National Ratepayers' Valuation Forum - Meeting Summary

MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON 7th DECEMBER 2004
VALUATION OFFICE AGENCY, LONDON WC2

Present - representatives of:

Association of Convenience Stores (Simon Barnes); Boots (Andrew Martin); British Hospitality Association (Martin Couchman); British Property Federation (Anthony Brittain); British Retail Consortium (Paul Browne); Central Council for Physical Recreation (Sarah Woolnough); Electrical Industries Association (Colin Mason); Federation of Small Businesses (Roger Culcheth); Forum of Private Business (James Meyrick); Institute of Chartered Surveyors in England and Wales (Clive Lewis) Inter Bank Rating Forum (Roger Littlewood); Local Government Association (David Maddison); National Federation of Retail Newsagents (Catherine Tong); ODPM (Nic Suggit); Retailers Association (Paul Yates); Small Business Bureau (Tim Kind); RICS (Charles Partridge, Jerry Schurder); Rating Surveyors Association (Blake Penfold); Welsh Assembly Government (David Fletcher); Valuation Office Agency (Andrew Hudson, Paul Sanderson, Vic East, Tony Capp, Julie Styles).

Apologies

Apologies were received from:

Action with Communities in Rural England (Deborah Clarke); British Hardware Federation (Jonathan Swift); Fuller Peiser (Mike Flecknoe); IRRV (Tom Dixon).

1 Minutes and action points arising from NRVF meeting held on 7 September 2004

1.1 Paul Sanderson opened the meeting by confirming that the draft rating lists and summary valuations had been published on 1 October 2004 as planned. He thanked members of the NRVF for their support throughout the revaluation process, including those involved in consultation on the revised rent return forms, the development of summary valuations and the relevant supporting material. One of the main features of the VOA’s modernisation agenda was to put information in front of ratepayers to provide an opportunity for comment - and amendment where necessary - in advance of the compiled lists coming into force on 1 April 2005 and this had been achieved.

1.2 The minutes of the meeting on 7 September 2004 were agreed.

1.3 Action points from 7 September meeting:

(Para 2.2) The final report of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Small Business to be completed and circulated to members when available. (Report not yet available).

(Para 5.2) VOA to circulate a note advising members on how to search the VOA website for valuation data. (Complete; note circulated on 18 September)

(Para 7.1) VOA to circulate copy of CD-ROM version of the mybusinessrates website to NRVF members on request. (Website launched on 1 October 2004)

2 Any Other Matters Arising

2.1 Paul Sanderson outlined the position on the National Land and Property Gazetteer and the use of Unique Property Reference Numbers (UPRN) by the VOA. This was one of the search parameters available to people conducting searches on the VOA website. There was concern that the UPRN was not being as widely used as it had been hoped in the property sector. Charles Partridge said that the RICS was trying to resolve some outstanding issues with Ordnance Survey, and it was hoped to move things forward early in 2005.

2.2 It was confirmed that, following announcements by ODPM on the 2005 revaluation (see section 5 below), the mybusinessrates website would be updated shortly.

3 Summary Valuations

3.1 Vic East summarised the position on the publication of summary valuations:

• 1.35 million summary valuations had been sent to ratepayers by post (more than originally anticipated).
• 1.49 million summary valuations had been published on the internet, and were available to view by any member of the public.
• Rateable values of all other properties would also be available on the Internet. Individual notifications would not be sent to ratepayers for whom a summary valuation was not available.
• The VOA had geared up to deal with responses to publication by setting up helpdesks in each of the VOA Groups around the country.
• By the end of November 86,000 responses had been received (a query rate of about 6% - lower than expected). Most queries were being made by small businesses. About half of these enquiries were of a factual nature related to the property and the VOA hoped to determine whether these responses merited any change in valuation before the compiled lists come into force on 1 April.
• Helpdesks have cleared 28,000 enquiries over the phone, largely general queries such as whether the summary valuation represented the amount of rates payable, etc.
• Less than 10% of summary valuations had been returned undelivered; there was concern that a significant proportion of those returned appeared to have perfectly acceptable addresses - this will be discussed with Royal Mail.

