What constitutes "Living" in a house?

davidmcn

princeofpounds wrote: »

You are right, it is basically stupid. But there is so much about the planning system that is stupid.

Not really stupid, as explained above there may be valid reasons why the council wish to control the number of additional homes with permanent residents.

vet8

We do not have any children at school and are registered with a doctor in a town several miles away. I do not see why we have to be paying council tax, not every one does, especially if you live in rented or shared accommodation.

vet8

Anatidaephobia wrote: »

Seems like part of the problem is that it clearly isn't operating as a holiday let. No wonder they think you live there if they have come to view a holiday let only to discover you're there and have been spending all your time there, including overnight stays.

It is not operating as a holiday let as it is not finished, it is still a building site and we need to spend time there to finish it. The council guy could clearly see it is not ready to let yet.

vet8

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Okay...can someone explain to me why a Council would approve a house as a holiday let, but not as a year-round "home" please.

I'm not following the logic of why a Council would do a partial approval on a place - rather than total approval on the one hand or no approval at all on the other hand.

EXACTLY. What is the differrence between a house occupied by one family all year and a house occupied by 52 different families, but the council were adamant that I could never get permission for a house. An office block, factory, abattoir, home for deliquents etc. they were all fine, but not a house. The planning laws are mad.

vet8

Ozzuk wrote: »

I'm pretty sure you also need a commercial mortgage if it is classed as a holiday let (assuming you need a mortgage). I know I did anyway. Council didn't care that we lived there, but we had 3 lets and only lived in one so we could use caretaker arguement. We were supposed to vacate for a few weeks Feb/March but just kept our heads down and it was never an issue.

Interesting. We do not need a mortgage.

I am surprised this whole thing has come up, I am pretty sure it is not the neighbours, in fact the council guy said it was the council tax women who reported us, but surely as long as someone pays the tax she should be happy and the planning guy said he had 230 cases to deal with.

pmlindyloo

You need to look at your planning permission consent and see what 'rules' there are as regards occupation. Usually there will be clauses to say how many weeks it needs to be available for letting and the exemption of being used for residential purposes.

If, in the future, you adhere to all these clauses then the onus is on you to prove that your main residence is somewhere else. If you are staying with friends then this may be difficult but at the very least you should be having your mail addressed elsewhere.

lincroft1710

vet8 wrote: »

We do not have any children at school and are registered with a doctor in a town several miles away. I do not see why we have to be paying council tax, not every one does, especially if you live in rented or shared accommodation.

Council Tax is a tax which is payable by the owner (if empty or a house in multiple occupation) or, more likely, the occupier of domestic property.

The occupation does not have to be lawful, a squatter would be liable for CT as it is a de facto rather than a de iure occupation. Similarly occupation of the property does not have to adhere to any planning laws or building regulations for there to be a liability for CT, it just needs to be lived in.

The occasions where someone in rented accommodation would not pay CT is if they were a lodger or if they lived in a house in multiple occupation, where the landlord would pay.

teddysmum

vet8 wrote: »

We do not have any children at school and are registered with a doctor in a town several miles away. I do not see why we have to be paying council tax, not every one does, especially if you live in rented or shared accommodation.

Why should you not pay council tax ?


It is not a tax paid for the privilege of living in a house (which is in good order ) but to pay for other things like schools, sports facilities, parks,libraries, roads, lighting, waste disposal,emergency services etc.


You may claim that you don't use all of these, but very few of us use all the services we pay for. eg I have no use for schools or sports facilities.

Guest101

teddysmum wrote: »

Why should you not pay council tax ?


It is not a tax paid for the privilege of living in a house (which is in good order ) but to pay for other things like schools, sports facilities, parks,libraries, roads, lighting, waste disposal,emergency services etc.


You may claim that you don't use all of these, but very few of us use all the services we pay for. eg I have no use for schools or sports facilities.

People complain because it's money they have and lose.

If it was taken via PAYE, they wouldnt even notice.

ReadingTim

Kynthia wrote: »

I'm not sure that there is a definition of 'living' somewhere, but facts are looked at in order to make a judgement.

You spend all your time there, eat there, regularly sleep there, are registered to vote there, have it as your billing address and have your post delivered there. Apart from sleeping somewhere else more often then you sleep there, somewhere you don't own or occupy exclusively and somewhere you aren't registered for council tax, it does sound like you are living there.

The best way to show you aren't living somewhere is to prove that you live somewhere else but you can't do that.

The OP also doesn't seem to show any progress towards not living there - their explanations surrounding the building work etc make sense while all that's happening, but at some point it needs to be finished, and the OP starts running it as a holiday cottage business, or sells it. I suspect if that was explained to the council, they may be more reasonable, but it does really seem like the OP is trying it on...