Jump to content
cc1

I paid Council Tax as a student! - ** REFUND RECEIVED **

Recommended Posts

This was quite a while ago. I've been going though my 2005 statements due to a problem with bank and have realised that I paid at least £600 of c/tax within a 5-month period. I was a full-time student at the time. Were students exempt from c/tax at this time? If so, what are the chances of recovering the sums paid?

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PLEASE DONT USE REPLY WITH QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

1. Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

2. Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

3. Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

4. The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes student exemption existed in 2005. Can you recover it? I suspect not, but you could contact the council and ask. Have you got evidence, other than your bank statements, of what your council tax was? And that you were a full time student? And who else lived in the property? And whether they were also full time students?

 

From a quick look online it seems that you can go back that far if your claim is that the house was placed in the wrong Band, but that it's up to individual councils how far you can go back if you failed to claim an exemption or discount.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This was quite a while ago. I've been going though my 2005 statements due to a problem with bank and have realised that I paid at least £600 of c/tax within a 5-month period. I was a full-time student at the time. Were students exempt from c/tax at this time? If so, what are the chances of recovering the sums paid?

 

Thanks

 

In England and Wales there is nothing itself within council tax itself to prevent a discount or exemption being backdated. There has been some argument by councils using s9 of the limitation act 1980 to try and prevent it, these are cases that usually end up at a valuation tribunal for a decison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is encouraging. Thanks!.

 

However, the council don't seem to be the problem. The university I was at has a policy of recording what it calls "Continuing" postgrad students as part-time even when they are not and sending that information on to the council. This issue is apparently ongoing even after all these years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you can prove orherwise so why is that aproblem?


PLEASE DONT USE REPLY WITH QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

1. Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

2. Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

3. Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

4. The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The university tell the council that a student on continuation status is effectively a part time student even though that was not the case. I was studying more than full time hours. The council require proof from the university of full time student status. The uni give you a continuation status sheet to give them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue you have is that it is the course which defines whether or not you qualify, not the actual hours of study undertaken. Off the top of my head, it's para 4(1) of Part 2 of Schedule 1 of the Council Tax (Discount Disregards) Order 1992 you need - bearing in mind that para 4 was amended on 2011 so, I think, it;s now 4(1)(a), (b)(i) and (ii) rather than 4(1)(a),(b) and © which sets the hours requirement but the comments made in Jagoo v Bristol City sums up a situation similar to yours:

 

(Jagoo's course required 20 hours p/w but she did more than that due to her disability - the court found that disability was immaterial, the wording of the legislation in para 4(1)(b)(ii) was the deciding factor.)

"Secondly, the legislation applies or withholds the student exemption on the basis of the normal requirements of the course. On the (limited) evidence in this case, the normal requirements of the course were for 20 hours of study per week. The extra support to which the Appellant was entitled was not a requirement of her as an individual, still less one of the normal requirements of the course. Even assuming that in every other respect the Appellant might be able to bring herself within the terms of paragraph 4, she was accordingly prevented by paragraph 4(1)(b)(ii) from being a person undertaking "a full-time course of education". The Respondent (and the VTE) did not treat her differently from other students on the same course: she, like her fellow-students, was treated as a person undertaking a part-time course. Like her, other students were so treated even if they in fact devoted more than 21 hours per week to their studies"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Off the top of my head, it's para 4(1) of Part 2 of Schedule 1 of the Council Tax (Discount Disregards) Order 1992 you need - bearing in mind that para 4 was amended on 2011 so, I think, it;s now 4(1)(a), (b)(i) and (ii) rather than 4(1)(a),(b) and © which sets the hours requirement

 

. ……...:-):-):-):-):-)

 

 

 

The issue you have is that it is the course which defines whether or not you qualify, not the actual hours of study undertaken. Off the top of my head, it's para 4(1) of Part 2 of Schedule 1 of the Council Tax (Discount Disregards) Order 1992 you need - bearing in mind that para 4 was amended on 2011 so, I think, it;s now 4(1)(a), (b)(i) and (ii) rather than 4(1)(a),(b) and © which sets the hours requirement but the comments made in Jagoo v Bristol City sums up a situation similar to yours:

 

(Jagoo's course required 20 hours p/w but she did more than that due to her disability - the court found that disability was immaterial, the wording of the legislation in para 4(1)(b)(ii) was the deciding factor.)

 

 

I didn't know that. Probably not relevant here, but I wonder how they decide how many hours a week are "the normal requirements" of a course for post-graduate research degrees? Studying for PhD for example. Just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I didn't know that. Probably not relevant here, but I wonder how they decide how many hours a week are "the normal requirements" of a course for post-graduate research degrees? Studying for PhD for example. Just curious.

