Examination of Witnesses (Questions 400-404)
MR MICHAEL
ROBERTS, MR
STELIO STEFANOU,
MS JULIA
PENFOLD AND
MR CHRIS
WILLIAMS
THURSDAY 11 JULY 2002
400. In the two years before the new valuation
comes in, the evidence would be that those properties have really
been under-valued, have they not?
(Mr Roberts) I think I understand the point. You are
basing that on, as it were, the market experience within the last
five or so years, but I would suggest that there are swings and
roundabouts here and in another revaluation, the market may have
operated the other way, so I think it would be unfair simply to
focus on possibly the forthcoming revaluation and the extent to
which people may have benefited from valuations which do not match
the way the market moves which is upwards.
401. Do you think it is easy to understand the
scheme the Government is putting forward?
(Mr Roberts) I think, generally speaking, no.
402. Could you design a much easier, much simpler
transitional relief scheme?
(Mr Roberts) Well, I will not be able to give you
a blueprint right now, but we certainly have—
403. No, but at least in theory should it be
easy?
(Mr Roberts) In theory, it should be, and we have
certainly in the last couple of years at a staff level been working
with the departments involved to try and find ways through the
revaluation maze. It is indeed complex.
404. So you want a transitional relief scheme,
but you do not want the losers, if you like, in terms of property
values to be the ones to have to pay for it. Is that right?
(Mr Roberts) Correct.
Chairman: Well, on that note, can I thank you
very much for your evidence.
| 
