It cuts both ways and understanding the situation in-depth helps find a better response. We’ve had a bloke do our place for many years. He bought the run off a retiring guy who was a qualified landscaper where the new guy was a former teacher. What worked ok originally suffered in the new hands but on inquiry the committee and some owners were quick to scoff the new guys efforts but didn’t realize he was entitled to stay within the original contract terms and it’s limits, and that the committee rather than pay him more or alter his terms on proper review actually cut out some of the things they thought were not necessary. So it can be unfair to blame him if you don’t first fully understand what he has agreed to be there to do.
But anyway, in Qld at least, there is a 10 year time limit max that the same guy can extend his contract for. Beyond that the whole thing needs to go back to market, and before doing that you really should re-assess what your needs are, what tech can be now applied to make the role more efficient, what extras might be called for and who manages these, who on the committee or someone they will appoint will be capable and willing to be the contact person so too many folk don’t hound the guy, what an alternate provider may put forward, and what the general market values the work at in today’s pricing.
Over the years owner’s will pay a small fortune for this service and it’s generally, other than site insurance your 2nd most expensive annual cost, so it’s worth reviewing. Especially considering the effect it can have on the owner’s home enjoyment, site upkeep, nature of tenant the building attracts, and perceived site values that the work reflects across your whole property.