council tax up due to alleged self contained flat

Sandra2021

Can someone help please - friends did a loft conversion about five years ago  and had a tiny kitchenette area installed whilst work was going on plus shower toilet - all on the third floor.
They never actually got around to using it - it's been empty all that time but they delayed removing the kitchenette area after all the works had been done and it just got left in there.
The council wrote to them alleging change of use to self contained flat.
Can it be appealed? thank you

Section62

Sandra2021 said:

Can someone help please - friends did a loft conversion about five years ago  and had a tiny kitchenette area installed whilst work was going on plus shower toilet - all on the third floor.
They never actually got around to using it - it's been empty all that time but they delayed removing the kitchenette area after all the works had been done and it just got left in there.
The council wrote to them alleging change of use to self contained flat.
Can it be appealed? thank you

a)  How did the council find out about it?

b) Does the loft conversion have its own external door/access?

Typical loft conversions are just creating aditional living space in the one property.  How exactly have the council concluded it is self-contained?

CIS

That would meet the criteria in most cases.

It's not about what it is being used for, but what it could be used for.

If it is capable of self contained occupation then under Article 3 of the chargeable dwellings order (or the Scottish equivalent) it will be banded by the valuation office agency/Scottish Assessor (not the council).

I recently searched through 3500 cases for a client's case and, of the cases that needed a tribunal, not a single one won. They all either stayed as banded. Any works then had to be undertaken to render them incapable of the self-containment and a new proposal made to have it reviewed.

I have a client right now in a similar situation, he's having to have the shower and bathroom removed.

Sandra2021

Many thanks for your input everyone; it's literally on their third floor without any separate outside or independent access - so basically the second floor just leads up via open staircase to the third floor  - there are no locked doors or any kind of separate access.

If they removed just the kitchen sink and plumbing would it then be most likely not be "self contained" anymore?

not sure how or why the council contacted them - I will ask. I believe they said they just got  letter your of the blue saying the works done indicate it is self contained and alleging it was being used to let.  They had to sign a form in which they made it clear there ware no tenancy agreements and no lodgers.

So surprised to think that  just building a loft extension with bathrooms/ shower room makes it automatically a " self contained" living unit ?  

Sandra2021

also, just to add, the bathroom is a separate room from the open plan area which contains a small kitchenette which they had meant to get rid of, So as you approach the third floor form the second floor, at the top of the stair is a door on the right which leads to the bathroom and straight ahead is a door which leads to an open plan area.  There is no lock on that door and no sealed off separate entrance or anything like that, 

JGB1955

It will be the kitchenette that has sparked someone's attention.

Sandra2021

thank you

do you think if they remove the kitchenette they can then successfully appeal or request a review prior to appealing ? 

Sandra2021

I've now got some further info - this is for a single mum who's struggling with how to deal with this. 

She received a letter out of the blue enclosing a planning contravention notice. 

She wrote back :

"I refer to your letter dated  X  X 2021 enclosing a Planning Contravention notice. The notice does not state what the alleged  material change of use of my property is.

If you are alleging that I have changed the use part of my property I confirm I have not. My property remains  one complete residential property inhabited only by family and I.

 In response to the questions on the notice served , I confirm:

 I am the freeholder, owner of the land at XXX. The property is also occupied by my adult children XXX and by my 9 year old XZX.

1. No one else has an interest in the land except the mortgage company - ……..
2. The current and on going intended use of the property is a family residence/ home for myself and my family.
3. No.
4. N/A – there is no flat/s
5. N/A – there is no flat/s
6. N/A – there is no flat/s
7. 0
8. There are no tenants in my property therefore there is no tenancy agreement.

 Please let me know if you require any further information from me and please specify what is the alleged change of use of my property and why is this being alleged ?

 Please provide me with full details of the investigation conducted into my property and the allegation being made in order that I may have an opportunity to fully respond ?

 I look forward to hearing from you.

 Kind regards"

She was requested to pay higher band council tax pending her above representations. Now she's got a letter from the Valuation Office stating a decision was properly made that it's self contained therefore higher band council tax applies. 

I suppose the key question now is if she removes the kitchenette would she now ask the council or valuation office or tribunal to review the situation? and would she provide photographs as evidence or invite them to come to inspect? Would she then expect lower banding form the date of removal of the kitchenette? 

thank you. 

lincroft1710

This doesn't make sense. There should not be any band increase but a separate CT band on the 3rd floor accom. If your friend carried out the alterations and they were carried out after 1 April 1993 the CT band cannot be increased. 

Your friend should contact the VOA and ask why the CT band has been increased when such an increase would not appear to be lawful. She should keep her query brief and to the point. 

anselld

lincroft1710 said:

This doesn't make sense. There should not be any band increase but a separate CT band on the 3rd floor accom. If your friend carried out the alterations and they were carried out after 1 April 1993 the CT band cannot be increased. 

Your friend should contact the VOA and ask why the CT band has been increased when such an increase would not appear to be lawful. She should keep her query brief and to the point. 

Presumably it is not a band increase but a separate banding for the loft conversion in addition to the band for the pre-existing property meaning that the owner is now liable for both bands.

Sandra2021

She's now explained that what's happened is that she's started receiving 2 lots of council tax bills- one for a "loft flat" and the other for the rest of the house which is on 2 floors. She's basically tried to dispute the second council tax bill arguing it's not a loft flat but part of her home - the bill for the "flat" is band A I believe or whichever is the highest.

Because she's so stressed out she's asking what would happen now if she just continues to pay 2 separate council tax bills without doing anything else? Could she then just leave everything alone as it is without having to get builders to remove the kitchen and/ or bathroom ( presumably removing the kitchenette area would be sufficient to then argue it's not longer a "flat"?)

would be grateful for any thoughts on this.

thank you.