We understand the pressure. Budgets are tight. The service charge is under scrutiny. Three window cleaning quotes land on your desk; one is cheaper, and it’s natural to feel pulled toward it.
But here’s the quiet truth we’ve learned over twenty years of working at height on London’s buildings. When a quote looks too good to be true, the corners usually haven’t been cut on the cleaning. They’ve been cut on the safety paperwork you can’t see.
And when something goes wrong at height, it isn’t the contractor’s name that ends up under the spotlight. It’s the building owner’s, and it’s yours.
We’re not saying this to alarm you. We’re saying it because so few contractors will, and because knowing what to look for genuinely protects you.
Where the cheap quote quietly saves money
To clean the outside of a high-rise safely, someone has to attach themselves to your building. That’s done through a mansafe system, a network of anchor points, eyebolts, and abseil posts fixed into the structure, designed to hold a person’s full weight if the worst happens.
That equipment is only as trustworthy as its last inspection. Anchor points don’t last forever, fixings loosen, sealant fails, and metalwork corrodes, which is exactly why they need testing and certifying at regular intervals, with the paperwork to prove it.
Testing that system properly costs money. Documenting it properly takes time. So when a quote comes in unusually low, one of the first questions worth asking is a simple one. Has the cost of verifying the safety system actually been included, or has it quietly been left out?
Because a contractor who assumes your anchors are fine, rather than confirming it, can price the job cheaper. They’re just moving the risk from their shoulders onto yours.
What “compliant” actually means at height
Working at height in the UK sits under the Work at Height Regulations 2005, and it’s supported by a set of standards that exist to keep people safe and to keep you protected.
In plain English, here’s what proper documentation should cover. Every job should be underpinned by a RAMS, a risk assessment and method statement setting out how the work will be done and how the risks are controlled. The anchor and mansafe system should be inspected and certified in line with BS 7883 and the anchor standard EN 795, at intervals that don’t exceed twelve months, so there’s never a stretch where nobody can say for certain the system is safe. Where the building design itself is in question, BS 8560 speaks to designing for safe access. And where powered access is involved, such as a cradle or BMU, LOLER and PUWER govern how that equipment is examined and maintained.
You don’t need to memorise any of that. That’s our job, not yours. But you should be able to expect that whoever cleans your building can produce this documentation clearly, quickly, and without fuss, because that paperwork is your evidence that the work was done safely and lawfully.
Why this lands on the FM’s desk
Here’s the part that makes this more than a technical footnote. Responsibility for safe work at height on a building doesn’t sit neatly with the contractor alone. As the party appointing them, the building owner and the managing agent carry a duty to make sure the people working on site are competent and that the systems they’re clipping into are safe.
So if an anchor fails and the documentation isn’t there, “the contractor said it was fine” is not a position you want to be defending. The liability, the questions, and the reputational damage flow back towards the FM, the managing agent, and the freeholder, not the firm that quoted cheap and moved on.
That’s the real cost hidden inside the cheapest quote. It was never really about a slightly better price on the cleaning. It was about who carries the risk when something goes wrong, and too often, that quietly becomes you.
There’s a better way to think about price
None of this means the most expensive quote is automatically the safe one. It means fair pricing and full documentation should travel together, and that a small, sensible compliance premium is almost always cheaper than the alternative.
The approach we believe in is straightforward. Bring the safety testing and the cleaning under one roof, with an in-house specialist competent in BS 7883, so your anchor and mansafe documentation is handled properly, priced fairly, and never left as somebody else’s problem. One relationship, one clear set of records, and no gap between who cleans the building and who confirms it’s safe to do so. That’s how a service partner reduces both your risk and your workload at the same time.
Five questions to ask before anyone clips into your building
Before you accept any window cleaning quote, these five questions will tell you almost everything you need to know.
First, can you show me a current test and certification record for the anchor and mansafe system on this building, dated within the last twelve months? Second, will you provide a job-specific RAMS before work begins, not a generic template? Third, who in your team is competent to BS 7883, and can I see evidence of that? Fourth, does your quote include verifying the safety system, or does it assume it’s already been done? And fifth, if I asked for your mansafe and anchor documentation right now, how quickly could you put it in my hands?
If those answers come back clear, confident, and quickly, that’s a good sign. If they come back vague, that vagueness is exactly the risk you’d be taking on.
Peace of mind is the point
At the heart of all this is something simple. You deserve to know, with genuine confidence, that the people working at height on your development are safe, competent, and fully documented, and that if anyone ever asks, the evidence is already there.
If you’re not certain your current documentation would stand up to scrutiny, it’s worth two minutes to find out. Our free High-Rise Compliance Audit gives you a clear, honest benchmark of how your programmes sit against best practice, whoever currently looks after your buildings. No sales pitch, just clarity.
Because when it comes to safety at height, being sure is always cheaper than being sorry.
