Most leak detection companies say a report is included.
Very few show what that actually means.
If you are paying for a leak investigation, you need to know what documentation you will receive afterwards, what it is useful for, and whether it is detailed enough to pass on to an insurer, factor, landlord, letting agent, contractor, or property manager.
This page is here to make that clear.
The example below is a fictional sample report. It is not taken from a real customer file. It is a composite example built to show the kind of structure, findings, methods, access notes, repair detail, and supporting evidence that a proper leak detection report may include. The real reports you shared show those elements in practice, including reported symptoms, testing methods, confirmed findings, excavation or opening-up details, repair or isolation notes, and photo evidence.
That is what turns a leak visit into something another party can actually use.
A leak can be found properly and still be written up badly.
Strong evidence becomes much easier to use when the report is structured clearly rather than presented like an invoice with notes.
A leak can be found properly and still be written up badly.
That is the problem most customers never see coming.
Some reports contain the right evidence but present it more like an invoice, a narrative site note, or a bundle of photos than a clear findings document. The reports you attached show why this matters. One clearly records boiler pressure loss, thermal imaging, acoustic testing, tracer gas testing, excavation beneath the kitchen floor, and isolation of an old underfloor heating loop. Another records damp symptoms, moisture survey results, thermal imaging, tracer gas, sound listening equipment, exposure of the shower leak, and the need for drying and rectification afterwards. The evidence is useful. The structure is what determines how easy that evidence is to understand and pass on.
A clearer report reduces repeated questions, reduces guesswork, and makes handover easier.
It should show what problem was reported, what was investigated, and what methods were used.
It should state the confirmed or suspected source clearly enough that another party can understand it.
If flooring was lifted, an access panel opened, or a repair completed, that should be recorded.
It should leave the next person with something practical, not just a loose description of what happened.
What it should not do is overpromise.
A report can provide clear evidence of source, access, and repair where applicable. It can support conversations with insurers, factors, landlords, and contractors. It cannot guarantee claim approval, decide liability on its own, replace legal advice, or automatically include wider reinstatement, drying, or restoration works.
Before you book any leak detection company, this is one of the most useful questions to ask.
In most cases, the documentation should include:
The format may vary depending on the case, but it should feel like a proper findings document, not just a receipt with notes attached.
Property type: Traditional upper-flat tenement property Location context: Edinburgh Reason for attendance: Investigate recurring ceiling staining in lower flat below upstairs bathroom Date of attendance: 19 March 2026
Lower-flat occupier reported recurring staining to bathroom ceiling, worsening after shower use in the flat above. Upper-flat occupier reported no visible standing water within their own bathroom.
What this tells you: The report starts with the symptom history, not assumptions.
Why it matters: It separates what was seen from what was later confirmed.
Who this helps: Landlords, factors, insurers, and neighbours all need to understand the starting point.
What a weak version often misses: A weak report may jump straight to “leak found” without recording what triggered the investigation.
Moisture mapping carried out to affected ceiling area and adjoining bathroom floor zone. Thermal imaging and tracer gas testing used to narrow the suspected source area around the shower tray and waste connection. Direct inspection carried out via existing shower tray access panel.
What this tells you: The conclusion was reached through a method, not guesswork.
Why it matters: A stronger report shows how the contractor got from symptom to finding.
Who this helps: Insurers, factors, and commercial property managers often need to understand the basis of the conclusion.
What a weak version often misses: It may say a leak was found but never explain how the source was identified.
Active water escape identified at the shower waste connection beneath the tray. Water was tracking into the upper-flat floor zone and through to the ceiling void below. Moisture pattern and testing results were consistent with the staining history reported by the lower-flat occupier.
What this tells you: This is the core finding: source, route, and connection to the visible damage.
Why it matters: This is often the most important section in the whole document.
Who this helps: Anyone trying to work out where the problem actually sits, especially in a shared building.
What a weak version often misses: It may say “bathroom leak” without identifying the actual failed component or water route.
Existing shower tray access panel removed for direct inspection. No wider floor removal was required to confirm the source.
What this tells you: The access was targeted and limited.
Why it matters: It helps distinguish trace and access from wider reinstatement or restoration.
Who this helps: Insurers, landlords, and homeowners who want to understand what was opened and what was not.
What a weak version often misses: It may mention disruption without explaining what was actually opened up.
Failed waste connection seal replaced. Trap connection refitted and tested under shower flow. No further active leak observed during post-repair testing.
What this tells you: The report does not just say “repaired.” It says what was repaired.
Why it matters: That makes the repair record usable.
Who this helps: Insurers, landlords, and contractors taking over any later works.
What a weak version often misses: It may confirm a repair happened without saying what part failed or what was done.
Report includes:
What this tells you: The report includes evidence you can actually look at, not just a written conclusion.
Why it matters: Photos and readings make the findings easier to understand and easier to pass on.
Who this helps: Everyone, especially where the reader was not present at the visit.
What a weak version often misses: Photos may be attached with no explanation of what they show.
Leak source identified and repaired. Any drying, redecoration, or reinstatement of affected finishes should be assessed separately once the area has dried.
What this tells you: The report makes the next step clear and keeps the boundaries of scope clear.
Why it matters: This prevents confusion between leak repair and wider restoration.
Who this helps: Homeowners, landlords, insurers, and contractors planning the next stage.
What a weak version often misses: It ends at the repair with no note of what still needs to happen next.
Weak report Leak found in bathroom. Repaired. Photos attached.
Strong report Active water escape identified at shower waste connection beneath tray. Source confirmed through moisture mapping, thermal imaging, tracer gas testing, and direct inspection via access panel. Failed seal replaced and post-repair testing completed. Photos included of symptom area, exposed source, and completed repair.
That difference matters because the second version answers the questions the next reader is actually going to ask.
That does not always mean the contractor did poor technical work. It may simply mean the document was written for billing, not for handover.
If several of those are missing, the document may still have some value, but it may not be strong enough for clear handover.
These are exactly the kinds of situations where vague paperwork slows everything down.
Homeowner Most often wants clear source, what was repaired, how much access was needed, and what happens next.
Landlord or letting agent Most often wants reported symptoms, findings, repair action, next step, and a written record they can use for tenant communication or further action.
Factor or property manager Most often wants source location, whether the issue appears private or shared, whether access to another flat or area was needed, and enough evidence to support the next instruction.
Insurer or loss adjuster Most often wants clear finding, access detail, repair detail where completed, supporting photos or readings, and a document that is structured enough to review quickly.
Commercial property manager Most often wants method used, clear findings, evidence that supports internal handover or third-party review, and a more formal record than a standard plumber’s job note.
If you want to understand how this documentation fits into the wider process, this is one of the next most useful pages.
Open guideUse this when the report now needs to be submitted or explained to another party.
Open guideUse this when the report needs to support a shared-building, rental, or managed-property next step.
Open guideUse the insurer-facing service page when the documentation needs to support a live claim route.
Open guideIf you need leak detection and want clear written findings, photo evidence, and documented source, access, and repair details where applicable, ask what documentation is included before you book.
If you describe what is happening, we can explain what the investigation includes, what reporting is usually provided afterwards, and how that documentation is commonly used by homeowners, landlords, factors, insurers, and property managers.