z-ct-man-sect3-wales-app3.3

Previous PageSection ContentsNext Page

Appendix 3:3 – Wales - Basic Requirements for a Valid Proposal

     

PART A – Details of dwelling and occupation

1.0 Full postal address of the dwelling

The address of the dwelling must be shown in Part A. Whilst it must be possible for the LO to identify the dwelling to which the proposal is intended to relate with a reasonable degree of certainty, it is not a requirement that the address should match exactly the entry shown in the list. The omission of the postcode does not make the proposal invalid.

EXAMPLE

The form shows an address of Apple Cottage, High Street. All entries in High Street are numbered only, but it is known from old records that Apple Cottage is No 12. Therefore the proposal is not invalid on address grounds.

2.0 Name of current Council Taxpayer

If this is omitted the proposal is incomplete and should be returned for completion.

If, in spite of requests, the proposer refuses to complete it, the proposal should be treated as invalid.

3.0 Date the proposer became the taxpayer

In the case where a person

• becomes a taxpayer, or

• in the case of a new dwelling

the date on which the proposer became the taxpayer is an essential requirement. It does not have to be exact to the day unless this is a crucial aspect of becoming the taxpayer.

If, in spite of requests, the proposer refuses to complete it, the proposal should be treated as invalid.

NB This requirement is not mandatory in other cases.

4.0 Valuation List reference number

Not essential. A proposal should not be treated as incomplete or invalid just because it has not been completed.

5.0 Band in List

Not essential. A proposal should not be treated as incomplete or invalid just because it has not been completed.

6.0 PART B – Details of your proposal

1

a

The entry set out in the Listing Officer’s Notice dated ddmmyyyy is inaccurate.
The date of issue of the LON must be given. If this date is more than six months from the date of receipt of the form, or if, on investigation, it transpires that a LON was not issued on that date, the proposal should be treated as invalid. This is self-explanatory.

 

b

Having become the taxpayer in respect of the dwelling shown above within the last six months I believe its present entry in the Valuation List is inaccurate.
The date must be included in Part A on which the maker became the taxpayer. There is no requirement to obtain documentary proof. If the date shown in Part A is more than six months from the date of receipt of the form, the proposal should be treated as invalid. This too is self-explanatory.

 

c

The dwelling shown above should be deleted from the Valuation List.
Reasons must be given in box 2. If there are none, the proposal should be treated as invalid.
EXAMPLE
The dwelling has been demolished.
The dwelling is no longer used for domestic purposes and should be deleted from the Council Tax List (this could result in a Rating assessment being made and the property included in the Rating List).

 

d

The dwelling shown above should be included in the Valuation List.
Reasons must be given in box 2. If there are none, the proposal should be treated as invalid.
EXAMPLE
The dwelling has been recently built and the BA are refusing to acknowledge its existence.

The dwelling is no longer used for non-domestic purposes and should be subject to Council Tax banding (this could result in the property being deleted from the Rating List).

 

e

The dwellings shown above should be included in the Valuation List as one entry.
This is most likely to apply where the owner makes the proposal to aggregate a number of existing bands into one band. Reasons must be given in box 2. If there are none, the proposal should be treated as invalid. See Practice Note 6.
EXAMPLE
A house is divided into 6 bedsits, each of which is banded. The owner/taxpayer wishes to have 1 band on the whole dwelling.

 

f

The dwelling shown above should be included in the Valuation List as more than one entry.
This is most likely to apply where the owner makes the proposal to disaggregate one existing band into a number of bands. Reasons must be given in box 2. If there are none, the proposal should be treated as invalid. See Practice Note 5.
EXAMPLE
A house consists of a main dwelling and a “granny” annexe, but has one band for the whole. The owner/taxpayer wishes to have 2 bands on the dwelling, one for the main dwelling and one on the “granny” annex.

