Water Charges

Golden_Anemone

cathy2702 wrote: »

The capital value was based on the property market strictly in January 2005 - if your valuation is too high you really should ask for a re-valuation, getting information regarding house prices in your area at that time are easy enough now with the internet to use as evidence of appeal, also when property prices hit their peak 2007-2008 your capital value did not increase!! Swings and roundabouts really

Cate

Cate - oh that it were so easy. I bought my property in November 04 for 35,000 less than the 150,000 Jan 05 valuation from LPS. Mortgage valuation supported the price I paid. It was a run down property so worth a lot less than the going rate for the area. After 2 years of arguing with LPS they said the legislation didn't allow for any reduction because of the state of the house so I just had to lump the higher valuation.

The system is screwed against the ordinary person so that the wealthy can have their rates subsidised by everyone else and our wonderful assembly members voted for this. I wonder how many of them have benefitted from the cap on values.

sleepymy

I'd be happy to pay extra if they would stop pumping the putrid, wet dog smelling, orange coloured devils squit through our taps. I'd gladly divert all the money I spend on bottled water to them, for something I could actually stick the taste of... seriously, you can still taste the mank after it's been filtered and mixed in cordial :lipsrseal

NAR

Golden_Anemone wrote: »

Cate - oh that it were so easy. I bought my property in November 04 for 35,000 less than the 150,000 Jan 05 valuation from LPS. Mortgage valuation supported the price I paid. It was a run down property so worth a lot less than the going rate for the area. After 2 years of arguing with LPS they said the legislation didn't allow for any reduction because of the state of the house so I just had to lump the higher valuation.

Sounds like you bought your property cheap because of the condition and then improved it - is this correct?

maccaz

seatzie wrote: »

Cate I'm well aware of when the property values were set and how to find them, the point is my father in law has lived in the same house for 37 years, his rates have gone from 120 quid to 600 quid in 5 years because of imaginary property values - his actual ability to pay in the last 5 years hasn't gone up 5 fold, its a tax nothing more nothing less, put water meters in and reduce the rates bill............

as I said if values go down they just change the multiplier, yes when values peaked ratable value stayed the same, but do you think they expected the property crash?.......... its a crap system.............

Not the best system in the world, but I don't think the values of the properties are far from the mark. It was always said with the change over from the old system that there would be winners and losers.
The old system of calculating rates was based on 1971 Rental Valuation of your house. Not sure if this was any better.
I'm sure when the the 'boom' was on, your house was worth more than your current capital value, that was set by LPS, and still is.

The main problem, as Golden Anemore said, is that the capital value has been capped to £400,000 so the house worth £1,000,000 will pay the same as a house worth £400,000. That to me is not fair. But that is our MLA's as their best.

seatzie

mac - yeah my house will probably still be worth more than their valuation, however I don't actually have any more cash do I? My father in law obviously will have seen his house go from £2000 in 1972 to well over £100k now, he doesn't have any more wealth or ability to pay does he? he still works the same job, has the same bills.......as we've argued many times before, why should I pay the same amount as a house with 5 or 6 people in it? why should I pay more than people just based on the possibility that someday I may sell my house and pocket any profit that there may be left in it after this recession?...........

I've said it before, I'll pay for water, give me a meter and reduce my rates bill

Golden_Anemone

NAR wrote: »

Sounds like you bought your property cheap because of the condition and then improved it - is this correct?

Yes, that's right - I improved it over the following 3 years or so and there are things that still need doing. It would not sell for the same price as the rest of the street even now and most certainly wouldn't have in Jan 05 yet the legislation means that LPS can value it the same.

warmhands.coldheart

Sorry "Goldy" but I still think per head of population we are massivly subsidised by the rest of the UK... I know the troubles did have it's tole on a lack of investment on Infrastructure, be it roads, sewerage etc but the services (or lack of) which we recieve and expect still need to be funded somehow and we will end up paying whether we like it or not. Take for example paying for parking in Hospitals, if they were properly funded the hospitals wouldn't be looking at this as a form of income (Which I know they'd dispute is not the reason for the charges).

As for Double paying.. A bit like MP's Expenses.... I believe there should be a lot more clarity and detail on where exactly our rate payments go as this would give the public a better idea of where any potential rises are being spent..

Maybe my rates are low then compared to the rest of you.... (Ah ha.. there is a benifit to living in Craigavon:rotfl:)

I do think the folk in Belfast etc are being completely shafted on the rates... I know my inlaws are paying over £1200.. I also believe there should be a fairer system brought in with regards to Water Charging... What the hell has the size of you house got to do with the amount of water you use... as stated before on a post... if your neighbour is washing 2 cars every other day why should a pensioner living in a big house (Which they bought 50 years ago) have to pay as much if not more for water charges... One shoe DOES NOT fit all....

wifeforlife

seatzie wrote: »

Cate I'm well aware of when the property values were set and how to find them, the point is my father in law has lived in the same house for 37 years, his rates have gone from 120 quid to 600 quid in 5 years because of imaginary property values - his actual ability to pay in the last 5 years hasn't gone up 5 fold, its a tax nothing more nothing less, put water meters in and reduce the rates bill............

as I said if values go down they just change the multiplier, yes when values peaked ratable value stayed the same, but do you think they expected the property crash?.......... its a crap system.............

I was only explaining on how the system works, you seem to have a personal vendetta with me on this forum, but it's fine. Was only trying to help

I do think the rise for your FIL is very extreme and certainly seems more to do with maybe the poundages rather than the value. The old NAV system was completely redundant and no longer viable within rates - it was completely unfair to alot of people. Now it obviously was fine for your FIL but for others it was completely unjust. Anyway yes it is a tax and it is an income for the executive and the councils.

Thanks
Cate

wifeforlife

warmhands.coldheart wrote: »

Maybe my rates are low then compared to the rest of you.... (Ah ha.. there is a benifit to living in Craigavon:rotfl:)

I do think the folk in Belfast etc are being completely shafted on the rates... I know my inlaws are paying over £1200.. I also believe there should be a fairer system brought in with regards to Water Charging... What the hell has the size of you house got to do with the amount of water you use... as stated before on a post... if your neighbour is washing 2 cars every other day why should a pensioner living in a big house (Which they bought 50 years ago) have to pay as much if not more for water charges... One show DOES NOT fit all....

Yes Craigavons rates are lower than most, I'm in that area too!

I completely agree with everything you say with regards the water charges, no point in me retyping it all out

Cate

wifeforlife

Golden_Anemone wrote: »

After 2 years of arguing with LPS they said the legislation didn't allow for any reduction because of the state of the house so I just had to lump the higher valuation.

.

Capital value states that the house must be considered in reasonable and fair condition to be marketed, if you house was not and is not, you've a great case! I'd have taken it to Lands Tribunal

Some links may help people

order

Valuations

Also compare to properties in your street- link

There has been talk that they want to include the billing of water charges in with rates, but thats a huge uphill struggle, and I sincerely hope they don't mix and or confuse the two! :rolleyes:

Cate