| Domestic rateable values [message #378218] |
Mo, 10 April 2006 15:22 |
|
Is there any way I can check the water board are using the correct rateable value of
my house? The rateable value seems very high compared with similar properties.
I phoned the District Valuation Office - who said they no longer hold domestic
rateable values, and told me Ofwat have them. Phoned Ofwat who told me that was
rubbish, they don't have them, and directed me to the local council. Phoned the
council who said they don't have them and suggested I phone the water company. I know
the water company have them, I want to check the figure they have is correct.
Surely someone other that the water company has to hold these records in their
archives? Who is fobbing me off?
TIA for any advice.
--
Andy
|
|
|
| Re: Domestic rateable values [message #378220 ] |
Mo, 10 April 2006 15:30 |
|
On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 14:22:29 +0100, "Andy Pandy"
<spam8times [at] wonderful.spam.invalid> wrote:
>Is there any way I can check the water board are using the correct rateable value of
>my house? The rateable value seems very high compared with similar properties.
>
>I phoned the District Valuation Office - who said they no longer hold domestic
>rateable values, and told me Ofwat have them. Phoned Ofwat who told me that was
>rubbish, they don't have them, and directed me to the local council. Phoned the
>council who said they don't have them and suggested I phone the water company. I know
>the water company have them, I want to check the figure they have is correct.
>
>Surely someone other that the water company has to hold these records in their
>archives? Who is fobbing me off?
>
>TIA for any advice.
Does such a thing exists since Council Tax came in .?
Stuart
|
|
|
| Re: Domestic rateable values [message #379879 ] |
Mo, 10 April 2006 17:44 |
|
"Stuart" wrote:
> Does such a thing exists since Council Tax came in .?
>
> Stuart
Yes. According to my water supply company, for properties that were built
before 1989 and do not have a meter then charges for water supply,
wastewater and highway drainage are based on the rateable value existing on
March 31st 1990. The rateable value for my property is 125 GBP.
Phil A.
------
|
|
|
| Re: Domestic rateable values [message #379907 ] |
Mo, 10 April 2006 21:02 |
|
"Phil Anthropist" <dont_bother [at] falseaddress.net> wrote in message
news:443a7d4e [at] 212.67.96.135...
> Yes. According to my water supply company, for properties that were built
> before 1989 and do not have a meter then charges for water supply,
> wastewater and highway drainage are based on the rateable value existing on
> March 31st 1990. The rateable value for my property is 125 GBP.
My property was council tax band C when the council tax was introduced a few years
later. The water board reckon the rateable value is £306, which seems very high for a
band C property.
I know the council tax is based on the value and the rateable value is based on what
rent you get for it, but it seems other similar band C properties round here have
much lower rateable values.
--
Andy
|
|
|
| Re: Domestic rateable values [message #379913 ] |
Mo, 10 April 2006 22:09 |
|
Andy Pandy wrote:
>
> "Phil Anthropist" <dont_bother [at] falseaddress.net> wrote in message
> news:443a7d4e [at] 212.67.96.135...
>> Yes. According to my water supply company, for properties that were built
>> before 1989 and do not have a meter then charges for water supply,
>> wastewater and highway drainage are based on the rateable value existing
>> on March 31st 1990. The rateable value for my property is 125 GBP.
>
> My property was council tax band C when the council tax was introduced a
> few years later. The water board reckon the rateable value is £306, which
> seems very high for a band C property.
>
> I know the council tax is based on the value and the rateable value is
> based on what rent you get for it, but it seems other similar band C
> properties round here have much lower rateable values.
>
If the ratable value is the same as used in 1990, then that 1990 value would
have been notified at the time and subject to appeal then. If no appeal
made then, it stands. You knew or could have found this out when you
purchased and adjusted your offered purchase price accordingly if
appropriate.
If the valuation is excessive compared with similar properties, you can
probably save money by having a water meter installed.
|
|
|
| Re: Domestic rateable values [message #379924 ] |
Mo, 10 April 2006 23:21 |
|
"Peter" <peterwn [at] parazzdise.net.nz> wrote in message news:443abb2b [at] clear.net.nz...
