Figures are as stated in the decision, and are values in the 2017 list; a dash means the document does not state that figure.
What was argued and what the tribunal found
The appellant, a large department store occupier (Debenhams), challenged the rateable value seeking a reduction from £2,080,000 (£135/m²) to £1,040,000 (£67.50/m²), arguing the department store market had drastically declined by April 2015 due to online sales and the collapse of BHS. The Valuation Officer had conceded a reduction to £1,750,000 (£113.50/m²). The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, accepting that although rent review evidence had limitations and market conditions were challenging, there was no direct rental evidence supporting a decline in the market for very large department stores at the valuation date. The tribunal concluded the market was stagnant rather than declining and found the VO's assessment consistent with comparable large retail properties in Cardiff.
Summary generated from the decision text and checked against it. The appellant was Debenhams Retail Limited, represented.
Grounds argued
- Rental evidence
- Comparable assessments (tone)
- Change of circumstances
- Validity of the proposal
- Change of circumstances
- online_sales
- Evidence
- Rents, Settled assessments, Expert report
- Cases cited
- Lotus and Delta Limited v Culverwell; Lamb (VO) v Go Outdoors Limited
- Hearing
- 24 November 2020
Similar decisions
- 503 Newport Road, Cardiff, CF24 9AD — Dismissed, 11 May 2026
- Former Hone and Jones, Hadfield Road, Cardiff, CF11 8AQ — Agreed at hearing, 25 Mar 2025
- Unit D, 16 The Hayes, Cardiff CF10 1AH — Allowed, 30 Jan 2025
- 177 Clare Road, Cardiff CF11 6RX — Dismissed, 25 Apr 2024
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.