Valuation accuracy usually conjures up images of empirical studies of comparisons between sales and valuations and different valuations of the same properties, and a number of references to these studies are included in the paper. However, this paper concentrates on the institutional influences which impact on valuations and their accuracy. The overall aim of this paper is to examine the legal interpretation of valuation inaccuracy in the UK. This might seem a bit parochial in the context of a World Valuation Congress. However, cases in many countries in the Commonwealth form precedents for each other and therefore decisions in, for example, the UK and Australasia, are drawn on by others in reaching decisions. The paper also reaches conclusions which have wider implications for all jurisdictions which have valuation disputes settled in courts, tribunals and any other quasi-judicial body.

No abstract

The financialisation literature has been criticised for its limited empirical base and its failure adequately to link the everyday world with that of high finance. The paper addresses these shortcomings by examining the calculative practice of property valuation. The way that valuations are performed affects their results and, therefore, the operation of the property market. The paper traces the evolving influence of finance capital on the valuation of commercial property in the UK by constructing a historiography of investment valuation since 1960. Traditional approaches to valuation have been increasingly challenged by those derived from financial economics. However, the former remains the dominant method for undertaking market valuation. Its grounding in comparison -a centring and standardising process -offers an explanation for some of the changes in the urban built environment that are ascribed to financialisation. This suggests that a more detailed and historically sensitive interpretation of financialisation is required.

In many instances, however, such additions were made in ignorance of their possible harmful effects on the consumer.Details of such malpractices can be found in the works of Accum,l Hassal12 and Bell.3 Examples of the first type of adulteration include the addition of flour, sand, china clay or water to samples of spices, tea, milk, etc. The most frequently encountered mineral adulterants were alum and chalk in bread, copper as (FeS0,.7H20) in beer, Prussian blue in tea, and soapstone (magnesium silicate), French chalk, sulphate of lime, lead chromate, oxides of iron and so on in a wide variety of food commodities. Perusal of the early volumes of The AnaZyst shows that by 1879 some such practices still remained, although on a much reduced scale. In the Annual Report of the Local Government Board for 1878,4 the addition of alum to flour was detected in 7% of the bread samples examined, while the use of noxious ingredients in beer was reported to be almost obsolete.In more recent times, interest in metallic elements in food has broadened from the detection of gross criminal malpractices to, on the one hand, investigations of chronic but possibly harmful effects on health of trace amounts present adventitiously as contaminants, together with, on the other hand, the beneficial and nutritional requirements of those elements now known to be essential to human or animal life. Such investigations require methods of analysis that are capable of measuring low levels of a wide variety of metals and metalloids in different organic substrates (foods, feedingstuffs, animal and plant tissues). Many elements are present in living tissues only at levels that are at, or even below, the limit of detection of the analytical methods formerly available and, hence, became known as trace elements. Nowadays, with the use of advanced instrumental techniques, the limits of detection have been lowered significantly and most elements can be measured with an accuracy and precision that are more than adequate for the study and interpretation of toxicological factors. However, the term "trace element" has survived and now refers to elements that occur at the milligrams per kilogram (parts per million) level or below, and which can exert some influence on plant or animal biochemistry and cell function. In this review, no distinction will be made between such elements and certain "major" elements, such as calcium or iron, which may be present in tissues or foods at much higher levels. Essential and Non-essential ElementsSimilarly, it is not possible to draw a clear distinction between essential and toxic elements, as all metals are probably toxic if ingested in sufficient amounts. In some instances, e.g., selenium or fluorine in man and copper in sheep,5 the margin between toxicity and deficiency is very small. However, it is usual to differentiate between those elements which are known (or thought) to be essential for animal (human) life and those which display severe toxicological effects at extremely low levels and have no known function in li...

Real estate depreciation continues to be a critical issue for investors and the appraisal profession in the UK in the 1990s. Depreciation-sensitive cash ¯ow models have been developed, but there is a real need to develop further empirical methodologies to determine rental depreciation rates for input into these models. Although building quality has been found to be an important explanatory variable in depreciation it is very dif® cult to incorporate it into such models or to analyse it retrospectively. It is essential to examine previous depreciation research from real estate and economics in the USA and UK to understand the issues in constructing a valid and pragmatic way of calculating rental depreciation. Distinguishing between `depreciation' and `obsolescence' is important, and the pattern of depreciation in any study can be in¯uenced by such factors as the type (longitudinal or crosssectional) and timing of the study, and the market state. Longitudinal studies can analyse change more directly than cross-sectional studies. Any methodology for calculating rental depreciation rate should be formulated in the context of such issues as `censored sample bias' , `lemons' and ® ltering' , which have been highlighted in key US literature from the ® eld of economic depreciation. Property depreciation studies in the UK have tended to overlook this literature, however. Although data limitations and constraints reduce the ability of empirical property depreciation work in the UK to consider these issues fully, `averaging' techniques and ordinary least squares (OLS) regression can both provide a consistent way of calculating rental depreciation rates within a `cohort' framework.

This paper investigates the extent to which clients were able to influence performance measurement appraisals during the downturn in commercial property markets that began in the UK during the second half of 2007. The sharp change in market sentiment produced speculation that different client categories were attempting to influence their appraisers in different ways. In particular, it was recognised that the requirement for open-ended funds to meet redemptions gave them strong incentives to ensure that their asset values were marked down to market. Using data supplied by Investment Property Databank, we demonstrate that, indeed, unlisted open-ended funds experienced sharper drops in capital values than other fund types in the last quarter of 2007, after the market turning point and at the time when redemptions were at their highest. These differences are statistically significant and cannot simply be explained by differences in portfolio composition. Client influence on appraisal forms one possible explanation of the results observed: the different pressures on fund managers resulting in different appraisal outcomes.

No abstract

UK commercial property lease structures have come under considerable scrutiny during the past decade since the property crash of the early 1990s. In particular, tenants complained that the system was unfair and that it has blocked business change. Government is committed, through its 2001 election manifesto, to promote flexibility and choice in the commercial property lettings market and a new voluntary Commercial Leases Code of Practice was launched in April 2002. This paper investigates whether occupiers are being offered the leases they require or whether there is a mismatch between occupier requirements and actual leases in the market. It draws together the substantial data now available on the actual terms of leases in the UK and surveys of corporate occupiers' attitude to their occupation requirements. Although the data indicated that UK leases have become shorter and more diverse since 1990, this is still not sufficient to meet the current requirements of many corporate occupiers. It is clear that the inability to manage entry and exit strategies is a major concern to occupiers. Lease length is the primary concern of tenants and a number of respondents comment on the mismatch between lease length in the UK and business planning horizons. The right to break and other problems with alienation clauses also pose serious difficulties for occupiers, thus reinforcing the mismatch. Other issues include repairing and insuring clauses and the type of review clause. There are differences in opinion between types of occupier. In particular, international corporate occupiers are significantly more concerned about the length of lease and the incidence of break clauses than national occupiers and private-sector tenants are significantly more concerned about leasing in general than public-sector occupiers. Proposed solutions by tenants are predictable and include shorter leases, more frequent breaks and relaxation of restrictions concerning alienation and other clauses. A significant number specify that they would pay more for shorter leases and other improved terms. Short leases would make many of the other terms more acceptable and this is why they are the main concern of corporate occupiers. Overall, the evidence suggests that there continues to be a gap between occupiers' lease requirements and those currently offered by the market. There are underlying structural factors that act as an inertial force on landlords and inhibit the changes which occupiers appear to want. Nevertheless, the findings raise future research questions concerning whether UK lease structures are a constraining factor on UK competitiveness.