Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
As published
9 Refund of overpayments.
(1) Without prejudice to sections 7(4)(b) and 18(4) of this . Act, but subject to subsection (2) of this section, where it is shown to the satisfaction of a rating authority that any amount paid in respect of rates, and not recoverable apart from this section, could properly be refunded on the ground that—
(a) the amount of any entry in the valuation list was excessive ; or
(b) a rate was levied otherwise than in accordance with the valuation list; or
(c) any exemption or relief to which a person was entitled was not allowed ; or
(d) the hereditament was unoccupied during any period ; or
(e) the person who made a payment in respect of rates was not liable to make that payment,
the rating authority may refund that amount or a part thereof.
(2) No amount shall be refunded under subsection (1) of this section—
(a) unless application therefor was made before the end of the sixth year after that in which the amount was paid; or
(b) if the amount paid was charged on the basis, or in accordance with the practice, generally prevailing at the time when the payment was demanded.
(3) Before determining whether a refund should be made under subsection (1) of this section—
(a) in a case falling within paragraph (a) of that subsection ; or
(b) in a case falling within paragraph (c) of that subsection where the exemption or relief was one which ought to have appeared in the valuation list,
the rating authority shall obtain a certificate from the valuation officer as to the manner in which in his opinion the hereditament in question should have been treated for the purposes of the valuation list, and the certificate shall be binding on the authority.
Your change, as a redline
9 Refund of overpayments.
(1) Without prejudice to sections 7(4)(b) and 18(4) of this . Act, but subject to subsection (2) of this section, where it is shown to the satisfaction of a rating authority that any amount paid in respect of rates, and not recoverable apart from this section, could properly be refunded on the ground that—
(a) the amount of any entry in the valuation list was excessive ; or
(b) a rate was levied otherwise than in accordance with the valuation list; or
(c) any exemption or relief to which a person was entitled was not allowed ; or
(d) the hereditament was unoccupied during any period ; or
(e) the person who made a payment in respect of rates was not liable to make that payment,
the rating authority may refund that amount or a part thereof.
(2) No amount shall be refunded under subsection (1) of this section—
(a) unless application therefor was made before the end of the sixth year after that in which the amount was paid; or
(b) if the amount paid was charged on the basis, or in accordance with the practice, generally prevailing at the time when the payment was demanded.
(3) Before determining whether a refund should be made under subsection (1) of this section—
(a) in a case falling within paragraph (a) of that subsection ; or
(b) in a case falling within paragraph (c) of that subsection where the exemption or relief was one which ought to have appeared in the valuation list,
the rating authority shall obtain a certificate from the valuation officer as to the manner in which in his opinion the hereditament in question should have been treated for the purposes of the valuation list, and the certificate shall be binding on the authority.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.