Lake District second home owners will have to pay full council tax from next year (From The Westmorland Gazette)
When news happens, text KENEWS and your photos and videos to 80360. Or contact us by email or phone.
Lake District second home owners will have to pay full council tax from next year
10:40am Wednesday 5th December 2012 in News
By Ellis Butcher, Reporter
SOUTH Lakeland District Council is planning to scrap a Council Tax discount for second home owners and use the extra income to cover a half-a-million pound reduction in government funding.
The 10 per cent reduction is likely to be no longer offered from April and instead second home owners will have to stump up the full rate.
The plan, supported by the council’s cabinet, will need to be backed at a full council meeting on December 18.
The aim is that part of the additional cash generated should be used to fund a newly-created Council Tax reduction scheme.
The government’s Welfare Reform Act abolishes Council Tax Benefit from April 1 2013 and Whitehall has told SLDC it will receive £560,000 a year less towards paying out the benefit.
Coun David Evans, portfolio holder for resources, said: “The abolition of the old scheme would have meant the most vulnerable in our society, such as the elderly, those on low wages and the disabled could have suffered.”
SLDC has consulted on the proposal, including those on benefits and second home owners, and say a significant majority supported getting rid of the discount. SLDC says it will now be looking at removing or reducing Council Tax discount on empty properties to encourage owners to bring them back into use.
Comments(22)
Geoff103
says...
11:38am Wed 5 Dec 12
A 10% discount seems a modest recognition of that. The notion that somehow that second-home owners should not only pay full Council Tax but a penalty rate above that speaks of nothing but resentment and envy on the part of those who suggest it.
And just in case anyone is minded to assume it, I am not a second home owner here or anywhere else. Just a Band E owner occupier somewhat depressed that the first thought of SLDC to a budgetary issue, is to attempt to increase revenue at every opportunity without first examining wasteful spending such as £340,000 on unnecessary new ticketing machines for its car parks - with more to be spent on modifying them.
Of course, that "SLDC has consulted on the proposal, including those on benefits and second home owners, and say a significant majority supported getting rid of the discount" is a totally disingenuous statement.
Non-Council Tax payers covered by the previous benefits regime will always be likely to vote for anyone other than themselves to pay more.
Gingery
says...
11:42am Wed 5 Dec 12
onelocal
says...
12:18pm Wed 5 Dec 12
Geoff103 wrote:I can assure you that my comment has nothing to do with resentment, and certainly not envy. It does however relate to the situation where a large percentage of what are usually the lower cost homes are snapped up as second homes. This obviously reduces the homes available for locals, particularly younger locals, and pushes up prices artificially although you may like that idea.
A second home is, by definition, a part-time home and thus its occupiers only part-time users of local services.
A 10% discount seems a modest recognition of that. The notion that somehow that second-home owners should not only pay full Council Tax but a penalty rate above that speaks of nothing but resentment and envy on the part of those who suggest it.
And just in case anyone is minded to assume it, I am not a second home owner here or anywhere else. Just a Band E owner occupier somewhat depressed that the first thought of SLDC to a budgetary issue, is to attempt to increase revenue at every opportunity without first examining wasteful spending such as £340,000 on unnecessary new ticketing machines for its car parks - with more to be spent on modifying them.
Of course, that "SLDC has consulted on the proposal, including those on benefits and second home owners, and say a significant majority supported getting rid of the discount" is a totally disingenuous statement.
Non-Council Tax payers covered by the previous benefits regime will always be likely to vote for anyone other than themselves to pay more.
Second home owners may be part time users of council services, that's their choice. However, councils have to provide most services for all homes, especially where their occupation might be intermittent. This means that full time occupiers may even subsidise services to second home owners.
Our council should be doing as much as possible to reduce the number of second homes, and charging a premium is the easiest way to do that
Geoff103
says...
12:27pm Wed 5 Dec 12
onelocal
says...
12:34pm Wed 5 Dec 12
Geoff103
says...
12:36pm Wed 5 Dec 12
Just write a cheque to SLDC. They accept donations.
zaney5
says...
12:38pm Wed 5 Dec 12
Geoff103 wrote:I wouldn't call onelocal's point envy or resentment.
