Who pays the Council Tax: L or T? [Archive]

T.M.

24-02-2005, 22:06 PM

Hi everyone.
Thanks for your help in past.

However i would really appreaciate some advice on another issue that is really bugging me! and i need to be prepared!

I had a new tenant move into a room, in a 4 bed house. She took up a 6 month tenancy agreement and signed and agreed to all terms (standard stuff) n conditions. (commenced on 23.02.05 for 6 months.)

However, the one thing i can think of now, is that on the terms and conditions, i explained that all bills including c.tax, gas electric, water, tv, etc...will need to be paid by tenants seperately to the rent of the room.
I did not actually state when advertising the cost of the room (ie £44 pw), that it does not include c.tax.
I assumed they would realise that the council tax would have to be paid for and shared by tenants anyawy as it stated it in the terms n conditions anyway!!

Anyway..when moving in..she complained even then, ( i should have seen it coming) that she had Loads of stuff!!

Yet she paid up deposit and 2 months rent in advance (23rd Jan 05).

But few weeks ago i asked her to confirm, with the Council Tax office, if she is exempt from it or not. And to provide proof to me also. Just to clarify it all.

After wk or so, she said she had been ( this was after i asked her about it couple of times and no proof provided to me still ) and that they did not require anything, they believed her and that if there was a problem, she was told to send the L.lord to the office itself!!

THis didnt sound right to me. So i left it till a bill would arrive, and today whilst sorting out the tax of a 2nd tenant in the property (who has just moved in also) i thought id ask them about 1st tenants proof.

Office said that nothing was logged on screen. I asked for a letter to be sent to her. They said they will send it to me and i can take it to her. Fine.

Since i had to go and see the 2nd tenant anyway tonight, i thought id mention it to 1st tenant also that the proof is still required so we know who is liable for it.

She responded in a refusing way, jokingly dismissive, in denial and just adamant that she does not need to go down! She lived like so and so before, this country ..etc..Why should she..they dont need it..etc..etc..etc..blah blah and blah!

I remained professional yet i answered every silly argument and question she had. I explained i did not come to argue or 'throw my weight around' and have never needed to with any other tenant ever.
That i came professionally to inform that it need to be done.
Yet your response is like this!!?
That i will pretend it never happened as i would not want a relationship like this to continue in this manner, and that we hopefully have a proffesional/respectfull relationship ..and 2ndly that i remind you thatyou have signed a legal document (the tenancy).

This went on for about 20 mins!! The 2nd tenant was quiet and not involved yet she did try to also explain it (tactfully) to the 1st tenant,that maybe proof had been lost or something. But it was hopeless! The ship was not sinking, it was still on dry land!

So..since i have never had to do this, i was wondering,
( Obviously i dont really want to go down the courts route. Long winded, no guarantee and loss of rent also...but...)

1)What are my rights about eviction? (just incase i need to in near future)
2)If i can ( if i wanted to that is ) then how so?
3) What would you suggest (if this continued) ?

I know they will send a letter and i will give it to her, and i will also ask them what they think of it.
But i was just thinking about any help, advice, information or suggestions anyone may have.

Really appreciate your time and help in anyway. Thanks.
T.M.

Jennifer_M

25-02-2005, 09:35 AM

Why are you getting involved with your tenants' council tax ?

As far as I know once you have told them they are responsible for paying it that should be it.
You have given the council the information about the tenant, it's up to them to chase her up, not you.

Paul_f

01-03-2005, 22:52 PM

Look! if the AST doesn't spell it out in b & w that council tax is to be paid by the tenant then I'm afraid the tenant doesn't have to pay it - period! You can't just change it after they've moved in to rectify the landlord's error as it's unenforceable to do so.

Also if there is more than one tenant sharing a singularly rated property then it's normally up to the landlord to include it as part of the rent as in the event of a default you won't be able to make individual tenants responsible for its payment otherwise.

I don't know why there isn't some clearer thinking sometimes.

Mrraybarton

01-09-2006, 17:20 PM

Why is it that if I moved into my rental property I get a 25% single occupancy discount which I do not get for non occupancy.The previous owners were awarded the 6 months rates relief for non occupancy so I do not get it. I have rung the council and they cannot explain the reason why.I have written to my M>P. and councillor and await reply. Anyone see any logic here

dazalock

02-09-2006, 07:16 AM

This disparidy bugs the hell out of me, whilst some councils allow discounts others do not. I recently had a tenant move out and the property was empty for 2 weeks, it used to be that I had a 90% discount for 6 months, but without me knowing they had reduced this to just 10%! As you rightly say, if I was living there I would get 25% discount, but by being empty for a couple of weeks, with no one using the services, it costs me more?

I understand that councils want to ensure properties are occupied, but once again no lea way is given to the LL who is trying to fill the gap, more stealth tax. :mad:

headache

06-12-2006, 15:09 PM

If a tenant pays the rent for a property but just uses the property as storage (or to sub-let) but actually lives elsewher, who is liable for the council tax bill? The (not-in-residence-but-still-paying-rent) tenant or the landlord?

MrLandlord

06-12-2006, 15:35 PM

jeffrey

06-12-2006, 16:25 PM

Hi.

Was an Assured Shorthold Tenancy agreement drawn up & signed ?

If so, there is a clause on tenants outgoings i.e. tenant is responsible for paying gas, electric, council tax.

Landlords are generally liable for maintenance costs & building insurance.

But see s.1(1)(b) of 1988 Act.
It can't be an AST (or even Standard Assured), no matter what the Agreement says, unless T is occupying as only or main residence.
That precludes "storage only" use.

jpfinney

22-06-2007, 16:18 PM

Is Council Tax something that is normally paid by the landlord?

I know that the old 'Rates' bill was a function of the property value, but remember that it was replaced by the Poll Tax which was an individual tax. Then it reverted to Council Tax which was supposed to be an amalgum of both.

I'm probably talikng out of my arse, so can anybody give me a brief explanation?

timbstoke

22-06-2007, 17:03 PM

The norm seems to be that if it's a single occupancy property, the tenant pays. If it's a HMO, the LL pays, unless it's a HMO aimed at, but not restricted to, students. Students are exempt, so there's usually a clause ensuring that students inform the council, and non-students pay the C.tax in addition to their rent.

At least, that's my experience

Ericthelobster

22-06-2007, 18:14 PM

The norm seems to be that if it's a single occupancy property, the tenant pays. If it's a HMO, the LL pays, unless it's a HMO aimed at, but not restricted to, students. Agreed. The LL doesn't want to be paying the council tax (ie and passing it on to the tenant) if he can help it, because if the tenant should do a runner, the council will still want paying.... better they chase the tenant for it rather than him.

caroline7758

30-06-2007, 11:14 AM

Landlords of HMOs are liable for the council tax, but often allow for this when setting the rent, i.e. include an amount to cover the council tax.

pcwilkins

03-07-2007, 10:54 AM

Is Council Tax something that is normally paid by the landlord?

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/pimmanual/pim2030.htm states that

Liability to pay council tax will, in the main, fall on individuals residing in the dwelling in question. Where tenants and landlord live in the same chargeable dwelling the liability falls on the landlord. Where two or more residents are both chargeable by virtue of having a similar interest in the property, each is jointly and severally liable. Spouses or civil partners living in the same dwelling are also jointly and severally liable, irrespective of whether they have the same interest. If the dwelling is empty, the tax is paid by the owner.

Also be aware that some occupants get discounts --- i.e. if only one person lives in the house, they get 25% off, and there are some people who aren't included in the count --- students, children, and (I believe) monks and nuns. So my advice is to marry a monk or nun and save yourself some cash.

Peter

jpfinney

26-07-2007, 13:16 PM

jeffrey

26-07-2007, 13:42 PM

tenant29

26-07-2007, 14:39 PM

I'm still confused about this. On the one hand there's the assertion that if fit's single tenant they are directly responsible for Council Tax, but if it's HMO the LL pays. What's the reason for this?

Then there's the quote in pcwilkins post above that suggests otherwise and sounds more reasonable.

My new tenants are not expecting me to pay their CT and it'd obviously be better for me if they paid this themselves, but I don't want to tell them it's not my responsibility and later find that it is.

The rental tenancy agreement ( arranged by flat owner or his letting agent ) should show which party has to pay council tax and water rates and this agreement must be signed before the tenant moves in. What is stated in your tenancy agreement ?

Normally flat owner should be informing local council of new occupant moving in to terminate Council billing you for an unoccupied flat .

jpfinney

26-07-2007, 16:45 PM

Thanks jeffrey. I'll look up and read the article to which you refer.

Thanks tenant29. My TA has the following clause:

22 Council Tax
The Tenant is responsible for performing his obligation to pay Council Tax (or any similar tax or levy).

..so it would seem a no brainer, but I know I paid the CT when my previous tenants were in and wouldn't have done this unless I'd been advised to do so. This was the reason for my question in the first place. If I'm not responsible for this then my previous tenants got a good deal and I've learned a valuable (if expensive) lesson.

I'll speak to the council tomorrow and say what they say.

jpfinney

26-07-2007, 17:06 PM

1. Generally, see Local Govenment Finance Act 1992, as amended.

2. Liability to C/Tax is explained in s.6. In descending order, the payer is:
a. resident freeholder;
b. resident leaseholder holding direct from freehold reversioner;
c. resident tenant;
d. resident licensee;
e. resident; or
f. owner of freehold (absolute or reversion) or leasehold granted for six months or more.

3. "Residence" means sole or main residence in whole or any part of property, where payer is aged 18 or over,

4. Liability to pay does NOT mean that the payer is necessarily billed direct. Local authority will usually bill L if property is HMO, or short let, or similar.

5. L ought therefore to include, in Letting Agreement, a clause obliging T to pay all or any C/Tax due, no matter whether billing is sent to L or T.

6. Some people are disregarded, as Schedule 1 provides (eg prisoners, mentally impaired, adult for whom child benefit is payable to another, students, patient in hospital/care home/hostel, care worker).

7. Single occupier gets 25% discount.

This would appear to make payment of CT the tenants' responsibility as I'm not a resident of the property and my TA includes a clause that specifys it explicitly. So it does indeed look like I was bit of a chump paying the last tenants' CT.

I'm wondering how I ended up doing so. I'm pretty sure I was advised to do so, but don't remember by whom. Maybe I asked the wrong question or interpreted the answer the wrong way.

Looking at point 4 above, it seems that having been been billed by the council I should then have claimed this back from the tenants. Is this normal procedure? Should I have sent a copy of the bill to the tenants asking them to repay this or add a monthly amount to the standing order to cover the amount?

I guess the idea of asking for it to be repaid now is a non-starter (wouldn't be too impressed with this if I were the tenant).

jeffrey

26-07-2007, 17:21 PM

Once tenancy ends, it is unlikely that you can extract C/Tax from T.
Either your AST's rent figure includes an element for C/Tax (so rent recieved from T puts you in funds to pay it) or it doesn't (so you should demand each T's proportion when demanding rent, no matter when/how you actually pay Council [as long as you do pay!])

jeffrey

27-07-2007, 09:07 AM

What tosh, IMO.

If it is a HMO - regardless of type of occupants - it is the landlords repsonsibility to pay the council tax bills.

If the landlord has exempt tenants (eg students) it is the landlords responsibility to get exemption certificates from the tenants and pass them on the the council. The council will then apply the exemption and reduce the bill accordingly.

I have tried the letter to the council: "the tenant xxx moved in the property xx/xx/xxxx. Please contact them to obtain their certificate" route, and was politely told to bugger off by the council and bring the forms to them.

Re students: I agree. Paragraph 5 in Schedule 1 to 1992 Act obliges student's educational institution to provide student with certificate re studentship. That should be handed to L (and L produces it to local authority, once C/Tax account issued to L) as evidence that no C/Tax liability.

Re HMO: also see s.8. Regulations prescribe chargeable classes of dwellings for which alternative liability applies in place of s.6 rules, in which case "owner" (as defined) is liable to pay C/Tax.

jpfinney

02-08-2007, 12:37 PM

I acccept that I boobed and paid my tenants' CT during their occupancy and didn't claim it back. It's my loss and I've learned a valuable lesson.

I have just contacted the council concerned and they were unequivocal in their assurance that all I needed to do was to advise the names of the tenants and the date they moved in and they'll do the rest.

However, there are clearly two different and quite contradictory pieces of advice being offered here. On one hand we have assurances that the wording of the TA determines who deals with the council and, on the other, some contradictory assurances that LLs where the tenancy is HMO that the LL pays the CT and either bills the tenats for it or allows for it in the rent.

My problem's solved, but it would be valuable for others reading this post to resolve the apparent contradiction between the advice offered.

pcwilkins

02-08-2007, 13:08 PM

However, there are clearly two different and quite contradictory pieces of advice being offered here. On one hand we have assurances that the wording of the TA determines who deals with the council and, on the other, some contradictory assurances that LLs where the tenancy is HMO that the LL pays the CT and either bills the tenats for it or allows for it in the rent.

Surely it's quite simple. If the property is not an HMO, then the tenants are liable for council tax. If it is an HMO, then the owner is responsible for paying council tax. Whether he then covers the cost by the rent is up to him.

See here: http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/Home/CouncilandGovernment/Counciltax/liability.htm

Peter

jeffrey

02-08-2007, 13:12 PM

Surely it's quite simple. If the property is not an HMO, then the tenants are liable for council tax. If it is an HMO, then the owner is responsible for paying council tax. Whether he then covers the cost by the rent is up to him.

See here: http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/Home/CouncilandGovernment/Counciltax/liability.htm

Peter

Better to say, "Whether he then recovers the cost either by including it in the rent reserved in the Agreement or (if the Agreement so permits) recharging the tenant by a demand separate from the rent is up to him."

jpfinney

06-08-2007, 16:57 PM

I think I may have misunderstood HMO thinking this was any tenancy with more than one tenant. On the Wansworth site (link in pcwilkins' post above) that HMO is explained as:

"Dwellings that are occupied by more than one household, where residents pay rent separately for separate parts of the property. An example of such cases would be hostels and groups of bed sits."

