Increased Council tax banding 40 years later

[Hectorsmother]

Posting on here for traffic.

We bought a house in October 2025 that had had an extension done in the 1980s.

For 40 years the house has been on band X, and we have continued to pay the same band for nearly 6 months. Council have written to say they have re-evaluated the property's value in 1994 and deemed it was worth more than they thought and therefore because of the sale we are now being moved up a higher tax band.

This feels utterly farcical and money grabbing from the council.

My ex bought a bungalow in band E. Since then he’s redeveloped it into a large house. It will stay band E likely until he sells it/ at which point they will most likely re and it to band G. The injustice here is that his house which is 2x as big as mine snd twice as expensive is band e vs mine band G….

however, what’s also nonsense is that as two single people households we pay completely different rates despite consuming the same service

the whole system
needs a rethink and don’t get me started on value for money, or council spending waste snd inefficiency……,

I was always under the impression that when the band is implemented on the property that when it's sold if there has been any extensions then on sale a new band is put on the property.a

I have a friend who lives in London, in a two bed terraced house, worth in the region of £1,000,000. Her council tax is £77 a month. My house is worth less than half of that and my council tax is over three times the cost of hers.

The whole thing needs rationalising.

I've rechecked all the paperwork. The property information questionnaire has the works declared as having been completed in 1984 and the current council tax band. I have also checked the website as helpfully pointed out and there is NO improvement marker?!?!

Neither the conveyancing nor the solicitor have pointed any of this out.

I am even more appalled.

I am genuinely sorry, but that argument doesn't hold water.
When your income goes up, so does your tax.

In this situation, your income has gone up you have enjoyed not paying a higher tax. You've the job and the new recruit is not being charged the higher rate because the rules say change of recruitment will trigger the higher tax. Surely you can see how ridiculous this sounds and this is the situation we are in.

Did you buy the property from the owners that built the extension? I assume so and this is why it only triggered at the next sale, albeit 40 years later.

I understand the frustration, but that's the system.

I expected our house to have an improvement marker on it when we bought, due to a large extension, but thankfully not. I assume it was at the lower end of the band previously and at the upper end now. Or it got missed!

Thank you, the dogs were distracting me. I shall ensure the appeal states a statute and not a sculpture.

The previous owners chose to extend. They chose to sink their money into this and undertake a loss. They have declared it and I don't know what came of it in 1991. To cite all of this 35 years later is disgustingly money grabbing.

If I chose to pursue a higher paying job, I can expect to be taxed contemporaneously as it impacts on any wealth trajectory. I wont expect to keep hold of the increased wages because I've sunk in more hours at work and then let my junior colleague pay the increased tax when they reach my level at the ladder.

Moreover, do you also budget for Wars? Epidemics? Unknowable unknowables?
I don't even want to get started on the tawdry council services we get in return for these increased and increasing prices.

Yes we bought it from the people who did they extension. I've checked there is no improvement marker.

Yes it seems like this, but quite galling non? I am shocked by one of the other posters friend paying 77 in London for a million pound house.

I just looked at ours and we have an improvement notice due to an extention 20 years ago
Out of about a 100 houses 3 are a band higher than us
We are planning a move so it's another thing to check on what we buy

Same happened to us last year. Moved from C to E. And they made us back pay from the start of the financial year! 😆

Thank you for understanding. Genuinely.
I am surprised by some of the comments with a very simplistic understanding. There seems to be an inherent incongruity to the whole system and that is the just the side where the money goes in!

Disgusting.

There is a reason for this, bear with me. I used to work in council tax. Before my time but I believe in the old rates days anyone who improved a property would see the immediate increase in rates to coincide with the new increased value of the property.

The upshot was not as many people improved their property especially landlords. Poll tax was brought in as a "fairer" option and then Council Tax was rushed in which did result in a chunk of properties being banded incorrectly.

The property you bought will have had a marker on the VOA website, this is publically available, my own house has a marker as I have extended and done other alterations. Your solicitor was I believe negligent in failing to alert you to this potential band increase. They would be aware that band increases are likely for extended properties.

The VOA are the ones who value the property and the council are the ones who bill it. You could try to challenge it but if it has just been assessed then it is unlikely to change.

