Figures are as stated in the decision, and are values in the 2017 list; a dash means the document does not state that figure. This judgement decided 2 properties together; the figures above are for this appeal's property (Unit 5A, Ewenny Industrial Estate, Bridgend, CF31 3EX). Every property is listed below.
The 2 properties in this decision
One judgement covered all of these appeals. Each property’s figures as the judgement states them (2017 list); this appeal’s property is highlighted.
| Property | Original RV | Sought | Tribunal decided | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unit 5A, Ewenny Industrial Estate, Bridgend, CF31 3EXThis appeal | £47,500 | — | £39,500 | Allowed in part |
| Unit 6A, Ewenny Industrial Estate, Bridgend, CF31 3EX | £36,500 | — | £30,500 | Allowed in part |
What was argued and what the tribunal found
The appellant contended that both properties should be reduced to nil rateable value, arguing that the cost of necessary repairs to bring them to a state of reasonable repair was beyond what a hypothetical landlord would consider economic to undertake. The tribunal accepted the Valuation Officer's costings and expert evidence that the required works constituted component repairs within the scope of reasonable repair rather than wholesale renewal, and that a prudent landlord would undertake such repairs over an anticipated 20-year occupation period. The tribunal rejected the appellant's comparison to redevelopment scenarios and held that neither property was subject to a demolition order or "doomed to demolition", therefore the nil valuation claim failed. The appeals were allowed only to the extent conceded by the Valuation Officer, with reductions from £47,500 to £39,500 for Unit 5A and from £36,500 to £30,500 for Unit 6A.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was an individual ratepayer, represented.
Grounds argued
- State of repair or deletion · decisive
- Valuation method
- Evidence
- Measurement survey, Expert report
- Cases cited
- Princess Street Ltd (Ipswich) v Bond (VO); Thomas and Davies v Denly (VO); Barber v CEREP III TW Sarl; Lurcott v Wakeley; Anstruther – Gough – Calthorp v McOscar; Thomas Davies (Merthyr Tydfil) Ltd v Denly (VO); McDougall v Easington District Council; Lotus and Delta Ltd v Culverwell (VO); Dawkins (VO) v Ash Bros & Heaton Ltd; Coppin (VO) v East Midlands Airport Joint Committee
- Hearing
- 17 August 2021
Similar decisions
- Workshop & Premises, Unit 37 Aneurin Bevan Avenue, Brynmenyn Industrial Estate, Bridgend CF32 9SZ — Dismissed, 8 May 2025
- Workshop & Premises, Stone and Glass Group, George Thomas Avenue, Brynmenyn Industrial Estate, — Dismissed, 8 May 2025
- 24 Ogmore Crescent, Bridgend Industrial Estate, Bridgend, CF31 2JS — Dismissed, 13 Jun 2022
- 18 Hij, Kingsman Building, Bridgend Industrial Estate, Bridgend — Dismissed, 2 Jul 2019
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 of the Valuation Tribunal for Wales, published at valuationtribunalwales.net and reproduced unaltered. This site does not index the names of private individuals that appear in decisions. Information, not advice.