# LPT: Are owners afraid to disagree with Revenue's Estimate?



## delgirl (19 Mar 2013)

I received the LPT1 today for a rental property - a terraced property in an estate of 65 identical and similar houses.

One idential property in this estate was sold in May 2012 for €88,000 and one very similar property with one extra bedroom was sold for €89,000 in March 2012. I have printed off the details of these sales from the Property Price Register and plan to send them by post with my return to support my estimate.

As with most parts of the country, property prices in this area have not risen in the last year and I have therefore estimated the value of the property at €88,000, which falls into Valuation Band 1 and therefore €45 is due this year for the 6 months from July to December and €90 is payable next year for the full year.

Revenue's estimate for my property as per the LPT1 is Band 2, €112 for this half-year and €225 for the next full year.

One of the owner/occupiers in this estate, who is an elderly man, has also received the Revenue's estimate, which incorrectly puts his property into Band 2 and is afraid to contest it. I have shown him the details of the 2 properties which were sold last year as recorded on the property price register, but, as he's on a pension, he says he will just have to eat and heat less to pay the full estimate as he's afraid they will just take it from his pension anyway.

How many other people whose property value is over-estimated by Revenue will just pay the estimate out of fear of what the repercussions might be since so many threats have been bandied about?


----------



## mandelbrot (19 Mar 2013)

What does the guide tell you to do?

EDIT: Here, I looked it up for myself, it says:

_"The following may assist you in valuing your property:_​ 
_● Property valuation guidance is available on _*www.revenue.ie*_which includes an on-line guide that __provides indicative property values. If you do not have internet access, terminals are available __at Revenue Information Offices and local libraries. You can also contact the Citizens Information __Service for assistance: Phone Service: 0761 07 4000, Monday to Friday, 9am - 8pm or in person by __calling to a Citizens Information Service near you._

_The valuation guidance is based on:_​ 
_- __The type of property e.g. detached, semi-detached, apartment etc._​ 
_- __The age of the property e.g. built before the year 2000 or after._​ 
_- __The average price of the type of property for the general area._​ 
_If your property has certain unique features, is smaller or larger than the average for your area, is in __a significantly poor state of repair or has exceptional features, you will have to factor this into your __assessment of the valuation of your property._​ 

_● *The Residential Property Price Register at *__*www.propertypriceregister.ie*_*produced by the Property Services Regulatory Authority (PSRA), provides an actual sales price of all properties sold since*
_*January 2010.*_​ 

_● You may choose to obtain a valuation from a competent professional valuer. Some valuers are __offering a special price for LPT valuations._​ 
_● If you have purchased your property or obtained a professional valuation in recent years, you may __use this valuation and adjust for any change in values in your area since the date of this valuation._
_You should also refer to other sources of information relating to local properties such as the property __section of local newspapers, information from local estate agents and property websites."_​ 
So, they've indicated they'll be perfectly happy with a valuation based on information available from the Property Price Register - no need to be attaching stuff to your return - if they want to know how you arrived at your valuation they'll ask you, but I'd be surprised if they did.​


----------



## MrEarl (19 Mar 2013)

Hello,

In my personal view, anyone who is afraid to return to the Revenue with a revised (and most likely, more accurate) estimate of the value of their property and the tax due - is simply nuts !

Everyone should be submitting a self declaration, based on what they believe to be their honest estimate of the value of their properties.  In the long term, it will serve the country better if we all do this now (as it will help support a genuine forecast of the future tax take from this source).

No one should have to pay more than their share of this tax ... but everyone should have to pay what they are liable for.

Regards

Mr. Earl.


----------



## delgirl (19 Mar 2013)

mandelbrot said:


> What does the guide tell you to do?


It's very clear to me mandelbrot and I'm happy to provide my own estimate with documentation to back it up, but my point is what about the elderly, such as this gentelman, or those who are afraid to disagree with Revenue?


----------



## mandelbrot (19 Mar 2013)

delgirl said:


> It's very clear to me mandelbrot and I'm happy to provide my own estimate with documentation to back it up, but my point is what about the elderly, such as this gentelman, or those who are afraid to disagree with Revenue?


