Bailiffs and whether the debt follows to parental property

[Mydogisagentleman]

My DD left a 3 year relationship when the bailiffs arrived at the rental property she shared with her partner.
She was a full time student and exempt from paying.
He disagreed with council tax and didn't pay, on top of that, he wrote a completely fictional person as the tenant.
There is no chance of reconciliation and he is moving back to live with his parents.
Is there a possibility that debt collectors could knock on their door?
DD was very fond of them and is considering telling them. He probably wouldn't.

Good advice.

I'm afraid that both of them are responsible for the entire debt, so if they can't find him they will probably come after her. If she's on a low income they should accept a payment plan.

My nephew got into a similar situation at university when one of his flatmates failed his first year. He was going to resit the module that he failed at the end of the year and and kept living in the flat and studied for the one module and worked (as did they all) and none of them really thought that he was technically no longer a student but he wasn't so they discovered at the end of the year that they hadn't been paying council tax that they should have paid.

This doesn't also preclude her separately chasing him for his share as a civil matter.

So pay it off to protect her from jail and ccls then chase him for half after.

Yes they could and will. She needs to pay it now.

Stop trying to scare OP with the jail talk!

If the daughter is in Scotland or Wales she won't be going to jail ever for non payment of CT. If in England theoretically she might under extreme circumstances. But it is vanishingly unlikely given current issues.

I agree, jail is very unlikely indeed. CCJs are going to be a serious issue - and she might already have one. And of course the debt itself. Which will be growing daily. Get is sorted op!

They do turn up at the door yes, we had an incident when we moved into a house, previous owners failed to pay energy bills & bayliffs turned up at the door.
The delight on the bayliffs faces when I told them the old owners new address was a picture! They moved just a few streets away.

Why would it grow daily? Yes the bailiffs will add their fees, but not on a daily basis

well, every day they act to try and recover the debt, it gets larger. A small debt can easily end up many orders of magnitude greater once it gets as far as court costs, and bailiff fees etc

So much poor advice. I would advise your daughter to get proper advice. Was she named on the tenancy and if so I assume she was not the sole tenant.

Most councils state that the non students are responsible for the bill and would only name them on the bill but she needs to a. check the disregard was correctly applied for and b. the council only named him on the bill. I don't know whether this is the actual legal position or whether there is discretion from individual councils, which is why proper legal advice is needed.

But regardless of that they cannot take anything belonging to your parents. Debt collectors can only take property/goods etc belonging to the debtor eg, the person named on the court order.

I see what you mean!

To clarify. She was named on the tenancy agreement and the other bills were 50/50.
I have advised her to call the council for proper advice.
I don't like paying £280 a month, but suck it up

This is what Manchester say, have a look for the council area she was in

1. Properties where one or more household members (over 18) are not students, cannot be exempt. The non-students are responsible for the bill. The non-students may be able to get another type of reduction. For example, a single parent with a child over 18 who is a student may be entitled to a single person discount.
2. If the student is the sole owner or tenant, they remain liable for the bill but may be able to get another type of reduction if someone who isn't a student is living with them.

https://www.manchester.gov.uk/info/500334/students/5783/money_off_council_tax_for_students_and_people_who_live_with_students

As PP have said, she's just as responsible as she is. She needs to ring and make payments of some kind before this gets even worse.

Not necessarily. If she properly applied for a disregard and was not named on the bill she is not liable. Which is why she needs to find out these things.

The non-students are responsible for the bill...........

Basic ally what I said, she is only liable for any periods when she wasnt a student.

I suggest contacting The Council either by letter or email with details of her period(s) of study and the appropriate certificate issued by her college.

They can then resolve who is liable for what period(s)

I found the legislation which was a clear as mud but in a 2023 House of Commons research briefing it states:

"Where more than one person lives in a property they are jointly and severally liable to pay the council tax bill. This means that both or all of them can be pursued for the full amount if the bill is unpaid. However, students, and severely mentally incapacitated people, cannot be held jointly and severally liable."

She is jointly and severally liable if she is named on the tenancy agreement. Whether she is named on the bill is irrelevant. Many councils just put one name on the bill, it doesn't stop the other tenant/s or owner from being J&S liable.

The only reason OP's daughter wouldn't be jointly liable is if only the boyfriend was named on the tenancy and she was just a lodger.

As others have said there is a hierarchy of liability for council tax..I would ring the council tax office, explain the situation and give contact details for the boyfriend's parents. With any luck they will pursue him first as he is more likely to be able to pay as he is earning. They can also do an attachment to earnings where they take a certain % directly from his salary.

That is not correct Waspie.

Yes it is. It's clear in the LGFA 1992 (as amended).

Subsection (3) above shall not apply as respects any day on which one or more of the persons there mentioned fall to be disregarded for the purposes of discount by virtue of F3paragraph 2 (severely mentally impaired) or 4 (students etc.) of Schedule 1 to this Act] and one or more of them do not; and liability to pay the council tax in respect of the dwelling and that day shall be determined as follows—
(a)if only one of those persons does not fall to be so disregarded, he shall be solely liable;
(b)if two or more of those persons do not fall to be so disregarded, they shall each be jointly and severally liable.

Only the non students are liable

It also appears that all of the local authorities I have looked up (about half a dozen so far) plus citizens advice plus the house of commons interpret this the same way and state the student is not liable to be pursued and only the non student(s) are liable

I trust the guidance offered by Citizens Advice was along these lines: DDs name on the tenancy agreement, utility bills, electoral roll are irrelevant. Was her name on the Council Tax bill? She should have applied to the council for an exemption: https://www.gov.uk/council-tax/who-has-to-pay
If she did this and accordingly is not named on the CT bill, the council will not be pursuing her.
If she did not apply for an exemption, as far as the council know she is jointly liable with the ex, who may be in more trouble if he has completed official forms with incorrect information. She should contact the council immediately to explain what has happened, including the invented tenant, and see if they are willing to retrospectively grant her exempt status, which they might - or might not.
If they will, she needs to ask that her name be taken off the Liability Order and she should hear no more from the bailiffs. If they won't, she is jointly liable with the ex and might as well see if she can strike an agreement with him to pay the debt. Worst case is she will have to pay it herself. If bailiffs turn up, they will probably find nothing of value of DD's to levy against but will try to pressure her into making a payment plan. Otherwise ... go back to CA for more advice.

I agree entirely with Perhaps.