A weekly update on benefits and taxation decisions

Please note: our decisions are published six weeks after they are issued to councils, care providers and the person who has made the complaint. The cases below reflect the caselaw and guidance available at the time of issue and the individual circumstances of each case.

London Borough of Ealing (20 007 442)

Summary: Mrs X complained about how the Council handled her housing benefit claim. The Council was not at fault as it gave Mrs X information about her appeal rights and she chose not to use them. Mrs X also complained about how the Council considered the suitability of her temporary accommodation. The Council was at fault. It delayed adding Mrs X’s husband to her housing application which caused her uncertainty. It also delayed considering whether Mrs X could afford to pay her rent. The Council has already apologised to Mrs X and made a suitable offer to address the impact of the delay in considering the affordability of her accommodation. It has agreed to remind its staff they must respond to change of circumstance information promptly.

London Borough of Camden (20 009 202)

Summary: Mr X complains the Council refused to decide on his charity’s applications for mandatory charitable rate relief which he submitted in November 2019 and August 2020. We have no jurisdiction to consider the complaint about the application submitted in November 2019. We find no fault with the Council’s actions in relation to the August 2020 application.

Middlesbrough Borough Council (20 010 600)

Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to produce a Council Tax bill for her property from 2016 until February 2020 despite her contacts. Miss X says this resulted in a large debt owed on her Council Tax account. The Ombudsman found fault with the Council failing to register Miss X’s Council Tax account. The Council agreed to provide Miss X with an apology and a payment of £300 to reflect the delays and distress caused.

East Hertfordshire District Council (21 001 880)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to backdate the council tax single person discount beyond 2014. This is because the complainant can appeal to the Valuation Tribunal.

West Suffolk Council (21 001 945)

Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s enforcement of a business rates debt. We will not investigate this complaint because this was a matter for the court.

London Borough of Ealing (20 001 847)

Summary: A woman complained about the way the Council had dealt with her council tax account and claims for council tax support. But we will not investigate these matters. This is because we have already considered many of the woman’s issues in a previous complaint investigation. In addition there is no sign of fault by the Council regarding more recent events which has caused her an injustice to warrant our involvement.

Huntingdonshire District Council (20 011 353)

Summary: Miss X complains about the Council’s refusal to provide financial support when she had to isolate due to COVID-19, causing financial difficulties, distress and anxiety. We find no fault in the Council’s decision making process.

Charnwood Borough Council (20 013 515)

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s empty property council tax premium and how it has dealt with his account. We cannot achieve what Mr X wants on the premium and there is insufficient evidence of Council fault.

Salford City Council (20 011 259)

Summary: Mr C complained the Council twice pursued him for an outstanding council tax debt owed by someone with the same name, even though it said it had removed him from the case after the first occasion. The Council also failed to address Mr C’s complaint and request for a review. The Council has agreed to review its staff guidance, apologise and pay £250 to Mr C for distress caused by the poor service he received.

Kettering Borough Council (20 011 625)

Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council dealt with the council tax on a property he jointly owned with his mother. He said the Council incorrectly informed him that the property was exempt from council tax. The Council was at fault because it did not properly check who owned the property. It also failed to communicate effectively with Mr X. This caused Mr X frustration. The Council has already made procedural changes to prevent recurrence of the fault. It will also apologise to Mr X and pay him £100 for the time and trouble the matter caused him.

East Suffolk Council (20 012 598)

Summary: We will not investigate this council tax complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Nuneaton & Bedworth Borough Council (20 014 480)

Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about how much housing benefit the complainant receives from the Council. This is because the complainant has appealed against the Council’s decision on his housing benefit entitlement. We will not look at issues relating to something the law says we cannot consider.

London Borough of Barnet (20 004 895)

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s poor handling of his housing benefit entitlement and claim for council tax support. He says the excessive and inaccurate information caused distress. We find the Council was at fault because some errors were made and it did not deal with his complaint properly. To put this right the Council had already agreed to backdate his claim. The Council has also agreed with our recommendation to apologise and make an additional payment to Mr X to remedy the distress and time and trouble spent pursing his complaint.

Huntingdonshire District Council (21 001 680)

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council unfairly refused the complainant council tax support and housing benefit. This is because the complainant has a right of appeal to a tribunal.