Aipedia: Principal designers and building safety

AI minutes of design reviews

Aipedia, by the Apex broking team · Last reviewed 2026-10-27

AI notetakers can minute design reviews quickly, but those minutes are often the main evidence that a principal designer monitored design work. An inaccurate summary can turn an open issue into an apparent agreement.

Part of: AI in principal design and building safety

In short

Under Part 2A reg 11M the principal designer must plan, manage and monitor design work, and design review minutes are the usual evidence. AI notetakers can transcribe and summarise meetings, but they can smooth over uncertainty, misassign actions and mistranscribe technical details. Transcripts and minutes are likely to be disclosable in later disputes, which under the Building Safety Act may arise years later. Tell attendees about recording, have the chair approve summaries, record open issues in the speaker's words and set a retention policy.

How PDs use AI for meeting records

Design reviews and coordination meetings are where a principal designer shows it is managing and monitoring design. AI notetakers can transcribe these meetings, summarise discussions and draft action lists within minutes. For a PD running many meetings across several projects, that is a real saving. Architects and project managers face similar questions with site meeting notes and meeting minutes.

The PD's minutes are also evidence. Years later they may be the main record of what was raised, agreed and left open. See the AI for principal designers overview for other uses.

The duties that apply

Part 2A reg 11M: the PD must plan, manage and monitor design work and take reasonable steps to ensure designs are coordinated and that designers comply with their duties. Minutes are the usual evidence of that monitoring.
Reg 11K(4): designers must report compliance concerns to the PD. A concern raised in a meeting and lost in a summary may still count as reported.
CDM 2015 reg 11: the PD plans, manages and monitors the pre-construction phase and ensures cooperation between designers.

Recording people also involves their personal data, so tell attendees, agree how recordings and transcripts will be used, and consider data protection obligations.

What can go wrong

Illustrative scenario. At a design review, the structural engineer says a transfer beam detail is "probably fine, but we need the services openings confirmed before we can sign it off". The AI summary records "transfer beam: agreed". The action to confirm openings is dropped. Years later, defects are found, and in the dispute the PD's minutes are the main evidence. They suggest the PD treated an open issue as closed.

Common problems:

summaries that smooth over disagreement or uncertainty;
actions assigned to the wrong party;
technical terms, figures or grid references mistranscribed;
raw transcripts kept alongside summaries, with the two telling different stories.

Disclosure in later disputes

Minutes, transcripts and recordings are documents that are likely to be disclosable in litigation or adjudication. Inconsistencies between them can damage credibility. Building Safety Act claims may come years later and may involve more than one party: under section 130, the High Court can extend certain building liabilities to associated companies where just and equitable. Apex's guide to building liability orders explains the wider position. Decide in advance what will be kept, for how long, and which version is the record.

How PI usually responds

An inaccurate minute is not itself a claim, but it can weaken the defence to one. A coordination failure claim would usually fall under the PD's PI, subject to the wording, and the insurer will want the records. Clear, checked minutes help both the PD and its insurer.

Policies commonly require the insured to cooperate with the insurer and provide relevant documents. If the only record of a key meeting is an unchecked AI summary that contradicts what designers remember, the defence becomes harder and more expensive. Notifying circumstances promptly, with the approved minutes and any transcript, gives the insurer the best chance to assess the position early.

Practical controls

Tell attendees when meetings are recorded and transcribed, and agree how the records will be used.
Have the chair check and approve AI summaries before circulation.
Record open issues and conditions in the speaker's own words.
Decide whether to keep raw transcripts, and apply a retention policy.
Link actions to the coordination log (see AI design coordination).
Record design risk decisions explicitly (see AI design risk registers).
Use approved minutes as evidence for the handover document (see AI-drafted handover documents).

How Apex helps

Apex arranges PI for principal designers. A broker can explain what records insurers expect to see if a coordination claim is made.

Sources

Frequently asked

Can AI minutes prove the PD monitored design work?

They can help, if they are accurate and approved. Reg 11M requires the PD to plan, manage and monitor design work, and checked minutes are the usual evidence. Unchecked summaries that misstate decisions can undermine that evidence.

Should we keep the raw transcript?

Decide in advance. Transcripts may be disclosable in a later dispute, and if they differ from approved minutes the inconsistency can be used against you. A retention policy applied consistently is sensible.

Can a designer rely on a concern it raised only in a recorded meeting?

Reg 11K(4) requires designers to report compliance concerns to the PD. A concern raised in a meeting may count, but if the AI summary dropped it the record is disputed. Designers and PDs both benefit from confirming significant concerns in writing.

Do we need consent to record design meetings?

Attendees should be told and the use of recordings agreed. Recordings and transcripts contain personal data, so data protection obligations apply. Check your own data protection advice for the right approach.

Check your PI covers how you use AI

Tell us about your firm and the work you do. A broker will review how your current PI treats AI-assisted work, or arrange new cover. No fee for a quote. Or call 0117 325 0027.

Start a PI quote Request a callback

Apex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England and Wales, company number 07014570. This page is general information about how AI is used in the profession and how insurance may respond. It is not legal, regulatory or insurance advice on your circumstances, and it does not guarantee that cover will be available or on what terms.