108 Bath Road, RG30 2EU
Petrol Filling Station and premises Decided 13 July 2023 35329504 Mua Property Services Ltd
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
The appellant challenged a notice of alteration dated 12 May 2021 that retrospectively increased the rateable value from £64,000 to £143,000 with effect from 28 June 2011. The tribunal found that the Valuation Officer was not empowered to make this alteration because it was undertaken of their own volition rather than to give effect to an outstanding proposal. Under Regulation 14(8), alterations made after the first anniversary of the next list's compilation can only have retrospective effect if made to give effect to a proposal. By 12 May 2021, both outstanding proposals had been disposed of, leaving no legal vehicle for the alteration. The appeal was allowed and the entry was reduced to £64,000 Rateable Value.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Tesco Stores Ltd, represented.
Grounds argued
- Validity of the proposal · decisive
- Evidence
- None from the ratepayer
- Cases cited
- Cardtronics UK Ltd v Sykes (VO) [2020] UKSC 21
- Hearing
- 3 July 2023
Similar decisions
- 160 Basingstoke Road, Riseley, RG2 0HJ — Dismissed, 15 Jul 2026
- UNIT 5, WORTON DRIVE, RG2 0TG — Allowed in part, 1 Jun 2026
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 propertyThe tribunal’s decision in full
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.