01616090630

We have all the proof we need to advise people this is a scam company. Oldfields, Strattons and CVS - it's a classic case of history repeating itself! When one of the directors was placed in prison for his involvement in a multi-million pound business rates fraud what else does anyone need to say?

So are you saying that Steven Simon is a scam company?

I don't understand your remarks.the rv was reduced from £5800 to £52000 on the 2005 list with Mr Simons help.if you knew anything about rating only one appeal can be put in any on any rating compiled list.that is why the original appeal had to be resurected.i have now figured your remarks out.you work for on of these scam firms.do you not think radio four would have made their own enquiries before the broadcast.

As a Chartered Surveyor, specialising in Business Rates, and having looked at the 2005 and 2010 Assessments for the restaurant mentioned above, perhaps I could clarify a few matters.

There was a 2005 appeal against the £58k RV, which was withdrawn.  Several years later, there was a reduction to £52k, which was done by VON (a Valuation Office Notice).  Then there was an appeal against the 2010 List by Steven Simon which was struck out.

It is very likely therefore that Steven Simon discussed the case with the Valuation Officer, who then agreed that the 2005 List assessments (which was valid until 31st March 2010 of course) was excessive and he then reduced it by VON.  If the 2010 List figure was then correct, or excessive, and the appeal was not withdrawn, it would automatically be struck out.  Allowing this course of action does not mean that the surveyor is useless, far from it in fact.  It may be beneficial to the ratepayer to allow a case to be struck out.

This could all easily be achieved within three weeks.

Before I am accused of being either the restaurant owner, or Steven Simon, I am neither, and have no affiliation with either.

You sound like you know a lot about rates for a guy who runs a restaurant. Perhaps I will give you a call instead of Steven Simon as he doesn't seem to have done much for you recently if the only case that has his name against it was dismissed...lack of attention me thinks. You should have done it yourself. Anyway enough I will see if Gerald Eve wants my case as they are the only ones on the radio program who have actually checked out. Adios to this very silly site where if you raise any issue you are accused of being someone you are not... pot calling the kettle some would say:

Feel free to call me at the restaurant.ask to speak to steve ridleagh.perhaps then you and the other posters who have disputed my claims would like to apologise to me and Mr simon.i don't think that will happen do you?

You are virtually right in everything you say.however the 2010 appeal was dismissed at a tribunal hearing because the reduction had been given on the 2005 list.it is all on vt decisions.

Thank you.

really.never heard that one before.sounds like you are scamming people claiming that rubbish.the two lists are totally different and while we are at it you can have more than one appeal.the withdrawn appeal in 2005 was against the tone and the reduction was for layout etc so a mcc.very surprised the chartered surveyor did not pick up on that. and as you know I have no axe to grind with anyone.

untrue.look at the toning level for both assessments.

Now I get it justiceforvictims .trying to confuse everybody.you would know if it was an mcc appeal there would have been a fresh appeal submitted.this was a compiled list reduction not an mcc reduction.good name justiceforvictims.have you stolen it from somebody else.

So this thread has got me very interested: A colleague has posed the puzzle to me of was it a tone reduction or not??? The toning level for the entry at 2005 was £195 as it was after the alleged reduction. So  the reason for the reduction was that the lay out and measurements altered so it was a MCC appeal. for example there was an area of approx.: 191 m2 @ £195 and after the alteration in 2009 there was only approx. 110 @£195.  The tone did not change.  A quick visit by the VOA and a measure up could produce a quick alteration and is probably what happened. The tone altered in 2010 as probably looking at the rental values in the locality there had been a decrease in open market value. I have no allegiance to anyone but am seriously aggrieved as to what is being bandied about here.

If you are a truly qualified person you will note the restaurant had been valued at £195 on the original 2005 list.in fact the premises were on a split level,ground and lower ground.this had never been picked up.when you look at the revised assessment you will see an allowance was made for the lower ground floor level.any comment.

