How do you compare contractor quotes fairly before approving spend?

Deciding how to spend owners' levy money is one of the most consequential things a strata committee does. Every dollar that goes to a contractor is a dollar of collective owner funds — and owners (reasonably) want to know that their committee obtained reasonable value, made a defensible decision, and didn't just call their cousin's plumbing business.

A consistent, transparent quote and approval process protects the committee from this scrutiny. When a decision can be shown to follow a clear process — same scope to every contractor, quotes attached to the decision record, rationale documented — it's very hard for owners to challenge it, even if they disagree with the outcome.

Why consistency matters more than lowest price

Before getting into the mechanics, it's worth addressing a misconception: the committee doesn't have to accept the lowest quote. What the committee must do is make a reasonable decision and document the rationale.

Choosing a more expensive contractor because they have better credentials for the specific work, because their timeline is more suitable, because previous work by the cheapest contractor was substandard, or because the cheaper quote excluded items that will need to be added later — all of these are legitimate rationales. They just need to be on the record.

What the committee must not do is accept a higher quote without explanation, have undisclosed relationships with contractors, or make decisions that appear designed to benefit a committee member personally. Transparency and documentation are your defence against these allegations.

Step 1: define a clear, detailed scope before requesting quotes

The most common reason quote comparisons fail is inconsistent scope. If you ask three contractors to quote on 'roof repairs', each will interpret that differently. One will quote on repairing three specific cracks. One will quote on the cracks plus preventive sealant coating. One will quote on a full roof membrane replacement. Comparing these is like comparing apples and submarines.

A good scope document includes:

- Exact description of the work to be done, with reference to specific areas or assets

- Specifications or standards the work must meet

- Any materials specified (brand, grade, type if relevant)

- Timeline requirements (must be complete by date X, or must not occur during period Y)

- Access arrangements and any constraints (can't shut water between 7am and 8pm, etc.)

- What's explicitly excluded (helps prevent scope creep claims)

- Any post-completion requirements (clean-up, inspections, warranties)

Send this same document to every contractor. Same scope, same information, same constraints. Anything else produces quotes you can't fairly compare.

Step 2: choose your contractors carefully

Who you invite to quote matters. A few principles:

**Appropriate credentials.** Trades work (plumbing, electrical, fire safety, structural) requires licensed contractors. Verify licences before engaging. Engaging an unlicensed contractor creates safety, legal, and insurance risks.

**Insurance.** All contractors working on the property should hold current public liability insurance and workers' compensation (where applicable). Request certificates of currency before any work commences.

**Relevant experience.** The cheapest general builder isn't necessarily the right choice for a specialised lift repair. Choose contractors with demonstrated experience in the specific type of work required.

**Number of quotes.** Many scheme by-laws and state legislation specify minimum quote requirements — often two or three for works above a threshold. Check your requirements. For smaller jobs within the committee's direct authority, a single quote may be acceptable if you document why (emergency work, specialist contractor with no practical alternative, value below the threshold).

Step 3: receive and organise quotes systematically

When quotes arrive, record them in one place: contractor name, date received, quoted amount, key inclusions and exclusions, timeline, warranty terms, and any conditions. Attach the original quote document.

Prepare a comparison table. This doesn't need to be complex — a spreadsheet or a summary in your committee papers is sufficient. For each contractor:

- Total quoted amount

- Breakdown of major line items (where provided)

- Timeline

- Any material differences in scope, exclusions, or conditions

- Notes on credentials, references, or prior relationship with the scheme

The comparison table becomes part of your committee papers for the relevant meeting. Attaching it to the meeting record in StrataBody means it's searchable and accessible when someone asks 'why did we choose that contractor?' a year later.

Step 4: the committee decision

Present the comparison to the committee as an agenda item with a clear motion: 'That the committee approves the quote from [Contractor] for [scope] at [$X] and authorises the secretary to issue the work order.'

If the committee doesn't choose the lowest quote, document the rationale in the minutes: '[Contractor] was preferred over the lower quote from [Other Contractor] because [reason — experience with the specific building asset, superior timeline, warranty terms, prior reliable work, etc.].'

This documentation is not bureaucratic over-engineering. It's a one-sentence note that protects the committee against any allegation of impropriety and demonstrates genuine deliberation.

**Important:** Any committee member with a direct or indirect interest in one of the contractors must declare that interest before the item is discussed and absent themselves for the decision. Failure to do so is a serious governance failure.

Step 5: work orders, execution, and completion

Once a quote is approved, issue a formal work order. The work order records the contractor engagement and links the authorised scope and price. It's the document that gives the contractor formal authority to proceed.

During execution, update the status in your system. Request progress updates for longer jobs. Conduct a completion inspection before approving final payment — check that the work matches the scope, identify any defects, and ensure the contractor addresses these before the job is closed.

Retain the final invoice, completion notes, and any warranty documentation. These records are valuable for insurance purposes, future similar works, and the case where a contractor returns to claim they weren't paid in full.

What about emergency situations?

Urgent repairs — burst pipe, fire safety equipment failure, dangerous structural issue — sometimes cannot wait for a full quote and approval process. In these situations, engage the appropriate contractor and document the decision retrospectively as an emergency engagement.

Note: who made the decision, when, why emergency procurement was necessary, what was authorised verbally, and when the formal records were completed. Most by-laws and legislation have provisions for emergency spend — the key is prompt and accurate documentation after the fact.