R.A. Stephenson and W.E. Stephenson v East Riding of Yorkshire Council

摘要

11. There are three factors relating to Mr Preston's evidence that concern me. Whilst he has, rightly in my view, allowed additions to the cost of works assessed by UKBS Plc (in 2009 and not updated to 2012) to bring the subject property up to a standard which will be acceptable under the relevant refurbishment requirements of the council's Empty Homes Policy, he has not specified what those costs are so that a total refurbishment cost can be established. He has also not given any evidence as to what precisely he thinks the value of the subject property would be at the valuation date were it to be in sound, habitable and marketable condition if the refurbishment costs had been expended. 12. Secondly, his adjustments of the comparables produced a very wide range of potential values and furthermore no adjustments for time have been made (for instance by reference to relevant house price indices), such that I find I can apply little weight to his conclusions.