mills, Spring Hill in Maidenhead,
Hurlingham in Fulham and
Trillium in Marylebone) have
been moved from land not under
development into work in progress.
Thecompleted stock is spread
across 25developments.
Creditors
Total creditors of £2,455.1 million
include £711.5 million of on-account
contract receipts from customers
(2024: £907.7 million) and land
creditors of £714.0 million (2024:
£881.7 million). Of the total £714.0
million land creditor balance, £251.2
million is classified as short-term
given the expected settlement
within 12 months of the balance
sheet date.
Creditors also include provisions
of £229.6 million (2024: £209.8
million) which represents post
completion development
obligations, including those related
to building fire-safety matters, and
other provisions.
Summarised Balance Sheet as at 30 April
2025
£m
2024
£m
Change
£m
Non-current assets 379.3 393.4 -14.1
Investment properties 145.7 +145.7
Inventories 5,052.2 5,283.9 -231.7
Debtors 100.4 127.0 -26.6
Creditors (2,455.1) (2,775.8) +320.7
Capital employed 3,222.5 3,028.5 +194.0
Net cash 337.3 532.0 -194.7
Net assets 3,559.8 3,560.5 -0.7
Shares, net of treasury and EBT 99.0m 105.9m -6.9m
Net asset value per share 3,595p 3,363p +232p
Abridged Cash Flow for year ended 30 April
2025
£m
2024
£m
Profit before taxation 528.9 557.3
Taxation paid (120.5) (170.5)
Net investment in working capital (215.5) (105.9)
Net investment in joint ventures (15.8) (3.7)
Other movements 9.7 14.8
Shareholder returns (381.5) (170.4)
(Decrease) / increase in net cash (194.7) 121.6
Opening net cash 532.0 410.4
Closing net cash 337.3 532.0
Hareshill, Fleet
30 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Net cash
The Group ended the year
with net cash of £337.3 million
(2024:£532.0 million), a decrease
of £194.7million.
The net cash of £337.3 million
comprises gross cash holdings
of £1,015.2 million and long-term
borrowings of £677.9 million.
Long-term borrowings have
increased by £17.9 million in the year
following a drawdown of the Homes
England borrowing facility.
Net assets and NAVPS
Net assets decreased over the
year by £0.7 million to £3,559.8
million (2024: £3,560.5 million) as
shareholder returns of £381.5 million
and other movements in reserves of
£1.2 million offset the profit after tax
for the year of £382.0 million.
The shares in issue, net of treasury
and EBT shares, closed at 99.0
million compared to 105.9 million
at the start of the year. The net
reduction of 6.9 million shares
comprises three movements
(subject to rounding):
The 3.3 million share buy-backs
undertaken during the year for
£129.7 million (£39.05 per share);
The issue of 0.2 million shares
under the 2011 LTIP; and
A reduction of 3.7 million
shares resulting from the
shareconsolidation.
Consequently, the net asset value
per share is 3,595 pence at 30 April
2025, up 6.9% from 3,363 pence at
the start of the year.
Funding
The Group’s borrowing capacity
of £1,200 million was unchanged
during the year and comprises:
£400 million unsecured 10-year
Green Bonds which mature in
August 2031 at a fixed coupon of
2.5% per annum; and
£800 million bank facility,
including a £260 million
Green Term Loan and a £540
million undrawn Revolving
CreditFacility.
Berkeley has allocated the proceeds
of the Green Bonds and Green Term
Loan to its ongoing development
activities in accordance with its
Green Financing Framework
(available on its website).
Berkeley has a facility with Homes
England whereby it may apply
amounts borrowed towards
financing or re-financing certain
infrastructure type costs incurred
on three of its developments.
The facility totals £125.6 million,
is unsecured, has floating interest
rates linked to UK base rate and
requires 33.33% of any outstanding
loans to be repaid by 31 December
2031, 50% by 31 December 2032
and 100% by 31 December 2033. As
at 30 April 2025, £17.9 million was
an outstanding loan (2024: £nil).
With borrowings of £678 million,
the Group’s gross cash holdings of
over £1 billion throughout the year
have been placed on deposit with
its six relationship banks.
Joint ventures
Included within non-current assets
are investments in joint ventures
accounted for using the equity
method which are at £243.4
million at 30 April 2025 (2024:
£227.0 million). The net £16.4
million increase in the year arises
from Berkeley’s 50% share of
twomovements:
Share of profits earned in joint
ventures of £14.7 million; and
Share of loan contributions to
site specific joint ventures of
£1.7million.
In St Edward, 282 homes
were completed in the year
at an average selling price of
£499,000 (2024: 406 homes at
£788,000). Completions occurred
predominately at its South-East
developments, Hartland Village in
Fleet, Green Park Village in Reading
and Highcroft in Wallingford.
In total, 2,429 plots (2024: 2,502
plots) in the land holdings relate to
four St Edward developments, all
outside of London (Reading, Fleet,
Wallingford and Guildford).
The Strategic Report on pages 02
to 91 was approved by the Board
and signed on its behalf by:
Rob Perrins
Chief Executive
20 June 2025
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 31
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
Our KPIs are aligned to the business strategy
and are used to actively monitor business performance.
Financial KPIs
Profit before tax
(£m)
557. 3
604.0
551.5
518.1
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
This is our core measure of profitability, our
absolute return from the sale and delivery
of new homes in the year.
Definition: Profit earned by the Group
during the year, including any finance
income and costs and share of results of
joint ventures, but before any tax expense.
Link to Our Vision 2030:
Pre-tax return on equity
(%)
18.7
17.5
16.5
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
This is the efficiency of the returns
generated from shareholder equity
inthebusiness.
Read more on remuneration on page 128.
Definition: This is measured by calculating
profit before tax as a percentage of
the average of opening and closing
shareholders’ funds. See page 222.
Link to Our Vision 2030:
Net cash
(£m)
410.4
268.9
1,128.2
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
This provides a measure of the financial
strength of the Group.
The £0.3 billion of net cash at 30 April
2025 combined with £1.2 billion of
borrowing capacity provides the Group
with total liquidity of £1.5 billion.
Definition: Cash and cash equivalents,
less total borrowings. See page 217.
Link to Our Vision 2030:
Net asset value per share
(£)
33.63
31.01
28.18
26.12
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
This Balance Sheet measure reflects the
value of shareholders’ interests in the net
assets of the business.
Definition: Net assets attributable to
shareholders divided by the number of
shares in issue, excluding shares held in
treasury and shares held by the Employee
Benefit Trust. See page 221.
Link to Our Vision 2030:
Cash due on forward sales
(£m)
1,403
1,701
2,136
2,171
1,712
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
This measures cash due from customers
under unconditional contracts and reflects
the strength and financial stability of the
business from secured future sales.
Definition: This measures cash still due
from customers at the relevant Balance
Sheet date under unconditional contracts
for sale. It excludes forward sales of
affordable housing, commercial properties
and institutional sales, and forward
sales within the Group’s joint ventures.
Seepage222.
Link to Our Vision 2030:
Future gross margin
in land holdings
(£m)
7,629
8,258
6,884
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
This provides a measure of expected
value in the Group’s land holdings,
including its share of joint ventures, in
the event that it successfully sells and
delivers the developments planned for.
Definition: This represents management’s
risk-adjusted assessment of the potential
gross profit for each of the Group’s sites,
including the proportionate share of its
joint ventures, taking account of a wide
range of factors, including: current sales
and input prices; the economic and
political backdrop; the planning regime;
and other market factors; all of which
could have a significant effect on the
eventual outcome.
Link to Our Vision 2030:
528.9 14.9
337. 3
532.0 16.2
35.95
6,929
6,722
32 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Non-Financial KPIs
Net Promoter Score (NPS)
(Rate)
77.9
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
Our six month rolling NPS is an indicator
of the success of our efforts to provide
world-class customer service. Our NPS
significantly exceeds the sector average
of +59 (Home Builders Federation (HBF),
March 2025) and compares favourably
with top-performing consumer brands.
Definition: Customers register a score
between 0 – 10 of how likely they are to
recommend us to a friend; 9 – 10 being
classified as promoters, 7 – 8 being
passive, and 0 – 6 being detractors.
The NPS is the percentage of promoters
less the percentage of detractors, on a
scale of -100 to +100.
Link to Our Vision 2030:
Annual Injury Incidence
Rate (AIIR)
(Rate per 100,000 people)
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
This measure shows the number of
reportable injuries during the year,
in relation to the number of Berkeley
employees and on-site contractors.
Our AIIR significantly outperforms the
construction industry average of 306
(Health and Safety Executive (HSE),
November2024).
Definition: This rate is calculated by
taking the number of reportable injuries
across our operations throughout the
year, multiplied by 100,000, divided by
the average number of people working
across our sites, offices and sales suites in
the year.
Link to Our Vision 2030:
Direct apprentices and training
(%)
8.9
7.2
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
This measure shows the proportion of
our employees who are an apprentice,
graduate or sponsored student.
On average, we had more than 100
apprentices, 50 graduates and 60
sponsored students during the course
ofthe year.
Definition: Calculated as the average
monthly percentage of our direct
workforce who are apprentices, graduates
or sponsored students, in line with the
definition provided by The 5% Club.
Link to Our Vision 2030:
Greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions intensity
(tCO
2
e/100 sqm)
0.28
0.61
0.95
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
This measure relates to the GHG emissions
resulting from our direct activities to the
floor area legally completed in the year.
The figure is disclosed on an operational
reporting boundary, as further explained in
the Directors’ Report on page 164.
Definition: This is calculated by dividing
our absolute scopes 1 and 2 (market-
based) emissions by the residential and
commercial floor area legally completed in
the year, including joint venture activities.
Link to Our Vision 2030:
Affordable housing subsidies
and wider contributions
(£m)
580
370
560
556
204
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
This measures our contribution to
affordable housing subsidies and wider
community and infrastructure benefits
delivered or committed during the year.
The value in any one year is influenced by
the number and mix of homes delivered.
Definition: This is the total financial
value of community and infrastructure
benefits committed to under Section 106
agreements during the year, together
with the affordable housing subsidy on
affordable homes delivered in the year
with reference to open market value.
Link to Our Vision 2030:
Brownfield regeneration
(%)
86
87
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
This measure shows the proportion of
our homes delivered during the year
(including joint ventures) on brownfield
regeneration land.
Definition: This is measured by calculating
the number of homes delivered during
the year on brownfield regeneration
land as a percentage of total homes
delivered during the year. It includes joint
ventureactivities.
Link to Our Vision 2030:
Key | Our Vision 2030 priorities
Customers
Quality
Communities
Climate action
Nature
Employee experience
Modernised production
Future skills
Supply chain
Shared value
81.6
80.2
79.2
77. 2
102
52
79
72
124
8.7
9.5
10.0
92
87
86
0.30
0.27
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 33
Our Vision 2030 is our
ambitious responsible
business strategy. It
centres on 10 strategic
priorities which help
to drive our continued
success, whilst setting us
apart andmaximising the
positiveimpact we make.
An integrated
strategy for ESG
Our Vision 2030 provides a framework
for how we address Environmental,
Social and Governance (ESG) issues. It
includes topics such as sustainability,
health and safety, and build quality,
and encompasses our approach
with a number of stakeholders such
as customers, employees and the
supplychain.
Our Vision 2030 includes 10 strategic
priorities for the business. Each of the
priorities includes a long-term goal
and is supported by an underlying
action plan with targets and a set of
core KPIs which we use to
measure outcomes and impacts.
Tackling material issues
A materiality assessment was
undertaken when developing our
strategy in 2020, based on
international best practice from the
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) to
help identify the priorities. It included
extensive research, together with
input from more than 40 internal
and external stakeholders.
Strong governance
Our Vision 2030 is overseen by a
team at Group level and managed by
a network of subject matter experts
across the business. Quarterly updates
are prepared for the Main Board
together with an annual presentation
on progress. Monthly Board meetings
are held with the CEO, CFO, COO,
Executive Committee member
responsible for sustainability, Group
Executive for Responsible Business
and Head of Sustainability. ESG
progress is taken into account in
ExecutiveRemuneration.
Embedding it day-to-day
Our Vision 2030 is underpinned
by detailed policies, standards
and management systems in areas
such as technical design, procurement,
sustainability and health and safety.
These set a clear framework for the
teams within each of our autonomous
businesses to follow.
We use our network of Group
committees (see page 103) to embed
Our Vision 2030 and to drive progress
in each priority area.
Reviewing our strategy
We are now at the halfway point
of the 10 year strategy we set out
in2020.
During the course of 2026 we will be
reviewing the strategy and timeline in
the context of our new Berkeley 2035
strategy for the business.
Read more about Our Vision 2030
on pages 36 to 55
Responsible business at a glance
Our vision is to be a
world-class business,
trusted to transform the
most challenging
sites into exceptional
places and to
maximise our positive
impact on society,
theeconomyand
thenatural world.
Berkeley has an established approach to responsible
business. We define this as the holistic way we
manage the business that takes into account
economic, socialand environmental value.
Scan the code to read about our
approach to ESG
34 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Engaging
stakeholders
The nature of our business means
that we have a wide variety of
stakeholder groups, with a range
of interests from the activities of
individual developments through
tostrategic business performance.
We engage with stakeholders to
understand their opinions and
respond to their requirements.
Getting this engagement right is
fundamental to the success of our
business, with the interests of our
stakeholders embedded into the
long-term strategy of the business.
Read more about our stakeholders
on pages 76 and 111 to 114
Picture caption, Location
Policies
We have policies in place to govern
our day-to-day activities and
the behaviour of our employees,
partners and supply chain across
key topics such as business ethics,
employee matters, human rights,
sustainability, building safety and
quality assurance, health, safety
andwellbeing.
Read more about the Berkeley
Foundation on pages 54 and 55
The Berkeley Foundation
We established the Berkeley
Foundation in 2011 as an independent
charity to support young people
and their communities to thrive
and be a force for change in the
world. It is funded by Berkeley and
our employees volunteer their time,
expertise and money to support the
Foundation and its charitypartners.
WhatHouse? Awards 2024
Best Large Housebuilder
RESI Awards 2024
Large Developer of the Year
London Construction Awards 2024
Apprenticeship Initiative of the Year
Better Society Awards 2025
Philanthropy Award
Awards
ESG performance
pages 56 and 57
Climate-related disclosures
pages 58 to 75
Section 172(1) Statement
page 76
Performance
and disclosures
Non-financial and Sustainability
Information Statement page 77
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 35
Our Vision 2030 strategy overview
Our responsible business strategy sets out our vision
to maximise our positive impact on society, the
economy and the natural world through 10 strategic
priorities. It is an integrated and holistic strategy,
so each priority supports the others and makes a
valuable contribution to achieving our vision.
Places that stand the test of time
What we create
Customers Quality Communities Climate action Nature
Put our customers
at the heart of our
decisions and provide
an industry-leading
home buying
experience.
Lead the industry
in producing high
quality, safe homes
for all.
Transform underused
land into unique,
well connected and
welcoming places
where people
and communities
can thrive for the
long-term.
Play an active role
in tackling the global
climate emergency by
creating low carbon,
resilient homes.
Create a biodiversity
net gain (BNG) and
make a measurable
contribution to the
natural environment
on every development.
Maintaining the trust,
loyalty and advocacy
of our customers
is fundamental to
our business model
and sets Berkeley
apart from other
homebuilding brands.
Creating unique
homes and places
of lasting quality
is fundamental
to our brand,
purpose, values
and working culture.
Regeneration and
placemaking
can strengthen
communities and
make a lasting
positive difference
to people’s lives.
We believe every
business has a duty
to tackle the global
climate emergency
and we want to
continue leading our
industry in taking
decisive action.
We want to play a
lead role in nature’s
recovery and to
create more beautiful,
wild and open
spaces in the heart
of cities, towns
andcommunities.
Long-term goalWhy is this a priority?Link to stakeholdersLink to risks
1 4 5
7 9 13
3 6 7
13 14
4 5
11 13
10 11 13 10 11 13
Customers
Communities and
local government
Environment
Government,
regulators
and industry
Customers
Communities and
local government
Supply chain
Environment
Government,
regulators
and industry
Customers
Communities and
local government
Government,
regulators
and industry
Customers
Communities and
local government
Government,
regulators
and industry
Customers
Government,
regulators
and industry
Scan the code to read more
about Our Vision 2030
36 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
15
15
Exceptional people and resources
How we work
Employee
experience
Modernised
production
Future
skills
Supply
chain
Shared
value
Create a positive
working environment
for our people; one
that fosters respect,
support, wellbeing,
safety and inclusivity.
Innovate and harness
modern methods of
construction and
digital technology
to achieve higher
standards of
quality, safety
and sustainability,
whilst increasing
productivity.
Equip our people with
the skills they need
both now and for the
future, enhancing
social mobility and
inspiring new talent
to join the industry.
Build a responsible
and constructive
supply chain; one
that is productive,
practical, profitable,
sustainable, ethical
and dependable.
Allocate capital to
deliver sustainable
returns to our
shareholders whilst
creating value for our
other stakeholders
including through
the work of the
Berkeley Foundation.
Our highly skilled
people are the drivers
of our success and
we want to build
an increasingly
diverse, talented and
productive workforce.
We want to address
housing needs,
whilst delivering high
standards for our
customers efficiently
by using technology
and innovation.
We want our people
to have the skills to
embrace innovative
technologies and
working practices,
while attracting a
new generation to
drive our future.
We want to maintain
strong partnerships
with our supply chain,
sharing goals and
collaborating to
ensure we are the
client of first choice.
We want to make
a lasting positive
impact, using our
unique operating
model and resources
to fulfil our purpose
and deliver value
for all.
Long-term goalWhy is this a priority?Link to stakeholdersLink to risks
6 12 11 12
13 14
6 14 1 2 10
11 12 14
1 2
3 8
Customers
Communities and
local government
Employees
Government,
regulators
andindustry
Environment
Supply chain
Investors
Supply chain
Government,
regulators
and industry
Employees
Communities and
local government
Supply chain
Government,
regulators
and industry
Supply chain
Government,
regulators
and industry
Employees
Government,
regulators
and industry
Key | Principal risks
1
Economic outlook
2
Political outlook
3
Regulation
4
Land availability
9
Mortgages
10
Climate change
11
Sustainability
12
Health and safety
5
Planning process
6
Retaining people
7
Securing sales
8
Liquidity
13
14
Build cost and programme
15
Cyber and data risk
Product quality
andcustomers
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 37
Places that stand the test of time
What we create
Customers Quality Communities Climate action Nature
Provided a
personalised
experience for
each of our
customers,
resulting in an
industry-leading
Net Promoter
Score (NPS) of
+81.6, compared
to an industry
average of+59
(HBF, March2025).
Won the In-
house Research
Outstanding
Achievement
Award and Gold
Award for the11th
consecutive year.
Launched
a quarterly
newsletter, a video
setting out the
Berkeley difference
and a brochure,
Why New,
WhyBerkeley.
Rated the top UK
housebuilder for
build quality by
HomeViews, the
only independent
review platform
for residential
developments in
the country.
Delivered 67%
of our homes
with zero defects
reported by
customers
compared to 6%
across the industry
(HBF, March 2025).
Introduced
additional training
on the Building
Safety Act to our
teams.
Taking a leading
role in working
with Government
and industry via
the Construction
Leadership Council.
Progressed with
the development
of our long-term
regeneration sites
and delivered
more than 4,000
homes.
Made community
contributions of
£580m, together
with delivering 535
public amenities
across live
development sites.
Launched new
Communities
Framework
to ensure a
structured
approach to
building strong
communities right
from the start.
Undertook
resident surveys
with State of Life
to assess people’s
quality of life.
Completed more
than 60 embodied
carbon assessments
to date, and
updated guidance
and targets for
ourteams.
Engaged with
additional
manufacturers on
embodied carbon
for concrete and
blocks, building
on our supplier
engagement for
aluminium.
Strengthened our
focus on energy
reduction through
our Energy Savings
Opportunity
Scheme (ESOS)
action plan.
Submitted our
new science-based
targets (SBTs)
forvalidation.
Completed 57
biodiversity net
gain strategies
todate.
Shared our
lessons learnt
from eight years
of successfully
delivering BNG.
Co-chairing the
Future Homes
Hub’s Biodiversity
Net Gain
Implementation
Board with the
Department for
Environment, Food
and Rural Affairs
(Defra).
Won Property
Week’s ESG
Edge Award
for Excellence
in Habitat
Restoration.
Achieve a
Net Promoter
Score of +70 or
aboveannually.
Achieve a
Recommend to
a Friend score
of at least 95%
annually.
Encourage 90% of
customers to sign
up to MyHome
Plus, our customer
information
portal.
Transform our
digital offering to
enable customers
to interact with us
24/7 by 2026.
Adjust and embed
processes in
response to the
Building Safety
Act requirements.
Ensure
appropriate
competence of
our people and
supply chain for
building safety.
Further
enhance our
internal training
programme for
building safety
year-on-year.
Target 90% of our
homes to be built
on brownfield
land.
Embed a
community
plan on all
developments
by2026.
Generate social
value through each
development.
Work with
external experts
to assess people’s
quality of life on
developments.
Undertake
embodied carbon
assessments and
target reductions
for each
development.
Engage with
manufacturers
of the top five
impact materials
by 2026.
Re-baseline and
achieve validation
on our science-
based targets and
Net Zero target
by 2026.
Achieve a 15%
reductionin energy
consumption from
2023 to 2030.
Develop an overall
approach for
environmental
netgain and trial
it by 2026.
Assess the impact
of nature within
our supply chain
in line with the
Taskforce on
Nature-related
Financial
Disclosures
(TNFD) and
externally report
on this by 2028.
Reduce
construction waste
intensity by 50%
from 2023 to
2030.
2025 performance highlights Progress against targets
Our Vision 2030 progress
38 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Employee
experience
Modernised
production
Future
skills
Supply
chain
Shared
value
2025 performance highlights Progress against targets
Improved every
score within our
employee survey
compared to
previous results.
Hosted a Group-
wide event for
the second year
to celebrate
International
Women’s Day
and implemented
enhanced
parental leave
and menopause
support.
Maintained
industry-leading
health and safety
standards with
an Annual Injury
Incidence Rate
(AIIR) of 102
compared to an
industry average
of 306 (HSE,
November 2024).
Progressed
with the
implementation
of an Electronic
Document
Management
System (EDMS).
Used pre-
manufactured
assemblies and
components for
the vast majority
of our projects.
Investigated
innovative
techniques and
products to focus
on increasing
productivity.
Retained Gold
membership of
The 5% Club,
with 8.7% of our
employees in
‘earn and learn’
positions.
Expanded our
apprenticeship
programmes to
support social
mobility and
diversity and
provide a range of
entry routes.
Won awards
for inclusive
recruitment of
apprentices and
graduates.
Ran or took part
in over 280 skills
events to engage
with young people
in education and
inspire them
to consider a
career in the built
environment.
Engaged with 80
manufacturers
to form Group-
level agreements,
maintaining
product quality
regardless of
prevailing market
conditions.
Built on established
supply chain
relationships and
collaboration
to improve
efficiencies.
Supported industry
best practice
in procurement
competence
via involvement
with Industry
Competence
Steering Group
(ICSG) and
the Code for
Construction
Product
Information (CCPI).
Achieved a pre-tax
return on equity of
14.9%.
Contributed £2.7
billion to UK
GDP, including an
average of £290k
per home through
taxation and
contributions to
the community.
Continued
to support
the Berkeley
Foundation and its
charity partners,
with employees
raising £839k and
volunteering 1,900
hours of time.
The Berkeley
Foundation won
two trophies at
the 2025 Better
Society Awards,
including the
Philanthropy
Award.
Achieved
Increase staff
engagement year-
on-year.
Embed our
approach to
Equity, Diversity
and Inclusion
(EDI), focusing
on leadership,
awareness
andtraining.
Achieve an AIIR
of 250 or below
per 100,000,
targeting
zeroharm.
Raise the
proportion
of women in
management
positions to
33%by 2026.
Further embed
our new digital
platform to
capture the
‘golden thread’
of information for
every home.
Utilise Building
Information
Modelling (BIM)
for apartment
schemes over 18
metres.
Measure and
increase the
proportion of Pre
Manufactured
Value (PMV)
within our
developments.
Ensure the
Berkeley
Competency
Framework is
being effectively
implemented.
Maintain
membership of
The 5% Club.
Host a range
of careers
events focused
on increasing
the diversity
of individuals
attracted to work
in the industry.
Gift
Apprenticeship
Levy to support
SMEs.
Align our
processes
with the
recommendations
of the Chartered
Institute of
Procurement and
Supply (CIPS).
Work with Code
for Construction
Product
Information
(CCPI) to ensure
information
standards are
improved across
the supply chain
by 2026.
Assess all
contractors
formodern
slavery risk.
Achieve a 15%
pre-tax return
onequity across
the cycle.
Increase
employee
engagement
with the Berkeley
Foundation year-
on-year.
Leverage skills
and expertise
across Berkeley
to support the
Foundation’s
charity partners.
Demonstrate
the impact of
the Foundation’s
worksupported
by the Group.
In progress
Exceptional people and resources
How we work
Key | Progress
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 39
Our Vision 2030 progress continued
Our Vision 2030 is helping
to drive our performance,
spur innovation and
reinforce Berkeley’s
position as a responsible
and sustainable developer.
This section highlights key
initiatives and progress
across our 10 priorities.
Key | Strategic priorities
Customers
Quality
Communities
Climate action
Nature
Employee experience
Modernised production
Future skills
Supply chain
Shared value
The power of communication in creating
a positive journey foreachcustomer
+81.6
Net Promoter Score compared
toan industry average of +59
(HBF, March 2025)
98%
customers would recommend
us to a friend, compared to
an industry average of 94%
(HBF,March 2025)
We use an independent market
research agency to measure
customer satisfaction using two
nationally recognised metrics,
and we consistently score
above industry averages. This
year we have been awarded
both the 2025 Gold Award for
Customer Satisfaction alongside
the Outstanding Achievement
Award, from independent body
In-house Research, for the
11thyearrunning.
We continually seek new ways
of understanding our customers
and how we can enhance
their experience. This year, we
added a new survey question to
deepen our knowledge of brand
perception and we are using focus
groups to gather a longer-term
perspective on how customers
feel five months after moving in,
aiming to improve our service.
93%
of our homes had zero or fewer
than fivedefects, as reported
by our customers
Using research to improve
customer experience
From exceptional customer service
to the quality of our homes, we aim
to delight our customers in every
detail. Our highly trained in-house
sales and customer teams provide
a personal touch to each customer,
supporting them throughout their
journey to buying and settling into
their new home.
Face-to-face contact during
customer visits to sales and
marketing suites pre- and post-
reservation, as well as ‘meet the
team’ community evenings and open
days for customers to measure up
at their new home, are supported
by communications including
virtual tours, video updates of site
progression, quarterly newsletters
and customer moving in guides.
We use our interactive portal,
MyHome Plus, to share information
about the home, the buying process
and customer choices.
Our new brochure, Why New, Why
Berkeley, explains the benefits
of buying a new build home and
particularly a Berkeley home. This
includes details on why our homes
are safe, high quality and energy
efficient, whilst having access to
nature and being well connected
to public transport andto
localcommunities.
We are also trialling a live-chat
service, enabling engagement
with potential customers 24/7 via
ourwebsite.
A new Mystery Shopping process
has also focused on how our
teams engage with customers, as
well as the information conveyed,
to ensure our relationships and
interactions with customers are
thebest they can be.
40 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
First line of defence
We ensure our staff are trained to adhere to stringent BSQA arrangements. We
use a cloud-based platform called FieldView to manage actions in real time and in
collaboration with our contractors, ensuring we keep a digital record throughout
the build stage. We work closely with manufacturers to deliver training to our
teams on their products, to ensure that they are installed to exacting standards.
Second line of defence
Each division has a dedicated local BSQA team which audits and works with our
production teams to assess and offer expert insights on build quality.
Third line of defence
As the industry-leader in BSQA auditing, we have a Group Internal Audit team who
regularly inspect our sites to perform an impartial review at all stages and ensure
strict adherence to all processes. This year the team completed detailed audits
of our projects for Fire and Life Safety and Façade Integrity, with demonstrable
improvements from previous audits in both areas.
We pride ourselves on our
reputation for quality and remain
committed to delivering safe
and high-quality homes for our
customers and communities.
Attention to detail is instilled in our
culture for all aspects of a home’s
delivery, from building safety and
design to final finishes that are
visible to our customers.
We have had a robust Building Safety
and Quality Assurance (BSQA)
system in place for five years which is
continually reviewed to make further
enhancements and to respond to
the evolving requirements of the
Building Safety Act. We ensure
that we have three lines of defence
prior to regulatory submissions and
handover tocustomers.
Rated the top UK
housebuilder for
build quality
We are delighted to be ranked
as the top UK housebuilder for
build quality by HomeViews, the
only independent review platform
for residential developments in
thecountry. Verified residents
provide reviews covering all aspects
of buying and living in their new
build home.
We are proud that our customers
have confidence in the build
quality of our homes, reflecting
our continued commitment to
delivering high quality homes our
customers cantrust.
The house quality
compared to other
developers is
outstanding. The
materials they have
used, the design and
high specification.
Customer at Leighwood Fields,
Cranleigh
This achievement is a
strong reflection of your
continued commitment
to delivering outstanding
service and exceeding
the expectations of
your homebuyers.
Yourdedication to
puttingcustomers first
sets a high standard
in theindustry and
reinforces trust in your
brand andthe wider
housing market.
Tom Weston | Chief Executive,
In-house Research
Delivering high quality
homes to ourcustomers
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 41
Our Vision 2030 progress continued
Ensuring workforce
competence inbuilding safety
The cornerstone of building safety
is competence; ensuring that
individuals and organisations have
the appropriate skills, knowledge,
experience, and behaviours. For
Berkeley, this includes ensuring
individuals have appropriate
qualifications and that training is
undertaken in line with a detailed
Berkeley training roadmap.
This year we have progressed our
training offering on the Building
Safety Act, introducing the
industry’s first training modules
on the Principal Designer and
Accountable Person duty holders
set out in the Building Safety Act, in
addition to our existing foundation
and contractor modules.
Our accredited training
organisation, The Berkeley
Academy, has worked with the
Construction Industry Training
Board (CITB) to convert these
modules into industry training
standards to improve the
competence of the wider industry.
We have also implemented a new
contractor assessment process
aligned to the requirements of
the Building Safety Act. We have
worked with our contractor,
consultant and material supply
chains to support them through
these significant industry changes,
enabling them to demonstrate
their organisational and
workforcecompetence.
Driving industry best practice
through proactive support
Berkeley is playing a pivotal role
in building safety through the
Construction Leadership Council
(CLC) and various other industry
groups. Karl Whiteman, a member
of Berkeley’s Executive Committee,
is the CLC’s Industry Sponsor for
Building Safety and continues to
work closely with the Government
and the Building Safety Regulator
to help them shape a workable and
effective gateway process.
We are members of the commercial
and procurement group under the
Industry Competence Steering
Group (ICSG) set up to create
a competence framework for
procurement professionals in the
built environment sector. Having
published the framework in April
2025, the group will now develop
and roll out training and assessment
to ensure that the framework is fully
adopted across the industry.
We have also supported the
development of the Code for
Construction Product Information
(CCPI) which ensures we can
deploy products that are supplied
with clear, accurate, accessible,
up to date and unambiguous
product information. Products
that are verified by CCPI adhere to
these information standards, which
enable us to continue to develop
quality buildings that meet safety
and performance standards. They
also aid our capture and submission
to the Building Safety Regulator of
an accurate record of building data
throughout the lifecycle of a project.
A strategic
supply chain
for materials
Our extensive materials supply
chain is critical to meeting our
production needs. To support
resilience of supply for common
materials, we have established
manufacturer design and
service level agreements with
key companies. These include
cross functional assessment
for items such as embodied
carbon, modern slavery and
labour abuse, sustainability
and build quality alongside
technical compliance and
qualitystandards.
With more than 80 agreements
now in place and more
continually being added, we are
able to maintain high standards
and continuity of supply despite
changing and unpredictable
marketconditions.
42 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Combatting modern slavery and labour abuse
All Berkeley employees are
required to complete training on
combatting modern slavery and
we have embedded due diligence
and risk management processes
within our commercial and
construction activities, including
a questionnaire that is completed
for all new tenders, and a
checklist that must be completed
during all factory visits.
We ensure that each Site Modern
Slavery Lead, the most senior
person on each construction
site, receives detailed training to
understand their role in raising
awareness, as well as responding
to and escalating modern slavery
concerns. This interactive training
involves time to discuss potential
risks on site, how processes could
be improved to mitigate any risks
and promote proactivity in other
areas of the business where this
may not yet have been considered.
We continue to collaborate
with industry and are part of
the Supply Chain Sustainability
School’s Built Environment
Against Slavery Group, the largest
anti-slavery collaboration in the
UKbuiltenvironment.
Supporting and
collaborating
withour valued
supply chain
Our goal is to build a responsible
and constructive supply chain;
one that is productive, practical,
profitable, sustainable, ethical
anddependable.
We work closely with our supply
chain on a daily basis on site as
well as helping them plan for future
opportunities across Berkeley.
We have been sharing project
forecasting details with both
material and contractor members of
our supply chain since 2017, with this
open dialogue forming a critical part
of long-term relationship building.
Feedback is also promoted to
continually improve services
onboth sides.
Following the success of our
first Group-wide Supply Chain
Conference in 2023, we are
planning another one to be held
in late 2025, which will build on
our established relationships
and enable collaboration on
topics such as environmental
management, equity, diversity and
inclusion, and labour exploitation.
Recognising that given the scale of
this issue, it cannot be addressed
by one company alone, we are
proud to be part of a construction
sector peer to peer working group
with representatives from Laing
O’Rourke, Skanska and Morgan
Sindall to share and discuss our
approach to a variety of topics
including modern slavery. This
year in collaboration with the UK’s
Modern Slavery Helpline Unseen,
the peer to peer group initiated and
produced a publicly available short
video to be used in construction
site inductions to raise awareness of
modern slavery and labour abuse
throughout theindustry.
Scan the code
to watch the video
onmodern slavery
Scan the code
to read our Modern
SlaveryStatement
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 43
600
acres of publicly accessible green
space or parks being developed
on live development sites,
connecting people withnature
Our Vision 2030 progress continued
We are proud to specialise in
regenerating brownfield sites, with
the highest potential for positive
change. Reviving neglected sites
is often the most sustainable place
to build, delivering new homes,
amenities, jobs and growth where
they are most desired. Given the
scale of these challenging sites, our
holistic placemaking programmes
can take up to 30 years to complete.
This year we were proud
to launchour latest report
BrownfieldPlanning Passports:
TheFast Track to Growth at the
Houses of Parliament. The report
explores thechallenges and
opportunities ofregeneration
A focus on brownfield sites where we
can make valuable andenduring contributions
92%
of live development sites
incorporate community facilities,
in addition to the landscaped-
open space that is delivered on
every site
535
community facilities will be
provided, including dedicated
places for communities to meet,
amenities and shops
>20
sports facilities will be provided,
contributing to improved
health and wellbeing and
socialintegration
>140
children’s play spaces will be
provided, together with more
than 25 schools and nurseries
43,000
people reached by our
engagement activities, including
15,000 via careers events
The Green Quarter, Ealing
and how it can accelerate much-
needed development without
sacrificing quality, affordability,
orenvironmental concerns.
Our teams work hard to engage
with the communities in the
neighbourhoods we develop, and to
champion our industry by showcasing
the breadth of opportunities available
to people from all walks of life, as
well as helping people to overcome
barriers and build a fairer society.
We prioritise the early delivery of
community engagement activities,
public amenities and natural spaces
to ensure local communities feel the
benefits of regeneration as soon
aspossible.
32
long-term regeneration sites
650
events held to engage local people,
including 280 careers events
44 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Community event on top of Oval Village’s Gasholder
30
apprentices supported directly
and through our supply chain
60
career-related events held
Oval Village
transforming an historic site
into a thrivingcommunity
One of our supply chain
apprentices working on site
was recognised by Lambeth
Council as the BeLambeth
Apprentice of the Year’ 2024,
and we were also awarded
‘Highly Commended’ in
the ‘Employer of the Year
awardscategory.
Hosted a unique game of
cricket inside the Victorian
gasholder to mark the Berkeley
Foundation’s £750,000
commitment to disability sport
with the Lord’s Taverners.
Restored a once-neglected
garden next door to Charlie
Chaplin’s former home,
revitalising a cherished
localspace.
This complex brownfield site,
consisting of four derelict
gasholders and an adjacent
supermarket and warehouse, is being
knitted back into the local fabric
and brought to life as a sustainable
mixed use neighbourhood.
With a network of pedestrian
streets, public squares and
biodiverse landscaping, Oval
Village will be a connected and
welcoming part of the London
Borough of Lambeth, delivering
1,360 high quality homes,
community spaces and a mix of
amenities and workspace. The
site’s Grade II Listed gasholder is
being sensitively restored and will
form the historic centrepiece of
Oval Village.
This year, we have been delighted
to have worked in partnership to
deliver the following at Oval Village:
Completed the structural
frame for 199 homes within
the Grade II Listed gas holder,
alandmarkachievement.
Won Gold at the Considerate
Constructors Scheme (CCS)
National Site Awards 2025,
recognising our commitment to
the highest industry standards.
Held more than 24 community-
focused activities and events.
Hosted 20 work experience
placements, and delivered 60
career-related events.
Supported more than 30
apprentices working for
Berkeley and with our supply
chain on site.
Scan the code
to read more on Oval Village
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 45
Strategy in action
A framework to meet the
needs and aspirations of
our neighbourhoods
This year we have launched our new Communities
Framework which builds on our previous work on
building strong communities and ensures a structured
approach right from the start. Our framework considers
both the physical and social fabric of a place and is an
important integrated part of our wider placemaking
and design process. The steps of the framework must
be recorded in each development’s Community Plan
which is started pre-planning and is bespoke to each
development. These Community Plans are shared
with our stakeholders and the local communities.
We use them to demonstrate our commitment
to the communities in which we work.
Our Vision 2030 progress continued
The principles that underpin
our framework:
OPEN: we listen carefully to the people and
communities around our sites to understand
their differing concerns and priorities.
INCLUSIVE: our core intent is to create
communities where a broad spread of
society feels included and where existing
stakeholders feel welcomed to contribute.
LONG-TERM: communities are hugely
complex, and it takes time, expertise and
sustained capital investment to make a
positive difference.
PROPORTIONATE: our approach must
reflect the scale and potential of our plans.
We must not promise more impact than we
can deliver.
COLLABORATIVE: our approach is highly
collaborative, and we look to develop lasting
relationships with a network of local people
and organisations.
BUILDING TRUST: this is fundamental to
successful placemaking. We earn local
trust through applying these principles and
through listening to local views to deliver on
our promises.
Establish Relevant
Local Needs and Aspirations
Deliver Social Value
Ensure Governance
and Stewardship
STEP
1
STEP
2
STEP
3
46 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Our approach In action
Understanding the interests, aspirations
and vision of our local stakeholders and
the communities in which we work is
fundamental. This is why meaningful
community engagement is the vital first
step for every project, and further
engagement then continues throughout
thedevelopmentstages.
The vision and plans for Bromley-by-Bow were
shaped through a far-reaching community
engagement programme, which included more than
270 visits and tours to the site by local people and
community groups. In addition, we have engaged with
more than 300 young people living locally through a
mix of careers events and workshops.
This proactive approach has helped meet a
wider range of local people and gain a deeper
understanding of local needs and aspirations. The
priorities of local people and groups included more
eateries and retail, public spaces, outdoor gym
equipment and spaces for sports.
Once the needs and aspirations of the
community, both physical and social, have been
established we develop a plan for delivering
social value. This will come from four areas:
working with partners; delivering community
events and activities; creating an action plan
regarding specific local needs; as well as
communicating the benefits that the overall
development will deliver.
The vision for the community at The Green Quarter
in Ealing and surrounding neighbourhoods is to
establish meaningful relationships and feel proud of
the area.
Through our partnership with OPEN Southall we
have delivered a popular community and creative
hub called Parkside Yards. It includes a gastro pub,
café, florist, gallery, tree nursery, padel courts and
affordable work and community event spaces.
We engage with local people through an annual
programme of community and careers events. We
have also delivered major upgrades to the local road
network and created new parks.
We look to establish the most appropriate
form of long-term governance for each site,
which gives local residents clear ownership and
agency over the way their neighbourhood is
managed and looked after long into the future,
from social committees and community liaison
groups to community funds, to support the
wider community. We also recognise that the
ultimate test of each place is through the lived
experiences of our customers and residents
which we can then feed back into the process.
Established in 2014, we have recently celebrated
10 years of the London Dock Community Fund
in partnership with the East End Community
Foundation. Its goal is to enhance the local area
providing long-term stewardship and governance.
The Fund allocates money annually to support
community projects and charities in the local area.
Over the last 10 years, it has awarded more than
£208,000 in grants to 99 community projects. More
than 8,000 local residents have benefited from
projects such as drama and gardening clubs and
health and wellbeing initiatives.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 47
Our Vision 2030 progress continued
Delivering low carbon, resilient homes
Carbon emissions from homes
whilst they are in use by residents
are an area covered by regulation
and dependent on the rate of
decarbonisation of the grid. It is
an ongoing focus as the industry
moves towards producing zero
carbon ready homes, removing
the use of gas and delivering all
electric homes with low-carbon
heating and solar photovoltaic
(PV) panels.
In advance of the Future Homes
Standard to be launched in
autumn 2025 we have been
preparing our developments
for the expected changes and
incorporating technologies such
as heat pumps and PV panels.
At Heron Wharf, we have
conducted ‘live-in’ trials with three
different exhaust air heat pump
technologies to gain valuable
insight into the experience of
living with and using each low-
carbon solution.
We also continue to engage with
Government and industry on
the topic, for example through
our membership and active
engagement with the Future
Homes Hub and the UK Green
Building Council (UKGBC).
Lowering carbon from our operations
Having completed energy audits of
our sites, sales suites, offices and
vehicle fleet in compliance with
the Energy Savings Opportunity
Scheme (ESOS), we have produced
an energy reduction action plan.
A large focus in the year has
been on reducing out-of-hours
consumption, with several sites and
offices adopting energy monitoring
systems and consumption alarms to
flag high usage for prompt action
by our teams. We are also working
to decarbonise our company
vehicle fleet with new or replaced
vehicles to be hybrid or electric
from 2026.
We continue to directly procure
responsibly sourced biodiesel HVO
(Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil) to
replace traditional diesel on our
construction sites. We are also
working with JCB to understand
more about hydrogen powered plant
and how this could work on our sites
as a clean poweralternative.
95%
of completed homes achieved
an EPC rating of B or above
77%
reduction in scopes 1 and 2
emissions since 2019
Strategy in action
Supporting
climate change
research and
development
We have been working with
the Supply Chain Sustainability
School on a project funded by
CITB to produce a series of
videos on how net zero is being
achieved across the industry,
and what skills are being used
to achieve this. These will be
made publicly available for
the benefit of the industry,
and particularly SMEs, to
share knowledge and develop
understanding on how to
transition to net zero.
We are taking part in the Mayor
of London’s Better Futures
Innovation Challenge which
provides support to eligible
SMEs who are seeking to
innovate and bring low carbon
solutions to market. We’ve
partnered with Energy Carbon,
a company which provides
surface heating systems
using low voltage, far infra-
red technology, designed to
minimise energy usage and
maximise efficiency and thermal
performance. This technology
will now be trialled in one of our
sales and marketing suites.
In partnership with Camden
STEAM (Science, Technology,
Engineering, Arts and
Mathematics), we have
supported climate and
environmental workshops
for a Green Dragon’s Den
Competition. Pupils pitched for
funds to support their school
projects to tackle climate
change, as well as attending
workshops and discussions on
sustainable development, air
quality and recycling.
Further detail is included in our climate-related disclosures on pages 58 to 75
Air source heat pumps
48 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
We have been taking voluntary
action on unregulated embodied
carbon emissions for several
years. These emissions from the
materials and services we use to
build the homes are a significant
impact for us, accounting for
more than half of the carbon
impact of the homes we build
throughout their lifetime. We have
now completed more than 60
embodied carbon assessments,
equipping our teams with
knowledge and experience in how
to reduce emissions.
Since we undertook our
embodied carbon baselining
exercise and set our original
reduction targets in 2022, we
have seen significant changes
in the planning and legislative
landscape including updates
to the Building Regulations
(FLOS and B (fire safety)).
These changes have led to an
unintended consequence of
increasing embodied carbon by
as much as 30% depending on
design mitigations employed.
For example, many buildings
now need to incorporate larger
cores to accommodate secondary
means of escape which requires
more concrete, and changes in
ventilation requirements have
resulted in higher ceilings and
more mechanical ventilation. In
addition, design standards within
London require us to deliver dual
aspect homes, with up to 40%
increased wall area.
Over recent years there have
been considerable steps forward
in the industry’s understanding of
embodied carbon. This year the
pilot version of the UK Net Zero
Carbon Building Standard was
released. We have chosen to align
our internal targets for project
teams with these industry-wide
limits and to adopt the updated
methodology for calculating
embodied carbon set out by RICS
to ensure comparability in results.
>60
detailed embodied carbon
studiescompleted
The most effective ways to reduce
embodied carbon emissions
Efficient design
Our approach focuses on the design of the development from the outset,
ensuring efficient design to reduce the volume of materials. Optimising the
structural design is key to reducing embodied carbon, as demonstrated at
our Trillium development, where wind tunnel testing allowed the volume of
concretefor the primary structure to be reduced by a third.
STEP
1
We aim to specify and procure materials with increased recycled
content and lower embodied carbon. We have focused on engaging
with material manufacturers for some of the most impactful
materials, such as aluminium and concrete.
For aluminium, our teams are now able to access low and ultralow
carbon options for windows and facades, reducing embodied carbon
by up to 75% at no or limited impact on costs and programme.
Thebenefits of Group-wide agreements with manufacturers are now
being realised, such as lower carbon windows installed at TheGreen
Quarter during the year. Through an improved understanding and
early engagement with manufacturers and frame contractors to
optimise specifications we are also successfully using lower carbon
concrete, with around 75% of deliveries during 2025 usinglower
carbon concrete mixes.
STEP
2
Low carbon materials
STEP
3
Low carbon site activities
Once on site, our Sustainability Standards and processes
promote efficient site operations to minimise waste
production and energy and water consumption, all of
which help reduce the embodied carbon of a project.
Driving down embodied carbon
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 49
Our Vision 2030 progress continued
Exemplary delivery
of biodiversity
netgain
Having championed and
pioneered the successful
implementation of biodiversity
net gain (BNG) on new
developments since 2017, we
welcomed the national milestone
of mandatory BNG for new
developments in February
2024. Recognising that the new
requirements are still bedding
in and that there are some
challenges to overcome, we
co-chair a BNG Implementation
Board with Defra via the Future
Homes Hub to help bring
together industry and collaborate
on solutions for successfully
delivering homes and nature.
We have been used by the
Government and others
internationally as an example
of successfully delivering BNG
and will continue to learn
andshare knowledge with
peersandindustry.
This year, we won the Excellence
in Habitat Restoration Award at
the ESG Edge Awards for our
demonstration of a long history
working with stakeholders
and communities to support
biodiversity protection. The
judges praisedour approach to
regeneration and supporting
nature recovery whichfocuses
on knowledge sharing
andcollaboration.
Connecting people with nature
We work hard to help our
communities enjoy nature and feel
the benefits that nature brings,
including better health and wellbeing.
Our preference is for BNG to be
delivered on site where it can benefit
residents and local communities and
help to re-green our towns and cities.
We use specialist ecologists
to ensure that our approach is
location-specific at each site and
fits within emerging local nature
strategies and plans. We also
partner with local Wildlife Trusts to
draw on their expertise to create
natural parks that provide wonderful
wildlife-rich areas for residents and
the wider communityto enjoy.
This year we won the susdrain SuDS
Large New Housing Development
Award at Chelsea Creek for the
integration of canals designed for
recreational use, together with reed
wetlands and green roofs.
A new park has been opened at
King’s Road Park this year, forming
part of the six-acre network of open
landscape being created at the
development, which is expected to
create a BNG of more than 110%.
At The Green Quarter, a new living
wall has been installed, which will
bring many benefits to residents
including improved air quality, health
and wellbeing. Our on-site tree
nursery, consisting of 600 trees, has
an interactive wildlife trail which is
attended by many local schools to
learn about the different UK tree
species and wildlife they attract.
At Hartland Village we have
developed a biodiversity garden
guide to give new residents
information on how they can utilise
their garden space to encourage
biodiversity, from wildflower areas
to drought gardens, with tips on
species and maintenance.
We are developing our understanding of value
chain nature-related dependencies, impacts, risks
and opportunities in line with the recommendations
of the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial
Disclosures(TNFD).
57
developments committed
toBNGsince May 2017
>1,200
acres of newly created
orenhancedhabitat including
500 acres at a 4,000 home
development in Milton Keynes
Abbey Barn Park, High Wycombe
Scan the code to read more about
our approach to TNFD
50 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
We retain Gold membership of The
5% Club, with 8.7% of our employees
in ‘earn and learn’ positions. On
average this includes more than
100 apprentices, 50 graduates
and 60 sponsored students
studying towards an accredited
external qualification. More than 40
graduates and apprentices joined
us in September 2024 and the next
cohort have been recruited and
are set to start their career with
Berkeley in September 2025.
We were delighted to be named the
second top company to work for
in our sector for both apprentices
and graduates by The Job Crowd,
together with featuring fourth
across all industries for apprentices
and 17
th
for graduates.
We support skills and training
across our supply chain through
our network of Employment Skills
Managers, who work with our
contractors to grow their own
talent and help tackle some of
the industry’s skills shortages. In
addition, we have partnered with
Workwhile to gift £100,000 per year
of our unallocated Apprenticeship
8.7%
of employees in
‘earn and learn’ roles
Prime Minister at Eastbrook
School visit to TwelveTrees Park, Newham
Levy, with a particular focus on
built environment roles within
London’sSMEs.
Improving our skills system is
a key part of the Government’s
growth mission, and we have been
delighted to host visits to our sites
throughout the year.
The Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer,
visited Eastbrook Village in Milton
Keynes where he spent time talking
to 15 of Berkeley’s apprentices.
Bridget Phillipson, Secretary of State
for Education, visited Oval Village
as the Department for Education
celebrated the beginning of National
Apprenticeship Week. Another visit
was made by the Secretary of State
for Work and Pensions, Liz Kendall
and Mayor of the West Midlands,
Richard Parker to Glasswater Locks
in Birmingham to understand how
our training partnership is helping
local people reach their potential in
the workplace.
We work hard to champion our
industry by showcasing the breadth
of attractive opportunities available
to people from all walks of life.
We undertake a range of
engagement activities with people
who may not be aware of the
range of fulfilling careers available,
such as visits to and from local
schools and colleges, attending
industry careers fairs, hosting
work experience placements and
providing mentoring or workshops
on employability skills to those who
areunemployed in local communities.
We have undertaken around 280
events this year with local schools,
colleges and universities, reaching
over 15,000 people.
Championing careers in the builtenvironment
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 51
We support a range of
apprenticeship levels and courses
to enhance social mobility and
diversity and give more people
an opportunity to enter the built
environment sector.
Our approach to hiring apprentices
and graduates is leading the way
in levelling the playing field to be
more inclusive and reduce the
potential for unconscious bias during
the selection process by removing
the use of CVs, anonymising
allapplications and asking role-
specific competency questions to
capture a candidate’s potential.
This year we celebrated
International Women’s Day with a
Group-wide event for the second
year, to reflect on the progress,
challenges and opportunities for
women in the built environment.
The event included a panel of
inspiring women representing
every division of our business
from a range of departments and
levels of seniority. They shared
their experiences as women in
the built environment sector
and at Berkeley and their hopes
for the future. The event was a
fantastic opportunity to celebrate
how far we have come and key
milestones, such as our first all-
female production leadership
team working at South Quay
Plaza, alongside an update from
senior leadership on plans to go
even further to support women.
This year we have improved our
Group-wide employee benefits
including enhanced parental leave
and free access to an externally
provided menopause plan.
Our Vision 2030 progress continued
Taking action on
Equity, Diversity
and Inclusion
Our goal is to foster an
environment where all
differences are valued,
practices are equitable and
everyone experiences a sense
of belonging. Our approach to
Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
(EDI) focuses on five areas:
Setting the tone by leading
from the top
Partnering with external
organisations that can
support us on our journey
Awareness, allyship
andcelebration
Attracting and recruiting the
best talent
Using analytics and feedback
to drive change
We run Group-wide
communication and events
on EDI and our autonomous
businesses deliver additional
detailed programmes
andinitiatives.
Using our voluntary employee
survey we are building a
more detailed picture of our
employees and the experience
of different demographics
enabling us to set specific
actions and targets to develop a
more representative workforce.
Supporting women at Berkeley
We have also completed the first
cohort of The Circle Partnership’s
12 month Academy Programme,
supporting women in the sector
to grow in their roles and become
the senior leaders of the future.
Another cohort of women are
now progressing with the 2025
programme and benefiting from
1:1 mentoring, a bespoke two-day
emerging leadership programme
as well as various events on
topics such as setting healthy
boundaries, improving resilience
and presenting with impact.
Interview responses are measured
against an objective scoring matrix
and assessment centres are attended
by assessors who have completed
inclusive recruitmenttraining.
We are delighted that our efforts to
promote inclusive recruitment have
been recognised by winning the
‘Candidate Assessment’ accolade
at the In-house Recruitment
Awards 2024 and ‘Apprenticeship
Initiative of the Year’ at the London
Construction Awards 2024.
International Women’s Day event
Inclusive recruitment practices to enhance
social mobility anddiversity
52 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Our established and robust
approach to health and safety
helps us to consistently outperform
the industry with an Annual Injury
Incidence Rate for the year at 102
per 100,000 people, compared
to an industry average of 306
(HSE,November 2024).
Our teams operate to stringent
Group-wide health and safety
standards that are audited regularly
by our Group audit team, as well
as audits completed by a Berkeley
Director twice a month. We have
a large team of local health and
safety managers who provide
expert advice and guidance to
the project teams on a daily
basis extending across safety,
occupational health and wellbeing,
and welfarestandards.
Targeting the
physical working
environment
Focusing on risk
management
and encouraging
positive behaviour
and attitudes
Targeting
improvements
in health and
wellbeing
We maintain our three established programmes:
The nature of regeneration and
developing apartments results in
higher risk activities. Our approach
is to ensure that every site applies
the same high standards, even if
it is not high risk. Our Working at
Height campaign instils a focus
within our workforce on this
keytopic.
We offer a range of initiatives
with the aim of having a positive
impact on the mental health of
our employees. All employees
have access to Bupa’s Employee
Assistance Programme offering
24/7 access to counselling and we
have a network of more than 400
mental health first aiders within
the business, trained to spot the
signs of poor mental health and
offer support.
1,970
health and safety audits completed
102
Annual Injury Incidence Rate
per 100,000 people compared to
an industry average of 306 (HSE,
November 2024)
Maintaining industry-leading health,
safety and wellbeing standards
Upskilling our
employees
The Berkeley Academy is an
Approved Training Organisation
(ATO) with the Construction
Industry Training Board
(CITB) and delivers training
for our employees across two
trainingcentres.
The Academy runs training on
many topics such as health and
safety, sustainability, building
safety and quality assurance
(BSQA), with over 1,000
colleagues trained on BSQA
inthe year.
This is supplemented by
training run locally by our
divisions covering topics such
as behaviours in the workplace,
leadership and management
skills and EDI.
We also offer opportunities
to work towards external
qualifications and professional
accreditations, with more
than 130 of our colleagues
choosing to upskill during
the year through recognised
externalqualifications
andapprenticeships.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 53
58%
of Berkeley employees involved
with Berkeley Foundation activities
in the year
1,900
hours volunteered by Berkeley
employees in the year
Our Vision 2030 progress continued
Understanding
employee
perspectives
We were pleased to see
improvements in each of the
three main areas of our 2024
employee engagement survey
– engagement, health and
wellbeing, and diversity and
inclusion – compared to the
2023 scores.
Improvements were also
demonstrated in each and
every one of the underlying
sub sections since the previous
survey, with the most notable
seen for diversity and inclusion,
organisational support
andautonomy.
We were able to see increases
clearly attributed to actions put
in place following the preceding
survey, demonstrating the
benefits of each action such
as investment in management
training, improving our office
facilities, providing more
agile working practices and
enhancing parental leave.
Supporting the work of
theBerkeleyFoundation
The Berkeley Foundation remains
deeply embedded at Berkeley and
our employees give their time and
expertise to support its partners,
together with charitable donations
and fundraising. More than half
of our employees chose to get
involved in the Foundation’s work
over the last year.
Employees were encouraged to use
their allocated volunteeringday
benefit through two volunteering
campaigns this year. All volunteers
reported that they’d like to
volunteer again, and 84% felt better
connected to the communities in
which we operate.
The volunteering opportunities
ranged from working at a Crisis
charity store, playing games and
serving food at a half-term activity
week for the Mayor’s Fund for
London (Kitchen Social), painting
and gardening at the sensory
garden at Richard House Children’s
Hospice, and many more.
We are delighted that the
Berkeley Foundation won
twotrophies at the 2025 Better
Society Awards, recognising
the positive impact it is having
across its partnerships and the
wider philanthropic sector:
Philanthropy Award,
withBerkeley Group
Partnership with a National
Charity, with MyBnk
Street Elite graduation at Grand Union
54 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
The Berkeley Foundation
This year was another
successful year for the Berkeley
Foundation, deepening impact
in the communities where
Berkeley operates through
long-term charity partnerships
and continued support from
Berkeleyemployees.
The Foundation worked with 43
expert frontline charities across
London, Birmingham and the
South of England to drive change
across five impact goals.
The Foundation invests in
four ways: strategic long-
term partnerships; community
partnerships which are chosen by
staff and local to Berkeley’s sites
and offices; the Resilience Fund
which supports small-to-medium
sized organisations with their own
development; and the Development
Fund which is a flexible funding
pot in order to explore new ideas
andopportunities.
£839k
raised by Berkeley employees for
the Foundation and its charity
partners through fundraising and
Give As You Earn (GAYE)
£3.3m
given to the Foundation’s charity
partners through grants, staff
fundraising and GAYE
>11,000
people reached through the
Foundation’s charity partnerships
A safe place
to call home
Journey to
employment
Health and
wellbeing
Youth
leadership
A resilient
voluntary sector
We want to ensure
everybody in our
communities has
somewhere safe,
secure and sustainable
to call home.
We want to ensure
that all young people
are prepared for
work and have the
opportunity to build a
sustainable career.
We want to ensure
that young people
and their communities
have the support they
need to live happier,
healthier lives.
We want to ensure
that young people
are empowered to
positively impact their
own lives and the
communities in which
they live.
We want to ensure
that young people
and their communities
are supported by a
voluntary sector that is
effective, inclusive and
well-resourced.
The Foundation
renewed its strategic
partnership with
MyBnk, supporting
its financial education
programme aimed
at preventing youth
homelessness
in London and
Birmingham.
The Foundation
continues to support
its strategic partners:
Crisis, the national
charity for single
homeless people; and
the New Horizon Youth
Centre, a leader in the
youth homeless sector
in London.
The Foundation
renewed its strategic
partnership with The
Change Foundation
in support of the
Street Elite training-
for-work programme,
committing £1.5m over
the next five years.
The Foundation
continues to support
its strategic partner
Imperial College
London to inspire
children and young
people to engage in
Science, Technology,
Engineering and
Mathematics (STEM).
The Foundation
renewed its strategic
partnership with the
Mayor’s Fund for
London in support
of the Kitchen
Social programme,
committing more than
£300,000 over the
next three years.
The Foundation
continues to support
its strategic partner
The Lord’s Taveners,
the UK’s leading youth
cricket and disability
sports charity.
During the year
Berkeley colleagues
assisted the
Foundation’s strategic
partner Groundwork
London with its youth
leadership programme,
providing feedback on
the young participants’
social action projects.
The Foundation
also launched a new
funding programme
targeting small-
to-medium-sized
organisations working
to build leadership
skills in young people
affected by racist or
Islamophobic violence.
This year saw the
Foundation launch
five new charity
partnerships through
the third year of its
Resilience Fund, aimed
at strengthening
the resilience of
organisations working
with young people
experiencing or at risk
of homelessness.
The fourth year of the
fund has now been
launched, to provide
unrestricted grants to
15 grassroots partners
affected by the racist
riots in August 2024.
Impact goal2025 key highlights
Street Elite Festival,
The Green Quarter, Ealing
Scan the code
to find out more about the
Berkeley Foundation
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 55
ESG Performance
We monitor a range of Environmental,
Social and Governance (ESG) indicators
across our business activities.
Indicator Metric Unit 2025 2024 2023
Link to
priorities
New homes Completed homes, including joint ventures # 4,329 3,927 4,637 All
Benchmarks
and indices
CDP Climate Change questionnaire Rating B
1
A A-
FTSE4Good Index Series listed company Y/N Y Y Y
MSCI ESG Rating Rating AAA AAA AAA
S&P Global Corporate Sustainability Assessment #/100 69 56 53
Sustainalytics ESG Risk Rating (Note: smaller values
indicate lower risk)
Rating 12.8
(Low)
14.0
(Low)
14.1
(Low)
1
Under review by CDP
Environmental
Indicator Metric Unit 2025 2024 2023
Link to
priorities
Environmentally
responsible
operations
Number of environmental prosecutions # 0 0 0
Monetary cost of environmental fines and penalties £ 0 0 0
Scopes 1 and 2 (location-based) emissions tCO
2
e 5,027 5,245 5,223
Scopes 1 and 2 (market-based) emissions tCO
2
e 896 917 963
Water consumption m 166,773 182,285 201,979
Total waste generated (including construction,
demolition and excavation wastes)
tonnes 274,747 388,765 596,921
Total waste diverted from landfill % 96 96 97
Sustainable
homes
Completed homes with an EPC rating of at least B % 95 93 93
Average EPC score and rating # 84 (B) 84 (B) 84 (B)
Completed homes with an Environmental Impact
Rating (EIR) of at least B
% 96 96 98
Average internal water efficiency of completed
homes
lpppd 102.2 101.2 102.6
Completed homes constructed on brownfield land % 92 87 86
Completed homes with internal recycling facilities % 100 100 100
Sustainable
places
Developments newly committed to deliver BNG # 2 2 8
% 100 100 100
Developments newly committed to deliver BNG on
site
% 50 100 100
Live development sites regenerating brownfield
land
% 72 75 76
Live development sites with sustainable drainage
systems (SuDS) being provided
% 100 100 100
Live development sites with cycle storage being
provided
% 100 100 100
Live development sites with electric car charging
infrastructure being provided
% 98 98 98
Key | Our Vision 2030 priorities
Customers Quality Communities Climate action Nature
Employee
experience
Modernised
production
Future skills Supply chain Shared value
Scan the code
for data notes and
more metrics
56 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Social
Indicator Metric Unit 2025 2024 2023
Link to
priorities
Charitable giving
and the Berkeley
Foundation
Employees involved with GAYE % 27 29 30
Employees involved with the Berkeley Foundation % 58 61 59
Considerate
construction
Average Considerate Constructors Scheme (CCS) score #/50 44.4 44.2 44.1
Customer
experience
Six month rolling average NPS (to March 2025) # 81.6 80.2 79.2
Customers who would recommend us to a friend (to
March 2025)
% 98.2 97.7 97.5
Health and safety AIIR per 100,000 people – direct employees and on-site
contractors
# 102 52 79
AIIR per 100,000 people – direct employees only # 39 36 0
AIIR per 100,000 people – on-site contractors only # 124 57 106
Work-related fatalities – direct employees and on-site
contractors
# 0 0 0
Accident Frequency Rate (AFR) per 100,000 hours –
direct employees and on-site contractors
# 0.05 0.02 0.04
Skills and training Average monthly percentage of direct workforce who
are graduates, direct apprentices or sponsored students
undertaking formal training
% 8.7 9.5 10.0
Graduates joining the business via Berkeley’s Graduate
Scheme programme
# 29 21 43
Average monthly number of directly employed
apprentices
# 107 151 162
Society and
community
contributions
Contribution to UK GDP, including through direct
activities by Berkeley, indirectly through supply chain
spend and the induced effect of household spend
£bn 2.7 2.5 2.6
Contribution to UK tax, including taxes paid directly by
Berkeley and the taxes paid by customers and suppliers
as a result of Berkeley activities
£m 760 800 837
Contribution to facilities and services for local
communities, including affordable housing subsidies
£m 580 370 560
UK jobs supported annually directly and indirectly
through the supply chain
#,000 27 24 29
Supply chain Average number of days taken to pay suppliers # 29 29 30
Average monthly number of on-site contractors #,000 7. 3 8.8 9.5
Quality Homes with five or fewer defects reported by
customers on completion
% 93 91 91
Governance
Indicator Metric Unit 2025 2024 2023
Link to
priorities
Board of
Directors
Executive Directors # 2 2 5
Independent Non-Executive Directors # 7 7 10
Board of Directors – Male % 56 56 67
Board of Directors – Female % 44 44 33
Average tenure of Board of Directors yrs 7 6 7
Employees
(as of 30 April)
Total employees # 2,552 2,610 2,802
Total employees – Male % 60 62 63
Total employees – Female % 40 38 37
Non-Board senior management – Male % 50 50 29
Non-Board senior management – Female % 50 50 71
Reporting to Board or senior management – Male % 65 68 69
Reporting to Board or senior management – Female % 35 32 31
Note: Metrics include joint venture activities.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 57
Berkeley aims to play an active role
in tackling the global climate emergency.
Climate action is a strategic priority
for the business and is embedded
within Our Vision 2030, with our
overarching target to be a net zero
business by 2045. Our transition
plan to achieve this is holistic and
transformative, encompassing our
direct business operations along
with the design of the new homes
and places we create in partnership
with our supply chain.
Having already achieved a 77%
reduction in our scopes 1 and 2
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
since 2019, we are looking to
push ourselves further. This year
an action plan to target energy
reduction was submitted to the
Environment Agency in line with the
requirements of the Energy Savings
Opportunity Scheme (ESOS).
Our focus on the currently
unregulated emissions associated
with the materials used to build
new homes will provide our
greatest impact to overall emissions
reductions. The embodied carbon
assessments that we complete during
the planning and design stages of
our developments enable our teams
to make more informed decisions
in relation to design, specification
and sourcing. Supply chain
engagement is also key; we continue
to engage with manufacturers to
better understand and influence the
decarbonisation pathways of high
impact material groups.
