How to Save Money on Dilapidation Claims With the Right Survey
Dilapidation claims can feel like a nasty surprise at the end of a lease. You might already be dealing with a move, a handover, a new fit out, or the practical headache of closing a site. Then a claim arrives listing repairs, decoration, reinstatement, and a long line of costs that look non negotiable.
In reality, a dilapidation claim is rarely as fixed as it first appears. The final figure usually comes down to evidence, timing, and whether the right people are involved early enough. If you want to keep costs under control, the most useful thing you can do is get the right survey in place before assumptions take over.
This is true whether you are a tenant trying to reduce exposure or a landlord trying to recover a property without months of back and forth.
Why dilapidation claims get expensive so quickly
Most overspending in dilapidations comes from one of three situations.
First, people leave it too late. Once the lease end date is close, choices narrow. Contractors cost more when they are rushed, works become harder to manage, and decisions are made under pressure.
Second, the lease is not being interpreted properly. Commercial leases can be unforgiving, but they are also specific. If a claim is built on the wrong interpretation, it is easy for costs to inflate.
Third, one side is working without decent evidence. A tenant who does not have an informed response often ends up agreeing to items they do not actually owe. A landlord who issues a claim that cannot be supported often triggers a dispute that delays re letting.
A proper dilapidations survey is designed to stop all of this before it spirals.
What the right survey actually does
A dilapidations survey is not just a defect list. It ties the condition of the property back to the obligations in the lease, then sets out what is likely to be enforceable and what is likely to be challenged.
That distinction matters.
A standard condition report might say a wall finish is worn. A dilapidations survey asks a different question. Is the tenant required to redecorate under the lease. Was the wall already worn at the start. Is this wear consistent with normal use. Is the claim asking for improvement rather than reinstatement.
When you work with a specialist team like Fresson and Tee’s dilapidations surveyors, the output is practical. It gives you a clear view of what can be defended, what should be negotiated, and what would genuinely be cheaper to put right.
Save money by starting earlier than you think you need to
If you are a tenant, the best time to instruct a surveyor is not when the schedule arrives. It is months before lease end, while you still have options.
An early survey gives you breathing room. You can prioritise the items that might genuinely matter, get realistic quotes, and avoid paying inflated rates for last minute works. More importantly, you can decide whether doing the works is even the right move.
Landlords benefit from early action too. If you know a tenant is leaving, getting an informed view early helps you plan the next stage, especially if you are coordinating refurbishment, re letting, or a change of use. That is often where good project management support becomes valuable, because the dilapidations conversation can be aligned with the delivery plan rather than treated as a separate fight.
The most expensive mistake tenants make
The biggest cost mistake is assuming the landlord’s schedule is the final bill.
Schedules are a starting position. They are often written conservatively, sometimes aggressively, and they can include items that are open to interpretation. Tenants who accept everything without a specialist response often pay for work they did not need to do, or agree to a settlement that could have been reduced with evidence.
A survey helps you respond line by line in a controlled way. It also helps you spot common problem areas, such as items that look like fair wear and tear being treated as disrepair, or reinstatement items
Negotiation is often where the real savings are
Some tenants think a claim can only be solved by carrying out the work. In practice, many end of lease outcomes are settled financially.
There are plenty of reasons for this. A landlord might want the keys back quickly. They may plan to refurbish anyway. They may not want contractors on site while marketing the space. Tenants often want certainty so they can close the lease chapter and focus on the next premises.
A survey supports that settlement conversation in a grounded way. Instead of arguing opinions, you are discussing evidence, scope, and realistic cost. That alone can strip out inflated items and bring the figure closer to what is actually defendable.
From a landlord’s point of view, this also reduces risk. If a schedule is pushed too hard, it often slows everything down. A more proportionate claim, backed by professional assessment, is more likely to settle quickly and allows the property to move forward.
Why a normal building survey does not solve dilapidations
This catches people out.
A building survey might be excellent for understanding condition, but it is not designed to interpret lease liability. It does not usually consider how clauses are applied in practice, or how a claim might be limited by the landlord’s actual loss.
Dilapidations sits in a slightly awkward space between building condition and lease enforcement. That is why specialist experience matters. It is also why multidisciplinary firms tend to handle these situations more smoothly, because they can draw on wider knowledge around refurbishment planning, compliance, and delivery.
If dilapidations works are likely to run alongside other building decisions, linking the conversation to broader cost planning can be useful, including items like building reinstatement cost assessments where insurance and rebuilding costs are part of the wider picture for owners and asset managers.
Landlords can reduce costs too, not just tenants
It is easy to assume dilapidations is only a tenant problem. It is not.
Landlords can lose money through delays, void periods, and disputes that drag on. Even when a claim is valid, a poorly structured schedule can push the situation into conflict. A realistic, well supported approach often achieves better outcomes than trying to claim for everything possible.
There is also a practical angle. If a property is in a building with shared responsibilities, access constraints, or neighbour sensitivities, dilapidations related works can become harder and more expensive than expected. In those cases, it helps when surveyors and project teams can factor in connected issues like party wall matters, because that can affect timing and cost exposure.
What to expect from a strong survey process
A good process feels calm and structured, even if the claim is not.
You should expect a surveyor to:
- Review the lease properly, not just skim it
- Inspect the property with a clear scope
- Photograph and document relevant condition points
- Cost items realistically rather than defensively
- Explain where a claim is strong, weak, or commercially unrealistic
- Support negotiation with facts rather than threats
For tenants, that usually translates into fewer surprises and a clearer route to settlement. For landlords, it means a claim that is more likely to be taken seriously and resolved sooner.
The real value is certainty
People focus on the headline figure, but the hidden savings often come from certainty.
When you know where you stand, you stop making rushed choices. You avoid agreeing to unnecessary works. You avoid calling in solicitors too early. You avoid weeks of emails going nowhere because nobody has a shared set of facts.
A well prepared survey does not just reduce the final number. It makes the whole process more predictable, which is often what clients want most when a lease is ending.
Speak to our team today about your property survey needs, please call our office on 020 7391 7100 or email us at surveyor@fandt.com.