BACed into a corner

By Emily Harbottle, Founder of Cascade Risk Management.

Has the BSR BACed itself into a corner?

The Building Assessment Certificate (BAC) was introduced to focus attention on the management of risk in higher-risk buildings (HRBs). Yet, given the reaction to organisations securing a BAC and the way it is spoken of as some kind of holy grail, the certificate itself, rather than effective risk management, risks becoming the desired end-state. The Building Safety Regulator (BSR) has issued only a handful of BACs and, while those duty-holders may breathe a sigh of relief, there is concern that some in the sector secretly interpret the certificate as meaning their building has been declared “safe”. The flood of praise on LinkedIn for securing a BAC is striking, when by now every organisation should arguably be BAC-ready, having had 17 months to meet the intent of the regulation.

For the housing sector to build a credible safety culture, it must embrace the true meaning of a safety case regime and recognise that the choice to centre compliance on a certificate risks fuelling misplaced and potentially dangerous emphasis.

What the law is asking for

Part 4 of the Building Safety Act 2022 places clear duties on Accountable Persons:

• Section 83 – Assess risks. Accountable Persons must, as soon as practicable and at suitable intervals, identify and assess building-safety risks for the parts they are responsible for, and periodically revisit the assessment.

• Section 84 – Manage risks. The Principal Accountable Person (PAP) must take all reasonable steps to prevent those risks from materialising and to reduce their impact if they do. This is an outcome-focused duty akin to the “so far as is reasonably practicable” requirement familiar from health and safety law.

• Section 85 – Show your working. The PAP must prepare a safety case report summarising the risk assessments carried out under Section 83 and explaining the steps taken under Section 84.

“BACed into a corner?”

The published guidance makes clear that the BAC is nothing more than the BSR’s moment-in-time view that legal duties have been met, and explicitly not a guarantee of ongoing safety or future compliance. Yet the symbolism of a certificate cannot be understated. Whether intended or not, it signals that a building has been “signed off”, and it is not surprising that organisations raised on prescriptive compliance may see it as the ultimate benchmark. There are already reports of insurers suggesting a BAC may be required before underwriting cover, and of it becoming a prerequisite in property transactions.

While the BAC does carry weight and may help demonstrate a PAP was aligned with regulatory expectations at a given time, an outdated or poorly maintained safety case could leave it irrelevant or even misleading. In contrast, due diligence on a safety case gives a far richer picture of how risks are managed day to day, rather than only proving compliance at the moment the certificate was issued.

Lessons from Defence Aviation

The UK Military Aviation Authority’s Manual of Air System Safety Cases (MASSC) provides a strong precedent. Organisations regulated by the MAA produce safety cases to demonstrate how they meet regulatory intent. The regulator reviews the case but does not issue a certificate. Instead, it issues a statement of confidence in the case’s integrity and the duty-holder’s argument. This avoids undue reassurance from certificates, requires continuous demonstration of safety, and reinforces that risk ownership lies with the operator, not the regulator.

From the MASSC we can take four practical lessons for Accountable Persons under the BSA 2022:

1. Write an argument, not a catalogue. Structure safety cases around claim–argument–evidence:

• Claim: precise and contextual. For example, “For Building X, as currently occupied and operated, we have taken all reasonable steps to prevent the spread of fire and structural failure and to minimise harm if they occur.”

• Argument: logical explanation of how the claim is true, covering the implementation and management of controls, why they are proportionate, how they interact, and how effectiveness is tested.

• Evidence: targeted proof that each argument is valid, with clear mapping to claims.

2. Ensure the Safety Management System supports timely updates to the safety case when circumstances change, so it always reflects the building as currently operated.

3. Demonstrate “all reasonable steps”, not simply “lots of activity”. Show how proportionality and cost–benefit have been considered, including measures taken, measures discounted, and the reasons why.

4. Guard against shelf-ware. A safety case that sits untouched is meaningless. It must actively govern today’s operations and tomorrow’s changes, explaining why the building is acceptably safe now, what could make it unsafe, and what is being done about it.

The accountability gap

Some organisations risk treating the BAC as the conclusion of the safety journey. This is a fundamental misunderstanding. The statutory duties created by the BSA are continuous and remain with the organisation’s leadership, supported by a robust Safety Management System. Certification should not become closure, nor should the safety case be reduced to a paperwork exercise.

The BAC should be seen as valuable endorsement but never as a warranty. If the sector continues to treat it as an end state, old hazards will be rediscovered the hard way. If, instead, it is treated as a checkpoint on a longer safety journey, it can reinforce accountability and continual improvement.

About the author

Emily Harbottle is the founder of Cascade Risk Management and the driving force behind Cascade, a purpose-built digital safety case platform transforming how organisations manage HRB risks. A former British Army helicopter pilot, instructor and aviation regulator, she further developed her expertise during her time with the UK Military Aviation Authority. Emily has since worked globally across aviation, healthcare, maritime, nuclear and housing, specialising in Safety Management Systems and structured risk management. She holds a Postgraduate Certificate in Safety and Human Factors in Aviation and is a Member of the International Institute of Risk and Safety Management (IIRSM). With Cascade, she is applying this experience to the housing sector, offering a platform that replaces static documents with a live, auditable and collaborative safety case tool.

Sources

BSR webinar slide-deck — Building Assessment Certificates: “What a BAC is, and isn’t”

Building Safety Act 2022, Section 83

Preparing a Building Assessment Certificate application (GOV.UK guidance)