Contractor Performance: Are You Paying for Visits or for Results?

Contractors play a significant role in how a residential building operates. From cleaning and gardening to lift maintenance, communal plant and day-to-day repairs, their performance directly affects building standards, resident experience and service charge expenditure.

For RTM directors, RMC directors and freeholders, however, there is an important distinction to make.

A contractor attending the building does not necessarily mean the required result has been achieved.

A cleaner may attend every week while standards gradually decline. An engineer may repeatedly visit the same piece of equipment without resolving an underlying fault. A gardener may complete the agreed number of visits while external areas become increasingly poorly maintained.

Contractor performance should therefore be measured by outcomes, not simply attendance.

A Completed Visit Is Not Always a Completed Job

Consider a communal lift that develops the same intermittent fault every few weeks.

An engineer attends, resets the system and closes the call-out. A few weeks later, the same problem occurs and another visit is arranged.

On paper, the contractor has been responsive. In practice, the underlying problem remains unresolved.

The same principle applies throughout a residential building.

Repeated plumbing call-outs, recurring lighting faults or continually reopened maintenance jobs can all indicate that activity is taking place without delivering a satisfactory long-term result.

Individual incidents will always occur. The important question is whether there is a pattern.

Clear Contractor Specifications Matter

Contractors cannot be properly held accountable if nobody has clearly established what they are expected to deliver.

A cleaning contract should define the areas covered, frequency of attendance and expected standards. Gardening arrangements should reflect seasonal requirements rather than simply prescribing a number of monthly visits.

Mechanical and electrical maintenance contracts should be equally clear about routine servicing, reactive attendance and works that fall outside the agreed contract.

Without a defined scope, it becomes difficult for directors to determine whether poor standards represent contractor underperformance or simply an unclear instruction.

Professional management should create that structure from the outset.

Look Beyond the Contractor's Attendance Record

When reviewing contractor performance, directors should consider what is happening across the building rather than looking at individual invoices in isolation.

Recurring complaints, repeat call-outs and unresolved recommendations can reveal more than an attendance sheet.

The board should be asking whether problems are being resolved, whether contractors are communicating clearly and whether recommendations arising from visits are actually being followed through.

This is where professional Block Management should add value.

Contractor oversight should sit within a wider management structure in which building condition, maintenance expenditure, resident feedback and future requirements are considered together.

Lowest Price Does Not Always Mean Best Value

Service charge expenditure should be controlled carefully, but contractor procurement should not become a race towards the lowest quotation.

A cheaper contractor may ultimately offer poor value if work repeatedly needs correcting, appointments are missed or management time is continually required to resolve problems.

Equally, a higher-cost contract does not automatically represent better value.

Directors need to understand what they are receiving in return for the building's expenditure.

A useful assessment considers the quality of the work, reliability, communication, response times, frequency of repeat problems and whether planned maintenance is reducing the need for reactive intervention.

The purpose is not simply to reduce expenditure. It is to ensure expenditure is producing an appropriate result.

Your Managing Agent Should Be Managing Performance

RTM and RMC directors should retain appropriate oversight of their building without becoming responsible for chasing cleaners, engineers, gardeners and maintenance contractors themselves.

That operational responsibility should sit within the managing agent's day-to-day management structure.

A managing agent should be able to explain what contractors have been instructed to achieve, whether those standards are being met and what action is being taken where performance falls short.

Recurring problems should be identified. Poor performance should be addressed. Significant recommendations should not disappear into old contractor reports.

Directors should receive enough information to make informed decisions without needing to become the building's de facto facilities manager.

Four Questions Every Board Should Ask

When the board next reviews its main contractor appointments, there are four useful questions to consider:

What exactly are we paying this contractor to achieve?
Do we have evidence that the required standard is being delivered?
Are the same complaints or faults repeatedly appearing?
What action is our managing agent taking when performance falls short?

If those questions are difficult to answer, the issue may extend beyond the contractor itself.

It may indicate that contractor management requires greater structure.

Effective block management is not demonstrated by the number of contractors visiting a building. It is demonstrated through properly maintained communal areas, resolved problems, controlled expenditure and clear accountability.

For directors, the objective should be straightforward: fewer recurring issues, clearer oversight and confidence that the building's service charge expenditure is achieving the intended result.

Frequently Asked Questions

How should an RTM board monitor contractor performance?

Directors should agree clear expectations and review performance against them. Managing agent reports, inspections, resident feedback, repeat call-outs and expenditure patterns can all help identify whether the required standard is being delivered.

Should we always choose the cheapest contractor?

No. Price is important, but it should be considered alongside quality, reliability, experience, scope and long-term value. An inexpensive appointment can become costly if work repeatedly requires correction or problems remain unresolved.

What should happen if a contractor repeatedly underperforms?

The issue should first be clearly identified and documented. The managing agent should address the performance concerns with the contractor and require appropriate corrective action. Where performance does not improve, the appointment may need to be reviewed subject to contractual and other applicable requirements.

How do directors know whether a maintenance contract represents value?

Consider more than the annual fee. Review reliability, quality of work, additional charges, recurring faults, response times and whether regular servicing is helping to prevent larger reactive problems.

What role should a managing agent play?

A managing agent should provide structured contractor oversight within the scope of its appointment. This can include selecting and instructing contractors, coordinating access, monitoring performance, reviewing recurring problems and keeping directors appropriately informed.

Samantha Hossack

Chief Operating Officer

Samantha Hossack, Chief Operating Officer with over 20 years of experience driving operational excellence, leading high-performing teams, and delivering strategic growth across the prime London property market.

Read full bio

LET US HELP YOU