James Andrew Residential — tribunal record
James Andrew Residential 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 9 September 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 James Andrew Residential
| Case reference | Decision date | Area | Our summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| LON/00BK/LDC/2024/0227 | 28 October 2024 | NW8 | — |
| LON/00AC/LDC/2023/0301 | 29 May 2024 | N2 | — |
| LON/00BK/LDC/2024/0032 | 8 May 2024 | W1H | — |
| LON/00AG/LDC/2023/0241 | 13 February 2024 | NW8 | — |
| LON/00BK/LDC/2023/0136 | 25 July 2023 | SW1X | — |
| LON/00BC/LDC/2022/0089P | 18 July 2022 | NW8 | — |
| LON/00BK/LDC/2021/0284 | 10 January 2022 | W2 | — |
| LON/00BK/LDC/2021/0172 | 11 August 2021 | NW8 | — |
| LON/00BK/LDC/2021/0090 | 1 June 2021 | SW1A | — |
What tribunals have said
The passages below are quoted verbatim from published tribunal decisions in which James Andrew Residential appears; each links to the full public decision on GOV.UK. We publish only the tribunal's own words — never our characterisation.
“the tribunal is not persuaded that the responses by the respondents could be classified as 'observations' as suggested by the Regulations, and that the failure to involve the residents in the decision to carry out repairs, has resulted in relevant prejudice.”
“the applicants rely on historic advice, and it would have been prudent for them to have had a fire risk assessment carried out to support any works.”
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 9 September 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.