147, KINGS ROAD, SW3 5TX
Shop and Premises Decided 4 April 2023 CHG100411493 Altus Group - Oakland - Manchester
Figures are as stated in the decision; a dash means the document does not state that figure. This decision covers 2 properties; the figures shown are for the first listed.
What was argued and what the tribunal found
The appellants argued that the rateable values of the two retail units at 147 and 149 Kings Road were excessive and should be reduced based on rental evidence. The tribunal considered competing rental evidence and comparable assessments within the same parade, finding that the established tone of value had not been settled. The tribunal determined that rental evidence provided the best basis for valuation, placing most weight on rent at 151 Kings Road agreed close to the AVD. The tribunal reduced the tone of value to £2,150 per m² ITZA, resulting in reductions of £5,000 and £5,000 respectively, allowing the appeals in part.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Lucas Hugh Ltd, represented.
Grounds argued
- Rental evidence
- Comparable assessments (tone)
- Evidence
- Rents, tone_of_list_comparables
- Cases cited
- Lotus and Delta v Culverwell; Gardiner & Theobald LLP v David Jackson
- Hearing
- 6 March 2023
Similar decisions
- Waterstones, 39-41 Notting Hill Gate, W11 3JQ — Dismissed, 16 Jun 2025
- 118 A, HOLLAND PARK AVENUE, W11 4UA — Allowed in part, 25 Jun 2024
- 162A SLOANE STREET, SW1X 9BS — Dismissed, 29 Jan 2024
- Bst & Gnd Fl 233, Kensington High Street, W8 6SF — Allowed in part, 4 Jan 2024
All decisions in Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea · Shops 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 propertyThe tribunal’s decision in full
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.