FirstPort Retirement Property Services — tribunal record
FirstPort Retirement Property Services 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 12 August 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 FirstPort Retirement Property Services
| Case reference | Decision date | Area | Our summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| HAV/21UH/LSC/2025/0703 | 16 June 2026 | TN21 | Summary |
| LON/00AH/LSC/2025/0807 | 30 March 2026 | CR0 | — |
| MAN/00BU/LSC/2023/0018 | 8 November 2023 | WA15 | Summary |
| MAN/36UG/LSC/2022/0115 | 25 May 2023 | YO14 | — |
| CHI/23UF/LSC/2021/0087 | 7 December 2022 | GL6 | — |
What tribunals have said
The passages below are quoted verbatim from published tribunal decisions in which FirstPort Retirement Property Services appears; each links to the full public decision on GOV.UK. We publish only the tribunal's own words — never our characterisation.
“It is also unclear why the agents paid the audit fees in advance, when there were already concerns about the substantial fee increase.”
“We were not impressed by the Respondent's solicitor's response to the application. Many of the arguments are statements of fact regarding service charges generally rather than pertaining to the issue before us. It also responds to matters not disputed by the Applicant.”
“We are not clear why the Respondent or the managing agent are so unwilling to provide the relevant information, from which we draw an adverse inference.”
“A much greater effort should have been made to ensure that the communal lounge was made fully available to the residents as quickly as possible. This is considered to be a management failure.”
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: 4,244 decisions covering 18,031 individually disputed items, last updated 12 August 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.