Ask a facilities manager about their asset data and you will get a rueful answer. Some of it came from a survey, some from a handover spreadsheet, some from whoever was there in 2019.
Every system sold into this market assumes you will fix that first. Few teams ever do, because the fixing never becomes more urgent than the work.
Working from a partial record without pretending otherwise
The approach that survives contact with reality is to treat completeness as a property of the record rather than a precondition for using it.
Assets with a known service history get forecast maintenance. Assets with nothing recorded are shown as unknown rather than assumed fine. The difference is visible, so a planner can see where the confidence is and where it is not.
Forecasts you can check
Where there is history, the forward view is deterministic. It reads the dates on the record and applies known intervals. No model is guessing at your buildings.
That makes it less impressive than a prediction engine and considerably easier to defend, because the reasoning is arithmetic on facts a person can look at.
What gets better on its own
Every job done through the platform is recorded against the asset it was done to. So the record fills in as work happens, rather than requiring a project to fill it in.
That is the honest version of "it improves over time". Not a promise about the software, a consequence of using it.
There is a facilities view at tradelynx.co.uk/demo/facilities-management, running on sample data.