council tax & permitted occupants

fleetwoodguy

Hi,

I'm currently living with some other ex-students, but our council tax exemption runs out on the 31st this year.

We're now having a dispute, though, because I'm a tenant on the TA and they are only permitted occupants - they say they shouldn't be liable to pay any council tax as they're only technically guests of mine, and want me to pay it all... and even say i should claim the single person discount to make it cheaper!!

However, I don't think this is the case... and all our names should have appeared on the bill and we should all be paying. Can anyone help?

00ec25

more info required as it looks a dogs breakfast at the moment. The rules relating to CT laibility are not based on the wording of your TA. Who is laible is set out in law in the "Hierarchy of Laibility" and does not depend on the relationships between you and them
The hierarchy of liability (in order of first person liable) is:
1. a resident owner-occupier who owns either the leasehold or freehold of all or part of the property
2.a resident tenant
3. a resident who lives in the property and who is a licensee. This means that they are not a tenant, but have permission to stay there
4. any resident living in the property, for example, a squatter
5. an owner of the property where no one is resident.

so you have 2 issues:

Firstly - who is liable for the CT
Are you certain that this is NOT classed as a House in Multiple Occupation? if it is an HMO then the LL is liable not the tenant. That is why many student LL will not let properties to non students as the LL then loses the CT exmeption

if it is not an HMO, you are the tenant and they are not so technically you rank above them in the Hierarchy of Liability and so you would be liable. Them contributing towards the bill is then a matter between you and them but you would not be allowed SPD as there is more than one non exempt >18 year old in the property

Secondly - you need to confirm if they are in fact tenants like you so you can apportion any bill fairly

You need to confirm exactly why you think they are permitted occuipiers. Who do they pay their rent to? What is there relationship with the LL? Are the rooms let indiovidually or is the whole house let to you all (joint and several liablity for rent), or you alone so you are sub letting to them and they pay rent to you meaning you rankl above them?

Note - re SPD - whatever the outcome there are more than one over 18 year old occupants of the property and so SPD cannot be claimed by anyone

fleetwoodguy

its an AST in my name, they come under a clause right at the end called "permitted occupants". the latter is correct; the whole house is let to me and i pay rent to the landlord. they then pay 'rent' to me.

00ec25

fleetwoodguy wrote: »

its an AST in my name, they come under a clause right at the end called "permitted occupants". the latter is correct; the whole house is let to me and i pay rent to the landlord. they then pay 'rent' to me.

arrgh - your LL has pulled a fast one on you

what makles as HMO for CT purposes is completely different to what makes a HMO in TA terms
it sounds like your LL is circumventing it by making out the others are your "lodgers" and have no relationship to him.

We need to wait for user CIS to post on this thread as they are the CT expert !

CIS

We're now having a dispute, though, because I'm a tenant on the TA and they are only permitted occupants - they say they shouldn't be liable to pay any council tax as they're only technically guests of mine, and want me to pay it all... and even say i should claim the single person discount to make it cheaper!!

From your description of the agreement , you hold the higher interest in the property and would be liable for the council tax due under section 6 of the local government finance act 1992 unless the landlord is liable under the council tax (liability for owners) regs 1992. As pointed out earlier the T/Agreement cannot overrule legislation

From the sounds of it you rent the property and then rent rooms to the other occupants and would be the liable party for the council tax charge. I can't see any reason why the landlord would be liable.

getmore4less

if they say they are lodgers kick them out and let them back at a higher rent, don't even mention council tax.

fleetwoodguy

getmore4less wrote: »

if they say they are lodgers kick them out and let them back at a higher rent, don't even mention council tax.

my mum rang her local council as an enquiry, and this is exactly what they recommended I should do.