- A live service-charge question needed a defensible answer.
- The Managing Agent wanted the committee to commission a £5,000 KC opinion.
- The committee wanted to see the wording before spending the money.
Real buildings. Real questions.
What changed when people opened the source.
These are the building stories customers and residents have allowed us to tell. Each one starts with a specific question, not a general promise about AI.
Gabriel Square, St Albans
Read the lease before commissioning the opinion.
The Managing Agent wanted the committee to spend £5,000 on a KC opinion. The committee used LEASE-iQ to see the relevant clause and legislation first.
- LEASE-iQ returned the relevant clause and legislation in four minutes.
- The committee could open and check the source.
- It tested the position with its Managing Agent and the KC opinion did not proceed.
What this showsOpening the source changed the next decision in this building.
What stays humanThe committee and its Managing Agent decided what to do with the answer.
Four building stories
Different problems. The same need to see the source.
A proposed £5,000 KC opinion did not proceed.
The Managing Agent wanted the committee to spend £5,000 on a KC opinion. The committee ran the question through LEASE-iQ first and tested the resulting position with its Managing Agent.
“Our managing agent wanted us to spend £5,000 on a King's Counsel opinion on a service charge question. We ran it through LEASE-iQ first. It came back with the clause and the legislation. We tested the position with our managing agent, and the KC opinion did not proceed.”
Sara Whitehead, Management Committee
Read the Gabriel Square storyA repair bill was taken back to the lease and warranty.
Leaseholders had been paying personally to replace failed panes. The lease analysis pointed the question back to the freeholder's responsibility and the structural warranty route across more than 15 flats.
“People in our block were paying out of their own pocket to replace failed window panes. We used LEASE-iQ and found the windows were freeholder demised.”
Donald Morrison, Lead leaseholder
Read the customer accountA resident-led board could see what had not been handed over.
The board used the lease and building records to identify gaps around fire risk, service-charge demands and the account holding building funds.
“Nobody told us what we were responsible for. We had no fire risk assessment, our service charge demands weren't compliant, and the building funds weren't in a client account.”
Confidential customer account
Read the customer accountOne roof claim consumed 2,600 recorded hours.
Adam Street logged the time in Xero between February 2023 and December 2024 while the residents managed the claim and the works. That experience shaped Building Trust and the wider BLOCK-iQ idea.
“The lease, policy, works, money and resident decisions all belonged to the same problem, but the record was scattered across different places.”
Adam Street, Founder
Read the Hafer Road storyHow to read the stories
A result in one building is a reason to test your lease, not assume the same answer.
- 01The document changes
Every lease, deed and building record may be different.
- 02The source stays visible
The useful output includes the clause and page someone else can open.
- 03The facts still matter
A lease cannot prove what happened in the building or what a report found.
- 04People make the decision
LEASE-iQ improves the first pass. It does not remove professional or board judgment.
See it working
