Westcolt Surveyors — tribunal record
Westcolt Surveyors 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 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 Westcolt Surveyors
| Case reference | Decision date | Area | Our summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| LON/00BB/LSC/2025/1222 | 10 July 2026 | E13 | Summary |
| CAM/26UC/LSC/2023/0021 | 27 August 2024 | HP1 | Summary |
| LON/00BB/LSC/2023/0244 & LON/00BB/LVL/2023/0004 | 31 January 2024 | E13 | Summary |
| LON/00AH/LDC/2020/0174 | 29 October 2021 | SW16 | — |
| LON/00BB/LSC/2020/0002-LON/00BB/LSC/2020/0234-LON/00BB/LDC/2020/0175 | 12 March 2021 | E13 | Summary |
What tribunals have said
The passages below are quoted verbatim from published tribunal decisions in which Westcolt Surveyors appears; each links to the full public decision on GOV.UK. We publish only the tribunal's own words — never our characterisation.
“The Applicant's lack of success in these proceedings is due to their failure (and that of their chosen agent) to properly read the leases and consider respective liabilities for the works given the layout of the property, as well as their failure to provide sufficient evidence to support the amounts claimed.”
“The claim for £12,000 for allegedly managing the resurfacing works was particularly cynical, given the total failure to provide any evidence at all in support of that claim – even the correct identity of the contractor (wrongly identified by Mr Ali in the dispensation proceedings shortly after the works had completed).”
“The images are unclear and there is no explanation as to what they are intended to illustrate.”
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.