Tribunals · Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea · 2017 rating list

Bst - Gnd Flrs 282-292 Westbourne Grove, W11 2PS

Restaurant and premises Decided 1 March 2024 CHG100878734 Matthews & Goodman - David Wagstaffe

OutcomeDismissedThe appeal failed and the rateable value was left unchanged.
Original RV£650,000£1625/m²
Ratepayer sought£335,500
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided£650,000£1625/m²

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 sought a reduction of the main space rate from £1,625/m² to £850/m² relying on comparable assessments of restaurants in the area, many valued at lower rates. The tribunal examined rental evidence, comparable property assessments, and the subject property's prominent location and high fit-out costs. The tribunal found the existing assessment of £650,000 RV at £1,625/m² was reasonable, noting that comparable restaurants on Westbourne Grove were valued at £1,700/m² and £1,200/m², and that the subject property's unique size and superior corner location justified the adopted rate.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Getti Ltd, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Comparable assessments (tone)
Evidence
Rents, Settled assessments
Cases cited
Lotus and Delta v Culverwell; Williams v Scottish and Newcastle Retail Ltd; Jafton Properties v Prisk; Futures London v Stratford; O'Brien v Harewood; Gardiner & Theobald LLP v David Jackson
Hearing
23 January 2024

Similar decisions

All decisions in Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea · Pubs, hotels and leisure 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.