Tribunals · Rushcliffe Borough Council · 2023 rating list

FOCUS LABEL MACHINERY LTD, CHAPEL LANE, BINGHAM, BINGHAM, NG13 8GF

Workshop and premises Decided 4 February 2025 CHG101174042 Altus Group - Oakland - Manchester

OutcomeDismissedThe appeal failed and the rateable value was left unchanged.
Original RV£111,000£45/m²
Ratepayer sought£71,500
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided£111,000£45/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 contended that the rateable value of £111,000 (£45 per m² for the 1993 section and £50 per m² for the 2003 section) was unreasonable and should be reduced to £71,500 (£28.25 per m² for the 1993 section and £32.75 per m² for the 2003 section), based on rental evidence analysed between £30.08 and £59.13 per m². The tribunal found that rental evidence from properties within Bingham itself, particularly Rear of Unit 4 analysed at £48.55 per m² and Office units at Ranch Chapel Lane at £47.31-£60.97 per m², supported the respondent's valuation. The tribunal was not persuaded by the appellant's argument that the RV was unreasonable and dismissed the appeals, confirming the RV at £111,000.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Focus Label Machinery Limited, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Rental evidence
  • Comparable assessments (tone)
  • Valuation method
Evidence
Rents, Settled assessments
Hearing
10 January 2025

Similar decisions

All decisions in Rushcliffe 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 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.