Barclays, 81 High Street, B4 7TE
Shop and premises Decided 2 May 2025 CHG101092842 Jones Lang LaSalle
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, represented by a surveyor, argued that the Zone A price of £2,300 per m² was excessive and proposed £1,320 per m² based on rental evidence from comparable High Street properties (including a 2016 transaction at £1,319.41 per m²). The tribunal found the rental evidence too wide-ranging and lacking clear AVD values, with most being nil increase reviews or post-AVD transactions. The tribunal attached most weight to the 17 comparable assessments on High Street unchallenged at £2,300 per m² and settlement evidence from Metro Bank and 46 Pavilion Central, finding these demonstrated an established tone of the list. The appeal was dismissed and the RV of £445,000 confirmed.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Barclays Bank PLC, represented.
Grounds argued
- Rental evidence
- Comparable assessments (tone)
- Evidence
- Rents, Settled assessments, Expert report
- Cases cited
- Lotus and Delta v Culverwell; O'Brien v Harwood; Futures London Ltd v Stratford; Ladies Hosiery and Underwear Ltd v West Middlesex Assessment Committee; Gardiner & Theobald LLP v David Jackson
- Hearing
- 17 April 2025
Similar decisions
- UNIT 10, ONE STOP SHOPPING CENTRE, WALSALL ROAD, B42 1SF — Dismissed, 14 Jul 2026
- UNIT 6, ONE STOP SHOPPING CENTRE, WALSALL ROAD, B42 1SF — Dismissed, 14 Jul 2026
- UNIT 2A, FORT SHOPPING PARK, FORT PARKWAY, FORT PARKWAY, B24 9FP — Allowed, 7 Jul 2026
- 39-40, CANNON STREET, B2 5EE — Dismissed, 29 Jan 2026
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.