STUDIO G.03, CHESTER HOUSE, 13, BRIXTON ROAD, SW9 6DE
Business unit and premises Decided 9 July 2025 CHG101071926 Altus Group - Oakland - Manchester/Ryan Property Tax Services UK Limited
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 challenged the RV of £42,500 (unadjusted rate £404.42/m²), proposing £27,250 (£260/m²), arguing the rate was too high and relying on comparable properties in Canterbury Court with lower rates. The tribunal found the VO's evidence of actual market rents from lettings in the same building (Chester House) at comparable rates close to the antecedent valuation date more persuasive than the appellant's settled assessments from a different building. The tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding the appellant had failed to discharge the burden of demonstrating the current RV was unreasonable.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Bond and Coyne Associates Limited, represented.
Grounds argued
- Rental evidence · decisive
- Comparable assessments (tone)
- Evidence
- Rents, Settled assessments, Earlier tribunal decisions
- Cases cited
- Lotus and Delta v Culverwell; Gardiner and Theobald LLP v David Jackson
- Hearing
- 11 June 2025
Similar decisions
- UNIT SB.410-411 AT SOUTH BANK HOUSE, BLACK PRINCE ROAD, SE1 7SJ — Dismissed, 25 Sept 2025
- UNIT SB 139A AT SOUTH BANK HOUSE, BLACK PRINCE ROAD, SE1 7SJ — Dismissed, 25 Sept 2025
- UNIT SB 139 AT SOUTHBANK HOUSE, BLACK PRINCE ROAD, SE1 7SJ — Dismissed, 25 Sept 2025
- UNIT 4 AT 16, PORTEUS PLACE, SW4 0AP — Dismissed, 16 Dec 2024
All decisions in London Borough of Lambeth · 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 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.