 
Sorry, see my edited response above.


----------



## dub_nerd (19 Mar 2013)

I just paid my tax online without even waiting for the Revenue letter. So no, don't have the slightest worry about their valuation. Miserable divils wanted to charge an extra 1.49% for using a credit card too.


----------



## mandelbrot (19 Mar 2013)

delgirl said:


> It's very clear to me mandelbrot and I'm happy to provide my own estimate with documentation to back it up, but my point is what about the elderly, such as this gentelman, or those who are afraid to disagree with Revenue?


 
It's got nothing to do with "disagreeing" with Revenue - the Revenue figure is an *average* based on property sales in the area since 2010 - it doesn't purport to be an individual valuation, it specifically says as much in their documentation.

They're asking people to value their own houses. Only if someone doesn't file a return does the Revenue "estimate" come into play, as this is the amount they'll seek to collect in the absence of a return by the liable person.


----------



## delgirl (19 Mar 2013)

mandelbrot said:


> Sorry, see my edited response above.


I've seen your edited response and have read all the literature on the LPT - my point is that some people, not me but the elderly gentleman I have mentioned below, seem to be afraid to challenge Revenue's estimate and are just going to pay whatever estimate is sent to them.


----------



## mandelbrot (19 Mar 2013)

delgirl said:


> I've seen your edited response and have read all the literature on the LPT - my point is that some people, not me but the elderly gentleman I have mentioned below, seem to be afraid to challenge Revenue's estimate and are just going to pay whatever estimate is sent to them.


...



mandelbrot said:


> It's got nothing to do with "disagreeing" with Revenue - the Revenue figure is an *average* based on property sales in the area since 2010 - it doesn't purport to be an individual valuation, it specifically says as much in their documentation.
> 
> They're asking people to value their own houses. Only if someone doesn't file a return does the Revenue "estimate" come into play, as this is the amount they'll seek to collect in the absence of a return by the liable person.


----------



## delgirl (19 Mar 2013)

mandelbrot said:


> Sorry, see my edited response above.


I've seen your edited response and agree with you that it's just an estimate and it's up to the property owner to sumbmit their own estimate.  But some people, like the gentleman I met today, are afraid to 'go against' Revenue's estimate, as he put it.

It's incomprehensible to you or me, but some owners are afraid of Revenue and feel threatened.


----------



## mandelbrot (19 Mar 2013)

delgirl said:


> I've seen your edited response and agree with you that it's just an estimate and it's up to the property owner to sumbmit their own estimate. But some people, like the gentleman I met today, are afraid to 'go against' Revenue's estimate, as he put it.
> 
> It's incomprehensible to you or me, but some owners are afraid of Revenue and feel threatened.


 
A lot of that is down to scaremongering in the media coverage.


----------



## mandelbrot (19 Mar 2013)

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/lpt/local-property-tax-guide.pdf​ 
"A Notice of Estimate of LPT is included on the enclosed letter. *This Estimate is not based on a valuation of **your property nor should it be regarded as an accurate calculation of the amount of LPT you should pay*."​ 
Anyone shown that, who is still afraid to put their own valuation on their own house and pay accordingly, is IMHO paying the excess as a stupidity tax.


----------



## mathepac (19 Mar 2013)

I looked at the sales data used to value houses in my area and it's ludicrous - too few samples and all high-end stuff (relative to my modest 10-bed palace on 17 acres ) so I lobbed in my own lower valuation.

Also under "Method of Payment" lobbed in "Deferral", ticking the criteria applying to me.  No-one in our area has yet received LPT1s. I rang Revenue about that today, also seeking clarification on my own online submission and honestly for the first time ever it was like contacting one of those Asian call centres about Microsoft Windoze - not a clue. Everthing I had done was wrong and there could be consequences, etc, etc

This is an all-time low for Revenue who I find are usually as smart as whips on the phone, in person, by mail etc. All too rushed IMHO, not thought through, very like  Inda Kinny the plagiarist, completely unlike Revenue.


