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

vivatifosi

lincroft1710 wrote: »

vivatifosi - blackfive is well out of time for an appeal. He's already asked for band reduction and VOA have said no. I've asked him twice what the 96 sale price was, his actual band and any subsequent sales so that I might be ableto give him further advice, but I'm still waiting.

I agree it would be helpful to know more, however I do think blackfive has options.

First he/she could do the same as some residents near me did (ok, with my prodding) and used my tribunal appeal to make a valid appeal that then was in date. We kept doing this, with varying types of houses that were further away in style from mine until the whole estate and two neighbouring ones were overturned. Although these were on a different type of house to mine, they were able to construct their argument the same way and so they too were successful. The VOA even overturned two previous lost tribunal appeals on the basis of the new evidence.

The second would be to find someone local who has moved in recently and see if they could work together to make an appeal, helping the person with local knowledge, so that if they won, then the valid appeal would open up a window of opportunity to make an appeal.

Either scenario would then mean they couldn't be considered out of date, though its really hard to do.

lincroft1710

viva - as you say this is hard to do. I get the impression blackfive's house is the only one of its type on the estate. Trying to find a "relevant VT decision" case is very, very difficult unless there has been a recent VT decision on a similar house on his or nearby estate.

I remember in earlyish days of CT a lot of appeals had been heard, we had an invalid at VT and clerk was trying to find a relevant VT decision so taxpayer could make valid proposal. He thought he'd found one until I pointed out that the taxpayer's existing band was the same as the band that the VT had determined for that case.

angiesavemoney

i am living in a housing association property (maisonette) and wonder if i am able to ask for a council tax rebanding, i have noticed that a lot of the private houses in my road are band B the same as my property. i have no ideal how much my property would have been worth in 1991, i have lived in this proerty since 1988. any advice would be great

lincroft1710

Angie - firstly HA properties aren't always worth less than private ones and very many different properties will be in the same band - yours could have a 91 value of £41K, private £51K - both still Band B.

There are two ways to see if your band is OK or not. Access archive local newspaper ads for 91 and look if there are similar flats/maisonettes for sale and what the asking prices are. If under £40K, you have some ammunition to request rebanding.

Try and find other similar HA/council flats/maisonettes and check their banding, if Band A, you again have a reason to request rebanding.

exvoperson

A question for Lincroft

I have a VT hearing on my mothers property next week. It was built in 2002 and had a conservatory built 2005. She brought the property in 2008. I consider that we have to consider the property at date of sale with the conservatory but of course using 1991 values.

The VO are saying the property should be valued as a new build (with improvements) with a new build premium being applicable. I consider we are valuing a 6 year old property with improvements. VO instructions say the property should be valued at date of sale.
The conservatory has no affect on the banding.
Any idea who is right. Thanks for any advice you can offer
Regards ExVOperson

lincroft1710

exvo - I'll get back to you on this later today (13/10).

lincroft1710

exvo - your approach suggests that newbuilds should be revalued as "secondhand" when there is a second sale, which would mean that all dwellings built in past 16/18 yrs should be revalued.

What would be interesting, would be to compare 2008 prices of 2002 (or thereabouts) house with a 1988 house which is as near as possible in size, type, character and location as 2002 one. If 2002 house is say 5% higher than 1988 one, it would bear out the VOA approach in respect of your mother's house.

The problem is that CT legislation only says what has to be found (1991 sale price) not how to find it. The CT manual doesn't seem to be much help either.

Do you think your method of valuation would convince a Tribunal, bearing in mind you're trying to create a precedent some 16 yrs into a Valuation List? Because on the day it doesn't matter whose approach is "right" it's what the members of the tribunal conclude is the correct band.

vivatifosi

exvoperson wrote: »

The VO are saying the property should be valued as a new build (with improvements) with a new build premium being applicable. I consider we are valuing a 6 year old property with improvements. VO instructions say the property should be valued at date of sale.
The conservatory has no affect on the banding.
Any idea who is right. Thanks for any advice you can offer
Regards ExVOperson

ExVOperson,

Has this happened yet? Just a thought. Per our case (which was the reverse of yours), we argued that our new houses were more expensive because of things that should be stripped out: furniture packages, carpets, fees paid, stamp duty paid, etc. This was a successful tribunal.

Could you possibly argue the opposite - that an extension cannot be classed the same way as such up-charges aren't included? Maybe showing the sort of up-charges that would have been included at other properties that were new at the time.

Good luck with the tribunal.

guppy

exvoperson wrote: »

A question for Lincroft

I have a VT hearing on my mothers property next week. It was built in 2002 and had a conservatory built 2005. She brought the property in 2008. I consider that we have to consider the property at date of sale with the conservatory but of course using 1991 values.

The VO are saying the property should be valued as a new build (with improvements) with a new build premium being applicable. I consider we are valuing a 6 year old property with improvements. VO instructions say the property should be valued at date of sale.
The conservatory has no affect on the banding.
Any idea who is right. Thanks for any advice you can offer
Regards ExVOperson

The person you are dealing has misdirected themselves and needs to remind themselves of the relevant legislation, as summarised in the VOA Council Tax Manual here. Whether this will actually help is another matter though.

As the manual says,

"In essence the question when valuing is always, "Given the size, layout, character of the dwelling and the physical state of its locality at a given date on or after 1/4/93, how much would it have sold for on 1 April 1991?"

In the case of a property being revalued because it has been extended and since sold, the date of that sale is the date at which the "character of the dwelling" should be considered.

The legislation is quite clear that it is the actual house as it exists at this date that should be valued (assuming it is in reasonable repair), and therefore its age at the time of the sale can be taken in to account.

The problem is finding 1991 evidence that demonstrates that a six year old house is worth less than a newly built one, and persuading the Tribunal to run with that argument.

Since its likely to be impossible to find sales of similar houses at 1991, on the same estate, that are of different ages, the next best evidence might be of prices of houses built in the mid-1980s that sold at 1991, but that introduces lots of other variables and opens the door to subjectivity.

Has the VO actually conceded that a "new build" premium exists?

In any case, where the evidence is of houses that were actually sold and completed in April 1991, these should technically be assumed to be two years old when originally valued, because the date to consider their character and the other physical factors is April 1993.

exvoperson

Thank you to you, Lincroft and Vivatifosi for your replies, Being my mum's property I feel I have to win so the more the help the better!

The VO have provided no evidence of new build premium but have just said it is worth more than the comps because it is new (built after 1/4/93)

I will be quoting VO instructions and the regs in the hearing. To be honest the VO have made so many errors it should be an easy one to win. But after years of experience I know you can never assume anything at VT.

I will let you know the results. As a matter of interest there are up to 16 out of 28 properties in the reg 26 notice that are potentialy in the wrong band either high or low, even semi detached bungalows in different bands.

Kind regards ExVOperson