Second home owners in North Yorkshire are selling their properties due to a hike in council tax — and are urging the local authority to reduce the “unfair” charges.
It comes as more than 200 English local authorities have charged second-home owners double council tax since the powers were granted last April. North Yorkshire Council have recently renewed the premium after it was introduced last year.
It has so far raised more than £10million in revenue and the authority says extra charges are to make the property market more accessible to buyers looking for affordable homes, with all the proceeds going towards “much-needed” housing initiatives. These include supporting the delivery of more than 500 new affordable homes over the next four years.
There are more than 8,000 second homes in North Yorkshire and many are found on the coast and in villages in the Yorkshire Dales.
In the seaside town of Filey, retired couple Alison and Chris Hardaker have been forced to sell their holiday home.
The second homeowner levy will cost the couple £4,000 a year for the three-bed flat, which is double the tax they pay on their five-bedroom house in Leeds. Alison and Chris make no supplemental income on the second home, as they do not rent it out.
They have been staying there for around half the year, more than the last 15 years of owning it, as well as inviting family and friends to stay. The couple are members of Second Homeowners Opposed to Unfair Taxation (Shout), a group set up to try to persuade the council to scrap the extra tax.
The group fears instead of freeing up housing stock for those who need it, the premium will create more long-term empty properties, with Alison saying: “Second home owners are here all year round, including winter when the weather is very poor and it’s noticeably quiet, and so we use local restaurants, local shops, and we use local services like plumbers and roofers, so I think we contribute quite a lot in North Yorkshire. What do we get for our council tax? Well, we get the bins emptied. We’re basically paying more council tax to get the bins emptied infrequently.”
Her husband Chris added: “We’ve had to put the house on the market because come April it’s just going to be unaffordable. It’s with great reluctance that we’ve put the flat on the market, but we’ve had no choice in the matter. We’ve had many happy times here and lots of memories for us and our family and leaving is going to leave a bit of a hole in our lives. It’s (the second home council tax) completely unfair. I’d like to see it going back to being the council tax that everyone else pays but I can’t see that coming about.”
Alison and Chris Hardaker have had their property on the market for a year since the council tax hike was introduced but have only had four viewings in 12 months and have recently dropped the price to £165,000. They have been exempt from the extra charges whilst it is for sale but will have to pay the new levy from April.
The flat is being sold by Nicholsons Property Group, who told GB News some of the second homes for sale are not suitable for families and first-time buyers but ideally suited to second-home owners, who bring revenue to Filey. The increase in council tax for second-home owners was brought in by North Yorkshire Council to bring unused properties into full‑time occupation or to let others get on the ladder, meaning more homes are now for sale but not necessarily selling.
James Bowes, Senior Sales and Letting Negotiator for Nicholsons Property Group, said: “A lot of the second homes that are coming onto the market are the flats on the Crescent and the flats in the town centre. A lot of them don’t have parking, they don’t have outside space, which first-time buyers want. I bought my first house last year and my requirements were parking in a garden, and the second homes, typically in the town centre, they don’t have them.
“They are more suited as bolt holes for people come for the weekend or to stay a few weeks here. Second home owners that are being forced to sell now because of the council tax are aggrieved more than anything. There have been a lot of them have had them for 15 years plus, and they they’ve been paying council tax all that time and just to increase it overnight is not fair. They’re buying in the shops, they’re using the restaurants, using the pubs, the fish and chip shops and things, that sort of thing, so it does have an effect on the area now that they are moving.”
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS
- Monkey caught near prison with ‘crack cocaine’ during drug bust
- Man handed whole life order for murdering former partner’s sister and children in house fire
- Yorkshire family butcher renowned for creating everything from scratch vies for prestigious award
Under Government rules, if a second home is made available for rent for 140 days of the year and let out for 70 days, it is considered a holiday let and owners pay cheaper business rates instead of council tax. But James said many of the second homes in Filey also have restrictive covenants on them, meaning they cannot be let out as holiday lets, which would allow them to save money.
The scheme has so far raised over £10million in revenue across North Yorkshire, with the money set to be spent on housing projects, but there is concern it will turn tourist resorts like Filey into ghost towns. Councillor Sam Cross an Independent North Yorkshire Councillor for Filey, told the People’s Channel: “The levy is absolutely ridiculous. They’ve (North Yorkshire Council) used no common sense in actually imposing it. They’ve used the proverbial sledgehammer to crack a peanut. This has not solved any problems for the residents of Filey. The holiday homes are generally buildings that have been converted to flats and that aren’t really suitable for families or residents – they are holiday accommodation.
“Second home owners are now trying to sell their flats because of the tax, and they can’t sell them because they’re not ideal for young families to live in. Filey is a tourist town… we have tourists coming in the summer but people that have holiday homes also come in the winter time… they come all year round and they actually spend the money in the town and employ tradesmen to put in new bathrooms and kitchens and to do the gas checks and keep up to the property. So without second home owners, it’s a negative effect on the economy of Filey and business is down, people aren’t spending as much the and the tradesmen aren’t as busy as they could be.”
