In this section
1. Regulations 11(3) and 12(2)(e) provide that interested persons (IPs) and persons, including Billing Authorities, who would have been competent to make an appeal may opt in to be a party to the proceedings in respect of an appeal.
2. An IP will not have been competent to make an appeal where it is a new taxpayer appeal under Regulation 5(4).
3. To opt in the person has to serve written notice on the Listing Officer (LO) within three months of the day on which the proposal was served on the LO. Once a person has opted in, they have certain rights but these rights vary depending on the status of the person. The rights are:-
a) Where the person would have been competent to make the appeal.
The right to be a party to any agreement.
b) Where the person is an IP and the appeal is withdrawn prior to transmission to the VT but after the opting in notice is served.
The LO must serve notice of the withdrawal on the IP.
c) Where the person is not only an IP but also would have been competent to make the proposal.
An additional right to, in effect, take over the appeal if it is withdrawal before transmission to the VT but after the opting in notice is served.
4. Where an appeal is withdrawn before transmission to the VT and a notice has been served by an IP, under Regulation 11(3) that IP must be notified of the withdrawal. If the IP would have been competent to make the appeal then letter VO 7724 from MS Word Template should be used.
In those limited number of cases where the IP who has served a notice under Regulation 11(3) could not have made the appeal, the optional paragraph in VO 7724 should not be used.
No time limit is specified in the Regulations for the service of a notice of withdrawal but it should be served immediately after the withdrawal is received from the appellant.
5. An IP who would have been competent to make the original appeal (ie receives a letter VO 7724) has the right to serve a notice on the LO that he or she “is aggrieved by the withdrawal of the proposal”. This has the effect of the appeal being “re-incarnated” as if the notice had been an appeal made on the same terms as the original one and made on the day on which the notice was served. The effective date for any alteration will however be the effective date which would have applied to the original appeal.
6. VO 7724 encourages persons who wish to “re-incarnate” an appeal to refer to it and state that they are “aggrieved by the withdrawal of the proposal”. If this wording is not used in the letter from the IP but it is clear that they wish to keep the matters contained in the withdrawn appeal alive, the correspondence should be treated as a valid notice under Regulation 11(4).
7. All notices under Regulation 11(4) must be served on the LO within six weeks from the Regulation 11(3) notice. Where a notice is served on the LO after this period the IP should be advised that it is out of time and no further action is to be taken on the matter.
8. Any notice received within the statutory time limit should be attached to a blank appeal form and registered on the computer as if it were a new appeal made in the same terms as the original (now withdrawn) appeal but for procedural purposes made on the day on which the Regulation 11(4) notice was served.
In the event that this appeal results in a transmission to the VT, a copy of the VO 7724 and the Regulation 11(4) notice together with a copy of the original appeal should be forwarded to the VT before the hearing.
9. Regulation 11(3) does not apply to appeals which have been transmitted to the VT. There is therefore no requirement for the LO to serve a withdrawal of appeal notice in accordance with Regulation 11(3). Regulation 19 requires all the parties to an appeal which has been transmitted to the VT, except the LO, to consent to a withdrawal and this will include an IP who was competent to make the proposal and such IPs will therefore already have consented to the withdrawal.