“Showdown” Needed On Valuation Question Of Native Reserve

Grey River Argus, 21 March 1947, Page 2

“Showdown” Needed On Valuation Question Of Native Reserve

Concerning an application by J. A. Rugg (Mr M. Jamieson) to sell a property in Tainui Street, Greymouth, to Peters' Shoes, Ltd., for £ll5O, it was pointed out to the Committee that agreement had been reached on the value of the improvements (£718) and the only item now requiring settlement was that of the value of the land. Mr Shallcrass had valued the land at £5OO, adding that the Government had, in 1941, placed the valuation at £229. This, on the basis of the approved sale of the adjoining section, gave a figure of £496. Mr Shallcrass declined to agree with Mr Bell that on his calculations the property was worth £650 as a freehold. The Crown called Mr E. A. Warnes, who stated that he valued the property at £420 (freehold) with a lessee’s interest of £96, and the ground rent at £7 10s yearly. Mr R. 11. Bell. Commissioner of Crown Lands', suggested the time'Avas fast approaching when a “show down’’ would be necessary on the question of the valuation of leasehold properties in Greymouth. Mr Wallace, chairman of the Westland Land Sales Committee, said such a show down would indeed be welcome.

That it was likely that prices nowbeing paid for leasehold would be taken into consideration when the renewal of the leases was- intended, was the opinion of Mr Bell. He emphasised that the £425 placed on the land by the Crown in the case under consideration represented its freehold value.

“There is an opportunity for the Crown or the vendor in this case to appeal against the Committee’s decision”, said Mr Wallace, adding that the Committee actually invited an appeal if it was considered that the decision was l erroneous. The matter would then be dealt: with by the Higher Court, and the issue settled once and for all, he said.

Mr Wallace pointed out to Mr Bell that, if Ins basis were accepted, the value of the section under consideration would be £22 10s instead of £425. Mr Eell asked the Committee not to approve of the sale at £420, for the purchaser would have to pay that, and then in 1952, when his rental was reviewed, he would find himself paying a substantially increased rate based on the purchase price. Mr J. W. Greenslade (member of the Committee): “Could the Committee assume that there will be an increase in rentals?”

Mr Bell replied that the price fixed by the Committee would be the basis on which future rentals would be based.

When recalled, the Crown valuer (Mr E. A. Warnes) said the section would have been sold in 1942 for £420, in spite of the fact that it was known there was an annual rental to be paid. Mr Wallace, in giving the Committee’s decision to reduce the price to £1143, and fixing the value of theland at £425, said every opportunity would be offered for an appeal to be made against the finding. Where ground rentals were somewhere in line with the five per cent, basis, then, as in a recent Cobden sale, the Committee did not take them into account, he added. In this case, the rental was in line with the genera! rentals in Greymouth, and there seemed to be no justification for a departure from the stand taken on this' issue since the inception of the Court, he concluded.