Council Tax backdated to 2001-2003

[NewportPag]

Hello everyone,

My girlfriend's parents have recently received a letter from Hounslow council asking for payment for council tax dating from 2001-2002.
It is not for their current house, although they still live in Hounslow.

I find it very odd that a council would chase up such an old payment. They rang up the council who claimed to have sent several letters in the past, however they never received any of them. I'm in no doubt that they didn't. They are sure they have always paid their council tax, but they don't have bank statements going that far back, and they phoned up their bank who said they don't keep records that old.

From a quick search, it looks like the council wouldn't be able to backdate more than 6 years. Would anyone have any advice?

Thanks in advance
James

[anonymous-user]

There is no legal limit on how far back the council can or cannot backdate. The six year myth is popular but probably comes from the fact that no longer than several years is reasonable practice. However, the council will struggle to enforce it. Is it worth their legal troubles to chase it in court? Probably not in their interest. However, you never know how far some councils will go to fill their coffers. If it did go to court it would probably be thrown out as it has been so long and it would also bring media attention to their incompetence. Do they want that? Is it worth the public backlash and unwanted spot light?! Again you never know. Rather than take the heat they almost always outsource it to a debt recovery firm.

It would therefore be in her interest to pay the council tax if the council pass it on to a debt recovery company (baliffs):

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2012/aug/31/chas...

Edited by Super_G on Wednesday 3rd March 14:58

Edited by Super_G on Wednesday 3rd March 15:35

[randlemarcus]

Super_G said:

Is it worth the public backlash and unwanted spot light?!

Hands up if we think that they will have thought about that

[anonymous-user]

randlemarcus said:

Super_G said:

Is it worth the public backlash and unwanted spot light?!

Hands up if we think that they will have thought about that

Hahahahaha

[NewportPag]

Super_G said:

There is no legal limit on how far back the council can or cannot backdate. The six year myth is popular but probably comes from the fact that no longer than several years is reasonable practice. However, the council will struggle to enforce it. Is it worth their legal troubles to chase it in court? Probably not in their interest. However, you never know how far some councils will go to fill their coffers. If it did go to court it would probably be thrown out as it has been so long and it would also bring media attention to their incompetence. Do they want that? Is it worth the public backlash and unwanted spot light?! Again you never know. Rather than take the heat they almost always outsource it to a debt recovery firm.

It would therefore be in her interest to pay the council tax if the council pass it on to a debt recovery company (baliffs):

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2012/aug/31/chas...

Edited by Super_G on Wednesday 3rd March 14:58

Edited by Super_G on Wednesday 3rd March 15:35

Thanks for your reply, I am quite hopefully that the council will backdown when they actually think about how chasing up a 20 year old debt looks!

Surely a bailiff would think twice before taking on such an old debt.

[Starfighter]

A letter straight back to any debt collector stating that the debt is in dispute should deal with that.

[anonymous-user]

You could push back and see what happens but if it goes to a bailiff then it’s not worth the drama of it going Pete Tong. Bailiffs have more rights/legal powers to enforce debt collection. Often councils sell debt off to reprocessing companies. The more you delay the bailiff the more interest added and higher the chance of legal proceedings.

Link may be of use: https://www.iva-advice.co/council-tax-arrears.html

[bgunn]

NewportPag said:

Hello everyone,

My girlfriend's parents have recently received a letter from Hounslow council asking for payment for council tax dating from 2001-2002.
It is not for their current house, although they still live in Hounslow.

I find it very odd that a council would chase up such an old payment. They rang up the council who claimed to have sent several letters in the past, however they never received any of them. I'm in no doubt that they didn't. They are sure they have always paid their council tax, but they don't have bank statements going that far back, and they phoned up their bank who said they don't keep records that old.

From a quick search, it looks like the council wouldn't be able to backdate more than 6 years. Would anyone have any advice?

Thanks in advance
James

Council tax debt has a statute of limitations on it. Let it go to court, they won't get a liability order on it, and it'll get thrown out. Bear in mind the council has to secure a liability order on the debt first, then and only then can they start recovery action (attachment of earnings, benefit, or involve bailiffs). It can't just suddenly be passed to a debt collection agency.

Why is there a new debt - loss of a discount or exemption? The bill will (usually) say so.

Edited by bgunn on Thursday 4th March 19:49

[Simpo Two]

Super_G said:

You could push back and see what happens but if it goes to a bailiff then it’s not worth the drama of it going Pete Tong. Bailiffs have more rights/legal powers to enforce debt collection. Often councils sell debt off to reprocessing companies. The more you delay the bailiff the more interest added and higher the chance of legal proceedings.

