SETTLERS' GRIEVANCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20304, 11 July 1929, Page 15

SETTLERS' GRIEVANCE.

NO STATE LOANS ON LAND. PROBLEM OF VALUATION. OBJECTIONS AT TOKOROA. [by XEI.EGR.\I'H.—OWN' COnitEsrONDKST ] MAT AMAT A, Wed nesd ay. Considerable interest was aroused at tho sitting of the Assessment Court, Jfatamatu, yesterday, by an objection made oil behalf of 24 Tokoroa settlers, who contended that the unimproved value oi their land was nil. After ventilating a grievance they had they withdrew their objection. Mi-. J. G. L. ITewitt, S.M., presided. Mr. J. R. 0 Loehhead, of Putaruru, appeared for the Tokoroa objectors. Counsel contended that as the objcetXirs could not get State loans there was no unimproved value on the sections. The president replied that there must be some value, and quoted the Colonial Company's case, in which i't was shown that land under the sea Jiad a site value for building purposes. To overcome this point it was agreed that for puiposes of objection the unimproved value should be set at Id per Ucre. The property of F. F. Flavell, farmer, Tokoroa, was taken as a typical cas.e. In evidence he stated that lie did not object to the valuation set down for improvements, but had been forced to the conclusion that there was no unimproved value to bis land, as lie could not get a State advance on his property. A letter was then handed in from the State Advances Office, - which read:— "After careful consideration by members of the board of information before them they were not prepared to sanction an advance of any amount on the proposed security." Counsel contended that if the land had a value for Covernment taxation purposes it should have a value for loan purposes. Mr. W. F. Wall is, of the Valuation Department, was called by counsel to give evidence. In reply to questions he stated that, there was no difference between valuations made for taxation and loan purposes. He admitted, however, that a confidential report was forwarded with loan valuations. Counsel then claimed that when valuers u.sed confidential figures to support their claims and would not produce them in Court it must of necessity bo considered as affecting the valuation. Mr. Wallis: That is a matter for tho State Advances Department. Mr. Loehhead: No, the Minister in charge of State advances stated less than three months ago that the Valuation Department was to blame The president admitted that there was a grievance, but held that his Court could not apportion the blame. Asked if he desired the valuation to be reduced to Id. counsel for the objectors replied "No," stating that they only wished to ventilate what they considered was a legitimate grievance. Iho valuations were then sustained in each case.