RATING ACT.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVII, Issue 65, 17 March 1936, Page 10

RATING ACT.

IS AMENDMENT NEEDED?

LOCAL BODIES' PROBLEM.

The difficulties which beset local bodies in the collection of rates that have fallen into arrears are great and are a source of anxiety, as is well known by all who have tried to gather in the revenue from defaulting ratepayers. The legal procedure in such cases appears to be quite clear in giving a local authority ample power to recover all rates and overhead expenses when the aid of tlft law is invoked.

Appearances are, however, sometimes deceptive, and while tho actual amount of rates can bo recovered without much difficulty, trouble often arises in obtaining all costs incurred in suing for the rates.

A case in point is the following: A local authority secured the judgment by substitute service against the owner 01 a property, the first mortgagee of which could not be traced. In due course application was made to the Registrar of the Supreme Court under section 79 of the Rating Act for the conduct of a rating sale, the preliminaries of which were initiated after tho local body had guaranteed (as is customary) the expenses of the rating silc, in case of a failure to dispose of the property.

After the public advertisement of intention to sell by auction the mortgagee's solicitor (presumably appraised of the position) thereby paid up judgment and subsequent rates and all costs of the summons. He declined to pay the expenses incurred in regard to the rating sale procedure, on the ground that no actual sale had taken place, and that the costs of the sale did not form paft of the judgment costs.

If this contention is correct the local authority is in the position of being unable to recover in such a case certain legitimate expenses, for which any person having any equity in the property concerned should be responsible.

The remedy would appear to be an amendment to section 79 of the Rating 1 Act.