Tribunals · London Borough of Southwark · 2017 rating list

1-2 Bear Gardens, SE1 9ED

School and premises Decided 16 December 2022 CHG100172397 Colliers International - Laurence Hatchwell

OutcomeAllowedThe tribunal reduced the rateable value.
Original RV£139,000£475/m²
Ratepayer sought£60,500
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided£60,500£220/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 argued that the subject property, a school occupying ground and lower ground floors of a mixed-use building in London SE1, should be valued using the contractors method at a base rate of £220/m2, resulting in an RV of £60,500 effective from 6 March 2018 (the practical completion date). The Valuation Officer had used rental evidence from comparable office properties to support an RV of £139,000 effective from 6 April 2018. The tribunal found that the VO's approach was not reasonable, placing insufficient weight on the comparables because they were office buildings whereas the subject property, when vacant and to let, must be assumed to be a school. The tribunal applied the contractors method and adopted £220/m2, reducing the RV to £60,500 with the correct effective date of 6 March 2018.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Bell Educational Services Ltd, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Rental evidence
  • Valuation method · decisive
  • Effective date
Evidence
Rents, Settled assessments, Expert report
Cases cited
Lotus and Delta v Culverwell
Hearing
22 November 2022

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.