Tribunals · Preston City Council · 2017 rating list

9-10, Cross Street, PR1 3LT

Offices and Premises Decided 24 May 2022 CHG100364704 Altus Group - Oakland - Manchester

OutcomeDismissedThe appeal failed and the rateable value was left unchanged.
Original RV£145,000
Ratepayer sought—
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided£145,000

Figures are as stated in the decision; a dash means the document does not state that figure. This decision covers 26 properties; the figures shown are for the first listed.

What was argued and what the tribunal found

The appellant sought a 65% reduction in rateable value for an office building (£145,000 RV), claiming material change of circumstances due to covid-19 and its effects on the locality and public behaviour. The tribunal dismissed all 26 appeals, holding that section 1(4) of the Rating (Coronavirus) and Directors Disqualification (Dissolved Companies) Act 2021 clearly prohibited any reduction attributable directly or indirectly to coronavirus, and none of the statutory exceptions in section 1(5) applied.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Vistra International Expansion Ltd, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Change of circumstances · decisive
Change of circumstances
covid
Evidence
None from the ratepayer
Cases cited
Clement v Addis Ltd; Chilton-Merryweather v Hunt; Pavlou (Valuation Officer); The Financial Conduct Authority v Arch and others; John Burvill and Gareth David Jones (Valuation Officer); Kendrick (Valuation Officer)
Hearing
18 May 2022

Similar decisions

All decisions in Preston City Council · Offices 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.