Not Another Charity Shop

13 posts in this topic

Posted

I see the health shop could be turning in to barnardos, soon the high street will have nothing but charity shops and hair saloons!!

:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I see the health shop could be turning in to barnardos, soon the high street will have nothing but charity shops and hair saloons!!

:(

Like the idea of a hair saloon. Like a wild west style barber shop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If one has to have a charity shop, Barnardo's is one of the best. The branch in Chalfont St Peter is very well organised, with a great selection of Christmas and other greetings cards etc., and they also have an award winning window display, which changes with the seasons ( 3 Kings at Christmas, Easter bunnies, regatta and Ascot themes etc.). They have been there for years and are a part of the community over there. And most importantly, it's a highly respectable and effective children's charity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Barnardos it is. Things are getting ridiculous. I saw the same thing happen in Ealing/West Ealing. All the normal brand shops closed to be replaced by charity and 99p stores. The high road there is now dead and very very run down. I don't understand how the town council can allow us to be swamped by hairdressers and charity shops. I guess it's down to who is willing to rent a site but surely the TC should be promoting to a diverse range of businesses? Presumably the lack of variety and to some degree quality on the high road reduces footfall and therefore desirability?

I really only go to the High road now for Waitrose or Robert Dyas. Occaisionally the record shop and WH Smiths.

How can we get a decent High Road? Chorleywood have managed it much better than we have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Don't blame the Town Council - and the District planners have little control. I am sure they all want to see a vibrant shopping centre. Councils are not the owners of the properties and have no say over who the landlords rent to.

It's a vicious circle - 'chicken and egg': which comes first, the shops or the shoppers. Presumably retailers willl only invest in the town if they foresee the footfall necessary to a successful business. When I shop in AotH it tends to be mainly Woodside Road area -specialist local small traders. Do we have an active trade association these days? Or has that been swept away by the national chains lack of local involvement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

We used to see posts on this forum from local groups saying local traders would not take part in things such as the Christmas lights. There have also been stories for years saying the rents were very high in the area hindering shops developing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Presumably there is some accounting trick that makes an empty shop look better on the landlord's balance sheet than one earning a rent that is affordable by a local business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think I am right in saying that landlords do not pay Council Tax on empty buildings and a very much reduced rate (is it only 20% ?) if occupied by a charity. So.... Bucks County Council gets very, very little business rates but the landlord's building is rising in value - doesn't seem fair to me.

Very happy to hear if this wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think I am right in saying that landlords do not pay Council Tax on empty buildings and a very much reduced rate (is it only 20% ?) if occupied by a charity. So.... Bucks County Council gets very, very little business rates but the landlord's building is rising in value - doesn't seem fair to me.

Very happy to hear if this wrong.

Not sure this is quite right - I thought shops paid the uniform business rate, which goes to national government. But I think the general thrust of what you're writing is correct, that there is little or no rate charged on empty buildings, and the rate charged for charitable entgerprises is much lower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Landlords have to pay full business rates on empty property. But when the property is let, the tenant pays the business rates. Charities get 80% discount on business rates, so it's more affordable for them. So if a landlord has a building that is empty, they can cut their own expenses by letting to a charity. I think that's why the Starbucks unit is being used - I guess whoever is using it is paying little or no rent to the landlord but covering the (discounted) business rates.

Retail property values have risen by 0.9% over the last 10 years in Buckinghamshire according to the Investment property databank. So I guess the landlord's return comes mainly from income - which explains why they would be so anxious to get ANY tenant into an empty retail unit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Retail property values have risen by 0.9% over the last 10 years in Buckinghamshire according to the Investment property databank. So I guess the landlord's return comes mainly from income - which explains why they would be so anxious to get ANY tenant into an empty retail unit.

I'm not sure how that squares with increasing rents to the point that shops close down though - both Nicolas and Starbucks closed due to rent increases making those units unprofitable. I presume the landlords (think they) know what they are doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm not sure how that squares with increasing rents to the point that shops close down though

I think we need an accountant to explain. There must be some book keeping ju-ju that makes no rent at all look better than a lower rent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Sometimes a tenant will still be paying rent on unit they've vacated as they have signed the lease for a number of years. The shop is vacant but still incoming producing from the landlord's point of view. Why would a landlord then relet at a lower rent? I dont' think it's 'book keeping ju-ju'. Just the way the UK property market works, which is hugely in favour of the landlord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now