What a dilapidations quote must show to be usable

Keyed to the schedule, in its numbering

The schedule is the document both sides argue from, so a quote that does not use its numbering cannot be argued against it. Every priced line should answer a numbered item.

That is what allows a claim to narrow: twenty items agreed, six disputed, and a conversation about six things rather than about one number.

Scope stated per item

What is in each price: materials, labour, access, making good, disposal. An unspecified line is the easiest kind to challenge, because the challenge does not have to be specific either.

Where a specification exceeds like for like repair, say so and say why. Pre-empting the betterment argument costs a sentence; losing it costs the item and some credibility.

Alterations separated from disrepair

Reinstatement of tenant alterations is frequently the largest single element and it does not arise under the repairing covenant. It turns on the licence to alter.

So it belongs in its own section, cross-referenced to the licence. This is also where a tenant most often finds an answer: a licence that waived reinstatement, or that recorded works as landlord's fixtures, changes the number rather than the argument.

Preliminaries, fees and VAT visible

Break them out rather than absorbing them into rates. They are argued on a different basis from the works and they are often recoverable differently.

Absorbed into rates they make the whole document look inflated, and they prevent the arguable parts being separated from the parts that were never in dispute.

State the assumptions

When the property was inspected, what was accessible, what was assumed rather than seen. Every quote contains assumptions and the credible ones say so.

The other side's surveyor is looking for an unstated assumption, because one discovered assumption discredits a document that is otherwise correct.