Free news & data alerts
Log in
Tribunals · London Borough of Islington · 2017 rating list

5TH FLR FINWELL HOUSE, 26 FINSBURY SQUARE, EC2A 1DS

Offices and premises Decided 9 January 2025 CHG100086353 Ryan

OutcomeAllowed in partThe tribunal reduced the rateable value, but by less than the ratepayer sought.
Original RV · 2017 list£372,500
Ratepayer sought£357,500
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided£358,750from 11 Aug 2017

Figures are as stated in the decision, and are values in the 2017 list; a dash means the document does not state that figure. This judgement decided 2 properties together; the figures above are for this appeal's property (5th floor, Finwell House, 26 Finsbury Square, London, EC2A 1DS). Every property is listed below.

The 2 properties in this decision

One judgement covered all of these appeals. Each property’s figures as the judgement states them (2017 list); this appeal’s property is highlighted.

The properties covered by this tribunal decision, with the figures it states for each
PropertyOriginal RVSoughtTribunal decidedOutcome
5th and 6th floors, Finwell House, 26 Finsbury Square, London, EC2A 1DS£745,000£715,000£715,000Allowed in part
5th floor, Finwell House, 26 Finsbury Square, London, EC2A 1DSThis appeal£372,500£357,500£358,750Allowed in part

What was argued and what the tribunal found

The appellant sought a reduction in the price per m² from £485 to £465, arguing that rent free periods should be analysed to the first review following city protocol. The tribunal accepted the respondent's approach that rent free periods should be analysed to the second review as the property was outside the city locality. However, the tribunal was satisfied the original price of £485 per m² was unreasonable and, on consideration of the rental evidence particularly for the 1st, 2nd and 3rd floors, accepted the appellant's revised figure of £465 per m².

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was M J Quinn Integrated Ltd and Mc Bains Cooper Consulting Ltd, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Rental evidence · decisive
  • Valuation method
Evidence
Rents, Expert report
Cases cited
Gardiner & Theobald LLP v David Jackson [2018] UKUT 0253 (LC); Bunyan (VO) v Acenden Limited [2023] UKUT 17 (LC); Lotus and Delta v Culverwell (VO) and Leicester City Council [1976] RA 141
Hearing
9 December 2024

Similar decisions

All decisions in London Borough of Islington · 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.