Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Dave Beans

House Seized After Non Payment Of Council Tax

Recommended Posts

http://www.westerngazette.co.uk/house-time-forgot-Crewkerne-property-seized-owner/story-24528741-detail/story.html

Didn't know they could do this, until I saw this article..

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/jan/06/empty-houses-rule-change

..so who keeps the difference? and who'll pay for the renovations? Does it come out of the "pot"? The council tax over 6 years will be, probably around £1200 a year or so (depending on banding)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.westerngazette.co.uk/house-time-forgot-Crewkerne-property-seized-owner/story-24528741-detail/story.html

Didn't know they could do this, until I saw this article..

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/jan/06/empty-houses-rule-change

..so who keeps the difference? and who'll pay for the renovations? Does it come out of the "pot"? The council tax over 6 years will be, probably around £1200 a year or so (depending on banding)...

Councillor Shane Pledger, portfolio holder for empty properties.

The non jobs they come up with is endless, it really is not the councils business what the fck people do with their houses.

I thought i you werent living in it then you didnt have to let them have this free money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest UK Debt Slave

http://www.westerngazette.co.uk/house-time-forgot-Crewkerne-property-seized-owner/story-24528741-detail/story.html

Didn't know they could do this, until I saw this article..

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/jan/06/empty-houses-rule-change

..so who keeps the difference? and who'll pay for the renovations? Does it come out of the "pot"? The council tax over 6 years will be, probably around £1200 a year or so (depending on banding)...

Ownership is "conditional" in the UK

You don't actually "own" anything

The state can always dip in and take back what it considers to be ITS property, houses, cars, even your own children

Edited by UK Debt Slave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ownership is "conditional" in the UK

You don't actually "own" anything

The state can always dip in and take back what it considers to be ITS property, houses, cars, even your own children

this is true unless you get a notified letter from a hand of the queen renouncing citizenship and then abide by the laws of the land (magna carta) unless they rewrite the law which is what they are doing now, putting an end to 800 years of natural rights in Britain.

the same applies to houses, as a citizen, after 15 years of holding the deed and titles you may approach the court and ask for the property to be removed of the register which stops statues being applied to the property as long as it conforms with natural law, eg. the right to light which is law (magna carta, maritime law etc) rather than statue (passed by parliament).

examples. having a child.

creating a birth cetificate is evidence of ownership by the state.

car.

you are the registered owner because the state is the actual owner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ownership is "conditional" in the UK

You don't actually "own" anything

The state can always dip in and take back what it considers to be ITS property, houses, cars, even your own children

Spot on.

Having reached aged 56 and observed life, this is how I think things are.

I'm thankful to have this insight!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest UK Debt Slave

this is true unless you get a notified letter from a hand of the queen renouncing citizenship and then abide by the laws of the land (magna carta) unless they rewrite the law which is what they are doing now, putting an end to 800 years of natural rights in Britain.

the same applies to houses, as a citizen, after 15 years of holding the deed and titles you may approach the court and ask for the property to be removed of the register which stops statues being applied to the property as long as it conforms with natural law, eg. the right to light which is law (magna carta, maritime law etc) rather than statue (passed by parliament).

examples. having a child.

creating a birth cetificate is evidence of ownership by the state.

car.

you are the registered owner because the state is the actual owner.

All that freeman on the land stuff is ******** I'm afraid.

If any Tom Dick or Harry could voluntarily opt out of the Matrix, everyone would do it

They OWN you

And frankly, there's F**K all you can do about it

Your only defence in "life on the slave farm" is to be as well informed as you possibly can be and plan your life accordingly

Edited by UK Debt Slave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ownership is "conditional" in the UK

You don't actually "own" anything

The state can always dip in and take back what it considers to be ITS property, houses, cars, even your own children

Yep...the latest thing with HMRC who can raid your bank account without a court order...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest UK Debt Slave

Yep...the latest thing with HMRC who can raid your bank account without a court order...

It's no different from a mafia protection racket.

Wanna be a member or our club? Fine! BUT WE OWN YOU!

They won't shoot you in the head. But they will impoverish you or even worse, kidnap your children.

Edited by UK Debt Slave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All that freeman on the land stuff is ******** I'm afraid.

If any Tom Dick or Harry could voluntarily opt out of the Matrix, everyone would do it

They OWN you

And frankly, there's F**K all you can do about it

Your only defence in "life on the slave farm" is to be as well informed as you possibly can be and plan your life accordingly

each to their own.

"Your only defence in "life on the slave farm" is to be as well informed as you possibly can be and plan your life accordingly"

i generally agree with this statement, either way the law must be protected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't just the non-payment of council tax, though - it was that it was a derelict eyesore, and it did say they had made efforts to contact the owner. In such cases I don't see what's wrong with a compulsory purchase if it's going to make the house available to someone else and get rid of a derelict eyesore.

You do wonder, though, how in this day and age people can apparently just forget about a property they own. Maybe the owner has gone abroad and subsequently died, or has got dementia. I don't think this sort of thing is all that uncommon. I saw a TV documentary not long ago - more than one case where neighbours were desperate for something to be done about a semi derelict eyesore of an empty house where the garden was a jungle. But it would usually be a long time before the council could do anything - they would have to make stringent efforts to find the owner first. Sometimes they would be successful, sometimes not.

If the owners ever do show up eventually, I dare say councils are obliged to hand over a fair price, after deducting expenses for doing up, back council tax, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for property rights usually, but if someone has so little use for a house that they can leave it unoccupied and without maintenance, left to rot for years and years on end, while there are others in need of housing, then I think it's fair enough that someone takes it from them and makes use of it.

I was looking at a (to me at least) beautiful double fronted victorian end terrace a few months back. Not in the most desirable part of town admittedly, but a nice big house with a big garden, facing the entrance of an award winning public park and within walking distance from a city center. Left to rot for years. I know someone who had a house on that street. They told me it had taken ages for the council to trace the person who owned it, who turned out to live abroad. It had squatters living in it but neighbours had complained, squatters kicked out, and house slowly going to ruin (still unoccupied, boarded up windows etc) without anyone to look after it.

I'd have quite liked to buy it and try fixing it up myself, but I'm pretty certain they'd either not be interested or would want so much for it that I wouldn't be able to afford to fix it up (for it to be worthwhile to fix up they'd virtually have to give it away - which is probably why they're just sitting on it letting it rot in the hope that the surrounding area growsn in value to make it worth more I'd guess).

Breaks my heart whenever I see it as I imagine what it could be (and probably once was). It could be such a nice house again.

I'd be quite happy to see someone take houses like this from the owners with zero compensation and let someone else have them who is prepared to put in the time and/or money to bring them back to life.

Edited by RandomFactor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

re the freedom and slavery debate.

Imagine there was no society.

you are born hungry and helpless...so by the definition of ownership, ie they control your ability to survive, in the stateless world, you are born a slave, your owner is your parent.

eventually you grow up and need to kill bears to survive...You move to new lands as your parents and siblings have just enough bears on their plot...you go 10 miles up river with your club, and find another land, but it is occupied with another family...you are hungry...so you club their family members to death and take their bears and control their weaker members.

They are now owned by you. You are not free either as without them, you are not going to eat or defend your bear stock.

There is no escaping ownership...probably because ownership is in its purest form simply a symptom of tribal co-operation and only exists through strength.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for property rights usually, but if someone has so little use for a house that they can leave it unoccupied and without maintenance, left to rot for years and years on end, while there are others in need of housing, then I think it's fair enough that someone takes it from them and makes use of it.

I was looking at a (to me at least) beautiful double fronted victorian end terrace a few months back. Not in the most desirable part of town admittedly, but a nice big house with a big garden, facing the entrance of an award winning public park and within walking distance from a city center. Left to rot for years. I know someone who had a house on that street. They told me it had taken ages for the council to trace the person who owned it, who turned out to live abroad. It had squatters living in it but neighbours had complained, squatters kicked out, and house slowly going to ruin (still unoccupied, boarded up windows etc) without anyone to look after it.

I'd have quite liked to buy it and try fixing it up myself, but I'm pretty certain they'd either not be interested or would want so much for it that I wouldn't be able to afford to fix it up (for it to be worthwhile to fix up they'd virtually have to give it away - which is probably why they're just sitting on it letting it rot in the hope that the surrounding area growsn in value to make it worth more I'd guess).

Breaks my heart whenever I see it as I imagine what it could be (and probably once was). It could be such a nice house again.

I'd be quite happy to see someone take houses like this from the owners with zero compensation and let someone else have them who is prepared to put in the time and/or money to bring them back to life.

Id agree with you but for the fact if i owned some land the same council more than likely wouldnt let me build on it, so they most certainly arent their draconian powers house for the benefit of mankind.

Edited by Corruption

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Id agree with you but for the fact if i owned some land the same council more than likely wouldnt let me build on it, so they most certainly arent their draconian powers house for the benefit of mankind.

I don't think council powers are particularly draconian when it comes to tackling empty, abandoned, derelict houses. From all I've heard they have to jump through a lot of legal hoops first. Presumably they would have to show that they have made every effort to find/contact the owner over a certain period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't HPC generally in favour of creditors aggressively pursuing defaulting debtors and seizing their assets?

What's this language I keep seeing like "HPC is in favour of this" and "HPC is against that"? HPC isn't a cult where everybody has to agree with each other, it's a forum for discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's this language I keep seeing like "HPC is in favour of this" and "HPC is against that"? HPC isn't a cult where everybody has to agree with each other, it's a forum for discussion.

Yes, but I would have thought that most people on this forum would be in favour of empty, derelict homes being made habitable and available for someone to live in. (As long as they don't go to auction and end up being bought by some spivvy developer gloating about his massive profit on HUTH, of.course...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's this language I keep seeing like "HPC is in favour of this" and "HPC is against that"? HPC isn't a cult where everybody has to agree with each other, it's a forum for discussion.

If you dissent we will track you down and excommunicate you..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should all leave, move to Poland, burn our passports then come back as immigrants and get a free house.

It's just a game till they hand you a gun and send you out to protect "freedom" (as far as I can tell freedom means their freedom not ours) . Play the game as best you can. They set the rules and for some reason most people play along.

When they are handing out guns, leave. It seems to me that if someone hands you a gun and demand you give up your life for king and country then the best thing you can do is either hand it back, if not allowed, shoot the @@@@ giving you the gun.

Would be interesting to see what would happen in this day and age if they start a real war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's this language I keep seeing like "HPC is in favour of this" and "HPC is against that"? HPC isn't a cult where everybody has to agree with each other, it's a forum for discussion.

I think the only two things we all agree on are, house prices are too high and second hand sales men are @@@@s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be interesting to see what would happen in this day and age if they start a real war.

It would last about two weeks, at most, so there's no need to worry about conscription.

Even if the remaining nukes weren't used in that time to leave smoking craters where most major cities used to be, the loss rate of aircraft and other expensive toys would be impossible to sustain, let alone finance. Not to mention that Western economies would collapse, as so much essential production is now in China.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   212 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.