Beds in Sheds

Actually, it is another loaded question...

A loaded question is a question which contains a controversial assumption

Gosh yes, I'd forgotten that the notion that people pay council tax was a 'controversial assumption'

I believe you work in an orange call centre?

That was years ago, I'm sure he's moved on now, and I doubt that Orange are being propped up by the public sector...
 
Well surely the way Council Tax works is that it's paid per dwelling, according to a band set by the value of said dwelling? And you get 25% off for one occupant?

So technically, putting someone in a shed in the back garden doesn't break taxation laws, unless that shed is changing the value of the dwelling (in which case, the land needs to be re-valued).

I do, however, think that it's a bit of a H&S nightmare and hence it's being clamped down on, and I agree with the council's action on this. Otherwise you're going to get every Tom, Dick, and Harry putting up a crappy shack in the back garden and renting it out.
 
Are you saying that if they rented out a room within their house, they shouldn't have to pay any extra at all, even though they use the same amount of additional services?

This is the false dichotomy created by council tax when applied to this sort of problem, and the reason why a simple answer is hard to give.

If absolutely pushed, I would say no, they shouldn't' have to pay extra, just as the extra people living in the same house don't have to pay extra. In reality, this is a result of the flawed system of taxation and a desire to try and fairly apply an unfair system.



Actually, it is another loaded question...

Can you not see how ridiculous your opinion on this subject is?
 
Can you not see how ridiculous your opinion on this subject is?

I'm waiting for someone to provide a meaningful counter, rather than snipping out the relevant points and attacking strawmen instead...

If council tax is based on the property, then it has already been paid. Simple really isn't it?

If council tax wasn't a massively flawed system to start with, the debate wouldn't exist.
 
I'm waiting for someone to provide a meaningful counter, rather than snipping out the relevant points and attacking strawmen instead...

If council tax is based on the property, then it has already been paid. Simple really isn't it?

If council tax wasn't a massively flawed system to start with, the debate wouldn't exist.

So you are saying that everyone should be able to convert a shed into a dwelling and rent it out?
 
Actually if its purely a per house charge I presume Dolph would support the removal of the single person discount.

As he seems at pains to point out the number of people are irrelevent..
 
So you are saying that everyone should be able to convert a shed into a dwelling and rent it out?

Sure, why not. Do a council tax re-evaluation of the original property and let the landlord and tenant sort it out between them.
 
[TW]Fox;19099098 said:
Actually if its purely a per house charge I presume Dolph would support the removal of the single person discount.

As he seems at pains to point out the number of people are irrelevent..

Absolutely. It doesn't make much sense as it is.
 
Sure, why not. Do a council tax re-evaluation of the original property and let the landlord and tenant sort it out between them.

yep, that's the way it works

currently looking to get my tax band lowered as it was increased when it was userd as a house of multiple occupancy
 
Well, technically speaking the council tax on the property has been paid already, remember we are talking council tax not poll tax.

Why should a bed in a shed be liable for additional council tax when a bed in the lounge isn't?

Does it not depend on whether the property is rented out and has a separate entrance?, thus effectively making it a separate address and thus liable to council tax.

We have a self-contained flat built about our garage that we use as an office, however if we rented it then it would become a separate dwelling and as such liable to CT banding.

Whether CT is a fair tax or not is largely academic regarding the OP, which is illustrating a form of tax evasion and planning law avoidance.
 
Last edited:
council tax is banded and among the factors determining a band is the number of rooms in a property. By effectively under-declaring this figure they are achieving a lower rate of council tax than they are entitled to, even if they are already paying.
 
But if they just put beds in the house, its fine, is it not?

So fundamentally, it's council's flexing their muscles for no real purpose other than because they can.

These sorts of places are targeted at people rather fresh off the boat - tis fairly important that the council crack down on the landlords and their obligations regarding planning and various regulations etc.. as the immigrant who likely isn't familiar with the UK at all isn't going to have a clue.

Landlords are required to have an annual gas safety inspection - do you reckon that old gas appliance attached to the camping gas cylinder is going to be declared 'safe' for use indoors?

Council tax wouldn't be my main concern rather more worrying would be that these sorts of rentals would have the potential to turn into modern day slum landlord type property if left unchecked.
 
That's a loaded question, because it assumes council tax should exist and is a good system in the first place...

No, it assumes council tax does exist, which it does.:confused: The argument wasn't about the validity of the tax but whether or not it should be paid in a certain circumstance, assuming the tax exists...
 
Last edited:
Believe it or not im typing this from the shed at the bottom of the garden which is my bedroom and has been for the last year lmao!
 
Back
Top Bottom