Council Tax Liability - not sure...?

Pricivius

I *think* I know the answer, but would appreciate some other opinions, experience or knowledge...

Widowed OAP1 owns house 1.

Separated OAP2 owns house 2.

No other occupants in either house. Romance blossoms and OAP2 effectively moves in with OAP1. They both spend every night at house 1. OAP2 returns to house 2 every day to check post, write letters, make calls, (technically retired but very active businessman). OAP2 has clothes and personal items at house 1, but also at house 2, which remains fully furnished and could be moved back into today. OAP1 never stays the night at house 1 and rarely even visits.

So... Council Tax Options. (NB This is an area where "empty" houses require 150% Council Tax to be paid.)

Option 1 - They would each need to pay 100% Council Tax on each house.

Option 2 - House 1 attracts 100% Council Tax, but house 2 attracts 75% as only OAP2 ever lives there (single occupacy discount).

Option 3 - House 1 attracts 100% Council Tax, but house 2 attracts 150% as it is considered "empty".

Option 4 - They would each pay 75% Council Tax on each house due to single occupancy discount.

I *think* the answer is Option 2, but I would very much welcome your views.

Please let me know if you need any further information and thanks in advance for any help...

Kirstyb1987

I would go for option 2.

Confusedandneedhelp

I believe its option 4.

Both people have a home, pay bills etc at those homes and on paper live at those homes.

where u sleep is not where u live.

pmlindyloo

I believe this is a question for your local council and get the answer in writing!

Annie1960

The correct answer is to contact the council involved and ask them. Councils get very funny about collecting CT and some can be very litigious.

As pmlindyloo says, get the answer in writing.

Pricivius

Thanks, everyone.

I made a call to the Council in question just now and they said it's a tricky one, put it in writing and we'll get back to you.

I will update when I hear back.

ETA They said house 2 would not class as "empty" as long as it remained furnished, so that's Option 3 out of the running!

jjlandlord

One should check the likely legal position before taking the council's word or suggesting something to them that would cause an increase in tax...
Communication with the council should be worded carefully because you want to pay less.

Confusedandneedhelp

My understanding, from a similar position was this:

scenario:
I lived with 1 flatmate, student. so paid 75% CT
My new girlfriend lived by herself, with 2 kids. entitled to benefits

i stayed there for weeks at a time, but because i had my own home, where i was registered on electoral role for example, and paid bills. Her benefits were not affected.

Presumebly, if the Council thought otherwise, they would have cancelled her benefits claims or reduced them or whatever.

The answer i got, 'u dont have to live where u sleep, and u dont have to sleep where u live'

jjlandlord

The difference, of course, is that once you permanently sleep somewhere it is more difficult to claim that you do not live there...

Presumably OAP1 and OAP2 both pay 75% on their respective houses at the moment, so I'm wondering if the simplest thing wouldn't be to not contact the council at all.
If one day the council says something they can play dumb and say they thought it was OK.

Buzby

Our local council say it's Option 4 until the visiting party makes it their declared residence (usually by going on the electoral register at that address).

booksurr

the start point is, as I'm sure you know, the hierarchy of liability in which case the resident owner comes before the non owning resident - this eliminates option 1 since in the circumstances you describe a pair of people cannot have simultaneous main residences where only one is an owner of each property

neither property is empty so option 3 is eliminated

neither OAP 1 nor OAP 2 have a share of ownership of the respective person's property - this eliminates a question of OAP 2 having a second home (and so being liable for the second home rate) whilst having a main residence in OAP1 or vice versa

for option 2 to apply then the other property would not be liable to the single person discount as you can only claim SPD on your main residence, so you cannot be 100% liable at one and 75% liable at the other as the other would in that case be a second home

so that leaves option 4 where we have the position that each person has security of tenure only at their respective "homes" and the fact of where OAP 2 spends his nights is irrelevant as to whether OAP 1's property is his main home or not even if they are living together as man and wife in OAP1's place

I vote option 4