My PAD data for my house is wrong - very wrong - Paying too much Council tax?

TheDimSleeper

• I’ve challenged the band G (£160,001–£320,000) since May 2025, arguing it should be band F.
• Provided six comparable detached houses  (built ~1930–1940, 139–180 sqm, £525,000–£700,000), all in bands F or E. These have similar or smaller sizes and higher valuations but lower bands.
• VOA rejected my comparables, stating they “differ” from my property but didn’t specify why (e.g., size, layout, or kerbside appearance).
• The VOA’s Property Attribute Data (PAD) contains errors: lists 5 bedrooms (actual: 4), 3 storeys (actual: 2), 289 sqm (actual: 182 sqm), and parking for 3 cars (actual: 2).
• Supporting evidence: 2010 Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) shows an unconverted attic (no third storey), and the LA  planning portal shows no applications for structural changes since 1991.
• I’ve requested corrections to the PAD and a band review, citing these errors and comparables, but VOA insists on “more compelling evidence” like 1989–1993 sales data, which is hard to obtain for my semi-rural area.

Where I Stand:

• The VOA’s latest response (July 2025) maintains band G and hasn’t addressed PAD errors or clarified why my comparables are unsuitable.
• I’ve offered to provide floor plans or a surveyor’s report and requested a property inspection to verify attributes.
• I’m concerned the VOA’s process feels opaque, and the errors inflate my 1991 valuation, unfairly keeping me in band G.

• Questions for the Forum:

  1. Has anyone successfully challenged a council tax band with similar PAD errors? How did you get the VOA to correct them?
  2. What makes a “comparable” property acceptable to the VOA? My comparables are similar in age, size, and type, but they have 2 bathrooms vs. my 1—does this matter?
  3. Any tips for finding 1989–1993 sales data for a semi-rural area ? Land Registry data from that period is scarce.
  4. Should I escalate to a formal Valuation Tribunal appeal, or try another informal review with new evidence (e.g., a surveyor’s report)?
  5. Any advice on pushing for a VOA inspection to verify my property’s attributes?

TheDimSleeper

The PAD says I have parking space for 3 cars; it's two. I have 5 bedrooms (it's four), and it's a 3-story house. it's not!

lincroft1710

You can only make a formal appeal if you have been the CT payer for less than 6 months.

If your home was built in the 1930s then the VOA would have inspected it in the 1950s. PADs were not in existence in 1992 when the CT banding exercise took place, so the band would have been based on details from the 1950s (and any subsequent) survey and visual inspection. VOA will do a reinspection if asked

TheDimSleeper

Thanks for that appreciated. I have mixed up my terminology. It's the informal rebanding I have requested. If i get a reinspection is that enough to get the banding changed or appeal matters? Or at least compare the simular houses in a lower band than mine ( not exact due to the semi rural location) 

lincroft1710

Unless the reinspection shows a difference with the original 1950s VOA survey, it won't be much help.


I don't where the PAD info comes from but I'm ex VOA and during my career dealt with surveys from 6 different offices and none mentioned number of car spaces. At best you got a tick or cross against "Parking".

Exodi

The VOA told me that to be considered a comparable it must at least tick these 4 boxes - it must be in the vicinity (typically within a few streets, though this can be extended if you live somewhere particularly rural), must be of the same type (not comparing flats to houses), of similar age (this was perhaps the most frustrating as they had these arbitrary brackets but it was loosely within 10 years) and similar size (within 10% of your sqm). Current list or sold prices is unfortunately of no interest to them. While they ask for multiple comparable properties, they only need one that is valid.

I'm not clear on the age of your property, but I'd assume it was built in the 1930s? 

Likewise confirming what your actual sqm is because 289m3 and 182m3 is a significant difference. If it is the latter, then you should be looking at properties that are at minimum 164m3 and not wasting their time with properties that are 139m3.