I'd misunderstood House in Multiple Occupancy to mean a tenancy with more than one tenant. My property is a three bed house with three tenants each of whose name appears on the TA, so I thought it was an HMO. Although I don't fully understand the dsitinction, it's clear from the examples quoted above that mine is NOT and HMO, but this misunderstanding is why I saw an apparent contradiction. Sorry if it's wasted time - Let's hope it will save someone else from making the same mistake.

pcwilkins

07-08-2007, 08:24 AM

My property is a three bed house with three tenants each of whose name appears on the TA, so I thought it was an HMO. Although I don't fully understand the dsitinction, it's clear from the examples quoted above that mine is NOT and HMO

The important issue is, do your tenants make up more than one household? According to communities.gov.uk, "A household comprises any tenants who are members of the same family living together including couples (whether or not they are married), relatives and half-relatives or step-relatives, adopted and fostered children. A group of friends sharing a house will not be a single household."

It sounds to me like your property is an HMO if your tenants are not related. Just because it is not a hostel or group of bedsits doesn't mean it's automatically not a HMO.

Peter

jpfinney

07-08-2007, 17:17 PM

Thanks pcwilkins.

Jeez this is such a complicated issue, but thanks all the same. Two of my tenants are a couple with a young son. The third tenant is a friend who may be related, but not directly. Her partner is still in the Philippines and is trying to get a work permit for the UK. I think they may have indicated that he was related, but I didn't pay too much attention because I had no idea it was significant.

So is it an HMO, then?

Either way, the council didn't ask any questions and said all they needed was the names of the tenants and the date the tenancy started. Unless you can see a good reason to do otherwise, I'll leave it unless they contact me for more information.

jeffrey

07-08-2007, 21:24 PM

Well, if the Council are prepared to bill the occupiers (of whatever description): let them do just that!
The main C/Tax problem is where Council insist on billing the owner (freeholder/long-leaseholder) subletting to non-student tenants.

pcwilkins

08-08-2007, 10:09 AM

Jeez this is such a complicated issue, but thanks all the same.

No problem. I don't think it's that complicated --- if the property contains more than one household, it's an HMO.

Two of my tenants are a couple with a young son.

They would be one household.

The third tenant is a friend who may be related, but not directly.

If she is related, then she is part of the same household, and the property is not an HMO. If she isn't related, then she is a separate household and the property is an HMO.

Her partner is still in the Philippines and is trying to get a work permit for the UK. I think they may have indicated that he was related, but I didn't pay too much attention because I had no idea it was significant.

I suspect that if her partner joins them in the property, they will be classed as a separate household. Because her partner is not related to the other two tenants. If they were to marry, you could argue that he would related, but I'm not sure of the law on this one.

So is it an HMO, then?

Only if the third tenant is unrelated to the first two. You say she "may be related". You need to check.

Here's some more info which should make it clear:

Q What is a household?

A The following are 'households' for the purposes of the Housing Act 2004:

Members of the same family living together including:

* Couples married to each other or living together as husband and wife (or in an equivalent relationship in the case of persons of the same sex)
* Relatives living together, including parents, grandparents, children (and step-children), grandchildren, brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts, nephews, nieces or cousins
* Half-relatives will be treated as full relatives. A foster child living with his foster parent is treated as living in the same household as his foster parent.

Any domestic staff are also included in the household if they are living rent-free in accommodation provided by the person for whom they are working.

Therefore three friends sharing together are considered three households. If a couple are sharing with a third person that would consist of two households. If a family rents a property that is a single household. If that family had an au-pair to look after their children that person would be included in their household.

Based on that, unless your third tenant is related to the first two, she is a separate household and the property is an HMO.

Either way, the council didn't ask any questions and said all they needed was the names of the tenants and the date the tenancy started. Unless you can see a good reason to do otherwise, I'll leave it unless they contact me for more information.

Would this count as a good reason?

From July 2006 it will be a criminal offence to operate an HMO without applying for a licence. The offence will be subject to a fine of up to £20,000. The local housing authority, and in certain circumstances the tenant, can apply for a rent repayment order, under which they can reclaim the rent paid during the period up to a maximum of 12 months when the landlord did not have a licence or a licence application outstanding. Finally, a landlord without a licence will not be able to use a section 21 notice to evict tenants. (A section 21 notice can be used by landlords to serve notice to quit on tenants simply because he wants to regain possession of his property, not on grounds of rent arrears or other reasons.)

Compared to a £20,000 fine, paying the council tax would seem like pennies.

If I were you I would contact your local housing department and get their opinion --- after all, their's is the one that counts. If they say it's not an HMO then that's all well and good --- if they say it is, you need a license.

Peter

jeffrey

08-08-2007, 10:16 AM

Note: licence (or lack of) for HMO purposes does not necessarily affect who is legally obliged to pay C/Tax.

pcwilkins

08-08-2007, 10:23 AM

I understood that for a HMO the owner is always liable for council tax. But some council's apparently only class a property as a HMO if each household within the property pays their rent seperately. It sounds like jpfinney's tenants don't fall into the category in which case they would be liable for council tax.

Peter

jpfinney

09-08-2007, 17:06 PM

Yes, my tenants pay their rent together - One single SO payment into my account.

Do you really not consider this to be complicated? I guess if you're a legal professional or bureaucrat it could be considered simple in relative terms, but I'm an engineer and the whole distinction of a 'household' seems unnecessary and over-complicated. If you look at the amount of discussion it's taken to get to the important part and the depth of detail that has been used to illustrate the points, I hope you can see my point.

Big thanks to all you guys who make this site such a great resource!

Bel

09-08-2007, 22:59 PM

I always thought it was HMO's where the tenants paid rent separtely and had their own agreements:LL pays council tax

Where HMO's are sharers who are friends and have signed an AST together: tenants pay their own council tax.

But I haven't really thought about it until now.

pcwilkins

10-08-2007, 09:09 AM

Suggest you refer to the Housing Act 2004 --- http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts2004/40034--s.htm --- particularly section 254, which defines a HMO.

From a brief reading of the act it seems that a property is a HMO if
a) it consists of one or more units of living accommodation not consisting of a self-contained flat or flats; AND
b) the living accommodation is occupied by persons who do not form a single household.

We've established what a household is but the next question is what is a "unit of living accomodation"? I think it means basically that the tenants rent rooms rather than jointly renting the whole house. In which case it seems your property is not a HMO.

You're right, the law as a whole is not simple --- my reference to it being simple was referring only to the definition of a household.

As I say, the best thing to do would be to contact your local housing department. Only they would be able to give a definitive answer because their interpretation of the law might differ from mine.

Peter

Blobby

01-09-2007, 11:14 AM

Hi
I'm letting two houses to students but my local council says that I will have to pay the council tax if they are on seperate contracts, and they will be exempt if they are on a joint contract?
Is this correct?
If so should I re do the contracts so that they are on a joint tenancy(currently on seperate tenancies)???
It does state in their tenancy that they are liable for all bills inc elec,gas and council tax!

Thanks

jeffrey

03-09-2007, 09:06 AM

Miffy

06-09-2007, 05:13 AM

What happens if its just 2 students sharing (ie not an HMO)?

Does the LL have to faff around with the council in this case or is it down to the tenants to do it?

pcwilkins

06-09-2007, 08:20 AM

What happens if its just 2 students sharing (ie not an HMO)?

Does the LL have to faff around with the council in this case or is it down to the tenants to do it?

I may be wrong but I thought a HMO was a property with two or more households. Therefore two students (providing they're not married or related) in a property would make it a HMO, if they pay the rent separately.

Peter

jeffrey

06-09-2007, 09:46 AM

I may be wrong but I thought a HMO was a property with two or more households. Therefore two students (providing they're not married or related) in a property would make it a HMO, if they pay the rent separately.

Peter

Even so, STUDENTS ARE EXEMPT FROM COUNCIL TAX- I could repeat this endlessly and still be ignored!

Rosa

21-09-2007, 19:40 PM

I let a house to 2 tenants, sharing facilities. They are not related so form seperate households.
I have now been billed for council tax, including a couple of months arrears from last year.
Can the council change the regulations so that only two tenants constitute a HMO?

Rodent1

21-09-2007, 23:57 PM

If they are on seperate ast's then i think you will find that it will be your legal responsibility to collect/pay CT.
If however they are on a joint ast then send a copy of ast to CT requesting that they re-bill the correct people !

Simon

Ps dont be surpised if this takes a few attempts as CT has got to be one of the most incompetent depts i have the misfortune to deal with on such a regular basis!!!

patrickyuis

22-09-2007, 20:50 PM

sounds like a wierd question i know, heres the situation.

2 students in a property (exempt from council tax)

another person wants to move in but is a young professional, so obviously they would have to pay the council tax (75% of £1,260 (BAND C) after deductions)

but they only want to stay for 6 months, and i know council tax is calculated every year, so is it possible to pay council tax monthly and then when the professional leaves the house goes back to being exempt from council tax because theres only student living there?

or does council tax have to be calcualted to a full year everytime?

thanks

pcwilkins

25-09-2007, 08:12 AM

Can the council change the regulations so that only two tenants constitute a HMO?

I doubt it:

Under the changes in the Housing Act 2004, if you let a property which is one of the following types it is a House in Multiple Occupation:

* An entire house or flat which is let to three or more tenants who form two or more households and who share a kitchen, bathroom or toilet.

You do not have three or more tenants, therefore you do not have a HMO and you should forward the bill to the tenants.

Peter

Rodent1

27-09-2007, 02:42 AM

Bel

27-09-2007, 18:52 PM

If on joint ast ..although house may well be an HMO even 3 storey licensable ....the T's come as one "unit" and as such you can elect for them to deal with CT as one such unit ...have hust done exactly this on a 3 storey HMO 8 let ...
Simon

I know this can happen in practice, but isn't it in regs that for any HMO the LL is responsible for paying it (but he can claim back from tenants)?

Rodent1

27-09-2007, 23:22 PM

Not any regs that i am aware of .....Legally T is responsible (re AST) ...never had a problem with this ...BUT do accept that if more than one ast is in place then LL is responsible...

Simon

newlord1971

26-10-2007, 03:23 AM

Even so, STUDENTS ARE EXEMPT FROM COUNCIL TAX- I could repeat this endlessly and still be ignored!

Hi Jeffrey.

What if there are two student tenants on the same tanancy as joint tenants. However since taking on the tenancy they brought their spouses over who live in the same premises but are not students.

The questions are:

Who is liable for the CT?

Is it now a HMO ?

Do they still CT exempt?

Do they spouses (only) pay the CT?

pcwilkins

26-10-2007, 18:01 PM

Who is liable for the CT?

LL if HMO, T if not. But LL doesn't have to pay if all T's are students, and if there is only one non-student LL has only to pay 75% of CT.

Is it now a HMO ?

Depends whose definition you use :-) depends on local council, in other words.

Do they still CT exempt?

The students are, the spouses aren't.

Do they spouses (only) pay the CT?

CT is reduced by 25% if there is only one person liable to pay it in the house. So if it was one student and one non-student, 75% of CT would be payable. If one student and two non-students, 100% of CT is payable. In the case you give, there is more than one person liable for CT. Therefore 100% of CT is payable.

Peter

smithy

26-10-2007, 18:46 PM

I have recently rented my house to a friend who is also planning to buy the property after xmas. the problem is she has told me she has received a court summons for non payment of council tax (and plans not to pay it!!!). i have rung the council and they wont discuss it with me only to say that if the tennant doesn't pay they will pass the bill onto me. when she moved into my house i rang the council and and gave them her name. does this sound right????

Surrey

26-10-2007, 21:15 PM

They will always try this on. The rules are clear, the person who lives in the house is liable to pay, while they are living there. Just because you own the house doesn't mean you have to pay if they can't get the money out of the resident but they'll try all manner of scare tactics to try to force you to pay.

Let them try...

bagpuss

14-01-2008, 15:10 PM

jeffrey

14-01-2008, 15:15 PM

I have a 2 bed house and wish to take on a couple as tenants. They will form one household. One is a full time student, her boyfriend is working.

Will the boyfriend be able to claim a 25% discount on the council tax bill?

If I ask them to sign a joint tenancy, will it make any difference to their position re the council tax bill?
1. If there's one student + one real person, the real person is deemed the sole occupant and receives 25% discount against full CT.
2. The contents of the AST are irrelevant to the liability between those two.
3. However, the AST ought to confirm that T (not L) is liable for CT. The Council might bill T direct but are more likely to bill L (= you), so you need a clause in AST whereby you can recover CT -as well as rent- from T.

TaxationPete

14-01-2008, 17:21 PM

These rules/guidelines are introduced differently across the country. Many borough use the words 'After the exemption period the full council tax is chargeable without any discount' some still allow the Pre April 04 allowance of 50% reduction after 6 months and some just allow a 10% reduction. You need to resolve this with the head of department at the authority in which the property is in. Regards Peter

Cornishman

14-01-2008, 17:49 PM

Hi Folks,

Can anybody help me with a problem I am having with a Council over the payment of Council Tax on one of my properties?

Under the terms of their Tenancy Agreement, the tenants were responsible for the payment of the Council Tax, during the period of the Agreement.

They then gave proper notice that they were intending to leave the house and move elsewhere. This Notice expired on 18th October, but the tenants actually left the house on the 29th September.

The Council have now billed me for the Council Tax from 30th September onwards. My argument is that the previous tenants are responsible for the payment of the Tax, until the expiry of their Tenancy Agreement on 18th October.

Who is correct? The Council or me.

Colincbayley

14-01-2008, 18:03 PM

Poppy35

14-01-2008, 19:23 PM

Colincbayley

14-01-2008, 20:28 PM

i believe that council is due to be paid by the tenants upto the end of the their agreement regardless of whether the property is furnished or not - as the discount for u/f applies to the owner not the tenant - this comes a close associate who works for local council.

I think that may depend on the council and even the person you speak to at the council.
I had this sitiation once and the council advised that if the property is empty then no council tax is due ( for the six months )
Besides if a LL has a property empty for six months, they shouldn't really be in the business!!!!!

pcwilkins

15-01-2008, 08:31 AM

Will the boyfriend be able to claim a 25% discount on the council tax bill?

Yes, providing that the course that the student is on meets the requirements (I think it has to be full time at a UK institution and must require a certain number of hours attendance per week --- in other words, it can't be a 'distance learning' course).

