|
Appeal No. VA93/1/047 AN BINSE LUACHÁLA Eamonn Davis APPELLANT RE: House and Shop at Map Ref. 24 Main Street, B E F O R E JUDGMENT OF THE VALUATION TRIBUNAL By Notice of Appeal dated the 1st March, 1993 the appellant appealed against the determination of the Commissioner of Valuation in fixing a rateable valuation of £72 on the above described hereditament. The grounds of appeal as set out in the Notice of Appeal are that "the net annual value of the property at the relevant date was not sufficient to justify the level of valuation". The Property Valuation History Written Submissions Mr. Boyle submitted that he understands the property to be freehold and in his opinion the rateable valuation of the property should be £52, being £40 for commercial element and £12 for residential. Also in his opinion the rental value of the commercial element at November, 1988 was £6,500 per annum. Mr. Boyle referred to three properties in his submission as comparative evidence and details of these are set out as under:- 1. Tax & Finance Shop, 13 Main Street, Dundrum. 2. Lady in Waiting, 5 Pembroke Cottages, Dundrum. 3. Dundrum Travel Limited, 4 Pembroke Cottages, Dundrum. A written submission was received on the 26th July, 1993 from Mr. Jim Gormley, a District Valuer with 19 years experience in the Valuation Office on behalf of the Respondent. In his submission, Mr. Gormley, set out details of the valuation history and he also gave a brief description of the property and location. Mr. Gormley submitted that the premises is owned by Bank of Ireland Group and that up to 1985 the premises was held under a lease (term not known) at a rent of £5 per month inclusive of rates. In 1985 the Bank of Ireland agreed to sell the premises for £50,000 or alternatively to lease it to Mr. Davis for £5,000 per annum. Mr. Davis opted to lease the premises but the terms of the lease were never finalised and it is understood that no rent has been paid or demanded since then. Mr. Gormley set out the basis for his calculation of the rateable valuation as follows:- Shop 362ft2 (all Zone A) @ £26/ft2 = £ 9,412 He also submitted details of six comparative properties and these are
summarised below:- Basis of Valuation: 2. Bella Donna, 56/1 Main Street. Basis of Valuation: Stores (poor) 552ft2 @ £4/ft2 = £ 2216 3. IPBS, 83 Main Street. Basis of Valuation: 4. Oxfam, 92ab/3 Main Street. Basis of Valuation: 5. Ashtrim Limited, 92ab/3 Main Street. (b) Russell Kane & Company, 15/1 Main Street. Oral Hearing Mr. Boyle said that the subject premises was in Maher's Terrace almost at the crossroads of Ballinteer, that it was a retail premises with residential accommodation. Mr. Boyle said that the same factors applying to Dundrum as stated in the previous appeal applied in this instance including a heavy volume of traffic and limited on-street carparking. Mr. Boyle referred to his comparisons and said that £40 for the commercial element in the subject premises was more than reasonable. Mr. Gormley said in relation to the subject premises that it was a substantial premises with a street frontage of 26 feet and much more substantial than any of the comparable properties. Mr. Gormley said that a rate of £26 per square foot had been applied which was the lower end of the retail range and that rental evidence, in particular his Comparison No. 1, a shoe shop, Roncalli, just the other side of the church supported the valuation applied on the subject premises. Mr. Boyle accepted that a considerable rent had been achieved for the premises, Roncalli, but maintained that in the last 10 years Dundrum had steadily gone down and that such a rent would be difficult to obtain nowdays. Mr. Boyle submitted that the rental which he had applied to the subject premises at £6,500 was correct and that the prime evidence available is the letting of the adjoining shop in 1988 of 920 square feet plus a store upstairs at £12,500 per annum. A shop, he said, which was actually twice the size of the subject premises. Determination: In line with its consideration the Tribunal has taken into account the decline in Dundrum as a retail centre and the exacerbating factors of the traffic and carparking problems. On this basis while accepting the rationale of Mr. Gormley's N.A.V., the Tribunal feels it may be a little too high on the subject premises and determines therefore the R.V. at £65.
|