SIX MONTHS LATE

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 878, 23 January 1930, Page 7

SIX MONTHS LATE

PENALTY ON MT. ALBERT RATES NEW VALUATION ROLL The statutory 10 per cent, penalty on unpaid rates for 1929-30 cannot be enforced by the Mount Albert Borough Council until six months and 14 days later than is ordinarily the case. This delay follows upon the decision of Mr. Justice Blair in the Supreme Court late last year that the council could not sue for rates for the current financial year because the demands were assessed on a valuation roll that was in use before rating on unimproved values was adopted. The roll which was used contained unimproved valuations besides capital values, but his Honour held that the roll was not a new one. which the Valuer-General was required to supply under the Rating Act, and further that ratepayers had had no opportunity of objecting to their unimproved assessments figuring on the roll. The council issued its rate demands on the figures in this roll because the Valuer-General held a new roll unnecessary and refused to supply the council with a new roll. That official has changed his attitude since the Supreme Court’s decision, and the Auckland Valuation Office is now bustling to complete the new' unimproved values roll. No revaluation of the borough has been made, but ratepayers will have the opportunity of objecting to their assessments before the Assessment Court. It is unknown whether any reductions in unimproved figures appearing on the old roll have been made in the new roll, and a Sun reporter, who approached the Valuation Department on the subject yesterday, was told that ‘‘interviews with newspaper people were not permitted!” The Mount Albert town clerk, Mr. H. Utting, says the new demands based on the new roll will be issued in a week or two and will be the same as those presented on the old roll six months ago. Because of the Supreme Court’s decision, however, the 10 per cent, penalty cannot be imposed until six months and 14 days have elapsed from the date of issue of the demands —six months later than usual. The penalty would have gone on in ordinary circumstances next month. Every ratepayer, therefore, will be responsible for payment of 1929-30 rates. The rates demanded for the current financial year total £74,323 compared with £60,935 the previous 12 months. To date £13,572 has been paid compared with £16,010 to the corresponding time last year. The attitude of refusal to pay is being adopted by some ratepayers, but it is pointed out that, 14 days after the issue of the new demands, the council can sue for recovery of the dues. _