Rate debt written off in Northern Ireland rises by 50%

NAR

I wonder do these figures refer purely to domestic rates or does this include write-off of business rates?

A.L.D.A

x12yhp wrote: »

Sorry but if they cannot afford the rates then they should move. If someone cannot afford the rates then they have bought a house which they could not afford so you are sitting there feeling sorry whilst basically funding them to live in a nicer house than they have earned... why?!

None of us know what tomorrow will bring and circumstance can change quicker than your ability to react. Many years ago someone ran into my car, I was still working after that, but my ability to work and income was severely reduced for several years.

If we follow your analogy everyone in those sort of circumstances should incur all the costs of moving house because for a period of time they cannot pay? What you suggest is punitive?

Rates (Council revenue) should be based on ability to pay and services used.

saverbuyer

I would also remove the rates cap at 400K. That would be useful in generating some cash and freeing up some of the housing stock.

I agree it is obviously regressive but without an alternative I think the cap should be removed.

A.L.D.A

saverbuyer wrote: »

I would also remove the rates cap at 400K. That would be useful in generating some cash and freeing up some of the housing stock.

I agree it is obviously regressive but without an alternative I think the cap should be removed.

I agree.

Another place worth consideration is placing a rateable value on the carparks at shoping centres and around businesses. They have a value just as a multi-storey car-park in Belfast does. It is in effect part of the sales area, or a liability that the developer should shoulder.

saverbuyer

A.L.D.A wrote: »

I agree.

Another place worth consideration is placing a rateable value on the carparks at shoping centres and around businesses. They have a value just as a multi-storey car-park in Belfast does. It is in effect part of the sales area, or a liability that the developer should shoulder.

I always thought car parking spaces we rated? If not you're right serious revenue stream missing there. Could I open a car park in Belfast and not pay rates?

x12yhp

A.L.D.A wrote: »

None of us know what tomorrow will bring and circumstance can change quicker than your ability to react. Many years ago someone ran into my car, I was still working after that, but my ability to work and income was severely reduced for several years.

If we follow your analogy everyone in those sort of circumstances should incur all the costs of moving house because for a period of time they cannot pay? What you suggest is punitive?

Rates (Council revenue) should be based on ability to pay and services used.

Sorry but you keep taking the general view that people who find themselves in a bad position are innocent victims. This whole big mess that the world is in is a result of people who are very much NOT guilty. I will bet my life savings on the fact that the vast majority of those who are unable to 'afford' rates have not suddenly been struck down by illness or been shunted in a car crash. They will have made a rash financial commitment which they could hardly afford at the time and which incorporated zero consideration for bad times.

A.L.D.A

x12yhp wrote: »

Sorry but you keep taking the general view that people who find themselves in a bad position are innocent victims. This whole big mess that the world is in is a result of people who are very much NOT guilty. I will bet my life savings on the fact that the vast majority of those who are unable to 'afford' rates have not suddenly been struck down by illness or been shunted in a car crash. They will have made a rash financial commitment which they could hardly afford at the time and which incorporated zero consideration for bad times.

They are not all innocent, and there are always devils, but you will seldom catch the professional fraudsters.

I would imagine that most are in difficulty because someone has lost their job or they are working reduced hours. Not everyone is in secure employment.

Imagine someone ran a small joinery business, could have been living well within their means for a decade and now finds he is having to price so low he is making virtually nothing. There are thousands and thousands of people in this position. Your answer is that they should sell their house and do what exactly? Go into emergency housing? You are assuming that most of those defaulting can downsize and can actually move to another house!

I would sooner see a serious attempt to cut Council Services to an absolute minimum than pursue these people at this moment in time.

wifeforlife

saverbuyer wrote: »

I’d be interested to know what sort of sanctions are applied and if they attempt to put charging orders on the properties. Might be worth a FOI request.
I can see why they want to rate vacant properties. It should cover these write-downs.

It's well known myself and a few others on here work within LPS so we're well placed to let you know the drill.

If when you get Bill and don't pay, you get a Final demand, if you still don't pay your immediately issued with a summons to court, this is a CCJ against you, if there is still no satisfactory arrangement to pay your lodged with the enforcement office who are responsible for enforcing the money judgement. Obviously there are timescales and other procedures involved.

The decision to rate vacant properties was the ministers 3 years ago.

I think the problem for everyone in the current economic climate is that people are prioritising a lavish lifestyle instead of the mortgage, rates, electric and what I would consider priority bills. The other side of it is, some people just don't the money, you can't get blood from a stone!

Personal bankruptcy, company dissolvements and liquidations are at a high which does contribute to the rates write offs.

HTH

Golden_Anemone

saverbuyer wrote: »

I would also remove the rates cap at 400K. That would be useful in generating some cash and freeing up some of the housing stock.

I agree it is obviously regressive but without an alternative I think the cap should be removed.

I completely agree with this. Yes, there are some poor people with homes worth more than this but Rates Relief is there to help these people. During the consultation Rates Policy said they would not introduce a 25% discount for single householders as exists in GB because this was a crude instrument and that not all single householders were on low incomes. Surely the same argument applies even more strongly to the cap on capital values. But then how many of our political representatives live in houses that are eligible for the cap? More than are single householders I'm sure!

A.L.D.A

saverbuyer wrote: »

I always thought car parking spaces we rated? If not you're right serious revenue stream missing there. Could I open a car park in Belfast and not pay rates?

I raised this a long time ago and was told that car parking was included in the value of the properties, an amenity as it were that increased the value, but when I then compared rateable values with like premises without, it seemed to me that it was not. Therefore the system was to the advantage of large stores sitting in islands of tarmac and to the disadvantage of small retailers sitting on a main road.

Rates are a terrible system of collecting money. There are all sorts of anomalies and what I would consider unfairness. Local income tax would be so much better and Local tax should be for local services so there is some clarity and we can see where our money goes.