Building safety expectations have fundamentally changed

The way buildings are owned, managed and regulated has changed. These changes have been shaped by hard lessons, including those exposed by failures such as Grenfell Tower.  The way safety information is handled has not kept pace.

For decades, safety-critical information has been fragmented across contractors, consultants, managing agents and owners. Documents have been passed between stakeholders, archived, duplicated and forgotten. Responsibility has been unclear. Accountability has been diluted.

That model no longer meets regulatory or commercial expectations, and requires a more structured approach supported by a building safety compliance platform.

​

The Building Safety Act introduced continuous responsibility

The Building Safety Act created a new legal framework for higher-risk residential buildings.

Principal Accountable Persons and Accountable Persons now carry ongoing duties to manage building safety risks and maintain accurate, up-to-date information for the life of a building.

This is not a one-time compliance task. It is a permanent obligation that must stand up to scrutiny at any point in time.

Regulators expect duty holders to demonstrate control, not intent.

​

The Golden Thread is no longer optional

The Golden Thread requires safety information to be:

Relevant to risk
Accurate and current
Accessible when decisions are made
Maintained through change

It is not defined by document lists or file storage.

Without structure, ownership and stewardship, simply digitising records recreates the same risks in a different format, rather than aligning with Golden Thread information management principles or supporting Safety Case evidence preparation. 

​

Regulatory, commercial and personal risk is increasing

Building safety failures now carry real consequences.

Regulatory enforcement
Delays to sales, refinancing and insurance
Increased scrutiny from lenders and insurers

Personal liability for Accountable Persons with statutory duties

The risk is no longer hypothetical. It is operational, financial and reputational, and in some cases may lead to formal escalation through Mandatory Occurrence Reporting (MOR).

​

Most organisations were not designed for this regime

Many existing systems were built to support handover, not lifetime accountability.

They struggle with:

Information ownership
Change over time
Clarity of responsibility
Confidence in data quality

As people, suppliers and structures change, safety information often degrades. This creates risk precisely when confidence is required.

​

Why NBR exists

The National Building Register (NBR) was created to support duty holders under the Building Safety Act with a structured, practical system for managing the Golden Thread.

We bring together safety information, accountability and guidance into a single, controlled environment. Where needed, this is supported by expert oversight to reduce pressure on internal teams.

NBR is not just about storing information. It is about maintaining confidence.

​

Why now matters

The transition period is narrowing.

Organisations that act early gain control, reduce risk and build long-term confidence. Those that delay may find themselves responding under pressure, with limited options and increased exposure.

Building safety is no longer about future preparation.
It is about present responsibility.