Part 10B: Check (Regs 5 to 10)
The Valuation Office Agency's (VOA) technical manual for the rating of business (non-domestic) property.
3 BACKGROUND
Before a proposal (Challenge) can be submitted a check must be made and completed by the same IP. (Reg 5). The purpose of this is for the IP to confirm or correct the facts about the property on which the valuation is based.
3.1 Check procedures
The requirements for Check are set out in Regs 6-10 and a check is completed when the VO serves a notice under Regulation 10(1) or it is taken to be complete under Reg 10(3) when the VO has not served a notice by the end of the permitted period (12 months from date of confirmation of check).
The provisions for the closing of the 2023 and subsequent lists and effects on CCA are explained in Appendix 6
3.2 Check Procedure and VO Portal
Check involves the IP requesting the detail that the VOA holds about the property, and then confirming whether that information is correct and providing any missing information.
The VOA has a digital portal to display and collect the relevant information about a property for the majority of check cases and must be used by the IP, however there is an alternative system for those who cannot access that portal may be used provided it has been prior agreed with the VO (Reg 6(5)).
CHECK PROCEDURE
3.3 Check Stages
The stages of check are as follows (Regs 6-10):-
1) Request from the IP for information held by the VO
2) Provision of information and request for missing information from the VO to the IP
3) Confirmation of the accuracy of the information by the IP
4) Acknowledgement of the receipt of confirmation
5) Amending the rating list if necessary, completion and notification of check from VO to IP (Reg 5(3) and Regs 9 and 10)
3.4 Number of checks and proposals
There are no restrictions on the number of Checks which an IP can make.
Different IPs may make checks at the same or different times, for example an owner and occupier may make separate checks at the same time.
There are no restrictions on the number of proposals that can be linked to a check provided they are made by the same IP who made the check and are made on different grounds.
There is no facility in the regulations for anyone other than the Proposer to be party to a check.
The IP is not obliged to give reasons for the check however the VO does ask for reasons for the check being made to assist with resourcing.
A check is not list specific as it relates to information about the hereditament but will be registered against the list which is live at the time the check is submitted. (see 5A ‘5A end of list regulations’. At the closure of a list depending on when the check was submitted the grounds of challenge may be restricted. See Appendix 6 for details.
3.5 Material Day for list alterations arising from Check.
Any alterations made to the rating list as part of the Check decision will be by VO Notice. The Material Day applicable to the alteration will depend on the reason for the change and will follow the provisions of 3(7)(b)(i) of the Non-Domestic Rating (Material Day for List Alterations) Regulations 1992, (SI 1992/556) as mentioned in Part 4 of the Rating Manual:
e.g. - for a compiled list change the material day will be compilation date
- for a deletion the material day will be the date the circumstances first arose
- for MCCs given effect to by VON, this will be:
(i) The date the circumstances first arose or
(ii) The day the list is altered (‘Date of Schedule’) if that date is not known (Material Day Regs 3(7)(ii)(bb))
Regarding to proposals for an MCC, the Material Day is the date of check confirmation.
3.6 Facts
The facts declared as part of a Check are the up-to-date facts at the date the Check is submitted.
For proposals, other than those for a material change in circumstances, the facts at the material day may be different eg it may be the date of compilation or date of event, so the caseworker may have to agree different facts at a different date when the case reaches the challenge stage.
Care should also be taken as to whether an historic assessment is being challenged in which case different facts may have to be agreed as opposed to those submitted at check.
If the hereditament includes parts which have been exempted or comprise domestic property these areas should also be confirmed by the IP to ensure any changes are picked up.
3.7 Time Period
If the VO has not completed a Check within twelve months of the date of confirmation, the Check is taken to have been completed and the IP can make a Proposal (Challenge) (Reg 10(3)). The VO may agree with the IP in writing to extend this time limit.
The date a check is completed starts the 4 month period within which proposals must be submitted apart from external MCCs which is 16 months from the date of check confirmation. The 4 month period itself cannot be extended only the start date of that period..
3.8 Request of information held (Reg 6) and new list entries
Check requires that a person entitled to submit a proposal must first request from the VO the information held about that hereditament. This information must be provided if the VO considers it reasonable to do so. The VO can also request any missing information to be provided. The request or provision of information must be by using the VO electronic portal (or other manner as agreed with the VO.(Reg 6))
In the situation where the IP requests that a new property is inserted into the rating list they still have to make a check request regarding any information we may hold and the IP will be required to provide the VO will all the relevant details relating to the hereditament in question in order that a check may be initiated. Separate CCA procedures are in place for this scenario as it is not supported by the VO portal.
3.9 Historic Assessments
A proposal may be made against an historic assessment by an IP. However, the valuation and survey data attached to check on the VOA website shows the current list entry. The IP will need to advise the VO if he is querying an historic assessment so that the correct valuation may be linked to the case for amendment if necessary. If further changes to the list are also required then these will be by way of additional Valuation Officer Notices.
See also Rating Manual section 6 Part 5B - where proposals may need re-linking following later amendments to the rating list which take effect before the Material Day of the subject proposal (precedent here was set by the judgement known as the Sheep St Decision (1A/2 Sheep Street, Wellingborough (RA 1 2003))
3.10 Confirmation of accuracy of information (Reg 7)
The person (IP or former IP) making the check then must confirm the completeness and accuracy of the information they have given and also that held by the VO (Reg 7(1)).
A declaration is also required that the information provided is accurate.
If the person provides the VO with information in, or in connection with the proposal (which will include Check), is false or incorrect then a penalty notice may be issued, but only after a complete proposal has been made (Reg 16(1))
For more information see penalties below. (Reg 16)
Once the penalty process has been implemented during challenge, the CCA process is paused until the penalty has been resolved.
3.11 Request for Information, Confirmation of Check and Material Day
The date of request for information held in respect of the hereditament at check is important as it affects the rights of former occupiers to make proposals and the grounds available to them. See below.
However, there is no specified ‘material day’ for check.
Check is the exchange and confirmation of information following receipt of which the VO may decide to alter the list, in which case the normal Material Day rules apply.
Material Day for MCC proposals
The Material Day for a proposal (reg 4(1)(b)) made on the grounds of an MCC is always the date the check was confirmed (ie date of submission) see VOA - Part 4 - Material Day
Proposals may be on any of the grounds specified in Reg 4(1) (a)-(o) and the Material Day to apply will depend on the ground chosen for the challenge.
NB - If as a result of check, the VO has amended the rating list for an MCC, the Proposer has the option if he wants to make a challenge in respect of an MCC by submitting a proposal under
(a) Reg 4(1)(b) - as an MCC proposal - in which case the Material Day will be the date of confirmation of the check
(ie the submission of the check document)
or (b) Reg 4(1)(d) against the VO alteration - in which case the Material Day will be the same date as in the VO notice of alteration
For the purposes of a proposal, if the facts agreed at the date of confirmation of check are different to those existing at the Material Day of the proposal, then it will be necessary for the caseworker to agree the facts as at the Material Day.
3.12 Acknowledgment (Reg 8)
The VO must, on receipt of the confirmation, serve a written acknowledgement of receipt stating the date on which the confirmation was received and the date of the acknowledgement.
3.13 Completion of Check (Reg 4E and 4F)
On receipt of the Reg 4C(1) confirmation from the IP, (completeness and accuracy of the information held by the VO), the VO has to acknowledge the receipt (which must include certain information (Reg 4D))
The VO must then decide if the information provided is accurate or not and then alter the rating list to correct any inaccuracies regarding the rateable value (RV) or other information shown in the list about the hereditament (Reg 4E) (such as the description or composite indicator).
The VO also has to update any additional information that is held for the property (Reg 4(E)(c))
3.14 Notification of Completion of Check (Reg 9 and 10)
When steps under Regs 6-9 have been completed the VO must serve a notice on the person making the check stating that a Check has been completed in relation to the hereditament (Reg 10). This notice must include the following (Reg 10(2)):-
(a) date on which the notice is served
(b) the name of the person who made the request
(c) identity of the hereditament
(d) details of any alteration made to the list as a result of the check
(e) a summary of any changes to information held as a result of the check
(f) a statement regarding the person’s right to make a proposal
(g) relates to any alteration relating to the entry appearing in the rating list eg RV, description etc
(h) relates to any changes we make to information we hold on the property, i.e amendments made to the survey data or valuation of the property itself.
The date of completion of check starts the 4 month period within which proposals must be submitted (Reg 6 (1)). The exception to this is the extended period allowed in respect of material changes in circumstance external to the hereditament only (Reg 12).
3.15 Deemed completion of Check (Reg 10(3))
A check is taken as completed if the VO has not served a Reg 10 notice (completed check) within 12 months from the date the VO having received confirmation under Reg 7 (completeness and accuracy of the information held by the VO), or as agreed in writing with the VO before the end of that period (Reg 10(3))
3.16 Deemed Checks giving rise to rights to make a proposal on reconstitutions
Checks on assessments which have become historic prior to the completion of the check 5(5)
(5) Where this regulation applies—
(a) for the purpose of paragraph 1, a check in relation to a new hereditament will be deemed to have been completed where a check has been completed on or after the creation day in relation to each historic hereditament; and
(b) for the purpose of these Regulations a check is completed in relation to a new hereditament on—
(i) the date on which the VO serves a notice under regulation 10(1) in respect of the final historic hereditament; or
(ii) the date on which the check in respect of the final historic hereditament is taken to be completed under regulation 10(3).
A new hereditament may come into existence because:-
(i) it was previously rated as a single hereditament but is now split,
(ii) it was previously rated in parts and is now merged as a single hereditament, or
(iii) the hereditament or any part becomes a different hereditament.
Where this happens before the subject check has been completed,
(a) for one of the three reasons above,
and
(b) the new hereditaments first existed on the ground prior to the completion of the check,
then this triggers the right for the IP to be able to make a proposal against the new hereditaments without the need to submit further checks on the new entries first.
N.B. The ‘creation day’ is not the same as the effective date shown in the list, it is the date the new hereditaments first came into existence on the ground.*
The IP would then have the usual time limit of 4 months from the date of completion of check to submit a proposal, or 16 months from the date of completion of check to serve an external MCC proposal under Reg 4(1)(b).
This is because by virtue of Reg 5(5)(a)
‘a check in relation to a new hereditament shall be deemed to have been completed where a check has been completed on or after the creation day in relation to each historic hereditament.’
NOTE: Reg 5(5) does not apply where the new hereditament(s) had a creation day before 1/4/23. In that case, the proposer has to submit a fresh check and challenge against the new properties
For practical purposes for CCA
A deemed check exists, for the purposes of this section of the Act, against the new entries, if the new reconstituted hereditament(s) existed on the ground before the completion of the check on the originating hereditament, regardless of when the list is updated.
At the same time the check is completed on the original hereditament, the ‘deemed’ checks are treated as being completed on the same date in respect of the new hereditaments. (Reg 5(5)(a) and (b).
The deemed check will then trigger the right for the proposer in respect of the new hereditament(s) to submit proposals in respect of those new units within the required time limits depending on the type of proposal without having to go through another check first.
One to one address changes are not reconstitutions for the purposes of regulation 5(5).
With a list amendment relating to the address only the hereditament does not change, even though the VO IT system treats it as a reconstitution. Consequently, in this situation, a deemed check (as defined above) does not arise, but the previous check should be re-linked to the new address.
Illustrative examples
EXAMPLE 1
Where a property is merged and the creation date is before the completion of checks on the original historic hereditaments, then the completion date for the deemed check on the new hereditament is taken as the date of the last check to be completed on the parts being merged. (Reg 5(5)(b)(i).
e.g.
Merger of units A and B to form unit C takes place on 1 April 2023
The rating list was updated on 1 January 2024.
Creation date of unit C (merged unit) is 1 April 2023 i.e. the date it physically appeared on the ground
A Check was submitted on Unit A on 1 July 2023 and completed on 1 September 2023 and Unit B on 1 September 2023 completed on 1 November 2023
The creation date of Unit C, 1 April 2023, is prior to the completion of either of the checks on Unit A or B. A deemed check is therefore assumed to exist the new hereditament C.
The date for completion of the deemed check on Unit C is 1 November 2023
(i.e. the date on completion of the last check to be finished on the units to be merged, in this case unit B).
This will be the date from which the time limits start for submission of any proposal in respect of unit C
EXAMPLE 2
A Check has been submitted by a landlord but before that check is completed the property has been split into 2 by a reconstitution.
The landlord, by virtue of the ‘deemed check’ on the new assessments will have the right to submit proposals against both new addresses if he wishes. However, the tenants of the new parts will have to submit fresh checks against their new assessment in order to have the right to submit a proposal.
In this example, if the initiating check was submitted by a tenant, who after the property has been split, only occupies part of the premises, then he will only be entitled to submit a proposal in respect of the part of the split he occupies. The occupier of the other part of the split will have to submit his own fresh check and proposal as he did not make the original check.
3.17 Request of Information and disclosure of FOR and receipts information held
Disclosure of RALD/ FOR information is covered by the provisions of s18(2)(a)(i) of Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005 (CRCA) regarding the VO’s statutory function to compile and maintain rating lists. Disclosure is subject to reasonableness, proportionality tests and being a necessary part of litigation.
If a ratepayer requests to see their own information there is little reason to refuse. An agent may see the FOR on the property only if they are authorised to act for the person who completed the FOR.
If the request relates to a period before or after the client’s occupation or a comparable hereditament then the situation is different and access may not be appropriate.
With premises valued on receipts and expenditure, the valuation is normally based on Fair Maintainable Trade (FMT). This figure is normally included in the valuation provided at check by the IP. The actual trade figures should be facts that the IP provides at check and confirms if they are correct.
If there is a dispute over actual trade figures on which the valuation has been based then this is a matter for discussion at challenge. Access to this information by the IP is subject to the normal rules of disclosure.
Similarly, the interpretation of receipts etc. and how they affect the adopted FMT are valuation matters. Check is designed to establish the facts and then for the VO to decide, based up on those facts if they are accepted and whether the list should be altered as a result. It is not appropriate at check stage, to discuss matters such as receipts and expenditure or valuation issues as these would form the basis of discussions at Challenge.
At Challenge, a Regulation 48(5) notice should be issued regarding the use of FOR information likely to be referred to at VT by the VO, if relevant to the case. At that point the proposer may request to view the actual FOR information referred to. See under Challenge below for the procedure to follow.
ON NO ACCOUNT CAN A COPY OF THE FOR/RALD BE PROVIDED TO THE RATEPAYER OR AGENT.
Neither should Ratepayers or agents be shown a copy of the FOR via video link due to the potential to take screen shots, i.e. photographic images of the forms which is prohibited by the regulations.