Tribunals · North West Leicestershire District Council · 2017 rating list

52-60 Sideley, DE74 2FJ

Factory and Premises Decided 10 March 2022 CHG100342362 FHP - Ian Mitchell

OutcomeDismissedThe appeal failed, leaving the value at the figure the Valuation Officer had already conceded.
Original RV£267,500
Ratepayer sought£173,000
VO conceded first£250,000−7% before the hearing
Tribunal decided£250,000from 1 Apr 2017

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 rateable value should be reduced to £173,000 due to excessive prices applied to various aged buildings on the site, and sought a 10% allowance for layout, split site, access, residential proximity, mixed ages, drainage issues, and proximity to sewage works. The Valuation Officer contended that the £250,000 RV was correct, reflected the ages and conditions of buildings, and included appropriate 7.5% allowance. The tribunal found the prices applied were not excessive compared to rental evidence and comparable assessments within the scheme, and that the existing 7.5% allowance was sufficient to reflect layout and split-site issues, dismissing the appeal.

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

Grounds argued

  • Valuation method · decisive
  • Quantum or end allowance
Evidence
Rents, Settled assessments, Photographs, Expert report
Hearing
11 February 2022

Similar decisions

All decisions in North West Leicestershire District 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.