The US Department of War has confirmed plans to integrate Elon Musk’s xAI models, including Grok, into its internal GenAI.mil platform, extending advanced artificial intelligence tools to millions of military and civilian personnel from early 2026.

xAI

The agreement, announced in December, will see the Department of War add xAI for Government to GenAI.mil, a bespoke generative AI environment designed to support everyday administrative work as well as sensitive defence and national security tasks. The move forms part of a broader effort by the Pentagon to scale up artificial intelligence use across the US military and federal workforce, while maintaining strict security controls.

A Note On The Department’s Name

It’s worth quickly noting here that, while recent executive actions and official communications have referred to the organisation as the Department of War, its formal and legal name actually remains the Department of Defense. For example, under US law, a permanent name change would require an Act of Congress, rather than an executive order from President Trump alone. As a result, references to the Department of War in this article currently reflect political direction and branding rather than a completed legislative change, with the Department of Defense still recognised as the official legal entity.

What Is GenAI.mil And Why Does It Matter?

GenAI.mil is the Department of War’s central platform for deploying generative AI tools internally. Launched earlier in 2025, it is designed to give authorised personnel access to large language models and AI agents within a controlled government environment, rather than relying on public consumer tools.

The platform is operated by the Pentagon’s Chief Digital and AI Office and is intended to support a wide range of use cases, from drafting documents and analysing data to supporting logistics planning and operational decision making. Crucially, it is built to operate at Impact Level 5, a US government cloud security standard that allows systems to handle Controlled Unclassified Information, or CUI. CUI refers to sensitive government data that is not classified but still requires protection, such as operational plans, procurement data, and internal communications.

By integrating xAI’s Grok models into GenAI.mil, the Department of War says it will expand the range of frontier grade AI capabilities available to its workforce, while keeping those tools within an environment approved for sensitive government use.

What xAI And Grok Bring To The Platform

xAI is Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company, launched in 2023 and best known for developing Grok, a large language model closely integrated with the social media platform X. Grok has been positioned by xAI as a real time, reasoning focused AI system, with the ability to draw on live data streams and respond to current events more directly than many competing models.

Under the agreement, Department of War personnel will gain access to xAI’s government specific AI offerings, including application programming interfaces, agentic tools, and AI models optimised for public sector workloads. The Pentagon has confirmed that Grok models will be available within Impact Level 5 environments, allowing them to be used in workflows that involve sensitive but unclassified data.

The Department has also highlighted the availability of real time global insights derived from X as a feature of xAI for Government. According to official statements, this is intended to provide analysts and planners with faster awareness of emerging developments, trends, and public information signals.

xAI described the partnership as part of its mission to deliver advanced AI tools to public institutions. In a statement released alongside the announcement, the company said the agreement reflected its “longstanding support of the United States Government” and its aim to make cutting edge industry technology available for national benefit.

How This Fits Into The Pentagon’s Wider AI Strategy

The agreement with xAI forms part of a broader Pentagon strategy to expand the use of advanced artificial intelligence across defence and government operations. For example, back in July 2025, the Department of War awarded up to $200 million each to four AI companies, including xAI, to support the development of defence ready AI systems. The other companies involved were Anthropic, Google, and OpenAI, reflecting a deliberate multi vendor approach rather than reliance on a single provider.

This strategy has been framed by the Pentagon as a way to avoid reliance on any single AI supplier, while ensuring access to a broad range of models and technical approaches. In early December, the Department integrated Google’s Gemini for Government into GenAI.mil, making xAI the second provider of so called frontier AI models on the platform.

Speaking earlier this year at the launch of Gemini for Government, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth described AI as a critical enabler for the modern military. “AI tools present boundless opportunities to increase efficiency,” he said, adding that the Department was committed to seeing AI deliver tangible operational benefits across defence and government.

Why Grok’s Inclusion Has Raised Questions

Despite the Department of War’s emphasis on security controls and oversight, the decision to integrate Grok has attracted scrutiny from politicians, policy experts, and technology analysts for several different reasons. For example, some concerns relate to the behaviour of the model itself, while others focus on governance, political influence, and the wider context surrounding Elon Musk’s relationship with the current administration.

Grok has previously generated controversial and inaccurate outputs in its consumer facing form, including false claims about historical events, natural disasters, and election outcomes, as well as politically charged responses. Critics argue that these incidents raise questions about how reliably the model can be constrained, even when deployed in more tightly controlled government environments.

