Tribunal Record

Austin Rees Ltd — tribunal record

Austin Rees Ltd appears in 9 published First-tier Tribunal service charge decisions in our corpus, listed below with a link to each one. Outcome and reduction figures for this firm are being rebuilt on a classification that separates leaseholder challenges from landlord applications, and are not shown. (n=9, as of 30 July 2026)

About these figures: Outcomes reflect disputes that reached the First-tier Tribunal, not portfolio-wide quality. Small samples are noisy; every figure links to the underlying decisions.

Decisions in the corpus naming Austin Rees Ltd

Case referenceDecision dateAreaOur summary
HAV/00ML/LDC/2025/070426 September 2025BN1
HAV/00ML/LDC/2025/069817 September 2025BN1
HAV/00ML/LDC/2025/065814 July 2025BN1
HAV/00ML/LDC/2025/06207 April 2025BN3
CHI/00ML/LUS/2024/000324 February 2025BN1
HAV/00ML/LDC/2025/060130 January 2025BN3
HAV/00ML/LDC/2024/064814 January 2025BN1
CHI/00ML/LSC/2023/00368 August 2023BN3
CHI/00ML/LDC/2021/011514 February 2022BN3

What tribunals have said

The passages below are quoted verbatim from published tribunal decisions in which Austin Rees Ltd appears; each links to the full public decision on GOV.UK. We publish only the tribunal's own words — never our characterisation.

“Surely, it is the duty of the managing agents to secure sufficient funds from the leaseholders for any major works.”
The tribunal in CHI/00ML/LUS/2024/0003, of Austin Rees Limited (managing agents)
“The 'attached notice' referred to in the application was not attached to the email with the Application.”
The tribunal in HAV/00ML/LDC/2025/0658, of Applicant / Austin Rees

Methodology

These statistics are computed from the published decisions of the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) in service charge cases (case types LSC, LIS and LDC). Each decision is parsed into a structured record — the sums challenged, the sums allowed, the outcome per cost head, and the orders made — and the aggregates on this page are recomputed nightly in plain arithmetic from those records. No figure on this page is estimated, modelled or hand-typed; each carries its sample size. Current corpus: 4,243 decisions covering 18,023 individually disputed items, last updated 30 July 2026.

Read this before quoting: Outcomes reflect disputes that reached the First-tier Tribunal, not portfolio-wide quality. Small samples are noisy; every figure links to the underlying decisions.