Council tax following sale and client confidentiality

Trusts Discussion
1

I was wondering if members could give me some assistance regarding their experiences following the sale of a property and the transfer of the Council Tax account.

In the current case (though this has happened before with a sale) I have assented a property to the beneficiaries of an estate. Following this I contacted the local authority to confirm that the property has been transferred out of the estate and asked for a final bill.

Today the authority have contacted me saying that they have not heard from the new owner and thus can I provide the new owners name/s. They have cited Schedule 2, part 1, paragraph 2 of the Data Protection Act 2018 and section 4 of the Council Tax (Administration and enforcement) regulations 1992 as why I should do this.

Now my standard response to this is that I cannot do this, it is covered by client confidentiality and thus not information I can provide. I normally find at this point that local authorities find it difficult to differentiate between GDPR (which is why they quote the Data Protection Act) and client confidentiality.

As for the Council Tax…regulations 1992 this is a new one on me today. However the section they quote is sub-titled “Information from public bodies” and so clearly doesn’t apply to solicitors.

I discussed this with the SRA ethics helpline before and they agreed that any information received during a matter is covered by client confidentiality and thus this also includes the name/s of any new owner of a property. However they noted that if we obtained our client’s instructions then we could provide the information the local authority are looking for.

Do other members have this issue with local authorities, do you simply tell them to go away, or provide them with the names?

2

The local authority has no legal power. As you say Reg 4 applies only to certain authorities and exceptions. Others required to respond are in Sch 2 of the Act e.g. HMRC.

Reg 3 applies to residents. It is not beyond contention that it cannot apply to a former owner and if “owner” was intended to include such a person it should have said so. If you asked any homme de la rue, on an omnibus or not, whether he “owns” the house whose sale he has just completed the correct answer would obviously be No. So obvious that even a judge should agree.

Before that point he would be the only person liable and the buyer is not liable nor susceptible to being served until he becomes a “resident” and cannot be an “owner” until after completion . You have to be a “resident” or an “owner” at the time of service of the notice surely, even if the information is in your possession or control. Furthermore under s14A of the Act regulations can only be made for obtaining information for prescribed “council tax purposes” defined in subs(7) as “purposes relating to a person’s liability to pay council tax”. Again, does this really include a non resident former owner and someone else’s liability to pay council tax? Though it might not be laudable to rely on this, I cannot find an offence for ignoring a notice even by someone clearly obliged to respond within 21 days or at all.

Anyway I can’t see a solicitor who is not an owner being a lawful recipient of a notice. And you have the nihil obstat of the Cubists, hopefully in writing, in view of their conspicuous infiltration by Expediency.

Jack Harper