THE FORESHORE VALUATION.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 178, 9 July 1884, Page 2

THE FORESHORE VALUATION.

THE COMMON SHELTON DIFFICULTY. WARM DEBATE HE VALUATION CHARGES. THE ENGINEER’S APOLOGY. "THE PRESENT ENGINEER BE REQUESTED TO RESIGN.” At the meeting of the Harbor Board last night there was a good attendance, and the public evinced the liveliest interest in the proceedings. The Board room, and the approaches to the same, was well filled. The proceedings re the foreshore valuation commenced by the Chairman (Mr. Lewis) reading the following letter from the Engineer in explanation of his conduct on the previous occasion :— " Sir,—As some inconvenience appears to have been caused by my absence from the special meeting of your Board on Tuesday last, I write this in explanation, (1.) I must first disclaim any intentional discourtesy to the Board, which has, as a whole, treated me with consideration, and express my regret that my non attendance did as it is turned out, retard the despatch of the Boards business. (2.) As to the award in the case of Common & Co., I followed the usual routine in placing the award in a closed envelope with the arbitrators and umpires charge stated on the outside. This is the usual course, and was deliberately adopted after consulting the other arbitrator who agreed with me what charges were to be made, viz., £l2 15s. to each arbitrator, and £lO 10s. to the umpire. Total, £36. (j>.) I am told by Messrs. Common and Co’s, arbitrator that he has made a private arrangement with his employers as to his fee. If this information had been given to me before the award was sent in some trouble would have been saved. Such being the case I will open the envelope and hand the award to the Board. I shall expect them to pay me £lB, that is £12155. for myself and £5 55., half the umpires fees, for which lam liable. (4.) I beg to point out that both in this case and Mr. Adair’s I have valued the whole of the buildings, including the portion above high water mark.—l am etc., J. Reynolds, Engineer.”

Mr. Lewis remarked that nothing whatever had been said about umpires. In answer to the Chairman, the Secretary said the letter had not been opened. Mr. Joyce would like to know how the valuator had arrived at his rate of charges and what percentage had been charged on the valuations. It was rot and nonsense to say that opening the letter made them Hable. They had certainly been told so by Mr. Nolan but he (the speaker) was much surprised to hear him say so much rubbish. He would not give much for such legal opinion. Talk about law ! There was neither law or order about it, and it was all nonsense. Mr. Lewis said it appeared that the Engineer had adopted the usual course in this case. Mr Joyce had never seen such an unusual course adopted towards a public body. It was certainly not a very “usual” course, but a most unusual one. Mr. Lewis pointed out that it was a case of valuation, and not arbitration. Mr. Joyce would like to know whether the two valuators differed much in their valuation, or whether they differed at all. Mr. Lewis—They must; otherwise the umpire would not have been employed. He wished to point out that the Engineer distinctly stated that he expected to be paid the sum of £lB. [The Board now sat for some minutes in silence, which was broken by Mr. Smith rising.] Mr. Smith considered that the charge made by Mr. Reynolds of £1215s as most excessive. Ho (Mr. Smith) had had considerable experience in the way of valuations, and had never known the charge to exceed £5 per day. Even when that charge was made he had to find his own horse, and go out a long distance, and put up with many inconven-

lences and hardships, in the way of camping out and shifting for himself, besides leaving all his business for several days. He had never charged more than £5 a day. He (Mr. Smith) had valued many properties, but could not think how Mr, Reynolds had arrived at the sum charged. It was close by and easily done, and he considered the charge most excessive. He should have thought that Mr. Reynolds, as an officer of the Board, would have been most lenient in his charge. He could not see how he (Mr. Reynolds) could lay claim to such a sum. lie considered that five guineas would be ample. Mr. Joyce was of the opinion that the engineer was not entitled to charge anything as it was part of his duty. He had employed several valuators at different times and had never been charged more than five guineas. In this instance the time occuppied in making the valuation could not have been more than half a day. He knew that the valuation had not been made on the Monday, but on Tuesday it was all done. He was firmly of opinion that the engineer had no right to make any charge whatever.