----------



## delgirl (20 Mar 2013)

mandelbrot said:


> Anyone shown that, who is still afraid to put their own valuation on their own house and pay accordingly, is IMHO paying the excess as a stupidity tax.


It's difficult for elderly people to get their heads around this new tax and calling the excess a stupidity tax doesn't help.

It may be anecdotal, but this poor old man made me think about how many others will get the estimate in the post and think that's what they have to pay otherwise Revenue will come after them.


----------



## PaddyW (20 Mar 2013)

Got my LPT1 today and have filed online. I checked other similar properties in my area that had sold in the past year or so. Although they were below €100,000, our house has some outbuildings added, plus we added another bathroom so I've lobbed it into band 2. I think that should be safe enough.. Or at least I hope!


----------



## Bronte (20 Mar 2013)

mandelbrot said:


> Anyone shown that, who is still afraid to put their own valuation on their own house and pay accordingly, is IMHO paying the excess as a stupidity tax.


 
There will be plenty of people like the elderly neighbour that Delgirl mentioned. They are not stupid, just fearful of the powers of revenue. The problem is not the way people perceive revenue but the way revenue can put fear into honest people. 

I hope in about a month as revenue get the data in that they will be able to pinpoint more accurate valuations for people. For example if revenue get proof from a few people in an estate that houses sold for X then revenue should tell the other people in the estate they they have overvalued or undervalued their properties. And then people should be allowed pay the extra without penalty or get a refund quickly.  That would be a fairer way to operate this.


----------



## T McGibney (20 Mar 2013)

Bronte said:


> I hope in about a month as revenue get the data in that they will be able to pinpoint more accurate valuations for people. For example if revenue get proof from a few people in an estate that houses sold for X then revenue should tell the other people in the estate they they have overvalued or undervalued their properties. And then people should be allowed pay the extra without penalty or get a refund quickly.  That would be a fairer way to operate this.



Sorry, this would be a recipe for confusion and mess. Sale prices vary for all sorts of reasons, many of them relevant only to the individual property being sold. 

It would be an absurdity to have citizens scurrying to and from the tax office every time a neighbouring property changes hands above or below the median market value.


----------



## Bronte (20 Mar 2013)

If there is an standard estate with lots of similar houses, then if 10 people fill out the form *proving* they are in Band 1 due to the last 5 sales in say, 2012, and the other 990 people just fill out the form revenue sends with say Band 2. The 990 people are incorrect, the 10 people are correct. Revenue know then that the band for that estate is Band 1 and should inform, should have a duty to inform the other 990 people that it should be band 1. 

There is not going to be much of a difference in price between each individual house in estates where say they are all 3 bed semi detached with x size of garden. Hence the banding to take care of that.


----------



## mandelbrot (20 Mar 2013)

Bronte said:


> There will be plenty of people like the elderly neighbour that Delgirl mentioned. They are not stupid, just fearful of the powers of revenue. The problem is not the way people perceive revenue but the way revenue can put fear into honest people.
> 
> I hope in about a month as revenue get the data in that they will be able to pinpoint more accurate valuations for people. For example if revenue get proof from a few people in an estate that houses sold for X then revenue should tell the other people in the estate they they have overvalued or undervalued their properties. And then people should be allowed pay the extra without penalty or get a refund quickly. That would be a fairer way to operate this.


 
Revenue already have that proof, it's been incorporated into their model in determining the average value for an area.



Bronte said:


> If there is an standard estate with lots of similar houses, then if 10 people fill out the form *proving* they are in Band 1 due to the last 5 sales in say, 2012, and the other 990 people just fill out the form revenue sends with say Band 2. The 990 people are incorrect, the 10 people are correct. Revenue know then that the band for that estate is Band 1 and should inform, should have a duty to inform the other 990 people that it should be band 1.
> 
> There is not going to be much of a difference in price between each individual house in estates where say they are all 3 bed semi detached with x size of garden. Hence the banding to take care of that.


