Getting PPM surveys right brings multiple benefits

Planned preventative maintenance (PPM) surveys have a significant role to play in ensuring properties remain compliant and future-proof. 

Indeed, failure to implement works proactively can lead to significant disruption, reduction in rental income and, ultimately, lower asset values.

PPM is therefore an area that deserves significant attention from clients and surveyors alike.

This article focuses on how landlords and surveyors can tailor their approach to suit unique property requirements and enhance the PPM service line to help modernise property operations.

One of the most important things to do when undertaking a PPM survey is to establish a clear scope.

Where the scope is unclear or generalised, the chances of building elements not being appraised in sufficient detail, due to access limitations or lack of specialist input for example, are increased.

In such circumstances, reactive maintenance will likely continue to be required, delaying crucial planned works and increasing the risk to the building.

To facilitate effective briefing, landlords should first develop a PPM policy using the knowledge of surveyors, engineers and incumbent contractors where required. Key considerations may include:

• the age and type of the building or estate
• exposure to adverse weather conditions
• known issues, perhaps requiring significant maintenance needs or risk mitigation measures
• operational priorities, such as safety, security, customer experience, services and components that are subject to high demand
• contractual obligations
• legal responsibilities
• approach to sustainability
• how to deal with structures or installations that are demised to tenants, e.g. is a cursory inspection required so that safety concerns are identified and acted upon without delay
• whether a visual inspection will suffice for facades or if close-range inspection and testing of facade components is required
• proximity of public realm to the buildings and level of footfall in these areas.  

Such considerations will influence the resources and equipment that the surveyor allocates to the project and ensure that priorities such as safety are accommodated.

It is rare to see a fully developed PPM policy. As a result, the survey is frequently confined to the common parts, with a number of caveats included in the report for areas that could not be accessed.

Some examples could include:

• an engineer to advise on complex mechanical and electrical system
• vertical transport consultants to advise on lifts and escalators
• building management system technicians to advise on controls and monitoring systems.

These are critical to the continued operation, compliance and safety of a building and will form significant portions of a maintenance budget. As such, it is crucial that the associated repair and replacement strategy is informed by the appropriate advice.

For taller buildings with ornate facades, or modern cladding systems, detailed facade inspections are likely to be required.

To be effective, such inspections often need to be holistic and involve tactile methods which in some cases may be best achieved using the building's roof-mounted cradle system. In these scenarios, the qualified operator will usually be a member of the client's team of incumbent contractors.

What is more, a team will be needed at ground level to enforce the necessary exclusion zones, which may involve temporary disruption or closure of public realm areas.

Not only is this likely to attract significant additional costs, but it will also require stakeholder engagement and coordination from both the surveyor and client. It is therefore crucial that all such requirements are understood and agreed in advance.

Corporations are also under increasing pressure to minimise energy consumption and emissions from their property portfolios as part of their environmental, social and governance (ESG) agenda. 

To that end, there is value in PPM surveys recommending appropriate allowances for energy efficiency improvements, particularly where buildings or portfolios are at risk of non-compliance. 

In practice, this might include the replacement of gas-fuelled heating and hot water installations with electric alternatives that can utilise more sustainably generated power sources.

The cost allocations within the PPM expenditure plan may need to coincide with lease expiries or renewals to minimise disruption.

Other considerations may include upgrading old windows to double, or triple glazed alternatives or replacing halogen lighting with LED. 

Increasingly, however, the internet of things and artificial intelligence are enabling the implementation of systems that analyse the performance of building components so that inefficiencies can be identified promptly and interventions made to reduce waste and increase performance.

These systems can record the associated reduction in carbon emissions to support compliance with legislation and help meet ESG targets.

Alongside such technology, surveyors and engineers will be better placed to recommend performance-based interventions that will not only enhance efficiency but ensure that the end of life replacement of building components is carried out at the optimum time.

However, a well-compiled digital asset register and asset tagging of building equipment will enable surveyors and engineers to develop a complete picture of a building's component parts, maintenance history and remaining service life.

But perhaps more importantly, it will be easier to identify any gaps in the current maintenance strategy that need to be addressed for the sake of compliance or safety.

Landlords will sometimes wish to explore modifications to the expenditure strategy put forward in the PPM report.

This may be in an attempt to soften spikes in the charge projection or following the completion of recommended works.

Fully understanding the impact of these adjustments and the operational risk that they present can be a difficult task that requires a significant amount of input from both landlords and surveyors.

Thankfully, a range of software is available that automatically adjusts cost projections where changes are made to a maintenance strategy. These programs also offer benefits such as:

• applying risk ratings to buildings, or specific building elements, which will automatically update in response to strategy changes or postponement of works
• highlighting priority work items
• providing compliance scores
• maintaining and automatically updating maintenance records
• presenting data and ratings to individual building or across entire portfolios.

This software will inform effective decision-making and provide a clear picture of the building's maintenance outlook for stakeholders.

However, identifying repair or replacement requirements in advance allows the operational risk to be mitigated and enables cost-effective implementation of works so that spikes in service charge are less sharp.

Examples of such mitigation may include the following.

• A phased approach to external repairs, whereby initial safety concerns are addressed by removing fragile materials with the help of temporary access equipment, followed by a period of regular monitoring before a comprehensive repairs programme.
• A phased replacement of boiler plant, whereby spare parts from decommissioned boilers are retained for repairs to the retained plant until its eventual replacement. 

A building with a comprehensive plan to tackle operational risks and spread service charge spikes will be more appealing to buyers, investors and prospective tenants than one without such a plan.

As such, the PPM survey plays a fundamental role in upholding asset value; but this relies on effective governance and a collaborative approach between surveyor and landlord.