Tribunals · Test Valley Borough Council · 2017 rating list

UNIT A & B1,, FARADAY PARK,, SP10 3SA

Factory and premises Decided 23 November 2020 CHG100149253 Altus Group - Oakland - Manchester

OutcomeAllowed in partThe tribunal reduced the rateable value, but by less than the ratepayer sought.
Original RV£54,000£47.5/m²
Ratepayer sought£41,750
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided£45,750£40/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 from Altus Group, argued that the 2017 assessment of £54,000 RV (£47.50/m²) was excessive, relying primarily on the actual rent passing on the property as at 1 April 2015 of £43,999 p.a. (£38.39/m²). The tribunal found that whilst the appellant's proposed rate of £36.50/m² was unjustifiably low, the original assessment was unreasonable when compared against the basket of available passing rents, particularly when considering also the rents on Cipher House and Unit 1 Telford Gate. The tribunal allowed the appeal in part, reducing the RV to £45,750 based on an unadjusted main space rate of £40.00/m².

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

Grounds argued

  • Rental evidence · decisive
Evidence
Rents
Cases cited
Lotus and Delta Ltd v Culverwell (VO) and Leicester City Council [1976]; Gardiner & Theobald LLP v David Jackson (VO) [2018] UKUT 0253 (LC)
Hearing
16 November 2020

Similar decisions

All decisions in Test Valley Borough Council · Industrial and warehouses 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.