ANNOUNCEMENTS

ACHIEVEMENTS what CBCRA do in the community
BECOME A MEMBER and raise the level of community spirit
SEND US your suggestions and comments
READ MORE about City of Cape Town’s activities & policies
FAULT REPORT system introduced by the City Council
VISIT Property Valuations for more details about your CV22

Tuesday 19 January 2010

Spectacular CBRRA Victory in the Municipal Rates Valuation Objection Process

This is an example where CBRRA has been able to assist a member to save a considerable amount of money in increased rates and services billings and alleged arrears which arrived without warning as a result of a supplementary valuation executed two years ago by the City.

With the correct approach, CBBRA managed to get the supplementary valuation, the increased rates and services billings and the arrears cancelled.

This is an excellent example of the real benefit of belonging to CBRRA (for a mere R200 per annum!).


Letter from CBRRA to the City Valuer

Dear Mr. Gavor,

Supplementary Valuation Roll for 2009 / 2010 (SV05) Rates Billing ; Account No. XXXXXXXX ; Erf XXXX, XX XXXXXXXXX XXXX, Camps Bay, 8005

1. I act on behalf of the owner, XXXXXXXX, who has also sought the advice of the Camps Bay Ratepayers and Residents Association and the Greater Cape Town Civic Alliance, in respect of the letter dated 25 November 2009 received from your Valuations Billing Department with attached tax invoice No. XXXXXXXXXXXX (Distribution Code XXXXXXXXXXX Business Partner Number XXXXXXXXXX) with an amount owing to be paid by him by 30 November 2009 of R 11 973,98) for alleged arrears resulting from the new supplementary valuation together with increased billings for rates and services.

2. This matter can be summarised as follows:

2.1. The property was valued at R 4 586 000,00 at the 1 July 2006 GV

2.2. By means of a Supplementary Valuation No. 5 the property was revalued at R 5 500 000,00 with a stated “effective date “ of 10 April 2008 and was rebilled with large increased rates and services costs in November 2009 including alleged arrears totalling R11973,98 on the revised valuation and service costs for the months of July 2008 to November 2009. The subsequent December 2009 billing continues the principle of the November billing.

3. Without, at this stage, going into the correctness of the supplementary valuation, the owner denies that the City had any right to undertake such a supplementary valuation in terms of the MPRA for the reason which follows.


4. The owner contends that some official revalued the property in terms of Section 55 of the Act instead of Section 78(d) as claimed on your website. I take it to be common cause that the question of re-valuation was picked up as a result of an application by the owner for building plan approval for a garden wall (which cost not exceeding R20,000) to be erected. It is accepted that all such successful applications are communicated to your Department. This procedure was confirmed by your Mr. Emil Weichardt.

Although Mr. Weichardt states that your Council informed the Owner of the supplementary valuation in about September 2009, he contends that he never received such notice, which situation has deprived him of the opportunity to submit a formal objection, hence this letter of mine now on his behalf.

5. It is contended that your official was incorrect in assessing that the market value of the property (valued at R4,586,000 in the 1 July 2006 GV) had "substantially increased" for the above reason. In truth and in fact, the construction of the garden wall had increased the market value of the property by 0.44%. Not by 1% or 4% or 10%. Your new Supplementary Valuation No. 5 is based on the property having increased in value by 20%! In law, there is absolutely no way that a reasonable person could have decided that the construction of a R20,000 garden wall had "substantially increased" the value of the property in this manner..


6. You are hereby accordingly urgently requested to now find that your Supplementary Valuation No. 5 in respect of this specific property, resulting in a 20% increase in the previous MV was done in error and that you will consequently withdraw it completely forthwith together with the increased and arrears billings charged to date.

7. Please acknowledge receipt of this letter and, as this is an extremely important matter, you reply at your earliest convenience is requested.

Yours faithfully,

John Powell
for
CBRRA and
X X XXXXXX


Letter from the City Valuer to CBRRA

Dear Mr. Powell

I’d been out of office and that’s why I am only responding to your mail now. I’ve read your mail and will investigate the matter. If there is no material increase in the value as a result the building plan, the remedy will be for Council to lodge a Council objection against the valuation and rectify the error immediately. This should about a week to process. I’ll get back to you on Friday after I’ve investigated the matter.

Kindly inform X X XXXXXX that the matter is being given urgent attention.

Regards

Christopher Gavor
DIRECTOR: VALUATIONS


Letter from the City Valuation Department to CBRRA

Good Day Mr Powell

I hope this email finds you in good health

I have been requested to respond to this email on behalf of Director: Valuations, Mr Christopher Gavor.

The municipal valuer has requested for an investigation regarding the SV05 valuation for this property.

Please be advised that a council objection has been lodged against this valuation, requesting for this to be reverted to the GV2006 valuation of R4 586 000.00.

As soon as the amended valuation is signed off by the municipal valuer, this will be submitted to the Technical Masterdata Department (TMD) so that the necessary adjustments can be made to the account.

The adjustments should be submitted to TMD by the end of this week, at which point they will start work on reversing the amounts owing to reflect the amended valuation.

Thanking you
Shahieda Samodien-Azad


Letter from CBRRA to the City Valuer and his Department

Dear Mr Samodien-Azad and Mr. Gavor

I acknowledge receipt of your letters dated 13 and 18 January 2010 and, on behalf of X X XXXXXX, I would like to say how delighted we both are at your responses to my letter dated 12 January 2010 to Mr. Gavor.

Thank you for your quick attention to what was a big shock to X X XXXXXX, it is much appreciated.

We trust that the Council’s objection will be successful. Kindly notify us of the outcome in due course.

X X XXXXXX has been paying your Department at the higher basic rates billings (excluding the arrears) shown on your November et seq. invoices, so he will be due some credits in this respect.

Kind regards,

John Powell
for CBRRA and
X X XXXXXX

No comments:

Post a Comment