I will admit I gave up. My house was built much later than the rest of my street and is worth maybe ~£400k. I found it (and continue to find it) very frustrating to see houses selling for £500k+ while in a lower council tax band, and not being able to challenge it because 'they're not comparable because they're older'. Council tax band inflation seems to be a thing, I see most new-builds now are coming out the gates at Band E/F/G.

lincroft1710

Exodi said:

TheDimSleeper said:

• I’ve challenged the band G (£160,001–£320,000) since May 2025, arguing it should be band F.
• Provided six comparable detached houses  (built ~1930–1940, 139–180 sqm, £525,000–£700,000), all in bands F or E. These have similar or smaller sizes and higher valuations but lower bands.
• VOA rejected my comparables, stating they “differ” from my property but didn’t specify why (e.g., size, layout, or kerbside appearance).
• The VOA’s Property Attribute Data (PAD) contains errors: lists 5 bedrooms (actual: 4), 3 storeys (actual: 2), 289 sqm (actual: 182 sqm), and parking for 3 cars (actual: 2).
• Supporting evidence: 2010 Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) shows an unconverted attic (no third storey), and the LA  planning portal shows no applications for structural changes since 1991.
• I’ve requested corrections to the PAD and a band review, citing these errors and comparables, but VOA insists on “more compelling evidence” like 1989–1993 sales data, which is hard to obtain for my semi-rural area.

Where I Stand:

• The VOA’s latest response (July 2025) maintains band G and hasn’t addressed PAD errors or clarified why my comparables are unsuitable.
• I’ve offered to provide floor plans or a surveyor’s report and requested a property inspection to verify attributes.
• I’m concerned the VOA’s process feels opaque, and the errors inflate my 1991 valuation, unfairly keeping me in band G.

• Questions for the Forum:

  1. Has anyone successfully challenged a council tax band with similar PAD errors? How did you get the VOA to correct them?
  2. What makes a “comparable” property acceptable to the VOA? My comparables are similar in age, size, and type, but they have 2 bathrooms vs. my 1—does this matter?
  3. Any tips for finding 1989–1993 sales data for a semi-rural area ? Land Registry data from that period is scarce.
  4. Should I escalate to a formal Valuation Tribunal appeal, or try another informal review with new evidence (e.g., a surveyor’s report)?
  5. Any advice on pushing for a VOA inspection to verify my property’s attributes?

.

I will admit I gave up. My house was built much later than the rest of my street and is worth maybe ~£400k. I found it (and continue to find it) very frustrating to see houses selling for £500k+ while in a lower council tax band, and not being able to challenge it because 'they're not comparable because they're older'. Council tax band inflation seems to be a thing, I see most new-builds now are coming out the gates at Band E/F/G.

In the 1950s/early 1960s my parents lived in an area of late Victorian/Edwardian small 2/3 bed terraced housing. In the early 1960s a new estate of 3 bed semis was built to the rear and those who could afford one of the new houses moved there. The older terraced houses (now modernised) are currently fetching more than the roomier more practical 1960s semis 

TheDimSleeper

It does seem designed to frustrate and stop you from changing your banding. Furthermore, I have had no luck finding a RICS surveyor who can / will do a retrospective valuation. There is no data to compare, apparently it starts in 1995. 

Just to confirm, the PAD had no bearing on the 1991 valuation? And I assume no records exist for how the valuation was decided?

incroft1710 said:

Unless the reinspection shows a difference with the original 1950s VOA survey, it won't be much help.


I don't where the PAD info comes from but I'm ex VOA and during my career dealt with surveys from 6 different offices and none mentioned number of car spaces. At best you got a tick or cross against "Parking".

lincroft1710

Most of the CT banding exercise was carried out by contractors (usually local estate agents) who used info supplied by the VOA from their property inspection records. The contractors were given this and the addresses of properties and told to go and give each a band. They were not asked to show how they arrived at the band,


The government of the day wanted the job done quickly and cheaply. There was a rumour going round at the time that the contractors only got 10 pence per property banded.


About 10% of the banding was actually carried out by VOA staff. 


I first heard of PAD about year ago. It certainly didn't exist in the 1990s!


Most rating surveyors will steer clear of CT, they prefer to deal with non domestic rating appeals