Other concerns centre on Grok’s training data and real time inputs. For example, much of the model’s context is drawn from content on X, the social media platform owned by Musk, which has undergone significant changes to moderation policies and enforcement since his acquisition. Analysts have warned that this increases the risk of bias, misinformation, or unverified narratives influencing AI outputs, particularly where models are promoted as offering real time global insights.

The partnership has also been viewed through a political lens. For example, Musk has become an increasingly prominent figure within President Donald Trump’s political orbit, including public support during the 2024 election campaign and his role in the short lived Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. That initiative, which was framed as a cost cutting and reform effort across federal agencies, led to large scale layoffs before facing legal challenges and being dismantled earlier in 2025.

Against that backdrop, some observers have questioned whether xAI’s expanding role within the Department of War could be perceived as a conflict of interest, particularly given the scale and sensitivity of defence AI programmes. While no evidence has been presented that procurement rules were breached, critics argue that the close alignment between Musk and the administration heightens the need for transparency around how vendors are selected, governed, and overseen.

Political concerns have also been voiced publicly. For example, in September, Senator Elizabeth Warren described the Pentagon’s planned deal with xAI as “uniquely troubling”, citing concerns about Grok’s accuracy when responding to questions about major events and emergencies. She warned that errors produced by AI systems could carry serious consequences when used in government or defence related contexts.

Technology analysts have further questioned the reliance on live social media data for decision support. This is because open platforms such as X are known to be vulnerable to coordinated misinformation campaigns, automated accounts, and rapidly spreading false narratives, particularly during geopolitical crises. Critics argue that without clear safeguards, such data streams could complicate rather than clarify situational awareness for government users.

Safeguards And Limits Highlighted By The Department

The Department of War has, however, sought to address some of these concerns by stressing that Grok’s deployment within GenAI.mil will differ from its public version. For example, officials have said that government deployments will include additional controls, usage policies, and human oversight, and that AI outputs will be used as support tools rather than authoritative sources.

Pentagon officials have also emphasised that GenAI.mil is designed to give users access to multiple models, allowing outputs to be compared and validated rather than accepted at face value. This reflects a growing recognition within defence and intelligence communities that generative AI systems can assist analysis but must not replace professional judgement.

The Department has not published detailed technical information about how real time data from X will be filtered or validated within government environments, though it has said that security and compliance requirements remain unchanged.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The Pentagon’s decision to bring Grok into GenAI.mil highlights how quickly generative AI is becoming embedded in the machinery of government, even in environments where errors, bias, or misjudgement carry serious consequences. The US Department of Defense, currently being popularly referred to as the Department of War, is clearly betting that the productivity and analytical gains on offer outweigh the risks, provided models are fenced in by controls, oversight, and a multi vendor approach that avoids dependence on any single supplier. At the same time, the scrutiny surrounding Grok shows that not all frontier models are viewed equally, and that questions around training data, governance, and political proximity now sit alongside technical capability in public sector AI decisions.

For other stakeholders, the move sharpens several fault lines. For example, policymakers and oversight bodies will be under pressure to demonstrate that procurement decisions remain robust and impartial, particularly when suppliers are closely linked to political leadership. Analysts and military users will need to treat real time AI assisted insights as prompts rather than answers, especially when those insights draw from open social platforms vulnerable to manipulation. AI vendors, meanwhile, are being judged not just on model performance, but on transparency, restraint, and their ability to operate credibly in high trust environments.

For UK businesses, the implications are indirect but important. For example, defence and government adoption often sets expectations that later filter into regulated industries, public procurement frameworks, and critical infrastructure projects. This deployment reinforces the idea that AI tools will increasingly be used alongside sensitive data, but only where governance, auditability, and human accountability are clearly defined. UK firms developing or deploying AI will be expected to meet similar standards if they want to work with government or highly regulated clients, while organisations adopting AI internally should take note of the Pentagon’s emphasis on comparison, validation, and professional judgement rather than blind automation.

Ofcom has opened formal investigations into BT and Three following separate UK-wide mobile network failures this summer that left some customers unable to connect 999 emergency calls.

Two Major Outages

The investigations centre on two major outages, one affecting Three customers in June and another impacting BT and EE customers in July, both of which disrupted basic voice services across large parts of the country. Ofcom said it is examining whether the companies took sufficient steps to prevent the incidents and to protect access to emergency services, which are treated as a critical national function under UK telecoms regulation.

What Happened During The Summer Outages?

The first incident occurred on 25 June, when thousands of customers on the Three network reported being unable to make or receive voice calls. The outage was nationwide and affected not only Three customers but also users on virtual operators that rely on its infrastructure, including ID Mobile. While mobile data services largely remained available, voice calls failed to connect, including calls to emergency services.

