Change in Council Tax Liability – Late notified change

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
  • #22501

    I’ve tried to bring up an old thread on the other board but no replies so far so thought I would start the discussion here. A partner or non dependent moves in and it affects the SPD, can we award increased CTB based on the higher CT costs regardless of whether they notified the change within 1 month? I realise that a change in the amount of CT payable is not a notified change but the person moving in is notifiable. The amount of CT would not have changed except that a person has joined the household which was not notified. I am getting arguments from both sides here so any comments would be appreciated.


    Could this have been the discussion you were looking for?

    I still maintain my position from my post in this thread.

    sold property now rent same property


    Thanks for that.
    Is there guidance anywhere on what constitutes one change or more than one change.
    I have read A38/2001 which seems pretty clear in relation to Child Benefit being two changes, a change in income and a change in household but doesn’t discuss whether this applies to all other changes, e.g partner moving in / out, non dependent moving in / out.

    I have to apologise if this is a straight forward question but I wasn’t in benefits when these changes were bought in so missed all the discussion at the time and the guidance I have read just doesn’t seem to be very clear on how this is applied in practice.


    My feeling is that where the Regs make specific provision for two different kinds of change, they should not be conflated. In CTB, there are different paragraphs in Reg 67 governing the effective date of:

    – a change in the amount of tax
    – a change in discount or disability reduction
    – arrival of a partner
    – death of/separation from a partner

    In many cases, the latter two will coincide with the former, and the effective date of both will almost certainly be the same, but the Regs are clear: two separate changes.

    The arrival or departure of a non-dependant is a change that will nearly always affect the amount of CTB, but will often not affect the amount of CT payable (because there are at least two other people in the household). Therefore the specific rules on a change in the amount of tax or discount cannot cover all non-dep scenarios. It follows that the arrival/departure of a non-dep, together with the immediate non-dep deduction implications, must fall under the generality of Reg 67(1). Any “linked” change in the amount of discount, if it happens, must be a separate change of circumstance.

    In the language of adjudication, as regards the amount of tax eligible for benefit the presence or absence of a non-dependant is a secondary fact which influences the primary fact of whether there is a discount. CTB decision makers are only concerned with primary facts – how much tax is this person liable to pay, and should there be a non-dep deduction from it? If the amount of the discount changes, that is a change in circumstance affecting the primary fact of tax liability; if a non-dep leaves that is a change of circumstance affecting the primary facts that govern non-dep deductions.


    Your argument is convincing but I can’t seem to transfer it to the Child Benefit scenario.

    The regs do not have separate provisions for a change to the household and a change to the income where it is a child joining the household but the circular clearly states these should be treated as two changes.


    I think the Child Benefit scenario is actually more straightforward, because the birth of the child and subsequent payment of Child Benefit are easily identified as separate events. If a claimant telephones you from the labour ward to say she has had a child, that’s £50-odd on the applicable amount for starters. Later on, Child Benefit will come through and that’s a further change of circumstance.

    Child Benefit doesn’t flow automatically from the birth of a child – the person needs to claim it. Having a child means that they will probably qualify for Child Benefit, but it’s still a separate event.


    Sorry to bring this up again but I was convinced until I was recently shown the following in A10/2005

    Should associated changes be counted separately or as one change for example
     customer notifies birth of baby and award of child benefit
     addition to the household results in a change to the rent officer determination
     customer’s partner who is working leaves the household and therefore the income of the household changes
    In these examples there is a clear association between the changes. They should be treated as one change.”

    How can the changes be treated separaetly to establish the effective date of the change but as one change for change of circumstances statistics?

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.