She will probably need a letter from her uni confirming her student status.

Have you thought about what might happen should they break up and the boyfriend moves out? It's worth thinking about.

Peter

pcwilkins

15-01-2008, 08:36 AM

My argument is that the previous tenants are responsible for the payment of the Tax, until the expiry of their Tenancy Agreement on 18th October.

According to http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/life/tax/council_tax.htm#Whohastopaycounciltax, the "hierarchy of liability in England" is:

1. a resident owner-occupier who owns either the leasehold or freehold of all or part of the property
2. a resident tenant
3. a resident who lives in the property and who is a licensee. This means that they are not a tenant, but have permission to stay there
4. any resident living in the property, for example, a squatter
5. an owner of the property where no one is resident.

Obviously there is no number [1]; in which case it passes on to number [2]; but unfortunately from the 29th September onwards there was no number [2] either because there wasn't a "resident tenant"; so it looks like it passes right down to number [5] which is you.

I don't think your argument holds any water, because CT is payable by the person who is living there. If T is no longer living there (regardless of when their TA actually expires) they aren't liable.

But that's just my opinion, I might be wrong...

Peter

Cornishman

16-01-2008, 15:06 PM

Hi Folks,

Many thanks for the advice and comments, which you have given me in your replies.

However, there is now a happy ending to the story. As a result of the dispute between myself and the Council Tax Dept., which had arisen during a telephone conversation which I made to try and resolve the problem of the amount which I still owed in C.Tax, the Council had then issued a Summons for non-payment of the full amount of £168.00.

I responded by setting out my case in writing to the Council, calculated how much I reckoned I still owed and sent them a cheque for £35.65.

This morning in the post, I received a Summons Withdrawal Notice from the Council. And so, I can only conclude they have eventually accepted my argument that the tenant was liable for the C.Tax, until the expiry of their Tenancy Agreement.

A smiling and better off Cornishman.

jeffrey

17-01-2008, 11:36 AM

The rules are clear, the person who lives in the house is liable to pay, while they are living there.
Not so. Short-term tenants (e.g. under AST) are not usually acceptable as Council Tax payers billable by Local Authority. See other Residential Lettings threads re descending precedence order of who is CT-chargeable person.

Ericthelobster

19-01-2008, 09:13 AM

Not so. Short-term tenants (e.g. under AST) are not usually acceptable as Council Tax payers billable by Local Authority. Eh? You're saying that on most tenancies the LL pays the council tax? Don't think so...

(Certainly under all my own ASTs it's been the tenants who've paid - where I had a tenant who I had to turf for non-payment of rent there was never any question of the council coming after me for the unpaid council tax.)

caroline7758

19-01-2008, 09:29 AM

There's a difference between who is liable and who actually pays. Here's how Citizens Advice expalin it:

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/life/tax/council_tax.htm#Whohastopaycounciltax

jeffrey

20-01-2008, 17:12 PM

L cannot force local authority to accept AST tenant as Council Tax-billable person.
BUT
L can stipulate, in AST, that T is responsible for all Council Tax whether bills are addressed to L or to T.

bagpuss

20-01-2008, 17:32 PM

L cannot force local authority to accept AST tenant as Council Tax-billable person.
BUT
L can stipulate, in AST, that T is responsible for all Council Tax whether bills are addressed to L or to T.

So does that mean that the LL would have to pay the council and then sue the T to recover the amount of the council tax since the T had broken the terms of the AST?

jeffrey

20-01-2008, 17:46 PM

The bill-addressee has to pay.
If that's L, then L can require T to indemnify him against Council Tax paid- which is why an express clause avods disputes.

bagpuss

20-01-2008, 18:15 PM

So if the council tax bill is sent to the T and the AST has a clause that states the T will pay the council tax, but then doesn't, can the council still force the LL to pay?

jeffrey

21-01-2008, 16:23 PM

So if the council tax bill is sent to the T and the AST has a clause that states the T will pay the council tax, but then doesn't, can the council still force the LL to pay?
No- in that instance, the Council are treating T as the Council Taxpayer, aren't they?

mollymoo

24-01-2008, 20:50 PM

The liable person for Council Tax is the person who is a resident over the age of 18 and who is at the highest position in the Council Tax heirarchy of liability. This heirarchy goes from Freeholder/leaseholder at the top down as far as squatters at the bottom so if your tenants, presumably joint tenants are living in the property and there is no one else living in the property with a higher interest in the property, they will be liable for the Council Tax. They would be liable even if they were squatters. The council could only chase the landlord if he was also living in the property with them or the property was classed as a house of multiple occupation.

The council will not take any notice of agreements between landlord and tenant on who pays the Council Tax, they will only go by the heirarchy of liability. Any agreement is a private matter between landlord and tenant. The council can only force the person who is liable for the CT charge to pay, if that person is the tenant then he cannot force the landlord to pay.

antonypallon

26-01-2008, 20:51 PM

One of the properties is in Colchester Essex the other is in Cambridge.

hi you bought a house in colchester bad news im afraid the council tax wallers there are a bad bunch apart from one guy called JD

they are a law unto themselves who cant apply the housing act properly... try to find the personal online calculator on the benefits website for applications and exemptions its absoulutely hidden under about 7 windows....

this bunch are bad brothers they fix the rules for their mates and themselves...
colchester is a number 9 town the number of death or endings... just add the letters up of the alphabet pythagorus style...3-15-12- so on

what is needed is a full internel ombudsmans audit commission investigation into this lot including how a recent sacked street services execs car was found with cheque book stubs torn in the glove box to the the tune of 60k dumped in their execs car park when he got the push...
sell up and move on no justice in the land of boudicaa' she tried to burn the place down...these councils are bent end of story really take them to litigation

mollymoo

28-01-2008, 18:39 PM

The boyfriend will be solely liable for the Council Tax charge if it is a joint names AST and he will get a 25% discount as long as his girlfriend fulfils all the criteria to be classed as a full time student. If AST in girlfriends name only, she will be jointly liable with boyfriend (with 25% discount). If in boyfriends name only, he will be solely liable (with 25% discount). Seems confusing I know but it has all to do with the hierarchy of liability for Council Tax, Joint and Several liability and Students being excluded from being liable depending on position on the heirarchy!!

She has to be on a full time course, lasting one academic or calendar year, at a "prescribed educational establishment" and there is a requirement to attend the uni/college for 24 weeks per year and 21 hours per week which can be made up of study, home study and tuition. No correspondence courses allowed. She must also be in receipt of a Student Status letter from her uni/college.

It does not matter what a AST says with regards to Council Tax liability, it is always the residents that are liable. CT legislation has to be followed not the legislation pertaining to AST's. The landlord is never liable unless a HIMO(House in Multiple Occupation).

pcwilkins

29-01-2008, 08:58 AM

It does not matter what a AST says with regards to Council Tax liability, it is always the residents that are liable.

Surely if the AST says that LL is liable, then LL is liable?

Peter

jeffrey

29-01-2008, 10:16 AM

Surely if the AST says that LL is liable, then LL is liable?

Peter
No. The Council are not interested in AST's contents nor are they party to it. Liability depends on:
a. statutory hierachy; and
b. Council's discretionary powers to disregard it and re-address demands.

johngekko

29-01-2008, 11:55 AM

pcwilkins

29-01-2008, 14:00 PM

No. The Council are not interested in AST's contents nor are they party to it. Liability depends on:
a. statutory hierachy; and
b. Council's discretionary powers to disregard it and re-address demands.

So even if LL accepts liability for council tax in AST, he isn't legally bound to accept liability for council tax?

Peter

jeffrey

29-01-2008, 14:22 PM

So even if LL accepts liability for council tax in AST, he isn't legally bound to accept liability for council tax?

Peter
Yes.
As between L and T, L or T might be contractually liable (and bound to indemnify the other party).
As between Council and L/T, Council will determine whom to bill.

mollymoo

31-01-2008, 17:28 PM

Students living with non-students are no longer jointly and severally liable for any Council Tax that the non-student attracts to the property. This also has implications for people who cease being students, as the dwelling will stop being exempt and the non-student will be billed for the full amount of tax payable on the property. The students living in the property will not be liable for the charge.

Students can still be liable. All depends on the hierarchy of liability for Council Tax. If a student is at the same position on the hierarchy such as joint tenants or joint owners then the non student will be solely liable as the student cannot be liable. However, if 2 people in property (not partners etc) such as tenant and his lodger and the student is only named on the tenancy then the student will still be solely liable as he is at the highest postion on the hierarchy. The lodger cannot be held liable.

If 2 people are in property with different positions on the heirarchy but are partners, husband and wife, in a civil partnership or living as if they were in a civil partnership then they will both be jointly and severally liable for the Council Tax, regardless of position on the heirarchy.

Not the easiest subject to get your head round!!

I Agree that students are responsible for sorting out their own discounts/exemptions from CT charge. I don't think any Council would allow a landlord to sort it out as signatures of student need to be obtained.

jeffrey

31-01-2008, 17:39 PM

Yes. A student (S) could be billed
(e.g. if house is occupied by S and another [A)]; S does not count for Council Tax; A counts but can claim 25% discount as is sole occupier [disregarding S]; S might be the owner, or at least high in the CT hierachy; so S is the addressee on the CT Demand for 75% of full amount).

bagpuss

01-02-2008, 12:30 PM

Wow, interesting thread this turned out to be.

As it turned out, the couple in question aren't now taking the house as the student is moving away to do another course elsewhere. We have a new couple who are both full-time uni students and they are providing us with letters from the uni verifying their status and photocopies of their student cards, both of which the council are happy to take as proof of status re council tax.

But the other info that this query threw up will be very useful in the future so thanks to all who contributed.

bagpuss

01-02-2008, 12:36 PM

Students living with non-students are no longer jointly and severally liable for any Council Tax that the non-student attracts to the property. This also has implications for people who cease being students, as the dwelling will stop being exempt and the non-student will be billed for the full amount of tax payable on the property. The students living in the property will not be liable for the charge.

I must also stress that the student needs to complete a Council Tax exemption form from the council. For often than not students don't do this and just think automatically they are exempt.

Just to clarify one point. Say you have an HMO with 5 tenants, all of whom have their own individual AST, and four of whom are full time students and one tenant who is working. Is the T who is working liable for the FULL council tax or could he claim some exemption due to the presence of the 4 students?

Common sense would tell you that he really shouldn't have to pay for the whole of the property as he has no access to 4 of the rooms - but in the minefield of legality, common sense seems to have very little to do with it. (Apologies to all you legal eagles out there)

jeffrey

01-02-2008, 12:45 PM

Just to clarify one point. Say you have an HMO with 5 tenants, all of whom have their own individual AST, and four of whom are full time students and one tenant who is working. Is the T who is working liable for the FULL council tax or could he claim some exemption due to the presence of the 4 students?

Common sense would tell you that he really shouldn't have to pay for the whole of the property as he has no access to 4 of the rooms - but in the minefield of legality, common sense seems to have very little to do with it. (Apologies to all you legal eagles out there)
The property's CT is reduced by 25% if there is sole occupancy.
The students are disregarded (as long as they produce University accreditation to prove status), so the worker T pays 75% of the full CT.

rajeshk4u

02-02-2008, 03:04 AM

My local council, will bill the Landlord if you fail to provide tenant details i.e. when they moved in and even when they moved out....

The empty property... yeah got to pay

Even Thames Water is like that.... they wanted to bill me for an empty property (it was between tenants). They say the property as to be unfurnished to pay no bills.... Even though no water is being used!. So I told them go cut the water supply to the property.... but they said it will cost me £32 to cut off! The only answer is a water meter, but I have to waste a half a day for their appointment.... So no-win scenario. So paid up! Crooks! When you have a water problem... they fob you, but when it comes to collecting cash, they are quick!

jeffrey

04-02-2008, 10:00 AM

The rules for Water/Drainage Rates etc. on empty properties are different from the Council Tax rules.

gsimwar

06-02-2008, 10:41 AM

We've had a tenant who hasn't paid council tax all year and council has got bailiffs to send a letter, and has now gone without saying a word although he was due to leave anyway. If we cannot get hold of him do we as landlord have to pay this or what can we do to get round it?

Bel

06-02-2008, 11:18 AM

If he is the only tenant at the property you will not need to pay the bill.

If he is part of a shared house (ie HMO), the landlord is responsibe for all the council tax

jeffrey

06-02-2008, 11:49 AM

Have Council been billing that T himself? If so, L is in clear.

Box On

12-02-2008, 13:34 PM

I have been renting my flat for the past 18 months from a guy who lives down south. I have never met him, but the rent is paid every month and there have been no problems. A lease was never drawn up. I got the impression he preffered it that way. it was cool with me. When I first moved in I called the council to enquire about council tax. I was told as there was no lease that I did not have to worry about it. They explained that the landlord would probably be dealing with it.

Out of the blue I get a call from my landlord telling me that I owe 18 months worth of Council tax. I have not recieved any correspondance from the council, only from my landlord. Her now wants to send me a lease and backdate it to when i moved in... then send it to the council so that they bill me for the debt.

Who is liable for this? Have I done anything wrong?

Any advice would be great, thanks!

jeffrey

12-02-2008, 13:58 PM

1. Differentiate between L's position and Council's.
2. L cannot make you pay CT unless that was agreed. No written AST means that the subject probably never arose in your original negotiations. As you did not agree to pay it, L cannot make you.
3. Council may or may not be billing L. Statutory precedence order governs who is legally liable; the parties concerned cannot change that other than by creating a long lease (n/a in your case).
4. So ignore L at this stage. Contact Council's CT Section. Ask whom they are (or wil be) billing.

Box On

12-02-2008, 16:16 PM

I have called the council and explained the entire situation. They told me that Council Tax has not been paid on my flat since 2002. So obviously, none of the tennants have been registered by the LL, no leases seem to have ever existed. They said that they have been in touch with my landlord and he has agreed to forward a copy of the backdated lease onto them and they will then pursue me for the debt. I can't believe this is legal. Basically if I dont sign the lease and move out am I liable for anything? All these other tennants over the years have just came and went... but now that they have finally caugh up with the LL whilst I'm still in the property it seems I have pay up. Due to lack of organisiation on his part I'm now stuck with this debt?

