Technical SEO

I run technical SEO audits and fixes: crawlability, rendering, Core Web Vitals, structured data, redirects and sitemap hygiene — the layer that decides whether your content is even eligible to rank.

Why most “SEO problems” are plumbing problems

The pattern repeats across almost every audit I run. The blog is genuinely good but renders client-side, so crawlers receive a spinner. A migration two years ago lost forty per cent of the URLs without redirects and rankings “mysteriously” fell. Three subdomains serve the same page and the search engine picked the wrong one as canonical. Content marketing gets commissioned on top of all of it, and produces nothing, because content on broken plumbing is watering a plant with no roots — mehnat full, result zero.

The uncomfortable part is that none of this is visible from inside the business. The site looks correct in a browser, because your browser runs the JavaScript that crawlers do not. Somebody has to look at what the machines actually receive, and that is what this service is.

What the audit covers

• Crawl and render. What bots receive versus what users see, page type by page type. Blocked resources, client-side rendering, robots directives, and the AI-crawler consequences covered in the GEO service.
• Status and redirect hygiene. Every 404 where equity used to live, every redirect chain taxing a hop, every renamed URL missing its 301. Permanence is the deal you made with the internet whether you knew it or not.
• Canonical discipline. Parameter soup, http and https twins, staging leaks, trailing-slash duplicates. One URL per intention, everything else canonicalised or redirected — including your internal links, which routinely undermine the canonical tags someone just added.
• Structured data. Valid, connected and honest. Schema that overclaims invites manual action; schema that underclaims leaves eligibility unearned. Connected matters as much as valid: one graph with stable identifiers beats islands of markup.
• Core Web Vitals. Measured on real pages under real conditions, fixed at the cause — which is almost always images, fonts and unaudited JavaScript rather than anything exotic.
• Sitemaps, robots and international signals where markets demand them.

How the engagement runs

Fixed scope, always. You know the price before it starts and the deliverable is defined: findings ranked by impact per unit of effort, each stated as a specific verifiable change rather than a category. “Add 301s from these 47 URLs to these successors” rather than “improve redirect strategy”. If a reader cannot tell what to do on Monday, the document was written to justify a fee.

Then implementation or specification, your choice. Some clients want me in the codebase; others have capable developers and need precision rather than hands. Both are priced the same, so the decision is about your team rather than my invoice.

Then a re-crawl that proves the delta. An audit without a verification pass is an opinion. With one, it is completed work — and you have a before-and-after you can show anyone who asks what the money bought.

And then I leave. Quarterly checks and a re-crawl after significant releases are usually enough. I will say plainly that this is not a service that should bill you monthly forever, because saying so is more valuable to me than the retainer would be.

The first thing I will ask you to do

Install Google Search Console and Bing Webmaster Tools today, before we speak again if possible.

Neither backfills. Data accumulates from the day of installation, and every week without it is query data permanently unavailable — which means every decision made in that window is made without evidence. It costs nothing, takes ten minutes, and it is the single highest-value instruction in this entire service page. I would rather you did that and never hired me than hired me and skipped it.

What good looks like afterwards

Your content becomes eligible to compete, which is all technical SEO can honestly promise. Rankings then depend on whether the content deserves them — and if it does not, I will say so rather than selling you another technical engagement to fix a content problem.

What you also get is diagnostic capability. After the audit you will know how to check the five things that matter yourself, which pages carry your commercial weight, and what to watch after a release. The method article gives that away deliberately, because a client who can spot a problem early is a client who does not pay me to find it late.

The findings that recur most often

Across audits, three problems account for a disproportionate share of lost eligibility, and it is worth knowing them because you can check for two yourself this afternoon.

A rendering gap nobody knew about. Usually one section — the blog, a filtered catalogue, a listing — mounting client-side while the rest of the site is static. It looks perfect internally, because everyone internally uses a browser. The check is ten minutes and the fix is usually a prerender configuration rather than a rebuild.

A redesign that lost URLs. Sometimes years earlier, still costing traffic, still reconstructible from old sitemaps or archive snapshots if anyone looks. The equity does not return by itself, but redirects laid late still recover a meaningful share — I have seen a two-year-old migration recovered in a fortnight because someone finally built the mapping.

Search Console installed late. Which means the diagnostic data for the period in question does not exist and cannot be recovered. It is the only finding whose cost is purely a function of delay, and it is why the instruction above sits before everything else.

None of the three is sophisticated. All three are common, and each is considerably cheaper to fix than to keep paying for.

Who this is not for

If your site is small, static and already crawlable, you probably do not need an audit — you need content, and I will tell you that on the first call rather than selling you a report that confirms everything is fine.

If you are looking for a monthly SEO retainer with rank reports, that is a different service from a different kind of vendor. What I sell is a fixed-scope diagnostic, the fixes, and the verification that they worked. It ends, deliberately.

What you can check before calling anyone

Four things, none needing a specialist, each taking minutes — and if all four are clean your problem is probably content rather than plumbing, which is worth knowing before you spend.

Fetch one commercially important page without JavaScript and read what returns. Search your own domain with a site: query and compare the count to what you expect. Click three internal links from your homepage and watch for redirect hops. Open a page on a real phone on mobile data rather than office wifi.

Anything alarming there justifies the audit. Nothing alarming means you should spend the money on writing instead, and I would rather tell you that now than after invoicing.

Related reading

/blog/technical-seo — the audit sequence in full · /services/generative-engine-opt — the same foundation for AI answer engines · /services/website-redesign — protecting rankings through a rebuild · /blog/google-updates — what volatility actually reprices

The free part

Send me the domain. The first call includes the three worst findings at no charge, and if they surprise your team we will get on well. /contact — seedhi baat, fixed scope, no retainer.