3.2 Tim Kind and Roger Culcheth congratulated the VOA on the success of summary valuations and the internet applications. Reaction from their members had been generally positive.

3.3 Paul Sanderson confirmed that:

• revised summary valuations would be issued in hard copy form (where one had been issued previously) following a change in rateable value.
• It was hoped that the VOA network would be proactive in making changes to valuations arising from other settlements/appeals rather than acting only in response to further appeals.
• It was also hoped that the VOA would negotiate settlement of any 2005 appeal immediately after settling any 2000 appeal rather than take unilateral action (which might otherwise trigger a further appeal).

3.4 Vic East agreed to check whether all amendments to summary valuations arising from changes to the draft lists would be shown on the internet version of the draft rating lists. Note: this has now been confirmed.

4 Communications

4.1 Julie Styles highlighted the main points of recent communications efforts:

• The VOA Communications team had responded to a number of requests from NRVF members for information and articles.
• An information pack on summary valuations had been sent to Ministers and ratepayer support groups.
• The advertising campaign around the issue of summary valuations - “check it don’t chuck it” - had been run in print, in the national, local and trade press, and on-line.
• The on-line campaign had generated 21,500 hits on the VOA website, a click rate of 4.7% (about double the national average).
• The VOA website would be reviewed in order to improve navigation.

4.2 Any organisation wishing to establish a link to the VOA or mybusinessrates sites were invited to contact Tony Capp

Action Point (all)

4.3 Members of the NRVF were invited to comment on the developments of the websites and the communications campaign. A list of responses is attached at appendix A.

5 ODPM update

5.1 Nic Suggit said that final decisions on the revaluation were announced on 1 December. Full details had been included in a Press Release issued the same day (circulated to members on 7 December and available on the ODPM website at www.odpm.gov.uk).

5.2.1 Ministers had responded to strong representations in the consultation process on the SBRR single property rule. Particular concerns had been raised about small businesses such as a bed and breakfast establishment with an advertising right; an office with a car parking space; and a small shop with a nearby storeroom, which would have been excluded.

5.2.2 Ministers had decided that the scheme would remain essentially a single property scheme, but if the ratepayer occupies other properties that each has a rateable value below £2,200, these would be disregarded for the purposes of the single property rule (provided that the total rateable value of all these properties is below £15,000, or £21,500 in London). The supplement on the multiplier used to finance the SBRR scheme would however, apply to these smaller properties.

5.2.2 The “buffer zone”, in which occupiers would not receive relief but would not pay the supplement, had been extended to correspond with the limits that apply to small businesses under the transition scheme. It would now apply to properties with a rateable value below £15,000, or £21,500 in London.

5.2.3 Nic Suggit confirmed that if a previously ineligible property fell within the parameters of the SBRR scheme following an appeal, the ratepayer would have six months to make a fully retrospective application for relief under the scheme. He agreed to check whether retrospection would apply to additional properties where an appeal resulted in a rateable value being reduced to below the £2,200 threshold.

Action Point (Nic Suggit)

5.2.4 Draft regulations would be circulated to NRVF members when available. (Note: details were circulated to members by e-mail on 22 December)

5.2.5 ODPM would review the scheme in due course. ODPM conducted a baseline study of attitudes of ratepayers towards a SBRR scheme. This study would be repeated (probably in 2010) and the scheme would be generally monitored through small business bodies. ODPM had given a commitment to Parliament to ensure that the scheme meets its objectives.

5.3.1 Nic Suggit said that the responses to the consultation paper had been generally favourable. 65% of respondents felt that the scheme was balanced. However, analysis of later data on the outcome of the revaluation had shown that the costs of the scheme would be lower than originally anticipated. This had allowed the downward caps to be made more favourable. It was now expected that almost all small businesses in downward transition would be out of transition within two years.