Three later said the problem was triggered by “an exceptional spike in network traffic” caused by a third-party software configuration change. The company acknowledged that the disruption affected access to 999 services and informed Ofcom at the time.

A second incident followed on 24 and 25 July, when customers on BT and its mobile network operator EE reported similar problems. In this case, BT attributed the disruption to a software issue that affected call interconnection between networks. As a result, some customers were unable to make or receive calls, including calls to emergency services, despite having signal on their devices.

Ofcom said both incidents caused UK-wide disruption and affected millions of mobile users across the two networks.

Why 999 Call Failures Raise Regulatory Stakes

While mobile outages are not uncommon, failures that prevent access to emergency services significantly increase regulatory scrutiny. For example, under UK law, telecoms providers have specific obligations to ensure that 999 and 112 calls can be made reliably, even during periods of network stress or partial failure.

Ofcom said providers must take “appropriate and proportionate” measures to identify risks to their networks and to plan for scenarios that could compromise availability, performance or functionality. These duties extend beyond preventing outages altogether and include effective monitoring, rapid response and mitigation when failures occur.

In announcing the investigations, Ofcom said it would assess “whether there are reasonable grounds to believe that BT and Three have failed to comply with their regulatory obligations”.

The regulator has not suggested that enforcement action is inevitable, but it does have the power to impose financial penalties, require remedial changes to network design or processes, or issue formal directions if breaches are found.

Network Resilience

Ofcom has placed increasing emphasis on network resilience in recent years, particularly as the UK becomes more reliant on mobile connectivity for essential services. For example, its Network and Service Resilience Guidance sets out expectations for how providers should design and operate networks to reduce single points of failure and limit the impact of incidents.

The guidance states that firms are expected to “identify and reduce the risks of disruption” and to take steps to prevent “adverse effects arising from any such compromises”. Where outages do occur, providers are expected to respond quickly, communicate clearly with customers and learn lessons to reduce the likelihood of recurrence.

Commenting on the investigations, Ofcom said: “The importance of connectivity cannot be underestimated. People rely on their mobile phones to stay in touch, to work, and to contact the emergency services.”

The regulator has made clear that customer impact, including the duration and scale of disruption, will be a central factor in assessing whether obligations were met.

Industry Reaction And Company Responses

Both companies have said they are cooperating fully with the investigation. A spokesperson for BT Group said the company apologised to customers affected by the July incident and would “co-operate fully with Ofcom throughout the investigation”. BT has previously said the outage was caused by a software issue rather than a hardware failure, and that services were restored once the fault was identified.

Three UK said it had engaged openly with Ofcom since the June outage and would continue to do so. The company said the disruption followed a third-party software configuration change that led to unexpected traffic levels on its voice network.

Ofcom has previously made clear that outages can still occur even where networks are designed with resilience in mind, but that providers are expected to have robust processes in place to detect faults quickly, limit their impact, and identify lessons that reduce the risk of similar incidents in future.

The regulator’s guidance stresses that compliance is not limited to preventing failures outright. It also includes effective planning, monitoring and response when services are disrupted, particularly where access to emergency calls is affected.

Previous Enforcement Action

The investigations also take place against a backdrop of previous enforcement action in the sector. For example, back in July 2024, BT was fined £17.5 million after Ofcom found a “catastrophic failure” in its emergency call handling service had prevented around 14,000 999 calls from connecting during a ten-hour outage in June 2023.

Three has also previously been fined by Ofcom. In 2017, the company was ordered to pay £1.9 million after a network failure in 2016 left customers without service. Ofcom concluded at the time that the disruption could have been prevented with better planning and safeguards.

More recently, Three’s UK operations merged with Vodafone to form VodafoneThree, creating the UK’s largest mobile network with around 27 million customers. While the summer outage occurred before the merger was completed, the investigation comes at a sensitive time as the combined business works to integrate networks and systems.

Why The Issue Matters More Now

The timing of the outages has heightened concern because mobile networks are increasingly treated as critical infrastructure. As the UK progresses with the digital landline switchover, many households and vulnerable users are becoming more dependent on mobile connectivity for emergency communication.

Ofcom has repeatedly warned that resilience expectations apply not just to traditional landlines but to all networks that support access to emergency services. The regulator has also highlighted the need for additional safeguards for users who rely on telecare systems, personal alarms or medical monitoring that may depend on voice connectivity.

Government guidance has echoed these concerns, with ministers previously stating that communications providers have statutory obligations to ensure networks are “appropriately resilient”.

