Student house but no longer a student!

busiscoming2

In the house my DS and his other uni friends shared, they had to prove to the council the fact they were students. They had to pay the first months council tax due as their paperwork wasn't forthcoming from the uni quick enough. They did get it refunded though.

macman

There is no need to take this issue to a student union or welfare office. It's been absurdly over-complicated, when the answer is perfectly straightforward. Unless the house is an HMO, the OP's son became fully liable for CT for the entire property either from the day he ceased to be a student, or the day his tenancy commenced, whichever is the latter. If he is the only person exempted in the property, CT will be payable minus the 25% single person discount. If he's failed to notify the LA of his change of status, then they will back-bill to the relevant date. If he doesn't pay, then eventually he will be summonsed.
His student pals will not be liable for anything, due to their student exemption, nor will the landlord have any responsibility for paying anything or administering anything.
If the OP's son is unemployed, on benefits or in receipt of CT benefit, then that is another matter entirely, but it doesn't remove his liability following the end of his student status.

MrsManda

dizzyrascal wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting that a LA would bring a criminal prosecution and a possible prison sentence upon a student (who probably hasn't any money or the intent to defraud)!!!
Really??
Because he may have owed some CT for a matter of a couple of months!!

He's not a student and from the OP's post he's not going to be a student when he starts living in the property with his mates. Therefore the LA wouldn't be prosecuting a student, they'd be prosecuting someone claiming to be a student when they are not. Which is no different from any other person claiming an exemption they're not entitled to.

As for 'a couple of months' where do you get this from? If they've signed a tenancy agreement for a year (which in my experience most tenancies for student houses are) and claim to be exempt from CT then that's ~12 months of CT which should've been paid which on a house this size is likely to be considerable.

macman

He will be summonsed for non-payment of CT, not for pretending to be a student. If that goes through successfully and payment is still not made, then an attachment of earnings order will be made, if he is earning.

CIS

If that goes through successfully and payment is still not made, then an attachment of earnings order will be made, if he is earning.

Or a bailiff instructed.

bestpud

dizzyrascal wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting that a LA would bring a criminal prosecution and a possible prison sentence upon a student (who probably hasn't any money or the intent to defraud)!!!
Really??
Because he may have owed some CT for a matter of a couple of months!!

I can just see the headlines if that did happen

My LA gets my CT wrong every year. And every year I have had to argue with them and prove, over and over again that once again, after nearly 20 years, I am still a single parent!

They happily send out nasty and extortionate letters to thousands of people who do not owe them any money, usually the people who need their help because they are already on benefits or are pensioners. They frighten the lives out of people over and over again.
All these things come out of the woodwork when the LA prosecute. That is why I would love to see the headlines if you did follow through with a prosecution.

Are you seriously suggesting that a non-student moving into a house with students and trying to get away with paying council tax, by passing himself off as a student, is not intend to defraud?

I'm afraid we have very different ideas about right and wrong as that is deliberately lying in order to avoid paying council tax in my book.

What do you call it then? It's not an error as he knows what he is doing - he's researching the likelihood of being caught for goodness sake!!

dizzyrascal

I was under the impression that this thread was to help him find out if CT would need to be paid and if it did, would he be better off getting someone else to take over his part of the letting agreement.
I did not, at any time, see anyone attempting to commit a deliberate fraud!
You clearly do.
I think that says more about you then about the actual request made by the op's Mum

tomandkath

Thank you all for your helpful replies. I'd like to point out though that my son has no intention of committing fraud and that I, as an interferring Mother, was just trying to ascertain the facts of the situation were he not to start another course next year!

macman

If he's already dropped out and living there, the liability has already arisen-not at the start of the next academic year.
Perhaps you can tell us if it is an HMO or not, since that is the only factor that can otherwise affect his liability?

dizzyrascal

It hasn't arisen yet as they have only signed up to it for next year!
Usually the change over day is July 1st or about that time.
Therefore he is not in the property yet