Single Occupancy Discount wrongly removed

[sutton6344]

My local authority wrongly removed my single occupancy discount 3 times leading to liability orders, they claim to have sent letters asking me to confirm the single occupancy and as there was no reply the discount was removed. They even claim this to be good practice.

 

Even though the discounts were corrected the local authority have refused to refund the fees.

 

Can this still be classed as the council's error?

[ss002d6252]

They are following government guidelines to protect public finances.

 

If the discount has been reviewed and not responsed to then they can remove the discount - when they removed the discount you would have been sent a demand notice , at least 1 reminder and a Court Summons before a Liability order is granted. I cant see how the council can be blamed, especially when its happened 3 times...

[outlawla]

....I cant see how the council can be blamed, especially when its happened 3 times...

 

sutton6344,

 

Did you have 3 liability orders and incur 3 separate charges?

 

Did they all relate to a single year's council tax liability, if not over what period did this happen?

 

How much outstanding debt did your council say you had when they summoned you (on each occasion)?

[sutton6344]

 

They are following government guidelines to protect public

finances.

 

If the discount has been reviewed and not responsed to then

they can remove the discount - when they removed the discount you would have

been sent a demand notice , at least 1 reminder and a Court Summons before a

Liability order is granted. I cant see how the council can be blamed, especially

when its happened 3 times...

 

How can the council claim the liability order is for the right amount when the discount has been wrongly removed ? especially when they wrongly removed the discount 3 times ?

 

 

Did you have 3 liability orders and incur 3 separate charges?

 

Did

they all relate to a single year's council tax liability, if not over what

period did this happen?

 

How much outstanding debt did your council say

you had when they summoned you (on each occasion)?

 

They failed to apply the discount for 18 months.

Applied the discount for 18 months.

Removed the discount for 18 months.

Applied the discount for 3 years.

Removed the discount for 1 year.

 

They summons for the full amount (without the discount) including costs, they adjusted the discounts but not their inflated costs.

[ss002d6252]

How can the council claim the liability order is for the right amount when the discount has been wrongly removed ? especially when they wrongly removed the discount 3 times ?

 

If they've removed the discount because you never responsed to the review then they can end the discount and issue an amended demand. Council Tax is then due as shown on this demand and action can be taken , legally, on this basis.

[outlawla]

They failed to apply the discount for 18 months. (were you paying your council tax according to the bill during this period? i.e. without the benefit of the 25% discount)

 

Applied the discount for 18 months. (to make adjustment for the previous 18 months???)

 

Removed the discount for 18 months. (?)

Applied the discount for 3 years. (?)

Removed the discount for 1 year. (?)

 

They summons for the full amount (without the discount) including costs, they adjusted the discounts but not their inflated costs. (only had one liability order and consequently incurred costs once?)

 

I don't understand what prompted the council to remove, apply, and fail to apply the discount. What correspondence, if any, did you receive from the council regarding the discount, reminders, summonses etc?

[sutton6344]

 

They failed to apply the discount for 18 months. (were you

paying your council tax according to the bill during this period? i.e. without

the benefit of the 25% discount)

 

 

I requested they get the amount correct first.

 

Applied the discount for 18 months. (to make adjustment for

the previous 18 months???)

 

Yes plus the following 18 months

 

Removed the discount for 18 months. (?)

Applied

the discount for 3 years. (?)

Removed the

discount for 1 year. (?)

 

 

Removed, applied and removed again

 

They summons for the full amount (without the discount) including costs, they

adjusted the discounts but not their inflated costs. (only

had one liability order and consequently incurred costs once?)

 

No many times

 

 

I don't understand what prompted the council to remove, apply, and fail to apply

the discount. What correspondence, if any, did you receive from the council

regarding the discount, reminders, summonses etc?

 

Neither do I.

[revshelp]

You can not generally withhold payment pending any challenge or appeals, so if the the instalments were not paid and they took the correct steps they can probably lawfully expect you to pay any reasonable costs incurred i.e. apply for a Summons and/or Liability Order.

[DollyDagger]

Whether or not they can legally do this is dubious. See the rules on backdated adusted demand notices.

 

The problem is that maladministration has to be dealt with via judicial review and valuation tribunals cannot deal with it, though you could probably appeal a VT decision if it was based on false assertions about the law itself and this affected the outcome.

 

The law contains no provision for discount 'reviews'; this term is commonly used to describe fraud investigations and also in connection with a single person discount which as it happens does not exist in law.

 

Failing to respond to a 'review letter' does not prove that the council issued the demand notice on the wrong assumption.

