Sudden snowfall, frantic efforts, and then the question: "Was anything even spread here?"

For winter service providers, proof of service is more than just documentation. It provides operational security. This article shows which data is convincing in practice and where weaknesses in documentation are often found.

Why proof of use is crucial in the event of complaints

Whether you are a local authority or a private client, when questions arise about ice control and snow clearance services, it must be clear quickly what has been done, when, and where. Discussions are of little help in such situations, but reliable evidence is all the more important. Clients expect a transparent presentation of the service, ideally available digitally and centrally.

Checklist: These deployment data have proven themselves

Requirements vary depending on the service description or municipal specifications. The following information constitutes a minimum documentation requirement that has been proven in practice:

• Date and time of the assignment (start and end)
• Area of use: Road, section, or GPS data
• Activity: clearing, spreading, or combination
• Vehicle and driver used: clear assignment
• Special circumstances: e.g., freezing rain, road closures
• deicing agent used (salt, brine, etc.)

Practical tip: Not every detail needs to be recorded, but every piece of information should be timely, consistent, and plausible.

Common weaknesses in documentation

Many companies keep records—until the first complaint comes in. Then it becomes clear where the problem lies:

• Media fragmentation: Information is scattered across paper, apps, Excel—but never centrally.
• Unclear information: Times or locations are too vague to draw reliable conclusions.
• Lack of traceability: Data is scattered, inconsistent, or outdated.

The result: uncertainty in customer dialogue or, in the worst case, legal disputes.

Practical example: Complaint the day after deployment

The day after a nighttime winter service operation, a client complains that an employee slipped on a sidewalk and that the area had not been adequately gritted at the time of the accident. The proper performance of the service is called into question.

The service provider can provide concrete evidence of the deployment: deployment began at 4:38 a.m., documented gritting along the agreed route, vehicle verification in the affected section. In addition, it is noted that freezing drizzle occurred again outside the deployment window.

This allows the facts of the case to be clearly classified: the service was provided as agreed; subsequent weather conditions were beyond the service provider's control. The complaint can be resolved objectively.

In the absence of such evidence, the discussion quickly shifts away from facts to assessments, with the corresponding time expenditure and potential for escalation.

Proof of deployment is not paperwork, but risk management

Complaints are inevitable in winter road maintenance—but their escalation can be avoided. The key factor is whether operations can be reviewed in a structured, timely, and consistent manner after the fact.

Service providers who accurately record assignment data benefit in several ways:

• Complaints can be resolved more quickly and objectively
• Internal queries and coordination are reduced.
• Clients receive transparency instead of explanations
• Operational teams are relieved of the burden of gathering information retrospectively.

Deployment records are therefore a key tool for minimizing risk in day-to-day business. A clear structure pays off, especially in changing weather conditions and under high operational pressure.

Quick check: Is your documentation robust?

We would be happy to review your current approach with you and clarify where proof of use is helpful today and where there is potential for optimization: