Council tax - single occupier discount, interview under caution

MikeJXE

If you have been staying sometimes at the home you own and paying single person CT 

Plus if you have been living with another in a property they own or rent and they pay single person CT but you have been staying with them 

How is it you're in trouble ? when I would have thought the owner/tenant is responsible in filing the CT forms 

Spoonie_Turtle

MikeJXE said:

If you have been staying sometimes at the home you own and paying single person CT 

Plus if you have been living with another in a property they own or rent and they pay single person CT but you have been staying with them 

How is it you're in trouble ? when I would have thought the owner/tenant is responsible in filing the CT forms 

Because (as I understand it) if they're not occupying the house they're refurbishing then there's no single occupier discount, they're liable for full council tax as the landlord when it's between tenants.

Jyana

I've found the following on various council websites, which of course may differ in part to your circumstances due to you most likely living in a different area than any of them, but I think is still useful as they have laid out some of the definitions on areas you have asked for in the thread. It may also give you an idea of what documents could be required.

What is the legal definition of a main residence, I’m not sure there is one? 

How we find out about your sole or main residence

If you spend time at more than 1 address, we have to decide which one is your main home.

By law, we have to ask you personal questions about your relationships and lifestyle. We will also need to see documents to prove what you say. You need to provide proof of:

• physically living at each address
• the reasons why you have 2 addresses
• where your wife, husband or partner lives, if you have one
• where your children live, if you have any
• your legal tie to each address
• where you keep most of your belongings
• whether you intend to return to 1 address eventually
• whether anything prevents you from returning whenever you want to
• which address is your most settled home

Long absence from your main home

You could have a main home but also own or rent another property nearer your work to use during the week, only returning to your main home at weekends.

By law, even if you spent time away, your main home is where you 'intend to return' and 'where you would live'. It is also where your partner and children live.

A court has agreed that a property can remain a person's main residence even if they remove the furniture while they are away.

Source

They have then stated it’s only a voluntary interview and I don’t have to attend?

That correct. They would just go over their evidence without you if you did not attend. The meeting is to decide to proceed with prosecuting so it's best to go and get your evidence in first as that would ideally halt things there. 

do the council have to disclose what evidence they have about my situation beforehand? 

As far as I am aware, no, they don't. But you should be aware of it all anyway as it should just be information about yourself, in this case anyway. Again, looking at other council websites to see how they handle single person fraud also gives you an idea of the information they collect though. Plus the info above from Thurrock's is pretty much covering it too.

They work with the credit companies (Experia, Equifax, etc), out source to people like Capita and Civica, and then use the National Fraud Initiative for data-matching any information that comes in. So it's pretty thorough. I had an interview, though not under caution, a couple of years back when reapplying for ESA after an inheritance and it's amazing how much information they have on you, it was an eye opener for sure.

Muttleythefrog

Yes I think all you can do is be open and honest including reiterating your previous attempt to describe situation so that things were correct and that you paid appropriate sums. As per previous comment I too, although not recently, had an interview but not under caution. I had made enquiries about benefit entitlement to council given my partner planned to move in (from abroad) and so I had assumed they too were looking at single person occupancy issue thinking perhaps she'd already moved in without me declaring it. It turned out actually they believed I had a savings account with serious levels of savings in and fortunately on the eve of the event I was able to get tipped off about this such that I was able to actually turn up with concrete evidence their data was wrong. Had I not been tipped off then they'd have asked about a closed account with a bank I would have not recognised (as it was a parent organisation) and it is likely I'd have made a false signed statement entirely in good faith. Unfortunately I never got an apology or a conclusion. They really need to look at these processes. 

Good Luck!

TELLIT01

HillStreetBlues said:

TELLIT01 said:

 Unfortunately, their definition will trump yours.

If neither parties agree the ultimately a judge will decide, it it goes that far. There is no "trumping" it's decided on the evidence.

Sorry, badly worded on my part.  I mean the council will have will have their definition and rules regarding qualification for single occupier discount, and they may not be the same as those of the OP.  The council is unlikely to roll over and say they have been wrong in their interpretation, and will stick to their version.  It would then be up to the OP to challenge that interpretation, not the council.

michael8626

dil1976 said:

michael8626 said:

TELLIT01 said:

The only way you are going to get this cleared up is to attend the interview.  Contact the council in advance to see if you can bring a legal representative with you, assuming there is nothing regarding that on the letter you received.  It may be something as simple as their definition of 'main residence' being different to yours.  Unfortunately, their definition will trump yours.

Yet it’s voluntary to attend, and if I am subsequently successful I am unable to claim costs? 

If it is found against you, will you be happy to pay all their fees they have had to pay out?

Absolutely. That is how the legal system works. 

Actions have consequences. If a local authority makes an accusation against an individual claiming they have acted dishonesty and committed fraud, surely you have to be held accountable if they are found to be wrong? 

Sometimes it’s not about winning or losing, it’s who is awarded costs. 

sheramber

You need to provide evidence that it is your main residence.

is the mortgage a buy to let mortgage?  You would not have that for a main residence

Landlords can have utility bills in their name so that doesn't prove it is your main residence.

WhiskersTheWonderCat

You say that you are renovating your ex-rental, so is it even in a habitable state? Do you have a bed there? Sounds to me like you are living at your "friend's" place, the place you have lived at for the past 12 years, and are simply frequenting the ex-rental so you can renovate it and get it ready for renting out again. I'm guessing that's why you have no property there either, because you have never lived there yourself. 

michael8626

WhiskersTheWonderCat said:

You say that you are renovating your ex-rental, so is it even in a habitable state? Do you have a bed there? Sounds to me like you are living at your "friend's" place, the place you have lived at for the past 12 years, and are simply frequenting the ex-rental so you can renovate it and get it ready for renting out again. I'm guessing that's why you have no property there either, because you have never lived there yourself. 

It has always been in a habitable state. The property in the past year has had a new shower/bathroom, consumer unit, electrical work, lighting, conservatory roof, fencing etc. 
It has a bed and I have been staying there 3-4 days/nights per week. 

Is there a legal definition for possessions? What is the requisite amount deemed necessary that an individual ‘must’ have? 

Another farcical question from the local authority. A person is quite capable of living with the absolute minimum of materialistic things. 

sevenhills

michael8626 said:

WhiskersTheWonderCat said:

You say that you are renovating your ex-rental, so is it even in a habitable state? Do you have a bed there? Sounds to me like you are living at your "friend's" place, the place you have lived at for the past 12 years, and are simply frequenting the ex-rental so you can renovate it and get it ready for renting out again. I'm guessing that's why you have no property there either, because you have never lived there yourself. 

It has always been in a habitable state. The property in the past year has had a new shower/bathroom, consumer unit, electrical work, lighting, conservatory roof, fencing etc. 
It has a bed and I have been staying there 3-4 days/nights per week. 

Is there a legal definition for possessions? What is the requisite amount deemed necessary that an individual ‘must’ have? 

Another farcical question from the local authority. A person is quite capable of living with the absolute minimum of materialistic things. 

I don't believe anyone on this forum believes that you are living there, so you will struggle to convince the local authority.
You need to think about that