Waverley residents protest against council planning fees
Instead they say they have been pursued and threatened with court action if they do not pay.On Tuesday, residents protested outside the council's executive meeting and challenged the authority on whether it had any "genuine intent" to review its CIL process.CIL is typically charged to developers as a contribution towards essential infrastructure; however a number of homeowners across Waverley have also faced the charge.
In most cases the council said it had been correct in issuing the bills - despite anger from those who felt wronged.The exception, it said, was the case of Steve and Caroline Dally who were billed £70,000 for a home extension and given no opportunity to argue their case.The rest, the council said, were not as straightforward – with any long-term solutions not expected until at least May,Councillor Liz Townsend, portfolio holder for planning, said the council was committed to carrying out a discretionary review which could be requested by homeowners previously subject to CIL liability.
Council leader Paul Follows said there were three categories of individuals in the process.Some, such as Mr and Mrs Dally, who "may have had some fault of the council", and others who were "advised poorly… as part of their building project".He added: "And thirdly there are individuals that disagree with the concept of homeowner CIL but have been charged legally for it at this point of time and that's subject to a different discussion of whether we should charge homeowners or not."The council said it would be taking this final group into consideration in May when it was due to discuss potential changes to CIL.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
6 days ago
- BBC News
M&S backs farmers over UK Labour ministers in inheritance tax row
A senior executive at major UK retailer Marks and Spencer has criticised planned changes to inheritance tax, warning they will put off young people from working in April 2026, inherited agricultural assets worth more than £1m will be taxed at a rate of 20%, half the usual McLean, M&S head of agriculture and fisheries, told BBC Wales the policy will "definitely" be a "deterrent for young people coming into the industry".A UK government spokesperson said the "reforms to agricultural and business property relief are vital to fix the public services we all rely on". Ministers insist "three quarters of estates will continue to pay no inheritance tax at all, while the remaining quarter will pay half the inheritance tax that most people pay, and payments can be spread over 10 years, interest-free".One farming union warned last month that Welsh family farms have been thrown into "turmoil" by the changes. Speaking at the Royal Welsh Show in Llanelwedd, Mr McLean, firmly backed the farmers in the argument. M&S, he said, was "very, very clear" that agriculture should be treated differently by the government."The whole taxation system was devised to recognise that the margins of profitability in agriculture weren't like other industries," he said."That's why you had a difference in how the inheritance tax approach was set up." Mr McLean warned the changes, announced by Chancellor Rachel Reeves last November, would "impact confidence"."They definitely will be a deterrent for young people coming into the industry, and we want to see a vibrant, viable farming structure where young people can come in and make a good living and be proud of what they do," he said. "So being able to give greater surety, greater security is going to be key to viable farming structure going forward."The UK government spokesperson added: "Our commitment to farming and food security is steadfast, which is why we've allocated a record £11.8bn to sustainable farming and food production over this parliament and appointed former NFU president Baroness Minette Batters to recommend new reforms to boost farmers profits."
The Independent
6 days ago
- The Independent
Grieving families warned they will have to work out inheritance tax on pensions
Grieving families will be forced to pay inheritance tax (IHT) on pensions after ministers decided to press ahead with reforms despite a fierce backlash. Rachel Reeves announced in last year's Budget that unspent pensions would be added to estates from April 2027 in a move that is expected to raise more than £1bn a year for the Exchequer by the end of the decade. However, while it previously thought that pension providers would be responsible for calculating and paying any death duties, HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) has confirmed this will instead be the responsibility of the 'personal representative', or executor, of the estate. Death in service payments, meanwhile, will be exempt, ministers confirmed as they published the results of a consultation on how the scheme will work. The government estimates that around 10,500 estates will become newly liable for inheritance tax under the changes in 2027. Polling earlier this month found the move was the most unpopular tax measure announced by Labour since entering office. Just a fifth of Britons (21 per cent) supported the policy, while 44 per cent were opposed. Sir Steve Webb, a former pensions minister, told the Times: 'Life is tough enough when you have just lost a loved one without having extra layers of bureaucracy on top. In future, the person dealing with the estate will need to track down all of the pensions held by the deceased which may have any balances in them, contact the schemes, collate all the information and put it into an online calculator and then work out and pay the IHT bill. 'Complications will no doubt arise where the family member cannot track down all of the deceased's pensions or where providers are slow to supply the information needed to work out the IHT bill.' He called for 'serious thought' to be given to changing the rules around penalties for late payment. Pete Maddern from the insurer Canada Life said death in service benefits 'provide a critical short-term financial lifeline for loved ones following the death of a working-age earner. Including them in the changes risked much wider repercussions not only for grieving families, but also for the employers that provide these benefits for their workforce.' It was released just a day after cabinet minister Liz Kendall warned Britain faces a 'tsunami of pensioner poverty' without major reform to the system, as she launched a review of the state pension age, opening the door for it to be increased. Age UK warns those looking to retire in 2050 are already on course to receive £800 per year less than current pensioners. The state pension age is currently 66 but is already set to rise to 67 in 2028 and 68 by 2046. Labour has already come under fire for the so-called 'tractor tax', an inheritance tax raid which critics warn could sound the death knell for family farms in England. Under those changes farms valued at £1m or more will be liable for 20 per cent inheritance tax for the first time.
