Residential moorings and Council Tax

[AlanH]

A hobby horse.

Why don't ALL residential ,moorings attract Council Tax? Surely to escape from paying it is parasitic.

Why isn't there a 'virtual' LA that could collect a Council tax equvalent from continuous cruisers?

[carlt]

A hobby horse.

Why don't ALL residential ,moorings attract Council Tax? Surely to escape from paying it is parasitic.

Why isn't there a 'virtual' LA that could collect a Council tax equvalent from continuous cruisers?

There is a test case for this (though I can't find it on the web, I do know the person involved). A woman was living on a long term mooring in Hillmorton and approached the council because she believed she should be contributing to the council tax, but, as she didn't use all the services, she wanted the council to calculate what proportion they thought she should pay. The council said it was all or nothing and bunged her a bill.

 

She argued that this was unfair because she used very few of the council services and, whilst happy to contribute a part of the tax, she didn't feel she was liable for the total.

 

The final ruling was that the council were wrong to claim the full amount but, as they were unable or unwilling to calculate a reduced amount, a liveaboard should pay nothing, unless on a residential mooring with planning permission.

 

Considering the services that a CC or residential moored liveaboard pays BW for, I think 'parasitic' is just the usual idiotic insult resulting from the misguided notion that liveaboards are getting something for nothing.

[dacaB]

Beware of trolls........................

[StoneHenge]

Tis the season.......

[carlt]

Beware of trolls........................

Never really understood the concept of trolls. There are plenty of regular contributors to the forum who I'm sure I could have the same argument with, and enjoy it just as much.

 

AlanH may be new, and may be kicking off with a controversial subject but whether he leads a trogolodyte existence is immaterial. As long as he doesn't spam me, steal my bank details or sell me a timeshare in Nigeria I'll welcome him.

 

He might be able to tell us if cave dwellers pay council tax.

[buccaneer]

A hobby horse.

Why don't ALL residential ,moorings attract Council Tax? Surely to escape from paying it is parasitic.

Why isn't there a 'virtual' LA that could collect a Council tax equvalent from continuous cruisers?

 

 

Very strange first post! sounds like you are part of a working party for the PM in waiting.

 

I wonder whats he got up his sleeve next.

 

Why do you ask such a question?

[nine9feet]

A hobby horse.

Why don't ALL residential ,moorings attract Council Tax? Surely to escape from paying it is parasitic.

Why isn't there a 'virtual' LA that could collect a Council tax equvalent from continuous cruisers?

 

Surely you believe that in our society people should only pay what they are required to? Therefore if you think the rules applying to moorings need to be changed, tackle that instead of complaining about people who comply!

 

HTH

[AlanH]

Surely you believe that in our society people should only pay what they are required to? T

 

HTH

 

No I believe that everyone should pay his/her share of the costs. I'm happy to try to persuade local government that this should be the case.

[nine9feet]

No I believe that everyone should pay his/her share of the costs. I'm happy to try to persuade local government that this should be the case.

 

I doubt you will get very far. If "everyone" were required to pay council tax, that would be similar to ( but actually go further than) the poll tax which council tax replaced. Think how unpopular poll tax was!

 

How would each person's "share" be calculated? Council tax is banded, rates were dependant on value, so it is argueable from one point of view that there has never been a time when everyone piad his "share" of the costs. What about the aged, the unemployed, the sick, etc.? How do you expect them to pay?

 

Yes, I'm sorry, I'm bending what you are saying to make a point and the point is that there has to be a set of rules which make it reasonably fair for the majority and are not too difficult to administer (bring back the poll tax ).

 

 

John

[AlanH]

Beware of trolls........................

 

 

From Wkipedia

Troll: In Internet terminology, a troll is someone who intentionally posts derogatory or otherwise inflammatory messages about sensitive topics in an established online community such as an online discussion forum to bait users into responding

 

My post was neither derogatory or inflammatory. The topic is not particularly sensitive. I am serious about this matter and would like to hear some good reasons for the state of affairs.

[carlt]

There is a test case for this (though I can't find it on the web, I do know the person involved). A woman was living on a long term mooring in Hillmorton and approached the council because she believed she should be contributing to the council tax, but, as she didn't use all the services, she wanted the council to calculate what proportion they thought she should pay. The council said it was all or nothing and bunged her a bill.

