Rating valuation
[edit] Purpose of a rating valuation
The aim of a valuation for rating is to find the annual rental value of a hereditament (property that can be inherited) at a particular time, in accordance with the definition of rateable value. Remember that you are trying to find a rental value, not a capital value, whichever method of valuation is used.
Four main methods of valuation for rating purposes are recognised by the courts and tribunals:
- Rental method (using direct or indirect rental evidence).
- Contractor’s method or test.
- Profits or accounts method.
- Statutory formulae.
Follow the links for detailed descriptions of the four methods
[edit] Choice of method
The choice of method is more limited than appears at first sight, because statute prescribes that certain hereditaments are to be valued by formula - mostly, although not exclusively, hereditaments which are in the central rating list. In those cases, once the formula has been laid down by Parliament, no other method may be used. However, formula rating is being phased out, and under the 2005 rating list there are relatively few hereditaments left that are valued by formula.
For other hereditaments one or more of the remaining three methods must be used: rental, contractor’s, profits/accounts.
Rating law requires the rental value of a hereditament to be found. Clearly, therefore the rental method is to be preferred over all other methods. However, this depends upon there being sufficient vital information to form a view.
It used to be thought that if direct rental evidence - that is, a rent on the hereditament itself - was available, no other method of valuation should be considered by the courts (Robinson Brothers (Brewers) Ltd v Durham County AC (1938)). However, in later cases (notably Baker Britt v Hampsher (VO) (1976)) the courts have stressed the need to compare the rent actually passing on the premises with other rents on comparable hereditaments or, where there are no other rents, other methods of valuation (Garton v Hunter (VO) (1968)).
Where other rents or methods of valuation are used, tribunals and courts will weigh each one in order to decide how much reliance should be placed on them having regard to the particular circumstances of the case. It may be necessary to do more than one valuation, using different methods.
The choice is left with the valuer to decide which method or combination of methods is best in the circumstances. The courts will not take kindly to the presentation of numerous valuations by different methods - they feel that it is up to the valuer to choose the most suitable method in relation to precedent, their experience and professional opinion. Nothing, however, should deter the valuer from exercising their judgement by comparing one method with others if they feels it will assist them.
Lord Denning MR in Garton v Hunter (VO) (1968) said: ‘Nowadays we do not confine ourselves to the best evidence. We admit all relevant evidence. The goodness or badness of it goes only to weight and not to admissibility.’
Therefore, when analysing rental evidence for use in a rating valuation, consider all the possible evidence, making adjustments where necessary rather than just discarding evidence because it is not a perfect fit with the rating hypothesis.
For more information see: Choice of method for rating valuation.
This article was created by --University College of Estate Management (UCEM) 17:06, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki
- Beneficial occupation.
- Case notes for rating valuation (Garton V Hunter).
- Choice of method for rating valuation.
- Contractor’s basis for rating valuation.
- Existing use value.
- Profits method of rating valuation.
- Rental method of rating valuation.
- Statutory formulae for rating valuation.
- What is a valuer?
Featured articles and news
Twas the site before Christmas...
A rhyme for the industry and a thankyou to our supporters.
Plumbing and heating systems in schools
New apprentice pay rates coming into effect in the new year
Addressing the impact of recent national minimum wage changes.
EBSSA support for the new industry competence structure
The Engineering and Building Services Skills Authority, in working group 2.
Notes from BSRIA Sustainable Futures briefing
From carbon down to the all important customer: Redefining Retrofit for Net Zero Living.
Principal Designer: A New Opportunity for Architects
ACA launches a Principal Designer Register for architects.
A new government plan for housing and nature recovery
Exploring a new housing and infrastructure nature recovery framework.
Leveraging technology to enhance prospects for students
A case study on the significance of the Autodesk Revit certification.
Fundamental Review of Building Regulations Guidance
Announced during commons debate on the Grenfell Inquiry Phase 2 report.
CIAT responds to the updated National Planning Policy Framework
With key changes in the revised NPPF outlined.
Councils and communities highlighted for delivery of common-sense housing in planning overhaul
As government follows up with mandatory housing targets.
CIOB photographic competition final images revealed
Art of Building produces stunning images for another year.
HSE prosecutes company for putting workers at risk
Roofing company fined and its director sentenced.
Strategic restructure to transform industry competence
EBSSA becomes part of a new industry competence structure.
Major overhaul of planning committees proposed by government
Planning decisions set to be fast-tracked to tackle the housing crisis.
Industry Competence Steering Group restructure
ICSG transitions to the Industry Competence Committee (ICC) under the Building Safety Regulator (BSR).
Principal Contractor Competency Certification Scheme
CIOB PCCCS competence framework for Principal Contractors.
The CIAT Principal Designer register
Issues explained via a series of FAQs.