Tribunals · City of Westminster · 2017 rating list

Basement, 4-5 Duke Of York Street, SW1Y 6LA

Club and premises Decided 19 April 2022 CHG100144720 Rupert David Ltd

OutcomeDismissedThe appeal failed and the rateable value was left unchanged.
Original RV£139,000£1000/m²
Ratepayer sought£90,000
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided£139,000£1000/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, represented by a surveyor, argued that the main space rate of £1,000/m² was excessive and sought a reduction to £650/m² and an RV of £90,000, relying on a June 2015 rent of £100,000 per annum and comparable properties. The tribunal found that the appellant had failed to produce sufficient evidence to justify the claim for reduction, particularly as the June 2015 rent was unsubstantiated whereas the respondent's February 2013 rent of £120,000 was supported by the Form of Return, confirmation from the club manager, and Land Registry records. The tribunal determined that the analysed rent of £2,564.74/m² (after adjusting for capital premium and refurbishment costs) supported the £1,000/m² rate, and dismissed the appeal.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Secrets Group, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Rental evidence · decisive
  • Comparable assessments (tone)
Evidence
Rents, Settled assessments, Photographs, Expert report
Cases cited
Lotus and Delta v Culverwell
Hearing
23 March 2022

Similar decisions

All decisions in City of Westminster · Pubs, hotels and leisure 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.