Tribunals · City of London Corporation · 2017 rating list

PT 1ST F, 24 Lombard Street, EC3V 9AJ

Office and Premises Decided 22 March 2021 CHG100074549 CBRE - Elliot Jones

OutcomeDismissedThe appeal failed, leaving the value at the figure the Valuation Officer had already conceded.
Original RV£95,000£375/m²
Ratepayer sought£57,500
VO conceded first£78,000−18% before the hearing
Tribunal decided£78,000£375/m²

Figures are as stated in the decision; a dash means the document does not state that figure. This decision covers 4 properties; the figures shown are for the first listed.

What was argued and what the tribunal found

The appellant contended that construction works on an adjacent site at 30-32 Lombard Street constituted a material change of circumstances warranting a 12.5% reduction in rateable value. The tribunal found that while building works were underway, they were substantially complete and major disruptive work had ceased by the material dates (November 2017 and March 2018). As there was no new material change in circumstances affecting the physical state or enjoyment of the properties since 1 April 2017, the appeals were dismissed.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Mitsubishi UFJ Trust & Banking Corporation, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Change of circumstances
Change of circumstances
building demolition and construction works
Evidence
Photographs, Earlier tribunal decisions
Cases cited
Gardiner & Theobald LLP v David Jackson (VO)
Hearing
9 March 2021

Similar decisions

All decisions in City of London Corporation · Offices 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.