Tribunals · London Borough of Camden · 2023 rating list

GND FLR REAR, 6-­10, WHITFIELD STREET, W1T 2RE

Offices and premises Decided 3 June 2026 CHG101256724 Ryan Property Tax Services UK Limited

OutcomeAllowed in partThe tribunal reduced the rateable value, but by less than the ratepayer sought.
Original RV£51,500£620/m²
Ratepayer sought£37,000
VO conceded first£45,250−12% before the hearing
Tribunal decided£44,500£565/m²

Figures are as stated in the decision; a dash means the document does not state that figure. This decision covers 2 properties; the figures shown are for the first listed.

What was argued and what the tribunal found

The appellant challenged the rateable values for two ground floor office units, arguing for a lower tone per m2 and increased allowance for poor natural light. The tribunal found that the adopted tone should be reduced from £620/m2 to £565/m2 based on the weight of rental evidence, including the subject property's own rent. However, the tribunal rejected the case for increasing the natural light allowance from 5% to 15% for the rear unit and applying a 7.5% allowance to the front unit, finding insufficient evidence of adverse internal impact.

Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was JIGSAW24, represented.

Grounds argued

  • Comparable assessments (tone) · decisive
  • Rental evidence
  • Quantum or end allowance
Evidence
Rents, Settled assessments, Earlier tribunal decisions, Photographs, Expert report
Cases cited
Lotus & Delta v Culverwell
Hearing
7 May 2026

Similar decisions

All decisions in London Borough of Camden · Offices 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.