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

sirmixalot_2

lincroft1710 wrote: »

I understand what you are saying, but there has to be good reason for the VOA to have done this which is what you need to ask them.

Would it be okay to send you a PM with the details on as things have changed over the last week and I would certainly appreciate your thoughts? Thank you.

lincroft1710

Unless it includes personal or confidential details I would prefer if you posted on this thread

sirmixalot_2

lincroft1710 wrote: »

Unless it includes personal or confidential details I would prefer if you posted on this thread

Okay, I think it should be okay.


I live on a development that was started in 2004 and finished in 2006 which is when I brought my four bedroom house. The development was done by a major builder so included house types that were built not only on this site but all over the country.


In December of 2016 we received a letter about notice of rebanding. My property went up a band to the second highest and other properties which were larger went down to the third highest. These properties were five bedroom properties but were build over three floors. At the time we realised that not only had they missed some properties in our road, but other roads on the development weren't touched. The VOA corrected the ones on our road, but left the other streets on the development alone.


We appealed as did several of our neighbours and mentioned the inconsistency again amongst our reasons, but was told that this would be addressed.


Roll forward to October and one of our neighbours then went to the Appeal tribunal - now as far as I can tell their case was solely on the fact that only our road had been rebanded and the other houses were bigger were now lower.


This had a result of changing the other houses on the development within a week of the hearing.


I was due to have a hearing a few weeks ago, but this got cancelled at 4pm day before at the request of the clerk as they felt the case due to be heard before mine was likely to overrun and wouldn't leave sufficient time.


My first point of concern is that we have been paying the higher band for nearly a year now compared to a similar property around the corner - this isn't a reason to restore my band back to it's original I realise, but surely it demonstrates that we have been treated unfairly in paying a higher rate of council tax for almost a year? Given that they have been told numerous times of the inconsistency and only addressed it after the hearing - grounds for complaint surely?


It terms of the house style influencing the banding I don't believe that the first hearing made mention of the fact that if you were to ignore the top floor of those larger properties the remaining two floors would be very, very close in size to the four bedroom house styles. Literally I could convert my loft and my property would be the same.

lincroft1710

sirmixalot wrote: »

Roll forward to October and one of our neighbours then went to the Appeal tribunal - now as far as I can tell their case was solely on the fact that only our road had been rebanded and the other houses were bigger were now lower.

This had a result of changing the other houses on the development within a week of the hearing.

My first point of concern is that we have been paying the higher band for nearly a year now compared to a similar property around the corner - this isn't a reason to restore my band back to it's original I realise, but surely it demonstrates that we have been treated unfairly in paying a higher rate of council tax for almost a year? Given that they have been told numerous times of the inconsistency and only addressed it after the hearing - grounds for complaint surely?

What was the result of your neighbour's appeal?

A 3 storey house will be worth less than a 2 storey house of the same type and size. Is your house detached and are the 3 storey houses detached or are they semis or terraced?

Although the VOA were tardy in increasing the bands of houses in the next road, complaining about it will achieve nothing other than perhaps a placatory letter or even just excuses as to why it wasn't done sooner. You haven't actually lost anything by their inaction.

sirmixalot_2

lincroft1710 wrote: »

What was the result of your neighbour's appeal?

A 3 storey house will be worth less than a 2 storey house of the same type and size. Is your house detached and are the 3 storey houses detached or are they semis or terraced?

Although the VOA were tardy in increasing the bands of houses in the next road, complaining about it will achieve nothing other than perhaps a placatory letter or even just excuses as to why it wasn't done sooner. You haven't actually lost anything by their inaction.

Once again thank you for your reply.


They lost their appeal - but from what I understand they did not present any evidence to show the property was in the wrong band and relied on the fact that the banding was different to the same house type elsewhere on the development. I think the listing officer apologized and said that the other similar properties to which they were referring would be rebanded, which they were the following week after the hearing.


There are four bedroom terraced houses on the development that are built over three floors and I can understand how these might be worth less than a four bedroom semi or detached two floor home, if they had a similar amount of space.


However, the ones that I am comparing against are detached, imposing, double-fronted properties with additional bedrooms or reception rooms. The internal floor area is around 25% more or 40 square metres. If you could slice the top floor off and put a roof back down, you would still have a property that was very, very close to mine in total floor area.


Re the delay in increasing bands - whatever the result of my hearing, surely I have been at a disadvantage in having to pay the higher band of council tax for almost a year, when the same house round the corner hasn't? Since VOA are an offshoot of HMRC isn't there something about fairness in their charter - especially when they were told multiple times of the inconsistency?

lincroft1710

sirmixalot wrote: »

Re the delay in increasing bands - whatever the result of my hearing, surely I have been at a disadvantage in having to pay the higher band of council tax for almost a year, when the same house round the corner hasn't? Since VOA are an offshoot of HMRC isn't there something about fairness in their charter - especially when they were told multiple times of the inconsistency?

