Assessment of adequacy of comparison pricing method for settling compensation claims : a case of compensation claims in Muleba town

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorLwerengera, Jackson Mbaijo
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-31T12:37:10Z
dc.date.accessioned2020-01-07T14:42:17Z
dc.date.available2019-10-31T12:37:10Z
dc.date.available2020-01-07T14:42:17Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.descriptionAvailable in print form, East Africana Collection, Dr. Wilbert Chagula Library, Class mark (THS EAF TH437.L853)en_US
dc.description.abstractThe dissertation assessed adequacy of comparison pricing valuation method for settling compensation claims with reference to views of people of Muleba town that were affected by the on-going Kagoma – Lusahunga road upgrading project and expert opinions from Kagera valuers as well as quantity surveyors. Qualitative and quantitative data were gathered from 40 out of 57 respondents. Data were collected from the three mentioned groups by using close- and open – ended questionnaire. Adequacy was tested in three categories. Absolute quality adequacy, adequacy relative to other available methods and absolute value adequacy based on quantity surveyors’ amounts. Absolute quality and relative quality adequacies were based on factors affecting building values as well as general quality criteria. All the hypotheses tests revealed that comparison pricing valuation method was not adequate because it did not address all buildings’ value factors and all quality criteria ignored 50 percent of the investigated quality criteria. Similarly, absolute value adequacy test did not support the method as the compensated amount was found to be not in line with the Quantity surveyors’ based market value. It was also revealed that building-owners’ expectations were relatively very high. Relatively, the comparative method ranked 2nd to replacement cost method in adequacy. It is therefore recommended that guidelines and policy should be reviewed in favor of the replacement cost method without imposing any deterioration adjustment or depreciation. It is also recommended to improve transparency by giving full details of valuation and identifying bodies for attending as well as monitoring claims at the earliest.en_US
dc.identifier.citationLwerengera, J. M. (2014) Assessment of adequacy of comparison pricing method for settling compensation claims : a case of compensation claims in Muleba town, Master dissertation, University of Dar es Salaam, Dar es Salaamen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/627
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherUniversity of Dar es Salaamen_US
dc.subjectBildingsen_US
dc.subjectValuationen_US
dc.subjectMuleba townshipen_US
dc.subjectTanzaniaen_US
dc.titleAssessment of adequacy of comparison pricing method for settling compensation claims : a case of compensation claims in Muleba townen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
Files
Collections
Masters Dissertations