6 LANSDOWNE MEWS, W11 3BH
Hairdressing salon and premises Decided 7 February 2022 CHG100135819 Altus Group - Oakland - Manchester
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 argued the rateable value was excessive and sought to reduce it from £155,000 to £110,000 based on an analysed rent of £354/m2, arguing the property had disadvantages including being a mews style property with no passing trade and being in a less valuable location than comparable properties. The tribunal found the 2014 lease was not an open market transaction due to connected party involvement, but having tested the rent against comparable properties and noting the scheme values of £500-£550/m2 for similar properties in the W11 and W2 postcodes, concluded the tribunal was not persuaded by the appellant's arguments and dismissed the appeal.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Hand Made Hair Ltd, represented.
Grounds argued
- Rental evidence · decisive
- Comparable assessments (tone)
- Evidence
- Rents, Photographs, Expert report
- Cases cited
- Lotus and Delta v Culverwell; K Shoe Shops v Hardy; Simpsons Malt Ltd v Jones; Denton v TH White Ltd; Gardiner & Theobald LLP v David Jackson
- Hearing
- 25 January 2022
Similar decisions
- Waterstones, 39-41 Notting Hill Gate, W11 3JQ — Dismissed, 16 Jun 2025
- 118 A, HOLLAND PARK AVENUE, W11 4UA — Allowed in part, 25 Jun 2024
- 162A SLOANE STREET, SW1X 9BS — Dismissed, 29 Jan 2024
- Bst & Gnd Fl 233, Kensington High Street, W8 6SF — Allowed in part, 4 Jan 2024
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 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.