Tribunals · Guildford Borough Council

Automatic Telling Machine 255, High Street, GU1 3BJ

Decided 24 May 2022 26415507 CBRE - London

OutcomeDismissed — nobody attended for the ratepayerThe appeal failed and the rateable value was left unchanged.
Original RV—
Ratepayer sought—
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided—

Figures are as stated in the decision; a dash means the document does not state that figure.

What was argued and what the tribunal found

This appeal concerned an ATM-related entry that had been stayed pending the Supreme Court's decision in Cardtronics v Sykes. Following the judgment and list maintenance exercise by the Valuation Officer, this appeal was considered redundant as multiple appeals had been lodged against the same list entry. The appellant did not appear, was not represented, and provided no evidence to support an arguable case, leading to dismissal.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was the ratepayer, unrepresented.

Grounds argued

No grounds were argued — the decision records none.

Evidence
None from the ratepayer
Cases cited
Cardtronics UK Ltd and Others v Sykes

Similar decisions

All decisions in Guildford Borough Council ·

Is your own rateable value in line?

A free check compares a property with the assessments around it and says plainly whether there is anything worth pursuing.

Check a property

The tribunal’s decision in full

Download the PDF · Find it on valuationtribunal.gov.uk

Decision © Crown copyright, published by the Valuation Tribunal Service under the Open Government Licence v3.0 and reproduced unaltered. This site does not index the names of private individuals that appear in decisions. Information, not advice.