Every strata scheme requires service providers. Depending on the size and complexity of the scheme, that list can include cleaners, gardeners, electricians, plumbers, fire safety specialists, lift technicians, security companies and building managers.

The reality is that service costs are rising, and owners corporations are aware that now is not the time for complacency. The juggle is that when you find good providers, there is something to be said for maintaining those relationships. They understand the property, know its history and can often identify a problem before it becomes a major issue.

But does that mean a strata scheme should simply renew the same contracts year after year? Not necessarily.

Regularly reviewing service providers is good governance. It doesn’t mean you need to change them. It means making sure the strata scheme continues to receive the service, expertise and value.

There is no set timetable that applies to every service provider or every strata scheme.

As a general approach, we suggest that service arrangements be reviewed regularly rather than waiting until something goes wrong. An annual review is a sensible opportunity to assess performance, costs, and changing requirements. This timing aligns with the owners corporation budget preparations for the coming year.

A more thorough comparison can then be undertaken when a significant contract is approaching renewal. The important point is to make reviewing providers part of the scheme’s normal management processes rather than something triggered solely by complaints.

It is easy to look at a service provider’s invoice and ask whether someone else could do the job for less. Cost is important. Owners are collectively paying for these services, and the owners corporation has a responsibility to manage funds carefully. However, the cheapest quote doesn’t automatically represent the best value.

For example, a cleaning business may have serviced a building reliably for five years. They know which areas need additional attention, respond quickly when something unexpected happens, and consistently complete the agreed work. They have increased their invoice by 5% for the coming year, citing fuel costs, wage increases, and material cost increases as the reasons.

A competing provider may offer a lower annual price, and on paper, it looks attractive. However, if service levels fall, complaints increase, or additional work needs to be arranged, those initial savings can disappear, and the reliability and quality of the work make changing providers a poor decision.

A review should consider price alongside reliability, quality, responsiveness and performance.

Start with the original agreement. What was the provider engaged to do, and are they doing it? Committees can consider whether work is being completed to the expected standard, whether the provider responds promptly to requests and whether recurring problems are being properly addressed.

There are practical considerations too. Are licences, qualifications and insurance current where required? Is the scope of work still appropriate? Has the property changed since the agreement was established?

A growing scheme or ageing building may have very different requirements today compared with five years ago.

A benefit of regular reviews is identifying smaller issues before they become bigger ones. Service standards can gradually slip. A provider that was once extremely responsive may become harder to contact. Jobs might take longer to complete, or additional charges may start appearing more frequently.

On the other hand, a review may demonstrate that a provider is doing an excellent job and their pricing remains competitive. That is equally valuable information.

It gives the committee confidence that continuing the relationship is a considered decision rather than simply maintaining the status quo because “that’s who we’ve always used”.

There are also times when an immediate review makes sense. Repeated complaints from residents, unexplained cost increases, poor communication, or recurring service failures should all warrant attention.

Major changes to the property also create different requirements. New security systems, major landscaping works, upgraded lifts, or changes to common property facilities could mean that an existing agreement needs to be expanded, renegotiated, or replaced.

Similarly, changes in legislation, safety requirements or insurance conditions may affect what is required from particular providers. Good strata management means staying ahead of these changes rather than reacting after something has been missed.

If a review suggests it is time to look elsewhere, obtaining alternative quotes is only part of the process. Comparisons need to be like-for-like. One quote may appear considerably cheaper because it includes fewer services, less frequent attendance or different response arrangements.

Committees should also consider experience, qualifications, insurance, references, availability and the provider’s ability to service the particular type and size of scheme. A smooth transition matters too. Relevant records, access arrangements, maintenance schedules and outstanding work may all need to be handed over.

Long-term relationships with reliable service providers can be extremely valuable to a strata scheme. The aim of reviewing service providers isn’t to disrupt those relationships. It is to make sure they remain productive.

At All Suburbs Strata Management, we work with owners corporations to manage contractors, obtain quotations, monitor services and help committees make informed decisions about their properties. Regular reviews bring transparency and accountability to the process. If a provider continues to deliver excellent service and good value, there may be every reason to keep them.

And if they don’t, the scheme is in a much better position to address it.