Ratepayer allowed to appeal against refusal to reinstate

We have commented on a number of occasions about the increasing procedural complexity of rating appeals, and a recent decision of the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) shows just how complex things can become when they start to go wrong.

In the case of Wonder Investments Ltd v Jackson (Valuation Officer) (2015) UKUT 0335 (LC) the ratepayer had made an appeal seeking to delete the rating assessment of a property in Barnet. The Valuation Officer (VO) did not agree that the assessment should be deleted and the ratepayer’s appeal was listed for hearing by the Valuation Tribunal for England (VTE). The VTE issued directions that the ratepayer should serve a statement of case on the VTE and on the VO. When the VTE did not receive such a statement it struck out the ratepayer’s appeal, as was set out in its directions.

The ratepayer made an application to have its appeal reinstated on the basis that it had, indeed, served a statement of case and, although this had been sent by post, it had not been received by either the VTE or the VO. The VTE refused the ratepayer’s application to reinstate the appeal and the ratepayer appealed against that refusal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber). As if matters were not already complicated enough, the VO then made an application that the ratepayer’s appeal to the Upper Tribunal should be struck out because the Upper Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear such an appeal.

The Upper Tribunal has considered the VO’s application and has determined that its does, indeed, have jurisdiction to hear the ratepayer’s appeal because, following the VTE’s refusal to reinstate, the original appeal remained an appeal for the limited purpose of consideration as to whether it should be reinstated. The parties now have the opportunity to make submissions to the Upper Tribunal on the substantive issue of whether the ratepayer’s appeal should be reinstated.

All of this reveals just how procedurally complex rating appeals have become and shows also an increasing, and unattractive, tendency of the Valuation Office Agency to seek to defeat ratepayers’ appeals on procedural grounds, rather than addressing the substantive issues behind those appeals.