Why the forums cannot decide this for you
PTT, Dcard and Mobile01 threads on drone facade cleaning contain three kinds of post, and they read identically: genuine customer experience, paid placement, and unresolved grievance.
The incentive structure is the problem. A job that went normally generates no post at all. So the visible record is systematically weighted toward the two extremes and toward whoever is paying for visibility.
That does not make the forums worthless. They are useful for building a shortlist and for surfacing failure modes you would not have thought to ask about. They are a poor basis for the decision itself, because none of it is verifiable.
What follows is verifiable.
Six criteria you can check yourself
1. CAA registration and pilot licensing
Ask for Civil Aeronautics Administration registration and — more meaningfully — a company-level capability review approval. The distinction matters: an individual pilot certificate tells you about one person, while a capability review assesses the organisation's personnel, equipment and operating capability.
Also confirm the company is a registered corporation issuing official invoices. That is what makes the contracting entity and the party liable for a claim unambiguous.
2. Insurance
Two policies, and ask for the actual policy copies before contract:
- Public liability — third-party injury and property damage. NT$10 million is the recommended level for high-rise facade work.
- Employer's liability — cover for the operating crew.
Check three things on each: sums insured, validity dates, and the name of the insured party. A policy in a related company's name is not cover for work on your building.
3. Verifiable references
Not a photo gallery — a contactable management committee at a comparable building. Similar height, similar cladding, similar constraints.
Then ask that committee two questions: did the programme run to schedule, and was there anything you would want to know in advance?
4. A transparent quote, including what happens afterwards
The quote should state the facade area it was calculated from, what proportion will be treated, what is included beyond the cleaning itself, and what happens if the result is incomplete on inspection.
"Including ongoing support" is the part most often missing. Ask what year two looks like.
5. Equipment specification and sensors
This is where drone providers genuinely differ, and it is easy to check.
A photography drone with a spray attachment is not facade equipment. Ask what sensors the platform carries: is there infrared thermography for hollowing detection? RTK positioning so defects have repeatable coordinates? What imaging resolution, and at what standoff distance?
A provider who can answer precisely operates precisely.
6. Data platform and what you keep
After the job, what do you actually hold? Operational video, before-and-after imagery, a defect record — and can you get at it next year to compare?
A provider who delivers a PDF and nothing else has given you a snapshot. A provider with a data platform has given you a baseline, which is what the second year is worth anything against.
Four red flags
Any one of these should end the conversation.
Refusal to produce CAA documentation. There is no legitimate reason. Either it does not exist or the operation is not what it claims.
A quote more than 50% below market. Insurance, licensing, equipment and crew time all have floors. A price far below them means something has been left out — most commonly insurance, the airspace permit, or the proportion of facade actually treated. Those savings do not stay with the contractor if something goes wrong.
No written contract. Verbal commitments are unenforceable and unauditable. For a management committee with a duty over common property, this is disqualifying on its own.
No verifiable prior work. Everyone starts somewhere, but your building is not the place for it — and a provider who cannot name a single comparable job is asking you to fund the learning.
Where we stand on these
For the record, so you can hold us to the same list:
- Registration: formal CAA registration; the company holds a Remote Drone Operator Capability Review Approval (application no. AA2511180001, valid 2025-12-05 to 2027-12-04). The certificate is published on our about page.
- Insurance: NT$10 million public liability, NT$5 million employer's liability. Policy copies available before contract.
- Track record: over 50,000㎡ serviced, no major incidents.
- Pricing: facade health check at NT$35/m² on a three-year contract covering three surveys, or NT$25/m² for a single survey. Contract clients get preferential terms on additional surveys within the term.
- Data: cloud timeline platform, so year two compares against year one rather than starting over.
Phone +886-2-7733-7678, or book an asset assessment.
Ask the same six questions of everyone on your shortlist, including us. A provider who minds being asked has told you something.
