HC Deb 28 January 1969 vol 776 cc1083-4
6. Mr. David Mitchell

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer on how many occasions the valuation of the present Basingstoke district valuer has been the subject of appeals heard by the Lands Tribunal in respect of valuations at Basingstoke; and in how many of these cases the award of the Tribunal has exceeded the valuation of the district valuer.

Mr. Taverne

Four, as opposed to over 780 settled by agreement. In all four cases the Lands Tribunal award exceeded the district valuer's assessment, but in three of them the awards were nearer to his figure than to the amounts claimed by the vendors.

Mr. Mitchell

Is the Minister aware that many more people would have appealed to the Lands Tribunal if they were not frightened of the costs involved?

Mr. Taverne

These cases are often difficult and the considerations of appeal are often ones which have to weigh these conflicting balances against each other.

7. Mr. David Mitchell

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer by what sum of money the Lands Tribunal found that his Department's local district valuer had under-valued compensation due on a compulsory purchase valuation at Basing-stoke, following the most recent appeal in this matter.

Mr. Taverne

By £183,000, part of the difference arising from a question of law rather than of valuation.

Mr. Mitchell

Does the Minister admit that there is a substantial difference, quite apart from a matter of law? Would he not agree that this is an unsatisfactory state of affairs? What does he propose to do about it?

Mr. Taverne

The answer to this Question has to be read with the answer given to the last Question, which showed that in three out of four cases, the district valuer's valuation was much closer. I am sure that the district valuer has done his best to arrive at a fair valuation in each case. I am sorry that this has led to difficulties, or rather resentment, in certain cases.

Mr. Mitchell

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest available opportunity.

Back to
Forward to