Updated near-term and new net
zero science-based targets (SBTs)
across scopes 1, 2 and 3 have been
submitted for validation this year to
continue to drive action.
In developing our climate-related
disclosures, Berkeley has reviewed
the TCFD report Recommendations
of the Task Force on Climate-related
Financial Disclosures, including
the 2021 Annex detailing Guidance
for All Sectors and Supplemental
Guidance for Non-Financial Groups
in relation to Materials and Buildings.
We are pleased to confirm that our
disclosures are consistent with these
guidelines and align with the UK
Listing Rules (as referred to in UK
Listing Rule 6.6.6R (8)).
Our reporting covers many of the
requirements detailed within IFRS
S2 Climate-related Disclosures
published in June 2023. IFRS S2
integrates and builds on the TCFD
recommendations and incorporates
industry-based disclosure
requirements derived from SASB
Standards. We will look to further
align in future reporting years, with
IFRS S2 set to form the basis of the
awaited UK Sustainability Reporting
Standards (SRS).
Supplementing the climate-related
disclosures within this report,
Berkeley responds to the climate
change elements of CDP’s corporate
questionnaire on an annual basis.
Climate-related disclosures
Climate progress
and roadmap
Ensuring that we take action
in relation to climate change
is not new to Berkeley,
with key milestones as follows:
2010
Set our first scopes 1 and 2
reduction targets as part of the
launch of Our Vision.
2014
Completed climate change
adaptation risk exercise
identifying flooding,
overheating and water shortage
as the key risks forthe homes
and places we develop.
2016
Designed all new homes from
this date to incorporate climate
change adaptation measures.
2018
Initiated backing 100% of our
UK electricity consumption with
Renewable Energy Guarantees
of Origin (REGOs), with this
continuing to date.
2019
Undertook research on
designing low carbon homes
and implemented outcomes.
2020
Achieved validation from the
SBTi for our first SBTs, including
a scope 3 reduction target.
2022
Undertook our first embodied
carbon assessments and
completed climate scenario
analysis.
2024
Introduced a detailed supply
chain engagement strategy for
high impact material groups.
2025
Revised transitional risks and
opportunities through updated
climate scenario analysis.
Submitted new SBTs,
including net zero targets, to
the SBTi for validation.
Submitted energy reduction
action plan under ESOS.
Assessed heat pump
technologies to determine
the most appropriate for use
in our homes.
58 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Governance
Theme Page reference Summary
Governance 59 to 60 The Board is provided with climate action progress updates each quarter
through Our Vision 2030 reporting.
CEO is the lead sponsor for climate action.
CEO, CFO and COO attend monthly Our Vision 2030 and Sustainability Board
meetings covering key climate actions including targets and progress on our
transition to net zero.
Executive Committee receives updates on climate action from the Responsible
Business Executive.
Responsible Business Executive and Group Head of Sustainability meet with
Group operational committees, divisional management teams and operational
sustainability teams to review progress and plan next steps.
Climate-related matters are assessed at development level which informs
strategic business planning activity.
Strategy 61 to 66 Our net zero transition plan is defined across three areas of focus and involves
engagement with stakeholders, in particular those across our industry, supply
chain and Government.
Climate change is a key risk monitored as part of the Group’s risk
managementprocess.
Climate scenario analysis has identified key transitional risks in the short-term
(0-2years) to medium-term (to 2030) and physical risks in the long-term (to
2050), based on financial impacts and probabilistic loss modelling where possible.
Consideration of climate change in preparing our Financial Statements is
detailed in Note 1.3 on page 191.
Risk
Management
67 to 71 Climate change identified as a standalone principal risk to the business since 2018.
Climate scenario analysis completed in 2022, with transitional risks and
opportunities reviewed and updated in 2025.
Main Board, Responsible Business Executive, Group sustainability team and
operational teams all form part of the process to identify risks and assess their
relative importance, combining a top-down and bottom-up approach.
Responsible Business Executive and Group sustainability teams manage
strategic compliance with evolving requirements.
Divisional management teams embed risk management in our day-to-day
operations, integrating mitigation measures for each development as required.
Metrics
and Targets
72 to 75 Science-based targets in place for scopes 1, 2 and 3 GHG emissions with
performance against these monitored and disclosed.
Relevant key metrics identified and disclosed, including industry-based metrics
in line with SASB.
Involvement of our
CEO and other key
senior management
with responsibility for
climate action across
all levels and aspects
of the business is key
to the success of our
governance structure.
To provide a governance framework
for our approach, Berkeley has
an overarching Climate Change
Policydetailing guiding principles
of action.
Delivery of these is driven through
our Climate Action priority area of
Our Vision 2030 incorporating the net
zero transition plan and supported
by Sustainability Standards. These
set out Berkeley’s minimum
requirements for our developments,
as well as our construction site and
supply chain activities, for topics
such as energy efficiency, risk
mitigation measures and reporting.
They ensure that we are aligned
to deliver the strategic actions
and milestones outlined within our
transition plan (see pages 61to65).
Management tools are in place to
monitor action and performance.
For example, each development
uses a Project Sustainability Strategy
to track compliance with the
Sustainability Standards from land
purchase through to completion,
whilst our online data management
system allows for live reporting of
GHG emissions from our site, office
and sales activities to assess progress
against our scopes 1 and 2 SBT. Our
management tools enable the regular
communication of performance
across the business, enabling
insights and areas for further action
to be identified and discussed.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 59
Climate-related disclosures continued
Key | Management roles with responsibility for climate action
1
Chief Executive
2
Chief Financial Officer
3
Chief Operating Officer
4
Executive Committee member with responsibility for sustainability
5
Responsible Business Executive
6
Group Head of Sustainability
Berkeley’s governance structure for monitoring climate-related risks and opportunities, implementing strategic
actions to address these and monitoring performance is summarised below.
Main Board Level
Board of Directors Audit Committee
Overall responsibility for oversight of our strategy and management of climate-related risks
and opportunities.
Monitor progress towards strategic climate targets, with the Board report for each meeting
including action taken in the year to date and planned next steps.
Review Group Risk Management Report presented at each Board meeting. Climate change
considered as a principal operating risk.
Restricted Share Plan awards include an ESG underpin whereby up to 20% will be forfeited
in the event of unsatisfactory progress against strategic and ESG priorities.
Oversight of Company-wide risk
management process, including climate
action alongside other principal risks.
Undertake annual assessment of principal
and emerging risks, along with the
adequacy and effectiveness of internal
control systems.
Consider climate change impacts on
the financial reporting judgements and
estimates in the Financial Statements
(seepage123).
Management Level
Chief Executive Executive Committee Our Vision 2030 and
Sustainability Board
Designated as accountable lead sponsor
for the Climate Action strategic priority
under Our Vision 2030.
Review climate-related commitments and
actions to ensure that they are ambitious
and appropriate for the business.
Review and sign off detailed plans and
specifications of each development,
from land purchase through all stages
ofdevelopment.
Assess and manage strategic and
operational risks.
Routinely discuss progress under
the Climate Action priority area and
measures to be implemented to further
drive improvement.
Consists of CEO, CFO, COO, Executive
Committee member with responsibility
for sustainability, Responsible
Business Executive and Group
HeadofSustainability.
Meet monthly with climate action a key
topic on each agenda.
Discuss progress against goals and
targets to agree planned next steps.
Group Level
Group Risk Function Group Responsible Business
and Sustainability Teams
Group Committees
andWorkingGroups
CEO ensures the appropriateness of
theGroup’s risk management strategy.
CFO leads on strategic risk management,
including oversight of climate
scenarioanalysis.
Risk Executive manages Group risk
process and register, including climate
change as a principal operating risk.
Identify strategic climate change risks
and opportunities facing the Group
and communicate these to the Group’s
RiskExecutive.
Develop targets and strategic climate
action, including our transition to netzero.
Integrate actions into day-to-day activities.
Actively collaborate with external experts
and industry working groups.
Operational committees (e.g. Technical
Committee and Sustainability
Committee) consisting of senior
representatives from each of our
businesses meet regularly, with climate
action raised by the attending
Responsible Business Executive and/or
Group Head of Sustainability.
Cross-disciplinary working groups
take action in specific areas, such as
embodied carbon and implementation
of the Future Homes and Buildings
Standards, guided by the Group Head
ofSustainability.
Operational Level
Divisional Management Teams Operational Sustainability Teams Development Project Teams
Responsible for climate action in relation to
the specific developments of their business.
Nominate a management sponsor for
the Climate Action strategic priority for
theirbusiness.
Maintain a risk register for their business,
which includes sustainability and climate
change risks.
Communicate business performance to
CEO and CFO at divisional board meetings.
Meet with Responsible Business Executive
and Group Head of Sustainability to
identify improvement areas.
Dedicated sustainability practitioners
within each business.
Support local management and
development teams to implement Group
Sustainability Standards and drive action
to achieve continual improvement.
Collaborate with the Group Responsible
Business and Sustainability Teams.
Monitor performance and present this
to the divisional management and
projectteams.
Ensure Environmental Risk Register
in place throughout the lifespan of a
project, to identify and control risks
from land purchase through to design
andconstruction.
Manage day-to-day energy efficiency,
implementation of new measures and
achievement of targets.
Report key data and actions to enable
monitoring of Group-wide performance.
1 2
1
1 2 4 53 1 2 4 53 6
1 2
4 5 6
53 6
1 2 5 63 5 6
60 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Strategy
Taking action on climate
has been a strategic
priority for Berkeley
since the launch of Our
Vision in 2010 and our
commitment to becoming
net zero by 2045
reinforces this.
Overview of climate risks
and opportunities
Berkeley uses the results of
climate scenario analysis within
our strategic planning processes.
Transitional climate change risks
and opportunities have been
assessed in the short-term (0-2
years) and the medium-term
(to 2030) to align with the time
horizons of Berkeley’s overarching
responsible business strategy, Our
Vision 2030. Present day exposure
to physical risks has been assessed,
with changes in the long-term (to
2050) considered in recognition
that physical risks can manifest
themselves over a longer period.
Climate scenario analysis
indicates that as we navigate the
implementation of the Future
Homes and Buildings Standards in
the short-term, Berkeley has higher
exposure to transition risks linked to
planning and design requirements
and the substitution of existing
technologies with lower emission
options. In the medium-term,
Berkeley may additionally be more
exposed to higher raw material
costs as a result of carbon pricing
policies and the transition actions of
our suppliers. A change in customer
demands is a moderate opportunity
in the medium-term should
considerations such as energy
efficiency become increasingly
important to customers within
theirbuying and rental decisions.
With low exposure to physical
risks in the present day, climate
scenario analysis shows that areas
in which Berkeley’s developments
are located will see more heatwave
days and a corresponding increase
in the occurrence of prolonged
drought stress by 2050 under a
4
O
C‘HotHouse World’ scenario.
Changes in precipitation
patterns with drier summers and
wetter winters could augment
the prevalence of subsidence
conditions, whilst sites at risk of
flooding could flood more often.
Transition planning
Responding to the key areas of
transitional risk and opportunities
for the business, and to achieve our
net zero ambitions, our transition
plan focuses on reducing embodied
carbon, low carbon operations
and delivering low carbon homes.
An overview of our transition plan
strategy can be found on pages 62
to 65, with details on key climate
actions taken in the year onpages
48 and 49.
To help ensure the ongoing
resilience of our strategy, actions
are continually reviewed against
evolving risks and opportunities by
the Responsible Business Executive
and Group Head of Sustainability,
along with Group operational
committees and working groups.
Where necessary, key processes and
controls such as our Sustainability
Standards are updated.
As part of the development of our
transition plan, Berkeley has been
reviewing our future approach
tocarboncredits. We currently
support the UK-based Retrofit
Credits project developed by HACT
and PNZ Carbon. This pioneering
and unique project uses funds to
retrofit social housing through the
installation of energy efficient
measures, reducing emissions of
existing housing stock whilst also
delivering social value. Our support
in 2025 has an associated co-
benefit of over £140,000 worth of
social value impact for residents
living in the retrofitted homes.
Berkeley recognises that whilst
many organisations have plans in
place to transition to a low carbon
economy, climatic changes will
occur and may affect the homes
and places we develop. Key risks
identified through climate scenario
analysis, such as subsidence and
flood risk, are assessed prior to
land acquisition, with mitigation
measures implemented as
necessary. Our Sustainability
Standards additionally set minimum
requirements, including the provision
of sustainable drainage systems
(SuDS) and targeting internal water
efficiency levels below building
regulations, delivered through
the integration of water efficient
fixtures and fittings. Measures
such as these help to ensure
the resilience of our homes and
communities in a changing climate.
Acknowledging the intrinsic link
between nature and climate,
Berkeley pioneered biodiversity net
gain (BNG) in our industry from
2017 and follows an integrated water
management approach whereby
rainwater is stored and released
into natural features to help manage
surface water, also reducing the
urban heat island effect.
Trent Park, Enfield
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 61
Climate-related disclosures continued
Embodied carbon
Link to Our Vision 2030
Why is this a focus?
Just over half of our scope 3 emissions relate to embodied
carbon arising from the activities of our supply chain, from
the energy used to extract raw materials, processing these
into construction products and transporting to site.
Reductions are targeted as part of our scope 3 SBT in
relation to category 1: purchased goods and services.
Link to business model
Designing and planning
new homes and places
Building new homes
andplaces
Link to climate risks
Planning and
designrequirements
Raw material costs
Existing strategic actions for continued implementation
Undertaking embodied carbon assessments for each
new development during planning and design stages,
enabling our project teams to make more informed
design, specification and sourcing decisions and to take
tangible action to reduce carbon impacts.
Engaging with manufacturers and suppliers, including
through our detailed supply chain engagement strategy
for high impact materialgroups.
Playing an active role within several industry groups to
share knowledge and lessons learnt. This includes the
UKGBC and the Future Homes Hub.
Planned strategic actions
Embed efficient design principles across
ourdevelopments.
Assess suppliers of key impact materials on their
performance, including carbon reduction targets and
availability of product-specific carbon data.
Work with suppliers and manufacturers delivering
low carbon solutions.
Procure lower carbon materials as standard where
there is limited cost impact.
Encourage and support suppliers in setting SBTs.
Low carbon operations
Link to Our Vision 2030
Why is this a focus?
Emissions related to the energy used during our
construction, sales, office and vehicle fleet activities are
under the direct control of Berkeley and we have the
greatest ability to reduce these.
Reductions are targeted as part of our scopes 1 and 2 SBT.
Link to business model
Building new homes
andplaces
Link to climate risks
Pricing of GHGemissions
Existing strategic actions for continued implementation
Ensuring 100% of UK electricity has been backed by
Renewable Energy Guarantees of Origin (REGOs)
fromsolar, wind or hydro sources.
Implementing energy efficiency requirements for our
construction sites, offices and sales suites in line with
ourESOS Action Plan.
Setting annual energy consumption budgets for
each division that are actively monitored through live
reportingin our online data management system.
Levying an internal carbon fee on each division, incentivising
low carbon alternatives which may have a greater capital
cost but that deliver reduced operational costs.
Sharing of best practice initiatives and lessons learnt
through Group committees, working groups, engagement
events and via the intranet.
Planned strategic actions
Replace traditionally fuelled company vehicles with
hybrid or electric alternatives.
Enhance focus on out of hours consumption.
Collaborate with the supply chain to increase the
use of electric or low carbon plant and machinery.
Increase the use of on-site renewable technology on
long-term construction sites.
Transition offices and sales suites away from natural
gas use.
Key climate actions of our transition plan
62 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Low carbon homes
Link to Our Vision 2030
Why is this a focus?
Almost half of our scope 3 emissions relate to the regulated
energy use (such as heating, hot water and lighting) of the
homes that we are creating for ourcustomers.
Reductions are targeted as part of our scope 3 SBT
inrelation to category 11: use of sold products.
Link to business model
Designing and planning
new homes and places
Building new homes
andplaces
Marketing and selling
newhomes
Link to climate risks
Planning and
designrequirements
Substitution of
existingtechnologies
Change in
customerdemands
Existing strategic actions for continued implementation
Applying a fabric-first design approach, in combination
with the most appropriate technology and infrastructure
solution for each individual development.
Delivering electric-led heating and hot water systems.
Engaging with our designers and wider industry through
the UKGBC, Future Homes Hub and the Chartered
Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE) to
understand how to reduce the impact of our buildings.
Communicating sustainable features to customers
through the sales process, providing accessible and
home-specific information.
Planned strategic actions
Increase the use of low carbon heating solutions,
such as heat pump technology.
Analyse as-built performance, monitoring in-use
energy consumption and emissions.
Improve energy demand management in homes.
Dependencies and challenges
The strategic actions of our transition plan are based on our current understanding of the decarbonisation routes
of our industry. With capabilities across our value chain continually evolving, we will be regularly updating our
planned actions.
Our transition is dependent on:
The willingness, ability and speed of our supply chain to decarbonise and reduce the embodied carbon
of materials.
Reforms to the power system including increased renewable energy capacity, in line with Government’s recently
launched Clean Power 2030 Action Plan.
The rate at which connected industries (e.g. utilities, transport, education and skills) set out detailed transition plans.
Customer acceptance of low carbon alternatives for heating and powering homes.
An industry-wide shift to low carbon alternatives and new technologies.
Workforce behaviour change to reduce avoidable emissions.
Our transition is challenged by:
A low number of suppliers and contractors that measure their emissions or have SBTs.
The changing policy and regulatory landscape for housing.
Lack of capacity in the electricity grid to connect new homes.
Customer concern over increased costs for electric homes, and behavioural change required to operate
non-traditional heating solutions.
Key | Our Vision 2030 priorities
Customers Quality Communities Climate action Nature
Employee
experience
Modernised
production
Future skills Supply chain Shared value
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 63
Key to milestones:
Low carbon homes
Embodied carbon
Emissions (tCO
2
e)
Our transition plan
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
2030
2019
2025
Key actions to date
Procuring biodiesel HVO
and implementing energy
efficiency measures
Applying a fabric-first design
approach, incorporating renewable
technologies and delivering homes
using electric-led heating and hot
water systems
Undertaking design stage embodied
carbon assessments to implement
low carbon design measures and
engaging with suppliers
All completed homes
‘zero carbon ready
(excluding homes
connected to existing
district heating
systems) by 2030
Post completion
embodied carbon
assessments undertaken
for all new homes
by2030
Carbon intensity of
electricity reduces by
2030 in line with the
UKGovernment’s Clean
Power target
Note: Emissions to date
depicted on a linear basis.
Key to milestones:
Low carbon homes
Embodied carbon
Emissions (tCO
2
e)
Our transition plan
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
2030
2019
2025
Key actions to date
Procuring biodiesel HVO
and implementing energy
efficiency measures
Applying a fabric-first design
approach, incorporating renewable
technologies and delivering homes
using electric-led heating and hot
water systems
Undertaking design stage embodied
carbon assessments to implement
low carbon design measures and
engaging with suppliers
All completed homes
‘zero carbon ready
(excluding homes
connected to existing
district heating
systems) by 2030
Post completion
embodied carbon
assessments undertaken
for all new homes
by2030
Carbon intensity of
electricity reduces by
2030 in line with the
UKGovernment’s Clean
Power target
Note: Emissions to date
depicted on a linear basis.
Climate-related disclosures continued
64 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
2035
Low carbon operations
Low carbon homes
External dependency
Net Zero
Key actions to reach net zero
Design to lower
embodied carbon
Work in partnership
with our supply chain
to reduce emissions
Ensure that all
suppliers provide
product-specific
carbon data
Transition district
heating to be net
zero ready
Improve energy
demand management
inhomes
Expand the use of
low carbon heating
technologies
Improve energy
efficiency with a focus
on reducing out of
hours usage
Cease use of natural
gas across our offices
and sales suites
Increase the use of
electric plant and
company vehicles
Explore nature-based solutions for carbon capture and storage
2045
2040
Net zero operations
across our sites, offices,
sales suites and vehicle
fleet by 2035
Decarbonised electricity grid
by 2035 in line with Future
Energy Scenarios (FES) 2024
Reduce emissions to
less than 10% of our
baseline year and offset
residual emissions
2035
Low carbon operations
Low carbon homes
External dependency
Net Zero
Key actions to reach net zero
Design to lower
embodied carbon
Work in partnership
with our supply chain
to reduce emissions
Ensure that all
suppliers provide
product-specific
carbon data
Transition district
heating to be net
zero ready
Improve energy
demand management
inhomes
Expand the use of
low carbon heating
technologies
Improve energy
efficiency with a focus
on reducing out of
hours usage
Cease use of natural
gas across our offices
and sales suites
Increase the use of
electric plant and
company vehicles
Explore nature-based solutions for carbon capture and storage
2045
2040
Net zero operations
across our sites, offices,
sales suites and vehicle
fleet by 2035
Decarbonised electricity grid
by 2035 in line with Future
Energy Scenarios (FES) 2024
Reduce emissions to
less than 10% of our
baseline year and offset
residual emissions
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Berkeley Group 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 65
Climate-related disclosures continued
Engagement
Berkeley aims to ensure that our decarbonisation efforts include a fair and equitable ‘just transition’ that identifies
potential effects on our stakeholders.
Collaboration is key to ensuring a just transition and delivering our transition plan, with key activities as follows:
Stakeholder impacts Key engagement activities
Link to climate risks
and opportunities
Supply chain
Taking action to reduce
emissions will be a challenge
for our supply chain,
requiring the adaptation
of operations and skills,
whilst minimising social
impacts such as inequalities
or job losses.
Our Common Materials Strategy for key material groups
includes embodied carbon and other sustainability
requirements alongside technical compliance and quality.
Detailed supply chain engagement for high impact materials
(concrete, steel, aluminium, glass and bricks) to assess the
maturity of key suppliers in their decarbonisation journey.
Sustainability Standard for on-site contractors includes
requirements in relation to energy and carbon reporting,
as well as minimum energy efficiency measures.
Partner of the Supply Chain Sustainability School, including
acollaboration project to deliver training to the supply chain
and SMEs on net zero (see page 48).
Raw material costs
Substitution of
existing technologies
Skills availability
to deliver low
carbonhomes
Government, regulators
and industry
We acknowledge the need
for a coordinated industry
approach and that regulation
can help to drive this.
Inconsistencies can lead to a
lack of trust and investment,
delaying progress.
Actively respond to Government consultations to share our
insights and experience on topics such as efficient design
standards and energy strategies.
Meet with local and national Government representatives and
host visits to our development sites to directly engage and
demonstrate challenges and progress.
Active participants in industry working groups including the
UKGBC, Future Homes Hub and CIBSE.
Planning and design
requirements
Substitution of
existing technologies
Customers and
communities
Solutions to address climate
change should not come
at an unaffordable price to
our customers or negatively
impact the communities we
help to create.
Development-specific information provided, including
climatechange mitigation and adaptation measures.
Home demonstration given at handover to ensure that
customers are aware of technologies integrated into their
home and efficiency measures to reduce costs.
Customer feedback used to provide insight into technologies
such as heat pumps.
Change in customer
demands
Substitution of
existing technologies
Employees
The transition to a low
emissions economy will
impact our workers due to
the rapid change in required
skills. We will invest in
training and competency
to manage our transition.
Sustainability training provided to all employees, with
subjectspecific training (e.g. embodied carbon, Future
Homesand Buildings Standards requirements) provided
torelevant departments.
Awareness campaigns including ‘lunch and learn’ sessions
andinternal intranet to share best practice.
Skills availability
to deliver low
carbonhomes
66 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Berkeley has recognised
climate change as one
of its principal operating
risks since 2018.
Our regular process to identify
and assess climate-related risk is
incorporated within the Group’s risk
management framework, combining
a top-down strategic review and a
bottom-up review (see page 79).
The Responsible Business
Executive and Group Head of
Sustainability identify and monitor
strategic climate-related risks and
opportunities facing Berkeley
through the evaluation of: evolving
legislation, regulation and policy;
customer feedback; and industry
and global trends.
Risks and opportunities are
identified for the short to medium-
term (e.g. evolving planning and
design requirements) and long-term
(e.g. transition to net zero carbon).
The risks and opportunities cover
our upstream value chain (such
as material costs), our direct
operations, and the impact on our
customers of a changing climate.
Identified risks and opportunities
are shared with the Group’s Risk
Executive and reported on at each
Board meeting, with feedback
provided back down the business
tooperating companies.
A fundamental principle of the
operating structure of Berkeley
is that the prime responsibility
for assessing, managing and
monitoring the majority of
operational risks rests with
divisional management teams,
ensuring that risk management
is embedded in our day-to-day
operations. At a development level,
the site-specific Environmental Risk
Register and Project Sustainability
Strategy tracker identify risks
and monitor action taken to
mitigate these from land purchase
throughto completion.
Summary of scenarios
1.5°C scenario – IEA Net Zero Emissions by 2050 and IPCC RCP 2.6
Actions are taken to reduce emissions in the short-term and consequently
high transition risk is experienced.
Physical risks are less severe than under the 4°C scenario and broadly similar
to the 2°C scenario.
Below 2°C scenario – IEA Sustainable Development Scenario (SDS)
Actions are taken to reduce emissions in the short-term, albeit slightly less
aggressive than the 1.5°C scenario, and consequently high transition risk
isexperienced.
Physical risks less severe than under the 4°C scenario and broadly similar to
the 1.5°C scenario.
4°C scenario – IPCC RCP 8.5
Increased level of warming associated with greater levels of acute and
chronic weather events.
Geographic climatic shift in the South East of the UK.
The scenarios selected are not
intended to be forecasts for the
future, but provide mechanisms to
assess plausible outcomes against
which Berkeley can assess its risks
and opportunities.
The results of climate scenario
analysis are periodically updated to
ensure continued relevance.
Risk management
Climate scenario analysis
Supplementing our regular
approach to risk management,
Berkeley undertakes climate
scenario analysis to assess risks
and opportunities relating to
the transition to a lower carbon
economy and the physical impacts
of climate change. Climate scenario
analysis is overseen by the CFO, the
Responsible Business Executive and
the Group Head of Sustainability.
Selected climate scenarios
draw from widely used
publicly availableand peer
reviewed sources, including the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) sixth assessment
report (AR6) and projections by the
International Energy Agency (IEA)
as summarised below.
Abbey Barn Park, High Wycombe
Scan the code to read more
about our climate scenario
analysis methodology
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 67
Climate-related disclosures continued
Transition risks and opportunities
This year, climate scenario analysis for transitional risks and opportunities (originally completed in 2022) has been
reviewed with the support of Aon in recognition of the changes that our industry has seen in recent years and
is expected to be exposed to in the near-term (e.g. the Future Homes and Buildings Standards). The aim was
torevisit and validate key risks and opportunities based on a below 2°C orderly transition.
Transition risks and opportunities have been assessed in relation to aggressive climate mitigation measures in
both the short-term (to 2027) and medium-term (to 2030). Berkeley is considered to have higher exposure to
the transition risks and opportunities detailed in the table below, albeit none of these are consideredindividually
material in the context of the Group’s current year financial statements.
Transition risks
Key | Exposure  Low Moderate  High
Transitional risk description Risk exposure and potential impact Mitigation strategy
Planning and design
requirements become
increasingly stringent as
part of the UK’s efforts to
reach net zero and broader
sustainability-related targets.
Short-term Medium-term
As part of efforts to meet its net zero target, the UK is introducing increasingly
stringent requirements related to sustainability through policy and legislation, such as
the Future Homes and Buildings Standards.
Due to the long-term nature and scale of Berkeley’s developments often requiring the
use of masterplan led energy strategies, we could be particularly affected by proposed
changes. In the short to medium-term, homes on future phases of developments that
are under construction may require a different heating solution from those currently
planned. For example, switching to the installation of air source heatpumps. Cost
impacts could be incurred through the substitution of existing technologies, as
described below.
Operational committees of relevant functions (Land and Planning, Technical and Sustainability) monitor and discuss the
evolving regulatory landscape and impacts on the business, taking action as required. To negate potential additional
cost impacts, emerging requirements form part of development appraisals at the land purchase stage.
Berkeley actively engages with government to help shape the direction of future regulation. Further to our submission
to the Future Homes and Buildings Standards consultation in 2024, this year we responded to the Government survey
on solar provision under the Future Homes Standard, including recommendations on the amount that can feasibly be
provided on homes.
We also participate in industry initiatives such as the Future Homes Hub, established to facilitate the collaboration
needed within and beyond the new homes sector to help meet the climate and environmental challenges ahead.
Substitution of existing
technologies with lower
emission options will
be required across our
developments to comply
withregulations.
Short-term Medium-term
Electrification of residential heating is fundamental to the Future Homes Standard.
The need to increase the capacity of the UK’s electricity infrastructure may lead to
constraints or additional costs. In addition, the principle of ‘sleeving’ heat networks
may particularly impact Berkeley, requiring us to upgrade existing energy centres on
our major regeneration sites with heat pump technologies.
There is the risk that technologies selected at the outset of a planning process could
become outdated and obsolete through the development process and upon building
completion. Should the technology selected for our developments not perform as
expected, there is the risk of customer dissatisfaction and reputational damage.
The potential financial impact of this risk could be £1 million to £10 million in the short
to medium-term.
Berkeley continually assesses nascent technologies and is incorporating heat pumps and photovoltaics within its
designs. Following comprehensive analysis of suitable options using ‘live-in’ trials at our Heron Wharf development, we
have identified the most appropriate exhaust air heat pumps for use within our homes.
At the same time, Berkeley is increasing customer engagement on the adoption of new technologies and sharing
feedback across the business to inform sales and customer service processes.
We are engaging with relevant parties to ensure that necessary localised infrastructure upgrades are in place to support
additional electrical loads ahead of the implementation of the Future Homes and Buildings Standards, whilst noting
that there is also a dependency on the national grid to decarbonise.
Raw material costs could
increase if suppliers pass
through the impact of
carbon pricing for high
embodied carbon building
materials, or if demand for
low carbon alternatives
outstrips availability.
Short-term Medium-term
Key materials such as steel, concrete, cement and glass have energy intensive
production processes which could require increased energy input costs or be subject
to carbon tax regimes under low carbon emission scenarios. The cost of suppliers
implementing mitigation measures as part of their own transition plans may also be
passed on to customers.
Demand for lower carbon or sustainable alternatives may increase and outstrip supply,
potentially leading to increased costs and issues with lead-in times.
The potential financial impact of this risk could be less than £1 million in the short-term
and £1 million to £10 million in the medium-term.
Berkeley has a diverse supply chain drawing material from a wide range of suppliers and we regularly assess material
costs as part of development appraisals. We have more than 80 manufacturer design and service level agreements to
maintain high standards and continuity of supply regardless of changing and unpredictable market conditions.
To help inform the efficient design of our buildings, embodied carbon assessments are undertaken. We also use our
supply chain engagement strategy to understand and drive down embodied carbon, forming Group-wide agreements
that enable us to access lower carbon alternatives at no or limited impact on costs and programme.
Transition opportunity
Transitional opportunity description Opportunity exposure and potential impact Realisation strategy
Change in customer
demands may lead to
an opportunity whereby
homes and buildings with
strong sustainability-related
credentials arepreferable.
Short-term Medium-term
Whilst in the short-term the scale of opportunity for higher demand is not necessarily
significant, as climate awareness and energy prices increase, customers (including
purchasers and those within the rental market under our BTR platform) are expected
to favour homes and buildings with greater energy operational efficiency. In addition,
customer preference for new buildings with the latest technologies could further
support demand.
The potential financial impact of this opportunity could be less than £1 million in the
short-term and between £1 million to £10 million in the medium-term.
Berkeley’s focus on urban, brownfield regeneration is inherently more sustainable. Through our climate actions and
delivery of Sustainability Standards we look to positively influence customer demands. For example, in 2023 we seta
requirement for all new homes (excluding refurbishments) to meet a minimum Energy Performance Certificate (EPC)
rating of B, aligning to the requirements of many of the green mortgages being offered by lenders.
We actively communicate sustainable features to customers throughout our sales process and plan to extend this
approach to our future rental customers, providing accessible and home-specific information.
68 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Berkeley has been assessed as having lower exposure to the following:
Risks: Pricing of GHG emissions; Climate-related reporting obligations;
Change in customer demands; Electric vehicle use; Investor perceptions;
Cost of capital; Climate change litigation; Skills availability to deliver low
carbon homes.
Opportunities: Electric vehicle use; Cost of capital; Investor perceptions;
Employee perceptions; Other stakeholder perceptions.
Details on the above can be found in our climate scenario analysis
methodology online.
Transitional risk description Risk exposure and potential impact Mitigation strategy
Planning and design
requirements become
increasingly stringent as
part of the UK’s efforts to
reach net zero and broader
sustainability-related targets.
Short-term Medium-term
As part of efforts to meet its net zero target, the UK is introducing increasingly
stringent requirements related to sustainability through policy and legislation, such as
the Future Homes and Buildings Standards.
Due to the long-term nature and scale of Berkeley’s developments often requiring the
use of masterplan led energy strategies, we could be particularly affected by proposed
changes. In the short to medium-term, homes on future phases of developments that
are under construction may require a different heating solution from those currently
planned. For example, switching to the installation of air source heatpumps. Cost
impacts could be incurred through the substitution of existing technologies, as
described below.
Operational committees of relevant functions (Land and Planning, Technical and Sustainability) monitor and discuss the
evolving regulatory landscape and impacts on the business, taking action as required. To negate potential additional
cost impacts, emerging requirements form part of development appraisals at the land purchase stage.
Berkeley actively engages with government to help shape the direction of future regulation. Further to our submission
to the Future Homes and Buildings Standards consultation in 2024, this year we responded to the Government survey
on solar provision under the Future Homes Standard, including recommendations on the amount that can feasibly be
provided on homes.
We also participate in industry initiatives such as the Future Homes Hub, established to facilitate the collaboration
needed within and beyond the new homes sector to help meet the climate and environmental challenges ahead.
Substitution of existing
technologies with lower
emission options will
be required across our
developments to comply
withregulations.
Short-term Medium-term
Electrification of residential heating is fundamental to the Future Homes Standard.
The need to increase the capacity of the UK’s electricity infrastructure may lead to
constraints or additional costs. In addition, the principle of ‘sleeving’ heat networks
may particularly impact Berkeley, requiring us to upgrade existing energy centres on
our major regeneration sites with heat pump technologies.
There is the risk that technologies selected at the outset of a planning process could
become outdated and obsolete through the development process and upon building
completion. Should the technology selected for our developments not perform as
expected, there is the risk of customer dissatisfaction and reputational damage.
The potential financial impact of this risk could be £1 million to £10 million in the short
to medium-term.
Berkeley continually assesses nascent technologies and is incorporating heat pumps and photovoltaics within its
designs. Following comprehensive analysis of suitable options using ‘live-in’ trials at our Heron Wharf development, we
have identified the most appropriate exhaust air heat pumps for use within our homes.
At the same time, Berkeley is increasing customer engagement on the adoption of new technologies and sharing
feedback across the business to inform sales and customer service processes.
We are engaging with relevant parties to ensure that necessary localised infrastructure upgrades are in place to support
additional electrical loads ahead of the implementation of the Future Homes and Buildings Standards, whilst noting
that there is also a dependency on the national grid to decarbonise.
Raw material costs could
increase if suppliers pass
through the impact of
carbon pricing for high
embodied carbon building
materials, or if demand for
low carbon alternatives
outstrips availability.
Short-term Medium-term
Key materials such as steel, concrete, cement and glass have energy intensive
production processes which could require increased energy input costs or be subject
to carbon tax regimes under low carbon emission scenarios. The cost of suppliers
implementing mitigation measures as part of their own transition plans may also be
passed on to customers.
Demand for lower carbon or sustainable alternatives may increase and outstrip supply,
potentially leading to increased costs and issues with lead-in times.
The potential financial impact of this risk could be less than £1 million in the short-term
and £1 million to £10 million in the medium-term.
Berkeley has a diverse supply chain drawing material from a wide range of suppliers and we regularly assess material
costs as part of development appraisals. We have more than 80 manufacturer design and service level agreements to
maintain high standards and continuity of supply regardless of changing and unpredictable market conditions.
To help inform the efficient design of our buildings, embodied carbon assessments are undertaken. We also use our
supply chain engagement strategy to understand and drive down embodied carbon, forming Group-wide agreements
that enable us to access lower carbon alternatives at no or limited impact on costs and programme.
Transitional opportunity description Opportunity exposure and potential impact Realisation strategy
Change in customer
demands may lead to
an opportunity whereby
homes and buildings with
strong sustainability-related
credentials arepreferable.
Short-term Medium-term
Whilst in the short-term the scale of opportunity for higher demand is not necessarily
significant, as climate awareness and energy prices increase, customers (including
purchasers and those within the rental market under our BTR platform) are expected
to favour homes and buildings with greater energy operational efficiency. In addition,
customer preference for new buildings with the latest technologies could further
support demand.
The potential financial impact of this opportunity could be less than £1 million in the
short-term and between £1 million to £10 million in the medium-term.
Berkeley’s focus on urban, brownfield regeneration is inherently more sustainable. Through our climate actions and
delivery of Sustainability Standards we look to positively influence customer demands. For example, in 2023 we seta
requirement for all new homes (excluding refurbishments) to meet a minimum Energy Performance Certificate (EPC)
rating of B, aligning to the requirements of many of the green mortgages being offered by lenders.
We actively communicate sustainable features to customers throughout our sales process and plan to extend this
approach to our future rental customers, providing accessible and home-specific information.
Scan the code to read more
about our transitional risks
and opportunities
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 69
Climate-related disclosures continued
Physical risks
Berkeley undertook climate scenario analysis for physical risks with the support of WTW (formerly Willis Towers
Watson) in 2022. The results of this analysis are still considered to be relevant as we continue to develop across
London, Birmingham and the South of England.
Physical risks have been assessed from present day over the long-term to 2050, with the latter being when the
most significant impacts are likely to manifest. The below table summarises the predominant physical risks for
the IPCC 1.5°C (RCP 2.6) and 4°C (RCP 8.5) scenarios. Risk exposure details are for 2050 and beyond under a
4°Cscenario.
Chronic risks
Physical risk description Risk exposure and potential impact Mitigation strategy
Heat stress set to increase
with more frequent
heatwave daysannually.
Present day heat stress is very low throughout the UK (less than five heatwave days a
year). The majority of England (in particular South East, South West and the Midlands)
could be exposed to more material heat stress by mid-century with the potential for
more than 20 heatwave days annually.
Correspondingly, 84% of Berkeley’s homes could be exposed to heat stress in the
decades beyond 2050.
There is the potential for overheating in our homes due to heatwave days, exacerbated
by the urban heat island effect.
Berkeley introduced a bespoke internal overheating risk assessment in 2016 to ensure that all project teams assessed
and mitigated this risk. Overheating risk is now incorporated within the 2021 Building Regulations and where homes are
deemed to be at a higher risk detailed dynamic thermal modelling is undertaken.
Mitigation measures are site-specific and can include thicker insulation to external walls, smaller windows with
thermally efficient glass, incorporating shading through the design, enhanced ventilation and the incorporation of soft
landscaping to help mitigate the heat island effect.
Drought stress expected
to increase with extended
periods ofwaterscarcity.
There is low exposure to drought (less than two months a year) at present with the
majority of England (in particular South East, South West and the Midlands) being
exposed to more material drought conditions by mid-century.
Correspondingly, 92% of Berkeley’s homes could be exposed to drought conditions
for three to four months annually in the decades beyond 2050. A significantly smaller
proportion (5%) of homes could see drought conditions for six months of the year.
The main implications are issues with water availability within our homes and impacts
on the green spaces of our developments.
Our teams integrate blue and green infrastructure into our developments using a Code of Practice developed in
conjunction with the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust (WWT). We follow an integrated water management approach
whereby rainwater is stored and released into natural features to help manage surface water. Attenuation offers
significant opportunities to hold water for reuse.
We reduce water usage by designing homes with water efficient fixtures and fittings and incorporate drought resilient
planting in our green spaces.
Subsidence conditions
and susceptibility could
increase due towarmer and
drier summers as well as
wetterwinters.
Present day ground conditions mean that building design addresses the risk
of subsidence, with current regulations for high-rise buildings catering for
designtolerance.
Large areas in the South East and Eastern England could be exposed to increasing
subsidence conditions in 2050 and beyond, including Greater London and the Thames
Estuary due to the clay soils.
The soil conditions for 90% of Berkeley’s homes could potentially be impacted
beyond2050.
The risk of subsidence is assessed at a project level prior to land acquisition and analysed further by external experts
during detailed design to ensure appropriate measures are incorporated to mitigate risk.
Our developments in London have piled foundations which are engineered with additional factors of safety margins to
ensure the buildings are anchored deep into the ground.
For our housing developments outside of London, foundation design is agreed with specialist consultants to ensure it is
appropriate for the underlying geology and risk of subsidence.
Acute risks
Physical risk description Risk exposure and potential impact Mitigation strategy
Flood risk likely to increase
due to the potential for
coastal flooding from sea
level rise, as well as surface
and groundwater flooding
from heavy rainfall.
By 2050 there are no further sites exposed beyond the 6% of sites already at risk in the
present day, given the predominance of Berkeley’s portfolio in London and the flood
defences in place in the area. However, these sites could flood more often.
The main implication from flood is physical damage to completed property and
construction assets. Probabilistic loss modelling estimates that by 2050 the physical
damage from flooding under a 4°C scenario could exceed £27 million in a severe year
(i.e. 1 in 200-year return period) and £60 million in an extreme year (i.e. a 1 in 1,000-
year return period).
Risk is assessed pre-acquisition for all sites and subsequently during development planning and design if the area falls
within a flood zone. Flood risk assessments vary in extent based on potential risk and include allowances for the effects
of climate change.
Our homes are designed to the flood risk identified with mitigation measures including raising lower floor levels and
designing sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) to hold and store water in times of extreme rainfall.
Windstorm risk already
exists for all of Berkeley’s
sites and there is no current
scientific consensus that
theUK will see an increase
in windstorm intensity.
The typical windstorm hazard could pose a moderate risk for 100% of Berkeley’s sites.
This does not reflect a change to the present day levels of exposure, probability or
potential losses of such risk.
The main impact of windstorms is physical damage to completed property and
construction assets.
Our developments are designed by specialist teams that select appropriate materials and fixing details which can
withstand local conditions. In respect of mid- to high-rise buildings, wind engineering is undertaken at the pre-planning
stage with designs incorporating features to resist high winds.
Wind alerts are communicated to residents with instructions such as to close windows and secure loose objects from
high level amenity spaces. Site safety guidance is sent to site teams ahead of storms and our tower cranes are fitted
with anemometers, alerting and preventing operation during high winds.
70 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Probabilistic loss modelling was used to analyse the financial impact of acute risks (windstorm and flood) before
any mitigation or adaptation measures, and irrespective of insurance or other recovery or consideration of financial
responsibility for any such losses.
As Berkeley already insures against potential losses from catastrophic events, the primary cost exposure for
Berkeley under a 4°C scenario could be an increase to insurance premiums for assets under construction.
Physical risk description Risk exposure and potential impact Mitigation strategy
Heat stress set to increase
with more frequent
heatwave daysannually.
Present day heat stress is very low throughout the UK (less than five heatwave days a
year). The majority of England (in particular South East, South West and the Midlands)
could be exposed to more material heat stress by mid-century with the potential for
more than 20 heatwave days annually.
Correspondingly, 84% of Berkeley’s homes could be exposed to heat stress in the
decades beyond 2050.
There is the potential for overheating in our homes due to heatwave days, exacerbated
by the urban heat island effect.
Berkeley introduced a bespoke internal overheating risk assessment in 2016 to ensure that all project teams assessed
and mitigated this risk. Overheating risk is now incorporated within the 2021 Building Regulations and where homes are
deemed to be at a higher risk detailed dynamic thermal modelling is undertaken.
Mitigation measures are site-specific and can include thicker insulation to external walls, smaller windows with
thermally efficient glass, incorporating shading through the design, enhanced ventilation and the incorporation of soft
landscaping to help mitigate the heat island effect.
Drought stress expected
to increase with extended
periods ofwaterscarcity.
There is low exposure to drought (less than two months a year) at present with the
majority of England (in particular South East, South West and the Midlands) being
exposed to more material drought conditions by mid-century.
Correspondingly, 92% of Berkeley’s homes could be exposed to drought conditions
for three to four months annually in the decades beyond 2050. A significantly smaller
proportion (5%) of homes could see drought conditions for six months of the year.
The main implications are issues with water availability within our homes and impacts
on the green spaces of our developments.
Our teams integrate blue and green infrastructure into our developments using a Code of Practice developed in
conjunction with the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust (WWT). We follow an integrated water management approach
whereby rainwater is stored and released into natural features to help manage surface water. Attenuation offers
significant opportunities to hold water for reuse.
We reduce water usage by designing homes with water efficient fixtures and fittings and incorporate drought resilient
planting in our green spaces.
Subsidence conditions
and susceptibility could
increase due towarmer and
drier summers as well as
wetterwinters.
Present day ground conditions mean that building design addresses the risk
of subsidence, with current regulations for high-rise buildings catering for
designtolerance.
Large areas in the South East and Eastern England could be exposed to increasing
subsidence conditions in 2050 and beyond, including Greater London and the Thames
Estuary due to the clay soils.
The soil conditions for 90% of Berkeley’s homes could potentially be impacted
beyond2050.
The risk of subsidence is assessed at a project level prior to land acquisition and analysed further by external experts
during detailed design to ensure appropriate measures are incorporated to mitigate risk.
Our developments in London have piled foundations which are engineered with additional factors of safety margins to
ensure the buildings are anchored deep into the ground.
For our housing developments outside of London, foundation design is agreed with specialist consultants to ensure it is
appropriate for the underlying geology and risk of subsidence.
Physical risk description Risk exposure and potential impact Mitigation strategy
Flood risk likely to increase
due to the potential for
coastal flooding from sea
level rise, as well as surface
and groundwater flooding
from heavy rainfall.
By 2050 there are no further sites exposed beyond the 6% of sites already at risk in the
present day, given the predominance of Berkeley’s portfolio in London and the flood
defences in place in the area. However, these sites could flood more often.
The main implication from flood is physical damage to completed property and
construction assets. Probabilistic loss modelling estimates that by 2050 the physical
damage from flooding under a 4°C scenario could exceed £27 million in a severe year
(i.e. 1 in 200-year return period) and £60 million in an extreme year (i.e. a 1 in 1,000-
year return period).
Risk is assessed pre-acquisition for all sites and subsequently during development planning and design if the area falls
within a flood zone. Flood risk assessments vary in extent based on potential risk and include allowances for the effects
of climate change.
Our homes are designed to the flood risk identified with mitigation measures including raising lower floor levels and
designing sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) to hold and store water in times of extreme rainfall.
Windstorm risk already
exists for all of Berkeley’s
sites and there is no current
scientific consensus that
theUK will see an increase
in windstorm intensity.
The typical windstorm hazard could pose a moderate risk for 100% of Berkeley’s sites.
This does not reflect a change to the present day levels of exposure, probability or
potential losses of such risk.
The main impact of windstorms is physical damage to completed property and
construction assets.
Our developments are designed by specialist teams that select appropriate materials and fixing details which can
withstand local conditions. In respect of mid- to high-rise buildings, wind engineering is undertaken at the pre-planning
stage with designs incorporating features to resist high winds.
Wind alerts are communicated to residents with instructions such as to close windows and secure loose objects from
high level amenity spaces. Site safety guidance is sent to site teams ahead of storms and our tower cranes are fitted
with anemometers, alerting and preventing operation during high winds.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 71
Climate-related disclosures continued
To assess and manage
performance in relation to
climate action, Berkeley
monitors and reports
on a range of metrics in
line with its operational
boundary (including joint
venture activities).
Scopes 1 and 2
emissionstarget
Berkeley has a validated SBT to
achieve a 50% reduction in absolute
scopes 1 and 2 (market-based) GHG
emissions by 2030. Having already
achieved a 77% reduction, updated
targets have been submitted to
the Science Based Targets initiative
(SBTi) for validation. These would
commit us to further reductions in
the near-term and at least a 90%
reduction by 2045 to achieve net
zero emissions.
To reduce our scope 2 emissions,
100% of our UK electricity
consumption continues to be
backed by Renewable Energy
Guarantees of Origin (REGOs)
fromsolar, wind or hydro power.
Further information on our scopes 1
and 2 emissions is contained within
the Directors’ Report on pages
164and 165.
Scope 3 emissions target
Berkeley’s most significant impacts
occur across our value chain
(scope 3), including the embodied
carbon of our homes resulting
from the activities of our supply
chain (category 1: purchased
goods and services) and the
energy use by our customers in
homes once sold (category 11: use
of sold products). These material
categories accounted for 91% of our
totalscope 3 emissions in our 2019
baseline year.
Recognising the importance of
taking action to reduce scope 3
emissions, we have a validated
SBT to reduce scope 3 purchased
goods and services and use of
sold products GHG emissions by
40% per square metre of legally
completed floor area by 2030.
As part of our SBT resubmission to
the SBTi, we are newly targeting
absolute scope 3 emissions
reductions both in the near-term
and by 2045 to achieve net zero.
Reductions in scope 3 emissions
from dedicated action taken at a
project level can take time to be
realised, due to there often being
several years between the planning
and design phase of a project
through to legal completions
occurring. Berkeley is also highly
dependent on supply chain
action to reduce emissions, with
our priority being to complete
embodied carbon assessments
to guide design and material
specifications, at the same time
as engaging with key contractors
andsuppliers.
Embodied carbon (category 1 –
purchased goods and services)
Berkeley currently uses a
methodology based upon spend
data to estimate the embodied
carbon of materials and services
used in the development of our
homes and places, in addition
to gathering data on contractor
purchased fuels.
The limitations of reporting using
a spend-based methodology
are recognised by Berkeley. We
continue to take action to move
away from this approach towards
more robust data calculations,
obtaining more detailed and
material-specific data through the
completion of embodied carbon
assessments, the Group-wide
introduction of a material delivery
data capture system and supply
chainengagement.
Low carbon homes (category 11 –
use of sold products)
To estimate the lifetime carbon
impact of our completed
homes, we apply the calculated
Dwelling Emission Rate (DER)
across a 60-year period, in line
with industry guidance. We
do not take into account the
anticipated decarbonisation of
the UK electricity grid due to the
variablesinvolved.
Significant reductions in this area
are anticipated in the coming
years through the implementation
of more stringent Building
Regulations. The new Home
Energy Model (HEM) calculation
methodology will evolve emissions
reporting in this area. We continue
to work with industry and ensure
our reporting reflects the prevailing
and accepted methodology.
Industry-based metrics
Berkeley discloses industry-based
metrics in line with the SASB Home
Builders Sustainability Accounting
Standard and has been an active
member of the Future Homes
Hub’s working group established
to develop a shared set of metrics
for the industry in relation to
sustainability performance.
To recognise climate-related
risks and opportunities, we
have additional targets to our
SBTs with associated metrics in
place. For example, we monitor
measures implemented to manage
the physical risks to our homes
and places such as heat stress,
drought stress and flood through
the reporting of overheating risk
assessments, water efficiency
andSuDS.
Metrics and targets
Grand Union, Brent
72 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Metric Unit 2025 2024
Baseline
2019
Link to
transition
plan
Link to
climate risks and
opportunities
Reduce scopes 1 and 2 GHG emissions
Absolute scopes 1 and 2
(market-based) emissions
tCO
2
e 896
A
917 3,980 Pricing
of GHG
emissions
Climate-
related
reporting
obligations
Percentage change in emissions compared
to FY2019 (SBT baseline year)
% -77 -77
Energy consumption associated with
scopes 1 and 2 emissions
MWh 25,745
A
27,505 35,681
Energy consumption from
renewablesources
% 87 88 60
Purchased electricity backed by REGOs % 98.2 98.3 99.1
Purchased electricity in the UK backed
byREGOs
% 100 100 100
Reduce scope 3 purchased goods and services and use of sold products GHG emissions
Absolute scope 3 emissions
(categories 1 and11)
tCO
2
e 501,825
A
519,040 585,690 Planning
and design
requirements
Substitution
of existing
technologies
Raw material
costs
Change in
customer
demands
Skills
availability to
deliver low
carbon homes
Percentage change in absolute emissions
(categories 1 and 11) compared to FY2019
% -14 -11
Scope 3 (categories 1 and 11)
emissions intensity
tCO
2
e/
100 sqm
157 169 171
Percentage change in emissions intensity
compared to FY2019 (SBT baseline year)
% -8 -1
Absolute emissions for category 1:
purchased goods and services
tCO
2
e 265,769
A
304,476 352,087
Emissions intensity for category 1:
purchased goods and services
tCO
2
e/
100 sqm
83 99 103
Absolute emissions for category 11:
use of sold products
tCO
2
e 236,056
A
214,564 233,603
Emissions intensity for category 11:
use of sold products
tCO
2
e/
100 sqm
74 70 68
Completed homes with an Energy
Performance Certificate (EPC) rated
AorB
% 95 93 93
Completed homes with an Environmental
Impact Rating (EIR) of A or B
% 96 96
Average Dwelling Emission Rate (DER)
of completed homes
kgCO
2
/
m2/yr
12.45 12.08 11.72
Average percentage improvement in
DER over Target Emission Rate (TER)
for completed homes
% 30 32 34
Implement measures to manage climate risks for our developments and business
Average water efficiency of
homescompleted
lpppd 102.2 101.2 102.6 n/a Drought stress
Flood
Heat stress
Change in
customer
demands
Live development sites that have
sustainable drainage systems (SuDS)
% 100 100 98
Live development sites that have assessed
overheating risk
% 90 82
A
2025 information has been separately subject to limited assurance by KPMG LLP. Further details of the assurance provided in 2025,
including the independent assurance report and our methodology for reporting emissions, can be found at www.berkeleygroup.
co.uk/sustainabilitydisclosures
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 73
Metric 2025 Detail
Number of controlled lots
(IF-HB-000.A)
52,714 Lots on owned or unconditionally contracted sites as of the last day of the
reporting period.
Number of homes
delivered (IF-HB-000.B)
4,329 The number of homes that completed within the reporting period.
Number of active selling
communities
(IF-HB-000.C)
50 Includes sites that have an implementable planning consent and that are
in production.
Land use and ecological impacts
Number of (1) lots and
(2) homes delivered on
redevelopment sites
(IF-HB-160a.1)
(1) 46,612
(88%)
(2) 4,001
(92%)
Redevelopment sites are those that have been previously developed,
including the replacement or refurbishment of existing structures, i.e. those
sites considered to be brownfield land.
Number of (1) lots and
(2) homes delivered in
regions with High or
Extremely High Baseline
WaterStress
(IF-HB-160a.2)
(1) 47,411
(90%)
(2) 4,202
(97%)
London and large areas of the South of England are identified as having
High Baseline Water Stress within the World Resources Institute’s (WRI)
Water Risk Atlas Tool. We recognise the need to balance providing new
homes in these areas with reducing their impact on existing resources
through the incorporation of water efficient fittings and sustainable drainage
systems(SuDS).
Total amount of monetary
losses as a result of legal
proceedings associated
with environmental
regulations (IF-HB-160a.3)
£nil The Group had no environmental prosecutions in the reporting period and
subsequently no monetary losses.
Discussion of process to
integrate environmental
considerations into site
selection, site design,
andsite development
andconstruction
(IF-HB-160a.4)
n/a Our Vision 2030 is supported by our Sustainability Standards and procedures
detailing Berkeley’s minimum requirements for our day-to-day operations
and our new developments. These ensure that we have processes in place to
integrate environmental considerations throughout the development process.
For example:
Site selection: Berkeley focuses on urban brownfield regeneration, which is
inherently sustainable. Prior to land purchase, Berkeley completes an assessment
which seeks to identify all types of risks, including those related to environmental
factors, such as climate change (e.g. flood risk), land contamination and
ecology. These assessments are site-specific, taking into account the unique
characteristics of each development.
Site design: Our Sustainability Standards detail minimum requirements for new
developments including achieving an internal water use of less than 105 litres per
person per day and designing for climate change adaptation.
Site development and construction: Berkeley has dedicated sustainability
professionals within each of our operating companies, who support project
teams by providing advice and driving environmental improvements (e.g. energy
and water efficiency). Each site has an Environmental Risk Register and a site
sustainability assessment is undertaken by our internal sustainability team at
least quarterly to monitor performance.
Design for resource efficiency
(1) Number of homes
that obtained a certified
residential energy
efficiency rating and
(2) average rating
(IF-HB-410a.1)
(1) 4,329
(100%)
(2) 84 (B)
All homes legally completed by Berkeley in the year had an Energy
Performance Certificate (EPC) with an average energy efficiency rating of
84(B). In the year, 95% legally completed homes were rated B or above.
Note that homes across the industry are rated on a scale ranging from
A(veryefficient) to G (inefficient).
Percentage of installed
water fixtures certified
to a water efficiency
standard (IF-HB-410a.2)
n/a The UK does not currently have water efficiency standards for fixtures.
The internal water efficiency of our legally completed homes in the year is
provided as an alternative. Target: 105 litres per person per day; Achieved
average: 102.2 litres per person per day.
SASB metrics (climate-related)
Climate-related disclosures continued
74 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Metric 2025 Detail
Design for resource efficiency continued
Number of homes
delivered certified to a
third-party multi-attribute
green building standard
(IF-HB-410a.3)
n/a There was no established multi-attribute green building standard specifically
for homes in the UK that could be applied in the reporting year. All Berkeley
homes are subject to UK building regulations.
Description of risks and
opportunities related to
incorporating resource
efficiency into home
design, and how benefits
are communicated to
customers (IF-HB-410a.4)
n/a We design to high fabric efficiency to reduce energy demand and install water
saving fixtures and fittings. A key risk associated with the design of energy
efficient homes is the unintended consequence of overheating and therefore
we consider overall building design and performance. We have Sustainability
Standards to communicate sustainability with customers at all stages in the
purchasing process, from initial marketing brochures to detailed information
upon completion and handover of the home.
Climate change adaptation
Number of lots located in
100-year flood zones
(IF-HB-420a.1)
11,902
(23%)
This figure includes lots in areas assigned as Flood Zone 3. We undertake flood
risk assessments on every site as part of the planning process and take measures
to ensure that the development design takes into account and mitigates flood
risk. Design measures include raising lower floor levels and designing SuDS to
manage rainwater by storing it and releasing it into well-designed natural features
to help manage surface water and reduce the impacts of flooding.
Description of climate
change risk exposure
analysis, degree of
systematic portfolio
exposure, and strategies
for mitigating risks
(IF-HB-420a.2)
n/a Berkeley routinely evaluates climate-related risks and opportunities as part of our
ongoing risk assessment process. Detailed climate scenario analysis in relation to
physical risks was completed in 2022 with this still considered to be relevant to
our operations as we continue to develop across London, Birmingham and the
South of England. Read more on pages 70 and 71.
SASB metrics (other)
In addition to the climate-related metrics of SASB, Berkeley has chosen to disclose the additional sustainability
topics and accounting metrics below in line with the Home Builders Sustainability Accounting Standard.
Metric 2025 Detail
Workplace health and safety
(1) Total recordable
incident rate (TRIR) and
(2) fatality rate for
(a) direct employees and
(b) contract employees
(IF-HB-320a.1)
(1a) 39
(1b) 124
(2a; 2b) 0
Annual Injury Incidence Rate (AIIR) per 100,000 people reported in line with
UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) methodology. Our combined rate for
direct and contract employees is 102 which outperforms the construction
sector average of 306 (HSE, November 2024). There have been no work-
related fatalities in the year.
Community impacts of new developments
Description of how
proximity and access to
infrastructure, services,
and economic centres
affect site selection and
developmentdecisions
(IF-HB-410b.1)
n/a At Berkeley, proximity to key infrastructure and amenities is a factor in the
selection of land. As a specialist in brownfield regeneration, many of our
sites are located within towns and cities with existing transport networks
and economic centres. We look to provide public amenities and sustainable
transport options across our developments. Of our live development sites,
92% are incorporating community facilities ranging from supermarkets to
nurseries, with 96% within 1 km (a 10-minute walk) of a public transport node.
Number of (1) lots and
(2) homes delivered on
infill sites (IF-HB-410b.2)
(1) 43,448
(82%)
(2) 3,169
(73%)
Infill sites are defined as vacant or underutilised lots of land, served by existing
physical installations such as roads, power lines, sewer and water, and other
infrastructure. In line with the SASB definition, our redevelopment sites are
only considered infill if they additionally meet this criteria.
(1) Number of homes
delivered in compact
developments and
(2) average density
(IF-HB-410b.3)
(1) 4,234
(98%)
(2)
Unknown
The main types of compact developments delivered by Berkeley are
mixed use developments and neighbourhood developments with
communityfacilities.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 75
Section 172(1) Statement
Members of the Board as a whole
and individually are bound by their
duties under section 172(1) (a) to
(f) of the Companies Act 2006 (the
Act). In this statement, we describe
how our Directors have considered
the matters set out in section 172(1)
of the Act (section 172) when
performing their duty to promote
the success of the Company.
This engagement, both directly
and through regular reports
from individual business areas
and various functions, ensures
the Board is made aware of key
issues to enable the Directors to
comply with their legal duty under
section172.
This statement summarises how the
Company promotes its success for
the benefit of its key stakeholder
groups by having regard to:
the likely consequences of any
decisions in the long-term;
the need to foster the Company’s
business relationships with
suppliers, customers and others;
the desirability of the Company
maintaining a reputation of high
standards of business conduct;
the interests of the
Company’semployees;
the impact of the Company’s
operations on the community
and environment; and
the need to act fairly between
members of the Company.
We believe that to progress our
strategy and to deliver substantial
sustainable long-term growth
opportunities, the Board should
consider all stakeholders relevant
to a decision and satisfy themselves
that any decision upholds our values
and aligns with Our Vision2030.
The Board recognises that
stakeholder engagement is
essential to understand what
matters most to our stakeholders
and the likely impact of our
keydecisions.
The following sections demonstrate
how the Directors fulfil their duties
in respect of these obligations by
addressing in turn some of the
keyareas of focus for the Board.
Further detail of Board activity
in the year is described in the
Corporate Governance section on
pages 104 and 105.
Culture
and values
The culture and values of the business are continuously considered by the Directors when discharging
their duties to ensure they are embedded into the business. Read more on pages 108 and 109.
Business model
and strategy
The Directors have collective responsibility for promoting the long-term success of the Company
in a safe and sustainable manner in order to create and enhance shareholder value. Read more on
pages 12 and 13.
Risk
management
The Directors are responsible for setting and monitoring the risk appetite for the business. For more
detail of risk management see ‘How we manage risk’ on pages 78 to 91.
Stakeholder
engagement
The Board reviews and confirms its key stakeholder groups for the purposes of section 172 annually. In
2025, they were confirmed as customers, communities and local government, employees, supply chain,
government, regulators and industry, the environment and investors. The following pages set out how
the interests of each of these key stakeholders is embedded into the long-term strategy of the business.
For more
information
Customers
see pages 40, 41 and 111.
Communities and local government
see pages 44 to 47 and 112.
Employees
see pages 52 to 54 and 112.
Supply chain
see pages 42, 43, 48, 49, 53 and 113.
Government, regulators and industry
see pages 42 to 55 and 113.
Environment  
see pages 48 to 50 and 114.
Investors
see page 114.
76 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Non-financial and Sustainability
Information Statement
Reporting
requirement
Where to read more in this report to understand the impact
on the business, and the outcome of applying our policies Page reference
Relevant policies in place that
govern our approach
Environmental
matters
Our Vision 2030 progress
Climate-related disclosures
Our stakeholders: Environment
ESG performance
Driving growth and value
48 to 50
58 to 75
114
56
09
• Sustainability
Climate Change
Sustainable Specification
andProcurement
Climate-related
financial
disclosures
Climate-related disclosures
Our Vision 2030 progress
Directors’ Report: Scopes 1 and 2 greenhouse gas
emissions and energy consumption
58 to 75
48 to 49
164 to 165
Climate Change
• Sustainability
Employees Our Vision 2030 progress
Our stakeholders: Employees
ESG performance
51 to 54
112
57
• Employee
Equality and Diversity
Health, Safety and Wellbeing
Respect for
human rights
Our Vision 2030 progress
Our stakeholders: Employees, Supply chain
Whistleblowing
42 to 43, 52 to 53
112 to 113
105
Modern Slavery Statement
Human Rights, Modern
Slavery and Child Labour
Equality and Diversity
• Whistleblowing
Sustainable Specification
andProcurement
Social matters Our Vision 2030 progress
The Berkeley Foundation
Our stakeholders: Customers, Communities and local
government, Employees, Supply chain
Driving growth and value
40 to 47 and
51 to 54
55
111 to 113
08 to 09
• Sustainability
Sustainable Specification
andProcurement
Building Safety and
QualityAssurance
Anti-bribery
and anti-
corruption
Bribery Act andAnti-Money Laundering Regulations 105 Anti-Bribery and Corruption
Business Ethics
Corporate Hospitality and
Promotional Expenditure
• Whistleblowing
Anti-Facilitation of
TaxEvasion
How we
manage risk
How we manage risk, Principal risks, Financial risks,
Risk tables
Climate-related disclosures
78 to 91
67 to 71
Business model Our business model
Brownfield regeneration at scale
Driving growth and value
12 to 13
06 to 07
08 to 09
Non-financial
KPIs
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
In addition to these non-financial KPIs, Berkeley
monitors and reports on business performance
through a host of other data, highlights and awards.
Some of these are detailed within the Our Vision 2030
business strategy sections of this report
ESG performance
Driving growth and value
33
38 to 55
56 to 57
08 to 09
The following table summarises where our non-financial
information can be found in our Annual Report and
within ourpolicies available on our website.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 77
How we manage risk
The assessment of risk and embedding risk
management throughout Berkeley are key elements
ofsetting and delivering the Groups strategy.
Cyclical market
Berkeley’s business model is
centred on the Board’s appreciation
of the risks of the cyclical market in
which the business operates, where
market sentiment and transaction
levels can change quickly, requiring
us to adopt a flexible approach
to our investment decisions. This
can be dependent on where the
Board believes we are within any
particularcycle.
Autonomy and values
Berkeley has recognised brands
and autonomous, talented and
experienced teams who embrace
Berkeley’s values in their approach.
Berkeley creates bespoke and
innovative solutions for each
site which requires experienced,
intensive management.
