Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • MSE Archna
    • By MSE Archna 6th Oct 06, 7:00 PM
    • 1,872Posts
    • 5,996Thanks
    MSE Archna
    Council Tax Cost Cutting: reduce your band and grab any discounts Discussion Area
    • #1
    • 6th Oct 06, 7:00 PM
    Council Tax Cost Cutting: reduce your band and grab any discounts Discussion Area 6th Oct 06 at 7:00 PM
    This thread is here to discuss the content of the article on Council Tax Cashback: reduce your band and save £1000s.

    However if you have already followed the system, please use report them in the Council tax rebanding successes discussion.

    Note from Martin: Thank you to all the contributers to the initial thread, which provided the genisis for the article. Much appreciated.


    Last edited by MSE Archna; 10-06-2010 at 4:39 PM.
    Report inappropriate posts: forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com




Page 251
    • sirmixalot
    • By sirmixalot 23rd Oct 17, 9:06 PM
    • 5 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    sirmixalot
    Hello, I am in the process of preparing to go before the tribunal after my council tax band was increased. I live in a small village where there was a distinct lack of properties for sale in 1991. The vast majority of the ones that the listing officer has used to justify their banding were new builds. I have dug out an advert from the local newspaper from 1991 that shows the prices of the new builds went up to £167,000 (newspaper was in April) this is above the £160,000 threshold so places the property in Band G , however the advert also mentions that carpets and curtains are included as well as part exchange as incentives. Could this be used to argue the case that the price should be lower to reflect the cost of these? And I'm guessing the cost of providing the NHBC warranty. Whereas the size of the example properties may be similar, they have much larger gardens (three or four times larger) and more parking. I have also found an older property that matches number of bedrooms, bathrooms, etc - slightly smaller than my own (by 10 square metres) but wasn't on sale in 1991 - would there be any negatives in including it in my case if it wasn't on sale? As far as I can tell it's band hasn't changed since council tax came into force. Any thoughts gratefully received!
    • lincroft1710
    • By lincroft1710 24th Oct 17, 1:43 PM
    • 9,898 Posts
    • 7,958 Thanks
    lincroft1710
    Including a property 10 sq m smaller than your own and in a lower band isn't really helpful to your case. If the newspaper ad is after Apr 1991, again not so helpful to your case.
    • sirmixalot
    • By sirmixalot 24th Oct 17, 2:08 PM
    • 5 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    sirmixalot
    Hello, the newspaper advert is from 7th April 1991. The smaller property would been built pre-1991 (probably by quite some time) and is located at the other end of the village. It's the same sort of house, detached, same number of bedrooms, same number of bathrooms, same number of reception rooms, just as I say 10 square metres smaller (at approx 175 square metres). Funnily enough it was sold nine months after I purchased mine for £75,000 more than what I paid for mine.
    • lincroft1710
    • By lincroft1710 24th Oct 17, 9:15 PM
    • 9,898 Posts
    • 7,958 Thanks
    lincroft1710
    So why did a 10 sq m smaller house sell for £75K more than yours, 9 months later? What are the month/year and sale prices?
    • sirmixalot
    • By sirmixalot 24th Oct 17, 10:39 PM
    • 5 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    sirmixalot
    Hello, my property is a new build which I brought for 368k in November 2005. The older property has a much larger garden and went for 440K In December 2006. Sorry it's a bit over a year as I reserved it while it was being built (I was thinking of the moving in date). I'm not to fussed about the price difference. - I am glad it's more obviously - but I'm more interested in the fact that it's a very good match for the number of rooms and size ( 10 square metre over two floors so around five square metres per floor) and it's in the lower band.
    • Cheryla
    • By Cheryla 24th Oct 17, 10:43 PM
    • 3 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Cheryla
    refused appeal
    I have recently asked for my council tax banding to be looked at. I am the only one that is an F (all the others are Es with a few Ds in my post code. All the properties are identical or very similar to mine. I have evidence that my property sold for under £120k in 1993 along with a property 2 doors away (identical to mine) having there banding dropped from F to E in 1993. The VOA officer hastened my banding is correct given house prices were on the decline form 1989 so mine would have been worth over £120k in 1991 for which he has no sale to support. I therefore asked for a case number so could appeal to which he replied I could not appeal as I had paid tax on the property for over 6 months. I am going to complain to the VOA and write to my MP but wondered if anyone could tell me is this correct regarding the appeal as I am aware of the people who have appealed that have been in their properties over 6 months. (i have lived in mine since 2006) Thank you
    • lincroft1710
    • By lincroft1710 25th Oct 17, 1:49 PM
    • 9,898 Posts
    • 7,958 Thanks
    lincroft1710
    Hello, my property is a new build which I brought for 368k in November 2005. The older property has a much larger garden and went for 440K In December 2006. Sorry it's a bit over a year as I reserved it while it was being built (I was thinking of the moving in date). I'm not to fussed about the price difference. - I am glad it's more obviously - but I'm more interested in the fact that it's a very good match for the number of rooms and size ( 10 square metre over two floors so around five square metres per floor) and it's in the lower band.
    Originally posted by sirmixalot
    Prices were on the increase in that period of time. But what is concerning me more is the fact your band was increased over 10 years after you bought the house. Bands aren't normally increased unless there is very good (possibly exceptionally good) evidence for such an increase. Did the VOA say why they had increased the band.

