Tribunals · London Borough of Merton · 2017 rating list

Units 25-26 Boundary Business Court 92-94, Church Road, CR4 3TD

Warehouse and Premises Decided 29 October 2025 CHG101106099 Jones Lang LaSalle

OutcomeAllowed in partThe tribunal reduced the rateable value, but by less than the ratepayer sought.
Original RV£117,000£75/m²
Ratepayer sought—
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided£113,000£75/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 to reduce the main space rate from £75/m² to £65/m² and challenged various area valuations and relativities in the assessment. The tribunal found that whilst the 2014 lease rent (£98.05/m² excluding premium/fit-out, £163/m² including) supported a change, comparable evidence was remote from the valuation date and properties differed in construction and age. The tribunal rejected the proposed main space rate reduction but agreed adjustments to certain area relativities (chiller assessment) that had been conceded by the respondent, resulting in a reduction of the RV from £117,000 to £113,000.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was William Jackson Food Group Limited, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Rental evidence
  • Comparable assessments (tone) · decisive
  • Zoning or layout
Evidence
Rents, Settled assessments
Cases cited
Lotus and Delta Ltd v Culverwell (VO) and Leicester City Council; Gardiner & Theobald LLP v David Jackson (VO); Simpsons Malt Ltd v Jones (VOs); Denton v TH White Ltd
Hearing
2 October 2025

Similar decisions

All decisions in London Borough of Merton · Industrial and warehouses 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.