Home > Forums > HB 2006 Regs > CTB appeal where there is no CTAX liability!

CTB appeal where there is no CTAX liability!

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • October 30, 2006 at 5:16 pm #22992
    Anonymous
    Guest

    I am dealing with an appeal where the claimant has appealed against the decision not to award CTB as he has no liability for CTAX (he lives in a HMO property).

    Have got all the regs sorted, apart from one little detail which is the basis of his appeal. He has queried where it states in the regs that the decision he is ‘liable’ for CTAX has to come from the LA, using the fact that the rent he pays contains an element of CTAX (so, by default, his landlady has held him ‘liable’ for CTAX). Please don’t touch on the fact that his HB allows CTB contributions as an eligible expense, as he has also appealed against the figure used in the input of his rent, believing that there should be deductions made in his HB award (and, yes, he is on full HB as there are no ineligible service costs and the RO decided that the rent was a reasonable amount! 😯 !). I’m saving that delight for appeal preparation later in the week.

    Any suggestions?

    October 30, 2006 at 5:22 pm #10512
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Have just found it (CTB 1992 51 (1), for anyone who cares as much as I did when I found it!)

    November 2, 2006 at 8:43 am #10513
    Anonymous
    Guest

    You should probably also quote from the primary legislation. Section 131 of the Conts and Bens Act 1992:

    subsections (1) & (3) say that the main condition of entitlement to CTB is that the claimant is liable to pay council tax for a dwelling of which he is a resident

    subection (11) defines “dwelling” and “resident” as having the same meaning as they have in the Local Government Finance Act 1992 and in that context it is inevitable that you read “liable” as having the same meaning that it has in that Act as well.

    The final clincher comes in s138 of the Administration Act: it only allows a CTB payment to exist in a case where the person is liable to pay tax to a “billing authority” – otherwise, there is no means of payment.

    In short, he is not in a position where he can benefit from a payment of CTB.

    No such thing as misconceived appeals any more…

    November 2, 2006 at 3:53 pm #10514
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Cheers Peter,

    You have made my life so much easier with that gem of information!!!! 😀

    November 3, 2006 at 5:12 pm #10515
    Anonymous
    Guest

    looks this is all wrapped up but the surname caught my eye

    stew farrow 😀

    November 3, 2006 at 5:12 pm #10516
    Anonymous
    Guest

    looks this is all wrapped up but the surname caught my eye

    stew farrow 😀

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.