A review of lease copies, repair plans and resident meeting notes finds a gap between the total in the public summary and the conditions recorded at the lease table at Fern Steps. The difference does not prove that anyone misstated the file. It shows what the public count leaves out: a shared roof garden is listed as an amenity in one copy and a duty in another.
The lease copies, repair plans and resident meeting notes lists 39 renewals with a repair duty written in both copies; the previous window lists 35. Aeren Thorn checked both against signed council records checked against the amendments residents submitted. The source was checked against a second copy held by Rill Orin. No dated correction to either copy was present when the comparison closed.
The owner points to a customary repair share. Residents say a duty should be written with its amount and review date. The office has not supplied a separate measure that would settle the disagreement, so the two explanations remain competing accounts.
This report supports a narrower finding: the count is repeatable, but it is not enough to decide whether a shared amenity can become an unpriced household obligation at renewal.
Neighbors and makers submit observations before the council table closes. The Year second, rest season window 1 file remains open for its scheduled decision. The mediator will compare signed copies before recommending standard wording.