What Ofcom Will Examine Next

Ofcom said its investigations will focus on the facts surrounding each incident, including how the faults arose, how quickly they were detected, and what steps were taken to restore services and protect emergency calling. It will also examine whether risk assessments, change management processes and contingency planning were adequate.

The regulator has not set a public timetable for completing the investigations and outcomes could range from no further action if compliance is found, through to enforcement measures if breaches are identified.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The investigations place renewed focus on how mobile networks are operated, governed and tested in practice, particularly where basic voice services are relied on for public safety rather than convenience. For Ofcom, the outcome will help clarify how existing resilience rules are being applied in real incidents and whether further intervention is needed to ensure emergency access is protected as networks become more complex and software-driven.

For telecoms providers, the cases highlight how resilience is being judged across the full lifecycle of network management, from configuration changes and third-party dependencies through to detection, response and communication. The fact that both incidents involved software-related failures rather than physical damage is likely to be closely examined, especially as automation and network virtualisation play a growing role in UK mobile infrastructure.

There are also wider implications for UK businesses that depend on mobile voice services for operational continuity, safety procedures and customer contact. For example, prolonged or widespread loss of calling capability, even where data services remain available, can disrupt frontline operations, lone worker safety and emergency escalation processes. The investigations may prompt organisations to recheck how resilient their own communications arrangements are, particularly where mobile phones are the primary or sole method of contact.

For consumers, emergency services and vulnerable users, the cases reinforce why mobile networks are now treated as critical infrastructure rather than optional utilities. As the digital landline switchover continues and reliance on mobile connectivity deepens, the tolerance for failures affecting 999 access appears to be narrowing. How Ofcom responds, and what it requires of operators as a result, is likely to shape expectations around network reliability and accountability well beyond these two incidents.

The most serious cyber incidents of 2025 showed a clear move away from data theft towards operational disruption and economic damage.

Globally, attackers exploited trusted platforms and supply chains, with US federal systems breached repeatedly and the Clop group stealing sensitive data by abusing an unknown flaw in Oracle E Business. More than one billion records were also accessed from Salesforce environments after hackers compromised connected third party platforms rather than Salesforce itself.

In the UK, disruption had immediate consequences. Cyber attacks on Marks & Spencer and Co-op exposed customer data and knocked systems offline, with Co-op later confirming all 6.5 million members were affected. The Cyber Monitoring Centre estimated the retail attacks caused up to £440 million in economic damage.

The most severe UK case involved Jaguar Land Rover, where a cyberattack halted production for months and destabilised its supply chain, prompting a £1.5 billion government guarantee to protect jobs and suppliers.

For businesses, the lesson from 2025 is that resilience is critical. Guidance from the National Cyber Security Centre emphasises patching, limiting third party access, tested backups, and rehearsed incident response, because fast recovery is now the key defence against disruptive attacks.

B&Q has added a brick described as the world’s most sustainable to its online marketplace, making a low-carbon construction material previously used mainly on commercial projects available to UK consumers for the first time.

Kenoteq

The product in question is the K-Briq, developed by Scottish cleantech firm Kenoteq, and its arrival on B&Q’s website marks a notable step in the retailer’s wider push to bring lower-impact building materials into the mainstream DIY market.

A Brick Designed to Tackle Construction Waste

The K-Briq was developed to address one of the construction sector’s biggest environmental problems, i.e., waste. For example, government figures show that construction, demolition and excavation activities generate around 62 million tonnes of waste each year in the UK, accounting for well over half of all waste produced nationally.

A Resource

Kenoteq’s approach is to treat much of that material not as waste, but as a resource. For example, the company says each K-Briq is made using more than 95 per cent recycled construction and demolition material, including crushed masonry, plasterboard and other site waste that would otherwise be sent to landfill.

Made Using Hydraulic Compression and Cured

Unlike traditional clay bricks, which are typically fired in kilns at temperatures of around 1,000 degrees Celsius, the K-Briq is formed using hydraulic compression and then cured rather than fired. This process dramatically reduces energy use during manufacture. Kenoteq has previously said the brick produces up to 90 per cent less embodied carbon than a conventional fired brick, a claim that has helped position it as a flagship low-carbon alternative in a carbon-intensive industry.

From Commercial Projects to DIY Shelves

Until now, K-Briqs have largely been specified for commercial developments, architectural projects and temporary installations, including high-profile festival structures and demonstration buildings. Interest from architects and designers has played a significant role in the product’s wider visibility, particularly among professionals looking to reduce the embodied carbon of their projects.

According to Kenoteq, that professional interest has increasingly spilled over into the domestic market. For example, architects and designers who specified the bricks at work began asking for the same product for home renovations, garden walls and landscaping projects.

