200% Council Tax for inherited retirement flat I can't sell, sublet or live in (costing £8K/year)

AdamDavidson

UPDATE: Good news. Sir John Redwood (MP) has managed to get Reading Borough Council to drop the long term empty 200% premium for 1 year. It's still set at 100%, and there's still no mention in writing of me being able to defer payments yet (almost the opposite), but I feel like I'm getting somewhere. It's a shame you have to distract MPs with these kind of things when common sense should surely have prevailed at Reading Borough Council. Alas we are all just numbers to the council bureaucrats. Empathy and reason aren't part of their portfolio of skills.

This also doesn't help all the other bereaved families who are facing the same death tax from RBC though:

AdamDavidson

BarelySentientAI said:

Just remember that it's the estate that would have these debts, not you.  You do not have personal financial responsibility for any of these things.  The worst possible financial outcome for you is that there is no inheritance from the estate.

Thanks for the advice on that one. There is no cash left in the estate, only this asset. I guess I'll have to work out if making some of the payments in the short-term is worth the risk, with the hope of getting some inheritance. Actually I loaned my mum £20K for her original flat deposit, but I've no idea how to account for that, so I'm just hoping I can get that back at the end of the day.

BarelySentientAI

AdamDavidson said:

Alas we are all just numbers to the council bureaucrats. Empathy and reason aren't part of their portfolio of skills.

It's more that the underpaid and overworked people dealing with it on the ground level don't have the time or power to make these sort of concessions, and you don't want to be the one who puts other work on hold to run things upstairs.

Just like when someone blames the customer service agent on the phone for an oil company's profit, or gets irate with an 18 year old shop assistant for a retailer's returns policy.

I appreciate you're frustrated, but it's not helpful to slander council workers or start getting tabloid with this "death tax at RBC" approach.

AdamDavidson

@BarelySentientAI - you are absolutely right, I apologize for my wording on that one.

It's almost impossible to be objective when you're frequently reminded, with bills from large entities, that your mum is dead and you're having to fight to protect what little savings she had accrued as a lifelong shop worker and single mum. We grew up living in housing association flats and council houses, and even had a coin operated electric meter that we couldn't always afford to run. She only had the £25K in cash to pay the first round of debts because she inherited it when her cousin died, otherwise she had nothing but a small top up to her state pension. It breaks my heart knowing the struggles she went through bringing me up.

I don't blame the low level council workers at all, just the machine that is the council and the effect the policies have when some common sense doesn't go into the decisions. Let me add that everyone I've talked to on the council tax line has been very helpful and understanding, even sympathetic in some cases. However at some point in the hierarchy, someone said "no" and they are the ones I hold responsible. I doubt they're 18 years old, and they almost certainly had some power to say "yes" since they eventually did when Sir John got involved.

Kim_13

AdamDavidson said:

UPDATE: Good news. Sir John Redwood (MP) has managed to get Reading Borough Council to drop the long term empty 200% premium for 1 year. It's still set at 100%, and there's still no mention in writing of me being able to defer payments yet (almost the opposite), but I feel like I'm getting somewhere. It's a shame you have to distract MPs with these kind of things when common sense should surely have prevailed at Reading Borough Council. Alas we are all just numbers to the council bureaucrats. Empathy and reason aren't part of their portfolio of skills.

This also doesn't help all the other bereaved families who are facing the same death tax from RBC though:

You shouldn’t feel that you are distracting your MP with this - MPs are the only ones who can stop Housing 21 and companies like them from behaving in this way, putting families like yours and that of the lady in the article you linked to in this situation. 

The government have taken action on leaseholds but haven’t gone far enough, and MPs need to be made aware of this.

The council shouldn’t be issuing an amended bill to you - make sure they amend it again to the estate if they have - as this is what protects you from liability if the eventual debt to RBC is more than the proceeds of any sale. 

Keep records of all payments made to Trading 21 - were anything beyond the balances in your mother’s accounts to have been paid to them, you would be entitled to reimbursement from the sale proceeds. 

If the flat eventually sold and the proceeds after costs were enough to repay OP but not enough to also repay RBC in full, would OP be entitled to his monies before RBC see a penny (as there will be no money coming at all if the lease is forfeited) or would the funds have to be apportioned? The answer may factor into how long it might be worth paying Trading 21 (barring any concession from them or Churchill) rather than letting them start the process of repossessing it straight away.

Could RBC seek a charge on the property that might affect the maths, or can they not do so because Trading 21 own 30%?

Kim_13

BarelySentientAI said:

AdamDavidson said:

Alas we are all just numbers to the council bureaucrats. Empathy and reason aren't part of their portfolio of skills.

I appreciate you're frustrated, but it's not helpful to slander council workers or start getting tabloid with this "death tax at RBC" approach.

OP did say that Trading 21 had thrown RBC under the bus. 

They only charge premiums because the government allow them to and they will be far from the only council exercising the powers given to them. The government should have said that Empty Property Premiums couldn’t be applied when a property had been left empty due to the death of the owner if that property was being marketed. Having said that, councils that charge the maximum permitted in every situation make themselves look greedy. When councils are paying anyone somewhere in the region of the prime minister’s salary, something has gone wrong.

Having had a Google it does seem that they are reducing the time before a premium is payable to one year, but the government site still says two for England. 

MerlinTT

We are in a very similar situation, my mother in-law's flat has been on the market since September 2020. There is no money in the estate. We spoke with Mole Valley district council way back when the money in the estate ran out (about 3 years ago) we were told it would be accrued and when the flat sold the council taxes would be settled at that point. We have this week been issued with a court summons for non payment of this. We were told by a solicitor it would be best to just pay up, this would mean that we have to take a loan to pay for this. However, today been told by citizens advice that we are not personally liable it should come out of the estate upon sale of the flat. Who is right?? At the retirement complex where the flat is, there are a total of 36 properties, of which 12 are on the market. Zoopla show the last sale of a flat at this location was in 2022. We have asked for RLHA to purchase the flat from us. This was declined. We asked to be able to let the flat. This was declined. The flat has been reduced in price and we do get very occasional viewings but since it's been on the market for over 3 and a half years, people are understandably wary.
We are running out of options. 

MeteredOut

MerlinTT said:

We are in a very similar situation, my mother in-law's flat has been on the market since September 2020. There is no money in the estate. We spoke with Mole Valley district council way back when the money in the estate ran out (about 3 years ago) we were told it would be accrued and when the flat sold the council taxes would be settled at that point. We have this week been issued with a court summons for non payment of this. We were told by a solicitor it would be best to just pay up, this would mean that we have to take a loan to pay for this. However, today been told by citizens advice that we are not personally liable it should come out of the estate upon sale of the flat. Who is right?? At the retirement complex where the flat is, there are a total of 36 properties, of which 12 are on the market. Zoopla show the last sale of a flat at this location was in 2022. We have asked for RLHA to purchase the flat from us. This was declined. We asked to be able to let the flat. This was declined. The flat has been reduced in price and we do get very occasional viewings but since it's been on the market for over 3 and a half years, people are understandably wary.
We are running out of options. 

Is the house still owned by the estate?

MerlinTT

Yes, it's a one bedroom flat and the only asset left in the estate

MeteredOut

MerlinTT said:

Yes, it's a one bedroom flat and the only asset left in the estate

I am *really* surprised a solicitor suggested paying up. Is there a reason they thought you (and not the estate) was liable? Why have the council said you are liable? Did you contest the debt (Prove It Letter)? What communications did you have before it got to the court summons stage?