Council tax bill

Author
Discussion

torqueofthedevil

Original Poster:

2,074 posts

178 months

Friday 17th February 2017
quotequote all
A mate moved out from a rental where he had been living with his girlfriend - whilst there they had a joint account paying council tax. When he left, the joint account was closed but his name remained on some council tax documentation as living there apparently. Council get in touch with him 3 years later saying there is a 1000 bill outstanding - turns out its after he's left. They've told him that between them they have to pay it, and if she won't pay, he needs to because it's been so long it will go to court and they will both get in trouble for it! The ex will not entertain paying a penny.

Is the person on the phone telling him this correct? It seems doubtful to me, he should be able to prove moving out with bills etc from his new house. Just because his name was on something before doesn't mean he has ongoing responsibility for it.

Thanks

torqueofthedevil

Original Poster:

2,074 posts

178 months

Friday 17th February 2017
quotequote all
Thanks for all the comments - yes they did warn of custodial sentences (seems a bit OTT at this point - it's the council who have taken ages finding him dispite he lives in same town paying council tax nearby!)

Sorry if I didn't make it clear, the ex girlfriend carried on living at the house but stopped paying council tax so the bill is for the time only she was there.

torqueofthedevil

Original Poster:

2,074 posts

178 months

Friday 17th February 2017
quotequote all
Yeah he was - I don't understand. How he is viable. You don't need to notify council when you stop living somewhere, you just stop paying. Just because he was one of the last known people to be there why does he owe for a time he wasn't there?

torqueofthedevil

Original Poster:

2,074 posts

178 months

Saturday 18th February 2017
quotequote all
PurpleMoonlight said:
If he was still party to the Lease then he is jointly liable for the Rates regardless of the fact he was not in occupation.
Of all the replies, unfortunately i suspect this is going to be the stance actually.