Sam Chapman, co-founder and executive director of Kenoteq, has previously explained the shift in demand, saying: “We’ve seen a remarkable change in recent months. Architects and designers who’ve specified K-Briqs for major commercial projects are now incorporating our bricks into their personal renovations and garden designs. This organic demand showed us that the consumer market is ready for a truly sustainable building material.”

B&Q’s decision to list the product online appears to reflect that change, effectively removing one of the remaining barriers to adoption, i.e., availability.

Certification and Performance Credentials

One of the reasons the K-Briq has gained so much traction beyond pilot projects is certification. In May this year, the brick received certification from the British Board of Agrément (BBA), a key benchmark for construction products used in the UK.

BBA certification assesses safety, durability and fitness for purpose, and is often essential for materials to be specified in mainstream building projects. For a product built from recycled waste and produced using an unconventional manufacturing process, that approval is significant.

At the time of certification, Chapman said the assessment showed that environmental performance and technical standards did not need to be in conflict. “The construction industry is under increasing pressure to reduce its environmental impact while maintaining high standards of quality and safety. The BBA certification of the K-Briq demonstrates that these goals are not mutually exclusive.”

For B&Q customers, it is likely that the certification could provide some reassurance that the brick can be used in real-world projects, rather than being limited to experimental or decorative applications.

How the Listing Fits B&Q’s Sustainability Strategy

The K-Briq joins B&Q’s online range as part of a broader strategy from B&Q to highlight products that reduce environmental impact across home improvement, building and gardening categories.

B&Q uses its “Green Star” labelling system to identify products that meet specific sustainability criteria, developed in partnership with sustainability charity Bioregional. These criteria focus on areas such as responsible sourcing, lower embodied carbon, reduced toxicity and energy-saving performance.

The retailer has publicly stated that it wants to make it easier for customers to choose lower-impact options without needing specialist knowledge. In a previous sustainability statement, B&Q said its aim is to “help customers live more sustainably at home by offering products that reduce environmental impact while remaining affordable and practical.”

That approach has already seen B&Q remove peat from its own-brand compost range, expand its selection of low-VOC paints, and commit to responsibly sourced timber certified under FSC or PEFC schemes. Adding a low-carbon brick seems to extend that thinking into the structural materials category, which has traditionally been harder to decarbonise.

Why Bricks Matter for Net Zero

Bricks may seem an unlikely focus for sustainability headlines, but their impact is actually quite substantial. For example, the UK produces an estimated 2.5 billion clay bricks each year, with brick manufacturing responsible for millions of tonnes of CO₂ emissions annually. Firing bricks is energy-intensive, and most kilns still rely heavily on fossil fuels.

As pressure grows on the built environment to align with the UK’s net zero targets, embodied carbon is receiving far more attention. Embodied carbon refers to the emissions associated with producing, transporting and installing materials, as opposed to operational emissions from heating or lighting a building.

Low-carbon alternatives such as the K-Briq directly target this problem by reducing emissions at the manufacturing stage. While such products alone will not decarbonise construction, they form part of a broader shift towards circular economy principles, where materials are reused and waste is designed out of the system.

Growing Momentum Across the Sector

The timing of B&Q’s move also aligns with wider developments in the construction industry. For example, back in October, the Construction Industry Council formally approved a new British Standard, the Competence Framework for Sustainability in the Built Environment. The framework is intended to embed sustainability knowledge and accountability across planning, design and construction roles.

Industry figures involved in drafting the framework have described it as a necessary step towards making sustainability measurable and consistent across the sector, rather than an optional extra. Products like the K-Briq sit squarely within that context, offering practical ways to translate sustainability commitments into material choices.

Kenoteq itself was spun out of Heriot-Watt University, reflecting the growing role of academic research in driving commercially viable low-carbon construction solutions.

Mainstream Access Rather Than Niche Adoption

By listing the K-Briq on its website, B&Q is effectively testing whether demand for sustainable construction materials extends beyond early adopters and design professionals. The retailer’s national reach and strong DIY customer base make it a significant distribution channel, particularly for home and garden projects that fall outside the scope of large developers.

For Kenoteq, the listing represents a shift from niche specification to mainstream retail exposure. For B&Q, it offers a high-profile example of how sustainability credentials can be applied not just to finishes and furnishings, but to the core materials used to build and shape homes.

The move does not solve the construction sector’s carbon challenge on its own, but it does signal a growing willingness among major retailers to back alternative materials and make them accessible to a wider audience, at a time when both regulation and public expectations around sustainability continue to tighten.

