Local taxation - Valuation Appeals Committees etc: transfer of functions

We agree that the Local Taxation Chamber is the appropriate chamber to deal with this matter. With the existing CTRR panel to be abolished and their functions to be transferred to the new Local Taxation Chamber this will mean all council tax appeals in Scotland will be heard within the First Tier Tribunal. As with any change, the transfer may cause disruption and delay. There should be a concerted effort to ensure a seamless transition to the new system on 1st January 2023 to avoid prejudicing any appellants. Where appeals are raised before the transition date and where a time limit applies, consideration should be given to delays caused by the abolishment of the existing CTRR to avoid prejudicing the appellant. In addition, the Tribunals should be adequately resourced to cope with the increase in volume of workload to avoid backlogs and delays. Furthermore, the qualifications of the members should be appropriate and commensurate for the panel on which they sit.

We agree that the Local Taxation Chamber is the appropriate chamber to deal with this matter. With the existing VAC’s and VAP’s to be abolished and their functions to be transferred to the new Local Taxation Chamber this will mean all non-domestic rates appeals in Scotland will be heard within the First Tier Tribunal. As with any change, the transfer may cause disruption and delay. There should be a concerted effort to ensure a seamless transition to the new system on 1st January 2023 to avoid prejudicing any appellants. Where appeals are raised before the transition date and where a time limit applies, consideration should be given to delays caused by the abolishment of the existing VAC’s and VAP’s to avoid prejudicing the appellant. In addition, the Tribunals should be adequately resourced to cope with the increase in volume of workload to avoid backlogs and delays. Furthermore, the qualifications of the members should be appropriate and commensurate for the panel on which they sit.

As we are not experts on Council Tax matters, we have no specific comment on the transfer of functions other than that during the transfer period a flexible attitude should be taken to avoid any prejudice to the ratepayers who’s appeals may be affected/delayed by the changes. An appropriate level of resource should be in place to accommodate the potential high volume of appeals within this chamber.

We agree with the proposed transfer of the functions of the Lands Tribunal for Scotland (in relation to valuation appeals) to the Upper Tribunal for Scotland. As with any change, this may cause disruption and delay. There should be a concerted effort to ensure a seamless transition to the new system on 1st January 2023 to avoid prejudicing any appellants affected by the transfer.

The proposed composition of 3 members to sit on the First Tier Tribunal for rating appeals seems reasonable so long as those members are suitably qualified. We don’t agree with the proposal that 2 ordinary valuation experience members and a legal member can make up the panel. We would suggest that on every Tribunal at least one of the ordinary members has a minimum number of years of surveyor experience within the rating sector. Furthermore, a directory of specialists should be recorded to ensure appeals are heard by the correct panel members ie a rating surveyor with pub experience should sit on a Tribunal panel for a licenced premises appeal. Not only will this ensure that the grounds of appeal can be fully understood and considered by the panel, it should reduce the time required for the panel to sit.
There is a proposal that in the absence of one of the non-legal panel members the other 2 members can hear and make a decision on the appeal. This could be problematic if the absent member is the specialist rating surveyor. Where unforeseen circumstances arise resulting in this situation every option including postponement/continuation should be considered before the panel can sit with only one legal and one ordinary member. The condition that this can only be considered ‘with the consent of the parties’ must remain.
Whilst our expertise is in Non Domestic Rates and not in Council Tax, we don’t agree that a Tribunal can sit with only a single legal member to hear a non-list or Council Tax appeal under any circumstances, even though this has been happening under the existing system. The authority of that decision should not sit with one member but be fully discussed and considered by a minimum of two members to avoid any undisclosed conflicts of interest.

Colliers have no concerns over the composition criteria for the Upper Tribunal when hearing referrals or appeals of referral decisions given it generally replicates what is already in existence. We would however comment that, unless there is absolutely no alternative and a postponement is not possible, a single member panel should not sit as common practice. If a single member panel is the only option available both parties should have the right to object and should only sit if all parties agree.

Colliers have no concerns over the composition criteria for the Upper Tribunal in respect of Local Taxation Chamber appeals given it generally replicates what is already in existence. We would however comment that, unless there is absolutely no alternative and a postponement is not possible, a single member panel should not sit as common practice. If a single member panel is the only option available both parties should have the right to object and should only sit if all parties agree.

It is fair and reasonable that all Tribunals under the Local Taxation Chamber operate under the same set of Rules of Procedures. Having reviewed the proposed rules, it appears they are broadly in line with the rules under the current system. We have no concerns with this approach.
Where we do have concern is where there is self-regulation of procedures. This is open to misuse and conflict and should be closely monitored. Ideally, a third party should be available to resolve matters where there is dispute between parties on how the rules are being interpreted or enforced.
In our opinion the proposed amendments to the timings within the Valuation Timetable (Scotland) Order 1995 (“the 1995 Order”) create a less fair and just appeal system. The changes merely increase the time pressures and put further barriers in the way of a ratepayer challenging their Rateable Values. Having carried out an exercise to calculate how much time Colliers would have to review, inspect and submit a proposal within the proposed new timings, we found that with our existing resources and clients we would have less than an hour for each property. Within that time we would have to drive to the property location, carry out a full inspection and measurement, analyse all rental evidence, collaborate with other parties and submit a valid proposal. Obviously, that is completely impossible. Frontloading the appeals system will achieve what the government require – less appeals, fewer reductions resulting in higher tax revenue. That will not create a more fair and just system for the ratepayer. The role of the Assessor is to maintain an accurate valuation roll. The systems in which the Assessors operate should not be influenced in any way by government tax policies. We will include a more detailed response to the proposed changes to the NDR appeal system under the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1975 by section 10 of the Non-Domestic Rates (Scotland) Act 2020 within the relevant consultation paper.
Given the penalty notices system is very much in its infancy, ratepayers are still trying to navigate several new procedures at once and it is imperative that there is an appeal’s process available to them.

The proposed Upper Tribunal rules of procedure for dealing with referred NDR appeals appears to be broadly in line with the existing system. We have no concerns with this approach.