Rating Talking Heads 2026: Empty Property Rates
After POLL, What Happens Next?
This event runs as an informal discussion with a small panel of leading and informed practitioners extracting the nuances from the selected topic - Empty Property Rates. They discuss practical issues that arise, with participants in the meeting being encouraged to listen, join in, ask questions and share comments.
| Start Date | Venue | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17 September 2026 | Virtual Discussion | £60 | BOOK |
Note: All prices are to be paid in GBP and are subject to VAT at the prevailing rate
Unoccupied property rates have generated an industry seeking to avoid or mitigate the cost to owners. This did not occur when the unoccupied rate was first introduced, but as a result of the expansion of the tax this century.
Empty Property Rates or unoccupied property rates as we should now call them, were intended to encourage property owners to let, occupy or redevelop vacant properties rather than leave them unused. Put simply, it was a tax on doing nothing.
The introduction of 100% empty rates in 2008 changed behaviours. The mitigation industry grew. Methods for mitigation included short-term occupation with boxes, stripping out, Bluetooth boxes and charitable occupation. Then came POLL.
In City of London v 48th Street Holdings Ltd & Principled Offsite Logistics Ltd [2026] EWCA Civ 970, The Court of Appeal delivered a comprehensive victory for the City of London.
- POLL’s scheme involved placing boxes containing redundant or worthless material into otherwise empty premises for the required occupation period, before removing them and claiming a fresh period of empty property relief.
- The Court of Appeal decided that wasn't rateable occupation.
- Where the sole purpose of the activity is to generate occupation for rates mitigation, with no independent commercial use or benefit, it does not amount to the “beneficial occupation” required by rating law.
- That reverses the decision below and, more significantly, The Court of Appeal expressly held that POLL v Trafford was wrongly decided.
- But how far does the decision go?
- And is this actually the end of POLL? Or will there be an appeal to The Supreme Court?
Current September's Talking Heads
- Josh Myerson FRICS Dip Rating IRRV (Hons), Head of Advisory, Montagu Evans LLP; Immediate Past Chair of the Rating Diploma Holders' Section of the RICS
- Roger Cohen, Consultant, DMH Stallard; Honorary Member of The Rating Surveyors' Association
Programme
This Talking Heads update will explore:
- What did The Court of Appeal actually decided in POLL?
- The application of the Ramsay principle to rating
- How the Rossendale case was used in POLL?
- “Beneficial occupation” – what is now required?
- What happens to box-shifting and how will the market react?
- What remains of Makro, PHE v Harlow and the earlier occupation cases?
- The significance of the 2024 changes and the 13-week reset period
- What billing authorities, ratepayers and advisers do next