Failure to comply with SLAs: who pays when service intervention logs are missing?

An SLA is a contract, and contracts are upheld through evidence

In the maintenance sector – covering plant, lifts, air conditioning, data networks and electrical systems – Service Level Agreements form the backbone of every contract. They define response times, resolution times, the frequency of preventative maintenance and escalation procedures. They are detailed, binding and, in most cases, provide for automatic penalties in the event of non-compliance.

The problem is that many maintenance companies sign ambitious SLAs without having the systems in place to demonstrate compliance. The call-out arrives, the technician carries out the work, and the problem is resolved. But the customer claims that the agreed response time was not met. Who is right? In the absence of verifiable logs, the answer depends on who has the best lawyer.

The service call log: the only evidence that counts

In a dispute over an SLA, there are three critical moments that must be documented beyond reproach: the moment the customer reports the problem, the moment the technician takes charge of the call-out, and the moment the call-out is closed with the customer’s confirmation. These three timestamps, if generated by a third-party system rather than by the company itself, constitute proof of whether or not the SLA has been met.

In the reality of many maintenance SMEs, these three moments are recorded using different and incompatible tools: the customer sends an email, the technician replies on WhatsApp, and the completion of the job is noted on a piece of paper that ends up in a filing cabinet. Reconstructing the timeline weeks later, in the event of a dispute, is an almost impossible task.

A survey conducted on a sample of 60 Italian maintenance companies found that 68% do not have an integrated system for managing and documenting SLAs. Most use email, Excel spreadsheets or, at best, management software not specifically designed for managing service records.

The cost of undocumented SLA penalties

SLA penalties in the maintenance sector are often calculated as a percentage of the monthly fee for each hour of delay beyond the contractually defined limits. In a contract worth €10,000 per month with penalties of 2% per hour of delay beyond 4 hours, every service call that is not properly documented potentially carries a risk of €200 per hour. A dispute over three contested service calls in a month can result in penalties running into thousands of euros, even if the technicians were on time.

The paradox is that these penalties are often accepted by the company not because the SLA has not been met, but because it is unable to prove it. It is a bureaucratic capitulation in the face of evidence that does not exist, not a defeat on the ground.

---

The solution: the log is created at the time of the service call, not afterwards

The difference between a maintenance company vulnerable to SLA disputes and one that is not does not lie in the technical skills of its operators. It lies in the system used to record each service call. Companies that use platforms where every action taken by a technician – opening a ticket, arriving on-site, carrying out tasks, and closing the job with the customer’s signature – automatically generates a log with a server-side timestamp are virtually invulnerable to SLA disputes.

Because the log isn’t produced: it’s generated. Automatically, the moment the event occurs. There’s no possibility of backdating, no chain of custody to ensure, and no post-hoc collection of evidence. The evidence already exists the moment the technician arrives on site and opens the app.

If your company manages contracts with SLAs and you want to stop paying penalties for jobs you’ve completed on time, see how GeoTapp automatically creates verifiable job logs for every technician in the field.

Imagine the next SLA dispute: instead of chasing down paperwork, you can scroll through a server-side log containing timestamps, GPS coordinates, photos and the customer’s signature, before the meeting even begins.