Not Just Kenoteq

It should be noted here that Kenoteq is not the only company attempting to reduce the environmental impact of fundamental construction materials, although examples that have reached mainstream retail remain relatively limited.

Across the UK construction supply chain, several manufacturers have introduced lower-carbon alternatives to traditional bricks, blocks and concrete products, often focused on reducing embodied carbon rather than eliminating it entirely.

For example, Lignacite produces concrete blocks using up to 70 per cent recycled aggregate and has invested heavily in reducing cement content, one of the largest sources of emissions in concrete manufacturing. Its products are commonly stocked by national builders’ merchants rather than consumer DIY retailers.

Forterra, one of the UK’s largest brickmakers, has also launched lower-carbon brick and block ranges that incorporate recycled content and improved kiln efficiency. While these products still rely on firing, Forterra has reported double-digit percentage reductions in embodied carbon compared with its older product lines.

Concrete producers have also begun targeting embodied emissions more directly. For example, Cemex markets its Vertua low-carbon concrete range in the UK, which uses alternative binders and optimised mix designs to cut emissions by between 30 and 70 per cent depending on specification. Similar products are offered by Aggregate Industries, which supplies low-carbon concrete and aggregate blends for both infrastructure and building projects.

On the retail side, availability is more uneven. Builders’ merchants such as Travis Perkins and Jewson stock a growing number of recycled-content blocks, low-carbon cement alternatives and responsibly sourced timber products, largely aimed at trade customers rather than casual DIYers.

Mainstream DIY retailers have tended to focus first on visible sustainability wins such as peat-free compost, certified timber and low-VOC paints. Wickes, for instance, has expanded its ranges of responsibly sourced timber and insulation products designed to improve home energy efficiency, but has so far made fewer structural low-carbon materials available to consumers.

Against that backdrop, B&Q’s decision to list a near-fully recycled, non-fired brick is notable not because alternatives do not exist, but because few have been made easily accessible to non-trade customers. Most low-carbon structural materials remain concentrated in professional supply chains, specified by architects and contractors rather than chosen directly by householders.

That context helps explain why the K-Briq’s arrival on a mass-market retail platform has attracted attention. It represents one of the clearer examples of a genuinely low-carbon construction material moving beyond specialist projects and into a setting where sustainability choices are made by everyday consumers rather than procurement teams.

What Does This Mean For Your Organisation?

The decision to make a near fully recycled, non-fired brick available through a major DIY retailer is a practical signal that low-carbon construction materials are beginning to move from specialist specification into everyday purchasing decisions. This is less about a single product launch and more about how sustainability is starting to influence the basic materials people use to build, extend and improve homes.

For UK businesses across construction, design and property, the move reflects a changing commercial environment. Embodied carbon is becoming harder to ignore, not just because of regulation and net zero commitments, but because clients are increasingly asking direct questions about material choices. Products such as the K-Briq, therefore, offer businesses a way to respond with something tangible, certified and already available through familiar supply channels, rather than relying on bespoke solutions or untested alternatives.

Retailers also have a clear stake in this shift. B&Q’s listing suggests that sustainability is no longer confined to finishes and lifestyle products, but is beginning to shape decisions around structural materials that sit at the heart of building projects. That carries implications for supply chains, product ranges and how environmental credentials are communicated to customers who may not have technical expertise but still want to make informed choices.

For manufacturers and innovators, the development highlights the importance of credibility and scalability. Certification, performance data and compatibility with existing building practices appear to be decisive factors in whether low-carbon materials can move beyond pilot schemes and into wider adoption. The K-Briq’s progression from university research to commercial projects and now mass market retail illustrates that pathway clearly.

Taken together, the listing underlines a broader recalibration taking place across the built environment. Sustainability is increasingly being judged not by ambition alone, but by whether lower-impact materials can be made accessible, affordable and usable at scale. How far and how fast that transition goes will depend on cost, demand and policy pressure, but the direction of travel is becoming harder for businesses and other stakeholders to dismiss.

End repetitive email chains with a single click, keeping your inbox focused and readable without missing the full conversation if you need it later.

How to do it:

– Select the email thread you want to silence.
– Click ‘Ignore’ in the toolbar, or right-click the message and choose ‘Ignore’.
– Outlook moves the entire conversation to ‘Deleted Items’.
– Any future replies to that thread are automatically sent there as well.

Why it helps:

Clean up your inbox instantly and reduce distractions caused by long reply-all chains. It’s a simple way to protect your focus and keep important emails visible.

Ofcom has fined Virgin Media £23.8 million after finding that the company’s move to digital landlines left thousands of vulnerable telecare customers at direct risk of harm.

