Council tax surcharge on empty property

[Pargeter]

We moved out of our old house in April 2025 and it has been vacant since, although it has been for sale continuously since late 2023.
Therefore the East Devon District Council have been charging a 100% premium on top of the normal council tax since this April,
as it is allowed to do on properties vacant for more than a year. There is a relief available from this premium for up to 12 months
where a property is being actively actively marketed BUT the council's webpage defines this as being available for:
"Dwellings being actively marketed for sale (class G) *12 months from when first marketed"
- and so have denied us any relief on the basis that the potential period of exemption expired in 2024 before any premium arose
and in fact before the property fell vacant.

The same council webpage carries for further clarification a link to the government's "Guidance on the implementation of the council tax premiums on long-term empty homes and second homes"
which they claim supports their approach. I quoted the relevant paragraph from this to the council when I wrote to protest as follows:

"It is perfectly illogical to determine that the period of exception from the premium charge should begin from a date before the onset of the premium charge itself.
An exemption from nothing is no exemption at all. The government guidance states:

“"This exception applies to dwellings which have been marketed for sale or let for 12 months or less.
This may include where the dwelling was marketed prior to the local authority applying a premium.
The exception will end either when the 12-month period has ended, when the dwelling has been sold or let or when the dwelling is no longer actively marketed for sale or let.”"

This does not state that the exception period begins on the marketing date. I suggest that the correct reading is that the relief is available even where the marketing predates the premium charge but that the exception period does start to run until 12 months after the property falls vacant. Otherwise the full benefit of the exception can only be obtained by an owner leaving a property empty for a full year before marketing. This encourages behaviour opposite to the government's objective and so I presume it is not their meaning or intention.

Further, the guidance begins: "“The government has been clear that its intention is not to penalise those who are genuinely trying to bring their dwelling back into use as a sole/main residence.”"
I cannot think that to deny the full potential relief to owners who bring their property to market sooner rather than later is anything but a penalty."

The council simply flatbatted a further denial of relief and presumably believe their reading of the government wording is self-evidently correct. I see that there is an appeals process although I'm not sure whether it applies to points of interpretation. First of all though I'd be very grateful for an opinion on whether my argument has any legs.

[someone]

This is a legal question not a tax question and you're unlikely to find anyone who can comment definitively - not least because it's unlikely to be an area of law that comes up in normal accountancy.

FWIW, I asked copilot and it agreed with the council interpretation - but you really need to find a legal group similar to this to ask the question. It hinges on interpretation and also (I believe) the intent of parliament.

Ultimately, if the council won't budge you're likely going to have to get lawyers involved anyway. Unless you can find a qualified lawyer in this area who asserts definitively that the council interpretation of the law is wrong, you're going to spend more on legal fees arguing it in court than you are just paying the bill. (I suspect the best you're going to get is someone saying "the council could be wrong but we'd have to take it to appeal to be sure")

Copilot tells me that court fees are c 2K to take a simple matter to the court of appeal but barrister and solicitor costs are like in the 17-36K (double if you use a KC). You've got to be absolutely certain you will win and get costs awarded before it's worth embarking on this route!

Just going to the valuation tribunal is much cheaper (typically 0-2K depending on how much representation you have) but based on copilot's assessment I'm not sure that there's much hope there. There's always the chance if you try this the council will fold and give you the 12 months from the date you moved out rather than the date you started marketing but I'm speculating.