Key Terrain Ltd v Gerdes (VO)
Key Terrain Ltd v Gerdes (VO)
- 1986
- Estates Gazette 280 (6313) 6 December 1986,1234-1235 (2) .
(LVC/289/1985) 30 June 1986. Appeal against lvc decision by the occupier of buildings forming one hereditament,in the middle of similar hereditaments,forming Aylesford Paper Mill Site at Maidstone . The main issue was the assessment of the rv of the new building, erected in 1984, with a height of 18ft at the eaves. The appellant contended for an rv of £113,250; the respondent VO in effect sought to uphold lvc decision of rv of £116,320. The level of assessment within the site was recognised to be lower than outside. The ratepayers` valuer contended that the main floor area of the new building should be valued according to an analysis of rv agreed for remainder of hereditament,in particular £5psm for a warehouse built in 1970,with a height of 38ft to the eaves. However,having regard to the height differences he valued it at £4.50 psm. It was common ground that no building was directly comparable to the new building; therefore the VO considered assessments on other factory and warehous
FACTORY
RATING APPEAL
(LVC/289/1985) 30 June 1986. Appeal against lvc decision by the occupier of buildings forming one hereditament,in the middle of similar hereditaments,forming Aylesford Paper Mill Site at Maidstone . The main issue was the assessment of the rv of the new building, erected in 1984, with a height of 18ft at the eaves. The appellant contended for an rv of £113,250; the respondent VO in effect sought to uphold lvc decision of rv of £116,320. The level of assessment within the site was recognised to be lower than outside. The ratepayers` valuer contended that the main floor area of the new building should be valued according to an analysis of rv agreed for remainder of hereditament,in particular £5psm for a warehouse built in 1970,with a height of 38ft to the eaves. However,having regard to the height differences he valued it at £4.50 psm. It was common ground that no building was directly comparable to the new building; therefore the VO considered assessments on other factory and warehous
FACTORY
RATING APPEAL