Resource and expertise
Berkeley must continually
assess the required investment
in its people so it is fully able to
implement its strategy in the wider
environment. Recruitment, training
and retention of resource are
fundamental to Berkeley retaining
its market leading position and
ensuring it has highly skilled and
experienced teams who create
bespoke and innovative solutions
for each of its sites.
Operational complexity
The business model also recognises
the complexity of the planning
and delivery of the sites Berkeley
undertakes, alongside their capital
intensive nature. It mitigates this risk
by focusing its activities in London
and the South East, recognising the
importance of relationships and local
knowledge and having highly skilled
and experienced teams in place.
Financial strength
This translates into an approach
that, at all times through the cycle,
keeps financial risk low, recognising
the operational risks within
thebusiness.
Through our strong financial
position we are therefore able to
take, under normal circumstances,
increased operational risk to
deliver robust risk-adjusted returns,
within the parameters of our
businessmodel.
Culture and purpose
Berkeley’s unique culture is the
sum of its shared values, vision
and overarching sense of purpose.
Together, they have a dynamic and
energising effect on the way the
business operates, shaping our
purpose, long-term Our Vision 2030
responsible business strategy, brand
and day-to-day behaviours. Our
culture sets the standards by which
we judge our behaviours, products
and internal processes.
Emerging risks
Berkeley faces a number of
uncertainties that have the potential
to be materially significant to our
long-term strategy but cannot be
fully defined as a specific risk at
present, and therefore cannot be
fully assessed or managed. These
emerging risks typically have a long
time horizon and are discussed
and agreed by the Board on a
regularbasis.
Risk appetite
The Board is responsible for
setting and monitoring the
risk appetite for Berkeley. Risk
appetite relates to the amount
of risk the Company may seek
or accept at any given time
when pursuing its strategic
objectives, in the context
of the prevailing operating
environment. The Board’s
approach to, and appetite for
risk is summarised opposite.
78 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Principal risks
In accordance with provisions of the 2018 UK Corporate Governance Code, the
Directors have carried out a robust assessment of the emerging and principal risks
facing the Group, including those that would threaten its business model, future
performance, solvency or liquidity. There are also areas of our existing principal
risks that are evolving over time.
The Group’s risk appetite is
reviewed annually and approved
by the Board. This review guides
the actions we take to implement
ourstrategy.
The last year has seen a
continuation of the market
uncertainty and volatility in the
operating environment which has
been prevalent over recent years.
Berkeley has therefore continued
to evolve its strategy to position
the business appropriately for the
ongoing uncertain operating and
risk landscape, which seems likely
to remain volatile in the medium-
term, and hence our risk appetite
will remain dynamic and respectful
of the cyclical nature of our industry
and the risks and opportunities
thispresents.
The principal operating risks and
our approach to mitigating them
are described in more detail on
pages 82 to 91.
Risk management framework
Our approach to risk management combines a top-down strategic
review and feedback of risks by the Board, coupled with a bottom-up
review and reporting of risk by each operating business.
Board
The Board takes overall responsibility for risk management, and the
assessment of risk. Embedding risk management into the business is a
key element of setting and delivering our strategy.
The top-down assessment of risk by the Board includes a review of the
external environment in which Berkeley operates, which complements
the deep seated knowledge of the industry and operations by the
Executive Committee members. This takes into account the likelihood
and impact of risks, whether pre-existing or emerging, which may
materialise in the short or longer-term.
Emerging risks are also considered at each Board meeting and are
then fed down to the operating businesses for further review and
consideration, if applicable.
Audit Committee
The Audit Committee has responsibility for ensuring the effectiveness
of risk management and internal controls on behalf of the Board. The
controls and processes surrounding how we assess risk across the Group
are explained further in the Audit Committee Report on pages 122 to 125.
Executive Committee
Risk registers at operational level are overlain by wider strategic risks
facing the Group, such as macro-economic risk. This is then assessed
and managed by the Board and Executive Committee.
Operational management
A fundamental principle of the operating structure of the Group is that
the prime responsibility for assessing, managing and monitoring the
majority of the risks rests with operational management, thus ensuring
that risk management is embedded in our day-to-day operations.
All employees
All employees are encouraged to be alert to risks associated with the
activities they perform and to report issues and suggest alternative
approaches as appropriate.
Our top-down approach
Our bottom-up approach
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 79
Financial risks
Exposure to financialrisks
The financial risks to which Berkeley
is exposed include:
Liquidity risk
The risk that the funding required
for the Group to pursue its activities
may not be available.
Market interest rate risk
The risk that Group financing
activities are affected by
fluctuations in market interest rates.
Market credit risk
The risk that counterparties (mainly
customers) will default on their
contractual obligations, resulting
in a loss to the Group. The Group’s
exposure to credit risk is comprised
of cash and cash equivalents, loans
to joint ventures and trade and
other receivables.
Other financial risks
Berkeley contracts all of its
sales and the vast majority of its
purchases in sterling, and so has
no significant exposure to currency
risk, but does recognise that its
credit risk includes receivables from
customers in a range of jurisdictions
who are themselves exposed
to currency risk in contracting
insterling.
Management of financial risks
Berkeley adopts a prudent approach to managing these
financialrisks.
Treasury policy and central overview
The Board approves treasury policy and senior management
control day-to-day operations. Relationships with banks and
cash management are coordinated centrally as a Group function.
The treasury policy is intended to maintain an appropriate capital
structure to manage the financial risks identified and provide the
right platform for the business to manage its operating risks.
Forward sales
Berkeley’s approach to forward selling new homes to customers
provides good visibility over future cash flows, as expressed in cash
due on forward sales which stands at £1.4 billion at 30 April 2025.
It also helps mitigate market credit risk by virtue of customers’
deposits held from the point of unconditional exchange of
contractswithcustomers.
Low gearing
The Group is currently financing its operations through shareholder
equity, supported by £337 million of net cash on the Balance Sheet
and debt facilities. This in turn has mitigated its current exposure to
interest rate risk.
Land holdings
By investing in land at the right point in the cycle, holding a clear
development pipeline in our land holdings and continually optimising
our existing holdings, we are not under pressure to buy new land
when it would be wrong for the long-term returns for the business.
Headroom provided by bank facilities
The Group has £800 million of committed credit facilities maturing in
February 2029. This comprises a green term loan of £260 million and
the revolving credit facility of £540 million. In addition, the Group has
listed debt in the form of Green Bonds to the value of £400 million
maturing in August 2031.
Berkeley has a strong working partnership with the six banks that
provide the facilities and this is key to Berkeley’s approach to
mitigating liquidity risk.
Detailed appraisal of spending commitments
A culture which prioritises an understanding of the impact of all
decisions on the Group’s spending commitments and hence its
Balance Sheet, alongside weekly and monthly reviews of cash
flow forecasts at operating company, divisional and Group levels,
recognises that cash flow management is central to the continued
success of Berkeley.
80 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Viability Statement
Berkeley is a unique asset-focused
development business that seeks
to manage risk and generate
value through market cycles.
Berkeley’s approach centres on
using its development expertise
to maximise the returns from our
large-scale assets, creating the right
development solution for each site.
Financial strength underpins this
approach and is a fundamental risk
management principle, evident in:
The scale of the land holdings
and focus on long-term
brownfield regeneration
developments which have the
scope for value creation through
the market cycle.
A strong forward planning
position which provides visibility
on delivery and mitigates
regulatory risk in the near-term.
The cash due on forward
sales which underpins near-
term delivery and cash flows,
alongside a strong balance
sheet with net cash and liquidity
provided through debt capacity.
The Group’s net cash of £337
million at 30 April 2025 which,
coupled with its debt capacity of
£1,200 million, ensures Berkeley
has available liquidity of over
£1,500 million. The debt capacity
comprises £400 million of listed
unsecured green bonds which
mature in August 2031, supported
by Fitch Ratings Ltd’s senior
unsecured investment grade rating
of BBB- (Stable Outlook), and
bank facilities of £800 million.
Thebank facilities are in place
untilFebruary2029.
Cash due on forward sales are
resilient in the prevailing market
conditions at £1,403 million, while
the land holdings comprise an
estimated £6.7 billion of future
gross margin across 53,000
futurehomes.
In accordance with code provision 31 of the 2018
revision of the UK Corporate Governance Code, the
Directors have assessed the viability of the Group.
Berkeley’s approach to risk
management and its risk appetite
are set out on pages 78 to 91 of
the Strategic Report. Individual
development site cash flow
forecasts, which are used to
prepare the Group’s consolidated
cash flow forecast, take account
of operational circumstances and
risks. The Group’s cash flow forecast
includes appropriate allowances
for discretionary investment and
the quantum and timing of this is in
turn subject to the delivery of the
site cash flows and broader strategy
forthe Group.
The viability assessment envisages
a severe but plausible deterioration
in the economic outlook which
impacts the site level cash flows,
principally through lower sales
transaction volumes and pricing.
In response to such a scenario,
Berkeley’s response could comprise
a myriad of mitigating combinations
of actions, but the key principles
modelled include:
Production effort re-focused
to buildings with forward sales
enabling these to be collected.
Cautious approach to new WIP
investment as new buildings or
sites are placed on hold or slowed,
whilst all discretionary new land
investment issuspended.
Sales transaction levels and
pricing reduce considerably as
economic conditions decline.
Shareholder returns beyond
those planned to 30 September
2025 are delayed.
The Directors have made this
viability assessment over a three-
year period from 1 May 2025 to 30
April 2028 principally to align with
the period covered by Berkeley’s
forward sales as these are the
key area of focus for the business
underthe viability assessment.
Based on the assessment, the
Directors confirm that they have
a reasonable expectation that the
Group will be able to continue in
operation and meet its liabilities as
they fall due over the three-year
period commencing 1 May 2025.
Read more on our going concern
on page 166
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 81
Risk tables
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
2030
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Economic
outlook
As a property developer, Berkeley’s
business is sensitive to wider economic
factors such as changes in interest rates,
employment levels and general consumer
confidence.
Some customers are also sensitive to
changes in the sterling exchange rate in
terms of their buying decisions or ability to
meet their obligations under contracts.
Changes to economic conditions in the
UK, Europe and worldwide may lead to a
reduction in demand for housing which
could impact on the Group’s ability to
deliver its corporate strategy.
Recognition that Berkeley operates in a cyclical market
is central to our strategy and maintaining a strong
financial position is fundamental to our business
model and protects us against adverse changes in
economicconditions.
Land investment in all market conditions is carefully
targeted and underpinned by demand fundamentals and
a solid viability case.
Levels of committed expenditure are carefully monitored
against forward sales secured, cash levels and headroom
against our available bank facilities, with the objective of
keeping financial risk low to mitigate the operating risks
of delivery in uncertain markets.
Production programmes are continually assessed,
depending upon market conditions. The business is
committed to operating at an optimal size, with a strong
Balance Sheet, through autonomous businesses to
maintain the flexibility to react swiftly, when necessary, to
changes in market conditions.
High Geopolitical and macroeconomic volatility continue to affect the operating environment.
Growth forecasts reflect this with further uncertainty over the impact of US tariffs.
Interest rates have fallen in the year from their high of 5.25%, but the rate of decrease has
been slower than expected due to ongoing global economic uncertainty.
Read more on
pages 18 to 28
Political
outlook
Significant political events in the UK and
overseas may impact Berkeley’s business
through, for example, supply chain
disruption or the reluctance of customers
to make purchase decisions due to political
uncertainty and, subsequently, policies and
regulation may be introduced that directly
impact our business model.
Whilst we cannot directly influence political events, the
risks are taken into account when setting our business
strategy and operating model. In addition, we actively
engage in the debate on policy decisions.
High The new Government’s mission for growth and brownfield led housing agenda to resolve
the issues in the planning system and deliver 1.5 million new homes over the next five years
is laudable. They have already implemented significant changes to improve the pace of
planning. Although this is an extremely welcome first step, there remains much more to do
if this cornerstone of economic growth is to be fully realised.
However, this is balanced by the international political arena which has become more
volatile, particularly with the implementation of regulatory and fiscal measures and
counter-measures. These global headwinds will inevitably impact the UK’s economic
growth prospects in the near-term.
Read more on
pages 18 to 25
Regulation Adverse changes to Government
policy on areas such as taxation, design
requirements and the environment could
restrict the ability of the Group to deliver
its strategy.
Failure to comply with laws and
regulations could expose the Group to
penalties and reputational damage.
Berkeley is primarily focused geographically on London,
Birmingham and the South East of England, which
limits our risk when understanding and determining
the impact of new regulation across multiple locations
andjurisdictions.
The effects of changes to Government policies at all
levels are closely monitored by operating businesses and
the Board, and representations made to policy-setters
whereappropriate.
Berkeley’s experienced teams are well placed to interpret
and implement new regulations at the appropriate time
through direct lines of communication across the Group,
with support from internal and external legal advisors.
High Housing and fire safety remain high on the agendas of the Government and the main
political parties, with the sector continuing to face regulation and scrutiny.
We are actively monitoring and managing the uncertainty and delays faced across the
industry from the introduction of the new Gateway approval process under the recently
established Building Safety Regulator, and in particular the risk of delays to our build
programmes arising from the determination of Gateway 2 applications for our Higher
RiskBuildings.
We continue to cooperate with the Competition and Markets Authority in their
investigation into possible sharing of information in the housing industry.
Read more on
pages 18 to 25
Key | Our Vision 2030 priorities
Customers Quality Communities Climate Action Nature
Employee
Experience
Modernised
Production
Future Skills Supply Chain Shared Value
82 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
2030
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Economic
outlook
As a property developer, Berkeley’s
business is sensitive to wider economic
factors such as changes in interest rates,
employment levels and general consumer
confidence.
Some customers are also sensitive to
changes in the sterling exchange rate in
terms of their buying decisions or ability to
meet their obligations under contracts.
Changes to economic conditions in the
UK, Europe and worldwide may lead to a
reduction in demand for housing which
could impact on the Group’s ability to
deliver its corporate strategy.
Recognition that Berkeley operates in a cyclical market
is central to our strategy and maintaining a strong
financial position is fundamental to our business
model and protects us against adverse changes in
economicconditions.
Land investment in all market conditions is carefully
targeted and underpinned by demand fundamentals and
a solid viability case.
Levels of committed expenditure are carefully monitored
against forward sales secured, cash levels and headroom
against our available bank facilities, with the objective of
keeping financial risk low to mitigate the operating risks
of delivery in uncertain markets.
Production programmes are continually assessed,
depending upon market conditions. The business is
committed to operating at an optimal size, with a strong
Balance Sheet, through autonomous businesses to
maintain the flexibility to react swiftly, when necessary, to
changes in market conditions.
High Geopolitical and macroeconomic volatility continue to affect the operating environment.
Growth forecasts reflect this with further uncertainty over the impact of US tariffs.
Interest rates have fallen in the year from their high of 5.25%, but the rate of decrease has
been slower than expected due to ongoing global economic uncertainty.
Read more on
pages 18 to 28
Political
outlook
Significant political events in the UK and
overseas may impact Berkeley’s business
through, for example, supply chain
disruption or the reluctance of customers
to make purchase decisions due to political
uncertainty and, subsequently, policies and
regulation may be introduced that directly
impact our business model.
Whilst we cannot directly influence political events, the
risks are taken into account when setting our business
strategy and operating model. In addition, we actively
engage in the debate on policy decisions.
High The new Government’s mission for growth and brownfield led housing agenda to resolve
the issues in the planning system and deliver 1.5 million new homes over the next five years
is laudable. They have already implemented significant changes to improve the pace of
planning. Although this is an extremely welcome first step, there remains much more to do
if this cornerstone of economic growth is to be fully realised.
However, this is balanced by the international political arena which has become more
volatile, particularly with the implementation of regulatory and fiscal measures and
counter-measures. These global headwinds will inevitably impact the UK’s economic
growth prospects in the near-term.
Read more on
pages 18 to 25
Regulation Adverse changes to Government
policy on areas such as taxation, design
requirements and the environment could
restrict the ability of the Group to deliver
its strategy.
Failure to comply with laws and
regulations could expose the Group to
penalties and reputational damage.
Berkeley is primarily focused geographically on London,
Birmingham and the South East of England, which
limits our risk when understanding and determining
the impact of new regulation across multiple locations
andjurisdictions.
The effects of changes to Government policies at all
levels are closely monitored by operating businesses and
the Board, and representations made to policy-setters
whereappropriate.
Berkeley’s experienced teams are well placed to interpret
and implement new regulations at the appropriate time
through direct lines of communication across the Group,
with support from internal and external legal advisors.
High Housing and fire safety remain high on the agendas of the Government and the main
political parties, with the sector continuing to face regulation and scrutiny.
We are actively monitoring and managing the uncertainty and delays faced across the
industry from the introduction of the new Gateway approval process under the recently
established Building Safety Regulator, and in particular the risk of delays to our build
programmes arising from the determination of Gateway 2 applications for our Higher
RiskBuildings.
We continue to cooperate with the Competition and Markets Authority in their
investigation into possible sharing of information in the housing industry.
Read more on
pages 18 to 25
Key | Risk
Increased risk No change Decreased risk
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 83
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
2030
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Land
availability
An inability to source suitable land to
maintain the Group’s land holdings
at appropriate margins in a highly
competitive market could impact
on the Group’s ability to deliver its
corporatestrategy.
Understanding the markets in which we operate is central
to Berkeley’s strategy and, consequently, land acquisition
is primarily focused on Berkeley’s core markets of
London, Birmingham and the South East of England,
markets in which it believes the demand fundamentals
are strong.
Berkeley has experienced land teams with strong market
knowledge in their areas of focus, which gives us the
confidence to buy land without an implementable
planning consent and, with an understanding of local
stakeholders’ needs, positions Berkeley with the best
chance of securing a viable planning consent.
Berkeley’s land holdings mean that it has the land in place
for its business plan requirements and can therefore
always acquire land at the right time in the cycle.
Low The Group continues to focus on protecting and enhancing the value of its land holdings
through a combination of acquiring new sites, enhancing the value of existing sites and
bringing sites through the strategic pipeline of long-term options.
Investment decisions are affected by the uncertainty in the political and economic outlook,
as well as complexities in the planning system, although new opportunities may arise as
demand from other use classes evolve, including through our recently established Build to
Rent platform.
Berkeley has acquired three new sites in the period, all outside London.
Read more on
pages 18 to 25
Planning
process
Delays or refusals in obtaining
commercially viable planning permissions
could result in the Group being unable to
develop its land holdings.
The current complex and evolving nature
of planning policies amplifies the risk.
This could have a direct impact on the
Group’s ability to deliver its product and
on its profitability.
The Group’s strategic geographical focus and expertise
place it in the best position to conceive and deliver the
right consents for the land acquired.
Full detailed planning and risk assessments are performed
and monitored for each site without planning permission,
both before and after purchase. The planning status of
all sites is also reviewed at both monthly divisional Board
meetings and Main Board meetings.
The Group works closely with local communities in
respect of planning proposals and maintains strong
relationships with local authorities and planning officers.
Berkeley has planning consents in place for its immediate
business plan needs.
High The new Government’s determination to fuel economic growth through the delivery of
1.5 million homes over this Parliament has galvanised the planning system. The challenge
remains agreeing the Section 106 agreements that codify the level of affordable housing
and other planning tariffs and there remains significant variations in approach across the
local authorities.
We have made good progress over the course of the year, with a resolution to grant
planning permission obtained on six future sites in the land holdings and pipeline.
Read more on
pages 18 to 25
Retaining
people
An inability to attract, develop, motivate
and retain talented employees could have
an impact on the Group’s ability to deliver
its strategic priorities.
Failure to consider the retention and
succession of key management could
result in a loss of knowledge and
competitive advantage.
Two priorities within Our Vision 2030 are designed to
help recruit and retain a high calibre work force.
The first is ‘Employee Experience’ which places a specific
focus on areas including employee engagement and
Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI). The second focuses
on ‘Future Skills’ looking at how we can create tangible
long-term change and inspire people to join the industry.
Succession planning is regularly reviewed at both
divisional and Main Board level. Close relationships and
dialogue are maintained with key personnel.
Remuneration packages are benchmarked against the
industry to ensure they remain competitive.
Medium The motivation, retention and progression of our people remains fundamental to the
delivery of our strategy.
The Group continues to have a stable senior management team and despite the normal
pressure of people retention, overall retention rates have remained relatively stable during
the year, with a continued focus on talent management, career progression opportunities,
training, benefits, health and wellbeing initiatives, and agile working.
This year we have improved our Group-wide benefits including enhanced parental leave
and a new menopause plan.
Our 2024 employee survey provided a route for feedback from employees, which is then
incorporated within action plans for improvement for each of our operating businesses.
Read more on
pages 52 to 54 and 112
Risk tables continued
84 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
2030
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Land
availability
An inability to source suitable land to
maintain the Group’s land holdings
at appropriate margins in a highly
competitive market could impact
on the Group’s ability to deliver its
corporatestrategy.
Understanding the markets in which we operate is central
to Berkeley’s strategy and, consequently, land acquisition
is primarily focused on Berkeley’s core markets of
London, Birmingham and the South East of England,
markets in which it believes the demand fundamentals
are strong.
Berkeley has experienced land teams with strong market
knowledge in their areas of focus, which gives us the
confidence to buy land without an implementable
planning consent and, with an understanding of local
stakeholders’ needs, positions Berkeley with the best
chance of securing a viable planning consent.
Berkeley’s land holdings mean that it has the land in place
for its business plan requirements and can therefore
always acquire land at the right time in the cycle.
Low The Group continues to focus on protecting and enhancing the value of its land holdings
through a combination of acquiring new sites, enhancing the value of existing sites and
bringing sites through the strategic pipeline of long-term options.
Investment decisions are affected by the uncertainty in the political and economic outlook,
as well as complexities in the planning system, although new opportunities may arise as
demand from other use classes evolve, including through our recently established Build to
Rent platform.
Berkeley has acquired three new sites in the period, all outside London.
Read more on
pages 18 to 25
Planning
process
Delays or refusals in obtaining
commercially viable planning permissions
could result in the Group being unable to
develop its land holdings.
The current complex and evolving nature
of planning policies amplifies the risk.
This could have a direct impact on the
Group’s ability to deliver its product and
on its profitability.
The Group’s strategic geographical focus and expertise
place it in the best position to conceive and deliver the
right consents for the land acquired.
Full detailed planning and risk assessments are performed
and monitored for each site without planning permission,
both before and after purchase. The planning status of
all sites is also reviewed at both monthly divisional Board
meetings and Main Board meetings.
The Group works closely with local communities in
respect of planning proposals and maintains strong
relationships with local authorities and planning officers.
Berkeley has planning consents in place for its immediate
business plan needs.
High The new Government’s determination to fuel economic growth through the delivery of
1.5 million homes over this Parliament has galvanised the planning system. The challenge
remains agreeing the Section 106 agreements that codify the level of affordable housing
and other planning tariffs and there remains significant variations in approach across the
local authorities.
We have made good progress over the course of the year, with a resolution to grant
planning permission obtained on six future sites in the land holdings and pipeline.
Read more on
pages 18 to 25
Retaining
people
An inability to attract, develop, motivate
and retain talented employees could have
an impact on the Group’s ability to deliver
its strategic priorities.
Failure to consider the retention and
succession of key management could
result in a loss of knowledge and
competitive advantage.
Two priorities within Our Vision 2030 are designed to
help recruit and retain a high calibre work force.
The first is ‘Employee Experience’ which places a specific
focus on areas including employee engagement and
Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI). The second focuses
on ‘Future Skills’ looking at how we can create tangible
long-term change and inspire people to join the industry.
Succession planning is regularly reviewed at both
divisional and Main Board level. Close relationships and
dialogue are maintained with key personnel.
Remuneration packages are benchmarked against the
industry to ensure they remain competitive.
Medium The motivation, retention and progression of our people remains fundamental to the
delivery of our strategy.
The Group continues to have a stable senior management team and despite the normal
pressure of people retention, overall retention rates have remained relatively stable during
the year, with a continued focus on talent management, career progression opportunities,
training, benefits, health and wellbeing initiatives, and agile working.
This year we have improved our Group-wide benefits including enhanced parental leave
and a new menopause plan.
Our 2024 employee survey provided a route for feedback from employees, which is then
incorporated within action plans for improvement for each of our operating businesses.
Read more on
pages 52 to 54 and 112
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 85
Risk tables continued
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
2030
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Securing
sales
An inability to match supply to demand
in terms of product, location and price
could result in missed sales targets and/
or high levels of completed stock which in
turn could impact on the Group’s ability to
deliver its corporate strategy.
The Group has experienced sales teams both in the UK
and within our overseas sales offices, supplemented by
market-leading agents.
Detailed market demand assessments of each site are
undertaken before acquisition and regularly during
delivery of each scheme to ensure that supply is matched
to demand in each location.
Design, product type and product quality are all assessed
on a site-by-site basis to ensure that they meet the target
market and customer aspirations in that location.
The Group’s ability to forward sell reduces the risk
of the development cycle where possible, thereby
justifying and underpinning the financial investment in
each of the Group’s sites. Completed stock levels are
reviewedregularly.
Medium
Sales rates have improved slightly in 2024/25, but remain 25-30% lower than the
historic levels. Enquiry levels are good, but buyers remain very price sensitive
and cautious to commit. This will persist until interest rates fall and confidence in
economic stability returns.
Pricing has been stable across our sites during the period and above business
planlevels.
Cash due on private forward sales was £1.4 billion at 30 April 2025, which has
moderated through a combination of strong delivery and the prevailing sales rates.
75% of required sales for 2025/26 are already secured.
We have established our own Build to Rent platform in the year and units across
six of our developments are already in production, with first rental homes to be
delivered in 2026/27.
Read more on
page 22
Liquidity Reduced availability of the external
financing required by the Group to pursue
its activities and meet its liabilities.
Failure to manage working capital may
constrain the growth of the business and
ability to execute the business plan.
The Board approves treasury policy and senior
management controls day-to-day operations.
Relationships with banks and cash management are
coordinated centrally as a Group function.
The treasury policy is intended to maintain an appropriate
capital structure to manage the Group’s financial risks
and provide the right platform for the business to
manage its operating risks.
Cash flow management is central to the continued
success of Berkeley. There is a culture which prioritises
an understanding of the impact of all decisions on the
Group’s spending commitments and hence its Balance
Sheet, alongside weekly and monthly reviews of cash
flow forecasts at operating company, divisional and
Group levels.
Low
The Group had net cash of £337 million at 30 April 2025, giving the Group circa £1.5
billion of liquidity when combined with bank facilities.
In addition, Berkeley has a borrowing facility with Homes England totalling £125.6
million, whereby it may apply amounts borrowed towards financing or re-financing
certain infrastructure type costs incurred on three of its developments.
Berkeley has a strong working partnership with the six banks that provide the
facilities which is key to Berkeley’s approach to mitigating liquidity risk.
Read more on
pages 31 and 217
Mortgages An inability of customers to secure
sufficient mortgage finance now or in the
future could have a direct impact on the
Group’s transaction levels.
Berkeley has a broad product mix and customer base
which reduces the reliance on mortgage availability
across its portfolio.
Deposits are taken on all sales to mitigate the financial
impact on the Group in the event that sales do not
complete due to a lack of mortgage availability.
Medium
Mortgage rates have continued to fall this year, helped by four reductions in the
base rate. All major UK lenders are now offering rates around 4% dependent on
individual circumstances, factoring in likely further decreases to the base rate in the
coming months.
86 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
2030
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Securing
sales
An inability to match supply to demand
in terms of product, location and price
could result in missed sales targets and/
or high levels of completed stock which in
turn could impact on the Group’s ability to
deliver its corporate strategy.
The Group has experienced sales teams both in the UK
and within our overseas sales offices, supplemented by
market-leading agents.
Detailed market demand assessments of each site are
undertaken before acquisition and regularly during
delivery of each scheme to ensure that supply is matched
to demand in each location.
Design, product type and product quality are all assessed
on a site-by-site basis to ensure that they meet the target
market and customer aspirations in that location.
The Group’s ability to forward sell reduces the risk
of the development cycle where possible, thereby
justifying and underpinning the financial investment in
each of the Group’s sites. Completed stock levels are
reviewedregularly.
Medium
Sales rates have improved slightly in 2024/25, but remain 25-30% lower than the
historic levels. Enquiry levels are good, but buyers remain very price sensitive
and cautious to commit. This will persist until interest rates fall and confidence in
economic stability returns.
Pricing has been stable across our sites during the period and above business
planlevels.
Cash due on private forward sales was £1.4 billion at 30 April 2025, which has
moderated through a combination of strong delivery and the prevailing sales rates.
75% of required sales for 2025/26 are already secured.
We have established our own Build to Rent platform in the year and units across
six of our developments are already in production, with first rental homes to be
delivered in 2026/27.
Read more on
page 22
Liquidity Reduced availability of the external
financing required by the Group to pursue
its activities and meet its liabilities.
Failure to manage working capital may
constrain the growth of the business and
ability to execute the business plan.
The Board approves treasury policy and senior
management controls day-to-day operations.
Relationships with banks and cash management are
coordinated centrally as a Group function.
The treasury policy is intended to maintain an appropriate
capital structure to manage the Group’s financial risks
and provide the right platform for the business to
manage its operating risks.
Cash flow management is central to the continued
success of Berkeley. There is a culture which prioritises
an understanding of the impact of all decisions on the
Group’s spending commitments and hence its Balance
Sheet, alongside weekly and monthly reviews of cash
flow forecasts at operating company, divisional and
Group levels.
Low
The Group had net cash of £337 million at 30 April 2025, giving the Group circa £1.5
billion of liquidity when combined with bank facilities.
In addition, Berkeley has a borrowing facility with Homes England totalling £125.6
million, whereby it may apply amounts borrowed towards financing or re-financing
certain infrastructure type costs incurred on three of its developments.
Berkeley has a strong working partnership with the six banks that provide the
facilities which is key to Berkeley’s approach to mitigating liquidity risk.
Read more on
pages 31 and 217
Mortgages An inability of customers to secure
sufficient mortgage finance now or in the
future could have a direct impact on the
Group’s transaction levels.
Berkeley has a broad product mix and customer base
which reduces the reliance on mortgage availability
across its portfolio.
Deposits are taken on all sales to mitigate the financial
impact on the Group in the event that sales do not
complete due to a lack of mortgage availability.
Medium
Mortgage rates have continued to fall this year, helped by four reductions in the
base rate. All major UK lenders are now offering rates around 4% dependent on
individual circumstances, factoring in likely further decreases to the base rate in the
coming months.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 87
Risk tables continued
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
2030
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Climate
change
The transition to a lower carbon economy
and the physical effects of temperature
changes could have wide ranging impacts
on Berkeley, with these assessed using
climate scenario analysis.
Identified risks and opportunities relating
to the transition to a lower carbon
economy include: evolving planning
and design requirements; substitution
of existing technologies; increasing
raw material costs; and changing
customerdemands.
Risks relating to the physical impacts
of climate change include: heat stress;
drought stress; subsidence; windstorm;
and flood.
Climate Action is a strategic priority within our
responsible business strategy, Our Vision 2030.
We have set science-based targets (SBTs) to drive action
to mitigate our impact. Energy efficiency requirements
are in place covering our direct activities. In addition, our
scope 3 SBT commits us to build more efficient homes
and work with our supply chain to reduce the embodied
carbon within the materials and services that we procure.
Evolving requirements and technologies are monitored
by our Group Sustainability Team and operational
committees, working with external experts and industry
working groups as necessary.
We consider climate change risks and incorporate
measures such as sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) to
build resilience into our homes and developments.
Read more about our mitigation actions for key
risks identified through climate scenario analysis on
pages 67 to 71
Medium This year, we have updated our transition risk and opportunity analysis (see pages 68 and
69). We are confident that our processes enable us to effectively manage and mitigate the
identified risks.
We submitted an energy reduction action plan in line with the requirements of the Energy
Savings Opportunity Scheme (ESOS) following the completion of energy audits across our
divisional offices, sales suites and construction sites.
We continue to prepare our homes to be ‘zero carbon ready’ ahead of the launch of the
Future Homes Standard later in 2025, including the installation of heat pump technology.
We undertake embodied carbon assessments, and this year have provided our teams with
detailed guidance using knowledge gained from assessments completed to date.
Read more on
pages 48, 49 and 58 to 75
Sustainability Berkeley is aware of the environmental and
social impact of the homes and places that
it builds, both throughout the development
process and during occupation and use by
customers and the wider community.
Failure to address sustainability issues
could affect the Group’s ability to acquire
land, gain planning permission, manage
sites effectively and respond to increasing
customer demands for sustainable homes
and communities.
Our Vision 2030 covers our approach to sustainability
across three areas: Communities, Climate Action
andNature.
Sustainability Standards are set at a Group level and
set out the minimum Berkeley requirements for new
developments and the operation of our construction sites,
divisional offices and sales suites. These are supported
by more detailed procedures within our Sustainability
Management System, including a requirement for
an Environmental Risk Register for each site and the
completion of at least quarterly site sustainability
assessments by our internal sustainability professionals.
Medium Over the last year we have completed a full review of our Sustainability Standards to
ensure that we continue to create sustainable places for our customers and operate our
business efficiently.
Following biodiversity net gain (BNG) becoming mandatory in February 2024, we
have continued to build on our industry leading approach to deliver BNG across our
developments. The potential impact of environmental delivery plans (EDPs) and a nature
restoration levy introduced through the Planning and Infrastructure Bill is being monitored
by the business.
We recognise that every community is unique, evolving in its own way and at its own
pace. This year we launched our new Communities Framework which brings together our
existing work to provide a structured approach to building strong communities from the
very start.
Read more on
pages 34, 40 to 50 and 114
88 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
2030
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Climate
change
The transition to a lower carbon economy
and the physical effects of temperature
changes could have wide ranging impacts
on Berkeley, with these assessed using
climate scenario analysis.
Identified risks and opportunities relating
to the transition to a lower carbon
economy include: evolving planning
and design requirements; substitution
of existing technologies; increasing
raw material costs; and changing
customerdemands.
Risks relating to the physical impacts
of climate change include: heat stress;
drought stress; subsidence; windstorm;
and flood.
Climate Action is a strategic priority within our
responsible business strategy, Our Vision 2030.
We have set science-based targets (SBTs) to drive action
to mitigate our impact. Energy efficiency requirements
are in place covering our direct activities. In addition, our
scope 3 SBT commits us to build more efficient homes
and work with our supply chain to reduce the embodied
carbon within the materials and services that we procure.
Evolving requirements and technologies are monitored
by our Group Sustainability Team and operational
committees, working with external experts and industry
working groups as necessary.
We consider climate change risks and incorporate
measures such as sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) to
build resilience into our homes and developments.
Read more about our mitigation actions for key
risks identified through climate scenario analysis on
pages 67 to 71
Medium This year, we have updated our transition risk and opportunity analysis (see pages 68 and
69). We are confident that our processes enable us to effectively manage and mitigate the
identified risks.
We submitted an energy reduction action plan in line with the requirements of the Energy
Savings Opportunity Scheme (ESOS) following the completion of energy audits across our
divisional offices, sales suites and construction sites.
We continue to prepare our homes to be ‘zero carbon ready’ ahead of the launch of the
Future Homes Standard later in 2025, including the installation of heat pump technology.
We undertake embodied carbon assessments, and this year have provided our teams with
detailed guidance using knowledge gained from assessments completed to date.
Read more on
pages 48, 49 and 58 to 75
Sustainability Berkeley is aware of the environmental and
social impact of the homes and places that
it builds, both throughout the development
process and during occupation and use by
customers and the wider community.
Failure to address sustainability issues
could affect the Group’s ability to acquire
land, gain planning permission, manage
sites effectively and respond to increasing
customer demands for sustainable homes
and communities.
Our Vision 2030 covers our approach to sustainability
across three areas: Communities, Climate Action
andNature.
Sustainability Standards are set at a Group level and
set out the minimum Berkeley requirements for new
developments and the operation of our construction sites,
divisional offices and sales suites. These are supported
by more detailed procedures within our Sustainability
Management System, including a requirement for
an Environmental Risk Register for each site and the
completion of at least quarterly site sustainability
assessments by our internal sustainability professionals.
Medium Over the last year we have completed a full review of our Sustainability Standards to
ensure that we continue to create sustainable places for our customers and operate our
business efficiently.
Following biodiversity net gain (BNG) becoming mandatory in February 2024, we
have continued to build on our industry leading approach to deliver BNG across our
developments. The potential impact of environmental delivery plans (EDPs) and a nature
restoration levy introduced through the Planning and Infrastructure Bill is being monitored
by the business.
We recognise that every community is unique, evolving in its own way and at its own
pace. This year we launched our new Communities Framework which brings together our
existing work to provide a structured approach to building strong communities from the
very start.
Read more on
pages 34, 40 to 50 and 114
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 89
Risk tables continued
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
2030
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Health
and safety
Berkeley’s operations have a direct impact
on the health and safety of its people,
contractors and members of the public.
A lack of adequate procedures and
systems to reduce the dangers inherent in
the construction process increases the risk
of accidents or site-related catastrophes,
including fire and flood, which could result
in serious injury or loss of life, or impact
the business through financial penalties or
disruption to operations.
Berkeley considers this to be an area of critical
importance. Berkeley’s health and safety strategy is set by
the Board. Dedicated health and safety teams are in place
in each division and at Head Office.
Procedures, training and reporting are all regularly
reviewed to maintain high standards and ensure that
comprehensive accident investigation procedures are
in place. Insurance is held to cover the risks inherent in
large-scale construction projects.
The Group continues to implement initiatives to improve
health and safety standards on site.
Medium Health and safety remains an operational priority for Berkeley and our AIIR at the year end
was 102, well below our target of 250 and remains one of the best in the industry.
Our teams continue to operate to stringent Group-wide health and safety standards that
are audited regularly by our Group and local assessors and management.
We run campaigns for high-risk activities such as Working at Height, and maintain an
intervention app where both our direct and contractor workforce can log interventions or
near misses to share information and learn from each other.
Read more on
page 53
Product
quality and
customers
Berkeley has a reputation for high
standards of build safety and quality
initsproduct.
Failure to deliver against these standards
and wider development obligations
could expose customers to issues with
their home and Berkeley to reputational
damage, reduced sales and increased cost
to rectify issues.
Detailed reviews are undertaken of the product on
each scheme both during the acquisition of the site and
throughout the build process to ensure that product
quality is maintained.
The Group has detailed quality assurance procedures in
place surrounding both design and build to ensure the
adequacy of build at each key stage of construction.
Customer satisfaction surveys are undertaken on the
handover of our homes, and feedback is incorporated
into the specification and design of subsequent schemes.
Medium The Group’s continued focus on improving the quality of design and product, with
attention to every detail in our homes, remains at the heart of our delivery.
We continually review our Building Safety and Quality Assurance (BSQA) system to make
further enhancements and respond to the requirements of the Building Safety Act. In
addition we constantly look at ways to meet the demands of changing lifestyles, as well as
the rapidly changing levels of expectations from our customers.
Customers remain at the heart of all of our decisions, and Berkeley prioritises customer service,
communities, nature and overall quality of place through its Our Vision 2030 targets.
Read more on
pages 40, 41 and 111
Build
cost and
programme
Build costs are affected by the availability
of skilled labour and the price and
availability of materials, suppliers
andcontractors.
Declines in the availability of a skilled
workforce, and changes to these prices
could impact on our build programmes
and the profitability of our schemes.
A procurement and programming strategy for each
development is agreed by the divisional Board before site
acquisition, whilst a further assessment of procurement and
programming is undertaken and agreed by the divisional
Board prior to the commencement of construction.
Build cost reconciliations and build programme dates are
presented and reviewed in detail at divisional cost review
meetings each month. Our Vision 2030 strategy includes
ongoing commitments to training and support across
both our employees and our indirect workforce.
Medium Build cost inflation remained neutral for much of 2024/25.
We are experiencing significantly longer timescales than anticipated in relation to the new
Gateway process for Higher Risk Buildings, which is being administered by the Building
Safety Regulator. Delays in the determination of Gateway 2 applications may have an
impact on future delivery programmes.
Read more on
pages 42, 43 and 113
Cyber and
data risk
The Group acknowledges that it places
significant reliance upon the availability,
accuracy and confidentiality of all of
its information systems and the data
contained therein.
The Group could suffer significant financial
and reputational damage because of the
corruption, loss or theft of data, whether
inadvertent or via a deliberate, targeted
cyber-attack.
Berkeley’s systems and control procedures are designed
to ensure that confidentiality, availability and integrity are
not compromised.
Our Information Security Programme focuses primarily
on the detection and prevention of security incidents and
potential data breaches.
An IT Security Committee meets quarterly to address all
cyber security matters.
The Group operates multiple physical data centres
supported by cloud-based services thereby reducing
centralised risk exposure. An IT disaster recovery plan is
regularly assessed.
The Group has cyber insurance in place to reduce any
potential financial impact.
High The threat from cyber-attacks remains high and the methods of attack continue to evolve.
Attacks are becoming more sophisticated, requiring additional technical controls, changes
to tools and awareness training.
The exploitation of trusted supply chain accounts poses an increasing risk, as adversaries
increasingly target our organisation through these channels.
The Cyber Security team regularly sends awareness reminders when threats affecting the
Group are detected.
The Group are leveraging industry leading security tools and harnessing the power of AI to
detect and prevent emerging cyber threats to the organisation.
In the past year, the rapid increase of AI technologies has significantly increased the
complexity and frequency of cyber threats, including sophisticated social engineering. The
Group understands as AI tools become more accessible, the need for robust cyber security
measures to mitigate these evolving risks is crucial.
Read more on
page 104
90 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
2030
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Health
and safety
Berkeley’s operations have a direct impact
on the health and safety of its people,
contractors and members of the public.
A lack of adequate procedures and
systems to reduce the dangers inherent in
the construction process increases the risk
of accidents or site-related catastrophes,
including fire and flood, which could result
in serious injury or loss of life, or impact
the business through financial penalties or
disruption to operations.
Berkeley considers this to be an area of critical
importance. Berkeley’s health and safety strategy is set by
the Board. Dedicated health and safety teams are in place
in each division and at Head Office.
Procedures, training and reporting are all regularly
reviewed to maintain high standards and ensure that
comprehensive accident investigation procedures are
in place. Insurance is held to cover the risks inherent in
large-scale construction projects.
The Group continues to implement initiatives to improve
health and safety standards on site.
Medium Health and safety remains an operational priority for Berkeley and our AIIR at the year end
was 102, well below our target of 250 and remains one of the best in the industry.
Our teams continue to operate to stringent Group-wide health and safety standards that
are audited regularly by our Group and local assessors and management.
We run campaigns for high-risk activities such as Working at Height, and maintain an
intervention app where both our direct and contractor workforce can log interventions or
near misses to share information and learn from each other.
Read more on
page 53
Product
quality and
customers
Berkeley has a reputation for high
standards of build safety and quality
initsproduct.
Failure to deliver against these standards
and wider development obligations
could expose customers to issues with
their home and Berkeley to reputational
damage, reduced sales and increased cost
to rectify issues.
Detailed reviews are undertaken of the product on
each scheme both during the acquisition of the site and
throughout the build process to ensure that product
quality is maintained.
The Group has detailed quality assurance procedures in
place surrounding both design and build to ensure the
adequacy of build at each key stage of construction.
Customer satisfaction surveys are undertaken on the
handover of our homes, and feedback is incorporated
into the specification and design of subsequent schemes.
Medium The Group’s continued focus on improving the quality of design and product, with
attention to every detail in our homes, remains at the heart of our delivery.
We continually review our Building Safety and Quality Assurance (BSQA) system to make
further enhancements and respond to the requirements of the Building Safety Act. In
addition we constantly look at ways to meet the demands of changing lifestyles, as well as
the rapidly changing levels of expectations from our customers.
Customers remain at the heart of all of our decisions, and Berkeley prioritises customer service,
communities, nature and overall quality of place through its Our Vision 2030 targets.
Read more on
pages 40, 41 and 111
Build
cost and
programme
Build costs are affected by the availability
of skilled labour and the price and
availability of materials, suppliers
andcontractors.
Declines in the availability of a skilled
workforce, and changes to these prices
could impact on our build programmes
and the profitability of our schemes.
A procurement and programming strategy for each
development is agreed by the divisional Board before site
acquisition, whilst a further assessment of procurement and
programming is undertaken and agreed by the divisional
Board prior to the commencement of construction.
Build cost reconciliations and build programme dates are
presented and reviewed in detail at divisional cost review
meetings each month. Our Vision 2030 strategy includes
ongoing commitments to training and support across
both our employees and our indirect workforce.
Medium Build cost inflation remained neutral for much of 2024/25.
We are experiencing significantly longer timescales than anticipated in relation to the new
Gateway process for Higher Risk Buildings, which is being administered by the Building
Safety Regulator. Delays in the determination of Gateway 2 applications may have an
impact on future delivery programmes.
Read more on
pages 42, 43 and 113
Cyber and
data risk
The Group acknowledges that it places
significant reliance upon the availability,
accuracy and confidentiality of all of
its information systems and the data
contained therein.
The Group could suffer significant financial
and reputational damage because of the
corruption, loss or theft of data, whether
inadvertent or via a deliberate, targeted
cyber-attack.
Berkeley’s systems and control procedures are designed
to ensure that confidentiality, availability and integrity are
not compromised.
Our Information Security Programme focuses primarily
on the detection and prevention of security incidents and
potential data breaches.
An IT Security Committee meets quarterly to address all
cyber security matters.
The Group operates multiple physical data centres
supported by cloud-based services thereby reducing
centralised risk exposure. An IT disaster recovery plan is
regularly assessed.
The Group has cyber insurance in place to reduce any
potential financial impact.
High The threat from cyber-attacks remains high and the methods of attack continue to evolve.
Attacks are becoming more sophisticated, requiring additional technical controls, changes
to tools and awareness training.
The exploitation of trusted supply chain accounts poses an increasing risk, as adversaries
increasingly target our organisation through these channels.
The Cyber Security team regularly sends awareness reminders when threats affecting the
Group are detected.
The Group are leveraging industry leading security tools and harnessing the power of AI to
detect and prevent emerging cyber threats to the organisation.
In the past year, the rapid increase of AI technologies has significantly increased the
complexity and frequency of cyber threats, including sophisticated social engineering. The
Group understands as AI tools become more accessible, the need for robust cyber security
measures to mitigate these evolving risks is crucial.
Read more on
page 104
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 91
Corporate
Governance
Pages 92 to 167
92 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
94 | Chairman’s introduction
96 | Board of Directors
100| Board leadership and
Companypurpose
101 | Division of responsibilities
104| Board activities during the year
108 | Our culture
110 | Stakeholder engagement
111 | Our stakeholders
116 | Nomination Committee Report
122 | Audit CommitteeReport
126 | Directors’ RemunerationReport
160 | Directors’ Report
St William has secured planning
consent to transform the derelict
Bromley-by-Bow Gasworks
into a green and sustainable
neighbourhood with 2,150 homes
and a 4.2-acre community park.
The site’s unique collection of
seven Grade II Listed gasholders
will be carefully restored.
Computer generated image The gasworks before regeneration
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 93
Corporate Governance
Chairman’s introduction
Michael Dobson
Chairman
The Board considered how the
Remuneration Policy can best be
structured to take account of the
operating environment, Berkeley
2035 and volatility. In line with
the normal three-year lifecycle,
we will be submitting the new
Remuneration Policy for approval
atthe AGM on 5 September 2025.
Following the externally facilitated
Board review in 2023/24, we
conducted an internal review this
year. The conclusions, detailed
more fully in the Nomination
Committee Report, were that the
Board is operating effectively and is
focusing on the key strategic issues.
I will step down at the conclusion
of the AGM as will William Jackson.
Subject to consultation with major
shareholders, Rob Perrins will
succeed me as Executive Chair and
Richard Stearn will be appointed
CEO. Richard Dakin will join the
Board as a Non-Executive Director
at the conclusion of the AGM, and
we are well advanced with the
appointment of a further Non-
Executive Director, anticipated to be
announced early in the New Year.
Michael Dobson
Chairman
20 June 2025
This report outlines Berkeley’s governance arrangements throughout
the year and describes how the Board and its Committees have
operated and discharged their responsibilities in considering and
applying the Principles and Provisions of the Code.
Berkeley is a business with a distinctively long-term operating
model and value-added approach with a commitment to
generatingsustainable returns for its shareholders across the
business cycle. Berkeley has a strong purpose, to build quality homes,
strengthen communities and improve people’s lives, a clear set
ofvalues and a unique culture.
A strong governance framework is of fundamental importance
in supporting Berkeley’s long-term success and ensuring an
effectiveBoard.
Corporate strategy was at the centre of the Board’s focus in 2024/25.
Responding to the Government’s housing led growth agenda and
the ongoing geopolitical and macro economic volatility, the Board
reassessed the Company’s strategic direction at this point in the
cycle. This culminated in Berkeley 2035 and its flexible capital
allocationframework.
I am pleased to introduce the Corporate
Governance Report for the 2024/25 financial year.
94 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Board Leadership and Company Purpose
Division of Responsibilities
Composition, Succession and Evaluation
Audit, Risk and Internal Control
Remuneration
The UK Corporate Governance Code 2018 (theCode)
applied to the Company during the 2024/25financial
year therefore the Company assessed itself throughout
the year, with reference to the Code. The Board
considers that it has applied the Principles and
complied with the Provisions of the Code.
The Board noted that the 2024 iteration of theCode
will apply to the Company with effect from the 2026/27
financial year commencing on 1 May 2026. As such the
Board will report against the new Code in its Annual
Report for the year ending 30 April 2027.
The ways in which the Code’s Principles were applied
during 2024/25 are evidenced throughout the Annual
Report. The Board has reviewed the Annual Report
and Accounts and considers that, taken as a whole,
it is fair, balanced and understandable and provides
the information necessary for shareholders to assess
the Company’s position, performance, business model
andstrategy.
The table below sets out page references against each
of the Code Principles (A to R). A full text of the Code
itself can be found on the Financial Reporting Council’s
website at www.frc.org.uk.
A: Board of Directors
B: Purpose, values, strategy and culture
C: Resources and control framework
D: Stakeholder engagement
E: Workforce policies and practices
F: Role of the Chairman
G: Division of responsibilities
H: Role of the Non-Executive Directors
I: Board policies, processes, information, time and resources
J: Appointments to the Board
K: Board skills, knowledge and experience
L: Board evaluation
M: Independence and effectiveness of internal and external auditors
N: Fair, balanced and understandable
O: Risk and internal controls
P: Alignment to purpose, values and long-term success
Q: Remuneration policy
R: Independent judgement and discretion
96-99
100, 104-105, 108-109
122-125
76, 110-114, 163
35, 52, 77, 105-110, 120-121, 157-159
101-102
101-103
101, 105
100-101
116-119
116-121
118-119
124-125
95
78-91, 124
126-131, 136, 137, 140
129, 136, 155
127, 135, 140-141, 148
UK Corporate Governance Code Compliance
Pages
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 95
The Board’s primary
responsibility is leading
the Company to deliver
sustainable, profitable
growth and drive
long-term value for
the shareholders of
Berkeley Group.
It sets a clear tone from
the top by providing
entrepreneurial
leadership of
the business and
custodianship of
the Berkeley brand.
N
R
A
N
Board of Directors
Knowledge,
skills and
experience
Michael Dobson
Chairman of the Board and of the
Nomination Committee
Appointed: 8 June 2022 as Non-
Executive Director and 6 September
2022 as Chairman
Tenure: 2 years
Skills, experience and contribution
Michael was appointed to the Board
on 8 June 2022 as an independent
Non-Executive Director and member
of the Nomination Committee and, on
6 September 2022, became Chairman
of the Board and the Nomination
Committee and a member of the
Remuneration Committee.
Michael brings extensive leadership,
corporate and financial experience
to the Board. He stepped down as
Chairman of Schroders plc in April
2022 after six years, following an
executive career in the City spanning
over 40 years. Michael was Chief
Executive of Schroders plc from 2001
to 2016 and previously held a number
of leadership positions at Deutsche
Bank AG, including Head of Global
Asset Management, Head of Global
Investment Banking and a Member
of the Board of Managing Directors.
Prior to that he was Chief Executive
of Morgan Grenfell Group PLC and
Deutsche Morgan Grenfell.
Other appointments
Chairman, Sienna Investment Managers
Rachel Downey ACA
Senior Independent Director
Appointed: 8 December 2017 and
on 8 September 2023 as Senior
Independent Director
Tenure: 7 years
Skills, experience and contribution
Rachel was appointed as a Non-
Executive Director on 8 December
2017 and Senior Independent Director
on 8 September 2023. She is a
member of the Nomination and
Audit Committees.
Rachel’s experience in real estate
development and operation brings
extensive industry expertise to the
Board. She is Project Director of
Manchester Life, a joint venture
between Acre Real Estate Investment
& Development LLC and Manchester
City Council, established in 2014
to make a significant contribution
towards achieving Manchester’s
regeneration and residential growth
ambitions. Manchester Life is
passionate about creating thriving
communities and has delivered
1,500 homes, with 500 more
planned for its third phase. Rachel is
Managing Director of Manchester Life
Management Ltd, which leases and
manages a portfolio of over 1,000
apartments built by Manchester Life.
Rachel, a Chartered Accountant,
is also currently the Senior
Independent Director of Lancashire
County Cricket Club and Chair of the
Club’s Development Committee.
Other appointments
Project Director, Manchester Life
Managing Director, Manchester Life
Management Ltd
Senior Independent Director of
Lancashire County Cricket Club
Key to Committees
A
Audit Committee
N
Nomination Committee
R
Remuneration Committee
Committee Chair
96 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
R
A
N
Appointed: 1 May 2001
Tenure: 24 years on the Main Board
(31 years with the Company)
Skills, experience and contribution
Rob joined Berkeley in 1994. He has
been a Main Board member since
2001 and Chief Executive since
2009, having previously been CFO
from 2001. Under his management,
Berkeley has increasingly focused on
transforming large-scale brownfield
sites, which are beyond the scope of
conventionalhomebuilders.
Rob has worked extensively in
property development throughout his
career, working on projects ranging
from single houses to mixed use
neighbourhoods with more than 10,000
homes. Rob champions Berkeley’s
operating culture and values, which are
based on customer focus, individual
design, exceptional placemaking
and a commitment to delivery for all
stakeholders. He oversees a highly
disciplined but decentralised operating
structure that fosters accountability
and innovation, chairing the boards of
Berkeley’s 21 autonomous operating
companies. Additionally, Rob oversees
Our Vision 2030 and is the Board-level
sponsor for Climate Action. He has
a firm foundation of knowledge and
personal interest in the natural world
and climate science having completed
a degree in Geology, together with an
understanding of the business need
totake action.
Rob was Founding Chairman of the
Berkeley Foundation, an independent
charity working in close partnership
with the Berkeley Group to maximise
its positive social impacts. He remains
a Trustee.
Other appointments
Trustee, Berkeley Foundation
Independent Non-Executive,
Public Interest Body, PwC
Non-Executive Director, Grosvenor
Property UK
Appointed: 13 April 2015
Tenure: 10 years on the Main Board
(19 years with the Company)
Skills, experience and contribution
Richard re-joined Berkeley on 13 April
2015 as Chief Financial Officer, having
previously worked for the Company
from 2002 to 2011 as Group Financial
Controller. In the intervening period,
Richard spent three years at Quintain
Estates and Development plc, serving
as the company’s Finance Director for
most of that time.
Richard is responsible for the Group’s
finance, investor relations, treasury, tax
and insurance functions. He also leads
on strategic risk management and has
oversight of the Group’s IT function.
Richard has 22 years of direct
experience in the property and
development industry. Prior to joining
Berkeley, he trained and practised for
12 years as a Chartered Accountant
with PwC, auditing and advising a wide
range of clients.
Other appointments
None
Appointed: 1 July 2021
Tenure: 3 years
Skills, experience and contribution
Appointed as a Non-Executive Director
on 1 July 2021, following his retirement
from PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
after a 39 year career with the firm.
Andy is a Chartered Accountant and
was a senior partner at PwC in London,
advising the boards of some of the
UK’s largest multinational companies.
Andy brings extensive knowledge
of accounting, risk and governance
matters having been an audit
partner for 27 years and through
his chairmanship of the PwC Non-
executive Director Programme.
Andy was previously a member
of PwC’s Audit and Risk Assurance
Executive Board.
Andy was appointed Chair of the
Audit Committee on 8 September
2023 and is a member of the
Nomination Committee and the
Remuneration Committee. Andy
was previously Chair of the
Remuneration Committee.
Other appointments
Chair, The Audit Committee Chairs’
Independent Forum
Non-Executive Director and Chair
of the Audit and Risk Committee,
Irwin Mitchell Holdings Limited
Governor, Birkbeck University
of London
Richard Stearn BSc (Hons) FCA
Chief Financial Officer
Rob Perrins BSc (Hons) FCA
Chief Executive
Andy Kemp BA (Econ) FCA
Independent Non-Executive Director
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 97
R
N
R
N
Board of Directors continued
Natasha Adams
Independent Non-Executive Director
Appointed: 1 February 2022
Tenure: 3 years
Skills, experience and contribution
Natasha is Chief Strategy and
Transformation Officer of Tesco PLC
and is a member of the Tesco PLC
Executive Committee.
Immediately prior to her current
role, Natasha was Chief Executive
Officer of Tesco Ireland and prior to
that was Group Chief People Officer
ofTescoPLC.
Natasha has experience as a Trustee
of the Tesco Pension Scheme and is a
member of the Board of Ibec.
Natasha brings to the Board valuable
insight on commercial, social
governance and people matters.
Natasha was appointed Chair of
the Remuneration Committee and a
member of the Nomination Committee
on 8 September 2023.
Other appointments
Chief Strategy and Transformation
Officer, Tesco PLC
Executive Committee member,
TescoPLC
Board Member, Ibec
The Ven. Elizabeth Adekunle
Independent Non-Executive Director
Appointed: 5 January 2021
Tenure: 4 years
Skills, experience and contribution
Liz is currently a Non-Executive
Director of The Royal Marsden NHS
Foundation Trust and a Chaplain
to His Majesty the King. She was
previously Chaplain to Her Majesty
Queen Elizabeth II (since April 2017)
and Archdeacon of Hackney in the
Diocese of London. Liz was awarded
the Freedom of the City of London in
April 2019.
Liz is a Westminster Abbey Institute
Fellow, an Associate at Ridley Hall
Theological College and an Honorary
Fellow of St Augustine’s College
of Theology. Liz is on the Board of
STRIDE, Metropolitan Police Board, a
member of the National Police Chiefs’
Ethics Committee and also a Board
Member of Hive Education Trust.
Liz was previously Chair of the
Monuments and Plaques Committee
at St Paul’s Cathedral. Liz has
considerable experience of social,
political and ethical matters and brings
a valuable perspective on the potential
of urban regeneration and good
placemaking to improve the lives of
those living in the communities within
which Berkeley operates.
Other appointments
Non-Executive Director, The Royal
Marsden NHS Foundation Trust
Chaplain to His Majesty the King
Board member, STRIDE, Metropolitan
Police Board Member, National Police
Chiefs’ Ethics Committee Board
Member, Hive Education Trust
Trustee: Berkeley Foundation
William Jackson
Independent Non-Executive Director
Appointed: 5 January 2021
Tenure: 4 years
Skills, experience and contribution
William is the Founder of Bridgepoint
Group plc, one of Europe’s leading
alternative asset management groups,
which he has led since 2001. William
has served on a wide range of UK and
international boards during his career
and stood down as Senior Independent
Director of British Land plc in 2020
and as a Non-Executive Director in
March 2021.
William is also Senior Independent
Director and Non-Executive Director
of The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation
Trust. William brings extensive
property, commercial, financial and
PLC experience to the Board.
William is a member of the
Remuneration Committee and is a
member of the Nomination Committee.
Other appointments
Founder, Bridgepoint Group plc
Non-Executive Director, The Royal
Marsden NHS Foundation Trust
Key to Committees
A
Audit Committee
N
Nomination Committee
R
Remuneration Committee
Committee Chair
98 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
A
Sarah Sands
Independent Non-Executive Director
Appointed: 30 April 2021
Tenure: 4 years
Skills, experience and contribution
Sarah is a journalist by profession
and was Editor of the BBC Radio 4
Today programme from 2017 to 2020.
Prior to this, Sarah was Editor of The
Evening Standard and The Sunday
Telegraph and has held Editor in Chief
and Consultant Editor roles at Reader’s
Digest and the Daily Mail.
Sarah is a Non-Executive Director
of Channel 4, a Partner at Hawthorn
Advisors and a Member of the
Board of Trustees of The Science
Museum Group. Sarah is a founder
of the Braemar Science Summit and
was Chair of the Gender Equality
Advisory Council for G7 for 2021 and
has continued to sit on the Advisory
Council in 2022 under the Germany
Presidency, in 2023 under the Japan
Presidency and in 2024 under the
Italian Presidency. Sarah sits on the
board of Walpole and is also a trustee
of the Quintessentially Foundation. In
2023, Sarah was acting Chair of the
British Council.
Sarah brings to the Board a broad
insight on economic, political
and social matters and a valuable
perspective on issues such as
the environment, sustainability,
communityand inclusivity.
Sarah is a member of the
AuditCommittee.
Other appointments
Non-Executive Director, Channel Four
Television Corporation
Partner, Hawthorn Advisors
Trustee of the Board, The Science
Museum Group
Trustee, Walpole
Trustee, Quintessentially Foundation
Board and Committee meeting attendance
N Adams did not attend certain scheduled meetings due to illness.
Board
Audit
Committee
Nomination
Committee
Remuneration
Committee
Michael Dobson
Andy Kemp
Rob Perrins
Richard Stearn
Rachel Downey
The Ven. Elizabeth Adekunle
William Jackson
Sarah Sands
Natasha Adams
Number of meetings held 6 4 3 7
6/6 3/3 7/ 7
6/6 4/4 3/3 7/ 7
6/6
6/6
6/6 4/4 3/3
6/6
6/6 3/3 7/ 7
6/6 4/4
2/6 1/3 4/7
Board visit to London Dock
Non-Executive Director skills matrix
PLC Board experience
Recent relevant
financial experience
Construction
Development /
Regeneration
Finance / Banking
Commerce
Governance
People / Culture
Media / Comms
Public Sector /
Government
International
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 99
During the year, the Board has
focused on the Company’s purpose,
vision and values and has continued
to oversee the embedding of
the Group’s Our Vision 2030
responsible business priorities.
Details of how this strategy has
been implemented across the
business and updates on progress
against targets can be found on
pages 34 to 55 of the Strategic
Report and at www.berkeleygroup.
co.uk/ourvision. Further information
on how the Company engages with
its stakeholders is set out on pages
110to 114.
Berkeley’s purpose is to build
quality homes, strengthen
communities and improve people’s
lives, transforming underutilised
places to deliver sustainable social,
economic and environmental value.
It is the Board’s role to ensure
the ongoing alignment of the
Company’s purpose, values and
culture with its strategy.
At Berkeley, the culture and values
start with the tone set by the
Board and encompass all of the
autonomous businesses and teams
across the Group.
Further details on how the Board
ensures that Berkeley’s purpose,
values and culture are embedded
across Berkeley are set out on
pages 106 to 114.
The work of the Board provides
direction, support and constructive
challenge to the Executiveteam.
The duties of the Board are set out
in a formal schedule of matters
specifically reserved for decision
bythe Board.
Board Leadership and Company Purpose
Board and Committees
Composition
The Board continues to be
comprised of nine Directors:
an Independent Non-Executive
Chairman, two Executive Directors
and six Non-Executive Directors
in compliance with all aspects
of Board composition under the
Code, with the Board meeting the
diversity targets set out in UKLR
6.6.6(9)(a).
Further explanation of the Board’s
compliance with UKLR6.6.6 (9)(a)
is set out on pages 120 and 121 of
thisreport.
Meetings
The full Board met formally six
times during the year ended
30April 2025 and attendance is set
out on page 99.
Meetings consider standing agenda
items and deep-dives on topics of
particular focus and importance
for the Company in the context
of delivery of the corporate and
responsible business strategies.
In addition to formal meetings
of the Board, the Non-Executive
Directors met with the Chairman
twice during the year. The Chief
Executive and Chief Financial
Officer attended part of these
meetings in order to provide an
update on the business activities of
the Group, including in respect of
health and safety, finance, trading
and performance and fire safety.
Thereafter, the Non-Executive
Directors met without the Executive
Directors being present.
During the year, the Non-Executive
Directors met without the Chairman
present at a meeting chaired by the
Senior Independent Director.
Board and Committee papers
and agendas are sent out in the
week prior to each meeting,
allowing sufficient time for
review and consideration of the
documentsbeforehand.
Standing Board
AgendaItems
Health and Safety Report
Building Fire Safety Report
Chief Executive’s Report
Finance and Performance Report
Risk Management Report
Litigation Report
Other Reports
Economicand Housing Market
Share Register Analysis
Customer Service
Board Committee Updates
Corporate Broker Updates
Corporate Governance Update
2024/25 Deep-Dives
Berkeley 2035 Corporate Strategy
Responsible Business Strategy
Risk and Internal Controls
Build to Rent Platform
Building Safety Regulator
External Positioning
The Board has collective responsibility for promoting
the long-term success of the Company in a safe
and sustainable manner in order to create value for
stakeholders. The Board provides leadership and
sets the Company’s purpose, values and long-term
strategicobjectives.
100 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Division of responsibilities
The Chairman leads the Board
and is responsible for the overall
effectiveness of the Board and its
Committees, for setting and shaping
the culture in the Boardroom and
the Company, overseeing high
standards of corporate governance,
ensuring the Board determines the
nature and extent of significant
risks the Company is willing to
embrace in the implementation
of its strategy, ensuring effective
communications between the Board
and shareholders and ensuring the
Board understands the views of the
Company’s key stakeholders.
The Chief Executive has day-
to-day executive responsibility
for the running of the Group’s
businesses. His role is to lead the
Group’s strategic direction and
propose, develop and deliver the
overall strategy and business plans,
to enable the Group to meet its
objectives, to oversee and maintain
relations with investors and other
key stakeholders, to ensure the
appropriateness of the Group’s
risk management strategy, and
to ensure effective policies and
procedures for the management,
development and succession
planning of the management team
and the Company’s staff.
The Senior Independent Director’s
primary role is to work closely with
the Chairman, serving as a sounding
board, providing support in the
delivery of objectives and serving as
an intermediary for other Directors
and shareholders.
The Non-Executive Directors,
led by the Senior Independent
Director, Rachel Downey, have the
skills, experience, independence
and knowledge of the Company
to enable them to discharge
their respective duties and
responsibilities effectively.
