Appeal No. VA92/6/018
AN BINSE LUACHÁLA Finbarr Galvin Limited APPELLANT RE: Garage at Map Ref: 4Ba, Townland of Knocknagarrane,
B E F O R E JUDGMENT OF THE VALUATION TRIBUNAL By Notice of Appeal dated the 23rd October, 1992 the appellant appealed against the determination of the Commissioner of Valuation in fixing a Rateable Valuation of £150.00 on the above described hereditament. The grounds of appeal as set out in the Notice of Appeal are that "the valuation is excessive due to location of premises (well out of town) and due to antiquity and condition (basic construction, unheated and uninsulated) of buildings". The Property Valuation History Written Submission IR£ per annum A written submission was received on the 19th October, 1993 from Mr. Colman Forkin a Chartered Valuation Surveyor with 12 years experience in the Valuation Office on behalf of the Respondent. In his written submission Mr. Forkin said that although located outside of Bandon there were three other car showrooms within 400 metres of the subject premises. He set out his calculation of the valuation on the subject premises as follows:- Bls. 1,2 Car Showroom: 4923 sq.ft. @} Say: £30,000 X 0.5% = £150.00 Mr. Forkin offered a number of comparisons to support his evidence. Oral Hearing Mr. Deller explained that the subject premises lie about half a mile further out of Bandon than any other similar type of business. He stressed that rental values of industrial buildings in rural areas were very low and in this respect he pointed out that even in urban areas industrial rents achieved were on the low side. He referred the Tribunal to the comparisons appended to his written submission and stated that in November, 1988 which is the relevant date for valuation the property situation in the south of Ireland was in a generally depressed condition. Mr. Deller pointed out that while he and Mr. Forkin were generally in agreement in relation to the letting values for the showroom, he felt that a figure of £1.80 as suggested by Mr. Forkin for the workshop was excessive. In his breakdown of valuation Mr. Deller had put no valuation on the spray booth or display yard as he felt that if a tenant were paying £1.00 per square foot for a workshop that tenant would normally expect to have a spray booth and a display yard included in the letting. Mr. Forkin stressed that the comparisons put forward by Mr. Deller were not valid as they were not buildings of a similar function and as there was no indication of their rateable valuation. He pointed out that Bandon Motors Limited referred to as No. 1 Comparison in his written submission was fairly close to the subject premises and should be taken into account as a valid comparison. Mr. Deller on the other hand stressed that Bandon Motors Limited had been completed only in August, 1988 that it was much closer to the town of Bandon than the subject premises, and that it had many other advantages over the subject. He said therefore that to compare it with the subject was not comparing like with like. Determination It does accept however, the appellants evidence in relation to the location of the property and its several disadvantages particularly in relation to the workshop. While the Tribunal has noted the overall letting patterns as shown by the comparisons appended to Mr. Dellers submissions, nonetheless it must take into account the nearest comparable premises which have been recently revised namely Bandon Motors Limited. The latter however is undeniably a superior building having been completed only in August, 1988 and it does possess certain advantages over the subject premises namely it has high petrol sales, a level tarmacadamed site and the construction cost were undeniably high. In the circumstances and taking all the evidence into account the Tribunal is of the opinion that the correct rateable valuation on the subject premises is £130 and so determines.
|