One standard everywhere
North office or south, experienced colleague or new starter: the same form, the same mandatory fields.
For housing companies
Handovers at portfolio scale, consistent rather than improvised
With thousands of units, documentation quality is not decided by how careful an individual is. It is decided by whether everyone, across every site, works to the same standard.
- One form across the entire portfolio
- Unlimited users on-premise
- Integration with ERP and asset systems
- Analysis across every property, not per folder
- External contractors included under scoped access
- Shorter vacancies through faster case handling
Effect across the portfolio
45 %
less time spent on documentation
131
satisfied customers
100 %
of data kept in your own house
The problem at scale is not the individual handover
A well-run property handover is not difficult. The problem arises through multiplication.
With a thousand units and ten per cent turnover that is a hundred changes a year, each with a pre-inspection, a move-out, possible repairs and a move-in. Spread across several staff and sites, that produces hundreds of documents of varying quality.
The decisive factor is therefore not how thorough any individual colleague is, but whether everyone works to the same standard. Without a binding form, report quality varies with the person, and you only notice when a case turns contentious and the photographs happen to be missing from exactly that one.
Vacancy is the expensive metric
Every day between handback and re-letting costs rent. With a hundred changes and an average of five avoidable vacant days, that adds up to five hundred days without income.
A substantial share of those days is not caused by contractor capacity but by delays in the information chain. The report is not in the system yet. The defects have not been ordered. Nobody knows whether the flat can be let again.
When the report leaves the appointment already complete and the defects exist as structured data, that chain shortens measurably. That is the commercial lever, rather than the minutes saved while filling in a form.
Bringing external contractors in cleanly
Larger portfolios rarely run on in-house staff alone. Caretaking firms, external inspectors and trades are involved in handovers, and therefore in sensitive data.
On paper that access is effectively uncontrolled: whoever holds the form sees everything. Digitally you can scope which properties, which forms and which fields an external user can see.
With Active Directory integration, permissions follow the groups you maintain anyway. When the collaboration ends, access ends with the account, without anyone having to remember.
Analysis: the questions nobody could answer before
A PDF archive answers no questions. Once reports exist as structured data that changes:
- How many handovers per site, quarter or member of staff?
- Which categories of defect cluster in which construction years?
- How long does an inspection take on average, and where does it deviate?
- How many cases are open, and how many are overdue?
- How long does a unit sit empty after handback?
The clustering of defects by property and construction year is particularly valuable. It shows where maintenance can be planned rather than reactive. That analysis emerges as a by-product of documentation you have to produce anyway.
What matters at scale
Many users
In the Ultimate edition and on-premise the number of users is unlimited, which also covers seasonal peaks.
ERP integration
Property and tenant data come from the leading system, and finished reports return as structured data.
Portfolio-wide analysis
Processing times, recurring defects and open cases across every property rather than per folder.
Bring contractors in
Caretaking firms and external inspectors work from the same forms, with scoped permissions.
Operations that scale
On-premise in your own data centre where data volume and protection requirements demand it.
Frequently asked questions
How many users are possible?
In the Ultimate edition the number of users and forms is unlimited, as it is with on-premise operation. For large portfolios with many participants that is usually the right variant.
Can several sites or legal entities be separated?
Which users see which properties and forms is controllable, so staff only see the portfolio relevant to them. How finely that separation is drawn depends on your structure and is defined during setup.
Can we build different forms for different portfolios?
Yes. Forms for move-in, move-out, pre-inspection and defect reports can be designed to your own specification, differentiated by portfolio type if needed. Changes are rolled out to every device, so nobody works from an outdated version.
How demanding is a rollout across a large portfolio?
The effort lies less in the technology than in designing the forms and aligning with the leading system. A pilot at one site or on part of the portfolio is sensible before rolling out widely, because it surfaces edge cases before they occur a hundred times over.
Pilot first, portfolio second
We demonstrate the solution on one of your properties, with your forms. A wide rollout only makes sense once that stands.