The ending of prescribed rating was enacted in the Local Government Act 2003 and the statutory port authorities (owners) were subject to conventional rating from 1 April 2005. The impact on the individual port authority was that their rateable value was ascertained by the same rules of assessment that apply to all other non-domestic property instead of by a prescribed formula.
The ending of prescribed rating had no effect on whether property occupied by other businesses within ports should be assessed separately for non-domestic rates. The principles concerning separate rateability where there is “exclusive occupation” and “paramount control” are long established. The leading case on the subject is a House of Lords decision from as far back as 1936—Westminster Council v. Southern Railway Company and W.H. Smith and Son.
The review of ports by the Valuation Office Agency is to ensure that all individual business properties within and outside ports are rated fairly to ensure that the burden of contributions to funding local government is shared fairly among businesses around the country.
The Government have listened to the concerns of businesses with significant and unexpected backdated bills, including some businesses within ports. It has legislated to enable such bills to be repaid over an unprecedented eight years rather than in a single instalment, helping affected businesses to manage the impact on their cash flows during the downturn by reducing the amount they are required to pay now by 87.5 per cent.
As at 8 October 2009, local authorities have reported that ratepayers occupying 221 properties within ports had fully discharged their backdated liability and ratepayers occupying a further 200 business properties within ports had been granted a schedule of payments.
The term “cumulo” (artificial hereditament) has been used to describe where properties (hereditaments) within the same occupation that under the normal rules of rating would be shown as individual entries in the rating lists are shown as a single entry in the rating list.
The ability to create an artificial port hereditament in this way is determined by regulation 5 of the Non-Domestic Rating Miscellaneous Provisions (2) Regulations 1989 (SI 1989/2303), which provides that in certain circumstances two or more hereditaments occupied by a statutory port authority to be a single hereditament to be liable for non-domestic rates where for example the properties are split by a river.
Whether a separate occupier within a port makes a contribution to business rates through their agreement with the port authority is a contractual matter between the occupier and the port authority. The cumulo is not and has never been a method for occupations that should be separately assessed for business rates to waive their liabilities.
The review of ports by the Valuation Office Agency is to ensure that all individual business properties within and outside ports are rated fairly to ensure that the burden of contributions to funding local government is shared fairly amongst businesses around the country.
The Government have listened to the concerns of businesses with significant and unexpected backdated bills, including some businesses within ports. It has legislated to enable such bills to be repaid over an unprecedented eight years rather than in a single instalment, helping affected businesses to manage the impact on their cash flows during the downturn by reducing the amount they are required to pay now by 87.5 per cent.
As at October 8 2009, local authorities have reported that ratepayers occupying 221 properties within ports had fully discharged their backdated liability and ratepayers occupying a further 200 business properties within ports had been granted a schedule of payments.
Valuation officers are required under Section 41 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 to maintain accurate rating lists. When they become aware that a change is needed, such as that at the ports, they must make the alteration and also specify the date from which the change should become effective for rates charging purposes.
The principles concerning separate rateability where there is “exclusive occupation” and “paramount control” are long established. The leading case on the subject is a House of Lords decision from as far back as 1936—Westminster Council v. Southern Railway Company and W.H. Smith and Son.
The VOA rated ports and properties within ports for the 2005 list based upon information supplied by the ports operators. A significant number of separate assessments appeared in the rating lists for individual port occupiers even before the following review was initiated.
It was only after the lists were compiled, through routine work to keep the lists up to date, it was found that the rating lists may not reflect all the separate properties within the ports. Port operators were advised by letter of the ports review and its background in May 2006. While the initial reviews have been completed, many port properties change over time and the VOA continue to make alterations to individual properties as part of its statutory duty to maintain the rating lists.
The review of ports by the Valuation Office Agency is to ensure that all individual business properties within and outside ports are rated fairly to ensure that the burden of contributions to funding local government is shared fairly among businesses around the country.
The Government have listened to the concerns of businesses with significant and unexpected backdated bills, including some businesses within ports. It has legislated to enable such bills to be repaid over an unprecedented eight years rather than in a single instalment, helping affected businesses to manage the impact on their cash flows during the downturn by reducing the amount they are required to pay now by 87.5 per cent.
As at 8 October 2009, local authorities have reported that ratepayers occupying 221 properties within ports had fully discharged their backdated liability and ratepayers occupying a further 200 business properties within ports had been granted a schedule of payments.
Valuation officers are required under Section 41 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 to maintain accurate rating lists. When they become aware that a change is needed, such as that at the ports, they must make the alteration and specify the date from which the change should become effective for rates charging purposes.
The principles concerning separate rateability, which is the rating rationale for the separate assessment of some properties within ports, where there is “exclusive occupation” and “paramount control” are long established. The leading case on the subject is a House of Lords decision from as far back as 1936—Westminster Council v. Southern Railway Company and W.H. Smith and Son.
The review of ports by the Valuation Office Agency is to ensure that all individual business properties within and outside ports are rated fairly to ensure that the burden of contributions to funding local government is shared fairly among businesses around the country.
The Government have listened to the concerns of businesses with significant and unexpected backdated bills, including some businesses within ports. It has legislated to enable such bills to be repaid over an unprecedented eight years rather than in a single instalment, helping affected businesses to manage the impact on their cash flows during the downturn by reducing the amount they are required to pay now by 87.5 per cent.
As at 8 October 2009, local authorities have reported that ratepayers occupying 221 properties within ports had fully discharged their backdated liability and ratepayers occupying a further 200 business properties within ports had been granted a schedule of payments.