 

She argued that this was unfair because she used very few of the council services and, whilst happy to contribute a part of the tax, she didn't feel she was liable for the total.

 

The final ruling was that the council were wrong to claim the full amount but, as they were unable or unwilling to calculate a reduced amount, a liveaboard should pay nothing, unless on a residential mooring with planning permission.

 

Considering the services that a CC or residential moored liveaboard pays BW for, I think 'parasitic' is just the usual idiotic insult resulting from the misguided notion that liveaboards are getting something for nothing.

Did you miss my post Alan?

Welcome to the forum btw.

[AlanH]

Considering the services that a CC or residential moored liveaboard pays BW for, I think 'parasitic' is just the usual idiotic insult resulting from the misguided notion that liveaboards are getting something for nothing.

 

Like education, footpath maintenance, street lighting, police, fire service, social services, refuse collection, etc, etc.

[carlt]

Like education, footpath maintenance, street lighting, police, fire service, social services, refuse collection, etc, etc.

A liveaboard, with a 60 foot boat and mooring puts more into the public purse for their home than someone living in the same equivalent surface area. It's easy to dismiss one tax because it doesn't go into the same bit of the purse, it doesn't mean someone isn't paying, they're just paying a different govt dept.

[magnetman]

I believe (may well be wrong) running water is a requirement before you can be asked for council tax, and not stale tanked water. I know some boats, with mains water, do pay council tax. If a boater has an address where c.t is paid already (a relative?) then its not valid anyway is it? (2nd home etc).

[WJM]

"they're just paying a different govt dept."

 

 

for now!

 

 

(BWplc)

[David Schweizer]

If you live on a boat as your principal place or residence, and that boat is permanenty moored in one place, you are required under the Local Governmenr Act to pay Council Tax. There are no exemptions, although some local Authorities seem to have difficulty in allocating a taxation band to boats, andsomtimes fail to issue a bill.

 

The case cited by Carl is interesting, but I would like to see the text of any tribunal decision before making any comment. I am certainly unaware of any device within legislation that permits a Council to waive certain aspects of Council Tax on the basis that the payer does not use the service. Most people do not use all the services privided by the Local Authorities at any one time, and some people never use all the services. Whilst that is often used as an arguement for reducing an individual household's Council Tax demand, as far as I am aware, it has no foundation in law. The only reductions I am aware of are for single person occupation or for a second home. There is also provision for a credit reduction is if the occupants are in reciept of certain Social Security benefits, or the gross household income is below the assesed statutory mninumum

 

It is possible that one of the above exeptions had not been applied correctly (or at all) which would result in a reduction, but just because you do not use the services available is not a valid reason for Council Tax remission.

Edited May 24, 2007 by David Schweizer

[nine9feet]

I believe (may well be wrong) running water is a requirement before you can be asked for council tax, and not stale tanked water. I know some boats, with mains water, do pay council tax. If a boater has an address where c.t is paid already (a relative?) then its not valid anyway is it? (2nd home etc).

 

The rules are here. Mind numbing unless you actually enjoy reading this stuff.

 

John

[Alastair]

Wot David said.

 

I'd just like to add that the council tax is assessed and paid on the *mooring*, not on the boat. The mooring is registered with the VOA, it then appears on the council tax lists and you are billed.

 

By definition, a continuous cruise has no mooring, hence is not liable for council tax.

 

Is this nitpicking? No. Consider our case.

Household of 3 adults (permanently) + 4 children (50% of week). Two boats (1 32" narrowboat, 1 67" sailing barge). We have 1 mooring, with 1 access point and 1 set of services (water pipe, telephone, lecky). Council wanted to charge 2 lots of council tax, on the basis that there were 2 boats. I wrote to VOA, enclosing photographs of mooring and boats. They agreed that it was one mooring, hence one bill at band A.

[carlt]

If you live on a boat as your principal place or residence, and that boat is permanenty moored in one place, you are required under the Local Governmenr Act to pay Council Tax. There are no exemptions, although some local Authorities seem to have difficulty in allocating a taxation band to boats, andsomtimes fail to issue a bill.

