Comparisons and alternatives
Construction progress reporting vs a snagging inspection
A snagging visit lists defects in a finished property, once, shortly before handover. Progress reporting checks what has been built against your contract, repeatedly, while the building goes up. They answer different questions, and the second one stops being answerable after the money is paid.
A snagging visit lists defects in a finished property, once, shortly before handover. Progress reporting checks what has actually been built against your contract, repeatedly, while construction is still underway. They answer different questions, and the second stops being answerable the moment the building is covered up and paid for.
The difference in one table
| Snagging at handover | Progress reporting | |
|---|---|---|
| When | Once, at the end | Through the build, at your interval |
| Compared against | Building standards and the specification | Your contract and your payment schedule |
| What it produces | A list of defects to be fixed | What is built, what is paid, and the gap between them |
| What you can still do | Ask for repairs | Decide whether the next instalment is due |
| Covers hidden work | No, it is already covered up | Yes, if the visit happens before it is |
Why the timing is the whole argument
By the time a snagging list exists, the structure is finished, the services are inside the walls, and you have paid most of the price. Every item on that list is a request. The developer may honour it, and in a well-run project they usually do, but you are asking rather than requiring.
During construction the same facts have force. An instalment that has not been earned is not yet owed, and that is a materially different conversation from a repair request after acceptance.
Reporting and snagging are not substitutes
This is worth saying plainly, because the comparison usually gets made as though one replaces the other. It does not. A snagging visit is the right thing to commission before you sign an acceptance document, and nothing about reporting during the build removes the need for it.
What reporting does is cover the period a snagging visit structurally cannot: everything between the first payment and the last, when the decisions that cost money are still being made.
Which one you need, by situation
| Your situation | What helps |
|---|---|
| Just signed, first instalments due | Reporting. The gap opens here. |
| Halfway through, invoices arriving | Reporting, timed to the invoices. |
| Handover in a few weeks | One report before you accept, plus a snagging visit. |
| Already accepted, defects appearing | Neither. Look at your defect liability period. |
Who does which
We do not sell snagging. It is done by a local firm you engage; what we sell is the visit during construction and the report that comes out of it — see pricing.
Snagging checks the finish once, at the end; progress reporting checks the building against your contract throughout, while an unearned instalment can still be questioned. Run both — reporting through the build and a snagging visit before you accept — and each covers what the other structurally cannot.
Last checked
Questions on this
- Can one visit do both?
- Partly. A report before handover covers what the contract required against what was delivered, and that overlaps with snagging on the visible finish. It does not replace a specialist walk-through with instruments, which is why we commission that separately rather than folding it into our own work.
- Is snagging worth it if I have had reports through the build?
- Yes. The reports tell you the building matches the contract; snagging tells you the finish is right. Both lists go to the developer, and the second one is much shorter when the first has been running.