Portfolio Profile
Lot Types
Residential 813 (94%)
Commercial 3 (0%)
Utility 49 (6%)
Scheme Size Distribution
Distribution of schemes by total lot count. Average scheme size: 9.6 lots. The portfolio is dominated by small schemes (10 lots or fewer), typical of townhouse and villa complexes.
Portfolio Age
Schemes by registration decade. Oldest scheme registered 1963, newest 2023.
Suburb Coverage
| Suburb | Schemes | Lots | % of Portfolio | Market Share | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coogee 2034 | 46 | 445 | 51% | 6.8% | |
| Randwick 2031 | 23 | 224 | 26% | 2.8% | |
| Clovelly 2031 | 4 | 29 | 4% | 2.7% | |
| Maroubra 2035 | 3 | 17 | 3% | 0.5% | |
| Rose Bay 2029 | 2 | 18 | 2% | 0.4% | |
| Kingsford 2032 | 2 | 15 | 2% | 0.9% | |
| South Coogee 2034 | 2 | 12 | 2% | 4.4% | |
| Kensington 2033 | 2 | 10 | 2% | 0.9% | |
| Bondi 2026 | 1 | 25 | 1% | 0.3% | |
| Double Bay 2028 | 1 | 24 | 1% | 0.5% |
| Pagewood 2035 | 1 | 15 | 1% | 7.1% | |
| Matraville 2036 | 1 | 15 | 1% | 0.7% | |
| Bondi Beach 2026 | 1 | 12 | 1% | 0.2% | |
| Bronte 2024 | 1 | 4 | 1% | 0.6% |
Tribunal & Court History
4
Total Cases
1
NCAT
3
Supreme Court
0.0
Adverse per 100 Schemes
4.4
Total per 100 Schemes
4 cases since 2021. None resulted in adverse findings — all were dismissed, withdrawn, settled, or brought by the owners corporation.
Orders Made 3
Dismissed 1
An applicant sought leave to proceed with a complaint of racial discrimination and victimisation against the owners corporation. The Tribunal found there was no evidence of racial discrimination and no detriment suffered due to a claim of discrimination. Therefore, the Tribunal refused the applicant's request to proceed with the claim.
HUMAN RIGHTS – equal opportunity – whether leave to proceed should be given – principles applying to grant of leave.
Before
M Tibbey, Senior Member
Hearing
4 October 2023
File Numbers
2023/00282698
Matched Strata Plans
SP9859
Parties
Lot Owner v Owners Corporation
Representation
Applicant – Self Represented Respondent – Mr Benjamin Jack
Orders
Leave to proceed with complaint of discrimination and victimisation
The Owners Corporation sued the Builder for building defects, and the Builder cross-claimed against the Building Supervisor. The court found the Builder's cross-claim was not properly pleaded. The court ordered the cross-claim be struck out and gave the Builder another opportunity to amend the cross-claim and the Builder must pay the Building Supervisor's costs.
CIVIL PROCEDURE — Summary disposal under UCPR r 13.4 — Dismissal of cross-claim — Defective pleading concerning statutory duty under s 37 of the Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020 (NSW) — Whether Scott Schedule provided by the cross-claimant adequately identifies the precautions the...
Before
Ball J
Hearing
9 December 2022
File Numbers
2019/294941
Matched Strata Plans
SP89005
Parties
Owners Corporation v Developer
Representation
Counsel: B Stanton (Solicitor) (Plaintiff) P Folino-Gallo (Second Cross-Defendant | Applicant) J O’Sullivan (Defendants | Cross-Claimants) Solicitors: Stanton Legal (Plaintiff) Bradbury Legal...
Orders
(1) Strike out paragraphs 20 to 33 of the Technology and Construction List Cross-Claim Statement filed on 23 December 2021; (2) Direct that any application to file an amended Technology and Construction List Cross-Claim Statement be served no later than 17 February 2023 and be made returnable on 24 February 2023; (3) Order that the cross-claimant pay the second cross-defendant’s costs of the Notice of Motion filed 20 October 2022.
The Owners Corporation sued the builder, and the builder then sought leave to continue proceedings against the certifier's insurer. The tribunal refused the leave for the insurer claim but allowed the builder to continue the proceedings against the certifier, now in liquidation, subject to a condition.
INSURANCE – procedure – civil – whether leave should be granted to proceed against the insurer pursuant to s 5 of the Civil Liability (Third Party Claims Against Insurers) Act 2017 (NSW) – whether arguable case that the relevant policy would respond to a claim made against it by the certifier...
Before
Stevenson J
Hearing
15 July 2022
File Numbers
2019/294941
Matched Strata Plans
SP89005
Parties
Owners Corporation v Third Party
Representation
Counsel: J O’Sullivan (First to Fourth Defendants/Cross-Claimants/Applicants) M F Newton (First and Second Respondents) Solicitors: & Legal (First to Fourth Defendants/Cross-Claimants/Applicants)...
Orders
Leave to proceed under Civil Liability (Third Party Claims Against Insurers) Act 2017 (NSW) refused; leave to proceed against company in liquidation to be granted
The owners corporation sued the developers and builder for building defects. The defendants sought leave to amend their list response to include a limitation defense, which was denied because it would prejudice the applicant. The tribunal also refused the defendants leave to file cross-claims against sub-contractors.
BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION – civil procedure – application to amend Technology and Construction List Response – proposed amendment to limitation defence based on construction of Home Building Act 1989 (NSW), ss 18C and 18E and schedule 4, clause 109 – defendants had previously withdrawn...
Before
Williams J
Hearing
13 July 2021
File Numbers
2019/294941
Matched Strata Plans
SP89005
Parties
Owners Corporation v Developer
Representation
Counsel: Mr B Stanton (Solicitor) (Plaintiffs) Mr J O’Sullivan (Defendants) Solicitors: Stanton Legal (Plaintiff) Darian Iancono & Legal (Defendants)
Orders
See paragraph [70]
Google Reviews
08 Feb 2026
“By far the best property management company I've had to date in Sydney. Incredidbly pleasant experience deadling with Nicholas for the past 18 months. If ever there was an issue (very few) things would get sorted and actioned right away. Not like other agents I have dealt with in the past and...”
09 Feb 2026
“Nicolas and the Lea team were exceptional over many years living in their properties.
No request was ever too much, they were always punctual and friendly. The best rental experience we've ever had.
Couldn't recommend Nicolas and the team any higher.”
16 Dec 2025
“We’ve entrusted Lea Real Estate with the management of our three properties for over 40 years, and they’ve consistently exceeded our expectations. From day one, they handled everything seamlessly - from finding quality tenants to managing levy payments and all the administrative details in...”
08 Dec 2025
“I am a Landlord and have used Lea Real Estate for over 10 years as my Property Managing Agent. In particular, I have been working with both Nicholas Paquer and Quentin Lea over this period, and they have been exceptional in managing all of the challenges associated with my property. Their...”
10 Sep 2025
“Nicolas was our property manager for the last 5 years. His professionalism, work ethic and knowledge is top notch. He is incredibly efficient, effective and super easy to deal with.
.
Highly recommend him to manage your rentals or sales.”