1 ST FLR, 6165 CONDUIT STREET, W1S 2JB
Offices and premises Decided 15 October 2024 CHG100108650 Altus Group - Oakland - Manchester
Figures are as stated in the decision; a dash means the document does not state that figure. This decision covers 3 properties; the figures shown are for the first listed.
What was argued and what the tribunal found
The appellants challenged the rateable value of three office floors at 61-65 Conduit Street, proposing a tone of £755/m2 instead of £900/m2, arguing the adopted rate was excessive. The tribunal preferred the Valuation Officer's comparable assessments in Conduit Street (21 Conduit Street, 14-15 Conduit Street, 52-53 Conduit Street) which analysed to higher rents and supported the £900/m2 valuation as the lowest within the valuation scheme. The tribunal found the VO's comparables were closer to the antecedent valuation date and in the same locality, and dismissed the appeals as the appellants failed to produce sufficient evidence to justify reduction.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was JRJ Investments Ltd, AKO Capital Management Ltd, Alken Asset Management, represented.
Grounds argued
- Rental evidence
- Comparable assessments (tone)
- Evidence
- Rents, Settled assessments, Photographs, Expert report
- Cases cited
- Lotus and Delta v Culverwell; Lamb v Go Outdoors Ltd
- Hearing
- 16 September 2024
Similar decisions
- 6TH FLR 3-5, BURLINGTON GARDENS, W1S 3EP — Allowed, 21 Sept 2026
- 4th Flr East 3-5, Burlington Gardens, W1S 3EP — Allowed, 21 Sept 2026
- Westminster House, 7 Millbank, SW1P 3JA — Allowed in part, 17 Aug 2026
- PART 3RD FLR WEST, 1, NEWMAN STREET, W1T 1PB — Dismissed, 8 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.