Southdown Estates Limited — tribunal record
Southdown Estates Limited appears in 6 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=6, 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 Southdown Estates Limited
| Case reference | Decision date | Area | Our summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| HAV/21UC/LDC/2026/0050 | 5 May 2026 | BN22 | — |
| HAV/21UC/LDC/2025/0687 | 17 December 2025 | BN20 | — |
| HAV/21UG/LDC/2025/0605 | 6 June 2025 | TN40 | — |
| HAV/21UC/LDC/2024/0620 | 31 December 2024 | BN24 | — |
| CHI/21UC/LDC/2023/0167 | 25 January 2024 | BN20 | — |
| CHI/21UG/LSC/2022/0127 & CHI/21UG/LSC/2022/0128 | 7 July 2023 | TN40 | Summary |
What tribunals have said
The passages below are quoted verbatim from published tribunal decisions in which Southdown Estates Limited appears; each links to the full public decision on GOV.UK. We publish only the tribunal's own words — never our characterisation.
“On enquiry from the Tribunal the Applicant said that the Directions had not been sent to the Lessees and made an application to allow service on 22 December 2023.”
“To have permitted such late service would have shortened the time allowed for the Lessees to respond and was therefore refused.”
“Various dates for compliance were missed by the Applicant and, on 30 April 2025, in response to a case management application by the Applicant, the dates for compliance were extended.”
“The Applicant failed to comply with this Direction, resulting in the Tribunal, on 3 June 2025, needing to seek such confirmation. In the alternative, the Applicant was advised that the matter would be referred to a Procedural Judge for a minded to strike out Notice.”
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.