Blenheims Estate & Asset Management (SW) Limited — tribunal record
Blenheims Estate & Asset Management (SW) Limited appears in 5 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=5, 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 Blenheims Estate & Asset Management (SW) Limited
| Case reference | Decision date | Area | Our summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| CHI/00HH/LDC/2023/0077 | 25 September 2023 | TQ2 | — |
| CHI/18UG/LDC/2023/0064 | 4 July 2023 | TQ9 | — |
| CHI/00HH/LDC/2023/0040 | 4 May 2023 | TQ4 | — |
| CHI/18UG/LSC/2022/0006 | 26 October 2022 | TQ9 | Summary |
| CHI/00HH/LDC/2021/0008 | 18 March 2021 | TQ1 | — |
What tribunals have said
The passages below are quoted verbatim from published tribunal decisions in which Blenheims Estate & Asset Management (SW) Limited appears; each links to the full public decision on GOV.UK. We publish only the tribunal's own words — never our characterisation.
“The poor drafting of the lease and the paucity of documentation provided by the Respondents has been an issue.”
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.