Council tax Tribunal appeal failed. What next?

Gwyn9999

Hi,

I have recently recieved the result of my council tax appeal from the Tribunal I attended. Myself and a neighbour put an extremely strong case together for the Tribunal and still didn't succeed. As a brief overview our council tax band is an E. Myself and numerous other neighbours believe it should be a D banding. Within the Tribunal we had a very detailed and factual case to present. This included presenting over 80 houses to the tribunal in the local area that are equivalent size and layout of our houses which were all band D. The report read very well and they were impressed with our findings but still took the councils side. The reasoning for their decision was stated that there could be a chance that all 80 houses are banded incorrectly and that the tribunal favoured the council as they had more experience in the field.
In my eyes as well as my neighbours the only response to this result is that the tribunal is extremely corrupt.
The result should be either we stay band E and the equivalent 80 houses in the area are changed to band E or we have ours changed to band D.
If anyone has had any experience or any advise what to do it would be much appreciated.
Regards.

lincroft1710

The right of appeal against a Valuation Tribunal decision is very limited and I would doubt you have grounds for such an appeal. An accusation that the VT was "extremely corrupt" should not be made without irrefutable evidence, you disagreeing with the VT's reasoning is not sufficient.

https://www.valuationtribunal.gov.uk/glossary-faqs/faqs/

jaybeetoo

Gwyn9999 wrote: »

In my eyes as well as my neighbours the only response to this result is that the tribunal is extremely corrupt.

That is a very serious accusation. I hope you've got some evidence to back it up otherwise you might want to remove that statement.

Tigsteroonie

How do you know that they're not going to re-evaluate those 80 houses and increase their banding?

[Deleted User]

Tigsteroonie wrote: »

How do you know that they're not going to re-evaluate those 80 houses and increase their banding?

If they actually do that, the OP is going to have 80 disgruntled neighbours! :eek:

Gwyn9999

I think the accusation has good evidence to back it up. With 80 plus houses within a mile of my property all the same size if not bigger than our house and yet still a higher banding, something is definitely not right with the system. We created and presented a 40 page document which was extremely detailed with a lot of credible evidence. For our banding as well as the other 80 houses to stay at the same banding shows very much that there is something not right with the system.

CIS

Gwyn9999 wrote: »

I think the accusation has good evidence to back it up. With 80 plus houses within a mile of my property all the same size if not bigger than our house and yet still a higher banding, something is definitely not right with the system. We created and presented a 40 page document which was extremely detailed with a lot of credible evidence. For our banding as well as the other 80 houses to stay at the same banding shows very much that there is something not right with the system.

There's a difference to the Tribunal being corrupt and the system. There are plenty of flaws in the system but the Tribunal are bound by legislation, regardless of whether they think it's right or not .

lincroft1710

Gwyn9999 wrote: »

I think the accusation has good evidence to back it up. With 80 plus houses within a mile of my property all the same size if not bigger than our house and yet still a higher banding, something is definitely not right with the system. We created and presented a 40 page document which was extremely detailed with a lot of credible evidence. For our banding as well as the other 80 houses to stay at the same banding shows very much that there is something not right with the system.

That in itself is not evidence of being "extremely corrupt". Size is not the only criterion used in arriving at a CT band, what evidence did the VOA produce to support their banding.

A 40 page submission is a bit extreme for a VT hearing!

Gwyn9999

I am well aware that it's not just size that CT band is based on. That is why I produce a 40 page document due to possessing a vast amount of evidence.
I am passionate an frustrated about the situation. I posted on this website for some constructive comments. Seems like people have far to much time on their hands to pull my question. If you haven't got anything better to say don't waste my time.

martinthebandit

Gwyn9999 wrote: »

I am well aware that it's not just size that CT band is based on. That is why I produce a 40 page document due to possessing a vast amount of evidence.
I am passionate an frustrated about the situation. I posted on this website for some constructive comments. Seems like people have far to much time on their hands to pull my question. If you haven't got anything better to say don't waste my time.

See post 2 for a constructive comment.

Your initial comment that boils down to 'the tribunal disagreed with me so they must be corrupt' has almost certainly dissuaded other helpful posters from joining in.

lincroft1710

Just because we have not agreed with what you have posted, does not mean we have wasted your time. I have 12 years experience of VTs and I asked you a very pertinent question which as yet you have not answered

"what evidence did the VOA produce to support their banding".

Answer this and I may be able to give you some "constructive comments", but bear in mind they may not be what you want to hear.