Just got a Rates Assessor valuation of £1,200/yr for a 14ft x 16ft self-built, timber hut with no services, no vehicular access, down a muddy, unmade track. That valuation essentially kills off having a hut for me, as I can’t afford another £100/month, no way. The hut was meant to provide free overnights for me and my family.
I shall contest it. And, of course, there is the “Small Business Rates Relief Scheme” which should give 100% “relief”. However this is entirely at the discretion of the government of the day and could be abolished tomorrow.
Do you think huts should attract rates? If not, where do I/we apply political pressure to have huts designated as rates-free?
It seems illogical for Scottish Government to support huts as affordable, occasional , basic overnight, self-built leisure accommodation that must not be rented out on the one hand and then to treat them as small businesses, rate them and potentially force owners down a “commercial” path in order to meet significant overheads. It is perverse in my view.
It also rankles that I built this hut with my own hands, on my own land, with my own savings, no council services provided, and then a local authority decides to help itself to around 10% of my gross income for my troubles.
I didn’t think huts did pay rates normally? That’s a crazy amount, more than we pay for our house!
I’ve looked at the thousandhuts.org resources and it suggests rates aren’t usually applicable because huts aren’t a dwelling, but it would be good to write a proper section on this to clarify for folk.
2 Likes
Hi Al,
People don’t usually have to pay the rates bill on a hut because they are able to claim back 100% “Small Business Rates Relief”.
But huts are still assessed and given a “Rateable Value” by the Assessors of Scotland (or whatever they are called).
When you get planning permission for a hut, the rates dept is informed automatically and will come looking for you.
If they do away with the rates relief scheme, I am screwed. No way can I afford an extra £100/month.
My opinion is that huts should be entirely exempt from the process of rates valuation in recognition of the fact that they cannot be lived in, or rented out, under the NPF4 definition of a “Hut”.
I’d like to know how to address this at a strategic, government level. I.e. Who do we lobby for a change?
(Wish I’d brought this up at The Gathering as a “Soapbox” item" ! A missed opportunity)
1 Like
Unless the hut is going to be used for a business, it makes no sense to me that ‘business rates’ are applied to a recreational hut as you will already be paying for council services through council tax etcetera.
Personally I would focus on engaging with someone senior at your local authority (a ward councillor perhaps) to gain agreement that rates are not applicable.
Which local authority area are you within out of curiosity?
This would be Stirling council. They will already be very familiar with huts at Carbeth, so will probably have heard (and ignored) well-articulated arguments in the past against huts attracting a rateable value.
When I queried the assessor he said that rates system was the only way for councils to know what buildings were on their patch. Therefore everything had to be assessed.
Sounded like they use it as a kind of reference data-base and therefore do not want to “miss” any buildings that could be generating an income for them. He agreed it was not a good fit, but them’s the rules etc.
EDIT: Of course, the genius move is that there are (natch) two agencies involved here; the Assessors of Central Scotland, who assess the rateable, and the local authority, who collects the rates. This will happily allow both parties to claim that it is the other who bears responsibility for any need for reform.
Yes, I suspect you are right. It is clearly an extremely frustrating situation and an unjustified application of business rates in my opinion.
I hope you are able to find someone to resolve matters and common sense will eventually prevail!
1 Like