Council Rates Increased by 23%

LRepposh on 07/09/2018 - 07:45

My council rates just arrived and they have increased by 23% on last year based on a revaluation increase of 37%.

They have created a fictitious gross annual value which is around triple what I'd get if I rented my house out.

Bill is now almost $4,000 per year.

Council is always going on huge spending splurges including recently planting trees every 5m apart, redoing footpaths seemingly every 4 years, funding every arts programme under the sun etc. I feel like they're wasting my rates at an ever increasing rate.

Questions:

  1. How are these valuation figures derived? I haven't made any changes to the house, and capital growth has been stagnant lately. So why the massive revaluation increase? In particular, the gross annual value is completely off the mark. It's a family home, not a hotel!

  2. What do I need to do if I want to appeal?

  3. What's the likelihood of a successful appeal?

Thanks!

TLDR: council rates increased, advice wanted on appealing rate increase

Home & Garden

Comments

  • azvc on 07/09/2018 - 07:51
    +1

    I found this, it outlines who can appeal and how: objecting to a council valuation - VIC

    Edit: I haven't encountered your situation so can only answer part of your questions, sorry

    • Repposh on 07/09/2018 - 09:52

      Thanks for the link, I'll take a look!

  • DarkOz on 07/09/2018 - 08:11
    +1

    23% is quite normal as my local council did the same last year at 20%. Also they have something bigger brewing as they have doubled the land value and reduced the rate to get that 120%. All they have to do now is to increase the rate back to the old level over the next few years to double the old council rate.

    • Repposh on 07/09/2018 - 09:54

      I thought rate increases were meant to be capped to 2.5% or something. I realize that individual assessments can vary a bit, but 23% is ridiculous. Prior to the cap on rate increases, the council already went on a rate increase binge. I didn't complain, thinking it wouldn't increase much more after that but this is ridiculous. My income is certainly not going up by 23%.

  • Ocker on 07/09/2018 - 08:13
    +2

    Our (Victorian) council levies rates based on the Capital Improved Value - NOT the Net Annual Value. You may care to check this point on your rates.

    From what I have recently read about 50% of objections to an assessment are successful. Go for it - you have nothing to lose.

    • Repposh on 07/09/2018 - 09:54

      Thanks, 50% is encouraging!

  • JimmyF on 07/09/2018 - 08:16
    +4

    Council is always going on huge spending splurges including recently planting trees every 5m apart, redoing footpaths seemingly every 4 years, funding every arts programme under the sun etc.

    Well at least you're getting SOMETHING for your money, unlike most areas.

    • [Deactivated] on 07/09/2018 - 08:20
      +5

      How dare you insinuate that the hardworking men and women of certain council areas haven't contirbuted. After all the tedious meetings over dinners and careful study if sister cities in person. All that travel and being put up in lousy accommodations have to count for something.

      • Repposh on 07/09/2018 - 09:56
        -1

        That would be true if we actually wanted the trees. All they do is ruin the footpaths and local roads (maybe another excuse to repave and relay the roads again?). Also, the leaves and seeds make a huge mess and guess who has to clean it? Certainly not the stupid council.

        • paulinspace on 09/09/2018 - 21:34

          go live in los angeles if you don't like trees. ugly big concrete jungle sounds right down your alley.

        • Repposh on 10/09/2018 - 15:25

          @paulinspace: I'm not saying we should have no trees at all - just don't see the need for a tree every 5m on both sides of every single street - it's completely over the top.

  • vinni9284 on 07/09/2018 - 08:31
    +7

    We are getting thrashed in all directions.

    I mean how do you think Council CEO's on average earn $400K per year? By yours truly!!!!

    … There should be another waive of Jeff Kennett .. reduction and amalgamations of councils across the state.

    Would that reduce rates? I wish I can say yes .. but ….

    • Diji1 on 07/09/2018 - 09:30
      -6

      You are getting "thrashed" because you keep voting extreme neo-liberal regimes into power, namely the Liberal and Labour Parties.

      As their actions have clearly shown, their intention are to shift as much public, taxpayer money into private hands as possible by ripping off the population whilst reducing the tax burden on businesses and shifting it onto individuals, preferably the poorer individuals.

      Braindead Australians apparently can't help voting against their own interests thereby making themselves poorer so wealthier people have more money.

      • Ughhh on 07/09/2018 - 09:33

        Then why do you keep voting for them??

      • Baysew on 07/09/2018 - 09:38
        +4

        planting trees every 5m apart, redoing footpaths seemingly every 4 years, funding every arts programme under the sun etc.

        Sounds more like the OP is getting "thrashed" due to a bunch of Greens spending as much as the ratepayers money as they can.

        • HighAndDry on 07/09/2018 - 09:56

          Lol yeah - I was going to say, that would've been the first bunch of neoliberals I've ever seen go on spending splurges on trees and arts programs.

