Tribunals · London Borough of Southwark · 2017 rating list

Suite 2504 Level 25 The Shard 31, St Thomas Street, SE1 9RY

Serviced office suites Decided 1 April 2025 CHG101088275 Avison Young (UK) Ltd

OutcomeAllowed in partThe tribunal reduced the rateable value, but by less than the ratepayer sought.
Original RV£8,800£550/m²
Ratepayer sought£8,300
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided£8,300£550/m²

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 sought a reduction from £550/m² to £500/m² based on rental evidence and disputed application of a 'Tower uplift' to south-facing suites. The tribunal found the base price of £550/m² was not unreasonable and rejected the uplift removal argument as unsupported. However, the tribunal allowed a 5% end allowance for material change of circumstances (demolition and reconstruction of adjacent Fielden House) from 1 April 2017 to 31 January 2022, reducing the RVs accordingly for 48 properties. Two suites (2511 and 2512) were dismissed as they had already received the 5% allowance.

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

Grounds argued

  • Comparable assessments (tone)
  • Change of circumstances
Change of circumstances
reconstruction works
Evidence
Rents, settlement_assessments
Cases cited
Lotus and Delta v Culverwell; Bunyan (VO) v Acenden Limited; Specialeyes Plc v Felgate
Hearing
5 March 2025

Similar decisions

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 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.