Tribunals · City of London Corporation · 2017 rating list

Pt 3rd Flr 55, Old Broad Street, EC2M 4RX

Offices and premises Decided 19 March 2025 CHG100785482 Ryan Property Tax Services UK Limited/Altus Group - Oakland - Manchester

OutcomeDismissedThe appeal failed and the rateable value was left unchanged.
Original RV£223,000£420/m²
Ratepayer sought£199,000
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided£223,000£420/m²

Figures are as stated in the decision; a dash means the document does not state that figure. This decision covers 5 properties; the figures shown are for the first listed.

What was argued and what the tribunal found

The appellants argued that a reduced tone of value of £375/m2 was appropriate for the office properties. The tribunal considered rental evidence for the subject properties and comparable properties in the building, including rents agreed close to the antecedent valuation date (1 April 2015). The tribunal found the valuation officer's tone of £420/m2 to be fair and reasonable, supported by compelling rental evidence including two rents agreed close to the AVD (9th Floor at £518/m2 and 10th Floor at £488/m2), and dismissed the appeals.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was JCW Search Limited, GB Railfreight Ltd, Finn Partners The Travel Company Limited, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Comparable assessments (tone) · decisive
  • Rental evidence
Evidence
Rents
Cases cited
Lotus and Delta v Culverwell; Gardiner & Theobald LLP v David Jackson
Hearing
25 February 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.