Why isn't the house on the Property Price Register?

P

PebbleBeach2020

Registered User
Messages
635
A house in our estate (new development) is the only house in the estate that has not appeared on the Property Price Register.

A relative of the builder lives there. In previous developments done by same builder, the same thing. One builder is living in a house in a development for two years and still hasn't appeared on PPR. Another house in development that builder built is owned by another of the builders and is on PPR at a much reduced price.

Is there a logical explanation to these not appearing on PPR. The house that does appear at a much lower value or sale price, is that just a dodge of full stamp duty?

Sometime just doesn't sit right.
 
I don’t know if it’s still the case, but pre the MUD Act builders were able to retain control of owners management companies by retaining ownership of at least one unit. If it’s not on the register, it didn’t transfer.
 
I was looking at a development of three houses. Two houses had turned up on the PPR but the third one (1st occupied) didn't. I thought may be the owner of the original house/site didn't have to do that.

Sometime it could be due to incorrect spellings, an extra space/no space etc.

I also came across a scenario where a house in a development was offered at a discounted price but the buyer was asked not to do the PPR bit till all the houses in the estate are sold so that the other buyers don't see the discount offered. Not sure if its practically possible or not.
 
bbari1 said:
Sometime it could be due to incorrect spellings, an extra space/no space etc.
Click to expand...

On both of the houses given to family members or builders themselves? And the one that appears on PPR but heavily reduced price to reduce stamp duty, anything illegal in that? Would revenue be interested?
 
Gordon Gekko said:
I don’t know if it’s still the case, but pre the MUD Act builders were able to retain control of owners management companies by retaining ownership of at least one unit. If it’s not on the register, it didn’t transfer.
Click to expand...
The developer is trying to get rid of management of the estate asap. It's costing me money in terms of street lighting, insurances, running a waste treatment plant on site too. Retaining one house to keep control of management group isn't necessary in this instance.

I and other residents feel there something tax dodgy going on here.
 
Advised by who ?
Why isn’t the person advising you reporting it themselves if they believe there is an issue.
 
This sounds like mad stuff.

There is no evidence of wrongdoing, only gossip and hearsay.

What business is it of yours anyway?

I’m all for reporting wrongdoing but there are any number of explanations for what you’ve seen.

And based on your posts, it sounds more like a case of someone else with a grudge using you as a pawn in a bigger game.
 
Gordon Gekko said:
What business is it of yours anyway?
Click to expand...

Well as a law abiding tax payer isn't it everyone's responsibility to report suspect activity? What's the explanation for one if the directors house appearing on PPR about 300000 euro cheaper than the sane house in the new build estate?

Strange that in both estates all other houses appear bar the two houses, one for developer and one for his brother.

I don't think it's a grudge I think people are taking tax evasion seriously and maybe dye to those insurance adverts about putting his hand in yr pocket, people are more inclined not to turn a blind eye.
 
Transactions like that happen all the time. Selling a property below market value isn’t illegal. You have no idea of the structure of their business, how they pay themselves, etc. Based on what you’ve posted, I see no evidence of anything untoward, just ill-informed begrudgery.
 
I'll advise them to report it on the site via the link above. I don't think it's begrudgery really. There's a lot of talk of instances of shady tax transactions. I think it's best to direct them to Revenue and let the experts investigate or decide if it's worth investigating.

personally, I think everything should be reporting. Why should done pay all tax due and are expected to turn a blind eye to dodgy practices for fear of "ratting" a tax dodger out.

are people against whistleblowers?
 
Bronte said:
Oh dear revenue are going to have their hands full with every crank in the country reporting their suspicions due to grudges!
Click to expand...

I'd imagine in most cases it's not too difficult or time consuming to distinguish a crank from someone with useful information. If you look at the link I posted, you'll see Revenue ask for a broad range of information, to facilitate cross checking / sense checking at their end.

A good few years ago a friend of mine reported someone they knew, who had a well paying PAYE job as a lecturer, that had been doing drawings and planning applications for years as a nixer, on a cash in hand basis.

My friend strongly suspected that this income wasn't being returned for tax purposes (based on the type of ignoramus this individual is), and was able to pinpoint a number of specific sites that this person had submitted drawings for. Now, if their suspicion was wrong, the person receiving their tip off would have been able to check in a matter of seconds whether this person had a second income declared and the level of it, and they could check the county council planning site within a further 5-10 minutes to confirm that this was something worth looking into.

A couple of years later, the individual was published as a tax defaulter, for in excess of 100k including a 100% penalty (they obviously didn't realise the gig was up and didn't even cooperate to secure mitigation of penalties when audited despite there being a clear paper trail - a good indicator of an ignoramus).

My point is, it's worth Revenue's time wading through a good few duds, to have the occasional gem like that offered up to them...
 
torblednam said:
I'd imagine in most cases it's not too difficult or time consuming to distinguish a crank from someone with useful information. If you look at the link I posted, you'll see Revenue ask for a broad range of information, to facilitate cross checking / sense checking at their end.

A good few years ago a friend of mine reported someone they knew, who had a well paying PAYE job as a lecturer, that had been doing drawings and planning applications for years as a nixer, on a cash in hand basis.

My friend strongly suspected that this income wasn't being returned for tax purposes (based on the type of ignoramus this individual is), and was able to pinpoint a number of specific sites that this person had submitted drawings for. Now, if their suspicion was wrong, the person receiving their tip off would have been able to check in a matter of seconds whether this person had a second income declared and the level of it, and they could check the county council planning site within a further 5-10 minutes to confirm that this was something worth looking into.

A couple of years later, the individual was published as a tax defaulter, for in excess of 100k including a 100% penalty (they obviously didn't realise the gig was up and didn't even cooperate to secure mitigation of penalties when audited despite there being a clear paper trail - a good indicator of an ignoramus).

My point is, it's worth Revenue's time wading through a good few duds, to have the occasional gem like that offered up to them...
Click to expand...

a couple of years later? id wager the 100k + the fine was a net loss on that basis.
 
When we were buying our current house I was amazed at the amount of times houses we knew had sold weren't appearing on the PPR. However they did tend to appear in an unusual (wrong) spelling and the database seems to be very strict in its searching so "St" wouldn't show up "Saint" and Hollybank would appear but not Holly Bank, it happened so often I'm sure there was something dodgy going on but probably mostly to protect estate agents rather than frustrate the tax man.
 
dereko1969 said:
When we were buying our current house I was amazed at the amount of times houses we knew had sold weren't appearing on the PPR. However they did tend to appear in an unusual (wrong) spelling and the database seems to be very strict in its searching so "St" wouldn't show up "Saint" and Hollybank would appear but not Holly Bank, it happened so often I'm sure there was something dodgy going on but probably mostly to protect estate agents rather than frustrate the tax man.
Click to expand...

i believe it’s down to what the solicitor enters on the stamp duty return so I don’t think estate agents have any part in this .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top