 

The case cited by Carl is interesting, but I would like to see the text of any tribunal decision before making any comment. I am certainly unaware of any device within legislation that permits a Council to waive certain aspects of Council Tax on the basis that the payer does not use the service. Most people do not use all the services privided by the Local Authorities at any one time, and some people never use all the services. Whilst that is often used as an arguement for reducing an individual household's Council Tax demand, as far as I am aware, it has no foundation in law. The only reductions I am aware of are for single person occupation or for a second home. There is also provision for a credit reduction is if the occupants are in reciept of certain Social Security benefits, or the gross household income is below the assesed statutory mninumum

 

It is possible that one of the above exeptions had not been applied correctly (or at all) which would result in a reduction, but just because you do not use the services available is not a valid reason for Council Tax remission.

Sorry David I probably wasn't clear. The outcome was that she didn't have to pay anything because there was no means to divide up the full amount.

[AlanH]

A liveaboard, with a 60 foot boat and mooring puts more into the public purse for their home than someone living in the same equivalent surface area. It's easy to dismiss one tax because it doesn't go into the same bit of the purse, it doesn't mean someone isn't paying, they're just paying a different govt dept.

 

Exactly how is this true?

What does a residential 60ft boat owner pay that a rented householder on CT band A doesn't apart from a licence fee which goes to BW not goverment funds? All us boat owners pay that anyway.

 

Which Depts are they paying and how?

[carlt]

Exactly how is this true?

What does a residential 60ft boat owner pay that a rented householder on CT band A doesn't apart from a licence fee which goes to BW not goverment funds? All us boat owners pay that anyway.

 

Which Depts are they paying and how?

BW is a govt dept. The licence and mooring fee is a tax. It goes into the public purse. As a house owner you may choose to have a boat for leisure purposes, for which you pay the public purse in the form of a boat tax and moorings tax. Just as you would pay if you have a holiday cottage in wales (or anywhere else). If you choose to sell your main residence and live in your welsh cottage then you will stop paying into the public purse twice and just pay once, the same as if you sell your home and move onto your boat.

 

Edited for translation into english.

Edited May 24, 2007 by carlt

[Freetochat]

On the original theme, surely most households can argue only partial services are used. Those without children paying for education etc. Is the council tax just not a shared responsibility to provide services for the community for which we are all responsible. The point concerning mooring charges. Is this not a charge to park a boat, and receive various services from the supplier, whether BW or private. Does this exempt the boater from the community responsibility?

[carlt]

On the original theme, surely most households can argue only partial services are used. Those without children paying for education etc. Is the council tax just not a shared responsibility to provide services for the community for which we are all responsible. The point concerning mooring charges. Is this not a charge to park a boat, and receive various services from the supplier, whether BW or private. Does this exempt the boater from the community responsibility?

 

Yes the council tax is exactly that but the public purse is also that and all your taxes go into the public purse. Despite what your friendly politician may tell you,there are no ring fenced taxes.

 

On the subject of the mooring tax, I pay to have my boat on the water. Why do I pay again just to stay still. Do we pay to park our car on the road? I accept further payments may be justified if there are any services provided (though rubbish points and water are covered in the moving around tax) but the only service I recieve is free mud. If a liveaboard is paying into the public purse a moving tax and a staying still tax which is a bigger contribution to the public purse than a council tax payer is making then I do not understand the 'parasitic' accusation that the original poster levelled.

[Adam]

The story about the women that only payed part of it because it went to caught shouldn't of happend. She could say i don't see any streetlights when i'm on my boat but when she walks through a town at night she uses them. I have my own water supply. So she will use public water eventually what if she goes to a public toilet. etc etc

[carlt]

The story about the women that only payed part of it because it went to caught shouldn't of happend. She could say i don't see any streetlights when i'm on my boat but when she walks through a town at night she uses them. I have my own water supply. So she will use public water eventually what if she goes to a public toilet. etc etc

 

First of all she didn't pay part of it, she paid none! But you're right it shouldn't have happened. She has a 72' boat and pays a full length, on-line mooring which meant she was paying over £2000 into the public purse, far more than if she was living in pretty much any house in Rugby. It should never have even reached a tribunal. Her water supply (despite having nothing to do with council tax, so why mention it?) is supplied by BW, as is rubbish disposal. But this is irrelevant. A liveaboard pays more in housing tax than a person living in an equivalent area of house.

 

And considering the public toilet provision is far outweighed by the BW toilet facilities, in Rugby, that argument is spurious anyway.