Identify the Churchfield Road frontage and the leased accommodation
Ealing’s Acton appraisal describes projecting shopfronts on Churchfield Road with decorative corbels and surviving mosaic forecourts. A dilapidations instruction in that setting needs the particular frontage identified on the lease plan. Establish whether the tenant’s responsibility extends to the projection, forecourt, upper facade or only part of the shopfront construction. An architectural feature visible from the street may sit outside the demise or be maintained through a different arrangement. Photograph the junctions and record the documents used to assign each item; the appraisal does not determine the tenant’s covenants.
For a shop with rooms behind or above it, show the accommodation and access on the present layout. Separate any later trading-space alteration from an original entrance or structural opening. Supply licences for alterations and the condition record agreed when the lease began. If a proposed schedule asks for removal of signage, a suspended ceiling or internal partitions, identify the installation and the relevant provision separately. A broad request to return the unit to its original condition is not an adequate substitute for identifying what was let, what was subsequently changed and what the executed documents require.
Local evidence: Ealing: Acton Town Centre appraisal, April 2009, section 5.1.
Describe Acton repair items without losing the material distinctions
A Churchfield Road frontage schedule can distinguish the joinery, decorative support, glazing and forecourt surface instead of assigning one undifferentiated replacement sum. Record the observed condition, proposed remedy and quantity against each alleged breach. Where the question is decoration, explain its extent; where it is repair, identify the defect being remedied. A retained mosaic or corbel should not silently be priced as a modern standard component. Obtain suitable technical advice about the actual material and whether investigation or a repair sample is necessary before finalising the proposed treatment.
Identify the stage of the Acton tenancy when instructing the review. During the term, an interim schedule addresses the relevant existing obligations; near expiry, a terminal assessment needs the anticipated handover position. After departure or completion of agreed work, record what remains at the final inspection and what evidence supports that conclusion. Mechanical and electrical systems need their own equipment references, maintenance information and agreed assessment scope. The RICS dilapidations professional standard covers the preparation of schedules and responses. A landlord’s costed schedule and a tenant’s itemised response should make their differences understandable from the documents and inspection record.
Local evidence: Ealing: Acton Town Centre appraisal, April 2009, section 5.1; RICS: Dilapidations in England and Wales.
Check current Acton proposals before quantifying the landlord’s loss
Ealing’s completed conservation-area review records an extension to Acton Town Centre approved in November 2025. The older 2009 appraisal remains character evidence, but its boundary descriptions should not determine the current designation of the premises without checking the council record. If a landlord proposes a different shopfront or an enlarged trading layout, request the drawings and consent position for that actual scheme. Neither a conservation designation nor a town-centre policy establishes that refurbishment has been commissioned. Put dates against the documents relied upon so that a proposal can be distinguished from an implemented decision.
Consider how the proposed work affects each claimed repair. Replacement of a component as part of a landlord’s scheme may raise a supersession question, while a suggested future possibility may require further evidence. Section 18(1) limits repairing-covenant damages by reference to diminution in the value of the reversion and contains a separate provision concerning demolition or structural alterations in the stated circumstances. It does not cap every head of a dilapidations claim indiscriminately. Obtain appropriate legal and valuation input. A Quantified Demand must explain the supported loss; adding together repair prices does not by itself establish that sum.
Local evidence: Ealing: completed conservation-area review and November 2025 boundary decisions; Ealing: Acton Town Centre appraisal, April 2009, section 5.1; Landlord and Tenant Act 1927, section 18.
Test access allowances against Acton’s actual work footprint
The Acton appraisal identifies the pedestrian space in front of St Mary’s Church as a distinct town-centre feature. For premises near that setting, show the proposed contractor’s working position and who controls it. A paved area that looks open to the public is not automatically available for storing materials, protecting a shopfront or erecting equipment. Separate private agreement, highway requirements and the tenant’s lease liability. An access allowance in the claim should state the method and duration on which it depends, with an explanation of any arrangement that has not yet been secured.
The same appraisal describes the Town Hall, its extension, former public baths and King’s Rooms as a related civic group. Architectural grouping does not establish a single landlord, occupier or service responsibility. Where the instructed premises adjoin a larger group, identify the actual boundary and shared interface before costing reinstatement. Keep any proposed use of another entrance or service route explicit. The commercial termination claim should follow the applicable Dilapidations Protocol, with evidence exchanged in a form that allows disputed scope and cost items to be examined. Confirm the lease event, client position and available documents when requesting advice on the Acton premises.
Local evidence: Ealing: Acton Town Centre appraisal, April 2009, section 5.1; Civil Procedure Rules: Dilapidations Protocol.
Acton lease-end questions
Does the Churchfield Road shopfront description establish my repair liability?
It identifies local architectural features, not the legal terms of your tenancy. Compare the demise plan, repair provisions and any agreed condition schedule with the individual corbel, forecourt or frontage item. The unit’s current photographs and documents establish what must be considered in the claim.
Can the Acton schedule treat mosaic paving as an ordinary replacement surface?
Identify the existing material and the alleged breach first. The proposed treatment and price should address that component, including any necessary specialist advice or sample. Whether the tenant is liable for the item is a separate question governed by the tenancy documents and relevant law.
Does the older Acton appraisal settle the consent position for reinstatement?
No. The council records a later town-centre boundary extension, so check the current designation and the intended work at the premises. Historic character information does not grant permission for a new shopfront or prove that an existing alteration was authorised.
What supports an Acton landlord’s proposed refurbishment deduction?
Provide the actual design, dates and intentions, then identify the claimed repair affected by the proposal. Explain the difference between work being replaced, work still required and an unconfirmed future option. The valuation and legal assessment should follow those facts rather than a general assumption about the town centre.
Related guidance: London dilapidations advice; lease condition records; licence to alter.
Acton Schedule of Dilapidations Enquiry (From £1,250 plus VAT)
Content updated: October 2026.
Other Acton surveying services
Need a RICS survey quote in Acton? We confirm a fixed fee after scoping. Call 020 7101 4590, email enquiries@hampsteadcharteredsurveyors.co.uk, or inspect our redacted RICS Level 3 sample reports. Sample reports.