Response Matches Severity

Expectation. The building shall respond to every request in language and timeframe appropriate to its severity — distinguishing between routine, urgent, and emergency issues from the first interaction.

Required.

• Emergency requests — conditions threatening safety, habitability, or property — receive a distinct acknowledgment that communicates urgency, an immediate or near-immediate expected response, and instructions for the interim if applicable.
• When an emergency condition affects the building or a zone rather than a single unit, the acknowledgment includes the scope of impact, whether the resident's unit is directly affected, and any interim alternatives.
• Routine requests receive acknowledgment that includes an expected response timeframe.
• Every automated communication refers to the specific issue the resident described, not a generic template.
• The interface does not require the resident to navigate a complex categorization system to submit a request. The resident describes the issue; the system classifies it.

Recommended.

• Emergency acknowledgment includes the name or role of the person responding.
• When a request is reclassified to a higher severity — routine to urgent, urgent to emergency — the resident is notified of the change and the revised response expectation.
• The interface accommodates photo and video attachment to help the resident describe the issue without requiring precise technical vocabulary.

In practice.

A resident reports water flooding from under the bathroom door. The acknowledgment: emergency — water intrusion in unit 4B, maintenance dispatched, expected on site within the hour. Turn off the water supply valve under the sink if accessible. The language matches the severity. The response includes an interim action.

A resident reports a squeaking cabinet hinge. The acknowledgment: received — cabinet hinge, unit 12A. Scheduled for maintenance review within 5 business days. The language is proportionate. No urgency is manufactured.

A resident opens the request form. They do not know the technical name for the issue — something is wrong with the heating. They describe it in their own words: "bedroom is cold, thermostat shows different temperature than it feels." They attach a photo of the thermostat display. The system accepts the description without requiring the resident to select from an HVAC taxonomy.

Failure modes.

Uniform severity response. A resident reports a gas smell. The acknowledgment is identical to one for a squeaking door: "Thank you for your submission. A team member will review your request during normal business hours." The system processed both through the same template. The gas smell warranted an immediate, distinct response. It received a queue number.

Forced categorization. The resident knows their bathroom ceiling is dripping. The submission form requires them to select a category: plumbing, electrical, HVAC, structural, appliance, other. They select plumbing. The issue is a roof membrane failure routed to the plumbing team. The forced categorization delayed correct assignment because the resident was asked to perform triage they are not equipped for.

Acknowledgment without agency. The system acknowledges an emergency — "urgent issue received" — but provides no interim guidance. The resident stands in a flooding bathroom with confirmation that the system knows, but no instruction on what to do in the next 30 minutes while waiting.

Test.

1. Submit an emergency request. Confirm: acknowledgment is distinct from routine — language, timeframe, and interim guidance differ.
2. Submit a routine request. Confirm: acknowledgment includes a proportionate expected timeline.
3. Submit a request using only a plain-language description with no category selection. Confirm: the system accepts and processes the request.