Opinion: AI, Property Management and the Technology Gap We Need to Talk About

At the other end of the spectrum sit a collection of mediocre platforms that have established dominant positions within the sector. They are deeply embedded, costly to migrate away from and, in some cases, owned by wider property groups whose interests extend far beyond software. Increasingly, technology providers, managing agents, consultants and service providers sit within the same corporate structures, creating a level of vertical integration that would have been almost unthinkable a decade ago.

That raises legitimate questions. Managing agents are expected to entrust these platforms with vast quantities of operational, financial and resident data, yet some of the businesses providing the technology are linked to organisations operating within the same marketplace. The ownership structures are a matter of public record and, whilst there is no suggestion of wrongdoing, independent agents are entitled to ask whether the sector has become too comfortable with a model where the largest players increasingly own the infrastructure while competing within the market itself.

The result is a technology landscape where innovation can become secondary to market position. Many managing agents therefore find themselves caught between cutting-edge solutions that are priced beyond reach and entrenched platforms whose dominance leaves limited choice. In an industry already experiencing consolidation, reduced competition and declining service standards, that should concern everyone with an interest in the future of residential property management.

This technology gap has arguably held the sector back for years. Then came artificial intelligence.

Unlike many previous technological advances, AI has not been reserved for large corporations with substantial IT budgets. For the first time, powerful tools capable of analysing documents, summarising reports, drafting correspondence, reviewing contracts and extracting information from vast quantities of data have become accessible to businesses of all sizes.

For property managers, the benefits have been significant. Teams can process information faster, undertake compliance reviews more efficiently, summarise complex documents in minutes rather than hours, generate meeting notes automatically and analyse technical reports rapidly. Large volumes of resident enquiries can also be categorised and prioritised with ease.

In an industry facing increasing regulation, growing client expectations and continuing resource pressures, AI has become an invaluable productivity tool. Used correctly, it allows professionals to spend less time on administration and more time on the operational aspects of the role that genuinely add value: problem solving, relationship management, strategic thinking and customer service.

This should be celebrated. However, as with every technological revolution, there are unintended consequences.

One emerging challenge is the sheer volume of AI-generated correspondence now being received by managing agents. Residents who may previously have sent a concise two-paragraph enquiry can now generate a twenty-page complaint in seconds. The length often creates an impression of authority, but the substance does not always follow.

Property professionals are increasingly seeing lengthy submissions containing legislation taken out of context, regulations that do not apply, unsupported technical assertions and, in some cases, entirely fabricated references.

I witnessed this first-hand in the First-tier Tribunal. In a recent hearing, an applicant sought to rely on case law that simply did not exist. Neither the Judge nor the respondent's legal counsel could locate the authorities being cited, and proceedings were interrupted while attempts were made to verify them. When challenged, the applicant blamed Google. The reality was rather more obvious. The language, formatting and presentation bore all the hallmarks of AI. The references were ultimately withdrawn, and the applicant was criticised by the Judge for wasting the Tribunal's time.

It was a stark reminder that whilst AI can produce something that looks convincing, professional and authoritative, that does not make it accurate.

AI is an incredibly powerful tool. It is not, however, a substitute for professional judgement, technical competence or critical thinking. The most successful organisations will not be those that blindly embrace AI, nor those that resist it. They will be the businesses that learn how to combine technology with experience.

Property management has always been a people business. Buildings do not manage themselves. Residents do not want relationships with algorithms. Lease interpretation, dispute resolution, stakeholder management and strategic decision-making still require human judgement.

AI should enhance those capabilities, not replace them.

If our industry can embrace that distinction, whilst continuing to push for more accessible and better-quality technology, the opportunities ahead are enormous.

Christopher Wade, Director, BPM Limited