Thousands of Aucklanders have objected to the new valuation of their property as the appeal deadline looms for those yet to do so.

Auckland ratepayers have until 5pm to object to the new rateable valuation (RV) of their property.

Auckland Council head of rates Debbie Acott said as of January 15, 6164 objections lodged have been - 1.1 per cent of the 548,000 evaluated last year.

In late November council released its latest valuations, which showed the total value of all residential properties across the region surging by 45 per cent since the 2014 valuation - taking the average house value in the Super City to $1.076m.

Advertisement

some saw their RV rise by as much as 437 per cent, while others slid by as much as 49 per cent.

Council was unable to elaborate further on the kinds of objections it had received to date and said it was too early for an outcome on any of the objections so far.

Acott expected the council to have reviewed the objections by June 30.

How much is your home worth? Find out using the Herald Insights tool

Lawyer Kate Sheehan was representing a number of clients filing objections and said having the appeal period across the holiday season would have caught a number of Aucklanders out.

"It's been very hard to get hold of experts to produce reports because everyone has been on holiday."

Acott said an extra two weeks had been added to the statutory period of 30 working days to allow for the holidays.

A late objection could also be lodged under "special circumstances", such as being out of the country for the entire appeal period.

To be entitled to object to a property's valuation Aucklanders needed to be ratepayers, the property owner, or acting on behalf of the owner, and must provide a reason for the objection.

To file an objection property owners needed to provide details of their property, including an estimate of what they believed the RV, land value and improvement value should be and the reason for objecting.

The council said on its website the reason must be because the valuation was "incorrect" not because of the impact it might have on rates.

Acott said late last year the impact of the revaluation on rates would not be known until the 2018 budget had been decided on.

She added just because a property had jumped in value did not mean there would be a corresponding increase in rates, and that rates were more to do with how a property's value had changed in proportion to the rest, than its actual RV.