UNIT H4, PILGRIMS WALK, PROLOGIS PARK, KERESLEY,, CV6 4QG
Factory and premises Decided 24 December 2025 CHG101163367 Ryan Property Tax Services UK Limited
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 argued the subject hereditament should be valued as a factory and premises (not a large distribution warehouse) with a reduced tone of value of £55 per m². The Valuation Officer had assessed it at £196,000 based on £70 per m², later increasing to £200,000 at £66.61 per m². The tribunal agreed the property should be valued as a factory and premises, but found neither party's proposed tone fully reflected the evidence. After weighing comparable assessments and rental evidence, the tribunal determined a tone of £60 per m² was fair, reflecting the subject property's location within Prologis Park (superior estate with 24-hour security and dual access) compared to Unit 2 Mallory Way (inferior location at £55 per m²), resulting in a tribunal RV of £182,000.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Richard Austin Alloys Limited, represented.
Grounds argued
- Comparable assessments (tone)
- Valuation method
- Evidence
- Rents, Settled assessments
- Cases cited
- Lotus & Delta Ltd v Culverwell
- Hearing
- 10 December 2025
Similar decisions
- Martin Robey Holdings Ltd, Pool Road, CV10 9AE — Dismissed, 7 Apr 2026
- 7, BAYTON ROAD, EXHALL, CV7 9EL — Allowed in part, 18 Mar 2026
- Bailey & Wade Engineering Co Ltd, 11, Bayton Road, Exhall, Exhall, CV7 9EL — Allowed in part, 18 Mar 2026
All decisions in Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council · 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 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.