[2025] UKUT 224 (LC)

To re-cap: the VO’s case as set out in counsel’s skeleton argument was that the evidence shows what the actual tenants were prepared to pay for the value of their beneficial occupation, namely the effective Category A rent plus the cost of fit out. It is argued that, once cross-checked with Category A comparables and once the capital fit out cost element is appropriately annualised and added, this is a direct route to the annualised price of the beneficial occupation to the existing occupier and the key piece of evidence in assessing the rateable value, which is the annual value of that beneficial occupation to the existing occupier.

If the VO’s approach is correct then the only data needed in a simple case of this kind are the effective Category A rent for the property, category A comparables by way of a cross-check, and the cost of the Category B fitting out works.

Both Mr Bailey and Mr Willetts gave evidence about the Mando Property; Mr Willetts is a Lead Valuer in the Regional Valuation Unit North of the Valuation Office Agency, based in the Manchester office. Only Mr Willetts examined the Category A rental market in Liverpool and the effective Category A rent for the property; Mr Bailey largely relied upon Mr Willetts’ evidence in that respect. Both considered the available evidence of Category B lettings, which we agree is remarkably sparse.