Each Non-Executive Director is
prepared to question and challenge
management. All of the Non-
Executive Directors are considered
to have been independent
throughout the year.
The Board reviews the
independence of Non-Executive
Directors on an annual basis taking
into account each individual’s
professional characteristics,
behaviour and their contribution to
unbiased and independent debate.
See page 119 of this report for
moredetails.
The Group operates through
autonomous divisions and
operating companies, each
with its own board. Operating
company boards meet on a weekly
basis and divisional boards on a
monthly basis, and comprehensive
information is prepared for such
meetings on a standardised
basis to cover all aspects of the
business. Formal reporting lines and
delegated levels of authority exist
within this structure and the review
of risk and performance occurs
at multiple levels throughout the
operating companies, divisions and
at Board level.
Strong central functions, including
Legal, Health and Safety and
Corporate Governance, provide
support and consistency to the Board.
In addition, the principal treasury-
related risks, decisions and control
processes are managed by the Group
Finance function, under the direction
of the Chief Financial Officer.
Board Committees
The Board has delegated certain
matters to individual Executives
and to the specific Committees
of the Board: Nomination, Audit
and Remuneration. The three
Board Committees operate within
clearly defined Terms of Reference
pursuant to the provisions of the
Code. The Terms of Reference
for each of the three main Board
Committees can be downloaded
from the Corporate Governance
page of the Investor section of
the Company’s website. Copies
are also available to shareholders
on application to the Company
Secretary. The responsibilities of
the key Board Committees are
described within the relevant
reports on pages 116, 122 and 126.
Conflicts of interest
In accordance with the Companies
Act 2006, the Company’s Articles
of Association allow the Board
to authorise potential conflicts
of interest that may arise and to
impose such limits or conditions
as it thinks fit. The decision to
authorise a conflict of interest can
only be made by non-conflicted
Directors (those who have no
interest in the matter being
considered) and in making such a
decision the Directors must act in
a way they consider in good faith
will be most likely to promote the
Company’s success.
The Company has established a
procedure whereby actual and
potential conflicts of interest of
current and proposed roles to be
undertaken by Directors of the
Board with other organisations
are regularly reviewed in respect
of both the nature of those roles
and their time commitment, and
for proper authorisation to be
sought prior to the appointment
of any new Director. The Board
considers these procedures to be
workingeffectively.
The Board has a range of experience and has strong
knowledge in areas of property development,
construction, media and communications, public
sector, Government, communities, inclusivity and social
engagement, finance and banking, and commerce
and governance, both in the UK and internationally.
It is the balance of skills, experience, independence
and knowledge of the Board as a whole which ensures
that the duties and responsibilities of the Board and
itsCommittees are dischargedeffectively.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 101
Non-Executive Chairman
Michael Dobson
Responsibilities:
leading the Board and ensuring its
overall effectiveness, setting the
agenda and ensuring that accurate,
timely and clear information is
provided to the Board as required;
setting, shaping and sustaining
the culture in the Boardroom
andthe Group;
overseeing the implementation
of high standards of
corporategovernance;
encouraging constructive Board
relations and open debate and
ensuring that each Director
contributes to effective decision
making; and
ensuring effective communication
between the Board and
shareholders and ensuring the
Board understands the views of
the Company’s key stakeholders.
Senior Independent Director
Rachel Downey
Responsibilities:
working closely with the Chairman,
serving as a sounding board and
providing support and advice in
the delivery of objectives;
leading the Chairman
successionprocess;
serving as an intermediary for
other Directors and shareholders,
including meeting with Non-
Executive Directors annually,
without the Chairman present
to evaluate the Chairman’s
performance, and provide
feedback to the Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer; and
being available to shareholders
and other Non-Executive Directors
to address any concerns not
otherwise dealt with through usual
channels of communication.
Non-Executive Directors
Andy Kemp
Elizabeth Adekunle
William Jackson
Sarah Sands
Natasha Adams
Responsibilities:
bringing an external perspective
in providing additional advice and
expertise to support the Board in
setting, developing and monitoring
the implementation of strategy;
providing sound judgement,
objectivity and an appropriate
level of constructive challenge
and scrutiny of Board decisions;
serving on Board Committees
to ensure that fair and balanced
policies are implemented, including
Executive remuneration and risk
management; and
having an awareness of shareholder
and other stakeholder matters and
offering guidance as required.
Chief Executive
Rob Perrins
Responsibilities:
day-to-day running of the Group’s businesses
andoperations;
leading the Group’s strategic direction, proposing,
developing and delivering the overall strategy
and business plans to enable the Group to meet
its objectives, having regard to the needs of
keystakeholders;
overseeing and maintaining relationships with
investors and other key stakeholders;
ensuring the appropriateness of the Group’s risk
management strategy; and
ensuring effective policies and procedures for the
management, development and succession planning
of the management team and the Company’s staff.
Chief Financial Officer
Richard Stearn
Responsibilities:
managing the financial affairs of the Group,
including investor relations, tax, treasury, internal
audit and insurance functions;
managing the relationship with the external auditor;
strategic risk management of the Group; and
oversight of the IT and HR functions.
Division of responsibilities continued
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BOARD
102 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT102 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
For the Report of the
Audit Committee
see page 122
Audit Committee
Chair: Andy Kemp
Responsibilities:
The Audit Committee is responsible
for monitoring and reviewing the
financial reporting and accounting
policies of the Company, reviewing
the adequacy of internal controls and
the activities of the Group’s internal
audit function, including financial,
operational and compliance controls,
and overseeing the effectiveness of
the external auditor.
Nomination Committee
Chair: Michael Dobson
Responsibilities:
The Nomination Committee
ensures that the membership
and composition of the Board,
including the balance of skills,
experience and diversity, is
appropriate, as well as giving
full consideration to succession
planning on a regular basis.
For the Report of the
Nomination Committee
see page 116
Remuneration Committee
Chair: Natasha Adams
Responsibilities:
The Remuneration Committee
is responsible for determining
the Company’s policy for Executive
remuneration and the precise terms
of employment and remuneration
of the Non-Executive Chairman
and the Executive Directors.
For the Report of the
Remuneration Committee
see page 126
The Executive Committee meets regularly and
reviews the financial and operating performance
of all Group divisions and companies. The
Committee is chaired by the Chief Executive
and comprises the CEO, the CFO, the heads of
the Group’s main operating divisions,
Piers Clanford (COO), Elkie Russell, Dean
Summers, Paul Vallone and Karl Whiteman,
along with the Group Solicitor, Wendy Pritchard,
Responsible Business Executive, Lorraine
Fursland, and is supported by the Company
Secretary, Victoria Mee.
Key responsibilities include:
business planning;
reviewing the financial and operating
performance of all Group divisions
and companies;
risk management;
cash management;
delivery of Group strategy;
legal and regulatory matters;
brand and reputation;
relationships with local authority
and Government stakeholders; and
people.
Divisional and operating
company boards
Key responsibilities include:
health and safety
sales and marketing
land and planning
people retention and development
regulatory matters
production
assessing the impact of the economic
and political environment
site-specific matters
customer service
Operational Committees
Key responsibilities include:
Health and Safety
IT
Production
People
Customer Service
Land and Planning
Commercial and Technical
Sales and Marketing
Sustainability
Estates Management
BOARD COMMITTEES
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 103
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 103
The governance
structure on pages
101 to 103 of this
report sets out the
key responsibilities
of the Board. These
responsibilities
are met through a
number of standing
Board agenda items
for which reports are
presented as set out
on page 100.
In addition, the Board
undertook a number
of deep-dive reviews
into topics during the
year as set out on
page 100.
Risk appetite and
evaluation of strategy
is a cornerstone
of the Board’s
considerations and
remains enshrined
in all reports to
theBoard.
The focus of Board
activities can largely
be categorised into
four areas: strategy,
operations, finance
and governance.
Strategy
Key Board Decision
Berkeley 2035
CorporateStrategy
Responding to the
Government’s housing led
growth agenda and the
ongoing geo-political and
macro economic volatility,
the Board reassessed the
Company’s strategic direction
at this point in the cycle. This
culminated in Berkeley 2035
and its flexible capital allocation
framework. More detail is set
out on pages 18 and 19.
Our Vision 2030
The Board monitors performance
against the Our Vision 2030 targets
and long-term goals, receiving
progress reports at each meeting.
Our Vision 2030 Executive board
meetings are held monthly to
review progress against the targets
and to drive performance.
Further details of the Group’s
performance in respect of ESG
matters of strategic importance to
the Group are set out on pages 36
to 39 of the Strategic Report.
Planning status of
futuredevelopments
The Board receives updates at
each meeting on the planning
environment and key planning
milestones of sites.
Regulatory changes
The Board is provided with updates
to the regulatory landscape. This
year, the Board has continued to
monitor the requirements of second
staircases in tall buildings, alongside
assessing the impact from the new
Building Safety Regulator and of
the wider regulatory framework
relating to the Building Safety
Act2022.
Cyber security and
dataprotection
Mindful of continuing cyber
security risks and data protection
requirements, the Board reviews
emerging threats and responses.
Board activities during the year
Through a steering group chaired
by the CFO that meets monthly,
the Group assesses and actions
opportunities for improvement and
to ensure appropriate response
plans are in place.
Political and public affairs
As a consistent theme explored by
the Chief Executive’s Report and as
a specific agenda item at a meeting
during the year, the Board receives
presentations on the current political
landscape and public affairs that help
shape Berkeley’s communication and
engagement approach.
Operations
Risk
Operational and strategic risk is
discussed at all Board meetings, with
emerging risks considered on an
ongoing basis. During the year, the
Board allocated one of its meetings
to discuss and debate the evolving
risk landscape and the implication of
this to Berkeley’sstrategy.
Risk and Internal Controls:
Focus on Provision 29
of the2024 Corporate
Governance Code
Provision 29 of the 2024 Code
will apply to the Company in
2026/27. The Board considered
an initial assessment of the
Company’s approach to
compliance including:
Evaluation of the principal
risks faced by the Company.
Assessment of the
Company’s material internal
controls and whether they
are financial, operational,
reporting or compliance
innature.
Mapping of these material
internal controls to the
Company’s principal risks
given that for most risks
a combination of controls
serves to mitigate risk.
The Board advanced its
appreciation of the Company’s
current material internal
controls, and its understanding
of the further assurance
evidence required to enable
the Board to comply with the
reporting requirements of
Provision 29.
104 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Health and safety
Health and safety is discussed at
all Board meetings. Being mindful
of its industry-leading approach to
health and safety, the Board keeps
under review initiatives to retain
focus in this area. Further details of
the Company’s health and safety
approach are set out on page 53 of
the Strategic Report.
Building fire safety matters
Building fire safety is a standing
agenda item discussed at all Board
meetings. The Board authorised
entry into the Responsible Actor
Scheme introduced under the
Building Safety Act 2022. The
Board receives reports on the
status of works required by fire
safety assessments being instructed
under the Self-Remediation Terms
andContract.
CMA market investigation
The Company continues
to cooperate fully with the
Competition and Markets Authority
in its investigation into the
sharing of information between
housebuilders and whether this
is adversely affecting pricing for
customers and build-out rates.
Supply chain resilience
The Commercial Committee
monitors risks around the Group’s
supply chain and works across the
divisions to mitigate such risks and
reports through to the Executive
Committee from which the Board
receives updates.
Finance
Shareholder returns
Following shareholder approval
at the September 2024 AGM, the
Board returned £184 million to
shareholders by way of a special
dividend and undertook a share
consolidation. Alongside further
interim dividends, totalling £68
million, the Board returned £130
million via share buy-backs and
undertook to cancel the associated
3.3 million shares. In total,
shareholder returns of £382 million
were made during the year.
The Board will continue to make
returns to shareholders under
the capital allocation framework
parameters set out inBerkeley2035.
Core funding and liquidity
The Board made no changes to
the borrowing capacity of the
Company during the year. The
Group’s borrowing capacity of
£1,200 million comprises an £800
million bank facility with a term to
February 2029 and £400 million
unsecured listed bonds which
mature in August 2031.
Annual Report and Accounts
During the year, the Board reviewed
and approved the Annual Report
and Accounts and interim results,
along with associated press releases
and trading updates.
Company tax policy
The Group’s tax strategy is overseen
by the Board, under which Berkeley
seeks to meet its statutory and
regulatory tax obligations. The
Board undertakes an annual review
of the Group Tax Policy, or more
frequently if there are material
changes in the tax environment.
The aim is to ensure that risks
associated with the interpretation
and application of taxation laws
and regulations are appropriately
managed, identified and evaluated
in accordance with the Group’s risk
management framework.
Governance
Bribery Act and Anti-Money
Laundering Regulations
The Board has responsibility for
complying with the requirements
of the Bribery Act 2010 and The
Money Laundering, Terrorist
Financing and Transfer of Funds
(Information on the Payer)
Regulations 2017 and is charged
with overseeing the development
and implementation of the Group’s
policies and procedures and
monitoring ongoing compliance.
Whistleblowing
The Group’s Whistleblowing Policy
is overseen by the Board and
enables Directors, management,
employees and external
stakeholders to report any concerns
in confidence, outside of normal
reporting channels. Such concerns
are subject to proportionate and
independent investigation and
may include malpractice, financial
irregularity, breaches of any Group
procedures, or other matters.
Board evaluation
The Board evaluation for
2024/25 was undertaken
internally and full details are
on page 119.
Site Visits
The Board attended a number
of site visits during the year,
including to the Horlicks
Quarter and London Dock.
For further detail
see pages 106, 107 and 110
Board and Committee
composition
The Board had reviewed the
independence and contribution of
each of the Non-Executive Directors
in accordance with Provision 10 of
the Code and concluded that they
each continued to maintain and
contribute an independent view in
all Board deliberations, consistently
providing robust challenge
andscrutiny.
It is proposed that with effect
from the conclusion of the 2025
AGM, that Michael Dobson will
step down as will William Jackson.
Richard Dakin will join the Board
as a Non-Executive Director.
Subject to consultation with
major shareholders, Rob Perrins
will succeed Michael Dobson as
Executive Chair and Richard Stearn
will be appointed CEO.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 105
In November 2024, the Board
visited the Horlicks Quarter
development, gaining insight
into its progress and impact
on stakeholders. They were
welcomed by Berkeley Oxford
andChiltern’s management team.
Horlicks
Quarter
NON-EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS’ VISIT
Board activities during the year continued
Taking our Non-Executive Directors on-site
highlighted how our teams overcome challenges
while maintaining efficiency and compliance,
showcasing the complexity and precision of
our work.
Bruce Lawton | Production Director
It was an opportunity to highlight logistics,
sequencing, and health and safety measures that
keep the project on track, ensuring timely delivery
within budget. Seeing the development first-hand
brought our efforts to life.
Peter Baker | Project Director
It was a pleasure to tour our Horlicks Quarter
development with the Non-Executive
Directors, showcasing how our placemaking
vision is coming to life. We highlighted how
design, sustainability, and community-focused
spaces create long-term value and set our
developments apart. It was great for the
team including our young apprentices and
graduates to meet our Main Board.
Elkie Russell | Managing Director
Berkeley Oxford and Chiltern
106 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT106 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Brownfield regeneration
Horlicks Quarter exemplifies future-
focused brownfield regeneration,
turning underused land into
a sustainable, well-connected
community. The project prioritises
placemaking, makes efficient use
of existing infrastructure, enhances
the local environment and limits
urban sprawl. It supports long-term
growth through job creation and
investment within a productive
and sustainable location while
delivering housing, public spaces,
and amenities that strengthen
community and quality of life.
Preserving heritage
Berkeley places heritage at the
core of placemaking. The original
Horlicks Factory building has been
carefully restored, as well as the
chimney, clocktower, war memorial
and the iconic red HORLICKS
lettering. Modern, functional
interiors and complementary new
architecture balance heritage with
contemporary living, preserving
cultural significance while meeting
community and landscape needs.
Building communities
Horlicks Quarter fosters a strong
community with a mix of affordable,
shared ownership, and private
homes. Partnerships with Sovereign,
Abri, and The Slough Hub create a
resident-led community plan and
events. A new café and 90-place
nursery, run by local businesses,
benefit both residents and the
wider community.
Changing landscape
ofSlough
The development is central to
Slough’s £3.5 billion regeneration,
offering strong connectivity,
community appeal, and long-term
infrastructure investment, making it
an attractive and sustainable place
to live.
Located in the Thames Valley tech
corridor, with 15-minute Crossrail
access to London and Heathrow
Appeals to young professionals
and families seeking value, job
opportunities, and excellent
transport links
Under two miles from the M4,
with easy access to the M25
and wider motorway network
£6.5 million investment from
Berkeley in highways, education,
and sustainable transport
Strong focus on nature
conservation and on-site
biodiversity net gain
New pedestrian and cycle link
reduces walking time to Slough
Station and the town centre
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 107
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 107
Our culture
2
3
1
Creating a positive, safeand
inclusive working environment
The Board helps shape our people framework,
including our EDI approach and health and
safetystrategy.
The Board monitors and provides challenge
against a range of performance metrics in this
area, including staff turnover, staff survey results,
accident rate, workforce demographics and our
future skills programme including apprenticeship
and graduate schemes.
Customers at the heart ofeverything
The Board challenges the business to deliver
high standards of customer service, monitors
customer satisfaction levels and interrogates
underlyingtrends.
The Board monitors the outcomes of engagement
at each stage of the customer journey, and actively
seeks to ensure that any issues arising are resolved
promptly and effectively.
Passion for people
andcommunities
The Executive Committee reviews the planning
and placemaking strategies for each site as-well-
as scrutinising bespoke Community Development
Plans to ensure they embed strong community
engagement and set a shared vision for an inclusive
and welcoming neighbourhood. The Board
monitors these positive social outcomes through
site visits and Our Vision 2030 reporting.
How we assess and
monitor our culture
Our strong, value-based working
culture is a key underpin to our
strategy. The Board continues to
embed, monitor and reinforce our
culture throughout the business.
Berkeley’s culture is defined by
its purpose and values, and has a
dynamic and energising effect on the
way we work, driving our performance
and outcomes at all levels at the
Company. It creates a positive working
environment for our people that
fosters respect, support, wellbeing,
safetyandinclusivity.
108 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
4
6
7
8
5
Our values
Excellence through detail
Be passionate
Respect people
Think creatively
Have integrity
Enhancing quality
inevery small detail
The Executive Committee
reviews and signs off detailed
plans and specifications of
each development. Directors
undertake regular site visits to
monitor build quality.
Visits by Non-Executive
Directors highlight differing
stakeholder perspectives. The
Board monitors and challenges
quality metrics and interrogates
underlying causes.
Collaborative and responsive partners
The Board monitors Berkeley’s
long-term partnerships which are
fundamental to the successful
delivery of large-scale urban
regeneration projects. Directors
maintain regular engagement with
central and local government,
alongside community, housing
association and landowner
partners to ensure we continue
to understand and deliver
against their goals. TheBoard
interrogates individual challenges
and solutions developed across
our sites to ensure learning
and innovation is shared across
theGroup.
Autonomy, independence and entrepreneurial flair
The Group operates through
our autonomous operating
companies, as well as a unique
network of international offices
in key markets across the globe.
Our companies are empowered
to develop unique solutions to
unlock each site and create places
of lasting quality and value, with
support from strong central
functions including Legal, Build
Quality, Health and Safety and
Corporate Governance.
Innovation and
industryleadership
The Board promotes innovation
andbest practice across
the business and challenges
Berkeley to maintain its industry
leading performance across a
wide range of areas, including
customer satisfaction, build
quality, brownfield regeneration,
community building, climate
action and nature recovery.
Sustainable,
responsible
and long term
Sustainability and responsible
business practice are central
to Our Vision 2030, which
is set and monitored by the
Board, and which includes
targets and actions to drive
positiveoutcomes.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 109
London Dock, Wapping
This year, divisions have shared best
practice from their local people
plans, including items such as
health and wellbeing provisions, EDI
initiatives and exit interviews, which
helped to inform the Group People
Framework. This framework sets the
structure for action to be taken at
a Group level and for a consistent
approach in five areas across our
operating businesses, including
employee engagement, attraction
and recruitment, equity, diversity
and inclusion, staff upskilling and
employee benefits and wellbeing.
Stakeholder engagement
Board engagement
withstakeholders
The role of the Board is to deliver
value to all stakeholders and
promote the long-term sustainable
success of the Company. The
Board recognises the importance
of engaging with its stakeholders
on all aspects of the Group’s
activities and this enables their
interests to be considered in the
decision making of the Board.
Throughout this year, the Board
sought to ensure that it understood
the views of stakeholders when
makingdecisions.
At Board meetings, the Chief
Executive provides an overview
on how the Group has delivered
for its key stakeholders. Papers
to our Board and Committees
include assessments of the relevant
stakeholder impacts to aid the
Board’s decision-making. The Board
is aware that, in some situations,
stakeholders’ interests will be
conflicted, and they may have
to prioritise some stakeholders’
interests. The Board, led by the
Chairman, ensures that as part of
its decision-making process, the
Directors are aware and discuss
theimpacts of their decisions on
the Group’s key stakeholders.
How the Board engages
with investors
The Company continues to
undertake active dialogue with its
current and prospective institutional
shareholders through annual and
interim results presentations and
ad-hoc meetings.
During 2024/25 discussions focused
around the half year and year end
results, and covered topics such as
operations, performance, markets,
business strategy and capital
allocation, and governance matters.
The Chair of the Remuneration
Committee extensively engaged
with investors in the development
of the proposed remuneration
policy. Further details are set out in
the Directors’ Remuneration Report.
Shareholders are also kept up to date
with the Company’s activities through
the results announcementsand
trading updates.
In addition, the corporate website
provides information on the
Group and latest news, including
regulatory announcements.
The presentations made after the
announcement of the preliminary
and interim results are available on
the Investor section of the website.
The Chief Executive and Chief
Financial Officer meet with major
shareholders twice annually to
discuss the strategy and operations
of the Group as well as any issues
the shareholders wish to raise. The
Board is always available to meet
with any of the major shareholders
throughout the year.
The Chairman and Senior
Independent Director are available
to shareholders if they have
concerns and contact through the
normal channels has failed or when
such contact is inappropriate.
How the Board engages with
employees and the workforce
The aim of the Board is to develop a
highly talented and skilled workforce
that will work together in a safe,
healthy and supportive environment,
and take pride in delivering
outputs of the highest quality that
deliver value to customers, local
communities and other stakeholders.
The Board recognises that talented
and motivated employees are the
Company’s strongest resource. The
health and safety of our employees
is paramount, in terms of both
physical and mental wellbeing, and
this continues to be a key area of
focus for the Board through Our
Vision 2030.
In addition to ensuring the safe
operation of our sites, the Board
engages with employees in a
number of different ways; the
Chief Executive and Chief Financial
Officer regularly visit the operating
companies and their developments
to oversee the site activities.
Members of the Board are present
at staff conferences to provide
business updates and encourage
open group discussions. The people
engagement forum is a single
platform for reviewing employee
matters, sharing best practice
and capturing its output for the
Executive Committee andBoard.
Site Deep Dives
Board members engage with
employees from across the
workforce on site visits.
In October 2024, St George
welcomed the Board to their
London Dock development
in Wapping. As well as
receiving an overview of the
development, they visited the
Grade II listed Pennington
Street Warehouse and the new
Mulberry Academy London
Dock secondary school and
sixth form college which has
also been created on the site,
with 1,200 local students,
and was officially opened in
February 2025 by Her Majesty
The Queen. During the visit,
Board members gained an
overview of the site design,
development and construction
through meeting and speaking
to the St George management
team and the local delivery
team at all levels.
110 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
What matters to them?
A bespoke, tailored service that responds to their needs.
Clear and timely communication and updates throughout
their customer journey.
Providing their new home on time, making them feel
valued and quick rectification of any problems that arise.
High quality specification and construction and energy
efficiency to reduce energy bills.
How we engage
Each customer has a dedicated point of contact and is
encouraged to provide feedback at any stage. They have
access to an online portal, MyHome Plus, which hosts
information, videos and progress updates.
Six weeks after a customer has completed on their
new home they are given the opportunity to complete
a detailed, independent survey covering all aspects of
their experience.
Direct engagement between senior management teams
and the Main Board and customers if any key issues arise.
Actions and outcomes
Prompt resolution of issues.
Continued innovation to ensure we are providing
aspirational homes.
Senior level review of each customer survey with
targetedactions.
Sales & Marketing and Customer Service Committees
review trends in feedback to identify improvement areas.
Consistent achievement of world-class levels of customer
satisfaction, with a ‘Gold’ standard achieved from an
independent customer service body.
Considering energy efficiency and the right energy
strategy, whilst accommodating existing regulations.
Key engagement activities this year
We continued to offer every customer opportunities to
provide feedback throughout the buying process and to
complete a survey after moving in through a third party.
Link to Our Vision 2030 priorities:
For further detail
see pages 40 and 41
Link to KPIs: Net Promoter Score
Our stakeholders
Customers
Placing the customer at the heart of every decision,
all the way through the development process
Key | Our Vision 2030 priorities
Customers
Quality
Communities
Climate action
Nature
Employee experience
Modernised production
Future skills
Supply chain
Shared value
Stakeholder
engagement
Prince of Wales Drive, Wandsworth
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 111
Our stakeholders continued
Communities and
local government
Making a positive contribution to the communities
in which we work through engagement and
partnership working
What matters to them?
Delivering high quality homes and places that improve
people’s quality of life.
Meaningful engagement with local people
andstakeholders.
Delivering local priorities and positive outcomes, such
as homes, public amenities, services and jobs, whilst
respecting heritage and culture.
Minimising negative impacts, such as traffic and noise.
How we engage
Site-specific consultation and engagement strategies,
starting at an early stage, pre-planning, with the aim of
nurturing lasting, collaborative relationships throughout
project delivery.
In a variety of ways, including open days, community
design workshops, presentations, meetings, door
knocking, walking tours, pre-application planning
meetings, exhibitions, Design Review Panels, newsletters,
notices, advertising, surveys, site-specific websites and a
mix of digital consultation and engagement tools.
Actions and outcomes
The creation of enduring local partnerships based on
shared objectives for the community’s future.
Bespoke masterplans and placemaking strategies which
reflect local views, aspirations and concerns.
Site-specific Community Plans to create social links and
integration with the wider community.
Prioritising local people for training and job opportunities
on our sites.
Key engagement activities this year
We undertook several site-specific community engagement
activities across our developments.
Link to Our Vision 2030 priorities:
For further detail
see pages 44 and 47
Link to KPIs
Affordable housing subsidies and wider contributions
Direct apprentices and training
Brownfield regeneration
Employees
Creating a positive working environment and
promoting health, wellbeing and inclusion
What matters to them?
Delivering positive outcomes for local communities.
Pride in creating great places and high quality homes.
Career progression.
Competitive pay and benefits.
Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI).
Health, safety and wellbeing.
The increasing cost of living and travel costs.
How we engage
Group-wide employee surveys.
A range of engagement initiatives through our operating
businesses including staff conferences, staff surveys and
‘sessions with the management’.
Via our Group People Committee.
Induction process for new graduates and apprentices who
get to meet senior management and have a Q&A session
with the CEO.
Our employee intranet, which provides updates and
keyinformation.
Actions and outcomes
Enhancing health and wellbeing strategies, such as
wellbeing webinars and menopause plans.
Implementing our approach to EDI, with actions taken
and events run to raise awareness and foster a culture
ofinclusion.
Providing a range of learning and development
opportunities, hosted by our in-house training venue, the
Berkeley Academy.
Enhancing parental leave.
Key engagement activities this year
We completed a Group-wide employee survey in autumn
2024; the feedback has been used to create local and Group-
wide action plans. We also engaged and requested feedback
at events, such as one held for International Women’s Day.
Link to Our Vision 2030 priorities:
For further detail
see pages 52 and 53
Link to KPIs
Annual Injury Incidence Rate
Direct apprentices and training
112 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Government, regulators
andindustry
Working in partnership to shape a delivery environment
which creates the conditions for growth and supports
high quality homebuilding and placemaking
What matters to them?
The delivery of private and affordable homes.
Regenerating brownfield land.
Placemaking, design, build quality and building safety.
Delivering economic growth and job opportunities.
Tackling environmental challenges such as climate change
How we engage
Responding to policy and regulatory consultations.
Maintaining constructive dialogue with Government
departments, agencies and regulatory bodies.
Active membership of collaborative initiatives and
membership bodies, including the Construction
Leadership Council, UK Green Building Council
(UKGBC), Future Homes Hub and LDN First and
NewLondonArchitecture.
Engaging in public debate via research and thought
leadership initiatives, conferences and roundtables.
Actions and outcomes
Alignment of our business strategy with long-term
national and local policy objectives such as increasing
economic growth, brownfield regeneration, housing
delivery, building safety, climate action, nature recovery
and social value.
Active contribution to policy development and public
debate on the above issues.
Key engagement activities this year
Executive Committee member Karl Whiteman is the Building
Safety sponsor of the Construction Leadership Council
which directly engages with Government on key policies.
Wehosted several Government site visits, including the Prime
Minister Sir Keir Starmer at Eastbrook, Milton Keynes.
Link to Our Vision 2030 priorities:
For further detail
see pages 40 to 55
Link to KPIs
Brownfield regeneration, Direct apprentices
What matters to them?
Understanding the pipeline of future opportunities and
building long-term relationships with us, across our
operating companies.
Early engagement and feedback on tenders, with the
ability to feed into the project programme and logistics.
High standards of health, safety and welfare and being
treated as an extended part of the project team.
Payment in a timely manner.
How we engage
Events such as supplier days and conferences.
Through our Supply Chain Portal which includes health
and safety, build quality and sustainability standards.
Throughout the tender process with frequent
communication from our commercial team, together with
formal tender meetings.
Pre-start meetings before site works commence and
frequent contact whilst on site through regular meetings,
signage and ‘toolbox talks’.
Through corporate memberships and industry groups.
Actions and outcomes
Long-term, collaborative supply chain partnerships.
Procurement on overall value rather than cost alone.
Compliance and buy-in around our site safety, quality,
ethics, human rights and environmental standards.
Prompt payment of suppliers.
Issuing six-monthly trade-specific opportunity schedules
to provide the supply chain with visibility of future work.
Working with our supply chain to help mitigate the risks
around financial stability.
Key engagement activities this year
Engagement continues on a daily basis through project
teams, and via strategic engagement with our Group Supply
Chain team for key manufacturers.
Link to Our Vision 2030 priorities:
For further detail
see pages 42, 43, 48, 49 and 53
Link to KPIs
Annual Injury Incidence Rate
Supply chain
Ensuring responsible procurement and collaborative
delivery through engagement and effective
communication at all levels with our supply chain
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 113
Environment
Reducing negative impacts and working towards
environmental net gain
What matters?
Reduction of environmental impact from both
construction activities and longer-term through the
developments we create.
Global impacts via the supply chain.
Movement towards a positive environmental impact.
How we engage
Directly with local authorities, who consult relevant
regulators such as the Environment Agency, Natural
England and water authorities on development proposals.
With the public via our partnership with the Considerate
Constructors Scheme.
With industry organisations and initiatives, including
the UKGBC, the Supply Chain Sustainability School, the
Construction Leadership Council’s Green Construction
Board and the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust Blue
Recovery Leaders Group.
By responding to consultations.
Through our supply chain to understand the
environmental credentials of materials.
Actions and outcomes
Incorporation of key environmental targets and actions
into our responsible business strategy, Our Vision 2030.
Inclusion of Our Vision 2030 and Sustainability within
Main Board reporting and monthly Board-level meetings
on the topic.
Clear standards for project teams covering all aspects of
operations and the homes and developments we create.
A dedicated team of sustainability practitioners taking
action at a local level on a daily basis.
The reporting of our impact publicly across a range
ofindicators.
Key engagement activities this year
We responded to Government’s consultations on topics such
as Energy Performance Certificates and the Future Homes
Standard solar proposal. We were also actively involved
in the Future Homes Hub, including co-chairing the BNG
Implementation Board with Defra.
Link to Our Vision 2030 priorities:
For further detail
see pages 48 to 50
Link to KPIs: Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensity
Brownfield regeneration
Investors
Delivering long-term sustainable shareholder returns
What matters to them?
Secure financial investment that provides sustainable risk-
adjusted returns over the long-term.
High standards of Environmental, Social and Governance
(ESG) matters.
How we engage
Twice yearly equity investor road shows in the UK and
USA by the CEO and CFO.
One-to-one meetings, often combined with site visits,
enabling investors to view the business operations.
Group meetings held at periodic investor conferences.
Structured shareholder consultations on key
governancematters.
Equity analyst briefings.
Actions and outcomes
An added-value model that recognises the risks of a
cyclical housing market and operational complexities of
the sites Berkeley develops.
A focus on financial strength, resilience and liquidity.
Investment in land to maintain sufficient pipeline and
value-added development opportunities.
Securing forward sales which underpins the upfront
investment in our regeneration sites.
Disclosure of both financial and non-financial information
covering a range of ESG topics.
Key engagement activities this year
We have continued to run road shows led by the CEO and
CFO, held one-to-one meetings with investors and attended
investor conferences.
We have also consulted on proposals for the 2025
Remuneration Policy.
Link to Our Vision 2030 priorities:
Link to KPIs
Profit before tax
Pre-tax return on equity
Net cash
Net asset value per share
Cash due on forward sales
Future gross margin in land holdings
Our stakeholders continued
114 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Oval Village
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 115
Board independence
Non-Executive Chairman 1
Non-Executive Directors 6
Executive Directors 2
30 Apr 2025
0 5 10
Board gender balance
Male Female
Non-Executive Director tenure
0–3 years 48 years
4 8
30 Apr 2025
0
Board composition dashboard
Nomination Committee Report
Composition, Succession and Evaluation
Michael Dobson
Chairman
Nomination Committee
The Board of Directors presents its
Nomination Committee Report for
the year ended 30 April 2025.
Committee purpose
and responsibilities
The key responsibilities
of the Committee include:
reviewing the structure, size and
composition of the Board and
Board Committees and making
recommendations to the Board
having regard to succession
planning and supporting diversity;
evaluating the balance of skills,
knowledge, experience
and diversity on the Board;
leading the process for
identifying and nominating
candidates for the Board; and
led by the Chairman, the
appointment and management
of an external consultant to
undertake the Board evaluation
at least once every three years.
Meeting items discussed
June 2024
External Board evaluation
September 2024
Board and Committees’ composition,
successionplanning and diversity
and inclusion
March 2025
Board and Committees’
composition and
successionplanning
Committee activities
The Committee met three times this
year, as set out on page 99.
Led by Michael Dobson, the
Committee gave further
consideration to Board and
Committee composition, having
regard in particular to tenure,
independence and diversity, to
ensure a mix of skills, knowledge
and experience with a view to Non-
Executive Director succession.
The Committee reviewed and
updated the Board Diversity
Policy. The policy is available on
the Company’s website at www.
berkeleygroup.co.uk/investors/
corporate-governance and
anupdate in respect of diversity
and inclusion is provided on pages
120 and 121.
This year our Board evaluation was
carried out internally. Further details
are set out on page119.
116 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Kidbrooke Village, Greenwich
Board and Committees
composition and
successionplanning
During the year the Committee
reviewed the Board’s composition
to ensure that it had the correct
balance of skills required for
the leadership of the Group.
Consideration was therefore
given to succession planning
for both Non-Executive and
ExecutiveDirectors.
The Board currently comprises
an independent Non-Executive
Chairman, two Executive Directors
(the CEO and CFO) and six Non-
Executive Directors.
As agreed with the full Board as a
goal for 2024/25, the Committee
considered staggering the rotation
of Non-Executive Directors
with similar start dates and the
requirement for a succession plan
for the Senior Independent Director.
The Committee commenced
the recruitment process for two
additional Non-Executive Directors
who would satisfy the knowledge,
skills and experience required.
In accordance with the Board
Diversity Policy, the recruitment
process included the appointment
of executive search consultants,
Russell Reynolds, who are
signatories to the Voluntary Code
ofConduct.
All Directors are subject to election
by shareholders annually in
accordance with the requirements
of the Code. Newly appointed
Directors are subject to election
at the first opportunity after
theirappointment.
As detailed in my Chairman’s
Statement, I will leave the Board
at the conclusion of the AGM in
September 2025, as will William
Jackson. Subject to consultation
with major shareholders, Rob
Perrins will succeed me as
Executive Chair and Richard Stearn
will be appointed CEO. Richard
Dakin will join the Board as a Non-
Executive Director at the conclusion
of the AGM, and we are well
advanced with the appointment of
a further Non-Executive Director.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 117
Nomination Committee Report continued
Composition, Succession and Evaluation
Board
appointment
process
The timeline summarises
each stage of the
process which
concluded with the
Nomination Committee’s
recommendation
to appoint Richard
Dakin to the Board as a
Non-Executive Director.
The Committee is
satisfied that the
process described was
appropriately thorough.
BRIEF
SEARCH
June 2024 – September 2024
Stage 1 – Building the Brief
The Nomination Committee
established a brief setting out the
attributes, skills and experience
that the Board required.
The principal criterion was direct
experience of the housebuilding
or property sector.
October 2024 – December 2024
Stage 2 – Candidate Search
Once the brief was finalised, the
Committee engaged executive
search firm Russell Reynolds
to undertake the search for
candidates matching its
keycriteria.
A diverse shortlist of candidates
was identified, with regular
updates to the Committee.
Interviews were conducted by
the Chairman.
The Company confirms that
Russell Reynolds has no other
connection with the individual
Directors or the Company.
Development
Ongoing training and development
is available to all Directors to
meet their individual needs. Board
members also receive regular
guidance and updates on regulatory
matters and the corporate
governance framework in which the
Group operates.
Additionally, during the year,
Directors received training on
the requirement for boards to
declare the effectiveness of their
risk management internal control
systems pursuant to the Corporate
Governance Code 2024 and the
Market Abuse Regulations.
Non-Executive members of
the Audit and Remuneration
Committees receive briefings
from the Group’s auditor and
remuneration advisor respectively
to ensure that they remain up
to date with current regulations
anddevelopments.
All Directors have access to advice
from the Company Secretary and
independent professional advisors,
at the Company’s expense, where
specific expertise is required in the
course of their duties.
2023/24 Board Evaluation
Following the 2023/24 Board
evaluation which was externally
facilitated, the Board set itself the
following goals:
Recognising the similar tenure
of the majority of Non-Executive
Directors, develop a plan for
the staggered rotation of Non-
Executive Directors.
Conduct a search for two
new Non-Executive Director
candidates for the Board with
relevant sector experience.
Continue to develop succession
plans for Executive Director and
Senior Management roles within
the business.
Increase site visits for
Non-Executive Directors,
recognising the value of these
in understanding the corporate
culture, engaging with employees
and the senior management
team below the main Board.
Continue to develop Board
induction processes and training,
in readiness for future Non-
Executive Director appointments.
Progress against these goals is
summarised in the feedback from
the 2024/25 Board evaluation.
118 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
ASSESS
OFFER INDUCTION
January 2025 – March 2025
Stage 3 – Review, Assessment
and Interview
The Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer met on several
occasions to discuss progress
and review the profiles of the
candidates who most clearly
reflected the criteria set out in
the brief.
Meetings were arranged between
the shortlisted candidates and all
members of the Committee and
the Chief Executive Officer.
The Committee unanimously
resolved to recommend the
appointment of Richard Dakin to
the Board.
June 2025
Stage 4 – Board Approval
The Board was unanimous in the
view that Richard Dakin would
bring valuable skills, knowledge
and experience that would
enhance the effectiveness of
theBoard.
On appointment, Non-Executive
Directors are provided with a
detailed induction programme.
This covers an overview of the
Group’s operations and its policies,
corporate responsibility and
corporate affairs issues, legal
matters and also the opportunity
to meet with Directors and key
senior employees and to visit
someof the Group’s sites.
The Board induction pack was
subject to review and update
during the course of the year.
The result was a streamlined
induction pack that provides a
clear and concise introduction
to the Company and the role
and responsibilities of becoming
a director of a FTSE 100 board.
Theupdated induction pack has
been made available to incoming
Non-Executive Directors and is
available to all Directors.
2024/25 Board Evaluation
The annual evaluation was
conducted by the Company
Secretary in accordance with
Provisions 21 and 22 of the Code
through a series of one-to-one
meetings with the Directors.
The review focused on Board
composition, Board meetings,
strategy, risk management, and the
overall effectiveness of the Board.
In summary, the feedback from
the 2024/25 Board review was
asfollows:
Meetings were more streamlined
and the focus on strategy
waswelcomed.
The Committees were seen to be
working effectively.
It was acknowledged that the
structure of meetings enabled
increased focus on the key issues,
and there was an appropriate
balance between strategic and
operational content.
Non-Executive Directors valued
increased site visits to engage
with employees and the senior
management team below the
main Board and gain further
insight into the corporate culture.
There was a good understanding
of the Board’s risk appetite,
and agreement that a focus
for 2025/26 would be a
deeper understanding of
the effectiveness of the risk
management and internal
controls framework.
The Board’s strengths were seen
as its diversity of perspective
andcommitment.
Goals
Following this years evaluation, the
Board set itself the following goals:
Review the balance of skills and
experience on the Board and
effectively embed any new Non-
Executive Directors.
Continue to develop the Board’s
understanding of the Company’s
risk management and internal
control framework ahead of
adoption of Provision 29 of the
Corporate Governance Code
2024 in 2026/27.
Continue to enhance site visits
for Non-Executive Directors and
interaction with Executives.
Review the implementation of
the 10-year strategy.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 119
Diversity and Inclusion
Berkeley strives to create a positive
environment for its people, one that
fosters respect, support, wellbeing,
safety and inclusivity and continues
to work towards a workplace that
is representative of the areas and
communities in which it operates.
Berkeley is committed to equal
opportunities and aims to
ensure that all individuals receive
equal treatment, regardless
of age, disability, ethnicity,
gender, sexual orientation or
socio-economic, educational or
professionalbackground.
Recognising the benefits and
value that diversity in its broadest
sense brings to the Board, and
that the Board sets the tone for
diversity and inclusion across the
business, Berkeley believes in
promoting a culture of integrity,
openness and inclusivity. Noting
the recommendations of the FTSE
Women Leaders and the Parker
Reviews, and the targets set out
in UK Listing Rule (UKLR) 6.6.6(9)
(a), the Board is committed to
sustaining a strong balance of
diversity, that reflects the diverse
range of perspective, insight and
challenge needed to enable the
Board to discharge its duties and
responsibilities effectively, and to
operate in a way that supports
the continued development of a
diverse and inclusive culture across
theGroup.
At 30 April 2025, female
representation on the Board stood
at 44.44%. The Group meets the
ethnic diversity target set by the
Parker Review, with one Non-
Executive Director identifying
as being from an ethnically
diversebackground.
Berkeley continues to help lead
the development of diversity and
inclusion within the construction
sector, bringing through a
generation of talented women
into senior positions within the
business. Across both the Board
and Executive Committee, female
representation in the most senior
roles within the Group stands at
47.1% at 30 April 2025.
Nomination Committee Report continued
Composition, Succession and Evaluation
Targets
Compliance as at 30 April 2025
At least 40% of the individuals on the
Board of Directors are women.
44.44% of the individuals on the Board of Directors
are women.
At least one of the senior Board positions
(Chairman, Chief Executive, Senior Independent
Director, Chief Financial Officer) is held
by a woman.
The position of Senior Independent Director is held
by a woman.
At least one individual on the Board
of Directors is from a minority
ethnicbackground.
The Board currently includes one Director from an
ethnically diverse background.
In accordance with UKLR 6.6.6(9)(a), set out below is a summary of the Company’s compliance with Board
diversity targets as at 30 April 2025 (the chosen reference date used for the purposes of UKLR 6.6.6(9)(a)).
120 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
In accordance with UKLR 6.6.6(9)(a), as at 30 April 2025, the numerical data on the gender identity and
ethnic background of the Board and Group Executive Committee, which was taken directly from the relevant
individuals, is as follows:
Number
of Board
members
Percentage
of the Board
Number
of senior
positions on
the Board*
Number in
executive
management
Percentage
of executive
management
Men 5 55.56% 3 6 60%
Women 4 44.44% 1 4 40%
Not specified/prefer not to say 0%
Number
of Board
members
Percentage
of the Board
Number
of senior
positions on
the Board*
Number in
executive
management
Percentage
of executive
management
White British or other White (including minority-
white groups) 8 89% 4 10 100%
Mixed/Multiple ethnic group 0%
Asian/Asian British 0%
Black/African/Caribbean/Black British 1 11% 0%
Other ethnic group, including Arab 0%
Not specified/prefer not to say 0%
* Senior positions on Board refer to the Chairman, Chief Executive, Senior Independent Director and Chief Financial Officer.
A Group-wide Equality and
Diversity Policy is in place, making it
clear that Berkeley does not tolerate
discrimination in any form.
In accordance with Disclosure and
Transparency Rule 7.2.8AR, the
Board maintains the Board Diversity
Policy which sits alongside the
Group-wide Equality and Diversity
Policy. The Board Diversity Policy
applies specifically to the Board
and its Committees and sets out the
approach to diversity in respect of
Berkeley’s Board of Directors and
Senior Management.
During the year, the Board Diversity
Policy was reviewed and updated
to take account of changes to
the Code and is available on the
Company’s website at:
www.berkeleygroup.co.uk/
investors/corporate-governance.
When reviewing the composition of,
and succession plans for the Board,
and making recommendations to
the Board in respect of changes,
the Nomination Committee has due
regard to all aspects of diversity
in determining the appropriate
balance of skills, experience,
knowledge and independence
to enable the Board to continue
to operate effectively in the best
interests of the Company.
During the year, the Board and its
Committees have complied fully
with the Board Diversity Policy.
Michael Dobson
Chairman, Nomination Committee
20 June 2025
Berkeley at London Pride
Read more about Equality
and Diversity on page 52
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 121
Audit Committee Report
Andy Kemp
Chair
Audit Committee
I am pleased to present the Audit Committee
Report for the year ended 30 April 2025. This
report describes the work undertaken by the
Committee, including its consideration of the key
areas of estimation uncertainty underpinning the
consolidated financial statements, its review of
the Group’s risk management and internal control
systems and its assessment of the external auditor’s
audit plan, strategy and independence.
Introduction
The report has been prepared in accordance with the requirements
of the Corporate Governance Code 2018, the Listing Rules, Disclosure
Guidance and Transparency Rules 7.1 and 7.2 and the FRC Guidance on
Board Effectiveness.
Details of the composition and experience of the Committee
can be found in the Directors’ biographies on pages 96 to 99 of
the Governance report and details of the key matters covered in
Committee meetings are summarised on the page opposite.
The Board is satisfied that the Audit Committee has sufficient financial
experience and competence.
Meetings
The Committee met four times during the year, as set out on page
99. By invitation, the external auditor, Chairman, Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer were present at all meetings, while
the Head of Finance was present at three meetings and the internal
auditor presented at two meetings. The Committee receives reports
on whistleblowing from the Group’s Solicitor. In addition, the Chair of
the Audit Committee meets with the Chief Financial Officer and the
external auditor ahead of each meeting and has the opportunity to
meet with the internal auditor, as required.
The Chair of the Audit Committee approves fees for non-audit work
undertaken by the external auditor, as permitted by the Company’s
policy on non-audit fees, and presents a paper on such fees at each
relevant meeting.
Financial Reporting
Ahead of the interim and full year
results announcements, the Chief
Financial Officer presented a report
on the consolidated financial results
of the Company, including the key
areas involving financial reporting
estimation uncertainty.
The Committee reviewed, prior
to their publication, the financial
disclosures in the Company’s
Annual Report and interim and
year end results announcements.
The Committee’s review
incorporated consideration
of the appropriateness of the
relevant accounting policies and
financial reporting estimates
adopted therein. The reports to
the Committee by the external
auditor were considered in reaching
itsconclusions.
Key Sources of Estimation
Uncertainty
Key accounting areas involving
estimation uncertainty that were
considered by the Committee
during the year were:
Cost of sales recognition
The Group recognises a cost of
sale on each property sold and
recorded in revenue by reference
to the forecast development
margin. The development margin
is an estimate of the forecast profit
percentage for a development
which, for the most part, is
developed over multiple financial
years. The recognition of cost of
sale at a point in time is dependent
on an estimate of future selling
price, direct costs and an allocation
of site-wide costs, including an
appropriate allowance for risk.
Consequently, the assessment of a
development’s margin evolves over
the development cycle in line with
the risk profile.
In addition, the Group’s particularly
complex, long-term regeneration
developments exhibit an inherently
higher degree of estimation
uncertainty given an exposure to
cross-cyclical market movements.
122 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
The Group applies an approach to
cost of sales allocation for these
sites whereby whole-site costs are
accelerated to the early stages
of the development to reflect
the greater uncertainty and the
evolution of risk over the life of
suchdevelopments.
Management undertook an
assessment of these risks and
development assumptions and
reported the conclusions of these
assessments, by exception, to the
Committee in the Chief Financial
Officer’s report prior to the release
of the Group’s interim and year
endresults.
Following review of each paper, the
Committee concluded that it was
satisfied with the assumptions and
estimates adopted.
Post completion
developmentprovisions
The accounting for provisions
relies on management estimating
the quantum and timing of cash
outflows to settle any legal or
constructive obligations.
The Group holds provisions for
post completion development
obligations in respect of the
construction of its portfolio of
complex mixed use developments
which are expected to be incurred
in the ordinary course of business,
based on historical experience of
Key matters covered in Audit Committee meetings
October 2024
KPMG’s report on the audit plan
and strategy for the year ending
30 April 2025
November 2024
Interim results for the period
ended 31 October 2024
KPMG’s report on the interim
review period
Internal audit report
April 2025
KPMG’s report on updates to
the audit strategy for the year
ending 30 April 2025
Annual formal review of risk
management and internal
control systems
Internal audit report
Review of the Company’s
taxstrategy
June 2025
Financial results for the year
ended 30 April 2025
Going concern and
viabilityassessment
Tax report for the year ended
30April 2025
KPMG’s report on the
Company’s consolidated results
Assessment of fraud risk
Internal audit report, including
approval of the audit plan for the
year ending 30 April 2026
Auditor independence and
non-audit fees and services,
alongside an evaluation of the
annual audit process
Review of the 2025 Annual
Report to ensure it is fair,
balanced and understandable.
the Group’s sites and current site-
specific risks, including matters
relating to building fire-safety, but
which are uncertain in terms of
timing and quantum.
The basis for determining these
provisions was presented to the
Committee for its consideration.
The Committee reviewed the
relevant papers and discussed
the assumptions underlying this
determination with management
and the Group’s external auditor
and concluded that it was satisfied
that the assumptions and estimates
adopted were appropriate.
A table of movements in provisions
over the year is included in
Note 2.17 to the Consolidated
FinancialStatements.
Other Areas of Focus
Other areas of financial reporting
focus for the year included:
Investment property
The Committee was satisfied that
management had evidenced its
decision to develop certain assets
for capital appreciation and to
earn rental income under the
Group’s Build to Rent platform.
Accordingly, the development
costs incurred to that point were
transferred from inventory to
investment property. Subsequent
costs incurred in developing
these assets are accounted for as
additions to investment property at
cost. The Group’s disclosure in this
respect is set out in Note 2.9 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements.
Going Concern and
ViabilityAssessment
The Committee reviewed the
assumptions and methodology
adopted in the Group’s going
concern and viability statement,
the period that the assessment
covered, and the sensitivity analysis
undertaken. The Committee
was satisfied that the going
concern basis and the viability
statement were appropriate and
recommended their approval to
the Board. The viability statement
can be found on page 81 of the
Strategic Report.
Consideration of climate change
Through review of reporting to the
Board and of TCFD disclosure in
the Annual Report, the Committee
concluded that there was no
material impact on the financial
reporting judgements and estimates
in the Consolidated Financial
Statements as a result of climate
change for the year ended 30 April
2025. The Group’s disclosure in this
respect is set out in Note 1.3 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 123
Audit Committee Report continued
Review of the Annual Report
The Committee reviewed the
Annual Report and, taking into
account the views of the external
auditor, concluded that, taken as
a whole, it was fair, balanced and
understandable and provided
the information necessary for
users thereof to assess the
Group’s corporate strategy and
financialperformance.
Risk management
andinternal control
The Board has overall responsibility
for monitoring the Group’s systems
of risk management and internal
control, ensuring that they comply
with the Code and the FRC’s
Guidance on Risk Management,
Internal Control and Related Business
Reporting, and for formally reviewing
their effectiveness on an annual basis,
but delegates this responsibility to
the Audit Committee.
The Group has processes and
procedures embedded within
its ongoing business activities
for identifying, evaluating and
managing its principal and
emerging risks. At an operating
company and divisional level, board
meetings are structured around the
key risks and opportunities facing
each of the businesses. In addition,
a quarterly formal process involves
each division producing a risk and
control report that identifies risks,
the potential impact of these and
the actions being taken to mitigate
them. A consolidated Group Risk
Management Report is presented at
each Board meeting, which overlays
strategic risks to those which are
the focus of the divisional reports.
The Group report sets out, and the
Board monitors, the evolving nature
of risk appetite which is a key
element in determining the Group’s
strategy and is set out on pages 78
and 79 of the Strategic Report.
With risk assessment and
management being an ongoing
dynamic process, it is embedded
within the Group’s procedures and
debated at each Board meeting.
Nonetheless, the Audit Committee
undertakes a formal review annually
on behalf of the Board, which covers:
An assessment of the principal
and emerging risks
The Committee reviewed a paper
covering the Group’s risk appetite
in response to the prevailing macro
and operating environment in
which the Group operated during
the financial year. In that context, it
also reviewed the risks reported in
the narrative of the Annual Report
for the year ended 30 April 2025,
which are set out on pages 78 to 91
of the Strategic Report.
Assessment of the Group’s
control processes to mitigate
these risks
The Group has five key components
to its internal control framework
and the Committee reviewed a
paper covering the assessment of
controls under each component
area for the year ended 30 April
2025 highlighted therein:
1) Environment and culture;
2) Controls over investment
decisions and delivery;
3) Internal financial and
operationalreporting;
4) Policies, procedures and IT
related security; and
5) Monitoring and challenge.
The Committee acknowledges
that internal control procedures
are designed to manage rather
than eliminate risk. They can
only provide reasonable, and not
absolute, assurance against material
misstatement or loss.
The effectiveness of
internalaudit
Internal auditors are in place at a
Group level and, as appropriate, at a
divisional level to provide assurance
on the effective operation of the
Group’s internal control systems.
Reports summarising the activities
of the Group Internal Audit function
were presented at the Committee
meetings during the year. These
reports covered:
a summary of the key findings
arising from the internal
auditsundertaken;
management response to
control findings and Internal
Audit’s follow-up review of
mitigatingaction;
the outcome of other operational
review work undertaken by
the Group Internal Audit
function;and
the internal audit plan for the
coming year for the approval
ofthe Committee.
The Committee continued to
assess Provision 29 in respect
of Principle O of the 2024
changes to the Code which is
applicable for the Company’s
financial year commencing
1 May 2026, related to the
Board’s requirement to review
the effectiveness of the
Company’s material controls
and report thereon in the
Annual Report. It noted that
a paper was being presented
to the Board at its April 2025
meeting. The Committee
acknowledges that it will
continue to play a key role
as the Company finalises its
approach to complying with
Provision 29.
124 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
The Committee also considered the
internal control recommendations
reported by the Group’s external
auditor in its reports to the
Committee and the Group’s
response to such recommendations.
The Committee was satisfied that
the scope, extent and effectiveness
of the Internal Audit function was
appropriate for the Group during
the year ended 30 April 2025.
External audit
Audit approach
KPMG presented its audit strategy
document to the Committee in
October 2024. This document
included an assessment of the
key audit risks and other areas of
audit focus, the scope of the audit
work, and updates in respect of
regulatory changes for the current
year and those anticipated in
futureyears.
KPMG reported to the Committee,
ahead of the release of the interim
and year end financial results, on its
assessment of the Group’s key areas
of estimation uncertainty which
correlate to the key audit risk areas,
alongside other findings arising
from its work.
The external auditor has recourse to
the Non-Executive Directors should
it consider it necessary. The Chair
of the Committee and the external
auditor meet regularly throughout
the year and, more formally, prior
to each Committee meeting.
After each Committee meeting
the Committee members met
with the external auditor without
management present.
Independence of
theexternalauditor
As part of its reporting to the
Committee, KPMG identified the
safeguards in place within its
internal processes and procedures
to protect the independence of
itsaudit.
To safeguard auditor independence,
the Committee has a policy on the
provision of non-audit services by
the external auditor. In accordance
with that policy the ratio of audit
fees to non-audit fees (the ‘ratio’)
should be no greater than 0.7:1, with
a target of lower than 0.5:1 in any
one year and in aggregate over the
previous three financial years.
The ratio for the year ended 30 April
2025 was 0.10:1, well within this
limit. The non-audit fees related to:
The interim review, which is closely
related to the annual audit process;
Provision of limited assurance
over the Group’s scope 1, 2 and 3
carbon emissions data contained
within the Directors’ Report on
pages 164 and 165; and
Provision of limited assurance on
the Group’s compliance with its
Green Finance Framework.
Audit and non-audit fee disclosures
are set out in Note 2.4 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements.
Any departure from the ratio
will only be as a consequence of
transactional work and only where
such transactional work is non-
recurring. Where the Committee
considers it is right for the external
auditor to undertake such non-
recurring transactional work, the
Committee will ensure:
that the nature of the work and
the basis for using the external
auditor shall be disclosed in the
Annual Report;
that the work does not pose
any threat to the independence
and objectivity of the external
auditor; and
that there is a presumption in
favour of using other firms to
provide transactional advice
unless such advice can only be
provided by the external auditor
on the grounds that:
it is proprietary to them;
it has pre-existing knowledge
and experience of a situation
which precludes the use of
alternative firms;
the nature of the transaction
is such that the Group’s
auditor is the only practical
appointment;and
it is at the discretion of the
Chair of the Audit Committee.
There is open dialogue between
the external auditor and the
Company’s management to
monitor any proposed non-audit
relatedinstructions.
The Committee has concluded
that the auditor was independent
throughout the year ended
30April2025.
Appointment of KPMG
KPMG was first appointed as the
Group’s auditor with effect from 1
May 2014 by way of a competitive
tender. In line with applicable legal
and regulatory requirements, the
Group conducted a competitive
tender process during 2023 which
culminated in the re-appointment
of KPMG as the external auditor for
the year ended 30 April 2024.
On completion of the audit for
the year ended 30 April 2025,
the Committee reviewed the
performance and effectiveness
of KPMG, with feedback sought
from management. Taking this
review into account, the Committee
resolved to propose KPMG’s re-
appointment as the Company’s
auditor at the 2025 Annual
GeneralMeeting.
The Company confirms that it
complied with the provisions of
the Competition and Markets
Authority’s Audit Order for the
financial year under review.
Andy Kemp
Chair, Audit Committee
20 June 2025
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 125
Directors’ Remuneration Report
Annual Statement of the Chair of the Remuneration Committee
126 Annual Statement of the Chair of the Remuneration Committee
134 Remuneration at a glance
135 Directors’ 2025 Remuneration Policy
146 Annual Report on Remuneration
155 Employment at Berkeley
Natasha Adams
Chair of Remuneration
Committee
I am pleased to introduce our
Directors’ Remuneration Report
forthe year ended 30 April 2025.
Contents of the Directors’
Remuneration Report
The Committee met seven times
this year as set out on page 99.
Decisions made in the year
The Committee determined the
following during the year:
Considered and approved the
vesting of the ninth 2011 LTIP
tranche in September 2024,
including consideration of
the extent to which financial
and individual performance
conditions were met.
Approved no salary increases for
Executive Directors for 2024/25,
compared to the average
workforce increase of 3.5%.
Carried out a comprehensive
review of the current directors’
remuneration policy which is
due to expire at the 2025 AGM,
resulting in the proposed changes
to the directors’ remuneration
policy outlined in this report.
Dear Shareholder,
I am pleased to introduce our
Directors’ Remuneration Report
for the year ended 30 April
2025. I would like to thank
shareholders for their support
of our 2023/24 Annual Report
on Remuneration at our AGM on
6September 2024, which received
a strong vote in favour of 92.5%.
Alongside our usual activities,
we undertook a comprehensive
review of our current directors’
remunerationpolicy.
Our current directors’ remuneration
policy (the 2022 Policy) was
approved by shareholders at
the 2022 AGM, and comprises a
bespoke structure based around
low fixed pay, annual awards under
a Restricted Share Plan (RSP) and
a one-off grant under the Long-
Term Option Plan (LTOP). In line
with the normal three-year lifecycle,
we will be submitting our new
directors’ remuneration policy (the
2025 Policy or the Remuneration
Policy) for approval at the AGM on
5 September 2025. On the following
pages, I outline the context behind
the key decisions made by the
Committee this year, particularly
those related to the 2025 Policy,
how we rewarded performance
in accordance with the existing
shareholder-approved 2022 Policy,
our decisions regarding 2024/25
remuneration arrangements, and the
broader context of workforce pay.
Key responsibilities of the Remuneration Committee
The key responsibilities include:
Determine and agree with the Board the broad policy for the
remuneration of the Group Chairman, Executive Directors and
seniormanagement.
Review pay policies for the widerworkforce.
Determine performance conditions for the incentive plans operated by
the Company and approve the total annual payments made under them.
Determine all share incentive plans for approval by the Board
andshareholders.
Take into account the views of shareholders and the wider workforce
when determining plans under the directors’ remuneration policy.
Ensure that the contractual terms on termination, and any payments
made, are fair to the individual and the Company and that failure is
not rewarded.
Note annually the remuneration trends and any major changes in
employee benefit structures across the Company or Group.
The Committee’s Terms of Reference set out its full remit and can
be downloaded from Corporate Governance section of the Berkeley
website (www.berkeleygroup.co.uk/investors/corporate-governance).
126 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Going forward, it is essential
that our Remuneration Policy
is sufficiently flexible to reward
executives as the Company adapts
to the changes in the UK housing
market in what are volatile geo-
political and macro-economic
times and implements our recently
announced Berkeley 2035 strategy,
which takes into account both
this persistent volatility and the
opportunities to create value
fromemerging opportunities.
The remuneration principles that
operate at Board level are cascaded
to our most senior management
as part of a joined-up approach to
incentivisation and alignment to
deliver on our strategy and facilitate
managementsuccession.
Following an extensive process
over the last year to consider how
our Remuneration Policy can best
be structured to suit Berkeley and
take account of views expressed
by a wide range of shareholders,
the Committee has concluded that
now is the right moment to move
to a market-aligned remuneration
package, consisting of an annual
bonus and annual grants under
a Performance Share Plan (PSP).
While these proposals represent a
shift from our previous approach
to executive remuneration, the
Committee firmly believes this new
approach upholds our remuneration
philosophy and culture of Berkeley
which places a strong emphasis
on performance-related pay and
motivating the Executive Directors
and senior management to drive
the business strategy, with a
continued focus on delivering
long-term sustainable risk-adjusted
returns for shareholders, forging
a strong alignment between them
and management.
Performance for the year
under review
Berkeley’s 2022 Policy was designed
to reinforce long-term decisions
and align with the interests of
our shareholders, and which
comprises fixed pay alongside two
equity-based awards both with
long vesting periods. In 2022/23,
following approval of the 2022
Policy, awards were made to the
Executive Directors under the LTOP,
and these one-off awards will vest
over the period through to 2030;
no decisions around the LTOP were
required of the Committee during
2024/25.
The Executive Directors normally
receive annual awards under the
RSP. However, for 2024/25, the
Committee and the Executive
Directors agreed to waive the
granting of these awards. RSP
awards are subject to achieving a
15% Return on Equity (ROE) over
a four-year period, with a further
downward adjustment of up to 20%
if progress against strategic and
ESG priorities is unsatisfactory. A
summary of ESG progress to date
can be found on pages 56 and 57.
In reaching the decision to waive
awards, the Committee and
Executive Directors considered the
significant challenge posed by the
15% ROE target, particularly given
current market conditions which
are more difficult than when the
target was set in the 2022 Policy,
and with regard to the Berkeley
2035 strategy with its more flexible
capital allocation. We concluded
that waiving the awards for this
yearwas the most appropriate
course of action.
The only incentive awards to vest
during 2024/25 was the ninth
tranche under the 2011 LTIP on
30 September 2024. The vesting
of these awards was linked to (i)
return targets – cumulative return to
shareholders since 2011 and returns
for the 12 months to 30 September
2024 and (ii) financial targets –
cumulative ROE and cumulative
Profit before Tax, all of which were
achieved in full. Consequently,
this tranche vested in full, and no
discretion was required by the
Committee other than to apply the
Total Remuneration Cap.
No changes were made to the
Executive Director salaries for
2024/25, in line with the approach
for other senior management.
This compares to average salary
increases of 3.5% awarded to
employees throughout the Group.
Financial performance
of2024/25
Net cash of £337 million
(2023/24: £532 million)
ROCE of 16.5%
(2023/24:18.3%)
Pre-tax return on
shareholders’ equity of 14.9%
(2023/24: 16.2%)
Net asset value per share
increased by 6.9% to £35.95
(2023/24: £33.63)
Cash due on forwardsales
of £1.4 billion
(2023/24:£1.7billion)
Future anticipatedgross
margin in the landbank
of £6.7 billion
(2023/24:£6.9billion)
Profit before tax
of £528.9million
(2023/24:£557.3 million)
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 127
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
ESG highlights
Awards under the RSP are subject to an ROE underpin and a discretionary assessment by the Committee as to
the Company’s progress towards its Our Vision 2030 priorities. This second underpin is tested at the vest date, but
the Committee reports on the tracking against these priorities in each annual Directors’ Remuneration Report. The
Committee reviewed progress during the year, taking into account the following aspects and noting the strong
performance and leadership positions in these areas:
Named Britain’s Most Admired Company 2024 and received Gold awards for clarity of strategy, long-term value
potential and reducing environmental impact in an assessment of over 230 FTSE-listed firms across 27 industry
sectors carried out in partnership with the London Stock Exchange.
Rated as a top 10% company within S&P’s Global Corporate Sustainability Assessment (CSA), an ESG Industry
Top-Rated company by Sustainalytics, ‘AAA’ within the MSCI ESG rating and given ‘prime’ status by ISS
Corporate Solutions ESG Corporate Rating.
92% of homes delivered in the year were on regenerated brownfield land.
Approximately £580 million of subsidies provided to deliver affordable housing and committed to wider
community and infrastructure benefits in the year.