It has caused issues in the past in respect of council tax and on the case of Feller it was accepted that the student was clearly undertaking more than 21 hours,even though there was no specific hours written to the PhD requirements (the council conceded that 21hrs+ for a PhD course would be reasonable). The problem with Feller is that Judge seemed to step over the full reasoning for stating the hours requirement was met, he never really went in to why he thought the course meet the full-time hours requirement, even though on the face of it it doesn't. I know there are some tribunals who have bypassed Feller by distinguishing the case, presumably to bypass that argument.

 

In Jagoo, which was a degree course, her course set the hours so there was something to relate to. Her required hours were set at 20, but she was doing 21+ on the basis she needed extra time due to a disability. The court held that it was course description which mattered, and that didn't require 21+ hrs (even if she did more hours) so she did not qualify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the college register you as a full time student so that is what you are even if staying at home writing up. Work behind the union bar to earn a few bob? so what. If it is your 15th year of writing up then the council may well wnat to know about your hours and what else you are doing with your time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey glad we could help

 

please consider a donation to keep us here.

 

dx


PLEASE DONT USE REPLY WITH QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

1. Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

2. Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

3. Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

4. The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:yo::yo:

PLEASE DONT USE REPLY WITH QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

1. Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

2. Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

3. Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

4. The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please fill in your quit date here

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?




  • Tweets

  • Our picks

    • This is a bit of a lengthy one but I’ll summerise best as possible.
       
      THIS IS HOW THE PHONECALL WENT 
       
      I was contacted by future comms by phone, they stated that they could beat any phone contract I have , (I am a limited company but just myself that needs a business phone and I am the only worker) 
      I told future comms my deal, £110 per month with a phone and a virtual landline, they confirmed that they could beat that, £90 per month with a phone , virtual landline  they also confirmed they would pay Vodafone (previous provider) the termination fee. As I am in business, naturally I was open to making a deal. So we proceeded. 
      Future comms then revealed that the contract would be with PLAN.COM and the airtime would be provided by 02, I instantly told them that this would break the deal as I have poor 02 signal in the house where I live as my partner is on 02 and constantly complaining about bad signal
      the salesman assured me he would send a signal booster box out with the phone so I would have perfect signal.
      so far so good.....
      i then explained this is the only mobile phone I use for business and pleasure, so therefore I didn’t want any disconnection time in the slightest between the switchover from Vodafone to 02
      the salesman then confirmed that the existing phone would only be disconnected once the new phone was switched on.
      so far so good....
      • 14 replies
    • I was talked into signing up with Future Comms (future-comms.co.uk) who cold-called me to change my mobile contract to them, via 02, rather than EE. I have a small business (only me!) and it's a business contract. True, the 4G network is better for my area. This company seemed to be a marketing set-up for various telecoms companies, so I assumed anything I signed would be with 02 and didn't think it might be a problem.
       
      They sent an email whilst I was on the phone to set up the direct debit mandate with my bank which I signed electronically. That was the first, of many, problems I found. Apparently THAT was my contract, binding me to 3 years and no 'cooling off' period, because I was a 'business' (meaning any consumer rights did not apply). When I subsequently asked in writing for a copy of my contract, that is what they sent - when I argued it was a DD mandate they insisted it was my contract!
       
      2 days later they asked for my phone details to get it unlocked which I sent. 10 days later, EE closed my account, so I changed the SIM card to 02 that had come a few days before. No network! They had done nothing about unlocking it. Fortunately I was lucky with EE who managed to give me the right codes, rather than the usual 10 days to go through Samsung.
       
      By this time I was suspicious of their set-up and wanted to cancel. As I said earlier, I found myself trapped into a 3 year contract with no 14 day cooling off period (they don't offer that). Promises to deal with my complaints never happened, promised return calls neither....and on and on.
       
      Ofcom's rules apply to consumers and small businesses (under 10 employees), yet this shower don't acknowledge that. They just repeat and repeat that I am a business so it doesn't apply. To cancel the contract I have to pay the full 3 year's fees!!
       
      I would like to know if others have had similar experiences? Or does anyone know how I can maybe declare the 'contract' unenforceable? I have never before been locked into something without a clear written contract, with t&c's! And, yes, I have asked, and yes, I have been ignored.
      • 84 replies
    • Future comms!. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/415706-future-comms/
      • 10 replies
    • A shocking story of domestic and economic abuse compounded by @BarclaysUKHelp ‏ bank complicity – coming soon @A_Gentle_Woman. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/415737-a-shocking-story-of-domestic-and-economic-abuse-compounded-by-barclaysukhelp-%E2%80%8F-bank-complicity-%E2%80%93-coming-soon-a_gentle_woman/
      • 0 replies
×
×
  • Create New...