'Time for a full revaluation of council tax bands?' poll discussion

Former_MSE_Lawrence

Time for a full revaluation of council tax bands?

English & Scottish homes’ council tax bands still rely on rushed valuations by estate agents driving past in 1991, and haven’t been touched since - leaving 400,000 homes in the wrong band (see council tax rebanding to check yours).

Last week, the govt. ruled out a full-scale revaluation worried some would move up bands (others would of course be lowered).

Which of these is closest to your view?

A. 20 years is too long – we need a full revaluation - 2,093 votes (34 %)
B. Leave it as it is – too much risk of it going wrong - 1,353 votes (22 %)
C. Leave it as it is but allow everyone a right to appeal if theirs is wrong - 2,411 votes (39 %)
D. I'm in Wales or Northern Ireland - this doesn't apply - 343 votes (6 %)

This vote has closed, but you can still click 'post reply' to discuss below. Thanks

Also see the ministers open door to councilt tax appeal reform news story

[threadbanner]box[/threadbanner]

Gareth_Lazelle

A - those who are artificially in lower bands than they should be (i.e.: with expensive houses) are being subsidised by everyone else!

C will result in council tax rising (because folks will only claim if they see their tax going down, which will reduce tax revenues),

<edit>Oh - and for context, I live in Devon, so if my tax is going to change at all it will be going up,

Gordon_the_Moron

Leave it as it is but giving everyone the right to appeal, I think a full revaluation of every property would cost a fortune for little benefit.

youngie

not many properties will have gone down in value in 20 years so most homes will be in a different band but surely the bands will also have to be reset and the cost of all of that will far outwiegh the revenue increase so the government?councils will be out of pocket it makes sense to leave it as it is and persue those who default

MSE_Martin

youngie wrote: »

not many properties will have gone down in value in 20 years so most homes will be in a different band but surely the bands will also have to be reset and the cost of all of that will far outwiegh the revenue increase so the government?councils will be out of pocket it makes sense to leave it as it is and persue those who default

Yes a revaluation if done would be at current prices

BNT

How about treating it as a genuine council tax and let each council decide how they want to handle rather than have the national government intervene.

rag31

Where is the 'stop playing round with this fundamentally unfair tax and instead introduce a local income tax' option? I can't vote for any of these because the tax is basically flawed and no amount of tweaking can alter that.

sue.b_2

I can't see many of my neighbours going for an appeal. Some of them have built massive extensions so that the original house is hidden inside. My immediate neighbours are still two bands lower than I am but in a house twice the size. I wish I could appeal against their banding.
The only fair way to deal with this is a full revaluation.

an1179

All the groundwork has already been done for the re-valuation. All the figures are there.

beardiedog

I voted A because, as sue.b rightly points out, these massively extended homes are only revalued for council tax when sold. Several houses on my estate are in band C, like mine, when they should really be in D or E or even higher. I can't appeal because they are currently valued on their original size.

I also agree that a local income tax should replace the council tax plus a basic charge for each home for the services everyone receives - a mix of poll tax plus income tax on ability to pay. That shouldn't cost very much to implement.

ifan.goch

I live in Wales, and when we were re-evaluated we were told that some people would go up, some down and some stay where they are. My whole village went up 2 bands, but were given two years to make the full adjustment.

I agree that the tax is unfair and should be based on income rather than the value of a property.

Also, I feel really aggrieved that people in rural areas are subsidising the people in towns and cities. When you look at the services that rural areas receive in comparison to built up areas it beggars belief that we have to pay the same price. The council says that we can use all of the facilities in the towns, but fail to take into account that many of us have ridiculously long trips to enjoy the ornamental parks, libraries, leisure centres, etc, not to mention things like daily street sweeping compared to our quarterly cleaning (if we're lucky) and kerbside recycling compared to our community recycling bins which we have to take our rubbish to. Rural poverty is far more isolating than urban poverty and is only exacerbated by the lack of facilities and services.