Numbnuts Posted November 24, 2023 Share Posted November 24, 2023 (edited) 31 minutes ago, forestboy said: Wonder how many occupied by pensioners. Mine is ….only another 12,157 to find . Edited November 24, 2023 by Numbnuts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forestboy Posted November 24, 2023 Share Posted November 24, 2023 1 minute ago, Numbnuts said: Mine is . +1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted November 24, 2023 Share Posted November 24, 2023 Quite likely that young people share to pay the high rents rather than single occp. Paying more tax would be good for a lot of services that we would like, not just a living wage. Just look at the shortfall in health services! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred the shred Posted November 24, 2023 Share Posted November 24, 2023 +1. So that is three accounted for 🤣 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilly Posted November 24, 2023 Share Posted November 24, 2023 51 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: It was Bill Henderson, couldn't get by on less apparently, though it was a few years ago. He'll need £100k 1 hour ago, Non-Believer said: I reckon quite a lot, between young singlies and oldies, divorced/widowed etc. We've been promised a rating review since forever with the old system having been using rent values since the early 70s, for some reason Govt eternally drags its heels. Possibly because if all this was actually evaluated and applied it might involve some loss of revenue, in my cynical mind. Sorry my post crossed over with yours. Good points. I find it hard to comprehend that our voted-in MHKs dont seem to know about single occupancy regarding rates charged. Maybe they do and would rather keep the revenue in the coffers than the 2.9 million they might lose through a 25% discount on single occupancy. It maybe worth noting that some of the poorest councils of the Uk give such discounts but not on 2nd home ownership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilly Posted November 24, 2023 Share Posted November 24, 2023 42 minutes ago, Numbnuts said: Mine is ….only another 12,157 to find . Thank you, Numbnuts. Well that's what census says! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilly Posted November 24, 2023 Share Posted November 24, 2023 16 minutes ago, Fred the shred said: +1. So that is three accounted for 🤣 I only counted 2, Who is 3rd one? Ah! Sorry just realised 😅 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted November 24, 2023 Share Posted November 24, 2023 54 minutes ago, Lilly said: Sorry my post crossed over with yours. Good points. I find it hard to comprehend that our voted-in MHKs dont seem to know about single occupancy regarding rates charged. Maybe they do and would rather keep the revenue in the coffers than the 2.9 million they might lose through a 25% discount on single occupancy. It maybe worth noting that some of the poorest councils of the Uk give such discounts but not on 2nd home ownership. They wouldn’t lose anything with a single occupancy discount or a new system that replaces rates. It’ll have to raise the same amount in total, whatever system you use. Favour some people, and reduce what they pay, and others will pay more. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilly Posted November 24, 2023 Share Posted November 24, 2023 Just now, John Wright said: They wouldn’t lose anything with a single occupancy discount or a new system that replaces rates. It’ll have to raise the same amount in total, whatever system you use. Favour some people, and reduce what they pay, and others will pay more. I didnt realise that. So in the present rate charges, it would put up everyone else's rates? I'm not sure l would be happy with passing the burden on to other households, especially at this time with rising cost of living. Thank you for the information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted November 24, 2023 Share Posted November 24, 2023 6 minutes ago, Lilly said: I didnt realise that. So in the present rate charges, it would put up everyone else's rates? I'm not sure l would be happy with passing the burden on to other households, especially at this time with rising cost of living. Thank you for the information. The problem with rates reform, with either a revaluation based on rental value, or bands based on sale valuation, is the cost of the valuations and the nightmare of appeals, that’ll drag on for years. i reckon a revaluation would likely cost £2.5 to £5 million and take 5 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted November 24, 2023 Share Posted November 24, 2023 22 minutes ago, John Wright said: reduce what they pay, and others will pay more. Well, that's socialism for you! Anything wrong with that? Well, perhaps for Bride residents!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted November 24, 2023 Share Posted November 24, 2023 I appreciate that a rates revaluation would be convoluted and politically and populace disagreeable but............. Can we always put off reforms that would be equitable because they are politically difficult??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilly Posted November 24, 2023 Share Posted November 24, 2023 4 minutes ago, John Wright said: The problem with rates reform, with either a revaluation based on rental value, or bands based on sale valuation, is the cost of the valuations and the nightmare of appeals, that’ll drag on for years. i reckon a revaluation would likely cost £2.5 to £5 million and take 5 years. I think that puts a different view on my initial comment. It's probably unlikely to proceed due to the massive implementation costs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilly Posted November 24, 2023 Share Posted November 24, 2023 1 minute ago, Kopek said: I appreciate that a rates revaluation would be convoluted and politically and populace disagreeable but............. Can we always put off reforms that would be equitable because they are politically difficult??? You have a good point Kopek but l think it's implementation costs they appear massive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted November 24, 2023 Share Posted November 24, 2023 Over 50 years of operation? Just and only a few quid a year!!! A black friday special for Island residents!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.