5.4.1 Nic Suggit confirmed that all previously prescribed assessments would be conventionally valued for 2005. There would be a short consultation on hereditaments shown in the central list and a paper would be issued in the near future. Members were invited to contact Nic Suggit if they wished to see a copy of the consultation document.

Action Point (all)

5.5.1 The ODPM had announced its intention to consult on the following changes to the appeals regulations:

• The removal of effective date restrictions on appeals.
• Allowing only one appeal against a compiled list entry.
• Requiring the provision of certain rental information about the appeal property.

5.5.2 Restrictions had been introduced in 2000 to facilitate programming but there had been complaints about effective date limitations, which had also encouraged protective appeals. ODPM proposed to remove date limitations in order to allow time for ratepayers and agents to consider whether an appeal was justified. In order to encourage this further, ODPM were proposing to limit appeals to one against each compiled list entry and any subsequent list alteration. ODPM had received a fair amount of feedback but hoped to go out to public consultation soon.

5.5.2 Jerry Schurder welcomed the proposal to remove in year restrictions. This probably dealt with the issue of duplicate appeals and further measures to remove spurious appeals were, in his view, probably unnecessary. However, introducing a rule allowing only one appeal could encourage unscrupulous agents to make bulk appeals against properties where they hold instructions and on other cases where they don’t, advising ratepayers that the only way they can appeal is by instructing that company.

5.5.3 He also had concerns over requiring the provision of rental information, suggesting that there may be resentment at being asked to repeat information that has already provided under threat of a civil penalty. It would be better for the VOA to request information if required. Paul Sanderson noted the point, but said that it would help to establish more strongly in ratepayers’ minds the link between rateable values and rents.

5.5.4 In a discussion of unscrupulous agents, Paul Yates cited the example of an accountant who signed a form, supposedly to confirm the visit of an agent. The paper transpired to be an instruction for the agent to represent the firm in future revaluations. Corrective action in cases like that could be blocked by the proposals, or force agents to file blanket appeal to protect their position.

5.5.5 Charles Partridge said he hoped Ministers could be persuaded to change their minds. If not, the VOA should consider issuing a practice statement on the approach it would take to these matters. It could, for example, allow an agent to be deselected on the instructions of the ratepayer and allow the appeal to be taken over by a new nominated representative.

5.5.6 Paul Sanderson said that the consultation paper would be issued soon and members should make their responses. There were considerable concerns about the numbers of appeals in the system, but it was essential to address the concerns around the actions of unscrupulous agents. (Note: the consultation paper was issued on 18 January with details circulated to NRVF members).

6 Welsh Assembly Update

6.1 David Fletcher said that the Welsh Assembly had now announced that the multiplier in Wales from 1 April 2005 had been set as 42.1p. A copy of the Press Release has been circulated to members and is available at www.wales.gov.uk.

6.2 The Welsh Assembly had also confirmed that there would be no transitional scheme in Wales. The average increase in rateable values was only 12.5%. The decision had been based on the Assembly’s view that the rating system should be as fair, accountable and as simple as possible. There would also be no small business rate relief in Wales from April 2005 pending a full review of rate reliefs in Wales.

7 Electronic Communications

7.1 Charles Partridge said he had attended the VOA’s Internet Rating Project group as the representative of the professional bodies. His objective was to ensure that communications between the Agency and rating professionals was as automated and efficient as possible. Progress had been good and it was expected that a facility to make appeals en bloc would be available from April 2005, with the electronic service and logging of other documentation to follow during the summer of 2005.

8 Local Ratepayer Valuation Forums

8.1 Tony Capp had circulated a paper on the current position on the Local Ratepayer Valuation Forums in advance of the meeting and this is attached at Appendix B.

9 Any Other Business

9.1 Tim Kind asked whether the Revenue and Customs and Excise Bill would affect the VOA. Paul Sanderson said that the VOA was mentioned in the Bill, primarily to preserve its statutory position; however, the Bill would have very little impact on the local taxation work of the Agency.

