Voa has 2 addresses land registry 1

jillbb_2

I bought a commercial property in 2019 registered as one address 2 floors of the property are occupied and get business rate relief the 2 upstairs floors are almost derelict in 2022 our local council sent me a business rates bill for the derelict part of the property as it appeared to be under a separate address with the voa I said it was all purchased as one property and was told I would get a summons if I didn’t pay the backdated £4000 and I could claim a refund if I merged the 2 properties with voa I tried several times to merge them but they wouldn’t accept my proof ….one been in with this for a while now and getting nowhere we have now asked for a refund and the council are saying because it hasn’t been mentioned that the upstairs is derelict with our dealings with the voa we can’t have a refund but most of the confusion is the fact that there are 2 different addresses when we purchased it as one
anyone any ideas please 

elmer

The VOA will need to merge the PRNs so I would go back to them asap to see what is possible
 they are unable to amend the roll for previous years so you may well be out of time now for a backdated entry  

Savvy_Sue

I'm hoping someone more knowledgeable will be along shortly, but it is definitely the case that different parts of the same building can have separate liabilities for business rates, and therefore be separately listed with the VOA. The ownership of the whole building may be with one entity, but 'occupiers' of the separate parts will normally be the ones liable for the business rates, and for negotiating with the VOA if, eg, size has changed. (If you were able to claim charity relief, that would be through the Council, not VOA.)

I'm wondering what the history of the derelict part of the building is in relation to business rates? And what 'proof' are VOA asking for? It's possible your argument has to be that the top floors are not usable / lettable / separate from the rest of the building, BUT the rateable value is, AIUI, at least partly based on floor area. 

This may well be something you have to get 'proper' legal advice on. In your purchasing due diligence, was rateable value covered?

Bookworm225

@lincroft1710 - can you help?

lincroft1710

If there are 2 addresses for NDR, then the assumption would be that prior to the OP's purchase there were 2 separate occupations. However if the OP is not occupying the upper 2 floors, this may still be correct. This can be confirmed if for example the OP bought the building as @jillbb_2, but his company occupying the lower floors is @jillbb_2 Trading Ltd.


"Derelict" is a very subjective term and in practice the VOA rarely give guidance as to what constitutes a derelict property. From personal experience many so-called derelict properties are just in a poor state of repair.


I think it would help if the OP asked the VOA for the exact reason they will not merge the two. They may be able to appeal the VOA decision and present a case to the Valuation Tribunal

Savvy_Sue

lincroft1710 said:

If there are 2 addresses for NDR, then the assumption would be that prior to the OP's purchase there were 2 separate occupations. However if the OP is not occupying the upper 2 floors, this may still be correct. This can be confirmed if for example the OP bought the building as @jillbb_2, but his company occupying the lower floors is @jillbb_2 Trading Ltd.


"Derelict" is a very subjective term and in practice the VOA rarely give guidance as to what constitutes a derelict property. From personal experience many so-called derelict properties are just in a poor state of repair.


I think it would help if the OP asked the VOA for the exact reason they will not merge the two. They may be able to appeal the VOA decision and present a case to the Valuation Tribunal

Just who I was hoping for ... 

Although, am I right in thinking that the liability to rates on the upper floors may (will?) remain, because at least one of the considerations is floor area?

lincroft1710

Savvy_Sue said:

lincroft1710 said:

If there are 2 addresses for NDR, then the assumption would be that prior to the OP's purchase there were 2 separate occupations. However if the OP is not occupying the upper 2 floors, this may still be correct. This can be confirmed if for example the OP bought the building as @jillbb_2, but his company occupying the lower floors is @jillbb_2 Trading Ltd.


"Derelict" is a very subjective term and in practice the VOA rarely give guidance as to what constitutes a derelict property. From personal experience many so-called derelict properties are just in a poor state of repair.


I think it would help if the OP asked the VOA for the exact reason they will not merge the two. They may be able to appeal the VOA decision and present a case to the Valuation Tribunal

Just who I was hoping for ... 

Although, am I right in thinking that the liability to rates on the upper floors may (will?) remain, because at least one of the considerations is floor area?

Floor area will most definitely affect the Rateable Value, but the prime consideration is ABET (Actual, Beneficial, Exclusive and not too Transient) - full explanation here 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/rating-manual-section-2-maintaining-the-rating-list/part-1-list-alterations-without-service-of-vo-notice-and-the-impact-of-address-onl

Savvy_Sue

lincroft1710 said:

Savvy_Sue said:

lincroft1710 said:

If there are 2 addresses for NDR, then the assumption would be that prior to the OP's purchase there were 2 separate occupations. However if the OP is not occupying the upper 2 floors, this may still be correct. This can be confirmed if for example the OP bought the building as @jillbb_2, but his company occupying the lower floors is @jillbb_2 Trading Ltd.


"Derelict" is a very subjective term and in practice the VOA rarely give guidance as to what constitutes a derelict property. From personal experience many so-called derelict properties are just in a poor state of repair.


I think it would help if the OP asked the VOA for the exact reason they will not merge the two. They may be able to appeal the VOA decision and present a case to the Valuation Tribunal

Just who I was hoping for ... 

Although, am I right in thinking that the liability to rates on the upper floors may (will?) remain, because at least one of the considerations is floor area?

Floor area will most definitely affect the Rateable Value, but the prime consideration is ABET (Actual, Beneficial, Exclusive and not too Transient) - full explanation here 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/rating-manual-section-2-maintaining-the-rating-list/part-1-list-alterations-without-service-of-vo-notice-and-the-impact-of-address-onl

That link doesn't work on my phone ...

Bookworm225

Savvy_Sue said:

lincroft1710 said:

Savvy_Sue said:

lincroft1710 said:

If there are 2 addresses for NDR, then the assumption would be that prior to the OP's purchase there were 2 separate occupations. However if the OP is not occupying the upper 2 floors, this may still be correct. This can be confirmed if for example the OP bought the building as @jillbb_2, but his company occupying the lower floors is @jillbb_2 Trading Ltd.


"Derelict" is a very subjective term and in practice the VOA rarely give guidance as to what constitutes a derelict property. From personal experience many so-called derelict properties are just in a poor state of repair.


I think it would help if the OP asked the VOA for the exact reason they will not merge the two. They may be able to appeal the VOA decision and present a case to the Valuation Tribunal

Just who I was hoping for ... 

Although, am I right in thinking that the liability to rates on the upper floors may (will?) remain, because at least one of the considerations is floor area?

Floor area will most definitely affect the Rateable Value, but the prime consideration is ABET (Actual, Beneficial, Exclusive and not too Transient) - full explanation here 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/rating-manual-section-2-maintaining-the-rating-list/part-1-list-alterations-without-service-of-vo-notice-and-the-impact-of-address-onl

That link doesn't work on my phone ...

try the long way starting from the section 2 index?

Rating Manual section 2: valuation principles - Guidance - GOV.UK