Building Safety Case Reports: 5 Myths Debunked

The Building Safety Act 2022 has introduced new compliance requirements for higher-risk buildings (HRBs), including the need for a Building Safety Case Report (SCR).

However, misconceptions around safety cases and their purpose continue to cause confusion. In this blog, we debunk five common myths to help Principal Accountable Persons (PAPs), property managers and housing providers navigate their way around the legislation.

Myth #1: "A Safety Case Report is just another compliance document."

Reality: A Safety Case Report is more than paperwork, it’s a live artefact that proves you have identified, assessed and are actively managing the risks of fire spread and structural failure.

The Building Safety Regulator (BSR) expects the Safety Case Report to be continuously updated and serve as a decision-making tool for the Principal Accountable Person (PAP). It should demonstrate that they are taking all reasonable steps to manage building safety risks, not just at the time of writing the report, but ongoing.

Myth #2: "I only need to complete a Safety Case Report once."

Reality: Writing a Safety Case is not a one-off endeavour. It must be kept up to date throughout the life of the building, reflecting changes such as:

• Maintenance and remedial works

• New risk assessments

• Additional or improved safety measures

• Changes in occupancy or building use

• Any reported safety incidents

  
  

If called upon, your safety case must reflect the most current situation. A static, outdated report could put your organisation at risk of non-compliance. All buildings must have a safety case in place as soon as reasonably practicable after 1 Apr 24.

Myth #3: "If my building has unresolved safety issues, I can’t submit a Safety Case Report."

Reality: Even if there are outstanding risks e.g., fire safety defects, un-remediated cladding etc. you must still submit a Safety Case Report when called for a BAC application. The key is to demonstrate that you have identified these risks and are taking all reasonable steps to manage them. This includes outlining the action plan for:

• Interim risk control measures (e.g., waking watch, enhanced fire alarms)

• Planned remedial actions and expected timelines

• Funding applications for necessary safety works

  
  

BSR does not expect perfection, but they do expect transparency and proactive risk management.

Myth #4: "The Safety Case Report is only for regulators."

Reality: While the BSR may request your SCR, your residents also have a legal right to understand how their building is being kept safe. A robust Safety Case should include a Resident Engagement Strategy, outlining:

• How residents are informed about fire safety and structural risks

• How they can report concerns and receive updates

• How their feedback is incorporated into safety management

  
  

This improves trust and cooperation, making safety management more effective.

Myth #5: "A Safety Case Report is too complicated—I need specialist consultants to create one."

Reality: While expert input (fire engineers, structural assessors) may be required, Principal Accountable Persons (PAPs) are ultimately responsible for compiling and maintaining the SCR. With digital tools like Cascade Risk, you can:

• Automate data collection from multiple sources

• Easily track and update action plans

• Generate and submit compliant Safety Case Reports quickly

  
  

Using technology simplifies compliance and reduces the need for costly consultancy fees.

Final Thoughts

Understanding the true purpose of a Building Safety Case Report helps property managers, housing associations and local councils stay ahead of compliance obligations. By debunking these myths, you can ensure your Safety Case is proactive, transparent and always ready for BSR review.

👉 Need help managing your Safety Case Report? Discover how Cascade Risk can streamline the process!