Any suggestions?

davidjohnbutton

12-02-2008, 16:21 PM

Grange

12-02-2008, 16:23 PM

Whilt I appreciate this is a large sum for you to raise, I find it somewhat difficult to believe that you didn't wonder about the Council Tax.

With my taxpayer's hat on, I find it quite reasonable that you should be required to pay the historical council tax.

Box On

12-02-2008, 16:30 PM

jeffrey

12-02-2008, 16:41 PM

I have always been of the opinion that if a lease said rent included council tax and water rates, then that settled that, the landlord was liable. If however, the lease is silent on that point or non existant, then unless the landlord said expressly rent included rates, then they were extra.

In the pecking order, I believe the occupier being a tenant is higher up than a landlord as far as the specified liability list for the council is concerned.
What the AST/lease states can only bind L and T.
In this case, there was no written AST. T never agreed with L that T would have to pay anything whether:
a. direct to Council; or
b. via L.

However, none of that binds the Council (as I have already posted, two or ten times). What DOES bind the Council is the statutory descending priority order of liability in s.6(2) or s.8 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992.

Ericthelobster

12-02-2008, 19:01 PM

Yeah, I do take your point. Although, as I said in my first post I did contact the Council Tax Office directly and I was told no lease = no bills for me. I just feel that if I had already left the property then this would have nothing to do with me... just like all the previous tennents. Maybe just one of those mistakes that I'll have to learn from, but it still seems pretty unfair to me. The council say they cannot transfer the debt to my name until I sign this lease and I feel really uncomfortable about doing that now. It seems that I'm paying for his mistake.I find it hard to believe that your signing the lease has anything whatsoever to do with your liability for Council Tax... if you're the occupier, then you're liable, end of story - unless there's a clause in your agreement stating that CT is included in the rent (which obviously there isn't in your case).

However, if you believe that it was included in your rent to the LL, then if the council apply this rather odd rule, what happens if you decline to sign this new lease? They chase the LL for the debt?

Box On

12-02-2008, 20:16 PM

Well, all I can go on is what I was initially told by the Council Tax Office. They said if there was no lease, then it was up to the landlord to sort it out and register us. Thanks for all your comments and information. I'll hopefully be able to get something sorted out. I just wanted to discuss the legality of my situation, it feels wrong, thats all.

Thanks

gemma

jeffrey

13-02-2008, 10:16 AM

But there IS a tenancy, agreed orally, even though no written AST. Did Council not understand this?

Box On

13-02-2008, 10:44 AM

I have had so many different stories from the council since this thing started! One woman told me that it is always a landlords responsibility to register his tennants with the Council by sending them a copy of the lease. Another woman says that if I'm still living there then I'm liable. Someone else asked why I was even calling them up because they were billing him, not me! It's all so unorganised and confusing. I'm taking the copy of the new lease, which is dated from february 2008, along to CAB and they said they will have a look and advise me.

mollymoo

15-02-2008, 17:59 PM

The council are wrong to say that without a lease, the landlord is liable. Whoever lives in the property is liable, even if they a are a squatter (unless the house has been deemed by the council to be a house of multiple occupation). They should have registered you when you first contacted them. It is not the landlords responsible to tell them who is liable for Council Tax (although a landlord contacting them to tell the council someone has moved in is always advisable), it is whoever is living in the property. If the Council bills you, which it should do as per legislation, you can always quote the Encon case law whereby a judge said that an authority has to send bills as soon as practicable after they are aware that a liability has arisen and if they don't, they are not valid bills. Also, there is the Wednesbury test of reasonableness. You could argue that the council is not acting reasonable after it gave you incorrect advise and is now making you pay the Council Tax. The Citizens Advice bureau should have details of these case law cases but further details will be on the Internet somewhere.

Box On

25-02-2008, 15:57 PM

Just thought I'd report back, incase any one is interested. The Citizens Advice have told me that the debt is not my problem. They called the council on my behalf and it was explained that as no lease had been presented to me by the landlord, it was my assumption that the council tax was included. If the landlord wanted to stipulate otherwise, then it was his responsibility to provide me with a lease explaining my duties as a tennent and his as a landlord. I have been told not to sign the backdated lease, as this would automatically make me liable for the debt.

jeffrey

25-02-2008, 16:09 PM

The backdated lease...would automatically make me liable for the debt.
No. What might make you liable is legislation (and Council policy).
As repeatedly posted, the parties' acts (and the Agreement between them) does NOT bind the Council.

alenuk

15-03-2008, 00:00 AM

Hi
i have bought flat BTL about 4 months ago and now i am ready to rent it out-and tenant is supposed to move this weekend
On Monday i am going to pay service charge that hasn't been for whole year,but my understanding is -there is no need to pay for council tax,since i haven't lived there.
I have checked some websites,and it looks like that if flat is furnished or unfurnished it makes difference how much to pay.
Again-when bought this flat was unfurnished but over last 4 months i furnished it -and now is ready to go.

So before i go to council on Monday,is there anything i should be aware of and what kind of questions i can expect to be asked.
I do pay council tax at my main residence.
Thanks for suggestions

ray

15-03-2008, 10:12 AM

Hi,

You need to ask the council for an exemption, Class C - The property is vacant and substantially unfurnished. Exempt for up to six months. I presume you have only furnished it today? Check out your local council's web site for more information.

Regards

mollymoo

20-03-2008, 22:39 PM

A Class C exemption only applies for the 6 months after a property has become substantially unfurnished and unoccupied so if it was unfurnished and unoccupied before you bought it, you may not get the full 6 months, only the balance if there is any.

A Class C does not apply if the property is substantially furnished, this bit is up for discussion with your council but essentially if the property has something in it to sit on, to sleep on and to cook with then the liklihood is the property will be deemed to be substantially furnished from the date you moved this amount of furniture into the property. The amount of Council Tax you pay on a furnished property varies between councils, quite legally. My own Council charges 90% but some only charge 50%. It can be anything between 50% and 90% of the full charge.

Remeber when you get a tenant to give full details of the tenants to the council yourselve to ensure that you are not held liable anymore. Regardless of what is put in an AST, your tenants will be liable for the Council Tax

mussdemi

28-03-2008, 12:04 PM

Hi There
I was wondering if anyone can advise. We have a victorian house that we converted each room into a self contained bedsit/studio (this is a single room used for sleeping, it has its own sink/cooker with a dedicated closed off shower/toilet/basin) all in the same room.

Until a few months ago, my fathers property had only one council tax account to cater for the whole property. It was a Band F. Recently the VOA office paid a visit and decided that each room should have its own account and Band A. Now that this has been implemented, our council tax annual cost has risen from £1800 (Band F) to 9 X Band A (Almost £9000 p.a)

I just wanted to ask if anyone has had a similar experience. This is a huge cost burden on us. Should bedsits have its own Band. I would prefer the whole property as having a single large band account.

I want to appeal on this on the grounds that the costs are 1. too high (£860 p.a per room) and 2. I cant sell off these individual bedsits like a normal flat. The property has only a single title deed.

Do I have a case. If there are similar cases, I would be gratefull if we can share/debate on this issue.

thanks in advance
MD

jeffrey

28-03-2008, 12:10 PM

The single (= unsplit) title for whole house is irrelevant re Council Tax liability.

TaxationPete

28-03-2008, 14:19 PM

I have come across this a few days ago on a forum somewhere. In that case the lady owned the two top floors and there was a flat on the ground floor. She pought it and returned the house to a complete residence. On inspection by the DV they seemed that as one of the floors contained a utility room not on the same floor as the kitchen they ruled that it could se self contained and they charge seperate rates to one floor. This is a rip off, I wonder if this is the same LA. I will try and find the thread. Regards Peter

bagpuss

29-03-2008, 15:16 PM

Jeffrey, am I right in thinking that in a 'normal' HMO, where tenants share a bathroom, kitchen & lounge, the Council Tax would usually be on the whole property and that this situation is because the rooms are self-contained bedsits? Or is it up to individual Councils to decide?

ah84

30-03-2008, 08:27 AM

Can I ask if all the bedsits have their own facilities or if they are self contained with their own shower.

I have 2 bedsit houses and if they introduced this it would crucify me although hopefully they would apply to all landlords and hence rents would have to be jacked up. Hence a room I rent for 100 quid a week would have to go up to 120 or I suppose tenant will have to pay their own council tax.

Would not surprise me if this takes place. In my opinion the current government is trying to strangle the rental sector with ideas such as licencing, and empty rates on commercial property.

bagpuss

30-03-2008, 19:08 PM

I copied this from this website:
http://www.voa.gov.uk/instructions/chapters/council_tax/council_tax_man_pn/Frame.htm

3.2 Properties in multiple occupation fall into two main categories, namely;

(i) a property which has been constructed or adapted for the purpose of a single dwelling but is occupied in parts

or

(ii) a property which has been constructed or converted so as to provide self contained accommodation for several occupiers.

3.3 For Council Tax purposes all properties that fall within category (i) should generally have a single band attached whilst those falling within category (ii) should generally have a band attached to each unit of self contained accommodation located within them.

Seems fairly self-explanatory. But good luck if you do decide to appeal.

nellster100

15-04-2008, 09:25 AM

Hello all,
Quick query - can a landlord be held liable for unpaid council tax during a tenancy prior to the Housing Act 2004 being introduced?

If there were arrears dating back to 2003, the tenants were all students and there are forwarding addresses readily available for all tenants can the council still pursue the landlord for an unpaid bill?

Thanks!

jeffrey

15-04-2008, 09:31 AM

nellster100

15-04-2008, 09:46 AM

Yes - 4 students on a single AST so is on HMO basis.

dleader

17-04-2008, 11:12 AM

I am in a similar situation (but in Scotland which sometimes makes a difference). I have let my property to four people - they are all friends and I have a single tenancy agreement with them. However one is on a years placement and so not classed as a student. The council have just worked this one out and have sent me a form which asks all sorts of questions about whether they responded together to my advert, do they have access to the whole house, are they on a single contract etc etc. I'm keen to avoid being liable for the CT if possible. Don't really know where I stand on this. Any help gratefully received.

Hi
I'm letting two houses to students but my local council says that I will have to pay the council tax if they are on seperate contracts, and they will be exempt if they are on a joint contract?
Is this correct?
If so should I re do the contracts so that they are on a joint tenancy(currently on seperate tenancies)???
It does state in their tenancy that they are liable for all bills inc elec,gas and council tax!

Thanks

bagpuss

18-04-2008, 18:42 PM

Firstly, in our area (South Wales) ALL full-time students are exempt from Council Tax regardless of whether they are on individual ASTs or a joint one. I don't know if this is the case just in Wales, but Jeffrey seems to think it applies everywhere and I'd take his word for it, if I were you.

Secondly, I have a full-time student who, in August, is taking our two bed house together with his wife. She is not a student. They each have an individual AST. We've told them that they will have to pay 75% of the CT because of the wife's non student status. They are OK with that as they appear to be paying that at the moment where they are currently living.

I was tempted to tell them to take the house with just his name on the AST and have his wife as a 'guest' in an attempt to help them financially, but like Jeffrey I wasn't sure of my position legal if the council ever got wind of the situation.

I am aware that she is not a student and will be living with him even if she wasn't officially on an AST, so if they got caught, I really couldn't argue that I wasn't aiding and abetting them to avoid council tax. I felt that if the tenants and I ever fell out, it would be something that they could threaten me with and at the end of the day, I'd be the one footing the bill, as the LL is always the one who is liable when all else fails.

Much as I might like to help them, I won't break the law or end up paying a lot of money on their behalf just because I was trying to do a good deed.

I'd be very careful if I were you.

wallace

19-04-2008, 17:23 PM

bagpuss

19-04-2008, 18:54 PM

I've since been told by my council that if the spouse of our tenant is non-British (which she is) and her visa does not allow her to work or recieve benefits then she will also be exempt from council tax. You live and learn.........

bagpuss

20-04-2008, 17:04 PM

I'd say so. Our council-licenced HMO's are all occupied by full time students on seperate ASTs and they provide us with either certificates from the Uni (in the 1st year of their course) or photocopies of their student enrolement cards (in subsequent years) which we then pass on to the council who then exempt us from paying council tax.

When we sign up students for the following academic year we take summer retainers which then are accepted by the council as proof that the houses are being held for the use of those students and give us exemption from council tax over the summer months too, even if no students are actually in residence over the summer. If students do remain in the property over the summer they are still exempt from council tax.

We've checked this all out with our council and this has been verified by them.

jeffrey

21-04-2008, 22:49 PM

wallace

26-04-2008, 01:02 AM

The Local Government Finance Act 1992, s13A relates to the Billing authority’s power to reduce amount of council tax as a matter of discretion in exceptional circumstances: It stipulates: (1) Where a person is liable to pay council tax in respect of any chargeable dwelling and any day, the billing authority for the area in which the dwelling is situated may reduce the amount which he is liable to pay as respects the dwelling and the day to such extent as it thinks fit.
(2) The power under subsection (1) above includes power to reduce an amount to nil.
(3) The power under subsection (1) may be exercised in relation to particular cases or by determining a class of case in which liability is to be reduced to an extent provided by the determination.]

In practice, do councils ever really use this discretion and is a subsequent reduction of a charge or increase of a discount something which is completely separate from Benefits and housing allowance? Is this discretion automatically employed by the Council when relevant or does it have to be specifically sought by liable persons through a special procedure?

kbj

28-04-2008, 17:37 PM

Ericthelobster

28-04-2008, 18:43 PM

Just a quicky - I've two new tenants moving in tomorrow and its the first property I've rented. Is it my responsibility to inform the council about who is in there regarding the council tax or will they have to do this themselves?It should be the tenant's responsibility, but as with utilities the prudent thing to do is to ring them yourself to ensure it's not your name on the bills in the event the tenants 'forget' to contact them personally.

glantisant

06-05-2008, 07:01 AM

is it the responsibility of the ll or his agent to advise that their tenant has left and the property is empty?

another quickie: there was a time when we were renting two properties - the one we were moving out of and the one we were moving in to. during this time (we were actually living in the new one) I guess I AM responsibile for both council tax bills?