Valuation Office Agency
January 2005

Appendix A

Communications activities by NRVF members (para 4.3)

Small Business Bureau - reaction had been generally good. The VOA might consider capturing e-mail addresses from visitors to the website to aid communications (e.g. via e-mail alerts).

British Hospitality Association - the BHA had provided members with regular updates and had advised members of the availability of summary valuations. There had so far been little reaction from members.

Federation of Small Businesses - articles had appeared in the national and regional member magazines and in the national press. Little reaction so far.

British Retail Consortium - some activity in communicating with members.

Petrol Retailers Association - Paul Yates had given a number of talks to members on the revaluation. Articles on business rates in the trade press competed with those on other issues and did not have great priority.

Boots - welcomed the publication of information. The company was currently checking its summary valuations and would respond in due course.

National Federation of Retail Newsagents - published a full page (A3) article in “The Fed” and incorporated website links to VOA site. Limited reaction so far.

Central Council of Physical Recreation – been busily promoting take up of new rate relief for community amateur sports clubs. There had been little reaction to summary valuations so far.

Inter Bank Rating Forum - launched a new website www.ibrf.org.uk. It was intended to have links to the mybusinessrates and VOA sites.

Forum of Private Business - provided a brief for the FPB information service. FPB had taken a lot of calls from members about changes in RV and have referred to the rates bill indicator on the mybusinessrates website.

Engineering Industries Association - published information through mail shots and newsletters. There had been little reaction so far.

British Property Federation - provided links to websites for members but no feedback so far (the BPF represents landlords).

Small Business Bureau - published articles and notified all e-mail contacts of developments and launch of summary valuations. Positive reaction.

CBI - issues have been covered in CBI newsletter. No strong reaction yet to summary valuations; stronger interest in consultations on small business rate relief and transition.

Local Government Association - little reaction so far. Local authority treasurers were having staff check summary valuations.

RICS - some frustration amongst surveyors in delays in announcements by ODPM (now out) WAG and the Scottish Executive on the new multiplier, etc.

Charles Partridge - Lambert Smith Hampton issues Rating in Brief regularly. He believed that the issue of summary valuation would dramatically change the way the property market works. Information covers details of most properties that are likely to be let in the open market.

Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales - taken articles and these were e-mailed to members in the Institute’s six-weekly alerts.

RSA - response to summary valuations has been positive, but frustration had been that liability couldn’t be assessed in the absence of announcements on the revaluation by central government.

Appendix B

Local Ratepayer Valuation Forums: Update on progress

North Wales

1 The fifth meetings of the North Wales LRVFs took place on 2 and 3 November In Bangor and Wrexham respectively. Around 20 members attended each meeting, and encouraging attendance from a core membership around 25-30.

2 At both locations, members were given information on the outcome of the revaluation in North Wales, a reminder of the principle methods of valuation to aid acceptance of summary valuations, an update on business rates developments in Wales. Members were also given an update on the council tax revaluation in Wales, which although “off topic” naturally remains of interest to members.

3 Next meetings are scheduled for 2 and 3 March 2005.

Newcastle

4 The sixth round of meetings in the Newcastle took place on Teesside and in Newcastle on 18 and 19 November respectively. Numbers attending were lower than previously, largely because of a number if resignations of members following a change in jobs. Work is underway to identify replacements.

5 The agenda included an update on the issue of summary valuations, the mybusinessrates website, an update on national rating issues and a joint presentation by the VT and RICS representatives on the current appeals system and possible changes.

6 Next meetings are scheduled for 16 and 17 February.

South West

7 The fifth round of meetings took place on 5 and 8 November. About 15 attended in Taunton, slightly down on recent numbers, although the Plymouth LRVF again proved popular with around 25 members present.

8 We again offered local items of interest, highlighting improvement projects linked to a discussion of the impacts of these developments on local values, and a session on a local BID scheme at each Forum. Other items included an update on the revaluation outcomes, a tour of the Mybusinessrates website and an update on developments at national level.

9 Next meetings are scheduled for 21 and 22 February.

6 December 2004