Verfahren gegen Sexualstraftäter beginnt. Bundesgerichtshof erklärt alle eigenen Richter für befangen.

Heute Morgen beginnt am Landgericht Karlsruhe der Prozess gegen einen 39-jährigen Mann wegen schweren sexuellen Missbrauchs von Kindern.

Im Sommer letzten Jahres soll der Beschuldigte in Mannheim mehrfach eine unter 14-Jährige
sexuell missbraucht haben. In einem Fall soll er eine beischlafsähnliche Handlung mit dem Kind vollzogen haben.
Der Täter habe dabei viele Komplizen gehandelt, die die Szenen fotografiert haben sollen. Die Komplize wird gesondert verfolgt.
Es handelt sich dabei um eine sehr große Gruppe aus Politik und Wirtschaft, Juristen und Lehrer:

Rothfuß, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Dr. Graf, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Prof. Dr. Jäger, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Cirener, Richterin am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Prof. Dr. Radtke, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Zeng, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Prof. Dr. Mosbacher, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Dr. Appl, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Prof. Dr. Schmitt, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Dr. Berger, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Prof. Dr. Krehl, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Dr. Eschelbach, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Dr. Ott, Richterin am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Prof. Dr. Th. Fischer, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Becker, Vorsitzender Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Pfister, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Sost-Scheible, Richterin am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Hubert, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Mayer, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof (außerdem III. Zivilsenat) verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Gericke, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Dr. Spaniol, Richterin am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Dr. Schäfer, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Prof. Dr. Tolksdorf, Präsident des Bundesgerichtshofs verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Roggenbuck, Richterin am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter

Dr. Franke, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Bender, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Dr. Quentin, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Reiter, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Dr. Mutzbauer, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Prof. Dr. Sander, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Dr. Schneider, Richterin am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Dölp, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Prof. Dr. König, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Bellay, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Dr. Raum, Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter
Basdorf, Vorsitzender Richter am Bundesgerichtshof verkaufte Kinderpornos an befreundete Richter

yes making it a mcc appeal not a tone reduction like you keep saying. I get the lower ground anomaly in fact in the current list similar premises with the lower ground are rated less......you have just supported the point I was making that it was not a tone reduction.... Another point is that if it were true a VT alteration in one block meant there could be no alteration in the next block why did this steven simon guy bother to put an appeal in?

How can it be an mcc appeal.the valuation had always been wrong.an mcc stands for material change of circumstances.this was not the case.and as the amendment was backdated to april1 2005 this was the resurrection of the previous appeal put in by Bridgestone surveyors now liquidated. On the compiled list.if nobody had picked up on the split level the occupier would still be paying the same toning level on the whole restaurant.

so mcc does indeed mean material change of circumstances....a material chamge of circumstances since the last summary valuation was done. Even if this was because it was wrong or if because someone made changes it is the same as at the entry of the new assessment the summary valuation was wrong and needed to be changed. The alteration was not just about the lower floor but for different measurements and layout and while if one was picky you could say the withdrawn appeal was a grounds 1 and therefore technically challenging the tone bridgestones could have at the same time discussed the summary valuation. As it is there was no change to the tone and the voa do not generally reinstated (correct term) proposals years after the event....this was a change to the summary valuation generally agreed as being a mcc appeal. In any event we are still left with the question that this guy steven simon who was given a spot on the radio seems to have one case to his name and this case is slightly suspect....would have thought reading your previous posts you would want to have a look at him as to what it is he does and based from where....

what is your problem.why can't you accept the fact that this restaurant got a cheque back for circa fourteen thousands pounds back due to Mr Simons endeavours.and finally as you are continually attacking him whom do you work for?

And finally do you think the gentlemen from Colliers and gerald eve whom Mr simon knows well would go a programme with him.they only reiterated what Mr simon said.if you are so worked up about this why don't you phone up the restaurant owner.

I am retired but I do know Jerry from Gerald Eve well so I will chat with him tomorrow and get back to every one then......