Free news & data alerts
Log in
Tribunals · London Borough of Camden · 2017 rating list

5 TH FLR 33, ALFRED PLACE, WC1E 7DP

Offices and premises Decided 13 May 2025 CHG100856470 Ryan

OutcomeDismissedThe appeal failed and the rateable value was left unchanged.
Original RV · 2017 list£37,250
Ratepayer sought—
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided£37,250from 2 May 2017

Figures are as stated in the decision, and are values in the 2017 list; a dash means the document does not state that figure. This judgement decided 2 properties together; the figures above are for this appeal's property (5TH FLOOR, 33 ALFRED PLACE, LONDON WC1E 7DP). Every property is listed below.

The 2 properties in this decision

One judgement covered all of these appeals. Each property’s figures as the judgement states them (2017 list); this appeal’s property is highlighted.

The properties covered by this tribunal decision, with the figures it states for each
PropertyOriginal RVSoughtTribunal decidedOutcome
4TH FLOOR, 33 ALFRED PLACE, LONDON WC1E 7DP£108,000—£108,000Dismissed
5TH FLOOR, 33 ALFRED PLACE, LONDON WC1E 7DPThis appeal£37,250—£37,250Dismissed

What was argued and what the tribunal found

The appellants sought a reduction in the tone applied to two adjoining office floors at 33 Alfred Place from £575/m2 to £475/m2, arguing this was supported by comparable evidence. The tribunal found the existing tone of £575/m2 was reasonable, being supported by rents agreed at nearby properties in Alfred Place close to the valuation date, specifically rents at Remax House and Whittington House which analysed to £611.38/m2 and £627.64/m2 respectively. The appellant's comparable examples were either too far from the subject property, explained by inferior accommodation standards, or had since been altered to higher valuations in the rating list.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Ezoic UK Ltd and Big Light Productions Ltd, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Comparable assessments (tone)
  • Rental evidence
Evidence
Rents, Settled assessments
Cases cited
Lotus and Delta Ltd v Culverwell; Gardiner & Theobold LLP v Jackson
Hearing
23 April 2025

Similar decisions

All decisions in London Borough of Camden · 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.