Council Tax liability whilst Living abroad

satelliteone

To the doubting Thomas`s and stinky sticks! UPDATE:


Officially the council have backed out, and dropped it.! why because of the advice of the LGO


http://www.lgo.org.uk/


This is not a dig at anyone here, but the advice was not very helpfull at all, but you were all wrong.


The reason is that "resident" does mean something in Law. Statute law says:- Sole or main residence.


The Law states clearly that liability is also both such `resident` and `tenant`: (Government Finance act 1992) that: Section 6, 2, C

Persons liable to pay council tax.E+W
(1)The person who is liable to pay council tax in respect of any chargeable dwelling and any day is the person who falls within the first paragraph of subsection (2) below to apply, taking paragraph (a) of that subsection first, paragraph (b) next, and so on.
(2)A person falls within this subsection in relation to any chargeable dwelling and any day if, on that day—
(a)he is a resident of the dwelling and has a freehold interest in the whole or any part of it;
(b)he is such a resident and has a leasehold interest in the whole or any part of the dwelling which is not inferior to another such interest held by another such resident;
(c)he is both such a resident and a statutory /FONT][/B][COLOR=black][FONT=Arial][URL="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1992/14/section/6#commentary-c1207288"][B][COLOR=black]F1[/COLOR][/B][/URL][/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=black][FONT=Arial], secure or introductory tenant[/FONT][/COLOR][B][FONT=Arialof the whole or any part of the dwelling;
(d)he is such a resident and has a contractual licence to occupy the whole or any part of the dwelling;
(e)he is such a resident; or
(f)he is the owner of the dwelling

That the Law is also clear on `resident` under section 5,b

“resident”, in relation to any dwelling, means an individual who has attained the age of 18 years and has his sole or main residence in the dwelling.


When used back at the local authority, the legal department and the investigation on revenues dep't, the whole case has to be looked at irrespective, The word "complaint" also is red taped for urgent-ness, for the LGO to look at it.


So my advice is never believe everything you get told, get professional help, and the advice of the LGO. They have a free phone number too.


The lesson of "both resident and tenant" take one away, then there is NO liability, falls back to the "hierarchy of liability". onus. And to pay for CT whilst not needing too, to the opposite of the above advice.

As we are talking about housing associations as well, they have no say what so ever on CT, they think they do by tenancy agreements. Tenancy is a requirement between you and the landlord. In reality you don't need this! renting is just that. In a world as it is! free movement in the UK is a right! and who and where we live is our right too. An agreement is honourable only.


"The law is the law it protects me just as much as you"



Regards

Doozergirl

Can someone translate this for me please?

AdrianC

satelliteone wrote: »

Officially the council have backed out, and dropped it.! why because of the advice of the LGO

Lucky you. The reality is that they probably figured it was going to be more expensive to go after than they would get back, and if they did get a judgement you'd probably just ignore it and leave the country again, leaving them with an unenforceable debt and unpaid costs.

As we are talking about housing associations as well, they have no say what so ever on CT, they think they do by tenancy agreements. Tenancy is a requirement between you and the landlord. In reality you don't need this! renting is just that. In a world as it is! free movement in the UK is a right! and who and where we live is our right too. An agreement is honourable only.

I find myself idly wondering what would have happened if you'd come back to the UK expecting to just walk back into your flat, since you don't appear to have actually terminated your tenancy formally, merely expecting everybody involved to guess your intentions and, even, location.

"The law is the law it protects me just as much as you"

Indeed.

CIS

What has happened is that the council have decided he wasn't liable for the council tax for the period - as to why is anyone's guess as usually we don't get to hear the actual reasoning.

That isn't to say that the landlord couldn't and wouldn't take action on the basis that a person still held a tenancy for the property and was thus still still liable for the rent as they're two separate issues.

In respect of the LGO they have no legal say in the matter, only opinions. The LGO has stated in quite a few decisions that the view they have given goes against the actual legislation as they didn't think it was fair.

satelliteone

Thanks for the advice you lot, and to put the record straight the LGO would of intervened. I really do not care at all about the tenancy, it was a right hell hole of a hobble, and that was the one of the biggest deciding factors and reasons for leaving it, also was not worth my money living there. When you get offered a better life else where and move on, which, is not up for debate either.


I am not going to air my washing in public, and give the satisfaction for the information vultures to spank the monkey over!


What is though, not to be threatened with bailiff's, attachment of earnings and eventually prison for a unjust TAX. There is a lot of people in this country who despise council tax, just look at the welfare reforms! and social media and you will get the `gist` of what real people really think. I am not alone.


CIS, as to the reasons, well I think it was the black and white of the law chap and nothing more than to do with chasing money. They could of quite easily, and they do every day. So better ask yourself why stop at me... Assumption's really!


I just hope that others who are in the same similar situation, read through this forum, and will get some decent advice, and not certain trolling opinionated, personal, and vague advice to which is incorrect. There is light at the end of the tunnel, not here though on this forum, and you can make you`re own minds up or, if it is worth even the bother writing it up.

Thrugelmir

satelliteone wrote: »

I had no intension to come back,

Next time tidy up your affairs before you leave. Pretty obvious what you were attempting to do.

CIS

Thanks for the advice you lot, and to put the record straight the LGO would of intervened

The LGO cannot intervene any more than offering the council their opinion - they have no powers of enforcement (although a council will usually take on board their recommendations).

The correct action for a binding decision would have been to use the Valuation Tribunal.

macman

So your real issue is an objection to paying council tax in general, rather than a claim that you should not be subject to it in these particular circumstances-which appear to be entirely of your own making.
The 'hell hole of a hobble' tenancy was of course one that you freely entered into...

satelliteone

No I do not object to fairness and council tax, paid enough of it for a very long time not unlike Like your selves. Why should I pay for it when I am not in the UK. How the hell does paying CT whilst abroad become a right? you are not on British soil! When I buy my own place here in the UK, then yeah, rightfully..


I am not using any of the services it applies too. I can not see how you lot think, that robbing people is justified by saying the law says that a tenancy is a reason for it , because you say so in a TAX?, because I am British, Because I live in the UK is that right?


And yes, I do think, if a tenancy is not worth the paper its written on, because a fat greedy tory thinks that it is, I walk away, It is that simple. Cow down! not me my son!


Ohh, Wonder why I work abroad!.. because eventually I will have enough money to buy my own place a lot quicker. and not cow down to any landlord's. And when the decision is made, it might be in the UK, it might be else where. Give my old rented place to some European! perfect!

macman

You really don't have a clue, do you? CT is not a tax on services, it is a tax on residential property. So if you are a tenant or owner, you potentially have a liability for CT. That applies whether you use the services or not. And CT funds less than 25% of local authority services anyway.