Council Tax: Single Occupancy - Residence vs occupancy

Samuel_Orange

I am doing research prior to possibly going to Valuation Tribunal on a Council Tax appeal concerning "sole or main residence."

I think I know where I am coming from, but want to know some case law so that I can quote it.

I know there is a publication called 'Ryde on Rating and Council Tax', but it is prohibitively expensive, and no local library holds a copy.

Does anyone know where I could access Ryde or any other publication that gives details of such case law, as detailed here previously.

CIS

What cases do you want details on - I may be able to get yout some info.

What is the particular point you wish to go with ?.

Samuel_Orange

Briefly CIS, without going into the nitty gritty of the case, it concerns the 'resident' v 'occupier' scenario, where the person concerned had a one year tenancy but after a few weeks returned to live with parents, and did not occupy the property again.

The local council say that because there was a tenancy, the person must pay Council Tax as they are deemed to be a liable person even though there was no intention on their part to return.

The tenant continued to pay rent etc., but could not relinquish the tenancy.

Thank you for your offer of assistance, but I was really expecting to look up case law myself to see what is the nearest scenario that has been tested by a Valuation Tribunal or higher body.

CIS

There's not much that has been tested as the details are relatively well covered through council tax legislation. If your going where I think your going you would overturn probably 10-20% of all council tax liabilities if you could get a decision in your favour and overturn the view on second homes.

The property would be a second home if you held the tenancy/ownership and did not live in the property. If someone else had the property as their main residence then you would not be liable.

Intention not to return would not remove council tax liability if you still held the right to occupy the property - it would merely remove the property as your 'sole or main residence' and you would be billed on this basis.

Samuel_Orange

"The property would be a second home if you held the tenancy/ownership and did not live in the property. If someone else had the property as their main residence then you would not be liable."

The person concerned had a joint tenancy with another, who was a full - time student, and who continued to live there but of course was not liable for Council Tax.

Does that make any difference?

CIS

It would - assuming you had left and you had no intention to return then it would be your second home however as it would still be the 'sole or main residence' of another person then liability would fall on them.

I would guess that the council are trying to say that you had the intention to return and therefore they believe you were still resident for council tax puposes. As such (under the 2004 ammendments to the regs) you are a joint tenant living with a student and are liable as the student cannot be held jointly liable.

From the supplied information the student should be liable (although they will have no council tax to pay under a Class N exemption) if the property is no longer the non-students 'sole or main residence'.

Section 6(2) of the LGFA 1992 -

(2)A person falls within this subsection in relation to any chargeable dwelling and any day if, on that day—

(a)he is a resident of the dwelling and has a freehold interest in the whole or any part of it;

(b)he is such a resident and has a leasehold interest in the whole or any part of the dwelling which is not inferior to another such interest held by another such resident;

(c)he is both such a resident and a statutory [F1, secure or introductory tenant]of the whole or any part of the dwelling;

(d)he is such a resident and has a contractual licence to occupy the whole or any part of the dwelling;

(e)he is such a resident; or

(f)he is the owner of the dwelling.

A resident is defined as

*

“resident”, in relation to any dwelling, means an individual who has attained the age of 18 years and has his sole or main residence in the dwelling.

harryhound

Samuel_Orange wrote: »

Does anyone know where I could access Ryde or any other publication that gives details of such case law, as detailed here previously.

Try the City of London business library - they are helpful and might know (but cut backs etc.).

Samuel_Orange

Thank you once again CIS.

Just so that you understand the situation, I am attempting to sort this problem out for a lady friend of mine (Miss .

Miss A and Miss B took up a joint tenancy for a house for one year. After a few months, Miss B left to return to her family’s house because of domestic circumstances. She therefore left the property on which she had the joint tenancy, but continued to pay her share of the rent in order to be fair to Miss A, but had, because of the prevailing circumstances, no intention to return there. She was though still a party to the tenancy.

When you say – “From the supplied information the student should be liable (although they will have no council tax to pay under a Class N exemption) if the property is no longer the non-students 'sole or main residence'”, do you mean that Miss B (the non – student) should not be liable for Council Tax because it is no longer her ‘sole or main residence’, because the Council are charging her on the basis as assumed by you in the 2nd. paragraph of your last posting.


If that is a correct interpretation on my part, where in Section 6(2) of the LGFA 1992 (which you kindly detailed for me) is that covered please?

Apologies for being a trifle dense on this.

CIS

Thats correct. It is not Miss B's sole or main residence on the basis of the supplied information.

Its not something that is written implicitly in section 6 of the LGFA 1992 - they never never defined resident in that above the defintion I gave - e.g over 18 and occupying the property as their 'sole or main residence'. The fact they never defined it is the cause of most council tax appeals.

The view I have posted has been taken from various cases and legislation courses I have taken (its also the view supprted by the IRRV who issue the most respected courses in council tax legislation). I have never come across a council yet who will take an alternative view however it appears that you have found a council who do.

Unfortunately apart from arguing it with the council then you cannot force them other than the threat of a tribunal to get them to change their decsion.


What I would do is to write to the head of revenues at the dept and quote something along the lines of:

Miss A and Miss B took the joint tenancy.

Miss B left the property for personnal reasons and moved back home. She has no intention to return to the property and as such no longer has her 'sole or main residence' at the rented property.

As the property is no longer Miss B's 'sole or main residence' then liability falls upon Miss A as per section 6 of the LGFA 1992 on the basis that it is her 'sole or main residence' and as such she is liable for council tax purposes under section 6(2c) of the act due to being the sole resident of the property - resident is defined as - 'resident”, in relation to any dwelling, means an individual who has attained the age of 18 years and has his sole or main residence in the dwelling'.

I would then finish it with a sentence advising that is to be taken as formal notice of appeal and that you will be issuing a formal appeal to the valuation tribunal if the matter is not settled within 2 months of the date of the letter.

Samuel_Orange

Thank you CIS.

I will do as you suggest, but feel sure that based on the discussion I had with a Council Tax Officer at the Local Authority concerned, they may very well try to hold out.

The individual concerned at the Council said - "I could go to the High Court if I wanted", but the fact was that, under the circumstances, Miss B was a liable person.

If it does eventually proceed to a Tribunal hearing, then I would be glad to be knowledgable of some case law - as referred to by you.

Any help given in this respect would be gratefully received.