Is this a recognised method?
Thanks to the vast amount of reliable data on house-prices available on Zoopla and Rightmove, we can all join in the game of valuing our own and others’ houses and flats. Professional valuers have been taught[1] to call this the Comparable Method, and it is the basis for the all-important decision on selling price. In combination with the valuer’s local knowledge and intuition, this wealth of data means that the vendor can rely on an asking price that is trustworthy and achievable.
But what if the valuer is asked to split this valuation into a price for the house only, and a separate price for the market value of the land it stands on? Due to lack of data on house-building land sales, the comparable technique is difficult to apply. Any plot-value estimate is likely to be subject to wide error bounds. If this valuation was to be used for taxation purposes (which is the whole point of this essay!) it would be contestable at law, and cause bafflement to the property owner, who after all is the one who will be expected to pay any land-value tax.
1. The difficulty for
valuers in estimating reliable and defensible land values.
2. The lack of
acceptance or understanding of such values by the tax-paying owners.
—First find the average
sale price of a house-type in the cheapest area in the country. This gives us a
base price for the house-plus-plot.
—Next, calculate the premium
for a comparable house in another location. This is a measure of the plot value
premium. This higher-than-cheapest price will include all the valued social, economic
and scenic benefits at this location.
Sale price at location X minus Sale price in base-location
Equals
Plot value at location X
[assume negligible plot value in base location]
How it might work
Examples of plot-valuing using base-location comparables
According to Zoopla it’s
Shildon in Co. Durham[2]
“The quaint town of Shildon in
County Durham has retained its crown as Britain’s most affordable town”.
BASELINE SHILDON 1930s 3-bed freehold Semi-detached (better than bog-standard, but gives you some idea) College Street, Shildon DL4
For sale May 2021 at £120,000; 90 sq m (950 sq ft)
frontage includes side parking. Cond. V. good.
Frontage: 10.5 m (estimated) Garden of average length.
Full details 3 bed semi-detached house for sale in
College Street, Shildon, Durham DL4 - Zoopla
BASELINE: SHILDON
Co. Durham £120,000
Now to calculate local plot values
from
comparable examples
MEDIUM PREMIUM West Park Ave, Northfield, Birmingham
For sale May 2021 at £210,000
For details 3 bed semi-detached house for sale in
West Park Avenue, Northfield, Birmingham B31 – Zoopla
From this I infer that the
Locational Plot Value of this property is £90,000
above Shildon baseline
(£210k
minus £120k)
HIGHPRICED PRICED COMPARATOR Quinton Road Birmingham B17
For sale May 2021 at £375,000; 112
sq m (1200 sq ft) Frontage 9 m (guesstimate) long garden
3 bed semi-detached house for sale in Quinton
Road, Harborne, Birmingham B17 - Zoopla
From
this I infer that the
Locational Plot Value of this property is £245,000
above Shildon baseline
(£375k
minus £120k)
Although
claimed sq m is 24% greater than Shildon, frontage is 17% less.
VERY HIGHPRICED PRICED COMPARATOR Marsh Lane Headington Oxford OX3
For sale May 2021 at £475,000; 81 sq m
(869 sq ft) Frontage 7.5 m (estimate) average/long garden
3 bed semi-detached house for sale in Marsh Lane,
Headington, Oxford OX3 - Zoopla
From
this I infer that the
Locational Plot Value of this property is £345,000
above Shildon baseline
(£475k
minus £120k)
EXTREMELY HIGHPRICED
PRICED COMPARATOR Sandpits Road, Richmond TW10
For sale May 2021 at £1,095,000; 108 sq m (incl
loft ext. 24 sq m) = 84 sq m equiv over 2 floors
Frontage 7 m (estimate) tiny garden part built
over
From
this I infer that the
Locational Plot Value of this property is £975,000
above Shildon baseline
(£1,095k
minus £120k)
——————————————————
This method of
inter-regional comparables is straightforward, although it would need to be worked up in more
detail. It also should be understandable
by the home-owner, who can then accept it as the basis for LVT.
So
1. Have I ‘re-invented the wheel’? Is this a well-known technique,
already in the literature?
2. Do the results of my calculation make sense? Is this a viable
plot valuation technique?
Tony Vickers writesI’m not a valuer either but I know a lot of people who are, all over the world. There are many countries who use LVT and hence use land values in a legally defensible way. So it cannot be impossible. In Denmark, it is the value of the ‘improvements’ (what is put on land plots) that causes the vast majority of appeals against valuation, not the site value. Site values are in the public domain.
ReplyDeleteThe valuer we used for the Oxfordshire trial was ex-VOA and was totally unbiased – not a support of LVT but treated the job we asked him to do as a challenge. His conclusion was quite clear:
“Valuations based on the undeveloped value of land present no special problems to a professional valuer”.
The profession is resistant to change but many in it have told me that it is the lack of political will to do LVT and the poor institutional framework of the public bodies that own the data – plus the attitude of Treasury towards any large IT project – that are the problems. It is categorically not the technical difficulty. We have a tradition of doing land valuation in a very expensive way here: CAMA is far cheaper once the initial investment is made in the systems, which they did in N Ireland 15 years ago.
As for the public, there is a minority – but a powerful and wealthy property owning minority at that! – who simply don’t want LVT at any cost. But the whole point of my PhD thesis (as someone with a background in mapping) was to show that once you can easily map what is happening to land values over space and time in a transparent way, it is going to show clearly what a dreadful trick is being played on the majority of us – being made to pay from hard-earned income for the wealth that the minority acquire with no effort.
Hope that helps.
Tony