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

lincroft1710

Relevant legislation for CT appeals :

Statutory Instrument 1993 No. 290 The Council Tax (Alteration of Lists and Appeals) Regulations 1993 -

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1993/uksi_19930290_en_1 -

The six month time limit is referred to in Part II Para 5 (5) (a) which is one of the easier paragraphs to understand.

Your method of valuation is not perfect but it may give an indication of possible 1991 values. Your problem is going to be finding 1991 sale prices as these are not in the public domain, although you could search archived newspaper records for asking prices.

leitmotif

Thanks Lincroft, that's very useful. Good to know what this is all based on. So the advice Martin Lewis gives is that even after six months of living in your property you can write and ask the VOA to investigate, but if I understand it correctly that's just a letter asking them to fulfil a general duty to investigate. It's not a "proposal", as the legislation terms it, valid or otherwise.

If they then investigate and turn you down, and you're outside the six months, you have no hope of taking it to tribunal, even if their letter turning you down amounts to a fob-off?

You see, even just looking at my brother's property it's obvious that it's significantly smaller than the other nine houses in his street. The VOA cited examples of two houses in his street that were comparable size. One is 'elongated' (i.e. same width at front but extends back nearly twice as much as my brother's house), and the other is a little bigger than my brother's house but the garden is four times as big (in fact, it contains a mini-orchard). Their street is a comparably shabby and small cul de sac off a load of nice streets, and his whole area makes his street look second class. With this in mind, I can only suggest that the VOA has had a cursory look round his street - much in the fashion of the second-gear valuations, judged them by how they look from the front (they certainly haven't been inside them) and fobbed him off.

How are we supposed to get a proper response and a valid proposal if the VOA can simply ignore all the maths we presented to them and just say what amounts to "no, you're wrong, no appeals, go away"?

Sorry, Lincroft, this isn't aimed at you. Your help is much appreciated, as is the help of anyone else who wishes to contribute.

It's just so obvious that my brother's house is smaller and less valuable than the neighbouring properties, and we've even given a load of accurate mathematics to prove that. Even if they ignore the indices, we still established from recent sales that my brother's house was worth between 75% and 85% of other properties in his street. That alone proves that it probably shouldn't be in the same band.

owens1_2

I live on a long street of all different houses, dormer bungalows and bungalows and the 3 houses the same as mine are worth thousands less than all the rest but we are banded all the same. I rang the council tax office to say i had checked the price these houses were sold for and worth in 1991, which is thousands less than the others on the street, they said i had to find similar properties that are banded lower than what im on but all the streets round here are the same a mix of high priced bungalows and the odd houses like mine. at the time the houses according to there value in 1991 should of been band C but we've all been banded the same band D. please can anyone help how i can get it reduced.

cjgrey

leitmotif wrote: »

Thanks Lincroft, that's very useful. Good to know what this is all based on. So the advice Martin Lewis gives is that even after six months of living in your property you can write and ask the VOA to investigate, but if I understand it correctly that's just a letter asking them to fulfil a general duty to investigate. It's not a "proposal", as the legislation terms it, valid or otherwise.

If they then investigate and turn you down, and you're outside the six months, you have no hope of taking it to tribunal, even if their letter turning you down amounts to a fob-off?

You see, even just looking at my brother's property it's obvious that it's significantly smaller than the other nine houses in his street. The VOA cited examples of two houses in his street that were comparable size. One is 'elongated' (i.e. same width at front but extends back nearly twice as much as my brother's house), and the other is a little bigger than my brother's house but the garden is four times as big (in fact, it contains a mini-orchard). Their street is a comparably shabby and small cul de sac off a load of nice streets, and his whole area makes his street look second class. With this in mind, I can only suggest that the VOA has had a cursory look round his street - much in the fashion of the second-gear valuations, judged them by how they look from the front (they certainly haven't been inside them) and fobbed him off.

How are we supposed to get a proper response and a valid proposal if the VOA can simply ignore all the maths we presented to them and just say what amounts to "no, you're wrong, no appeals, go away"?

Sorry, Lincroft, this isn't aimed at you. Your help is much appreciated, as is the help of anyone else who wishes to contribute.

It's just so obvious that my brother's house is smaller and less valuable than the neighbouring properties, and we've even given a load of accurate mathematics to prove that. Even if they ignore the indices, we still established from recent sales that my brother's house was worth between 75% and 85% of other properties in his street. That alone proves that it probably shouldn't be in the same band.

Hi Leitmotif

I wrote to my VOA and gave them similar information about my house and got what from the sound of it is a virtually identical letter to yours. I rang them up to say that I was very surprised indeed and the very helpful chap told me straightaway and repeated it several times that if I wasn't happy with it, I should write again and ask for a second review. I said "but the letter is very clear that there's no right of appeal" - he said no but they would be happy to do a second review, which would be done be someone higher up, a "caseworker". I asked him what evidence they had looked at and it was practically nothing, two sales in my Close that he didn't say were in band F (our band), and some houses in the neighbouring mock Tudor estate which he said were firmly in the next band - when I challenged him, he agreed very quickly though that these are much more valuable than ours. This probably isn't relevant to you, but he also told me that they would need very strong evidence to reband 40 houses.

