Are you at the end of your lease and facing an expensive Schedule of Dilapidations required by the landlords to put the property in good order?

Did you know that the amount the landlords can claim from you is limited by Statute and not always based upon the cost of the repair works. There are situations where the tenant in fact is not liable to pay any cost of putting the property back into repair at the termination of the lease.
In our experience most dilapidation claims are exaggerated and can be reduced with our professional help.

We will assess your claim against the terms of your lease and current case law and negotiate on your behalf and only charge you if we succeed in reducing the claim against you.

The Cost of Repairs

When a tenant enters into a lease of commercial premises in England and Wales they enter a contract that contains many provisions, at least one of which will relate to the responsibility for repairs of the various elements of the property.

The repairing liabilities can range from the tenants being liable for the internal finishes to complete responsibility for all elements of the property from the roofs to the foundations. Over time all properties will deteriorate in condition unless regular maintenance is undertaken, however even those which have been maintained will require works at the end of the lease, for example to reinstate alterations and make good damage caused by removal of the tenants fixtures.

At the end of a lease the landlords will inspect the property to ascertain the condition, if the tenants have not complied with the terms of the lease the Landlords will probably serve a Schedule of Dilapidations. The Schedule may run into a hundred pages listing every little item of disrepair in the property and amount to tens of thousands of pounds even for the smallest of properties.

At this point the tenants have a choice of whether to simply accept the landlords claim and proceed with the works or arrange a monetary settlement, however even if all the repairs claimed by the Landlord’s are actually required, which may not be the case, the tenants may not be liable for all or any of the works.

Take for example an office building built in the 1960’s using High Alumina Cement. It is highly unlikely that the property would let in the market place today whether or not it was in repair, due to the HAC and the dated nature of accommodation. Such a property would need to be demolished or at least completely refurbished. The tenants would not be liable for works required to improve the property and could expect to avoid a claim by the landlords for disrepair.

Another example is a case we recently settled at less than half the original claim. In this instance the lease stated that the tenants would not be liable for any disrepair due to structural movement. The landlords claimed for all the repairs required to put the property into repair, including replastering areas of internal walls, reconstruction of boundary walls and making good damage to external brickwork. The building had moved and there were cracks throughout the property. After an argument about the nature of the cracks the landlords accepted a much reduced settlement.

The principal that the landlords are only entitled to recover the loss to them of the tenants breach of repairing covenant is a matter of law in England and Wales and affects many claims.

Every dilapidation claim is different, due to the variation in lease terms and the nature of each property it is rare in our experience that a Schedule submitted by a landlord is wholly justified.

So what does it all mean to you?

Put simply if you don't get advice on a dilapidation claim it could cost you thousands of pounds, far more than the cost of professional advice.