    Finally, 10 sq m difference can easily bring 2 houses into 2 different bands, e.g 155 sq m house sells for £155,000 in Apr 1991 = Band F, 165 sq m sells for £165,000 also Apr 1991 = Band G. I should also point out that VOA attribute very little value to large gardens.
    • lincroft1710
    • By lincroft1710 25th Oct 17, 2:05 PM
    • 9,898 Posts
    • 7,958 Thanks
    lincroft1710
    I have recently asked for my council tax banding to be looked at. I am the only one that is an F (all the others are Es with a few Ds in my post code. All the properties are identical or very similar to mine. I have evidence that my property sold for under £120k in 1993 along with a property 2 doors away (identical to mine) having there banding dropped from F to E in 1993. The VOA officer hastened my banding is correct given house prices were on the decline form 1989 so mine would have been worth over £120k in 1991 for which he has no sale to support. I therefore asked for a case number so could appeal to which he replied I could not appeal as I had paid tax on the property for over 6 months. I am going to complain to the VOA and write to my MP but wondered if anyone could tell me is this correct regarding the appeal as I am aware of the people who have appealed that have been in their properties over 6 months. (i have lived in mine since 2006) Thank you
    Originally posted by Cheryla
    VOA are correct that you are well out of time to appeal, it is pointless writing to the VOA or your MP to complain about this. In the area I worked prices dropped by about 20% between 1991 and 1993, so if yours had sold for £100,000 in 1993, it would still show a value in excess of £120,000 in 1991.

    I would suggest you ask VOA why they have reduced the identical house and why they will not reduce yours similarly. However I suspect the answer you will probably get is that the other house was reduced in error. The answer to your next question is that bands reduced in error are sometimes not increased back up to their original band.
    • sirmixalot
    • By sirmixalot 26th Oct 17, 11:20 AM
    • 5 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    sirmixalot
    Prices were on the increase in that period of time. But what is concerning me more is the fact your band was increased over 10 years after you bought the house. Bands aren't normally increased unless there is very good (possibly exceptionally good) evidence for such an increase. Did the VOA say why they had increased the band.

    Finally, 10 sq m difference can easily bring 2 houses into 2 different bands, e.g 155 sq m house sells for £155,000 in Apr 1991 = Band F, 165 sq m sells for £165,000 also Apr 1991 = Band G. I should also point out that VOA attribute very little value to large gardens.
    Originally posted by lincroft1710
    Hello, the reason for the re-banding is strange as some properties have been re-banded up, some larger have been re-banded down. I can't say too much as I suspect that will identify the development and feelings around here are running quite high sadly.
    • lincroft1710
    • By lincroft1710 26th Oct 17, 1:57 PM
    • 9,898 Posts
    • 7,958 Thanks
    lincroft1710
    Hello, the reason for the re-banding is strange as some properties have been re-banded up, some larger have been re-banded down. I can't say too much as I suspect that will identify the development and feelings around here are running quite high sadly.
    Originally posted by sirmixalot
    Sounds as if someone was either using a builder's siteplan which had been superseded or had wrongly identified the different house types
    • sirmixalot
    • By sirmixalot 26th Oct 17, 8:59 PM
    • 5 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    sirmixalot
    Not quite - it's a case of larger, more expensive properties going down a band and smaller properties going up a band if that makes sense!!!
    • lincroft1710
    • By lincroft1710 27th Oct 17, 2:00 PM
    • 9,898 Posts
    • 7,958 Thanks
    lincroft1710
    I understand what you are saying, but there has to be good reason for the VOA to have done this which is what you need to ask them.
    • Cheryla
    • By Cheryla 31st Oct 17, 1:23 PM
    • 3 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Cheryla
    appeal refused
    Thank you for your response, My MP is being very supportive and I am still pursuing this as I feel its just so morally wrong given all the compelling evidence I have to support my case. I will update you if I have any success
    • lincroft1710
    • By lincroft1710 31st Oct 17, 2:12 PM
    • 9,898 Posts
    • 7,958 Thanks
    lincroft1710
    MPs will be "supportive", they want your vote at the next election.

    Your MP will write a letter to the VOA and will receive one of 2 replies which can be paraphrased either as

    1. The matter was under consideration and it had been decided to reduce the band

    or more usually

    2. The time limit in law for an appeal is well past. However I have again reviewed the band, but remain of the opinion that it is correct

    If you think I am being cynical, I have actually replied to MP's letters when I was in the VOA. They don't know CT legislation or its machinations so when you reply quoting said laws, they don't pursue the matter.

    Did you ask the VOA why they won't reduce your band in line with the other house?
    Last edited by lincroft1710; 31-10-2017 at 2:16 PM.
    • Cheryla
    • By Cheryla 14th Nov 17, 8:16 AM
    • 3 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Cheryla
    appeal refused
    I have asked them to look at the evidence that resulting in them dropping the banding in 1993 of the identical property to mine (2 doors away) as this would be relevant to my case. That was some two weeks ago and I'm still awaiting a response from the VOA and my MP. Interestingly my Mp sent a copy of the letter he received from the VOA that stated property indexes could not be used as evidence as they were too generalised and not region specific......that however is the only evidence my local VOA officer is using to support his case. Needless to say I have pointed this out to them in the email i sent 2 weeks ago. Lets see what happens
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,796Posts Today

7,311Users online

Martin's Twitter