PENALTY ON OVERDUE RATES

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21117, 19 March 1934, Page 9

PENALTY ON OVERDUE RATES

TO THE EDITOR Or THE IRE--. Sir.—Some of your correspondents have lately brought up the matter of the penalty on overdue rates, and one can only form the opinion that the whole system needs overhauling. It seems that a local body has power to impose this 10 per cent, penalty, and then almost immediately to sue for it, together with the rute itself. If ratcpavcrs are unable to pay the amount due, how can they be expected to pay another 2s in the pound? Further, if a local body were to exercise its powers, and were to hurry the proceedings, the 10 per cent, might easilv amount to 40 per cent, per annum," or even more. Considering that their security is equal to a first mortgage of the safest kind, o per cent, is quite er.oujjhuto pay. and the 10 Decent, should *arry on for two years. I think it would take some to get this 10 per cent, penalty under the heading of fair trading. No tradesmen could honestly give such a rebate, and in the rush to get it the other creditors are squeezed out. Even the tctahsator would have to take second place. The bodies concerned say that they are compelled to impose'a penalty and then collect jt: but it would be easy eitoush to dod'e it if they honestly tried to. I believe thev will not even remit the line on a part payment, so that on a rate of. sr.v. £IOO. if £OO were paid in liri". the penalty would sJill be £10: or' so I understand it. As for | posinoninc the due date, that will not I "much heln the ratepayers who are I hard up. and who are trying to spread their payments honestly and evenly; over all 'their debts. The rate has to i be collected eventually; but the prcs- j cut is not a suitable time for harshness, i p.r.d for the authorities to make a ] virtue of it. —Yours, etc., I T.A.S. i March 18. 1931. ;