Housing disrepair claims do not always end cleanly when damages are agreed. In many HDR files, settlement includes more than a payment of damages — it may include repair works, access arrangements, timescales, inspection obligations, costs terms and a Tomlin Order or consent order.
The problem comes later.
The landlord agrees to do the works, but the works are not completed. The schedule of repairs is missed. Access is disputed. The tenant comes back with photographs showing the same damp, mould or water ingress. The solicitor has to reopen the file. More advice is needed. More correspondence is sent. Sometimes the matter has to be enforced.
The question for claimant firms is then: can we recover the further costs caused by the breach of settlement?
The honest answer is: sometimes, but not automatically.
Further costs after breach will usually depend on the settlement wording, whether proceedings had been issued, whether there is an order, whether enforcement is required, whether a fresh claim is needed, and whether the court makes a further costs order. That is why breach of settlement in housing disrepair claims should be treated as a costs issue from the moment the breach is identified.
Settlement Does Not Always End the Costs Risk
A housing disrepair settlement may resolve the damages claim, but it does not always resolve the practical dispute. Common post-settlement problems include:
- agreed repair works not completed;
- works completed late;
- works completed poorly;
- only some defects repaired;
- access appointments missed;
- the landlord refusing to confirm a works timetable;
- the tenant reporting ongoing damp or mould;
- the defendant failing to pay damages;
- the defendant failing to pay agreed costs;
- the defendant delaying costs negotiations;
- disagreement over whether the settlement terms have been complied with.
Each of these issues can generate further work. The solicitor may need to review the order, advise the client, obtain updated evidence, correspond with the landlord, consider enforcement, review costs entitlement and decide whether further proceedings are required.
The costs of that work need careful treatment. They should not be assumed to fall automatically into the original bill unless the wording and procedural position support that approach.
The First Question: What Does the Settlement Say?
Before considering further costs, the first document to review is the settlement agreement or order. The costs position may be very different depending on whether the settlement was:
- a Part 36 acceptance;
- a consent order;
- a Tomlin Order;
- a damages-only settlement;
- a global inclusive settlement;
- damages plus costs to be assessed if not agreed;
- a settlement with repair terms in a confidential schedule;
- a settlement with express breach/enforcement costs wording;
- a settlement silent on breach costs.
This is where costs recovery can be won or lost.
If the settlement clearly says the defendant will pay the claimant’s reasonable costs, to be assessed if not agreed, that may preserve the original costs recovery position. If the settlement also contains wording about the costs of enforcing repair terms, that may assist if the landlord later breaches those terms.
If the settlement is global and inclusive of costs, the claimant firm may have much less room to recover additional costs unless the later breach gives rise to a separate route. If the settlement is silent or unclear, the costs position becomes more difficult.
Tomlin Orders in Housing Disrepair Claims
Tomlin Orders are common in housing disrepair claims because they allow the parties to agree detailed terms, including repair works and timescales. The order usually stays the proceedings on agreed terms, while the schedule records the detailed settlement obligations.
This can be useful, but it also creates costs issues if the repair terms are breached. The key questions are:
- What exactly did the landlord agree to do?
- By what date?
- Was access required?
- Did the tenant have to provide access on specific terms?
- Was there a mechanism for resolving disputes about works?
- Does the order or schedule deal with costs of enforcement?
- Are costs of the original claim preserved?
- Are further costs reserved?
- Is there liberty to apply?
- Has the breach been properly evidenced?
A weak Tomlin Order can create uncertainty. A strong one can make enforcement and costs recovery much easier. For costs purposes, the Tomlin Order should always be provided to the costs draftsman. The schedule may be just as important as the order itself.
Are Further Costs Automatically Recoverable After Breach?
No.
Further costs are not automatically recoverable just because the landlord has breached settlement terms. There must be a basis for recovery. That basis may come from:
- the original costs order;
- the settlement agreement;
- an express breach costs clause;
- a later court order;
- a successful enforcement application;
- a fresh claim;
- costs reserved and later determined;
- or a negotiated agreement.
Without a clear basis, the paying party may argue that further work is not recoverable as part of the original costs claim. That is why claimant firms should avoid treating breach work as ordinary post-settlement administration without checking the position.
Original Costs vs Breach Costs
It is important to separate two categories of costs.
1. Original HDR claim costs
These are the costs incurred in bringing the housing disrepair claim up to settlement. They may include:
- taking instructions;
- Letter of Claim;
- disclosure review;
- expert inspection;
- surveyor report;
- photographs;
- repair chronology;
- client updates;
- settlement advice;
- Part 36 offers;
- preparing the bill;
- N252;
- PoDs and Replies;
- negotiation.
If settlement preserves costs, these costs may be recoverable in the usual way.