 

g

There has been a ‘material reduction’ in the value of the dwelling shown above.
This relates to the demolition of part of the dwelling or some change in the physical state of the locality, or disabled person’s adaptations that have lowered the dwelling’s value. Reasons, and the date of the event, must be given in box 2. If there are none, the proposal should be treated as invalid.
What is being considered here is the validity of the proposal, not the band for Council Tax purposes. Demolition of part is dealt with in Practice Note 4 para 4.3 and will not be a reason for reducing a band where connected with a future building operation, but this would not prevent the proposal from being treated as validly made.
Examples of matters which are not ‘material reductions’ are increases in nuisance from traffic, flooding caused by extreme weather conditions, annoying conduct from neighbours, and temporary building works in the vicinity. See Council Tax Manual - Section 3 - Part 2 : Invalid Proposals and Invalidity Appeals

 

h

There has been a ‘material increase’ in the value and a subsequent ‘relevant transaction’ in respect of the dwelling shown above.
This is the same circumstance as a CR10 report for List maintenance purposes and is most unlikely to result in a proposal being made. Reasons, and the date of the relevant transaction, must be given in box 2. If there are none, the proposal should be treated as invalid.
If any date given is found to be incorrect or there is no supporting evidence that a sale has been completed, the proposal should be treated as invalid.

 

i

There has been an increase or decrease in the domestic use of the dwelling shown above.
This is where a composite property (partly domestic and partly non-domestic and identified in the Council Tax List) has changed by including additional part(s) of the building for domestic use, or by transferring parts of the domestic portion into non-domestic use. Reasons must be given in box 2. If there are none, the proposal should be treated as invalid.
It must be noted that the non-domestic part does not have to be subject to rating.
EXAMPLES
The living accommodation attached to a shop is reduced in size because one room is now used as part of the shop.
Part of the living accommodation attached to a place of worship is now used as a vestry for the church.
One room formerly used as office accommodation has reverted to use as a living room (most likely when a Rating proposal is made to reduce the Rating assessment).

 

j

Review following a decision of a Valuation Tribunal or the High Court
The date of the decision, whether it was made by a VT or the HC and the address(es) of the dwelling(s) concerned. must be given in box 2. If this information is omitted, the proposal should be treated as invalid.

2

Reason(s)
The use of this is explained in each of the paragraphs above. Where it is incomplete AND is needed, the proposal should be treated as invalid.
Any separate sheet of Reasons must be stapled to the original form and not attached using a paper clip.

3

Proposed Band and Effective Date
Leaving one or both of these fields blank does not make the proposal invalid on its/their own.

7.0 PART C – Details of the person making this proposal

The maker of this proposal is Owner Occupier Other
This must be completed. If it is not the proposal is incomplete and should be returned for completion.

If, in spite of requests, the proposer refuses to complete it, the proposal should be treated as invalid.

Both the maker's name and the maker's address are statutorily required and together make up the "Party Details" for input to the Council Tax Application.

It is a requirement that an proposal must state the capacity of the maker (eg owner/occupier, agent). If the maker's capacity is not stated, or the wording used is unacceptable, the form should be returned for clarification.

VO 7455 asks for the name of the occupier (if different from the maker). This is in itself not a statutory requirement. It is designed to assist the LO to fulfil the requirement to serve a copy of the proposal on the taxpayer where necessary. Where it is obvious that the name given as "occupier" is wrong or is not supplied (unless the dwelling is vacant) and the proposal has been made by another person, a copy should be served on "The Council Taxpayer".

Name of the person making this proposal and address for correspondence
The name of the proposer must be clearly stated, or a reference (“As above”) to the name of the current Council Taxpayer in Part A.

There is no requirement for the form to be actually signed nor for telephone numbers or email address to be included.

If it is not dated, the date of receipt by the LO is to be treated as the date of the proposal.

8.0 PART D – Dwelling Details

As stated, this part does not form part of the proposal for legal purposes. Failure to complete it does not make the proposal invalid.

Where a proposal can be accepted as validly made but it is "incomplete" because certain additional information is necessary or desirable, it should be obtained from the maker in writing. A copy of the form should accompany the LO's letter but the original should be registered as a valid proposal in accordance with part 3, paragraph 3.1 and retained by the LO.

For circumstances & period when valid proposals can be made see Appendix 3:4.

Previous PageSection ContentsNext Page