BIMINAM AS BUILT INFORMATION MEETING, 24-07-2026
Meeting Summary
Date: 24 July 2026
Duration: 1 Hour 51 Minutes
Meeting Objective
The meeting focused on reviewing the latest draft of the As Built Information guidance, including new infographics, definitions, terminology, and the proposed information handover process. Members examined whether the document remained within its agreed scope and discussed how to clearly distinguish As Built Information, handover information, and the Golden Thread while ensuring the guidance reflects current legislation and industry practice.
- Review of Draft Infographics
The session began with a review of two new infographics intended to explain the As Built Information process. Participants agreed that the diagrams contained too much information, relied heavily on acronyms, and could confuse readers rather than simplify the guidance. A small working group was established to refine the graphics, simplify the content, improve terminology and correct technical inaccuracies before publication.
- Clarifying Terminology and Regulatory References
A significant part of the discussion centred on ensuring legal and technical terminology is used consistently throughout the document. Members highlighted concerns around the interchangeable use of terms such as Accountable Person, Responsible Person, and Relevant Person, noting that each has a specific meaning under different legislation. Participants also identified references requiring correction, including Gateway stages, liability wording and other regulatory descriptions to ensure the guidance accurately reflects current UK building safety legislation.
- Validation, Verification and Responsibility
The group revisited one of its core discussions—who is responsible for validating and verifying information at handover. Members agreed that the organisation supplying information should verify that it has delivered the required information accurately, while the receiving organisation must determine whether that information is sufficient for operating and managing the building. The discussion emphasised the need to define these responsibilities clearly within the guidance to avoid ambiguity.
- Scope of the Guidance
Several participants expressed concern that the document was expanding beyond its original objective. The agreed purpose of the subgroup was to define what information should be handed over at project completion and how that information should be verified and validated, rather than describing the complete lifecycle management of information after occupation. Members recommended keeping the guidance focused on handover while allowing future workstreams to address broader asset information management.
- As Built Information versus the Golden Thread
The discussion explored the relationship between As Built Information and the Golden Thread. Participants agreed that while change records and other information form part of the Golden Thread for Higher-Risk Buildings, not all of this information is necessarily required for day-to-day building operation. The group recognised the importance of distinguishing between information needed for regulatory compliance, contractual records and operational use by building owners.
- Defining Information for Building Operators
Members discussed the need to define the information that building owners and operators actually require to safely operate and maintain assets. Rather than attempting to prescribe every document, the group considered focusing on the purpose of the information and ensuring the final guidance helps clients understand what information should be requested and handed over without becoming operational guidance itself.
- Actions and Next Steps
The meeting concluded with agreement to revise the draft diagrams, simplify definitions, improve consistency of terminology and reconsider sections that extend beyond the agreed scope. Participants also suggested removing or simplifying complex reference tables where they created confusion, while retaining clear definitions that support the document's primary objective.
Key Takeaways
Meeting 8 focused on refining the draft guidance rather than introducing new technical requirements. The group agreed that the document should remain focused on defining As Built Information at handover, use legally accurate terminology, clearly distinguish verification from validation, simplify the supporting infographics and avoid expanding into wider asset management guidance. These revisions are intended to produce clearer, more practical guidance that can be consistently understood and applied across the construction industry.