 
What you've described there would be a perfect world, and that doesn't come cheap. As long as you'd be OK with the tax rate being increased substantially to deal with the increased cost of administration all of the above would require then I say go for it..!

Also, your 990 people are all very silly people IMHO, who didn't read the guidance Revenue gave them, which asked them to value their house, and to refer to whatever sources they think suitable to aid them in that valuation, and specifically told them the estimate is not a valuation by Revenue of their specific house.

Seriously though, I think you're missing the point that the tax is self assessment - if Revenue had the means to tell people what every individual property in the country is worth then it wouldn't need to be a self assessment tax.

I think you're being very optimistic with a prediction of one month for Revenue to be able to assimilate the data on this - there's over 1.5m properties, and from some of the stuff I'm seeing on here and elsewhere lots of people are going to inundate Revenue with paper forms accompanied by cutouts or printouts of recent sales in their area and other stuff to backup their valuations.

You must think Revenue have an endless resource pool or can assimilate data by magic if you think they're going to have any meaningful conclusions about anything in the next month, or even 6. Their main priority, as I heard Ms Feehily say on the radio, will be to ensure compliance with the filing of the LPT returns, and only after they've got a decent compliance rate will they start trying to find what she described as the "outliers" for scrutiny.


----------



## Bronte (20 Mar 2013)

mandelbrot said:


> Seriously though, I think you're missing the point that the tax is self assessment -.


 
But most people are PAYE and have no experience whatsoever of self assessment. Most people will probably think that this is a bill, revenue says it is X so I'll pay X.

In relation to data and analysis. How come Daft were able to come up with a simple to use, much better than revenue webside so quick. And I'd love to know how much revenue paid for their system. I bet Daft paid nothing like that. 

It doesn't have to be a month, lets make it from to 2016 for revenue to inform everybody who has over paid or underpaid. Because surely they are going to feed the data on the forms into their computer system. 

Revenue stated on the radio they are going to going to do an analysis. That they will check out what values people have and where your value is way off then they are coming after those people. The 10 people in my example who correctly valued will get caught by this, but they can back up the value so presumable they will be ok. Revenue had a special word for this analysis - 'outlining' or somesuch.

And you can be assured I'll be sending in my proofs and a letter outlining my honest valuation of my property too. It's exactly what I'd planned to do once I heard how it worked. For no other self assessment did I ever have to do such a thing.


----------



## mandelbrot (20 Mar 2013)

Bronte said:


> And you can be assured I'll be sending in my proofs and a letter outlining my honest valuation of my property too. It's exactly what I'd planned to do once I heard how it worked. For no other self assessment did I ever have to do such a thing.


 
And it won't be looked at. Your form is going to go to a centre to be processed, along with hundreds of thousands more, and nothing more. I don't know what will happen to the paper you attach, it might be scanned in somewhere and at some point maybe someone will look at it. But IMHO it's overkill, pure and simple.

And if your valuation does appear as an outlier (that's the word you're thinking of  ) in the final analysis, they'll almost certainly still make contact to ask you why, notwithstanding the paper you sent in previously.


----------



## Magpie (21 Mar 2013)

If anyone thinks its a set bill that they just have to pay, it means that they haven't read the form, or the letter that goes with it or the website.... it couldn't be clearer, and it would be entirely their own fault.


----------



## Bronte (21 Mar 2013)

mandelbrot said:


> And it won't be looked at.
> 
> And if your valuation does appear as an outlier (that's the word you're thinking of  ) in the final analysis, they'll almost certainly still make contact to ask you why, notwithstanding the paper you sent in previously.


 
I know they won't look at the supporting documents but if they do look at my file because it's an 'Outlier' (never heard that word before) then they will see my justifications and that should be the end of the matter.  Or if they do contact me I'll refer them to it.


----------



## smeharg (21 Mar 2013)

Magpie said:


> If anyone thinks its a set bill that they just have to pay, it means that they haven't read the form, or the letter that goes with it or the website.... it couldn't be clearer, and it would be entirely their own fault.


