ASSESSMENT COURT.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 10032, 10 May 1898, Page 3

ASSESSMENT COURT.

ST. ALBANS AND SYDENHAM.

The Assessment Court under the Land Act was opened yesterday morning at 10 o'clock, in the S.M.* Court, before Mr R. Beetham, S.M. There was a very large attendance of objectors. ST. ALBANS. The following object-ions were dealt with: —Thomas Alhui, objectiou excessive valuation. Disallowed. Estate of George Gould (Mr G. Gould), objection to valuation on the ground of excess, the land being let by public tender at a rent which would pay net value £50 per ucre, and that the trustees would gladly sell at £75 per ucre, the Government valuation being £90 per acre. Evidence was taken on the subject of the value per acre, the witness stating that as the St. Albans Borough Council compelled the proprietors cutting up to asphalt, the subdivision of the land would be very costly and bring down the value of the land to £50 per acre. The valuator, Air S. C. Fan, gave evidence to the effect that he valued the land at fully £100 per acre, but as there were some back sections and swamp on the property it had been made at £90 per acre. The Court reduced the assessment to £85 per acre, as suggested by Mr Whitelaw. J. X. Peacock (Mr J. B. "Fisher), assessed at £3431, capital value, last assessment £2180. Mr Fisher said the property was let at £50 per annum and was used as agricultural land. Mr Fisher called evidence to show that the property was over assessed at £160 pei acre. The proper value was £110 per acre. His Worsnip reduced the assessment to £130 per j acre. S. K. Bassett, objection to assessment being too high, the valuation being £390, and Mr Bassett having sold the property for £250. The Court reduced the assessment of the capital value to the amount of the sale. J. T. Peacock (Mr J. B. Fisher) objected to on the ground of over assessment. The property, six acres, was let at £27 per annum. The last assessment of the property was £620, this time it had been raised to £1024. The valuation for assessment was £165 per acre, whereas the proper value of the land was £110 per acre. Mr Clark deposed as to his valuation being £100 per acre. The Court reduced the assessment to £130 per acre. J. T. Peacock {Mr J. B. Fisher), the objection being to the value of the improvements, which it was claimed should be put at £4450. instead of £2840, as put by the valuers. This was Mr Peacock's residence, Hawkesbury, and the valuation for improvements as put by the valuers it was claimed was absurd. The improvements on the property as a wnole had cost some £8000 or £9000. Mr Chas. Clark deposed that the unimproved value of the property was £150 per acre, £200 per acre would be an outside value. The valuer, Mr Farr, said they had valued the land at an average of £300 per acre. The Court disallowed the objection. The objections of W. Maher, G. J. M. Maher, D. Mahoney, J. Perrin, J. J. Glass, R. S. Gibson, C. E. Dickenson, J. Moles, and Mrs Grogan were also disallowed. B. H. Hemming, assessment objected to on the ground that the improved value, £282, was too much by £25. Mr Bull gave evidence in support of the objection. The objection was disallowed. Elizabeth Oliver objected on the ground of over assessment. Reduced to £220. John Foster, objected to on the ground of over valuation of the improvements. Objection disallowed. Ruth Mullins, objected- to on the ground of over assessment. This was a mistake/and the assessment stood. Ruth Mullins, objection to improved value. Reduction allowed. Ruth Mullins, objection to improved value. Reduction allowed. Edmund Green, objection to valuation as excessive, having been raised by 70 per cent, since (the bust revision. B. Bull gave evidence as to the valuation made by him of g-acre o f the property of the objector at £700. Since then Mr Green had sold a quarter-acre of the land. The property was not worth more than £400. Reduction allowed. James Moore, objected to on the ground of no interest on the part ot the lessee in the improvements assessed at £28. Objection disallowed. Benjamin Moore, objection to the assessment of the lessee's interest, £50. The objection was that the lessee had no interest in the improvements. Objection disallowed. Thomas Rowley, objection to assessment of capital value, £1-92. Objection disallowed. J. Bosomworth, objection to the .valuation as excessive, tjie former valuation being £360, whereas'now it was much increased, though there Had been a good deal of depreciation in the value of property. Objection "disallowed. H. Meech, objected to on ground of over valuation. Objection disallowed. In several cases of Church property the Church Property Trustees, having accepted the values as owners, the tenants had no standing. D. Carpenter, objection to improved value, £186, required to be reduced by £24. Evidence was brought in support of the objection. Objection, disallowed. W. H. Butler, assessment objected to on the ground of the improved value not being more than £120, the assessment being £2io. After hearing evidence the objection was disallowed. J. C. Maddison, improved value reduced by arrangement to £231 frora £384. J. F. Guiney, objection on the ground of over assessment, which was improved value £952, unimproved value £3113, the assessment being made at £300 per acre. The objection was disallowed. W. R. Flint, objection to the capital value at £300 per acre. Objection allowed- to the extent of reducing the capital value. P. Patten, objection to the land value £551 at rate of £300 per acre. Reduction allowed to £320 land value. Mary Bowers, objection to the • improved value £139, asked to be reduced to £100. Objection disallowed. B. Bull, objection in i*Cwo sections to the improved value of two houses, £187, each asked to be reduced to £150 each. These two objections were disallowed. B. Bull also objected to the improved and unimproved value of another section, which he would be willing to sell at £60, improvements and all. A reduction was made in this case.. H. Moore objected to the unimproved value and the improved value, asked to be fixed at £200 improved value and £90 unimproved. Objection disallowed. Robert Taylor, objection to improved value. P.cduced. Union Bank of Australia* objected to on ground of excessive valuation at £250 per acre, or a total of £1108. The Bank were prepared to take £750 for the land. Mr Brown, from Mr Chas. Clark's, gave evidence. The Court reduced the amount to £850. Robert Taylor, objection to improved value in two cases. Objection disallowed. T. M. Brown, objection to improved value. Improved value reduced. William Chancy, objection to improved value £291, required to be reduced to £250. Both objections disallowed. MJ. Wood, objected to on ground of excessive valuation of improvements. Objection disallowed.- Bi Bull, objection to improved value. Objection disallowed. G. Davidobjection to capital value £127. Objection disallowed. J, S. Buxton, objection to tJie unimproved value £160 per acre. Objection disallowed. S. L. Bull, objection to improved value. Objection disallowed. A. Brockett, objection to improved value. Reduction allowed. G. G. Stead (Mr W. B. Cbwtishaw), unimproved value £2048, reduced to £1395 by arrangement. G. B. Ritchie, reduced by arrangement. Mr Studholme (Mr Bftchie), reduced by arrangement. J. Highsted's trustees, reduced by arrangement. Phoebe Garforth, objected to on the ground of excessive valuation: Reduced by arrangement. J. Waller, objection to unimproved value. . Reduced as asked. A very large number of other objections in St. Albans and Sydenham were dealt with, the Court sitting to a late hour.