Home / Kitchen Extraction Cleaning / Guide
Kitchen extraction - certificate challenged
You did the cleaning, you have the certificate - and yet your insurer is questioning it. That is a jarring position, but it usually has a clear cause: the certificate does not actually prove what a genuine one should. Understanding why a certificate gets challenged is the key to holding one that does not.
The short answer
If your insurer is questioning your compliance certificate, it is usually because the certificate does not actually prove what a genuine one should. Common reasons: it is a token certificate that merely asserts a clean rather than verifying it with photographs and grease measurements; it does not show cleaning to the recognised standard; the scope did not cover the whole system; or the cleaning has lapsed. An insurer needs genuine, verified evidence of compliance, and a certificate that falls short of that gets questioned - which is why holding a real verification report matters.
Having a certificate is not enough
The disconcerting thing about an insurer questioning your certificate is that you have one - so it feels like you have done what was required. But an insurer is not looking for the existence of a certificate; it is looking for genuine proof that the extract was cleaned to the required standard. A certificate is only useful to the insurer if it actually demonstrates that. So the fact that you hold a certificate does not settle the matter - the question the insurer is really asking is whether that certificate genuinely proves compliance, and if it does not, holding it changes nothing.
This reframes what is happening. The insurer questioning your certificate is not being unreasonable or pedantic; it is checking whether the document actually provides the evidence its policy conditions require. If the certificate does provide genuine proof of cleaning to standard, it should satisfy that check. If it does not - if it is a certificate in name but not in substance - then the insurer questioning it is exactly the certificate failing to do its job. So the reasons a certificate gets questioned come down to the ways a certificate can fall short of genuinely proving compliance.
It doesn't verify the clean
The most common reason a certificate is questioned is that it does not actually verify the cleaning - it merely asserts that a clean happened, without the evidence to prove it was done to standard. A genuine extract cleaning certificate is a verification report, backed by before-and-after photographs from matching positions and measured grease-deposit readings against the standard's limits. A token certificate - a slip stating a clean was carried out, with no photographs and no measurements - proves nothing, because it shows no evidence the system was actually cleaned to the required standard.
An insurer scrutinising a certificate will see the difference immediately. A genuine verification report gives them the evidence they need; a token certificate gives them a claim with nothing behind it, which is exactly what prompts a question. So if your certificate is being questioned and it lacks photographs and grease measurements, that is very likely why - it is not a verification of the clean but an assertion of it, and an assertion is not what the insurer needs. The remedy is a genuine certificate that verifies the clean, which is what would satisfy the scrutiny.
Other reasons it's questioned
Beyond a lack of verification, a few other things get a certificate questioned. The standard: if the certificate does not show the cleaning was done to the recognised standard - TR19 Grease for extract - the insurer may question whether it meets the requirement, because a clean to no recognised standard is not the same as a compliant one. The scope: if the certificate covers only part of the system, or it is unclear that the whole system was cleaned, the insurer may question whether the extract as a whole is actually compliant, since an uncovered section remains a risk.
Currency is another. If the cleaning has lapsed - the certificate is old and the system has not been cleaned within an adequate interval since - the insurer may question whether the extract is currently compliant, because compliance is ongoing, not a one-off. So a certificate can be questioned not only for lacking verification, but for not showing the recognised standard, not covering the whole system, or not being current. Each is a way the certificate fails to demonstrate genuine, complete, up-to-date compliance - which is what the insurer's scrutiny is testing for.
How to hold one that stands up
The way to avoid a questioned certificate is to hold one that genuinely stands up, which means addressing each of the reasons it gets challenged. It should be a real verification report - with before-and-after photographs and grease measurements against the standard's limits - proving the clean, not a token slip. It should show the cleaning was done to the recognised standard. It should cover the whole system, so there is no uncovered part to question. And it should be current, part of a continuous, up-to-date cleaning history.
A certificate that is all of these - genuine, standard-referenced, complete and current - is one that gives the insurer exactly the evidence its conditions require, so there is nothing to question. So if your certificate is being questioned, the constructive response is to get the extract cleaned and verified properly, to the recognised standard, with a genuine report covering the whole system, and to keep that up to date. That gives you a certificate that stands up to scrutiny - which is the point of holding one. A questioned certificate is a signal to upgrade to a real one, not a problem with the insurer.
The takeaway
If your insurer is questioning your compliance certificate, it is usually because the certificate does not genuinely prove what a real one should. The common reasons: it is a token certificate asserting a clean rather than verifying it with photographs and grease measurements; it does not show cleaning to the recognised standard; it does not cover the whole system; or the cleaning has lapsed and it is no longer current. Each is a way the certificate fails to demonstrate genuine, complete, up-to-date compliance.
The insurer questioning it is not being unreasonable - it is checking whether the document provides the evidence its conditions require, and a certificate that falls short does not. So the answer is to hold one that stands up: a genuine verification report, to the recognised standard, covering the whole system, kept current. That gives the insurer exactly what it needs and leaves nothing to question. A questioned certificate is a prompt to upgrade to a real one - because a genuine certificate is precisely one that does not get questioned.
Questions
Because an insurer is not looking for the existence of a certificate but for genuine proof the extract was cleaned to standard. If your certificate does not actually demonstrate that - because it lacks verification, standard, scope or currency - holding it changes nothing, and it gets questioned.
That it does not verify the clean - it merely asserts a clean happened, with no before-and-after photographs and no grease measurements against the standard. A token certificate proves nothing, which an insurer scrutinising it sees immediately.
If it does not show cleaning to the recognised standard (TR19 Grease for extract), if it covers only part of the system rather than the whole, or if the cleaning has lapsed and the certificate is no longer current. Each fails to show genuine, complete, up-to-date compliance.
No - it is checking whether the document provides the evidence its policy conditions require. If the certificate genuinely proves cleaning to standard, it should satisfy the check; if it does not, the insurer questioning it is the certificate failing to do its job.
Get a genuine verification report - with before-and-after photographs and grease measurements - showing cleaning to the recognised standard, covering the whole system, and kept current as part of a continuous cleaning history. That gives the insurer exactly what it needs.
Treat it as a prompt to upgrade to a real one - get the extract cleaned and verified properly to the recognised standard, with a genuine report covering the whole system, kept up to date. That gives you a certificate that stands up to scrutiny rather than one that gets questioned.
We provide a genuine TR19 verification report covering your whole system - the complete, standard-referenced evidence that stands up to an insurer's scrutiny rather than being questioned.
