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

blackfive

I read with interest the problems and success of others with their CT.

Unfortunately for me its becoming very fustrating indeed with the local Valuation Office (Harrogate sub-office to Leeds) as their responses are very ambiguous and contradictory. They point blank refuse to take into account any of the painstackingly researched evidence of mine regarding the value of the house and band.

The house wasn't extent on 1 April 1991 as it wasn't built until late 1996 and the CT is based opon the initial selling price when new. The prices for new properties often have a premium added as was the case for mine. However subsequent sales and valuations haven't had this premium and using indices the CT band is above what it should be given its market value.

The main points I put, with evidence, to the VO are;
Initial cost of house inflated by a new build premium.
Four larger houses were initially sold at lower cost but now obviously higher valuation reflecting larger property.
The area is within the "Yorkshire Golden Triangle" (Leeds, Harrogate & York) with prices rising higher than the national average and far higher rises than the general Yorkshire and Humberside region.
Subsequent sales prices and two current valuations.
Calculations using indices showing market value on 1 April 1991.
Only 3 bedroom house on higher band on the same road.
Comparison with nearby estate showing houses of same size (but extent on 1 April 1991) with greater valuations but lower CT band.

The first refusal of lowering the CT band cited comparison with other properties within the same area used as a comparison. The second refusal cited the only value they can work with is the initial selling price when new and not any susequent prices or valuations.

Three months ago I asked in writing for details of the properties they used for comparisons, the details of the rules applying the initial selling price as the only consideration, the question of how two other areas in the country (giving locations) could apply subsequent sales and valuations but not them, details of the indices they used for calculating the CT band, plus other discrepencies contained within their letters. I still haven't had any reply to this and have subsequently send a reminder letter that a reply is still awaited.

I get the distinct impression that the letters are being ignored by the Harrogate VO as 3 months to not have a reply is certainly very excessive.

Has anyone any advice of what the next step I can take can be?

lincroft1710

Blackfive - unless you have a valid appeal outstanding VOA will not divulge details of comparables other than in general terms as there is no obligation to do so.

If they have sent you a letter saying (moreorless) "I have investigated the band, it is correct and there is no appeal against my decision so please don't write again", then they won't entertain any further discussion/correspondence on the matter.

You can still complain to the VOA Customer Service Manager at Leeds if you consider you have been unfairly treated and you can also write to your MP (who no doubt will be very keen to assist his/her constituents over the next 7 months). However neither of these avenues is guaranteed to result in a lower band.

blackfive

lincroft1710 wrote: »

Blackfive - unless you have a valid appeal outstanding VOA will not divulge details of comparables other than in general terms as there is no obligation to do so.

If they have sent you a letter saying (moreorless) "I have investigated the band, it is correct and there is no appeal against my decision so please don't write again", then they won't entertain any further discussion/correspondence on the matter.

You can still complain to the VOA Customer Service Manager at Leeds if you consider you have been unfairly treated and you can also write to your MP (who no doubt will be very keen to assist his/her constituents over the next 7 months). However neither of these avenues is guaranteed to result in a lower band.

Thanks lincroft1710 for your reply to my posting. It appears that I'm under the misapprehension that government and public bodies are supposedly open with their dealings these days. Nothing seems to have changed.

Interestingly reading the VOA Customer Service Policy I've just found on their website (not sure if that was supposed to be accessed but a Google search linked to it) they are suppossed to answer all letters they recieve so can't ignore mine.

Everyone I've spoken too to take advice from state that I've got a very strong case as the VOA can't deny the svidence I've submitted to them as incorrect. I'm of the belief this is the reason they don't want to divulge any of their evidence for fear it can be proven incorrect. At no stage have they stated my information is factually incorrect.

I shall give them a little longer to reply to me (I've requested it all in writing from them) and then may take it up with their main Leeds Office concurrently with the MP. We're fortunate in having a MP who's strong in campaigning on people's behalf.

Would there also be any right to gain the information I require by asking for all the information held in their files for my property under the Freedom of Information? Although not directly personal but would the Data Protection also apply to a house as someone's personal property?

I'm kicking myself that I didn't know about all this within 6 months of moving into the property as then they'd have been an automatic right to an appeal and seeing their information. I still think its grossly unfair to have this time limit but this won't stop me pressing for it.

lincroft1710

Blackfive - the info VOA hold on your property would be sale price(s) and names/addresses of vendors/purchasers, size, approx age, type and accom/major outbuildings. Most of which you would know or could calculate. VOA have very few FOI requests as there is little they have that is actually covered by this.

Sale prices of properties not owned by enquirer are exempt from FOI and because of an historic law/agreement (which VOA is bound by) can only be disclosed at a certain stage of valid appeal procedure. I never came across DPA as I don't believe it was relevant and therefore didn't arise - but I could be wrong.

Although they may not dispute the veracity of your evidence, they seem to be of the opinion that they have better/more relevant evidence.

