Insight: The Building Safety Act – What the Industry Is Learning in Practice
The Building Safety Act 2022 has fundamentally reshaped the residential property sector. While the principles of improved safety, accountability and transparency are well understood, the practical reality of operating under the Act is now becoming clear — and it is materially different from the regulatory environment that preceded it.
From our work across consultancy, project delivery, remediation and building management, we are seeing a clear distinction emerge between organisations that are adapting successfully to the new regime and those still treating compliance as a procedural exercise.
Accountability Is Now Structural, Not Theoretical
The most significant change introduced by the Building Safety Act is not documentation or process — it is accountability. Responsibility is no longer diluted across contractual arrangements or deferred to the end of a project. Dutyholders are expected to demonstrate clear ownership of safety decisions, supported by evidence that stands up to scrutiny.
In practice, this has exposed weaknesses in traditional delivery models, where roles are fragmented and responsibility is transferred rather than retained. Organisations that have not embedded accountability into governance structures are finding themselves exposed during regulatory engagement.
The Golden Thread: Where Most Projects Are Still Falling Short
While awareness of the Golden Thread requirement is widespread, effective implementation remains inconsistent. What we are consistently seeing is confusion between information collection and information governance.
Many projects still rely on:
- fragmented data held across multiple platforms
- late-stage collation of compliance information
- unclear ownership of safety-critical records
The result is information that exists, but cannot be relied upon, interrogated or presented coherently to the regulator. The most successful projects are those treating the Golden Thread as a live management system, embedded from the outset and maintained through occupation.
Competence Is Now Under the Microscope
The Act has brought organisational competence into sharp focus. This extends beyond individual qualifications and into how organisations define roles, manage assurance and demonstrate capability at a corporate level.
We are seeing increasing scrutiny of:
- how dutyholder roles are defined and discharged
- whether governance arrangements align with statutory obligations
- how competency is assured across supply chains
In many cases, procurement strategies have not yet caught up with regulatory reality, leading to gaps between contractual appointments and statutory responsibility.
Regulatory Engagement Is Becoming More Forensic
Engagement with the Building Safety Regulator is evolving rapidly. Early interactions centred on Gateway submissions; current engagement is increasingly focused on systems, decision-making and assurance.
The regulator is asking more searching questions:
- How are safety decisions made and recorded?
- Who is accountable when risks are identified?
- How is information managed post-completion?
Projects that cannot clearly evidence these matters are experiencing delay, challenge and, in some cases, enforcement action.
Remediation and Occupied Buildings: The Industry’s Greatest Test
The practical delivery of remediation and retrofit works in occupied buildings is where the Building Safety Act is proving most demanding. These projects require a level of coordination, communication and governance that traditional delivery models were never designed to accommodate.
We are increasingly seeing clients struggle with:
- balancing safety improvements with resident impact
- managing live compliance obligations during works
- maintaining clear accountability across multiple stakeholders
Successful programmes are those that integrate advisory, delivery and management expertise, rather than treating these functions as separate or sequential.
What Leading Organisations Are Doing Differently
Across our work, a clear pattern is emerging. Organisations that are adapting well to the Building Safety Act are:
- defining responsibility early and unambiguously
- embedding safety and compliance into project governance
- treating the Golden Thread as an operational asset, not a deliverable
- aligning procurement and appointments with statutory roles
- planning for compliance in occupation, not just at completion
These organisations recognise that the Act is not a compliance hurdle to clear, but a framework that demands long-term behavioural change.
Our View
The Building Safety Act represents a permanent shift in how residential buildings are developed, delivered and managed. Those who continue to approach it tactically will face increasing difficulty. Those who embed accountability, competence and information governance into their operating model will be best placed to succeed.
From our position working across development, consultancy and building management, it is clear that the future belongs to organisations that are prepared to take responsibility, and retain it.