Tribunal Record

Rendall & Rittner — tribunal record

Rendall & Rittner appears in 18 published First-tier Tribunal service charge decisions in our corpus; across the 128 individually challenged items in those cases, 28.1% were reduced or disallowed by the tribunal. (n=18, as of 4 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.

Median reduction by cost head where this firm was involved

Cost headItems with amounts (n)Median reduction
Other charges200%
Repairs & maintenance170%
Utilities60%
Management fees542%
Legal & professional costs520.2%
Administration charges597.8%
Staffing & concierge40%
Buildings insurance40%
Gardening & grounds20%
Cleaning20%
Major works20%
Reserve fund contributions20%
Lifts10%

Decisions in the corpus naming Rendall & Rittner

Case referenceDecision dateAreaOur summary
LON/00AU/LSC/2025/085710 March 2026N7—
LON/00AG/LSC/2025/080131 December 2025SW18—
LON/00AT/LSC/2024/013123 February 2025W4Summary
LON/00AR/LSC/2024/032119 November 2024RM8—
LON/00BE/LSC/2023/02194 November 2024SE17Summary
BIR/00GG/LDC/2024/000510 July 2024SY1—
LON/00AG/LSC/2023/044321 June 2024NW8—
LON/00AY/LDC/2023/0181-AND-LON/00AY/LDC/2023/022421 February 2024SW8—
LON/00AG/LSC/2023/007518 August 2023NW8—
CHI/24UJ/LSC/2023/001922 June 2023SO45—
LON/00BK/LLE/2021/0005-B-LON/00BK/LSC/2020/01529 March 2023W1T—
LON/00BE/LSC/2022/002215 February 2023SE1Summary
LON/00BJ/LSC/2021/042826 September 2022SW12Summary
MAN/00BN/LSC/2021/002625 March 2022M4—
LON/00BG/LDC/2021/030724 February 2022E14—
MAN/00BR/LDC/2021/001516 July 2021M50—
LON/00AY/LDC/2020/022215 March 2021SW4—
LON/00BG/LSC/2020/01621 March 2021E2—

What tribunals have said

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

“The tribunal also asked about the different sizes of the blocks. It was a little concerned that estimated electricity charges were the same across different sizes of blocks but considered that overall, the charges were not unreasonable.”
The tribunal in LON/00AR/LSC/2024/0321, of Applicant / managing agent (Rendall and Rittner)
“The Tribunal was not provided with any details of the inspection reports, copies of photographs or the estimate of the costs of the work and the details of the contractor or any updating information concerning the works have been completed.”
The tribunal in LON/00AY/LDC/2020/0222, of Applicant / managing agent
“The Tribunal is concerned about the limited information which has been provided to this tribunal in support of the application.”
The tribunal in LON/00AY/LDC/2020/0222, of Applicant / managing agent
“The Tribunal were not happy with this explanation or with the expenditure that was largely unexplained and unacceptable.”
The tribunal in LON/00BJ/LSC/2021/0428, of FairFX PLC charge (para 34(i)) and Rendall & Rittner invoice 56993 (para 34(vi))
“the Tribunal considered that it was reasonable to conclude that there may have been some failures regarding the oversight of the project by both RR and GV, and, in particular, but without limitation, some apparent confusion between HGM, RR and GV as to the boundaries/extent of their roles.”
The tribunal in MAN/00BN/LSC/2021/0026, of Rendall & Rittner (managing agent) and Gateley Vinden (employer's agent)

Related

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: 2,383 decisions covering 12,898 individually disputed items, last updated 4 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.