Sylvester Sweeney+mary Sweeney V. The Assessor For Ayrshire Valuation Joint Board
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judge | Lord Doherty,Lady Dorrian,Lord Woolman |
| Neutral Citation | [2013] CSIH 107 |
| Date | 23 October 2013 |
| Published date | 05 December 2013 |
| Court | Court of Session |
| Docket Number | XA56/13 |
| LANDS VALUATION APPEAL COURT | |
| Lady Dorrian Lord Woolman Lord Doherty | [2013] CSIH 107 XA56/13 OPINION OF LADY DORRIAN in the appeal by SYLVESTER SWEENEY and MARY SWEENEY Appellants; against THE ASSESSOR FOR AYRSHIRE VALUATION JOINT BOARD Respondents: _______________ |
Respondent: Gill; Simpson & Marwick
23 October 2013
[1] I agree that the appeal should be refused for the reasons given by Lord Doherty.
| LANDS VALUATION APPEAL COURT | |
| Lady Dorrian Lord Woolman Lord Doherty | XA56/13 OPINION OF LORD WOOLMAN in the appeal by SYLVESTER SWEENEY and MARY SWEENEY Appellants; against THE ASSESSOR FOR AYRSHIRE VALUATION JOINT BOARD Respondents: _______________ |
Respondent: Gill; Simpson and Marwick
23 October 2013
[2] I agree that, for the reasons given by Lord Doherty, the appeal should be refused.
| LANDS VALUATION APPEAL COURT | |
| Lady Dorrian Lord Woolman Lord Doherty | XA56/13 OPINION OF LORD DOHERTY in the appeal by SYLVESTER SWEENEY and MARY SWEENEY Appellants; against THE ASSESSOR FOR AYRSHIRE VALUATION JOINT BOARD Respondents: _______________ |
Respondent: Gill; Simpson and Marwick
23 October 2013
Introduction
[3] The appeal subjects, Seamill Hydro, are a hotel comprising four main buildings. The principal hotel building was built in 1879 and was extended in the 1960s and in 1995. The "Seaview" building was built in the 1890s. Five separate annex blocks containing 18 self‑contained two-bedroomed flats were built in 1995. In all, there are 191 bed spaces. There are also restaurants and bar areas, conference facilities, leisure facilities (including a swimming pool, a sauna, a steam room, a gym, tennis courts, a 5‑a‑side football pitch, a crazy golf course and a children's play area), and a hair and beauty salon. The subjects have open sea views to Arran and beyond. They adjoin, and have direct access to, the beach at Seamill. They are enclosed in part by a seawall extending to 130 metres in length.
[4] At the 2010 revaluation the subjects were entered in the valuation roll with a net annual value of £365,000. The appellants appealed against that entry. The appeal was heard by the Valuation Appeal Committee at Ayr on 19 December 2012.
[5] The Assessor had valued the subjects as a class 3 hotel. No issue was taken with that. He had followed the approach set out in the Scottish Assessors' Practice Note 16 "Valuation of Hotels" ("PN16"). He had applied the following percentages to the relevant hypothetical achievable turnover figures: accommodation, 9.5%; catering, 6.5%; liquor, 6.5%; and leisure club, 9.5%. He had applied an end allowance of 2.5% to reflect the fact that the complex had been developed over a number of years and was spread out over a number of buildings.
[6] Before the Committee the appellants' case was that the subjects should not be valued on the basis of a percentage of their turnover, but that a rate per bed space should to be used. The appellants suggested that an appropriate bed space rate could be derived by taking the net annual values of 18 hotels which they relied upon as comparisons (3 of which were within the valuation area and 15 of which were elsewhere in Scotland) and in each case dividing the net annual value by the number of bed spaces in the hotel. They argued that on that approach an appropriate bed space rate was £1,300, and that that figure should be multiplied by the 191 bed spaces in the appeal subjects to result in a net annual value of £248,000. The appellants did not present an alternative valuation based on turnover. They did contend, however, that the Assessor's end allowance of 2.5% was inadequate to reflect disadvantages which the subjects suffered from (because, e.g., of their age, fragmented layout, and higher than normal maintenance costs attributable to their coastal situation). They also submitted that too high a rate had been applied to the leisure club turnover, and that if turnover was to be used the appropriate rate to be applied to that income stream was 6.5%.
[7] The Committee was not persuaded that the appellants' bed space method of valuation was appropriate. It accepted the Assessor's case that the subjects should be valued on their turnover. It decided that the rate which ought to be applied to the leisure club turnover was 8%. It held that an appropriate end allowance in all the circumstances was 5%. It allowed the appeal in those two respects and reduced the net annual value of the subjects to £350,000.
[8] The appellants have appealed the Committee's decision.
Counsel for the appellants' submissions
[9] Miss Locke accepted that the Committee had been entitled on the evidence to find that valuation of the subjects by reference to their turnover was appropriate. It had been open to it to prefer that method to the bed space method put forward on the appellants' behalf. Nevertheless, she submitted that the committee had erred in two respects.
[10] First, it had applied an inappropriate percentage to the leisure club element of the valuation. There had been evidence that Assessors in...
To continue reading
Request your trial