Phone Booth 1 Level 24 The Shard 31, St Thomas Street, SE1 9RY
Serviced offices and premises Decided 1 April 2025 CHG101088216 Avison Young (UK) Ltd
Figures are as stated in the decision; a dash means the document does not state that figure. This decision covers 50 properties; the figures shown are for the first listed.
What was argued and what the tribunal found
The appellant (serviced office provider) sought reductions to the rateable values for 50 office suites at The Shard on the grounds of tone and a material change of circumstances relating to demolition and reconstruction of adjacent Fielden House (affecting 48 suites). The tribunal found the base tone of £550/m2 reasonable based on comparative rental evidence and accepted the Acenden principles for devaluing rent-free periods over the full lease term rather than to the first review. The tribunal allowed 48 appeals in part, granting a 5% end allowance for the period 1 April 2017 to 31 January 2022, but dismissed 2 suites which had already benefited from this allowance. The tribunal rejected arguments that suites on the south side should be discounted for lacking Thames views.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was The Office Group Holdings Ltd, represented.
Grounds argued
- Comparable assessments (tone) · decisive
- Change of circumstances
- Change of circumstances
- demolition and reconstruction
- Evidence
- Rents, Expert report
- Cases cited
- Lotus and Delta v Culverwell; Bunyan v Acenden Limited; Specialeyes Plc v Felgate
- Hearing
- 5 March 2025
Similar decisions
- 2 ND FL 96-108, GREAT SUFFOLK STREET,, SE1 0BE — Allowed, 25 Nov 2025
- GND FL 96-108, GREAT SUFFOLK STREET,, SE1 0BE — Allowed, 25 Nov 2025
- The Salvation Army, 101 Newington Causeway, SE1 6BN — Allowed, 12 Nov 2025
- Lotus Group Ltd, 37-39 Queen Elizabeth Street, SE1 2BT — Dismissed, 30 Oct 2025
All decisions in London Borough of Southwark · 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.