Link may be of use: https://www.iva-advice.co/council-tax-arrears.html

My understanding is that bailiffs only get involved after a court case has been fought and lost. They can't just send somebody round and take your car, there is due process. A debt collection agency is not a bailiff. And then there are County and High court bailiffs. Be afraid of the latter.

[Chrisgr31]

Simpo Two said:

My understanding is that bailiffs only get involved after a court case has been fought and lost. They can't just send somebody round and take your car, there is due process. A debt collection agency is not a bailiff. And then there are County and High court bailiffs. Be afraid of the latter.

Chances are the court case has already been fought and lost, even if the OP is unaware of it. For council tax the certified enforcement officer will need a liability order but its also an automatic process. Very few are fought, sometimes as the taxpayer is unaware of the hearing.

[anonymous-user]

Yes totally. Sorry I jumped the gun. The debt recovery company is not necessarily a bailiff and the bailiff is a last resort. At this juncture OP you should consult your local CAB because the waters are muddied by the fact that there are some councils exempt from pursuing backdated payments. Pro bono legal advice would be sound before you respond by letter.
Legal beagles usually has users who can provide a template.

[bgunn]

Chrisgr31 said:

Chances are the court case has already been fought and lost, even if the OP is unaware of it. For council tax the certified enforcement officer will need a liability order but its also an automatic process. Very few are fought, sometimes as the taxpayer is unaware of the hearing.

If the council have an address to write correspondence to sending a bill, they will also be informing of impending liability order hearings - it certainly isn't going to happen without them sending out warnings. Taxpayers would only be unaware of hearings if correspondence wasn't received.

[Mikebentley]

Chrisgr31 said:

Simpo Two said:

My understanding is that bailiffs only get involved after a court case has been fought and lost. They can't just send somebody round and take your car, there is due process. A debt collection agency is not a bailiff. And then there are County and High court bailiffs. Be afraid of the latter.

Chances are the court case has already been fought and lost, even if the OP is unaware of it. For council tax the certified enforcement officer will need a liability order but its also an automatic process. Very few are fought, sometimes as the taxpayer is unaware of the hearing.

Chrisgr31’s reply is sound advice. The LA need to follow due process and obtain a writ/warrant or liability order, normally the latter. Once obtained they will if still outstanding pass batches of cases to a debt recovery company who will attempt to contact the debtors and establish payment in full or an arrangement. At this stage called compliance only £75 is added. If no arrangement is made the debt is passed to their EAs (Court Certified Enforcement Agents) and if they visit a further £235 (+7.5% if over £1500 debt) is added. To my knowledge LAs do not “sell” debts.

My advice is tell them to speak with the LA and establish the legitimacy of the debt. As previously stated sometimes these cases are generated if a retrospective action is taken in regards to a previous change in circumstances. An example would be that during the time of this debt they were in reciept of CTS (Council Tax Support) which has subsequently at a later date been found they were not entitled to.

[Simpo Two]

bgunn said:

If the council have an address to write correspondence to sending a bill, they will also be informing of impending liability order hearings - it certainly isn't going to happen without them sending out warnings. Taxpayers would only be unaware of hearings if correspondence wasn't received.

My thought too (unless they've been ignoring them). You can't just go to court and win without the defendant knowing.

[Shotgun Jon]

Head of Revenues here at a large local authority.

Need more details of the back dated bill but Mikebentley is correct in what he says! Sound advice.

I suspect a historic liability order is already in place if they are chasing a 19 year old debt, that would stop the debt from becoming statue barred.

Also local authorities cannot sell debt on to debt purchasers, it’s a tax, not a debt.

Edited by Shotgun Jon on Thursday 4th March 22:21

Edited by Shotgun Jon on Friday 5th March 07:53

[anonymous-user]

Shotgun Jon said:

Head of Revenues here at a large local authority.

Need more details of the back dated bill but Mikebentley is correct in what he says! Sound advice.

I suspect a historic liability order is already in place if they are chasing a 19 year old debt, that would stop the debt from becoming statue barred.

Also local authorise cannot sell debt on to debt purchasers, it’s a tax, not a debt.

Edited by Shotgun Jon on Thursday 4th March 22:21

Respectfully sir I disagree. Here is what the facts are according to the national debt line:

https://www.nationaldebtline.org/fact-sheet-librar...

A debt line that advises tens of thousands of people a year.

It is in fact a priority debt.

Sir please provide relevant legislation the OP can refer to if it is statute barred. Is there a landmark case he can quote?