 

 

 

If they've removed the discount because you never responsed to the review then they can end the discount and issue an amended demand. Council Tax is then due as shown on this demand and action can be taken , legally, on this basis.

[DollyDagger]

They cannot legally 'apply' a discount for longer than ONE year. By law they MUST take steps every year to work out whether any discount applies. A discount CANNOT legally last longer than one year, and before the next year they MUST take steps to find out whether any discount applies. So what you are saying suggests that the council is really not conforming with the administrative requirements. They cannot apply it for the following 18 months, it makes no sense. Could you clarify?

 

I requested they get the amount correct first.

 

 

 

Yes plus the following 18 months

 

 

 

Removed, applied and removed again

 

 

 

No many times

 

 

 

 

Neither do I.

[DollyDagger]

I do not believe that there are any government guidelines to this effect.

 

On the contrary, the law stipulates that the council may choose how to ascertain entitlement subject to the usual public law requirements in terms of what is reasonable. This is why valuation tribunals sometimes describe wrongly cancelled discounts as arising from perversity, perhaps?

 

 

 

They are following government guidelines to protect public finances.

 

If the discount has been reviewed and not responsed to then they can remove the discount - when they removed the discount you would have been sent a demand notice , at least 1 reminder and a Court Summons before a Liability order is granted. I cant see how the council can be blamed, especially when its happened 3 times...

[DollyDagger]

The council should have informed you of your right to appeal against their decision and if it did not you might have cause to complain to the Local Government Ombudsman for such maladministration. Pending your appeal you do have to pay.

 

 

My local authority wrongly removed my single occupancy discount 3 times leading to liability orders, they claim to have sent letters asking me to confirm the single occupancy and as there was no reply the discount was removed. They even claim this to be good practice.

 

Even though the discounts were corrected the local authority have refused to refund the fees.

 

Can this still be classed as the council's error?

[DollyDagger]

I note that a great many councils use this term 'review' in respect of a 'single occupancy' discount which does not exist in terms which appear to make it clear that they are ignoring reguations 15 and 20(3)(f). Where this is the case, their action is not 'legal' but maladministration, and could be challenged via judicial review or if misinformation is provided as it often is via the Local Government Ombudsman.

 

Councils using CAPITA and Northgate are particularly likely to put out misinformation and on that basis to be indulging in maladministration on various counts (see the Crossman list).

 

 

If they've removed the discount because you never responsed to the review then they can end the discount and issue an amended demand. Council Tax is then due as shown on this demand and action can be taken , legally, on this basis.

[ss002d6252]

terms which appear to make it clear that they are ignoring reguations 15 and 20(3)(f).

 

And on what basis are they ignoring these 2 regs ? - by checking entitlement to a discount (reg 14 & 15) and then issuing an appropriate bill (reg 20) they are complying with these regs.

 

 

Whether or not they can legally do this is dubious. See the rules on backdated adusted demand notices.

 

Which particular ones would this be ?

 

A discount CANNOT legally last longer than one year, and before the next year they MUST take steps to find out whether any discount applies.

 

The regs do not say that a discount cannot last longer than one year - the requirement is that the council take 'reasonable steps' to ascertain entitlement - issuing review forms and information with each bill as to the discounts/exemptions is sufficient to meet these regs (20e/ f).

[DollyDagger]

Thanks for your comments, as clarity is important especially in view of the amount of nonsense spoken on this topic

 

Your first point:

 

The regs do not say that a discount cannot last longer than one year - the requirement is that the council take 'reasonable steps' to ascertain entitlement - issuing review forms and information with each bill as to the discounts/exemptions is sufficient to meet these regs (20e/ f).

 

I disagree. Regulation 14 stipulates that 'reasonable steps' have to be taken before making any calculations for the purposes of billing. Therefore, entitlement has to be ascertained once a year. A demand notice /bill is a bill for the coming tax year. Therefore, not discount can last longer than a year. The original poster stated that the council had told him it had applied the discount for more than one year. This it cannot do. At a point part way before that long time period is over it MUST take reasonable steps once more. You can continue to receive the discount year after year but it does have to be assessed once every twelve months. This is the point I was making.

 

Your second point

 

terms which appear to make it clear that they are ignoring reguations 15 and 20(3)(f).

 

And on what basis are they ignoring these 2 regs ? - by checking entitlement to a discount (reg 14 & 15) and then issuing an appropriate bill (reg 20) they are complying with these regs.

 

Regulation 14 does not say that a council must 'check entitlement' to a discount. Regrettably many councils do assert that they are checking entitlement to a discount about which they appear to be confused and about which they publish misinformation eg 'you cannot be entitled to this discount if there is more than one resident'. Nonsense, as you will realise if you have ever read the law.

