Incorrect addresses did not affect calculation of valuation

THANK you for affording the City the opportunity to respond to the letter “City’s property valuer ‘incompetent’ ” (Cape Argus, August 26).

The City undertakes a General Valuation (GV) of all properties within its jurisdiction that is valid for three consecutive years. Each GV has a fixed valuation date which reflects market conditions as at that date.

In 2018 we were coming off the back of unprecedented threeyear property growth, which has also been to the great advantage of property owners.

Changes in market conditions after the valuation date – be they upward or downward – are therefore irrelevant within a particular GV cycle, until the next GV is carried out.

The City’s valuers are highly trained and competent. International Valuation Standards (IVS 2020) is very clear on the processes that any professional valuer must follow in order to determine the market valuation of the property at a specific price.

All the valuers in the City have the legislative obligation to have the qualifications required to be members of the South African Council for Property Valuers, and to abide by the Code of Conduct and the international standards and best practices required of them in order to retain their professional membership.

These international standards stipulate that sales are used to derive value and a valuer, in terms of international standards, can use any supporting sales (adjusted if need be) to support a value.

Thus, the standards acknowledge that not every valid sale, in the same area as the property being valued and that is a clear representation of market valuation, will be on the date of the valuation of the property.

For this, various adjustments are made based on the in-depth knowledge of the performance of the market.

Further, the valuation roll is audited by an independent body to ensure compliance to international standards and that the maximum deviation from the expected variances is not exceeded during the Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal procedures.

The City acknowledges that the valuer did make a mistake with the addresses reflected on the form and apologises for the mistake.

The incorrect addresses, however, did not affect the calculation of the valuation, as the erf numbers, sale prices, sale dates, as well as the respective supporting data, of all the sales, are correct and gives credence to the valuation decision arrived at by the valuer.

We further acknowledge that there were some properties that were not reflective of the market value of the area and these have been flagged for reconsideration.

We have spent much time liaising and responding to Mr Ismail’s emails, so we have been in direct contact.