 
Very well said. 

I think Revenue has made a big mistake issuing these estimates.  Judging by comments on this and other sites it serves only to confuse the issue (and some media coverage doesn't help).


----------



## smeharg (21 Mar 2013)

Bronte said:


> I know they won't look at the supporting documents but if they do look at my file because it's an 'Outlier' (never heard that word before) then they will see my justifications and that should be the end of the matter. Or if they do contact me I'll refer them to it.


 
If your return is queried you'll most likely get a letter from Revenue requesting you submit reasoning/supporting documentation.  The chances are you'll have to re-submit what you've already sent and there could be further communications to seek clarifications etc.

It's unlikely to be as need and tidy as you predict.


----------



## mathepac (21 Mar 2013)

Bronte said:


> ... And you can be assured I'll be sending in my proofs and a letter outlining my honest valuation of my property too. It's exactly what I'd planned to do once I heard how it worked. For no other self assessment did I ever have to do such a thing.


This is exactly the process described to me by a Revenue rep on the telephone.

My issues were, as I pointed out earlier,


The valuation band of my home as decided by Revenue and
My entitlement to a full deferral
I was able to do both of these via the website, which the Revenue rep failed to tell me, and I await their request for proofs  (as I also await their hard-copy LPT1)

So in advance of the May deadlines, I'm up-to-date and honest.

The way to tackle the issue of fear of Revenue and their powers would have been to contact local community groups and to assist elderly people to make on-line returns in local libraries. I have done this for a number of elderly neighbours and for neighbours whose first language is not English.

Shame on you Enda for the fear you have instilled in a vulnerable segment of our society.


----------



## delgirl (22 Mar 2013)

mathepac said:


> The way to tackle the issue of fear of Revenue and their powers would have been to contact local community groups and to assist elderly people to make on-line returns in local libraries. I have done this for a number of elderly neighbours and for neighbours whose first language is not English.
> 
> Shame on you Enda for the fear you have instilled in a vulnerable segment of our society.


At last someone with empathy and compassion for those in our society who aren't as well equiped to deal with these matters as the rest of us are.



Magpie said:


> If anyone thinks its a set bill that they just have to pay, it means that they haven't read the form, or the letter that goes with it or the website.... it couldn't be clearer, and it would be entirely their own fault.


Did it ever occur to you that some elderly people's literacy skills are perhaps not as good as yours?  

The old gentleman who lives near my rental property, who is just going to pay revenue's estimate out of fear, left school when he was 14 to support his family and thefore missed out on a proper education.  He can read and write, but his comprehension skills are unfortunately lacking.


----------



## dereko1969 (22 Mar 2013)

delgirl said:


> At last someone with empathy and compassion for those in our society who aren't as well equiped to deal with these matters as the rest of us are.
> 
> Did it ever occur to you that some elderly people's literacy skills are perhaps not as good as yours?
> 
> The old gentleman who lives near my rental property, who is just going to pay revenue's estimate out of fear, left school when he was 14 to support his family and thefore missed out on a proper education. He can read and write, but his comprehension skills are unfortunately lacking.


 
What is your suggestion to resovle this? The Revenue information leaflet that I've seen makes things as simple as can be done I think. 

So, even though you've spoken to your neighbour and told him he doesn't have to pay the estimated amount, he is still going to do so. What could be done to make him change his mind? I'm interested in how this could be achieved, it's not a rhetorical question.


----------



## delgirl (22 Mar 2013)

dereko1969 said:


> What is your suggestion to resovle this? The Revenue information leaflet that I've seen makes things as simple as can be done I think.
> 
> So, even though you've spoken to your neighbour and told him he doesn't have to pay the estimated amount, he is still going to do so. What could be done to make him change his mind? I'm interested in how this could be achieved, it's not a rhetorical question.


Perhaps Revenue shouldn't have put an estimate on the LPT1 at all, since from what I am reading, these estimates are mostly incorrect.