VOA argument would be that you are not at a disadvantage as the band has been incorrect since day one and you have been underpaying from that day until your home was rebanded. If one was to have "fairness" then you and all your neighbours in increased band houses would have to pay the council the underpayment going back all those years. But fortunately for you and your neighbours CT legislation does not permit this.

Your band was incorrect, the VOA corrected it as is their duty. As I said in my previous post, complaining about the delay in increasing the other bands will achieve absolutely nothing. In fact it may divert attention from more pertinent aspects of your appeal.

Your neighbours losing the appeal could be bad news as the VOA now have evidence of the new band being confirmed. Regarding the larger houses, you must urge the VOA to explain the discrepancy.

Shirazee

Just wondering if anyone could offer us any help or advice. My mother-in-law died earlier this year and it was only as a result of this that we discovered that her council tax banding is G, she never discussed anything like this with the family, with only occasional comments that her banding was high. On checking we found that only 2 other houses on her street were G, both much bigger & on checking further we discovered that originally 9 properties were rated G, 6 of these has since been reduced to F (which would seem to indicate that the original bands were inaccurate, several other properties have also had their bands reduced.)

We have contacted VOA to query, our main problem is that the property was built by my husband's grandfather back in 1953 so has never been sold, meaning that we have no sales price evidence. It is also an individually designed house, originally a bungalow, but extended in 1977 by my late father-in-law (they were builders) which means we have no identical or very similar properties to compare with. The road comprises of many different types of older properties; bungalows, terraces, semis as well as detached houses, this is not a modern development of similar properties.

It seems unfair that as we cannot supply evidence, as there isn't any, that they are not prepared to look at our query. The plan is for my husband & I to buy out his sisters' shares & move into the property once ours is sold & we could well do without the extra expense of this high banding.

Do we have any hope?

lincroft1710

Shirazee wrote: »

Do we have any hope?

As Band G has such a wide ban span (£160,001 - £320,000) there are bound to be very different houses in same band. Try to find larger houses than yours in Band F

Graham_Wilson

I recently received a Council Tax refund of more than £6,000 and am currently complaining to the VOA because of their refusal to pay me circa £2,500 of related interest.

At the heart of my complaint is the fundamental inequality, which the VOA fails to acknowledge, that the “pound” I paid my Council in 1993 is not the same as the “pound” they refunded in 2017.

The VOA argues that, because they feel no mistake was made when my property was originally banded, there is no obligation under their code of practice to pay interest. A code of practice has no legal status. I accept Council Tax law does not provide for the automatic payment of interest (unlike the law governing non-domestic rates). IMPORTANTLY, Council Tax law does not prohibit it, and so, where statute is silent, in my view one should look to case law. For example, in the case Reinhard v Ondra [2015] EWHC 2943 (Ch), the judge reminded the court that the basic principle behind awarding interest is to compensate for being kept short of money and is not a punitive measure. Mistake is irrelevant.

Has anyone used this argument? Would any lawyers out there wish to comment?

CIS

Graham_Wilson wrote: »

I recently received a Council Tax refund of more than £6,000 and am currently complaining to the VOA because of their refusal to pay me circa £2,500 of related interest.

At the heart of my complaint is the fundamental inequality, which the VOA fails to acknowledge, that the “pound” I paid my Council in 1993 is not the same as the “pound” they refunded in 2017.

The VOA argues that, because they feel no mistake was made when my property was originally banded, there is no obligation under their code of practice to pay interest. A code of practice has no legal status. I accept Council Tax law does not provide for the automatic payment of interest (unlike the law governing non-domestic rates). IMPORTANTLY, Council Tax law does not prohibit it, and so, where statute is silent, in my view one should look to case law. For example, in the case Reinhard v Ondra [2015] EWHC 2943 (Ch), the judge reminded the court that the basic principle behind awarding interest is to compensate for being kept short of money and is not a punitive measure. Mistake is irrelevant.

Has anyone used this argument? Would any lawyers out there wish to comment?

Or - look at it the other way, there's nothing in council tax legislation requiring the statutory payment of interest - in a decade of working in council tax I've not come across any case of anyone getting interest for a banding error.

Where a court hears a civil case there is a statutory, discretionary, basis for payment of interest (CCA 1984, SCA 1981 etc) and/or it will form part of an alleged agreed contract. This statutory basis is not there in respect of the valuation office or local authority - it would only become a due where a court hears the case and orders that interest be paid.