The Guardian
7 days ago
- The Guardian
‘Broken' water industry in England and Wales faces tighter controls under new watchdog
The 'broken' water sector in England and Wales faces an era of much tighter oversight after a landmark review, including the creation of a new sector watchdog to 'prevent the abuses of the past'. With water and sewerage companies reeling from what the report's author Sir Jon Cunliffe called their 'Great Stink' moment, the government announced it would be abolishing Ofwat and combining its powers with those of other water watchdogs under a new super-regulator. The environment secretary, Steve Reed, told parliament on Monday that ministers would be immediately adopting five of Cunliffe's 88 recommendations, including creating a real-time sewage map with automatic data that names and shames water companies. At the moment, the companies are responsible for reporting their own spills. Campaigners and environment groups will have more of a say in the cleaning-up of their local rivers, Reed announced, and regional water boards will be set up with powers to clean up rivers and seas locally as well as planning essential infrastructure. 'Volunteers and citizen scientists will be able to engage for the first time through regional structures. Citizens, local authorities, businesses will all have a voice,' he said. A 'super regulator' will be created to replace Ofwat, which has been blamed for letting water companies preside over decades of financial mismanagement and widespread sewage dumping. This new watchdog will also take in the powers of the Environment Agency (EA), the Drinking Water Inspectorate and Natural England, to avoid duplication of efforts and provide one clear regulatory system for the industry. Announcing this, Reed said: 'I agree with Sir Jon that water regulation has been too weak, too complex and ineffective. Having four separate regulators with overlapping and conflicting remits has failed customers and the environment.' However, Cunliffe told the Guardian it would be 2027 at the earliest before the new body was fully set up, comparing it to the media regulator. 'We looked at Ofcom, which took two years,' he said. Launching his 465-page report at the London Museum of Water and Steam on Monday, he said the current system had failed: 'If we are to achieve the water sector we need, we need to look at all the factors that have contributed to our Great Stink moment. Some companies have manifestly acted in their private interest but against the public interest. That must be prevented in future.' The Great Stink was the name given to the terrible hot summer of 1858 that created such an awful smell from the Thames that Sir Joseph Bazalgette was tasked with creating the capital's sewer system. Another recommendation Reed is adopting from Cunliffe's report is to create an ombudsman with legal powers to recoup funds for customers who face water outages, and Reed will set out 'strong ministerial directives' for Ofwat and the EA while they are merged, as Cunliffe recommended. The rest of the suggestions will be considered over the summer, with conclusions to be published in a white paper in the autumn. Cunliffe also proposed the creation of a new formal turnaround regime to allow struggling companies space to recover under 'regulatory forbearance' which could let them avoid fines. Thames Water, the UK's largest water company with 16 million customers in London and the south-east, is loaded with £20bn of debt and struggling to stave off financial collapse into special administration, a form of temporary nationalisation. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion However, it may not be able to benefit from the proposed turnaround regime, according to Reed, who said the government was prepared for the company to enter special administration if that became necessary. The company has been asking to be let off more than £1bn in fines, arguing it faces financial collapse if it has to pay for committing environmental offences. Some campaign groups welcomed the report. Mark Lloyd, the chief executive of the Rivers Trust, said the 88 recommendations 'would lead to a dramatic improvement in the water environment and far more cost-effective delivery'. Others were less enthusiastic, particularly as Cunliffe was barred by Reed from exploring the possibility of nationalisation. The water campaigner Feargal Sharkey accused the government of a year of inaction on sewage and called for the environment secretary to quit: 'The first year has been so chaotic,' he said. 'Quite frankly I think Steve Reed now needs to resign and hand the job over to somebody who can be more effective.' A spokesperson for Keir Starmer said the prime minister had full confidence in Reed, who was doing an 'excellent' job. The GMB union called for the renationalisation of water. Gary Carter, its national officer, said: 'Water privatisation has been a disastrous failure. It's a disgrace – and one Ofwat has overseen. Now is the time to fundamentally reform the water sector and renationalise this vital resource.' Reed said that he had not considered nationalisation as an option because his department had found the cost would be in excess of £100bn which is money which could be used for services such as the NHS. Economists have queried this figure and suggested it could cost as little as £14.5bn. Cunliffe said that regardless of nationalisation being out of his remit, the ownership structure was not necessarily the cause of the sewage pollution, arguing that the UK had been the 'dirty man of Europe' under a nationalised model. He also defended the high pay of water company executives after anger caused by the news last week about Southern Water's chief executive receiving a doubled pay package. 'We are not proposing the regulator should set pay scales for the industry,' Cunliffe said. 'They do need to recruit, and you have to attract the best people. What really makes the public angry is when the pay is there but the performance is not.'
