PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.

SDLT on a purchase of uninhabitable main home

Hi, I bought an uninhabitable property back in 2017. The SDLT was over £7k . Some 5 years later we find out that this was not payable on the property due to its poor state of repair. We tried to get a few mortgages but no one would touch it. So we had to pay cash. This was our main residence and despite the condition we moved straight in. It was shortly after a test case so HMRC should have been aware that this was not payable on the listed, derelict property. I’m no solicitor or property professional so would have no clue about this. Why are HMRC able to keep hold of this not insignificant amount. Has anyone else missed? What did you do? To get it refunded instead of using these reclaim companies. 

Comments

  • user1977
    user1977 Posts: 17,275 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Seventh Anniversary Photogenic Name Dropper

    HMRC should have been aware that this was not payable on the listed, derelict property. 
    How would HMRC have been aware? SDLT is self-assessed, if you think you qualify for relief then it's up to you to fill in the return appropriately.
  • I don’t know how HMRC would or would not know. Other than their calculator my solicitor would have used . Will apply for it. Cheers. Even though I maybe out of time. Which is my point here really. If it’s overpaid in error then there should be no timescale to reclaim it. They say on line it’s upto 4 years. It’s now 6 sadly. 
  • SDLT_Geek
    SDLT_Geek Posts: 2,837 Forumite
    Seventh Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Hi, I bought an uninhabitable property back in 2017. The SDLT was over £7k . Some 5 years later we find out that this was not payable on the property due to its poor state of repair. We tried to get a few mortgages but no one would touch it. So we had to pay cash. This was our main residence and despite the condition we moved straight in. It was shortly after a test case so HMRC should have been aware that this was not payable on the listed, derelict property. I’m no solicitor or property professional so would have no clue about this. Why are HMRC able to keep hold of this not insignificant amount. Has anyone else missed? What did you do? To get it refunded instead of using these reclaim companies. 
    You seem to have bought “residential property”.  The fact that you moved into it is pretty conclusive.  You are well out of time to reclaim SDLT anyway.  I suggest that you give this one up!
    For reclaim companies you might want to read this: https://www.tax.org.uk/stamp-duty-refunds-too-good-to-be-true
  • user1977
    user1977 Posts: 17,275 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Seventh Anniversary Photogenic Name Dropper
    edited 10 February 2024 at 9:28PM
    Yes, "uninhabitable" from the point of view of mortgage lenders is a much lighter test than "so uninhabitable it doesn't even count as a house" for SDLT standards.
  • macman
    macman Posts: 53,129 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Difficult to argue that it was 'uninhabitable' if you moved straight in?
    No free lunch, and no free laptop ;)
  • user1977
    user1977 Posts: 17,275 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Seventh Anniversary Photogenic Name Dropper
    sheramber said:
    I'm impressed that someone has considered "too radioactive to live in" as a likely scenario which might come up...(look forward to the tax savings to be made in property purchases after nuclear armageddon!).
  • loubel
    loubel Posts: 988 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 500 Posts Name Dropper
    As has been said above, if you moved in then it was clearly habitable, hence your solicitor did not suggest claiming relief.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 349.8K Banking & Borrowing
  • 252.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453K Spending & Discounts
  • 242.7K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 619.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 176.3K Life & Family
  • 255.6K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.