VOA want to visit...

lincroft1710

Sounds like another standard letter

lincroft1710

jimmo - in the VOA "proposal" and "appeal" are more or less synonymous. The District Valuer does not deal with CT, the DV is that part of the VOA which deals with valuations for central/local government for acquisitions/disposals and IHT and CGT.

Council Taxpayers can appeal their band by making a proposal. The form is called "Proposal to alter the Valuation List" and can be either completed online or by hard copy.

There is no "innocent" or "guilty", the VOA has to decide if the current band is correct or should be altered in accordance with CT payer's request. If VOA believe band is correct then CT payer is asked if he wishes to withdraw his proposal. If proposal not withdrawn then the Valuation Tribunal will determine the matter at a hearing at which both parties are invited to attend. The Tribunal then consider all the evidence put to them by the parties and make their decision based on this evidence.

If a proposal were made asking for alteration to existing band it would probably be rejected as invalid as it did not specify what alteration should be made in Valuation List. The VOA would not increase a band unless it was clearly too low, has no interest in whatever "tax" would be lost (although the billing authority might be), nor would the cost of taking such an appeal to VT be considered.

The word "court" has not been used in connection with CT appeals for many years. It is "tribunal" and "hearing" now.

If dfarry filled in a proposal form on line then he has definitely appealed.

dfarry

Well I have received the outcome of my appeal....

It makes for depressing reading and leaves me feeling... Give up! but then I stop an think that why should I pay £1200 more than I used to pay for similar services that I use no more or less now.... but because I've got a bigger house I'm fair game

I couldn't find it online but if this information is in the public domain and you are interested in reading it then see Appeal No. 223516230C/9 (Trapham Road) Tunbridge Wells Valuation Office

First question on area... the response I have received highlights some 6 post war detached properties in the same town and the "size" in metres square, plus the prices they sold at or near 1/4/1991. The properties vary in value from £122 - £195k and the floor area from 135m2 - 190m2... the bands are a mixture of F and G. In my case the property floor area has been indicated as 179m2. Is this simply the downstairs floor area/perimeter of the house structure that is doubled for the second floor? Or is the calculation a bit more complex?

Then to justify their decision that the F banding is correct they have included the outcome of an appeal for a "non-extended" post war detached house in the same town but it does have a smaller size at 124m2.

All of these properties are as I said in the same town but arguably in a better location (OK nicer part of town) and are certainly not within the grounds of a school. The appeal was heard on the 12th Oct. 1995 and the occupiers put forward a very strong case from what I can see. The appeal has referred to occupers in neighbouring houses and comment on for example the fact that other homes nearby might adversely affect the value of the property concerned and that properties of a similar kind were selling under the £120K amount in 1991.

Suffice to say there are quite a few very strong arguments for a rebanding from band F to E.... The houses in this road all seem quite similar though and form part of a private estate so to that extent they are comparable. I also note that the majority of the houses seem to have been valued in Band F and the majority of occupants just accepted it. There is however a statement that the house in question is not comparable to those that are in Band F. It appears that there were other appeals at the time and there was a risk that rebanding any one of the properties would set a precedence.

Despite all of this the Listing Officer with the appeals documents and "sales evidence" (see below) support the Band F valuation on the property in question, and even states that a neighbouring road will re-examined for their values (presumably upwards!). This all seems cut and dried to me.... a foregone conclusion! and I am likely to face the same thing.

The sales evidence intrestingly refers to properties sold in 1990 before the recession of the early 90's started to hit house prices and yet everyone of the houses is just over the magic £120K point.... now I am really getting cynical!!

Despite all this, our house is quite unique... one of kind even... it has many plus points but also some negatives I still contend that a jump of two bands is not correct based simply on a theoretical 1991 valuation using properties in another part of town that themselves were perhaps over valued by the VOA..... the problem I have is now proving it

EDIT: Just to add, reading the document I was sent it appears that although it relates to the appeal for one property it actually forms part of a group appeal for properties in the same road that were all revalued from band E to F in 1995. Did the VOA have some vested interest (or pressure) to ensure that all these properties were valued as F - each of the occupiers put up a strong case from a Band E and the sales of properties at lower prices post 1990 recession seem to support a lower sale value. Suffice to say it looks like all the appeals were lost and subseuqent owners have accepted the valuation and banding as set back in 1995.

lincroft1710

Dfarry - houses and bungalows are measured to Gross External Area, the external areas (perimeter) of all floors are added together.

House prices started falling from late 1989 right through to about late 1995.

dfarry

Appeal Dismissed....

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2223257

lincroft1710

At least you tried.

dfarry

Hi all, Tribunal Part Deux!

Also dismissed... check it out here... https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2223257

:think: