Graphs to calculate relativity

[Ian_R]

The Leasehold Valuation Tribunal in their recent judgements state that they disregard the LEASE graph of LVT determinations for the purposes of evidence.

They make use of the Moss Kaye Graph (2005), the John D Wood (2004) and the Charles Boston Graphs for relativity calculation. They seem to ignore the attempts of surveyors at 'guessing' the “No Act World” exisiting values, because of inconsistency.

Does anyone have a reference or access to these graphs. They would be most useful for the case I am preparing.

[OneTwo]

Hi Ian,

Try the following link:

http://www.beckettandkay.co.uk/pdfs/Graph_of_graphs.pdf

Regards

[sgclacy]

This is rather alarming: the idea that relativity can be read off a graph!. This coupled with the judgement in Cadogan and Sportelli would make the calculations very straight forward indeed.

[Ian_R]

OneTwo many thanks.

Do I detect a tongue-in-cheek response in the last posting? The LVT have certainly used these graphs in cases 1548 and 1627 available through their web site.

[Jueyclaire]

so according to the magic graphs relativity at 65 years could be anywhere between 80 and 90% depending on which way the wind is blowing.

Is it any wonder that the general public don't have a clue how these extension costs are calculated:confused:

Going back to sglacy's comment - if it's not worked out based on these graphs - how is it worked out ?
It seems to be so arbitrary as to be a farce.

As my dear freeholder said to me today, "we pick a figure, double it, and see what we can get away with"
if you don't like it, tough. See you at arbitration in 2 years time.
What a wonderful system.

[Achilles]

The surveyors' powerful trade union, RICS, has a long and ancient history and was a prime mover in rubbishing and then effectively scuppering the HIPs project since a) most of the surveyors' work would be easily done by a competing bunch of newly-trained, lower paid HIPs inspectors and, horror of horrors, b) we might have a situation where only one survey was required on each house/flat sale rather then several - particularly where a sale falls through a few times.

RICS would be similarly alarmed (on behalf of their members' fee income!) if not only the deferment rate issue was now easily settled by landlords and tenants post-Sportelli but, worse still, if relativity was also easily settled by a graph of sensible percentages.

How would these surveyors (and the rest of the lucrative enfranchisement industry) spend their time? There would be almost nothing left to have repeated and fatuous arguments over between advisors, at the LVT, etc generating a vast stream of fee income for all the players. The likelihood of RICS issuing standard guidance on relativities is about as likely as turkeys voting for Christmas.

Most LVT decisions are fatally flawed on relativity since a) there has been no reliable property market evidence since 1992 (all settled prices have been distorted in an Act-impaired world) and b) prior LVT decisions are not evidence (see Arbib and Sportelli decisions on this topic) even though the LEASE organisation continues to perpetuate this nonsense but graphing prior LVT decisions.

There you have it in a nutshell!

..........Achilles



This is rather alarming: the idea that relativity can be read off a graph!. This coupled with the judgement in Cadogan and Sportelli would make the calculations very straight forward indeed.

[sgclacy]

The surveyors' powerful trade union, RICS, has a long and ancient history and was a prime mover in rubbishing and then effectively scuppering the HIPs project since a) most of the surveyors' work would be easily done by a competing bunch of newly-trained, lower paid HIPs inspectors and, horror of horrors, b) we might have a situation where only one survey was required on each house/flat sale rather then several - particularly where a sale falls through a few times.

RICS would be similarly alarmed (on behalf of their members' fee income!) if not only the deferment rate issue was now easily settled by landlords and tenants post-Sportelli but, worse still, if relativity was also easily settled by a graph of sensible percentages.

How would these surveyors (and the rest of the lucrative enfranchisement industry) spend their time? There would be almost nothing left to have repeated and fatuous arguments over between advisors, at the LVT, etc generating a vast stream of fee income for all the players. The likelihood of RICS issuing standard guidance on relativities is about as likely as turkeys voting for Christmas.

Most LVT decisions are fatally flawed on relativity since a) there has been no reliable property market evidence since 1992 (all settled prices have been distorted in an Act-impaired world) and b) prior LVT decisions are not evidence (see Arbib and Sportelli decisions on this topic) even though the LEASE organisation continues to perpetuate this nonsense but graphing prior LVT decisions.

There you have it in a nutshell!

..........Achilles

I agree with you 100%

[puncie]

i also agree with achilles valuers have had a field day for too long