Council tax challenge (new build) - preparing for tribunal (England)

thomas01155

I submitted a proposal after moving into a new one bed flat, to have it moved from D to B in England.

The evidence I provided was of other new builds nearby that are larger or similar and valued at B.

The VOA rejected my proposal. The evidence the VOA provided back so far was of 5 apartments in the same block all at D since they are identical pretty much in this new build, which I thought would be obvious as it is a new build block and would have been banded at the same time.

The other 3 properties they provided were flats, though built at a significantly different time and quite some distance away, so are only comparable in terms of being flats and a similar size.

The other thing they have relied on is "Your [city] is an area of regeneration and has changed a lot since 1991" They didn't elaborate on this and I have asked for more information.

I've registered for a tribunal now, so have many months to gather my evidence, the hearing date hasn't even being entered yet.

The main evidence I have so far are the addresses of 3 other new build flat blocks within 100-300 meters of my flat, of similar quality and size (or larger) plus the estate agent brochures for each of these, that show the floor plans, sizing similar, quality similar but they are all band B. They did not comment on any of the information I submitted in my proposal about these other new builds which I found odd.

The reason they state for no change is:
"I have reached this decision because having reviewed your case, and I am satisfied that the entry is correct. I have looked at evidence of sales and bandings of properties in the area and I am satisfied that the value of the property, reflecting 01 April 1991 values (the date of valuation for all council tax bandings), is within the range of the existing band. I am also satisfied that the effective date of the entry is correct.

I have also enclosed additional information which I hope you find helpful."

I'm wondering If I should try and get some prices for 1991 additionally for some older blocks of flats from the 60s/70s nearby? They don't seem very comparable but there are some flats that are band A nearby that are the same size (sqm) from the 1960's.

Any other ideas of what evidence I could get?

lincroft1710

Your problem will be finding actual 1991 sale prices as these are not in the public domain.  The VOA would doubtless argue that the 1960s built flats are much inferior in quality to yours.


How do the prices of the new build Band B flats compare with your purchase price? 

thomas01155

lincroft1710 said:

Your problem will be finding actual 1991 sale prices as these are not in the public domain.  The VOA would doubtless argue that the 1960s built flats are much inferior in quality to yours.


How do the prices of the new build Band B flats compare with your purchase price? 

The price of the new builds that are band B are fairly similar in listing price currently

(flat a) is the same listing price in 2023 currently (I also found the original listing price when the flat was sold which was £10k lower than mine in 2023) However the land registry shows a significantly lower price as it was purchased as a shared ownership, so I don't know the exact amount they paid (or what percentage to work it out)

The other two (flat b &c) are around 10,000 lower listing price currently on the estate agents site.

(flat b) Was sold for £25000 less in 2022 than my listing price, but 17625 more than what I actually paid. (flat c) was sold for £27500 less in 2021 than my asking price, but 12625 more than what I actually paid.

I got 10% off my new build flat, as they all have some level of new build premium applied, so taking this into account it's around 30-40000 different to their current listing price, is it worth highlighting this? Should I use the asking price or the actual amount I paid for comparisons?

lincroft1710

Actual sale price is the important one. 

thomas01155

lincroft1710 said:

Actual sale price is the important one. 

Thanks Is it worth bothering getting some of the dissimilar flats from 1991 or shall I leave it? There is a records centre near me that has lots of old newspapers etc

lincroft1710

thomas01155 said:

lincroft1710 said:

Actual sale price is the important one. 

Thanks Is it worth bothering getting some of the dissimilar flats from 1991 or shall I leave it? There is a records centre near me that has lots of old newspapers etc

Probably not if they are so dissimilar that the VOA could argue they were not relevant for comparison purposes and you don't have actual sale price.also you could spend a lot of time searching and not find any remotely similar flats for sale and you probably won't be able to identify them other than the block they are in

thomas01155

lincroft1710 said:

thomas01155 said:

lincroft1710 said:

Actual sale price is the important one. 

Thanks Is it worth bothering getting some of the dissimilar flats from 1991 or shall I leave it? There is a records centre near me that has lots of old newspapers etc

Probably not if they are so dissimilar that the VOA could argue they were not relevant for comparison purposes and you don't have actual sale price.also you could spend a lot of time searching and not find any remotely similar flats for sale and you probably won't be able to identify them other than the block they are in

Thanks, I have my tribunal hearing soon! Quite looking forward to it, as I think I have a good and reasonable case.

I'm still waiting for the bundle from the VOA in regards to their property evidence, they just have few more weeks to send it to remain within the directions of the tribunal. From their old evidence so far they sent three road addresses, that all have quite old flats on or are further away that I expected. They don't seem very similar but I don't have the exact addresses yet which I am pending.

I have complied a list of the 5 nearest flats that I think are the most similar, they are between 100 meters to 500 meters away. Some being built just a couple of years before mine.

Their latest excuse for not looking at some of these flats was that my flat has a sea view (it doesn't unless you lean significantly out the balcony and even then it's just a glimpse) and there other excuse was that some of the flats in the other area contain student housing.

I'm unsure they should rely on the nearby presence of student housing to discredit the flat I am comparing, since there are students in the rentals here at my development also (though not as many), plus council residents and affordable housing. I find it a bit mean of them, as it sounds like they are slightly discriminating against students. 

Should I use that that their are council flats and affordable flats (shared ownership) etc nearby to dispute this? It feels a bit dirty and discriminatory towards certain groups. Is it genuine for the VOA to rely on that their are dedicated student flats near the other development, the city I live is surrounded by student properties, as it is pretty much a student city, with multiple nearby universities.

There quotes:

- "The reasons for this are that they are both located further inland than [REDACTED - my flat] and do not have sea views."

- "[REDACTED - nearby development] is also a mixture of private rentals, student accommodation and affordable housing. This mixture is not reflected in the [redacted MY FLAT] development and the student housing at [REDACTED - nearby development] does impact on the value of those properties.

 - "[ REDACTED - my flat] position is closer to the beach and, whilst not all the flats there have sea views, those that do enjoy uninterrupted views of the sea and are in a higher band."

They seemed to ignore the flats that I sent that are closer to the sea than my flat. I don't really like their conduct much, it seems to be bias, discriminatory towards students and they ignored 4 out of the 5 flats I sent.

Additionally, they saying the value of the flats are impacted by the student properties, but some of them sold for more than my flat and are 2 bands lower.

lincroft1710

VOA can put forward any reasoning behind their decision to reject your evidence or to support their evidence. You can do the same. The acid test is what the Tribunal believes to be the best evidence, either that of the VOA or your evidence. If student accommodation or social housing affect nearby property prices it is not discrimination to claim this, it may be a provable fact.


You will not know the actual strength of the VOA case until you see the evidence they intend to produce at the hearing,

thomas01155

lincroft1710 said:

VOA can put forward any reasoning behind their decision to reject your evidence or to support their evidence. You can do the same. The acid test is what the Tribunal believes to be the best evidence, either that of the VOA or your evidence. If student accommodation or social housing affect nearby property prices it is not discrimination to claim this, it may be a provable fact.


You will not know the actual strength of the VOA case until you see the evidence they intend to produce at the hearing,

That is true, I will wait until 6 weeks before the hearing and I should have their case to fully assess it. I might be back in touch to get your opinion again if there is something I don't understand in it.

Can I state that my property is on a busy dual carriage way, and that loud noise impacts it's value? It's a major route for police cars and ambulances also, I even located a planning document that shows high noise values as it looks like the developers carried out an assessment before building it that I could put in my bundle. I'm not sure if that is excessive to include.

lincroft1710

You can state it, but have you sales evidence to back up your claim?

thomas01155

I see I probably won't have the information. 

So I will focus on nearby similar properties.

I have sales information of various properties sold around 2019/2020 that are similar to mine.

Once I have their full case I will request various property information that I am lacking that I think will be good for my case.

Paragraph 31 of the guide states
"...It may also send you details of the prices that properties it considers to be similar to yours were sold for. If so, you then have the right to ask the VOA for information about the selling prices of up to four other properties that you have identified as being similar to yours. If the VOA provides selling prices of more than four properties, you can ask for information on the same number of properties of your choice."

So once I have their total number, I will request some missing pricing information I need. In their initial notice from when I first disputed it they are relying on 8 properties (honestly very poor comparisons also), but it will be interesting to see how many they rely on in their full case bundle, as I guess it could be more or less?