ASSESSMENT COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LV, Issue 273, 10 April 1913, Page 7

ASSESSMENT COURT.

BOROUGH VALUATIONS. OBJECTING RATEPAYERS. The Assessment Court opened its sittings in the Magistrate's Court yesterday, before Mr. A. Crooke, S.M. A large number of objections were heard to new valuations of Borougli properties. Many ratepayers were in attendance at the Court, but when the Clerk of the Court (Mr. J. Terry) read over the list of those who had filed objections, several did not respond to their names. In opening his address, Mr. C. T. Mills, the Borough Valuer, was interrupted by Mr. D. Hutchen, who questioned his right to address the Court, asking him what authority he had for doing so. Mr. Mills replied that he was representing the borough, whereupon Mr. Crooke allowed him to proceed.

Mr. Mills then continued. There were, he said, many in the Court who were unaware why their valuations had been raised. Hitherto tiie borough had valued property on a fi per cent, basis, but he had revalued this time on a (5 per cent, basis. Owing to clerical errors in some cases wrong valuations were shown, but. there were not many such cases, and he would ask for them to be reduced. The valuations as shown were for the benefit of the town, and very many whose valuations were on the same basis were not in the Court. He thought the fact that there were only 227 objectors showed that the greater part of the ratepayers were .satisfied with the revaluation.

Mr. A. H. Johnstone, who appeared for a number of objectors, said that general dissatisfaction was felt Over the new valuations. The objections were on several counts, for the revaluing had not been done in accordance with the Rating Act. He would call evidence to prove that insufficient time had been allowed in which to examine the roll properly. The list had by law to be posted in some conspicuous spot where the public could see it, and it had not been open to the ratepayers for the legal time allowed. Insufficient time also was allowed between the date on which the borough called for applications for a valuator and the time at which the valuations were to be finished, so that it was impossible for the ' valuator to make a proper valuation of the borough. Had the time been longer, he knew of others who would have applied for the post, but who did not do so because they knew that they would not have time to do the work properly. A great deal more expense had been «ast on the objectors by the Borough's refusal to appoint assessors. There had in recent times been very little demand for land and there had been no factor which should account for any substantial rise in valuation. In some case the valuations had been increased as much as 300 per cent. Another factor to be taken into account was the rise in the price of interest, and this being so, instead of there being any substantial increase in valuations, there should be a decline.

The first case heard was that of Boon Bros,, owners of the Bungalow, Gilbert Street.

Mr. Johnstone called Francis P. Corkill, a valuer of over 30 years' experience in New Plymouth. Witness deposed to having examined section 104(5 and residence in Gilbert Street. After allowing for rates and taxes it would be worth £6O .in rent per annum. The previous value was £45, and the owners were now prepared to accept a valuation of £6O /per annum. The building cost only £9OO.

P. C. J. Bellringer, Town Clerk, said that until October last he was Borough Valuer. Mr. Mills was appointed to the position on October 14. The terms of his appointment were that he was to deliver his valuations on January 15. The list of valuations was handed to him on February 26. Witness could not say for certain whether it comprised the whole of the properties or not. As far as he knew the list was open for inspection in the Town Hall after February. 26 when the Council advertised the list for inspection, it was not really available. Order-in-Council was obtained, extending the time of objection from February 15 to March 15.

To Mr. Mills: Long before the Council {?ot an extension of time from the Department, lie (Mr. Mills) was in attendance at the Town Hall to answer an? questions.

Mr. Johnstone said he proposed to raise objection in each case in which he was engaged on the ground that certain legal formalities had not been complied with, in that the Council did not cause the list to be open for inspection bv all persons during the prescribed time.

Giving evidence in substantiation of his valuation. Mr. Mills said the building, which had 17 rooms, was three years' old. His estimate of the value of the building alone was £12.70, washhouse £3O. fencing £B. planting £4, drainage £3O (total £1322), and land £2OO. The total capital value was £1.522. The owners in town were contractors, and that would probably account for Mr. Corkill statin? that the building cost only £SOO. If that was rcallv its cost, then it was the cheapest building in town.

To Mr. Johnstone-. Tt was fairlv cogent evidence of its value that" the building was now offered for sale for £1250. The rental value of the place should lie worth about £2 a week. He was not surprised to hear that it was let ior £1 10s a week, as the tenant was a sister of one of the owners. Similarly he was not surprised to hear that the owners had paid all rates and taxes. Mr. Johnstone then applied for a reduction in this case to £OO. The case was then allowed to stand down till later in the day when, after hearing the evidence of a foreman in the employ of Boon Bros, in corroboration of that already given, his Worship reduced the valuation to £O2 10s.

