Anaerobic Digester Plant, Bay Farm, Worlington, Worlington, IP28 6BS
Anaerobic Digestion plant Decided 28 May 2025 CHG100858911 DMH Stallard / HM Revenue & Customs
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 3 properties together; the figures above are for this appeal's property (A D Plant, Bay Farm, Bury St Edmunds IP28 6BS). Every property is listed below.
The 3 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.
| Property | Original RV | Sought | Tribunal decided | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A D Plant, Bay Farm, Bury St Edmunds IP28 6BSThis appeal | £285,000 | — | £285,000 | Dismissed |
| A D Plant, Scottow Road, Scottow, NR10 5GD | £145,000 | — | £140,000 | Allowed |
| A D Plant, Scottow Road, Scottow, NR10 5GD | — | — | — | Dismissed |
What was argued and what the tribunal found
The appellant argued that the Valuation Officer's standard 10% uplift to the tenant's share to reflect risk was insufficient for anaerobic digestion plants, which face greater risks than other renewable energy facilities. The tribunal found that whilst AD plants do carry greater risks than wind and solar farms, and the VO had not properly accounted for working capital requirements, the 10% uplift was too low. The tribunal increased the risk adjustment to 15% for both properties. For Oak Grove, this reduced the RV from £145,000 to £140,000, allowing that appeal. For Bay Farm, despite increasing the tenant's share, the valuation cap prevented a reduction, so that appeal was dismissed.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Oak Grove Renewable Energy Ltd, represented.
Grounds argued
- Valuation method · decisive
- Comparable assessments (tone)
- Evidence
- Expert report, Trading accounts
- Cases cited
- Railway Assessment Authority v Southern Railway; Hong Kong Electric Co Ltd v Commissioner of Rating and Valuation; Fryer v Cox (VO); O'Brien v Harwood (VO); Robinson Brothers (Brewers) Ltd v Houghton and Chester Le Street Assessment Committee; Sandown Park Ltd v Esher Urban District Council
- Hearing
- 3 April 2025
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.