Appeal No. VA98/3/032
AN BINSE LUACHÁLA
VALUATION TRIBUNAL
AN tACHT LUACHÁLA, 1988
VALUATION ACT, 1988
Peter Murtagh APPELLANT
and
Commissioner of Valuation RESPONDENT
RE: Licensed House/Office/Yard/Garden/Small Garden at Lot No. 24,
Tanderagee,
Town of Bailieborough, Main Street, Bailieborough, RD: Bailieborough,
Co. Cavan
B E F O R E
Con Guiney - Barrister at Law Deputy Chairman
Ann Hargaden - FRICS.FSCS Member
Finian Brannigan - Solicitor Member
JUDGMENT OF THE VALUATION TRIBUNAL
ISSUED ON THE 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1999
By Notice of Appeal dated the 29th day of July 1998, the
appellant appealed against the determination of the Commissioner of
Valuation in fixing a rateable valuation of £65 on the above described
hereditament.
The Grounds of Appeal as set out in the said Notice of
Appeal are that; "the ratable valuation is based on rental values
that are excessive. There is a poor letting market for property in Bailieborough".
The appeal proceeded by way of an oral hearing, which
took place in the Circuit Court, Cavan on the 29th day of October 1999.
Mr. Peter Murtagh, Commissioner for Oaths, B.COMM. M.I.P.A.V., Estate
Agent, Auctioner & Valuer was himself in attendence. Mr. Ray Sweeney,
an Appeal Valuer with 30 years experience in the Valuation Office appeared
on behalf of the Commissioner of Valuation. In accordance with the Rules
of the Tribunal, the valuers had prior to the commencement of the hearing
exchanged their précis of evidence and submitted the same to
this Tribunal. Both parties having taken the oath, adopted their précis
as being their evidence in chief. Submissions were also made. From the
evidence so tendered the following emerged as being the facts relevant
and material to and for the purposes of the appeal.
Valuation History:
At 1996/4 revision, the Rateable Valuation was increased to £65
and there was no change on appeal.
The Property:
The property comprises a terraced licensed premises, auctioneers office
with private residence overhead, situated on the main street in Baileborough,
Co. Cavan.
The accommodation, as agreed between the parties, comprises the following:
Office: 329sq.ft.
Bar/Lounge area: 1,144sq.ft.
Bottle Store: 438sq.ft.
Domestic: 2,000sq.ft.
The office was originally the bar area with a small drinking
room to the rear. The property was rearranged internally in the 1980's
to provide a considerably larger bar and lounge area.
The Appellants Case:
The Appellant gave evidence and confirmed his acceptance of the respondent's
floor area. He stated that Baileborough was a small town with a population
of 1,550 according to the 1996 Census which had decreased by 1.4% since
the 1991 Census. In 1996 there were 14 trading licenced premises in
the town and 6 trading licenced premises in the hinterland which was
excessive for a rural town. He stated that the town was not on any main
route other than the Longford to Dundalk route. He also stated that
the premises only opens at night time due to a lack of trade throughout
the day.
Mr Murtagh submitted several comparisons of premises rented
in Bailborough in 1988/1989 and stated that in his view the Rateable
Valuation should remain unchanged at £40 based on a net annual
value of £8000p.a. Mr Sweeney then cross examined Mr Murtagh on
several aspects of his evidence, particulary on his comparisions.
The Respondent's Case:
Mr Sweeney gave evidence and confirmed that he did not differ greatly
on the methodology used by Mr Murtagh in assessing the net annual value
but did differ greatly on quantum. He stated that Bailborough was a
thriving town and that the property was a well established licensed
premises in a central location. He submitted comparisons which relied
on the tone of the list with no evidence of 1988 passing rents. He indicated
that in accordance with the practice adopted by the commissioner, he
had decapitalised the value of the licence of £20,000 at 10% to
arrive at a net annual value of £2,000 for this element. He submitted
that the net annual value should be £13,061 p.a. or R.V. £65.
Determination:
The Tribunal have considered the written submissions and the oral evidence
given by both parties at the hearing. The property comprises an attractive
licenced premises which the Appellant confirmed was internally altered
in layout in the 1980's, resulting in enlarged bar and lounge areas.
Several comparisons of 1988/1989 passing rents were submitted by the
appellant and the Tribunal considers the passing rents on premises within
the town to be the most relevant. No issue was made by the Appellant
on the net annual value of the domestic portion or the valuation of
the license, therefore we accept the respondent's valuations for these
items. Notwithstanding our reliance on the passing rents, we have given
due weight to the tone of the list and find as follows:
Lounge/Bar: 1,144sq.ft. @ £4 =£4,576
Bottle Stores: 438sq.ft. @ £1 = £438
Offices: 329sq.ft. @ £5 = £1,645
Add Licence = £2,000
Domestic = £2,600
Total N.A.V.: £11,259
£11,259 @ .5% = £56.29 say £56 R.V. and the tribunal
so finds.