Mr. C. H. Weston appeared for Alexander Shnttleworth, in order to sustain three objections. The objection in one case was withdrawn as the Borough had agreed to reduce the valuation from £32 to £27. Counsel also withdrew two objections on the part of George George, and the only point to decide •was the capital value of Mr. Shuttleworth's property at the time of its valuation. Prospective or speculative value should not be taken into account. 'J'hf property consisted of four narrow sections in Devon Street, opposite the Convent. They were not of the usual widili. and Hi" total frontage to Devon Street was 21.') feet. The buildings consisted of a store, two long timber sheds, and a mill. They were very old and practically of no value except to the owner himself. Tn spite of the numerous pronerties which he held, he had raised objection in only Hie one case. Tn lfll'2 Hie Government valuation stood at £3115. Tt was made in TflOO. There ■"•as no reasonable ."•round for assuming that Xew Plymouth values hail srone ahead to anv appreciable increase since 100(1. The Bormirrh valuation existing at the end of 1012 was £l4O. This gnve a capita? value of £2.800. The annua! value. £l4O. was a verv fair business rental. Tn the new roll th" annual value was iV'-"a«od to £4.m. This was a startlinjr increase, and it meant a total capital value of £O.IOO. Had the property rone up three times its value sir">e WOfi?

Gnorsre fin nr o P . -wiio niaiarred Vr Shiiftlewovfh's ?>.>»iness for Hie past ,<M voars. sravp ev ; dence in support of co"ns"l's contentions. To y r r He did not Vnow t?f> original cost of the buildings. They were

not worth £ISOO. He did not know •what the Government's valuation was. P. P. Corkill said he had valusd the Borough in 1889 under the old Property Tax Act since then and before he had been in close touch with valuations, He 'valued Mr. Shuttleworth's property at •£3,727 for the land and £1175 for the buildings as they stood, making a total of £4,902. The whole of the buildings Were so placed on the sections as to discount the value of the whole property. In his opinion, the property was out of j the commercial area of the town. To Mr. Mills: His valuation worked out at £l7 10s per foot for the land. He did not know it to be a fact that land beyond this property was fetching £25 per foot. Walter Bewlcy said he had been in business in New Plymouth as a valuer for 19 years. He had valued Shuttleworth's property, the Devon • Street frontage at £l4 per foot, £2,982, and the Kins; Street frontage at £lO per foot, £1.570. The buildings he valued at £650. ft was a difficult property to deal with ind for retail business equally outside, as the business was going in the other direction. The property had no attraction to a speculator. This closed the case for the objector, but Mr. Weston said lie wished to take advantage of the same point as that raised by Mr. Johnstone with reference to the validity of the valuation list. He i nsked that the valuation be reduced to £250. i

C. T. Mills, in the course of his evidence in support of his valuations, cited the case of a number of sections bevond that of Mr. Shuttleworth's which had sold at £25 per foot, and frontage to Devon Street and to King Street for £ll per foot, making £36 right through. He had valued Mr. Shuttleworth's property at £4O per foot frontage to Devon Street, because it was elose to the centre of the town, and the buildings he had assessed at £1,115, which was the same as the Government valuation. This was one of the most important cases on the whole list, and Mr. Mills asked his Worship to make an inspection of_ the property before coming to a decision. To Mr. Weston: He did not 'know whether the sales he quoted were cash transactions or merely exchanges. After inspecting the property, his Worship resumed and reduced the valuation from £455 to £275. OBJECTIONS SUSTAINED.

Evidence was also taken in a number of other cases, which were adjudicated upon ns 7 follow:—Charles Stanley Cottam (Mr. Roy) £SO, reduced to £2B; C. Arnold Jones (Mr. Eoy) ten acres of land and two cottages situate on Mill Road, £77, reduced to £OS; Ann Knott £45, reduced to £35; Francis J. Morshead (Mr. Roy) a dwelling-house and 14 acres of land used as a nursery, situate on South Road £28,5, reduced to £175; Emmaline Roy (Mr. Roy) property situate in Devon street, occupied by Messrs. McLeod and Slade, £lB7, reduced to £IG3; Mary Ann Cunningham. (Mr. Hutchcn) £7l, reduced to £55. '

_ In a number of other cases the objections were withdrawn while in regard to others it was announced that an arrangement had been arrived at with the Valuer. Shortlv after 5 p.m. the Court adjourned until 11 o'clock this morning.