 

Regulation 15 specifies that the council must assume entitlement to a discount of that amount/rate (it makes no difference which term I use here). In other words, the council, even if it found reason to believe that one adult and no disregarded adults were present, has to assume entitlement to a discount of that amount. Regulation 20 is equally clear; the demand notice must be issued on an assumption relating to the future, that the same rate and amount will apply on every day of the coming year. Many councils fail to comply with regulations 15 and 20, to judge from information they publish, and issue the bill on the assumption that the same people will be living at the address for the rest of the year. A number of people, and unacceptably, some council officers, falsely believe that the law contains something called and working as a 'single person' or 'single occupant' discount, to which only people living literally alone are entitled. A number of these falsely list disregard categories as discounts and falsely tell taxpayers they can be fined for not informing about every new adult resident, including young people who have had an 18th birthday. All this is nonsense. Therefore, what I said was, I feel, accurate and reasonable.

 

Here are the regulations in question:

 

Ascertainment of entitlement to discount

 

14. Before making any calculation for the purposes of Part V of these Regulations of the chargeable amount in respect of any dwelling in its area, a billing authority shall take reasonable steps to ascertain whether that amount is subject to any discount under section 11 of the Act or, in the case of a chargeable dwelling in Wales, that section or section 12 of the Act, and if so, the amount of that discount.

 

15.(2) Where, having taken such steps as are referred to in regulation 14, a billing authority has reason to believe that the chargeable amount for the financial year concerned is subject to a discount of a particular amount, it shall assume, in making any such calculation as is mentioned in paragraph (1) above, that the chargeable amount is subject to a discount of that amount.

 

And here are the circumstances in which a discount of what the law calls not a 'single person' or 'single occupant' discount apply

 

Discounts.

 

(1)The amount of council tax payable in respect of any chargeable dwelling and any day shall be subject to a discount equal to the appropriate percentage of that amount if on that day—

(a)there is only one resident of the dwelling and he does not fall to be disregarded for the purposes of discount; or

(b)there are two or more residents of the dwelling and each of them except one falls to be disregarded for those purposes.

Demand notices: payments required

 

20.—(1) If the demand notice is issued before or during the relevant year, the notice shall require the making of payments on account of the amount referred to in paragraph (2).

 

(2) The amount is—

 

(a)the billing authority’s estimate of the chargeable amount, made as respects the relevant year or part, as the case may be, on the assumptions referred to in paragraph (3); or

(b)where an amount falls to be credited by the billing authority against the chargeable amount, the amount (if any) by which the amount estimated as mentioned in sub-paragraph (a) exceeds the amount falling to be so credited.

(3) The assumptions are—

 

(a)that the person will be liable to pay the council tax to which the notice relates on every day after the issue of the notice;

(b)that, as regards the dwelling concerned, the relevant valuation band on the day the notice is issued will remain the relevant valuation band for the dwelling as regards every day after the issue of the notice;

©if on the day the notice is issued the person satisfies conditions prescribed for the purposes of regulations under section 13 of the Act (and consequently the chargeable amount in his case is less than it would otherwise be), that he will continue to satisfy those conditions as regards every day after the issue of the notice;

(d)if, by virtue of regulation 9(1), the dwelling to which the notice relates is assumed to be a chargeable dwelling on the day the notice is issued, that it will continue to be a chargeable dwelling as regards every day after the issue of the notice;

(e)if, by virtue of regulation 15(1), the chargeable amount is assumed not to be subject to a discount on the day the notice is issued, that it will not be subject to a discount as regards any day after the issue of the notice;

(f)if, by virtue of regulation 15(2), the chargeable amount is assumed to be subject to a discount on the day the notice is issued, that it will continue to be subject to the same rate of discount as regards every day after the issue of the notice; and

(g)if on the day the notice is issued a determination as to council tax benefit to which the person is entitled is in effect, and by virtue of regulations under section 138(1) of the Social Security Administration Act 1992(1) the benefit allowed as regards that day takes the form of a reduction in the amount the person is liable to pay in respect of council tax for the relevant year, that as regards every day after that day he will be allowed the same reduction in that amount.

 

 

The Third Point

 

The law does not say anything about 'cancelling discounts'. In the middle of the year, one has to look at the regulations on issuing adjusted notices. The council may issue an adjusted demand notice if the assumptions explained above prove to be incorrect. The fact that somebody has ignored what is often a relatively offensive and threatening notice, often containing nonsense such as 'our records show you are receiving a discount because you live alone' does not mean that the assumption has been proved to be incorrect.

 

I hope this is helpful.