Scary council tax letter!

00ec25

subject to corrections by CIS...

an HMO for the purposes of CT legislation and licensing rules is a property occupied by 2 or more households who share kitchen and/or bathroom/toilet.
A (single) household comprises either a single person or a co-habiting couple.

So in your case:
- how many bedrooms did the property have?
- did you share such facilties?
- how many "households" lived there
- was your contract a "joint and several liability" or were you on individual contracts ie one per room?

If you can show it was an HMO then the LL is liable, full stop.
His liability applies even after you ceased to be a student and therefore were no longer exempt. For an HMO the "hierarchy of liability" means the LL is always the only person who is liable for CT, the occupants are never liable, but only if it is genuinely an HMO.

Therefore your safest outcome is to show 3 or more tenancy agreements to the council to prove it was an HMO. You need another agreement to show them and there should be some overlap of dates to show simultaneous occupancy and thus remove any further doubt the council may have!

BTW did the property have 3 stories and 5 or more bedrooms? As the council have apparently tried to inspect I suspect not, but if it did then that is a mandatory HMO and the LL would be in serious trouble for failing to register it as an HMO. One assumes that the council will still need to inspect to prove to themselves that the occupants do indeed have to share the facilties, so until the council gains access they may be less enthusiastic in pursuing the LL's CT liability

definitions of HMO and comments re CT liability here here and here

DanielleR

00ec25 wrote: »

So in your case:
- how many bedrooms did the property have? It started with three, 2 doubles and one single. In the June of 2008 (before the period the CT is due for) my LL then converted our living room into another double bedroom
- did you share such facilties? We each had locks on our doors but shared a kitchen and eating area, bathroom, downstairs toilet and hallways.
- how many "households" lived there? When it was three bedrooms three, when it was four four.
- was your contract a "joint and several liability" or were you on individual contracts ie one per room? Individual contracts, each one was an AST I think.

BTW did the property have 3 stories and 5 or more bedrooms? It was over three stories (It was a block of maisonettes, the downstairs was just the hall, kitchen, toilet and one bedroom/living room upstairs and the top floor was the three other bedrooms and a bathroom.

Thank you so much for clairfying this. The council I get the distinct impression didn't actually go to the property at all. I'm not sure if the contracts we have have overlaps because as we each individually did not get a new tenancy agreement when ours ran out. Despite trying!

DanielleR

So I've sent the council two tenancy agreements from previous tenants. The dates overlap and they say ROOM 2 and ROOM 3 on them seperately with different rates.

It's NOT for the time period they are trying to charge for however.

Went to CAB yesterday to get them to call just to see if I could move things on a bit and found them very unhelpful.

The guy at CAB said that I would already have a CCJ because of the summons (From a magistrates court? Erm, no don't think so) had an argument with him about this.Then he said that although he could see what I was trying to prove "Two little bits of paper wont make a difference".

He said my best best was to take it to court and hire a solicitor as he doubts that the council will accept those tenancy agreements as proof of an HMO. Really infuriated me and said that "it's not that much to pay" and that "If I got a full time job (I HAVE a full time job that I took a day off in holiday to go down to the stupid CAB) I would be able to pay it straight away"

The council said that they've not had the email yet and if I don't receive a reply by Wednesday then to call them. They've put baliff action on hold for a further 14 days.

I'm really getting to the end of my tether with this. The guy at CAB said as the tenancy agreements were for the year before the amount was due from (2007 instead of 2008) then they wont be accepted, even though one of these people was actually living in the property after I left without a new tenancy agreement.

Any support/advice/a hug would be appreciated. I really feel like I'm losing this battle and for being honest am being victimised. I don't understand why the whole bill should fall to me when I'm the only person who did exactly what they were supposed to and didn't defraud the bloody council. :mad:

00ec25

sadly as your documenary evidence does not cover the period in question then a court would not accept it. Also sadly it has to have 5 bedrooms as well as 3 stories to be a mandatory licence HMO and given all this is now well after the event i can understand why the council can't assess the LL as liable because you/they can no longer prove it was demonstrably an HMO

you have my sympathy but sadly not a contribution towards your (inevitable) costs

PS although you did not get replacement tenancy agreements I would therefore assume that as you (each?) continued in residence, and thus overlapped the charge period, you would therefore each be occupying under a Statutory Periodic Tenancy rather than a documented AST detailing specfic dates. Therefore a long shot might be to get each of your fellow residents to attest to the dates they moved out and thus this could (?) establish the existence of a cotemporaneous HMO despite the lack of paperwork?

RAS

I am totally confused by this thread.

The OP moved out of the property in November 2008 and is being chased for CT due 2010/11.

Surely the nature of the contract or whether it is an HMO is irrelevant.

If the OP was not resident in 2010/11 then they cannot be liable for CT liabilities incurred since November 2008? As per post 2?

All the OP needs to do is proved they were living elsewhere, surely?

bobothebear

Yes RAS i read it exactly as you and am confused as well.
I immediately thought this letter was just Council Tax for the new place the OP had moved into and from October 2010 - April 2011 would be about £500ish on most places.

Fairly sure I've the complete wrong end of the stick though!

00ec25

RAS wrote: »

I am totally confused by this thread.

The OP moved out of the property in November 2008 and is being chased for CT due 2010/11.

No, as pointed out in posts 2 -5 and acknowledged at post 6 by the OP, the OP is potentially liable for the period from when they stopped being a student (July 08) to the date they left (Nov 08)

The council is now charging them for this retrospectively in accordance with the fact the council knew the OP was resident at that time and the council will chase the OP because on the info available to the council as at today then the OP is the first person liable under the "hierarchy of liability" nd was not an exempt student during that period

However, if the OP can establish the property was an HMO then it becomes exempt from the hierarchy rules and under legislation CT liability for an HMO automatically reverts to the LL in all cases

the OP's problem is it is much easier for the council to chase the OP for payment rather than go to the expense of establishing HMO status and thus LL liability 3 years down the line. Remember the council workers are under enormous pressure to collect as much money as possible to save their jobs, so understandably will try the easiest things first – the OP being the person they can contact then she is the easy target

Mrs_Arcanum

Thought this was the very reason the rules over HMOs came in, because councils were not getting paid. With various shared houses in the UK the company I work for have discovered not all councils apply the rules for HMOs the same way.

Get proof of where you were living post graduation and give them the LL address for any further action. Councils are quite vicious about chasing debt so it may even be worth getting some proper legal guidance (try via a free half hour). CAB often receives funding from the council so may be under pressure to get the council their money.

DanielleR

Thanks for all the comments and apologies to the people who were confused. I was confused to as the dates were for 2010/2011 and they wouldn't give me a breakdown at first.

In reference to getting my flatmates to attest the dates they are refusing to do anything more than pass me paperwork as they "don't want to get involved" (brilliant mates hey?)

As for the LL he never gave us an address, he no longer owns the property in question so I don't even think I could use the land registry to find him.

As for the "rules" of an HMO. There was, at the time in question 6 people living in the building and it's over three floors however I can't get the tenants at that time to cough up their tenancy agreements (one has lost it, two have blanked me, one has already provided me their tenancy agreement that ran out but has the same terms, one has left the country and seems uncontactable).

I REALLY don't want to have to go to court over £600 but at the same time it's really important I get the searches they've put on my account through a tracking agency removed. They stay on my account for two years and I think they are completley unfair (never not been registered on electoral role or on the council tax and made them aware where i moved to)

Really is quite a sad state of affairs really

DanielleR

Mrs_Arcanum wrote: »

CAB often receives funding from the council so may be under pressure to get the council their money.

Why doesn't that surprise me?