> >> Yes. According to my water supply company, for properties that were built
> >> before 1989 and do not have a meter then charges for water supply,
> >> wastewater and highway drainage are based on the rateable value existing
> >> on March 31st 1990. The rateable value for my property is 125 GBP.
> >
> > My property was council tax band C when the council tax was introduced a
> > few years later. The water board reckon the rateable value is £306, which
> > seems very high for a band C property.
> >
> > I know the council tax is based on the value and the rateable value is
> > based on what rent you get for it, but it seems other similar band C
> > properties round here have much lower rateable values.
> >
>
> If the ratable value is the same as used in 1990, then that 1990 value would
> have been notified at the time and subject to appeal then. If no appeal
> made then, it stands.
I know I can't appeal against the rateable value set by the valuation office.I just
want to make sure the water board are using the correct rateable value.
Which is why I want the valuation office, the council, or someone other than the
water board, to confirm what the rateable value was.
Does the valuation office or council not have to keep archives going back to 1990?
--
Andy
|
|
|
| Re: Domestic rateable values [message #379933 ] |
Di, 11 April 2006 04:12 |
|
Andy Pandy wrote:
>
> "Peter" <peterwn [at] parazzdise.net.nz> wrote in message
> news:443abb2b [at] clear.net.nz...
> Which is why I want the valuation office, the council, or someone other
> than the water board, to confirm what the rateable value was.
>
> Does the valuation office or council not have to keep archives going back
> to 1990?
>
Probably not. No reason for the Council to keep them. Valuation Office
would probably need to retain them for several years, but is unlikely to be
obliged to keep them for 15 years.
|
|
|
| Re: Domestic rateable values [message #379947 ] |
Di, 11 April 2006 13:10 |
|
Peter wrote:
> Andy Pandy wrote:
>
>>
>> "Peter" <peterwn [at] parazzdise.net.nz> wrote in message
>> news:443abb2b [at] clear.net.nz...
>
>> Which is why I want the valuation office, the council, or someone other
>> than the water board, to confirm what the rateable value was.
>>
>> Does the valuation office or council not have to keep archives going back
>> to 1990?
>>
> Probably not. No reason for the Council to keep them. Valuation Office
> would probably need to retain them for several years, but is unlikely to
> be obliged to keep them for 15 years.
Well, *someone* must be obliged to keep them *forever*.
For instance it is customary in Scotland for the title deeds to flats
to stipulate that the cost of common repairs be divided up amongst the
individual flat owners in the proportion which the rateable value of
each flat bears to the sum of the RVs of all the flats in the block.
The councils still have microfiches which can be consulted by the public,
which hold the Rvs since the last time they were updated, i.e. just
before the poll tax came in.
As an aside, it's interesting to note that in the case of blocks in
which the ground floor "flats" are actually shops, the RVs of the shops
are disproprtionately large compared to the domestic properties in the
block. So if you live in a block with shops, your roof repair bills
will be much lower than if you lived in an otherwise equivalent
flats-only block, because the shops will carry the lion's share.
|
|
|
| Re: Domestic rateable values [message #379974 ] |
Di, 11 April 2006 22:11 |
|
Ronald Raygun wrote:
> Peter wrote:
>
>
> Well, *someone* must be obliged to keep them *forever*.
>
> For instance it is customary in Scotland for the title deeds to flats
> to stipulate that the cost of common repairs be divided up amongst the
> individual flat owners in the proportion which the rateable value of
> each flat bears to the sum of the RVs of all the flats in the block.
>
> The councils still have microfiches which can be consulted by the public,
> which hold the Rvs since the last time they were updated, i.e. just
> before the poll tax came in.
>
The Councils in question probably recognised a continuing public need for
this information so may have kept it. It may only however be a moral, not
a legal obligation. Just because some title deeds refer to RV's would not
seem to impose an obligation on an organisation not concerned with the
titles to keep information for ever. In the absence of RV's, the title is
not frustrated, the owners would have to agree among themselves on how to
split the bills up, if need be obtaining mediation or even going to court.
In any event, 15 year old RV's may be regarded as no longer relevant
especially if major renovations, etc havebeen done.
|
|
|
