Tribunals · Southampton City Council

Atm At 52-53, Bedford Place, SO15 2DT

Decided 24 May 2022 28498741 Dunlop Heywood

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 was one of several hundred ATM-related appeals stayed pending the Supreme Court judgment in Cardtronics v Sykes. Following the judgment's release, the tribunal lifted its stay and the Valuation Officer undertook a list maintenance exercise. The Valuation Officer determined this appeal to be redundant following review and discussions with interested parties. As the appellant did not appear, was unrepresented, and provided no evidence of an arguable case, the appeal was dismissed.

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

Grounds argued

  • Validity of the proposal
Evidence
None from the ratepayer
Cases cited
Cardtronics UK Ltd and Others v Sykes

Similar decisions

All decisions in Southampton City 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.