What to expect in a professional cleaning report

What was cleaned (canopy, filters, ductwork, fan) and the extent, the standard (TR19 Grease), before-and-after photographs of the internal ductwork, the date, and observations and recommendations - a detailed, specific record of the job. A professional extraction cleaning report should contain: what was cleaned (which parts of the system - canopy, filters, ductwork, fan - and the extent, so it's clear the whole system was done); the standard (that the cleaning was to the TR19 Grease standard); before-and-after photographs (of the internal ductwork surfaces, showing the grease present and removed - proof the hidden parts were cleaned); the date (of the clean); observations and findings (the grease condition found, the system's state, any issues like a worn filter or poor access, and recommendations such as the right cleaning frequency); and often the access used (access points, any panels fitted). So it's a detailed, specific record of the job - what was done, to what standard, with proof and useful findings. A report with these is professional; a vague, photo-less one is a warning sign. So a detailed record with photos, standard, date and observations. So the full job, to standard, with photographs. This is general guidance.

Because the cleaned ductwork is hidden, the photographs are the only way to actually see the internal surfaces were cleaned (grease present, then removed) - so they're the proof the hidden parts were done, which a report without them lacks. The report should include before-and-after photographs because the cleaned ductwork is hidden. The important cleaning happens inside the ductwork, out of sight - so you can't see, by looking, whether it was cleaned. Before-and-after photographs of the internal surfaces (showing the grease present before and removed after) are the way to actually see that the hidden parts were cleaned - direct visual proof of the otherwise-invisible clean. So they're a crucial part of the report's evidence value: without them, the report can describe the clean but can't prove the hidden ductwork was done (you'd be relying on the description alone). A report with before-and-after photographs proves the clean; one without them is weaker (and can signal a superficial clean, since a proper cleaner takes the photographs). So expect before-and-after photographs of the internal ductwork in the report, and treat their absence as a red flag. So because they prove the hidden duct was actually cleaned. So they're the visual proof of the hidden clean. This is general guidance.

The observations and findings tell you the grease condition, the system's state, any issues (a worn filter, poor access, a fan concern), and recommendations like the right cleaning frequency - useful information for managing your extraction. Beyond proving the clean, a professional report tells you useful things about your system through its observations and findings. It records the grease condition found (how greasy the system was, which reflects your cooking and cleaning frequency); the state of the system (its general condition); any issues noted (a worn filter needing replacement, poor access that should be improved, a fan concern, or other problems); and any recommendations (such as the appropriate cleaning frequency for your kitchen, or work that should be done). So the report is a source of maintenance information: it tells you what state your extraction is in, what needs attention, and how often it should be cleaned - helping you manage the system proactively. This is one of the two main values of the report (the other being compliance evidence). So read the report's observations and act on them (address the issues, adjust the frequency if advised). So it tells you the grease condition, issues, and the right frequency. So your system's state and what it needs. This is general guidance.

Yes - a generic report with no detail, no photographs and no observations suggests the clean may have been superficial, because a proper clean produces a detailed report; so a thin report is a warning about the clean, not just the paperwork. Yes - a vague, thin report is a warning sign, not just a documentation shortfall. A generic page with no detail (not specific to your system), no photographs (no proof of the hidden clean), and no observations suggests the clean may have been superficial. The reasoning: a proper, thorough clean produces a detailed report - the cleaner surveyed and cleaned the system, so they have the information (what was cleaned, the grease condition, findings) and the before-and-after photographs to fill a proper report. A token report suggests they don't have that, because the clean was superficial (a quick job of the visible parts, no real survey, no hidden-duct cleaning, no photographs). So the quality of the report is a clue to the quality of the clean: a thin, photo-less, generic report points to a possibly superficial clean (as covered in the telltale-signs-your-last-duct-clean-was-incomplete page). So treat a vague report, and the clean behind it, with suspicion. So yes - it can signal a superficial clean. So yes; a thin report is a red flag. This is general guidance.

The report and certificate go together: the certificate formally certifies the clean to TR19 Grease, and the report (with photographs) details and proves what was done - together they're your evidence of the clean. The report and the certificate are complementary parts of your evidence from a clean. The certificate is the formal statement that the system was cleaned to the TR19 Grease standard - a concise certification. The report is the detailed record: what was cleaned (which parts, the extent), the observations and findings, and, with the before-and-after photographs, the proof of what was done. So the certificate certifies the clean, and the report (with photos) details and demonstrates it. Together with the photographs, they form your complete evidence of the clean - the certificate as the headline certification, the report and photos as the substantiating detail and proof. This is why you should get all of them (certificate, report, photographs) from a professional clean, and keep them together as your compliance records (as covered in using photos and reports as compliance evidence). So they complement each other: the certificate certifies, the report details and proves. So the certificate certifies, the report evidences the detail. This is general guidance.

Question it - a thin or missing report suggests a superficial clean; ask the cleaner for a proper report with photographs, and for future cleans use a contractor who provides a detailed, photographed report as standard. If your report is thin (vague, generic, no photographs, no detail) or missing, question it - because it suggests the clean may have been superficial (a proper clean produces a detailed report). Ask the cleaner for a proper report: the detail of what was cleaned, to what standard, with before-and-after photographs of the internal ductwork, the date and observations. If they can't provide it (no photographs, no detail), that's a strong indication the clean didn't do (or verify) the hidden parts. And for future cleans, use a contractor who provides a detailed, photographed report as standard - and check, when choosing, that they do (ask what their report includes). If you're concerned the last clean was inadequate, consider having the system surveyed to check its actual state (a thin report can mean grease was left in the duct). So question a thin or missing report, and choose a contractor who reports properly. So ask for a proper report, and use a reporting contractor next time. So question it and get proper reporting in future. This is general guidance.