31/08/2026
π Every UK building over four storeys is legally required to have roof safety systems. Proof of compliance must be available at all times.
Not at audit. Not on request. At all times.
That is a stricter standard than most compliance regimes, and it produces a specific kind of exposure, one that has nothing to do with whether the systems were installed correctly or inspected on schedule.
The exposure is evidential. The work was done. The proof isn't immediately producible.
We see the same pattern across this sector:
π Installation certificates held by the contractor who fitted the system, not the building owner
β±οΈ Inspection records that exist, somewhere, in a format nobody can locate under pressure
β Building managers who inherited an estate and no coherent history with it
π A statutory duty that is technically met and practically unprovable
For duty holders, this matters more than it first appears. Under a continuous-availability standard, "we can get that to you next week" is not compliance. It is a gap, and it is visible to enforcement, to insurers, and to anyone conducting due diligence on the building.
The sector has been well served on installation standards and poorly served on evidence infrastructure. Systems get specified, fitted, and inspected to a high standard, and then documented in a way that assumes someone will always know where to look.
The fix is not more inspection. It is structuring the evidence at the point the work happens, attached to the asset it relates to, retrievable in seconds by whoever holds the duty.
Installation, inspection, and maintenance history in one place. Against the specific system. Available continuously, because that is what the law actually asks for.
If you hold duty for buildings with roof safety systems and could not produce the full evidence trail this afternoon, that is worth looking at before someone else asks for it.
See what continuous compliance evidence looks like in practice.
Request a demo of TickAudit. Link below.