The main ones that get changed are the ones that have been wrong for a long time. I had someone ring in, he was a 2 bed in a row of six 3 beds, they had all been assessed as the same band, he was then dropped down a band to reflect the 2 bed status.

All Council Tax bands are based on what a property value would have been in 1994 even the ones built now.

It is appalling and unfair

what’s unfair for you op is not necessarily that’s it’s now rebanded into the correct rate ( although as said the whole council tax bands and rates needs a good rethink) but that it was not called out at all as part of the conveyancing process. This should be mandatory so at least you go into it with transparency rather than being blindsided retrospectively and you can then make the decision whether it’s the house you want or not

Perhaps have a look on rightMove sold prices in your area and see what other houses bands are too, which would help if you do decide to ask for a reevaluation of bands

Thank you for this insightful post. This was exactly the kind of information I was hoping for when I did my original post.

I am curious about the Poll tax you mention. Please can you tell us more that.

I have looked at the VOA website and our house doesn't have a marker on in. The dates it states was 1991 and I have the property questionnaire that states the extension was done in 1984. I am not sure how my solicitor could have picked that up.

A big part of my dissatisfaction comes from the fact that this extension was done 40 years ago. FORTY!! How long is the arm of retrospective taxation?

Anyway, thank you once again for post.

Poll tax caused riots. As a student on a £1k a year grant (basically covered my rent and nothing more) I had to pay Poll Tax I think it was £16 which was honestly ridiculous. I don't know a huge amount about it.

Council tax is a hereditament, so 50% property and 50% person (2 adults, and this can mean a single parent with a child who hits 18, but they would be exempt if they were in full time education) hence why a single occupant gets a 25% discount on the person side. As land comes into it bungalows are often 1 band higher than the equivalent house due to footprint.

Council Tax is a government tax collected locally. D band is the original starting point for all other bands to be calculated off. Where I worked this was a 3 bed detached house. Everything was a percentage higher or lower than the D band. All the exemptions and exceptions both persons (students, apprentices on low income) and properties (empty unfurnished between tenants, adapted properties for disabled occupants) were all standardised across the country. Legislation and case law set things in stone,

Since then certain powers were handed to councils to determine what they charge for second homes etc. There is a pot of money needed for the services that the councils provide and I believe that central gov funding has been cut and cut and cut so that councils struggle to keep up what services they provided.

The VOA marker would have now been removed and would have shown on the page of addresses on the street. I am sure if you click into your property you can see your previous band. I loved my job, it was fascinating and we helped as many people as we could within the rules around reminders etc. It is a tax, the council can take a lot of steps to recoup any monies owed. Because of this after your mortgage/rent, pay your council tax next.

@Goodadvice1980 we are in this process at the moment. All neighbours are band E and we are band F.

We have had 2 rejections of our evidence from VO but we’re not giving up. Do you have any advice for me that might help clinch our appeal ? Thanks

Yes. The previous employee got lucky. Doesn't mean you should too.

It's a shame and I can see why it's annoying but, unless your house has been banded incorrectly, it is absolutely fair. You haven't got a leg to stand on.

Look at it from another point of view if you owned a house the same as yours and had always paid the correct rate, wouldn't you pissed off if someone was paying less than you?

We have to pay for council services. Whining about not being able to pay less than the standard is a little odd.

You might end up inadvertantly having everyone else's raised to match yours. Are you currently friendly with your neighbours? Is there any difference between the properties such as end of terrace, extension, garage?

What evidence did you provide so far? For me I would be looking at any floor plans you can pull from Rightmove to show they are the same layout/footprint. Google maps to show the plot size is the same as yours. Google streetmaps to show they are the same/very similar from the outside.

As you typed that out, didnt you realist that your example is exactly fair. The tax needs to be paid, the new person coming in needs to pay their fair share, the person going out got away with it yes but you cant turn back time.

The current tax liability is now correct.

I voted that you were being unreasonable because you should be paying the appropriate council tax for the size of the house. But imo it should increase when an extension is completed. So I understand your shock in that regard.

Presumably it has a very very small social services liability.