Berkeley is delivering some 10% of London’s new private and affordable homes supporting an average of
approximately 27,000 UK jobs per annum directly and indirectly through its supply chain over the last fiveyears.
Industry leading Net Promoter Score (+81.6) and customer satisfaction ratings maintained.
Ranked as the top UK housebuilder for build quality by HomeViews, the only independent review platform in the
country for residential development, which is part ofRightmove.
Taking a leading role in building safety across the industry, whilst evolving our own established arrangements
andtraining for building safety and qualityassurance.
Long-term commitment to achieving biodiversity net gain on site, helping to connect people and nature. In
total, more than 57 developments now committed, which together will create more than 1,200 acres of new or
measurably improved naturalhabitats.
Reducing embodied carbon within the materials used to construct our buildings, through targeted actions
on projects throughout design, specification and procurement. More than 60 embodied carbon assessments
completed to date.
Gold membership of The 5% Club, with 8.7% of direct employees in ‘earn and learn’ positions as graduates,
apprentices or sponsored students within the year.
Continued industry leading Health & Safety performance, with an Annual Injury Incidence Rate (AIIR) of 102 per
100,000 people.
£3.3 million given by the Berkeley Foundation last year to its charity partners through grants and staff
fundraising, with 58% of staff involved with the work of theFoundation.
Long-term Company performance
Berkeley’s ROE compared with the sector over the last 10 years illustrates the relative performance of the Company:
2015/16 2016/17
2017/18
Restated 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25
10-year
average
Berkeley
30.8% 41.1% 41.9% 27.9% 16.6% 16.5% 17. 5% 18.7% 16.2% 14.9% 24.2%
Sector highest 30.8% 41.1% 41.9% 34.1% 32.3% 23.1% 27.1% 20.7% 16.2% 14.9% 24.2%
Sector lowest 16.0% 15.7% 11.0% 15.9% 15.0% 5.7% 13.9% 8.8% 9.3% 3.1% 11.6%
Sector
average*
(excluding
Berkeley)
22.3% 24.2% 23.3% 24.9% 23.8% 10.5% 17.7% 13.7% 12.8% 5.8% 19.1%
* Sector includes Barratt Developments, Bellway, Persimmon, Redrow, Taylor Wimpey and Vistry.
The performance over the last 10 years highlights Berkeley’s strategy to deliver long-term returns over the cycle.
128 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
2025 Remuneration Policy
As indicated in the 2024/25 Directors’ Remuneration Report, the core focus for the Committee this year has been
to undertake a comprehensive review of the 2022 Policy. Throughout the process the Committee was cognisant
that the UK residential development sector is undergoing a profound transition. Government policy on planning,
building regulations and environmental requirements, coupled with the well documented ongoing geo-political
and macro-economic volatility, have significantly impacted sector returns over the last three years. At Berkeley, we
adapted to this by announcing a revised strategy in 2024/25. Berkeley 2035 provides a framework within which
Berkeley can utilise its entrepreneurial property expertise to: (i) increase return on capital in the core business
through optimising existing sites, bringing pipeline sites into delivery and investing in new land; (ii) establish
our own market-leading Build to Rent (BTR) platform and significantly grow its value; and (iii) make returns to
shareholders, through share buy-backs or dividends; a strategy that will grow the long-term value of the Company,
while retaining financial strength. The opportunity to introduce third-party funding to the Build to Rent platform
provides the financial capacity and flexibility to increase investment or shareholder returns further.
These strategic priorities require a remuneration framework that rewards delivery of a broader set of outcomes,
provides a competitive pay opportunity to reinforce exceptional performance, and which retains and motivates
the executive team. The Committee concluded that now is an appropriate time to move to a market-aligned
remuneration package, consisting of an annual bonus and annual grants under a PSP as follows:
Proposed Remuneration Policy structure
The Committee considers that the revised remuneration structure is fully aligned with Berkeley’s established
remuneration philosophy, which prioritises performance-driven incentives. This approach is designed to motivate
the Executive Directors and senior management to execute Berkeley 2035 effectively, with a sustained focus on
generating long-term, sustainable, risk-adjusted returns for shareholders. It reinforces a strong alignment between
the interests of management and those of shareholders.
Annual
bonus*
PSP
Cash
Shares
purchased
3-year holding period on
purchased shares
Shares
released
Shares
released
2-year holding
period on
vesting shares
PSP award
vests
FY
2026
2027
2028 2029
2030
2031
Performance
period
Performance period
* 50% paid in cash or 75% paid in cash where shareholding requirement met.
Current Executive Directors have met their shareholding requirements.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 129
Annual bonus
Berkeley has not operated an annual bonus plan for Executive Directors since 2018/19. Instead, from the approval
of the 2022 Policy, annual awards have been granted under the RSP. We considered retaining and amending the
conditions to the RSP, but ultimately concluded that reintroducing an annual bonus, with appropriate deferral,
would allow greater flexibility to set appropriate incentive measures and targets as the housing market evolves
in London and the South East, and which would also help ensure greater alignment in pay structures with other
employees at Berkeley for whom bonus participation is part of the existing remuneration offering.
The proposed annual bonus therefore has a regular FTSE structure, with a maximum opportunity of 200% of salary,
and a requirement that 50% of any earned bonus (net of tax) is used to purchase shares to be held for three years,
reducing to 25% of any earned bonus for any Executive Director who has achieved their shareholding requirement.
Performance Share Plan
We propose to introduce a PSP which is consistent with FTSE norms i.e. annual rolling grants, a three-year vesting
period and a two-year post-vesting holding period. Consistent with our philosophy to have a large emphasis
on performance-related pay linked to shareholders’ interests, we propose annual awards of 400% of salary for
Rob Perrins and 250% for Richard Stearn, reflecting the expertise and experience of the current executive team
who have been in place for 16 and 10 years, respectively. In the event of a new appointment to the Board, the
Committee will consider the appropriate PSP award opportunity taking account of the experience of the individual,
but which will be limited to 300% of salary.
The Committee recognises the proposed grant level for the CEO is high relative to practice at companies of similar
size but is satisfied that the level is consistent with the historical pay opportunity at Berkeley and the experience
and performance of the current CEO. The proposed grant levels have been modelled to provide an overall pay
outcome which is consistent with the Total Remuneration Cap for each Executive Director under realistic-but-
stretching performance scenarios, whilst avoiding excessive grant levels. Our modelling also suggests that the pay
outcomes under the 2025 Policy will likely be lower than those under the 2022 Policy at various shareholder return
scenarios, as illustrated below which indicates the vest-date value of the proposed remuneration package under
different performance outcomes.
Value of overall remuneration package after 3 years, £000
2025 Policy: assumes the bonus and PSP vest at levels which are commensurate with Berkeley’s Total Shareholder
Returns (TSR), assuming nil vesting below TSR of 4% p.a., full vesting at 18% p.a., and with scaled vesting
inbetween. 2022 Policy: assumes the ROE underpin for the RSP is not achieved below TSR of 8% p.a. LTOP value
is based on one tranche (i.e. one-fifth of the total grant) valued after the average vesting period (of 6 years)
discounted back to 3 years at 8% p.a.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
Shareholder return % over vesting period, p.a.
(i.e. share price growth plus dividends)
Shareholder return % over vesting period, p.a.
(i.e. share price growth plus dividends)
19 20 21
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
CEO remuneration Cap
2022 Policy
2025 Policy
CFO remuneration Cap
2022 Policy
2025 Policy
CEO CFO
130 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Total Remuneration Cap
Berkeley is only one of two FTSE 100 companies to include an annual remuneration cap (to-date set at £8m for
the CEO, £3.25m for the CFO, and which limits the vest-date value of all remuneration except benefits). The caps
have not been increased since they were first adopted by the Company in 2017. The Total Remuneration Cap was
introduced to protect against unexpected windfall gains from the 2011 LTIP. Although the Committee does not
intend to remove the Total Remuneration Cap as part of the transition to a market-standard package, it is proposed
that it be increased annually broadly in line with general inflation going forward, starting from 2025/26. The
Committee will keep under review whether it is applied to any new appointments to the Board, although it is likely
that the cap would not apply if they do not have outstanding awards under previous remuneration arrangements.
Transition between Policies
For many years, Berkeley has had a long-term incentive structure which is based around one-off awards, with the
latest of these being the 2022 LTOP structure. While there are certain merits to one-off structures, a challenge
arises in the final stages of such structures whereby the value of the inflight (i.e. unvested) awards significantly
diminishes, reducing the ‘lock-in’ (an effect which is absent in the more traditional rolling award structure).
The Committee takes seriously our responsibility to shareholders to ensure that the executive team is suitably
motivated and incentivised through the transition from the LTOP to the FTSE-regular pay structure and considered
at length how best to minimise the potential reduction in pay opportunity over this period.
The 2025 Policy will be implemented for FY26, with the first PSP awards granted following shareholder approval at
the September 2025 AGM, as is common practice. The first release of any vested PSP shares will be in September
2030 (following the 5-year vesting and holding period). Moving to a market-standard policy in 2025 introduces an
overlap with the final vesting of the last LTOP tranche in September 2030, an approach with which the Committee
is satisfied there is technical merit as it helps mitigate the diminished lock-in from the LTOP (as illustrated below)
and smooths the transition from the LTOP to the PSP. Furthermore, unlike at most other FTSE companies, the Total
Remuneration Cap will ensure overall vesting values remain within acceptable boundaries and pay outcomes are
aligned with shareholder interests.
Illustration of LTOP ‘run-off
FY28
Cycle
FY27
Cycle
FY26
Cycle
T4
T5
T2
T3
T1
Long-Term
Option Plan
(LTOP)
Performance
Share Plan
(PSP)
FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 FY29 FY30 FY31 FY32 FY33
Unlike a rolling plan, the one-off
LTOP has a significantly diminishing
retention ‘hook’ in FY30 and FY31,
as prior tranches vest
Performance period Vest period
Shareholding requirements
We are proposing no change to the shareholding requirement for the current Executive Directors, which require
a shareholding of 400% of salary by 2027 and 1000% of salary by 2032, levels which are at the top end of FTSE
practice, noting also that the current shareholdings of our CEO and CFO significantly exceed the required level,
demonstrating their commitment to Berkeley. However, under the 2025 Policy, for any new appointment to the
Board it will be set in line with their annual PSP award level, i.e. up to 300% of salary, to be achieved within five
years of appointment, to be more consistent with the levels observed in the FTSE 100.
The PSP has been
designed to reduce
this effect
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 131
Implementation of the 2025 Policy in 2025/26
The table below summarises the proposed implementation of the 2025 Policy in its first year of operation:
Element R Perrins, CEO R Stearn, CFO
Salary £785,000 £510,000
Annual bonus
Maximum (% of salary) 200% 200%
Deferral, 3 years (% of award) (applies to the net of tax value of annual bonuses) 25% 25%
Performance Share Plan
Maximum award (% of salary) 400% 250%
Performance period 3 years 3 years
Post-vesting holding period 2 years 2 years
Shareholding requirement (% of salary)
400% by 2027,
1000% by
2032
400% by 2027,
1000% by
2032
Total Remuneration Cap £8.33m £3.38m
As part of the review, we considered the competitive positioning of our Executive Directors’ remuneration. We
chose a group of sector comparators (based on housebuilders and real estate companies, listed below) and size
comparators (based on FTSE companies of a similar market cap, revenue and employees to Berkeley).
Sector comparators comprise: Barratt Redrow, Bellway, British Land, Crest Nicholson, Derwent London, Great
Portland Estates, Hammerson, Land Securities, LondonMetric, Persimmon, Segro, Shaftesbury Capital, Taylor
Wimpey, Unite, Vistry, Workspace.
To date, the CEO and CFO salaries have been set at very low levels, roughly equivalent to bottom decile of
our peers. This has a historical context and was deemed appropriate as part of the previous, more bespoke
remuneration arrangements of the Company, going back to 2011. As part of the shift to a more FTSE-aligned
package, the Committee is proposing that salaries are moved closer to a market-median position of the sector
peer group and FTSE companies of comparable size in FY26 to help ensure the variable pay opportunities being
proposed in the 2025 Policy are reasonable within the FTSE context. The Committee considered phasing the salary
increase over the 3-year 2025 Policy period but rejected this approach given the complexity this would introduce
around also phasing (down) the bonus and PSP award opportunities, which would have been required to provide a
consistent remuneration package in each award cycle.
The Committee acknowledges that the proposed salary increases are significant, but these follow only modest
salary increases over the last 5 years, with the CEO and CFO salaries increasing by, on average, 1.8% per annum.
The proposed salaries are positioned around median of the comparator groups as illustrated below; we estimate
the overall positioning of pay (on a fair value basis) going forward will be around the upper quartile of the sector
and size comparator groups for both the CEO and CFO, a position which the Committee is satisfied is appropriate
given the experience, quality and tenure of the Berkeley management team.
Salary position vs market, £000 Total remuneration position vs market, £000
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
3,800
3,300
2,800
2,300
1,800
1,300
800
300
CEO CFO CEO CFO
Upper quartile
Median
Lower quartile
Upper quartile
Median
Lower quartile
Key
 Berkeley proposed
 Berkeley current
Average of
sector and
size groups
Average of
sector and
size groups
132 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Furthermore, the bonus and the PSP will enable the Committee to set performance targets which are relevant to
each award cycle, taking into account Berkeley’s ambition and prevailing market conditions, which will likely mean
that the overall vest-date value of the proposed 2025 Policy will be more variable than that observed in recent years.
Subject to shareholder approval of the 2025 Policy, the Executive Directors will be eligible to participate in the
annual bonus scheme in respect of 2025/26. The bonus will be based 80% on financial metrics (for 2025/26,
50% PBT and 30% operating margin) and 20% on strategic metrics (for 2025/26, 10% Net Promoter Score and
10% ‘Earn and Learn’, an employee education-support measure). The targets are considered to be commercially
sensitive and will be disclosed in the 2025/26 Remuneration Report, as is normal FTSE practice.
The Committee also intends to make PSP awards to Executive Directors as soon as practicable following the 2025AGM.
For the 2025/26 cycle the following metrics will be used (see page 154 for full details of the metrics and targets):
45% NAV per share, reinforcing our new strategy, its medium-term profit guidance and its investment ambitions,
including in our BTR platform;
20% cash generation, reinforcing cash discipline; and
35% ROCE, reinforcing disciplined capital allocation and long-term profitability.
The announcement made on 20 June, concerning the structure of the Board, has several implications for
the implementation of the new remuneration policy in FY26, some of which could not be disclosed earlier in
the remuneration report given the timing of the report’s drafting and the timing of the announcement. On
appointment as Executive Chair, Rob Perrins will continue on the proposed salary of £785,000 and be granted a
PSP award of 400% of salary but will not be eligible to participate in the annual bonus for any part of FY26 or in
future years. On appointment as CEO, Richard Stearn’s salary will be increased to £625,000 and he will continue
to participate in the annual bonus and PSP with award opportunities of 200% and 250% of salary respectively. The
remuneration for the executive directors (including the new CFO once appointed) under the revised Board structure
will be at such levels to keep the cost to the Company broadly the same as under the existing Board structure.
Rob Perrins’ remuneration cap will be as per the Remuneration Policy (i.e. £8.33m in FY26), and Richard Stearns’
remuneration cap will be raised to £5m from his appointment as CEO to reflect his higher salary and new role (and
which has been set at broadly the upper quartile typical actual remuneration level for a CEO in the FTSE100).
Conclusion
As part of the Remuneration Policy renewal, the Committee has engaged with shareholders and shareholder
advisory bodies. We have had the benefit of feedback and engagement with approximately 42% of Berkeley’s
ownership as well as the key proxy advisors. Our discussions with shareholders centred around i) the reasons for
the transition away from the less traditional remuneration structure we have used for many years to one which is
consistent with FTSE norms, ii) the rationale for the significant increase in salaries, iii) the slight overlap of the new
PSP with the existing LTOP, and iv) the targets which would be used to determine bonus and PSP vesting. The
topics raised through our engagement with shareholders were broadly consistent with the discussions at Committee
meetings during the development of the proposals. I trust that the information provided earlier in this letter helps our
shareholders understand the rationale for where the Committee has concluded on these issues. Over the course of
the 3-year term of the 2025 Policy, the Committee will be setting performance targets for the annual bonus and PSP
which will reinforce the delivery of Berkeley 2035, and reflect Berkeley’s performance-oriented culture.
The Committee took comfort from the predominantly positive reception for the new Policy and concluded that the
Policy which had been originally proposed should remain unchanged, other than to reduce the PSP opportunity
for Rob Perrins from 500% to 400% of salary.
I would like to thank my fellow Committee members for their support, insight and commitment, and shareholders
for their invaluable feedback and support which has helped inform and update our proposed Remuneration Policy,
and for their support over the last year.
The Committee, and Board, recognise that the proposed 2025 Policy represents a significant change from how
Executive Directors have been remunerated at Berkeley in the past, but have a strong belief that this revised
approach will help ensure remuneration reinforces the drivers of financial success for Berkeley, be more motivational
for the management team going forward as we evolve our strategy over the next Remuneration Policy period, better
reflect the potential volatility of the housebuilding sector, and be better suited for succession in the long term.
We believe this evolution in our remuneration approach is essential to support our next chapter. The Committee
remains committed to ongoing dialogue with shareholders and I hope you will support our remuneration-related
resolutions at the AGM.
Natasha Adams
Chair of Remuneration Committee
20 June 2025
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 133
Remuneration at a glance
What we paid Executive Directors in the year
Executive Director £’000 Fixed pay
1
LTIP
Total
2025
R C Perrins 650 7,367 8,017
R J Stearn 449 2,821 3,270
1. Fixed pay includes benefits, which are not included in the Total Remuneration Cap. See page 146 for a full breakdown
Read more
pages 146 to 148
Executive Directors shareholdings
R C Perrins CEO
Shares at 30/04/25 % base salary
8,467%
R J Stearn CFO
Shares at 30/04/25 % base salary
2,227%
Read more
page 150
Looking ahead
Executive Directors’ remuneration for 2025/26
Fixed pay
CEO salary £785,000
CFO salary £510,000
Benefits package remains unchanged
Pension contribution of 6% of salary
Annual bonus
Maximum opportunity: 200% of salary
Performance metrics: 50% PBT; 30% operating margin; 10% net promoter score; 10% ‘Earn and Learn’
Deferral: 25% of any earned bonus to be used to purchase shares to be held for three years (provided
the Executive Directors continue to maintain shareholdings above their shareholding requirement)
Read more
page 154
Performance shares
Annual grant: Rob Perrins 400% of salary; Richard Stearn 250% of salary
Performance metrics: 45% NAV per share; 20% cash generation; 35% ROCE
Two-year post-vesting holding period
Read more
page 154
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
134 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Directors’ Remuneration Policy
This section of the Remuneration Report contains details of our Remuneration Policy. During the course of the
last year, we undertook a detailed review of the 2022 Policy which applies to our Executive Directors. We have
proposed some changes to ensure that the Remuneration Policy remains aligned with the Group’s strategy, is
competitive within the market and effectively supports the attraction and retention of the senior management
team. The amended Remuneration Policy will be put to shareholder approval at our 2025 AGM and, if approved,
will become effective from that date. We have indicated the changes to the components of pay in the
Remuneration Policy table and have made minor changes to some of the other policy wording to improve clarity
or to update for recent regulatory or market practice developments.
The Committee has established the Remuneration Policy on the remuneration of the Executive Directors; the
Board has established the Remuneration Policy on the remuneration of the Non-Executive Directors. All awards
granted under previous Directors’ remuneration policies will be honoured as will any legacy arrangements for the
Executive Directors.
The Committee considers that the remuneration framework appropriately addresses the following principles:
Clarity: Our remuneration framework is clear and transparent for both Executive Directors and shareholders.
Fulldetails of the proposed Remuneration Policy and how it will be implemented has been set out in this report.
We have undertaken an extensive consultation process with major shareholders to discuss the proposals and
address feedback.
Simplicity: The new remuneration structure for the Executive Directors is simple (comprising of fixed pay, a short-
term incentive and a long-term incentive), and is aligned to the strategic priorities (both short- and long-term) of
the business.
Risk: The Remuneration Policy includes a number of features to mitigate potential risks and drive right behaviours.
These include: i) performance measures and targets that are calibrated appropriately; ii) the Committee retaining
discretion to adjust variable incentive outcomes away from formulaic outturns in the context of wider performance;
iii) malus and clawback provisions; iv) the continued inclusion of a Total Remuneration Cap mitigates against the
reputational risk from excessive rewards; and v) the significant shareholding requirement for current Executive
Directors provides further safeguards, aligning Executive Director interests with those of shareholders.
Predictability: The inclusion of a Total Remuneration Cap provides a limit on the remuneration which can be
provided to an Executive Director in respect of any one financial year providing predictability of the maximum
levels of remuneration that could be earned. The Remuneration Policy clearly sets out relevant limits as well as an
illustration of each Executive Director’s potential package under different performance scenarios.
Proportionality: We believe that our approach ensures proportionate pay outcomes that reward performance.
A significant part of each Executive Directors remuneration package under the proposed and historic long-term
plans is based on variable pay and measured over a long-term time horizon.
Alignment to culture: The proposed new approach upholds our remuneration philosophy and culture, placing a
strong emphasis on performance-related pay and motivating the Executive Directors and senior management
to drive the business strategy, with a continued focus on delivering long-term sustainable risk-adjusted returns
forshareholders.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 135
Compliance with the UK Corporate Governance Code
Key remuneration element of the UK Corporate Governance Code Alignment with our Remuneration Policy
Five-year period between the date of grant and realisation
for equity incentives
The PSP has a combined vesting and holding period of
5years.
Phased release of equity awards The PSP ensures the phased release of equity awards
through annual rolling vesting.
Discretion to override formulaic outcomes The Remuneration Policy contains the ability to override
formulaic outcomes and apply discretion where
deemednecessary.
Post-cessation shareholding requirement The Executive Directors are required to comply with a
2-year post-cessation shareholding requirement.
Pension alignment The pension entitlement for Executive Directors is in line
with the eligibility for the majority of the wider workforce.
Extended malus and clawback The current malus and clawback provisions already exceed
the best practice suggested in relation to the Code.
Our remuneration philosophy
We have developed a clear set of principles which embed our strategy into how we deliver remuneration to our
Executive Directors.
Remuneration principle Details
Fixed pay should be aligned
to the market and the
individual’sexperience.
The Committee sets salaries for the Executive Directors based on their experience, role,
individual and corporate performance. Salaries on appointment to the Board may be set
below that of the comparator group and subsequently, based on appropriate levels of
individual and corporate performance, may be increased with experience gained over time.
Variable pay should be linked to
the long- term performance of
the Company.
The Committee believes that shareholders’ interests are best served by remuneration
packages that have a large emphasis on performance-related pay which encourage
the Executive Directors to focus on delivering the business strategy.
Executive Directors
should be rewarded for
sustainableperformance.
Our Remuneration Policy delivers variable pay in the form of an annual bonus and
PSP, designed to link reward to both short- and long-term performance, with a focus
on delivering long-term sustainable risk-adjusted returns for shareholders.
Executive Directors should hold
substantial equity holdings.
In order to align the interests of Executive Directors and shareholders, the reward
strategy is designed so that, provided performance is delivered, the Executive
Directors become material (in relation to their overall compensation) shareholders
inthe Company. We have a two-year post-cessation shareholding period to align
withbest practice.
Executive Director remuneration
should not be excessive.
The Committee is cognisant of the broader environment regarding executive
remuneration and the potential concerns regarding the quantum available to
Executive Directors notwithstanding the level of performance and growth which
mayhave been achieved by the Company.
The Committee considers the use of the Total Remuneration Cap for each Executive
Director to be an appropriate response to these challenges.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
136 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Remuneration Policy
The following table sets out the Remuneration Policy for Executive Directors:
Objective and link
tostrategy Operation Maximum opportunity Performance conditions andassessment
Base salary
To recruit and
retain Executive
Directors of the
appropriate calibre
and experience
to achieve the
Company’s
business strategy.
An Executive Director’s basic
salary is set on appointment
and reviewed annually (effective
from 1 May each year) or when
there is a change in position
orresponsibility.
When determining an
appropriate level of salary,
theCommittee considers:
the Executive
Directors experience
andresponsibilities;
the performance of the
individual Executive Director
and the Group;
pay and conditions throughout
the Group;
general salary rises
toemployees;
the economic
environment;and
when the Committee
determines a benchmarking
exercise is appropriate, levels
of base salary for similar
positions with comparable
status, responsibility and
skills in companies in the
comparator groups used for
remuneration benchmarking.
Individuals who are recruited or
promoted to the Board may, on
occasion, have their salaries set
below the targeted policy level
until they become established
in their role. In such cases
subsequent increases in salary
may be higher than the general
rises for employees until the
target positioning isachieved.
Typically, the base salaries
of Executive Directors in
post at the start of the
Remuneration Policy period
and who remain in the
same role throughout the
Remuneration Policy period
will be increased by a similar
percentage to the average
annual percentage increase
in salaries of all other
employees in the Group.
The exceptions to this rule
may bewhere:
an individual is below
market level and a
decision is taken to
increase base pay
to reflect proven
competence in role; or
there is a material increase
in scope or responsibility
to the Executive
Directorsrole.
The Committee ensures
that maximum salary levels
are positioned in line with
companies of a similar size
to Berkeley and validated
against other companies in
the industry, so that they
are competitive against
themarket.
The Total Remuneration Cap
will apply to salary.
There are no performance
conditions on salary. However, the
performance of the individual and
the Company are reflected in the
salary they are paid.
Change to 2022 Policy: none.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 137
Objective and link
tostrategy Operation Maximum opportunity Performance conditions andassessment
Benefits
To provide
competitive levels
of employment
benefits.
Benefits include a fully expensed
car or car allowance alternative,
andmedicalinsurance.
Additional benefits may also
be provided in appropriate
circumstances, if required for
business needs, for example
(but not limited to), relocation
expenses, housing allowance, and
education support.
May also include other benefits
to which the wider workforce
becomes eligible in thefuture.
The maximum level of
benefit is the cost of
providing the relevant
benefits. Levels are
determined by market rates.
The Total Remuneration Cap
does not apply to benefits.
No performance conditions.
Change to 2022 Policy: slight updating of wording around the operation of the 2022 Policy.
Pension
To provide
competitive levels
of retirement
benefits.
The Company provides either
a contribution to a pension
arrangement or a payment in
lieuof pension.
All payments in lieu of pension
are subject to income tax and
nationalinsurance.
Salary is the only element
of remuneration that is
pensionable. In line with the
contribution to the majority
of the wider workforce, the
maximum contribution into
a pension arrangement or
payment in lieu of pension is
6% of base salary.
The Total Remuneration Cap
will apply to pension.
No performance conditions.
Change to 2022 Policy: none.
Annual bonus
To drive the short-
term strategy and
recognise annual
performance
against targets
which are based
on business
objectives.
Awards are based on Group
annual performance targets. The
Committee will determine the
business performance metrics
and weightings on anannual basis.
50% of any annual bonus will be
paid (net of tax) in cash and 50%
of any bonus (net of tax) will be
used to acquire shares which
may not be sold or transferred
for a three-year period. For an
Executive Director who has
achieved the shareholding
guideline, the proportion of
bonus deferred into shares will
be reduced to 25%.
The Committee may determine
that, as an alternative, deferral
may take place through a
deferred share award.
Bonus awards are subject
to appropriate malus and
clawbackprovisions.
The maximum opportunity in
respect of a financial year is
200% of salary.
The opportunity will be up to
200% of salary for any new
appointments to the Board,
depending on experience
and role.
The Total Remuneration Cap
will apply to bonus awards at
the point at which the annual
bonus is determined.
The annual bonus will be measured
against a range of key Group
performance indicators, including
both financial and non-financial
measures, with a minimum weighting
of 70% on financial measures.
At threshold performance up to
25% of the maximum bonus can
beearned.
At target performance up to 50% of
the maximum bonus can be earned.
Annual bonus out-turns are
normally assessed by the
Committee at year-end, taking
into account performance against
the targets and the underlying
performance of the business.
The Committee has the ability
to adjust annual bonus payments
if it believes that out-turns are
not appropriate in the context of
overall performance and wider
stakeholder experience.
Change to 2022 Policy: the annual bonus is a new incentive arrangement from 2025/26.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
Remuneration Policy continued
138 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Objective and link
tostrategy Operation Maximum opportunity Performance conditions andassessment
Performance Share Plan (PSP)
To provide long-
term retention
and alignment
of Executive
Directors’ interests
with shareholders.
Grant of conditional share awards
which vest after three years,
subject to Company performance
and continued employment.
Awards may alternatively be
granted as nil-cost options if
consideredappropriate.
The shares acquired upon
vestingwill normally be subject
to a two-year holdingperiod.
Malus and clawback applies for
five years from the date of grant.
Up to 400% of salary in any
financial year.
The award opportunity for
the current CEO will be
400% of salary and 250% of
salary for the current CFO.
The opportunity will be up to
300% of salary for any new
appointments to the Board,
depending on experience
and role.
The Total Remuneration Cap
will apply to PSP awards.
Performance measures will be set
to reflect the Company’s strategy
and provide stretching conditions
in the light of the Company’s
current and expected performance
over the performance period.
The measures and targets are
reviewed and may be changed by
the Committee for each new cycle
to ensure alignment with strategic
objectives. For each performance
measure up to 25% of the maximum
pays out for threshold performance.
Vesting is normally assessed by
the Committee after the end of
the performance period, taking
into account performance against
the targets and the underlying
performance of the business.
The Committee has the ability
to adjust incentive payments
(positively or negatively) if it
believes that out-turns are not
appropriate in the context of overall
performance and shareholder and
wider stakeholder experience.
Change to 2022 Policy: the PSP is a new incentive arrangement from 2025/26.
Total Remuneration Cap
To achieve a
balance between
the need to reward
and incentivise
the Executive
Directors to
implement the
Company strategy
and the interests
of other
stakeholders
in the Company.
Individual caps will limit the
amount of total remuneration
that has been earned over the
financial year and is capable of
being paid out with reference
to the values in the single total
figure of remuneration table.
All elements of remuneration are
subject to the Total Remuneration
Cap excluding buy-out awards
and benefits. Benefits are
not included in the Total
Remuneration Cap as they are
not material in the context of the
overall package and vary based
on the individual circumstances
of the relevant Executive Director.
The Committee will apply its
discretion to reduce one or more of
the incentive components vesting
in each year to ensure compliance
with the Total Remuneration Cap,
taking into account the exposure
of each component to share price
volatility and the relative timing of
the vest dates.
The Total Remuneration Cap
for the Executive Directors
was previously set at £8.0m
for the current CEO and
£3.25m for the current CFO.
From the start of FY26 the
Total Remuneration Cap will
be increased annually broadly
in line with general inflation.
The Committee will keep
under review whether
a capis applied, and at
what level, to any new
appointments to the Board
on a case-by-case basis.
The Committee may alter
the level of an individual’s
cap in the event of a
significant change in their
responsibilities and/or
payopportunity.
No performance conditions.
Change to 2022 Policy: the Total Remuneration Cap is to be increased annually broadly in line with general inflation
going forward and the Committee may alter the cap in the event of a significant change in an individual’s responsibilities.
The Committee will keep under review whether a cap is applied to any new appointments to the Board. The sequencing
of the application of the cap will be at the discretion of the Committee.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 139
Objective and link
tostrategy Operation Maximum opportunity Performance conditions andassessment
Shareholding requirements
To ensure that
Executive
Directors’ interests
are aligned
with those of
shareholders over
a longer time
horizon and
encourage
long-term share
ownership by
the Executive
Directors.
In-post
Current Executive Directors:
The full requirement should
be achieved by the later of
10 years from appointment
and 6 September 2032. The
interim requirement should be
achieved by the later of five
years from appointment and
6September2027.
New Appointments: the
requirement should normally
be met within 5 years
ofappointment.
Post-employment
For two years following cessation
of employment, Executive
Directors are required to hold
shares to the value of the
shareholding requirements
that applied at the cessation
of their employment; or, in
cases where the individual
has not had sufficient time to
build up shares to meet their
requirements, the actual level
ofshareholdingatcessation.
Current Executive Directors:
1000% of salary; interim
requirement: 400% of salary
New appointments: set in
line with their annual PSP
award level.
No performance or recovery
provisions apply.
Change to 2022 Policy: no change for current incumbents. For any new appointment to the Board, the in-post
requirement will be set in line with their annual PSP award level.
Notes to the Remuneration Policy table
Legacy arrangements
The Committee reserves the right to make any remuneration payments and/or payments for loss of office
(including the exercise of any applicable discretions) even if such payments are not in line with the Remuneration
Policy, where the terms of those payments were agreed: i) prior to the implementation of the Remuneration Policy
set out above, provided the terms were consistent with the shareholder-approved directors’ remuneration policy
in effect at the time; or ii) at a time when the individual was not a Director of the Company (or otherwise subject
to the scope of the Remuneration Policy), and where, in the Committee’s view, the payment was not made in
consideration of that individual becoming a Director.
Performance measures and target setting
The Committee considers carefully the selection of measures to be used in the incentive scorecards at the start of
each performance cycle. In doing so, the Committee takes into consideration the Group’s financial, non-financial
and strategic objectives as well as the macro-economic environment. Annual bonus performance measures are
selected to closely reinforce the Group’s short-term KPIs. The performance measures attaching to the PSP are
selected to reinforce the delivery of the Company’s longer-term strategic aims and align with shareholder interests
by underpinning success and value creation.
Malus and clawback
Malus provisions apply to unpaid annual bonus and to unvested PSP awards. Under malus, unpaid annual bonus
and unvested PSP awards can be reduced (down to zero if considered appropriate).
Clawback is the recovery of payments under the annual bonus or vested PSP awards and may be effected,
among other means, by requiring the transfer of shares, payment of cash or reduction of other share awards or
bonuspayments.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
Remuneration Policy continued
140 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Malus and clawback can be operated up to four years following the start of the relevant bonus year for bonuses
and up to five years from the date of grant for PSP awards.
Circumstances in which malus and clawback may be applied include:
errors in assessing a performance condition or in the information, calculations or assumptions which impacts
upon the level at which an award was granted, vests or is released:
conduct by a participant which results in or is reasonably likely to result in significant reputational damage to
the Company or censure by regulatory authority;
misconduct or fraud;
significant corporate failure which has a material impact on the value of the Group (taken as a whole) or the
ability of the Group to continue normal operations; or
any other circumstances that the Board considers to be similar in their nature or effect.
Differences in remuneration policy for all employees
The Company seeks to establish remuneration packages that will attract, retain and motivate high quality
employees. Remuneration packages for all employees are linked to both individual and business performance.
The Company’s business comprises a number of operating Divisions. The annual cash-based compensation
arrangements for other senior employees of the Company are linked to the performance of the relevant Division
for which they work. It is proposed that members of the Executive Committee will participate in the PSP. It is the
view of both the Committee and the Board as a whole that these arrangements are very effective in ensuring the
delivery of Divisional performance for which the Executive Committee is responsible, as well as supporting the
Company’s performance through participation in the PSP.
All other eligible employees participate in bonus plans, which, together with salary reviews linked to business
performance, enable all employees to share in the success of the Group.
Application of the Remuneration Policy
The charts below provide an indication of the level of remuneration that would be received by each Executive
Director under four performance scenarios.
CEOCFO
Maximum + 50%
Maximum
On-target
Minimum
Maximum + 50%
Maximum
On-target
Minimum
£1,000k £2,000K £3,000k £4,000k £5,000k £6,000k £7,000k £8,000k £9,000k £10,000k£0k
Fixed pay
Annual Bonus
PSP
£7,129k
£5,559k
£2,419k
£849k
£3,400k
16%
£2,856k
£1,389k
£561k
19%
40%
100%
12%
15%
35%
100%
22%
28%
32%
66%
57%
33%
30%
36%
37%
54%
45%
23%
£2,856k
Minimum Fixed elements of pay which comprise: FY25/26 salary, 6% of salary pension contribution; FY24/25
benefits as an estimate for FY25/26
On-target Fixed elements of pay as set out above, plus:
50% of the maximum pay-out under the annual bonus (100% of salary)
25% vesting under the PSP (100% of salary for R C Perrins and 62.5% of salary for R J Stearn)
Maximum Fixed elements of pay as set out above, plus:
Annual bonus payout at 200% of salary
PSP vesting at 400% of salary for R J Perrins and 250% of salary for R J Stearn
Maximum
+ 50%
As maximum above, plus 50% assumed share price growth over three-year PSP performance period
(and subject to the FY26 Total Remuneration Cap of £8.33m for R C Perrins and £3.38m for R J Stearn)
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 141
Approach to recruitment remuneration
The Committee’s approach to recruitment remuneration is to pay no more than is necessary to attract candidates
of the appropriate calibre and experience needed for the role. The remuneration package for any new Executive
Director would be assessed following the same principles as for the current Executive Directors.
External appointment
When hiring or appointing a new Executive Director from outside the Group, the Committee may make use of all
existing components of the Remuneration Policy, as follows:
Pay element Policy on recruitment Maximum
Salary The salary level will be set taking into account the responsibilities of the individual,
experience and the salaries paid to similar roles in comparable companies. The
Committee will apply the Remuneration Policy set out on salaries for the current
Executive Directors in the Remuneration Policy table.
No maximum.
Benefits As described in the Remuneration Policy table.
The Committee may approve the payment of one-off relocation-related expenses
and legal fees. On-going benefits may be approved in cases where the Director is
expected to spend significant time away from their country of domicile.
No maximum.
Pension Eligible to join the defined contribution scheme available to the wider workforce or
alternatively to receive a supplement in lieu of pension contributions as set out in
the Remuneration Policy table.
In line with
Remuneration
Policy limits.
Annual bonus As described in the Remuneration Policy table, and typically pro-rated in the
year of joining for the proportion of the year served. Performance measures
may include strategic and operational objectives tailored to the individual in the
financial year of joining.
In line with
Remuneration
Policy limits.
Performance
Share Plan
New appointees may be granted PSP awards on similar terms to other Executive
Directors. Different performance targets and measures may be set initially
for incentives in the first year of appointment to recognise the timing of their
appointment during the year. The rationale will be clearly explained in each case.
In line with
Remuneration
Policy limits.
Total
Remuneration
Cap
The Committee will determine if a Total Remuneration Cap will apply to a new
Executive Director on appointment based on the elements of remuneration offered
as part of the remuneration package, although this is unlikely if the only variable
components are the bonus and PSP.
In line with
Remuneration
Policy limits for
existing CEO.
Other The Committee’s policy is not to provide buy-outs as a matter of course. However,
should the Committee determine that the individual circumstances of recruitment
justifies the provision of a buy-out, the equivalent value of any incentives that will
be forfeited on cessation of an Executive Director’s previous employment will be
calculated taking into account the following:
the proportion of the performance period completed on the date of the
Executive Director’s cessation of employment;
the performance conditions attached to the vesting of these incentives and the
likelihood of them being satisfied; and
any other terms and conditions having a material effect on their value
(lapsedvalue).
The Committee may then grant up to the equivalent value as the lapsed value,
where possible, under the bonus and/or the PSP. To the extent that it is not possible
or practical to provide the buyout within the terms of the bonus and/or the PSP, a
bespoke arrangement would be used, which could be share or cash based.
No maximum.
The Committee reserves discretion to offer appropriate benefit arrangements, which may include the continuation
of benefits received in a previous role.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
142 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Internal promotion to the Board
In cases of appointing a new Executive Director via internal promotion, the Remuneration Policy will be consistent
with that for external appointees detailed above (except in relation to buyout awards). Where an individual has
contractual commitments made prior to their promotion to Executive Director, the Company will continue to
honour these arrangements even if there are instances where they would not otherwise be consistent with the
Remuneration Policy.
Service contracts
All contracts are available for viewing at the Company’s registered office. When setting notice periods for
Executive Directors, the Committee has regard to market practice and corporate governance best practice. Notice
periods will not be greater than 12 months. Directors’ service contracts do not contain any obligation on the
Company which could give rise to or impact on remuneration payments or payments for loss of office in addition
to those disclosed elsewhere in this Remuneration Policy.
The following table shows the date of the contract for each Executive Director who served during the year:
Executive Director Date of contract
Notice period months
(employer/employee)
R C Perrins 15 July 2002 12 / 12
R J Stearn 3 October 2014 12 / 12
Payments for loss of office
The following principles apply when determining payments for loss of office for the Executive Directors and any
new Executive Directors. The Company will take account of all relevant circumstances on a case-by-case basis
including (but not limited to): the sums stipulated in the service contract; whether the Executive Director has
presided over an orderly handover; the contribution of the Executive Director to the success of the Company
during his or her tenure; and the need to compromise any claims that the Executive Director may have. The
Company may, for example, if the Committee considers it to be appropriate:
enter into agreements with Executive Directors which may include the provision of legal fees or the settlement
of liabilities in return for a single one-off payment or subsequent payments subject to appropriate conditions;
reimburse reasonable relocation costs where an Executive Director (and, where relevant, their family) had
originally relocated to take up the appointment;
terminate employment other than in accordance with the terms of the contract (bearing in mind the potential
consequences of doing so); or
enter into new arrangements with the departing Executive Director (for example, confidentiality, restrictive
covenants and/or consultancy arrangements).
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 143
The table below sets out the Company’s termination policy for each element of total remuneration. Provisions for
legacy arrangements (RSP, LTOP) can be found in the 2022 Notice of Annual General Meeting on page 140.
Reason for cessation Calculation of vesting/payment Time of vesting / forfeiture
Annual bonus
Voluntary resignation or termination
forcause
No bonus to be paid for the
financialyear.
Not applicable.
All other circumstances Bonuses will be paid only to the extent
that the objectives have been met. Any
such bonus will normally be paid on
a pro-rata basis up to the termination
date and will typically be subject to
deferral requirements where applicable.
Following the end of the financial
year, unless the Committee
determinesotherwise.
Deferred share bonus
Termination for cause Deferred shares acquired with after-tax
bonus will normally be forfeited.
Forfeiture of deferred shares will
normally apply for up to three years
from acquisition.
All other circumstances Deferred shares acquired with after
tax bonus will not be forfeitable,
unless the Committee, in its discretion,
decidesotherwise.
Forfeiture of deferred shares may
continue to apply for up to three years
from acquisition of deferred shares.
Performance Share Plan awards
Good leaver Awards will normally be pro-rated
for time. Awards will vest based
on performance over the original
performance period (unless the
Committee decides to measure
performance to the date of cessation,
for example in the case of death).
At the normal vesting date, save in
the case of death or in exceptional
circumstances at the Committee’s
discretion, in which cases the award will
vest as soon as practicable.
Holding periods will apply unless
waived at the discretion of
theCommittee.
Change of control Awards will be pro-rated for time
(unless the Committee decides
otherwise). Awards will vest subject
to performance over the performance
period to the change of control.
Awards may be exchanged for
equivalent replacement awards,
whereappropriate.
On change of control.
All other reasons Awards normally lapse. Not applicable.
A good leaver is a person whose cessation of employment is in the following circumstances:
death;
injury;
ill-health;
disability;
redundancy;
retirement, in agreement with the Company;
employing company ceasing to be a Group company;
transfer of employment to a company which is not a Group company; and
any other reason at the discretion of the Committee.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
144 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Non-Executive Directors
This section of the Report describes the Remuneration Policy for the Non-Executive Directors.
Objective and link
tostrategy Operation Maximum opportunity
Performance conditions
andassessment
To attract
Non-Executive
Directors with the
requisite skills
and experience
to contribute to
the strategy of
the Company
and to review its
implementation.
All Non-Executive Directors have
specific terms of engagement, and
their remuneration is determined by
the Board within the limits set by the
Articles of Association.
Each Non-Executive Director receives
a fee which relates to membership of
the Board and additional fees are paid
for Committee Chairmanship.
In exceptional circumstances, fees may
also be paid for additional time spent
on the Company’s business outside
of the normal duties. The Board
reviews the fees of the Non-Executive
Directors annually taking into account
the following factors:
the workload and level of
responsibility of the Non-
Executive Directors under the
changing corporate governance
expectationsof shareholders and
their representative bodies;
the current market rate for fees
for Non-Executive Directors based
on the comparators used for the
Executive Directors
Changes are effective from 1 May
eachyear.
The Company has a shareholding
requirement for Non-Executive
Directors, equal to 100% of the net
feethey receive from the Company.
This should be achieved within three
years of appointment.
Non-Executive Directors do
not participate in any variable
remuneration or benefits/
pensionarrangements.
In general, fee rises will be limited to
the increase applied to the salary of
employees of the Company as a whole.
In setting fees, the Board looks
at the fee levels of companies in
the housebuilding sector, and at
companies of broadly similar size
andcomplexity.
The Company will pay reasonable
expenses incurred by the Non-
Executive Directors and may settle
anytax incurred in relation to these.
The Articles of Association impose
a limit on the aggregate annual sum
that can be paid to Non-Executive
Directors by way of fees (excluding
amounts payable under any other
Articles) of £1,000,000 or such larger
amount as the Company may by
ordinary resolution determine.
No performance
conditions.
The Non-Executive Directors have letters of appointment, which are available for viewing at the Company’s
registered office, and are renewable annually on 1 May. Non-Executive Directors’ appointments can be terminated
by either party with one month’s notice. The appointments are subject to the provisions of the Articles of
Association and, in accordance with the UK Corporate Governance Code, are subject to annual re-election.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 145
The dates relating to the appointments of the Chairman and Non-Executive Directors who served during the
reporting period are as follows:
Non-Executive Director Date of appointment
M Dobson 8 June 2022
R Downey 8 December 2017
E Adekunle 5 January 2021
W Jackson 5 January 2021
S Sands 30 April 2021
A Kemp 1 July 2021
N Adams 1 February 2022
The terms of appointment for a new Non-Executive Director would be in accordance with the Remuneration Policy
for Non-Executive Directors as set out in the table above.
Consideration of employment conditions elsewhere in the Group
In making annual pay decisions the Committee also gives consideration to pay and employment conditions in
the rest of the Group, including any base salary increases awarded. The Committee is provided with data on
the remuneration structure for management level tiers below the Executive Directors and uses this information
to ensure consistency of approach throughout the Group. Although the Committee takes into account the
pay and conditions of other employees, the Company does not consult with employees when drawing up the
RemunerationPolicy.
Consideration of shareholder views
The Committee takes the views of shareholders seriously and these views have been taken into account in shaping
the Remuneration Policy through an extensive shareholder consultation exercise, and further detail on the outcome
of this consultation is provided in the Committee Chair’s letter. Shareholder views are considered when evaluating
and setting remuneration strategy and the Committee commits to consulting with key shareholders prior to
significant changes to the Remuneration Policy or as to how it is implemented.
Annual Report on Remuneration
This section of the Remuneration Report contains details of how the Company’s Remuneration Policy, approved by
shareholders at the AGM on 6 September 2022, was implemented for Executive Directors during the financial year
that ended on 30 April 2025.
Single total figure of remuneration (Audited)
The table below sets out the single total figure of remuneration and breakdown for each Executive Director paid in
the 2024/25 financial year. The components of the single figure for 2024/25 are aligned with the calculation of the
individual elements of remuneration for the purposes of the Total Remuneration Cap.
Executive Director
£’000
Salary
2025
Pension
2025
Total Remuneration
Benefits
4
Total fixed
2025
Total
variable
2025
Total
2025LTIP
1
Cap
2
Actual
3
R C Perrins 597 36 7, 367 8,000 8,000 17 650 7,367 8,017
R J Stearn 405 24 2,821 3,250 3,250 20 449 2,821 3,270
Notes
1 This represents the ninth tranche of the 2011 LTIP that vested on 30 September 2024 at a share price of £48.14 subject to the operation
of the Total Remuneration Cap (see table on page 148 for details). Where the LTIP value would have been greater without the Total
Remuneration Cap, it is the capped amount which is payable and therefore disclosed in the single figure of remuneration. The capped
amount is equivalent to the Total Remuneration Cap less salary less pensions.
2 The Total Remuneration Cap limits the amount of total remuneration that has been earned over the financial year and is capable of
being paid out.
3 The Total Remuneration Cap operated for the 2024/25 financial year and where the remuneration would have been greater without
the Total Remuneration Cap, it is the capped amount which is payable and therefore disclosed in the single figure of remuneration.
4 Benefits, which are not included in calculating the Total Remuneration Cap, include a fully expensed company car or cash allowance
alternative and medical insurance.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
146 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Comparative figures for 2023/24, as disclosed in last year’s Directors’ Remuneration Report, are set out in the
tablebelow.
Executive Director
£’000
Salary
2024
Pension
2024
Total Remuneration
Benefits
4
Total fixed
2024
Total
variable
2024
Total
2024LTIP
1
Cap
2
Actual
3
R C Perrins 597 36 7,367 8,000 8,000 26 659 7,367 8,026
R J Stearn 405 24 2,405 3,250 2,834 24 453 2,405 2,858
Notes
1 This represents the eighth tranche of the 2011 LTIP that vested on 2 October 2023 at a share price of £41.03 subject to the operation
of the Total Remuneration Cap. Where the LTIP value would have been greater without the Total Remuneration Cap, it is the capped
amount which is payable and therefore disclosed in the single figure of remuneration. The capped amount is equivalent to the Total
Remuneration Cap less salary less pensions.
2 The Total Remuneration Cap limits the amount of total remuneration that has been earned over the financial year and is capable of
being paid out.
3 The Total Remuneration Cap operated for the 2023/24 financial year and where the remuneration would have been greater without
the Total Remuneration Cap, it is the capped amount which is payable and therefore disclosed in the single figure of remuneration.
4 Benefits, which are not included in calculating the Total Remuneration Cap, include a fully expensed company car or cash allowance
alternative and medical insurance.
Long-term incentives (Audited)
Vesting of the ninth tranche of the 2011 LTIP
The ninth tranche of the LTIP was the fifth to be subject to the enhanced performance conditions set out on pages
112 and 113 of the 2020 Report and Accounts. The following table sets these out split between Return Targets and
Financial Targets:
Return Targets No element of the 2011 LTIP can vest unless the cumulative returns target has been met through the
delivery of the targeted returns during the financial year.
Performance Condition Detail Actual Performance
Cumulative Return Target returns in respect of the 12 months to
30September 2024: £283.2 million.
Cumulative return target since 2011: £2,245 million.
Actual returns made in respect of the 12
months to 30 September 2024: £283.2 million.
Actual cumulative return since 2011:
£2,245million.
Vesting 50% of the 2011 LTIP tranche will be capable of
vesting at the 2024 vesting date and will vest
on the satisfaction of the Cumulative Return
performance condition. Where this performance
condition is not met 100% of the relevant tranche
due to vest on 30 September 2024 will lapse.
This element of the award vested in full on 30
September 2024.
Financial Targets Provided the Cumulative Return performance condition has been satisfied 50% of this tranche
under the 2011 LTIP is subject to the satisfaction of the following additional performance conditions.
Performance Condition Detail Actual Performance
Cumulative ROE 30% of the tranche is subject to achieving a
cumulative pre-tax Return on Equity (ROE) of a
minimum of 15% (to be calculated commencing
1May 2019).
Actual cumulative ROE of 16.8%.
Full vesting of the 30% of the tranche subject
to this performance condition.
Cumulative Profit
before Tax
20% of the tranche is subject the cumulative Profit
before Tax; to achieve the target in any one year:
1. The Company needs to deliver Profit before Tax
of at least £500 million; or
2. The Company must be on track to deliver a
cumulative Profit before Tax of £3 billion in the six
years ending 30 April 2025.
The Company delivered a Profit before Tax of
£557.3 million for the year ended 30 April 2024.
Full vesting of the 20% of the tranche subject
to this performance condition.
Vesting of the 2011 LTIP Tranche on
30September2024
100%
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 147
As detailed on page 128 of the 2021 Report and Accounts, the tranches of the 2011 LTIP which vest from 2021
onwards are subject to additional performance conditions based on the individual performance of the Executive
Directors. The Committee assessed the individual contribution of the Executive Directors and determined that no
adjustment to the formulaic outcome, as detailed in the table above, was appropriate.
The ninth tranche of the 2011 LTIP award vested in the year as follows. The number of options released from the
2011 LTIP is limited to ensure the value of the Total Remuneration Cap for each individual is not exceeded:
Cumulative
banked
options at
30/9/23
1
Net Total
Remuneration
Cap after
fixed pay
2
Options
in each
annual
tranche for
2022 to
2025
3
Maximum
number
of banked
options
capable of
vesting
4
Actual
number
of options
capable of
vesting
5
Performance
measure and
outcome
Number
of options
vested after
performance
test
Value of gain
on options
vested
6
Cumulative
Banked
options
carried
forward
7
R C Perrins
1,880,920 7,367,180 590,904 171,981 171,981 See page
147 for
performance
measures.
Vesting
outcome –
100%
171,981 7,367,150 1,708,939
R J Stearn
134,606 2,820,700 67,303 65,847 65,847 65,847 2,820,688 68,759
Notes
1 This is the brought forward banked shares after the vesting on 30 September 2023.
2 The Total Remuneration Cap continues to limit the LTIP vesting at each vesting date. The Total Remuneration Cap operated for the
2024/25 financial year and where the 2011 LTIP value would have been greater without the Total Remuneration Cap based on the
cumulative banked options vesting in four equal tranches, it is the capped amount which is payable and therefore disclosed in the
single figure of remuneration.
3 The banked options at 30 September 2021 vest in four equal tranches from September 2022 to September 2025, subject to the
application of the Total Remuneration Cap at each vesting.
4 This is the maximum number of options that could have vested up to the Total Remuneration Cap.
5 This is the maximum number of options that vested, being the lesser of (3) and (4)
6 This is the value of the options that vested, calculated using the opening share price of £48.14 on 30 September 2024 (the date the
options vested and became exercisable) less the exercise price of £5.30 per share.
7 These are the banked options carried forward to next year.
8 Each Executive Director exercised all the options that vested on 30 September 2024. Under the rules of the 2011 LTIP, after the sale
of shares to pay tax, only 10% of shares are permitted to be sold each year until 30 September 2025 at which point the sale restriction
falls away.
The Committee did not adjust the level of option vesting as a result of share price growth over the performance
period. It is an inherent feature of the 2011 LTIP that management and shareholders’ interests are aligned based
on Total Shareholder Returns (including share price growth) over the performance period. The Committee
did not exercise any other discretion in relation to the level of the option vesting other than to apply the Total
Remuneration Cap.
Restricted Share Plan awards granted in the year
RSP awards entitle Executive Directors to acquire shares subject to continued employment and two underpins:
the Company’s average return on equity over four financial years being at least 15% on an annualised basis; and an
additional discretionary underpin pursuant to which the Committee may reduce the level of vesting by up to 20%
to reflect what it considers to be unsatisfactory progress over the performance period against the strategic and
ESG priorities set out in Our Vision 2030.
During 2024/25, the Committee and Executive Directors were mindful of the significant stretch represented by the
15% ROE underpin, which is materially more challenging in the current operating environment for the sector than
was envisaged at the time of embedding this level of underpin in the 2022 Policy. In light of this the Committee
and the Executive Directors agreed to waive the grants for 2024/25.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
148 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Dilution
A maximum of approximately 19 million shares were approved by shareholders under the 2011 LTIP. The actual
number issued is significantly lower due to a combination of the Total Remuneration Cap, the settlement of awards
net of both the option price and participants’ tax obligations and leavers.
To date, 4.6 million shares have been issued under the 2011 LTIP since 2016 and it is anticipated that, applying the
same principles, a maximum of approximately 0.2 million further shares will be awarded by the final vesting in
September 2025; in total 4.5% of the Company’s current issued share capital over a ten year period.
The Company intends to manage the level of dilution arising from the LTOP awards by implementing net settling
for tax and the exercise price where appropriate.
Non-Executive Directors single figure table (Audited)
The table below sets out the single total figure of remuneration and breakdown for each Non-Executive Director. Non-
Executive Directors do not participate in any of the Company’s incentive arrangements, nor do they receive benefits.
Non-Executive Director
£’000
Basic fees Additional fees
1
Total fees
2025 2024 2025 2024 2025 2024
M Dobson 400.0 400.0 400.0 400.0
R Downey 88.5 82.6 5.0
b)
93.5 82.6
E Adekunle 72.5 72.5 72.5 72.5
W Jackson 72.5 72.5 5.0
c)
77.5 72.5
S Sands 72.5 72.5 5.0
b)
77.5 72.5
A Kemp 72.5 72.5 20.0
a)c)
13.0 92.5 85.5
N Adams 72.5 72.5 15.0
a)
8.2 87.5 80.7
J Armitt
2
31.3 31.3
A Myers
2
25.9 4.6 30.5
D Brightmore-
Armour
2
31.5 31.5
Notes
1 Additional fees represent fees paid for:
a) the role of Committee Chair;
b) membership of the Audit Committee;
c) membership of the Remuneration Committee.
2 J Armitt, A Myers and D Brightmore-Armour stepped down from the Board on 8 September 2023.
3 R Downey’s basic fee includes the SID fee.
Payments to past Directors (Audited)
Karl Whiteman, Justin Tibaldi and Paul Vallone stepped down from the Board on 8 September 2023. They
remain in their current operational roles and members of the Board of the Company’s immediate subsidiary.
Their outstanding 2011 LTIP, LTOP and RSP awards vest at their normal vesting dates and subject to performance
conditions and/or underpins as set out in previous annual reports. The ninth tranche of the 2011 LTIP award vested
on 30 September 2024 as to the following number of options: Whiteman 66,243 options; Tibaldi 23,056 options;
Vallone 46,400 options. Each former Executive exercised all the options that vested.
Payments for Loss of Office (Audited)
No payments were made in the year.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 149
Directors’ shareholding and share interests (Audited)
The Company has a shareholding requirement for both Executive and Non-Executive Directors, linked to the base
salary or net fee they receive from the Company. Using the Company’s closing share price of £41.70 on 30 April
2025, compliance with the requirements was as follows:
Obligation
1
(% of salary)
Actual
Shareholding as a
% of salary at
30 April 2025
Achievement at
30 April 2025
Executive Directors
R C Perrins 400%/1000% 8,467% P
R J Stearn 400%/1000% 2,227% P
Obligation
2
(% of net fee)
Actual
Shareholding as a
% of net fee at
30 April 2025
Achievement at
30 April 2025
Non-Executive Directors
M Dobson 100% 435% P
R Downey 100% 96% O
E Adekunle 100% 116% P
W Jackson 100% 4,061% P
S Sands 100% 86% O
A Kemp 100% 216% P
N Adams 100% 169% P
Notes
1 A 1000% of salary requirement for the current Executive Directors is to be achieved within the later of 10 years from appointment and
6 September 2032. An interim requirement equal to 400% of salary should be achieved within the later of 5 years from appointment
and 6 September 2027.
2 To be achieved within three years of appointment. The level of shareholding is inevitably impacted by share price fluctuations which
can move individuals above or below the threshold for periods of time.
3 There have been no changes in the interests of the Directors from the end of the period under review to the date of this report.
Beneficially
owned shares
1
Banked 2011
LTIP options
2
LTOP options
3
RSP awards
4
Total interests
held
Executive Directors
R C Perrins 1,212,122 1,708,939 1,000,000 49,785 3,970,846
R J Stearn 216,247 68,759 350,000 28,948 663,954
Non-Executive Directors
M Dobson 22,969 22,969
R Downey 1,145 1,145
E Adekunle 1,069 1,069
W Jackson 40,000 40,000
S Sands 843 843
A Kemp 2,543 2,543
N Adams 1,878 1,878
Notes
1 Beneficial interests include shares held directly or indirectly by connected persons.
2 Banked 2011 LTIP options may vest subject to the achievement of performance conditions depending on the number of banked
options held by a participant and the share price of the Company.
3 LTOP options vest in five equal tranches between September 2026 and September 2030, subject to continued service, with a holding
restriction in place until at least 5 years from grant. The exercise price ranges from £48.50 to £58.50, and will be reduced in proportion
to dividends paid over the exercise period.
4 RSP awards vest after four years subject to satisfaction of underpin conditions and continued service.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
150 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Comparison of CEO total remuneration and Total Shareholder Return against the market
The graph below shows the Company’s performance, measured by Total Shareholder Return (TSR), compared with
the performance of the FTSE 250, FTSE 100 and the FTSE All Share indices. The Company considers these the
most relevant indices for Total Shareholder Return disclosure required under the Regulations.
To give context to the total single figure levels of the CEO we have also included the single figure historical
outcomes from the table below onto the chart to demonstrate the clear alignment between shareholder returns
and the CEO’s single figure pay that results from the nature of the remuneration structure in place.
Total Shareholder Return (Rebased)
Remuneration £’000
30,000
300
25,000
250
20,000
200
15,000
150
10,000
100
5,000
2024/252015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24
50
0 0
Chief Executive Single Figure
Berkeley FTSE 250 Index FTSE 100 IndexFTSE All-Share Index
CEO pay in the last 10 years
The table below shows the remuneration of the CEO for each of the financial years shown in the graph above.
R C Perrins CEO
Single figure total
of remuneration
(£’000)
Annual bonus
payout (as a %
of maximum
opportunity)
Multi-year
incentive vesting
awards (as a %
of maximum
opportunity)
2024/25 8,017 100%
2023/24 8,026 100%
2022/23 8,043 100%
2021/22 8,043 100%
2020/21 7,971 100%
2019/20 8,303 100%
2018/19 7, 809 100% 100%
2017/18 7,806 100% 100%
2016/17 27,963 100% 100%
2015/16 10,993 100% 100%
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 151
Percentage change in Directors’ remuneration
The following table compares Directors’ pay (including salary, taxable benefits and annual bonus) with the wider
employee population. The Company considers the full-time employee population, excluding the Main Board, to be
an appropriate comparator group and the most stable point of comparison:
Base salary/fees Benefits Annual bonus
2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021
Executive Directors
R C Perrins 0% 0% 3.0% 3.5% 0% -34% -40% 1% 64% -37% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
R J Stearn 0% 0% 3.0% 3.5% 0% -19% 4% 1% 1% 1% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Non-Executive Directors
M Dobson
1
0% 0% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
R Downey
2
0% 22.1% 3.1% 3.5% 0% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
E Adekunle 0% 0% 3.1% 3.5% 0% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
W Jackson 0% 0% 3.1% 3.5% 0% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
S Sands 0% 0% 3.1% 3.5% 0% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
A Kemp 0% 0% 3.1% 3.5% 0% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
N Adams 0% 0% 3.1% 3.5% 0% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Average
percentage for
employees
3
3.5% 3.8% 6.2% 5.3% 0.2% -2% 0% 5% 4% 4% 8% -7% 2% 5% 7%
Notes
1 M Dobson was appointed to the Board on 8 June 2022.
2 On appointment as Senior Independent Director on 8 September 2023 R Downey’s fee increased from £72.5k to £88.5k per annum.
3 The listed Parent Company does not employ any staff. The data in respect of employees is therefore in relation to the whole Group
(excluding the Main Board).
The Committee considers the year-on-year change in salary between the CEO and the employees is a clear
indication that there is no divergence in the rate of fixed pay.
Pay comparisons
The following table provides the ratio of the CEO to that of the median, 25th and 75th percentile total
remuneration of full-time equivalent UK employees.
Year Method
1
25th percentile
pay ratio
Median
pay ratio
75th
percentile
2024/25 Option B 165:1 107:1 70:1
2023/24 Option B 176:1 111:1 77:1
2022/23 Option B 189:1 123:1 77:1
2021/22 Option B 200:1 109:1 85:1
2020/21 Option B 189:1 119:1 85:1
2019/20 Option B 189:1 125:1 84:1
Notes
1 CEO pay ratio is determined by reference to representative employee data as at the financial year end
The median pay ratio for 2024/25 is 107:1. The Company considers that the median pay ratio for 2024/25 is
consistent with the pay, reward and progression policies for the Company’s UK employees as a whole.
The Committee determined that it would be appropriate to use Option B of The Companies (Miscellaneous
Reporting) Regulations 2018, where the latest available gender pay gap data (i.e. from April 2025) was used to
identify the best equivalent for three Group UK employees whose hourly rates of pay were at the 25th, 50th and
75th percentiles for the Group. A full-time equivalent total pay and benefits figure for the relevant financial year
was then calculated for each of those employees. No adjustments (other than the approximate up-rating of pay
elements to achieve full time equivalent rates) were made and no components of pay have been omitted. We
believe this provides a clear and robust methodology to facilitate year-on-year reporting whilst remaining simple
and providing a reasonable estimate for employee pay at these levels.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
152 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
The Committee is satisfied that the individuals identified within each relevant percentile appropriately reflects the
employee pay profiles at those quartiles, and each was remunerated in line with Berkeley’s remuneration policies.
A small number of employees at either side of the quartile points identified from the gender pay gap data were
also considered, together with their corresponding full time equivalent total pay and benefits figures to ensure that
the employees identified at each of the three percentile points are reasonably representative of each quartile.
The table below sets out the salary and total pay and benefits for the representative employees.
25th percentile Median 75th percentile
Salary 42,000 62,981 88,904
Total pay and benefits 48,663 75,129 114,543
Shareholders expect the CEO to have a significant proportion of his pay based on performance and paid in shares.
It is this element of his package which will provide any observed volatility in his remuneration when comparing
this on a year-to-year basis to the wider employee population. The Committee is comfortable that the underlying
picture is not one of a greater divergence of the CEO remuneration from employees, i.e. excluding the volatility of
long-term incentive arrangements, the relationship will be consistent. There is likely to be significant volatility in
this ratio year-on-year, and we consider that this is caused by the following factors:
Our CEO’s pay is made up of a higher proportion of incentive pay than that of our employees, in line with the
expectations of our shareholders. This introduces a higher degree of potential variability in his pay each year,
which will affect the ratio.
The value of long-term incentives is disclosed in pay in the year it vests, which increases the CEO’s pay in that
year, again impacting the ratio for that year.
Long-term incentives are provided in shares, and therefore an increase in share price magnifies the impact of a
long-term incentive award vesting in a year, reflecting alignment with shareholder value.
We recognise that the ratio is driven by the different structure of the pay of our CEO versus that of our
employees, as well as the make-up of our workforce. This ratio varies between businesses even in the same
sector. What is important from our perspective is that this ratio is influenced only by the differences in structure,
and not by divergence in fixed pay between the CEO and the wider workforce.
Where the structure of remuneration is similar, as it is for the Company’s most senior executives and the CEO,
the ratio will be much more stable over time.
