Tribunal Record

Michael Richards and Co — tribunal record

Michael Richards and Co appears in 17 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=17, 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 Michael Richards and Co

Case referenceDecision dateAreaOur summary
LON/00BA/LSC/2025/090012 April 2026SW19
LON/00AX/LDC/2024/016220 May 2025KT5
LON/00AH/LDC/2024/066514 April 2025SW16
LON/00AP/LDC/2024/01543 April 2025N17
LON/00AP/LDC/2024/066231 March 2025N22
LON/00AH/LDC/2024/020512 March 2025SE25
LON/00AN/LSC/2023/041315 July 2024W14
LON/00AY/LDC/2024/005815 May 2024SW2
LON/00AN/LDC/2023/031218 March 2024SW6
LON/00AH/LDC/2022/013613 March 2024SW16
LON/00AH/LDC/2023/029013 March 2024SW16
LON/00BE/LDC/2023/007122 November 2023SE22
LON/00AP/LDC/2022/02203 October 2023N4
LON/00AN/LDC/2023/004411 May 2023SW6
LON/00AN/LDC/2022/02436 March 2023W14
LON/00AG/LDC/2021/02439 November 2021NW2
LON/00AP/LDC/2020/003625 January 2021N11

What tribunals have said

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

“The Applicant has not explained the delay in making this application.”
The tribunal in LON/00AH/LDC/2024/0665, of Foxglade Properties Limited / Michael Richards & Co (managing agents)
“the Tribunal was satisfied that the nature of the roof works were perhaps not as urgent as was stated by Michael Richards. That is not consistent with the approximately two-year delay that was incurred from the serving of the Notice of Intention in September 2020 to the actual works commencing on or about November 2022. The obvious point is that statutory consultation could and perhaps should have taken place during this period of time.”
The tribunal in LON/00AN/LDC/2023/0312, of Michael Richards & Co (managing agent)
“This dispute could have been avoided if the Respondent had engaged more with the Applicants.”
The tribunal in LON/00AN/LSC/2023/0413, of Orchidbase Limited / Michael Richards & Co
“no specific detail has been provided about this”
The tribunal in LON/00AP/LDC/2024/0662, of Applicant (Orchidbase Limited / Michael Richards & Co)

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.