Well onelocal says his "comment has nothing to do with resentment, and certainly not envy" and then goes on to demonstrate that it's exactly that which underlies his viewpoint.
Just plain old common sense.
johnwalker1000
says...
1:08pm Wed 5 Dec 12
Milkbutnosugarplease
says...
3:24pm Wed 5 Dec 12
If people can afford to buy a second home worth a minimum of (say) £300,000, the loss of 10% discount in council tax is not likely to drive them out. A change in the rules on capital gains tax or tax on holiday lettings income would be far more influential. There are some excellent comments above mine - thanks for that high level of debate.
Hoad Hill
says...
3:41pm Wed 5 Dec 12
Geoff103 wrote:In what way does he go on to demonstrate.........
Well onelocal says his "comment has nothing to do with resentment, and certainly not envy" and then goes on to demonstrate that it's exactly that which underlies his viewpoint.
..?
Hoad Hill
says...
3:44pm Wed 5 Dec 12
johnwalker1000 wrote:And they will be breaking the law...what's your point?
So a couple who live together will now register themselves as a single occupant at both their addresses so getting 25% discount in both locations. Even less money coming in for the council then. Was this latest plan thought through I wonder?
zaney5
says...
7:14pm Wed 5 Dec 12
johnwalker1000 wrote:This makes no sense whatsoever. The article is about 2nd home owners, not couples trying to screw over the system by pretending to live apart.
So a couple who live together will now register themselves as a single occupant at both their addresses so getting 25% discount in both locations. Even less money coming in for the council then. Was this latest plan thought through I wonder?
2 different things.
Ladyxxmacbeth
says...
8:00am Thu 6 Dec 12
oceancloud
says...
9:57am Thu 6 Dec 12
tictoc1
says...
1:16pm Thu 6 Dec 12
Guanajuato
says...
3:37pm Thu 6 Dec 12
Milkbutnosugarplease wrote:When we moved to Kendal 11 years ago, every single estate agent said not to be bothered by local occupancy clauses, as they were easy to get around.
If you look at Rightmove or Zoopla property websites, you'll see that the cheapest homes in the SLDC area have a local occupancy clause. It states that buyers/occupiers must have lived in that parish for 3 years previously or must have a prior connection with that area, so people from outside the area trying to buy a second home will look for a different property, often at a higher price. Ex-local authority houses and new-build houses (and building plots) often have that local occupancy clause. My point is that the cheapest houses are always available to local buyers and the minor change to council tax discounts is not a big deal, except to SLDC's budget.
If people can afford to buy a second home worth a minimum of (say) £300,000, the loss of 10% discount in council tax is not likely to drive them out. A change in the rules on capital gains tax or tax on holiday lettings income would be far more influential. There are some excellent comments above mine - thanks for that high level of debate.
As for a discount for 2nd homes, why? By having a 2nd home you deprive the local community of permanence, contributing to the community. The usual response is 'but we spend our money in the community when we're there'. But there's a lot more to contributing to a community than money. I'd be happy to see 2nd homes forcibly used to home the most vulnerable in society.
mailman1964
says...
8:06pm Thu 6 Dec 12
if you dont like it then sell up.
plenty of people still looking for their first house, so no problem selling at the right price
jazzactivist
says...
5:04pm Fri 7 Dec 12
They also don't contribute to the local communities they buy into, as most 2nd homers have the attitude that they are here on holiday away from all their responsibilities, so don't need to participate. So local people serve on the committees and action groups, vote and take care of the local environment for them. Yet they expect to dash to the front of the queue for emergency doctor's and dental appointments etc.
No, it's morally unacceptable for people to buy 2nd properties in areas where there is a shortage of affordable housing for local people. Of course permanent residents should feel resentful. But it isn't envy, its anger at the thoughtless behaviour of a wealthy few who aren't considering the bigger picture of their actions.
emmysar
says...
5:07pm Sun 9 Dec 12
furthersouth
says...
6:20pm Tue 11 Dec 12
onelocal
says...
8:02pm Tue 11 Dec 12
onelocal says...
11:12am Wed 5 Dec 12