From 2026 onwards, missing building safety records on a regulated construction site are no longer treated as an administrative problem. They are treated as a control failure. On Building Safety Regulator (BSR) controlled projects, records are not supporting documents. They are regulated construction evidence. If they are missing, incomplete, or cannot be verified, the regulator assumes that control has failed.
Under the Building Safety Act, construction is no longer just a delivery activity. It is a regulated safety process. Every inspection, every installation, every change and every approval must be evidenced. If that evidence does not exist, the regulator treats the work as unverified, regardless of how well it may appear to have been built.
On a regulated site, missing records do not create inconvenience. They create exposure.
Why Records Are Now Treated as Safety Controls
The Building Safety regime is built around the concept of continuous assurance. The regulator does not certify buildings based on intent or reputation. It certifies buildings based on evidence.
Daily site diaries, inspection and test records, photographic evidence, product conformity certificates, permits, temporary works checks and change control logs now form part of the building’s legal safety case. They sit inside the Golden Thread and are used to verify that the approved design has been constructed correctly and that safety-critical systems have been installed under controlled conditions.
If a record is missing, the regulator does not ask what probably happened. It asks what can be proven.
If it cannot be proven, the work is treated as non-compliant until evidence is produced.
What the Regulator Assumes When Records Are Missing
On BSR-regulated projects, missing records trigger a simple regulatory assumption.
If it is not recorded, it did not happen.
That assumption applies to inspections, tests, product deliveries, fire stopping checks, structural checks, temporary works sign-offs and change approvals. The regulator does not accept reconstructed paperwork or retrospective declarations. Evidence must be live, attributable and time-stamped.
When an inspector attends site and discovers gaps in the record system, they are not just looking at paperwork quality. They are assessing whether the project is under control. Missing records indicate weak governance, poor supervision and uncontrolled delivery.
In regulatory terms, missing evidence is treated as missing control.
What Happens During a BSR Inspection If Records Are Missing
When a BSR inspector attends site, they normally follow three parallel lines of enquiry. They review the regulatory status of the project, they review the site record system, and they walk the physical installation.
If records are missing, the inspection immediately escalates.
The inspector will identify which inspections, tests or approvals cannot be evidenced. They will then walk the affected areas of the site and physically inspect the installations. If the installation cannot be verified against approved design and inspection records, it is treated as a compliance risk.
At that point, the regulator may require intrusive inspections, opening up of completed works, additional testing, independent verification or full reinstallation of affected systems. The commercial impact can be severe.
Missing records do not save time. They multiply cost.
The Enforcement Consequences of Missing Records
On higher-risk buildings, missing or incomplete records can trigger formal enforcement action.
This can include:
Compliance notices requiring corrective action
Improvement notices requiring system changes
Evidence audits across multiple work packages
Work restrictions or stoppages on safety-critical activities
Gateway delays or rejection
Escalation to dutyholder level
In serious cases, where missing records indicate systemic control failure, the regulator can require a full compliance review of the project’s delivery systems.
From a programme perspective, missing records can stop work faster than any technical defect.
Why Missing Records Can Delay Gateway Approval
Gateway approvals are not design approvals. They are control approvals. The regulator is not only assessing whether the building has been designed correctly, but whether it has been built under a compliant delivery system.
If the construction record shows gaps, inconsistencies or missing evidence, the regulator cannot certify the building as safe to progress or be occupied. This is why poor record keeping is now one of the most common causes of Gateway delay.
On regulated projects, Gateway approval is not based on what the building looks like. It is based on whether the regulator can trust the evidence trail.
If the evidence trail is weak, the building is not certifiable.
The Commercial Impact of Missing Safety Records
A building without a complete construction record is becoming a commercially impaired asset.
Insurers are already pricing risk based on evidence quality. Lenders are increasingly asking for safety case documentation. Purchasers and funders are commissioning independent compliance audits. Asset managers are inheriting long-term exposure tied directly to the quality of the construction record.
If a building cannot demonstrate how it was built, it becomes harder to insure, harder to finance, harder to sell and harder to operate.
From 2026 onwards, no serious investor will accept a building without a fully auditable compliance history.
Who Is Accountable When Records Are Missing
While legal responsibility sits with the dutyholders, operational accountability sits on site.
The Principal Contractor owns the system.
The Site Manager controls compliance.
The Site Supervisor maintains the daily record.
The Foreman provides operational input.
Subcontractors supply installation evidence.
When records are missing, the regulator will examine where the system failed and who was responsible for maintaining it. Investigations always begin with the daily diary and inspection trail. They establish the timeline. They identify who was in control. They show what was known and when.
In regulatory terms, missing records are treated as a management failure.
Why Retrospective Records Are No Longer Accepted
One of the biggest cultural shifts under the Building Safety regime is the rejection of retrospective paperwork. The regulator does not accept reconstructed diaries, backdated inspections or post-completion declarations.
Live construction must be evidenced live.
This is why digital record systems with time-stamped entries, controlled access, audit trails and secure storage are now the regulatory standard. Messaging apps, personal phones and informal photo folders do not constitute compliant evidence systems.
If it is not in the project system, it does not exist.
What Site Teams Must Do to Avoid Record Failures
Preventing record failure is not about adding more paperwork. It is about building record keeping into daily operations.
Every inspection must be logged on the day it happens.
Every photograph must be uploaded to the project system.
Every delivery must be recorded and verified.
Every change must go through formal control.
Every supervisor must understand what evidence is required.
On regulated sites, record keeping is no longer an admin task. It is a safety function.
What This Means for Construction Sites in 2026
In 2026, missing building safety records are treated as missing safety controls. They trigger enforcement. They delay certification. They increase commercial risk. They expose dutyholders and site leadership to regulatory scrutiny.
The industry has moved beyond trust-based construction. It now operates on evidence-based delivery.
On a regulated project, you are not only building a structure. You are building its legal record. And if that record is incomplete, the building is not compliant.
|
Expert Verification & Authorship: Mihai Chelmus
Founder, London Construction Magazine | Construction Testing & Investigation Specialist |
