GOVERNMENT VALUATIONS

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 25, 31 January 1933, Page 6

GOVERNMENT VALUATIONS

' (To the Editor.) Sir,—The Hon. Mr. Ransom has surely supplied a conclusive argument why the provisions of sections 45 and 50 of "The "Valuation of Land Act" should not be repealed. It is these sections of the Act which permit a property holder to apply' for a new Government valuation of his ■ .property (at his own expense), and also to offer the property to the Government ■at his own valuation if he is dissatisfied with the Government valuation as reviewed by the Assessment Court. Mr. Pansom cites a case in which a property was valued by the Government, at £825, exclusive of the value of the improvements (which were worth £3025 in Mil). This valuation was confirmed by the Assessment Court. The new valuation ot the improvements is not stated. The owner of the property then offered it to the Government at £5, but

the Government declined to buy, even at this figure, because Mr. Ransom states, "the property was no use to it"! It seems clear that the new Government valuation was absurdly high, and the case throws, a peculiar light on the judgment of the Assessment Court,.which said that the unimproved value of the property was one hundred and sixty-five times more than the Government refused to buy it at, with all the improvements given in! ' The Act states that Government valuation must be "the fair selling value," and it shows how property owners need the present safeguards when the Government won't give £5. for a property which their own valuers and Court say is worth £825, plus the value of the improvements. The fact is that the agitation to repeal the above sections of "The Valuation of Land Act" is being carried on by representatives of local bodies, who have largely over-borrowed on their. assets, but if the agitation is successful, it. will put very many property owners in; a parlous"plight by assessing them for rates and taxes on fictitious values, against -which they will have no redress. ~r ■-_;■■.., :■'

The Assessment Court ii a Court to keep values up, and taxpayers - have no representation 'on, it. The President and one assessor are .appointed-by the Government, presumably on the advice or endorsement of the Valuer General, and the other assessor is appointed by ': the inlferested local body. . In< case; of conflict, the President can overrule both assessors. The right given to a-dissatisfied property owner to apply for a revaluation (at his own.'-expense), under section 50, and also the right to offer his freehold to the Government, if he is dissatisfied with ' the' Assessment Court's value (section 45) have in the past been the most. effective safeguards against the vagaries and .mistakes of the Government Valuers and the Assessment Court. It will be a retrograde step to take these'rights away, and unless property owners make their protests heard at once, they may be lost this session. It js to be hoped that at least the Chambers'of Commerce will'wake up before it is too late.—l am, etc.,- ■_ _, "SISSYPHUS." Wanganui, 30th January. •'..""