Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CASTLEPOINT VALUES

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION PETITION DISALLOWED In the report of the Valuation of Land Commission, to which was referred tho petition of certain ratepayers in the Castlepoint County, protesting against tho values imposed upon their lands, there appears the following statement of the petitioners' case and the findings of the Commission thereon:—

The petition was as follows: — "Whereas on examination of the valuations rolls giving the revaluations of properties in the four ridings of the Castlepoint County, as estimated by the Government Valuer for.the year commencing April 1, 1913, shows an average increase en the unimproved value, in the North Riding of 30.3 per cent.; in the East Riding of 31.9 per cent.; in the West Riding of 355.9 per cent.; and in the SoLth Riding of 79.2 per •■'-lit. on the prsvious valuations; "And whereas in our opinion the increase in value ui tlie South Riding should have hown but little diffeience from that in tho other ridings in the county, and we are quite at a loss to discover any adequate grounds for belioving that there has been such an extremely disproportionate increase in the unimproved value of property in this riding compared with tho other ,riding 6;

"And whereas, also, by this great increase in our valuations the burden of the county rates is largely transferred from the ratepayers of each of the other ridings to us of the South Riding; "We, therefore, respectfully petition you to cause a readjustment of the valuations to be made, with a viow of placing us on a fair footing with the ratepayers in the other ridings, and rectifying the injustice which we believe has been done to ns."

The case for the petitioners wa6 conducted by Mr. H. H. S. Ryder, of Langdale. He stated that the petitioners were satisfied generally with the valuations of their own properties, but considered that the North, East, and West Ridings of the county had been undervalued, with the result that the South Riding had to bear a larger share of the burden of the local rates.

The evidence satisfied us that land in the South Riding is generally of better quality than land in the other ridingg, and, moreover, has considerably appreciated in value in recent years. We were not satisfied that land in the other ridings bad been undervalued. The evidence showed that in the East, North, and West Ridings considerable increases had been made > in the Government valuation of unimproved values of 1912 upon previous valua'tipn of 1907. For example, some properties in the East Riding had been increased by 60, 68, 70, and 94 per cent, respectively; in the North Riding by 50 and 61 per cent.; and in the West Riding by 50, 100, 127, and 313 per cent.; and sales were quoted in support of valuations in each of tho four ridings. The evidence was largely directed to the Annedale property, situate in the West Riding, which the petitioners thought was valued too low m comparison with their properties. This property, which was valued at £6 Bs. per acre capital value, was stated to carry practically two sheep to the acre, and to fatten ail the surplus stock produced each year, and also the bullocks off the hilly country. It was brought out in evidence, however, that there were three separate owners of three different parts of the Annedale property, and that as each of those owners was the rateable occupier of 1 her part of the property, there had, in accordance with Section 6 of the Valuation of Land Act, 1908, to be a separate valuation of each of these parts, cach part being consequently treated as a separate and distinct holding. Although the property as a whole was sufficiently served with roads, yet the back portion, which was stated to be twelve miles from the main road, had no legal means of access of its own. The whole property is, however, worked as one holding. In these circumstances we do not consider that the three separate parts of the property, treated as three separate holdings, liavo been undervalued. At the same time, it appears to ns that the manner in which tho property has been subdivided has caused the total of the valuations of the separate parts to be considerably less than the property a-s a whole would be valued at. ■ ■

•l'ho unimproved values of the Annedalo property were increased at the recent valuations as follows' Vahia- Val nation tion Acreage. Owner. of 1907. of 1912. «fi •& 6,863 Mrs. Bnrge and Miss 23,878 30,910 Williams 3,445 Mrs. Hoare 7,413 11,627 5,366 Mrs. Reed and Miss 15,998 22,805 E. C. Williams ' 15,680 47,289 65,312 This shows a total increase in tfee unimproved value of £18,053. Having carefully considered the evi» denco adduced, we are of opinion thai, the petitioners have not substantiated the matter of their petitioa.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19150421.2.18

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2441, 21 April 1915, Page 5

Word count
Tapeke kupu
812

CASTLEPOINT VALUES Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2441, 21 April 1915, Page 5

CASTLEPOINT VALUES Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2441, 21 April 1915, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert