Responsibility for LPT on House Puchase after May 1st

[Meath Lady]

I am curious to know whether anyone who has purchased a house since 1st May had to pay their portion of the property tax from date of purchase to end of year. I am about to close a sale and my solicitor has advised that the Law Society has stated that this is how it must be done. So I must pay from date of closing and vendor pays from 1st May til closing date. I have spoken to the LPT who deny this but my solicitor is adamant. Any advice

 

[Brendan Burgess]

The Law Society has set this up as a standard term and it is fair. You pay the LPT for In law, the liability falls on the person who occupied the house on 1 May.

In, fairness, anyone buying it after the 1 May, should pay their share. the period for which you own the house.

There is nothing to stop you as the buyer in specifying otherwise in the contract for purchase. If it's not specified, then you have no liability for it.

 

[Meath Lady]

Thanks Brendan. I am not really disputing the fairness of it, as i would agree that one should probably pay for their term of ownership only. However that completely contradicts what the LPT say so where does that leave one. I am unclear whether this is in my contract as just assumed I would not be paying it going on LPT information.

 

[mandelbrot]

Thanks Brendan. I am not really disputing the fairness of it, as i would agree that one should probably pay for their term of ownership only. However that completely contradicts what the LPT say so where does that leave one. I am unclear whether this is in my contract as just assumed I would not be paying it going on LPT information.

I think you're getting confused between the legal requirements around the property tax, and the standard clauses included in contracts by the Law Society.

Legally there's no obligation on the purchaser to pay any portion of the LPT charge that arose prior to their ownership, unless they sign a contract obliging them to do so.

If you don't want to, then you insist that the equivalent amount be knocked off the contract price - same net effect, but cheaper i'd imagine than changing clauses in the contract.