[Robert Hay]

Hi Donna

In my opinion you’re correct.

While the MRCA impairment rating of 80 points is the highest level of impairment and is treated as the MRCA equivalent of total and permanent incapacity for compensation purposes, this impairment score does not, on its own, provide eligibility for a pensioner rebate.

Eligibility arises only when they hold a Gold Card (TPI/EDA).

Hope this helps

Robert

[Robert Hay]

Neil was a valued friend, colleague, and mentor to many. Those who worked with him will remember his sense of humour and his knowledge of rating, which he shared generously and professionally.
Always my favourite part of any conference was Neil as MC. His jokes never failed to bring laughter while his professionalism ensured everything ran smoothly.
Personally, the support and assistance he provided to me, particularly at conference time was invaluable and will never be forgotten.

You will be greatly missed.

[Robert Hay]

Hi Donna

Time for my favourite response:

Council’s position remains the same, and the decision stands.

Unless you can provide the forum anything new from your original post.

Robert

[Robert Hay]

Hi Andrea

Putting it on the rate notice gives a literal meaning to “pay our respects”. 🙂

If it has been resolved and the notice continues to meet the requirements of Section 127 of the Regs its fine. I do believe that this is becoming increasingly common in public documents for organisations committed to reconciliation and cultural awareness.

At this stage The Hills do not include any statement.

Robert

• This reply was modified 6 months ago by Robert Hay.

[Robert Hay]

Hi Maria

I had this exact situation a few years ago.

Whilst the pensioners are required to contribute to rates and charges per the contract, they are not the owners of the property. Oak Tree Retirement Village is the owner and under section 560 of the Act they are liable for payment of Council rates.

The question to ask is if the rates were unpaid who would you take legal action against? It would be the owner as per section 560.

The other thing is to is Council is not bound by the contract as they are not a party to it.

Hope this helps

Robert

[Robert Hay]

Hi Tiarne

If you look at Section 596 which states, the following:

A rateable person for land for which an application has been made under this Division but not determined, or for which a determination or redetermination of the attributable part of the land value is in force, must inform the council (within 1 month) if land used or occupied solely as a site for a single dwelling-house, or as rural land, ceases to be so used or occupied.

Whilst it relates to change of circumstance it is the 1st sentence which needs to be looked at which shows that if there is a change of ownership then the new owner has not made the application for postponed rates and the postponed should be transferred back to the main account.

The new owner who has become the rateable person due to transfer of ownership should make a new application for postponed rates as per section 585 remembering that the new owner will only be eligible for the current year and or the following rating year.

Robert

[Robert Hay]

Hi Jason

I would get them to clarify under exactly what section of the act they are applying for non-ratability and provide evidence of why they should be exempt under that section. It shouldn’t be up to Council to do the work for them.

Robert

• This reply was modified 8 months ago by Robert Hay.

[Robert Hay]

Hi Gail

Thanks for clarifying for me.

Unfortunately, I’m not much help as it is outside what the legislation allows, I would not do it.

Also, you are going what is stated in your operational plan.

Robert

[Robert Hay]

Hi Gail

I’m not familiar with the term “inhibited minimum” can you please elaborate?

Thanks

[Robert Hay]

Hi Matt

I would also counsel heavily against it, for the reasons Andrew provided, it would be pretty hard to get and SV if you had to advise IPART you didnt take the full peg. It also goes against

8B Principles of sound financial management in the Act.

(d) Councils should have regard to achieving intergenerational equity, including ensuring the following—
(i) policy decisions are made after considering their financial effects on future generations,
(ii) the current generation funds the cost of its services.

Cheers
Robert

[Robert Hay]

Hi Glynes

It becomes ratable from the date is became ratable, this could be a notice of transfer or a lease agreement date. Also refer to 19B (1) of Valuation of Land Act 1916.

Where any non ratable land becomes ratable on or after 1 July 1977 and at the date it becomes ratable there is no valuation for it in the Register of Land Values the Valuer-General shall make a valuation—
(a) of the land value, and
(b) if a rating or taxing authority, by instrument in writing, so requests, or the Valuer-General decides to do so, of the assessed annual value,
of the land.

Hope this helps

Robert

• This reply was modified 1 year, 1 month ago by Robert Hay.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 1 month ago by Robert Hay.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 1 month ago by Robert Hay.

[Robert Hay]

Hi Dallas

Environmental Upgrade Agreements only allow for non-residential dwellings and only for residential strata schemes of more than 20 lots. The Act is pretty specific in what you can charge ratepayers.

I do know that Ku-ring-gai offers a Solar rebate which was paid after purchase towards invoiced material and installations costs. Rebates were subject to availability of funds and must be pre-approved. Rebates were not given to works required for either BASIX or development application compliance.

https://www.netzero.krg.nsw.gov.au/Take-action/Browse-by-topic/Energy-use/Get-energy-smart

54F Buildings that can be subject of environmental upgrade agreement of the LGA 1993.

(1) An environmental upgrade agreement must relate to an existing building (that is, a building that is complete and ready for lawful use and occupation at the time the agreement is entered into).
(2) The building must be a non-residential building or a strata building that is the subject of a multi-residence scheme.
(3) A non-residential building is a building used wholly or predominantly for commercial, industrial or other non-residential purposes.
(4) A multi-residence scheme is a strata scheme comprising more than 20 lots (disregarding utility lots and lots used for parking).
(5) The building must be located in the council’s area at the time that the agreement is entered into.

Robert

[Robert Hay]

Hi Dallas

I agree with Suzi such a fee could not be recovered on the Rate Notice, refer to sections 501, 502,535 and 550 of the Act and Sections 127 and 128 of the Regulations for why it’s a nonstarter.

Robert

[Robert Hay]

Hi Suzy

I’m guessing this would be a voluntary rebate granted under 582.

Unfortunately, Commonwealth Seniors Health Cardholders are not eligible under Section 136 of the regulations.

As I have been told recently you may wish to seek your own independent legal advice.

Hope this helps

Robert

[Robert Hay]

Sorry

The edit timeout beat me. Because you can’t charge under 501 this allows you to charge under 608. Charging under 608 will then allow you to utilise 610e which allows you to waive or reduce a charge for identified hardship categories.

Robert

[Author]

Posts