      • EightImmortals on 07/09/2018 - 09:39

        QFT

      • Repposh on 07/09/2018 - 10:00

        I don't actually vote for either Lib or Labour but thanks for the compliment anyhow haha ;)

        I think they're both as bad as each other. Funny but true - a few years ago I voted for the train party in the senate. With all the backyard deals between the micro parties, turns out I indirectly voted for Ricky Muir!

      • burningrage on 07/09/2018 - 13:17

        This argument about Lib/Lab/Greens is getting old.

        Stand at the election if you want to make a change. I'll vote for you.

      • ozbjunkie on 09/09/2018 - 01:08

        Not me, I draw a penis on the ballot as a sign of protest, and maturity.

        More seriously though, I vote greens nowadays, but I'm not sure I would if I thought they would really get in.

        Who do you think is a valid choice for a vote? I'm feeling like my representatives don't represent me… But don't see a solution, at least at the individual level.

        I used to vote labour just so the libs wouldn't get in, then I realised they are too close on several issues.

    • Repposh on 07/09/2018 - 09:58

      I agree with the amalgations. One of my friends in Sydney said his rates were 1/3 of ours. Perhaps reducing the number of councils would make a difference?

      • WreckTangle on 07/09/2018 - 19:46
        +2

        Maybe reduce them down to 6 and call them states

    • greywise on 09/09/2018 - 10:59

      Jeff Kennett inadvertently caused the wages and benefits of staff to soar. There was a spate of Melbourne visits to find out how it works. On return it was agreed councils should be run like businesses ie the names of staff positions were changed eg Town Clerk became CEO, Town Engineer became Manager Works then Director Works - cars were upgraded from Ford Escort to Falcon to cars of choice within a price range. Supervisors became Managers and utes or Ford Fiesta to Falcons or car of choice. Assistants to CEO from no cars to cars of choice. Duties were wide ranging before and became "specialised" and narrow in scope. I still remember the look on the faces of the Town clerk and staff when they first learnt of Jeff Kennet's revolutionary changes. Their friends were given work as consultants. etc. I am afraid the genie is out of the bottle.

  • stratbargain on 07/09/2018 - 08:34
    +1

    Check recently sold similar houses in your area on http://house.ksou.cn and if the capital improved value is vastly different then raise an objection to the valuation.

    • Repposh on 07/09/2018 - 10:01

      Thanks for the link, will check it out!

  • GourmetFoodie on 07/09/2018 - 08:55
    +5

    Victorian councils are corrupt scum. I've had the unfortunate displeasure of seeing some of it first hand. They are such a waste of money. State govt should be responsible for everything.

    • EightImmortals on 07/09/2018 - 09:38
      +2

      It's not limited to Victoria, they are all the same these days and I think people are getting sick of it.

  • CyberMurning on 07/09/2018 - 09:14
    +1

    which council????? specific as possible please

    • Repposh on 07/09/2018 - 10:03
      +1

      Maribyrnong. I read in a local newspaper some time ago we've got the highest rates in Victoria. My hip pocket agrees :(

      • lgacb08 on 08/09/2018 - 22:54

        sounds like you're same boat with my friend, I was crying when council upped my rate by more than 11% and he was laughing and a week later it was his turn, lol.

  • EightImmortals on 07/09/2018 - 09:37
    +3

    Rates are just another unlawful tax.

    • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 07/09/2018 - 11:21

      "Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious."

      George Orwell.

  • tsunamisurfer on 07/09/2018 - 14:58

    Perth Councils are no better.

    The amount of money wasted on unwarranted road works is frightening.

  • elgrande on 07/09/2018 - 20:47

    $4k.. thats alot.

    • whooah1979 on 07/09/2018 - 20:49

      Not for a $2m property.

      • Repposh on 10/09/2018 - 15:18

        the property is not worth anywhere near this amount - if anyone wants to buy for $2m happy to sell haha

  • singingwolf on 08/09/2018 - 10:58

    Have had a similar issue. Appealed and was rejected. Despite a mountain of evidence.

    I can bet now that prices are falling, in 3 years when they re-evaluate back down, your rates won't reduce.

    • Repposh on 10/09/2018 - 15:21

      Bummer :(

  • BigBirdy on 08/09/2018 - 17:15

    Councils collect rates in order to meet their budget requirements. Those rates are divided up amongst property owners, proportionally by valuation. Sounds simple, but the thing to note is, how much you pay depends on your property value relative to other property values in your council zone. Ie, Council can double your valuation, but if everyone’s in the zone doubles, rates stay roughly the same (they usually use thresholds so you may actually get a minor increase/decrease). This is why a $100k property in one council might have same rates as a $2M property in another council.

    • singingwolf on 09/09/2018 - 10:56

      ok - makes sense. For some reason I thought it was a direct % of land value.

    • Repposh on 10/09/2018 - 15:19

      Makes sense in principle but 23% is not minor

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join