VALUATION TRIBUNAL FOR ENGLAND Non-domestic rating appeal; 2017 rating list; Offices and Premises; comparable properties; accuracy of rateable value in list; locality; rental and comparable evidence considered; Appeal dismissed. RE: British Airways Waterside, Speedbird Way, Harmondsworth, West Drayton, Middlesex, UB7 0GB APPEAL NUMBER: CHG100039641 BETWEEN: British Airways Plc Appellant (represented by CBRE Ltd) And Andrew Corkish (Valuation Officer) Respondent PANEL: Mr G Coombes (Chairman) Mr S Kandola SITTING AT: VTS Offices, 120 Leman Street, Whitechapel, London E1 8EU ON: 8 January 2020 APPEARANCES: Mr V Newbury of CBRE for the Appellant Mr D Alford for the Valuation Officer Summary of decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. The existing valuation is not unreasonable and the entry in the rating list is confirmed at £8,060,000 rateable value (RV) with effect from 1 April 2017. Introduction 2. This document is not intended as a verbatim report of the proceedings nor is it proposed to reproduce in full all of the parties’ evidence. The absence in this decision of a reference to any statement or item of evidence placed before it by the parties should not be construed as an indication that that statement or item of evidence has been overlooked by the panel. www.valuationtribunal.gov.uk 3. This was a 2017 Rating List appeal. The Rateable Value of the appeal hereditament was £8,060,000 from 1 April 2017. This was a compiled list appeal, so the material day was also 1 April 2017. The appeal was made on 3 October 2019 against the Valuation Officer’s (VO) Decision Notice of 3 June 2019 in respect of the appeal property. The VO’s decision was to treat the Appellant’s proposal as not well founded and the existing entry of £8,060,000 RV was deemed as correct. 4. The subject property is a large office assessment located on Harmondsworth Moor which houses the headquarters of British Airways Plc. The property is owned on a freehold basis by the occupier and therefore no rent is currently passing on the hereditament. Issue 5. The matter before the panel was to determine the correct level of the RV for the appeal property, having regard to the weight to be attached to the rental evidence and levels of value placed on comparable assessments in the immediate and wider locality. The Appellant proposed a revised RV of £6,490,000, based on a valuation of £140/m2. The VO requested dismissal of the appeal as he considered the existing valuation to be correct. 6. All relevant factual information was agreed between the parties and the sole issue concerned the price per m2 to be applied to the valuation. Decision and reasons 7. The appeal hereditament must be valued for the purpose of non-domestic rating on the basis of the rent at which it might reasonably be expected to let from year to year on a number of assumptions (see paragraph 2(1) of Schedule 6 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988). The date of the hypothetical rent was 1 April 2015 (antecedent valuation date or AVD). Matters that affect the physical state or enjoyment of the property or the locality were to be taken as at 1 April 2017 (material day) for this appeal. When assessing the RV of any property, rating law also requires that the property must be assumed to be ‘vacant and to let’, and in the state set out in Schedule 6 of paragraph 2(7) of the Act, in relation to both the physical nature of the property and its mode or category of use. 8. In this appeal the subject hereditament has no rent on it and therefore must be valued by comparison with other similar office assessments. Mr Newbury contended that in previous lists the value for the subject property had been assessed in line with, and at a price just below, the largest assessments at Stockley Park and in comparison with assessments at Bedfont Lakes. The subject property is much larger than any assessment at either Stockley Park or Bedfont Lakes, measuring 44,883m2 and Mr Newbury argues that an allowance for quantum should result in a unit price lower than the largest Stockley Park property. The largest assessment at Stockley Park measures 27,506m2 and is valued at £155/m2; the largest at Bedfont Lakes measures 25,037m2 and is valued at £240/m2. The current valuation is based on £175/m2 and Mr Newbury argued that £140/m2 would be more appropriate. Mr Newbury also highlighted that the current valuation represents a 31% increase from the valuation in the 2010 list. 9. Mr Alford states that the subject property is located geographically in between Stockley Park and Bedfont Lakes so those sites are useful sources of rental evidence. However, he contends that the subject property is a large headquarters campus situated in its own grounds and incorporating various amenities for the 4000 staff that work at the site. In comparison, Stockley www.valuationtribunal.gov.uk Park and Bedfont Lakes are business parks containing multiple buildings of mixed use. Mr Alford provided details of rents on other office assessments, including one on Bedfont Lakes, to illustrate that higher values had been used to assess these properties. The Cisco International building on Bedfont Lakes measures 25,037.50m2 and is valued at £240/m2. This property was subject to a rent review in June 2015, two months after the AVD, but the panel notes that this was a 25 year lease and RPI indexed so considers this rent to be of limited use. The other rent presented by the Respondent that is close to the AVD is that of 450 South Oak Way, Reading, occupied by Pepsico UK. This property measures 10,229m2 and is valued at £240/m2 based on a new 10 year lease effective from 1 February 2015. The panel notes that the terms of the lease require the rent to be analysed and that the building is considerably smaller than the subject property so, again, finds this rent to be of limited use. 10. Mr Newbury has highlighted the increase between the valuation for the subject property in the 2017 list and that shown in the 2010 list. Mr Alford has supplied details on other large office assessments showing that increases of 63% and 134% have been experienced by other ratepayers but no challenges have been received as yet. The panel notes this evidence and also Mr Newbury’s point that there is still time for challenges to be made on these other properties. However, whilst the panel notes Mr Newbury’s comments regarding the percentage increases between the 2010 and 2017 lists for the subject property and others, it is mindful that the starting point for any 2017 rating list entry must be evidence which relates to the AVD, 1 April 2015, rather than from the previous rating list, as this was sourced from an entirely different pool of rental information. The rents passing were considered afresh at a revaluation when the VO sought to establish a tone of values. The whole point of a revaluation is to re- assess the demands of the hypothetical tenant and movements in the market leading to changes in rents. The panel attaches no weight to the comparisons between lists. 11. The panel does consider the two examples, provided by Mr Alford to demonstrate other large increases from the previous list, to be useful evidence of the values applied to other large office assessments. The GSK building in Brentford measures 61,350m2, thus larger than the subject property, and has been valued at £195/m2. The Microsoft Campus in Reading measures 36,306m2, is smaller than the subject property but more comparable in size than those on Stockley Park and Bedfont Lakes, and has been valued at £200/m2. These two properties were constructed in 2001 and 1997 respectively, so are of similar age to the subject property which was built in 1997. Whilst the panel acknowledges Mr Newbury’s contention that these two properties are not in the same locality as the subject property, the panel finds that these examples are useful evidence of the values applied to larger office assessments in the broader region. The panel observes that it is to be expected that properties closer to London would command higher values than a remote location such as the subject property but considers that this is somewhat off-set by the prestigious campus setting and multiple amenities enjoyed at the subject property. 12. Due to the lack of comparable office assessments in the immediate locality, details were presented on three additional large office assessments for comparison with the subject property. The Vodafone building in Newbury, Berkshire measures 42,391.50m2 and has been valued at £105/m2. The panel notes that this property is similar in size and age to the subject property, being built in 2002, but is situated further outside the London area. The Foster Wheeler building in Reading measures 31,685m2 and has been valued at £100/m2 with adjustments for raised floors and air conditioning. The panel notes that this smaller property was constructed in 1979 and therefore concludes that the lower value reflects its age. Finally, the BP Research Centre at Sunbury on Thames measures 41,445m2, similar in size to the subject property, and has been valued at £150/m2. The panel notes that this building is mixed use as it is a research centre as well as offices. Parts of the centre were constructed in 2003 but parts were built in the 1950s.