Ericthelobster

06-05-2008, 07:42 AM

we were renting two properties - the one we were moving out of and the one we were moving in to. during this time (we were actually living in the new one) I guess I AM responsibile for both council tax bills?Yes, except that if the empty property is unfurnished, you would usually be able to claim a 100% CT exemption for it, for up to 6 months. Probably difficult to claim in retrospect though as the council can't verify the unoccupancy.

alidee

20-05-2008, 21:25 PM

Am managing a house which has 6 bedrooms but is not an HMO.

The rent includes all bills. I have a student interested who says her budget can't quite stretch but was wondering if the rent can be lowered as she is council tax excempt. I have not come across this before as don't really deal with students.
If for example the rest of the tenants are working yet you have one excempt student , does the landlord pay less council tax ? I don't think so myself but maybe someone could enlighten me.
Regards
Alidee

Poppy

21-05-2008, 07:33 AM

The property would be completely exempt of council tax if all of the adult occupants are full time students.

If your prospective student tenant wants to pay less, she should seek a totally student-occupied letting. (I must say I am surprised she does not know that.)

Here's an explanation from Lewisham Council (http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/13CDA4BC-2410-47A5-A0AC-00B864C54C82/0/StudentFactSheet.pdf)

alidee

21-05-2008, 08:16 AM

Many thanks for your replies.

Our Council seem to be a law unto themselves when it comes to HMOs and each landlord I have dealt with seems to be given a different story :mad:

As far as they are concerned it is the 3 storey/5 person rule and you can have a 2 storey property with 50 people in it as far as they are concerned - anyway less of that and many thanks for replies

Alidee

Lynne13

06-06-2008, 10:26 AM

bagpuss

07-06-2008, 11:30 AM

PLEASE help, this is very confusing. Have conflicting advice from Scottish council.
Daughter is a full time student and owner occupier. Will have 2 lodgers; a full time student and a low wage earner. Should she be liable to pay council Tax?
One council advice says yes, daughter liable and should make full payment and reclaim off lodger, with no discount.
Other advises only Low Wage earner liable and that SHE should pay tax and will be able to claim 25% discount.
Am trying to contact council again but call queues ................
Thanks.

In England and Wales its the second option: only Low Wage earner liable and that SHE should pay tax and will be able to claim 25% discount.
BUT, as Jeffrey quite rightly keeps pointing out, the law may be different in Scotland.

Isn't there a Scottish website that can tell you what the council tax rules are specifically for Scotland?

Southcoast Landlord

16-06-2008, 10:34 AM

Hi.
I have just agreed to let one of my (4 bed) properties to a group of 3 girls with a view to filling the 4th room ASAP.
2 of the girls are full time students at Uni, but the 3rd is a graduate and working in Healthcare. How does this stand with regards to Council Tax? Will the graduate have to pay tax with a discount? Or will the full amount be payable?
Any help or advice appreciated
Cheers
Lee

stanjan

16-06-2008, 10:52 AM

Hi

The students will need to submit a student exemption which they will be able to get from the University. This means that the only person at the moment who will have a liabilty for CT is tenant number 3, therfore, will receive the 25% discount. If you take on a 4th tenant then they will lose the 25% discount and will become liable for the full amount.

jeffrey

16-06-2008, 10:52 AM

1. Is person3 "working in healthcare" as employee or in continuing-education-studentlike status?
2. If as employee, she will probably pay the 75% CT figure (unless person4 is also no-student, in which case no 25% discount).
3. The above asumes that Local Authority will bill occupiers. It might seek to bill you as L instead, so provide (in ASTs) that each T has to reimburse you for any CT payable by him/her individually had Local Authority billed that individual. Person3 would then have to pay her 75% to you; if person4 is non-student, persons3+4 would each have to pay half of total CT to you.

mollymoo

21-06-2008, 17:18 PM

But who will have to pay will depend on where all the occupiers are on the heirachry of liability. Just because there are students in a household does not mean they are not liable for the Council Tax charge, even if they are not counted themselves.

For instance:

If all students are on the tenancy agreement but the non-students(s) aren't, it will be the students who will be held liable for the 75% or 100% charge.

If all residents are on the tenancy agreement, it will be the non-students who are liable for any charge.

AndyJohnson

30-07-2008, 13:32 PM

Afternoon gents

I have a large property, owned via a limited company

I havent paid council tax for years - i will pay eventually when i have it

What can happen in this instance? Is this a criminal offence?

jeffrey

30-07-2008, 14:13 PM

Companies do not pay Council Tax. Only individuals do.
Companies DO pay Uniform Business Rates (National Non-Domestic Rates), however. Does yours?

AndyJohnson

30-07-2008, 14:45 PM

if its residential properties, shouldnt the company pay the council tax?

davidjpowell

30-07-2008, 15:02 PM

yup. The tax is on the use not the owner, so if used for residential purposes it will be council tax. It is normally the occupier who is responsible and not the landlord.

David

jeffrey

30-07-2008, 15:07 PM

But a company cannot physically occupy, can it?

davidjpowell

30-07-2008, 15:22 PM

This is true, but sometimes the use is still residential. The most obvious case I can think of would be where a company owns a house which is normally let out as a house but has been vacant for more than 3 months. Empty rates would fall on the owner, who is a limited company, but this would not force a change to a Business Rate assessment.

David

AndyJohnson

30-07-2008, 16:19 PM

thanks gents

what would be the consequences of me not paying this tax? is it a criminal offence?

eventually i will pay, but i owe many years worth so cant pay it at this instance

jeffrey

30-07-2008, 16:25 PM

thanks gents

what would be the consequences of me not paying this tax? is it a criminal offence?

eventually i will pay, but i owe many years worth so cant pay it at this instance
You don't need to pay, because you don't own the property.
Your company does, because it does.

AndyJohnson

30-07-2008, 16:36 PM

sorry i didnt make it clear

i own the company 100%

what can happen to my company in this instance?

thanks again

jeffrey

30-07-2008, 16:41 PM

sorry i didnt make it clear

i own the company 100%

what can happen to my company in this instance?

thanks again
Statutory Demand, Court proceedings, insolvency, liquidation, striking-off.

Rich172

01-08-2008, 20:38 PM

hi - heard you can get 100% relief on council tax if property is unoccupied and unfurnished.
but I cannot find this on the info of local council - says 50% if long term empty and largely unfurnished....

Mrs Dingle

01-08-2008, 21:12 PM

For six months you are exempted from payment.After that I think its 50%.Check again with you local council.

tenant29

01-08-2008, 22:16 PM

You can get 6 months exemption after the council tax inspector has checked the property and satisfied there is NO furniture.

TraceyA

02-08-2008, 23:02 PM

Should give all the information you require on back of invoice. Or call them. Brighton and Hove have been the only council I have found that have given me false information over the phone.

mat300

03-10-2008, 14:11 PM

i have a 2 bed flat rented out per room, the council have sent me a bill for the council tax, to which i said why and they replied its my responsibility for the council tax as i am an HMO ? News to me i thought it was 3 or more rooms ?

red40

03-10-2008, 15:14 PM

3 or more people in 2 seperate households (i.e) unrelated.

Matthew Moody

03-10-2008, 17:13 PM

Technically speaking; if you have a property that is rented out to 2 or more unrelated people, then it is a HMO.

The official definition from the 2004 Housing Act is:

"Is occupied by more than one household and where more than one household shares, or lacks an amenity, such as a bathroom, toilet or cooking facilities."

In terms of the bill sent from the council, I guess this depends on what you have agreed with your tenants - are they paying this equally or are you?

There's nothing in the legislation that says you have to pay it but if they have contacted the tenants who have passed on your name - perhaps this is the reason for the bill!

Matthew

jeffrey

05-10-2008, 12:27 PM

1. Distinguish between:
a. whom the Council bill; and
b. who ultimately pays.

2. If the Council bill L:
a. L must pay the Council; but
b. L may be able to recover it from T, IF that's what the Letting Agreement states.

3. However, no 'private' arrangements between L and T- i.e. in the Letting Agreement- can ever bind the Council.

Yossarian

08-10-2008, 10:49 AM

oaktree

08-10-2008, 13:18 PM

As the owner, you are liable for council tax from the day you first bought it and for any period that the property stands empty depending on how your local council have interpreted the Local Government Bill 2003.

Many (but not all) councils will give you a 100% rebate on council tax for the first 6 months that the property is empty if it is unfurnished.

Furnished properties will usually attract a council tax charge but it may be reduced by the council, at their discretion, for a period of time.

Norm

08-10-2008, 20:13 PM

I have a property I let directly to students - the property is furnished. When the property is not let - eg during the summer vacations - what is the situation about council tax - am I obliged to pay it?

It's a property I've recently purchased and the local council are saying I owe council tax for the period before the tenancy began.

Thanks in advance for your help

Yossarian

The occupier is responsible for payment of council tax, however if the property is empty then the owner is. It varies but my council allows a 10% reduction if the property is empty. Who is registered to pay with the council?

Poppy

09-10-2008, 07:58 AM

Remember that a single occupant is eligible for a 25% discount. ;)

Paragon

09-10-2008, 10:15 AM

Perhaps it would be less expensive to rent a small garage or use your own (if you have one) to keep the furniture in during quiet periods. When the students move in - give them an option to borrow some of the furniture while they are staying there. Then you should get the six months (per year) council tax free.

AndyJohnson

24-10-2008, 07:50 AM

gd morning to you all

in my residence i have a lodger and a friend living here

does this constitute an hmo?

Matthew Moody

24-10-2008, 18:57 PM

Hi Andy

This would depend I guess on whether your friend is paying rent?

If he is, then technically it could be considered a HMO but then are you providing breakfast or are you cooking together - all things that may constitute one "household" in the housing officers eyes?

Matthew

red40

24-10-2008, 20:23 PM

A resident landlord is allowed 2 lodgers before it becomes a HMO to which the Regulations apply. But as Matthew has previously highlighted under Part 1 of the Housing Act it would be a HMO if it was occupied by 2 unrelated people.

AndyJohnson

24-10-2008, 20:56 PM

mind the gap

24-10-2008, 22:21 PM

thanks for the useful info!

does this mean that as they've been living there for over 5 years, i can gain an automatic hmo license?

would showing proof of the contracts be enough evidence to show to gain the permisson?

An automatic HMO licence?! Sounds optimistic. And what would be the point? The whole idea of LLs having to apply for an HMO for themselves and their property(/ies) is so that the council can satisfy themselves that all regulations relating to fire safety, avoidance of overcrowding, etc, have been complied with. To establish this, you need to fill in a very long form and produce all kinds of evidence including a CRB check (and pay a big fee, especially if your property is in Newcastle where for some reason the council think £1100 is reasonable). They may then send someone round to check that the property is as you have described it and that you aren't actually concealing anything.

Or am I missing something here? Can HMO licences now be bought/granted on the same basis as papal indulgences in the Middle Ages?

Or were you hoping to get one on eBay?

Rodent1

24-10-2008, 23:16 PM

Don't think you will be automatically be getting one !!

But you dont need one unless 5+ people and 3 storeys ...unless your local council has enveloped lower graded prop as well ...but seems highly unlikely you willnedd one from your decription ...call local council and ask they dont nite ..but can give a very nasty suck!!!!

The Rodent

AndyJohnson

26-10-2008, 08:26 AM

my view is that if i can gain an hmo license, then i can convert all the rooms in the property into studios which i can rent, thereby increasing the income - my sums indicate a yield of 10%+ after coverting the property into 5 studios

will an hmo be granted here assuming all the regulations are met? there is no living room or kitchen pencilled in, all will be self contained studios)

mind the gap

26-10-2008, 09:22 AM

red40

26-10-2008, 18:53 PM

If they are self contained studio flats with the bathroom and a kitchen for the occupants exclusive use, then it wont need a mandatory HMO licence.

AndyJohnson

26-10-2008, 20:01 PM

none of the facilities will be shared - all five will be self contained units

wont i require an hmo license for this red40?

Bel

02-11-2008, 14:25 PM

none of the facilities will be shared - all five will be self contained units

wont i require an hmo license for this red40?

No you wont, but you will need to get planning permission and building regs first which may not be easy at all.

ttg

04-11-2008, 19:10 PM

I purchased a two bedroom flat in February 2008 and had tenants lined up to go straight in on the 1st Feb. However, due to not taking possession of the property until 22nd Feb, the prospective tenants understandably found somewhere else prior which left me a short time to find tenants.

As the exchange of contracts date approached, I became more and more desperate to get somebody in who could start paying the rent and was approached by a chap who needed a place to rent but was going to have to claim Housing Benefit in order to pay his rent. I knew Housing Benefit wouldn't cover the cost of the whole flat so I agreed to rent him a room on the proviso that I would be looking for somebody else to take the other room and that he would have to flatshare. He was fine with this and luckily I found a full time student who needed a room and everything was sorted.

I have had no problems with any rent payments as the Housing Benefit is sent direct to me and the student always pays me on time via a standing order. The full time student is exempt from paying Council Tax and provided the Local Authority with the evidence required, and the chap claiming the HB has letters that show he is receiving a 25% discount and that the other 75% is covered by his claim for CT benefit.

I have now received a final demand notice from the Local Authority for the whole year's Council Tax. I phoned and asked the LA to state why I was responsible for the CT and they spouted something about 'Houses in Multiple Occupation' and that it is the landlord who is liable for paying the Council Tax in these circumstances.

Being very sceptible about anything the Local Authority says, I decided to do a little research and have come up with the following:

'What is an HMO?

Under the changes in the Housing Act 2004, if a landlord lets a property which is one of the following types it is a House in Multiple Occupation:

* an entire house or flat which is let to three or more tenants who form two or more households and who share a kitchen, bathroom or toilet'

This comes from the communities.gov.uk website and I have edited out the other parts which are completely irrelevant. As I only let the 2 bedroom flat to two tenants, I don't see how the property would be classed as a 'House in Multiple Occupation' with regards to the above.

I also found this on the same website:

'A house in multiple occupation was formerly defined in The Council Tax (Liability forOwners) Regulations 1992 (Statutory Instrument 1992/551 as amended by 1993/151) as:

A dwelling which

a) was originally constructed or subsequently adapted for occupation by
persons who do not constitute a single household; and

b) is inhabited by a person who, or by two or more persons each of whom
either, -

i) is a tenant of, or has a licence to occupy, part only of the dwelling; or

ii) has a licence to occupy, but is not liable (whether alone or jointly
with other persons) to pay rent or a licence fee in respect of, the
dwelling as a whole.'

