Salter Rex LLP — tribunal record
Salter Rex LLP 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 30 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.
Decisions in the corpus naming Salter Rex LLP
| Case reference | Decision date | Area | Our summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| LON/00BG/LSC/2024/0228-AND-LON/00BG/LSC/2023/0435 | 6 November 2025 | E3 | Summary |
| LON/00BG/LDC/2023/0072 | 22 May 2023 | E3 | — |
| LON/00AK/LDC/2022/0020 | 19 April 2022 | N9 | — |
| LON/00BK/LDC/2021/0049 | 21 April 2021 | W2 | — |
| LON/00BA/LSC/2020/0245 | 9 February 2021 | CR4 | Summary |
What tribunals have said
The passages below are quoted verbatim from published tribunal decisions in which Salter Rex LLP appears; each links to the full public decision on GOV.UK. We publish only the tribunal's own words — never our characterisation.
“These proceedings could have been avoided, had the Respondents acted in accordance with their management duties, and liaised with the Applicant.”
“The Respondents had failed to engage with her prior to her application to the tribunal, had failed to attend the case management hearing and had failed to provide any documentary evidence to support their claims during the hearing.”
“Nothing in the appeal bundle supported these claims, and the Tribunal found on balance, that if Mr Preko was engaging such a large number of contractors, which would involve substantial hours of work for the company, he would be able to be specific and been able to provide the Tribunal with some documentary evidence of this.”
“The specimen lease (of Flat A on the ground floor) provided did not appear to include all its pages (there appear to be pages missing between that page numbered Pg 46 and that numbered Pg 47 in the copy lease provided).”
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: 4,243 decisions covering 18,023 individually disputed items, last updated 30 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.