Go Home Direct Trading Ltd, Unit 9 1, LS23 7FE
Retail warehouse and premises Decided 21 July 2025 CHG100430160 Wharfedale Property Management Ltd
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 contended that a material change of circumstances on 1 July 2019 resulted in an 80% vacancy rate and two lease renewals at peppercorn rents, warranting a nil rateable value. The Valuation Officer had awarded a 50% allowance. The tribunal found that whilst the vacancy rate would have had a considerable effect on rental negotiations, insufficient evidence demonstrated that a hypothetical tenant on 1 April 2015 would not have paid any rent if the vacancy level had been the same. The tribunal applied a 60% allowance as more appropriate, reducing the RV from £29,750 to £11,750, allowing the appeal in part.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Trustees of Patrizia Hanover Property Unit Trust, represented.
Grounds argued
- Change of circumstances
- Quantum or end allowance
- Change of circumstances
- increased vacancy rate, reduced footfall
- Evidence
- Settled assessments, Rents, Expert report
- Cases cited
- Lotus and Delta v Culverwell; Jafton Properties Ltd v Prisk
- Hearing
- 9 July 2025
Similar decisions
- CARCRAFT, CAPITOL PARK WEST, CAPITOL BOULEVARD, CAPITOL BOULEVARD, LS27 0TS — Allowed in part, 2 Jun 2026
- 318, TRINITY LEEDS, ALBION STREET, LS1 5AT — Dismissed, 28 May 2026
- Mamas Pizzeria, 384 Dewsbury Road, LS11 7JX — Dismissed, 3 Sept 2025
- GND FLR TANNERY BUILDING, 471, KIRKSTALL ROAD, LS4 2QD — Dismissed, 6 Aug 2024
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.