Appeal No. VA96/3/091
AN BINSE LUACHÁLA John Gillespie APPELLANT RE: Licensed House, Shop, Caravan Park and land at
Lot No. 1Ba, B E F O R E JUDGMENT OF THE VALUATION TRIBUNAL By Notice of Appeal dated the 15th July, 1996 the appellant appealed against the determination of the Commissioner of Valuation in fixing a rateable valuation of £113.35 on the above described hereditament. The grounds of appeal as set out in the Notice of Appeal are that:- The Property: Written Submissions: Mr. McCarroll assessed rateable valuation on the basis of turnover. He said that percentages applied by the Tribunal had ranged from 7.4% in VA93/2/063 - Jack Graham, Rathcoole Inn to 9% in VA93/3/038 - Westside Taverns Limited t/a The Greyhound Inn to 7.6% of turnover in VA94/3/019 - Stardale House Limited t/a Lake of Shadows. Mr. McCarroll based his assessment on an average of turnover for the
two years 93/94 and assessed rateable valuation as follows:- Mr. McCarroll offered one comparison VA95/1/044 - Henry & Bridget Goff 68 sites at 82p equates to £56. A written submission was received on the 19th November, 1996 from Mr. Christopher Hicks, Appeal Valuer on behalf of the respondent. In his written submission he described the premises. He said that he had used the comparative method in assessing the rateable valuation on the subject premises. He said that his most important comparison was the Gweedore Bar in Falcarragh because it was well known to the appellant and because it was agreed in conjunction with two other appeals on the basis of net annual value at 25% of average of gross profit. Mr. Hicks set out his rateable valuation as follows:- Turnover y/e 31/10/94: = £163,297 Average Turnover: = £159,908 NAV @ 9½% as per "Gweedore Bar" = £12,913 Devalues Service Block Residence on First Floor Caravan Park Mr. Hicks offered two comparisons which are summarised below:- (2) Thomas Barrett "Kilclooney Tavern". Oral Hearing: Mr. McCarroll confirmed and adopted his written submission dated 18th November, 1996 as his evidence in chief and stressed the seasonal nature of the business carried on in the subject property. He submitted that his estimate of net annual value of the licensed portion of the property as of 1988 was £135,043 and that the correct percentage of turnover to be applied was 7% taking into account the location and nature of the subject hereditament. Mr. McCarroll accepted that he had agreed to the rateable valuation of Mr. Hicks first comparison but suggested that it had in fact been too high and not in keeping with the tone of the list. Referring to Mr. Hicks second comparison Mr. McCarroll submitted that the percentage of 9.5% applied by Mr. Hicks to the estimated turnover as of 1988 was inappropriate and more suited to a licensed premises in an upmarket location in Dublin. Mr. Hicks in evidence said that he had understood that the residential portion and caravan park were not in dispute and produced to the Tribunal, Mr. McCarroll's objection having been noted, comparative evidence relating to other caravan parks in County Donegal which indicated that his assessment of 60p per site for the subject was reasonable. These comparisons also show the range of valuation assessed on service blocks attached to caravan parks. Mr. Hicks submitted that the best comparative evidence was that included in his précis in particular comparison one which had in fact been agreed by Mr. McCarroll himself and which seems to have been decided on the basis of 25% average gross profit. Findings and Determination: The subject is not comparable to a licensed premises in a premier location for example in Dublin. It is however comparable to other similar licensed premises in County Donegal. The Tribunal has had regard to the comparative evidence adduced by the
respondent and finds that the difficulties if they may be so described,
in terms of location, apply equally to these comparisons.
|