Now, from what I can gather, the flat would not constitute a House in Multiple Occupation as the property has not been 'originally constructed or subsequently adapted for occupation by persons who do not constitute a single household'. It is a bog standard 2 bedroom flat!!!! 2 bedrooms, a living room, a kitchen, a bathroom, and a seperate WC.

Does anybody have any experience of such demands, or know whether or not the Local Authority are talking out of their ar*e.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

TTG

Worldlife

04-11-2008, 21:02 PM

Igoring for a moment the case for and against multiple occupation it is obvious that the Council feel entitled for Council Tax payments from your property!!!

Did you include anything in your rental agreement stipulating whether or not your tenant was responsible for whole or part of the Council Tax?

Did you notify the Council Tax Office of the date of the occupation of part of the property by your tenant?

This information from Direct Gov might be helpful

Who is responsible for paying the bill?

There's one Council Tax bill for each home. Usually the person living in the property has to pay the bill. Spouses and partners who live together are both responsible for paying the bill.

The person at the top or nearest to the top of the following list has to pay the bill:

• lives in the property and owns it
• lives in the property and has a lease (this includes 'assured tenants' under the Housing Act 1988)
• lives in the property and is a 'statutory' or 'secure' tenant
• lives in the property and isn't a tenant but has permission to live there
• lives in the property (for example a squatter)
• has a lease of six months or more on the property, but doesn't live there
• owns the property but doesn't live there

You can't be responsible for paying the bill if you're under age 18.

If you're still unsure about who is responsible for paying the bill, you can contact your local council and they'll be able to help.

The Council want the Council Tax payment and the owner is the person can finally be held responsible. In this case it would be unreasonable to apportion a single bill for the whole of the property on your tenant who only occupies part of it. If there are joint occupiers/tenants then the Council would regard them a jointly responsible but could pursue any one of the joint tenants for payment. The Council regard you as responsible whether or not they have quoted the right grounds for doing so.

ttg

05-11-2008, 00:48 AM

Thanks for the input Worldlife. There is no problem with the Tenancy Agreement nor with the notification of tenancy. I fully understand the heirarchy of payment of CT and I'm not trying to apportion a single bill to either tenant as they have satisfied all requirements for the LA to correctly calculate a CT bill. The problem is to do with the LA's interpretation of what a HMO is or isn't. In this case they believe the property is a HMO and as such makes me liable for the CT bill.

Firstly, I am querying whether or not the property would be classed as a HMO. If so, what is the correct CT bill amount. My answer would be £0. The student is completely disregarded from CT and has provided the LA with the required documentation to prove such. The other tenant, who is in receipt of Housing Benefit, is therefore entitled to a 25% discount on the CT bill and has already received letters from the LA stating that CT benefit will be paid to cover the amount remaining after the discount.

As far as I have researched, the requirement for landlords to become ultimately liable for CT bills in HMOs was born out of the difficulty of LAs tracking down departed tenants in properties where turnover is high. That seems fine. If CT bill is £X, then landlord of HMO is liable to pay £X. But the CT bill on this property is surely £0. Therefore, even if the property was considered a HMO, which again I believe to be massively incorrect based on the research I've done, then my liabilty as landlord would be for a bill of £0.

Either way, there is no reason why I should have to pay a bill of £1300+.

Thanks,

TTG

Worldlife

05-11-2008, 06:18 AM

By all means make a complaint to the Chief Executive of the relevant Council providing evidence to support the case you are not a House in Multiple Occupation as defined in the Housing Acts or under the The Council Tax (Liability forOwners) Regulations 1992.

State you reject the retrospective claim for £1300 Council Tax based on the incorrect assessment of your property as a Housing in Multiple Occupation.

Take care however. Might your tenants have arranged sub tenancies or lodgers and the Council have a housing application or similar evidence that could contradict you and make you liable for penalties for failure to register a House in Multiple Occupation?

jeffrey

05-11-2008, 10:38 AM

Is any of the tenants a student?

ttg

05-11-2008, 11:03 AM

Hi Jeffrey,

Yes, one of the tenants is a full time student at university. They supplied the LA with the required documentation at the start of the tenancy. The other tenant then received a letter stating that they would only have to pay 75% of the CT bill, and as they were in receipt of HB and CTB, the CT bill would be fully covered.

Thanks,

TTG

Matthew Moody

06-11-2008, 10:18 AM

Hi TTG,

I agree with all of the above comments made above and think that you have a good case for pushing the claim out to pasture. It certainly doesn't appear to be a HMO.

But do find out if any sub-tenancies have been created just to protect yourself first, then get your pen & paper (or should it be keyboard and hands) and start writing your rebuttal letter.

If you are right as you claim and both tenants have council tax covered and letters to prove this, I cannot see how the council can chase you for this debt as they will have contradicted themselves through the issuing of aforesaid documentation.

regards
Matthew

Worldlife

06-11-2008, 10:23 AM

Don't forget a formal complaint to the Chief Executive will result in a thorough review within the Council.

The last thing the Local Authority want is an expensive investigation by the Ombudsman..........

Good luck

nask70

25-11-2008, 11:13 AM

Hi all, i gave my property to an a lettings agent to manage this year during march-September, however, the agent closed its office due to landlord theft of deposit money. i now have received a massive council tax bill which indicates that during the period i march-September I have to pay someone else council tax.

i wrote to the council and they say i am liable to submit the tenancy agreement, but i was unable to do so; as i was away from the uk, so a assumed the agent would have a legal obligation to submit the agreement.

....do i still have to pay this bill? And is it really my job to pay someone else’s bill?
i think something is not right here...........

ps: the letter received from the council was not so polite either. it seemed they want the money and don’t really care about the agency problem.
:confused:

jeffrey

25-11-2008, 11:30 AM

You as L are principally liable for CT. Council are not bound by any contractual provision (in AST etc.) under which you require T to pay it- that would merely give you the right to demand CT from T, in addition to the rent reserved.

usemobile

29-11-2008, 21:06 PM

No you wont, but you will need to get planning permission and building regs first which may not be easy at all.

We are in the same situation, We have 5 bedroom house and consists of 4 self contained flats.....with 4 kithens and 4 bathrooms.

what to do now, If i appoarch council they may ask to remove all .....

Any suggestions please

attilathelandlord

01-12-2008, 16:08 PM

Folks please note that the definition of HMO for council tax is different to the definition of HMO as regards the Housing Act 2004.

If you are letting individual rooms in a house, then the landlord is responsible for the council tax.

If the tenants are renting the whole house on joint AST then the tenants are responsible for the council tax.

As to whether the house requires licensing, if it is 3 storey and 5 or more people, then it will require an HMO licence regardless of the council tax position.

Where you've got properties converted into bedsits/letting units be very careful re council tax. If the landlord has paid council tax for the whole property (based on original use as house) and not on each unit and the council tax dept gets wind of this they could very well say that the units are liable for council tax for each unit and backdate council tax to when the property was converted and land the landlord a bill for a lot of money (tenants ast usually says landlord pays council tax for bedsits). I've heard of landlords being asked for £30,000 or more in back tax.

Depending on the conversion, ie if it complies with 1991 Building Regs then the property containing self-contained bedsits may not require HMO licence.

You won't get one by default of time tho!

Bel

03-12-2008, 14:48 PM

Depending on the conversion, ie if it complies with 1991 Building Regs then the property containing self-contained bedsits may not require HMO licence.

What is a self contained bedsit ? I thought bedsits weren't self contained because they share facilities.

attilathelandlord

03-12-2008, 15:35 PM

Meant self-contained units.

bullseye

08-12-2008, 23:34 PM

Hi Guys,

It seems like I'm the guy with lots of problems...well here is one more..

1. I was a student then. I used a particular property where my mates were living as a mail forwarding address. Did stay there in that address for couple of days a week for couple of months.

2. Went out of this country as my VISA was about to expire and also my purpose of visit completed.

3. My mail kept going to that address, even after my mates left that property.

4. Came back to this country again after around 21 months.

5. after 2.5 years of coming back into this country received a letter saying I owe concil tax for the property where my mates were staying. Surprising part is that council tax was owed to the property for the duration I was not in this country at all and also none of mates stayed in that property during that period.

6. After receiving the letter from the council, disputed the council tax bill and explained to them the situation.

7. Council went back the landlord and has now come back saying that landlord provided the tenancy agreement copy. council is now asking me to pay.

8. I have not lived in that property for the period mentioned by the council/LL, infact I was not in this country at all. Do I stand any chance? I'm thinking of reporting this as a fraud case, again will i stand any chance?

By the way property in question is in scoltand and now I live in England.

Gerbil

09-12-2008, 05:14 AM

The law may be different in Scotland, but generally if your name is on the tenancy agreement as tenant then you will be responsible for council tax, even if you werent physically living at the house and even if overseas, as long as you remained officially a tenant for the period you are being billed.

However, and again I'm not sure on Scottish law, but in England at least, full time students don't have to pay council tax, so you need to provide some evidence that you (and the rest of the household) were in full time education at the time. If any of your housemates however were in full time employment at the time though the whole house will be subject to council tax. You should check this with the council though.

bullseye

09-12-2008, 07:32 AM

bullseye

09-12-2008, 21:34 PM

Tell the council to provide proof that you were living at the address. Does your passport have entry and exit stamps? (eg were you travelling from outside the EU?). This might help although not conclusive.

I would tell them to get stuffed. If you do get taken to court tell them in writing you will be paying for counsel and will apply for costs if you win. How much are you talking about in terms of owed money?

Yes, my passport has exit and entry stamps..

amount involved is around 2.4k ..which is a huge amount, atleast for me

EIMB

24-12-2008, 10:40 AM

I have let out my property to a couple, one of which is a student and the other is working. It was very difficult to let a couple of months ago and the tenant wanted to avoid paying council tax by claiming his girlfriend, the student, as the only tenant.

I said he could do what he wants and it was nothing to do with me partly because I could see that if they were to pay council tax they might struggle and decide not to take the flat.

He has now asked me for my address as he is only now filling in the exemption form, not sure why this wasn't already sorted. He has my address but I only know about this as he was at work and wanted to fill in the form there.

Anyway I am surprised that the council need to know my details and I was wondering whether this is standard and does anyone know whether they are likely to write or phone me and want to ask about or see the contract.

I believe they are both on the contract as I assured him that they wouldn't want to see this.

Any thoughts or experience of this?

Preston

24-12-2008, 10:48 AM

Hi

Yes, unfortunately, lots of experience of shared flats with various combinations of students and non students. I share your desire to stay out of it as much as possible. In theory they dont need to contact you as landlord; and all I can say is that in my experience, they wont do unless there is a particular issue.

So good luck!

Preston

Poppy

24-12-2008, 11:48 AM

You (the landlord) should have transferred the council tax bill to both their names stating the date when they commenced their tenancy. The council would have sent the bill to the tenants from that date onwards. It would then be up to the working tenant to claim a 25% discount as a single person (the student is a non-person if you get my drift).

Surely you're asking yourself what else is this tenant trying to get out of paying? :rolleyes:

As a landlord, I always take control of meter readings and bill changeovers.

EIMB

24-12-2008, 12:02 PM

Poppy,

I see what you are saying but my point is that I do not want to interfere and to insist that he goes down the route you are suggesting.

I keep a very close eye on what my tenants are doing and they know this so anything else underhand should come to my attention quite quickly.

He wants to claim exemption and I want to avoid knowing about it!

clothespeg

26-12-2008, 14:19 PM

I read this thread with great interest. My daughter last year lived in a mixed household of 7 people where she was the only fulltime student. The resident landlord and one other were part-time students with full-time jobs, the others all full-time workers. My daughter was the only person in the household to receive a council tax bill, with the full amount of tax (about 1,300 GBP), with a student exemption. She never had any contact with the council, therefore the resident landlord must have registered her. None of the other occupants received a bill, and I always wondered why.

Do you think the landlord registered her as the only occupant in order to get the exemption, with his other working tenants hiding underneath ?

Poppy

27-12-2008, 10:46 AM

Of course the other occupants were (un)knowingly deliberately evading council tax - especially the resident landlord who was obviously in control of the situation. I bet that landlord looks out for someone like your daughter every academic year.

One day they'll slip up.

mh1111

19-01-2009, 15:05 PM

I let a property to a tenant. His name is on the AST. The AST states he is not allowed to sub let and he is responsible for paying the council tax. My tenant appears to have sub let the property.

The council have inspected the property and have discovered that there are occupants other than his immediate family at the property. these occupants are not on the AST. The premises have been designated as a HMO for Council Tax Purposes and I am considered liable as owner for the Council Tax. Is this correct? They have also accused me of not putting these people on the AST.

The property has been kept is a reasonably good condition and the rent is coming in. What does one do in this situation?

Do I write to the council informing them of again of the AST and my tenant's liability for Council Tax according to the AST?

Who is liable for the council tax in this situation?

Do I ammend the AST now retrospectively to include these additional occupants and accordingly raise the rent to cover the additional wear and tear and the changed councl tax liability?

If a tenant and his immediate family (wife and children) want to rent a property, is it sufficient just to have only the name of the head of the family on the AST?

Answers would be appreciated.

Many thanks.

jeffrey

19-01-2009, 15:16 PM

If the AST states that T (not L) is liable for Council Tax, that binds only L and T. It does not bind the Council.

LandlordLee

21-01-2009, 18:17 PM

Hello all.

I have a shared house with four tenants on separate agreements.

In the TA's of each tenants it specifies that all bills such as council tax, utilities ect are paid by the tenants.

Leeds City council have told me that as i have individual tenancies, i am liable for the council tax as they are classing it as a HMO. They state that the council tax should in turn be collected from the tenants, this could be as an extra payment or inclusive in rent.

Although it is not a licensable property, why are they classing it as a HMO for council tax purposes? And are they able to make the landlord liable for the future payments of council tax even all though the TA states they tenants pay the bills?

It has made a balls up of the council tax, as they sent the tenants a rebate one what they have paid, and billed me. This meant i had to get the payment off the tenants to pay.