None of the lower quartile, median and upper quartile employees identified this year is a participant in the 2011
LTIP. If the value of the 2011 LTIP is excluded in the CEO pay ratio calculation, the ratios would be as follows:
To employee at the 25th percentile – 13:1
To employee at the 50th percentile – 9:1
To employee at the 75th percentile – 6:1
Relative importance of spend on pay
The table below sets out the relative importance of spend on pay in the 2023/24 and 2024/25 financial years
compared with distributions to shareholders.
2024/25
£m
2023/24
£m % change
Remuneration of Group employees (including Directors) 218 233 (7%)
Distributions to shareholders by way of dividends and share buy-backs 381 170 124%
Implementation of the Remuneration Policy in 2025/26
The details provided below relate to the FY26 pay proposals for Rob Perrins as CEO and Richard Stearn as CFO.
Should the Board changes announced on 20 June become effective following the 2025 AGM, the pay structure
detailed on page 133 will be effective for Rob Perrins as Executive Chair and Richard Stearn as CEO.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 153
Salary
Base salary levels for 2025/26 will be as follows:
£000 2024 2025 % Increase
R C Perrins 597 785 31.5%
R J Stearn 405 510 25.9%
The salary increases awarded to employees throughout the Group, which were on average 3.5%.
Benefits and pension
There is no change in benefits arrangements for 2025/26. Executive Director pension contributions are aligned
with the wider workforce at 6% of salary.
Annual bonus
Maximum opportunity of 200% of salary. As both Executive Directors have achieved their shareholding
requirement, 25% of any earned bonus to be used to purchase shares to be held for three years.
For 2025/26 the following metrics will apply:
50% PBT;
30% operating margin;
10% net promoter score; and
10% ‘Earn and Learn’.
The annual bonus out-turn will be assessed by the Committee at year-end, taking into account performance
against the targets and the underlying performance of the business.
Performance Share Plan
Annual awards of 400% of salary for Rob Perrins and 250% for Richard Stearn, with a three-year vesting and two-
year post-vesting holding period.
For the 2025/26 cycle, vesting will be based on the ranges as per the table below. In determining these ranges,
the Committee has considered internal and external projections, Berkeley’s performance vs the sector, and taken
account of the capital allocation framework of Berkeley 2035 and the BTR investment profile which will be in its
infancy over the FY26 cycle performance period but which aims to add value over the long-term.
Weighting
Threshold
(25% vesting)
Max
(100% vesting)
Growth in NAV per share plus dividends 45% 21.5% 27.5%
Cumulative Cash (FY26-FY28) 20% £1300m £1550m
ROCE (3-year average) 35% 10% 13%
The PSP out-turn will be assessed by the Committee at the end of the performance period, taking into
account performance against the targets and the underlying performance of the business.
Total Remuneration Cap
The Total Remuneration Cap as of 1 May 2025 will be as follows:
Total
Remuneration
Cap p.a. (£)
R C Perrins 8,330,000
R J Stearn 3,380,000
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
154 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Non-Executive Directors
Non-Executive Director fee levels for 2025/26 are as follows:
Chair: £400k;
SID fee: £88.5k;
Basic fee: £72.5k;
Additional fee for Chair of Committee: £15k;
Membership of Committee fee (Audit and Remuneration): £5k.
The Committee’s remit
The Committee remit includes responsibility for setting and managing the remuneration of Berkeley’s Senior
Management, in addition to Executive Directors. The Committee’s focus is on determining the Remuneration Policy
and practices to ensure that the incentives operated by the Company align with its culture and strategy.
The Committee also has oversight of wider workforce pay and policies and incentives, which enables it to ensure
that the approach to executive remuneration is consistent with those for the workforce. The Committee is provided
with additional information from the Company in order to carry out these responsibilities.
Who supports the Committee?
In determining the Executive Directors’ remuneration for the year, the Committee consulted with the CEO, R C
Perrins, and the CFO, R J Stearn. No Director played a part in any discussion about their own remuneration. The
Company Secretary attended each meeting as Secretary to the Committee.
Ellason LLP has been appointed by the Committee as its independent remuneration advisor. Ellason does not
provide any other services to the Company. Ellason is a member of the Remuneration Consultants Group and
the voluntary code of conduct of that body is designed to ensure objective and independent advice is given to
remuneration committees. Fees of £210,080 (2024: £47,535) were paid to Ellason during the year in respect of
advice to the Committee on Directors’ remuneration. The Committee is comfortable that the members of the
advisory teams who provide remuneration advice have no connections with the Company or its Directors that may
impair theirindependence.
Shareholder support
The results of the shareholder votes on the 2022 Policy at the 2022 AGM and the 2024 Annual Report on
Remuneration at the 2024 AGM are set out below.
Votes For Votes Against Votes Withheld
2022 Policy 60.3% 39.7% 10,552,281
2024 Annual Report on Remuneration 92.5% 7. 5% 73,132
Notes:
1 A vote withheld is not a vote in law and it not counted in the calculation of the votes for or against a resolution.
Employment at Berkeley
Fairness, diversity and wider workforce considerations
Our employees are our strongest resource; it is important that we attract, develop and retain talented teams
at every level. Each operating company runs personal and professional development programmes and ensures
individuals receive the support and training that they need. In the section titled ‘Our Vision 2030 progress’, on
pages 51 to 54, we set out how we are working towards creating a positive working environment for our people;
one that fosters respect, support, wellbeing, safety and inclusivity.
The Committee seeks to ensure that pay is fair throughout the Company and makes decisions in relation to the
structure of executive pay in the context of the cascade of pay structures throughout the business.
Remuneration across the Company
The Committee carried out a review of key remuneration elements, policies and processes during the 2024/25
financial year, in order to ensure that wider workforce pay and policies were designed to support the Company’s
desired culture and values.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 155
A process was adopted whereby the Committee receives a report periodically from the Company setting out key
details of remuneration throughout the Company. Clearly the levels of remuneration and the types offered will vary
across the Company depending on the employee’s level of seniority and role and also the employee’s location.
The Committee is not looking for a homogeneous approach; however, when conducting its review, it is paying
particular attention to:
whether the element of remuneration is consistent with the Company’s remuneration principles;
if there are differences, are they objectively justifiable; and
whether the approach seems fair and equitable in the context of other employees.
Once the Committee has conducted its review of the wider workforce remuneration and incentives it considers
the approach applied to the remuneration of the Executive Directors and Senior Management. In particular, the
Committee is focused on whether, within the framework set out above, the approach to the remuneration of the
Executive Directors and senior management is consistent with that applied to the wider workforce.
The following table sets out a summary of the information received by the Committee.
Element of remuneration Key areas reviewed and summary of findings
Base salary We set salaries to ensure that we remain competitive in the market and that levels are
appropriate considering roles and responsibilities of individuals. We have also committed
to ensuring that all our employees receive at least the voluntary Living Wage as set by the
Living Wage Foundation.
Pension We provide either a contribution to a pension arrangement or a payment in lieu of pension.
The maximum pension contribution for the wider workforce is 15% of salary; the average is
6%, the level to which pension contributions for the Executive Directors have been aligned
since 31 December 2022.
Benefits We offer a range of benefits to our employees, including medical insurance.
Bonus Each business operates a bonus scheme for its employees. For senior employees (other
than Executive Directors) elements of the bonus plan are linked to the performance of the
relevant Division and are deferred to ensure performance over the long-term and to provide
lock-in.
LTOP A number of senior individuals participate in the LTOP, on largely similar terms to those for
the Executive Directors.
Medium-term incentives In addition, medium-term incentive schemes are in place for some staff below Executive
Director level.
In conducting the review process for wider workforce remuneration for the coming financial year, and recognising
the ongoing cost of living pressures, the Company focused reviews on lower salary levels and young talent, and
exhibited restraint at higher salary levels.
The Committee is satisfied that:
all employees are treated consistently and that the context and knowledge shared with the Committee is a
useful underpin to ensure that the Committee’s future decision making around Executive Director’s and senior
management’s pay supports fair and equal remuneration;
salary increases for employees across the Company are being applied on an equitable basis, and that average
employee increases are considered when setting pay increases for both the Executive Directors and Non-
Executive Directors;
our levels of variable pay continue to be linked to the achievement of stretching performance targets and a
strong governance framework, and all employees have the ability to share in the success of the Company. The
incentive approach applied to the Executive Directors aligns with the wider Company policy on incentives,
which is to have a higher percentage of at risk performance pay for more senior employees and to increase
the amount of incentive deferred, provided in equity and/or measured over the longer term for more senior
employees; and
overall the wider workforce pay policies and practices for all employees are in line with the remuneration
principles, and the approach to Executive Director remuneration aligns with wider Company pay policy and that
there are no anomalies specific to the Executive Directors.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
156 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Gender pay gap reporting
The median pay gap for Berkeley is 31.0%.
We acknowledge the existence of a gender pay gap. Our mean and median gender pay gaps have decreased by
more than 20% since we began reporting in 2017.
Like much of our industry, this is primarily driven by the shape of our workforce, with a lower proportion of women
in senior, higher paid roles, and more women occupying junior, lower paid roles. This has been slowly improving
year on year since we began reporting in 2017.
In addition, the pay gap is shaped by Berkeley’s strategy for procurement whereby construction labour (roles
typically filled by men) is procured through subcontractor packages rather than directly employed labour; this
results in fewer men occupying junior, lower paid roles.
The shape of our workforce also impacts our bonus gap, with our senior executives participating in the Company’s
Long-Term Incentive Plans.
How we are improving diversity, fairness and equality across our organisation
We are committed to paying for performance equally and fairly and rewarding and retaining our best people. We
believe there are real benefits in ensuring diverse views, skills and perspectives which can lead to creative thinking
and more effective problem solving. We remain committed to creating an engaged and inclusive environment and
seeking to attract and retain a diverse workforce.
The proportion of women in our business varies across our teams, with a high or growing number of women in
a range of roles, including people functions, sustainability, sales and marketing and finance. However, within the
production areas of the business, women are still underrepresented; this includes our construction teams on site,
together with supporting functions such as commercial, procurement and health and safety.
We are taking steps to increase the proportion of women within Berkeley as a whole, focusing on our emerging
talent programmes and appropriate representation within the recruitment process for experienced roles. There is also
the desire in the Group to promote from within and therefore provide increased opportunities for career progression
within the organisation and to more senior roles over the long-term. Central to this is the creation of a positive
working environment — one that promotes respect, support, wellbeing, safety, and inclusivity for all ourpeople.
Employee experience
This area of our long-term business strategy places a specific focus on several areas, including employee
experience and diversity and inclusion. Over the past year we have continued to develop our approach to EDI for
everyone working in the Berkeley Group. We have focused on, and continue to drive, a range of actions across the
business to help drive change.
Strong leadership to support diversity
Our Main Board meets the recommendations of the Hampton-Alexander Review to help increase the
representation of women on boards. Currently 44% of Berkeley’s Board of Directors are female, including our
Senior Independent Director.
Each member of our Executive Director team is responsible for our approach to EDI and encouraging senior
leadership support within our autonomous businesses for all aspects of its implementation.
We committed to increasing the representation of women in management positions to 33% by 2026, ensuring
greater alignment with our overall workforce. This target has already been reached, with women currently
making up 35% of our people managers, and this number has been increasing year on year. Currently, 40% of our
colleagues are female.
Setting the tone at a leadership level is key to creating a culture where everyone can thrive; our Leadership Competency
Framework clearly outlines the importance of our management staff in creating an inclusiveenvironment.
This year we have reinforced our commitment to EDI at a senior level, underpinned by training on behaviours in
the workplace, including all directors. Our Group values – and particularly respect for people – are used within both
Group-wide and local communication to support expected behaviours within the workplace.
Many of our autonomous management teams have also had specific training on EDI within the period. For example,
the East Thames management team has had detailed training to provide an enhanced awareness of EDI challenges
and opportunities and practical ways to understand and embrace inclusive leadership behaviours. In addition, each
individual also received one to one EDI coaching sessions to discuss areas they would personally like to develop.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 157
People policy and practices
In 2024/25 we enhanced our maternity leave policy (increasing fully paid leave from three to six months), with the
view of attracting more women and retaining a more diverse pool of talent.
Within the past year we have also introduced a new Menopause Plan to supplement the existing suite of health and
wellbeing benefits, so women can get tailored menopause support and feel confident about managing symptoms.
We are an industry that relies on site presence for construction and sales and face-to-face working to solve
complex problems with a variety of stakeholders, often with early starts and tight deadlines to meet. We operate
core working hours to enable people to flex their day to meet their needs. Our autonomous businesses implement
agile working policies locally. This year, autonomy – measured by whether people feel they have control over how
they carry out their work – saw the largest increase in score in our employee survey.
Employee engagement and sentiment
Our 2024 employee survey gave insight into how men and women feel working at Berkeley, and how employees
perceive Berkeley’s efforts to maintain a diverse workforce and create an inclusive environment. We were pleased
to see overall increases in engagement and diversity scores across the business. Women feel more supported by
their managers and have more healthy peer relationships.
Ambassadors to champion Fairness, Inclusion and Respect
We support the built environment sector’s Fairness, Inclusion and Respect (FIR) programme, which provides
training and resources on EDI. This year we have increased the number of FIR Ambassadors across the business,
ensuring we have a network of individuals who can help us to improve workplace culture day-to-day within their
teams. We also continue to promote the use of the FIR resources to our supply chain. Within St George FIR
toolbox talks have been carried out on all construction sites and we also raised awareness with 100 of our key
contractors at our Supply Chain conference in autumn 2023.
Employing best practice recruitment practices
Attracting and recruiting more women into our business is a crucial step in addressing the gender gap and
fostering a culture where everyone can thrive. We are actively enhancing our proactive outreach, partnerships,
and recruitment strategies to ensure that talented women see Berkeley Group as a place where they can build
successful careers and make a lasting impact.
Developing women in the business
All of our autonomous businesses run leadership programmes to develop the leaders of the future. Typically these
include workshops on key skills together with mentoring and coaching. To supplement this, we are committed to
an industry-wide programme for women developed and run by The Circle Partnership.
The Mentoring Circle was established to increase and promote female talent retention in the built environment,
through mentoring, networking and leadership development. In 2024 10 women from Berkeley successfully
completed the programme out of a total of 100 participants across the Real Estate industry. We have now
committed to at least three years of the programme, with 13 women joining in 2025.
Recognising that this detailed programme for women is only available to a small number each year, this year we
are piloting a bespoke programme in St James. This has been designed by The Circle Partnership to empower
and support the growth of women within our business, with five modules tailored specifically to women covering
content such as confidence and authenticity, understanding leadership, and communicating with impact.
Celebrating women within the business
We remain committed to fostering networking and discussions on how women thrive in the workplace. Building
on the success of last year’s International Women’s Day event, we brought together another 250 colleagues from
across our divisions to celebrate, inspire, and connect female talent. This event provided a fantastic platform to
highlight ongoing initiatives to empower women and reinforce our commitment to creating a workplace where
everyone feels a sense of belonging. The event included a panel session to hear about the experience of women
working in different roles and we also used a photo gallery and videos to showcase and share the stories of
women within our business.
Taking action locally
Our autonomous businesses run networks for women and allies. Their actions range from delivering training on
key areas such as imposter syndrome and public speaking, to more practical items such as expanding the range
of women’s PPE and sales uniforms, alongside networking events, workshops and socials. Additionally, they have
focused on topics such as supporting women returning to work after maternity leave, ensuring they have the
guidance and tools needed for a smooth transition.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
158 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Skills and training
Our second strategic priority under Our Vision 2030 focuses on ‘Future Skills’, looking at how we can
create tangible long-term change within the industry and inspire a broad range of people to join the built
environmentsector.
Bringing in the next generation of talent
Our emerging talent programmes, such as graduate and apprenticeship pathways, offer an opportunity to bring
a diverse range of people into the business and to train them to become the next generation of leaders. Success
in this area will help us to make long-term lasting changes to our teams, and the wider industry. This will naturally
take a period of time but we are investing for the long term.
Our programmes continue to target a balanced intake each year. We use an anonymised application form to level
the playing field for all early careers applications. By eliminating bias and emphasising skills and potential, we’ve
been able to identify individuals who truly align with the roles we offer. This approach has helped us to recruit
more females into the industry; more than 50% of graduate offers this year are to females.
Inspiring people to join the built environment sector
In line with our continued work in local communities, we have continued to engage with young people in schools.
We have worked with Spark! to offer tailored support and mentoring to ensure young women receive the best
possible careers education in their local area, in addition to attending numerous schools and trusts to network with
young women and educate them about careers in construction.
Signed on behalf of the Board
Natasha Adams
Chair of the Remuneration Committee
20 June 2025
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 159
Directors’ Report
The Directors submit their
report together with the
audited Consolidated
and Company Financial
Statements for the year
ended 30 April 2025.
For the purpose of Disclosure
Guidance and Transparency Rule
(DTR) 4.1.8R, the Directors’ Report
is also the Management Report for
the year ended 30 April 2025.
Certain information that is relevant
to this report, including information
required in accordance with the
Companies Act 2006, the Large
and Medium-sized Companies and
Groups (Accounts and Reports)
Regulations 2008 (as amended),
DTR 4.1.8R, DTR 7, UK Listing Rule
(UKLR) 9.3.3R and UKLR 6.6.1R can
be found in the Strategic Report
and the Corporate Governance
section of this Annual Report, as
detailed in each case below, and is
thereby incorporated by reference
into this report.
The following information in respect
of UKLR 6.6.1R can be located in the
following sections:
Information
Section in
Annual Report Pages
Capitalised
interest
Directors’
Report
163
Unaudited
financial
information
N /A
Long-term
incentive
schemes
Remuneration
Report
126–159
Waiver of
Directors’
emoluments
Remuneration
Report
126-159
Allotments
of equity
securities
N /A
Contracts of
significance
Directors’
Report
163
Controlling
shareholders
163
Dividend
waivers
Directors’
Report
161
The Corporate Governance section
on pages 92 to 159 forms part of
the Directors’ Report.
The Company’s statement of how
it has applied the Principles of
the Code and complied with the
relevant provisions of the Code is
set out on pages 95, 122 and 136 of
this report.
A full review of the business, its
development, performance and
position at the year end, together
with information in respect of
important events and likely future
developments, as required by
DTR 4.1.8R, is set out on pages 16
to 31 of the Strategic Report and
is incorporated into this report
byreference.
Financial risk management
and financial instruments
The Company has not used financial
instruments during the year under
review. Information in respect of the
principal financial and operating
risks and uncertainties relating
to the business, including the
Group’s financial risk management
objectives and policies and its
exposure to liquidity, foreign
currency, interest rate, price and
credit risks, is set out on pages 78
to 91 of the Strategic Report and
in Note 2.24 of the Consolidated
Financial Statements, and is
incorporated into this report
byreference.
Dividends
An interim dividend of 33 pence per
share was paid to shareholders on
27 June 2024. A special dividend
of 174 pence per share was paid
to shareholders on 20 September
2024 and a further interim dividend
of 33 pence per share was paid on
25 March 2025.
Post Balance Sheet events
There are no post Balance Sheet
events that require disclosure.
Share capital
As at 30 April 2025, the Company
had 107,372,287 ordinary shares of
5.6110477936 pence each in issue
(2024: 114,711,897 ordinary shares
of 5.4141 pence each), which are
fullypaid.
The share capital of the Company
was reduced by 3.51% as a result of
the share consolidation undertaken
in the year. The share consolidation
involved the reduction in the
total number of ordinary shares
in issue by the consolidation of
the existing ordinary shares, with
the nominal value of 5.4141 pence
each into a smaller number of new
ordinary shares, each at a nominal
value of 5.6110477936 pence.
See note 2.19 of the Consolidated
FinancialStatements.
During the year to 30 April 2025,
and in accordance with the authority
provided by shareholders at the
2023 and 2024 AGMs, the Company
has purchased through the market
for cancellation 3,320,898 ordinary
shares with a nominal value of
£18,633,717, which equated to 3.09%
of the called-up share capital of the
Company immediately following
the share consolidation in the year,
excluding treasury shares. The
aggregate consideration paid for
these shares was £129.7 million.
As at 30 April 2025, the Company
held 8,305,936 shares in treasury.
These shares have no voting rights.
Authority will be sought from
shareholders at the forthcoming
AGM to renew the authority given
at the 2024 AGM for a further
year, permitting the Company to
purchase its own shares in the
market up to a limit of 10% of its
issued share capital.
The business of the Company shall
be managed by the Directors, who
may exercise all the powers of the
Company subject to the provisions
of the Company’s Articles of
Association (the ‘Articles’) and
statutes, and to such directions
as may be given by the Company
in general meeting by special
resolution, provided that no such
direction or alteration of the Articles
shall invalidate any prior act of the
160 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Directors which would have been
valid if such direction or alteration
of the Articles had not been given.
Further details of Directors’ powers
are set out in the Articles.
At the Company’s 2024 AGM,
Directors were authorised to allot
shares or grant rights to subscribe
for, or convert, any security into
shares up to an aggregate nominal
amount of £1,907,729.34 and to
allot shares for a similar aggregate
nominal amount for the purposes of
a rights issue.
The Directors were further
authorised to disapply statutory
pre-emption rights in connection
with certain allotments of shares.
These authorities will apply until the
conclusion of the 2025 AGM and it
is proposed that shareholders will
be asked to authorise the Directors
to allot shares and disapply
statutory pre-emption rights at the
2025 AGM.
Movements in the Company’s share
capital are shown in note 2.19 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements.
All the Company’s issued share
capital is publicly listed on the
London Stock Exchange.
All shares have full rights in the
Company with respect to voting,
dividends and distributions,
except as explained above in
respect of treasury shares. Further
information in respect of the rights
and obligations attaching to the
ordinary shares are set out in
theArticles.
There are no specific restrictions
on the size of a shareholding or on
the transfer of shares, which are
both governed by the Articles and
the prevailing law. The Directors
are not aware of any agreements
between holders of the Company’s
shares that may result in restrictions
on the transfer of shares or on
votingrights.
No person has special rights
of control over the Company’s
sharecapital.
Information on the Group’s share
option schemes is set out in note
2.5 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements. Details of the Long-
Term Incentive Schemes and
Long-Term Incentive Plans for key
Executives are set out within the
Directors’ Remuneration Report on
pages 126 to 159.
Articles of Association
The Articles set out the basic
management and administrative
structure of the Company. They
regulate the internal affairs of the
Company and cover such matters
as the issue and transfer of shares,
Board and shareholder meetings,
powers and duties of Directors and
borrowing powers. In accordance
with the Articles, Directors can
be appointed or removed by
shareholders in a general meeting.
The Articles may only be amended
by special resolution at a general
meeting of shareholders. The
Articles are available on the
Company’s website (www.
berkeleygroup.co.uk/investors/
corporate-governance). Copies are
available by writing to the Company
Secretary and are also open to
inspection at Companies House.
Directors
The Directors of the Company, their
profiles and details of their roles
and the Committees of which they
are members are detailed on pages
96 to 99 and are incorporated
into this report by reference. The
Directors served throughout the
year under review and up to the
date of this report.
The appointment and replacement
of Directors is governed by the
Company’s Articles, the Code,
the Companies Act 2006 and any
related legislation. The Company,
by ordinary resolution, or the
Directors may from time to time
appoint a Director to fill a casual
vacancy or as an additional Director.
Any Director so appointed shall
hold office only until the next
AGM and shall then be eligible
forreappointment.
The Articles require Directors to
submit themselves for re-election
every three years. However, in
accordance with UK Corporate
Governance Code, each of the
Directors is subject to annual re-
election at the AGM and is being
unanimously recommended by all
the other members of the Board.
The interests of the Directors and
their connected persons in the
share capital of the Company and
its subsidiaries are set out on page
150. At 30 April 2025 each of the
Executive Directors was deemed
to have a non-beneficial interest
in 46,062 (2024: 56,116) ordinary
shares held by the Trustees of the
Berkeley Group Employee Benefit
Trust (EBT). The shares held in
the EBT rank pari passu with all
other shares in issue. However, the
Trustees of the EBT has waived
entitlement to dividends until
further notice and has agreed not to
vote on any shares held in the EBT
at any general meeting.
There were no contracts of
significance during, or at the end
of, the financial year in which a
Director of the Company is, or was,
materially interested, other than
those set out in note 2.26 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements,
the contracts of employment of
the Executive Directors, which
are terminable within one year,
and the appointment terms of the
Non-Executive Directors, which are
renewable annually and terminable
on one month’s notice.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 161
Directors’ Report continued
Directors’ indemnities
The Company maintains Directors’
and officers’ liability insurance
which provides appropriate cover
for legal action brought against
itsDirectors.
The Company’s practice has always
been to indemnify its Directors in
accordance with the Company’s
Articles and to the maximum
extent permitted by law. Qualifying
third-party indemnities, under
which the Company has agreed
to indemnify the Directors, were
in force during the financial year
and at the date of approval of the
Financial Statements, in accordance
with the Company’s Articles and to
the maximum extent permitted by
law, in respect of all costs, charges,
expenses, losses and liabilities
which they may incur in or about
the execution of their duties for the
Company, or any entity which is an
associated company (as defined
in Section 256 of the Companies
Act 2006), or as a result of duties
performed by the Directors on
behalf of the Company or any such
associated company.
Annual General Meeting
The Company’s AGM will take
place at 11.00 a.m. on 5 September
2025. Details of the AGM and
arrangements for engagement with
shareholders will be set out within
the Notice of Meeting.
In accordance with the FRC
Guidance on Board Effectiveness,
the Company arranges for the
Annual Report and Accounts and
related papers to be posted to
shareholders so as to allow at least
20 working days for consideration
prior to the AGM.
At the AGM, voting on all
resolutions will be by proxy voting
and the results of the AGM will be
announced to the Stock Exchange
shortly after the close of the
meeting. They will also be made
available on the Company’s website.
The terms and conditions of
appointment for the Non-Executive
Directors, which set out their
expected time commitment, in
addition to the service contracts
for the Executive Directors, are
available for inspection during
normal business hours at the
Company’s registered office.
Ordinarily, these are also available
for inspection at the AGM.
The Directors are responsible for
preparing the Annual Report and
the Group and Parent Company
Financial Statements in accordance
with applicable law and regulations.
Company law requires the Directors
to prepare Group and Parent
Company Financial Statements
for each financial year. Under that
law they are required to prepare
the Group Financial Statements
in accordance with UK-adopted
international accounting standards
and applicable law and have elected
to prepare the Parent Company
Financial Statements in accordance
with UK accounting standards and
applicable law, including FRS 101
Reduced Disclosure Framework.
Under company law the Directors
must not approve the Financial
Statements unless they are satisfied
that they give a true and fair
view of the state of affairs of the
Group and Parent Company and
of the Group’s profit or loss for
that period. In preparing each of
the Group and Parent Company
Financial Statements, the Directors
are required to:
select suitable accounting
policies and then apply
themconsistently;
make judgements and estimates
that are reasonable, relevant,
reliable and prudent;
for the Group Financial
Statements, state whether they
have been prepared in accordance
with UK-adopted international
accounting standards;
for the Parent Company Financial
Statements, state whether
applicable UK accounting
standards have been followed,
subject to any material
departures disclosed and
explained in the Parent Company
Financial Statements;
assess the Group and Parent
Company’s ability to continue
as a going concern, disclosing,
as applicable, matters related to
going concern; and
use the going concern basis of
accounting unless they either
intend to liquidate the Group or
the Parent Company or to cease
operations, or have no realistic
alternative but to do so.
The Directors are responsible for
keeping adequate accounting
records that are sufficient to show
and explain the Parent Company’s
transactions and disclose with
reasonable accuracy at any time
the financial position of the Parent
Company and enable them to
ensure that its Financial Statements
comply with the Companies
Act 2006. They are responsible
for such internal control as they
determine is necessary to enable
the preparation of Financial
Statements that are free from
material misstatement, whether due
to fraud or error, and have general
responsibility for taking such steps
as are reasonably open to them to
safeguard the assets of the Group
and to prevent and detect fraud and
otherirregularities.
Under applicable law and
regulations, the Directors are
also responsible for preparing a
Strategic Report, Directors’ Report,
Directors’ Remuneration Report and
Corporate Governance Statement
that complies with that law and
those regulations.
162 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
The Directors are responsible for
the maintenance and integrity
of the corporate and financial
information included on the
Company’s website. Legislation in
the UK governing the preparation
and dissemination of Financial
Statements may differ from
legislation in other jurisdictions.
In accordance with Disclosure
Guidance and Transparency Rule
(“DTR”) 4.1.16R, the financial
statements will form part of the
annual financial report prepared
under DTR 4.1.17R and 4.1.18R.
The auditor’s report on these
financial statements provides
no assurance over whether the
annual financial report has been
prepared in accordance with
thoserequirements.
Substantial shareholders
Number of
ordinary
shares held
(i)
% of
voting
rights
(i)
The latest notifications received by the
Company from shareholders in respect of
their interests, pursuant to DTR 5, as at 30
April 2025 are as follows:
BlackRock 6,600,867 5
(i) The number of ordinary shares held
and percentage of voting rights is as
stated by the shareholder at the time
of notification.
Between 30 April 2025 and the
date of this report, the Company
was not notified by a shareholder of
any change pursuant to DTR 5.
Political donations
The Group did not make any
political donations or incur any
political expenditure (2024: £nil)
during the year.
Capitalised interest
No interest has been capitalised by
the Group (2024: £nil) during the
year under review.
Significant agreements
Pursuant to the Companies Act
2006, the Company is required
to disclose whether there are any
significant agreements that take
effect, alter or terminate upon a
change of control.
Change of control provisions are
included as standard in many types
of commercial agreements, notably
bank facility agreements and joint
venture shareholder agreements,
for the protection of both parties.
Such standard terms are included in
Berkeley’s bank facility agreement
which contains provisions that give
the banks certain rights upon a
change of control of the Company.
In addition, the Company’s share
schemes contain provisions
which take effect upon change of
control. These do not entitle the
participants to a greater interest
in the shares of the Company than
that created by the initial grant of
the award. The Company does not
have any arrangements with any
Director or employee that provide
compensation for loss of office
or employment resulting from
atakeover.
Stakeholder engagement
The Company recognises the
importance of good supplier,
customer and other relationships to
the overall success of the business
and manages dealings with
stakeholders in a fair, consistent
andtransparent manner.
The Company’s s172(1) Statement
on page 76 of the Strategic Report
sets out further details of how the
Directors have:
engaged with employees;
had regard to employee interests
and the effect of that regard,
including on the principal
decisions taken by the Company
during the year; and
had regard to the need to
foster the Company’s business
relationships with suppliers,
customers and others, and the
effect of that regard, including on
the principal decisions taken by
the Company during the year.
Employee engagement
The Group’s policy of operating
through autonomous subsidiaries
has ensured close consultation
with employees on matters likely
to affect their interests. The
Group is firmly committed to the
continuation and strengthening
of communication lines with all
itsemployees.
Further information is provided
on pages 51 to 54 of the
StrategicReport.
The Group has in place an Equality
and Diversity Policy Statement,
an Employee Policy and Equal
Opportunities Policy in addition to
Sexual Harassment and Workplace
Bullying and Harassment Policies
which aim to ensure that all
employees, potential employees
and other individuals receive
equal treatment (including access
to employment, training, career
development and opportunity for
promotion) regardless of their age,
disability, gender reassignment,
marriage or civil partnership,
pregnancy and maternity, race,
religion or belief (including lack of
belief), sex and sexual orientation.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 163
Directors’ Report continued
Location-based
Scope 1 12%
Scope 2 88%
Market-based
Scope 1 65%
Scope 2 35%
GHG Emissions by Scope
5,027
tCO
2
e
896
tCO
2
e
Scopes 1 and 2 greenhouse
gas emissions and
energyconsumption
The Group has reported on
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
for which it is responsible and
energy use associated with these
GHG emissions, as required under
the Large and Medium-sized
Companies and Groups (Accounts
and Reports) Regulations 2008,
as amended by the Companies
Act 2006 (Strategic Report and
Directors’ Report) Regulations 2013
and the Companies (Directors’
Report) and Limited Liability
Partnerships (Energy and Carbon
Report) Regulations 2018.
The emissions and energy
consumption disclosed are aligned
to the Group’s financial reporting
year; are based on the operational
boundary of the Group covering
regional offices, sales suites,
development sites and business
vehicle travel; include 100% of
joint venture emissions for these
activities; and are considered
material to the business. They have
the following parameters:
Scope 1 – direct emissions
from natural gas consumed for
office, sales and development
site activities; biodiesel HVO
(Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil),
diesel, petrol and liquefied
petroleum gas (LPG) purchased
directly for development site
activities; and travel (business
and other travel where expensed)
in Company owned and
Company leased vehicles utilising
conventional fuels as an energy
source. Fugitive emissions from
refrigerants are also included.
Scope 2 – indirect emissions from
electricity and heat consumed
for office, sales and development
site activities; and travel
(business and other travel where
expensed) in Company owned
and Company leased vehicles
utilising electricity as an energy
source. The Group has reported
both location-based and market-
based emissions for scope 2,
with the market-based emissions
taking into account Berkeley’s
purchase of Renewable Energy
Guarantees of Origin (REGOs) to
certify that 100% of UK electricity
is from a renewable source (i.e.
solar, wind or hydropower).
Emissions intensity ratios have
been calculated using the floor area
of legally completed homes and
commercial space during the year,
including our joint ventures.
The Group creates homes and
neighbourhoods across London,
Birmingham and the South of
England. As a result, the majority of
emissions and energy consumption
are UK-based. Global emissions
and energy consumption result
from electricity usage in eight
international offices.
In addition to the emissions
reported in the table on page 165
in 2025 biogenic CO
2
(considered
‘outside of scopes’) amounted to
1,903 tCO
2
.
UK Government Environmental
Reporting Guidelines 2019
have been used as the basis for
disclosures. UK Government GHG
Conversion Factors for Company
Reporting and International Energy
Agency conversion factors have
been used to convert raw data
units into GHG emissions and
energyconsumption.
The Directors confirm that
reported GHG emissions and
energy consumption have been
prepared in accordance with the
Group’s established reporting
criteria, are free from material
misstatement and have been
presented in a manner that provides
relevant, reliable, comparable and
understandableinformation.
Further details on our methodology
for reporting emissions and energy
consumption can be found in
our established reporting criteria
available at www.berkeleygroup.
co.uk/sustainabilitydisclosures.
A range of actions have been
implemented in the year to
reduce energy consumption and
emissions, including the installation
of solar photovoltaic (PV) panels
to power construction activities
at our Bow Green development
site and the refurbishment of our
Imperial Wharf divisional office to
improve the energy efficiency of
operatingsystems.
Following the completion of
energy audits in 2024 that were
compliant with the Energy Savings
Opportunity Scheme (ESOS),
this year we have shared the
recommendations across the
business and developed an energy
reduction action plan. A key focus
has been on addressing out of
hours energy usage, particularly
through the use of enhanced
energy monitoring and real-time
consumption alerts.
We have continued to encourage
the use of sustainably sourced
biodiesel HVO (Hydrotreated
Vegetable Oil). The use of this
alternative fuel has reduced scope 1
emissions by 564 tCO
2
e in the year
compared to an equivalent use of
fossil diesel.
164 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Scope 1
Biodiesel HVO 8%
Vehicle Travel 5%
Natural Gas 3%
Diesel 2%
LPG 0%
Petrol 0%
Scope 2
Purchased Electricity – UK 78%
Purchased Heat 2%
Purchased Electricity
– Global exc UK
1%
On-site Generated
Renewable Electricity
1%
Electric Vehicle Travel 0%
Development Site 75%
Divisional Office 10%
Sales Suite
10%
Vehicle Travel
5%
Energy Consumption by Fuel Type Energy Consumption by Activity Type
75% of energy
consumption
is a result of
construction
activities
87% of our energy
consumption is
from renewable
sources
Unit
2025 2024
Total UK
Global
(excluding UK) Total UK
Global
(excluding UK)
Scope 1 emissions tCO
2
e 582
A
582 609 609
Scope 2 (location-based) emissions tCO
2
e 4,445
A
4,246 199 4,636 4,425 211
Scope 2 (market-based) emissions tCO
2
e 314
A
115 199 308 97 211
Scopes 1 and 2 (location-based)
emissions tCO
2
e 5,027
A
4,828 199 5,245 5,034 211
Scopes 1 and 2 (location-based)
emissions intensity
tCO
2
e/
100sqm 1.57 1.71
Scopes 1 and 2 (market-based)
emissions tCO
2
e 896
A
697 199 917 706 211
Scopes 1 and 2 (market-based)
emissions intensity
tCO
2
e/
100sqm 0.28 0.30
Energy consumption associated
with scope 1 emissions MWh 4,658
A
4,658 5,665 5,665
Energy consumption associated
with scope 2 emissions MWh 21,087
A
20,723 364 21,840 21,470 370
Energy consumption associated
with scopes 1 and 2 emissions MWh 25,745
A
25,381 364 27,505 27,135 370
A
2025 information has been separately subject to limited assurance by KPMG LLP. Further details of the assurance provided
in 2025, including the independent assurance report and our methodology for reporting emissions, can be found at
www.berkeleygroup.co.uk/sustainabilitydisclosures
Renewable energy sources
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 165
Directors’ Report continued
Sustainability
The Group is committed to being
a responsible and sustainable
business which thinks about the
long-term and creates positive
environmental, social and economic
impacts. These aspects are
considered in the Group’s approach
to managing its operational
activities and in the homes and
places it develops.
The Group has an integrated
responsible business strategy: Our
Vision 2030. Sustainability is a key
element of the Group’s strategy
with three priority focus areas
and underlying targets directly
relating to material sustainability
topics; Climate Action, Nature and
Communities. Information on Our
Vision 2030 can be found within
theStrategic Report and on the
Group’s website.
The Directors have ultimate
responsibility for sustainability
within the Group. The Our Vision
2030 and Sustainability Board,
which meets monthly to set
strategic direction and review
performance, consists of the Chief
Executive, the Chief Financial
Officer, the Chief Operating Officer,
the Executive Committee member
responsible for sustainability, the
Responsible Business Executive and
the Group Head of Sustainability.
Dedicated operational practitioners
work throughout the business
to ensure that sustainability is
incorporated into daily activities.
Group Sustainability Standards
cover our activities, supported
by detailed procedures within a
Sustainability Management System.
Independent auditor and
disclosure of information
to auditor
Each of the persons who is a
Director at the date of approval of
this Annual Report confirms that:
so far as the Director is
aware, there is no relevant
audit information of which
the Company’s auditor is
unaware;and
the Director has taken all the
steps that he/she ought to have
taken as a Director in order to
make himself/herself aware of
any relevant audit information
and to establish that the
Company’s auditor is aware
ofthat information.
This confirmation is given and
should be interpreted in accordance
with the provisions of Section 418
ofthe Companies Act 2006.
Going concern
The Group’s business activities
together with the factors likely
to affect its future development
performance and position are set
out in the Strategic Report. The
financial position of the Group, its
cash flows, liquidity position and
borrowing facilities are all described
in the Trading and Financial Review
on pages 29 to 31.
The Directors have assessed the
business plan and future funding
requirements of the Group over
the medium-term and compared
these with the level of committed
loan facilities and existing cash
resources. As at 30 April 2025, the
Group has net cash of £337.3 million
and total liquidity of £1.5 billion
when this net cash is combined
with banking facilities of £800
million, (which expire in February
2029) and £400 million listed Green
Bonds (which mature in August
2031). Furthermore, the Group
has cash due on forward sales of
£1,403million, a significant amount
of which covers delivery for the
next 18 months.
In making this assessment,
consideration has been given to
the uncertainty inherent in future
financial forecasts and where
applicable, reasonable sensitivities
have been applied to the key factors
affecting the financial performance
of the Group. The Directors have
a reasonable expectation that the
Group has adequate resources to
continue in operational existence
for not less than 12 months from the
date of these Financial Statements.
For this reason, it continues to
adopt the going concern basis
of accounting in preparing its
Consolidated Financial Statements.
By order of the Board
Victoria Mee
Company Secretary
The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
Registered number: 5172586
20 June 2025
166 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Directors’ responsibility
statement
Each of the Directors confirms
that, to the best of each
person’sknowledge:
the Consolidated Financial
Statements, prepared
in accordance with the
applicable set of accounting
standards, give a true and fair
view of the assets, liabilities,
financial position and profit or
loss of the Company and the
undertakings included
in the consolidation taken
asawhole;
the Company Financial
Statements, which have been
prepared in accordance with
United Kingdom Accounting
Standards, comprising FRS
101, give a true and fair view
of the assets, liabilities,
financial position and results
of the Company; and
the Strategic Report,
together with the Directors’
Report, includes a fair review
of the development and
performance of the business
and the position of the Group,
together with a description
of the principal risks and
uncertainties that it faces,
including those that would
threaten its business model,
future performance, solvency
or liquidity.
For and on behalf of the Board
R Perrins
Chief Executive
R J Stearn
Chief Financial Officer
20 June 2025
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 167
Financial
Statements
Pages 168 to 237
168 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
170 | Independent Auditor’s Report
186 | Consolidated Income
Statement
186 | Consolidated Statement
of Comprehensive Income
187 | Consolidated Statement
of Financial Position
188 | Consolidated Statement
of Changes in Equity
189 | Consolidated Cash Flow
Statement
190 | Notes to the Consolidated
Financial Statements
230 | Company Balance Sheet
231 | Company Statement of
Changes in Equity
232 | Notes to the Company
Financial Statements
236 | Five Year Summary
237 | Financial diary
237 | Registered office and advisors
TwelveTrees Park
At TwelveTrees Park we are
transforming a derelict 12-acre
logistics site into a sustainable
mixed-use neighbourhood
with over 4,700 homes, a new
entrance to West Ham Tube
station, commercial space, a
secondary school and a 4.5-acre
public park.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 169
KPMG LLPs Independent Auditors Report
To the members of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
1. Our opinion is unmodified
In our opinion:
the financial statements of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc give a true and fair view of the state of the Group’s
and of the Parent Company’s affairs as at 30 April 2025, and of the Group’s profit for the year then ended;
the Group financial statements have been properly prepared in accordance with UK-adopted international
accounting standards;
the Parent Company financial statements have been properly prepared in accordance with UK accounting
standards, including FRS 101 Reduced Disclosure Framework; and
the Group and Parent Company financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the requirements
of the Companies Act 2006.
What our opinion covers
We have audited the Group and Parent Company financial statements of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc (“the
Company”) for the year ended 30 April 2025 (FY25) included in the Annual Report, which comprise:
Group Parent Company (The Berkeley Group Holdings plc)
Consolidated Income Statement, Consolidated Statement
of Comprehensive Income, Consolidated Statement of
Financial Position, Consolidated Statement of Changes
in Equity, Consolidated Cash Flow Statement and notes
1 to 2.27 to the Group financial statements, including the
accounting policies in notes 1 to 2.27.
Company Balance Sheet, Company Statement of Changes
in Equity and notes C1 to C2.9 to the Parent Company
financial statements, including the accounting policies in
notes C1 to C2.9.
Basis for opinion
We conducted our audit in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (UK) (“ISAs (UK)”) and applicable
law. Our responsibilities are described below. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is a sufficient
and appropriate basis for our opinion. Our audit opinion and matters included in this report are consistent with
those discussed and included in our reporting to the Audit Committee (“AC”).
We have fulfilled our ethical responsibilities under, and we remain independent of the Group in accordance with,
UK ethical requirements including the FRC Ethical Standard as applied to listed public interest entities.
170 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
2. Overview of our audit
Factors driving
our view of
risks
Our risk assessment considers the Group’s operations, the
macro-economic and other external factors which impact
the judgements and estimates made by the Group. Having
considered these external factors, we have identified the
same key audit matters as in the prior year, except in respect
of the Parent Company key audit matter as described below.
Cost of sales is subject to estimation uncertainty as it is
dependent on the Group’s estimate of future sales prices and
land and build costs, including an allowance for risk. However,
the risk has not been significantly impacted by changes in
the macro-economic environment during FY25.
Post completion development provisions are estimates
based on historical experience of liabilities arising on
completed developments and have a high level of estimation
uncertainty. There have been no significant changes in the
macroeconomic environment or regulatory framework during
the year that would materially affect these estimates. As a
result, the provisions remain broadly stable.
Recoverability of the Parent Company’s investment in
subsidiaries remains our focus in the audit of the Parent
Company, The Berkeley Group Holdings plc, due to its
materiality in the context of the Parent Company’s financial
statements.
We have not considered the recoverability of amounts due
from the Parent company’s indirect subsidiaries as a key
audit matter this year as, following our risk assessment
procedures, we have determined that this is not an area with
a significant impact on our audit of the Parent Company,
therefore, it is not separately identified in our report this year.
Key Audit Matters Vs FY24 Item
Cost of sales
recognition
4.1
Post completion
development
provisions
4.2
Recoverability of the
Parent Company’s
investment in
subsidiaries
4.3
Audit
committee
interaction
During the year, the AC met four times. KPMG is invited to attend all AC meetings and are provided
with an opportunity to meet with the AC in private sessions without the Executive Directors being
present. For each Key Audit Matter, we have set out communications with the AC in section 4,
including matters that required particular judgement for each.
The matters included in the Audit Committee Chair’s report on pages 122 and 123 are materially
consistent with our observations of those meetings.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 171
Independent Auditors Report continued
To the members of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
Our
independence
We have fulfilled our ethical responsibilities under, and we
remain independent of the Group in accordance with, UK
ethical requirements including the FRC Ethical Standard as
applied to listed public interest entities.
We have not performed any non-audit services during FY25
or subsequently which are prohibited by the FRC Ethical
Standard.
We were first appointed as auditor by the directors for
the year ended 30 April 2014. KPMG were reappointed as
external auditors in FY24 following a competitive tender
process. The period of total uninterrupted engagement is for
the 12 financial years ended 30 April 2025.
The Group engagement partner is required to rotate every
five years. As these are the fourth set of the Group’s financial
statements signed by Anna Jones, she will be required to
rotate off after the FY26 audit.
Total audit fee £1.6m
Audit related fees
(including interim
review)
£0.1m
Other services £0.1m
Non-audit fee as a
% of total audit and
audit related fee %
6%
Date first appointed 27 November
2013
Uninterrupted audit
tenure
12 years
Next financial period
which requires a
tender
2034
Tenure of Group
engagement partner
4 years
Materiality
(Item 6 below)
The scope of our work is influenced by our view of
materiality and our assessed risk of material misstatement.
We have determined overall materiality for the Group
financial statements as a whole at £25.0m (FY24: £26.0m)
and for the Parent Company financial statements as a whole
at £14.5m (FY24: £14.5m).
Consistent with FY24, we determined that Group profit
before taxation remains the benchmark for the Group as the
users of the financial statements will be primarily interested
in the profitability of the Group and its ability to generate
returns for shareholders. As such, we based our Group
materiality on Group profit before taxation, of which it
represents 4.7% (FY24: 4.7%).
Materiality for the Parent Company financial statements
was determined with reference to a benchmark of Parent
Company total assets of which it represents 0.7% (FY24:
0.8%).
Materiality levels used in our audit
Group
GPM
HCM
PLC
LCM
AMPT
FY25 £m  FY24 £m
26
19.5
15
14.5
6
1.3
1.25
25
18.7
14.5
14.5
6
Group Group Materiality
GPM Group Performance
Materiality
HCM Highest Component
Materiality
PLC Parent Company Materiality
LCM Lowest Component
Materiality
AMPT Audit Misstatement
PostingThreshold
172 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Group scope
(Item 7 below)
We have performed risk assessment procedures to
determine which of the Group’s components are likely to
include risks of material misstatement to the Group financial
statements, what audit procedures to perform at these
components and the extent of involvement required from
our component auditors to address those risks.
Of the Group’s 16 reporting components, we identified 5 as
quantitatively significant components and 3 as requiring
special audit consideration owing to Group risks related to
cost of sales recognition and post completion development
provisions. One component was selected for audit
procedures relating to significant borrowings contributing to
specific RMMs of the Group financial statements.
The components within the scope of our work accounted for
the percentages illustrated opposite.
In addition, for the remaining components for which we
performed no audit procedures, we performed analysis at
an aggregated Group level to re-examine our assessment
that there is not a reasonable possibility of a material
misstatement in these components.
We consider the scope of our audit, as communicated to
theAudit Committee, to be an appropriate basis for our
audit opinion.
Our audit procedures covered 100%
of Group revenue.
We performed audit procedures in
relation to components that accounted
for 93% of Group profit before tax and
98% of Group total assets.
The impact of
climate change
on our audit
In planning our audit, we considered the potential impact of climate change on the Group’s business
and its financial statements.
The Group’s core activities of designing, building, and selling new homes is a carbon intensive
process. This includes developing large-scale regeneration projects to transform mainly brownfield
sites into new homes and communal spaces by using heavy machinery to demolish existing
structures and constructing new buildings using carbon intensive materials, such as steel and
concrete. The Group emits greenhouse gases directly from energy used in its construction
operations.
As part of the Group’s Our Vision 2030, the Group has set targets of reducing greenhouse gas
emissions and becoming a net zero business by 2045. Whilst the Group has set targets to be carbon
neutral by 2045, the full impact on its cost base and on cash flows are inherently uncertain and the
Group’s assessment continues to evolve. Further information is provided in the Strategic Report on
pages 48 and 49 and the Group’s climate-related disclosures on pages 58 to 75 of the annual report.
Climate change initiatives and commitments could impact the Group’s future cash flows, particularly
the forecasts of future build costs: for example, in relation to materials, new building technologies,
regulatory changes, and changes in specifications. The potential effect of climate on build costs in
the future is not separately identifiable and the full extent is uncertain. Our work on the forecasts of
future build costs as they apply to the estimates of the cost of sales recognition is discussed in our
cost of sales recognition key audit matter.
As part of our audit, we have performed a risk assessment, including enquiries of Group and
divisional management to understand how the impact of commitments made by the Group in
respect of climate change, as well as the physical or transition risks of climate change, may affect the
financial statements and our audit.
Our risk assessment procedures also included comparing operational plans for the Group’s existing
climate related initiatives, such as the installation of air source heat pumps and EV charging points on
sites, to the Group’s forecast of future build costs.
We have also read the Group’s disclosure of climate related information in the front half of the annual
report and considered consistency with the financial statements and our audit knowledge.
Group
Revenue
100%
Group profit
before tax
93%
Group
Total assets
98%
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 173
Independent Auditors Report continued
To the members of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
3. Going concern, viability and principal risks and uncertainties
The directors have prepared the financial statements on the going concern basis as they do not intend to liquidate
the Group or the Parent Company or to cease their operations, and as they have concluded that the Group’s and
the Parent Company’s financial position means that this is realistic. They have also concluded that there are no
material uncertainties that could have cast significant doubt over their ability to continue as a going concern for
atleast a year from the date of approval of the financial statements (“the going concern period”).
Going concern
We used our knowledge of the Group, its industry, and the general economic
environment to identify the inherent risks to its business model and analysed
how those risks might affect the Group’s and Parent Company’s financial
resources or ability to continue operations over the going concern period.
The risk that we considered most likely to adversely affect the Group’s and
Parent Company’s available financial resources over this period was a possible
reduction in sales prices and volumes as a consequence of changes in the
economic environment leading to a sustained medium-term decline in revenue
and profits.
We also considered less predictable but realistic second order impacts, such as
cost inflation, delays to construction programmes and new building regulations.
We considered whether these risks could plausibly affect the liquidity or
covenant compliance in the going concern period by comparing severe, but
plausible, downside scenarios that could arise from these risks individually and
collectively against the level of available financial resources and covenants
indicated by the Group’s financial forecasts.
Our conclusions
We consider that the directors’
use of the going concern basis of
accounting in the preparation of the
financial statements is appropriate;
We have not identified, and concur
with the directors’ assessment that
there is not, a material uncertainty
related to events or conditions that,
individually or collectively, may cast
significant doubt on the Group’s or
Parent Company’s ability to continue
as a going concern for the going
concern period;
We have nothing material to add
or draw attention to in relation
to the directors’ statement in
note 1.2 and C1.2 to the financial
statements on the use of the going
concern basis of accounting with no
material uncertainties that may cast
significant doubt over the Group and
Parent Company’s use of that basis
for the going concern period, and we
found the going concern disclosure
in note 1.2 and C1.2 to be acceptable;
and
The related statement under the
Listing Rules set out on page 166
is materially consistent with the
financial statements and our audit
knowledge.
However, as we cannot predict all
future events or conditions and as
subsequent events may result in
outcomes that are inconsistent with
judgements that were reasonable at
the time they were made, the above
conclusions are not a guarantee that
the Group or the Parent Company
will continue in operation.
174 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Disclosures of emerging and principal risks and longer-term viability
Our responsibility
We are required to perform procedures to identify whether there is a material
inconsistency between the directors’ disclosures in respect of emerging and
principal risks and the viability statement, and the financial statements and our
audit knowledge.
Based on those procedures, we have nothing material to add or draw attention
to in relation to:
the directors’ confirmation within the Viability Statement on page 81 that
they have carried out a robust assessment of the emerging and principal
risks facing the Group, including those that would threaten its business
model, future performance, solvency and liquidity;
the ‘how we manage risk’ disclosures describing these risks and how
emerging risks are identified and explaining how they are being managed
and mitigated; and
the directors’ explanation in the Viability Statement of how they have
assessed the prospects of the Group, over what period they have done so
and why they considered that period to be appropriate, and their statement
as to whether they have a reasonable expectation that the Group will be
able to continue in operation and meet its liabilities as they fall due over
the period of their assessment, including any related disclosures drawing
attention to any necessary qualifications or assumptions.
We are also required to review the Viability Statement set out on page 81 under
the Listing Rules.
Our work is limited to assessing these matters in the context of only the
knowledge acquired during our financial statements audit. As we cannot
predict all future events or conditions and as subsequent events may result in
outcomes that are inconsistent with judgements that were reasonable at the
time they were made, the absence of anything to report on these statements is
not a guarantee as to the Group’s and Parent Company’s longer-term viability.
Our reporting
We have nothing material to add or
draw attention to in relation to these
disclosures.
We have concluded that these
disclosures are materially consistent
with the financial statements and our
audit knowledge.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 175
Independent Auditors Report continued
To the members of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
4. Key audit matters
What we mean
Key audit matters are those matters that, in our professional judgement, were of most significance in the audit of the
financial statements and include the most significant assessed risks of material misstatement (whether or not due to
fraud) identified by us, including those which had the greatest effect on:
the overall audit strategy;
the allocation of resources in the audit; and
directing the efforts of the engagement team.
We include below the Key Audit Matters in decreasing order of audit significance together with our key audit procedures
to address those matters and our results from those procedures. These matters were addressed, and our results are
based on procedures undertaken, for the purpose of our audit of the financial statements as awhole. We do not provide
a separate opinion on these matters.
4.1 Cost of sales recognition (group)
Financial Statement Elements
FY25 FY24
Cost of sales £1,826.2m £1,819.8m
Our assessment of risk vs FY24
We have not identified any significant
changes in our assessment of the level of
risk relating to the cost of sales
recognition compared to FY24.
Our results
FY25: Acceptable
FY24: Acceptable
Description of the Key Audit Matter Our response to the risk
Cost of sales is subject to estimation
uncertainty as it is dependent on the
Group’s estimate of future sales prices
and land and build costs, including an
allowance for risk.
Further, estimation uncertainty and
exposure to market cyclicality exists
within longer term sites. Forecasts are
dependent on market conditions, which
can be difficult to predict and can be
influenced by political and economic
factors including, but not limited
to, the future market uncertainties
surrounding the longer term impacts of
macroeconomic factors, uncertainties
over associated costs and sales prices.
The effect of this matter is that, as part
of our risk assessment, we determined
that cost of sales has a high degree of
estimation uncertainty, with a potential
range of reasonable outcomes greater
than our materiality for the financial
statements as a whole. The financial
statements (note 2.13) disclose that this
is unlikely to have a material effect in the
next financial year.
Our procedures to address the risk included:
Methodology choice: Assessed whether the cost allocation methodology
used by the Group to recognise cost of sales, including any changes in
methodology made in the year, is in accordance with the Group’s accounting
policies;
Control observation and operation: We attended a haphazard sample of the
Group’s build cost meetings that are held for each site to assess the discussion
and review of site forecasts. We assessed whether the appropriate individuals
attended the meetings, and that the site forecast costs for developments are
challenged and discussed, and costs forecasts are updated as appropriate;
and
We tested the effectiveness of control over changes in margin, for a
haphazard sample of sites where cost of sales was recognised in the year.
For a sample of sites that we consider at higher risk of misstatement, due
to either their size, complexity or specific risk factors, we inspected the
whole site forecasts and challenged the Group’s inputs and assumptions by
performing the following procedures:
Historical and current transactions comparison – forecast sales prices: We
compared forecast sales prices to recent prices achieved for similar units as
this is the best indicator of current market prices; compared forecast sales
prices to average sales prices per unit and square footage achieved to date on
a site; and assessed the Group’s historical accuracy of forecasting sales prices;
Historical and current transactions comparison – forecast costs: We assessed
the Group’s historical accuracy of forecasting costs by comparing build costs
incurred to date to original budgets and benchmarking forecast build costs
against similar sites across the Group. Benchmarked contingencies included
in the site wide forecasts for cost increases, sales price uncertainties or
other potential changes such as new regulations or climate related costs to
forecast contingencies held for similar sites across the Group and to historical
uncertainties that have crystalised;
Our sector experience: We challenged the Group’s forecast sales price
and forecast cost assumptions using our own expectations based on our
knowledge of the Group and experience of the industry in which it operates;
Sensitivity analysis: We used third party forecasts for the housing market and
industry cost indices to sensitise the sales price and build cost assumptions, to
assess the impact on the forecast margin used to allocate costs and compared
the results to site contingencies held; and
Assessing transparency: We considered the adequacy of the Group’s
disclosures in note 2.13 to the financial statements regarding the degree of
judgement, estimation uncertainty and sensitivity to key assumptions involved
in arriving at the forecast site margins and resultant cost of sales recognised.
176 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Communications with The Berkeley Group Holdings plc’s Audit Committee
Our discussions with and reporting to the Audit Committee included:
Our approach to the audit of cost of sales including details of our planned substantive procedures and the extent of
our control reliance.
Our assessment of the Group’s methodology for accounting for cost of sales.
Our assessment of the key assumptions used by management in determining the cost of sales to be recognised for
units legally completed in the year.
Our assessment of the level of contingency held across the Group’s sites.
The adequacy of disclosures made by the Group on the estimates, and related estimation uncertainty, used to
determine the amount of cost of sales to recognise.
Areas of particular auditor judgement
We identified the cost, sales, and risk allowance forecast utilised in the Group’s estimate as the area of particular
auditjudgement.
Our results
We found the cost of sales recognised to be acceptable (FY24 result: acceptable).
Further information in the Annual Report and Accounts: See the Audit Committee Report on pages 122 and 123 for
details on how the Audit Committee considered cost of sales recognition as an area of significant attention, note 2.13 for
the accounting policy on cost of sales recognition, and note 2.13 for the financial disclosures.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 177
Independent Auditors Report continued
To the members of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
4.2 Post Completion Development Provision (Group)
Financial Statement Elements
FY25 FY24
Post
completion
development
provision
£217.5m £200.6m
Our assessment of risk vs FY24
We have not identified any
significant changes in our
assessment of the level of risk
relating to the cost of sales
recognition compared to FY24.
Our results
FY25: Acceptable
FY24: Acceptable
Description of the Key Audit Matter Our response to the risk
The Group holds post completion
development provisions in respect
of claims and construction related
liabilities that have arisen, or that prior
claims experience indicates may arise
subsequent to the completion of certain
developments. The identification and
estimation of amounts to be recognised
in relation to post completion
development provisions is judgemental
by its nature as it requires the Group
to make a number of estimates,
including the forecast costs to rectify
identified issues and whether prior
claims experience is reflective of future
issues. The effect of these matters is
that, as part of our risk assessment,
we determined that post completion
development provisions have a high
degree of estimation uncertainty, with a
potential range of reasonable outcomes
greater than our materiality for the
financial statements as a whole. The
financial statements (note 2.17) disclose
that this is unlikely to have a material
effect in the next financial year.
We performed the tests below rather than seeking to rely on any of the
Group’s controls because the nature of the balance is such that we would
expect to obtain audit evidence primarily through the detailed procedures
described.
Our procedures to address the risk included:
Methodology: We assessed the Group’s methodology for accounting for
provisions and the appropriateness of estimates made in making provisions;
Personnel interviews: We inspected board minutes to identify potential
claims to be provided for and corroborated through enquiries of Group
Directors and Management, and divisional management and compared to
Group’s provisions assessments;
Test of detail: We critically assessed the Group’s calculation of the provision
held, challenged internal remediation cost assessments and considered third
party evidence for provisions made for significant known issues and claims;
Historical comparisons: Where past events indicate that an obligation may
arise, we evaluated the Group’s risk assessment performed in respect of
known and/or settled issues and considered any changes in the development
portfolio over time, in assessing the estimation of the provision. For a sample
of post completion development provisions, we performed a retrospective
review, comparing actual rectification costs incurred to the Group’s previously
estimated cost to evaluate the Group’s forecasting accuracy;
Our sector experience: We utilised the audit team’s experience to challenge
the assumptions over appropriateness of the rectification cost assumptions;
Enquiry of lawyers: In respect of open matters of litigation, we held
enquiries with the Group’s in-house legal counsel and inspected relevant
correspondence and considered against provisions made; and
Assessing transparency: We considered the adequacy of the Group’s
disclosures in the financial statements regarding the degree of judgement,
estimation uncertainty, and sensitivity to key assumptions involved in arriving
at the recorded post completion development provisions.
Communications with The Berkeley Group Holdings plc’s Audit Committee
Our discussions with and reporting to the Audit Committee included:
Our approach to the audit of the post completion development provisions including details of our planned substantive
procedures.
Our assessment of the Group’s methodology for accounting for provisions.
Our conclusion of the appropriateness of estimates made in making provisions.
The adequacy of disclosures made by the Group on the estimates, and related estimation uncertainty, used to
determine the amount of provisions to recognise.
Areas of particular auditor judgement
We identified the Group’s estimation of amounts to be recognised as a provision to be the area of particular auditor
judgement.
Our results
We found the amount of post completion development provision to be acceptable (FY24 result: acceptable).
Further information in the Annual Report and Accounts: See the Audit Committee Report on page 123 for details on how
the Audit Committee considered post completion development provisions as an area of significant attention, note 2.17
for the accounting policy on post completion development provisions and note 2.17 for the financial disclosures.
178 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
4.3 Recoverability of the Parent Company’s Investment in Subsidiaries
Financial Statement Elements
FY25 FY24
Investment
carrying
value note
2.4
£1,445.8m £1,443.1m
Our assessment of risk vs FY24
We have not identified any
significant changes in our
assessment of the level of risk
relating to the cost of sales
recognition compared to FY24.
Our results
FY25: Acceptable
FY24: Acceptable
Description of the Key Audit Matter Our response to the risk
The carrying amount of the Parent
Company’s investment in subsidiary
undertakings represents circa 69.3% of
the Parent Company’s total assets.
Their recoverability is not at high risk
of significant misstatement or subject
to significant judgement. However, due
to their materiality in the context of the
Parent Company financial statements,
this is considered to be the area that has
the greatest effect on our overall Parent
Company audit.
The Parent Company holds a direct
investment in The Berkeley Group plc,
which in turn holds the rest of Group’s
subsidiaries.
Our procedures to address the risk included:
We compared the carrying amount of the investment with the material
indirect subsidiaries’ net assets in the Group’s consolidation to identify
whether their aggregate net assets, being an approximation of the
investment’s minimum recoverable amount, were in excess of the carrying
amount of that investment and assessed whether those indirect subsidiaries
have historically been profit-making; and
We assessed the work performed by the subsidiary audit team on all of those
subsidiaries and considered the results of that work on those subsidiaries’
profits and net assets.
We performed the tests above rather than seeking to rely on any of the
Group’s controls because the nature of the balance is such that we would
expect to obtain audit evidence primarily through the detailed procedures
described.
Communications with The Berkeley Group Holdings plc’s Audit Committee
Our discussions with and reporting to the Audit Committee included:
Our approach to the audit of the recoverability of the Parent Company investment in subsidiaries including details of
our planned substantive procedures.
Our conclusion of the appropriateness of the carrying value of the Parent Company’s investment in subsidiaries.
We found the Parent Company’s conclusion that there is no impairment of its investment in subsidiaries to be acceptable
(FY24 result: acceptable).
Further information in the Annual Report and Accounts: See note C2.4 for the accounting policy on the Parent
Company’s investment in subsidiary and note C2.4 for the financial disclosures.
We continue to perform procedures over the recoverability of amounts due from the Parent Company’s indirect
subsidiaries. However, following completion of our risk assessment procedures, we have not determined this as
one of the areas with a significant impact on our audit of the Parent Company and, therefore, it is not separately
identified in our report this year.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 179
Independent Auditors Report continued
To the members of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
5. Our Ability to Detect Irregularities, and our Response
Fraud – Identifying and responding to risks of material misstatement due to fraud
Fraud risk assessment To identify risks of material misstatement due to fraud (‘fraud risks’) we
assessed events or conditions that could indicate an incentive or pressure to
commit fraud or provide an opportunity to commit fraud.
Our risk assessment procedures included:
our forensic specialists assisted us in identifying key fraud risks. This
included attending the Risk Assessment and Planning Discussion, holding
a discussion with the engagement partner, engagement manager, and
engagement quality control reviewer, and assisting with designing relevant
audit procedures to respond to the risk of management override of
controls;
enquiring of Directors, the Audit Committee, internal audit, internal legal
counsel and inspection of policy documentation as to the Group’s high-
level policies and procedures to prevent and detect fraud, including the
internal audit function, and the Group’s channel for ‘whistleblowing’, as well
as whether they have knowledge of any actual, suspected or alleged fraud;
reading Board, Audit Committee and Remuneration Committee minutes;
considering remuneration incentive schemes (these include the 2011 LTIP,
Restricted Share Plan and Long-Term Option Plan) and performance
targets for management and Directors, including any revenue and trading
margin targets for management remuneration; and
using analytical procedures to identify any unusual or unexpected
relationships.
Risk communications We communicated identified fraud risks throughout the audit team and
remained alert to any indications of fraud throughout the audit.