2. Post-settlement breach costs
These are the costs incurred after settlement because the landlord has not complied. They may include:
- reviewing the breached settlement terms;
- advising the client on breach;
- obtaining updated photographs;
- reviewing further disrepair evidence;
- corresponding about missed works;
- seeking confirmation of repair dates;
- preparing enforcement correspondence;
- considering whether to issue an application;
- considering whether a fresh claim is required;
- attending hearings;
- preparing further costs submissions.
These costs may not automatically sit inside the original bill. They need to be considered separately.
What If the Landlord Fails to Complete the Agreed Works?
This is the classic breach scenario.
The damages claim has settled. The landlord agreed to complete repairs by a certain date. That date passes. The tenant says nothing has been done, or the works are inadequate. The claimant solicitor should first gather evidence. That may include:
- the settlement agreement or Tomlin Order;
- the schedule of works;
- repair deadlines;
- access correspondence;
- photographs before and after the deadline;
- tenant witness evidence;
- landlord updates;
- contractor attendance records;
- expert comments where necessary;
- any complaints made after settlement.
From a costs perspective, the issue is not only whether there has been a breach. It is also whether further recoverable costs are being generated and under what route. If the matter was issued and stayed under a Tomlin Order, the court route may be different from a purely pre-issue settlement agreement. If there was no issued claim, the claimant may need to consider whether the breach creates a separate claim or enforcement route.
The costs draftsman needs to understand that procedural position before deciding how the further work should be presented.
What If Costs Were Agreed But Not Paid?
Sometimes the breach is not about repairs. It is about payment.
The defendant may agree to pay damages and costs, but then fail to pay the agreed costs. Or the defendant may agree costs in principle but refuse to engage on the amount. If the parties have agreed who will pay costs but not the amount, and no proceedings have been issued, CPR 46.14 costs-only proceedings may need to be considered.
However, CPR 46.14 is not a general route for enforcing every breach of settlement. It is focused on costs-only disputes where the substantive dispute has settled, the paying party’s liability for costs is agreed in writing, but the amount of costs remains unresolved. That distinction matters. If the dispute is about unpaid agreed costs, the route may be different from a dispute about incomplete repair works.
What If the Settlement Was Global Inclusive?
Global settlements can be dangerous in HDR files.
If the claimant accepted a single global inclusive sum for damages, costs, disbursements and VAT, it may be difficult to recover further costs in respect of the original claim. If the landlord later breaches repair terms, the claimant may still have options depending on the settlement wording and the nature of the breach. But the original costs may already have been compromised.
That is why claimant firms should be careful before accepting global inclusive offers in housing disrepair claims, especially where repair obligations remain outstanding. A global settlement may be commercially attractive, but if the works are not completed later, the costs position can become messy.
Why Breach Wording Matters
Good settlement wording should anticipate the possibility of breach. In housing disrepair claims, the settlement should ideally make clear:
- the damages to be paid;
- whether the settlement is inclusive or exclusive of costs;
- whether the defendant will pay reasonable costs to be assessed if not agreed;
- the repair works to be completed;
- deadlines for the works;
- access requirements;
- what happens if works are not completed;
- whether there is liberty to apply;
- who pays costs of enforcement;
- whether further costs are reserved;
- whether the claimant can rely on updated evidence;
- whether damages or rent abatement continue if works are delayed.
Costs wording should not be left until the end. If breach is foreseeable, the settlement should deal with it.
How Breach Can Support the Original Costs Argument
Even where post-settlement breach costs are not automatically recoverable, the landlord’s conduct may still matter. If the defendant delayed repairs, ignored complaints, failed to engage with the protocol, delayed disclosure, failed to comply with settlement terms or forced unnecessary further correspondence, that conduct may support the claimant’s position on proportionality and reasonableness.
A paying party may argue that the original HDR costs are disproportionate. The answer may be that the defendant’s conduct caused additional work. A good bill should explain:
- when the landlord was notified;
- how long the disrepair continued;
- whether the landlord failed to inspect;
- whether works were delayed;
- whether settlement was delayed;
- whether repair terms were breached;
- whether the claimant had to chase compliance;
- whether the defendant’s conduct caused additional costs.
Conduct does not guarantee recovery. But it can be important when presenting the bill.
Are Breach HDR Cases Still Standard Basis?
This depends on the exact claim and procedural route.
Many housing disrepair claims remain outside the mainstream fixed recoverable costs regime where the claim relates to residential property or a dwelling and includes disrepair — as explained in our guide to housing disrepair costs in 2026. However, a later dispute about breach of a settlement agreement may need separate consideration.
If the later dispute is still part of the housing disrepair claim or enforcement of repair terms within existing proceedings, the position may be different from a fresh claim framed purely as breach of contract. The safe approach is not to assume. Check:
- what the original claim included;
- whether proceedings were issued;
- what order was made;
- whether the claim was stayed;
- whether the breach is within the existing proceedings;
- whether the later work is enforcement;
- whether fresh proceedings are needed;
- whether fixed costs arguments may be raised;
- whether standard basis costs are preserved.
This is why breach HDR cases should be reviewed before the bill is served or updated.
