|
|
Rates shake-up bombshell at Hull docks |  | | | 14 August 2008 | | Source: This is Hull | Thousands of jobs in the Humber region could be lost as a result of a shake up of the rating system for commercial properties in the port of Hull.
Companies renting premises at Hull docks have been presented with unexpected bills totalling more than £20m, including payments for this year and back payments as far back as 2005.
The bills are a result of changes in national legislation that mean organisations with premises on land owned by Associated British Ports (ABP) face paying business rates on their properties for the first time.
Up until now, a single rate assessment was made for the whole port, with the bill being paid by landlord ABP. Changes in the way ports are assessed for their rateable value mean individual businesses have now been sent rate bills, along with bills covering arrears dating back more than three years.
The effect on small companies is expected to be catastrophic, but now larger companies have said they are considering whether they can afford to invest in Hull in the future.
Brian Rees, head of public relations for P&O Ferries, which operates services to Rotterdam and Zeebrugge from Hull, said: "Hull is disadvantaged by the new rates. In the longer term it will make us think again about which ports we should invest in. Existing port users agreements hold good - but in the longer term it means that Hull may not seem a good investment. We have huge resources in Hull and ports built specifically for ships but say we wanted to expand the port business, if Hull becomes too expensive under the new system we may have to go where we can."
Hull is the first of Britain's 58 ports to be faced with the new rating system. Previously, a rating element was woven into the rent which companies paid to the landlord, ABP. But the new rules mean that rates are to be paid directly by the company renting the property and not by the landlord. This change, from what was known as a "cumulo" arrangement, brings with it rate demands dating back to April 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
