Landlord taking half of garden

KittenChops

maisie_cat wrote: »

You are paying for sole occupancy and are no longer going to get it. At the very least a rent reduction is in order as well as the landlord paying the council tax as the property will become a technical HMO

CIS wrote: »

They're looking at the point of it becoming a council tax HMO on the basis the tenant no longer rents the whole of the property (A resident landlord isn't a HMO, it'd dealt with by a different section of legislation although the end result on liability is the same).

As to how it would affect the council tax issue HMO issue it is one that has not been fully tested in law yet - Goresmsandu, the only court case to date in this matter, addressed only the issue of access to a conservatory, it did not address the external part of the property, so it is of limited assistance.

lincroft1710 wrote: »

Reduction in garden size is extremely unlikely to lead to a reduced CT band

I don't believe that anyone is suggesting that the property should be rebanded for council tax purposes if the garden is reduced. I believe they are saying that if the tenant doesn't rent the whole property, then the liability for council tax lies with the landlord. (Although it's a grey area because the area being reduced is external not internal, and we don't know if the titles for the two properties have been amended to reflect the change.)

lincroft1710

KittenChops wrote: »

I don't believe that anyone is suggesting that the property should be rebanded for council tax purposes if the garden is reduced. I believe they are saying that if the tenant doesn't rent the whole property, then the liability for council tax lies with the landlord. (Although it's a grey area because the area being reduced is external not internal, and we don't know if the titles for the two properties have been amended to reflect the change.)

That argument would only stand a chance if the LL were to retain the garden for his own use. His intention seems to be to annex the land to the next door property and sell that on. Therefore "the whole property" being rented will comprise the house and the now reduced garden size. The landlord will not have use of any part of the property.

KittenChops

lincroft1710 wrote: »

That argument would only stand a chance if the LL were to retain the garden for his own use. His intention seems to be to annex the land to the next door property and sell that on. Therefore "the whole property" being rented will comprise the house and the now reduced garden size. The landlord will not have use of any part of the property.

Which we don't know - hence the last part of my post:

KittenChops wrote: »

I don't believe that anyone is suggesting that the property should be rebanded for council tax purposes if the garden is reduced. I believe they are saying that if the tenant doesn't rent the whole property, then the liability for council tax lies with the landlord. (Although it's a grey area because the area being reduced is external not internal, and we don't know if the titles for the two properties have been amended to reflect the change.)