Mr, Hepburn agreed with the last speaker and thought the charge most excessive. Had frequently valued buildings and only charged £2. He thought the engineer’s charge much too high.

Mr. Brown also considered the charge much too high. Had often valued engines and other very valuable property, entailing considerable trouble and had only charged two guineas. The sum charged by Mr. Reynolds was far too high.

Mr. Kenny remarked that the Board did not know on what basis the Engineer had arrived at his scale of charge. In justice and fairness the Board’ should know this.

Mr. Smith said it was monstrous to suppose that a percentage could be charged upon the value of the property valued. He had valued property of such large value that if he had charged a per centage it would have amounted to a little fortune.

Mr. Reynolds here explained that he had consulted others upon this matter and had been told that it was usual to charge 1 per cent, upon the valuation. As al!the members of the Board seemed to think that the charge was too high, and sooner than take any less sum than that stated, he would not make any charge at all in this case. Mr. Kenny said many members had thought it necessary to make some very harsh remarks about this matter, but all was now explained. It appeared to be usual to charge 1 per cent. As the Engineer had now “ handsomely ” offered to make no charge, the trouble had been got over. He (Mr. Kenny) had given this subject considerable attention and was of opinion that the Engineer had a right to make a charge for Harbor Board valuations. The only other matter which remained for consideration was the umpire’s fee.

Mr. Smith said the Board had been most frank in this matter, and had not gone behind the Engineer’s back. He still repeated that the charge was most excessive and out of all proportion. He had spoken his opinion openly.

Mr. Lewis—there remains the question as to the umpire’s fee. Mr. Joyce would like to know whether there was any necessity for engaging an umpire.

The Chairman now opened the valuation, which ran as follows:—

"We, the undersigned, valuers appointed respectively by the Gisborne Harbor Board and Messrs. Common, Shelton & Co., for the purpose of assessing the value of the stores and buildings on the Gisborne foreshore near the foot of Gladstone Road, as now occupied by Common, Shelton & Co., do hereby certify that after having first appointed a referee before proceeding to the valuation, we have carefully inspected the said stores and buildings, and, in conjunction with our referee, we do hereby assess the value thereof at one thousand two hundred and seventy-five pounds (£1,275). “ Dated this Ist July, 1884. “R. J. Reynolds, 1 -r 7 , “F.DI-faub, ’j Valuers. “ J. W. Nolan, Referee.”

M. Joyce said the price at which the property was valued was fully double what it was worth and was most detrimental to the interests of the Board. It would also prevent any one bidding at the sale. The buildings were not worth anything like half the valuation. They had been erected fifteen to twenty years ago, and a large portion was absolutely rotten. He was much against the valuation as it was double the real value. He had spoken to two competent judges who valued the premises at £6OO and £650 respectively. Mr. Lewis agreed with Mr. Joyce. The valuation was very high. He could not see how the Board could now alter affairs or do anything further.

Mr. Joyce disagreed with this, as they could refuse the valuation and appoint another valuator.

Mr. Lewis could not see this, as they had agreed that the decision of the umpire should be final on both sides. The valuation was far too high, but the Board could not help itself.

Mr. Townley said the valuation must now stand, as Common and Co. would not agree to the proposed course. The valuation was so high that it would have the effect of preventing any bidding at auction, but the Board could not alter this now and would have to go on. The discussion on the valuation was out of order and the matter was entirely out of their hands. The valuation was dead against the Board, but still they must go on as there was no help for it. Mr, Joyce would call attention to the low valuation of the ground, and the high valuation of the buildings, which would have the effect of preventing bidding. Look at the valuation for Adair’s store which had been built five or six years ago for £416, and £ll extras, and now the Engineer had valued it at £460 and allowed nothing whatever for depreciation in value. Was that right, was that valuating? Mr. Lewis said the Engineer had valued all both above and below high-water mark. Mr. Hepburn—l should think he did at that price. The following letter from Mr. Nolan was then read,

" Dear Sir, —Herewith please find conditions of sale in re Common, Shelton and Co. and Adair, as amended at your request. With reference to the former, I would point out to you that the valuation has apparently been made for the whole of the building, whereas one of the clauses of the conditions provides for the license of tho portion on the foreshore only.—Yours &e., J. W. Nolan.” Mr. Lewis supposed there could be no objections to paying Mr. Nolan his fees as umpire.

