PROPERTY
PERPETUITY
Log inSign up

Commercial · Originally published · 2 min read

Viewpoint: small-office landlords should test demand rather than assume a return

An accountancy-sector commentator questions whether familiar high-street tenants will need the same offices. Firm counts and office demand are different measures.

Property Perpetuity editorial illustration for “Viewpoint: small-office landlords should test demand rather than assume a return” — propertyperpetuity.com
Illustrative artwork · Property Perpetuity

Sign in to save this for later →

Facebook ↗LinkedIn ↗

Small-office landlords should examine the changing needs of local occupiers rather than assume that a general return to office working will restore demand for every suite. That is the central argument of a PropertyWire opinion piece by Ian Gargett, managing director of Rapport Digital, published on 4 November 2026.

Gargett, whose marketing business works with accountancy firms, points to consolidation, retirement and technology as factors changing the profession. He argues that a business can continue serving clients while requiring fewer separate premises. His contribution suggests landlords consider what occupiers want from fitted space or examine other potential uses.

The argument is a viewpoint, not proof that a particular office will become vacant. A count of firms is not a count of occupied premises: a merger can change the former without establishing the latter. Similarly, national or central-London evidence cannot determine demand on an individual high street. This article does not repeat the contributor’s statistical calculations as independently verified findings.

Start with the local evidence

Before committing to refurbishment, ask local commercial agents about actual enquiries, recently agreed terms and competing space. Separate the asking rents advertised from the terms achieved. Ask which property features appear to matter to the occupiers making enquiries now.

Discuss a specific specification rather than a broad promise of modernisation. A prospective tenant may value a practical layout, reliable services or a ready-to-use fit-out, but the landlord needs evidence before deciding what to provide. Record which proposed works are based on confirmed interest and which are a speculative improvement.

Review the options consistently

Compare retaining the current layout, carrying out targeted work and exploring an alternative use using the same assumptions about timing and costs. Ask appropriate advisers about lease obligations, building condition, planning and finance. A commentary article cannot establish that a conversion is permitted or commercially sensible for your building.

Include a period without rent in the financial discussion and identify the spending that would be difficult to recover if demand disappoints. Avoid treating a possible new occupier as a confirmed letting.

The useful challenge in Gargett’s piece is to reconsider assumptions about familiar tenant types. The response should be a property-specific evidence file and a proportionate plan, rather than a conclusion that all small offices face the same future.

Source: Ian Gargett, PropertyWire, 4 November 2026. This is commentary, not a valuation or investment recommendation.

Reference source ↗