Ringley Law — tribunal record
Ringley Law appears in 13 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=13, as of 31 October 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 Ringley Law
| Case reference | Decision date | Area | Our summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| LON/00AY/LDC/2025/0827 | 3 February 2026 | SW2 | — |
| LON/00AG/LDC/2025/0888 | 13 January 2026 | NW3 | — |
| LON/00AW/LDC/2025/0831 | 5 November 2025 | SW5 | — |
| LON/00BH/LDC/2025/0777 | 10 September 2025 | E4 | — |
| LON/00AY/LDC/2025/0750 | 23 July 2025 | SW9 | — |
| LON/00AY/LDC/2025/0636 | 27 May 2025 | SW2 | — |
| LON/00BG/LDC/2023/0297 | 10 December 2024 | E14 | — |
| LON/00AW/LDC/2024/0507 | 13 November 2024 | SW3 | — |
| LON/00AW/LDC/2024/0047 | 15 May 2024 | SW3 | — |
| LON/00AW/LDC/2024/0006 | 30 April 2024 | SW1X | — |
| LON/00AW/LDC/2023/0204 | 15 January 2024 | SW7 | — |
| LON/00AU/LDC/2021/0080 | 6 July 2021 | N19 | — |
| LON/00BK/LDC/2020/0160 | 18 December 2020 | SW1V | — |
What tribunals have said
The passages below are quoted verbatim from published tribunal decisions in which Ringley Law appears; each links to the full public decision on GOV.UK. We publish only the tribunal's own words — never our characterisation.
“The Wellcome Trust decided to instruct Rosco and Perlini, but no justification is given in the written submissions for the choice of contractor or why only one quotation was obtained.”
“The case for urgency made in the application is somewhat thin, in that it amounts to an assertion that the works are urgent to allow lift access to the residents.”
“I assume there were safety and/or operational reasons for the lift being out of service, although they are not specified in the application or the witness statement from the property manager.”
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: 4,423 decisions covering 19,030 individually disputed items, last updated 31 October 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.