Appeal No. VA94/2/001
AN BINSE LUACHÁLA Lorcan Caffrey, Niall Laurence Hair Salon APPELLANT RE: Shop (ground floor) and Hairdressing Salon (1st
and 2nd floors) at B E F O R E JUDGMENT OF THE VALUATION TRIBUNAL By Notice of Appeal dated the 1st day of July, 1994 the appellant appealed against the determination of the Commissioner of Valuation in fixing a rateable valuation of £37 on the above described hereditament. The grounds of appeal are as set out in the Notice of Appeal. The Property: The property is of rubble and masonry construction with a slate roof and a two storey extension to the rear. It is located in a terrace of business and domestic premises. The accommodation consists of a ground floor ladies drapery shop, first floor hairdressing salon and second floor mens hairdressing salon. Each unit has separate access from a common hallway and stairs. Valuation History: Written Submissions: Mr. Caffrey, in his written submission, described the business as labour intensive with high overheads. He said that the turnover in profits did not justify the valuation. Mr. Caffrey said the street frontage was very small and not on the Main Street of Mullingar. He said that other larger buildings were valued at a lower rate. A written submission was received on the 21st October, 1994 from Mr.
Noel Lyons, B.Comm, a District Valuer in the Valuation Office. a) Estimate of Net Annual Value b) Rateable Valuation Mr. Lyons gave a number of comparisons of recently revised valuations
in Seery Street. These comparisons are set out below:- 2) Map Reference: In 46.47b Seery Street 3) Map Reference: 46b.47b Seery Street 5) Map Reference: In 2a Dominick Street 6) Map Reference: 34b Oliver Plunkett Street Oral Hearing: In evidence, Mr. Caffrey stated that the subject premises was located in Seery Street, Mullingar, which was off the main business track and could not be seen from Market Place. He indicated that there was no car parking permitted outside his premises. He indicated that the subject premises had a very narrow frontage. He stated that the construction of the premises did not lend itself to a separate letting in respect of the ground floor, first floor and second floor as access to the first and second floors was through the ground floor. He stated that it suited him as his wife managed the boutique on the ground floor. He indicated that he was prepared to accept a rental figure of £75 per week in respect of the ground floor shop, but added that he did not think it would be possible for him to obtain £45 per week for the first floor and £25 per week for the second floor. He added that he had been advised that the rateable valuation would be reduced to £30, which figure he felt was reasonable. Mr. Caffrey pointed out that the premises at No. 6 and 7 Seery Street, which is occupied on the ground floor by Daragh Caffrey and on the first and second floor by David Walsh & Company, Solicitors, was a far bigger premises with approximately twice the frontage of his own premises. Mr. Lyons supplied to the Tribunal information on leases and rents applying to his comparisons in support of the rental level he attributed to the subject premises. Mr. Lyons indicated that he did not accept that the first floor and second floor could not readily be let, and indicated that the largest reduction he could possibly make in relation to the first floor and second floor rents was £5 per week in respect of each floor reducing the rent to £40 in respect of the first floor and £20 in respect of the second floor. Determination:
|