Tribunals · Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea · 2017 rating list

UNIT 1 BARKERS ARCADE, KENSINGTON HIGH STREET, W8 5SF

Retail unit Decided 25 August 2022 CHG100127256 Altus Group - Oakland - Manchester

OutcomeAllowed in partThe tribunal reduced the rateable value, but by less than the ratepayer sought.
Original RV£330,000
Ratepayer sought£305,000
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided£322,000£2200/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 contended that the irregular shape of the retail unit, being significantly wider at the front, warranted an allowance of 10% (reducing RV to £305,000) rather than the 2.5% originally applied. The tribunal found that reconfiguration work to the arcade constituted a material change and considered comparable properties with higher allowances. However, after balancing the evidence and noting that the comparables were not directly comparable due to location and varied reasons for their allowances, the tribunal determined that an allowance of 5% was reasonable, setting the RV at £322,000.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Robinson Webster (Holdings) Limited, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Zoning or layout · decisive
  • Comparable assessments (tone)
Evidence
Rents, tone_of_list_comparables
Cases cited
Lotus and Delta v Culverwell; Barnard and Barnard v Walker; Gardiner & Theobald LLP v David Jackson
Hearing
11 August 2022

Similar decisions

All decisions in Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea · 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.