Council Tax Single Occupancy

Avaggdu

Hi everybody - long time reader, first time user.

I know there may be similar threads relating to single-occupancy council tax discounts (in fact it was another discussion which has raised my fears), but I'm fairly confident my situation is quite unique, so I hope someone can help me, and please bear with me while I explain it.

The situation is that I am in a relatively long-term monogamous relationship with my partner. We are both independent people, both personally, financially and domestically - i.e. we both have our own solely-owned and -maintained properties in which we live separately and receive the discount on council tax as sole occupiers. We're very happy with this arrangement, have never lived together and aren't intending to ever live together (unless demands of economy or the unforeseen happens.) It's a lifestyle choice that is working very well.

We both have pensions which have provision for a spouse/nominated partner in the event of either of us dying; in my case, that provision is considerable (over £70k lump sum and £5k pa pension for my widow, on top of the more standard benefits my partner has in her pension). That's quite a considerable amount which would go to waste if I die without a wife/nominated partner.

However, as one of the conditions of someone being acknowledged as a nominated (unmarried) partner is that you must live together, it kinda throws a spanner in the works of our desire to continue our relationship in our chosen manner - living separately - if we wish to see our paid-for pension benefits not go down the drain if either of us dies.

So, we have decided to get married for our mutual benefit. I make no bones about or apologies for saying our decision to marry is for purely financial reasons. It's not that we don't love each other, etc., but neither of us has any other desire or reason to get married.

Apparently, getting married is a nice loophole in the law for couples such as us; it allows us to continue being happy with our separate lives and get all the benefits from our respective pensions but is recognised in the law to the extent that cohabitation is not required.

Lovely! No problem there.

What is worrying me are the stories I've read about local authorities' view on how marriage affects single occupancy and the council tax - such things as couples living separately in different countries for years and still being treated as co-habiting.

My question is, am I right in assuming that as myself and my partner have never lived together (and aren't intending to) and our properties are solely-owned, when we get married we can continue to receive the discount of 25% on our council tax bills?

I would appreciate any comments; in particular I would welcome advice from CIS (if you're out there?) as you seem particularly knowledgeable and helpful in these matters, from what I've read previously.

Thanks in anticipation.

Valli

I suggest you ask Helena Bonham-Carter and Tim Burton. They, apparently, live in separate houses (albeit next door as far as I recall)

Seriously though as soon as my (now ex) husband left, and I contacted CT and gave them an address for him they were happy to give me single occupancy discount. As far as I am aware it's judged on occupancy only.

According to this it is based on the number of eligible adults who live in the home and not on their relationship. For example my son has just turned 18 BUT he's exempt because he's still at school. So for CT purposes 1 eligible adult - 25% discount here.

When you fill in the forms (because they do check up from time to time) you have to state who is resident in the home. Not whether you are married (or whatever) as far as I recall!

Avaggdu

Valli wrote: »

As far as I am aware it's judged on occupancy only.

Thanks! I'll ask Tim and Helena when they and Angelina Jolie and Johnny Depp pop over for tea and crumpets 8)

My fears were raised because I thought it relied on actual occupancy too, but apparently this isn't the case (according to first-hand anecdotes I've read in this esteemed organ).

I'm counting on the fact my future wife and I have never lived together and won't be will be the deciding factor. Our "main residence" is, and will remain, our separate homes to which we will be deemed to live in, despite being married.

It's just the assumption that married people want to (and will) live together that's bothering me. The LA can check up all they like til doomsday for all I care....the only women's clothing in my house is for personal use

CIS

I'm counting on the fact my future wife and I have never lived together and won't be will be the deciding factor. Our "main residence" is, and will remain, our separate homes to which we will be deemed to live in, despite being married.

Assuming you have never made your main residence together then there shouldn't be an issued with it - it would be no different to many long term couples who keep different households.

CIS

According to this it is based on the number of eligible adults who live in the home and not on their relationship.

The basic charge is based on the number of adults and not their relationship - relationship is one of the factors involved in some disregards and to determine who is liable for the charge.

Avaggdu

CIS wrote: »

Assuming you have never made your main residence together then there shouldn't be an issued with it - it would be no different to many long term couples who keep different households.

Thank you CIS. I shamelessly name-dropped in my OP in the hope you'd turn up like the shopkeeper in Mr Benn. I appreciate your advice.

If you ever need the favour returning in the fields of state pension or land registration, then I'll be happy to oblige.

CIS

Always happy to help.

Land Registration, if I can ever afford it. State Pensions possibly not (I used to work in pension forecasting so I'm reasonable OK in that area)

Avaggdu

Thanks to Valli and CIS (for just responding). I have an answer to my question from CIS that I'm confident is correct. Apologies to Polonius56, who in the mean-time I've scouted to add his personal experiences in a similar problem - Polonius56: I hope you've managed to solve your problem too, and I know I'm not the only one who would like to hear if you've made any headway.

Thanks.

Valli

By the way, OP, in the event you get a council jobsworth (or some idiot decides to stir it) and the council DO start interfering you will have, of course;) LOTS of evidence that you do maintain separate households - TV licences in different names and for different addresses; driving licences and other utility bills, bank accounts which are separate etc. Morover Mrs Avaggdu doesn't actually need to use the name Mrs Avaggdu, she can carry on being Miss Not Avaggdu.
So you COULD just get married, quietly, and go back to your separate, happy households.

John_Pierpoint

Avaggdu wrote: »

So, we have decided to get married for our mutual benefit. I make no bones about or apologies for saying our decision to marry is for purely financial reasons. It's not that we don't love each other, etc., but neither of us has any other desire or reason to get married.

Inheritance Tax if either of you have a net worth greater than £325K and that includes the interest your savings have "accrued" but that you will never have had a chance to spend ??

Don't forget to make new wills.

jennifernil

Could owning 2 properties when married be a problem too?