What Ofcom Has Decided

On 1 December 2025, Ofcom announced that it had imposed a £23.8 million penalty on Virgin Media for serious failings during its programme to migrate customers from traditional analogue landlines to digital services.

Why?

The regulator’s investigation concluded that, between August 2022 and December 2023, Virgin Media’s handling of telecare users breached its consumer protection obligations. For example, under Ofcom’s rules, telecoms providers must have clear and effective policies to ensure the fair treatment of customers whose circumstances make them vulnerable.

In practice, Ofcom found that Virgin Media failed on two major fronts. First, it did not properly identify and record telecare customers, which created significant gaps in its screening and support processes. Second, it disconnected some known telecare users who did not respond to the company’s contact attempts about the digital switchover, despite the risks that disconnection posed.

Those disconnections prevented telecare alarm devices from reaching monitoring centres in an emergency, leaving affected users in potentially unsafe situations. Ofcom said this put thousands of vulnerable people at direct risk of harm.

Four Weeks To Pay

Virgin Media must pay the £23.8 million fine within four weeks. The amount reflects a 30 per cent reduction in recognition of the company’s decision to admit liability, cooperate with Ofcom’s investigation and enter a formal settlement process.

Why Telecare Users Were So Exposed

Telecare systems are widely used by elderly, disabled or otherwise vulnerable people who rely on an emergency pendant or wristband to call for help. When activated, the device connects via the user’s landline to an alarm monitoring centre or a designated carer. Any break in that connection, therefore, can have severe consequences for anyone experiencing a fall, sudden illness or another emergency.

Transition

The UK’s telecoms sector is currently transitioning from the ageing public switched telephone network, the copper based PSTN, to digital IP based voice services. The PSTN is now considered beyond its intended lifespan and increasingly unreliable, which is why the digital upgrade is underway across the industry.

For most households, the change is relatively straightforward. For telecare users, however, migration must be handled with greater care. Telecare devices may not work correctly if not fully tested on digital lines, and power outages can affect digital services unless appropriate backup solutions are in place. For this reason, Ofcom has repeatedly stressed that telecoms companies must identify, protect and support these users throughout any transition.

How Virgin Media’s Switchover Went Wrong

Virgin Media first alerted Ofcom to a series of “serious incidents” involving telecare customers in November and December 2023. These reports triggered a formal investigation into whether the company had systemic issues in its migration process.

Over a period of roughly sixteen months, Ofcom found that Virgin Media’s approach had exposed vulnerable users in several ways. For example, significant numbers of telecare customers were not correctly identified in Virgin’s internal systems, meaning they were not flagged for the additional support required during migration.

Ofcom also found that Virgin Media disconnected some telecare users who did not respond to letters, emails or calls about the switchover. These disconnections went ahead even though the company was aware of the risks this created for users who depended on working landlines for emergency assistance.

During its remedial work, Virgin Media contacted 42,991 identified telecare customers to support them through migration. This figure gives a sense of the scale of the telecare customer base that the company needed to re-assess once the issues came to light.

What Virgin Media Says In Its Defence

Virgin Media has accepted Ofcom’s findings and the pretty substantial fine. The company has emphasised that the majority of migrations were completed without issue, but acknowledges that it did not get everything right for telecare users.

A spokesperson said the company recognised the problems that occurred and had since addressed the issues identified by Ofcom. Virgin Media has also highlighted the broader context, stating that the move to digital phone lines is essential because analogue lines are becoming less reliable and are increasingly difficult to maintain.

Reviews And Improvements

The company says it’s carried out an end to end review of its digital migration processes and introduced a “comprehensive package of improvements”, including:

– Better targeted communications for telecare users.

– Additional in home support during the switchover.

– Extensive post migration checks.

– Manual reviews of customer records to identify additional telecare users.

– A new policy that keeps non engaging telecare customers in a continuous engagement process rather than disconnecting them.

Virgin Media also says it is working with government, Ofcom and local authorities on a national awareness campaign to help improve understanding of the digital switchover and the specific needs of telecare users.

Virgin Media Customers

For most customers, the fine itself doesn’t change day to day services, since the money will go directly to the Treasury. However, the wider questions relate to whether Virgin Media’s updated processes are now strong enough to prevent a recurrence and whether customers, particularly those responsible for the care of vulnerable people, can have confidence in the company’s revised safeguards.

Businesses that rely on landlines for safety critical systems are likely to now be paying close attention to these developments. For example, telecare is the highest risk category, but many organisations still have legacy analogue dependencies, including alarm systems, lift phones, payment terminals and monitored entry systems. As the Virgin Media case shows, identifying those dependencies early is essential to ensure continuity during migration.

