Westminster Rate Books

[jmduke]

Seeking help in interpreting Westminster Rate Books. In particular, who was liable for the rates - owner, occupier, or either depending on circumstances.

I have numerous entries pertaining to three generations of one branch of my family dating from the late 1700s through the mid-1800s. I would like to determine whether they were owners or tenants. The earlier books do not appear to distinguish. Although the later books list owners and tenants, the data is ambiguous. In an example from the 1840s, the Electoral Roll states that my 2x GGF, resident in Grey Coat Place, was entitled to vote by virtue of his freehold of two properties in a nearby Queens Place. Several other sources confirm both his residence and his ownership of the properties. Nevertheless, the Rate Book lists him as the occupant of the freehold property, with no owner listed. Moreover, census data suggest that others occupied these same dwellings.

[Lesley Robertson]

I've moved this query to the London Forum because its original location, Finding your Feet, is intended to help people find their way around. Hopefully, our London experts are more likely to find it here.

[jmduke]

I believe that I have found the answer to my own question in an 1870 publication entitled "The Cabinet Lawyer: A Popular Digest of the Laws of England" accessible on Google Books. Normally the occupant of a property was liable for the poor rate. However, under various circumstances, the vestry was authorized to assess the owner or lessor as, for example, for small tenements where the annual rent was less than £6. Similarly, the owner might be assessed where the rent ranged from The same applied when the property was let for less than a year at a rent from £6 to £20.

Further, there is a useful TNA pamphlet about the Land Tax for which the owner rather than the occupant was liable. However, it seems that the tax was often collected from the occupant, who than claimed a rebate from the property owner.