BOROUGH VALUATIONS

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 87, Issue 62, 16 March 1943, Page 6

BOROUGH VALUATIONS

OBJECTIONS RAISED IN PATEA (0.C.) Patea, March 12. Eight objections to the recent revaluation of borough properties at Patea were lodged at a sitting of the Assessment Court held before Mr. J. H. Salmon, S.M. Mr. F. W. Havel appeared on behalf of the Patea oßrough Council, and Mr. S. G. Cathro on behalf of the eight objectors. In most cases the magistrate reserved his decision. The first objection considered was that of Dr. W. T. Simmons, who objected to the annual value of his property of eight acres and a 14-roomed house, with outbuildings consisting of two garages, being increased from £ll7 to £147. He stated' that he originally paid £650 for the house and land. Since then he had spent £2OOO on the house and outbuildings. He valued the land at £4O an acre.—Decision was reserved. Mr. S. C. Mcßae objected to the annual value of his property being raised from £5B to £72. He stated that the house was built 29 years ago and he had offered it for sale at £l4OO. The outbuildings consisted of two car sheds, a loose box and a wash-house. Mr. Grant stated, in reply to Mr. Hamel, that he considered 30s a week a fair rent for the property, but it would not be impossible to let it for 35s a week.—Decision was reserved. Mr. A. R. Johnson objected to the value of his property being raised from £24 to £4l. The property consisted of one-eighth of an acre in a back street. He bought the house and section six years ago for £125 and had spent about £250 on the house since, doing most of the improvements himself. Mr. Grant said that the highest rent that could be obtained for the property under the Fair Rents Act was 15s a week.—Decision was reserved.

Mr. C. Adams objected to the valuation of his property being raised ’from £135 to £l5O, in respect of one house in which the objector lived and another, a double unit, occupied by his daughter and another tenant.—Decision was reserved.

Mrs. F. Hills objected to the valuation of her boarding-house, which had not been increased, but stood at £lO. She considered this too high. There were ten rooms and a sleeping por h. She had seven boarders, but before the war there were 14. She would not deny that she could get 35s a week for the house. It was bought four years ago for £750. —Decision was reserved.

Mrs. M. A. Lawson objected to the valuation of her property at £B-1, the same figure as last year. It could no longer be let as a boarding-house, but was now let at •£! a week and a slop in front of the building was also let at the same figure. The valuer said that last year the valuation had been reduced from £lO7 to the present value.—The valuation was sustained. Miss Lawson objected to the valuation of her house in Stafford Street, which had been raised from £5O to £62. She claimed that it was not a modern house and worth about 25s a week. There was » whare worth 5s a \*'eek. Mr Cathro said he did not think a rent of 30s per week would be sustained under the Fair Rents Act.— Decision was reserved. The last objection dealt with was that of Mr. A. J. Wills who objected to a valuation of his property of li acres, and house, in Egmont Street. This was the same value as that of last year. The land would carry only seven cows and he could not make a living off the property if he had to pay a rent of £2 a week for it. The valuer said that the valuation was based on a rental of 33s 6d a week.—Decision was reserved.