OP:
1. Find out if it is one of the 42? councils exempt from pursuing payment.
2. If it is not then make an offer. You can word it however you want e.g. you may be able to prove the property was unoccupied for over a year. Someone lived in Madagascar for a year. Or the property was rented out to a tenant for 2 years (shared liability and said tenant is untraceable or deceased) be honest... Slash the payment.
3. If it’s not something you can get out of you might be delaying the inevitable i.e. the liability order is obtained and it’s outsourced.

The ultimate goal is to not have to pay it and if you are liable then a reasonable offer may suffice. Otherwise you may delay the inevitable and it’s not worth the drama.

Your responses need to be in a timely manner of say within 14 days. Outside of that it makes it look like you’re not playing ball. You can always respond with a 14 day letter saying you need time to ascertain who lived there when you were in the Maldives (if you can prove you did live out). I keep saying you but we’re addressing the person whose name is on the bill. If that persons name was not on the bill at the time and they lived there then they may have joint liability. Age limits apply. So if the council write to someone who was under 18 at the time then that’s not usually considered. Other factors may also include a bathroom was knocked out and converted to a storage room...

Sorry you’re having to go through this. It’s massively inconvenient and a pain.

Edited by Super_G on Friday 5th March 07:46

[Prolex-UK]

Work for a large London Borough.

No way on earth we would consider chasing such an old debt.

Comments above regarding liability orders are right

Also I am sure there is something somewhere where if the creditor takes no action for 5 (think) years on a debt then they can ask for the money but are unable to use enforcement.

I have,with some success, have chased old debts (under 6 years) for CTAX where the amount O/S is under £50 (has to owe more than that to be enforced) Letter asked nicely asking if they could make payment saying money used would help provide local services etc.

Used email for this to reduce cost

I would go to the CAB and or the local councillor to enquire myself

[Shotgun Jon]

Super_G said:

Shotgun Jon said:

Head of Revenues here at a large local authority.

Need more details of the back dated bill but Mikebentley is correct in what he says! Sound advice.

I suspect a historic liability order is already in place if they are chasing a 19 year old debt, that would stop the debt from becoming statue barred.

Also local authorise cannot sell debt on to debt purchasers, it’s a tax, not a debt.

Edited by Shotgun Jon on Thursday 4th March 22:21

Respectfully sir I disagree. Here is what the facts are according to the national debt line:

https://www.nationaldebtline.org/fact-sheet-librar...

A debt line that advises tens of thousands of people a year.

It is in fact a priority debt.

Sir please provide relevant legislation the OP can refer to if it is statute barred. Is there a landmark case he can quote?

OP:
1. Find out if it is one of the 42? councils exempt from pursuing payment.
2. If it is not then make an offer. You can word it however you want e.g. you may be able to prove the property was unoccupied for over a year. Someone lived in Madagascar for a year. Or the property was rented out to a tenant for 2 years (shared liability and said tenant is untraceable or deceased) be honest... Slash the payment.
3. If it’s not something you can get out of you might be delaying the inevitable i.e. the liability order is obtained and it’s outsourced.

The ultimate goal is to not have to pay it and if you are liable then a reasonable offer may suffice. Otherwise you may delay the inevitable and it’s not worth the drama.

Your responses need to be in a timely manner of say within 14 days. Outside of that it makes it look like you’re not playing ball. You can always respond with a 14 day letter saying you need time to ascertain who lived there when you were in the Maldives (if you can prove you did live out). I keep saying you but we’re addressing the person whose name is on the bill. If that persons name was not on the bill at the time and they lived there then they may have joint liability. Age limits apply. So if the council write to someone who was under 18 at the time then that’s not usually considered. Other factors may also include a bathroom was knocked out and converted to a storage room...

Sorry you’re having to go through this. It’s massively inconvenient and a pain.

Edited by Super_G on Friday 5th March 07:46

Don’t agree with what?

It’s not a commercial debt that can be sold on to debt purchasers because it is a tax.

[anonymous-user]

Then perhaps you can provide a template the OP can use and send to said council?

[Shotgun Jon]

Super_G said:

Then perhaps you can provide a template the OP can use and send to said council?

What, in relation to statue barring of the debt? You do realise the 6 year period doesn’t relate to debt age but to the period of time a creditor has to instigate legal proceedings?

As stated in my first post I said I needed full details but it’s likely an historic liability order was already in place....to get a liability order requires legal proceedings hence the statute of limitations is no longer relevant.

I find it hard to believe a local authority would even consider chasing a 19 year old debt that is statute barred. It’s a basic check.