Council Tax Cost Cutting: reduce your band and grab any discounts Discussion Area

guppy

diane456 wrote: »

We've today had a letter turning down our request to reband our house to band B. All of our neighbours are band B and we are the only ones who are band C. I've been told it's because I have an acre paddock with my house, but I though that plot size wasn't a factor. Also, this is agricultural land, not part of the domestic curtailment.

I need to put together an appeal and hope someone can offer some assistance. My house is identical to my neighbours and was a new build in 2000. We do have a double garage, whereas they have single garages but that is the only difference. In March 2000, our house sold for £54500, as did all my neighbours houses. We purchased it in March 2003 for £99950.

Any help?

Hello,

Was the land included with the 2000 sale? If it was then that would suggest it made little difference to the value. Did any of the other houses sell in 2003 for comparison?

An acre on its own is likely to be considered a leisure plot rather than agricultural. This is especially the case if its used to graze horses...unless they're working horses.

Having said that, land was relatively cheaper in 1991 compared to now. Have the VOA referred to the land? If all the houses are identical, I'd ask them to explain their valuation, particularly what value they are attributing to the land and the garage at 1991.

Good luck.

carefulK

Hi everyone

I am upset because I have checked my banding and it's fine for the house I am in now but the house I moved from was banded too high. I lived there for ten years and they have made lots of money from me.

Does anyone know if you can appeal if it's for your previous address? How far back can you expect to be refunded?

Thank you all in advance i't's my first post on here so I hope I have done this correctly.

CK x :j

Bob_Roberts

Martin, you may remember my postings around 27/28 January this year in which I expressed concern over your heavy promotion of challenges to Council Tax bandings. My concern was that whilst some would gain, the cost of this would fall to the rest of society. Of particular note was the fact that the "successes" seemed to come predominantly from more expensive houses/bandings i.e people who could afford their charge were going to get money back from already cash strapped local authorities who would, in turn, look to the rest of the community to pay for that. Given that many of those people would have bought their houses, knowing what the Tax Band was, and knowing the amount they were expected to pay, I thought it disappointing that you should be encouraging such issues.You will no doubt have read in yesterdays Daily Mail about the chap from Portslade in East Sussex, who challenged his banding because his house was seemingly in a higher band than his neighbours. His appeal was unsuccessful. The Council said his property was correctly banded - but they have now increased the banding of all of the neighbours properties and those neighbours are now having to find £30 per month extra as a result of this mans greed - but did he do so as a result of your numerous TV appearances.Legally, you are perfectly right of course. But being legal doesn't always mean that is the right answer. As with many of the issues you raise such as this Council Tax problem, Bank Charges etc, you are either failing to think through the consequences of what you promote or, more worryingly, tv appearances matter to you more than people. Can you seriously believe that any Bank losing tens of millions of income will simply say ok - or will they will look to recover it from elsewhere i.e. will we see an end to free Banking. Guess what, the well off will be seen as valuable customers and won't have to pay - but most ordinary working people/pensioners etc, will have to pay up all beacuse of the greed of people who issued cheques without fund etc and generally managed their accounts badly.Don't say it won't happen - as you do countless times on TV/over these forums. It will. And you will probably be amongst the good customers who won't have to pay. Lots of people won't have that luxury and will have to pay.Incidentally, in one of your replies to me, you said - of the Council Tax issue - "it is unlikely to put other Council Tax up" - try telling that to the residents of Portslade - although the correlation isn't direct - doubtless the Council are simply looking to ways to recoup funds they pay out for issues such as unjustified rebates.

CIS

The Council said his property was correctly banded - but they have now increased the banding of all of the neighbours properties and those neighbours are now having to find £30 per month extra as a result of this mans greed

Banding's are down to the Valuations Office, the council have no control over the band of a property.

vivatifosi

Sorry Bob, I disagree.

Martin is right to promote this issue because there are so many properties incorrectly banded. The people of Portslade do still have a right to appeal, as others have written. Why should a large number of people put up with paying the wrong amount of tax, in the hundreds, or thousands of pounds, just because in a relatively small percentage of enquiries the opposite may be the case?

If there is an issue with Council Tax appeals it is because people haven't historically been very good at making them, particularly the issue of going to tribunal. Too many people make really poorly constructed cases and this website provides a vital service to everyone who wants to make a valid case. In my own case I would have been doomed to failure if it wasn't for the invaluable help of Guppy, Maisie and everyone else who has aided me. It isn't always easy, especially if you have to take it as far as tribunal, but the VOA aren't always right and I for one have better things to spend 30 quid per month of my income that has already been taxed at source on than yet another form of tax.

guppy

I'm afraid I disagree too, Bob.

The guy wasn't greedy, he was just rightfully questioning why he was paying more than his neighbours in identical houses. Its not his fault the VOA got it wrong first time around.

Of course when bands get reduced, it has to be subsidised by everyone else, but its money that was overpaid in the first place. In most cases people don't get interest either, so the amount is greatly reduced taking in to account inflation.

Obviously its not very nice to have your taxes put up unexpectedly, but on the other hand those people (through no fault of their own) have underpaid thousands over the years. They rightfully aren't being asked to pay it back.

Putting the other bands up from today isn't going to pay for all the bands that have been reduced back to 1993, and as CIS said, the council have no say in bandings. Its simply a matter of making sure everyone is paying their fair share.

Bob, are you really saying if you found out you were paying one or two bands higher than you should be, that you'd accept it to save the rest of us pennies each?

Maisie

carefulK wrote: »

Hi everyone

I am upset because I have checked my banding and it's fine for the house I am in now but the house I moved from was banded too high. I lived there for ten years and they have made lots of money from me.

Does anyone know if you can appeal if it's for your previous address? How far back can you expect to be refunded?

Thank you all in advance i't's my first post on here so I hope I have done this correctly.

CK x :j

carefulK.

You can't ask for a review now that you have left the property. However if you can persuade the current occupiers to ask for a review/rebanding and if they are successful you will probably get a refund for the time you were.

Look back at this thread and the many posts on this subject. There's loads of advice and information for anyone looking to start the rebanding process.

Good luck. Maisie

carefulK

:j Hi

Sorry to interupt but I was wondering if anyone knew the answer to my question at all. I just trust the people who know rather than having to ring them up and them fob me off. If you don't don't worry.

Thanks in advance

CK x:rotfl:

Mark-W_2

Well i just had my VTS decision letter through the letter box and im afraid its bad news.

The VTS have agreed with the VOA and i remain at band D.

The letter states that they put the most weight on the sale price of 2 properties similar to mine.
The first is identical to mine but it did not exist in 1991, it sold for £74k in 1998 when it was first built.
The second which is in a better location but marginally smaller sold for £80k in 1990.

I listed 22 properties of band C, which were very similar and 4 of which sold for less that £65k in 1991.
2 vs 22

So dispite the fact that my evidence was far stronger the voa won.

Not sure what to do now, probably re-appeal under the reduction of material value due to the proximity of local pub.

carefulK

:beer: Thank you Maisie for your reply.

I am quite good friends with the lady that lives in my old house so I will have a chat with her about rebanding my old property. I'm sure she's not going to object to my suggestions if she is going to save money.

Thanks again for your help. This site is great I feel I have been so naive for many years until I looked on here.

love from
CK x :T