Local Taxation - Level 2

Question 1

Tell me about a rating appeal you have submitting upon behalf of a
client.

Question 2

Tell me about how the last rating revaluation affected
tenants/landlords/your role?

Question 3

Notting Hill - Why did you not deem it appropriate to delete the property at the flood date?

Answer 3

Due to statute and caselaw - the deletion should be at the date of strip out as that constituted it being incapable of beneficial occupation

Question 4

Tell me about a favourable rating outcome you have negotiated for a
client.

Question 5

Tell me about your experience of the compiled list/MCC appeals?

Question 6

Notting Hill – What guidance did you use to consider the case?

Answer 6

Supreme Court in Newbiggin v Monk

Question 7

Notting Hill - What condition was the property in?

Answer 7

Property was in disrepair

Question 8

Notting Hill - What was included with in the schedule of works?

Answer 8

Strip out work, work to be completed together with the plans and specifications, forms the basis of a contract between the employer and the contractor to successfully deliver the project. On time and on budget.

Question 9

Notting Hill - In your opinion, was the property capable of being occupied after the flood?

Answer 9

No evidence was suggesting the condition of the property internally therefore i had to rely on when strip out took place.

Question 10

Notting Hill - Why did you recommend deletion on the date the works began?

Answer 10

The hypothetical landlord would consider the works economic to undertake and the property became incapable of beneficial occupation at the date of strip out.

when the works of repair commenced and the accommodation was stripped out it is my opinion that it was no longer a hereditament

Question 11

Notting Hill – how did you assess whether the property was capable of beneficial occupation?

Answer 11

With photographs, Articles relating to the flood, and a gant chart of the work

Question 12

Notting Hill – How did you deal with the challenge?

Answer 12

My first step was to carry out my desk based review.

during my desked based review i came to the realisation that the material day needs to be questioned as the proeprty was a matter of disrepair

I contacted the agent a copy of the schedule of work and i made the decision that the landlord would have seen the work to be economical so i informed the agent that the property should be deleted but not at the date of the flood but at the date of the works beginning.

Question 13

Notting Hill – How did you consider the disrepair and flood risk?

Answer 13

I considered the definition of rateable values 3 assumptions. assumption being the property was in reasonble state of repair and the fact that the landlord would deem the property economical the do the work.

Question 14

Notting Hill – How did you consider the scheme of works proposed?

Answer 14

When looking at the schedule of work, i looked at the work and the dates to make the decision when the material day should be

Question 15

Office Merger – What do you mean by the units being contiguous?

Question 16

Notting Hill – How did you decide to delete the property from the rating list?

Answer 16

Under case law the 4 tenets for a property to be in rateable occupation are:
- Actual Occupation
- Beneficial Occupation
- Exclusive Occupation
- Transient (not too transient)

The property at the date of strip out became incapable of beneficial occupation

Question 17

Notting Hill – When would the property be reinstated on the rating list?

Answer 17

When the works have been completed. when it shown to benefit from beneficial occupation

Question 18

Office Merger – How did this impact on the request for a tone reduction?

Answer 18

When combing the units into one hereditament the floor area changed and va

Question 19

Office Merger– Why did you reject the challenge but merge the two units on a valuation office notice?

Answer 19

Unit of assessment was incorrect and therefore the challenge was incorrect. I merged the units as the property has a single occupier, it was contigious and following Pico it was a single hereditament

Question 20

Office Merger – What impact did that have on the rates payable?

Answer 20

The tone was reduced to £450 from £472.50 however, as the hereditament was merged they main space area became significantly larger which meant the rateable value went up.

Question 21

Office Merger– What were the key issues relating to the tone reduction?

Answer 21

The agent was seeking a reduction in tone mentioning the small unit space being in the basement. Having determined the property was contigious and the unit was a single hereditament, the tone was reduced

Question 22

Office Merger – How did you assess the tone for this property?

Answer 22

The tone was reflected by comparable evidence

Question 23

Office Merger – What does contiguous mean in the context of this instruction?

Question 24

Office Merger – Why did you reject the challenge?

Question 25

Office Merger – Why did you then merge the two units?

Question 26

Office Merger – What was the outcome of this for the ratepayer?

Question 27

Office Merger – Why was the base rate lowered as a result?

Question 28

Notting Hill - What was the effective date and why?

Answer 28

30 August 2021 date of strip out when it became incapable of beneficial occupation

Question 29

Notting Hill - What case law did you follow?

Question 30

Notting Hill - Why did you ask for a scheme of works?

Answer 30

To see when the extent of the works and to see when the proeprty became incapable of beneficial occupation

Question 31

Notting Hill - What principle of Newbigin v Monk was relevant?

Question 32

Notting Hill - What is the canary wharf case about and why did you consider it?

Question 33

Office Merger - What is ‘tone’?

Answer 33

The general level of bands which have been established within an area for a particular type of property

Question 34

Office Merger - What was the material day for the proposal?

Answer 34

20 October 2017

Question 35

Office Merger - What is the AVD for the 2017 list?

Answer 35

1 April 2015

Question 36

Office Merger - Why is contiguity relevant? What case law refers to this?

Answer 36

It is crucial to identify the unit of assessment - Woolway (VO) v Mazars (2016) and Pico

Question 37

Office Merger - What is PICO?

Answer 37

Under section 1 of the Act, these contigious properties will b viewed a one proeprty for business rates purposes if the following condition are met:
A) two or more hereditaments (whether in the same building or otherwise) are occupied by the same person)
B) The hereditaments qualify as ‘contigious’ (for example separated by a common wall, or located on seperate floors of the same office building)
C) none of the hereditaments is used for a purpose which is wholly different from the purpose of which any of the other hereditaments is used.

Question 38

Office Merger - What is Mazars?

Answer 38

All floors in a multi-occupied office building occupied by the same entity must be
separately assessed even where the floors are contiguous, save where there is a direct link (e.g. an
internal staircase) without passing through the common parts.

This Supreme Court landmark case related to premises leased by a firm of
accountants in Tower Bridge House, being on the 2nd and 6th floors of a multi-occupied office
building. The intervening floors were leased to a firm of solicitors.

Question 39

Office Merger - What is a valuation office notice?

Question 40

Office Merger - What is ‘unit of assessment’?