Preston

22-01-2009, 20:19 PM

Hi

I'm afraid that the approach you describe is quite normal. Presumably from what you have said the house has been assessed as a whole for council tax purposes. It is therefore in practice impossible for the individual tenants to ensure that the liability is met. For example, what happens if one of the units is empty for a while; do the remaining three pay extra?

The council could have been a bit more helpful in speaking to you before refunding any amounts paid, although I would imagine they did this because the bills were issued in error in the wrong names rather than the tenants paying against a bill in your name? If the former, again I can understand why they did this because, in effect they will have wrongly demanded payment.

In my day job we have a few hundred shared flats of this type. The best way to deal with it is to estimate what your total council tax billl will be and split it between your tenants, charging as part of their normal rent.

Hope this helps.

Preston

hunter

22-01-2009, 21:19 PM

Hello all.

I have a shared house with four tenants on separate agreements. ...
...
Although it is not a licensable property, why are they classing it as a HMO for council tax purposes? ....

It is classed as an HMO because it has 3 or more tenants in there forming more than 2 households. It is therefore a "non-licensable HMO" unless the council runs an extended licensing scheme.

munkymush

09-02-2009, 20:38 PM

hi, if a house was converted to 2 flats without planning permission, then discovered by the local council years later and an enforcement notice was issued to reinstate the property to a single house again, would or could the council claim back council tax not paid on the second flat for the time it was used? assuming that the council tax was paid in full all the time for the single house.

ryouga

02-03-2009, 17:08 PM

Just got a phone call from ex flatmate which we havent lived in same flat for 18 months, we both officially moved out start of October 2007.

We were both on jobseekers at the time and got a final payment of HB and havent heard anything until now where my friend got a letter at his new address since council knew his new address, I havent got one but they dont know my current one.

Anyway it says there was an overpayment of Council Tax to him of over £300 for the period October 2007 to November 2007.

How does that work when we got CTB and the rates were the lowest ones?

Poppy

02-03-2009, 17:12 PM

I think you'd notice a £300 council tax overpayment in a one month period. Sounds like the council have made a mistake somewhere, probably addressed to the wrong person.

timecharger

06-03-2009, 08:56 AM

Hi everyone

I've just heard from Barnet Council, who have sent me three orders (Notice to Comply with Liability Order) for me to pay council tax on a rental property I own. It seems that my former tenant, who has now fled the country, never paid a penny of council tax. I had written to the council when he moved in, but they claim not to have received the letter.

Apparently, the Council applied to the Mag's court, and secured three Liability Orders against me, even though I wasn't living at the flat. I have a couple of questions:

1) Were the original court papers served properly, if they were only served at the property I was renting out?

2) Can I get the Liability Orders rescinded (taken away)? Is it too late to appeal?

Any other info would be much appreciated.

Cheers very much indeed

Editor

06-03-2009, 11:11 AM

In order to be liable for Council Tax a tenant must be resident in the building (and hold a tenancy of 6 months’ or more) otherwise the liability falls on the owner (Local Government Finance Act 1992 s6).

Therefore the landlord will be charged Council Tax, subject to the 6 months’ tax-free period when a property is empty and substantially unfurnished.

The landlord may likewise be charged by the utilities companies – water, gas and electricity – unless the tenant signed up contracts.

However, the landlord can pass on all these charges to the tenant providing their agreement allows this – the tenancy agreement should clearly state that the tenant is liable for all these charges.

bunny

06-03-2009, 17:46 PM

mind the gap

06-03-2009, 18:53 PM

A very similar thing happened to a landlord I deal with. I picked the Liability Order up off the doormat at the rental property. I dealt with it on the landlord's behalf and all it took was for me to send the signed AST to the council. I passed on contact numbers of the tenant so they could chase the tenant. I hope Barnet Council will be as accommodating.

About 12 months later, the said tenant called me asking for me to confirm the dates he lived at the property as he'd just been hit with a huge council tax bill ;)

Good luck

Interesting! A certain city council has just sent me a panic-stricken letter asking me to supply the tenancy agreements for all our student tenancies over the last four years, so they can set about tracing them all and asking them all individually for proof of their student status during the tax years in questions! As the previous tenants are now as far away as Mexico, Australia and Canada, I wish them the best of British!

Good job I keep these things...

Rodent1

10-03-2009, 12:28 PM

Poppy

10-03-2009, 13:22 PM

Yes, it would be considered a single person with a 25% discount.

Your students probably would not want such a person living with them.

Keep it simple. Only let this property to exempt students. Or all workers.

mind the gap

10-03-2009, 13:23 PM

I have a prop which is likely to end up as 5 students and 1 prof, all on 1 AST.

I have spoken to a csa in CT dept who assured me that:
as long as 5 students had exemptions they would be exempt, also that the only discount applicable will be 25% single occ discount.

Leaving the prof with a very large bill.

I Haven't had this scenario for some time, so just checking if there are any other ways of setting prop up to reduce liability any further, with this configuration of T ?

Anyone know any different ?

AS far as I am aware there is no legal way out of this - the students would either have to contribute voluntarily or the prof would have to foot entire bill alone - unless prof decides it would be better to move in with other profs.

Profs sharing with students is a recipe for disaster, anyway. Half the time the students are just coming in drunk as the young prof wants to start their day. It will end in tears. Get 6 students!

Rodent1

10-03-2009, 16:22 PM

AS far as I am aware there is no legal way out of this - the students would either have to contribute voluntarily or the prof would have to foot entire bill alone - unless prof decides it would be better to move in with other profs.

Profs sharing with students is a recipe for disaster, anyway. Half the time the students are just coming in drunk as the young prof wants to start their day. It will end in tears. Get 6 students!

Usually dont mix for the very reasons stated!

But:
Bit of a queer one really, as 6 are all friends and ALREADY living together(in my prop), one flipping from student to prof and the other 5 are med students, most will be on placement so all "working", no issues with mix on this occ as they are an exceptionally good crowd!

Just looking at the finances to see if there were any developments/changes i was not aware of.

mind the gap

10-03-2009, 18:11 PM

Bit of a queer one really, as 6 are all friends and ALREADY living together(in my prop), one flipping from student to prof and the other 5 are med students, most will be on placement so all "working", no issues with mix on this occ as they are an exceptionally good crowd!

.

Well in that case, I think you should do the decent thing and foot the bill (or 75% of it) yourself, out of the many millions you keep telling us you earn, Aristotle. What is it to you - a few days of ebay trading?

Medical students are pretty special and may save your life one day.

Even as a business decision, it might be worth it to keep six good tenants.

Preston

10-03-2009, 23:02 PM

By the way I've just realised that this thread is all about students and a professional... I couldn't quite figure out why on earth some distinguished, middle-aged, university professor would want to go and live with a bunch of students!

Me too.

On the substantive issue, in my day job we have 10s of flats shared in exactly this way. We haven't found a way around the problem, so we generally set the rents to recover our overall anticipated council tax bill.

Preston

Rodent1

10-03-2009, 23:30 PM

If i was letting on a room by room with this prop, rent would be set to cover Ct regardless of T status (if CT applicable), as with other similar props that I run.

jeffrey

11-03-2009, 00:16 AM

I have a prop which is likely to end up as 5 students and 1 prof, all on 1 AST...

Anyone know any different ?
Yes. You cannot validly vest a single tenancy in > 4 people.

wallclimber1983

26-03-2009, 14:59 PM

Hi All,

I hope someone can advise me on where I stand. Bare with me here as there are many issues involved with this one.

My tenant was last witnessed at the property on 26th January 2009, with her A.S.T agreement due to expire on the 28th February. Prior to this she was in arrears for 2 months rent, and as such I advised her in mid January that I would be terminating the tenancy on the 28th February as per the agreement and that she should vacate the premises by this date. As such I recieved no response from the tenant and actioned / served a section 21 possession notice on the 28th February which ends on the 28th April, I have been advised that because there is still furnitiure and no confirmation of vacancy has been received from the tenant that I will require a court order to regain full possession.

I recently (19th March) visited the property to see if she had moved back in or see if there were any signs of habitation. There were none, and so there was an accumulation of mail. On filtering through some of the mail I discovered a council tax notification addressed to the "Occupier / Owner" of the property.

The possession notice is still in effect, as is the "tenancy" for the time being, even though the tenant isn't actually present, but all of her belongings, furniture and personal affects are still within the property. From a legal aspect I will not be getting possession of the property until the section 21 has been served and the subsequent court order received. Therefore who is liable for council tax?

Having telephoned the council tax office this morning to update them on the status of the house, they tried te tell me that I was liable for the council tax now that the tenant has left. I find it hard to believe that simply because the tenant may not be present in the house, but still legally resides there that I am liable even after the tenancy agreement has ended. If I don't legally possess the house until the court order has been issued how can I be liable?

I don't dispute that once the tenant has been served with the court order and evicted by law that I would then be liable. However, as the property is still furnished with her belongings and I have not recieved the keys back or recieved notice in writing from her that she has left the property, then how can I be liable for council tax?

The council tax operative on the phone (and his manager) said that I could and (they could) consider the property as abandoned, and I was adamant that this is not the case, as she could still return (because she has the keys) and collect the furniture / possessions and/or live there until the end of the section 21 / court order. As you can imagine the conversation got quite heated.

Where do I stand legally? Any advice on this would be appreciated.

Regards,

WallClimber

kikuyu

26-03-2009, 17:08 PM

I think you Coucil's CT is talking a lot of bull. You have done the right thing to apply to the Court for possession and until this is granted, you are not in possession.

As you rightly state, the tenant could return any time and if you have taken possession illegally then that would spell trouble for you.

Ask the CT Department to refer you to the appropriate section of the relevant Act. As far as you are concerned your tenant is still in occupation.

If you think that the property has been abandoned, aren't you supposed to affix a notice at the property to state that if you do not hear from the tenant within so many days you will take it that she/he has abandoned the propety and you have taken posseession? You can then dispose off the contents of the flat which are not yours. Perhaps someone can throw some light of this.

TwoHouses

17-05-2009, 10:03 AM

Ok ... I own 2 houses and had the excemption for long term building work for 12 months, due to personal circumstances the work on the property was not completed, so stood empty, for the second year I took the hit and paid the council tax on both properties still with the intention of renting one out, now I'm in the situation that Council tax is due again..... A friend has some rental properties that when one is empty he gets excemption for up to 6 months as it is a rental property that has been let for more than 6 weeks, Can I apply for this excemption? as the one property is for rental (although not complete) as it's getting a bit expensive paying X2 council tax. Also are the Council tax excemption rules std accross the uk or just down to local authorities?

I was told by the council that structural excemption cannot be extended beyond 12 months and they have no set rule for when you can apply for this again. So any other suggestions greatly welcomed...

TaxationPete

17-05-2009, 10:19 AM

They are properties not in your rental business as you have not rented them out yet so you can not claim the 6 months exemption. LA's vary, some have reduced rates for empty properties for, again a varying amount of time, some are 50% for 3 months some are 25% and even 6 months. You say you could not complete the owrk for personal reasons. Some authorities make allowances for good reasons, particularly medical for financial difficulties, but agin there are no hard and fast rules on this. Regards Peter

sherry

30-05-2009, 16:23 PM

Hi.

I am new to this site,...have posted a few questions myself..and have received great help.

Yes, I am an inexperienced landlord but have learned one thing about council tax. I was renting my house out to 2 x people, each had their own tenancy agreement. Both of these tennants, may I add, were claiming housing benefit.

1 year on and out of the blue, I got a council tax court summons to my home address. It appeared, that I had been receiving this court summons letter for months at the address that I was renting out, but obviously as I did not live there myself, I did not know, as the tennants did not tell me, and were simply throwing the letter in the bin, therefore, I had no idea about this until a year on. So to receive a court summons and a years council tax bill for £1200.00 out of the blue, was a complete shock to me.

Although my tennancy agreement stated that all utility bills including council tax were to be paid by the tennant, the housing benefit department just did not want to know.

I argued with housing benefits over this for weeks, stating that it says in their contracts that each tennant is responsible for their own council tax. I then learned a lesson the hard way. Apparantley if 2 tennants have a single tennancy agreement, then the landlord is responsible for the council tax. If however a joint tenancy is in place, then the tennants are responsible for the council tax.

I obviously had no choice but to pay the bill...it seems that housing benefits just don't give a damn about the landlord...

jeffrey

01-06-2009, 09:09 AM

Apparantly if 2 tenants have a single tenancy agreement, then the landlord is responsible for the council tax. If however a joint tenancy is in place, then the tenants are responsible for the council tax.

I obviously had no choice but to pay the bill...it seems that housing benefits just don't give a damn about the landlord...
Not quite so. The LG (Finance) Act sets-out a (descending) order of priority as to who is billed. L and T can agree, with each other, only from whose pocket the bill is payable, not to whom it will be issued; arrangements between L and T do not bind local authority.

Emma1973

01-06-2009, 10:57 AM

Unfortunatly Sherry, you got a bit done over! Council Tax goes on who is 'liable' to pay the council tax, not who owns it! The court summons are also there to decide who is liable, not to initially enforce payment on who the LA has decided is the person to pay.

I suggest that every LL who gets a Court summons for a property occupied by tenants goes along to court with a copy of the tenancy agreement (the one that states the tenant is liable for CT), and evidence of regular rent payments, and tells them to stuff it and go and chase the liable person. (well, not quite the words I would really use, but you get the jist of it! :D)
If the judge decides, and he should do, that you are not liable, then please do tell the council to go whistle for it!

As for empty properties, all the different LA's seemed to have their own rules, for Manchester they are:

empty properties are exempt when they:

*are unfurnished (exempt for up to six months since last occupied)
*are owned by a charity (exempt for up to six months)
*have just been built, require or are undergoing structural alteration or major *work (exempt while work is being done and for up to six months after *completion, for a maximum of 12 months)
*are waiting probate or for letters of administration to be granted (and up to six months after)
*are left empty by someone who has gone into prison or who has moved to *receive personal care in a hospital, a home or elsewhere
*have been left empty so the owner can provide personal care to another person
*have been repossessed
*are the responsibility of a bankrupt's trustee
*are empty because the law says it it not fit to be lived in, for example where a property is subject to a demolition order, closing order or a compulsory purchase order.
So if you were in Manchester TwoHouses, you would be able to claim on the grounds of it being empty for 6 months.

