NNDR appeals under check challenge appeal


we''re just looking at the accounting implications of the change to the NDR appeal system to check-challenge-appeal, which came in from 1/4/2017. This has relevance to both 17/18 final accounts as well as the 18/19 NNDR1. Has anyone else started to form a view about whether this is going to pose a challenge in terms of forming a reliable estimate? Some of the issues we came up with locally were

1. whether submission of a ''check'' would count as an obliging event under IAS37 (maybe in some cases??) or would these fall within contingent liabilities?
2. is information coming through the system to provide enough base data to establish expected values?
3. is information coming through the system to give assurance that we''ll have timely access to a materially complete list as at 31/3/2018 and for prep of the 18/19 NNDR1?

I know when retained rates came in LAAP covered the appeals provision in a couple of the year end bulletins; does anyone know if this is on their radar or that of the CIPFA FAN year end team?


  • Without checking chapter and verse, I believe the final advice given concerning provisioning for appeals under BRR was that the "event" was not the receipt of an appeal but the issue by the VOA of the rating list, which contains values that will be appealed. Certainly that''s how Basildon dealt with it from the beginning, and with the support of our auditors. So, looking to the 2017 List, we are intending to make full provision in our 2017/18 account for the ultimate outcome of check-challenge-appeal over the life of the list, so far as this can be determined.

    In our NNDR1 this year, we made certain assumptions about particular hereditaments (e.g. the ongoing effect on 2017 RV of our expected outcomes of appeals still outstanding against the 2010 List), but generally we assumed losses of 4.7% in line with the assumption the CLG made in setting the multiplier for 2017/18. Our provision at March 2018 was estimated at £5.8 million.

    On the advice of the VTS (who will be taking over from VOA in administering all appeals under the new CCA system), very little information will be coming out of their system before we have to close our 2017/18 accounts, so Basildon is likely to simply maintain the assumptions made in our NNDR1 2017/18.

    We''d be very interested in how other authorities are viewing this and thank you for raising the question.
  • Hi both,
    We plan to adopt a similar approach to you David - and charge a provision in 2017/18 for the estimated losses over the life of the 2017 list. Like you we also made assumptions in our NNDR1 along these lines, using data from the experience over the life of the 2010 list, and that came out with a forecast provision that was fairly consistent with the DCLG assumption of 4.7%.
    We did recently download our ''challenge data'' from the VOA but there have been none at all yet so we are working on the basis that it is very unlikely that we will have any info from VTS on lodged appeals by the time we are preparing our 2017/18 accounts.
    It is definitely a concern about how auditors will view our approach to this so we will be discussing this with our current auditors asap and we are also liaising with our neighbouring billing authorities & our preceptors to try and agree on a consistent methodology where possible.
  • Further to the earlier posts on this subject, I presume that, like us, most authorities are still continuing to see very few (if any) appeals coming through on the Check/Challenge data lists. Has anyone yet had conversations with their auditors about the approach to the provision calculation for the 2017/18 accounts.
  • From data published by the VOA on the 7th December there have only been 390 challenges received nationally up to the 30th September 2017, of which only 100 had been resolved. The VTS have also confirmed that as at the 30th September there have been no 2017 list appeals.

  • Hi
    Just following on from this discussion last year, we've very little data on appeals on the 2017 rating list still.
    What are peoples intentions for calculating a provision for the 2017 rating list in their 2018/19 collection fund?
    Many thanks
  • Just an update on the figures, as supplied by Wilks, Head & Eve at their seminar last Thursday.

    As at 30th September 2018:
    ■ 50,880 Checks registered; 39,660 resolved and 11,210 outstanding
    ■ 6,510 Challenges registered; 1,680 resolved, 690 incomplete and 4,140 outstanding
    ■ Of the 1,680 resolved Challenges, 1,010 were agreed, 540 disagreed and 120 withdrawn.

    Appeals to the VTS, 11 cases up to 30th June 2018.
  • Thanks David

    We really have very few checks and challenges so are still unsure as to how to estimate a provision based on the 2017 listing - any ideas anybody???

  • Coincidentally, I found the following link in my inbox this morning straight after reading this post. It's the VOA's latest quarterly update on checks and challenges in England and Wales as at December 2018:


  • Further to my earlier post, I find the VTS have also published data - on appeals. See www.valuationtribunal.gov.uk/.../VTS-Stats-Release-Oct-Dec18.pdf

    It's interesting that 40 appeals have been received so far against the 2017 List (England), 18 of which have been settled (or "cleared"), leaving 22 outstanding at 31st December. I wonder which billing authorities are affected and what reporting the VTS are giving them. The data are not broken down below national level.

    Against the 2010 List, they have 75,100 outstanding, which sounds a lot. But they had 130,500 brought forward at 1st April 2018 and had cleared a net 55,400 (42%) by the end of December, of which a net 13,200 were in the latest quarter. So at this rate, if the VOA perform at least as well as the VTS, it could all be over by this time next year!