Approval is a statement about your records, not your engineers

NSI Gold and SSAIB certification do not tell a buyer that the installation work is good. Most owners already know their engineers are competent and find the suggestion faintly insulting. What the certification proves is narrower and far more useful to an acquirer: that somebody independent has been through the documentation, the procedures, the commissioning records and the maintenance regime, repeatedly, and found them in the state the scheme requires.

That is an unglamorous thing to own and an expensive thing to build from nothing. A firm holding current approval has years of audited process behind it, a set of habits its staff already follow, and a file that can be handed to somebody else without a month of explanation. A firm without it has the same engineers and none of the evidence.

The Approved Contractor Scheme sits alongside this on the guarding side, and BS 7858 screening records sit underneath both. Each answers a different question: whether the company is run to a standard, whether the security operation is approved, and whether the individual standing at the client gate was vetted before being put there. A buyer wants all three answers in writing and dated.

Owners sometimes ask whether NSI or SSAIB is the better badge to hold. In a sale the answer is that current, in-scope approval from either matters far more than which scheme awarded it, because what the buyer is checking is whether the contracts specifying a certificated contractor remain enforceable. The schemes have different reputations in different corners of the market, and both are recognised by insurers and by police response policy. Neither is worth switching purely as a sale tactic.

Why certification is read before the accounts are

The reason approval is read first is contractual rather than technical. A meaningful share of commercial and public sector security work specifies a certificated contractor in the contract itself, or in the insurer requirements sitting behind it. If the certificate does not survive the change of ownership, those contracts become terminable, and the revenue the buyer is paying for stops being revenue.

So the question an acquirer asks is not whether you hold approval. It is whether the approval, in the entity being bought, at its current scope, continues on the day after completion. That turns on how the deal is structured, on the scheme rules about changes of control, and on how early anybody thought to ask. Owners who raise it at heads of terms, when the main points of the deal are first agreed, are generally fine. Owners who raise it during diligence, the buyer's detailed checks, spend six weeks proving something that should have taken a phone call.

It is also why scope creep in the certificate matters. Approval covering intruder alarm installation but not CCTV, or covering installation but not monitoring, leaves part of the contract book standing on nothing. A buyer will find that, and will price the uncovered part as though it were held by any unapproved contractor.

The same logic runs through the police response position on monitored alarms, which depends on the installing and maintaining company holding recognised certification. An account that loses its police response because a certificate lapsed at the wrong moment is an account the client will question, and questioned accounts are the ones that cancel. Buyers ask about this directly in diligence on any book with police response attached, and they ask for the correspondence rather than the reassurance.

What an unapproved competitor is actually worth

An unapproved firm of the same size is not worth a little less. It is worth less in a way that compounds, because it is excluded from the contracts carrying the longest terms, it is harder for a certificated acquirer to absorb without dragging its own audit position down, and its contract book is the part of the business most likely to walk after completion. The shortlist a seller reaches is shorter before price is even discussed.

That is why the point is worth putting flatly to any owner considering letting approval lapse to save the audit cost in a difficult year. The saving is real and small. The effect on what the business is worth is larger, delayed, and slow to reverse, because the scheme will want a period of evidenced operation before it restores you.

The reverse is true as well, and gets less attention than it deserves. An owner two or three years out from a sale, holding no approval, has time to obtain it. That is the sort of preparation that changes which buyers are able to look at the business, rather than merely improving the offer from the ones who already could.

Approval does not win the premium on its own, but its absence takes you off the shortlist before price is discussed.

Have Your Approval Read

If you would like your certification, its scope and your contract book read the way an acquirer reads them, that is a straightforward conversation to have.

Try the free calculator