I don't like to be cynical but I was left wondering if it isn't just a standard response to try to put people off if it isn't absolutely clear that they're in the wrong band! I have asked for a second review and am waiting to see if the outcome is any different. It's very frustrating that you can't get hold of 1991 prices yourself, as it does rather leave them with the upper hand!

Sooozie

I have got stuck with exactly the same issue as you guys above - being unable to prove a 1991 market value ( I am E band, but believe I should be D). There are 3 other terraced houses which are similar to mine (I bought mine in 1996) and the VOA say that they have evidence from 1991 sales that my house is correctly banded. They will not provide details of their evidence for me to check whether the property transactions which they have used can sensibly be compared to mine. Although I only moved here in 1996, I am not aware that any of the 4 houses exchanged hands in 1991 (I know definitely that 3 of the 4 did not, as owners had been here for many years), so I think the VOA are comparing my house with something which is not comparable.

The whole system is completely unfair if we are unable to access readily the information re 1991 values etc on which the VOA based their view. I can't see why it is data protected info, as all that kind of info is now available on the internet (post 2000 onwards).

I have provided details of:

- more recent house sales (the properties similar to mine) adjusted back to 1991 prices;
- details of recent house sales in the area (not like mine but of similar market value) and the fact that their bandings are lower than mine:
- details of larger houses in the street which are banded lower than mine etc etc.

None of the above is accepted and the VOA won't even come out to view my property.

Have drawn a blank on this now, and think I may have to give up. The system is v unfair.

lincroft1710

leitmotif - as you say, outside six months no appeal.

Although I don't know the figures, at 85% value of the other Band C houses, your brother's house may be in the right band. If other houses sold for £66K in 1991, would indicate around £56K for your brother's.

If a lot of good streets surround a not so good street it can have the effect of increasing the value of the nsg street rather than the reverse, which how VOA may view situation. They may not even regard it as that bad or just a temporary thing.

It is very difficult to persuade VOA that their opinion may be wrong. Unless there was a 1991 sale of the subject dwelling, the band is just a matter of opinion.

From what I can remember when CT was in its formative stages, there was a problem as VOA received property sales details from the Stamps Office/Land Registry in the strictest confidence, the information was not to be divulged. I understand Parliament had to grant permission for VOA to quote sales details and VOA could only do this regarding relevant sales when a valid proposal had been made.

Whatever the rights or wrongs their hands are tied and this information is exempted from FOI. I may be wrong but I don't think the VOA are in any hurry to ask Parliament to relax the disclosure rules.

I think cjgrey's post is sensible and I don't think he's cynical.

Everyone has the opportunity to appeal against their Council Tax band. Unfortunately a lot of people leave it too late and are time barred. There was good reasoning behind the six month time limit, it was to stop occupiers making repeated appeals if they didn't win the first time. It was hoped this would save the ordinary (income) taxpayer money as ultimately it is your (and my) taxes which fund VOA and the Valuation Tribunal and appeals are costly as they are very time consuming.

lincroft1710

owens1 - where are you obtaining your 1991 values from? If it is from house price indices be aware that these are inaccurate. Also as Band D has a span of £20K, then bungalows at the top of the band would easily sell for thousands more than properties at the bottom of the band.

Unless you can find a similar house in Band C, you will have a hard time persuading the VOA that your band is wrong.

owens1_2

lincroft1710 wrote: »

owens1 - where are you obtaining your 1991 values from? If it is from house price indices be aware that these are inaccurate. Also as Band D has a span of £20K, then bungalows at the top of the band would easily sell for thousands more than properties at the bottom of the band.

Unless you can find a similar house in Band C, you will have a hard time persuading the VOA that your band is wrong.

thanks for getting back, i had a look and round the corner there are loads pending and band Cs so im going to ring them in the morning with the addresses same houses as mine on band C.

strathearn

Maisie wrote: »

halloweenqueen. So pleased you will get a refund. Pass the word on to others to check council tax banding. voa.gov.uk.

Many other MSE's are in line for refunds too.


Happy to have helped.

Maisie OP

Hi - havn't posted before so be gentle. I purchased my house in '95 with a valuation band of GSome ten months later I challenged this as the price I paid was in the F bracket (by £6,000). I was told there was nothing could be done as it was over six months.

I have since had major extension work carried out that would put me into a higher bracket but is there anything I could do to appeal my initial valuation?

Thanks for any help.
strathearn

MKPhil05

We've just moved (about 2 months ago) and our new place is a Band C. All the neighbours are also Band C but the Nationwide House Price index says:

Results:-
A property located in Outer South East which was valued at £150000 in Q1 of 2010, would be worth approximately £45469 in Q2 of 1992.

Which is firmly in Band B territory.

I know Martin says "Not worth the risk" when the "Neighbours check" fails but what have we got to loose? They can't (realistically) put us up to a D can they? As we're in the 6-month window after moving in we can take advantage of the official process... Thoughts? Comments? Worth a punt?