Fraud risks As required by auditing standards and taking into account our overall
knowledge of the control environment, we perform procedures to
address the risk of management override of controls, in particular the risk
that Group and component management may be in a position to make
inappropriate accounting entries and the risk of bias in accounting estimates
and judgments such as cost of sales recognition and post completion
development provisions. On this audit we do not believe there is a fraud risk
related to revenue recognition as the accounting for the Group’s revenue is
non-complex and the majority is only recognised on the legal completion
of the sale, being the point at which the balance of the sale is paid for
and title of the unit transfers to the customer. There are therefore limited
levels of judgment with limited opportunities for manual intervention in the
sales process to fraudulently manipulate revenue. We did not identify any
additional fraud risks.
Procedures to address fraud risks In determining the audit procedures, we took into account the results of our
evaluation and testing of the operating effectiveness of some of the Group-
wide fraud risk management controls, such as the appropriate sign off of
changes in forecasted site wide margin and appropriate challenge to changes
in forecasted costs within the Build Cost meetings. We also performed
procedures including:
identifying journal entries and other adjustments to test for all entities
across the Group based on specific risk-based criteria and comparing
the identified entries to supporting documentation. These included those
posted by senior finance management, certain descriptions, those posted
to unusual accounts, seldom used accounts and journals posted by leavers;
and
assessing whether the judgements made in making accounting estimates
are indicative of a potential bias.
180 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Laws and regulations – Identifying and responding to risks of material misstatement relating to compliance with
laws and regulations
Laws and regulations risk assessment We identified areas of laws and regulations that could reasonably be
expected to have a material effect on the financial statements from our
general commercial and sector experience, through discussion with the
Directors and other management (as required by auditing standards),
and from inspection of the Group’s regulatory and legal correspondence
and discussed with the Directors and other management the policies and
procedures regarding compliance with laws and regulations.
As the Group is regulated, our assessment of risks involved gaining an
understanding of the control environment including the entity’s procedures
for complying with regulatory requirements.
Risk communications We communicated identified laws and regulations throughout the audit team
and remained alert to any indications of non-compliance throughout the
audit.
Direct laws context and link to audit The potential effect of these laws and regulations on the financial statements
varies considerably. The Group is subject to laws and regulations that directly
affect the financial statements including financial reporting legislation
(including related companies legislation), distributable profits legislation and
taxation legislation and we assessed the extent of compliance with these laws
and regulations as part of our procedures on the related financial statement
items.
Most significant indirect law/
regulation areas
The Group is subject to many other laws and regulations where the
consequences of non-compliance could have a material effect on amounts or
disclosures in the financial statements, for instance through the imposition of
fines or litigation or the loss of the Group’s license to operate.
We identified the following areas as those most likely to have such an effect:
UK planning permission and building regulations, such as the Building
Safety Act;
health and safety;
anti-bribery;
anti-money laundering and sanctions checking;
employment laws;
data protection laws;
environmental laws; and
competition law.
Auditing standards limit the required audit procedures to identify non-
compliance with these laws and regulations to enquiry of the directors and
other management and inspection of regulatory and legal correspondence, if
any. Therefore, if a breach of operational regulations is not disclosed to us or
evident from relevant correspondence, an audit will not detect that breach.
Context
Context of the ability of the audit to
detect fraud or breaches of law or
regulation
Owing to the inherent limitations of an audit, there is an unavoidable risk
that we may not have detected some material misstatements in the financial
statements, even though we have properly planned and performed our audit
in accordance with auditing standards. For example, the further removed
non-compliance with laws and regulations is from the events and transactions
reflected in the financial statements, the less likely the inherently limited
procedures required by auditing standards would identify it. In addition, as
with any audit, there remained a higher risk of non-detection of fraud, as
fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations,
or the override of internal controls. Our audit procedures are designed to
detect material misstatement. We are not responsible for preventing non-
compliance or fraud and cannot be expected to detect non-compliance with
all laws and regulations.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 181
Independent Auditors Report continued
To the members of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
6. Our determination of materiality
£25m
(FY24: £26m)
Materiality for the group
financial statements as
a whole
What we mean
A quantitative reference for the purpose of planning and performing our audit.
Basis for determining performance materiality and judgements applied
Materiality for the Group financial statements as a whole was set at £25.0m (FY24: £26.0m).
This was determined with reference to a benchmark of Group profit before taxation.
Consistent with FY24, we determined that Group profit before taxation remains the main
benchmark for the Group as the users of the financial statements will be primarily interested
in the profitability of the Group and its ability to generate returns for shareholders.
Our Group materiality of £25m was determined by applying a percentage to the Group
profit before taxation. When using a benchmark of Group profit before taxation to determine
overall materiality, KPMG’s approach for listed entities considers a guideline range of 3%-5%
of the measure. In setting overall Group materiality, we applied a percentage of 4.7% (FY24:
4.7%) to the benchmark.
Materiality for the Parent Company financial statements as a whole was set at £14.5m (FY24:
£14.5m), determined with reference to a benchmark of Parent Company total assets, of which
it represents 0.7% (FY24: 0.7%).
£18.7M
(FY24: £19.5M)
Performance Materiality
What we mean
Our procedures on individual account balances and disclosures were performed to a lower
threshold, performance materiality, so as to reduce to an acceptable level the risk that
individually immaterial misstatements in individual account balances add up to a material
amount across the financial statements as a whole.
Basis for determining performance materiality and judgements applied
We have considered performance materiality at a level of 75% (FY24: 75%) of materiality for
The Berkeley Group Holdings plc Group financial statements as a whole to be appropriate.
The Parent Company performance materiality was set at £10.8m (FY24: £10.8m), which
equates to 75% (FY24: 75%) of materiality for the Parent Company financial statements as
awhole.
We applied this percentage in our determination of performance materiality because we did
not identify any factors indicating an elevated level of risk.
£1.25M
(FY24: £1.30M)
Audit misstatement
posting threshold
What we mean
This is the amount below which identified misstatements are considered to be clearly trivial
from a quantitative point of view. We may become aware of misstatements below this
threshold which could alter the nature, timing and scope of our audit procedures, for example
if we identify smaller misstatements which are indicators of fraud.
This is also the amount above which all misstatements identified are communicated to
The Berkeley Group Holdings plc’s Audit Committee.
Basis for determining performance materiality and judgements applied
We set our audit misstatement posting threshold at 5% (FY24: 5%) of our materiality for
the Group financial statements. We also report to the Audit Committee any other identified
misstatements that warrant reporting on qualitative grounds.
The overall materiality for the Group financial statements of £25.0m (FY24: £26.0m) compares as follows to the
main financial statement caption amounts:
Total Group Revenue Group profit before tax Total Group Assets
FY25 FY24 FY25 FY24 FY25 FY24
Financial
statement Caption
£2,486.5m £2,464.3m £528.9m £557. 3m £6,692.8m £6,996.3m
Group Materiality
as % of caption
1.0% 1.1% 4.7% 4.7% 0.4% 0.4%
182 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
7. The scope of our audit
Group
scope
What we mean
How the Group auditor determined the procedures to be performed across the Group.
This year, we applied the revised group auditing standard in our audit of the consolidated financial
statements. The revised standard changes how an auditor approaches the identification of components,
and how the audit procedures are planned and executed across components.
In particular, the definition of a component has changed, shifting the focus from how the entity prepares
financial information to how we, as the group auditor, plan to perform audit procedures to address group
risks of material misstatement (“RMMs”). Similarly, the group auditor has an increased role in designing
the audit procedures as well as making decisions on where these procedures are performed (centrally
and/or at component level) and how these procedures are executed and supervised. As a result, we
assess scoping and coverage in a different way and comparisons to prior period coverage figures are not
meaningful. In this report we provide an indication of scope coverage on the new basis.
We performed risk assessment procedures to determine which of the Group’s components are likely
to include risks of material misstatement to the Group financial statements and which procedures to
perform at these components to address those risks.
In total, we identified 16 components, having considered our evaluation of the Group’s operational
structure, the existence of common risk profiles across business activities, the presence of key audit
matters and our ability to perform audit procedures centrally.
Of those, we identified 5 quantitatively significant components which contained the largest percentages
of either total revenue or total assets of the Group, for which we performed audit procedures.
We also identified 3 components as requiring special audit consideration, owing to Group risks relating to
cost of sales recognition and post completion development provisions residing in these components.
Additionally, having considered qualitative and quantitative factors, we selected 1 component with
significant borrowings contributing to the specific RMMs of the Group financial statements.
The below summarises where we performed audit procedures:
Component type
Number of components
where we performed audit
procedures
Range of
materiality
applied
Quantitatively significant components 5 £10.5m - £14.5m
Components requiring special audit consideration 3 £6m - £8m
Other components where we performed procedures 1 £9m
Total 9
All the work on components and the audit of the Parent Company were performed by the group auditor.
Our audit procedures covered 100% of Group revenue. We performed audit procedures in relation to
components that accounted for 93% of Group profit before taxation and 98% of Group total assets.
For the remaining components for which we performed no audit procedures, no component represented
more than 3% of Group profit before taxation or 1% of Group’s total assets. We performed analysis at
an aggregated Group level to re-examine our assessment that there is not a reasonable possibility of a
material misstatement in these components.
Group
scope
continued
Impact of controls on our group audit
We identified the main finance IT system used to record underlying transactions within the Group to be
the main IT system relevant to our Group audit.
We used IT auditors to assist us in assessing the design and operating effectiveness of the general IT
controls of this system, which is managed from the UK.
Following our testing over the IT system, we relied on general IT controls to allow us to place reliance on
these controls when designing our audit response. This reduced both the extent of testing required over
the completeness and accuracy of system information used in manual controls and sample sizes in our
substantive procedures for quantitatively significant components.
We also tested the design and operating effectiveness of manual controls over the Cost of Sales
recognition key audit matter and certain other areas of the audit, including revenue and inventory. For
these areas we were able to rely on these manual controls, which reduced both the extent of substantive
testing required over the completeness and accuracy of system information used in manual controls and
sample sizes in our substantive procedures.
In the other areas of the audit a predominately substantive approach was taken.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 183
Independent Auditors Report continued
To the members of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
8. Other information in the annual report
The directors are responsible for the other information presented in the Annual Report together with the financial
statements. Our opinion on the financial statements does not cover the other information and, accordingly, we do
not express an audit opinion or, except as explicitly stated below, any form of assurance conclusion thereon.
All other information
Our responsibility
Our responsibility is to read the other information and, in doing so, consider whether,
based on our financial statements audit work, the information therein is materially
misstated or inconsistent with the financial statements or our audit knowledge.
Our reporting
Based solely on that work we
have not identified material
misstatements or inconsistencies
in the other information.
Strategic Report and Directors’ Report
Our responsibility and reporting
Based solely on our work on the other information described above we report to you as follows:
we have not identified material misstatements in the strategic report and the directors’ report;
in our opinion the information given in those reports for the financial year is consistent with the financial statements;
and
in our opinion those reports have been prepared in accordance with the Companies Act 2006.
Directors’ Remuneration Report
Our responsibility
We are required to form an opinion as to whether the part of the Directors’
Remuneration Report to be audited has been properly prepared in accordance with
the Companies Act 2006.
Our reporting
In our opinion the part of the
Directors’ Remuneration Report
to be audited has been properly
prepared in accordance with the
Companies Act 2006.
Corporate Governance Disclosures
Our responsibility
We are required to perform procedures to identify whether there is a material
inconsistency between the financial statements and our audit knowledge, and:
the directors’ statement that they consider that the annual report and financial
statements taken as a whole is fair, balanced and understandable, and provides
the information necessary for shareholders to assess the Group’s position and
performance, business model and strategy;
the section of the annual report describing the work of the Audit Committee,
including the significant issues that the Audit Committee considered in relation to
the financial statements, and how these issues were addressed; and
the section of the annual report that describes the review of the effectiveness of
the Group’s risk management and internal control systems
Our reporting
Based on those procedures, we
have concluded that each of
these disclosures is materially
consistent with the financial
statements and our audit
knowledge.
We are also required to review the part of the Corporate Governance Statement
relating to the Group’s compliance with the provisions of the UK Corporate
Governance Code specified by the Listing Rules for our review.
We have nothing to report in this
respect.
Other matters on which we are required to report by exception
Our responsibility
Under the Companies Act 2006, we are required to report to you if, in our opinion:
adequate accounting records have not been kept by the Parent Company, or
returns adequate for our audit have not been received from branches not visited
by us; or
the Parent Company financial statements and the part of the Directors’
Remuneration Report to be audited are not in agreement with the accounting
records and returns; or
certain disclosures of directors’ remuneration specified by law are not made; or
we have not received all the information and explanations we require for our audit.
Our reporting
We have nothing to report in
these respects.
184 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
9. Respective responsibilities
Directors’ responsibilities
As explained more fully in their statement set out on page 167, the directors are responsible for: the preparation of
the financial statements including being satisfied that they give a true and fair view; such internal control as they
determine is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement,
whether due to fraud or error; assessing the Group and Parent Company’s ability to continue as a going concern,
disclosing, as applicable, matters related to going concern; and using the going concern basis of accounting
unless they either intend to liquidate the Group or the Parent Company or to cease operations, or have no realistic
alternative but to do so.
Auditor’s responsibilities
Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from
material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue our opinion in an auditor’s report. Reasonable
assurance is a high level of assurance, but does not guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with ISAs
(UK) will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are
considered material if, individually or in aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic
decisions of users taken on the basis of the financial statements.
A fuller description of our responsibilities is provided on the FRC’s website at www.frc.org.uk/
auditorsresponsibilities.
The Company is required to include these financial statements in an annual financial report prepared under
Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rule 4.1.17R and 4.1.18R. This auditors report provides no assurance over
whether the annual financial report has been prepared in accordance with those requirements.
10. The purpose of our audit work and to whom we owe our responsibilities
This report is made solely to the Company’s members, as a body, in accordance with Chapter 3 of Part 16 of the
Companies Act 2006. Our audit work has been undertaken so that we might state to the Company’s members
those matters we are required to state to them in an auditor’s report and for no other purpose. To the fullest
extent permitted by law, we do not accept or assume responsibility to anyone other than the Company and the
Company’s members, as a body, for our audit work, for this report, or for the opinions we have formed.
Anna Jones (Senior Statutory Auditor)
for and on behalf of KPMG LLP, Statutory Auditor
Chartered Accountants
London
20 June 2025
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 185
Consolidated Income Statement
2025 2024
For the year ended 30 April
Notes
£m£m
Revenue
2.1
2 ,486. 5
2,464. 3
Cost of sales
(1,826.2)
(1,819.8)
Gross profit
660. 3
644.5
Net operating expenses
(1 60. 3)
(164.8)
Operating profit
500.0
479 .7
Finance income
2.3
55 . 8
53 .9
Finance costs
2.3
(4 1 . 6)
(4 1 . 9)
Share of results of joint ventures using the equity method
2.12
14 .7
65 .6
Profit before taxation for the year
528 . 9
5 5 7. 3
Income tax expense
2.6
(1 46 . 9)
(159 .7)
Profit after taxation for the year
382 .0
3 9 7. 6
Earnings per share (pence):
Basic
2.7
371 . 8
373. 9
Diluted
2.7
3 70.0
3 7 1 .1
Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income
2025 2024
For the year ended 30 April
Notes
£m£m
Profit after taxation for the year
382 .0
3 9 7. 6
Other comprehensive income/(expense)
Items that will not be reclassified to profit or loss:
Actuarial gain/(loss) recognised in the pension scheme
2.5
0. 2
(0 . 7)
Total items that will not be reclassified to profit or loss
0. 2
(0 . 7)
Other comprehensive income/(expense) for the year
0. 2
(0 . 7)
Total comprehensive income for the year
382 . 2
396 .9
186 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Consolidated Statement of Financial Position
2025 2024
As at 30 April
Notes
£m£m
Assets
Non-current assets
Intangible assets
2.8
1 7. 2
1 7. 2
Investment property
2.9
145. 7
Property, plant and equipment
2.10
2 7. 2
28 .0
Right-of-use assets
2.11
4.2
4.3
Investments accounted for using equity method
2.12
243. 4
2 27. 0
Deferred tax assets
2.18
87. 3
116.9
525 .0
393 .4
Current assets
Inventories
2.13
5,0 52 . 2
5 , 283 .9
Trade and other receivables
2.14
88.8
119. 8
Current tax receivables
11. 6
7. 2
Cash and cash equivalents
2.15
1 ,01 5. 2
1,1 92 . 0
6 , 1 6 7. 8
6 ,6 02 .9
Total assets
6, 692 . 8
6, 996. 3
Liabilities
Non-current liabilities
Borrowings
2.24
(6 7 7. 9)
(6 6 0 . 0)
Trade and other payables
2.16
(4 6 2 . 8)
(6 8 3 . 6)
Lease liabilities
2.11
(2 . 3)
(2 . 3)
Provisions for other liabilities and charges
2.17
(153 .6)
(1 40 .7)
(1,296.6)
(1,486.6)
Current liabilities
Trade and other payables
2.16
(1,75 8.4)
(1,87 8.0)
Lease liabilities
2.11
(2 .0)
(2 .1)
Provisions for other liabilities and charges
2.17
(76 .0)
(6 9 . 1)
(1,836. 4)
(1 , 9 49 . 2)
Total liabilities
(3,133.0)
(3, 435. 8)
Total net assets
3, 559. 8
3, 560. 5
Equity
Shareholders’ equity
Share capital
2.19
6.0
6.2
Share premium
2.19
49. 8
49. 8
Capital redemption reserve
2.20
25. 5
25 .3
Other reserve
2.20
(961 . 3)
(9 6 1 . 3)
Retained earnings
2.20
4, 439. 8
4, 44 0.5
Total equity
3, 559. 8
3, 560. 5
The financial statements on pages 186 to 229 were approved by the Board of Directors on 20 June 2025 and were
signed on its behalf by:
R J Stearn
Chief Financial Officer
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 187
Capital
Share Share redemption Other Retained Total
capital premium reserve reserve earnings equity
For the year ended 30 April
Notes
£m£m£m£m£m£m
At 1 May 2024
6.2
49. 8
25 .3
(9 61 . 3)
4,44 0.5
3, 560. 5
Profit after taxation for the year
382 .0
382 .0
Other comprehensive income
for the year
0. 2
0. 2
Purchase of own shares
2.19
(0 . 2)
0. 2
(129.7)
(129.7)
Transactions with shareholders:
Charge in respect of employee
share schemes
2.5
(2 . 6)
(2. 6)
Deferred tax in respect of
employee share schemes
2.18
1. 2
1. 2
Dividends to equity holders
ofthe Company
2.21
(251 . 8)
(25 1. 8)
At 30 April 2025
6.0
49. 8
25. 5
(96 1 . 3)
4,439 .8
3,5 59.8
At 1 May 2023
6.3
49. 8
25. 2
(9 6 1 . 3)
4 , 212. 3
3,3 32.3
Profit after taxation for the year
3 9 7. 6
3 9 7. 6
Other comprehensive expense
for the year
(0 . 7)
(0 . 7)
Purchase of own shares
2.19
(0 .1)
0.1
(72 . 3)
(72. 3)
Transactions with shareholders:
Charge in respect of employee
share schemes
2.5
(0 . 8)
(0 . 8)
Deferred tax in respect of
employee share schemes
2.18
2.5
2. 5
Dividends to equity holders
ofthe Company
2.21
(9 8 .1)
(9 8 .1)
At 30 April 2024
6. 2
49.8
25 .3
(9 61 . 3)
4,4 40. 5
3, 56 0.5
Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity
188 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Consolidated Cash Flow Statement
2025 2024
For the year ended 30 April
Notes
£m£m
Cash flows from operating activities
Cash generated from operations
2.23
285. 8
383 .0
Interest received
57. 4
50.4
Interest paid
(29.6)
(29 . 5)
Income tax paid
(1 20. 5)
(170. 5)
Net cash flow from operating activities
19 3 .1
233.4
Cash flows from investing activities
Additions to investment property
2.9
(2 . 0)
Purchase of property, plant and equipment
2.10
(1 .0)
(1 . 4)
Proceeds on disposal of property, plant and equipment
0.1
0. 3
Dividends from joint ventures
2.12
74 . 9
Increase in loans with joint ventures
2.12
(1 .1)
(12 . 9)
Net cash flow from investing activities
(4 . 0)
60. 9
Cash flows from financing activities
Lease capital repayments
2.11
(2 . 3)
(2 . 3)
Purchase of own shares
2.19
(129.7)
(72. 3)
Dividends to equity holders of the Company
2.21
(251 . 8)
(9 8 . 1)
Drawdown of borrowings
2.24
1 7. 9
Net cash flow from financing activities
(3 65 . 9)
(17 2.7)
Net (decrease)/increase in cash and cash equivalents
2.23
(176 . 8)
121 .6
Cash and cash equivalents at the start of the financial year
1 ,19 2 . 0
1 , 070 . 4
Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the financial year
2.23
1,01 5. 2
1 ,1 9 2. 0
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 189
1 Basis of preparation
1.1 Introduction
These Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared and approved by the Directors in accordance with
UK-adopted International Accounting Standards (UK-adopted IFRS). The Company has elected to prepare its
Parent Company financial statements in accordance with FRS 101; these are presented on pages 230 to 235.
The Group Financial Statements consolidate those of the Company and its subsidiaries (together referred to as
the Group) and equity account the Group’s interest in joint ventures. The Parent Company financial statements
present information about the Company as a separate entity and not about its Group.
The Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared under the historical cost convention and on the
going concern basis. Historical cost is generally based on the fair value of the consideration given in exchange
for the assets.
Critical accounting judgements and key sources of estimation uncertainty
The preparation of financial statements in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS)
requires the use of certain critical accounting estimates. It may also require management to exercise their
judgement in the process of applying the Group’s accounting policies.
The key areas involving estimation uncertainty, which are significant to the Consolidated Financial Statements, are:
cost of sales recognition which is dependent on an estimate of future selling prices and costs. See Note 2.13; and
post completion development provisions which rely on management judgement in estimating the quantum and
timing of outflows of resources to settle any associated legal or constructive obligations. See Note 2.17.
Whilst these are key areas of estimation uncertainty, these are unlikely to have a material impact on the carrying
value of assets and liabilities in the next financial year.
There are no significant areas of judgement in applying the Group’s accounting policies exercised by management
during the current or prior year.
Group accounting policies
The significant Group accounting policies are included within the relevant notes to the Consolidated Financial
Statements on pages 190 to 229. The accounting policies set out have been applied consistently to all periods
presented in these Consolidated Financial Statements, except for investment property which applies to the
current financial year.
1.2 Going concern
The Directors have assessed the business plan and funding requirements of the Group over the medium-term
and compared these with the level of committed debt facilities and existing cash resources. As at 30 April 2025,
the Group had net cash of £337 million and total liquidity of £1,537 million when this net cash is combined with
banking facilities of £800 million (committed to February 2029) and £400 million of listed bonds (which mature in
August 2031). Furthermore, the Group has cash due on forward sales of £1,403 million, a significant proportion of
which covers delivery for the next 18 months.
In making this assessment, consideration has been given to the uncertainty inherent in future financial forecasts
and where applicable, severe but plausible sensitivities have been applied to the key factors affecting the financial
performance of the Group. The Directors have a reasonable expectation that the Group has adequate resources
to continue in operational existence for not less than 12 months from the date of approval of these Consolidated
Financial Statements. For this reason, the Directors continue to adopt the going concern basis of accounting in
preparing the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
190 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
1.3 Consideration of climate change
In preparing the Financial Statements, consideration has been given to the Group’s activities to address climate
change as part of Our Vision 2030 and its assessment and reporting of future climate-related transitional and
physical risks under the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) framework, both of which are
set out in the Strategic Report.
The costs incurred in developing the Group’s sites are held in inventory as these are trading in nature and
are therefore taken through cost of sales to match the revenue generated by the sale of properties on each
development. The recognition of cost of sales, and therefore the carrying value of inventory, during a financial year
is made by reference to the latest assessment of each development’s forecast profit margin, which is a key area of
estimation uncertainty as set out in Note 2.13.
The cost of specific climate change related activities undertaken as part of the development of a site are inherently
difficult to disassociate from other input costs as these typically involve a myriad of inter-related design and
construction based solutions, for instance over the selection of key materials and technologies adopted to reduce
embodied carbon and minimise future energy use of the Group’s occupied homes. In turn, these activities are
regulated by prevailing planning and building regulations requirements.
The future cost estimates used to determine the cost of sales recognition during the financial year inherently
reflect the Group’s current development-specific climate-related actions through its cost plans. Consistent with
the inherently higher cost uncertainty of its longer-term developments from evolving regulatory and other market-
led changes, the Group may incur as yet unknown costs associated with its own future climate-related actions as
well as costs arising from the impact of climate change. As set out in Note 2.13, the Group’s cost assessments and
allocation evolve over the life of each development.
1.4 Basis of consolidation
(a) Subsidiaries
The Consolidated Financial Statements comprise the financial statements of the Parent Company and all its
subsidiary undertakings. The accounting date for subsidiary undertakings is 30 April, unless otherwise stated in
Note 2.27.
Subsidiaries are entities controlled by the Group. The Group controls an entity when it is exposed to, or has rights
to, variable returns from its involvement with the entity and has the ability to affect those returns through its
power over the entity. In assessing control, the Group takes into consideration substantive rights that are currently
exercisable. The acquisition date is the date on which control is transferred to the acquirer. The financial statements
of subsidiaries are included in the Consolidated Financial Statements from the date that control commences until
the date that control ceases. Losses applicable to the non-controlling interests in a subsidiary are allocated to the
non-controlling interests even if doing so causes the non-controlling interests to have a deficit balance.
The purchase method of accounting is used to account for the acquisition of subsidiary undertakings by the Group.
Where necessary, adjustments are made to the financial statements of subsidiaries to bring the accounting
policies used in line with those used by the Group. All intra-Group transactions, balances, income and expenses are
eliminated on consolidation. Acquisition-related costs are expensed as incurred.
(b) Joint ventures
Joint ventures are accounted for using the equity method (equity accounted investees) and are initially recognised
at cost.
The Group’s investment includes goodwill identified on acquisition, net of any accumulated impairment losses.
The Consolidated Financial Statements include the Group’s share of the total comprehensive income and equity
movements of equity accounted investees, from the date that joint control commences until the date that joint
control ceases. When the Group’s share of losses exceeds its interest in an equity accounted investee, the Group’s
carrying amount is reduced to £nil and recognition of further losses is discontinued except to the extent that the
Group has incurred legal or constructive obligations or made payments on behalf of an investee.
1.5 Adoption of new and revised standards
The following amendments to standards and interpretations are applicable to the Group and are mandatory for the
first time for the financial year beginning 1 May 2024:
Amendments to IAS 1 Presentation of Financial Statements, Classification of Liabilities as Current or Non-
Current and Non-Current Liabilities with Covenants.
The Group did not have to change its accounting policies or make retrospective adjustments as a result of
these amendments.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 191
1 Basis of preparation continued
1.6 Impact of standards and interpretations in issue but not yet effective
The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) has published the following amendments to IFRSs, which
are not yet effective, and have not been applied to these Consolidated Financial Statements. These amendments
are not expected to have a significant impact on the results of the Group:
IFRS 18 Presentation and Disclosure in Financial Statements;
Annual improvements to IFRS Accounting Standards – Volume 11; and
Amendments to the Classification and Measurement of Financial Instruments (Amendments to IFRS 9 Financial
Instruments and IFRS 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosures).
2 Results for the year
2.1 Revenue
The Group’s revenue derives principally from the sale of residential homes and commercial properties across mixed
use developments in the United Kingdom.
Revenue represents the amounts receivable from the sale of properties, comprising private and affordable
residential homes and commercial properties, ground rent assets and other income directly associated with
residential property development.
For the significant majority of residential and commercial property sales, properties are treated as sold
and profits and revenues are recognised when all performance obligations under the contract have been
satisfied, following which control of the unit is passed to the customer. This is determined as the point of
legal completion.
Where revenue arises on contracts where the customer controls the property during construction and
for which the Group has a right to payment for work performed, the Group recognises revenue over time.
Revenue and costs are recognised with reference to the stage of completion of the contract, measured by
construction progress.
Ground rent and land assets are treated as sold when contracts are exchanged, all material conditions
precedent to the sale have been satisfied and control of the assets has passed to the customer.
An analysis of the Group’s continuing revenue is as follows:
2025 2024
£m £m
Residential revenue
2,432.2
2,395.7
Commercial revenue
14.8
47. 2
Land sale
39.5
21.4
2,486.5
2,464.3
Included within revenue is £403.3 million (2024: £343.2 million) of customer deposits, received in prior years, for
units that legally completed in the year. Included within commercial revenue is £3.7 million (2024: £14.0 million)
of revenue recognised in relation to the stage of completion of the contract. Included within residential revenue is
£27.2 million (2024: £17.0 million) of revenue recognised in relation to the stage of completion of the contract.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
192 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
2.2 Segmental disclosure
Operating segments are identified in a manner consistent with the internal reporting provided to the chief
operating decision maker. The Group determines its reportable segments having regard to permitted
aggregation criteria with the principal condition being that the operating segments should have similar
economic characteristics.
The Group is engaged in residential-led, mixed use property development, comprising for-sale private and
affordable residential revenue and commercial revenue, alongside a Build to Rent platform that is operated and
managed internally.
For the purposes of determining its operating segments, the chief operating decision maker has been identified
as the Executive Committee of the Board. This Committee approves investment decisions, allocates the Group’s
resources and reviews the internal reporting in order to assess performance.
The Group has determined that its operating segments are the management teams that report into the Executive
Committee of the Board, having regard to the types of services provided and the manner in which returns are
earned by the Group. Operating segments with similar economic characteristics have been aggregated, having
regard to the aggregation criteria in IFRS 8.
For the purpose of monitoring segment performance and allocating resources between segments, assets are
considered to be attributable to for-sale private, affordable and commercial revenue and the Group’s Build to
Rent platform.
In line with IFRS 8, an entity shall report separately information about an operating segment that meets any of the
quantitative thresholds. As at 30 April 2025, the assets allocated to the Build to Rent platform are not considered
to meet any of the quantitative thresholds and is therefore not considered reportable.
2.3 Net finance income
2025 2024
£m £m
Finance income
55.8
53.9
Finance costs
Interest payable on borrowings and non-utilisation fees
(29.0)
(29.2)
Amortisation of facility fees
(2.2)
(2.0)
Other finance costs
(10.4)
(10.7)
(41.6)
(41.9)
Net finance income
14.2
12.0
Finance income predominantly represents interest earned on cash deposits. Other finance costs represent imputed
interest on land purchased on deferred settlement terms and lease interest.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 193
2 Results for the year continued
2.4 Profit before taxation
Expenditure recorded in inventory is expensed through cost of sales at the time of the related property
sale. The amount of cost related to each property includes its share of the overall site costs including, where
relevant, its share of forecast costs to complete. See inventories Note 2.13 for further disclosures on the key
estimates and judgements around cost recognition.
Net operating expenditure is recognised in respect of goods and services received when supplied in
accordance with contractual terms. Provision is made when an obligation exists for a future liability in respect
of a past event and where the amount of the obligation can be reliably estimated.
Government grants are recognised when there is reasonable assurance that the Group will comply with the
conditions attached to them and the grants will be received. Grants related to assets are deducted from the
carrying value of the asset, and are recognised in the Income Statement so as to match with the related costs
they are intended to compensate for.
Profit before taxation is stated after charging the following amounts:
2025 2024
£m £m
Staff costs (note 2.5)
263.8
280.5
Depreciation on property, plant and equipment (note 2.10)
1.6
2.3
Depreciation on right-of-use assets (note 2.11)
2.2
2.5
Loss on sale of property, plant and equipment
0.1
5.2
Fees paid and payable to the Company’s auditor for the audit
of the Group and Parent Company
1.5
1.4
Fees paid and payable to the Company’s auditor for other services:
Audit of the Company’s subsidiaries and joint ventures
0.1
0.1
Audit related assurance services
0.1
0.1
Non-audit related assurance services
0.1
0.1
Profit before taxation in the 2025 financial year includes an accrual for the anticipated settlement of the CMA’s
investigation into possible anti-competitive sharing of information in the housebuilding industry.
The value of inventories expensed and included in the cost of sales is £1,756.5 million (2024: £1,757.7 million).
Government grants of £38.9 million (2024: £44.7 million) were received in the year relating to the provision of
highway and other site infrastructure, for which all performance conditions were satisfied. This amount is netted
against inventory and no amount has been recorded in the Income Statement during the year (2024: £nil).
Fees incurred in the year to the Group’s current auditor for audit and non-audit related assurance services
relate to the interim review and assurance services related to carbon emissions and compliance with the Green
Financing Framework.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
194 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
2.5 Directors and employees
Profit before taxation is stated after charging the following amounts:
2025 2024
£m £m
Staff costs:
Wages and salaries
217.8
233.1
Social security costs
27.3
30.0
Share based payments – equity settled
4.8
7.1
Pension costs
13.9
10.3
263.8
280.5
The average monthly number of persons employed by the Group during the year was 2,532 (2024: 2,717).
Key management compensation
Key management comprises the Executive Members of the Board, as they are considered to have the authority
and responsibility for planning, directing and controlling the activities of the Group. Details of Directors’
emoluments included in the Income Statement are as follows:
2025 2024
£m £m
Directors’ remuneration
1.0
1.4
Amount charged under long-term incentive schemes
2.1
3.1
3.1
4.5
The Directors’ Remuneration Report includes disclosure of the gains made by Directors on the exercise of share
options during the year, which were £10.2 million (2024: £9.8 million) in aggregate.
K Whiteman, J Tibaldi and P Vallone stepped down from the Board on 8 September 2023 and remuneration
amounts disclosed in the table, in the prior year, is to the date of stepping down from the Board.
Equity settled share based payments
Where the Company operates equity settled share based compensation plans, the fair value of the employee
services received in exchange for the grant of the options is recognised as an expense. The total amount to be
expensed over the vesting period is determined by reference to the fair value of the options granted, taking
into account only service and non-market conditions.
At each Balance Sheet date, the Group revises its estimate of the number of options that are expected to
vest. It recognises the impact of the revision to original estimates, if any, in the Income Statement, with a
corresponding adjustment to equity.
The proceeds received net of any directly attributable transaction costs are credited to share capital (nominal
value) and share premium when the options are exercised.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 195
2 Results for the year continued
2.5 Directors and employees continued
The Group operates three (2024: three) equity settled share based payment schemes. The charge/(credit) to the
Income Statement in respect of share based payments in the year relating to grants of share options awarded are:
2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (2011 LTIP) credit of £0.4 million (2024: charge of £1.8 million)
2022 Long-Term Option Plan (2022 LTOP) of £3.2 million (2024: £3.7 million)
Restricted Share Plan (RSP) of £2.0 million (2024: £1.6 million)
The charge to the Income Statement attributable to key management was £2.1 million (2024: £3.1 million).
The charge to the reserves during the year in respect of employee share schemes was £2.6 million
(2024: £0.8 million), resulting from the non-cash IFRS 2 charge for the year.
There were nil exercisable share options at the end of the year (2024: nil). During the year:
377,612 options vested under the 2011 LTIP (2024: 481,857) and nil options lapsed (2024: nil)
Nil options vested under the 2022 LTOP (2024: nil) and 200,000 options lapsed (2024: 90,000)
2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan
The 2011 LTIP was approved by shareholders at the 2011 AGM. The 2011 LTIP is designed to incentivise management
to both deliver long-term shareholder returns and create value in the ongoing business. Under the plan eligible
employees are granted options which will only vest if certain performance conditions are satisfied.
The current term of the plan runs for 14 years, with the final options due to vest in September 2025. The original
scheme was due to run until September 2021, but at the 2019 AGM the scheme was extended, for eligible
employees, by four years to September 2025.
The amount of options that vest is dependent on a shareholder return hurdle and, for certain employees, the
remuneration caps in place. Each year options can vest up to the value of their remuneration cap. Any options
prevented from vesting due to the caps are banked, and vest in equal tranches from September 2022 to 2025.
Additional returns equivalent to £2 per annum (approximately £283 million) must be returned to shareholders from
2022 to 2025 in order for the banked options to vest.
Options granted under the plan are for nil consideration and carry no dividend or voting rights. The original option
price was £16.34, which equated to £2.3 billion of shareholder return that needed to be returned to shareholders
over the original term of the LTIP to 2021. The option price for each tranche was reduced by the value of dividend
paid each year, but fixed at 30 September 2021 for subsequent tranches vesting in 2022 to 2025. The fixed option
price for tranches vesting from September 2022 to 2025 is £5.30.
Sale restrictions are in place which provide a maximum of 10% of the cumulative balance of the shares earned to
be sold each year.
The table below summarises the movement in options under the 2011 LTIP during the year:
2025
2024
Option price Number of Option price Number of
per share options per share options
£ No. £ No.
As at 1 May
2,428,990
2,910,847
Exercised during the year
5.30
(377,612)
5.30
(481,857)
As at 30 April
2,051,378
2,428,990
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
196 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
The historic options vested, options banked and the option price are shown in the table below:
2025
Share options
Option price vested Options at
Vesting date £ No. 30 April 2025
30 September 2016
10.00
5,719,166
30 September 2017
8.63
892,487
1,163,737
30 September 2018
7.73
990,955
1,231,409
30 September 2019
7.46
926,265
1,202,514
30 September 2020
5.39
836,466
1,096,471
30 September 2021
5.30
815,903
982,628
30 September 2022
5.30
568,761
30 September 2023
5.30
481,857
30 September 2024
5.30
377,612
Banked options vested
(1,428,230)
Banked options lapsed
(2,197,151)
Total
2,051,378
Fair value of 2011 LTIP options
The assessed fair value of the original options granted, determined using the current market pricing model,
was £3.17. The inputs into the current market pricing model were as follows:
Inputs
Grant date
5 September 2011
Final vesting date
30 September 2021
Share price at date of grant (p)
1,236
Exercise price
£nil
Discount rate (Group’s cost of capital over original vesting period at the grant date)
6.3%
Modifications to the 2011 LTIP, approved at the 2019 AGM, were considered to be non-beneficial due to the
extended service period and requirement for additional shareholder returns. Therefore, there was no impact
on the fair value of the options or accounting treatment applied.
2022 Long-Term Option Plan (LTOP)
The LTOP was approved by shareholders at the 2022 AGM. The LTOP is designed to ensure the remuneration
policy is as closely aligned to the Company’s strategy as possible and rewards management for enhancing value
for shareholders over the long-term. Under the plan, eligible employees are awarded a one-off grant of options
with an initial exercise price of £48.50. Participation in the plan is at the discretion of the Remuneration Committee.
Vesting will occur in five equal tranches between September 2026 and September 2030, with a holding restriction
of at least five years from grant.
The initial exercise price of the options increases by £2.50 per year for vesting dates from September
2027 onwards. As such, the exercise price for the options granted (prior to deductions for dividends as
referenced below) is as follows, which is the only performance condition applied to the plan in addition
to continued employment:
Minimum exercise price
(prior to reductions for
Tranche
Percentage of LTOP Award
Vesting date
shareholder distribution)
1
20%
30 September 2026
£48.50
2
20%
30 September 2027
£51.00
3
20%
30 September 2028
£53.50
4
20%
30 September 2029
£56.00
5
20%
30 September 2030
£58.50
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 197
2 Results for the year continued
2.5 Directors and employees continued
Dividends or other distributions to shareholders (other than share buy-backs) are deducted from the exercise price.
There are caps in place in relation to all options granted. Any options prevented from vesting due to the caps
are lapsed.
The table below summarises the movement in options under the 2022 LTOP during the year:
2025
2024
Number of Number of
options options
No. No.
As at 1 May
4,270,000
4,360,000
Granted during the year
Lapsed during the year
(200,000)
(90,000)
As at 30 April
4,070,000
4,270,000
Fair value of 2022 LTOP options
The assessed fair value of the options granted, determined using a Monte Carlo simulation model,
was £19.35 million. The inputs into the model for the three grant dates were as follows:
Grant date
9 Feb 2023
10 Mar 2023
21 Mar 2023
Number of options
2,400,000
350,000
1,610,000
Share price at grant date (p)
4,308
4,039
4,070
Exercise price
Initial exercise prices from £48.50 for Tranche 1, increasing
by £2.50 for each Tranche to £58.50 for Tranche 5
Dividend yield
0%
Risk free interest rate
3.26%
3.47%
3.22%
Share price volatility
30%
Expected life
Between circa 3.5 years (Tranche 1) and 7.5 years
(Tranche 5) from grant
Restrictive Share Plan (RSP)
The RSP was approved by shareholders at the 2022 AGM. The RSP is designed to incentivise management
to deliver long-term performance. The RSP is an annual restrictive share award with the first awards granted
in September 2022, vesting in 2026 with a further one-year holding period. Participation in the plan is at the
discretion of the Remuneration Committee.
Annual awards are determined by the Remuneration Committee, however the maximum number of shares under
the RSP awards granted to participants will not exceed 175% of the salary of the CEO and 150% of the salary of all
other participating employees.
The vesting of awards is subject to remaining in service and the following two underpin conditions:
i) The average Return on Equity over the four prior financial years must be at least 15%, commencing with the
financial year in which the RSP Awards are granted; and
ii) Up to 20% of the award will be forfeited in the event of unsatisfactory progress against strategic and ESG
priorities over the relevant vesting period.
The vesting of awards is restricted to the level of each employee’s remuneration cap. The remuneration cap is
first applied to the 2022 LTOP to the extent that total remuneration would exceed the cap, followed by the RSP
if required. Any RSP awards in excess of the total remuneration cap will lapse immediately.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
198 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
The table below summarises the movement in options under the RSPs:
2025
2024
Number of Number of
options options
No. No.
As at 1 May
189,949
93,123
Granted during the year
96,826
Lapsed during the year
As at 30 April
189,949
189,949
Fair value of RSPs
The fair values of RSP awards are equal to the share price at grant as these awards are not subject to market-
based performance conditions and they attract dividend equivalents. The values are fixed at grant.
The total fair value of the RSP awards granted during the year was £nil (2024: £4.06 million).
Cash settled share based payments
The cost of cash settled transactions is recognised as an expense over the vesting period measured by
reference to the fair value of the corresponding liability which is recognised on the Statement of Financial
Position. The liability is remeasured at fair value at each Balance Sheet date until settlement with changes in
fair value recognised in the Income Statement.
Pensions
The Group accounts for pensions under IAS 19 ‘Employee Benefits’. The Group has both defined benefit and
defined contribution plans. The defined benefit plan was closed to future accrual with effect from 1 April 2007.
For the defined benefit scheme, the obligations are measured using the projected unit credit method. The
calculation of the net obligation is performed by a qualified actuary. The operating and financing costs of
these plans are recognised separately in the Income Statement; service costs are set annually on the basis
of actuarial valuations of the scheme and financing costs are recognised in the period in which they arise.
Actuarial gains and losses are recognised immediately in the Statement of Comprehensive Income.
Pension contributions under defined contribution schemes are charged to the Income Statement as they fall due.
Defined contribution plan
Contributions amounting to £14.2 million (2024: £9.1 million) were paid into the defined contribution schemes
during the year. There were £2.7 million of contributions outstanding to the scheme at 30 April 2025 (2024:
£1.0 million).
Defined benefit plan
As at 30 April 2025, the Group operated one defined benefit pension scheme which was closed to future accrual
with effect from 1 April 2007. This is a separate Trustee administered fund holding the pension plan assets to meet
long-term pension liabilities for some 154 past employees. The level of retirement benefit is principally based on
salary earned in the last three years of employment prior to leaving active service and is linked to changes in
inflation up to retirement.
The Berkeley Final Salary Plan is subject to an independent actuarial valuation at least every three years. The
most recent valuation was carried out as at 30 April 2022 and finalised on 30 June 2023. The method adopted in
the 2022 valuation was the projected unit credit method, which assumed no allowance for over performance on
investments both prior to and after retirement and inflation linked pension increases derived at each term using
Black Scholes Methodology with a volatility assumption of 1.40% per annum. The market value of the Berkeley
Final Salary Plan assets as at 1 May 2022 was £22.9 million and covered 117% of the scheme’s liabilities. The Group
made additional voluntary contributions of £0.4 million during the year (2024: £0.6 million).
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 199
2 Results for the year continued
2.5 Directors and employees continued
Following the High Court ruling on 26 October 2018, regarding the equalisation of Guaranteed Minimum Pension
(GMP) benefit, the plan was required to adjust benefits to remove the inequalities between the GMP benefits
awarded to males and females. On 20 November 2020, the High Court issued a supplementary ruling in respect
of GMP equalisation with regard to members who transferred out of the scheme prior to the ruling. The plan has
not yet completed a full review of the impact of GMP equalisation and no additional costs have been recognised
during the year (2024: £nil). In prior years an amount of £0.7 million has been allowed as a past service cost.
For the purpose of IAS 19, the 2022 valuation was updated for 30 April 2025.
The most significant risks to which the plan exposes the Group are as follows:
Inflation risk: A rise in inflation rates will lead to higher plan liabilities as a large proportion of the defined
benefit obligation is indexed in line with price inflation. This effect will be limited due to caps on inflationary
increases to protect the plan against extreme inflation.
Investment risk: There is a risk that future investment performance fails to generate expected returns.
Employer covenant risk: There is a risk that the strength of the employer covenant materially weakens which
may impact the ability to support the fund.
Mortality risk: An increase in life expectancy would result in an increase to plan liabilities as a significant
proportion of the pension schemes’ obligations are to provide benefits for the life of the member.
The amounts recognised in the Statement of Financial Position are determined as follows:
2025 2024
£m £m
Present value of defined benefit obligations
(13.3)
(14.3)
Fair value of plan assets
15.6
15.9
Net surplus recognised in the Statement of Financial Position
2.3
1.6
Defined benefit Fair value Net defined
obligations plan assets benefit asset
2025 2024 2025 2024 2025 2024
£m £m £m £m £m £m
Balance at 1 May
(14.3)
(14.5)
15.9
16.2
1.6
1.7
Included in Income Statement:
Net interest
(0.7)
(0.7)
0.8
0.8
0.1
0.1
Included in Other Comprehensive Income:
Remeasurements:
Actuarial gain/(loss) arising from:
Demographic assumptions
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
Scheme experience
0.1
(0.3)
0.1
(0.3)
Financial assumptions
0.8
0.5
0.8
0.5
Return on plan assets
(0.9)
(1.2)
(0.9)
(1.2)
Other:
Contributions by the employer
0.4
0.6
0.4
0.6
Benefits paid out
0.6
0.5
(0.6)
(0.5)
Balance at 30 April
(13.3)
(14.3)
15.6
15.9
2.3
1.6
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
200 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Cumulative actuarial gains and losses recognised in equity:
2025 2024
£m £m
Cumulative amounts of losses recognised in the Statement of
Comprehensive Income at 1 May
(8.4)
(7.7)
Net actuarial gain/(loss) recognised in the year
0.2
(0.7)
Cumulative amounts of losses recognised in the Statement of
Comprehensive Income at 30 April
(8.2)
(8.4)
The fair value of the assets was as follows:
30 April 2025 30 April 2024
Long-term value Long-term value
£m £m
Diversified growth fund
3.3
Absolute return bonds
4.8
4.3
Liquidity driven investment
4.5
4.4
Asset backed securities
4.8
1.8
Cash
1.5
2.1
Fair value of plan assets
15.6
15.9
All equity securities and government bonds have quoted prices in active markets. All Government bonds are issued
by European Governments and are AAA- or AA- rated. All other plan assets are not quoted in an active market.
History of asset values
30 April 30 April 30 April 30 April 30 April
2025 2024 2023 2022 2021
£m £m £m £m £m
Fair value of plan assets
15.6
15.9
16.2
21.4
26.4
Present value of defined benefit obligations
(13.3)
(14.3)
(14.5)
(19.1)
(23.2)
Net surplus in the plan
2.3
1.6
1.7
2.3
3.2
Actuarial assumptions
The major assumptions used by the actuary for the 30 April 2025 valuation were as follows:
30 April 30 April
2025 2024
Discount rate
5.55%
5.20%
Inflation assumption (RPI)
3.30%
3.60%
Inflation assumption (CPI)
2.85%
3.15%
Rate of increase in pensions in payment post 97 (pre-97 receive 3% p.a. increases)
3.75%
3.90%
The mortality assumptions are the standard S3PMA/S3PFA_M CMI_2023_X (1.25%) (2024: S3PMA/S3PFA_M
CMI_2022_X (1.25%)) base table for males and females, both adjusted for each individual’s year of birth to allow
for future improvements in mortality rates. The life expectancy of male and female pensioners (now aged 65)
retiring at age 65 on the Balance Sheet date is 20.8 years and 22.8 years respectively (2024: 20.9 and 22.9 years
respectively). The life expectancy of male and female deferred pensioners (now aged 45) retiring at age 65 after
the Balance Sheet date is 21.7 years and 24.0 years respectively (2024: 22.2 and 24.4 years respectively).
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 201
2 Results for the year continued
2.5 Directors and employees continued
Sensitivity analysis
The calculation of the defined benefit obligation is sensitive to the assumptions set out above. The following table
summarises how the impact on the defined benefit obligation at the end of the reporting period would have
increased/(decreased) as a result of a change in the respective assumptions.
Change in Change in defined
assumption benefit obligation
Discount rate
+0.5% p.a.
£(0.7)m
Rate of inflation
+0.25% p.a.
£0.2m
Rate of mortality
+1 year
£0.4m
These calculations provide an approximate guide to the sensitivity of results and may not be as accurate as a full
valuation carried out on these assumptions. In practice, changes in some of the assumptions are correlated and so
each assumption change is unlikely to occur in isolation, as shown above.
Funding
The Group has no obligation to pay contributions to its defined benefit plan and expects to pay £nil in the year
ending 30 April 2026 (2025: £0.4 million).
2.6 Taxation
The Group applies IAS 12 ‘Income Taxes’ in accounting for taxes on income. Income tax payable on taxable
profits (current tax) is recognised as an expense in the periods in which the profits arise.
The taxation expense represents the sum of current tax payable, including Residential Property Developer Tax
(‘RPDT’), and deferred tax. Current tax and deferred tax are provided at the amounts expected to be paid (or
received) using the tax rules and laws that have been enacted, or substantially enacted, by the reporting date.
The tax charge for the year is as follows:
2025 2024
£m £m
Current tax (including RPDT)
UK current tax payable
(123.5)
(166.0)
Adjustments in respect of previous years
7.4
6.4
(116.1)
(159.6)
Deferred tax (including RPDT)
Deferred tax movements
(28.3)
2.8
Adjustments in respect of previous years
(2.5)
(2.9)
(30.8)
(0.1)
(146.9)
(159.7)
Tax on items recognised directly in equity is as follows:
2025 2024
£m £m
Deferred tax in respect of employee share schemes (note 2.18)
1.2
2.5
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
202 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Corporation tax is calculated at 25% (2024: 25%) of the estimated assessable profit for the year. Taking into
account RPDT at a rate of 4%, the weighted statutory rate of corporate income tax is 29% for the year (2024: 29%).
The tax charge assessed for the year differs from the weighted statutory rate of corporate income tax of 29%
(2024: 29%). The differences are explained below:
2025 2024
£m £m
Profit before tax
528.9
557.3
Tax on profit at standard UK corporation tax rate (including RPDT)
153.4
161.6
Effects of:
Expenses not deductible for tax purposes
1.7
1.0
Tax effect of share of results of joint ventures
0.6
0.6
Adjustments in respect of previous years
(4.9)
(3.5)
Other rate impacting adjustments
(2.0)
Other
(1.9)
Tax charge
146.9
159.7
The Group has an overall tax charge for the year of £146.9 million (2024: £159.7 million) including UK current tax
payable of £123.5 million (2024: £166.0 million). The effective tax rate for the year is 27.8% (2024: 28.7%) and
includes a £2.5 million credit (2024: £2.9 million credit) arising from the remeasurement, in part, of the Group’s UK
deferred tax assets.
In December 2021, the OECD published its proposals in relation to Global Anti-Base Erosion Rules, which provide
for an internationally coordinated system of taxation to ensure that large multinational groups pay a minimum level
of corporate income tax in countries in which they operate. The UK Finance (No. 2) Act 2023, which implements
Pillar Two, was enacted by the UK Government on 11 July 2023. Owing to its size and multinational operations, the
Berkeley Group is within the scope of the OECD Pillar Two model rules for the accounting period 30 April 2025
onwards. The Group has undertaken a review and expects to meet the transitional safe harbour provisions meaning
the top up tax will not be payable. There is no impact on the Group’s results for the year ended 30 April 2025. The
Group applies the exception to recognising and disclosing information about deferred tax assets and liabilities
related to Pillar Two income taxes, as provided in the amendments to IAS 12.
2.7 Earnings per ordinary share
Basic earnings per share (EPS) are calculated as the profit for the financial year attributable to shareholders of the
Group divided by the weighted average number of shares in issue during the year.
For the year ended 30 April
2025
2024
Profit attributable to shareholders (£m)
382.0
397.6
Weighted average no. of shares (million)
102.7
106.3
Basic EPS (pence)
371.8
373.9
For diluted earnings per ordinary share, the weighted average number of shares in issue is adjusted to assume the
conversion of all potentially dilutive ordinary shares.
At 30 April 2025, the Group had two (2024: two) categories of potentially dilutive ordinary shares: 0.4 million
(2024: 0.7 million) share options under the 2011 LTIP and 0.1 million share option (2024: 0.1 million) under the
Restrictive Share Plan.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 203
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
2 Results for the year continued
2.7 Earnings per ordinary share continued
A calculation is undertaken to determine the number of shares that could have been acquired at fair value based
on the aggregate of the exercise price of each share option and the fair value of future services to be supplied to
the Group which is the unamortised share based payments charge. The difference between the number of shares
that could have been acquired at fair value and the total number of options is used in the diluted EPS calculation.
For the year ended 30 April
2025
2024
Profit used to determine diluted EPS (£m)
382.0
397.6
Weighted average number of shares (million)
102.7
106.3
Adjustments for:
Share options – 2011 LTIP
0.4
0.7
Share options – Restrictive Share Plan
0.1
0.1
Shares used to determine diluted EPS (million)
103.2
107.1
Diluted EPS (pence)
370.0
371.1
2.8 Intangible assets
Where the cost of acquiring new and additional interests in subsidiaries, joint ventures and businesses exceeds
the fair value of the net assets acquired, the resulting premium on acquisition (goodwill) is capitalised and its
subsequent measurement is based on annual impairment reviews and impairment reviews performed where
an impairment indicator exists, with any impairment losses recognised immediately in the Income Statement.
Goodwill is allocated to cash-generating units for the purpose of impairment testing. The allocation is made to
those cash-generating units or groups of cash-generating units that are expected to benefit from the business
combination in which the goodwill arose.
Goodwill
£m
Cost:
At 1 May 2024 and 30 April 2025
17.2
Accumulated impairment:
At 1 May 2024 and 30 April 2025
Net book value:
At 1 May 2024 and 30 April 2025
17.2
Cost:
At 1 May 2023 and 30 April 2024
17.2
Accumulated impairment:
At 1 May 2023 and 30 April 2024
Net book value:
At 1 May 2023 and 30 April 2024
17.2
The goodwill balance relates solely to the acquisition of the 50% of the ordinary share capital of St James Group
Limited, completed on 7 November 2006, that was not already owned by the Group. The goodwill balance is
tested annually for impairment. The recoverable amount has been determined on the basis of the value in use of
the business using the current five year pre-tax forecasts. Key assumptions are as follows:
(i) cash flows beyond a five year period are not extrapolated; and
(ii) pre-tax discount rate of 11.0% (2024: 13.1%) based on the Group’s weighted average cost of capital.
The Directors have identified no reasonably possible change in a key assumption which would give rise to an
impairment charge.
204 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
2.9 Investment property
Land and buildings being developed or held to generate capital appreciation and to earn rental income are
recognised as investment properties. Investment property is measured at cost less accumulated depreciation
and impairment losses. Once the asset is ready for use, depreciation is provided to write off the cost of the
assets to the residual values over the useful life. Any gain or loss on the disposal of investment property is
recognised in profit or loss.
Under
development
£m
Cost:
At 1 May 2024
Transfer from inventory
143.7
Additions
2.0
At 30 April 2025
145.7
Carrying amount:
At 1 May 2024
At 30 April 2025
145.7
During the year, £143.7 million of cost was transferred from inventory to investment property in relation to assets
under development given management’s decision to hold these assets in the Group’s BTR platform to earn rental
income and for capital appreciation. Management use criteria to ensure that judgement is exercised consistently
on the appropriate point of cost transfer, the main criteria being the formal decision to contract for the transfer of
ownership of the building under development to asset specific entities which form part of the BTR platform.
As at 30 April 2025, the Directors have internally assessed the fair value of investment property under
development, which approximates cost.
2.10 Property, plant and equipment
Property, plant and equipment is carried at historic purchase cost less accumulated depreciation. Cost includes
the original purchase price of the asset and the costs attributable to bringing the asset to its working condition
for its intended use. Depreciation is provided to write off the cost of the assets on a straight line basis to their
residual value over their estimated useful lives at the following annual rates:
Freehold buildings 25 – 50 years
Fixtures, fittings and equipment 3 – 12 years
Motor vehicles 4 years
Freehold property disclosed in the notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements consists of both freehold
land and freehold buildings. No depreciation is provided on freehold land. Computer equipment is included
within fixtures and fittings. The assets’ residual values, carrying values and useful lives are reviewed on an
annual basis and adjusted if appropriate at each Balance Sheet date. Where an impairment is identified, the
recoverable amount of the asset is identified and an impairment loss, where appropriate, is recognised in the
Income Statement.
Subsequent costs are included in the assets’ carrying amount or recognised as a separate asset, as
appropriate, only when it is probable that future economic benefits associated with the item will flow to the
Group and the cost of the item can be measured reliably. The carrying amount of the replaced part is de-
recognised. All other repairs and maintenance are charged to the Income Statement during the financial period
in which they are incurred.
Gains and losses on disposals are determined by comparing the proceeds with the carrying amount and are
recognised within net operating expenses in the Income Statement.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 205
2 Results for the year continued
2.10 Property, plant and equipment continued
Freehold Fixtures, fittings Motor
property & equipment vehicles Total
£m £m £m £m
Cost:
At 1 May 2024
30.9
5.8
2.3
39.0
Additions
0.8
0.2
1.0
Disposals
(0.3)
(0.4)
(0.7)
At 30 April 2025
30.9
6.3
2.1
39.3
Accumulated depreciation:
At 1 May 2024
5.1
5.0
0.9
11.0
Charge for the year
0.7
0.6
0.3
1.6
Disposals
(0.2)
(0.3)
(0.5)
At 30 April 2025
5.8
5.4
0.9
12.1
Net book value:
At 1 May 2024
25.8
0.8
1.4
28.0
At 30 April 2025
25.1
0.9
1.2
27. 2
Freehold Fixtures, fittings Motor
property & equipment vehicles Total
£m £m £m £m
Cost:
At 1 May 2023
30.9
15.2
2.1
48.2
Additions
0.6
0.8
1.4
Disposals
(10.0)
(0.6)
(10.6)
At 30 April 2024
30.9
5.8
2.3
39.0
Accumulated depreciation:
At 1 May 2023
4.4
8.2
1.0
13.6
Charge for the year
0.7
1.4
0.2
2.3
Disposals
(4.6)
(0.3)
(4.9)
At 30 April 2024
5.1
5.0
0.9
11.0
Net book value:
At 1 May 2023
26.5
7.0
1.1
34.6
At 30 April 2024
25.8
0.8
1.4
28.0
2.11 Right-of-use assets and lease liabilities
The lease liability is initially measured at the present value of the remaining lease payments, discounted using
the Group’s incremental borrowing rate. The Group determines the borrowing rate from external financing
sources and adjusts this to reflect the term of the lease and the type of assets subject to the lease. The lease
term comprises the non-cancellable period of the contract, together with periods covered by an option to
extend the lease where the Group is reasonably certain to exercise that option. Subsequently, the lease liability
is measured by increasing the carrying amount to reflect interest on the lease liability, and reducing it by the
lease payments made. The lease liability is remeasured when the Group changes its assessment of whether it
will exercise an extension or termination option.
Right-of-use assets are initially measured at cost, comprising the initial measurement of the lease liability, plus
any initial direct costs and an estimate of asset retirement obligations, less any lease incentives. Subsequently,
right-of-use assets are measured at cost, less any accumulated depreciation and any accumulated impairment
losses, and are adjusted for certain remeasurements of the lease liability. Depreciation is calculated on a
straight line basis over the length of the lease.
The Group has elected to apply exemptions for short-term leases and leases for which the underlying asset is
of low value. For these leases, payments are charged to the Income Statement on a straight line basis over the
term of the relevant lease.
Right-of-use assets are presented separately in non-current assets on the face of the Consolidated Statement
of Financial Position and lease liabilities are shown separately on the Consolidated Statement of Financial
Position in current liabilities and non-current liabilities depending on the length of the lease term.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
206 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Leasehold Motor
property vehicles Total
£m £m £m
Cost:
At 1 May 2024
13.6
0.9
14.5
Additions
2.0
0.1
2.1
Disposals
At 30 April 2025
15.6
1.0
16.6
Accumulated depreciation:
At 1 May 2024
9.5
0.7
10.2
Charge for the year
2.1
0.1
2.2
Disposals
At 30 April 2025
11.6
0.8
12.4
Net book value:
At 1 May 2024
4.1
0.2
4.3
At 30 April 2025
4.0
0.2
4.2
Lease liabilities included in the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position:
2025 2024
£m £m
Current
2.0
2.1
Non-current
2.3
2.3
Total
4.3
4.4
Amounts recognised in the Consolidated Income Statement:
2025 2024
£m £m
Depreciation charged on right-of-use assets – Office buildings
2.1
2.4
Depreciation charged on right-of-use assets – Motor vehicles
0.1
0.1
Interest on lease liabilities
0.2
0.1
Total
2.4
2.6
The total cash outflow for leases in 2025 was £2.3 million (2024: £2.3 million) .
2.12 Investments in joint ventures
Joint ventures are accounted for using the equity method (equity accounted investees) and are initially
recognised at cost. The Consolidated Financial Statements include the Group’s share of the total
comprehensive income and equity movements of equity accounted investees, from the date that joint control
commences until the date that joint control ceases. When the Group’s share of losses exceeds its interest
in an equity accounted investee, the Group’s carrying amount is reduced to £nil and recognition of further
losses is discontinued except to the extent that the Group has incurred legal or constructive obligations or
made payments on behalf of an investee. For loans to joint ventures, the Group assesses at each reporting
date, the value of the loans against future cash flows. For any credit losses, the carrying value of the asset is
reduced through the write off of the loan amounts recognised in the Income Statement within share of profit
or loss in joint ventures. Management fees received and other recharges to joint ventures are recorded in the
Income Statement.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 207
2 Results for the year continued
2.12 Investments in joint ventures continued
2025 2024
£m £m
Loans
55.5
53.8
Share of post acquisition reserves
187.9
173.2
243.4
227.0
Details of the joint ventures are provided in Notes 2.26 and 2.27.
2025 2024
£m £m
At 1 May
227.0
223.4
Group’s share of profit after taxation for the year
14.7
65.6
Increase in loans to joint ventures
1.7
12.9
Dividends from joint ventures (St Edward)
(74.9)
At 30 April
243.4
227.0
The Group’s share of joint ventures’ net assets, income and expenses is comprised as follows:
St Edward Other Total
2025 £m £m £m
Cash and cash equivalents
278.1
1.5
279.6
Other current assets
262.6
63.5
326.1
Current assets
540.7
65.0
605.7
Current liabilities
(89.0)
(2.3)
(91.3)
Non–current financial liabilities*
(72.9)
(65.7)
(138.6)
Net assets/(liabilities) (at 100%)
378.8
(3.0)
375.8
Group share of net assets/(liabilities) (50%)
189.4
(1.5)
187.9
Loans to joint ventures
22.6
32.9
55.5
Total interest in joint ventures
212.0
31.4
243.4
Revenue
144.6
0.2
144.8
Costs
(122.9)
(1.5)
(124.4)
Operating profit/(loss)
21.7
(1.3)
20.4
Net finance income/(costs)
10.2
(0.6)
9.6
Profit/(loss) before taxation for the year
31.9
(1.9)
30.0
Tax charge
(0.6)
(0.6)
Profit/(loss) after taxation and total comprehensive income/(expense)
(100%)
31.3
(1.9)
29.4
Group share of post tax profit/(loss) of joint ventures (50%)
15.7
(1.0)
14.7
* Non-current financial liabilities include amounts owed to joint venture partners
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
208 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
The Other joint ventures in the table comprise asset specific 50/50 joint ventures – Latimer Developments Limited
and SEGRO Properties Limited.
St Edward Other Total
2024 £m £m £m
Cash and cash equivalents
229.8
0.4
230.2
Other current assets
287.0
61.3
348.3
Current assets
516.8
61.7
578.5
Current liabilities
(109.2)
(0.6)
(109.8)
Non–current financial liabilities*
(59.8)
(62.5)
(122.3)
Net assets/(liabilities) (at 100%)
347. 8
(1.4)
346.4
Group share of net assets/(liabilities) (50%)
173.9
(0.7)
173.2
Loans to joint ventures
22.6
31.2
53.8
Total interest in joint ventures
196.5
30.5
227.0
Revenue
326.8
326.8
Costs
(204.4)
(0.3)
(204.7)
Operating profit/(loss)
122.4
(0.3)
122.1
Net finance income/(costs)
10.4
(0.5)
9.9
Profit/(loss) before taxation for the year
132.8
(0.8)
132.0
Tax charge
(0.8)
(0.8)
Profit/(loss) after taxation and total comprehensive income/(expense)
(100%)
132.0
(0.8)
131.2
Group share of post tax profit/(loss) of joint ventures (50%)
66.0
(0.4)
65.6
* Non-current financial liabilities include amounts owed to joint venture partners.
2.13 Inventories
Property in the course of development and completed units are valued at the lower of cost and net realisable
value. Direct cost comprises the cost of land, material and development costs but excludes indirect overheads.
Provision is made, where appropriate, to reduce the value of inventories and work in progress to their net
realisable value.
Land purchased for development, including land in the course of development, is initially recorded at cost.
Where such land is purchased on deferred settlement terms, and the cost differs from the amount that
will subsequently be paid in settling the liability, this difference is charged as a finance cost in the Income
Statement over the period to settlement.