What Documents Should Be Sent to the Costs Draftsman?
For breach of settlement HDR files, the costs draftsman needs more than the original file. You should provide:
- the Letter of Claim;
- pleadings if issued;
- expert report;
- photographs;
- settlement agreement;
- Tomlin Order;
- confidential schedule;
- consent order;
- Part 36 offers;
- damages settlement correspondence;
- costs settlement correspondence;
- repair schedule;
- access correspondence;
- breach correspondence;
- updated photographs;
- evidence of works completed or not completed;
- any application or enforcement documents;
- any further order;
- all costs offers;
- disbursement invoices;
- fee earner details and rates.
Without the settlement wording and breach evidence, the bill may not deal with the issue properly.
Practical Steps When Breach Is Reported
When the client reports breach after settlement, the claimant firm should avoid rushing straight into costs correspondence without checking the position. A practical sequence is:
- review the settlement agreement or order;
- check whether proceedings were issued or stayed;
- identify the exact repair obligations;
- check the deadline for compliance;
- confirm whether access was required and provided;
- obtain updated evidence from the tenant;
- ask the landlord for its position;
- consider whether further expert evidence is needed;
- check whether breach costs are dealt with;
- consider enforcement or fresh proceedings;
- record all further work carefully;
- review whether further costs are recoverable;
- update the costs strategy before serving or negotiating the bill.
Good record-keeping at this stage can make a significant difference later.
Common Costs Mistakes in Breach HDR Files
1. Treating breach work as automatically recoverable
It may not be. Always check the settlement wording and procedural route.
2. Not sending the Tomlin Order to the costs draftsman
The schedule may contain the key terms needed to understand breach and costs.
3. Accepting global settlements where works remain outstanding
This can create problems if the landlord later fails to comply.
4. Failing to record post-settlement work properly
Vague entries such as “update from client” or “review file” are weak. The purpose of the work should be clear.
5. Not separating original costs from breach costs
These may need to be presented differently.
6. Ignoring defendant conduct
Delay, non-compliance and breach can be relevant to proportionality and costs presentation.
7. Waiting too long to review enforcement options
Delay can weaken both the substantive and costs position.
Example Time Entry Wording
Poor post-settlement breach entries include:
- telephone call with client;
- review file;
- email to defendant;
- update client;
- consider breach.
Better entries include:
- taking client’s instructions on landlord’s failure to complete agreed bathroom works by Tomlin Order deadline;
- reviewing settlement schedule and repair obligations following report of non-compliance;
- considering updated photographs showing continued damp and mould following agreed repair deadline;
- drafting correspondence to defendant requesting confirmation of works timetable and breach position;
- advising client on evidence required to support breach of repair terms;
- reviewing defendant’s response on access and contractor attendance;
- considering costs position following non-compliance with settlement repair terms.
Clear entries are harder to reduce.
Can DMD Costs Help With Breach HDR Files?
Yes.
DMD Costs can assist claimant firms with the costs side of breach HDR files, including:
- reviewing settlement wording;
- checking costs entitlement;
- drafting or updating the bill;
- preparing Precedent S where required;
- dealing with N252;
- preparing Points of Dispute replies;
- reviewing low offers;
- advising on costs negotiation;
- assisting with CPR 46.14 costs-only issues;
- identifying whether breach work should be separated;
- presenting defendant conduct properly.
We do not treat breach HDR files as ordinary routine bills. The settlement wording, repair terms and post-settlement conduct all need to be understood before the costs position is finalised.
So, Can Claimant Firms Recover Further Costs?
Sometimes.
Further costs after breach of a housing disrepair settlement may be recoverable where there is a proper basis for recovery, such as settlement wording, a court order, enforcement costs, fresh proceedings, costs reserved or a later agreement. But recovery is not automatic.
The safest position is to deal with costs at the point of settlement and again as soon as breach is reported. Before serving the bill, accepting a low costs offer or issuing any costs-only step, claimant firms should review:
- the original costs entitlement;
- the settlement agreement;
- any Tomlin Order;
- the repair schedule;
- evidence of breach;
- post-settlement work;
- whether further costs are recoverable;
- whether a separate route is needed.
A well-drafted bill can recover the original HDR costs. A well-managed breach file can protect the further costs position.
How DMD Costs Can Help
DMD Costs works with claimant solicitor firms on housing disrepair costs, including files where settlement has been breached or repair terms remain outstanding. We can assist with:
- HDR bills of costs;
- Precedent S electronic bills;
- N252 and Notice of Commencement;
- Points of Dispute and Replies;
- breach-related costs review;
- Tomlin Order costs issues;
- repair-term breach costs;
- CPR 46.14 costs-only support;
- proportionality arguments;
- surveyor fee disputes;
- settlement-led negotiation.
If the landlord has breached the settlement or failed to complete agreed works, send us the order, settlement terms and costs correspondence. We will review the costs position and help you decide the best route forward.