The clarity engine for
the built environment.
A single, continuously maintained record of your estate, assembled from the documentation you already hold. Every answer is evidenced and traceable to source.
Centropic ingests drawings, O&M manuals, CAFM exports, condition surveys and subcontractor certification in their existing form, and returns ranked, evidenced answers — resolved to room level, with every statutory position referencing the underlying regulation. No data-cleansing exercise is required and no template is imposed. The platform operates upstream of your existing CAFM, under your ownership.
The truth about an estate is scattered across hundreds of files — and they rarely agree.
Every building generates records faster than they can be filed, across systems that do not interoperate. Much of that data was created by others; the responsibility for standing behind it nonetheless rests with you. The answer usually exists — in a drawing, a certificate, or a spreadsheet maintained by a single individual. Locating it takes a week. Defending it takes considerably longer.
At mobilisation
Inherited registers frequently fail to match conditions on site — a discrepancy typically discovered months into the contract, after the maintenance schedule has been built against them. Our team has stood in that plant room.
In the register
Multiple asset lists under inconsistent naming conventions, with no reliable means of establishing which version the maintenance regime is operating against.
At the audit
The estate is probably compliant — turning probably into evidence takes days, each time the client, the insurer or the regulator asks.
- DWG
- O&M manual
- CAFM export
- Condition survey
- Subcontractor certificates
- Point cloud
- Site photos
- One asset register
- Located to the room
- Conflicts flagged
- Evidence attached
- Statutory clocks
- Rule version pinned
- Audit pack
What Centropic does
Centropic ingests the estate as it stands — client drawings, CAFM exports, subcontractor returns — and resolves it into a single living model: every asset matched, every conflict flagged, every claim supported by evidence that can be opened and inspected. Questions are asked in plain English and answered in a form that can be defended. From the first drawing to the board paper: a single, unbroken chain of evidence. Centropic is a compliance-engineering input, not legal advice; it does not confer compliance, but identifies, with the relevant provision, where compliance is not met.
Developed by the Centropic team · Grounded in years of first-hand estate documentation practiceDemo estate · synthetic data · figures on this page are illustrative unless marked as generated from the rule base
From your files to a defensible position.
No data cleansing, no template, no installation. One team, end to end — with first answers typically arriving within weeks. The programme below sets out each stage, and how little of it falls to your team.
Nominate a site
You: provide system exports and a document folder — drawings, PDFs and spreadsheets in their current form.
Centropic: processes every file and establishes a complete inventory of the material held.
Deliverable: a complete source inventoryYour estate, connected
You: minimal involvement — typically two clarification questions.
Centropic: matches each record to the correct asset, flags conflicts rather than merging them, and assigns confidence scores.
Deliverable: a confidence report and conflict registerYour first answers
You: raise the questions your organisation already holds — compliance position, risk exposure, backlog.
Centropic: returns ranked, evidenced answers with a complete audit trail.
Deliverable: your statutory position, evidencedEstate-wide, always current
You: adopt it for decision-making and extend coverage building by building.
Centropic: synchronises nightly from every source and notifies you when a position changes.
Deliverable: a board-ready capital planAsk one question. Receive a ranked, evidenced answer, with the reasoning attached.
The questions estates and facilities teams raise every week, expressed as they are asked. The first three are answerable from the rule base today; the remainder are in development and marked accordingly — the panel illustrates the intended form of the answer, not a result we currently stand behind.
Provenance denotes the proportion of records underpinning the answer whose source document has been located and traced. It is neither a probability that the answer is correct nor a compliance score.
One register. Every asset, the system it serves, and the evidence behind it.
View the 48 buildings as a list
| Ref | Building | Systems | Assets | Compliance | Overdue | Backlog |
|---|
Defensible by design.
Where data predates a regulation, the platform states so explicitly. Where the law is silent, it records that silence rather than supplying a date without legal basis. Every element is designed to withstand client audit, insurer scrutiny and contract handback.
The golden thread
Every computed position carries its rule_version; every sign-off carries its model_version. These allow any previously reported position to be re-derived in full, and enable systematic identification of positions requiring review when a regulation changes mid-contract.
Evidence, not assertion
A completion certificate constitutes evidence — but not conclusive evidence, and it is presented as such. Where a subcontractor return cannot be obtained, the reason is recorded. A missing certificate is never scored as compliant.
Human oversight
An automated system cannot hold knowledge, take reasonable steps, or act as a competent person, and it cannot sign. All agents operate within defined guardrails, and the handover to your competent person is itself treated as a source of risk and managed accordingly.
Stated limitations
Rules derived from public secondary sources, rather than from a licensed original, are flagged as such in the data and are fully identifiable. They are suitable for scoping and estimation; they are not presented as settled. No schedule is included in the system where its publisher's licence prohibits that use.
Knowing isn't the problem. Proving it is.
Every statutory clock is data: provision, interval, anchor and day-type — because the anchor matters more than the interval. An early gas check is deemed made on the deadline date and keeps the anniversary. An early evacuation-plan review moves the clock. Two review clocks, opposite behaviour, and nothing separates them but reading the provision.
Nearly half of the obligations held carry no interval in the source at all. Fire risk assessment review, legionella risk assessment review and asbestos re-inspection are the three most frequently used clocks in UK facilities management, and none carries a statutory interval. A system that supplies a date in these cases reports a breach of a rule that does not exist — an error the service provider is then required to explain.
Three of the five severity bands in common industry use likewise have no basis in law. Every target date on a Centropic finding states its authority — 28 days, SI 2020/312 reg 3(4) or 90 days, Centropic convention — and is never presented as a bare date.
Generated from the rule base at build time · v2026-08-13 · 118 acceptance tests, all passing
| Regime | Interval | Anchor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Electrical · EICR | 28 days | Date of inspection, not the report | Overdue |
| LEV · Thorough exam | 14 months | Previous examination | Due |
| Gas · Safety record | 12 months | Anniversary preserved | Compliant |
| Fire risk assessment | No statutory interval | Self-set review point | Review due |
| Lifting · LOLER | Scheme required | Prohibition tested first | Compliant |
A missing written scheme is not an overdue task; it is a prohibition, and prohibition is tested before any date arithmetic is applied. Where no interval exists in law, Centropic reports against the duty-holder's own recorded review point and states explicitly that it has done so.
Four regimes, not England with variations
Where contracts span more than one UK nation, this is the area in which compliance systems most frequently err — and the finding lands on your report, under your name.
England
Higher-risk building duties from 18 metres. The Fire Safety (England) Regulations 2022 apply here and nowhere else.
Wales
Regulates at 11 metres where England regulates at 18. Most of the Building Safety (Wales) Act 2026 is enacted and not yet in force — known, and not scheduled.
Scotland
No equivalent of the Fire Safety (England) Regulations, and no higher-risk building regime. Applying the English rule here produces a finding that does not exist.
Northern Ireland
Most GB health and safety law arrives through NI's own instruments, and the NI citation is what you are shown. RIDDOR does not transpose at all — applying the GB rule under-reports.
Start with a single site.
A pilot engagement comprises one site and approximately two days of your team's time. We ask that the estate is provided as it stands — including drawings of uncertain provenance, the current CAFM export and uncollated subcontractor certification. This is precisely the input the platform is designed for; pre-cleansed data limits the value of the exercise.
Direct enquiries: info@centropic.co.uk
All data remains the property of you or your client — UK-hosted, exportable on exit, and never used to train third-party models.