I advised the neighbour to go to the Citizen's Advice Bureau with his LPT1 form and the copies from the property price register I gave him to back up the lower valuation and they will help him to complete the form.  

I think  people who are unsure or cannot understand the forms will be more comfortable if they are helped by a family member or an official body of some sort such as Citizen's Advice.


----------



## Cloudnine (17 Apr 2013)

I agree with Mandelbrot. There are many out there who are fearful of deviating from the Notice of Estimate from Revenue - and they are not necessarily old. Revenue has my house in Band 3 and I am fairly sure I am in Band 1. I am feeling a bit pressured to claim in Band 2 just in case, and I wonder if that isn't strategy on Revenue's part.


----------



## Dermot (17 Apr 2013)

I have spoken to 3 elderly neighbours in relation to the LPT. They have gotten their revenue from revenue and their houses are "billed" in their own mind from revenue for Band 2.  The houses are very obviously in Band 1. One of the people was relatively easily convinced but the other two were very much afraid of revenue. I convinced them eventually and I have paid it online for them. They are "hoping that everything will be ok"


----------



## mandelbrot (17 Apr 2013)

Cloudnine said:


> I agree with Mandelbrot. There are many out there who are fearful of deviating from the Notice of Estimate from Revenue - and they are not necessarily old. Revenue has my house in Band 3 and I am fairly sure I am in Band 1. I am feeling a bit pressured to claim in Band 2 just in case, and I wonder if that isn't strategy on Revenue's part.



No, you don't agree with me, based on the above!

If I owned a house (and I don't), and I reckoned its value is less than 100k - based on anything realistic or tangible (the best source being a recent sale of a comparable property), then I'd be putting it down as Band1, regardless of anything in the letter from Revenue.

I also don't subscribe to this conspiracy theory nonsense about Revenue overstating values - go elsewhere and you'll find other conspiracy theories about them undervaluing properties so as to make people less bolshy about filing/paying. Both of these are nonsense, since Revenue have published a technical paper explaining in great detail how their valuation model was designed. Go away, read it, and then if/when you're in possession of full facts come back and set out your stall.


----------



## Bronte (18 Apr 2013)

delgirl said:


> Perhaps Revenue shouldn't have put an estimate on the LPT1 at all, since from what I am reading, these estimates are mostly incorrect.
> 
> .


 
I agree with you in that revenue should probably not have put estimates at all, it's only caused more confusion.


----------



## fraggle (18 Apr 2013)

My house was undervalued by 2 bands. I just completed online and upped it.

I think a lot of people are completely unaware of how the older generation views the world. 

I help look after an elderly neighbour. He is 91. He is scared of the police. He has been robbed 5 times and will not report it. 

He will grant the utmost respect to anybody in authority, even if it is just the 'gas man'. To him these are officials and must be correct in all things.

Luckily he does not have to pay the LPT but if he did there is no chance on earth that he would question the estimate.


----------



## ClubMan (23 Apr 2013)

fraggle said:


> I help look after an elderly neighbour. He is 91. He is scared of the police.


Why?!


----------



## fraggle (23 Apr 2013)

No idea. Perhaps scared is the wrong word.... I guess he just doesn't want to bring attention to himself and be seen as a hassle. It must be a (multi) generational thing and related to fear/respect of all those in authority.


----------



## Bronte (24 Apr 2013)

fraggle said:


> No idea. Perhaps scared is the wrong word.... I guess he just doesn't want to bring attention to himself and be seen as a hassle. It must be a (multi) generational thing and related to fear/respect of all those in authority.


 

My grandmother was like that.  She wasn't scared at all in life and was a formidable women but is relation to authority she was as you described.


----------



## ClubMan (24 Apr 2013)

If some people of whatever age have an illogical fear of "the authorities" then it's surely something that those individuals need to deal with?


----------



## fraggle (24 Apr 2013)

HA!

Clubman, when you are 91 and can't get out of bed without help and need to go to the shop for something I'm just going to shove you onto that hoverboard and push you down the hill and tell you to deal with it! 

Figure out your own way back home


----------

