Empty Property Charge being inherited by new owners?

[Snoopy1948]

I have friends who have just bought a property, executors sale apparently, been empty for two years, so currently attracting a 100% council tax premium i.e. a 200% charge, although there is some doubt as to the property being furnished and occupied by persons unknown during that two year period.

Apparently, the local authority are trying to charge two years empty property charge at premium rates to the new owners i.e. that accrued before the date of completion and acquisition of the property. I am reading that the premium empty property charge will continue after the date of completion and will only be modified when the new owners have advised the council that they have just purchased and moved in whereupon the council will check with a visit.

Is there any legislation that states that councils can charge this back council tax at premium rates before the date of completion. I appreciate that the empty property charge at premium rates applies to the property but surely you cannot be liable to any of that until ( and from ) the date you legally own the property?

[echat11]

Here's the legislation - https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1992/14/contents

If there are mitigating circumstances you might be able to appeal.

[EnglandPi]

A party cannot be held responsible for a contract they were not party too. With this in mind, I doubt anyone can be held responsible for a debt incurred by others before they owned the property.

[Snoopy1948]

Here's the legislation - https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1992/14/contents

If there are mitigating circumstances you might be able to appeal.

Thank you ECHAT11 but as ENGLANDPI points out, this link covers a lot of ground and I wondered if you could indeed quote the precise and relevant clauses that cover the treatment of empty properties and the applied premiums on council tax?

I have indeed found an additional statement that states 'The Premium Charge is calculated from two years after the property became unoccupied and unfurnished ... this may be before the current owner became liable for the property, so that owner is liable for the charge when the two-year anniversary period is reached , regardless of when their ownership of the property began'. It would be great if that point can be defined in the supplied legislation please as I understand that's the exact point of complaint here.

Many thanks

[echat11]

I appreciate your help echat11 but would it be at all possible to quote the relevant clauses of the Local Government Finance Act 1972 to save us the time trawling through it?

Thanks in advance

You don't need to trawl through it, if you know how to search for relevant information in a document, which I'm sure you do.

[des8]

Sorry to advise but it looks as if the council are correct
a link which explains:https://www.theguardian.com/money/20...remium-correct

Together with this briefing (https://researchbriefings.files.parl...57/SN02857.pdf) Sec 3.1 in particular where the footnote will direct you to relevant regulations)

[EnglandPi]

Sorry to advise but it looks as if the council are correct
a link which explains:https://www.theguardian.com/money/20...remium-correct

Together with this briefing (https://researchbriefings.files.parl...57/SN02857.pdf) Sec 3.1 in particular where the footnote will direct you to relevant regulations)

Thanks, I live and learn.

[des8]

I didn't realise either until I investigated..... so much for natural justice ... charged/liable for something for which you weren't responsible

[echat11]

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/ho...x/council-tax/

[Snoopy1948]

Thank you everyone who has contributed here! Even though I worked as a council tax enforcement officer for 23 years, retired 2014, I have never met this problem. I too, would have agreed at first sight that no one can incur a council tax liability without owning the property or living in it, so this does appear unfair. I'm a little bit concerned that individual councils can 'interpret the legislation to suit' and I wonder whether they would stray a tad to promote income, which I agree is important, but I also understand that there is substantial case law to back up their individual decisions. One point I would make is that this empty property tax together with its premiums can only be made liable to a new party on completion of buying the property, so up till then it surely must be made the liability of the owner or executor of the estate, so why is it not being collected and charged on a regular basis? Surely a potential buyer could decline to exchange and complete if they were aware of this liability, that could run into thousands? And should conveyancing solicitors be aware of this trap and include it in their own investigations? I am assuming that it does not fit into pre-contract enquiries? And should the seller have an obligation to declare the liability, knowing that it could stall the purchase or even cause a post completion claim of some sort? Sadly, I am hearing the term 'Let The Buyer Beware' bantered around far too much.

Interestingly, the case in question that prompted me to ask this question, this was an executors sale I understand and the beneficiary advertised the property on social media, would you believe, and the property was viewed through that and agreement to buy followed. So, no paper trail of the property situation as the time which of course a selling agent would have been aware of. Perhaps selling agents ought to also be aware of this liability trap and it be part of their NAEA Propertymark qualification?