Tribunals · City of Westminster · 2017 rating list

1-3, Chepstow Road, W2 5BL

Shop and Premises Decided 19 November 2020 CHG100046554 Altus Group - Oakland - Manchester

OutcomeDismissedThe appeal failed, leaving the value at the figure the Valuation Officer had already conceded.
Original RV£70,500£800/m²
Ratepayer sought£52,000
VO conceded first£55,500−21% before the hearing
Tribunal decided£55,500£800/m²

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, trading as Infusion Haberdashery, challenged the rateable value of a shop on Chepstow Road, London, proposing £52,000 based on a 30% width-to-depth allowance. The tribunal considered comparable rental evidence from similar properties in the locality which supported a zone A rate of £800 per m2, and found that this base rate was not excessive. Although the tribunal acknowledged the shop's individual characteristics (isolated, ageing, underneath residential flats, set back behind pillars), it found no substantive evidence to increase the width-to-depth allowance from the 20% already adopted at the challenge stage, and therefore dismissed the appeal.

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

Grounds argued

  • Comparable assessments (tone)
  • Floor area or measurement
  • Quantum or end allowance
Evidence
Rents, Settled assessments
Cases cited
Lotus and Delta v Culverwell
Hearing
23 October 2020

Similar decisions

All decisions in City of Westminster · Shops nationally

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.