Tribunals · Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council · 2017 rating list

322 & 1ST FLOOR 324 CROMPTON WAY, BL2 2NE

Shop and premises Decided 10 September 2025 CHG101139857 Ken Batty Chartered Surveyors - Sara

OutcomeDismissedThe appeal failed, leaving the value at the figure the Valuation Officer had already conceded.
Original RV£8,400£200/m²
Ratepayer sought£5,000
VO conceded first£7,800−7% before the hearing
Tribunal decided£7,800£200/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 challenged the £7,800 RV valuation, seeking reduction to £5,000 on grounds including: zone rate reduction from £200/m² to £150/m², allowance for disability (rear steps), masking of zones A and B, and superfluous first floor area. The tribunal found the existing £200/m² rate was reasonable based on comparable rental evidence from adjacent properties and the subject property's own lease terms. The appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence to support reductions for the disability, masking, or superfluous area claims. The appeal was dismissed, and the assessment of £7,800 was confirmed as not unreasonable.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Greenhalghs Craft Bakery Ltd, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Comparable assessments (tone)
  • Quantum or end allowance
  • Zoning or layout
  • Other
Evidence
Rents, Settled assessments
Cases cited
Lotus and Delta v Culverwell
Hearing
14 August 2025

Similar decisions

All decisions in Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council · Shops 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.