REUSE OF VALUATION NUMBERS
NOTICE: The documents shown below are published for educational purposes and to encourage
discussion. There is no implication in publishing these documents that anyone who has recorded this information
has acted improperly. The author is merely providing this documentation to show anomolies in the Tasmanian land tenure
system.
As we saw in the previous page, I was charged separate rates
for the property shown in folio of the register 4301/96. However you will
remember I found out in 1993 that this folio of the register was still in joint names. How was
the property "split" for valuation and rating purposes without a change in the
title?
The split resulted from a previously cancelled valuation number being reused by the Valuer General's
Department.
This scan shows the consolidation of two separate vauation numbers, 2175 and 2176 in 1988. This consolidation was effected in order to
produce a property which
was rated as one.
What is then surprising is that the number 2175 which was consolidated with 2176 in 1988 was re-used in the 1992 valuation. The spare unused number was used in order to
split the property comprised in folio 4301/96 for rating purposes, when no seperate rating was possible as the title was still jointly owned by myself and my former partner.
This creation of two new file numbers, the simultaneous consolidation of those two file numbers and the failure to cancel the first of the two consolidated
file numbers is a classic element of both filing mistake and filing fraud. Whenever two file numbers have been consolidated it is necessary for the file manager
to check that the first unused file number has been cancelled so that the "ghost" file number cannot be reused.
It should be pointed out that if a person is paying rates on a property then they will understandably believe that that particular property has been transferred
to them and will appear to be acceeding to a joint ownership of a particular property.
Questions which arise from this re-using of previously "cancelled" valuation numbers include:
Was authority obtained from the Recorder of Titles before the "split" was recorded?
How does this re-use of valuation numbers affect auditing within the Valuer-General's Department?
How does this re-use of valuation numbers affect the valuation of property in Tasmania?
Comments from valuers, auditors welcomed.
REPLY FROM THE VALUER-GENERAL'S DEPARTMENT
under construction
HOME