Council Tax Long Term Vacant Premium

AprilDay1

I purchased a small flat for retirement in November and I am currently serving my 3 months notice to retire at the end of April. My job requires me to live on-site and a flat is provided. I was expecting to pay £141.00 per month in council tax on my new flat, however, the Council have sent a bill for £3531.80 for 2024/25 claiming a 100% surcharge because the property has been long term vacant (in addition to the £641.28 already billed). I have written and spoken to the Council, who say I am liable, even though I don't own a second home, only purchased in November and cannot, due to my employment contract, move in any sooner. The previous owner passed away and probate slowed up the sale, but there is nothing unusual in this. Any advice would be welcomed.

lincroft1710

Change of ownership doesn't restart the date at which a property first becomes unoccupied. So if the flat you purchased had been unoccupied for some time, then as soon as that flat had been unoccupied for 2 years then you as current owner would get a bill which included a 100% premium.


Obviously as soon as you actually move into the flat, the empty premium will cease and you will just pay normal CT going forward   

amanda1024

From what you’ve said, it sounds like you’ll only have to pay the premium for April - tell the council as soon as you move in. And try to move in as soon as you can. Presumably your employer isn’t the armed forces (there’s a specific exemption) https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/why-am-i-paying-an-empty-homes-premium-on-my-council-tax/

AprilDay1

Thank you both for your comments, it is very much appreciated. From the information sent by the Council, I suppose I have to be thankful that the property hasn't been empty for 10 years - a 300% premium. 

uptdale

This seems to be a problem for any property bought from the executors of someone who had been living in the property alone, typically a widow or widower.  If the person died more than a year before the sale - or had moved out into, say, a nursing home more than a year before, then the premium will now apply immediately on purchase, unless the purchaser is able to move in immediately.  It is common for such properties to need work before it is practical to move in.

I suspect that many solicitors are not aware of this issue.  I can see it deterring some purchasers from buying properties from executors, or executors having to reduce the price.

AprilDay1

I agree totally with your comments. Yes, the previous owner was a widow and had moved out into a nursing home before passing away. Nor was my solicitor aware of this issue. Also seems a little unfair if exemption can be granted to members of the armed forces, but not others who have contracted obligations to employers. 

lincroft1710

AprilDay1 said:

Also seems a little unfair if exemption can be granted to members of the armed forces, but not others who have contracted obligations to employers. 

That you would have to take up with Parliament, as it is their wish that in certain circumstances members of the armed forces are exempt.

mivona

Since when has it become acceptable to charge people for something over which they had no control?

I purchased a property to rent to some friends, and have been denied even a 1 month rebate while I get it ready to rent (electrical inspection, etc), and am faced with double council tax after owning it only two months.

The assessment for council tax is property based (banding), but liability is personal, and determined by personal characteristics (single person, age, income, landlord/tenant). 

If I owned the property for a year, and kept it vacant, the charge is justified and just. If I only just bought it, it is insanely unjust to charge a premium council tax for a vacancy I was not responsible for. 

The real kicker is that none of this is revealed in a Land Charges Search. The Council knows but doesn't have to tell potential buyers if this liability. 

lincroft1710

mivona said:

Since when has it become acceptable to charge people for something over which they had no control?

I purchased a property to rent to some friends, and have been denied even a 1 month rebate while I get it ready to rent (electrical inspection, etc), and am faced with double council tax after owning it only two months.

The assessment for council tax is property based (banding), but liability is personal, and determined by personal characteristics (single person, age, income, landlord/tenant). 

If I owned the property for a year, and kept it vacant, the charge is justified and just. If I only just bought it, it is insanely unjust to charge a premium council tax for a vacancy I was not responsible for. 

The real kicker is that none of this is revealed in a Land Charges Search. The Council knows but doesn't have to tell potential buyers if this liability. 

Who do you think is responsible for the vacancy?

Age in itself has no effect on CT liability unless the sole occupier is under 18. Landlords are only responsible for CT if the property is vacant or HMO.