As residential development is largely speculative by nature, not all inventories are covered by forward sales
contracts. Furthermore, due to the nature of the Group’s activity and in particular, the scale of its developments
and the length of the development cycle, the Group has to allocate site-wide development costs between units
being built and/or completed in the current year and those for future years. It also has to forecast the costs to
complete on such developments.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 209
2 Results for the year continued
2.13 Inventories continued
In making such assessments and allocations in determining each development’s site margin which is used
to estimate cost of sales when revenue is recognised for each unit, there is a degree of inherent estimation
uncertainty. In particular due to the need to take account of future direct input costs, sales prices and the need
to allocate all site-wide costs on an appropriate basis to reflect the overall level of development risk, including
planning risk. The Group has established internal controls designed to effectively assess and centrally review
inventory carrying values and ensure the appropriateness of the estimates made. These assessments and
allocations evolve over the life of the development in line with the risk profile, and accordingly the margin
recognised reflects these evolving estimates. Similarly, these estimates impact the carrying value of inventory
at each reporting date as this is a function of costs incurred in the year and the allocation of inventory to costs
of sales on each property sold.
An increase or decrease to estimated costs recognised in the year, by virtue of a 1% change to forecast
development margin, would lead to a change in cost of sales and inventory of £17.6 million in the current
financial year (2024: £17.6 million). This sensitivity is based on a reasonably possible scenario and is provided in
the absence of a change to any other factor affecting future gross margins on the Group’s developments, such
as a change in future sales prices.
In addition, the Group has consistently applied its approach to margin recognition in relation to the Group’s
particularly complex, long-term regeneration developments where whole-site costs are accelerated to the
early stages of the development to reflect the greater uncertainty and the evolution of risk over the life of such
developments. These developments, where the development life cycle is typically greater than 10 years, are
considered to be particularly susceptible to potential downward shifts in profitability due to the cyclical nature
of the property market and its impact on both revenue and costs. As such, the inherent estimation uncertainty
is increased.
A fundamental principle of the Group’s accounting policy is to reduce the possibility of recognising margin
in the early stages of a development that could subsequently reverse. As such, for these long-term sites with
greatest estimation uncertainty, a greater proportion of whole-site costs is recognised during the earlier stages
of the development up to a point of inflection when such developments are deemed to be sufficiently de-
risked. Subsequent to this inflection point, and should the uncertainties have not materialised, margin would
increase as the visibility over projected revenue and costs across the development improves.
As at 30 April 2025, the greater proportion of whole-site costs recognised in either the current or previous
financial years during the earlier stages of the development for the Group’s particularly complex, long-term
sites amounted to 4% (2024: 4%) of the future estimated revenue for the specific sites. As with all judgements
involving estimation over a long-term horizon, the outcome of future events may affect the eventual
accounting outcome.
2025 2024
£m £m
Land not under development
554.3
725.8
Work in progress: Land cost
1,692.9
1,715.3
Total land
2,247.2
2,441.1
Work in progress: Build cost
2,467.2
2,632.4
Completed units
337.8
210.4
Total inventories
5,052.2
5,283.9
The key areas of estimation uncertainty described above are relevant to the work in progress and completed stock
balances as at 30 April 2025.
During the year, an amount of £143.7 million was transferred from inventory to investment property. Further
disclosure is set out in Note 2.9.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
210 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
2.14 Trade and other receivables
Trade receivables are recognised initially at fair value and subsequently measured at amortised cost using the
effective interest method, less provision for impairment. Expected credit losses are based on the difference
between the contracted cash flows due in accordance with the contract and all the cash flows that the Group
expects to receive, discounted on an approximation of the original effective interest rate. For trade receivables
the Group does not track changes in credit risk, but instead recognises a loss allowance based on lifetime
expected credit losses at each reporting date. The carrying amount of the asset is reduced through the use of
an allowance account, and the amount of the loss is recognised in the Income Statement within net operating
expenses. When a trade receivable is not collectible, it is written off against the allowance account for trade
receivables. Subsequent recoveries of amounts previously written off are credited against net operating
expense in the Income Statement.
2025 2024
£m £m
Trade receivables
47. 2
72.5
Other receivables
18.6
23.6
Prepayments and accrued income
23.0
23.7
88.8
119.8
Further disclosures relating to trade receivables are set out in Note 2.24.
2.15 Cash and cash equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents comprise cash balances in hand and at the bank, including bank overdrafts
repayable on demand which form part of the Group’s cash management, for which offset arrangements across
Group businesses have been applied where appropriate.
2025 2024
£m £m
Cash and cash equivalents
1,015.2
1,192.0
Cash and cash equivalents are held at floating interest rates linked to the UK base rate and money market rates,
as applicable.
Cash equivalents comprise amounts placed in fixed term deposit and notice accounts which are all held in order
to meet short-term cash requirements and are subject to an insignificant risk of changes in value. Cash equivalents
include an amount of £150.8 million (2024: £210.2 million) that is accessible between 90 and 120 days.
2.16 Trade and other payables
New property deposits and on account contract receipts are held within current trade and other payables.
Deposits and on account contract receipts are non-refundable and are recorded as a liability on receipt. They
are released to the Income Statement, as revenue, upon legal completion.
Trade and other payables on normal terms are not interest bearing and are stated at their nominal value which
is considered to be their fair value. Trade payables on extended terms are recorded at their fair value at the
date of acquisition of the asset to which they relate. The discount to nominal value is amortised over the period
of the credit term and charged to finance costs.
Deferred revenue relates to consideration received in advance of units being delivered. Revenue is recognised
in the Income Statement as control is passed to the customer, which has either been determined as the point
of legal completion or, on contracts where the customer controls the property during construction, over time
with reference to the stage of completion.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 211
2 Results for the year continued
2.16 Trade and other payables continued
2025 2024
£m £m
Current
Trade payables
(838.1)
(736.6)
Deposits and on account contract receipts
(711.5)
(907.7)
Other taxes and social security
(5.5)
(9.5)
Deferred income
(37.2)
(52.9)
Accruals
(166.1)
(171.3)
(1,758.4)
(1,878.0)
Non-current
Trade payables
(462.8)
(683.6)
Total trade and other payables
(2,221.2)
(2,561.6)
The reduction in deferred income of £30.9 million (2024: £35.5 million) in the year has been recorded as revenue in
the Income Statement.
All amounts included above are unsecured. The total of £5.5 million (2024: £9.5 million) for other taxes and social
security includes £2.7 million (2024: £4.6 million) for Employers National Insurance provision in respect of share
based payments.
Further disclosures relating to current trade and non-current trade payables are set out in Note 2.24.
2.17 Provisions for liabilities and charges
Provisions are recognised when the Group has a present legal or constructive obligation as a result of past
events, and it is probable that an outflow of resources will be required to settle that obligation, and the amount
has been reliably estimated.
The Group makes assumptions to determine the timing and its best estimate of the quantum of its
construction and other liabilities for which provisions are held.
Provisions include a best estimate of the expected value of its post completion development obligations in
respect of the construction of the Group’s portfolio of complex mixed use property developments which are
expected to be incurred in the ordinary course of business, based on historical experience of the Group’s sites
and current site-specific risks, including matters relating to building fire-safety, but which are uncertain in terms
of timing and quantum. Provisions are discounted to present value where the effect is material.
The Group continually reviews the identified risks that it is aware of for the Group’s portfolio of developments
to ensure that the amount of the provision remains appropriate. The increase in the year relates to post
completion items on a number of sites including matters relating to building fire-safety. The Group continually
reviews its utilisation of this provision and in recognition that the risk of post completion development
obligations reduces over time, releases any unutilised provision to the Income Statement on a systematic basis
across the 10 years following completion.
If costs estimated in the provisions are overstated or understated by 10%, this would lead to a change in cost of
sales and provision of £23.0 million in the current financial year (2024: £21.0 million).
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
212 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Post completion
development Other
provisions provisions Total
£m £m £m
At 1 May 2024
(200.6)
(9.2)
(209.8)
Utilised
12.1
0.1
12.2
Released
7.0
1.4
8.4
Charged to the Income Statement
(36.0)
(4.4)
(40.4)
At 30 April 2025
(217.5)
(12.1)
(229.6)
Post completion
development Other
provisions provisions Total
£m £m £m
At 1 May 2023
(189.0)
(4.6)
(193.6)
Utilised
19.1
0.2
19.3
Released
7.8
7. 8
Charged to the Income Statement
(38.5)
(4.8)
(43.3)
At 30 April 2024
(200.6)
(9.2)
(209.8)
2025 2024
£m £m
Non-current
(153.6)
(140.7)
Current
(76.0)
(69.1)
Total
(229.6)
(209.8)
2.18 Deferred tax
Deferred taxation is the tax expected to be payable or recoverable on differences between the carrying
amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and corresponding tax bases used in the
computation of taxable profit, and is accounted for using the Balance Sheet liability method. Deferred tax
liabilities are generally recognised on all taxable temporary differences. Deferred tax assets are recognised
to the extent that it is probable that taxable profits will be available against which deductible temporary
differences can be utilised. Such assets and liabilities are not recognised if the temporary difference arises
from goodwill, or from the initial recognition (except in a business combination) of other assets and liabilities
in a transaction that affects neither the taxable profit nor the accounting profit, or from differences relating to
investments in subsidiaries to the extent that it is probable that they will not reverse in the foreseeable future.
Deferred taxation is calculated at the tax rates that are expected to apply in the period when the liability is
settled or the asset is realised based on tax laws and rates that have been enacted or substantively enacted
at the Balance Sheet date. The carrying value of deferred tax assets is reviewed at each Balance Sheet date
and reduced to the extent that it is no longer probable that sufficient taxable profits will be available against
which taxable temporary differences can be utilised. Deferred taxation is charged or credited to the Income
Statement, except when it relates to items charged or credited directly to reserves, in which case the deferred
taxation is also dealt with in reserves.
Deferred taxation assets and liabilities are offset when there is a legally enforceable right to offset current tax
assets against current tax liabilities and when the deferred taxation assets and liabilities relate to income taxes
levied by the same taxation authority on either the taxable entity or different taxable entities where there is an
intention to settle the balances on a net basis.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 213
2 Results for the year continued
2.18 Deferred tax continued
The movement on the deferred tax account is as follows:
Accelerated Unrealised Other timing
capital allowances inventory profit differences Total
£m £m £m £m
At 1 May 2024
(2.5)
79.7
39.7
116.9
Adjustments in respect of previous years
(0.9)
(1.6)
(2.5)
Charged to the Income Statement
in the year
(10.6)
(17.7)
(28.3)
Adjustment in respect of change of tax rate for
future periods (note 2.6)
Charged to Income Statement in the year
(10.6)
(17.7)
(28.3)
Charged to equity in year (note 2.6)
1.2
1.2
At 30 April 2025
(2.5)
68.2
21.6
87. 3
Accelerated Unrealised Other timing
capital allowances inventory profit differences Total
£m £m £m £m
At 1 May 2023
(4.2)
77.7
41.0
114.5
Adjustments in respect of previous years
(0.1)
(1.0)
(1.8)
(2.9)
Credited/(charged) to the Income Statement in
the year
1.8
3.0
(2.0)
2.8
Adjustment in respect of change of tax rate for future
periods (note 2.6)
Credited to Income Statement in the year
1.8
3.0
(2.0)
2.8
Charged to equity in year (note 2.6)
2.5
2.5
At 30 April 2024
(2.5)
79.7
39.7
116.9
Other timing differences primarily relates to deferred tax assets held in relation to long-term incentive schemes,
bonuses and provisions.
Deferred tax is calculated in full on temporary differences at the tax rates that are expected to apply for the period
when the asset is realised and the liability is settled.
All deferred tax assets are available for offset against deferred tax liabilities and hence the net deferred tax asset at
30 April 2025 is £87.3 million (2024: £116.9 million).
Deferred tax assets of £39.9 million (2024: £74.6 million) are expected to be recovered after more than one year.
The carrying value of deferred tax assets is reviewed at each Balance Sheet date and reduced to the extent that
it is no longer probable that there will be sufficient available profits to offset all or part of the asset. There are no
unrecognised deferred tax assets as at 30 April 2025.
The deferred tax credited to equity during the year was as follows:
2025 2024
£m £m
Deferred tax movement in the year in respect of employee share schemes (note 2.6)
1.2
2.5
Cumulative deferred tax credited to equity at 1 May
18.8
16.3
Cumulative deferred tax credited to equity at 30 April
20.0
18.8
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
214 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
2.19 Share capital and share premium
Ordinary shares are classified as equity. Incremental costs directly attributable to the issue of new shares or
options are shown in equity as a deduction, net of tax, from the proceeds.
Where any Group company purchases the Company’s equity share capital (treasury shares), the consideration
paid, including any directly attributable incremental costs (net of income taxes) is deducted from equity
attributable to the Company’s equity holders until the shares are cancelled, sold or reissued. Where such
shares are subsequently sold or reissued, any consideration received, net of any directly attributable
incremental transaction costs and the related income tax effects, is included in equity attributable to the
Company’s equity holders.
The movements on allotted and fully paid share capital for the Company in the year were as follows:
Ordinary shares
Share capital
Share premium
2025 2024 2025 2024 2025 2024
No ’000 No ’000 £m £m £m £m
Issued
At start of year
114,712
116,537
6.2
6.3
49.8
49.8
Shares cancelled
(3,321)
(1,825)
(0.2)
(0.1)
Share consolidation
(4,019)
At end of year
107,372
114,712
6.0
6.2
49.8
49.8
On 9 September 2024, a share consolidation was undertaken which reduced the Company’s ordinary share capital,
net of treasury and EBT shares, by 3.51%. The share consolidation replaced the total number of existing ordinary
shares of 114.5 million, with a nominal value of 5.4141 pence each, into a reduced number of new ordinary shares of
110.5 million, each at a nominal value of 5.6110 pence at the time of the consolidation.
Each ordinary share of 5.6110 pence is a voting share in the capital of the Company, is entitled to participate in the
profits of the Company and on the winding up is entitled to participate in the assets of the Company.
During the 2025 financial year, 3,321 thousand shares were repurchased (2024: 1,825 thousand) for a
total consideration of £129.7 million, excluding transaction costs (2024: £72.3 million). These shares were
subsequently cancelled.
On 19 September 2024, 170 thousand ordinary shares (2024: 175 thousand) were allotted and issued to the
Employee Benefit Trust.
On 30 September 2024, 178 thousand ordinary shares (2024: 222 thousand) were transferred from the Employee
Benefit Trust to Executive Directors to satisfy the exercise of options under the 2011 LTIP.
At 30 April 2025, there were 46 thousand shares held in trust (2024: 56 thousand) by the Employee Benefit Trust.
The market value of these shares at 30 April 2025 was £1.9 million (2024: £2.6 million).
At 30 April 2025, there were 8,306 thousand (2024: 8,784 thousand) treasury shares held by the Group. The
market value of the shares at 30 April 2025 was £346.4 million (2024: £414.1 million).
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 215
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
2 Results for the year continued
2.20 Reserves
The movement in reserves is set out in the Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity on page 188.
Capital redemption reserve
The capital redemption reserve was created to maintain the capital of the Company following the redemption of
the B-Shares associated with the Scheme of Arrangement created in 2004 which completed on 10 September
2009 with the re-designation of the unissued B-Shares as ordinary shares.
During the year, 3,321 thousand (2024: 1,825 thousand) shares were repurchased to the value of £129.7 million
(2024: £72.3 million). These shares were subsequently cancelled (2024: 1,825 thousand) as shown in Note 2.19. On
cancellation of the share capital, the capital redemption reserve was credited with the nominal value of shares.
Other reserve
The other reserve of negative £961.3 million (2024: negative £961.3 million) arose from the application of merger
accounting principles to the financial statements on implementation of the capital reorganisation of the Group,
incorporating a Scheme of Arrangement, in the year ended 30 April 2005.
Retained earnings
On 19 September 2024, the Company issued to the Employee Benefit Trust 170 thousand ordinary shares (2024:
175 thousand ordinary shares). On 30 September 2024, 178 thousand ordinary shares were transferred from the
Employee Benefit Trust to Executive Directors to satisfy the exercise of options under the 2011 LTIP (2024: 222
thousand ordinary shares).
2.21 Dividends per share
Dividend distributions to shareholders are recognised as a liability in the period in which the dividends are
appropriately authorised and approved for payout and are no longer at the discretion of the Company.
Unpaid dividends that do not meet these criteria are disclosed in the notes to the financial statements.
2025
2024
Dividend per Dividend per
share share
pence
£m
pence
£m
Amounts recognised as distributions to equity
shareholders during the year:
September 2023
59.30
63.1
March 2024
33.00
35.0
June 2024
33.00
35.0
September 2024 (special dividend)
174.00
183.8
March 2025
33.0 0
33.0
Total dividends
251.8
98.1
2.22 Contingent liabilities
The Group makes provisions for management’s best estimate of post-completion development obligations,
including the cost of remediation associated with building fire-safety matters, and all known material legal and
other claims, and investigations in the ordinary course of business. It is possible that the eventual costs may differ
from management’s current best estimates.
Certain companies within the Group have given performance and other trade guarantees on behalf of other
members of the Group in the ordinary course of business. The Group has performance agreements in the ordinary
course of business of £23.9 million which are guaranteed by third parties (2024: £24.5 million). The Group
considers that the likelihood of an outflow of cash under these agreements is low and that no provision is required.
216 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
2.23 Notes to the Consolidated Cash Flow Statement
Reconciliation of profit after taxation for the year to cash generated from operations:
2025 2024
£m £m
Profit for the financial year
382.0
397.6
Adjustments for:
Taxation
146.9
159.7
Depreciation
3.8
4.8
Loss on sale of property, plant and equipment
0.1
5.2
Finance income
(55.8)
(53.9)
Finance costs
41.6
41.9
Share of results of joint ventures after tax
(14.7)
(65.6)
Non-cash charge in respect of share awards
(2.6)
(0.8)
Changes in working capital:
Decrease in inventories
87.9
18.2
Decrease/(Increase) in trade and other receivables
29.4
(24.4)
Decrease in trade and other payables
(332.8)
(99.7)
Cash generated from operations
285.8
383.0
Reconciliation of net cash flow to net cash:
Net (decrease)/increase in cash and cash equivalents, including bank overdraft
(176.8)
121.6
Movement in borrowings
(17.9)
Movement in net cash in the financial year
(194.7)
121.6
Opening net cash
532.0
410.4
Closing net cash
337. 3
532.0
Net cash as at 30 April:
Cash and cash equivalents
1,015.2
1,192.0
Non-current borrowings
(677.9)
(660.0)
Total borrowings
(677.9)
(660.0)
Net cash*
337.3
532.0
* IFRS 16 lease liabilities are detailed in Note 2.11.
2.24 Capital management, financial instruments and financial risk management
The Group finances its operations by a combination of shareholders’ funds, working capital and, where appropriate,
borrowings. The Group’s objective when managing capital is to maintain an appropriate capital structure in the
business to allow management to focus on creating sustainable long-term value for its shareholders.
The Group monitors capital levels principally by monitoring net cash/debt levels, cash flow forecasts and return
on average capital employed. The Group considers capital employed to be net assets adjusted for net cash/debt.
Capital employed at 30 April 2025 was £3,222.5 million (2024: £3,028.5 million). The increase in capital employed
in the year of £194.0 million reflects a reduction in net cash during the year (2024: £106.6 million).
The Group’s financial instruments comprise financial assets being trade receivables, loans to joint ventures and
cash and cash equivalents; and financial liabilities being borrowings, trade payables excluding other taxes and
social security, lease liabilities and accruals other than those accounted for under IAS 19 ‘Employee Benefits’. Cash
and cash equivalents and borrowings are the principal financial instruments used to finance the business. The other
financial instruments arise in the ordinary course of business.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 217
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
2 Results for the year continued
2.24 Capital management, financial instruments and financial risk management continued
As the Group’s activities are predominantly conducted in sterling there is negligible direct currency risk. Therefore,
the Group’s key financial risks are primarily:
liquidity risk – the risk that suitable funding for the Group’s activities may not be available;
market interest rate risk – the risk that Group financing activities represented by floating borrowings are
adversely affected by fluctuation in market interest rates; and
credit risk – the risk that a counterparty will default on its contractual obligations resulting in a loss to the Group.
Financial instruments: financial assets
The Group’s financial assets can be summarised as follows:
2025 2024
£m £m
Current:
Trade receivables
47. 2
72.5
Loans to joint ventures
55.5
53.8
Cash and cash equivalents
1,015.2
1,192.0
Total financial assets
1,117.9
1,318.3
Trade receivables are non-interest bearing. Of the current trade receivables balance of £47.2 million (2024: £72.5
million) none of the balance was overdue by more than 30 days (2024: £nil).
Cash and cash equivalents are short-term deposits held at either floating rates linked to the Bank of England base
rate or fixed money market rates. There are currently no Group assets that are measured at fair value.
Financial instruments: financial liabilities
The Group’s financial liabilities can be summarised as follows:
2025 2024
£m £m
Current
Trade payables
(838.1)
(736.6)
Lease liabilities
(2.0)
(2.1)
Accruals
(105.7)
(107.1)
(945.8)
(845.8)
Non-current
Trade payables
(462.8)
(683.6)
Lease liabilities
(2.3)
(2.3)
Borrowings
(677.9)
(660.0)
(1,143.0)
(1,345.9)
Total trade and other payables
(2,088.8)
(2,191.7)
All amounts included above are unsecured, except for borrowings under the Group’s bank facilities as set out later
in this note.
Trade payables and other current liabilities are non-interest bearing.
218 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
The maturity profile of the Group’s non-current financial liabilities, all of which are held at amortised cost, is as
follows:
2025 2024
£m £m
Amounts due:
In more than one year but not more than two years
(97.5)
(229.2)
In more than two years but not more than five years
(525.8)
(504.2)
In more than five years
(519.7)
(612.5)
(1,143.0)
(1,345.9)
Current trade receivables and current trade and other payables approximate to their fair value as the transactions
which give rise to these balances arise in the normal course of trade and, where relevant, with industry standard
payment terms and have a short period to maturity (less than one year).
Non-current trade payables comprise long-term land payables, which are held at their discounted present value
(calculated by discounting expected future cash flows at prevailing interest rates and yields as appropriate),
and borrowings. The discount rate applied reflects the Group’s credit risk, which is considered to be aligned to a
nominal, low risk pre-tax rate, on initial recognition of the financial liability, applied to the maturity profile of the
individual land creditors within the total. Non-current bank loans approximate to fair value as they are held at
variable market interest rates. The fair value of the £400 million unsecured 10-year Green Bonds at 30 April 2025
was determined by the ask price of £81.80 per £100 (2024: £75.86 per £100).
Liquidity risk
This is the risk that suitable funding for the Group’s activities may not be available. Group management addresses
this risk through review of rolling cash flow forecasts throughout the year to assess and monitor the current and
forecast availability of funding, and to ensure sufficient headroom against facility limits and compliance with
banking covenants. The committed borrowing facilities are set out below.
The contractual undiscounted maturity profile of the Group’s financial liabilities, which are included at their
carrying value in the preceding tables, is as follows:
2025 2024
£m £m
Amounts due:
In less than one year
(947.8)
(846.9)
In more than one year but not more than two years
(99.3)
(234.4)
In more than two years but not more than five years
(543.2)
(517. 2)
In more than five years
(526.7)
(631.6)
(2,117.0)
(2,230.1)
Deposits and on account contract receipts are not included in the table above as they represent deferred income
and therefore do not have a payment maturity date.
Market interest rate risk
The Group’s cash and cash equivalents, bank and Homes England loans expose the Group to cash flow interest
rate risk.
The Group’s rolling cash flow forecasts incorporate appropriate interest assumptions, and management carefully
assesses expected activity levels and associated funding requirements in the prevailing and forecast interest rate
environment to ensure that this risk is managed.
If interest rates on the Group’s cash and cash equivalents and bank loans had been 50 basis points higher
throughout the year ended 30 April 2025, profit after tax for the year would have been £1.6 million higher (2024:
£1.7 million). This calculation is based on the monthly closing net cash/debt balance throughout the year. A 50
basis point increase in interest rate represents management’s assessment of a reasonably possible change for the
year ended 30 April 2025.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 219
2 Results for the year continued
2.24 Capital management, financial instruments and financial risk management continued
Credit risk
The Group’s exposure to credit risk encompasses these financial assets: trade receivables, loans to joint ventures
and cash and cash equivalents. The Group has assessed expected credit losses and the loss allowance for trade
and other receivables and loans to joint ventures as immaterial.
There has been no impairment of trade receivables during the year (2024: £nil), nor are there any material provisions
held against trade receivables (2024: £nil), and £nil trade receivables are past their due date (2024: £nil).
The credit risk on cash and cash equivalents is limited because counterparties are leading international banks with
long-term A credit ratings assigned by international credit agencies.
Borrowings
Borrowings are recognised initially at fair value, net of transaction costs incurred. Any difference between the
proceeds (net of transaction costs) and the redemption value is recognised in the Income Statement over the
period of the borrowings using the effective interest method.
The Group has committed corporate borrowing facilities as follows:
2025
2024
Drawn/ Drawn/
Available issued Undrawn Available Available issued Undrawn Available
£m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m
Bank facilities
Green Term Loan
260
(260)
Feb-29
260
(260)
Feb-29
Revolving Credit
Facility
540
540
Feb-29
540
540
Feb-29
Listed debt
Green Bonds
400
(400)
Aug-31
400
(40 0)
Aug-31
1,200
(660)
540
1,200
(660)
540
The £400 million unsecured 10-year Green Bonds mature in August 2031 at a fixed coupon of 2.5% per annum and
are listed on the International Securities Market of the London Stock Exchange plc. The Group is in compliance
with all of the financial covenants associated with the bonds.
The £800 million banking facilities comprise a £260 million Green Term Loan, which was initially drawn in March
2022 and bears interest at a rate linked to SONIA, and a £540 million Revolving Credit Facility (RCF) which
remains undrawn. The bank facilities are secured by debentures provided by certain Group holding companies over
their assets. The Group’s £800 million banking facilities are in place to February 2029.
The Group’s bank facilities contain the usual financials covenants, including minimum interest cover, asset cover
and maximum gearing, which are reported on bi-annually in line with the Group’s accounting dates. The Group is in
compliance with all the financial covenants associated with the bank facilities and expects to continue to do so.
At 30 April 2025, the total drawn balance of these combined borrowing facilities was £660.0 million (2024: £660.0
million). At 30 April 2025 there were £nil bank bonds in issue (2024: £nil) which are capable of being issued under
ancillary facilities available as part of the Group’s RCF.
The Group has a borrowing facility with Homes England whereby it may apply amounts borrowed towards
financing or re-financing certain infrastructure type development costs incurred by the Group on three of its
development sites. The facility totals £125.6 million, is unsecured, has floating interest rates linked to the UK base
rate and requires 33.33% of any outstanding loans to be repaid by 31 December 2031, 50% by 31 December 2032
and 100% by 31 December 2033.
On 10 January 2025, £17.9 million was drawn down from the borrowing facility with Homes England. As at 30 April
2025 £17.9 million was an outstanding loan (2024: £nil). There were no non-cash changes to borrowings.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
220 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
2.25 Alternative performance measures
Berkeley uses a number of alternative performance measures (APMs) which are not defined by IFRS. The Directors
consider these measures useful to assess the underlying performance of the Group alongside the relevant IFRS
financial information. They are referred to as Financial KPIs throughout the year end results. The information below
provides a definition of APMs and reconciliation to the relevant IFRS information, where required:
Net cash
Net cash is defined as cash and cash equivalents, less total borrowings. This is reconciled in Note 2.23.
Net assets value per share attributable to shareholders (NAVPS)
This is defined as net assets attributable to shareholders divided by the number of shares in issue, excluding shares
held in treasury and shares held by the Employee Benefit Trust.
2025
2024
Net assets (£m)
3,559.8
3,560.5
Total shares in issue (million)
107.4
114.7
Less:
Treasury shares held (million)
(8.3)
(8.7)
Employee Benefit Trust shares held (million)
(0.1)
(0.1)
Net shares used to determine NAVPS (million)
99.0
105.9
Net asset value per share attributable to shareholders (pence)
3,595
3,363
Return on capital employed (ROCE)
This measures the profitability and efficiency of capital being used by the Group and is calculated as profit before
interest and taxation (including joint venture profit before tax) divided by the average net assets adjusted for
debt/(cash).
2025 2024
£m £m
Operating profit
500.0
479.7
Share of joint ventures using equity method
14.7
65.6
Profit used to determine ROCE
514.7
545.3
Opening capital employed:
Net assets
3,560.5
3,332.3
Net cash
(532.0)
(410.4)
Opening capital employed
3,028.5
2,921.9
Closing capital employed:
Net assets
3,559.8
3,560.5
Net cash
(337. 3)
(532.0)
Closing capital employed
3,222.5
3,028.5
Average capital employed
3,125.5
2,975.2
Return on capital employed (%)
16.5%
18.3%
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 221
2 Results for the year continued
2.25 Alternative performance measures continued
Return on equity (ROE) before tax
This measures the efficiency of returns generated from shareholder equity before taxation and is calculated
as profit before taxation attributable to shareholders as a percentage of the average of opening and closing
shareholders’ funds.
2025 2024
£m £m
Opening shareholders’ equity
3,560.5
3,332.3
Closing shareholders’ equity
3,559.8
3,560.5
Average shareholders’ equity
3,560.2
3,446.4
Profit before tax
528.9
557.3
Return on equity before tax (%)
14.9%
16.2%
Cash due on forward sales
This measures cash still due from customers, allowing for a risk adjustment, at the relevant Balance Sheet date
under unconditional contracts for sale. It excludes forward sales of affordable housing, commercial properties and
institutional sales as well as forward sales within the Group’s joint ventures.
Future gross margin in land holdings
This represents management’s risk-adjusted assessment of the potential gross profit for each of the Group’s sites,
including the proportionate share of its joint ventures, taking account of a wide range of factors, including: current
sales and input prices; the economic and political backdrop; the planning and regulatory regime; and other market
factors; all of which could have a significant effect on the eventual outcome.
2.26 Related party transactions
The Group has entered into the following related party transactions:
Transactions with Directors
There were no transactions with Directors in the year. In the comparative 2024 year, Mr R C Perrins paid £99,683
and P M Vallone paid £5,831 to the Group in connection with works carried out at their respective homes at
commercial rates in accordance with the relevant policies of the Group. There were no balances outstanding at
either year end.
Transactions with joint ventures
During the financial year, the joint ventures paid management fees and other recharges to the Group of £10.4
million (2024: £14.2 million). Other transactions in the year include the movements in loans of £1.7 million (2024:
£12.9 million) and there were no receipt of dividends (2024: £74.9 million).
The outstanding loan balances with joint ventures at 30 April 2025 total £55.5 million (30 April 2024:
£53.8 million).
2.27 Subsidiaries and joint ventures
(a) Subsidiaries
In accordance with Section 409 of the Companies Act 2006, a full list of subsidiaries, partnerships, associates, joint
ventures and joint arrangements, the country of incorporation, the registered address and the effective percentage
of equity owned, as at 30 April 2025 is disclosed below. The Berkeley Group plc is the only direct subsidiary of The
Berkeley Group Holdings plc and is an intermediate holding company. All wholly owned and partly owned subsidiaries
are included in the consolidation and all associated undertakings are included in the Group’s financial statements.
All of the companies listed below are incorporated in England and Wales and have their registered office address
at Berkeley House, 19 Portsmouth Road, Cobham, Surrey, KT11 1JG, unless otherwise stated, and the principal
activity is residential-led mixed use development and ancillary activities. All of the companies are wholly owned by
the Group and unless otherwise indicated, all of the companies have ordinary share capital.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
222 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Agents of Berkeley Commercial Developments Limited
Ely Business Park Limited
Agents of Berkeley Homes (Central London) Limited
Chelsea Bridge Wharf (Block A) Limited
Chelsea Bridge Wharf (C North) Limited
Chelsea Bridge Wharf (Block B) Limited
Chelsea Bridge Wharf (C South) Limited
Chelsea Bridge Wharf (Block P) Limited
Agents of Berkeley Homes (Hampshire) Limited
Berkeley Homes (South Western House No. 1) Limited
Agents of Berkeley Homes public limited company
Berkeley (Canalside) Limited
Berkeley Homes (Surrey) Limited
Berkeley Build Limited
Berkeley Homes (Thames Gateway) Limited
Berkeley Fifty-Five Limited
Berkeley Homes (Thames Valley) Limited
Berkeley Forty-Five Limited
(i)
Berkeley Homes (Three Valleys) Limited
Berkeley Forty-Four plc
Berkeley Homes (Urban Developments) Limited
Berkeley Gateway Limited
Berkeley Homes (Urban Living) Limited
Berkeley Homes (Barn Elms) Limited
Berkeley Homes (Urban Renaissance) Limited
Berkeley Homes (Capital) plc
Berkeley Homes (Western) Limited
Berkeley Homes (Central & West London)
Public Limited Company
Berkeley Homes (West London) Limited
Berkeley Homes (Central London) Limited
Berkeley Homes (West Thames) Limited
Berkeley Homes (Chiltern) Limited
Berkeley Modular Limited
Berkeley Homes (East Anglia) Limited
Berkeley Ninety-One Limited
Berkeley Homes (East Kent) Limited
Berkeley Partnership Homes Limited
Berkeley Homes (East Thames) Limited
Berkeley Seven Limited
Berkeley Homes (Eastern Counties) Limited
Berkeley STE Limited
Berkeley Homes (Eastern) Limited
Berkeley SW Management Limited
Berkeley Homes (Festival Waterfront Company) Limited
Berkeley Urban Renaissance Limited
Berkeley Homes (Hampshire) Limited
Clare Homes Limited
Berkeley Homes (Home Counties) plc
Lisa Estates (St Albans) Limited
Berkeley Homes (North East London) Limited
PEL Investments Limited
Berkeley Homes (Oxford & Chiltern) Limited
St John Homes Limited
(viii)
Berkeley Homes (South East London) Limited
St Joseph Homes Limited
Berkeley Homes (South London) Limited
Stanmore Relocations Limited
Berkeley Homes (Southern) Limited
Tabard Square (Building C) Limited
Agents of Berkeley Twenty Limited
Thirlstone Homes (Western) Limited
Thirlstone Homes Limited
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 223
2 Results for the year continued
2.27 Subsidiaries and joint ventures continued
Agents of St George Central London Limited
Castle Court Putney Wharf Limited
Imperial Wharf (Block J) Ltd
Imperial Wharf (Block C) Limited
Imperial Wharf (Riverside Tower) Residential Limited
Agents of St George plc
St George Central London Limited
St George North London Limited
St George City Limited
St George South and Central London Limited
St George Developments Limited
St George South London Ltd
(vii)
St George Kings Cross Limited
St George West London Ltd
(ii)
Agents of St George South London Ltd
Battersea Reach Estate Company Limited
Riverside West (Block D) Residential Limited
Kensington Westside No. 2 Limited
Riverside West Car Park Limited
Putney Wharf Estate Limited
St George Wharf (Block B) Limited
Riverside West (Block C) Commercial Limited
St George Wharf (Block C) Limited
Riverside West (Block C) Residential Limited
St. George Wharf (Block D) Commercial Limited
Riverside West (Block D) Commercial Limited
St George Wharf Car Park Limited
Agents of St John Homes Limited
Berkeley Sixty-Six Limited
Non-Agency Companies
(v)
Ancestral Homes Limited
Berkeley Fifty-Two Limited
Berkeley (Inner-City Partnerships) Limited
Berkeley First Limited
Berkeley (SQP) Limited
Berkeley Five Limited
Berkeley (Virginia Water) Limited
(i)
Berkeley Forty Limited
Berkeley Affordable Homes Limited
Berkeley Forty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Asset MSA Limited
Berkeley Forty-Seven Limited
Berkeley College Homes Limited
Berkeley Forty-Six Limited
Berkeley Commercial Developments Limited
Berkeley Forty-Three Limited
Berkeley Commercial Investments Limited
Berkeley Forty-Two Limited
Berkeley Commercial Limited
Berkeley Fourteen Limited
Berkeley Community Villages Limited
Berkeley Group Pension Trustees Limited
Berkeley Construction Limited
Berkeley Group Services Limited
Berkeley Developments Limited
(i)
Berkeley Group SIP Trustee Limited
Berkeley Eighteen Limited
Berkeley Guarantee One Limited
Berkeley Eighty Limited
Berkeley Homes (Carmelite) Limited
Berkeley Eighty-One Limited
Berkeley Homes (Chertsey) Limited
Berkeley Eighty-Three Limited
Berkeley Homes (City & East London) Limited
Berkeley Eighty-Two Limited
Berkeley Homes (City) Limited
Berkeley Enterprises Limited
Berkeley Homes (Dorset) Limited
Berkeley Festival Development Limited
Berkeley Homes (East London) Limited
Berkeley Festival Hotels Limited
Berkeley Homes (Essex) Limited
Berkeley Festival Investments Limited
Berkeley Homes (Fleet) Limited
(i)
Berkeley Festival Limited
Berkeley Homes (Greater London) Limited
Berkeley Fifty Limited
Berkeley Homes (Hertfordshire & Cambridgeshire) Limited
Berkeley Fifty-Eight Limited
Berkeley Homes (Kent) Limited
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
224 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Non-Agency Companies
(v)
Berkeley Fifty-Four Limited
Berkeley Homes (North Western) Limited
(i)
Berkeley Fifty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Homes (PCL) Limited
Berkeley Fifty-One Limited
Berkeley Homes (South) Limited
Berkeley Fifty-Seven Limited
Berkeley Homes (Southall) Limited
Berkeley Homes (Southern Counties) Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Fifty-One Limited
Berkeley Homes (Stanmore) Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Fifty-Seven Limited
Berkeley Homes Group Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Fifty-Six Limited
Berkeley Homes public limited company
(iii) (viii)
Berkeley One Hundred and Fifty-Three Limited
Berkeley London Residential Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Fifty-Two Limited
Berkeley Manhattan Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Five Limited
Berkeley Ninety-Eight Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Forty Limited
Berkeley Ninety-Five Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Forty-Eight Limited
Berkeley Ninety-Nine Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Forty-Five Limited
Berkeley Ninety-Seven Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Forty-Four Limited
Berkeley Ninety-Six Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Forty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Number Four Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Forty-One Limited
Berkeley Number Seven Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Forty-Seven Limited
Berkeley Number Six Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Forty-Six Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eight Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Four Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eighteen Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Nine Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eighty Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Ninety Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eighty-Eight Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Ninety-Eight Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eighty-Five Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Ninety-Five Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eighty-Nine Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Ninety-Four Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eighty-One Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Ninety-Nine Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eighty-Seven Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Ninety-Seven Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eighty-Two Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Ninety-Six Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Fifteen Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and One Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Fifty Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Seven Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Fifty-Eight Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Seventeen Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Fifty-Five Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Seventy-Eight Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Fifty-Four Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Seventy-Five Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Fifty-Nine Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Seventy-Four Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Seventy-Nine Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-Nine Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Seventy-One Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-One Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Seventy-Seven Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-Seven Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Seventy-Six Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-Six Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Seventy-Three Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-Three Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Seventy-Two Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-Two Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Six Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Two Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Sixteen Limited
Berkeley Portsmouth Harbour Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Sixty-Five Limited
Berkeley Portsmouth Waterfront Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Sixty-Four Limited
Berkeley Properties Limited
(i)
Berkeley One Hundred and Sixty-One Limited
Berkeley Residential Limited
(i)
Berkeley One Hundred and Sixty-Six Limited
Berkeley Ryewood Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Sixty-Three Limited
Berkeley Seventy Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirteen Limited
Berkeley Seventy-Four Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty Limited
Berkeley Seventy-One plc
(vii)
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 225
Non-Agency Companies
(v)
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-Eight Limited
Berkeley Seventy-Seven Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-Five Limited
Berkeley Seventy-Six Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-Four Limited
Berkeley Seventy-Three Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Seventy-Two Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-One Limited
Berkeley Sixty Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-Seven Limited
Berkeley Sixty-Eight Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-Six Limited
Berkeley Sixty-Five Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-Three Limited
Berkeley Sixty-Four Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-Two Limited
Berkeley Sixty-Nine Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Three Limited
Berkeley Sixty-One Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty Limited
Berkeley Special Projects Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-Eight Limited
Berkeley Strategic Land Limited
(vii)
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-Five Limited
Berkeley Sustainable Communities Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-Four Limited
Berkeley Thirty-Eight Limited
Berkeley Thirty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Forty-Six Limited
Berkeley Thirty-Three Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Forty-Three Limited
Berkeley Three Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Forty-Two Limited
Berkeley Twenty Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fourteen Limited
Berkeley Twenty-Eight Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Nine Limited
Berkeley Twenty-Four Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Nineteen Limited
Berkeley Twenty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and One Limited
(i)
Berkeley Twenty-Seven Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Seven Limited
Berkeley Twenty-Three Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Seventeen Limited
Berkeley Twenty-Two Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Seventy Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Eight Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Seventy-One Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Eighteen Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Sixty Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Eleven Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Sixty-Eight Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Sixty-Four Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-Eight Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Sixty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-Five Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Sixty-Seven Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-Four Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Sixty-Six Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Sixty-Three Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-One Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Sixty-Two Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-Seven Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Thirteen Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-Six Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Thirty Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-Three Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Thirty-Four Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-Two Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Thirty-One Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Five Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Thirty-Six Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Forty-Eight Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Thirty-Three Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Forty-Five Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Thirty-Two Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Forty-Four Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Three Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Forty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Twelve Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Forty-Seven Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Twenty Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Twenty-Eight Limited
Great Woodcote Park Management Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Twenty-Four Limited
Hertfordshire Homes Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Twenty-Nine Limited
Historic Homes Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Twenty-Seven Limited
Kentdean Limited
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
2 Results for the year continued
2.27 Subsidiaries and joint ventures continued
226 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Non-Agency Companies
(v)
Berkeley Two Hundred and Twenty-Six Limited
One Tower Bridge Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Twenty-Three Limited
Oval Works Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Twenty-Two Limited
Paddington Green Propco Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Two Limited
Quod Erat Demonstrandum Properties Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred Limited
Retirement Homes Limited
Berkeley Ventures Limited
Royal Clarence Yard (Marina) Limited
BH (City Forum) Limited
Royal Clarence Yard (Phase A) Limited
Boardcable Limited
(viii)
Royal Clarence Yard (Phase B) Limited
Bromyard House (Car Park) Limited
Royal Clarence Yard (Phase C) Limited
Bromyard House (Freehold) Limited
Royal Clarence Yard (Phase E) Limited
Bromyard House (North) Limited
Royal Clarence Yard (Phase G) Management
Company Limited
Bromyard House Limited
Royal Clarence Yard (Phase H) Limited
BWW Management Limited
(viii)
Royal Clarence Yard (Phase I) Limited
Charco 143 Limited
(i)
Royal Clarence Yard (Phase K) Management
Company Limited
Chelsea Bridge Wharf (Management Company) Limited
Royal Clarence Yard Estate Limited
Chelsea Bridge Wharf Car Park Limited
(viii)
Sandgates Developments Limited
(i)
Community Housing Action Limited
Sitesecure Limited
Community Villages Limited
SJC (Highgate) Limited
(viii)
CPWGCO 1 Limited
South Quay Plaza Management Limited (62.5%)
(vi)
Drummond Road (Number 1) Ltd
St Edward Limited
Drummond Road (Number 2) Ltd
St George (Crawford Street) Limited
Exchange Place No.2 Limited
St George (Queenstown Place) Limited
Fishguard Bridge Limited
St George Blackfriars Limited
Fishguard Tunnel Limited
St George Commercial Limited
St George Ealing Limited
St William Nine Limited
St. George Eastern Ltd
St William Nineteen Limited
St. George Inner Cities Ltd.
St William One Ltd
St. George Investments Ltd
St William Seven Limited
St. George London Ltd
St William Seventeen Limited
St George Northfields Limited
St William Six Limited
St. George Partnerships Ltd
St William Sixteen Limited
St George plc
(iv)
St William Ten Limited
St George Project Management Limited
St William Thirteen Limited
St. George Properties Ltd.
St William Three Ltd
St George Real Estate Limited
St William Twelve Limited
St George Regeneration Limited
St William Twenty Limited
St. George Southern Ltd
St William Twenty-Eight Limited
St. George Western Ltd
St William Twenty-Five Limited
St George Wharf Hotel Limited
St William Twenty-Four Limited
St. George’s Hill Property Company Limited
St William Twenty-One Limited
St James Group Limited
St William Twenty-Seven Limited
St James Homes (Grosvenor Dock) Limited
St William Twenty-Six Limited
St James Homes Limited
(viii)
St William Twenty-Three Limited
St Katharine Homes Limited
(ix)
St William Twenty-Two Limited
St William Eight Limited
St William Two Ltd
St William Eighteen Limited
Tabard Square (Building A) Limited
St William Eleven Limited
Tabard Square (Building B) Limited
St William Fifteen Limited
Tabard Square (Car Park) Limited
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 227
Non-Agency Companies
(v)
St William Five Limited
TBG (3)
2009
Limited
St William Four Ltd
The Berkeley Festival Waterfront Company Limited
St William Fourteen Limited
The Berkeley Group plc
St William Holdings Limited
The Millennium Festival Leisure Company Limited
St William Homes LLP
The Oxford Gateway Development Company Limited
The Tower, One St George Wharf Limited
(i)
Thirlstone plc
(ii)
Thirlstone (JLP) Limited
Woodside Road Limited
Thirlstone Commercial Limited
(i) A ordinary and B ordinary shares
(ii) Ordinary and preference shares
(iii) Ordinary and deferred shares
(iv) Ordinary, deferred and preference shares
(v) List contains companies that are a principal to agency agreements but are not agents themselves
(vi) Registered office is 83 The Avenue, Sunbury-On-Thames, Middlesex, TW16 5HZ
(vii) Ordinary and redeemable preference shares
(viii) Registered office is 19 Portsmouth Road, Cobham, Surrey, KT11 1JG
(ix) Formerly known as Berkeley Forty-Eight Limited
Partnership with no share capital
The subsidiary companies listed below are incorporated outside of England and Wales. Their country of incorporation
and registered offices are listed below. Their principal activities continue to be that of residential-led mixed use
development and ancillary activities. All of the companies are wholly owned by the Group and unless otherwise
indicated, all of the companies have ordinary share capital.
Country of
incorporation
Registered office
Aragon Investments Limited
(ii)
Jersey
28 Esplanade, St. Helier, JE2 3QA, Jersey
Berkeley (Carnwath Road) Limited
Isle of Man
First Floor, Jubilee Buildings, Victoria Street, Douglas, IM1
2SH, Isle of Man
Berkeley (Hong Kong) Limited
Hong Kong
3806
Central Plaza, 18 Harbour Road, Wanchai, Hong Kong
Berkeley Homes Special Contracts
Scotland
Saltire Court, 20 Castle Terrace, Edinburgh, EH1 2EN
Public Limited
(iii)
Berkeley Property Investments Limited
Jersey
28 Esplanade, St. Helier, JE2 3QA, Jersey
Berkeley Real Estate Consulting (Beijing)
China
Unit 1902,
floor 19, No.1, Guanghua Road, ChaoYang District,
Co. Limited
*
Beijing, China
Berkeley Residential (Singapore) Limited
Singapore
77 Robinson Road, #13-00 Robinson 77, Singapore 068896
Berkeley Whitehart Investments Limited
Jersey
28 Esplanade, St. Helier, JE2 3QA, Jersey
Real Star Investments Limited
(i)(ii)
Jersey
28 Esplanade, St. Helier, JE2 3QA, Jersey
Silverdale One Limited
(ii)
Jersey
28 Esplanade, St. Helier, JE2 3QA, Jersey
St George Battersea Reach Limited
Jersey
2 Hill Street, St. Helier, JE2 4UA, Jersey
(i) Agency company of St James Group Limited
(ii) Non-UK nominee company
(iii) Ordinary, A deferred and B deferred shares
* Accounting date of 31 December
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
2 Results for the year continued
2.27 Subsidiaries and joint ventures continued
228 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
(b) Joint ventures
At 30 April 2025, the Group had an interest in the following joint ventures which have been equity accounted to
30 April and have an accounting date of 30 April unless otherwise indicated. All of the companies listed below
are incorporated in England and Wales and have their registered office address at Berkeley House, 19 Portsmouth
Road, Cobham, Surrey, KT11 1JG, unless otherwise stated, and the principal activity is residential-led mixed use
development and ancillary activities. All of the companies are 50% owned by the Group and unless otherwise
indicated, all of the companies have ordinary share capital.
Berkeley Carlton Holdings Limited
(ii)
St Edward Homes Number Five Limited
**
Berkeley Sutton Limited
(ii)
St Edward Homes Number Four Limited
**
Diniwe One Limited
St Edward Homes Number One Limited
**
Diniwe Two Limited
St Edward Homes Number Three Limited
**(v)
Berkeley Latimer Estates Limited
(ii) (v)***
St Edward Homes Number Two Limited
**
Berkeley Two Hundred and Sixty-Five LLP
(i)(vi)
St Edward Homes Partnership Freeholds Limited
Mayflower Residential Limited
(ii) (v)***
St Edward Strand Partnership Freeholds Limited
Segro V-Park Grand Union LLP
*†
St George Little Britain (No. 1) Limited
(ii)
SEH Manager Limited
St George Little Britain (No.2) Limited
(ii)
SEH Nominee Limited
Strand Property Unit Trust (unregistered)
SES Manager Limited
(ii)
The St Edward Homes Partnership
(unregistered partnership)
(i)
SES Nominee Limited
The St Edward (Strand) Partnership
(unregistered partnership)
(i)
St Edward Homes Limited
(iii)
U B Developments Limited
(iv) (v)
(i) Partnership with no share capital
(ii) A ordinary and B ordinary shares
(iii) A ordinary, B ordinary, C preference and D preference shares
(iv) B ordinary shares
(v) Registered office is 19 Portsmouth Road, Cobham, Surrey, KT11 1JG
(vi) Formerly known as St Katharine Homes LLP
* Accounting date of 31 December
** 100% owned by St Edward Homes Limited
*** Accounting date of 31 March
Registered office address is 1 New Burlington Place, London, United Kingdom, W1S 2HR
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 229
Company Balance Sheet
As at 30 April Notes
2025
£m
2024
£m
Fixed assets
Investments C2.4 1,445.8 1,443.1
1,445.8 1,443.1
Current assets
Debtors C2.5 640.8 636.4
Cash at bank and in hand 0.9 0.9
641.7 637.3
Current liabilities
Creditors (amounts falling due within one year) C2.6 (907.7) (874.0)
Net current liabilities (266.0) (236.7)
Total assets less current liabilities and net assets 1,179.8 1,206.4
Capital and reserves
Called-up share capital C2.7 6.0 6.2
Share premium account C2.7 49.8 49.8
Capital redemption reserve 25.5 25.3
Profit and loss account 1,098.5 1,125.1
Total shareholders’ funds 1,179.8 1,206.4
As permitted by Section 408 of the Companies Act 2006, The Berkeley Group Holdings plc has not presented its
own Income Statement. The profit after taxation of the Company for the financial year was £353.9 million (2024:
£232.6 million).
The financial statements on pages 230 to 235 were approved by the Board of Directors on 20 June 2025 and were
signed on its behalf by:
R J Stearn
Chief Financial Officer
Registered no: 5172586
230 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Called-up share
capital
£m
Share premium
account
£m
Capital
redemption
reserve
£m
Profit and loss
account
£m
Total shareholders’
funds
£m
At 1 May 2024 6.2 49.8 25.3 1,125.1 1,206.4
Profit after taxation for the year 353.9 353.9
Purchase of ordinary shares (0.2) 0.2 (129.7) (129.7)
Credit in respect of employee share
schemes 0.1 0.1
Deferred tax in respect of employee
share schemes 0.9 0.9
Dividends to equity holders of the
Company (251.8) (251.8)
At 30 April 2025 6.0 49.8 25.5 1,098.5 1,179.8
At 1 May 2023 6.3 49.8 25.2 1,058.7 1,140.0
Profit after taxation for the year 232.6 232.6
Purchase of ordinary shares (0.1) 0.1 (72.3) (72.3)
Credit in respect of employee share
schemes 2.6 2.6
Deferred tax in respect of employee
share schemes 1.6 1.6
Dividends to equity holders of the
Company (98.1) (98.1)
At 30 April 2024 6.2 49.8 25.3 1,125.1 1,206.4
Company Statement of Changes in Equity
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 231
Notes to the Company Financial Statements
C1 Basis of preparation
C1.1 Introduction
The Company meets the definition of a qualifying entity under Financial Reporting Standard 101 (FRS 101)
issued by the Financial Reporting Council. Accordingly, these financial statements were prepared in accordance
with FRS 101 ‘Reduced Disclosure Framework’ as issued by the Financial Reporting Council. In preparing these
financial statements, the Company applies the recognition measurement and disclosure requirements of UK-
adopted international accounting standards, but makes amendments where necessary in order to comply with the
Companies Act 2006.
The accounting policies adopted for the Parent Company, The Berkeley Group Holdings plc, are otherwise
consistent with those used for the Group which are set out on pages 186 to 229.
In these financial statements, the Company has applied the exemptions available under FRS 101 in respect of the
following disclosures:
Cash Flow Statement and related notes;
disclosures in respect of transactions with wholly owned subsidiaries;
disclosures in respect of capital management;
the effects of new but not yet effective IFRSs;
certain disclosures required by IFRS 13 ‘Fair Value Measurement’ and the disclosures required by IFRS 7
‘Financial Instrument Disclosures’; and
disclosures in respect of the compensation of key management personnel.
The principal activity of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc (the Company) is to act as a holding company.
C1.2 Going concern
The Group’s business activities together with the factors likely to affect its future development performance and
position are set out in the Strategic Report. The financial position of the Group, its cash flows, liquidity position and
borrowing facilities are all described in the Trading and Financial Review on pages 30 and 31.
The Group has significant financial resources and the Directors have assessed the future funding requirements
of the Group, including the return of £0.3 billion to shareholders set out to September 2025, and compared this
with the level of committed loan facilities and cash resources over the medium term. In making this assessment,
consideration has been given to the uncertainty inherent in future financial forecasts and, where applicable,
reasonable sensitivities have been applied to the key factors affecting the financial performance of the Group.
Based on the financial performance of the Group, the Directors have a reasonable expectation that the Company
has adequate resources to continue its operational existence for at least 12 months from the date of signing the
accounts, notwithstanding its net current liability position of £266.0 million (2024: £236.7 million). For this reason
they continue to adopt the going concern basis of accounting in preparing the annual financial statements.
C2 Notes to the Company accounts
C2.1 Profit before taxation
Expenditure is recognised in respect of goods and services received when supplied in accordance with contractual
terms. Provision is made when an obligation exists for a future liability in respect of a past event and where the
amount of the obligation can be reliably estimated.
Profit before taxation is stated after charging the following amounts:
2025
£m
2024
£m
Auditor’s remuneration 0.1 0.1
There were no non-audit services provided by the Company’s current auditor during the year (2024: £nil).
232 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
C2.2 Directors and employees
The Company operates three equity settled, share based compensation plans (2024: three). The fair value of
the employee services received in exchange for the grant of the options is recognised as an expense. The total
amount to be expensed over the vesting period is determined by reference to the fair value of the options granted.
At each Balance Sheet date, the Company revises its estimates of the number of options that are expected to
vest. It recognises the impact of the revision to original estimates, if any, in the profit and loss account, with a
corresponding adjustment to equity. Amounts recognised in respect of Executive Directors of the Company’s
subsidiaries are recognised as an addition to the cost of the investment.
The proceeds received net of any directly attributable transaction costs are credited to share capital (nominal
value) and share premium when the options are exercised.
Pension contributions under defined contribution schemes are charged to the Income Statement as they fall due.
2025
£m
2024
£m
Staff costs:
Wages and salaries 2.1 2.1
Social security costs 0.5 0.6
Share based payments – equity settled 2.1 2.0
4.7 4.7
The average monthly number of persons employed by the Company during the year was nine, all of whom are
Directors (2024: 10).
Directors
Details of Directors’ emoluments are set out in the Remuneration Report on pages 126 to 159.
Pensions
During the year, the Company participated in one of the Group’s pension schemes, The Berkeley Group plc
Group Personal Pension Plan. Further details on this scheme are set out in Note 2.5 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements. Contributions amounting to £nil (2024: £nil) were paid into the defined contribution scheme during
the year.
Share based payments
The charge to the profit and loss account in respect of equity settled share based payments in the year are:
2011 LTIP of £0.1 million (2024: £0.2 million)
2022 LTOP of £1.2 million (2024: £1.3 million)
RSP of £0.8 million (2024: £0.7 million)
The credit to the reserves during the year in respect of employee share schemes was £0.1 million (2024: £2.6
million credit) which includes the corresponding entry to the cost of investment of £2.7 million (2024: £5.0 million)
detailed in Note C2.4. The offsetting entry within reserves results from the non-cash IFRS 2 charge for the year.
Further information on the Company’s share incentive schemes are included in the Remuneration Report on pages
126 to 159 as well as Note 2.5 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
C2.3 The Berkeley Group Holdings plc profit and loss account
The profit for the year in the Company is £353.9 million (2024: £232.6 million).
C2.4 Investments
Investments in subsidiary undertakings are included in the Balance Sheet at cost less provision for any impairment.
2025
£m
2024
£m
Investments at cost:
Investments in shares of subsidiary undertaking at 1 May 1,443.1 1,438.1
Additions 2.7 5.0
Investments in shares of subsidiary undertaking at 30 April 1,445.8 1,443.1
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 233
Notes to the Company Financial Statements
continued
C2 Notes to the Company accounts continued
C2.4 Investments continued
Additions in the year relate to Company contributions to The Berkeley Group plc for employee services to be
settled through the issue of shares on the vesting of the Berkeley Group Holdings plc 2011 LTIP awards, 2022 LTOP
awards and RSP awards for the benefit of employees of its subsidiaries.
The Directors believe that the carrying value of the investments is supported by their underlying net assets. Details
of subsidiaries are given within Note 2.27 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
C2.5 Debtors
Deferred tax is recognised in respect of all timing differences that have originated but not reversed at the
Balance Sheet date, where transactions or events that result in an obligation to pay more tax in the future or a
right to pay less tax in the future have occurred at the Balance Sheet date.
A net deferred tax asset is recognised as recoverable and therefore recognised only when, on the basis of all
available evidence, it can be regarded as more likely than not that there will be suitable taxable profits against
which to recover carried forward tax losses and from which the future reversal of underlying timing differences
can be deducted.
Deferred tax is measured at the average tax rates that are expected to apply in the periods in which the timing
differences are expected to reverse, based on tax rates and laws that have been enacted or substantively
enacted by the Balance Sheet date. Deferred tax is measured on an undiscounted basis.
2025
£m
2024
£m
Current
Amounts owed from subsidiary undertakings 636.6 630.8
Deferred tax 4.2 5.6
640.8 636.4
All amounts owed from subsidiary undertakings are unsecured, bear no interest and are payable on demand. The
Company has assessed expected credit losses as immaterial on amounts owed from subsidiary undertakings.
The movements on the deferred tax asset are as follows:
2025
£m
2024
£m
At 1 May 5.6 6.0
Deferred tax in respect of employee share schemes (1.4) 1.9
Realisation of deferred tax asset on vesting of employee share scheme (2.3)
At 30 April 4.2 5.6
Deferred tax is calculated in full on temporary differences at the tax rates that are expected to apply for the period
when the asset is realised and the liability is settled using a tax rate of 25% (2024: 25%). Accordingly, all temporary
differences have been calculated. There is no unprovided deferred tax (2024: £nil) at the Balance Sheet date.
The deferred tax asset of £4.2 million relates to short-term timing differences (2024: £5.6 million).
C2.6 Creditors: Amounts falling due within one year
Creditors are recognised initially at fair value. Subsequent to initial recognition they are measured at amortised
cost using the effective interest method.
2025
£m
2024
£m
Current
Amounts owed to subsidiary undertakings (906.1) (871.3)
Other taxation and social security (1.6) (2.7)
(907.7) (874.0)
All amounts included above are unsecured. The interest rate on the whole amount (2024: the whole amount) owed
to subsidiary undertakings is 4.0% (2024: 4.0%), with no fixed repayment date.
234 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
C2.7 Called-up share capital
The movements on allotted and fully paid share capital for the Company in the year were as follows:
Ordinary shares Share capital Share premium
2025
No ’000
2024
No ’000
2025
£m
2024
£m
2025
£m
2024
£m
Issued
At start of year 114,712 116,537 6.2 6.3 49.8 49.8
Shares cancelled (3,321) (1,825) (0.2) (0.1)
Share consolidation (4,019)
At end of year 107,372 114,712 6.0 6.2 49.8 49.8
On 9 September 2024, a share consolidation was undertaken which reduced the Company’s ordinary share capital,
net of treasury and EBT shares, by 3.51%. The share consolidation replaced the total number of existing ordinary
shares of 114.5 million, with a nominal value of 5.4141 pence each, into a reduced number of new ordinary shares of
110.5 million, each at a nominal value of 5.6110 pence at the time of the consolidation.
Each ordinary share of 5.6110 pence is a voting share in the capital of the Company, is entitled to participate in the
profits of the Company, and on the winding up is entitled to participate in the assets of the Company.
During the 2025 financial year, 3,321 thousand shares were repurchased (2024: 1,825 thousand) for a
total consideration of £129.7 million, excluding transaction costs (2024: £72.3 million). These shares were
subsequentlycancelled.
On 19 September 2024, 170 thousand ordinary shares (2024: 175 thousand) were allotted and issued to the
Employee Benefit Trust.
On 30 September 2024, 178 thousand ordinary shares (2024: 222 thousand) were transferred from the Employee
Benefit Trust to Executive Directors to satisfy the exercise of options under the 2011 LTIP.
At 30 April 2025, there were 46 thousand shares held in trust (2024: 56 thousand) by the Employee Benefit Trust.
The market value of these shares at 30 April 2025 was £1.9 million (2024: £2.6 million).
At 30 April 2025, there were 8,306 thousand (2024: 8,784 thousand) treasury shares held by the Group. The
market value of the shares at 30 April 2025 was £346.4 million (2024: £414.1 million).
The movements in the year are disclosed in Notes 2.19 and 2.20 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
C2.8 Dividends per share
Dividend distributions to shareholders are recognised as a liability in the period in which the dividends are
appropriately authorised and approved for payout and are no longer at the discretion of the Company.
Unpaiddividends that do not meet these criteria are disclosed in the notes to the financial statements.
2025 2024
Dividend
per share
pence £m
Dividend
per share
pence £m
Amounts recognised as distributions to equity
shareholders during the year:
September 2023 59.30 63.1
March 2024 33.00 35.0
June 2024 33.00 35.0
September 2024 (special dividend) 174.00 183.8
March 2025 33.00 33.0
Total dividends 251.8 98.1
C2.9 Related party transactions
The Company has not undertaken related party transactions during the year with entities that are not wholly
owned subsidiaries of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc. Transactions with wholly owned members of The Berkeley
Group Holdings plc are exempt under FRS 101 with reduced disclosure.
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 235
2025
£m
2024
£m
2023
£m
2022
£m
2021
£m
Income statement
Revenue 2,486.5 2,464.3 2,550.2 2,348.0 2,202.2
Operating profit 500.0 479.7 518.3 507.9 502.3
Share of results of joint ventures 14.7 65.6 96.3 56.1 22.4
Net finance income/(costs) 14.2 12.0 (10.6) (12.5) (6.6)
Profit before taxation 528.9 557.3 604.0 551.5 518.1
Basic earnings per share 371.8 373.9 426.8p 417.8p 339.4p
Statement of financial position
Capital employed 3,222.5 3,028.5 2,921.9 2,867. 2 2,047. 2
Net cash 337.3 532.0 410.4 268.9 1,128.2
Net assets 3,559.8 3,560.5 3,332.3 3,136.1 3,175.4
Net assets per share attributable
to shareholders
1
3,595p 3,363p 3,101p 2,818p 2,612p
Ratios and statistics
Return on capital employed
2
16.5% 18.3% 21.2% 23.0% 26.2%
Return on equity after tax
3
10.7% 11.5% 14.4% 15.3% 13.5%
Return on equity before tax
4
14.9% 16.2% 18.7% 17.5% 16.5%
Homes sold
5
4,047 3,521 4,043 3,760 2,825
Cash due on forward sales
6
1,403 1,701 2,136 2,171 1,712
Gross margin on land holdings
7
6,722 6,929 7,629 8,258 6,884
1 Net assets attributable to shareholders divided by the number of shares in issue excluding shares held in treasury and shares held by
the Employee Benefit Trust.
2 This measures the profitability and efficiency of capital being used by the Group and is calculated as profit before interest and
taxation (including joint venture profit before tax) divided by the average net assets adjusted for debt/(cash).
3 This measures the efficiency of returns generated from shareholder equity after taxation and is calculated as profit after taxation
attributable to shareholders as a percentage of the average of opening and closing shareholders’ funds.
4 Calculated as profit before taxation attributable to shareholders as a percentage of the average of opening and closing shareholders
funds.
5 The number of homes legally completed and recorded in revenue in the year excluding joint ventures.
6 Cash still due from customers under unconditional contracts for sale.
7 The measure of expected value in the Group’s land holdings in the event the Group successfully sells and delivers the developments
planned for.
See Note 2.25 Alternative Performance Measure for full definitions where relevant.
Five Year Summary
236 | BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT
Annual General Meeting and Trading Update 5 September 2025
Half year end 31 October 2025
Interim Results Announcement for the six months ending 31 October 2025 10 December 2025
Trading Update March 2026
Year end 30 April 2026
Announcement of Results for the year ending 30 April 2026 June 2026
Publication of 2026 Annual Report August 2026
Registered office and advisors
Registered office and principal place
ofbusiness
The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
Berkeley House
19 Portsmouth Road
Cobham
Surrey KT11 1JG
Registered number: 5172586
Registrars
MUFG Corporate Markets
10th Floor
Central Square
29 Wellington Street
Leeds LS1 4DL
0871 664 0300 (from the UK)
+44 (0) 371 664 0300 (from overseas)
shareholderenquiries@cm.mpms.mufg.com
Corporate brokers and financial advisors
Barclays Bank plc
HSBC Bank plc
Share price information
The Company’s share capital is listed on the London
Stock Exchange. The latest share price is available via
the Company’s website at www.berkeleygroup.co.uk
Solicitor
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP
Bankers
Barclays Bank plc
HSBC Bank plc
Lloyds Bank plc
Banco Santander, S.A., London Branch
National Westminster Bank plc
Handelsbanken plc
Auditor
KPMG LLP
Financial diary
02–91 | STRATEGIC REPORT 92–167 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 168–237 | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BERKELEY GROUP 2025 ANNUAL REPORT | 237
The Berkeley Group Holdings plc 2025 Annual Report
The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
Berkeley House
19 Portsmouth Road
Cobham
Surrey KT11 1JG
www.berkeleygroup.co.uk
Registered number: 5172586