logo
HomeServicesAbout usBlogContact
Blog
Points of Dispute in HDR: Templates & Replies That Win | DMD Costs

Points of Dispute in HDR: Templates & 7 Replies That Move Numbers

Maximise Recovery. Minimise Delay.

Short answer: In housing disrepair (HDR) cases, winning standard-basis costs means drafting a DA-ready electronic bill (Precedent S), serving N252, and neutralising Points of Dispute (PoDs) with particularised Replies that prove necessity, proportionality and conduct. Use tight evidence (surveyor/counsel notes, ADR record, access/vulnerability proof) and a negotiation cadence that lands agreement—or you walk into detailed assessment ready.

We’re drafting-only, B2B support for solicitors. Standard-basis (non-FRC) only. No advocacy. No lay clients.

________________________________________

TL;DR (what to do this week)

• Serve N252 + e-bill (Precedent S) + exhibits.

• Triage PoDs → concede the noise; defend the money.

• File Replies to PoDs (short, particularised, evidence-backed).

• Run a three-step negotiation and time Part 36 to bite.

• If no deal, request detailed assessment with a DA-ready bundle.

Primary SEO terms used here: points of dispute housing disrepair, replies to points of dispute, standard basis, detailed assessment, electronic bill.

________________________________________

What Points of Dispute are (and the real goal)

PoDs are the paying party’s line-by-line challenges to your bill. The goal is not to win every skirmish; it’s to move the net figure with focused Replies plus leverage (conduct, Part 36, DA timing).

________________________________________

The 10 PoDs you’ll see most in HDR

• Hourly rates (GHR, grade challenge, location band).

• Proportionality (damages vs time; “routine claim”).

• Pre-action/ADR conduct (post-Churchill noise).

• Surveyor fees (aborted attends; re-inspection).

• Access/vulnerability (duplication; “unreasonable”).

• Disclosure & landlord conduct (delay; duplication).

• Correspondence “admin” (non-recoverable assertion).

• Counsel’s fees (short hearings; vacated lists).

• Travel/attendance (local counsel argument; remote option).

• e-Bill coding (mis-phasing; “hidden” time).

________________________________________

How to triage PoDs (fast)

• Sort by money: phases with the largest deltas first.

• Concede low-value fluff that buys goodwill.

• Defend with proof (attach exhibits); keep prose short.

• Box clever on rates: anchor to GHR + justification (complexity/vulnerability/senior supervision).

• Proportionality narrative: tie work to issues (access refusals, vulnerable tenants, landlord non-compliance).

________________________________________

Mini-Templates (paste & adapt)

A) PoDs (paying party) skeleton

• Item/Phase: [e.g., CMC correspondence]

• Ground: [rate/proportionality/duplication]

• Reason: [short phrase]

• Proposed reduction: £[x] / [y%]

B) Replies (receiving party) skeleton

• Reply to PoD [#]:

Issue: [rate/proportionality/necessity]

Reason: [1–3 short lines tying time to issue]

Evidence: [exhibit ref: fee note/letter/email/order]

Position: [maintain £x / accept £y / counter-offer £z]

(Keep sentences tight; attach proofs. No filler.)

________________________________________

The 7 Replies that move numbers (HDR-ready wording)

1) Hourly rates (GHR anchor + justification)

Reply:

Rates are GHR-aligned for [Band/Location] and reflect complexity and supervision: [issue list—vulnerability/access/late disclosure]. Grade A oversight was proportionate to risk/novelty at [milestone]. Maintain claimed rates.

2) Proportionality (issues-based)

Reply:

Work was necessary and proportionate to the issues actually faced: repeated access refusals, vulnerability accommodations, landlord non-compliance with directions. The time claimed is phase-appropriate and evidenced (see [letters, orders]). Maintain.

3) Surveyor fees & aborted attends

Reply:

Two attends were required: first aborted due to access refusal, second completed after landlord engagement. Both were reasonably incurred and evidenced (invoices/attendance notes). Re-inspection was necessary to progress settlement. Maintain.

4) ADR conduct after Churchill

Reply:

ADR was proactively invited on [dates], with reasonable proposals. Landlord response was [late/refusal/no-engagement], increasing costs. Conduct supports the standard-basis claim; time spent is reasonable. Maintain.

5) Correspondence labelled “admin”

Reply:

Challenged items are procedural correspondence required to progress the claim (inspection scheduling, disclosure chasing, compliance letters). These are recoverable inter partes; see [exhibits]. Maintain.

6) Counsel’s fee / vacated hearing

Reply:

Counsel was instructed reasonably given [application/complexity/timetable]. Fee is evidenced (note attached). Late vacation was outside our control; brief fee remains properly incurred. Maintain.

7) e-Bill coding / mis-phasing

Reply:

Coding conforms to Precedent S phase definitions. Entries challenged sit naturally in [phase] (see narrative). No duplication; totals reconcile to WIP and disbursement exhibits. Maintain.

________________________________________

Evidence pack that makes Replies bite

• Surveyor invoices + note (aborted/why).

• Counsel fee note / brief.

• ADR invitations + responses.

• Access/vulnerability evidence (emails, notes, risk).

• Orders / listing notes.

• Disclosure chase trail.

• Client VAT status.

________________________________________

Negotiation cadence (proven in HDR)

1. Counter schedule (by phase): quick concessions + defended items.

2. Without-prejudice call: confirm deltas; set a 72-hour decision window.

3. Part 36: drop when your paper is strongest (post-Replies / pre-DA request).

4. Settlement wording: sum, interest, pay date, DA stage costs.

________________________________________

If stalemate: request DA (walk in ready)

• File the DA request and serve your bundle (bill/e-bill, PoDs, Replies, offers, exhibits).

• Keep a corridor figure ready. If agreement lands, record via consent order (who pays DA costs).

________________________________________

Common mistakes (and quick fixes)

• Generic Replies → replace with issue-based lines + exhibits.

• No ADR record → rebuild from sent items or concede modestly.

• Rates with no anchor → add GHR band + why uplift/Grade A applies.

• e-Bill miscoding → re-map high-value entries; add a one-line narrative.

• Letting dates drift → diary 21-day PoDs, Part 36 expiry, DA listing.

________________________________________

Mini-checklist (print this)

• ☐ N252 served + e-bill + exhibits

• ☐ PoDs triaged (money phases first)

• ☐ Replies drafted (7 patterns used)

• ☐ Counter sent + WP call booked

• ☐ Part 36 timed; interest ready

• ☐ DA request pre-prepared

________________________________________

FAQs — Points of Dispute in HDR (for snippets)

How long to serve Replies to PoDs?

Serve promptly after PoDs to keep leverage; don’t let the 21-day window post-N252 go cold.

Do HDR final costs need an electronic bill?

In Part 7 multi-track, yes (subject to limited exceptions). Using an electronic bill usually lifts outcomes.

What wins proportionality arguments in HDR?

Issues-based narrative: access refusals, vulnerability, ADR conduct, landlord delay—each tied to time phases and proofs.

Can I recover aborted surveyor attends?

Yes, if reasonably incurred. Evidence the attempt and explain why re-inspection was necessary.

When should I make a Part 36 on costs?

After Replies (paper strongest) and before DA request, so expiry aligns with a pressure point.

________________________________________

Try us on one HDR file — free

We’ll draft the bill/e-bill and run negotiations to settlement on one HDR file, at no cost.

Standard-basis only. No advocacy. No lay clients.

📩 info@dmdcosts.co.uk



Sign up for our newsletter
© 2025. All Right Reserved.