And Sherry, if its been less than 2 months since this all happened, write to your local council and appeal, and do it to the CT department, not the Housing Benefit department!

nik

01-10-2009, 17:03 PM

Dear all

I have recently found out I am a HMO landlord. I issue individual tenancy agreements to my three tenants.

Q1) My tenants are students, therefore am I liable for any council tax reduction?

Q2) Can anybody suggest ways of renting rooms in a house to individuals and not being classed as a HMO

thanks

Nik

tom999

01-10-2009, 17:11 PM

Q1) My tenants are students, therefore am I liable for any council tax reduction?Depends if local council classes T's as full time students (FTS). If property is only occupied by FTS then household pays no council tax.

Q2) Can anybody suggest ways of renting rooms in a house to individuals and not being classed as a HMOYes, not let 3 storeys (if you mean trying to avoid being classed as a licensable HMO). However, depending on the council, you may still be liable for additional licensing.

nik

01-10-2009, 17:24 PM

diver

01-10-2009, 17:31 PM

The council has classed 2 of the students as FTS and the other as part time. Therefore I felt I would be entitled to a 25% discount.

They are suggesting that I am fully liable even if there were all FTS living in the accommodation.

You should be entitled to at least a 25% reduction. As the two FTS are zero rated. Try calling the council and ask to speak to the head of benefit and taxation as most of the muppets on the phone are clueless.

tom999

01-10-2009, 17:34 PM

Have you already applied for a student discount on your Council Tax (http://local.direct.gov.uk/LDGRedirect/index.jsp?LGSL=59&LGIL=0&ServiceName=Apply%20for%20a%20discount%20on%20coun cil%20tax)?

Typically you will need a letter from student's college/university giving details about their course's.

If they still say you're liable then contact the council directly (phone/letter) to try to resolve the matter as diver has mentioned.

red40

02-10-2009, 07:04 AM

Q2) Can anybody suggest ways of renting rooms in a house to individuals and not being classed as a HMO

Yes only rent to two people or a family.

havensRus

04-10-2009, 19:08 PM

Yes only rent to two people or a family.

two unrelated people constitute two separate households and hence HMO status applies.

red40

04-10-2009, 19:23 PM

two unrelated people constitute two separate households and hence HMO status applies.

Does it, where in the Housing Act does it say that?

Two seperate people in two seperate households does not constitute a HMO.

jeffrey

04-10-2009, 21:53 PM

See Schedule 14 to Housing Act 2004 (here: http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=All+Legislation&title=Housing+Act&Year=2004&searchEnacted=0&extentMatchOnly=0&confersPower=0&blanketAmendment=0&sortAlpha=0&TYPE=QS&PageNumber=1&NavFrom=0&parentActiveTextDocId=977975&ActiveTextDocId=978760&filesize=554)
Paragraph 7 is relevant- see below.

SCHEDULE 14
Section 254- Buildings which are not HMOs for purposes of this Act (excluding Part 1)
...
7. Any building which is occupied only by two persons who form two households.

silentman21

22-10-2009, 17:49 PM

This is what I also thought, until I heard that Council Tax Depts. do not abide by this part of the law, because C.T definitions for HMO's differ!!! Apparently they have the discretion to do this. So this could mean that even if there are only 2 people living in a house, unrelated or not, the fact that there are shared facilities means it is an HMO, according to C.T definitions, which is really confusing. Any sugguestions out there from people who have suffered this experience from the CT office?

bagpuss

22-10-2009, 22:56 PM

I think the person you are talking to at the council doesn't know what they're talking about. I agree with Jeffrey - 2 unrelated people sharing a house don't constitute an HMO and, in your case, the part-time student should only pay 75% of the CT as they get a 25% discount.

Have a look at the link below:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/HomeAndCommunity/YourlocalcouncilandCouncilTax/CouncilTax/DG_10037383

The person at the top or nearest to the top of the following list has to pay the bill:

• lives in the property and owns it
• lives in the property and has a lease (this includes 'assured tenants' under the Housing Act 1988)
• lives in the property and is a 'statutory' or 'secure' tenant
• lives in the property and isn't a tenant but has permission to live there
• lives in the property (for example a squatter)
• has a lease of six months or more on the property, but doesn't live there
• owns the property but doesn't live there

The full time students are exempt.

Our council is fairly strict and uses its discretion to say all houses with a minimum of 3 unrelated tenants forming 3 separate households are HMOs, but even they say 2 separate tenants in one house does not constitute an HMO.

silentman21

23-10-2009, 10:43 AM

The Council Tax office say that 2 people who live in a house who are
1. not related
2. not students
still live in a HMO, according to their definition. This is because despite Paragraph 7. of schedule 14 of the Housing Act, which states not a HMO if 2 people live there, Schedule 14 says (Excluding Part 1 of 254). Part 1 of 254 states a) it meets the conditions in subsection (2) the standard test). The standard test, (2b) states:
`the living accommodation is occupied by persons who do not form a single household.

To the Council Tax office, the plural word persons, means 2 or more who do not form a single household. This is why they stress the (Excluding Part 1)of 254 in paragraph 7. of schedule 14. For this reason they do not recognise the fact that having 2 people only in a house that form 2 households means it is not an HMO.

Does anyone else think they are wrong like me? I would love to challenge this but am at a loss as to what to do next. The only thing I can think of is where it says paragraph 14 (Excluding Part 1) it does not say Excl. part 1 of section 254.
Have I got them here? Surely where it says 254, means this is just an Amendment of section 254 not excluding 254 part 1. AM I RIGHT HERE?

jeffrey

23-10-2009, 11:00 AM

This is because despite S14.7 of the Housing Act...
This cryptic reference is wrong. You meant "paragraph 7 of Schedule 14 to the Housing Act 2004".

bagpuss

23-10-2009, 20:11 PM

Firstly, I don't think it matters what the Council Tax office say about HMOs as they aren't the council department who licenses HMOs.

Anyway, I don't think it matters one way or the other if the house is an HMO or not, in terms of the council tax. That all depends on if there's anyone in the house who is working and so liable for CT and if there are others who are exempt.

peterr

25-11-2009, 16:02 PM

Ive read that the landlord of an HMO is responsible for paying council tax. My HMO is in 4 s/c unfurn' flats with 2 of them having a communal entrance. There is 1 tenant each flat and no sharing of amenities. So who pays c/tax?

TopNotch

25-11-2009, 17:34 PM

My understanding is:

If there are several tenants on a single AST agreement and you do not allocate rooms individually and regardless of the fact that the property has locks on every door (the excuse C/T enforcers lamely use) then it is NOT an HMO regardless whether you are letting the property out to students or otherwise. In this case, and as long as you have declared it in the AST, the tenants are jointly and severally liable for the C/T. Students will of course get exemption as long as they ALL submit their certs to the Council otherwise they will all be liable.

If, however, you let the property out to single people on seperate AST and the rooms are allocated for each tenants sole use then it is an HMO and the L/L is liable for the C/T.

The property itself does not incure the C/T but the basis of your tenancy agreement.

Telometer

25-11-2009, 18:10 PM

TopNotch

25-11-2009, 20:53 PM

No. It IS an HMO. It may not be an HMO for Council Tax purposes, but it is an HMO.

Sorry, should have been more clear - I was only referring to its classification for C/T purposes

jeffrey

26-11-2009, 11:51 AM

Sorry, should have been more clear - I was only referring to its classification for C/T purposes
Yes. Always remember that (bizarrely) there are radically different definitions of HMO for:
a. Council Tax;
b. the Town and Country Planning Act 1990/ Use Classes; and
c. the Housing Act 2004.

bagpuss

26-11-2009, 23:05 PM

I recently thought of a scenario to which I don't know the answer and I wondered if anyone here knows the answer?

If you have a licensed student HMO, say a 5 bed house, and you only let to 4students, could the council charge you C/T on the empty bedroom, if it remains locked and unavailable for use by the existing tenants?
(The AST's state that tenants have use of their rooms and communal areas in the property. In this case the 'spare' room would not be a communal area.)

Would the empty bedroom be regarded as being liable for C/T or does C/T only apply to a complete property, not just part of one?

tom999

27-11-2009, 00:29 AM

C/T liability is per household, not per room (availability of an empty bedroom and whether it's locked is not relevant).

For example, if household consists only of 4 occupants, and council classes them all as full time students, there will be no C/T liability .

peterr

27-11-2009, 10:27 AM

Hi, Doe's anyone know who is responsible for paying council tax in a HMO? I My place is in 4 s/c flats with com' entrance all occupied by 1 person each. Thanks

Telometer

27-11-2009, 10:55 AM

All I wanted to say was, that all this piece of legislation has acheived, as far as I am concerned, is to ensure that in the future I will NEVER take on workers as tenants in my student HMO's.

Does the government or the councils ever question what effect such legislation will have on LLs?

As a typical HMO will be band H, and the Council Tax for my LA is £2,500 for band H, don't you think that expecting a single working person in a house of students to pay £150 per month council tax on top of £300 rent is a bit much?

This is good legislation, IMO.

bagpuss

27-11-2009, 11:27 AM

As a typical HMO will be band H, and the Council Tax for my LA is £2,500 for band H, don't you think that expecting a single working person in a house of students to pay £150 per month council tax on top of £300 rent is a bit much?

This is good legislation, IMO.

I don't know which area you are in but our rent per room is only £180 per month (market rate), plus we pay the water rates, so by the time you take out of that the council tax, it's hardly worth us renting the room out to a working tenant.

We were doing this particular guy a favour as he was stuck for a place to live and was more than willing to pay the 75% council tax, which we warned him about before he signed the AST - but I'll never do it again now that I know that I'll be liable for the council tax for working tenants.

Telometer

27-11-2009, 15:35 PM

But a person who works knows he has to pay council tax, so you have to factor it in when setting the rent.

mmrm2

05-01-2010, 21:02 PM

Hi guys,

I read most of the very long thread on council tax liability but couldn't really get to the bottom of many varied answers.

This is my quandry.

- I'm sure my property is classed as an HMO
- My tennancy agreement states that tennants must pay the council tax.

However after reading through the 2004 act i seem to think i'm liable for the council tax.

Therefore i'm guessing that i will have to pay the tax and then charge the tennants afterwards?

Is this thinking correct? or does the 2004 act make this in my clause invalid?

Please only reply if you know for sure. I'll be contacting the council direct tomorrow but thought i could do with some independent advice first.

Thanks for any advice you can give. :)

Gordon999

06-01-2010, 12:18 PM

I thought council tax is paid by the account holder (s) except where occupied by students who can be vouched by the educational establishment.

jeffrey

06-01-2010, 12:34 PM

I thought council tax is paid by the account holder (s) except where occupied by students who can be vouched by the educational establishment.
But who, then, ought to be the account-holder?

AndyJohnson

29-06-2010, 20:16 PM

jeffrey

30-06-2010, 10:26 AM

hi

can council tax be levied over 6 years ago if it goes undetected?

the council had been requesting it from my old tenant - when they couldnt get it off him, they have now come to request it off me, going back years

can they do this?
Either way, the usual Limitation Act 1980 time limit for contract debts is six years; so anything older is irrecoverable.

jethro

17-07-2010, 15:55 PM

I was not sure where to post this question

i paid council tax for my rental property (not yet let) and was charged 1.83% of amount paid (£101.83 instead of £100)- credit card transaction charge.

I am about to put all my accounts onto a computerised accounts system (bills and preletting costs only so far). i was wondering if the whole amount counts as council tax or do i have to split it and post the 1.83% charge into another nominal code. If so which one? Also i assume utility bill etc are allowable preletting expenses

I would be grateful for some help.

Thank you

boggit

17-07-2010, 19:24 PM

My dyslexic friend has got himself into a tangle which I'm trying to help him unravel.

He is the leaseholder of a flat where he, a series of tenants and his daughter have lived over the past 5 years. His life has been a bit chaotic during this time.

He lived in his flat when he was unemployed and in receipt of benefits.

During most of this time he has been living with a girlfriend, in her house, in another local authority area than the one in which his flat is and at times staying with friends.
A month ago, he split from his girlfriend and moved back into his flat.

In the process of informing the local authority that he was moving back in, he discovered that neither his tenants or daughter had been paying council tax.

The local authority have now sent demands for most of the missing payments plus court costs.

I have sat down with him and worked out a detailed table of who was living in the flat and when, which I sent to the local authority.

The local authority have replied and want:

copies of original, signed tenancy agreements
and proof of where he was living and registered for council tax

He's discovered his ex girlfriend had not included him in her council tax payments and was instead claiming a single person discount. Despite paying her monthly more than enough money to cover this, he does not feel able to 'drop her in it' with her local authority, due to the acrimonious and distressing nature of their break up - she has a mental health history, too.

Questions:

If he supplies tenancy agreement copies for most of his tenants (apart from his daughter, who just had his permission to live there), does he HAVE to prove where he was living?

If he was staying with friends - a married couple paying standard council tax, would they have had to listed him, to their local authority as living there in order to prove he was there? Would a letter from them serve as proof? Would they be liable to pay any more, if they were already paying the full amount for two people?

Is he liable for court costs for bills he never saw?

Is there anything else that can help him?

After some disastrous years, he just managed to see a debt-free future in reach and the possibility of a bill for nearly £3000 is a major setback.

davidjpowell

17-07-2010, 20:44 PM

I had something very similar to this. I moved from Doncaster to the Southwest, and then a few years later back to Doncaster.

A couple of years after I moved back my brother had a call on his mobile asking for my contact details. Never got to the bottom of how that happened! They decided that I owed them for a modest amount of council tax still.

They did send a letter asking for payment, and I asked for more details on dates etc. Council never responded so presumably lost interest.

In your friends case I would be arguing:

The council must have been aware that someone other than your friend occupied the building. If the case has been to court, presumably bailiff's must have visited?

If he has the tenancy agreements, that will help him. I'm not convinced that he really has to tell the council where he lived, after all he could even have been at an address overseas that would mean nothing to the LA.

I'd let them have a fairly stern response with the tenancy agreements and see where it gets you. If the LA were aware that there were new occupiers and did nothing I would be tempted to start muttering Local Government Ombudsman under my breath.