You can blame MSE for VOA's current stance! Since Martin started encouraging people to challenge their CT band (shortly before I left VOA - a genuine coincidence) VOA resources have been stretched, so they will investigate a band, but only send out a standard "It's correct and that's end of it" reply. If I considered the taxpayer needed to be convinced his band was correct I would not quote actual sales evidence but say "Houses of similar size and type in the area/neighbourhood/road were selling for in excess of band minimum around 1 Apr 91." No time to do that now apparently.

The time limit for appeals was set down by Parliament in CT legislation and was not decided by VOA, but again they are bound by it.

blackfive

lincroft1710 wrote: »

<snipped>

Although they may not dispute the veracity of your evidence, they seem to be of the opinion that they have better/more relevant evidence.

You can blame MSE for VOA's current stance! Since Martin started encouraging people to challenge their CT band (shortly before I left VOA - a genuine coincidence) VOA resources have been stretched, so they will investigate a band, but only send out a standard "It's correct and that's end of it" reply.
<snipped>
QUOTE]

That's exactly why I want the information so I can see for myself what evidence they have used. Without this I won't let it rest as otherwise how do I know its correct or how can I dispute it?

I don't blame Martin for the current stance of the VOA, I blame the government for having so understaffed to deal with all the discrepencies they caused in the first place on the botched initial so called surveys. Had they carried those out correctly in the first place they wouldn't now have this high workload.

When I purchased my house all I was sent was a form from the VOA asking what facilities the house had. They had incorrect information then as was down for 2 reception rooms when its a combined living/dining room so only 1 reception room. There was no information at all with this form on the fact that I only had 6 months to appeal and I only found this out when questioning my banding after doing extensive research. Only then did they send me a leaflet informing me of this fact.

I'm wondering if the VOA comes under any ombudsman I could contact if require to take this further as a last resort?

lincroft1710

You have no "right" to see the evidence I'm afraid.

VOA started carrying out property surveys in early 1950s, and have tried to continuously update them (not as easy as it would first appear). Successive governments have failed to ensure adequate resources for VOA and much of original CT banding was carried out by poorly paid outside "contractors" (firms of estate agents) and ex estate agents working on contract in VOA and had little incentive to do a first class job. The govt at the time wanted the task done in a very short timespan and VOA were forced to agree to this or they would not get the work. There was some resentment at these "outsiders" and their lack of professionalism by established VO staff, many of whom were Chartered Surveyors.

I realise none of the above is really relevant to your problem but that's why things are the way they are, and boy after 35 yrs was I glad to be out of it!

In itself having 1 or 2 receps is not likely to be band significant. Never personally known of Ombudsman involvement in CT band reduction case, so I can't usefully comment. VOA Customer Service Manager would be best person to ask.

blackfive

Thanks again lincroft1710 for an informative reply.

Whilst there may be no pressing legal requirement for them to furnish me with the evidence of their results, there is a moral issue of openess. Quite frankly I won't be satisfied until I have seen this proof of their's and had the chance to comment on it.

To be honest this is a case of the VOA claiming the value is only just within the higher CT Band when my extensive evidence, of multiple points, each proves its well within the mid range of the CT Band below. Had my evidence also shown it to be marginal then I'd have been inclined to accept the VOA findings but it isn't marginal.

At least today I've at last had an acknowledgement of my letter from them to state they'll deal with it. Its still a long way from resolving this though.

lincroft1710

What you're failing to understand is that VOA cannot reveal sales evidence where there is not a valid appeal. It's not that they choose not to, it is that they are not allowed to. Stupid and archaic it may be but it would break the confidentiality conditions which were attached when sales evidence was supplied to them.

I understand that they had to obtain Parliamentary permission to quote sales evidence details at Valuation Tribunals.

derektomblin

lincroft1710 wrote: »

derektomblin - this is correct insofar as CT legislation makes no reference to payment of interest on overpayments. If you are in England or Wales, the VOA in very, very exceptional circumstances will sometimes pay interest. But you would virtually have to prove that they had known for a long, long time that your band was wrong and did nothing about it. And it would still be at their discretion.

Many thanks Lincroft. Sorry for delay, I have been away from my computer. Since I had a long hard struggle, involved my MP and had a VOA Surveyor to my house who said it was a borderline case, I not not think I would have any case at all to argue that they knew all along my house was in the wrong band. Not even worth the effort trying, I think.
Thanks again- carry on the good work. derektomblin

blackfive

lincroft1710 wrote: »

What you're failing to understand is that VOA cannot reveal sales evidence where there is not a valid appeal. It's not that they choose not to, it is that they are not allowed to. Stupid and archaic it may be but it would break the confidentiality conditions which were attached when sales evidence was supplied to them.

I understand that they had to obtain Parliamentary permission to quote sales evidence details at Valuation Tribunals.

It certainly makes a mockery of that when you consider that all sales with values have been available on the internet in the public domain since 2000. I've even found all the complete sales data from my own road from when it was built in 1996. The secrecy also makes a complete mockery of the openess Government bodies are supposed to work under these days.

This secrecy fuels suspicion at what is being hidden from you. I for one won't be giving up on this quest due to having so much evidence showing the CT Band is too high. The fight with the VOA will continue.