How Significant Is This Penalty?

The penalty sits among Ofcom’s larger fines in recent years. It is smaller than the £50 million fine issued to Royal Mail in 2018 and the £42 million penalty imposed on BT in 2017, but it is one of Ofcom’s largest decisions involving consumer protection rather than competition or technical service breaches.

What sets this case apart, however, is its focus on vulnerability and safety. Ofcom has made clear that the digital switchover cannot be treated as a purely technical exercise, particularly where safety critical devices are involved. Providers must be able to demonstrate that they have identified every customer who relies on telecare or similar services and that they have a safe, verified plan for migrating them.

Implications For Rivals And The Wider PSTN Switchover

The decision arrives during a complex national transition. Telecoms providers, government and industry bodies have agreed new charters and non voluntary migration checklists designed to strengthen protections for vulnerable customers. These include new expectations around individual risk assessments, enhanced contact attempts and safeguards before any disconnection can take place.

Other major providers have already had to revise their own migration plans in response to concerns about telecare reliability. The Virgin Media case is likely to intensify scrutiny across the sector, as Ofcom has made clear that it will not hesitate to take enforcement action if providers cannot demonstrate that vulnerable customers are being safeguarded.

Questions And Criticisms

The decision has raised several points of debate. For example, one relates to the absence of direct compensation, since the fine goes to the Treasury rather than to affected customers or local authorities who may have had to respond to incidents during the switchover. Ofcom’s role in this case is enforcement rather than redress, which means affected users will not receive direct financial support through this process.

Another issue is whether the failures identified at Virgin Media point to a broader challenge for the sector. Telecare providers, charities and parliamentary committees have continued to highlight confusion about responsibilities during migration, particularly where equipment manufacturers, care providers and telecoms companies all play different roles in keeping telecare services working.

There are also concerns that awareness among small businesses and property managers remains low. For example, even organisations not directly involved in health or social care may still rely on analogue lines for alarms, access systems or monitoring equipment without realising the implications of the switchover. The Virgin Media enforcement action is likely to prompt renewed calls for clearer guidance, more proactive industry communication and closer coordination with equipment suppliers.

What Happens Next?

Virgin Media has already paused and redesigned parts of its migration process. The company is now operating under updated policies, a revised engagement model for telecare users and closer regulatory oversight.

Ofcom is continuing to issue guidance on how providers should handle the remainder of the PSTN switch off. This includes expectations around vulnerability assessments, business continuity planning and coordination with emergency services, local authorities and telecare operators.

The case is likely to remain a reference point for months to come as organisations, regulators and telecoms companies navigate the final stages of the UK’s shift to digital landline services.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

This enforcement decision leaves the sector with a clearer sense of what regulators expect during the remainder of the switchover. Virgin Media’s failings were specific, but the underlying challenges are shared across the industry, particularly the difficulty of mapping analogue dependencies and ensuring that every vulnerable user is identified before any change goes ahead. The scale of the fine signals that Ofcom is prepared to act when those responsibilities are not met, which will shape how major providers approach their own migration plans over the next year.

The case also demonstrates why UK businesses should pay closer attention to their remaining reliance on analogue systems. Many organisations have digitalised most of their operations but still depend on a single lift line, alarm system or monitored entry point that uses outdated infrastructure. The disruption experienced by telecare users shows how easily those hidden dependencies can be overlooked and why forward planning is essential. For sectors such as housing, healthcare, facilities management and retail, the risks are not only technical but operational and reputational.

For telecare users, charities and local authorities, the decision provides reassurance that regulators are watching and treating these risks seriously. It also highlights how fragmented responsibilities have made safe migration more complicated. Telecoms providers can update their own processes, but the safety of vulnerable customers also depends on the readiness of equipment manufacturers, monitoring centres and care providers. The outcome may drive more coordinated planning across these groups, which has often been missing.

The broader lesson for the sector is that the digital switchover is not simply a matter of replacing one network with another. It is an exercise in risk management that requires precise data, careful customer engagement and a full understanding of how different services interact with the telecoms network. Virgin Media has now rebuilt much of its process, but the scrutiny it faced is likely to set new expectations for every provider involved in the transition.

As the migration continues, the focus will shift to whether the safeguards now put in place are strong enough to prevent a repeat of the problems uncovered here. The coming months will show whether the industry can maintain the pace of digital upgrade while keeping vulnerable customers protected and giving businesses and public sector bodies the certainty they need to manage their own critical systems.