Despite welcoming the proposal, councillor Michelle Donohue-Moncrieff said the ringfencing of funds exclusively for housing-related schemes should be re-examined to take into account the impact on amenities and infrastructure. She is an Independent on North Yorkshire Council, representing Hunmanby, a ward three miles away from Filey and told Britain’s News Channel: “In some areas, residential housing is being used either for second home use or for holiday lets, which takes it out of primary residential use.
“Now, in some cases, those properties aren’t really suitable for residential, so I think in that situation we need to be sensible and recognise the fact that they’re not going to be used for a couple or for a family. The theory was that it would bring properties back into the market and back into primary use. What seems to have happened is that we’ve obviously had a lot of properties come onto the market, even a place like here, where there isn’t a huge amount that are clearly as a result of the second homes levy, but they’ve not sold. The infrastructure around here badly needs repair.
“An example I’ve used is highways. This would be an opportunity to use the money from the second homes levy to start getting some roads properly repaired and properly start getting the resurfacing programme properly going again. The problem we have got is the road network, and it’s not just in North Yorkshire; it is across the country because these budgets have been repeatedly underfunded; they have been starved. The type of works and the type of repairs that really needs doing aren’t being done and the state some roads are just downright disgraceful. We need to actually accept that road infrastructure matters. If you’re going to have more houses across North Yorkshire, you’ve got to have more vehicles on the roads.
“You’re going to have more movements. So you have to look at the infrastructure as well. It seems to me we’re raising a lot of money (through second home council tax) and if we’re not going to spend that 100% and we haven’t got a purpose and we can’t find projects to spend it on, then we shouldn’t be collecting it, or we should be using it to invest so the public can see a direct benefit to them, and that’s whether they live here or they’re visitors here.”
Some businesses here are concerned that an increased tax on second-home owners could ruin their livelihoods and Filey locals have mixed views on the extra charges. Janet was out walking her dogs near the seafront said: “I think we need to be careful of the consequences of that of that tax because if that’s if that stops people from having holiday homes to then rent out to people to come and visit this beautiful place, then who’s going to live in them? Because there’s only so many people that will want to move here, I would have thought. Yeah, I think it’s probably too much.”
Tony was out shopping and commented “I think that it’s theft, taken out of income that’s already been taxed and there’s no logic to it unless you go into also tax second cars, second boats, second holidays, second meal second whatevers. The double council tax is costing honest individuals who have saved and invested over £100,000, and it’s being spent on people haven’t saved and haven’t invested.”
Colin, who was also on the High Street, said: “I’m 50/50 on the double council tax for second homeowners. In some ways, I think it’s a good thing to kind of try to help people who are living locally buy a house, but then at the same time, we’re a seaside town, and we need the holidaymakers here to help keep seaside towns going.” Another shopper, Vicky, added: “I do see why they’re doing it, but you only have to look around and see a number of properties for sale to see what it’s actually done. So is it going to be a benefit in the long run? I’m not sure.”
The leader of North Yorkshire Council, Carl Les, said: “Affordable housing is one of the biggest challenges we face in North Yorkshire and we’re doing all we can to allow people to live in the places that they wish to. Introducing the council tax premium is aimed at discouraging people from buying or keeping second homes, helping more properties stay available for local residents. We have more than 9,000 people on housing waiting lists in the county and over 8,200 second homes. This policy is expected to raise around £10million annually for the council, with all the proceeds going towards much-needed housing initiatives. These include supporting the delivery of more than 500 new affordable homes over the next four years, in those areas of North Yorkshire where properties are needed the most.”
In other areas of the country, local authorities have either voluntarily axed the premium on second homeowners or have been forced into an about-turn over legalities. Rushcliffe Borough Council in Nottinghamshire has proposed scrapping the levy, just a year after introducing it, while Warwick District Council was ordered to compensate hundreds of taxpayers after it “acted outside the law” by enforcing the levy despite failing to specify the technicalities of the premium.
Second homeowners from across North Yorkshire and beyond are joining the ever-growing group and one of the first of its kind in England, Second Homeowners Opposed to Unfair Taxation (Shout), set up to try to persuade the council to scrap the extra tax. Its members are concerned instead of freeing up housing stock for those who need it, the premium will create more long-term empty properties.
Shout has been emboldened by recent events in Warwick, where second-home owners were refunded their premium payments because the district council had not done a proper impact assessment. In North Yorkshire, the council has said the decision to introduce the premium was made by the elected full council in 2024 and that all necessary processes were followed and related reports published.
For now, the council stands firm in its position that the premium will tackle the shortage of affordable housing in an area that has more than 9,000 families on its waiting lists for homes.
Our Standards:
The GB News Editorial Charter
