Tribunals · City of London Corporation · 2017 rating list

RM G.09 GND FLR, 80 COLEMAN STREET, EC2R 5BJ

Offices and premises; serviced offices Decided 29 July 2025 CHG100729230 Avison Young (UK) Ltd

OutcomeAllowed in partThe tribunal reduced the rateable value, but by less than the ratepayer sought.
Original RV£28,750£395/m²
Ratepayer sought£27,000
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided£27,000£380/m²

Figures are as stated in the decision; a dash means the document does not state that figure. This decision covers 146 properties; the figures shown are for the first listed.

What was argued and what the tribunal found

The appellant challenged the rateable values of 146 serviced office units, arguing that building works on an adjacent building caused disturbance and that the tone adopted was too high. The parties extensively discussed the appeals and reached an agreement prior to the hearing to reduce the main tone from £395/m² to £380/m², apply a 4% allowance from 1 April 2017 and an additional 4% allowance from 14 August 2017 to reflect the material change in circumstances caused by building works. The tribunal ratified the agreed valuations based on the spreadsheet submitted by the appellant.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was BEAUMONT BUSINESS CENTRES LTD, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Building works or disturbance nearby
  • Change of circumstances
  • Comparable assessments (tone)
Change of circumstances
building works
Evidence
None from the ratepayer
Hearing
17 July 2025

Similar decisions

All decisions in City of London Corporation · 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.