FUTILE OBJECTIONS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVII, Issue 17429, 26 March 1920, Page 6

FUTILE OBJECTIONS.

CONTENTIONS OF LANDLORD.

PROPERTY " TOO MUCH TROUBLE."

Objection to the valuation of a nuirrber of his properties on the ground Chat the values were excessive was made by Mr. J. H. Hannan before the Assessment Court for the City of Auckland yesterday. In respect to a property in Federal Street on which two buildings were assessed respectively at £20 and £30, Mr. Hannan said that last year the buildings bad been valued at £10 and £12 respectively. He was receiving 7s 6d a week for one and ,10s 9d a week for the other. One had been condemned by the City Council and would shortly be vacated.

It was stated by the city valuer that the property- was a valuable building site, with a frontage of 27 J ft, worth about £40 a foot. The valuation had been computed on the capital Value. according to the provisions of the Act.

Mr. Hannan protested against some of his properties being valued on the capital value and others on the rental value.

The chairman, Mr. J. W. Poynton, S.M., said provision had been made in the Act for rating on the capital value for the purpose of getting owners of valuable sites to place suitable buildings on them. Other people had to pay rates on costly buildings to provide improvements for the city. The valuation was sustained.

In respect to the valuation, of a house and fiv. srtsa of land at Victoria Avenue, Remaera, at the rental value of £140, Mr. Haniuta applied for a reduction to £80. He • <atod thai? the renting value of the properly was not more than £2 a week, and allowing for the statutory reduction of 2D per cent, this would bring the valuation to £80. The valuation had been raised last year to £130, and his objection had been thrown out on a technical point. Mr. Hannan said he would now rake the technical objection that the house was not finished, and that rates could not bo levied on an unfinished building. It transpired that the house contained thirteen rooms, eight of which were occupied by the objector, the interior of five of the rooms not having been completed. The technical objection was disallowed by the chairman.

Mr. Harman said the property had cost him £1200, and he had been paying rates on it for nothing ever since Remuera had joined the city. The valuation was sustained. Mr. Hannan, on being called upon to support objections in respect to other properties, said he declined to go into any other case. He was floored in one way on one point and in another way on another point. It was simply outrageous, he said. . '