LAND VALUATIONS

Dominion, Volume 26, Issue 105, 27 January 1933, Page 8

LAND VALUATIONS

Owners Still Take Unfair Advantage of State DISPOSAL OF PROPERTIES Although strong representations for their repeal have lately been renewed, the Government has not .vet decided just what steps it will take to remove the disabilities imposed by Sections 45 and 50 of the Valuation of Land Act which provide that the Valuer-General must reduce the value of any property to a sum named by the owner or else acquire the land. Under the present exceptional circumstances, when valuations generally are high and the Government is not in a position to acquire further properties, many people are stated to be taking an unfair advantage of thes >. provisions. “The strongest representations have been renewed for the amendment of the Act, but I have not yet decided what course of action I shall recommend to Cabinet,” said the Minister of Lands, Hon. E. A. Ransom, in an interview yesterday. ’ “Some organisations have proposed a fiat reduction of valuations by 25 per cent, through entire districts, but to follow such a course would throw the valuation system out of gear even more than at present, and might have injurious effects upon the mortgage securities of those districts:” Mr. Ransom said that he hoped to have the matter settled by legislation during the present session, as he regarded it as one of urgency. The extent to which some people have tried to take advantage of the Act is revealed by a case which was recently brought to the Government’s notice. A property which was bought in 1911 for £5775 had an unimproved value of £2750. Upon revaluation this value was reduced to £825. Recently the owners of the property applied for a further valuation under the terms of Section 50 of the Act. Their appeal was refused, and. the refusal was upheld by the Assessment Court. The owners thereupon took advantage of Section 45 of the Act, and applied to the Government to reduce the value to £5 or to buy the property at the valued price. Since the property was of no use to it, the Government had no alternative but to reduce the valuation accordingly. The effect of this was that. the share of six special rates carried by the property was reduced from £5B to one shilling, and that the balance of £57/19/- had to be paid by other ratepayers in the district. The Government considers that such an imposition is most unfair.