Tribunals · Reading Borough Council · 2023 rating list

160 Basingstoke Road, Riseley, RG2 0HJ

Car showroom and premises Decided 15 July 2026 CHG101212583 Colliers International - Matthew Hawkins

OutcomeDismissedThe appeal failed and the rateable value was left unchanged.
Original RV£645,000£200/m²
Ratepayer sought£317,500
VO conceded first—
Tribunal decided£645,000£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 argued that the rateable value of £645,000 (£200/m² tone) was excessive and should be reduced to £317,500 based on an analysed rent of £87/m² from a January 2021 lease. The tribunal found that whilst the lease was important evidence, it was let in shell condition requiring substantial tenant-funded refurbishment, and the passing rent required adjustment for fit-out costs of approximately £500/m². After adjustment, the lease analysed to approximately £211/m², supporting the VO's adopted tone of £200/m². The tribunal also rejected the appellant's claim for a 7.5% end allowance for floor level variations, finding no rental evidence demonstrated a measurable reduction in value. The appeal was dismissed.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Tesla Motors Ltd, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Rental evidence · decisive
  • Comparable assessments (tone)
  • Quantum or end allowance
Evidence
Rents, Expert report
Cases cited
Lotus and Delta v Culverwell; Johnson v H & B Foods Limited; Group1 Automotive Ltd v Valuation Officer
Hearing
24 June 2026

Similar decisions

All decisions in Reading 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.