Mr. Joyce said it appeared that Mr. Nolan had been apppinted before ever the valuation was made. He could not see that he was required at all.

Mr. Smith contended that this was the usual course to adopt. Mr. Townley also agreed that it was usual to appoint the umpire first. Mr. Joyce never heard of such a thing before and would like to know of a case in point. Mr. Lewis remarked that they were not there to consider points of law. Mr. Townley thought they should not be in any hurry about paying the umpire who might treat the Board in the same generous manner as the Engineer had done. (Laughter.)

The following letter was here r r ad :— " Yours of the 25th ult., covering memo of conditions of sale between Harbor Board and Adair, and Harbor Board and Common Shelton A Co., duly to hand. I forward a copy draft conditions of sale, which I think will meet both cases, but before any agreement is definitely entered into or any use made of conditions, I should the like Board to look at the following points. Judging from your letter I must presume that your Board proposes granting licenses under section 9 of the Harbor’s Act Amendment Act, 1883. This being the case, it will be necessary for your Board before making ani/ arrangement for such licenses’ to obtain from the Governor in Council an approval. Under the Circumstances of these licenses, niy reading. of tho section 9, is, that the only part of it under which you can expect from the Governor in Council, on approval, is the latter part of sub-section 4, section 9, commencing from the words " or object.” I think these proposed licenses will not come within tha meaning of the “purposes” set out in any other parts of subsection of section 9, and it is very doubtful whether they will come within the meaning of the portion of the subsection whicli I have referred to. I | would also direct the attention of your Board

to section 12 of the Harbor Act Amendment Act, 1883.—Yours Obediently,, J. W. Nolan, The conditions of sale, (which are too lengthy for insertion), were next read. In reference to the terms of payment Mr. Kenny thought the conditions of sale should state explicitly the terms upon which Messrs. Common and Co. would receive the money. Bidders should know exactly what they were buying and also the terms of payment. Mr. Townley said this was a matter of business to Common and Co. who would arrange their own matters. Mr. Joyce wished to know who in the event of the buildings changing hands, would be responsible for the rates and taxes. The Chairman —The tenant, of course. Mr. Joyce said the buildings were all valued, but the buyer would only be entitled to that portion which occupied the foreshore. He took it that the portion of the building on the borough ground above high-water mark should not have been valued but only that part which rested on the foreshore. If any one bought the buildings Common and Co. could prevent them from removing that portion which rested on the borough ground. Mr. Smith remarked that this had been provided for in the conditions of sale. The Harbor Board could only deal with that part on tho foreshore and give a title for the same, The buyer would have to take the building at his own risk and make his own arrangements with Common and Co. Mr. Lewis said the Board was not committing itself about any portion not on the foreshore. The conditions of sale re Adair’s store was next read. Mr. Townley thought Messrs. Common and Adair should state when possession could be given in the event of the property being sold. These gentlemen were present and might answer. Mr. Shelton said there were several matters in connection with the conditions of sale which required consideration. If a copy of these were given him he would give an answernext Tuesday. He was sorry to cause any delay, but the step was necessary. After some discussion as to providing the copy, it was arranged that Messrs. Adair and Common and Co. should obtain them at their own cost. In answer to a further question from Mr. Joyce it was stated that all the tanks were included in the valuation. It was finally agreed to further adjourn the matter until next Tuesday, when a special meeting of the Board would be held. Notice of Motion. Mr, Joyce gave notice of the following motion :—" Owing to the dissatisfaction at present existing as to late valuations, I beg to move that the present Engineer be requested to resign.” This terminated the subject.