Why safety case reports get refused – and how to get your BAC approved

The background: safety cases and BACs

Under the Building Safety Act 2022, every occupied higher-risk building – at least 18 metres or 7 storeys with two or more residential units – must have a principal accountable person (PAP). The PAP must assess the building's building safety risks (the spread of fire and structural failure), take reasonable steps to manage them, and prepare a safety case report explaining how. Since April 2024 the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) has been directing PAPs to apply for a building assessment certificate (BAC), which it issues if it's satisfied the duties are being met.

Not sure if your building is in scope? See Is my building a higher-risk building?

What the regulator said in July 2026

On 9 July 2026, the BSR said it had directed PAPs to apply for certificates for nearly 2,000 buildings since April 2024, that 66% of applications decided so far that year had been refused, and that assessments were taking twice as long as expected. It gave three main reasons:

• Process over safety. Applications focused on showing that processes existed rather than on how safety risks are actually managed.
• Fire spread and structural risks not demonstrated. Applications didn't show adequate arrangements for the risks of fire spread and structural failure.
• Volunteer-led organisations struggling. Resident management companies, right to manage companies and commonhold associations found the requirements hard to meet – and refusals pushed extra costs onto residents.

How the BSR's approach is changing

The regulator announced a more proportionate, intelligence-led and risk-based approach:

• Existing applications are being prioritised, and new ones called in only when needed
• The risk-based approach will focus first on organisations responsible for multiple higher-risk buildings
• Smaller, volunteer-run resident management companies will get more time
• Previously refused applicants may get fast-track reassessments once standards are met
• Updated resources and simplified assessment criteria were promised from September 2026

What hasn't changed is the law. PAPs have been under the safety case duties since 2024, and the BSR said they should prepare safety case reports without waiting to be assessed.

What a safety case report needs to show

A strong safety case report answers one question clearly: what could go wrong in this building, and how do we know it's under control? It should include:

1. A clear description of the building – height, storeys, construction, external walls, evacuation strategy, fire safety systems and structure
2. An assessment of the building safety risks – how fire could start and spread, including over the external walls and through compartments, and how structural failure could occur
3. The measures in place to prevent and limit those risks – compartmentation, fire doors, detection and alarm, smoke control, sprinklers, firefighting facilities, maintenance and management
4. The evidence behind each claim – the fire risk assessment, FRAEW, fire strategy, compartmentation survey, fire door checks, structural surveys and maintenance records
5. Gaps and the plan to close them – honest, prioritised and time-bound
6. The supporting systems – mandatory occurrence reporting, the resident engagement strategy and the golden thread

Common weaknesses we see

• No usable fire strategy, so nobody can explain how the building is meant to work in a fire. A retrospective fire strategy often fills this gap.
• Assumptions presented as facts – for example "compartmentation is assumed adequate" with no survey behind it.
• Generic templates that describe policies but not the building.
• Out-of-date or contradictory documents – an FRA that doesn't reflect the FRAEW, or plans that don't match the building.
• Structural safety treated as an afterthought.

How to get your BAC approved

• Start with a gap analysis. List what you hold, what's missing and what's out of date.
• Fix the evidence before the narrative. A well-written report can't make up for a missing survey.
• Make it building-specific. Every risk and measure should be traceable to this building.
• Be honest about gaps. The regulator expects a plan, not perfection.
• If you were refused, use the feedback. Fast-track reassessment is possible once the issues are fixed.

What "process over safety" looks like in practice

The regulator's main criticism is easy to fall into. Compare these two ways of describing the same building:

• Process: "A fire risk assessment is carried out annually by a competent assessor, and actions are tracked."
• Safety: "The 2026 fire risk assessment found 14 flat entrance doors without working self-closers. Twelve have been fixed; two are awaiting access, and residents have been written to. A compartmentation survey in March confirmed riser fire-stopping on all floors."

The first describes a system. The second shows the risk is understood and being controlled, with evidence. Safety case reports need much more of the second.

A simple structure that works

1. The building – what it is, in plain English, with plans
2. What could go wrong – fire spread and structural failure scenarios specific to the building
3. What stops it – the measures, mapped to each scenario
4. How we know – the evidence for each measure
5. What's not right yet – and the dated plan to fix it

Our safety case report service covers gap analysis, evidence gathering and drafting, and our Building Safety Act support helps PAPs with registration, the golden thread and resident engagement.

Sources

• GOV.UK – BSR to introduce more proportionate and targeted approach for higher-risk building assessments (9 July 2026)
• GOV.UK – Criteria for being a higher-risk building during the occupation phase

This guide is general information based on the law and guidance in England as at 8 November 2026. It isn't legal advice – for advice on a specific building, get in touch.